Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 1 2
Transcript of Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 1 2
7
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 1 1
2 3
4 Abstract 5 6
Distributed workers - those who work autonomously and remotely from their organization’s
8
9 main locations for at least some of their work-time, are an important and growing proportion 10 11 of the workforce that share common characteristics of temporal and spatial distance. Yet 12 13 many leadership styles and management practices assume face-to-face interaction, potentially 14 15
rendering them less helpful in trying to ensure good occupational safety and health (OSH) 16 17
18 outcomes for distributed workers. We conducted a systematic literature review to examine 19
20 the leadership and management of OSH for distributed workers. Twenty-three papers were 21 22 identified. Eleven papers identified established leadership styles, including leader-member 23 24 exchange, (safety-specific) transformational and considerate leadership. Twenty papers 25 26
27 examined management. Findings from these 20 papers were interpreted as representing 28
29 resources, deployed through management and utilized by managers to ensure OSH for 30 31 distributed workers, including communication technologies, social support, and a good safety 32 33 climate. Despite limited research in this area, findings indicate the importance of both 34 35
leadership and management in ensuring OSH for distributed workers. Findings suggest a 36 37
38 fertile area for future enquiry. 39 40
Keywords: distributed workers, leadership, management, resources, health, safety, wellbeing. 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53
54 55 56 57
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 2 1 2 3 Introduction 4
5 In this paper, we present findings from a systematic literature review of current knowledge of 6 7 leadership and management in respect of occupational safety and health (OSH) of workers 8 9 who work autonomously and remotely from their organization’s main locations or operations 10 11
for at least a fraction of their work-time. We follow the precedent of Dix & Beale (1996) to 12 13
14 apply the umbrella term of ‘distributed workers’ to describe these workers, irrespective of the 15
16 nature of the work or ways in which it is undertaken. Distributed workers encompass white 17 18 and blue-collar workers, regardless of locational, technological (e.g., presence or absence of 19 20
the use of ICT) or organizational features. Examples of distributed workers include mobile 21 22
23 maintenance engineers, construction workers, haulage workers, community nurses, police 24
25 officers and homeworkers, amongst others. As such, distributed workers comprise a large and 26 27 growing part of the workforce (First findings, Sixth European Working Conditions Survey, 28 29 2015; IDC, 2010). 30 31 32 Over the last 30 years, a substantial body of research has examined the topic of 33 34
workers who undertake some or all of their work away from a conventional workplace, for 35 36
37 example, teleworkers, virtual workers and mobile workers (e.g., Bailey & Kurland, 2002; 38
39 Martins, Gilson & Maynard, 2004; Raghuram, Tuertscher & Garud, 2010). Research has 40 41 tended to focus on varied aspects of the work, such as physical locations (e.g., Hislop & 42 43 Axtell, 2007) and the extent of communications (e.g., Wellman et al, 1996); issues such as 44 45
coordination (e.g., Montoya-Weiss, Massey & Song, 2001); and, challenges of distributed 46 47
48 working (e.g., Allen, Golden & Shockley, 2015; Hislop & Axtell, 2007; Konradt, Schmook, 49
50 & Malecke, 2000; Siha & Monroe, 2006). Furthermore, recent attention has focussed on OSH 51 52 issues such as mental workload for multi-locational ICT enabled virtual working (e.g., 53 54
Vartiainen & Hyrkkänen, 2010) and both negative (i.e. exhaustion) and positive (i.e. 55 56
57 engagement) OSH outcomes of teleworking (Sardeshmukh, Sharma & Golden, 2012).
33
47
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 3 1 2
3 Although a heterogeneous group in some aspects, distributed workers share common 4 5 work characteristics of temporal and spatial distance from co-workers, managers and leaders, 6 7
by virtue of working away from a conventional location. These common characteristics raise 8 9
10 questions as to how to ensure good OSH outcomes for workers who are out of sight. In this 11
12 paper, we utilize the umbrella-term of distributed workers in order to focus on commonality 13 14 of physical and temporal separation, rather than typological approaches focussed on 15 16 operational characteristics as seen in prior research. 17 18 19 Ensuring OSH of distributed workers presents leadership and management challenges 20 21
due to a lack of face-of-face contact between workers and managers, limited access to 22 23
24 sources of organizational information about good safety and health procedures and a lack of 25
26 control over the work settings that distributed workers encounter while away from the main 27 28 location (e.g., Kurland & Bailey, 1999). Leadership and management are equally important in 29 30 influencing OSH behaviour (Pilbeam, Doherty, Davidson & Denyer, 2016), but have not 31 32
been reviewed systematically in respect of OSH across the broad category of distributed
34
35 workers. Pilbeam et al. (2016) recommended that research attend to broader approaches to 36
37 the study of OSH management and leadership and that more attention should be paid to lower 38 39 and medium hazard occupations. We acknowledge this need by taking an encompassing 40 41
approach to distributed workers and focusing on both leadership behaviours and enabling- 42 43
44 management. 45 46
In our review, we examine leadership and management, as both may play a part in
48
49 influencing and directing good OSH outcomes of distributed workers. Leadership comprises 50
51 behaviours directed at facilitating and influencing followers in the achievement of desired 52 53 outcomes or objectives, in this case good OSH outcomes (Yukl, Gordon & Taber, 2002). As 54 55
such, leadership behaviours may be embodied by those holding formal leadership roles 56 57
58 and/or managerial roles (Furnham, 2005). For example, the importance of managers’
19
33
53
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 4 1 2
3 leadership behaviours in ensuring employee safety (e.g., Barling, Loughlin & Kelloway, 4 5 2002; Zohar, 2002) and health (e.g., Kuoppala, Lamminpaa, Liira, & Vainio, 2008; Skakon, 6 7
Nielsen, Borg, & Guzman, 2010) is well documented. Management comprises systems, 8 9
10 practices and procedures put in place by those in charge of organizations in order to direct 11
12 and facilitate what employees do (Mintzberg, 1989). In the case of OSH, this may include 13 14 aspects put in place by those responsible for OSH of distributed workers, for example, senior 15 16 managers and OSH professionals with functional responsibility within their organization. 17 18
Management systems, practices and procedures may be important in ensuring OSH for
20
21 distributed workers, by compensating for the lack of face-to-face interaction that makes 22 23 influencing behaviours through leadership more challenging (Ashford, George & Blatt, 24 25 2007). 26 27 28 We conducted a systematic literature review of the past 20 years of empirical research 29 30 to examine current knowledge of leadership and management in ensuring OSH of distributed 31 32
workers. Numerous prior reviews have focused on types of distributed working in respect of
34
35 OSH challenges (e.g., Allen et al., 2015; Hislop & Axtell, 2007; Konradt, Schmook, & 36
37 Malecke, 2000; Siha & Monroe, 2006); leadership (e.g., Brunelle, 2013; Dahlstrom, 2013)
38 39 and OSH outcomes (e.g., Hislop, Axtell & Daniels, 2008; Montreuil & Lippel, 2003; Quinlan 40 41
& Bohle, 2008; Standen, Lamond & Daniels, 1999). What is missing from these previous 42 43
44 reviews is a focus on how common characteristics and challenges across differing types of 45
46 distributed working relate to concepts, such as OSH leadership and management. As a result, 47 48 we do not yet know enough as to what organizations can do to influence OSH for these 49 50 workers. Our study is, to the best of our knowledge, the first systematic literature review to 51 52
examine leadership and management in respect of OSH for distributed workers.
54 55 56
35
55
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 5 1 2 3 Distributed working and the challenges for leadership and management in ensuring OSH 4 5 Distributed workers are in many ways a heterogeneous group, as they vary according to 6 7 factors such as hours spent in different locations during work, the extent of communication 8 9
10 with co-workers or clients, technologies used to conduct their work and communication, and 11
12 the complexity of tasks and application of complex knowledge (Daniels et al., 2001; Hislop, 13 14 Axtell & Daniels, 2008). 15 16
17 However, distributed workers also share common work characteristics of temporal 18
19 and physical separation that pose several challenges for OSH leadership and management. 20 21 First, there is a lack of physical proximity between those responsible for ensuring employees’ 22 23
OSH and distributed workers, which restricts the opportunity for face-to-face interaction that 24 25
26 would otherwise facilitate leadership modelling and enable enhanced understanding of which 27
28 OSH risks employees face. Similarly, lack of physical proximity presents a barrier to those 29 30 responsible for OSH, who have little opportunity to observe whether working practices are 31 32 undertaken to ensure workers’ safety and health, directly identify OSH problems, or to offer 33 34
immediate and direct advice to workers and/or their line managers. The lack of contact with
36
37 colleagues for some distributed workers also reduces the opportunity for aspects linked to 38
39 positive health and wellbeing outcomes, such as social support (House, 1981). Second, 40 41 distributed workers tend to have less frequent opportunity for informal OSH related 42 43
information exchange and in some cases, such as remote working, may be unable to 44 45
46 communicate directly or seek advice. Therefore, those responsible for ensuring worker OSH 47
48 are less able to rely on conventional sources of organizational information as a means of 49 50 relaying important safety and health information to workers. Third, work settings present 51 52 differing physical and psychological hazards and risks, and so precede employee health and 53 54
wellbeing (Danna & Griffin, 1999) and present differing within- and between-locational
56
57 wellbeing issues (Vartiainen & Hyrkkänen, 2010). Thus, differing work settings and multiple 58
36
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 6 1 2
3 work locations (IDC, 2010), provide both contextual OSH challenges and exacerbate the 4 5 difficulties arising from lack of interaction. 6 7
8 The risks associated with distributed work have been subject to literature reviews 9 10 (e.g., Raghuram et al., 2010). Work settings such as highways, roadsides, public and 11 12 domestic spaces, construction or engineering sites may provide increased and less 13 14
15 controllable risks when compared to fixed location or office workers. Furthermore, mobile 16
17 distributed workers may be exposed to synergistic effects of multiple hazards if they switch 18 19 locations (Danna & Griffin, 1999), in comparison to effects when exposed to single hazards 20 21 in a single location. These OSH issues, when coupled with the challenges of distributed 22 23
working underscore the vital importance of knowledge of leadership and management of 24 25
26 good OSH outcomes for these workers, since both leadership and management are important 27
28 in ensuring OSH - leadership through influencing others and management through directing 29 30 and facilitating behaviour. 31 32
33 Leadership frameworks and models that ensure distributed worker safety and health 34 35
Kelloway and Barling (2010) suggest three important ways in which a leader informs OSH
37
38 outcomes: by serving as a model for others, such as modelling safe working practices; by 39 40 holding power to reward or encourage desired behaviours of others or minimize undesired 41 42 behaviours; and, through decision making that may reduce worker stressors, such as reducing 43 44
work demands. The question is then how can leaders influence OSH outcomes for distributed 45 46
47 workers, given the problems of physical and temporal distance that may restrict opportunities 48
49 for face-to-face interaction? 50 51
52 In the leadership literature, a wide range of established leadership concepts, also known 53
54 as leadership styles, exist which define effective leadership behaviours (see Avolio, 55 56 Walumbwa & Weber, 2009 for a review). However, leadership models and frameworks may
19
39
56
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 7 1 2
3 be limited in ensuring OSH for distributed workers in two ways. First, they have been 4 5 developed primarily for performance management purposes (Avolio et al., 2009). Although 6 7
systematic reviews have provided some evidence that common leadership frameworks are 8 9
10 also related to positive outcomes in respect of worker safety and health (Kuoppala et al., 11
12 2008; Skakon et al., 2010), it is possible that the principles of “performing above and beyond 13 14 the call of duty” as stipulated by the transformational leadership paradigm (Bass & Riggio, 15 16 2006) may over time exhaust workers, leading to ill-health (Nielsen & Daniels, 2016) or 17 18
encourage workers to ignore safety procedures. Second, many leadership models and
20
21 frameworks build upon assumptions of face-to-face interaction between the leader and 22 23 worker (Avolio et al., 2009) and therefore may not be suited in distributed work contexts. For 24 25 example, many of the ways in which leaders inform positive safety and health outcomes, such 26 27
as modelling behaviours, assume some form of social interaction. To the best of our 28 29
30 knowledge, there have not yet been any systematic reviews of the evidence of how effective 31
32 these styles are in ensuring distributed workers’ safety and health. Given the extensive 33 34 literature on leadership frameworks (e.g., Avolio et al., 2009; Yukl, 2012), we formulated our 35 36 first research question with an expansive approach to uncover OSH leadership frameworks, 37 38
rather than focusing on specific frameworks or models.
40 41 Research Question 1. What current leadership models or frameworks are applied in 42 43
the context of good OSH for distributed workers? 44 45 46 Distributed working: Management systems, practices and procedures in ensuring OSH 47 48
49 Management is “largely a facilitating activity” (Mintzberg, 2004 p.12), so may complement 50 51 leadership as an important means of ensuring OSH for distributed workers. Therefore, 52 53 management can be considered as comprising differing resources that may be deployed, 54 55
conserved or invested in by those responsible, to ensure OSH of distributed workers.
57
58 Resources are defined as “those objects, personal characteristics, conditions, or energies that
19
32
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 8 1 2
3 serve as a means for attainment of these objects, personal characteristics, conditions” 4 5 (Hobfoll, 1989 p. 516) – in this case, OSH of distributed workers. The notion of resources is 6 7
a useful heuristic when considering how concepts at higher levels such as management, when 8 9
10 utilized, may be linked to individual outcomes such as OSH (Day & Nielsen, 2017; Nielsen 11
12 et al., 2017). We therefore, took an expansive approach and cast the net widely to explore 13 14 management with respect to OSH of distributed workers by applying the management search 15 16 term, rather than focussing on specific aspects of management. We reasoned that the 17 18
systematic review methodology and generic search term would uncover a variety of relevant
20
21 concepts. 22 23
24 Research Question 2. What management systems, practices and procedures, may be 25 26 utilized to ensure OSH for distributed workers? 27 28 29
Methods 30 31
We conducted a systematic literature review of the past 20 years of empirical research to
33
34 examine current knowledge of leadership and management in ensuring OSH of distributed 35 36 workers. A systematic literature review methodology provides a critical exploration, 37 38 evaluation and synthesis of studies salient to a particular topic or research question, with a 39 40
view to identifying gaps in current knowledge (Mulrow, 1994; Suri & Clarke, 2009). We 41 42
43 applied broad search criteria to unearth empirical studies where the central focus was on 44
45 understanding the OSH outcomes of leadership and/or management in a distributed work 46 47 context. The findings presented reflect the current state of evidence provided in the literature. 48 49
50 Inclusion criteria and search strategy 51
52 Our review comprised a search of PubMed, Psycinfo, Google Scholar and Web of Science 53 54 databases. We applied the following parameters: empirical papers published in the English 55 56
language, in peer reviewed journals, between 1995 and the date of the searches, February
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 9 1 2
3 2015. From our prior knowledge of this subject matter, we expected few studies specifically 4 5 examining OSH leadership and management of distributed workers. We also recognized that 6 7
different terms are applied to distributed workers, such as teleworkers, mobile workers and so 8 9
10 on. Search terms were identified through discussion amongst the study team, liaison with 11
12 subject matter experts, and prior knowledge of the subject area. 13 14
15 With respect of OSH, we searched terms related to health, safety and wellbeing. We 16
17 adopted the guidance from the World Health Organization to define health as a state of 18 19 complete physical, mental and social wellbeing. Therefore, we searched on psychological and 20 21 physiological outcomes of wellbeing (Danna & Griffin, 1999) such as ‘stress’, ‘burnout’ 22 23
‘anxiety’, ‘strain’ and ‘fatigue’. Occupational safety refers mainly to the prevention of 24 25
26 accidents or mitigating the effects of accidents (Armstrong, 2001). We follow Halbesleben 27
28 and Bellairs (2015) to view adverse safety outcomes broadly as physical harm to employees, 29 30 which may have arisen due to accidents or similar events. Our search terms therefore, 31 32 included ‘safety’, ‘accident’ and ‘injury’, as well as terms that represented antecedents, such 33 34
35 as ‘risk’ and ‘hazard’. Our central focus is on the two ways in which organizations can ensure 36
37 OSH for distributed workers, irrespective of specific issues or risks. Therefore, we applied an 38 39 expansive search rather than focusing on specific OSH issues, risks, or on specific challenges 40 41 of distributed working, which have been subject to reviews before (e.g., Allen et al., 2015; 42 43
Hislop & Axtell, 2007). With respect to distributed work, we searched terms such as 44 45
46 ‘telework’, ‘virtual work’, ‘lone work’ and ‘remote’; we also searched sectors where 47
48 distributed workers might be prevalent, such as ‘construction’, ‘oil and gas’ and ‘transport’. 49 50 In line with our broad search approach, we applied ‘leadership’ and ‘management’ as generic 51 52
search terms. 53 54 55 Papers selected from the title search were those empirical studies that met all the 56 57 search criteria of a central focus of OSH and distributed workers and leadership or 58
15
35
51
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 10 1 2
3 management. This search therefore generated papers whose titles fulfilled the topic area of 4 5 the study. More information on the search terms used and the selection of studies to be 6 7
included can be obtained from the corresponding author. 8 9 10 Paper selection criteria 11 12 The title search identified 922 papers, once duplicates had been removed. We independently 13 14
undertook a title-sift to select studies for inclusion in the abstract sift by applying the
16
17 following criteria: OSH outcomes and distributed workers and leadership or management. 18
19 We then cross checked selections and resolved any disagreement through discussion. This 20 21 exercise left 408 papers selected for the abstract sift. We undertook two abstract sifts: first, 22 23
we removed non-empirical papers, then papers that did not investigate distributed workers, 24 25
26 OSH outcomes and leadership or management as the main focus. We conducted this exercise 27
28 through independent examination, then discussion. Some 65 papers were selected for the full 29 30 paper sift, which comprised a fine-grained examination of the studies’ fulfilment of the 31 32 selection criteria. A total of 23 papers were selected at this stage for inclusion in the full- 33 34
paper analysis.
36 37
38 Analysis
39 Three authors independently extracted data from each paper comprising the type, or category 40 41
42 of distributed worker, geographical location, methods, findings, concepts, OSH outcomes and 43
44 sample size. Data extraction included descriptions of existing leadership models, which were 45 46 identified using prior knowledge of the subject and agreed within the research team. We then 47 48 examined and discussed each other’s data extraction to arrive at an agreed interpretation of 49 50
the selected studies. Disagreements were resolved through discussion and revision. We then
52
53 re-examined the papers in detail in order to extract the main evidence from the studies in 54
55 respect of the research questions in the present paper, through independent examination and 56
57 discussion.
56
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 11 1 2
3 To address research question 1, we synthesized the findings from the papers that had 4 5 examined leadership frameworks with respect to OSH of distributed workers. We then 6 7
collated and synthesized findings according to each leadership framework studied. 8 9 10 For research question 2, analysis comprised a qualitative synthesis of findings, which 11 12 is suited to a methodologically diverse range of studies around a similar topic (Suri & Clarke, 13 14
15 2009). To the best of our knowledge, there is no existing and comprehensive framework of 16
17 classifying aspects of management for good OSH outcomes of distributed workers; therefore, 18 19 we applied an inductive approach to group and categorize the findings of the studies. Our 20 21 inquiry was directed at what may be utilized to ensure OSH for distributed workers and so 22 23
enhance the impact of OSH leadership behaviours. Given the studies’ methodological 24 25
26 diversity and heterogeneous samples, we categorized the content into distinct groups 27
28 (Krippendorf, 2004), which we agreed through discussion. Although there was a small 29 30 selection of papers, we were still able to identify three management groupings that could be 31 32 considered as resources in generating good OSH outcomes for distributed workers: 33 34
35 communications, information and related technologies; the line manager’s approach in 36
37 managing distributed workers; and, safety climate. Our proposals progress the recent call by 38 39 Halbesleben, Neveu, Paustian-Underdahl and Westman (2014) for a clearer explanation of 40 41 resources in relation to specific goals such as positive OSH outcomes. 42 43 44 Results 45 46
47 Of the 23 papers analysed, ten studies were conducted in the USA, seven in Europe, one in 48
49 Canada, three in Asia, one in Australia and one across several continents. Two studies 50 51 included more than one industrial sector (Nurmi, 2011; Whitford & Moss, 2009). Fourteen 52 53 studies used a quantitative survey approach, six papers used qualitative methods such as 54 55
interviews, focus groups and quality circles and three papers employed a mixed method
57
58 design. Most of the quantitative studies used scales that were not adapted to the distributed
19
56
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 12 1 2
3 worker context; Huang et al. (2013) and Huang et al. (2014) are exceptions as both studies 4 5 applied scales tailored to truck drivers. Distributed worker categories studied include virtual 6 7
workers (those who work interdependently in differing locations), teleworkers (those who 8 9
10 work from home utilizing technologies), truck drivers, construction workers, oil workers, 11
12 community and healthcare workers and police workers. Overall, the papers selected were 13 14 dominated by cross-sectional studies with only one prospective study, therefore causal 15 16 inferences cannot be reliably drawn. Qualitative studies tended to be descriptive in nature. 17 18
Most of the studies were small scale and representative of limited groups of workers. No
20
21 papers explored the role of comprehensive OSH management strategies encompassing 22 23 resources and leadership, in ensuring distributed worker safety and health. 24 25
26 Current leadership models or frameworks applied in the context of good OSH for 27
28 distributed workers 29 30
31 Five papers addressed leadership models or frameworks that might be applicable to the 32
33 context of OSH leadership in distributed workers. In all, three leadership frameworks were 34 35 examined: LMX (leader-member exchange), transformational leadership and considerate 36 37 leadership. The papers are summarized in table 1. 38 39 40 Two studies (Golden & Veiga, 2008; Zohar, Huang, Lee & Robertson, 2014) explored 41 42 leader-member-exchange (LMX, Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995), whereby leaders adopt a 43 44
differentiated style of interactional exchange with subordinates. Both studies found high 45 46
47 quality exchange relationships between leaders and followers are important in generating 48
49 positive OSH outcomes, when workers are distributed. Golden and Veiga (2008) found that 50 51 LMX has a stronger relationship with job satisfaction of virtual workers, compared to non- 52 53 virtual workers, while Zohar et al. (2014) found LMX was significantly related to truckers’ 54 55
safety climate at the organizational level and in turn, driving safely. Two studies (Conchie,
57
58 2013; Whitford & Moss, 2009) examined transformational leadership (Bass & Riggio, 2006),
19
52
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 13 1 2
3 whereby leaders inspire workers to transcend self-interest for the good of the organization. 4 5 Both studies found transformational leadership behaviours, including those relating 6 7
specifically to safety, important for motivating safe behaviours and wellbeing, specifically 8 9
10 when the leader is trusted and/or when workers are motivated. Conchie (2013) found trust in 11
12 the leader important for construction workers’ safety voice behaviours, while Whitford and 13 14 Moss (2009) found visionary leadership important for remote worker engagement, especially 15 16 when the leader demonstrated personal recognition. Finally, one study (Mulki & Jaramillo, 17 18
2011) found that considerate leadership (House, 1971), was related to virtual workers’
20
21 involvement in the workplace and satisfaction with the supervisor. 22 23
Overall, we found limited evidence of established leadership frameworks in ensuring 24 25
26 OSH outcomes for distributed workers, suggesting a fertile area for future research. 27 28
[Insert Table 1 around here] 29 30 31 Management systems, practices and procedures, which may be utilized to ensure OSH for 32 33 distributed workers 34 35 36 From the synthesis and analysis of the findings, we identified three categories of management 37 38 resources deployed and utilized in ensuring OSH of distributed workers: structural resources, 39 40
organizational safety climate and line managers – who could be considered as resources in 41 42
43 their own right if integrated into formalized management practices and procedures. 44
45 Summaries of the studies are presented in table 2. 46 47
48 Structural resources
49 We assigned the category label ‘structural resources’ to refer to means, such as 50 51
communication and information that are utilized in ensuring OSH of distributed workers.
53
54 These resources are especially important when natural face-to-face communication is difficult 55
56 and/or information communication technologies have to be used instead (e.g., for 57
56
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 14 1 2
3 asynchronous working). Eight studies fell under the category of structural resources specific 4 5 to the distributed worker context. 6 7
8 The ways in which structural resources such as information and communication are 9 10 utilized is more important to OSH outcomes for distributed workers than frequency and 11 12 quantity (Mulki & Jaramillo, 2011). Communication and communications technologies 13 14
15 (ICTs), especially video-conferencing, may be important for facilitating communication and 16
17 improving information flow (Konradt, Schmook, Wilm, & Hertel, 2000; Nurmi, 2011), yet 18 19 are not always encouraged nor utilized by managers of distributed workers (Mihhailova, 20 21 2009). Where communicating via technology is utilized, managers’ use of motivating 22 23
language such as clear instructions, may lead to positive OSH outcomes such as satisfaction 24 25
26 and commitment (Madlock, 2013). However, communication issues can cause problems that 27
28 may lead to adverse wellbeing outcomes, such as role ambiguity, workload and stress from 29 30 interruptions (Fonner & Roloff, 2012). Information regarding good OSH behaviours, role 31 32 clarity and managerial advice are important resources in ensuring OSH for distributed 33 34
35 workers. Yet managers either did not utilize information resources (Nurmi, 2011) or lacked 36
37 knowledge of how to utilize them (McDonough et al., 2014). Lack of goal clarity, role clarity 38 39 and unrealistic management expectations were all sources of stress for distributed workers 40 41 (Nurmi, 2011; Weymouth et al., 2007). 42 43
44 [Insert table 2 about here] 45 46
47 The line manager/supervisor as a resource in their own right 48
49 Some studies found that the line manager’s way of managing distributed workers has a direct 50 51 impact on these workers’ safety and health. Therefore, we suggest that the line 52 53 manager/supervisor may be considered a resource in their own right, in ensuring good OSH 54 55
for distributed workers; they do so, in three ways.
19
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 15 1 2
3 First, when managers are also distributed workers, there may be many benefits to their 4 5 workers such as increased job satisfaction, feedback, personal development and 6 7
empowerment (Golden & Fromen, 2011). These benefits may occur because of a better 8 9
10 managerial understanding of distributed workers’ context, such as work conditions, required 11
12 support and information, and through promoting a good safety climate. Conversely, limited 13 14 understanding of distributed work may lead to conflicting and unrealistic expectations of 15 16 distributed workers, insufficient task related feedback (Mihhailova, Õun & Türk, 2011) and 17 18
increased workload (Long, Kuang & Buzzanell, 2013).
20 21 Second, managers’ exhibiting support and encouragement (i.e. knowledge seeking 22 23
and sharing), was related to distributed workers’ positive OSH behaviours of safety 24 25
26 knowledge sharing and utilization (Nesheim & Gressgård, 2014). Managerial social support 27
28 may reduce adverse OSH outcomes for distributed workers experiencing role conflict (Gray- 29 30 Stanley et al., 2010) or stress (Nurmi, 2011). Conversely, a lack of instrumental support may 31 32 lead to adverse OSH behaviours such as smoking and lack of physical activity (Chen, Wong 33 34
35 & Yu, 2008) and adverse OSH outcomes such as stress and workplace frustration (Chen et 36
37 al., 2008; Weymouth et al., 2007). Utilizing managerial or supervisory support to ensure OSH 38 39 for distributed workers requires that managers and supervisors have skills and competencies 40 41 (Yang, Yen & Chiang, 2012) to address the challenges presented by distributed working 42 43
(Greer & Payne, 2014). 44 45 46 Third, the line manager/supervisor may generate positive OSH outcomes for 47 48
distributed workers through their role in generating group-level safety climate. The line 49 50
51 manager’s enactment of policies and procedures and demonstration of commitment to ensure 52
53 worker safety is an important facet of group-level safety climate (Zohar, 2008) and in turn, 54 55 safety performance. Two studies found group-level safety climate was related to positive 56 57 OSH performance such as safe driving (Huang et al., 2013), although employees’ shared
15
35
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 16 1 2
3 perceptions of group level safety climate provided a better predictor than their supervisors’ 4 5 ratings (Huang et al., 2014). 6 7
8 Organizational-level safety climate as a resource 9 10 Organizational-level safety climate refers to employee perceptions about the institutional 11 12 policies and procedures, together with top-management actions for the promotion of safety 13 14
(Zohar, 2008). Three studies examined organizational-level safety climate. Huang et al.
16
17 (2013) found organizational-level and group-level safety climate are two levels through 18
19 which perceptions of safety climate are transferred to the individual worker, which in turn 20 21 influence safety performance. Thus organizational level safety climate can be considered an 22 23
utilizable resource in generating positive OSH outcomes for distributed workers. Perceptions 24 25
26 of procedures and policies in place to manage safety were found to be significantly related to 27
28 safety performance (Huang et al., 2013; Huang et al., 2014; Zohar et al., 2014). Furthermore, 29 30 workers’ perceptions of safety climate were found to be more accurate measures than 31 32 supervisors’ perceptions, in that they more strongly predicted safety outcomes. One study 33 34
explored pre-conditions for organizations demonstrating good safety standards to workers,
36
37 which included safety-related planning, roles, procedures and available resources (Törner & 38
39 Pousette, 2009). 40 41
42 Surprisingly, we found no studies examined the role of OSH professionals in 43
44 generating or enacting organizational level safety climate for distributed workers. 45 46 47 Discussion 48 49 In the present paper, we reviewed the current state-of-the art on how organizations may 50 51
ensure the safety and health of distributed workers through appropriate management and 52 53
54 leadership. We propose that, considering the common characteristics of distributed working, 55
56 we do not know enough about how organizations can ensure OSH for distributed workers. In
33
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 17 1 2
3 our review, we focus on two ways in which this may be achieved. One way is through 4 5 leadership as a means of influencing distributed workers’ health, well-being and safety 6 7
behaviour, the other is through management, comprising systems, procedures and practices, 8 9
10 which can be considered as resources when utilized in ensuring OSH for distributed workers. 11
12 In distributed work contexts both leadership and management are equally important. 13 14
15 The contribution of this paper is unique in three respects. First, we examine 16
17 distributed work as a single category, given the common characteristics of temporal and 18 19 spatial distance. This is different from previous reviews that have focussed on specific types 20 21
of distributed working or challenges or risks. Second, we took an inclusive approach to how 22 23
24 organizations may ensure OSH for distributed workers. We did so by examining two ways of 25
26 influencing OSH of distributed workers, irrespective of the type of work, challenges or risks: 27 28 leadership and management. Third, following a synthesis and classification of findings (Suri 29 30 & Clarke, 2004) of management to ensure OSH of distributed workers, we suggest that the 31 32
systems, practices and procedures that comprise management (Mintzberg, 1989) can be
34
35 thought of as resources that may be deployed and utilized by those responsible, to ensure 36
37 OSH for distributed workers. This suggestion responds to the call by Halbesleben et al. 38 39 (2014) for clearer explanation of resources and their role in attainment of goals - such as OSH 40 41
outcomes for distributed workers, as examined in the present study. Although our review was 42 43
44 not centred on the Conservation of Resources Theory (Hobfoll, 1989), our synthesis of 45
46 findings suggests that resources employed at higher levels may be linked to outcomes (i.e. 47 48 OSH) of specific groups of workers (i.e. distributed workers). 49 50
51 Our starting point in formulating the topic for this review was to redress the 52 53 fragmentation of the distributed worker literature to date, which has tended to focus on 54 55
specific groups of workers, ways of working, or occupations. We did so by arguing that 56 57
58 although heterogeneous in many ways, there are common characteristics of distributed
19
33
53
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 18 1 2
3 working that present common challenges, in turn rendering the topic of leadership and 4 5 management of distributed workers worthy of examination. The broad perspective of 6 7
distributed workers was necessary in order to unearth studies examining leadership. Our 8 9
10 reasoning aligns with the recommendations of Pilbeam et al. (2016), who recently conducted 11
12 a review of the literature on leadership of safety. The authors concluded that future research 13 14 attend to broader approaches in both the range of hazard occupations examined and in 15 16 encompassing both leadership and management. Our encompassing approach acknowledges 17 18
this need. Likewise, rather than focus on specific OSH outcomes or OSH challenges for these
20
21 workers, which have been addressed through numerous studies and literature reviews, we 22 23 centred our review on the topic of management and leadership with respect to OSH 24 25 outcomes. Following the same line of thinking, we also took an expansive approach when 26 27
considering OSH by including safety, health and wellbeing, rather than focusing on specific 28 29
30 outcomes. 31 32
In the leadership literature, there is a substantial body of work on leadership styles,
34
35 some of which focus on OSH outcomes. In the present review, we found that the leadership 36
37 of good safety and health outcomes for distributed workers is an understudied topic. 38 39 Similarly, we found that literature on the management of distributed workers to ensure OSH 40 41
is fragmented and understudied. We propose that there are aspects of management that can be 42 43
44 considered as resources to be utilized by those responsible for OSH of distributed workers. 45
46 As resources may be deployed at the organization-level, they could be considered 47 48 organizational, in the sense that decisions of investment and deployment sit with those in 49 50 charge of the organization. Viewing aspects of management as resources at higher levels is a 51 52
useful organizing heuristic when examining specific outcomes at lower levels, such as OSH
54
55 for distributed workers. Our review revealed a number of differing resources that may be 56
57 utilized in ensuring good OSH outcomes; we were able to undertake a simple categorization
19
47
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 19 1 2
3 exercise from the evidence to date, which we categorized as structural resources, line 4 5 manager practices and safety climate. We suggest that line managers’ practices in ensuring 6 7
OSH of distributed workers could be considered as resources as they could be for example, 8 9
10 integrated into and deployed as part of into formal organizational practices (e.g., enhanced 11
12 through management training and performance management systems that encourage certain 13 14 management behaviours). However, the small number of studies indicates an underdeveloped 15 16 research area. Given the proportion of the workforce engaged as distributed workers, we 17 18
suggest that a holistic approach, such as the one we have taken in the present review, is a
20
21 valuable lens for examination. 22 23
24 Implications for future research 25 26
Overall, our review has highlighted the limited amount of research examining OSH 27 28
29 leadership and management of distributed workers. The papers identified in the present 30
31 review examined behaviours that are especially important in respect of leading and managing 32 33 positive OSH outcomes for distributed workers: for example, high levels of instrumental 34 35
support, engendering trust, using motivating language and competent communications. 36 37
38 However, the relatively small sample sizes, fragmented nature of the literature, lack of 39
40 prospective studies and, in some cases, narrow range of workers examined, limit the 41 42 conclusions that can be drawn on how organizations may ensure the safety and health of 43 44 distributed workers. Rather the findings presented in this review may be best considered as 45 46
indicators of promising lines of enquiry for future research to be extended and developed
48
49 using more powerful conceptual frameworks and methods. Fundamentally, our review 50
51 highlights that research has yet to engage with issues in common across distributed workers. 52 53 Future research should expand by examining common issues across different types of 54 55
distributed working. 56
19
33
53
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 20 1 2
3 Little is known as to relevant and effective leadership frameworks for OSH of 4 5 distributed workers. Future research should examine leadership frameworks that are specific 6 7
to OSH outcomes for distributed workers, and those that are applicable across a range of 8 9
10 distributed work contexts. The utilization of structural management resources is under- 11
12 explored and further research may lead to insights into how leadership may become more or 13 14 less effective for distributed workers. Structural resources are a particularly important facet of 15 16 the management of distributed workers, because the lack of physical proximity. In a recent 17 18
review of safety leadership, Pilbeam et al. (2016) call for both a more pluralistic approach to
20
21 examining to leadership and management and more attention to OSH leadership across a 22 23 range of occupations. 24 25
26 The role of the OSH professional within organizations requires further attention. None 27 28 of the studies identified in the present review focused on the role of the OSH professional in 29 30 the safety and health of distributed workers, for example through the enactment of health or 31 32
safety. This lack of attention is concerning, as OSH professionals may directly influence
34
35 specific behaviours such as encouraging workers to follow procedures. They may also be 36
37 instrumental in developing policies and procedures to ensure good safety and health or 38 39 initiatives to promote safe and healthy working such non-smoking campaigns or driving 40 41
safely. Although some studies explored the presence of structural resources, there were no 42 43
44 studies that explored whether such resources had been developed as part of an explicit OSH 45
46 strategy. As there was no research on OSH professionals, we found no research on the role of 47 48 the line manager in enacting the OSH professionals’ intended policies, practices and 49 50 behaviours. No studies examined modelling behaviours between the OSH professional and 51 52
the line manager/supervisor. The role of the line manager within this chain of leadership
54
55 influence requires attention, in order to assist practice in determining the means by which 56
57 OSH professionals ensure positive OSH outcomes for distributed workers. Allied to this, we
19
31
45
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 21 1 2
3 concur with Pilbeam et al. (2016) that future research should examine the means through 4 5 which OSH leadership responsibilities and skills are distributed around the organization to 6 7
reflect differing work contexts. This may include, for example, the processes or structures of 8 9
10 shared influence for good OSH. We have touched upon some of these means by focusing on 11
12 resources that enable, enhance or supplement leadership of good OSH outcomes. To our 13 14 knowledge, research has yet to develop robust theoretical frameworks that accommodate 15 16 leadership influence of good OSH for distributed workers. The development of frameworks is 17 18
another area for future study.
20 21
22 Implications for practice 23
24 With regard to communication, our review suggests that organizations need to ensure 25 26 structural resources are available, for example, access to ICTs (especially video-conferencing 27 28 etc.) may be important for facilitating good communication. Furthermore, line managers and 29 30
supervisors need in-depth knowledge on the conditions and the risks that distributed workers
32
33 may face when away from the main location. Such knowledge may be obtained through line 34 35 managers and supervisors taking on distributed working themselves, shadowing distributed 36 37 workers in the field or through training using practice videos. 38 39 40 Our results also suggest that training leaders in enacting certain leadership behaviours 41 42 such as transformational leadership and considerate leadership may promote the safety and 43 44
health of distributed workers, in particular when training focuses on the safety issues faced by
46
47 such workers. No studies focused on health specific transformational leadership, however it is 48 49 possible that training focussed on such topics may be particularly effective. Finally, it is 50 51 important that line managers and supervisors build a trusting relationship with their 52 53
distributed workers. Such relationships may develop through regular face-to-face interaction 54 55
56 and team-building activities.
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 22 1 2 3 Strengths and Limitations 4 5 The main strengths of the present literature review are threefold. First, in our unique approach 6 7 of examining distributed workers as an umbrella term, based on the shared challenges 8 9
10 associated with this type of work. Second, in our focus of how organizations may address 11
12 these challenges through leadership and management. To gain an understanding of these 13 14 issues we included qualitative and quantitative empirical research. Third, where we found no 15 16 pre-existing frameworks through which to synthesize aspects of management that may ensure 17 18
OSH for distributed workers, we developed a categorization of aspects of management that 19 20
21 could be considered as utilizable resources. Overall, our review identified gaps where 22
23 knowledge is still limited. 24 25
26 There are a number of weaknesses with regard to the review itself and the studies 27 28 included in the review that must be considered when drawing conclusions based on the 29 30 evidence presented here. First, we did not include unpublished and “grey” literature in the 31 32
review. It can be argued that this is a limitation, however, it may also be considered as a 33 34
35 strength, as we included only studies published in peer-review journals, so would have 36
37 undergone rigorous review and been subjected to quality control. Second, the overall quality 38 39 of the studies included was low. We identified relatively few studies (23 papers in total) that 40 41 examined the OSH management and leadership of distributed workers. These studies 42 43
44 comprised small sample sizes. The survey studies were cross-sectional and do not allow us to 45
46 draw causal relationships between the OSH leadership and management of distributed 47 48 workers and safety and health outcomes. The qualitative studies were primarily of a 49 50 descriptive nature exploring the problems faced by distributed workers but provided less 51 52
information about how OSH professionals and line managers may develop and implement 53 54
55 coherent OSH management policies and procedures to ensure distributed worker safety and 56
57 health. Very few studies focused on more than one type of distributed worker, few examined
19
31
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 23 1 2
3 established leadership frameworks and none of these discussed the transferability of existing 4 5 frameworks to the distributed worker context. Most studies restricted their examination to 6 7
one or two safety and health outcomes. As a result, the findings from our literature review 8 9
10 provide no strong evidence. Therefore, future research should be more extensive in scope, 11
12 comprising large samples and more rigorous designs such as longitudinal designs and/or 13 14 multiple sources of data. A third limitation lies in the disparity of workers studied, which 15 16 allied with the low evidence base make it difficult to draw any generalizable conclusions as 17 18
to OSH leadership or indeed detailed examination of the types of resources.
20 21
22 Conclusion 23
24 There are four main contributions of this review. First, although many existing leadership 25 26 frameworks have been developed for performance purposes and implicitly rely on face-to- 27 28 face interaction, we found some support that existing leadership styles can successfully be 29 30
employed to influence the health and safety of distributed workers. Second, upon reviewing
32
33 the evidence, we found examples of aspects of management that could be considered as 34 35 resources, which could be employed by organizations to ensure the safety and health of 36 37 distributed workers. These resources primarily relate to line managers and supervisors and to 38 39
a lesser extent senior management. The studies show consistently, that immediate line 40 41
42 managers play an important role in the safety and health of distributed workers. Third, we 43
44 extend the notion of aspects of management as resources by offering a simple classification: 45 46 from the studies selected, we identified structural resources, line manager practices if codified 47 48 and safety climate. Fourth, we identified several gaps in the literature. Distributed working 49 50
51 comprises common characteristics (Dix and Beale, 1996) across a range of types of 52
53 distributed work, yet despite the functional role of OSH professionals within organizations in 54 55 ensuring distributed worker safety and health, no studies focused explicitly on these key 56 57 players. Furthermore, no studies explored the role of comprehensive OSH management
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 24 1 2
3 strategies and policies in ensuring distributed worker health and safety. Overall, the 4 5 fragmented nature of the literature suggests fertile ground for further research on how to 6 7
ensure the safety and health of distributed workers. Furthermore, the research designs to date 8 9
10 have tended to be weak, which suggests a fertile research area for stronger research methods. 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42
43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56
57
18
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 25 1
2 3 References 4 5 Papers marked * were included in the systematic review. 6 7
8 Allen, T. D., Golden, T. D., & Shockley, K. M. (2015). How effective is telecommuting? 9
10 Assessing the status of our scientific findings. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 11 12 16(2), 40-68. 13 14
15 Armstrong, M. (2001). A Handbook of management techniques. London: Kogan Page. 16 17
Ashford, S. J., George, E., & Blatt, R. (2007). Old Assumptions, New Work: The
19
20 Opportunities and Challenges of Research on Nonstandard Employment. Academy of 21
22 Management Annals, 1(1), 65-117. 23 24
25 Avolio, B. J., Walumbwa, F. O., & Weber, T. J. (2009). Leadership: Current theories, 26
27 research, and future directions. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 421–449. 28 29
30 Bailey, D. E., & Kurland, N. B. (2002). A review of telework research: Findings, new 31
32 directions, and lessons for the study of modern work. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33 34 23(4), 383-400. 35 36
37 Barling, J., Loughlin, C., & Kelloway, E. K. (2002). Development and test of a model linking 38 39 safety-specific transformational leadership and occupational safety. Journal of Applied 40 41 Psychology, 87(3), 488496. 42 43
44 Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational leadership. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence 45
46 Erlbaum Associates Inc. 47
48 Brunelle, E. (2013). Leadership and Mobile Working: The impact of distance on the superior- 49 50 subordinate relationship and the moderating effects of leadership style. International Journal 51 52 of Business and Social Science, 4(11), 1-14. 53 54 55
20
37
54
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 26 1 2
3 *Chen, W. Q., Wong, T. W., & Yu, I. T. S. (2008). Association of occupational stress and 4 5 social support with health-related behaviors among Chinese offshore oil workers. Journal of 6 7
Occupational Health, 50(3), 262-269. 8 9 10 *Conchie, S. M. (2013). Transformational leadership, intrinsic motivation, and trust: A 11 12 moderated-mediated model of workplace safety. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 13 14
15 18(2), 198-210. 16 17 Dahlstrom, T. R. (2013). Telecommuting and leadership style. Public Personnel 18 19
Management, 42(3), 438-451.
21 22 Daniels, K., Lamond, D., & Standen, P. (2001). Teleworking: frameworks for organizational 23 24
research. Journal of Management Studies, 38(8), 1151-1185. 25 26 27 Danna, K., & Griffin, R. W. (1999). Health and well-being in the workplace: A review and 28 29
synthesis of the literature. Journal of Management, 25(3), 357-384. 30 31 32 Day, A., & Nielsen, K. (2017). What Does Our Organization Do to Help Our Well-Being? 33 34 Creating Healthy Workplaces and Workers. In N. Chmiel, F. Fraccaroli, and M. Sverke 35 36
(Eds), An Introduction to Work and Organizational Psychology: An International
38
39 Perspective, (pp. 295-314). London: Wiley Blackwell. 40 41
Dix, A., & Beale, R. (1996). Information requirements of distributed workers. In A. Dix and 42 43
44 R. Beale (Eds), Remote cooperation: CSCW issues for mobile and teleworkers (pp. 113-143). 45
46 London: Springer. 47 48
49 Eurofound (2015) First Findings: Sixth European Working Conditions Survey. ISBN: 978- 50
51 92-897-1429-7. 52 53
*Fonner, K. L., & Roloff, M. E. (2012). Testing the connectivity paradox: Linking
55
56 teleworkers' communication media use to social presence, stress from interruptions, and 57
58 organizational identification. Communication Monographs, 79(2), 205-231.
37
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 27 1 2
3 Furnham, A. (2005). The psychology of behaviour at work. Hove, UK: Psychology Press. 4 5
6 *Golden, T. D., & Fromen, A. (2011). Does it matter where your manager works? Comparing 7
8 managerial work mode (traditional, telework, virtual) across subordinate work experiences 9 10 and outcomes. Human Relations, 64(11), 1451-1475. 11 12
13 *Golden, T. D., & Veiga, J. F. (2008). The impact of superior–subordinate relationships on 14 15 the commitment, job satisfaction, and performance of virtual workers. The Leadership 16 17 Quarterly, 19(1), 77-88. 18 19
20 Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: 21 22 Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: 23 24
Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 219-247. 25 26 27 *Gray□Stanley, J. A., Muramatsu, N., Heller, T., Hughes, S., Johnson, T. P., & 28 29
Ramirez□Valles, J. (2010). Work stress and depression among direct support professionals: 30 31
32 the role of work support and locus of control. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 33
34 54(8), 749-761. 35 36
*Greer, T. W., & Payne, S. C. (2014). Overcoming telework challenges: Outcomes of
38
39 successful telework strategies. The Psychologist-Manager Journal, 17(2), 87-111. 40 41
Halbesleben, J. R., & Bellairs, T. (2015). Employee Well-Being and Safety Behaviors. In S. 42 43
44 Clarke, T. M. Probst, F. Guldenmund and J. Passmore (Eds), The Wiley Blackwell Handbook 45
46 of the Psychology of Occupational Safety and Workplace Health (pp. 251-271). Chichester, 47 48 UK: John Wiley & Sons. 49 50
51 Halbesleben, J. R., Neveu, J. P., Paustian-Underdahl, S. C., & Westman, M. (2014). Getting 52 53 to the “COR” understanding the role of resources in conservation of resources theory. 54 55 Journal of Management, 40(5), 1334-1364.
33
50
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 28 1 2
3 Hislop, D., & Axtell, C. (2007). The neglect of spatial mobility in contemporary studies of 4 5 work: the case of telework. New Technology, Work and Employment, 22(1), 34-51. 6 7
8 Hislop, D., Axtell, C., & Daniels, K. (2008). The challenge of remote working. In S. 9 10 Cartwright and C. L. Cooper, (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Personnel Psychology, (pp. 564- 11 12 585). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. 13 14 15 Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. 16 17 American Psychologist, 44(3), 513-524. 18 19
20 House, J. S. (1981). Work stress and social support. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley. 21 22
23 House, R.J. (1971). A Path Goal Theory of Leader Effectiveness, Administrative Science 24 25
Quarterly, 16(3), 321-339. 26 27 28 *Huang, Y. H., Robertson, M. M., Lee, J., Rineer, J., Murphy, L. A., Garabet, A., & Dainoff, 29 30 M. J. (2014). Supervisory interpretation of safety climate versus employee safety climate 31 32
perception: Association with safety behavior and outcomes for lone workers. Transportation
34
35 research part F: traffic psychology and behavior, 26(B), 348-360. 36 37
*Huang, Y. H., Zohar, D., Robertson, M. M., Garabet, A., Murphy, L. A., & Lee, J. (2013). 38 39
40 Development and validation of safety climate scales for mobile remote workers using 41
42 utility/electrical workers as exemplar. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 59, 76-86. 43 44
45 International Data Corporation (IDC) (2010) Worldwide Mobile Worker Population 2009- 46
47 2013 Forecast, IDC 221309E. 48 49
Kelloway, E. K., & Barling, J. (2010). Leadership development as an intervention in
51
52 occupational health psychology. Work & Stress, 24(3), 260-279. 53
54 55 56 57
20
37
54
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 29 1 2
3 Konradt, U., Schmook, R., & Malecke, M. (2000). Impacts of telework on individuals, 4 5 organizations and families - A critical review. International Review of Industrial and 6 7
Organizational Psychology, 15, 63-100. 8 9 10 *Konradt, U., Schmook, R., Wilm, A., & Hertel, G. (2000). Health circles for teleworkers: 11 12 selective results on stress, strain and coping styles. Health Education Research, 15(3), 327- 13 14
15 338. 16 17 Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Thousand 18 19
Oaks, California: Sage.
21 22 Kuoppala, J., Lamminpaa, A., Liira, J., & Vainio, H. (2008). Leadership, job well-being, and 23 24
health effects - A systematic review and a meta-analysis. Journal of Occupational and 25 26
27 Environmental Medicine, 50(8), 904–915. 28 29
Kurland, N. B., & Bailey, D. E. (1999). The advantages and challenges of working here, there 30 31
32 anywhere, and anytime. Organizational Dynamics, 28(2), 53-68. 33 34 *Long, Z., Kuang, K., & Buzzanell, P. M. (2013). Legitimizing and elevating telework: 35 36
Chinese constructions of a nonstandard work arrangement. Journal of Business and Technical
38
39 Communication, 27(3), 243-262. 40 41
*Madlock, P. E. (2013). The influence of motivational language in the technologically 42 43
44 mediated realm of telecommuters. Human Resource Management Journal, 23(2), 196-210. 45 46
Martins, L. L., Gilson, L. L., & Maynard, M. T. (2004) Virtual teams: what do we know and 47 48
49 where do we go from here? Journal of Management, 30(6), 805-835. 50 51 *McDonough, B., Howard, M., Angeles, R., Dolovich, L., Marzanek-Lefebvre, F., Riva, J. J., 52 53
& Laryea, S. (2014). Lone workers attitudes towards their health: views of Ontario truck
55
56 drivers and their managers. BMC research notes, 7(1), 297.
16
33
50
55
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 30 1 2
3 *Mihhailova, G. (2009). Management challenges arising from the use of virtual work. Baltic 4 5 Journal of Management, 4(1), 80-93. 6 7
8 *Mihhailova, G., Õun, K., & Türk, K. (2011). Virtual work usage and challenges in different 9 10 service sector branches. Baltic Journal of Management, 6(3), 342-356. 11 12
13 Mintzberg, H. (1989). Mintzberg on Management. New York: Free Press. 14 15
Mintzberg, H. (2004). Managers, not MBAs: A hard look at the soft practice of managing and
17
18 management development. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 19 20
Montoya-Weiss, M. M., Massey, A. P., & Song, M. (2001). Getting it together: Temporal 21 22
23 coordination and conflict management in global virtual teams. Academy of Management 24
25 Journal, 44(6), 1251-1262. 26 27
28 Montreuil, S., & Lippel, K. (2003). Telework and occupational health: a Quebec empirical 29
30 study and regulatory implications. Safety Science, 41(4), 339-358. 31 32
*Mulki, J. P., & Jaramillo, F. (2011). Workplace isolation: salespeople and supervisors in
34
35 USA. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(04), 902-923. 36 37
Mulrow, C. D. (1994). Rationale for systematic reviews. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 38 39
40 309(6954), 597-599. 41 42
*Nesheim, T., & Gressgård, L. J. (2014). Knowledge sharing in a complex organization: 43 44
45 Antecedents and safety effects. Safety Science, 62, 28-36. 46 47 Nielsen, K., & Daniels, K. (2016). The relationship between transformational leadership and 48 49
sickness absenteeism: The role of presenteeism. Work & Stress. 30(2), 193-208.
51 52 Nielsen, K., Nielsen, M. B., Ogbonnaya, C., Känsälä, M., Saari, E., & Isaksson, K. (2017). 53 54
Workplace resources to improve both employee well-being and performance: A systematic
56
57 review and meta-analysis. Work & Stress, 31(2), 101-120.
20
37
54
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 31 1 2
3 *Nurmi, N. (2011). Coping with coping strategies: How distributed teams and their members 4 5 deal with the stress of distance, time zones and culture. Stress and Health, 27(2), 123-143. 6 7
8 Pilbeam, C., Doherty, N., Davidson, R., & Denyer, D. (2016). Safety leadership practices for 9 10 organizational safety compliance: Developing a research agenda from a review of the 11 12 literature. Safety Science, 86, 110-121. 13 14 15 Quinlan, M., & Bohle, P. (2008). Under pressure, out of control, or home alone? Reviewing 16 17 research and policy debates on the occupational health and safety effects of outsourcing and 18 19
home-based work. International Journal of Health Services, 38(3), 489-523.
21 22 Raghuram, S., Tuertscher, P., & Garud, R. (2010). Research note-mapping the field of virtual 23 24
work: A cocitation analysis. Information Systems Research, 21(4), 983-999. 25 26 27 Sardeshmukh, S. R., Sharma, D., & Golden, T. D. (2012). Impact of telework on exhaustion 28 29
and job engagement: A job demands and job resources model. New Technology, Work and 30 31
32 Employment, 27(3), 193-207. 33 34 Siha, S. M., & Monroe, R. W. (2006). Telecommuting's past and future: a literature review 35 36
and research agenda. Business Process Management Journal, 12(4), 455-482.
38 39 Skakon, J., Nielsen, K., Borg, V., & Guzman, J. (2010). Are leaders' well-being, behaviors 40 41
and style associated with the well-being of their employees? A systematic review of three 42 43
44 decades of empirical research. Work & Stress, 24(2), 107–139. 45 46
Standen, P., Lamond, D.A., Daniels, K. (1999). The home as a workplace: impacts on the 47 48
49 psychological well-being of teleworkers. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 4, 368- 50
51 381. 52 53
Suri, H., & Clarke, D. (2009). Advancements in research synthesis methods: From a
55
56 methodologically inclusive perspective. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 395-430.
20
53
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 32 1 2
3 *Törner, M., & Pousette, A. (2009). Safety in construction–a comprehensive description of 4 5 the characteristics of high safety standards in construction work, from the combined 6 7
perspective of supervisors and experienced workers. Journal of Safety Research, 40(6), 399- 8 9
10 409. 11 12 Vartiainen, M., & Hyrkkänen, U. (2010). Changing requirements and mental workload 13 14
15 factors in mobile multi□locational work. New Technology, Work and Employment, 25(2), 16
17 117-135. 18 19
Wellman, B., Salaff, J., Dimitrova, D., Garton, L., Gulia, M., & Haythornthwaite, C. (1996).
21
22 Computer networks as social networks: Collaborative work, telework, and virtual 23
24 community. Annual Review of Sociology, 22(1), 213-238. 25 26
27 *Weymouth, S., Davey, C., Wright, J. I., Nieuwoudt, L. A., Barclay, L., Belton, S., Svenson, 28
29 S., & Bowell, L. (2007). What are the effects of distance management on the retention of 30 31 remote area nurses in Australia? Rural and Remote Health, 7(3), 652. 32 33
34 *Whitford, T., & Moss, S. A. (2009). Transformational leadership in distributed work groups: 35 36 The moderating role of follower regulatory focus and goal orientation. Communication 37 38 Research, 36(6), 810-837. 39 40
41 *Yang, L. R., Yen, H. F., & Chiang, Y. F. (2012). A framework for assessing impacts of 42 43 leadership competency on police project performance: Mediating role of job satisfaction and 44 45
moderating role of project type. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & 46 47
48 Management, 35(3), 528-550. 49 50 Yukl, G. (2012). Effective leadership behavior: What we know and what questions need more 51 52
attention. Academy of Management Perspectives, 26(4), 66-85.Zohar, D. (2002). The effects
54
55 of leadership dimensions, safety climate, and assigned priorities on minor injuries in work 56
57 groups. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(1), 75–92.
20
Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 33 1 2
3 Yukl, G., Gordon, A., & Taber, T. (2002). A hierarchical taxonomy of leadership behavior: 4 5 Integrating a half century of behavior research. Journal of Leadership & Organizational 6 7
Studies, 9(1), 15-32. 8 9 10 Zohar, D. (2008). Safety climate and beyond: A multi-level multi-climate framework. Safety 11 12 Science, 46, 376–387. 13 14 15 *Zohar, D., Huang, Y. H., Lee, J., & Robertson, M. (2014). A mediation model linking 16 17 dispatcher leadership and work ownership with safety climate as predictors of truck driver 18 19
safety performance. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 62, 17-25.
21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37
38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51
52 53 54 55 56
1 2 Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 34 3 4 5 Table 1. Current leadership models or frameworks applied in the context of good OSH for distributed workers. 6 7
Leadership 8
framework Authors Design / methods
Country Distributed worker sample OSH Outcomes Synopsis of key findings
9 10 Transformational
11 leadership
12 13 14 15 16 17 Transformational 18 leadership
19
20 21 22 23 Leader-member-
24 exchange
25 26 27
28 Leader-member-
29 exchange
30 31 32 33
Considerate 34
leadership
35 36 37 38 39 40
Conchie
(2013)
Whitford &
Moss (2009)
Golden
&Veiga
(2008)
Zohar et al.
(2014)
Mulki &
Jaramillo (2011)
Cross-sectional,
survey.
UK
Cross-sectional,
survey.
Australia, USA, Europe, Asia, South Africa,
South America
Cross-sectional,
survey.
USA
Prospective:
survey, and safety
data, collected
over following 6
months.
USA
Cross-sectional,
survey.
USA
Study 1: 251 construction
workers in 3 companies (engineers, electricians,
plumbers, joiners).
Study 2: 220 construction
workers in 1 company across 4
sites (electricians, ground
workers, pipefitters).
165 employees from small,
medium, and larger organizations in both traditional and virtual environments.
375 employees from a large
high-tech corporation, who
worked an average of 25% of
the working week in virtual
mode.
3,207 long haul truck drivers
from a large national haulage
company.
344 field salespeople working
for a subsidiary of a large multi- national pharmaceutical
company.
Safety
behaviour (safety voice,
safety compliance)
Job satisfaction
Work
engagement
Job satisfaction
Commitment
Safety
performance
(driving)
Workplace
isolation
Study 1: Intrinsic motivation mediates the relationship between safety-
specific transformational leadership and challenge citizenship behaviours.
Study 2: Intrinsic motivation partially mediates the relationship between safety-specific transformational leadership and challenge citizenship
behaviours. This relationship is moderated by trust.
In virtual environments, visionary leadership (part of transformational leadership) is significantly related to job satisfaction only when there is
a high focus on promotion and related to work engagement when employees are prevention focused.
Leader-member-exchange (LMX) is important for job satisfaction, but
especially important for job satisfaction of virtual workers.
The link between LMX and job satisfaction is moderated by the degree
of virtual working.
Leader-member-exchange (LMX) was related to trucking safety
climate. The relationship between LMX and driving safety was
mediated by trucking safety climate.
Considerate leadership directly impacts satisfaction with supervisor. Satisfaction with supervisor mediates between workplace isolation and
turnover intentions.
The number of face-to-face meetings between supervisors and field
salespersons and between salespersons doesn’t significantly influence
worker perceptions of workplace isolation. Those higher on self- efficacy and who believe considerate leadership actions are made by their supervisor experience lower workplace isolation.
1 2 Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 35 3 4 5 Table 2. Management systems, practices and procedures, which may be utilized to ensure OSH for distributed workers 6 7 Category of 8 management 9 resource
Authors Design / methods
Country
Distributed worker sample OSH Outcomes Synopsis of key findings
10 Structural Fonner & 11 Roloff
12 (2012) 13
Structural Madlock 14 (2013)
15 16 17 Structural McDonough
18 et al. (2014)
19 20 21 Structural Mihhailova
22 (2009)
23 24 25 26 Structural Mulki & 27 Jaramillo
28 (2011)
Cross-sectional,
survey.
USA
Cross-sectional,
survey.
USA
Cross-sectional,
qualitative
interviews.
Canada
Case study -
semi-structured
interviews and
focus groups.
Estonia, Russia
Cross-sectional,
survey.
USA
100 office workers and 80
high intensity teleworkers.
177 teleworkers from a
variety of industries.
16 truck drivers and 10
managers from two haulage
companies based in South
Western Ontario.
58 virtual working employees
from one Estonian and one
Russian IT services company.
344 field salespeople from a
multi-national pharmaceutical company.
Stress from
interruptions
Job satisfaction
Organizational
commitment
Physical health
and disease
Stress and fatigue
Satisfaction (with
virtual working)
Workplace
isolation
Teleworkers indicate that face-to-face communications, videoconferencing,
instant messaging and email are related to higher levels of stress from
interruptions.
Specific facets of managers’ oral communication in providing motivating
language were related to worker job satisfaction: direction-giving
(instructions, guidance), and empathetic language (emotion focused - praise, criticism).
Management recognize the importance of their roles, but were frustrated by
lack of awareness of workplace health promotion resources, nor how to
communicate in that respect with drivers - given shift and remote working.
Top management were willing to be available to teleworking middle
managers using ICT. However, top management applied classic management
concepts more suited to office-based workers, rather than management
concepts appropriate for virtual workers.
The number of face-to-face meetings between supervisors and field
salespersons and between salespersons does not significantly influence worker perceptions of workplace isolation.
29 Structural
30 Line manager
31 (support)
32 33 34 35 Structural
36 Line manager 37 (support)
38
39 40
Nurmi
(2011)
Weymouth
et al. (2007)
Multiple case
study, qualitative.
Finland
Cross-sectional,
mixed methods.
Australia
97 team leaders and
employees from electronics,
telecommunications,
software, consultancy, pulp
and paper, and banking
industries.
61 Remote area nurses in
Australia.
26 ex-remote area nurses and
9 nursing executives with
experience of distance
management.
Role ambiguity
Role overload
Burnout
Management
handling of OSH
issues
Teams working in multiple time zones and extending working hours for
synchronous communication experienced burnout.
Team members who worked remotely from managers had the least access to informational and social support from their manager. Employees worked
remotely from manager were more likely to experience role-overload, because the leader was not aware of their workload.
According to remote nurses, managers are inaccessible and unsupportive with
poor responsiveness to issues when communicated with.
According to nursing executives, crisis management skills differentiated good
leaders; but there was a lack of time to build rapport with nurses; high
bureaucratic demands, high turnover, lack of communication; that quality
leadership would enhance team cohesion.
1 2 Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 36 3 4 5
Category of 6
management 7
resource
Authors Design / methods
Country
Distributed worker sample OSH Outcomes Synopsis of key findings
8 Structural
9 Line manager
10 (understanding of
11 distributed
12 working)
Konradt,
Schmook,
Wilm &
Hertel.
(2000)
Intervention
study: health
circle discussions.
Germany
17 teleworking employees. Work strain
Workplace
isolation
Lack of interruption from supervisors during daily work was a positive aspect
of teleworking, as was supervisors demonstrating a good understanding of
work-life balance issues and task-related discussions.
13 Line manager 14 (support)
15 16
Chen et al.
(2008)
Cross-sectional,
survey.
China
581 off shore oil company
workers.
Stress High levels of instrumental support from supervisors was related to lower
risk of smoking and increased risk of physical inactivity and in turn, stress,
after controlling for a range of factors.
Line manager 17 (support)
18 19
20 21
Line manager 22
(support)
23 24 25 26 27 28
29 Line manager
30 (support)
31 32
Gray- Stanley et
al. (2010)
Greer &
Payne
(2014)
Nesheim &
Gressgaard
(2014)
Cross-sectional, survey.
USA
Cross-sectional,
survey: coded
qualitative data
from survey
correlated with
quantitative
ratings.
USA
Cross-sectional,
survey.
Norway
323 direct support (care) workers from 5 community-
based organizations.
86 high performing
teleworkers as identified by
58 supervisor ratings.
880 employees from oil
operating firm and 1773
employees from
subcontractors.
Depression
Role conflict
Workplace
isolation
Work engagement
Safety knowledge
utilization
Work social support (supervisor and co-worker) was inversely related to depression.
The effects of role conflict were moderated by supervisor support so that
supervisory support moderates the negative effects of role conflict on
depression (particularly for workers experiencing high stress levels).
Supervisors indicated challenges with telework most frequently, such as lack
of face-to-face communication, interdependency of telework and managing
and monitoring performance.
High performing teleworkers identified strategies to overcome challenges,
such as use of advanced technologies and communication with co- workers/supervisors.
Knowledge utilization, including items in relation to safety, is related to
knowledge sharing, experience, training and management support.
33 Line manager (support)
34
Yang et al. (2012)
Cross-sectional, mixed methods.
Taiwan
171 project leaders and workers from police
departments.
Job satisfaction Leadership competency (classified into 3 factors: emotional, managerial and intellectual competency) had a direct relationship with job satisfaction.
1 2 Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 37 3 4 5
Category of 6
management 7
resource
Authors Design / methods
Country
Distributed worker sample OSH Outcomes Synopsis of key findings
8 Line manager
9 (understanding of
10 distributed
11 working)
12
13 14
Golden &
Fromen
(2011)
Cross-sectional,
survey.
USA
11.059 professional-level
employees in Fortune 500
company. No information on
occupation or sector.
Job satisfaction Findings suggest work mode of workers and managers should match:
Employees with a teleworking manager reported a number of adverse
outcomes such as lower job satisfaction, when compared to those with a traditional manager (face-to-face).
Teleworkers (virtual workers) with a teleworking manager reported a number
of positive outcomes such as higher job satisfaction, when compared to
teleworkers with traditional managers.
15 Line manager 16 (understanding of 17 distributed
18 working)
Long et al.
(2013)
Cross-sectional,
qualitative
interviews.
China
8 teleworkers. Workload Supervisors lack understanding of the nature of and processes of teleworking.
Supervisors from other areas assign tasks to teleworkers, based on
perceptions that teleworkers have less work to do.
19 Line manager 20 (understanding of 21 distributed
22 working)
23
Mihhailova
et al. (2011)
Cross-sectional,
survey and
qualitative
interviews.
Estonia
3,156 virtual working
employees from 323 different
service sector organizations.
Job satisfaction Managers find virtual work suitable for routine tasks where no complex
decision-making is involved, however, employees prefer managers to not
intervene in work process, but grant autonomy to make decisions
independently
24 Line manager
25 (role in safety
26 climate)
27 Organizational-
28 level safety
29 climate
30 Line manager
31 (role in safety
32 climate)
33 Organizational- level safety
34 climate
35 36
Organizational- 37
level safety 38
climate
39
40
Huang et al.
(2014)
Huang at al.
(2013)
Torner &
Pousette,
(2009)
Cross-sectional,
survey.
USA
Cross-sectional,
mixed methods:
development and
test of industry
specific safety
climate scale
USA
Cross- sectional,
qualitative.
Sweden
A matched sample of 1831
long haul truck drivers and their supervisors (219) from
four truck companies.
2421 remote workers from 2
large electric utilities.
19 line managers and 5
worker safety representatives,
from a single large road
tunnel construction project.
Safety
performance (driving)
Safety
performance
(driving)
Safety
performance
Supervisors’ interpretations of organizational and group level safety climate
were higher than truck drivers.
Safety behaviours mediate between employee organization level safety
climate and lost work days due to injury, but did not mediate between supervisors’ interpretation of organizational level safety climate and lost
work days due to injury.
Individual safety climate scores significantly predict worker safety behaviour;
but individual safety climate scores did not significantly predict vehicle
accidents. Work unit safety climate (shared perceptions) predicts individual
safety behaviour.
Organizational-level and group-level safety climate perceptions both predict
workers near misses, accidents and lost days.
According to participants, the characteristics of high safety standards are
organization and structures (planning, roles, procedures, resources);
collective values norms and behaviours (climate, interaction, cooperation);
and, individual competence and attitudes.
1 2 Leading and managing distributed worker health and safety 38 3 4 5
Category of 6
management 7
resource
Authors Design / methods
Country
Distributed worker sample OSH Outcomes Synopsis of key findings
8 Organizational-
9 level safety
10 climate
11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
33 34
Zohar et al.
(2014)
Prospective:
survey and - hard
braking safety
data, collected
over following 6
months.
USA
3,207 long haul truck drivers
from a large national haulage
company.
Safety
performance
Work ownership (Van Dyne & Pierce, 2004) and distant leadership are
positively related to lone-worker psychological safety climate, which is in
turn related to safety behaviour.