Suchergebnisse

PurposeThis paper aims to identify longitudinal associations between job demands, job resources and experience of meaning at work.Design/methodolgy/approachUsing data from a longitudinal survey study among 6,299 employees in Danish eldercare who were divided into 301 work‐groups, experience of meaning at work was predicted from a series of job demands and job resources measured at individual level and group level.FindingsA combination of individual‐level and group‐level measures of job demands and job resources contributed to predicting meaning at work. Meaning at work at follow‐up was predicted by meaning at work at baseline, role ambiguity, quality of leadership, and influence at work at individual level and emotional demands at group level. Individual‐level measures of job demands and job resources proved stronger predictors of meaning at work than group‐level measures.Research limitations/implicationsPsychosocial job demands and job resources predict experience of meaning at work.Practical implicationsExperience of meaning at work constitutes an important organizational resource by contributing to the capacities of employees to deal with work‐related stresses and strains, while maintaining their health and well‐being.Social implicationsExperience of meaning at work is positively associated with well‐being and reduces risk for long‐term sickness absence and turnover. Attention towards enhancing employee experiences of meaning at work may contribute towards the ability of western societies to recruit the necessary supply of labour over the coming decades.Originality/valueThis is the first study to provide longitudinal, multi‐level evidence on the association between job demands, job resources and experience of meaning at work.

AbstractObjectivesTo investigate the predictive validity of 32 measures of the Danish Psychosocial Work Environment Questionnaire (DPQ) against two criteria variables: onset of depressive disorders and long-term sickness absence (LTSA).MethodsThe DPQ was sent to 8958 employed individuals in 14 job groups of which 4340 responded (response rate: 48.4%). Depressive disorders were measured by self-report with a 6-month follow-up. LTSA was measured with a 1-year follow-up in a national register. We analyzed onset of depressive disorders at follow-up using logistic regression models, adjusted for age, sex, and job group, while excluding respondents with depressive disorders at baseline. We analyzed onset of LTSA with Cox regression models, adjusted for age, sex, and job group, while excluding respondents with previous LTSA.ResultsThe general pattern of the results followed our hypotheses as high job demands, poorly organized working conditions, poor relations to colleagues and superiors, and negative reactions to the work situation predicted onset of depressive disorders at follow-up and onset of LTSA during follow-up. Analyzing onset of depressive disorders and onset of LTSA, we found risk estimates that deviated from unity in most of the investigated associations. Overall, we found higher risk estimates when analyzing onset of depressive disorders compared with onset of LTSA.ConclusionsThe analyses provide support for the predictive validity of most DPQ-measures. Results suggest that the DPQ constitutes a useful tool for identifying risk factors for depression and LTSA in the psychosocial work environment.