Artikel
How to design digital work through organizational measures to prevent technostress and mental health problems? Results from a systematic review
Suche in Medline nach
Autoren
-
Mariann Rigó
- Institute of Medical Sociology, Centre for Health and Society, University Hospital and Medical Faculty, Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf, Germany
-
Christoph Benken
- Institute of Medical Sociology, Centre for Health and Society, University Hospital and Medical Faculty, Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf, Germany
-
Nico Dragano
- Institute of Medical Sociology, Centre for Health and Society, University Hospital and Medical Faculty, Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf, Germany
| Veröffentlicht: | 6. September 2024 |
|---|
Gliederung
Text
Background: Digital technologies in workplaces are known to be a double-edged sword. On the one side they can increase productivity. On the other side they can be a source of stress and related health problems (so called ‘technostress’). To design workplaces in a health promoting way, technostress needs to be addressed on the individual and company level so that technologies may unfold their positive potential. In this project, we systematically reviewed the scientific literature to evaluate the current state of research on organizational characteristics related to technostress as well as reliable organizational measures preventing technostress and its adverse health outcomes.
Methods: With recourse to the PRISMA guidelines, the electronic search of the systematic review was carried out on February 1st, 2022, based on the datasets Scopus, Web of Science and Pubmed. An update is planned during May 2024. The initial search resulted in a first sample of 3,697 papers, out of which 95 articles qualified for the conceptual analysis. The quality assessment was conducted using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale adapted for cross-sectional studies. Focusing on organizational characteristics, we summarize measures, which (1) aim to prevent technostress or (2) reduce the adverse health impacts of technostress at work.
Results: Analysing the characteristics of the evaluated organizational measures, five main categories emerged: 1. Literacy facilitation / Technology-related training; 2. Involvement facilitation; 3. Technology support (i.e. traditional ICT-support provided by the organisation); 4. Non-traditional support forms (i.e. Social-, Organizational support); 5. Organizational rules, policies, and guidelines. Within the categories, several further measures are subsumed. Exemplary, regarding the most evaluated “non-traditional support forms” category, empowering-, health-promoting leadership, a high quality of leader-employee communication as well as a social and supportive collaboration among colleagues had a buffering effect on the negative relationship between technostress and health outcomes. Contrary, social pressures like norms that promote responsiveness, constant availability, or a competitive climate worsened the technostress’s effect on health.
Conclusion: The results of this review indicate that there are several organizational measures at the disposal of companies to alleviate technostress and reduce technologies’ adverse impacts on health.
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
The authors declare that an ethics committee vote is not required.
