When colleagues become bullies

Although it’s an open secret within the profession, bullying among university faculty has not been widely studied. In informal discussions among colleagues, many academics will say that they have witnessed bullying, experienced it themselves, or know someone who has. This observation prompted a multi-institutional team from across Quebec in 2025 to conduct the unfunded study L’intimidation académique entre professeurs dans le milieu universitaire au Québec (Academic bullying among professors in the Quebec university setting). 

“There is a certain omerta fed, among other things, by the fear of reprisal,” noted Catherine Malboeuf-Hurtubise, a professor at Université Laval’s school of psychology, who belongs to the research team that presented its results on May 14 at the annual Acfas (Association canadienne-franҫaise pour l’avancement des sciences) congress.  

The research team defined bullying as abusive or disrespectful behaviour by one faculty member toward another. This could include threats, humiliation, silencing tactics, ostracism, and deliberate efforts to hinder professional or academic success. “This preliminary definition is incomplete and imperfect, but it gives us a common framework for understanding the phenomenon,” explained Sébastien Béland, a professor in the faculty of education at Université de Montréal, who also belongs to the research team.  

Professors from all fields and backgrounds affected 

The research team was surprised by how many faculty members (a group that included lecturers) were willing to speak out on the issue: more than 1,000 across Quebec answered the callout.   

Preliminary results were likewise striking. No fewer than half of respondents said they had either experienced or witnessed bullying by colleagues. It’s important, however, to note that these results were not necessarily representative of the faculty population as a whole: in a case of self-selection, people may have been more likely to respond to the survey if they had seen or experienced bullying, than if they had not.  

The results were analyzed based on research area and sociodemographic profile (gender, age, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, etc.). Although women, members of some minority groups, and people working in the fields of health, society and culture reported more instances of bullying, the differences were not significant. “Bullying between university professors seems to be found just about everywhere,” said Dr. Béland. 

Dr. Malboeuf-Hurtubise noted that bullying often occurs in situations where competition is high — especially around promotions, tenure, grant applications, or in situations where collective decisions are made.

Consequences often devastating

Bullying can have wide-ranging consequences for professors. Participants reported mental health problems such as anxiety, hypervigilance, depression and burnout, as well as physical conditions like insomnia, headaches or complications during pregnancy. 

Dr. Malboeuf-Hurtubise said bullying also has an effect on institutions. “Certainly, people who aren’t doing well at work because they’re being bullied start to disengage, take absences, or spend less time at the office. Many even told us they had resigned,” she explained. 

Reduced engagement and productivity can also affect universities’ scientific reach. 

Existing mechanisms to address bullying 

Universities clearly have much to gain from tackling bullying among faculty. Yet study participants described existing reporting mechanisms as ineffective and said they had lost trust in institutions. “People don’t feel supported,” summarized Dr. Malboeuf-Hurtubise. 

Many also said they did not know where to turn for help, or were unaware whether formal mechanisms existed. 

Dr. Malboeuf-Hurtubise added that many respondents felt that sanctions did little to curb bullying behaviour, and that filing complaints was discouraged. Some respondents, however, noted that it could be helpful to talk to a supportive department or program head.   

Is collegiality a risk factor? 

Why do universities struggle to protect their faculty from bullying? Finn Makela, a professor in the faculty of law at Université de Sherbrooke, shared some reflections on academic collegiality at the same Acfas conference.  

Quebec labour law rests on a clear distinction between employer and employee. Under the civil code, employees work “under the direction or control” of an employer, who must “take any measures consistent with the nature of the work to protect the health, safety and dignity of the employee.”  

“In a traditional employment relationship, what are the employer’s prerogatives?” Dr. Makela asked. “Hiring, work assignments, assessments, promotions, and dismissals, among other things.” 

What, on the other hand, are employees’ obligations? One of them is obedience.  

But universities work differently. Many of the employer’s responsibilities devolve, in whole or in part, to collegial management bodies such as committees and assemblies, made up of salaried faculty members.  

Historically, Canadian universities have been granted a great deal of managerial autonomy in order to protect their independence, which gave rise to the tenure system. “Awarding tenure requires people who are qualified to assess the quality of scientific work — hence the system of collegial governance built around peer review,” explained Dr. Makela.  

As a result, professors’ employment relationship is defined by a high degree of individual and collective autonomy, which runs counter to the notions of subordination and obedience underlying traditional employment relationships. “Faculty members have to be able to debate with their peers and, especially now that academic freedom is enshrined in law, they also have the right to criticize their institution,” he said.  

This form of self-management is a component of collective academic freedom, which is often seen as more democratic than traditional management structures. “But this broad distribution of managerial power can make academia especially ripe for psychological and collective harassment,” said Dr. Makela. “And all of this does not free employers from their obligations.” 

Possible solutions 

What possible solutions exist? The answer isn’t clear. Training might help, Dr. Makela suggested, along with improving the structure of collegiate management bodies, including the use of procedural guides. For example, the Morin code is a set of procedural rules widely used in Quebec to ensure deliberative assemblies are conducted in a fair and orderly manner. “It helps manage the risks associated with debates, up to a point, without controlling the debates themselves,” explained Dr. Makela.  

Dr. Malboeuf-Hurtubise noted that the study initially aimed to find solutions. However, the literature on the subject indicates that the measures that have been proposed so far “don’t work.” Study participants nevertheless identified a few possible solutions, including confidential, accessible, and transparent reporting processes that do not expose them to reprisals.  

Encouragingly, all respondents said they wanted to see a shift in their organizational culture and a zero-tolerance policy.  

Still, Dr. Malboeuf-Hurtubise remains concerned about the sense of powerlessness expressed by study participants. “It’s important to document it, and maybe live with it for a while, to be able to maybe, eventually, find solutions.”