Limits...
Considering the Differential Impact of Three Facets of Organizational Health Climate on Employees' Well-Being.

Zweber ZM, Henning RA, Magley VJ, Faghri P - ScientificWorldJournal (2015)

Bottom Line: Two samples are used in this study to examine health climate at the individual level and group level in order to provide a clearer picture of the impact of the three health climate facets. k-means cluster analysis was used on each sample to determine groups of individuals based on their levels of the three health climate facets.Results provide evidence that having strength in all three of the facets is the most beneficial in terms of employee well-being at work.Findings from this study suggest that organizations must consider how health is treated within workgroups, how supervisors support employee health, and what the organization does to support employee health when promoting employee health.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269, USA.

ABSTRACT
One potential way that healthy organizations can impact employee health is by promoting a climate for health within the organization. Using a definition of health climate that includes support for health from multiple levels within the organization, this study examines whether all three facets of health climate--the workgroup, supervisor, and organization--work together to contribute to employee well-being. Two samples are used in this study to examine health climate at the individual level and group level in order to provide a clearer picture of the impact of the three health climate facets. k-means cluster analysis was used on each sample to determine groups of individuals based on their levels of the three health climate facets. A discriminant function analysis was then run on each sample to determine if clusters differed on a function of employee well-being variables. Results provide evidence that having strength in all three of the facets is the most beneficial in terms of employee well-being at work. Findings from this study suggest that organizations must consider how health is treated within workgroups, how supervisors support employee health, and what the organization does to support employee health when promoting employee health.

No MeSH data available.


Sample 1 DFA group centroids.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4561991&req=5

fig2: Sample 1 DFA group centroids.

Mentions: One discriminant function was significant (Wilks' lambda = 0.685, p < 0.001) and accounted for 64% of the variance among the groups. This function was defined with a positive correlation with civility norms (r = 0.89), a positive correlation with work ability (r = 0.39), a positive correlation with SF-12 mental (r = 0.34) and negative correlations with job stress (r = −0.34), exhaustion (−0.46), disengagement (r = −0.57), and depression (r = −0.43). This pattern of correlations indicates that more positive scores on the function are associated with more positive work-related well-being. Group centroids are plotted in Figure 2. Comparisons of how clusters perform on the function within pairs as well as comparisons between pairs in terms of outcomes can serve to address the research question of whether all three facets of health climate are necessary for optimal well-being.


Considering the Differential Impact of Three Facets of Organizational Health Climate on Employees' Well-Being.

Zweber ZM, Henning RA, Magley VJ, Faghri P - ScientificWorldJournal (2015)

Sample 1 DFA group centroids.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4561991&req=5

fig2: Sample 1 DFA group centroids.
Mentions: One discriminant function was significant (Wilks' lambda = 0.685, p < 0.001) and accounted for 64% of the variance among the groups. This function was defined with a positive correlation with civility norms (r = 0.89), a positive correlation with work ability (r = 0.39), a positive correlation with SF-12 mental (r = 0.34) and negative correlations with job stress (r = −0.34), exhaustion (−0.46), disengagement (r = −0.57), and depression (r = −0.43). This pattern of correlations indicates that more positive scores on the function are associated with more positive work-related well-being. Group centroids are plotted in Figure 2. Comparisons of how clusters perform on the function within pairs as well as comparisons between pairs in terms of outcomes can serve to address the research question of whether all three facets of health climate are necessary for optimal well-being.

Bottom Line: Two samples are used in this study to examine health climate at the individual level and group level in order to provide a clearer picture of the impact of the three health climate facets. k-means cluster analysis was used on each sample to determine groups of individuals based on their levels of the three health climate facets.Results provide evidence that having strength in all three of the facets is the most beneficial in terms of employee well-being at work.Findings from this study suggest that organizations must consider how health is treated within workgroups, how supervisors support employee health, and what the organization does to support employee health when promoting employee health.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269, USA.

ABSTRACT
One potential way that healthy organizations can impact employee health is by promoting a climate for health within the organization. Using a definition of health climate that includes support for health from multiple levels within the organization, this study examines whether all three facets of health climate--the workgroup, supervisor, and organization--work together to contribute to employee well-being. Two samples are used in this study to examine health climate at the individual level and group level in order to provide a clearer picture of the impact of the three health climate facets. k-means cluster analysis was used on each sample to determine groups of individuals based on their levels of the three health climate facets. A discriminant function analysis was then run on each sample to determine if clusters differed on a function of employee well-being variables. Results provide evidence that having strength in all three of the facets is the most beneficial in terms of employee well-being at work. Findings from this study suggest that organizations must consider how health is treated within workgroups, how supervisors support employee health, and what the organization does to support employee health when promoting employee health.

No MeSH data available.