Workplace Bullying: A Social Network Perspective

  • Birgit PauksztatEmail author
  • Denise Salin
Living reference work entry
Part of the Handbooks of Workplace Bullying, Emotional Abuse and Harassment book series (HWBEAH, volume 1)


This chapter introduces a social network perspective on workplace bullying, emotional abuse and harassment. As a type of interpersonal interaction, bullying behaviours can be conceptualized as interpersonal ties, and the bullying ties among a set of individuals can be considered a social network. Moreover, many of the antecedents and consequences of bullying, such as social relationships and various types of interactions, are usefully understood and analysed as social networks. Adopting a social network perspective will not only provide new perspectives for theory development but will allow researchers to take advantage of well-established methods, thus improving our understanding of the social dynamics of workplace bullying.


  1. Aquino, K., & Lamertz, K. (2004). A relational model of workplace victimization: Social roles and patterns of victimization in dyadic relationships. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6), 1023–1034. Scholar
  2. Aquino, K., & Thau, S. (2009). Workplace victimization: Aggression from the target’s perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 717–741. Scholar
  3. Baillien, E., Neyens, I., De Witte, H., & De Cuyper, N. (2009). A qualitative study on the development of workplace bullying: Toward a three way model. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 19(1), 1–16. Scholar
  4. Berman, E. M., West, J. P., & Richter, M. N. (2002). Workplace relations, friendship patterns and consequences (according to managers). Public Administration Review, 62(2), 217–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Block, P., Stadtfeld, C., & Snijders, T. A. B. (2016). Forms of dependence: Comparing SAOMs and ERGMs from basic principles. Sociological Methods & Research. Advance online publication, Scholar
  6. Borgatti, S. P., & Halgin, D. S. (2011). On network theory. Organization Science, 22(5), 1168–1181. Scholar
  7. Borgatti, S. P., & Molina, J.-L. (2005). Toward ethical guidelines for network research in organizations. Social Networks, 27(2), 107–117. Scholar
  8. Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Freeman, L. C. (2002). Ucinet for Windows: Software for social network analysis. Harvard: Analytic Technologies.Google Scholar
  9. Borgatti, S. P., Mehra, A., Brass D. J., & Labianca, G. (2009). Network analysis in the social sciences. Science, 323(5916), 892–895.
  10. Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Johnson, J. C. (2018). Analyzing social networks (2nd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
  11. Brandes, U., & Wagner, D. (2004). Visone: Analysis and visualization of social networks. In M. Jünger & P. Mutzel (Eds.), Graph drawing software (pp. 321–340). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brandes, U., Indlekofer, N., & Mader, M. (2012). Visualization methods for longitudinal social networks and stochastic actor-oriented modeling. Social Networks, 34(3), 291–308. Scholar
  13. Brass, D. J. (2005). Intraorganizational power and dependence. In J. A. C. Baum (Ed.), The Blackwell companion to organizations (pp. 138–157). Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  14. Brass, D. J., Butterfield, K. D., & Skaggs, B. C. (1998). Relationships and unethical behavior: A social network perspective. Academy of Management Review, 23(1), 14–31.
  15. Brass, D. J., Galaskiewicz, J., Greve, H. R., & Tsai, W. (2004). Taking stock of networks and organizations: A multilevel perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 47(6), 795–817. Scholar
  16. Breiger, R. L. (1974). The duality of persons and groups. Social Forces, 53(2), 181–190. Scholar
  17. Breiger, R. L., Boorman, S. A., & Arabie, P. (1975). An algorithm for clustering relational data, with applications to social network analysis and comparison with multi-dimensional scaling. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 12(3), 328–383. Scholar
  18. Brewer, D. D. (2000). Forgetting in the recall-based elicitation of personal and social networks. Social Networks, 22(1), 29–43. Scholar
  19. Burt, R. S. (1992). Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Carrington, P. J. (2011). Crime and social network analysis. In J. Scott & P. J. Carrington (Eds.), Models and methods in social network analysis (pp. 236–255). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Carrington, P. J., Scott, J., & Wasserman, S. (Eds.). (2005). Models and methods in social network analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Coyne, I., Craig, J., & Smith-Lee Chong, P. (2004). Workplace bullying in a group context. British Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 32(3), 301–317. Scholar
  24. Crossley, N., Bellotti, E., Edwards, G., Everett, M. G., Koskinen, J., & Tranmer, M. (2015). Social network analysis for ego-nets. Los Angeles: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2010). The exit coping response: The condition of inclusivist and exclusivist HRM strategies. Employee Relations, 32(2), 102–120. Scholar
  26. D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2011). The limits to workplace friendship: Managerialist HRM and bystander behaviour in the context of workplace bullying. Employee Relations, 33(3), 269–288. Scholar
  27. Dekker, D., Krackhardt, D., & Snijders, T. A. B. (2007). Sensitivity of MRQAP tests to collinearity and autocorrelation conditions. Psychometrika, 72(4), 563–581. Scholar
  28. Domínguez, S., & Hollstein, B. (Eds.). (2014). Mixed methods social network research: Design and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Doreian, P., & Krackhardt, D. (2001). Pre-transitive balance mechanisms for signed networks. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 25(1), 43–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. EgoNet Development Team. (2009). EgoNet. Available at
  31. Einarsen, S. (2000). Harassment and bullying at work: A review of the Scandinavian approach. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 5(4), 379–401. Scholar
  32. Einarsen, S., & Skogstad, A. (1996). Bullying at work: Epidemiological findings in public and private organizations. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 5(2), 185–202. Scholar
  33. Einarsen, S., Hoel, H., & Notelaers, G. (2009). Measuring exposure to bullying and harassment at work: Validity, factor structure and psychometric properties of the Negative Acts Questionnaire-Revised. Work & Stress, 23(1), 24–44. Scholar
  34. Einarsen, S., Hoel, H., Zapf, D., & Cooper, C. L. (2011). The concept of bullying and harassment at work: The European tradition. In S. Einarsen, H. Hoel, D. Zapf, & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Bullying and harassment in the workplace: Developments in theory, research, and practice (pp. 3–39). Boca Raton: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  35. Ellwardt, L., Labianca, G., & Wittek, R. (2012). Who are the objects of positive and negative gossip at work? A social network perspective on workplace gossip. Social Networks, 34(2), 193–205. Scholar
  36. Emirbayer, M., & Goodwin, J. (1994). Network analysis, culture and the problem of agency. American Journal of Sociology, 99(6), 1411–1454.
  37. Escartin, J., Ullrich, J., Zapf, D., Schlüter, E., & van Dick, R. (2013). Individual- and group-level effects of social identification on workplace bullying. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 22(2), 182–193. Scholar
  38. Faust, K., & Skvoretz, J. (2002). Comparing networks across space and time, size and species. Sociological Methodology, 32(1), 267–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Feld, S. L., & Carter, W. C. (2002). Detecting measurement bias in respondent reports of personal networks. Social Networks, 24(4), 365–383. Scholar
  40. Ferligoj, A., Doreian, P., & Batagelj, V. (2011). Positions and roles. In J. Scott & P. J. Carrington (Eds.), The Sage handbook of social network analysis (pp. 434–446). Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
  41. Frank, O. (2011). Survey sampling in networks. In J. Scott & P. J. Carrington (Eds.), Models and methods in social network analysis (pp. 389–403). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Freeman, L. C. (1977). A set of measures of centrality based on betweenness. Sociometry, 40(1), 35–41. Scholar
  43. Freeman, L. C. (1978/9). Centrality in social networks: Conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1(3), 215–239. Scholar
  44. Freeman, L. C. (1992a). The sociological concept of “group”: An empirical test of two models. American Journal of Sociology, 98(1), 152–166. Scholar
  45. Freeman, L. C. (1992b). Finding groups with a simple genetic algorithm. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 17(4), 227–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Freeman, L. C. (2000). Visualizing social networks. Journal of Social Structure, 1.
  47. Freeman, L. C. (2005). Graphic techniques for exploring social network data. In P. J. Carrington, J. Scott, & S. Wasserman (Eds.), Models and methods in social network analysis (pp. 248–269). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Friedkin, N. E. (2004). Social cohesion. Annual Review of Sociology, 30, 409–425. Scholar
  49. Girvan, M., & Newman, M. E. J. (2002). Community structure in social and biological networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99(12), 7821–7826.
  50. Glomb, T. M., & Liao, H. (2003). Interpersonal aggression in work groups: Social influence, reciprocal, and individual effects. Academy of Management Journal, 46(4), 486–496. Scholar
  51. Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380. Scholar
  52. Granovetter, M. S. (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481–510. Scholar
  53. Harrington, S., Warren, S., & Rayner, C. (2015). Human resource management practitioners’ responses to workplace bullying: Cycles of symbolic violence. Organization, 22(3), 368–389. Scholar
  54. Heider, F. (1946). Attitudes and cognitive organization. Journal of Psychology, 21, 107–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Hershcovis, M. S., & Reich, T. C. (2013). Integrating workplace aggression research: Relational, contextual, and method considerations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(S1), S26–S42. Scholar
  56. Hogg, M. A., & Terry, D. J. (2000). Social identity and self-categorization processes in organizational contexts. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 121–140. Scholar
  57. Høgh, A., Mikkelsen, E. G., & Hansen, Å. M. (2011). Individual consequences of workplace bullying/mobbing. In S. Einarsen, H. Hoel, D. Zapf, & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Bullying and harassment in the workplace: Developments in theory, research, and practice (pp. 107–128). Boca Raton: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  58. Hubert, L., & Schultz, J. (1976). Quadratic assignment as a general data analysis strategy. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 29(2), 190–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Huisman, M., & Van Duijn, M. A. J. (2011). A reader’s guide to SNA software. In J. Scott & P. J. Carrington (Eds.), The Sage handbook of social network analysis (pp. 578–600). Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
  60. Huitsing, G., Veenstra, R., Sainio, M., & Salmivalli, C. (2012a). “It must be me” or “It could be them?” The impact of the social network position of bullies and victims on victims’ adjustment. Social Networks, 34(4), 379–386. Scholar
  61. Huitsing, G., van Duijn, M. A. J., Snijders, T. A. B., Wang, P., Sainio, M., Salmivalli, C., & Veenstra, R. (2012b). Univariate and multivariate models of positive and negative networks: Liking, disliking, and bully-victim relationships. Social Networks, 34(4), 645–657. Scholar
  62. Hutchinson, M. (2013). Bullying as workgroup manipulation: A model for understanding patterns of victimization and contagion within the workgroup. Journal of Nursing Management, 21(3), 563–571. Scholar
  63. Ibarra, H., Kilduff, M., & Tsai, W. (2005). Zooming in and out: Connecting individuals and collectivities at the frontiers of organizational network research. Organization Science, 16(4), 359–371. Scholar
  64. Jones, C., & Volpe, E. H. (2011). Organizational identification: Extending our understanding of social identities through social networks. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32(2), 413–434. Scholar
  65. Kadushin, C. (2002). The motivational foundation of social networks. Social Networks, 24(1), 77–91. Scholar
  66. Kadushin, C. (2005). Who benefits from network analysis: Ethics of social network research. Social Networks, 27(2), 139–153. Scholar
  67. Kilduff, M., Tsai, W., & Hanke, R. (2006). A paradigm too far? A dynamic stability reconsideration of the social network research program. Academy of Management Review, 31(4), 1031–1048.
  68. Klovdahl, A. S. (2005). Social network research and human subjects protection: Towards more effective infectious disease control. Social Networks, 27(2), 119–137. Scholar
  69. Krackhardt, D. (1987). QAP partialling as a test of spuriousness. Social Networks, 9(2), 171–186. Scholar
  70. Krackhardt, D. (1988). Predicting with networks: Nonparametric multiple regression analysis of dyadic data. Social Networks, 10(4), 359–381. Scholar
  71. Krackhardt, D. (1992). The strength of strong ties. In N. Nohria & R. G. Eccles (Eds.), Networks and organizations: Structure, form, and action (pp. 216–239). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  72. Krackhardt, D. (1999). The ties that torture: Simmelian tie analysis in organizations. In S. B. Andrews & D. Knoke (Eds.), Research in the sociology of organizations (Vol. 16, pp. 183–210). Greenwich: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  73. Krackhardt, D., & Kilduff, M. (2002). Structure, culture and Simmelian ties in entrepreneurial firms. Social Networks, 24(3), 279–290. Scholar
  74. Krempel, L. (2011). Network visualization. In J. Scott & P. J. Carrington (Eds.), Models and methods in social network analysis (pp. 558–577). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  75. Labianca, G., & Brass, D. J. (2006). Exploring the social ledger: Negative relationships and negative asymmetry in social networks in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 31(3), 596–614. Scholar
  76. Labianca, G., Brass, D. J., & Gray, B. (1998). Social networks and perceptions of intergroup conflict: The role of negative relationships and third parties. Academy of Management Journal, 41(1), 55–67. Scholar
  77. Lamertz, K., & Aquino, K. (2004). Social power, social status and perceptual similarity of workplace victimization: A social network analysis of stratification. Human Relations, 57(7), 795–822. Scholar
  78. Laumann, E., Marsden, P., & Prensky, D. (1983). The boundary specification problem in network analysis. In R. Burt & M. Minor (Eds.), Applied network analysis (pp. 18–34). Bevery Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  79. Lewis, S. E., & Orford, J. (2005). Women’s experiences of workplace bullying: Changes in social relationships. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 15(1), 29–47. Scholar
  80. Leymann, H. (1986). Vuxenmobbing: Om psykiskt våld i arbetslivet. Stockholm: Studentlitteratur.Google Scholar
  81. Leymann, H. (1996). The content and development of mobbing at work. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 5(2), 165–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Lusher, D., Koskinen, J., & Robins, G. (2013). Exponential random graph models for social networks: Theory, methods, and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  83. MacIntosh, J. (2005). Experiences of workplace bullying in a rural area. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 26(9), 893–910. Scholar
  84. Marin, A., & Hampton, K. N. (2007). Simplifying the personal network name generator: Alternatives to the traditional multiple and single name generators. Field Methods, 19(2), 163–193. Scholar
  85. Marsden, P. V. (2011). Survey methods for network data. In J. Scott & P. J. Carrington (Eds.), Models and methods in social network analysis (pp. 370–388). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  86. Mayhew, B. H. (1980). Structuralism and individualism, part 1: Shadowboxing in the dark. Social Forces, 59(2), 335–375. Scholar
  87. Mayhew, B. H. (1981). Structuralism and individualism, part 2: Ideological and other obfuscations. Social Forces, 59(3), 627–648. Scholar
  88. McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415–444.
  89. Moody, J., & White, D. R. (2003). Structural cohesion and embeddedness: A hierarchical concept of social groups. American Sociological Review, 68(1), 103–127.
  90. Moody, J., McFarland, D., & Bender-deMoll, S. (2005). Dynamic network visualization. American Journal of Sociology, 110(4), 1206–1241. Scholar
  91. Mrvar, A., & Batagelj, V. (2018). Pajek: Program for large network analysis. Available at
  92. Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242–266.
  93. Neuman, J. H., & Baron, R. A. (2011). Social antecedents of bullying: A social interactionist perspective. In S. Einarsen, H. Hoel, D. Zapf, & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Bullying and harassment in the workplace: Developments in theory, research, and practice (pp. 201–225). Boca Raton: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  94. Nielsen, M. B., & Einarsen, S. (2012). Outcomes of exposure to workplace bullying: A meta-analytic review. Work & Stress, 26(4), 309–332. Scholar
  95. Nielsen, M. B., Notelaers, G., & Einarsen, S. (2011). Measuring exposure to workplace bullying. In S. Einarsen, H. Hoel, D. Zapf, & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Bullying and harassment in the workplace: Developments in theory, research and practice (pp. 149–175). Boca Raton: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  96. Notelaers, G., Van der Heijden, B., Hoel, H., & Einarsen, S. (2018). Measuring bullying at work with the short-negative acts questionnaire: Identification of targets and criterion validity. Work & Stress. Advance online publication.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Pauksztat, B., & Salin, D. (2017). Exposure to workplace bullying and group dynamics: A social network analysis. Paper presented at the 18th Congress of the European Association of Work and Organizational Psychology, Dublin, 17–20 May 2017.Google Scholar
  98. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  99. Ripley, R. M., Snijders, T. A. B., Boda, Z., Vörös, A., & Preciado, P. (2018). Manual for RSiena (17 April 2018). University of Oxford: Department of Statistics and Nuffield College, University of Groningen: Department of Sociology. Available at
  100. Robins, G. (2011). Exponential random graph models for social networks. In J. Scott & P. J. Carrington (Eds.), The Sage handbook of social network analysis (pp. 484–500). Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
  101. Robins, G. (2015). Doing social network research: Network-based research design for social scientists. Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
  102. Robinson, S. L., & O’Leary-Kelly, A. M. (1998). Monkey see, monkey do: The influence of work groups on the antisocial behavior of employees. Academy of Management Journal, 41(6), 658–672.
  103. Salin, D. (2003). Ways of explaining workplace bullying: A review of enabling, motivating and precipitating structures and processes in the work environment. Human Relations, 56(10), 1213–1232. Scholar
  104. Salin, D., & Hoel, H. (2011). Organizational causes of bullying. In S. Einarsen, H. Hoel, D. Zapf, & C. Cooper (Eds.), Workplace bullying and harassment: Developments in theory, research and practice (pp. 227–243). Boca Raton: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  105. Salin, D., & Notelaers, G. (2018). The effects of workplace bullying on witnesses: Violation of the psychological contract as an explanatory mechanism? International Journal of Human Resource Management.
  106. Salin, D., Cowan, R. L., Adewumi, O., Apospori, E., Bochantin, J., D’Cruz, P., Djurkovic, N., Durniat, K., Escartin, J., Guo, J., Işik, I., Köszegi, S., McCormack, D., Monserrat, S., & Zedlacher, E. (2018). Workplace bullying across the globe: A cross-cultural comparison. Personnel Review, 47(4). Scholar
  107. Salmivalli, C. (2010). Bullying and the peer group: A review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 15(2), 112–120. Scholar
  108. Schulte, M., Cohen, N. A., & Klein, K. J. (2012). The coevolution of network ties and perceptions of team psychological safety. Organization Science, 23(2), 564–581. Scholar
  109. Scott, J. (2017). Social network analysis, 4th edn. Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
  110. Scott, J., & Carrington, P. J. (Eds.). (2011). Models and methods in social network analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  111. Sentse, M., Kretschmer, T., & Salmivalli, C. (2015). The longitudinal interplay between bullying, victimization, and social status: Age-related and gender differences. Social Development, 24(3), 659–677. Scholar
  112. Sijtsema, J. J., Rambaran, A. J., & Ojanen, T. J. (2013). Overt and relational victimization and adolescent friendships: Selection, de-selection, and social influence. Social Influence, 8(2–3), 177–195. Scholar
  113. Snijders, T. A. B., Van de Bunt, G. G., & Steglich, C. E. G. (2010). Introduction to stochastic actor-based models for network dynamics. Social Networks, 32(1), 44–60. Scholar
  114. Thirlwall, A. (2015). Organizational sequestering of workplace bullying: Adding insult to injury. Journal of Management and Organization, 21, 145–158. Scholar
  115. Van den Brande, W., Baillien, E., De Witte, H., Van der Elst, T., & Godderis, L. (2016). The role of work stressors, coping strategies and coping resources in the process of workplace bullying: A systematic review and development of a comprehensive model. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 29(1), 61–71. Scholar
  116. Van Duijn, M. A. J., & Huisman, M. (2011). Statistical models for ties and actors. In J. Scott & P. J. Carrington (Eds.), The Sage handbook of social network analysis (pp. 459–483). Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
  117. Veenstra, R., Lindenberg, S., Zijlstra, B. J. H., De Winter, A. F., Verhulst, F. C., & Ormel, J. (2007). The dyadic nature of bullying and victimization: Testing a dual-perspective theory. Child Development, 78(6), 1843–1854.
  118. Venkataramani, V., & Dalal, R. S. (2007). Who helps and harms whom? Relational antecedents of interpersonal helping and harming in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 952–966. Scholar
  119. Venkataramani, V., Labianca, G., & Grosser, T. (2013). Positive and negative workplace relationships, social satisfaction, and organizational attachment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(6), 1028–1039. Scholar
  120. Vie, T. L., Glasø, L., & Einarsen, S. (2010). Does trait anger, trait anxiety or organisational position moderate the relationship between exposure to negative acts and self-labelling as a victim of workplace bullying? Nordic Psychology, 62(3), 67–79. Scholar
  121. Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Zapf, D., & Einarsen, S. (2005). Mobbing at work. Escalated conflicts in organizations. In S. Fox & P. Spector (Eds.), Counterproductive work behavior: Investigations of actors and targets (pp. 237–270). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Zapf, D., & Einarsen, S. (2011). Individual antecedents of bullying: Victims and perpetrators. In S. Einarsen, H. Hoel, D. Zapf, & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Bullying and harassment in the workplace: Developments in theory, research, and practice (pp. 177–200). Boca Raton: CRC Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Business StudiesUppsala University, Campus GotlandVisbySweden
  2. 2.Department of Management and OrganizationHanken School of EconomicsHelsinkiFinland

Personalised recommendations