1. Organizational Power and Organizational Tolerance of Sexual Harassment: The Effects on Bystanders in the Military
Matthew McConnell, Senior, Criminal Justice & Psychology Major,
Lisa L. Scherer, Ph.D., & Shereen Bingham, Ph.D.
Department of Psychology, University of Nebraska at Omaha
Presentation for the University of Nebraska at Omaha Research & Creativity Fair
March 1st, 2019
McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019

2. McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019
Surveys of nonmilitary perpetrators reveal that, 40-70% of women and 13-31% of men report sexual harassment within their organizations (Willness, Steel, & Lee, 2007)
Within the military, 1 and 5 women and 1 and 70 men will experience some form of sexual harassment (Bell, Dardis, Vento, & Street, 2018)
McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019

3. Costs to Victims of Sexual Harassment
Increased levels of depression (Thompson, 2014)
Substance abuse and higher risk of suicide (Thompson, 2014)
Increased levels of stress (Danksy & Kilpatrick, 1997)
1 in 10 people who experience unwanted sexual attention or coercion have greater chance for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (Danksy & Kilpatrick, 1997)
Impact on physical health such as increasing incidence of nausea, headaches, exhaustion, etc. (Espinoza & Cunningham, 2010)
Decrease in morale and job satisfaction (Schneider, Swan, & Fitzgerald, 1997)
McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019

4. McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019
What about the consequences for bystanders in sexual harassment incidents?
McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019

5. Overview of Presentation
1. Define sexual harassment
2. Continuance of sexual harassment in the military
3. Focus on organization tolerance
4. Focus on organization power
5. Define bystander and a bystander’s role in sexual harassment
6. Focus on bystander’s moral courage
7. Review consequences of observing sexual harassment on bystander:
emotional well-being
attitudes toward organization
8. Focus on bystander’s organizational cynicism
9. Planned study
McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019

6. What is Sexual Harassment?
Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature that are either a condition of employment or that create an intimidating or hostile work environment (Quick & McFadyen, 2016)
Examples: unwelcomed touching, verbal remarks, jokes, sexual requests, degrading comments, flashing or exposing body parts, displays of sexual materials, or displays of sexual appearances (McDonald, 2012)
McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019

7. Forms of Sexual Harassment
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC, 1980) legally defines two forms of Sexual Harassment recognized by courts:
Quid Pro Quo: Sexual harassment that occurs when a supervisor or one in an authority position requests sex, or a sexual relationship, in exchange for not firing or otherwise punishing the employee, or in exchange for favors, such as promotions or raises.
Hostile Work Environment: Sexual harassment that occurs through the presence of demeaning or sexual photographs, jokes or threats, unwelcomed sexual advances or remarks, repeated request for dates, sexual propositions, or verbal remarks. The inappropriate behavior or conduct must be so pervasive as to, as the name implies, create an intimidating and offensive work environment.
McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019

8. Sexual Harassment in the Military
For decades, sexual harassment remains a persistent problem in the U.S. military (Buchanan, Settles, Hall, & O’Connor, 2014)
RAND Military Workplace Study (2014): 560,000 soldiers were interviewed and approximately 116,600 cases of sexual harassment were reported in a given year
22% women and 7% men
60% of occurrences being committed by supervisors or unit officials
McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019

9. Why is Sexual Harassment Continuing to Occur in the Military?
Though the military has been somewhat successful in lowering the amount of occurrences of sexual harassment, the percent of people experiencing or observing such unwanted behaviors remain high (Bastian, Lancaster, Reyst, 1996).
Why?
McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019

10. Why is it Continuing to Occur?
The Department of Defense (DoD) focuses on individual behavior and not organizational context (Harrel & Miller, 1997)
Employees’ perception on the organizational climate they work in can influence the prevalence of sexual harassment occurrences (Bingham & Scherer, 1993)
McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019

11. Organizational Tolerance of Sexual Harassment
A complaint being filed to an organization official could depend on the perception of the organization's response to the sexual harassment (Hulin, Fitzgerald, & Drasgow, 1996)
High tolerance is a strong predictor of presence and prevalence of sexual harassment (Fitzgerald, 2017).
Organizations that tolerate sexual harassment are less inclined to implement effective procedures that result in satisfactory outcomes to occurrences of sexual harassment (Bingham & Scherer, 1993)
Seen as a greater violation in proactive environments than compliant environments (Espinoza & Cunningham, 2010)
McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019

12. Organizational Power of Sexual Harassment
Sexual harassment is seen as an abuse of power (Bingham & Scherer, 1993)
Response may depend on the perpetrator’s formal power compared to their own (Bingham & Scherer, 1993)
More complex and threatening and less likely to be satisfied with the outcome of the harassment (Bingham & Scherer, 1993)
McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019

13. Overall Cost to the Military
Substantial cost including legal costs, employee turnover, increased absenteeism, lower motivation and commitment, and team disruption (Shaw, Hegewisch, Hess, 2018).
1988 study showed that the U.S. Army reported an annual cost of over $250 million (Faley, Knapp, Kustis, Dubois, 1997)
McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019

14. Overall Cost to Military
6.5 times more likely that victims change jobs (McLaughlin, Uggen, & Blackstone, 2017)
1.7 times more likely that victims take two or more weeks off after the experience (Khubchandani & Price, 2015)
Damaging to a team’s performance leading to lack of commitment and motivation (Willness et al., 2007)
McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019

15. Bystanders of Sexual Harassment
An individual who sees the sexual harassment occurring but is not directly involved (Bowes-Sperry & O’Leary-Kelly, 2005)
Often the individual who has the power to change a situation (Bowes-Sperry & O’Leary-Kelly, 2005)
Taking action and stopping or preventing future occurrences
Reporting cases of sexual harassment
Providing negative feedback to harassers regarding their behavior
McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019

16. Bystanders to Sexual Harassment: Moral Courage
Moral courage is brave behavior that intends to enforce societal and ethical norms without considering one’s own social costs (Greitemeyer,Oswald, Fischer, & Frey, 2007)
Defending a victim of sexual harassment may entail some negative social costs to the bystander (Galdi, Maass, & Cadinu, 2017)
Getting insulted or attacked by the perpetrator (Galdi, Maass, & Cadinu, 2017)
Does a bystander have the sufficient amount of moral courage to take action when witnessing an occurrence of sexual harassment?
McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019

17. McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019
How Does Witnessing Sexual Harassment Influence Bystanders to the Incident?
Act more assertively when chances of help being provided are unlikely (Espinoza & Cunningham, 2010)
Less likely to intervene when the perceive sexual harassment is seen as not serious and ambiguous (Bowes-Sperry & O’Leary-Kelly, 2005)
Slower bystanders realize sexual harassment is occurring the more intervention is delayed
Less likely intervene when victim is not part of in-group (Bowes-Sperry & O’Leary-Kelly, 2005)
Less likely to intervene when more observers are present (Bowes-Sperry & O’Leary-Kelly, 2005)
McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019

18. Emotional Consequences from Observing Sexual Harassment
Increase in levels of stress (Hitlan, Schneider, Walsh, 2006)
Increase in levels of fear of reprisals (Hitlan, Schneider, Walsh, 2006)
Increase in levels of depression (Glomb, Richman, Hulin, Drasgow, Schneider, & Fitzgerald, 1997)
Decrease in life satisfaction and increase of suicide (Schneider, 1996)
McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019

19. McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019
Consequences for Sexual Harassment Observers: Attitudes Towards Organization
Leads to negative job-related outcomes (Schneider, Swan, & Fitzgerald, 1997):
Decrease in morale, increase in absenteeism and job loss, and deterioration of co- worker relationships
Leads to job dissatisfaction and decrease in organizational commitment (Hanisch & Hulin, 1991):
Increase in job withdrawal and turnover intentions
Become cynical towards organizations (Cheung, Goldberg, King, & Magley, 2018).
Institutional betrayal
McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019

20. Consequences for Sexual Harassment Observers: Cynicism
Cynicism is defined as, “The perceived futility of change, along with negative attributions toward the change facilitator” (Cheung, Goldberg, King, & Magley, p. 537, 2018).
Cynicism is the attitude that comes with the belief that an organization lacks the tendencies towards negative behaviors
Linked to decreased trust and resistance to organizational change
With a widespread of organizational cynicism, employees will be less acceptable to changes, because change will not be effective (Cheung, Goldberg, King, & Magley, 2018)
McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019

21. Planned Study: Predictions
Hypothesis 1: Bystanders with high moral courage are more likely to act or intervene when observing incidents of sexual harassment
Hypothesis 2: Bystanders to sexual harassment in the military will experience organizational cynicism when the occurrence is reported and there is no accountability for the perpetrator.
McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019

22. Planned Study: Methodology
Participants: Active and Prior Service Soldiers (Previous 20 years)
Online, Anonymous Survey
Mixed Methodology: Quantitative and Qualitative
McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019

23. Planned Study: Quantitative Scales
Cynicism About Organizational Change Scale (Reichers, Wanous, & Austin, 1997)
8 questions, 7-point scale ranging from 1 = Strongly Disagree to 7 = Strongly Agree
Example: “The people responsible for solving problems will not produce positive outcomes”
Workplace Social Courage Scale (Howard, Farr, Grandey, & Gutworth, 2016)
6 questions, 7-point scale ranging from 1 = Strongly Disagree to 7 = Strongly Agree
Example: “Even though might damage relationship with victim or perpetrator, I would report to my superiors when witness an act of sexual harassment”
McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019

24. Planned Study: Qualitative Measures
Specifics of the event
Effect of the incident on the observer
Power of the perpetrator
Action bystanders took after experience
Organization response
Effects on bystander from organizations response
McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019

25. McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019
I want to take the time to personally thank Dr. Scherer and Dr. Bingham for their time and collaboration. Also, I want to thank the rest of my research group for the full support throughout this study. Thank you to the University for allowing us to present our research.
Questions?
The University of Nebraska does not discriminate based on race, color, ethnicity, national origin, sex, pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, disability, age, genetic information, veteran status, marital status, and/or political affiliation in its programs, activities, or employment.
McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019

26. McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019
References
Bastian, L.D., Lancaster, A.R. and Reyst, H.E. (1996). Department of Defense Sexual Harassment Survey. Arlington VA: Defense Manpower Data Center.
Bell, M. E., Dardis, C. M., Vento, S. A., & Street, A. E. (2018). Victims of sexual harassment and sexual assault in the military: Understanding risks and promoting recovery. Military Psychology, 30(3), 219–228. doi: /mil
Bingham, S.G., & Scherer, L.L. (1993). Factors associated with responses to sexual harassment and satisfaction with outcome. Sex Roles, 3(29),
Bowes-Sperry, L., & O’Leary-Kelly, A.M. (2005). To act or not to act: The dilemma faced by sexual harassment observers. Academy of Management Review 30(2), 288–306.
Buchanan, N. T., Settles, I. H., Hall, A. T., & O’Connor, R. C. (2014). A review of organizational strategies for reducing sexual harassment: Insights from the U.S. military. Journal of Social Issues, 70, 687–702. doi: /josi.12086
Cheung, H. K., Goldberg, C. B., King, E. B., & Magley, V. J. (2018). Are they true to the cause? Beliefs about organizational and unit commitment to sexual harassment awareness training. Group & Organization Management, 43(4), 531–560.
Dansky, B. S., & Kilpatrick, D. G. (1997). Effects of sexual harassment. In W. T. O'Donohue (Ed.), Sexual harassment: Theory, research, and treatment (pp ). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Espinoza, C.B., & Cunningham, G.B. (2010). Observers’ reporting sexual harassment: The influence of harassment type, organizational culture, and political orientation. Public Organize Review, 10, doi: /s
Faley, R.H., Knapp, D.E., Kustis, G.A., & Dubois, C. (1999). Estimating the organizational costs of sexual harassment: The case of the U.S. Army. Journal of Business and Psychology 13(4) 461–484.
Galdi, S., Maass, A., & Cadinu, M. (2017). Defending the victim of sexual harassment: The influence of civil courage and media exposure. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 41(3), doi: /
McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019

27. McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019
References
Greitemeyer, T., Osswald, S., Fischer, P., & Frey, D. (2007). Civil courage: Implicit theories, related concepts, and measurement. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 2, 115–119. doi: /
Hanisch, K. A., & Hulin, C. L. (1991). General attitudes and organizational withdrawal: An evaluation of a causal model. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 39,
Harrell, M.C. and L. L. Miller (1997). New opportunities for military women; effects upon readiness, cohesion, and morale. Washington, D.C.: Rand National Defense Research Institute.
Harris, R.J, McDonald, D.P., Sparks, C.S. (2018). Sexual harassment in the military: Individual experiences, demographics, and organizational contexts. Armed Forces & Society, 4(1),
Howard, M.C., Farr, J.L., Grandey, A.A., & Gutworth, M.B. (2017). The creation of the Workplace Social Courage Scale (WSCS): An investigation of internal consistency, psychometric properties, validity, and utility. J BUS Psychology, 32, doi: /s
Hulin, C.L., Fitzgerald, L.F., & Drasgow, F.(1996). Organizational influences on sexual harassment. Sexual harassment in the workplace: Perspectives, frontiers, and response strategies. London: SAGE Publications.
Khubchandani, J., & Price, J.H. (2015). Workplace harassment and morbidity among US adults: Results from the National Health Interview Survey. Journal of Community Health 40(3):
McDonald, P.  (2012).  Workplace sexual harassment 30 years on:  A Review of the Literature.  International Journal of Management Reviews, 14,
McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019

28. McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019
References
McLaughlin, H., Uggen, C., & Blackstone, A. (2017). The economic and career effects of sexual harassment on working women. Gender & Society, 31(3): 333–58.
Morral, A.R., Gore, K., Schell, T.L., & Bicksler, B. (2014). Sexual assault and sexual harassment in the U.S. military: Highlights from the 2014 RAND military workplace study. RAND Corporations.
Quick, J.C., & McFadyen, M.A. (2016). Sexual harassment: Have we made any progress? Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 22(3),
Reichers, A.E., Wanous, J., & Austin, J.T. (1997). Understanding and managing cynicism about organizational change. The Academy of Management Executive, 11(1),
Schneider, K.T, Swan, S., & Fitzgerald, L.F. (1997). Job-related and psychological effects of sexual harassment in the workplace: Empirical evidence from two organization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82: 3,
Thompson, D. (2014). Sexual harassment toxic to mental, physical health. WebMD. harassment-toxic-to-mental-physical-health#1
Willness, C.R.,Steel, P., & Lee, K.(2007).A meta-analysis of the antecedents and consequences of workplace sexual harassment. Personnel Psychology, 60, 127–162.
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (1980). Guidelines on discrimination because of sex. Federal Register, 45,
McConnell, Scherer, Bingham, 2019