Directors, managers and top authority positions: They may have benefits but there are risks for the physical and mental health
November 2009

The study – which used data from a national survey of 1,800 American workers in different occupations and sectors – reveals previously undocumented evidence about the up and downsides of having authority in the workplace.

People with job authority are defined as those who direct or manage the work of others, have control over others, pay, and can hire or fire others.

Sociology professor Scott Schieman and PhD student Sarah Reid found people with more authority at work experience certain benefits that can contribute to better health. They tend to earn greater pay and have jobs that involve more problem-solving tasks, making their work more interesting and engaging.

"Unfortunately, there are also downsides to job authority that undermine or offset the upsides of having power at work," says Schieman. "In most cases, the health costs negate the benefits."

People with job authority report significantly higher levels of interpersonal conflict with others, says Schieman. They're also more likely to encounter work-to-home interference, where stressors at work spill over into non-work domains like family and leisure time. These factors increase the risk for psychological distress, anger and poor health.

"Power at work does have drawbacks, and the negative impact on personal health – both emotional and physical – is one of them," says Schieman, lead author on the study.

These findings help explain a lingering paradox in sociological research about job stress: Higher status positions have attributes that should contribute to less stress and better health, but people with authority at work don't seem to have better health. This study sheds new light on the underlying dynamics.

Using data from a 2005 national survey of 1800 working American adults,  the University of Toronto researchers examined the association between job authority and three health outcomes: physical symptoms, psychological distress, and anger. They also sought to explicate the intervening conditions that suppress and/or contribute to those associations.

They observed that higher levels of interpersonal conflict in the workplace and work-to-home interference among those with more job authority suppress the negative association between authority and each health outcome.

By contrast, the greater earnings and nonroutine work among those with higher job authority explain their lower levels of physical symptoms, distress, and anger.

According to the the study authors these observations elaborate on and refine the “stress of higher status” theoretical perspective and illuminate the paradox of the overall null association between job authority and health.

Moreover, they draw much-needed attention to the ways that suppression effects can broaden our understanding of workplace inequality, stress processes, and multiple health outcomes.

Bibliography - Sources

1. Job authority and health: Unraveling the competing suppression and explanatory influences,  Journal of Social Science and Medicine  2009; doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.08.038, online publication, 30 September 2009.
2. University of Toronto
3. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Healt