Key Determinants of a Healthy Shipping Company: A Pilot Study of Seafarers’ and Management Perspectives

Abstract

The concept of a healthy organisation promotes environments that enhance employee well-being, motivation, and productivity. Despite its benefits, it remains underexplored in the shipping sector. To address this gap, a pilot study was conducted to examine how seafarers and management perceive a healthy shipping company, with a focus on identifying the key determinants. This approach underlines the importance of active employee involvement, which is consistent with the principles of a healthy organisation. An exploratory, convergent, mixed-methods pilot study combined qualitative and quantitative data collection. The questionnaire included demographic and work-related characteristics, an open-ended question on the definition of a healthy shipping company from a personal perspective, and scaled ratings of key determinants of healthy shipping companies identified through a literature review. The sample consisted of 309 participants from the international shipping sector, including 238 seafarers and 71 shipping company managers. The study identified key factors that contribute to a healthy shipping company, with both seafarers and managers recognising the importance of employee well-being, safety, work-life balance, and a supportive organisational culture. These findings were consistently reflected in both the quantitative and qualitative data. The qualitative results also revealed group-specific perspectives: managers highlighted the importance of financial management, strategic innovation, and corporate governance, while seafarers placed greater emphasis on immediate working conditions and mutual respect. Overall, the findings underscore the importance of a collaborative approach, where both seafarers and managers are actively engaged in shaping a healthy organisational environment.

Keywords

healthy organisation healthy shipping company seafarers managers well-being shipping sector

What do we already know about this topic?

Existing literature highlights the importance of employee well-being in increasing organisational effectiveness, although the concept of a healthy organisation is still under-researched in the shipping sector.

How does your research contribute to the field?

This study fills the gap by exploring seafarers’ and managers’ perspectives on the definition and key determinants of a healthy shipping company, providing new insights into potential solutions for improving well-being, health and organisational effectiveness in shipping.

What are your research’s implications towards theory, practice, or policy?

As the first pilot study in this area, the findings contribute to theory by expanding the understanding of a healthy shipping company, to practice by offering initial strategies to improve employee well-being, health and organisational outcomes, and to policy by advocating for evidence-based initiatives to enhance working conditions and operational efficiency in the sector.

Introduction

A Healthy Organisation: Key Characteristics and Principles

Although the concept of a healthy organisation is gaining more research attention due to the many changes and challenges in today’s work environment,^1,2 it remains largely unexplored in the shipping sector, despite its potential to enhance effectiveness by focusing on employee well-being. To fully grasp the significance of this topic, it’s essential to first define what a healthy organisation actually means. A healthy organisation is one that promotes employees’ physical, mental, and social well-being, which ultimately benefits both individual health and the overall success of the organisation.^3
-5 This concept emerged from extensive theoretical and empirical evidence on occupational stress,^6,7 which highlights the detrimental effects of workplace stress at both an individual (eg, cardiovascular and gastrointestinal diseases, mental health problems, burnout, etc.) and organisational level (eg, errors and accidents, employee turnover, reduced productivity). However, focusing exclusively on occupational stress and its management is a limited approach and neglects the positive role of work in fulfilling basic human needs. Self-Determination Theory suggests that when employees experience autonomy, feel competent, and build meaningful connections with others, it significantly enhances their motivation, well-being, and overall job performance.⁸ Healthy organisations go beyond traditional health and safety measures, which focus mainly on preventing illness. They aim to enhance employee well-being, recognising that this is key to boosting motivation, engagement, and productivity.

Well-being linguistically, refers to health, safety, happiness and prosperity, while scientific definitions vary and include aspects such as subjective (hedonic) well-being, which includes affective and cognitive components, psychological (eudaimonic) well-being, physical, mental and social well-being, and economic or financial well-being.^9
-14 Promoting well-being at work requires a holistic approach in which all components of well-being are addressed and integrated into organisational practices.¹⁵ It is clear that promoting well-being has important humanistic objectives in terms of employee health, but it is also important to recognise the potential positive impact on organisational success. Although the relationship between employee well-being and productivity is complex and likely bidirectional,¹⁶ research generally supports the idea that organisational practices that promote well-being have a positive impact on productivity and success.^17
-20 Investing in practices that prioritise employee well-being, such as support, learning opportunities, flexibility and transparent communication, and integrating well-being into core organisational strategies contribute to better outcomes such as performance, job satisfaction, employee retention and organisational success.^1,2,21,22 In the long term, such investments pay off and lead to better business results and a healthier, more engaged workforce.²¹

A review of the literature on healthy organisations, but also related constructs such as healthy workplaces, healthy work environments, organisational health, healthy culture and/or healthy climate,^{1
-5,18,21
-24} can lead to considerable confusion when trying to define the key elements (what constitutes a healthy organisation) or guidelines (how to develop it). However, an analysis of the various models of healthy organisations reveals many common elements that, when considered separately, are not new to the broader field of Work and Organisational Psychology.^25
-27 The concept of a healthy organisation involves strategies designed to promote well-being, which in turn positively affects both the health and performance of employees and the organisation as a whole. It essentially offers a roadmap, drawing on existing evidence about the key factors that contribute to well-being, health, and overall effectiveness.²⁸ Common elements and guiding principles of most models include, for example, involving employees in all stages of developing a healthy organisation, integrating employee well-being and health into the strategic goals of the organisation, that is, developing a “healthy culture.” In addition, the guidelines usually include supportive and fair employee-centred leadership, ensuring a healthy working environment that promotes various aspects of safety, well-being, and the reconciliation of work, family and social roles. Finally, healthy workplace design is characterised by clear roles, optimal workload and resources, a sense of autonomy and purpose, transparent and fair rewards and meaningful interpersonal relationships at work.

Applying a Healthy Organisation Principles to the Shipping Industry

It is important to emphasise that all of the above are general guidelines that should be adapted to the specifics of each organisation. The definition of a long-term development strategy must therefore be specific, that is, it should come from within and require effort and commitment from both management and employees. In other words, the organisation itself, by adopting a holistic perspective of well-being, develops organisational activities that lead to health and success. A healthy organisation is not a final destination, but a “journey” that requires constant reassessment and adaptation to new circumstances.²² It requires constant attention to the needs of employees and active involvement in designing workplace practices that promote well-being.⁵ The need for continuous assessment and improvement is recognised as central to all models of healthy organisations. Indeed, a healthy organisation must not only be developed but also maintained, which is a challenge in the face of numerous social, economic and technological changes.^1,2 In all of this, industry-specific characteristics, such as those of the shipping industry, must also be taken into account.

Shipping companies face unique challenges that make the concept of a healthy organisation particularly relevant. Despite some positive changes, working at sea continues to be a challenging profession, marked by high levels of risk and stress, which can adversely impact safety as well as physical and mental health.^29
-31 Seafarers’ working conditions are often characterised by long periods of separation from family, isolation, high workloads with long overtime hours, limited access to basic amenities such as quality food, internet and recreation opportunities, and challenges due to the length of contracts on board.^32
-36 While many studies have explored how the conditions aboard ships influence individual outcomes such as health and well-being,^37
-46 the broader idea of a healthy shipping company has not yet been systematically explored. The economic impact of promoting well-being in the shipping industry has also not yet been fully explored. Indeed, compared to studies focused on stress and health, which have rapidly increased in number over the last decade,^47
-49 especially during and after the COVID-19 pandemic,^42,50
-53 fewer studies address the relationship between onboard working conditions and relevant organisational outcomes such as productivity or effectiveness and intention to change jobs.^45,54
-57

The dependence of the shipping industry on human capital, most evident in the shortage of qualified seafarers,⁵⁸ makes it essential to better understand how the well-being of seafarers affects company performance. A healthy shipping company, in addition to its commitment to the health and well-being of seafarers and their families,^59,60 can also help reduce labour turnover and improve operational efficiency—both of which are crucial for long-term sustainability and resilience in a highly competitive global market. The core principle of a healthy organisation^1
-5,21,22 states that employee well-being is key to health and efficiency. This emphasises a critical responsibility of managers in the shipping sector: achieving an optimal alignment between the occupational demands imposed on seafarers and the resources allocated to support their functioning and resilience. This principle is in line with the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model,⁶¹ which assumes that the interaction between job demands and resources leads to a dual process - either negative stress outcomes such as burnout or, on the “other side of the coin” often overlooked in other occupational stress models, increased employee well-being, motivation, and engagement. Applying this perspective to the shipping sector provides a valuable framework for improving seafarer well-being and organisational performance. However, empirical insights remain scarce regarding how seafarers and management perceive the concept of a healthy shipping company.

Study Overview

This study addresses a gap in the current literature by examining how seafarers and shipping managers define a healthy shipping company. It aims to identify the key factors that contribute to organisational health from the perspectives of these 2 stakeholder groups. This focus is consistent with the core principles of healthy organisations, which stress the active involvement of all employees.

A mixed methods approach was used, combining qualitative and quantitative data collection to provide a well-rounded understanding of what constitutes a healthy shipping company. As the topic has received limited attention in the maritime sector, the study adopts an exploratory design, with research questions developed without predefined hypotheses. By introducing the concept of a healthy organisation into the context of shipping, this pilot study offers both a basis for future research and practical guidance for industry stakeholders.

Method

Sample

The non-probabilistic international sample consisted of 309 participants in total, including 238 seafarers and 71 managers of shipping companies. Given the exploratory design of this mixed-methods study, a sample of 309 participants was considered appropriate, particularly in light of the limited research available on the topic.⁶² Table 1 presents the demographic and work-related characteristics of the seafarers and managers who took part. The sample is notably diverse, including individuals of different nationalities, educational backgrounds, and professional experiences.

Table 1.

Demographic and Work Characteristics of the Sample.

Seafarers (n = 238)
Gender	Men: 215, Women: 21, Other: 2
Age range	18-67 years (M = 33.22, SD = 12.82)
Nationality	Greek: 104, Croatian: 94, Other (40)
Educational background	High School: 93 Bachelor’s Degree: 57 Merchant Marine Academy: 55 Master’s Degree: 29 Doctoral Degree: 3 Basic Education: 1
Seafaring experience	0.25-46 years (M = 10.88, SD = 11.76)
Tenure in current company	0.17-40 years (M = 5.04, SD = 6.95)
Work sector	Deep-sea Shipping: 201, Coastal Shipping: 37
Position on board	Junior Deck Personnel: 89 Senior Deck Personnel: 73 Senior Engineering Personnel: 28 Junior Engineering Personnel: 23 Other: 25
Type of vessel	Oil Tankers: 50 LNG/LPG Tankers: 44 Bulk Carriers: 32 Container Ships: 21 Cruise Ships: 21 Chemical Tankers: 17 General Cargo Ships: 11 Offshore Vessels: 10 Other: 31
Managers (n = 71)
Gender	Men: 49, Women: 22
Age range	21-79 years (M = 46.32, SD = 11.94)
Nationality	Greek: 45, Croatian: 17, Other (9)
Educational background	Master’s Degree: 34 Bachelor’s Degree: 21 Merchant Marine Academy: 7 High School: 5 Doctoral Degree: 2 Prefer not to disclose: 2
Work experience in shipping	0.58-58 years (M = 21.52, SD = 13.15)
Tenure in current company	0.50-58 years (M = 10.39, SD = 10.96)
Work sector	Ocean-Going Shipping: 54 Coastal Shipping: 7 Cruise Industry: 3 Other: 7
Managerial positions	Operations Manager: 13 HR Manager: 13 Fleet Manager: 5 Engineering Manager: 5 Supply Chain Manager: 4 Technical Manager: 4 Other: 27

Instruments

The online questionnaire used in this study was developed by the authors specifically for this research, as the concept of a healthy organisation has not yet been empirically explored within the shipping sector. It consisted of 3 parts: (1) questions about participants’ demographic and occupational characteristics, (2) an open-ended question asking participants to define a healthy shipping company, and (3) the Healthy Shipping Company Determinants Scale (HSCDS).

The questionnaire was administered in English, the primary language used for communication in international shipping. This aligns with the standardised language requirements in maritime operations, where English proficiency is a key component of the Standards of Training, Certification, and Watchkeeping for Seafarers.⁶³ Participants were informed beforehand that the survey would be conducted in English. Given that most respondents were certified officers—whose roles require a demonstrated understanding of English—it was reasonable to assume they could comprehend and respond accurately to the questionnaire. Additionally, all questions in the survey were mandatory to ensure thorough data collection aligned with the research objectives. Given the brief nature of the survey, this approach was adopted, while still adhering to ethical guidelines. Participants were given the option to select “I don’t know or I do not want to answer” for potentially sensitive personal questions.

The demographic and occupational characteristics section included questions on age, gender, nationality, education level, length of service in the seafaring (for seafarers) or in the shipping sector (for managers) and length of service in the current company. Seafarers were also asked about the type of shipping (deep-sea or coastal), the type of ship they work on and their position on board. Managers were asked about the type of shipping in which their company operates and their specific leadership role within the company.

In the open-ended question , respondents were asked to give a descriptive answer to the following question: “What does the term “healthy shipping company” mean to you?”. To guide their answers, the question was accompanied by further explanations, encouraging participants to reflect on and describe their personal associations with a healthy shipping company. They were also asked to highlight the key characteristics or factors they believe are essential for defining a healthy company in the shipping industry. The question was designed to gather participants’ personal views on what they believe makes a healthy shipping company, based on their own experiences and understanding.

In the third part of the questionnaire - Healthy Shipping Company Determinants Scale (HSCDS) , participants were firstly asked to carefully read the definition of a healthy shipping company. The provided definition was: “A healthy shipping company is one that prioritizes the well-being of its employees, fostering an environment that promotes physical, mental, and social health. The focus on employee well-being leads to a workforce that is satisfied, healthy, motivated, engaged, and which, in turn, drives the company’s effectiveness.” Participants were then asked to rate each of the proposed 28 determinants regarding their importance (in their opinion) for a “healthy shipping company.” They used a scale from 1 to 7, where 1 = not important at all and 7 = extremely important. To ensure the content validity of the HSCDS, the 28 determinants were carefully developed through a thorough review of existing literature in 2 main areas: (1) general research on healthy organisations, including foundational principles and established frameworks^1
-5,21
-24; and (2) studies that focus on related factors within the shipping sector, particularly working conditions that impact employee well-being, health, performance, and turnover intentions.^{29
-33,37
-45,54
-57} Since the concept of a healthy organisation has not yet been directly examined in maritime contexts, this dual approach was crucial in ensuring the scale accurately captures the key elements that define a healthy shipping company. Items covered main determinants of the concept of healthy organisation applied to shipping sector, such as relations, communication, and support, mental and physical well-being, safety and compliance, environmental responsibility, work-life balance and flexibility, living and working conditions and resources, inclusion and respect, professional development, ethical treatment and fairness, as well as crisis management and flexibility (items are presented in Table 3). To examine the factorial structure of HSCDS, an exploratory factor analysis (MLF extraction method) was conducted. The prerequisite assumptions related to sampling adequacy and sphericity were examined, indicating that the data were suitable for factor analysis (KMO = 0.972; Bartlett’s test: χ²(378) = 11740.60, P < .01). The initial factor solution suggested 2 factors; however, the second one was not satisfactory. The first factor had an eigenvalue of 20.34, explaining 72.64% of the variance while the second one had an eigenvalue below 1 (0.96). All factor loadings on the first factor were significant and high (=/> 0.80), whereas those on the second factor were below 0.30, indicating weak contributions. Consequently, an unidimensional structure was accepted, particularly given the high internal reliability (Cronbach alpha = .986, average inter-item correlation = .729), which supports calculating a total score on the scale.

Procedure

The study was previously approved by the Ethics Committee of the Department of Psychology, University of Zadar and was conducted in 2025. The questionnaire was completed online via Google Forms from 16 January to 25 February. The estimated completion time per participant was approximately 10 min, depending on the length of the answers to the open-ended questions. Participants were recruited through various shipping companies and unions as well as via the snowball method by posting invitations in maritime and shipping groups on LinkedIn and Facebook. Taking part in the survey was completely voluntary, and participants gave their informed consent simply by completing the questionnaire. The process was entirely anonymous, as no personal or company names were collected. If participants had any questions, comments, or wanted feedback on the results, they were welcome to contact the principal researchers directly.

Results

Qualitative Data

The responses to the open-ended question about perceptions of a healthy shipping company were analysed using thematic analysis, separately for each of the 2 samples. An inductive approach was employed, allowing themes to emerge naturally from the data. The analysis identified key themes that are relevant across the entire sample, as well as specific themes unique to each of the 2 sub-samples. These themes are presented in Table 2, with each theme supported by an illustrative quote.

Table 2.

Healthy Shipping Company - Main Themes Identified Across the Whole Sample and Sub-Samples.

Group	Theme	Quote
Entire sample	Employee well-being & work-life balance	“A company that cares about employees and maintains a good work-life balance.”
	Safety & compliance	“A healthy shipping company must offer safety for employees.. . .”
	Ethical & transparent company culture	“Open communication between the members of the company—solutions, not judgment or punishment.”
	Financial stability & profitability	“It strategically plans to expand its fleet without making exaggerations and fast moves to prevent economic disasters.”
	Environmental & social responsibility	“It is not only about making money but also about taking care of the workers and the planet.”
Seafarers	Onboard working & living conditions	“Shipping companies should look after seafarers to keep the maritime profession alive. High wages are not enough.”
	Respect & communication	“. . .no favoritism, and respecting employee feedback.”
	Career growth & development	“. . .recognition for hard work, and career development opportunities.”
Managers	Financial management	“Sufficient resources for long-term viability, self-improvement, and training.”
	Strategic innovation	“A healthy company invests in digitalization, technological advancements, and sustainable shipping solutions.”
	Corporate governance	“A financially sound company with good corporate practices—transparency, ethics, ESG.”

The analysis revealed several central themes that reflect what participants view as the core features of a healthy shipping company. The most frequently mentioned across the entire sample was Employee Well-being & Work-Life Balance. Participants described a healthy company as one that genuinely cares for both the physical and mental health of its employees. They pointed to fair wages, manageable working hours, opportunities for career advancement, and a supportive working environment as key contributors to job satisfaction and long-term retention. In a profession as demanding as shipping, maintaining a healthy balance between work and personal life was seen as not only essential for individual well-being but also for overall productivity and performance.

Equally prominent was the theme of Safety & Compliance. Participants emphasised that strict adherence to international safety standards is not optional—it’s a basic requirement for protecting employees and ensuring the smooth, reliable operation of vessels. They also highlighted the importance of continuous training, fostering a strong safety culture, and being prepared for emergencies, all of which reduce risk and improve operational efficiency.

Another widely endorsed factor was Ethical & Transparent Company Culture. Respondents described this as a workplace atmosphere built on trust, open communication, and integrity in leadership. A “no-blame” approach, where employees can speak up about problems without fear, was particularly valued as a way to strengthen collaboration, engagement, and problem-solving across the organisation.

Participants also highlighted Financial Stability & Profitability as a critical theme—especially relevant in the context of a competitive and often unpredictable global market. Financial resilience was seen not only as essential for business continuity, but also as a factor that directly influences job security and investment in workforce development.

The importance of Environmental & Social Responsibility was also raised. As awareness of sustainability grows, participants advocated for shipping practices that are environmentally responsible and socially conscious. This includes reducing environmental impact, treating employees fairly, and contributing positively to the wider community—all seen as important for a company’s long-term reputation and success.

In addition to the shared views above, seafarers placed special emphasis on Onboard Working & Living Conditions. For them, daily life at sea has a major influence on their well-being and engagement. They pointed to the quality of accommodation, access to the internet, and respectful treatment as key to staying connected with family and coping with the isolation of shipboard life—factors that also play a role in retention and morale. Another strong theme for seafarers was Respect & Communication. Many stressed the need for clear and open communication between crew members and shore-based management. Feeling heard and respected was described as essential for building trust and resolving issues effectively. They also underscored the value of Career Growth & Development. Opportunities for ongoing training, structured career progression, and recognition of their contributions were seen as vital to maintaining motivation and professional fulfilment.

On the managerial side, Financial Management stood out as a top concern. Managers stressed the importance of strategic financial planning and careful allocation of resources to maintain economic sustainability in a volatile market. They also emphasised Strategic Innovation as crucial for staying competitive. This included embracing digital technologies, investing in greener practices, and improving operational efficiency. Finally, Corporate Governance was viewed by managers as the backbone of a healthy company. Strong leadership, transparency in decision-making, and clear accountability structures were all identified as necessary to ensure integrity and long-term organisational success.

Quantitative Data

The basic descriptive parameters for each item and the overall HSCDS scale are presented separately for the 2 subsamples in Table 3. The data show that the results for all items are skewed towards higher scores. However, this negative skewness remains within acceptable limits for conducting parametric statistical analyses.⁶⁴ In other words, both seafarers and managers on average rate all the proposed determinants of healthy work organisation as very important (all mean scores are above 5 on the 1-7 scale).

Table 3.

Descriptive Statistics of HSCDS (N = 309).

Items	Seafarers (n = 238)			Managers (n = 71)
Items	M	Range	SD	M	Min	SD
Transparent and open communication between management and seafarers	6.15	1-7	1.28	6.45	2-7	1.07
Supportive management providing regular feedback and support, ensuring crew members feel valued and heard	6.10	1-7	1.30	6.46	3-7	1.08
Prevention and proactive resolution of conflicts to maintain a positive and respectful work environment	5.97	1-7	1.31	6.34	2-7	1.15
Encouraging positive relationships and teamwork among crew members	6.07	1-7	1.32	6.34	3-7	1.04
Prevention of bullying and discrimination, ensuring a safe and respectful work environment	6.21	1-7	1.33	6.52	2-7	1.00
Respecting cultural differences and promoting mutual respect among seafarers	5.99	1-7	1.39	6.25	1-7	1.34
Providing mental health support (e.g. counselling, telemedicine) and reducing stigma around seeking help	5.84	1-7	1.49	6.08	1-7	1.33
Regular health checks, medical support, and physical health promotion activities (e.g. healthier diet, physical exercise etc.)	5.95	1-7	1.36	6.31	2-7	1.06
Promoting a strong safety culture onboard via strict adherence to international safety regulations	5.92	1-7	1.40	6.38	1-7	1.16
Ensuring adequate living conditions onboard (e.g. food quality, internet access, and opportunities for sports and social activities) to support the well-being and morale of the crew	6.26	1-7	1.28	6.46	1-7	1.03
Reasonable work-rest schedules in compliance with maritime labour regulations to prevent overwork and fatigue	6.13	1-7	1.32	6.24	1-7	1.20
Providing adequate shore leave for rest and recuperation	5.92	1-7	1.47	6.06	2-7	1.19
Flexible leave policies to accommodate personal or family emergencies	6.16	2-7	1.27	6.18	2-7	1.05
Promoting an inclusive and respectful work environment, where every crew member feels respected and included	6.04	2-7	1.32	6.32	1-7	1.20
Creating a low-stress, high-support atmosphere for seafarers, i.e. providing sufficient support and resources to meet job demands	6.01	2-7	1.36	5.90	1-7	1.36
Recognition and reward of high performance, by promoting a culture of appreciation where employees feel motivated and valued for their contributions	6.03	2-7	1.26	6.32	2-7	1.14
Providing continuous professional growth and development opportunities, allowing seafarers to advance in their careers	6.06	2-7	1.26	6.15	1-7	1.26
Providing safety and job-specific skills training	5.91	1-7	1.35	6.21	1-7	1.31
Encouraging seafarers’ involvement in decision-making processes	5.82	2-7	1.32	5.97	2-7	1.21
Providing feedback mechanisms (e.g. regular surveys, open forums, or suggestion boxes) to improve the working environment	5.49	1-7	1.54	5.93	1-7	1.48
Ensuring adequate crew staffing to prevent overwork and burnout	6.11	2-7	1.27	6.25	1-7	1.26
Providing modern, well-maintained equipment for operational efficiency	6.04	1-7	1.28	6.18	2-7	1.30
Promoting environmentally responsible operations which comply with international environmental regulations	5.84	1-7	1.50	6.14	1-7	1.53
Ensuring the ethical treatment of workers (fair wages, proper working conditions, respect for worker’s rights)	6.19	1-7	1.32	6.37	1-7	1.19
Raising awareness about mental health issues and providing related training (e.g. recognising early signs of stress or burnout, creating a supportive culture around mental well-being)	5.81	1-7	1.44	6.15	1-7	1.34
Establishing peer support programmes or mentoring for mutual encouragement	5.56	1-7	1.48	5.85	1-7	1.38
Being prepared for emergencies (e.g., medical, technical, environmental) with established protocols and crew training	6.03	2-7	1.31	6.37	2-7	1.19
Showing flexibility in adjusting policies (e.g., crew rotations) during crises (e.g. during pandemics or geopolitical issues)	6.06	1-7	1.28	6.21	2-7	1.17
HSCDS Average Total Mean	5.99	1.68-7.00	1.16	6.23	1.89-7.00	1.03

To analyse possible differences between the 2 subsamples, an independent samples t-test was performed on the overall mean score. Prior to this, the assumption of homogeneity of variances was confirmed (Levene test (1307) = 0.24, P > .05). The t-test revealed no significant difference between the 2 groups (t(1.307) = −1.57, P > .05) in the average total scale, which indicates that both seafarers and managers consider these determinants to be equally important.

Discussion

The aim of this study was to explore seafarers’ and managers’ perceptions of the determinants of a healthy shipping company, using both qualitative (Table 2) and quantitative data (Table 3). The findings reveal a strong alignment between the qualitative and quantitative data, especially regarding the shared themes that emerged across both sets. This convergence suggests that the integrated approach used in this study offers a well-rounded understanding of the key elements that define a healthy shipping company. In line with the theoretical framework of a healthy organisation, these factors are seen as supporting overall employee well-being, which in turn fosters a healthy and engaged workforce and supports the success of the company.^1
-5,21,22

The quantitative data show that there is no significant difference between seafarers and managers in their overall assessments, as reflected in the non-significant t-test results presented in the Results section. Additionally, Table 2 clearly illustrates this finding. Both groups of participants rated all the proposed determinants of a healthy shipping company highly, with average scores above 5 on a 7-point scale. This indicates that the determinants proposed in the questionnaire, covering employee wellbeing, safety, work-life balance, and organisational culture, are seen as an integral part of the concept of “healthy” in the shipping sector. It is important to emphasise that the same or very similar main themes also emerged in the qualitative analysis of the entire sample (Table 2). This convergence indicates a common understanding of the importance of these factors to the health, sustainability and success of the organisation.

Whilst both seafarers and managers agree on the overall importance of certain factors, the nuances of certain issues vary according to the different roles and experiences of each stakeholder (specific themes in Table 2). These findings are consistent with previous research from a broader field which has shown that health in organisations is viewed differently depending on the perspective and responsibilities of individuals within the organisation.²¹ Seafarers’ focus on immediate working conditions and interpersonal dynamics contrasts with managers’ concerns about broader organisational goals. Specifically, seafarers identified key factors such as working and living conditions on board, respect, opportunities for promotion, and communication as essential to their well-being. These issues resonate with their daily experiences in the highly structured and demanding environment of a ship. Their perspectives are shaped by the nature of their responsibilities, which often involve long hours, strict operational protocols, and limited downtime—conditions that make fair treatment, recognition, and clear communication even more important. The challenges of dealing with a heavy workload in an isolated setting are well-documented sources of stress in seafaring.^39,65 While access to reliable internet on some ships can help reduce feelings of isolation and maintain connections with family and support networks, it doesn’t completely counterbalance the cumulative pressures of the job. These dynamics have been explored in numerous studies.^37
-45 On the other hand, managers placed more emphasis on financial management, strategic innovation and corporate governance, reflecting their broader organisational and strategic perspective, which is crucial for the strategic direction and long-term viability of the company. Furthermore, it is important to emphasise that the qualitative analysis of the whole sample also highlighted the importance of financial stability and profitability. As 1 participant (a seafarer) explained: “. . .a healthy shipping company is one that balances profit, people and the planet while being agile enough to thrive in a competitive and ever-evolving industry.” So it can be said that seafarers are also very aware of the financial aspects of a healthy business and the need to “survive” in a competitive environment. However, it is clear from many of their responses that in many cases they feel that their well-being is being compromised by the pursuit of profit. This is evident in the following quotes from seafarers: “Company that priorities wellbeing of their workers first, not just looking for profit“; “To me personally, means place where company cares about people and where is friendly and healthy environment all around. That company doesn’t exist, to be honest;” “Seamen should not be only serial numbers for company staff on shore. They should respect seamen and not use us like consumables.”

Overall, the findings of this study are broadly consistent with existing theoretical models of healthy organisations,^1
-5,21,22 with the key elements that constitute a healthy organisation being employee well-being, safety, fair treatment and organisational culture—all elements that were highlighted by both seafarers and managers. However, the unique characteristics of the shipping industry require a customised application of these general principles. As the sector faces particular challenges, such as long isolation periods, demanding workloads and high risks, some of the factors identified in this study, such as living conditions on board and communication between seafarers and managers, are more specific to the shipping industry than to other sectors. This finding suggests that the general principles of a healthy organisation need to be adapted to the specific context of the shipping industry, especially considering the particular working conditions of seafarers.

Contributions, Limitations, and Future Directions

This study offers a significant theoretical contribution to the existing literature on occupational health in the shipping industry. While much of the previous research has focused mainly on stress-related physical and mental health issues among seafarers,^{29,31,37,39,40} this study expands the discussion by including the perspectives of both seafarers and shipping managers. By this approach, the study shifts the emphasis from individual health outcomes to a broader, more systemic understanding of what defines a healthy shipping company. The findings highlight the need for a more integrated approach to organisational health that considers both the well-being of seafarers and the strategic needs of the organisation as a whole. Furthermore, the study has practical implications for shipping companies seeking to improve their organisational health. By fostering an environment that prioritises employee well-being companies can achieve tangible benefits such as reduced turnover, increased job satisfaction and improved operational performance. Agreement between seafarers and managers on the importance of these factors provides a solid foundation for developing strategies that meet the needs of both stakeholder groups. One of the key practical implications from this study is the importance of everyone in the organisation working together to build a healthy company. This effort needs to begin from within, involving all levels of the organisation. Taking a collaborative, internal approach is crucial for driving lasting change and creating a genuinely supportive workplace culture.

Despite these contributions, this study has several limitations. Firstly, the non-probabilistic sampling method limits the generalisability of the results as the sample (Table 1) does not fully represent the wider population of seafarers and managers in the shipping industry. Additionally, the sample size (N = 309), while adequate for the exploratory nature of this study, may limit the statistical power and generalisability of the findings. In addition, the measurement tool used in this study—HSCDS—was newly developed and requires further validation. However, it was specifically designed to assess how stakeholders perceive the importance of various factors contributing to a healthy shipping sector. The content validity of the scale was established during its development, and the results presented in the Instruments section show a clear, unidimensional structure with high internal consistency. These findings demonstrate the scale’s initial reliability and support the calculation of a total score. As a result, the HSCDS, along with the themes from the qualitative analysis, provides a solid foundation for future research exploring these characteristics in specific shipping companies. Furthermore, this study was exploratory and the qualitative data analysis was inductive, which means that further research is needed to validate these findings and refine the understanding of the determinants of a healthy shipping company. Longitudinal studies could provide valuable insights into how the presence of the factors identified in this study affects individual outcomes (such as employee health, motivation, engagement and performance) and organisational outcomes (including productivity, employee retention and operational efficiency) in the shipping industry.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank all participants and all organisations, associations and individuals who helped to promote the study.

ORCID iDs

Ana Slišković

Ioannis Katsounis

Ethical Considerations

Ethical approval was granted by the Ethics Committee of the Department of Psychology, University of Zadar.

Consent to Participate

Participants were informed about all relevant aspects of the study and gave their consent via completing the online questionnaire.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Data Availability Statement

The data can be made available to interested parties upon request.

References

Fielden

Woolnough

Hunt

CM.

Creating a Healthy Organisation: Perceptions, Learning, Challenges and Benefits. Edward Elgar; 2021.

Ryan

Burchell

MJ.

Make Work Healthy: Create a Sustainable Organisation With High-Performing Employees. John Wiley & Sons; 2023.

Canto

Solis

Tun

RR.

Healthy organisation: the importance of its conceptualization. Int J Arts Soc Sci. 2020;3(1):1-6. https://www.ijassjournal.com/2020/V3I1/4146575156.pdf

Di Fabio

. Positive Healthy Organizations: promoting well-being, meaningfulness, and sustainability in organizations. Front Psychol. 2017;8:1938. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01938

Jaimez

Bretones

FD.

Towards a healthy organisation model. J Ind Relat Hum Resour. 2011;13(3):7-26. doi:10.4026/1303-2860.2011.0180.x

Langan-Fox

Cooper

CL.

Handbook of Stress in the Occupations. New Horizons in Management. Edward Elgar; 2011.

Dewe

O’Driscoll

Cooper

CL.

Coping With Work Stress: A Review and Critique. Wiley-Blackwell; 2010.

Ryan

Deci

EL.

Brick by brick: the origins, development, and future of self-determination theory. In: Elliot

ed. Advances in Motivation Science. Elsevier Academic Press; 2019;111-156.

Diener

Oishi

Lucas

RE.

Subjective well-being: the science of happiness and life satisfaction. In: Snyder

Lopez

eds. Handbook of Positive Psychology. Oxford University Press; 2002;187-194.

10.

Ryan

Deci

EL.

On happiness and human potentials: a review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annu Rev Psychol. 2001;52:141-166. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.141

11.

Aubrey

Morin

AJS

Fernet

Carbonneau

Financial well-being: capturing an elusive construct with an optimized measure. Front Psychol. 2022;13:935284. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.935284

12.

Steptoe

Happiness and health. Annu Rev Public Health. 2019;40:339-359. doi:10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040218-044150

13.

WHO. Basic Documents. 49th ed. World Health organisation; 2020. https://apps.who.int/gb/bd/

14.

Zhang

Balloo

Hosein

Medland

A scoping review of well-being measures: conceptualisation and scales for overall well-being. BMC Psychol. 2024;12:585. doi:10.1186/s40359-024-02074-0

15.

Kowalski

THP

Loretto

Well-being and HRM in the changing workplace. Int J Hum Resour Manage. 2017;28(16):2229-2255. doi:10.1080/09585192.2017.1345205

16.

Warr

Nielsen

Wellbeing and work performance. In: Diener

Oishi

Tay

, eds. Handbook of Well-Being. DEF Publishers; 2018;647-667.

17.

Bellet

De Neve

Ward

Does employee happiness have an impact on productivity?

Saïd Business School WP. 2019;(2019-13). doi:10.2139/ssrn.3470734.

18.

Grawitch

Gottschalk

Munz

DC.

The path to a healthy workplace: A critical review linking healthy workplace practices, employee well-being, and organizational improvements. Consult Psychol J Pract Res. 2006;58(3):129-147. doi:10.1037/1065-9293.58.3.129

19.

Oswald

Proto

Sgroi

Happiness and productivity. J Labor Econ. 2015;33(4):789-822. doi:10.1086/681096

20.

Pagán-Castaño

Maseda-Moreno

Santos-Rojo

Wellbeing in work environments. J Bus Res. 2020;115:469-474. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.12.007

21.

Bersin

Mertens

The Definitive Guide to Wellbeing: The Healthy Organisation. The Josh Bersin Company; 2021.

22.

Lowe

Creating Healthy Organizations: Taking Action to Improve Employee Well-Being. Creating Healthy Organizations. University of Toronto Press; 2020.

23.

Burton

WHO Healthy Workplaces: A Model for Action: For Employers, Workers, Policymakers and Practitioners. World Health Organisation; 2010. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241599313

24.

Lindberg

Vingård

Indicators of healthy work environments–a systematic review. Work. 2012;41 Suppl 1(1):3032-3038. doi:10.3233/WOR-2012-0560-3032

25.

Rothmann

Cooper

, eds. Work and Organizational Psychology. 3rd ed. Routledge; 2022.

26.

Conte

Landy

, eds. Work in the 21st Century: An Introduction to Industrial and Organizational Psychology. 7th ed. Wiley; 2024.

27.

Ones

Anderson

Viswesvaran

Sinangil

, eds. The Sage Handbook of Industrial, Work & Organizational Psychology, Vols. 1–3, 2nd ed. Sage Publications Ltd; 2021.

28.

Thompson

Britt

Jex

, eds. Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior: Evidence-Based Lessons for Creating Sustainable Organizations. 4th ed. Wiley; 2024.

29.

Slišković

Occupational stress in seafaring. In: MacLachlan

, ed. Maritime Psychology: Research in Organisational and Health Behavior at Sea. Springer International Publishing; 2017;99-126.

30.

Oldenburg

Jensen

HJ.

Stress and strain among seafarers related to the occupational groups. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019;16(7):1153. doi:10.3390/ijerph16071153

31.

Jonglertmontree

Kaewboonchoo

Morioka

Boonyamalik

Mental health problems and their related factors among seafarers: a scoping review. BMC Public Health. 2022;22:282. doi:10.1186/s12889-022-12713-z

32.

Slišković

Penezić

Descriptive study of job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction in a sample of Croatian seafarers. Int Marit Health. 2015;66(2):97-105.

33.

Baygi

Shidfar

Sheidaei

Farshad

Mansourian

Blome

Psychosocial issues and sleep quality among seafarers: a mixed methods study. BMC Public Health. 2022;22(1):695. doi:10.1186/s12889-022-13154-4

34.

Toygar

Nart

Yıldırım

Work-family conflict and work alienation among seafarers: the mediating role of emotional exhaustion. Mar Pol. 2023;155:105759. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2023.105759

35.

Arıcan

OH.

The effects of digital fatigue on mental health in seafarers: Delphi and multiple regression analysis. Turk J Marit Mar Sci. 2025;11(1):46-67. doi:10.52998/trjmms.1566728

36.

Krämer

The Seafarer Perspective in Social Sustainability Reporting: Do Sustainability Reports of Leading European Container Shipping Companies Reflect the Social Issues of Seafarers? Master’s thesis. Turku, Finland: Master of Maritime Management, Turku University of Applied Sciences; 2024.

37.

Brooks

Greenberg

Mental health and psychological wellbeing of maritime personnel: a systematic review. BMC Psychol. 2022;10:139. doi:10.1186/s40359-022-00850-4

38.

Galić

Slišković

Russo

Dodoja

The need to destigmatize help-seeking behaviour: A pilot study of self-stigma associated with seeking psychological help in a sample of seafarers. In: Senbursa

Tavacioglu

eds. Maritime Wellbeing. Nova Science Publishers; 2023;27-40.

39.

Zhou

Yuen

KF.

A systematic review on seafarer health: conditions, antecedents, and interventions. Transp Policy. 2022;122:11-25. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2022.04.010

40.

Nittari

Gibelli

Bailo

Sirignano

Ricci

Factors affecting mental health of seafarers on board merchant ships: a systematic review. Rev Environ Health. 2024;39(1):151-160. doi:10.1515/reveh-2021-0070

41.

Sić

Galić

Slišković

Fair companies, satisfied seafarers: the mediating role of stress on board. In: Valerjev

Tucak Junaković

, eds. 23rd Psychology Days in Zadar: Book of Selected Proceedings. University of Zadar; 2024;105-112.

42.

Slišković

Seafarers' well-being in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study. Work. 2020;67(4):799-809. doi:10.3233/WOR-203333

43.

Slišković

The role of personality traits, work motivation and job satisfaction in the explanation of seafarers' well-being. In: Kolodziej-Durnas

Sowa

Grasmeier

, eds. Maritime Professions - Issues and Perspectives. Brill; 2023;205-224.

44.

Slišković

Penezić

Testing the effects of different aspects of contract and on-board internet access on seafarers’ satisfaction and health. Arch Ind Hyg Toxicol. 2016;67:351-361.

45.

Svetina

Perkovič

Yang

, et al. Factors impacting seafarers’ mental health and career intentions. Inquiry. 2024;61:469580241229617. doi:10.1177/00469580241229617

46.

Russo

Mulić

Kolčić

Maleš

Jerončić Tomić

Pezelj

Longitudinal study on the effect of onboard service on seafarers’ health statuses. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023;20(5):4497. doi:10.3390/ijerph20054497

47.

Jiang

Wan

Chen

Wang

Knowledge mapping of seafarers’ health research: a bibliometric analysis. Marit Pol Manage. 2021;50(5):692-705. doi:10.1080/03088839.2021.2017039

48.

Çelik Maşalacı

. A bibliometric analysis of mental health and wellbeing of seafarers. Mar Sci Technol Bull. 2024;13:56-65. doi:10.33714/masteb.1404370

49.

Sharma

Visualisation and bibliometric analysis of worldwide research trend of stress among seafarer: an extensive publication analysis. Int Marit Health. 2021;72(1):64-75. doi:10.5603/IMH.2021.0009

50.

Hayes-Mejia

Stafström

Psychosocial work environment and mental health among the global workforce of seafarers in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. BMC Public Health. 2023;23:2151. doi:10.1186/s12889-023-17035-2

51.

Onakpojeruo

Jeong

Park

Mental wellbeing; human reliability assessment of seafarers during the COVID-19 era. J Int Marit Saf Environ Aff Shipping. 2023;7(1):1-15. doi:10.1080/25725084.2023.2184604

52.

Carrera-Arce

Baumler

Hollander

A systematic review of assessment methods for seafarers’ mental health and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. Inquiry. 2023;60:469580231212218. doi:10.1177/00469580231212218

53.

Pauksztat

Grech

Kitada

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on seafarers' mental health and chronic fatigue: beneficial effects of onboard peer support, external support and Internet access. Mar Pol. 2022;137:104942. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2021.104942

54.

Liu

Sun

Liu

Impact of work-family conflict, job stress and job satisfaction on seafarer performance. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(7):2191. doi:10.3390/ijerph17072191

55.

Liu

Zheng

Yang

Dong

Tee

EYJ

. The effects of Chinese seafarers’ job demands on turnover intention: the role of fun at work. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(14):5247. doi:10.3390/ijerph17145247

56.

Senbursa

Dunder

The mediating effect of well-being, happiness, and trust in the relationship between work-life balance and work effectiveness in seafarers. Inquiry. 2024;61:469580241254745. doi:10.1177/00469580241254745

57.

Yuen

Loh

Zhou

Wong

YD.

Determinants of job satisfaction and performance of seafarers. Nanyang Technological University. 2018. Accessed March 2, 2025. https://dr.ntu.edu.sg/bitstream/10356/105474/1/Determinants%20of%20job%20satisfaction%20and%20performance%20of%20seafarers.pdf

58.

BIMCO, ICS. Seafarer Workforce Report: The Global Supply and Demand for Seafarers in 2021. 2021. Accessed March 2, 2025. https://www.bimco.org/products/publications/titles/seafarer-workforce-report/

59.

Slišković

Juranko

Dual life of seafarers’ families: Descriptive study of perspectives of seafarers’ partners. Community Work Fam. 2019;22(5):629-646.

60.

Slišković

Juranko

General mental health of seafarers' partners: Testing the role of personal resources and human-resource practices. Work. 2019;64(2):291-301.

61.

Bakker

Demerouti

Sanz-Vergel

Job demands–Resources Theory: ten years later. Annu Rev Organ Psychol Organ Behav. 2023;10(1):25-53. doi:10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-120920-053933

62.

Creswell

Plano Clark

, eds. Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. 4th ed. Sage Publications; 2018.

63.

International Maritime Organization. International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW), Including 2010 Manila Amendments. IMO Publishing; 2021.

64.

Kline

ed. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. 4th ed. The Guilford Press; 2016.

65.

Galić

Sić

Slišković

I constantly feel worn out": Mixed-methodology approach to seafarers’ sleep on board. Inquiry. 2023;60:469580231159746. doi:10.1177/00469580231159746