The pervasive issue of bullying among university faculty, long an unspoken concern within academic circles, is beginning to surface, thanks to a groundbreaking study conducted across Quebec. While anecdotal evidence and informal discussions among colleagues have consistently pointed to the existence of intimidation, harassment, and abusive behavior between professors, formal research has lagged significantly. This reality prompted a multi-institutional research team from Quebec to embark on an unfunded initiative in 2025, titled "L’intimidation académique entre professeurs dans le milieu universitaire au Québec" (Academic bullying among professors in the Quebec university setting). The study’s preliminary findings, presented on May 14th at the annual Acfas (Association canadienne-française pour l’avancement des sciences) congress, shed light on the prevalence and devastating consequences of this phenomenon, challenging the deeply entrenched silence surrounding it.
"There is a certain omerta, fed, among other things, by the fear of reprisal," explained Catherine Malboeuf-Hurtubise, a professor at Université Laval’s school of psychology and a member of the research team. This code of silence, often fueled by anxieties about career repercussions, has historically prevented a comprehensive understanding and effective addressing of academic bullying. The research team’s definition of bullying, though acknowledged as preliminary and imperfect, provided a crucial common framework: abusive or disrespectful behavior by one faculty member toward another. This encompasses a range of actions, including threats, humiliation, silencing tactics, ostracism, and deliberate efforts to impede professional or academic advancement. "This preliminary definition is incomplete and imperfect, but it gives us a common framework for understanding the phenomenon," stated Sébastien Béland, a professor in the faculty of education at Université de Montréal and another key member of the research team.
A Widespread Problem Across Academia
The research team was notably surprised by the willingness of faculty members, including lecturers, to engage with the study. Over 1,000 academics across Quebec responded to the callout, indicating a significant pent-up demand for addressing this issue. The preliminary results were striking, with no fewer than half of the respondents reporting that they had either experienced or witnessed bullying by colleagues. It is crucial to acknowledge, however, that these findings stem from a self-selected group. Individuals who had encountered or been subjected to bullying may have been more inclined to participate in the survey than those who had not, suggesting that the true prevalence could be even higher.
The study analyzed the collected data based on various research areas and sociodemographic profiles, including gender, age, ethnic origin, and sexual orientation. While women, members of certain minority groups, and those in the fields of health, society, and culture reported more instances of bullying, these differences were not statistically significant. "Bullying between university professors seems to be found just about everywhere," Dr. Béland observed, underscoring the ubiquitous nature of the problem.
Dr. Malboeuf-Hurtubise highlighted that bullying often thrives in environments characterized by intense competition, particularly concerning promotions, tenure decisions, grant applications, and situations involving collective decision-making. These high-stakes academic arenas can unfortunately become fertile ground for manipulative and aggressive behaviors.
Devastating Consequences for Individuals and Institutions
The ramifications of academic bullying extend far beyond the immediate workplace, inflicting profound damage on the mental and physical well-being of affected professors. Participants reported a spectrum of mental health challenges, including anxiety, hypervigilance, depression, and burnout. Physical ailments such as insomnia, persistent headaches, and even complications during pregnancy were also linked to experiences of bullying.
The impact on institutions is equally significant, though perhaps less immediately apparent. "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," Dr. Malboeuf-Hurtubise stated. This disengagement leads to a decline in productivity, reduced collaboration, and a potential erosion of institutional morale. Furthermore, the departure of experienced faculty members can diminish the university’s intellectual capital and its capacity for groundbreaking research, thereby affecting its scientific reach and reputation.
Ineffective Existing Mechanisms and Eroded Trust
Despite the clear benefits of addressing faculty bullying, study participants expressed widespread dissatisfaction with existing reporting mechanisms. Many described these systems as ineffective and reported a significant loss of trust in institutional processes designed to handle such complaints. "People don’t feel supported," summarized Dr. Malboeuf-Hurtubise. A substantial number of respondents also indicated a lack of awareness regarding available support channels or the existence of formal reporting procedures.
Adding to the problem, many felt that the sanctions imposed for bullying behavior were insufficient to deter perpetrators. The process of filing complaints was often perceived as discouraging, and there was a general sense that reporting did not lead to meaningful change. While some individuals did note that speaking with a supportive department or program head could be helpful, this was often an informal and inconsistent form of recourse.
The Paradox of Collegiality and Academic Autonomy
The persistent struggle of universities to effectively protect their faculty from bullying has led to deeper structural questions, particularly concerning the nature of academic collegiality and autonomy. Finn Makela, a professor in the faculty of law at Université de Sherbrooke, offered insights into this complex dynamic at the same Acfas conference.
Quebec’s labour law, in traditional employment contexts, establishes a clear distinction between employer and employee. Employers are mandated to "take any measures consistent with the nature of the work to protect the health, safety and dignity of the employee." This framework typically includes employer prerogatives such as hiring, work assignments, assessments, promotions, and dismissals, alongside employee obligations like obedience.
However, universities operate under a different model. Many managerial responsibilities are devolved to collegial management bodies, such as committees and assemblies, composed of faculty members themselves. This system of governance is rooted in the historical autonomy granted to Canadian universities to safeguard their academic independence, a principle that underpins 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.
This environment fosters a high degree of individual and collective autonomy for faculty members, a characteristic that stands in contrast to the subordination and obedience inherent in 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," Dr. Makela noted.
While this self-management is often viewed as a cornerstone of collective academic freedom and a more democratic approach to governance, Dr. Makela cautioned that "this broad distribution of managerial power can make academia especially ripe for psychological and collective harassment." He emphasized that this inherent structural characteristic does not absolve employers of their fundamental obligations to ensure a safe and respectful workplace.
Navigating Towards Solutions
The question of how to effectively address academic bullying remains complex, with no simple answers. Dr. Makela suggested that enhanced training for faculty and improved structures within collegial management bodies could be beneficial. The implementation of procedural guides, such as the Morin code widely used in Quebec to ensure fair and orderly conduct in deliberative assemblies, could help manage the risks associated with academic debates without stifling open discussion. "It helps manage the risks associated with debates, up to a point, without controlling the debates themselves," Dr. Makela elaborated.
Dr. Malboeuf-Hurtubise acknowledged that the study’s initial aim was to identify tangible solutions. However, existing literature suggests that many previously proposed measures have proven ineffective. Despite this challenge, study participants did articulate a clear desire for accessible, confidential, and transparent reporting processes that shield them from reprisals. A resounding sentiment among respondents was the urgent need for a shift in organizational culture towards a zero-tolerance policy for bullying.
Dr. Malboeuf-Hurtubise expressed ongoing concern regarding the pervasive sense of powerlessness reported 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," she concluded, underscoring the long road ahead in fostering a truly supportive and safe academic environment. The findings from this Quebec study represent a critical first step in acknowledging and understanding a deeply rooted problem, paving the way for future research and policy interventions aimed at protecting the well-being and professional integrity of university faculty.
