A bully as an archetypal destructive leader.

Negative life themes (e.g., negative events--death of parents, financial impoverishment, physical harm, or lasting deformity and the like--in the life of an individual) can influence the willingness of an individual to become aggressive in social settings. Socially destructive acts by a bully may be based on a desire of the bully to "make-up" for the negative life events in the past of the bully (Mumford et al., 2001). This feeling of retaliation against others is justified in the bully's perceptions of mistreatment and/or disadvantage due to circumstances beyond his or her own control. These negative perceptions can lead to the bully's exhibiting high levels of greed, self-absorption, physical and/or verbal aggression, and devaluing others in a group or organization (Van Fleet & Van Fleet, 1998). The negative life themes scar the bully so that aggression against others (those that have not been negatively affected by life events) becomes an acceptable interpersonal behavior.

A final characteristic of a bully that that may be deemed of importance is evil (i.e., continuous infliction of a highly negative state on another for a brief state of pleasure for the bully or due to a slight annoyance to the bully) (Darley, 1992). Frequently, the bully may posses a quality of evilness and can be considered having the cardinal trait of being an evildoer (Allport, 1937). The resulting "agentic state" (i.e., not governed by one's own conscience but rather the conscience has been "switched-off") facilitates a situation where the bully acts without remorse (Millgram, 1974). There are "bad" people and, unfortunately, they work in organizations, as illustrated by popular novels where Hannibal Lector is a "productive" member of society or when "Charles Manson" shows up for work. There are individuals who have innate destructive tendencies that if not controlled, will result in the infliction of pain and suffering on those in an organization (Darley, 1992).

The bullied. Just as the bully can affect the level of bullying activity in an organization, so too the individual(s) being bullied may have a salient influence on the occurrence and/or impact of bullying. There are a number of characteristics that may encourage and perpetuate bullying in organizations. Almost anyone can become the victim of bullying, yet there is a widely held belief that individuals with specific characteristics are primary targets for bullying activities (Aquino, 2000; Aquino & Byron, 2002; Felson & Steadman, 1983; Olweus, 1978; Schwartz et al., 1993; R. Sparks et al., 1977).

Frequently, the victim exhibits anxiety and fear (i.e., a feeling of dissatisfaction and/or anxiety due to perceived risk or danger). It has been proffered that individuals become targets of harmful bullying activities because they exhibit victim characteristics (Aquino, Grover, Bradfield, & Allen, 1999; Aquino, 2000). Victimization is an individual's self-perception of having been the target of bullying, either momentarily or over time, from one or more persons and having become inured to the situation (Aquino & Byron, 2002).

Victims can be passive, not well connected in the organization, or not essential to the work group (Aquino, Grover, Bradfield, & Allen, 1999; Aquino, 2000). This lack of identification with bases of power signals to the bully that these individuals are likely or passive targets of bullying behaviors. This situation can escalate into a learned helplessness of the bullied individual, thus perpetuating the bullying or bullied cycle (Kelly, Jennings, & Dran, 1999). The lack of power of the bullying victims heightens their likelihood on the bully's radar, insuring that they will continue to be bullied absent some sort of intervention.

There are a number of characteristics believed to be present in victims of bullies. These factors are as follows: (a) passive and/or submissive personality that indicates an "easy target," (b) low self-esteem individuals who believe that they deserve to be bullied because of their inadequacies, (c) belonging to vulnerable groups that lack influence in the organization, (d) being a member of the "out-group" versus the powerful "in-group," (e) lack of political influence and/or political skill, and (f) having adopted a learned helplessness and accepting their victimization (Aquino, 2000; Aquino & Byron, 2002; Aquino, Douglas, & Martinko, 2004; Aquino et al., 1999). These characteristics are not only observed by the bully but also by others in the organization. The victim "deserves" to be bullied and if he or she is not the target, then we as "others" might become the intended target of the bully. Thus, the characteristics of the observers of bullying should be examined.

The "observer(s)." The reaction of "others" to bullying behavior can delineate the parameters of acceptance of the bullying behavior in an organization. One key issue is that the acceptance of the bully's behavior may encourage bullying to continue in the organization. The "others" region of rejection, relative to the bullying act, becomes the set point that is used to determine the level of acceptance of the bullying behavior.

An aggressive stance by the observers is less likely to occur when they have neither the power to control nor authority to sanction the bully. Furthermore, involvement may draw attention as a potential target of bullying (i.e., aggressive, dominating social behaviors can influence vulnerability to bullying if the bully cannot be confined; Aquino & Byron, 2002). Frequently, the observers will remain in a passive role until there is an indication (i.e., negative sanctions) that the bullying behavior will not be tolerated.

Bullying activities can encourage acquiescence. The behavior that occurs most frequently is that of the "spiral of silence" (Moy, Domke, & Stamm, 2001). As developed by Noelle-Neumann (1974), the "commonwealth (i.e., shared beliefs of groups and to a lesser extent global organizations) is held together by prevailing views, habits, and prescribed behavior; from which none can deviate without running the risk of being ostracized" (Noelle-Neumann, 1989, p. 6). Employees and/or managers are willing to ignore what they know is "wrong" for fear they will be isolated or that support will be withdrawn (Noelle-Neumann, 1974).

The withholding of judgment by an "observer" of bullying is believed to indicate that there is a significant emotional component to the bullying activity. The fear perceived by "observers" does not have to be accurate relative to the potential retaliation of the bully; in fact, the power comes from the misperception of the "observer," which is commonly referred to as "pluralistic ignorance" (i.e., withholding personal opinion to mimic or support the perceived group or organizational position on an issue) (O'Gorman, 1986). The observer is normally a passive participant in the bullying act but one that is essential to reducing the occurrence of bullying in an organization.

Group Characteristics

Although most researchers have examined the dyadic relationship between the bully and the bullied (e.g., Aquino & Lamertz, 2004; Coyne, Chong, Seigne, & Randall, 2003; Felson, 1992; Leymann & Gustafsson, 1996; Namie, 2003; Smith, Singer, Hoel, & Cooper, 2003); much can be learned from examining the impact of bullying on the functioning of groups. A group may not be the target of bullying but the concomitant impact on the functioning of the group may be significant (Bowes-Sperry & O'Leary-Kelly, 2005; Delbecq, 2001; Einarsen, Hoel, Zapf, & Cooper, 2003; O'Gorman, 1986). It would appear that there are a number of related group issues that could be influenced by a bully, particularly as a destructive leader (Greer, 2000).

Individuals evaluating group membership prior to joining a particular group can do so through observation and interaction with group members. This reconnoitering on the part of a potential member may have significant input on the decision to join a group (Brown, 2000). One of the primary inputs to a decision to join may be the nature and/or quality and/or reputation of the leadership in the group. Groups with leaders who are destructive (e.g., a bully) may have greater difficulty in attracting new group members due to the negative opinions of the leader (Hogh & Dofradottir, 2001; Zapf, 1999). In addition, there could be tension and stress in the group indicating dysfunctional dynamics, which could influence the willingness of potential members to join (Strube & Garcia, 1981). Without new membership, or interest in joining the group, the group may atrophy and lose vitality as a group.

A group member's social identity is partly defined by the group and the role in the group (Turner, 1982). If social identity is directly affected by the bully in the group, then the individual group member will have a conflicted social image. In addition, the personal image (i.e., how the individual refers to self-descriptions) may also be affected given the turmoil the individual experiences in a group with a bully leader. The level of stress and lack of continuity in the group will be heightened when the group is led by a bully (Druskat & Wolff, 2001; Einarsen, Raknes, & Matthiesen, 1994; Zapf, 1999). The foundation of group membership, group identity, is directly related to the bully's influence on the group and group processes.