Education in occupational health psychology: Where have we been, where are we now and where are we going?

At the first full conference of the European Academy of Occupational Health Psychology (Lund, 1999), the decision was ratified to organise activities around three fora. These together represented the pillars on which the European Academy had been founded that same year: education, research and professional practice. Each forum was convened by a chair person and a small group of full members; it was agreed that a forum meeting would take place at each full conference and working groups would be established to move developments forward between conferences. The forum system has proven an effective means by which to channel the energies of individual members, and the institutions that they represent, towards advancements in all three areas of activity in occupational health psychology (OHP) in Europe. During the meeting of the education forum at the third full European Academy conference (Barcelona, 2001), the proposal was made for the establishment of a working party that would be tasked with the production of a strategy document on The Promotion of Education in Occupational Health Psychology in Europe. The proposal was ratified at the subsequent annual business meeting held during the same conference. The draft outline of the strategy document was published for consultation in the European Academy’s e-newsletter (Vol. 3.1, 2002) and the final document presented to the meeting of the education forum at the fourth full conference (Vienna, 2002). The strategy document constituted a seminal piece of literature in so far as it provided a foundation and structure capable of guiding pan-European developments in education in OHP – developments that would ensure the sustained growth of the discipline and assure it of a long-standing embedded place in both the scholarly and professional domains. To these ends, the strategy document presented six objectives as important for the sustained expansion and the promotion of education in the discipline in Europe. Namely, the development of: [1] A core syllabus for education in occupational health psychology [2] A mechanism for identifying, recognising and listing undergraduate and postgraduate modules and courses (programmes) in occupational health psychology [3] Structures to support the extension of the current provision of education in occupational health psychology [4] Ways of enhancing convergence of the current provision of education in occupational health psychology [5] Ways of encouraging regional cooperation between education providers across the regions of Europe [6] Ways of ensuring consistency with North American developments in education and promoting world wide co-operation in education Five years has elapsed since the presentation of these laudable objectives to the meeting of the education forum in Vienna in December 2002. In that time OHP has undergone considerable growth, particularly in Europe and North America. Expansion has been reflected in the evolution of existing, and emergence of new, representative bodies for the discipline on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean. As such, it might be considered timely to pause to reflect on what has been achieved in respect of each of the objectives set out in the strategy document. The current chapter examines progress on the six objectives and considers what remains to be done. This exercise is entered into not merely in order to congratulate achievements in some areas and lament slow progress in others. Rather, on the one hand it serves to highlight areas where real progress has been made with a view to the presentation of these areas as ripe for further capitalisation. On the other hand it serves to direct the attention of stakeholders (all those with a vested interest in OHP) to those key parts of the jigsaw puzzle that is the development of a self-sustaining pan-European education framework which remain to be satisfactorily addressed

Optimising workplace interventions for health and wellbeing: a commentary on the limitations of the public health perspective within the workplace health arena [forthcoming]

Purpose: This paper discusses contemporary approaches to workplace health and well-being, articulating key differences in the intervention architecture between public and workplace health contexts and implications for intervention design. Approach: Contemporary practice is discussed in light of calls for a paradigm shift in occupational health from a treatment orientation to an holistic approach focused on mitigation of the causes of ill health and the promotion of well-being. In practice, relatively few organizations have or seem able to engage with a broader perspective that encompasses challenges to health and well-being associated with contextual organizational drivers, e.g. job design/role, workload, systems of reward, leadership style and the underpinning climate. Drawing upon insights from public health and the workplace safety tradition, the scope for broadening the perspective on intervention (in terms of vectors of harm addressed, theory of change and intervention logic) is discussed. Findings: There are important differences in scope and options for intervention between public health and workplace health contexts. While there is scope to emulate public health practice, this should not constrain thinking over intervention opinions. Increased awareness of these key differences within work organizations, and an evidence-based epidemiological approach to learning has the potential to strengthen and broaden the approach to workplace health and well-being management. Originality/Value: We argue that approaches to workplace well-being interventions that selectively cross-fertilise and adapt elements of public health interventions offer promise for realising a broader change agenda and for building inherently healthy workplaces

The changing landscape of OSH regulation in the UK

This report presents key findings of a research project on the changing landscape of OSH regulation in the UK. Understanding the changing landscape of OSH regulation and standards and its implications are of central importance for ensuring that OSH outcomes are not compromised and the needs of different types of organisations are met. This project examined the landscape of OSH in the UK since its origin and in particular looked at how regulation of OSH has evolved over time. It considered both policy and practice issues as well as the role of key stakeholders in this process with a view to identify how the right balance can be achieved to promote health and safety going forward. To achieve its aims, a qualitative methodology was implemented in five stages: a. a literature and policy review, including a comparative analysis with other countries; b. case study analysis; c. stakeholder interviews, d. stakeholder workshops including focus groups; and e. research output synthesis

Vision zero: from accident prevention to the promotion of health, safety and well-being at work

There is growing attention in industry for the Vision Zero strategy, which in terms of work-related health and safety is often labelled as Zero Accident Vision or Zero Harm. The consequences of a genuine commitment to Vision Zero for addressing health, safety and well-being and their synergies are discussed. The Vision Zero for work-related health, safety and well-being is based on the assumption that all accidents, harm and work-related diseases are preventable. Vision Zero for health, safety and well-being is then the ambition and commitment to create and ensure safe and healthy work and to prevent all accidents, harm and work-related diseases in order to achieve excellence in health, safety and well-being. Implementation of Vision Zero is a process – rather than a target, and healthy organizations make use of a wide range of options to facilitate this process. There is sufficient evidence that fatigue, stress and work organization factors are important determinants of safety behaviour and safety performance. Even with a focus on preventing accidents these additional factors should also be addressed. A relevant challenge is the integration of the Vision Zero into broader business policy and practice. There is a continued need more empirical research in this area

Work-related stress case definitions and prevalence rates in national surveys

Background: There is concern about lack of consistency in the design of case definitions used to measure work-related stress in national workforce surveys and the implications of this for the reliability and validity of prevalence estimates as well as for developments in policy and practice on tackling work-related stress. Aims: To examine associations between case definitions used for the measurement of work-related stress in nationally representative workforce surveys and the prevalence rates generated. Methods: The study focused on 18 nationally representative workforce surveys conducted between 1995 and 2008 that involved British samples. The published report from each survey was scrutinized for evidence of the case definition used to measure work-related stress and the associated prevalence rate. Results: Several types of case definition were identified that differed in terms of their theoretical basis, structure, and content. Each was associated with a unique range of prevalence rates. Conclusions: The results illustrate the challenge presented to the production of valid and reliable estimates of the scale of work-related stress by inconsistent case definition design. The imperative for theory-based consistency in the design of case definitions used for the measurement of work-related stress in national workforce surveys is highlighted

A participatory physical and psychosocial intervention for balancing the demands and resources among industrial workers (PIPPI): study protocol of a cluster-randomized controlled trial

Background: Need for recovery and work ability are strongly associated with high employee turnover, well-being and sickness absence. However, scientific knowledge on effective interventions to improve work ability and decrease need for recovery is scarce. Thus, the present study aims to describe the background, design and protocol of a cluster randomized controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of an intervention to reduce need for recovery and improve work ability among industrial workers. Methods/Design: A two-year cluster randomized controlled design will be utilized, in which controls will also receive the intervention in year two. More than 400 workers from three companies in Denmark will be aimed to be cluster randomized into intervention and control groups with at least 200 workers (at least 9 work teams) in each group. An organizational resources audit and subsequent action planning workshop will be carried out to map the existing resources and act upon initiatives not functioning as intended. Workshops will be conducted to train leaders and health and safety representatives in supporting and facilitating the intervention activities. Group and individual level participatory visual mapping sessions will be carried out allowing team members to discuss current physical and psychosocial work demands and resources, and develop action plans to minimize strain and if possible, optimize the resources. At all levels, the intervention will be integrated into the existing organization of work schedules. An extensive process and effect evaluation on need for recovery and work ability will be carried out via questionnaires, observations, interviews and organizational data assessed at several time points throughout the intervention period. Discussion: This study primarily aims to develop, implement and evaluate an intervention based on the abovementioned features which may improve the work environment, available resources and health of industrial workers, and hence their need for recovery and work ability

Is psychosocial risk prevention possible? Deconstructing common presumptions

This paper tackles a much debated and often misunderstood issue in the modern world of work, psychosocial risks. Although the prevalence and impact of psychosocial risks is now widely acknowledged as a priority in health and safety in Europe, there remains resistance by key stakeholders in prioritizing psychosocial risk management both in business and policy making. This paper explores why this is still the case by discussing three presumptions in relation to the current state of the art in this area. It examines the validity of these presumptions by summarizing key evidence, policies and practices. It is concluded that, although guidance on psychosocial risks and their management exists in abundance as does evidence to support the ‘case’ for psychosocial risk management, the concept of psychosocial risk is still not clearly understood in its entirety with discussions being focused on negative impacts and not opportunities that can be capitalized upon through effective psychosocial risk management at the organizational and societal levels. A key issue is the false distinction often made between psychosocial factors and issues pertaining to work organization, since psychosocial risks are embedded in certain forms of work organization. The suitability of available methods and tools is also considered as well as existing capabilities in the context of socioeconomic changes and constraints. On the basis of the current state of the art, an action plan for the prevention of psychosocial risks in the workplace is proposed, linked to sustainability and a value-based perspective

Tailoring psychosocial risk assessment in the oil and gas industry by exploring specific and common psychosocial risks

Background: Psychosocial risk management [Psychosocial Risk Management Approach (PRIMA)] has, through the years, been applied in several organizations in various industries and countries globally. PRIMA principles have also been translated into international frameworks, such as PRIMA-EF (European framework) and the World Health Organization Healthy Workplace Framework. Over the past 10 years, an oil and gas company has put efforts into adopting and implementing international frameworks and standards for psychosocial risk management. More specifically, the company uses a PRIMA. Methods: This study explores available quantitative and qualitative risk data collected through the PRIMA method over the past 8 years in order to explore specific and common psychosocial risks in the petroleum industry. Results: The analyses showed a significant correlation between job resources and symptoms of work-related stress, there was a significant correlation between job demands and symptoms of work-related stress, and there were differences in psychosocial risk factors and symptoms of work-related stress onshore and offshore. The study also offers recommendations on how the results can further be utilized in building a robust system for managing psychosocial risks in the industry. Conclusion: The results from the analyses have provided meaningful and important information about the company-specific psychosocial risk factors and their impact on health and well-being