Search results

This paper aims to explain how the dynamics of inter-firm relations between small and large firms can, in the case of some behaviours, be interpreted as inter-organizational bullying.

This paper draws on a qualitative approach adopting the critical incident method to explore the subjective experiences of 13 individual managers and owners of small service businesses in dealing with the representatives/executives of the large corporations they serviced. The method facilitated an investigation of the significant occurrences identified by the small-firm respondents about the undue advantage taken by the large firms. This was found to be more than simple occasional opportunistic or unfair business practices perpetrated by representatives of the large firms but, instead, involved bullying.

The results revealed that large corporations actively, though covertly, sought to take advantage of their small service providers by resorting to bullying practices. Intimidation, opportunism, use of deceitful or unfair business practices, as well as abuse of power, were manifestations of inter-organizational bullying committed by the large and powerful corporations. The contrasting characteristics of size, access to resources, economic and market power were identified as strong impediments against building effective ethical relational exchanges between the large corporations and their small service providers.

The study's findings provide valuable insights into the root causes and consequences of inter-organizational bullying. However, it is crucial to interpret these results in the context of this specific study. It is worth nothing that these findings primarily represent the self-perception of inter-organizational bullying among small service providers and may not capture other viewpoints or aspects of the industrial sector. Replicating this study in different sectors could enhance the generalizability of the conclusions drawn.

This analysis is valuable in understanding what constitutes the phenomenon referred to as inter-organizational bullying. It also assists to understand the conditions when large firms exhibit such behaviours and their implications on the well-being of relevant stakeholders.

Firstly, the business partners should maintain a healthy relationship if they want to avoid incidents of bullying, which can harm the performance of the relationship. In doing so, they need to reduce the level of uncertainty in their business relationships through the transparent information exchange, formulating commonly agreeable contracts and enhancing communication procedures. They also need to put aside their self-interest, but rather strive for achieving results that will be beneficial to both parties.

This exploratory study offers a novel and unexplored way of theorizing inter-organizational bullying, as well as uncovering its antecedents and impacts on the welfare of small businesses, particularly small service providers.

This article describes what department directors and chiefs of staff reported when asked about the competencies they need to be effective in addressing on-the-job challenges. The study analyzed the generated data in two different ways to both understand what participants said in their own terms and to determine whether there is a fit between participants’ responses and facilitative leadership theory.

Twenty-four semi-structured interviews were conducted with five department directors and seven chiefs of staff in a US city that had a mayor-council form of government. Responses were analyzed in two ways. Initially, coding categories were developed inductively in an effort to employ what anthropologists characterize as an emic or insider perspective. Then the data were recoded from an etic perspective using the theory of facilitative leadership as a conceptual framework.

Although participants identified a wide variety of competencies, all participants emphasized the importance of working collaboratively with others, including the members of their teams, the elected official they worked with (and for) and constituents.

While most studies of facilitative leadership have focused on mayors and city managers, i.e. those at the top of the city administration hierarchy, this study’s focus is on middle managers who are not necessarily thought of as leaders but who must in fact, exercise leadership at least at times. Another relatively unique feature of this paper is its focus on a city that employs a mayor-council form of governance, a type of governance structure that has been underdiscussed in the literature to date.