Safety at work: A meta-analytic investigation of the link between job demands, job resources, burnout, engagement, and safety outcomes.

verifiedrich profile · Journal of Applied Psychology · 2011

Nahrgang, Jennifer D.; Morgeson, Frederick P.; Hofmann, David A.

10.1037/a0021484 · CrossRef: verified · attribution required

How this was studied

paradigm: positivistpurpose: explanatory causaldesign: meta analytic synthesisidentification: nonetime: cross sectionaldata: quantitative survey

A meta-analytic synthesis — it pools many primary studies rather than running a single design, so there is no single-study diagram.

analysis: meta analysis · validity (validity): internal addressed · external addressed · construct addressed · statistical addressed · classifier confidence 0.9

What this article reports

The findings we extracted from this work, normalized into Principia’s relationship form (X → Y). Each feeds the synthesized models below.

safety climateoccupational injuries

r = -0.24 · k=45 · grade A · unverified

safety climateburnout

r = -0.18 · k=18 · grade A · unverified

safety complianceoccupational injuries

r = -0.2 · k=24 · grade A · unverified

safety climatesafety participation

r = 0.8 · k=58 · grade B · unverified

safety climatesafety compliance

r = 0.71 · k=47 · grade A · unverified

safety climateaccidents

r = -0.24 · k=45 · grade A · unverified

safety climatejob satisfaction

r = 0.57 · k=23 · grade A · unverified

safety complianceaccidents

r = -0.2 · k=24 · grade A · unverified

Models this article informs

The meta-analytic priors this article contributes evidence to — its place in the broader synthesis.

In the authors’ words

The article’s own abstract.

In this article, we develop and meta-analytically test the relationship between job demands and resources and burnout, engagement, and safety outcomes in the workplace. In a meta-analysis of 203 independent samples (N = 186,440), we found support for a health impairment process and for a motivational process as mechanisms through which job demands and resources relate to safety outcomes. In particular, we found that job demands such as risks and hazards and complexity impair employees' health and positively relate to burnout. Likewise, we found support for job resources such as knowledge, autonomy, and a supportive environment motivating employees and positively relating to engagement. Job demands were found to hinder an employee with a negative relationship to engagement, whereas job resources were found to negatively relate to burnout. Finally, we found that burnout was negatively related to working safely but that engagement motivated employees and was positively related to working safely. Across industries, risks and hazards was the most consistent job demand and a supportive environment was the most consistent job resource in terms of explaining variance in burnout, engagement, and safety outcomes. The type of job demand that explained the most variance differed by industry, whereas a supportive environment remained consistent in explaining the most variance in all industries.

What the literature says about it

Attributed, open-access quotes from other works that cite this article, plus the citation-graph verdict tally. Corroborations and disputes, in one place — the honest-broker view.

16 supporting

supportsA clear safety climate is therefore an important organizational resource that promotes well-being and inhibits burnout, particularly in high-risk environments (Nahrgang et al., 2011) Drawing on these frameworks and theoretical foundations, we developed FOCUS, a multilevel fire service specific safety climate measure.

Development and validation of the fire service safety climate scale (2019) · CCBYNCND

Ancillary research

Neighbouring works in the citation graph around this article.

Assembled from Principia’s registry — bibliographic record, extracted effect sizes, the models they inform, and open-access citing literature.