We are organizing a JCQ 2.O International Workshop

September 4 and 5th at 3rd ICOH

MEASURING COMPLEX SOCIAL JOB DEMANDS IN THE GLOBAL ECONOMY AND SERVICE/INFORMATION SOCIETY

Workshop Discussion Contributions Accepted


 

At the 3rd ICOH 2008 in Quebec, we can look forward to the results of the multiple Chinese-site JCQ 2.0 Proto-pilot #2 and comparisons with Korean Pilot #1 results in a scientific symposium, a new JCQ 2 theory base from a revised Demand/Control model.



And: we are organizing a JCQ 2.O International Workshop, September 4 and 5th: Measuring multi-level complex social job demands in the global economy and service/information society.

We have discussed JCQ 2.0 Macro-Decision Latitude areas (with macro-support and job insecurity), developed new scales in this area, and now report the results in the Chinese Pilot a study. However, for Demand scales we have held less comprehensive discussions (although a new emotional demand scale is part of the Chinese pilot).



Thus, a JCQ International Workshop discussion on Job Demands is the last remaining intellectual step before a final version of JCQ 2.0.  With a final JCQ 2.0 comes the possibility of 35 countries using a completely consistent and theoretically updated job stress questionnaire, formatted for easy international comparisons.  Thus, this is a critical next step we must really take. Pilot testing new Demands question, a final board review of all Pilot results, and a concluding JCQ 2.0 International Workshop, all sometime next year, would then conclude the international discussion process begun in 2002.



The enclosed Discussion Set-Up memo outlines some of the basis for this discussion, and attempts to make the best argument that a new discussion really is needed here.   The memo is a bit provocative: claiming that our previous approaches here are NOT sufficient to capture the complex work demand requirements of the global economy and service/information societies.



You will all be able to see that this discussion opens "new territory" and thus it remains an open question whether we will succeed in develop JCQ-like questions for this challenge. But it is a necessary step.



Please read the "Discussion Set-Up Memo" and see if you are "provoked" to attend. We hope so. The outcome for this short JCQ workshop should, hopefully, be a new set of recommendations in the job demands areas.



The spread and extension of a global economy with few protective social structures increases coping challenges for many workers all over the globe. The extension of social services in the developed economies, and the "information society" provide complex new social job demands. A variety of theoretical expansions and understandings of complex social behavior also imply the need for a new look at demands scales, as do statistical, and comparative analysis of demand scale properties. New conceptions of work demands, as structured by the revised, "Associationist" Demand/Control model (Stress-Disequilibrium-based: "Low Social Control...," paper attached) can - potentially - theoretically accommodate such new dynamic changes, and multiple levels of stressors and control. However, how these conceptions would be translated into practical assessment tools requires a broad new discussion.



Please review the enclosed attachments for more information on the JCQ International Workshop.  We hope to see you there!



RSVP: If you plan to attend the workshop, please send notification to Sandra Gibson below before August 18th, since Workshop attendance is usually limited.



If you would like further information please contact:



Sandra Gibson

JCQ Center

Phone: 978-934-3348

Email: jcqcenter@uml.edu





Workshop Contributions



Because this topic covers new materials, we are accepting contributions from researchers and doctoral students to assist in providing Background materials for the discussion.  This would consist of a 5 to 10 minute presentation covering the following topics:

a)      Provide a case study from your own actual work environment research experience, which illuminates the real work settings which contribute to "complex, multilevel demand work demands" - in our new economic situations.  This could also be provided in a written format, no longer than two or three paragraphs, for use in the Workshop discussions.

b)      Provide a brief scholarly review of the main points from a research field related to complex social work demands, interpreted in a manner which emphasizes their relevance for the multi-level work demands topic.  The fields that could be relevant, but which are not normally mastered by JCQ researchers, could include, for example, additional review of materials relating to complex animal social behavior (a la the enclosed New York Times article), or areas of current psychological interest which imply complex social demands such as "emotional intelligence."  In all cases this review would be used to build a background of relevant, short inputs for our discussion focused on complex social work demands.

c)      Provide empirical findings from new studies or pilot studies to show new scale structures and risk/disease associations in this area.





If you are interested in making a contribution please contact:

Bong Kyoo Choi

JCQ Center

E-mail:  bongkyoo@hotmail.com







Proposed Agenda

JCQ International Workshop




September 4, 2008 ~4:30 to 6:00 pm



A.      Initial background presentations  (a lot for this short time period):

a)      Workshop Challenge: Complex social job demands in the global economy and service/information society.

b)      Short summary: the state of our Korean/Chinese pilot information in other scale areas.

c)      Some statistical findings relating to the current 5-item demand scale, and the new scale supplements in pilot studies,

d)      Some orientation talks on theoretical background literature suitable to frame our thoughts in the "complex social demands" directions.



September 5th: 8:30 to 12:30 pm



B.      Main Discussion: Complex, Multi-level Social Job Demands - Breakout Groups.  We organize groups with the following related sub-goals, bridging our current research themes with these new social challenges and potentially broader theoretical constructions. These answers the Workshop's main question: what is it we should try to measure in these new demand areas?  We set up goals for a set of four working sub-groups (an alternative list may be developed). For example:

a)      Multiple-level "quantitative demands" (a la Marx's labor intensification) - related to new global economic production structures or service/economy information structures.

b)      Multi-level demands of emotional labor, social support, hostility - related to new global economic production structures or service/economy information structures.

c)      Multi-level demands of human relations personal politics - related to new global economic production structures or service/economy information structures.

d)      Multi-level demands of job insecurity, boundarylessness, and unpredictability - related to new global economic production structures or service/economy information structures.



  - Coffee Break: 10:15 - 10:45 -



C.      Main Discussion: Complex, Multi-level Social Job Demands: The Best Approach - Plenary.  This plenary discussion to developing an integrated idea from these four group contributions. What shall we try to measure?
D.      Working Lunch: (12:30 to 1:00 pm): Practical Steps toward the Final JCQ 2.0

a)      Assignment of Working Group to develop new demand questions for a JCQ 2.0 Proto-Pilot #3.

b)      What site will volunteer for Pilot #3?

E.      Post-Lunch (1:15 to 2:45 pm):  Conclusion of Macro Decision Latitude Pilot Studies. Discussion of Macro Decision Latitude and Social Support Findings from Pilot # 1 and #2 in Korea and China

a)      1:15 to 1:45  Extended presentations of findings from Korea and Chinese Proto-Pilots #1 and #2

b)      1:45 to 2:45  General Discussion: Toward the final JCQ 2.0 Macro-Decision Latitude and Macro-Social Support / Job Security scales

F.      Workshop Concludes 2:45 pm







Discussion Set-Up Memo: Rationale for a New Approach to Job Demands



Workshop Goal:  Measuring complex, multi-level social job demands in the global economy and service/information society

            The existing JCQ 1.x Psychological Demand scales may not optimally measure complex social demands in the global economy, nor demands of the service/information society. So how then shall we improve the JCQ demands scales theoretically and methodologically to address these challenges, as we move to complete the JCQ 2.0?



Finding this answer is the goal of the Workshop.



I. The traditional work demand models vs. the "New Work" JCQ 1.x Psychological Demand Scale questions such as "work hard, work fast, not enough time" are traditional quantitative demand measures - assessing the amount of arousal or engagement per unit of time - they are a type of "labor intensification" measure. However, consider, for example, the new types of demands in this "New Work" situation in the current global economy. The issue is not really task-related intensification:

You're "always ready" to find a new job if "something big" in is your economic picture changes - and this can happen with every price change, new product introduction, new trading rule, every expansion of market, each regulatory change etc., etc.  Your job's requirement is to "continually improve:" there is never a real limit for a fair day's work. You never have a guarantee of a sphere of time for relaxation nor a guarantee of time for family (with family problems becoming a new source of stress).

This new situation certainly implies a very different "work demand model" than that applying to agrarian peasants - with its physical demands and insecurity relating to natural forces - relevant for the last many thousand of years of human social history.  It is also very different than the last two hundred years of industrialization - and its labor demands - and Marx's "brute intensification" model applied to this economy.  Indeed both Marx and the 19th century capitalist economists argued that all work is reduced to unskilled repetitive operations and that workers were always on the edge of physical subsistence; pushed to the maximum. Thus the only issue of concern was the quantity of such homogenous human activity (and it was to be the maximum physiologically sustainable).



In these historically important models, there was no meaningful differentiation in labor quality (quality is "zero"), or of skills level, or certainly of any social relational complexity burden on the worker.  Indeed, of course, these models are still very much relevant in the contemporary world in many less developed countries - and in fact the agrarian labor model would have fit the vast majority of the world's population barely more a century ago.   Both describe demands in economic structures that offered major steps in human progress away from the uncertainties of the "statue of nature" in past times. But these forms of understanding seem no longer to be enough.  Our new situation throws us back again to the state of nature, but in a very different way (albeit with an over-abundance of calories guaranteed in the diet).



Think about this aspect of the state of nature: every day the wolf must look for its breakfast - perhaps catching a rabbit or a squirrel.  There is no breakfast for the sleepy wolf that lays back and says: "Well, I think I'll just take my usual stroll around the tree and see of something comes my way."  The need is for constant vigilance and skills constantly reading for the maximum, supremely coordinated effort - to sustain the nutrient "flows" the wolf must have to survive (this is also true for the rabbit and the squirrel). However, - in nature - natural rhythms limit these vigilant conditions to specific times of the day, or certain seasons of the year. Our global economy seems have no such nature-based limitations.

II. Even our so-called New Demand Scale concepts are probably insufficient - including those included the current JCQ 2.0 Proto- Pilots - and do not pick up these important new demands. For example:

1. Extensification:   Tage Kristensen and colleagues have claimed that intensification of labor must be supplemented by "extensification of labor" - more working hours, and related issues.  But this has not been enough in our epidemiological surveys (which often do add working hours, or a shift work component).  While these are important additions, they do not capture the major social complexity of the New Work.



2. Hostility and social support.  There are certainly current suggestions for assessing social demands. Of course a significant aspect of stress related moderation of an individual's stress response may occur via "social support buffering" mechanisms and these are indeed assessed with the JCQ already.  Also, new additions within the JCQ 2.0 Pilots have added collective social support - again bolstering the individual's defense against larger organization structure exploitation. Also hostility can and has been measured.  However, hostility may not be a personal antipathy so much as a reflection of an underlying conflict in social roles and optimal behaviors. So then how should these underlying structural "demands" be understood and assessed? And while also important, may also not be an exhaustive metric for the demands of complex new social relationships at work.



3. Emotional demands. Emotional demand scales are indeed also included as a component of the JCQ 2 Pilot studies.  But assessment of the challenges of hiding or managing feelings toward clients may again not be a sufficiently general formulation to capture a large portion of the burden of complex social demands.



However, if neither Marx's "brute labor intensity," nor labor extensification, nor hostility, nor emotional demands are sufficient, then how shall we define work demands conceptually?  And how shall we discuss such an intellectual gap in a short JCQ Workshop?   This is a much less structured question - in its present form - than the questions addressed by past JCQ Workshops.  However, it is also the only remaining intellectual discussion hurdle to be overcome before JCQ 2.0 is complete.  Thus, we should take this chance to move quickly forward.  (Of course - in practical terms there are further steps to follow this intellectual progress:  new demand questions must be pilot tested, all three pilot tests must be reviewed by the JCQ Board, and then a recommended final JCQ 2.0 must be accepted by the JCQ User's in many countries).
               Below, we offer two "straw-man" Rejected Scenarios, I and II, and then real Proposal: III.  The rejected scenarios are close-at-hand approaches, easy to relate to existing literature - but not giving us really broad new answers. Strategy III is the proposal advanced for this workshop.

REJECT FOR WORKSHOP:

Strategy I: A long list of different types of work demands;

Diverse vocabularies for work demands: mental workload, mental demands, mental efforts, external efforts, internal efforts, psychological work demands, quantitative overload, qualitative underload, physical demands, cognitive demands, intellectual demands, sensorial demands, emotional demands, emotional labor, social demands, work/family conflict, work/social life conflict, etc.  This does give us a long list, but not much conceptual coherence, and what we can mainly conclude is that among experts/researchers there are large variations in definitions of work demands. While this is of importance in itself -it does not give us a new JCQ 2.0, nor a clear path toward Workshop Agenda


Strategy II: 
Categorization by general type of capability required for the work task.
             Here demands could be assessed in these categories (for example see, Welford, 1976):

(a) physical demands,

(b) sensorial demand (requiring attention and alertness; vigilance);

(c) emotional demand (requiring emotional control/hiding);

(d) cognitive demands (requiring cognitive skills; judgment /problem-solving/coordination).


Partly this has already been done in the current JCQ (ie, physical demand scales). Also  some of the sensorial and cognitive demands scale measures tried have appeared not to work well in epidemiological studies, possibly because the close correlations with beneficial decision altitude job aspects appears to cancel "demand" effects. This approach does not cover the new challenges above. There are new types of complex social demands that are not well assessed.

PROPOSE FOR WORKSHOP: 

Strategy III:  Assess complex, multilevel social demands

Complex, multilevel social demands reflect needs for the individual to secure advantages when many, potentially competitive social groups are involved. Such demands occur ever more frequently in the global economy and service/information economy. This is an economy where you are "always ready to find a new job, and never have a special space for relaxation, never a guaranteed for family time, never a true limit on job requirements,..

The new global economy's "demand" is to keep many levels of social skills in a constant state of readiness -so that the individual feels securely prepared to maintain the necessary "constant state of flows of resources" - whatever the situation (see attached Stress-Disequilibrium theory paper). Also required is constant improvement in the ability to coordinate these multiple skills into effective unified environmental response - in a state of constant global competition.  Consider these typical new challenges, for example:

a.       The Personal Politician: As BK Choi has noted: the advice to Koreans seeking a good job is always to maintain your best human relationship at work and among contacts - always be a "politician".  The demand is for creation and maintenance of favorable human network/relationships (requiring conscientious efforts to build and maintain the network/relationship for getting a job done effectively, or to maintain or increase status in an organization); (see NYT article:" Political Animals...") Collective goals may also be served: continuously management human networks or strengthening the group or collectivity - The Social Politician.

b.      The Communicator: the demand is for good communication skills (transfer information effectively and efficiently to the counterpart; exemplary occupations: news media anchors; social organizers).

c.       The Negotiator: the demand here is to gain advantage in directly competitive social contests. The requirement for the Workshop is then to describe the multiple levels of mental function, social judgment, and coordination of mental resources which must be summoned simultaneously in a highly integrated manner in the social situation above.  The Stress- Disequilibrium theory, while admittedly quite abstract (see attached paper; SJWEH Suppl 6, August 2008) discusses two general ideas which could be a critical help for mapping a the multi-level aspect for
these demands:
(a)  How complex, multi-level social capabilities are created, and must constantly be re-created.
(b) How "demands" are met as these resources are expended.



How to measure these New Demands?
             A major question is how we could capture these new demands by a short series of questions.  Could this be done - via simple key words - as now occurs for the JCQ questions?   One conclusion of this discussion maybe that, however, important, thus new materials cannot fit into a JCQ-like format.



Please review the attached documents. We hope to see you at his upcoming workshop!