Faktor Psikososial Kerja
Kristensen, T. S., Hannerz, H., Hogh, A. & Borg, V. · 2005
Juga dikenal sebagai: Psychosocial Risk Factors · Psychosocial Work Environment
Kerangka faktor psikososial kerja menyatakan bahwa karakteristik terukur dari cara kerja diorganisasikan, tuntutan kuantitatif dan emosional, pengaruh dan kontrol, kejelasan peran, prediktabilitas, dukungan sosial, pengakuan, dan keadilan organisasi, merupakan penyebab hasil kesehatan tersendiri, terlepas dari disposisi individu. Konsekuensi praktisnya adalah bahwa unit penilaian dan intervensi adalah tempat kerja, bukan pekerja: sebuah departemen yang mendapat skor buruk pada tuntutan dan kontrol memiliki masalah organisasi, bukan akumulasi individu yang buruk dalam mengatasi masalah.
Kerangka yang menyatakan bahwa karakteristik terukur dari cara kerja diorganisasikan, tuntutan (demands), kontrol, dukungan, penghargaan, prediktabilitas, keadilan, ketidakamanan, membentuk kesehatan, motivasi, dan performa pekerja. Kerangka ini mengintegrasikan teori-teori utama lingkungan kerja daripada mengikuti satu teori saja: demand-control-support (Karasek & Theorell), ketidakseimbangan usaha-penghargaan (effort-reward imbalance, Siegrist), demands-resources pekerjaan, konflik kerja-keluarga, dan modal sosial di tempat kerja. Eksposur adalah properti dari lingkungan kerja, diukur sebagai persepsi pekerja terhadap kondisi saat ini, dimensi demi dimensi, bukan sifat dari individu.
- Sumber:
- Burr, H., Berthelsen, H., Moncada, S., et al. (2019). The Third Version of the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire. Safety and Health at Work, 10(4), 482-503.
Ikuti tes tervalidasi yang dibangun berdasarkan teori ini
Membaca tentang suatu konstruk memberi tahu Anda apa itu. Instrumen yang tervalidasi memberi tahu Anda di mana posisi Anda pada konstruk tersebut. Gratis untuk dikerjakan, hasil dalam hitungan menit.
Bukti sekilas
- Dukungan empiris
- Bukti kuat
- Replikasi
- Terreplikasi dengan baik
- Lintas budaya
- Sebagian besar universal
- Meta-analisis
- 14 terindeks
Peringkat ini merangkum literatur yang telah dipublikasikan tentang teori tersebut, bukan kualitas dari tes tertentu yang dibangun berdasarkannya. Ini adalah penilaian editorial berdasarkan sumber-sumber yang tercantum di bawah, dan dapat berubah seiring bertambahnya bukti.
Konteks Historis
Landasan bidang ini adalah model demand-control Karasek tahun 1979, yang memprediksi tekanan (strain) dari kombinasi tuntutan tinggi dan keleluasaan pengambilan keputusan yang rendah, yang kemudian diperluas oleh Johnson dan Hall untuk mencakup dukungan sosial, serta model ketidakseimbangan usaha-penghargaan Siegrist tahun 1996. Kedua model tersebut dikritik karena hanya mencakup sebagian kecil dari kehidupan kerja. Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire, yang dikembangkan di National Research Centre for the Working Environment Denmark dan diterbitkan dalam versi keduanya pada tahun 2005, dirancang sebagai alternatif yang komprehensif, netral secara teori, dan tersedia secara bebas, serta mencapai versi internasional ketiganya pada tahun 2019.
Konstruk
Tuntutan Kuantitatif
The mismatch between the volume of work and the time available to perform it — tasks piling up, work left undone, insufficient time. A core demand dimension of the psychosocial work environment (Burr et al., 2019); high scores indicate exposure to work overload.
Kecepatan Kerja
The speed the work demands from moment to moment — working very fast and at a high pace throughout the day. Distinct from the volume of work (quantitative demands), it captures sustained work speed as its own exposure (Burr et al., 2019).
Tuntutan Emosional
The extent to which work places the worker in emotionally disturbing situations or requires dealing with other people's personal problems. An exposure reading characteristic of care, teaching, and service work (Burr et al., 2019).
Tuntutan untuk Menyembunyikan Emosi
The requirement to conceal feelings and keep opinions unexpressed at work — staying kind regardless of how one is treated. It names the self-containment load carried by many people-facing roles (Burr et al., 2019).
Pengaruh dalam Pekerjaan
The degree of say a worker has over decisions concerning their own work, including the amount of work and how it is done. A classic buffering resource in the demand-control tradition: the same demands weigh differently with and without it (Karasek & Theorell; Burr et al., 2019).
Peluang untuk Berkembang
Whether the work offers the possibility of learning new things and using one's skills and expertise. A resource dimension of the work environment: work that neither stretches nor draws on the worker is a documented path to disengagement (Burr et al., 2019).
Kendali atas Waktu Kerja
The worker's control over the timing of their own work — deciding when to take a break, taking holidays roughly when wanted, leaving the workplace for private business. Small time freedoms measured as a distinct resource dimension (Burr et al., 2019).
Makna Pekerjaan
Whether the work is experienced as meaningful and important. One of the strongest sustaining resources a job can offer; its absence makes even light work heavy (Burr et al., 2019).
Prediktabilitas
Whether information arrives when needed — advance notice of important decisions and changes, and all the information required to do the work well. Uncertainty about one's own near future at work is a stressor in its own right (Burr et al., 2019).
Pengakuan
Whether one's work is recognized and appreciated by the management. Measured by a single item in the COPSOQ III middle version, it reads whether sustained effort visibly registers above (Burr et al., 2019).
Kejelasan Peran
Whether the work has clear objectives, known areas of responsibility, and explicit expectations. High clarity lets energy go to the work itself instead of to decoding what counts (Burr et al., 2019).
Konflik Peran
Exposure to contradictory demands at work and to tasks one believes should be done differently. A property of how the role is designed — work that argues with itself (Burr et al., 2019).
Tugas Tidak Sah
The share of work tasks that seem unnecessary to the person performing them. The operational reading of illegitimate tasks — work experienced as an offence to one's professional sense of self (stress-as-offence-to-self tradition; Burr et al., 2019).
Kualitas Kepemimpinan
How good the immediate superior is at the concrete craft of leading — planning the work, solving conflicts, developing people. Read as a working capability of the leader, not charisma (Burr et al., 2019).
Dukungan Sosial dari Atasan
How often help, support, and a willing ear are available from the immediate superior when needed. A support resource that determines whether difficulties escalate to solutions or accumulate (demand-control-support tradition; Burr et al., 2019).
Dukungan Sosial dari Rekan Kerja
How often help, support, and a willing ear are available from colleagues when needed. One of the classic protective factors in demanding work; without it, individual difficulties are carried alone (Burr et al., 2019).
Rasa Kebersamaan di Tempat Kerja
The atmosphere between colleagues and the feeling of being part of a community at the workplace — the social fabric dimension of the work environment (Burr et al., 2019).
Ketidakamanan Kerja
Worry about becoming unemployed and about how difficult it would be to find another job. A documented stressor that acts well before — and whether or not — any job is actually lost (Burr et al., 2019).
Ketidakamanan atas Kondisi Kerja
Worry about unwanted changes to the conditions of the job — being transferred, having the schedule changed, or pay reduced against one's will. Insecurity about the shape of the job, distinct from insecurity about keeping it (Burr et al., 2019).
Kualitas Pekerjaan
Satisfaction with the quality of the work performed at one's workplace. Measured by a single item in the COPSOQ III middle version; low scores often mark conditions that force work below one's own standard (Burr et al., 2019).
Kepuasan Kerja
Overall satisfaction with the job — work prospects, pay, and the job as a whole, everything taken into consideration. The summary evaluation that the other work environment dimensions feed (Burr et al., 2019).
Konflik Kehidupan Kerja
Whether work drains so much energy, and takes so much time, that it negatively affects private life. The spillover dimension of the work-family conflict tradition: the job's cost measured where it lands outside work (Burr et al., 2019).
Kepercayaan Horizontal
Whether employees in general trust each other. A workplace social capital dimension: trust between colleagues makes information move and cooperation cheap, and its absence taxes every interaction (Burr et al., 2019).
Kepercayaan Vertikal
Trust between management and employees, in both directions — whether management trusts the employees to do their work well, whether the employees can trust the information coming from management, and whether views and feelings can be expressed upward (Burr et al., 2019).
Keadilan Organisasi
Whether conflicts are resolved in a fair way and the work is distributed fairly — the perceived fairness of the organization's procedures, a workplace social capital dimension (Burr et al., 2019).
Kesehatan yang Dinilai Sendiri
The worker's general rating of their own health, from excellent to poor. A single-item measure with a long epidemiological record as a predictor of health outcomes; in the COPSOQ III it provides individual context for the environmental dimensions (Burr et al., 2019).
Instrumen
- Kuesioner Psikososial Copenhagen III(COPSOQ III)Burr, Berthelsen, Moncada, et al.2019
- Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire II — Brazilian short version(COPSOQ II-Br)Gonçalves, Moriguchi, Chaves & Sato2021
Tes yang dibangun berdasarkan teori ini
Lingkungan Kerja Psikososial (COPSOQ III)
Kuesioner referensi internasional tentang kondisi kerja psikososial, 26 dimensi lingkungan kerja Anda, satu pembacaan 0-100 masing-masing.
Pelajari lebih lanjut →Brazilian Psychosocial Risk Assessment (COPSOQ II-Br)
The validated Brazilian instrument for psychosocial risks at work — 23 dimensions, each read against published safe/attention/risk bands.
Pelajari lebih lanjut →Aplikasi Praktis
Penilaian risiko psikososial merupakan persyaratan hukum di banyak wilayah hukum, dan COPSOQ adalah salah satu instrumen standar yang digunakan untuk memenuhinya, dengan nilai referensi nasional yang memungkinkan suatu departemen dibandingkan dengan sektornya. Hasilnya memandu intervensi organisasi, redistribusi beban kerja, penjelasan peran, peningkatan pengaruh terhadap cara kerja dilakukan. Dalam epidemiologi okupasional, faktor-faktor ini memprediksi absensi karena sakit, onset depresi, dan hasil kardiovaskular dalam kohort prospektif, yang menjadi basis bukti yang mendasari persyaratan regulasi tersebut.
Cara Pengukurannya
Diukur dengan skala Likert laporan diri yang mencakup beberapa dimensi independen, diagregasi pada tingkat departemen atau organisasi dan dibandingkan dengan nilai referensi nasional atau sektoral, bukan dengan suatu ambang batas (cutoff).
Kritik & Keterbatasan
Hampir semua bukti bergantung pada eksposur yang dilaporkan sendiri dan hasil yang dilaporkan sendiri, sehingga varians metode umum (common-method variance) dan bias pelaporan meningkatkan asosiasi secara berlebihan; studi yang menggunakan karakteristik pekerjaan yang dinilai secara eksternal menemukan efek yang lebih kecil. Kausalitas terbalik (reverse causation) sulit disingkirkan, karena pekerja yang mengalami distres menilai pekerjaan mereka secara lebih negatif. Instrumen-instrumen ini panjang, dan bentuk singkatnya kehilangan detail dimensional yang membuat hasilnya dapat ditindaklanjuti. Nilai referensi nasional juga tidak dapat dibandingkan secara langsung antar negara karena perbedaan gaya respons, yang mempersulit pembandingan (benchmarking) multinasional.
Publikasi Utama
- Kristensen, T. S., Hannerz, H., Hogh, A. & Borg, V.. (2005). The Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire: A tool for the assessment and improvement of the psychosocial work environment. 10.5271/sjweh.948
- Karasek, R. A.. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications for job redesign. 10.2307/2392498
- Siegrist, J.. (1996). Adverse health effects of high-effort/low-reward conditions. 10.1037/1076-8998.1.1.27