per oystein nottingham presentation

7/31/2019 Per Oystein Nottingham Presentation

1/32

1

Hunting the trolls of

interventions

Per ystein Saksvik

professor


2/32

2


interventionsOutline of my presentation:

Our story of our troll hunting what we have done to comecloser to understanding interventions how interventions workand (eventually) can have an impact

Not give an overview of the best papers on interventions. Suchan overview can be found here:

http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/MentalWellbeingWorkFinal

Report.pdf

Or you can read the latest publication from

Nielsen & Randall in EWOP
http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/MentalWellbeingWorkFinalReport.pdfhttp://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/MentalWellbeingWorkFinalReport.pdfhttp://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/MentalWellbeingWorkFinalReport.pdfhttp://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/MentalWellbeingWorkFinalReport.pdf


3/32

3


4/32

4


5/32

5

If you would like to see som real Norwegian trollhunting, take a look

at this trailer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xG5hKeOzmEQ&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xG5hKeOzmEQ&feature=relatedhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xG5hKeOzmEQ&feature=relatedhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xG5hKeOzmEQ&feature=relatedhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xG5hKeOzmEQ&feature=related


6/32

6


interventions


7/32

7


interventionsWhy are trolls problematic?

Distroy a lot on their way Not easy to find and catch Unpredictable

The same can of course be said about interventions


8/32

8


interventionsIntervention 1

Improving the health of service sector workers


9/32

9

Health care workers at

institutions for elderly

residents

Sales clerks in a shopping mall


10/32

10

The inspiration and background of the intervention

A quote (p.531) from: Dahl-Jrgensen, C. & Saksvik, P. . (2005). An evaluation ofthe impact of two workplace interventions on the health of service workers.International Journal of Health Services, 35, 529-549.

Scandinavian intervention projects have built a strong tradition for focusing on organizationallevel interventions through their emphasis on the necessity for collective participation and

involvement from all parties in order to bring about change. According to the underlying

argument, an effective intervention should be based on collective participation, dialogue, and

workplace democracy


11/32

11

Improving the health of service sector workers (the health care workers)

Problem: Up to 20 % sickness absenteeism at some units

Objective: Changes in stress and health threatening factors at organizational (unit)level

The intervention: Three-step strategy; 1. Interviews with absentees about perceivedcauses and precautions taken at their workstation when returning. 2. Assessment ofrisk factors/ risk persons in the workplace (surveys with standardized scales measuringe.g. strass). 3. Search conference (dialog) to identify stress and health problems(based on 1 and 2) and to formulate local solutions

Implemented by: Mainly researchers, but also local experts were involved

Evaluation: pre-post design (questionnaires) with process evaluation (interviews). E-group (n=84, eight units), K-group (n=100, four units)


12/32

12

Improving the health of service sector workers (the health care workers) (2)

Results (quantitative): Not impressive!

MANOVA showed a main effect for change over time (one year) for the main variables,but not a difference between the E- and C-group

Results (qualitative = process): A bit to general...

Three categories of constrains:

- Time (too much is happening, difficult to prioritize)- Interaction (physical and social barriers to work together to improve work)- Organization (mangers changed, budget cuts, threats to close one unit)

Conclusion:

We (the contract researchers) did an OK job with this intervention, but it may have beentoo complicatedfor the organizations.


13/32

13

Next step: The natural intervention (field experiment)

The employees in the health care sector of a municipality were

allowed to take up to five days of self-administered sick leavewith full financial compensation up to four times a year.

Intervention group

N=165

Control group N=100

14


14/32

14

The field experiment

The employees in the health care sector of a municipality were

allowed to take up to five days of self-administered sick leavewith full financial compensation up to four times a year.

Intervention group

N=165

Control group N=100

30 incidents of use

of the option

15


15/32

15


Among those who used the option:

- Slight subjective health effects = improvement of

musculoskeletal problems and cold/ influenza

- No effect on overall absenteeism

Interviews

- The contextis important: in some units sanctions to attend

existed, in others you should stay at home reflecting a

consideration of the patients.

Results (Survey and statistics)

16


16/32

16


References:

Saksvik, P. ., & Nytr, K. (2001). Improving subjective health and

reducing absenteeism in a natural work life-intervention.

Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 42, 17-24.

Dahl-Jrgensen, C., Opdahl Mo, T. & Saksvik, P. . (2002). Utvidet

egenmelding som strategi for bedre subjektiv helse og redusere

sykefravr.Norsk Samfunnsvitenskaplig Tidsskrift, 43, 3-29.

17


17/32

17

The third step: Finding the intervention that optimizes both

OHP and business (profit).

The implementation of the six hour working day

http://www.6

hourday.org/

18


18/32

18

SinkaBerg Hansen AS

Intervention: Implementing 6-hours day in a fish processing firm

same salary as for the former 8-hours day.

19


19/32

19

What trolls could be found here?

Troll Iwork organizationchange to shift work (06 -12; 1218),

not in accordance with the kindergartens opening hours

Troll IIemployees had to work harderfewer brakes and higher

speed on the production line

20


20/32

20

Results

Result 1:

- No clear effect on subjective health and work environment variables

- No clear effect on productivity measures

Result 2:

Those who wanted to keep the 8 hour day were allowed to do so. The

firm showed flexibility and they still have this arrangement

(No international publication)

21


21/32

21

Final step: What can we learn from organizational change?

Modern

Norwegian

troll

22


22/32

22

What can we learn from organizational change?

23 What can we learn from organizational change?


23/32

23 What can we learn from organizational change?

We started our research in 2004 by undertaking 180

interviews in 90 enterprises undergoing some kind of

change (selected by The Norwegian Labor Inspectorate, i.e.they did something that may have been considered a threat

to health and/or safety).

The most frequent studied changes going on (worldwide)are:

downsizingrestructuring

closing down

This was not our central interest

24


24/32

24


We wanted to study how change was implemented, i.e. thechange process and found inspiration in the new Norwegian

Work Environment Act issued in 2006 stating in 4-2

(3)During reorganization processes that involve changes ofsignificance for the employees working situation, the

employer shall ensure the necessary information,

participation and competence development to meet the

requirements of this Act regarding a fully satisfactory

working environment.

25


25/32

25


What does:

information, participation and competence development

mean?

Are we back to where we started? To:

collective participation, dialogue and workplace democracy

I.e. back to the normative ideal of the Nordic work lifetradition?

26


26/32

26


To make a long research story short: What we found in our

studies about the change process ended up in what we havecalled The healthy change process model

27


27/32

27

28


28/32

28

29


29/32

Leader availability - Employees ought to have immediate access tosomebody they can talk to and discuss how the changes will affect meand my work tasks. This somebody must be a person with

organizational insight and knowledge regarding the change, and one who

may be able to influence the process.

Change impact - is about the meaning of change for the person: how itis interpreted and acted upon. It has been shown how important it is that

employees understand and react to the implications the change has for

him/herself (Nielsen, Randall, and Albertsen , 2007)

Leader availability and change impact

30


30/32

Tvedt, S. D. & Saksvik, P. . (2012). Finding the content of the processpart of interventions. In (Eds.) Biron Caroline., Maria Karanika-Murray,

& Cary L. Cooper:Managing psychosocial risks in the workplace: The

role of process issues. Routledge/Psychology Press.

Saksvik, P. ., Tvedt, S. D., Nytr, K., Buvik, M. P., Andersen, G. R.,Andersen, T. K., and Torvatn, H. (2007). Developing criteria for healthy

organizational change. Work & Stress. 21, 243-263.

References

31


31/32

The sound of well-being - an evaluation of an innovative measure for

improvement of well-being and health in the public sector

Pre/post-tests and process evaluation

Content: choir battles within the organisation; establishing choirs,

rehearsals with and without professional musicians, mini-concerts,

competitions, musical arrangements, sing back and ultimately a grand

finale

At the momentevaluating a new intervention:

32


32/32

Conclusion

- The content of the intervention does matter

- The intervention process is important, but you have to know

what the main factors are in your context

- TIMEthe 3 Ts (Things Take Time)results may appear

after more than a year

per oystein nottingham presentation

Documents