Tianan Yang1, Mingjing Zhu, Xiyao Xie. 1. Department of Organization and Human Resource Management, School of Management and Economics, Beijing Institute of Technology.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to identify the determinants of presenteeism, taking health and individual factors into account. METHODS: A quantitative analysis applying structural equation modelling analysis was conducted on the basis of secondary data from the Health and Retirement Survey (2008 wave), which measured presenteeism and its determinants. RESULTS: Stress-related factors at work (β =-0.35, p<0.001), individual factors (α =-0.27, p<0.001), and health (β =0.24, p<0.001) were significantly related to presenteeism. Individual factors were found to be directly correlated with stress-related factors at work (β =0.22, p<0.001). Significant indirect effects between stress-related factors at work and presenteeism (Sobel z=-6.61; p<0.001) and between individual factors and presenteeism (Sobel z=-4.42; p<0.001), which were mediated by health, were also found. Overall, the final model accounted for 37% (R(2)=0.37) of the variance in presenteeism. CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates some important and practical guidelines for employers to avoid the burdens of stress-related presenteeism among their employees. These findings could help select target factors in the design and implementation of effective presenteeism interventions in the aging working population.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to identify the determinants of presenteeism, taking health and individual factors into account. METHODS: A quantitative analysis applying structural equation modelling analysis was conducted on the basis of secondary data from the Health and Retirement Survey (2008 wave), which measured presenteeism and its determinants. RESULTS: Stress-related factors at work (β =-0.35, p<0.001), individual factors (α =-0.27, p<0.001), and health (β =0.24, p<0.001) were significantly related to presenteeism. Individual factors were found to be directly correlated with stress-related factors at work (β =0.22, p<0.001). Significant indirect effects between stress-related factors at work and presenteeism (Sobel z=-6.61; p<0.001) and between individual factors and presenteeism (Sobel z=-4.42; p<0.001), which were mediated by health, were also found. Overall, the final model accounted for 37% (R(2)=0.37) of the variance in presenteeism. CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates some important and practical guidelines for employers to avoid the burdens of stress-related presenteeism among their employees. These findings could help select target factors in the design and implementation of effective presenteeism interventions in the aging working population.
Authors: Carlo Ammendolia; Pierre Côté; Carol Cancelliere; J David Cassidy; Jan Hartvigsen; Eleanor Boyle; Sophie Soklaridis; Paula Stern; Benjamin Amick Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2016-11-25 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Tessa A Kouwenhoven-Pasmooij; Suzan J W Robroek; Roderik A Kraaijenhagen; Pieter H Helmhout; Daan Nieboer; Alex Burdorf; M G Myriam Hunink Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2018-06-19 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Tianan Yang; Run Lei; Xuan Jin; Yan Li; Yangyang Sun; Jianwei Deng Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-03-06 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Tianan Yang; Yina Guo; Mingxu Ma; Yaxin Li; Huilin Tian; Jianwei Deng Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2017-08-29 Impact factor: 3.390