METHODOLOGY FOR THE ANALYSIS OF ORGANIZATIONAL EXPOSURE TO PSYCHOSOCIAL RISKS IN THE WORKPLACE
Abstract
The growing scientific and regulatory attention to workplace mental health has increased the demand for structured approaches to assess psychosocial risks in organizations. However, these risks are still frequently measured using instruments primarily focused on workers’ individual perceptions, which may limit the identification of organizational exposure to psychosocial risk factors. To address this gap, this study aims to develop and conceptually ground and operationalize a methodology for
analyzing organizational exposure to psychosocial risks. The proposed approach integrates three complementary analytical dimensions: individual perceptions of workers, deliberative evaluation by multidisciplinary committees, and analysis of organizational evidence related to work structure and institutional practices. This study is characterized as a methodological research of a theoretical-applied nature, including an exploratory application in a large organization to assess the operational feasibility of the model and its ability to integrate multiple sources of information in the identification of psychosocial exposure. The results indicate that the proposed methodology enables a more structured mapping of psychosocial risks by distinguishing individual perceptions from structural organizational conditions. By integrating multiple analytical dimensions, the model strengthens diagnostic robustness and supports more effective workplace mental health management practices.
Author Biographies
Engenheira mecânica e mestre em Industrial and Organizational Psychology – Extension Studies pela Harvard University. Atua na interface entre a pesquisa e a prática aplicada nas áreas de liderança, segurança psicológica e gestão de riscos psicossociais no trabalho. É fundadora da Mentohub e sócia da Relatom Inteligência em Gestão e da Elevolus Treinamentos Corporativos.
Marcelo Maulepes é administrador de empresas com mais de 35 anos de experiência profissional, Doutor em Business Administration pela FCU - Florida Christian University (USA), mestre em Administração pela Universidad de Extremadura (Espanha). Atua na interface entre gestão estratégica, liderança e desenvolvimento organizacional, com atuação executiva em estratégia de negócios. Atualmente desenvolve atividades de consultoria e pesquisa aplicada em gestão e liderança organizacional.
References
BAKKER, A. B.; DEMEROUTI, E. The Job Demands–Resources model: state of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, Bingley, v. 22, n. 3, p. 309–328, 2007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940710733115
BEATON, D. E.; BOMBARDIER, C.; GUILLEMIN, F.; FERRAZ, M. B. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine, Philadelphia, v. 25, n. 24, p. 3186–3191, 2000. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014
BRASIL. Lei nº 14.831, de 27 de março de 2024. Institui o Certificado Empresa Promotora da Saúde Mental. Brasília: Presidência da República, 2024.
COUSINS, R.; MACKAY, C.; CLARKE, S.; KELLY, C.; KELLY, P.; McCAIG, R. Management Standards and work-related stress in the UK: practical development. London: Health and Safety Executive (HSE), 2004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370410001734322
COX, T.; GRIFFITHS, A. The nature and measurement of work-related stress: theory and practice. In: WILKINSON, G.; COOPER, C. L. (ed.). The handbook of work and health psychology. 2. ed. Chichester: Wiley, 2005. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420055948.ch19
DOLLARD, Maureen F.; BAILEY, Tessa S. Building psychosocial safety climate in turbulent times: the case of COVID-19. Safety Science, Amsterdam, v. 139, 105229, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000939
EDWARDS, J.; WEBSTER, S. Psychosocial risk assessment: measurement and intervention. Work & Stress, London, v. 26, n. 2, p. 103–121, 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2012.688554
HERDMAN, M.; FOX-RUSHBY, J.; BADIA, X. A model of equivalence in the cultural adaptation of HRQoL instruments: the universalist approach. Quality of Life Research, Oxford, v. 7, n. 4, p. 323–335, 1998. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008846618880
HSU, C.; SANDFORD, B. The Delphi technique: making sense of consensus. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, v. 12, n. 10, 2007.
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR STANDARDIZATION. ISO 45003: Psychological health and safety at work — Guidelines for managing psychosocial risks. Geneva: ISO, 2021.
KARASEK, R. Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: implications for job redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly, Ithaca, v. 24, n. 2, p. 285–308, 1979. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2392498
NIELSEN, K.; EINARSEN, S. Outcomes of exposure to workplace bullying: a meta-analytic review. Work & Stress, London, v. 26, n. 4, p. 309–332, 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2012.734709
NIELSEN, K.; MIRAGLIA, M. What works for whom in which circumstances? On the need to move beyond the “what works?” question in organizational intervention research. Human Relations, London, v. 70, n. 1, p. 40–62, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726716670226
NIELSEN, K.; RANDALL, R. Opening the black box: presenting a model for evaluating organizational-level interventions. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, London, v. 22, n. 5, p. 601–617, 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2012.690556
PEJTERSEN, J. H.; KRISTENSEN, T. S.; BORG, V.; BJØRNER, J. B. The second version of the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, Copenhagen, v. 38, n. 3, p. 8–24, 2010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1403494809349858
PODSAKOFF, P. M.; MACKENZIE, S. B.; LEE, J. Y.; PODSAKOFF, N. P. Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, Washington, v. 88, n. 5, p. 879–903, 2003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
SAFE WORK AUSTRALIA. Managing psychosocial hazards at work: Code of Practice. Canberra: Safe Work Australia, 2022.
SIEGRIST, J. Adverse health effects of high-effort/low-reward conditions. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, Washington, v. 1, n. 1, p. 27–41, 1996. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.1.1.27
SMARTLAB – OBSERVATÓRIO DE SEGURANÇA E SAÚDE NO TRABALHO. Dados sobre afastamentos por transtornos mentais no Brasil. Brasília: OIT/Ministério Público do Trabalho, 2023.
SPECTOR, P. E. Do not cross me: optimizing the use of cross-sectional designs. Journal of Business and Psychology, New York, v. 34, n. 2, p. 125–137, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-018-09613-8
WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION. Burn-out an occupational phenomenon: International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11). Geneva: WHO, 2019.
WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION. Mental health at work: policy brief. Geneva: WHO, 2022.
WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION; INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANIZATION. Mental health at work: policy brief. Geneva: WHO; ILO, 2022.
License
Copyright (c) 2026 RECIMA21 - Revista Científica Multidisciplinar - ISSN 2675-6218
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Os direitos autorais dos artigos/resenhas/TCCs publicados pertecem à revista RECIMA21, e seguem o padrão Creative Commons (CC BY 4.0), permitindo a cópia ou reprodução, desde que cite a fonte e respeite os direitos dos autores e contenham menção aos mesmos nos créditos. Toda e qualquer obra publicada na revista, seu conteúdo é de responsabilidade dos autores, cabendo a RECIMA21 apenas ser o veículo de divulgação, seguindo os padrões nacionais e internacionais de publicação.