Can job insecurity be managed? Evaluating an organizational-level intervention addressing the negative effects of restructuring

an article by Johan Simonsen Abildgaard (The National Research Centre for the Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark), Karina Nielsen (Institute of Work Psychology, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK) and Magnus Sverke (Stockholm University, Sweden; North-West University, Potchedstroom, South Africa) published in Work & Stress: An International Journal of Work, Health & Organisations Volume 32 Issue 2

Abstract

Although downsizing and reorganisation are recognised as serious threats to the psychological well-being of employees, intervention strategies for addressing these events are limited.

This study evaluated the effects of a participatory organisational-level intervention in which employees and managers chose to address the psychosocial consequences, specifically job insecurity, of restructuring.

The intervention was conducted among postal service letter carriers in Denmark and was evaluated based on quantitative and qualitative data. Using interviews (N = 24) and observations, the programme theory of the intervention and to what extent the intervention had been implemented were assessed. Using survey data (N = 238), repeated measures ANOVAs were conducted to test for differences in the development of job insecurity between the intervention group and a comparison group.

The results indicate that the intervention group had a significantly smaller increase in one dimension of job insecurity as compared to the comparison group.

Therefore, we conclude that employees’ experiencing of job insecurity, which typically follows in the wake of restructuring, can be addressed by planned efforts at the workplace level.

---

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

an article by Karina Nielsen (University of East Anglia, UK) published in Human Relations Volume 66 Number 8 (August 2013)

Abstract

In recent years, there has been an increasing interest in the processes of organisational interventions when evaluating the outcomes on employee health and well-being. Nevertheless, process evaluation is still in its infancy and primarily consists of checklists inspired by the public health intervention literature.

In these frameworks, employees are seen as passive recipients whose reactions to pre-developed interventions should be evaluated. Current organisational intervention design rests on a participatory approach and recent process evaluations reveal that employees and line managers influence the implementation and the outcomes of organisational interventions.

Following the current foci of current frameworks we may miss out on important information on the influence of both the participatory process and the line managers on intervention outcomes.

I argue that current evaluation frameworks suffer from four limitations:

1. they are not aligned with state-of-the-art research and practice;
2. and therefore they fail to apply theory to explain how and why human agents influence intervention implementation and outcomes;
3. they do not offer suggestions as to how such agency can be measured; and
4. nor do they discuss how we may use knowledge obtained from process evaluation proactively when designing future organizational interventions.

---