posted on 2015-11-11, 16:24authored byAadil Kazi, Cheryl Haslam
Background: Psychological stress is a major cause of lost working days in the UK. The Health and Safety Executive have developed Management Standards (MS) to help organisations to assess work-related stress.
Aims: The aim of this study was to investigate the relationships between the MS Indicator Tool and employee health, job attitudes, work performance and environmental outcomes. Methods: The first phase involved a survey employing the MS Indicator Tool, GHQ-12, job attitudes, work performance and environmental measures. Three hundred and four call centre employees from a large utility company responded. The second phase comprised six focus groups to investigate what employees believed contributed to their perceived stress.
Results: Significant negative correlations were found between GHQ-12 and two MS dimensions; demands (Rho = -0.211, p = 0.000) and relationships (Rho = -0.134, p = 0.02). Other dimensions showed no significant relationship with GHQ-12. Higher levels of stress were associated with reduced job performance, job motivation and increased intention to quit but low stress levels were associated with reduced job satisfaction. Lack of management support, recognition and development opportunities were identified as sources of stress. Conclusion: The findings support the utility of the MS as a measure of employee attitudes and performance.
History
School
Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences
Published in
OCCUPATIONAL MEDICINE-OXFORD
Volume
63
Issue
5
Pages
335 - 340 (6)
Citation
KAZI, A. and HASLAM, C.O., 2013. Stress management standards: a warning indicator for employee health. Occupational Medicine, 63 (5), pp.335-340
This work is made available according to the conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) licence. Full details of this licence are available at: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Publication date
2013
Notes
This is a pre-copyedited, author-produced PDF of an article accepted for publication in Occupational Medicine following peer review. The version of record is available online at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/occmed/kqt052