This study investigates the defining features that distinguish workplace bullying from interpersonal conflict – being frequency, negative social behaviour, power imbalance, length and perceived intent – by contrasting the characteristics of conflict incidents in a group of workplace bullying victims versus a group of non-victims. A group of 47 victims and 62 non-victims were identified based on a questionnaire time 1 and time 2 (time lag of 6 months). The conflict incidents were assessed between time 1 and time 2 using an event-based diary study that was filled out for a period of two times 20 working days with a break of 4 months in between. Hierarchical linear modelling (HLM) showed that conflict incidents differed for victims versus non-victims, in line with the defining aspects of workplace bullying: victims’ conflict incidents related more to the work context and included more personal and work-related negative social behaviour. Victims perceived more inferiority and less control in the conflicts, indicated more continuation of previous conflict incidents and reported more negative intentions from their opponent. These findings validate the conceptual differentiation between interpersonal conflict and workplace bullying, while at the same time adhering to their related nature.

There has been an increase in the use of Information Communication Technologies in the workplace. This change extends the scope of bullying behaviours at work to the online context. However, a generally accepted measure of workplace cyberbullying is still lacking. The purpose of the present paper is to construct and validate the Inventory of Cyberbullying Acts at Work, in order to contribute to this emerging field. Building on existing knowledge, we expected three types of cyberbullying behaviours to emerge in the work context: person related, work related and intrusive. First, the items of the scale were constructed and the three-dimensional structure of the scale was tested in two different samples. Then, the reliability and the convergent validity of the scale were assessed. Finally, we tested the predictive validity of the scale by assessing the impact of exposure to cyberbullying acts at work to individuals’ mental well-being six months later. Our analyses confirmed the three-dimensional structure of the scale. In addition, the scale was found reliable and valid. The construction of this scale offers an avenue for further research on cyberbullying in the work context.

In this study the causal relationships between work characteristics, in terms of job demands and job resources, and both targets’ and perpetrators' reports of workplace bullying, are investigated. In line with the Job Demands-Resources model and the bullying literature, we assumed that both high job demands (i.e. workload, role conflict and job insecurity) and low job resources (i.e. task autonomy, social support and skill utilization) increase bullying over time (i.e. normal causation). Our sample included 177 employees of various establishments of a large Belgian organization. The results of structural equation modelling analyses partially supported our hypothesis. As expected, we found that T1 job demands related positively to targets’ reports of bullying at T2 one year later, and that T1 job resources related negatively to T2 targets’ reports of bullying. Unexpectedly, there was no significant cross-lagged effect of T1 job demands and resources on T2 perpetrator's reports of bullying. No evidence was found for reverse causation or reciprocal effects. Overall, at least for targets, these findings support the validity of the theoretical models postulating a causal link from work characteristics to workplace bullying.