Employee control over work provides dividends to both employer and employee

How much control do you have over your work? Can you determine when, where, and how you perform your job? Do you have the authority to change aspects of the workplace that need changing?

Your answers to these questions have important implications for your well-being. There is persuasive evidence in the psychological literature that the experience of control over one’s work environment can reduce stress and fatigue, and enhance motivation and personal growth. Likewise, the lack of employee control can have negative consequences for both employer and employee.

The experience of control has long been recognized as being an important factor in helping people deal with stress. Compared to workers with a high degree of control, those perceiving low control typically experience more exhaustion after work, trouble awakening in the morning, depression, nervousness, anxiety, and insomnia or disturbed sleep. These findings led psychologist Robert Karasek to propose the demand/control model hypothesis, which predicts that the most unpleasant psychological reactions occur when job demands (the need to work quickly and hard) are high, and the worker's ability to make decisions is low.

Workers who experience low control over work conditions are not only at risk for depression, exhaustion, and job dissatisfaction. For those of us unlucky enough to be in a low-control workplace, there is new evidence of increased health risks. Low control over work has most recently been associated with increased risk of cardiovascular disease, poor health functioning, and absenteeism due to illness.

The relationship between employee control and occupational stress has not gone unnoticed by progressive-minded employers, and for good reason. Workers who experience emotional distress or reduced health functioning can negatively affect the corporate bottom line through lowered work efficiency, absenteeism, and high employee turnover. Accordingly, some employers have begun looking for ways to give workers a greater sense of control as a means of improving employee health, morale, and productivity.

Ford Motor Company, for example, has instituted a team-based approach in many of its manufacturing operations. This model allows employees to assume much greater control over their work. Whereas the conventional approach is for employees to simply follow directions from their supervisors, under Ford’s new system employees have the ability to resolve quality issues with parts suppliers, and take other actions independently to improve work conditions and product quality.

An even more progressive means of allowing employees control over their work is known as “telework.” Telework allows employees the ability to choose the time or place that best allows them to accomplish their work duties in an effective and efficient manner. As you might guess, many employees choose their home as the preferred place to work. Obviously, certain occupations would seem more conducive to telework than others. Many solitary activities, such as writing, typing, and tasks performed at a telephone or computer terminal would appear readily adaptable to telework. I would probably not like it, however, if my physician chose to do his work from his home.

One interesting aspect of the literature on control is the fact that it is the belief in control that is essential in determining our responses to situations. Implicit in this finding is the fact that we always have the ability to increase our belief in, and experience of control. The idea is not that we should delude ourselves into believing that we have control where we don’t. Rather, we have the ability to focus attention on those aspects of our work situation over which we do have control, while ignoring those aspects over which we have little or no control.

There are also ways to lessen the impact of unpleasant situations over which we determine we have no control. We can, for example, view an undesirable situation as temporary, one that might improve on its own in the future, or one we might better control in the future. Another method is to change our perspective on the situation. A snake may seem dangerous and threatening when thought of in a certain way. However that same snake may also be viewed as a creature of exquisite beauty, an object of tremendous interest and fascination. It’s not so much the situation that’s critical. It’s how we perceive it.

Finally, it can be empowering to consider that even when we can’t change an unpleasant workplace situation, we always have the option of removing ourselves from the situation, of changing to a different work setting. Although one might legitimately choose to remain in a low control situation, simply realizing the availability of other options can enhance one’s perception of control, in theory, reducing the risk of emotional distress and stress-related ailments.