A case of tightrope walking

Abstract

Purpose – Given that current policy in the UK is focused on encouraging individuals with long-term health conditions (LTCs) to work wherever possible, the purpose of this paper is to explore employer’s and manager’s perspectives of supporting those with LTCs as any successful workplace engagement will largely be influenced by their readiness to be supportive. Design/methodology/approach – In total, 40 semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with employers’ and managers’ from a range of organisations in the north-west of England during the period March 2011 to January 2012. Comparative analysis of the data was guided and informed by grounded theory principles. Findings – All bar one participant typified their role as one of a difficult “balancing” act of additional and often incompatible demands, pressures and feelings. It was evident that coping with this ambivalent situation incurred an emotional consequence for participants. Practical implications – Employers’ and managers’ response to ambivalent feelings may serve to undermine their capacity to translate supportive intentions into tangible action and are thus reflected in employee’s perceptions of unsupportive relations. Developing an intervention to raise awareness of the potential for this situation and subsequent impact on the return to work process would be beneficial for all stakeholders – the government, employees and employers alike. Originality/value – This in-depth study gives voice to employers and managers whose experiences and perceptions of supporting people with LTCs is largely unknown and empirically under-researched. Findings add to the wealth of research from the employee perspective to provide a more nuanced picture of the workplace for those working with and/or supporting those with LTCs.

Managing mental health problems in the workplace: are small businesses different?

“…However, a common theme across extant qualitative studies is that managers experience tensions in simultaneously responding to the needs of the unwell employee alongside carrying out their broader managerial role. This broader role includes ensuring the needs of the wider workforce and business operations are met, and involves the manager reconciling personal, emotional or moral conflicts alongside maintaining their own psychological wellbeing (Bramwell et al, 2016;Kirsh et al, 2018;Ladegaard et al, 2019;Nielsen and Yarker, 2023). This has been referred to as a 'difficult balancing act' (Bramwell et al, 2016) or the navigation of 'cross pressures' (Ladegaard et al, 2019).…”

“…Previous research has found that managers are conscious of the potential impact on co-workers, whowhilst initially supportive of the unwell employeemay become frustrated or resentful, losing empathy over time as their own workload increases (Bramwell et al, 2016;Jansson and Gunnarsson, 2018;Ladegaard et al, 2019;Martin et al, 2015;Porter et al, 2019). 'Managing the workplace social climate' can be challenging (Kirsh et al, 2018, p. 552), especially if confidentiality precludes co-workers from being made aware of reasons underlying changes in behaviour or accommodations made for an individual (Martin et al, 2015).…”

The management balancing act

“…The review is based on “A case of tightrope walking: An exploration of the role of employers and managers in supporting people with LTCs in the workplace” by Bramwell et al (2016). Difficulties faced by managers with potentially conflicting workplace responsibilities are explored in this compelling piece.…”

Juggling on a tightrope: Experiences of small and micro business managers responding to employees with mental health difficulties

“…Research identifies cross pressures and a difficult ‘balancing act’ in managing employees with mental health difficulties, in which the needs of the employee, co-workers, business, and manager’s values, feelings and interests are weighed against one another (Bramwell et al, 2016; Kirsh et al, 2018; Ladegaard et al, 2019; Martin et al, 2018). Managers are conscious of impacts on co-workers, including increased workload and time consumed in supporting the unwell employee, either practically or emotionally, which in turn affect overall productivity (Porter et al, 2019).…”

“…Approaches to HRM and workplace health and safety in smaller firms tend to be informal (Marlow, 2002; Nguyen and Bryant, 2004) with informal approaches to health and wellbeing perceived as in keeping with organisational size and culture, as well as more cost effective (Tu et al, 2021). Financial survival of the business is typically the most pressing issue, with OH matters taking lower priority (Bramwell et al, 2016; Hasle and Limborg 2006; Martin and LaMontagne, 2018). Small and microbusinesses are less likely to have access to OH provision, dedicated HR support, or to develop policies in advance of problems arising (Fullick et al, 2019; Harrison et al, 2013; Steadman et al, 2015; Tu et al, 2021).…”