WORK-RELATED STRESS ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT IN AN ITALIAN MUNICIPALITY WORKFORCE

WORK-RELATED STRESS ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT IN AN ITALIAN MUNICIPALITY WORKFORCE MAIN MESSAGE: Work-related stress (WRS) is a significant problem for the municipal workforce. Over the years, municipal management has spent many resources to manage it with limited results. The multi-disciplinary intervention implemented has improved the capacity to manage WRS situations with a participative approach at various levels that, by using suitably sensitized and trained internal resources, should be able to monitor and manage WRS problems. PROBLEM: heterogeneous municipal activities are characterized by multiple and continuous demands from citizens and various political and institutional bodies, with heavy consequences regarding individual psychological well-being and the smooth functioning of the organization, which take more work to manage. CONTEXT: Some critical issues were identified by analyzing previous stress management actions. Risk assessment of WRS identified critical areas but low response rate and non-comparability of data limited interpretation; health surveillance often reported stress-related problems, but no structured intervention or integration with other municipality functions was noted; data on wellness were outdated, generic, and not relevant; psychologists and consultant personnel evaluated many cases and often suggested operative solutions, but the impact was not clear; data on manager training to improve communication and management skills were inconsistent. ACTIONS: 1 – institution of a Research Centre for Well-being and Health managed by a multidisciplinary working group, coordinated by a psychologist, involving occupational physicians and all consultants for WRS, with dedicated space and time and a commitment to evaluate single cases and general issues, as well as to elaborate, adopt and monitor specific interventions. 2 - Meetings with managers aimed to involve them and make them participate in the change process improving the management of critical issues that have emerged in the course of the Research Centre's work. 3 – risk assessment of WRS by the revised methodology proposed by the Italian Workers' Compensation Authority, including an approach to improve participation and involvement of all organization's key figures coordinated by an external specialized figure. OUTCOMES: The Research center worked for about three years; 55 workers requested the center’s intervention. Only one of the requests had a specificity related to the working methods 'imposed' by the pandemic (smart working). Analysis of the cases and issues allows the researchers to identify some key critical points in human resource management and communication styles on which the training interventions were built. An initial meeting was held for managers to present the activities, and an analytical report on the meetings was sent to all participants. In the following meetings, an activity was proposed in small groups on critical situations deduced from the Research Centre work after an introductory part and restitution of the work carried out. Fourteen managers participated in the first meeting and 18 in the second; 32 out of 34 were invited to participate (91%). From the group work and the plenary discussion, some significant reflections emerge. They all agree on the general aims of interventions in critical situations, namely 1) improvement of the working climate, with a view to acceptance and 2) increased productivity and effectiveness. It was highlighted that it is easy to agree on such broad objectives, but problems may emerge when we try to make them operational. We have to decide on what it means to be efficient and welcoming. For this reason, in the second meeting, a specific activity is proposed to highlight group dynamics and the representation of authority. The risk assessment of WRS showed a high-risk level only for Local Police Officers, a score on which sentinel events and content indicators weighed heavily. For five homogeneous groups (social workers, social service drivers, nursery school teachers, and organizational positions), the risk level was medium, and also, in this case, the content area score appears to have contributed most as a determinant of the risk level. DISCUSSION: Working with managers reveals the usefulness of broadening the vision by moving from the individual to the group and from a synchronic to a diachronic perspective. Attention to evaluating contextual elements that may have triggered and sustained a problematic situation favors the transition from a reading of personal elements often thought of as immutable characteristics to a systemic and dynamic view. Another emerging theme is related to the limits that stand in the way of achieving objectives: the most crucial issue concerns authority, the perception of external authority, and the exercise of one's own. Overall, the risk assessment of WRS showed that just a few working groups were at higher risk. Still, it should be pointed out that even for those homogeneous groups in the green area, the content area indicators are often borderline or frankly 'yellow.' The content indicators probe four fundamental dimensions of the working environment and equipment, where critical issues regarding adequacy and maintenance have emerged transversally. The participating approach and the in-person meeting to compile the checklists were exploited as a moment of confrontation that brought out critical issues that escape the mere numerical value attributed to each indicator, allowing for better targeting of interventions to reduce WRS levels. CONCLUSION: The experience gained in the three years made it possible to highlight the main critical points and thus to identify clear directions for priority action that will enable the organization to improve the management of the factors that most contribute to WRS. Moreover, the intervention has contributed to developing management team awareness that, with the internal resources adequately harnessed, they can monitor and evaluate WRS over time, resorting to specific specialist support only where it identifies the need. REFERENCES: Di Tecco C, Ghelli M, Iavicoli S, Persechino B, Ronchetti M. (2018). The methodology for the assessment and management of work-related stress risk. Handbook for companies compliant with the Legislative Decree 81/2008 and subsequent