This study evaluated variation at the individual and work unit levels in the relations of job control, hostility, and trait anxiety to mental health and job satisfaction. Questionnaire data from a sample of 2,900 employees working at 152 hospital wards were analyzed by means of multilevel regression analyses. Results showed that mental health (General Health Questionnaire-12), varying mainly at the individual level, was explained mostly by hostility and trait anxiety. Job satisfaction varied significantly at the individual and the ward level. Job control accounted for most of this multilevel variation. Thus, this study demonstrated the significance of individual characteristics and organizational effects in explaining the mental health and job satisfaction of employees.

Two alternative versions of the Team Climate Inventory (TCI; Anderson & West, 1994), consisting of either four or five factors, have been introduced by innovation researchers. This study compared the psychometric properties of these two versions by using data obtained from a Finnish sample of 2 265 local government employees. Exploratory factor analysis of the entire sample reproduced both the four‐ and five‐factor versions with good internal consistencies. When a distinction was made between samples with low and high job complexity, significant differences between the four‐ and five‐factor versions emerged. Exploratory factor analysis of the sample with low job complexity suggested that both factor versions obtained clear and interpretable structures. However, only the five‐factor version obtained a clear factor structure in the sample of high job complexity. Further LISREL confirmatory factor analyses of both samples suggested that the five‐factor structure provided significantly better fit to the data than the four‐factor version. In conclusion, the five‐factor version of the TCI, including subscales of vision, participative safety, task orientation, support for innovation and interaction frequency, is preferred to the four‐factor version because it is more structurally intact and less likely to be affected by job complexity.

Purpose The challenges arising from the reform of the social and healthcare sector call for efficient, effective and novel processes in both public and private health and medical care. Facilities need to be designed to suit the new processes and to offer usable workspaces at different levels of healthcare services. Along with traditional construction, modular facility innovations could be one solution to these pressures.Design/methodology/approach This case study analyzed the different usability characteristics of the work environment in modular and non-modular healthcare facilities. The qualitative research method was based on semi-structured interviews of employees and observations of the case buildings.Findings According to the results, the usability characteristics were divided into four main categories: functionality, healthiness, safety/security, and comfort. The main differences between the modular and non-modular facilities appeared to be room size, soundproofing, safety issues, and the utilization of colors and artwork, which were all perceived as better realized in the non-modular facilities. The staff highlighted functionality as the most important characteristic in their work environment. They even considered functionality a feature of a comfortable work environment.Originality/value This paper presents new knowledge and a detailed description of the opinions and experiences of healthcare professionals concerning a user-centric, usable environment in the context of modular and non-modular healthcare facilities.

Työssä voi kohdata monenlaisia yhteensattumia. Toisinaan nuo sattumukset ovat todellisia onnenpotkuja, toisinaan niiden merkitys on pienempi, mutta ne voivat silti olla hyödyllisiä tai merkityksellisiä. Nämä onnekkaat sattumat eli sattumalöydökset ovat serendipisyyskokemuksia. Tämän tutkimuksen tavoitteena on selvittää 1) millaisia sattumanvaraisia havaintoja asiantuntija­ työssä kohdataan, 2) missä sattumanvaraisia havaintoja tehdään, 3) missä määrin nämä havainnot tapahtuvat digitaalisessa ympäristössä ja 4) millaisia arvokkaita asioita syntyy sattuman seurauksena. Tutkimuksen teoreettisena viitekehyksenä toimii serendipisyyteen kohdistuva tutkimustraditio. Tutkimus pohjautuu kolmentyyppiseen keväällä 2019 kerättyyn laadulliseen aineistoon: haastattelut, työpaja­aineisto ja kyselyn avovastaukset. Kaikkiaan aineistoista tunnistettiin 437 sattumaesimerkkiä. Sosiaalinen vuorovaikutus ja ihmisten kasvokkainen kohtaaminen omalla työpaikalla osoittautuivat keskeisimmiksi serendipisyyskokemusten paikoiksi asiantuntijatyössä. Onnekkaitten löytöjen kautta syntyi sekä pieniä oivalluksia omaan työhön, kuten ohjelman tai sovelluksen uusia käyttötapoja, että merkittäviä tiedettä tai oman työpaikan toimintaa edistäviä havaintoja tai ratkaisuja. Tutkimus osoitti, että serendipisyys ei ole harvinainen ilmiö vaan ennemminkin luonnollinen ja olennainen osa asiantuntijatyötä.

No abstract