Quality of Working Life Strategy OHS 24 Aug04
Quality of Working Life Strategy OHS 24 Aug04
Quality of Working Life Strategy OHS 24 Aug04
Acknowledgements This manual was developed through action research undertaken in two demonstration projects in the Department of Social Security. The demonstration projects were run as joint projects by the Department and Comcare Australia. Comcare Australia acknowledges with thanks the efforts of the many Department of Social Security staff who participated. Particular thanks must go to staff in the Area South Metropolitan and Area North Australia. This publication was produced under the direction of Dr Niki Ellis, a public and occupational health consultant. Commonwealth of Australia 1993 This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior permission from Comcare. ISBN 1 876700 43 2 (on-line) ISBN 0 642 19388 6 (hardcopy) Publishing Notice This publication has been published with changes to the cover page, logo and contact details only. Content has not been altered.
Contents
Preface. ............................................................................................................................. 4 Introduction. ................................................................................................................. 8
Aim. ........................................................................................................................ 8 Scope. ..................................................................................................................... 8 How this manual applies to your workplace. ..................................................... 8 How to use this manual. ....................................................................................... 8
Step 16 - Develop and Implement Action Plan. ................................................ 40 Step 17 - Evaluate. .............................................................................................. 42
Appendices
Appendix 1 - Guide to Workplace Visits. ......................................................... 44 Appendix 2 - Sample Information Letter. ........................................................ 45 Appendix 3 - Sample Questionnaire. ................................................................ 46 Appendix 4 - Case Study. ................................................................................... 48 The Organisation ......................................................................................... 48 Scope ........................................................................................................... 48 Administrative Arrangements ..................................................................... 48 Methodology ............................................................................................... 49 Results of the Survey .................................................................................. 49 Results of the Discussion Group ................................................................. 50 Action Plan.................................................................................................. 51
Preface
Quality of Working Life Strategy
"Quality of Working Life" was a term developed from work health research beginning in the early 1970s. It has various meanings which are usually based on the degree to which members of an organisation are able to satisfy important personal needs through their experience in the organisation. Quality of working life programs, therefore, focus on providing a work environment conducive to the satisfaction of individual needs.
Research
A research project on the Quality of Working Life was conducted by Comcare Australia in six selected Commonwealth Government organisations during 1990/91 to investigate the incidence, cost and causes of occupational stress. The researchers analysed workers' compensation claims for stress-related illness in the six participating organisations and conducted interviews with their staff. Comcare Australia's workers' compensation data for 1990/91 was also analysed. The study found that stress-related workers' compensation claims were a significant and disproportionate cost to Commonwealth Government organisations. In 1990/91 stress claims made up 4.6% of all claims, but were responsible for 18% of the costs.
Table 1: Acute Events by Frequency of Staff Members Reporting of at Least One Episode
Acute Event Conflict with supervisors Physical assault, harassment or abuse Conflict with peers Forced relocation or redeployment Counselling for poor performance Disciplinary action Frequency 47% 43% 29% 29% 23% 12%
Analysis of stress claims in the participating organisations demonstrated that workload, physical assault, harassment or abuse, conflict with supervisors, and forced relocation or redeployment were leading precipitating events. For workload however, the researchers found that in many cases where workload had been nominated as the cause, other relevant factors were at play. Interviews with staff in the participating organisations showed that the events demonstrated to be the precipitating factors in the stress claims were experienced frequently. This is shown in table 1. Many staff also reported illness or injuries which they attributed to work. Almost half (49%) of those interviewed said they had an episode of work-related illness or injury in the previous three years, and one-fifth described the illness or injury as stress-related. Only one of the 171 staff members interviewed had lodged a workers' compensation claim, which means that the other 84 employees who reported that they had experienced an illness or injury which they attributed to work, had dealt with the problem through sick leave. The research demonstrated that claimants took three to four times the amount of sick leave in the 12 months before making a claim, compared to non-claimants. Furthermore it showed that statistically significant relationships existed between physical assault, harassment and abuse; conflict; forced relocation; and sick leave and illness.
However the Quality of Working Life Strategy also recognises that as well as designing work systems which promote health and productivity, it is necessary to assist and support individuals who experience stress reactions. The Quality of Working Life Strategy is multi-faceted covering prevention, rehabilitation and compensation. The activities which were undertaken in phase one of the Strategy are shown in table 3.
Early Intervention, Claims Administration and Return to Work StrategiesGuidelines Review of current policy
Introduction
Aim
The aim of this manual is to assist workplaces to develop, implement and evaluate an action plan to improve health and productivity.
Scope
This manual is designed to guide you through the steps to be taken to: assess the impact of the work system on health and productivity identify modifications to the work system which have the potential to improve health and productivity at work develop, implement and evaluate an action plan to improve health and productivity.
A fundamental principle on which the manual is based is one of full participation by all parties in the workplace. Without it, this approach will not succeed. Staff members are often the best source of suggestions for positive change. They are in the best position to know what is going wrong, and frequently know how to improve the work system. The steps outlined in this manual are designed to identify problems and capture suggestions for improvements by: generating statistics about health and productivity collecting information about staff views using discussion groups to investigate those and other suggestions for change developing and implementing an action plan based on all the information collected.
about the way each step will be taken. Points at which decisions need to be made are listed under the heading "Decision Points". Together with the "Action" box they make up a checklist for each step of the project. At the back of the manual you will find a case study based on a demonstration project. The information from two demonstration projects formed the basis of the steps outlined in this manual. The process described in this manual is not prescriptive. Whatever is done must be culturally appropriate for your workplace. You are encouraged to adapt the steps to meet the needs of your organisation.
Getting Started
Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Develop a Project Brief Inform Staff Select Project Co-ordinator Form a Project Group or Groups
Evaluation
Step 17 Evaluate 10
10
The need to improve health and productivity can be recognised at either a local or central organisational level. In either case a proposal to run a project to improve health and productivity should be submitted to senior management for approval. Before doing so support for the project should be gauged through consultation with the OHS committee, the union and key individuals in the organisation. A project brief will be required. It should describe the aim and scope of the project outline the proposed strategies and specify how the project will be organised and resourced. The project brief should include reference to the results and what will be done with them (development and implementation of an action plan). The details of the methodology will be developed later. (See Step 5)
Action
Develop project proposal. Consult with management, unions and OHS Committee. Obtain approval from senior management for the project. Develop project brief.
Outcome
Support for project elicited. Approval for project obtained. Documented and agreed description of the aim, outline, resources and anticipated results for the project.
11
11
Promoting the project throughout the organisation is essential. Once the project has been approved, staff should be informed, told that a project group will be established and that they will receive further information as the project progresses. Make sure that the promotion is undertaken in a way appropriate to the workgroup culture. In the case study it was found that having union representatives involved in giving information and encouragement to staff members was successful. Initially, staff were "suffering from survey fatigue" and doubted the benefits of participating. Having a union representative who was committed to the project reassured them and encouraged enthusiastic participation. It should be emphasised that this process is designed to improve the health and productivity of all staff, and will be based on their suggestions and needs.
Action
Circulate information to staff.
Outcome
Staff informed of project. Understanding of and support for project from staff.
12
12
Following the decision to undertake the project, a project co-ordinator will need to be selected. An occupational health and safety (OHS) officer would be a suitable person. If the co-ordinator is from outside the organisation, she/he must become familiar with the worksystem, staff structures, office layout, etc. This can be achieved by workplace visits. As well as familiarisation with the organisation, the visits can be used by the co-ordinator to collect management and staff opinions on health and productivity issues, and information on strategies that have been tried in the past. A proforma to assist with collection of information on workplace visits is included. (See Appendix 1) The project co-ordinator will be responsible for planning and organising the project. This will involve establishing and convening the project group and undertaking other activities as agreed by the project group. (See Step 4)
Action
Management appoint project co-ordinator.
Outcome
Project co-ordinator appointed.
13
13
How the project is organised will depend on whether you are running one project at a workgroup level (Option 1) or a number throughout the organisation (Option 2). Throughout the document differences in the process between Option 1 and Option 2 have been outlined.
Option 1
The project is organised at a local level involving one workgroup. The co-ordinator will be responsible for establishing and leading a project group which will plan and run the project at the workgroup level. The success of the project will largely depend on the success of the project group in organising and enthusing project participants. The project group should contain: the project co-ordinator. Preferably the occupational health and safety officer management representative(s). Preferably from both the workgroup and central organisation workplace union representative(s) occupational health & safety officer (if not the co-ordinator) the person who will be running the discussion groups (if not one of the above).
14
14
The nucleus for the project group could already exist, ie, the OHS committee or subcommittee. It is useful to have a representative from senior management as a member of the project group. The survey (see Step 7) and discussion groups (see Step 12) may elicit suggestions for change which can only occur at the central organisational level. A senior manager can act as a conduit for this information. The project group will act together to decide how to run the project. The manual gives guidance for each of the steps.
Option 2
The project is organised at a central organisation level involving several workgroups or the whole organisation. If you are running the project this way, you will need to form a steering committee to coordinate the activities of the several projects run by individual project groups at the workgroup level. The steering committee will develop the methodology to be used and will oversee the implementation and evaluation of the projects at the workplace level. Local co-ordinators will be represented on the steering committee. The steering committee should go through this manual, paying particular attention to the decision points marked for each step. It should, by making these decisions, come up with a plan for participating workgroups to follow. This plan will then be put into operation by the local co-ordinators. The steering committee should include senior management representative. Preferably from Human Resources occupational health & safety co-ordinator or equivalent union representative(s) local workgroup representatives (project co-ordinators at workplace level).
The steering committee will monitor progress as workgroups undertake their projects and will have a role to play in consideration of action to be taken on organisational-wide issues. Project groups at the workgroup level will be formed as for option 1.
15
15
Action
Invite appropriate people to join project group or steering committee and project groups. Organise first meeting/s. Provide group members with the case study for background information. (See Appendix 4)
Outcome
Project group or steering committee and project groups established.
16
16
The project brief will give an overview of the project (see Step 1), the methodology will describe the nuts and bolts of how the project will be run. A major part of deciding on your methodology will be agreeing on how the required information is gathered by this project and how the information will be acted upon. In Option 1 the project group will decide on the methodology to be used in the project. In Option 2 the steering committee will develop a draft methodology for consideration by the local project groups. Once the methodology has been determined, follow the remaining steps of this manual. Decisions about who will be responsible for each task will need to be made. A timeline should be set, with deadlines for group members for tasks as appropriate. Collecting the information can be undertaken successfully in a month. Whatever the decision, try not to let it drag on. Staff need to know that there is a definite process which will produce specified results. If staff know how the information they are being asked to provide will be used to achieve improvements they will be more likely to participate. Therefore it is important that the project group or steering committee decide at this point how the information collected will be acted upon. That is, who will develop the action plan. The action plan should be developed in consultation with unions. In some organisations the responsible body will be the project group or steering committee. In others, the information will be referred to already established consultative forums (eg, a joint consultative committee).
17
17
The methodology will include the following stages: collecting information on Quality of Working Life indicators (see Step 6) informing staff about the details of the project (see Step 9) collecting information on factors affecting health and productivity and suggested solutions by conducting a survey or an alternative means of data collection (see Step 7) collating results from survey or alternate means of data collection (see Step 11) composing discussion groups (see Step 12) preparing material for discussion groups (see Step 13) running the discussion groups (see Step 14) feeding information back to management and staff (see Step 14) preparing a report summarising the information (see Step 15) developing an action plan (see Step 16) implementing the action plan (see Step 16) evaluating the project (see Step 17)
Action
Determine methodology. Assign tasks. Prepare timeline.
Outcome
Methodology determined. All project group members clear on their tasks, deadlines. Necessary resources committed to project.
18
18
For the purpose of this manual, quality of working life is described as the degree to which members of a organisation are able to satisfy important personal needs through their experience in the organisation. Quality of working life programs focus on providing a work environment conducive to the satisfaction of individual needs, and so improve health and productivity.
Measures that are appropriate indicators of Quality of Working Life in your organisation, either a reduction or improvement, need to be identified. Examples of potential Quality of Working Life Indicators are listed table 4. Some of these indicators will be more relevant in your workplace than others. Data for some may not be available at all. There may be other indicators which you feel are also important. You are free to choose the 19 ones which are suitable for your workgroup or organisation.
19
Other indicators were not available (eg, staff turnover) or were considered irrelevant (eg, rate of disciplinary procedures). Once the indicators to be used in your project have been determined someone in the project group (probably the coordinator) will need to collect the data. One use of this information will be to stimulate the discussion groups. Perhaps more importantly, your chosen indicators will provide a benchmark for the project - a level against which the quality of working life in your organisation can be compared to itself over time. Data from your organisation can also be compared to data from other organisations, eg, Comcare Australia figures for Australian Government Employment. None of the information should be collected in such a way that individual staff members can be identified. Persons collecting the information must understand the privacy requirements imposed in their organisation.
Action
Collect information.
Outcome
Indications obtained on the Quality of Working life in your organisation.
20
20
Known Risk Factors Numbers of incidents of client aggression per staff member for the previous 12 months (Compare to national average for your organisation, data from other Qualify of Working Life projects) Percentage of type of incident of client aggression for the previous 12 months Rate of systems breakdowns
Staff Turnover By workplace, area or regional group By staff levels - eg, entrance level, supervisors, etc By length of service
Complaints Regarding Work Activities Formal Number of grievances (by type) per employee (Compare to national average for your organisation ) Number of disciplinary cases per staff member
Informal Reports to: supervisors, workplace delegates, OHS reps, How often? What issues?
Note: Information on grievances reported informally will be collected by interviews with supervisors, OHS officers and representatives and others. Therefore information on grievances will be both quantitative (number and type of formal 21 grievances) and qualitative (based on interviews). You will need some way of organising the qualitative data. It may be appropriate to use the some grievance categories as for formal complaints.
21
Step 7 - Prepare to Collect Information on Factors Affecting Health and Productivity and Suggested Solutions
Decision Points
Either Or What other means will you use to collect information? How will the survey be handed out and collected? Who will be responsible for introducing the survey to staff? How long will you give people to complete the survey?
As stated earlier, staff are often the best source of suggestions for positive change. They are in the best position to know what is going wrong, and frequently know how to improve the work system. As well as providing information directly useful for the development of the action plan, this information will be used to stimulate debate in the discussion groups. Collection of information from staff on factors affecting their health and productivity and suggested solutions can be done in one of two ways.
Either
Conduct a survey. (See Step 8) In administering a survey, aim for a good return rate (50% or more), and as little collusion between staff as possible. Giving the survey out at staff meetings and asking people to fill it in on the spot is useful. Make sure staff understand that it is confidential and anonymous and will be used to: 1) inform the discussion groups; and 2) inform management of staff concerns. If you run special information sessions, the survey can be handed out then.
Or
Collect information by other means. Distributing a survey in your workgroup may not be appropriate, particularly if other surveys have been carried out recently. Instead, you could gather information on major issues in other ways, like informal discussions with staff, talking to OHS representatives and union representatives. 22
22
Action
Decide how to collect information from workgroup.
Outcome
Means for collecting information on factors which influence health and productivity and suggested solutions are determined.
23
23
If the steering committee or project group chooses to conduct a survey, a questionnaire based on local issues will need to be developed. The aim of the questionnaire is to identify the factors which the workgroup consider have a significant impact, either positive and/or negative, on their health and productivity. To do this the project group can start by using its own knowledge of the workgroup and then consult others. If possible, ask for help from your systems or statistical section in the design of the questionnaire. Their involvement from the outset will facilitate the production of meaningful results. Before you send out the questionnaire to all staff, you must test it. Select a small number of staff (see Step 10) and ask them to fill in the questionnaire. Check that they have done so accurately, and then talk to them to make sure that they understood the questions in the same way you intended them.
24
Public contact Feedback on individual performance Face to face contact Current rotation system Relationships with supervisor/manager Relationships with work group Services from other parts of organisation Feedback on your group's performance Space/work layout Overtime Other
Testing may lead to changes in the list of factors or in terminology. For example, table 5 shows the factors included in the survey questionnaire in the case study. This table includes the factors "Public contact" and "Face to face contact". In some workplaces there is no face to face contact with the public, and this could be taken to mean face to face contact with fellow workers. In others, public contact occurs over the phone and by letter as well as face to face, so two categories are appropriate. Make sure that your questions convey the meaning which is intended. Another example is job security - this stressor might mean the fear of being retrenched, or the fear of being attacked by clients. If necessary, change the terms used so that there is no ambiguity. If several of your test subjects make the same or similar entries in the box marked "Other", then add those items to your list. The factors listed in table 5 provide an example of the kind of factors influencing health and productivity which you might include in your questionnaire. Many of these factors may be relevant to your workplace. However, you do not have to use any of these factors if they are not appropriate. A sample questionnaire is in Appendix 3. Note that the survey is anonymous.
25
25
Action
Develop questionnaire. Test questionnaire and adjust if necessary.
Outcome
Reliable questionnaire developed.
26
26
Staff were told about the project before the project group was formed. (See step 2) Now that you have the basics of your methodology worked out, you should begin giving your staff more detailed information. Use whatever means are at your disposal: newsletter, staff meetings, noticeboards, informal meetings, union meetings. The case study describes special information sessions to brief staff on the project. The opportunity was taken to distribute the survey questionnaire at these sessions. It is important that the means chosen to inform staff be appropriate for the culture of your organisation. The union representative on the project group will have good ideas about what works best. A useful method is to have a manager and union representative speak at a meeting. Follow this up with a letter to each staff member from the co-ordinator.
To selected participants:
request for volunteers for discussion groups plus clear directions on how to volunteer and what it will entail, eg, two hours on specified date. (See Appendix 2)
27
27
Action
Circulate information to staff. Invite participants.
Outcome
Understanding of and support for project. Participants volunteer.
28
28
Action
Either Or Collect information by alternate means. Distribute and collect survey.
Outcome
Information on factors which influence health and productivity, and suggestions collected from workgroups.
29
29
Option 1
The project is organised at a local level involving one workgroup. You should now have two sets of information: the data on the Quality of Working Life Indicators and issues/suggestions for improvement from your workgroup. If you have administered a questionnaire as a tool to collecting information, it now needs to be analysed. Using the sample questionnaire (see Appendix 3) as an example, first you would tally the responses to question 1 and 2 to determine the frequency of responses to each factor. This will give a rough estimate of which issues are most important to staff. A table then needs to be prepared in a format suitable for presentation to discussion groups. Next, the responses to questions 3 & 4 would require analysis. This may call for some judgement on your part, since these responses will be qualitative, not statistical. It is suggested that the responses be sorted under the headings of the factors listed in the earlier questions. Some answer may be applicable to more than one category. Remember that for the discussion groups, stimulating ideas are more important than a perfect classification. If you choose to collect information in other ways, you could use the list of factors to help you organise this information.
Option 2
The project is organised at a central organisation level involving several workgroups or the whole organisation. Results should be passed up from the workgroups and analysed centrally. As well as making comparisons between individual workgroups and the organisation as a whole, or other organisations it may be possible to make comparisons between workgroups. Factors which may be significant in making comparisons include whether workgroups have public contact or not, size, location, demographics of area, office layout (eg, open-plan vs closed), management structure. Talk to your statistical section. 30
30
Action
Collate and analyse information.
Outcome
Information in useable form.
31
31
Discussion groups are the primary vehicle for staff to discuss possible strategies /solutions for improving health and productivity based on:
data on the Quality of Working Life Indicators information about issues/solutions collected from workgroups.
Participation in the discussion groups will be voluntary. Groups may be organised in two ways: horizontally or vertically. Horizontal groups are drawn from one level of staff. You might, for example, run two groups of junior staff, and one of supervisors. Horizontal groups are more likely to talk freely, but less likely to develop an overall or balanced picture of problems in the workplace. Vertical groups are made up of staff drawn from different levels. Such groups may be able to give an overall picture of how certain problems affect the workplace at all levels and therefore be more likely to negotiate workable solutions. However, junior staff may be intimidated and reluctant to put their views forward, particularly if they are in conflict with supervisors' views. If you choose to run the groups this way it is preferable that supervisors are not put into groups with the staff that they supervise. If this happens, the group may fail. However, in small workplaces where there are insufficient numbers of any one level of staff to make up separate groups this may be necessary (in this situation, discussion groups could be run at ordinary staff meetings). In the case study, around one-third of the staff in each of three offices was involved in nine discussion groups (groups of ten). Participation, by those selected, was on a voluntary basis. A representative mixture of staff was invited to participate. Care was taken that the usual spokespeople (those who always volunteer their views) were not over represented this is a chance to hear the views of quieter members of staff. 32
32
Group composition should be representative with regard to age and gender. An issue to be considered is how many staff will be involved in discussion groups. In small workplaces, if you have a large number of volunteers, it may be better to use everyone, time and resources permitting, than to cause resentments by choosing only some of the staff. Each group will need two project group members: one to run the group and the other to observe and take notes. These roles should be clearly defined (and may be rotated). Groups should have at least six and not more than twelve participants for maximum effectiveness.
Action
Decide on nature, timing and size of groups.
Outcome
Groups organised with optimum mix of staff.
33
33
With this information you should prepare a presentation which you will give at the beginning of each discussion group. This presentation should have two aims: 1) To give discussion group members enough information about the overall issue so that they realise the impact of your current system of work on the health and productivity of staff. To stimulate discussion not only on the problems associated with how work is arranged but also solutions or strategies for reducing stress and improving health and productivity.
2)
34
34
Prepare overhead transparencies and handouts with this information (trigger material). Action
Prepare presentation.
Outcome
Presentation ready.
The following is a format for keeping a record of discussions. This format can be used on a whiteboard, an overhead projector or butcher's paper.
Factor/Problem Suggestion Action Required
Local Central
35
35
The discussion should be structured to ensure that objectives are achieved and unrealistic expectations are not raised. The discussion group will be led by a member of the project group. A suggested method for running a discussion group is presented below: 1) Present information about how work system factors have an impact on stress, health and productivity. Present the statistics based on the Quality of Working Life Indicators. Present the results of the survey. Ask for the group's reaction to this information. Are there any factors in the work system/problems which currently have a negative impact on health and productivity?
2) 3) 4)
List all suggested factors/problems. (See Step 13) 5) 6) As factors/problems are mentioned, write them down in the first column. For each factor/problem presented, solicit suggestions or solutions and write them down in the second column. If discussion flags at this point, use the questions below to regenerate it.
With the group decide what action is required to make the suggestion work. Which items can be acted on at a local level? Which need to be forwarded to the central organisation? Record this information in the third column.
36
36
At the conclusion of discussion give group participants a hard copy of the information recorded during the session, if possible, and tell them what will happen to it. If it is not practicable to provide a copy immediately, send hard copies as soon as possible. If using an overhead transparency or electronic whiteboard, simply photocopy the record and distribute this to participants, their managers, project group/s and/or steering committee members. Before concluding, offer participants the chance to speak to you privately. A good way to put it is, "If there are any problems we haven't had time for today, please come and see me .....". People who are shy in groups prefer face to face contact; sometimes a conflict between one or more participants might inhibit their input. Make sure individuals feel comfortable in coming to see you after the session. After each session brief managers of staff who participated in the group. It is helpful to let management know which issues the group felt strongly about. Finally, evaluate the discussion groups. One option is to use a questionnaire. Another idea is to interview one or two participants to check that the group covered the important issues. Try to choose interviewees who are impartial and not pushing their own hobby horse.
9)
10)
11)
Action
Organise and run discussion groups. Distribute a copy of the record to participants, appropriate management and project group/steering committee members ASAP. Evaluate the discussion groups.
Outcome
Discussion group members participate fully and with realistic expectations. They generate accurate lists of problems and suggest solutions. Problems and suggestions are passed on to appropriate managers. Project group or steering committee and project groups informed of outcomes. 37
37
38
38
Combine the results from the Quality of Working Life Indicators, the survey (or alternative data collection method) and each of the discussion groups and summarise results in a report for those preparing the action plan. Some aspects you may wish to consider: How much agreement is there on which factors are significant? Is there agreement on possible solutions? If so, what are they? Do the survey/research results and the results from the groups agree? If not, how do they differ? Is the difference related to the staff level in the various groups? Are there certain factors in the work system which at seen differently by different levels of staff? Which of the factors is controlled at the workgroup level and which comes from elsewhere in the organisation or from society in general?
Action
Collate results from the Quality of Working life Indicators, survey and groups, and write report. Circulate report.
Outcome
Information in useable form and circulated to appropriate people.
39
39
Option 1
The project is organised at a local level involving one work group. Results of the collation of the Quality of Working Life Indicators, survey and discussion groups should now be sent to whomever the project group has decided will develop the action plan. The action plan may be developed under the aegis of the project group itself or another participative forum, eg, joint consultative committee, OHS committee. This group will make recommendations about changing the work system to reduce stress factors and improve health and productivity. It should be clear by now which problems can be addressed at the workgroup level. These should be considered immediately. Draw up action plans for dealing with each problem and assign a project group member to see the action plan through. Developing the action plan should be done with appropriate consultation (eg, with OHS specialist, with managers of sections, with other union representatives). The action plans themselves should include methods of feeding back plans and results to staff. It is important that credible timelines be used for these action plans and that deadlines are adhered to wherever possible. Once the first enthusiasm of running the discussion groups wears off it is easy for this kind of project to disappear under the onslaught of daily work demands. Make sure that dates and realistic goals are set for the action plans so that everyone involved continues to give the project the time and resources it needs. Make sure that everyone who will be involved in the action plan is thoroughly briefed and supportive. Clearly establish lines of responsibility and reporting.
40
40
Option 2
The project is organised at a central organisation level involving several workgroups or the whole organisation. Once the results from the local level are fed back to the steering committee, act immediately so local level staff can see that their comments have not been ignored. Develop action plans for organisational change and distribute them, through the project groups to the general staff. Make them as specific and concrete as possible. State deadlines and realistic, understandable goals. Support the local level in implementing the action plans wherever you can - either by additional resources, encouragement or by increased attention to these issues in performance appraisals.
Action
Develop action plans. Implement plans. Keep staff and management informed.
Outcome
Action plan implemented.
41
41
Step 17 - Evaluate
Decision Points
What performance indicators will be used? Who will collect the information and write the evaluation report? Who receives the evaluation report? How will action be taken as a result of evaluation?
Indicators by which the project will be evaluated should be determined at the time the action plan is developed. The data collected using the Quality of Working Life Indicators will act as a benchmark for the project, however other indicators specifically related to the action plan will also be required. It is suggested that an evaluation be done in three phases at 6, 12 and 24 months after implementation has commenced.
Phase 1
Time: 6 months after commencing the implementation of the action plan. Indicator: Progress in implementing action plan. If the evaluation reveals that satisfactory progress has not occurred, find out why. The action plan may need to be adjusted. Reassess timeframes, have realistic goals been set? Targets may need modification, are additional resources required? Has enthusiasm for the project waned? Does the project need further promotion?
Phase 2
Time: 12 months after commencing the implementation of the action plan. Indicators: Progress in implementing action plan; change in Quality of Working Life Indicators; change in other medium- term indicators.
Phase 3
Time: 24 months after commencing the implementation of the action plan. Indicators: Change in Quality of Working Life Indicators, change in other long-term indicators.
42
42
Action
Conduct evaluation of specified periods offer commencement of implementation. Report on evaluation.
Outcome
Project accurately assessed and changes mode to implementation accordingly. Change in health and productivity demonstrated.
43
43
44
44
45
45
Which of the items that you have just ticked do you think has the greatest effect on you?
46
46
Q.3. Can you suggest any ways that those factors could be changed to improve health and productivity in your work?
Thank you for your time and effort in completing this questionnaire.
47
47
Scope
The scope of the project was to:
identify work practices that have an impact on the health and productivity of staff consider and subsequently implement suggested solutions which have the potential to improve health and productivity assess (if possible) the effectiveness of: the client aggression strategy establishment of the Teleservice Centre, in improving health and productivity.
Administrative Arrangements
There were two levels of decision making, ie, national and local. A Steering Committee was established with representatives from the organisation at a National and Area level, the Public Sector Union and Comcare Australia. The Committee's role was to approve the methodology, oversee the development and implementation of the action plan, and to monitor the evaluation process. At the Area level a Project Group was established. It developed the methodology, monitored the collection of information and promoted the project. The Project Group consisted of the Area Manager, the Public Sector Union representative, the two Co-ordinators; one from Comcare Australia and the manager responsible for Occupational Health and Safety in the Area. Occupational health and safety from the central organisation was also represented.
48
48
Methodology
As the Comcare Australia co-ordinator was unfamiliar with the worksystem, workplace visits were conducted. The proforma for the visits was the basis for Appendix 1, of this resource. The Project Group then developed the methodology which was endorsed by the Steering Committee. It comprised the following stages.
Promotion to Staff
The Area Manager sent a letter to all staff advising them of the project. This formed the basis of the letter at Appendix 2. Information sessions were run at each office. The Area Manager, the Public Sector Union representative and one of the Co-ordinators spoke at each session. Staff were briefed about all aspects of the project and urged to participate. At the union representative's suggestion a point was made of explaining exactly what would be done with the information provided by staff and how it would be acted upon. The effectiveness of the communication about the project ensured good participation in the survey and discussion groups.
49
49
Discussion Groups
The Project Group decided to have a mixture of discussion groups, some comprising staff at the same level (ie, horizontal) and some with staff at a variety of levels (ie, vertical groups). As expected the horizontal had a higher degree of input than the vertical, however the vertical groups were effective. The experience confirmed however, the expectation that the inclusion of a supervisor with his or her staff makes a group less effective. The results of each discussion group were copied from the white board, typed and circulated to the relevant group participants and manager immediately following the discussion.
Evaluation
It was proposed to refine the indicators when the action plan was developed. The evaluation was to be monitored by the Steering Committee.
50
50
Specific issues were raised and suggestions put forward in relation to each of the following: Supervision Selection procedures Job rotation Training Absenteeism Written communication to clients Systems performance Client aggression (one office only) Telephone services (one office only).
Action Plan
The findings from the surveys and discussion groups were considered and the Area decided, in consultation with the Staff Association, to establish joint management-union working parties to look at ways to improve the working environment for staff in the following broad areas: feedback and communication between staff and their supervisors a management of change at the local workplace level staff support in respect of client contact managing unplanned staff shortages making staff selections less stressful skills retention in the Teleservice Centre.
51
51
For further information contact Comcare GPO Box 9905 Canberra ACT 2601 Telephone - 1300 366 979 Email - ohs.help@comcare.gov.au Internet - www.comcare.gov.au
OHS 24 (1993)