217 Training for supervisors to guide employees with a work disability Characteristics affecting the effectiveness of ‘Mentorwijs’ (aim 2) The results show that the effect of ‘Mentorwijs’ tended to be stronger among employees with a temporary contract and with a social welfare benefit 12 months before the end of the intervention, as opposed to employees without a temporary contract and a social welfare benefit (Supplementary file 2). The betas in supplementary file 2 are presented for one subgroup. For instance, the results in supplementary file 2 show that the betas for employees that had a social welfare benefit (i.e. within one subgroup) were positive after 3 (β=0.28), 6 (β=0.29), 9 (β=0.27), and 12 (β=0.27) months. This means that the effect of the training in the intervention group is stronger among employees that had a social welfare benefit, and that the effect of the training is weaker among employees without a social welfare benefit. Moreover, the effect of ‘Mentorwijs’ also tended to be stronger among employees that have a supervisor that guides less than 10 employees with a work disability. Conversely, the results show that the effect of ‘Mentorwijs’ tended to be weaker among employees in the governmental sector, working in an organization with more than 250 employees, working in sheltered workplaces and with a work disability benefit 12 months before the end of the intervention. Effect of ‘Mentorwijs’ on supervisor guidance of employees with a work disability (aim 3) Table 5 shows that knowledge and self-efficacy for attitudes and skills of supervisors significantly improved between T0, and all follow-up moments after the training. Improvements were mainly between T0 and T1, and then remained stable over time. For intention to adopt attitudes significant effects were also found between T0 and all follow-up moments. However, for intention to adopt and applied attitudes and skills no significant effects were found. 7
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw