Med Lav. 2014 Mar-Apr;105(2):130-8.
Following EU requirements, in recent years standard procedures for the assessment of work-related stress have been developed in Italy. However, while such standardization has facilitated the spread and use of these procedures, it has brought a lack of specificity in risk assessment.
To exemplify a method for the assessment of work-related stress that was developed by the University of Milan to allow the definition of risk profiles tailored to the different organizational settings.
We examined risk factors for work-related stress in call centre operators employed by two separate Italian companies. At an early stage of the assessment procedure, we conducted a wide series of consultation and training activities that allowed the identification of context-specific risk factors and homogeneous groups, which fuelled the preparation of both the "objective" and the "subjective" evaluation instruments.
Results obtained by means of the standardized "Effort-Reward Imbalance Questionnaire" and "Job Content Questionnaire", interpreted in the light of consultations with key organizational figures and individual interviews with employees, have allowed the detection of different risk profiles and priorities for intervention at both the group and the organizational levels.
Findings demonstrated the existence of both common and specific risk factors in the two companies, which would have remained undetected with the exclusive use of standardized approaches.
近年来，根据欧盟的要求，意大利制定了工作相关压力评估的标准程序。然而，虽然这种标准化促进了这些程序的传播和使用，但也导致了风险评估的缺乏特异性。
举例说明米兰大学开发的一种工作相关压力评估方法，该方法可定义针对不同组织环境的风险概况。
我们研究了两家意大利公司的呼叫中心运营商的工作相关压力的风险因素。在评估程序的早期阶段，我们进行了广泛的咨询和培训活动，这些活动确定了特定于上下文的风险因素和同质性群体，为“客观”和“主观”评估工具的编制提供了依据。
通过使用标准化的“努力-回报失衡问卷”和“工作内容问卷”获得的结果，并结合与关键组织人物的咨询和与员工的个别访谈进行解释，已检测到不同的风险概况，并确定了在团体和组织层面上进行干预的优先事项。
研究结果表明，在这两家公司中，既有共同的风险因素，也有特定的风险因素，如果只使用标准化方法，这些因素可能会被遗漏。
