Jelena Dujmović Bocka, Danijela Romić, Željka Vajda Halak

CITIZENS’ ATTITUDE TOWARDS LOCAL OFFICIALS - FREQUENCY, PREVENTIVE MEASURES AND CONSEQUENCES OF AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOUR

Introduction

Citizens’ attitude towards local officials - frequency, preventive measures and consequences of aggressive behaviour. Explore citizen aggression towards local public officials. This study analyzes its frequency, impact on well-being & performance, and preventive measures in Croatian local government units.

Abstract

A safe working environment is one of the fundamental rights of workers, regardless of the type of job or employer. All previous research on workplace aggression has primarily focused on intra-organizational forms, while aggressive behaviour from external stakeholders (such as users or citizens) has been studied far less frequently, particularly in relation to public officials. Research findings indicate that citizen aggression significantly affects employees’ overall wellbeing and health, their organizational commitment and performance. Public officials work in the public interest, follow the rules and cannot always meet citizens’ demands and needs. Under the influence of New Public Management, officials are expected to do more with fewer resources, leading to overwork, stress, and potentially declining service quality and trust in public administration. At the same time, citizens are becoming more demanding and better informed, while trust in public services is declining. Along with other classic predictors, these factors may contribute to increased citizen aggression toward public officials. In this paper, the focus of research is on officials in local government units in Osijek-Baranja and Vukovar-Srijem counties. The questions posed in the research are: how frequently do citizens exhibit aggressive behaviour toward officials in local government units, what are the consequences of such behaviour for officials and what preventive measures have been implemented to prevent aggression? To collect data, a survey questionnaire was created using Google Forms, containing seventeen questions, and was sent to respondents in October 2024. The collected data underwent qualitative and quantitative analysis using classical statistical methods. Relations were made between independent variables (such as gender, type and size of the local government unit, length of service, and job type) and dependent variables. The results align with comparative research. The respondents report a high frequency of citizen aggression toward officials in local government units, with verbal aggression being the most common form. This type of aggression causes officials to feel moderately to highly distressed, yet a significant number of incidents go unreported. Additionally, many reported incidents receive no response. The most commonly cited preventive measure is the presence of security cameras. Following the introduction, which highlights the importance of officials’ sense of security for organizational efficiency, the second part of the paper analyses the existing legal framework based on Council Directive 76/207/EEC, Directive 2002/73/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, and other documents of European social partners. Furthermore, the results of comparative research on the frequency and consequences of citizen aggression toward officials, their well-being and work performance in the member states of the European Union are presented. The third part of paper explains the research methodology, while the fourth presents and analyses the results. In the conclusion, the authors emphasize the need for further research on this phenomenon in order to reduce and prevent its harmful effects on officials and the local government units in which they work. The scientific contribution of this paper is reflected in initiating a comprehensive discussion— previously non-existent in Croatia—on the causes and consequences of citizen aggression toward local officials. The practical implications include raising awareness of this phenomenon, which should lead to a more frequent reporting of citizen aggression and more appropriate organizational responses to these challenges.

Review

This paper addresses a highly relevant and often overlooked aspect of workplace aggression: that from external stakeholders towards public officials. The abstract clearly identifies a critical research gap, particularly concerning local government units, and sets out precise objectives to investigate the frequency, consequences, and preventive measures related to such behavior. The theoretical background correctly situates the problem within the context of New Public Management, increasing citizen demands, and declining trust in public services, providing a robust rationale for the study. The stated scientific contribution, initiating a previously non-existent comprehensive discussion in Croatia on this specific phenomenon, is particularly noteworthy and highlights the paper's potential for significant regional impact. While the abstract outlines the use of a survey questionnaire distributed via Google Forms and mentions "qualitative and quantitative analysis using classical statistical methods," it unfortunately lacks crucial methodological detail. Key omissions include information regarding the sample size, response rate, specific statistical techniques employed (beyond vague "classical methods"), and how the "qualitative analysis" was conducted. The mention of the survey being "sent to respondents in October 2024" also presents a temporal incongruity for a research paper implying completed work, which warrants clarification. Without these specifics, it is challenging to fully assess the rigor and generalizability of the findings, especially given the geographical focus on only two counties. Despite these methodological ambiguities in the abstract, the paper clearly presents significant findings: a reported high frequency of primarily verbal aggression, causing moderate to high distress among officials, yet often going unreported or receiving no organizational response. The identification of security cameras as the most common preventive measure offers a tangible, albeit potentially limited, insight. These results strongly support the stated practical implications of raising awareness, promoting more frequent reporting, and fostering appropriate organizational responses. This research, by shedding light on a neglected but critical issue, holds considerable promise for informing policy and practice aimed at improving the working environment for public officials and warrants further detailed examination in its full form.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.