Background and objectives: Changes in teachers’ work situation in Sweden since the 1990s may have contributed to an increase in common mental disorders (CMDs) and burnout. However, there is a lack of research in this field. The aim was to describe how Swedish elementary school teachers experience their health, organizational and social work environment, and the psychosocial safety climate at the workplace, and especially differences and similarities between female and male teachers. Materials and methods: Data were collected with the COPSOQ, OLBI, UWES and PSC-12 from 478 elementary teachers, 81.0% of them women, from twenty schools. The response rate was 96.4%. Results: Teachers reported relatively good general health but experienced high stress, high work pace and emotional demands, low influence at work and a poor psychosocial safety climate. These factors were especially prominent among female teachers. Both women and men experienced good development possibilities and high work engagement. Conclusions: The results of this study can help us to develop a more sustainable work environment for female and male teachers. A more sustainable work environment might attract more people to the profession and incentivize existing teachers to remain in the profession.

Purpose: The first objective was to contribute to a better understanding of the contrasting and paradoxical results in studies of work environment factors and sickness presence and sickness absence. A second objective was to examine if, and under what conditions, employees choose to replace sickness absence with sickness presence, i.e., so-called substitution. Methods: The study utilizes a large body of cross-sectional questionnaire data (n = 130,161) gathered in Sweden from 2002 to 2007 in connection with a comprehensive health promotion initiative. Health and motivation were analyzed as mediators of the effects of five job factors, job control, job support, job demand, role conflict and “work to family conflict” on sickness presence and absence. Results: The results concerning job demands indicate substitution in that increased job demands are associated with increased presenteeism and reduced absenteeism. The direct effect of higher job support was increased absenteeism, but via the health and motivation paths, the total effect of more social support was health-promoting and associated with a reduction in sickness absence and sickness presence. High job control emerged as the most pronounced health-promoting factor, reducing sickness presenteeism as well as absenteeism. More role conflicts and work-to-family conflicts were directly and indirectly associated with decreased health and increased absenteeism as well as presenteeism. earlier research. Conclusion: The mediation analyzes shed light on some of the paradoxes in research on sickness presenteeism and sickness absenteeism, especially regarding job demands and job support. The substitution effect is important for workplace policy and occupational health practice.

The purpose of this review was to investigate the association between publication performance and the organizational and psychosocial work environment of academics in a university setting. In 2018 we conducted database searches in Web of Science, Medline and other key journals (hand-searched) from 1990 to 2017 based on population, exposure and outcome framework. We examined reference lists, and after a title and abstract scan and full-text reading we identified studies that were original research and fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Articles were evaluated as having a low, moderate or high risk of bias using a quality assessment form. From the studies (n= 32) identified and synthesized, work-environment characteristics could explain the quality and quantity aspects of publication performance of academics. Management practices, leadership and psychosocial characteristics are influential factors that affect academics’ publication productivity. Most of the reviewed studies were judged to be of moderate quality because of issues of bias, related to the measuring of publication outcome. The findings in the studies reviewed suggest that highly productive research academics and departments significantly tend to be influenced by the organizational and psychosocial characteristics of their working environment. The practical relevance of this review is that it highlights where academics’ performance needs support and how the work environment can be improved to bolster publication productivity.

Work motivation and job attitudes are important for productivity levels among academic employees. In situations where employees perceive problems, for example, health-related and work environment-related problems, the ability to perform at work could be affected, which may result in fewer publications, reduced quality and less research funding. Few studies, however, have paid attention to productivity loss among academic employees in order to understand how, or if, the perceived loss is affected by the reported problems, either alone or in combination with work motivation and job attitudes. To evaluate whether attitudes towards work—measured as job satisfaction, organisational commitment and work motivation—are associated with productivity loss in the workplace, a cross-sectional study was conducted. This type of design is required as performance is highly variable and is affected by changes in health and work status. This study includes employees who reported either health-related problems, work environment problems or a combination of both (n = 1475). Linear regression analyses were used to answer the hypotheses. Higher levels of motivation, job satisfaction and organisational commitment were associated with lower levels of productivity loss among employees who experienced either health-related or work environment problems. High work motivation and high commitment were significantly associated with lower levels of productivity loss among employees who experienced a combination of problems. In summary, productivity loss among academic employees is not only affected by health-related problems or problems in the work environment but also by work motivation, job satisfaction and organisational commitment; i.e., these factors seem to buffer, or moderate, the reduction in performance levels for this group of employees.

This study is a process evaluation of a trial examining the effects of an organizational intervention (Productivity Measurement and Enhancement System or ProMES) on employee stress. The aims were to explore the implementation process and fidelity to the intervention guidelines, examine the influence of contextual factors (hindrances and facilitators) and explore participants’ experience of working with ProMES. We used the UK Medical Research Council (MRC) guidance to guide the process evaluation. The recruitment, reach and dose delivered were satisfactory and participation high. The employees felt ProMES clarified priorities, gave control and increased participation in decision-making. However, difficulty in obtaining statistical productivity data from the central administration office (a central feature of the intervention) hindered full implementation and regular feedback meetings. Staffing shortages interfered with the implementation process, while having seven design teams and one consultant prevented all occupational groups from working simultaneously. A detailed examination of access to necessary organizational data should be undertaken before implementing ProMES. We recommend a better introduction for new employees, more work on design and packaging and giving employees more training in how to use the software program. The study contributes to our understanding of process evaluations in research into organizational stress management interventions.

This longitudinal retrospective study shows that when the results of an organizational development intervention are fed back properly and action plans are made, factors associated with leadership and commitments to organization are enhanced. The study compared the effects of survey feedback, including the making of action plans and survey feedback without action plans, to the effects of no feedback at all on several psychosocial factors and sick leave over a 3-year period. The data were derived from 1236 individuals for whom baseline data were available and who completed a 3-year follow-up. Applied statistics revealed that the feedback action plan group reported greater improvements regarding leadership factors and commitment to the organization. The results reveal no differences between the feedback groups in regard to sick leave. There is a need for further studies, preferably with a randomized control design, on how to enhance both the psychosocial work environment and employee health and also how to reduce sick leave in the workplace.