Harassment at Workplace

Mariyam Ijaz
Robina Hazer
Tayyaba
University of central Punjab Pakistan

Contents
Harassment At Workplace...........................................................................................................................2
Introduction:............................................................................................................................................2
Significance:............................................................................................................................................3
Research Objectives:...............................................................................................................................3
Research Question:..................................................................................................................................3
Variables:.................................................................................................................................................4
Literature Review........................................................................................................................................5
Methodology...............................................................................................................................................9
Findings & Analysis..................................................................................................................................11
Correlation and Linear Regression........................................................................................................18
Recommendation & Conclusion................................................................................................................23
Executive Summary...................................................................................................................................24
Annexure...................................................................................................................................................25

Harassment at Workplace
Introduction:
The word harassment comes from French word harassement, which means torment, annoyance,
bother, trouble. (www.wikipedia.org)
Women are being harassed even when there was no a term for it. Women encounter different
types of harassment behaviors when they join the workplace. There is no universal definition of
harassment. Some defines the harassment is sexual in nature. While other explains it as offensive
workplace situations that are based on their race, class, incapacity, sexual orientation, language,
staring, sexually suggestive motions, extortion and hooting.
These types of behavior were not named until 1970s. The women of United States raised voice
against these behaviors and requested to acknowledge such activities as sex discrimination at
national level.

Intimidation at workplace should not be mixed with recommendation or guidance on the work
performance of an individual or group. Advises or recommendations on work performance are
differ from harassment, because feedback or advise are intended to guide employees to enhance
his or her skills related to work.(Wiliams, Maintaining a harassment free workplace, 8 february
2001)

Examples:
The forms of sexual harassment along with some examples are described below.
1. Physical conduct: it includes physical violence, contact such as touching or pinching etc,
job related threats to attain sexual favors.
2. Verbal conduct: it includes comments about workers appearance, age, personal life and
sexual jokes or stories, repeated invitation for lunch dinner etc.
3. Non-verbal: it includes gestures, whistling display of sexually explicit material etc.
McCann, D. (2005).

Significance:
At global level, there is increasing realization of the existence and intensity of workplace
harassment. At international level, both public and private sectors have established laws and
policies to make workplace free of harassment. They are establishing such rules and regulations
to prevent and combat workplace harassment.
The importance of our research is an attempt to assess the degree of workplace harassment in
Pakistan and evaluating womens experience of harassment at the workplace of Pakistan.

Research Objectives:
Although the issue of workplace harassment has been acknowledged internationally yet in
Pakistan, Harassment has not been addressed seriously. Workplace harassment is a phenomenon
that is spreading continuously with time in Pakistan. The following are main intentions of our
research:

To scrutinize the level of workplace harassment that women face.

To get familiarity with the forms and aspects of workplace harassment.
To what extent the act 2010 against women harassment in an organization has been
communicated.

To know the level of understanding of a women about their contribution in raising their voice
against harassment.

Research Question:
The rationale of this study is to understand of the current workplace harassment phenomenon in
the Pakistan. Precisely it examines the rate of incidences of workplace harassment as well as
seeks the potential reasons that could lead to workplace harassment behaviors.
Our research question for this paper is how common is harassment in Pakistan workplace as well
as how much respondent is familiar about Pakistani act 2010 against sexual harassment?

Variables:
We use nine variables for our research study. Variables are as follows
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

Harassment
Grievance policy & procedure (complain policy)
Power Influence
Working Environment
Age
Education Level
Income
Marital Status
Job Status

Harassment is dependent variable, grievance policy & procedure (complain policy), power
influence and working environment are independent variables. We use age, education level,
income, marital status and job status as control variables.
1. Harassment:
Harassment is used as a tool to effect the subordination of women. Workplace harassment is any
improper and unwelcome behavior or attitude by male staff members to humiliate female staff
member or group.
2. Grievance policy & procedure (complain policy):
Under this variable, we want to study what and which procedures are established in the
organization to cater this issue. To what extent females are informed about act 2010 and
whether the organization takes complaints seriously regarding harassment.
In this study, we also seek that how much respondent can trust in the grievance policy and
process of an organization to file harassment complaint. As awareness of workplace
harassment has escalated, it has become obvious that the problem is relatively increasing,
even in Pakistan. Some organizations do not have harassment policies while some have vague
complaint procedures to tackle with harassment. The newspapers and electronic media expose
harassment at workplace. Keeping in view the recent and past incidents, Pakistan has
established harassment law in 2010 named as The Protection against Harassment of Women
at The Workplace Act, 2010.
4

3. Power Influence:
It entails that misuse of a position of influence, power or authority by a boss or coworker against
female employees. This is serious when the men in authority use his power to influence the
career or employment of female staff member. It includes the use of intimidation, threats,
blackmail or coercion. Male staffs have recently gained power of authority may also harass female
subordinates to prove their masculine power.
4. Working Environment:
It is considered as another significant variable. It entails that how much the poor working
environment causes or emboldens harassment.
A boss or coworker is mistreated and humiliated fellow female workers by repeated negative
acts like verbal abuse, offensive language or the continuously degrading of her work or male
workers are involved in non-work activities, these behaviors or activities within a workplace
produces an environment that is difficult for female worker to work.

5. Control Variables:
To see the demographics of respondents and their possible relationship with harassment we take
control variables which include age, qualification, marital status, and income and job status of
respondents.

Literature Review
The dilemma of workplace harassment is faced by employees all over the world though there
was not considerable research conducted till 1970s. Mostly western countries have done a lot of
research on this issue. (Crocker & Kalemba, 1999). Little work has been done in broad ( Lui,
1996,Williams, 2006), developing countries like Pakistan & Malaysia etc. Sexual harassment
includes both men and women, however mostly females are victims of harassment and mostly
males are part of harassers.(Terpstra& Cook, 1985). Problem has existed many decades ago
when even there was no familiarity with the term harassment, research on this issue has initiated
5

in 1970s. The main difficulty faced by researcher in investigating this issue has been the lack of
awareness that what behavior actually constitute harassment and the situations under which they
are observe to do so ( Anila&Naeem, 1997). One of the findings shows that large proportion of
women report that at their workplace they experience harassing actions like touching, stroking
etc. but only a few women indicate that they have been harassed. (Fitzgeral,et al 1988; Fitzgerald
&Shullman, 1985).
The significant indicator in identifying outcome of harassment actions are involved. Sexually
unambiguous actions and actions involving coercions or warnings is more likely than other less
threatening behavior, to be judged as sexual harassment( Gutek, Nakamura, gahart,
Handschumacher, &Russel, 1980, reilly 1982, Weber-Burdin& Rossi 1982). Touching is more
expected to be considered as sexual harassment than comments, gazes or signals ( DunwoodyMiller &Gutek, 1985; Gutek, morasch& Cohen, 1983; Reilly 1982; Weber-burdin& Rossi,
1982). Harassment at workplace is considered as offensive actions which have power relations.
These kind of behaviors are general intimidating, abusive remarks and degrading behaviors.
(Thornton 2002; Zippel 2006).
Even though sexual harassment was referred as a hidden issue but like other countries in
Pakistan it also started receiving consideration and attentiveness among women ( Anila,
1992,1994, 1995; Anila, Ansari,& Tariq, 1991) . No laws for protection against harassment were
available ( Anila 1994) but in 2010 an act has been introduced, Pakistan has established
harassment law in 2010 as TheProtection against Harassment of Women at The Workplace
Act, 2010", which clearly describes the procedure of inquiry and penalties also.
From the studies conducted we come to know that some variables are more linked to the
harassment. Like most of the research reported that younger ones are more victims of harassment
as compared to the older. But on the other hand there are studies who also report that older
women more experience a higher rate of sexual harassment. According to Fitzgeral and Ormerod
(1992), women of all age sets report suffering harassment (Farley 1978).

Working Environment:
We found the relationship of working environment with the occurrence of harassment incidents.
Intimidating work environments is the type that exists in both public and private sectors.
(Adams, 1992a, b; Leymann, 1990; Wilson, 1991).
Studies has showed that those organizations which are more people oriented than job oriented
face more incident of workplace harassment ( Handy 2006) International research report that
sexual harassment emerge in a extensive variety at workplace setting (Ellis et al. 1991; McCabe
and Hardman 2005).
Hence from the above mentioned literature we developed our HypothesisH1 that:
1. Poor/Hostile working environment are more likely to cause incidents of harassment.
Power Influence:
According to organizational model inherent opportunities and the power of position give rise to a
working environment that enables harassment events to happen. This simply means that persons
with authority or power in any organization force sexual satisfaction from others. Similarly,
sociocultural model points out sexual harassment to the leading spot of men as compared to
women in terms of monetary and political power. Thus women who have less authority and
control are more likely to be harassed. (MohdNazari Ismail1, Lee KumChee and Chan Foong
Bee 2007).Those behaviors which shows sexual pressure comprises of rewards like bonuses,
salary increment, upgrade of position, decrease in workload, termination or other threats which
made life difficult to survive (Fitzgerald et al. 1997a; MacKinnon 2007; McDonald et al. 2008).
At workplaces verbal harassment seems less threatening than harassment relating physical
contact that develops environment as male dominated environment that reinforce harassment in
socially acceptable ways (Cleveland et al. 2005; Thornton 2002).
From this we developed our second hypothesis H2 which relates to power influence:
2. Women employees with less power and authority are more likely to experience
harassment.

Power influence variable is characterized by threats, reward or promotion by fulfilling immoral

demand and degrade at work due to not fulfilling boss demand.
Grievance policy & Procedure:
Workplace harassment laws offer legal reimbursement for people who have been harassed and
hold criminals or employers responsible in court (Zippel, 2006). However, the workplace setting
offers many rules and norms that actually shape the ways in which organizational policy makers
figure out and apply organizational policy (Cahill2001). The details of workplace harassment
policy depends upon the nature, size and place of the organization and there are no universally
accepted measures for implementing them (McCann 2005).Organizational grievance measures
are the mostly used to legislate the employee related policies (Paula McDonald 2012).
One study reported that presence of grievance policy and procedure in any organization report a
lower rate of harassment incidents ( MohdNazari Ismail1, Lee KumChee and Chan Foong Bee
2007). In Pakistan, we also have Law against harassment, which is introduced in 2010. So our
research will also examine the presence of complaint policy in organization and their
contribution in decreasing harassment incidents.
It is hypothesizedH3 that:
3. Organization with improper policy and compliant procedure are more likely to
experience harassment incidents.

Methodology
Extent of Researcher Interference:
Our interference is minimal we have just take the data from the environment without changing
anything.

Study Setting:
Our study setting is non-contrived because we are not studying the behavior of the employee
through lab experiment we are just studying the behavior of the employees on the field.
Design:
The design for the research is Cross Sectional and then quantitative analysis. By using this
method we have produced accurate results and ensured their validity.
Population:
Female employees working in different organizations are the population for our research as we
are focusing on harassment at workplaces.
Sample Size:
Our sample size is comprised of a total number 206 of employees working in different
organizations. The sample size is a proportionate representation of female employees from
various departments. It comprises a good mix field experience, qualification and nature of work.
Sampling Procedure:
We used convenient sampling assuring upon the availability and consent of employees at work
place meeting in organizations and our sample criterion.
Data Collection & Unit of Analysis:
Data was collected by personally visiting the different organizations and unit of analysis were
female employees as we need to assess the occurrence of female harassment at workplaces.
Research Tool:
The data for this research was collected by questionnaire survey. We got filled out our
questionnaires from female employees working at different levels in the organization and
department to get optimum information to complete our research effectively and efficiently.

Data Analysis:
Data analysis is done by using different analysis on Excel & SPSS.
Limitations:
The scope of the research is limited to employees working in Pakistani Companies.
Ethical Issues:
In the whole process of conducting this study the respondents are assured for their secrecy,
confidentiality of the data and the use of results etc.
Procedure of developing questionnaire:
The questionnaire consists of three independent variables (Working environment, Power
influence & Grievance policy & procedure), one dependent variable (Harassment) and
demographic of the respondents (age, qualification, income, job status & marital status) which
assessed the harassment experience at workplaces. Following sources were used to develop the
questionnaire:

Research objectives were focused before developing questionnaire.

Concepts were taken from Secondary Sources i.e. Books, Websites, and Articles etc.

Simple and precise questions were developed.

Questions were developed, keeping in view the level of Audience/Respondents.

Liker scales were used to measure the extent of harassment and its relationship with other
variables. Control variables were measured through following scale:
Age:
We measure age by seven categories, coded by 1 to 7. The range of each category is 6 years. Our
first category is 20-25 years, coded as 1 while our last category is 50 & above, coded as 7.
Education Level:

10

We use six categories from Metric to University degree holder; start coded as 1 to 6.
Income:
We classify this variable in seven groups. Each group has difference of 10,000 rupees. First
group i.e.10, 000-20,000 is coded as 1, whereas last group i.e. 80,000 & above is coded as 7.
Marital Status:
Under this variable we code single as 1, married as 2, widow as 3 and divorced /separated as 4.
Job Status
We use five heading for this variable, worker coded as 1, customer sale representative coded as 2
manager as 3, consultant as 4 and other as 5.

Findings & Analysis

In our project we have tried to portray the feedback of respondents through the Statistical tables
and Pie chart where the questionnaire was carried out on 200+ people throughout the course of
the weeks. To suit the age group starting from 20 to 50 years above, different educational levels
ranging from metric to degree holder and occupation from different levels including Services
sectors Education, Retail chain stores, marital status etc. The results of this questionnaire are
displayed below, with the questions which felt were most related to our study of harassment at
work place being analyzed and displayed in charts.

11

Statistics:
AGE INCOME EDUCATION MARITALSTATUS JOBSTATUS
Valid
206
206
206
206
206
N
Missing
0
0
0
0
0
Mean
2.21
3.86
2.45
1.36
2.59
Median
1.00
4.00
2.00
1.00
2.00
Mode
1
3
1
1
1
Std.
1.656
1.435
1.698
.538
1.673
Deviation
Variance
2.742
2.059
2.883
.290
2.799
Range
6
5
6
3
4
Minimum
1
1
1
1
1
Maximum
7
6
7
4
5
Interpretation:
As far as our project is concerned, we took 206 respondents as sample from population and no
one has missing any sort of information while filling the questionnaire. The symmetry of data
can be seen for variables the data is more concentrated in between 1 to 3 percent. While the
dispersion is depicting multiple values showing data is non-symmetric. Huge variance in
opinions can be seen for age, income education and job status seems more diverse view point
cover while data collection, strengthen the argument of having true representative of population.
So we conclude from above that our data is equally concentrated showing symmetry also
reasonable dispersion of the data without having any outliers in data.
Control Variables Analysis

Valid

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Total

Frequency

AGE
Percent

Valid Percent

109
34
21
13
12
16
1
206

52.9
16.5
10.2
6.3
5.8
7.8
.5
100.0

52.9
16.5
10.2
6.3
5.8
7.8
.5
100.0

Cumulative
Percent
52.9
69.4
79.6
85.9
91.7
99.5
100.0

12

Pie Chart:

Respondents Age Group

6%

20-25

8% 0%

26-30
31-35

6%
10%

36-40
41-45

53%

46-50
51 & above

17%

Interpretation:
Selected respondents for our study was ranging 20 to 51 and above, the reason of having this
particular age group was based on assumption that cooperate or services sector employees fall in
mentioned brackets and we have good representative sample of population. Major of our
respondents falls in between 20 to 25 years and similarly, cumulative percent shows the mix of
all leading to 100%.

13

EDUCATION
Percent

Frequency

V
a
l
i
d

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Total

86
49
17
19
23
6
6
206

41.7
23.8
8.3
9.2
11.2
2.9
2.9
100.0

Valid Percent
41.7
23.8
8.3
9.2
11.2
2.9
2.9
100.0

Cumulative
Percent
41.7
65.5
73.8
83.0
94.2
97.1
100.0

Pie Chart:

Respondents Education

19%

4%

11%

Matric
Intermediate
Bachelors
Post Graduate
Diploma Holder

15%
33%

University degree holder

18%

14

Interpretation:
Finding showing that we have different education levels where very fewer of our respondents
have metric education and on 2nd we have Intermediate and diploma holders, university degree
holders, so it was a mix of education level showing different levels of understanding.

INCOME
Percent

Frequency

V
a
l
i
d

1
2
3
4
5
6
Total

9
22
67
38
30
40
206

Valid Percent

4.4
10.7
32.5
18.4
14.6
19.4
100.0

4.4
10.7
32.5
18.4
14.6
19.4
100.0

Cumulative
Percent
4.4
15.0
47.6
66.0
80.6
100.0

Pie Chart:

Respondents Income (000')

11%
10-20

21-30

31-40

9%

3% 3%
41-50

51-60

42%

61-70

71-80

8%
24%

15

Interpretation:
Most prevailing income brackets identified are in between 10 thousand to 30 thousand, then 11
presents of our respondents belongs to 50 to 60 thousands and others showing the combination of
youth participation and remaining belongs to managerial positions, so we safely can say that
majority of respondents belongs to our upcoming generation and rest are of high position
officials.

MARITALSTATUS
Frequency
Percent
V
a
l
i
d

1
2
4

136
68
2
206

Total

Valid Percent

66.0
33.0
1.0
100.0

66.0
33.0
1.0
100.0

Cumulative
Percent
66.0
99.0
100.0

Pie Chart:

Respondents Marital Status

1%
Single

33%

Married
Divorced/ Separated

66%

Interpretation:
16

Marital status is also taken as control variable to add more value in our responses and
respondents data shows that 66% or our respondents are single and 33% are married and few
cases are identified as divorced or separated showing the equal participation from every level of
society, having the prime focus of representative sample from population.

JOBSTATUS
Frequency
Percent

Valid

1
2
3
4
5
Total

83
40
18
8
57
206

40.3
19.4
8.7
3.9
27.7
100.0

Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent
40.3
40.3
19.4
59.7
8.7
68.4
3.9
72.3
27.7
100.0
100.0

Pie Chart:

Respondents Job Status

Worker
Customer Sales
Representative

28%
40%

Manager
Consultant
Other please mention

4%
9%
19%

17

Interpretation:
We take different institutes as sample including Retail Stores and other different services sectors
which indicates different Job Status ranging from worker to managers consultants CRMs and
others, however major respondents belongs to worker class including merchandisers and stores
associates, and others are second large category and similarly others.

Correlation and Linear Regression

Regression
Descriptive Statistics
Mean
Std.
Deviation
1.80
.902
HARASSMENT
GPP
3.72
1.001
PI
1.60
.769
WE
2.37
.969
AGE
2.21
1.660
INCOME
3.87
1.437
EDUCATION
2.44
1.698
1.36
.539
MARITALSTATUS
JOBSTATUS
2.59
1.677

N
205
205
205
205
205
205
205
205
205

18

GP
P
MENT
1.000 -.2
60

HARASS

HARASSMENT

GPP

-.260 1.0
00

PI

.650 -.1
73

WE

.359 -.2
30

Pearso
n
Correl AGE
ation

.079

.151
INCOME
EDUCATIO
N
MARITALS
TATUS
JOBSTATUS
Sig.
HARASSM
(1ENT
tailed)

.154

.055

-.085
.

.000

.
24
7
.
07
1
.
18
3
.
03
9
-.2
14
.
00
0
.

GPP
PI

.000

.
00
6

Correlations
PI W A INCO EDUCA MARITALS JOBSTA
E GE ME
TION
TATUS
TUS
.
.
. .151
.154
.055
-.085
65 35 07
0 9 9
-.1 -.2
. .071
.183
.039
-.214
73 30 24
7
1.0
.
. .116
.108
.049
-.202
00 36 16
3 8
. 1.0
. .313
.304
.219
-.150
36 00 37
3
0
.
. 1.0 .414
.713
.611
-.399
16 37 00
8 0
.
.
. 1.000
.522
.277
.118
11 31 41
6 3 4
.
.
. .522
1.000
.458
-.219
10 30 71
8 4 3
.
.
. .277
.458
1.000
-.221
04 21 61
9 9 1
-.2 -.1 -.3 .118
-.219
-.221
1.000
02 50 99
.
.
. .015
.014
.215
.114
00 00 13
0 0 2
.
.
. .155
.004
.287
.001
00 00 00
6 0 0
.
.
. .048
.061
.243
.002
00 00
0 8

19

.000
WE
.132
AGE
.015
INCOME
EDUCATIO
N
MARITALS
TATUS

.014

.215

.114
JOBSTATUS
HARASSM
ENT
GPP
PI
WE
N

AGE
INCOME
EDUCATIO
N
MARITALS
TATUS
JOBSTATUS

205
205
205
205
205
205
205
205
205

.
00
0
.
00
0
.
15
5
.
00
4
.
28
7
.
00
1
20
5
20
5
20
5
20
5
20
5
20
5
20
5
20
5
20
5

.
00
0
.
00
8
.
04
8
.
06
1
.
24
3
.
00
2
20
5
20
5
20
5
20
5
20
5
20
5
20
5
20
5
20
5

.
00
0
.
.
00
0
.
.
00 00
0 0
.
.
00 00
0 0
.
.
00 00
1 0
.
.
01 00
6 0
20 20
5 5
20 20
5 5
20 20
5 5
20 20
5 5
20 20
5 5
20 20
5 5
20 20
5 5
20 20
5 5
20 20
5 5

.000

.000

.001

.016

.000

.000

.000

.000

.000

.000

.046

.000

.000

.001

.000

.000

.001

.046

.001

.001

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

205

Interpretation:

20

Variables Entered/Removed
Model
Variables
Variables
Method
Entered
Removed
JOBSTATUS
. Enter
, INCOME,
GPP, PI,
1
MARITALS
TATUS, WE,
EDUCATIO
N, AGE

21

a. Dependent Variable: HARASSMENT

b. All requested variables entered.

Model Summary
Model
R
R
Adjusted Std. Error
Change Statistics
Square R Square
of the
R Square
F
df1
df2
Sig. F
Estimate Change Change
Change
a
1
.693
.480
.459
.663
.480 22.599
8
196
.000
a. Predictors: (Constant), JOBSTATUS, INCOME, GPP, PI, MARITALSTATUS, WE,
EDUCATION, AGE
Interpretation:
In model summary, the R-Square value check the variation of the model, so its always good if
one has high value of R-Square. In our study .480 indicates 48% variation of this model is
explained by choice of independent and control variables. In our study findings indicating good
choice of responses which predict the good effect of one variable on anther in this model,
therefore its ensuring the significance of the sample and choice of control variables representing
the population.

Model

ANOVAa
Df

Sum of
Mean
Squares
Square
Regression
79.571
8
9.946
1
Residual
86.266
196
.440
Total
165.837
204
a. Dependent Variable: HARASSMENT
b. Predictors: (Constant), JOBSTATUS, INCOME, GPP, PI,
MARITALSTATUS, WE, EDUCATION, AGE

F
22.599

Sig.
.000b

Interpretation:
In ANOVA significance is check through p-value when p value is less than .05 then the test is
significance, basically ANOVA check the overall model strength, hence in our study our model is
strong as our p-value is less than .05

22

Model

Coefficients
Unstandardized
Standardized
Coefficients
Coefficients
B
Std. Error
Beta
.684
.336
-.107
.053
-.119
.697
.067
.595
.107
.059
.115
-.114
.050
-.210
.021
.041
.034
.101
.042
.190
.059
.111
.035

(Constant)
GPP
PI
WE
AGE
1
INCOME
EDUCATION
MARITALSTA
TUS
JOBSTATUS
-.006
a. Dependent Variable: HARASSMENT

.033

-.011

Sig.

2.034
-2.006
10.426
1.826
-2.267
.510
2.417
.532

.043
.046
.000
.060
.025
.610
.017
.596

-.182

.856

Interpretation:
In coefficient table we will check the significance of the model by studying the each independent
and control variable. In our study our independent variables and control variables are mentioned
below
Independent Variables:
1. Grievance policy and procedures
2. Power Influence
3. Working Environment
Control Variables
1. Age
2. Income
3. Education
4. Marital Status
5. Job Status
In our project Harassment at Workplace we found that our independent variables Grievance
Policy and Procedures, Power Influence and Working Environment are significant as these p
value is less than .05 which indicates on unit increase in GPP leads to decrease to .107 units of
Harassment at workplace, similarly on unit increase in Power Influence increases to .697 units of
Harassment at workplace and one unit increase in Working Environment increases to .107 units
of Harassment at workplace. In Control variables findings Age and Education are significant
variables indicates significance by pointing one unit increase in age leads to decrease .114 units
of Harassment at workplace and one unit increase in education leads to increase .101 units of
23

Harassment at workplace while others control variables including Income, Marital Status are
positively correlated and whereas Job Status is negatively correlated, hence we conclude that
Poor/Hostile working environment are more likely to cause incidents of
harassment.
Women employees with less power and authority are more likely to experience
harassment.
Organization with improper policy and compliant procedure are more likely to
experience harassment incidents.
Our respondent view validates our tentative statements about Harassment at workplace and
hence we reject Ho or counter statements.
In light of responses received our finding concludes that 1) poor working environment 2) low
power or absence of authority and 3)absences of proper policy or effective complaint
procedures leads to increase in harassment incidents at workplace.
Limitations:
This study has made several contributions but still it is important to note some potential
limitations. Our sample did not include a wide range of female employees as they were reluctant
to participate on this serious issue. Some female employees did not familiar with the term
harassment. Several organizations did not allow us to conduct this research on their female staff
because of the sensitivity of the issue. We encourage further research on this topic by having
large number of sample from variety of organizations.
This research is not very extensive because of the short period of time; this study should be
conducted through case study method as well to get more feedback and data.

Recommendation & Conclusion

Recommendations:
In view of the findings of this study, some recommendations could be put forward. We
recommend that women should be aware of harassment act 2010 by social and print media as
well through different campaigns or seminars. Managers of the organizations should implement
strict policies and procedures against harassment at workplaces. There should be proper system
for dealing with such issues at workplaces. In the long term, we should educate to enhance public
awareness of sexual harassment among the young generation in schools and higher education
system as well as in the working environment both in public and private organization.

24

Trade unions or employee groups in the organization should form the committees to deal with
such issues/complaints, so that action should be taken against such complaints. However, this
study took place in short span of time we recommend future research in all the cities of Pakistan
to have wider picture of sexual harassment issue that could be obtained.
Conclusion:
In light of responses our findings conclude that the organizations where poor working
environment, absence of authority, absence of proper policy exist that organizations working
females face act of harassment. And we also conclude that our findings also matched with our
research objective, and also answer the research questions very well. According to our research,
mostly everybody took the word harassment as a sensitive issue but practically no body took any
action on it.
References:
McDonald, P. (2012). Workplace sexual harassment 30 years on: a review of the
literature. International Journal of Management Reviews, 14(1), 1-17.
Ismail, M. N., Chee, L. K., & Bee, C. F. (2007).Factors influencing sexual harassment in the
Malaysian workplace.
Kamal, A., & Tariq, N. (1997). Sexual harassment experience questionnaire for workplaces of
Pakistan: Development and validation. Pakistan Journal of Psychological Research, 12(1-2).
Fitzgerald, L. F., Gelfand, M. J., &Drasgow, F. (1995).Measuring sexual harassment: Theoretical
and psychometric advances. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17(4), 425-445.
Einarsen, S., Raknes, B. R. I., &Matthiesen, S. B. (1994). Bullying and harassment at work and
their relationships to work environment quality: An exploratory study. European journal of work
and organizational psychology,4(4), 381-401.
McCann,D.(2005).Sexual harassment at work: national and international responses
(No.2).International Labor Organization,2005.

Executive Summary
Harassment is an offensive act at work place based upon race, class, sexual orientation, language
extortion and hooding. There is a thin line of differentiation between advices or recommendation
on work performance and harassment. Feedback links to ones performance where comments are
given with the intension to enhance the performance of her/his skills level.
Why you chose this particular topic for research project, the reason is that we have some
underlying objectives which we were intended to attain through conducting this study, including

25

level of harassment in local organizations, knowing the reasoning and different types of
harassment prevailing in Pakistan, people awareness level on different act of harassment acts.
Based upon our objectives our research question is take form as under
How harassment at workplace is common in Pakistan and to what extend people are familiar
with Harassment act 2010.
So harassment at work place will work as our dependent variable because we are interested in
check the impact of other variables known as independent variables on Harassment at work
place, named as Harassment, Working Environment, Grievance Policy and Procedure and Power
Influence.
Who will be our respondents, for that we have defined control variables to identify the exact
demographics related to our study, our control variables were include Educational level, age,
Income, Marital Status and Job status.
As were are interested in testing the impact of independent variables on Harassment at
workplace, our tentative statements are as below,
1. Poor/Hostile working environment are more likely to cause incidents of harassment.
2. Women employees with less power and authority are more likely to experience
harassment.
3. Organization with improper policy and compliant procedure are more likely to
experience harassment incidents.
The design for the research is Cross Sectional and then quantitative analysis. Our population
consists of working Women, Sample count 206, we chose convenient sampling approach, and
research tool was questionnaire. Data analysis tools used are SPSS and Excel, scope of study was
limited to the working women in organizations. We take into consideration the ethical issues by
maintaining the secrecy of data.
As we have very diverse sample representing different sections of populations portraying the mix
of opinions, overall we have experience the negative feedback about harassment, which
introduced us to the new prospects to see the organizations in Pakistan although these issues are
there to some extent which limit its productivity by discouraging women to work out of their
houses.

26

Annexure
HARASSMENT AT WORKPLACE
QUESTIONNAIRE
Harassment:
To what extent you are agree with the following statements
1. My boss/coworker offered lift in their
car/bike.

1
2
3
4
5
Strongly disagree, Disagree, Uncertain, Agree, Strongly agree

2. My boss/coworker collided with me

while passing by.

1
2
3
4
5
Strongly disagree, Disagree, Uncertain, Agree, Strongly agree

3. My boss/coworker tried to touch my

hand while giving me something.

1
2
3
4
5
Strongly disagree, Disagree, Uncertain, Agree, Strongly agree

4. My boss/coworker called me
sweetheart/darling.

1
2
3
4
5
Strongly disagree, Disagree, Uncertain, Agree, Strongly agree

5. My boss/coworker invited me for

outing or asking for lunch together
outside.

1
2
3
4
5
Strongly disagree, Disagree, Uncertain, Agree, Strongly agree

Grievance Policy & Procedure: (Complaint Policy)

To what extent you are agree with the following statements
1. In my organization management takes
action on harassment.

1
2
3
4
5
Strongly disagree, Disagree, Uncertain, Agree, Strongly agree

2. In my organization harassment is taken

seriously at my workplace.

1
2
3
4
5
Strongly disagree, Disagree, Uncertain, Agree, Strongly agree

3. In my organization employer has

effectively communicated harassment
policy to me.
4. In my organization protection against
harassment of women at the workplace act

1
2
3
4
5
Strongly disagree, Disagree, Uncertain, Agree, Strongly agree
1
2
3
4
5
Strongly disagree, Disagree, Uncertain, Agree, Strongly agree
27

2010 is effective in my organization.

Power Influence:
To what extent you are agree with the following statements
1. My boss/coworker assured me of
promotion in the job or some other
benefits if I could fulfill his immoral
demands.
2. My boss/coworker threatened me to
throw out of job if I did not have/physical
relation with him.
3. My boss/coworker tried to defame me
for not fulfilling his immoral demands.

1
2
3
4
5
Strongly disagree, Disagree, Uncertain, Agree, Strongly agree

1
2
3
4
5
Strongly disagree, Disagree, Uncertain, Agree, Strongly agree
1
2
3
4
5
Strongly disagree, Disagree, Uncertain, Agree, Strongly agree

Working Environment:
To what extent you are agree with the following statements
1. At my workplace there is disrespect
among employees
2. At my workplace there is use of
offensive language.
3. At my workplace mostly people are
involved in non-work activities.
4. At my workplace there is unauthorized
use of company time and resources for
personal use.
Age:

1
2
3
4
5
Strongly disagree, Disagree, Uncertain, Agree, Strongly agree
1
2
3
4
5
Strongly disagree, Disagree, Uncertain, Agree, Strongly agree
1
2
3
4
5
Strongly disagree, Disagree, Uncertain, Agree, Strongly agree
1
2
3
4
5
Strongly disagree, Disagree, Uncertain, Agree, Strongly agree

20- 25 years, 26-30 years, 31-35 years, 36-40 years, 41-45 years, 46-50 years, 50 & above.
Education Level:
Matric, Intermediate, Bachelors, Post Graduate, Diploma Holder, University degree holder
Income:

28

10000-20000, 21000-30,000, 31000-40000, 41000-50000, 51000-60000, 61000-70000, 7100080000, 80000 & above
Marital Status:
Single, Married, Widowed, Divorced/Separated.

Job Status: Worker, Customer Sales Representative, Manager, Consultant, Other please
mention

29