Advertisement

Leadership Qualities in the Return to Work Process: A Content Analysis

  • Randi W. Aas
  • Kjersti L. Ellingsen
  • Preben Lindøe
  • Anders Möller
Article

Abstract

Introduction Supervisors have a core role to play in facilitating the safe and effective return to work (RTW) of employees on long-term sick leave. Previous studies have revealed that the risk of long-term sick leave increases with lower social support from the supervisor and lower management quality. The aim of this study was to elucidate leadership qualities that are valued in the RTW process of employees. Methods The study formed part of the Rogaland RTW study, and was designed as a qualitative case study that included interviews with subordinates (n = 30) on long-term sick leave (>8 weeks) and their supervisors (n = 28) from 19 companies. The informants represented a heterogeneous sample regarding diagnoses, types of occupations, positions, company sector, branches, and sizes. Qualitative and quantitative content analysis of the transcripts obtained during interviews identified leadership qualities. Results Three-hundred-and-forty-five descriptions of leadership qualities were identified, which were categorized into 78 distinct leadership qualities and 7 leadership types. The five most valued leadership qualities were “ability to make contact”, “being considerate”, “being understanding”, “being empathic”, and “being appreciative”. The three most valued leadership types were the Protector, Problem-Solver, and Contact-Maker. While the subordinates gave more descriptions to the Encourager, Recognizer, and Protector types, the supervisors described the Responsibility-Maker and Problem-Solver most often. The most frequent reported combination of types was the Protector and Problem-Solver, reported by 54% of the informants, while the most common three-types-combination was the Protector, Problem-Solver, and Contact-Maker reported by 37% of the informants. Conclusions This study revealed that there is a wide spectrum of valued leadership qualities, with those reported as being valuable differing between employees and supervisors.

Keywords

Sick leave Disability management Return to work Content analysis Occupational rehabilitation Workplace Leadership Rogaland RTW study 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We are very grateful to the 19 participating companies, especially to the 30 subordinates and 28 supervisors who shared their experiences with us. We also thank the funding sources: the National Research Council of Norway, Program for Work and Health, and the Norwegian Employers’ Organization (NHO) Working Environment fund.

Reference

  1. 1.
    Larsson G. Utvecklande ledarskap. Psykologtidningen 1999;12–3.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hemphill HK. Relations between the size of the group and the behavior of “superior” leaders. J Soc Psychol. 1950;32:11–2.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Burns JH. Leadership. New York: Harper & Row; 1978.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bass BM. Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press; 1985.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fiedler F. A theory of leadership effectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1967.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nyberg A, Bernin P, Theorell T. The impact of leadership on the health of subordinates. SALTSA; Working life research in Europe; 2005. Report No.: 1:2005.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Woods V. Work-related musculoskeletal health and social support. Occup Med. 2005;55:177–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Labriola M, Christensen KB, Lund T, Nielsen ML, Diderichsen F. Multilevel analysis of workplace and individual risk factors for long-term sickness absence. J Occup Environ Med. 2006;48(9):923–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Vaananen A, Toppinen-Tanner S, Kalimo R, Mutanen P, Vahtera J, Peiro JM. Job characteristics, physical and psychological symptoms, and social support as antecedents of sickness absence among men and women in the private industrial sector. Soc Sci Med. 2003;57(5):807–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hoivik D, Baste V, Brandsdal E, Moen BE. Associations between self-reported working conditions and registrered health and safety results. J Occup Environ Med. 2007;49(2):139–47.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Halford V, Cohen HH. Technology use and psychosocial factors in the self-reporting of musculoskeletal disorder symptoms in call center workers. J Saf Res. 2003;34:167–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sosial og helsedepartementet. NOU 2000:27. Sykefravær og uførepensjonering. Et inkluderende arbeidsliv. 2000.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Norwegian Government. Letter of intent regarding a more inclusive working life 2006–2009. http://www.regjeringen.no/upload/AID/temadokumenter/velferd/ia/A_more_inclusive_working_life_2006-2009.pdf. 2006. Ref Type: Internet Communication.
  14. 14.
    Holmgren K, Ivanoff SD. Supervisors’ views on employer responsibility in the return to work process.A focus group study. J Occup Rehabil. 2007;17:93–106.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hsieh HF, Shannon SE. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res. 2005;15(9):1277–88.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cavanagh S. Content analysis: concepts, methods and applications. Nurse Res. 1997;4(3):5–16.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Downe-Wamboldt B. Content analysis: method, applications and issues. Health Care Women Int. 1992;13:313–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Graneheim UH, Lundman B. Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today. 2004;24:105–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Priest, R, Woods L. An overview of three different approaches to the interpretation of qualitative data. Part 1: theoretical issues. Nurse Res. 2002;10(1):30–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Woods L, Priest H, Roberts P. An overview of three different approaches to the interpretation of qualitative data. Part 2: practical illustrations. Nurse Res. 2002;10(1):43–51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Uniformed requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals: Writing and editing for biomedical publications. 2007. Report No.: Updated October 2007.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    House J. Work, stress and social support. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing; 1981.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Johnsen JV. The impact of workplace social support, job demands and work controlupon cardiovascular disease in Sweden. Stockholm: Department of Psychology; 1986.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Karasek R. Job demands, job decision latitude and mental strain: implications for job redesign. Admin Sci Quart. 1979;24:285–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Karasek R, Theorell T. Health work. Stress, productivity, and the reconstruction of working life. USA: Basic Books, A division of Harper Collins Publishers; 1990.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Shaw WS, Robertson MM, Pransky G, McLellan RK. Employee perspective on the role of supervisors to prevent workplace disability after injuries. J Occup Rehabil. 2003;13(3):129–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Currier KF, Chan F, Berven NL, Habeck RV, Taylor DW. Functions and knowledge domains for disability management practice. Rehabil Couns Bull. 2001;44(3):133–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hursh N, Rosenthal D. Dynamic changes in the field of disability management: responding to employer needs with broader responsibilities. Case Manag. 2005;11:16–22.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Rosenthal DA, Hursh N, Lui J, Isom R, Sasson J. A survey of current disability management practice: emerging trends and implications for certification. Rehabil Couns Bull. 2007;50(2):76–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Westmorland MG, Buys N. A comparison of disability management practices in Australian and Canadian workplaces. Work. 2004;23:31–41.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Westmorland MG, Williams RM, Amick BC, Shannon H, Rasheed F. Disability management practices in Ontario workplaces: employees’ perceptions. Disabil Rehabil. 2005;27(14):825–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Chan F, Taylor D, Currier K, Chan CCH, Wood C, Lie A, et al. Disability management practitioners: a work behavior analysis. J Vocat Rehabil. 2000;15:47–56.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Caggianelli P. New skills, expertise needed for disability managers as part of workplace teams. Case Manag. 2006;12:15.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Randi W. Aas
    • 1
    • 2
  • Kjersti L. Ellingsen
    • 3
  • Preben Lindøe
    • 4
  • Anders Möller
    • 5
  1. 1.IRIS, International Research Institute of StavangerStavangerNorway
  2. 2.Karolinska InstitutetStockholmSweden
  3. 3.Diakonhjemmet University College RogalandSandnesNorway
  4. 4.Faculty of Social SciencesUniversity of StavangerStavangerNorway
  5. 5.Nordic School of Public HealthGothenburgSweden

Personalised recommendations