Sick and working: Current challenges and emerging directions for future presenteeism research

Patel, Charmi; Biron, Michal; Cooper, Cary L.; Budhwar, Pawan

doi:10.1002/job.2727

Cited by 13 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 116 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It forms a foundation for future research to examine the consequences that workers face for making this trade-off. Additionally, considering growing research attention to outcomes of presenteeism (Patel et al, 2023), future research could examine the short- and long-term consequences of health-threatening behaviors in light of chronic or acute episodes of precariousness. Doing so will further enable the field of occupational health psychology to make significant contributions to discussions about workplace inequalities and power dynamics that shape health disparities and health outcomes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risking one’s life to save one’s livelihood: Precarious work, presenteeism, and worry about disease exposure during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Shoss,

Min,

Horan

et al. 2023

Journal of Occupational Health Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study advances research on the negative consequences of precarious work experiences (PWE), which include perceptions of threats to one's job and financial security as well as a sense of powerlessness and inability to exercise rights in the workplace. Using the COVID-19 pandemic as a backdrop, we examine how PWE relate to sickness presenteeism and worry about work-related COVID-19 exposure. In a 12-week, four-wave study of workers working fully in-person, perceptions of powerlessness and job insecurity were associated with presenteeism (e.g., general presenteeism as well as attending work with known or possible COVID-19 infection) and concerns about disease exposure at work. Whereas powerlessness primarily operated at the between-person level of analysis, job insecurity's effects emerged at both levels of analysis. A sense of powerlessness at work also predicted sending children to school/daycare sick. In sum, the findings suggest that precarity related to being able to keep one's job and a sense of powerlessness at work contribute to concerns about the risk of COVID-19 exposure at work and, simultaneously, behaviors that may contribute to the health risks faced by others. This research provides added support to the argument that precarious work should be addressed in order to improve both worker well-being and public health.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risking one’s life to save one’s livelihood: Precarious work, presenteeism, and worry about disease exposure during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Shoss,

Min,

Horan

et al. 2023

Journal of Occupational Health Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The economic crisis and the phenomena it leads to, such as restructuring, downsizing, financial problems, and fears of dismissal due to the absence from work have a significant impact on employees' decisions about whether to continue the work despite poor health or stay at home [10]. Various studies indicate that the economic costs of presenteeism amount to tens of millions of dollars per year [11] and significantly exceed the costs of absence due to sickness (absenteeism).…”

Section: Review and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The issues of absenteeism and presenteeism in terms of the right to decent and safe conditions of labor

Burka,

Bodnaruk

2023

VJHR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The right to work is a fundamental human right, whereas decent, safe and favorable conditions of labor are essential to its implementation. Today, decent labor implies efficient employment that provides a fair income, job security, and social protection. Approval of the concept of decent labor and its implementation in practice also means approval of the concept of respect for employees’ rights and taking measures to improve conditions of labor. The purpose of the study is to investigate the issues of absenteeism and presenteeism in terms of the right to decent and safe conditions of labor; to determine the interconnection between the improper fulfillment of the employer’s obligations to create a safe labor environment on the one hand, and absenteeism and presenteeism in the workplace on the other. The methodological basis of the research is the results of previously conducted foreign studies, scientific conclusions, and views on the concept, causes, consequences of absenteeism and presenteeism; legal acts and provisions of the International Labor Organization. The authors of the article emphasize that today’s labor activity carries more and more risks associated not only with the physical but also with the mental health of an employee. Therefore, modern safety and health management systems at enterprises, as well as legal norms, require constant transformation in the direction of the development of society, social values and employees’ needs. The article identifies the main causes of absenteeism, presenteeism and their consequences, as well as concludes that an unsafe labor environment is one of the main factors resulting in presenteeism and absenteeism. The article also points out that the implementation of certain programs (which aim at improving the balance between stress factors at work and work resources; supporting employees, taking care of their physical, mental, financial and social well-being; the formation of a safe, healthy, inclusive labor culture that increases productivity and work efficiency; the regulatory expansion of the content of the right to safe conditions of labor; the creation of additional guarantees for the employee in the field of occupational safety, in particular the safety of mental health and their consolidation at the local or legislative level) is now a necessity, a demand of society and a guarantee of the productive activity of enterprises and the growth of the economy as a whole.

show abstract

“…In spite of this growing knowledge, theoretical, conceptual and measurement, issues still remain ( Lohaus and Habermann, 2019 ) and more recently Patel et al (2023) have re-sounded the alarms about the many lacunae and gaps that are still of concern. It is in some ways quite surprising that after almost three decades since the inception of the construct, there are still unresolved issues.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Adding to this conceptual challenge is the fact that a number of measures have been developed claiming to assess presenteeism ( Ospina et al, 2015 ). Indeed, while the construct still requires various clarifications ( Gosselin et al, 2013 ; Patel et al, 2023 ) some of the measures still lack criterion validity ( Lohaus and Habermann, 2019 ). Measures include the Health and Work Performance Questionnaire ( Kessler et al, 2004 ), the Health and Work Questionnaire ( Shikiar et al, 2004 ), the Work Limitations Questionnaire ( Lerner et al, 2001 ), the Workplace Attendance-Behavior Legitimacy Scale ( Ruhle and Breitsohl, 2023 ) and the Stanford Presenteeism Scale (SPS) ( Koopman et al, 2002 ) which is the subject of our paper.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…‘Presenteeism’ as a construct still struggles to be properly defined ( Patel et al, 2023 ) although a number of authors seem to agree that this is associated with the conscious desire and personal decision to attend work while feeling or being ill ( Johns, 2010 ). At the heart of this definition is the notion of personal decision-making to attend work and that presenteeism is an adaptive mechanism intended to alleviate the potential negative effects of ‘letting go’ by remaining at work.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Re-visiting the six-item Stanford presenteeism scale (SPS-6) and its psychometric properties

Bezzina,

Zielińska,

Cassar

2023

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Presenteeism has often been considered as the correlate of absenteeism and associated to productivity loss. This study sought to re-examine the psychometric properties of the 6-item Stanford Presenteeism Scale (SPS-6), a popular measure which has been translated in a number of languages. The study adopted a cross-sectional design with 268 participants aged 18 - 65 working in a multinational IT company with headquarters based in Poland. The respondents participated willingly in an online questionnaire on a presenteeism health-related productivity measure (SPS-6), job resources (peer support), job demands (work-to-family conflict), engagement and burnout. Their responses were subjected to statistical analyses. Confirmatory Factor Analysis revealed that the SPS-6 is better represented by two singular and independent components, namely completing work and avoiding distractions, rather than an aggregated measure of health-related productivity. In fact, the aggregated measure had convergent and discriminant validity issues. We also assessed, via Structural Equation Modeling (SEM), the explanatory role of the SPS-6 within the wider well-being discourse by subjecting its’ factors as outcomes using the JD-R framework. Here, burnout was better at explaining its relationship to avoiding distractions and completing work compared to engagement, while avoiding distractions was more dominant than completing work in explaining indirect pathways. Given the convergent and discriminant validity of its two-dimensional measures, we argue that the SPS-6 is a better assessment of health-related productivity in the light of presenteeism when keeping both components separate rather than adding the scores from both dimensions to provide a global score as has been the practice so far. In addition, the SEM findings suggest that both SPS-6 components may require different theoretical explanations. This study supports a growing chorus of scholars who argue the need to look deeper into the presenteeism phenomenon, not least its measures.

show abstract

Sick and working: Current challenges and emerging directions for future presenteeism research

Cited by 13 publications

References 116 publications

Risking one’s life to save one’s livelihood: Precarious work, presenteeism, and worry about disease exposure during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Risking one’s life to save one’s livelihood: Precarious work, presenteeism, and worry about disease exposure during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The issues of absenteeism and presenteeism in terms of the right to decent and safe conditions of labor

Re-visiting the six-item Stanford presenteeism scale (SPS-6) and its psychometric properties

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About