17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A Qualitative Study on Employees’ Experiences of a Support model for Systematic Work Environment Management

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background: The aim is to explore how an organisational work environment support model, the Stamina model, influences employees’ work situations and the development of sustainable work systems. Methods: It was a qualitative study with semi-structured, focus-group interviews, including 45 employees from six work groups. Eighteen focus group interviews were conducted over a period of two years. Data were analysed with constant comparative method. Results: The core category, shifting focus from an individual to an organisational perspective of work, illustrated how communication and increased understanding of one’s work tasks changed over time and contributed to deeper focus on the actual operation. These insights were implemented at different time points among the work groups during the two-year process. Conclusions: Our results indicate that working with the model engages employees in the work environment management, puts emphasis on reflections and discussions about the meaning and purpose of the operations and enables a shared platform for communication. These are important features that need to continue over time in order to create a sustainable work system. The Stamina model, thus seems to have the potential to promote productive and healthy work places.

          Related collections

          Most cited references37

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Does intrinsic motivation fuel the prosocial fire? Motivational synergy in predicting persistence, performance, and productivity.

          Adam Grant (2008)
          Researchers have obtained conflicting results about the role of prosocial motivation in persistence, performance, and productivity. To resolve this discrepancy, I draw on self-determination theory, proposing that prosocial motivation is most likely to predict these outcomes when it is accompanied by intrinsic motivation. Two field studies support the hypothesis that intrinsic motivation moderates the association between prosocial motivation and persistence, performance, and productivity. In Study 1, intrinsic motivation strengthened the relationship between prosocial motivation and the overtime hour persistence of 58 firefighters. In Study 2, intrinsic motivation strengthened the relationship between prosocial motivation and the performance and productivity of 140 fundraising callers. Callers who reported high levels of both prosocial and intrinsic motivations raised more money 1 month later, and this moderated association was mediated by a larger number of calls made. I discuss implications for theory and research on work motivation. 2008 APA
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Review Article: How can we make organizational interventions work? Employees and line managers as actively crafting interventions

            K. Nielsen (2013)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Organizational interventions: A research-based framework for the evaluation of both process and effects

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                ijerph
                International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
                MDPI
                1661-7827
                1660-4601
                23 September 2019
                October 2019
                : 16
                : 19
                : 3551
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Medical Sciences, Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Dag Hammarskjölds väg 60, 752 37 Uppsala, Sweden; fredrik.molin@ 123456medsci.uu.se (F.M.); magnus.svartengren@ 123456medsci.uu.se (M.S.)
                [2 ]IPF, the Institute for Organizational and Leadership Development at Uppsala University, Bredgränd 18, 753 20 Uppsala, Sweden
                Author notes
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4328-220X
                Article
                ijerph-16-03551
                10.3390/ijerph16193551
                6801862
                31547496
                fe633892-bec5-4c5c-96ef-4ccebf14ff9f
                © 2019 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 28 August 2019
                : 20 September 2019
                Categories
                Article

                Public health
                work environment,employee participation,occupational health
                Public health
                work environment, employee participation, occupational health

                Comments

                Comment on this article