Link between quality of work environment and size of workplace

The worst physical work environment can be found among male workers in small privately owned enterprises, according to a 2005 study. However, these workers experience a better psychosocial work environment than employees in larger enterprises, presumably due to closer personal relations and relations between management and staff.

A study by the Danish National Institute of Occupational Health, in collaboration with the Department of Manufacturing, Engineering and Management at the Technical University of Denmark, focuses on differences in work environment factors, depending on size and ownership characteristics of the enterprise. Even though small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) have attracted much policy attention at European and national level, this study is the first of its kind in Denmark focusing on working conditions at national level. The investigation of company size and ownership yields some surprising insights.

Work environment and workplace size

From the study, it becomes obvious that, in relation to physical and chemical work environment factors, the worst working environment can be found in small privately owned companies. In other words, regarding ergonomic (monotonous repetitive work excluded), physical and chemical work factors, employees in small privately owned companies are generally more exposed. This may be explained by differences in technology applied in production.

However, the psychosocial work environment appears to be better in smaller than in larger companies. Even though it is only possible to look at the tendencies and, in some cases, not statistically significant findings, this proves to be the case for the following factors:

• quantitative demands;
• emotional demands;
• role conflicts;
• quality of management;
• recognition;
• predictability.

An immediate conclusion could be that closer personal relations in the workplace, and less of a distance between management and the employee, improve the psychosocial work environment.

Furthermore, measures to improve the quality of the work environment are less likely to be undertaken and are less systematic in smaller companies. However, due to methodological reasons, it is not possible to determine whether or how this actually affects the working environment.

Workplace size and type of enterprise

The study distinguishes between three different types of enterprises based on ownership characteristics: privately owned companies; private companies owned by a third party (i.e. not by the management); and public sector workplaces. Below, Tables 1 to 3 give an overview of the degree to which company size affects the work environment in different types of enterprises.

*The numbers indicate the ergonomic, physical, psychosocial, etc factors measured in the survey. Source: Hasle, P., Bach, E., Sørensen, O.H. and Roepstorff, C., Arbejdsmiljø i små virksomheder, National Institute of Occupational Health/Technical University of Denmark, Copenhagen, 2005.

*The numbers indicate the ergonomic, physical, psychosocial, etc factors measured in the survey. Source: Hasle et al, Copenhagen, 2005

*The numbers indicate the ergonomic, physical, psychosocial, etc factors measured in the survey. Source: Hasle et al, Copenhagen, 2005

The most striking finding when comparing the results is that, for privately owned companies, work environment risk exposures generally seem to increase as the size of the enterprise decreases. On the other hand, when looking at private companies owned by a third party, the opposite tendency is evident. For this type of enterprise, the work environment appears to be better in smaller companies. No straightforward explanation offers itself as to why this should be the case, but it may be due to differences in the tasks performed. According to the report, similar results have not been reported elsewhere. However, this result emphasises the need for an analytical approach differentiating between small enterprises and taking ownership characteristics into consideration.

When looking at public sector organisations, no clear tendency can be detected in the data. This may be due to the aforementioned problem of pooling essentially different types of enterprises into one category.

Gender perspective

Focusing on gender issues, it becomes clear that the correlation between workplace size and work environment risk exposure is stronger for men than for women. Men in small enterprises appear to be more exposed to ergonomic, physical and chemical factors, whereas no clear-cut picture emerges for women. This is, presumably, closely related to the gender allocation of employees in different occupations and sectors. The ‘traditional’ exposure factors referred to here are typically present in sectors such as crafts, manufacturing, construction and farming - sectors characterised by a large proportion of small enterprises typically employing male workers.

About the study

The analysis, carried out in 2005, is based on a coupling of the datasets from the Danish Working Environment Cohort Study, undertaken by the National Institute of Occupational Health in 2000, and data from the first round of the monitoring of preventive working environment activities undertaken by enterprises. The latter is a study initiated by the Danish Working Environment Authority as part of the general monitoring programme, and is based on data gathered in 2001. For further information, see the survey data report, ‘Trends for risk factors in the Danish work environment’ (DK0512SR01).

The report ‘ Arbejdsmiljø i små virksomheder’ [Work environment in small enterprises] (308Kb pdf; in Danish) is available on the National Institute of Occupational Health website.