At the assessment stage, the steering group will need to take an overall look at the organisation and gather information of various types, such as:
• general demographic and job information
• recognised psychosocial hazards within the organisation
• measured individual/group symptoms of stress
• measured outcomes (e.g. absenteeism, accidents, performance)
• existing interventions.
It is important to note that when identifying psychosocial hazards the group must look at aspects of the work environment that are relevant to workers’ emotions, cognitions and behaviours.
The steering group may well be able to compile a list of the most obvious hazards to mental health in its particular organisation. It is often useful to develop a questionnaire tailored to the organisation which lists possible hazards. A good response to this (which can be encouraged by allowing respondents to be anonymous) will provide detailed information on employees’ perceptions of stressors in their work environment and should help to prioritise interventions. It is usual to classify these hazards as organisational or job specific.
Organisational factors
There are six widely recognised organisational psychosocial hazards:
• organisational culture
• communications
• morale
• change
• inadequate personnel policies
• poor management.
Organisational culture
There are four broadly recognised organisational styles (Table 5.2). All have positive or negative effects on employee well-being.
Communications
A significant part of the structure of an organisation is the communi-cation network. In practice it appears almost impossible to achieve adequate communication and in most organisations there is the
complaint that communication is poor both upwards and downwards.
The perceived lack of downward communication becomes particularly critical at times of change and can be responsible for much stress and anxiety. However, communication overload also occurs. For example, the increasing use of email may be promoting a whole new area of psychological hazard because of the associated:
• increased workload
• opportunity for aggression
• opportunity for harassment
• substitution for face-to-face discussion/criticism
• opportunities for espionage.
Morale
Low morale is associated with high stress levels and if the organisation is not held in high regard publicly then employees are likely to become alienated from its aims. The belief that one is doing a worthwhile job in a worthwhile organisation can carry an individual healthily through pressured times (in the short term).
Table 5.2 The four organisational styles and their effects on employee well-being
Style Characterisation
Power The people in control use resources to control employees. This form of management is often known as ‘Taylorism’ or as ‘stick and carrot management’. It is probably one of the most damaging and, although long since shown to be a poor form of management, is still present in many organisations.
Role Everyone has clearly defined duties and rewards. The structure, routine and predictability provide security but are likely to restrict individuality and creativity. In the maelstrom of work today, many individuals yearn for such stability.
Achievement Employees are lined up behind the organisation’s mission statement.
The personal energy of individuals is focused on the common goal. There is an expectation of total commitment that may be detrimental to family and social life. In such organisations you are only as good as your last ‘whatever’ (sales figures, budget man-agement programme, etc.). In line with the thinking of manman-agement gurus, an increasing number of organisations are basing their working practices on this concept of employee identification with management aims.
Support Based on mutual trust between the individual and the organisation, it is nurturing to most individuals, although dissatisfaction may be felt if equal reward is applied when there is not equal effort.
FINGRET
Change
It is difficult to think of any organisation that is not undergoing massive change. To most people change is associated with insecurity, either because of concomitant redundancies or because the job requirements are drastically changed and the individual may feel deskilled and vulnerable.
Continuous change can stretch employees’ adaptive and coping behaviours and so have an adverse effect on mental and physical well-being.
Inadequate personnel policies
As far as possible, employees need to know where they are in an organisation, and to feel that everyone will be treated fairly and with respect. Good personnel policies, which seek to safeguard these principles, should be in place and their absence may lead to much unnecessary anxiety.
Poor management
Another commonly perceived cause of stress is poor management.
Individuals ascending the organisational ladder necessarily acquire an increased management role but frequently this is not accompanied by adequate management training. Indeed, particularly for those with specialist skills, the management part of their role may be regarded as an unimportant nuisance factor. The extent and effectiveness of management training are important factors in assessing risk to all areas of health.
Job-specific factors
Well-researched job-specific factors include:
• the nature of the work
• job overload
• interpersonal relationships
• job ambiguity and role conflict
• home–work conflicts.
The nature of the work
Although all work can be stressful, certain types of work are recognised as being more likely to induce stress:
• dealing with people and controlling groups of people
• monotonous work
• work with a risk of violence
• work involving short and unpredictable time-scales
• dirty work
• poorly regarded work
• work in hazardous situations
• work in exposed situations.
Job overload
One of the most common causes of stress at work is overload, where there is too much to do in too little time. Overload is compounded if the individual lacks control over inputs and if there are unrealistic deadlines. Overload can develop insidiously as tasks increase and, even if the individual perceives overload, it may not be possible to identify a solution without losing credibility or status.
Interpersonal relationships
If there is no relationship of mutual trust and respect between senior managers and other members of the team, the subordinate is likely to feel under pressure. Senior staff may feel equally under pressure when there is a mismatch between formal and actual power, or when a more democratic approach to decisions has been adopted. Unsatisfactory peer group relationships may cause more distress; ‘scapegoating’ is not unusual in work groups and cliques can develop.
Job ambiguity and role conflict
The lack of a clear or realistic job specification is a recognised risk factor which can lead to differing expectations between employee, manager and the peer group. Individuals may be responsible to more than one manager and have no clear guidance on priorities.
Home–work conflicts
Extended working hours and unsociable hours tend to disturb family and social life. Long hours of work may be the result of cultural imperatives rather than actual work demand.