Organizations and social worker well-being: the intra-organizational context of practice and its impact on a practitioner's subjective well-being.

Shier, Micheal L. ; Graham, John R.

The concept of subjective well-being (SWB) refers to the ways in which individual people evaluate their lives from their own perspective (Diener, 1984; Diener, Duh, Lucas, & Smith, 1999). SWB is understood to be composed of both experiences and mental processes and decisions along with overall life and job satisfaction (Diener, 1984; Larsen & Edi, 2008). As a result, SWB is more comprehensive than single measures of job or profession related satisfaction and also consists of personal life experiences and cognitive processes.

In order to better understand the subjective well-being of social workers we must first further conceptualize those aspects of social workers' lives that they are evaluating when determining their level of subjective well-being. Therefore, this qualitative research sought to better understand those aspects of a social workers' life that they are evaluating and which contribute to their overall subjective well-being. We asked the following research question: What factors in an individual social workers' life contributes to their perceived (i.e. subjective) well-being? By building knowledge about those factors and conditions that social workers are evaluating and which contribute to their overall perceived well-being we can help identify strengths, which then can be leveraged towards improving occupational conditions in the field (Graham & Shier, 2010a, b).

Related directly to occupational conditions, one thematic category that emerged from the data analysis was the implications for subjective well-being of the intra-organizational context in which social workers practice. The intra-organizational context of direct social work practice consists of those factors that characterize the work environment. These include organizational culture, physical aspects of the office, leadership style, and interpersonal dynamics: elements that are central to understanding the internal functioning and day to day operation of an organization (Cohen, 1994, 1999; Glisson & Hemmelgarn, 1998; Jaskyte & Dressler, 2005; Savaya, Packer, Strange, & Namir, 2008). This finding should not be of a surprise. For instance, workplace satisfaction and satisfaction with one's profession have a bearing on how professionals view their world (Graham & Shier, 2010a; Shier & Graham, 2011a), as well as their perceived well-being (Graham & Shier, 2010b; Shier & Graham, 2011b). For instance, individuals inspired to pursue careers in care giving professions are often compelled by particular reasons and identify with certain self-concepts (Collings & Murray, 1996; Stevens et al., 2012). The congruence with which the expectations social workers have match their work environment and accomplishments greatly influences their overall well-being. As one example, violations of the social worker's expectations can lead to individual psycho-social consequences such as self-doubt and workplace interpersonal conflict (Savaya, Gardner, & Strange, 2011). Because the work is meaningful on a personal level the role of workplace well-being in overall subjective well-being can be high and therefore needs to be better addressed within workplaces. For social work in particular, fending off compassion fatigue, burnout and vicarious trauma from exposure to their clients' tremendously stressful experiences (Jenkins & Baird, 2002; Kim & Stoner, 2008), and facing elements of risk and danger, including actual and threatened violence (Kosny & Eakin, 2008; Macdonald & Sirotich, 2005; Smith, 2006, 2007), can significantly influence rates of burnout and attrition within the human services (Lloyd, King, & Chenoweth, 2002). As a result of these conditions, workplaces need to become a source of improved subjective well-being, rather than as a contributing factor to negative subjective well-being.

While previous research has found that these intra-organizational elements can have an impact on social work practitioner job satisfaction (Acker, 2004; Poulin, 1994; Vinokur-Kaplan, Jayaratne, & Chess, 1994), negative workplace outcomes such as burnout and attrition (Lloyd, King, Chenoweth, 2002), and overall life satisfaction (Pasupuleti, Allen, Lambert, & Cluse-Tolar, 2009), most scholarship on workplace well-being (a key component of overall subjective well-being) only identifies key workplace factors such as cohesion, support, or levels of involvement within an organization without specific reference to the qualitative nuances that contribute to negative workplace experiences (and subsequently impact subjective well-being) (see for example: Bowling, 2010; Buys, Matthews, Randall, 2010; Huxley et al., 2005; Kafetsios, Nezlek, & Vassiou, 2011; Ulrich, O'Donnell, Taylor, Farrar, Danis, & Grady, 2007).

As a result of this previous research we know some organizational domains that could improve social workers' well-being, among them: involvement in ethical decision making, and the increase of supervisory emotional support. But, we know little about how practitioner subjective well-being can be manifested in the day to day operation of organizations. Practitioner well-being may be enhanced by extrinsic recognition for an individual's work, and by empowerment from management to make decisions (Travis, 2006). Team work is important in other ways. For instance, Freund and Drach-Zahavy (2007) found that both mechanistic (i.e. hierarchically structured organizations) and organic (i.e. less formal hierarchies and more fluidity amongst organizational departments) structuring within an interdisciplinary setting positively impacted teamwork. But here, and in other research (Carpenter, Schneider, Brandon, & Wooff, 2003), there was no common understanding of the ways these organizational structures can influence interpersonal relationships among various workplace groups. Likewise, interpersonal relationships among workplace groups are just one aspect of workplace well-being. The following excerpts provide a more comprehensive model of the multiple factors within the workplace that can impact social worker perceived well-being. Together, these excerpts provide an applied foundation for organizations to implement structured policies and unstructured practices in the workplace that can help support positive practitioner subjective well-being.

METHODS

The following research analyzes one-to-one interviews (n = 19) conducted in 2010 based on an initial quantitative study reporting on the satisfaction and well-being of social workers practicing in the Northwest Territories and northwestern Ontario, Canada (Graham et al., 2012). Elements of work and professional satisfaction were elicited from participants representing a variety of social work fields, and ranging broadly in age and educational attainment (N = 138). Survey instruments and multiple regression analyses were designed to quantify work and life satisfaction, professional attachment, career commitment, intentions to turnover and organizational citizenship (Kline & Graham, 2009; Pugh, 2007).

A recruitment section was included in the informed consent process in the initial study inviting respondents to provide their contact information to be contacted to take part in a follow-up interview. Interview participants were selected by purposive sampling from the 91 respondents who completed the social worker satisfaction scale that had scored mid to low on overall subjective well-being. The overall score of subjective well-being comprised of scores for life satisfaction, professional satisfaction, and job satisfaction. Three factors contributing to individual perceptions of well-being. While it is also likely that people who scored high on the measures of work and profession satisfaction would have insights about those things that contribute to their high levels of satisfaction, previous research on social worker SWB has shown that those insights tend to be more general (see for example: Graham & Shier, 2010a, b; Shier & Graham, 2011b). So we sought the perspective of less happy social workers because their insights might provide more specific examples of ways in which their subjective well-being is presently being impacted.

A standardized telephone script was used to initiate contact and a total of 19 respondents agreed to participate in the research. All participants held a diploma or university degree in social work, the majority were employed by government mandated social welfare programs, levels of experience varied widely, the most frequent age categories were 36 to 45 and 46 to 55, and all worked in the Northwest Territories and northwestern Ontario, Canada. The University of Calgary Ethics Review Board granted ethics certification for the study.

Data collection was accomplished using standard approaches to interviewing (Fetterman, 1998, 2008; Holstein & Gubrium, 1995; Patton, 1990; Seidman, 1991). Interviews lasted approximately 1 hour and were conducted by a research team member over the telephone due to the distance between where respondents resided/worked and where the researchers were located. Following a semi-structured open-ended interview guide respondents were asked questions that sought to identify aspects of the intra-organizational context of their workplace, the environments and geographical locations in which they practice, the interconnections between their personal and professional lives, and professional expectations that have an impact on their overall SWB. This focus of questioning was devised from previous research conducted on the SWB of social workers, with the intention of further developing on the thematic categories that have emerged in that research (see for example: Graham & Shier, 2010a, b; Shier & Graham, 2011b). With regard to factors related to the intra-organizational workplace context that can impact overall SWB, respondents were specifically asked: How do the organizational dynamics of your workplace bear on your SWB? How do the relationships you have with your supervisor and your colleagues influence your SWB? What aspects of workload, expectations and resources have an effect on your SWB? All the interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed.

Strategies of analytic induction and constant comparison (see Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Goetz & LeCompte, 1984) were applied in detecting themes identified by the respondents as impacting their SWB. Specifically, data were analysed for emergent themes (see for example: Charmaz, 2000; Williams, 2008) and patterns (see for example: Creswell, 2009; Fetterman, 2008). By first reading through all the interviews and isolating recurring themes, the researchers coded the data until all contradictions, similarities, and differences were explained, thus increasing the conclusions dependability and consistency. The data was then translated into general categories (one of which is the intra-organizational context of practice and its impact of practitioner subjective well-being). The collaboration of the team on this stage of the research ensured the credibility criteria of the study were maintained. Thematic categories became saturated approximately two-thirds of the way through the analysis.

FINDINGS

Respondents identified several categories in which workplace dynamics can have a direct impact on their overall SWB. The functioning of their team, the style of supervision of those in positions of power, and the manner in which decisions are reached were all identified by respondents as impacting on their SWB, as were workload and work expectations, and available resources. These categories are discussed in connection with current literature and practical insight. It is of importance to note for the reader that all participant responses were in regard to their subjective well-being. They were asked how some aspect of their life (and in this case, their work-life) can impact their subjective well-being. The responses therefore are ways in which they perceive their well-being impacted positively and negatively. From these descriptions we then get a sense of what it is these social workers are evaluating in determining their subjective well-being.

Interpersonal Workplace Relationships

The way that people work together is an important workplace factor contributing to a person's overall sense of well-being. For instance, in their meta-analysis of 37 studies, Balkundi and Harrison (2006) found a strong link between social network structures and team performance, goal attainment and aversion to attrition. Good work relations have been found to reduce individual demands, stimulate growth and functioning, and act as a motivational factor, therefore increasing the well-being of human service employees and their productivity (Costa, 2003; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004; Sousa-Poza & Sousa-Poza, 2000).

Furthermore, stronger interpersonal connections between workers built on mutual respect, high regard, and companionship foster atmospheres that encourage joy and learning, decrease emotional exhaustion and fulfill the need of relatedness (Baumeister & Leary, 1995; Richer, Blanchard, & Vallerand, 2002; Shier & Graham, 2011). On the other hand, negative work relations have the potential to cause mistrust and conflict thus escalating levels of frustration and stress and leading to diminished capacity, avoidance, and burnout (Guerin, Devitt, & Redmond, 2010; Jehn, Greer, Levine, & Szulanski, 2008; Levert, Lucas, & Ortlepp, 2000; Lozinkaia, 2002; Panteli & Sockalingam, 2005). Building off this previous literature, respondents in the present study identified several aspects of team dynamics and working relationships that impact their perceived well-being, and provide insight into practical ways that these positive workplace relationships can be attained. For instance, one respondent describing how their work relationships can positively impact their SWB stated: We try to keep a positive work site, in that we laugh. We try to have an atmosphere of camaraderie, we like each other, we support each other. We like being around each other. We don't blame each other. It's easy to get down on people about making decisions or not following through on decisions, but we really try to just move on from here. (017)

Similarly, another respondent discussed how their perceived well-being is affected by workplace relationships: My well-being is affected when the work place is dysfunctional and people no longer work as a team. When you tell somebody something in confidence and then you find out it got spread...The kind of social work that I tend to practice can be gruelling and very emotionally draining at times. So if the workplace becomes abusive or non-supportive, how can I go out and do the work I do and then come back to this type of environment? (011)

The previous respondents described introducing humor into the workplace and being able to share information with colleagues both as aspects supporting positive team dynamics. Other respondents suggested more structured approaches to supporting interpersonal development by working collaboratively and participating in team meetings which can help improve well-being: We had regular team meetings so we could check in with each other on how we were doing with our work. Sometimes weeks would go by and we wouldn't see one another but we found as a group we needed to get together. Once a month we made sure we could have a meeting when everybody was in the office. I think that definitely contributed to all of our well-being. (016)

Other respondents identified a sense of trust in each other's capabilities as an important aspect contributing to positive teamwork dynamics in the workplace. Likewise, teams that cooperate well can create meaningful work environments and this can positively impact SWB. For instance, one respondent said: I have really good direct support staff. We are small enough that we can sit down and hash things out if we need to. We can take action pretty quickly and we have the means to do that. Last Thursday I decided I needed to take my vehicle out on a 12 hour drive for service. I felt pretty confident that I have staff here that can handle the situation. Sure enough there were a couple of issues that came up but they did a great job. (018)

Through these excerpts, respondents highlighted several practical ways in which team dynamics can support or hinder overall perceived well-being. Through sharing, consultation and collaboration in direct work, via team meetings and positive workplace interactions an individual's perceived well-being can be enhanced. Greater efforts within organizations might be placed on developing these types of interactions between workers.

Decision Making

The role of decision making in regard to the function of organizations and employee effectiveness has been a substantial area of research across many disciplines. It has been argued that employee participation in decision making and employee empowerment is beneficial to organizations (Menon, 2001). It can also have direct benefits for social work practitioners. For instance, involving social service workers in decision making processes can have an impact on practitioner engagement with their day to day work, indirectly impacting their willingness to leave an organization (Travis & Mor Barak, 2010). Similar worker affective outcomes related to decision making have been found in other occupational groups, such as teachers (Cheng, 2008), nurses (Lymbery, 2002), and public service workers (Witt, Andrews, & Kacmar, 2000). Karasek (1979) identifies this phenomenon in his job demand-control model. In this model workplace stress is seen as a function of job related demands and the amount of control individual workers have over their own responsibilities (Jones & Bright, 2001; Van der Doef & Maes, 1999). Respondents here identify similar phenomenon, pointing out how not being involved in decision making, or having one's professional opinion disregarded, can be problematic and also impact social workers' overall SWB. For instance, one respondent who works in the child welfare field described: Everyone has a different view of how things should go or how people should be with their children. Even though I think "Ok, that person has problems but they're fine, they can have their kids at home", my supervisor might not agree with me. I found that happened a lot and it pained me considerably. (021)

Likewise, another respondent described previous workplace situations with shared decision making and her present situation where a supervisor makes decisions without consulting her and that this negatively impacts her SWB: Some offices have a clear process for making decisions while others don't. When the supervisor changes her mind about how she thinks the case should go, she'll just tell you, whereas in other offices the decisions are made as a group. You know how everybody stands because we spoke openly. I don't think it works well when decisions are made and handed down as edicts. (016)

A similar situation can occur in inter-professional settings where the mandates of social workers are considered subordinate to the goals of dominant professional groups, and can impact negatively on the SWB of social workers: In health, doctors reign and when you have two professions working in the system with the same budget you don't always get the legitimacy of the second profession. Your view and issues with regard to the budget are sometimes seen as secondary. (020)

Likewise, another respondent discussed the importance of professional collaboration in decision making and outcomes to support positive SWB: We work in an interdisciplinary environment and there's definitely recognition that social workers have a measure of expertise in certain areas. If you're working on a project with a group of people, some will look to you to answer certain questions such as those related to Mental Health .. .They don't just do it themselves, they turned to me for help and input. (019)

Inherent in decision-making is the presence of autonomy in each individual practice. Certain types of practice settings support individual autonomy and some social workers are cognizant of these environments in their search for employment. One of the things that really contributes to my well-being in my job is the community based nature of it. There are so many jobs that are structured and I like that ours are less structured in certain ways. Sometimes we are weighed down by hierarchy but I have a lot of autonomy and can do things at my job that a hospital social worker could never do. (011)

As these respondents have pointed out, creating practice environments that are supportive of practitioner well-being can be as simple as fostering decision making practices that are inclusive and respectful of professional background. Structured policies within organizations can be adopted that seek to include alternative viewpoints in decision making and support less hierarchical models of leadership. Unstructured practices can also be incorporated in day to day operations when seeking input about situations that may come up regarding service users.

Supervisory/Management Dynamics

The following excerpts describe the types of supervisory and management related interactions that can help improve social worker subjective well-being. Respondents were adamant about the importance of supervisory support. One respondent described what they needed from their workplace to increase their perceived well-being: I need to have very good clinical supervision that will help guide me and ensure that we're doing what I would consider good practice (020).

Similarly, another respondent described the need for direct clinical supervision to maintain positive perceived well-being, something that is absent within their present inter-professional practice setting: The other thing that doesn't help is not having supervision. Sometimes I don't notice when I'm getting myself into a mess. Having psychiatry makes things much easier for me but not having access to someone else to chat with is detrimental (005).

A third respondent communicated the necessity of professional guidance, even if sporadic, and the value of finding alternative sources of support: I had supervision, even though it was distant. The psychiatrist would come in once a month. My peers provided informal supervision and support but it was really helpful and important that the psychiatrist provided more formal [clinical] kinds of supervision (014).

Another consideration is peer supervision. Some respondents expressed concern about being the only practicing social workers in their region and the limitations put on their efficacy by the degree of independence they were required to assume. For instance, one respondent stated: I'm the only counselor in my building, my agency, and my community and it gets difficult. Supervision is sometimes hard to come by. It doesn't happen as much as it should. I try my best to reach out and get that but it can be difficult. It's also helpful in the way you have to put yourself out there and jump in and try different things. (009)

Managerial support was also identified by respondents as something that impacts their SWB. For instance, not having upper level management to rely on for supervision and assistance was a great source of strain. One respondent described the frustrations of absentee management: If the management took more time to take care of us as workers [my well-being would be improved]. For example, the proper amount of meeting with supervisors and staff to go over your files and how things are going. There were times I would go 6 months without having a meeting with my supervisor. You were just thrown in, left there to try and figure things out by yourself without being able to ask people questions because everybody is too busy with their own work. (021)

A further consideration within organizations is receiving adequate attention regarding issues that emerge. For instance, several respondents articulated the significance of being heard and understood by the managerial and supervisory staff. Likewise, other respondents noted the positive effects of being encouraged and recognized. As one respondent put it: Well just recently we had a ministerial tour. It's a public meeting and so Minister's [i.e. government department leaders] get grilled. It was evident there that there was one particular issue for which we had to sit down with a client who was disgruntled. The client said "I really appreciate everything you do personally, but it's a bigger issue, it's a system issue", and that's what she was dealing with. But following that public meeting the Minister said to me, "You must have done something right here because there was really no issues to deal with". That made me very pleased. (018)

On the other hand, respondents also discussed the detriments of being excessively overseen, controlled, and organized by management. It was agreed that supervisors should be approachable, offer constructive criticism and provide a comfortable environment allowing workers to participate in day to day office operations. Adopting managerial and supervisory styles contrary to these characteristics was believed to incite self-doubt which had negative implications for individual subjective well-being.

Other aspects identified as harmful to practitioners' well-being included needless uncertainty and stress caused by a lack of communication between managerial and supervisory staff and social workers, and the volatility of the profession's integrity caused by the restructuring of Health regions (the broader organizational framework in which the workers practise). A general mistrust of the application of market imperatives in the workplace also resonated for many. The internal politics, loss of funding, sense of declining flexibility, and increased policing apparent from the new way of running things also diminished the well-being of social workers. One respondent remarked: This is a hospital, it's not a clinic. And my take on management has been that, over the last little while, they have adopted a much more business kind of model. For example, our sick days and our health plan are now handled by a third party, a company in Toronto. That has caused all kinds of grief for people, having to justify your time and doctor's notes and doctor's reports. It feels more and more oppressive and, though we have very important jobs that impact peoples' lives, it seems we are treated with less autonomy and respect. That of course impacts hugely on one's subjective well-being. (007)

These excerpts illustrate the direct impacts of managerial and supervisory relationships on the SWB of social workers. The insight generated from this data provides practical application to common workplace settings. Supervisors are expected to perform a function and provide a level of psycho-social involvement that supports autonomy in some areas of practice, involvement in other areas of practice, and acknowledgement of social worker efforts. Each worker is also different in their needs for supervision; therefore effort should be made at an organizational level to implement practices that help determine these supervisory needs.

Workload/Work Expectations

A great deal has been discovered on workload and its burden on the working conditions and quality of life of human service providers (Bride, Radley, & Figley, 2007; Chou & Robert, 2008; Cink, 2008; Coffey, Dugdill, & Tattersall, 2009). In their study spanning 21 countries, Sousa-Poza & Sousa-Poza (2000) found perceptions of having an exhausting job to be the factor with the greatest negative effect on job satisfaction. Work overload has been linked to absenteeism and poor well-being (Coffey, Dugdill, & Tattersall, 2009), psychological symptoms and distress (Snow, Swan, Raghavan, Connell, & Klein, 2003), and burnout (Levert et al., 2000; Lozinskaia, 2002). Closely associated with workload, the clear delineation of professional roles and expectations has also been singled out as having a substantial impact on the well-being of social workers (Carpenter et al., 2003). One respondent described the feelings of isolation caused by an overburdened workload as contributing to their subjective well-being: [Because of our high workloads, this is a] place where everybody is very, very busy and there's no opportunity to connect with colleagues, and this creates stress. We are all so busy working hard in our offices or cubicles and there's not much interaction. You feel very alone in the work that you do. The opportunity to connect with the other people you work in the same environment with would enhance well-being in the workplace. (010)

Workload seems connected to other aspects of the previous findings. For instance, excessive workloads can impact the interpersonal dynamics that exist within a work environment. Here it becomes apparent the possible interconnection between these multiple intra-organizational factors that can impact social worker subjective well-being.

One component that is contributing to increasing workloads is the lack of qualified staff. In a highly specialized profession such as social work, it is crucial to hire qualified staff. However, narrowing pools of prospective employees and decreasing resources have greatly restricted the possibility of attracting the most skilled and experienced practitioners. This creates increased workload and burden on existing employees, resulting in lower levels of perceived well-being. For example, one respondent stated: I think it's basically that we absolutely need another person in my position. There's nobody here I can talk to about what I do. In terms of batting ideas back and forth there's no other therapist in the mental health team. I have a back log of clients and my supervisor has requested funding for another position but it hasn't gone through. That's what we are waiting for and that's probably my biggest stress over here. (010)

While the previous respondent described the lack of workers as impacting their increased workload and their overall well-being, other respondents perceived the age of workers and high turnover rates as sources of tension sometimes leading to mistakes and inefficiencies in direct service, both of which contribute to increased workloads and levels of workplace stress: I should say that the largest changes have happened. When a permanent position becomes vacant, employers now fill it with a staff member who is on contract. We have a lot of very young new staff, which is great to a point, but there's a whole body of history and knowledge that has been lost. It is also very unstable because those people are on contract. (007)

In other cases, social workers are hired into positions they simply do not have the competencies to fill. According to one respondent: The person who was in the position previously was a nightmare who didn't do anything and wasn't remotely qualified. Having a partner in the work that you do is really helpful. Because if you're really swamped with something and then something else comes in for the Minister or something like that, there's somebody else you can lean on to share the work load, to brainstorm with and things like that. (019)

This respondent likewise described the relationship between workloads and interpersonal dynamics within the workplace.

In other instances, no one can be found to fill the positions, and subsequently increases the workload of existing employees. A respondent reflected on the negative consequences on their own well-being of being understaffed: Right now my workplace is a little bit more stressful because we are the only two Adult Addiction Outpatient Counselors because the other one is gone off sick until September. I've had to figure out how to cover her cases and my cases and any new referrals. (001)

Workplace roles and expectations are closely related to workload. And it has been noted that the division of labour within departments can also be associated with a degree of unease: The way work is designed is really important. Poor design can lead to conflict between positions because peoples' jobs haven't been clearly defined. That can cause difficulty for people. (014)

And it is not entirely uncommon that circumstances or obligations required of some positions are discovered to be incongruent with the comfort levels or values of certain social workers, which then can impact subjective well-being. As one respondent put it: Even when a service is well developed and there's really good people in the other positions, sometimes my temperament doesn't fit with the service. Your temperament can sometimes conflict with what is being demanded in the job. (014)

As these respondents have articulated, certain aspects of workload and work expectations negatively impact subjective well-being. For instance, not having a sufficient amount of staff or staff with the necessary qualifications, the occurrence of workload overlap between departments within an organization, and being required to fill roles that are not conducive to the practice of social work can all have negative effects on social worker SWB. To improve levels of subjective well-being among some social workers, organizational leaders (and funding sources) need to take into consideration the capabilities of their workforce and the required amount of work.

Adequate Resources and Infrastructure Support

While previous research has found that social support is an important element contributing to positive workplace experiences of social workers (Collins, 2008), support within the work environment is comprised of more than just interpersonal support. Social workers also require resources and sufficient infrastructure to actualize their roles (Bakker, Demerouti, & Euwema, 2005; Coffey et al., 2009). This type of support typically comes from management-executive leaders or board structures within an organization-along with funders. Many respondents commented on how thinly human and financial resources are spread and the subsequent impact on their subjective well-being. For instance, one respondent described: Having minimal staff when you've got two or three vacant management positions means you're jumping in to do that other level. It causes a bit of confusion with front line staff. The fact that we are delivering programs to nine communities varying 5 levels creates a bit of havoc. Again, it's the public expectation that they want more and we're in a fiscal environment where that's not going to be possible. (018)

The nature of the social work environment can be so extreme that infrastructure support across multiple services is absolutely essential. One respondent described the demands and anxiety associated with practice with limited support from within the public system to carry out their role: On call after hours, dealing with the vicarious trauma of going into homes and seeing difficult situations, being cursed and swore at, lied to, yelled at, and chased off. Those types of things cause me anxiety (017).

Other respondents discussed incidences where management from within larger government departments act at cross purposes with social workers and their needs. For example, one respondent described: When communication isn't really good and you get the feeling that it's because things that are important to you or to staff in general aren't being taken seriously. For example, we need new videotaping equipment and we made a committee and met last July but still don't have the equipment. It's just a little thing but it felt like it got stalled by somebody who doesn't understand the work. It's not because there isn't enough money but the person who is at the end of the line and has to sign the cheque doesn't get it. (012)

One of the most significant consequences of lack of infrastructure support and resources mentioned by respondents was the jeopardizing of staff and client safety which causes employee strain: We were complaining about our staff cars for two years because they weren't working and would break down while we'd have kids in them. It was crazy, it wasn't good. They finally got new cars. (021)

Respondents identified that insufficient resources and infrastructure support diminished their personal safety while at work, impacted their ability to adequately conduct their jobs, and directly affected their psychosocial well-being; all of which negatively affected subjective well-being. With insufficient financial resources and infrastructure support becoming a more common cited occurrence within the social services sector, more effort needs to be made to address these limitations at the direct practice level within organizations. Since respondents here

provided little insight into how to improve these situations, and in the absence of a robust secondary literature, further research should investigate ways in which organizations are particularly adept at responding to these resource cutbacks, understaffing, and disconnect from the wider government system of decision making.

Inter-organizational relationships

The social work field has a long history of working collaboratively with other disciplines and allied organizations to affect change in a more precipitous and efficient manner (Crawford, 2012; Leiba, 2003). In the current economic climate, punctuated by budget constraints and downsizing, the strategy of building partnerships and alliances has virtually become necessary for program development. And though numerous studies have investigated the wherewithal pragmatics and logistics of inter-organizational relationships (see for example: Austin, 2000; Einbinder, Robertson, Garcia, Vuckovic, & Patti, 2000; Vangen & Huxham, 2003), few have paid attention to the affective outcomes of collaboration for social service providers. Many social workers commented on the psychosocial benefits of joining forces and working together towards a common goal. For example, one respondent described how working with other organizations and community groups on projects improved their SWB: A lot of those interactions I'm talking about, say when we develop a suicide campaign, are not totally something within our organization, there was myself and one other person from our organization. But it's working with community based people and NGO organizations across the territories. Because I'm only really one person in a sense within my department, in a lot of ways the majority of my interactions in terms of the actual work that I do and projects I move forward always involves interaction with other organizations. We do a pretty good job of involving NGO's, Aboriginal organizations and community people and not just making sort of top down decisions from a government level. I do a lot of that which is good, so that has a positive impact on my well-being. (019)

Another described the joy of pooling resources and achieving positive change: We know we don't have all of the knowledge or funding so we partner a lot and that's another thing that I really enjoy about my job. You're with a lot of other people not just social workers. Our organization is interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary and you work collaboratively with other agency committees. You can see change, you can see people buying in, you can see people wanting to partake and participate. (020)

Similarly, another respondent explained: It is great that we have good relationships with other service providers in the community. We do the workshops in the community and other service providers attend. So that's a good thing (010).

Though many respondents expressed the advantages of developing inter-organizational relationships, it was also articulated that some collaborations could be strained and negatively impact practitioner subjective well-being. According to one respondent: Part of the work piece I quite enjoy is that we don't work alone. We work quite collaboratively with the court system and with the Child Welfare System. I quite enjoy working together and developing things together. But there are times when we don't work well together which causes many frustrations. I guess more than frustration, but you have to settle for what the system can manage. (012)

Lastly, one respondent discussed the difficulties of cooperating with those organizations that have authority: The Community Care Access Centre, which provides the admissions after a mental health referral, can sometimes negatively impact my well-being by causing stress over things that are out of my control. They basically decide whether or not I'm allowed to admit people to my facility. Everyone has to apply to the CCAC and I have to ask them if I can make a bed to offer those people. Sometimes they'll say "No you have to take this person over this person". (008)

As these respondents indicated, the nature of collaboration with other organizations and community groups can influence social worker subjective well-being. Possibly, collaboration gives a sense of purpose to one's work and also creates a positive social network environment that makes the work more meaningful to individual social workers. Further research might investigate the relationship between external types of collaboration and organizations as a mediating effect on some of the other workplace factors that impact social worker subjective well-being highlighted earlier.

CONCLUSION

How, then, to understand the perceptions of social workers with medium to low levels of workplace and profession satisfaction? The findings confirm previous conclusions that social interactions between employees greatly affect their level of stress and well-being. The research also described the influence of what was perceived as high quality supervisory and management styles on the support and empowerment of workers and the proper governance of good practice. Involvement in workplace decisions positively influences workers' engagement and affective outcomes, further decreasing stress and improving well-being while having a corresponding impact on functioning. In addition, respondents made clear the grave consequences of excessive workloads and that the importance of clearly delineating professional expectations and roles should not be underestimated. Having adequate resources and funding as well as sufficiently sophisticated infrastructure and support systems is also identified as a critical factor determining social worker subjective well-being. Finally, the often-rewarding experience of working collaboratively across departments and organizations can be beneficial in supporting social worker SWB, but depending on the nature of the relationships in the collaboration.

Together, this research provides a comprehensive investigation of the dynamics at play within organizations and the subsequent impact on practitioner SWB. The social workers provided useful practical insight into ways that negative workplace environments can be transformed slightly to improve social worker subjective well-being. For instance, simple mechanisms can be instituted that structure supervisory relationships, create an environment of shared collaboration among workers, and promote interaction and involvement with external organizations and community groups. Supervision can also be aligned with decision making. For instance, decisions can be undertaken in a collaborative manner between all those invested in a particular case. Decision-making should also be more structured in the sense that evidence should be provided as to why a particular decision is better than another. It would also seem necessary to address the manner of communication within organizations. More directive methods of sharing information between management and supervisors and direct social work practitioners might help create a workplace environment in which social workers can have more ownership of decision making, while at the same time the division of labour between management and direct workers and between different occupational groups becomes less structured.

A further implication of these findings for human and health service organizations is that all of these factors identified by respondents are being evaluated and act as contributing aspects to individual subjective well-being. Subjective well-being is an individualistic term. Referring to how one person evaluates different aspects of their lives and the subsequent implications for their own individual happiness. Therefore, to better understand social worker well-being more effort within organizations needs to be spent on identifying which factors specifically are meaningful for individual social workers. This data provides a place to begin, offering a more comprehensive overview of workplace related factors that can contribute to individual SWB.

REFERENCES

Austin, J.E. (2000). The collaboration challenge: how nonprofits and businesses succeed through strategic alliances. Hoboken, NJ: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Acker, G.M. (2004). The effect of organizational conditions (role conflict, role ambiguity, opportunities for professional development, and social support) on job satisfaction and intention to leave among social workers in mental health care. Community Mental Health Journal, 40(1), 65-73.

Balkundi, P., & Harrison, D.A. (2006). Ties, leaders, and time in teams: Strong inference about network structure's effects on team viability and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 49-68.

Bakker, A.B., Demerouti E., & Euwema, M.C. (2005). Job resources buffer the impact of job demands on burnout. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 70(2), 170-180.

Baumeister, R., & Leary, M.R. (1995). The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 777, 497529.

Bowling, N. (2010). Effects of job satisfaction and conscientiousness on extra-role behaviors. Journal of Business & Psychology, 25(1), 119-130.

Bride, B.E., Radey, M., & Figley, C.R. (2007). Measuring compassion fatigue. Clinical Social Work Journal, 35(3), 155-163. Brownlee, K., Delaney, R., Graham, J.R. (Eds.). (1997). Strategies for Northern Social Work Practice. Thunder Bay, ON: Lakehead University Northern Studies.

Buys, N., Matthews, L.R., & Randall, C. (2010). Employees' perceptions of the management of workplace stress. International Journal of Disability Management Research, 5(2), 25-31.

Carpenter, J., Schneider, J., Brandon, T., & Wooff, D. (2003). Working in multidisciplinary community mental health teams: The impact on social workers and health professionals of integrated mental health care. British Journal of Social Work, 33(8), 10811103.

Cheng, C.K. (2008). The effect of shared decision-making on the improvement in teachers' job development. New Horizons in Education, 56(3), 31-46.

Chou, R.J., & Robert, S.A. (2008). Workplace support, role overload, and job satisfaction of direct care workers in assisted living. Journal of Health & Social Behavior, 49(2), 208-222.

Cink, T. (2008). Organizational stress factors in the social work profession. Socialno Delo, 47(1/2), 1-21.

Coffey, M., Dugdill, L., & Tattersall, A. (2009). Working in the public sector: A case study of social services. Journal of Social Work, 9(4), 420-442.

Cohen, B.J. (1999). Fostering innovation in a large human services bureaucracy. Administration in Social Work, 23(2), 47-59.

Cohen, B.J., & Austin, M.J. (1994). Organizational learning and change in a public child welfare agency. Administration in Social Work, 78(1), 1-19.

Collings, J.A., & Murray, P.J. (1996). Predictors of Stress Amongst Social Workers: An Empirical Study. British Journal Social Work, 26(3): 375-387.

Collins, S. (2008). Statutory social workers: Stress, job satisfaction, coping, social support and individual differences. British Journal of Social Work, 38(6), 1173-1193.

Costa, A.C. (2003). Work team trust and effectiveness. Personnel Review, 32, 605-622.

Crawford, K. (2012). Interprofessional collaboration in social work practice. London, UK: Sage.

Creswell, J.W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (Third Edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95(3), 542-575.

Diener, E., Duh, E.M., Lucas, R.E., & Smith, H.L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 725(2), 276-302.

Einbinder, S.D., Robertson, P.J., Garcia, A., Vuckovic, G., & Patti, R.J. (2000). Interorganizational collaboration in social service organizations: A study of the prerequisites to success. Journal of Children and Poverty, 6(2), 119-140.

Fakunmoju, S., Woodruff, K., Kim, H.H., Lefevre, A., & Hong, M. (2010). Intention to leave a job: The role of individual factors, job tension, and supervisory support. Administration in Social Work, 34(4), 313328.

Fetterman, D.M. (1998). Ethnography: Step by step. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Fetterman, D.M. (2008). Ethnography. In L.M. Given (Ed.), The Sage encyclopedia of qualitative research methods (pp. 288-292). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Freund, A., & Drack-Zahavy, A. (2007). Organizational (role structuring) and personal (organizational commitment and job involvement) factors: Do they predict interprofessional team effectiveness? Journal of Interprofessional Care, 27(3), 319-334.

Glaser, B.G., & Strauss, A.L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine Press.

Glisson, C., & Hemmelgarn, A. (1998). The effects of organizational climate and interorganizational coordination on the quality and outcomes of children's service systems. Child Abuse and Neglect, 22, 401-421.

Goetz, J.P. & LeCompte, M.P. (1984). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Graham, J.R., Fukuda, E., Shier, M.L., Kline, T.B.J., Brownlee, K., & Novik, N. (2012, online first). Demographic, work-related, and life satisfaction predictors of Northern social workers' satisfaction with work and profession. International Social Work. doi:10.1177/0020872811429953

Graham, J.R., & Shier, M.L. (2010a). Social work practitioners and subjective well-being: Personal factors that contribute to high levels of subjective well-being. International Social Work. 53(6), 757772.

Graham, J.R., & Shier, M.L. (2010b). The social work profession and subjective well-being: The impact of a profession on overall subjective well-being. British Journal of Social Work, 40(5), 1553-1572.

Graham, J., Trew, J., Schmidt, J., & Kline, T. (2007). Influences on the Subjective Well-Being (SWB) of Practicing Social Workers. Canadian Social Work, 9(1), 92-105.

Guerin, S., Devitt, C., & Redmond, B. (2010). Experiences of early-career social workers in Ireland. British Journal of Social Work, 40, 2467-2484.

Holstein J.A., & Gubrium, J.F. (1995). The active interview. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Press.

Huntington, A., Gilmour, J., Tuckett, A., Neville, S., Wilson, D., & Turner, C. (2011). Is anybody listening? A qualitative study of nurses' reflections on practice. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 20(9), 14131422.

Huxley, P., Evans, S., Gately, C., Webber, M., Mears, A., Pajak, S., et al. (2005). Stress and pressures in mental health social work: The worker speaks. British Journal of Social Work, 35(7), 1063-1079.

Jaskyte, J., & Dressler, W.W. (2005). Organizational culture and innovation in nonprofit human service organizations. Administration in Social Work, 29(2), 23-41.

Jehn, K.A., Greer, L.L., Levine, S., & Szulanski, G. (2008). The effects of conflict types, dimensions, and emergent states on group outcomes. Group Decision and Negotiation, 77, 465-495.

Jenkins, S.R., & Baird, S. (2002). Secondary traumatic stress and vicarious trauma: A validation study. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 75(5), 423-432.

Jones, F., & Bright, J. (2001). Stress: Myth, theory and research. London: Prentice Hall.

Kafetsios, K., Nezlek, J.B., & Vassiou, A. (2011). A multilevel analysis of relationships between leaders' and subordinates' emotional intelligence and emotional outcomes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 47(5), 1121-1144.

Karasek, R.A. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications for job redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24,285-308.

Kim, H., & Stoner, M. (2008). Burnout and turnover intention among social workers: Effects of role stress, job autonomy and social support. Administration in Social Work, 32(3), 5-25.

Kosny, A.A., & Eakin, J.M. (2008). The hazards of helping: Work, mission and risk in non-profit social service organizations. Health, Risk & Society, 70(2), 149-166.

Lloyd, C., King, R., & Chenoweth, L. (2002). Social work, stress and burnout: A review. Journal of Mental Health, 77(3), 255-265.

Lymbery, M. (2002). Shared governance in community. Journal of Nursing Management, 70(5), 291-298.

Kline, T.J.B., & Graham, J.R. (2009).The social worker satisfaction scale: A measure of social worker subjective well-being (SWB) as it pertains to the workplace. Canadian Social Work, 77(1), 53-59.

Larsen, R.J., & Eid, M. (2008). Ed Diener and the science of subjective well-being. In M. Eid & R.J. Larsen (Eds.). The Science of Subjective Well-Being. New York, NY: The Guildford Press.

Leiba, T. (2003). Collaboration in social work practice. Philadelphia, PA: Jessica Kingsley.

Levert, T., Lucas, M., & Ortlepp, K. (2000). Burnout in psychiatric nurses: Contributions of the work environment and a sense of coherence. South African Journal of Psychology, 30(2), 36-43.

Lloyd, C., King, R., & Chenoweth, L. (2002). Social work, stress and burnout: A review. Journal of Mental Health, 77(3), 255-265.

Lozinskaia, E.I. (2002). Study of stress parameters in the work of the clinical psychiatrist. International Journal of Mental Health, 37(1), 93-98.

Macdonald, G., & Sirotich, F. (2005). Violence in the social work workplace: The Canadian experience. International Social Work, 48(6), 772-781.

Menon, S. (2001). Employee empowerment: An integrative psychological approach. Applied Psychology, 50(1), 153-180.

Mor-Barak, M.E., & Cherin, D.A. (1998). A tool to expand organizational understanding of workforce diversity: Exploring a measure of inclusion-exclusion. Administration in Social Work, 22(1), 47-64.

Panteli, N., & Sockalingam, S. (2005). Trust and conflict within virtual interorganizational alliances: A framework for facilitating knowledge sharing. Decision Support Systems, 39, 599-617.

Patton, M.Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (Second Edition). Newberry Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Pasupuleti, S., Allen, R.I., Lambert, E.G., & Cluse-Tolar, T. (2009). The impact of work stressors on the life satisfaction of social service workers: A preliminary study. Administration in Social Work, 33(3), 319-339.

Poulin, J.E. (1994). Job task and organizational predictors of social worker job satisfaction change: A panel study. Administration in Social Work, 78(1), 21-38.

Pugh, R. (2007). Dual relationships: Personal and professional boundaries in rural social work. British Journal of Social Work, 37, 1405-1423.

Richer, S.F., Blanchard, C., & Vallerand, R.J. (2002). A motivational model of work turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 732(10), 2089-2113.

Savaya, R., Gardner, F., & Strange, D. (2011). Stressful encounters with social work clients: A descriptive account based on critical incidents. Social Work, 56(1), 63-72.

Savaya, R., Packer, P., Strange, D., & Namir, O. (2008). Social entrepreneurship: Capacity building among social workers in public human service agencies. Administration in Social Work, 32(4), 65-86.

Schaufeli, W.B., & Bakker, A.B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: a multi-sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 293-315.

Seidman, I.E. (1991). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Shier, M.L., & Graham, J.R. (2011a). Mindfulness, subjective well-being, and social work: Insight into their interconnection from social work practitioners. Social Work Education. 30(1), 29-44.

Shier, M.L., & Graham, J.R. (2011b). Work-related factors that impact social work practitioners' subjective well-being: Well-being in the workplace. Journal of Social Work, 77(4), 402-421.

Smith, M. (2006). Too little fear can kill you. Staying alive as a social worker. Journal of Social Work Practice, 20(1), 69-81.

Smith, M. (2007). Smoke without fire? Social workers' fears of threats and accusations. Journal of Social Work Practice, 27(3), 323-335.

Snow, D.L., Swan, S.C., Raghavan, C., Connell, C.M., & Klein, I. (2003). The relationship of work stressors, coping, and social support to psychological symptoms among female secretarial employees. Work and Stress, 77(3), 241-263.

Sousa-Poza, A., & Sousa-Poza, A. (2000). Well-being at work: a cross-national analysis of the levels and determinants of job satisfaction. Journal of Socio-Economics, 29(6), 517-538.

Stevens, M., Moriarty, J., Manthorpe, J., & Hussein, S. (2012). Helping others or a rewarding career? Investigating student motivations to train as social workers in England. Journal of Social Work, 72(1), 16-36.

Travis, D.J. (2006). Is doing good enough? A path analytic model of intrinsic job satisfaction among human service workers. Journal of Workplace and Behavioral Health, 22(1), 13-32.

Travis, D.J., & Mor-Barak, M.E. (2010). Flight or fight? Factors influencing child welfare workers' propensity to seek positive change or disengage from their jobs. Journal of Social Service Research, 36(3), 188-205.

Ulrich, C., O'Donnell, P., Taylor, C., Farrar, A., Danis, M., & Grady, C. (2007). Ethical climate, ethic stress, and the job satisfaction of nurses and social workers in the United States. Social Science and Medicine, 65(8), 1708-1719.

Van der Doef, M., & Maes, S. (1999). The job demand-control (support) model and psychological well-being: A review of 20 years of empirical research. Work & Stress, 73(2), 87-114.

Vangen, S., & Huxham, C. (2003). Nurturing Collaborative Relations: Building Trust in Interorganizational Collaboration. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 39(1), 5-31.

Vinokur-Kaplan, D., Jayaratne, S., & Chess, W.A. (1994). Job satisfaction and retention of social workers in public agencies, non-profit agencies, and private practice: The impact of workplace conditions and motivators. Administration in Social Work, 78(3), 93121.

Williams, J.P. (2008). Emergent themes. In L.M. Given (Ed.), The Sage encyclopedia of qualitative research methods (pp. 248-249). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Witt, L.A., Andrews, M.C., & Kacmar, K.M. (2000). The role of participation in decision-making in the organizational politics-job satisfaction relationship. Human Relations, 53(3), 341-358.

MICHEAL L. SHIER

University of Pennsylvania

JOHN R. GRAHAM

University of Calgary