Team Awareness for Mental Well-Being in the Workplace: Original Theoretical Article

of 52
Workplace Substance Abuse Prevention
Concepts, Research, and Innovation of a Team
Awareness Training
The TCU Drugs in the Workplace Project
This deck was originally created in 1999 and was downloadable from the Institute of Behavioral
Research at Texas Christian University. This deck is a supplement to the published article:
Bennett, J. B., Lehman, W. E., & Reynolds, G. S. (2000). Team awareness for workplace substance abuse
prevention: The empirical and conceptual development of a training program. Prevention Science, 1(3), 157-172.
Available at ResearchGate

of 52
Workplace SubstanceAbuse Prevention:
An IntegratedResearchModel
Integrated Research Model
Introduction: Social Factors
at Work
Research Abstracts
Innovative Training Model
This poster has four sections.
Please click on the section title to the
left that you wish to go to.
You can return here to this “Home”
page by clicking the symbol
in the lower right corner.
To proceed through this presentation,
you may click anywhere on the screen
when you see the “Click to proceed”
message.
Click to proceed

of 52
The great majority of jobs and occupations require
that people work together to get the job done
Introduction: Social Factors at Work
Click to proceed

of 52
Workers rely
on each other
to provide information,
tools, and support
in all kinds
of work
Click to proceed

of 52
Many jobs require
attention to security
or safety to help
protect coworkers,
customers, and the
general public
Click to proceed

of 52
These examples indicate that
many jobs include one or more of these factors:
• Tasks require that we work together
• Jobs require we rely on each other
• Our actions have effects on others
• Sometimes these effects involve safety and security
Click to proceed

of 52
Even when
employees
work in isolation,
they will sometimes
get together just to
talk or socialize
Click to proceed

of 52
Our research team
has studied how employee
misuse of alcohol or
drugs can be, and
often is, influenced
by these workplace
social factors
Click to proceed

of 52
Substance abuse rarely
occurs in isolation;
coworkers can be affected
and they can play a
role in enabling the problem
or encouraging their peers to get help
Click to proceed

of 52
P o l i c y
In recent years the federal
government has required
businesses to have a drug free
workplace policy.
As a rule, these policies focus on
dealing with workers as individually
susceptible to substance use
problems, rather than on the social
context that may surround
substance use.
Click to proceed

of 52
The research described in this
presentation is in three parts.
P o l i c y
W o r k
E n v i r o n m e n t
Work
Groups
Research covers employee attitudes
toward drugs and policy, effects of
substance use on employees and
coworkers, and the role of the work
environment and the work group.
The first part describes an
“Integrated Research Model,” and
reviews ten years of psychological
and organizational research.
Click to proceed

of 52
The second part briefly shows how
we developed an interactive
substance abuse prevention training
for workplaces.
Click to proceed
This “Innovative Training Model” is
based upon the following:
1 – ideas and concepts from the
2 – research summarized in the
Abstracts
3 - ideas about Social Factors at
Work, as described earlier

of 52
The third part of this presentation
shows “Research Abstracts” of over
20 different research studies.
PolicySubstance
Use
Group
Processes
Perceptions &
Attitudes
Workplace
Environment
Safety
Drinking
Climate
Enabling
Exposure to
Use
Tolerance
Social
Integration
Wellness
Team
Cohesion
Support
Policy
Click to proceed
Much of this research was used to
build the “Integrated Research
Model.”
These research abstracts are
summaries of papers that have been
published in scientific journals.

of 52
Policy
Testing
Education
Discipline
EAP
Individual &
Problematic
Substance Use
leads to
regulates
Group
Processes
Perceptions &
Attitudes
Workplace
Environment
Social
Integration
Organizational
Wellness
Team
Cohesion
Support
Policy
Safety-related
Occupations
Drinking
Climate
Neutralization
& Enabling
Exposure to
Coworker Use
Tolerance
Organizational
Influence
Psychological
influence
Social
influence
Performance
Personal
Background
This section of slides describes the
different elements in the full model
that seeks to understand job-
related risks and strengths
associated with employee
substance abuse.
Click to proceed

of 52
Employee
Substance Abuse
Misuse of alcohol or
Prescription drugs
Illicit Drug use
Potential Performance
Problems
Unscheduled Absences
Accidents
Psychological Withdrawal
Antagonism
Violence Risk
Performance
Concerns
The model described here
assumes that employee
substance abuse can
potentially or eventually
lead to performance
problems.
Click to proceed

of 52
Policy Formation
Over the past twenty years, an increasing number of workplaces have
developed substance use policies.
This model shows a standard view of how policy is formed.
First, the possibility of
substance use leads to
the development of policy,
which can include testing,
education, discipline, and
access to help, usually
through an Employee
Assistance Program or
EAP.
leads to
Individual &
Problematic
Substance Use
These policy
components are
designed to regulate
individual and
problematic substance
use.
regulates
Policy
Testing
Education
Discipline
EAP
Click to proceed

of 52
Policy
Testing
Education
Discipline
EAP
Individual &
Problematic
Substance Use
leads to
regulates
TheWorkplace Context
• Factors in the work setting may have an
important influence on employees
• a) over and above the effects of formal,
written policy, or
• b) in interaction with employee attributes
• Policy does not operate in a vacuum. The
effect of policy on employee substance
use depends on a number of factors in
the work setting.
Workplace
Context
Click to proceed

of 52
Policy
Testing
Education
Discipline
EAP
Individual &
Problematic
Substance Use
leads to
regulates
TheWorkplace
Context
• The current model is
sensitive to these
factors but focuses
more on reaching
and understanding
employees once
they are in the work
setting.
Personal
Background
• Employees are also
vulnerable to
substance abuse
because of personal
background factors.
Employees inthe
context of their
worksetting
Click to proceed

of 52
Policy
Testing
Education
Discipline
EAP
Individual &
Problematic
Substance Use
leads to
regulates
TheWorkplace
Context
Risks Strengths
Risks &
Strengths
The workplace
contains two types of
factors that relate to
employee substance
use.
Factors associated
with decreased
substance use are
considered strengths.
Factors associated
with increased
substance use are
considered risks.
Click to proceed

of 52
Policy
Testing
Education
Discipline
EAP
Individual &
Problematic
Substance Use
leads to
regulates
Risks Strengths
Risks &
Strengths
Risk factors include
working in safety
sensitive occupations,
coworkers who drink
together socially, and
employees who
enable, ignore, or
tolerate coworker use.
Safety-related
Occupations
Drinking
Climate
Neutralization
& Enabling
Exposure to
Coworker Use
Tolerance
Strength factors
include socially
healthy work settings,
wellness policies, an
an atmosphere of
team cohesiveness,
and employee
knowledge and
support of policy.
Social
Integration
Organizational
Wellness
Teamwork
(cohesion)
Support
Policy
Click to proceed

of 52
Policy
Testing
Education
Discipline
EAP
leads to
regulates
Individual &
Problematic
Substance Use
Three Levels
In the Work
Context
Risk and Strengths
exist at three
levels
Group or
Team
Organizational
Individual
Click to proceed

of 52
Policy
Testing
Education
Discipline
EAP
leads to
regulates
Individual &
Problematic
Substance Use
Organizational
Workplace
Environment
Safety-related
Occupations
Drinking
Climate
Social
Integration
Organizational
Wellness
The overall work
environment or culture of
an organization can
contain factors
associated with alcohol or
drug use.
Conversely, healthy work
cultures that emphasize
employee involvement,
family friendly policies,
and good communication
may show lower levels of
abuse.
For example, occupations
involving safety risk
(machinery use, toxic
chemicals, vehicles)
tend to have higher
use levels.
Risks Strengths
Click to proceed

of 52
Policy
Testing
Education
Discipline
EAP
leads to
regulates
Individual &
Problematic
Substance UseSocial and psychological
processes within work
groups can also influence
employee attitudes and
behaviors toward alcohol
and drugs.
Group or Team
Group
Processes
Team
Cohesion
Neutralization
& Enabling
Conversely, alcohol and
drug use is less when
employees report
working in positive team
environments and with
cohesive work groups.
For example, research
shows that coworkers
can ignore, minimize, or
enable employees who
use alcohol or drugs.
Risks Strengths
Click to proceed

of 52
Policy
Testing
Education
Discipline
EAP
leads to
regulates
Individual &
Problematic
Substance UseJob-related perceptions
and attitudes of individual
employees also correlate
with substance abuse.
Perceptions &
Attitudes
Support
Policy
Exposure to
Coworker Use
Tolerance
Individual
Conversely, employees
with clear and positive
attitudes toward policy
are less likely to abuse
alcohol or drugs.
For example, employees
who are willing to tolerate
(cover for, fail to report)
coworkers who use are
themselves more likely to
be drug user than those
who are less tolerant.
Risks Strengths
Click to proceed

of 52
Following from our previous
research (described in the
Abstracts section), the Drugs in
the Workplace Project developed
two types of training programs to
help prevent employee substance
abuse.
Innovative Training Model
Policy
Testing
Education
Discipline
EAP
Individual &
Problematic
Substance Use
leads to
regulates
Group
Processes
Perceptions &
Attitudes
Workplace
Environment
Social
Integration
Organizational
Wellness
Team
Cohesion
Support
Policy
Safety-related
Occupations
Drinking
Climate
Neutralization
& Enabling
Exposure to
Coworker Use
Tolerance
Organizational
Influence
Psychological
influence
Social
influence
Performance
Personal
Background
Click to proceed

of 52
Policy
Testing
Education
Discipline
EAP
Individual &
Problematic
Substance Use
leads to
regulates
Group
Processes
Perceptions &
Attitudes
Workplace
Environment
Social
Integration
Organizational
Wellness
Team
Cohesion
Support
Policy
Safety-related
Occupations
Drinking
Climate
Neutralization
& Enabling
Exposure to
Coworker Use
Tolerance
Informational
Training
Informational Training
is an enhanced version
of the standard
educational training.Education
TeamTraining
Team Training is an
advanced training that
combines team building
exercises along with
peer referral skills and
in depth policy training.
The team training focuses on enhancing strengths and
reducing risks within work groups.
Group
Processes
Team
Cohesion
Neutralization
& Enabling
Click to proceed

of 52
Problem
Presentation
Problem
Neutralization
Problem
Continuance
Climate
Reinforcement
Policy
Testing
Education
Discipline
EAP
Individual &
Problematic
Substance Use
leads to
regulates
Group
Processes
Perceptions &
Attitudes
Workplace
Environment
The Team Awareness training was
developed in three conceptual stages
and according to previous research.
Stage 1: The Negative Cycle
Previous research suggested that a
negative cycle may prevent coworkers
or work groups from dealing with
employee problems.
an employee shows some problem behavior (e.g.,
excessive absence, working with a hangover),
coworkers neutralize (enable,
minimize, deny, rationalize),
the problem continues,
a climate of enabling develops
Click to proceed

of 52
Problem
Presentation
Problem
Neutralization
Problem
Continuance
Climate
Reinforcement
Poor
Communication
Inadequate
Coping
Tolerance &
Resignation
Withdrawal/
Antagonism
Disconnected
from Policy
(not meaningful)
Stage 2: Correlates of Neutralization
Our research suggest five factors
correlate with this negative cycle.
5 – Employees with substance abuse
problems are psychologically
withdrawn or antagonistic.
4 – Employees tolerate coworkers who
have problems.
3 – Employees experience stress or job
tension.
2 – Work groups lack communication
skills to deal with the problem (i.e.,
alienation, low group cohesion).
1 – Employees are either not aware of
policy or consider it meaningless.
Click to proceed

of 52
Stage 3: Training Goals
For each of the five areas
that relate to enabling and
neutralization, we
developed training
objectives.
These five training
objectives were used to
help develop actual
training materials and
manuals.
These materials are
available from this web-
site.
• Purpose
Enhance team communication for work groups
to help reduce any risks related to substance use
• Objective 1: Relevance
Explore how this training can help you and
your group and identify Risks and Strengths
• Objective 2: Team Ownership of Policy
Understand how substance use policy protects
employees and requires shared responsibility
• Objective 3: Understanding Stress
Understand the relationship between stress,
substance abuse, and communication. Identify
resources for healthy (versus unhealthy) coping.
• Objective 4: Understanding Tolerance
Identify risky levels of tolerance at individual
and group levels and adjust if necessary.
• Objective 5: Support, Encourage Help
Improve effective listening, nudge coworkers
to get help, address resistance to change.
• Goals
1 - Increase supportive group climate
2 - Improve attitudes (policy, tolerance)
3 - Increase help-seeking behavior/peer referral
Poor
Communication
Inadequate
Coping
Tolerance &
Resignation
Withdrawal/
Antagonism
Disconnected
from Policy
(not meaningful)
Click to proceed

of 52
To summarize, the team
awareness training was
developed from three
areas:
1 - ideas about Social
Factors at Work, as
described in the
Introduction
2 – ideas and concepts
from the Integrated
Research Model
3 – research summarized
in the Abstracts
Policy
Testing
Education
Discipline
EAP
Individual &
Problematic
Substance Use
leads to
regulates
Group
Processes
Perceptions &
Attitudes
Workplace
Environment
Social
Integration
Organizational
Wellness
Team
Cohesion
Support
Policy
Safety-related
Occupations
Drinking
Climate
Neutralization
& Enabling
Exposure to
Coworker Use
Tolerance
TeamTraining
Group
Processes
Team
Cohesion
Neutralization
& Enabling
Click to proceed

of 52
Policy
Testing
Education
Discipline
EAP
Individual &
Problematic
Substance Use
leads to
regulates
Group
Processes
Perceptions &
Attitudes
Workplace
Environment
Social
Integration
Organizational
Wellness
Team
Cohesion
Support
Policy
Safety-related
Occupations
Drinking
Climate
Neutralization
& Enabling
Exposure to
Coworker Use
Tolerance
Performance
Personal
Background
This slide provides
numbered links to
research abstracts.
These abstracts are
summaries of research
papers that provide the
basis for the full
prevention model.
6 91 2 85 10
32
PreventIonTraInIng
6
7
9
10
10
12
13
14
* Note. Abstract 16 describes the full model
13
17
18
4
5
8
13 15
16*
16*
17
17
18
18
18
5 82
15
3
6 7
7 11
11
12
14
15
4 18
Research Abstracts
To view abstracts
in sequence, click
to go to next slide.
Click to proceed
Click on any
number (1, 2, 3,
etc.) in the full
model to the right
to go to that
abstract. To
return to this
map, click on the
button.

of 52
Patterns of drug use in a large metropolitan
workforce
Wayne E. K. Lehman and D. Dwayne Simpson
In Gust, Steven W. (Ed); Walsh, J. Michael (Ed); et-al. (1991). Drugs
in the workplace: Research and evaluation data, Vol. 2. NIDA research
monograph 100. (pp. 45-62). Rockville, MD, USA: US Department of
Health & Human Services
This report combines three different methods of assessing drug
and alcohol use prevalence in the workforce: (1) self-report,
(2) perceptions of use among coworkers, and (3) urine screens.
The report addresses five major aspects of drug use, including
alcohol, in the work setting of municipal employees. These
include (1) prevalence of drug use by employees while off-the-job
as well as while in the workplace, (2) employee
sociodemographic and background characteristics which are
related to drug use, (3) work environment characteristics which
are related to employee drug use, (4) employee performance
indicators which are related to drug use, and (5) validation of self-
reported drug use data via urinalysis.
PolicySubstance
Use
Group
Processes
Perceptions &
Attitudes
Workplace
Environment
Safety
Drinking
Climate
Enabling
Exposure to
Use
Tolerance
Social
Integration
Wellness
Team
Cohesion
Support
Policy
Risks Strengths
Abstract 1 1
A KeyFinding:
Self-reportsof
substanceuse correlate
withdrugtestresults.
First Abstract Click to proceed

of 52
Employee substance use and on-the-job behaviors
Wayne E. K. Lehman and D. Dwayne Simpson
Journal of Applied Psychology 1992 Jun; Vol 77(3): 309-321
Substance use and job behaviors were assessed in a sample of
municipal employees from a large city in the southwestern United
States. Job behaviors included psychological and physical
withdrawal, positive work behaviors, and antagonistic work
behaviors. Employees who reported substance use at or away
from work were found to more frequently engage in withdrawal
activities and antagonistic work behaviors than did nonusers,
although users and nonusers did not differ on positive work
behaviors. Hierarchical regression models were tested to
determine whether substance use contributed unique variance to
the prediction of job behaviors after controlling for variance
associated with personal and job background domains.
Substance use added unique variance to the prediction of
psychological and physical withdrawal behaviors but not to
positive or antagonistic work behaviors.
Policy
Group
Processes
Perceptions &
Attitudes
Workplace
Environment
Safety
Drinking
Climate
Enabling
Exposure to
Use
Tolerance
Social
Integration
Wellness
Team
Cohesion
Support
Policy
Risks Strengths
Abstract 2
Substance
Use
2
A KeyFinding:
Substanceuse correlates
withnegativejob
performance.
Click to proceed

of 52
Employee accidents: Influences of personal
characteristics, job characteristics, and substance
use in jobs differing in accident potential
Melvin L. Holcom, Wayne E. K. Lehman, and D. Dwayne Simpson
Journal of Safety Research, 1993 Win; Vol 24(4): 205-221
Assessed relationships between employee substance use and
accidents (i.e., injury and noninjury accidents) at work in a
sample of 1,325 municipal employees. A questionnaire was used
to gather self-reported information on general deviance, job
structure and job attitude, and personal drug and alcohol use at
and away from work. Ss were classified into low- and high-risk
job samples, and discriminant function analyses were computed
within job samples to classify Ss into "no accident" and "some
accident" classifications. Results indicate that Ss likely to have
accidents tended to have dysfunctional personal backgrounds
and reported that they were dissatisfied and tense at work.
Associating with substance-using peers, high levels of
depression, and low levels of religious service attendance were
characteristic of Ss who had accidents. Drug and alcohol use
were major discriminators of accident groups for the high-risk job
sample but not for the low-risk job sample.
Policy
Group
Processes
Perceptions &
Attitudes
Workplace
Environment
Safety
Drinking
Climate
Enabling
Exposure to
Use
Tolerance
Social
Integration
Wellness
Team
Cohesion
Support
Policy
Risks Strengths
Abstract 3
Substance
Use
3
A KeyFinding:
Substanceuse correlates
withaccidentsforsafety
jobs.
Click to proceed

of 52
Social categorization and the influence of drug
involvement on drug attitude structures:
Implications for assessing drug use and tolerance
in the workplace
Melvin L. Holcom, Wayne E. K. Lehman, and Charles C. Lord
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 1993 Dec; Vol 23(23): 1968-1988
A sample of 78 adults completed questionnaires assessing drug
attitude/involvement, a drug user similarity sorting task, and a
drug user profiling task. Data indicated that greater drug exposure
tended to foster more complex knowledge structures for drugs
and drug users as revealed by Ss' perceptions of drug users,
tolerance for drug use, and perceptions of drug seriousness.
Basically, high drug involvement in terms of personal alcohol use
and associating with illicit drug users was related to greater
individuation of drug user types. Therefore, high-involved Ss,
relative to low-involved Ss, were better able to discriminate
between different drug user subtypes, and drug user subtypes
were more important to high-involved Ss when responding to
drug-related survey items.
Policy
Group
Processes
Perceptions &
Attitudes
Workplace
Environment
Safety
Drinking
Climate
Enabling
Exposure to
Use
Tolerance
Social
Integration
Wellness
Team
Cohesion
Support
Policy
Risks Strengths
Abstract 4
Substance
Use
4
A KeyFinding:
Previousdruguse
influencesattitude
towardsubstance
users.
Click to proceed

of 52
Prediction of substance use in the workplace:
Unique contributions of personal background and
work environment variables
Wayne E. K. Lehman, David J. Farabee, Melvin L. Holcom, and
D. Dwayne Simpson
Journal of Drug Issues, 1995 Spr; Vol 25(2): 253-274
Assessed the relationships of personal and job factors with
substance use in municipal workers. 1,325 employees (aged
below 30 yrs and above 40 yrs) from 109 different workgroups
completed the "Employee Health and Performance in the
Workplace" questionnaire. Results indicated that both personal
and job domains significantly predict substance use at and away
from the workplace. Employees who use illicit drugs or other
drugs at work tend to be young, single males who do not attend
religious services regularly, have low self-esteem, an arrest
history, and have family members and friends with drug problems.
Further, drug users experience higher levels of job tension and
appear more estranged from work than nondrug users. They have
lower levels of job satisfaction, faith in management, job
involvement, and organizational commitment.
Policy
Group
Processes
Perceptions &
Attitudes
Workplace
Environment
Safety
Drinking
Climate
Enabling
Exposure to
Use
Tolerance
Social
Integration
Wellness
Team
Cohesion
Support
Policy
Risks Strengths
Abstract 5
Substance
Use
5
A KeyFinding:
Bothpersonaland
jobfactorspredict
substanceuse at
andawayfromwork.
Click to proceed

of 52
Employee attitude crystallization and substance
use policy: Test of a classification scheme
Joel B. Bennett and Wayne E. K. Lehman
Journal of Drug Issues, 1996, Vol. 26(4), 831-864
Previous research suggests that employees are often unaware of
or ambivalent toward substance abuse policies. These studies
focus on one policy component—drug-testing—and fail to
distinguish employees with clear (or crystallized) from unclear
attitudes. The current study explored a broader view of policy and
examined both personal and situational factors that may
determine attitudes. Survey data from employees in three
municipalities support a distinction among five attitude categories;
those who are: (a) dissatisfied with efforts to control employee
abuse, (b) satisfied, (c) anti-policy, (d) pro-policy, and (e)
uninformed. Discriminant analyses suggest that different profiles
characterize these attitude groups. For example, dissatisfied
employees report low personal alcohol use, high co-worker
alcohol use, and low self-referral whereas anti-policy employees
report high personal drug use, high co-worker use, and low job
identity. Discussion focuses on policy as a social construction and
the implications of attitude distinctions for employee training.
Policy
Group
Processes
Perceptions &
Attitudes
Workplace
Environment
Safety
Drinking
Climate
Enabling
Exposure to
Use
Tolerance
Social
Integration
Wellness
Team
Cohesion
Support
Policy
Risks Strengths
Abstract 6
Substance
Use
66
6
A KeyFinding:
Exposure toco-
workeruse is
associatedwithattitudes
toward
policy.
Click to proceed

of 52
Policy
Group
Processes
Perceptions &
Attitudes
Workplace
Environment
Safety
Drinking
Climate
Enabling
Exposure to
Use
Tolerance
Social
Integration
Wellness
Team
Cohesion
Support
Policy
Risks Strengths
Alcohol, antagonism, and witnessing violence in
the workplace: Drinking climates and social
alienation-integration
In VandenBos, Gary R. (Ed); Bulatao, Elizabeth Q. (Ed); et-al. (1996).
Violence on the job: Identifying risks and developing solutions. (pp.
105-152). Washington, DC, USA: American Psychological Association.
This chapter reviews the different areas of research [on alcohol
and aggression] / provides general background knowledge about
the alcohol-aggression relationship and workplace factors that
may be relevant to this relationship / focus in more on individual
alcohol use and subsequent aggression / reports an empirical
study that directly examines alcohol use within the work setting /
focus is more on the perceptions of drinking climates or drinking
norms at work / considers alcohol from 2 perspectives: it
discusses alcohol as it affects the individual aggression of
employees who drink and it studies the impact of coworker
drinking as it affects employee risk for witnessing violence / [Ss
were municipal workers randomly selected from the total city
workforce of 3 cities in the southwestern US]
Abstract 7
Substance
Use
7
7
A KeyFinding:
Drinkingclimates
Enhance thelike-
lihoodofworker
exposuretoviolence.
7
Click to proceed

of 52
Policy
Group
Processes
Perceptions &
Attitudes
Workplace
Environment
Safety
Drinking
Climate
Enabling
Exposure to
Use
Tolerance
Social
Integration
Wellness
Team
Cohesion
Support
Policy
Risks Strengths
Ethnic differences in the workplace environment by
employees in two municipal workforces
Jamie K. Forst and Wayne E. K. Lehman
Hispanic Journal of the Behavioral Sciences 1997 Feb; Vol 19(1): 84-96
Cultural scripts have been proposed to suggest that Hispanics will
respond differently than non-Hispanics when asked questions
about personal issues such as workplace attitudes. This study
evaluated self-report questionnaires between 2 samples of
Hispanic and non-Hispanic municipal employees regarding
productivity-related work behaviors, personal background variables,
and job climate variables. Sample 1 had 1,068 Ss (70% Hispanic,
20% Anglo, and 8% African-American, 64% male), and sample 2
consisted of 1,081 Ss (14% Hispanic, 55% Anglo, 29% African-
American, 63% male). Minimal evidence was found in either
sample to suggest systematic response differences based on
cultural scripts, and even less evidence to suggest that these
differences are moderated by gender. The authors discuss the
findings in terms of the acculturation level among Hispanic Ss.
Abstract 8
Substance
Use
8
8
A KeyFinding:
Hispanicworkers
reportedhigher
levelsofproblem
drinkingintwo
samples.
Click to proceed

of 52
Policy
Group
Processes
Perceptions &
Attitudes
Workplace
Environment
Safety
Drinking
Climate
Enabling
Exposure to
Use
Tolerance
Social
Integration
Wellness
Team
Cohesion
Support
Policy
Risks Strengths
From dual policy to dual attitudes:
The Social construction of substance use policy
Review of Public Personnel Administration, 1997; Vol 17(1): 58-83
Administrators of workplace substance use policies often
coordinate many components such as drug-testing, discipline,
EAP, and employee awareness. Analyses from two
municipalities (ns = 1,068, 1,081) indicated that employees who
most disfavor all policy components -- particularly drug-testing --
report higher frequencies of alcohol drunkenness. In contrast,
employees with the most punitive attitudes report the highest
levels of exposure to co-worker use. Finally, those who favor an
educative approach report higher levels of alcohol use but not
alcohol problems or drug use. Policy administrators are likely to
benefit from listening to and addressing these differences in
policy attitudes.
Abstract 9
Substance
Use
9
9
A KeyFinding:
Mostemployees
favorallaspects ofpolicy:
testing,
education,anddiscipline.
Click to proceed

of 52
Policy
Group
Processes
Perceptions &
Attitudes
Workplace
Environment
Safety
Drinking
Climate
Enabling
Exposure to
Use
Tolerance
Social
Integration
Wellness
Team
Cohesion
Support
Policy
Risks Strengths
Employee views of organizational wellness and the
EAP: Influence on substance use, drinking
climates, and policy attitudes
Employee Assistance Quarterly 1997; Vol 13(1): 55-71.
Examined the influence of organizational wellness and the Employee
Assistance Program (EAP) on substance use, and developed the
Organizational Wellness Scale (OWS) to assess perceptions of
healthy work climates. 799 city employees completed measures of
employee health and performance, EAP attitudes, the OWS, and
measures of personal substance use, work climate, and attitudes
toward policy. Employee views of organizational wellness correlated
significantly (negatively) with self-reports of substance use,
perceptions of personal and co-worker enabling of substance use, and
co-worker alcohol and drug use. Employees who perceived their
workplace as healthy also reported less personal and co-worker
substance use. Comparable relationships between EAP attitudes and
substance use were generally not as reliable or consistent. Employees
who said they would use or recommend the EAP reported less alcohol
use, personal enabling, co-worker enabling, and co-worker drinking.
Positive views of organizational wellness or the EAP were associated
with favorable attitudes toward substance use policy.
Abstract 10
Substance
Use
10
10
A KeyFinding:
Substanceuse may be
associated
withworkingin
anunhealthy
workclimate.
10
Click to proceed

of 52
Policy
Group
Processes
Perceptions &
Attitudes
Workplace
Environment
Safety
Drinking
Climate
Enabling
Exposure
to Use
Tolerance
Social
Integration
Wellness
Team
Cohesion
Support
Policy
Risks Strengths
Perceptions and correlates of co-worker
substance use
Wayne E. K. Lehman, David J. Farabee, and Joel B. Bennett
Employee Assistance Quarterly ,1998; Vol 13(4): 1-22.
Assessed data from 1,491 completed questionnaires of municipal
workers regarding co-worker substance use. Employee
perceptions and consequences of co-worker substance use were
assessed to (1) examine perceptions of co-worker use as
supplemental measures of substance use problems in
organizations, and (2) examine relationships with employee
perceptions and attitudes. Support was found for the hypothesis
that exposure to co-worker substance use is negatively associated
with job performance and attitudes. Results suggest the utility of
evaluating perceptions of co-worker substance use in
assessments of drug use in the workplace. Results have
implications for training and education programs, which should
emphasize substance use is a problem that extends beyond the
substance-using employee.
Abstract 11
Substance
Use
11
11
A KeyFinding:
Ratingsofco-
workeruse may
behelpfulin assessing
ratesof
prevalence.
Click to proceed

of 52
Policy
Group
Processes
Perceptions &
Attitudes
Workplace
Environment
Safety
Drinking
Climate
Enabling
Exposure to
Use
Tolerance
Social
Integration
Wellness
Team
Cohesion
Support
Policy
Risks Strengths
Workplace drinking climate, stress, and problem
indicators: Assessing the influence of teamwork
(group cohesion)
Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 1998 Sep; Vol 59(5): 608-618
Hypothesized that either exposure to co-worker drinking or the
presence of a drinking climate would positively correlate with reports of
stress and other problems. Following previous research, we also
predicted that work group cohesion (or team orientation) would buffer
against such problems. Two random samples totaling 1,977 municipal
employees completed anonymous surveys. These assessed individual
drinking, co-worker drinking, task-oriented group cohesion, the direct
reports of negative consequences due to co-worker substance use,
and 5 problem indicators: job stress, job withdrawal, health problems,
and performance (work accidents and absences). In each sample,
drinking climate correlated with stress and withdrawal more so than did
reports of individual drinking. Drinking climate and individual job stress
were negatively associated with cohesion. Drinking climate combined
with low cohesion resulted in increased vulnerability for all 5 problems.
Moreover, cohesion appeared to buffer the negative effects of drinking
climate.
Abstract 12
Substance
Use
12
12
A KeyFinding:
Group cohesionbuffers
againstthe
negativeeffects
ofdrinkingclimates.
Click to proceed

of 52
Policy
Group
Processes
Perceptions &
Attitudes
Workplace
Environment
Safety
Drinking
Climate
Enabling
Exposure to
Use
Tolerance
Social
Integration
Wellness
Team
Cohesion
Support
Policy
Risks Strengths
Change, transfer climate, and customer orientation:
A contextual model and analysis of
change-driven training
Joel B. Bennett , Wayne E. K. Lehman, and Jamie K. Forst
Group and Organization Management, 1999 Jun; Vol 24(2): 188-216
The success of large-scale or "paradigm change" training programs often
hinge on work climate factors that support transfer of training. Focus
groups (N = 70) and survey data from both trained (N = 564) and
untrained (N = 345) municipal employees were used to assess
perceptions related to change (e.g., role ambiguity) and transfer climate
that constrained or facilitated their use of Total Quality (TQ) training.
Employees who felt blocked from applying training reported significantly
less customer orientation than untrained employees, whereas those
reporting a helpful transfer climate reported significantly more customer
orientation than the untrained group. Regression analyses suggested that
controlling for contextual factors (e.g., department affiliation), both a
change and stress climate and, to a lesser extent, transfer climate (e.g.,
supervisor and coworker support) predicted customer orientation. Results
have implications for organizational development practitioners and
managers who seek to improve transfer of training in the midst of
organizational change and stress.
Abstract 13
Substance
Use
13
13
T
R
A
I
N
I
N
G
13
A KeyFinding:
A supportivetraining
climatecan bufferagainst
thenegativeeffectsof
stress.
Click to proceed

of 52
Policy
Group
Processes
Perceptions &
Attitudes
Workplace
Environment
Safety
Drinking
Climate
Enabling
Exposure to
Use
Tolerance
Social
Integration
Wellness
Team
Cohesion
Support
Policy
Risks Strengths
The relationship between problem coworkers and
quality work practices: A case study of exposure to
sexual harassment, substance abuse, violence and
job stress.
Work & Stress, 1999 Oct-Dec, 13(4), 299-311
The current study examined employees’ exposure to co-worker
behavioral problems (violence/hostility, sexual harassment, and
substance abuse) and organizational climate factors that support
total quality (TQM) work practices. Utilizing survey data from a
municipal organization (n = 764), regression analyses (a) assessed
whether exposure to problems was associated with climate
(teamwork, customer orientation, empowerment), and (b) compared
problem co-workers with other job stress indices (e.g., conflict,
strain). Analyses controlled for personal (e.g., job commitment) and
organizational factors. Relationships were found between employee
emotional reactions to witnessing violence/harassment and both
teamwork and empowerment. Job strain also correlated with
empowerment. Results suggest that researchers may benefit from
further study of co-worker exposure and from creating links between
behavioral risk management and quality work practices (TQM).
Abstract 14
Substance
Use
14
14
A KeyFinding:
Exposuretoproblemco-
workersmay hurt
performance(e.g.,
customerservice).
Click to proceed

of 52
Policy
Group
Processes
Perceptions &
Attitudes
Workplace
Environment
Safety
Drinking
Climate
Enabling
Exposure to
Use
Tolerance
Social
Integration
Wellness
Team
Cohesion
Support
Policy
Risks Strengths
Employee exposure to coworker substance use and
negative consequences: The moderating effects of work
group membership
Journal of Health and Social Behavior; 1999 Sep; Vol. 40(3): 307-322.
This study examined the relationship between individual exposure to
coworker substance use, and the moderating effects of work group
membership, and negative consequences resulting from exposure. A
Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM) was conducted across 2 samples of
male municipal employees (n = 650, 878; n = 50, 49 groups). Results
revealed that groups with higher proportions of jobs involving risk (e.g.,
machine work) and groups with a strong drinking climate were most
vulnerable to negative consequences under conditions of exposure.
Importantly, findings controlled for individual risk factors (e.g., personal
drinking, job stress). A discussion examines the implications of this study
for theory and policy related to workplace substance abuse.
Abstract 15
Substance
Use
15
15
15
A KeyFinding:
Workersingroupswith
safetysensitivejobsare
vulnerabletoco- worker
druguse.
Click to proceed

of 52
Policy
Group
Processes
Perceptions &
Attitudes
Workplace
Environment
Safety
Drinking
Climate
Enabling
Exposure to
Use
Tolerance
Social
Integration
Wellness
Team
Cohesion
Support
Policy
Risks Strengths
Team awareness for workplace substance abuse
prevention: The empirical and conceptual development
of a training program
Joel B. Bennett, Wayne E. K. Lehman and G. Shawn Reynolds
Prevention Science, 2000, Sept.. 1(3), 157-172
Describes the empirical and theoretical development of a training program
to help reduce/prevent employee alcohol and drug abuse and enhance
aspects of the work group environment that support ongoing prevention.
The paper (1) examines the changing social context of the workplace (e.g.,
teamwork, privacy issues) as relevant for prevention, (2) reviews studies
that assess risks and protective factors in employee substance abuse
(work environment, group processes, and employee attitudes), (3)
provides a conceptual model that focuses on work group processes
(enabling, neutralization of deviance) as the locus of prevention efforts, (4)
describes an enhanced team-oriented training that was derived from
previous research and the conceptual model, and (5) describes potential
applications of the program. The research and conceptual model may
help prevention scientists to assess the organizational context of any
workplace prevention strategy. The need for this team-oriented approach
may be greater among employees who experience risks such as
workplace drinking climates, social alienation, and policies that emphasize
deterrence (drug testing) over educative prevention.
Abstract 16
Substance
Use
16
16
16
16
Summary
Thispapersummarizes
thefullmodeldescribed
earlier.
Click to proceed

of 52
Policy
Group
Processes
Perceptions &
Attitudes
Workplace
Environment
Safety
Drinking
Climate
Enabling
Exposure to
Use
Tolerance
Social
Integration
Wellness
Team
Cohesion
Support
Policy
Risks Strengths
Workplace Substance Abuse Prevention and Help-
Seeking: Comparing a Team-Oriented and
Informational Training
Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 2001, 6 (3), 243-254
Employees fail to seek help for alcohol or drug (AOD) abuse
because of unhealthy work climates, stigma, and distrust in
employee assistance programs (EAP). To address such problems,
groups of municipal employees (n = 260) were randomly assigned
to two types of training: a 4-hour informational review of EAP and
policy, and an 8-hour training that embedded messages about
AOD reduction in the context of team-building and stress
management. Pre- and post-training and six-month follow-up
surveys assessed change. Group privacy regulation, EAP trust,
help-seeking and peer encouragement increased for team training.
Stigma of substance users decreased for information training.
EAP/policy knowledge increased for both groups. A control group
showed little change. Help-seeking and peer encouragement also
predicted EAP utilization. Integrating both team and informational
training may be the most effective for improving help-seeking and
utilization of the EAP.
Abstract 17
Substance
Use
T
R
A
I
N
I
N
G
17
17
17
A KeyFinding:
Teamtrainingcan
Improveemployee
willingnesstoseekhelp
forproblems.
Click to proceed

of 52
Policy
Group
Processes
Perceptions &
Attitudes
Workplace
Environment
Safety
Drinking
Climate
Enabling
Exposure to
Use
Tolerance
Social
Integration
Wellness
Team
Cohesion
Support
Policy
Risks Strengths
Team and Informational Trainings for Workplace
Substance Abuse Prevention
Wayne E. K. Lehman, G. Shawn Reynolds, and Joel B. Bennett
In J.B. Bennett, W.E.K. Lehman eds. Moving beyond drug testing: Recent
innovations in workplace substance abuse prevention. American
Psychological Association (in preparation).
A team-based training for workplace substance abuse prevention
was developed to increase the awareness of substance abuse as a
group problem rather than an individual event. Major objectives were
to examine and address the role that work group culture and social
dynamics play in enabling substance use and how use by any
member can negatively impact other workgroup members. This
training was implemented in two municipal workforces – one was
from a medium-sized city and included all city departments (except
for fire and police); the other was a larger city and the training was
implemented in three departments identified as at-risk for substance
abuse problems. An evaluation design compared the team training to
an informational training and a no-training control group using
random assignment of workgroups to condition and a pre-test/post-
test design. The results indicated that both trainings increased
awareness of the EAP and substance abuse policy. The team-based
training was successful at decreasing drinking climates at post-test
and a six-month follow-up in the at-risk departments.
Abstract 18
Substance
Use
T
R
A
I
N
I
N
G
18
18
18
18
A KeyFinding:
Teamtrainingmayreduce
thepresenceofdrinking
climatesinsome
situations.
Click to proceed

of 52
Policy
Group
Processes
Perceptions &
Attitudes
Workplace
Environment
Safety
Drinking
Climate
Enabling
Exposure to
Use
Tolerance
Social
Integration
Wellness
Team
Cohesion
Support
Policy
Risks Strengths
Abstract 19
Substance
Use
T
R
A
I
N
I
N
G
19
19
A KeyFinding:
Trainingimproved
supervisorwillingnessto
respondtoproblem
workers.
Supervisor tolerance-responsiveness to substance abuse
and workplace prevention training: use of a cognitive
mapping tool
Bennett, Joel B.; Lehman, Wayne E. K.
Health Education Research, 2002, 17 (1), 27-42.
Supervisor tolerance-responsiveness refers to the attitudes and behaviors
associated with either ignoring, or taking proactive steps with troubled
employees. Two studies were conducted to examine and improve
responsiveness to employee substance abuse. Study 1 examined
supervisor response to and tolerance of coworker substance use and ways
of interfacing with the Employee Assistance Program (EAP) in two
workplaces (ns = 244 and 107). These surveys suggested that engaging
supervisors in a dialogue about tolerance might improve willingness to use
the EAP. Study 2 was a randomized field experiment that assessed a team-
oriented training. This training adopted a cognitive mapping technique to
improve supervisor responsiveness. Supervisors receiving this training (n
= 29) were more likely to improve on several dimensions of responsiveness
than were supervisors who received a more didactic, l training (n =23), or a
no-training control group (n = 17). Procedures and maps from the mapping
activity are described. Results indicate that while tolerance of coworker
substance use inhibits EAP utilization, it may be possible to address this
tolerance using prevention training in the work-site.
Click to proceed

of 52
Job Risk and Employee Substance Use:
The Influence of Personal Background and Work
Environment Factors
Lehman, Wayne E. K.; Bennett, Joel B.;
American Journal of Alcohol and Drug Abuse, 2002 (in press)
Previous studies suggest that employees who work in jobs with physical
risk report more substance use than employees working in non-risky jobs.
This study examined the extent to which this relationship could be
explained by personal background, specifically general deviance, or work
characteristics (e.g., job stressors). Results from two worksites (ns = 943,
923) indicated that the relationship of job risk and alcohol problems could
be fully explained by personal characteristics, particularly deviant behavior
styles, but not by work characteristics. The relationship between job risk
and illicit drug use was not explained by either personal or job background
factors. Drinking climate also predicted substance use. Additional analyses
indicated significant interactions between variables that served as markers
for personal background (deviance) and environment (drinking climate).
Employees with more deviant characteristics were susceptible to substance
use when they worked in drinking climates or were exposed to coworker
drinking. These latter results support the use of workplace interventions
that target the social environment as a way to ameliorate the negative
effects of job-related risks for substance abuse.
Substance
Use
Policy
Group
Processes
Perceptions &
Attitudes
Workplace
Environment
Drinking
Climate
Enabling
Exposure to
Use
Tolerance
Wellness
Team
Cohesion
Support
Policy
Risks Strengths
Abstract 20
AKeyFinding:
Therelationshipbetween
employeedevianceand
substanceuse isstrongerin
highdrinkingclimates.
Last Abstract Last slide
Safety
Social
Integration20
20
20

of 52
Thanks for visiting;
please visit our materials
and training programs at

Team Awareness for Mental Well-Being in the Workplace: Original Theoretical Article

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Ähnlich wie Team Awareness for Mental Well-Being in the Workplace: Original Theoretical Article

Ähnlich wie Team Awareness for Mental Well-Being in the Workplace: Original Theoretical Article (20)

Mehr von Joel Bennett

Mehr von Joel Bennett (18)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Team Awareness for Mental Well-Being in the Workplace: Original Theoretical Article