Psychometric properties of the Irish Management Standards Indicator Tool

Boyd, Suzanne; Kerr, Robert; Murray, Paul D.

doi:10.1093/occmed/kqw163

Cited by 8 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the preparation phase, two tools were considered: the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire II (Berthelsen et al. , 2014) and the Republic of Ireland – Management Standards Indicator Tool (ROI-MSIT) (Boyd et al. , 2016).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The survey was a 35-item questionnaire that measured seven work factors (Boyd et al. , 2016): Demands refer to workload and work patterns. Control measures how much input the person has in the way they do their work. Peer support describes the ability to obtain requested help from colleagues. Managerial support includes the ability to obtain feedback and support when needed. Relationships measures bullying and conflicts. Roles include knowing what to do, how to do it and how it fits in with the overall organizational work. Organizational change refers to how change is managed, communicated and measured.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are several different psychosocial risk tools that can be used to map the psychosocial work environment to attain a starting point (SAWEE, 2019). In the preparation phase, two tools were considered: the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire II (Berthelsen et al, 2014) and the Republic of Ireland -Management Standards Indicator Tool (ROI-MSIT) (Boyd et al, 2016). The ROI-MSIT was selected because the questions were available via a digital platform called work positive, i.e.…”

Section: Questionnairementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The survey was a 35-item questionnaire that measured seven work factors (Boyd et al, 2016): The psychosocial risk assessment process…”

Section: Questionnairementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both scales were previously validated (Boyd et al, 2016;Kessler et al, 2003) and are included in Appendix.…”

Section: Questionnairementioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Interaction training – an enabler for improvement measures within the psychosocial risk assessment process

Bäckström

Berglund

2022

IJWHM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe study objectives were to (1) identify if providing solution-focused interaction training enables managers and employees to develop and implement actions to improve their psychosocial work environment and (2) test a recontextualization of the psychosocial work environment as social structures affecting members of the workplace and verify if social interactions effectively change the local psychosocial work environment.Design/methodology/approachThe intervention involved training managers, supervisors and employees in solution-focused interaction. This study used a controlled interrupted time-series design, with an intervention and control group (CG) and pre- and post-measurements.FindingsThe psychosocial work environment improved, indicating that the training led to better social interactions, contributing to changes in the social structures within the intervention group (IG). Collective reflection between participants in the take action phase was the key to success. The recontextualization uncovered these mechanisms.Research limitations/implicationsThe present study supports a recontextualization of the psychosocial work environment as primarily decided by social structures that emerge in recurrent interactions within work teams. The same social structures also seem to be important for other features of the production system, like job performance.Practical implicationsTraining designed to enable high-quality social interactions, like dialogue and collective reflection, has proven to be effective in changing social structures. Moreover, managers may need training in facilitating the collective reflection between participants. Increased focus on social interactions within work teams is suggested for future study of organizational change processes, psychosocial work environment and practical psychosocial work environment management.Originality/valueThe intervention was delivered in the preparation phase to enable an effective take action phase. Both phases are less studied in psychosocial risk assessments research. The recontextualization has never been fully used in psychosocial research.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Questionnairementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The survey was a 35-item questionnaire that measured seven work factors (Boyd et al, 2016): The psychosocial risk assessment process…”

Section: Questionnairementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both scales were previously validated (Boyd et al, 2016;Kessler et al, 2003) and are included in Appendix.…”

Section: Questionnairementioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Interaction training – an enabler for improvement measures within the psychosocial risk assessment process

Bäckström

Berglund

2022

IJWHM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Manager-driven intervention for improved psychosocial safety climate and psychosocial work environment

Tripney Berglund,

Kombeiz,

Dollard

2024

Safety Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Psychometric properties of the HSE Indicator Tool: evidence from Argentina

Vaamonde

Giacobino

2023

Occupational Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The Health and Safety Executive’s Management Standards Indicator Tool (MSIT) is a 35-item self-report questionnaire that assesses seven psychosocial risk factors associated with work-related stress. Although the instrument has been validated in the UK, Italy, Iran and Malta, no validation studies have been carried out in Latin America. Aims To examine the factor structure, validity and reliability of the MSIT among Argentine employees. Methods A sample of employees of different organizations from Rafaela and Rosario, Argentina, completed an anonymous questionnaire that included the Argentine MSIT and specific scales to measure job satisfaction, workplace resilience and perceived mental and physical health (12-item Short Form Health Survey). Confirmatory factor analysis was used to determine the factor structure of the Argentine MSIT. Results A total of 532 employees participated in the study (74% response rate). After testing three measurement models, the final respecified model was composed of 24 items distributed in six factors (demands, control, manager support, peer support, relationships and role clarity), showing satisfactory fit indices. The original MSIT change factor was discarded. Composite reliability ranged from 0.70 to 0.82. Although all dimensions showed adequate discriminant validity, convergent validity for control, role clarity and relationships is a matter of concern (average variance extracted values ≤ 0.50). Criterion-related validity was demonstrated by significant correlations between the MSIT subscales and job satisfaction, workplace resilience and mental and physical health. Conclusions The Argentine version of the MSIT presents good psychometric properties for use among employees of the region. Further research is needed to provide more evidence on the convergent validity of the questionnaire.

show abstract

Psychometric properties of the Irish Management Standards Indicator Tool

Abstract: The ROI-MSIT is reliable and valid, with a factor structure similar to the original UK instrument and the Italian MSIT. Further psychometric evaluation of the ROI-MSIT is recommended.

Cited by 8 publications

References 14 publications

Interaction training – an enabler for improvement measures within the psychosocial risk assessment process

Interaction training – an enabler for improvement measures within the psychosocial risk assessment process

Manager-driven intervention for improved psychosocial safety climate and psychosocial work environment

Psychometric properties of the HSE Indicator Tool: evidence from Argentina

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About