WORKING WITH SYSTEMATIC WORK ENVIRONMENT WITHIN THE CONSULTANCY INDUSTRY : - A qualitative study of consultant employees’ and managers’ perceptions of how consultant- and client companies work with work environment/health

(1)

School of Health, Care and Social Welfare

WORKING WITH SYSTEMATIC WORK

ENVIRONMENT WITHIN THE

CONSULTANCY INDUSTRY

- A qualitative study of consultant employees’ and managers’ perceptions of

how consultant- and client companies work with work environment/health

JENNIFER IDAHOSA

Main Area: Work Life Studies Level: Advanced level

Credits: 30 credits

Programme: Masters in Work Life Studies within Health and Social welfare

Supervisor: Christin Mellner

Examiner: Susanna Toivonen & Ulrica Schwarz

Seminar date: 2021-06-04 Grade date: 2021-06-22

(2)

ABSTRACT

Approximately 1,6 percent of Swedish employees work under a consultancy firm, which is a fast-growing market. The responsibility of consultant’s work environment is in accordance with Swedish legislation on systematic work environment (SAM) divided between consultant- and client company. This study investigated how 1) consultants experience that their consultant- and client company employers, respectively, work with work environment health; 2) both consultant- and client company employers, respectively, experience their work with implementing work environment/health practices based on SAM. Data collection consisted of 12 in-depth interviews with 8 consultants, 3 consultant managers, and 1 workplace manager. Based on thematic analysis of interviews with consultants three themes were identified: Communication and relation with managers; Justice and inclusion; Managers’ involvement in workplace health. Based on thematic analysis of interviews with managers four themes were identified: Working with SAM; Work environment goals, Relation between consultant- and workplace managers, Relation with consultants. Findings showed the importance of supportive and present leadership, workplace justice and inclusion for consultants’ wellbeing. This responsibility of consultant’s daily work environment was mainly taken by workplace managers. Conclusions are that clear communication and division of responsibility between consultant- and workplace managers regarding consultants’ work environment/health is vital for well-functioning SAM.

Keywords

Job demands-resources, psychological contract, staffing industry, thematic analysis, work environment health

(3)

INTRODUCTION

This part presents the subject area and the current problems within the subject field. It also presents the aim and the research questions of the study.

Approximately 1,6 percent of all workers in Sweden are employed by a consultancy firm. Hiring consultants means that a client company rents staff from consultancy firms instead of employing workers themselves. This brings special implications for the consultancy firms regarding the work environment. In Sweden, all employers have a mandatory responsibility to ensure a safe work environment, both physical and mental, for their employees. As such, all employers have to systematically work with their work environment to ensure safety and well-being for the employees, which includes to investigate, follow-up and evaluate the organization to prevent health- and safety risks along with provide a satisfying work environment (AFS 2001:1). However, regarding the responsibility of the work environment within the staffing industry, both consultant- and client company are responsible for the work environment of the consultants. This means that the two parties have to co-operate in preventing health- and safety risks for the consultants (Arbetsmiljöverket, 2018). The work force is also more vulnerable sense the employed consultants are mostly younger adults, people born outside of Europe and individuals with a weak position on the Swedish labour market (Albin, Gustafsson, Kjellberg & Theorell 2017: 128). The amount of precarious employments in this industry has increased since the 90’s (ibid), therefore more research is needed regarding the shared employer responsibility of consultant- and client companies as well as consultants’ experiences of their work environment. This subject area is going to be treated in this study.

The staffing industry: History

The staffing industry has been active since the 1930’s in its country of origin, America. Internationally, the industry started to grow rapidly in the 80’s and 90’s, as a result of a more flexible work model and a related higher request for temporary staff (Coe, Johns & Ward, 2009, p. 71). In Sweden however, due to concerns for the exploitation of workers, it was not until the 90’s, during the economic crisis and the subsequent large number of

(6)

unemployment, that the Swedish government decided to legalize the staffing industry to help the Swedish labour market get back on its feet (ibid). These historical events, i.e., the unemployment boom in 1990, the recession in 2001 and the subsequent recovery, have caused the labour market to reshape which have been in favour for the staffing industry (Peck & Theodore, 2006, p. 172).

By the year 1994 approximately 5 000 employees in Sweden worked as consultants, and by the year 2014 the number had increased to approximately 172 000 (Albin, Gustafsson, Kjellberg & Theorell 2017: 128). Today, approximately 1,6 percent of all workers in Sweden work under a consultancy firm. Because of the strict regulations in Sweden regarding the staffing companies, many workers today are not as afraid as previously to work under a consultant employment (Coe, Johns & Ward, 2009, p. 65).

The Swedish labour market: Regulations

In Sweden, work-related health has for a long time been an important discussion where safety representatives can be traced back to 1912 (Frick, 2013, p. 71). The current basis for the work legislation came about in the 70’s when the labour unions and the Swedish Democratic party decided to formulate work reforms, including for instance lay off rules, labour union representatives, and co-determination of employees (Frick, 2014, p. 25). These new Swedish new reforms provided increased safety for employees, state control by regulation/inspection and more research (Frick, 2014, p. 26). Furthermore, in the 70’s to 80’s Sweden developed a “new way of thinking”, from viewing the work environment as a descriptive environment and identifying risk factors by using a “list”, to viewing the work environment as a more fluid environment filled with potential risks. In 1993, Sweden joined the European Union (EU), which required Sweden to align with the work forms within the EU. However, this had little effect in Sweden on its already well-developed work market (Frick, 2014, p. 26).

Working with preventing problems in the work environment, such as health issues, is furthermore complex partly because of individual factors. Employees working in the same work environment can have different subjective perceptions of that same environment. Hence, individuals experience -factors in their environment differently and react to various exposures in different ways. Explanatory factors to individuals’ perceptions can be found in previous life experiences, but also age, gender and education. In addition, interpretations of the work situation regarding leadership, interaction with others, decision making etc. also come into play in how the work environment is perceived by different individuals. Some common beneficial factors for employees’

(7)

perception of their work environment have however been identified. For instance, leadership have shown effects on employees’ job satisfaction, and also to strengthen employees’ personal development to trigger work engagement (Aronsson, 2012, p. 68). Leadership has an effect on stress level, well-being and employee health, it also impacts the degree of absent from work (Nyberg, 2009, p. 80), as well as creating an organizational culture of participation and individual feedback which can counter ill-health and absence among employees (Aronsson, 2012, p. 69).

Even though there are well-developed regulations in Sweden, and continuous work to improve organizational well-being, there has been a significant increase in long-term sick-leave in the past years. In particular, psychological ill-health have increased. Organizational and psychosocial factors have been identified in explaining this increase in sick-leave, as represented by high work-related stress, high workload, depression and burnout (Regeringskansliet, 2000, p. 6). According to Försäkringskassan (2020), stress- related health issues is one of the most common reason for sick-leaves. Because of the rapid increase in sick-leave due to problems in the organizational- and psychosocial work environment, Arbetsmiljöverket put forth a new regulation in September 2015 targeting the organizational- and psychosocial work environment, in order to change this disturbing pattern (Social och Organisatorisk arbetsmiljö, OSA). This regulation focuses on the dialogue between employers and employees (Albin, Gustafsson, Kjellberg & Theorell 2017:146), including aspects covering work demands, workload, victimization, work organization, work-related resources, as well as policies, knowledge about how to work with issues in the work environment, how work should be performed and work goals (AFS 2015:4).

Systematic work environment work (SAM) is another Swedish regulation, introduced in 2001 by Arbetsmiljöverket. SAM means that it is mandatory for employers to work with the work environment in their daily routines regarding physical, psychological and social aspects that have an impact on the work environment. In addition, employees also need to have knowledge of SAM and be able to contribute to working with it. Moreover, every workplace has to formulate a work environment policy where it in detail explains how that specific workplace works with SAM. Furthermore, the employer should divide the work duties of SAM to the staff (Arbetsmiljöverket, 2018).

In order to investigate SAM within the staffing industry, an extensive inspection of 880 workplaces, including both consultant- and client companies, within multiple industries was conducted for a period covering the years 2016-2018 (Arbetsmiljöverket, 2018). A total of 65 percent of the inspected workplaces were required to take action due to

(8)

failures in their work with SAM. The consultant companies had problems investigating and correcting failures regarding health problems, and also had a lack of routines when working with SAM. The client companies showed a lack of knowledge about their obligations as employers when renting staff. The investigation painted the picture of an industry where SAM is not fully a part of the daily routines at many companies, and that the companies struggle with establishing efficient SAM work.

Aim and research questions

The staffing industry is a fast-growing market, both in Sweden and internationally, with an increase in precarious employment where consultants today are mostly younger adults, people born outside of Europe and individuals with a weak position on the labour market (Albin et al., 2017: 128). Therefore, building and maintaining a healthy work environment for consultants is of high relevance. In this connection, there is limited knowledge on how both consultancy- and client employers work with the implementation of work environment/health practices based on SAM.

The aim of this study is to qualitatively investigate how consultants experience that their managers work with issues regarding their work environment, and how their managers, in turn, experience that they work with SAM. Based on this aim, three specific research questions were formulated:

1. How do consultant employees experience that their consultant- and client company employers, respectively, work with work environment/health?

2. How do managers at consultant companies experience their work with implementing work environment/health practices based on SAM?

3. How do managers at client companies experience their work with implementing work environment/health practices based on SAM?

(9)

PREVIOUS RESEARCH

This part contains the previous research within the subject area. Previous research on the PATH-model, leadership, social support and employee control and ownership will be presented in this chapter. The previous research will present some important aspects that have been highlighted in earlier studies.

Work-related stress is common in many parts of the world, and it has been associated with health issues such as depression and other psychological disorders (Chen, Siu, Lu, Cooper & Phillips, 2009, p. 432). Work-related stress can be defined as a multidimensional concept (Baruch-Feldman, Brondolo, Ben-Dayan & Schwartz, 2002, p. 84). It can have different sources and be caused by different factors, such as poor co-worker relations and leadership, lack of meaning, lack of participation, work overload, and lack of control (Chen et al, 2009, p. 432). By investing in the work environment, organizations will maintain a healthier workforce (Chen et al., 2009, p. 440).

Many studies have tried to define and explain what healthy organizations include. Most studies have demonstrated that it is not only a few factors that are associated with healthy workplaces but instead numerous correlating factors. Some frequently mentioned factors are growth and development, involvement, teamwork, leadership, and social positive climate (Lindberg & Vingård, 2012, p. 3035-3036). Work climate can be defined as the shared perception of our environment, also related to norms and values (Caricati et al., 2014, p. 986). In an organization, the organizational goals and values are meant to set a climate aiming to reach and maintain the purpose of the organization. The work climate has an effect on employee motivation which leads to increased performance and job satisfaction (Caricati et al., 2014, p. 986). Moreover, professional commitment, i.e., feelings of commitment to the profession, and work values, i.e., beliefs or behaviour found in the job, are two other important factors necessary for a healthy workforce (Caricati et al., 2014, p. 986). A positive psychological workplace climate has also been associated with lower levels of emotional exhaustion and increased both engagement and personal accomplishments among employees (Shuck & Reio, 2014, p. 54).

To define a healthy work environment, previous research shows that several factors need to be included, for instance leadership, social support, employee control and ownership. These factors will be presented below, after the introduction of a commonly used tool for the exploration and development of employee well-being and organizational

(10)

The PATH-model

The Practices for Achievement of Total Health (PATH-model) is a tool for organizations to explore the well-being among their employees and include suggestions on how to work with organizational improvements. The model is based on a synthesis of previous research and include five categories: (1) work-life balance, (2) employee growth and development, (3) health and safety, (4) recognition and (5) employee involvement (Grawitch, Gottschalk & Munk, 2006, p. 132).

This model suggests two ways to organizational improvements, direct or indirect. This means that the organization either focuses on workplace practices that lead to organizational improvement, or the indirect path that goes through employee well-being to achieve organizational improvements. The indirect path is described to provide work engagement, work satisfaction and health which in turn will increase employee productivity. Therefore, employee’s well-being is not viewed as a by-product of organizational improvement but instead as highly associated with and crucial to organizational improvement (Grawitch et al., 2006, p. 135).

Within the model, work-life balance refers to employees’ perceived conflict between work- and private life, where organizations need to be aware of this potential conflict and if needed, offer work arrangements for example flex time that can reduce conflict and increase balance. Employee growth and development refers to knowledge, skills and experience which is argued to act as motivators for employees in their work. Health and safety refer to both health risks and health care which can be linked to higher levels of stress, as well as health promoting activities associated with productivity. Recognition refers to the compensation that is received by the employees from the organization, which in turn, can be expected to bring job satisfaction, efficiency and reduce turn-over. Finally, the model includes employee involvement, which is linked to well-being and productivity, and has been associated with loyalty and organizational commitment and also a more positive view of the management (Grawitch et al., 2006, p. 136-138).

Leadership

Leadership has for a long time been associated with employee well-being, where organizations built and led by people who master relational skills, viewing the staff as individuals, and have high collaborative skills with all parts of the organization have shown to promote well-being among employees (Cummings, MacGregor, Davey, Lee, Wong, Lo, Muise & Stafford, 2010, p. 381). There is a difference between “manager” and

(11)

“leader”, manager is a position given to a person though appointment while leader is a role given by legitimacy from workers (Bergman & Klefsjö, 2012, p. 400-401). Leadership is relationship- based and builds on providing the workers with resources for example employee-growth, cooperation, providing opportunities and participation (ibid). Furthermore, relational leadership, e.g., investing in relationships with employees, will eventually lead to a healthier workforce. Moreover, fair and equal leadership is also associated with employee well-being, where studies have shown associations between loss of productivity and unfair leadership (Lohela-Karlsson, Hagberg &Bergström, 2014, p. 773). However, if employees experience a sense of fairness and equality within the organization there will instead be less productivity loss and psychological distress (Lohela-Karlsson et al., 2014, p. 774). As such, fair leadership, and also role clarity within an organization, will help employees to cope with work environment issues and therefore these factors can be said to serve as job resources (Lohela-Karlsson et al., 2014, p. 773). Leadership has also shown to have a significant impact on employees’ stress levels and ill-health, where for instance poor social support can trigger feelings of loneliness and frustration (Nyberg, 2009, p. 80). Current research within the consultant industry stated that high job demands could lead to stress regardless of control, how consultants react to demands are based on their job roles and mental health (Wallgren & Hanse, 2007, p. 56). Job satisfaction can eliminate stress among consultants by being well managed, having a supportive leadership and providence of resources, which will contribute to perceive job satisfaction (Ramirez, Graham, Richards & Gregory, 1996, p. 728). Furthermore, consultants have previously reported poor communication and skill training by managers, which impact the likelihood for burn-outs (ibid). Therefore, job satisfaction has been located as an important key factor, which is achievable by providence in variety of work, training, good communication and management (ibid).

Because of this association between leadership and either positive psychological workplaces, and increased productivity or ill-health for employees, organizations would benefit from focusing on developing health-promoting leadership (Shuck & Reio, 2014, p. 54-55; Lohela-Karlsson et al., 2014). In this context, leadership can be defined by some key features (Nyberg, Bernin & Theorell, 2005, p. 8).

Leadership as a:

1. Reciprocal process: leadership is constantly influenced and is influencing different parts in the organizations. This means that it is fluent, dynamic and in need of adjustments throughout time.

(12)

2. Transactional process: a social exchange relationship between supervisor and subordinate in terms of an exchange of workers’ time for supervisor reward.

3. Transformational process: the leader motivates, inspire and work towards satisfaction for the subordinates.

4. Cooperative process: legitimate influence rather than a power position between supervisor and subordinates.

5. Adaptive process: focus on goal-seeking by motivating subordinates to achieve collective and individual goals.

Social support

Social support is often included when discussing workplace well-being. The concept of social support means employees perceived emotional and confiding social support from both managers and colleagues (Stansfeld, Shipley, Heas, Fuhrer & Kivimäki, 2013, p. 3). Social support has been proven to be a factor related to wellbeing, where high social support is associated with higher wellbeing (ibid). The positive aspects of socially supportive relationships have shown to significantly predict employee well-being despite other potential problematic work factors (Stansfeld et al., 2013, p. 7). If the worker receives low social support together with high work demands, the worker is likely to experience ill-health. Social support has been negatively associated with psychological distress, depression, and ill-health, and therefore it is a key factor in maintaining employee health (Michie, 2003, p. 5-6).

Social support has also shown to be linked to work outcomes depending on the source of support. Social support from managers is associated with higher employee job satisfaction and productivity, but not to prevent burn-out. Social support from family members however, can prevent burnout but is not affecting productivity. This difference is explained partly by knowledge for example family members have access to personal knowledge of the employee and can give support when employees are in emotional distress (Baruch-Feldman et al., 2002, p. 91). Increased productivity may instead be linked to skills regarding how to support employees’ work-related behaviour, which supervisors may have gained during e.g., training (ibid).

In research, a term called social competence among leaders has been discussed as an important characteristic for successful leadership in terms of giving social support to employees. This includes empathy, a key factor in social competence, as well as the ability

(13)

to understand human behaviour and the value it brings to cooperation, giving leaders the incitement to develop and maintain healthy relationships with their employees (Aronsson, 2018, p. 330). Social competence and healthy relationships are thus crucial to provide social support to workers, by having knowledge about other people’s emotions (ibid).

Employee Control and Ownership

Employee control, knowledge and investment of a work-related target all create a feeling of ownership (O’Driscoll, Pierce & Coghlan, 2006, p. 389). Organizations that promote employee knowledge, participation and control will support employees in developing ownership over their work situation (ibid.).

Ownership can be defined as feeling responsible for one’s work but also a concern for the same. This can be both conceptual and operational, which implies that an employee has a more caring effect on his/her work and work situation (Pierce et al., 2004, p. 510). This type of psychological ownership has furthermore been associated with positive employee attitudes and behaviours due to a strong connection with the organization and experiencing a feeling of “value” to the organization (Olckers & Enslin, 2016, p. 119). To develop a feeling of ownership, control over one’s work situation is an important and crucial key. By giving employees the sense of control over their work, they likely will feel ownership. In this context, previous studies have shown that employer monitoring and controlling of employees through technology influence their perception of control negatively and is linked to less job satisfaction (O’Driscoll et al., 2006, p. 391). In contrast, by participating in organizational decision making and having the autonomy to design one’s work in accordance with one’s competencies, needs and preferences, employees are able to exercise control, which has been strongly linked to a range of positive effects, such as employee job satisfaction, motivation and performance (O’Driscoll et al., 2006, p. 391-392). Thus, how organizational technology is used, employee participation in decision making as well as autonomy as regards job design are all related to the sense of control, which in turn is related to psychological ownership (Pierce et al, 2004, p. 527). In addition, feelings of ownership will not only increase responsibility and care for one’s work, but will also influence competitiveness among workers as well as decrease the risk for resistance to organizational changes (O’Driscoll, Pierce & Coghlan, 2006, p. 389).

(14)

Taken together, employee control and ownership can be argued to be especially important in today’s society where the new generation that enters the work force looks for a workplace not only supplying them with a pay, but also with tools and possibilities for personal development, skills and gaining of experience (Olckers & Enslin, 2016, p. 119).

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS

The job demands-resources model and psychological contract theory, respectively, were chosen as theoretical frameworks based on their relevance in relation to the aim of this study.

Job Demands-Resources Model

The job demands-resources model (JD-R model) (Demerouti et al., 2001) is a widely adopted work-related stress model within the field of work- and occupational health psychology. In comparison to other models, like for instance the effort-reward imbalance model, the JD-R model has a framework that provides a broader spectrum of work-related categories such as physical, mental, social and organizational factors (Brachli, Jenny, Füllemann & Bauer, 2015, p. 2). The model is furthermore based on the assumption that workplace factors can be seen as either job demands or job resources, where a balance between the two will result in health, well-being and motivation (Lesener, Gusy & Wolter, 2019, p. 77). Any work factor can as such constitute either a demand or a resource depending on its degree. This means that for instance low social support can be regarded as a job demand while high social support can be regarded as a resource. Thus, this model has not specifically defined what constitutes job demands and resources, respectively, but instead indicates that any work factor can affect employees’ health and well-being (Schaufeli & Taris, 2014, p. 2). This model can, due to its flexibility, therefore be applied to different types of organizational contexts and occupations. Within this model, burnout and work engagement are used as opposites when discussing positive and negative outcomes. Job demands are linked to negative outcomes, such as stress, ill-health and burnout, whereas job resources are linked to positive outcomes, such as work engagement, motivation and performance. Job demands are defined as

(15)

physical, social or organizational aspects of a job that require some sort of effort and therefore a physiological or psychological cost e.g., time, role conflicts. Job resources are defined as physical, social or organizational aspects of a job that are associated with achieving goals, reduce job demands and stimulate growth and development (Lesener, Gusy & Wolter, 2019, p. 78)

The interaction between job demands and resources also plays a role in developing either strain or motivation (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007, p. 315). This is described as two underlying processes, a health impairment process where job demands are high and resources low, which can lead to strain, ill-health and burnout (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007, p. 313). The other process is a motivational process, where high resources can counterbalance high job demands, which can lead to job satisfaction, engagement and performance (bid.).

The model further state that workers strive to create a balance between job demands and resources in their everyday work by bending, or shaping, their work to align with their abilities and needs (Demerouti, 2014, p. 238). This kind of proactive behaviour, referred to as job crafting, is incorporated into the daily work by either seeking resources, increasing job demands through seeking stimulating work tasks, or reducing job

demands (ibid).

The psychological contract

The term psychological contract was established in the 1930’s, and refers to an informal, non-written contract between employee and employer (Aronsson, 2012, p. 116). The contract includes the employment relationship, both organizational and individual, as well as obligations between the two parties (Guest, 2004. p. 6). It is connected to the interpretations of the conditions in the formal employment contract, as well as the expectations of both parties regarding their mutual responsibilities, therefore it reflects the informal agreements of both parties (Aronsson, 2012, p. 116). Overall, the concept refers to the meaning and content of the perceived employment agreements rather than the written agreements in the formal employment contract.

The most visible exchange in formal employment is wage, in return for work effort. This part is regulated in the formal contract of employment, but is also included in the psychological contract as a subjective interpretation that builds on individual experience. Therefore, the interpretation can differ between employees even though they can have

(16)

contract starts before the formal contract of employment, already in the recruitment process where the conditions of the employment are discussed to ensure that the potential employee understands the requirements of the employment. After the informal part is stated, the formal parts are discussed, e.g., wage. This process will continue during the first period of employment where the subjective interpretations of these initially discussed conditions will become the centre of the psychological contract.

The interpretations of the psychological contract can differ depending on whether an employment is full-time or part-time (Aronsson, 2012, p. 120). There can also be a difference between the employer’s and employee’s interpretation and expectation on the contract. For instance, the employers should ensure a good work climate, help with making work fit with other parts of life, offer career opportunities, improve future possibilities on the work market, and ensure a safe work environment. The employee should be loyal to the organization, work over-time if needed, be on time, improve his/her competence and help improve the organization, and be a team player (Aronsson, 2012, p. 121).

The psychological contract can change over time if exposed to influential factors and therefore it needs continuous maintenance. These influencing factors can change employees’ attitudes and behaviour, and include giving what they want to receive in return, commitment and consistency, social recognition, follow lead of similar others, liking people that like them, authority/ in terms of people with expertise, wanting more of what they cannot have (Kautz & Bjerknes, 2015, p. 80).

If the two parties do not share the same interpretation of the agreements in the contract due to e.g. lack of communication during the recruitment process, different types of actions will likely take place. For instance, if a breach of the contract would occur an emotional reaction is likely to be triggered, and the importance of the breach will determine the reaction. Common response on part of the employee is “not to do more than needed” or in worse cases the employee could start to sabotage for the organization (Aronsson, 2012, p. 123). It is therefore important to keep the promises made in the recruitment process and to be as specific and clear as possible regarding these, and that the content of the agreements is understood by both parties in order to eliminate misunderstandings (Aronsson, 2012, p. 125). Given this, it is evident that the psychological contract plays a huge role for the practical work in organizations as well as for employee- and staff- related management issues.

(17)

METHOD

In this chapter the method is described by the following parts: Thematic analysis, participants, data collection, analysis and the ethical considerations.

This study has a qualitative research approach, where the method builds on assumptions, and the use of interpretations with theoretical frameworks to find meaning described by people (Creswell & Poth, 2018, p. 42). This approach is appropriate when one needs to explore something through studying a group or population, or understanding a complex issue (Creswell & Poth, 2018, p. 45). Qualitative research approaches do not separate the context from the individual, but rather the opposite, meaning that the context plays a part, e.g., workplace, membership in a group, and as in the case of the present study, working as a consultant. The approach can also be used when measurements may not be visible or be sensitive for example regarding gender or age. Therefore, using a qualitative approach will allow for the uniqueness of the data to be still visible (Creswell & Poth, 2018, p. 46).

The characteristics of the qualitative approach are: a natural setting, which regards finding the setting for where the issue or problem occurs; the researcher is viewed as a key instrument of the study doing the heavy data gathering through interviews and observations; using multiple methods as the data collection often consists of different types of data gathering, e.g. interviews and observations; inductive and deductive data analysis where inductive analysis is a bottom-up approach building up the theory, whereas deductive analysis is looking back at identified themes to find support for the theory; the potential influence of researchers’ background in order to understand the connection between researcher and study as well as the participants background; and finally how past experience of involved researchers may shape the study (Creswell & Creswell, 2018, p. 183-184).

Thematic analysis

Thematic analysis is a well-used and flexible qualitative method when analysing data, and therefore the researcher can use different ways to identify themes (Braun & Clarke, 2012, p. 58). This is done by systematically identifying and organizing themes (patterns of meaning) which will provide insight in the data material (Braun & Clarke, 2012, p. 57). The focus is to identify themes within the data and using codes (Guest, MacQueen &

(18)

frequency, co-occurrence and the relationship between codes (ibid). By using this technique, meaning can be created from the themes taken together. Thus, thematic analysis is a useful analysis tool when trying to capture complexity within data of meaning (Guest, MacQueen & Namey, 2012, p. 11), where the identified themes will be important in relation to the aim and research questions of the study.

Participants

A random sampling of participants was conducted among individuals purposely selected based on their current job positions to target the population of interest in alignment with the aim of the study. All participants were currently working as either consultants, consultant- or client (workplace) managers within three organizations.

Participants were recruited through email by contacting different consultancy firms; this method was chosen due to the work current situation of the workplaces (Creswell & Creswell, 2018, p. 185), where all workers were stationed at home at the time of the study due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. The study was approved by office managers at the consultant companies and information on work-email to consultants and workplace managers was given to the researcher by the office managers at the consultant companies. All consultants and managers at three organizations got an invitation to participate in the study by email. The three organizations were chosen due to workers willing to participate. The original research plan was to have an equal number of participants in each group: consultants (4); consultant managers (4); and workplace managers (4). Due to difficulties in the recruitment process the participants were unevenly distributed within the groups. The final 12 participants consisted of: 8 consultants, 3 consultant managers, and 1 workplace manager. Initial pilot interviews were performed with two other consultants. All participants gave verbal consent to participate before the interviews started.

Data collection

Semi-structured interviews were chosen as the data collection method, which included pre-formulated questions together with follow-up questions (Creswell & Creswell, 2018, p. 188), for a more in-depth understanding and to successfully target the study aim. This was also determined to be the most appropriate way to gather information, as making workplace observations would have been too time-consuming given the time frame of the study.

(19)

The interview guide was built by using areas targeting different parts of the participants' experiences, and such that participants could freely explain their experiences, using the questions more as a guide. Two different interview guides were constructed, one for the consultants and one for the managers (see appendix 1 and 2). To prevent any misunderstandings regarding the study field, all participants were given information about the definition and content of SAM and OSA before the interview to ensure they had the same definition of these.

Before the interviews were made, two pilot interviews were conducted with two consultants in order to evaluate the quality of the interview guide. This led to minor adjustments of the guide to improve its quality. The interviews were conducted through telephone and audio recording was performed; the interviews lasted around 15-25 minutes. Telephone interviews were the most appropriate data- gathering method due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, which excluded face- to face interviews as an alternative. The interviews were later transcribed for analysis. After the transcription, the audio files were deleted. All interviews were conducted in September and October 2020.

Analysis

All interviews were transcribed for analysis. The interviews were then analysed by using a thematic analysis approach. The three groups of consultants, consultant- and workplace managers were analysed separately, but presented together in two blocks in the results. Three thematic analyses were thus made to find themes within the interview material. All interview areas in the interview guide were analysed separately to compare the answers from the participants (see appendix 1 and 2). All interviews were carefully and systematically analysed to find coherence in the answers. It was done by marking the important elements from the answers in the interview areas. All markings were compared which made different pattern different patterns visible. These patterns made the base as the themes, the themes were then shaped based on the relevance to the research questions (Braun & Clarke, 2008, p. 10).

The different themes were analysed to find answers in regard to the three research questions. The identification was with a deductive approach. The themes were also latent, which indicate an interpretative level. The latent level means that the interpretation level is deeper than the exact words that the participants use, and

(20)

three dimensional by both describing and finding meaning but also to identify underlying features (Braun & Clarke, 2008, p. 13). The analysis was done with a theory-driven approach, meaning pre-chosen theories was shaping the direction of the study (Langemar, 2008, p. 130).

Ethical considerations

All interviews were done in regards to the ethical requirements by Vetenskapsrådet (2002) in terms of informational requirement. This means that the participation must be voluntary and researchers are to inform the participants about what their part will be in the study. The consent requirement, the researcher has to get the participants consent before the study. The confidential requirements, the participants identity must be private and protected, all information that can be traced back to the individual needs to be handled carefully and confidential. The utilization requirement, the information from the participants have to be used for the intended purpose and should not be lent to other parties (Vetenskapsrådet, 2002, p. 7-14).

The participants received clear information about the purpose of the study and which part of the study their interviews would contribute to. Furthermore, all participants were informed that their workplaces and names would not be mentioned in the study, along with deleting the audio recordings after transcription. They also got information on that no part of the study would be able to be referred back to them as individuals. All participants gave their consent before the interviews were performed.

(21)

RESULTS

In this following part, the results from the three thematic analyses are presented in two blocks. The first block is based on the thematic analysis of the interviews with consultants and consists of three identified themes: Communication and relation with managers; Justice and inclusion; Managers’ involvement in workplace health. The second block is based on the thematic analysis of the interviews with managers and consists of four themes: Working with SAM; Work environment goals, Relation between consultant- and workplace managers, Relation with consultants.

Clarification of what is meant in the illustrative quotes is expressed within ().

First block: Consultants

Distant yet available communication/ relation with managers

The first theme identified in the interview material was the communication between the consultants and their managers. Many consultants experienced a lack of communication, mostly regarding frequency of communication, with the consultant manager. Some even described the relationship as mostly through digital channels and conversations mostly concerned their employment. However, many consultants also described the consultant manager as available due to the access to numerous digital channels and quick responses. In these cases, consultants experienced the communication as acceptable, as they expressed an understanding for this being the result of the physical distance between consultant and manager. The following quote illustrates this acceptance towards the scarce communication even though consultants also clearly pointed out feelings of what was lacking in the communication and failures in the relationship.

“I would say that it's (the communication) so distanced that it doesn't feel like it's my manager. But the manager is very quick to answer, always respond quickly, even though it's not as personal or conversational.”

(22)

The poor communication was furthermore found to result in a relationship that can be viewed more as an employer-employee and not a leader-worker type of relationship such that problems that the consultants raised with the consultant manager were mostly regarding their employment. Some consultants even described the consultant manager as “someone in the background”. Therefore, few consultants complained about the lack of communication but rather expressed neutral feelings. Instead, they developed a closer relationship to the workplace manager whose knowledge about the work, workplace, work situation etc. was wider. The workplace manager was as such filling a part of the leader-worker relationship that the consultants felt was lacking with the consultant manager. This indicates that the consultants needed a more present and visible leadership, which in this case was given by the workplace manager.

This is confirmed by the fact that the consultants experienced a more visible relationship, including frequency of communication, with the workplace manager. Some consultants described this communication as daily, more personal, easier and more comfortable.

“It's easier and more comfortable because I'm meeting the person (workplace manager) more. And because it's there where I work, the manager is more available. I would describe it as a good relationship. However sometimes it's deficient... because they can't answer all questions.”

The workplace manager hence provided the consultants with most of the needed resources, e.g., support and feedback. However, the workplace manager could not take on the full role as a manager of the consultants as she/he is not the employer. In this context, some of the consultants stated that they had learned over time which manager, consultant manager or workplace manager, to ask for what. Others rather felt they would like more clarity, as they experienced is as being like a grey area between the managers with regard to who is responsible for what. One consultant described a feeling of confusion about who to contact in various situations, which led to dissatisfaction. Taken together, this illustrates that the employment in itself can be difficult to handle for consultants without sufficient frequency of communication and role clarity with regard to both consultant manager and workplace manager.

(23)

Justice and inclusion

Some consultants raised problems with unfair treatments due to the consultant employment, and expressed the feeling of not being treated as the rest of the workforce in the organization. Although the relationship with the workplace manager for some consultants was perceived as sufficient, they expressed that it was not as deep as the relationship between the workplace manager and the ordinary staff. Some consultants described feelings of being less prioritized at the workplace due to their employment form.

“I would say that we are less prioritized when it comes to (issues regarding) work health. We know how they (workplace managers) work with work environment health, but when it comes down to improvements, we're always last to get help.”

This kind of situation can be illustrated by that during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, the regular staff received equipment for working from home delivered quickly whereas the consultants had to wait 4 months to get it. Even though the interviewed consultants experienced unfair treatment at their workplace regarding the work environment, many of them still expressed a more positive relationship with their workplace manager than with the consultant manager. As in the above theme, this shows that this specific form of employment can bring leadership problems, where the workplace manager supplies the consultants with necessary resources when their employer, as represented by the consultant manager, does not. However, the analysis of the interview material points to that there are still parts of the leadership that are absent and cannot be fulfilled by the workplace manager.

Managers’ involvement in workplace health

The third theme identified concern how the consultants perceived that the consultant managers and workplace managers, respectively, work with questions regarding the consultants’ work environment. Many of the consultants expressed feeling excluded and not updated on what kind of work duties the consultant manager actually performs in this area. The reason for this was explained as that the consultant manager rarely discussed work-related health with the consultants. Therefore, some consultants did not

(24)

perceive that the consultant manager did any work regarding issues related to the consultants’ work environment and/or health.

“It is many things in the structure of the employment as a consultant that leads to worse (working) conditions, since the employment form is not designed in the employees’ advantage”

In the interviews, different explanations were expressed as to why the consultant manager is lacking in certain areas regarding working with the work environment. Some argued that the physical distance was a deciding factor as to the consultant managers lack of work regarding consultants work-related health, as the consultant manager basically had little knowledge about what actually was going on in the workplace. Another explanation concerned the employment structure, which was seen as leading to failures in working with issues regarding work-related health for the consultants. As such, the employment structure was perceived as interfering with the consultant managers ability to “do better” in this area. The consultants’ explanations for the consultant managers’ lack of work with health-related work was thus based on the knowledge of the employment conditions, which in turn also can be an explanation for the consultants’ attitudes towards the consultant manager.

“The consultant manager sometimes asks about the work environment… It feels like it's more to be polite and because they have obligations…but they don't really do anything…. I don't think they do anything.”

In contrast, when it comes to how the workplace managers work with work-related health concerning the consultants, many of the interviewees expressed positive feelings. The workplace manager was perceived as treating issues of work environmental health as very important as well as being open to suggestions for improvement. Some consultants reported that the workplace manager performed regular work environment check-ups, and was more visibly working with both practical and regular tasks related to the work environment. The workplace manager’s work was described as being of high quality containing weekly updates and providing for instance seminars within work-related health. This provided the consultants with a feeling of being of importance for the

(25)

organization, which can be one explanation for the closer relationship shaped between consultant and workplace manager, in contrast to the relationship between consultant and consultant manager.

Second block: Workplace- and Consultant Managers

Working with SAM

In the interviews with the consultant managers a picture emerged where they regarded the beginning phase of consultants’ employment at a specific hiring company as the most important part of their responsibility to secure a good work environment. Before the consultants begin an assignment, the consultant managers said that they always visit the workplace to ensure that it meet the consultant company’s criteria. Some of the consultant managers described that they had a checklist to evaluate the workplace, and that they also ask for documents and workplace policies to make sure the workplace have routines regarding work environment health.

“We always have to take the work environment into consideration when we get a new client, I have then always asked questions about the work environment, especially if it's a new client. I have always asked questions to make sure it's (issues regarding work environment health) handled in a good way; I also like to get documents regarding their work environment. We need to see that they actually work actively and have a work environment we can rely on.”

However, after the start-up phase, the consultant managers work regarding the work environment health is basically done. As such, the consultant managers do not work continuously with the work environment of the consultants, where one explanation put forth was that since the consultants are working in offices there is no need for further work, as the likelihood of things happening at that kind of workplace is much smaller than in jobs within for instance logistics. Another explanation was that due to the physical distance, the consultant managers rely on the workplace manager to inform them if anything would happen. Taken together, this can be seen as that the

(26)

responsibility for the work environment shifts from the consultant company to the hiring company, i.e., the workplace of the consultants, where the start-up controls and evaluations made by the consultant managers can be interpreted as to be performed in order to determine whether the specific workplace can manage the responsibility for the work environment of the consultants.

“No… no continuous work… no set goals. More, check-ups like ‘how are you, how is it going for you?’. And now I have so many consultants that work from home so it adds another dimension on how to work with it (the work environment). “

When it comes to the workplace managers, it is described that the workplace already has work environment routines installed, e.g., work environment representatives, and annual co-worker surveys. The consultants are included in these routines and are also described as being a central part in the discussion at the workplace regarding work environment issues. The workplace managers also do check-ups regularly with the consultants as they do with the regular staff. The work with the consultants’ work-related health is continuously and systematically performed by the workplace, and the workplace manager is described to have an important role for the consultants’ well-being. This can be one potential explanation as to why the consultants perceive their workplace managers as their “real” manager and not the consultant manager. Thus, they develop a closer relationship with the workplace manager who provide more resources and support, and hence is more invested in the consultants than the consultant manager is.

Work environment goals

One theme that was identified in the material was the lack of goals when working with the work environment, which is an important part of SAM. According to the consultant managers, there were no explicit goals neither are annual goals set up. In this context, it was expressed that having annual goals is regarded a responsibility of the workplace, although the consultant company have policies and routines for this if needed. One common feature in the interviews was the importance of check-ups described by the consultant managers, where most of their work with the consultants’ work environment were related to health check-ups. Although health check-ups were described as the main work task for the consultant managers once the initial evaluations in the beginning phase of consultants’ employment was made, there was consensus among the interviewed

(27)

consultant managers that the consultant company’s work with consultants’ work environment health was working well and was sufficient.

Relation between consultant- and workplace managers

The dialogue between consultant managers and workplace managers regarding their respective responsibilities for consultants’ work environment was described as that the division of responsibilities is clear to the involved parties and is done before the start of consultants’ employment. Consequently, the communication between managers was more frequent before the employment in order to determine the conditions of the employment.

“When we go through everything with the client, we also talk about who is responsible for what. We make an individual plan for every client depending on what work the consultant is performing.”

The consultant managers described the work process such as making individual plans for the employment of the consultants with the client company, or in some cases the discussion between the managers were more in form of that the consultant manager submit claims that the workplace has to follow, or else the consultant is removed. In the interview material there however were also descriptions of that the consultant manager inform the workplace manager in the initial employment phase of that they share a 50/50 responsibility with the workplace manager. Taken together, this show that different managers have different strategies in how to relate to one another with regard to how they work with work environmental health and related responsibilities, although there is a common main goal to make this relationship a good cooperation and secure a good work environment for the consultants.

Also, the workplace manager described the communication between managers as well-functioning, with a clear division of responsibilities and as a transparent relationship. However, concerns about the relationship between the consultant manager and consultants was raised. This was explained as a consequence of the physical distance between them, where more visible and present leadership often is important for employees. If this is lacking, the workplace manager expressed a worry that an unsatisfying relationship could develop between the consultants and their employer, i.e.,

(28)

communication/relationship with regard to the consultant managers is noticeable not only to the consultants, but also to the workplace manager. Because of the distant relationship between the consultants and the consultant manager, the workplace manager may try to compensate for this by taking on their responsibilities as well as develop a closer relationship with the consultants.

Workplace- and Consultant managers relation with consultants

From the analysis of the interview material, a shared view of both consultant- and workplace managers’ relationship with the consultants emerged, where this relation was described as good with open communication and as that managers have regular contact with their consultants. However, there were differences in what the actual relationship, or contact, could look like. Some of the interviewees described a very close relationship with their consultants, talking once a week, whereas others had less contact but least once a month.

The relationship and contact with the consultants were in some cases perceived as depending on the consultant, where managers adapt the frequency and closeness depending on the consultants’ needs and preferences. This can be understood as that if the consultant does not raise any issues or take initiatives for a close relationship the consultant manager seldom invests in developing a closer leadership. This was explained as that some consultants do not want a more personal contact, but only regarding employment questions, therefore the managers adjust the contact and make it individualized. However, in the interviews the significance of time was also mentioned, where having fewer consultants as a consultant manager plays a big role, as they then are able to give more time to each of the consultants.

To summarize, according to the consultant managers, time and adaptation to consultants’ requests were the two main reasons for how the communication and relationship evolved over time. However, as time is often limited and consultants might not express their needs, the workplace managers seem to play a crucial role in both the well-being and inclusion of the consultants in workplace.

(29)

DISCUSSION

In this part the result is discussed. The results are interpreted with the use of the two selected theoretical frameworks: job demands-resources model and the psychological contract, together with previous research presented earlier in this paper. The discussion ends with a method discussion.

Result discussion

The purpose of this study was to qualitatively investigate how consultants experience that their managers work with issues regarding their work environment, and how their managers, in turn, experience that they work with SAM. The interviews with the consultants had a strong coherence, such that they all expressed that the consultant manager was not perceived to be involved in either the work of the consultants or in how the consultant managers worked with questions regarding the work environment to the same degree as the workplace manager. Moreover, the consultants reported failures in SAM on behalf of the consultant managers, however they did not express dissatisfaction with regard to this. This can be explained by the psychological contract theory, since the conditions of the employment are presented in the recruitment process, it may explain the consultants’ acceptance of the consultant managers’ lack of work with SAM (Aronsson, 2012, p. 125). If the two parties, consultant and consultant manager, have the same interpretation of the terms of the contract, the likelihood of breaching the contract is smaller (ibid). This was supported by the results as the consultants mentioned the employment structure as an influencing factor in the distant relationship and lack of working with SAM in regards to their consultant manager.

Furthermore, the neutral feelings in regard to the lack of working with SAM by the consultant managers can also be explained by factors influencing the psychological contract. The workplace manager can for instance be viewed as an influencing factor to the contract, by providing a close relationship to the consultants, the consultant may settle for a low frequency of contact with their consultant manager (Aronsson, 2012, p. 116). This interpretation is supported by that all consultants stated that they formed a strong bond with the workplace manager, and also reported close communication and perceived engagement from the workplace manager. This picture of the relationship as being close and fulfilling was shared by the workplace manager. As such, the terms in the psychological contract between consultants and consultant managers may be able to bend without consequences (Aronsson, 2012, p. 125), as the workplace manager fulfilled many of the

(30)

The neutral feelings of the consultants regarding the lack of SAM performed by the consultant manager, can be explained by the concept of job crafting within the JD-R model, i.e., employees proactively shaping their work in accordance with their abilities and needs (Demerouti, 2014, p. 238). One dimension of job crafting is seeking resources, where the consultants in the present study can be said to seek a closer relationship with workplace managers to obtain resources, for instance social support and workplace inclusion, that the consultant manager did not provide them with.

Thus, the workplace managers’ relationship with the consultants was mostly linked to providing consultants with resources and the consultants expressed satisfaction with this, which is in line with the JD-R model (Bakker & Demerouti, 2006, p. 315). This relates in particular to social support, which has been linked to positive outcomes (Lesener, Gusy & Wolter, 2019, p. 78), such as well-being and to prevent psychological ill-health among employees (Michie, 2003, p. 5-6). The supportive relationship between the workplace manager and the consultants can as such be seen as vital in order to both prevent ill-health (health impairment process) and to create motivation (motivational process), by providing resources to the worker (Bakker & Demerouti, 2006, p. 315). The workplace manager acts as a “leader” for the consultants. The consultants were gravitating towards the workplace manager due to the providence of resources and close communication. According to Bergman and Klefsjö (2012, p. 400), the consultants are giving legitimacy to the workplace manager to act as their leader, while the consultant manager act more as a “manager” because the communication is mostly about employment.

The relationship between consultant and workplace manager can furthermore be seen from the perspective of leadership as a process of social exchange, such that the workplace manager, by investing resources (support, feedback, inclusion) in the consultants, in return received engagement and performance (a productive workforce) (Nyberg, Bernin & Theorell, 2005, p. 8). The resources invested in the consultants by the workplace manager can also be said to invoke feelings of control and ownership in the consultants, which according to previous research, is linked to positive employee behavior (O’Driscoll, Pierce & Coghlan, 2006, p. 389). Taken together, this can serve as explanations to the importance of the positive relationship that the interviewed consultants expressed towards their workplace managers.

In the results, it moreover became clear that working with SAM was mostly performed by the workplace manager. The consultant managers often evaluated the workplace of the client companies, including their routines and policies, to ensure that they had a well-functioning SAM. In this way, the consultant managers saw as their responsibility to ensure

(31)

that the workplace offered a healthy work environment to the consultants, although the consultant firms did not formulate specific goals with SAM regarding the consultants. This indicates that the consultant firms did not work with SAM as required by legislation, but instead relied on the workplace manager to work with SAM. This could potentially lead to failures in SAM if the division of responsibility between managers is unclear, or the involved parties are not fully introduced to their responsibilities properly.

The division of SAM between consultant- and workplace managers was moreover also shaping the relationship between the consultants and managers. The workplace manager, who was found to be responsible for most parts of SAM and in providing resources to the consultants, developed a closer relationship with the consultants. Consultant managers, who were mostly responsible for the initial employment phase and were not as involved in working with SAM, had a more distant relationship to the consultants. From the findings, it became clear how the distance between worker and manager can affect the relationship, as this distance makes it difficult to provide resources like social support, feedback and participation/inclusion, which are central parts of SAM (Aronsson, 2012, p. 69). Since the distance make it more difficult for consultant managers to provide the consultants with resources, the consultants may lean more towards the workplace manager, as s/he is more available. Although the distance between consultant and consultant manager was frequently mentioned in the interviews as an influencing factor to the poor relationship with the consultant manager as experienced by the consultants, it could in addition also be the lack of provision of resources from the consultant manager that explain the poor relationship.

One interesting finding was the worries expressed by the workplace managers regarding the relationship between consultant manager and consultants. This contradicted the perceptions of the consultant managers, who in turn, stated that they had a sufficient relationship with their consultants, and they expressed the benefits of having an individualized contact with the consultants. According to the consultant managers, by giving resources, e.g., feedback, to the extent that the individual consultant wishes, the necessary resources are given and the consultants’ needs are fulfilled. Thus, the consultant managers, in their eyes, adjusted the relationship to a state where the two parties, consultants and consultant managers, were satisfied. This view was partly shared by the consultants, as they did not express dissatisfaction with the relationship with the consultant manager, although it was perceived as poor. This can be understood as that the consultant managers and the consultants, according to the psychological contract theory, did not experience any negative feeling because the two of them, in the initial employment phase, had formed and agreed on the relationship and communication (Aronsson, 2012, p. 125). Returning to the worries of the workplace manager regarding the distant relationship

WORKING WITH SYSTEMATIC WORK ENVIRONMENT WITHIN THE CONSULTANCY INDUSTRY : - A qualitative study of consultant employees’ and managers’ perceptions of how consultant- and client companies work with work environment/health