Preventing workplace aggression through a multi-actor perspective: bridging the gap between evidence and public policies.

Abstract

Background: Despite extensive research on workplace aggression, far less attention has been paid to how regulatory frameworks structure its prevention and management. Although national policies establish legal duties and guidance, it remains unclear how prevention is conceptualised, how responsibilities and interventions are articulated for different actors (perpetrators, targets and bystanders), and the extent to which policy aligns with contemporary evidence.

Aims and objectives: This study conducts a systematic policy mapping review of UK statutory and non-statutory documents addressing workplace aggression. Using a multi-actor, multi-level prevention framework, we examine how policies define workplace aggression, structure monitoring, and distribute primary, secondary and tertiary prevention across perpetrators, targets, and bystanders.

Findings: We screened 8,413 documents and analysed 57 eligible policies. The mapping reveals a fragmented policy landscape characterised by definitional inconsistencies, uneven monitoring guidance, limited attention to digital forms of aggression and an imbalanced prevention portfolio. Prevention efforts are comparatively concentrated on targets and post-incident responses, with limited articulation of bystander-focused and tertiary strategies, and relatively little structured primary prevention targeting perpetrators beyond normative statements such as zero-tolerance. These patterns suggest a predominantly reactive orientation within current policy approaches.

Discussion and conclusion: By systematically applying a multi-actor framework across the full policy corpus, this study moves beyond descriptive review to provide a diagnostic account of prevention coverage within a mature regulatory system. The framework offers a practical tool for policy makers and organisations to audit gaps, strengthen prevention portfolios and stage implementation.