Does the advice people give kids being bullied to simply punch them in the face actually end it?

[Gerry Seymour]

If you read the study mentioned in the article in the link I posted, the answers to your questions are right there. Regarding seeing it in the wild, I truly don't see how that's possible. Is it possible that you dobt see it because you aren't looking? What I mean is, I don't know what you do when you are training. Do you interview employees? Do you talk to the hr folks about complaints? I'm just suggesting it's possible that if you are in and out of a business in a week or two, you are not really seeing everything that's going on.

This is also a topic that is frequently discussed in thr greater training and leadership development community, both private sector and public. Not to mention in EEOC and LR/ER. At the risk of overstating this, questioning the pervasiveness of workplace bullying is like being a climate change denier. What I mean by this is, while i think there is a lot of room for discussion , we should be past the point of agreeing it's a serious issue.

Okay, I read through the article. I saw a number of definitions of bullying, but I'm unclear which - if any - were provided to the participants in the survey. One of the definitions used ('The Trade Union Congress (TUC) states that "usually if a person genuinely feels they are being singled out for unfair treatment by a boss or colleague they are probably being bullied".') creates a pretty subjective measure, because of the use of "unfair". This is where surveys of bullying (and bad bosses, and other workplace issues with negative connotations) have a weakness.

I'm also unclear on the numbers around impact on job/health. I can't tell (I didn't see the questions provided) whether that was a response about what impact bullying could have, or about the impact it has had for that person. And even if we knew the questions, we're still asking someone to guess (can't really measure it, so it's all impressions) whether the bullying had an adverse effect on their work. If bullying (as I'd define it) happened around me, it'd probably have an adverse effect on my work (though I don't know how I could establish that as fact), so if half are experiencing bullying, it seems likely that same half is suffering some work (and health) degradation.

Later numbers say that 36% of people surveyed have left their jobs over bullying. That has to be a lifetime question, and leads right back to the question of definition. And there's likely some skewing by outliers - bad companies where lots of bullying happens, and everyone below a certain level experiences it nearly daily.

To be clear, I know folks who were bullied at work. Some close to me, some clients, and some I've learned of in training sessions. But these numbers, if accurate (for the definition I'd use) would imply that it's in nearly every office, nearly every day, on average. I see nothing in my work, nor in discussions with others, that supports that. That leads me to believe I'm either misreading the numbers, or the way they've been used in the article is a misread of them.

Still, it's a real problem, and needs to be addressed. I just don't think over-stating the problem helps us get there. It causes some loss of credibility when trying to convince people action is needed.

 

[Steve]

Okay, I read through the article. I saw a number of definitions of bullying, but I'm unclear which - if any - were provided to the participants in the survey. One of the definitions used ('The Trade Union Congress (TUC) states that "usually if a person genuinely feels they are being singled out for unfair treatment by a boss or colleague they are probably being bullied".') creates a pretty subjective measure, because of the use of "unfair". This is where surveys of bullying (and bad bosses, and other workplace issues with negative connotations) have a weakness.

I'm also unclear on the numbers around impact on job/health. I can't tell (I didn't see the questions provided) whether that was a response about what impact bullying could have, or about the impact it has had for that person. And even if we knew the questions, we're still asking someone to guess (can't really measure it, so it's all impressions) whether the bullying had an adverse effect on their work. If bullying (as I'd define it) happened around me, it'd probably have an adverse effect on my work (though I don't know how I could establish that as fact), so if half are experiencing bullying, it seems likely that same half is suffering some work (and health) degradation.

Later numbers say that 36% of people surveyed have left their jobs over bullying. That has to be a lifetime question, and leads right back to the question of definition. And there's likely some skewing by outliers - bad companies where lots of bullying happens, and everyone below a certain level experiences it nearly daily.

To be clear, I know folks who were bullied at work. Some close to me, some clients, and some I've learned of in training sessions. But these numbers, if accurate (for the definition I'd use) would imply that it's in nearly every office, nearly every day, on average. I see nothing in my work, nor in discussions with others, that supports that. That leads me to believe I'm either misreading the numbers, or the way they've been used in the article is a misread of them.

Still, it's a real problem, and needs to be addressed. I just don't think over-stating the problem helps us get there. It causes some loss of credibility when trying to convince people action is needed.

There are several studies linked to in the article. Each defines the terms.

You're suggesting the issue is being overstated, but it really seems like you've pre-decided that and are not being objective.

 

[dvcochran]

@Chrisinmd , I have went back and read many of the post on this thread. I'm wondering if you found what you were looking for in your original post?

 

[Chrisinmd]

I was raised in an earlier age, and things were less well understood I think. My solution with a persistent bully was to pick up a brick and beat him in the head until I was pulled off of him. I had to do it twice. The third time he bullied me, I told him that even though he could beat me up, I would never stop beating his head in with a brick or a stick or a rock, I'd do it every time I saw his back to me for the rest of his life. He decided I was too crazy to deal with. Not saying that was the best possible solution, but I was tired of taking beatings.

The brick method seems like a good way to get charged with Aggravated Assault. Plus don't you have to have a brick available at all times you may run into him? Not sure I would want to be carrying a brick around for 4 year of high school.

Good idea though

 

[Chrisinmd]

@Chrisinmd , I have went back and read many of the post on this thread. I'm wondering if you found what you were looking for in your original post?

Seems to be most peoples answer is it just depends on the situation. Its hard to know for sure. Good responses.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

The brick method seems like a good way to get charged with Aggravated Assault. Plus don't you have to have a brick available at all times you may run into him? Not sure I would want to be carrying a brick around for 4 year of high school.

Good idea though

Earlier times, earlier methods. There were no police in my town of 400. We would not have called them if there was. Bricks and all manner of blunt objects littered the alleys and vacant lots of my childhood homes.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

There are several studies linked to in the article. Each defines the terms.

You're suggesting the issue is being overstated, but it really seems like you've pre-decided that and are not being objective.

I'll need to go back and look at the links.

I think the numbers are overstated (again, going by how I'd define the term - if they're using a different definition, the numbers could be reasonable). But overstating numbers happens, even with an honest attempt to avoid it. Sometimes it's just a statistical problem, sometimes it's a reporting issue, etc.

I don't think anyone can help but bring their own experience into something like this. If the numbers for any study seem very off from related experience, it brings up reasonable questions about why. Among the possibilities are some I've mentioned (related to how the numbers are gathered) and some you've mentioned (my experience not matching others'). I think I mentioned this in a prior post (but maybe not), but one possible inflator (that doesn't really make the numbers overstated, but makes them misleading, IMO) would be if the questions are lifetime questions. I'd agree a large number of people experience bullying at some point in their work career. But if I experience it a few times many years ago, then that's a very different situation from you experiencing it daily for months or years (as some do).

 

[Bruce7]

Does the advice people give kids being bullied to simply punch them in the face actually end it? I know from some fights I have seen for example was the first job I worked at. I remember one fight the guy being bullied punched the guy in the face and the other guy responded and beat him pretty good punching him and bloodying him up pretty good. I don't remember people stopping screwing with you simply because he fought back and threw a punch. I don't think this myth that you simply fight back and then you earn respect and become best buddies after words is reality from what I have seen.

Another example was we had a mentally disabled guy that also worked their that people liked to screw with. He would go off verbally on them, get in their face and start screaming at them. So I know at least he stood up for himself verbally although I never personally seem him get physical. But I don't remember that ending the bullying either.

So the advice that you simply have to fight back to end bullying seems not to be the case to me. Seems like you have to win. Thoughts?

In my opinion if someone wants to kick your ****, they're not going to be nice about it. The idea that fights are some sort of gentleman's game, where two people face off and fight fair and square, seems like a bit of Hollywood mythology to me. None of my fights I have seen were like that.

There is a lot of truth to what you are saying, but I don't total agree.
Age and your ability to fight are important factors.
If you are a grown up , your boss or the law should fix the bulling problem.

As a child I was small and moved around alot so I got bullied a lot.
For me I decided in first grade, I would not be bullied, I did not care how bad I got hurt.
For me punching the bully in the face and keep hitting until teacher pulls you apart worked for me
because you at least hurt them.
Most bullies don't like getting hurt, so if you can hurt them, it is not worth it to keep bullying you.
One drawback to my plan, my parents sent me to military school when I became a teenager.
Oddly enough we soldem got into fights. They keep us so busy, who had the time or energy to fight.

 

[dvcochran]

I'll need to go back and look at the links.

I think the numbers are overstated (again, going by how I'd define the term - if they're using a different definition, the numbers could be reasonable). But overstating numbers happens, even with an honest attempt to avoid it. Sometimes it's just a statistical problem, sometimes it's a reporting issue, etc.

I don't think anyone can help but bring their own experience into something like this. If the numbers for any study seem very off from related experience, it brings up reasonable questions about why. Among the possibilities are some I've mentioned (related to how the numbers are gathered) and some you've mentioned (my experience not matching others'). I think I mentioned this in a prior post (but maybe not), but one possible inflator (that doesn't really make the numbers overstated, but makes them misleading, IMO) would be if the questions are lifetime questions. I'd agree a large number of people experience bullying at some point in their work career. But if I experience it a few times many years ago, then that's a very different situation from you experiencing it daily for months or years (as some do).

I guess it is unavoidable and can be gleaned from most anything we do in life but damn I have being a statistic.

 

[Steve]

I'll need to go back and look at the links.

I think the numbers are overstated (again, going by how I'd define the term - if they're using a different definition, the numbers could be reasonable). But overstating numbers happens, even with an honest attempt to avoid it. Sometimes it's just a statistical problem, sometimes it's a reporting issue, etc.

I don't think anyone can help but bring their own experience into something like this. If the numbers for any study seem very off from related experience, it brings up reasonable questions about why. Among the possibilities are some I've mentioned (related to how the numbers are gathered) and some you've mentioned (my experience not matching others'). I think I mentioned this in a prior post (but maybe not), but one possible inflator (that doesn't really make the numbers overstated, but makes them misleading, IMO) would be if the questions are lifetime questions. I'd agree a large number of people experience bullying at some point in their work career. But if I experience it a few times many years ago, then that's a very different situation from you experiencing it daily for months or years (as some do).

I really think you're overestimating yiur ubdersrandknh of an organizations culture based on your brief interactions with some cross section of the employees. The stats are quite consistent from study to study, in the USA, the UK, and Australia. As with self defense and other areas, you're making confident declarations that are unsupported by evidence. It's a concerning pattern .

To he clear, where your experience and evidence is consistent, great. Where they are inconsistent, you have to consider which is more reliable . You often default to your experience and dismiss evidence both before considering or even reading the evidence.

For what its worth, my experience is consistent with the evidence in this case. I'm happy to consider alternative evidence, if you care to share it.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I really think you're overestimating yiur ubdersrandknh of an organizations culture based on your brief interactions with some cross section of the employees. The stats are quite consistent from study to study, in the USA, the UK, and Australia. As with self defense and other areas, you're making confident declarations that are unsupported by evidence. It's a concerning pattern .

To he clear, where your experience and evidence is consistent, great. Where they are inconsistent, you have to consider which is more reliable . You often default to your experience and dismiss evidence both before considering or even reading the evidence.

For what its worth, my experience is consistent with the evidence in this case. I'm happy to consider alternative evidence, if you care to share it.

I thought I'd made it clear that I consider it likely the difference is in the definition and/or timeline. The stats make sense if I assume the question asked was "have you ever experienced workplace bullying" - in fact, I'd consider those numbers low on that timeline. I could also see those numbers making sense with a less restrictive definition than the one in my mind.

 

[Chrisinmd]

Earlier times, earlier methods. There were no police in my town of 400. We would not have called them if there was. Bricks and all manner of blunt objects littered the alleys and vacant lots of my childhood homes.

I grew up in a small town of 20,000 in the Midwest. Kind of the same situation just to a lessor extent. Could have called the police but then you get labeled a snitch and may have made matters worse.

 

[Steve]

I thought I'd made it clear that I consider it likely the difference is in the definition and/or timeline. The stats make sense if I assume the question asked was "have you ever experienced workplace bullying" - in fact, I'd consider those numbers low on that timeline. I could also see those numbers making sense with a less restrictive definition than the one in my mind.

Okay, sooooo... Then if you think those numbers might be low, we can agree that it is.... What's the word??? Pervasive maybe?

Can you see how I might grow frustrated at your habit of taking internally inconsistent positions and arguing both sides of an issue simultaneously?

 

[Buka]

@Steve, is there workplace bullying at your workplace?

 

[Steve]

@Steve, is there workplace bullying at your workplace?

Sure. Of course. Though I think it happens in pockets.

 

[Buka]

Sure. Of course. Though I think it happens in pockets.

By "happens in pockets" you mean hidden? And what kind of bullying?

I'm not looking to argue or nitpick, I'm truly curious about this. Does it happen in your presence, or do you hear about it or somthing?

 

[Steve]

By "happens in pockets" you mean hidden? And what kind of bullying?

I'm not looking to argue or nitpick, I'm truly curious about this. Does it happen in your presence, or do you hear about it or somthing?

I can talk to you offline, if you're looking for specifics. I don't get the impression youre arguing, but I'm also not going to sling mud.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Okay, sooooo... Then if you think those numbers might be low, we can agree that it is.... What's the word??? Pervasive maybe?

Can you see how I might grow frustrated at your habit of taking internally inconsistent positions and arguing both sides of an issue simultaneously?

You're frustrated because you're reacting to part of each post, Steve. My posts have been consistent about the fact that the numbers seem high...if they're using the same definitions I'd use.

 

[Buka]

Offline would be fine.

 

[Steve]

You're frustrated because you're reacting to part of each post, Steve. My posts have been consistent about the fact that the numbers seem high...if they're using the same definitions I'd use.

I'm actually frustrated precisely because I'm considering the totality of your posts amd not parsing them out.