Background: Despite growing interest in sustainable employability (SE), studies on the effectiveness of interventions aimed at employees’ SE are scarce. In this review, SE is defined by four core components: health, productivity, valuable work, and long-term perspective. The aim of this review is to summarize the effectiveness of employer-initiated SE interventions and to analyze whether their content and outcome measures addressed these SE components. Methods: A systematic search was performed in six databases for the period January 1997 to June 2018. The methodological quality of each included study was assessed. A customized form was used to extract data and categorize interventions according to SE components. Results: The initial search identified 596 articles and 7 studies were included. Methodological quality ranged from moderate to weak. All interventions addressed the components ‘health’ and ‘valuable work’. Positive effects were found for ‘valuable work’ outcomes. Conclusions: The quality of evidence was moderate to weak. The ‘valuable work’ component appeared essential for the effectiveness of SE interventions. Higher-quality evaluation studies are needed, as are interventions that effectively integrate all SE core components in their content.

Background: The perspectives of low-educated employees are often neglected when designing sustainable employability (SE) interventions. As a result, the interventions offered by the employer do often not align with the needs of low-educated employees. This particular group should therefore be actively involved in the process of developing and implementing SE interventions in their work organizations. The current paper describes the development process of a web-based intervention for HR managers and direct supervisors aimed at improving the SE of low-educated employees. This intervention is specifically designed to involve low-educated employees. Methods: The first four steps of the Intervention Mapping (IM) approach were used to systematically develop the intervention with the active involvement of stakeholders. Step 1 comprised a needs assessment including a literature review, empirical evidence, scoping search and several focus group interviews with employees and with representatives of employers. Step 2 formulated the intervention objective. During step 3, suitable theoretical methods were selected and translated to practical applications. Step 4 involved the development of a web-based intervention by integrating all information from the preceding steps. Results: The needs assessment indicated that the employees’ active involvement and employees-employer genuine dialogue should be essential characteristics of an SE intervention for low-educated employees. The online toolkit ‘Healthy HR’ (HHR) was developed, which contains eight steps. Each step consists of one or more tasks helping the employer and employees with developing and implementing SE interventions themselves. One or more dialogue-based tools support each task. The leading principle providing structure within HHR was Adapted Intervention Mapping. Conclusion: Principles of IM appeared to be useful to develop the intervention HHR systematically. This development process resulted in a practical online toolkit that supports employers in the development and implementation of local SE interventions tailored to the needs of low-educated employees. These employees should be actively involved in the process through a dialogue-based approach. By using IM principles, HHR is expected to increase the effectiveness in bettering the health and well-being of low-educated employees.

Background: There is a need to develop sustainable employability (SE) interventions that are better aligned to the needs of low-educated employees. This group needs to get a voice in intervention development and implementation. In this study, a dialogue-based approach is proposed consisting of an online step-by-step support toolkit for employers, ‘Healthy Human Resources’ (HHR). When intervening, this toolkit enables and stimulates employers to have a continuous dialogue with their low-educated employees. By improving the employees’ job control, HHR is aimed at cost-beneficially improving SE. This paper describes the protocol of the evaluation study to evaluate the effectiveness and implementation process of HHR on the SE of low-educated employees. Methods: The protocol of the evaluation study consists of: 1) an effect evaluation with a pretest-posttest design with a one-year follow-up in five work organizations in the Netherlands deploying low-educated employees and with SE as the primary outcome and job control as the secondary outcome. The effect evaluation is expanded with a budget impact analysis; 2) a mixed-method process evaluation at six and twelve months after the start of HHR to evaluate the whole implementation process of HHR. This includes the experiences with HHR of various stakeholders, such as employees, human resource managers, and line managers. Discussion: The effect evaluation will give insight into the effects of HHR on the SE of low-educated employees. The process evaluation will provide insight into the underlying mechanisms of the (in) effectiveness of HHR. By improving dialogue, we hypothesize that HHR, through enhancing job control, will strengthen the SE of low-educated employees. Also for helping with tackling the socioeconomic health gap, if proven effective, the implementation of HHR on a wider scale can be recommended.

Background: Adoption and implementation are prerequisites for the effectiveness of organisational interventions, but successful implementation is not self-evident. This article provides insights into the implementation of the organisational intervention ‘Healthy Human Resources’ (HHR). HHR is developed with Intervention Mapping and aims at improving sustainable employability (SE) of employees in low-skilled jobs. Methods: Qualitative data on adoption and implementation were collected by interviews with three employees and seven middle managers in five Dutch organisations and by extensive notes of observations and conversations in a logbook. Data triangulation was applied and all data were transcribed and analysed thematically using the qualitative analysis guide of Leuven (QUAGOL). Results: All organisations adopted HHR, but three failed during the transition from adoption to implementation, and two implemented HHR only partially. The steepness of the organisational hierarchy emerged as an overarching barrier: steeper hierarchical organisations faced more difficulties with implementing HHR than flatter ones. This was reflected in middle managers’ lack of decision-making authority and being overruled by senior management. Middle managers felt incapable of remedying the lack of employees’ voice. Subsequently, ‘us-versus-them’ thinking patterns emerged. These power imbalances and ‘us-versus-them’ thinking reinforced each other, further strengthening the hierarchical steepness. Both processes could be the result of wider socio-political forces. Conclusions: This study improved the understanding of the difficulties to adopt and implement such organisational intervention to contribute to the sustainable employability of employees in low-skilled jobs. Practical implications are given for future implementation of organisational interventions.

Background: Sustainable employability (SE) is important for work organizations. Recently, the MAastricht Instrument for Sustainable Employability (MAISE-NL) was developed and validated. This study describes the development and validation of an adapted version of the MAISE-NL, the MAISE-Easy, which can be used for employees in low-skilled jobs. Methods: The adaptation of the MAISE-NL was based on six focus groups with employees in low-skilled jobs in various sectors. The MAISE-Easy was distributed among employees in five organizations. The response rate (n = 1033) was 53%. Construct validity, reliability and criterion validity were analyzed by means of principal component analysis (PCA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), Cronbach’s alpha and correlational analyses. Results: The MAISE-Easy included 17 scales divided over four main areas: (1) level of SE; (2) factors affecting SE; (3) overall responsibility for SE; (4) responsibility for factors affecting SE. Construct validity, reliability and criterion validity were adequate to good. Conclusions: The MAISE-Easy is a well-validated instrument for measuring SE among employees in low-skilled jobs in terms of the level of SE, factors affecting SE, responsibility for SE and responsibility for factors affecting SE. MAISE-Easy is recommended for both needs assessments and evaluation research in as yet underserved groups of low-skilled workers.

Purpose: To perform the process evaluation of an intervention that aims to facilitate clinical healthcare professionals (HCP) to provide Maastricht Work-Related Support (WRS) to working patients with a chronic disease. Methods: A mixed-methods approach was applied to address reach, efficacy, adoption, implementation, and maintenance (RE-AIM framework) as well as context of the Maastricht WRS intervention. Qualitative data included interviews with HCPs (N = 10), patients at two time points (N = 10 and N = 9), and field notes. Quantitative data included screening logbooks of HCPs, patient screening forms, and a questionnaire for patients. Content analysis or computation of frequencies was applied where applicable. Results: Twenty-eight HCPs participated in the intervention (reach). They had a low attitude toward providing Maastricht WRS themselves (adoption). During clinical consultations, they addressed work for 770 of 1,624 (47%) persons of working age. Only 57% (437/770) had paid work, of which 10% (44/437) acknowledged a current need for support. Discussing work during clinical consultations by HCPs was hindered by other medical priorities and patients not disclosing problems (implementation). Over time, Maastricht WRS was less consistently provided (maintenance). Patients reported a positive impact of the intervention, such as fitness for work (efficacy). Context (e.g., lack of urgency, priority, time, and management support) played a pivotal role in the implementation. Conclusion: This evaluation showed that HCPs had a positive attitude toward WRS in general, but their attitude toward provide Maastricht WRS themselves in daily clinical care was low. Recommendations include improving HCPs’ attitude, addressing WRS as a key policy point, and facilitating time.