No Job Demand Is an Island – Interaction Effects Between Emotional Demands and Other Types of Job Demands

Abstract

Emotional demands are an inevitable feature of human services, and suggested to be a defining antecedent for workers’ stress and ill health. However, previous research indicate that emotional demands can have a favorably association to certain facets of human service workers’ motivation and well-being. Furthermore, recent research report that the effect of emotional demands on workers’ health and well-being seem to be contingent on the parallel level of other job demands. Still, initial investigations of interaction effects between emotional demands and other types of job demands have primarily focused on negative outcomes in terms of stress-related concerns and absenteeism. The present study investigated interaction effects between emotional demands and other types of job demands in relation to positive outcomes. In a larger sample of human service workers (social workers, n = 725), interaction effects were investigated between emotional demands and other job demands (quantitative demands, work pressure, and role conflict) for meaning in work and quality of work. Hypotheses stated that other job demands would moderate the relationship between emotional demands and positive outcomes, so that emotional demands would have a positive relation (i.e., act as a challenge) when the level of other demands is lower, but have a negative relation (i.e., act as a hindrance) when the level of other demands is high. Overall, the results provided support for the idea that emotional demands may act as a challenge. We found small but significant interaction effects between emotional demands and work pressure – in relation to meaning of work, as well as between emotional demands and quantitative demands, work pressure, and role-conflict, respectively – in relation to quality of work. Yet, the results did not support the assumption that emotional demands act as a hindrance when the level of other types of job demands is high. In sum, the results contribute by showing that emotional demands may promote human-service workers’ job attitudes when the level of parallel job demands is lower. We discuss the contribution of the study and the potential practical implications of the results, and give some suggestions for future research.

Validation of the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire Version III and Establishment of Benchmarks for Psychosocial Risk Management in Sweden

“…The nomological validity has been corroborated by operationalization of an extended JD-R model by the instrument with aspects of workability as outcome [11] as well as need for recovery [12] and also in relation to the newly introduced dimensions in the COPSOQ III of Work Engagement, Quality of Work [13] and Cyber Bullying [14]. Studies across different occupations have corroborated the internal consistency reliability and construct validity of the scales [11][12][13][15][16][17][18][19]. The ability to distinguish different groups (organizations with similar missions, work teams or occupational groups) has been demonstrated [20][21][22], as also the relevance of multilevel analyses and for intervention and organizational change studies [23][24][25][26][27][28][29].…”

Not All Emotional Demands Are the Same: Emotional Demands from Clients’ or Co-Workers’ Relations Have Different Associations with Well-Being in Service Workers

“…Future studies could also control for the potential effects of sociodemographic characteristics in the model, such as age. Previous studies have explored how emotional demands interact with other job demands (e.g., [ 52 ] and resources e.g., [ 29 ]) in predicting well-being and work engagement. This body of research suggests that when other types of demands are absent or low, or when appropriate resources are provided, emotional demands increase employees’ engagement with their role, or in other words, can be perceived as a positive “challenge”.…”

“…Moreover, given that emotional demands are closely tied to work tasks especially for service workers, these can be hard to avoid. Therefore, human resources practices that provide employees with working conditions that allow them to manage emotional demands, for example, by decreasing other types of job demands, e.g., [ 52 ], or by increasing job resources, e.g., [ 29 ], may promote engagement but not at the expense of their psychological well-being. Similarly, efforts to work on modifying PSC in organizations could increase employees’ resilience to the negative effects of emotional demands on psychological well-being, e.g., [ 54 ].…”

Credence in the Organization’s Ability to Respond to Change – Implications on Work Engagement and Job Satisfaction in the Church of Sweden

“…In fact, emotional demands were found to contribute to higher levels of work engagement. This suggests that the emotional aspects of the work may be considered as challenges, contributing to the motivational process (e.g., Lepine et al, 2005;Bakker and Sanz-Vergel, 2013;Geisler et al, 2019a). In some contrast, the results showed that job demands were significantly related (negative direction) to job satisfaction.…”

“…Respondents who answer less than half of the questions were set as missing (cf. Berthelsen et al, 2017;Geisler et al, 2019a). Furthermore, the data collection included a scale for organizational resilience (Kantur and Iseri-Say, 2015), in order to assess employees' levels of credence in the organization's ability to respond to changes.…”