Showing posts with label Kenneth Westhues. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Kenneth Westhues. Show all posts

Monday, November 9, 2026

Perry pieces blast business model of higher ed

George MJ Perry has lately published two superb commentaries on dysfunction in higher education, both citing Prof. Kenneth Westhues's classic, The Envy of Excellence: Administrative Mobbing of High-Achieving Professors (Mellen Press 2006).

Perry is always worth reading at "Abuse of Process," and he publishes widely besides. I met Perry virtually through the most recent Niagara Conference on Workplace Mobbing (NCWM) in July. I became a fan immediately, and we connected after the conference. 

Perry and I have in common an interest in the intersection of law, journalism, and sport. Perry is a track-and-field athlete, sport performance coach, businessperson, and writer. As well, Perry is a U.S. Navy veteran who specialized in submarine warfare, coincidentally the same as law librarian and veteran Misty Peltz-Steele, my wife and chief strategist.

At the Niagara Conference, Perry led an informative and riveting panel, "From Organizational Mobbing to Public Exile." The panel posited the credible and distressing thesis that contemporary media transform workplace mobbings into public cancellations—see the congruity I described in 2021—thus compounding the trauma inflicted on mobbing victims. The panel discussion touched on the adjacent subjects of media ethics, defamation law, and the right to erasure in data protection.

RJ Peltz-Steele with Google Gemini CC0 1.0
Last week, Perry published "When Universities Pretend to Be Businesses" at The James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal. In the lead, he explained: 

Since at least the early twentieth century, universities have flirted with America's penchant for "running things like a business." But like government, non-profits, and other non-businesses that try to be something they are not, universities' scattershot copycatting of business practices creates new harms to the institutions and the people within them.

More than "flirting," I'd say full-on embracing. 

The thesis resonated with me, especially working at a public university that is not the state system's well endowed "flagship." Faculty achievement at my university often is quantified in dollars, i.e., how much grant money a faculty member brings in. Meanwhile we take precious few measurements of student attainment and do almost nothing to assess how our alumni enrich the world.

Similarly, curricular programs are assessed according to cost-benefit analysis. As a result, market demand in fields such as business and technology drives resource allocation to those departments. The likes of liberal arts are edged out. Poorly remunerative fields such as journalism operate at threadbare minimums.

My university is not unusual in this vein. But that's not how universities are supposed to work. In the classical conception, the university is a bastion of knowledge for its intrinsic worth. It is axiomatic that the preservation and dissemination of knowledge in all fields is essential for the advancement of human civilization. The founding of the University of Bologna in 1088 marked the endpoint of the Dark Ages, a time when Roman knowledge and law were rediscovered.

Today, higher education, especially in the United States and increasingly elsewhere in the world, is dominated by private commercial interests, a worrisomely pervasive demonstration of capitalism run amuck. In such an environment, the historical, civic responsibility of the public university should only be heightened over financial incentives.

Yet funding models for public universities such as mine run flatly contrary to the civic mission. Budgets come vanishingly from public subsidies, and rather from sport-aligned private fundraising (the "flagship" model) or eat-what-you-kill tuition and fees (the rest of us). Unsurprisingly, the result is a higher ed system that reflects ever expanding socioeconomic disparity as nakedly as K12 schools funded by property taxes—the original American sin, one might say.

Perry observed the irony that universities teach business, management, and public administration, yet seem themselves not to understand the important social role dictated by their not-for-profit status. And among the many hazards of running a university like a business is a deterioration of professional relationships built on trust, or what Westhues described as "unwritten rules [and] reciprocal loyalties."

Instead, academic interaction is reduced to the bottom-line letter of the business contract. Characteristically, at my university, where faculty are compulsorily unionized, the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) is the be-all-end-all. If a benefit or privilege is not in the CBA, faculty can forgeddaboudit. If there is a faculty duty in the CBA, then it is meticulously enforced, regardless of whether it serves evolving educational needs.

Perry quoted Westhues at the Niagara conference: "'Academic life has grown emptier, merely contractual. A market mentality has penetrated into more and more aspects of life. When everything has a price, nothing really matters.'"

That very deterioration of professionalism on the university campus leads to the problem Perry wrote about in an earlier piece in late October. For "Reality's Last Stand," he published "The University's War on Excellence." The piece explained why workplace mobbing and social cancellation occur with alarming frequency in the academic environment.

"Elaborate contracts are the prototypical 'inaccessible texts,' of which university bureaucracies are particularly prolific producers," Perry posited. Corollary to arcane contracts and procedures are written and unwritten human-resource assessments of who is and who is not a "team player." Such "[i]naccessible texts are easily weaponized in workplace mobbing," he wrote.

Antithetically, but correspondingly with the civic responsibility of the university, faculty are in a "weird" and very not-corporate employment arrangement. The administration works for the faculty, not the other way around. Tenure is a feature of this arrangement. It was designed to protect faculty from firing or other adverse employment action, both to shield expression of informed opinion on matters of public affairs, and to shield unpopular decisions in academic governance.

This arrangement is all but forgotten in the contemporary university-as-business model. Tenure has withered on the vine, as universities figured out how to circumvent it contractually. Courts shirked any role in social accountability for the university and deferred to reductionist contractualism. Perry aptly quoted Paul Siskind, legislative director at New York Healthy Workplace Advocates:

"Tenure, as a doctrine, says you can only be fired for just cause. In real life, employers can come up with very flimsy reasons and even lies that justify their 'just cause.' There is no accountability outside of the school itself unless you work for a union school, and then you have a grievance process."

But that, too, is a shallow promise.

"Due process doesn't mean that the procedure itself has to be fair and it doesn't mean that the outcome has to be fair. It just means they have a procedure and they followed it." 

Mobbing researchers such as Prof. Peter Wylie (video) have demonstrated that unions, owing to their nature as collective actors, are as likely to be perpetrators of mobbing as defenders of victims.

With professional values undermined and labor guardrails stripped away, faculty are no longer shining guardians of the ivory tower. They are mere cogs in the machine, toiling to satisfy corporatocratic taskmasters. In this environment, excellence and merit give way to group-think and sycophancy. Base instincts run roughshod, and conditions are ripe for social dysfunctions in the workplace, such as mobbing.

At a union meeting last week—I went in my capacity as a representative of the law faculty, though I am not a union member—the brokenness of the system was evident. Rank distrust of the institution and abysmal morale were cautiously buoyed by "blue wave" election results. But, I thought but did not say, I have no confidence that purportedly labor-friendly legislators will care to effect any systemic change. They have in the past rather only shifted benefits to their own favored interest groups.

"Universities are upstream of culture, society, and politics," Perry observed. Ultimately, dysfunction in the university "is a cultural problem within universities, not a legislative or regulatory one."

So fixated are today's universities on the almighty dollar, I am skeptical that the ship can be turned around; that the creation and transmission of knowledge might ever again be the overriding university mission; that, dare I suggest it, we might reimagine universities as institutions that are supposed to lose money. Universities are supposed to be investments in the greater good, generating unquantifiable intangibles in the people who support, protect, and grow our very democracy and the rule of law.

I hope my skepticism is ill founded. It is disappointing to think that in the journey of human enlightenment since 1088, we are not on an ever ascendant curve, but on the downslope of a repeating waveform.

Monday, November 2, 2026

Professional coach explains mobbing, other social dysfunctions that cause workplace trauma

Coach Heffernan analogizes workplace mobbing
to William Golding's Lord of the Flies (1954).

Cry of the Hunters (2011) by Eljiasan,
via DeviantArt, CC BY-NC-ND 3.0
Personal and executive coach Lynda Heffernan, architect of "A Kaizen Mind," has posted a brilliant video explainer of workplace mobbing.

I admit, I can be a person who rolls the eyes upon hearing words such as "cognitive behavioral hypnotherapy," or just "coach" when not attached to a sport team. But after spending some time with Heffernan's substantive content and video channel, I've concluded that this coach is worth listening to. She's the real deal, clinically trained in cognitive neuroscience.

"Kaizen" refers to a Japanese philosophy of continuous, incremental betterment (Forbes, Medium). Lausanne, Switzerland-based Heffernan has adapted the concept to a strategic mindset for self-improvement. In plain English, she does leadership and development training for organizations and executives.

The video on workplace mobbing (Oct. 19, 2026, embedded below) is the fourth in a series about related, trauma-inducing social dynamics, including workplace bullying, gaslighting, and ostracism. Here is the description of the video on mobbing:

In this video, I introduce you to the Island, and to workplace mobbing. If you read Lord of the Flies at school, you'll remember how a group of perfectly ordinary boys, stranded together, gradually turned on one of their own. Nobody set out to be cruel. But once the group had chosen its target, each small act made the next one easier. Mobbing is closely related to bullying, but with one important difference. It isn't one person. It's a whole island. 

Gratifyingly, Heffernan is well versed in the sociological origins and research of workplace mobbing, so she recognizes its discrete nature, especially thanks to the work of my friend and colleague, Dr. Kenneth Westhues. Somewhat jealously defining that distinctiveness is a key part of the mission of the World Association for Research on Workplace Mobbing (WARWM), which I have served as a co-founder and officer along with Dr. Qingli Meng and Dr. Westhues, and of WARWM's annual Conference on Workplace Mobbing at Niagara University (at The Savory Tort), ably led by Dr. Meng.

Incidentally, the fifth entry in the video series also might be of especial interest to the legal community, as Heffernan spoke on the bystander effect. She referenced the classic film 12 Angry Men (1957), and the 1964 Kitty Genovese case, eye-openingly explored in the James Solomon documentary, The Witness (2015) (YouTube). Bystander effect and "Kitty Genovese syndrome" are discussed in connection with tort law in my Tortz, volume 2 (pp. 400-02, 2026 ed.) (SSRN, Lulu).

Understanding workplace mobbing, especially as distinct from its close relative, bullying, literally can save lives. As Heffernan observed in the video, "[B]eing targeted by a group is not proof that the group is right. Very often it's proof that you were willing to see something that they weren't."


Monday, July 20, 2026

Workplace mobbing researchers convene in Niagara

The Third Niagara Conference on Workplace Mobbing opened today, and I was privileged to participate in the opening session.

I've been likewise privileged to be part of the leadership team of this conference, though all recognition for the heavy lifting must go to fearless chair Professor Qingli Meng and legendary sociologist Ken Westhues. As host-Niagara University President Father James Maher recounted in his opening remarks, the progress since our inaugural conference is astonishing, including the founding of the World Association for Research on Workplace Mobbing (WARWM) and the Journal on Workplace Mobbing.
 
(UPDATE, July 29, 2026: Conference videos are now posted on the WARWM YouTube channel.)  
 
Baron Nigel Biggar (2023)
Elekes Andor via Wikimedia Commons
(2023), CC BY-SA 4.0
This morning's opening featured greetings, besides Father Maher's, from Nigel Biggar, an academic and member of the U.K. House of Lords (read more at, e.g., the Hoover Institution); Constanza Ceruti, University of Salta, Argentina; and John Mueller, University of Calgary, Canada.
 
I paste below the Niagara University press release on the third annual conference. The impressive conference program includes these multi-national presenters and subjects:
  • Linda Shallcross & Summer Bland, Workplace Mobbing Australia and Summer Bland, Workplace Mobbing Australia, When Organisations Perpetuate Workplace Mobbing: Race, Gender, and Institutional Responsibility
  • Linda Shallcross & Summer Bland, Workplace Mobbing and Organizational Response: Why Escalation Persists
  • Qingli Meng, Niagara University, Institutionalized Mobbing and the Mobility of Power: Leadership Networks, Culture Transfer, and Accountability in Higher Education
  • Lindsey Brown, Rochester City School District, Open Secrets: Inaccessible Texts as Roadmaps to Mobbing
  • Catherine Koverola, licensed psychologist, When Workplace Mobbing and Moral Injury Co-occur: A Path Forward
  • AnnMarie Flynn, independent scholar, Academic Mobbing as It Unfolds for Targets: An Inflection-Point Model of Psychological Injury
  • Tamara Thermitus, McGill University and Toronto Metropolitan University Diversity Institute, When Silence Becomes Violence: Institutional Silencing of Black Women in Leadership
  • Heliana Ramirez, Workplace Trauma Recovery, LLC, M.O.M. (Mobbing on Maternity) Leave: Impacts of Mobbing on Pregnant Workers and Their Babies
  • Jocelynne Scutt, University of New South Wales, Mobbing "the Mob": When Workplace Dynamics Promote Mobbing Power
  • Roselle Aranha, Niagara University, Ethical Leadership and Systems Thinking as Safeguards Against Workplace Mobbing in Higher Education: Lessons from Faculty Development and Appointment Processes
  • Deitra Payne, Fabulous Coaching, Training, and Productions, LLC, From Silence to Safety: Human Resource Strategies for Preventing and Addressing Workplace Mobbing
  • Cevat Celep, Girne American University, Mobbing Directed at Teachers in Türkiye
  • Linda Crockett, Canadian Institute of Workplace Bullying Resources, Working With All Parties Without Excusing Harm: A Trauma-Informed Accountability Pathway for Mobbing
  • Steve Fellner, SUNY Brockport, Academic Mobbing and the Fragmented Memoir
  • Mariya E. Ivanova, Trakia University, From Experience to Analysis: Workplace Mobbing as a Systemic Phenomenon: Structural Amplification, Triggers, and Recovery
  • Gisèle Yasmeen, McGill University, Let No Good Deed Go Unpunished: Whistleblowing and Workplace Mobbing in Publicly Funded and Regulated Institutions
  • Maritza Reyes (at The Savory Tort), attorney and independent scholar, Qualifying Workplace Mobbing for Expert Testimony in U.S. Federal Courts
  • Sandra Kouritzin, University of Manitoba, Civility as Governance: Linguistic Regimes of Credibility and Exclusion in Higher Education
  • Paul Siskind, New York Healthy Workplace Advocates, Workplace Bullying and Mobbing: Legal Basics and Legislative Challenges
  • Peter Coughlin, EconPolicy Research Group (Maputo, Mozambique), Canadian Credit Unions’ Vulnerability to Capture by Administrators and Directors: Remedies for Mobbing and Other Takeover Tactics
  • Martin Sawma, Edwin Mellen University, Extending Conceptual Analysis of Reflective Motives to Causal Motivations
  • Peter Wylie, University of British Columbia, Okanagan, Workplace Mobbing Victims Beware: Why Your Union Will Side With the Mobbers and Not You
  • Paul Siskind and Mike Schlicht, New York Healthy Workplace Advocates; Qingli Meng, Niagara University; and Kenneth Westhues, University of Waterloo, Addressing Workplace Bullying and Mobbing Through Legislation
  • George Perry, independent writer; Dave Scott-Thomas, coach and independent writer; Jonah Arnold, Health Law Firm; Christine Marie, independent writer; Michael Capiraso, independent writer, Media Coverage Transforms Workplace Mobbing Into Full-blown Cancellations
  • Janet Glover-Kerkvliet, Kerkvliet Counseling Associates LLC; and Sonja Pitts, Reign Consulting Group LLC, From Crisis to Coordination: Toward a National Network for Workplace Mobbing Target Survivors
Auditorium at Niagara University this morning


Niagara University Press Release

NIAGARA UNIVERSITY HOSTS THE 3RD ANNUAL NIAGARA CONFERENCE ON WORKPLACE MOBBING

NIAGARA UNIVERSITY, N.Y. — Organized in partnership with the World Association for Research on Workplace Mobbing (WARWM), Niagara University is hosting the 3rd annual Niagara Conference on Workplace Mobbing (NCWM) on July 20–22, 2026 (in-person and virtual).

Workplace mobbing is a subtle social process in which an employee from multiple levels of positions in an organization becomes the target of a systematic, persistent, and collaborated campaign of collective aggressions in the workplace, with the goal of eliminating the person out of the organization meanwhile destroying their identity. Workplace mobbing differs from ordinary workplace conflict. It is a social process in which multiple actors participate directly or indirectly in ways of psychological attack against the targeting, with a predetermined goal of eradication.

By supporting the scholarly study of workplace mobbing as a distinct academic discipline, Niagara University is becoming a significantly recognized hub for research, scholarship, and global dialogue on workplace mobbing.

The workplace mobbing initiative aims to establish an academic framework for understanding, researching, and preventing workplace mobbing, distinct from general bullying. It also aims to publish research and influence policy, moving toward treating workplace mobbing as a recognized, serious form of systemic psychological violence.

The efforts have led to the creation of the Journal of Workplace Mobbing, the first ever refereed and peer-reviewed academic journal dedicated exclusively to the topic. Its inaugural issue (2025) includes multiple articles originating from the 2024 NCWM at Niagara University. This journal–conference pipeline further cements Niagara University’s role in shaping this field. The second issue is ready to publish.

The initiatives also bring together experts globally, notably Dr. Kenneth Westhues from the University of Waterloo, Canada, "the world's most renowned expert on mobbing in higher education" (The Swiss magazine Republik), "the world’s leading authority on academic mobbing" (Peter Wood, president of the National Association of Scholars).

Niagara University welcomes scholars, professional experts, practitioners, and students to join us as we work together to advance the science of workplace mobbing.

About Niagara University. Founded in 1856, Niagara University is a Catholic and Vincentian institution dedicated to educating the whole person through a values-based education rooted  in justice, service, and compassion. For media inquiries, please contact: Alaina Jonathan, Asst. Director of Communications, phone (716) 946-2110, email ajonathan@niagara.edu.

Thursday, April 2, 2026

Workplace mobbing researchers plan global conference

The third annual Niagara Conference on Workplace Mobbing (NCWM) is open for proposals and registration and will occur hybrid, online and in person, at Niagara University, New York, on July 20-22, 2026.

The NCWM is the conference of the World Association for Research on Workplace Mobbing (WARWM), which publishes the Journal of Workplace Mobbing. It has been my honor to serve as an inaugural organizer of the conference, organization, and journal. (Read about previous conference convenings at The Savory Tort.)

Following is the call for proposals, recently dispatched by my friend and colleague at Niagara University, the president of the WARWM, Dr. Qingli Meng. Dr. Meng spoke to Tegan Osmond, a workplace abuse recovery coach, about workplace mobbing in 2025. More information is at the conference website.


We are pleased to invite you to the third annual hybrid Niagara Conference on Workplace Mobbing (NCWM), to be held July 20–22, 2026, at Niagara University, Niagara Falls, New York.

Hosted by the World Association for Research on Workplace Mobbing (WARWM) and Niagara University, this year's theme, "From Awareness to Action: Creating Healthy, Respectful, and Dignified Workplaces," continues our commitment to advancing research, dialogue, and practical strategies for addressing workplace mobbing. All conference participants are automatically become member of WARWM.

We warmly invite proposals for:

  • Individual paper presentations
  • Panel discussions
  • Roundtable discussions
  • Poster presentations

The purpose of the conference is to advance the understanding of workplace mobbing as a distinct phenomenon. Proposals will focus specifically on workplace mobbing. We welcome submissions that examine different aspects of mobbing, including leadership and power dynamics, cross-cultural and comparative perspectives, legal and ethical frameworks, psychological impact, trauma and recovery, organizational change, and preventive practices.

Both in-person and virtual participation options are available. The registration fee is $225 for in-person participants and $100 for virtual participants.

Please submit proposals through the online portal (linked on the conference website). For questions, you may contact us.

Conference presenters and participants are invited to submit their papers for publication in the Journal of Workplace Mobbing.

Follow us on Facebook.

We look forward to welcoming you to Niagara Falls in July 2026 for an inspiring and collaborative international gathering.

Thursday, September 11, 2025

Conference launches 'Journal of Workplace Mobbing'

In July, I participated virtually in the second Niagara Conference on Workplace Mobbing, which launched the Journal of Workplace Mobbing.

As a co-organizer and a founder of the conference in 2024, I was privileged to address the assembly on this year's opening morning, in a panel that reviewed, "What Was Learned Last Year." 

The panel also comprised my friends and colleagues, Eve Seguin, University of Quebec in Montreal; Peter Wylie, University of British Columbia; Kenneth Westhues, University of Waterloo; and Caroline Crawford, University of Houston Clear Lake, chair. Dr. Qingli Meng was again the brilliant conference organizer in Niagara.

I will share more from the conference when videos are posted.

Meanwhile, I'm pleased to celebrate the launch of the Journal of Workplace Mobbing. The journal is an online, open source. Here is the table of contents of volume 1, number 1, comprising selected papers from the 2024 conference.

Here is the ISSN-registered Journal's "About":

Journal of Workplace Mobbing is a cognitive, intellectual, scholarly, and academic platform dedicated to the rigorous study of workplace mobbing. As the first refereed, open access journal focused exclusively on this phenomenon, this interdisciplinary journal serves as a critical space for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers to explore the complexities of mobbing.

We invite scholars to actively engage in this critical academic discourse, contributing to the advancement of knowledge, the deepening of global awareness and understanding of workplace mobbing, and the development of informed policies and effective interventions—ultimately fostering healthier, more equitable, and just workplace environments.

Authors can find guidelines and submission instructions here. 

Here is the journal editorial team:

  • Senior Editorial Advisor: Kenneth Westhues, Sociology, Emeritus, University of Waterloo, Canada
  • Editor-in-Chief: Qingli Meng, Criminology, Niagara University, USA
  • Lead Editor: Richard Peltz-Steele, Law, University of Massachusetts, USA
  • Managing Editor: Peter Wylie, Socioeconomics, Retired, University of British Columbia, Kelowna, Canada 
  • Editorial Advisory Board: 
    • Emily Godbey, Art History, Retired, Iowa State University, USA
    • Janice Harper, Anthropology, Independent Scholar, USA
    • Gorazd MeÅ¡ko, Criminology, University of Maribor, Slovenia
    • Florencia Peña, Anthropology, National School of Anthropology and History, Mexico 
    • Stephen Petrina, Educational Technology Support, University of British Columbia, Canada
  • Copy Editor: Martin Sawma, Sociology, Mellen University 

Tuesday, December 17, 2024

Niagara Conference opens registration, call for proposals on workplace mobbing for summer '25

Following on the success of last year's inaugural Conference on Workplace Mobbing at Niagara University (YouTube playlist), the 2025 conference has posted a call for proposals and opened for registration.

The founding of the World Association for Research on Workplace Mobbing was a key accomplishment of last year's event.

Thursday, May 9, 2024

Conference on workplace mobbing posts presenters

Niagara Falls, N.Y.
Carol M. Highsmith's America, Library of Congress,
Prints and Photographs Division, via Picryl
The Niagara Conference on Workplace Mobbing is taking shape.

Read more about the interdisciplinary conference at Niagara University, July 22-24, 2024, in the February announcement.  The conference website now features information about presenters and their work. Presenters include:

Dr. Ann Marie Flynn
Dr. Caroline Crawford
Dr. Emily Godbey
Dr. Eve Seguin
Gail Pursell Elliott
Dr. Janice Harper
Dr. Joseph Donnermeyer
Dr. Karen Moustafa Leonard
Dr. Kenneth Westhues
Dr. Peter Wylie
Prof. Richard Peltz-Steele
Prof. Robert Ashford

Dr. Rebecca Pearson
Dr. Qingli Meng
Dr. Walter DeKeseredy

As well, from the conference website:

Host of the conference is Niagara University, which dates from 1856, and which is meeting the challenges of the present century with extraordinary success. Its president, Rev. Dr. James Maher (theology), and its provost, Dr. Timothy Ireland (criminology), will welcome conference participants.

Among sponsors of this conference is the Edwin Mellen Press, which has published more books on mobbing than any other publisher. Professor Herbert Richardson (theology), Its founder and chief editor, now in his 93rd year, will address the conference on cybermobbing. In 1994, he was the subject of what is still the most famous case of academic dismissal in Canadian history. Dr. Eva Kort will also be on hand representing the Edwin Mellen Press.

A book by the late Joel Inbody, his factual analysis of being mobbed as a graduate student at the University of Massachusetts, will be released posthumously at the conference. His mother, New York educator Kimberly Lewis, will tell the story behind the book, and chronicle the events that led to Joel’s being slain by a gang of six law enforcement officers in New Mexico, in 2023.

Also sponsoring the conference is the Society of Socio-Economists. Its founder and leading light, Professor Robert Ashford, Professor of Law at the University of Syracuse, arranged for a session on academic mobbing way back in 2010, at the Annual Meeting of the Association of American Law Schools. Professor Ashford will address the conference on "Mobbing and Academic Freedom."

Registration remains open until July 1, or 100 participants, whichever comes first.  If you or a colleague wish to present as well as attend but are finding out about the conference only now, after the proposal deadline, reach out to Dr. Meng via the conference website to inquire.

Tuesday, February 27, 2024

Conference on Workplace Mobbing to convene in July, aims to establish mobbing as discrete field of study

PLEASE JOIN US IN NIAGARA IN JULY,
AND SPREAD THE WORD TO YOUR NETWORKS!

The first Niagara Conference on Workplace Mobbing will convene July 22-24, 2024, at Niagara University in Niagara, New York, and registration is now open for participation and presentation proposals, in-person and hybrid.

The conference is sponsored by Niagara University and co-sponsored by the Society of Socio-Economists. Additional sponsorships are invited; please contact conference registrar Qingli Meng, in criminology at Niagara University, via the conference website.

Mobbing is a form of group abuse of an individual and has been documented in studies in sociology and related fields for almost half a century. Mobbing is associated particularly with workplaces, where persons act in concert to effect a victim's alienation and exclusion from the community.

Workplace mobbing is especially prevalent in academic institutions. A sociologist and expert on mobbing, Professor Kenneth Westhues has studied the phenomenon and why the academic work environment is especially fertile soil for mobbing behavior. Westhues maintains the website, Workplace Mobbing in Academe.

While forms of interpersonal abuse such as harassment and bullying have found traction in law and become recognized in popular culture as wrongful, mobbing has not yet come fully into its own. Mobbing behaviors are complex, involving multiple perpetrators with variable states of culpability, so mobbing is not always as readily recognizable as a more abrupt infliction, such as bullying. Like harassment and bullying victims, especially before the wrongfulness of those acts were widely acknowledged, mobbing victims tend to self-blame and self-exclusion, so might not bring mobbing behaviors to light.

A purpose of the planned conference, therefore, is to disentangle mobbing from adjacent behaviors, such as bullying, harassment, and ostracism. By recognizing mobbing as a discrete phenomenon and focusing study on mobbing as a cross-cutting scholarly sub-field, fields such as psychology, economics, organizational management, employment law, and criminal law can recognize and respond to the problem of mobbing more effectively, bringing relief to victims and preventing victimization to begin with.

A welcome and invitation at the Niagara Conference on Workplace Mobbing website explains the conference mission better than I have here, as resources available through Westhues's website well explain mobbing and its defining characteristics.

I am chairing the Scientific Committee of the Niagara Conference on Workplace Mobbing . The interdisciplinary committee also comprises Dr. Meng; Dr. Westhues; Robert Ashford, in law at Syracuse University; Walter S. DeKeseredy, in criminology at West Virginia University; Joseph Donnermeyer, in criminology at Ohio State University; and Tim Ireland, provost at Niagara University.

The conference is grateful for technical and logistical support from Niagara University's Yonghong Tong, PhD; Michael Jeswald, MBA; Valerie Devine, assistant director of support and web development; Michael Ebbole, audio visual systems coordinator; William Stott, audio visual systems specialist; and Chang Huh, PhD.

The Niagara Conference on Workplace Mobbing is a project of Conference on Workplace Mobbing Ltd., a New York nonprofit organization.

Friday, December 31, 2021

Atlantic's Applebaum adds to reminscences of academic, editorial freedom; mob justice rules now

In an article in the October Atlantic, Anne Applebaum examined the potentially devastating effect of cancel culture on academic and editorial freedom.

With her usual incisive writing, Applebaum compared contemporary cancellation with the summary imposition of the scarlet letter on Hester Prynne and described how today's mob justice is dangerously empowered by social media.

What's missing from Applebaum's tale is recognition that the threat to academic freedom is not new.  Workplace mobbing has been studied since the 1980s ("ganging up"), and, as I have written before, sociologist Kenneth Westhues wrote about the threat to academic freedom in a 2004 book. I know of what I speak (2005-10, 2017-19).

The following lines struck me as most salient in Applebaum's analysis.

A journalist told me that when he was summarily fired, his acquaintances sorted themselves into three groups.  First, the "heroes," very small in number, who "insist on due process before damaging another person's life and who stick by their friends." Second, the "villains," who think you should "immediately lose your livelihood as soon as the allegation is made." .... But the majority were in the third category: "good but useless.  They don't necessarily think the worst of you, and they would like you to get due process, but, you know, they haven't looked into it."

This observation is spot on.  My heroes once were two in number, another time zero.  One of my heroes paid a price for his chronic condition of character.  Villains are rewarded by employers.  But I respect honest villains more than I respect the "good but useless," who are the vast majority of academic colleagues, for their hypocrisy is galling.  That this group is the majority is precisely what makes "ganging up," or "mobbing," possible; the villains, otherwise, are too few in number to get away with it.  Especially in legal education, I have been horrified repeatedly by the selfish indifference to wrongs in their midst borne by people who hold themselves out as champions of civil rights.

Sometimes advocates of the new mob justice claim that these are minor punishments, that the loss of a job is not serious, that people should be able to accept their situation and move on.

Indeed, in my experience, I vividly remember one colleague acknowledging the wrongfulness of the persecution, but advising that I "just wait five years" for people to forget the false allegations.  Never mind the opportunity cost to career, nor providing for my family in the interim, nor the uncertainty that five years would be enough, nor the inference of guilt that would derive from acquiescence.

"I wake up every morning afraid to teach," one academic told me: The university campus that he once loved has become a hazardous jungle, full of traps.

Check.  My classroom students are both my greatest motivation and my greatest fear.  I think of both every single time a class is about to begin.  It is a difficult and stressful dissonance to manage. 

[T]he protagonists of most of these stories tend to be successful....  They were professors who liked to chat or drink with their students, ... people who blurred the lines between social life and institutional life....  [Yale Law Professor Amy Chua:] "I do extra work; I get to know them," she told me. "I write extra-good recommendations." ....

It's not just the hyper-social and the flirtatious who have found themselves victims of the New Puritanism....  Others are high achievers, who in turn set high standards for their colleagues or students.  When those standards are not met, these people say so, and that doesn't go over well.  Some of them like to push boundaries, especially intellectual boundaries, or to question orthodoxies.

First, yes.  Westhues long ago identified jealousy, revenge, and schadenfreude as mob motivators.  Hard work and success make one a target.  Second, also yes.  To be fair, early in my academic career, work probably was too much my life: too much overlap between co-workers and social life.  In my defense, that's not unusual for an ambitious young person, especially after relocating to a new city for a new career.  

I've been disabused of that ethic.  Co-workers willing to sacrifice you to save or glorify themselves are not your friends.  Workplaces and schools design social events with the intent to mislead, imbuing senses of belonging and community that only serve the master's interests.  At today's university, students and faculty rather should be forewarned explicitly that if they find themselves on the wrong side of the groupthink, they will be devoured by the mob.

Workplaces once considered demanding are now described as toxic.  The sort of open criticism, voiced in front of other people, that was once normal in newsrooms and academic seminars is now as unacceptable as chewing gum with your mouth open.

Just so.  The kind of hard-nosed, openly aired editorial critique that was a staple of my education as a journalism student, and which conditioned me to take heat and to be stronger for it, I wouldn't dare administer in today's classroom.  Some of my law students understand the new game and read between the lines, and they'll be OK.  Some will be shocked the first time they are across the table from an adversary or in front of a judge who wasn't schooled to coddle.

Students and professors ... all are aware of the kind of society they now inhabit.  That's why they censor themselves, why they steer clear of certain topics, why they avoid discussing anything too sensitive for fear of being mobbed or ostracized or fired without due process.

True.  I have resisted modestly on this front, refusing to purge sensitive content from class materials.  But I do prioritize-down the sensitive, choose materials strategically, and exert tighter control of student discussion.  As usual, this decades-old practice in the academic trenches became a point of public concern only when Yale and Harvard professors started talking about it, as if they discovered the problem. 

If nothing is done, Applebaum concluded,

[u]niversities will no longer be dedicated to the creation and dissemination of knowledge but to the promotion of student comfort and the avoidance of social media attacks.

"[W]ill"?

The article is Anne Applebaum, The New Puritans, The Atlantic, Oct. 2021, at 60.

Thursday, September 9, 2021

So now you care about academic mobbing

Angry Mob by Robert Couse-Baker, CC BY 2.0
Princeton politics professor Keith E. Whittington (on the blog) has a wisely worded op-ed, on The Volokh Conspiracy at Reason, on the too often abdicated responsibility of university administrators to push back against viewpoint-based campus mobbing of faculty.

"It is now a familiar pattern," he writes: attack, petition, social media campaign, demand for termination.  Of the university's duty, he writes:

University presidents have a responsibility in such a situation. It should go without saying, but unfortunately it does not, that they have a responsibility to actually live up to their constitutional and contractual responsibilities and refrain from sanctioning the faculty member for saying something that someone finds controversial. They should insist that harassment and threats directed against members of the faculty will not be tolerated. Professors should at least be confident that when the mobs arrive, pitchforks in hand, that university leaders will not flinch and give in to the demands of the mob.

I hope the piece hits the desk of every university president in the land with a thunderclap of j'accuse.

Yet it is fascinating to me to see described today as cliché what was once fringe.  Canadian sociologist Kenneth Westhues, professor emeritus at the University of Waterloo, published his Workplace Mobbing in Academe (2004) seventeen years ago, and that book was built on his earlier Eliminating Professors (1998).

By the time I met Ken in 2009, he was already the world's leading expert on academic mobbing.  He still is.  Westhues's website is still the online clearinghouse on mobbing as a sociological phenomenon. But he's almost never cited, at least in the legal lit.  I find eight references to Westhues on Westlaw's JLR database, and none in the last dozen years.

At a program at the Association of American Law Schools (AALS) in 2010, I accepted the invitation of Westhues and Syracuse University law professor Robert Ashford to speak of my experience.  Ashford perceived a worthwhile connection to his inventive work in socio-economics, and Westhues flattered me with my name as a participle. 

The splash we made at AALS and in legal academics eleven years ago might be described well as mostly indifferent curiosity.  Mostly modifies indifferent, not curiosity.  

I wrote in the Journal of College and University Law in 2009 about the need for broader academic freedom, beyond published research and into the professorial "penumbra."  I presented at AAUP, besides AALS.  The article was cited once in a 2011 bibliography and once in 2013.  (Thanks, Profs. Benson and Jones.)  And that was that.

Not until cancel culture reached the well known coastal scholars of academia's elite institutions did mobbing hit the mainstream.  Now a lot of important people are wringing their hands over academic freedom and waning tenure.

Too bad they don't seem able to find my article.  Or Westhues's work.  Is there really a wheel until it's invented at a "top" school?

It's nice to see serious people having serious thoughts about academic freedom, at last.  But it's too late to give solace to a generation of victim-scholars.  And it's probably too late to resuscitate intellectual liberty on campus, for at least a generation yet.