Copyright David Alman 2010 Page 1

Organizational Health

Improving Organizational Performance and Employee Well-being

Abstract

Organizational Health refers to an organization’s ability to achieve its goals based on an environment

that seeks to improve organizational performance and support employee well-being. While these two

perspectives are very different, a nexus between them means issues in one affect the other.

Improving organizational performance involves applying a systems thinking approach at organization,

process, and role levels, and supporting employee well-being involves addressing both employee

satisfaction and employee health (physical, mental, and social). Organizational health and employee

well-being audits provide the means whereby an organization can continuously learn how to improve

itself.

Contents

1. Organizational Health

2. Employee Well-Being

3. Improving Organizational Health

Conclusion

Notes:

References

1. Organizational Health

1.1 Organizational Performance and Employee Well-being

Organizational Health refers to an organization's ability to achieve its goals based on an environment

that seeks to improve Organizational Performance and support Employee Well-being [1].

Organizational Health, as a concept, reflects two perspectives:

Organizational performance, based on the organization performing as an interacting system; and

Employee well-being in terms of employee satisfaction and employee health.

Current thinking suggests that Organizational Performance and Employee Well-being are

interdependent variables that affect the other and gain from both perspectives being jointly addressed

[2]. In turn the interaction between these variables affects the organization’s ability to achieve its

goals.

A generic model of Organizational Health is shown in Figure 1 that incorporates both perspectives,

providing examples of what can be considered when assessing and improving Organizational Health.

Copyright David Alman 2010 Page 2

One way of recognising why attention should be given to addressing Organizational Health is to

consider characteristics of unhealthy organizations.

Unhealthy organizations can reflect, for example, lack of direction and accountability; misalignment of

priorities; and poor coordination in and between systems and processes causing both costly

inefficiencies and ineffectiveness. Unhealthy organizations can also demonstrate low employee

commitment and disengagement as reflected in the costs of dissatisfaction, damaging conflicts,

suppressed resentment, unnecessary absence, turnover, and presenteeism.

1.2. Organizational Performance Based on Human Activity Systems (HAS)

Some writers on Organizational Health refer to the need to address ‘soft’ factors that affect an

organization’s ability to perform such as Leadership; Direction; Capability; Cultural values [3]. Other

writers include aspects of an organization’s structural framework such as accountability,

organizational reporting structure, and coordination & control [4] that reflect “hard” factors.

Still others consider that in improving Organizational Health all aspects of a work system as well as

their interactions are involved, where improving Organizational Health is viewed as analogous to

improving an organism’s biological health. That is, Organizational Health is dependent on the

organizations performance as a system of interrelated components functioning together, seeking

balance [5].

Copyright David Alman 2010 Page 3

A system is:

“any group of interacting, interrelated, or interdependent parts that form a complex and

unified whole that has a specific purpose” [6]

To explain in practical terms how a systems approach to organizational performance can assess,

develop, and improve Organizational Health, a Generic Human Activity System (HAS) with four key

components is used. The four Key Components are:

Purpose: Such as goals, aims, outcomes, results sought.

Means: “Hard” factors such as “management”, “performance” and “architectural” systems and

the work practices they contain. For example, policies, procedures, reporting structures,

communication practices, software and hardware, operating processes;

Relations: “Soft” factors such as leadership style, supervisory and management practices,

employee behavior and relations;

Meaning: Such as an organization’s culture that provides underpinning shared values,

norms, attitudes, assumptions;

Figure 2 examples this generic Human Activity System model with its four key components made up

of “Meaning” that gives common understanding and direction to the system's “Means” and “Relations”

components. These three components, in the way they interact and perform, affect the ability of a

Human Activity System to achieve its Purpose [7].

Copyright David Alman 2010 Page 4

In a Generic Human Activity System, the term “system” draws from two different sources:

Systems Thinking. Organizational Health, and the Generic Human Activity System, uses a

“systems thinking” approach to focus on improving interactions affecting organizational

performance, productivity, and employee well-being.

Management Systems. Within the “Means” component, the term system refers to

management/ performance/ production/ architecture systems that focus on designing,

managing, and controlling prescribed processes upon which the organization runs, where

emphasis is on addressing “compliance” gaps between prescribed and actual outcomes. For

example, in systems managing the application of legislation, regulation, and standards (e.g.

HR Administration Policies, WH&S Management system, Financial Management systems)

and the setting and achievement of targets & aims (e.g. Corporate and Employee

Performance Management systems, and operating systems).

1.3 Human Activity Systems Operate at Multiple Levels

Human Activity Systems (HAS) are identifiable at Organizational; Process; and Role (team and job)

levels [8].

The organizational reporting structure in Figure 3 illustrates at organizational, process, and role level

a number of Human Activity Systems drawn around identified problem situations. For example

Human Activity Systems are drawn around:

The Organizational Structure mapping the area affected by a lack of accountabililty;

Function C mapping a Service Function area providing poor service;

Functions A & B mapping an area with poor coordination across Functions that have

interdependent processes (1,2,3,4,5 & 6) in providing delivery to external customers;

Team 6 mapping an area with unsatisfactory team performance.

Copyright David Alman 2010 Page 5

In these examples, addressing issues involves considering all the components of a Human Activity

System, and not just the obvious part. For example, in an organizational structure the lack of

accountability may have been identified as the problem situation, however in addressing this may also

involve considering:

Role redesign (Means);

Change in "core" attitudes (Meaning) over their role accountability;

Changes in the way managers are expected to work together (Relations); and

Improved alignment between the organizational structure, roles; and work relations in

achieving organizational objectives (Purpose).

Not all Human Activity Systems can be so graphically mapped against an organization’s reporting

structure, as shown in Figure 3. In Table 1, problem situations at different levels of an organization

begin to be mapped into Human Activity Systems starting with a key component (e.g. Means) where

problem situations are found.

Copyright David Alman 2010 Page 6

Figure 4 shows an example of a Human Activity System applied to improving Health Care Services

[9]. The Human Activity System shows the interrelationship between its key components, and the

Human Activity System operating across multiple levels.

Copyright David Alman 2010 Page 7

In considering approaching Human Activity Systems from organization, process, and role levels, the

key components of a Human Activity System highlight factors relevant to that key component at that

level, as exampled in Figure 5.

Copyright David Alman 2010 Page 8

1.4 Improving Organizational Performance Through Alignment

The usual approach to improving performance and productivity is based on attention to variance in

time; rate; quality; service, and cost around which management systems develop either incrementally,

or transformationally as occurs in major system changes.

In contrast, Organizational Health seeks to improve performance and productivity through improved

alignment. Human Activity Systems can be seen to operate at multiple levels of an organization, as

described in Section 1.3.

The purpose of these systems can be focused "horizontally" across an organization to improve the

efficiency and effectiveness of organizational performance. The purposes of systems can also be

"vertically" aligned to fit and link into strategic plans and organizational objectives in order to sustain

an organization's ability to adapt to changing stakeholder and organizational needs [10].

Within a Human Activity System, the performance of individual key components can also be improved

through alignment, for example:

Competence: Improving competence of one or more of the key components, such as mindset,

work design, and work relations, that better achieves a system’s purpose. For example at role

level, improving the technical competence in a role so the role is more effective.

Copyright David Alman 2010 Page 9

Interface: Improve the alignment between key components as a means of improving internal

consistency and the system’s performance. For example improving the interface between

work processes within an operation, or the way work processes and employee work practices

interact.

Conflict: Reduce unhealthy conflict and improve collaborative work relations. For example,

improving group dynamics in a team or management style to fit work situations.

2. Employee Well-Being 2.1 Employee Satisfaction

One perspective of employee well-being is considering employee attitudes over their job satisfaction

“plus” [11]. That is to say employee attitudes toward their roles, and the consequences of those

attitudes. The “plus” refers to physical and mental health issues such as work related stress.

Employee Satisfaction Surveys cover areas such as pay, benefits, interpersonal relations,

participation in decision-making, role design, and work stress that are causing dissatisfaction and

unhealthy stress. More recently, Organizational Climate Surveys identify the extent the work

environment is personally beneficial or damaging/painful to a person’s sense of well-being through

factors such as leader support, management concern, job autonomy, work relations, work demands,

and role clarity [12].

Reasons for paying attention to employee satisfaction includes the view that a positive organizational

climate enhances motivation and increases the likelihood that an employee will allocate discretionary

effort to their work, and that it assists in employee retention.

In seeking to improve organizational health, feedback from stakeholders, both internal and external, is

of particular importance as the purpose of “systems” within an organization can be viewed as

ultimately focusing on satisfying both the wants and needs of not only key external stakeholders but

also key internal stakeholders such as employees [13]. Refer to Figure 6.

Copyright David Alman 2010 Page 10

2.2 Employee Health

The World Health Organization (WHO) and International Labour Organization (ILO) define the

aim of occupational health as [14]:

The promotion and maintenance of the highest degree of physical, mental and social well-

being of workers in all occupations by prevention of departures from health, and controlling

risks.

This highlights three aspects of employee well-being:

Employee Well-being is prescribed as Physical, Mental, and Social in nature;

Risks to Employee Well-being should be controlled;

Employee Well-being involves promotion, maintenance, and means of preventing

departures.

Figure 7 resets these three aspects suggesting:

1. The work environment contains hazards that affect Employee Well-being;

2. The organization should develop Risk Management Systems to identify, assess, and

manage uncontrolled environmental risks to Employee Well-being;

3. Employee Well-being should include personal development as a means of promoting

employee physical, mental, and social well-being.

Figure 7 indicates that these three Well-being domains are not isolated, but interact with each

other. For example, physical hazards such as excessive noise can cause mental distress, and

antisocial behavior can result in mental distress. Additionally, there is a continuum between

risk management and personal development as to means of addressing Employee Well-being.

Copyright David Alman 2010 Page 11

Figure 7 illustrates physical, mental, and social well-being addressed through a risk management

approach to work environment hazards, and, additionally, addressing personal health hazards

through:

Wellness programs to improve employees physical health;

Emotional and cognitive development programs to improve employees mental resilience

and comprehension to add value and contribution to theirs and others lives on a

personal and vocational level; and

A work culture that encourages pro social behavior to support employee and team

collaboration.

The result of Workplace Health and Safety legislation can place pressure on an organization to

prioritize both physical health, safety and mental health (e.g. stress) issues over social health issues,

though all levels contribute not only to employee well-being but also to an organization’s health (e.g.

costs from physical and stress injury claims, presenteeism, employee disengagement, and turnover).

2.2.1 Social Well-being

2.2.1.1 Fair Treatment: Legal, Psychological, and Social Contracts

Social Well-being involves addressing the socially unfair treatment of employees. Such unfair

treatment may be may be redressed through enforceable legislation, depending upon a Country’s

legislation. For example, there is labor law protecting employees from discrimination based on their

Copyright David Alman 2010 Page 12

sex, race, age, disability, religion, and from harassment. Unfair treatment by an employer can affect

more than one employee and result in Systemic Unfairness.

Systemic Unfairness is:

Ongoing actions, practices, and attitudes within an organization that knowingly or

unknowingly allow employees to be (or feel) unfairly treated. [15]

In some cases, systemic unfairness may go unrecognized by an employer by being built into “neutral”

and accepted practices that are nevertheless illegally discriminatory. For example, a belief that only

men can, or should, do certain type or work.

Figure 8 illustrates the difference between illegal discrimination and systemic unfairness. Illegal

discrimination refers to the interpretation of legislation set up to protect individuals from particular

sections of the community in the way they are treated, and in the case of harassment the protection of

all employees’ health and safety.

Claims of systemic unfairness, of inequitable and disadvantageous practices, may not be based on

legislative rights or employer employment conditions but on perceptions of unfair treatment. Such

perceptions in employees can cause disaffection, complaint, and disengagement unless the employer

identifies and addresses them. The source of such perceptions of systemic unfairness lies in

“psychological” and “social” contracts.

Psychological contracts relate to employer and employee expectations of the other within the

employment relationship, and influences the behavior of employees [16].

Such expectations may be informal and assumed, based on past actions and employer statements.

Employee perceptions of the psychological contract can become negative with employees

Copyright David Alman 2010 Page 13

demonstrating negative behavior if the contract is viewed as having been breached. For example,

where an employer exceeds an understanding of an employee such as when an employee is

pressured into working excessive hours. Similarly, the trust in the contract relationship can be

breached if there is a change in employment security.

A Social Contract, in comparison, is an unwritten and tacit agreement among members of a

community or group that guides employee behavior in establishing rights and responsibilities [17].

This agreement therefore could result from associating with a social group outside of the organization.

For example, dissatisfaction with the employer’s employment conditions where a previous employer’s

employment conditions and employee treatment is perceived to have been better. Alternatively,

dissatisfaction can arise from expectations that develop based on the employee’s family or social

group, such as a religious group. Figure 9 illustrates how these variations can play out.

2.2.2.2 Pro-Social Behavior and the use of Behavioral Competencies

Pro-social behavior can be encouraged through the application of behavioral competencies.

Behavioural competencies refer to:

Behaviors that employees demonstrate when effectively undertaking role-relevant tasks

within a given organizational context [18].

Examples of Pro-social behavioral competencies are “Teamwork” and “Interpersonal relations” that

can be sought of an employee in carrying out their role. That is, they are part of a Role’s selection

criteria, and employee’s performance assessment. A Pro-social behavioral competency can also be a

Copyright David Alman 2010 Page 14

“core” competency sought of all employees by an organization as part of the values an organization

wants to promote.

2.2.3 Mental Well-being

2.2.3.1 Stress Risk Management

Unhealthy stress occurs whenever there is a departure from optimum conditions which an employee

finds difficult, or unable, to cope with. It arises from the effect of exposure to stress risk factors in the

work environment that an employee considers important where the extent of this exposure can vary

from too little to too much [19], as exampled in Figure 10.

Where:

Eustress, results in a healthy response (e.g. collaborative problem solving that

encourages personal growth and development)

Distress, results in an unhealthy response (e.g. anxiety and depression)

Hypostress and Hyperstress, results in an unhealthy extreme response extremes (e.g.

too much or too little intrapersonal conflict).

Means of addressing unhealthy stress usually require one or more changes to the work environment

and can include factors such as work demands; low levels of control; poor support from supervisors

and/or co-workers; lack of role clarity; poorly managed relationships; low levels of recognition and

reward; poorly managed change; and organizational justice [20].

The application of a Stress Risk Management Audit provides the basis for identifying and assessing

underlying causes of stress, and determining what actions should be taken.

Copyright David Alman 2010 Page 15

2.2.3.2 Personal Transformations and Role Transitions

Personal development involves transformations and transitions. Personal transformation involves a

person, as a conflict manager, adjusting their social interactions to better manage in their work

environment. This can be associated with a shift, a transformation, in the way they perceive

themselves. For example, an employee may need to adjust their perceptions of themselves and the

way they manage their interactions with others because they are either being treated, or are treating

others, in a manner that is causing distress [21].

An employee’s work environment can also change involving an employee to respond by undergoing a

personal transformation to successfully manage a role transition, such as occurs in a promotion to a

different organizational level where the role requires the employee to act and think quite differently.

For example, where a supervisor whose role is to ensure pre-specified quality and service outputs are

achieved using prescribed standards and related competencies is promoted to a manager role

managing a “mini organization” and is expected to create improvements in products, systems, and

services [22].

2.2.4 Physical Well-being.

Physical well-being is addressed from two perspectives:

2.2.4.1 Environmental Hazards

Physical Well-being is dependent upon the level of risk an employee is exposed to resulting from

hazards within the work environment. Thus, identifying, assessing, and managing risks resulting from

environmental hazards are a matter to be addressed. In this respect:

A Hazard can be described as the capacity of a physical, chemical, or biological “agent” to

cause an unhealthy effect;

A Risk can be described as the probability, in a certain amount of time, for an adverse

unhealthy outcome to occur if exposed to a level of force, level of exposure, or level of toxicity

(of a hazard).

2.2.4.2 Employee Health Hazards

Physical well-being can not only involve managing environmental hazards but also preventing health

hazards through disease prevention and healthy lifestyle by, for example, increasing awareness

through health promotions, screening for health hazards, and counseling employees [23].

The relationship of environmental and employee health hazards to risk management is illustrated in

Figure 11 [24].

Copyright David Alman 2010 Page 16

3. Improving Organizational Health

3.1 Collaborative Change Management Projects

The Collaborative Change Management (CCM) process is relevant where organizational conflict

management is the key issue in an organizational change [25]. For example where interpersonal

conflicts block, or are anticipated to block, a change sought by the organization.

The Collaborative Change Management process can also be linked to the stages of a standard

project management process as a means of addressing latent and manifested stakeholder conflicts

prior, during, and subsequent to a change.

The CCM Process has four Stages and places emphasis on collaboration and using conflict

management methodologies.

For example:

Copyright David Alman 2010 Page 17

Stage 1. Analyze the situation.

Analyze the situation surrounding a proposed change. This can include steps such as a

preliminary review to identify issues and stakeholders involved; explore understanding by

collecting information; and assessing the overall situation.

Stage 2. Develop a Plan.

Develop an implementation plan, taking into account the issues identified in Stage 1. The

development of this plan involves collaborative approach and incorporates the results of

consultative feedback.

Stage 3. Work through the Plan

Implement the plan using a range of supporting conflict management techniques such as

consultation, collaborative problem solving, and group facilitation techniques that help

address stakeholders concerns and implementation. The emphasis is therefore on direct

and personal communication where possible, and to address conflicts that can affect

agreement and support of proposed changes.

Stage 4. Complete & Follow up

On implementing the change, either a review after a specified time and/or the ability of

stakeholders to provide feedback is relevant to settle in a change and address loose ends.

3.2 Organizational Health and Employee Well-being Audits

Organizational Health Audits provide evaluative means to identify performance and well-being “gaps”

within an organization’s work environment. Organizational Health Audits assess a range of

interactions (e.g. work practices and workplace relations) and their healthy or unhealthy

consequences at organizational, process, and role levels. Equally, the social, mental, and physical

wellness and well-being of employees can be assessed through a range of Employee Well-being

Audits.

Audits have prescribed and different criteria to assess organizational performance or employee well-

being, yet each, in different ways, represent differing and important aspects relating to Organizational

Health. These audits can also involve the application of different models and legislative frameworks

relevant to the audit process. Audits can also involve a range of methodologies such as surveys,

workshops, and/or interviews as means of gathering information, depending upon the size of an audit.

Audits may therefore be quick and simple lasting no more than a few hours, or draw out to a few days

in search of recommendations to address “messy” and complicated problems.

Figure 12 illustrates the link between Organizational Health and assessment methodologies.

Copyright David Alman 2010 Page 18

Organizational Heath Audits are multileveled, seeking underlying causes to issues. Figure 13

examples Organizational Health Audits as a continuous improvement process with feedback loops

based on triple loop learning [26]. In this way, Organizational Health incorporates a dynamic systems

thinking approach, and supports the concept of a continuous learning organization.

Copyright David Alman 2010 Page 19

3.3 Organizational Health as an Improvement Program

To establish Organizational Health as an ongoing continuous improvement system applicable across

an organization a three-staged Continuous Improvement Cycle of “Plan, Implement, and Review”

(PIR) may be considered.

In Figure 14 a Continuous Improvement Cycle of Plan, Implement, and Review (PIR) is aligned to the

Organizational Health model. It should be noted, however, that in implementing Organizational

Health as a continuous improvement system there is an initial assessment stage (which uses

‘assessment’, ‘review’ or ‘audit’ tools) to set up the PIR cycle.

Copyright David Alman 2010 Page 20

Conclusion Organizational Health, as a concept, continues to evolve drawing from two distinct themes. One

theme relates to the organization as a performance system and its ability to achieve organizational

goals. The other theme relates to employee well-being and the impact of employee satisfaction and

employee health upon both the organization and employees.

A Generic Human Activity System is used to provide a practical approach to Organizational Health,

where improving an organization’s performance takes a systems thinking approach at organizational,

process, and role levels. This in turn suggests the need to improve the alignment within and between

key components that make up such Human Activity Systems.

Organizational health audits are a means of assessing and improving organizational performance at

organizational, process, and role levels using feedback based on stakeholder satisfaction with

services and deliveries from these systems. In this sense, organizational health audits cover both the

improvement of organizational performance and employee satisfaction.

Employee well-being involves addressing employee health at a social, mental, and physical level.

Problems relating to employee health incurs costs upon both the organization and employees. In

addressing employee health both negative aspects causing risks and positive aspects that protect

and develop employees, and support the achievement of organizational health are considered.

Organizational Health and Employee well-being audits provide the means of supporting a

continuously improving, and learning, organization: A Healthy Organization.

Copyright David Alman 2010 Page 21

Notes: [1] This description is consistent that that used in Healthy organizations from conflict management.

The associated Note in that Google Knol is as follows: “Dive (2004, p.3) describes a healthy

organization as one that meets its mission and simultaneously enables individuals to learn, grow, and

develop. Britton in Organizational Learning and Organizational Health views organizational health as

the achievement of employee and organizational goals. He also refers to the need to create an

environment to support a healthy organization".

[2] A brief background on the historical perspectives covered under the term Organizational Health is

available in Organisational health: A new perspective on performance improvement? published by the

NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement. A causal relationship between organizational health,

organizational performance, and employee health and well-being is also briefly referred to.

[3] Both the NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement in Organisational health: A new

perspective on performance improvement? and the Mckinsey & company in The Missing Link’ refer to

‘Soft’ factors that can improve organizational performance such as Direction; Leadership;

Accountability; Coordination & control; external orientation; capability; environment & values;

motivation; and Innovation. ComCare in Building a case to invest in OHS and organisational health

also identify seven elements: Direction, Leadership; Capability; Governance; Relationship; and

Culture. ComCare’s elements similarly reflect these “soft” factors.

[4] Mckinsey & company in The Missing Link includes areas such as Accountability, Coordination &

Control, while European Network for Workplace Health 2009 Promotion also refers to the “work

organisation”. Dive dedicates a book to explaining how to improve accountability as a means of

improving organizational performance in The Healthy Organization.

[5] In Improving performance and quality of working life: A model for organizational health assessment

in emerging enterprises, Shoaf, Genaidy, Karwowski, and Huang provide an historical background to

the development of the concept of organizational health in the United States, and refer to

Organizational Health as a system of interrelated components, analogous to biological health.

[6] The description of what a “system” is, is taken from Introduction to Systems Thinking by Kim

(1999, p2).

[7]. In this article the variables used are loosely based upon those found in the concept of a Human

Activity System (HAS). The Human Activity System, as used in the article, is a system with a Purpose

and the activity of the system involves “hard” “means”, and “soft” “relations” supported by a “World

View” or sense of “meaning”. The term Human Activity System (HAS) was coined by Peter

Checkland to cover “a set of activities so connected as to make a purposeful whole” (Soft Systems

Methodology in Action), and the Human Activity System variables as used in this article are drawn

Copyright David Alman 2010 Page 22

and adapted from a discussion on system concepts by David Patching in Practical Soft Systems

Analysis. The application of a Human Activity System is applied to both actual and “notional”

systems, and separated from Checkland’s Soft System Methodology, where a Human Activity System

is applied in a quite specific way and to reflect “notional” or “ideal types” of solutions to problem

situations (refer to Systems Thinking, Systems Practice, Glossary of an HAS). In the way a Human

Activity System could be analyzed in this article, a methodology consistent with a Human

Performance System (HPS) could be applied, refer to a brief explanation of HPS by Alan Ramais in

The Human Performance System. More specifically the application of the Nine Performance

Variables matrix found in Rummler and Brache (1995). For example, in that Matrix, Goals could

equate to Purpose; Design and Management to Means; with Relations and Meaning opening out the

matrix to performance issues more associated with a Human Activity System.

[8] In Improving performance and quality of working life: A model for organizational health

assessment in emerging enterprises, Shoaf, Genaidy, Karwowski, and Huang propose a model

covering a four orientation approach to organizational health. These orientations being: the

organization, process, job, and individual. Rummler & Brache (1995) in Improving Performance: How

to manage the white space on the organization chart also view organizations as systems, identifying

three levels of performance: Organization, process, and job/performer

[9] Figure 4 is adapted from Figure 1 in Organizational climate of staff working conditions and safety –

an integrative model. A difference is that “Work Design” would also include “hard” process issues

relating to organizational performance not normally sought in climate surveys.

[10] Improving integration is referred to in Armstrong (2004 p8,9). "Horizontal" integration is treated

differently in this article, though the concept of "bundling" (i.e linking "inputs" required to achieve an

output) seems to fit with a systems thinking approach. With regard to "vertical" integration there is

consistency, and they both appear to complement the definition of Organizational Capability

described by Ulrich & Lake (1990 p40). That is, organizational capability is "a business's ability to

establish internal structures and processes that influence its members to create organization-specific

competencies and thus enable the business to adapt to changing customer and strategic needs".

[11] The term Well-being in terms of addressing employee satisfaction as discussed in Work and

Well-being by Warr & Wall (1975).

[12] The Queensland Public Agency Staff Survey (QPASS) is an example of an organizational climate

survey that seeks employee opinion. Climate surveys focus on aspects of an immediate workplace

that effect employee satisfaction such as supervisory style, participation in decisions affecting an

employee, role clarity, and workload. Survey responses can lead to changes in work practices to

improve employee satisfaction.

Copyright David Alman 2010 Page 23

[13] The wants and needs of stakeholders are reflected in Performance and Health: In search of

sustainable excellence by McKinsey and company and in The Performance Prism: The scorecard for

measuring and managing business success by Neely, Adams, and Kennerley.

[14] Williams (1994, p8) includes a definition of the aims of occupational health by the World Health

Organization (WHO) and the International Labour Organization (ILO). In that definition of

occupational health well-being covers physical, mental, and social health of workers.

[15] Systemic Unfairness is based on the concept of systemic discrimination which are practices,

laws, or attitudes, viewed as neutral and sometimes acceptable, but which entrench inequity and

disadvantage to certain groups of people (based on Responding to systemic discrimination).

[16] Material on the Psychological Contract is based on the model to be found in Employee Well-

being and the Psychological Contract of which a simplified model can be found in Managing Change:

The role of the psychological contract.

[17] This description of a social contract is based on that found in the Business Directory.

[18] The description of what a competency is can be found in A Practical guide to competencies

(2006) by Whiddett & Hollyforde. Their publication provides an explanation of what is meant by

behavioural competencies, the development of behavioural based Competency Frameworks, and

their application to areas such as Selection and Employee Performance Management.

[19] In Introduction to Stress Theory, the Cox and Mackay Model is described as four major stress

response types; Eustress, distress, boredom, and exhaustion. The latter two described here as

Hypostress and Hyperstress respectively. Their model’s dimension of “Demands” is changed to

“Conflict Intensity” and the “Performance” dimension to “Stress Response”.

[20] An identification and explanation of Occupational Stress Risk Factors can be found on the

Occupational Health and Safety Queensland website. Stress Risk Management Audits use stress

risk factors as audit criteria to identify, risk assess, and recommend action to improve the well-being

of employees.

[21] The approach to personal transformation draws from The Promise of mediation: The

transformative approach to conflict (2005). Personal Transformation involves addressing both

intrapersonal (internal) conflict and developing appropriate conflict management techniques to

manage situations. In this respect examples in Conflict Coaching: Conflict management strategies

and skills for the individual (2008) are viewed as reflecting this form of personal transformation.

Copyright David Alman 2010 Page 24

[22] In Understanding professional competence: Beyond the limits of Functional Analysis Holmes

refers to transition in terms of a promotion where a manager has to let go of past skills and behaviour

patterns, that were previously successful and now ineffective, and adopt new ways of understanding

what is involved in being a manager in the new situation. Dive (2008) in The Accountable Leader:

Developing effective leadership through managerial accountability refers to the need to identify

different levels of accountability (referred to here as Transition Levels). Other writers use alternative

terms such as “Work Levels” and “Impact Levels” as is intended here under the term “Transition”.

[23] An explanation of well-being from a health and wellness perspective is provided in Sloan Work

and Family Network Glossary on Health and Wellness, definition(s) of.

[24] The description of a Hazard and a Risk, and the Risk Management Model are adapted from

Guidelines for assessing human health risks from environmental hazards. The concept of Employee

Health hazards has been added to this model to incorporate wellness aspects that fall within an

Organizational Health perspective.

[25] The Collaborative Change Management process is mentioned in Healthy Organizations from

conflict management: How conflict management helps manage change, performance and well-being.

In that Google Knol reference is made to Claremont & Davies (2005) who use the more general and

embracing term of Collaborative Conflict Management to provide examples of this approach applied

to whole groups and organizations.

[26] An explanation of Triple Loop Learning is found in the Kansas Prevention WIKI. Both Brian Dive

(2004), and Britten in Organizational learning and organizational health, view a Healthy Organization

as a learning organization.

References

Armstrong, M. (2001). Performance management: Key strategies and practical guidelines. (2nd

ed). London: Kogan Page.

Baruch Bush, R.A., & Folger, J.P. (2005). The promise of mediation: The transformative approach to conflict. San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass.

Building a case to invest in OHS and organisational health. Comcare (June 2009) Australian Government. Retrieved 1 August 2009, from http://www.comcare.gov.au/forms__and__publications/publications/safety_and_prevention/?a=53413

Britton, B. Organizational learning and organizational health. Retrieved January 2009, from http://www.framework.org.uk/files/framework/Organisational%20Learning%20and%20Organisational%20Health.pdf

Checkland, P., & Scholes, J. (1998). Soft systems methodology in action. Chichester, West Susssex: John Wiley & Sons.

Copyright David Alman 2010 Page 25

Checkland, P. (1981). Systems thinking, systems practice. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.

Claremont, R., & Davies, L. (2005). Collaborative Conflict Management. Sydney, NSW: Lansdowne Publishing.

Dive, B. (2008). The accountable leader: Developing effective leadership through managerial accountability. London: Kogan Page.

Dive, B (2004). The healthy organization. (2nd

ed) London: Kogan Page.

Do organizational climate and strategic orientation moderate the relationship between human resource management practices and productivity? Neal, A., West, M.A., & Patterson, M.G. CEP Discussion Paper No 624 (March 2004). Retrieved 14 October 2009, from http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/dp0624.pdf

Employee Well-being and the Psychological Contract Retrieved 26 November 2009 from http://www.cipd.co.uk/subjects/empreltns/psycntrct/empwellbpsyc.htm

Guidelines for assessing human health risks from environmental hazards. Retrieved 2 February 2010, from http://enhealth.nphp.gov.au/council/pubs/pdf/envhazards.pdf

Health and Wellness, Definition(s) of Sloan Work and Family Research Network Glossary. Retrieved 14 May 2009, from http://wfnetwork.bc.edu/glossary_entry.php?term+health%20and%

Healthy employees in healthy organisations – for sustainable social and economic development in Europe. European Network for Workplace Health 2009 Promotion. Retrieved 28 December 2009, from http://www.enwhp.org/publications.html

Healthy organizations from conflict management: How conflict management helps manage change, performance, and well-being. Retrieved 14 October 2009, from http://knol.google.com/k/david-alman/healthy-organizations-from-conflict/11ytsa5mr372d/4#

The Human Performance System (2008). Alan Ramais. Retrieved 23 February 2010, from http://www.bpminstitute.org/articles/article/article/the-human-performance-system.html

Improving performance and quality of working life: A model for organizational health assessment in emerging enterprises. Shoaf, Genaidy, Karwowski, and Huang (2004). Retrieved 30 December 2009, from http://www.eng.uc.edu/icams/publications/2004a.pdf

Introduction to stress theory. Retrieved 24 February 2009, from http://www.wikieducator.org/Introduction_to_Stress_Theory

Jones, T.S., & Brinkett. R. (2008). Conflict coaching: Conflict management strategies and skills for the individual. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc.

Kim, D.H. (1999). Introduction to systems thinking. Waltham, MA: Pegasus Communications, Inc.

Managing Change: The role of the psychological contract. Retrieved 26 November 2009, from http://www.cipd.co.uk/NR/rdonlyres/06B92739-19F8-4BB4-AE47-796EA5F5CB15/0/manachang1105.pdf

The Missing Link. Connecting organizational and financial performance Confidential working paper DeSmet, Palmer, & Shaninger February 2007. McKinsey & Company. Retrieved 28 August 2009, from https://solutions.mckinsey.com/ohi/_SiteNote/WWW/GetFile.aspx?uri=:/ohi/default/en-us/Files/wp1591276990/The%20Missing%20Link_Connecting%20Organizational%20and%20Financial%20Performance_cc09969f-7f08-4e23-a0d0-d68175054a9e.pdf

Copyright David Alman 2010 Page 26

Neely, A., Adams, C., & Kennerley, M. (2002). The performance prism: The scorecard for measuring and managing business success. Harlow, Essex: Pearson Education Limited.

Occupational Stress Risk Factors Retrieved 3 March 2010, from http://www.deir.qld.gov.au/workplace/resources/pdfs/occstress-riskfactors.pdf

Organizational climate of staff working conditions and safety – An integrative model. Stone, Harrison, Feldman, Linzer, Peng, Roblin, Scott-Cawiezell, & Williams. Retrieved 1 March 2010, from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/bookshelf/br.fcgi?book=aps2&part=A3614

Organisational health: A new perspective on performance improvement? NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement 2009. Retrieved 29 July 2009, from http://www.matrixknowledge.com/north-america/wp-content/uploads/organisational-health1.pdf

Organisational Health. Quality public service workplaces _ Information paper 8 (June 2008). Retrieved 15 May 2009, from http://www.opsc.qld.gov.au/library/docs/resources/publications/retention/QPSW_infokit_OrgHealth.pdf

Patching, D. (1995). Practical soft systems analysis. London: Pitman publishing.

Performance and health: In search of sustainable excellence by McKinsey and company. Retrieved 28 August 2009, from https://solutions.mckinsey.com/ohi/_SiteNote/WWW/GetFile.aspx?uri=:/ohi/default/en-us/Files/wp1591276990/Performance%20and%20Health%20In%20Search%20of%20Sustainable%20Excellence_a658bb4f-17b6-4cd6-9293-f7a453a24372.pdf

The Queensland Public Agency Staff Survey (QPASS). Retrieved 17 January 2010, from http://www.qpassassist.com/home.htm

Responding to systemic discrimination. Retrieved April 2008, from www.equalopportunitycommission.vic.gov.au

Rummler, G.A., & Brache, A.P. (1995). Improving Performance: How to manage the white space on the organization chart. (2

nd Ed). San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass.

Social contract definition Retrieved 26 November 2009 from http://www.businessdirectory.com/definition/social-contract.html

Ulrich, D., & Lake, D. (1990). Organizational capability: Competing from the inside out. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.

Understanding professional competence: Beyond the limits of functional analysis Len Holmes Retrieved 3 November 2009, from http://www.re-skill.org.uk/relskill/profcomp.htm

Whiddett, S., & Hollyford, S. (2006). A Practical guide to competencies. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.

Warr P & Wall T. (1975) Work & well-being Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin Books Ltd.

Williams, S. (1994). Ways of creating healthy work organizations. In C.L. Cooper & S. Williams (Ed). Creating healthy work organizations. Chichester, West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons.