Ravalier PhD Theis.pdf - Anglia Ruskin Research Online

60
Stress Management Interventions (SMIs) were put into one of three
classifications in a framework developed by Ivancevich et al. (1990). The
model suggests that interventions can be classified into interventions
which focus on the intensity of stressor, how the individual considers the
situation, or the mechanisms available for coping with the outcomes of
the stress. These three methods of intervention have been conceived as
primary, secondary and tertiary interventions:
1e.1) Primary Interventions
There is an increasing amount of scientific literature investigating
the effects of organisational-level interventions for work-related stress
(Levi, Sauter & Shimomitsu, 1999). Nonetheless organisationally-focussed
interventions are still utilised much less than either secondary or tertiary
approaches (Jordan et al., 2003). Primary, or organisational-level,
management stress interventions are designed to deal with the source of
the problem by changing the design, management and/or organisation of
work (Cox, Griffiths & Rial-Gonzalez, 2000). In doing this primary
interventions are proactive in identifying and reducing the stress hazard at
the source, while also easing the employee stress burden. These methods
target the actual cause of the workplace stress, and as such are claimed
to be an effective stress reduction technique over the long term. The
organisation is seen as the ‘generator’ of the stress-related risk to health
(Cox et al., 2007), and as such risks should be dealt with at the source.
Therefore primary stress management interventions include techniques
such as job redesign in order to modify workplace stressors or increasing
workers’ autonomy (Ongori & Agolla, 2008).
Examples of primary interventions include job redesign, changes in
the pace of work, and enhancing social support (Lamontagne et al., 2007).
Many papers exist which indicate that primary interventions are the most
effective at reducing workplace stressors. Indeed, research produced by
Ongori and Agolla (2008) suggest that occupational stressors should be
fought at their infancy, and due to the nature of primary interventions
they are the best at doing so and as such, if these strategies are taken