Integrating Local Wisdom into Anti-Bullying Management: A Case Study of Senior High Schools in Tomohon City, Indonesia

International Journal of Social Science and Human Research ISSN (print): 2644-0679, ISSN (online): 2644-0695 Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 DOI: 10.47191/ijsshr/v8-i10-89, Impact factor8.007 Page No: 8269-8282 IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 www.ijsshr.in Page 8269 Integrating Local Wisdom into Anti-Bullying Management: A Case Study of Senior High Schools in Tomohon City, Indonesia Maria Ribeka Walukow1, Deitje Adolfien Katuuk1, Orbanus Naharia1, Jeffry Sony Junus Lengkong1, Mint Husen Raya Aditama2 1Doctoral Department of Educational Management, Universitas Negeri Manado, North Sulawesi, Indonesia 2Department of Guidance and Counseling, Universitas Negeri Manado, North Sulawesi, Indonesia ABSTRACT: This study aims to analyze the anti-bullying management model implemented in senior high schools in Tomohon City, emphasizing cultural dimensions and collaborative participation within the school management process. A descriptive qualitative approach was employed, with data collected through interviews, observations, and documentation involving principals, teachers, and educational stakeholders. The findings reveal that anti-bullying management in Tomohon comprises three main stages—planning, implementation, and supervision—rooted in local values such as deliberation (musyawarah), mutual cooperation (gotong royong), and social empathy. This model integrates global practices, such as Finland’s KiVa Program and the United States’ Whole School Approach, while adapting them contextually to Indonesia’s social norms and institutional structures. Theoretically, this study expands the concept of contextualized school management by incorporating local wisdom as a determinant of educational policy effectiveness. Practically, it provides strategic recommendations for developing community-based educational policies that position all school actors as agents of change. Consequently, the Tomohon model contributes to the advancement of school management theory and practice that is culturally grounded yet globally oriented. KEYWORDS: Anti-bullying management, school leadership, local wisdom, cultural responsiveness, contextualized school management. INTRODUCTION Bullying has been identified as a widespread concern that impacts learners in nations across various stages of development (Iordache et al., 2025). Traditionally prevalent within school environments, this behavior has now extended into online spaces, influencing students’ educational progress and personal growth (Putra & Dendup, 2022; Siddiqui & Kamran, 2024). Acts of bullying may manifest in physical, verbal, relational, or cyber forms and are marked by repeated aggression and an unequal distribution of power, with the deliberate purpose of inflicting harm (Alvarado et al., 2020; Dadras, 2025). Individuals targeted by bullying frequently suffer from psychological distress, including anxiety, depression, feelings of isolation, and suicidal thoughts (Putra & Dendup, 2022). Such adverse consequences often continue into adulthood, affecting both social relationships and career development (Mguye & Omodan, 2023; Smokowski et al., 2014). In school settings, children who experience bullying often face problems in academic performance and school engagement. Victims tend to report lower academic achievement and school satisfaction (Elias & Zins, 2013; Gruber & Fineran, 2016). As a result, they are also at greater risk of engaging in harmful behaviors, such as substance misuse and unsafe sexual practices (Dadras, 2025; Putra & Dendup, 2022). The phenomenon of bullying can be influenced by various environmental systems, including interpersonal interactions, school climate, and broader social values. Interventions at the exosystem and macrosystem levels are essential for effective prevention (Sakroni, 2025). Cultural and societal values significantly influence how bullying is expressed and perceived within different communities. For example, in Lesotho, behaviors that diverge from the ubuntu/botho cultural philosophy are regarded as factors that promote bullying (Mosia, 2019). In many lowand middle-income nations, a strong connection exists between social deprivation and bullying rates. Higher levels of absolute poverty are correlated with increased bullying victimization, although the detected cases tend to be lower compared to developed countries, which generally have more effective anti-bullying management systems (Chen et al., 2024). Data from the 2018 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) indicate that 41% of Indonesian students aged 15 experienced bullying on multiple occasions each month (UNICEF, 2020). Similarly, research by (Noboru et al., 2021) revealed that 20.6% of students aged 13–17 had encountered bullying, a figure somewhat lower than that observed in other Southeast Asian Integrating Local Wisdom into Anti-Bullying Management: A Case Study of Senior High Schools in Tomohon City, Indonesia IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 www.ijsshr.in Page 8270 nations. Correspondingly, results from the 2021 National Assessment showed that approximately 24% of Indonesian learners were affected by bullying. In addition, the Ministry of Women’s Empowerment and Child Protection (KemenPPPA) reported updated data as of January 1, 2024, outlining the distribution of bullying cases across various age categories, as presented in Figure 1. Figure 1. Graph of Victims by Age Group On the other hand, the distribution of bullying victims by educational level as of January 1, 2024, is presented in Figure 2. sumber: https://kekerasan.kemenpppa.go.id/ringkasan Figure 2. Graph of Victims by Educational Level The available data reveal that incidents of violence are most prevalent at the upper secondary education level (SLTA), encompassing senior high schools (SMA). The proportion of bullying cases in Indonesia (41.1%) is above the OECD average (23%), placing Indonesia fifth among 78 surveyed countries. According to the 2025 report on child violence in Indonesia from the official government database (https://kekerasan.kemenpppa.go.id), there were 24,078 reported cases, with female victims accounting for 20,625 cases. In North Sulawesi alone, 488 bullying cases were recorded, the majority involving female victims (392 cases). These figures indicate that incidents of violence, including bullying, remain a serious concern in Indonesia. Extensive international research has underscored the critical function of effective school administration and educational leadership in curbing bullying. Studies conducted in developed regions suggest that constructive leadership and a nurturing school atmosphere are decisive in minimizing bullying prevalence. For example, evidence from Finland shows that school-based antibullying programs achieve optimal outcomes when driven by committed principals and active collaboration between teachers and students (Salmivalli, 2014). Furthermore, global scholarship highlights the importance of transformational and distributed leadership styles in cultivating a school culture grounded in non-violence and mutual respect (Elwasefy, 2020; Gil-Monte et al., 2025). Schools that uphold principles of cooperation, equity, and transparency generally exhibit lower bullying rates. Nevertheless, much of this body of research originates from Western contexts, where school governance frameworks and cultural norms differ substantially from those found in developing nations. On the other hand, studies conducted in Asian countries have shown that local cultural values and social hierarchies can influence how bullying is defined, reported, and addressed (J. Lee et al., 2022; Xu et al., 2020). In many Asian societies, social norms that prioritize deference to authority and the maintenance of group cohesion may inhibit students from reporting bullying incidents. In Indonesia, several initiatives—such as Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) programs and the creation of school- Integrating Local Wisdom into Anti-Bullying Management: A Case Study of Senior High Schools in Tomohon City, Indonesia IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 www.ijsshr.in Page 8271 based anti-bullying task forces—have been launched to mitigate these challenges (Jannah et al., 2025; Talib et al., 2024; Wulandari et al., 2025). Additionally, educational and cultural interventions, including religious and civic education, have demonstrated success in reinforcing moral and social values that discourage aggressive behaviors (Noboru et al., 2021). Collectively, these findings emphasize the importance of culturally responsive strategies that tailor school management and prevention frameworks to align with local values and the national education system. Despite the fact that bullying in Indonesia has reached critical levels—according to reports from UNICEF (UNICEF, 2025) and the Ministry of Women’s Empowerment and Child Protection (2025)—academic inquiry into anti-bullying management within Indonesia’s cultural setting remains scarce. Most domestic research has concentrated on describing the types and psychological consequences of bullying, rather than exploring the administrative and strategic dimensions of prevention and intervention. Furthermore, there is a notable absence of comprehensive management models that integrate cultural values, leadership dynamics, and community engagement in addressing bullying at the school level. This research gap provides a crucial basis for the current study to investigate the development and implementation of a culturally responsive anti-bullying management system tailored to the social and cultural realities of Indonesian schools—specifically at the senior high school (SMA) level in North Sulawesi. The study seeks to enhance understanding of how school management practices can be contextually adapted to local cultural norms while maintaining consistency with global theoretical frameworks for bullying prevention and intervention. METHODS Research design This research utilized a qualitative methodology with a multi-case study design. The qualitative approach was selected to enable a deep exploration of how anti-bullying management is implemented in senior high schools, emphasizing participants lived experiences and perspectives within their authentic settings. As outlined by Creswell & Creswell (2018), qualitative inquiry is distinguished by its focus on natural environments, the researcher’s active role as the primary instrument, reliance on diverse data sources, and an adaptive design that evolves alongside field conditions. Such an approach allows the researcher to refine the research focus and methodological procedures dynamically, in response to patterns and insights that surface throughout the data collection process. A multi-case study design was selected because this research involved two schools with distinct characteristics, allowing for comparative insights and a richer understanding of how anti-bullying management is implemented. Moreover, the multi-case approach enhances the validity and transferability of the findings through cross-case analysis (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). Participants / setting The study was conducted in two schools: SMA Negeri 2 Tomohon, a public school managed by the Tomohon City Government, and SMA Kristen 2 Binsus Tomohon, a private boarding school administered by the GMIM (Gereja Masehi Injili di Minahasa) Educational Foundation. These schools were intentionally selected because, within the framework of a multi-case study, institutional differences between public and private schools were expected to generate variation in strategies and implementation of anti-bullying management. Thus, the inclusion of these two schools allowed for a comparative and contextual analysis, providing a deeper understanding of how school policies, institutional culture, and management systems influence the effectiveness of bullying prevention efforts. Data collection The primary data sources of this study included the principal, vice principals, teachers, students, and the head of the school committee. These participants were selected purposively to represent different roles and perspectives within the school management structure, allowing for a comprehensive understanding of how anti-bullying management is conceptualized and implemented across institutional levels. The key components covered in the data collection process are summarized in Table 1 below. Table 1. Components of Data Collection in the Anti-Bullying Management Study Main Component Focus of Data Collection Data Sources Purpose of Data Collection Anti-Bullying Management Planning, implementation, and evaluation of school-based antibullying programs Principal, vice principal, guidance and counseling teachers, subject teachers To understand the overall practice of anti-bullying management at the school level Determinant Factors that Serve as Supporting Elements Leadership, school culture, internal policies, teacher support, and community collaboration Principal, teachers, students, school committee To identify factors that strengthen the effectiveness of anti-bullying program implementation Integrating Local Wisdom into Anti-Bullying Management: A Case Study of Senior High Schools in Tomohon City, Indonesia IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 www.ijsshr.in Page 8272 Main Component Focus of Data Collection Data Sources Purpose of Data Collection Determinant Factors that Serve as Inhibiting Elements Limited resources, cultural resistance, lack of training, and weak communication among school stakeholders Principal, teachers, students To explore the factors that hinder the implementation of anti-bullying management Data analysis The data in this research were examined using the interactive analysis model introduced by Miles and Huberman (1994). This analytical framework was selected because it effectively captures the cyclical and iterative nature of qualitative data analysis, encompassing three interrelated components: data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing/verification. These components operate simultaneously and continuously throughout the study, ensuring that the final interpretations are both valid and meaningful. This multi-case study was conducted in two stages: beginning with single-case analysis and followed by cross-case (multicase) analysis. This multi-case study unfolded in two distinct phases: single-case analysis followed by cross-case (multi-case) analysis. The single-case analysis was executed sequentially for each site, beginning with SMA Negeri 2 Tomohon (Case 1) and followed by SMA Kristen 2 Binsus Tomohon (Case 2). Each case was treated as an integral segment of the broader inquiry, comprising a comprehensive overview of the research context, collected data, identified findings, conceptual summaries displayed in tabular form, and the development of propositions. Upon completing the single-case analyses, the researcher proceeded with the cross-case analysis, which compared and synthesized findings from both schools. This stage aimed to identify convergent and divergent themes concerning anti-bullying management practices. The process involved integrating the conceptualized insights from each case, organizing them into comparative tables, and generating overarching propositions that encapsulated the collective understanding derived from Case 1 and Case 2. To ensure systematic and consistent analysis, the study employed a coding system for both research subjects and main interview components, as shown in Table 2 below. Table 2. Coding System for Research Subjects and Main Interview Components Category Element Code Interview Subjects Principal W-KS Vice Principal W-WKS Homeroom Teacher W-GWK Guidance and Counseling Teacher W-GBK Main Interview Components Anti-Bullying Management RenAP Supporting Factors of Anti-Bullying Management FPFT-MAP Inhibiting Factors of Anti-Bullying Management FPFH-MAP RESULTS Single Case Description The findings of this study are presented in the form of data displays derived from the single-case analysis, as shown below. Table 3. Data Display – Anti-Bullying Management at SMA Negeri 2 Tomohon Informant Code Data Reduction Category Key Findings W-KSRenAP - Planning is carried out through systematic stages (problem identification, goal setting, resource allocation, collaboration development). - Four program types: education, prevention, intervention, and collaboration strengthening. - The principal leads the program development involving multiple stakeholders. - Decision-making is based on consensus (musyawarah mufakat). - Program Collaborative and classroom-based planning process. Strategic and participatory planning of the school’s anti-bullying program. Integrating Local Wisdom into Anti-Bullying Management: A Case Study of Senior High Schools in Tomohon City, Indonesia IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 www.ijsshr.in Page 8273 Informant Code Data Reduction Category Key Findings implementation is classroom-based with homeroom teachers as the main actors. W-WKSRenAP - Participatory planning involves all teachers. - Planning through consensus decision-making. - Program focuses on prevention and intervention. - Homeroom teachers play a central role in implementation. - Communication with school committee and parents. School–parent collaboration in antibullying program planning. Anti-bullying management planning involves all school elements through consensus and active communication with committees and parents. W-GWKRenAP - The principal applies democratic leadership. - Planning involves all school stakeholders. - Joint problem identification and goal setting. - Communication of planning outcomes with the committee and parents. - Homeroom teachers act as primary implementers. - Coordination with guidance and counseling teachers if cases cannot be resolved at the class level. Collaborative planning and implementation based on democratic leadership and homeroom teacher roles. Anti-bullying planning is conducted through democratic leadership, participation of all school elements, and the involvement of homeroom teachers and committees to ensure effective implementation. W-GBKRenAP - Homeroom teachers are the main actors in resolving bullying cases. - Guidance and counseling (BK) teachers act as facilitators and student mentors. - Counseling is carried out formally and informally (individual and group). - Planning involves case identification and consensus decision-making. - Program is communicated to committee and parents. Functional collaboration between BK teachers and homeroom teachers in planning and mentoring. Anti-bullying planning is carried out democratically and collaboratively, with a clear division of roles between homeroom teachers as implementers and BK teachers as facilitators and mentors in prevention and intervention efforts. Table 4. Data Display – Supporting Factors of Anti-Bullying Management at SMA Negeri 2 Tomohon Informant Code Data Reduction Category Key Findings W-KSFPFT-MAP - Principal leadership as the main supporting factor. - Government policies support anti-bullying implementation. - Active involvement of teachers, students, student council (OSIS), parents, and the school committee. - MPLS and TPPK committees act as field implementers. Structural and participatory support in school management. Strong leadership, government policy, and active participation of the school community are the main pillars supporting effective anti-bullying management. W-WKSFPFT-MAP - Principal leadership plays a central role in program support. - Government policy strengthens implementation. - Collaborative support from teachers, students, OSIS, parents, and committees. - MPLS and TPPK involvement in preventive activities. Leadership support and school community collaboration. The synergy between leadership, government policy, and community collaboration serves as a key foundation for strengthening anti-bullying management. W-GWKFPFT-MAP - Democratic and inspiring leadership from the principal. - Collaborative support among teachers. - Existence of government regulations on anti-bullying. - Active role of students as agents of change. - Participation of parents and the school committee. Structural and participatory support in anti-bullying management. Anti-bullying management is reinforced by democratic leadership, peer support among teachers, government policy, and the active involvement of students, parents, and the school committee. Integrating Local Wisdom into Anti-Bullying Management: A Case Study of Senior High Schools in Tomohon City, Indonesia IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 www.ijsshr.in Page 8274 Table 5. Data Display – Inhibiting Factors of Anti-Bullying Management at SMA Negeri 2 Tomohon Informant Code Data Reduction Category Key Findings W-KSFPFH-MAP - Barriers are a natural part of school organization. - Limited funding. - Inadequate monitoring facilities (CCTV). - Students and victims fear reporting. Structural and psychological barriers to anti-bullying management. Structural and psychological factors hinder the effectiveness of antibullying management. W-WKSFPFH-MAP - Barriers arise from individual teachers and organizational structure. - Student conflicts and dissatisfaction with case handling. - Unfavorable school climate (feeling unsafe, unfair treatment). - Students fear reporting. - Limited funding and monitoring facilities. Personal, structural, and cultural barriers to anti-bullying management. Systemic barriers—including individual, organizational, and cultural factors—impede the effectiveness of anti-bullying management. W-GWKFPFH-MAP - Program implementation not yet optimal. - Classic barriers: limited funds and inadequate facilities. - Victims fear reporting due to perpetrator threats. Structural and emotional barriers. Common barriers such as resource limitations and students’ fear hinder anti-bullying management implementation. W-GBKFPFH-MAP - Fear of reporting among victims and witnesses. - Insufficient anti-bullying budget. - Inadequate monitoring facilities (CCTV, reporting technology). Psychological and structural barriers. Students’ fear of reporting, coupled with budget and monitoring limitations, constitutes the main barriers to anti-bullying management. Table 6. Data Display – Anti-Bullying Management at SMA Kristen 2 Binsus Tomohon Informant Code Data Reduction Category Main Findings W-KSRenAP - The anti-bullying program is developed based on the official guidelines from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology (Kemendikbudristek).- The principal acts as the main person in charge.- Involves all school elements: vice principals, homeroom teachers, guidance and counseling teachers, religious teachers, and subject teachers.- The planning process includes problem identification and decision-making through consensus.- The program covers four areas: character education, prevention (through orientation and extracurriculars), intervention (through the Anti-Bullying Task Force and counseling), and strengthening collaboration with parents. Participatory leadership and collaborative planning based on national guidelines. The school’s anti-bullying planning is rooted in national policy, implemented collaboratively, and guided by participatory leadership to establish an integrated system of prevention and intervention. W-GWKRenAP Planning is conducted collaboratively through school meetings and results in a structured program (character education, prevention, intervention, collaboration). Cross-role teacher collaboration and coordination. Anti-bullying planning is carried out through cross-role collaboration within the school using consensusbased decision-making, producing a comprehensive program focused on character education, prevention, intervention, and parental collaboration. W-GBKRenAP Guidance and counseling teachers play roles in mentoring, counseling, and participatory program design through joint discussions. Counseling role and collaboration in planning. Guidance and counseling teachers are involved in prevention and intervention through counseling activities. Integrating Local Wisdom into Anti-Bullying Management: A Case Study of Senior High Schools in Tomohon City, Indonesia IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 www.ijsshr.in Page 8275 Table 7. Data Display – Supporting Factors of Anti-Bullying Management at SMA Kristen 2 Binsus Tomohon Informant Code Data Reduction Category Main Findings W-KSFPFT-MAP Supporting factors consist of individual, policy, psychological, and organizational aspects. Internal and external supporting factors for anti-bullying management. Multi-actor synergy and the school system serve as the main supports for effective anti-bullying management. W-WKSFPFT-MAP Supporting factors include motivation, competence, organizational structure, leadership, school community participation, and school rules/policies. Individual, organizational, and policy-based supporting factors. Collaboration and structural support act as key enablers of anti-bullying management. W-GWKFPFT-MAP Supporting factors include work experience, trust, motivation, principal leadership, teacher competence, organizational support, and the roles of students, parents, school committees, and government policy. Individual, structural, and policy factors. The synergy among personal, structural, and policy aspects strengthens the implementation of anti-bullying management. Table 8. Data Display – Inhibiting Factors of Anti-Bullying Management at SMA Kristen 2 Binsus Tomohon Informant Code Data Reduction Category Main Findings W-KSFPFHMAP - Students’ fear of being witnesses or victims.- Student trauma and insecurity.- Limited school funding.- Inadequate facilities and infrastructure.- Additional costs required for program activities. Psychological and structural barriers in program implementation. Students’ psychological limitations and lack of school resources are the main factors hindering the effective implementation of anti-bullying management. W-WKSFPFHMAP - Students’ fear and trauma prevent reporting.- Teachers’ support for the program is not yet optimal.- Limited school facilities and infrastructure.- Limited funding for program implementation. Personal and institutional barriers in program implementation. The main inhibiting factors in antibullying management stem from individual (students and teachers) challenges and limited school resources such as funding and facilities. W-GWKFPFHMAP - Students are afraid to report bullying cases.- Victims experience psychological trauma.- Some victims choose to transfer schools to escape. Psychological and behavioral barriers among students in handling bullying cases. The main obstacles in anti-bullying management arise from students’ psychological aspects such as fear, trauma, and reluctance to report, which reduce the effectiveness of case detection and resolution. W-GBKFPFHMAP - Students are afraid to report bullying cases (both witnesses and victims).- No specific budget allocation for anti-bullying programs.- Surveillance facilities (CCTV, mobile phones) are unavailable or restricted.- School phone collection policy limits reporting channels. Students’ psychological barriers and limited school resources. Students’ fear of reporting and limited financial and surveillance resources are key obstacles to the implementation of anti-bullying management in schools. Description of Multi-Case Study Interpretation Following the presentation of the single-case study findings, the subsequent phase focuses on outlining the results of the multi-case study. In this stage, the insights gathered from each individual case serve as the empirical basis for the broader comparative analysis. Accordingly, this section presents the interpretations developed and synthesized as the central findings of the multi-case study, guided by the main research questions. The interpretive analysis was conducted through a comparative examination of Case 1 (SMA Negeri 2 Tomohon) and Case 2 (SMA Kristen 2 Binsus Tomohon). This comparative process aimed to identify both intra-case variations and cross-case Integrating Local Wisdom into Anti-Bullying Management: A Case Study of Senior High Schools in Tomohon City, Indonesia IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 www.ijsshr.in Page 8276 commonalities. The findings from this analytical comparison—highlighting shared themes as well as distinctive characteristics of each school’s anti-bullying management practices—are systematically presented in Table 9 below. Table 9. Comparative Interpretation of Data from Two Schools Main Theme SMA Negeri 2 Tomohon SMA Kristen 2 Binsus Tomohon Meaning of Findings 1. Strategic Planning Planning was conducted systematically and structurally through regular meetings involving the principal, guidance and counseling teachers, homeroom teachers, and the school committee. The focus was on case prevention and the establishment of the TPPK (Anti-Bullying Task Force). Planning was collaborative and based on deliberation. The principal emphasized values of togetherness and empathy in program design. Anti-bullying planning is a strategic and participatory process in which all school stakeholders play active roles in designing preventive and curative measures. 2. Comprehensive Program Programs included character education, anti-bullying socialization, and a reporting system. Collaboration was built with parents and external parties. Developed four main programs: education, prevention, intervention, and character strengthening based on Christian moral values. Schools establish a comprehensive student protection system through educational, preventive, and responsive approaches. 3. Collaborative Leadership The principal served as the main coordinator, delegating tasks and providing supervision. Decision-making was based on deliberation. The principal acted as a moral role model and encouraged participation from all stakeholders. Teachers were trained to detect early signs of bullying. Collaborative leadership reinforces shared responsibility and builds a caring, proactive school culture toward bullying prevention. 4. Classroom-Based Implementation Homeroom teachers were the main implementers of anti-bullying activities in class, focusing on character-building and moral discussions. Homeroom teachers conducted informal guidance and counseling. Their close relationship with students became a means of early detection. A classroom-based approach is effective because teachers directly monitor students’ daily behavior and provide early intervention. 5. Supervision and Evaluation Supervision was carried out daily through homeroom teacher reports and CCTV monitoring, with evaluations conducted each semester. Supervision was conducted through a personal approach; guidance teachers and the principal regularly monitored students’ conditions. Supervision plays a crucial role in maintaining program continuity and improving casehandling strategies. 6. Supporting Factors Supporting factors included school policies, organizational structure, and collaboration with parents. The main strength lay in the religious and familial culture that fostered solidarity among students. Supporting factors are both structural and cultural, reinforcing the effectiveness of program implementation. 7. Inhibiting Factors Limited funding and lack of digital reporting facilities; some students were still afraid to report incidents. Main obstacles included inadequate facilities and victims’ trauma. The main inhibiting factors are psychological and structural, reducing the effectiveness of reporting and intervention systems. Conceptual Relationship Analysis The study’s findings reveal that anti-bullying management in senior high schools across Tomohon City operates as a structured managerial process encompassing three primary phases: (a) planning, (b) implementation, and (c) supervision. Integrating Local Wisdom into Anti-Bullying Management: A Case Study of Senior High Schools in Tomohon City, Indonesia IJSSHR, Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 www.ijsshr.in Page 8277 The planning stage involves a systematic process that includes identifying problems, setting objectives, allocating resources, and fostering collaboration. Key participants in this stage include the principal, vice principal for student affairs, homeroom teachers, guidance and counseling staff, and religious education teachers. The planning process is grounded in collective deliberation and consensus-building, leading to the creation of programs that integrate educational, preventive, and interventionbased components. The implementation stage involves several actors, including teachers assigned as homeroom teachers, students serving as peer change agents, and parents. Activities in this phase stem from educational initiatives—such as character education integrated into the curriculum, school orientation (MPLS), and extracurricular programs—as well as the establishment of the Anti-Bullying and Violence Prevention and Handling Team (TPPK). Further implementation efforts include counseling services, reporting mechanisms, and parent collaboration. These initiatives are executed through structured processes of delegation, mentoring, guidance, and motivational support. The supervision of anti-bullying management in senior high schools in Tomohon City is demonstrated through several key practices. First, anti-bullying supervision is carried out in the form of monitoring and evaluation. Second, the process employs various tools and media, including online reporting systems, closed-circuit television (CCTV), and mobile digital technologies. Third, monitoring occurs daily throughout the school week. Fourth, program evaluations focus on both the execution of initiatives and observable behavioral improvements among students. Lastly, evaluations are conducted periodically to ensure the sustainability, relevance, and overall effectiveness of the anti-bullying programs in each institution. The key factors supporting the implementation of anti-bullying management in senior high schools throughout Tomohon City can be categorized across several dimensions. The individual-level factors include the principal, who functions as a planner and supervisor; teachers, who serve as program implementers; students, who act as peer change agents; and the involvement of parents, school committee leaders, and the surrounding community. At the institutional level, support is provided through mechanisms such as the School Orientation Program (MPLS), the Anti-Bullying and Violence Prevention and Handling Team (TPPK), the school committee, and the student council (OSIS). Additionally, policy-level factors play a pivotal role by providing the regulatory, legal, and procedural frameworks necessary to ensure the effective governance of anti-bullying initiatives. Conversely, the barriers to effective anti-bullying management can be grouped into two main categories. The first involves individual psychological factors, including students’ fear of retaliation when they witness bullying and the emotional trauma that deters victims from reporting incidents. The second pertains to structural and resource-based limitations, such as insufficient budgetary support and inadequate facilities or infrastructure required for implementing holistic and sustained anti-bullying programs. These challenges collectively impede the optimal functioning and long-term success of anti-bullying management efforts in schools across Tomohon City. Figure 3. Conceptual Model of Research Findings