An appraisal of key factors in the implementation of occupational stress interventions

Nytrø, Øystein; Saksvik, Per Øystein; Mikkelsen, Aslaug; Bohle, Philip; Quinlan, Michael

doi:10.1080/02678370010024749

Cited by 160 publications

(150 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

142

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Secondly, we articulate the relevant implementation process (and contextual) issues and illustrate how they can be taken into account to explain the success or failure of an intervention. Thirdly, we offers an embryonic answer to the recent call for more methodological reflexivity, considered theoretical models, broader frameworks, and more eclectic methods in this field (Biron et al, 2012a;Cox, Karanika-Murray, et al, 2007;Cox et al, 2010;Nytrø, Saksvik, Mikkelsen, Bohle, & Quinlan, 2000;Saksvik et al, 2002). The bulk of research in this field tends to focus on describing process issues influencing the implementation phase, but few studies have linked this type of data to outcomes or considered how early phases of the intervention can impact on its implementation.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Process evaluation for organizational stress and well-being interventions: Implications for theory, method, and practice.

Biron

Karanika‐Murray

2014

International Journal of Stress Management

124

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although the body of evidence showing the effects of psychosocial risks on employees' health is substantial, effective and sustainable stress prevention remains a thorny and complex issue. Most studies have focused on evaluating the effects of organizational interventions, and the results are mixed. Researchers find the evaluation of such actions methodologically challenging whereas practitioners often find the development and implementation of such actions a complicated matter. One of the reasons for this mixed impact is the lack of attention to contextual and process issues, namely how, when, and why interventions have their effects on outcomes such as mental health, well-being, and organizational performance. This paper aims to help researchers and practitioners to improve the development, implementation, and evaluation of organizational initiatives designed to reduce exposure to stress, to promote well-being, and healthy organizations. We review recent developments in the literature on process evaluation and propose examples of broader theoretical frameworks that could be used to improve this area. We articulate the essential elements for developing and bridging gaps between theory, methods, and practice.Throughout, we provide recommendations for the content, process and reporting of research on IPE.Keywords: intervention process evaluation, context, organizational interventions, well-being, occupational stress INTERVENTION PROCESS EVALUATION 3Process evaluation for organizational stress and well-being interventions: Implications for theory, method, and practice Because of their focus on reducing or eliminating the stressful and harmful aspects in the workplace, organizational-level interventions have been thought to be more effective compared to individual-level initiatives which attempt to modify individuals' ability to cope with stress (Semmer, 2011). Several reviews (Briner & Reynolds, 1999;Graveling, Crawford, Cowie, Amati, & Vohra, 2008;Parkes & Sparkes, 1998;Richardson & Rothstein, 2008; Van der Klink, Blonk, Schene, & Van Dijk, 2001) have concluded that there is not sufficient empirical evidence to draw conclusions on the effectiveness of organizational-level interventions, and that the research designs that have been used are too varied or not considered sufficiently strong. This is worrying given the pervasiveness and costs of workrelated stress and the considerable resources that organizations invested to manage it. In 2010 an observation was made that "at present little real progress is being made in [stress] intervention research [and] we do not need 'more of the same'" (Cox et al., 2010, p. 217). The implementation of interventions at the organizational level is considerably more complex and requiring more extensive resources than interventions at the individual level. Nevertheless, and despite calls for the importance of understanding intervention implementation coming from a range of areas such as organizational studies (e.g. Langley, 2009;Pettigrew, Woodman, & Cameron, 2001) and ...

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Process evaluation for organizational stress and well-being interventions: Implications for theory, method, and practice.

Biron

Karanika‐Murray

2014

International Journal of Stress Management

124

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…), especially for primary school teachers, and above all by training them to improve their classroom management (classroom management role) and instructional skills (instructional role). However, the fact that most personal interventions are unsuccessful in the implementation of training programmes, given the lack of attention paid at an organisational level, must be considered (Friedman, 1999;Nytro, Mikkelsen, Bohle, & Quinlan, 2000). Therefore, personal interventions should be carried out simultaneously with interventions at an organisational level.…”

Section: Practical Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self‐efficacy, school resources, job stressors and burnout among Spanish primary and secondary school teachers: a structural equation approach

Betoret

2009

Educational Psychology

196

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is noticeable that one quarter of the experimental groups, belonged to a department that differed from the other departments with regard to leadership due to missing their department-leader [33], which could have reduced the interventional effects under a provisional leader. Nytro et al [34] imply that both motivation and trust in the intervention affect outcome in addition to intervention syntax. Furthermore, Wheelan [4] indicates that an essential ingredient is the precis definition of goals within assignment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Teambuilding on Team Development: A Quasi-Experiment within a Swedish State Authority

Jacobsson¹,

Nissling²,

Skär³

et al. 2017

Clin Exp Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effect of teambuilding on team development was studied with a quasi-experimental design by evaluating consultants' teambuilding interventions in 20 experimental groups within a Swedish state authority. These were compared to 22 control groups that did not receive an intervention. Team development was assessed through pre-and post-test with the "Group Development Questionnaire" (GDQ). Results indicated that experimental groups had significant higher values on scale IV in the GDQ in the post-test compared to control groups. There were no significant differences between experimental and control groups on GDQ scale I-III across time. The results indicate that teambuilding contributes to team development and encourages to further research with regard to "real life" work groups.

show abstract

An appraisal of key factors in the implementation of occupational stress interventions

Cited by 160 publications

References 34 publications

Process evaluation for organizational stress and well-being interventions: Implications for theory, method, and practice.

Process evaluation for organizational stress and well-being interventions: Implications for theory, method, and practice.

Self‐efficacy, school resources, job stressors and burnout among Spanish primary and secondary school teachers: a structural equation approach

The Effect of Teambuilding on Team Development: A Quasi-Experiment within a Swedish State Authority

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About