Organizational interventions are often recommended when organizations want to improve employee psychological health and well-being. Research, however, has revealed inconsistent results and reviewers have called for research on why interventions either bring about desired change or fail to do so. Answering the “how” and “why” of intervention outcomes requires a close examination of the elements that hinder or facilitate desired outcomes, thus moving beyond evaluation of only the overall effects. In this paper, we present an evaluation framework based on recent intervention research and process-oriented organization theory. The framework offers suggestions for which elements to include when evaluating organizational interventions. Within the framework, elements crucial to intervention evaluation are grouped into four overarching categories that we argue are crucial to evaluation over the five phases of an intervention programme. These categories are: the organizational “actors”; the mental models of those actors; the context of the intervention; and intervention design and process. Evaluation during the process as well as of the overall effects, as recommended by this framework, should throw light on what works for whom, why, how and under which circumstances

Job crafting describes a set of proactive behaviours in which employees may engage to shape their work in order to minimize hindering job demands and maximize resources and challenging demands. Such behaviours may be particularly important among blue-collar workers whose jobs are characterized by poor working conditions and low well-being. We present the development and adaptation of a job crafting measure that may be used among blue-collar workers, based on an existing scale by Tims, Bakker, and Derks (2012) that was not specifically developed for blue-collar workers. We test the validity and reliability of the measure in a longitudinal study based on multiple source information from mail delivery workers in Denmark (N = 362 at Time 1; N = 408 at Time 2). Results indicate the presence of five job crafting dimensions: increasing challenging demands, decreasing social job demands, increasing social job resources, increasing quantitative demands and decreasing hindering job demands. These can be reliably measured with 15 items. The measure shows acceptable discriminant and criterion validity, and test-retest reliability. The findings extend the application of the original questionnaire. They also add to knowledge of the job crafting behaviours in which blue-collar workers engage and link them to well-being outcomes.

Realistic evaluation emphasizes the importance of exploring the mechanisms through which organizational interventions are effected. A well-known mechanism in organizational interventions is the screening process. Standardized questionnaires, in popular use, neither consider individuals’ appraisals of working conditions nor the specific context of the workplace. Screening with items tailored to intervention contexts may overcome the limitations of standardized questionnaires. In the present study, we evaluate an approach to develop a tailored questionnaire to measure employees’ appraisals of their specific working conditions. First, we interviewed 56 employees and 17 managers and, later, developed tailored items focused on the working conditions in a postal service. In follow-up interviews, we explore participants’ experiences with the tailored questionnaire, including the development of initiatives, compared with their previous experiences with the company’s annual attitude survey that used standardized scales. Results indicated that participants felt the tailored questionnaire highlighted issues that had previously been ignored, that initiatives were easier to develop owing to its specificity and that the feedback strategy was useful in prioritizing questionnaires. Overall, it can be concluded that tailored questionnaires may be appropriate for use in organizational intervention research and more broadly that evaluations of organizational interventions need to be contextually grounded.

Research on organizational interventions needs to meet the objectives of both researchers and participating organizations. This duality means that real-world impact has to be considered throughout the research process, simultaneously addressing both scientific rigour and practical relevance. This discussion paper aims to offer a set of principles, grounded in knowledge from various disciplines that can guide researchers in designing, implementing, and evaluating organizational interventions. Inspired by Mode 2 knowledge production, the principles were developed through a transdisciplinary, participatory and iterative process where practitioners and academics were invited to develop, refine and validate the principles. The process resulted in 10 principles: 1) Ensure active engagement and participation among key stakeholders; 2) Understand the situation (starting points and objectives); 3) Align the intervention with existing organizational objectives; 4) Explicate the program logic; 5) Prioritize intervention activities based on effort-gain balance; 6) Work with existing practices, processes, and mindsets; 7) Iteratively observe, reflect, and adapt; 8) Develop organizational learning capabilities; 9) Evaluate the interaction between intervention, process, and context; and 10) Transfer knowledge beyond the specific organization. The principles suggest how the design, implementation, and evaluation of organizational interventions can be researched in a way that maximizes both practical and scientific impact.

No abstract