Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

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

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

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.

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

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Reference

  1. Larsson G. Utvecklande ledarskap. Psykologtidningen 1999;12–3.

  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. Burns JH. Leadership. New York: Harper & Row; 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bass BM. Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press; 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Fiedler F. A theory of leadership effectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  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.

  7. Woods V. Work-related musculoskeletal health and social support. Occup Med. 2005;55:177–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Sosial og helsedepartementet. NOU 2000:27. Sykefravær og uførepensjonering. Et inkluderende arbeidsliv. 2000.

  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. 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hsieh HF, Shannon SE. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res. 2005;15(9):1277–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Cavanagh S. Content analysis: concepts, methods and applications. Nurse Res. 1997;4(3):5–16.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Downe-Wamboldt B. Content analysis: method, applications and issues. Health Care Women Int. 1992;13:313–21.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

  22. House J. Work, stress and social support. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing; 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  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. Karasek R. Job demands, job decision latitude and mental strain: implications for job redesign. Admin Sci Quart. 1979;24:285–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  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. 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  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. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Westmorland MG, Buys N. A comparison of disability management practices in Australian and Canadian workplaces. Work. 2004;23:31–41.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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. Caggianelli P. New skills, expertise needed for disability managers as part of workplace teams. Case Manag. 2006;12:15.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

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.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. IRIS, International Research Institute of Stavanger, Box 8046, 4068, Stavanger, Norway

    Randi W. Aas

  2. Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden

    Randi W. Aas

  3. Diakonhjemmet University College Rogaland, Sandnes, Norway

    Kjersti L. Ellingsen

  4. Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway

    Preben Lindøe

  5. Nordic School of Public Health, Gothenburg, Sweden

    Anders Möller

Authors
  1. Randi W. Aas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kjersti L. Ellingsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Preben Lindøe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Anders Möller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Randi W. Aas.

Appendix: The Reporting Profile

Appendix: The Reporting Profile

Age

Gender(*)

Protector(*)

Trust-Creator(*)

Recognizer(*)

Problem-Solver(*)

Contact-Maker(*)

Encourager(*)

Responsible-Maker(*)

40–50

F(F)

3(1)

1(1)

3

 

(1)

  

40–50

F(F)

2(2)

 

1

2(2)

4

2

1(2)

30–40

F(F)

3(1)

(1)

4

(6)

(1)

1(1)

1(1)

50–60

F(F)

1(2)

  

1(1)

2(3)

 

(1)

30–40

F(F)

4(3)

1(1)

3(2)

2(4)

  

(1)

30–40

F(F)

3(1)

(1)

3(2)

1(1)

  

1(1)

30–40

F(M)

1(3)

1

(2)

(2)

1

  

50–60

F(F)

(1)

1

(1)

(3)

1(2)

3

(1)

50–60

F(F)

   

1(7)

1(5)

(1)

 

60–70

M(M)

1

(1)

1(1)

 

1(1)

  

20–30

M(F)

1(2)

 

2

(2)

2(1)

 

(2)

30–40

F(F)

1(1)

2(1)

2(2)

1

1(1)

1

 

50–60

F(F)

1(1)

 

2

2(2)

(2)

 

3

50–60

F(M)

2(2)

  

(2)

1(3)

 

(3)

30–40

F(F)

2

  

(4)

2(3)

 

(2)

50–60

F(F)

2(2)

 

1

(3)

1(1)

(1)

(2)

30–40

M(M)

2(1)

(1)

 

(2)

 

1

(1)

50–60

M(F)

1(2)

 

2

8(3)

(1)

 

1

60–70

F(M)

2(2)

 

1

1(2)

1

  

40–50

F(F)

  

(1)

1(1)

1(1)

 

(3)

30–40

F(F)

2(4)

1(1)

 

1

1

 

(2)

50–60

F(F)

2(1)

1

(1)

2(4)

1(1)

  

50–60

M(–)

 

1

1

    

50–60

M(M)

    

2(1)

  

30–40

M(M)

1

  

1

2

  

60–70

F(F)

2(1)

(3)

 

1(1)

1(2)

 

(1)

40–50

F(M)

3

2

 

1

1

 

2

50–60

F(F)

2(1)

  

1

1(1)

 

(2)

30–40

F(M)

1(3)

(1)

1(1)

 

1

(1)

 

30–40

F(F)

4(1)

1(2)

 

(1)

(2)

4

 
  1. 1Notes: The number in the table is referring to how many leadership qualities descriptions each informant reported. * The information in brackets is the supervisors reporting. Age is only referring to the subordinates. Gender: M = Male, F = Female, the supervisors gender is reported in brackets

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Aas, R.W., Ellingsen, K.L., Lindøe, P. et al. Leadership Qualities in the Return to Work Process: A Content Analysis. J Occup Rehabil 18, 335–346 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-008-9147-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-008-9147-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation