This topic is a bit uncomfortable to write about — partly because it can sound like privileged whining (“Being a leader is so hard! People are so mean!”), and partly because it can be embarrassing to confess that, as a leader, one might actually be subject to bullying by the people one is supposed to be leading. But I’ve seen it happen too often to too many people for it to continue going unaddressed — despite the discomfort that might come with discussing it.

When I was new in a leadership position some years ago, my assistant at the time – who had previously worked in a similar position in a very different campus organization – made an interesting comment in passing. “I’ve been really surprised,” she said, “by the things people in the library are willing to say to their bosses.”
 
Why would she be surprised? Because the things she had witnessed being said to bosses by their subordinates would, in virtually any other workplace, have gotten them fired.

Why were those things not getting these library employees fired? There are several reasons, including:

• A pervasive campus culture that valorizes “speaking truth to power” (and tends to assume that anything critical said “to power” must be truth)
• The cultural difficulty of defending oneself when one is in a position of hierarchical authority
• The difficulty of firing anyone – especially faculty – in academia

But let’s be clear here: insubordination is not the same thing as bullying. Bullying from below is not: questioning a leader’s decisions (either publicly or privately), raising concerns (legitimate or not) about policy or practice, or otherwise delivering criticism in either an appropriate or an inappropriate way. Failures of civility or collegiality, while never okay, are not in themselves the same thing as bullying. Everyone loses their cool sometimes; bullying from below is more than that.

Here’s how I define bullying from below: any attempt to get one’s way through intimidation, threats, or simply making the leader’s life as miserable as possible. In extreme cases it can be disconnected from any strategic or purposeful goal and simply be an attempt to harm the leader, often because the leader has done something (or holds views) seen by the bully as objectionable. Purely malicious bullying of this latter type is relatively rare, though I have seen it happen; more common is strategic or instrumental bullying designed to achieve an organizational or personal objective.
 
So what does bullying from below look like in real life? Here are a few examples (you, my readers, will surely be able to contribute more if you’ve worked in libraries long enough):

• I have seen a leader who was unwilling to assert their authority over the budget because they had been so effectively browbeaten by a subordinate financial officer who was deeply invested in the way things had been done in the past and wanted to preserve their power over budget management.

• I once saw a librarian repeatedly attack a leader in various public forums and finally bring a formal complaint against the leader, subjecting them to a long process of investigation (that ultimately resulted in a finding against the librarian who brought the complaint).

• I have seen a leader’s personal property destructively vandalized by an unhappy line librarian.

• I’m aware of a situation in which an HR administrator had to be escorted to her car in the parking lot because she had been terrorized (screamed at, threatened) by a librarian in her organization.

• I once watched an executive-level university administrator subjected to repeated hostile questions from a librarian in a public forum — the librarian monopolizing meeting time by repeating variations on the same question over and over, and consistently interrupting the administrator when they tried to respond.

In none of those situations was the bully subjected to discipline.

I’d like to suggest that failing to respond fairly but firmly to bullying behavior — whether the bully is “punching down” or “punching up” — represents a failure of leadership. When a leader or manager becomes aware of such behavior, the best course of action is neither to ignore it nor to “bully back” (yelling at or browbeating or threatening the bully of the first instance) but rather to counsel immediately with the HR manager and determine next steps. What these steps are will, of course, vary by situation — but the response to bullying behavior must be, from the very beginning, carefully planned and carried out according to library and university policy.

Now, I anticipate a few possible objections to what I’ve written here. Let me channel those, and offer my responses:

Objection #1: Insisting on “civility” and “collegiality” benefits the privileged and is just a tool to preserve existing structures of power.

Response: Civility and collegiality (also sometimes called “professionalism”) should be a baseline expectation for all library employees, at all levels. No one should be treated with contempt, no one should be steamrolled, no one should be attacked. This expectation, this norm, protects people in subordinate positions at least as much as it does those in leadership positions, and should be applied consistently across the organization. Does this mean that the concept of “collegiality” can’t be weaponized by the more-powerful against the less-powerful? Of course it can. (This will be the topic of my next Two and a Half Cheers For… post.) But virtually all legitimate policies and expectations can, in theory, be weaponized by the powerful against the less-powerful. This does not make those policies or expectations less legitimate; it underscores the importance of ethical management and leadership.

Objection #2: Library leaders are paid relatively large salaries for a reason; one of them is because their jobs expose them to criticism. Instead of whining about “bullying,” they need to develop a thicker skin.

Response: There’s no question that a library leader needs to have a thick skin in order to thrive in his or her position. You need a thick skin because you’re going to be subject to a lot of criticism. “Criticism” and “bullying” are not the same thing. Having a thick skin does not mean overlooking unprofessional and inappropriate conduct.

Objection #3: Give me a break. Someone with less power can’t “bully” someone with more power.

Response: Power is contextual, and there are significant ways in which leaders are relatively powerless. For one thing, pushing back against a bully-from-below — or responding with anything other than quiet submission — can, sometimes, all too easily be seen (and characterized) as retaliation, or as an abuse of power. (Paradoxically, this puts the leader in a less powerful position — in this context — than the subordinate who can speak much more freely without fear of appearing abusive.) For another thing, not all power is organizational power. Someone who is willing to behave in an inappropriate and abusive way has power over someone who feels more constrained by social or professional norms, regardless of where they stand in the organizational hierarchy. Academic organizations, including libraries, tend not to deal very effectively with people who do not feel bound by norms of behavior, especially if those people have successfully gained tenure.

I’m sure there are questions or objections that I haven’t anticipated. Share them in the comments!