Workplace Innovation and Wellbeing at Work: A Review of Evidence and Future Research Agenda
Researchers have focused efforts for many years on understanding the determinants of wellbeing at work. Recently focus has been placed on the promotion of workplace innovation as such a determinant. In this chapter, we briefly examine definitions of workplace innovation and wellbeing at work and discuss key the determinants of wellbeing at work. In doing so we present findings from studies based on relevant theoretical models in work and organizational psychology like the Job Demand Control (Support) Model, and the Job Demand Resources Model and work organization and psychosocial factors as key concepts in theoretical knowledge as well as applied practice in relation to wellbeing at work and overlaps with workplace innovation. The chapter then proceeds to discuss commonalities in good practice interventions at the organizational level, specifically focusing on Vision Zero and PRIMA-EF. At the company level and policy level, ‘Vision Zero’ (zero accidents, zero harm, etc.) is an example where innovative solutions for the promotion of wellbeing and health and safety are encouraged. In the PRIMA-EF model, focus is placed on achieving optimal conditions that can enhance a range of outcomes. The chapter also reiterates the compelling arguments on why interventions at the policy and organizational levels should aim to promote factors that represent common key determinants and how these can present important opportunities. Finally, we conclude by arguing that workplace innovation and wellbeing are not only linked but also dependent on one another. Considering the current evidence base, recommendations for future research and practice are made while also referring to the relevance of policy level interventions to promote them in the workplace.
KeywordsWellbeing Workplace innovation Work organization Psychosocial factors Job demands Job resources Vision Zero PRIMA-EF
- Bakker, A. B., & Oerlemans, W. (2011). Subjective wellbeing in organizations. The Oxford Handbook of Positive Organizational Scholarship, 178–189.Google Scholar
- Bergh, L. I. V., Hinna, S., & Leka, S. (2014). Sustainable business practice: Integrating psychosocial risk management into a company management system. In S. Leka & R. Sinclair (Eds.), Contemporary occupational health psychology: Global perspectives on research and practice (Vol. 3). Chichester, England: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
- Birtch, T. A., Chiang, F. F., & Van Esch, E. (2016). A social exchange theory framework for understanding the job characteristics–job outcomes relationship: The mediating role of psychological contract fulfillment. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 27(11), 1217–1236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- British Standards Institution (BSI). (2011). Publicly Available Specification 1010: Guidance on the management of psychosocial risks in the workplace. London: BSI.Google Scholar
- Costanza, R., Kubiszewski, I., Giovannini, E., Lovins, H., McGlade, J., Pickett, K., …. Wilkinson, R. (2014). Development: Time to leave GDP behind. Nature, 505(7483), 283–285.Google Scholar
- DGUV. (2008). Prävention lohnt sich: Die Position der Selbstverwaltung der gesetzlichen Unfallversicherung zur Prävention - Leitlinien und Umsetzung - Mitgliederversammlung 2/08 der DGUV, Fulda.Google Scholar
- EU-OSHA—European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. (2010). European Survey of Enterprises on New and Emerging Risks: Managing safety and health at work. European Risk Observatory Report. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.Google Scholar
- EU-OSHA—European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. (2013). Priorities for OSH research in Europe: 2013–2020. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.Google Scholar
- G7. (2015). Action for fair production, ministerial declaration. http://www.bmz.de/g7/includes/Downloadarchiv/G7_Ministerial_Declaration_Action_for_Fair_Production.pdf. Accessed January 28, 2016.
- Haukkal, E., Leino-Arjasl, P., Ojajärvil, A., Takalal, E. P., Viikari-Juntural, E., & Riihimäkil, H. (2011). Mental stress and psychosocial factors at work in relation to multiple-site musculoskeletal pain: A longitudinal study of kitchen workers. European Journal of Pain, 15(4), 432–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hollnagel, E., Woods, D. D., & Leveson, N. (2006). Resilience engineering: Precepts and concepts. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
- ILO. (2015). Our goal: Vision Zero. Berlin: Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, G7 Project Group, October 2015. http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/—europe/—ro-geneva/—ilo-berlin/documents/genericdocument/wcms_414171.pdf. Accessed January 28, 2016.
- ISSA. (2016). Safety 7.0—7 Golden rules to vision zero. https://www.issa.int/-/safety-7-0-7-golden-rules-to-vision-zero. Accessed February 12, 2016.
- Karasek, R. (2008). Low social control and physiological deregulation: The stress–disequilibrium theory, towards a new demand–control model. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health Supplements, 6, 117–135.Google Scholar
- Leka, S., & Cox, T. (2008). PRIMA-EF guidance on the European Framework for Psychosocial Risk Management: A resource for employers and worker representatives (WHO Protecting Workers’ Health series, number 9). WHO: Geneva.Google Scholar
- Leka, S., Cox, T., & Zwetsloot, G. (2008). The European Framework for Psychosocial Risk Management (PRIMA-EF). In S. Leka & T. Cox (Eds.), The European Framework for Psychosocial Risk Management: PRIMA-EF (pp. 1–16). Nottingham, UK: I-WHO Publications.Google Scholar
- Leka, S., Jain, A., Iavicoli, S., & Di Tecco, C. (2015—open access). An evaluation of the policy context on psychosocial risks and mental health in the workplace in the European Union: Achievements, challenges and the future. Biomed Research International, Special issue on Psychosocial Factors and Workers’ Health & Safety. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/213089
- Leka, S., Jain, A., & Lerouge, L. (in press). Work-related psychosocial risks: Key definitions and an overview of the policy context in Europe. In L. Lerouge (Ed.), Psychosocial risks in labour and social security law. The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
- Netterstrøm, B., Kristensen, T., Jensen, G., & Schnor, P. (2010). Is the demand-control model still a useful tool to assess work-related psychosocial risk for ischemic heart disease? Results from 14 year follow up in the Copenhagen City Heart study. International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health, 23(3), 217–224.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Reason, J. T. (1997). Managing the risks of organisational accidents. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
- Roberts, K. H. (1990). Some characteristics of high-reliability organizations. Organization Science, 1, 160–177.Google Scholar
- Singh, S. (2012). New mega trends—Implications for our future lives. Hamshire (UK), New York (US): Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
- Weick, K. E., & Sutcliffe, K. (2007). Managing the unexpected. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- World Health Organization (WHO). (2010). Healthy workplaces: A model for action: For employers, workers, policy-makers and practitioners. Geneva: WHO.Google Scholar