[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i24p13593-d698307.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Participatory Approach to Identify Key Areas for Sustainable Work Environment and Health in Employees with Flexible Work Arrangements

Author

Listed:
  • Sofie Bjärntoft

    (Department of Occupational Health Sciences and Psychology, University of Gävle, 80176 Gävle, Sweden)

  • David M. Hallman

    (Department of Occupational Health Sciences and Psychology, University of Gävle, 80176 Gävle, Sweden)

  • Camilla Zetterberg

    (Department of Occupational Health Sciences and Psychology, University of Gävle, 80176 Gävle, Sweden)

  • Johan Larsson

    (Department of Occupational Health Sciences and Psychology, University of Gävle, 80176 Gävle, Sweden
    Human Work Science, Luleå University of Technology, 97187 Luleå, Sweden
    Department of Occupational Health and Safety, LKAB, 98381 Gällivare, Sweden)

  • Johanna Edvinsson

    (Department of Occupational Health Sciences and Psychology, University of Gävle, 80176 Gävle, Sweden)

  • Helena Jahncke

    (Department of Occupational Health Sciences and Psychology, University of Gävle, 80176 Gävle, Sweden)

Abstract
Flexible work arrangements are common worldwide, but knowledge on how to achieve a sustainable work environment is sparse. The aim of this study was to use a participatory approach to identify concrete suggestions and key areas for improvement that were considered relevant, effective, and feasible for promoting good work environment and health at organizational, work group and individual level (O-G-I), among office employees with flexible work arrangements. Eight focus group interviews (including 45 employees) were conducted in a large Swedish government agency in 2017. By using a Tree diagram approach, employees made a total of 279 suggestions for improvements, which were sorted into O-G-I levels and mapped into 18 key areas. We found that 13 key areas addressed organizational level (e.g., improving leadership, policy, job demands, and work efficiency), two key areas addressed group level (create common rules of availability and activity-based working), and three key areas addressed individual level (e.g., individuals’ responsibility to clearly communicate their availability). The participatory process was effective in obtaining concrete suggestions and key areas in need of improvement, which may provide an action plan that can guide organizations in developing interventions to promote good work environment and health in flexible work.

Suggested Citation

  • Sofie Bjärntoft & David M. Hallman & Camilla Zetterberg & Johan Larsson & Johanna Edvinsson & Helena Jahncke, 2021. "A Participatory Approach to Identify Key Areas for Sustainable Work Environment and Health in Employees with Flexible Work Arrangements," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-14, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:24:p:13593-:d:698307
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/24/13593/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/24/13593/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anya Johnson & Shanta Dey & Helena Nguyen & Markus Groth & Sadhbh Joyce & Leona Tan & Nicholas Glozier & Samuel B Harvey, 2020. "A review and agenda for examining how technology-driven changes at work will impact workplace mental health and employee well-being," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 45(3), pages 402-424, August.
    2. Lotta Dellve & Andrea Eriksson, 2017. "Health-Promoting Managerial Work: A Theoretical Framework for a Leadership Program that Supports Knowledge and Capability to Craft Sustainable Work Practices in Daily Practice and During Organizationa," Societies, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-18, May.
    3. Marta Fana & Santo Milasi & Joanna Napierala & Enrique Fernandez-Macias & Ignacio Gonzalez Vazquez, 2020. "Telework, work organisation and job quality during the COVID-19 crisis: a qualitative study," JRC Working Papers on Labour, Education and Technology 2020-11, Joint Research Centre.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Eugenia Țigan & Radu Lucian Blaga & Florin-Lucian Isac & Monica Lungu & Ioana Anda Milin & Florin Tripa & Simona Gavrilaș, 2022. "Analysis of Sustainable Communication Patterns during the Telework Period in Western Romanian Corporations," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-19, August.
    2. Liyuan Wang & Tianyi Xie, 2023. "Double-Edged Sword Effect of Flexible Work Arrangements on Employee Innovation Performance: From the Demands–Resources–Individual Effects Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-27, June.
    3. Johanna Edvinsson & Svend Erik Mathiassen & Sofie Bjärntoft & Helena Jahncke & Terry Hartig & David M. Hallman, 2022. "A Work Time Control Tradeoff in Flexible Work: Competitive Pathways to Need for Recovery," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-15, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Emmelie Hazelzet & Eleonora Picco & Inge Houkes & Hans Bosma & Angelique de Rijk, 2019. "Effectiveness of Interventions to Promote Sustainable Employability: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-17, June.
    2. Dr. Muhammad Bilal Ahmad & Ayesha Badar & Dr. Muhammad Ramzan, 2023. "Investigating the Factors Affecting Employee Job Satisfaction through Job Autonomy in the Growing Concept of Hybrid Working Model in the IT Industry," Journal of Policy Research (JPR), Research Foundation for Humanity (RFH), vol. 9(2), pages 591-601.
    3. Emma Brulin & Sofie Bjärntoft & Gunnar Bergström & David M. Hallman, 2023. "Gendered Associations of Flexible Work Arrangement and Perceived Flexibility with Work–Life Interference: A Cross-Sectional Mediation Analysis on Office Workers in Sweden," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 167(1), pages 571-588, June.
    4. Zahoor, Nadia & Donbesuur, Francis & Christofi, Michael & Miri, Domnan, 2022. "Technological innovation and employee psychological well-being: The moderating role of employee learning orientation and perceived organizational support," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    5. Michaela Heřmanová & Kateřina Kuralová & Michal Prokop & Ladislav Pilař, 2024. "The Attractiveness of Employee Benefits in Agriculture from the Perspective of Generation Z," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-29, July.
    6. Iqbal, Qaisar & Piwowar-Sulej, Katarzyna, 2024. "Technological social responsibility: A stakeholder theory-based measurement scale," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    7. Green, Francis, 2021. "Decent Work and The Quality of Work and Employment," GLO Discussion Paper Series 817, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    8. Göran Jutengren & Ellen Jaldestad & Lotta Dellve & Andrea Eriksson, 2020. "The Potential Importance of Social Capital and Job Crafting for Work Engagement and Job Satisfaction among Health-Care Employees," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-16, June.
    9. Emily J. Haas & Emanuele Cauda, 2022. "Using Core Elements of Health and Safety Management Systems to Support Worker Well-Being during Technology Integration," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-17, October.
    10. Chiara Ghislieri & Domenico Sanseverino & Tindara Addabbo & Vincenzo Bochicchio & Rosy Musumeci & Ilenia Picardi & Patrizia Tomio & Gloria Guidetti & Daniela Converso, 2022. "The Show Must Go On: A Snapshot of Italian Academic Working Life during Mandatory Work from Home through the Results of a National Survey," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-22, March.
    11. Hazrat Hassan & Qianwei Ying & Habib Ahmad & Sana Ilyas, 2019. "Factors that Sustain Health and Safety Management Practices in the Food Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-20, July.
    12. Emma Hagqvist & Stig Vinberg & Susanna Toivanen & Bodil J. Landstad, 2021. "A balancing act: Swedish occupational safety and health inspectors’ reflections on their bureaucratic role when supervising micro-enterprises," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 57(2), pages 821-834, August.
    13. Zenon Pokojski & Agnieszka Kister & Marcin Lipowski, 2022. "Remote Work Efficiency from the Employers’ Perspective—What’s Next?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-16, April.
    14. Jung, Dain & Kwak, Do Won & Tang, Kam Ki & Yazbeck, Myra, 2022. "Poor Job Conditions Amplify Negative Mental Health Shocks," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    15. Wielgoszewska, Bożena & Bryson, Alex & Joshi, Heather & Wilkinson, David, 2024. "Do Women Pay for Working from Home? Exploring Gender Gaps in Pay and Wellbeing by Work Location in the UK Cohort Studies," IZA Discussion Papers 17405, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    16. Ellen Jaldestad & Andrea Eriksson & Philip Blom & Britt Östlund, 2021. "Factors Influencing Retirement Decisions among Blue-Collar Workers in a Global Manufacturing Company—Implications for Age Management from A System Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(20), pages 1-22, October.
    17. Andrea Eriksson & Arne Orvik & Margaretha Strandmark & Anita Nordsteien & Steffen Torp, 2017. "Management and Leadership Approaches to Health Promotion and Sustainable Workplaces: A Scoping Review," Societies, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-17, May.
    18. Selimović, Jasmina & Pilav-Velić, Amila & Krndžija, Lamija, 2021. "Digital workplace transformation in the financial service sector: Investigating the relationship between employees' expectations and intentions," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:24:p:13593-:d:698307. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.