Does the evidence show that Swoop-and-Poop managers cause heart disease?

You know the type: Stays uninvolved while others do the heavy lifting, then swoops in at the last minute to deposit some "management input". This leads to chaos and resentment -- and possibly heart disease, according to the Talent Management article Bad Bosses Do More Than Kill Productivity -They Can Kill Employees. Travis Bradberry recommends some ways to avoid disruptions caused by so-called seagull managers: "Each manager must discover when and where he or she succumbs to seagull tendencies. Every single one of us is a seagull manager sometimes, in some situations, with some people." I think that's a great point.

Show us the evidence (or link to it, at least). To underscore the hazards of Swoop-and-Poop management, Bradberry talks about "researchers from the Finnish Institute of Occupational Health" who "followed British civil servants for 15 years to see if the type of boss one works for has any impact on long-term, physical health. ...The team from Helsinki found seagull-type managerial behaviors lead to a much higher incidence of employee coronary heart disease. In fact, employees working for a seagull manager were 30 percent more likely to develop coronary heart disease than those who do not. What's more, the incidence of coronary heart disease — the No. 1 killer in Western societies — was measured after the researchers had removed the influence of typical risk factors, such as age, ethnicity, marital status, educational attainment, socioeconomic position, cholesterol level, obesity, hypertension, smoking, alcohol consumption and physical activity."

Seriously? But Bradberry doesn't reference the specific research, or provide a link to follow. He interprets the findings for us, and that's where I have a problem with the article. We're told there's evidence that "seagull-type managerial behaviors" cause coronary disease -- but I'd be really, really surprised if "seagull manager" was one of the variables identified in the study. I would like to see for myself how the research was conducted.

Run with the big dogs. Human resources executives often admit they don't always have a seat at the executive table, and want to be more involved in strategic decision-making. They could advance their cause by demonstrating that they can, and do, practice evidence-based management. Alas, Bradberry isn't setting a very good example (though he could have without making his article look like a thesis).

Is this it? I looked for the source of this evidence using Infovell, the research site I recently recommended. I found one potential match, the 2007 BMJ article Social inequalities in self reported health in early old age: follow-up of prospective cohort study. It looks at civil servants over 19 years, but focuses on health differences among pay grades -- so maybe it's not the research Bradberry talked about. [FYI: The authors reported "RESULTS: Physical health deteriorated more rapidly with age among men and women from the lower occupational grades." Authors: Chandola, Ferrie, Sacker, & Marmot. Citation: BMJ (Clinical research ed.) , Volume 334 (7601) :( 990 ).]

Comments

[Buy Viagra]

Hi, I think your article its very important and interesting,good work, thanks for sharing!! Have a nice day!

[Tracy Allison Altman]

Bob, Thanks for the citations.

[Bobsutton]

Tracy,

The study might have been this one one -- which really isn't about seagull type managers, whatever that is, but is about bad bosses -- inconsiderate, who are bad at getting things done. The lack of citations is a problem, I agree.

http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=94503

http://www.themedguru.com/articles/bosss_behavior_could_give_you_a_heart_attack-86118013.html