Raymond Randall, Karina Nielson and Sturle Tyedt (2009)
wrote that “in current European legislation there is a clear emphasis on the
use of organizational-level interventions (changes in the design, organization,
and management of work) as a way of improving working conditions and tackling
problems such as work stress. Research has shown that these interventions can
have very powerful effects on employee satisfaction and well-being (Bond,
Flaxman, & Loivette, 2006; Elo, Ervasti, & Mattila, 2008; Semmer,
2006).
But what is happening in practice? ‘Stress’ can be one of
the most misunderstood words in business today – you’ll have people reading this
who will claim to thrive on stress, implying that they need stress to perform
at their best. Yet it’s not actually stress they strive on – but a challenge,
sometimes under pressure – also at a stage when the ‘excited’ individual isn’t
stressed in the first place. You’ll have other’s who will feel stressed but
will be too scared or nervous to talk about it within their organisation –
firstly, not really knowing who they would talk to about it.
Then you’ll have a few, a small few, who work within an
organisational culture where the negative impact of stress on an employee’s
performance is recognised and ‘open’ internal systems exist to deal with stress
related issues. Where these issues can stem from work and/or personal based
issues – but where the most common cause of stress, by far, is organisational
change.
Of course it doesn’t help that in today’s business world
change is the rule not the exception – so preparing for and managing potential
‘stress-related activities’ should be one skill organisational management, at
all levels, are equipped to deal with. But although managing change is a core
topic of many training and development courses – it still seems to be an area
where management and leadership are sadly lacking.
I’m old fashioned, so always suggest to leaders who are about
to implement change programmes that they treat others like they would like to
be treated themselves – but sometimes this falls on deaf ears. It’s unfortunate
that some leaders still prefer to use the gung-ho approach, using power and
threats to ‘force’ change on the organisation. In fact it’s my belief that one
reason ‘leaders’ use this ‘power’ approach to change is that they are already
‘stressed’ themselves and they find the use of power a ‘release’ from some of
the stress – weird but true.
As Randall, Nielson and Tydet mention “participation plays a
major role in well-known stress intervention theories such as the German Health
Circles (Aust & Ducki, 2004) and risk management approaches to work stress
(e.g. Cox et al., 2000). Participation may help to ensure employee buy-in and
commitment and make use of employees’ expertise, thus improving the chances of
intervention success (Kompier, Cooper, & Geurts, 2000; Kompier, Geurts,
Grundemann, Vink, & Smulders, 1998). Line managers also appear to play an
important role in the implementation of many organizational-level stress
management interventions (Donaldson-Feilder, Yarker, & Lewis, 2008).
Previous research suggests that the line manager is important in the communication
processes that underpin and determine the impact of changes (Jimmieson, Terry,
& Callan, 2004). Line managers help to keep employees up-to-date about
anticipated events, the consequences of change and employees new work roles
(Øyum, Kvernberg Andersen, Pettersen Buvik, Knutstad, & Skarholt, 2006). For
example, a study on downsizing found that information helped to reduce uncertainty
and anxiety, whereas poor communication was related to absenteeism and turnover
(Johnson, Bernhagen, Miller, & Allen, 1996),” (p.4).
With many organisations still suffering from the effects of
the global meltdown – stress levels are already high in many organisations –
where uncertainty about the future doesn’t help. When the change comes - which
it has to for many organisations to survive – often it’s the simple lack of
communication that causes the employees to start the negative rumours on the
corporate grapevine – that just adds to the already underlying stresses within
the organisation.
Randall, Nielson and Tydet also highlight how “quantitative
measures of readiness for change have been used in a variety of organizational
change interventions. Readiness for change is usually conceptualized as
containing capability and motivation components that can be measured at an organizational
or individual level (Weiner, Amick, & Lee, 2008). Such measures show some,
albeit inconsistent, predictive validity in relation to change outcomes (Weiner
et al., 2008). To date, these measures have not been used in the evaluation of organizational-level
stress management interventions. However, several qualitative process
evaluation studies of stress management interventions have discussed the importance
of organizational and individual capability and motivation to change (Nytrø et
al., 2000; Saksvik et al., 2002). In addition some authors have mentioned the
role of employees’ previous experiences of similar interventions in determining
their response to subsequent interventions (Saksvik et al., 2002; Theberge,
Granzow, Cole, Laing, & The Ergonomic Intervention Evaluation Research
Group, 2006),” (p.4).
So what the business world needs today are executives and managers who
are sensitive to the ‘mood’ of the organisation and who can identify ‘stress’
when it appears and develop one-on-one interventions to deal with it. The
payback is huge, as you’ll have an organisation focused on change, with a
dedicated support system to see the process through. A top team that recognises
that stress harms productivity and motivation – and that if they take a
transformational approach to change they can ‘lead’ the organisation through the
process with ‘everyone’ on board and intact.
It’s organisations with these cultures instilled in the
leadership and management functions that will lead the business community
through the 21st century.
References
Randall, R., Nielsen, K. and Tvedt, S. D. (2009). The
development of five scales to measure employees' appraisals of
organizational-level stress management interventions. Work & Stress; Vol.
23 Issue 1, p.1-23.