An Introduction to the Social Psychology of Insults in Organizations

TLDR

Insults are a pervasive organizational phenomenon that involve a perpetrator, target, and audience, can arise intentionally or accidentally, elicit shame, guilt, and anger, and function as a political tool that shapes domination hierarchies, status distinctions, and coalition dynamics. The study shows that insults create opportunities for status mobility by pitting individuals against one another and allowing observers to side, thereby testing and influencing alliances within the organization.

Abstract

The author argues that insults are an important social and organizational phenomenon, which causes powerful emotions and enters peoplés personal histories. It is suggested that insults involve a perpetrator, a target and, often, an audience. The intention to insult is not necessary, as some insults are the result of misunderstanding or accident. However, the experience of being gratuitously offended and the corresponding feelings of shame, guilt, and anger are fundamental to insults. Several types of insults are observed, such as exclusion, stereotyping, obliteration of significant identity details, ingratitude, scapegoating, rudeness, broken promises, being ignored or kept waiting. Even more potent insults result from the defamation or despoiling of idealized objects, persons, or ideas. Different insult dynamics are noted; these include an apology, a commensurate retaliation, a disproportionate retaliation and possible escalation, a retaliation against a surrogate and weaker target than the perpetrator of the initial insult, an affected indifference with a possible delayed retaliation, or more commonly a resigned tolerance which may fuel subsequent insults. Insults as well as retaliation and resistance to them are part of an organization's political process which establishes, first, lines of domination/subordination, second, finer gradations of status and power, i.e., a pecking order, and third, opportunities for building coalitions and alliances. It is argued that insults allow for a certain mobility within a pecking order, by offering 'matches' for contestants to pitch their wit, venom, and courage against each other. They also enable audiences to take sides, thus influencing and testing the operation of coalitions and alliances.