Skip to main content

Table 4 Adjusted logistic regression analyses between the continuous GMSI scores and the dichotomized workability score (WAS; n = 2219)

From: Supportive and demanding managerial circumstances and associations with excellent workability: a cross-sectional study of Swedish school principals

Independent variables Model 1 partially adjusted1 Model 2 partially adjusted2 Model 3 partially adjusted3 Model 4 fully adjusted4
(OR increase with 95% CI, WAS Poor to good vs. Excellent) (OR increase with 95% CI, WAS Poor to good vs. Excellent) (OR increase with 95% CI, WAS Poor to good vs. Excellent) (OR increase with 95% CI, WAS Poor to good vs. Excellent)
OR 95% CI P value OR 95% CI P value OR 95% CI P value OR 95% CI P value
GMSI Demanding circumstances, effect per unit increase in mean score (1–5)
Resource deficits 1.11 0.98–1.25 .096 1.10 0.98–1.25 .115 1.12 0.99–1.26 .085 1.11 0.98–1.26 .108
Organisational control 0.90 0.78–1.05 .177 0.90 0.78–1.05 .187 0.89 0.76–1.03 .122 0.89 0.76–1.04 .132
Role conflicts 0.76 0.65–0.88  < .001 0.76 0.65–0.88  < .001 0.77 0.66–0.90 .001 0.75 0.64–0.88  < 0.001
Role demands 0.70 0.59–0.83  < .001 0.69 0.58–0.82  < .001 0.69 0.58–0.82  < .001 0.73 0.62–0.87  < 0.001
Group dynamics 0.86 0.72–1.02 .083 0.87 0.73–1.03 .107 0.86 0.72–1.03 .105 0.90 0.75–1.07 .222
Buffer-function 0.89 0.77–1.03 .119 0.91 0.78–1.05 .190 0.91 0.79–1.06 .226 0.92 0.80–1.07 .283
Co-workers 1.13 0.96–1.33 .156 1.13 0.96–1.33 .153 1.14 0.96–1.34 .137 1.09 0.92–1.29 .305
Container-function 0.87 0.75–1.01 .064 0.85 0.73–0.99 .034 0.86 0.74–1.00 .051 0.86 0.74–1.01 .057
GMSI Supportive circumstances, effect per unit increase in mean score (1–5)
Supportive management 0.99 0.89–1.11 .904 1.00 0.89–1.11 .960 1.00 0.89–1.11 .924 1.00 0.90–1.12 .991
Cooperating co-workers 1.05 0.88–1.27 .576 1.04 0.86–1.25 .714 1.03 0.86–1.25 .732 1.01 0.84–1.22 .895
Supportive colleagues 1.13 1.02–1.25 .018 1.13 1.02–1.26 .017 1.12 1.01–1.25 .030 1.13 1.01–1.25 .027
Supportive private life 1.32 1.19–1.47  < .001 1.32 1.19–1.48  < .001 1.23 1.10–1.38  < .001 1.23 1.10–1.37  < .001
Supportive org. structures 1.25 1.09–1.42 .001 1.26 1.10–1.43 .001 1.25 1.10–1.43 .001 1.22 1.06–1.39 .004
Length of work experience as a principal
1–3 years of experience 1.47 1.08–2.00 .014 1.46 1.08–1.99 .015 1.43 1.05–1.94 .024 1.42 1.04–1.94 .028
 > 3–5 years of experience 1.18 0.88–1.58 .272 1.18 0.88–1.59 .263 1.16 0.87–1.56 .314 1.17 0.87–1.57 .311
 > 5 to 10 years of experience 1.04 0.80–1.35 .793 1.04 0.80–1.36 .760 1.02 0.79–1.34 .861 0.99 0.76–1.30 .955
 > 10 years of experience Ref Ref Ref Ref
School-level
Pre-school 1.17 0.75–1.82 .492 1.18 0.75–1.83 .475 1.28 0.81–2.01 .287
Pre-and compulsory school 1.64 0.92–2.94 .096 1.71 0.95–3.08 .072 1.81 1.00–3.27 .052
Compulsory school 1.44 0.94–2.21 .092 1.45 0.95–2.22 .088 1.54 1.00–2.38 .051
Upper secondary school 1.24 0.77–1.97 .375 1.23 0.77–1.96 .397 1.29 0.80–2.08 .295
Adult education Ref Ref Ref
Self-rated health
Poor, Neither good nor poor (= 0) vs. good, very good (= 1) 2.08 1.54–2.81  < 0.001 2.09 1.54–2.83  < 0.001
Self-efficacy, effect per unit increase in mean score (1–5)
Mean score 2.01 1.60–2.53  < 0.001
  1. 1 Model 1: Estimates are adjusted for GMSI-scores and length of work experience as a principal. Naglekerke R2 was 0.189.2 Model 2: Estimates are adjusted for model 1 and school level. Naglekerke R2 was 0.19.3 Model 3: Estimates are adjusted for model 2 and self-rated health. Naglekerke R2 was 0.21.4 Model 4: Estimates are adjusted for model 3 and self-efficacy. Naglekerke R2 was 0.23
  2. Figures in bold are statistically significant p ≤ 0.05