Health Promotion International, Vol. 23 No. 2 # 2008 The Author(s).

doi:10.1093/heapro/dan015 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Advance Access published 15 March, 2008 Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/uk/)
which permits unrestricted non-commerical use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly cited.

Leadership, organization and health at work: a case

study of a Swedish industrial company

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/heapro/article/23/2/127/715336 by guest on 01 August 2021

ANDREA ERIKSSON1*, BJARNE JANSSON2, BO J. A. HAGLUND2
and RUNO AXELSSON1
1
Nordic School of Public Health, P.O. Box 12133, SE-402 42 Göteborg, Sweden and 2Department of
Public Health Sciences, Division of Social Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, SE-171 76 Stockholm, Sweden
*Corresponding author. E-mail: andrea@nhv.se

SUMMARY
The application of knowledge on organization and lea-
dership is important for the promotion of health at work-
place. The purpose of this article is to analyse the
leadership and organization, including the organizational
culture, of a Swedish industrial company in relation to the
health of the employees. The leadership in this company
has been oriented towards developing and actively pro-
moting a culture and a structure of organization where
the employees have a high degree of control over their
work situation. According to the employees, this means
extensive possibilities for personal development and
responsibility, as well as good companionship, which
makes them feel well at work. This is also supported by
the low sickness rate of the company.
The results indicate that the leadership and organiz-
ation of this company may have been conducive to the
health of the employees interviewed. However, the culture
of personal responsibility and the structure of self-
managed teams seemed to suit only those who were able
to manage the demands of the company and adapt to that
kind of organization. Therefore, the findings indicate that
the specific context of the technology, the environment
and the professional level of the employees need to be
taken into consideration when analysing the relation
between leadership, organization and health at work.

Key words: health at work; leadership; organization

INTRODUCTION organization is important for the promotion of

Workplace is an important setting for health
promotion. Studies have shown that the organ-
ization of work affects the health of the employ-
ees (Van der Hek and Plomp, 1997; Chu et al.,
2000). In this connection health has been
defined not merely as an absence of disease but
as a resource for everyday life, embracing phys-
ical, mental and social well-being (WHO, 1986).
Studies have also shown that the leadership of
the organization plays a critical role for creating
and sustaining a health promoting workplace
(Shain and Kramer, 2004). Therefore, the
application of knowledge about leadership and
health at work (Paton et al., 2005).
Parsons (Parsons, 1999) has presented a
concept of health promoting organizations
based on an ecological systems framework,
including efforts targeting the organizational
level, the interpersonal level and the individual
level. Leadership plays an important role for
organizations adopting such a holistic approach
to health. However, the application of knowl-
edge about organization and leadership is
limited in the field of health promotion at work-
places. Instead, most health-promoting inter-
ventions have been focusing on individual
employees and dealing with behavioural rather

127
128 A. Eriksson et al.
than organizational change (Shain and Kramer,
2004).
Research in this field has indicated that an
increased personal control over the work situ-
ation is conducive to the health and well-being
of an individual employee (Sparks et al., 2001),
and affecting his or her possibilities to develop
competence in work (Mikkelsen et al., 1999).
The major risk factors for ill health related to
stress in working life seem to be situations with
high demands and low decision latitude, i.e.
situations where the employees have a low
degree of control over their work (Theorell
et al., 1998).
Different forms of organization and leader-
ship have been described in the management
literature, but a key question is how applicable
they are from a health promotion perspective.
Management studies have mostly been targeting
job satisfaction to increase productivity, and
they have not been addressing other health
issues such as the quality of working life and
how to create supportive environments for
health. One question is what form of leadership
is required to create an organization that gives
the employees control over their work situation.
Another question is whether such leadership
can lead to positive outcomes concerning both
the health of the employees and the pro-
ductivity of the organization.
Boumans and Landeweerd (Boumans and
Landeweerd, 1993) have found that a task-
oriented leadership, focusing mainly on the per-
formance of work tasks in an organization, may
lead to a high productivity but also to health
complaints. Their research indicate, on the
other hand, that a leadership that is more
oriented towards human relations, or has a com-
bination of task and relationship orientation,
may have a positive impact on both job satisfac-
tion and the productivity of the organization
(Boumans and Landeweerd, 1993).
Studies have also shown that a ‘transforma-
tional’ leadership may be particularly important
for job satisfaction (Pollock, 1998). This is a
form of leadership that is oriented towards
inspiring and motivating the employees through
a shared vision of the future. Transformational
leadership may give the employees an enhanced
feeling of meaning in their jobs (Brossoit,
2001), which has also been shown to correlate
with positive health outcomes (Hochwälder and
Bergsten Brucefors, 2005).
The necessity to adapt the form of leadership
to situational factors has often been stressed. In
a classic model, Hersey and Blanchard (Hersey
and Blanchard, 1982) have suggested that it is
necessary to vary the leadership style depending
on the maturity of the employees, i.e. their
motivation to reach results, their willingness
and ability to take responsibility and their
knowledge and experience. When the maturity
of the employees is low, the leadership has to
be task-oriented, but it can be more relation-
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/heapro/article/23/2/127/715336 by guest on 01 August 2021
ship-oriented with a higher maturity. When the
maturity is very high, neither a task- nor a
relationship-oriented leadership is needed.
Instead, in such a situation, leadership responsi-
bilities can be delegated to the employees.
Self-managed work teams are examples of
organizational units created to give a high
degree of control to the employees. In such a
team, the members are planning, organizing
and controlling their own work tasks. Studies
have shown that self-managed teams may con-
tribute to a feeling of responsibility, which is
linked both to increased job satisfaction (Batt,
2004) and increased work efforts (Manz, 1992).
There is, however, no clear evidence on the
effectiveness of self-managed teams. Some
studies have reported a high productivity in such
teams (DeDreu and West, 2001), whereas others
have reported a low productivity (Verespej,
1990). It has been suggested that these differ-
ences may be explained by the organizational
context. Research has shown that it is easier to
introduce teams with a high degree of self-
management in an organization with a low level
of centralization and formalization (Tata and
Prasad, 2004).
Leadership may play an important role in
creating such a decentralized structure, and also
in creating an organizational culture that sup-
ports a high degree of control among the
employees (Jones, 2005). Culture has been
defined as the basic assumptions that are held
and shared by the individuals within an organiz-
ation (Schein, 2004). Such assumptions are
found in beliefs and values about the organiz-
ation, and they are expressed in symbols, pro-
cesses and behaviours. The organizational
culture may be created to support the structure
of the organization, but it may also be used as a
tool to exercise social control (Bate, 1994).
Against this background, further studies are
needed to explore the role of organization and

leadership in relation to health at work. The
purpose of this article is to analyse the leader-
ship and organization, including the organiz-
ational culture, in relation to the health of the
employees in a Swedish industrial company.
METHODS
Despite the previous research in the field, there
is still a lack of knowledge of what form of
organization and leadership is required for
creating and sustaining health at work. Case
studies have often been recommended in situ-
ations with such a lack of knowledge. However,
the critical part is to select a case that may con-
tribute to a deeper understanding of the health-
promoting mechanisms of organization and
leadership.
A Swedish industrial company with a low
sickness rate was selected as a case for this
study. The company is a family firm in the
Stockholm area, constructing and producing
cable machines for industrial applications. It is a
leading performer in the market and constantly
has to find innovative technical solutions to stay
in that position. When the study was under-
taken, the company had about 60 employees
in three countries, including Sweden. The
founder of the company was, at the time of the
study, still active as a leader of the company,
although his son was formally the chief execu-
tive officer (CEO).
The organization has a structure of self-
managed teams and an organizational culture
with the expressed aim to promote the possibili-
ties of the employees to develop their skills and
influence their work situation. According to
market surveys, the company has had a better
economic performance than other comparable
companies (Market Manager, 2004). At the
same time, the employees of the company have
also had a comparatively low sickness rate
(SCB, 2004), on the average 2 days a year.
To study this company, a qualitative case
study methodology was chosen, and the data
were collected through documentary studies,
interviews and observations. The documentary
studies included organizational documents
dating up to 15 years prior to the commence-
ment of the study, produced by the company
itself and by national media. The documents
were collected with help from administrative
employees at the company and through internet
Leadership, organization and health at work 129
searches. External marketing surveys, news-
paper articles and television programmes about
the company were analysed as well as annual
reports, company journals and other documents
produced by the company itself.
The interviews were undertaken with the CEO
and five employees at three different occasions.
These employees were chosen for having worked
between 2 and 5 years at the company, being
familiar with the company, but not having
worked so long to take things in the company for
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/heapro/article/23/2/127/715336 by guest on 01 August 2021
granted. They were also chosen for representing
the different work areas within the company:
administration, fitting and construction. An
additional interview was also conducted with one
employee who had worked for 30 years in the
company, to get his perspective on how the work
organization had developed over years.
The interviews were semi-structured following
an interview guide based on the following
themes: the work tasks, the organization and the
organizational culture, the leadership, the com-
munication and relationships with colleagues
and the feelings of well-being related to work.
The employees were asked to describe an ordin-
ary day at work, and how their experiences of
the organization and leadership of the company
were related to perceived work pressure and
well-being. The CEO was asked to describe the
ideas behind the work organization, how new
employees were recruited and introduced to
work, how decisions were taken and his relation-
ship with the staff.
The observations were made during six differ-
ent staff meetings, both meetings with all the
employees and smaller team meetings. On
these occasions, an observational guide, inspired
by Schein (Schein, 2004), was used to capture
key issues such as the environment, the partici-
pants, their interaction (overt as well as non-
verbal) and activities. There were also obser-
vations made at coffee breaks and when work
was performed, and there were opportunities to
have informal discussions with employees and
with the founder of the company, in addition to
the interviews. Field notes were taken during
the observations and reflections were written
directly after each visit at the company.
All data collection was performed by the first
author. All interviews were tape-recorded and
transcribed. The data from the transcribed
interviews, the summaries of the corporate
documents and the notes from the observations
were analysed according to hermeneutic
130 A. Eriksson et al.
principles (Gadamer, 2003), searching for a
holistic context-based meaning of the content
alternating between preliminary interpretations
of the whole text and interpretations of the
different parts of the text. All the text was read
several times and the whole material was sorted
under different themes, validated through con-
sistency between the different data sources. The
analysis process was continued until all essential
aspects of the empirical data were included in
the final interpretation.
RESULTS
Values and culture
The founder of the company has consciously
developed and refined the culture and the struc-
ture of the organization since it was established
in the 1970s. He claims that ‘my business idea is
basically honesty’ and that power and control is
associated with fear and suspicion, and a sign of
lacking confidence. He assumes that all individ-
uals want to do something meaningful, take
responsibility and develop in their work. He
thinks that this is best promoted by freedom,
appreciation and participation.
The philosophy of the founder permeates
both the structure and the culture of the organ-
ization. It is also reflected in the buildings of
the company. A new factory building was con-
structed in 2003. The major parts of this build-
ing are made of glass, meant to symbolize a
pure flow of communication. The idea is that
the shaping of the building should promote the
participation of all employees and promote an
open and honest communication. On the walls
are hanging pictures from the company’s
history, such as the first machines constructed.
The founder of the company is actively com-
municating the values of the organizational
culture to the employees. He is taking a central
role in the meetings with all the employees. In
his communication he is often using metaphors,
such as ‘geese flying in a delta formation’,
related to the organization of the company. He
spends a lot of time talking about the import-
ance of the employees being alert and taking
responsibility, emphasizing that it is the respon-
sibility of the employees to make the company
profitable and to find sustainable solutions.
An observation was made when the founder
of the company together with all the employees
formulated the quarterly goals of the company.
The employees made their contributions when
they were asked to, and the founder decided
if he thought that a contribution was worth
writing down. During the meeting, a picture of
the company’s economic turnover was shown,
and the founder talked about where money
needed to be saved. He encouraged the employ-
ees to work with the quality of the products to
change a negative trend. The final version of
the goals was typed out and handed to all
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/heapro/article/23/2/127/715336 by guest on 01 August 2021
employees during the next coffee break.
A respect but also a certain distance to the
founder of the company was expressed by the
employees interviewed. They believed that a
prerequisite for the company’s organization of
work was a leader who raised the awareness of
the employees’ own responsibilities for work
performance.
Organizational structure
The company has a flat and decentralized
structure. It has no formal hierarchy, no
foremen and no time clocks. Instead, it is orga-
nized in self-managed teams. In these teams,
the employees are expected to take initiative,
try new things, take responsibility, adapt and
co-operate. According to one of the employees,
‘it is a mental development, you are developing
mentally, it is not only . . . machines, you are also
developing as an individual. You always learn
something new all the time . . . no limits are set,
you can decide yourself in what pace and all
that. . .’.
There is also an ambition to avoid pro-
fessional divisions in the company. For
example, the employees take turns in managing
the reception and cleaning the workplaces.
According to the CEO, the practical work
experiences of the employees are more import-
ant than their formal education. Therefore, it is
important for the company to have a work
environment where the employees can learn,
develop and take responsibility. Employees who
are unwilling to step outside their professional
limits and want to have a clear working division
are not suitable for this company.
All the employees meet at 7.45 –8.00 every
morning in smaller teams. The aim of the meet-
ings is that the employees should share their
visions for the day, but also report what they
have achieved the previous day and what they
plan to achieve during the day. The teams are

formed according to functions, needs or
common work tasks. The members of the teams
shift regularly to promote contacts between
different employees. According to the inter-
views, the morning meetings are a great help
for performing work tasks and finding ways to
collaborate with colleagues. Without these
meetings, more managers would be needed.
The work of the self-managed teams is
goal-oriented. A structured schedule is used for
setting annual and quarterly goals of the
company, and the employees are involved in
this process. The employees are also setting
their own goals every week according to the
schedule. The quarterly and annual goals were
described in the interviews as reminder of what
is expected by the individual, an eye-opener,
rather than financial goals or goals for
production.
In addition to the morning meetings, there
are also common coffee breaks every day at 9
AM and 2 PM, where all the employees are
expected to participate. These breaks are used
as information meetings. A bell rings in the
building to call attention that the meetings are
taking place. A flipchart and an overhead pro-
jector are always present to be used at these
occasions.
The individuals and the organization
Work is divided according to the ability and the
motivation of the different employees. It was
expressed, however, both in the interviews and
in connection with the observations that it
could be hard for some employees to balance
the extensive responsibility given to each indi-
vidual with the need to co-operate in teams.
Therefore, it could be difficult for the employ-
ees to find their roles. As one of them explained
it, ‘you get nothing served on a silver spoon; no
one tells you that this is what you should do. . .’.
The employees interviewed described that
they manage to perform their tasks by experi-
ence and by asking other employees. They said
that they can feel burdened by new and exten-
sive tasks, but they are always able to manage
these tasks somehow, which leads to an
enhanced skill and task development. Two of
them described that they occasionally felt bur-
dened and worried in their spare time about
their work tasks, whereas others said that they
don’t have a problem separating work from
their private life. All the employees interviewed
Leadership, organization and health at work 131
emphasized, however, that the extensive possi-
bilities for personal development and responsi-
bility make them feel very well at work.
Several persons interviewed pointed out that
there is no competition between the employees.
Instead, co-operation was described as a con-
dition for the organization of work, and the
team work was regarded as both positive and
sensible. One explanation for the good
co-operation was that there are no divisions
where employees only mind their own work
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/heapro/article/23/2/127/715336 by guest on 01 August 2021
tasks, ‘everything is woven together, everyone is
dependent on each other, no matter what area
they work in’. In all the interviews it was
expressed that the good companionship and
support from colleagues strongly contribute to a
feeling of well-being at work.
All the persons interviewed described the fre-
quent communication in the company as some-
thing positive and an important condition for
their work. The employees felt motivated by
what they perceived as a good atmosphere in
the organization. They felt that their contri-
butions were appreciated. According to the
CEO, they try to have a straight and honest
communication in the organization, where
everyone should be aware of the situation of
the company.
The employees explained in the interviews
how they over time had adapted to the organiz-
ational culture. They described how they had
learnt to express themselves according to the
prevailing norms for communication at meet-
ings and how to perform their work tasks within
the self-managed teams. Those who have not
been able to accomplish their tasks or conform
to the organization of the company had, over
the years, resigned. Today the structure and
culture of the organization is clearly expressed
already during recruitment of new employees.
The recruitment is selective, favouring those
who are able to adapt to the organization.
DISCUSSION
This case study has described the leadership
and organization, including the organizational
culture, of a Swedish company in relation to the
health of the employees. The founder of this
company has developed and actively promoted
an organizational culture, which is based on
assumptions that all individuals want to do
something meaningful and take responsibility
132 A. Eriksson et al.
for their work. With this culture, the
organization has developed a decentralized
structure consisting of self-managed teams
where the employees have a high degree of
control over their work situation. According to
the employees, there are extensive possibilities
for personal development and responsibility, as
well as good companionship, which make them
feel well at work. This is also supported by the
low sickness rate of the company.
These results support the studies indicating
that an increased personal control over the
work situation is conducive to the well-being of
individuals (Sparks et al., 2001). Creating self-
managed teams is one way of increasing the
degree of control for the employees. However,
as Tata and Prasad (Tata and Prasad, 2004)
have pointed out, the success of self-managed
teams is context-dependent. A decentralization
of responsibility may be facilitated by a leader-
ship that actively promotes the organizational
culture and the goals of the company. It also
requires a structure for the employees to plan
their work, including overall guidelines and
channels for communication. Without the daily
meetings it would be hard for the employees
in the company studied to develop their
co-operation. Furthermore, the employees need
constant information to enable them to work
independently. Good relations between the
employees are also critical for their co-operation
in the performance of the work tasks.
The organization of work in the company
studied has many parallels to current manage-
ment theories. Employees are encouraged to
work independently and it is seen as an import-
ant task of leadership to create understanding
and support for work performance (Mintzberg,
1999). The founder of this company has many
of the characteristics of a transformational lea-
dership, which is also very similar to the form
of leadership found in ‘excellent’ corporate cul-
tures (Peters and Waterman, 1982). The ques-
tion is, however, if these characteristics of the
company really are meant to be health promot-
ing or just a way to socially control employees
to work harder to fulfil the goals of the
company.
Important ethical aspects of the organization,
leadership and culture of the company studied
can be raised in this connection (Bate, 1994).
The founder has a central role in the studied
company, strongly promoting his own ideas on
organizational culture and structure. This may,
however, lead to difficulties for employees
with different perspectives. Employees in the
company can decide how to perform their work
tasks, but they do not express opinions against
the dominating culture of the company during
the observations and interviews. Making the
employees feel responsibility for the goals
of the company is a way to create a strong
loyalty to the company. The way the employees
are organizing themselves through regular
group meetings can also be interpreted as a way
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/heapro/article/23/2/127/715336 by guest on 01 August 2021
of creating a social peer pressure to make them
work harder.
A literature review by Shain and Kramer
(Shain and Kramer, 2004) has shown that the
organization and design of work needs to be
targeted to promote health. Additionally, it
would be important also to consider contextual
factors such as the technology and the environ-
ment of the organization and the professional
level of the employees (Mintzberg, 1993;
Mintzberg, 1999). This study indicates that the
form of leadership and organization of the
company studied may be both effective and
health promoting, but it may not suit all
employees and organizations. Employees who
did not fit the culture and structure of this
company have resigned and those who are still
there have adapted to the existing organization.
The conclusions of this study should be
drawn with caution because of the specific
context of the company studied. Most of the
employees in the company are skilled workers
selected by the company for their will and
ability to cope with the particular organization
of work. Parallels to a healthy workers effect
can be drawn, i.e. that employees in general are
healthier compared with individuals without
employment (Choi, 1991). The company
studied seems to suit those who are able to
manage the demands of the company and adapt
to the organizational culture. When extensive
responsibilities are delegated to the employees
in an organization, they can be handled only if
necessary skills exist and if the employees
experience success in accomplishing their tasks
(Yukl, 2006).
There is clearly a need for more research
about the impact of organization and leadership
on the health of employees. Comparative
studies would give a more general picture of the
health-promoting mechanisms associated with
different forms of organization and leadership.
Aspects of organizational culture are not always

as explicit as in this study, and should be
explored further in continued research on
health-promoting work organizations. Future
research should also explore what different
employees consider as health promoting for
them, and how this fits with management ideas
and performance.
FUNDING
Funding to pay the Open Access publication
charges for this article was provided by the
Nordic School of Public Health.
REFERENCES
Bate, P. (1994) Strategies for Cultural Change.
Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd, Oxford.
Batt, R. (2004) Who benefits from teams? Comparing
workers, supervisors and managers. Industrial relations,
43, 183– 212.
Boumans, N. P. and Landeweerd, J. A. (1993) Leadership
in the nursing unit: relationships with nurses well-being.
Journal of Advanced Nursing, 18, 767– 75.
Brossoit, K. B. (2001) Understanding employee empower-
ment in the workplace: Exploring the relationships
between transformational leadership, employee percep-
tions of empowerment, and key work outcomes.
Dissertation Abstracts International. Univ Microfilms
International, US, pp. 9-B. Section B61.
Choi, B. C. K. (1991) Definition, sources, magnitude,
effect modifiers, and strategies of reduction of the
healthy worker effect. Journal of Occupational
Medicine, 34, 979– 989.
Chu, C., Breucker, G., Harris, N., Stitzel, A., Gan, X., Gu, X.
et al. (2000) Health-promoting workplaces—international
settings development. Health Promotion International, 15,
155–167.
DeDreu, C. K. W. and West, M. A. (2001) Minority
dissent and team innovation: The importance of partici-
pation in decision making. Journal of applied
Psychology, 86, 1191–1201.
Gadamer, H. -G. (2003) Truth and Method, 2nd edition.
The Continuum Publishing Company, New York.
Hersey, P. and Blanchard, K. H. (1982) Management of
Organizational Behavior. 4th edition. Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Hochwälder, J. and Bergsten Brucefors, A. (2005)
Psychological empowerment at the workplace as a pre-
dictor of ill health. Personality and Individual
Differences, 39, 1237–1248.
Jones, K. (2005) Leading an empowered organization
(LEO): does the course work? British Journal of
Community Nursing, 10, 92– 97.
Manz, C. (1992) Self-leading work teams: moving beyond
self-management myths. Human Relations, 45,
1119– 1139.
Leadership, organization and health at work 133
Market Manager (2004) MM-Class – A valuation of a
company’s growth, profitability, and capital structure.
http://www.mmp.se (last accessed 1 February 2004).
Mikkelsen, A., Saksvik, P. O., Eriksen, H. R. and Ursin,
H. (1999) The impact of learning opportunities and
decision authority on occupational health. Work and
Stress, 13, 20–31.
Mintzberg, H. (1993) Structure in Fives: Designing
Effective Organizations. Prentice Hall, Englewood
Cliffs, NJ.
Mintzberg, H. (1999) Mintzberg on managing pro-
fessionals. Human Resource Management International
Digest, 15– 15.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/heapro/article/23/2/127/715336 by guest on 01 August 2021
Parsons, M. (1999) Health promoting organizations: A
systems model for advanced practice. Holistic Nursing
Practice, 13, 80– 89.
Paton, K., Sengupta, S. and Hassan, L. (2005) Settings,
systems and organization development: the Healthy
Living and Working Model. Health Promotion
International, 20, 81–89.
Peters, T. and Waterman, R. (1982) Search of Excellence:
Lessons from America’s Best-Run Companies. Harper &
Row, New York.
Pollock, K. S. (1998) The relationship between leadership
style and subordinate satisfaction and performance in
public accounting firms. Dissertation Abstracts
International. University Microfilms International, US,
pp. 1244. 594–A.
Schein, E. (2004) Organizational Culture and Leadership.
3rd edition. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
SCB (2004) Sickness absence and ill-health in Sweden – in
a statistical perspective [In Swedish: Sjukfrånvaro och
ohälsa i Sverige – en belysning utifrån SCB:s statistik].
Official statistics from Sweden, Stockholm.
Shain, M. and Kramer, D. M. (2004) Health promotion in
the workplace: Framing the concept; Reviewing the evi-
dence. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 61,
643– 648.
Sparks, K., Faragher, B. and Cooper, L. C. (2001)
Well-being and occupational health in the 21st century
workplace. Journal of Occupational and Organisational
Psychology, 74, 489–509.
Tata, J. and Prasad, S. (2004) Team self-management,
organizational structure, and judgements of team
effectiveness. Journal of Management Issues, 16,
248– 265.
Theorell, T., Tsutsumi, A., Hallquist, J., Reuterwall, C.,
Hogstedt, C., Fredlund, P. et al. and the SHEEP
Study Group (1998) Decision latitude, job strain and
myorcardial infarction: A study of working men in
Stockholm. American Journal of Public Health, 88,
382– 388.
Van der Hek, H. and Plomp, H. N. (1997) Occupational
stress management programme: a practical overview of
published effect studies. Occupational Medicine, 47,
133– 141.
Verespej, M. A. (1990) When you put the team in charge.
Industry Week, 229, 30– 32.
WHO (1986) The Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion.
WHO, Copenhagen.
Yukl, G. (2006) Leadership in Organizations. 6th edition.
Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.