Abstract
BACKGROUND:
In many European countries, entrepreneurs have to consider psychosocial factors in the workplace risk assessment. Little is known about psychosocial working conditions in micro- and small companies. Even less is known about the entrepreneur in these settings.
OBJECTIVE:
The present study was conducted to develop and examine the job demands and resources of small business owners and managers, who serve as important designers of their businesses’ working characteristics.
METHODS:
N = 29 semi-structured interviews with a unique sample of owners and managers of the transportation sector were analysed via qualitative content analysis.
RESULTS:
The data suggest the presence of specific demands (time-, management-, and organisational demands) and resources (support and feedback). In particular, the variability and load of the demands indicate that the existing theoretical framework for employees is inadequate for evaluating the working characteristics of micro- and small business managers.
CONCLUSION:
Occupational health activities in small companies should include the working situation of the entrepreneur/manager.
Introduction
Psychosocial risk assessment
European Union Directive 89/391/EEC requires employers to ensure the safety and health of workers with regard to all aspects of their work, including psychosocial factors. The Arbeitsschutzgesetz (German Occupational Safety and Health Act) of 1996 translated the framework directive into German law. Work must now be designed such that unfavourable mental stress (which is highly likely to cause psychological disorders) be avoided. The employer should thereby use a risk assessment to determine which preventive measures are required. Psychosocial risks result from work content, work organisation, and social relationships [1]. By documenting a risk assessment, the employer should be able to demonstrate that existing and potential risks have been identified and that adequate preventive measures have been derived as far as possible. Implementing such a process raises a variety of methodological and practical questions. This documentation obligation applies to all companies, regardless of their operational structure or the number of their employees. As in many areas of legislation, such as health and safety regulations, the specific conditions of small businesses are not included. As a result, few entrepreneurs from these companies in Germany deal with mental stress in their companies in a structured manner [2]. A representative survey found that only 38% of the 1,000 interviewed micro- and small-business entrepreneurs claimed to have carried out a risk assessment [3], and only 6.3% claimed to also have integrated mental stress factors into their analysis. Additionally, these figures have yet to take the quality of the assessment and the implementation of measures into account. The authors found that other, more intuitive strategies are pursued in micro- and small businesses to ensure that the work remain healthy and safe. In addition, measures to improve working conditions often depend on the employer’s social relationship with his or her employees [4, 5]. These entrepreneurs usually lack time, economic resources, and expertise in occupational health and safety as well as organisational development [6, 7]. They also find that there are too many regulations, uncertainties, and documentation requirements in occupational health and safety in relation to the small number of labourers [8, 9]. Moreover, in most cases, existing informational material and counselling services are not tailored to small business structures [10].
Micro- and small enterprises
The European Union defines micro- and small enterprises by means of the number of employees (< 10, < 50) and either the turnover or balance sheet total below a certain amount (< EUR 2 million, < EUR 10 million) [11]. Micro- and small enterprises comprised 97.2% (88.0% micro, 9.2% small) of the almost 3.5 million companies in Germany in 2016 and together employed 32.1% (13.5% micro, 18.6% small) of the German workforce [12]. In order to investigate the question of whether working in small companies is more or less healthy, sick leave and accident rates are often compared. There tend to be higher sickness rates and longer sickness periods with an increasing number of employees in German companies [13, 14]. However, it is important to consider the fact that the obligation to have medical certificates in large companies and sick presenteeism could influence these data. Furthermore, microenterprises report fewer occupational accidents per full-time employee in comparison with small- and medium-sized enterprises, whereas the risk of major accidents that lead to retirement is highest in these settings [15]. On the other hand, a literature study of international publications found that small enterprises have a greater risk of severe and fatal accidents [16]. A possible explanation for this finding is that larger companies deal with the issue of occupational health and safety in a more structured manner. However, it should also be noted that small businesses are found more often than average in sectors with increased risk potential. Many statistics summarize micro-, small-, and medium-sized enterprises together, whereas differentiating between them appears reasonable in some cases [17]. In summary, it is not possible to exclude confounding variables that are associated with company size. Therefore, it is not possible to make reliable statements about a difference between small and large companies regarding health and occupational safety from these data.
There is a lack of research about the specific demands and resources of employees in micro- and small businesses. Field studies tend to be more likely to take place in large companies due to the larger sample size. Extensive literature research yielded hardly any studies dealing with the peculiarities of psychosocial working conditions in very small businesses. Very few studies exist that explicitly compare the psychosocial work environment in companies of different sizes. One exception is an analysis of a representative sample of employees in the Danish industry [16], which indicated that there are fewer demands (for a lot of and fast work, emotional work) in small enterprises. Employees in micro- and small enterprises tend to have more favourable psychosocial working conditions (e.g. greater autonomy and social support) [18–21] at the workplace compared with employees in larger firms, even if the regression is controlled for firm size [22]. There appear to be differences in health-related psychosocial working conditions depending on the size of the company, which indicates an indirect effect of employer size on health [16, 23]. Unlike in large companies, where there is often a variety of managers with various leadership styles, the culture in micro- and small enterprises is dominated by the business owner–manager’s influence. The obvious assumption is that human resources are much more important for economic success in small businesses than in large enterprises. As a result, these managers should have a greater commitment to the well-being of their staff and a closer and more informal relationship with each individual employee [24]. The small number of employees should also lead to better communication and collaboration opportunities and positive employee attitudes and behaviour [21, 26]. In addition to the positive working conditions in small companies, there are also conceivable framework conditions that could have a rather negative effect on the well-being of the employees (e.g. less job security, more responsibility, lower wages).
Work characteristics of entrepreneurs
Some research results demonstrate that entrepreneurs have worse scores on different health indicators in comparison with the general population (e.g. stress, depression, anxiety, sleep disturbances, blood pressure) [27, 28]. However, conflicting findings also exist [29–31] and indicate that there are many variables to consider when predicting the health and well-being of entrepreneurs. Entrepreneur research distinguishes, for instance, between two types of entrepreneurs who are dependent on the motivation of starting a business: Findings show that the so-called ‘necessity entrepreneurs’ (those who needed to become self-employed) are more dissatisfied and therefore probably more distressed than so-called ‘opportunity entrepreneurs’ [32, 33]. Distinguishing between mental and physical health effects, Nikolova [34] found that being formally unemployed improved only mental health indicators. As with employees, it is practicable to predict the level of work-related strain caused by the specific demands (impairing health) and resources (motivating working characteristics) (JD-R Model, [35]) of the work tasks [36]. However, entrepreneurs generally design these working conditions by themselves, and they differ from the typical stress-related factors of employees. The degree of autonomy is the main difference between the self-employed and employees [37]. This autonomy and being responsible for their own work design might appear to have health benefits for entrepreneurs. By determining their own tasks and time schedules themselves, they can act freely within legal regulations. On the other hand, the workload, working time, and responsibility are high [29, 31]. Dijkhuizen et al. [38] formulated a job demands–resources model for entrepreneurs that includes specific entrepreneurial job demands and found ‘uncertainty and risk’, ‘time demands’, and ‘quantitative workload’ to be important job demands, and ‘work organisation’ and ‘feedback’ were found to be important job resources for entrepreneurs. Rau et al. [27] could not predict entrepreneur health with the Job Demand–Control Model: Contrary to the research status of employees, job control and demand had no predictive power for health. Wach et al. [39] found specific challenging (cognitive demands) and hindering (emotional demands) stressors for entrepreneurs. Compared with other employment statuses, individuals who are self-employed with labour tend to have a favourable job quality (e.g. better social environment, skills, and discretion; higher job security) yet seem comparatively vulnerable to ‘work–private inference’ and ‘presenteeism’ [40]. In a study with entrepreneurs, a Dutch research group [41] found that difficulty detaching from work was related to higher levels of exhaustion and physical complaints. Due to the autonomy experienced in organising their working time and the lack of legal regulations for the working hours of the self-employed, they generally work an average more than employees [42]. However, Taris et al. [41] could not find a negative effect of long working hours on health for entrepreneurs. Millan et al. [43] found a positive association of working hours and job satisfaction for the self-employed, which contrasts with a negative association for employees. The autonomy of the self-employed could be assumed to have a positive or buffering effect on stress [44]. However, entrepreneurs appear to design their working time based more on the needs of the business than on their personal needs. A common, more maladaptive behaviour for coping with work-related demands is sick presenteeism and extending working time without taking time to recover [45]. One example is the availability for the company beyond regular working hours (e.g. at night, over the weekend, during holidays), which has negative effects on employees’ recovery processes and health of employees [46, 47]. Previous published investigations have not explored the effects of entrepreneurs’ availability or time flexibility. The self-employed experience more work–family conflict than employees, mediated by job demands (e.g. longer working hours and working at short notice) [48]. Social support from colleagues or supervisors is another effective resource for employees [49] but is usually not immediately available for entrepreneurs unless they are organised in an entrepreneurial network or manage the company in a team.
Stephan [50] reviewed the research on entrepreneurs’ mental health and well-being and concluded that a much deeper and more well-founded understanding of entrepreneurs’ work and mental health that outlines a specific interdisciplinary theoretical framework is needed. The review found various work characteristics and resources to be antecedents of entrepreneurs’ mental well-being: autonomy, working hours, flexibility, significance, demands, job insecurity and uncertainty, social support, and feedback.
Psychosocial demands and resources of micro- and small business owner–managers
Literature on the working reality and health of small business owners is scant [51]. By clustering the European self-employed, Gevart et al. [52] differentiated small employers from other self-employed individuals (farmers, larger employers, freelancers). We know that the smaller the company, the more the working conditions of entrepreneurs and employees resemble each other, and the manager performs operative tasks in addition to managerial functions [37]. Whether the execution of these operational activities has a positive or negative effect on the entrepreneur remains to be explored yet likely influences the entrepreneur’s understanding of the operative activities in the company and increases the variability of work (significance and skill utilisation). Scase and Goffee [26] differentiate between four types of small business owners based on different work roles: the ‘self-employed’, the ‘small employer’, the ‘owner–controller’, and the ‘owner–director’. The ‘self-employed’ have no employees, the ‘small employer’ works alongside the staff and (like the ‘owner–controller’) as administrator and manager, and the ‘owner–director’ delegates these tasks. Overall, in very small companies, at least one person is responsible for jobs, security, and the health of employees, which could lead to stress due to work overload. Furthermore, leadership responsibility in small businesses is an additional managerial stress-relevant demand of entrepreneurs. Individuals who are self-employed with labour experience more stress (partially due to higher demands) than self-employed individuals without employees [44]. Supervision as well as all tasks in the field of human resources (e.g. acquisition, recruitment, development) are usually part of the entrepreneur’s scope of duties. There are no findings as to whether these duties are stress-relevant for the target group of the present research.
Purpose of the study
Based on the state of research, the present study examines the following question:
What are the specific demands and resources of micro- and small business owner–managers?
In order to answer this research question, only a qualitative approach was possible due to the marginal scientific knowledge of important stressors, strains, and coping mechanisms for this specific target group. The main methodological approach in occupational health psychology is quantitative, and qualitative field research has rarely been used [53]. Therefore, guideline-based interviews were conducted and evaluated using the qualitative content analysis [54]. This approach has the advantage of being schematic and rule-based on the one hand while being open enough to generate new insights from the respondents’ subjective perspective on the other hand.
Procedure
This study was conducted between May and November 2018. When possible, the people interviewed always included the owner of the company if he or she was involved in daily operations as owner–manager. When this was not possible, the manager responsible for the formal working environment in the company was interviewed. Participants were recruited from among the insured companies of the Berufsgenossenschaft Verkehrswirtschaft Post-Logistik Telekommunikation (German Social Accident Insurance Institution for Commercial Transport, Postal Logistics and Telecommunication, ‘BG Verkehr’) as one of the nine institutions in Germany for statutory accident insurance and prevention for the industrial sector as it is structured according to commercial branches. ‘BG Verkehr’ insures ca. 196,000 companies and their ca. 1,702,343 dependent employees and entrepreneurs in the transportation sector: freight transport, logistic companies, courier express parcel service companies, as well as bus-, taxi-, aviation-, and shipping companies. The sample consisted of 29 interviewees (Table 1) who were found via a call on the website and the member magazine as well as through personal contacts of the labour inspectors. The aim of the sampling was to achieve a high variation of interview partners until information redundancy or saturation occurred.
Sample
Sample
The mean age of the sample was 47.7 years (SD = 9.8; range 28 to 63), and n = 9 (31%) were female. N = 19 (66%) were company owners, n = 3 (10%) were the partner or wife of the owner, and n = 7 (24 %) were employees with management responsibility, such as operation manager or managing director. N = 12 (41%) of the owned companies were founded by the current owner, and n = 7 (24%) were taken over by a family member or employee. The average number of employees per company was 17.1 (SD = 12.2; range: 2–45). On average, participants had held their respective positions for 12 years (SD = 7.2; range: 1–27 years).
The interviews were conducted by phone or (in 3 cases) face to face. The interview duration had a minimum of 26 minutes and a maximum of 110 minutes. Interviews were audio-recorded with informed consent and transcribed for the purpose of analysis. Every member of the sample participated in a semi-structured interview based on the literature review. This interview comprised four sections: ‘introduction’, ‘fields of duty of the participant’, ‘entrepreneurial demands and resources’, and ‘coping’. Other questions (not evaluated here) concerned the working situation of the employees as well as occupational safety.
The opening question was: “What exactly is your function in the company?” This question was followed by some introductory questions about the individual’s personal career and the foundation, development, and structure of the company. To explore the participants’ specific demands and resources, two questions based on the ‘Stress Incident Record’ [55] were included: The participants were asked to describe a situation in the preceding 4 weeks that had made them feel stressed, annoyed, upset, or frustrated as well as a situation that had made them feel content, proud, happy, or motivated. Through this approach, accounts that had been remembered as particularly distressing and motivating were collected. Additional theory-driven demands and resources (especially those based on Dijkhuizen [38] and Stephan [50]) were included: task variety and complexity, time demands, responsibility, uncertainty and risks, management demands, feedback, and support. The final questions concerned ‘self-endangering behaviour’. The categories of the literature-based interview guideline served as a rough structure for the initial coding system, which was differentiated and supplemented via the interview material based on the research question. The interviews were coded and evaluated using MAXQDA 2018 software [56]. The results are reported analogously to the final coding system.
Tasks
When asked about their responsibilities in the company, most interview participants stated that they were responsible for the office and organisation, such as payroll, accounting, scheduling, procurement, marketing, and fleet management. These tasks were often considered annoying because they were perceived as being monotonous and having nothing to do with the actual profession. The activities were usually not delegated to staff or external companies as they were too expensive for these small-scale businesses. It is noteworthy that some respondents only performed tasks that they did not like.
I: Is there anything you particularly like to do at your job?
R04: (Pause). Well, what should I say? Not really, no.
In two cases, the field of duty involved more the technical management of the company. Three people had more strategic duties and tried to stay out of the day-to-day business. Two-thirds of the entrepreneurs performed the same tasks as the employees, such as taxi driving, carrying out funerals, or shipping. Some entrepreneurs performed these operational activities to stay in touch with their employees’ practical processes and working situations. It should be noted that these specific activities were often the most enjoyed.
I: Are there times when you can help with the move yourself?
R08: Yeah, once in a while. Like yesterday. But it’s also fun because you have a connection with the employees. And you can see on site, basically, how things are going. Process optimization is the keyword.
However, most entrepreneurs jump in when no other employee is available, but one-third never do any operational work.
Demands and resources of the sample.
Time demands
The participants were asked how many hours they work per week. The range of the answers was very broad as three respondents participated in entrepreneurial activity that constituted only a fraction of their total activities and others often completed work through seasonal businesses (e.g. passenger shipping, boat rental, soil transport). The average working time of the respondents was 48 hours/week (SD = 19.3; range: 2–90). Half of them also worked on weekends.
In addition to working hours, n = 17 respondents were available 24 hours/day for clients or employees, and some were even available at night or while on holiday. Four respondents were only available during the day.
I: So you are available 24 hours a day if something comes up?
R27: Yes, yes, seven days a week, 365 days a year.
I: And also while on holiday?
R27: Yes, exactly, no one can fill in for me.
On the subject of recovery, a dual picture emerged. Almost half of the respondents reported having good strategies to recover and detach from work (e.g. a daily, relaxed lunch break; regular exercise; no emails after work).
I: Do you sacrifice any leisure activities for work, such as family?
R05: No, they would hold that against me at some point, and I don’t want that. No, I’m just too happy being with my kids and my wife, and I –No, so on weekends, I stay home. Maybe that answers the question. And I take them to bed every night, so I spend time with them.
On the other hand, one-third of the interviewees talked about recovery difficulties (e.g. no time for family, recreation, or hobbies; no work breaks; no detachment; no holidays).
R14: So when I get home from work, I need to recover yet, right? Sometimes my mind is still on work a while later, especially if there were any problems. “What are you doing?” Or “Could you do this better?” When we work in shifts, the late shift usually calls again in the evening. Then you can’t detach. I can’t do it at all. So I haven’t had a relationship for two years, no partner anymore. I also don’t know how I could have a relationship here. Because I am. . . some days, I am just at work. When I am no longer physically there, then I am still mentally at work. Permanently, around the clock.
Of the interviewees, three people had already experienced a stress-related breakdown (“serious warning”), and all of them had changed their behaviour afterwards (e.g. tried to slow down, reduced working time, delegated tasks).
N = 22 interviewees said that they also worked when sick, with each drawing different boundaries (e.g. no work if they have “fever”, “cannot walk”, or have a “head or arm injury”).
R23: Let’s put it this way: When my children had the chickenpox, I got it, too, and that didn’t stop me from working.
Some interviewees stated that they always tried to get things done and worked from bed with their cell phone and laptop if necessary, whereas others explicitly avoided working when sick. However, having ‘a cold’ did not represent a reason for any respondent to stay home from work.
Management demands
Supervisory difficulties were amongst the most stressful situations for respondents. In 7 cases, respondents reported on employees who had cheated on or exploited the entrepreneur (e.g. faking sickness, theft, no repayment of private loan). Other situations involved a lack of work engagement from individual employees. These situations were particularly stressful as the informal exchange relationship was perceived as being disturbed.
I: Thinking about the last 4 weeks, was there any situation that particularly annoyed you, or frustrated or angered you?
R15: Yes, I actually had to fire someone. And that got me really upset because she had been with us for 13 years. We were basically looking to retire at the same time. But the woman defrauded us, so I had to let her go. And that go me really upset because we are really easygoing people. We are all on a first-name basis and work together. And it was really bitter to get so screwed over after 13 years. It got me really upset and also hurt me as a person very much.
One-third of the interviewees described employee supervision as being stressful. The need to control employees (e.g. dress code, effective application of disinfectants) and repeat instructions very often or in a strict tone were mentioned.
R25: I keep noticing that men really often act like little children. I think you have to remind them of the same thing every quarter because they keep forgetting again. Like I said, like when they jump out of their trucks so fast. I keep saying that it’s too fast, that they can break their ankle, but they sometimes don’t think because of how monotonous the work is, always the same thing, and you don’t always think about what you’re doing.
Overall, many respondents had the special requirement of caring for their employees. The respondents often reported a sense of commitment to their staff. They tried to help them in private, administrative, and financial issues.
R01: You have to be mom, dad, bank, and personal assistant in every situation. Everything’s on my shoulders.
The subject of occupational safety was also discussed, especially if the entrepreneurs felt that they had to protect their employees (e.g. personal protective equipment, preventing them from working overtime, caring for their employees after a traumatic event).
When asked about their leadership style, more than half of those interviewed described an employee-oriented management style (e.g. cooperative, amicable, informal). 30% customised their behaviour depending on the specific situation or the specific employee.
R02: So it’s a bit of a mix - how should I say? - between being the good cop and the bad cop, I think. I’m pretty strict with some things, and also assertive, so if I want certain things done a certain way, then I get what I want. But when it comes to everything else, the workers can basically do whatever they want.
Four respondents evaluated their interaction with their staff as being too laissez faire and felt that they were sometimes exploited.
Interviewees were asked about demands that arise as a result of customer contact or customer requirements. Some companies mainly work for other companies (B2B), whereas others usually have the end customer as clients (B2C) (e.g. funeral transport, taxi service). This distinction plays a role in entrepreneurs’ demands through customer requirements. Some statements indicated that contact with the end consumers was the nicest part of the job.
R29: I always try –well, when we have rough days –I also always try to work on site with the customer because that’s basically the whole reason I do this job.
On the other hand, customer complaints are not always reasonable (e.g. bus delay in extreme weather conditions, unwillingness to pay for services, customers only want to deal with the owner). Client organisations sometimes ask for unreasonable requirements (e.g. certificates). However, in some instances, these companies report being much more flexible in terms of order execution than are large contractors.
Almost all interviewed business owners claimed to be 100% responsible for the functioning of their business, as did some of the employed managing directors. Many business owners explicitly mentioned their own responsibility for their employees (e.g. health, payment, work–life balance) and for their own family incomes. One responsibility in family business is also the family heritage, which needs to be preserved. The funeral directors also mentioned the special responsibility of attending to the customers’ emotional situation.
The attitude towards and handling of uncertainties and risks were very different among the respondents, which is partly due to the different business areas and can also be explained by the heterogeneous stages of the companies development. There are more uncertainties when a company is young than after years of experience in a business field. Given an understanding of entrepreneurial fundamentals, uncertainty is manageable for many respondents. Some have clear strategies for financially difficult times (e.g. selling specific vehicles, slow growth). Investment in employees was also mentioned as an uncertainty factor (e.g. finding good staff and worthwhile training costs).
Many of the statements in the interviews involved requirements from authorities towards businesses (e.g. documentation requirements, licensing procedures, regulations). Most of these requirements dealt with the increasing complexity of regulations and some examples of non-compliance with rules due to ignorance (e.g. taxes, health and safety regulations, refund claims). Many rules were described as “nonsensical”, “unrealistic”, or “lacking in practical relevance”. Those most frequently mentioned were documentary requirements, which require more working time and are usually perceived of as being excessive.
R30: Sometimes, I think there is so much bureaucracy with certain things that you have to be careful not to spend all your time dealing with them so that you also actually work once you are finished with the bureaucracy. It’s always a little difficult sometimes. The energy you need to deal with the bureaucracy is sometimes really enormous, yeah. (...) Yes, of course, because you want something to be done and you want it documented, and then you record it and think you did everything correctly. But in the end, you didn’t do anything that you were actually supposed to do.
R11: What’s thrown me for a loop a little bit in the last 4 weeks is that we’re now getting audited by the tax office. Because that’s always the most important thing to worry about, I’d say. It can mess a lot of things up. Because you know, if they come, they search until they find something, and if they find something, they always want at least 5,000 euros extra, and then they are satisfied. That really worries me because I know for sure that they will find something. That’s the way it is. They always find something.
Another issue was equal regulations for large and small companies because small enterprises usually do not have skilled specialists for diverse disciplines (e.g. data security, environmental legislation, taxes).
Depending on the sector of the company, different framework conditions can be demanding for entrepreneurs. For instance, in the taxi industry, the respondents reported a great deal on unfair conditions of competition through undeclared work as well as on the threat posed by new transportation concepts in cities. At funerals, all respondents mentioned that there is no mandatory qualification requirement that would serve as a measure of quality. In the case of patient transport, price negotiations with health insurance companies are considered problematic, especially the associated price war that caps the payable wages. Inland shipping companies complain about the tactics of relocating employment relationships abroad as well as the industry’s lobby, which is perceived of as being poor. The new requirements of digitalisation are common among all industries.
Organisational demands
Different qualification requirements in various regional and occupationally specific labour market situations paint a heterogeneous picture when it comes to recruiting employees. More than half of the respondents reported difficulties in finding new employees. The presumed reasons are full employment, salary, and unattractive professions or working conditions. Only a few considered professions require recognised vocational training (e.g. inland shipping, paramedics, driving instructor, thanatologist). There are comparatively low qualification requirements for working in the transportation industry. For professional drivers, a corresponding driving license and the prescribed training sessions are sufficient. The driver shortage is more likely to be due to the financing of the driving license and, of course, the precarious working conditions in many jobs (e.g. working hours, traffic situation, reputation of the occupation). Some organisations could grow because of the present positive order situation but cannot find further capable staff.
R07: I would rather say that because of the current situation, you really can’t get any clever people anymore or there are not many people left on the market. We prefer to go lower and get 4 clever people as opposed to 9 with 5 being rotten eggs.
Others (28%) did not find it difficult to find new staff and often justified this success via their good reputation and employee-friendly working conditions (e.g. continuing education, high-quality work equipment, high appreciation) or simply via competitors who mistreat their staff.
R24: Well, we put out another job advertisement, and a lot of people applied for it, especially in this industry, where people say there’s a shortage of drivers, skilled personnel, and so on. But I have to say, the response was really positive. And when we asked one of them, “Man, hey, how did you find us?” he said, “Yeah, word is going around in the industry as well, yeah, basically the way you treat your employees.”
A disadvantage of a small company is the lack of flexibility in the case of absent employees.
R16: If someone is missing or something, the others have to pick up the slack. And you don’t notice that in large companies. And here, I don’t need to say anything at all. They figure things out amongst themselves. That’s how it is. “Man, you weren’t sick at all. Why didn’t you show up? Just because of a little cold?” They figure things out by themselves. I don’t need to get involved at all. They put a bit of pressure on each other and let each other know what’s acceptable. And of course, you get a sense of community.
Depending on the importance of the contract, companies have different strategies for dealing with short-term staff shortages. In most cases, colleagues simply need to work more or the manager/entrepreneur fills in. Several companies have temporary employees or know people from a pool of acquaintances who step in in an emergency (e.g. wife, former employee, colleagues). A couple of entrepreneurs avoid personnel shortages in advance via a high (and expensive) staffing level. The use of temporary employment agencies is less widespread (due to the lack of skilled workers and additional strain or subcontractors). If no strategies can be found, the work is simply left undone.
R06: So you hardly get any drivers at all from some temporary employment agency or something. That’s almost impossible. That’s why I have only drivers on staff, and if I have to look for employees for a holiday or replacement if someone gets sick, I only have to look for a loader in the back who has a very low qualification. And it’s much easier to recruit them than drivers. (...) If there’s a problem, I go to the truck myself to deal with it, or you have to organize things somehow in the team so that the other employees work more so that the tours are finished by the evening.
I: But what if, for example, a driver is absent for 3 weeks? What happens then? How do you deal with that?
R13: We can’t deal with that on such short notice.
I: That means that the car stops running, then?
R13: Exactly. Unfortunately, that would be a breakdown. There wouldn’t be any temporary help for 3 weeks. That’s not possible.
Resources
Feedback
Interviewees were asked how they knew if they worked well. Four sources were used for the feedback: work output, clients, employees, and financial success. Positive feedback and a motivating moment occurred when projects could be successfully completed or problems were solved. Other indicators included positive examinations by authorities, certifications, or prices. Funeral companies often received explicit praise from customers, whereas other companies considered no complaints to be positive feedback. Three respondents distributed feedback forms to their customers or could be evaluated on the Internet. For others (28%), employees were the most important indicator of the quality of their own work. These respondents measured themselves via satisfied employees, a low turnover, or a good working atmosphere. A content workforce was also identified as a condition for business success.
R12: If the people here in the company are not satisfied, especially with the management, that leaks outside the company. And the crane operator, the crane operator is alone at the construction site for a while. He is also, let’s say, our representative during that time. Because he is the company’s representative at the customer’s construction site. Because he actually has the most customer contact. Of course, if you see him leave the yard in the morning with a long face, that doesn’t look good for the customer.
Support
The interviewees were asked who supported them in their work. Three respondents could not think of any support. N = 8 thought of asking someone in the management, a business partner, or –in one case –the former owner for support. In family businesses, other family members often help each other. Some explicitly mentioned that a specific employee or the whole workforce supported them in their work.
I: Who or what supports you in your work?
R06: My employees. Basically, my two employees in the office, my foreman, and of course, the rest of the staff. Ultimately, everyone on the team –including the janitor –is needed in some way or another, and I have some colleagues I can rely on a lot who actively support me. No matter how big or small the company is, you can’t run it alone, you can’t have that illusion.
R22: And we can rely on our employees. So if they notice that we need to focus on something else or that we’re dealing with a project that we’re planning, the employees know that. Or if a driver is absent due to illness, the workers are committed to helping out independently and to offering assistance.
Furthermore, six entrepreneurs named a business association as a form of support even though there individual statements about disillusioned institutions were also made. Some entrepreneurs viewed the exchange with other entrepreneurs as a form of support, and three companies even cooperated with competitors to support each other. Only one entrepreneur mentioned supporting authorities, and others expressed their disappointment with government agencies due to a lack of support or even the obstacles that these agencies created.
Discussion
In the present study, interviews were evaluated in order to investigate the specific demands and resources of managing directors of micro- and small businesses. The current state of research on working conditions in small-scale enterprises as well as on the demands and resources of entrepreneurs is fragmented. Supplementing existing theories and models designed for employees (of large enterprises) or the self-employed via additional working characteristics therefore appeared insufficient. For instance, Dijkhuizen et al. [38] had conversations with entrepreneurs (not described in detail) about the differences between the work performed by employees in comparison with entrepreneurs in order to develop an expanded job-demand scale. Lek et al. [57] recently explored psychosocial risk factors in various kinds of entrepreneurs (self-employed, small business owners as well as liberal professionals). The present interview study extended this approach to explore specific demands and resources for owner-managers of micro- and small companies. The focus was thereby explicitly on small employers, and diverse questioning methods (e.g. existing scales, Stress Incident Record, circular questioning) were used to gain a deeper understanding of micro- and small business owner–managers. A qualitative methodology was chosen in which existing theoretical approaches were examined and additional aspects could simultaneously be explored. Small employers’ experience of distressing working conditions should serve as a basis for expanding the state of research as well as for target-group-orientated health promotion.
To summarise the results, first, the respondents’ concrete working tasks revealed a wide range of complexity (from simple bookkeeping tasks to strategic company development). Many perform tasks that they could delegate, and they mostly no longer work in their initial profession. Above all, the management’s regular operational activity (e.g. as stand-ins) is a peculiarity in small businesses. The variety of responsibilities and the range of complexity of the tasks reveal role or work overload as potential antecedents of burnout [58] for small business managers and owners.
Second, as expected for the self-employed, working time is long, and self-endangering behaviour (availability, presenteeism, lack of recovery) is widespread.
Third, the explored leadership and organisational demands have thus far hardly been considered in the literature. The particular personal proximity of the entrepreneurs to the workforce seems to play a comparatively large role in small businesses. It seems to be very important for the managers that the ‘psychological contract’ [59] be respected, which suggests a norm of reciprocity between the manager and the workforce.
Fourth, additional demands result from the entrepreneur’s role as a generalist without his or her own experts in a variety of fields. Changing legal requirements create stress for the respondents more than anything else.
Fifth, each industry has peculiarities that should be considered in the overall constellation of working conditions.
A number of limitations of this study and areas for future research should be mentioned. Of course, these results are not representative of and do not suggest anything about the effect of these factors on the well-being and health of this target group. All interview participants work in the transport industry. The framework conditions and the educational requirements of the employees are very different in other sectors. Another limitation is the mixture in the sample of owners and managers. Responsibility and role stressors should differ between an entrepreneur and an employed managing director [60]. The behaviour of many entrepreneurs is primary shaped by the aim to keep their company alive. The company’s situation from the entrepreneur’s point of view should therefore also be considered.
This study should thus be seen as a first step in giving scientific attention to and enhancing the academic understanding of an under-researched group. More in-depth analysis in other industries and settings is needed in order to prepare large-sample investigations to confirm correlations with health indicators. Further studies should be conducted on demands and resources, and their health effects should be differentiated based on the position as well as the different roles of small business owners (especially ‘small employers’ and ‘owner–controllers’ [26]). Personalities, experience, and careers should also be considered for a holistic understanding personal resources. Furthermore, a company owner’s wife or partner seems to play a crucial role in designing the working climate in small businesses. In addition, sector-specific features should also be taken into account in future research. Some industries (such as funerals, inland shipping) are not represented in the literature yet are still part of our working world. We thus miss out on relevant stress factors when mixing different business areas in analyses.
Moreover, the behaviour of an entrepreneur has direct and indirect effects on the psychosocial working conditions of his or her employees. Better understanding the mental health of entrepreneurs represents another step in dealing with the health of employees in small companies and addressing relevant factors in practice. Small business owners are better addressed with specific research findings than with abstract concepts from large-scale research in order convince these owners of the benefits of health promotion or risk assessments in practice. In summary, further research should identify the factors that keep entrepreneurs healthy as well as what kind of managers create healthy working conditions for their labour force. Future studies would also benefit from adding additional perspectives on the subject (e.g. of the employees, spouse) validating the statements of the asked managers.
The current study has practical implications for improving occupational health in micro- and small enterprises. The results of this study demonstrate that micro-entrepreneurs need support in shaping their own working conditions (e.g. job crafting) and managerial competence, for example, from business associations or authorities. In addition, organisations that deal with occupational safety should focus on the entrepreneur as well as on small companies as a healthy entrepreneur as well as healthy and content employees improve occupational health safety.
Conclusion
Managing directors in small businesses have specific demands (time-, management-, and organisational demands) and resources (support and feedback). The results of this interview study indicate that the theoretical framework for employees is not sufficient analysing working conditions of their employers. Occupational health activities in small companies should include the working situation of the entrepreneur/manager.
Conflict of interest
The author declares that there is no conflict of interest. This work also did not receive any funding.