Research for Organisational

Biron and Karinaka-Murray 2013

 Stress prevention theories.
 Mixed results previously, often methodologically challenging,
 Lack of attention to contextual and process issues; how, why and when interventions have an
effect on performance and wellbeing.
 Review process evaluation, with examples of broader theoretical framework.

 Little progress made in intervention work 2010

 Intervention process evaluation.(IPE)
 Use of case studies, and organisational change literature.
 Often too focused on being a-theoretical, and not much use for practical input, rather more
interested in methodological issues.
 Variance vs process models: Variance = how and when things happen, process = necessary
conditions for an outcome. More focus using variance models, hence the low practical
applicability.
 Process (formative) seeks to find weakenesses in the programme and correct for these, variance
(summative) equates to evaluating the outcomes of the programme.
o In order to be able to improve a programme, it must be inderstood through it’s process
in the first place!
 What should actually be evaluated?
 Goldenhar et al (2001) three-phase framework on intervention process; concrete answers to
questions provided at each stage. Developmental phase; answers to the change needed to
enhance target population health, best way to bring about change, theories applying to certain
situation, barriers hindering change, and extent that target audience buys into and understands
the need for changes.
 Implementation phase; how it is implemented and it’s componenet/materials, how they were
delivered, quality of intervention, quality of components, descriptive experience of target
audience, whether intervention was delivered according to plan.
 Effectiveness phase; summative evaluation, extent of reduction of illness, and worker exposure
to hazardous condition e.g. workload, effect on social and economic consequences at work and
how worker knowledge, attitudes and behaviour changed after intervention.
o Really like the idea of focusing this around the Welsh governments ‘welfare hour’
policy, it’s creation, implementation and outcome evaluation. Also incorporating their
other policies and activities in this, though may have to extend my interview with mum
to access this information.
 Often qualitative methods are used to assess the viabliilty and usefulness of the interventions,
e.g. Bourbonnais et al., 2006).
 Used to document both process and effectiveness of complex organisational stress interventions.

Second model: Nielsen and Randall (2012) 3-phase.

 Intervention context, design and implementation, and pps mental models.
 Omnibus contextual issues: (mediators or moderators) situations constraints affecting
occurrence and meaning of organisational behaviour.
 Includes pre-intervention organisation healthiness, fit between the culture and proposed
intervention, and ceiling effects.
 ….

 If line managers in the prep phase feel the have implementation responsibility without
appropriate support, they risk intervention failure (Biron et al., 2010).
o Longitudinal study in UK private company, why stress management poorly used by
managers. Intended as user friendly and simple, but managers perceived little need for
the tool and context too unstable to have valid portrait of psychosocial risks plus
comparative view between each intervention group. Reluctant to discuss results of
assessment with employees. Also, implementation by managers without follow up =
employee decrease in commitment over time, so unmet expectations are worse than
not having the intervention in the first place.
 Designing interventions; employees are often passive recipients of interventions (2013), with
their reaction measured to determine outcomes.
  They interpret the results of the risk assessment, and their involvement in translating it into actionable
plans has an effect on the intervention outcomes.
 Nielsen, Randall and Albertson (2007); having an influence and opportunity to shape the
intervention mediated the relationship between information about the project and participation
in intervention activities.

 IPE can help make sure that conclusions about a programmes failure are attributed correctly;
rather than at the intervention itself, at the implementation of the intervention.
 Implementation integrity (Jackson and Waters, 2005).
o Biron, Ivers, Brun and Cooper (2011): complex intervention effectiveness, 2 conditions,
nonrandomised, before and 18 months later, PE in first 2 phases: 1) documenting
changes, employee perceptions, barriers and facilitators, 2) questionnaires about
exposure to intervention. Had many complex aims to implement simultaneously. Those
highly exposed = best outcomes, while only 12% improved in low exposure level.

 IPE should go beyond measures of what has been implemented and to what extent. Subgroup
analysis should be conducted to verify what groups of pps would benefit most.
 What constitutes success or failure can differ according to certain criteria.

 Generally also an uncertainty on how to report these things given the lack of general
framework.
 Whether researchers/implementers realise what is important to measure and understand in
order to evaluate/improve the intervention.

 Given that organisational interventions are generally voluntary, sometimes there is not
sufficient ownership by managers who are responsible for implementing interventions within the
team; this is needed as a driver of change.

 Disjunction between practice, research and theory in this area,

 Often interventions take place in the absence of an underlying theoretical framework;
understandable when practical need to reduce stress, however this can’t be done or improved
or even work without knowledge about why it should/shouldn’t work.

Petrie et al., 2018 (mostly observational research)

 Framework outlining key strategies for implementing mentally healthy workplaces.
 Five key stages: Designing to minimise harm, reliance through good management, enhancing
personal resilience, promoting early-help seeking, supporting recovery and return to work.
 Each workplace needs tailored solutions, however this gives a simple framework.

 Australia
 Little evidence about what interventions may be able to mitigate factors relating to stress and
mental health at work
 Employers often reluctant to await results to implement interventions.
 The first 3 strategies map onto ideas of universal prevention, and final 2 relate to indicated
prevention and recovery.
 Spans 3 levels, from individual, individual/team and whole team/organisation.
 Bets created with a mix of preventative and reactive strategies.
 Two meta-analyses literature review.
 Designing work to minimise harm;

 Modifying workplaces and job design to reduce risk factors. (mostly strong evidence for this)
 Limited job control, excessive job demands, role conflict, imbalance of effort and reward.
 Most risk factors have focussed on employee control.
 Joyce et al., 2010: Flexible working conditions increasing employee control = greater positive
benefits and positive effect on health.
 Bond and Buance; also significantly reduces sickness absence in employees.

 Relience through management: (moderate to weaker evidence)

 Resilience; the process of managing and adapting to significant source of stress.
 Occurs at organisational and individual level.
  Manager confidence in dealing with stress issues can be increased through training, but whether
this effects mental health problems overall is unclear.
 Leadership styles can also impact employee wellbeing: Transformational leadership that inspires
meaning in employees = good psychological wellbeing.

 Team support interventions;

o Few interventions developed and tested to enhance perceived support in the
workplace.
o Ahola et al., 2012: 1-week support group reduced depression symptoms in employees.
 Psychosocial safety climate; perception of appropriate balance between management concern
for workers health and productivity.
o Employees in places with higher PSC = better mental health in general (Dollard et ak.,
2012).
 Effective change management;
o During times of organisational change
o Schewiger and Dennis, 1991; longitudinal field study, received open and realistic
communication about a merger vs those who received limited information = reduced
psychological stress, uncertainty and absenteeinm in those who received open
communication.

Enhancing personal resilience

 Improving individual coping skills.
o Mindfulness or CBT
o Coaching; limited evaluation, but small controlled studies = reductions in stress.
However, considerable variation in treatments
o Workplace physical activity programmes (effective). Positive effects of physical health
on mental wellbeing highly documented (Harvey et al., 2010). 13-week off-worksite
exercise programme found an improvement in overall psy- chological health for
employees who received the intervention compared to controls (Brand et al., 2006).

Promoting and facilitating early help-seeking

 Reducign barriers to early help-seeking
 Wellbeing checks:
o not very strong, Wang et al 2007; randomised control, screening followed by outreach
programme = lower depression and higher job retention rates.
 Peer-support schemes;
o mostly in high risk occupations, provides additional mental health taining to a selection
of workers. Provide more general support to other employees who might require
professional assistance
 Workplace counselling;
o Common intervention, providing support as part of Employee Assistance Programmes.
Although popular, overall effectiveness evidence is limited.
o (McLeod, 2001) published report, it was effective in treating mental illness. However,
findings significantly compromised by methodological limitations (Henderson et al.,
2003).
o Often linked with lower quality of studies and assessment methods.
 Mental health education of employees.
o Mental health first aid; helps people help others who may be experiencing problems.
o Beneficial through research, improving mental health knowledge, stigmatising attitudes
and confidence (thus efficacy).
o Also, trained group showed greater improvement in their own anxiety levels. (Kitchener
and Jorm, 2004)

Support recovery and return to work.

 Work-focussed psychological therapy
o Need to be supported in the workplace if the are to be effective
o Cochrane review has also evalu- ated the effectiveness of interven- tions facilitating the
return to work of individuals with adjustment disor- ders and found that problem solving
therapy (PST) assisted individuals in achieving a partial return to work (Arends et al.,
2012) sooner com- pared to treatment as usual.
 Workplace adjustement and support.
 o Strategies such as support from supervisors and colleagues, as well as workplace
adjustments like partial sickness absence can facilitate return to work. (Anderson et al
2012)

Sharpley and Gardner, 2001

 36 senior managers large firm, semi-structured interviews about their knowledge on stress.
 80% acknowledged stress was an issue of great concern, attributing 50% of their stress to work
related things.
 55% believed stress was a reaction to events, rather than the events themselves, and nearly all
related stress to loss of control in physical, emotional and behavioural domains.
 Although all of them realised it’s negative impact on employees and productivity, very few had
attended stress management interventions.
 Mostly down to the need to avoid drawing attention to oneself as failing or appearing weak in
the workplace.

 Historically, stress has been portrayed as a reaction to a stimulus rather than the stimulus itself.
Look at this paper for background on physiological stress theories
 Lack of clarity surrounding the term stress means that efforts to reduce unwanted stress at work
can be complex and difficult, due to refrain from people in charge not knowing enough or having
the relevant skills to do so.
 Given that managers may have good general knowledge of stress, the fact that it remains a
stubborn cause of ill-productivity and sick employees needs to be researched

 The people used were of the highest rung of management, not necessarily middle management
who may deal with smaller teams of people.
 A range of personal and non-personal companies
 Australia
 Semi-structured qualitative interview in order to clarify ambiguous meaning and responses.
 Interviews ranged from 12-60 minutes.

 Concern almost equally great for themselves and others about stress.
 81% attributed their own stress to workplace factors, and around 75% of others’.
 Only 28% of people believed other workers stress came from workplace factors.
 56% believed half of their stress came from environmental factors, 64% believed this to be true
of other employees.
 Stress definitions/statements categorised into; stress as a reaction, stress as an event,
combination and stress as a state of mind.
 11% stated stress as a state of mind, 55% reaction and 33% event;94% focussed overall on the
reaction.
 Generally comments about lack of control were common; leading to high levels of stress in other
research e.g. Bosma. Et al., 1997.

 Only 4 people had attended a single session on stress management, 2 finding them not very
helpful or effective. Single session was insufficient and had not resulted in behaviour change of
attendees.
 1 pps attended individual counselling sessions finding them very useful and effective.
 Really awkward definition of stress that sounds circular, hence 25% queried it and a further 25%
did not answer.
 Opinions about stress management techniques;
o Most commonly endorsed; understanding of stress and strategies to minimise the effects
of stress, assisting development of normal healthy expressions of stress, organisational
change to reduce stressors and assistance for reducing reactivity to stressful situations.
 No major differences between male and female responses.
 Most common single issues was job insecurity.

 Theme lack of control stated by 94% of managers.

 Stress management training, if not made compulsory and expected part of the job/organisation,
could also be seen as an extra demand on their own and other’s already precious time, eating
into deadlines.
  Such an attitude of "it won't happen to me" when faced with the sight of a colleague's heart
attack, is likely to maintain an attitude of "illusory mental health" (Shedler, Mayman & Manis,
1993), which has been associated with longterm poor prognosis for physical and mental health.

Harms et al.,2016

 Stress indicated as important determinant of leadership functioning.

 Also determines levels of stress in employees
 No systematic attempt to organize and compare these literatures.
 Meta-analysis
 3 leadership constructs; transformational, leader-member exchange and abusive supervision.
 Stress and burnout
 Found that leader tress influences leader behavior, and leader-follower relations are significant
predictors for stress and burnout.

 Two types of stress in the workplace; interpersonal stress and job stress
 Job stress= nature of task itself, interpersonal stress = conflict with others or expectancy to met
demands of others.
 The more an individual values a resource or relationship, the more stress will occur when this is
threatened (Fiedler, 1992).
 Burnout includes three primary symptoms; emotional exhaustion, depersonalization and reduced
personal accomplishment.

 Higher levels of stress and burnout were associated with lower levels of transformational
leadership and higher abusive leadership.
 Majority of data was same source, issues with causation.
 Could be a reciprocal relationship.
 Posotive leadership may serve as a buffer against stress in employees, they reported less stress
and burnout overall.
 Burnout showed higher stronger relationships with leadership style than stress did; perhaps due
to the type of measures used.
 Stress measures can usually use only a transitory state questioning i.e. at this time/instance,
rather than chronic nature over a long time period. Dilutes the level reported.