Workplace Stress: Research, Explanations and Practical Application

Job Strain: The workplace causes stress and illness in two ways: High workload (high job demand) and Low Job Control (low control of deadlines e.t.c.)

The Research

Marmot et. al.(1997) researched workplace stress and referred to job strain as being a toxic mixture of high workload, low job control and a lack of social support. The combination of these factors was most likely to produce destructive stress in an individual. 

The study followed 10,000 civil servants who had worked in Whitehall since 1985. Some of them worked in high-grade jobs (such as accountants) and others worked in low-grade positions such as administration. It was suggested that those in high-grade jobs would have a greater level of workload and control in comparison to the lower grade positions who while having a lower workload they also had lower job control. The job strain model would suggest that they would both suffer from workplace stress for different reasons.

The researchers began by assessing the level workload for each worker as well as their perceived job control and the amount of social support they received. After eleven years they were assessed for coronary disease risk.

What was counterintuitive about the results was that having a high workload on its own was not associated with stress-related illness (CHD) in the study, however, if an individual had high workload and this was coupled with a lack of control, for example, having less opportunity to have autonomy over their work and the results, they were more likely to suffer the negative effects of stress. In addition to this the opportunity to have a support network was also beneficial; working in isolation was not ideal particularly when coupled with the other two factors.

Another study of approx. 800 workers from Finland (Kivimaki et. al., 2002) found those workers with high ‘job strain’ (high workload and low control) were more likely to die from CHD than those with the low workload and high control. Even more interesting was that when each component (workload or control) was assessed separately, there was no significant effect on health. It appears that it is the combination of the two elements that can have a negative effect on an individual’s health.

But we all react differently to stress, don’t we?

Whether we perceive a situation to be stressful or not is very much an individual thing. Generally speaking, we feel stressed when the demands of the situation are greater than our perceived ability to cope. If you believe you can manage the situation, then you are less likely to feel stressed and presumably face a lower risk of negative health effects.

In terms of job control, sometimes we welcome the idea of having no responsibility and lower control as a way of reducing stress. The greater the responsibility and higher control over a job may increase stress because when things go wrong the finger of blame is pointed firmly at those that had the control. 

In one study (Schaubroek et.al., 2001) the health effects of stress were measured by immune system functioning and found those with low control (less responsibility) actually had higher immune functioning. Perhaps there is something in not taking on too much responsibility if you want to lower your stress?

It is also possible that not being challenged enough (work under-load) is also stressful. This can result from there not being enough work to do, leading to boredom or the work is below a person’s capabilities providing less challenge and lower satisfaction. This can be over-looked because we have a tendency to assume that having a high-workload is going to be more stressful, however, the research indicates something different.

Stress in the Workplace and Mental Wellbeing

Of course, meaningful and satisfying work is important for our mental wellbeing, but clearly, workplace stress can have a negative effect too. Stress in the workplace may not directly cause mental health problems, but it may act as a trigger in someone who is already vulnerable.

In a similar way to the diathesis-stress model, if someone has problems at home, underlying health conditions or perhaps already suffering from a mental health condition, the stress in the workplace may trigger negative health effects. It is important for any employer or manager to consider how the lives of their team members may impact how they are dealing with the pressures of the job.

Practical Applications

We have to admit that there is room for a workplace to make changes that would not massively alter how things are done. Considering how we can increase the control an individual has over their job would be a good start.

Managers could consult their team members about different ways they feel they would make the job easier. Remember the employee is within the job and can sometimes see more beneficial was of working. There is no harm (and I can see the only advantage) in asking the individual themselves what changes they feel would make the job more productive. Even if those changes cannot be made straight away, at the very least you have acknowledged that the employee’s view has value.

A manager may already know the team is valuable, but do they know? Essentially we are saying: ’the job needs to get done - how best can we achieve that, even if that requires thinking differently about how we do it.’

When the COVID-19 lockdown was suddenly enforced upon us, many people had to work from home and new ways of completing the same work were highlighted. It is the ideal time to review how tasks are completed and how this might alter employees job strain. Did that weekly meeting have to be face to face? Did all the team members need to be there? Would meeting face to face once a month be just as productive?

Working from home may have inevitably created a better work/life balance… how does that feel? Did they find that the work was completed anyway (and often more efficiently) because those employees were less stressed by the commute and balancing home pressures with work demands?

It seems to me that this is an ideal opportunity to create new ways of working that will help employees be happier, less stressed and therefore more productive. It really is a win, win situation: happier workforce and greater productivity.

KickStart Coaching for Stress and Burnout Prevention

I have devised a programme that combines both coaching and hypnotherapy to manage the negative effects of workplace and aims to prevent burnout. As a KickStart the use of Hypnosis alongside coaching can produce positive results quickly. Using positive psychological techniques and learning self-hypnosis, the programme trains you to relax and develop a positive mindset. Find out more here!


References:
Marmot, M., Bosma, H., Hemingway, H., Brunner, E. and Stansfield, S. (1997) Contributions of job control and other risk factors to social variation in health disease incidence. The Lancet, 350, 235-9

Kivimaki, M., Lenio-Arjas, P.,Luukkonen,R.,Riihimaki,H.,Vahtera,J. and Kirjonen, J. (2002) Work stress and risk of cardiovascular mortality: Prosepective cohort study of industrial employees. BMJ, 325(7369), 857 

Schaubroeck, J., Jones, J.R. and Xie, J.L. (2001). Individual differences in utilising control to cope with job demands: Effects on susceptibility to infectious diseases. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(2), 265-78