Workplace aggression refers to any behavior that is intended to harm an employee psychologically or physically within an organization. It not only damages the health of the victim directly, but also brings negative impact on the individual’s work and life indirectly, so it is an important issue in organizational management. In previous studies, scholars focused on influencing factors and outcomes of workplace aggression from different perspectives: the perpetrator, the victim and the third party. However, research on workplace aggression from a single perspective isolates the three parties and consequently overlooks the fact that they are interchangeable. Firstly, this paper defines workplace aggression and distinguishes this notion from antisocial behavior, social undermining, deviant behavior, incivility, workplace violence and abusive supervision. Secondly, it deeply analyzes the triggered path, the response style and the dyadic construct of workplace aggression, based on the perspectives of the perpetrator, the victim and the third party. Lastly, it establishes an integrated model to systematically reflect the dynamic relationship among the three parties. The perpetrator, the victim and the third party are all likely to conduct aggressive behavior. Therefore the triggered path is the same: the triggering event leads to the cognitive evaluation which in turn brings about the aggressive behavior. The aggressive behavior itself may function as the triggering event which may trigger another round of aggressive behavior conducted by the victim or the third party. All of the three parties may address the workplace aggression with same behavioral responses, either aggressive or non-aggressive. When the victim and the third party adopt aggressive behavior response, it will produce the dyadic construct, which involves the three parties attacking each other on a one-to-one basis and can be influenced by both the individual and situational characteristics. The integrated model of workplace aggression not only integrates the triggered path, the response style and the dyadic construct, but also reflects the workplace aggressions’ traits as a spiraling cycle . This paper provides a new perspective for the study of workplace aggression. However, there is no quantitative data analysis or case studies presented in this research. A follow-up empirical research on this subject is thus needed.