Conducting organizational-level occupational health interventions: What works?

Nielsen, Karina; Randall, Raymond; Holten, Ann-Louise; González, Eusebio Rial

doi:10.1080/02678373.2010.515393

Cited by 357 publications

(391 citation statements)

References 82 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

353

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Nielsen, Randall, Holten, and González (2010) note the importance of participant readiness to change and senior manager support for the success of interventions. If senior managers were not able to emphasize the importance and benefits of our intervention, individuals may have chosen not to participate.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Building and sustaining work engagement – a participatory action intervention to increase work engagement in nursing staff

Knight

Patterson

Dawson

et al. 2017

European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study evaluated whether a participatory action research intervention with nursing staff on acute care older people National Health Service wards in the United Kingdom was effective for increasing work engagement. Mediation analyses between job resources (social support, influence in decisionmaking), job demands, work-related needs (autonomy, competence, relatedness), and work engagement explored the presumed psychological mechanisms underlying the intervention. A non-randomized, matched control group, pretest, post-test design involved three intervention and five control wards. A significant decrease in relatedness, and a borderline significant decrease in competence, was observed in the intervention group compared to the control group, with no effect on work engagement (N = 45). Work-related needs mediated between resources and work engagement, supporting the job demands-resources model and self-determination theory as an underlying explanatory theory. Intervention implementation was difficult, highlighting the need for participant and organizational readiness for change, and strong management support. This is the first known study to apply participatory techniques to increase work engagement in nursing staff and explore the underlying explanatory psychological mechanisms, offering a novel means of taking work engagement research forward. Crucially, it highlights the challenges involved in intervention research and the importance of including evaluations of intervention implementation alongside statistical evaluations to avoid erroneous conclusions. ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Building and sustaining work engagement – a participatory action intervention to increase work engagement in nursing staff

Knight

Patterson

Dawson

et al. 2017

European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Call centre agents and supervisors in the experimental group (four of the twelve teams in the call centre) participated in the main phases of the intervention: assessment (i.e., problem definition and solution development) and implementation (planning, securing support, implementing changes) (Nielsen, Randall, Holten, & Gonzalez, 2010).…”

Section: Organizational Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can job redesign interventions influence a broad range of employee outcomes by changing multiple job characteristics? A quasi-experimental study.

Holman¹,

Axtell²

2016

Journal of Occupational Health Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many job redesign interventions are based on a 'multiple mediator/multiple outcome' model in which the job redesign intervention indirectly influences a broad range of employee outcomes by changing multiple job characteristics. As this model remains untested, the aim of this study is to test a 'multiple mediator/multiple outcome' model of job redesign. Multilevel analysis of data from a quasi-experimental job redesign intervention in a call centre confirmed the hypothesized model and showed that the job redesign intervention affected a broad range of employee outcomes (i.e., employee well-being, psychological contract fulfillment, and supervisor-rated job performance) through changes in two job characteristics (i.e., job control, feedback). The results provide further evidence for the efficacy and mechanisms of job redesign interventions. Key Words; job redesign, quasi-experiment, well-being, performance, psychological contract, call centre 3 Job redesign interventions are planned change initiatives that aim to modify job characteristics as a means of enhancing employee outcomes such as well-being and job performance (Parker & Wall, 1999;Semmer, 2006). Within the literature on job redesign, there is an increasing interest in understanding why job redesign interventions lead to successful outcomes (Biron, Karinka-Murray & Cooper, 2011). One approach to examining this issue has been to establish whether a change in job characteristics is the mechanism through which job redesign interventions have their effects. Specifically, studies have tested two models of this mediational process. The first is a 'single mediator/multiple outcome' model in which a job redesign intervention influences multiple types of employee outcome (e.g., affective, behavioral and attitudinal) through a change in one job characteristic, such as job control (Bond & Bunce, 2001;Bond, Flaxman & Bunce, 2008;Logan & Ganster, 2005). The second is a 'multiple mediator/single outcome' model in which a job design intervention influences one type of employee outcome (e.g., affect) by changing multiple job characteristics such as job control, feedback and participation (Holman, Axtell, Sprigg, Totterdell, & Wall, 2009).Many job redesign interventions are based on a 'multiple mediator/multiple outcome' model in which the job redesign intervention influences a broad range of employee outcomes by making changes to multiple job characteristics (Semmer, 2008). But this model of the job redesign process has not been tested, so there is little evidence for the efficacy of job redesign interventions based on it. Indeed, it is possible that intervention-induced changes to multiple job characteristics may only affect one type of employee outcome, or that changes to multiple outcomes might only occur when a single job characteristic is changed (Bond & Bunce, 2001).The main aim of this paper is therefore to test a 'multiple mediator/multiple outcome' model of 4 job redesign intervention by examining whether a job redesign intervention can enhance a range of...

show abstract

“…Yet, evidence suggests that employees and managers are actively engaging in phase of the intervention (Nielsen, Randall, Holten, & Gonzalez, 2010). They interpret the results of the risk assessment, and their involvement in translating it into actionable plans has an effect on the intervention outcomes.…”

Section: Designing Actionable Intervention Plansmentioning

confidence: 99%

Process evaluation for organizational stress and well-being interventions: Implications for theory, method, and practice.

Biron

Karanika‐Murray

2014

International Journal of Stress Management

131

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although the body of evidence showing the effects of psychosocial risks on employees' health is substantial, effective and sustainable stress prevention remains a thorny and complex issue. Most studies have focused on evaluating the effects of organizational interventions, and the results are mixed. Researchers find the evaluation of such actions methodologically challenging whereas practitioners often find the development and implementation of such actions a complicated matter. One of the reasons for this mixed impact is the lack of attention to contextual and process issues, namely how, when, and why interventions have their effects on outcomes such as mental health, well-being, and organizational performance. This paper aims to help researchers and practitioners to improve the development, implementation, and evaluation of organizational initiatives designed to reduce exposure to stress, to promote well-being, and healthy organizations. We review recent developments in the literature on process evaluation and propose examples of broader theoretical frameworks that could be used to improve this area. We articulate the essential elements for developing and bridging gaps between theory, methods, and practice.Throughout, we provide recommendations for the content, process and reporting of research on IPE.Keywords: intervention process evaluation, context, organizational interventions, well-being, occupational stress INTERVENTION PROCESS EVALUATION 3Process evaluation for organizational stress and well-being interventions: Implications for theory, method, and practice Because of their focus on reducing or eliminating the stressful and harmful aspects in the workplace, organizational-level interventions have been thought to be more effective compared to individual-level initiatives which attempt to modify individuals' ability to cope with stress (Semmer, 2011). Several reviews (Briner & Reynolds, 1999;Graveling, Crawford, Cowie, Amati, & Vohra, 2008;Parkes & Sparkes, 1998;Richardson & Rothstein, 2008; Van der Klink, Blonk, Schene, & Van Dijk, 2001) have concluded that there is not sufficient empirical evidence to draw conclusions on the effectiveness of organizational-level interventions, and that the research designs that have been used are too varied or not considered sufficiently strong. This is worrying given the pervasiveness and costs of workrelated stress and the considerable resources that organizations invested to manage it. In 2010 an observation was made that "at present little real progress is being made in [stress] intervention research [and] we do not need 'more of the same'" (Cox et al., 2010, p. 217). The implementation of interventions at the organizational level is considerably more complex and requiring more extensive resources than interventions at the individual level. Nevertheless, and despite calls for the importance of understanding intervention implementation coming from a range of areas such as organizational studies (e.g. Langley, 2009;Pettigrew, Woodman, & Cameron, 2001) and ...

show abstract

Conducting organizational-level occupational health interventions: What works?

Cited by 357 publications

References 82 publications

Building and sustaining work engagement – a participatory action intervention to increase work engagement in nursing staff

Building and sustaining work engagement – a participatory action intervention to increase work engagement in nursing staff

Can job redesign interventions influence a broad range of employee outcomes by changing multiple job characteristics? A quasi-experimental study.

Process evaluation for organizational stress and well-being interventions: Implications for theory, method, and practice.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About