Analyzing the stress management intervention impacting the mindfulness and well-being of employees

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Developing employee well-being as well as lowering stress may have several benefits for organizations. Stress management intervention techniques utilized via organizations help to develop worker mindfulness and well-being, and reduce stress.

OBJECTIVE:

To review stress management interventions to determine the effectiveness of diverse interventions in improving the mindfulness and well-being of employees working in an organization.

METHODS:

This work is split into two main sections: collection of data and analysis of data. First, data collection is carried out. The structured questionnaire was organized and distributed to managers and working employees of an organization. Based on the developed hypothesis, the questionnaire was arranged and all queries were compulsory. Subsequently, the collected data were performed by Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) and One Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) analysis.

RESULTS:

The Standard Mean Residual Root Square for the baseline model of mindfulness and well-being of employees working in an organization is 0.2156, which is better than threshold value.

CONCLUSION:

From the analysis, the goodness of fit and significant relation among the stress intervention techniques as well as mindfulness and well-being of employees in an organization has been found.

Keywords

Data organization managers questionnaire hypothesis

1 Introduction

Employee stress is becoming an increasingly important issue for today’s organizations. Stress is well-defined as a living environment in which people are facing restrictions, opportunities, and the consequences are uncertain and considerable [1]. Work-related stress also affects employee behavior and has a wide range of impacts on employee motivation and satisfaction [2, 3]. Employee productivity and the overall productivity of an organization are affected by stress and motivation. Stress may cause physiological effects, psychological effects, and emotional effects [4].

The stress of employees in the organization can be caused by individual and organizational factors [5]. Stress is avoided when an organization accepts the ideas of employees, guides employees, and offers a chance for an employee to be involved in decision-making [6, 7]. When employees are actively concerned in the decision-making method of an organization, they tend to put more effort into improving performance. Injustice can be dissatisfying and disenchanting [29 –31]. When employees feel that they are being treated improperly, they are less productive and sometimes even counterproductive [8]. Therefore, an effective stress management program helps organizations improve the performance of individuals, groups, and thus the organization itself [32, 33].

In an organization, stress management intervention activities are planned to enhance the well-being of employees and reduce the work stress of employees [22 –24]. Stress management intervention is classified as primary, secondary, and territory types of intervention [9, 10]. The primary type of intervention is prevention and is proactive, where activities like planning and time management, job redesign, training and development, and personal organization fit are offered [34, 35]. The secondary type of intervention is based on coping ameliorative in which problem-facing techniques, emotional coping methods, resilience, and social support were provided to the employee [11, 39]. Finally, the territory intervention focuses both on the individual and organizational level stress of employees [25, 26]. While focusing on individual stress employee guidance programs, mindfulness, role analysis, and respite were provided to the employee for managing the stress [12, 13]. Focusing on the organization level stress included flexible scheduling of work, diversity programs, and health management policies. These were offered to the employees to reduce the organizational level of stress [36 –38].

Recently, Holman et al. [14] explained different levels of factors causing stress among the employees in the organization. They also explained the stress intervention types to be followed by the organization. Mihalits et al. [15] identified the effectiveness of organizations’ stress management strategies. They evaluated the SMI in an organization by conducting a structured interview and the resultant outcome shows that activities of stress management help to enhance the work engagement and work motivation of employees. Kriakous et al. [16] explained the work stress of health care professionals. They explained that being mindful helps to reduce the health-related stress of individuals. Eby et al. [17] suggested that mindfulness training programs help to reduce the stress/strain of employees. Lagrosen and Lagrosen [18] demonstrated employees’ work stress in an organization and their health-related issues due to the stress level. They created a structured questionnaire and gathered the necessary information from the company. Akerstrom et al. [19] explained the stress intervention at the organizational level. They collected data from managers and HR partners of the organization to perform an analysis.

Moreover, Talati et al. [20] demonstrated that a healthy workplace program enhances the health and well-being of employees. They collected data from 350 participants of the program from 204 organizations. With the collected data they performed Krushkal’s Wallis test. Daniels et al. [21] explored the employee well-being practices in the organization. Also, they examined the intervention activities performed by the organization to reduce the stress level of employees. Perez et al. [27] created a training program based on positive psychology principles to enhance employees’ successful adaptive use of humor as a stress-reduction strategy. Chen et al. [28] established a stress management as well as health monitoring framework that uses data technology and it provides improved working situations, motivation and so on. Comparing to extant works, the proposed work reviews the research on stress management interventions to determine what is known from the efficacy of various interventions in enhancing employees’ mindfulness and well-being.

The main contributions can be summarized as follows:

As a novelty, this work identifies the importance of stress invention techniques and to found the mindfulness and well-being of employees in an organization by using those techniques.

The data collection is performed by sharing the structured questionnaire to the workers as well as managers of an organization.

The rest of this work is delineated into five sections: Section II discusses the importance of stress management intervention techniques. Statistical analyses like SEM and ANOVA are discussed in Section III. The research ends in Section IV.

2 Analyzing the importance of stress management intervention techniques

This study discusses the stress management intervention techniques followed by the organization. The stress intervention techniques are of three types namely: primary, secondary, and territory type. The primary type of intervention is an organizational-level intervention that causes stress to employees. This study focused on the stress management intervention techniques that help to overcome the primary type of intervention for employees. This strategy aids employees to get well from severe ill health resulting from stress. This study also demonstrates the stress management intervention techniques that help to overcome the territory type of intervention for employees.

Some research questions of this study are:

What are the stress management programs conducted in an organization?

How the intervention of stress management helps to enhance the worker’s wellbeing?

How does the psychological well-being of employees get impacted by stress intervention management?

2.1 Research hypothesis

The hypothesis for analyzing the effectiveness of stress management intervention techniques that impact the mindfulness and wellbeing of employees working in an organization is manifested below.

H1: The most common method of stress management invention is proactive measures done by an organization with the goal of preventing illness in people by lowering stress exposure. This should be a major priority because it is the most effective strategy to lower work stress and the illnesses that go along with it. We have considered the primary type of stress management intervention techniques as planning and time management, job redesign, training and development, and personal organization fit. And in this hypothesis, we are going to analyze the impact of this primary type of intervention technique on the mindfulness and well-being of employees working in an organization.

H2: The goal of secondary treatments is to alter a person’s reaction to stressors. To help staff members manage ongoing workplace stress and lessen its negative consequences, they frequently include offering training and instruction on stress management. In our research work, we have considered the secondary type of stress management intervention techniques as an alike problem-facing techniques, emotional coping methods, resilience, and social support. And in this hypothesis, we are going to analyze the impact of this secondary type of intervention technique on the mindfulness and well-being of employees working in an organization.

H3: The goal of tertiary interventions, which are reactive in nature, is to lessen the consequences of stress-related issues after they have already arisen. Tertiary interventions cannot stop issues with job stress from developing. These tactics help employees recover from serious ill health resulting from stress. In this work, we considered the territory type of stress management intervention techniques as stress employee guidance programs, mindfulness, role analysis, respite, work scheduling, diversity programs, and health management policies. And in this hypothesis, we are going to analyze the impact of this territory type of intervention technique on the mindfulness and well-being of employees working in an organization.

The research hypothesis is illustrated in Fig. 1. It states the importance of stress management intervention strategies to improve the mindfulness and well-being of workers working in an organization. The three types of stress management intervention approach we have demonstrated in our research work are planning and time management, job redesign, training and development, personal organization fit, problem facing techniques, emotional coping methods, resilience, social support, stress employee guidance programs, mindfulness, role analysis, respite, work scheduling, diversity programs, and health management policies.

Fig. 1

Research hypothesis framework.

2.2 Data collection

The samples are collected randomly from the organization. The data has been gathered from the managers and employees working in an organization. The study was conducted from July 2021 to May 2022. SEM and ANOVA analyses was carried out using the collected information. Through the survey data, the proposed hypothesis was tested. The data for the survey is in the form of a questionnaire. The prepared questionnaire was distributed to 400 employees of an organization and (n = 359) employees replied to the questions. The prepared questionnaire comprised four different sections. All queries were evaluated using the 5-point Likert scale. The replies ranged from “Strongly agree (1)” to “Strongly disagree (2)”. Each question mentioned was kept mandatory.

3 Analysis of research and discussion

Data collection is the primary procedure of this investigation. Here, the prearranged questionnaire was prepared and distributed to managers and working employees of an organization. The questionnaire is prepared on the basis of hypothesis proposed. The questionnaire part consists of four sections: a) mindfulness and well-being of employees b) primary type of stress management intervention technique c) secondary type of stress management intervention technique, and d) territory type of stress management intervention technique. In the data collection process, a prepared questionnaire is organized and distributed to the managers as well as employees working in an organization. As per Fig. 2, from the managers of an organization, about 99% of data was collected and 260% of information was gathered from the workers working in an organization.

Fig. 2

Percentage of participants.

3.1 Demographic factor analysis

Here, analysis is done from the age of 22 to 50 years and the cumulative percentage is calculated, which is illustrated in Table 1. The cumulative percentage for 22–26 years is 27.6%, 27–31 years is 46.8%, 32–45 years is 65.5%, 46–50 years is 80.5, and 50 years and higher is 100%.

Table 1
Age groups analysis

Age Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulative percentage

22–26 yrs 99 27.6 27.6 27.6

27–31 yrs 69 19.2 19.2 46.8

32–45 yrs 67 18.7 18.7 65.5

46–50 yrs 54 15 15 80.5

50 yrs and higher 70 19.5 19.5 100

Total 359 100 100

Age	Frequency	Percentage	Valid percentage	Cumulative percentage
22–26 yrs	99	27.6	27.6	27.6
27–31 yrs	69	19.2	19.2	46.8
32–45 yrs	67	18.7	18.7	65.5
46–50 yrs	54	15	15	80.5
50 yrs and higher	70	19.5	19.5	100
Total	359	100	100

3.2 ANOVA analysis

3.2.1 Analyzing the primary type of stress Intervention techniques that influence mindfulness and well-being of employees

The analysis of primary types of stress intervention techniques that influence on mindfulness and well-being of employees working in an organization is depicted in Table 2. According to the results of the ANOVA analysis, the variables’ sum of squares (SS) is 28.233, and the calculated residual error is 138.169. The degree of freedom (df) and F ratio are calculated using the ANOVA method, and they are F (1,14) = 2.844. Then, 0.05 is chosen as the ANOVA’s significant threshold. The hypothesis is accepted when the resulting probability value is smaller than the level of significance. The probability (p) value found for the proposed hypothesis (H₁) is 0.036, which is marginally higher than the predetermined value. Consequently, the result concluded that the primary type of stress management intervention techniques slightly influences the mindfulness and well-being of employees working in an organization.

Table 2
ANOVA analysis of the primary type of stress intervention techniques impact on mindfulness and well-being of employees

Mindfulness_wellbeing-Primary type

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Between groups 28.233 24 1.176 2.844 0.036

Within groups 138.169 334 0.414 – –

Total 166.402 358 – – –

Mindfulness_wellbeing-Primary type
	Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
Between groups	28.233	24	1.176	2.844	0.036
Within groups	138.169	334	0.414	–	–
Total	166.402	358	–	–	–

3.2.2 Analyzing the secondary type of stress intervention techniques that influence mindfulness as well as the well-being of employees

The analysis of secondary types of stress intervention techniques that influence on mindfulness and well-being of employees working in an organization is illustrated in Table 3. The results of the ANOVA analysis show that the residual error obtained is 104.536 and the SS between the variables is 94.529. ANOVA is used to determine the DF and F ratio, which are taken to be F(1,9) = 12.585. Then, 0.05 is chosen as the ANOVA’s significant threshold. The hypothesis is accepted when the resulting probability value is smaller than the significance. The probability (p) found for the proposed hypothesis (H₁) is 0.019, which is less than the predetermined value. Consequently, we can say that the secondary type of stress management intervention techniques positively influences the mindfulness and well-being of employees working in an organization.

Table 3
ANOVA analysis of the second type of stress intervention techniques impact on mindfulness and well-being of employees

Mindfulness_wellbeing- Secondary Type

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Between groups 94.529 24 3.939 12.585 0.019

Within groups 104.536 334 .313 – –

Total 199.065 358 – – –

Mindfulness_wellbeing- Secondary Type
	Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
Between groups	94.529	24	3.939	12.585	0.019
Within groups	104.536	334	.313	–	–
Total	199.065	358	–	–	–

3.2.3 Analyzing the territory type of stress intervention techniques influence on mindfulness and wellbeing of employees

The analysis of territory type of stress intervention techniques influence on mindfulness and well-being of employees working in an organization is illustrated in Table 4. According to the results of the ANOVA analysis, the variables’ SS is 87.039, and the resulting residual error is 100.567. The DF and F ratio are determined by an ANOVA and are taken to be F (1,9) = 1.9681. Then, 0.05 is chosen as the ANOVA’s significant threshold. The hypothesis is accepted when the resulting probability value is smaller than the level of significance. The probability (p) value obtained for the proposed hypothesis (H₁) is 0.002, which is less than the predetermined value. It follows that the territory kind of stress management intervention strategies has a good impact on the mindfulness and wellness of personnel working for an organization.

Table 4
ANOVA analysis on territory type of stress intervention techniques impact on mindfulness and wellbeing of employees

Mindfulness_wellbeing-Territory Type

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Between groups 87.039 24 3.627 12.045 0.002

Within groups 100.567 334 0.301 – –

Total 187.606 358 – – –

Mindfulness_wellbeing-Territory Type
	Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
Between groups	87.039	24	3.627	12.045	0.002
Within groups	100.567	334	0.301	–	–
Total	187.606	358	–	–	–

3.3 Regression analysis

The descriptive statistics in Table 5 portray the average value of mindfulness and well-being of employees for the selected factors like primary, secondary, and territory type of stress intervention techniques is 2.317%, the average of the primary type of intervention is 2.35%, the average secondary type of intervention is 2.28%, the average territory type of stress intervention is 2.25%. The standard deviations for the primary, secondary, and territory categories of intervention strategies in particular demonstrate the extremely low variability of the data values around their means.

Table 5
Descriptive statistics of variables

Metrics N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

mindfulness_wellbeing 359 1.2 3.7 2.317 0.55619

Primary_type 359 1.2 4.6 2.3588 0.68721

Secondary_type 359 1 4 2.2813 0.74569

Territory_type 359 1 4 2.2557 0.72391

Valid N (listwise) 359

Metrics	N	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std. Deviation
mindfulness_wellbeing	359	1.2	3.7	2.317	0.55619
Primary_type	359	1.2	4.6	2.3588	0.68721
Secondary_type	359	1	4	2.2813	0.74569
Territory_type	359	1	4	2.2557	0.72391
Valid N (listwise)	359

Table 6

Coefficient correlation of variables

Control variables			Primary type	Secondary type	Territory type
mindfull_wellbeing	primary_type	Correlation	1	0.136	0.097
		Significance (2-tailed)	–	0.01	0.068
		df	0	356	356
	secondary_type	Correlation	0.136	1	0.964
		Significance (2-tailed)	0.01	–	0
		df	356	0	356
	territory_type	Correlation	0.097	0.964	1
		Significance (2-tailed)	0.068	0	–
		df	356	356	0

One statistical metric for describing the strength as well as the association among 2 variables is the coefficient of correlation. The values less than 0 indicate that the coefficient has an error. In this, p = 0.01 is chosen as the significant threshold value. When the significance value is below the threshold value, the method is deemed to fit the data well. The mindfulness and well-being of employees were achieved highly by the secondary type of stress management intervention technique.

3.4 Structural equation modelling (SEM) analysis

The comments gathered from the management as well as employees working in an organization were examined utilizing SEM. SEM is normally utilized to find out the structural correlations among the variables. While simultaneously taking measurement errors into account, it also examines the linear causal relationships between variables.

3.4.1 Measurement model

a) Analysis of total indices: Standard Mean Residual Root Square (SRMR) is a metric that is considered to be “an actual fit measure is determined as an unchanging alteration among predictable correlations as well as experiential correlations and is a good attribute. Additionally, the SRMR threshold value is set at 0.08. The SRMR for the baseline model used in this research, which determines the mindfulness and well-being of people working in an organization, is 0.2156, which is marginally superior to the threshold value. The SRMR values for the factor and composite models are 0.1579 and 0.1370, respectively, and are fairly higher than the threshold value. The factor model has the best average fit out of the three. As a result, the average fit model is used to assess the well-being and mindfulness of employees inside an organization. The outcomes of the SRMR are illustrated in Table 7.

Table 7
SRMR analysis

SRMR

Baseline model 0.2156

Composite model 0.1579

Factor model 0.1370

	SRMR
Baseline model	0.2156
Composite model	0.1579
Factor model	0.1370

b) TLI analysis: Tucker and Lewis Index (TLI), also known as a non-normed fit index (NNFI). NNFI values occasionally go beyond the range of 0 to 1, however it does resolve some of the problems associated with negative bias.

c) NFI analysis: The NFI (Normalised Fit Index) is an incremental measure of a statistical model’s goodness of fit that is unaltered by the model’s variable count.

The outcomes of both TLI as well as NFI is depicted in Table 8. The threshold values of both TLI as well as NFI are set at 0.01. The values of TLI as well as NFI in this study are just a little bit higher than the cutoff point. So, the model for analyzing the well-being and mindfulness of employees working in an organization is considered a good fit.

Table 8

Analysis of TLI and NFI

Metrics	TLI	NFI
Composite model	0.0241	0.0265
Factor model	0.0678	0.0718

d) Average Variance Explained (AVE) is “the average difference between a building and its measurements.” AVE values attained is illustrated in Table 9. The cutoff value of AVE is fixed as 0.5. Nevertheless, AVE values of the presented work is lower. Therefore, we may conclude that, the AVE for analyzing the well-being as well as mindfulness of employees working in an organization is lower.

Table 9

AVE analysis

Metrics	AVE
mindfulness_wellbeing	0.1552
Primary_type	0.2307
Secondary_type	0.3336
Territory_type	0.3175

e) Discriminant validity: A measure’s discriminant validity verifies that there is no association between its underlying construct and any other measure whose underlying construct is theoretically not related to it. For this study, the Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio of Correlation (HTMT) and Fornell-Larcker Criterion (FLC) tests were conducted.

f) HTMT: is an assessment utilized for access the validity of constructs. HTMT is designed by means of the principle shown in Eq. (1). ${HTMT}_{ab} = \frac{A}{\sqrt{B \times C}}$ (1)

When a hetero-trait correlation average is written as A, B stands for a mono-trait correlation average, and C stands for an average of mono as well as hetero-trait correlations. Table 10 presents the average correlations of the HTMT.

g) FLC: Discriminant validity of constructs is recognized by means of the FLC. In this, every measure loads maximally on its connected measures since the square root of every measure’s AVE is higher to the connection with a new measure. When AVE is higher to the squared coefficient, the discriminant validity is satisfied. Table 11 expresses the satisfying and criterion construct.

Table 10

HTMT analysis

Metrics	Primary_type	Secondary_type	Territory_type
Primary_type	0.5739	0	0
Secondary_type	1.4822	0.8168	0
Territory_type	1.5269	0.5604	3.4096

Table 11

FLC analysis

	Primary_type	Secondary_type	Territory_type	‘FLC’ criterion
Primary_type	0.109	0.7012	0.6338	‘satisfied’
Secondary_type	0	0.1698	0.1813	‘not satisfied’
Territory_type	0	0	0.9589	‘satisfied’

3.4.2 Structural model

a) Path graph: The path graph shows how each node (variable) is connected, as depicted in Table 12. In this work, stress management intervention techniques and the mindfulness and well-being of employees are considered a node. This illustrated path graph demonstrates the relation among the intervention techniques in the well-being of employees with other nodes.

Table 12
Analysis on path graph

Metrics R2 R2adj

Primary_type 0.1090 0.1026

Secondary_type 0.7012 0.6990

Territory_type 0.6223 0.6312

Metrics	R2	R2adj
Primary_type	0.1090	0.1026
Secondary_type	0.7012	0.6990
Territory_type	0.6223	0.6312

b) Path design matrix: The path design matrix of primary, secondary, as well as territory types of stress management intervention techniques that impacted the employees working in an organization is depicted in Table 13. Also, the uses of stress intervention in creating mindfulness and the well-being of employees were measured. From Table 13 it is noticeable that the value for all variable is 1. Thus, there exists correlations among the variables.

c) Path coefficient, indirect effect, and total effect: The undeviating effect of one variable assumed to be a source on another variable assumed to be a consequence is specified by a route coefficient. Similarly, indirect effect of primary, secondary, and territory types of stress management intervention techniques that impacted the employees working in an organization are mentioned in Table 14.

d) Inter-construct correlations: Table 15 illustrates the inter-construct correlations of factors influencing the human resource analytics of an organization is mentioned.

Table 13

Path design matrix

Metrics	Primary_type	Secondary_type	Territory_type
Primary_type	1	1	1
Secondary_type	0	0	0
Territory_type	0	0	0

Table 14

Overview of direct effect, path-coefficient, as well as indirect effect

Metrics	Path coefficient	Indirect effect	Direct effect
Mindfulness_wellbeing->primary_type	0.3302	0	0.3302
Mindfulness_wellbeing->secondary_type	0.8374	0	0.8374
Mindfulness_wellbeing->territory_type	0.7961	0	0.7961

Table 15

Inter-construct coefficient

Metrics	Mindfulness-wellbeing	Primary_type	Secondary_type	Territory_type
Mindfulness_wellbeing	1	0	0	0
Primary_type	0.3302	1	0	0
Secondary_type	0.8374	0.412	1	0
Territory_type	0.7961	0.4258	0.9793	1

3.5 Limitations and future works

This work provide data about the stress management intervention and its use in enhancing the mindfulness and well-being of employees working in the organization. Here, the information was gathered from the employees and managers of an organization. While analyzing the information gathered from the employees, the stress management intervention techniques were very useful to them. The recognition of this is related to the types of stress management intervention techniques like primary, secondary, and territory types of interventions. Our results found that mindfulness and the well-being of employees working in an organization are impacted by the primary, secondary, and territory types of stress management intervention techniques. Only a few samples were collected from the employees of an organization and it is suggested to include more samples to perform a detailed analysis. Also, this research study is limited to a few stress-management intervention techniques.

Thus, it is recommended to find other intervention techniques which are helpful for the employees to reduce their stress levels and work with mindfulness. In the future, we will extend the factors causing stress to the employees in the workplace and can concentrate on some other stress management intervention techniques to reduce the stress of employees working in an organization.

4 Conclusion

The experimental investigation performed in this research work help to find out the role of stress management intervention techniques in enhancing the mindfulness and well-being of employees working in an organization. The experimental investigation carried out in this study helps to find out the function of stress management intervention strategies in boosting the mindfulness and well-being of workers in an organisation. This study focused mostly on the types of stress management intervention techniques like the primary type of intervention, secondary type, and territory type of intervention techniques for managing the organizational stress among employees. The secondary and territory types of stress management intervention techniques positively impact the mindfulness and wellbeing of employees. Likewise, the SRMR for the baseline method of determining the mindfulness as well as well-being of employees working in an organization is 0.2156 is somewhat superior to the threshold value. Thus, the efficiency of the research work is validated.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to convey their sincere gratitude to the reviewers for their insightful comments that helped this study work come to fruition during the planning and development stage.

Informed consent

Not applicable.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Author contributions

All authors made a significant contribution to the idea and design, editing of the document, and decision to publish the final version.

References

Patro

, Kumar

. Effect of workplace stress management strategies on employees’ efficiency. International Journal of Scientific Development and Research. 2019;4(5):412–8.

Panigrahi

. Managing stress at workplace. Journal of Management Research and Analysis. 2016;3(4):154–60.

Bossi

, Zaninotto

, D’Arcangelo

, Lattanzi

, Malizia

, Ricciardi

. Mindfulness-based online intervention increases well-being and decreases stress after Covid-19 lockdown. Scientific Reports. 2022;12(1):6483.

Diachenko

, Smith

, Fjorback

, Hansen

, Linkenkaer-Hansen

, Pallesen

Pre-retirement employees experience lasting improvements in resilience and well-being after mindfulness-based stress reduction. Frontiers in Psychology. 2021:2828.

Nadler

, Carswell

, Minda

. Online mindfulness training increases well-being, trait emotional intelligence, and workplace competency ratings: A randomized waitlist-controlled trial. Frontiers in Psychology. 2020;11:255.

Hudson

The best laid plans: process evaluation of a preventative stress-management strategy in the public sector. University of Salford (United Kingdom); 2016.

Decuypere

, Audenaert

, Decramer

Leader mindfulness: Well-being throughout the organization. The Palgrave handbook of workplace well-being. 2020:1-28.

Beuchel

, Ophoff

, Cramer

, Hautzinger

. Promoting occupational health and teaching quality: The impact of a mindfulness intervention in teacher training. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2022;114:103703.

Ongori

, Agolla

. Occupational stress in organizations and its effects on organizational performance. Journal of Management Research. 2008;8(3):123–35.

10.

Johnson

, Park

, Chaudhuri

Mindfulness training in the workplace: Exploring its scope and outcomes. European Journal of Training and Development. 2020 Jan 20.

11.

Holman

, Johnson

, O’Connor

Stress management interventions: Improving subjective psychological wellbeing in the workplace. Handbook of well-being. Salt Lake City, UT: DEF Publishers. 2018;2.

12.

Goodrich

, Harrison

, Cornwell

, Cooper

, Richardson

Resilience: a framework supporting hospice staff to flourish in stressful times. London: Hospice UK. 2015.

13.

Ohadomere

, Ogamba

. Management-led interventions for workplace stress and mental health of academic staff in higher education: a systematic review. The Journal of Mental Health Training, Education and Practice. 2021;16(1):67–82.

14.

Holman

, Johnson

, O’Connor

Stress management interventions: Improving subjective psychological wellbeing in the workplace. Handbook of well-being. Salt Lake City, UT: DEF Publishers. 2018;2.

15.

Mihalits

, Schiller

, Barrech

, Riedel

, Li

, Angerer

, Gündel

, Mörtl

. The flipside of work engagement: A qualitative evaluation of a stress management intervention in the workplace. Human Arenas. 2021;6(1):1–5.

16.

Kriakous

, Elliott

, Lamers

, Owen

. The effectiveness of mindfulness-based stress reduction on the psychological functioning of healthcare professionals: A systematic review. Mindfulness. 2021;12:1–28.

17.

Eby

, Allen

, Conley

, Williamson

, Henderson

, Mancini

. Mindfulness-based training interventions for employees: A qualitative review of the literature. Human Resource Management Review. 2019;29(2):156–78.

18.

Lagrosen

, Lagrosen

. Workplace stress and health–the connection to quality management. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence. 2022;33(1-2):113–26.

19.

Akerstrom

, Corin

, Severin

, Jonsdottir

, Björk

. Can Working Conditions and Employees’ Mental Health Be Improved via Job Stress Interventions Designed and Implemented by Line Managers and Human Resources on an Operational Level? International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021;18(4):1916.

20.

Talati

, Grapes

, Davey

, Shilton

, Pettigrew

. Predictors of uptake of general and tailored services to improve employee health and wellbeing. Health Promotion Journal of Australia. 2021;32(3):548–53.

21.

Daniels

, Fida

, Stepanek

, Gendronneau

. Do multicomponent workplace health and wellbeing programs predict changes in health and wellbeing? International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021;18(17):8964.

22.

Anderson

. An evaluation of a mindfulness-based stress reduction intervention for critical care nursing staff: A quality improvement project. Nursing in Critical Care. 2021;26(6):441–8.

23.

Strauss

, Gu

, Montero-Marin

, Whittington

, Chapman

, Kuyken

. Reducing stress and promoting well-being in healthcare workers using mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for life. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology. 2021;21(2):100227.

24.

Hegney

, Tsai

, Craigie

, Crawford

, Jay

, Rees

. Experiences of university employees of the impact of a mindful self-care and resiliency program on their well-being. Higher Education Research & Development. 2021;40(3):524–37.

25.

Scheepers

, Emke

, Epstein

, Lombarts

. The impact of mindfulness-based interventions on doctors’ well-being and performance: A systematic review. Medical Education. 2020;54(2):138–49.

26.

Walsh

, Arnold

. The bright and dark sides of employee mindfulness: Leadership style and employee well-being. Stress and Health. 2020;36(3):287–98.

27.

León-Perez

, Cantero-Sánchez

, Fernández-Canseco

, León-Rubio

. Effectiveness of a humor-based training for reducing employees’ distress. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021;18(21):11177.

28.

Chen

, Ran

, Gao

, Yu

, Wang

, Jagannathan

. Evaluation of occupational stress management for improving performance and productivity at workplaces by monitoring the health, well-being of workers. Aggression and Violent Behavior. 2021 Nov 27:101713.

29.

Tanwar

, Vaish

, Rao

. Mathematical modeling of asset liability management in banks using goal programming and AHP. Indian Journal of Finance and Banking. 2020;4(4):1–9.

30.

FUNK, Philippe: Artificial Intelligence and cybersecurity implications for business management. figshare. Journal Contribution. 2022. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.21550926.v1

31.

Tanwar

, Vaish

, Rao

. Comparative analysis of employees’ perspective on asset-liability management in banks. Indian Journal of Finance and Banking. 2022;9(1):47–64.

32.

Tanwar

, Seth

, Vaish

, Rao

. Revisiting the efficiency of Indian banking sector: An analysis of comparative models through data envelopment analysis. Indian Journal of Finance and Banking. 2020;4(1):92–108.

33.

Ikpuri

. Policy enactment in nigerian secondary schools: The case of the national policy on education. South American Journal of Basic Education, Technical and Technological. 2018;5(3).

34.

Strauss

, Gu

, Montero-Marin

, Whittington

, Chapman

, Kuyken

. Reducing stress and promoting well-being in healthcare workers using mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for life. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology. 2021;21(2):100227.

35.

Gál

, Stefan

, Cristea

. The efficacy of mindfulness meditation apps in enhancing users’ well-being and mental health related outcomes: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Journal of Affective Disorders. 2021;279:131–42.

36.

Sulosaari

, Unal

, Cinar

. The effectiveness of mindfulness-based interventions on the psychological well-being of nurses: A systematic review. Applied Nursing Research. 2022;64:151565.

37.

Monzani

, Escartín

, Ceja

, Bakker

. Blending mindfulness practices and character strengths increases employee well-being: A second-order meta-analysis and a follow-up field experiment. Human Resource Management Journal. 2021;31(4):1025–62.

38.

Vonderlin

, Biermann

, Bohus

, Lyssenko

. Mindfulness-based programs in the workplace: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Mindfulness. 2020;11:1579–98.

39.

You

. Discrete Lion Swarm Optimization Algorithm for face recognition: Discrete Lion Swarm Optimization Algorithm for face recognition. Multimedia Research. 2021;4(3).

Analyzing the stress management intervention impacting the mindfulness and well-being of employees

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

OBJECTIVE:

METHODS:

RESULTS:

CONCLUSION:

Keywords

1 Introduction

2 Analyzing the importance of stress management intervention techniques

2.1 Research hypothesis

3 Analysis of research and discussion

Table 1 Age groups analysis Age Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulative percentage 22–26 yrs 99 27.6 27.6 27.6 27–31 yrs 69 19.2 19.2 46.8 32–45 yrs 67 18.7 18.7 65.5 46–50 yrs 54 15 15 80.5 50 yrs and higher 70 19.5 19.5 100 Total 359 100 100

3.2.1 Analyzing the primary type of stress Intervention techniques that influence mindfulness and well-being of employees

Table 5 Descriptive statistics of variables Metrics N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation mindfulness_wellbeing 359 1.2 3.7 2.317 0.55619 Primary_type 359 1.2 4.6 2.3588 0.68721 Secondary_type 359 1 4 2.2813 0.74569 Territory_type 359 1 4 2.2557 0.72391 Valid N (listwise) 359

3.4.1 Measurement model

Table 7 SRMR analysis SRMR Baseline model 0.2156 Composite model 0.1579 Factor model 0.1370

Table 12 Analysis on path graph Metrics R2 R2adj Primary_type 0.1090 0.1026 Secondary_type 0.7012 0.6990 Territory_type 0.6223 0.6312

4 Conclusion

Funding

Conflict of interest

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

Informed consent

Ethical approval

Author contributions

References

Table 1
Age groups analysis

Age Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulative percentage

22–26 yrs 99 27.6 27.6 27.6

27–31 yrs 69 19.2 19.2 46.8

32–45 yrs 67 18.7 18.7 65.5

46–50 yrs 54 15 15 80.5

50 yrs and higher 70 19.5 19.5 100

Total 359 100 100

Table 5
Descriptive statistics of variables

Metrics N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

mindfulness_wellbeing 359 1.2 3.7 2.317 0.55619

Primary_type 359 1.2 4.6 2.3588 0.68721

Secondary_type 359 1 4 2.2813 0.74569

Territory_type 359 1 4 2.2557 0.72391

Valid N (listwise) 359

Table 7
SRMR analysis

SRMR

Baseline model 0.2156

Composite model 0.1579

Factor model 0.1370

Table 12
Analysis on path graph

Metrics R2 R2adj

Primary_type 0.1090 0.1026

Secondary_type 0.7012 0.6990

Territory_type 0.6223 0.6312