hig.sePublications
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Karlsson, Thomas
Publications (10 of 22) Show all publications
Lindberg, P., Karlsson, T., Strömberg, A., Gustafsson, S. & Anderzén, I. (2017). Can a systematic participative method for procesing workplace survey data enhance organizational communication skills?. In: : . Paper presented at 12th International Conference on Occupational Stress and Health, "Work, Stress and Health 2017: Contemporary Challenges and Opportunities,", 7-10 June, 2017, Minneapolis, USA.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Can a systematic participative method for procesing workplace survey data enhance organizational communication skills?
Show others...
2017 (English)Conference paper, Poster (with or without abstract) (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Objectives

The concept healthy workplace has been defined as an organization that maximizes the integration of worker goals for wellbeing and company objectives for profitability and productivity (Sauter, Lim, & Murphy, 1996). The PATH-model (Grawitch, Gottschalk, & Munz, 2006) shows a synthesis of earlier research in a number of different disciplines and frames how a healthy workplace with wellbeing for the individual along with organizational improvements can be achieved. The model suggests five general categories of healthy workplace practices: work-life balance, employee growth and development, health and safety, recognition, and employee involvement. In order for these workplace practices to have an influence on the employees and the organizational outcomes the effectiveness of communication within the organization is crucial as is the alignment of workplace practices with the organizational context. Effective organizational communication in this context means that the management communicates what the organization offers the employees in order to enable good performance and wellbeing at work as well as that the employees state their needs in order to do a good job. The ongoing GodA-project (a Swedish acronym for good work environments and healthy workplaces) aims at investigating if workplace strategies in line with the PATH-model add to better health and wellbeing among the employees as well as organizational improvements. The present study is part of the GodA-project and aims at exploring to which extent the specific “GodA-method” for processing workplace survey data influences organizational communication skills. 

Methods

The GodA study is a 2-year follow up study with a survey feedback design in three companies with both blue- and white collar workers. One of the companies serves as “intervention-company”, the other two as controls. The project started in 2012 with a pre-project by means of focus groups and individual interviews in order to find out how employees and managers in the three companies describe the concept of a healthy work environment and what contributes to their well-being at work. In 2013 a baseline questionnaire was sent out including items, a) based on the combined results of the pre-study and a comprehensive literature review (Lindberg & Vingård, 2012) , and b) well-established questions on health and work environment. The results from the survey were reported back to the companies, which have been processing their respective results. In spring 2015 another survey wave was administered. Parallel, data concerning the company’s key indicators and internal development have been collected.

 Baseline results in the GodA-study showed that the employees considered communication as a very important factor for their well-being at work. However, they also reported that the internal communication was not at all at desired level. Considering that the PATH-model emphasizes internal communication as critical in establishing a healthy workplace, the intervention was designed to enhance communication skills. The “GodA-method”, to process the survey feedback was developed in collaboration with the “intervention-company”. In short, the baseline results concerning health, and physical- and psychosocial factors at the workplace, as reported by respective working group, are split into nine themes. Each theme is designed small enough to be processed during the groups’ monthly staff meetings. At the meetings the employees discuss today’s theme, first without then together with their supervisor and decide upon one measurable action to be taken to improve their work environment. To begin each discussion without the supervisor was a chosen strategy in order to empower the employees and in an implicit way train communication skills. The intervention has been followed by process evaluation forms for the supervisors as well as group interviews with employees and supervisors, respectively.   

Results

Nine working groups, each with 7-13 employees, were studied. The individual groups performed heterogeneous. The degree to which the various groups actively took actions for improvements seemed to be associated with the closest supervisor’s understanding of the importance of respective themes and his/her capability to conduct group discussions.

Communication was measured by a 5-item index showing the discrepancy between experienced and desirable communication level, where an index score of -0,5 to 0 (no discrepancy) was considered as good and a score below -.5 was considered undesirable. Preliminary results show that in groups (=5) performing 3-5 meetings the communication index in average deteriorated from -0.89 to -1.41, whereas groups (=4) performing 8-9 meetings the index improved or remained at a rather high level, in average from -0.92 to -0.71. Further analyses and results will be presented at the conference.

Conclusion

The results give support to the hypothesis that systematic and continuous training focusing on a mutual theme is a feasible method for improving communication skills.

Practical implications

Healthy workplaces are not created overnight. The GodA-method for processing employee surveys seems to be a useful way to systematically work with continuous improvements of the workplace. However, training of supervisors for group discussions seems necessary.

National Category
Occupational Health and Environmental Health
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-24780 (URN)
Conference
12th International Conference on Occupational Stress and Health, "Work, Stress and Health 2017: Contemporary Challenges and Opportunities,", 7-10 June, 2017, Minneapolis, USA
Funder
AFA Insurance
Note

Acknowledgements

This study was made possible by grants from AFA insurance and University of Gävle.

Available from: 2017-08-02 Created: 2017-08-02 Last updated: 2018-03-13Bibliographically approved
Lindberg, P., Karlsson, T., Nordlöf, H., Engström, V. & Vingård, E. (2017). Factors at work promoting mental health and wellbeing - a systematic litterature review. In: : . Paper presented at 12th International Conference on Occupational Stress and Health, "Work, Stress and Health 2017: Contemporary Challenges and Opportunities," 7-10 June, 2017, Minneapolis, USA.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Factors at work promoting mental health and wellbeing - a systematic litterature review
Show others...
2017 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation only (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Introduction

There is strong evidence that work itself, despite its risks, reduces the risk of depression and improves mental health (Waddell & Burton, 2006; van der Noordt, IJzelenberg, Droomers, & Proper, 2014). Mental health, like mental illness, is a vaguely defined concept. Mental health is a non-contextual concept which can be defined as absence of mental illness and with the opportunity to develop and flourish with high levels of emotional, psychological and social well-being (Keyes, 2005). The concept of wellbeing at work is inclusive. It relates to the physical environment, work-related risks, organization of work and tasks, relationships with colleagues, personal health and work ability and even family-related stress (Suomaa Leo, Yrjänheikki Erkki, Savolainen Heikki, & Hannu, 2011). It can also be seen as an important determinant of productivity at the individual, corporate and community levels (Schulte & Vainio, 2010).

"Healthy factors" for mental health in the workplace are factors and circumstances at work that may have a preventive and/or promotional effect on mental health and wellbeing of the workers. These factors can serve as resources (buffers) against negative consequences of various risks at work, but they may also be factors that, by themselves, create positive health benefits for the individual and the workplace.

The large numbers of work-related mental unhealthy in the western world (not the least in Sweden), call for actions in improving working conditions, but which are the important determinants of positive mental health and wellbeing at work to be influenced?  A review of indicators for healthy workplaces has recently been performed (Lindberg & Vingård, 2012), but we have not found any comprehensive review explicitly concerning positive mental health at work. Hence, the aim of this study was to review current knowledge concerning determinants for mental health and wellbeing at work.

Method

Two comprehensive literature searches were conducted in nine scientific databases, EBSCO (includes Academic Search Elite, Cinahl, PsycINFO och PsycARTICLES), Emerald, PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science, for relevant articles written in English, German or the Scandinavian languages. The first search, covering 2000-2014, was done for a Swedish government report (Lindberg & Karlsson, 2015). The second search, covering 2014 - June 2016, updated the previous data for the purpose of a scientific publication. Exclusion of articles was made stepwise by title, abstract and full text. The quality of included articles was assessed by acknowledged guidelines (STROBE Statement) and done separately by two researchers. The combined results are being analysed and will be presented in Montreal.

Search terms were: work OR workplace OR "healthy workplace" OR "healthy work" OR "healthy work* environment" OR "good work* environment" AND "depressive disorder" OR depression OR "behavioral symptoms" OR "anxiety disorders" OR "stress, psychological" OR "common mental disorders" OR "mental health" OR "sustainable mental health” OR "mental wellbeing" OR "mental well-being" OR "job wellbeing" OR "job well-being" OR "positive mental health" OR "good mental health" OR "positive mental wellbeing" OR "positive mental well-being" AND prevention OR promotion.

Results

According to preliminary analyses 5378 unique publications were found, of these 30 review-, cohort-, cross sectional-, and qualitative studies are included.

In the included studies 25 individual or categories of related factors promoting positive mental health and wellbeing at work were identified. Below is a list of the twelve most frequently researched factors listed in order of descending frequency.

  • Style of  leadership
  • Empowerment; Autonomy; Control at work; Participation
  • Possibilities for own development
  • Positive work climate
  • Social  support from supervisor
  • Communication supervisor-employee
  • Clear goals
  • Appreciation from supervisors, colleagues, customers
  • Work time control; Enough time
  • Effort-reward balance
  • Intellectually stimulating
  • Job security

 As seen above the most frequently investigated factor was the impact of leadership on mental health. It was found that “good leadership”, i.e. fair, supportive and empowering, gave positive health changes and increased well-being, that increased quality of a staff-oriented leadership reduced sickness absence in the company and that transformational leadership increased psychological wellbeing and job satisfaction among workers.

Conclusion

Independent of study design leadership was the most scrutinized factor. Apart from possibly being a research trend (?), this may be interpreted as an understanding of both its explicit influence on the well-being of the employees, and its implicit influence by having the authority to facilitate communication, empowerment, control, support, respect, work content, feedback, etc.

Practical implications

Working conditions arise in the interaction between the individual and the organization, but creating working conditions that promote mental health cannot be put on the individual. It must be organized in the workplace for the employees in that special context, whereby the leadership seems to be paramount for the promotion of mental health and wellbeing at work.

National Category
Applied Psychology Occupational Health and Environmental Health
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-24779 (URN)
Conference
12th International Conference on Occupational Stress and Health, "Work, Stress and Health 2017: Contemporary Challenges and Opportunities," 7-10 June, 2017, Minneapolis, USA
Projects
ArbPsykForterapport 2015: "Psykisk ohälsa, arbetsliv och sjukfrånvaro - en kunskapsöversikt
Funder
Forte, Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare
Note

Acknowledgements

This study was commissioned by the Swedish government and funded by the Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare, and the University of Gävle.

Available from: 2017-08-02 Created: 2017-08-02 Last updated: 2018-03-13Bibliographically approved
diva2:1129336
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Factors at work promoting mental health and wellbeing at work – a systematic literature review
Show others...
2017 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation only (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Introduction

There is strong evidence that work itself, despite its risks, reduces the risk of depression and improves mental health (Waddell & Burton, 2006; van der Noordt, IJzelenberg, Droomers, & Proper, 2014). Mental health, like mental illness, is a vaguely defined concept. Mental health is a non-contextual concept, which can be defined as absence of mental illness and with the opportunity to develop and flourish with high levels of emotional, psychological and social well-being (Keyes, 2005). The concept of wellbeing at work is inclusive. It relates to the physical environment, work-related risks, organization of work and tasks, relationships with colleagues, personal health and work ability and even family-related stress (Suomaa, Yrjänheikki, Savolainen, & Jokiluoma, 2011). It can also be seen as an important determinant of productivity at the individual, corporate and community levels (Schulte & Vainio, 2010).

"Healthy factors" for mental health in the workplace are factors and circumstances at work that may have a preventive and/or promotional effect on mental health and wellbeing of the workers. These factors can serve as resources (buffers) against negative consequences of various risks at work. They may also be factors that, by themselves, create positive health benefits for the individual and the workplace.

The large numbers of work-related mental unhealthy in the western world (not the least in Sweden), call for actions in improving working conditions, but which are the important determinants of positive mental health and wellbeing at work to be influenced?  A review of indicators for healthy workplaces has recently been performed (Lindberg & Vingård, 2012), but we have not found any comprehensive review explicitly concerning mental health at work. Hence, the aim of this study was to review current knowledge concerning determinants for mental health and wellbeing at work.

Method

Two comprehensive literature searches were conducted in nine scientific databases, EBSCO (includes Academic Search Elite, Cinahl, PsycINFO och PsycARTICLES), Emerald, PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science, for relevant articles written in English, German or the Scandinavian languages. The first search, covering 2000-2014, was done for a Swedish government report. The second search, covering 2014- June 2016, updated the previous data for the purpose of a scientific publication. Exclusion of articles was made stepwise by title, abstract and full text. The quality of included articles was assessed by acknowledged guidelines (STROBE Statement) and done separately by two researchers. The combined results are being analysed and will be presented in Montreal.

Search terms were: work OR workplace OR "healthy workplace" OR "healthy work" OR "healthy work* environment" OR "good work* environment" AND "depressive disorder" OR depression OR "behavioral symptoms" OR "anxiety disorders" OR "stress, psychological" OR "common mental disorders" OR "mental health" OR "sustainable mental health” OR "mental wellbeing" OR "mental well-being" OR "job wellbeing" OR "job well-being" OR "positive mental health" OR "good mental health" OR "positive mental wellbeing" OR "positive mental well-being" AND prevention OR promotion.

Results

5378 unique publications were found, of these 30 review-, cohort-, cross sectional-, and qualitative studies are included (preliminary data).

We found 25 individual or “group of related factors” promoting positive mental health and wellbeing at work. Below is a list of the twelve most frequently investigated factors arranged in order of descending frequency.

  • Style of leadership
  • Empowerment; Autonomy; Control at work;      Participation
  • Possibilities for own development
  • Positive work climate
  • Social support from supervisor
  • Communication supervisor-employee
  • Clear goals
  • Appreciation from supervisors, colleagues,      customers
  • Work time control; Enough time
  • Effort-reward balance
  • Intellectually stimulating
  • Job security

As seen above the most frequently investigated factor was the impact of leadership on mental health. It was found that “good leadership”, i.e. fair, supportive and empowering, gave positive health changes and increased well-being, that increased quality of a staff-oriented leadership reduced sickness absence in the company and that transformational leadership increased psychological wellbeing and job satisfaction among workers.

Conclusion

Independent of study design leadership was the most investigated factor. Apart from possibly being a research trend, this can be interpreted as an insight into both its explicit influence on the well-being of the employees, and its implicit influence by having the authority to facilitate communication, empowerment, control, support, respect, work content, feedback, etc.

Working conditions arise in the interaction between the individual and the organization, but creating working conditions that promote mental health cannot be put on the individual. It must be organized in the workplace for the employees in that special context, whereby the leadership seems to be paramount for the promotion of mental health and wellbeing at work.

Keywords
Work, mental health, wellbeing, review, leadership
National Category
Occupational Health and Environmental Health Psychology (excluding Applied Psychology)
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-24781 (URN)
Conference
5th World Congress International Positive Psychology Association, 13-16 July 2017, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Projects
ArbPsykForterapport 2015: Psykisk ohälsa, arbetsliv och sjuknärvaro - en kunskapsöversikt
Funder
Forte, Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare
Note

Acknowledgements

This study was commissioned by the Swedish government and funded by the Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare, and the University of Gävle.

Available from: 2017-08-02 Created: 2017-08-02 Last updated: 2018-03-13Bibliographically approved
Lindberg, P., Karlsson, T., Strömberg, A., Gustafsson, S. & Anderzén, I. (2016). Can a systematic participative method for processing workplace survey data enhance organizational communication skills?. In: Scientific programme: Book of Abstracts. Paper presented at Fourth International Scientific conference on Wellbeing at Work 2016, 29 May - 1 June 2016, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Can a systematic participative method for processing workplace survey data enhance organizational communication skills?
Show others...
2016 (English)In: Scientific programme: Book of Abstracts, 2016Conference paper, Oral presentation only (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Objectives

The PATH-model (1) frames how a healthy workplace with wellbeing for the individual along with organizational improvements can be achieved, suggesting five healthy workplace practices. In order for these practices to have the desired influence, the effectiveness of communication within the organization is crucial. The ongoing GodA-project (an acronym for good work environments and healthy workplaces) is set up to investigate different aspects of the PATH-model. The present sub-study aims at exploring to which extent the specific “GodA-method” for processing workplace survey data influences organizational communication skills. 

Methods

The GodA study is a 2-year follow up study with a survey feedback design in three companies with both blue- and white collar workers. In one of the companies the “GodA-method” for processing survey feedbacks was developed and tested. Baseline results concerning workplace factors were split into nine themes, small enough to be processed during respective working groups’ monthly staff meetings. At the meetings the employees discussed today’s theme, first without, then together with their supervisor and decided on one action for improvements. This strategy was chosen in order to empower the employees and implicitly train their communication skills. The intervention was followed by process evaluations.   

Results

Nine working groups, each with 7-13 employees, were studied. The degree to which the various groups actively took actions for improvements seemed to be associated with the closest supervisor’s understanding of the importance of respective themes and his/her capability to conduct group discussions.

Communication was measured by a 5-item index showing the discrepancy between experienced and desirable communication level, where -0,5 – 0 was considered as good. In groups (=5) performing 3-5 meetings the communication index in average deteriorated from -0.89 to -1.41, whereas groups (=4) performing 8-9 meetings the index improved or remained at a rather high level, in average from -0.92 to -0.71.

Conclusion

The results give support to the idea that systematic and continuous training focusing on a mutual theme is a feasible method for improving communication skills. Training of supervisors for group discussions seems necessary.

National Category
Occupational Health and Environmental Health
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-23054 (URN)
Conference
Fourth International Scientific conference on Wellbeing at Work 2016, 29 May - 1 June 2016, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Funder
AFA Insurance
Available from: 2016-12-15 Created: 2016-12-15 Last updated: 2018-12-03Bibliographically approved
Lindberg, P., Karlsson, T. & Vingård, E. (2016). Determinants for positive mental health and wellbeing at work – a literature review. In: : . Paper presented at 4th Wellbeing at Work 2016, May 29th to June 1st, 2016, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Determinants for positive mental health and wellbeing at work – a literature review
2016 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation only (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Objectives

There is strong evidence that work itself, despite its risks, reduces the risk of depression and improves mental health. Mental health is a non-contextual concept which can be defined as the absence of mental illness, and with the opportunity to develop and flourish. The concept of wellbeing at work is inclusive, relating to the physical environment, work-related risks, organization of work and tasks, relationships with colleagues, personal health and work ability and even family-related stress. The large numbers of work-related mental unhealthy call for actions in improving working conditions, but which are the important determinants to be influenced?  Hence, the aim of this study was to review current knowledge concerning determinants for mental health and wellbeing at work.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search was conducted in nine scientific databases for articles published 2000 and forward. The exclusion by titles were made by one of the researcher, the further selection was made by two researchers independently.

Results

Of the 4262 found unique publications 27 were included encompassing 7 reviews,

12 cohort-, 5 cross-sectional-, and 3 qualitative studies.

Results

Of the 4262 found unique publications 27 were included encompassing 7 reviews, 12 cohort-, 5 cross-sectional-, and 3 qualitative studies.The most frequently investigated determinants for mental health and wellbeing at work were, in descending order:

  • Style of leadership: transformative, transactional, positive, employee oriented, ethical, supportive as well as managers own wellbeing
  • Empowerment; Autonomy; Control at work; Participation
  • Possibilities for own development
  • Positive work climate- Social support from supervisor
  • Communication supervisor-employee
  • Clear goals
  • Appreciation from supervisors, colleagues, customers
  • Work time control; Enough time
  • Effort-reward balance
  • Intellectually stimulating
  • Job security

Conclusion

Independent of study design leadership is the most investigated factor, which can be interpreted as a sign of its influence on the mental health of the employees. Beside the explicit influence of leadership styles on the employees’ mental health, several studies show an implicit influence, e.g. (enabling) support at work, skilled communication, empowerment, control, treated with respect and intellectual stimulation.Working conditions arise in the interaction between the individual and the organization, not least psychosocial conditions. Prevention and establishment of good working conditions cannot be put on the individual; it must be organized in the workplace for the employees in that special context.

National Category
Medical and Health Sciences Occupational Health and Environmental Health
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-23052 (URN)
Conference
4th Wellbeing at Work 2016, May 29th to June 1st, 2016, Amsterdam, Netherlands
Funder
Forte, Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare
Available from: 2016-12-15 Created: 2016-12-15 Last updated: 2018-03-13Bibliographically approved
Anderzén, I., Karlsson, T., Strömberg, A., Gustafsson, S. & Lindberg, P. (2016). Predictors of Well-being at work. In: Scientific Programme: Wellbeing at Work 2016. Paper presented at 4th Wellbeing at Work 2016, 29 May - 1 June 2016, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Predictors of Well-being at work
Show others...
2016 (English)In: Scientific Programme: Wellbeing at Work 2016, 2016Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

The concept of healthy workplace has been defined as an organization that maximizes the integration of worker goals for wellbeing and company objectives for profitability and productivity. Conditions in today’s working life make new approaches necessary in order to limit negative health effects of work and to enhance wellbeing and health at work. About 24 % of the working population in Sweden report to have had work-related disorders during the last twelve months. In order to achieve a sustainable working life it is likely that strategies and actions from different and new angles are needed.ObjectivesThe present study is a part of a larger study (the GodA –study; a Swedish acronym for good work environments and healthy workplaces) and aims to investigate how work environment factors, work ability, work motivation, work and life balance predict well-being at work.

Methods

The GodA study is a 2-year follow up study in Sweden with a survey feedback design in three companies with both blue- and white collar workers. One of the companies serves as “intervention-company”, the other two as controls. A baseline questionnaire was sent out 2013 and the results from the survey were reported back to the companies, which have been processing their results. In spring 2015 a follow up survey has been administered. Data have been analysed with univariate and multivariate linear regression analyses.

Results

A baseline multivariate linear regression model, which included background factors, perceived psychosocial work climate and work environmental factors (motivation, leadership, employee responsibilities, efficacy, work ability and management committed to employee health) and work life balance, showed that psychosocial work climate (B= .48, 95% CI=.27 – .69) leadership, (B= .27, 95% CI=.05– .49), work ability (B= -.12, 95% CI= .03 – .21), motivation (B= -33, 95% CI= .14 – .51) and work life balance (B= -.34, 95% CI=-.57– -.12), were signifi-cantly associated with well-being at work and explained 40% of the variance (Adjusted R2=.40, p<.001).

Conclusions

Results showed that not only work environment factors are important predictors. To maintain a healthy work place a promotion of balance between work and private life is needed.

National Category
Occupational Health and Environmental Health
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-23055 (URN)
Conference
4th Wellbeing at Work 2016, 29 May - 1 June 2016, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Funder
AFA Insurance
Available from: 2016-12-15 Created: 2016-12-15 Last updated: 2018-03-13Bibliographically approved
Lindberg, P., Karlsson, T., Strömberg, A., Gustafsson, S. & Anderzén, I. (2015). Can a systematic participative method for processing workplace survey data enhance organizational communication skills?: Experiences from the GodA-project for healthy workplaces. In: Proceedings 19th Triennial Congress of the IEA, Melbourne 9-14 August 2015: . Paper presented at 19th Triennial Congress of the IEA, 9-14 August 2015, Melbourne, Australia.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Can a systematic participative method for processing workplace survey data enhance organizational communication skills?: Experiences from the GodA-project for healthy workplaces
Show others...
2015 (English)In: Proceedings 19th Triennial Congress of the IEA, Melbourne 9-14 August 2015, 2015Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Conditions in today’s working life make new approaches necessary in order to limit negative health effects of work and to enhance wellbeing and health at work. Despite rather progressive legislation, a century of labour inspections, and the efforts of thousands of occupational health personnel, still 24 % of the working population in Sweden report to have had work-related disorders during the last twelve months (Swedish Work Environment Authority and Statistics Sweden, 2014). Even if the “elimination approach” partly has succeeded in reducing detrimental factors at work, it is obvious that this is insufficient or inadequate for a working life where key issues for progress are motivation, cooperation and creativity (Aronsson, Gustafsson, & Hakanen, 2009). In order to achieve a sustainable working life, not the least to coop with issues related to the ageing population, it is likely that strategies and actions from different and new angles are needed.

The concept healthy workplace has been defined as an organization that maximizes the integration of worker goals for wellbeing and company objectives for profitability and productivity (Sauter, Lim, & Murphy, 1996). The PATH-model (Grawitch, Gottschalk, & Munz, 2006) shows a synthesis of earlier research in a number of different disciplines and frames how a healthy workplace with wellbeing for the individual along with organizational improvements can be achieved. The model suggests five general categories of healthy workplace practices: work-life balance, employee growth and development, health and safety, recognition, and employee involvement. In order for these workplace practices to have an influence on the employeesand the organizational outcomes the effectiveness of communication within the organization is crucial as isthe alignment of workplace practices with the organizational context. Effective organizational communication in this context means that the management communicates what the organisation offers the employees in order to enable good performance and wellbeing at work as wellas that the employeesstate their needs in order to do a good job.The ongoing GodA-project (a Swedish acronym for good work environments and healthy workplaces) aims at investigating if workplace strategies in line with the PATH-model (Grawitch et al., 2006) lead to better health and wellbeing among the employees as well as organizational improvements. The present study is part of the GodA-project and aims at exploring to which extent the specific “GodA-method” for processing of workplace survey data influences organizational communications skills.

Keywords
Communication, PATH - model, Work environment, Intervention, Healthy workplace
National Category
Occupational Health and Environmental Health
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-23065 (URN)
Conference
19th Triennial Congress of the IEA, 9-14 August 2015, Melbourne, Australia
Available from: 2016-12-15 Created: 2016-12-15 Last updated: 2018-03-13Bibliographically approved
Lindberg, P., Karlsson, T. & Vingård, E. (2015). Determinanter för psykisk hälsa och välbefinnande på arbetet – en litteraturöversikt.. In: Book of Abstracts: FALF 2015 : Conference10-12 June 2015. Paper presented at FALF 2015 'Arbetslivets förhållanden och villkor – mellan kontinuitet och förändring', 10-12 juni 2015, Landskrona, Sverige.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Determinanter för psykisk hälsa och välbefinnande på arbetet – en litteraturöversikt.
2015 (Swedish)In: Book of Abstracts: FALF 2015 : Conference10-12 June 2015, 2015Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Refereed)
Abstract [sv]

Det har konstaterats att det generellt är fördelaktigt för hälsan att vara i arbete och att det finns stark evidens att arbete, trots sina risker, reducerar risken att drabbas av depression liksom förbättrar generell psykisk hälsa. Psykisk hälsa är ett icke-kontextuellt begrepp vilket kan definieras som ett tillstånd då individen är fri från psykisk ohälsa, utvecklas och mår bra (flourish) med höga nivåer av emotionellt, psykologiskt och socialt välbefinnande. Begreppet välbefinnande i arbetet är allomfattande, det relaterar till den fysiska miljön, arbetsrelaterade risker, organisering av arbete och arbetsuppgifter, relationer med kollegor, personlig hälsa och arbetsförmåga och även familjerelaterade påfrestningar. Det kan dessutom ses som en viktig determinant av produktivitet på individ-, företags- och samhällsnivå.

“Friskfaktorer” för psykisk hälsa på arbetet är faktorer och omständigheter på arbetet som kan ha en preventiv och främjande effekt på arbetstagarna psykiska hälsa och välbefinnande. Dessa faktorer kan vara inverterade riskfaktorer och fungera som buffrare mot negativa konsekvenser av riskfaktorer. De kan också vara faktorer som av sig själva ger positiva hälsovinster för individ och arbetsplats. En kunskapsöversikt över indikatorer för en god arbetsmiljö har nyligen gjorts, men till vår kännedom saknas en översikt som berör psykisk hälsa på arbetet. Således, var syftet med föreliggande studie att fastställa kunskapsläget vad gäller determinanter för psykisk hälsa och välbefinnande på arbetet.

National Category
Occupational Health and Environmental Health
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-23079 (URN)
Conference
FALF 2015 'Arbetslivets förhållanden och villkor – mellan kontinuitet och förändring', 10-12 juni 2015, Landskrona, Sverige
Funder
Forte, Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare
Available from: 2016-12-16 Created: 2016-12-16 Last updated: 2018-03-13Bibliographically approved
Lindberg, P., Karlsson, T. & Vingård, E. (2015). Determinants for positive mental health and wellbeing at work – a literature review. In: The Proceedings of the 19th Triennial Congress of the International Ergonomics Association - Melbourne, 9-14 August, 2015: . Paper presented at 19th Triennial Congress of the International Ergonomics Association (IEA 2015), 9-14 August 2015, Melbourne, Australien.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Determinants for positive mental health and wellbeing at work – a literature review
2015 (English)In: The Proceedings of the 19th Triennial Congress of the International Ergonomics Association - Melbourne, 9-14 August, 2015, 2015Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

In general it can be stated that it is beneficial for your health to be employed. There is strong evidence that work itself, despite its risks, reduces the risk of depression and improves mental health(Waddell & Burton, 2006; van der Noordt, IJzelenberg, Droomers, & Proper, 2014).Mental health, like mental illness, is avaguely defined concept.Mental healthis a non-contextual concept which canbedefined asthe absence ofmental illness, and with the opportunity to developand flourish with high levels ofemotional,psychological and socialwell-being(Keyes, 2005).The concept ofwellbeingat workis inclusive.Itrelates tothe physical environment,work-relatedrisks, organization of work andtasks, relationships with colleagues,personalhealth and work ability and evenfamily-relatedstress(Suomaa, Yrjänheikki, Savolainen, & Jokiluoma, 2011). It canalso be seenas an importantdeterminantofproductivityat the individual, corporate and community levels(Schulte & Vainio, 2010).

"Healthy factors" for mental health in the workplace are factors and circumstances at work that may have a preventive and/or promotional effect on mental health and wellbeing of the workers. These factors can be reversed risk factors and serve as a resource (buffer) against negative consequences of various risks at work. They may also be factors that, by themselves, create positive health benefits for the individual and the workplace. The large numbers of work-related mental unhealthy call for action in improving working conditions, but which are the important determinants of positive mental health and wellbeing at work to be influenced? A review of indicators for healthy workplaces has recently been performed (Lindberg & Vingård, 2012), but we have not found any comprehensive review concerning mental health at work. Hence, the aim of this study was to review current knowledge concerning determinants for mental health and wellbeing at work.

Keywords
Work, mental health, wellbeing, review, leadership
National Category
Occupational Health and Environmental Health
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-23064 (URN)
Conference
19th Triennial Congress of the International Ergonomics Association (IEA 2015), 9-14 August 2015, Melbourne, Australien
Available from: 2016-12-15 Created: 2016-12-15 Last updated: 2018-03-13Bibliographically approved
Karlsson, T. & Lindberg, P. (2015). Employees' and managers' perception of a healthy workplace - interviews from three medium-sized companies. In: Proceedings 19th Triennial Congress of the IEA, Melbourne 9-14 August 2015: . Paper presented at 19th Triennial Congress of the IEA, IEA 2015, 9-14 August, Melbourne, Australia.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Employees' and managers' perception of a healthy workplace - interviews from three medium-sized companies
2015 (English)In: Proceedings 19th Triennial Congress of the IEA, Melbourne 9-14 August 2015, 2015Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

In a recent review by van der Noordt et al. (2014), aimed at systematically summarize the literature on the health effects of employment, strong evidence was found for a protective effect of employment as such on depression and general mental health. Another review by Lindberg & Vingård (2012), aimed at systematically review the scientific literature and search for indicators of healthy working environments, defined as working environments that not just have a lack of detrimental factors at work but also yield a positive return in the form of rich job content, job satisfaction, social participation and personal development (Swedish Work Environment Authority 2010). The authors found 23 studies that either investigated employee´s views of what constitute a healthy workplace or were guidelines for how to create such a workplace. The most pronounced factors, considered as important for a healthy workplace were: collaboration/teamwork; growth and development of the individual; recognition; employee involvement; positive, accessible and fair leadership; autonomy and empowerment; appropriate staffing; skilled communication; and safe physical work (Lindberg and Vingård 2012).

The knowledge in the field is still rather vague concerning what creates, promotes and sustains health and wellbeing at work among managers and employees and what factors might be the most important. In order to take action we need to further explore and understand these underlying factors, the “healthy work factors”. The aim of this study was therefore to explore how a sample of Swedish blue- and white collar workers describe healthy factors at work as well as understand the concept of wellbeing at work.

National Category
Occupational Health and Environmental Health
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-23060 (URN)
Conference
19th Triennial Congress of the IEA, IEA 2015, 9-14 August, Melbourne, Australia
Available from: 2016-12-15 Created: 2016-12-15 Last updated: 2018-03-13Bibliographically approved
Organisations

Search in DiVA

Show all publications