Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Recognition During the Return-to-Work Process in Workers with Common Mental Disorders

  • Published:
Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose Considering worker’s perspective, the purpose of this study was twofold: (1) to document the meaning of the experience of recognition in the return to work (RTW) process of work after a sick leave due to a common mental disorder (CMD) and (2) to investigate the phenomenon of recognition for workers in the process of RTW after a sick leave due to a CMD, by evaluating the presence or absence of marks of recognition from salient RTW stakeholders stemming from different systems. Methods The Relational Caring Inquiry phenomenological method was used to explore the meaning of recognition during the return-to-work process and marks of recognition in a group of 20 workers who returned to their employment after a sick leave due to a CMD. In depth individual interviews were conducted with each participant. Results The definition of recognition that emerged from workers experiencing the RTW process is related to the behaviours and attitudes of various stakeholders, stemming from the work, health, insurance and social systems that allow them to feel appreciated, valued and respected, throughout the RTW process. Recognition was most often described as showing support, trust, respect for recovery and pace, and providing positive feedback. Conclusion The findings from this study could serve as guidelines in organizations regarding the RTW process, and in particular clarifying the roles and actions that different stakeholders could take in the workplace to stimulate expressions of meaningful recognition.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Nigatu YT, Liu Y, Uppal M, et al. Interventions for enhancing return to work in individuals with a common mental illness: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Psychol Med. 2016;46:3263–3274. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291716002269.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Gili M, Vicens C, Roca M, et al. Interventions for preventing relapse or recurrence of depression in primary health care settings: a systematic review. Prev Med. 2015;76:S16–S21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2014.07.035.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Joyce S, Modini M, Christensen H, et al. Workplace interventions for common mental disorders: a systematic meta-review. Psychol Med. 2016;46:683–697. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291715002408.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Dewa CS, Loong D, Bonato S. Work outcomes of sickness absence related to mental disorders: a systematic literature review. BMJ Open. 2014;4:e005533. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005533.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Ervasti J, Joensuu M, Pentti J, et al. Prognostic factors for return to work after depression-related work disability: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Psychiatr Res. 2017;95:28–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2017.07.024.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Nielsen K, Yarker J, Munir F, et al. IGLOO: an integrated framework for sustainable return to work in workers with common mental disorders. Work Stress. 2018;32:400–417. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2018.1438536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Negrini A, Corbière M, Lecomte T, et al. How can supervisors contribute to the return to work of employees who have experienced depression? J Occup Rehabil. 2018;28:279–288. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-017-9715-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Corbière M, Mazaniello-Chézol M, Bastien M-F, et al. Stakeholders’ role and actions in the return-to-work process of employees on sick-leave due to common mental disorders: a scoping review. J Occup Rehabil. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-019-09861-2.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Scharf J, Angerer P, Müting G, et al. Return to work after common mental disorders: a qualitative study exploring the expectations of the involved stakeholders. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17:6635. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17186635.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Aas RW, Ellingsen KL, Lindøe P, et al. Leadership qualities in the return to work process: a content analysis. J Occup Rehabil. 2008;18:335–346.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Tiedtke C, de Casterlé BD, Donceel P, et al. Workplace support after breast cancer treatment: recognition of vulnerability. Disabil Rehabil. 2015;37:1770–1776. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2014.982830.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Renger D, Miché M, Casini A. Professional recognition at work: the protective role of esteem, respect, and care for burnout among employees. J Occup Environ Med. 2020;62:202–209. https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0000000000001782.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Molinier P, Flottes A. Travail et santé mentale: approches cliniques [Work and mental health: clinical approaches]. Travail et emploi. 2012;129:51–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Brun J-P, Dugas N. La reconnaissance au travail: analyse d’un concept riche de sens [Recognition at work: analysis of a meaningful concept]. Gestion. 2005;30:79–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Saint-Arnaud L, Saint-Jean M, Rhéaume J. Regard de l’autre et dynamique de la reconnaissance : un effet loupe sur les personnes qui ont des troubles mentaux au travail [The gaze of the other and the dynamics of recognition: a magnifying glass effect on people with mental disorders at work]. Travailler. 2004;12:99–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Guéguen H, Malochet G. Les théories de la reconnaissance [Theories of recognition]. Paris: La Découverte; 2012.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  17. Lazzeri C, Nour S. De L’Inclusion–Reconnaissance et Identification Sociale [On Inclusion - Social recognition and identification]. Paris: Presses Universitaires de Paris Ouest; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Roelen C, Thorsen S, Heymans M, et al. Development and validation of a prediction model for long-term sickness absence based on occupational health survey variables. Disabil Rehabil. 2018;40:168–175. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2016.1247471.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Dorvil H, Kirouac L, Dupuis G. Les troubles mentaux en milieu de travail et dans les médias de masse [Mental disorders in the workplace and in the mass media]. Presses de l'Université du Québec; 2015.

  20. Ricoeur P. Parcours de la reconnaissance [Recognition course]. Trois études, Paris: Stock; 2004.

  21. Roche A. Définition de deux systèmes dialectiques de reconnaissance présents au sein des organisations [Definition of two dialectical systems of recognition present in organizations]. Manag Hum Entrep 2015:20–44.

  22. La HA. société du mépris [The society of contempt]. Paris: La Découverte; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  23. La HA. lutte pour la reconnaissance [The struggle for recognition]. Paris: Édition du Cerf; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Tiedtke C, Donceel P, de Rijk A, et al. Return to work following breast cancer treatment: the employers’ side. J Occup Rehabil. 2014;24:399–409. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-013-9465-6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Brun J-P, Dugas N. An analysis of employee recognition: Perspectives on human resources practices. Int J Hum Resource Manag. 2008;19:716–730. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585190801953723.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Worms F. Revivre. Éprouver nos blessures et nos ressources [To relive. To experience our wounds and our resources]. Paris: Flammarion; 2015.

  27. Boštjančič E, Galič K. Returning to work after sick leave—the role of work demands and resources, self-efficacy, and social support. Front Psychol. 2020;11:661.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Fraser N. Qu’est-ce que la justice sociale? Reconnaissance et redistribution [What is social justice? Recognition and redistribution]. Paris: La Découverte; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Merino MD, Privado J. Does employee recognition affect positive psychological functioning and well-being? Spanish J Psychol 2015;18:E64.

  30. Cara C. Managers’ subjugation and empowerment of caring practices: a relational caring inquiry with staff nurses. Doctoral dissertation, University of Colorado, Colorado. UMI Dissertation Services; 1997.

  31. O’Reilly L, Cara C. La phénoménologie selon l’école de pensée de Husserl [Phenomenology according to the Husserl school of thought]. In Corbière M Larivière N, editors. Méthodes qualitatives, quantitatives et mixtes: dans la recherche en sciences humaines, sociales et de la santé [Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods: in research in the humanities, social and health sciences]. 2nd ed. Québec: Presses de l'Université du Québec; 2020.

  32. Buys NJ, Selander J, Sun J. Employee experience of workplace supervisor contact and support during long-term sickness absence. Disabil Rehabil. 2019;41:808–814.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Coutu M-F, Légaré F, Durand M-J, et al. Operationalizing a shared decision making model for work rehabilitation programs: a consensus process. J Occup Rehabil. 2015;25:141–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-014-9532-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Boileau-Falardeau F, Turcotte J-R, Lafleur P-A, et al. Dilemmes des médecins traitants lors du retour au travail de personnes aux prises avec un trouble mental courant: illustration par des vignettes cliniques [Treating physicians’ dilemmas in returning to work for people with a common mental disorder: clinical vignettes]. Santé mentale au Québec. 2019;44:219–237.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Légaré F, Stacey D, Turcotte S, et al. Interventions for improving the adoption of shared decision making by healthcare professionals. Cochrane database of systematic reviews 2014.

  36. Armaou M, Schumacher L, Grunfeld EA. Cancer survivors’ social context in the return to work process: narrative accounts of social support and social comparison information. J Occup Rehabil. 2018;28:504–512. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-017-9735-9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Pfister IB, Jacobshagen N, Kälin W, et al. How does appreciation lead to higher job satisfaction? J Manag Psychol. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-12-2018-0555.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Lysaght RM, Larmour-Trode S. An exploration of social support as a factor in the return-to-work process. Work. 2008;30:255–266.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Corbière M, Renard M, St-Arnaud L, et al. Union perceptions of factors related to the return to work of employees with depression. J Occup Rehabil. 2015;25:335–347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-014-9542-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Geue PE. Positive practices in the workplace: Impact on team climate, work engagement, and task performance. J Appl Behav Sci. 2018;54:272–301. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886318773459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Yagil D, Goldblatt H, Cohen M. Dyadic resources in the return to work of cancer survivors: exploring supervisor–employee perspectives. Disabil Rehabil. 2019;41:2151–2158. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2018.1459885.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Gilbert SL, Kelloway EK. Leadership, recognition and well-being: a moderated mediational model. Can J Admin Sci. 2018;35:523–534. https://doi.org/10.1002/cjas.1477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Montani F, Boudrias J-S, Pigeon M. Employee recognition, meaningfulness and behavioural involvement: test of a moderated mediation model. Int J Hum Resource Manag. 2020;31:356–384. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2017.1288153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Christopherson RM, Fadyl JK, Lewis GN. Return-to-work expectations and workplace supports in New Zealand: injured workers’ perspectives. Disabil Rehabil. 2020;44:702–709.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Corbière M, Mazaniello-Chézol M, Lecomte T, et al. Developing a collaborative and sustainable return to work program for employees with common mental disorders: a participatory research with public and private organizations. Disabil Rehabil. 2022;44:5199–5211. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2021.1931481.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Poulsen MG, Khan A, Poulsen EE, et al. Work engagement in cancer care: The power of co-worker and supervisor support. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2016;21:134–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejon.2015.09.003.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Musti MA, Collina N, Stivanello E, et al. Perceived work ability at return to work in women treated for breast cancer: a questionnaire-based study. Med Lav. 2018;109:407–419. https://doi.org/10.23749/mdl.v110i6.7241.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Bernoux P. Reconnaissance et appropriation : pour une anthropologie du travail [Recognition and appropriation: for an anthropology of work]. Esprit 2011;October:158–8.

  49. Deslandes G, Bouilloud J-P. Pour une éthique d’après la reconnaissance [For an ethic after recognition]. Manag Hum Entreprise. 2019;34:88–102.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Butow P, Laidsaar-Powell R, Konings S, et al. Return to work after a cancer diagnosis: a meta-review of reviews and a meta-synthesis of recent qualitative studies. J Cancer Surviv. 2020;14:114–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-019-00828-z.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Toth K, Yvon F, Villotti P, et al. Disclosure dilemmas: how people with a mental health condition perceive and manage disclosure at work. Disabil Rehabil. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2021.1998667.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study would not have been possible without the important contribution and generosity of the participants in sharing their experience.

Funding

Funding was provided by Research Chair on Mental Health and Work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Education and Pedagogy – Career Counseling, Université du Québec à Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Marc Corbière

  2. Research Center of the Institut, Universitaire en Santé Mentale de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Marc Corbière, Élyse Charette-Dussault & Nadine Larivière

  3. Department of Psychology, Université du Québec à Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Élyse Charette-Dussault

  4. School of Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada

    Nadine Larivière

Authors
  1. Marc Corbière
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Élyse Charette-Dussault
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nadine Larivière
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marc Corbière.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Centre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et Services Sociaux de l’Est-de-l’Île de Montréal (human research ethics committee) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Corbière, M., Charette-Dussault, É. & Larivière, N. Recognition During the Return-to-Work Process in Workers with Common Mental Disorders. J Occup Rehabil 33, 486–505 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-022-10087-y

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-022-10087-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation