Models of healthy work organizations.
From Experience to Innovation. IEA'97, Vol. 3, Complex Systems, Cognitive Ergonomics, Occupational Safety, Materials Handling, Proceedings of the 13th Triennial Congress of the International Ergonomics Association, Tampere, Finland, June 29-July 4, 1997. Seppala P, Luopajarvi T, Nygard H, Mattila M, eds. Helsinki, Finland: Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, 1997 Jun; 3:501-503
The results of a study examining various models for healthy work organizations, defined as organizations that promote low employee stress and high job performance, were summarized. Three models were evaluated. The first was a standard model which postulated that organizational practices influence an organization's 'climate' and values, which in turn impact on the effectiveness of the organization. The second model was the first of two alternative models and postulated that an organization's 'climate' and values were key factors that influenced its practices. The third model, the second of the two alternative models, postulated that an organization's values creates the 'climate' which influences management practices which, in turn, influence the organization's effectiveness. These models were evaluated using data obtained in a survey of organizational effectiveness of a major manufacturing company. The survey included 5,199 workers at 30 different company locations. Sixty two percent of the workers were male and 59% ranged in age from 25 to 45 years (yr). Fifty four percent of the workers had been with the company for more than 10yr. By occupational category, 24% of the workers were managers and professionals, 20% were administrative and technique personnel, and 56% were production and maintenance workers. Organizational practice measures including leadership practices, career growth and development, and continuous work improvements and two climate measures, innovation and workplace diversity, and a value index that represented the company's core values on individual development, technological commitment, progressive leadership, and performance accountability were evaluated. Organizational health outcomes evaluated included organizational effectiveness, work group performance, job satisfaction, and a stress index derived from stress experiences, effectiveness in coping with stress, and finding a balance between work and family life. Analysis of the data revealed that all models were valid depending on which organizational health outcomes were being examined. For example, in the case of the traditional model, multivariate regression analysis showed that organizational practice variables explained a significant proportion of the variance in innovation, workplace diversity, and values. For the first alternative model, all climate and value variables explained a significant proportion of the variance on progressive leadership style, career development, and continuous work improvement.
Work-environment; Occupational-health-programs; Job-stress; Human-factors-engineering; Statistical-analysis; Coping-behavior;
Seppala-P; Luopajarvi-T; Nygard-C-H; Mattila-M
From Experience to Innovation. IEA'97, Vol. 3, Complex Systems, Cognitive Ergonomics, Occupational Safety, Materials Handling, Proceedings of the 13th Triennial Congress of the International Ergonomics Association, Tampere, Finland, June 29-July 4, 1997