Psychosocial safety climate as a predictor of work engagement, creativity, innovation, and work performance: A case study of software engineers.

Introduction: Creativity is vital for competitive advantage within technological environments facing the fourth industrial revolution. However, existing research on creativity has rarely addressed how a climate beneficial for worker psychological health, a psychosocial safety climate (PSC), could additionally stimulate the growth of workplace creativity, innovation, and performance in digital environments. Method: To examine how individually perceived PSC influences subsequent work engagement promoting higher levels of computer-based radical and incremental creativity, innovation, and work performance, employees in a software engineering firm (N = 29, 86 observations) completed a weekly questionnaire for 4 consecutive weeks. Results: At the between-person level PSC was positively related to average future weekly individual fluctuations of creativity (radical and incremental), work engagement, and job performance. Additionally weekly work engagement was related to future creativity (radical and incremental). Work engagement also mediated the between-person relationship between PSC and future creativity (both radical and incremental). PSC did not predict innovation. Discussion: This study contributes to the theory on PSC, creativity, and work performance by elucidating the individual perceived PSC-creativity relationship and suggesting PSC systems as meaningful antecedents to digital work performance.

The role of psychosocial safety climate on flexible work from home digital job demands and work-life conflict.

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of employees in flexible work from home has increased markedly along with a reliance on information communication technologies. This study investigated the role of an organisational factor, psychosocial safety climate (PSC; the climate for worker psychological health and safety), as an antecedent of these new kinds of demands (specifically work from home digital job demands) and their effect on work-life conflict. Data were gathered via an online survey of 2,177 employees from 37 Australian universities. Multilevel modelling showed that university level PSC to demands, y=-0.09, SE=0.03, p<0.01, and demands to work-life conflict, y=0.51, SE=0.19, p<0.05, relationships were significant. Supporting the antecedent theory, university level PSC was significantly indirectly related to work-life conflict via demands (LL -0.10 UL -0.01). Against expectations PSC did not moderate the demand to work-life conflict relationship. The results imply that targeting PSC could help prevent work from home digital job demands, and therefore, work-life conflict. Further research is needed on the role of digital job resources as flexible and hybrid work takes hold post COVID.

The effect of exposure to long working hours on depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis from the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related Burden of Disease and Injury.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Labour Organization (ILO) are developing the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related Burden of Disease and Injury (WHO/ILO Joint Estimates), supported by a large number of individual experts. Evidence from previous reviews suggests that exposure to long working hours may cause depression. In this article, we present a systematic review and meta-analysis of parameters for estimating (if feasible) the number of deaths and disability-adjusted life years from depression that are attributable to exposure to long working hours, for the development of the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to systematically review and meta-analyse estimates of the effect of exposure to long working hours (three categories: 41-48, 49-54 and ≥55 h/week), compared with exposure to standard working hours (35-40 h/week), on depression (three outcomes: prevalence, incidence and mortality). DATA SOURCES: We developed and published a protocol, applying the Navigation Guide as an organizing systematic review framework where feasible. We searched electronic academic databases for potentially relevant records from published and unpublished studies, including the WHO International Clinical Trial Registers Platform, Medline, PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, CISDOC and PsycInfo. We also searched grey literature databases, Internet search engines and organizational websites; hand-searched reference lists of previous systematic reviews; and consulted additional experts. STUDY ELIGIBILITY AND CRITERIA: We included working-age (≥15 years) workers in the formal and informal economy in any WHO and/or ILO Member State but excluded children (aged <15 years) and unpaid domestic workers. We included randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies and other non-randomized intervention studies with an estimate of the effect of exposure to long working hours (41-48, 49-54 and ≥55 h/week), compared with exposure to standard working hours (35-40 h/week), on depression (prevalence, incidence and/or mortality). STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: At least two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts against the eligibility criteria at a first stage and full texts of potentially eligible records at a second stage, followed by extraction of data from qualifying studies. Missing data were requested from principal study authors. We combined odds ratios using random-effects meta-analysis. Two or more review authors assessed the risk of bias, quality of evidence and strength of evidence, using Navigation Guide and GRADE tools and approaches adapted to this project. RESULTS: Twenty-two studies (all cohort studies) met the inclusion criteria, comprising a total of 109,906 participants (51,324 females) in 32 countries (as one study included multiple countries) in three WHO regions (Americas, Europe and Western Pacific). The exposure was measured using self-reports in all studies, and the outcome was assessed with a clinical diagnostic interview (four studies), interview questions about diagnosis and treatment of depression (three studies) or a validated self-administered rating scale (15 studies). The outcome was defined as incident depression in all 22 studies, with first time incident depression in 21 studies and recurrence of depression in one study. We did not identify any study on prevalence of depression or on mortality from depression. For the body of evidence for the outcome incident depression, we had serious concerns for risk of bias due to selection because of incomplete outcome data (most studies assessed depression only twice, at baseline and at a later follow-up measurement, and likely have missed cases of depression that occurred after baseline but were in remission at the time of the follow-up measurement) and due to missing information on life-time prevalence of depression before baseline measurement. Compared with working 35-40 h/week, we are uncertain about the effect on acquiring (or incidence of) depression of working 41-48 h/week (pooled odds ratio (OR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.86 to 1.29, 8 studies, 49,392 participants, I2 46%, low quality of evidence); 49-54 h/week (OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.21, 8 studies, 49,392 participants, I2 40%, low quality of evidence); and ≥ 55 h/week (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.24, 17 studies, 91,142 participants, I2 46%, low quality of evidence). Subgroup analyses found no evidence for statistically significant (P < 0.05) differences by WHO region, sex, age group and socioeconomic status. Sensitivity analyses found no statistically significant differences by outcome measurement (clinical diagnostic interview [gold standard] versus other measures) and risk of bias ("high"/"probably high" ratings in any domain versus "low"/"probably low" in all domains). CONCLUSIONS: We judged the existing bodies of evidence from human data as "inadequate evidence for harmfulness" for all three exposure categories, 41-48, 48-54 and ≥55 h/week, for depression prevalence, incidence and mortality; the available evidence is insufficient to assess effects of the exposure. Producing estimates of the burden of depression attributable to exposure to long working appears not evidence-based at this point. Instead, studies examining the association between long working hours and risk of depression are needed that address the limitations of the current evidence.

Predicting new major depression symptoms from long working hours, psychosocial safety climate and work engagement: a population-based cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess the association between long working hours, psychosocial safety climate (PSC), work engagement (WE) and new major depression symptoms emerging over the next 12 months. PSC is the work climate supporting workplace psychological health. SETTING: Australian prospective cohort population data from the states of New South Wales, Western Australia and South Australia. PARTICIPANTS: At Time 1, there were 3921 respondents in the sample. Self-employed, casual temporary, unclassified, those with working hours <35 (37% of 2850) and participants with major depression symptoms at Time 1 (6.7% of 1782) were removed. The final sample was a population-based cohort of 1084 full-time Australian employees. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The planned and measured outcomes were new cases of major depression symptoms. RESULTS: Long working hours were not significantly related to new cases of major depression symptoms; however, when mild cases were removed, the 41-48 and ≥55 long working hour categories were positively related to major depression symptoms. Low PSC was associated with a threefold increase in risk for new major depression symptoms. PSC was not related to long working hours, and long working hours did not mediate the relationship between PSC and new cases of major depression symptoms. The inverse relationship between PSC and major depression symptoms was stronger for males than females. Additional analyses identified that WE was positively related to long working hours. Long working hours (41-48 and ≥55 hours) mediated a positive relationship between WE and major depression symptoms when mild cases of major depression were removed. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that low workplace PSC and potentially long working hours (41-48; ≥55 hours/week) increase the risk of new major depression symptoms. Furthermore, high WE may increase long working hours and subsequent major depression symptoms.

The impact of dayshifts and sleepover nightshifts on the eating and driving behaviours of residential support workers: An exploratory workplace study.

BACKGROUND: Residential support workers (RSWs) provide 24-hour care to clients and many work overnight sleepover nightshifts. Although RSWs perform safety-critical tasks and are at high-risk of work stress and exhaustion, the health and safety of RSWs has not been investigated. OBJECTIVE: This explorative workplace case study explored the impact of support work on the eating and driving behaviours of RSWs. METHODS: Thirteen RSWs who had worked a dayshift (n = 6) or a sleepover nightshift (n = 7) completed questions on the timing of food intake during their shift, motivations for eating during the shift, subjective work performance, alertness and sleepiness post-shift, and driving performance post-shift. RESULTS: RSWs reported snacking during the night on a sleepover nightshift. Time available was the biggest determinant for when RSWs ate during a day and sleepover nightshift. Ratings of subjective alertness and sleepiness after eating were not different between shift types, however participants reported an increase in work performance after eating during a dayshift. Driving events were more frequently reported post-sleepover nightshift, compared to post-dayshift. CONCLUSIONS: Findings demonstrate an impact of shift type on eating and driving behaviours of RSWs and highlight the importance of further investigation of this under-researched group to identify appropriate strategies for improving health and safety.

WHO/ILO work-related burden of disease and injury: Protocol for systematic reviews of exposure to long working hours and of the effect of exposure to long working hours on depression.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Labour Organization (ILO) are developing a joint methodology for estimating the national and global work-related burden of disease and injury (WHO/ILO joint methodology), with contributions from a large network of experts. In this paper, we present the protocol for two systematic reviews of parameters for estimating the number of deaths and disability-adjusted life years from depression attributable to exposure to long working hours, to inform the development of the WHO/ILO joint methodology. OBJECTIVES: We aim to systematically review studies on occupational exposure to long working hours (Systematic Review 1) and systematically review and meta-analyse estimates of the effect of long working hours on depression (Systematic Review 2), applying the Navigation Guide systematic review methodology as an organizing framework, conducting both systematic reviews in tandem and in a harmonized way. DATA SOURCES: Separately for Systematic Reviews 1 and 2, we will search electronic academic databases for potentially relevant records from published and unpublished studies, including Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, CISDOC and PsycINFO. We will also search electronic grey literature databases, Internet search engines and organizational websites; hand search reference list of previous systematic reviews and included study records; and consult additional experts. STUDY ELIGIBILITY AND CRITERIA: We will include working-age (≥15 years) participants in the formal and informal economy in any WHO and/or ILO Member State, but exclude child workers (<15 years) and unpaid domestic workers. For Systematic Review 1, we will include quantitative prevalence studies of relevant levels of occupational exposure to long working hours (i.e. 35-40, 41-48, 49-54 and ≥55 h/week) stratified by country, sex, age and industrial sector or occupation, in the years 2005-2018. For Systematic Review 2, we will include randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies and other non-randomized intervention studies with an estimate of the relative effect of relevant level(s) of long working hours on the incidence of or mortality due to depression, compared with the theoretical minimum risk exposure level (i.e. 35-40 h/week). STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: At least two review authors will independently screen titles and abstracts against the eligibility criteria at a first stage and full texts of potentially eligible records at a second stage, followed by extraction of data from qualifying studies. At least two review authors will assess risk of bias and the quality of evidence, using the most suited tools currently available. For Systematic Review 2, if feasible, we will combine relative risks using meta-analysis. We will report results using the guidelines for accurate and transparent health estimates reporting (GATHER) for Systematic Review 1 and the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines (PRISMA) for Systematic Review 2. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018085729.

Should psychosocial safety climate theory be extended to include climate strength?

Psychosocial safety climate (PSC; climate for psychological health) is an organizational antecedent to work conditions articulated in the job demands-resources model. We responded to calls for broader consideration of organizational climate in terms of both climate level and strength. We tested PSC level and strength as main and interactive predictors of work conditions, psychological health, and engagement. Using multilevel analysis and cross-sectional data, the effects of unit-level PSC constructs were investigated in 21 hospital work units (n = 249 employees) in Australia. The correlation between PSC levels (measured at the unit mean) and PSC strength (measured as unit -1 × SD) was moderate and positive, suggesting that ceiling effects of PSC scores were not problematic. PSC level was a better predictor than PSC strength or their interactions for job demands (psychological and emotional demands), job resources (e.g., skill discretion and organizational support), and health (emotional exhaustion). For engagement, the interaction was significant-improving engagement, therefore, benefits from high levels of PSC and PSC strength within the work units. So, in answer to the research question regarding PSC theory extension, "it depends on the outcome." Research limitations are acknowledged, and the potential of the PSC model to guide the reduction of workplace psychosocial risk factors and the negative consequences is discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

Psychosocial safety climate, emotional exhaustion, and work injuries in healthcare workplaces.

Preventing work injuries requires a clear understanding of how they occur, how they are recorded, and the accuracy of injury surveillance. Our innovation was to examine how psychosocial safety climate (PSC) influences the development of reported and unreported physical and psychological workplace injuries beyond (physical) safety climate, via the erosion of psychological health (emotional exhaustion). Self-report data (T2, 2013) from 214 hospital employees (18 teams) were linked at the team level to the hospital workplace injury register (T1, 2012; T2, 2013; and T3, 2014). Concordance between survey-reported and registered injury rates was low (36%), indicating that many injuries go unreported. Safety climate was the strongest predictor of T2 registered injury rates (controlling for T1); PSC and emotional exhaustion also played a role. Emotional exhaustion was the strongest predictor of survey-reported total injuries and underreporting. Multilevel analysis showed that low PSC, emanating from senior managers and transmitted through teams, was the origin of psychological health erosion (i.e., low emotional exhaustion), which culminated in greater self-reported work injuries and injury underreporting (both physical and psychological). These results underscore the need to consider, in theory and practice, a dual physical-psychosocial safety explanation of injury events and a psychosocial explanation of injury underreporting.