Skip to main content

If your eyes glaze over when you hear the phrase "work-life balance," you can't be blamed for being an insensitive brute - at least, not at first. In many workplaces, this overused expression is second only to "thinking outside the box" in meaning anything you want. But I bet you'd snap to attention if you saw twice as many employees taking disability leave since the arrival of a new manager obsessed with benchmarks.

A connection between bad bosses and bad health has long been suspected but has been hard to confirm. Now, new research shows that a manager's approach to work-life balance predicts just how likely his or her employees are to have a heart attack or a stroke - catastrophic events that cost $25-billion a year, according to the Conference Board of Canada.

That sum includes disability benefits, hospital care and drugs, but doesn't come close to measuring the human costs - the family relationships, expertise, and human capital lost when an employee burns out or, worse, dies prematurely.

Story continues below advertisement

Ratios of two to six times the likelihood of multiple cardiovascular risk factors were found in workers whose managers were rigid about work-family conflicts, according to the study, published by Lisa Berkman, a professor of epidemiology at Harvard University; Orfeu Buxton, a neuroscientist at Harvard Medical School; and their colleagues.

The study of almost 400 health-care workers and their managers found that inflexible managerial practices predicted - with startling accuracy - the cardiovascular status and sleep patterns of staff.

"Managers who think that work is work and home is home, and that employees must leave family issues at home when they come to work," are the ones most likely to put employees at risk, Dr. Buxton said. "We think that inflexible managers are causing them [the employees]to sleep less, and that also increases their cardiovascular risk."

Workers who were supervised by inflexible managers were twice as likely to accumulate multiple risk factors as other employees, and the odds increased to six times the risk for those working directly with patients. The manager and employees worked in nursing homes, which Dr. Buxton calls a "boom industry" that is sure to grow in size and in the range of demands placed on staff in coming years.

Other research also links workplace pressures to heart disease. A 15-year Danish study of 12,000 nurses found that the more the nurses struggled with inflexible schedules and managers, the more likely they were to have a heart attack. Interestingly, the danger was most acute for nurses under 50.

The question is what to do with this volatile information, especially at a time when many people -workers and employers alike -feel it's a privilege simply to be employed. Given the massive costs involved, doing nothing is riskier than teaching managers how to help their employees. And training programs need not be expensive.

In a 2008 issue of the Harvard Business Review, for example, Ellen Ernst Kossek, a professor of organizational behaviour at Michigan State University, described training supermarket managers on how to provide support to staff. She found that a 30-minute computer tutorial followed by a 75-minute, face-to-face discussion with managers was all it took to improve blood pressure levels, heart rates, quality of sleep and job attitudes in their employees.

Story continues below advertisement

Some might call that thinking outside the box. I call it a good idea.



Susan Pinker is a psychologist and author of The Sexual Paradox: Extreme Men, Gifted Women and the Real Gender Gap.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Comments

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • All comments will be reviewed by one or more moderators before being posted to the site. This should only take a few moments.
  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed. Commenters who repeatedly violate community guidelines may be suspended, causing them to temporarily lose their ability to engage with comments.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.
Cannabis pro newsletter