Complex ethical and methodological issues can sometimes arise when conducting research into sensitive topics. By employing an autobiographic approach to explore the personal dilemmas that arose for the author while undertaking doctoral research on workplace bullying in Irish education, this article highlights potential difficulties and tensions which may arise for researchers (particularly those at the beginning of their careers) when conducting sensitive research. Specific attention is paid to the importance of protecting the researcher from harm, the exiting of the research relationship in an appropriate manner, and the necessity of anticipating potential problems before they become manifest.

Workplace bullying is broadly defined as a detrimental form of negative micro-political interaction(s) incorporating a range of aggressive interpersonal behaviours. While targeted toxic behaviour based upon legally protected grounds such as ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation is conceptualised as harassment, this paper positions harassment as a constituent subset of workplace bullying—distinct, but inextricably linked to the broader landscape of workplace predation and incivility. Meta-analyses of cross-sectional and longitudinal studies demonstrate a robust relationship between being bullied and compromised health, and some sectors, e.g., education, display higher than average levels of exposure, suggesting that contexts matter. The higher education sector is the focus of this scoping review. High rates of bullying have been reported in Higher Education Institutions (HEIs), where many of the organisational factors that drive bullying are present. One systematic literature review has been carried out on bullying in HEIs, reviewing papers prior to 2013. Since the sector has seen considerable contextual change since that time, another review is timely. This systematic scoping review aims to identify the volume, range, nature, and characteristics of studies of workplace bullying in HEIs between 2003 and 2023, with a specific focus on how the context of HEIs contributes to the enactment and/or the response to workplace bullying. To this end, 3179 records were identified, with 140 papers charted to identify methods, institution, population, and country. Forty-seven papers were subjected to full-text review for the exploration of contextual factors. Priorities for future research lie in addressing the pernicious effects of neoliberal governance models as well as the complex and intersecting power relations that are unique to higher education.

International studies have consistently highlighted the challenges experienced by lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) teachers from around the world as they negotiate their personal and professional identities within the context of an often hostile work environment, In Ireland, the education system remains heavily influenced by denominational mores, particularly those of the Roman Catholic Church. Unsurprisingly, with the declaration by the Roman Catholic Church that homosexuality was ‘intrinsically disordered’ (Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church, Libreria Edittrice Vaticana, 2003), LGB teachers’ professional identity is often (in)formed by fear as well as perceived, or actual, harassment, bullying and overt discrimination. This study represents the first in-depth examination of the apparent contradiction between EU law (Employment Equality Directive 2000/78/EC – European Union, 2000) and the derogation afforded organizations with denominational ethos in Irish equality legislation which explicitly permitted discrimination in order to protect that ethos from being ‘undermined’ (Section 37(1), Employment Equality Acts, 1998–2011). Drawing on semi-structured, in-depth interviews with 23, LGB Irish primary school teachers, the research reveals the tensions which exist between the competing (and legitimate) rights of faith organizations to protect their values against those of LGB workers ‘to working conditions which respect his or her health, safety and dignity’ (Article 31, EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, 2000).

Owing to a variety of complex historical and socio-cultural factors, the Irish education system remains heavily influenced by denominational mores and values [Ferriter, D. 2012. Occasions of Sin: Sex & Society in Modern Ireland. London: Profile Books], particularly those of the Roman Catholic Church [O’Toole, B. 2015. “1831–2014: An Opportunity to Get it Right This Time? Some Thoughts on the Current Debate on Patronage and Religious Education in Irish Primary in Primary Schools: Reflections from the Republic of Ireland.” Irish Educational Studies 34 (1): 89–102. doi:10.1080/03323315.2015.1010704; Faas, D., M. Darmody, and B. Sokolowska. 2016. “Religious Diversity in Primary Schools: Reflections from the Republic of Ireland.” British Journal of Religious Education 38 (1): 83–98]. Unsurprisingly, with the declaration by the Church that homosexuality was ‘intrinsically disordered’ [Libreria Edittrice Vaticana. 2003. “Roman Catholic Catechism.” Accessed January 18 2013. http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a6.htm], the professional identity and practice of lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) teachers working in denominational schools is often (in)formed by fear, as well as perceived, or actual, harassment and discrimination [Gowran, S. 2004. “The Experiences of Gay and Lesbian Teachers in Irish Schools.” In Primary Voices, edited by J. Deegan, D. Devine, and A. Lodge, 37–56. Dublin: IPA; Fahie, D. 2016. “‘Spectacularly Exposed and Vulnerable’ – How Irish Equality Legislation Subverted the Personal and Professional Security of Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Teachers.” Sexualities]. This paper examines the lived-experience of 23 self-identified LGB teachers who work(ed) in Irish Roman Catholic primary schools. Their unique experiences and perspectives of faith-based schooling are examined against a backdrop of the complex processes of rationalisation and reflexivity these teachers undertake as they endeavour to reconcile their sense of personal integrity – as members of the LGB community – with their professional responsibilities. The study draws particular attention to those LGB teachers who hold deeply felt, and sincere, beliefs in the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church but who, nonetheless, express a level of discomfort at the language and tone of church dogma in respect of minority sexualities.

Sectoral and institutional context[s] are critical to understanding how workplace toxicity manifests and how it might best be addressed. The education sector, specifically higher education, is the focus of this study, drawing on qualitative data collected from Irish Higher Education Institutions [HEIs]. Underpinned by a multi-faceted conceptualisation of bullying, the study explores how it is experienced by university staff and how institutional or contextual factors impinge on that experience. The study employed a qualitative interpretive methodology involving one-to-one semi-structured interviews with self-selecting participants. Persons who currently work or have recently worked in higher education institutions were recruited into the study. A generic thematic approach resulted in five intersecting themes, converging on one overarching organising construct, i.e., bullying in higher education as a traumatic process. The data displayed relationality, institutionalisation and unethicality, which are underlying features of a multi-faceted conceptualisation of bullying. It was concluded that the processes and procedures in place to address bullying and provide redress do not appear to be sufficiently nuanced to accommodate the complex behaviours and power plays involved in bullying in Higher Education, assuming a rationality stripped of power dynamics, which risks aggravating the damage already inflicted by bullying. The findings suggest that the institutional response, or lack thereof, can sometimes be more traumatising than the bullying itself. Individual cases often reflect a wider organisational culture that tolerates bullying and victimisation. Institutional responses will need to tackle the entire HEI ecosystem, requiring and a more nuanced understanding of the power dynamics and organisational context.

There is increasing awareness of the value of interdisciplinary collaboration within academia. Scholars argue that by drawing upon the conceptual, methodological, and interrogative paradigms of at least two disparate disciplines, researchers are challenged to re-evaluate and reconsider their own discipline-centric assumptions. A consequence of such purposeful boundary-blurring is an increased rigour and richness in the analysis of raw data, as well as the development of revealing insights through the novel application of discrete conceptual perspectives and theories. In such a way, dominant, taken-for-granted methodological and analytical assumptions are destabilised, as researchers are obliged to embrace contrasting perspectives while reassessing the epistemological foundations of their work. This paper focuses on the phenomenon of bystander responses to workplace bullying dynamics. While traditional scholarship into workplace bullying emanates from disciplines such as business, psychology, law, medicine and sociology, for example, this paper argues that philosophy, as a subject/field, may provide the researcher with a fresh interrogative lens through which to (re)view the phenomenon of workplace bullying, along with the consequential response of bystanders to such noxious behaviours. It suggests that, by drawing upon the philosophical concept of virtue ethics—which posits the question “What would a good or virtuous person do?”—we are afforded a robust theoretical framework to support a thoughtful and reasoned destabilization of contemporary perspectives on bystander behaviours and motivations.