Scholarlink

<p>Psychosocial hazards in the workplace are gaining global attention, with many jurisdictions introducing regulatory frameworks and guidelines. However, little is known about how these are implemented in practice, particularly across different business sizes.&#xa0;This cross-sectional online survey of 217 NSW businesses, completed by business representatives, most of whom self-identified as key Work Health and Safety (WHS) decision makers (67.3%), examined how small and medium–large businesses differ in their familiarity with the <i>Code of Practice: Managing Psychosocial Hazards at Work</i>, implementation activities, knowledge, barriers, and support needs. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics, and open-text responses were thematically analysed.&#xa0;Clear size-related disparities were observed. Respondents from medium–large businesses were significantly more familiar with the Code and reported undertaking more psychosocial risk-management actions than small businesses. Across all businesses, implementation activity remained low: fewer than one-third had undertaken a psychosocial risk assessment (28.6%) or implemented hazard controls (24.0%). Barriers differed by size, with respondents from small businesses more often citing limited knowledge, financial constraints, and competing priorities, while respondents from medium-large businesses reported organisational complexity and variable managerial commitment.&#xa0;Findings highlight a persistent implementation gap in psychosocial risk management, with small businesses facing distinct capacity constraints and unclear expectations compared to larger organisations. Participants expressed strong demand for practical, low-burden resources that translate regulatory intent into feasible action. Intermediary organisations are well placed to support this process, but their effectiveness will depend on adequate resourcing, coordination, and evaluation.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Size-based Disparities in Workplace Psychosocial Hazard Management: An Australian Study of Implementation Activity

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年3月12日

查看全文
  • Kristy Burns,
  • Louise A. Ellis,
  • Abilio De Almeida Neto,
  • Josephine Y. Chau,
  • Janaki Amin

摘要

Psychosocial hazards in the workplace are gaining global attention, with many jurisdictions introducing regulatory frameworks and guidelines. However, little is known about how these are implemented in practice, particularly across different business sizes. This cross-sectional online survey of 217 NSW businesses, completed by business representatives, most of whom self-identified as key Work Health and Safety (WHS) decision makers (67.3%), examined how small and medium–large businesses differ in their familiarity with the Code of Practice: Managing Psychosocial Hazards at Work, implementation activities, knowledge, barriers, and support needs. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics, and open-text responses were thematically analysed. Clear size-related disparities were observed. Respondents from medium–large businesses were significantly more familiar with the Code and reported undertaking more psychosocial risk-management actions than small businesses. Across all businesses, implementation activity remained low: fewer than one-third had undertaken a psychosocial risk assessment (28.6%) or implemented hazard controls (24.0%). Barriers differed by size, with respondents from small businesses more often citing limited knowledge, financial constraints, and competing priorities, while respondents from medium-large businesses reported organisational complexity and variable managerial commitment. Findings highlight a persistent implementation gap in psychosocial risk management, with small businesses facing distinct capacity constraints and unclear expectations compared to larger organisations. Participants expressed strong demand for practical, low-burden resources that translate regulatory intent into feasible action. Intermediary organisations are well placed to support this process, but their effectiveness will depend on adequate resourcing, coordination, and evaluation.