Author(s):     B. Gersons, I., Carlier and M. Olff                                   Country:   Netherlands

Is the intervention sector specific?

Is the intervention usable with different enterprise sizes?

Is the intervention equally applicable to both genders?

Is the intervention based on theory?

Can the intervention approach be adapted/ tailored?

Does the intervention promote CSR and how?

Does the intervention promote social dialogue and how?aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Overview (including risk assessment and law – legal requirements etc.):

Protocol Brief Eclectic Psychotherapy (BEP) for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is a work-related violence victim rehabilitation model which is currently in use at the University Hospital of Amsterdam. Protocol Brief Eclectic Psychotherapy is based on psychodynamic, cognitive-behavioural and directive psychotherapies. This evidence-based programme seeks to address the rehabilitation needs of traumatised police officers and thereby promote successful return to work and overall employee health and well being.

Implementation:

The intervention contains five key elements (maximum 16 sessions):

1) Psychoeducation: teaching about the phenomenon and reasons for unexplained feelings.

2) Imaginal exposure: re-experiencing the damaging experience/traumatic event (4-6 sessions, 15-20 minutes each). A key success factor for imaginal exposure is for patients to feel a sense of reclaiming control of one’s own life.

3) Writing tasks and mementos: Written assignments are completed by clients outside the therapy sessions. These written tasks serve an explicit purpose; to help patients uncover difficult feelings connected to the traumatic experience and learn to address these feelings. The use of mementos, objects linked to the traumatic event, may be used to instigate this process.

4) Meaning and integration: issues explored are psychoeducative, including security issues, decision making, meaning of self worth, life history issues, understanding of feelings, reintegration to work.

5) Farewell ritual: the therapy finishes and the traumatic experience is left behind, however, is not forgotten. The patient is encouraged to look into the future

Recovery needs approximately 16 sessions with a trained therapist. However, duration may vary according to the needs of the individual.

Practical applications:

The method has been successfully used with victims of work-related violence. The successful implementation of this intervention requires a trained therapist.

Innovative aspects:

The patient’s partner is invited to attend/participate in the first meeting of the rehabilitation therapy; in order to increase their understanding and promote support for his/her partner throughout the therapeutic process. In so doing, this takes the overall situation of the patient into consideration.

Evaluation (including process issues, outcomes and sustainability):

An evaluation of the client’s therapeutic development is conducted six months following their treatment.  

Benefits (including cost effectiveness):

Ten years of experience of implementing this programme has demonstrated its overall effectiveness.

References:

Gersons B., Carlier I., & Olff M. (2004). Protocol, Brief Eclectic Psychotherapy (BEP), for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder. University of Amsterdam, Center for Psychological Trauma.

Comments:

It is heavily recommended that the intervention is adapted and tailored to the individual.

Author(s):    Klinik Berus, Schwickerath Josef and Kneip Volker                             Country:   Germany

Is the intervention sector specific?

Is the intervention usable with different enterprise sizes?

Is the intervention equally applicable to both genders?

Is the intervention based on theory?

Can the intervention approach be adapted/ tailored?

Does the intervention promote CSR and how?

Does the intervention promote social dialogue and how?aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Overview (including risk assessment and law – legal requirements etc.):

Klinik Berus is a Centre for Psychosomatic and Behavioural Medicine that has offered rehabilitative treatment for the victims of bullying since 1999. Since that time, more than 1200 targets of bullying have been treated. The Bullying Groups method uses group therapy based on behavioural therapy principles. The overall objective of Bullying Groups is to empower the target of bullying and to promote the development of active coping strategies¹ to help facilitate recovery, and sustain its maintenance.

Implementation:

The intervention starts by giving the patient information regarding bullying and by initiating an active process of addressing the problem. The person is guided to build his/her own personal motto for his/her career (this is seen as key success factor for the intervention).

Rehabilitation phases in the Bullying Groups treatment include:

• establishing a distance,

• learning how to understand,

• reaching decisions,

• training behavioural steps of coping.

Methods and strategies used during the Bullying Group sessions are: dissemination of information, behavioural analysis, role play, and anger management. The group sessions are led by two therapists. Trust is of central importance both within the group and with the therapist.

During the group therapy sessions irrational thoughts and dysfunctional beliefs are identified, critically evaluated and subsequently reframed within a more positive self-enhancing perspective. Role play is used during group session to facilitate the development and mastering of new skills. Issues surrounding anger management are one of the central issues discussed.

Patients usually spend 6-8 weeks in treatment; over the course of which they participate in approximately 8 sessions. The group sessions have a maximum size of 12 patients.

Practical applications:

The Bullying Group method requires the professional experience of a trained therapist in its implementation. The most important element of the treatment is for patients to actively participate in the group therapy.

Innovative aspects:

The Bullying Groups method is a group therapy technique, underpinned by an empowerment approach, which teaches patients to develop and use active coping strategies to enhanced management of negative emotions resulting from previously traumatic incidents. Active coping strategies are either behavioural or psychological responses designed to change the nature of the stressor itself or how one thinks about it. Generally speaking, active coping strategies are thought to be a better way to deal with stressful events than passive strategies.

Evaluation (including process issues, outcomes and sustainability):

The effectiveness of the treatment has been evaluated using a comparative assessment of patients’ psychological complaints and overall mental health both prior to and directly following participating in the Bullying Groups treatment. Additionally, several longer follow-up evaluations have also been conducted, to examine the sustainability of the observed results and patient improvements. Patients were assessed by an admission interview and by the completion of several questionnaires.

Benefits (including cost effectiveness):  

References:

Schwickerath, J.(2005). Mobbing am Arbeitsplatz, Grundlagen und stationäre Verhaltenstherapie psychosomatischer Erkrankungen bei Mobbing. Klinik Berus. Praxis Klinische Verhaltensmedizin und Rehabilitation , 69, 132-145. Inter alia Bullying Groups.

Schwickerath J., Carls W., Zielke M., Hackhausen W. Mobbing am Arbeitsplatz, Grundlagen, Beratungs- und Behandlungskonzepte. Pabst Science Publishers.

Schwickerath J., Riedel H., Kneip V.(2006). Le Harcèlement Moral sur le lieu de Travail: Fondements et Thérapie Dognitivo-Comportementale des Maladies Psychosomatiques Liées au Harcèlement Moral Dans le Milieu Hospitalier. Journal de Thérapie Comportementale at Cognitive 16 (3), 108-112.

Comments:

A key success factor for the implementation of the intervention is the motivation and engagement of the patient.

Author(s):     Helge Hoel, Sabir Giga and Brian Faragher                                        Country:   United Kingdom

Is the intervention sector specific?

Is the intervention usable with different enterprise sizes?

Is the intervention equally applicable to both genders?

Is the intervention based on theory?

Can the intervention approach be adapted/ tailored?

Does the intervention promote CSR and how?

Does the intervention promote social dialogue and how?aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Overview (including risk assessment and law – legal requirements etc.):

This management training intervention was implemented in five public organisations: three health trusts, one police force and one governmental organisation. Training was directed particularly at managers. Targeting managers was considered to be the most cost effective method as managers are in many ways key persons in the management of bullying at work and in shaping organisational climate. The training programmes focussed on different key issues that included policy communication, stress management training and negative behaviour awareness training.

Implementation: 
 

Three different bullying training programmes were used:

1) Policy communication; training time 30 minutes,

2) Stress management training programme; training time 3 hours, and

3) Negative behaviour awareness training programme; training time 3 hours.

About 20-25 managers (and other employees) were invited to attend the respective training sessions in all organisations.

During the project, the Bullying Risk Assessment Tool (BRAT) was developed to measure potential risk factors of bullying. The tool examines the following themes: organisational fairness, team conflict, role conflict, workload and leadership.

Practical applications:

The management intervention was carried out in five organisations, demonstrating its practical applicability across a wide variety of occupational sectors and sizes of enterprises. Additionally, a trained psychologist is required to conduct the training programmes.

Innovative aspects:

This was the first academic anti-bullying intervention study which included different organisational contexts and different variations of interventions. Additionally, through this study the BRAT risk assessment tool was developed.

Evaluation (including process issues, outcomes and sustainability):

The interventions were evaluated by means of participant feedback at the end of the training sessions and six months afterwards, by pre and post intervention surveys and feedback from post-intervention focus groups. The time lag between the pre- and post- surveys was 6 months.

In order to evaluate the efficacy of the intervention programmes and validity of the risk-assessment tool, a comprehensive questionnaire comprising of questions related to experiences of bullying and negative behaviour, and potential risk-factors of bullying was used. The questionnaire survey allowed the comparison of pre- and post- training data.

To evaluate the effectiveness of the different training programmes, five study groups were formed: 1) control group, 2) policy communication group, that received only policy communication training, 3) policy and stress management group, that received both policy communication training and stress management training, 4) policy and negative behaviour awareness group, that received policy communication training and Negative Behaviour awareness training and 5) a final group that was trained with all three training programmes. Additionally, trainers' feedback was collected following each session.

Benefits (including cost effectiveness):

Based on the results of the assessment, positive outcomes were achieved. Improvements were found in 45% of experiment groups. The results indicated that the combination of all three interventions (policy communication, stress management, and negative behaviour awareness training programme) together led to best results.

References:

Hoel, H. & Giga, S. (2006). Destructive Interpersonal Conflict in the Workplace: The Effectiveness of Management Intervention,  The University of Manchester, Manchester Business School. Retrieved from http://www.bohrf.org.uk/downloads/bullyrpt.pdf.

Comments:

A key success factor for the implementation of the intervention is stability, having a proper team to work with systematically and take responsibility, and management commitment. One key challenge was how to get some specific people to actively participate and, moreover, to attend the training sessions.