Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 358

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 96 of the 96 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

‘Management Standards’ and work-related stress in the UK: policy background and science

MacKay *, Colin J., Cousins, Rosanna, Kelly, Peter J., Lee, Steve, McCaig, Ron H.·2004·Work & Stress

Abstract

In the late 1990s, the Health and Safety Commission, as the lead authority in the UK responsible for Health and Safety at Work, conducted an extensive consultation exercise to elicit views about how work-related stress should be tackled. The Commission subsequently decided that regulation was not justified and opted for an approach with four strands. One of these was to work with stakeholders to develop clear, agreed standards of good management practice. This paper describes and discusses the rationale behind a standards-based approach that is essentially based on a method of controlling hazards. The Management Standards approach uses a taxonomy of six stressors that has evolved out of extensive research carried out on behalf of the UK's Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and in conjunction with stakeholders, and a three-phase risk assessment methodology. Further developmental work on the standards (which are to be subjected to public consultation) and associated measurement tools is described in a companion paper in this issue of Work & Stress (Cousins, Mackay, Clarke, Kelly, Kelly, & McCaig, ). The emphasis is on prevention towards reducing stress in the UK working population. We review current thinking on models of work stress, consider evidence linking workplace psychosocial factors and various health and organizational outcomes, and examine the effectiveness of organizational interventions. We argue that the literature supports an approach that aims to move organizational states (represented by the current situation) to more desirable ones (represented by the six Management Standards), and that this is an effective ‘population’ based approach to tackling workplace stress and promoting individual and organizational health.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/02678370410001727474

Cites

96 of 96 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 96 references

Research works printed but not linked: 48

  1. Birman J, 1999, Australian National Safety Journal, 7, 17
  2. Briner RB, 2003, HSE Books
  3. Broadbent DE, 1981, A Social Science Contribution to Work Reform, pp. 39–51
  4. Brunner E, 2002, Circulation, 2659
  5. Burnes B, 1989, AMT: A Strategy for Success?
  6. Cox T, 1993, HSE Books
  7. Cox T, 1998, The Changing Nature of Occupational Health, pp. 137–159
  8. Cox T, 2000, Organisational Interventions for Work Stress: A Risk Management Approach
  9. Cox T, 2002, HSE Books
  10. Cummings TG, 1989, Organization Development and Change
  11. 10.1080/02678379608256813 · doi:10.1080/02678379608256813
  12. Frankenhaeuser M, 1981, A Social Science Contribution to Work Reform, pp. 213–233
  13. French JRP, 1972, The Failure of Success, pp. 30–66
  14. 10.1037/1076-8998.4.3.179 · doi:10.1037/1076-8998.4.3.179 · Paper page
  15. 10.1037/0021-9010.71.1.102 · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.71.1.102 · Paper page
  16. Gardell D, 1981, A Social Science Contribution to Work Reform
  17. Goldberg DP, 1978, Manual for the General Health Questionnaire
  18. 1995, Stress at Work—A Guide for Employers
  19. 1998, Five Steps to Risk Assessment
  20. 1999, Norwich
  21. 1999, Managing Stress at Work. DDE 10
  22. 2000, HSE Books
  23. 2001, HSE Books
  24. 2003, HSE Books
  25. 1992, ISO
  26. 1994, Ergonomic Principles Related to Mental Workload
  27. 2003, ISO
  28. The Standard
  29. Jackson PR, 2001, Change in Manufacturing: How to Manage Stress-related Risk
  30. Jones JR, 2003, Self-reported Work-related Illness in 2001/02: Results from a Household Survey
  31. Kasl SV, 1992, Work and Well-Being: An Agenda for the 1990s
  32. Kelly JE, 1982, Autonomy and Control at the Workplace, pp. 213–237
  33. Kvarnstrom S, 1992, Preventing Stress at Work (Conditions of Work Digest), 11, 227
  34. Landy FJ, 1992, Work and Well-Being: An Agenda for the 1990s, pp. 41–56
  35. Mackay CJ, 1984, Breakdown in Human Adaptation to Stress, 1
  36. Makin P, 1996, Organizations and the Psychological Contract
  37. 1999, HMSO
  38. Mayhew C, 2003, Journal of Occupational Health and Safety—Australia & New Zealand, 19, 59
  39. 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)04905-9 · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(00)04905-9
  40. Parker SK, 1998, Organisational Interventions to Reduce the Impact of Poor Work Design
  41. Parker SK, 2001, Effective Teamworking: Reducing with the Psychosocial Risk
  42. Parkes KR, 1986, Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford
  43. Parkes KR, 1998, Organizational Interventions to Reduce Work Stress: Are they Effective?
  44. Pheasant S, 1987, Ergonomics: Standards and Guidelines for Designers
  45. Quick JC, 1984, Organizational Stress and Preventative Management
  46. Rick J, 2002, HSE Books
  47. Smith A, 2000, The Scale of Occupational Stress: The Bristol Stress and Health at Work Study
  48. 10.1037/1076-8998.1.1.9 · DOI

Cited by

See all 358

Metadata

Authors
MacKay *, C. J., Cousins, R., Kelly, P. J., Lee, S., & McCaig, R. H.
Venue
Work & Stress
Published
2004-04
Volume
18
Issue
2
Pages
91-112
ISSN
  • 0267-8373 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-5335
OpenAlex
W2092615620
Cited by
358
References
96
FWCI
21.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: ‘Management Standards’ and work-related stress in the UK: policy background and science. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/02678370410001727474
The paper
MacKay *, C. J., Cousins, R., Kelly, P. J., Lee, S., & McCaig, R. H. (2004). ‘Management Standards’ and work-related stress in the UK: policy background and science. Work & Stress. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370410001727474

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.