What men and women value at work: Implications for workplace health

What Men and Women Value at Work: Implications for Workplace Health

M i c h a e l Peterson , EdD

University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware

ABSTRACT

Background: Current research suggests that workplace culture can influence health outcomes. Objective: This study was conducted to determine what men and w o m e n value at work, how each

defines a heal thy workplace, and what work factors best predict their health outcomes and stress. Methods: A national study was conducted by LLuminari, Inc., a health education company, via a

Harris Interactive Inc. online panel that screened for US participants who were employed full-time in organizations with >1000 employees. The online questionnaire used stimulus words/phrases to which respondents verbally free-associated. Each verbatim response was given a weighted score based on the order in which it was written, then thematically clustered with similar responses to form categories for each stimulus item.

Results: A total of 1123 individuals participated in the study (608 males, 515 females). Results indicated that men and w o m e n value the same aspects of work but ranked them differently. Men valued pay, money, and benefits, as well as power, authority, and status significantly more than w o m e n did (P < 0.001). Women valued the following significantly more than men did: friends and relationships (P < 0.05); recognition and respect (P < 0.001); communica t ion (P < 0.001); fairness and equity (P < 0.001); teams and collaboration (P < 0.001); family and home (P < 0.001). The results also indicated that men underestimate and are generally unaware of women's work-related values (P < 0.05). In comparison, w o m e n overestimate how men value pay, money, and benefits, and power, authority, and status (P < 0.05). Although little difference was observed in health status between the sexes, women did report being slightly more distressed at work. Findings also suggested that the cultural and environmental aspects of work best predicted women's health outcomes; for men, health outcomes were related to supervision and management factors. The health of both sexes was significantly predicted by their perceived home life (P < 0.001). Men and women also defined a heal thy workplace differently, with w o m e n more than men emphasizing understanding, support, communica t ion (P < 0.05), relationships, and ethics (P < 0.001).

Conclusions: Knowing and managing gender differences may help to effectively motivate employees, increase productivity, foster loyalty, and improve physical and mental well-being. (Gender Med. 2004;1:106-124) Copyright © 2004 Excerpta Medica, Inc.

Key words: gender, values, work, health.

Accepted for publication August 23, 2004. Printed in the USA. Reproduction in whole or part is not permitted.

106 Copyright © 2004 Excerpta Medica, Inc.

M. Peterson

INTRODUCTION Research on gender differences in the workplace has received much attention among scholars. 1-4 Invest igat ion has primarily centered on 2 themes: the impact of paid work on women's health, and the work-family conflicts inherent in women's dual roles as nurturer and provider, s The paid work theme has manifested itself in studies investigating equity in pay, recognition, and opportuni ty for advancement. 3,4,6-11 Findings suggest that inequal i ty does exist between the sexes with respect to these 3 factors, and that women (and men) experience greater distress when working in occupations dominated by the opposite sex. Research related to work- fami ly balance indicates that w o m e n experience significantly more distress related to work and family role conflict than do men (P < 0.05). 8A2-1s In Europe, where consistent effort has been made to create workplace gender equality in policy and programs, women still reported >2 times the rate of depression that men did. 16

Despite efforts to treat men and w o m e n equally in the workplace, research continues to show that men and w o m e n have a different view of their roles at work. According to Taylor et a117 and Nolen-Hoeksema and Jackson, 18 w o m e n respond to stress differently than men by put t ing a greater emphasis on behaving in a "tend and befriend" manner as opposed to a "fight or flight" response, and have a greater tendency to ruminate about negative life experiences and work events. These findings have been supported by research indicating that w o m e n have a stronger need than men for a supportive organizational climate and practical assistance at work. 2 Studies further demonstrate that men p redominan t ly define themselves based on their role as worker and seek to mini- mize distress through the maximization of control and influence, whereas w o m e n place equal importance on all the roles they assume in life, have a greater proclivity and desire for social interaction and support, and are more emotionally at tuned to themselves and those around them compared with men. 19-21 For example, in a study of physician health and stress, 22 70% of

the variance in somatic symptoms of stress in w o m e n was explained by lack of support from colleagues when stressed, and by workload demands- -a lmos t twice the influence on these health outcomes compared with male physi- cians. Bulan et a122 also found that men and women in the service sector (eg, health care, banking) respond, emotionally, very differently to the same work conditions. More recently, in a study by Bond et a123 to determine the differences in health and work outcomes between male- and female-dominated occupations, psychological distress was associated with different organizational factors depending on gender orientat ion--social support being the strongest predictor of health outcomes for women.

Trego 24 postulated that gender differences in communica t ion patterns and learning sWles may partly explain the gender differences in how men and women prefer to work and learn. Men prefer to work independent ly and seek help from those in positions of authority. In contrast, women prefer to work interactively and seek help from those within their peer group. According to Bryce and Haworth, 2s control at work was significantly associated with all dimensions of work-related mental health among men, but was no t associated with any dimension of mental health among women. Karlin et a126 also concluded that immediate supervisory support reduced workday blood pressure during stressful work periods among female New York City traffic agents but had no impact on male workers' blood pressure. This suggests that a supportive social work environment more positively affects the health of female workers.

These differences and concomitant health outcomes may be further exacerbated when a man or woman is working in another gender- dominated work environment , z7 Specifically, when men and w o m e n occupy jobs in which they are in the numerical minority, adverse health effects that are gender specific may O c c u r . 27 Aveling, 8 in a s tudy that t racked young w o m e n (defined as those who were in school during an era of equal opportunity) over a 10-year period, found that their life roles as

107

GENDER MEDICINE

mother and worker did not allow them to "have it all." Despite demonstrat ing that they could succeed as well as men in the workplace, women's compet ing role as nurturer, coupled with a workplace culture that enshrined male patterns of participation (eg, full-time work taking precedence in life) as the norm, ensured that their work patterns replicated those of women from previous generations (ie, part-time or limited career advancement at work and greater focus on duties at home). Simply, it was the prevailing male workplace culture that posed a problem for females.

Workplace culture has recently been identified as a fundamental element of employee health outcomes. According to the Culture- Work-Health model, 28 the predominant core values and assumptions of a business or organizational ent i ty de termine h o w employees should act, think, and communicate. These values and assumpt ions are no t haphazard ly derived but have been created by the founders, perpetuated through management , and rein- forced through the organization's successes. Subsequently, workers-- to be successful within a given work cul ture--must learn to adapt or adopt these sets of values and assumptions and act accordingly. For women, this means they must adapt to the predominant male model of work to be successful. Women can and do succeed in this culture, but not wi thout paying a price in bo th life choices and health consequences. 8 Distress and i l l health can occur when one's values do not conform to those of the organizational body. 27,28 In particular, w o m e n may experience increased emotional labor, 2° which refers to efforts to cope with emotional states and displays--both one's own and that of others. Women may be more susceptible to this labor because of their proclivity for seeking social support and their " tend and befriend" response to stress. 17 Emotional labor over time, however, leads to emotional distress, job dissatisfaction, and a decreased sense of professional- ism. 20 Organizational culture may shape the character of emot ional labor performed by workers and their experience of it. 29,3° In addition, increased job dissatisfaction has been shown

to decrease perceived current and future health status, as well as perceived resistance to illness. 31 Specifically, individuals who experience a person- culture conflict may be more susceptible to emotional labor.

Thus far we have reviewed how workplace culture can influence health outcomes and how male values dominate contemporary work cul- tures and serve to drive behaviors, expectations, and ways of working. However, little is known about what men and w o m e n really value at work. The medical and psychosocial literature has many inferences regarding what men and w o m e n value but is lacking authentic data on what each gender values and to what degree, and how these values may impact health outcomes.

The purpose of the current study was to determine what men and women value at work, how these values differ, how men and women define a heal thy workplace, and what work factors best predict worker health and distress. The results will shed light on how gender differences shape workplace realities and predict employee and organizational health outcomes.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS Sampling

A national online study was conducted by LLuminari, Inc. via a Harris Interactive Inc. online panel that screened for US participants who were employed full-time in organizations with >1000 employees. (LLuminari, Inc. is a national health education company located in Wilmington, Delaware.) The panel consisted of >2 million individuals. The Harris Interactive screening process (via initial demographic ques- tions) provided a stratified random sample of working Americans employed in large organizations that was representative of this target group in terms of age, gender, education, and race/ethnicity at 95% CI.

Methodology Measures of Values and Perceptions

The LLuminari online questionnaire incorporated the Associative Group Analysis (AGA) technique that utilizes stimulus words]phrases

108

M. Peterson

to which respondents verbally free-associate. Stimulus items incorporated into this study included "at work men value," "at work w o m e n value," and "a healthy workplace." Each respondent was allowed to write as many single words or 2-word phrases that came to mind for each stimulus word/phrase. Each verbatim response was given a weighted score based on the order in which it was written, then thematically clustered with similar responses to form cluster categories for each stimulus item. For a complete description of the process, the reader is directed to Peterson and Martin 32 or Kelly. 33

Various assessments of reliability, and con- struct and content validity, indicate that AGA is a viable me thod for measuring perception and for group evaluation. Weighted score values in previous studies have been assessed for stability of responses at various rank places via test-retest methods and found to be both valid and reliable (r > 0 . 8 6 ) . 34-36 The me thod has been compared with 5 other widely accepted measures: scaling, substi tution, grouping or classifica- tion, judgment of relationship, and semantic- differential. 34-a6 It has also been reviewed by a panel of independent researchers and found to be a valid assessment of organizational factors, especially culture and proclivity for performance and health. 37

Each respondent was also asked to verbally free-associate via AGA methods and rate 10 work, family, and health categories on a 7-point Likert-type scale from very negative (-3) to very positive (3). Scores were used to quantitatively incorporate categories with health-related measures. Categories included "my pay, .... my supervisor," "my workplace," "my job, .... my coworkers," "my company," "management," "my family," "my home life," and "my health."

Measures of Health The LLuminari online questionnaire incorpo-

rated a variety of job, health, and work-family measures that have been scientifically validated and measured for acceptable standards of statistical reliability. The Stress Satisfaction Offset Scale (SSOS) 38 consists of four S-point Likert- type scale items (ranging from strongly disagree

to strongly agree) that create a cumulative score of stress and ill health susceptibility. The 4 items were: "I am satisfied with the amount of involvement I have in decisions that affect my work"; "I feel I am well rewarded (in terms of praise and recognition) for the level of effort I put out for m y job"; "In the last 6 months, too much time pressure at work has caused me worry, 'nerves,' or stress"; and "In the last 6 months, I have experienced worry, 'nerves,' or stress from mental fatigue at work."

Items related to personal health were also obtained from the National Quality Institute 38 health and work survey. These frequency-based, Likert-type scale items related to how often employees came to work feeling tired and fatigued, mean number of hours they slept each night, how often they had trouble sleeping, how often they were so physically or mental ly tired at the end of work that they did not really enjoy their t ime away from work, their general perception of their health, and their perception of the amount of stress they experienced at work and in their personal life. All items have been proved to be bo th valid and reliable measures of these constructs. 38 Demographic study variables included age, marital status, number of dependents, work category (salaried or hourly), ethnicity, and gender.

Statistical Analysis/Treatment of Data AGA analysis is completed in the following

sequence: (1) Respondents write as many 1-word or short 2- to 3-word phrase responses to each stimulus word/category in the order they come to mind. Maximum of 1 minute per stimulus word. (2) Each response is given a score based on the order in which it is written. Initial responses are given a higher score, and subsequent words are given a lower value. The scoring is as follows: 6, 5, 4, 3, 3, 3, 3, 2, 2, 1, 1, 1. (3) A thematic cluster analysis is used to combine respondent like-word responses to generate a list of thematic clusters and corresponding words within each stimulus word category. (4) Each cluster is given a cumulative weighted score (sum of all weighted scores for each word within the cluster). Each word within a cluster

109

GENDER MEDICINE

is given a cumulative score based on frequency and individual weightings (sum of all assigned weights for each respondent who wrote that word). (5) Higher scores for a given cluster or word response indicate a more predominant perception/value among the responding group than that of lower scores.

AGA-weighted score totals for each subcluster wi thin each stimulus word/phrase category were adjusted to account for the differences in gender sample size by dividing the total weighted score by the number of respondents and multiplying by 100. A 2 x 2 chi-square analysis was conducted using the adjusted score as the observed score, and the mean adjusted score for the combined male and female total as the expected score. Gender comparisons for all quantitative measures utilized independent sample t tests. Stepwise backward regression analysis was used to determine the best study variables for predicting health outcomes.

SSOS was calculated by first awarding a score of 1 to the "agree strongly" or "agree" responses for the 4 questionnaire items. The final score was determined by subtracting the sum total of the 2 stress-related items from the sum total of the 2 satisfaction-related items. The result is a score ranging from 2 to -2.

RESULTS Response

A total of 1123 individuals from companies comprising >1000 employees responded to the LLuminari online survey. Harris Interactive Inc. ensured that the demographic profile of respondents was within an acceptable margin of error for this targeted US population. There were 608 males and 515 females; mean (SD) age was 41 (10.8) years. Of the respondents, 24.8% were single, 55.0% married, 12.0% divorced or sepa- rated; 6.4% co-habitating, 0.9% widowed, and 0.9% declined to answer; 79.0% were white, 10.3% black, 5.0% Hispanic/Latino, 2.5% Asian, and 3.2% other. The mean range of time with current employer was 5 to 9 years; 46.0% had a college degree, 37.5% had a high-school degree, and 14.9% had an associate's degree. Approxi- mately 52% were full-time salaried employees,

and 47.6% were full-time hourly; mean annual household income was $75,000. There was no statistical difference between male and female respondents in terms of ethnicity, marital status, dependents, time with employer, annual household income level, and education level. Response totals generated results with a _+3% error rate for the general population.

Perceptions of a Healthy Workplace Men and w o m e n valued similar aspects of the

work environment, but they did not value them equally (Table I). ( A p p e n d i x 1 provides a list of sample words for each cluster under "Healthy Workplace.") Verbatim responses indicated that both men and women rate a clean and comfortable work environment as the primary criteria for a heal thy workplace. This was followed by an environment with manageable workloads, manageable stress, and a "doable" pace of work. Both men and w o m e n also wanted an environment defined as fun, friendly, and positive.

Where men and women significantly differed was in their relative importance of the following in defining a healthy workplace (adjusted weighted scores are provided in parentheses). Men placed far more emphasis than women (125 vs 68; P < 0.05) on safety and security as a criterion for heal thy workplaces (perhaps a function of the type of occupations in which many men find themselves, eg, law enforce- ment, mining). Women placed far more emphasis than men (110 vs 65; P < 0.05) on their coworkers, teams, and group cohesion, as well as a greater emphasis on effective and honest communica t ion (89 vs 46; P < 0.05). Women placed more emphasis on ethics and values than men did (87 vs 36; P < 0.001) when they were asked to describe what came to mind when they thought of a "healthy workplace." Women placed a significantly higher value than men did (127 vs 87; P < 0.05) on a workplace that was characterized as being understanding, caring, and supportive.

What Men and Women Value at Work Verbatim responses from men and w o m e n

indicated that they value the same things at

110

M. Peterson

Table I. Healthy workplace: Comparative perceptions by gender (men, n = 608; women, n = 515).

Men's Raw Women's Raw Adjusted Adjusted Cluster Weighted Score Weighted Score Men's Score Women's Score P

Clean/comfortable/healthy 2015 1958 331 380 NS Energy~stress~pace 782 741 129 144 NS Fun/happy/friendly 625 673 103 131 NS Understanding/caring/supportive 528 653 87 127 <0.05 Safety/security 758 352 125 68 <0.05 Fitness/nutrition/health 386 400 63 78 NS Good/positive/pleasant 429 342 71 66 NS Coworkers/team/cohesion 396 567 65 110 <0.05 Communication/honesty 279 459 46 89 <0.05 Recog n ition/respect/pay 388 332 64 64 NS Ethics/values 217 447 36 87 <0.001 Flexibility/control/autonomy 143 222 24 43 NS Space 159 168 26 33 NS Fairness/equity 101 155 17 30 NS Work ethic/hard work 95 134 16 26 NS Physical appearance 96 118 16 23 NS Management/leadership 118 95 19 18 NS Advancement~growth/opportunity 124 79 20 15 NS Work/life balance 59 125 10 24 NS Productivity/achievement 90 86 15 17 NS Work equipment/supplies 64 62 11 12 NS Breaks/rest 35 81 6 16 NS Organization/structure 42 60 7 12 NS Health insurance 49 36 8 7 NS Location/convenience 22 3 4 1 NS

work (Table II); that is, responses revealed no clusters that were uniquely male or female. ( A p p e n d i x 2 lists sample verbatim responses for each cluster under "What Men/Women Value at Work.") T a b l e I I l provides a cluster- by-cluster comparison that highlights where the sexes differ significantly in what they value at work. Results indicated that men and women were similar in their relative value of work- related results, achievement, success, virtues, challenge and interest, opportuni t ies and growth, ability and knowledge, flexibility, work ethic, and structure and time.

Where men and women were significantly dissim- ilar was in their self-reported value of the following:

• Men, significantly more than women, valued pay, money, and benefits (150 vs 92; P < 0.05), and power, authority, and status (79 vs 39; P < 0.001).

• Women valued recogni t ion and respect almost twice as much as men did (135 vs 74; P < 0.001), friends and relationships almost 3 times more (179 vs 67; P < 0.001), communica- t ion almost 3 times more (70 vs 26; P < 0.001), teams and collaboration almost 6 times more (88 vs 15; P < 0.001), fairness and equity 2.5 times more (52 vs 20; P < 0.001), and family and home life -4 times more (67 vs 16; P < 0.001).

• Women were slightly more concerned than men about their work environment (42 vs 16; P < 0.05), receiving help, support, and care (40 vs 16; P < 0.05), and health and well-being (32 vs 10; P < 0.05).

Results suggested that w o m e n do not place as high a value on pay, but place a higher value on friends and relationships, and recognit ion and respect compared with men. Data also indicated that men's responses tended to clus-

111

GENDER MEDICINE

Table II. Work value rankings* and relative scores (men, n = 608; women, n = 515).

Cluster Men's Rankings Score Cluster Women's Rankings Score

Pay/money/benefits 1 150 Friends/relationships 1 179 Results/achievement/success 2 110 Recognition/respect 2 135 Work ethic 3 105 Virtues 3 131 Virtues 4 92 Pay/money/benefits 4 92 Power/authority/status 5 79 Teams/collaboration 5 88 Recognition/respect 6 74 Work ethic 6 82 Friends/relationships 7 67 Results/achievement/success 7 82 Ability/knowledge 8 44 Communication 8 70 Structure/time 9 29 Family/home 9 67 Communication 10 26 Fairness/equity 10 52 Opportunities/growth 11 25 Ability/knowledge 11 48 Flexibility 12 24 Structure/time 12 44 Job security/stability 12 24 Work environment 13 42 Challenge/interest 14 22 Flexibility 14 42 Fairness/equity 15 20 Help/su pport/care 15 40 Fun/happy 16 18 Job security/stability 16 39 Recreation/sports/travel 17 17 Power/authority/status 17 39 Self-esteem/appearance 18 17 Self-esteem/appearance 18 32 Work environment 19 16 Health/well-being 19 32 Family/home 20 16 Opportunities/growth 20 19 Help/support/care 21 16 Fun/happy 21 13 Teams/collaboration 22 15 Challenge/interest 22 11 Sex/men/women 23 12 Feelings/emotions 23 10 Food 24 11 Sex/men/women 24 6 Health/well-being 25 10 Food 24 6 Work equipment/supplies 26 7 Recreation/sports/travel 26 4 Same as men/women 27 5 Same as men/women 27 3 Feelings/emotions 28 0 Working equipment/resource 28 2

*Rankings are based on total adjusted weighted score for each cluster by sex.

ter a round 7 major areas, whereas women ' s responses clustered around 11 major areas, indicating that w o m e n value more aspects of the work environment , especially friends and relationships. Men tended to strongly value fewer things.

Men and w o m e n also reflected different understandings of what the other sex values at work. Women had a more accurate perception of what men value at work, compared with what men though t w o m e n value at work (Tables I 7 and V). However, w o m e n significantly overestimated the value men place on power, authority, and status (P < O.OS) and pay, money, and benefits (P < O.OS). In comparison, men significantly underestimated the value

w o m e n place on family and home (P < 0.05); teams and collaboration (P < 0.001); ability and knowledge (P < 0.05); friends and relationships (P < 0.001); results, achievement, and success (P < 0.05); and recognition and respect (P < 0.05).

Ratings of Work and Family Categories T a b l e VI provides respondent ratings of

work- and family-related categories. Men and women rated 7 of the categories equally in terms of positive or negative perception, includ- ing the category of pay. The 3 areas that differed by sex included management, home life, and ratings of the company worked fo r - -women rated each area significantly more positive than men did (P < 0.05).

112

M. Peterson

Table II1. Comparison between what men and women value at work (men, n = 608; women, n = 515).


Pay/money/benefits 912 476 150 92 <0.05 Power/authority/status 483 201 79 39 <0.001 Recognition/respect 448 697 74 135 <0.001 Results/achievement/success 668 421 110 82 NS Virtues 560 677 92 131 NS Work environment 100 218 16 42 <0.05 Challenge/interest 133 55 22 11 NS Opportunities/growth 154 98 25 19 NS Work ethic 639 422 105 82 NS Friends/relationships 407 920 67 179 <0.001 Structure/time 175 228 29 44 NS Communication 157 360 26 70 <0.001 Ability/knowledge 265 245 44 48 NS Teams/collaboration 90 453 15 88 <0.001 Help/support/care 95 205 16 40 <0.05 Fairness/equity 120 270 20 52 <0.001 Flexibility 148 216 24 42 NS Health/well-being 60 164 10 32 <0.05 Self-esteem/appearance 103 167 17 32 NS Family/home 98 347 16 67 <0.001 Recreation/sports/travel 105 22 17 4 <0.05 Sex/men/women 74 29 12 6 NS Food 67 29 11 6 NS Work equipment~supplies 43 11 7 2 NS Job security/stability 147 203 24 39 NS Fun/happy 107 67 18 13 NS Feelings/emotions 0 53 0 10 <0.05 Same as men/women 30 18 5 3 NS

General Health Outcomes In response to the question "How often do

you come to work feeling tired or fatigued?" 53.7% of all respondents reported they often to almost always come to work in a state of fatigue. Just under half (49%) of respondents slept _<6 hours each night (mean [SD], 6.56 [1.13]). Although there were variations in sleep needs, responses indicated that a considerable number of respondents may not be receiving adequate rest to maintain their health or to function opti- mally at work: About 1 of every 7 respondents may be sleep deprived (ie, mean of _<5 hrs sleep/night). Almost 2 of every 5 respondents had difficulty sleeping on a regular basis. Ten percent of employees reported that they are very often so physically and mentally tired at the end

of work that they do not enjoy their home and family time, and another 28% of respondents indicated that fatigue from work often impact- ed their free time. Eighty percent of respondents, however, perceived their health as good, very good, or excellent.

The SSOS score (Table VII) provides an indi- cation of the number of employees who are at risk for stress-related health problems. A negative raw score is indicative of an individual who is at risk for stress-related health problems; a neutral ("0") or positive score is indicative of an individual who is not at risk. Based on the SSOS results, 20% of respondents are at serious risk for stress-related health problems and another 15% are at an elevated risk level. There were no significant gender-related differences in SSOS scores.

113

GENDER MEDICINE

Table IV. Men's and women's perceptions of what men value at work (men, n = 608; women, n = 515).


Pay/money/benefits 912 1040 150 202 <0.05 Power/authority/status 483 685 79 133 <0.05 Recog n ition/respect 448 374 74 73 N S Results/achievement/success 668 691 110 134 NS Virtues 560 391 92 76 NS Work environment 100 92 16 18 NS Challenge/interest 133 158 22 31 NS Opportunities/growth 154 243 25 47 NS Work ethic 639 436 105 85 NS Friends/relationships 407 218 67 42 NS Structure/time 175 124 29 24 NS Communication 157 128 26 25 NS Ability/knowledge 265 176 44 34 NS Teams/collaboration 90 38 15 7 NS Help/support/care 95 62 16 12 NS Fairness/equity 120 44 20 9 NS Flexibility 148 111 24 22 NS Health/well-being 60 28 10 5 NS Self-esteem/appearance 103 177 17 34 NS Family/home 98 68 16 13 NS Recreation/sports/travel 105 62 17 12 NS Sex/men/women 74 101 12 20 NS Food 67 44 11 9 NS Work equipment/supplies 43 47 7 9 NS Job security/stability 147 107 24 21 NS Fun/happy 107 67 18 13 NS Feelings/emotions 0 0 0 0 NS Same as men/women 30 42 5 8 NS

Gender-Based Health Differences The t test analyses indicated significant statisti-

cal differences (P < 0.05) between the sexes for the following health measures (mean values are given in parentheses): Men more than women reported going to work feeling tired or fatigued (men, 3.33; women, 3.05; t = 3.70), and men had more difficulty initiating sleep (men, 1.91; women, 1.76; t -- 3.26), based on a 5-point scale. Women reported experiencing more stress than men did at work (women, 5.04; men, 4.89; t = 2.05) and in their personal lives (women, 5.03; men, 4.77; t-- 3.95), based on a 7-point scale. Women reported experiencing more time pressure than men did (women, 3.02; men, 2.83; t - - 2.46) and more stress from mental fatigue at work (women, 3.13; men, 2.92; t = 2.72), based on a 5-point scale.

Best Workplace Predictors of Health Measures

Based on respondent quantitative ratings for the 10 work-related and family-related measures, stepwise regression analysis indicated that home life was a consistent predictor for all 5 health outcomes for men, suggesting that men's health was significantly influenced by their home life experience (P < 0.001). Management, supervision, the job, and the workplace were also significant predictors of men's health and stress (P < 0.001) (Table VIII). Each of these measures was defined by the respondents based on the verbatim responses they supplied (as a whole) during the AGA portion of the questionnaire. AGA verbatim responses indicated that the sample defined these measures as follows:

114

M. Peterson

Table V. Men's and women's perceptions of what women value at work (men, n = 608; women, n = 515).


Pay/money/benefits 537 476 88 92 NS Power/authority/status 355 201 58 39 NS Recognition/respect 518 697 85 135 <0.05 Results/achievement/success 252 421 41 82 <0.05 Virtues 617 677 101 131 NS Work environment 185 218 30 42 NS Challenge/interest 35 55 6 11 NS Opportunities/growth 150 98 25 19 NS Work ethic 336 422 55 82 NS Friends/relationships 599 920 99 179 <0.001 Structure/time 226 228 37 44 NS Communication 426 360 70 70 NS Ability/knowledge 109 245 18 48 <0.05 Teams/collaboration 217 453 36 88 <0.001 Help/support/care 163 205 27 40 NS Fairness/equity 341 270 56 52 NS Flexibility 194 216 32 42 NS Health/well-bei ng 90 164 15 32 NS Self-esteem/appearance 286 167 47 32 NS Family/home 189 347 31 67 <0.05 Recreation/sports/travel 15 22 2 4 NS Sex/men/women 94 29 15 6 NS Food 70 29 11 6 NS Work equipment/supplies 9 11 1 2 NS Job security/stability 166 203 27 39 NS Fun/happy 72 67 12 13 NS Feelings/emotions 41 53 7 10 NS Same as men/women 63 18 10 3 NS

Table VI. Ratings of work- and family-related categories: Means* and differences by sex (men, n = 608; women, n = 515).

Overall Male Female

Category Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD t Score

My workplace 0.54 1.70 0.50 1.72 0.60 1.66 1.05 My coworkers 1.21 1.55 1.22 1.54 1.19 1.56 0.33 My family 2.34 1.15 2.28 1.20 2.40 1.10 1.77 My company 0.50 1.71 0.40 1.76 0.61 1.65 2.08t My supervisor 0.89 1.81 0.86 1.75 0.91 1.87 0.46 My job 1.06 1.63 1.02 1.65 1.10 1.62 0.88 My pay 0.40 1.86 0.42 1.81 0.36 1.92 0.55 My home life 1.83 1.42 1.72 1.47 1.95 1.35 2.76 ~r Management -0.26 1.79 -0.36 1.79 -0.13 1.77 2.16~ My health 1.21 1.41 1.24 1.33 1.17 1.49 0.88

*Means based on a score ranging from -3 (very negative) to 3 (very positive). tp < 0.05.

115

GENDER MEDICINE

Table VII. Stress Satisfaction Offset Score (SSOS) percentages.*

Category Description SSOS Score 38 Overall, N (%) Male, N (%) Female, N (%)

Job stress greater than job satisfaction -2 Job stress slightly greater than job satisfaction -1 Job stress equal to job satisfaction 0 Job satisfaction slightly greater than job stress 1 Job satisfaction greater than job stress 2

226 (20.1) 125 (20.6) 101 (19.6) 168 (15.0} 94 (15.5) 74 (14.4) 323 (28.8) 187 (30.8) 136 (26.4) 188 (16.7) 89 114.61 99 (19.2) 218 (19.4) 112 (18.4) 106 (20.6)

*Lower score indicates a higher risk for ill health. There were no significant statistical differences in SSOS scores between men and women.

• Management: the sample's overall perceptual measure of its leadership, style, demeanor, ability, organization, communication, help, support, caring, fairness, trust, and effectiveness.

• Supervision: the sample's overall perceptual measure of supervisory ability, help, support, friendliness, leadership, style, demeanor, communication, work ethic, and trustworthiness.

• My job: the sample's overall rating of the amount of perceived challenge and interest,

stress, enjoyment, workload, stability, fulfill- ment, pace, control, flexibility, importance, growth, and opportunity.

• Workplace: the sample's perceptual measure of the physical environment, energy and stress levels, psychosocial atmosphere (eg, caring, political, morale, impersonal), friendliness, fun, safety, space, organization, and structure.

• Company: the sample's overall perceptual measure of whether the company was good or bad, growing, caring and supportive, reputable,

Table VIII. Best predictors of male health outcomes.*

Dependent Variable Independent Variable Beta SE Multivariate R R 2 P

Coming to work tired or fatigued

Job stress

Life stress

Health

Stress Satisfaction Offset Scale

Constant 3.031 0.077 0.365 0.133 0.001 My home life -0.065 0.033 My workplace -0.167 0.038 My lob -0.109 0.040

Constant 5.006 0.058 0.443 0.196 0.001 My workplace -O.164 0.036 My supervisor -0.088 0.032 Management -0.115 0.034

Constant 5.082 0.064 0.247 0.061 0.001 My home life -0.176 0.028

Constant 3.023 0.059 0.275 0.076 0.001 My home life 0.110 0.026 My job 0.107 0.023

Constant 0.219 0.077 0.613 0.372 0.001 Management 0.228 0.033 My workplace 0.200 0.035 My supervisor 0.101 0.031 My home life 0.097 0.030

*All dependent variable betas significant at P < 0.05.

116

M. Peterson

financially strong, and organized. In addition, the company rating related to the psychosocial climate (eg, political, fun), people management and interpersonal communica t ion patterns, and its virtues and values.

° Home life: the sample's overall perception of whether their life at home was positive or negative, happy, secure, relaxing or stressful, loving, closeness, importance, supportive, active or inactive, and amount of t ime available to it.

For women, the most consistent predictors of heal th outcomes were quality of home life and of the workplace environment (Table IX). Beta values for these variables were also m u c h stronger for females than for males, which may be indicative of the dual roles that women assume in life. SSOS scores for women were significantly predicted (P < 0.05) by their inter- actions with management and supervisors (as were men's). However, women differed from men in that their SSOS score was more influenced by their jobs.

Men and women differed distinctively in variable predictability of job stress. For men, stress was related to respondents' perceptions of the workplace and how they were being managed and supervised--the latter 2 measures reflecting

how men may perceive their level of control, authority, and status. For women, stress was predicted by their perception of the company (as a whole) and the workplace--2 measures that reflect the general value system and culture of the organization. For men, it appears that how they were treated by those in authority predicted their level of distress, whereas for women the general environment played the greater role. Perceived health status for women was predicted solely by their perceived home life. Women who perceived their home lives more negatively also viewed their health less positively.

DISCUSSION Although men and women value the same aspects of work, they value them very differently. Whereas m e n place greater value on pay, money, status, power, results, and achievement, women place greater value on friends and relationships, recognition and respect, and virtues such as integrity and honesty. Given that respondents were not limited to any set of response choices (via AGA methodology), the results provide an authent ic measure (ie, in their own words) of gender differences and simi- larities toward work and the workplace.

Table IX. Best predictors of female health outcomes.*

Dependent Variable Independent Variable Beta SE Multivariate R R 2 P

Coming to work tired or fatigued

Job stress

Life stress

Health

Stress Satisfaction Offset Scale

Constant 2.455 0.094 0.400 0.160 0.001 My workplace -0.223 0.033 My home life -0.236 0.040

Constant 5.262 0.050 0.472 0.223 0.001 My company -0.125 0.039 My workplace -0.243 0.038

Constant 5.406 0.081 0.240 0.058 0.001 My home life -0.192 0.034

Constant 3.102 0.074 0.244 0.060 0.001 My home life 0.179 0.031

Constant 0.418 0.069 0.612 0.370 0.001 My workplace 0.196 0.047 Management 0.148 0.040 My supervisor 0.122 0.033 My job 0.129 0.041

*All dependent variable betas significant at P < 0.05.

117

GENDER MEDICINE

The gender-based value differences identified in this LLuminari study suggest 2 distinct views of what makes an optimal work environment. A female-oriented culture is based on the assumptions that work is done in conjunct ion with other people, and that for a company/business to be successful it must recognize the importance of h u m a n relationships and communication. Success is defined not just by how much money is made, but also by the strength of the relationships between workers and the balance that is achieved between work and family. In contrast, a male-oriented culture is based on the assumption that work is done for the purpose of achievement and fortune, and that for a company/ business to be successful it must recognize the importance of achieving results. Success is defined primarily by how much is achieved in terms of profit and market share, and status and influence. According to Peterson and Wilson, 28 values define the culture and create a set of assumptions that dictate how people should behave, communicate, and work, which in turn may create specific health outcomes. These 2 distinct gender-based set of values and assumptions would suggest very different ways of oper- ating and achieving, and would predict various ways of behaving, communicating, and working that ult imately may result in very different health consequences.

Despite reports of distress, lack of sleep, and being overly fatigued, 80% of respondents still perceived their heal th as good to excellent. Given these negative heal th reports, perceived hea l th may be more of an indica t ion of "absence of illness" rather than a percept ion of overall "wellness," and may be influenced by comparisons made with those a round the individual (eg, "I am bet ter off than that person, so I must be in bet ter health"). Taking this result in con junc t ion wi th the previous results related to fatigue, m a n y respondents may run the risk of incurring ill health.

Although w o m e n reported slightly more distress at work than men, in this study there were very few significant self-reported health differences between the sexes. However, the workplace factors that best predicted health out-

comes were noticeably different, reinforcing the not ion that men and w o m e n respond and function differently under different work contexts. For men, how they were managed and treated by those in authori ty had the greatest impact on health/stress, whereas for women the overall work as well as social and work context had the greatest impact on health. These findings intimate that men and w o m e n would benefit from interventions that address the gender-specific workplace factors that most affect their health.

Although nothing is inherently wrong with the way each sex prioritizes values, the difference between men and w o m e n in terms of their relative importance--as well as their understanding of the values espoused by the other sex--creates potential value-based conflicts that may contribute to the stress, inequalities, and ill health experienced by both sexes. Men were far less aware of what women value at work compared with women's awareness of men's values. Notably, men underest imated the value w o m e n place on collaboration, relationships, ability and knowledge, results and achievement, recognition and respect, and their needs and values as mothers and wives. This may help to explain the previous findings that w o m e n suffer negative health consequences when they are in a male-dominated o c c u p a t i o n y or why they become frustrated with work and often replicate female home-based work patterns of previous generations. 8

In a male-dominated culture, if men do not understand the values w o m e n have--or if they underestimate the value w o m e n place on ability, knowledge, achievement, and recognit ion-- they may unwitt ingly ignore the skills, talents, and contributions of their female workforce. This could contr ibute to the difference in reward, promotion, and recognition outcomes between the sexes often demonstrated in the literature. 3 In addition, a failure to recognize the home- and family-related values and responsi- bilities women have may produce a work context that is inherently stressful for women. There is also the propensity for groups (in this case, gender-based) to demean those who do not believe in or value what they do, 39 creating the

118

M. Peterson

potential for an "us versus them" mental i ty wi th in a workforce, which in turn could enhance a hostile atmosphere. To succeed in this type of culture, w o m e n may have to adopt the ma le -domina ted value s y s t e m - - o n e to which they do not subscribe and do not prefer. The resultant value incongruence could enhance the amoun t of distress and negative health consequences women experience.

In this LLuminari study, women reported slightly more stress from time pressure and mental fatigue at work, attributes that may be indicative of perceived burdens and inadequate support, found in another s tudy as being pre- dictive of women's health. 4° Results also indicated that men's health was significantly influenced by their home life. To our knowledge, little has been done to study this issue of work- fami ly balance, because research has focused more on the role of females in this context. Findings suggest that men may be equally susceptible to negative health consequences of an entrenched male-based work value system as it relates to work and family balance. Contin- ued investigation of the health-related consequences of home life on men's health status is warranted.

In addition, because of women's high value for communicat ing and friendships, it may pre- dispose them to more emotional labor than men experience. 2° Women's value of social relationships supports previous work which found that w o m e n benefited more from a supportive organizational climate and practical assistance from supervisors and management. 2 It also helps to explain why ratings of the workplace and company in this study were the strongest predictors of health outcomes for women. Both these measures reflect the general psychosocial environment in which women work. In addition, the value w o m e n have for friends and relationships at work may help to explain why women are more vulnerable to the psychosocial climate in which they work and live, 41 and serves to support the findings that women have a stronger "tend and befriend" response to distress. 17 A work environment void of social interaction and support bui lding may, by its very nature,

increase the level of distress among women. Essentially, a socially restrictive environment may put women at a psychosocial disadvantage in the workplace in terms of performance, coping and work ability, and health outcomes. 23 Results may also help explain why there is a higher rate of depression among female workers in Europe. 16 Perhaps it is not a lack of government programs and policies that is to blame but rather an inherent male culture, unmindful of the values of women, that exacerbates negative health outcomes. According to Bond et a123 and Kieffer at a l y job performance and optimal employee health involve creating an environment that accounts for gender differences.

Women, however, overestimated the value men place on pay, money, and benefits, as well as power, authority, and status. It is unclear what may cause this misperception. Men tended to be less aware of what women value at work, whereas women tended to reflect a more gender- based stereotype (ie, men just value power and money) related to these 2 criteria. Although beyond the scope of this study, it is logical to suggest that men may be equally susceptible to value conflict if they work within a female- dominated occupation or organization. Specif- ically, their need to achieve and prove themselves may be overlooked or ignored, and the value placed on social interaction may produce psychological and social strains. 43

Men's work-related values may also increase their proclivity for workaholism, 14 and produce greater psychological distress when they are not promoted. 7 These gender-related values and rankings may also explain why personal control and au tonomy have been shown to be more highly correlated with cardiovascular disease symptoms among men, 25 whereas lack of social support has been shown to be more highly correlated with cardiovascular disease symptoms among women. 26

Literature related to "person-culture fit" suggests that individuals who do not identify with or subscribe to a corporation's culture, values, and expectations are less productive and more likely to leave the organization. 44 Over time, individuals who do no t fit with the cultural val-

119

GENDER MEDICINE

ues of the organization are also likely to be less motivated and less committed, and experience more work-related stress and job dissatisfaction than those who do fit. 45,46 This study suggests that organizational fitness may fall along gender lines. Specifically, significant gender differences in work values intimate that women who work in a male value-dominated environment (or men in a female value-dominated environment) may be more susceptible to negative health consequences, be less productive, have decreased motivation, and be more inclined to leave that organization.

What Is a Healthy Workplace? Both men and women defined a heal thy

workplace as being clean and comfortable, func- t ioning at a manageable energy level and pace, and displaying an overall fun and friendly atmosphere. The work environment should also be pleasant and positive, demonstrate a proper work ethic, reward and recognize achievements, provide opportunities for growth and advancement, and allow for appropriate control and autonomy. It should be fair and equitable, and provide appropriate workplace health promotion programs. Women, however, defined a heal thy workplace significantly more in terms of an environment and behaviors that demonstrate and provide support, understanding and caring, more opportunities for collaboration, greater social and coworker cohesion, more honest communicat ion, and a greater focus on ethics and values. Results suggest that a heal thy workplace is gender defined, based on what each sex values at the workplace.

CONCLUSIONS Overall, our findings support the conclusion that hea l thy workplaces are no t exclusively defined by safety, cleanliness, smoking policies, and exercise facilities. Rather, both m e n and w o m e n recognize that for a workplace to be considered healthy, there must be satisfying work relationships, opportunit ies for growth and advancement , control over workload and pace, recognit ion and respect for what has been achieved, and work-life balance. Results

also suggest that workplaces may not be equally hea l thy for m e n and w o m e n because of value incongruence and poor person-cul ture fit. Reducing stress, p romot ing health, and reducing heal th care costs may require greater a t tent ion to gender values at work, and to creating a culture and climate that capitalize on gender differences. A chronical ly unpleasant work experience may incur increased illness rates.

Based on the frequency of negative self- reported hea l th outcomes, worker hea l th appears to be of little concern for the leaders and decision makers of large corporations. Levels of fatigue and distress reinforce the not ion that worker heal th is not an issue for management . Data also suggest that m a n y organizations do not unders tand the relationship between work culture, worker health, and organizational success--particularly how gender- based work-related values relate to productivity, performance, and health.

Today, w o m e n are more involved in the workplace than any previous generation, but their roles and needs in caring for family (as well as work) have not changed. Women bring with t hem and offer an organization a unique value system and way of working, thinking, and communica t ing (ie, culture). Knowing and manag ing gender differences may help to effectively motivate employees, increase productivity, foster loyalty, and improve physical and mental well-being. The key for managers and corporations in the 21st century is to appropriately blend the strengths of each sex to achieve optimal heal th for both the organization and the employees that comprise it.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT This study was funded by LLuminari, Inc.

REFERENCES 1. Moen P, Yu Y. Effective work-life strategies:

Working couples, work conditions, gender, and life equality. Soc Probl. 2000;47:291-326.

2. Van Emmerik IJH. Gender differences in the effects of coping assistance on the reduction of burnout. Work Stress. 2002;16:251-263.

120

M. Peterson

3. Heilman ME, Wallen AS, Fuchs D, Tamkins MM.

Penalties for success: Reactions to women who

succeed at male gender-typed tasks. JAppl Psychol. 2004;89:416-427.

4. Forret ML, Dougherty TW. Networking behaviors

and career outcomes: Differences for men and

women? J Organizational Behav. 2004;25:419- 437.

5. Marecek J. Mad housewives, double shifts,

m o m m y tracks and other invented realities.

Feminism Psychology. 2003;13:259-264.

6. Sturm R, Gresenz CR. Relations of income

inequality and family income to chronic medical conditions and mental health disorders: National

survey. BMJ. 2002;324:20-23. 7. Cassirer N, Reskin B. High hopes: Organizational

position, employment experiences, and women's

and men's promotion aspirations. Work Occup. 2000;27:438-463.

8. Aveling N. "Having it all" and the discourse of equal

opportunity: Reflections on choices and changing

perceptions. GendEduc. 2002;14:265-280.

9. Shain M. Fairness in families, schools and work-

places: Implications for healthy relationships in

these environments. Center for Health Promo-

tion. University of Toronto. 2000. Available at:

h t tp : / /www.hc - sc .gc . ca /hecs - sesc /workp lace /

publications/Fairness/introduction.htm. Accessed

July 25, 2004. 10. Miner-Rubino K, Cortina LM. Working in a con-

text of hostility toward women: Implications for

employees' wellbeing. J Occup Health Psychol. 2004;9:107-122.

11. Melton G. Vying for power: Gender, race, and

conflict within a high technology corporation. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section A: Humanities & Social Sciences. 2004;64:2673.

12. Goldberg AE, Perry-Jenkins M. Division of labor and working-class women's well-being across the transi-

tion to parenthood. JFam Psychol. 2004;18:225-236. 13. Reynolds J. You can't always get the hours you

want: Mismatches between actual and preferred

work hours in the U.S. Soc Forces. 2003;81:1171-1199. 14. Harpaz I, Snir R. Workaholism: Its definition and

nature. Hum Relat. 2003;56:291-319.

15. Cooke RA, Rousseau DM. Stress and strain from family roles and work role expectations. ] Appl Psychol. 1984;69:252-260.

16. Angst J, Gamma A, Gastpar M, et al. Gender dif-

ferences in depression, epidemiological findings

from the European DEPRES I and II studies. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2002;252:201-

209. 17. Taylor SE, Klein LC, Lewis BP, et al. Biobehavioral

responses to stress in females: Tend-and-befriend, not fight-or-flight. Psychol Rev. 2000;107:411-429.

18. Nolen-Hoeksema S, Jackson B. Mediators of the

gender difference in rumination. Psychol Women Q. 2001;25:37-47.

19. Reitzes DC, Mutran EJ. Self-concept as the orga-

nization of roles: Importance, centrality and bal-

ance. Sociol Q. 2002;43:647-667.

20. Pugliesi K. The consequences of emotional labor: Effects on work stress, job satisfaction, and well-

being. Motivation Emotion. 1999;23:125-154.

21. Weisz JR, Rothbaum FM, Blackburn TC. Standing out and standing in: The psychology of control in

America and Japan. Am Psychol. 1984;39:955-969. 22. Bulan HI?, Erickson RJ, Wharton AS. Doing for

others on the job: The affective requirements of

service work, gender, and emotional well-being.

Soc Probl. 1997;44:235-256.

23. Bond MA, Punnett L, Pyle JL, et al. Gendered work

conditions, health and work outcomes. J Occup Health Psychol. 2004;9:28-45.

24. Trego CD. Gender differences in communicat ion

patterns and learning styles in asynchronous dis- tance education. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section A: Humanities & Social Sciences. 2004;64:2387.

25. Bryce J, Haworth J. Psychological well-being in a

sample of male and female office workers. J Appl Soc Psychol. 2003;33:565-585.

26. Karlin WA, Brondolo E, Schwartz J. Workplace

social support and ambulatory cardiovascular ac-

tivity in New York City traffic agents. Psychosom Med. 2003;65:167-176.

27. Evans O, Steptoe A. The contribution of gender-

role orientation, work factors and home stressors

to psychological well-being and sickness absence

in male- and female-dominated occupational

groups. Soc Sci Med. 2002;54:481-492. 28. Peterson M, Wilson JF. The Culture-Work-Health

model and work stress. Am J Health Behav. 2002; 26:16-24.

29. Gibson DE. The struggle for reason: The sociol- ogy of emotions in organizations. In: Erickson RJ,

121

GENDER MEDICINE

Cuthbertson-Johnson B, eds. Social Perspectives on

Emotion. New York, NY: JAI Press; 1997:111-156. 30. Ashforth BE, Humphrey RH. Emotion in the

workplace: A reappraisal. Hum Relat. 1995;48:97-

125. 31. Peterson M, WilsonJ. Job satisfaction and perceptions

of health. J Occup Environ Med. 1996;38:891-898. 32. Peterson M, Martin S. Associative group analysis:

A tobacco prevention case study. Soc Mar (2. 2003; 9:32-49.

33. Kelly RM. The Associative Group Analysis method and evaluation research. Eval Rev. 1985;9:35-50.

34. Szalay LB, Inn A, Strohl JB, Wilson LC. Perceived harm, age, and drug use: Perceptual and motiva- tional dispositions affecting drug use. J Drug Educ.

1993;23:333-356. 35. Szalay L, Deese J. Subjective Meaning and Culture:

An Assessment Through Word Association. Hills-

dale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc; 1978. 36. Szalay LB, Windle C, Lysne DA. Attitude measure-

ment by free verbal associations. J Soc Psychol.

1970;82:43-55. 37. Peterson M. Cultural and Environmental Mea-

sures of Work, Stress, and Health. Proceedings of the APA-NIOSH 5th Interdisciplinary Conference on Occupational Stress and Health; March 19-22, 2003; Toronto, Ontario (CD-ROM).

38. National Quality Institute. Health in the Workplace Employee Questionnaire. Investing in Comprehensive Workplace Health Promotion.

Toronto, Ontario: National Quality of Health Institute; 2001. Available at: http://www.nqi.ca/ nqistore/product-details.aspx?ID=56. Accessed

July 25, 2004.

39. Peterson M. Creating the dream team: Skills to enhance productivity, profit and performance. Landenberg, Pa: Workplace Consultants tnc; 2003. Available at: http://www.stormindex.com. Accessed July 25, 2004.

40. Bergman B. The validation of the women workplace culture questionnaire: Gender-related stress and health for Swedish working women. Sex Roles.

2003;49:287-297. 41. Ronka A, Oravala S, Pulkkinen L. Turning points in

adults' lives: The effects of gender and the amount of choice. ] Adult Develop. 2003; 10:203-215.

42. Kieffer KM, Schinka JA, Curtiss G. Person- environment congruence and personality do- mains in the prediction of job performance and work quality. ] Couns Psychol. 2004;51:168-177.

43. Copenhaver MM, Lash SJ, Eisler RM. Masculine gender-role stress, anger and male intimate abu- siveness: Implications for men's relationships. Sex

Roles. 2000;42:405-414.

44. Mosley DC. The influence of person-job fit, person- organization fit, and self-efficacy perceptions on work attitudes, job performance and turnover. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section A:

Humanities & Social Sciences. 2002;63:666.

45. Chan D. Cognitive misfit of problem-solving style at work: A facet of person-organization fit. Organ

Behav Hum Decis Process. 1996;68:194-207. 46. O'Connor-Cahill ME. A study of how the congru-

ence between person and culture relates to employee perceptions of organizational fit, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and intent to leave. Dissertation Abstracts International:

Section B: The Sciences & Engineering. 2002;62:4769.

(cont'd on next page)

Address c o r r e s p o n d e n c e to: Michael Peterson, EdD, Associate Professor, Director of Heal th P romot ion , Univers i ty of Delaware, 023 Carpen te r Sports Building, Newark, DE 19716, E-mail: pmpeter@udel .edu; or to S tephanie Mogavero , VP Public Affairs, LLuminari , Inc., 300 Water Street, Wi lming ton , DE 19801, E-mail: smm@llumina r i . com

122

M. Peterson

Appendix 1. Cluster Definitions: Healthy Workplace.

Cluster Verbatim Examples

Clean/comfortable/healthy Energy~stress/pace Fun/happy/friendly Understanding/caring/supportive Safety/security Fitness/nutrition/health Good/positive/pleasant Coworkers /team /cohesion Communication/honesty Recognition/respect/pay Ethics/values Flexibility/control/autonomy Space Fairness/equity Work ethic/hard work Physical appearance Management/leadership Advancement/growth/opportunity Balance/work life Productivity/achievement Work equipment/supplies Breaks/rest Organization~structure Health insurance Location/convenience

Clean, bright, comfortable, clean air, well lit Stress free, low stress, peaceful, calm, relaxed Fun, friendly, happy, enjoyable, smiles, laughter Supportive, caring, understanding, helpful, encouraging Safe, safety, OSHA, secure, safety minded No smoking, gym, exercise, healthy food Positive, pleasant, nice, good atmosphere Teamwork, cooperative, working together Communication, honesty, open communication, no gossip, courteous, open door Good pay, good benefits, appreciation, recognition, rewarding Integrity, values, trust, ethical, loyal, moral Flexible, freedom, empowering Windows, open, spacious, roomy Fair, equality, no favoritism Hard work, dedication, work ethics Plants, well maintained, nice facility Good/well managed, leadership, good boss Progressive, advancement, opportunity, growth oriented Balanced, family oriented, family friendly, work-life balance Productive, focused, engaging, goal oriented Good equipment, necessary tools, advanced technology Breaks, time off, lunch breaks Organized, efficient, rules Health insurance, health benefits, medical programs At home, close, telecommuting

123

GENDER MEDICINE

Appendix 2. Cluster Definitions: What Men/Women Value at Work.

Cluster Verbatim Examples

Pay/money/benefits Results~achievement/success Work ethic Virtues Power/authority/status Recognition/respect Friends/relationships Ability/knowledge Structure/time Communication Opportunities~growth Flexibility Job security/stability Challenge/interest Fairness/equity Fun/happy Recreation/sports/travel Self-esteem/appearance Work environment Family/home Help/support/care Teams/collaboration Sex/men/women Food Health/well-being Work equipment/supplies Same as men/women Feelings/emotions

Money, pay, bottom line, compensation, salary, benefits Results, success, performance, quality, productivity Hard work, work, work ethic, effort, laziness, less work Honesty, integrity, loyalty, trust, reliability Power, status, control, position, leadership, prestige, authority Respect, recognition, appreciation, praise Friendship, friends, relationships, camaraderie, buddies, coworkers Knowledge, intelligence, competence, ability, education, skill Time, speed, schedules, organization, deadlines, structure Communication, talking, chatting, gossip, meetings Promotion, advancement, opportunity, growth Time off, flexibility, free time, good hours Security, stability, consistency Competition, challenge, being challenged Equality, fairness, equal work Fun, humor, jokes, laughter Sports, golf, toys, recreation Themselves, looks, self, looking good, self-image, egos Job, tasks, work environment, work atmosphere Family, home, a life Support, help, caring, assistance, helpfulness Teams, teamwork, working together, interaction, participation, input Sex, short skirts, flirting, pretty girls Food, coffee, lunch Health Technology, working equipment, tools, resources Same as men, same as women Feelings, emotions, touchy feely, crying

124

Documents

What men and women value at work: Implications for workplace health