Types of bullies at workplace in Malaysia

Thivya Khalidass*  -  Psychology & Counselling Program, School of Applied Psychology, Social Work and Policy, College of Arts and Sciences, Universiti Utara Malaysia, Malaysia
Saralah Devi Mariamdaran Chethiyar  -  Psychology & Counselling Program, School of Applied Psychology, Social Work and Policy, College of Arts and Sciences, Universiti Utara Malaysia, Malaysia
Muhammad Ali Equatora  -  Department of Community Guidance, Politeknik Ilmu Pemasyarakatan, Indonesia

(*) Corresponding Author
DOI: 10.21580/jagc.2023.4.1.17365

Purpose - The purpose of this study was to examine the type of bully’s perception of workplace in Malaysia. This study can reveal the type of bullies that happens at work because most employees are not aware or know that they are being bullied at work.

Method - The population of this study is employees of Sungai Petani Social Security Organization. This selection of samples in this study using purposive sampling method and selected 45 persons. Research data was obtained through the distribution of a set of questionnaires. The instrument used in this study is the Revised Malaysian Bullying Questionnaire (R-MBQ).

Result - The results showed that that the perception of bullying among employees of the Sungai Petani Society is at a low level.

Implication - This method suggests prevailing bullying behavior in public or private sector at Malaysia through the types of bullying behavior such as bullying in the form of personal attacks, bullying by looking down, work-related bullying and bullying by physical violence.

Originality - This research is the first study that used intervening variable regarding types of bullying among employees.

***

Tujuan - Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui jenis persepsi pengganggu di tempat kerja di Malaysia. Penelitian ini dapat mengungkap jenis bully yang terjadi di tempat kerja karena sebagian besar karyawan tidak menyadari atau mengetahui bahwa mereka sedang diintimidasi di tempat kerja.

Metode - Populasi dari penelitian ini adalah karyawan Organisasi Jaminan Sosial Sungai Petani. Pemilihan sampel dalam penelitian ini menggunakan metode purposive sampling dan terpilih sebanyak 45 orang. Data penelitian diperoleh melalui penyebaran seperangkat kuesioner. Instrumen yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah Revised Malaysian Bullying Questionnaire (R-MBQ).

Hasil - Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa persepsi perundungan di kalangan karyawan Masyarakat Sungai Petani berada pada tingkat rendah.

Implikasi - Metode ini menunjukkan perilaku bullying yang berlaku di sektor publik atau swasta di Malaysia melalui jenis-jenis perilaku bullying seperti bullying dalam bentuk serangan pribadi, bullying dengan meremehkan, bullying yang berhubungan dengan pekerjaan, dan bullying dengan kekerasan fisik.

Orisinalitas - Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian pertama yang menggunakan variabel intervening mengenai jenis-jenis perundungan di kalangan karyawan.

Keywords: Bully; crime; deviant; social security organization; perception; penindasan, kejahatan; penyimpangan; organisasi jaminan sosial; persepsi

  1. Agnew, R. (1992). Foundation for a general strain theory of crime and delinquency: Criminology, 30(1), 47-88.
  2. Azizan, N. (2004). Buli dan hubungannya dengan prestasi akademik di sekolah berasrama penuh di Kedah. Unpublish master dissertation, Universiti Utara Malaysia, Malaysia.
  3. Blaauw, E., Winkel, F. W., & Kerkhof, A. J. (2001). Bullying and suicidal behavior in jails. Criminal Justice & Behavior, 28(3), 279-299.
  4. Cohen, A. K. (1955). Delinquent boys: The culture of the gang.
  5. DeHart, D. D. (2008). Pathways to prison: Impact of victimization in the lives of incarcerated women. Violence against Women, 14, 1362–1381.
  6. Einarsen, S., & Raknes, B. (1997). Harassment in the workplace and the victimization of men. Violence and Victims, 12, 247–263.
  7. Fazel, S. & Seewald, K. (2012). Severe mental illness in 33,588 prisoners worldwide: systematic review and meta-regression analysis. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 200(5), 364-373.
  8. Geffner, R., Griffin, D., & Lewis, J. (2014). Children exposed to violence: Current issues, interventions and research. In R. Geffner, D. Griffin, & J. Lewis III, (Eds.), Children exposed to violence: Current issues, interventions and research. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
  9. Haufle, J. & Wolter, D. (2015). The interrelation between victimization and bullying inside young offender institutions. Aggressive Behavior, 41(4), 335-345.
  10. Ireland, J. L. & Archer, J. (2002). The perceived consequences of responding to bullying with aggression: a study of male and female adult prisoners. Aggressive Behavior, 28(4), 257-272.
  11. Ireland, J. L. (2005). Bullying among prisoners: the need for innovation. In J. L. Ireland (Ed.), Bullying among prisoners: innovations in theory and research. New York, NY: Routledge.
  12. Thivya & Saralah Devi. (2022). Exploring Perception Of Bullying at The Work Place:A Case Study Of SOCSO Sungai Petani, Kedah. SARJANA. Retrieved https://ejournal.um.edu.my/index.php/SARJANA/article/view/40434/15123
  13. Leymann, H. (1996). The content and development of mobbing at work. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 5(2), 165–184.
  14. Merton, R. K. (1938). Social structure and Anomie. American Sociological Review, 3, 672–682.
  15. Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at school: what we know and what we can do. Oxford, England: Blackwell.
  16. Rigby, K. (2003). Consequences of bullying in schools. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 48(9), 583-590.
  17. Rita, Z. (2008). Bullying Worse Than Sexual Harassment? HR Magazine. Alexandria.Vol. 53, Iss. 5; pg. 28, 1 pgs
  18. Sekol, I. & Farrington, D. P. (2010). The overlap between bullying and victimization in adolescent residential care: are bully/victims a special category? Children & Youth Services Review, 32(12), 1758–1769.
  19. Smith, P. K. & Brain, P. (2000). Bullying in schools: lessons from two. Aggressive Behavior, 26, 1-9.
  20. Smith, Peter K., Helen Cowie, Ragnar F. Olafsson, and Andy P.D. Liefooghe. 2002. “Definitions of Bullying: A Comparison of Terms Used, and Age and Gender Differences, in a FourteenCountry International Comparison.” Child Development 73(4): 1119–33.
  21. Unison. Bullying Report, 1997: UNISON, London.
  22. Utusan Malaysia (2020). Kes buli Kadet. Dimuat turun pada 20 Oktober 2021 di https://www.utusanmalaysia.com.my/utusan/nasional/2019/03/591204/kes-buli-kadet-di-buli-malaysiah

Open Access Copyright (c) 2023 Journal of Advanced Guidance and Counseling
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
View My Stats
apps