IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i24p12872-d696577.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Co-Creating an Occupational Health Intervention within the Construction Industry in Sweden: Stakeholder Perceptions of the Process and Output

Author

Listed:
  • Emma Cedstrand

    (Unit of Occupational Medicine, Institute for Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, Sweden)

  • Helle Mølsted Alvesson

    (Department of Global Public Health, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, Sweden)

  • Hanna Augustsson

    (Procome Research Group, Medical Management Centre, Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, Sweden)

  • Theo Bodin

    (Unit of Occupational Medicine, Institute for Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, Sweden
    Center of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Stockholm Region, 113 65 Stockholm, Sweden)

  • Erika Bodin

    (Unit of Occupational Medicine, Institute for Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, Sweden)

  • Anna Nyberg

    (Unit of Occupational Medicine, Institute for Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, Sweden
    Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Uppsala University, 751 22 Uppsala, Sweden)

  • Gun Johansson

    (Unit of Occupational Medicine, Institute for Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, Sweden
    Center of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Stockholm Region, 113 65 Stockholm, Sweden)

Abstract

One way to prevent work-related stress, is to implement primary occupational health interventions aimed at improving the psychosocial work environment. However, such interventions have shown a limited effect, often due to implementation failure and poor contextual fit. Co-creation, where researchers, together with end-users and other relevant stakeholders, develop the intervention is increasingly encouraged. However, few studies have evaluated the effects of co-created interventions, and participants’ experience of the co-creation process. This is one of the first studies evaluating stakeholder perceptions of co-creating an occupational health intervention. We applied a thematic analysis, with data from 12 semi-structured interviews with stakeholders involved in the co-creation. Our results show that the respondents, in general, were satisfied with engaging in the co-creation, and they reported an increased awareness regarding risk factors of stress and how these should be handled. Additionally, the respondents described trust in the intervention activities and a good fit into the context. The study indicates that co-creating occupational health interventions can enhance the implementation and the contextual fit.

Suggested Citation

  • Emma Cedstrand & Helle Mølsted Alvesson & Hanna Augustsson & Theo Bodin & Erika Bodin & Anna Nyberg & Gun Johansson, 2021. "Co-Creating an Occupational Health Intervention within the Construction Industry in Sweden: Stakeholder Perceptions of the Process and Output," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(24), pages 1-14, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:24:p:12872-:d:696577
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/24/12872/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/24/12872/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Emma Cedstrand & Anna Nyberg & Sara Sanchez-Bengtsson & Magnus Alderling & Hanna Augustsson & Theo Bodin & Helle Mölsted Alvesson & Gun Johansson, 2021. "A Participatory Intervention to Improve the Psychosocial Work Environment and Mental Health in Human Service Organisations. A Mixed Methods Evaluation Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-19, March.
    2. Bozana Arapovic-Johansson & Irene Jensen & Charlotte Wåhlin & Christina Björklund & Lydia Kwak, 2020. "Process Evaluation of a Participative Organizational Intervention as a Stress Preventive Intervention for Employees in Swedish Primary Health Care," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-20, October.
    3. Marie E. Ward & Aoife De Brún & Deirdre Beirne & Clare Conway & Una Cunningham & Alan English & John Fitzsimons & Eileen Furlong & Yvonne Kane & Alan Kelly & Sinéad McDonnell & Sinead McGinley & Brend, 2018. "Using Co-Design to Develop a Collective Leadership Intervention for Healthcare Teams to Improve Safety Culture," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-17, June.
    4. W. H. Voorberg & V. J. J. M. Bekkers & L. G. Tummers, 2015. "A Systematic Review of Co-Creation and Co-Production: Embarking on the social innovation journey," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(9), pages 1333-1357, October.
    5. Jermaine M Ravalier & Elaine Wainwright & Nina Smyth & Oliver Clabburn & Paulina Wegrzynek & Mark Loon, 2020. "Co-Creating and Evaluating an App-Based Well-Being Intervention: The HOW (Healthier Outcomes at Work) Social Work Project," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-15, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Malene Friis Andersen & Karina Nielsen & Jeppe Zielinski Nguyen Ajslev, 2021. "The Relational Fit in Organizational Interventions—What Can Organizational Research Learn from Research in Psychotherapy?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(15), pages 1-12, July.
    2. Tania Pearce & Myfanwy Maple & Anthony Shakeshaft & Sarah Wayland & Kathy McKay, 2020. "What is the Co-Creation of New Knowledge? A Content Analysis and Proposed Definition for Health Interventions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-18, March.
    3. Maarten Houben & Rens Brankaert & Gail Kenning & Berry Eggen & Inge Bongers, 2020. "The Perspectives of Professional Caregivers on Implementing Audio-Based Technology in Residential Dementia Care," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(17), pages 1-19, August.
    4. Petteri Repo & Kaisa Matschoss, 2019. "Social Innovation for Sustainability Challenges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-12, December.
    5. Wynen, Jan & Boon, Jan & Kleizen, Bjorn & Verhoest, Koen, 2020. "How multiple organizational changes shape managerial support for innovative work behavior : Evidence from the Australian Public Service," Other publications TiSEM 4f721d76-0c44-4d72-a494-9, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    6. Philippe BANCE & Marie-J. BOUCHARD & Dorothea GREILING, 2022. "Conclusions and Directions for further Research," CIRIEC Studies Series, in: Philippe BANCE & Marie-J. BOUCHARD & Dorothea GREILING & CIRIEC (ed.), New perspectives in the co-production of public policies, public services and common goods, volume 3, chapter 0, pages 259-274, CIRIEC - Université de Liège.
    7. Benoît Desmarchelier & Faridah Djellal & Faïz Gallouj, 2018. "Public Service Innovation Networks (PSINs): Collaborating for Innovation and Value Creation," Working Papers halshs-01934275, HAL.
    8. Filippetti, Andrea & Vezzani, Antonio, 2022. "The political economy of public research, or why some governments commit to research more than others," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    9. Anne Seneca Terkelsen & Christian Tolstrup Wester & Gabriel Gulis & Jørgen Jespersen & Pernille Tanggaard Andersen, 2022. "Co-Creation and Co-Production of Health Promoting Activities Addressing Older People—A Scoping Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(20), pages 1-20, October.
    10. Vassallo, Jarrod P. & Banerjee, Sourindra & Zaman, Hasanuzzaman & Prabhu, Jaideep C., 2023. "Design thinking and public sector innovation: The divergent effects of risk-taking, cognitive empathy and emotional empathy on individual performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    11. Tânia Martins & Alexandra Braga & Marisa R. Ferreira & Vítor Braga, 2022. "Diving into Social Innovation: A Bibliometric Analysis," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-18, April.
    12. Pwint Kay Khine & Jianing Mi & Raza Shahid, 2021. "A Comparative Analysis of Co-Production in Public Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-13, June.
    13. Manuel Alméstar & Sara Romero-Muñoz & Nieves Mestre & Uriel Fogué & Eva Gil & Amanda Masha, 2023. "(Un)Likely Connections between (Un)Likely Actors in the Art/NBS Co-Creation Process: Application of KREBS Cycle of Creativity to the Cyborg Garden Project," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-25, May.
    14. Roberto Vivona & Mehmet Akif Demircioglu & David B. Audretsch, 2023. "The costs of collaborative innovation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 873-899, June.
    15. Alessandro Piperno & Christian Iaione & Luna Kappler, 2023. "Institutional Collective Actions for Culture and Heritage-Led Urban Regeneration: A Qualitative Comparative Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-22, May.
    16. Benoît Desmarchelier & Faridah Djellal & Faïz Gallouj, 2018. "Public service innovation networks (PSINs): an instrument for collaborative innovation and value co-creation in public service(s)," Working Papers halshs-01934284, HAL.
    17. Tan, Wee-Liang & Zuckermann, Ghil'ad, 2021. "External impetus, co-production and grassroots innovations: The case of an innovation involving a language," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    18. Juliet Carpenter & Christina Horvath & Ben Spencer, 2021. "Co-Creation as an agonistic practice in the favela of Santa Marta, Rio de Janeiro," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 58(9), pages 1906-1923, July.
    19. Ratten, Vanessa & da Silva Braga, Vitor Lélio & da Encarnação Marques, Carla Susana, 2021. "Sport entrepreneurship and value co-creation in times of crisis: The covid-19 pandemic," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 265-274.
    20. Marta Irene DeLosRíos-White & Peter Roebeling & Sandra Valente & Ines Vaittinen, 2020. "Mapping the Life Cycle Co-Creation Process of Nature-Based Solutions for Urban Climate Change Adaptation," Resources, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-26, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:24:p:12872-:d:696577. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.