El proceso de creación del Cubismo

Throughout the years, numerous significant psychosocial and organisational work-related hazards have been identified as aspects with impact on workers and OHS. According to Cox and Griffiths (2005) psychosocial hazards are features of the design and management of work, and its social and organisational contexts that have the potential for causing psychological or physical harm.

The PRIMA-EF has classified the most significant psychosocial hazards into, essentially, ten groups. According to this framework, the main psychosocial work-related hazards can be classified as displayed in table 1.2.

Although there is a generable agreement in the literature on psychosocial hazards, it is important to bear in mind that new forms of work give rise to new hazards – not all of which are yet presented in empirical data (González et al., 2010).

Originally, authors noticed that workplace characteristics ranging from health and safety practices by the organization (Demerouti et al., 2004; Pitsopoulos and Greenwood, 2004; Pisarski et al., 2008) to work design issues associated with basic ergonomics (Thomas et al., 1995; Robertson et al., 2008) – working

environment – work under or over-load, and pace, high levels of time pressure

– workload & pace – had negative impacts on individuals (Danna and Griffin, 1999; Leka and Jain, 2010; Costa and Santos, 2013; Malard et al., 2013; Laine et

Sara Leitao Alexandre – PhD Thesis 72 Table 1.2 – Psychosocial work-related hazards as per PRIMA-EF classification

(adapted from Leka and Cox (2008).

Work-related Psychosocial Hazards Environment &

equipment

Inadequate equipment availability, suitability or maintenance; poor environmental conditions such as lack of space, poor lighting, excessive noise.

Workload & work pace Work overload or under load, machine pacing, high levels _{of time pressure, continually subject to deadlines.} Interpersonal

relationships at work

Social or physical isolation, poor relationships with superiors or co-workers, interpersonal conflict, lack of social support

Work schedule Shift working, night shifts, inflexible work schedules, and

unpredictable hours, long or unsociable hours.

Job content

Lack of variety or short work cycles, fragmented or meaningless work, under use of skills, high uncertainty, continuous exposure to people through work.

Role in organisation Role ambiguity, role conflict and responsibility for people Control Low participation in decision making, lack of control over

workload, pacing, shift working, etc.

Career development

Career stagnation and uncertainty, under promotion or over promotion, poor pay, job insecurity, low social value to work.

Home-work interface Conflicting demands of work and home, low support at

home, dual career problems.

Organisational culture & function

Poor communication, low levels of support for problem- solving and personal development, lack of definition of, or agreement on, organisational objectives.

Furthermore, the nature of the relationship at work with superiors, colleagues, subordinates, and possible interpersonal conflict or lack of social support –

interpersonal relationships - have been implicated in health and wellbeing

outcomes (Ylipaavalniemi et al., 2005; Rugulies et al., 2007; Geldart et al., 2010; Leka and Jain, 2010; Afshin et al., 2012; Leiter et al., 2015). This has been further linked to feelings of procedural and relational justice which, in turn, have shown to lead to stress-related disorders (Nieuwenhuijsen et al., 2010;

Sara Leitao Alexandre – PhD Thesis 73 Singh et al., 2013). Similarly, a work environment where co-workers and supervisors are supportive of employees’ psychological and mental health concerns, and respond appropriately as needed is also essential (Burton, 2010). Various other elements of work have been identified as significant aspects for the health and wellbeing of workers. These include workplace aggression (Rugulies et al., 2007)), workplace violence (Landsbergis, 2003a), bullying or harassment (McDonald, 2012; Nielsen and Einarsen, 2012; Neall and Tuckey, 2014), various forms of dysfunctional behaviour (Hershcovis, 2011; Anthony Geoffrey Sheard, 2013) and social or physical isolation (Danna and Griffin, 1999; Leka and Jain, 2010). Psychosocial risks, work-related stress, violence, harassment, bullying (or mobbing) are now also widely recognised as major challenges to OHS (Leka and Jain, 2010; Eurofound and EU-OSHA, 2014; International Labour Organization (ILO), 2014; Laine et al., 2014).

PRIMA-EF also encompasses hazards such as violence, bullying and harassment at work, however this framework considers these a multiform phenomenon which should be seen as the consequence of one of the factors listed in table 1.2 (Leka and Cox, 2008).

It is important to bear in mind that organisational work factors can also contribute to the level of exposure to physical hazards on the job, for example, workers working extended work hours may be at risk of exceeding permissible exposure limits to hazardous substances (Landsbergis, 2003a). Increased public contact and alternative work schedules (such as shift work), may expose workers to an increased risk of violence on the job or anti-social behaviours.

Sara Leitao Alexandre – PhD Thesis 74 Factors intrinsic to the job as shift work, long hours, travel, risk and danger, new technologies (work schedule) and job content (variety tasks, work cycles, fragmented or meaningless work, under use of skills, high uncertainty) have also proven to be important for the maintenance of the health and wellbeing of the workforce (Sparks et al., 2001; Silla et al., 2005; Stansfeld and Candy, 2006a; Leka and Jain, 2010).

Recent literature has shown that role in the organisation (role ambiguity, role conflict, and the degree of responsibility for others) and level of control (for instance, low participation in decision making) can have significant effects on the health and wellbeing of individuals as well (Burton et al., 1999; Carayon and Lim, 1999; Arezes and Swuste, 2012). Furthermore, factors linked to career

development, job insecurity, social value of work are also known to be

important (Sparks et al., 2001; Silla et al., 2005; Stansfeld and Candy, 2006a; Leka and Jain, 2010).

The home-work interface (work-life balance) is also an important factor in the general health of individuals (Joyce et al., 2010; Laine et al., 2014; Lunau et al., 2014) considering that, on the one hand, the interaction between work and the family can be a source of pressure itself and, on the other, this relationship can be a source of “spill-over” stress as well. A positive environment where there is recognition of the need for balance between the demands of work, family and personal life is, therefore, essential (Burton, 2010).

As clarified by Leka and Jain (2010), psychosocial hazards and work-related stress can stem from organisational culture and management styles. A work

Sara Leitao Alexandre – PhD Thesis 75 environment where there is effective leadership and support that helps employees understand how their work contributes to the organization, that promotes worker involvement open consultation across stakeholders and communicates whether there are impending changes happening is also considered a positive workplace (Burton et al., 1999; Carayon and Lim, 1999). Furthermore, an organisational culture with strong communication, adequate levels of support for problem solving and personal development, with recognition and reward is also one that promotes a stronger a healthier workforce (Danna and Griffin, 1999; Burton, 2010).

The work environments described above should then characterise a workplace that staff can enjoy and where they feel connected to their work, and feel motivated to do their job well, thus benefiting from greater health and wellbeing (Burton, 2010). Additionally, it has been shown that work engagement is linked to workers’ wellbeing as well as higher productivity (Schaufeli et al., 2006; Right Management, 2009; Bakker et al., 2010). Hence, these authors have shown that individuals with a greater feeling of dedication and absorption at work, experiencing their job as something stimulating and energetic report better health and wellbeing but also are highly energetic and self-efficacious employees (Bakker et al., 2010).

Organisations and employers, conversely, can avail of many advantages of a strong psychosocial work environment concerning higher performance and productivity, cost reductions and numerous other business-related benefits such as more inspired employees, improved quality of personnel (leadership,

Sara Leitao Alexandre – PhD Thesis 76 work style, competencies), reduction of workers’ sickness absence compensation and of insurance premiums for health, reduction of costs related to staff turnover and replacement of workers on sick leave, amongst others (Zwetsloot et al., 2010).

5.4. Epidemiological research linking work-related psychosocial risk