The development and dissemination of new technologies has brought forward a rise in flexible work arrangements, such as mobile work. In the literature, mobile work has mostly been discussed from a microergonomic perspective, considering detachment, stress, strain, and life-domain balance. However, the macroergonomic or institutional perspectives have often been neglected, although for occupational health and safety (OHS) management, as well as occupational health and safety systems, many questions remain unanswered. Therefore, in the present paper, information and communication technologies (ICT)-enabled mobile work is described taking into account institutional and regulative, as well as company-related, requirements. As the literature-based analysis was able to show, existing regulations cover many aspects of mobile work arrangements but also offer starting points for a more concrete protection of mobile workers. Furthermore, there are challenges regarding the enforcement of regulation. In this regard, new technologies might offer the chance to improve the interactions between institutional and company-related occupational health and safety systems. Additionally, 278 co-funded research projects in Germany were categorized, yielding 18 projects on new ways of work, of which another eleven projects addressed different aspects of mobile work. The project analysis revealed that current research focuses on tools and strategies for designing communication and cooperation. In conclusion, the examination of research trends can be used to generate new knowledge for better OHS management and effective OHS systems.

Although the popularity of workplace health promotion (WHP) has considerably increased over the years, there are still concerns about the way this concept is being implemented by the companies. There is, however, a seeming lack of empirical knowledge about variations in WHP practice. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of different patterns (and related quality levels) of WHP activity and the effect of organisational predictors on the chances of these WHP activity levels being implemented. Data from an establishment survey (N = 6,500) were used to calculate the prevalences of four configurations of WHP among German companies. Furthermore, multinominal logistic regressions were performed to determine odds ratios for these WHP activity levels according to several organisational characteristics. 9% of companies exhibited the most comprehensive type of WHP including analysis, individual-directed prevention measures and participatory groups concerned with working conditions improvement (level A), 18% featured a combination of analysis and individual-directed prevention (level B), 29% had reported measures from only one of these categories (level C), and 44% showed no WHP activity at all (level D). In the multivariate analysis company size turned out to be the strongest predictor of WHP at all levels. WHP was also predicted by a good economic situation of the company, the availability of safety specialist assistance, the availability of specialist assistance in occupational health and the presence of an employee representative body. These effects usually became stronger when moving up in the hierarchy of WHP levels. For the two sector-level variables (private vs. public, production vs. services) no statistically significant associations with WHP were found. WHP still shows great potential for improvement both in quantitative and qualitative terms. Especially required are additional efforts in developing and implementing WHP practice models and dissemination strategies which are tailored to the particular conditions and needs of small companies. However, findings suggest that the chances for achieving progress in WHP also depend on developments in adjacent policy areas such as labour relations or occupational safety and health.

With the increasing digital transformation, work tasks are changing—in some cases, significantly. Our study addresses the question of whether the established criteria for work design are still sufficient or if they should get updated and additional criteria become necessary in the context of digitalization. In a multistage consensus process involving interdisciplinary groups of experts, we have identified specific criteria for the humane design of work in a world increasingly permeated by digitalized work tools. Starting with an expert workshop using a combined nominal group/focus group technique, followed by a real-time Delphi study, a content analysis and a five-stage peer comment process, we detected 13 criteria and 38 design guidelines for human-centered work in digital transformation. Mapping these with established criteria, it became apparent that some established criteria have experienced a new dynamic because of the digital transformation. For other criteria, a need for digitization-sensitive design is discernible. In addition, criteria have emerged whose necessity is rooted in the digital transformation. A diffusion and stronger interconnection of the various levels of the work system in connection with the digital transformation of work is apparent.

Zusammenfassung: Die vorliegende Studie prüft auf der Basis der Daten der deutschen Teilstichprobe der europäischen Unternehmenserhebung über neue und aufkommende Risiken (ESENER) aus den Jahren 2014 und 2019 den Zusammenhang zwischen der Güte der betrieblichen Arbeitsschutzorganisation und der Umsetzung einer Gefährdungsbeurteilung. Zur Bestimmung der Güte der Arbeitsschutzorganisation und der Güte der Gefährdungsbeurteilung wurden verschiedene Items der ESENER-Befragung verwendet. Die Analysen wurden in Form logistischer Regressionsmodelle ausgeführt. Die Ergebnisse werden in Form von adjustierten prognostizierten Wahrscheinlichkeiten und durchschnittlichen marginalen Effekten dargestellt. In beiden untersuchten Erhebungswellen der ESENER-Befragung zeigt sich ein ausgeprägter und signifikanter Zusammenhang zwischen der Güte der Arbeitsschutzorganisation und der Umsetzung einer Gefährdungsbeurteilung, auch nach Adjustierung für Größe, Branche und Sektor. Während Betriebe mit einer Arbeitsschutzorganisation hoher Güte mehrheitlich angaben, eine umfassende Gefährdungsbeurteilung durchzuführen (2014: 56 %, 2019: 59 %), waren es für Betriebe mit einer Arbeitsschutzorganisation geringer Güte fast 40 Prozentpunkte weniger (18 % bzw. 23 %). Diese Ergebnisse sprechen dafür, dass Maßnahmen zur Stärkung der betrieblichen Arbeitsschutzorganisation zu einer verbesserten Umsetzung der Gefährdungsbeurteilung beitragen.