For this paper, you are going to expand on one of the discussion forums that you have already written.
You will choose one of the topics from discussion forums 1-4 and elaborate on the current trend in this
area.
Your paper should include an introduction of the topic that includes a historical definition based on
literature, a discussion of the current research in the field (last 5 years only), and a section that
addresses future questions that will need to be addressed and/or explored in research.
This paper should draw on a minimum of ten substantial journal article resources and will be 10 to 12
pages in length (not including the title page, abstract, or reference pages) observing all APA style
conventions.
You may use any articles or writings that you wrote about in your previous discussion forums in this
course.
RUNNING HEADER: Incivility 1
Incivility
Stacey Greer
Liberty University
Incivility 2
To better understand the word ‘Incivility’, I researched the word using the google search,
and the results were: rude or unsociable speech or behavior, or impolite or offensive comment.
The suggested reading material for the week by Rosen et al. (2016) states that workplace
incivility is low intensity deviant behavior with ambiguous intent to harm the target, an example
was provided in the text which included being discourteous and rude behaviors, such as making
derogatory remarks, ignoring coworkers, and using a condescending tone. Rosen et al. (2016)
I found the article very interesting, because as I was reading the text, I have encountered
a co-worker with this type of behavior in the workplace toward many people. When I first met
the co-worker, I thought he was being condescending because he was overlooked for position or
didn’t like having diversity introduced to the team that was once 98% male and is now 85%
males. I also thought it was my position, as I audit his work. I better understand his behavior, or
the lack of self-control.
Contribution of Journal Article A (Selective incivility: an insidious form of
discrimination in organizations)
In the article written by Kabat et al. (2020) the author examined the selective incivility
and gender demography. This topic correlates to the assign reading with the facts that incivility is
rude, and have certain behavioral patterns, however incivility can spill over into discrimination.
Selective incivility and gender demography investigation of the roles that demography and
perceived dissimilarity play in incivility outcomes for women and found that female perceptions
of gender dissimilarity to one’s workgroup exacerbate the negative effect of incivility. In
interpreting this effect, the authors discuss gender similarity in relation to belongingness,
theorizing that when women feel that they are a gender minority in the workgroup, low levels of
Incivility 3
incivility can signal exclusion and trigger thoughts of leaving the organization. Kabat et al.
(2020). From a personal experience, I can agree that these findings are factual, as my thoughts of
leaving the organization due to a feeling of not belonging, or that I didn’t fit into the boy’s club.
Contribution of Journal Article B (the “I” in team: Coach incivility, coach gender,
and team performance in women’s basketball team)
The article of The ‘I” in team Coach incivility, coach gender, and team performance in
women’s basketball team, is extremely relevant to the study of incivility because although we
are examining the correlations amongst the rudeness of the meaning, one have overlooked the
rudeness of incivility in regards to sports. In the article written by Smittick et al. (2019), the
authors points out in the introduction of the article that rude and discourteous behaviors are
common in sports, that even parents have displayed the behaviors of rudeness to other team,
coaches or referees. Forward thinking, although I have not pondered on the meaning of the word
incivility, I have been guilty of the same rude behavior, and have unconsciously taught the
behavior to my children through my very own actions.
Contribution of Journal Article C (Confronting Incivility in the Online Classroom)
I believe that this article really ties it all together in regard to my understanding of
incivility. The authors have done a really good job explain and examining the online classroom
incivility. Swartzwelder et al. (2019) suggested in the abstract portion of their article, that digital
communication can easily be perceived as hostile between students and faculty. However, the
misunderstanding can be a lack of understanding of diverse cultures, life experiences, and
professional and spiritual histories. Swartzwelder et al. (2019) goes on to write that uncivil
behaviors occur on a continuum from simple disruption to covert or overt threats, which should
be dealt with to promote a civil and engaged learning environment. Although most
Incivility 4
communications do not occur face-to-face (such as on camera) but in written form such as email,
discussion boards, group work, and other experiential assignments, uncivil behavior in the online
classroom can result in reduced student participation, lower student satisfaction, and decreased
student retention.
Word count:794
Reference
Kabat-Farr, D., Settles, I. and Cortina, L. (2020), "Selective incivility: an insidious form of
discrimination in organizations", Equality, Diversity and Inclusion, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp.
253-260. https://doi-org.ezproxy.liberty.edu/10.1108/EDI-09-2019-0239
Rosen, C. C., Koopman, J., Gabriel, A. S., & Johnson, R. E. (2016). Who strikes back? A daily
investigation of when and why incivility begets incivility. Journal of Applied Psychology,
101(11), 1620-1634. http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.liberty.edu/10.1037/apl0000140
Smittick, Amber L, Kathi N Miner, and George B Cunningham. “The ‘I’ in Team: Coach Incivility,
Coach Gender, and Team Performance in Women’s Basketball Teams.”
Sport
management review
22.3 (2019): 419–433. We
Swartzwelder, Kay et al. “Confronting Incivility in the Online Classroom.”
Journal of Christian
nursing : a quarterly publication of Nurses Christian Fellowship.
36.2 (2019): 104–111.
Web.
1
Running head: WORKPLACE INCIVILITY
Workplace Incivility
Student’s name:
Course:
Date:
2
WORKPLACE INCIVILITY
Introduction
The concept of workplace incivility has significantly grown over the past few decades
owing to the increased interest of researchers on the issue. Workplace incivility is gaining attention
from all public and private sectors due to the extent of harm it causes on workgroups and
individuals, yet such acts are not legally punishable (Akella & Lewis, 2019). According to various
definitions, incivility in the workplace refers to low-intensity behaviors whose intentions to harm
are always ambiguous. The most commonly used examples of workplace incivility include abrupt
and curt language, diminished use of basic courtesies, and generally impoliteness. When viewed
under such lenses, it becomes apparent the frequency of workplace incivility behaviors.
Workplace incivility has progressed from being a dismissible concern within organizations
to a persistently growing problem. Many scholars attribute the advent of strategies such as flex-
time and outsourcing, innovative strategies, corporate capitalism, and technological advances as
the principal contributors to the growing concern of workplace incivility. These factors have been
highly praised for the global economic developments but have also led to the breakdown of
interpersonal relationships in equal measure (Akella & Lewis, 2019). As opposed to physical
violence in the workplace, which makes headlines, incivility is often low-level nonphysical
workplace violence, making researchers ignore the topic most of the time.
Due to the immense impacts of workplace incivility on organizational performance,
however, scholars have recently dived into studying the issue. The result is a plethora of research
that tries to explain workplace incivility and provides various approaches for dealing with the
phenomenon. This realization and development of interest can be associated with the need to create
and maintain a healthy work environment, whereby organizational behavior takes center stage.
Nonetheless, the increasing interest of researchers, as well as the already existing studies, do not
3
WORKPLACE INCIVILITY
adequately answer all the questions surrounding the issue of incivility in the workplace. A
continuum of questions that need to be addressed by future researchers on the topic still emerge.
Discussion of Current Research on the Field
The problem of workplace incivility, in combination with its ethical and moral
implications, have received considerable scholarly attention since its emergence as an
organizational behavior research topic in the 1990s. Researchers are trying to explore the different
facets of the workplace, and the role and influence of aspects such as fusion of boundaries, diverse
working cultures, new organizational structures, as well as technological, political, and economic
changes on organizational behavior (Miner et al 2018). In other words, researchers are treating
workplace incivility as an integral part of corporate behavior and how it impacts organizational
performance. Thus, research on workplace incivility has currently gained momentum with a
substantive group of authors producing reports on the various aspects of the issue.
Types of Incivility
Various research studies indicate that workplace incivility differs based on the type. The
researchers list the forms of workplace incivility as experienced, witnessed, and instigated.
Regarding experienced incivility, contextual, behavioral, and dispositional elements play a central
role in determining the target’s experience of incivility. For instance, the dispositional element
lists factors such as diversity and other personal attributes of targets, which lead to their
consideration as minorities, significantly increase their chances of experiencing workplace
incivility (Holm et al, 2015). Behavioral antecedents, on the other hand, are the behaviors of
victims that make them the targets of other’s incivility. Lastly, situational antecedents are the
4
WORKPLACE INCIVILITY
circumstances that make incivility prevalent for the targets and may include supervisor-perpetrated
incivility.
Another form of workplace incivility is witnessed incivility. Whereas researchers have paid
less attention to this type of incivility, its impact on the primary witnesses is often paramount.
Scholars suppose that those who witness acts of incivility are also negatively affected, particularly
when they share similar perspectives with the direct victims of uncivil conduct (Holm et al, 2015).
As a result, these witnesses also suffer consequences, including increased dysfunctional ideation,
reduced task performance, increased helpfulness towards others, and creative performance,
depending on the source of the incivility. However, the topic of witnessed incivility is still
insufficiently addressed, thereby providing opportunities and gaps that future researchers ought to
address.
As the name suggests, instigated workplace incivility aims to look at the perpetrators of
incivility. Numerous studies have shifted focus from the targets of incivility and the consequences
of such conducts on them to the perpetrators of uncivil behavior, the driving factors, and the
anticipated outcomes of their uncivil conducts (Miner et al 2018). Research on this form of
workplace incivility began not long ago and still lacks substantially in explaining incivility from
the perspective of instigators. Nonetheless, the existing relatively little research covers situational
variables, perceptions, attitudes, and characteristic variables of the perpetrators as the antecedents
of their conduct. Some studies have also focused on the consequences of incivility on the
perpetrators.
5
WORKPLACE INCIVILITY
Sources of Incivility
Supervisors and coworkers are the most significant sources of workplace incivility.
Whereas customer-initiated incivility has also become commonplace in today’s work
environment, many researchers have mainly focused on coworker-initiated and supervisor-
initiated as the primary sources of uncivil behavior in the workplace. Most researchers report
generational differences as the key contributing factors to both coworker-initiated incivility and
supervisor-initiated incivility (Lewis & Malecha, 2016). Uncivil behavior stemming from these
sources, in turn, lead to various forms of incivility as well as the consequences on both the victims
and the perpetrators. Consequently, role differentials and status also influence the sources of
workplace incivility. For instance, the likelihood of a supervisor to instigate uncivil behavior on
junior employees is higher than the junior employees instigating uncivil conduct on their
supervisors.
In simple terms, role differentials and status influence the content and severity of uncivil
behavior. Also, these factors determine the reactions of the targets towards the incivility actions
perpetrated against them. For instance, a supervisor’s uncivil conduct can cause more harm to the
targets than the incivility of coworkers. Research attributes this fact to the generalization that the
experience of such uncivil behavior has the potential to lead to other unfavorable events. Further,
employees depend on their supervisors for appraisals, evaluations and rewards (Lewis & Malecha,
2016). Therefore, they are likely to view their supervisors’ uncivil behaviors as one of those and
consider such conducts as part of the evaluation and reward process.
Coworker-instigated incivility also ranks higher than customer-instigated incivility in
terms of the severity of their impacts and outcomes on the targets. This is because employees do
not have to see customers every day after an incivility incident, whereby they are the victims. On
6
WORKPLACE INCIVILITY
the contrary, employees have to face an uncivil coworker every day, which increases the harm and
the consequences of the uncivil conduct on the target (Lewis & Malecha, 2016). Hence, customer-
instigated workplace incivility ranks the lowest of the three sources of uncivil behavior.
Consequently, the impacts of workplace incivility are also ranked with respect to the
sources of incivility. Incivility perpetrated by supervisors or senior employees affects job
performance, organizational deviance, health, turnover intent, affective commitment, and job
satisfaction. Coworker-instigated workplace incivility also leads to most of the mentioned
outcomes but with less magnitude than that of supervisor-instigated incivility (Lewis & Malecha,
2016). Thus, incivility perpetrated on targets by members of the same organization has a high
potential of reducing the overall productivity and performance of the employee than customer-
instigated incivility. This aspect partly explains the minimal interest of researchers on customer-
initiated incivility.
Consequences for Targets of Workplace Incivility
Other than low performance, workplace incivility also leads to affective outcomes,
attitudinal outcomes, cognitive outcomes, and behavioral outcomes. The behavioral aspect of the
outcomes of workplace incivility links the targets to their ability to respond with counterproductive
behavior. This means that the victim of workplace incivility is likely to reciprocate the acts of
incivility on the perpetrator or engage in deviant and retaliatory behavior at work. Withdrawal
from work, absenteeism, turnover intentions, decreased career salience, decrements in task
performance, and organizational exit are also behavioral consequences of workplace incivility.
The cognitive outcomes of incivility include lower task-related memory recall and the
target’s perceived fairness. Attitudinal outcomes, on the other hand, focus on the influence of
7
WORKPLACE INCIVILITY
incivility encounters on the attitudes of the targets. Studies suppose that workplace incivility leads
to decreased motivation, commitment to the organization, and lower satisfaction with the
coworkers and supervisors of the target (Collins & Rogers, 2017). The changed attitude towards
such factors leads to the overall outcome of the targets’ less satisfaction with their lives.
Affective outcomes mainly touch on the impact of incivility on the emotions of the target.
These outcomes include heightened emotionality, lower affective trust, lower positive affect,
negative emotions, depression, emotional exhaustion, emotional labor, and lower levels of energy.
This is because workplace incivility does not only affect the targets in their workplace
environments only. Rather, such effects extend to the personal lives of these victims of incivility
by decreasing their overall levels of well-being (Collins & Rogers, 2017).
The existence of a vast array of studies that address varied outcomes of workplace incivility
on targets means that researchers are on the right track towards finding ways of making incivility
punishable. As part of organizational behavior, failing to address its outcomes can have significant
adverse impacts on the general productivity of the organization, and thereby the achievement of
organizational goals (Collins & Rogers, 2017). The availability of research on these outcomes can
save organizations from focusing a lot of resources on creating a healthy work environment while
missing this essential component that acts as a speedbump to achieving that objective.
Motivating Factors for Perpetrators of Workplace Incivility
Research studies have also extended from looking at workplace incivility from the
perspective of the targets only to focusing on the motivational factors of the instigators. Instigator
perceptions and attitudes play a vital role in enacting incivility. Perceptions of distributive injustice
and lower job satisfaction increase the chances of instigated incivility. Other scholars purport that
8
WORKPLACE INCIVILITY
employees with the perception that they are too invested in their jobs than the rewards they receive
for the dedication, or the absence of reciprocity, also have a high potential of being instigators of
workplace incivility (Gallus et al, 2017). Common workplace factors such as distributive and
procedural unfairness, company closure unfairness, and contract violation also motivate instigators
of workplace incivility. In other words, a vast range of research studies associates uncivil conducts
of instigators to underlying factors, mostly around perceptions and attitudes.
Situational factors are another category of antecedents that motivate incivility instigators
to behave in uncivil ways towards others in the workplace. The characteristics of a situation highly
determine the behavior of employees towards one another. Researchers report a direct relationship
between being a target of workplace incivility and later becoming an instigator of incivility (Gallus
et al, 2017). Another assumption is that employees who experience customer-instigated incivility
tend to reciprocate that incivility on other customers, making them incivility instigators as well.
Therefore, prevailing situations or circumstances also motivate people to become instigators of
workplace incivility.
Based on the several antecedents enlisted as the motivators of instigated incivility, it is
possible to relate workplace incivility to other forms of discriminative behavior within
organizations. Many moderating and mediating processes, outcomes, and antecedents of instigated
incivility have striking similarities to the dynamics of discrimination (Di Fabio & Duradoni, 2019).
Such involves the inclusion of the interpersonal relationship between the instigator and the target
as a causative factor of uncivil conduct.
However, researchers propose that the ambiguous and stealthy nature of incivility, against
the typical prohibition of prejudiced individuals, as well as the decreasingly tolerated sexism and
racism, have contributed to the instigation of incivility in the workplace as a way of expressing
9
WORKPLACE INCIVILITY
prejudice. In other words, instigators of incivility are now relying on uncivil conducts which is
unpunishable, instead of the consequential acts of obvious discrimination to express their prejudice
(Di Fabio & Duradoni, 2019). This is due to researchers’ findings that minority groups were the
most common targets of workplace incivility, leading to their assumptions that incivility could be
another form of discrimination within workplace environments.
Studies on workplace incivility remain minimal in the present age. However, it is essential
to note the progress of researchers in the past two decades in providing insight into the issue. The
studies have already covered the sources, types, consequences, and perpetrator attitudes and
perceptions that contribute to the prevalence of uncivil behavior in workplace settings.
Nonetheless, the continuum of literature still does not sufficiently address certain aspects of the
problem, given the limited texts that cover various parts of the general issue. Therefore, workplace
incivility remains a broad, diverse topic that also appears fragmented.
Future Questions that Need to be Addressed
The continuum of research that currently exists does not only give the insight to help
understand the issue of workplace incivility but also points to several gaps that future researchers
of the topic ought to address. The most important question that future researchers need to explore
involves the absence of theoretical frameworks that can efficiently explain uncivil behavior. The
development of theoretical frameworks is necessary because a unified theory will effectively
integrate the different fragments of workplace incivility such as connecting experienced,
instigated, and witnessed incivility to help organizations find solutions for such incidents (Miner
et al, 2018). Models such as interpersonal communication in the workplace, trait relevant
situational cues as well as interpersonal traits, and trait activation theory can provide an avenue for
the development of a unified theory that is relevant to workplace incivility.
10
WORKPLACE INCIVILITY
The attribution of the instigation of incivility with situation antecedents also needs a theory
that can help organizations to focus on team and organizational level factors that influence
incivility. In other words, theories provide sufficient insights that help people understand different
phenomena. Given the numerous scientific research on this topic, the development of a theoretical
framework will not be as challenging as it could have been two decades ago. Consequently, a
unified theory will also play a significant role in drawing the line between workplace
discrimination and workplace incivility (Grant, 2019). Therefore, the lack of a theoretical
framework for workplace incivility is a wide gap that future researchers ought to fill.
Another question for future researchers to address is on the similarities and differences
between workplace incivility and other interpersonal misbehavior. For instance, aggressive
conducts such as social undermining, interpersonal conflict, bullying, and abusive supervision all
tend to lead to similar outcomes as those of workplace incivility. Scholars have attributed the
similarities in the outcomes of these two phenomena to the use of similar measures in the
conceptualization of workplace aggression and incivility (Marchiondo et al, 2018). This element,
in turn, obscured the researchers’ findings and differentiation of other modes of aggression in the
workplace from incivility, and their subsequent impacts on the target. Most of the reports of the
various studies failed to distinguish the distinct forms of workplace aggression and mistreatment.
Therefore, the inexistence of adequate evidence to elaborate on the differences between
other forms of workplace aggression or mistreatment and workplace incivility poses a significant
question that future researchers can address. Finding out the potential differences and antecedents
is crucial to arriving at this distinction and explaining the relevance of workplace incivility as a
component of organizational behavior (Marchiondo et al, 2018). Also, determining such
differences will assist responsible authorities to design ways of curbing workplace incivility, just
11
WORKPLACE INCIVILITY
like other forms of organizational misbehavior have been dealt with over the years (Schilpzand et
al, 2016). The future works, thus, need to focus on processes, antecedents, and outcomes of
workplace incivility that directly relate to the definition of the issue’s ambiguity in terms of intent
and low-intensity characteristics. Future researcher’s ability to provide this distinction will also
enable the building and testing of a theoretical framework for the problem.
The role of attributions in the appraisal of uncivil incidents is also a question that requires
further exploration. This is based on the assumption that people’s reactions to the outcomes of an
event are holistically dependent on what causes they attribute to the events (Schilpzand et al, 2016).
The existing research explores the possible underlying factors that lead instigators to uncivil
behavior but does not look at how the antecedents influence the outcomes of such behavior on the
victims.
For example, an employee who knows that the supervisor is acting uncivilly due to pressure
from senior employees and the need to meet goals will respond differently from another employee
who may not be aware of such events. Simply, what the victims of workplace incivility consider
as the causes of uncivil behavior towards them significantly determine their behavioral and
emotional reactions (Schilpzand et al, 2016). Hence, it is essential to explore this dimension in
future research to find out the relationship between attributions and reactions during incivility
incidents.
Conclusion
An exploration of the different facets of workplace incivility has shown that researchers
are making commendable progress in addressing the issue. The existing forms of research have
explained the potential sources, forms, and consequences of incivility, as well as the motivating
12
WORKPLACE INCIVILITY
factors for the instigators. However, an analysis of the various forms of research has also led to
the identification of questions that future researchers need to address. Therefore, it is correct to
state that the vast range of existing research still does not adequately address the issue of workplace
incivility.
13
WORKPLACE INCIVILITY
References
Akella, D., & Lewis, V. J. (2019). The Modern Face of Workplace Incivility. Organization
Management Journal, 16(2), 55-60.
Collins, N. R., & Rogers, B. (2017). Growing concerns with workplace incivility. Workplace
health & safety, 65(11), 564-564.
Di Fabio, A., & Duradoni, M. (2019). Fighting Incivility in the Workplace for Women and for all
Workers: the Challenge of Primary Prevention. Frontiers in psychology, 10, 1805.
Gallus, J. A., Bunk, J. A., Matthews, R. A., Barnes-Farrell, J. L., & Magley, V. J. (2017). An eye
for an eye? Exploring the relationship between workplace incivility experiences and
perpetration. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 19(2), 143.
Grant, S. M. (2019). Incivility as a Veiled Display of Workplace Discrimination: The Intersection
of Workplace Incivility and Gender-Based Discrimination.
Holm, K., Torkelson, E., & Bäckström, M. (2015). Models of workplace incivility: The
relationships to instigated incivility and negative outcomes. BioMed research
international, 2015.
Lewis, P. S., & Malecha, A. (2016). The impact of workplace incivility on the work environment,
manager skill, and productivity. JONA: The Journal of Nursing Administration, 41(1), 41-
47.
Marchiondo, L. A., Biermeier-Hanson, B., Krenn, D. R., & Kabat-Farr, D. (2018). Target
Meaning-Making of Workplace Incivility Based on Perceived Personality Similarity with
Perpetrators. The Journal of psychology, 152(7), 474-496.
14
WORKPLACE INCIVILITY
Miner, K. N., Diaz, I., Wooderson, R. L., McDonald, J. N., Smittick, A. L., & Lomeli, L. C. (2018).
A workplace incivility roadmap: Identifying theoretical speedbumps and alternative routes
for future research. Journal of occupational health psychology, 23(3), 320.
Schilpzand, P., De Pater, I. E., & Erez, A. (2016). Workplace incivility: A review of the literature
and agenda for future research. Journal of Organizational behavior, 37, S57-S88.
Outline
Thesis Statement: Nonetheless, the increasing interest of researchers, as well as the already
existing studies do not adequately answer all the questions surrounding the issue of incivility in
the workplace. A continuum of questions that need to be addressed by future researchers on the
topic still emerge.
I. Discussion of Current Research on the Field
a. Types of Incivility
b. Sources of Incivility
c. Consequences for Targets of Workplace Incivility
d. Motivating Factors for Perpetrators of Workplace Incivility
II. Future Questions that Need to be Addressed
III. Conclusion
