Workplace cyberbullying significantly impacts employee well-being and innovation. Unlike traditional bullying, cyberbullying’s digital nature makes it pervasive and challenging to address.
Objective
This study investigates how workplace cyberbullying affects employee innovation performance, focusing on the mediating role of work disengagement and the moderating roles of bystander behavior and employee resilience.
Methods
Snowball sampling was used to identify 263 victims of workplace cyberbullying in the IT sector of Pakistan. The data collected through an online survey was analyzed using structural equation modeling to examine the relationships between workplace cyberbullying, work disengagement, innovation performance, and the moderating effects of bystander behavior and resilience.
Results
Workplace cyberbullying negatively impacts innovation performance directly and through increased work disengagement. Active bystander behavior mitigates, while passive bystander behavior exacerbates the adverse effects of workplace cyberbullying on work disengagement. Contrary to expectations, employee resilience did not significantly moderate the relationship between workplace cyberbullying and disengagement.
Conclusions
Workplace cyberbullying undermines employee innovation performance by increasing work disengagement. Active bystander intervention can reduce these negative impacts, highlighting the need for organizational policies to encourage supportive behavior. The lack of a moderating effect of resilience suggests that tailored resilience training is necessary for high-pressure environments like the IT sector in Pakistan.
KrausSFerrarisABertelloA. The future of work: How innovation and digitalization re-shape the workplace. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge2023; 8(4): 100438. DOI: 10.1016/j.jik.2023.100438.
2.
CretuDMMorandauF. Bullying and cyberbullying: a bibliometric analysis of three decades of research in education. Educ Rev2024; 76(2): 371–404. DOI: 10.1080/00131911.2022.2034749.
3.
SnymanRLohJM. Cyberbullying at work: The mediating role of optimism between cyberbullying and job outcomes. Comput Hum Behav2015; 53: 161–168. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.06.050.
4.
OguzAMehtaNPalviaP. Cyberbullying in the workplace: a novel framework of routine activities and organizational control. Internet Res2023; 33(6): 2276–2307. DOI: 10.1108/INTR-05-2021-0288.
5.
GroverSRajuVV. Cyberbullying: A narrative review. J Ment Health Hum Be2023; 28(1): 17–26. DOI: 10.4103/jmhhb.jmhhb_47_22.
6.
SmithPKMahdaviJCarvalhoM, et al.Cyberbullying: Its nature and impact in secondary school pupils. J Child Psychol Psychiatry2008; 49(4): 376–385. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2007.01846.x.
7.
WangSKimKJ. Effects of victimization experience, gender, and empathic distress on bystanders’ intervening behavior in cyberbullying. Soc Sci J2021; 61: 1–10. DOI: 10.1080/03623319.2020.1861826.
8.
MalikOFPichlerS. Organizational politics, anger and workplace cyberbullying perpetration: a multigroup analysis of gender. Management Research Review2024. DOI: 10.1108/MRR-08-2023-0622.
9.
OksanenAOksaRSavelaN, et al.Cyberbullying victimization at work: Social media identity bubble approach. Comput Hum Behav2020; 109: 106363. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2020.106363.
10.
TaoSLanMTanCY, et al.Adolescents’ cyberbullying experience and subjective well-being: sex difference in the moderating role of cognitive-emotional regulation strategy. Comput Hum Behav2024; 153: 108122. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2023.108122.
11.
SripaKThummaphanPNinphetT, et al.Combating cyberbullying in Thai youth: Learning innovation as a possible solution. Int J Educ Dev2024; 108: 103065. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijedudev.2024.103065.
12.
RudnickiKVandeboschHVouéP, et al.Systematic review of determinants and consequences of bystander interventions in online hate and cyberbullying among adults. Behav Inf Technol2023; 42(5): 527–544. DOI: 10.1080/0144929X.2022.2027013.
13.
SahaRAhlawatSAkramU, et al.Online abuse: a systematic literature review and future research agenda. Int J Conflict Manag2024; 35: 1–16. DOI: 10.1108/IJCMA-09-2023-0188.
14.
ChanTKCheungCMBenbasatI, et al.Bystanders join in cyberbullying on social networking sites: the deindividuation and moral disengagement perspectives. Inf Syst Res2023; 34(3): 828–846. DOI: 10.1287/isre.2022.1161.
15.
EldridgeMAJenkinsLN. The bystander intervention model: teacher intervention in traditional and cyber bullying. Int J Bullying Prev2020; 2: 253–263. DOI: 10.1007/s42380-019-00033-7.
16.
FerreiraPCSimãoAVFerreiraA, et al.Student bystander behavior and cultural issues in cyberbullying: When actions speak louder than words. Comput Hum Behav2016; 60: 301–311. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.059.
17.
AnwarAKeeDMHAhmedA. Workplace cyberbullying and interpersonal deviance: understanding the mediating effect of silence and emotional exhaustion. Cyberpsychol, Behav Soc Netw2020; 23(5): 290–296. DOI: 10.1089/cyber.2019.0407.
18.
CeluchMOksaRSavelaN, et al.Longitudinal effects of cyberbullying at work on well-being and strain: A five-wave survey study. New Media Soc2024; 26(6): 3410–3432. DOI: 10.1177/14614448221100782.
19.
ZhangZXiaoHZhangL, et al.Linking cyberbullying to job strain: roles of ego depletion and self-efficacy. J Aggress Maltreat Trauma2022; 31(6): 798–815. DOI: 10.1080/10926771.2021.1933288.
20.
UllahSShaukatMRKukretiM, et al.From bystander to protector: reducing impact of cyberbullying on employee innovation behavior through bystander intervention. Int J Bullying Prev. 2024; Published ahead of prints: 1–11. DOI: 10.1007/s42380-024-00267-0.
21.
MushtaqWQammarAShafiqueI, et al.Effect of cyberbullying on employee creativity: examining the roles of family social support and job burnout. Foresight2022; 24(5): 596–609. DOI: 10.1108/FS-01-2021-0018.
22.
KalyarMNSaeedMUstaA, et al.Workplace cyberbullying and creativity: examining the roles of psychological distress and psychological capital. Management Research Review2021; 44(4): 607–624. DOI: 10.1108/MRR-03-2020-0130.
23.
AboobakerNShanujasV. Towards a sustainable workplace: investigating workplace cyberbullying and its relationship with employee wellbeing and intention to stay in remote and hybrid work settings. Int J Prod Perform Manag2024. DOI: 10.1108/IJPPM-12-2023-0662.
24.
IqbalSUllahSRizwanA, et al.The impact of organizational culture on knowledge sharing and absorptive capacity: a study of the microfinance institutions in Pakistan. South Asian Journal of Business Studies2024. DOI: 10.1108/SAJBS-01-2024-0038.
25.
LazarusRSFolkmanS. Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer, 1984.
26.
FarleySMokhtarDNgK, et al.What influences the relationship between workplace bullying and employee well-being? A systematic review of moderators. Work Stress2023; 37(3): 345–372. DOI: 10.1080/02678373.2023.2169968.
27.
BiggsABroughPDrummondS. Lazarus and Folkman’s psychological stress and coping theory. In: The handbook of stress and health: A guide to research and practice. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Ltd., 2017, pp. 349–364.
28.
MaddenCLohJ. Workplace cyberbullying and bystander helping behaviour. Int J Hum Resour Manag2020; 31(19): 2434–2458. DOI: 10.1080/09585192.2018.1449130.
29.
JenningsLZhaoKFaulknerN, et al.Mapping bystander intervention to workplace inclusion: A scoping review. Hum Resour Manag Rev2024; 34(2): 101017. DOI: 10.1016/j.hrmr.2024.101017.
30.
FerreiraPCSimãoAVPaivaA, et al.Responsive bystander behaviour in cyberbullying: a path through self-efficacy. Behav Inf Technol2020; 39(5): 511–524. DOI: 10.1080/0144929X.2019.1602671.
31.
NgKNivenKHoelH. ‘I could help, but.’: a dynamic sensemaking model of workplace bullying bystanders. Hum Relat2020; 73(12): 1718–1746. DOI: 10.1177/0018726719884617.
32.
AhmadSIslamTSohalAS, et al.Managing bullying in the workplace: a model of servant leadership, employee resilience and proactive personality. Person Rev2021; 50(7/8): 1613–1631. DOI: 10.1108/PR-06-2020-0470.
33.
AnasoriEDe VitaGGürkan KüçükerginK. Workplace bullying, psychological distress, job performance and employee creativity: the moderating effect of psychological resilience. Serv Ind J2023; 43(5–6): 336–357. DOI: 10.1080/02642069.2022.2147514.
34.
ÖzkanOSÜzümBÇakanS. Could unlocking employee resilience be considered a potential path to achieving workplace success?Curr Psychol2024; 43(13): 11772–11784. DOI: 10.1007/s12144-023-05307-4.
35.
VarelaJJHernándezCBergerC, et al.To ignore or not to ignore: The differential effect of coping mechanisms on depressive symptoms when facing adolescent cyberbullying. Comput Hum Behav2022; 132: 107268. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2022.107268.
36.
LyuMSunBZhangZ. Linking online voice to workplace cyberbullying: roles of job strain and moral efficacy. Kybernetes2023; 52(5): 1778–1794. DOI: 10.1108/K-03-2021-0246.
37.
NgKNivenKNotelaersG. Does bystander behavior make a difference? How passive and active bystanders in the group moderate the effects of bullying exposure. J Occup Health Psychol2022; 27(1): 119–135. DOI: 10.1037/ocp0000296.
38.
NielsenMBMikkelsenEGPerssonR, et al.Coping with bullying at work: how do targets, bullies and bystanders deal with bullying? Bullying and Harassment in the Workplace. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2020, pp. 563–591.
39.
VranjesIBaillienEVandeboschH, et al.The dark side of working online: Towards a definition and an Emotion Reaction model of workplace cyberbullying. Comput Hum Behav2017; 69: 324–334. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.055.
40.
GiniGThornbergRPozzoliT. Individual moral disengagement and bystander behavior in bullying: The role of moral distress and collective moral disengagement. Psychology of Violence2020; 10(1): 38–47. DOI: 10.1037/vio0000223.
41.
RastogiAPatiSPKrishnanT, et al.Causes, contingencies, and consequences of disengagement at work: An integrative literature review. Hum Resour Dev Rev2018; 17(1): 62–94. DOI: 10.1177/153448431775.
42.
MaqboolMLyuBUllahS, et al.Abusive supervisor triggers counterproductive work behaviors in nursing staff: role of psychological contract breach and Islamic work ethics. Leader Organ Dev J2024; 45(3): 461–477. DOI: 10.1108/LODJ-06-2023-0295.
43.
OlaleyeBRLekunzeJN. Emotional intelligence and psychological resilience on workplace bullying and employee performance: a moderated-mediation perspective. J of Law and Sust Develop2024; 12(1): e2159. DOI: 10.55908/sdgs.v12i01.2159.
44.
De ClercqDPereiraR. Using resilience and passion to overcome bullying and lack of meaning at work: a pathway to change-oriented citizenship. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance2023; 10(1): 132–157. DOI: 10.1108/JOEPP-06-2022-0163.
45.
Al DoghanMAArshadS. Cyberbullying and psychological stress among female employees. International Journal of Cyber Criminology2023; 17(1): 166–184. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.4766610.
46.
VranjesIBaillienEVandeboschH, et al.When workplace bullying goes online: Construction and validation of the inventory of cyberbullying acts at work (ICA-W). Eur J Work Organ Psychol2018; 27(1): 28–39. DOI: 10.1080/1359432X.2017.1363185.
47.
KwonKKimT. An integrative literature review of employee engagement and innovative behavior: Revisiting the JD-R model. Hum Resour Manag Rev2020; 30(2): 100704. DOI: 10.1016/j.hrmr.2019.100704.
48.
MalikOFPichlerS. Linking perceived organizational politics to workplace cyberbullying perpetration: the role of anger and fear. J Bus Ethics2023; 186(2): 445–463. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-022-05234-7.
49.
BusseyKLuoA. Mindfulness as a moderator between the association of moral disengagement and cyberbullying. International Journal of Bullying Prevention. 2024; Published ahead of prints: 1–8. DOI: 10.1007/s42380-024-00256-3.
50.
CoyneIFarleySAxtellC, et al.Understanding the relationship between experiencing workplace cyberbullying, employee mental strain and job satisfaction: A dysempowerment approach. Int J Hum Resour Manag2017; 28(7): 945–972. DOI: 10.1080/09585192.2015.1116454.
51.
UllahSAhmadTMehmoodT, et al.Innovation and economic performance of firms in national science & technology park, Islamabad, Pakistan. Foresight2023; 25(5): 633–648. DOI: 10.1108/FS-08-2021-0151.
52.
WangY. Understanding the role of social factors in cyberbullying at work. Comput Hum Behav2022; 134: 107325. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2022.107325.
53.
TongJSpitzmuellerC. To reflect or to detach after work? Relating interpersonal challenge and hindrance stressors to engagement and burnout. Int J Stress Manag2024. DOI: 10.1037/str0000317.
54.
McCordMASawhneyGMcHughB. Working in a virtual world: A meta-analytic investigation of cyber mistreatment in the workplace. Comput Hum Behav2024; 159(10): 108324. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2024.108324.
55.
PauksztatBSalinDKitadaM. Bullying behavior and employee well-being: how do different forms of social support buffer against depression, anxiety and exhaustion?Int Arch Occup Environ Health2022; 95(7): 1633–1644. DOI: 10.1007/s00420-022-01844-w.
56.
KrishnaASoumyajaDSowmyaC. Workplace bullying and diffident silence: a moderated mediation model of shame and core self-evaluation. Int J Conflict Manag2023; 34(3): 417–439. DOI: 10.1108/IJCMA-04-2022-0075.
57.
MarshEVallejosEPSpenceA. The digital workplace and its dark side: An integrative review. Comput Hum Behav2022; 128: 107118. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2021.107118.
58.
ZhengXQinXLiuX, et al.Will creative employees always make trouble? Investigating the roles of moral identity and moral disengagement. J Bus Ethics2019; 157: 653–672. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-017-3683-3.
59.
AzeemMUBajwaSUShahzadK, et al.Psychological contract violation and turnover intention: The role of job dissatisfaction and work disengagement. Employee Relat2020; 42(6): 1291–1308. DOI: 10.1108/ER-09-2019-0372.
60.
AkramZKhanAGAkramU, et al.A contemporary view of interpersonal aggression and cyberbullying through ICT: multilevel insights from LMX differentiation. Internet Res2022; 32(5): 1700–1724. DOI: 10.1108/INTR-11-2020-0659.
61.
DeSmetADe BourdeaudhuijIWalraveM, et al.Associations between bystander reactions to cyberbullying and victims’ emotional experiences and mental health. Cyberpsychol, Behav Soc Netw2019; 22(10): 648–656. DOI: 10.1089/cyber.2019.0031.
62.
Lo CricchioMGGarcia-PooleCte BrinkeLW, et al.Moral disengagement and cyberbullying involvement: A systematic review. Eur J Dev Psychol2021; 18(2): 271–311. DOI: 10.1080/17405629.2020.1782186.
63.
CoyneIGopaulA-MCampbellM, et al.Bystander responses to bullying at work: The role of mode, type and relationship to target. J Bus Ethics2019; 157: 813–827. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-017-3692-2.
64.
UllahSAhmadTLyuB, et al.Integrating external stakeholders for improvement in green innovation performance: role of green knowledge integration capability and regulatory pressure. Int J Innovat Sci2024; 16(4): 640–657. DOI: 10.1108/IJIS-12-2022-0237.
65.
PaullMOmariMD'CruzP, et al.Bystanders in workplace bullying: working university students’ perspectives on action versus inaction. Asia Pac J Human Res2020; 58(3): 313–334. DOI: 10.1111/1744-7941.12216.
66.
UllahSLyuBAhmadT, et al.A mediated moderation model of eco-guilt, personal and social norms and religiosity triggering pro-environmental behavior in tourists. Curr Psychol2024; 43: 6830–6839. DOI: 10.1007/s12144-023-04894-6.
67.
KazerooniFTaylorSHBazarovaNN, et al.Cyberbullying bystander intervention: The number of offenders and retweeting predict likelihood of helping a cyberbullying victim. J Comput Mediat Commun2018; 23(3): 146–162. DOI: 10.1093/jcmc/zmy005.
68.
Olenik-ShemeshDHeimanTEdenS. Bystanders’ behavior in cyberbullying episodes: Active and passive patterns in the context of personal–socio-emotional factors. J Interpers Violence2017; 32(1): 23–48. DOI: 10.1177/0886260515585531.
69.
AhmadTUllahS. Development under belt and road initiative: Gains for tourism industry in participant countries. J China Tourism Res2023; 19(4): 950–972. DOI: 10.1080/19388160.2023.2167895.
70.
HarperM-G. Tolerable deviance and how it applies to cyberbullying. Deviant Behav2019; 40(1): 29–39. DOI: 10.1080/01639625.2017.1411023.
71.
LohJSnymanR. The tangled web: consequences of workplace cyberbullying in adult male and female employees. Gender in Management: Int J2020; 35(6): 567–584. DOI: 10.1108/GM-12-2019-0242.
72.
SlonjeRSmithPKFrisénA. Perceived reasons for the negative impact of cyberbullying and traditional bullying. Eur J Dev Psychol2017; 14(3): 295–310. DOI: 10.1080/17405629.2016.1200461.
73.
JiangHJiangXSunP, et al.Coping with workplace ostracism: the roles of emotional exhaustion and resilience in deviant behavior. Manag Decis2021; 59(2): 358–371. DOI: 10.1108/MD-06-2019-0848.
74.
RaperMJBroughPBiggsA. Is it all about the personal resources? The moderating role of resilience on daily stress appraisal and emotion. Work Stress2023: 1–22. DOI: 10.1080/02678373.2023.2283217.
75.
SmithMMSaklofskeDHKeeferKV, et al.Coping strategies and psychological outcomes: The moderating effects of personal resiliency. J Psychol2016; 150(3): 318–332. DOI: 10.1080/00223980.2015.1036828.
76.
JanssenOVan YperenNW. Employees’ goal orientations, the quality of leader-member exchange, and the outcomes of job performance and job satisfaction. Acad Manage J2004; 47(3): 368–384. DOI: 10.5465/20159587.
77.
MostafaAMSFarleySZaharieM. Examining the boundaries of ethical leadership: The harmful effect of co-worker social undermining on disengagement and employee attitudes. J Bus Ethics2021; 174: 355–368. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-020-04586-2.
78.
LuthansFAvolioBJAveyJB, et al.Positive psychological capital: Measurement and relationship with performance and satisfaction. Person Psychol2007; 60(3): 541–572. DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2007.00083.x.
79.
HairJFSarstedtMRingleCM, et al.Going beyond the untold facts in PLS–SEM and moving forward. Eur J Mark2024; 58(13): 81–106. DOI: 10.1108/EJM-08-2023-0645.
80.
HairJFRisherJJSarstedtM, et al.When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. Eur Bus Rev2019; 31(1): 2–24. DOI: 10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203.
81.
HairJFHowardMCNitzlCAssessing measurement model quality in PLS-SEM using confirmatory composite analysis. J Bus Res2020; 109: 101–110. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.11.069.
82.
PodsakoffPMMacKenzieSBPodsakoffNP. Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annu Rev Psychol2012; 63: 539–569. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452.
