Small opportunities are often the beginning of great enterprises: The role of work engagement in support of people through the recovery process and in preventing relapse in drug and alcohol abuse
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online October 17, 2016
Small opportunities are often the beginning of great enterprises: The role of work engagement in support of people through the recovery process and in preventing relapse in drug and alcohol abuse
BACKGROUND: This study, carried out in five Therapeutic Communities (TCs), aims to evaluate the relationship between social support and sense of community for people with pathological addictions and the personal and professional dimensions of hope, resilience, work engagement, future time perspective, and job performance. Support to the person is attained through social support at work by the supervisor and the person’s sense of belonging to the community.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to analyze the relationship between social support, sense of community, hope, resilience, work engagement, future time perspective, and job performance.
METHODS: In order to verify the relations between those variables, structural equation models with observed variables (path analysis) were estimated using LISREL 8.80.
RESULTS: The results show a direct relationship between social support at work by the supervisor and hope, as well as between sense of community and resilience at work, while work engagement plays a mediating role between the two antecedents and the personal and professional variables investigated – hope, resilience, future time perspective and performance at work. Performance was measured through both people’s self-perceptions and their supervisors’ evaluations. A positive correlation exists between the two assessments.
CONCLUSIONS: The positive consequences of the research entail both theoretical and practical aspects.
DekelR, BenbenishtyR, AmramY. Therapeutic communities for drug addicts: Prediction of long-term outcomes. Addict Behav2004;29(9):1833–7.
2.
CarrollJFX, McGinleyJJ. An agency follow-up outcome study of graduates from four inner-city therapeutic community programs. J Subst Abuse Treat2000;18(2):103–18.
3.
De LeonG. The therapeutic community: Theory, model, and method. Springer Publishing Company; 2000.
4.
McLellanAT, McKayJR, FormanR, CacciolaJ, KempJ. Reconsidering the evaluation of addiction treatment: From retrospective follow-up to concurrent recovery monitoring. Addiction2005;00(4):447–58.
5.
AllisonM, HubbardRL. Drug abuse treatment process: A review of the literature. Subst Use Misuse1985;20(9):1321–45.
6.
PlattJJ, MetzgerD. The role of employment in the rehabilitation of heroin addicts. Progress in the Development of Cost-Effective Treatment for Drug Abusers. National Institute on Drug Abuse Research Monograph1985;58:111–45.
7.
SiegalHA, FisherJH, RappRC, KelliherCW, WagnerJH, O’BrienWF, ColePA. Enhancing substance abuse treatment with case management its impact on employment. J Subst Abuse Treat1996;13(2):93–8.
8.
WillenbringML, RidgelyMS, StinchfieldR, RoseM. Application of case management in alcohol and drug dependence: Matching techniques and populations. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration; 1991.
9.
MoosRH. Theory-based processes that promote the remission of substance use disorders. Clin Psychol Rev2007;27(5):537–51.
10.
LaudetAB, StanickV. Predictors of motivation for abstinence at the end of outpatient substance abuse treatment. J Subst Abuse Treat2010;38(4):317–27.
11.
CohenSE, SymeS. Social support and health. Academic Press; 1985.
12.
SarasonSB. The psychological sense of community: Prospect for a community psychology. San Francisco: Josset-Bass Sarason; 1974.
13.
DeciEL, RyanRM. Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York, NY: Plenum; 1985.
14.
RyanRM, DeciEL. The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychol Inq2000;11(4):227–68.
15.
BrewingtonV, ArellaL, DerenS, RandellJ. Obstacles to the utilization of vocational services: An analysis of the literature. Subst Use Misuse1987;22(11):1091–118.
16.
Van den BroeckA, VansteenkisteM, De WitteH, LensW. Explaining the relationships between job characteristics, burnout, and engagement: The role of basic psychological need satisfaction. Work Stress2008;22(3):277–94.
17.
DeciEL, ConnelJP, RyanRM. Self-determination in a work organization. J Appl Psychol1989;74(4):580.
18.
BlaisMR, BrièreNM, LachanceL, RiddleAS, VallerandRJ. L’inventaire des motivations au travail de Blais. Revue québécoise de psychologie1993;14(3):185–215.
19.
SchaufeliWB, BakkerAB. Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. J Organ Behav2004;25(3):293–315.
20.
KahnWA. Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Acad Manage J1990;33(4):692–724.
21.
RyanRM, DeciEL. On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Ann Rev Psychol2001;52(1):141–66.
22.
BakkerAB, DemeroutiE. The Job Demands-Resources model: State of the art. J Manage Psychol2007;22(3):309–28.
23.
LambertSJ, HopkinsK. Occupational conditions and workers’ sense of community: Variations by gender and race. Am J Commun Psychol1995;23(2):151–79.
24.
KinjerskyVM, SkrypnekBJ. Defining spirit at work: Finding common ground. J Organ Change Manag2004;17(1):26–42.
25.
BarbieriB, AmatoC, PassafaroP, Dal CorsoL, PicciauM. Social support, work engagement, and non-vocational outcomes in people with severe mental illness. TPM – Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology in Applied Psychology2014;21(2):181–96.
26.
SchaufeliWB, BakkerAB, SalanovaM. The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educ Psychol Meas2006;66:701–16.
27.
SonnentagS. Recovery, work engagement, and proactive behavior: A new look at the interface between nonwork and work. J Appl Psychol2003;88(3):518.
28.
SchaufeliWB. Work engagement: What do we know and where do we go. Romanian Journal of Applied Psychology2012;14(1):3–10.
29.
SnyderCR, SympsonFC, YbascoFC, BordersTF, BabyakMA, HigginsRL. Development and validation of the State Hope Scale. J Pers Soc Psychol1996;70(2):321–35.
30.
MathisGM, FerrariJR, GrohDR, JasonLA. Hope and substance abuse recovery: The impact of agency and pathways within an abstinent communal-living setting. Journal of Groups in Addiction and Recovery2009;4(1-2):42–50.
31.
JacksonR, WernickeR, HaagaDAF. Hope as a predictor of entering substance abuse treatment. Addict Behav2003;28(1):13–28.
32.
IngersollRE. Spiritual wellness in the workplace. In
GiacaloneRA, JurkiewiczCL, editors. Handbook of Workplace Spirituality and Organizational Performance. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe; 2010. pp. 216–26.
33.
FletcherD, SarkarM. Psychological Resilience. A review and critique of definitions, concepts, and theory. Eur Psychol2013;18(1):12–23.
34.
FadardiJS, AzadH, NematiA. The relationship between resilience, motivational structure, and substance use. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences2010;5:1956–60.
35.
KrentzmanAR. Review of the application of positive psychology to substance use, addiction, and recovery research. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors2013;27(1):151–65.
36.
ZimbardoPG, BoydJN. Putting time in perspective: A valid, reliable individual-differences metric. J Pers Soc Psychol1999;77(6):1271.
37.
AlvosL, GregsonRAM, RossMW. Future time perspective in current and previous injecting drug users. Drug Alcohol Depen1993;31(2):193–7.
38.
PetryNM, BickelWK, ArnettM. Shortened time horizons and insensitivity to future consequences in heroin addicts. Addiction1998;93(5):729–38.
39.
BondMJ, FeatherNT. Some correlates of structure and purpose in the use of time. J Pers Soc Psychol1988;55(2):321.
40.
GoodhueDL, ThompsonRL. Task-technology fit and individual performance. MIS quarterly1995;213–36.
41.
KinjerskyVM, SkrypnekBJ. Measuring the intangible: Development of the Spirit at Work Scale. In. WeaverM, editor. Best Paper Proceedings of the Sixty-fifth Annual Meeting of the Management of Academy. Atlanta, GA. 2006. pp. A1–6.
42.
BalducciC, FraccaroliF, SchaufeliWB. Psychometric properties of the Italian version of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES-9). Eur J Psychol Assess2010;26(2):143–9.
43.
Di SipioA, FalcoA, KravinaL, De CarloNA. Positive personal resources and organizational well-being: Resilience, hope, optimism, and self-efficacy in an Italian health care setting. TPM – Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology in Applied Psychology2012;19(2):81–95.
44.
D’AlessioM, GuarinoA, De PascalisV, ZimbardoPG. Testing zimbardo’s stanford time perspective inventory (STPI)-short form: An Italian study. Time Soc2003;12(2-3):333–47.
45.
FalcoA, GirardiD, KravinaL, TrifilettiE, BartolucciGB, CapozzaD, De CarloNA. The mediating role of psycho-physic strain in the relationship between workaholism, job performance, and sickness absence: A longitudinal study. J Occup Environ Med2013;55(11):1255–61.
46.
JöreskogKA, SörbomD. LISREL 8.80 for Windows [Computer software]. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International. 2006.
47.
BarbaranelliC. Analisi dei dati. II Edizione. Milano: Led. 2007.
48.
SchaferJL, GrahamJW. Missing data: Our view of the state of the art. Psychol Methods2002;7(2):147–77.
49.
SobelME. Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. Sociol Methodol1982;13:290–312.
50.
HuL, BentlerPM. Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indexes in covariance structure Analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Modeling1999;6(1):1–55.
51.
Schermelleh-EngelK, MoosbruggerH, MüllerH. Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online2003;8(2):23–74.
