The burdens and benefits of managing and engaging: a diary study approach to person-centred risk assessment of top executives and works council members.

The present diary study investigates the impact of daily effort-reward imbalance (ERI), subjective stress and the cortisol awakening response (CAR) as an objective measure on work engagement of top managers and high-level works council members (N = 45) on three consecutive working days. In the scope of psychosocial risk assessment, we argue that focusing on ERI as a generalized work characteristic might be more suitable for work re-design of higher leadership positions because of their highly dynamic and unpredictable psychosocial work characteristics, while at the same time having more access to job resources. The analyses reveal that both baseline and daily ERI, as well as subjective stress, influence work engagement. Our results suggest that interventions to reduce daily levels of ERI may improve the work environment of top managers and works councils by promoting work engagement and related positive health outcomes in the scope of person-centred risk assessment.

Applying risk matrices for assessing the risk of psychosocial hazards at work.

Although wide-ranging amendments in health and safety regulations at the European and national level oblige employers to conduct psychosocial risk assessment, it is still under debate how psychosocial hazards can be properly evaluated. For psychosocial hazards, an epidemiological, risk-oriented understanding similar to physical hazards is still missing, why most existing approaches for hazard evaluation insufficiently conceive psychosocial risk as a combination of the probability of a hazard and the severity of its consequences (harm), as found in traditional risk matrix approaches (RMA). We aim to contribute to a methodological advancement in psychosocial risk assessment by adapting the RMA from physical onto psychosocial hazards. First, we compare and rate already existing procedures of psychosocial risk evaluation regarding their ability to reliably assess and prioritize risk. Second, we construct a theoretical framework that allows the risk matrix for assessing psychosocial risk. This is done by developing different categories of harm based on psychological theories of healthy work design and classifying hazards through statistical procedures. Taking methodological and theoretical considerations into account, we propose a 3 × 3 risk matrix that scales probability and severity for psychosocial risk assessment. Odds ratios between hazards and harm can be used to statistically assess psychosocial risks. This allows for both risk evaluation and prioritizing to further conduct risk-mitigation. Our contribution advances the RMA as a framework that allows for assessing the relation between psychosocial hazards and harm disregarding which theory of work stress is applied or which tool is used for hazard identification. By this, we also contribute to further possible developments in empirical research regarding how to assess the risk of workplace stress. The risk matrix can help to understand how psychosocial hazards can be evaluated and organizations can use the approach as a guidance to establish a suitable method for psychosocial risk evaluation.