The organization grasps the root sources of harm before choosing controls and runs ongoing, proactive hazard identification for psychosocial hazards in three families. Work organization (Table 1): unclear or conflicting roles and expectations; little control or autonomy; job demands (skills underused, constant dealings with the public, too much work for the time or staff, clashing deadlines, unrealistic expectations, monotony, sustained vigilance, aggressive or distressed people, traumatic events); poorly supported or drawn-out organizational change; remote or isolated work; workload and pace; hours and schedules (shifts, inflexible, unpredictable, long or unsocial hours); insecure or precarious work. Social factors (Table 2): relationships, leadership, culture, recognition and reward, careers, backing from colleagues and supervisors, the quality of supervision, respect and civility, balance between work and home, violence, harassment, and bullying and victimization, face to face or online. Environment, equipment and tasks (Table 3): unsuitable or poorly maintained equipment, poor space, lighting or noise, missing tools, extreme conditions, unstable settings such as conflict zones. Methods include reading job descriptions, examining tasks, rosters and places of work, consulting workers, clients and others, surveys and questionnaires, interviews, group discussion, checklists, inspections and observation, and records such as incident reports, absence, turnover and compensation claims, drawing on workers' own knowledge. Interaction with other hazards and human factors is considered. The assessment then shows potential harm, compares groups by exposure or reporting, looks at combined effects with other risks, ranks hazards by risk level, accounts for workforce diversity and particular groups, and informs controls and improvement opportunities.
This control maps to 5 controls across 2 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.
Every mapping shown was judged rather than inferred from wording similarity, and the ones that failed review are published too. See the coverage reports and what was rejected.
The graph holds this control, the 5 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.