**8. Results**

**Tables 2**–**4** show that the highest middle2 value of the frequency of the workers' HPLC in their working day falls in the category 5—more often and the lowest middle value falls in the category 3—sometimes. The statements with achieved median 5—more often in both inde‐ pendent samples are listed in **Table 2**.


<sup>2</sup> For a data set with an odd number of respondents, the median is the middle value. For a data set with an even number of respondents, the median is the average of the two middle values. To simplify the description of the obtained results, we use the term "the middle value" when talking about the median.


Measured on a 7‐step ordinal scale: 1—never; 2—seldom; 3—sometimes; 4—often; 5—more often; 6—very often; 7 always

**Table 2.** The medians of the frequency of the workers' HRLD in their working day—part 1.

Out of the 292 respondents who answered the questions about HPLC, 74 (25.3%) were classified

The collected data were processed with the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS; Version 21). As the variables are ordinal, the median was used to measure the central tendency. We also displayed the frequency tables. As the collected data were measured on an ordinal scale, the independent samples Mann‐Whitney U test that is the nonparametric equivalent to the parametric independent samples t‐test (for example, see [51, 52])was used to verify the null hypothesis: The distribution of the workers' HPLC is the same across categories of position in

working day falls in the category 5—more often and the lowest middle value falls in the category 3—sometimes. The statements with achieved median 5—more often in both inde‐

**Statement Leaders Employees Asymptotic**

…effort isn't unnoticed 74 5.00 217 5.00 0.341 …feedback is received and can be claimed 74 5.00 216 5.00 0.931

…every input is valued 74 5.00 217 5.00 0.907 …quality is valued 74 5.00 215 5.00 0.940

…colleagues in a team support each other 74 5.00 214 5.00 0.925

 For a data set with an odd number of respondents, the median is the middle value. For a data set with an even number of respondents, the median is the average of the two middle values. To simplify the description of the obtained results,

value of the frequency of the workers' HPLC in their

**N Median N Median**

74 5.00 218 5.00 0.968

74 5.00 217 5.00 0.050

74 5.00 216 5.00 0.399

**significance of the difference between leaders and employees**

as leaders and 218 (74.7%) as employees.

**Tables 2**–**4** show that the highest middle2

pendent samples are listed in **Table 2**.

*As a leader:* **I as a leader take care that** *As an employee:* **My leader takes care that**

…it is possible to act in an autonomous

…one can rely on that everybody does

…employees experience in a conversation that one is interested in what they have to say

we use the term "the middle value" when talking about the median.

and independent way

**7.4. Statistics**

88 Occupational Health

the company.

**8. Results**

*I answer:*

their work

2

**Table 3** shows that this middle value (5—more often) was achieved only by leaders, also for the statements that they pay attention that: "Employees are motivated to care for their health," "Nobody must work against their personal values," "One can identify with the val‐ ues of the organization" and "Health of the employees has a high value." From the view‐ point of employees that their leaders pay attention to these HPLC in their working day, the middle value of the responses to these statements was 4—often.

Employees achieved the median 5—more often only for the statements that their leaders pay attention that: "Criticism is given with appraisal," "It is possible to discuss one's own acting on and off," "Everybody has the necessary latitude" and "In a conversation, employees experience that they are accepted like they are." From the viewpoint of leaders that they pay attention to the first and the third above‐mentioned HPLC, the middle value of the responses to these statements was 4—often, and for the second and the fourth above‐mentioned HPLC, the middle value was 4.5—from often to more often.


N—number of respondents.

Measured on a 7‐step ordinal scale: 1—never; 2—seldom; 3—sometimes; 4—often; 5—more often; 6—very often; 7 always.

**Table 3.** The medians of the frequency of the workers' HRLD in their working day—part 2.

**Table 4** shows that the lowest median of the frequency of the leaders' HPLC in their working day falls in the category 3—sometimes. It was detected for the statement that they pay attention that "Every mean is shared fairly." From the viewpoint of employees that their leaders pay attention to this HPLC in their working day, the middle value of the responses to this statement was 4—often. For other HPLC items, the median 4—often was achieved in both independent samples.



N—number of respondents.

**Statement Leaders Employees Asymptotic**

…employees are motivated to care for their health 74 5.00 216 4.00 0.240 …criticism is given with appraisal 74 4.00 214 5.00 0.415 …nobody has to work against their personal values 74 5.00 214 4.00 0.180 …it is possible to discuss one's own acting on and off 74 4.50 214 5.00 0.537 …everybody has the necessary latitude 74 4.00 214 5.00 0.699 …one can identify with the values of the organization 74 5.00 214 4.00 0.272 …health of the employees has a high value 74 5.00 214 4.00 0.526

Measured on a 7‐step ordinal scale: 1—never; 2—seldom; 3—sometimes; 4—often; 5—more often; 6—very often; 7—

**Table 4** shows that the lowest median of the frequency of the leaders' HPLC in their working day falls in the category 3—sometimes. It was detected for the statement that they pay attention that "Every mean is shared fairly." From the viewpoint of employees that their leaders pay attention to this HPLC in their working day, the middle value of the responses to this statement was 4—often. For other HPLC items, the median 4—often was achieved in both independent

**Statement Leaders Employees Asymptotic**

…interventions against stress are considered 74 4.00 217 4.00 0.439

**Table 3.** The medians of the frequency of the workers' HRLD in their working day—part 2.

*I answer:*

90 Occupational Health

*As a leader:* **I as a leader take care that** *As an employee:* **My leader takes care that**

…employees experience in a conversation that they

are accepted like they are

always.

samples.

*I answer:*

company

*As a leader:* **I as a leader take care that** *As an employee:* **My leader takes care that**

…the personal career aims have to be consistent with the aims of the

…everybody can decide themselves

…there is enough time to finish everything important

how their work is done

N—number of respondents.

**significance of the difference between leaders and employees**

**significance of the difference between leaders and employees**

**N Median N Median**

74 4.50 214 5.00 0.933

**N Median N Median**

74 4.00 216 4.00 0.977

74 4.00 216 4.00 0.923

74 4.00 214 4.00 0.070

Measured on a 7‐step ordinal scale: 1—never; 2—seldom; 3—sometimes; 4—often; 5—more often; 6—very often; 7 always.

**Table 4.** The medians of the frequency of the workers' HRLD in their working day—part 3.

The results of the two independent samples Mann‐Whitney U test written in **Tables 2**–**4** show that there are no statistically significant differences, regarding the distributions of the workers' HPLC, between the two independent samples of workers: leaders (that they pay attention to HPLC) and employees (that their leaders pay attention to HPLC).

The distribution of the workers' HPLC in their working day is not statistically different across categories of position in the company; **Table 5** presents the relative frequencies only for the statements with different medians in both independent samples (**Tables 3** and **4**). Results in **Table 5** clarify the results of the two independent samples Mann‐Whitney U test (**Tables 3** and **4**) even for these statements.


**Table 5.** Frequency table for selected statements about the workers' HPLC in their working day for two independent samples: leaders and employees.

#### **9. Discussion**

The presented research results let us confirm both above developed hypotheses. In view of median 5 at the claims in **Table 2**, we can explain that the leaders allow employees their autonomy at work and establish basics for mutuality/inter‐dependence. We can also conclude that leaders recognize the employees' achievements and evaluate them appropriately. They also communicate well with employees and give them real‐time feedback.

The distribution of the workers' HPLC in their working day is not statistically different across categories of position in the company; **Table 5** presents the relative frequencies only for the statements with different medians in both independent samples (**Tables 3** and **4**). Results in **Table 5** clarify the results of the two independent samples Mann‐Whitney U test (**Tables 3**

**Category Never Seldom Some‐**

…every mean is shared fairly Leaders 10.8 17.6 23.0 12.2 18.9 13.5 4.1

**Table 5.** Frequency table for selected statements about the workers' HPLC in their working day for two independent

The presented research results let us confirm both above developed hypotheses. In view of median 5 at the claims in **Table 2**, we can explain that the leaders allow employees their autonomy at work and establish basics for mutuality/inter‐dependence. We can also conclude

**Frequency—valid percent**

**times**

Leaders 5.4 13.5 14.9 14.9 17.6 16.2 17.6 Employees 9.7 14.8 13.0 17.1 19.0 12.0 14.4

Leaders 1.4 12.2 13.5 24.3 23.0 18.9 6.8 Employees 5.1 10.7 15.0 15.4 19.2 17.3 17.3

Leaders 4.1 8.1 14.9 18.9 20.3 25.7 8.1 Employees 6.1 9.3 20.1 19.6 20.6 11.7 12.6

Leaders 2.7 6.8 17.6 23.0 23.0 13.5 13.5 Employees 4.2 9.8 14.0 15.4 22.0 18.7 15.9

Leaders 1.4 8.1 21.6 20.3 21.6 18.9 8.1 Employees 4.2 7.9 16.4 21.0 20.1 19.2 11.2

Employees 10.3 16.8 13.1 20.1 14.0 11.7 14.0

Leaders 2.7 12.2 13.5 14.9 29.7 20.3 6.8 Employees 6.1 12.1 15.9 18.2 24.3 15.0 8.4

Leaders 2.7 16.2 16.2 10.8 16.2 24.3 13.5 Employees 8.4 9.8 13.6 20.6 18.2 15.4 14.0

Leaders 2.7 10.8 16.2 20.3 21.6 18.9 9.5 Employees 5.6 11.7 15.0 17.3 17.8 19.6 13.1

**Often More often Very often Always**

and **4**) even for these statements.

**Statement** *I answer:*

92 Occupational Health

*As a leader:* **I as a leader take care that…**

**takes care that…**

acting on and off

of the organization

high value

appraisal

latitude

*As an employee:* **My leader**

…employees are motivated to care for their health

…criticism is given with

…nobody has to work against their personal values

…it is possible to discuss the own

…everybody has the necessary

…one can identify with the values

…health of the employees has a

…employees experience in a conversation that they are accepted like they are

samples: leaders and employees.

**9. Discussion**

Hence, we can confirm hypothesis "H1: Leaders and employees established positive (social) relations with others." The results presented in **Table 3** show that communication between leaders and employees is appropriate. Employees are more pleased with the communication and feedback than leaders. Namely, not only top managers, but also middle managers were included in the research; the middle and top management do not communicate much. Due to the new legislation [1], WHP is very timely in Slovenia. Leaders are responsible for design and implementation of WHP, but employees should participate, too. WHP requires team work. Therefore, WHP causes improved interpersonal communication and consequently mutual relations. It also supports the systematic approach to stress management, mitie management, career development, etc.

However, the results of the two independent samples Mann‐Whitney U test presented in **Tables 2**–**4** show that there are no statistically significant differences, regarding the distribu‐ tions of the workers' HPLC, between the two independent samples of workers: leaders (that they pay attention to HPLC) and employees (that their leaders pay attention to HPLC). The hypothesis "H2: There are no statistically significant differences between leaders' and em‐ ployees' health‐promoting leadership culture in their working environment," is thus con‐ firmed.

Namely, according to the legislation [1], one must assess risk at every working place in company/organization, which can negatively impact employees. To minimize these risks, one must implement systematic activities, which positively impact reducing stress and stressors. All activities are performed in the frame of WHP.

Society and companies are dependent on well‐trained, highly qualified and motivated employees nowadays more than ever before. At the same time, the potential of workers and their ability to develop became the subject of a new understanding of health, which encom‐ passes both physical and mental well‐being, the quality of life and learning.

Companies benefit from WHP: working in better work‐environment improves their employ‐ ees' health and motivation. This consequently results in diminished sickness‐related and other costs, better products and services, more innovation and productivity. WHP includes prestige, helping to improve the public image of the given company and its attractiveness for employees, suppliers and customers.

Social insurance organizations benefit, too: successes in health and safety at the workplace diminish costs for the social security (health, pension and accident insurance funds). Healthy working conditions improve the health of the entire population. Less people using medical and rehabilitative services reduce costs in public health service. Companies diminish costs for supplementary wages for sick employees (e.g., continuation of wage payment during sick‐ ness), which reduce non‐wage labor costs and the contributions to the statutory health insurance funds.

While proposals for prolonging working life are under discussion, in reality more employees leave work earlier for health reasons. The aging of the workforce caused by the demographic change belongs to the major challenges facing the future world of work, which WHP can help to master by helping workers to remain employed throughout their working life.

There are many benefits for employees too: less stress and strain factors and improved well‐ being and attitude to work. A company is only as healthy and efficient as its employees, hence WHP causes that there are only winners and no losers.
