3.8 Article

HSE management standards indicator tool and positive work-related outcomes

出版社

EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1108/IJWHM-11-2013-0044

关键词

Personal development; Job performance; Active learning hypothesis; HSE management standards; Indicator Tool; Work-related stress

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to evaluate if the Management Standards (MS) Indicator Tool developed by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) for the assessment of work-related stress is associated with positive work-related outcomes. Design/methodology/approach - In total, 326 employees of an Italian firm filled in a questionnaire including the HSE Indicator Tool (measuring MS) and validated scales investigating personal development, job performance and Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB). Regression analyses were run to evaluate the explained variance of the outcomes and the demands/control interaction effect hypothesized by Karasek's active learning hypothesis. Findings - The MS explained variance of all the outcomes analysed and the active learning hypothesis was confirmed for personal development. Contrary to previous studies on negative stress-related outcomes, job content MS were the most important predictors. However, higher job demands were unexpectedly positively associated with the outcomes. Practical implications - Taking into account positive work-related outcomes could provide organizations with additional information for the development of interventions with greater emphasis on preventive orientation (improvement of health, well-being and motivation, rather than only work stress reduction). Originality/value - The study provides new insight into the relationship between MS and positive work-related outcomes, thus expanding the nomological network of the Indicator Tool questionnaire and giving empirical evidence to the notion of the business case for work stress prevention. Firms performing well on MS could expect greater worker development and higher performance.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据