UNDERSTANDING THE AGGRESSIVE WORKPLACE: DEVELOPMENT OF THE WORKPLACE AGGRESSION TOLERANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

In sum, the WATQ is offered as a diagnostic tool for discovering possible tolerances for aggressive behavior in the workplace. Since finding the problem is a prelude to solving it, the WATQ can provide a useful service to organizations looking to improve the health of its workplace by reducing all forms of workplace aggression.

Communication scholars should make a more concerted effort to apply their expertise to the problem of workplace aggression. Our skills can provide new insights into the assessment and amelioration of this serious, global concern. The WATQ offers a step in that direction as it identifies problems which communication-based concepts can help to solve. As a field, communication has a great deal to offer the efforts to reduce workplace aggression. We can and should do more to realize that potential.

NOTE

1 When assessing the discriminant validity of the Vengeance Scale, Stuckless and Goranson (1992) found one item from the social desirability scale ("Sometimes I try to get even rather than forgive and forget") correlated highly with the Vengeance Scale. Because the item was very similar to items on the Vengeance Scale, it was dropped from the analysis. A similar concern existed with the WACI items. The 12-item version of the Marlowe-Crowne Scale correlated r = .98 with the 13-item version of the Marlowe-Crowne Scale so the 12-item version was used for the analysis.

REFERENCES

Andersson, L. M., & Pearson, C. M. (1999). Tit for tat? The spiraling effect of incivility in the workplace. Academy of Management Review, 24, 452-471.

Baron, R. A., & Neuman, J. H. (1996). Workplace violence and workplace aggression: Evidence on their relative frequency and potential causes. Aggressive Behavior, 22, 161-178.

Beatty, M. J., Valencic, K. M, Rudd, J. E., & Dobos, J. A. (1999). A "dark side" of communication avoidance: Indirect interpersonal aggressiveness. Communication Research Reports, 16(2), 108-109.

Bensimon, H. F. (1997, Sept.). What to do about anger in the workplace. Training and Development, 51, 28-32.

Bingham, S. G, & Burleson, B. R. (1996). The development of the sexual harassment proclivity scale: Construct validation and relationship to communication competence. Communication Quarterly, 44, 308-325.

Bjorkqvist, K., Osterman, K., & Hjelt-Back, M. (1994). Aggression among university employees. Aggressive Behavior, 20, 173-184.

Braverman, M. (1999, June). Seven steps to preventing workplace violence. Access Control and Security Systems Integration, (42)7, 41-42.

Briggs, S. R., & Cheek, J. M. (1986). The role of factor analysis in the development and evaluation of personality scales. Journal of Personality, 54, 106-148.

Burgoon, J. K., & Hale, J. L. (1987). Validation and measurement of the fundamental themes of relational communication. Communication Monographs, 54, 19-41.

Buss, A. H. (1961). The psychology of aggression. New York: John Wiley.

Collinson, D. (1994). Strategies of resistance: Power, knowledge and subjectivity in the workplace. In J. M. Jermier, D. Knights, & W. R. Nord (Eds.), Resistance and power in organizations (pp. 25-68). London: Routledge.