© Copyright 2000 Rogers Media. The following article first appeared in the March 2001 edition of BENEFITS CANADA magazine.

The toxic workplace

Is your organization making workers sick? Poor management practices erode employee health and send benefits costs soaring. Know the symptoms and how to treat the root causes.

By Dianne Dyck and Tony Roithmayr

To sustain business success and maintain employee health, employers must provide a supportive environment. Maximizing performance in the workplace requires both employees and leaders within the organization to work together and create an environment that fosters these four principles: people know what to do; are able to it; are equipped to do it; and want to do it. In the absence of these favourable conditions, organizational stressors, such as conflicting priorities and a lack of recognition, loom and they lead to a toxic workplace.

Sustained exposure to workplace stressors can negatively impact the well-being of even the most resilient employees. The more stressors there are and the longer the period of exposure, the more likely it is that detrimental effects will occur. The impact on individual employees depends on several factors, including personality of the individual, the level of self-confidence and self-esteem the worker possesses as well as their overall emotional well-being and whether they have a good personal support system in place to help manage stress.

Reactions to workplace stressors also vary among individuals. Physiologically, there may be changes in blood pressure or cholesterol levels, heightened awareness of the environment, or increases in muscle tension. Psychologically, judgment may be impaired, employees may experience irritability, anxiety, anger, an inability to concentrate and memory loss.

We all have individual ways of dealing with everyday sources of stress. Good communication and problem solving skills, regular exercise and relaxation, as well as a variety of personal interests can serve to lessen the effects of stress.

However, when stress is prolonged, many of us respond in ineffective ways. Avoidance, withdrawal, panic or aggressive behaviour emerge, as can an increased use of substances such as drugs and alcohol. These ineffective coping mechanisms can seriously impair employees' physical and mental health and, as a result, pose significant problems for the employer.

COST OF STRESS

For years, health professionals have recognized the common physical symptoms of workplace stress--headaches, ulcers, hypertension, substance abuse, anxiety and clinical depression. But, as a society, we are just beginning to understand the tremendous costs associated with workplace stress, such as lost productivity, increased employee benefits costs and the enormous burden on our healthcare system. The price tag for indirect and direct costs associated with both undiagnosed and treated depression in North America is $60 billion, according to the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health in Toronto.

Organizations are not solely responsible for the negative effects of organizational stress. But, they are a significant contributor. For example, the average Calgary employee spends as much as two-thirds of his waking hours either at work or thinking about work-related concerns. Given this, what level of responsibility should organizations assume for the health of their workers?

Companies and institutions are not typically uncaring. Nor do most organizations choose to deliberately ignore stress-related problems. Many business leaders themselves are affected by work stress. In response, a growing number of plan sponsors have invested in services to help employees develop effective coping mechanisms. These include: employee assistance programs (EAPs); flexible benefits plans that allow employees to do things such as use health credits to buy extra vacation days; flexible work hours that can eliminate the stress associated with commuting in rush hour; fitness centre subsidies; exercise and relaxation programs; child and eldercare services; as well as health education and wellness programs.

No doubt, these are commendable and necessary initiatives. But are they treating symptoms instead of causes? In other words, in many instances we are using expensive painkillers when we really need to examine the root causes of workers' physical and emotional pain--the organizational environment in which employees work.

The root causes of workplace stress are worth investigating because the cost of stressors is not borne by employees alone. Organizations pay a huge price for emotional mismanagement of employees in the form of benefits expenses, including the high use of drug plans, and short- and long-term disability programs and productivity losses.

Low morale, lack of co-operation, conflict, apathy and hostility are among the behavioural outcomes of a toxic workplace that make it all the more difficult for business leaders to run the organization. This impacts the organization's bottom line and its ability to effectively compete in the marketplace.

Dealing with causes, as opposed to symptoms, breaks this unfortunate cycle of harm. To do this, however, an organization must truly understand what is going on within its walls. Measurement is the key. It enables an organization to make evidence-based decisions about which remedies will produce the desired improvements.

Measurement is not only about tracking EAP or drug plan usage, counting union grievances or determining the number of absent employees. Measurement must track all the components of the cycle of stress and bring that data together to form a holistic picture of the relationships within the cycle. Measurement systems should provide data on the following areas:

• The degree to which stressors are being experienced by employees.
• The physical and psychological effects they have on individuals.
• The effects on the operation of the business, employees' behaviour and the organization as a whole.
• The financial or balanced scorecard results of the organization.

Identifying, measuring and tackling workplace stressors may appear to be an overwhelming task. The good news is that human resources professionals, wellness champions and performance and organizational effectiveness consultants have the skills needed to deal with organizational stressors as root causes of a toxic workplace, and in the process, to improve employee performance. The skills and insight of these professionals are needed by organizations to: conduct assessments; analyze causes; select and implement interventions; track results; and evaluate outcomes.

The principles and research that underpin this approach encourage a front-end assessment of an organization and its cycle of stress in order to make evidence-based decisions about improvement. An analysis of an organization may point to such remedies as:

• Education. Comprehensive briefings to top executives and senior management using both external and internal data to illustrate the business case associated with workplace stress and enhancing employee health and well-being.
• Measurement system. Develop and implement measurement initiatives that include indicators for stress toxicity as well as individual health and financial results.
• Communication. Promote access to and the use of wellness programs.
• Detection and action. Improve the capacity of management to recognize and respond to causes of workplace stress.
• Performance support practices. Give managers the tools and training they need to better manage people.

On this last point, the most effective and enduring remedy is to implement and sustain performance support practices that focus on the four Es of people management. These principles contain no surprises, however, far too many organizations find it difficult to consistently follow them. The four Es are:

• Establish purpose. Help em-ployees understand the organization's vision, values, goals and business strategies. Guide the dev- elopment of individual performance and learning plans that will achieve organization goals.
• Enable performance. Align resource allocations with performance expectations. Coach em- ployees to overcome difficulties and build skills and knowledge. Foster and maintain effective work groups. Resolve performance issues and remove barriers that are beyond the control of individuals and teams.
• Expect results. Measure progress, contributions and development. Hold people accountable for delivering agreed upon results.
• Encourage success. Sustain communication that maintains focus, fosters commitment and facilitates implementation. Recognize and celebrate progress and the achievement of desired results.

Dennis Kravetz, a respected U.S. human resources consultant, has studied the correlation between employee management practices and financial success. He developed an index for rating an organization's performance in people management practices (PMP) known as a PMP score.

In 1996, Kravetz published a study that looked at the correlation of PMP scores to financial performance over a 10-year period that compares companies with low and high PMP. The study reveals that organizations that consistently practice good people management create an environment that reduces--even eliminates--significant workplace stressors. Not only do these organizations foster the conditions for a healthy workplace, they also have higher sales, profit growth and margins than their counterparts (see "The people skills pay- off," above).

This research and other studies clearly show that workplace stressors can lead to mental and physical illnesses that lead to higher benefits costs and lower productivity and morale that, in turn, threaten the health of the organization itself. The reverse, a positive cycle, is also true as Kravetz's study demonstrates.

Unfortunately, however, there does not seem to be enough of this type of information available today to make a direct link between the causes, notably stressors, and effects, such as depression and chronic headaches, in this vicious cycle. This lack of hard data is a major stumbling block in addressing toxic workplaces.

Employers want to make evidence-based decisions regarding the allocation of their limited resources. That is both understandable and prudent. To get a breakthrough on the stressor cycle, however, we need organizations to take some big steps forward. Perhaps the first move is a leap of faith--committing to doing something about this issue.

To heal a toxic workplace and sustain its improved health status, organizations must implement a measurement system that tracks the entire cycle of harm in their institution, implement evidence-based actions to reduce or eliminate stressors and monitor and evaluate progress over a three- to five-year period. Then they must be willing to share the results publicly in order to motivate others.

Only when these initiatives become more widespread will we truly be on the road towards eradicating the toxic workplace.

Dianne Dyck is an occupational health specialist in Calgary and author of Disability Management: Theory, Strategy and Industry Practice. dyck@cadvision.com. Tony Roithmayr operates Performance by Design, a Calgary-based performance consulting firm. performancebydesign@home.com.

*** ***

Reality check

Human resources and wellness professionals recognize the sources of stress in their workplaces. But a new study reveals there is work to be done in this area.

An informal survey of Calgary workplaces conducted by Performance by Design of Calgary reveals that significant organizational stressors exist in that city's workplaces. Here are some highlights from the survey of 42 human resources and wellness professionals who represent 30 organizations:

Know what to do:

• 72% say employees are faced with conflicting priorities and demands.
• 42% say employees are unclear about how their performance is measured.

Are able to do it:

• Less than 25% of employers appear to report goal alignment.
• Half of the respondents report that employees don't get the coaching and learning support they need.

Are equipped to do it:

• Few (10%) believe that employees get measurement data about their progress.
• Even fewer (7%) believe employees have clear and effective work processes and procedures.
• 63% report that employees don't have the time to do the work required of them.

Want to do it:

• Half the respondents say that employees lack the recognition they need to stay motivated while only 5% indicate that employees do receive recognition.
• 15% report that employees get positive feedback while only 10% say they get helpful, corrective feedback.

The individuals who completed the survey acknowledge the cycle of harm that workplace stressors cause. Their experience supports a causal relationship among stressors, health and operational results.

These findings are consistent with re-search reported by Dr. Martin Shain of the University of Toronto in 1998. Dr. Shain advocates addressing workplace stress at the source--work design, work control, work demand and work effort.

While organizations certainly need to heighten their awareness of these stressors, there is some good news emerging from the study. More than 80% of respondents believe that organizations can reduce or eliminate stressors while maintaining or growing their businesses.

*** ***

10 Top sources of workplace stress

1.Treadmill syndrome. Too much to do at once, requires 24-hour workday.

2.Random interruptions.

3.Doubt. Employees are uncertain about what is happening and where things are headed in their position, department or organization.

4.Mistrust. Vicious office politics disrupts positive behaviour.

5.Unclear company direction and policies.

6.Career/job ambiguity. Things happen without employees knowing why.

7.Inconsistent performance management. Raises but no review. Positive feedback and then laid off with no understanding of why.

8.Being unappreciated.

9. Lack of two-way communication, up and down the chain of command.

10. Feeling of not contributing and having a lack of control.

SOURCE: The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health

*** ***

The people skills payoff

A comparison of companies with high people management practices (PMP) scores and those with low PMP scores demonstrates that effective employee management isn't just a warm and fuzzy concept. It is a business advantage that leads to greater success.

source: Dennis Kravetz, www.kravetz.com.

The Romanow Commission has released its final report on the future of healthcare in Canada.

For Commissioner Romanow's recommendations, click here.

Click here for Senator Michael Kirby's report, "The Health of Canadians – The Federal Role: Recommendations for Reform."