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 2 discriminant function analysis group centroids.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4561991&req=5

fig4: Sample 2 discriminant function analysis group centroids.

Mentions: Group centroids on this significant function are plotted in Figure 4. Results from this analysis indicate that Hypothesis 2 was supported. Figure 4 shows that “Consistently Positive” fell at the most positive end of this function. Similarly, “Consistently Negative” fell at the most negative end of this function. Interestingly, “Consistently Average” and “Average-Higher Workgroup” do not significantly differ on this function, even though “Average-Higher Workgroup” has higher levels of the workgroup facet. However, “Consistently Positive” has a significantly more positive score on the function than “Average-Higher Workgroup” even though these two clusters have similar scores on the workgroup facet but differ in that “Average-Higher Workgroup” has lower scores on the supervisor and organization facets. These results suggest that having high scores in each of the three facets is most beneficial for the outcomes of performance, engagement, organizational citizenship behaviors, burnout, and job stress.


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 2 discriminant function analysis group centroids.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

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

fig4: Sample 2 discriminant function analysis group centroids.
Mentions: Group centroids on this significant function are plotted in Figure 4. Results from this analysis indicate that Hypothesis 2 was supported. Figure 4 shows that “Consistently Positive” fell at the most positive end of this function. Similarly, “Consistently Negative” fell at the most negative end of this function. Interestingly, “Consistently Average” and “Average-Higher Workgroup” do not significantly differ on this function, even though “Average-Higher Workgroup” has higher levels of the workgroup facet. However, “Consistently Positive” has a significantly more positive score on the function than “Average-Higher Workgroup” even though these two clusters have similar scores on the workgroup facet but differ in that “Average-Higher Workgroup” has lower scores on the supervisor and organization facets. These results suggest that having high scores in each of the three facets is most beneficial for the outcomes of performance, engagement, organizational citizenship behaviors, burnout, and job stress.

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.