Workplace mobbing is not merely a personal issue; it constitutes an organisational crisis with far-reaching implications that extend beyond the perpetrator and victim. Critically, greater attention must be directed toward the group dynamics that sustain such behaviours. Often, mobbing is enabled by a network of bystanders—whether active participants or passive observers—who either facilitate or fail to disrupt the harmful behaviour. Analogous to the spread of a virus, mobbing thrives in organisational environments characterised by weak conflict management, rigid hierarchical structures, and a culture of silence. Addressing this issue necessitates more than individual accountability; it requires systemic interventions to alter the organisational context. If left unaddressed, these toxic dynamics can result in significant financial and reputational costs, erode employee morale, and undermine organisational effectiveness. For instance, a median-sized S&P 500 company could incur over $480 million in annual losses due to these impacts (McKinsey, 2024). Despite such staggering figures, mobbing often remains an invisible threat, silently degrading productivity, harming employee well-being, and jeopardizing the bottom line. This article provides a comprehensive examination of mobbing by first defining the phenomenon and outlining its key criteria and manifestations. It then explores the psychological motivations underlying mobbing behaviours and concludes with an analysis of the often-overlooked organisational costs, emphasising the deleterious effects on employee health and overall organisational profitability.
Identifying Mobbing: Criteria and Manifestations
The identification of workplace mobbing is primarily based on two key parameters: frequency and manifestation (Karpenko, 2019).
a) Frequency
A defining characteristic of mobbing is its persistence. To qualify as mobbing, the behaviours must occur repeatedly—on a daily, weekly, or monthly basis—over an extended period, typically six months or longer. While isolated incidents of harassment are harmful, they do not meet the threshold required to be classified as mobbing, which is characterised by sustained and systematic abuse.
b) Manifestations
The manifestations of mobbing are diverse but uniformly damaging, targeting the victim’s professional credibility, self-esteem, and social support. A common tactic is overloading the individual with work by assigning excessive tasks designed to induce burnout, often referred to as burnout syndrome. Another frequent approach involves setting up the victim for failure by delegating unattainable tasks with the explicit intention of ensuring their inability to succeed. In some cases, mobbing manifests as withholding work; this phenomenon, sometimes described as “empty desk mobbing,” deprives the victim of meaningful assignments, fostering feelings of alienation and inadequacy.
Information withholding is another strategy, characterised by the intentional denial of access to critical information necessary for effective job performance. Victims may also face public humiliation, where insults, jokes, or ridicule are directed at them in front of peers, further eroding their confidence and standing. Social exclusion is a pervasive manifestation, as mobbing often involves deliberate exclusion from team activities, meetings, or decision-making processes. Finally, systematic discrediting undermines the victim’s reputation and credibility, isolating them both socially and professionally (Karpenko, 2019).These behaviours collectively contribute to an environment where the victim is progressively marginalised, both professionally and socially, often leading to severe psychological and occupational consequences.
Inside the Mind of a Mobber: Motivations and Psychological Profiles
Perpetrators are individuals driven by deep selfish motivations, seeking to impose their will on others through coercion, manipulation, or psychological tactics to fulfil personal desires. They are indifferent to, or even hostile toward, moral principles, showing a disregard for ethical norms and societal expectations. Their behaviour is parasitic—they exploit others for personal gain without contributing positively to the group. Such actions are not motivated by fairness or justice but by an ingrained drive for power and resources. Perpetrators are fiercely competitive, often outmaneuvering colleagues at their expense to secure their own position, with the goal of winning the power struggle and asserting dominance at any cost (Karpenko, 2019). Workplace harassment can be categorised based on the underlying motivations of perpetrators, which fall into three primary groups: power-hungry, emotionally driven, and bias-driven individuals:
Power-Hungry Perpetrators
These individuals are primarily motivated by a desire to maintain control or mask their inadequacies. The Hierarchy-Enforcer rigidly adheres to hierarchical structures, stifling innovation and eroding morale to reinforce authority. In contrast, the Incompetent Leader compensates for their lack of skills by harassing others to conceal their deficiencies and secure their position of power.
Emotionally-Driven Perpetrators
This group is characterised by personal emotional triggers. The Jealous Coworker is driven by envy, targeting high-performing colleagues perceived as threats to their status. Meanwhile, the Sadistic Perpetrator is motivated by a destructive desire to inflict harm on others, often displaying a disregard for the consequences of their actions.
Bias-Driven Perpetrators
Perpetrators in this category exhibit behaviours rooted in prejudice or entitlement. The Gender Bias Perpetrator engages in discriminatory actions, often targeting women due to deeply ingrained misogynistic attitudes. Similarly, the “Master-like” Perpetrator views the workplace as their domain, treating others in a condescending and controlling manner that reinforces a sense of personal superiority.
Overall, those who engage in such behaviour are irritated by individuals who demonstrate concern for the common good and take social responsibility, as it highlights qualities they have suppressed or rejected within themselves. The values that prompt others to care for their colleagues, show compassion, and act with integrity, contrast sharply with the selfishness that drives these individuals. As a result, they often target those who operate under different principles, viewing them as “weaklings” or obstacles to their own survival and success. These targets, driven by a sense of ethical duty and a commitment to collective well-being, represent everything these perpetrators perceive as a threat to their personal gain and control.
The Hidden Costs of Mobbing: Impact on Organisational Health and Profitability
Workplace bullying and harassment pose substantial threats to organisational sustainability, with research consistently highlighting their far-reaching consequences. Beyond individual harm, these behaviours impose significant financial and operational burdens on businesses, undermining performance across key dimensions. One of the most immediate impacts of mobbing is a decline in productivity. Toxic workplace environments erode employee motivation and engagement, leading to inefficiencies and reduced output (Escartín et al., 2021). In many cases, presenteeism—where employees are physically present but unable to perform at full capacity—further exacerbates these losses.
Turnover and absenteeism also represent critical challenges linked to mobbing. Affected employees are more likely to resign or take frequent sick leave, driving up costs associated with recruitment, onboarding, and training. Turnover alone accounts for approximately 42% of the total costs of mobbing, with one in six employees eventually leaving their positions due to harassment (Szarek et Szarek, 2018). During the transition period, organisations face additional productivity losses as new employees are integrated into the workforce.
Administrative burdens arising from workplace mobbing place further strain on organisational resources. Internal complaints necessitate significant time and attention from employees, managers, and human resources teams, diverting focus from more productive activities. Research indicates that approximately 12.1% of affected workers file formal complaints, highlighting the scale of resource allocation required to address such issues (Szarek et Szarek, 2018).
The legal and reputational risks associated with unaddressed mobbing are equally severe. Organisations may face costly litigation and compensation claims, while reputational damage can undermine efforts to attract and retain top talent. The long-term financial consequences of these reputational challenges further compound the economic burden (Salin et Notelaers, 2018).
Conclusions
Work serves as a cornerstone in shaping human identity and fostering social connections, carrying profound emotional and societal implications. The substantial time and energy individuals invest in their professional roles significantly influence their interpersonal relationships and contribute to the construction of cultural identities. Recognising the warning signs of workplace issues, understanding their associated costs, and implementing proactive measures are critical for organisations seeking to safeguard their workforce. By addressing these challenges effectively, companies not only promote employee well-being but also enhance organisational profitability (Grotto de Souza, 2023).
References:
Escartín Solanelles, J., Dollard, M., Zapf, D., & Kozlowski, S. W. J. (2021). Multilevel emotional exhaustion: Psychosocial safety climate and workplace bullying as higher level contextual and individual explanatory factors. European Journal of Work and Organisational Psychology, 30(7), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2021.1939412
Karpenko, Z. (2019). Mobbing in organizations: The typological-strategic approach. In Proceedings (pp. 49–69). https://doi.org/10.36059/978-966-397-161-2/49-69
Grotto-de-Souza, J., Pohl, H. H., & Aguiar-Ribeiro, D. (2023). Mobbing as a source of psychological harm in workers. Revista Brasileira de Medicina do Trabalho: Publicacao Oficial da Associacao Nacional de Medicina do Trabalho NAMT, 20(4), 670–675. https://doi.org/10.47626/1679-4435-2022-766
Petric, D. (2022). Psychology of abusive human behavior. Open Journal of Medical Psychology, 11, 29–38. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojmp.2022.112003
Samnani, A.-K., & Singh, P. (2016). Workplace bullying: Considering the interaction between individual and work environment. Journal of Business Ethics, 139(3), 537–549. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2653-x
Salin, D., & Notelaers, G. (2018). The effects of workplace bullying on witnesses: Violation of the psychological contract as an explanatory mechanism? The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 31(18), 2319–2339. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2018.1443964
Szarek, S., & Szarek, E. (2018). Economic effects of mobbing and violence in the workplace. Przedsiębiorczość i Zarządzanie, 19(2), 255–269
Tierney, B. (2024, April 15). Increasing your return on talent: The moves and metrics that matter. McKinsey & Company. https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/sustainable-inclusive-growth/charts/many-happy-talent-returns
Beyond grey matter 
Leave a comment