There is a growing interest to use mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) for occupational health promotion. As most evidence for the beneficial effects comes from convenience samples in the social/education/health sector, it is still an open question if MBIs are effective in other contexts, or for whom MBIs are more effective. In addition, self-selection and sample characteristics may have biased previous findings. Theoretically and practically, it is important to know whether MBIs are also effective for nonselective samples outside the social and health sector, especially in agentic and male-oriented cultures. Therefore, this study investigates the effects of a MBI on physiological and psychological criteria in a nonselective sample of police officers. Moreover, this study examines whether effectiveness depends on participants’ personality (neuroticism, openness, and conscientiousness) and on perceived social norms toward MBIs. Using a pre–post intervention design, N = 267 police officers were randomly assigned to an intervention group receiving a 6-week intervention and to a control group. Repeated-measures analysis of variance showed a positive effect on heart rate variability and a stronger reduction of psychological strain, health complaints, and negative affect, as well as more improvement of mindfulness and self-care in the intervention group in comparison with the control group. Additionally, participants higher in neuroticism and openness benefitted more, and the effectiveness was stronger for those who perceived a favorable social norm toward MBIs. Our findings provide evidence that participants with male-oriented occupations may also benefit from a MBI. The importance of individual differences and the social context is discussed.

Health-oriented leadership consists of three dimensions that contribute to employee health: staff care, i.e., health-specific follower-directed leadership, as well as both leaders’ and followers’ self care, i.e., health-specific self-leadership. This study explores profiles of follower self care, leader self care and staff care, and investigates the relationships with follower health in two samples. We identified four patterns of health-oriented leadership: A consistently positive profile (high care), a consistently negative profile (low care), and two profiles showing inconsistencies between follower self care, leader self care, and staff care (leader sacrifice and follower sacrifice). The high care profile reported the best health compared to both the low care profile and the inconsistent profiles. The follower sacrifice profile reported more strain than the leader sacrifice profile, while strain and health levels were the least favorable in the low care profile. Findings reveal that (in-)consistency between follower-directed leadership and self-leadership contributes to follower strain and health.

PurposeDrawing upon the job-demands resources and the job demands-control-support model, the authors examined the buffering effect of health-oriented leadership (HoL) in terms of staff care on the relationship between job demands and employee health and job satisfaction.Design/methodology/approachCross-sectional data from two studies (N1 = 314 and N2 = 260) were analyzed using moderation analyses.FindingsStudy 1 showed that staff care mitigates the effect of job demands on strain and health complaints. Study 2 found that staff care also buffered the effect of job demands on general health and job satisfaction.Practical implicationsParticularly under high job demands, staff care is an important resource for employees' health and satisfaction. Organizations should promote leaders' staff care.Originality/valueFindings provide further evidence for the beneficial role of leaders in terms of HoL.

Leadership plays an important role in employee well-being. In light of a growing research interest in leaders’ resources as determinants of healthy leadership, it is not yet clear how leaders’ behavior regarding their own health (self-care) may trickle down to employees. Drawing on Conservation of Resources Theory and the model of Health-Oriented Leadership, this study tests two mechanisms through which employees may benefit from self-caring leaders: (a) through staff care, that is, concern for their employees’ health (improved leadership hypothesis); and (b) through a direct relationship between leaders’ and employees’ self-care (role-modeling hypothesis). In turn, both staff care and employee self-care would relate positively to employee health. Multilevel path models based on a sample of N = 46 supervisors and 437 employees revealed that leader self-care was positively related to leader-rated staff care at Level 2, which was positively related to employee-rated staff care at Level 1. In turn, employee-rated staff care was positively related to employee health. The findings support the improved leadership hypothesis and underline the importance of leader self-care as a determinant of healthy leadership.

No abstract