research on workplace stress

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

How to Recover from Work Stress, According to Science

• Alyson Meister,
• Bonnie Hayden Cheng,
• Franciska Krings

Five research-backed strategies that actually work.

To combat stress and burnout, employers are increasingly offering benefits like virtual mental health support, spontaneous days or even weeks off, meeting-free days, and flexible work scheduling. Despite these efforts and the increasing number of employees buying into the importance of wellness, the effort is lost if you don’t actually recover. So, if you feel like you’re burning out, what works when it comes to recovering from stress? The authors discuss the “recovery paradox” — that when our bodies and minds need to recover and reset the most, we’re the least likely and able to do something about it — and present five research-backed strategies for recovering from stress at work.

The workforce is tired. While sustainable job performance requires us to thrive at work, only 32% of employees across the globe say they’re thriving. With 43% reporting high levels of daily stress, it’s no surprise that a wealth of employees feel like they’re on the edge of burnout, with some reports suggesting that up to 61% of U.S. professionals feel like they’re burning out at any moment in time.  Those who feel tense or stressed out during the workday are more than three times as likely to seek employment elsewhere.

• Alyson Meister is a professor of leadership and organizational behavior at IMD Business School in Lausanne, Switzerland. Specializing in the development of globally oriented, adaptive, and inclusive organizations, she has worked with thousands of executives, teams, and organizations from professional services to industrial goods and technology. Her research has been widely published, and in 2021, she was recognized as a Thinkers50 Radar thought leader.  
• Bonnie Hayden Cheng is an associate professor of management and strategy and the MBA program director at HKU Business School, University of Hong Kong. She is the chief resilience officer of Human at Work and serves as a scientific advisor of OneMind at Work. She works with senior executives of companies ranging from startups to Fortune 500, transforming corporate cultures by incorporating wellness into their business strategy. Follow her on Twitter: @drbcheng.
• ND Nele Dael is a senior behavioral scientist studying emotion, personality, and social skills in organizational contexts. She is leading research projects on workplace well-being at IMD Lausanne, focusing on stress and recovery. Nele is particularly tuned into new technologies for the benefit of research and application in human interaction, and her work has been published in several leading journals.
• FK Franciska Krings is professor of organizational behavior at HEC Lausanne, University of Lausanne. Her research interests include workforce diversity and discrimination, work-family balance, impression management, and (non)ethical behaviors. Her work has been published regularly in leading journals in the field.

Partner Center

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Work stress, mental health, and employee performance.

• 1 School of Business, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China
• 2 Henan Research Platform Service Center, Zhengzhou, China

The COVID-19 pandemic outbreak—as a typical emergency event—significantly has impacted employees' psychological status and thus has negatively affected their performance. Hence, along with focusing on the mechanisms and solutions to alleviate the impact of work stress on employee performance, we also examine the relationship between work stress, mental health, and employee performance. Furthermore, we analyzed the moderating role of servant leadership in the relationship between work stress and mental health, but the result was not significant. The results contribute to providing practical guidance for enterprises to improve employee performance in the context of major emergencies.

Introduction

Small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are the key drivers of economic development as they contribute >50, 60, 70, 80, and 90% of tax revenue, GDP, technological innovation, labor employment, and the number of enterprises, respectively. However, owing to the disadvantages of small-scale and insufficient resources ( Cai et al., 2017 ; Flynn, 2017 ), these enterprises are more vulnerable to being influenced by emergency events. The COVID-19 pandemic outbreak—as a typical emergency event—has negatively affected survival and growth of SMEs ( Eggers, 2020 ). Some SMEs have faced a relatively higher risk of salary reduction, layoffs, or corporate bankruptcy ( Adam and Alarifi, 2021 ). Consequently, it has made employees in the SMEs face the following stressors during the COVID-19 pandemic: First, employees' income, promotion, and career development opportunities have declined ( Shimazu et al., 2020 ). Second, as most employees had to work from home, family conflicts have increased and family satisfaction has decreased ( Green et al., 2020 ; Xu et al., 2020 ). Finally, as work tasks and positions have changed, the new work environment has made employees less engaged and less fulfilled at work ( Olugbade and Karatepe, 2019 ; Chen and Fellenz, 2020 ).

For SMEs, employees are their core assets and are crucial to their survival and growth ( Shan et al., 2022 ). Employee work stress may precipitate burnout ( Choi et al., 2019 ; Barello et al., 2020 ), which manifests as fatigue and frustration ( Mansour and Tremblay, 2018 ), and is associated with various negative reactions, including job dissatisfaction, low organizational commitment, and a high propensity to resign ( Lu and Gursoy, 2016 ; Uchmanowicz et al., 2020 ). Ultimately, it negatively impacts employee performance ( Prasad and Vaidya, 2020 ). The problem of employee work stress has become an important topic for researchers and practitioners alike. In this regard, it is timely to explore the impact of work stress on SME problems of survival and growth during emergency events like the COVID-19 pandemic.

Although recent studies have demonstrated the relationship between work stress and employee performance, some insufficiencies persist, which must be resolved. Research on how work stress affects employee performance has remained fragmented and limited. First, the research into how work stress affects employee performance is still insufficient. Some researchers have explored the effects of work stress on employee performance during COVID-19 ( Saleem et al., 2021 ; Tu et al., 2021 ). However, they have not explained the intermediate path, which limits our understanding of effects of work stress. As work stress causes psychological pain to employees, in response, they exhibit lower performance levels ( Song et al., 2020 ; Yu et al., 2022 ). Thus, employees' mental health becomes an important path to explain the relationship mechanism between work stress and employee performance, which is revealed in this study using a stress–psychological state–performance framework. Second, resolving the mental health problems caused by work stress has become a key issue for SMEs during the COVID-19 pandemic. As the core of the enterprise ( Ahn et al., 2018 ), the behavior of leaders significantly influences employees. Especially for SMEs, intensive interactive communication transpires between the leader and employees ( Li et al., 2019 ; Tiedtke et al., 2020 ). Servant leadership, as a typical leader's behavior, is considered an important determinant of employee mental health ( Haslam et al., 2020 ). Hence, to improve employees' mental health, we introduce servant leadership as a moderating variable and explore its contingency effect on relieving work stress and mental health.

This study predominantly tries to answer the question of how work stress influences employee performance and explores the mediating impact of mental health and the moderating impact of servant leadership in this relationship. Mainly, this study contributes to the existing literature in the following three ways: First, this research analyzes the influence of work stress on employee performance in SMEs during the COVID-19 pandemic, which complements previous studies and theories related to work stress. Second, this study regards mental health as a psychological state and examines its mediating impact on the relationship between work stress and employee performance, which complements the research path on how work stress affects employee performance. Third, we explore the moderating impact of servant leadership, which has been ignored in previous research, thus extending the understanding of the relationship between the work stress and mental health of employees in SMEs.

To accomplish the aforementioned tasks, the remainder of this article is structured as follows: First, based on the literature review, we propose our hypotheses. Thereafter, we present our research method, including the processes of data collection, sample characteristics, measurement of variables, and sample validity. Subsequently, we provide the data analysis and report the results. Finally, we discuss the results and present the study limitations.

Theoretical background and hypotheses

Work stress and employee performance.

From a psychological perspective, work stress influences employees' psychological states, which, in turn, affects their effort levels at work ( Lu, 1997 ; Richardson and Rothstein, 2008 ; Lai et al., 2022 ). Employee performance is the result of the individual's efforts at work ( Robbins, 2005 ) and thus is significantly impacted by work stress. However, previous research has provided no consistent conclusion regarding the relationship between work stress and employee performance. One view is that a significant positive relationship exists between work stress and employee performance ( Ismail et al., 2015 ; Soomro et al., 2019 ), suggesting that stress is a motivational force that encourages employees to work hard and improve work efficiency. Another view is that work stress negatively impacts employee performance ( Yunus et al., 2018 ; Nawaz Kalyar et al., 2019 ; Purnomo et al., 2021 ), suggesting that employees need to spend time and energy to cope with stress, which increases their burden and decreases their work efficiency. A third view is that the impact of work stress on employee performance is non-linear and may exhibit an inverted U-shaped relationship ( McClenahan et al., 2007 ; Hamidi and Eivazi, 2010 ); reportedly, when work stress is relatively low or high, employee performance is low. Hence, if work stress reaches a moderate level, employee performance will peak. However, this conclusion is derived from theoretical analyses and is not supported by empirical data. Finally, another view suggests that no relationship exists between them ( Tănăsescu and Ramona-Diana, 2019 ). Indubitably, it presupposes that employees are rational beings ( Lebesby and Benders, 2020 ). Per this view, work stress cannot motivate employees or influence their psychology and thus cannot impact their performance.

To further explain the aforementioned diverse views, positive psychology proposes that work stress includes two main categories: challenge stress and hindrance stress ( Cavanaugh et al., 2000 ; LePine et al., 2005 ). Based on their views, challenge stress represents stress that positively affects employees' work attitudes and behaviors, which improves employee performance by increasing work responsibility; by contrast, hindrance stress negatively affects employees' work attitudes and behaviors, which reduces employee performance by increasing role ambiguity ( Hon and Chan, 2013 ; Deng et al., 2019 ).

During the COVID-19 pandemic, SMEs have faced a relatively higher risk of salary reductions, layoffs, or corporate bankruptcy ( Adam and Alarifi, 2021 ). Hence, the competition among enterprises has intensified; managers may transfer some stress to employees, who, in turn, need to bear this to maintain and seek current and future career prospects, respectively ( Lai et al., 2015 ). In this context, employee work stress stems from increased survival problems of SMEs, and such an external shock precipitates greater stress among employees than ever before ( Gao, 2021 ). Stress more frequently manifests as hindrance stress ( LePine et al., 2004 ), which negatively affects employees' wellbeing and quality of life ( Orfei et al., 2022 ). It imposes a burden on employees, who need to spend time and energy coping with the stress. From the perspective of stressors, SMEs have faced serious survival problems during the COVID-19 pandemic, and consequently, employees have faced greater hindrance stress, thereby decreasing their performance. Hence, we propose the following hypothesis:

H1 . Work stress negatively influences employee performance in SMEs during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Work stress and mental health

According to the demand–control–support (DCS) model ( Karasek and Theorell, 1990 ), high-stress work—such as high job demands, low job control, and low social support at work—may trigger health problems in employees over time (e.g., mental health problems; Chou et al., 2015 ; Park et al., 2016 ; Lu et al., 2020 ). The DCS model considers stress as an individual's response to perceiving high-intensity work ( Houtman et al., 2007 ), which precipitates a change in the employee's cognitive, physical, mental, and emotional status. Of these, mental health problems including irritability, nervousness, aggressive behavior, inattention, sleep, and memory disturbances are a typical response to work stress ( Mayerl et al., 2016 ; Neupane and Nygard, 2017 ). If the response persists for a considerable period, mental health problems such as anxiety or depression may occur ( Bhui et al., 2012 ; Eskilsson et al., 2017 ). As coping with work stress requires an employee to exert continuous effort and apply relevant skills, it may be closely related to certain psychological problems ( Poms et al., 2016 ; Harrison and Stephens, 2019 ).

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the normal operating order of enterprises as well as employees' work rhythm. Consequently, employees might have faced greater challenges during this period ( Piccarozzi et al., 2021 ). In this context, work stress includes stress related to health and safety risk, impaired performance, work adjustment, and negative emotions, for instance, such work stress can lead to unhealthy mental problems. Hence, we propose the following hypothesis:

H2 . Work stress negatively influences mental health in SMEs during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Mediating role of mental health

Previous research has found that employees' mental health status significantly affects their performance ( Bubonya et al., 2017 ; Cohen et al., 2019 ; Soeker et al., 2019 ), the main reasons of which are as follows: First, mental health problems reduce employees' focus on their work, which is potentially detrimental to their performance ( Hennekam et al., 2020 ). Second, mental health problems may render employees unable to work ( Heffernan and Pilkington, 2011 ), which indirectly reduces work efficiency owing to increased sick leaves ( Levinson et al., 2010 ). Finally, in the stress context, employees need to exert additional effort to adapt to the environment, which, consequently, make them feel emotionally exhausted. Hence, as their demands remain unfulfilled, their work satisfaction and performance decrease ( Khamisa et al., 2016 ).

Hence, we propose that work stress negatively impacts mental health, which, in turn, positively affects employee performance. In other words, we argue that mental health mediates the relationship between work stress and employee performance. During the COVID-19 pandemic, work stress—owing to changes in the external environment—might have caused nervous and anxious psychological states in employees ( Tan et al., 2020 ). Consequently, it might have rendered employees unable to devote their full attention to their work, and hence, their work performance might have decreased. Meanwhile, due to the pandemic, employees have faced the challenges of unclear job prospects and reduced income. Therefore, mental health problems manifest as moods characterized by depression and worry ( Karatepe et al., 2020 ). Negative emotions negatively impact employee performance. Per the aforementioned arguments and hypothesis 2, we propose the following hypothesis:

H3 . Mental health mediates the relationship between work stress and employee performance in SMEs during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Moderating role of servant leadership

According to the upper echelons theory, leaders significantly influence organizational activities, and their leadership behavior influences the thinking and understanding of tasks among employees in enterprises ( Hambrick and Mason, 1984 ). Servant leadership is a typical leadership behavior that refers to leaders exhibiting humility, lending power to employees, raising the moral level of subordinates, and placing the interests of employees above their own ( Sendjaya, 2015 ; Eva et al., 2019 ). This leadership behavior provides emotional support to employees and increase their personal confidence and self-esteem and thus reduce negative effects of work stress. In our study, we propose that servant leadership reduces the negative effects of work stress on mental health in SMEs.

Servant leadership can reduce negative effects of work stress on mental health in the following ways: Servant leaders exhibit empathy and compassion ( Lu et al., 2019 ), which help alleviate employees' emotional pain caused by work stress. Song et al. (2020) highlighted that work stress can cause psychological pain among employees. However, servant leaders are willing to listen to their employees and become acquainted with them, which facilitates communication between the leader and the employee ( Spears, 2010 ). Hence, servant leadership may reduce employees' psychological pain through effective communication. Finally, servant leaders lend employees power, which makes the employees feel trusted. Employees—owing to their trust in the leaders—trust the enterprises as well, which reduces the insecurity caused by work stress ( Phong et al., 2018 ). In conclusion, servant leadership serves as a coping resource that reduces the impact of losing social support and thus curbs negative employee emotions ( Ahmed et al., 2021 ). Based on the aforementioned analysis, we find that servant leaders can reduce the mental health problems caused by work stress. Hence, we propose the following hypothesis:

H4 . Servant leadership reduces the negative relationship between work stress and mental health in SMEs during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methodology

Data collection and samples.

To assess our theoretical hypotheses, we collected data by administering a questionnaire survey. The questionnaire was administered anonymously, and the respondents were informed regarding the purpose of the study. Owing to the impact of the pandemic, we distributed and collected the questionnaires by email. Specifically, we utilized the network relationships of our research group with the corporate campus and group members to distribute the questionnaires. In addition, to ensure the quality of the questionnaires, typically senior employees who had worked for at least 2 years at their enterprises were chosen as the respondents.

Before the formal survey, we conducted a pilot test. Thereafter, we revised the questionnaire based on the results of the trial investigation. Subsequently, we randomly administered the questionnaires to the target enterprises. Hence, 450 questionnaires were administered via email, and 196 valid questionnaires were returned—an effective rate of 43.6%. Table 1 presents the profiles of the samples.

Table 1 . Profiles of the samples.

Table 1 shows the descriptive statistics of the sample. Based on the firm size, respondents who worked in a company with 1–20 employees accounted for 9.2%, those in a company with 21–50 employees accounted for 40.8%, those in a company with 51–200 employees accounted for 38.8%, and those in a company with 201–500 employees accounted for 11.2%. Regarding industry, the majority of the respondents (63.8%) worked for non-high-technology industry and 36.2% of the respondents worked for high-technology industry. Regarding work age, the participants with a work experience of 3 years or less accounted for 32.1%, those with work experience of 3–10 years accounted for 32.7%, and those with a work experience of more than 10 years accounted for 35.2%.

Core variables in this study include English-version measures that have been well tested in prior studies; some modifications were implemented during the translation process. As the objective of our study is SMEs in China, we translated the English version to Chinese; this translation was carried out by two professionals to ensure accuracy. Thereafter, we administered the questionnaires to the respondents. Hence, as the measures of our variables were revised based on the trial investigation, we asked two professionals to translate the Chinese version of the responses to English to enable publishing this work in English. We evaluated all the items pertaining to the main variables using a seven-point Likert scale (7 = very high/strongly agree, 1 = very low/strongly disagree). The variable measures are presented subsequently.

Work stress (WS)

Following the studies of Parker and DeCotiis (1983) and Shah et al. (2021) , we used 12 items to measure work stress, such as “I get irritated or nervous because of work” and “Work takes a lot of my energy, but the reward is less than the effort.”

Mental health (MH)

The GHQ-12 is a widely used tool developed to assess the mental health status ( Liu et al., 2022 ). However, we revised the questionnaire by combining the research needs and results of the pilot test. We used seven items to measure mental health, such as “I feel that I am unable (or completely unable) to overcome difficulties in my work or life.” In the final calculation, the scoring questions for mental health were converted; higher scores indicated higher levels of mental health.

Servant leadership (SL)

Following the studies by Ehrhart (2004) and Sendjaya et al. (2019) , we used nine items to measure servant leadership, including “My leader makes time to build good relationships with employees” and “My leader is willing to listen to subordinates during decision-making.”

Employee performance (EP)

We draw on the measurement method provided by Chen et al. (2002) and Khorakian and Sharifirad (2019) ; we used four items to represent employee performance. An example item is as follows: “I can make a contribution to the overall performance of our enterprise.”

Control variables

We controlled several variables that may influence employee performance, including firm size, industry, and work age. Firm size was measured by the number of employees. For industry, we coded them into two dummy variables (high-technology industry = 1, non-high-technology industry = 0). We calculated work experience by the number of years the employee has worked for the enterprise.

Common method bias

Common method bias may exist because each questionnaire was completed independently by each respondent ( Cai et al., 2017 ). We conducted a Harman one-factor test to examine whether common method bias significantly affected our data ( Podsakoff and Organ, 1986 ); the results revealed that the largest factor in our data accounted for only 36.219% of the entire variance. Hence, common method bias did not significantly affect on our study findings.

Reliability and validity

We analyzed the reliability and validity of our data for further data processing, the results of which are presented in Table 2 . Based on these results, we found that Cronbach's alpha coefficient of each variable was >0.8, thus meeting the requirements for reliability of the variables. To assess the validity of each construct, we conducted four separate confirmatory factor analyses. All the factor loadings exceeded 0.5. Overall, the reliability and validity results met the requirements for further data processing.

Table 2 . Results of confirmatory factor analysis and Cronbach's alpha coefficients.

To verify our hypotheses, we used a hierarchical linear regression method. Before conducting the regression analysis, we performed a Pearson correlation analysis, the results of which are presented in Table 3 .

Table 3 . Descriptive statistics and correlation analysis.

In the regression analysis, we calculated the variance inflation factor (VIF) of each variable and found that the VIF value of each variable was <3. Hence, the effect of multiple co-linearity is not significant. The results of regression analysis are presented in Tables 4 , 5 .

Table 4 . Results of linear regression analysis (models 1–6).

Table 5 . Results of linear regression analysis (models 7–9).

Table 4 shows that model 1 is the basic model assessing the effects of control variables on employee performance. In model 2, we added an independent variable (work stress) to examine its effect on employee performance. The results revealed that work stress negatively affects employee performance (β = −0.193, p < 0.01). Therefore, hypothesis 1 is supported. Model 5 is the basic model that examines the effects of control variables on mental health. In model 6, we added an independent variable (work stress) to assess its effect on mental health. We found that work stress negatively affects mental health (β = −0.517, p < 0.001). Therefore, hypothesis 2 is supported.

To verify the mediating effect of mental health on the relationship between work stress and employee performance, we used the method introduced by Kenny et al. (1998) , which is described as follows: (1) The independent variable is significantly related to the dependent variable. (2) The independent variable is significantly related to the mediating variable. (3) The mediating variable is significantly related to the dependent variable after controlling for the independent variable. (4) If the effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable becomes smaller, it indicates a partial mediating effect. (5) If the effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable is no longer significant, it indicates a full mediating effect. Based on this method, in model 4, mental health is significantly positively related to employee performance (β = 0.343, p < 0.001), and no significant correlation exists between work stress and employee performance (β = −0.016, p > 0.05). Hence, mental health fully mediates the relationship between work stress and employee performance. Therefore, hypothesis 3 is supported.

To verify the moderating effect of servant leadership on the relationship between work stress and mental health, we gradually added independent variables, a moderator variable, and interaction between the independent variables and moderator variable to the analysis, the results of which are presented in Table 5 . In model 9, the moderating effect of servant leadership is not supported (β = 0.030, p > 0.05). Therefore, hypothesis 4 is not supported.

For SMEs, employees are core assets and crucial to their survival and growth ( Shan et al., 2022 ). Specifically, owing to the COVID-19 pandemic, employees' work stress may precipitate burnout ( Choi et al., 2019 ; Barello et al., 2020 ), which influences their performance. Researchers and practitioners have significantly focused on resolving the challenge of work stress ( Karatepe et al., 2020 ; Tan et al., 2020 ; Gao, 2021 ). However, previous research has not clearly elucidated the relationship among work stress, mental health, servant leadership, and employee performance. Through this study, we found the following results:

Employees in SMEs face work stress owing to the COVID-19 pandemic, which reduces their performance. Facing these external shocks, survival and growth of SMEs may become increasingly uncertain ( Adam and Alarifi, 2021 ). Employees' career prospects are negatively impacted. Meanwhile, the pandemic has precipitated a change in the way employees work, their workspace, and work timings. Moreover, their work is now intertwined with family life. Hence, employees experience greater stress at work than ever before ( Gao, 2021 ), which, in turn, affects their productivity and deteriorates their performance.

Furthermore, we found that mental health plays a mediating role in the relationship between work stress and employee performance; this suggests that employees' mental status is influenced by work stress, which, in turn, lowers job performance. Per our findings, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, employees experience nervous and anxious psychological states ( Tan et al., 2020 ), which renders them unable to devote their full attention to their work; hence, their work performance is likely to decrease.

Finally, we found that leaders are the core of any enterprise ( Ahn et al., 2018 ). Hence, their leadership behavior significantly influences employees. Per previous research, servant leadership is considered a typical leadership behavior characterized by exhibiting humility, delegating power to employees, raising the morale of subordinates, and placing the interests of employees above their own ( Sendjaya, 2015 ; Eva et al., 2019 ). Through theoretical analysis, we found that servant leadership mitigates the negative effect of work stress on mental health. However, the empirical results are not significant possibly because work stress of employees in SMEs is rooted in worries regarding the future of the macroeconomic environment, and the resulting mental health problems cannot be cured merely by a leader.

Hence, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, employees experience work stress, which precipitates mental health problems and poor employee performance. To solve the problem of work stress, SMEs should pay more attention to fostering servant leadership. Meanwhile, organizational culture is also important in alleviating employees' mental health problems and thus reducing negative effects of work stress on employee performance.

Implications

This study findings have several theoretical and managerial implications.

Theoretical implications

First, per previous research, no consistent conclusion exists regarding the relationship between work stress and employee performance, including positive relationships ( Ismail et al., 2015 ; Soomro et al., 2019 ), negative relationships ( Yunus et al., 2018 ; Nawaz Kalyar et al., 2019 ; Purnomo et al., 2021 ), inverted U-shaped relationships ( McClenahan et al., 2007 ; Hamidi and Eivazi, 2010 ), and no relationship ( Tănăsescu and Ramona-Diana, 2019 ). We report that work stress negatively affects employee performance in SMEs during the COVID-19 pandemic; thus, this study contributes to the understanding of the situational nature of work stress and provides enriching insights pertaining to positive psychology.

Second, we established the research path that work stress affects employee performance. Mental health is a psychological state that may influence an individual's work efficiency. In this study, we explored its mediating role, which opens the black box of the relationship between work stress and employee performance; thus, this study contributes to a greater understanding of the role of work stress during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Finally, this study sheds light on the moderating effect of servant leadership, which is useful for understanding why some SMEs exhibit greater difficulty in achieving success than others during the COVID-19 pandemic. Previous research has explained the negative effect of work stress ( Yunus et al., 2018 ; Nawaz Kalyar et al., 2019 ; Purnomo et al., 2021 ). However, few studies have focused on how to resolve the problem. We identify servant leadership as the moderating factor providing theoretical support for solving the problem of work stress. This study expands the explanatory scope of the upper echelons theory.

Practice implications

First, this study elucidates the sources and mechanisms of work stress in SMEs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Employees should continuously acquire new skills to improve themselves and thus reduce their replaceability. Meanwhile, they should enhance their time management and emotional regulation skills to prevent the emergence of adverse psychological problems.

Second, leaders in SMEs should pay more attention to employees' mental health to prevent the emergence of hindrance stress. Employees are primarily exposed to stress from health and safety risks, impaired performance, and negative emotions. Hence, leaders should communicate with employees in a timely manner to understand their true needs, which can help avoid mental health problems due to work stress among employees.

Third, policymakers should realize that a key cause of employee work stress in SMEs is attributable to concerns regarding the macroeconomic environment. Hence, they should formulate reasonable support policies to improve the confidence of the whole society in SMEs, which helps mitigate SME employees' work stress during emergency events like the COVID-19 pandemic.

Finally, as work stress causes mental health problems, SME owners should focus on their employees' physical as well as mental health. Society should establish a psychological construction platform for SME employees to help them address their psychological problems.

Limitations and future research

This study has limitations, which should be addressed by further research. First, differences exist in the impact of the pandemic on different industries. Future research should focus on the impact of work stress on employee performance in different industries. Second, this study only explored the moderating role of servant leadership. Other leadership behaviors of leaders may also affect work stress. Future research can use case study methods to explore the role of other leadership behaviors.

This study explored the relationship between work stress and employee performance in SMEs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using a sample of 196 SMEs from China, we found that as a typical result of emergency events, work stress negatively affects employees' performance, particularly by affecting employees' mental health. Furthermore, we found that servant leadership provides a friendly internal environment to mitigate negative effects of work stress on employees working in SMEs.

Data availability statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author/s.

Ethics statement

Ethical review and approval was not required for the study on human participants in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. Written informed consent from the patients/participants or patients/participants legal guardian/next of kin was not required to participate in this study in accordance with the national legislation and the institutional requirements.

Author contributions

BC: conceptualization, methodology, writing—original draft, and visualization. LW: formal analysis. BL: investigation, funding acquisition, and writing—review and editing. WL: resources, project administration, and supervision. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

This research was supported by the major project of Henan Province Key R&D and Promotion Special Project (Soft Science) Current Situation, Realization Path and Guarantee Measures for Digital Transformation Development of SMEs in Henan Province under the New Development Pattern (Grant No. 222400410159).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher's note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Adam, N. A., and Alarifi, G. (2021). Innovation practices for survival of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in the COVID-19 times: the role of external support. J. Innov. Entrepreneursh . 10, 1–22. doi: 10.1186/s13731-021-00156-6

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ahmed, I., Ali, M., Usman, M., Syed, K. H., and Rashid, H. A. (2021). Customer Mistreatment and Insomnia in Employees-a Study in Context of COVID-19. J. Behav. Sci. 31, 248–271.

Google Scholar

Ahn, J., Lee, S., and Yun, S. (2018). Leaders' core self-evaluation, ethical leadership, and employees' job performance: the moderating role of employees' exchange ideology. J. Bus. Ethics . 148, 457–470. doi: 10.1007/s10551-016-3030-0

Barello, S., Palamenghi, L., and Graffigna, G. (2020). Burnout and somatic symptoms among frontline healthcare professionals at the peak of the Italian COVID-19 pandemic. Psychiatry Res . 290, 113129. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113129

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Bhui, K. S., Dinos, S., Stansfeld, S. A., and White, P. D. (2012). A synthesis of the evidence for managing stress at work: a review of the reviews reporting on anxiety, depression, and absenteeism. J. Environ. Public Health . 2012. doi: 10.1155/2012/515874

Bubonya, M., Cobb-Clark, D. A., and Wooden, M. (2017). Mental health and productivity at work: Does what you do matter?. Labour Econ . 46, 150–165. doi: 10.1016/j.labeco.2017.05.001

Cai, L., Chen, B., Chen, J., and Bruton, G. D. (2017). Dysfunctional competition and innovation strategy of new ventures as they mature. J. Bus. Res . 78, 111–118. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.05.008

Cavanaugh, M. A., Boswell, W. R., Roehling, M. V., and Boudreau, J. W. (2000). An empirical examination of self-reported work stress among US managers. J. Appl. Psychol . 85, 65–74. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.85.1.65

Chen, I. S., and Fellenz, M. R. (2020). Personal resources and personal demands for work engagement: Evidence from employees in the service industry. Int. J. Hosp. Manage . 90, 102600. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2020.102600

Chen, Z. X., Tsui, A. S., and Farh, J. L. (2002). Loyalty to supervisor vs. organizational commitment: Relationships to employee performance in China. J. Occupa. Organ. Psychol . 75, 339–356. doi: 10.1348/096317902320369749

Choi, H. M., Mohammad, A. A., and Kim, W. G. (2019). Understanding hotel frontline employees' emotional intelligence, emotional labor, job stress, coping strategies and burnout. Int. J. Hosp. Manage . 82, 199–208. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.05.002

Chou, L., Hu, S., and Lo, M. (2015). Job stress, mental health, burnout and arterial stiffness: a cross-sectional study among Taiwanese medical professionals. Atherosclerosis . 241, e135–e135. doi: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2015.04.468

Cohen, J., Schiffler, F., Rohmer, O., Louvet, E., and Mollaret, P. (2019). Is disability really an obstacle to success? Impact of a disability simulation on motivation and performance. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol . 49, 50–59. doi: 10.1111/jasp.12564

Deng, J., Guo, Y., Ma, T., Yang, T., and Tian, X. (2019). How job stress influences job performance among Chinese healthcare workers: a cross-sectional study. Environ. Health Prevent. Med . 24, 1–11. doi: 10.1186/s12199-018-0758-4

Eggers, F. (2020). Masters of disasters? Challenges and opportunities for SMEs in times of crisis. J. Bus. Res . 116, 199–208. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.05.025

Ehrhart, M. G. (2004). Leadership and procedural justice climate as antecedents of unit-level organizational citizenship behavior. Pers. Psychol . 57, 61–94. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2004.tb02484.x

Eskilsson, T., Slunga Järvholm, L., Malmberg Gavelin, H., Stigsdotter Neely, A., and Boraxbekk, C. J. (2017). Aerobic training for improved memory in patients with stress-related exhaustion: a randomized controlled trial. BMC psychiatry . 17, 1–10. doi: 10.1186/s12888-017-1457-1

Eva, N., Robin, M., Sendjaya, S., Van Dierendonck, D., and Liden, R. C. (2019). Servant leadership: a systematic review and call for future research. Leadersh. Q . 30, 111–132. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2018.07.004

Flynn, A. (2017). Re-thinking SME disadvantage in public procurement. J. Small Bus. Enter. Dev . 24, 991–1008. doi: 10.1108/JSBED-03-2017-0114

Gao, Y. (2021). Challenges and countermeasures of human resource manage in the post-epidemic Period. Int. J. Manage Educ. Human Dev . 1, 036–040.

Green, N., Tappin, D., and Bentley, T. (2020). Working from home before, during and after the Covid-19 pandemic: implications for workers and organisations. N. Z. J. Employ. Relat . 45, 5–16. doi: 10.24135/nzjer.v45i2.19

Hambrick, D. C., and Mason, P. A. (1984). Upper echelons: the organization as a reflection of its top managers. Acad.Manage. Rev . 9, 193–206. doi: 10.2307/258434

Hamidi, Y., and Eivazi, Z. (2010). The relationships among employees' job stress, job satisfaction, and the organizational performance of Hamadan urban health centers. Soc. Behav. Pers. Int. J . 38, 963–968. doi: 10.2224/sbp.2010.38.7.963

Harrison, M. A., and Stephens, K. K. (2019). Shifting from wellness at work to wellness in work: Interrogating the link between stress and organization while theorizing a move toward wellness-in-practice. Manage. Commun. Q . 33, 616–649. doi: 10.1177/0893318919862490

Haslam, S. A., Reicher, S. D., and Platow, M. J. (2020). The New Psychology of Leadership: Identity, Influence and Power . London, UK: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9781351108232

Heffernan, J., and Pilkington, P. (2011). Supported employment for persons with mental illness: systematic review of the effectiveness of individual placement and support in the UK. J. Mental Health . 20, 368–380. doi: 10.3109/09638237.2011.556159

Hennekam, S., Richard, S., and Grima, F. (2020). Coping with mental health conditions at work and its impact on self-perceived job performance. Employee Relat. Int. J . 42, 626–645. doi: 10.1108/ER-05-2019-0211

Hon, A. H., and Chan, W. W. (2013). The effects of group conflict and work stress on employee performance. Cornell Hosp. Q . 54, 174–184. doi: 10.1177/1938965513476367

Houtman, I., Jettinghof, K., and Cedillo, L. (2007). Raising Awareness of Stress at Work in Developing Countires: a Modern Hazard in a Traditional Working Environment: Advice to Employers and Worker Representatives . Geneva: World Health Organization.

Ismail, A., Saudin, N., Ismail, Y., Samah, A. J. A., Bakar, R. A., Aminudin, N. N., et al. (2015). Effect of workplace stress on job performance. Econ. Rev. J. Econ. Bus . 13, 45–57.

Karasek, R., and Theorell, T. (1990). Healthy Work: Stress, Productivity, and the Reconstruction of Working Life . New York: Basic Books.

Karatepe, O. M., Rezapouraghdam, H., and Hassannia, R. (2020). Job insecurity, work engagement and their effects on hotel employees' non-green and nonattendance behaviors. Int. J. Hosp. Manage . 87, 102472. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2020.102472

Kenny, D., Kashy, D., and Bolger, N. (1998). Data analysis in social psychology. Handbook Soc. Psychol. 1, 233–268.

Khamisa, N., Peltzer, K., Ilic, D., and Oldenburg, B. (2016). Work related stress, burnout, job satisfaction and general health of nurses: a follow-up study. Int. J. Nurs. Pract . 22, 538–545. doi: 10.1111/ijn.12455

Khorakian, A., and Sharifirad, M. S. (2019). Integrating implicit leadership theories, leader–member exchange, self-efficacy, and attachment theory to predict job performance. Psychol. Rep . 122, 1117–1144. doi: 10.1177/0033294118773400

Lai, H., Hossin, M. A., Li, J., Wang, R., and Hosain, M. S. (2022). Examining the relationship between COVID-19 related job stress and employees' turnover intention with the moderating role of perceived organizational support: Evidence from SMEs in China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health . 19, 3719. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19063719

Lai, Y., Saridakis, G., and Blackburn, R. (2015). Job stress in the United Kingdom: Are small and medium-sized enterprises and large enterprises different?. Stress Health . 31, 222–235. doi: 10.1002/smi.2549

Lebesby, K., and Benders, J. (2020). Too smart to participate? Rational reasons for employees' non-participation in action research. Syst. Pract. Action Res . 33, 625–638. doi: 10.1007/s11213-020-09538-5

LePine, J. A., LePine, M. A., and Jackson, C. L. (2004). Challenge and hindrance stress: relationships with exhaustion, motivation to learn, and learning performance. J. Appl. Psychol . 89, 883. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.89.5.883

LePine, J. A., Podsakoff, N. P., and LePine, M. A. (2005). A meta-analytic test of the challenge stressor–hindrance stressor framework: an explanation for inconsistent relationships among stressors and performance. Acad. Manage J . 48, 764–775. doi: 10.5465/amj.2005.18803921

Levinson, D., Lakoma, M. D., Petukhova, M., Schoenbaum, M., Zaslavsky, A. M., Angermeyer, M., et al. (2010). Associations of serious mental illness with earnings: results from the WHO World Mental Health surveys. Br. J. Psychiatry . 197, 114–121. doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.109.073635

Li, S., Rees, C. J., and Branine, M. (2019). Employees' perceptions of human resource Manage practices and employee outcomes: empirical evidence from small and medium-sized enterprises in China. Employee Relat. Int. J . 41, 1419–1433. doi: 10.1108/ER-01-2019-0065

Liu, Z., Xi, C., Zhong, M., Peng, W., Liu, Q., Chu, J., et al. (2022). Factorial validity of the 12-item general health questionnaire in patients with psychological disorders. Current Psychol . 1–9. doi: 10.1007/s12144-022-02845-1

Lu, A. C. C., and Gursoy, D. (2016). Impact of job burnout on satisfaction and turnover intention: do generational differences matter?. J. Hosp. Tour. Res . 40, 210–235. doi: 10.1177/1096348013495696

Lu, J., Zhang, Z., and Jia, M. (2019). Does servant leadership affect employees' emotional labor? A Soc. information-processing perspective. J. Bus. Ethics . 159, 507–518. doi: 10.1007/s10551-018-3816-3

Lu, L. (1997). Hassles, appraisals, coping and distress: a closer look at the stress process. Kaohsiung J. Med. Sci . 13, 503–510.

PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar

Lu, Y., Zhang, Z., Yan, H., Rui, B., and Liu, J. (2020). Effects of occupational hazards on job stress and mental health of factory workers and miners: a propensity score analysis. BioMed Res. Int . 2020. doi: 10.1155/2020/1754897

Mansour, S., and Tremblay, D. G. (2018). Work–family conflict/family–work conflict, job stress, burnout and intention to leave in the hotel industry in Quebec (Canada): moderating role of need for family friendly practices as “resource passageways”. Int. J. Human Res. Manage . 29, 2399–2430. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2016.1239216

Mayerl, H., Stolz, E., Waxenegger, A., Rásky, É., and Freidl, W. (2016). The role of personal and job resources in the relationship between psychoSoc. job demands, mental strain, and health problems. Front. Psychol . 7, 1214. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01214

McClenahan, C., Shevlin, M. G., Bennett, C., and O'Neill, B. (2007). Testicular self-examination: a test of the health belief model and the theory of planned behaviour. Health Educ. Res . 22, 272–284. doi: 10.1093/her/cyl076

Nawaz Kalyar, M., Shafique, I., and Ahmad, B. (2019). Job stress and performance nexus in tourism industry: a moderation analysis. Tour. Int. Interdiscip. J . 67, 6–21.

Neupane, S., and Nygard, C. H. (2017). Physical and mental strain at work: relationships with onset and persistent of multi-site pain in a four-year follow up. Int. J. Indus. Ergon . 60, 47–52. doi: 10.1016/j.ergon.2016.03.005

Olugbade, O. A., and Karatepe, O. M. (2019). Stressors, work engagement and their effects on hotel employee outcomes. Serv. Indus. J . 39, 279–298. doi: 10.1080/02642069.2018.1520842

Orfei, M. D., Porcari, D. E., D'Arcangelo, S., Maggi, F., Russignaga, D., Lattanzi, N., et al. (2022). COVID-19 and stressful adjustment to work: a long-term prospective study about homeworking for bank employees in Italy. Front. Psychol . 13, 843095. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.843095

Park, S. K., Rhee, M. K., and Barak, M. M. (2016). Job stress and mental health among nonregular workers in Korea: What dimensions of job stress are associated with mental health?. Arch. Environ. Occup. Health . 71, 111–118. doi: 10.1080/19338244.2014.997381

Parker, D. F., and DeCotiis, T. A. (1983). Organizational determinants of job stress. Organ. Behav. Human Perform . 32, 160–177. doi: 10.1016/0030-5073(83)90145-9

Phong, L. B., Hui, L., and Son, T. T. (2018). How leadership and trust in leaders foster employees' behavior toward knowledge sharing. Soc. Behav. Pers. Int. J . 46, 705–720. doi: 10.2224/sbp.6711

Piccarozzi, M., Silvestri, C., and Morganti, P. (2021). COVID-19 in manage studies: a systematic literature review. Sustainability . 13, 3791. doi: 10.3390/su13073791

Podsakoff, P. M., and Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: problems and prospects. J. Manage . 12, 531–544. doi: 10.1177/014920638601200408

Poms, L. W., Fleming, L. C., and Jacobsen, K. H. (2016). Work-family conflict, stress, and physical and mental health: a model for understanding barriers to and opportunities for women's well-being at home and in the workplace. World Med. Health Policy . 8, 444–457. doi: 10.1002/wmh3.211

Prasad, K., and Vaidya, R. W. (2020). Association among Covid-19 parameters, occupational stress and employee performance: an empirical study with reference to Agricultural Research Sector in Hyderabad Metro. Sustain. Humanosphere . 16, 235–253.

Purnomo, K. S. H., Lustono, L., and Tatik, Y. (2021). The effect of role conflict, role ambiguity and job stress on employee performance. Econ. Educ. Anal. J . 10, 532–542. doi: 10.15294/eeaj.v10i3.50793

Richardson, K. M., and Rothstein, H. R. (2008). Effects of occupational stress manage intervention programs: a meta-analysis. J. Occup. Health Psychol . 13, 69–93. doi: 10.1037/1076-8998.13.1.69

Robbins, S. P. (2005). Essentials of Organizational Behavior (8th ed.) . Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Saleem, F., Malik, M. I., and Qureshi, S. S. (2021). Work stress hampering employee performance during COVID-19: is safety culture needed? Front . Psychol . 12, 655839. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.655839

Sendjaya, S. (2015). Personal and Organizational Excellence Through Servant Leadership Learning to Serve, Serving to Lead, Leading to Transform . Berlin, Germany: Springer.

Sendjaya, S., Eva, N., Butar Butar, I., Robin, M., and Castles, S. (2019). SLBS-6: Validation of a short form of the servant leadership behavior scale. J. Bus. Ethics . 156, 941–956. doi: 10.1007/s10551-017-3594-3

Shah, S. H. A., Haider, A., Jindong, J., Mumtaz, A., and Rafiq, N. (2021). The impact of job stress and state anger on turnover intention among nurses during COVID-19: the mediating role of emotional exhaustion. Front. Psychol . 12. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.810378

Shan, B., Liu, X., Gu, A., and Zhao, R. (2022). The effect of occupational health risk perception on job satisfaction. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health . 19, 2111. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19042111

Shimazu, A., Nakata, A., Nagata, T., Arakawa, Y., Kuroda, S., Inamizu, N., et al. (2020). PsychoSoc. impact of COVID-19 for general workers. J. Occup. Health . 62, e12132. doi: 10.1002/1348-9585.12132

Soeker, M. S., Truter, T., Van Wilgen, N., Khumalo, P., Smith, H., Bezuidenhout, S., et al. (2019). The experiences and perceptions of individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia regarding the challenges they experience to employment and coping strategies used in the open labor market in Cape Town, South Africa. Work . 62, 221–231. doi: 10.3233/WOR-192857

Song, L., Wang, Y., Li, Z., Yang, Y., and Li, H. (2020). Mental health and work attitudes among people resuming work during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study in China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health . 17, 5059. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17145059

Soomro, M. A., Memon, M. S., and Bukhari, N. S. (2019). Impact of stress on employees performance in public sector Universities of Sindh. Sukkur IBA J. Manage. Bus . 6, 114–129. doi: 10.30537/sijmb.v6i2.327

Spears, L. C. (2010). Character and servant leadership: ten characteristics of effective, caring leaders. J. Virtues Leadersh . 1, 25–30.

Tan, W., Hao, F., McIntyre, R. S., Jiang, L., Jiang, X., Zhang, L., et al. (2020). Is returning to work during the COVID-19 pandemic stressful? A study on immediate mental health status and psychoneuroimmunity prevention measures of Chinese workforce. Brain Behav. Immun . 87, 84–92. doi: 10.1016/j.bbi.2020.04.055

Tănăsescu, R. I., and Ramona-Diana, L. E. O. N. (2019). Emotional intelligence, occupational stress and job performance in the Romanian banking system: a case study approach. Manage Dyn. Knowl. Econ . 7, 323–335. doi: 10.25019/MDKE/7.3.03

Tiedtke, C., Rijk, D. E., Van den Broeck, A. A., and Godderis, L. (2020). Employers' experience on involvement in sickness absence/return to work support for employees with Cancer in small enterprises. J. Occup. Rehabil . 30, 635–645. doi: 10.1007/s10926-020-09887-x

Tu, Y., Li, D., and Wang, H. J. (2021). COVID-19-induced layoff, survivors' COVID-19-related stress and performance in hospital industry: the moderating role of social support. Int. J. Hosp. Manage . 95, 102912. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2021.102912

Uchmanowicz, I., Karniej, P., Lisiak, M., Chudiak, A., Lomper, K., Wiśnicka, A., et al. (2020). The relationship between burnout, job satisfaction and the rationing of nursing care—A cross-sectional study. J. Nurs. Manage . 28, 2185–2195. doi: 10.1111/jonm.13135

Xu, S., Wang, Y. C., Ma, E., and Wang, R. (2020). Hotel employees' fun climate at work: effects on work-family conflict and employee deep acting through a collectivistic perspective. Int. J. Hosp. Manage . 91, 102666. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2020.102666

Yu, D., Yang, K., Zhao, X., Liu, Y., Wang, S., D'Agostino, M. T., et al. (2022). Psychological contract breach and job performance of new generation of employees: Considering the mediating effect of job burnout and the moderating effect of past breach experience. Front . Psychol . 13, 985604. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.985604

Yunus, N. H., Mansor, N., Hassan, C. N., Zainuddin, A., and Demong, N. A. R. (2018). The role of supervisor in the relationship between job stress and job performance. Int. J. Acad. Res. Bus. Soc. Sci . 8, 1962–1970. doi: 10.6007/IJARBSS/v8-i11/5560

Keywords: COVID-19, work stress, mental health, employee performance, social uncertainty

Citation: Chen B, Wang L, Li B and Liu W (2022) Work stress, mental health, and employee performance. Front. Psychol. 13:1006580. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1006580

Received: 29 July 2022; Accepted: 10 October 2022; Published: 08 November 2022.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2022 Chen, Wang, Li and Liu. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Biao Li, lib0023@zzu.edu.cn

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• BJPsych Bull
• v.40(6); 2016 Dec

Perceptions of work stress causes and effective interventions in employees working in public, private and non-governmental organisations: a qualitative study

Kamaldeep bhui.

1 Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry

Sokratis Dinos

2 BPP University, London

Magdalena Galant-Miecznikowska

Bertine de jongh, stephen stansfeld.

Aims and method

To identify causes of stress at work as well as individual, organisational and personal interventions used by employees to manage stress in public, private and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Qualitative interviews were conducted with 51 employees from a range of organisations.

Participants reported adverse working conditions and management practices as common causes of work stress. Stress-inducing management practices included unrealistic demands, lack of support, unfair treatment, low decision latitude, lack of appreciation, effort–reward imbalance, conflicting roles, lack of transparency and poor communication. Organisational interventions were perceived as effective if they improved management styles, and included physical exercise, taking breaks and ensuring adequate time for planning work tasks. Personal interventions used outside of work were important to prevent and remedy stress.

Clinical implications

Interventions should improve management practices as well as promoting personal interventions outside of the work setting.

The conceptualisation of work stress is of crucial importance when developing interventions for the workplace. Work-related stress is defined as ‘a harmful reaction that people have to undue pressures and demands placed on them at work’. 1 As many as 440 000 people in the UK complain of work-related stress, depression or anxiety that makes them ill; nearly 9.9 million work days were lost as a consequence in 2014/2015. 1 The most recent Health and Safety Executive (HSE) report (2015) gives a prevalence of 1380 and an incidence of 740 per 100 000 workers, and also concludes that work stress is more common in public service institutions. 1 The estimated economic costs to the British economy as a result of stress at work are considerable, with £14.3 billion lost in 2013/2014, 2 and the higher costs in public service amount to £1.2 billion per year. 3

Work stress can lead to physical illness, as well as psychological distress and mental illness. 4 , 5 , 6 The recent increase in work stress has been linked with the global and national recession, 7 - 9 job insecurity and work intensity, all leading to greater workloads and more interpersonal conflicts, 3 and can have an impact on children's mental health through disrupted parenting. 10 Essentially, stress in the workplace may be the result of exposure to a range of work stressors and appears to arise when people attempt to manage their responsibilities, tasks or other forms of pressure related to their jobs, and encounter difficulty, strain, anxiety or worry in this attempt. 11 Work stressors can take different forms depending on the characteristics of the workplace, and may be unique to an organisation or an industry. 12 Theoretical models of stress consider it to be either related to adverse life events and stressful environments or the individual's physiological and psychological responses to stressors, or a ‘transactional’ interaction between the individual and environment. 13 , 14 – 17 Although theoretical models conceptualise stress as a result of an imbalance between perceptions of external demands and internal resources, the consensus between theoretical academic models and lay representations of definitions of stress is far from clear. Definitions of stress in the research literature as well as those reported by lay people vary considerably. For example, Kinman & Jones 18 found that there was a lack of consensus on conceptualisations of stress, and a number of different personal, social, environmental and work-related factors were used to define and interpret the meaning of stress. 11 Brooker & Eakin 19 suggest that concepts such as power or control in relation to gender and class are related to stress, yet models of stress do not explicitly take them into account. For example, Page et al 20 found that participants perceived stress as a feminine trait associated with weakness, thus few people admit to it.

Cahil, 16 Cooper et al 13 and Marine et al 21 describe categories of stress management interventions that target individuals or organisations; these can be further segmented as preventive interventions at primary, secondary or tertiary levels. 22 Primary interventions aim to prevent the causal factors of stress, secondary interventions aim to reduce the severity or duration of symptoms, and tertiary or reactive interventions aim to provide rehabilitation and maximise functioning among those with chronic health conditions. 23 Individual interventions may include stress awareness training and cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) for psychological and emotional stress. Organisational interventions affect groups of people at work and may include workplace adjustments or conflict management approaches in a specific organisation. Some interventions target both the individual and the organisation, for example policies to secure a better work–life balance and peer-support groups. Bhui et al 's systematic review 24 found that interventions that target individuals show larger effects compared with organisational interventions on individual outcomes such as levels of depression and anxiety. However, individual interventions did not improve organisational outcomes such as absenteeism, which is the most important indicator of loss of organisational productivity. The evidence gaps identified in this review included studies that compared different types of organisation (e.g. public, private and non-governmental organisation (NGO)), and studies that examine whether they employ and benefit from similar interventions, given that different sectors deploy very different business processes, levels and consistency of resources and profit focus, and public service or charitable objectives. Furthermore, studies tended to be based in work settings, rather than considering all interventions applied outside of work that people found helpful. 25

These evidence gaps continue to exist despite the growing body of research into work stress. Our systematic synthesis of the research evidence on managing work stress showed a wide variety of organisational settings, research methods and outcome measures, such that too many questions were being asked but few answered definitively. 24 We concluded that more empirical research was required, but that surveys were premature until there was a better understanding of:

• What work stress issues do employees and managers face on a day-to-day basis?
• What are organisations and employees already doing about work stress in the workplace and outside of work?
• What are the interventions that employees perceive to be the most effective when managing work-related stress?
• Should the approaches taken by public and private organisations and NGOs be distinct given the very different levels and consistency of resources, focus on profit, and public service or charitable objectives?

The present study used qualitative interviews to address these questions and to identify individual, organisational and personal interventions and their perceived effectiveness in managing work-related stress. Contrasts between different types of organisation were also investigated.

Participants

The sample used in this study was purposive (e.g. type and size of organisation, vocational role) and explored participants' experiences of work stress in the course of their working day. A total of 12 organisations took part in the study, of which 6 were public organisations, 4 were private organisations and 2 were NGOs. Three organisations were based outside London, whereas the remaining 9 were based in London. Organisations were from a variety of sectors, including education, health services, insurance, graphic design and betting agencies. The purposive sampling methods aimed to ensure as broad as possible a representation of organisations, levels of the organisation and types of work within the organisation.

For the organisations that met the inclusion criteria, the senior manager was contacted by telephone and informed about the nature of the study, and agreement was reached for participation in the study. The researchers selected a number of employees in different positions along the hierarchy so there is representation from different roles: 28 of the participants were in managerial roles, and the remaining were in non-management positions. We interviewed approximately 5 participants per organisation. A total sample of 51 employees (17 men and 34 women) took part in the study; 26 participants were aged 30 years or under, 17 were between 31 and 50 years and 8 were over 51 years old.

Procedure and topic guide

The topic guide was piloted on six employees who had experienced work stress. The content of these pilot interviews was used to refine the topic guide and to gain feedback from participants on clarity and appropriateness of the questions. Organisations were approached and invited to participate by e-mails containing information on the nature of the study and the data collection processes. Participation was voluntary; the interviews were conducted face to face and, whenever possible, at the interviewee's place of work. The interviews were semi-structured and lasted up to 45 minutes. The topic guide focused on factors that may cause stress and/or absence, personal experiences of and/or recommendations on managing stress at work and experiences of effective individual and organisational interventions to manage work-related stress (see the appendix for topic guide).

The interviews were transcribed verbatim, excluding any potentially identifying information. The data collected were subject to thematic analysis in order to identify and describe recurring themes. 26 Themes and subthemes were organised using the framework approach that is commonly used in policy-relevant qualitative research. 27 Charts were generated from the themes, the range and nature of the experiences were mapped, and patterns between and within themes were revealed. Typologies were iteratively generated to accommodate the data if existing themes were inadequate or were better grouped within a higher theme. Content analysis was also performed by counting the frequency of themes in order to identify their relative prominence in the data, and also to reveal types of interventions and contexts, and views about effectiveness. These frequencies are presented only to support the strength of the findings in these data rather than to estimate prevalence more generally. With this purpose in mind, the analysis proceeded until saturation was reached, and only themes on which saturation was reached are presented.

Data were organised by three higher themes that captured the aims of the study:

• perceived causes of stress at work
• individual and organisational stress management interventions and their perceived effectiveness
• personal interventions to manage stress at work.

Causes of stress at work

The narrative data on participants' understanding of factors that may cause stress at work suggested working conditions, management practices, nature of job, life events and financial factors ( Table 1 ). The majority of participants ( n = 42/51) referred to working conditions as a main source of stress. Working conditions were mainly related to factors such as workload, the physical environment (e.g. noisy offices, lack of windows, small rooms, and offices in which the temperature was either too low or too high for comfort), long working hours, heavy workloads and understaffing.

NGO, non-governmental organisation.

‘We are short [staffed] so two people cannot go on holiday at the same time, so it's such an inconvenience and … we are trying to cover the days, nights and it's like wrrrr … really stressful place to be … ’ (female, 24, NGO).

Working conditions were the main cause of stress regardless of the sector people worked in; people working in the NGO or the public sector more often referred to the physical environment and workloads as relevant factors. Private sector employees more often referred to long working hours and a lack of structure to the working day.

A similar number of participants ( n = 40) suggested that the nature of the job itself contributed to stress, with participants from private organisations and NGOs more often reporting this as a cause of stress. Participants attributed stress more specifically to a job with high unpredictability in what may be required from day to day, or a job that demands unsociable hours.

‘Shift work … I find that quite stressful because it affects my personal life because I have to work during the weekends and that's when most of my family and friends are off … ’ (female, 26, NGO).

Management practice was proposed as a cause of stress by more than half of the interviewees ( n = 32), but was least often implicated in the public sector organisations. Participants in high managerial positions (e.g. head of unit) tended to refer to management practice as a cause of stress less often than employees in non-managerial positions. However, for all other participants (e.g. middle management positions and employees) no differences were observed. Management practice as a cause of stress related to personal style of leadership, implicating lack of warmth and support with a feeling that staff were unimportant and not respected as people; insufficient praise or confidence-building were also important omissions that caused stress. Limited opportunities for decision-making (often referred to as low decision latitude) and lack of transparency as well as unrealistic demands, poor communication and effort–reward imbalance were all implicated.

‘That's what makes you angry, because there's nobody taking my case. As soon as this phone goes to my boss and they complain about me, nobody asks me what happened. And even if I'm right, they still apologise. Why? I've done nothing wrong. It's them. They've done the wrong thing’ (male, 45, public). ‘ … the message the organisation gives to you is that you don't really matter’ (female, 40, NGO).

Life events were identified as another contributor to the level of stress experienced by employees regardless of the type of organisation they worked for ( n = 21). Life events referred to problems with family or relationships, death and sickness, as well as trying to maintain a balance between work demands and responsibilities in the social and personal or family lives of respondents.

A small number of respondents ( n = 6) reported financial factors as a cause of work stress; financial strain causing work stress was related to working for organisations that lacked a benefits package, or in which the salary did not reflect the amount of effort invested in work. Job insecurity as a cause of work stress reflected fears about losing income and facing further financial strain.

Individual and organisational stress management interventions

Participants were asked about any interventions at their workplace for managing stress. Overall, participants referred less frequently to individual interventions; such interventions were also either secondary or tertiary. In particular, they were either psychological interventions such as face-to-face telephone or internet counselling, or educational interventions or training courses that taught practical skills such as organisational management and assertiveness ( Table 2 ).

NGO, non-governmental organisation; TOIL, time off in lieu.

Some patterns emerged in the use of individual interventions by type of organisation: NGOs were least likely to deliver individual interventions to employees, perhaps owing to cost. In terms of effectiveness, those participants who received one-to-one counselling interventions thought these were effective, mainly because they could be accessed promptly when needed.

‘So [I] went to my [general practitioner] GP and they set it up through my local authority for face-to-face counselling, so I was seeing the occupational therapist, [had] face-to-face counselling and that happened on my day off. So [I] could do some work at home, because I was very tired I didn't have the stress of having to get into work, so just took a bit off. So [it was] kind of a package of things that just assisted me for a while’ (female, 49, public).

Organisational interventions were more often mentioned by workers in public sector employment and in contrast to individual interventions, they were mainly primary or secondary ( Table 2 ). Most of these organisational interventions were related to management practices ( n = 35/51). In particular, participants mentioned efforts to develop a management style that was supportive and improved communication, as well as frequent team meetings and supervision and two-way feedback.

‘[The manager is] one of those people that make you feel appreciated, even if it's a little thing she will praise you for it. A lot goes for being praised, that in itself can take away stress. If someone turns around and says what you are doing is a fantastic job you feel good’ (female, 52, public).

A supportive organisational and team culture, a collective spirit including dialogue in groups and space for discussion, and educational and training courses to improve management skills were frequently reported as effective interventions to manage stress at work ( n = 27/51).

‘ … it's good that we all sit down together and discuss anything that may be causing a problem or tension, or anything we feel needs to be adjusted’ (female, 27, public).

Flexibility in working hours, well-planned shifts and environmental or structural interventions such as a staff room for relaxation were mentioned by almost a third of the participants as effective ways of managing work stress. Participants working in private sector organisations rarely report the existence of any interventions related to work structure (e.g. flexibility in work times), whereas in the public sector there was evidence of trying to introduce more flexibility.

‘ … time off in lieu […] seems to work quite well 'cos it's about that work–life balance’ (female, 54, public).

Almost half of participants ( n = 22) said training and career development opportunities in the workplace were effective for managing work-related stress, as they made them feel adequately informed and valued. Appropriate training and adequate equipment and resources allowed employees to perform their roles effectively. A small number of interviewees ( n = 3) suggested training in stress management was a useful intervention.

‘[My manager] is very good at sending people on training courses. I've just been on one which is positive interactions, which was telling you the right way of dealing with situations’ (female, 52, public).

Finally, a small number of participants ( n = 9/51) reported that there were a number of health promotion interventions (e.g. courses, exercise) at their workplace to help them prevent work stress. Participants thought that being subsidised for gym membership or being encouraged by their organisation to exercise during their working day were very effective interventions. None of the participants working for NGOs mentioned health promotion.

‘ … we're quite actively encouraged to do lots of exercise in this trust, we get lots of emails about walking to work, or running … I think linking exercise and well-being and being healthy at work […] I think that's always good, it would be good to have that in every institution’ (female, 28, public).

Personal interventions to manage work stress

Participants were asked general questions about their personal strategies to manage work stress. We were interested in personal interventions not provided by their employers but ones that were used and considered effective.

Table 3 shows the types of personal interventions used at work. Some interventions helped employees process stressful thoughts and think through difficult situations, akin to what CBT therapists might suggest as cognitive restructuring and tackling cognitive distortions – for example, focusing on positive rather than stressful situations, and using self-reflection to gain a better perspective.

Effective personal interventions to manage stress at work (total number of respondents: 51)

‘Yeah, yeah or if something happens I try and think, erm, so there's another technique I learnt in the last place I worked at was five questions so I ask, the why questions five times, why this? why is it causing stress? … because of this, why is that? Why is that? And I usually get to the root cause and that usually chills me out a bit if I deal with the root cause rather than the thing causing me the stress’ (male, 30, public).

Support from colleagues and friends was the most frequently reported personal intervention for managing stress at work.

‘I actually had to say to a colleague, “I can't see the wood for the trees here, can you help me?” and the colleague was absolutely brilliant and helped me so we got through it. I got some excellent help from a colleague yeah and that was someone I worked with in the team who does the same job as me. My manager was very supportive and helpful as well’ (male, 41, private).

Keeping oneself organised and maintaining a structured schedule at work were thought to be very effective personal interventions. These included planning, reducing overtime, prioritising tasks and keeping a better balance between work and personal life.

‘One of the signals for me is if my desk starts getting a bit messy, it means I'm chasing between too many projects and that's often the time when I personally just take stock, think, right, what do I need to do, look at a priority list, clear the decks again and sort of take a bit of a step back and review. So that's how I manage it and I find that to be helpful for me’ (male, 47, public).

Almost half of the participants ( n = 24) pointed out the importance of a healthy lifestyle when trying to manage stress at work. In particular, exercise was the most frequently reported personal intervention. Participants also acknowledge the importance of healthy eating as a means of maintaining a healthy weight and better health in general, both of which helped people to better manage stress at work.

‘Exercise is the most important thing for me for stress. So yeah, if I'm stressed, as long as I can, I'll often leave work at a decent time and go for a run and come back to work or go take my computer home and go for a swim and then do some more work. As long as I can make sure I can get some exercise in then I'm fine. It kinda works quite good 'cause I can generally take a longer lunch break and go to the gym at lunch and then, you know, work later or whatever it is. That's probably the most important flexibility for me at work is being able to have that’ (female, 32, private).

Finally, having out-of-work interests and leisure activities was reported by more than half of the participants ( n = 31). For example, participants mentioned relaxation during lunch breaks and going on holidays as an effective personal intervention.

‘We do get inspired by going to talks and design galleries and illustration events and all that sort of thing, they're hobbies as much as they are a career but, at the same time, I think that, in a way, [this] helps to alleviate the stress levels at work because what you're doing at work is part of your hobby as well’ (male, 30, private).

A mixture of personal, organisational and individual interventions were reported in our study, but these are not often captured together, with emphasis often being given to workplace changes or separate public health approaches to lifestyle and physical activity. 28 – 30 The majority of individual and organisational interventions reported were secondary and tertiary preventive interventions, with less emphasis on primary prevention.

High-demand and low-control situations and effort–reward imbalance related to working conditions, management style and the type of job were causing distress at work. 12 , 31 , 32 It is also important to address management practices as one of the most significant and consistent work-related stressors. Management practice as a stressor was also more prominent in private and NGO sectors than in the public sector and in middle and low management positions than in higher management ones. Participants identified poor communication with management, unfair treatment and, above all, the feeling of not being appreciated as the biggest sources of stress for them. Furthermore, many participants highlighted working conditions, such as physical environment, unsociable working hours and under-staffing, as causes of their work stress, the harmful effects of which have been identified in previous research. 18 , 33 Financial factors, mainly a lack of financial recognition by the organisation, were also reported as a cause of stress. According to Stranks, 11 when workers experience insufficient rewards in the form of salary or amount of praise received, or are missing recognition, the feeling of devaluation might appear and can contribute to an experience of work stress.

Interventions used by employees to manage stress at work: perceived effectiveness

Participants in the present study tended to report mainly the presence of primary and secondary organisational interventions (as opposed to individual interventions) at their workplace. With regard to individual approaches, these were mainly psychological interventions. Although there is much research that has documented the effectiveness of psychological interventions, these are usually provided at the secondary or tertiary level rather than for primary prevention. 34 – 36

Organisational interventions were discussed by the participants more frequently and were also more often perceived as effective in managing stress at work than individual interventions. One of the main reasons that organisational interventions were identified as an effective way of managing stress was because they were primary interventions with the aim to modify or eliminate environmental stressors. Participants in the present study identified the organisational interventions to manage stress at work as: job redesign, change of organisational culture, encouragement of participative management, introduction of work–life balance policies, flexible working and reconstruction of the organisation as well as improvement of organisational communications. 11 The literature on organisational interventions does not identify management practices as an intervention. The main reason may stem from the fact that management is seen as part of organisational structures rather than as potentially subject to modification to manage stress. Our findings highlighted management practices as an important workplace intervention, especially management characteristics such as open communication, supportiveness, approachability and being appreciative; these ranked the highest in terms of perceived effectiveness. Improving management practices as an intervention and introducing flexibility in working structures were much more apparent in the public sector as opposed to the private sector and the NGOs. Content analysis suggested that there may be a relationship between reported causes of stress and individual and organisational interventions. For example, stress was less often reported in the public sector because there were more management interventions than in other sectors, and these were perceived to be effective by the participants.

Most personal interventions identified by participants were related to health behaviours such as exercise, meditation and healthy eating, as well as leisure activities and social support from family and colleagues. Although personal interventions outside the workplace were not considered by the organisations, it is important to emphasise the power of such interventions and that they should be included in future intervention packages. For example, physical activity programmes have been among the few organisational interventions that show convincing effects on absenteeism in accord with our previous reviews, but physical activity could be encouraged more generally. 24 , 30 By adapting organisational interventions to capitalise on and encourage personal individual interventions outside the workplace, stress management in the workplace may be less necessary or more effective where it is needed.

Strengths and limitations

The results suggest that employees in private organisations and NGOs report more perceived causes of stress and have fewer interventions in place to help employees manage stress compared with public sector organisations, notably National Health Service (NHS) employers. We have listed potential organisational, individual and personal interventions that were used and found to be helpful. These might be tested as correlates of better workforce health and well-being and less work stress.

A limitation of the study was related to the sample characteristics. Although there were variations, especially with regard to type, size and location of the organisations involved, the sample consisted of only 12 organisations in total. A larger number of organisations would have provided us with more variety of occupations and organisation size and location, which would have given a more complete picture concerning the causes of stress and interventions between sectors. Our study is exploratory, and although these are perceived causes, the findings should not be understood in terms of epidemiological causal relationships, but rather as important ways in which workers think about and manage work stress, providing clues as to how interventions might be developed, tested and located in these work settings.

Qualitative studies offer new insights and provide the in-depth and experience-near perspectives of participants, rather than an overtheorised and superficial analysis. The findings will contribute to future in-depth work including more varied samples, as well as survey research to test for interventions that correlate with organisational measures of health and well-being. Future work should also consider how to improve management practices, as these seemed to have the most important influence on reducing work stress. More research is needed to further explore the differences between private, public and NGO sectors and different job types such as education and healthcare to examine whether they respond to the same or different intervention techniques. Finally, research needs to take into account compositional effects including the demographic characteristics of samples, and the cost effectiveness of interventions.

Topic guide

General questions to start the interview

• How do you find your job with regard to demands, pressure, working hours, etc.?
• Are there any elements in your job that you find stressful?
• What are the common organisational factors that can cause stress at work?
• What are the common individual factors that can cause stress at work?

Managing stress at work (both managing yourself and other people)

• If you manage other people, how do you manage stress?
• How do you manage other people's stress at work?
• How do you deal with this?
• What were/are the challenges?
• Can you give any examples?

Managing return to work (managing both yourself and other people)

• How do you manage your return to work after sickness?
• How do/did you manage their return to work after sickness?
• If no experience, how would you manage their return to work?

Policies: managing stress at work and return to work

• How has this policy been put together?
• How effective is it in practice?
• What are the strong and weak points of this policy, if any? Or
• How (in what ways) would you change this policy?
• 12. What would you say are the best (individual and organisational) policies for managing employee stress?
• 13. What would you say are the best (individual and organisational) policies for managing employee return to work after sickness absence?

Declaration of interest None.

• Tools and Resources
• Customer Services
• Affective Science
• Biological Foundations of Psychology
• Clinical Psychology: Disorders and Therapies
• Cognitive Psychology/Neuroscience
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational/School Psychology
• Forensic Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems of Psychology
• Individual Differences
• Methods and Approaches in Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational and Institutional Psychology
• Personality
• Psychology and Other Disciplines
• Social Psychology
• Sports Psychology
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

Work, stress, coping, and stress management.

• Sharon Glazer Sharon Glazer University of Baltimore
•  and  Cong Liu Cong Liu Hofstra University
• https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.30
• Published online: 26 April 2017

Work stress refers to the process of job stressors, or stimuli in the workplace, leading to strains, or negative responses or reactions. Organizational development refers to a process in which problems or opportunities in the work environment are identified, plans are made to remediate or capitalize on the stimuli, action is taken, and subsequently the results of the plans and actions are evaluated. When organizational development strategies are used to assess work stress in the workplace, the actions employed are various stress management interventions. Two key factors tying work stress and organizational development are the role of the person and the role of the environment. In order to cope with work-related stressors and manage strains, organizations must be able to identify and differentiate between factors in the environment that are potential sources of stressors and how individuals perceive those factors. Primary stress management interventions focus on preventing stressors from even presenting, such as by clearly articulating workers’ roles and providing necessary resources for employees to perform their job. Secondary stress management interventions focus on a person’s appraisal of job stressors as a threat or challenge, and the person’s ability to cope with the stressors (presuming sufficient internal resources, such as a sense of meaningfulness in life, or external resources, such as social support from a supervisor). When coping is not successful, strains may develop. Tertiary stress management interventions attempt to remediate strains, by addressing the consequence itself (e.g., diabetes management) and/or the source of the strain (e.g., reducing workload). The person and/or the organization may be the targets of the intervention. The ultimate goal of stress management interventions is to minimize problems in the work environment, intensify aspects of the work environment that create a sense of a quality work context, enable people to cope with stressors that might arise, and provide tools for employees and organizations to manage strains that might develop despite all best efforts to create a healthy workplace.

• stress management
• organization development
• organizational interventions
• stress theories and frameworks

Introduction

Work stress is a generic term that refers to work-related stimuli (aka job stressors) that may lead to physical, behavioral, or psychological consequences (i.e., strains) that affect both the health and well-being of the employee and the organization. Not all stressors lead to strains, but all strains are a result of stressors, actual or perceived. Common terms often used interchangeably with work stress are occupational stress, job stress, and work-related stress. Terms used interchangeably with job stressors include work stressors, and as the specificity of the type of stressor might include psychosocial stressor (referring to the psychological experience of work demands that have a social component, e.g., conflict between two people; Hauke, Flintrop, Brun, & Rugulies, 2011 ), hindrance stressor (i.e., a stressor that prevents goal attainment; Cavanaugh, Boswell, Roehling, & Boudreau, 2000 ), and challenge stressor (i.e., a stressor that is difficult, but attainable and possibly rewarding to attain; Cavanaugh et al., 2000 ).

Stress in the workplace continues to be a highly pervasive problem, having both direct negative effects on individuals experiencing it and companies paying for it, and indirect costs vis à vis lost productivity (Dopkeen & DuBois, 2014 ). For example, U.K. public civil servants’ work-related stress rose from 10.8% in 2006 to 22.4% in 2013 and about one-third of the workforce has taken more than 20 days of leave due to stress-related ill-health, while well over 50% are present at work when ill (French, 2015 ). These findings are consistent with a report by the International Labor Organization (ILO, 2012 ), whereby 50% to 60% of all workdays are lost due to absence attributed to factors associated with work stress.

The prevalence of work-related stress is not diminishing despite improvements in technology and employment rates. The sources of stress, such as workload, seem to exacerbate with improvements in technology (Coovert & Thompson, 2003 ). Moreover, accessibility through mobile technology and virtual computer terminals is linking people to their work more than ever before (ILO, 2012 ; Tarafdar, Tu, Ragu-Nathan, & Ragu-Nathan, 2007 ). Evidence of this kind of mobility and flexibility is further reinforced in a June 2007 survey of 4,025 email users (over 13 years of age); AOL reported that four in ten survey respondents reported planning their vacations around email accessibility and 83% checked their emails at least once a day while away (McMahon, 2007 ). Ironically, despite these mounting work-related stressors and clear financial and performance outcomes, some individuals are reporting they are less “stressed,” but only because “stress has become the new normal” (Jayson, 2012 , para. 4).

This new normal is likely the source of psychological and physiological illness. Siegrist ( 2010 ) contends that conditions in the workplace, particularly psychosocial stressors that are perceived as unfavorable relationships with others and self, and an increasingly sedentary lifestyle (reinforced with desk jobs) are increasingly contributing to cardiovascular disease. These factors together justify a need to continue on the path of helping individuals recognize and cope with deleterious stressors in the work environment and, equally important, to find ways to help organizations prevent harmful stressors over which they have control, as well as implement policies or mechanisms to help employees deal with these stressors and subsequent strains. Along with a greater focus on mitigating environmental constraints are interventions that can be used to prevent anxiety, poor attitudes toward the workplace conditions and arrangements, and subsequent cardiovascular illness, absenteeism, and poor job performance (Siegrist, 2010 ).

Even the ILO has presented guidance on how the workplace can help prevent harmful job stressors (aka hindrance stressors) or at least help workers cope with them. Consistent with the view that well-being is not the absence of stressors or strains and with the view that positive psychology offers a lens for proactively preventing stressors, the ILO promotes increasing preventative risk assessments, interventions to prevent and control stressors, transparent organizational communication, worker involvement in decision-making, networks and mechanisms for workplace social support, awareness of how working and living conditions interact, safety, health, and well-being in the organization (ILO, n.d. ). The field of industrial and organizational (IO) psychology supports the ILO’s recommendations.

IO psychology views work stress as the process of a person’s interaction with multiple aspects of the work environment, job design, and work conditions in the organization. Interventions to manage work stress, therefore, focus on the psychosocial factors of the person and his or her relationships with others and the socio-technical factors related to the work environment and work processes. Viewing work stress from the lens of the person and the environment stems from Kurt Lewin’s ( 1936 ) work that stipulates a person’s state of mental health and behaviors are a function of the person within a specific environment or situation. Aspects of the work environment that affect individuals’ mental states and behaviors include organizational hierarchy, organizational climate (including processes, policies, practices, and reward structures), resources to support a person’s ability to fulfill job duties, and management structure (including leadership). Job design refers to each contributor’s tasks and responsibilities for fulfilling goals associated with the work role. Finally, working conditions refers not only to the physical environment, but also the interpersonal relationships with other contributors.

Each of the conditions that are identified in the work environment may be perceived as potentially harmful or a threat to the person or as an opportunity. When a stressor is perceived as a threat to attaining desired goals or outcomes, the stressor may be labeled as a hindrance stressor (e.g., LePine, Podsakoff, & Lepine, 2005 ). When the stressor is perceived as an opportunity to attain a desired goal or end state, it may be labeled as a challenge stressor. According to LePine and colleagues’ ( 2005 ), both challenge (e.g., time urgency, workload) and hindrance (e.g., hassles, role ambiguity, role conflict) stressors could lead to strains (as measured by “anxiety, depersonalization, depression, emotional exhaustion, frustration, health complaints, hostility, illness, physical symptoms, and tension” [p. 767]). However, challenge stressors positively relate with motivation and performance, whereas hindrance stressors negatively relate with motivation and performance. Moreover, motivation and strains partially mediate the relationship between hindrance and challenge stressors with performance.

Figure 1. Organizational development frameworks to guide identification of work stress and interventions.

In order to (1) minimize any potential negative effects from stressors, (2) increase coping skills to deal with stressors, or (3) manage strains, organizational practitioners or consultants will devise organizational interventions geared toward prevention, coping, and/or stress management. Ultimately, toxic factors in the work environment can have deleterious effects on a person’s physical and psychological well-being, as well as on an organization’s total health. It behooves management to take stock of the organization’s health, which includes the health and well-being of its employees, if the organization wishes to thrive and be profitable. According to Page and Vella-Brodrick’s ( 2009 ) model of employee well-being, employee well-being results from subjective well-being (i.e., life satisfaction and general positive or negative affect), workplace well-being (composed of job satisfaction and work-specific positive or negative affect), and psychological well-being (e.g., self-acceptance, positive social relations, mastery, purpose in life). Job stressors that become unbearable are likely to negatively affect workplace well-being and thus overall employee well-being. Because work stress is a major organizational pain point and organizations often employ organizational consultants to help identify and remediate pain points, the focus here is on organizational development (OD) frameworks; several work stress frameworks are presented that together signal areas where organizations might focus efforts for change in employee behaviors, attitudes, and performance, as well as the organization’s performance and climate. Work stress, interventions, and several OD and stress frameworks are depicted in Figure 1 .

The goals are: (1) to conceptually define and clarify terms associated with stress and stress management, particularly focusing on organizational factors that contribute to stress and stress management, and (2) to present research that informs current knowledge and practices on workplace stress management strategies. Stressors and strains will be defined, leading OD and work stress frameworks that are used to organize and help organizations make sense of the work environment and the organization’s responsibility in stress management will be explored, and stress management will be explained as an overarching thematic label; an area of study and practice that focuses on prevention (primary) interventions, coping (secondary) interventions, and managing strains (tertiary) interventions; as well as the label typically used to denote tertiary interventions. Suggestions for future research and implications toward becoming a healthy organization are presented.

Defining Stressors and Strains

Work-related stressors or job stressors can lead to different kinds of strains individuals and organizations might experience. Various types of stress management interventions, guided by OD and work stress frameworks, may be employed to prevent or cope with job stressors and manage strains that develop(ed).

A job stressor is a stimulus external to an employee and a result of an employee’s work conditions. Example job stressors include organizational constraints, workplace mistreatments (such as abusive supervision, workplace ostracism, incivility, bullying), role stressors, workload, work-family conflicts, errors or mistakes, examinations and evaluations, and lack of structure (Jex & Beehr, 1991 ; Liu, Spector, & Shi, 2007 ; Narayanan, Menon, & Spector, 1999 ). Although stressors may be categorized as hindrances and challenges, there is not yet sufficient information to be able to propose which stress management interventions would better serve to reduce those hindrance stressors or to reduce strain-producing challenge stressors while reinforcing engagement-producing challenge stressors.

Organizational Constraints

Organizational constraints may be hindrance stressors as they prevent employees from translating their motivation and ability into high-level job performance (Peters & O’Connor, 1980 ). Peters and O’Connor ( 1988 ) defined 11 categories of organizational constraints: (1) job-related information, (2) budgetary support, (3) required support, (4) materials and supplies, (5) required services and help from others, (6) task preparation, (7) time availability, (8) the work environment, (9) scheduling of activities, (10) transportation, and (11) job-relevant authority. The inhibiting effect of organizational constraints may be due to the lack of, inadequacy of, or poor quality of these categories.

Workplace Mistreatment

Workplace mistreatment presents a cluster of interpersonal variables, such as interpersonal conflict, bullying, incivility, and workplace ostracism (Hershcovis, 2011 ; Tepper & Henle, 2011 ). Typical workplace mistreatment behaviors include gossiping, rude comments, showing favoritism, yelling, lying, and ignoring other people at work (Tepper & Henle, 2011 ). These variables relate to employees’ psychological well-being, physical well-being, work attitudes (e.g., job satisfaction and organizational commitment), and turnover intention (e.g., Hershcovis, 2011 ; Spector & Jex, 1998 ). Some researchers differentiated the source of mistreatment, such as mistreatment from one’s supervisor versus mistreatment from one’s coworker (e.g., Bruk-Lee & Spector, 2006 ; Frone, 2000 ; Liu, Liu, Spector, & Shi, 2011 ).

Role Stressors

Role stressors are demands, constraints, or opportunities a person perceives to be associated, and thus expected, with his or her work role(s) across various situations. Three commonly studied role stressors are role ambiguity, role conflict, and role overload (Glazer & Beehr, 2005 ; Kahn, Wolfe, Quinn, Snoek, & Rosenthal, 1964 ). Role ambiguity in the workplace occurs when an employee lacks clarity regarding what performance-related behaviors are expected of him or her. Role conflict refers to situations wherein an employee receives incompatible role requests from the same or different supervisors or the employee is asked to engage in work that impedes his or her performance in other work or nonwork roles or clashes with his or her values. Role overload refers to excessive demands and insufficient time (quantitative) or knowledge (qualitative) to complete the work. The construct is often used interchangeably with workload, though role overload focuses more on perceived expectations from others about one’s workload. These role stressors significantly relate to low job satisfaction, low organizational commitment, low job performance, high tension or anxiety, and high turnover intention (Abramis, 1994 ; Glazer & Beehr, 2005 ; Jackson & Schuler, 1985 ).

Excessive workload is one of the most salient stressors at work (e.g., Liu et al., 2007 ). There are two types of workload: quantitative and qualitative workload (LaRocco, Tetrick, & Meder, 1989 ; Parasuraman & Purohit, 2000 ). Quantitative workload refers to the excessive amount of work one has. In a summary of a Chartered Institute of Personnel & Development Report from 2006 , Dewe and Kompier ( 2008 ) noted that quantitative workload was one of the top three stressors workers experienced at work. Qualitative workload refers to the difficulty of work. Workload also differs by the type of the load. There are mental workload and physical workload (Dwyer & Ganster, 1991 ). Excessive physical workload may result in physical discomfort or illness. Excessive mental workload will cause psychological distress such as anxiety or frustration (Bowling & Kirkendall, 2012 ). Another factor affecting quantitative workload is interruptions (during the workday). Lin, Kain, and Fritz ( 2013 ) found that interruptions delay completion of job tasks, thus adding to the perception of workload.

Work-Family Conflict

Work-family conflict is a form of inter-role conflict in which demands from one’s work domain and one’s family domain are incompatible to some extent (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985 ). Work can interfere with family (WIF) and/or family can interfere with work (FIW) due to time-related commitments to participating in one domain or another, incompatible behavioral expectations, or when strains in one domain carry over to the other (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985 ). Work-family conflict significantly relates to work-related outcomes (e.g., job satisfaction, organizational commitment, turnover intention, burnout, absenteeism, job performance, job strains, career satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors), family-related outcomes (e.g., marital satisfaction, family satisfaction, family-related performance, family-related strains), and domain-unspecific outcomes (e.g., life satisfaction, psychological strain, somatic or physical symptoms, depression, substance use or abuse, and anxiety; Amstad, Meier, Fasel, Elfering, & Semmer, 2011 ).

Individuals and organizations can experience work-related strains. Sometimes organizations will experience strains through the employee’s negative attitudes or strains, such as that a worker’s absence might yield lower production rates, which would roll up into an organizational metric of organizational performance. In the industrial and organizational (IO) psychology literature, organizational strains are mostly observed as macro-level indicators, such as health insurance costs, accident-free days, and pervasive problems with company morale. In contrast, individual strains, usually referred to as job strains, are internal to an employee. They are responses to work conditions and relate to health and well-being of employees. In other words, “job strains are adverse reactions employees have to job stressors” (Spector, Chen, & O’Connell, 2000 , p. 211). Job strains tend to fall into three categories: behavioral, physical, and psychological (Jex & Beehr, 1991 ).

Behavioral strains consist of actions that employees take in response to job stressors. Examples of behavioral strains include employees drinking alcohol in the workplace or intentionally calling in sick when they are not ill (Spector et al., 2000 ). Physical strains consist of health symptoms that are physiological in nature that employees contract in response to job stressors. Headaches and ulcers are examples of physical strains. Lastly, psychological strains are emotional reactions and attitudes that employees have in response to job stressors. Examples of psychological strains are job dissatisfaction, anxiety, and frustration (Spector et al., 2000 ). Interestingly, research studies that utilize self-report measures find that most job strains experienced by employees tend to be psychological strains (Spector et al., 2000 ).

Leading Frameworks

Organizations that are keen on identifying organizational pain points and remedying them through organizational campaigns or initiatives often discover the pain points are rooted in work-related stressors and strains and the initiatives have to focus on reducing workers’ stress and increasing a company’s profitability. Through organizational climate surveys, for example, companies discover that aspects of the organization’s environment, including its policies, practices, reward structures, procedures, and processes, as well as employees at all levels of the company, are contributing to the individual and organizational stress. Recent studies have even begun to examine team climates for eustress and distress assessed in terms of team members’ homogenous psychological experience of vigor, efficacy, dedication, and cynicism (e.g., Kożusznik, Rodriguez, & Peiro, 2015 ).

Each of the frameworks presented advances different aspects that need to be identified in order to understand the source and potential remedy for stressors and strains. In some models, the focus is on resources, in others on the interaction of the person and environment, and in still others on the role of the person in the workplace. Few frameworks directly examine the role of the organization, but the organization could use these frameworks to plan interventions that would minimize stressors, cope with existing stressors, and prevent and/or manage strains. One of the leading frameworks in work stress research that is used to guide organizational interventions is the person and environment (P-E) fit (French & Caplan, 1972 ). Its precursor is the University of Michigan Institute for Social Research’s (ISR) role stress model (Kahn, Wolfe, Quinn, Snoek, & Rosenthal, 1964 ) and Lewin’s Field Theory. Several other theories have since evolved from the P-E fit framework, including Karasek and Theorell’s ( 1990 ), Karasek ( 1979 ) Job Demands-Control Model (JD-C), the transactional framework (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984 ), Conservation of Resources (COR) theory (Hobfoll, 1989 ), and Siegrist’s ( 1996 ) Effort-Reward Imbalance (ERI) Model.

Field Theory

The premise of Kahn et al.’s ( 1964 ) role stress theory is Lewin’s ( 1997 ) Field Theory. Lewin purported that behavior and mental events are a dynamic function of the whole person, including a person’s beliefs, values, abilities, needs, thoughts, and feelings, within a given situation (field or environment), as well as the way a person represents his or her understanding of the field and behaves in that space. Lewin explains that work-related strains are a result of individuals’ subjective perceptions of objective factors, such as work roles, relationships with others in the workplace, as well as personality indicators, and can be used to predict people’s reactions, including illness. Thus, to make changes to an organizational system, it is necessary to understand a field and try to move that field from the current state to the desired state. Making this move necessitates identifying mechanisms influencing individuals.

Role Stress Theory

Role stress theory mostly isolates the perspective a person has about his or her work-related responsibilities and expectations to determine how those perceptions relate with a person’s work-related strains. However, those relationships have been met with somewhat varied results, which Glazer and Beehr ( 2005 ) concluded might be a function of differences in culture, an environmental factor often neglected in research. Kahn et al.’s ( 1964 ) role stress theory, coupled with Lewin’s ( 1936 ) Field Theory, serves as the foundation for the P-E fit theory. Lewin ( 1936 ) wrote, “Every psychological event depends upon the state of the person and at the same time on the environment” (p. 12). Researchers of IO psychology have narrowed the environment to the organization or work team. This narrowed view of the organizational environment is evident in French and Caplan’s ( 1972 ) P-E fit framework.

Person-Environment Fit Theory

The P-E fit framework focuses on the extent to which there is congruence between the person and a given environment, such as the organization (Caplan, 1987 ; Edwards, 2008 ). For example, does the person have the necessary skills and abilities to fulfill an organization’s demands, or does the environment support a person’s desire for autonomy (i.e., do the values align?) or fulfill a person’s needs (i.e., a person’s needs are rewarded). Theoretically and empirically, the greater the person-organization fit, the greater a person’s job satisfaction and organizational commitment, the less a person’s turnover intention and work-related stress (see meta-analyses by Assouline & Meir, 1987 ; Kristof-Brown, Zimmerman, & Johnson, 2005 ; Verquer, Beehr, & Wagner, 2003 ).

Job Demands-Control/Support (JD-C/S) and Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) Model

Focusing more closely on concrete aspects of work demands and the extent to which a person perceives he or she has control or decision latitude over those demands, Karasek ( 1979 ) developed the JD-C model. Karasek and Theorell ( 1990 ) posited that high job demands under conditions of little decision latitude or control yield high strains, which have varied implications on the health of an organization (e.g., in terms of high turnover, employee ill-health, poor organizational performance). This theory was modified slightly to address not only control, but also other resources that could protect a person from unruly job demands, including support (aka JD-C/S, Johnson & Hall, 1988 ; and JD-R, Bakker, van Veldhoven, & Xanthopoulou, 2010 ). Whether focusing on control or resources, both they and job demands are said to reflect workplace characteristics, while control and resources also represent coping strategies or tools (Siegrist, 2010 ).

Despite the glut of research testing the JD-C and JD-R, results are somewhat mixed. Testing the interaction between job demands and control, Beehr, Glaser, Canali, and Wallwey ( 2001 ) did not find empirical support for the JD-C theory. However, Dawson, O’Brien, and Beehr ( 2016 ) found that high control and high support buffered against the independent deleterious effects of interpersonal conflict, role conflict, and organizational politics (demands that were categorized as hindrance stressors) on anxiety, as well as the effects of interpersonal conflict and organizational politics on physiological symptoms, but control and support did not moderate the effects between challenge stressors and strains. Coupled with Bakker, Demerouti, and Sanz-Vergel’s ( 2014 ) note that excessive job demands are a source of strain, but increased job resources are a source of engagement, Dawson et al.’s results suggest that when an organization identifies that demands are hindrances, it can create strategies for primary (preventative) stress management interventions and attempt to remove or reduce such work demands. If the demands are challenging, though manageable, but latitude to control the challenging stressors and support are insufficient, the organization could modify practices and train employees on adopting better strategies for meeting or coping (secondary stress management intervention) with the demands. Finally, if the organization can neither afford to modify the demands or the level of control and support, it will be necessary for the organization to develop stress management (tertiary) interventions to deal with the inevitable strains.

Conservation of Resources Theory

The idea that job resources reinforce engagement in work has been propagated in Hobfoll’s ( 1989 ) Conservation of Resources (COR) theory. COR theory also draws on the foundational premise that people’s mental health is a function of the person and the environment, forwarding that how people interpret their environment (including the societal context) affects their stress levels. Hobfoll focuses on resources such as objects, personal characteristics, conditions, or energies as particularly instrumental to minimizing strains. He asserts that people do whatever they can to protect their valued resources. Thus, strains develop when resources are threatened to be taken away, actually taken away, or when additional resources are not attainable after investing in the possibility of gaining more resources (Hobfoll, 2001 ). By extension, organizations can invest in activities that would minimize resource loss and create opportunities for resource gains and thus have direct implications for devising primary and secondary stress management interventions.

Transactional Framework

Lazarus and Folkman ( 1984 ) developed the widely studied transactional framework of stress. This framework holds as a key component the cognitive appraisal process. When individuals perceive factors in the work environment as a threat (i.e., primary appraisal), they will scan the available resources (external or internal to himself or herself) to cope with the stressors (i.e., secondary appraisal). If the coping resources provide minimal relief, strains develop. Until recently, little attention has been given to the cognitive appraisal associated with different work stressors (Dewe & Kompier, 2008 ; Liu & Li, 2017 ). In a study of Polish and Spanish social care service providers, stressors appraised as a threat related positively to burnout and less engagement, but stressors perceived as challenges yielded greater engagement and less burnout (Kożusznik, Rodriguez, & Peiro, 2012 ). Similarly, Dawson et al. ( 2016 ) found that even with support and control resources, hindrance demands were more strain-producing than challenge demands, suggesting that appraisal of the stressor is important. In fact, “many people respond well to challenging work” (Beehr et al., 2001 , p. 126). Kożusznik et al. ( 2012 ) recommend training employees to change the way they view work demands in order to increase engagement, considering that part of the problem may be about how the person appraises his or her environment and, thus, copes with the stressors.

Effort-Reward Imbalance

Siegrist’s ( 1996 ) Model of Effort-Reward Imbalance (ERI) focuses on the notion of social reciprocity, such that a person fulfills required work tasks in exchange for desired rewards (Siegrist, 2010 ). ERI sheds light on how an imbalance in a person’s expectations of an organization’s rewards (e.g., pay, bonus, sense of advancement and development, job security) in exchange for a person’s efforts, that is a break in one’s work contract, leads to negative responses, including long-term ill-health (Siegrist, 2010 ; Siegrist et al., 2014 ). In fact, prolonged perception of a work contract imbalance leads to adverse health, including immunological problems and inflammation, which contribute to cardiovascular disease (Siegrist, 2010 ). The model resembles the relational and interactional psychological contract theory in that it describes an employee’s perception of the terms of the relationship between the person and the workplace, including expectations of performance, job security, training and development opportunities, career progression, salary, and bonuses (Thomas, Au, & Ravlin, 2003 ). The psychological contract, like the ERI model, focuses on social exchange. Furthermore, the psychological contract, like stress theories, are influenced by cultural factors that shape how people interpret their environments (Glazer, 2008 ; Thomas et al., 2003 ). Violations of the psychological contract will negatively affect a person’s attitudes toward the workplace and subsequent health and well-being (Siegrist, 2010 ). To remediate strain, Siegrist ( 2010 ) focuses on both the person and the environment, recognizing that the organization is particularly responsible for changing unfavorable work conditions and the person is responsible for modifying his or her reactions to such conditions.

Stress Management Interventions: Primary, Secondary, and Tertiary

Remediation of work stress and organizational development interventions are about realigning the employee’s experiences in the workplace with factors in the environment, as well as closing the gap between the current environment and the desired environment. Work stress develops when an employee perceives the work demands to exceed the person’s resources to cope and thus threatens employee well-being (Dewe & Kompier, 2008 ). Likewise, an organization’s need to change arises when forces in the environment are creating a need to change in order to survive (see Figure 1 ). Lewin’s ( 1951 ) Force Field Analysis, the foundations of which are in Field Theory, is one of the first organizational development intervention tools presented in the social science literature. The concept behind Force Field Analysis is that in order to survive, organizations must adapt to environmental forces driving a need for organizational change and remove restraining forces that create obstacles to organizational change. In order to do this, management needs to delineate the current field in which the organization is functioning, understand the driving forces for change, identify and dampen or eliminate the restraining forces against change. Several models for analyses may be applied, but most approaches are variations of organizational climate surveys.

Through organizational surveys, workers provide management with a snapshot view of how they perceive aspects of their work environment. Thus, the view of the health of an organization is a function of several factors, chief among them employees’ views (i.e., the climate) about the workplace (Lewin, 1951 ). Indeed, French and Kahn ( 1962 ) posited that well-being depends on the extent to which properties of the person and properties of the environment align in terms of what a person requires and the resources available in a given environment. Therefore, only when properties of the person and properties of the environment are sufficiently understood can plans for change be developed and implemented targeting the environment (e.g., change reporting structures to relieve, and thus prevent future, communication stressors) and/or the person (e.g., providing more autonomy, vacation days, training on new technology). In short, climate survey findings can guide consultants about the emphasis for organizational interventions: before a problem arises aka stress prevention, e.g., carefully crafting job roles), when a problem is present, but steps are taken to mitigate their consequences (aka coping, e.g., providing social support groups), and/or once strains develop (aka. stress management, e.g., healthcare management policies).

For each of the primary (prevention), secondary (coping), and tertiary (stress management) techniques the target for intervention can be the entire workforce, a subset of the workforce, or a specific person. Interventions that target the entire workforce may be considered organizational interventions, as they have direct implications on the health of all individuals and consequently the health of the organization. Several interventions categorized as primary and secondary interventions may also be implemented after strains have developed and after it has been discerned that a person or the organization did not do enough to mitigate stressors or strains (see Figure 1 ). The designation of many of the interventions as belonging to one category or another may be viewed as merely a suggestion.

Primary Interventions (Preventative Stress Management)

Before individuals begin to perceive work-related stressors, organizations engage in stress prevention strategies, such as providing people with resources (e.g., computers, printers, desk space, information about the job role, organizational reporting structures) to do their jobs. However, sometimes the institutional structures and resources are insufficient or ambiguous. Scholars and practitioners have identified several preventative stress management strategies that may be implemented.

Planning and Time Management

When employees feel quantitatively overloaded, sometimes the remedy is improving the employees’ abilities to plan and manage their time (Quick, Quick, Nelson, & Hurrell, 2003 ). Planning is a future-oriented activity that focuses on conceptual and comprehensive work goals. Time management is a behavior that focuses on organizing, prioritizing, and scheduling work activities to achieve short-term goals. Given the purpose of time management, it is considered a primary intervention, as engaging in time management helps to prevent work tasks from mounting and becoming unmanageable, which would subsequently lead to adverse outcomes. Time management comprises three fundamental components: (1) establishing goals, (2) identifying and prioritizing tasks to fulfill the goals, and (3) scheduling and monitoring progress toward goal achievement (Peeters & Rutte, 2005 ). Workers who employ time management have less role ambiguity (Macan, Shahani, Dipboye, & Philips, 1990 ), psychological stress or strain (Adams & Jex, 1999 ; Jex & Elaqua, 1999 ; Macan et al., 1990 ), and greater job satisfaction (Macan, 1994 ). However, Macan ( 1994 ) did not find a relationship between time management and performance. Still, Claessens, van Eerde, Rutte, and Roe ( 2004 ) found that perceived control of time partially mediated the relationships between planning behavior (an indicator of time management), job autonomy, and workload on one hand, and job strains, job satisfaction, and job performance on the other hand. Moreover, Peeters and Rutte ( 2005 ) observed that teachers with high work demands and low autonomy experienced more burnout when they had poor time management skills.

Person-Organization Fit

Just as it is important for organizations to find the right person for the job and organization, so is it the responsibility of a person to choose to work at the right organization—an organization that fulfills the person’s needs and upholds the values important to the individual, as much as the person fulfills the organization’s needs and adapts to its values. When people fit their employing organizations they are setting themselves up for experiencing less strain-producing stressors (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005 ). In a meta-analysis of 62 person-job fit studies and 110 person-organization fit studies, Kristof-Brown et al. ( 2005 ) found that person-job fit had a negative correlation with indicators of job strain. In fact, a primary intervention of career counseling can help to reduce stress levels (Firth-Cozens, 2003 ).

Job Redesign

The Job Demands-Control/Support (JD-C/S), Job Demands-Resources (JD-R), and transactional models all suggest that factors in the work context require modifications in order to reduce potential ill-health and poor organizational performance. Drawing on Hackman and Oldham’s ( 1980 ) Job Characteristics Model, it is possible to assess with the Job Diagnostics Survey (JDS) the current state of work characteristics related to skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, and feedback. Modifying those aspects would help create a sense of meaningfulness, sense of responsibility, and feeling of knowing how one is performing, which subsequently affects a person’s well-being as identified in assessments of motivation, satisfaction, improved performance, and reduced withdrawal intentions and behaviors. Extending this argument to the stress models, it can be deduced that reducing uncertainty or perceived unfairness that may be associated with a person’s perception of these work characteristics, as well as making changes to physical characteristics of the environment (e.g., lighting, seating, desk, air quality), nature of work (e.g., job responsibilities, roles, decision-making latitude), and organizational arrangements (e.g., reporting structure and feedback mechanisms), can help mitigate against numerous ill-health consequences and reduced organizational performance. In fact, Fried et al. ( 2013 ) showed that healthy patients of a medical clinic whose jobs were excessively low (i.e., monotonous) or excessively high (i.e., overstimulating) on job enrichment (as measured by the JDS) had greater abdominal obesity than those whose jobs were optimally enriched. By taking stock of employees’ perceptions of the current work situation, managers might think about ways to enhance employees’ coping toolkit, such as training on how to deal with difficult clients or creating stimulating opportunities when jobs have low levels of enrichment.

Participatory Action Research Interventions

Participatory action research (PAR) is an intervention wherein, through group discussions, employees help to identify and define problems in organizational structure, processes, policies, practices, and reward structures, as well as help to design, implement, and evaluate success of solutions. PAR is in itself an intervention, but its goal is to design interventions to eliminate or reduce work-related factors that are impeding performance and causing people to be unwell. An example of a successful primary intervention, utilizing principles of PAR and driven by the JD-C and JD-C/S stress frameworks is Health Circles (HCs; Aust & Ducki, 2004 ).

HCs, developed in Germany in the 1980s, were popular practices in industries, such as metal, steel, and chemical, and service. Similar to other problem-solving practices, such as quality circles, HCs were based on the assumptions that employees are the experts of their jobs. For this reason, to promote employee well-being, management and administrators solicited suggestions and ideas from the employees to improve occupational health, thereby increasing employees’ job control. HCs also promoted communication between managers and employees, which had a potential to increase social support. With more control and support, employees would experience less strains and better occupational well-being.

Employing the three-steps of (1) problem analysis (i.e., diagnosis or discovery through data generated from organizational records of absenteeism length, frequency, rate, and reason and employee survey), (2) HC meetings (6 to 10 meetings held over several months to brainstorm ideas to improve occupational safety and health concerns identified in the discovery phase), and (3) HC evaluation (to determine if desired changes were accomplished and if employees’ reports of stressors and strains changed after the course of 15 months), improvements were to be expected (Aust & Ducki, 2004 ). Aust and Ducki ( 2004 ) reviewed 11 studies presenting 81 health circles in 30 different organizations. Overall study participants had high satisfaction with the HCs practices. Most companies acted upon employees’ suggestions (e.g., improving driver’s seat and cab, reducing ticket sale during drive, team restructuring and job rotation to facilitate communication, hiring more employees during summer time, and supervisor training program to improve leadership and communication skills) to improve work conditions. Thus, HCs represent a successful theory-grounded intervention to routinely improve employees’ occupational health.

Physical Setting

The physical environment or physical workspace has an enormous impact on individuals’ well-being, attitudes, and interactions with others, as well as on the implications on innovation and well-being (Oksanen & Ståhle, 2013 ; Vischer, 2007 ). In a study of 74 new product development teams (total of 437 study respondents) in Western Europe, Chong, van Eerde, Rutte, and Chai ( 2012 ) found that when teams were faced with challenge time pressures, meaning the teams had a strong interest and desire in tackling complex, but engaging tasks, when they were working proximally close with one another, team communication improved. Chong et al. assert that their finding aligns with prior studies that have shown that physical proximity promotes increased awareness of other team members, greater tendency to initiate conversations, and greater team identification. However, they also found that when faced with hindrance time pressures, physical proximity related to low levels of team communication, but when hindrance time pressure was low, team proximity had an increasingly greater positive relationship with team communication.

In addition to considering the type of work demand teams must address, other physical workspace considerations include whether people need to work collaboratively and synchronously or independently and remotely (or a combination thereof). Consideration needs to be given to how company contributors would satisfy client needs through various modes of communication, such as email vs. telephone, and whether individuals who work by a window might need shading to block bright sunlight from glaring on their computer screens. Finally, people who have to use the telephone for extensive periods of time would benefit from earphones to prevent neck strains. Most physical stressors are rather simple to rectify. However, companies are often not aware of a problem until after a problem arises, such as when a person’s back is strained from trying to move heavy equipment. Companies then implement strategies to remediate the environmental stressor. With the help of human factors, and organizational and office design consultants, many of the physical barriers to optimal performance can be prevented (Rousseau & Aubé, 2010 ). In a study of 215 French-speaking Canadian healthcare employees, Rousseau and Aubé ( 2010 ) found that although supervisor instrumental support positively related with affective commitment to the organization, the relationship was even stronger for those who reported satisfaction with the ambient environment (i.e., temperature, lighting, sound, ventilation, and cleanliness).

Secondary Interventions (Coping)

Secondary interventions, also referred to as coping, focus on resources people can use to mitigate the risk of work-related illness or workplace injury. Resources may include properties related to social resources, behaviors, and cognitive structures. Each of these resource domains may be employed to cope with stressors. Monat and Lazarus ( 1991 ) summarize the definition of coping as “an individual’s efforts to master demands (or conditions of harm, threat, or challenge) that are appraised (or perceived) as exceeding or taxing his or her resources” (p. 5). To master demands requires use of the aforementioned resources. Secondary interventions help employees become aware of the psychological, physical, and behavioral responses that may occur from the stressors presented in their working environment. Secondary interventions help a person detect and attend to stressors and identify resources for and ways of mitigating job strains. Often, coping strategies are learned skills that have a cognitive foundation and serve important functions in improving people’s management of stressors (Lazarus & Folkman, 1991 ). Coping is effortful, but with practice it becomes easier to employ. This idea is the foundation for understanding the role of resilience in coping with stressors. However, “not all adaptive processes are coping. Coping is a subset of adaptational activities that involves effort and does not include everything that we do in relating to the environment” (Lazarus & Folkman, 1991 , p. 198). Furthermore, sometimes to cope with a stressor, a person may call upon social support sources to help with tangible materials or emotional comfort. People call upon support resources because they help to restructure how a person approaches or thinks about the stressor.

Most secondary interventions are aimed at helping the individual, though companies, as a policy, might require all employees to partake in training aimed at increasing employees’ awareness of and skills aimed at handling difficult situations vis à vis company channels (e.g., reporting on sexual harassment or discrimination). Furthermore, organizations might institute mentoring programs or work groups to address various work-related matters. These programs employ awareness-raising activities, stress-education, or skills training (cf., Bhagat, Segovis, & Nelson, 2012 ), which include development of skills in problem-solving, understanding emotion-focused coping, identifying and using social support, and enhancing capacity for resilience. The aim of these programs, therefore, is to help employees proactively review their perceptions of psychological, physical, and behavioral job-related strains, thereby extending their resilience, enabling them to form a personal plan to control stressors and practice coping skills (Cooper, Dewe, & O’Driscoll, 2011 ).

Often these stress management programs are instituted after an organization has observed excessive absenteeism and work-related performance problems and, therefore, are sometimes categorized as a tertiary stress management intervention or even a primary (prevention) intervention. However, the skills developed for coping with stressors also place the programs in secondary stress management interventions. Example programs that are categorized as tertiary or primary stress management interventions may also be secondary stress management interventions (see Figure 1 ), and these include lifestyle advice and planning, stress inoculation training, simple relaxation techniques, meditation, basic trainings in time management, anger management, problem-solving skills, and cognitive-behavioral therapy. Corporate wellness programs also fall under this category. In other words, some programs could be categorized as primary, secondary, or tertiary interventions depending upon when the employee (or organization) identifies the need to implement the program. For example, time management practices could be implemented as a means of preventing some stressors, as a way to cope with mounting stressors, or as a strategy to mitigate symptoms of excessive of stressors. Furthermore, these programs can be administered at the individual level or group level. As related to secondary interventions, these programs provide participants with opportunities to develop and practice skills to cognitively reappraise the stressor(s); to modify their perspectives about stressors; to take time out to breathe, stretch, meditate, relax, and/or exercise in an attempt to support better decision-making; to articulate concerns and call upon support resources; and to know how to say “no” to onslaughts of requests to complete tasks. Participants also learn how to proactively identify coping resources and solve problems.

According to Cooper, Dewe, and O’Driscoll ( 2001 ), secondary interventions are successful in helping employees modify or strengthen their ability to cope with the experience of stressors with the goal of mitigating the potential harm the job stressors may create. Secondary interventions focus on individuals’ transactions with the work environment and emphasize the fit between a person and his or her environment. However, researchers have pointed out that the underlying assumption of secondary interventions is that the responsibility for coping with the stressors of the environment lies within individuals (Quillian-Wolever & Wolever, 2003 ). If companies cannot prevent the stressors in the first place, then they are, in part, responsible for helping individuals develop coping strategies and informing employees about programs that would help them better cope with job stressors so that they are able to fulfill work assignments.

Stress management interventions that help people learn to cope with stressors focus mainly on the goals of enabling problem-resolution or expressing one’s emotions in a healthy manner. These goals are referred to as problem-focused coping and emotion-focused coping (Folkman & Lazarus, 1980 ; Pearlin & Schooler, 1978 ), and the person experiencing the stressors as potential threat is the agent for change and the recipient of the benefits of successful coping (Hobfoll, 1998 ). In addition to problem-focused and emotion-focused coping approaches, social support and resilience may be coping resources. There are many other sources for coping than there is room to present here (see e.g., Cartwright & Cooper, 2005 ); however, the current literature has primarily focused on these resources.

Problem-Focused Coping

Problem-focused or direct coping helps employees remove or reduce stressors in order to reduce their strain experiences (Bhagat et al., 2012 ). In problem-focused coping employees are responsible for working out a strategic plan in order to remove job stressors, such as setting up a set of goals and engaging in behaviors to meet these goals. Problem-focused coping is viewed as an adaptive response, though it can also be maladaptive if it creates more problems down the road, such as procrastinating getting work done or feigning illness to take time off from work. Adaptive problem-focused coping negatively relates to long-term job strains (Higgins & Endler, 1995 ). Discussion on problem-solving coping is framed from an adaptive perspective.

Problem-focused coping is featured as an extension of control, because engaging in problem-focused coping strategies requires a series of acts to keep job stressors under control (Bhagat et al., 2012 ). In the stress literature, there are generally two ways to categorize control: internal versus external locus of control, and primary versus secondary control. Locus of control refers to the extent to which people believe they have control over their own life (Rotter, 1966 ). People high in internal locus of control believe that they can control their own fate whereas people high in external locus of control believe that outside factors determine their life experience (Rotter, 1966 ). Generally, those with an external locus of control are less inclined to engage in problem-focused coping (Strentz & Auerbach, 1988 ). Primary control is the belief that people can directly influence their environment (Alloy & Abramson, 1979 ), and thus they are more likely to engage in problem-focused coping. However, when it is not feasible to exercise primary control, people search for secondary control, with which people try to adapt themselves into the objective environment (Rothbaum, Weisz, & Snyder, 1982 ).

Emotion-Focused Coping

Emotion-focused coping, sometimes referred to as palliative coping, helps employees reduce strains without the removal of job stressors. It involves cognitive or emotional efforts, such as talking about the stressor or distracting oneself from the stressor, in order to lessen emotional distress resulting from job stressors (Bhagat et al., 2012 ). Emotion-focused coping aims to reappraise and modify the perceptions of a situation or seek emotional support from friends or family. These methods do not include efforts to change the work situation or to remove the job stressors (Lazarus & Folkman, 1991 ). People tend to adopt emotion-focused coping strategies when they believe that little or nothing can be done to remove the threatening, harmful, and challenging stressors (Bhagat et al., 2012 ), such as when they are the only individuals to have the skills to get a project done or they are given increased responsibilities because of the unexpected departure of a colleague. Emotion-focused coping strategies include (1) reappraisal of the stressful situation, (2) talking to friends and receiving reassurance from them, (3) focusing on one’s strength rather than weakness, (4) optimistic comparison—comparing one’s situation to others’ or one’s past situation, (5) selective ignoring—paying less attention to the unpleasant aspects of one’s job and being more focused on the positive aspects of the job, (6) restrictive expectations—restricting one’s expectations on job satisfaction but paying more attention to monetary rewards, (7) avoidance coping—not thinking about the problem, leaving the situation, distracting oneself, or using alcohol or drugs (e.g., Billings & Moos, 1981 ).

Some emotion-focused coping strategies are maladaptive. For example, avoidance coping may lead to increased level of job strains in the long run (e.g., Parasuraman & Cleek, 1984 ). Furthermore, a person’s ability to cope with the imbalance of performing work to meet organizational expectations can take a toll on the person’s health, leading to physiological consequences such as cardiovascular disease, sleep disorders, gastrointestinal disorders, and diabetes (Fried et al., 2013 ; Siegrist, 2010 ; Toker, Shirom, Melamed, & Armon, 2012 ; Willert, Thulstrup, Hertz, & Bonde, 2010 ).

Comparing Coping Strategies across Cultures

Most coping research is conducted in individualistic, Western cultures wherein emotional control is emphasized and both problem-solving focused coping and primary control are preferred (Bhagat et al., 2010 ). However, in collectivistic cultures, emotion-focused coping and use of secondary control may be preferred and may not necessarily carry a negative evaluation (Bhagat et al., 2010 ). For example, African Americans are more likely to use emotion-focused coping than non–African Americans (Knight, Silverstein, McCallum, & Fox, 2000 ), and among women who experienced sexual harassment, Anglo American women were less likely to employ emotion focused coping (i.e., avoidance coping) than Turkish women and Hispanic American women, while Hispanic women used more denial than the other two groups (Wasti & Cortina, 2002 ).

Thus, whereas problem-focused coping is venerated in Western societies, emotion-focused coping may be more effective in reducing strains in collectivistic cultures, such as China, Japan, and India (Bhagat et al., 2010 ; Narayanan, Menon, & Spector, 1999 ; Selmer, 2002 ). Indeed, Swedish participants reported more problem-focused coping than did Chinese participants (Xiao, Ottosson, & Carlsson, 2013 ), American college students engaged in more problem-focused coping behaviors than did their Japanese counterparts (Ogawa, 2009 ), and Indian (vs. Canadian) students reported more emotion-focused coping, such as seeking social support and positive reappraisal (Sinha, Willson, & Watson, 2000 ). Moreover, Glazer, Stetz, and Izso ( 2004 ) found that internal locus of control was more predominant in individualistic cultures (United Kingdom and United States), whereas external locus of control was more predominant in communal cultures (Italy and Hungary). Also, internal locus of control was associated with less job stress, but more so for nurses in the United Kingdom and United States than Italy and Hungary. Taken together, adoption of coping strategies and their effectiveness differ significantly across cultures. The extent to which a coping strategy is perceived favorably and thus selected or not selected is not only a function of culture, but also a person’s sociocultural beliefs toward the coping strategy (Morimoto, Shimada, & Ozaki, 2013 ).

Social Support

Social support refers to the aid an entity gives to a person. The source of the support can be a single person, such as a supervisor, coworker, subordinate, family member, friend, or stranger, or an organization as represented by upper-level management representing organizational practices. The type of support can be instrumental or emotional. Instrumental support, including informational support, refers to that which is tangible, such as data to help someone make a decision or colleagues’ sick days so one does not lose vital pay while recovering from illness. Emotional support, including esteem support, refers to the psychological boost given to a person who needs to express emotions and feel empathy from others or to have his or her perspective validated. Beehr and Glazer ( 2001 ) present an overview of the role of social support on the stressor-strain relationship and arguments regarding the role of culture in shaping the utility of different sources and types of support.

Meaningfulness and Resilience

Meaningfulness reflects the extent to which people believe their lives are significant, purposeful, goal-directed, and fulfilling (Glazer, Kożusznik, Meyers, & Ganai, 2014 ). When faced with stressors, people who have a strong sense of meaning in life will also try to make sense of the stressors. Maintaining a positive outlook on life stressors helps to manage emotions, which is helpful in reducing strains, particularly when some stressors cannot be problem-solved (Lazarus & Folkman, 1991 ). Lazarus and Folkman ( 1991 ) emphasize that being able to reframe threatening situations can be just as important in an adaptation as efforts to control the stressors. Having a sense of meaningfulness motivates people to behave in ways that help them overcome stressors. Thus, meaningfulness is often used in the same breath as resilience, because people who are resilient are often protecting that which is meaningful.

Resilience is a personality state that can be fortified and enhanced through varied experiences. People who perceive their lives are meaningful are more likely to find ways to face adversity and are therefore more prone to intensifying their resiliency. When people demonstrate resilience to cope with noxious stressors, their ability to be resilient against other stressors strengthens because through the experience, they develop more competencies (Glazer et al., 2014 ). Thus, fitting with Hobfoll’s ( 1989 , 2001 ) COR theory, meaningfulness and resilience are psychological resources people attempt to conserve and protect, and employ when necessary for making sense of or coping with stressors.

Tertiary Interventions (Stress Management)

Stress management refers to interventions employed to treat and repair harmful repercussions of stressors that were not coped with sufficiently. As Lazarus and Folkman ( 1991 ) noted, not all stressors “are amenable to mastery” (p. 205). Stressors that are unmanageable and lead to strains require interventions to reverse or slow down those effects. Workplace interventions might focus on the person, the organization, or both. Unfortunately, instead of looking at the whole system to include the person and the workplace, most companies focus on the person. Such a focus should not be a surprise given the results of van der Klink, Blonk, Schene, and van Dijk’s ( 2001 ) meta-analysis of 48 experimental studies conducted between 1977 and 1996 . They found that of four types of tertiary interventions, the effect size for cognitive-behavioral interventions and multimodal programs (e.g., the combination of assertive training and time management) was moderate and the effect size for relaxation techniques was small in reducing psychological complaints, but not turnover intention related to work stress. However, the effects of (the five studies that used) organization-focused interventions were not significant. Similarly, Richardson and Rothstein’s ( 2008 ) meta-analytic study, including 36 experimental studies with 55 interventions, showed a larger effect size for cognitive-behavioral interventions than relaxation, organizational, multimodal, or alternative. However, like with van der Klink et al. ( 2001 ), Richardson and Rothstein ( 2008 ) cautioned that there were few organizational intervention studies included and the impact of interventions were determined on the basis of psychological outcomes and not physiological or organizational outcomes. Van der Klink et al. ( 2001 ) further expressed concern that organizational interventions target the workplace and that changes in the individual may take longer to observe than individual interventions aimed directly at the individual.

The long-term benefits of individual focused interventions are not yet clear either. Per Giga, Cooper, and Faragher ( 2003 ), the benefits of person-directed stress management programs will be short-lived if organizational factors to reduce stressors are not addressed too. Indeed, LaMontagne, Keegel, Louie, Ostry, and Landsbergis ( 2007 ), in their meta-analysis of 90 studies on stress management interventions published between 1990 and 2005 , revealed that in relation to interventions targeting organizations only, and interventions targeting individuals only, interventions targeting both organizations and individuals (i.e. the systems approach) had the most favorable positive effects on both the organizations and the individuals. Furthermore, the organization-level interventions were effective at both the individual and organization levels, but the individual-level interventions were effective only at the individual level.

Individual-Focused Stress Management

Individual-focused interventions concentrate on improving conditions for the individual, though counseling programs emphasize that the worker is in charge of reducing “stress,” whereas role-focused interventions emphasize activities that organizations can guide to actually reduce unnecessary noxious environmental factors.

Individual-Focused Stress Management: Employee Assistance Programs

When stress become sufficiently problematic (which is individually gauged or attended to by supportive others) in a worker’s life, employees may utilize the short-term counseling services or referral services Employee Assistance Programs (EAPs) provide. People who utilize the counseling services may engage in cognitive behavioral therapy aimed at changing the way people think about the stressors (e.g., as challenge opportunity over threat) and manage strains. Example topics that may be covered in these therapy sessions include time management and goal setting (prioritization), career planning and development, cognitive restructuring and mindfulness, relaxation, and anger management. In a study of healthcare workers and teachers who participated in a 2-day to 2.5-day comprehensive stress management training program (including 26 topics on identifying, coping with, and managing stressors and strains), Siu, Cooper, and Phillips ( 2013 ) found psychological and physical improvements were self-reported among the healthcare workers (for which there was no control group). However, comparing an intervention group of teachers to a control group of teachers, the extent of change was not as visible, though teachers in the intervention group engaged in more mastery recovery experiences (i.e., they purposefully chose to engage in challenging activities after work).

Individual-Focused Stress Management: Mindfulness

A popular therapy today is to train people to be more mindful, which involves helping people live in the present, reduce negative judgement of current and past experiences, and practicing patience (Birnie, Speca, & Carlson, 2010 ). Mindfulness programs usually include training on relaxation exercises, gentle yoga, and awareness of the body’s senses. In one study offered through the continuing education program at a Canadian university, 104 study participants took part in an 8-week, 90 minute per group (15–20 participants per) session mindfulness program (Birnie et al., 2010 ). In addition to body scanning, they also listened to lectures on incorporating mindfulness into one’s daily life and received a take-home booklet and compact discs that guided participants through the exercises studied in person. Two weeks after completing the program, participants’ mindfulness attendance and general positive moods increased, while physical, psychological, and behavioral strains decreased. In another study on a sample of U.K. government employees, study participants receiving three sessions of 2.5 to 3 hours each training on mindfulness, with the first two sessions occurring in consecutive weeks and the third occurring about three months later, Flaxman and Bond ( 2010 ) found that compared to the control group, the intervention group showed a decrease in distress levels from Time 1 (baseline) to Time 2 (three months after first two training sessions) and Time 1 to Time 3 (after final training session). Moreover, of the mindfulness intervention study participants who were clinically distressed, 69% experienced clinical improvement in their psychological health.

Individual-Focused Stress Management: Biofeedback/Imagery/Meditation/Deep Breathing

Biofeedback uses electronic equipment to inform users about how their body is responding to tension. With guidance from a therapist, individuals then learn to change their physiological responses so that their pulse normalizes and muscles relax (Norris, Fahrion, & Oikawa, 2007 ). The therapist’s guidance might include reminders for imagery, meditation, body scan relaxation, and deep breathing. Saunders, Driskell, Johnston, and Salas’s ( 1996 ) meta-analysis of 37 studies found that imagery helped reduce state and performance anxiety. Once people have been trained to relax, reminder triggers may be sent through smartphone push notifications (Villani et al., 2013 ).

Smartphone technology can also be used to support weight loss programs, smoking cessation programs, and medication or disease (e.g., diabetes) management compliance (Heron & Smyth, 2010 ; Kannampallil, Waicekauskas, Morrow, Kopren, & Fu, 2013 ). For example, smartphones could remind a person to take medications or test blood sugar levels or send messages about healthy behaviors and positive affirmations.

Individual-Focused Stress Management: Sleep/Rest/Respite

Workers today sleep less per night than adults did nearly 30 years ago (Luckhaupt, Tak, & Calvert, 2010 ; National Sleep Foundation, 2005 , 2013 ). In order to combat problems, such as increased anxiety and cardiovascular artery disease, associated with sleep deprivation and insufficient rest, it is imperative that people disconnect from their work at least one day per week or preferably for several weeks so that they are able to restore psychological health (Etzion, Eden, & Lapidot, 1998 ; Ragsdale, Beehr, Grebner, & Han, 2011 ). When college students engaged in relaxation-type activities, such as reading or watching television, over the weekend, they experienced less emotional exhaustion and greater general well-being than students who engaged in resources-consuming activities, such as house cleaning (Ragsdale et al., 2011 ). Additional research and future directions for research are reviewed and identified in the work of Sonnentag ( 2012 ). For example, she asks whether lack of ability to detach from work is problematic for people who find their work meaningful. In other words, are negative health consequences only among those who do not take pleasure in their work? Sonnetag also asks how teleworkers detach from their work when engaging in work from the home. Ironically, one of the ways that companies are trying to help with the challenges of high workload or increased need to be available to colleagues, clients, or vendors around the globe is by offering flexible work arrangements, whereby employees who can work from home are given the opportunity to do so. Companies that require global interactions 24-hours per day often employ this strategy, but is the solution also a source of strain (Glazer, Kożusznik, & Shargo, 2012 )?

Individual-Focused Stress Management: Role Analysis

Role analysis or role clarification aims to redefine, expressly identify, and align employees’ roles and responsibilities with their work goals. Through role negotiation, involved parties begin to develop a new formal or informal contract about expectations and define resources needed to fulfill those expectations. Glazer has used this approach in organizational consulting and, with one memorable client engagement, found that not only were the individuals whose roles required deeper re-evaluation happier at work (six months later), but so were their subordinates. Subordinates who once characterized the two partners as hostile and akin to a couple going through a bad divorce, later referred to them as a blissful pair. Schaubroeck, Ganster, Sime, and Ditman ( 1993 ) also found in a three-wave study over a two-year period that university employees’ reports of role clarity and greater satisfaction with their supervisor increased after a role clarification exercise of top managers’ roles and subordinates’ roles. However, the intervention did not have any impact on reported physical symptoms, absenteeism, or psychological well-being. Role analysis is categorized under individual-focused stress management intervention because it is usually implemented after individuals or teams begin to demonstrate poor performance and because the intervention typically focuses on a few individuals rather than an entire organization or group. In other words, the intervention treats the person’s symptoms by redefining the role so as to eliminate the stimulant causing the problem.

Organization-Focused Stress Management

At the organizational level, companies that face major declines in productivity and profitability or increased costs related to healthcare and disability might be motivated to reassess organizational factors that might be impinging on employees’ health and well-being. After all, without healthy workers, it is not possible to have a healthy organization. Companies may choose to implement practices and policies that are expected to help not only the employees, but also the organization with reduced costs associated with employee ill-health, such as medical insurance, disability payments, and unused office space. Example practices and policies that may be implemented include flexible work arrangements to ensure that employees are not on the streets in the middle of the night for work that can be done from anywhere (such as the home), diversity programs to reduce stress-induced animosity and prejudice toward others, providing only healthy food choices in cafeterias, mandating that all employees have physicals in order to receive reduced prices for insurance, company-wide closures or mandatory paid time off, and changes in organizational visioning.

Organization-Focused Stress Management: Organizational-Level Occupational Health Interventions

As with job design interventions that are implemented to remediate work characteristics that were a source of unnecessary or excessive stressors, so are organizational-level occupational health (OLOH) interventions. As with many of the interventions, its placement as a primary or tertiary stress management intervention may seem arbitrary, but when considering the goal and target of change, it is clear that the intervention is implemented in response to some ailing organizational issues that need to be reversed or stopped, and because it brings in the entire organization’s workforce to address the problems, it has been placed in this category. There are several more case studies than empirical studies on the topic of whole system organizational change efforts (see example case studies presented by the United Kingdom’s Health and Safety Executive). It is possible that lack of published empirical work is not so much due to lack of attempting to gather and evaluate the data for publication, but rather because the OLOH interventions themselves never made it to the intervention stage, the interventions failed (Biron, Gatrell, & Cooper, 2010 ), or the level of evaluation was not rigorous enough to get into empirical peer-review journals. Fortunately, case studies provide some indication of the opportunities and problems associated with OLOH interventions.

One case study regarding Cardiff and Value University Health Board revealed that through focus group meetings with members of a steering group (including high-level managers and supported by top management) and facilitated by a neutral, non-judgemental organizational health consultant, ideas for change were posted on newsprint, discussed, and areas in the organization needing change were identified. The intervention for giving voice to people who initially had little already had a positive effect on the organization, as absence decreased by 2.09% and 6.9% merely 12 and 18 months, respectively, after the intervention. Translated in financial terms, the 6.9% change was equivalent to a quarterly savings of £80,000 (Health & Safety Executive, n.d. ). Thus, focusing on the context of change and how people will be involved in the change process probably helped the organization realize improvements (Biron et al., 2010 ). In a recent and rare empirical study, employing both qualitative and quantitative data collection methods, Sørensen and Holman ( 2014 ) utilized PAR in order to plan and implement an OLOH intervention over the course of 14 months. Their study aimed to examine the effectiveness of the PAR process in reducing workers’ work-related and social or interpersonal-related stressors that derive from the workplace and improving psychological, behavioral, and physiological well-being across six Danish organizations. Based on group dialogue, 30 proposals for change were proposed, all of which could be categorized as either interventions to focus on relational factors (e.g., management feedback improvement, engagement) or work processes (e.g., reduced interruptions, workload, reinforcing creativity). Of the interventions that were implemented, results showed improvements on manager relationship quality and reduced burnout, but no changes with respect to work processes (i.e., workload and work pace) perhaps because the employees already had sufficient task control and variety. These findings support Dewe and Kompier’s ( 2008 ) position that occupational health can be reinforced through organizational policies that reinforce quality jobs and work experiences.

Organization-Focused Stress Management: Flexible Work Arrangements

Dewe and Kompier ( 2008 ), citing the work of Isles ( 2005 ), noted that concern over losing one’s job is a reason for why 40% of survey respondents indicated they work more hours than formally required. In an attempt to create balance and perceived fairness in one’s compensation for putting in extra work hours, employees will sometimes be legitimately or illegitimately absent. As companies become increasingly global, many people with desk jobs are finding themselves communicating with colleagues who are halfway around the globe and at all hours of the day or night (Glazer et al., 2012 ). To help minimize the strains associated with these stressors, companies might devise flexible work arrangements (FWA), though the type of FWA needs to be tailored to the cultural environment (Masuda et al., 2012 ). FWAs give employees some leverage to decide what would be the optimal work arrangement for them (e.g., part-time, flexible work hours, compressed work week, telecommuting). In other words, FWA provides employees with the choice of when to work, where to work (on-site or off-site), and how many hours to work in a day, week, or pay period (Kossek, Thompson, & Lautsch, 2015 ). However, not all employees of an organization have equal access to or equitable use of FWAs; workers in low-wage, hourly jobs are often beholden to being physically present during specific hours (Swanberg McKechnie, Ojha, & James, 2011 ). In a study of over 1,300 full-time hourly retail employees in the United States, Swanberg et al. ( 2011 ) showed that employees who have control over their work schedules and over their work hours were satisfied with their work schedules, perceived support from the supervisor, and work engagement.

Unfortunately, not all FWAs yield successful results for the individual or the organization. Being able to work from home or part-time can have problems too, as a person finds himself or herself working more hours from home than required. Sometimes telecommuting creates work-family conflict too as a person struggles to balance work and family obligations while working from home. Other drawbacks include reduced face-to-face contact between work colleagues and stakeholders, challenges shaping one’s career growth due to limited contact, perceived inequity if some have more flexibility than others, and ambiguity about work role processes for interacting with employees utilizing the FWA (Kossek et al., 2015 ). Organizations that institute FWAs must carefully weigh the benefits and drawbacks the flexibility may have on the employees using it or the employees affected by others using it, as well as the implications on the organization, including the vendors who are serving and clients served by the organization.

Organization-Focused Stress Management: Diversity Programs

Employees in the workplace might experience strain due to feelings of discrimination or prejudice. Organizational climates that do not promote diversity (in terms of age, religion, physical abilities, ethnicity, nationality, sex, and other characteristics) are breeding grounds for undesirable attitudes toward the workplace, lower performance, and greater turnover intention (Bergman, Palmieri, Drasgow, & Ormerod, 2012 ; Velez, Moradi, & Brewster, 2013 ). Management is thus advised to implement programs that reinforce the value and importance of diversity, as well as manage diversity to reduce conflict and feelings of prejudice. In fact, managers who attended a leadership training program reported higher multicultural competence in dealing with stressful situations (Chrobot-Mason & Leslie, 2012 ), and managers who persevered through challenges were more dedicated to coping with difficult diversity issues (Cilliers, 2011 ). Thus, diversity programs can help to reduce strains by directly reducing stressors associated with conflict linked to diversity in the workplace and by building managers’ resilience.

Organization-Focused Stress Management: Healthcare Management Policies

Over the past few years, organizations have adopted insurance plans that implement wellness programs for the sake of managing the increasing cost of healthcare that is believed to be a result of individuals’ not managing their own health, with regular check-ups and treatment. The wellness programs require all insured employees to visit a primary care provider, complete a health risk assessment, and engage in disease management activities as specified by a physician (e.g., see frequently asked questions regarding the State of Maryland’s Wellness Program). Companies believe that requiring compliance will reduce health problems, although there is no proof that such programs save money or that people would comply. One study that does, however, boast success, was a 12-week workplace health promotion program aimed at reducing Houston airport workers’ weight (Ebunlomo, Hare-Everline, Weber, & Rich, 2015 ). The program, which included 235 volunteer participants, was deemed a success, as there was a total weight loss of 345 pounds (or 1.5 lbs per person). Given such results in Houston, it is clear why some people are also skeptical over the likely success of wellness programs, particularly as there is no clear method for evaluating their efficacy (Sinnott & Vatz, 2015 ).

Moreover, for some, such a program is too paternalistic and intrusive, as well as punishes anyone who chooses not to actively participate in disease management programs (Sinnott & Vatz, 2015 ). The programs put the onus of change on the person, though it is a response to the high costs of ill-health. The programs neglect to consider the role of the organization in reducing the barriers to healthy lifestyle, such as cloaking exempt employment as simply needing to get the work done, when it usually means working significantly more hours than a standard workweek. In fact, workplace health promotion programs did not reduce presenteeism (i.e., people going to work while unwell thereby reducing their job performance) among those who suffered from physical pain (Cancelliere, Cassidy, Ammendolia, & Côte, 2011 ). However, supervisor education, worksite exercise, lifestyle intervention through email, midday respite from repetitive work, a global stress management program, changes in lighting, and telephone interventions helped to reduce presenteeism. Thus, emphasis needs to be placed on psychosocial aspects of the organization’s structure, including managers and overall organizational climate for on-site presence, that reinforces such behavior (Cancelliere et al., 2011 ). Moreover, wellness programs are only as good as the interventions to reduce work-related stressors and improve organizational resources to enable workers to improve their overall psychological and physical health.

Concluding Remarks

Future research.

One of the areas requiring more theoretical and practical attention is that of the utility of stress frameworks to guide organizational development change interventions. Although it has been proposed that the foundation for work stress management interventions is in organizational development, and even though scholars and practitioners of organization development were also founders of research programs that focused on employee health and well-being or work stress, there are few studies or other theoretical works that link the two bodies of literature.

A second area that requires additional attention is the efficacy of stress management interventions across cultures. In examining secondary stress management interventions (i.e., coping), some cross-cultural differences in findings were described; however, there is still a dearth of literature from different countries on the utility of different prevention, coping, and stress management strategies.

A third area that has been blossoming since the start of the 21st century is the topic of hindrance and challenge stressors and the implications of both on workers’ well-being and performance. More research is needed on this topic in several areas. First, there is little consistency by which researchers label a stressor as a hindrance or a challenge. Researchers sometimes take liberties with labels, but it is not the researchers who should label a stressor but the study participants themselves who should indicate if a stressor is a source of strain. Rodríguez, Kozusznik, and Peiró ( 2013 ) developed a measure in which respondents indicate whether a stressor is a challenge or a hindrance. Just as some people may perceive demands to be challenges that they savor and that result in a psychological state of eustress (Nelson & Simmons, 2003 ), others find them to be constraints that impede goal fulfillment and thus might experience distress. Likewise, some people might perceive ambiguity as a challenge that can be overcome and others as a constraint over which he or she has little control and few or no resources with which to cope. More research on validating the measurement of challenge vs. hindrance stressors, as well as eustress vs. distress, and savoring vs. coping, is warranted. Second, at what point are challenge stressors harmful? Just because people experiencing challenge stressors continue to perform well, it does not necessarily mean that they are healthy people. A great deal of stressors are intellectually stimulating, but excessive stimulation can also take a toll on one’s physiological well-being, as evident by the droves of professionals experiencing different kinds of diseases not experienced as much a few decades ago, such as obesity (Fried et al., 2013 ). Third, which stress management interventions would better serve to reduce hindrance stressors or to reduce strain that may result from challenge stressors while reinforcing engagement-producing challenge stressors?

A fourth area that requires additional attention is that of the flexible work arrangements (FWAs). One of the reasons companies have been willing to permit employees to work from home is not so much out of concern for the employee, but out of the company’s need for the focal person to be able to communicate with a colleague working from a geographic region when it is night or early morning for the focal person. Glazer, Kożusznik, and Shargo ( 2012 ) presented several areas for future research on this topic, noting that by participating on global virtual teams, workers face additional stressors, even while given flexibility of workplace and work time. As noted earlier, more research needs to be done on the extent to which people who take advantage of FWAs are advantaged in terms of detachment from work. Can people working from home detach? Are those who find their work invigorating also likely to experience ill-health by not detaching from work?

A fifth area worthy of further research attention is workplace wellness programing. According to Page and Vella-Brodrick ( 2009 ), “subjective and psychological well-being [are] key criteria for employee mental health” (p. 442), whereby mental health focuses on wellness, rather than the absence of illness. They assert that by fostering employee mental health, organizations are supporting performance and retention. Employee well-being can be supported by ensuring that jobs are interesting and meaningful, goals are achievable, employees have control over their work, and skills are used to support organizational and individual goals (Dewe & Kompier, 2008 ). However, just as mental health is not the absence of illness, work stress is not indicative of an absence of psychological well-being. Given the perspective that employee well-being is a state of mind (Page & Vella-Brodrick, 2009 ), we suggest that employee well-being can be negatively affected by noxious job stressors that cannot be remediated, but when job stressors are preventable, employee well-being can serve to protect an employee who faces job stressors. Thus, wellness programs ought to focus on providing positive experiences by enhancing and promoting health, as well as building individual resources. These programs are termed “green cape” interventions (Pawelski, 2016 ). For example, with the growing interests in positive psychology, researchers and practitioners have suggested employing several positive psychology interventions, such as expressing gratitude, savoring experiences, and identifying one’s strengths (Tetrick & Winslow, 2015 ). Another stream of positive psychology is psychological capital, which includes four malleable functions of self-efficacy, optimism, hope, and resilience (Luthans, Youssef, & Avolio, 2007 ). Workplace interventions should include both “red cape” interventions (i.e., interventions to reduce negative experiences) and “green cape” interventions (i.e., workplace wellness programs; Polly, 2014 ).

A Healthy Organization’s Pledge

A healthy workplace requires healthy workers. Period. Among all organizations’ missions should be the focus on a healthy workforce. To maintain a healthy workforce, the company must routinely examine its own contributions in terms of how it structures itself; reinforces communications among employees, vendors, and clients; how it rewards and cares for its people (e.g., ensuring they get sufficient rest and can detach from work); and the extent to which people at the upper levels are truly connected with the people at the lower levels. As a matter of practice, management must recognize when employees are overworked, unwell, and poorly engaged. Management must also take stock of when it is doing well and right by its contributors’ and maintain and reinforce the good practices, norms, and procedures. People in the workplace make the rules; people in the workplace can change the rules. How management sees its employees and values their contribution will have a huge role in how a company takes stock of its own pain points. Providing employees with tools to manage their own reactions to work-related stressors and consequent strains is fine, but wouldn’t it be grand if organizations took better notice about what they could do to mitigate the strain-producing stressors in the first place and take ownership over how employees are treated?

• Abramis, D. J. (1994). Work role ambiguity, job satisfaction, and job performance: Meta-analyses and review. Psychological Report, 75 , 1411–1433.
• Adams, G. A. , & Jex, S. M. (1999). Relationships between time management, control, work–family conflict, and strain. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 1 , 72–77.
• Alloy, L. B. , & Abramson, L. Y. (1979). Judgment of contingency in depressed and nondepressed students: Sadder but wiser? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 108 , 441–483.
• Amstad, F. T. , Meier, L. L. , Fasel, U. , Elfering, A. , & Semmer, N. K. (2011). A meta-analysis of work-family conflict and various outcomes with a special emphasis on cross-domain versus matching-domain relations. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 16 , 151–169.
• Assouline, M. , & Meir, E. I. (1987). Meta-analysis of the relationship between congruence and well-being measures. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 31 , 319–332.
• Aust, B. , & Ducki, A. (2004). Comprehensive health promotion interventions at the workplace: Experiences with health circles in Germany. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 9 , 258–270.
• Bakker, A. B. Demerouti, E. , Sanz-Vergel, A. I. (2014). Burnout and work engagement: The JD-R approach. Annual Review of Organizational Behavior, 1 , 389–411.
• Bakker, A. B. , van Veldhoven, M. J. P. M. , & Xanthopoulou, D. (2010). Beyond the demand-control model: Thriving on high job demands and resources. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 9 , 3–16.
• Beehr, T. A. , Glaser, K. M. , Canali, K. G. , & Wallwey, D. A. (2001). Back to basics: Re-examination of demand control theory of occupational stress. Work & Stress, 15 , 115–130.
• Beehr, T. A. , & Glazer, S. (2001). A cultural perspective of social support in relation to occupational stress. In P. Perrewé , D. C. Ganster , & J. Moran (Eds.), Research in occupational stress and well-being (pp. 97–142). Amsterdam: JAI Press.
• Bergman, M. E. , Palmieri, P. A. , Drasgow, F. , & Ormerod, A. J. (2012). Racial/ethnic harassment and discrimination, its antecedents, and its effect on job-related outcomes. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 17 , 65–78.
• Bhagat, R. S. , Krishnan, B. , Nelson, T. A. , Leonard, K. M. , Ford, D. J. , & Billing, T. K. (2010). Organizational stress, psychological strain, and work outcomes in six national contexts: A closer look at the moderating influences of coping styles and decision latitude . Cross Cultural Management, 17 , 10–29.
• Bhagat, R. S. , O’Driscoll, M. P. , Babakus, E. , Frey, L. , Chokkar, J. , Ninokumar, B. H , et al. (1994). Organizational stress and coping in seven national contexts: A cross-cultural investigation . In G. P. Keita & J. J. Hurrell (Eds.), Job stress in a changing workforce: Investigating gender, diversity, and family issues (pp. 93–105). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
• Bhagat, R. S. , Segovis, J. C. , & Nelson, T. A. (2012). Work stress and coping in the era of globalization . New York: Routledge.
• Billings, A. G. , & Moos, R. H. (1981). The role of coping responses and social resources in attenuating the stress of life events. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 4 , 139–157.
• Birnie, K. , Speca, M. , & Carlson, L. E. (2010). Exploring self-compassion and empathy in the context of mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR). Stress & Health, 26 , 359–371.
• Biron, C. , Gatrell, C. , & Cooper, C. L. (2010). Autopsy of a failure: Evaluating process and contextual issues in an organizational-level work stress intervention. International Journal of Stress Management, 17 , 135–158.
• Bowling, N. A. , & Kirkendall, C. (2012). Workload: A review of causes, consequences, and potential interventions. In J. Houdmont , S. Leka , & R. Sinclair (Eds.), Contemporary occupational health psychology (Vol. 2) (pp. 221–238). Chichester, U.K.: Wiley.
• Breaugh, J. A. , & Colihan, J. P. (1994). Measuring facets of job ambiguity: Construct validity evidence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79 , 191–202.
• Bruk-Lee, V. , & Spector, P. E. (2006). The social stressors-counterproductive work behaviors link: Are conflicts with supervisors and coworkers the same? . Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 11 , 145–156.
• Cancelliere, C. , Cassidy, J. D. , Ammendolia, C. , & Côte, P. (2011). Are workplace health promotion programs effective at improving presenteeism in workers? A systematic review and best evidence synthesis of the literature. BMC Public Health, 11 , 395–406.
• Caplan, R. D. (1987). Person–environment fit in organizations: Theories, facts, and values. In A. W. Riley & S. J. Zaccaro (Eds.), Occupational stress and organizational effectiveness (pp. 103–140). New York: Praeger.
• Cartwright, S. , & Cooper, C. L. (2005). Individually targeted interventions. In J. Barling , E. K. Kelloway , & M. R. Frone (Eds.), Handbook of work stress (pp. 607–622). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Cavanaugh, M. A. , Boswell, W. R. , Roehling, M. V. , & Boudreau, J. W. (2000). An empirical examination of self-reported work stress among U.S. managers . Journal of Applied Psychology, 85 , 65–74.
• Chong, D. S. F. , van Eerde, W. , Rutte, C. G. , & Chai, K. H. (2012). Bringing employees closer: The effect of proximity on communication when teams function under time pressure. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 29 , 205–215.
• Chrobot-Mason, D. , & Leslie, J. B. (2012). The role of multicultural competence and emotional intelligence in managing diversity. Psychologist-Manager Journal, 15 , 219–236.
• Cilliers, F. (2011). Individual diversity management and salutogenic functioning. International Review of Psychiatry, 23 , 501–507.
• Claessens, B. C. , Van Eerde, W. , Rutte, C. G. , & Roe, R. A. (2004). Planning behavior and perceived control of time at work . Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25 , 937–950.
• Cooper, C. L. , Dewe, P. D. , & O’Driscoll, M. P. (2011). Employee assistance programs: Strengths, challenges, and future roles. In J. C. Quick , L. E. Tetrick , J. C. Quick , L. E. Tetrick (Eds.), Handbook of occupational health psychology (2d ed.) (pp. 337–356). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
• Cooper, C. L. , Dewe, P. J. , & O’Driscoll, M. P. (2001). Organizational stress: A review and critique of theory, research, and applications . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
• Coovert, M. D. & Thompson, L. F. (2003). Technology and workplace health. In J. C. Quick & L. E. Tetrick (Eds.), Handbook of occupational health psychology (pp. 221–241). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
• Dawson, K. M. , O’Brien, K. E. , & Beehr, T. A. (2016). The role of hindrance stressors in the job demand-control-support model of occupational stress: A proposed theory revision . Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37 (3), 397–415.
• Dewe, P. , & Kompier, M. (2008). Foresight mental capital and wellbeing project: Wellbeing and work: Future challenges . London: The Government Office for Science.
• Dopkeen, J. C. , & DuBois, R. (2014). Stress in the workplace: A policy synthesis on its dimensions and prevalence . White paper. University of Illinois Chicago, Center for Employee Health Studies, School of Public Health.
• Dwyer, D. J. , & Ganster, D. C. (1991). The effects of job demands and control on employee attendance and satisfaction. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 12 , 595–608.
• Ebunlomo, E. O. , Hare-Everline, N. , Weber, A. , & Rich, J. (2015). Development of a comprehensive 12-week health promotion program for Houston Airport System. Texas Public Health Journal, 67 (1), 11–13.
• Edwards, J. R. (2008). Person-environment fit in organizations: An assessment of theoretical progress. The Academy of Management Annals, 2 , 167–230.
• Etzion, D. , Eden, D. , & Lapidot, Y. (1998). Relief from job stressors and burnout: Reserve service as a respite. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83 , 577–585.
• Firth-Cozens, J. (2003). Doctors, their wellbeing, and their stress: It’s time to be proactive about stress—and prevent it. British Medical Journal, 326 , 670–671.
• Flaxman, P. E. , & Bond, F. W. (2010). Worksite stress management training: Moderated effects and clinical significance. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 15 , 347–358.
• Folkman, S. , & Lazarus, R. S. (1980). An analysis of coping in a middle-aged community sample . Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 21 , 219–239.
• French, J. R. P., Jr. , & Caplan, R. D. (1972). Organizational stress and individual strain. In A. Marrow (Ed.), The failure of success . New York: AMACOM.
• French, J. R. P., Jr. , & Kahn, R. L. (1962). A programmatic approach to studying the industrial environment and mental health. Journal of Social Issues, 18 , 1–48.
• French, S. (2015, May 27). PCS workload and work-life balance survey 2013 . London: Public and Commercial Services Union.
• Fried, Y. , Laurence, G. A. , Shirom, A. , Melamed, S. , Toker, S. , Berliner, S. , & Shapira, I. (2013). The relationship between job enrichment and abdominal obesity: A longitudinal field study of apparently healthy individuals. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 18 , 458–468.
• Frone, M. R. (2000). Interpersonal conflict at work and psychological outcomes: Testing a model among young workers. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5 , 246–255.
• Giga, S. I. , Cooper, C. L. , & Faragher, B. (2003). The development of a framework for a comprehensive approach to stress management interventions at work. International Journal of Stress Management, 10 , 280–296.
• Glazer, S. (2008). Cross-cultural issues in stress and burnout. In J. R. B. Halbesleben (Ed.), Handbook of Stress and Burnout in Health Care (pp. 79–93). Huntington, NY: Nova Science Publishers.
• Glazer, S. , & Beehr, T. A. (2005). Consistency of the implications of three role stressors across four countries. Journal of Organizational Behavior , 26 , 467–487.
• Glazer, S. , Kożusznik, M. W. , Meyers, J. H. , & Ganai, O. (2014). Cultural implications of meaningfulness as a resource to mitigate work stress. In S. Leka & R. Sinclair (Eds.), Contemporary occupational health psychology: Global perspectives on research and practice (Vol. 3) (pp. 114–130). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
• Glazer, S. , Kożusznik, M. W. , & Shargo, I. A. (2012). Global virtual teams: A cure for- or a cause of- stress. In P. L. Perrewé , J. Halbesleben , & C. Rosen (Eds.), Research in occupational stress and well being: The role of the economic context on occupational stress and well being (Vol. 10, pp. 213–266). Bingley, U.K.: Emerald.
• Glazer, S. , Stetz, T. A. , & Izso, L. (2004). Effects of personality on subjective job stress: A cultural analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 37 , 645–658.
• Greenhaus, J. H. , & Beutell, N. J. (1985). Sources of conflict between work and family roles. Academy of Management Review, 10 , 76–88.
• Hackman, J. R. , & Oldham, G. R. (1980). Work Redesign . Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
• Hauke, A. , Flintrop, J. , Brun, E. , & Rugulies, R. (2011). The impact of work-related psychosocial stressors on the onset of musculoskeletal disorders in specific body regions: A review and meta-analysis of 54 longitudinal studies . Work & Stress, 25 , 243–256.
• Health & Safety Executive (n.d.). Cardiff and Value University Health Board—A stress case study .
• Heron, K. E. , & Smyth, J. M. (2010). Ecological momentary interventions: Incorporating mobile technology into psychosocial and health behaviour treatments. British Journal of Health Psychology, 15 , 1–39.
• Hershcovis, M. (2011). “Incivility, social undermining, bullying … oh my!”: A call to reconcile constructs within workplace aggression research . Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32 , 499–519.
• Higgins, J. E. , & Endler, N. S. (1995). Coping, life stress, and psychological and somatic distress . European Journal of Personality, 9 , 253–270.
• Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44 , 513–524.
• Hobfoll, S. E. (1998). Stress, culture, and community: The psychology and philosophy of stress . New York: Plenum Press.
• Hobfoll, S. E. (2001). The influence of culture, community, and the nested-self in the stress process: Advancing Conservation of Resources Theory. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 50 , 337–421.
• International Labor Organization (2012, July 5). Why stress at work matters . International Labor Organization.
• International Labor Organization (n.d.). Psychosocial risks and work-related stress . International Labor Organization.
• Jackson, S. E. , & Schuler, R. S. (1985). A meta-analysis and conceptual critique of research on role ambiguity and role conflict in work settings. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 36 , 16–78.
• Jayson, S. (2012, January 11). Yeah, we’re stressed but dealing with it; Americans report a decrease in stress for the first time in five years, maybe because it’s just the new normal . USA Today .
• Jex, S. M. , & Beehr, T. A. (1991). Emerging theoretical and methodological issues in the study of work-related stress. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 9 , 311–365.
• Jex, S. M. , & Elaqua, T. C. (1999). Time management as a moderator of relations between stressors and employee strain. Work & Stress, 13 , 182–191.
• Johnson, J. V. , & Hall, E. M. (1988). Job strain, workplace social support, and cardiovascular disease: A cross-sectional study of a random sample of the Swedish working population. American Journal of Public Health, 78 , 1336–1342.
• Kahn, R. L. , Wolfe, D. M. , Quinn, R. P. , Snoek, J. D. , & Rosenthal, R. A. (1964). Organizational stress: Studies in role conflict and ambiguity . New York: Wiley.
• Kannampallil, T. G. , Waicekauskas, K. , Morrow, D. G. , Kopren, K. M. , & Fu, W. (2013). External tools for collaborative medication scheduling. Cognition, Technology & Work, 15 , 121–131.
• Karasek, R. A. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications for job redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly , 24 , 285–308.
• Karasek, R. A. , & Theorell, T. (1990). Healthy work: Stress, productivity, and the reconstruction of working life . New York: Basic Books.
• van der Klink, J. J. L. , Blonk, R. W. B. , Schene, A. H. , & van Dijk, F. J. H. (2001). The benefits of interventions for work-related stress. American Journal of Public Health, 91 , 270–276.
• Knight, B. G. , Silverstein, M. , McCallum, T. J. , & Fox, L. S. (2000). A sociocultural stress and coping model for mental health outcomes among African American caregivers in southern California . The Journals of Gerontology: Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 55B , 142–150.
• Kossek, E. E. , Thompson, R. J. , Lautsch, B. A. (2015). Balanced workplace flexibility: Avoiding the traps. California Management Review, 57 , 5–25.
• Kożusznik, M. , Rodriguez, I. , & Peiró, J. M. (2012). Cross-national outcomes of stress appraisal. Cross Cultural Management, 19 , 507–525.
• Kożusznik, M. , Rodriguez, I. , & Peiró, J. M. (2015). Eustress and distress climates in teams: Patterns and outcomes. International Journal of Stress Management, 22 , 1–23.
• Kristof-Brown, A. L. , Zimmerman, R. D. , & Johnson, E. C. (2005). Consequences of individuals’ fit at work: A meta-analysis of person-job, person-organization, person-group, and person-supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58 , 281–342.
• LaMontagne, A. D. , Keegel, T. , Louie, A. M. , Ostry, A. , & Landsbergis, P. A. (2007). A systematic review of the job-stress intervention evaluation literature, 1990–2005. International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health, 13 , 268–280.
• LaRocco, J. M. , Tetrick, L. E. , & Meder, D. (1989). Differences in perceptions of work environment conditions, job attitudes, and health beliefs among military physicians, dentists, and nurses. Military Psychology, 1 , 135–151.
• Lazarus, R. S. , & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping . New York: Springer.
• Lazarus, R. S. , & Folkman, S. (1991). The concept of coping. In A. Monat & R. S. Lazarus (Eds.), Stress and coping: An anthology (3d ed.) (pp. 189–206). New York: Columbia University Press.
• LePine, J. A. , Podsakoff, N. P. , & LePine, M. A. (2005). A meta-analytic test of the challenge stressor-hindrance stressor framework: An explanation for inconsistent relationships among stressors and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 48 , 764–775.
• Lewin, K. (1936). Principles of topological psychology . New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Lewin K. (1951). Field theory in social science . New York: Harper and Row.
• Lewin, K. (1997). Resolving social conflicts & Field theory in social science . Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Previously published in 1948 and 1951.
• Lin, B. C. , Kain, J. M. , & Fritz, C. (2013). Don’t interrupt me! An examination of the relationship between intrusions at work and employee strain. International Journal of Stress Management, 20 , 77–94.
• Liu, C. , & Li, H. (2017) Stressor and stressor appraisals: The moderating effect of task efficacy . Journal of Business and Psychology , 1–14.
• Liu, C. , Liu, Y. , Spector, P. E. , Shi, L. (2011). The interaction of job autonomy and conflict with supervisor in China and the United States: A qualitative and quantitative comparison. International Journal of Stress Management, 18 , 222–245.
• Liu, C. , Spector, P. E. , & Shi, L. (2007). Cross-national job stress: A quantitative and qualitative study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28 , 209–239.
• Luckhaupt, S. E. , Tak, S. , Calvert, G. M. (2010). The prevalence of short sleep duration by industry and occupational in the National Health Interview Survey. Sleep, 33 , 149–159.
• Luthans, F. , Youssef, C. M. , & Avolio, B. J. (2007). Psychological capital: Developing the human competitive edge . New York: Oxford University Press.
• Macan, T. H. (1994). Time management: Test of a process model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79 , 381–391.
• Macan, T. H. , Shahani, C. , Dipboye, R. L. , & Philips, A. P. (1990). College students’ time management: Correlations with academic performance and stress. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82 , 760–768.
• Masuda, A. D. , Poelmans, S. A. Y. , Allen, T. D. , Spector, P. E. , Lapierre, L. M. , Cooper, C. L. , et al. (2012). Flexible work arrangements availability and their relationship with work-to-family conflict, job satisfaction, and turnover intentions: A comparison of three country clusters. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 61 , 1–29.
• McMahon, M. (2007). Think you might be addicted to email? You’re not alone . AOL.
• Monat, A. , & Lazarus, R. S. (Eds.). (1991). Stress and coping: An anthology (3d ed.). New York: Columbia University Press.
• Morimoto, H. , Shimada, H. , & Ozaki, K. (2013). Does stressor evaluation mediate sociocultural influence on coping selection? An investigation using Japanese employees. International Journal of Stress Management, 20 , 1–19.
• Narayanan, L. , Menon, S. , & Spector, P. E. (1999). A cross-cultural comparison of job stressors and reactions among employees holding comparable jobs in two countries. International Journal of Stress Management, 6 , 197–212.
• National Sleep Foundation (2005). Segment profiles . National Sleep Foundation.
• National Sleep Foundation (2013). How much sleep do adults need? . National Sleep Foundation.
• Nelson, D. L. , & Simmons, B. L. (2003). Health psychology and work stress: A more positive approach. In J. C. Quick & L. E. Tetrick (Eds.), Handbook of Occupational Health Psychology (pp. 97–119). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
• Norris, P. A. , Fahrion, S. L. , & Oikawa, L. O. (2007). Autogenic biofeedback training in psychophysiological therapy and stress management. In P. M. Lehrer , R. L. Woolfolk , & W. E. Sime (Eds.), Principles and practices of stress management (3d ed., pp. 175–205). New York: Guilford.
• Ogawa, N. (2009). Stress, coping behavior, and social support in Japan and the United States. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A , 69 , 3802.
• Oksanen, K. , & Ståhle, P. (2013). Physical environment as a source for innovation: Investigating the attributes of innovative space. Journal of Knowledge Management, 17 , 815–827.
• Page, K. M. , & Vella-Brodrick, D. A. (2009). The “what,” “why” and “how” of employee well-being: A new model. Social Indicators Research, 90 , 441–458.
• Parasuraman, S. , & Cleek, M. A. (1984). Coping behaviors and managers’ affective reactions to role stressors . Journal of Vocational Behavior, 24 , 179–193.
• Parasuraman, S. , & Purohit, Y. S. (2000). Distress and boredom among orchestra musicians: The two faces of stress. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5 , 74–83.
• Pawelski, J. O. (2016). Defining the “positive” in positive psychology: Part II. A normative analysis . Journal of Positive Psychology, 11 , 357–365.
• Pearlin, L. I. , & Schooler, C. (1978). The structure of coping . Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 19 , 2–21.
• Peeters, M. A. G. , & Rutte, C. G. (2005). Time management behavior as a moderator for the job demand-control interaction. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology , 1 , 64–75.
• Peters, L. H. , & O’Connor, E. J. (1980). Situational constraints and work outcomes: The influence of a frequently overlooked construct. Academy of Management Review , 5, 391–397.
• Peters, L. H. , & O’Connor, E. J. (1988). Measuring work obstacles: Procedures, issues, and implications. In F. D. Schoorman & B. Schneider (Eds.), Facilitating work effectiveness (pp. 105–123). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
• Polly, S. (2014, July 2). Workplace well-being is not an oxymoron . Positive Psychology News Daily .
• Quick, C. J. , Quick, J. D. , Nelson, D. L. , & Hurrell, J. J. (2003). Preventive stress management in organizations . Washington, DC: APA.
• Quillian-Wolever, R. E. , & Wolever, M. E. (2003). Stress management at work . In J. C. Quick & L. E. Tetrick (Eds.), Handbook of occupational health psychology (pp. 355–375). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
• Ragsdale, J. M. , Beehr, T. A. , Grebner, S. , & Han, K. (2011). An integrated model of weekday stress and weekend recovery of students. International Journal of Stress Management, 18 , 153–180.
• Richardson, K. M. , & Rothstein, H. R. (2008). Effects of occupational stress management intervention programs: A meta-analysis. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 13 , 69–93.
• Rodríguez, I. , Kozusznik, M. W. , & Peiró, J. M. (2013). Development and validation of the Valencia Eustress-Distress Appraisal Scale. International Journal of Stress Management, 20 , 279–308.
• Rothbaum, F. , Weisz, J. R. , & Snyder, S. S. (1982). Changing the world and changing the self: A two-process model of perceived control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42 , 5–37.
• Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, 80 , 609.
• Rousseau, V. , & Aubé, C. (2010). Social support at work and affective commitment to the organization: The moderating effect of job resource adequacy and ambient conditions. Journal of Social Psychology, 150 , 321–340.
• Saunders, T. , Driskell, J. E. , Johnston, J. , & Salas, E. (1996). The effect of stress inoculation training on anxiety and performance. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 1 , 170–186.
• Schaubroeck, J. , Ganster, D. C. , Sime, W. E. , & Ditman, D. (1993). A field experiment testing supervisory role clarification. Personnel Psychology, 46 , 1–25.
• Selmer, J. (2002). Coping strategies applied by Western vs overseas Chinese business expatriates in China. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 13 , 19–34.
• Siegrist, J. (1996). Adverse health effects of high effort/low reward conditions. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 1 , 27–41.
• Siegrist, J. (2010). Effort-reward imbalance at work and cardiovascular diseases. International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health, 23 , 279–285.
• Siegrist, J. , Dragano, N. , Nyberg, S. T. , Lunau, T. , Alfredsson, L. , Erbel, R. , et al. (2014). Validating abbreviated measures of effort-reward imbalance at work in European cohort studies: The IPD-Work consortium. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, 87 , 249–256.
• Sinha, B. K. , Willson, L. R. , & Watson, D. C. (2000). Stress and coping among students in India and Canada . Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue Canadienne Des Sciences Du Comportement , 32 (4), 218–225.
• Sinnott, J. , & Vatz, R. E. (2015, March 13). Maryland doesn’t trust state employees to manage their health . Baltimore Sun .
• Siu, O. L. , Cooper, C. L. , & Phillips, D. R. (2013, July 1). Intervention studies on enhancing work well-being, reducing burnout, and improving recovery experiences among Hong Kong health care workers and teachers . International Journal of Stress Management, 21 , 69–84.
• Sonnentag, S. (2012). Psychological detachment from work during leisure time: The benefits of mentally disengaging from work. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21 , 114–118.
• Sørensen, O. H. , & Holman, D. (2014). A participative intervention to improve employee well-being in knowledge work jobs: A mixed-methods evaluation study. Work & Stress, 28 , 67–86.
• Spector, P. E. , Chen, P. Y. , & O’Connell, B. J. (2000). A longitudinal study of relations between job stressors and job strains while controlling for prior negative affectivity and strains. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85 , 211–218.
• Spector, P. E. , & Jex, S. M. (1998). Development of four self-report measures of job stressors and strains: Interpersonal Conflict at Work Scale, Organizational Constraints Scale, Quantitative Workload Inventory, and Physical Symptoms Inventory. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 3 , 356–367.
• State of Maryland . (n.d.). Wellness program frequently asked questions . Maryland.gov.
• Strentz, T. , & Auerbach, S. M. (1988). Adjustment to the stress of simulated captivity: Effects of emotion-focused versus problem-focused preparation on hostages differing in locus of control . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55 , 652–660.
• Swanberg, J. E. , McKechnie, S. P. , Ojha, M. U. , & James, J. B. (2011). Schedule control, supervisor support and work engagement: A winning combination for workers in hourly jobs? Journal of Vocational Behavior, 79 , 613–624.
• Tarafdar, M. , Tu, Q. , Ragu-Nathan, B. S. , & Ragu-Nathan, T. , (2007). The impact of technostress on role stress and productivity. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24 , 301–328.
• Tepper, B. J. , & Henle, C. A. (2011). A case for recognizing distinctions among constructs that capture interpersonal mistreatment in work organizations . Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32 , 487–498.
• Tetrick, L. E. , & Winslow, C. J. (2015). Workplace stress management interventions and health promotion. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2 , 583–603.
• Thomas, D. C. , Au, K. , & Ravlin, E. C. (2003). Cultural variation and the psychological contract. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24 , 451–471.
• Toker, S. , Shirom, A. , Melamed, S. , & Armon, G. (2012). Work characteristics as predictors of diabetes incidence among apparently healthy employees. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 17 , 259–267.
• Velez, B. L. , Moradi, B. , & Brewster, M. E. (2013). Testing the tenets of minority stres theory in workplace contexts. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 60 , 532–542.
• Verquer, M. L. , Beehr, T. A. , & Wagner, S. H. (2003). A meta-analysis of relations between person–organization fit and work attitudes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63 , 473–489.
• Villani, D. , Grassi, A. , Cognetta, C. , Toniolo, D. , Cipresso, P. , & Riva, G. (2013). Self-help stress management training through mobile phones: An experience with oncology nurses. Psychological Services , 10 , 315–322.
• Vischer, J. C. (2007). The effects of the physical environment on job performance: Towards a theoretical model of workspace stress. Stress & Health, 23 , 175–184.
• Wasti, S. A. , & Cortina, L. M. (2002). Coping in context: Sociocultural determinants of responses to sexual harassment . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 83, 394–405.
• Willert, M. V. , Thulstrup, A. M. , Hertz, J. , & Bonde, J. P. (2010). Sleep and cognitive failures improved by a three-month stress management intervention . International Journal of Stress Management, 17 , 193–213.
• Xiao Q. , Ottosson I. , & Carlsson I. (2013). Stressors and coping strategies in Chinese and Swedish students at a Swedish university. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 21 , 309–312.

Related Articles

• Work and Family
• Organizational Climate and Culture
• Physical Activity and Stress Reactivity
• The Roles of Psychological Stress, Physical Activity, and Dietary Modifications on Cardiovascular Health Implications
• Inflammation as a Biomarker Method in Lifespan Developmental Methodology
• Stress and Coping Theory Across the Adult Lifespan
• Occupational Health Psychology

Printed from Oxford Research Encyclopedias, Psychology. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 25 August 2024

• Cookie Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility
• [185.39.149.46]
• 185.39.149.46

Character limit 500 /500

A Systematic Review of Workplace Stress and Its Impact on Mental Health and Safety

• Conference paper
• First Online: 02 December 2023
• Cite this conference paper

• Gabriella Maria Schr Torres 12 ,
• Jessica Backstrom 12 &
• Vincent G. Duffy 12  

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 14055))

Included in the following conference series:

• International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction

760 Accesses

2 Citations

Workplace stress and health are important subsets of the safety engineering field. Engineers need to maintain physical, emotional, and mental health to be productive and safe employees, which is beneficial to their employers through the reduction of accidents. Besides the human element, which may involve injury, death, or other lasting physical or mental consequences, accidents cost companies time, money, and valuable resources spent on extensive litigation. This paper focuses on mental health within the context of workplace stress since the globally felt adverse effects of the COVID-19 pandemic have brought high priority to research on identifying and combating mental health problems. While most mental health research focuses on healthcare professionals, our contribution is the extrapolation of this research to engineering. A systemic literature review was performed, which consisted of gathering data, using multiple bibliometric software, and providing discussion and conclusions drawn from the metadata. The software utilized for analysis included Vicinitas, Scopus, Google n-gram and Google Scholar, VOSviewer, Scite.ai, CiteSpace, BibExcel, Harzing, and MaxQDA. The original keywords included “workplace stress”, “mental health”, and “engineering,” but our analysis revealed additional trending terms of mindfulness, nursing, and COVID-19. Our findings showed that workplace stress is experienced throughout multiple industries and causes significant harm to employees and their organizations. There are practical solutions to workplace stress studied in nursing and construction that can be applied to other fields that need intervention.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Influence of psychosocial safety climate on occupational health and safety: a scoping review

Occupational stress among workers in the health service in Zimbabwe: causes, consequences and interventions

Workplace Stress and Health: Insights into Ways to Assist Healthcare Workers During COVID-19

Goetsch, D.: Chapter 11: stress and safety. In: Occupational Safety and Health for Technologists, Engineers, and Managers, Ninth, pp. 243–55. New York, Pearson (2019)

Google Scholar  

Brauer, R.: Section 31–6: job stress and other stresses in chapter 31: human behavior and performance in safety. In: Safety and Health for Engineers, Third, pp. 921–24. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley (2016)

Sallinen, M., Kecklund, G.: Shift work, sleep, and sleepiness differences betwen shift schedules and systems. Scandanavian J. Work, Environ. Health 36 (2), 121–133 (2010)

Article   Google Scholar  

Moustafa, A.: Mental Health Effects of COVID-19. Elsevier, London (2021)

Latino, F., Cataldi, S., Fischetti, F.: Effects of an 8-week yoga-based physical exercise intervention on teachers’ burnout. Sustain. (Switzerland) 13 (4), 1–16 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13042104

Darling, E.L., et al.: A mixed-method study exploring barriers and facilitators to midwives’ mental health in ontario. BMC Women’s Health 23 (155) (2013). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-023-02309-z

Ayalp, G.G., Serter, M., Metinal, Y.B., Tel, M.Z.: Well-being of construction professionals: modelling the root factors of job-related burnout among civil engineers at contracting organisations. In: Advances in Sociology Research, vol. 40, pp. 1–38 (2023)

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). 2022. Healthcare Workers: Work Stress & Mental Health. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 1 Dec 2022. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/healthcare/workstress.html

University of Maryland. 2023. Systematic Review. University Libraries. 12 April 2023. https://lib.guides.umd.edu/SR/welcome

World Health Organization (WHO). 2022. “Mental Health.” WHO Newsroom. 17 June 2022. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/mental-health-strengthening-ourresponse

Wasser, J.: NASA for Kids: Intro to Engineering. National Geographic. 27 Sept 2022. https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/nasa-kids-intro-engineering/

Borenstein, J.: 2020. Stigma, Prejudice, and Discrimination Against People with Mental Illnesses. American Psychiatric Association. Aug 2020. https://www.psychiatry.org/patients-families/stigma-and-discrimination

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2021. A Brief History of the Origin of Ergonomics and Human Factors. Emergency Services Ergonomics and Wellness. 8 Feb 2021. https://www.usfa.fema.gov/a-z/health-safety-wellness/ergonomics/ch1-origin-ergonomics-human-factors.html

Bell, K.: “The Mental Health Systems Act of 1980.” Documents to the People. 2022. https://journals.ala.org/index.php/dttp/article/view/7933/11034

Bartlett, L., Lovell, P., Otahal, P., Sanderson, K.: Acceptability, feasibility, and efficacy of a workplace mindfulness program for public sector employees: a pilot randomized controlled trial with informant reports. Mindfulness 8 (3), 639–654 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-016-0643-4

Allexandre, D., Bernstein, A.M., Walker, E., Hunter, J., Roizen, M.F., Morledge, T.J.: A webbased mindfulness stress management program in a corporate call center. J. Occup. Environ. Med.up. Environ. Med. 58 (3), 254–264 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0000000000000680

Larsen, R.C.: Workers’ compensation stress claims: Workplace causes and prevention. Psychiatr. Ann. 25 , 234–237 (1995). https://doi.org/10.3928/0048-5713-19950401-10

Cheung, T., Yip, P.S.F.: Depression, anxiety and symptoms of stress among Hong Kong nurses: a cross-sectional study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health (2015). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph120911072

Cheung A.T., Ho, L.L.K., Li, W.H.C., Chung, J.O.K., Smith G.D.: Psychological distress experienced by nurses amid the fifth wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Hong Kong: a qualitative study, Front. Public Health 10 , 1023302 (2023). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.1023302

Mansoor, A.E.R., O’Neil, C.A., McDonald, D., Fraser, V.J., Babcock, H.M., Kwon, J.H.: Knowledge, beliefs, and practices related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection and vaccination in healthcare personnel working at nonacute care facilities. Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 44 (10), 1657–1662 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2023.45

Restauri, N., Sheridan, A.D.: Burnout and posttraumatic stress disorder in the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic: intersection, impact, and interventions. J. Am. Coll. Radiol. 17 (7), 921–926 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2020.05.021

Enshassi, A., El-Rayyes, Y., Alkilani, S.: Job stress, job burnout and safety performance in the palestinian construction industry. J. Financ. Manag. Prop. Constr. 20 (2), 170–187 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1108/JFMPC-01-2015-0004

Chen, S.W., Wang, P.C., Hsin, P.L., Oates, A., Sun, I.W., Liu, S.I.: Job stress models, depressive disorders and work performance of engineers in microelectronics industry. Int. Arch. Occup. Environ. Healthnt. Arch. Occup. Environ. Health 84 (1), 91–103 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-010-0538-y

Saleh, S.D., Desai, K.: An empirical analysis of job stress and job satisfaction of engineers. J. Eng. Tech. Manage. 7 (1), 37–48 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1016/0923-4748(90)90024-2

Auster, E.R., Ekstein, K.L.: Professional women’s mid-career satisfaction: An empirical exploration of female engineers. Women Manag. Rev. 20 (1), 4–23 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1108/09649420510579540

National Science Foundation. SCH: Detecting and mapping stress patterns across space and time: Multimodal modeling of individuals in real-world physical and social work environments. Award Number 2204942, 22 Aug 2022

National Science Foundation. CHS: Medium: collaborative research: managing stress in the workplace: Unobtrusive Monitoring and Adaptive Interventions. Award Number 1704636, 21 June 2017

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, 47906, USA

Gabriella Maria Schr Torres, Jessica Backstrom & Vincent G. Duffy

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Gabriella Maria Schr Torres or Jessica Backstrom .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Tsinghua University, Beijing, China

Chongqing University, Chongqing, China

Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA

Vincent G. Duffy

Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas (FORTH), Heraklion, Crete, Greece

Margherita Antona

University of Crete and Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas (FORTH), Heraklion, Crete, Greece

Constantine Stephanidis

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Cite this paper.

Torres, G.M.S., Backstrom, J., Duffy, V.G. (2023). A Systematic Review of Workplace Stress and Its Impact on Mental Health and Safety. In: Gao, Q., Zhou, J., Duffy, V.G., Antona, M., Stephanidis, C. (eds) HCI International 2023 – Late Breaking Papers. HCII 2023. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 14055. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-48041-6_41

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-48041-6_41

Published : 02 December 2023

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-48040-9

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-48041-6

eBook Packages : Computer Science Computer Science (R0)

Share this paper

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• MEMBER LOGIN
• MEDIA RELATIONS

Military Stress

• ASSESSMENTS
• DOCUMENTARIES

Workplace Stress

Numerous studies show job stress is a major stress or for American adults and it has escalated progressively during the past few decades. Increased levels of job stress ( perceived as having lots of demands but little control ) have been associated with increased rates of heart attack, hypertension, and other disorders. In New York, Los Angel e s , and other large cities , the relationship between job stress and heart attacks is so well acknowledged that any police officer who suffers a coronary event on or off the job is assumed to have a work-related injury and is compensated accordingly.

Stress is a highly personalized phenomenon and can vary widely even in identical situations . One survey showed that having to complete paperwork was more stressful for many police officers than the dangers associated with pursuing criminals. The severity of job stress depends on the magnitude of the demands and the individual’s sense of control or decision-making latitude in dealing with them. Scientific studies based on this model confirm that workers who perceive they are subjected to high demands but have little control are at increased risk for cardiovascular disease.

Empathetic management practices can encourage communication and compassion amongst teams and create a safe environment for employees to be transparent about their mental health and stress levels. This positive environment can combat stress and prevent burnout.

Take our FREE Workplace Stress Scale

This 8-question assessment is a valuable starting point to gauge your stress levels in the workplace. Take this proactive step toward managing your stress effective ly, and prevent stress from controlling your life .

Burnout in the Workplace

Workplace stress is likely to be an issue for all professionals at some stage in their careers. No matter your industry or experience, all professionals need to practice managing stress for success and happiness in and out of work.

P oorly managed workplace stress can cause workers to experience burnout, a phenomenon we’ve all become more familiar with since the coronavirus pandemic.

Workplace stress tests us all, especially in achieving a work-life balance. According to research from Indeed , 52% of employees feel burn out , and it’s never been more important to understand how it can impact our lives . In 2020 , online searches for “ signs of burnout ” increased by 24% compared to the previous year . The good news is there are many ways employers and employees can reduce the probability of experiencing burnout. From self-care to evolving company cultures, the future of work doesn’t have to include burnout a s commonplace.

In the age of multiple screens and constant communication, learning how to spot the warning signs of burnout and prioritizing your mental health is essential to a sustainable career . In this guide , we explore what burnout looks and feels like, how to avoid it, and how to progress in your career without compromising your self .

We all understand burnout in the context of workplace stress — putting in longer hours , meeting important deadlines , etc . Research by Mental Health America and FlexJobs shows that 76% of respondents agreed that workplace stress affects their mental health , and they have experienced burnout.

Historically, the work culture in most companies is centered around productivity. And this is because businesses, by nature, are driven by profit, which is achieved by operating at maximum output. This often translates to productivity coming first, and inevitably, the needs of people com ing second.

This environment is ripe for burnout because prioritizing profits and results become s a work cultur e norm . And worse, employees may be afraid to voic e concerns about their mental health because it could reflect negatively on their performance .

Tips for Promoting Employee Well-Being & Mental Health in the Workplace

A work culture that normalizes long working hours and neglects mental health is much more likely to see staff experience burnout.

The Cost of Stress

Besides the toll on a person’s health, stress costs businesses ( and the economy )  billions of dollars in absenteeism, decreased productivity, lower output, employee turnover, healthcare costs . Because workplace stress is inevitable, providing stress management tools can mitigate stress and lower its costs to the business over time .

• Depression and anxiety cost the global economy approximately $1 trillion in lost productivity.
• An estimated 1 million workers are absent every day because of stress.
• Job stress is estimated to cost the US industry more than $300 billion in losses due to absenteeism, diminished productivity, and accidents.
• Over 5 work hours are lost weekly to employees thinking about their stressors.
• Work-related stress costs the United States $190 billion in annual healthcare costs.

Free Evidence-based Workforce Resilience and Well-being Course

Learn How to Control Your Reactivity to Stress with this Favorite Certified Online Course.

In this course you will learn behaviors, coping strategies and mindsets that lead to increased resilience against the negative impacts of stress.

The Silent Rhythm of Workplace Stress

New study reveals link between white-collar work and atrial fibrillation..

Updated August 19, 2024 | Reviewed by Jessica Schrader

• What Is Stress?
• Take our Burnout Test
• Find a therapist to overcome stress
• A new 18-year study links job strain and effort-reward imbalance to the risk of atrial fibrillation (AFib).
• Workers experiencing high job strain had an 83% higher risk of developing AFib.
• Creating healthier work environments could potentially reduce AFib risk among employees.

Your heart races unexpectedly, pounding against your chest. You feel a flutter, an irregularity in its beat. Shortness of breath follows, accompanied by weakness and fatigue. These aren't just symptoms of a stressful day at the office—they could be signs of atrial fibrillation (AFib), a heart condition that new research suggests may be linked to the very nature of our work lives.

Consider Jay King, an engineer at Abbott with over 16 years of experience in high-stakes roles. From vascular production to leading special projects in rapid diagnostics, Jay's career mirrors that of many professionals navigating today's demanding corporate landscape. In 2020, he even played a crucial role in Abbott's COVID-19 testing ramp-up. Yet, despite his active lifestyle, a routine physical revealed an unexpected diagnosis: Jay was in AFib.

New Research Unveils Workplace-AFib Connection

A recent 18-year prospective study published in the Journal of the American Heart Association sheds light on why professionals like Jay might be at risk. The research, led by Canadian researchers and published last week in the Journal of the American Heart Association , examined the relationship between psychosocial stressors at work and AFib incidence among nearly 6,000 white-collar workers.

The findings are striking:

• Workers exposed to high job strain (high demands combined with low control) had an 83% increased risk of developing AFib.
• Those experiencing an effort-reward imbalance at work (high effort with low recognition or compensation) faced a 44% higher risk.
• Individuals exposed to both these stressors had nearly double the risk of AFib compared to their less-stressed counterparts.

But what exactly is AFib? It's the most common form of heart arrhythmia, affecting about 1 in 4 middle-aged adults in their lifetime. During AFib, the heart's upper chambers beat chaotically and irregularly, out of coordination with the lower chambers. This can lead to blood clots, stroke, heart failure, and other heart-related complications.

The study's findings illuminate how our modern work environments might be contributing to this health risk. Long hours, high-pressure deadlines, constant connectivity, and the blurring of work-life boundaries are all hallmarks of many white-collar jobs. These factors can create a perfect storm of chronic stress, potentially setting the stage for heart issues like AFib.

Detoxing Management: A Heart-Healthy Approach

This research underscores the critical need for what I call "detoxing management." It's not just about productivity anymore; it's about creating work environments that don't jeopardize our health. Managers and organizational leaders have a crucial role to play in mitigating these risks.

While the link between workplace stress and AFib risk is concerning, there are proactive steps both managers and employees can take to create healthier work environments. My own heart attack last year sparked a deep curiosity about the relationship between work and heart health. This personal experience, combined with my work on detoxing management, led me to develop the RISE Framework for Healthy Leadership , which offers guidance that can be particularly relevant in light of this new research:

• Relate : Managers should get to know their team members as individuals. Understanding each person's strengths and how they best contribute can reduce stress and increase job satisfaction.
• Inspire : Foster a sense of purpose in your team's work. When employees believe in the meaning of their efforts, it can make hard work feel rewarding rather than draining.
• Simplify : Clear expectations and focused priorities can significantly reduce workplace stress. Conflicting demands are often more stressful than hard work itself.
• Empower : Give employees a sense of control over their work. This agency can act as a buffer against the negative effects of job strain.

By implementing these principles, leaders can create work environments that are not only more productive but also potentially healthier for employees' hearts.

The implications of this research extend far beyond the individual. They challenge us to reconsider our work cultures and management practices. As we strive for success in our careers, we must also prioritize creating environments that support our health and well-being.

Awareness is the first step. By recognizing the potential health impacts of workplace stress, we can begin to make informed choices—both as individuals managing our own careers and as leaders shaping our organizations. The rhythm of our work lives shouldn't come at the cost of our heart's rhythm. It's time to listen closely to what our bodies are telling us about our work, and to create workplaces that truly work for our health.

Abbott. (2022, September 15). He Was in AFib. He Didn't Know It. Would You? Retrieved from https://www.abbott.com/corpnewsroom/healthy-heart/he-was-in-AFib-he-didnt-know-It-would-you.html

E., Lavigne-Robichaud, M., Milot, A., Brisson, C., Gilbert-Ouimet, M., Vézina, M., ... & Trudel, X. (2024). Psychosocial Stressors at Work and Atrial Fibrillation Incidence: An 18-Year Prospective Study. Journal of the American Heart Association, 13(2), e032414. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1161/JAHA.123.032414

Jake Breeden is a leadership expert who partners with companies to unlock high performance through workshops on influence, trust, psychological safety, team performance, innovation, and challenging the status quo.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

Sticking up for yourself is no easy task. But there are concrete skills you can use to hone your assertiveness and advocate for yourself.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

Workplace Stress Management: 11 Best Strategies & Worksheets

An American Psychological Association survey found that 31% of staff felt stressed out during their workday (cited in Tetrick & Winslow, 2015).

Help is available. Workplace stress management and wellness programs can help reduce the degree and impact of stress and restore an employee’s depleted psychological resources (Tetrick & Winslow, 2015).

This article explores what we mean by workplace stress management and introduces mechanisms and activities that can provide relief and help staff cope.

Before you continue, we thought you might like to download our three Stress & Burnout Prevention Exercises (PDF) for free . These science-based exercises will equip you and those you work with with tools to manage stress better and find a healthier balance in your life.

This Article Contains:

What is workplace stress management, how to prevent stress at work: 3 strategies, 2 helpful coping mechanisms for employees, stress relief at work: 3 worksheets to reduce stress, 3 activities & worksheets to cope with stress, how to craft prevention programs & workshops, assessing stress: 4 questionnaires & scales, best stress-relief tools from positivepsychology.com, a take-home message.

The relationship between the workplace and our psychological, cognitive, and physiological responses to stress is complex, impacted by “a broad set of occupational and work demands as well as environmental stressors” (Quick & Henderson, 2016, p. 2).

And yet, our stress response at work can typically be attributed to one of the following four workplace demands (Quick & Henderson, 2016):

• Task demands Job insecurity, workload, occupation, etc.
• Role demands Role conflict and ambiguity
• Physical demands Workplace, lighting, and temperature
• Interpersonal demands Staff density, leadership style, and personality conflicts

Workplace stress management (WSM) has been significantly influenced by the theory of preventive stress management, introduced in 1979, which proposes that it is not the stimuli that decide the degree of stress experienced by the individual, but the individual’s response to those stressors (Hargrove, Quick, Nelson, & Quick, 2011).

Over the years, many theoretical frameworks and organizational wellness programs that fall under the umbrella term of WSM have been proposed to understand occupational stress and employee wellbeing. WSM aims to understand specific stressors and take positive steps to reduce their effects (Tetrick & Winslow, 2015).

WSM interventions are typically divided into three types:

• Primary Proactive and involved in preventing stress and promoting employee wellbeing (including wellness programs, conflict management, etc.)
• Secondary Proactive and reactive, to help remove risk factors (including coping skills, employee fitness programs, job redesign)
• Tertiary Reactive, for employees who need help (including counseling, employee assistance programs, and Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy)

Stress interventions include (modified from Tetrick & Winslow, 2015):

• Cognitive-behavioral interventions Primary and secondary interventions. Changing cognitions and reinforcing active coping skills .
• Relaxation techniques Secondary and tertiary interventions. Physical and mental relaxation techniques to help cope with the consequences of stress.
• Multimodal programs Secondary interventions. Acquiring passive and active coping skills. They consist of a combination of approaches, including relaxation and cognitive-behavioral skills.
• Organization-focused interventions Mostly primary interventions, but some considered secondary. Organizational development and job redesign.
• Individual-level interventions Secondary or tertiary interventions, including relaxation, meditation, and cognitive-behavioral skills training.
• Organizational-level interventions Primary and secondary interventions, including changing working conditions and employee participation.
• Systems approach Primary and secondary, combining individual and organizational interventions.

Such interventions are often used in combination to prevent, reduce, and cope with stress.

While many of the following strategies appear simple, they require focus and commitment. Others foster a new mindset and change how we relate to work and occupational stress.

1. Controlling your stress

Our brains are constantly flooded with increasing demands and information, causing us stress and reducing our ability to focus and solve problems.

There are many steps we can take to avoid or reduce stress, including promoting positive emotions, taking physical care of our brain, and becoming more organized (modified from Hallowell, 2014).

• Ensure you get adequate sleep (don’t eat late at night and reduce caffeine and alcohol intake).
• Enjoy a balanced diet and stay hydrated.
• Exercise throughout the week and get time away from your desk, preferably in nature.
• Schedule regular catch-ups with people you value.
• Break large tasks into smaller ones.
• Maintain a tidy work environment.
• Schedule some ‘think time’ in your busy schedule.
• Allocate time for lunch and take it away from your desk.
• Recognize when you do your best work. Plan your most demanding tasks for those times.
• Walk around more, stand, or listen to music, depending on what works best for you.
• Set reminders for a ‘hard stop’ at the end of the workday.

2. When you feel overwhelmed

• Slow yourself down. When stressed, we often move into panic mode.
• Take time to perform a calming exercise.
• Move around. Walk outside or head to the break room/kitchen.
• Ask for help. Seek out people you trust.

3. Managing your energy

Demanding jobs, long hours, and increasing workloads can leave us feeling emotional, disengaged, stressed, and exhausted (Schwartz & McCarthy, 2014).

Creating a series of habits , practices, and rituals can promote your physical, emotional, mental, and spiritual energy (modified from Schwartz & McCarthy, 2014).

Physical energy

• Recognize times in the day when you feel tired or unable to concentrate. Step away from the desk, meet colleagues, or perform something interesting.
• Aim to focus for 90 to 120 minutes at a time, taking regular breaks.
• Eat smaller, lighter meals during the day to maintain energy.

Emotional energy

• Practice abdominal breathing to manage negative emotions , such as irritability, anxiety, and impatience.
• Express gratitude and appreciation for others while adopting self-compassion for yourself.
• Use a reverse lens to see a situation from the other person’s point of view. Use a long lens to consider how we might look at the issue in six months. Use a wide lens to consider the bigger picture.

Mental energy

• Switch off email and move phones away to perform high-concentration tasks.
• Schedule specific times in the day to answer and respond to emails.
• At the end of each day, make a list of key actions for tomorrow.

Spiritual energy

• Identify when you perform at your best. What strengths do you enjoy using, and how can you use them more often?
• On your commute home, or the last 20 minutes of your day when working remotely, relax. This may mean sitting mindfully or listening to music before returning to home life.
• Recognize your core values. Reflect on whether you are using and showing them to others around you. Find opportunities to be your authentic self.

We all have finite limits before reducing energy levels and increasing stress interrupt what we can achieve. Investing in healthy work habits can maintain productivity and performance throughout the day.

Download 3 Free Stress & Burnout Prevention Exercises (PDF)

These detailed, science-based exercises will equip you or your clients with tools to manage stress better and find a healthier balance in their life.

Download 3 Stress & Burnout Prevention Exercises Pack (PDF)

By filling out your name and email address below.

• Email Address *
• Your Expertise * Your expertise Therapy Coaching Education Counseling Business Healthcare Other
• Name This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

How we experience and handle stress changes its cognitive, emotional, and behavioral impact (Crum & Crum, 2018). The following two coping mechanisms offer practical approaches for managing stress in the workplace and can be implemented with little training.

Mindfulness

Research has confirmed the success of mindfulness at reducing perceived stress and emotional exhaustion, and improving sleep quality and job satisfaction (Tetrick & Winslow, 2015).

While we may sometimes think of mindfulness as passive and accepting, it is often the first step toward growth and change. While incredibly valuable for handling life stresses, it is also powerful enough to enrich positive and happy times in our lives (Shapiro, 2020).

Mindfulness expert Shauna Shapiro (2020) considers three points essential to mindfulness:

• Intention – why we pay attention
• Attention – attending to the present
• Attitude – how we pay attention (compassion, kindness, etc.)

A review of the literature confirms that mindfulness is a powerful and cost-free approach to coping with stress (Shapiro, 2020).

Reframing stress

While we are familiar with the negative impacts of stress, we sometimes forget that achieving a stress-free life is unlikely and, perhaps, impossible (Crum & Crum, 2018).

We must recognize that some degree of stress is crucial to our personal and professional growth. Stress reminds us that something is important to us, that we care.

People who adopt a “stress is enhancing” mindset rather than a “stress is debilitating” mindset perform better and experience fewer negative health consequences (Crum & Crum, 2018).

But how do we see stress differently?

We can rethink stress using the following three steps (Crum & Crum, 2018; Crum, Salovey, & Achor, 2013):

• See it Rather than deny stress, you must recognize and name the stress you are facing.

“I am stressed about my job interview.” “I am stressed about finals.”

Acknowledging stress can help you move brain activity from being automatic and reactive to conscious and deliberate.

• Own it Recognize that what you are stressing about must be important to you. “Owning this realization unleashes positive motivation” (Crum & Crum, 2018, p. 73).
• Use it Stress is not designed to kill us, but to boost our mind and body, and prepare for the challenge ahead. By reframing your stress response as something positive, such as eustress , you can use your heightened energy and awareness to improve your performance.

Even with long-term, chronic stress at work, you can recognize opportunities for learning, growth, or the motivation to change yourself or your situation. While it may not always be possible, if you can find a way to embrace stress, it can become a “powerful tool for helping you overcome the inevitable challenges that can – and will – arise” (Crum & Crum, 2018, p. 75).

World’s Largest Positive Psychology Resource

The Positive Psychology Toolkit© is a groundbreaking practitioner resource containing over 500 science-based exercises , activities, interventions, questionnaires, and assessments created by experts using the latest positive psychology research.

Updated monthly. 100% Science-based.

“The best positive psychology resource out there!” — Emiliya Zhivotovskaya , Flourishing Center CEO

The following worksheets share the same goal: to reduce stress.

Identifying Your Stress Resources

Your resources (internal and external) provide a potentially limitless amount of support that will sustain you during challenging times and stressful situations (Niemiec, 2019).

The Identifying Your Stress Resources worksheet helps you recognize your resources and identify how they can support your strengths.

Stress Decision Framework

The Stress Decision Framework worksheet helps you put decision-making in context, aiming for a good enough , not perfect , decision (Armstrong, 2019).

Vicious Versus Virtuous Stress Thinking

Stress is a choice, yet it is often perpetuated by negative (vicious) cycles of thinking (Armstrong, 2019).

It doesn’t have to be this way.

Using a cognitive-behavioral approach, it is possible to reframe unhelpful beliefs and thinking, and adopt a virtuous cycle of thinking.

The Vicious Versus Virtuous Stress Thinking worksheet helps you compare unhelpful and helpful thinking regarding an event (Armstrong, 2019).

The cost of workplace stress – and how to reduce it – Rob Cooke

Coping with stress can often be about gaining control of what is – or, more importantly, what we perceive to be – within our control. The following activities and exercises can help.

One-Hour Stress Plan

When we feel overwhelmed, we get stressed, which can damage our focus and cloud our thinking. “Working within a limited time frame is important because the race against time keeps you focused” (Bregman, 2014, p. 157).

Use the One-Hour Stress Plan worksheet when stressed to plan and work through what you can in 60 minutes. At the end of the hour, you will have progressed and can repeat the exercise as many times as you like (modified from Bregman, 2014).

Stress as a Stimulus for Change

Sometimes stress is a good indication that something in your life needs to change.

The Stress as a Stimulus for Change worksheet can capture what you wish to change in your life and begin the transformation process.

Workplace Mindfulness

Mindfulness can be a powerful way to adopt a state of loving-kindness about yourself and others, and has significant benefits to how you handle stress (Shapiro, 2020; Tetrick & Winslow, 2015).

The Workplace Mindfulness worksheet can help decrease stress and improve workplace satisfaction through a series of simple questions asked when relaxed and present.

Instead, a multimodal approach should be considered when crafting prevention programs and workshops (Tetrick & Winslow, 2015).

Most likely, it will be necessary to put in place learning and education that are both proactive and reactive.

Proactive interventions

Focus on preventing stress (removing risk factors) and promoting positive actions for all employees.

Interventions are likely to include:

• Conflict management
• Employee wellness
• Job redesign and the organization of work
• Coping skills
• Employee fitness programs (for employees with known risk factors)

Reactive interventions

Focus on helping employees who need assistance.

• Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy
• Rehabilitation after illness or returning to work
• Employee assistance programs

A multimodal approach combines multiple intervention styles and techniques, and can be rolled out across the organization while focusing on the individual (Tetrick & Winslow, 2015).

The following questionnaires measure a respondent’s current degree of stress and assess their risk of experiencing future stress.

Perceived Stress Scale

The Perceived Stress Scale is one of the most widely used measures of the perception of stress (Cohen, 1994; Cohen & Williamson, 1988).

The 10 questions are answered with a rating between 0 (never) and 4 (very often).

For example:

In the last month, how often have you been upset because of something that happened unexpectedly?

In the last month, how often have you felt nervous and “stressed”?

Life Events and Difficulties Schedule (LEDS) and Stress and Adversity Inventory (STRAIN)

LEDS is a structured interview used to assess stressor exposure over a lifetime. It has since been turned into an online version known as STRAIN (Crosswell & Lockwood, 2020).

“Both measures provide a comprehensive assessment of stressor exposures across the lifespan” (Crosswell & Lockwood, 2020, p. 2) and can be valuable for research and therapy.

Stress Mastery Questionnaire (SMQ)

The American Institute of Stress offers the SMQ as an online self-assessment of stress risk.

The results, plus a 66-page Stress Mastery Guide and Workbook , provide a personalized stress risk profile that can help you lead a less stressed, more enjoyable life.

You’ll find a range of powerful stress-related interventions and assessment tools available throughout our site. Check out the following for some of our favorites:

• Radical Acceptance of a Distressing Situation This worksheet presents a sequence of eleven questions to help clients reflect on a current or past distressing situation and work toward radically accepting the reality of that event.
• Changing Physical Habits This worksheet helps clients reflect on their vulnerabilities and routines surrounding aspects of their physical health and consider steps to develop healthier habits.
• Coping With Stress This two-part exercise invites clients to list experienced physiological and emotional symptoms of stress and brainstorm strategies to reduce, cope with, or eliminate these sources of stress.
• Coping: Stressors and Resources This worksheet helps clients identify past, present, and future stressors and link them with coping resources they can use to overcome them.
• Squeeze and Release This group activity helps participants discover the energizing potential of positive stress, known as eustress , which can help improve motivation, performance, and emotional wellbeing.
• 13 Stress-Relief Books About the Science of Managing Anxiety This article provides an excellent selection of stress-relief books .
• 17 Stress & Burnout Prevention Exercises If you’re looking for more science-based ways to help others manage stress without spending hours on research and session prep, check out this collection of 17 validated stress-management tools for practitioners . Use them to help others identify signs of burnout and create more balance in their lives.

Our physical and mental wellbeing, work environment, and the demands of our job all impact our degree of stress. They also influence our performance and productivity in the workplace.

Reducing stressors and managing their impact by adopting effective coping mechanisms help us regain a sense of control (Quick & Henderson, 2016).

According to Angela Armstrong (2019), stress is a choice. Appropriate workplace stress management (personal and organizational) helps us identify ways to control what we can and learn how to see things differently when we cannot.

With the right mindset, seeing stress as enhancing, we can increase our motivation and see challenges as opportunities for growth rather than debilitating obstacles (Crum et al., 2013).

There are powerful tools to help. In recent years, mindfulness in particular has become increasingly popular for stress reduction, helping individuals to confront situations “in an accepting, nonjudgmental manner” (Tetrick & Winslow, 2015, p. 8).

Why not review some strategies, techniques, and tools in this article and identify what can help you, your employees, or your clients manage the impact of stress or turn it into something positive and life enhancing?

We hope you enjoyed reading this article. Don’t forget to download our three Stress & Burnout Prevention Exercises (PDF) for free .

• Armstrong, A. (2019). Resilience club: Daily success habits of long-term high performers . Rethink Press.
• Bregman, P. (2014). A practical plan when you feel overwhelmed. In HBR guide to managing stress at work (pp. 27–50). Harvard Business Review Press.
• Cohen, S. (1994). Perceived Stress Scale . Mind Garden. Retrieved September 1, 2021, from https://www.mindgarden.com/documents/PerceivedStressScale.pdf
• Cohen, S., & Williamson, G. (1988). Perceived stress in a probability sample of the United States . In S. Spacapan & S Oskamp (Eds.), The social psychology of health . Sage.
• Crosswell, A. D., & Lockwood, K. G. (2020). Best practices for stress measurement: How to measure psychological stress in health research. Health Psychology Open , 7 (2).
• Crum, A., & Crum, T. (2018). Stress can be a good thing if you know how to use it. In HBR’s 10 must reads: On mental toughness (pp. 71–75). Harvard Business Review Press.
• Crum, A. J., Salovey, P., & Achor, S. (2013). Rethinking stress: The role of mindsets in determining the stress response. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 104 (4), 716–733.
• Hallowell, E. M. (2014). Overloaded circuits. In HBR guide to managing stress at work (pp. 27–50). Harvard Business Review Press.
• Hargrove, M. B., Quick, J. C., Nelson, D. L., & Quick, J. D. (2011). The theory of preventive stress management: A 33-year review and evaluation. Stress and Health: Journal of the International Society for the Investigation of Stress , 27 (3), 182–193.
• Niemiec, R. (2019). Strength-based workbook for stress relief: A character strengths approach to finding calm in the chaos of daily life . New Harbinger.
• Quick, J., & Henderson, D. (2016). Occupational stress: Preventing suffering, enhancing wellbeing. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health , 13 (5), 459.
• Schwartz, T., & McCarthy, C. (2014). Manage your energy not your time.  Harvard Business Review Press.
• Shapiro, S. L. (2020). Rewire your mind: Discover the science + practice of mindfulness . Aster.
• Tetrick, L. E., & Winslow, C. J. (2015). Workplace stress management interventions and health promotion. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior , 2 (1), 583–603.

Share this article:

Article feedback

What our readers think.

I’m looking for an active stress avoidance / proactive approach to a stress-free work experience. This article appears to focus on alleviating the effects of stress rather than designing a work experience that removes it, and/or deals with those in positions of power in the workplace who rely on others for results and enforce this through control techniques, resulting in high employee stress, since the techniques are seldom nice, polite, sustainable or implemented with the employee’s long term well being in mind. I need workplace strategies that negate those manipulations and exploitations put in place by the hierarchy to simply get more work from employees, no matter what. Engagement surveys, annual reviews, and many workplace methodologies are in fact trojan horses. Please advise, many thanks Alvin Zest

Thanks for your comment; I completely understand where you’re coming from. Many of the dominant approaches to addressing strain, stress, and high work demands in organizations are largely reactive and center on ‘undoing’ the harm (i.e., stress) done to employees after it’s already done, rather than being proactive and creating conditions that prevent the harm in the first place. However, more research is coming out that’s looking at these proactive strategies.

Research is a long way from identifying a complete solution, but I would encourage you to look into the research and efforts by a researcher named Sharon Parker and her colleagues at the Center for Transformative Work Design. Some of the videos on this page might begin pointing you in the right direction and highlight the path research has taken so far.

I hope this helps.

– Nicole | Community Manager

Let us know your thoughts Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Related articles

Company Culture: How to Create a Flourishing Workplace

Company culture has become a buzzword, particularly in the post-COVID era, with more organizations recognizing the critical importance of a healthy workplace. During the Great [...]

Integrity in the Workplace (What It Is & Why It’s Important)

Integrity in the workplace matters. In fact, integrity is often viewed as one of the most important and highly sought-after characteristics of both employees and [...]

Neurodiversity in the Workplace: A Strengths-Based Approach

Promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in the workplace is a priority for ethical employers who want to optimize productivity and leverage the full potential [...]

Read other articles by their category

• Body & Brain (52)
• Coaching & Application (39)
• Compassion (23)
• Counseling (40)
• Emotional Intelligence (21)
• Gratitude (18)
• Grief & Bereavement (18)
• Happiness & SWB (40)
• Meaning & Values (26)
• Meditation (16)
• Mindfulness (40)
• Motivation & Goals (41)
• Optimism & Mindset (29)
• Positive CBT (28)
• Positive Communication (23)
• Positive Education (36)
• Positive Emotions (32)
• Positive Leadership (16)
• Positive Parenting (14)
• Positive Psychology (21)
• Positive Workplace (35)
• Productivity (16)
• Relationships (46)
• Resilience & Coping (38)
• Self Awareness (20)
• Self Esteem (37)
• Strengths & Virtues (29)
• Stress & Burnout Prevention (33)
• Theory & Books (42)
• Therapy Exercises (37)
• Types of Therapy (54)

Download 3 Free Work & Career Tools Pack (PDF)

Download 3 Work & Career Exercises Pack (PDF)

Learn how to manage your workplace stress

Workers at every level are experiencing increased tension and uncertainty, and are updating their resumes.

• Healthy Workplaces

In today’s economic upheavals, downsizing, layoffs, mergers, and bankruptcies have cost hundreds of thousands of workers their jobs. Millions more have been shifted to unfamiliar tasks within their companies and wonder how much longer they will be employed.

Adding to the pressures that workers face are new bosses, computer surveillance of production, fewer health and retirement benefits, and the feeling they have to work longer and harder just to maintain their current economic status. Workers at every level are experiencing increased tension and uncertainty, and are updating their resumes.

The loss of a job can be devastating, putting unemployed workers at risk for physical illness, marital strain, anxiety, depression, and even suicide. Loss of a job affects every part of life, from what time you get up in the morning, to whom you see, and what you can afford to do. Until the transition is made to a new position, stress is chronic.

A sense of powerlessness

A feeling of powerlessness is a universal cause of job stress. When you feel powerless, you’re prey to depression’s traveling companions, helplessness and hopelessness. You don’t alter or avoid the situation because you feel nothing can be done.

Secretaries, waitresses, middle managers, police officers, editors, and medical interns are among those with the most highly stressed occupations marked by the need to respond to others’ demands and timetables, with little control over events. Common to this job situation are complaints of too much responsibility and too little authority, unfair labor practices, and inadequate job descriptions.

Employees can counteract these pressures through workers’ unions or other organizations, grievance or personnel offices, or, more commonly, by direct negotiations with their immediate supervisors.

Your job description

Every employee should have a specific, written job description. Simply negotiating one does more to dispel a sense of powerlessness than anything else we know. It is a contract that you help write. You can object to what don’t want and insist on what you do want. If there is a compromise, it’s because you agreed to it. With a clear job description, your expectations are spelled out, as are your boss’s.

A good job description is time limited. Set a specific date for a review and revision based on your mutual experience with this initial job description. If you and your boss can’t agree on what your job description should be, look for another job, either within the same company or outside. Even in these tough economic times, it is important that your job be a source of satisfaction and respect.

When you’re a square peg and your job is a round hole

Remember the old saying, “Find a job you love and you’ll never work another day in your life.” Most people spend about 25% of their adult lives working. If you enjoy what you do, you’re lucky. But if you’re the proverbial square peg and your job is a round hole, job stress hurts your productivity and takes a serious toll on your mind and body.

There are many reasons for staying in a job that doesn’t fit you or that you don’t particularly like. One reason can be the “golden handcuff”—having salary, pension, benefits and “perks” that keep one tied to a job regardless of stress consequences.

Many people are in jobs they don’t like or aren’t good at. The quick answer is to get a job they like or one that better matches their skills, abilities, and interest—easier said than done. Some people have no idea what kind of job they would like or what kind of job would be better. Worse, they don’t have a clue on how to go about finding out this information.

Traumatic events on the job

Some jobs are inherently dangerous and others can suddenly become so. Criminal justice personnel, firefighters, ambulance drivers, military personnel, and disaster teams witness many terrible scenes and are exposed to personal danger routinely. They usually handle such incidents capably.

But occasionally a particularly bad episode will stay with them, appearing in memory flashbacks and nightmares. Sleep disturbance, guilt, fearfulness, and physical complaints may follow.

Even ordinary jobs can become traumatic: a coworker, boss, or client physically threatens an employee; a bus crashes on a field trip; an employee is robbed or taken hostage; a shooting occurs. Such events can create posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and result in workers’ compensation claims if left untreated by a trauma specialist.

Work setting

Sometimes your work setting creates physical stress because of noise, lack of privacy, poor lighting, poor ventilation, poor temperature control, or inadequate sanitary facilities. Settings where there is organizational confusion or an overly authoritarian, laissez-faire or crisis-centered managerial style are all psychologically stressful.

Act through labor or employee organizations to alter stressful working conditions. If that doesn’t work, try the courts, which have become increasingly receptive to complaints of stressful working conditions. Recent rulings created pressure for employers to provide working environments that are as stress free as possible.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration is the federal agency charged with monitoring the work environment in the interest of work safety and health. If you think your work environment is dangerous to your health and safety from a physical standpoint, give them a call.

If nothing helps and the working environment remains stressful, exercise your avoidance options and get a new job. Job hunting can be stressful, particularly in times of high unemployment, but being ground down day after day by work is far worse.

Adapted from The Stress Solution by Lyle H. Miller, PhD, and Alma Dell Smith, PhD.

Recommended Reading

Related reading

• Coping with stress at work
• Managing your distress in the aftermath of a shooting

You may also like