Relational aggression in teams: Practical steps for leaders and HR

The most damaging bullying in teams might be the kind you don’t see so easily.
When most people think of workplace bullying, they picture shouting, insults or open confrontation.
But bullying can also be subtle - hidden behind gossip, cliques and social exclusion. This is called relational aggression.
Relational aggression in teams uses relationships as the weapon. It can involve:
Gossip or spreading rumours
Excluding people from conversations or social activities
Withholding information to undermine someone
Undermining credibility through subtle digs or side comments
It’s easy to miss. It often gets dismissed as “office politics” or “personality clashes”. But it has real consequences for trust, morale and performance.


Why relational aggression in teams is harmful
Research shows relational aggression reduces psychological safety, i.e. the belief that it’s safe to speak up without fear of embarrassment or retaliation.
Teams affected by gossip and exclusion tend to:
Collaborate less effectively
Experience lower trust and engagement
Have higher turnover and absenteeism
Struggle to manage conflict constructively
Left unchecked, this behaviour can normalise itself. Over time, it becomes part of the team culture.
Practical steps to reduce relational aggression in teams
Leaders and HR professionals can take action early. Here are five steps to address it:

Building a culture that doesn’t tolerate relational aggression
Preventing relational aggression in teams is about more than responding to incidents. It’s about building a culture where respect, openness and inclusion are everyday norms.
When leaders consistently challenge gossip and exclusion, encourage diverse working relationships and communicate openly, they make it harder for toxic behaviour to become embedded in the team culture.
Reference: Crothers, L. M., Lipinski, J., & Minutolo, M. C. (2009). Cliques, Rumors, and Gossip by the Water Cooler: Female Bullying in the Workplace. The Psychologist-Manager Journal, 12(4), 297–312.
Comments