Chapter 7 Psychological and Soical Demands and Resources.docx

Psychosocial Demands and Resources at Work Many psychological and social aspects of work jointly influence or affect each other, creating complex demands and resources that can have strong and lasting effects on WHSWB. Sometimes these influences are positive, such as when perceived job control helps...

Psychosocial Demands and Resources at Work Many psychological and social aspects of work jointly influence or affect each other, creating complex demands and resources that can have strong and lasting effects on WHSWB. Sometimes these influences are positive, such as when perceived job control helps to weaken the relationship between specific work demands and unhealthy worker outcomes. Sometimes these shared influences are negative, such as when workers experience boredom at work, which is made worse by lack of control over how tasks are accomplished. Psychosocial demands and resources are difficult to manage or control in work settings because they often operate invisibly within and between workers. The effects of such demands can also be exacerbated by the presence of more visible physical and environmental work demands (Winwood & Lushington, 2006), which we discuss in Chapter 10. The theories we reviewed in Chapter 6 provide a starting point for understanding psychosocial demands and resources. Here we dig deeper into this essential area of OHP research and practice, beginning with a review of the main types of psychosocial demands and resources. Cognitive Demands and Resources Extending from the expanded stimulus-response model we presented in Chapter 2, recall that most of the intervening processes linking stimuli to responses involve some level of cognitive processing. These cognitive processes can involve perception, appraisal, and response planning (e.g., Hockey, 1997). More negative forms of appraisal (e.g., demands as hindrances or threats) are associated with negative and resource-draining personal responses and work-related outcomes, while more positive appraisals (i.e., challenge) are associated with opportunities for achievement, growth, and resource replenishment (e.g., Boswell et al., 2004; Crane & Searle, 2016; also, note that, regardless of how demands are cognitively appraised, their physiological effects are consistent; Mazzola & Disselhorst, 2019). In this section we explore several essential forms of psychosocial demand and resource phenomena linked to workers’ cognitive processing of work-related stimuli. Perceived Workload A commonly studied and strongly influential psychosocial demand is workers’ perception of workload, or the amount and difficulty one’s work (i.e., its quantitative and qualitative aspects; Bowling & Kirkendall, 2012). Research has shown that perceived workload is significantly associated with multiple other forms of work-related demands and general stress reactions, and can be detrimental to WHSWB in a variety of ways (e.g., Bowling et al., 2015; Karasek et al., 1988). Perceived workload can be an excellent, broad-spectrum indicator of overall work demands. However, it is important in OHP research and practice to clearly differentiate between workload as a demand and workload as an indication of strain. Perceived Constraints Paradoxically, one of the most common psychosocial demands is the perception of having inadequate resources to address demands. This is the essence of perceived resource, situational, or organizational constraints (e.g., Peters & O’Connor, 1980; Villanova & Roman, 1993). Constraints can also be real or perceived impediments or barriers that prevent workers from accessing resources that are needed. Addressing constraints directly is more likely to be effective than broadly increasing general resources; sometimes the solution to a constraint is not more resources, but better access to existing resources. For example, if it takes a complex form and 48 hours to access the talents of your organization’s IT department, the fix for this constraint is simply streamlining the process of accessing the resources that already exist. The point to note here is perceived constraints can emerge from missing resources and difficulty accessing available resources. We agree with others who have argued that these types of constraints need more attention (Pindek & Spector, 2016), given that they are a major factor connected to many WHSWB phenomena. Perceived Control and Self-Efficacy Perceived control (or lack thereof) when responding to a work demand can be a resource when present or an additional form of cognitive demand when it is absent. This complex psychosocial resource (Spector, 1998), and sometimes demand, is perhaps most directly aligned with the Demands-Control theory (Karasek, 1979), but also with the resource theories we outlined in Chapter 6. Recall that workers tend to manage demands better when they have more latitude or control over how they respond to those demand. Research from a Job Demands-Resources perspective has also shown that control, as a resource at work, can protect workers from the negative effects of job demands (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007; Schaufeli & Taris, 2014). In a related fashion, control over work breaks and time outside of work can help workers more easily replenish resources (e.g., Sonnentag et al., 2017). Often linked to actual or perceived control over one’s work, is a worker’s own sense of confidence in their abilities to be able to meet work demands. This cognitive belief is often studied as self-efficacy (Bandura, 1977). Heavy work demands are daunting, even when perceived control is high, unless the worker is confident in their ability to address those demands (e.g., Meier et al., 2008). In essence, then, the presence of self-efficacy enables workers to access or make use of the resource of available control. Additional research has further shown that those with higher levels of self-efficacy are also more likely to seek and find ways to exercise control over their work, sometimes in the form of job crafting, especially in resource poor work environments (Tims et al., 2014; Xanthopoulou et al., 2009). As an interesting reciprocal effect, engaging in job crafting also appears to strengthen workers’ self-efficacy and perception of other resources more generally (e.g., van Wingerden et al., 2017). Perceived (In)security and (In)justice Another type of cognitively oriented psychosocial demand that is also a potential resource is the extent to which workers generally perceive and experience (in)security and (in)justice while working. Insecurity regarding one’s working and corresponding financial situation is a form of psychological demand that can negatively affect workers’ attitudes (Ashford et al., 1989), lead to emotional exhaustion (De Cuyper et al., 2014), and weigh heavily on workers’ minds, potentially distracting or impairing general cognitive and behavioral functioning (Sverke et al., 2002). This particular psychological demand also can have serious consequences at the level of an organization, including increased rates of turnover and reductions in worker performance (cf., Greenhalgh & Rosenblatt, 1984). The psychological demand of insecurity is often explored in OHP research with respect to job and income insecurity (e.g., Ashford et al., 1989; Strazdins et al., 2004), but there are deeper issues here that are only beginning to be explored. Perceptions of insecurity at work are likely to correlate with experiences of injustice, which may be due to workers’ minority status, poverty, education level, citizenship, or any number of other factors in work settings (e.g., Landsbergis et al., 2014). Research jointly considering insecurity and injustice has identified additive effects on psychological strain (Francis & Barling, 2005) and sometimes complex conditioning effects, such that these demands mediate or moderate the effects of each other on various health-related outcomes (e.g., Piccoli & De Witte, 2015). Insecurity and perceptions of injustice in and about our work create additional interrelated demands, over and above those associated with normal work responsibilities. These types of demands also force workers to question the security and stability of other important resources (e.g., relationships, shelter and food, pay and benefits). Emotional Demands and Resources Another major class of psychosocial demands and resources are those experienced emotionally. Two commonly studied examples of these phenomena are emotional labor and empathy. Emotional Labor Workers in many occupations must manage their emotional displays so as not to upset the people they serve. Although we all regulate our emotions to some degree in social interactions (e.g., Beal et al., 2013), so-called emotional display rules (Diefendorff & Richard, 2003; Gosserand & Diefendorff, 2005) are essentially added demands on workers to demonstrate and exhibit emotions that are contrary to what they may actually be feeling. This type of forced emotional labor is a major psychosocial demand that especially affects service-oriented workers. Researchers have distinguished between surface acting and deep acting as distinct forms of emotional labor (i.e., faking versus experiencing emotions to meet display rules), with some evidence suggesting that former may be more detrimental to workers than the latter (Brotheridge & Grandey, 2002). While researchers continue to tease apart that nuance, the more essential WHSWB reality here is that covering up what we are really feeling and displaying an entirely different set of opposing feelings drains important resources (Grandey et al., 2005). It is most certainly true that controlling our emotions is often essential to controlling our behaviors in sometimes challenging work situations – emotional labor is not wrong or unnecessary; it is a very real and often challenging component to many occupations. Thankfully, developing research suggests that certain types of resources (e.g., emotional intelligence, general affectivity) may support workers’ efforts to manage these demands (e.g., Liu et al., 2008). There are also some trainable skills for regulating one’s emotions that can help workers who often encounter these demands (Buruck et al., 2016; Edelman & van Knippenberg, 2016; Hulsheger et al., 2015). Empathy Whereas emotional labor is clearly a demand on workers’ psychosocial resources, empathy is more complex. Empathy is, “the action of understanding, being aware of, being sensitive to, and vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts, and experience of another…”, often without knowledge of the other person’s complete circumstances (Merriam-Webster, n.d.). In research and practice, empathy is often treated as an emotional resource (with cognitive elements), though demonstrating empathy, especially over extended periods of time or in otherwise very demanding situations, can be quite resource depleting – ask any social worker, nurse, physician, teacher, etc. Research regarding empathy is limited in OHP, but interest is growing, especially given the broad impact empathy can have on workers and the people they serve. For example, Heckenberg et al. (2020) found that job resources and empathy (a personal resource) seemed to protect social service care workers (as shown by effects on various physiological indicators of stress and health). This is consistent with the findings of a systematic review by Wilkinson et al. (2017), which highlighted the negative linkage between empathy and burnout among healthcare professionals. Interestingly, although practicing empathy is a form of emotional labor, existing research suggests that outcomes associated with empathy are more positive than negative (e.g., Pohl et al., 2015). Findings like these support intervention efforts to improve workers’ capacity for empathy (e.g., Krasner et al., 2009). The effectiveness of such interventions may be improved with corresponding efforts to provide workers with the resources they need to demonstrate empathy on the job (e.g., coworker and supervisor support). Social Demands and Resources A third general class of psychosocial work demands and resources pertain to the nature of social interactions within the work environment. Such interactions can absolutely serve as a resource when they are supportive, but they can also quickly become major demands if they turn negative or uncivil. Workers also struggle when the social expectations and requirements of work-related role(s) are unclear or interfere with workers’ other life role demands. We explore in more detail issues of interpersonal and role-related demands and resources in Chapters 8 and 9, respectively. Here, we examine a couple of more general and essential forms of social demands and resources. Norms and Expectations Social pressures to conform and match general behavioral expectations at work are major demands that can manifest in various ways. Sometimes these social demands take the form of stigmas in the workplace or concerns over being treated differently because of a socially undesirable attribute or behavior. In OHP, stigma have been studied pertaining to psychological health (Corrigan et al., 2015), physical health (McGonagle & Barnes-Farrell, 2014), and involvement in safety incidents (Black et al., 2019). Social norms and expectations can be particularly difficult for newcomers to manage, especially in organizations that do not engage in high-volume hiring and where a new hire may continue to be the “new person” for some time. At this level, we tend to think about social pressure as negative demands, but social norms and expectations also provide needed clarity and structure for workers, particularly those in new situations. Social norms also help to establish appropriate and inappropriate forms of social interaction among people in particular work environments. Social Support Another work-related social factor that can be both demand and resource is social support. Lack of social support is an influential demand (e.g., Blanton & Morris, 1999), while the presence of social support can be seen as a valuable resource. Such support may come from coworkers or supervisors (Halbesleben, 2006), and from sources outside the organization who encourage and facilitate workers’ success (e.g., Russo et al., 2016). The large body of OHP-related research on the topic of social support highlights the power of our connections with others to directly and indirectly improve workers’ abilities to manage effects of demands (e.g., Cohen & Wills, 1985; Frese, 1999). Sometimes, however, social support is present, but not helpful because it is insufficient or not properly matching a specific need. Social support can even “hurt” workers if it draws attention to insecurity, such as a boss trying to help with a project, but a worker feeling like the boss does not trust in their abilities (Beehr et al., 2010; Tucker et al., 2018). Support also functions at a number of levels within organizations. Perhaps the best examples of this come from the research on perceived organizational support (Eisenberger et al., 2016; Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002) and supportive supervisors who can help workers manage a variety of WHSWB issues (e.g., Russo et al., 2018; Sianoja et al., 2020). Consistent support has emerged for a positive link between organizational support and worker attitudes and well-being (Kurtessis et al., 2015). Although there are nuances in these findings, the main takeaway is that supportive connections at work are broadly useful and valuable resources for workers. Why Psychosocial Demands and Resources Matter Psychosocial demands and the resources needed to meet them are typically experienced at a personal level, hidden from general view. This is an important area of OHP research and practice because every organization is a combination of individuals managing these issues. In this section, we explore several more specific reasons psychosocial demands and resources need our attention. Worker Health and Resilience Responding to demands of any form requires workers to expend or use up available resources. Chronic exposure to psychosocial work demands without sufficient resources to meet those demands can be especially debilitating over time (e.g., Elovainio et al., 2015). This is largely because these types of demands are very difficult to “shift gears” away from or accommodate compared to physical and environmental work demands (see Chapter 10). For example, when physical work demands (e.g., lifting a heavy load) are met, the demand stops requiring resources to manage. In contrast, many psychosocial demands do not automatically turn off or leave us alone even when we have physically detached from our work environments. As discussed more in Chapter 6, an inability to detach psychologically and socially from work-related demands can be particularly detrimental to workers’ ability to recover depleted resources and generally maintain positive psychological and physical health and generally demonstrate resilience (e.g., Meier & Cho, 2019; Sonnentag et al., 2017). Ensuring that workers have the necessary psychosocial resources to meet work-related demands (through high-quality recovery and self-care practices) is an essential component to protecting and promoting WHSWB (Leka & Jain, 2010; Niedhammer et al., 2015). Business and Societal Reasons Our work environments are major sources of psychosocial demands and resources. Although psychosocial demands may be personally experienced, there are many ways in which organizations can help workers to manage these challenges with adjustments to work assignments, and features of the work environment and culture. For some individuals, work roles provide more consistent and controlled opportunities for psychosocial resource replenishment than nonwork roles. Business and Societal Reasons Our work environments are major sources of psychosocial demands and resources. Although psychosocial demands may be personally experienced, there are many ways in which organizations can help workers to manage these challenges with adjustments to work assignments, and features of the work environment and culture. For some individuals, work roles provide more consistent and controlled opportunities for psychosocial resource replenishment than nonwork roles. Helping workers to manage psychosocial demands and resources is a legitimate business concern. Organizations suffer when workers regularly must manage high levels of psychosocial work demands without the necessary and corresponding resources. Work-related psychosocial demands and resources can also have a broader impact on society, due to their tendency to have lasting spillover effects that impact workers, and their families and communities. As just one example, consider how the effects of chronically imbalanced psychosocial demands and resources can negatively affect the functioning of essential workers in all segments of society (e.g., healthcare professionals, police officers, social workers, teachers). Part of the complexity involving psychosocial demands and resources is that their effects are often intertwined and difficult to tease apart. A positive implication of this is that focusing on one or two essential psychosocial demands and resources can have multiple positive ripple effects at the organizational and societal level. For example, worker performance and perceived ability to be productive suffer when perceived resources like control and support are absent, but increase when such resources are present (e.g., Dollard et al., 2000; Madrid et al., 2017; Park et al., 2004). In a particularly strong intervention study, Nielsen et al. (2002) demonstrated how attention to psychosocial risk factors can even help organizations reduce turnover and absenteeism, and improve worker health. These types of positive effects can also transcend organizations and impact society, as shown by Stansfeld et al. (2013), who found that support and control at work are connected to population-level well-being. Methodological Considerations and Practical Recommendations Given the personal nature of psychosocial demands and resources, most OHP research and practice in this area leverages self-reported measures and individual-level interventions. Effective use of these methodologies requires consideration of several important details, as outlined in this section. Measuring and Monitoring Psychosocial Demands and Resources Efforts to understand and intervene to address psychosocial demands and resources will be more effective if informed by high quality data. When relying on self-report methods, such data are best obtained using mixed method (i.e., quantitative and qualitative) data collection efforts that also ideally involve multiple rounds of data collection over time (to permit observation of trends and trajectories of change within individual workers and groups). Primary methodologies used when studying psychosocial demands and resources are surveys and interviews or focus groups (e.g., Gondim & Borges-Andrade, 2009; Montgomery et al., 2013). Other common methods include experience sampling and diary studies to monitor and track how these types of demands and resources develop and are managed, and social network analyses to illustrate social interaction patterns and interdependencies (e.g., Almeida et al., 2016; Ferrin et al., 2006). With respect to survey techniques, most OHP professionals will design and build surveys to fit specific research and intervention evaluation situations. These surveys typically gather data that workers report about themselves and are often composed of a mix of established measures of psychosocial demands (e.g., Karasek et al., 1998; Spector & Jex, 1998). It is also possible to gather self-reported survey data on psychosocial resources using measures targeting specific constructs, such as control or social support, or even respondents’ more generalized sense of resource availability (Hobfoll et al., 1992). When using less structured approaches, like interviews and focus groups, questions are typically tailored to specific research or intervention evaluation purposes. The same is true for longitudinal measurement efforts involving experience sampling and diary study techniques, which often require adapting and creating measures that are brief and easy to administer in a repeated fashion (e.g., single-item and limited response choice items). Intervening to Improve Psychosocial Demand and Resource Management Workers’ ability to manage psychosocial demands and resources can be improved through interventions in work settings. Here, we highlight several such strategies at the individual, group, leader, and organizational level. Strategies for Individuals At the level of individual workers, interventions that facilitate personal job crafting and emotional regulation are particularly appropriate options for facilitating management of psychosocial work demands and resources. As introduced in Chapter 6, job crafting is a technique by which employees drive change in some aspect of their work environment or process (e.g., Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001). Facilitating job crafting for individual workers is a way of granting workers more control over at least some aspect of their work, including psychosocial (and other) forms of demands and resources. In allowing and encouraging workers to do this, organizations and leaders also signal trust, respect, and support for workers. There is no single way to go about crafting a job, but it is essential to ensure that workers are supported in identifying their resources, strengths, values, and motivations, and then encouraged to consider these elements as they determine how they will approach meeting work-related demands going forward. Employees who feel good about their work tend to be more likely to engage in job crafting (e.g., Clegg & Spencer, 2007), so some management-driven effort to recognize good work and promote worker self-efficacy may be a necessary foundation before employees feel empowered to craft their own work. To address challenges associated with emotion-oriented work demands, individual workers may benefit from emotion regulation interventions designed to improve their abilities to recognize and manage emotions. This type of educational and skills-based intervention can be focused internally (within the worker) and externally (when interacting with others). Specific techniques that have been helpful in this type of intervention include mindfulness and meditation (Hulsheger et al., 2015), relaxation (Jain et al., 2007), and prayer (e.g., McCulloch & Parks-Stamm, 2020). Strategies for Groups, Leaders, and Organizations Management of psychosocial work demands and resources can also be facilitated by interventions that operate at a higher level than individual workers. We examine three major forms of such interventions. CLARIFYING NORMS AND FACILITATING SUPPORT Intervention efforts to improve general awareness of psychosocial demands and resources can be valuable for workers and their supervisors. Shared knowledge of these factors that influence WHSWB can facilitate the setting and maintenance of healthy social norms and expectations pertaining to what demands are made, how they are framed, and how they are evaluated. Supervisor awareness of subordinates’ abilities and available resources may also lead to more reasonable demands. Two general and common techniques for doing this in organizations are through new-hire onboarding or socialization (e.g., Lapointe et al., 2014) and through mentoring relationships (Allen et al., 2017; Baranik et al., 2010). Socialization efforts can provide new members to an organization with important information and clarity regarding norms and expectations for responding to common psychosocial demands within a particular work environment. Longer-term, ongoing mentorship relationships can also help to build and sustain organizational cultures in which workers feel supported and are likely to communicate better with others to manage psychosocial work-related demands. There is even some evidence that the benefits of supervisor support can emerge when workers do not actively utilize it (Munc et al., 2017). REDESIGNING WORK FOR MEANING AND CONTROL Work redesign is a common strategy for addressing an imbalance between psychosocial (and other forms of) demands and resources. At the individual level, this can happen through job crafting. At a broader group or even organizational level, redesign can occur through enriching, enlarging, or otherwise changing workers’ experiences in a way that provides a greater sense of meaning and control related to demands. Job enrichment is a job redesign technique supported by elements of job characteristics theory (Hackman & Oldham, 1976), which suggests that workers will be more motivated and perform better if their daily work includes skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, and feedback. These characteristics in jobs are also good for WHSWB. Straightforward applications of this theory help to reduce repetition, monotony, and boredom, and increase overall richness of one’s work experiences. More specifically, organizations can increase task identity by creating ways for workers to be involved in a complete work process (which can often also increase task variety). Similarly, task significance can be generated by helping employees to see the importance of their work, either in relation to the functioning of the organization or the service provided to customers, clients, or patients. Autonomy and control are enhanced when a worker has some freedom to choose their tasks or at least the order or manner in which tasks are completed. Feedback helps workers to know how they are doing and can provide room to either recognize their good work or improve their work. Another intervention approach involves applying principles of the Demand-Control theory (discussed more in Chapter 6). Conti et al. (2006) used this model to explain how an organizational effort to implement a lean production system may improve process efficiency, but lead to high levels of worker stress. Many organizations have experimented with similar workforce optimization and minimization efforts. From a psychosocial demands and resources perspective, lean can become mean very quickly. Organizations operating with no excess personnel create work environments in which there is no room for workers to have a down day, or for someone to be sick, take time off to care for a loved one, or generally to be human. An important point here is that organizational interventions to improve worker control must do more than adjust workers’ perceptions of control; workers also need the opportunity to exercise such control. Many studies have documented the power of control within work settings; as one example, Cendales-Ayala et al. (2017) demonstrated how providing control over one’s work could improve physiological and psychological health-related outcomes. ENHANCING SECURITY AND STABILITY At an organizational level, there is value in exploring ways to enhance workers’ feelings of security and stability at work. While the specific approach will vary by organization, typically this will involve improvements to transparency and communication throughout an organization’s hierarchy. Organizations can also enhance workers’ sense of security and stability by fostering a growth mindset (e.g., Dweck & Yeager, 2019) that encourages workers to continue developing their skills and learning new things. This strategy builds adaptability and value in workers, not just within their current organization, but in a more generalizable sense if there is ever a future period of insecurity and workers need to consider other employment options. Related to this, proper management of talent resources facilitates better management of psychosocial demands and resources. This requires developing and validating consistent and defensible processes for recruiting, selecting, developing, and promoting talent throughout the organization. This also involves realistic workforce and succession planning efforts that factor in the need to ensure workers opportunities to recover and perhaps also avoid absurdly high psychosocial demands altogether. Good workforce planning and cross-training within a workforce can also enable organizations to avoid large-scale terminations during periods of economic instability, by using furloughs and other flexible work assignments to provide workers with economic security and stability when it is most needed. Evaluating Psychosocial Demand and Resource Interventions Given the complex nature of psychosocial demands and resources, interventions in this area of OHP may generate some short-term benefits, but are more likely to show their full effects only over an extended period of time and effort. Initial attempts to address one psychosocial demand (e.g., lack of support) may end up developing into more complex interventions once other connected demands are identified (e.g., perceived workload limiting socializing opportunities). Similarly, it will take time for workers to adopt new ways of working (e.g., job crafting), especially if they do not feel supported by their supervisors and leaders. We recommend that psychosocial demand and resource intervention evaluations involve multiple time points of data collection, to address these concerns and enable modeling of trends and trajectories of change, and to inform process-related adjustments to an intervention strategy if needed. Also, because of the personal nature of psychosocial demands and resources, it is recommended that intervention evaluations in this area include a variety of question formats and a combination of quantitative and qualitative data collection strategies. This will help to limit the effects of single/common source bias, and greatly improve your ability to understand and interpret what the evaluation data indicates. Especially valuable are open-ended remarks from workers participating in such interventions, as this information can help us understand what we may otherwise miss in quantitative evaluation data by itself. Similarly, measuring key individual differences among intervention participants (e.g., nonwork demands, demographics) can help explain why an intervention works better for some workers than others, and why this might be. Concluding Thoughts and Reality Check Psychosocial demands and resources may be difficult to see, but their impact is real. On the demand side, we have all witnessed this in the exhausted faces of healthcare professionals or restaurant servers who have had to regulate their emotions or deal with work-related constraints. You may have experienced this yourself after navigating a particularly challenging day with coworkers or customers. In terms of psychosocial resources, we all know even the most complex work demands are easier to manage with some control and social support. While research continues in this area of OHP, enough is known at this point to put our theories, knowledge, and methods to work to improve workers’ and organizations’ management of psychosocial demands and resources. By partnering with organizations and helping workers directly, OHP professionals can improve workers’ opportunities to have meaningful and manageable psychological and social experiences at work every day.