How Organizational Policies Influence Bystander Likelihood of Reporting Moderate and Severe Sexual Harassment at Work
- 1.6k Downloads
Little is known about the causal effect of sexual harassment policies on sexual harassment outcomes at work. Based on schema theories of social cognition, organizational policies related to sexual harassment should have a greater impact on responses to moderate, versus severe, forms of sexual harassment. In Study 1, 219 undergraduate students were shown a fictitious company website describing one of three company policies on sexual harassment (a zero-tolerance policy, a standard harassment policy, or no policy), and were then assigned to read about a moderate or severe instance of sexual harassment they ostensibly observed at the organization. Results indicated participants in the zero-tolerance policy condition were more likely to intend to formally report the harassment to their organization than those in the other conditions. This effect was especially strong for the moderate, or more ambiguous, sexual harassment scenario. Study 2 replicated and extended Study 1 using 101 Human Resources professionals and actual policy statements from an organization. Results again indicated that a zero-tolerance policy leads to the highest estimates of bystander reporting, especially for instances of moderate sexual harassment. Implications for practice include a caution against using minimal or compulsory harassment policies in place of salient zero-tolerance policies.
KeywordsOrganizational policies Sexual harassment policies Sexual harassment reporting Coworker sexual harassment Bystander reporting
Special thanks to Dr. Lilia Cortina for her helpful and encouraging comments on an earlier version of this manuscript.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Conflict of Interest
Ryan Jacobson declares that he has no conflict of interest. Asia Eaton declares that she has no conflict of interest.
- Anton, C. M. (2015). The effects of persuasive communication on knowledge and attitudinal outcomes of a sexual harassment training program. Social Psychology, 16, 117–128.Google Scholar
- Association of Women for Action and Research (AWARE) (2008). Research study on workplace sexual harassment 2008. Retrieved from http://aware.org.sg/wpcontent/uploads/AWARE_Research_Study_on_Workplace_Sexual_Harassment.pdf.
- Bastian, L. D., Lancaster, A. R., Reyest, H. E., & United States. (1996). Department of Defense 1995 sexual harassment survey (DMDC report no. 96–014). Arlington: Defense Manpower Data Center.Google Scholar
- Berdahl, J. L., & Raver, J. L. (2011). Sexual harassment. In S. Zedeck (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 3) (pp. 641–669). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
- Bodenhausen, G. V. (1992). Information-processing functions of generic knowledge structures and their role in context effects in social judgment. In N. Schwarz & S. Sudman (Eds.), Context effects in social and psychological research. New York: Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-2848-6_18.Google Scholar
- Carli, L. L. (2004). Gender effects on social influence. In J. S. Seiter & R. H. Gass (Eds.), Perspectives on persuasion, social influence, and compliance gaining (pp. 133–148). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
- Cortina, L.M., Kabat-Farr, D., Leskinen, E.A.,Huerta, M., Magley, V.J. (2011). Selective incivility as modern discrimination in organizations: evidence and impact. Journal of Management, 39(6), 1579-1605.Google Scholar
- Dougherty, T. W., Turban, D. B., Olson, D. E., Dwyer, P. D., & Lapreze, M. W. (1996). Factors affecting perceptions of workplace sexual harassment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17(5), 489–501. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199609)17:5<489::AID-JOB780>3.0.CO;2-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (2007). Through the labyrinth: The truth about how women become leaders. Cambridge: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (1980). Guidelines on discrimination because of sex (Sect. 1604.11). Federal Register, 45, 74676–74677.Google Scholar
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (1990). Employment guidance: vicarious employment liability for unlawful harassment. (Sect. 915.0E48) Federal Register, https://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/sexualfavor.html.
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (2015). Charges alleging sexual harassment FY 2010 - FY 2015. Retrieved from https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/statistics/enforcement/sexual_harassment_new.cfm.
- Fitzgerald, L. F., & Ormerod, A. J. (1991). Perceptions of sexual harassment: the influence of gender and academic context. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 15(2), 281–294. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1991.tb00797.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Fitzgerald, L. F., Swan, S., & Magley, V. J. (1997). But was it really sexual harassment? Legal, behavioral, and psychological definitions of the workplace victimization of women. In W. O'Donohue (Ed.), Sexual harassment theory, research, and treatment. New York: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
- Gutek, B. A. (1995). How subjective is sexual harassment? An examination of rater effects. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17(4), 447-467.Google Scholar
- Hames, D. S. (1994). Disciplining sexual harassers: What’s fair?. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 7(3), 207-217.Google Scholar
- Holland, K. J., & Cortina, L. M. (2016). Sexual harassment: Undermining the wellbeing of working women. In Handbook on well-being of working women (pp. 83-101). Netherlands: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9897-6_6.
- Hulin, C., Fitzgerald, L., & Drasgow, F. (1996). Organizational influences on sexual harassment. In M. S. Stockdale (Ed.), Women and work: A research and policy series, volume 5: Sexual harassment in the workplace: Perspectives, frontiers, and response strategies (pp. 127–150). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications Ltd..Google Scholar
- Ilies, R., Hauserman, N., Schwochau, S., & Stibal, J. (2003). Reported incidence rates of work-related sexual harassment in the United States: using meta-analysis to explain reported rate disparities. Personnel Psychology, 56(3), 607–631. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2003.tb00752.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kaser, J., George, B., & LaBella, A. (1995). Honoring boundaries: preventing sexual harassment in the workplace. Amherst: Human Resource Development Press.Google Scholar
- Keenan, J. P., & McLain, D. A. (1992). Whistleblowing: a conceptualization and model. In Wall, J. L., & Jauch, K. R. (Eds.), Academy of Management Best Papers Proceedings (pp. 350–352). Las Vegas, NV.Google Scholar
- King, G. (1999). The implications of an organization’s structure on whistleblowing. Journal of Business Ethics, 20(2), 315–326.Google Scholar
- Linenberger, P. (1983). What behavior constitutes sexual harassment? Labor Law Journal, 4, 238–247.Google Scholar
- Macrae, C. N., & Quadflieg, S. (2010). Perceiving people. Handbook of social psychology, 1(5) (pp. 428–463). Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Marshall, A. M. (2017). Confronting sexual harassment: the law and politics of everyday life. New York, NY:Routledge.Google Scholar
- Mesmer-Magnus, J. R., Viswesvaran, C. (2005). Whistleblowing in organizations: An examination of correlates of whistleblowing intentions, actions, and retaliation. Journal of Business Ethics, 62(3), 277-297.Google Scholar
- Miceli, M. P., & Near, J. P. (1992). Blowing the whistle: The organizational and legal implications for companies and employees. New York: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
- Near, J. P., & Miceli, M. P. (1990). When whistleblowing succeeds: Predictors of effective whistle-blowing. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, San Francisco.Google Scholar
- Parkes, C., & Davis, A. J. (2013). Ethics and social responsibility–do HR professionals have the ‘courage to challenge’ or are they set to be permanent ‘bystanders?’. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(12), 2411–2434. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2013.781437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Perry, E. L., Kulik, C. T., Bustamante, J., & Golom, F. D. (2010). The impact of reason for training on the relationship between “best practices” and sexual harassment training effectiveness. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 21(2), 187–208. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.20043.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Restaurant Opportunities Centers United (ROCU) (2014). The glass floor: Sexual harassment in the restaurant industry. Retrieved from http://rocunited.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/REPORT_The-Glass-Floor-Sexual-Harassment-in-the-Restaurant-Industry2.pdf.
- Shotland, R. L., & Straw, M. K. (1976). Controlled and automatic human information processing. II: Perpetual learning, automatic attending, and a general theory. Psychological Review, 84, 127–190.Google Scholar
- Smith, E. R. (1998). Mental representation and memory. The handbook of social psychology, 1–2 (4), 391–445. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
- Stockdale, M. S. (1998). The direct and moderating influences of sexual-harassment pervasiveness, coping strategies, and gender on work-related outcomes. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 22(4), 521–535. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1998.tb00175.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Terpstra, D. E., & Cook, S. E. (1985). Complaint characteristics and reported behaviors and consequences associated with formal sexual harassment charges. Personnel Psychology, 38(3), 559–574. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1985.tb00560.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Trades Union Congress (2016). Still just banter? Sexual harassment in the workplace 2016. Retrieved from https://www.tuc.org.uk/sites/default/files/SexualHarassmentreport2016.pdf.
- Valliere, D. (2013). Towards a schematic theory of entrepreneurial alertness. Journal of Business Venturing, 28(3), 430-442.Google Scholar
- Wilkerson, J. M. (1999). The impact of job level and prior training on sexual harassment labeling and remedy choice. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29(8), 1605–1623. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1999.tb02044.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar