Evidence-Based Framework for Understanding and Responding to Workplace Retaliation
The Tall Poppy Theory framework emerged from nearly a decade of practice-based qualitative research, combining structured interviews with professional women, analysis of workplace bullying literature, and examination of legal and organizational documents.
In-depth interviews with dozens of professional women across healthcare, corporate, nonprofit, and education sectors who experienced workplace targeting at the peak of their professional performance. Interviews focused on:
Comprehensive review of existing research on workplace bullying, including:
Examination of public records, including:
Supporting Evidence: Research by Namie & Namie (2009) demonstrates that workplace bullying targets are most often independent, skilled, and well-liked employees who "refuse to kiss up, who are ethical, honest, and non-political." The Workplace Bullying Institute's 2024 survey confirms that 32% of Americans have experienced workplace bullying, with women targeted at higher rates than men.
Original Contribution: Interviews consistently revealed that targeting intensified following visible achievements, promotions, or public recognition—not during periods of average performance or failure.
Supporting Evidence: The Workplace Bullying Institute's 2024 survey found that 67% of workplace bullying cases result in negative outcomes for the target when reported to HR. The principal factor that stops bullying is target displacement—termination, constructive discharge, quitting, or transferring—occurring in 62% of cases.
Original Contribution: Interview data revealed that women who used covert methods to document and address targeting experienced better long-term outcomes than those who immediately escalated through formal HR channels.
Theoretical Foundation: Building on Wortman and Brehm's (1975) integration of reactance theory and learned helplessness, and Thacker's (1992) research on behavioral responses to workplace harassment, we identified three primary strategic pathways:
Original Contribution: Within each pathway, covert execution methods consistently produced better outcomes than overt approaches across all professional sectors studied.
Supporting Evidence: Farrell's (2001) research on horizontal violence describes "aggression within oppressed groups" where overt dominance is unavailable, so power is enforced laterally through punishment of peers who deviate from norms. Simmons (2002) documents relational aggression among women in hierarchical or emotionally driven workplaces.
Original Contribution: Interview data from education and nonprofit sectors revealed that targeting often came from female colleagues and supervisors who perceived the target's competence as threatening to informal power structures.
The TARGETED framework synthesizes findings across all research methods to provide a systematic approach for high-performing women facing workplace retaliation.
Each component emerged from patterns identified across interview data and validated against existing workplace bullying literature:
Research Foundation: Decision-making under stress requires clarity about core priorities. Values-based frameworks reduce cognitive load during crisis response (Schwartz, 2012).
Application: Interview subjects who maintained clarity about their values (family, career advancement, mission, dignity) made more strategic decisions than those who attempted to satisfy all stakeholders simultaneously.
Research Foundation: Power in organizations operates through both formal hierarchy and informal networks (Pfeffer, 1992). Understanding power flows is essential for strategic action.
Application: Successful strategic responses required accurate mapping of who held decision-making authority, who controlled resources, and who influenced informal culture.
Research Foundation: Workplace bullying involves perpetrators, enablers, witnesses, and potential allies (Rayner & Keashly, 2005). Distinguishing between these roles determines strategic options.
Application: Misidentifying allies as enablers (or vice versa) resulted in failed strategic efforts. Accurate player assessment was prerequisite for successful action.
Research Foundation: Psychological reactance theory (Wortman & Brehm, 1975) demonstrates that perceived control over outcomes reduces stress and improves decision quality. Generating multiple strategic options before committing to action increases likelihood of successful outcomes.
Application: Interview subjects who explored all three strategic pathways (Endure, Escalate, Exit) before choosing one demonstrated better outcomes than those who defaulted to their initial emotional response.
Research Foundation: Research on workplace harassment responses (Thacker, 1992) indicates that covert action consistently produces better outcomes than overt confrontation when power asymmetries exist.
Application: Targets who executed strategic responses with precision timing and protection of their identity achieved their objectives more frequently than those who confronted openly without strategic preparation.
Research Foundation: Power dynamics in organizations are not static. Documentation, strategic relationships, legal mechanisms, and organizational leverage all represent forms of power that can be systematically accumulated and deployed (Pfeffer, 1992).
Application: Successful strategic responses involved intentional power transfer—whether through building documentation, cultivating external relationships, or creating legal accountability—rather than direct confrontation of existing power holders.
Research Foundation: Crisis response frameworks that incorporate future-oriented planning produce better long-term outcomes than reactive crisis management (Pearson & Clair, 1998).
Application: Interview subjects who maintained focus on their long-term professional vision—rather than short-term vindication—reported higher career satisfaction and professional achievement five years post-targeting.
Conference: 2026 International Association on Workplace Bullying and Harassment
Abstract Status: Submitted January 2026, notification expected January 29, 2026
Abstract Summary: This presentation challenges the conventional wisdom that formal reporting to HR represents the primary remedy for workplace bullying. Drawing on qualitative research with high-performing women across multiple professional sectors, we present evidence that formal reporting leads to retaliation in 67% of cases. We introduce the TARGETED framework as an alternative strategic approach that acknowledges workplace power dynamics and provides actionable pathways for targets who find institutional protections inadequate.
Farrell, G. A. (2001). From tall poppies to squashed weeds: Why don't nurses pull together more? Journal of Advanced Nursing, 35(1), 26-33.
Namie, G., & Namie, R. (2009). The Bully at Work: What You Can Do to Stop the Hurt and Reclaim Your Dignity on the Job. Sourcebooks.
Pearson, C. M., & Clair, J. A. (1998). Reframing crisis management. Academy of Management Review, 23(1), 59-76.
Pfeffer, J. (1992). Managing with Power: Politics and Influence in Organizations. Harvard Business Press.
Rayner, C., & Keashly, L. (2005). Bullying at work: A perspective from Britain and North America. In S. Fox & P. E. Spector (Eds.), Counterproductive Work Behavior: Investigations of Actors and Targets (pp. 271-296). American Psychological Association.
Schwartz, B. (2012). Practical Wisdom: The Right Way to Do the Right Thing. Riverhead Books.
Simmons, R. (2002). Odd Girl Out: The Hidden Culture of Aggression in Girls. Harcourt.
Thacker, R. A. (1992). A descriptive study of behavioral responses of sexual harassment targets: Implications for control theory. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 5(2), 155-172.
Workplace Bullying Institute. (2024). 2024 WBI U.S. Workplace Bullying Survey. Retrieved from workplacebullying.org
Wortman, C. B., & Brehm, J. W. (1975). Responses to uncontrollable outcomes: An integration of reactance theory and the learned helplessness model. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 8, pp. 277-336). Academic Press.