This study explores organizational bystander responses to sexual harassment in order to understand how bystanders facilitate healing, perpetuate harm, and create tensions for individuals who experience workplace sexual harassment. This qualitative analysis expands our understanding of bystander communication in several ways. First, we present patterns of constructive and destructive bystander communication practices and introduce the concept of holistic support. Second, we analyze how responses by organizational bystanders (dis)organize sexual harassment or ignite fears of (dis)organization. Last, we introduce a continuum of bystander response patterns that demonstrate the tensions targets of sexual harassment navigate when interacting with bystanders. Findings illuminate the possibilities for workplace transformation and we provide recommendations for how to best support individuals who are sexually harassed.
ArmitageJ. S. (2022). “When I least expected it”: An autoethnography of reporting workplace sexual harassment and compassionate bystanders. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 51(1), 29–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/08912416211022817
2.
BanyardV. L. (2011). Who will help prevent sexual violence: Creating an ecological model of bystander intervention. Psychology of Violence, 1(3), 216–229. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023739
3.
BergmanM. E.LanghoutR. D.PalmieriP. A.CortinaL. M.FitzgeraldL. F. (2002). The (un)reasonableness of reporting: Antecedents and consequences of reporting sexual harassment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 230–242. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.2.230
4.
BinghamS. G.BatteyK. M. (2005). Communication of social support to sexual harassment victims: Professors’ responses to a student’s narrative of unwanted sexual attention. Communication Studies, 56(2), 131–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/00089570500078767
5.
BiselR. S. (2010). A communicative ontology of organization? A description, history, and critique of CCO theories for organization science. Management Communication Quarterly, 24(1), 124–131. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318909351582
6.
BiselR. S.KavyaP.TracyS. J. (2020). Positive deviance case selection as a method for organizational communication: A rationale, how-to, and illustration. Management Communication Quarterly, 34(2), 279–296. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318919897060
7.
Booth-ButterfieldM. (1986). Recognizing and communicating in harassment-prone organizational climates. Women's Studies in Communication, 9(2), 42–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/07491409.1986.11089693
8.
Bowes-SperryL.O’Leary-KellyA. M. (2005). To act or not to act: The dilemma faced by sexual harassment observers. Academy of Management Review, 30(2), 288–306. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2005.16387886
9.
ClairR. P. (1993). The bureaucratization, commodification, and privatization of sexual harassment through institutional discourse: A study of the big ten universities. Management Communication Quarterly, 7(2), 123–157. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318993007002001
10.
ClairR. P. (1994). Hegemony and harassment: A discursive practice. In BinghamS. G. (Ed.), Conceptualizing sexual harassment as discursive practice (pp. 59–70). Praeger.
11.
ClairR. P.BrownN. E.DoughertyD. S.DelemeesterH. K.Geist-MartinP.GordenW. I.SorgT.TurnerP. K. (2019). #MeToo, sexual harassment: An article, a forum, and a dream for the future. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 47(2), 111–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2019.1567142
DoughertyD. S.SmytheM. J. (2004). Sensemaking, organizational culture, and sexual harassment. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 32(4), 293–317. https://doi.org/10.1080/0090988042000275998
14.
DoughertyD. S.SorgT. A. (2020). Sexual harassment, communication, and the bystander: Setting an applied agenda. In O’HairH. D.O’HairM. J. (Eds.), The handbook of applied communication research (pp. 653–673). John Wiley and Sons.
15.
FairhurstG. T.SheepM. L. (2019). Rethinking order and disorder: Accounting for disequilibrium in knotted systems of paradoxical tensions. In VásquezC.KuhnT. (Eds.), Dis/organization as communication (pp. 80–98). Routledge.
16.
FirestoneJ. M.HarrisR. J. (2003). Perceptions of effectiveness of responses to sexual harassment in the US military, 1988 and 1995. Gender, Work and Organization, 10(1), 42–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0432.00003
17.
ForbesD. A. (2009). Commodification and co-modification: Explicating black female sexuality in organizations. Management Communication Quarterly, 22(4), 577–613. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318908331322
18.
FordJ. L.IvancicS. R. (2020). Surviving organizational tolerance of sexual harassment: An exploration of resilience, vulnerability, and harassment fatigue. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 48(2), 186–206. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2020.1739317
19.
HarrisK. L. (2019). Beyond the rapist: Title IX and sexual violence on US campuses. Oxford University Press.
20.
HerovicE.ScarduzioJ. A.LuekenS. (2019). It literally happens every day”: The multiple settings, multilevel considerations, and uncertainty management of modern-day sexual harassment. Western Journal of Communication, 83(1), 39–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/10570314.2018.1485052
21.
HulinC. L.FitzgeraldL. F.DrasgowF. (1996). Organizational influences on sexual harassment. In StockdaleM. S. (Ed.), Sexual harassment in the workplace (pp. 127–150). Sage.
22.
KeytonJ.ClairR.ComptonC. A.DoughertyD. S.Forbes BerthoudD.ManningJ.ScarduzioJ. A. (2018). Addressing sexual harassment in a sexually charged national culture. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 46(6), 665–683. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2018.1546472
23.
KeytonJ.FergusonP.RhodesS. C. (2001). Cultural indicators of sexual harassment. Southern Communication Journal, 67(1), 33–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/10417940109373217
24.
McDonaldP.CharlesworthS.GrahamT. (2016). Action or inaction: Bystander intervention in workplace sexual harassment. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 27(5), 548–566. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2015.1023331
PageA.ArcyJ. (2020). MeToo and the politics of collective healing: Emotional connection as contestation. Communication, Culture and Critique, 13(3), 333–348. https://doi.org/10.1093/ccc/tcz032
27.
PutnamL. L. (2019). Constituting order and disorder: Embracing tensions and contradictions. In VásquezC.KuhnT. (Eds.), Dis/organization as communication (pp. 17–35). Routledge.
28.
RisanP.MilneR.BinderP.-E. (2020). Trauma narratives: Recommendations for investigative interviewing. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 27(4), 678–694. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2020.1742237
29.
ScarduzioJ. A.Malvini ReddenS.FletcherJ. (2020). Everyone’s “uncomfortable” but only some people report: An exploration of emotional discomfort and thresholds in reporting decisions. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 49(1), 66–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2020.1849771
30.
ScarduzioJ. A.SheffS. E.SmithM. (2018). Coping and sexual harassment: How victims cope across multiple settings. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 47(2), 327–340. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-017-1065-7
31.
TownsleyN. C.GeistP. (2000). The discursive enactment of hegemony: Sexual harassment and academic organizing. Western Journal of Communication, 64(2), 190–217. https://doi.org/10.1080/10570310009374671
32.
TracyS. J. (2020). Qualitative research methods. Wiley Blackwell.
VásquezC.KuhnT. (2019). Introduction. In VásquezC.KuhnT. (Eds.), Dis/organization as communication (pp. 1–13). Routledge.
35.
WeickK. E. (1993). The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: The Mann Gulch disaster. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(4), 628–652. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393339
36.
WillnessC. R.SteelP.LeeK. (2007). A meta‐analysis of the antecedents and consequences of workplace sexual harassment. Personnel Psychology, 60(1), 127–162. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2007.00067.x
