**Table 2.**

*\*\**

*p* ≤ *0.01.*

*Subjective well-being of male staff of ordinal and innovative manufacturing and medical companies.*

*Statistical significance of differences by Mann-Whitney U-test; Wilcoxon W- test:\*p* ≤ *0.05.*

*Subjective Well-Being at the Workplace as a Social Action: Opportunities for Management… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.106595*

From 60

OP

21.8

3.7

4.8

\*

5.0

4.9

—

0.7

2.6

1.5

not reduce SW [60]. Here it can be attributed to the young doctors of an innovative clinic, but not to the doctors of an ordinary clinic, because more than 30 points according to R. Kessler correspond to a pronounced distress. Undoubtedly, we are talking about a self-assessment that may reflect severe experiences at the level of subjective distress, but not associated with serious mental distress. Nevertheless, the average stress scores in all age groups of respondents exceeded 20 points, which indicates a pronounced subjective disorder. In all age groups of the personnel of innovative companies, stress indicators do not exceed 20 points, with the exception of doctors not only young, but also middle-aged, but in ordinaries their peers' stress is significantly higher.

Special attention should be paid to the indicators of psychological well-being in the work collective. Here we can see that the indicators in innovative companies are significantly higher. In ordinary companies, young employees and middle-aged engineers have indicators in the zone of negative values or close to zero and become somewhat higher along with adaptation to organizational conditions. At first glance, this is paradoxical data. Personnel of ordinary companies work in the organizational culture with a pronounced clan component and strive for its unconditional dominance. The clan component with the value of maintaining good relations is usually a good psychological protection for employees at the expense of solidarity, even exceeding the measure of maintaining an acceptable level of work performance [61]. In situations of attempts to introduce innovations by the management of ordinary companies, the function of psychological protection ceases to work. Conflicting relations and contradictions increase in the units, anxiety and stress experiences grow, which causes a sense of subjective disadvantage.

**Table 2** contains a factor that is an inherent characteristic of hierarchical-clannish OC, described by G. Hofstede as applied to the then Soviet and now Russian management model—a long power distance, the separation of managers and executives. It is significantly shorter in innovative companies. In ordinary companies, even when the manager is satisfied with the actions of his subordinates, the distance is between 3.6 and 3.9 points, whereas in innovative companies, the range is 2.0–3.5 points. In situations where the manager is not satisfied with the actions of the subordinate, in ordinal companies, the distance always increases to high values in the interval of 4.4–4.8 points with a maximum of 5 points. The exception is the senior doctors. In their case the increase in distance does not reach the level of statistical significance, although the distance is quite pronounced. These data add to the picture of provocation of subordinates' stress by the supervisor. Performers do not feel the psychological opportunity to tell the manager about their doubts and difficulties cannot count on help and support. A supervisor implements an autocratic model of managerial interaction [62]. He is a source of demands, control, anxiety, fears, strong stress, formation of a sense of subjective disadvantage.

In innovative companies, managers are much more accessible. This is especially noticeable in the innovation clinic. There, even when the manager is dissatisfied, he does not lengthen the distance significantly. This shows the special sensitivity of the medical manager, who understands that the stress created by an increase in power distance can provoke a high level of stress, the consequence of which can be errors at the cost of a human life. The management of innovative companies implements a supportive model of managerial interaction [62], which is a factor of stress prevention and SW in difficult conditions.

**Table 3** shows the effects of SW of the personnel of innovative and ordinary companies.


*Subjective Well-Being at the Workplace as a Social Action: Opportunities for Management… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.106595*


*of scores on 10 questions, the maximum score is 50. T - trend, - no statistically significant differences.*

*Statistical significance of differences by Mann-Whitney U test; Wilcoxon W test: \*p* ≤ *0.05.\*\*p* ≤ *0.01.*
