| | 1) Protocol Brief Eclectic Psychotherapy (BEP) for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, rehabilitation of work-related violence | Author(s): B. Gersons, I., Carlier and M. Olff Level of Intervention: Tertiary | Is the intervention sector specific? | No | Is the intervention usable with different enterprise sizes? | Yes | Is the intervention equally applicable to both genders? | Yes | Is the intervention based on theory? | Yes | Can the intervention approach be adapted/ tailored? | Yes | Does the intervention promote CSR and how? | BEP encourages employers to take care of employees' well-being | Does the intervention promote social dialogue and how?aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa | The implementation of the intervention requires the cooperation with research, rehabilitation personnel in different locations, employers and government. | 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. |
| 2) The Systematic Approach model - how to prevent and overcome undesirable interaction | Author(s): Adrienne Hubert Level of Intervention: Primary | Is the intervention sector specific? | No | Is the intervention usable with different enterprise sizes? | Yes | Is the intervention equally applicable to both genders? | Yes | Is the intervention based on theory? | Yes | Can the intervention approach be adapted/ tailored? | Yes | Does the intervention promote CSR and how? | The intervention was not explicitly linked to responsible business practices although it does promote employee well-being. | Does the intervention promote social dialogue and how?aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa | The model was first developed in cooperation with different social partners and then further discussed with representatives of umbrella organisations: including employers' organisations, trade unions, occupational health and safety professionals, occupational welfare workers, Labour Inspection and the national organisation for confidential counsellors. | Overview (including risk assessment and law – legal requirements etc.):
The Systematic Approach Model was designed to prevent and manage undesirable behaviour (bullying/harassment) at work. It is a Dutch intervention but can be modified to policies and other national contexts. The Model is a five phase approach, which seeks to provide advice and guidance to organisations on how to build and develop a systematic and comprehensive programme to address undesirable behaviour (bullying and harassment) at work effectively.
| Implementation: The phases of the programme are as follows:
1) Prevention, setting up a preventive policy for the company (including a policy statement), developing knowledge and raising manager awareness on bullying and harassment at work, on their financial consequences, and on the organisation’s legal obligations. Subsequently, developing a code of conduct, as a more profound policy; whereby procedures for reporting undesirable behaviour are outlined, responsibility is assigned, and the developed and existing procedures are continuously evaluated. 2) Uncovering, developing knowledge about the nature of bullying and harassment, making the phenomena visible. 3) Support, for the victim, mainly social and psychological help: for example, confidential counsellors in the organisation can provide support, occupational health care and psychological support. 4) Intervention can be: a) informal solution (victim talks directly to the perpetrator, and mediation or mediation/correction is provided by the supervisor), b) formal complaint or c) transfer to another department or outplacement. 5) After-care, should match the chosen intervention strategy. After-care can take many forms: for example, in cases of undesirable group behaviour it means that the supervisor remains alert to signals of objectionable behaviour. In the case of mediation, after-care means that the counsellor remains in contact with the victim and continues to provide him/her with support. | Practical applications:
Parts of the model have been implemented in more than 350 organisations. The method is suitable for medium and large organisations; and more recently, has been trailed in small-sized enterprises. This method has implemented in a variety of occupational sectors: namely, government and public administration, health care and the hotel and catering industry
| Innovative aspects: The Model was developed through a process of social dialogue where a series of discussion were held with staff representatives and representatives of institutions (e.g. managers, works councils, human resources department, confidential counsellors, labour inspection and labour unions). The model tackles a large variety of undesired behaviour and takes into consideration different stages, from prevention to management and support. | Evaluation (including process issues, outcomes and sustainability): Four times a year, ‘a day of return’ including feedback and counselling is organised. During these days a lot has been learned about the functioning of the model in practice.
The effectiveness of the model has not, however, been systematically evaluated. | Benefits (including cost effectiveness):
Due to the comprehensive nature of the Model, this approach promotes deeper change in the workplace in relation to undesirable behaviour, bullying and harassment. The goal of the method is to create a lasting solution.
| References:
Hubert, A.B. (2003). To prevent and overcome undesirable interaction: A systematic approach mode. In S. Einarsen, H. Hoel, D. Zapf and C.L. Cooper (Eds.) Bullying and Emotional Abuse in the Workplace. International perspectives in research and practice (pp.299-311). London & New York: Taylor & Francis.
| Comments: It is important that that the Model is developed in cooperation with all the relevant stakeholders in the organisation/enterprise. The Model is a comprehensive intervention; despite being labelled a primary intervention, it includes a variety of methods and strategies commonly observed in secondary and tertiary level programmes. |
| 3) Safe Care Policy | Author(s): P. Peerdeman Level of Intervention: Primary | Is the intervention sector specific? | Yes | Is the intervention usable with different enterprise sizes? | Yes | Is the intervention equally applicable to both genders? | Yes | Is the intervention based on theory? | Yes | Can the intervention approach be adapted/ tailored? | Yes | Does the intervention promote CSR and how? | The intervention was not explicitly linked to responsible business practices although it does promote employee well-being. | Does the intervention promote social dialogue and how?aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa | The covenant, that has been developed, can be viewed as a product of social dialogue. | Overview (including risk assessment and law – legal requirements etc.):
In 2000, the “Safe Care Policy” project was developed in the health care system in the Netherlands. The project’s development was underpinned by the active cooperation between the police and the public prosecutor with the overall aim to: (a) decrease internal and external aggression (especially verbal aggression), and (b) to present an overview of the prevalence of external and internal aggression and violence.
| Implementation: The method is based on the policy cycle: global inventory of problems, declaration of intent, problem analysis, set goals/prioritize, develop strategy, implementation, evaluation, and adjust goals/measures. More specifically, the policy consists of different components. First, a collective agreement is made between the hospital, the police and the Public Prosecutor according to which, visitors and patients who misbehave receive a warning and after two warnings the person can be banned from entering the hospital.
Incidents of violence are reported by the head of in-house emergency and first-aid service that are responsible for dealing with the situation. Furthermore, workplace safety is increased by additional camera surveillance and an increased availability of security service for emergencies. The house regulations are presented and communicated by means of posters. Additionally, in the hospital employers work according to an ‘aggression-protocol’ whereby all employers are familiar with the necessary procedures on how to handle cases of aggression. | Practical applications: Because the intervention is based on a collective agreement between the hospitals, the police and the Public Prosecutor, some law- or legal requirements underpin it. | Innovative aspects: The main innovative aspect of this approach is the development of an organisational-level policy directly addressing issues surrounding workplace violence through a process of social dialogue between several key stakeholders. | Evaluation (including process issues, outcomes and sustainability):
As the policy outlines, all incidents are reported, providing a clear overview of the prevalence of aggression and violence in the hospital. Information from reported incidences of violence is used to evaluate the effectiveness of the policy and to identify prevalent trends in perpetrator behaviour.
| Benefits (including cost effectiveness):
Safe Care Policy has been implemented in over 15 hospitals. On the basis of registration information from 2006, the amount of incidents involving verbal or physical violence has decreased. Additionally, employers working at the hospitals have reported increased feelings of safety.
| References:
Goede praktijken tegen geweld - casusboek. (Ministerie van Sociale Zaken en Werkgelegenheid). 2006. (in Dutch)
| Comments: Safe Care Policy can be adapted and tailored to a variety of occupational sectors or other national contexts however, the degree to which it can be tailored is dependent on legal requirements unique to that area/or national legal framework. |
| |