The key role of shared participation in changing occupational self‐efficacy through stress management courses

Abstract

This study is the first that longitudinally examined change in occupational self‐efficacy (OSE) through individual and shared participation in occupational stress management courses (SMC). Applying the framework of social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986, Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice‐Hall), we assumed that participation in SMC facilitates OSE perceptions. We further assumed that the psychosocial environment promotes change in OSE through high shared participation (reach) in SMC within work groups. Comparing participants and non‐participants, we conducted growth analyses with three waves of data nested in n = 545 employees further nested in 97 work groups. The results showed that individual participation in SMC alone was insufficient to enhance OSE, a combination of individual and high shared participation being needed to significantly enhance OSE perceptions over a period of 2 years. The results are discussed with reference to specificity issues and the role of the psychosocial environment by applying social identity theory and the notion of shared mental models. We conclude by recommending SMC as a feasible intervention to enhance OSE in heterogeneous occupational contexts – if a majority of work group members can be involved. Practitioner points The study recommends stress management courses for enhancing occupational self‐efficacy as a short and relatively low‐cost intervention that is feasible to implement in various occupational and organizational contexts. The key point here is that a majority of work group members are encouraged to engage in courses to obtain the beneficial effects on change in occupational self‐efficacy.

The relevance of intervention participants’ process appraisal for change in well-being and lean work processes of entire teams

“…Füllemann et al 2015). Participation rate is the relative number of team members directly involved in the workshops and the development of action plans compared to the total number of team members.…”

Randomised Controlled Trials in WOHP Interventions: A Review and Guidelines for Use

“…Although a small number of papers focused on a sample that was pre‐assessed as experiencing significant psychological distress, burnout, depression or similar complaints (De Vente, Kamphuis, Emmelkamp, & Blonk, ; Kröger et al, ; McGonagle, Beatty, & Joffe, ; Salmela‐Aro et al, ; Salmela‐aro, Näätänen, & Nurmi, ), others were based either on particular areas of job design (such as psychosocial work factors) that were lacking among employees (Hasson et al, ; Martin, Reece, Lauder, & McClelland, ) or on unemployed individuals in a job search program (Vuori & Vinokur, ). The rest of the papers in our review did not select a distressed sample, but many focused on the reduction of “ill‐being”, such as stress, depressive symptoms, and distress (Flaxman & Bond, ; Füllemann, Jenny, Brauchli, & Bauer, ; Gardner, Rose, Mason, Tyler, & Cushway, ; Kröger et al, ; Le Blanc, Hox, Schaufeli, Taris, & Peeters, ; Lloyd, Bond, & Flaxman, ; Querstret, Cropley, Kruger, & Heron, ; Schaer, Bodenmann, & Klink, ; van Dierendonck, Schaufeli, & Buunk, ; Vuori et al, ; Wolever et al, ).…”

Resource‐based interventions in the workplace: Integration, commentary, and recommendations

“…Another well-designed and intensive study is admirable in its design and extent, though the results were disappointing (F€ ullemann, Jenny, Brauchli, & Bauer, 2015). Stress-management courses failed to improve workplace efficacy among workers who took part individually, over a 2-year period.…”

“…There are ample reasons to think that some interventions might work better with one or the other gender. For example, issues of fit between job and person and of work-family balance may differ by gender, given that men and women differ, on average, in the kinds of occupations they select and in how they prefer to balance work and family (e.g., Baumeister, 2010;Farrell, 2005). To be sure, results from past work have been mixed, with some studies finding workplace stress differences between women and men and other studies finding no differences (e.g., Garc ıa-Vega, 2011;Gyllensten & Palmer, 2005;Nelson & Burke, 2002).…”