Post on 10-Apr-2020
Leading to a Healthy Workplace
E. Kevin Kelloway, PhD.
Canada Research Chair in Occupational Health
Psychology
Ce document est réservé à
l’usage exclusif des détenteurs
de licences d’utilisation de
Global-Watch.
Par respect pour les
organisations ayant accepté de
vous partager cette information,
merci de ne pas faire circuler.
General Context
• Leadership is important
- For performance (Barling, Weber & Kelloway,
1996, MacLellan & Kelloway, in preparation)
– For Safety (Barling, Loughlin, & Kelloway,
2002; Mullen & Kelloway, 2009)
– For Wellbeing (Kelloway & Barling, 2010)
• Leadership can be taught (Barling et al.,
1996; Mullen & Kelloway, 2009)
www.A6training.co.uk
Obligatory Perfect Storm
Reference Begins In….
5 4 3 2 1 End
The Perfect Storm • Legislation on workplace violence and
aggression/harassment passed in many
jurisdictions
• Some WCB decisions hold employers
responsible for stress-related disorders
• Increasingly court decisions hold employers
responsible
• Drug plan reviews highlight antidepressant use
• LTD and STD cost spiralling
– 30-40% stress related (but up to 70% of costs)
The Three Pillars
Pillar #1 Prevention
• Primary intervention – the preferred
approach of most occupational health
psychologists
• A great deal of evidence about the
detrimental effects of workplace stress
Leaders as the stressor
(Wong and Kelloway, 2016)
• Diary study of 55 nursing home employees
• Hourly readings of ambulatory blood pressure
from time of wakening until sleep
• Supplemented by pre-test measures and short
hourly measures
• One item measure of valence of interactions with
supervisor
• Resulted in 422 observations
Hypotheses
• H1 (Cardiac Reactivity):The perceived valence of
interactions with supervisors predicts cardiovascular
reactivity such that negatively perceived interactions with
supervisors are associated with higher momentary
systolic blood pressure.
• H2 (Cardiac Recovery): The average perceived valence
of interactions with supervisors at work predicts
cardiovascular recovery such that negatively perceived
interactions with supervisors are associated with higher
average systolic blood pressure in the period after work.
McKee Driscoll Kelloway & Kelley (under review)
Wait List Control Group Design
Training comprised 1.5 days of transformational
leadership in groups of 20-25 leaders.
Post training, each leader met with a coach (30-60
min) who reviewed subordinate ratings of transformational
leadership (see Barling et al., 1996).
In both the training and the coaching, emphasis was
on developing five behavioral goals tied to the tenets of
transformational leadership theory
Hypotheses
Hypothesis 1: Employees of leaders who are trained will perceive their leaders as exhibiting higher levels of transformational leadership behavior than do the employees of leaders who are not trained. (MANIPULATION CHECK)
Hypothesis 2: Controlling for transformational leadership at pre-test, transformational leadership at post test will predict employees’ [a] emotional well-being at time 2, [b] healthy behavior at time 2, [c] physiological well-being at time 2, and [d] spiritual well-being at time 2.
Hypothesis 3: Controlling for transformational leadership at pre-test, transformational leadership at post-test will have an indirect positive effect, mediated through meaning on employees’ [a] emotional well-being at time 2, [b] healthy behaviour at time 2, [c] physiological well-being at time 2, and [d] emotional well-being at time 2
Participants and Method
243 subordinates and 65 leaders provided complete and
matched data (across time periods and levels)
Predominantly female (90%) corresponding to workplace
Most had more than 5 years tenure
Most worked in home care (50%) or long term care (34%)
Pretest just before training, coaching within 5 days of training
and posttest three months after training
Results
Transformational leadership training resulted in
enhanced subordinate ratings of leadership – they
noticed a difference
Leadership ratings associated with enhance
perceptions of workplace spirituality (meaning) –
they felt a difference
Sense of workplace meaning predicts wellbeing –
it made a difference
Serendipity
• Post –hoc analysis shows a significant
increase in LEADER’s wellbeing as a
result of participating in training
• Leaders in the trained group reported
higher (M = 6.06) levels of well-being than
did leaders in the control group (M = 5.65)
The R.I.G.H.T Way to Lead
• Based on an extension of the APA Model
of Psychologically Healthy Work
• Leaders should focus on
– Recognition
– Involvement
– Growth and Development
– Health and Safety
– Teams
Results to Date
• Scale Development
• Pilot Test in a long term care facility
– Trained all leaders in facility in RIGHT
Leadership – employees complete surveys
before and 1 year after training)
– Saw increases in employee wellbeing, sense
of psychological safety and employee
engagement (love of the job – passion,
commitment and relationships)
Pillar #2 Intervention
• Recognize that not all (mental) health
issues originate in the workplace
• However, workplaces may be uniquely
positioned to recognize changes in
behavior associated with being in crisis
• Workplace leaders as intervention agents
Dimoff and Kelloway (writing)
• Qualitative interviews with 17 managers
(16 used)
• Asked about managing people with mental
health issues – grand tour questions
• Thematic coding
Recognition
• Emotional outbursts
• Withdrawal
• Absence
• Performance
Intervention
• Dependent on mgmt style
• Resources and experience
• Tools and training
The Signs of Struggle (SOS) Scale: The
Development and Validation of a Workplace
Tool for Leaders
April 2016
•
Dimoff and Kelloway
Mental Health: What is it?
• Compromised health and wellbeing
• Distressing and cognitively taxing
• If recognized, can be alleviated
through support and professional
help
• Diagnosable illness
• Requires professional intervention or
treatment
• Disrupts one’s life, work, and/or relationships
• Not just the absence of
illness
• State of positive wellbeing
• Ability to perform, cope and
adapt normally
World Health Organization, 2012
Use4%
No Use96%
Use No Use
Problem with the Solution?
Ipsos Reid, 2012; MHCC, 2012; National Behavior Consortium, 2013; Randstad,
2014
Poorly prepared leaders = Gross underutilization of resources
80% of managers believe it is part of
their job to intervene if an employee is
struggling
Only 30% of managers know how
to intervene
The Development & Validation of the “SOS”
• Purpose: Develop and validate a tool that can be used by people in a workplace context to recognize warning signs of stress or “struggle”.
“Signs of Struggle” Checklist ─ Other-rated
─ Not diagnostic
─ Behavioral items—recognizable, visible warning signs of struggle
─ Captures the construct of “work impairment” ─ A state in which someone is functioning at a limited capacity, who is
struggling to accomplish work-related tasks, and who is otherwise
compromised—mentally, emotionally, or physically. (Al-hamdani et al., 2012)
Results of the SOS Development
EFA ─453 Participants
─5 Items deleted
─Accounts for 62% of variance
─5 factors
Reliability Coefficients ─Emotional (Passive) (6 items) α = .87
─Withdrawal (3 items) α = .91
─Extreme Behavior (5 items) α = .78
─Attendance (3 items) α = .80
─Performance (3 items) α = .84
─ 55% female; 45% male
─ Average age = 38
─ 85% had post-secondary
education
─ Full range of occupations
Implications for the SOS
Implications
People at work = show behavioral warning signs of “struggle”
Others at work = can “see” these behavioral warning signs
First other-rated tool designed specifically for managers in a workplace setting
Future Directions
Validation r = .70!!!!!
Need to determine if the utility of the SOS is the same for leaders and coworkers/peers
A short-form of the SOS may be valuable for practical considerations
May be a valuable component of training and interventions
Dimoff Kelloway and
Burnstein (IJSM, 2014)
Mental Health Awareness Training
Resource Utilization
(Dimoff & Kelloway,2016)
• People in crisis often do not seek help
because
– They don’t recognize that they are in crisis
– They don’t know that help is available
– They are afraid (stigma)
Mental Health First Aid: The 3
Steps
6
• Three hour training for leaders
• Designed to increase mental health
literacy “what do we know and where do
you go”
• Focus is on DETECTION not treatment or
counselling
• Detect and refer/resource
Studies 1 & 2: Design & Follow-Up
Study #1: N=43 (n=21 Intervention; n=22 Control; 40% Male &
60% Female)*
Study #2: N=142 (n=88 Intervention; n=54 Control); 47% Male &
53% Female)*
1 Week 24
Hours
8
Weeks Baseline Survey Survey #2 Survey #3
Baseline Survey Survey #2 Survey #3 Training
Intervention Group
Control Group
30
31
Training Evaluation: Cost-Effectiveness
Mental Health Claims: Pre & Post Training
Copyright 2014 All Rights Reserved
Dimoff and Kelloway (in press,
JOHP) • Replicated the MHAT study just described
• Collected data from both managers and
their subordinates
• Subordinates of trained managers report
– More willingness to talk to manager about
mental health
– More likely to seek and use organizational
resources
– More support from manager
Pillar #3 Accomodation
• What do individuals need to stay at work?
– Alternate duties
– Expanded timelines
– Restructured work
– Control
• What do individuals need when they take
STD or LTD?
– Continued contact
– A plan to return
– A “story”
Everything you need to know
about return to work • “Good will and trust are overarching
conditions that are central to successful
return-to-work arrangements”
• MacEachern, Clarke, Franche & Irvin
(2003).
• Scand J Work Environ Health. 2006 Aug;32(4):257-69.
• Systematic review of the qualitative literature on return to work after
injury.
Leaders
Kevin.Kelloway@smu.ca
P
R
E
V
E
N
T
I
O
N
I
N
T
E
R
V
E
N
T
I
O
N
A
C
C
O
M
O
D
A
T
I
O
N
Kevinkelloway.com
Evidencebasedsolutions.ca