Identification of actions to be taken by managers to facilitate the return to work of cancer survivors: Consensus between managers and cancer survivors

Abstract

Background Managers are considered to be main stakeholders in the return to work (RTW) of cancer survivors. However, the perspectives of cancer survivors and managers differ on what managerial actions should be taken during the RTW of cancer survivors. This difference might put effective collaboration and successful RTW at risk. Therefore, this study aims to reach consensus among managers and cancer survivors on the managerial actions to be taken during the four different RTW phases of cancer survivors (i.e., Disclosure, Treatment, RTW plan, Actual RTW). Methods The Technique for Research of Information by Animation of a Group of Experts (TRIAGE) was implemented with managers and cancer survivors (hereafter referred to as “experts”). An initial list of 24 actions was derived from a previous study. Firstly, for each action, fifteen experts were asked to indicate individually how important this action is per RTW phase (Likert scale from 1 – “Not important at all” to 6 – “Very important”). Consensus was reached when ≥ 80% (i.e., ≥ twelve experts) of the experts rated that action ≥5. Secondly, for each phase of the RTW process, the 15 actions with the highest percentage were discussed with eight experts during the collective consultation, except for the actions that already reached consensus. After discussion, the experts voted whether each action was important (“yes” / “no”) and consensus required ≥ 87.5% (i.e., ≥ seven experts) of the experts to consider an action as important. Results Twenty-five managerial actions were finally retained for at least one of the RTW phases, e.g., Disclosure: “respect privacy” and “radiate a positive attitude”, Treatment: “show appreciation” and “allow sufficient sick leave”, RTW Plan: “tailor” and “communicate”, and Actual RTW: “support practically” and “balance interest”. Conclusion Cancer survivors and managers reached consensus on the importance of 25 managerial actions, distributed into each phase of the RTW process. These actions should be considered an interplay of managerial actions by different stakeholders on the part of the employer (e.g., direct supervisor, HR-manager), and should be a responsibility that is shared by these stakeholders. The collective implementation of these actions within the company will help cancer survivors feel fully supported.

Supporting the return to work of breast cancer survivors: perspectives from Canadian employer representatives

“…Moreover, several studies have emphasized how feeling supported in the workplace, flexibility, and the implementation of support measures favor sustainable RTW and its maintenance after a cancer diagnosis [ 3 , 9 , 11 , 27 , 41 ]. A recent expert consensus, including cancer survivors and managers who had experienced the RTW process, identified actions that may be taken by managers to improve the RTW of cancer survivors [ 13 ]. Actions reflecting empathy were as follows: “offering emotional support,” “treating the survivor normally,” “reducing work related pressure,” and “tailored support” [ 13 ].…”

“…A recent expert consensus, including cancer survivors and managers who had experienced the RTW process, identified actions that may be taken by managers to improve the RTW of cancer survivors [ 13 ]. Actions reflecting empathy were as follows: “offering emotional support,” “treating the survivor normally,” “reducing work related pressure,” and “tailored support” [ 13 ]. Other authors have suggested that managers should develop emotional support skills given the unique and sensitive nature of cancer [ 42 ].…”

“…A sustainable RTW for BCSs (breast cancer survivors) relies partly on maintaining working conditions adapted to the survivor [ 12 ]. Studies from Europe have highlighted how employers can facilitate a sustainable RTW for cancer survivors at all steps of the process [ 13 , 14 ]. Efforts have been made to document the perspectives of Canadian employer representatives who manage RTW [ 15 , 16 ]; however, to date, the scientific literature from Canada has mainly focused on understanding the experience of the RTW process [ 8 , 9 , 17 , 18 ].…”

“…However, employer representatives feel ill-equipped to accompany the RTW of cancer survivors on a daily basis [ 11 ]. Consequently, employer representatives have the power to provide accommodations, such as modifying tasks, work schedule, and environment to facilitate a RTW [ 21 , 22 ], but, from their perspective, managing RTW after cancer is complex because of the many challenges and dilemmas that arise such as providing appropriate support, ensuring communication, balancing interests, and respecting privacy [ 13 , 17 , 23 , 24 ]. If European studies, related to employer representatives, are well developed [ 13 , 14 , 19 , 25 - 30 ], those in Canada should be enhanced insofar that RTW laws may vary from country to country and, as a result, employer representatives may be more or less involved in the RTW process of BCSs [ 10 , 24 , 31 ].…”

The cancer survivor—Manager dyad during the return‐to‐work process: An introduction with theoretical, conceptual, and methodological considerations

“…2 When focusing on the workplace, managers (i.e., direct supervisors, human resource managers/directors) are usually the first interlocutors for cancer survivors, and they have a primary role in supporting cancer survivors to RTW. 3 Although several managerial actions (e.g., practical or emotional support, communication) have been highlighted as being vital for a successful RTW, 4 their success depends on the willingness and ability of the manager and the cancer survivor to act as a unit. 3,5 Such a unified entity could be referred to as a "dyad".…”