Bullying is a concept which, although generally understood, is not clearly defined in a workplace context. Unlike harassment (which in the UK is defined in the Equality Act 2010) there is no similar legal definition of bullying.

For the purpose of this guide, we will use the Acas definition of ‘offensive, intimidating, malicious or insulting behaviour, an abuse or misuse of power through means that undermine, humiliate, denigrate or injure the recipient’ 

There are a number of key points to consider here.

The first is that bullying typically involves some form of power relationship.

In the workplace, while this is often manager/ subordinate, it can include others with particular positional power in the organisation, or where a group of employees misuse their authority.

Second, it does not have to be done in the workplace – increasingly bullying situations take place in online contexts and may happen out of work. These can include inappropriate use of social media or online communications tools (such as text message). It can also occur at social events, whether or not organised by the employer. 

The UK legal position on bullying is complex as there’s no single piece of legislation that deals with workplace bullying. Unlike the legal definition of harassment, bullying does not have to be on account of a protected characteristic. It can be for any reason.

In the UK employers have a legal responsibility under the Health and Safety at Work Act to protect the health and wellbeing of their staff, as well as a general duty to protect their safety. These aspects will be explored more fully in this guide.

Workplace bullying can affect any workplace, and recent research suggests that it has been experienced by many. For example, 15% of UK employees reported experience of bullying in the CIPD’s Managing Conflict in the Modern Workplace report, twice as many as those who reported concerns about harassment.

Bullying not only affects the individuals concerned, but can have a wider ‘knock-on’ effect across an organisation. Employees who witness or become aware of bullying can be affected in terms of their confidence and enthusiasm for work (Escartín, J. (2016) Insights into workplace bullying: psychosocial drivers and effective interventions. Psychology Research and Behavior Management. Vol 9.).

While there is no evidence that bullying overall has increased (surveys going back to the early 1990s report similar percentages of staff had experienced or witnessed bullying behaviour), what has changed in recent years is the willingness of individuals to challenge what they see as unacceptable behaviour in the workplace. This is a positive development. 

It’s expected that online or ‘cyber-bullying’ has increased as more people work from home. There is some research data that indicates online bullying among schoolchildren increased during the pandemic, and this may also be the case in the workplace. Cyber-bullying is often more difficult to detect and problematic for organisations to monitor.

This can be one of the most difficult areas to manage or resolve in the workplace, since, by its very nature, it may happen away from the workplace or outside normal business channels. The CIPD Managing Conflict in the Modern Workplace report suggests that this form of bullying or harassment is more common than at workplace social events.

Examples of the sorts of situation that an organisation might consider as cyber-bullying include:

• contacting individuals about work matters through a non-work channel (this could be a text message to a personal mobile phone, or via Facebook or Twitter)
• contacting an individual – even if through a work channel – outside normal working hours without a significant reason, expecting individuals to respond outside normal working hours
• following someone through their personal social media and misusing the information in a work context (such as criticising someone for a work issue because ‘you saw on Facebook they had been out drinking the night before’)
• sending offensive, aggressive or abusive messages to someone electronically
• excluding people from work-related social media issues – for example setting up a WhatsApp group that deliberately omits certain people, or ‘unfriending’ individuals
• making negative public comments about an individual in a forum where colleagues (or customers/suppliers) might see it. 

People professionals may often be unaware of the existence of elements of cyber-bullying until they are brought to their attention. It is important to make sure that awareness of this aspect is included as a key part of any preventative action being taken, and to highlight the sort of behaviour that would be considered unacceptable. Depending on the organisation, these areas might form part of a wider social media policy or be included in a policy on bullying.

Bullying is not necessarily something that is carried out by ‘rogue’ employees – it often reflects an organisational culture and management approach that either deliberately allows such behaviour to go unchallenged or, more commonly, fails to respond to issues.

Sometimes there are concerns raised by managers that individuals are being ‘oversensitive’ to what they consider to be fair performance management feedback or other constructive criticism. While there is case law (for example Sithirapathy v PSI CRO) that hypersensitivity to unfortunate or badly phrased comments does not mean that harassment (and by extension bullying) has occurred, this does not mean that concerns should be dismissed without proper investigation. It’s equally important to consider the issue of ‘micro-aggressions’ – small acts that, in themselves, are not bullying but which build up to show a pattern of behaviour that suggests bullying has occurred. Often one of these small acts can be the tipping point for an individual to make a complaint, even if the act itself is relatively trivial. See the section on Bullying and performance management  for more.

It is not enough for an employer to simply respond or react to allegations of bullying, although it should have a clear and fair process to deal with such allegations. HR professionals and other senior leaders need to take appropriate actions to create a culture where bullying is not acceptable.

Having a policy that is clearly communicated to all staff, including managers, is a useful starting point, but is not sufficient on its own. As the CIPD Managing Conflict in the Modern Workplace concluded, ‘Policies dealing with equality and diversity, and bullying and harassment, are important but will only have impact if they are visible and brought to life across the organisation.’

A policy will obviously need to reflect the particular circumstances of the organisation, but as a general guide it should:

• Be short and readable so that any member of staff can understand the key points quickly.
• Define what is meant by bullying (with examples if possible). 
• Outline the expected standards of behaviour from employees. 
• Differentiate between bullying and managerial supervision. Managers have a legitimate right to raise issues and criticise poor work, timekeeping, attitude, and so on. Examples can be found in the ‘Bullying and performance management’  section below. 
• Explain that bullying can take place outside work and can be online as well as face-to-face. 
• Make clear that bullying could be considered as gross misconduct and lead to the dismissal of a perpetrator. 
• Explain how to raise a concern or issue, to whom, and which procedure (grievance/ disciplinary, and so on) might be followed. 

To become embedded, the policy needs to be integrated in day-to-day working practice. A positive employment relations climate and culture change cannot happen overnight and is not solely within the control of HR, but there are a number of key areas where organisations need to take action

Senior leaders have a defining influence on workplace culture and how middle managers and employees behave. They need to demonstrate visibly values such as dignity and respect, and that they will not tolerate bullying behaviour.

This includes:

• zero tolerance for unacceptable behaviour, including among senior leaders and people managers 
• ‘modelling’ positive behaviour that they wish to see more widely in the organisation 
• listening to other viewpoints with respect, even if they disagree with them 
• seeking to resolve issues in an amicable, problem-solving way wherever possible 
• being approachable and willing to listen to concerns 
• treating concerns seriously 
• ensuring that issues are dealt with as quickly as possible, in line with procedure, rather than being allowed to fester 
• where work is not delivered to the required standard, providing constructive rather than destructive criticism, in a private and confidential manner. 

While ‘target-driven’ businesses, or those with a ‘command and control’ leadership approach, are often seen as those where bullying may be more prevalent, it can happen in any organisation. Even those with a less formal or more participative management style may still harbour bullying managers, for example where favouritism develops towards certain team members to the exclusion of others.

While HR cannot effect a change on its own, its role is essential in helping to create the right culture and ensuring bullying is given the attention it needs from senior leaders.

In addition to its role in developing policies and procedures, HR should take a key role in: 

• developing appropriate learning and development support (which is likely to be more than a training course). It can include areas such as coaching and mentoring, and needs to focus on areas such as interpersonal relationships in the workplace. More information on success criteria for effective interventions is available in the Bullying and incivility at work evidence review.
• supporting managers and ensuring they are confident and competent to deal with workplace conflict and bullying 
• being open and approachable so that individuals feel comfortable raising a concern 
• discussing the policy and approach with staff representatives, including trade unions 
• ensuring issues are not prejudged based on previous perceptions of the individuals involved 
• aiming to establish facts rather than take a ‘litigation avoidance’ or ‘reputation management’ approach to allegations 
• looking at how dispute resolution processes (including early, informal resolution approaches as well as the grievance procedure) can be used to create lasting solutions rather than a ‘win/lose’ situation 
• trying to resolve workplace conflict before it escalates into bullying or other, more serious situations 
• considering how issues, such as language and organisational behaviour, that facilitate a culture of bullying (for example, if swearing is tolerated, or if there are ‘cliques’ of staff who socialise together) can be tackled.

The CIPD Managing Conflict in the Modern Workplace report shows that of those who experience bullying in the workplace, the biggest single cause is the manager, and so it is important that managers are aware of their own behaviour and the important role they play in creating a culture where bullying is not tolerated.

Many of the issues relating to senior leaders will also apply to managers, but in addition organisations should:

• train managers on how to handle workplace conflict (perhaps using the CIPD guide  as a basis) 
• ensure managers understand how their own behaviour can set the ‘tone’ and expectations for behaviour in their team, and how to ensure that it is appropriate 
• check managers understand how to balance demanding business targets with the need to be a good people manager and support team members. This also means ensuring people are not overloaded in their role and have autonomy in their role where possible 
• encourage managers to spot and challenge unacceptable behaviour among their teams or their peers and nip it in the bud 
• provide advice and guidance on how to deliver constructive feedback when there are performance failings.

In addition to making employees aware of the organisation’s policies (for example, around dignity and respect, bullying and harassment, equality, and inclusion and diversity), it is important to communicate expectations of acceptable behaviour.

These are sometimes referred to as ‘organisational citizenship behaviours ’ (Organ, D. W. (1988) Organizational citizenship behavior: the good soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books) and cover areas such as:

• altruism – helping a colleague without expecting anything in return 
• courtesy and civility to all colleagues 
• being supportive – willingly dealing with a negative situation (for example covering work when a colleague is off sick) 
• being conscientious – awareness of issues that may have an impact on others and planning in advance to address them 
• acting as a positive representative of the organisation. To support a diverse workforce, organisations should ensure staff understand cultural sensitivities – for example behaviour which is seen as perfectly acceptable in one culture may be seen as rude or discourteous in others.

Individual members of staff need to feel comfortable and supported in challenging negative behaviours – the CIPD Managing Conflict in the Modern Workplace report finds that 60% would feel confident about raising issues in their organisation; this still leaves a substantial minority who would not do so. More significantly, however, less than half consider that their organisation would respond appropriately.

Even if you make every effort to create a culture where bullying is not tolerated or condoned, you may still receive a complaint. It’s important that employees know how to raise a formal complaint and to whom. 

An individual employee or a group of employees makes an allegation of bullying. While this might be made to the direct people manager, if that manager is the alleged bully, the complaint may be made to a more senior manager or HR.

In some organisations it may be appropriate to have independent ‘dignity at work’ champions – this could be a nominated senior manager or board member – a similar process to whistleblowing procedures, where it is common to have named roles or people to whom staff can raise concerns. 

Key actions include:

• Make clear to employees (in your policy) who they should raise complaints with and the procedure for doing so. 
• Even if a complaint is raised in a different way, it should still be dealt with. 
• Consider what support can be given to the individual outside any investigation process that’s carried out. Many bullying situations have been going on for some time before the individual raises their concern. If your organisation has access to counselling, EAP support or other mental health support, encourage managers to signpost to them. 

Complaints don’t have to be in writing, but if not, the individual handling the issue should arrange to meet with the individual to record the key allegations.

Sometimes an individual may allege bullying but ‘not want to take it further’, perhaps because of fear of reprisals or other actions. However, once revealed, you cannot fail to respond to an allegation. A failure to challenge or investigate potentially unacceptable behaviour could be seen to be condoning or colluding with it. As the CIPD Code of Conduct and Ethics makes clear, HR professionals have a duty to support human rights and dignity at work, and not to encourage or assist those who may be behaving unlawfully or unethically.

Allegations are rarely made spuriously, even if the extent of the bullying may be less than the individual believes. The starting point for any complaint is that the individual should be taken seriously and that there may be some substance for the allegations. As noted above, situations can have been continuing for some time before they are raised.

It’s important not to prejudge or jump to conclusions. While concerns should never be dismissed, neither should action be taken without a proper investigation. To this extent, while you should always support the individual making the complaint – for example by having concern for their health and wellbeing and offering them counselling while the investigation takes place – you also have a duty of care to an employee accused of bullying during an investigation to establish the facts. In practice, this means ensuring good communication with them, carrying out processes in a timely manner and, if appropriate, also providing support (especially if suspended).

You must also be careful not to substitute your own view of the situation – remember that while you may not consider specific incidents or actions as bullying, it is the perception of the individual that is also key. As noted above, what on the face of it appears to be a relatively trivial incident or comment might be the latest in a long line of micro-aggressions.

Whether the allegation is being dealt with through the organisation’s grievance, disciplinary or dignity at work procedure, it is essential that matters are investigated fairly and thoroughly. And while the role of HR is not simply to manage procedures, it is important that people professionals play a key role in ensuring that the matter is dealt with in a systematic and detailed way, guiding the investigator and others involved in the process throughout.

In the majority of cases, it would be better to appoint an independent person to undertake the investigation. This may be a senior manager from a different department or location, someone from the HR team who has no direct connection with the issue or individuals, or an external consultant or adviser.

The alleged bully (if an employee) will need to be informed of the complaint made against them. Depending on the nature of the allegations, it may be necessary to suspend the individual on full pay. As always, you should make clear that suspension is not disciplinary action but a precautionary measure. Suspension should be a matter of last resort, when working relationships have broken down irreparably and after all other reasonable options have been considered. It can have a significant detrimental impact on any individual. It should be reviewed on an ongoing basis and be timebound.

If suspension is not considered appropriate, you may want to make arrangements to ensure that the complainant and the alleged bully do not come into contact with each other. This may be done by moving the alleged bully to a different department/location, or by creating different managerial arrangements for the complainant. Only if no other options are possible should you consider moving the complainant, as this can be perceived as punishing someone for raising a complaint.

If the alleged bully is someone external to the organisation, such as a customer or supplier, this can make investigating matters more difficult. While commercial relationships will inevitably need to be considered, this should not prevent a proper investigation being carried out. Such a situation should, however, make it easier to separate the alleged bully from the complainant.

In some situations, individuals who make complaints and/or potential witnesses may wish to speak up on the basis that their identities are kept confidential. While it is important to try and respect this, if at all possible, it cannot be guaranteed because it may be obvious from the context who the individual is, and if matters did proceed to a disciplinary hearing, the alleged bully may wish to challenge or question certain claims which require the identity of individuals to be disclosed.

If the complaint or allegation is based on cyber-bullying or other online activity, this may have occurred on individuals’ personal accounts or devices, and it is important to be careful not to disclose personal information relating to individuals (such as personal email addresses or information relating to family members, and so on). It may require the complainant to have kept screenshots or other evidence of the activities in question

If at the end of the investigation there are grounds for believing that the individual has been bullied, you should take action under your relevant procedure (in most cases the disciplinary procedure). While each case must be treated on its own merits and dismissal should not be an automatic consequence, organisations should ensure that they demonstrate that bullying allegations are taken seriously and, if substantiated, are not tolerated. If the investigation concludes there is insufficient evidence of bullying, or that the alleged actions do not constitute bullying, it is important that the complainant(s) is made fully aware of how the conclusions were reached and why no formal action is being taken. The alleged bully also needs to be informed of the outcome. In reaching such a decision, it is important to consider the line between bullying and performance management, the full context of the incidents, and relevant case law and guidance. If in doubt, you may wish to seek legal advice before drawing a conclusion.

If the complaint was made genuinely, it would be unusual for there to be nothing to the allegations, and it may be that specific learning and development issues need to be addressed with the alleged bully, for example over communication style. In this situation there may also be work to be done to rebuild the working relationship between the two individuals, an area where HR may play a direct role or in facilitating support. You could consider offering mediation or another form of independent third-party resolution. It is particularly important to avoid any victimisation of the individual who raised the complaint. In the – very rare – situation that a spurious or malicious complaint is made, it may be necessary to take some form of action against the complainant.

Whatever the outcome of the specific investigation, HR professionals should review whether there are any wider issues that need to be addressed.

For many people professionals, their major contact with allegations of workplace bullying will happen in individual cases following a complaint. It is important to make sure that such issues are dealt with properly, in terms of both seeking to investigate and resolve matters as well as ensuring that procedures are followed. However, it is more important to take a proactive approach to prevent bullying happening in the first place, by striving to create a workplace culture that makes it unacceptable and where low-level personality clashes can be dealt with before they escalate into a more serious issue.

When an individual is being monitored or managed because of work performance that is seen as below standard there can often be allegations of bullying.

It is perfectly legitimate for an employer to bring performance failings to the attention of an employee (and arguably it has a duty to do so), but performance management should: 

• be aimed at improving the performance 
• be supportive and constructive 
• take into account any underlying health or wellbeing issues 
• be done in a private environment 
• be focused on the specific aspects or work areas that require improvement 
• be based on realistic timescales and targets for improvement. 

In contrast, bullying would be seen as: 

• being personally critical of the individual 
• picking up mistakes or errors that would not be mentioned to others 
• micro-managing the individual 
• creating unrealistic timescales and targets – ‘setting the individual up to fail’ 
• raising issues in front of others.