1

CONFIDENTIEL

Feedback on an assessment of psychosocial risks in a large French industrial company

Emilie Dupret Julie Lebon

2

CONFIDENTIEL

Context

Major difficulties raised in a Department of a company : global project to improve andstandardize its practices in the prevention of Psychosocial Risks (sponsor: President)Around 5,000 employees in France spread over three sites

Creation of a multidisciplinary steering committee: launch of a call for tender to jointlychoose a service provider

3

CONFIDENTIEL

PROPOSED METHODOLOGY

4

CONFIDENTIEL

Different steps of the project

FOCUS GROUP & INDIVIDUAL INTERVIEWS

PSR SURVEY PRESENTATION OF RESULTS AND WORKING GROUPS

ON ACTION PLAN

5

CONFIDENTIEL

Planning of intervention

2018Se

ptem

bre2019

Oct

obre

Nov

embr

e

Déce

mbr

e

Mar

s

Avril

Févr

ier

Janv

ier

Mai

Juin

Sept

embr

e

Oct

obre

Août

Juill

et

Questionnaire PSR

3 weeks

Participation rate : 63%

21 presentations

of resultsLead by Preventis

• COMEX• CHSCTs• CODIs• Establishment

Feedbacks to employeesLead in interne*

• Written communication + video for overall results

• Declination by scope provided by managers

*Preventis on 2 Department

IN-DEPTH STUDY OF RESULTS AND DEVELOPMENT OF ACTION PLANS *

* For the 9 perimeters more particularly highlighted by the RPS survey

Outline scopingMeetings with the

managers and RHOP of each

sector

Framework withthe Project Manager

Early January

PSR MAPPING

Collection phase

• Focus group and individualinterviews

• 200 people met (managers and non-managers)

SamplingPreventis

CHSCT

Intermediatepresentations

at CHSCTsLead by

Preventis• Methodology• Raw proposals

fromparticipants

Workinggroups with

management

• Restitution of diagnoses

• 1st work on the action plan

Continuation of work and restitutions

internally insured

• Finalization of action plans

• Presentation of the action plans to the CHSCTs thenreturn to the employees

Follow-up of action plans

FEEDBACK TO COMEX

6

CONFIDENTIEL

Different steps of the project – STEP 1

PSR SURVEY

GOALSKEY POINTS

Collaborative and efficient multidisciplinary project group (respect for confidentiality, constructive exchanges, concerted decisions made by all members of the group)

Results widely shared (21 feedbacks to key players and communications to employees)

Suggested support for the units particularly highlighted by COPSOQ – 9 units selected

Fluid and constructive dialogue with Health and SafetyInspection and CARSAT (Pension and Occupational HealthInsurance Fund), who were in favor of the approach

• Have quantitative and shared indicatorsaround the professional experience of the company's employees

• Identify strengths and areas for improvement for the entire company

• Highlight the professional groups on which actions should be carried out as a priority

DELIVERABLES

PSR mapping

Highlighting the most / least satisfied groups

ATTE

NTION

Take into account the results of the othergroups in a logic of prevention

Guide managers in the appropriation of the results and the opening of the dialogue with the employees around the findings

7

CONFIDENTIEL

Different steps of the project – STEP 2

FOCUS GROUP & INDIVIDUAL INTERVIEWS

Approach invested by participants (managers and non-managers)

Specific framework appreciated by participants

Rich exchanges

Need to reassure certain groups to allow free expression (lack of confidence or visibility around the process)

• Get more precise results of the surveyon both positive and negative aspects to understand the origin

• Involve employees in the process and search for improvement actions

Consolidated PSR diagnosis by sector integrating the recommendations of workers and Preventis

Strong expectations of the follow-up givento the process with, for many, the fearexpressed that this work is vain or thattheir expression is blamed on them

GOALS

KEY POINTS

DELIVERABLESAT

TENTION

8

CONFIDENTIEL

Different steps of the project – STEP 3

RESTITUTION AND WORKING GROUPS AROUND THE ACTION PLAN

Confrontation with the formalization of employee experiencedifficult for stakeholders

Strong emotions expressed for those which require support from the company

Strong awareness for some and willingness to move forwardwith the collective

For others, difficulties to take into account and to accept the results, at this stage (feeling of injustice, of results dependent, perceptions opposed to those expressed by the employees on almost all the subjects, feeling of n ' have little or no room for maneuver, etc.)

Opening of the dialogue within the management

• Guide the exploration of the results and collect emotions

• Define the subjects to address and startthinking about the action plans

Overview of exchanges

Basis of actionManager's ability to take into account and acceptContinue the opening of the dialogue on this subject with the teamsMaintain momentum to sustain action plansInvolve all the stakeholders

GOALS

KEY POINTS

DELIVERABLESAT

TENTION

9

CONFIDENTIEL

SOME RESULTS

10

CONFIDENTIEL

Quantitative demands

WorkloadWork pace

Cognitive demands

AutonomyInfluence at work

Possibilities for development

Organisation&

Leadership

Predictability

Rewards

Role clarity

Organisational justice

Value conflicts

Quality of leadership of supervisor

Social support from supervisor

Confiance entre les salariés et le managementRelationships

betweencolleagues

Social support from colleagues

Trust and cooperation between colleagues

Professional experience

Commitment to the workplace

Satisfaction at work

Meaning of work

Health&

Wellness

Self-rated health

Emotional demands

Burnout

Stress Copsoq

Work / life conflicts

Job insecurity

Perceived stress scale

Legend

Significant difference veryunfavorable compared to the panel

Significant difference comparedto the panel

No significant difference / Similarexperience

Significant difference comparedto the panel

Significant difference veryfavorable compared to the panel

Comparison with Benchmark

11

CONFIDENTIEL

COPSOQ scales Grp1N=20

Grp2N= 70

Grp 3 N=133

Grp 4N=1 006

Grp 5N=51

Grp 6N=221

Grp 7N=614

Grp 8N=659

Grp 9N=72

Grp 10N=93

WorkloadWork paceCognitive demandsInfluence at workPossibilities for developmentPredictabilityRewardsRole clarityOrganisational justiceValue conflictsQuality of leadership of supervisorSocial support from supervisorConfiance entre les salariés et le managementSocial support from colleaguesTrust and cooperation between colleaguesCommitment to the workplaceSatisfaction at workMeaning of workSelf-rated healthEmotional demandsBurnout Stress CopsoqWork / life conflictsJob insecurityPerceived stress scale

Analysis by Directions - Summary of Results

12

CONFIDENTIEL

COPSOQ scales Grp 4AN=44

Grp 4BN=107

Grp 4CN=167

Grp 4DN=151

Grp 4E N=124

Grp 4FN=102

Grp 4GN=98

Grp 4HN=36

Grp 4IN=68

Grp 4JN=35

Grp 4HN=74

WorkloadWork paceCognitive demandsInfluence at workPossibilities for developmentPredictabilityRewardsRole clarityOrganisational justiceValue conflictsQuality of leadership of supervisorSocial support from supervisorConfiance entre les salariés et le managementSocial support from colleaguesTrust and cooperation between colleaguesCommitment to the workplaceSatisfaction at workMeaning of workSelf-rated healthEmotional demandsBurnout Stress CopsoqWork / life conflictsJob insecurityPerceived stress scale

Analysis by sub Directions - Group 4

13

CONFIDENTIEL

Methodology

Specific participatory approach for 1 sector

Participatory approach in 2 stepsGeneric approach, implemented for the majority of sectors in vigilance

• Focus Group, collective workshop (samelevel of hierarchy)

• In addition, individual interviews withmanagers

• Working group, with management andoperational Human Resources

Step 1 - Deepening the results of the survey

Step 2 - Development of the action plan

Group 3 – Deepening through individual interviews because ofthe relationship difficulties between colleagues known andconfirmed by the survey

14

CONFIDENTIEL

• 16 individual interviewsØ All the managers, non

managers and alternates weremet during an interview

• Restitution of the diagnosis (Directorof the service and HR)

• 1 day of seminar with the wholeteam (manager, non manager and alternates)

Ø Custom program co-built withthe Director

Ø Objectives: restitution of the results of the PSR diagnosis and get employees to becomeaware, to question themselvesin order to involve them in the implementation of the action plan

Perimeter Focus

Group 3

APPROACH

STRENGTHS• A heart of business that pleases• Latitude in the management of the agendas• The professionalism of the Director and the autonomy given in the

organization of working time

MAIN TRACKS OF ACTIONS *• Optimize the Organization to decompartmentalize management, promote

synergies and teamwork• Develop the knowledge of the professions and activities of everyone to

raise awareness and lead to a better consideration of the difficulties at different levels

• Reflect on the management of the activity to better anticipate, gain predictability to reduce the impact of the workload and the feeling of beingconstantly in the emergency

• (Re) establish spaces for dialogue between employees as well as betweenemployees and managers around the functioning of the Directorate, focusing on real work

• Develop skills to increase efficiency, support job transformations and recognize employees

• A lack of predictability and management of the activity impacting the workload

• An organization that does not favor cooperation and sharing between Poles• Relationship difficulties anchored between people• A destabilizing management mode• A lack of support in the rise of skills and developments

VIGILANT POINT

* Recommendations developed by Preventis based on the feelings expressed by the participants and their proposals for action; non-exhaustive list

15

CONFIDENTIEL

• 3 focus group non managers

• 1 focus group managers

• 3 entretiens individuelsØ Department heads

• Pre-return of diagnosis (responsibleand RRH establishment)

• 2 working sessions for the action planØ Line managers, department

heads, HR and manager

Perimeter Focus

Group 4B STRENGTHS• An attachment to the trades and the company• The autonomy left on the organization and work / life balance• A friendly working atmosphere, support and mutual support within the

services

MAIN TRACKS OF ACTIONS *• Conduct a reflection to optimize the planning and control of the load• Define and communicate the Department's strategy to enable employees to

subscribe to a shared line of conduct and better identify the priorities and management of the activity carried out

• Reinstitute a managerial dynamic and put team management in the prioritiesof managers

• Valuing the work of employees in particular through individual and collective feedback (positive for the successes and constructive for the areas of improvement), through taking into account feedback and involvingemployees

• Clarify HR procedures and rules in place to reduce feelings of unfairness

• High workload and pace• Silo work (lack of synergy between services and between managers)• A lack of visibility on the medium and long term objectives• A feeling of lack of recognition and a communication experienced as devaluing• Managerial positioning (clarity of roles, alignment, modes of communication)• A feeling of unfairness

VIGILANT POINT

APPROACH

* Recommendations developed by Preventis based on the feelings expressed by the participants and their proposals for action; non-exhaustive list