Sickness presenteeism explained by balancing perceived positive and negative effects

Abstract

Within the ever-growing body of research on sickness presenteeism, studies of perceived consequences are scarce and equally rare are joint considerations of beneficial and harmful effects. This study examined how experienced and expected consequences of the behavior are related to presenteeism. Positive and negative effects were considered simultaneously and comprehensively. This approach allowed us to capture the trade-off process of individuals in deciding to work or call in sick when ill. In a cross-sectional online survey, 591 working adults in Germany rated a thoroughly developed pool of specific experienced or potential consequences of working while sick and gave an overall judgment of effects. The results show that perceptions of effects are consistent with behavior. Individuals who exhibit presenteeism do so primarily because of work-related effects such as the completion of one’s work tasks and the meeting of deadlines. Few specific effects stand out and can largely explain attendance behavior and the overall assessment of effects. The findings are consistent with the assumptions of the health belief model and the expectancy value theory of work motivation and they relate to the health-performance framework. They demonstrated that benefits and costs of the behavior are simultaneously weighed in the decision to engage in presenteeism or not.

The health-performance framework of presenteeism: A proof-of-concept study

“…Calls for a more neutral and functional definition of presenteeism ( Ruhle et al, 2019 ; Karanika-Murray and Biron, 2020 ) have led to more insightful research investigating positive motives ( Knani et al, 2021 ; Lohaus et al, 2021 ) and potential benefits ( Wang et al, 2022 ) of presenteeism. For example, evidence of positive effects for working while ill comes from Lohaus et al (2022 , 2021) who identified several categories of factors, including social norms (e.g., being liked, maintain career prospects, being loyal), financial considerations, showing endurance, and getting work done. Similarly, in a qualitative study with small enterprises, Knani et al (2021) revealed several motives explaining why workers and managers came to work despite illness.…”

“…Using insights from a range of related fields, Karanika-Murray and Biron (2020) emphasized that presenteeism has an adaptive function for workers who act with agency in the decision-making process ( Whysall et al, 2023 ). Indeed, recently Lohaus et al (2022) provided in-depth evidence that presentees make their decisions with intent and a consideration of trade-offs in the decision to work when experiencing illness. The potential for adaptation means that in order for presentees to be able to respond to both their performance requirements and the health impairments that they face, they manage their health and work resources, perhaps by either striving to protect their resources (e.g., their health, relationships at work, career development opportunities, consideration from their superior, etc.)…”

Risking one’s life to save one’s livelihood: Precarious work, presenteeism, and worry about disease exposure during the COVID-19 pandemic.

“…In the case of PWE, the primary meaning ascribed to absence is a worker’s fear about potential threats to their job and finances, retaliation from more powerful others, or obstacles in the way of taking time off (Caverley et al, 2007; Hansen & Andersen, 2008). In other words, from the theoretical perspective articulated earlier, and based on COR theory, workers perceiving themselves to be in precarious positions are likely to view absenteeism as a behavior that would further threaten their resources; in contrast, they are likely to view presenteeism as a way to prevent exacerbating threats (Lu et al, 2013) and perhaps even to present themselves as a dedicated worker (Lohaus et al, 2022) in an effort to reduce threats.…”

“…Although little research has explored the relationship between multidimensional precarious work and presenteeism, research has linked job insecurity to presenteeism and job and financial insecurity to poorer adherence to pandemic safety guidelines (Blake et al, 2010; Miraglia & Johns, 2016; Probst et al, 2020). Moreover, research finds that employees who engage in presenteeism anticipate that doing so will enable them to complete their tasks and meet their deadlines, promote the security of their jobs, stay in good standing with their manager, and promote their image as reliable and professional (Lohaus et al, 2022). Although research focused on both positive and negative effects of presenteeism, in the case of PWE, we suspect that the primary motivation is to avoid further threats to resources.…”

Pengaruh Perceived Supervisor Support Terhadap Loss of Productivity Akibat Presenteeism pada Karyawan

“…Presenteeism dengan dampak yang ditumbulkannya hadir bukan hanya disebabkan oleh faktor personal seperti kepribadian, namun juga karena berbagai faktor penyebab yang berasal dari pekerjaan dan lingkungan pekerjaannya seperti power distance, job insecurity, tuntutan pekerjaan, task significancy, kekuatiran akan penyelesaian tugas dan tenggat waktu (Lohaus et al, 2022;Quazi, 2013b). Oleh karenanya manajemen secara proaktif juga dapat mengambil peran Vol.15, No.1, Januari 2023, pp.…”