Employers nurse the stress bug
Nick Harris, a project manager at BT Group, knows only too well how serious work-related stress can be. Nearly two years ago, he was moved against his will from a job leading a small technical team to a complex project management role for which he felt unsuited and inadequately trained.
“ Up till then, I'd been performing extremely well and was well regarded as a professional in my field,” explains Mr Harris, 53, who works at the telecommunications group's research and development centre at Martlesham, Suffolk. “I suddenly felt completely out of my depth. I was under pressure to perform in this role and I was not supported, and that combination was pretty lethal.”
One morning, after a sleepless night with a throbbing head and stomach ache, he buckled under the strain.
“ I was unable to come into work and face a large workshop I was due to run,” he says.
Mr Harris was off work for nearly two months and it took him six months to recover fully. But once the crisis was understood, he says that the help he received from the company, including counselling and a phased return to work, was critical in encouraging his rehabilitation.
Stress-related illness is now the leading cause of long-term absence from work among non-manual workers, according to the UK's Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development. Workplace absence whether due to stress, minor illness or more traditional complaints such as back pain, which particularly affect manual staff is a big burden on employers. In the UK, the cost is estimated at ￡11.6bn ($22bn) a year.
Other western European countries have even bigger problems with absenteeism. Short-term absence is highest in Portugal, Italy and Belgium, according to a study by researchers at the University of Surrey. Long- term absence is worst in the Netherlands, Sweden, Portugal and France. Only Austria and Ireland have significantly lower rates of long- term absence than the UK.
Concern about stress-related illness is mounting. Last year, the Health and Safety Executive, a UK government body, called on employers to carry out risk assessments to help prevent the problem. A study last month by Human Resources magazine and ASB, a law firm, said employers were still not doing enough and could face a wave of compensation claims over stress.
But some feel the problem is exaggerated. The lack of consensus underlines how slippery stress is: it is subjective, it can have more than one cause, both inside and outside the workplace, and it can be hard to identify, even for those affected. “Most people don't feel they're under that much stress,” says a former sufferer. “They don't see it coming. You have to look to your colleagues to tell you you're under stress.”
Given its complexity, human resources and occupational health professionals recommend a holistic approach to tackling stress. This is what BT has tried, with significant results and cost savings. In 2001, its sickness absence rate was above the mean for British business, and rising. Last year, it fell below the mean.
Work-related cases of ill health, of which about 40 per cent are due to stress and mental illness, have fallen by 64 per cent. This is considerably more than the 50 per cent target and has cut the annual cost of sick pay by ￡15m from ￡82m, says Paul Litchfield, chief medical officer. In addition, the group's insurance premiums have fallen.
BT adopted a new health and safety strategy at the end of 2002 that includes solutions such as work-life balance, stress awareness training for managers and assistance from experts when handling serious cases.
Its biggest effort has gone into identifying people who might become unable to cope with work pressures. In collaboration with managers, trade unions and a research psychiatrist from London's Maudsley Hospital, the company devised an online risk assessment tool called Stream. Employees answer questions about their health and about sources of pressure including work demands, control over work, relationships, and how much support they receive.
The system produces a report identifying the individual's stress level as red (very stressed), amber (a bit stressed) or green (at peace with the world), says Dr Litchfield.
It also indicates which forms of pressure are causing the most stress, suggests solutions and gives links to detailed advice on the BT intranet.
The assessment is voluntary “otherwise people would see it as a chore” and about 12,000 of BT's nearly 90,000 UK-based employees have used it so far. A manager of the individual's choosing, usually his or her immediate boss, also sees the report.
This is crucial, says Dr Litchfield. “Harm arising from a work hazard is a health and safety issue, in which the legal and moral responsibility for assessing and controlling the risk lies squarely with line management. Palming these issues off to third parties or, even worse, to ‘experts', is wrong and just doesn't work.”
The system renders the data anonymous so they can be analysed by the company in the context of teams but not individuals. Stream was piloted in BT's call centres. Working in call centres is notoriously stressful, but the problem was exacerbated at BT by a cut in the number of centres to about 30 from 120, which involved voluntary redundancies and relocation.
The pilot showed that bad results in one centre were linked to management style, a problem that has now been remedied, he says. Since Stream was introduced last year, stress-related absence in the call centres has fallen by 24 per cent, saving ￡500,000 in sick pay. “All data sources suggest this programme accelerated improvements where it has been introduced.”
Could managers be tempted to make the figures look better than they are? Dr Litchfield points out that the primary measure BT uses is cases of sickness, rather than absence. There will be some under-reporting, as in any organisation, and he plans to involve internal auditors in checks. But he adds: “The big drivers are operational getting the job done to time, budget and the satisfaction of the customer. Absence impacts adversely on those for managers, so they are more likely to report it than not.”
BT has also gathered the views of employees who have returned to work after suffering from stress or mental illness. These show clearly that there is no “one-size-fits-all” solution. For some workers, returning to the same job is crucial to regaining their self-esteem. For others, a change of job or a reduced workload is more effective. Mr Harris, who came back to a different job, has used his experience to help improve the way stress is managed in his division. He has also trained as a leadership coach. “I don't feel any recrimination,” he says. “That's a measure of the level of support within the organisation.” 如何给员工减压
工作会会给人造成多大压力，英国电信集团 (BT Group) 的项目经理尼克?哈里斯 (Nick Harris) 再清楚不过了。不到两年前，他被迫调离岗位，从原先负责领导一个小规模技术团队，后被安排到一个复杂的项目管理岗位。他觉得自己不适合这个岗位，专门技能掌握得也不够。
“在那以前，我的表现一直极为出色，被视为所在领域的专家，”哈里斯先生解释道。他现年 53 岁，在英国电信集团位于萨弗克 (Suffolk) 市玛特哈姆希斯 (Martlesham) 的研发中心工作。“自从换了岗位以后，我突然觉得自己完全是个外行。我在这个新岗位感觉很有压力，我没有得到支持。这两种因素加起来很要命。”
一天早晨，在忍受头痛和胃痛而一夜未眠后，他终于被工作压力击垮了。
他说，“我当时无法去工作，去并面对那个需要我管理的大车间”。
哈里斯先生休息了近 2 个月，花了 6 个月的时间才完全恢复。然而，他说，在公司理解了他所面临的难题后，给予了他很大帮助，其中包括咨询指导和分阶段重返工作，这对于鼓励他身体复原至关重要。
英国皇家人事和发展协会 (CIPD) 报告说，目前，与压力相关的疾病是导致非体力劳动者长期无法工作的主要原因。由于压力、轻度疾病或者背部疼痛而导致员工缺勤，已成为雇主的一大负担。员工经常抱怨背部疼痛，它特别影响体力劳动者。在英国，由此造成的损失估计每年为 116 亿英镑 ( 合 220 亿美元 ) 。
其它西欧国家的缺勤问题甚至更为严重。萨里大学 (University of Surrey) 研究人员从事的一项研究结果显示，葡萄牙、意大利和比利时的短期缺勤率最高。而荷兰、瑞典、葡萄牙和法国的长期缺勤现象最为严重。只有奥地利和爱尔兰的长期缺勤率明显低于英国。
目前，人们对因压力而导致的疾病也表示更多关注。去年，英国政府下设的健康与安全管理局 (HSE) 要求雇主进行风险评估，以帮助避免这一问题发生。《人力资源》 (Human Resources) 杂志和一家名为 ASB 的律师事务所上个月从事的一项研究表明，雇主做得仍然不够，而且可能会面临一轮针对工作压力的赔偿要求。
然而，也有些人认为问题被夸大了。人们在这一点上缺乏共识，突出表明了压力这个概念非常模糊：压力是一种主观感受，产生的原因也不单一，可能是在工作内，也可能是在工作外。因此即便对受到压力影响的人而言，这也很难明确界定。“多数人没感到有那么大的压力，”一位曾经遭受压力之苦的人说。“人们自己感受不到压力的出现，得由同事告诉你，你才知道自己在承受压力。”
鉴于压力问题的复杂性，人力资源和职业健康专家建议采取一体化方式解决这一问题。英国电信集团已尝试了这种做法，并成效显著，大大节约了成本。 2001 年时，该公司因疾病导致的缺勤率还超过英国企业的平均值，而去年已经降到平均值以下。
目前，职业性健康状况不佳的案例 ( 其中约 40% 源于压力和精神性疾病 ) 已经下降了 64% 。这大大超过了 50% 的原定目标，公司每年支付的病假工资成本已从原来的 8200 万英镑的基础上降低了 1500 万英镑，总医务官保罗?利奇菲尔德 (Paul Litchfield) 说。此外，该集团的保险费支出也有所减少。
2002 年底，英国电信集团采取了一项新的健康和安全策略。内容包括：如何平衡工作和生活的关系，开展针对管理人员的压力意识培训，以及聘请专家协助处理严重的压力相关问题等。
在寻找可能已无法应对工作压力的员工方面，英国电信集团付出了巨大的努力。该公司与其管理人员、工会和来自伦敦莫斯里医院 (Maudsley Hospital) 的一位精神病研究学家合作，设计了一种名为“ Stream ”的网上风险评估工具。员工回答包括个人健康状况、压力来源（含工作要求、工作控制和人际关系）在内的相关问题，以及所获得的支持。
系统然后生成一份报告，显示员工个人的压力水平：红色为压力很大，琥珀色为有压力，绿色为心态平和，利奇菲尔德博士说。
该报告还可以显示哪种类型的压力会引发最严重的紧张感，并给出解决办法，及提供网络链接，可以找到 BT 内部网上的详细建议。
这种评估是自愿的，“否则人们会把它当作是例行公事”。迄今为止，英国电信集团在本土工作的近 9 万名雇员中，已有约 1.2 万使用了该评估工具。此外，员工还可以自己选择把报告提交给哪位管理人员查看，不过这位管理人员通常是该员工的直接上司。
利奇菲尔德博士说，这点至关重要。“工作中的危险而导致的伤害，是一个健康和安全问题。评估和控制这类风险的法律和道义责任，是各级管理部门的责任。将这类问题推诿给第三方，甚至‘专家'是错误的，而且根本解决不了问题。”
该系统对数据进行匿名处理，这样在分析数据时，公司就会以各个团队，而非个人为背景。“ Stream ”系统在英国电信集团的呼叫中心试行。呼叫中心的工作是出了名的压力繁重，使问题更加严重化的，是英国电信集团将呼叫中心从 120 个缩减为约 30 个，这就要求呼叫中心的一些员工自愿离职或更换工作地点。
利奇菲尔德博士说，此次试点结果显示，某呼叫中心测试结果不佳是与管理方式有关，但这一问题现在已经得到补救。自“ Stream ”系统于去年启动以来，呼叫中心因工作压力导致的缺勤率下降了 24% ，病假工资支出节约 50 万英镑。“所有数据来源都表明，在已实施该计划的部门，情况好转的速度都有所增加。”
管理人员是否有可能虚报数据？利奇菲尔德博士指出，英国电信集团采用的主要衡量标准是员工的患病次数，而非缺勤率。当然会存在一些隐瞒少报的情况，这在任何机构中都可能发生。为此，利奇菲尔德博士计划启用内部稽核员进行数据核对。但他同时也补充说：“主要动力是运作方面的，是要按时、按预算开展工作并以顾客满意度为主旨。缺勤会给管理层的运作带来负面影响，因此管理人员更可能报告缺勤状况，而非不报。”
针对那些由于压力过大或患精神类疾病治愈后重返工作的员工，英国电信集团同时征集了他们的想法。结果明确显示，没有一个能够适合所有人的解决方案。对有些工人而言，重返原来的岗位对重塑自尊至关重要。对其他人而言，更换岗位或减少工作量却更为有效。哈里斯先生康复后更换了工作岗位，并利用自己的经验提高其所在部门的压力管理水平。此外，他还接受培训，成为了一名领导力指导。“我并未感到有人反过来指责我，”他说。“这体现出公司内部给予我的支持力度。”
