literature review on impact of unemployment

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• HHS Author Manuscripts

The Far-Reaching Impact of Job Loss and Unemployment *

Jennie e. brand.

University of California – Los Angeles

Job loss is an involuntary disruptive life event with a far-reaching impact on workers’ life trajectories. Its incidence among growing segments of the workforce, alongside the recent era of severe economic upheaval, has increased attention to the effects of job loss and unemployment. As a relatively exogenous labor market shock, the study of displacement enables robust estimates of associations between socioeconomic circumstances and life outcomes. Research suggests that displacement is associated with subsequent unemployment, long-term earnings losses, and lower job quality; declines in psychological and physical well-being; loss of psychosocial assets; social withdrawal; family disruption; and lower levels of children’s attainment and well-being. While reemployment mitigates some of the negative effects of job loss, it does not eliminate them. Contexts of widespread unemployment, although associated with larger economic losses, lessen the social-psychological impact of job loss. Future research should attend more fully to how the economic and social-psychological effects of displacement intersect and extend beyond displaced workers themselves.

A central tradition of research in sociology and economics seeks to identify and take account of the processes shaping socioeconomic outcomes, including the mechanisms that affect mobility and define opportunity structures. A notable strand of this research has assessed the extent to which job loss, often accompanied by a period of unemployment, divides the career achievement of workers. With the recent severe economic upheaval came a precipitous increase in attention to the study of job loss and unemployment. Much of this work has understandably focused on economic outcomes as indicated by employment levels and earnings, but another important body of research has attended to the wider impact of job loss.

A few definitions help fix ideas. Job separation includes both voluntary (worker initiated job separation, or “quitting”) and involuntary job termination. Job loss is generally understood as indicating involuntary separation that occurs when workers are fired or laid off, where layoffs occur as a result of firms downsizing, restructuring, closing plants or relocating. Involuntary job loss may also indicate job separation as a result of health conditions. In this case, the separation may be worker initiated, but nevertheless be considered to some degree involuntary. Job displacement is a specific form of involuntary job loss that does not include workers being fired or termination for health reasons; it is reserved for involuntary job separation that is the result of economic and business conditions that are largely beyond the control of the individual worker and thus presumably less governed by worker performance. Strict definitions include some period of pre-displacement firm-specific tenure, such as three years in the Displaced Worker Survey of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Some studies on job loss focus attention on involuntary job loss, while others focus more specifically on job displacement. I nevertheless use these terms somewhat interchangeably throughout this review, as the distinctions are not always explicitly made in the literature and are to some degree amorphous.

Individual-level (involuntary) unemployment occurs when individuals are without a job and actively seeking employment; some definitions allow discouraged workers who have dropped out of the labor force to be counted among the unemployed, or at least among the jobless. Unemployment is one potential consequence of job loss. Job loss, as opposed to unemployment, is a discrete event and is not synonymous with unemployment. A period (at times a prolonged period) of unemployment typically, but not necessarily, accompanies job loss. However, unemployment is not necessarily preceded by job loss, and displaced workers are not generally representative of the unemployed population ( Kletzer 1998 ). Job loss is a discrete event, while unemployment is a state, with a great deal of heterogeneity with respect to instigation and duration. Job displacement is more of an exogenous shock than unemployment, or job loss more broadly defined, allowing for better estimates of the consequences of socioeconomic mobility. I spend considerably more time on job displacement than on unemployment, per se, in this review.

This review proceeds as follows. I begin with a description of trends and risk factors associated with job loss, and then consider some methodological and interpretative issues in estimating displacement effects. I then review the economic impact of job loss. Thereafter I thoroughly attend to the wider impact of worker displacement. I conclude with several directions for future research. I focus my review on job loss in the United States.

Trends in and Risk Factors Associated with Job Loss

Widespread job insecurity, waves of job loss, and associated periods of unemployment and income loss have characterized the last several decades in the U.S. ( Farber 2010 ; Farley 1996 ; Kalleberg 2000 , 2009 ; Kletzer 1998 ; Wetzel 1995 ). Most Americans believe that employment stability has declined ( Hollister 2011 ), and job displacement is now considered a common feature of the U.S. labor market. The macroeconomic trends commonly associated with worker displacement include: technological change; foreign trade and the shift to production offshore to take advantage of low-wage foreign workers; immigration; firms’ greater use of outside suppliers, subcontractors, and partners, and the paring down of the activities of the firm; the shift in U.S. consumption from manufactured goods to services; poor firm management; weakened labor unions; and regional and national economic downturn.

High levels of workers displacement marked the last four recessions in the U.S. The early 1980s recession convinced firms to utilize effective new equipment, shift production to modern plants, and lay off thousands of workers ( Farley 1996 ). Wetzel (1995) wrote: “Industrial firms that had prided themselves on lifetime paternalistic commitments to their production workers – largely men with average or below-average educational attainment – slashed employment … The abrupt contraction struck at the heart of the middle class by drastically impacting mature family men with strong labor force attachment, good work histories, and long job tenure” (p. 101). The economic recovery of the 1980s was marked by large employment gains; nevertheless, unemployment persisted at a relatively high rate and newly created jobs were in general of a lower quality than jobs from which workers had lost. The early 1990s recession was marked by the creation of flat organization and elimination of middle management positions. High levels, particularly during economic recessions, of job loss and unemployment characterize the U.S. labor market since 1990. In the 1990s through early 2000s, worker layoffs, once regarded as organizational failure, were increasingly utilized as a labor allocative process available to firms in order to preserve shareholder value. Ensuing waves of downsizing, reorganization, mergers and takeovers rewarded some individuals with great prosperity while others were threatened with displacement, unemployment, and downward mobility ( Baumol et al. 2003 ). The recessionary period from the end of 2007 to mid-2009, the “Great Recession,” was deeper and more extensive than any other since the Great Depression of the 1930s ( Hout, Levanon, and Cumberworth 2011 ). The U.S. unemployment rate hovered around 9 to 10 percent in 2009–2011, the highest rate since the early 1980s recession and roughly twice the pre-crisis rate. The proportion of families with an unemployed member was roughly 12 percent in 2009, up from about 6 percent in 2007. The large increase in long-term unemployment in this most recent recession is suggestive of longer-term structural labor market changes ( Katz 2010 ).

While macroeconomic and firm-level factors influence the incidence of job loss and unemployment, a number of individual-level characteristics also govern the risk of displacement. Men and blacks and Hispanics had a higher probability of being displaced than women and whites in the 1980s; family background disadvantage, blue-collar and manufacturing work, low occupational status, low job tenure, and low levels of education likewise heightened the risk of job loss over this period (Brand 2005; Farber 2005 ). Job loss rates increased for women and for whites in the 1990s, as well as for college-educated and high tenure workers (Couch 1998; Farber 1993b , 1997b , 2005 ). While educated workers maintain a lower risk of displacement, the increased rates have nevertheless aroused public concern that the structure of job loss qualitatively changed over recent decades, increasing vulnerability to job loss across the population ( Fallick 1996 ; Farber 1993a , 1993b , 2010 ).

Estimating Effects of Job Loss

Abrupt changes in socioeconomic conditions provide a sort of “natural experiment” offering a stronger basis for inference than the usual practice of examining the covariation of outcomes with socioeconomic status that may arise from a variety of sources over an indeterminate period of time. The study of job displacement, thus, provides a unique opportunity to assess within individual changes in socioeconomic conditions that are relatively exogenous to individual characteristics. Indeed, scholars often explicitly describe the study of displacement as a purer way to estimate the effects of socioeconomic shocks ( Stevens 2014 ). Nevertheless, the study of displacement does not fully mitigate selection issues, as job loss is clearly conditioned by factors that are also associated with levels of subsequent outcomes. A primary concern in attempting to identify effects of job loss is the potential presence of unobservable characteristics that affect both worker displacement and subsequent outcomes. That is, we are left with the fundamental question of whether workers who were displaced from jobs have outcomes that are different than they otherwise would have been had they not been displaced. If employers make targeted decisions regarding whom to displace, there is a possibility that it is relatively less productive workers (e.g. lower levels of motivation, commitment, and ability), workers with physical or mental health issues, and socially inept workers who both are more likely to lose jobs and have worse economic and social outcomes. Scholars, however, have found few differences across several leading estimators of causal effects (including regression, matching, difference-in-difference and fixed effects models), suggesting a degree of robustness regarding the nature of the observed associations between displacement and life outcomes in the face of various technical assumptions and model specifications ( Brand 2006 ; Coelli 2011 ; Stevens and Schaller 2009).

Yet another strategy to deal with possible selection bias is to adopt a quasi-experimental strategy that tracks the well-being of workers following a plant closure. When an entire organization closes, it is unlikely that a workers’ specific characteristics are responsible for the displacement. Thus if the results for plant closings and more individualized lay-offs are similar, we have a firmer basis for claiming the validity of the effect estimates for the full population of displaced workers. Likewise, job losses occurring during recessionary periods, in which large numbers of individuals lose jobs, may provide better causal estimates of job loss ( Stevens 2014 ). A few caveats as to inferences we can make from mass layoff studies are nevertheless in order. While such studies make strong claims for having eliminated the influence of selection, plant closure studies are typically limited to specific populations (often blue-collar workers) in specific geographic areas, restricting generalizability to the U.S. workforce as a whole. That is, studies of plant closures ostensibly sacrifice external for internal validity. Some closure studies are also lacking a control group of non-displaced workers. Additionally, plant closure studies may still be subject to selection bias, as more qualified and adaptive employees may leave the plant upon word of the impending closure. The same can be said for studies of workers displaced during recessions.

Job losses due to layoffs and those due to plant closings, and job loss occurring in different economic contexts, may also produce different effects because they are potentially different treatment conditions. In the case of layoffs and job loss during economic expansions, the greater likelihood for discretionary dismissal of employees can call into question competency and character and act as a signal of below-average productivity, to the displaced workers, as well as to their families and communities, and in the labor market. If potential employers interpret layoffs as indications of ineptitude, hiring will be discouraged. The resulting difficulty of laid-off workers to secure suitable reemployment may result in greater long-term economic losses. Economic distress, alongside attribution of job loss to one’s own shortcomings, and the stigma of a layoff and resulting strained relations with colleagues, friends, and/or family members, can in turn lead laid off workers to lower self-esteem, anxiety, and depressive symptoms (Leana and Feldman 1992; Miller and Hoppe 1994 ). Individually laid of workers may also lack similarly strained workers to offer a network of support ( Miller and Hoppe 1994 ; Brand, Levy, and Gallo 2008 ). These circumstances contrast with that of job loss due to plant closings and loss occurring in economic recessions, in which clearly external influences, including the health of the macro-economy and firms’ decisions to restructure or relocate business units, provokes separation. Because such factors are clearly beyond the control of individual employees, plant closings do not involve a negative signal that raises transaction costs for displaced workers. Indeed workers displaced due to business closings are victims of an event that could befall anyone, and seldom perceive themselves as responsible for the job loss. Thus, such workers may endure lower economic and social-psychological burdens. 1

Economic Effects of Job Loss

Increasing job insecurity and displacement has motivated a large body of research on effects, beginning with economic losses. The average displaced worker experiences a long period of unemployment ( Brand 2004 ; Chan and Stevens 1999; Fallick 1996 ; Farber 2003, 2005 ; Kletzer 1998 ; Podgursky and Swaim 1987 ; Ruhm 1991 ), but the duration has a high degree of worker variance ( Seitchik 1991 ). Unemployment among displaced workers generally lasts longer during recessions than expansions ( Farber 1993a ; Kletzer 1991 , 1998 ). The impact of job loss on careers is considerable even when workers do not experience long-term unemployment. Displaced workers suffer substantial earnings losses, which are generally more persistent than unemployment effects ( Brand 2004 ; Cha and Morgan 2010 ; Chan and Stevens 1999, 2001 ; Couch 1998; Couch, Jolly, and Placzek 2011 ; Couch and Placzek 2010 ; Davis and von Wachter 2012 ; Fallick 1996 ; Farber 2003, 2005 ; Jacobson, LaLonde, and Sullivan 1993 ; Kletzer 1998 ; Podgursky and Swaim 1987 ; Ruhm 1991 ; Seitchik 1991 ; Stevens 2014 ; von Wachter 2010 ). Couch and Placzek (2010) report an immediate 33 percent earnings loss and as much as a 15 percent loss six years following job separation. The cumulative lifetime earning loss is estimated to be roughly 20 percent, with wage scarring observed as long as 20 years post-displacement ( Brand and von Wachter 2013 ; Davis and von Wachter 2012 ; von Wachter 2010 ; von Wachter, Song, and Manchester 2009). Reemployed displaced workers are more likely than their non-displaced counterparts to be employed part-time, and this likelihood has increased over time, particularly during recessions ( Farber 1993b , 2003, 2005 ). Displaced workers may also find, when reemployed, that their jobs are of lower quality in terms of job authority, autonomy, and employer-offered benefits in comparison to both the jobs they lost and those held by their non-displaced counterparts ( Brand 2004 , 2006 ; Podgursky and Swaim 1987 ). Workers also withstand greater job instability for at least a decade following a displacement event ( von Wachter 2010 ).

While economic losses occur for displaced workers across demographic categories, across industries and throughout the skill distribution ( von Wachter 2010 ), there is nevertheless effect variation by worker characteristics. Displaced workers’ losses reflect both industry-specific decline and the loss of firm- and industry-specific skills ( Kalleberg 2000 ). Older workers with higher pre-displacement tenure, those who change industries, and those who experience multiple job losses thus experience greater earnings losses ( Carrington and Zaman 1994 ; Couch, Jolly, and Placzek 2009; Fallick 1996 ; Jacobson, LaLonde, & Sullivan 1993 ; Stevens 1997; von Wachter 2010 ). As greater skill transferability is expected for educated workers, employment, earnings, and job quality reductions are typically more pronounced for less-educated workers ( Farber 1997 , 2003, 2005 ; Kletzer 1991 , 1998 ; Podgursky and Swaim 1987 ; Seitchik 1991 ). Still, as the incidence of displacement for more educated workers has increased, the transition difficulties for such workers have increased as well.

While displaced workers’ economic costs are substantial during both economic recessions and expansions, losses are cyclical ( Couch, Jolly, and Placzek 2011 ; Davis and von Wachter 2012 ; Fallick 1996 ; Farber 1993a , 1997a , 2005 ; Jacobson, LaLonde, and Sullivan 1993 ; Kletzer 1998 ; von Wachter 2010 ). As few firms hire during economic contractions, displaced workers seeking reemployment are in a poorer negotiating position than during economic expansions. Davis and von Wachter (2012) find that men lose an average of 1.4 years of pre-displacement earnings if displaced in mass-layoff events that occur when the national unemployment rate is below 6 percent, and lose 2.8 years of pre-displacement earnings if displaced when the unemployment rate exceeds 8 percent. Similarly, Couch, Jolly, and Placzek (2011) find that long-term earnings losses for displaced workers during a recessionary period are about 2 to 4 times larger than for those observed during a period of economic expansion.

There is some debate over variation in economic losses by the specific form of job loss. Recent work (Kashinsky 2002; Stevens 1997; von Wachter 2010 ) has questioned the findings of an influential study by Gibbons and Katz (1991) that suggested that layoffs are associated with greater economic losses than are plant closings. Gibbons and Katz (1991) argued that in the case of a layoff, the discretionary dismissal of employees acts as a signal of below average productivity, stigmatizing laid-off workers, resulting in large employment and earnings losses. On the contrary, a plant closing, in which all workers are terminated without discretion, does not carry a comparable performance signal, rendering earnings penalties less severe. Extending this argument to differences in earnings losses by economic context, we might expect countercyclical earnings losses, as the stigma associated with displacement during an economic contraction should be less than that during an economic expansion. However, as I note above, such losses are cyclical. In support of the evidence for cyclicality, we should expect larger earnings losses from job loss due to plant closings as such closures may indicate weak local or macro economic conditions. Krashinsky (2002) argues that the Gibbons and Katz (1991) result is driven by the fact that small plants are more likely to close, and that layoffs that occur from larger, higher-wage employment establishments result in larger earnings losses. 2

Several mechanisms help explicate the large economic losses of displaced workers. Earnings and job quality declines are likely to increase with unemployment duration. Yet it is unclear whether this association is the result of length of unemployment itself, and possible stigma effects, or because those workers facing the greatest challenges in the labor market take longer to find a new job ( von Wachter 2010 ). Workers are also disadvantaged in the market if industries in which they were previously employed shift their operations elsewhere or permanently reduce their employment levels. Relatedly, lower job quality upon reemployment is a function of the loss of a high quality match between the worker and the job ( Fallick 1996 ). While a worker generally only leaves a job voluntarily when he or she believes there are relative gains in career attainment to be made, displaced workers likely feel an urgency to find a new job and are in a poor position to perform a quality job screening ( Newman 1988 ).

Non-Economic Effects of Job Loss

Job loss is a negative, often unpredictable event that entails a sequence of stressful experiences, from job loss notification, anticipation, dismissal, and often unemployment, to (in most cases) job search, re-training and eventual reemployment, often at jobs with lower wages and job quality. Yet the impact of job loss and unemployment is not limited to economic decline; it is also associated with considerable, long-term non-economic consequences for displaced workers, as well as for their families and communities. Displaced workers face psychological and physical distress, personal reassessment in relation to individual values and societal pressures, and new patterns of interaction with family and peers. Much of the work on the non-economic consequences of job loss is consistent with a large literature demonstrating a strong correlation between indicators of socioeconomic status and individual life chances and well-being. However, as displacement is a relatively exogenous labor market shock, its study enables a stronger causal link between socioeconomic circumstances and life outcomes. In this section, I begin reviewing individual worker effects on psychological and physical well-being, and then consider the consequences for families and communities.

Job Loss and Psychological Well-Being

A large literature on mental health has focused on the impact of stressful life events, such as unemployment and job loss. Job loss disrupts more than just income flow; it disrupts individuals’ status, time structure, demonstration of competence and skill, and structure of relations. It carries societal stigma, creating a sense of anxiety, insecurity, and shame ( Newman 1988 ). The loss of a job presents a source of acute stress associated with the immediate disruption to a major social role, as well as chronic stress resulting from continuing economic and social and psychological strain (House 1987; Pearlin et al. 1981 ). Research suggests that displaced workers report higher levels of depressive symptoms, somatization, and anxiety and the loss of psychosocial assets including self-acceptance, self-confidence, self-esteem, morale, life satisfaction, goal and meaning in life, social support, and sense of control ( Brand, Levy, and Gallo 2008 ; Burgard, Brand and House 2007 ; Catalano et al. 2011 ; Dooley, Fielding and Levi 1996 ; Darity and Goldsmith 1996 ; Dooley, Prause, and Ham-Rowbottom 2000 ): Gallo et al. 2000 ; Gallo et al. 2006a ; Hamilton et al. 1990 ; Jahoda 1981 , 1982 ; Jahoda, Lazarsfeld, and Zeisel 1933[1971] ; Kasl and Jones 2000; Kessler, Turner, and House 1988 , 1989 ; Leana and Feldman 1992 ; McKee-Ryan et al. 2005 ; Miller and Hoppe 1994 ; Paul and Moser 2009 ; Pearlin et al. 1981 ; Turner 1995 ; Warr and Jackson 1985 ). 3 The increase in reported symptoms of depression and anxiety among displaced workers compared to non-displaced workers is roughly 15 to 30 percent ( Burgard, Brand, and House 2007 ; Catalano et al. 2011 ; Paul and Moser 2009 ). Leading explanations for why job loss and unemployment negatively impact well-being include lowered self-esteem, sense of purpose, and control; heightened apathy, idleness, isolation, and the breakdown of social personality structure; and a loss of the positive derivatives of participating in a work environment, such as skill use, time structure, economic security, interpersonal socialization, and valued societal position ( Darity and Goldsmith 1996 ; Jahoda 1982 ; Jahoda, Lazarsfeld, and Zeisel 1933[1971] ; McKee-Ryan et al. 2005 ). 4

Although displacement is more of an exogenous shock than other types of job mobility, the possibility of omitted variable bias nevertheless threatens the validity of results associating job loss to subsequent outcomes. Of particular concern in the study of psychological well-being, workers with psychological distress and lacking self-confidence and morale may be those workers most likely to be displaced from jobs. Studies have used various approaches to address this selection problem, most often attempting to control for a range of factors that impact the likelihood of job loss and subsequent well-being. Studies continue to find an association, although often reduced in magnitude. For example, Burgard, Brand, and House (2007) adjust for numerous social background characteristics, including baseline psychological health, and find a significant effect of job loss on depressive symptoms. Moreover, using meta-analytic techniques drawing on over 100 empirical studies, McKee-Ryan et al. (2005) find consistency in results across multiple kinds of studies and hundred of data points suggesting a relationship between job loss and worker well-being. Studies based on plant closures, thought to be less prone to issues of selection, continue to find an increased risk of mental distress among the displaced ( Hamilton et al. 1990 ). 5

As is true with the economic consequences of job loss, the effects of job loss on psychological well-being vary by a range of factors, including demographic characteristics, socio-emotional skills and social support, and the economic context. While more disadvantaged workers may be more vulnerable to financial shocks ( Hamilton et al. 1990 ), such economic adversity is a comparatively normative experience; by contrast, job displacement and socioeconomic decline may instigate an acute sense of deprivation among more advantaged families whose peers tend to be likewise advantaged and for whom displacement is a considerable shock ( Brand and Simon Thomas 2014 ). That is, judgments of disruptive events depend on the experience of similar situations in the past, and higher levels of past adversity may lessen the impact of current adversity ( Clark, Georgellis, and Sanfey 2001 ; Dooley, Prause, and Ham-Rowbottom 2000 ). If the difficulties posed by job loss and unemployment are primarily financial, then reemployment has the potential to remove much of the stress, particularly if the income is comparable to what the worker had been earning. If job loss profoundly alters one’s self-concept and place in society, however, the extent to which reemployment will reverse these effects is unclear. While significant effects of reemployment have been documented among blue-collar workers ( Kessler, Turner, and House 1989 ; Warr and Jackson 1985 ), professionals and upper-level, white-collar workers do not seem to recover as readily. In contrast to the literature on the economic effects, attention has also been paid to variation in the effects of job loss by socio-emotional skills and social support. For example, worker response to displacement varies by individual work-role centrality, or employment commitment, where workers who place more importance on the work role to their sense of self suffer more from job loss. Individuals also vary in their coping resources, i.e. the personal, financial, and social resources they draw on to cope with job loss, and social support, such as social integration, availability of friends, relatives, and co-workers, and marital status and spousal support ( Darity and Goldsmith 1996 ; Leana and Feldman 1988 ; Pearlin et al. 1981 ).

The experience of job loss and unemployment may also vary by the economic context. Displacement that occurs during recessions, in which many workers are laid off, is associated with greater economic losses than displacement that occurs during economic expansions ( Couch, Jolly, and Placzek 2011 ; Davis and von Wachter 2011; Fallick 1996 ; von Wachter 2010 ). However, contexts of widespread unemployment lessen the internalization of blame and social stigma associated with job loss ( Brand, Levy, and Gallo 2008 ; Charles and Stephens 2004 ; Clark 2003 , 2010 ; Miller and Hoppe 1994 ). That is, displaced workers may benefit from a “social norm effect”: as aggregate unemployment increases, one’s own unemployment represents a smaller deviation from the social norm ( Clark 2010 ), and thus displacement effects on social-psychological well-being may be less in contexts of mass layoffs. Turner (1995) shows a three-way interaction, indicating that unemployment effects on psychological well-being are strongest in low unemployment areas, particularly among individuals with a college-level education. While economic burden is greater among workers with lower socioeconomic status and those displaced in higher unemployment contexts, personal attribution is greater among higher status victims of job loss and those displaced in low unemployment contexts ( Kessler, Turner, and House 1988 ; Pearlin et al. 1981 ; Turner 1995 ). These interactions highlight that results are sensitive to the population, geographic location, and time period under study.

Scholars have proposed a number of mechanisms to explain the relationship between job loss and psychological well-being. First, economic deprivation and downward socioeconomic mobility provide leading explanations for the relationship between job loss and psychological distress, as indicated by unemployment duration ( Clark, Georgellis, and Sanfey 2001 ; McKee-Ryan et al. 2005 ) and income loss ( Gallo et al. 2006a ; Kasl and Jones 2000; Kessler, Turner, and House 1988 ; Warr and Jackson 1985 ). Second, job loss and unemployment can dampen self-esteem, aspirations, and time structure; incite resignation, apathy, uncertainty, and stigmatization; and frustrate one’s social identity by replacing a socially approved role with one of markedly lower prestige ( Jahoda 1982 ; Jahoda, Lazarsfeld, and Zeisel 1933[1971] ). Scholars either include these measures within the set of dependent variables of interest, or treat the psychosocial indicators as mediators linking job loss to depressive symptoms. Third, family and social strain help to explain the relationship ( Darity and Goldsmith 1996 ). Fourth, additional stressful life events that occur subsequent to job loss, such as additional job losses, divorce, health shocks, and migration explain some of the effects. Although scholars routinely implicate these mechanisms, few studies rigorously empirically test these mediating influences ( Catalano et al. 2011 ).

Job Loss and Physical Well-Being

Job loss has been linked to both short and long-term declines in physical health, including worse self-reported health, physical disability, cardiovascular disease, a greater number of reported medical conditions, increase in hospitalization, higher use of medical services, higher use of disability benefits, an increase in self-destructive behaviors and suicide, and mortality ( Burgard, Brand, and House 2007 ; Catalano et al. 2011 ; Dooley, Fielding, and Levi 1996 ; Ferrie et al. 1998 ; Gallo et al. 2000 ; Gallo et al. 2004 ; Gallo et al. 2006b ; Gallo et al. 2009 ; Kasl and Jones 2000; Kessler, Turner, and House 1988 ; McKee-Ryan et al. 2005 ; Strully 2009 ; Turner 1995 ). For example, Gallo et al. (2004 , 2006b) found that job loss doubled the risk of subsequent myocardial infarction and stroke among older workers. Sullivan and von Wachter (2009) and von Wachter (2010) found a 50 to 100 percent increase in mortality the year following displacement and a 10 to 15 percent increase in mortality rates for the next 20 years.

Despite a large literature suggesting an association between job loss and ill health, the causal relationship remains contested due to concerns over selection bias. The fundamental concern is whether job loss leads to ill health, or whether at least some or all of the observed association occurs because those individuals who have poor health are more likely to lose jobs. Even with a rich set of pre-displacement covariates, the question remains as to whether models fully adjust for pre-displacement health, personality and psychosocial characteristics, lifestyle, and labor market experiences that may lead to both job loss and ill health. Burgard, Brand, and House (2007) continue to find a significant association between involuntary job loss and overall self-rated health even after adjustment for social background characteristics and baseline health. More nuanced analyses of specific reasons for job loss and the timing of job loss relative to health shocks reveal that those who lose their jobs for health-related reasons have, not surprisingly, the most precipitous declines in health. Effects of job losses for non-health reasons on self-rated poor health are relatively small ( Burgard, Brand, and House 2007 ). Studies of plant closures also show that workers’ health declines following job loss (Arnetz et al. 1991; Beal and Nethercott 1987; Gore 1978; Iversen, Sabroe, and Damsgaard 1989; Kasl and Cobb 1970; Kessler, House, and Turner 1987; Strully 2009 ).

Variation in displacement effects and the mechanisms linking job loss to physical health are similar to psychological effects, including economic loss ( Sullivan and von Wachter 2009 ; von Wachter 2010 ) and erosion of psychosocial assets and social support ( Eliason and Storrie 2009 ) and subsequent adverse life events. Yet a few comments specific to the mediating effects on physical health are merited. The effect of job loss and unemployment on depressive symptoms may manifest itself in physiological outcomes, thus the impact of job loss on psychological well-being can help explain the effect on physical health. In addition, health behaviors, such as greater alcohol and drug use, unhealthy food consumption and less exercise, and sleep quality, may partially mediate the association. On the other hand, for some individuals, the increase in discretionary time due to unemployment may be used to pursue health-promoting behaviors, such as physical activity, that might precipitate weight loss or encourage alcohol temperance ( Catalano et al. 2011 ). Another clear mechanism is the loss of employer-offered health insurance and reduced access to medical care.

Job Loss and Families

As job displacement has significant, long-term effects on workers’ socioeconomic status and psychological and physical well-being, we reasonably expect these consequences to impact the families of displaced workers. The displaced have an increased risk of family tension, and of family disruption ( Attewell 1999 ; Charles and Stephens 2004 ; Jahoda, Lazarsfeld, and Zeisel 1933 [1971] ). Charles and Stephens (2004) considered differences in the mode of displacement on subsequent risk for divorce, reporting increased likelihood of divorce following a layoff but not a plant closing. The authors attributed the higher risk for marital dissolution to the spouse’s negative inference about the worker’s personal role in the layoff, i.e. the discretionary nature of the termination conveys to the spouse certain qualities of the displaced worker which may suggest a lack of marital fitness.

A literature is also emerging which suggests deleterious effects of parental displacement on children, including lower self-esteem and higher likelihood of grade repetition, dropout, and suspension or expulsion from school ( Johnson, Kalil, and Dunifon 2012 ; Kalil and Ziol-Guest 2005 , 2008 ; Stevens and Schaller 2010 ), educational attainment ( Kalil and Wightman 2011 ), and lower income of children in adulthood ( Page, Stevens, and Lindo 2009 ). These studies largely emphasize the deleterious effects of fathers’ loss of financial standing in the family among married couple households. Studies examining differences between paternal and maternal displacement effects among married couples find significant effects of paternal but not maternal displacement ( Kalil and Ziol-Guest 2008 ; Rege, Telle, and Votruba 2011 ). They hypothesize that maternal displacement is not as detrimental to children’s outcomes as paternal due to greater psychological consequences associated with economic loss among fathers who are largely expected to maintain the role of primary provider. Brand and Simon Thomas (2014) , however, focus on displacement among single mothers, and find significant negative effects on children’s educational attainment and social-psychological well-being in young adulthood. Overall, the evidence suggests a significant impact of parental displacement on children’s life outcomes.

Just as worker response to job loss varies, children also respond differently to parental displacement. As I note above, more disadvantaged workers and workers displaced during recessions tend to have greater economic losses than more advantaged workers and workers displaced during economic expansions. However, disadvantaged families may have acquired particular coping skills and support structures as a result of previous experience with economic adversity, while advantaged families lack referents to similarly strained families and a social norm of deprivation. Additionally, contexts of widespread unemployment increase economic losses but lessen the internalization of blame and social stigma associated with job loss, and thus effects on social-psychological well-being among displaced workers and their families are potentially greater in contexts of more individualized layoffs. Some studies suggest that effects are concentrated among disadvantaged families ( Kalil and Wightman 2011 ; Oreopoulos, Page, and Stevens 2008 ; Stevens and Schaller 2011), while others find larger effects among more advantaged families and in low unemployment contexts ( Brand and Simon Thomas 2014 ). 6

Mechanisms linking parental job loss to children’s outcomes are similar to those I discuss above. Fewer parental resources restrict the ability to purchase goods critical for child development, such as schooling, housing, food, and safe and cognitively-enriched learning environments ( Kalil and Ziol-Guest 2008 ). Job loss is also associated with residential mobility, inciting stress as well as a disruption of children’s schooling and social networks. Parental downward mobility can also dampen children’s attitudes about the value of education and work. Displaced parents may foster psychological distress among their children to the extent that they model despondency and despair. Displaced parents’ decreased physical and psychological well-being can inhibit emotional warmth and incite erratic or punitive parenting practices ( Kessler, Turner, and House 1989 ; McLoyd 1990 ; McLoyd et al. 1994 ), and social withdrawal can reduce children’s social capital and collective efficacy.

Job Loss and Communities

Employment and career stability have long been considered important factors for social involvement ( Durkheim 1933 ; Jahoda, Lazarsfeld, and Zeisel 1933 [1971] ; Rotolo and Wilson 2003 ; Wilensky 1961 ; Wilson and Musick 1997 ). Expanding on Durkheim’s (1933) notion that employment performs an integrative role, drawing people into social life, Wilensky (1961) and Wilson and Musick (1997) find that stable employment and an orderly career marked by functionally related, hierarchically-ordered jobs (i.e., the absence of job displacements and downward socioeconomic mobility) is associated with higher levels of social integration. Likewise, Rotolo and Wilson (2003) show that disorderly careers have the potential to undermine social involvement. These studies, however, are restricted to specific populations and careers marked by substantial job movement, whether voluntary or involuntary. In fact, the research on the effects of job loss and unemployment is decidedly limited. Brand and Burgard (2008) , in an analysis most similar to those I review above, find that displaced workers have significant and long-term lower probabilities of involvement in various modes of social participation, including church groups, youth and community groups, charitable organizations, and informal social gatherings with friends. The strain of insecure employment, displacement events, periods of unemployment, reemployment in jobs with lower earnings and quality, psychological distress, geographic mobility, and diminished social trust and the erosion of commitment to social reciprocity indubitably contribute to decreased levels of social involvement among displaced workers ( Putnam 2000 ; Wilson 2000 ; Wilson and Musick 1997 ). Brand and Burgard (2008) find that workers who experience one displacement are significantly less likely to participate socially, while workers experiencing disorderly careers marked by multiple job displacements are no less likely to participate, relative to non-displaced workers. Among workers with high levels of job instability, displacements may be more normalized and less of a shock, and thus less likely to lead to further declines in already lower levels of social involvement.

Effects described above are individual effects on social involvement. The assumption is that social withdrawal will have a meaningful impact upon the aggregate welfare and the distribution of welfare in society, but this impact is not directly estimated in these studies. Another approach is to consider the impact of community-level job loss and unemployment on individual well-being. For example, Ananat, Gassman-Pines, and Gibson-Davis (2011) show that community-level job losses affect the achievement test scores of children, possibly the result of both direct effects on children whose parents lost jobs and indirect peer and teacher effects. The link between individual job loss and unemployment and community well-being, as well as the link between community-level unemployment and individual well-being, is limited ( Dooley, Fielding, and Levi 1996 ).

Conclusions and Directions for Future Research

A job is more than a source of income. It is a fundamental social role providing a source of identity, self-concept, and social relations. Classical social theorists, including Weber and Marx, describe, in diverse ways, the centrality of work to the individual ego and social identity and prestige. Jobs are also an integral component to the process of social stratification, inequality, and mobility, representing a principal outcome of social background resources and individual attainment. The displacement of workers has become a normative feature of the U.S. labor market, commonly assumed to increase economic efficiency. However, the costs of such fluidity are unequally distributed, born largely by displaced workers and those closest to them. Moreover, if lack of regulation negatively impacts worker, family, and community well-being, countervailing effects that decrease overall productivity inevitably follow.

The evidence that job loss matters, that the range of consequences is wide, and that the effects persist long-term, is persuasive. The research literature described above documents nontrivial, short- and long-term observed differences between displaced and non-displaced workers across far-reaching life outcomes. Displacement is associated with significant economic costs, including a period of unemployment, reduced income, lower job quality, loss of health and pension benefits, and interruption of asset accrual. Long-term trends of rising inequality and job market polarization exacerbate adjustment problems the displaced endure. And, as indicated throughout this review, job loss is not limited to economic effects. Worker displacement is associated with: lower levels of self-acceptance, goal and meaning in life, and morale; higher levels of depressive symptoms and poor health; loss of social support and personal reassessment in relation to societal norms and unemployment stigmatization; new patterns of interaction with family members, restriction of socially-supportive collegial relationships, and disruption of social and family ties; and intergenerational effects as indicated by reduced attainment among children of displaced workers. Some of these themes have received considerable empirical investigation, while others, including family and community effects, have received less attention. Future work should attend more fully to the impact of displacement beyond workers themselves.

An intricate intersection of the outcomes of displacement is needed to illuminate any particular estimated effect. When job loss impacts workers’ psychological well-being, for example, human capital depreciates and further restricts displaced workers’ ability to secure comparable reemployment and socioeconomic welfare. Social withdrawal may further impede labor market position, as social and economic resources are embedded in social networks. Likewise, while reemployment mitigates some of the negative effects of job loss on social and psychological well-being, it does not eliminate them. In fact, no single explanation can account for why job loss hurts. Here, also, more work is needed to understand the mechanisms linking displacement to workers’ outcomes, and to the outcomes of the families and communities of the displaced. Scholars have not rigorously attended to the empirical study of these mechanisms, and particularly to the complex issues that underlie a causal analysis of direct and indirect effects ( Morgan and Winship 2014 ).

Effects vary by workers characteristics and contexts in which displacement occurs. Economic consequences seemingly diminish with workers’ relative position in the labor market. Future work would benefit from developing models that explicitly recognize the way in which both opportunity and choice influence employment outcomes, incorporating data on the characteristics of both employees and potential employers [see e.g., Logan (1996) ]. Moreover, while workers with fewer skills and workers displaced in economic recessions have more transition difficulties and suffer greater economic losses, the same cannot be said for the non-economic consequences of displacement. Economic adversity is a comparatively normative experience for disadvantaged workers, while socioeconomic decline may be a greater shock and incite a stronger sense of relative deprivation among more advantaged workers, and consequently have a greater impact upon psychological well-being and social interactions. Likewise, contexts of widespread unemployment, while associated with larger economic losses, lessen the internalization of blame and social stigma associated with job loss. As one’s own unemployment represents a smaller deviation from the social norm, psychological and social effects are potentially lessened. Future research should continue to explore the way the economic and social responses to worker displacement interact with and potentially diverge according to differing economic and social contexts.

Important interactions may exist not only between displacement and the social and economic context, but also between one displacement and another one nearby, between one displaced worker and another competing for a job in the same market ( Fallick 1996 ). Such interference, or dependency, violates the “stable unit treatment value assumption” in the estimation of worker displacement effects, i.e. that the observation on one unit is unaffected by the assignment of treatments to other units ( Morgan and Winship 2014 ). Research to date has focused, understandably, on individuals. But spillover effects are themselves substantively interesting and should be the subject of future study.

The most common response to reduce the burden of job loss is to increase the duration over which eligible workers can receive unemployment benefits. Extended benefits provide workers some income to buffer short-term earnings losses and allow workers time to search for a suitable job. While many express concern that unemployment insurance may reduce recipients’ willingness to work, the aggregate benefits of extended unemployment insurance surely outweigh the possible costs ( von Wacther 2010 ). Additional policy suggestions include prompt reallocation of workers to suitable employment and skill retraining, as well as universal health care ( Farber 2005 ). Reemployment efforts should be focused on getting displaced workers in jobs that offer the prospect of long-term employment, preferably in a job in their pre-layoff industry or one that is a good match to their skills. Most of these policy efforts focus on alleviating the economic burden of displacement. Yet it is unclear if these will have the same impact upon the social and psychological consequences of job loss. For example, assistance with geographic mobility may help workers find jobs, but discounts potential consequences of migration for psychological well-being and for families and communities of displaced workers. Discourse involving social assistance should admit to the widespread consequences of involuntary job separation.

Economists and sociologists have many motivations for studying job loss and unemployment. There is clearly interest in the economic and social difficulties that workers face when they lose their jobs due to reasons beyond their control. Job displacement is an involuntary and often unforeseen disruptive life event that induces abrupt changes in workers’ trajectories, enabling robust estimates of associations between socioeconomic circumstances and life outcomes. The increasing incidence of job displacement among growing segments of the workforce, alongside the recent era of economic upheaval, furthers societal attention to the far-reaching impact of job loss on life chances.

Acknowledgments

This project used facilities and resources provided to the author at the California Center for Population Research at UCLA, which receives core support (R24HD041022) from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD). The ideas expressed herein are those of the author.

JENNIE E. BRAND

Jennie E. Brand is Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of California – Los Angeles and Associate Director of the California Center for Population Research (CCPR). Her research centers on inequality and its implications for various outcomes that indicate life chances. This substantive focus accompanies a methodological focus on causal inference and the application and innovation of statistical models for panel data. Current research projects include evaluation of heterogeneity in the effects of education on socioeconomic outcomes and the socioeconomic and social-psychological consequences of disruptive events, such as job loss and family disruption.

1 In addition to the issue of selection bias, measurement error, recall bias, and attrition bias are all of concern in the study of the effects of worker displacement. Most studies of job displacement have used administrative or survey data. Commonly use nationally representative data include the Displaced Worker Survey supplement to the Current Population Survey, the Panel Study of Income Dynamics, and the National Longitudinal Survey. Others have used data from specific geographic areas, or specific establishments. Some of these data are limited for making causal statements because they are cross-sectional, inadequate for constructing a control group of comparable non-displaced workers, or are unable to distinguish displaced workers from those suffering other types of job loss, such as firings.

2 When an entire plant closes, it is unlikely that a worker’s specific characteristics are responsible for his or her displacement; larger differences from layoffs relative to plant closings could thus also be the result of greater selection bias, as I describe above.

3 Some scholars contend that the lowest level of well-being may occur prior to and in anticipation of the job loss, and lessen when the actual loss occurs ( Dooley, Fielding, and Levi 1996 ). Other research suggests that persistent job insecurity may be even more detrimental for psychological well-being than actual job loss ( Burgard, Brand, and House 2009 ).

4 The work cited generally focuses on subclinical symptomatology, as measured by some form of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression (CESD) battery currently administered in many U.S. surveys. Little work has examined the link between displacement and clinically diagnosable depression and anxiety ( Catalano et al. 2011 ).

5 As I note above, job loss due to layoffs may also have larger effects on psychological well-being than that due to plant closings as the former are more likely to suggest personal deficiencies and thus negatively impact self-concept and social relations ( Miller and Hoppe 1994 ). Few studies explicitly compare effects by form of job loss on psychological distress [although see Brand, Levy, and Gallo (2008) for evidence on older workers].

6 Effects of displacement may also vary by children’s age when parental job displacement occurs. Early childhood is important for development and may be a period especially sensitive to parental displacement and associated economic adversity. Low income can limit families’ ability to provide adequate nutrition, health care, and enriching activities during children’s formative years. Conversely, periods of unemployment allow mothers more time to spend with children. Moreover, young children are likely less conscious of relative status. We may expect larger effects of parental displacement when children are adolescents, as older children are more attuned to social stigma and relative status, such that displacement negatively impacts important life transitions in adolescence. Economic adversity is quite important to adolescents as well, especially for their educational decision making process.

• Ananat Elizabeth O, Gassman-Pines Anna, Gibson-Davis Christina M. The Effects of Local Employment Losses on Children’s Educational Achievement. In: Duncan Greg J, Murname Richard., editors. Whither Opportunity: Rising Inequality, Schools, and Children’s Life Chances. New York: Russell Sage Foundation; 2011. pp. 299–313. [ Google Scholar ]
• Attewell Paul. The Impact of Family on Job Displacement and Recovery. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences. 1999; 562 :66–82. [ Google Scholar ]
• Baumol William J, Blinder Alan S, Wolff Edward N. Downsizing in America: Reality, Causes, and Consequences. New York: Russell Sage Foundation; 2003. [ Google Scholar ]
• Brand Jennie E. Doctoral Dissertation. University of Wisconsin – Madison; 2004. Enduring Effects of Job Displacement on Career Outcomes. [ Google Scholar ]
• Brand Jennie E. The Effects of Job Displacement on Job Quality: Findings from the Wisconsin Longitudinal Study. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility. 2006; 24 :275–298. [ Google Scholar ]
• Brand Jennie E, Burgard Sarah A. Job Displacement and Social Participation over the Life Course: Findings for a Cohort of Joiners. Social Forces. 2008; 87 (1):211–242. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brand Jennie E, Levy Becca, Gallo William T. Effects of Layoffs and Plant Closings on Depression among Older Workers. Research on Aging. 2008; 30 (6):701–721. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brand Jennie E, Thomas Juli Simon. Job Displacement Among Single Mothers: Effects on Children’s Outcomes in Young Adulthood. American Journal of Sociology. 2014; 119 (4):955–1001. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brand Jennie E, Von Wachter Till. The Economic and Social Consequences of Job Loss and Unemployment. Population Reference Bureau (PRB) Webinar. 2013 Nov 20; http://www.prb.org/Multimedia/Video/2013/job-loss-webinar.aspx .
• Burgard Sarah A, Brand Jennie E, House James S. Toward a Better Estimation of the Effect of Job Loss on Health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior. 2007; 48 :369–384. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Burgard Sarah A, Brand Jennie E, House James S. Perceived Job Insecurity and Worker Health in the United States. Social Science and Medicine. 2009; 69 :777–785. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Carrington W, Zaman A. Interindustry Variation in the Costs of Job Displacement. Journal of Labor Economics. 1994; 12 :243–276. [ Google Scholar ]
• Catalano Ralph, Goldman-Mellow Sidra, Saxton Katherine, Margerison-Zilko Calire, Subbaraman Meenakshi, LeWinn Kaja, Anderson Elizabeth. The Health Effects of Economic Decline. Annual Review of Public Health. 2011; 32 :431–50. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cha Youngjoo, Morgan Stephen. Structural Earnings Losses and Between-Industry Mobility of Displaced Workers, 2003–2008. Social Science Research. 2010; 39 :1137–1152. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chan Sewin, Stevens Ann Huff. Job Loss and Employment Patterns of Older Workers. Journal of Labor Economics. 2001; 19 :484–521. [ Google Scholar ]
• Charles Kerwin Kofi, Stephens Melvin., Jr Job Displacement, Disability, and Divorce. Journal of Labor Economics. 2004; 22 :489–522. [ Google Scholar ]
• Clark Andrew. Unemployment as a Social Norm: Psychological Evidence from Panel Data. Journal of Labor Economics. 2003; 21 (2):323–351. [ Google Scholar ]
• Clark Andrew. Boon or Bane? Others’ Unemployment, Well-Being and Job Insecurity. Labour Economics. 2010; 17 :52–61. [ Google Scholar ]
• Clark Andrew E, Georgellis Yannis, Sanfey Peter. Scarring: The Psychological Impact of Past Unemployment. Economica. 2001; 68 :221–241. [ Google Scholar ]
• Coelli Michael. Parental Job Loss and the Education Enrollment of Youth. Labour Economics. 2011; 18 :25–35. [ Google Scholar ]
• Couch Kenneth A, Jolly Nicolas A, Placzek Dana W. Earnings Losses of Displaced Workers and the Business Cycle: An Analysis with Administrative Data. Economics Letters. 2011; 111 :16–19. [ Google Scholar ]
• Couch Kenneth A, Placzek Dana A. Earning Losses of Displaced Workers Revisited. American Economic Review. 2010; 100 (1):572–589. [ Google Scholar ]
• Darity William, Jr, Goldsmith Arthur H. Social Psychology, Unemployment, and Macroeconomics. Journal of Economic Perspectives. 1996; 10 (1):121–140. [ Google Scholar ]
• Davis Steven, von Wachter Till. Recessions and the Cost of Job Loss. Brookings Papers in Economic Activity 2012 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dooley David, Fielding Jonathon, Levi Lennart. Health and Unemployment. Annual Review of Public Health. 1996; 17 :449–465. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dooley David, Prause Joann, Ham-Rowbottom Kathleen A. Underemployment and Depression: Longitudinal Relationships. Journal of Health and Social Behavior. 2000; 41 :421–436. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Durkheim Emile. Division of Labor in Society. Free Press; 1933. [ Google Scholar ]
• Eliason Marcus, Storrie Donald. Does Job Loss Shorten Life? Journal of Human Resources. 2009; 44 (2):277–302. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fallick Bruce. A Review of the Recent Empirical Literature on Displaced Workers. Industrial and Labor Relations Review. 1996; 50 :5–16. [ Google Scholar ]
• Farber Henry S. The Changing Face of Job Loss in the United States, 1981–1995. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity. Microeconomics. 1993a; 1 :55–42. [ Google Scholar ]
• Farber Henry S. The Incidence and Costs of Job Loss: 1982–91. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity. Microeconomics. 1993b; 1 :73–119. [ Google Scholar ]
• Farber Henry S. The Changing Face of Job Loss in the United States, 1981–1995. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity. Microeconomics. 1997; 1997 (1997):55–142. [ Google Scholar ]
• Farber Henry S. Alternative and Part-time Employment Arrangements as a Response to Job Loss. Journal of Labor Economics. 1999; 17 (4):S142–S169. [ Google Scholar ]
• Farber Henry S. What Do we Know About Job Loss in the United States? Evidence from the Displaced Workers Survey, 1984–2004. Economic Perspectives. 2005; 2Q :13–28. [ Google Scholar ]
• Farber Henry S. Job Loss and the Decline of Job Security in the United States. In: Abraham Katharine G, Spletzer James R, Harper Michael., editors. Labor in the New Economy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 2010. pp. 223–262. [ Google Scholar ]
• Farley Reynolds. The New American Reality: Who We Are, How We Got Here, Where We Are Going. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation; 1996. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ferrie JE, Shipley MJ, Marmot MG, Stansfield SA, Smith GD. An Uncertain Future: The Health Effects of Threats in Employment Security in White-Collar Men and Women. American Journal of Public Health. 1998; 88 :1030–1036. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gallo William T, Bradley Elizabeth H, Siegel Michele, Kasl Stanislav V. Health Effects of Involuntary Job Loss among Older Workers: Findings from the Health and Retirement Study. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences. 2000; 55B :S131–S140. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gallo William T, Bradley Elizabeth, Alba Tracy A, Dubin Joel, Cramer Laura, Bogardus Sidney T, Jr, Kasl Stanislav V. Involuntary Job Loss as a Risk Factor for Subsequent Myocardial Infarction and Stroke: Findings from the Health and Retirement Survey. American Journal of Industrial Medicine. 2004; 45 :408–416. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gallo William T, Bradley Elizabeth, Dubin Joel, Jones Richard, Flaba Tracey, Teng Hsun-Mei, Kasl Stanislav V. The Persistence of Depressive Symptoms in Older Workers who Experience Involuntary Job Loss: results from the Health and Retirement Survey. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences. 2006a; 55B :S131–S140. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gallo William T, Teng Hsun-Mei, Falba Tracy A, Kasl Stanislav V, Krumholz Harlan M, Bradley Elizabeth H. The Impact of Late-Career Job Loss on Myocardial Infarction and Stroke: A 10-Year Follow-Up Using the Health and Retirement Survey. Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 2006b; 63 :683–87. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gallo William T, Brand Jennie E, Teng Hsun-Mei, Leo-Summers Linda, Byers Amy L. Differential Impact of Involuntary Job Loss among Older Workers: Does Predisposition Matter? Research on Aging. 2009; 31 (3):345–360. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gibbons Robert, Katz Lawrence. Layoffs and Lemons. Journal of Labor Economics. 1991; 9 :351–80. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hamilton V Lee, Broman Clifford L, Hoffman William S, Renner Deobrah S. Hard Times and Vulnerable People: Initial Effects of Plant Closing on Autoworkers’ Mental Health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior. 1990; 31 :123–140. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hollister Matissa. Employment Stability in the U.S. Labor Market: Rhetoric vs. Reality. Annual Review of Sociology. 2011; 37 :305–24. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hout Michael, Levanon Asaf, Cumberworth Erin. Job Loss and Unemployment. In: Grusky David, Western Bruce, Wimer Christopher., editors. The Great Recession. New York: Russell Sage Foundation; 2011. pp. 59–81. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jacobson Louis S, LaLonde Robert J, Sullivan Daniel G. Earnings Losses of Displaced Workers. American Economic Review. 1993; 83 :685–709. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jahoda Marie. Work, Employment, and Unemployment. American Psychologist. 1981; 36 :184–191. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jahoda Marie. Employment and Unemployment: A Social Psychological Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1982. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jahoda Marie, Lazarsfeld Paul F, Zeisel Hans. Marienthal: The Sociography of an Unemployed Community. Transaction Publishers; 1933[1971]. [ Google Scholar ]
• Johnson Rucker C, Kalil Ariel, Dunifon Racehl E. Employment Patterns of Less-Skilled Workers: Links to Children’s Behavior and Academic Progress. Demography. 2012; 49 :747–772. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kasl S, Jones B. The Impact of Job Loss and Retirement on Health. In: Berkman Lisa, Kawachi Ichiro., editors. Social Epidemiology. Chapter 6. OUP; Oxford: [ Google Scholar ]
• Kalil Ariel, Wightman Patrick. Parental Job Loss and Children’s Educational Attainment in Black and White Middle-Class Families. Social Science Quarterly. 2011; 92 (1):57–78. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kalil Ariel, Ziol-Guest Kathleen M. Single Mothers’ Employment Dynamics and Adolescent Well-Being. Child Development. 2005; 76 (10):196–211. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kalil Ariel, Ziol-Guest Kathleen M. Parental Employment Circumstances and Children’s Academic Progress. Social Science Research. 2008; 37 :500–515. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kalleberg Arne L. Changing Contexts of Careers: Trends in Labor Market Structures and Some Implications for Labor Force Outcomes. In: Kerkhoff AC, editor. Generating Social Stratification: Toward a New Research Agenda. Boulder: Westview Press; 2000. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kalleberg Arne L. Precarious Work, Insecure Workers: Employment Relations in Transition. American Sociological Review. 2009; 74 (1):1–22. [ Google Scholar ]
• Katz Lawrence. Long-Term Unemployment in the Great Recession. Hearing on “Long-Term Unemployment: Causes, Consequences and Solutions”; Joint Economic Committee U.S. Congress; April 29, 2010.2010. [ Google Scholar ]
• Leana CR, Feldman DC. Individual Responses to Job Loss: Perceptions, Reactions, and Coping Behaviors. Journal of Management. 1988; 14 :375–389. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kessler Ronald C, Turner J Blake, House James S. Effects of Unemployment on Health in a Community Survey: Main, Modifying, and Mediating Effects. Journal of Social Issues. 1988; 44 :69–85. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kessler Ronald C, Turner J Blake, House James S. Unemployment, Reemployment, and Emotional Functioning in a Community Sample. American Sociological Review. 1989; 54 :648–657. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kletzer Lori. Earnings after Job Displacement: Job Tenure, Industry and Occupation. In: Addison JT, editor. Job Displacement: Consequences and Implications for Policy. Detroit: Wayne State University Press; 1991. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kletzer Lori. Job Displacement. Journal of Economic Perspectives. 1998; 12 :115–136. [ Google Scholar ]
• Krashinsky Harry. Evidence on Adverse Selection and Establishment Size in the Labor Market. Industrial and Labor Relations Review. 2002; 56 (1):84–96. [ Google Scholar ]
• Leana Carrie, Feldman Daniel. Coping with Job Loss: How Individuals, Organizations, and Communities Respond to Layoffs. New York: Lexington; 1992. [ Google Scholar ]
• Logan John. Opportunity and Choice in Socially Structured Labor Market. American Journal of Sociology. 1996; 102 (1):114–160. [ Google Scholar ]
• McKee-Ryan Frances M, Song Zhaoli, Wanberg Connie R, Kinicki Angelo J. Psychological and Physical Well-Being During Unemployment: A Meta Analytic Study. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2005; 90 (1):53–76. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McLoyd Vonnie C. The Impact of Economic Hardship on Black Families and Children: Psychological Distress, Parenting, and Socioemotional Development. Child Development. 1990; 61 (2):311–346. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McLoyd Vonnie C, Jayaratne Toby E, Ceballo Rosario, Borquez Julio. Unemployment and Work Interruption among African American Single Mothers: Effects on Parenting and Socioeconomic Functioning. Child Development. 1994; 65 :562–589. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Miller Michael V, Hoppe Sue Keir. Attributions for Job Termination and Psychological Distress. Human Relations. 1994; 47 :307–28. [ Google Scholar ]
• Morgan Stephen, Winship Christopher. Counterfactuals and Causal Inference: Methods and Principles for Social Research, Second Edition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2014. [ Google Scholar ]
• Newman Katherine S. Falling from Grace: The Experience of Downward Mobility in the American Middle Class. New York, NY: Vintage Books; 1988. [ Google Scholar ]
• Oreopoulos Philip, Page Marianne, Stevens Ann Huff. The Intergenerational Effects of Worker Displacement. Journal of Labor Economics. 2008; 6 (3):455–483. [ Google Scholar ]
• Page Marianne, Stevens Ann Huff, Lindo Jason. Parental Income Shocks and Outcomes of Disadvantaged Youth in the United States. In: Gruber J, editor. The Problems of Disadvantaged Youth: An Economic Perspective. University of Chicago Press; 2009. pp. 213–236. [ Google Scholar ]
• Paul KI, Moser K. Unemployment Impairs Mental Health: Meta-Analyses. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 2009; 74 :264–82. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pearlin Leonard, Lieberman Morton, Menaghan Elizabeth, Mullan Joseph. The Stress Process. Journal of Health and Social Behavior. 1981; 22 :337–56. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Podgursky Michael, Swaim Paul. Job Displacement and Earnings Loss: Evidence from the Displaced Worker Survey. Industrial and Labor Relations Review. 1987; 41 :17–29. [ Google Scholar ]
• Putnam Robert. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. Simon & Schuster; 2000. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rege Mari, Telle Kjetil, Votruba Mark. Parental Job Loss and Children’s School Performance. Review of Economic Studies 2011 [ Google Scholar ]
• Rotolo Thomas, Wilson John. Work Histories and Voluntary Association Memberships. Sociological Forum. 2003; 18 (4):603–19. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ruhm Christopher J. Are Workers Permanently Scarred by Job Displacement? The American Economic Review. 1991; 81 :319–324. [ Google Scholar ]
• Seitchik Adam. Who Are Displaced Workers? In: Addison JT, editor. Job Displacement: Consequences and Implications for Policy. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press; 1991. [ Google Scholar ]
• Stevens Ann Huff. Labor Market Shocks: Are there Lessons for Antipoverty Policy? Pathways. 2014 Summer; 2014 :20–22. [ Google Scholar ]
• Stevens Ann Huff, Schaller Jessamyn. Short-Run Effects of Parental Job Loss on Children’s Academic Achievement. Economic of Education Review. 2010; 30 (2):289–299. [ Google Scholar ]
• Strully Kate W. Job Loss and Health in the U.S. Labor Market. Demography. 2009; 46 (2):221–246. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sullivan Daniel, von Wachter Till. Job Displacement and Mortality: An Analysis Using Administrative Data. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 2009; 124 :1265–1306. [ Google Scholar ]
• Turner J Blake. Economic Conditions and the Health Effects of Unemployment. Journal of Health and Social Behavior. 1995; 36 :213–229. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Von Wachter Till. Long-Term Employment: Causes, Consequences, and Solutions. Testimony before the Joint Economic Committee of the U.S. Congress.2010. [ Google Scholar ]
• Warr P, Jackson P. Factors influencing the psychological impact of prolonged unemployment and of re-employment. Psychological Medicine. 1985; 15 :795–807. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wetzel James R. Labor Force, Unemployment and Earnings. In: Farley R, editor. State of the Union: America in the 1990s. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation; 1995. pp. 59–105. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wilensky Harold. Orderly Careers and Social Participation: The Impact of Work History on Social Integration in the Middle Mass. American Sociological Review. 1961; 26 (4):521–39. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wilson John. Volunteering. Annual Review of Sociology. 2000; 26 :215–40. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wilson John, Musick Marc A. Work and Volunteering: The Long Arm of the Job. Social Forces. 1997; 76 (1):251–72. [ Google Scholar ]

Services on Demand

Related links, south african journal of economic and management sciences, on-line version  issn 2222-3436 print version  issn 1015-8812, s. afr. j. econ. manag. sci. vol.23 n.1 pretoria  2020, http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/sajems.v23i1.3049 .

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

A systematic literature review of the implementation and evaluation of the JOBS programme: A suggested framework for South Africa

Rachéle Paver I , II ; Hans De Witte I , II ; Sebastiaan Rothmann II ; Anja Van den Broeck II , III ; Roland Blonk II , IV , V

I Research Group Work, Organisational and Personnel Psychology, KU Leuven, Belgium II Optentia Research Focus Area, North-West University, Vanderbijlpark, South Africa III Work and Organization Studies, KU Leuven, Brussels, Belgium IV Healthy Living, Toegepast Natuurwetenschappelijk Onderzoek (TNO), Leiden, the Netherlands V Department of Human Resource Studies, Tilburg University, Tilburg, the Netherlands

Correspondence

BACKGROUND : South Africa is challenged with high levels of unemployment, comprising many people with low levels of education and also individuals who have never held a job before. Despite having many vulnerable participants, interventions aimed at the unemployed generally exclude psychosocial training and are methodologically weak. AIM : The JOBS programme, a scientifically sound intervention, has been developed specifically to help people affected by unemployment to cope with the psychological effects. As a means of applying such a programme in South Africa, this study aimed to develop a framework based on the insights gained on the implementation and evaluation of the JOBS programme. METHODS : The study comprised a systematic review of literature regarding the JOBS intervention and its derivatives ( n = 34). RESULTS : The results revealed that populations similar to the unemployed in South Africa had benefitted significantly regarding re-employment and mental health outcomes. CONCLUSION : Suggestions derived from the literature included aiming the programme at the most vulnerable unemployed in South Africa: the youth and long-term unemployed. Furthermore, expanding the programme by adding an entrepreneurial component may yield positive results, considering the lack of employment opportunities in South Africa.

Keywords : JOBS programme; employment interventions; systematic literature review; unemployment; South Africa.

Introduction

South Africa is facing an unemployment crisis: currently 29.1% of people in South Africa are jobless (Stats SA 2019). While statistics may indicate the magnitude of the problem at hand, they fail to depict the nature and severe impact of unemployment. Unemployment is not only associated with societal and economic ramifications; it also has serious psychological consequences for those who are unemployed (see Strandh et al. 2014; Wanberg 2012).

Numerous interventions have been implemented to alleviate unemployment (Independent Evaluation Group 2013; McCarthy 2008). Despite the benefits of evidence-based practices (see Heckman, Lalonde & Smith 1999; Ravallion 2008), it is startling to see that most vocational interventions are consensus-based - implying that the interventions are based on what the stakeholders think is necessary, without the supporting evidence to prove what is really needed (Marais & Matebesi 2013). Considering the urgency of unemployment, the shortage of evidence-based practices in South Africa is a concern.

One profound example of a scientifically sound employment initiative is the JOBS programme (Caplan et al. 1989). The JOBS intervention seeks to enhance the employability of jobseekers by equipping them with the necessary job search, social and problem-solving skills to support them in their job search efforts. Several factors contribute to the achieved outcomes. Two of the strengths of the programme are its strong theoretical foundation and empirically tested evidence (Vinokur & Price 2015). Likewise, the comprehensive protocol guiding the programme contributes significantly to successful dissemination undertakings (Curran, Wishart & Gingrich 1999). Extensive evidence of the effectiveness of the JOBS programme has previously been reported (Price & Vinokur 2014).

Due to the encouraging results, several JOBS derivatives have been implemented in other countries. These programmes include the Työhön Job Search Programme in Finland (Vuori et al. 2002), the Jobs in China programme (Price & Fang 2002), the Job-Search programme in Israel (Shirom Vinokur & Price 2008), the Winning New Jobs (WNJ) programme in Ireland (Barry et al. 2006) and the JOBS intervention in the Netherlands (Brenninkmeijer & Blonk 2011). Although these programmes have proven to be reliable in different economic contexts (Vinokur et al. 1995a), they have been implemented mainly in developed countries, except for China. The lack of evidence-based practices in South Africa, together with the successful replication of the JOBS programme, creates an opportunity to explore whether such an intervention can be tailored to suit the South African context.

Much effort has been devoted to developing materials that explicitly explain the procedures and dynamics of the JOBS programme (Curran et al. 1999). Yet investigating literature pertaining to the execution and subsequent outcomes of the JOBS programme may assist further dissemination. A greater understanding of typical components of an intervention - implementation and evaluation - can be used to serve as guiding principles for application and assessment in the South African context. Based on the above statement of the research problem, the objectives of this research were:

To review literature regarding the implementation (context and process aspects) and evaluation (promoting and impeding effects) of the JOBS programme and variations of it.

Based on the previous findings, to develop a framework to assist with the implementation and evaluation of the JOBS programme in South Africa.

To make recommendations for future research and practice.

Research design

Research approach

A systematic literature review was done to achieve the objectives of this study. A systematic review identifies the main scientific contributions relevant to a specific topic by conducting extensive literature searches of published and unpublished studies (Tranfield, Denyer & Smart 2003). This review aimed to identify literature containing information about the JOBS programme and variations of it. Transparent and reproducible procedures were used to enhance the quality and outcomes of the review process.

Research method

Targeted body of literature

Before starting with the review, the founders of the JOBS programme and the web page of the Michigan Prevention Research Center (MPRC) were consulted to obtain information regarding the JOBS programme and its dissemination. Electronic searches were undertaken to allocate articles identified on the web page. Next, a search was conducted to ascertain whether possible articles were excluded. Databases such as Google Scholar and EBSCOhost (Academic Search Premier, Africa-Wide Information, American Doctoral Dissertations, PsycARTICLES and PsycINFO) were utilised to find the relevant articles.

Search terms and selected criteria

It was anticipated that the articles worth including in the review would refer to the JOBS programme in the articles themselves. Therefore, numerous searches were conducted by including the authors involved (as obtained from the dissemination page) with the term Job Opportunities and Basic Skills programme (e.g. AUTHOR: Vuori; IN-TEXT: 'JOBS program*'). Because another programme, called the JOBS Program, yielded additional results when searching for 'Jobs Program*', it was necessary to include the various authors. The search string consisted of two search concepts joined by the Boolean operator AND; the second string contained a list of authors joined by the Boolean operator OR. The following search string was entered in the databases: [1] IN-TEXT: 'jobs program*' [2] AUTHOR: 'Barry', 'Caplan'; 'Choi'; 'Kessler' 'Price'; 'Schul'; 'Van Ryn' 'Vinokur' and 'Vuori'.

To prevent the omission of essential articles, a complementary search was performed. Reference lists of the selected articles were reviewed for more relevant publications. During the process, it became evident that there were indeed articles that did not refer to the JOBS programme in their content. Therefore, an additional search was conducted using the authors involved from the different variations of the JOBS programme and each of the different JOBS variations (e.g. AUTHOR: 'Barry'; IN-TEXT: 'Winning New Jobs'). The second search string again consisted of two search concepts joined by the Boolean operator AND; the first string contained a list of names for variations of the JOBS programme and the second a list of authors, with both strings joined by the Boolean operator OR. The following search string was entered in the databases: (1) IN-TEXT: Jobs in China Project, Job-search Intervention, Työhön Job Search Program, or Winning New Jobs (2) AUTHOR: 'Blonk', 'Brenninkmeijer', 'Choi', 'Donaldson', 'Fang', 'Friedland', 'Ling', 'Shirom', and 'Turner'.

Criteria for including articles were as follows:

Articles and chapters had to be peer-reviewed.

Articles and chapters had to be written in English.

Articles had to be about the JOBS programme or variations of it.

The study population had to be unemployed people.

Gathering the data

Conference proceedings and papers to which access was limited or where no full-text papers were available were excluded. Price and Vinokur (2014) mention that the JOBS programme has previously been executed in Sweden and South Korea; however, the literature seemed limited and unavailable. Furthermore, the JOBS programme has also been implemented in organisational and school contexts. Considering that the circumstances of the participants are not the same, these studies were omitted. The inclusion and exclusion criteria narrowed the scope of this review. Finally, 34 articles met all the inclusion criteria ( Figure 1 ).

Analysis and presentation of the data

Implementation and evaluation aspects were studied to gain a better understanding of the JOBS programme and its derivatives.

Implementation is described as the process of putting a plan into action to achieve objectives (Miller, Wilson & Hickson 2004). To ensure sufficient programme fidelity and to effectively replicate the JOBS, it seemed necessary to study the various components involved in executing such a programme. Evaluation can be described as the determination of the merit, worth and significance of an area of interest using criteria directed by specific standards for purposes of decision-making (Richards & Schmidt 2002). Evaluation practices are a crucial component in the success of evidence-based programmes (Jané-Llopis et al. 2005). To develop a framework aimed at guiding the implementation and evaluation of the JOBS programme in South Africa, the following aspects of the papers included in the systematic literature review were studied ( Table 1 ).

Assessment of methodological quality

An additional reviewer - a researcher involved in the broader project - was consulted to ensure methodological quality. After the duplicates had been removed, both the researcher and reviewer were involved in selecting studies to remain in the systematic review based on their abstracts and full content.

Ethical considerations

Ethical clearance was obtained from the Humanities and Health Research Ethics Committee (HHREC), North-West University, with ethical clearance number: NWU-HS-2018-0006.

The literature review comprised 34 studies. The predetermined criteria, as per Table 1 , guided the systematic review. The main aspects regarding the implementation and evaluation of the JOBS programme and variations of it were tabulated. The summarised findings are reported below.

Implementation

This section contains information about the context in which the various programmes were implemented as well as participant and programme specifics.

The JOBS programme has been implemented in numerous states and countries, in all of which the context has differed to some degree (see Appendix 1 ). The unemployment rates, as reported in the studies included, varied from 4% to 20% (Brenninkmeijer & Blonk 2011; Vuori et al. 2002). Additionally, the unemployed seemed to be supported by welfare benefits, also safeguarding them against severe financial hardship. Unemployment grants differed, depending on the social policies of the countries involved (Vinokur & Price 2015).

Participants

Biographical variables

According to Vinokur and Price (2015), benefits of the JOBS programmes did not seem to be distributed equally to all the participants. Some findings are reported below; yet it should be noted that only a few of the studies included mentioned the impact of demographic variables on the intended outcomes. Findings regarding participants' demographic variables were not always consistent and sufficient to substantiate these relationships. Compared to other demographic variables, education had the strongest impact on the outcomes of the job search interventions.

Gender: Female participants seemed to suffer greater economic losses and experience more difficulties regaining employment (Vinokur et al. 2000). Yet women generally benefitted more from the programme than their male counterparts (MPRC 2003). They were more likely to (1) obtain employment six months after the intervention (Shirom et al. 2008), (2) score higher on participant engagement (Caplan et al. 1989), (3) experience positive group participation (Vuori et al. 2005) and (4) participate voluntarily (Vuori et al. 2002).

Age: Unemployed people between the ages of 16 and 65 were generally the targeted population. The mean age of participants in the studies included was 36 (Standard deviation [SD] = 9). Vuori et al. (2005) state that younger participants were usually more positive and found employment more easily than older participants, but showed a higher tendency of non-participation (Van Ryn & Vinokur 1992; Vinokur et al. 2000; Vinokur, Price & Caplan 1991a). The training programme seemed to also have a positive impact on older participants regarding improved job search skills and increased self-confidence (Price & Choi 2001).

Level of education: The majority of participants in the programmes involved had a secondary level of education (equivalent to 12 years of schooling; mean of all the studies: 40.65%). Participants with higher levels of education more often gained in terms of obtaining re-employment (MPRC 2003), increases in job search self-efficacy (Choi, Price & Vinokur 2003), a lower likelihood of major depressive episode diagnosis (Vinokur et al. 2000) and non-participation (Caplan et al. 1989; Van Ryn & Vinokur 1992; Vinokur et al. 2000), and higher levels of voluntary participation (Vuori et al. 2002). Despite these positive findings, in some other studies, it was evident that the programme also clearly yielded mental health benefits and economic benefits for those less educated and most disadvantaged in terms of the job market (Price & Choi 2001; Vinokur, Price & Schul 1995b).

Duration of unemployment: The JOBS programme was originally designed to prevent further deterioration in mental health among the unemployed and was not specifically intended to deal with potential problems associated with long-term unemployment (Caplan et al. 1989). Therefore, the majority of the initial studies included only those who had been unemployed for less than 13 weeks (Caplan et al. 1989; Price et al. 1992; Van Ryn & Vinokur 1992; Vinokur et al. 1991a, 1991b, 1995a, 2000; Vinokur, Price & Caplan 1996; Vinokur & Schul 1997). However, because the long-term unemployed were reported as the most vulnerable, more recent developments included participants who had been unemployed for longer periods (Brenninkmeijer & Blonk 2011; Malmberg-Heimonen & Vuori 2005; Price & Choi 2001; Reynolds, Barry & Gabhainn 2010; Vuori et al. 2005).

Population, sample size and recruitment

Population: Eligibility criteria required individuals to be aged between 16 and 65. Prospective screening questionnaires were used in some studies to determine participants' risk score for poor mental health (Vinokur et al. 1995b). However, those who showed major signs of mental illness, serious psychosocial problems or behavioural problems or who scored extremely high on depression symptoms were omitted from the study (Brenninkmeijer & Blonk 2011; Vinokur et al. 1995a).

Sample size: Most of the studies included were conducted as a part of large-scale field experiments, ranging from 1087 to 3402 participants. Smaller-scale studies ranged from 125 to 672 participants. Sample sizes did not seem to influence the results achieved or the sustainability of the programmes. It was rather the use (or lack) of effective methods that seemed to have an impact on the outcomes (Price & Vinokur 2014).

Recruitment: The primary method used to recruit participants was through recruiters who approached individuals eligible for employment benefits while collecting grants at employment offices. In studies including an experimental and control group, participants were told about the two programmes on job-seeking methods. One programme was described as a workshop consisting of five half-day sessions (the experimental condition); the other was described as a self-guided programme, in which participants received a booklet with job search information (the control condition). To prevent biases, participants had to show no preference for a type of intervention (experimental or control condition; Caplan et al. 1989; Vinokur et al. 1995a).

Voluntary or enforced participation: Participants from some programmes had to participate in the job search workshop to qualify for welfare benefits (Brenninkmeijer & Blonk 2011; Lee & Vinokur 2007). When studying the impact of voluntary or enforced participation, a Finnish study showed that enforced participation did not increase re-employment; however, it impaired the positive mental health impacts of the programme. Further analysis demonstrated that enforced participation in job search training decreased re-employment among the longer-term unemployed workers (Malmberg-Heimonen & Vuori 2005).

Dropout rates: In the US programmes, on average, 59% (varying by 5%) of participants failed to show up for the intervention (Caplan et al. 1989; Vinokur et al. 1995a). Consequently, dropout rates could be anticipated and, therefore, twice as many participants were recruited and allocated to intervention groups in the Israeli study (Shirom et al. 2008). In the Malmberg-Heimonen and Vuori (2005) study, it was surprising to find that response rates did not differ much among the enforced, voluntary and control groups (94%, 92%, and 91%).

The information presented below was derived from the JOBS training manual (Curran et al. 1999).

The JOBS programme entails two main processes. On the one hand, job search skills (the actual content of the programme) are taught to participants, while, on the other hand, empowerment of the participants, by applying the programme's underlying principles in the method of delivery, is the true underlying mission of the workshop. The following aspects guided the method of delivery used by the trainers:

Referent power: Moderate self-disclosures shared by facilitators create an environment in which participants feel safe to reveal their concerns and experiences. These also contribute to creating an atmosphere of unconditional acceptance and to enhancing feelings of being normal and valued.

Guiding behaviour: Specific positive feedback is given to participants to reinforce positive behaviour. Strategies used to generate positive feedback include active listening, observation and reflecting on what participants have shared as a means of showing participants that they are valued.

Inoculation against setbacks: The group is encouraged to identify potential setbacks and difficulties in the job search process. Strategies are developed to overcome the identified challenges and, consequently, participants realise that their problems can be solved. Participants are asked to commit themselves to action by selecting and vowing to undertake a solution most appealing to them.

Social support: Social support forms an integral part of the underlying processes, as exercises are specifically designed to create opportunities for facilitators and participants to support each other. An environment where participants are unconditionally accepted is created. Such a safe environment contributes to participants feeling comfortable to express their opinions and reveal their feelings.

Active leaning: The learning process relies greatly on participants' knowledge and skills. Participants acquire job search skills by using active learning methods, elicited using group discussions and brainstorming sessions.

In contrast to traditional top-down, trainer-focused training methods, the JOBS programme relies heavily on its individual-focused approach. The delivery principles mentioned above contribute to the strong individual-focused approach. Principles are continuously applied and integrated and form the basis on which the content is delivered.

The programme consists of five sessions. During the first session, participants discover their job skills; the second session focuses on dealing with obstacles related to employment; the third session is used to introduce participants to some job search techniques; the fourth session covers topics such as curriculum vitae writing and preparing participants for job interviews; during the fifth session participants rehearse skills acquired throughout the week. The workshop concludes with a certificate ceremony, during which facilitators boost participants' confidence by highlighting their strengths and skills and providing each participant with a sincere and inspiring message.

The JOBS protocol describes the programme processes meticulously. Yet these processes are flexible and can be altered, depending on the needs of the groups, without losing the intended effects of the programme. The majority of the disseminated versions of the JOBS programme were implemented strictly according to the protocol. The content differed in terms of minor language, cultural, procedural and scheduling changes to suit different contexts. To maintain the standard of the JOBS programme, all materials were piloted and approved. It is worth mentioning that, when the protocol was somewhat neglected, it was reported that the programme was less successful in achieving the intended outcomes (Shirom et al. 2008).

Participants were rewarded monetarily for participation or each returned questionnaire (varying between $5.00 and $15.00, depending on the currency of the country). In cases where questionnaires were not returned, an additional amount was issued on the completion of their questionnaires. This incentive was reported to result in a substantial increase in response rates (about 20%; Shirom et al. 2008). Participants in the JOBS programme and Netherlands JOBS programme also received a certificate of participation for completing the programme (Brenninkmeijer & Blonk 2011; Caplan et al. 1989).

Researchers obtained higher response rates when offering incentives: in cases with relatively high dropout rates, no mention of rewards or incentives was evident (Barry et al. 2006; Reynolds et al. 2010; Shirom et al. 2008). The same finding was, however, not true in the WNJ California studies, which managed to retain approximately 70% of their participants, seemingly without the use of incentives (Choi et al. 2003).

Facilitators

Pairing: Teams consisting of one male and one female trainer are prescribed by Curran et al. (1999) to complement each other well. An untested assumption existed that a pair of trainers reduced deviation from the principles of the JOBS programme. However, the assumed benefits of having male-female pair facilitators have not yet been tested. Benefit-cost research could determine whether the cost of using two trainers, rather than one, is outweighed by the benefits that are generated (Price et al. 1998).

Prerequisites: Facilitators were generally social workers, labour advisors, educational counsellors or high school teachers. It was suggested that facilitators ought to be skillful in working with people (public speaking and communications backgrounds). Because trained individuals (that is, mental health professionals, such as counsellors or clinicians) might execute strongly embedded techniques not necessarily consistent with unemployment-related counselling methods, professional training was not a prerequisite (Caplan et al. 1989).

Programme-related training: Facilitators had to undergo extensive formal training. The content of the training covered understanding of group processes, theoretical foundations of the programme and extensive rehearsal in the form of pilot studies. The duration of training varied from 6 to 30 days (48 h-240 h). The reason for the extensive training was that facilitators were not only conveyors of information, but also experts in navigating the group processes, with the ability to connect emotionally with the participants and facilitate interactions in a group setting. To promote conformity, trainers' performance was evaluated by trained supervisors.

Duration of the programme

Some of the findings yielded by the original JOBS trial encouraged the revision of the programme, which consequently led to the development of the JOBS II intervention (Vinokur et al. 1995a). The first version (the JOBS I programme) spanned eight 3 h sessions, over a two-week period (four mornings per week; Caplan et al. 1989). To increase programme efficiency and the attendance of participants, meeting hours were reduced by 30%, delivered over five 4 h sessions in a one-week period in the JOBS II (Vinokur et al. 1995a). The majority of disseminated versions of the JOBS programme continued to apply the programme following the JOBS II protocol. In some groups, the Finnish programme was delivered over four days, as the first day was used to deal with recently laid-off workers' negative emotions (Vuori et al. 2002) - an illustration of how the programme can be altered to meet the needs of the group, without affecting the outcomes.

Group sizes

Guidelines of the JOBS programme suggest groups consisting of 12-20 participants (Curran et al. 1999). There were exceptions, where the groups ranged from three to 110 participants per group (median = 11; Malmberg-Heimonen & Vuori 2005). Although only a few studies reported on the impact of group sizes, larger groups seemed to have more negative experiences than smaller groups (Vuori et al. 2005).

Venue of training

Venues such as community centres, school classrooms, churches and union halls, easily accessible to participants, were mostly used. Venues had to be large enough to accommodate 25 people and furnished with movable chairs, arranged in a semicircular layout. Such a layout was reported to be most effective in delivering the group intervention (Curran et al. 1999).

Stakeholder involvement

Crucial to the success of the WNJ programme in Ireland was that the developers of the original JOBS programme were involved from the outset and contributed to obtaining buy-in from strategic stakeholder agencies. Despite a substantial initial investment of resources for demonstration, neither the WNJ in California nor the JOBS in China project continued beyond their initial stages, as commitment of resources for continuation was not offered by the government or other stakeholders. Therefore, the success of programme dissemination depended considerably on the involvement of, and support received from, stakeholders (Vinokur & Price 2015).

This section is comprised of information regarding evaluation of the processes and the impact of the JOBS programme.

Methodology

Data collection method

Self-administered questionnaires were used to assess participants' attitudes, intentions, various behavioural components and experience of the workshop (Van Ryn & Vinokur 1992). In cases of unreturned questionnaires or where participants failed to show up for the workshop, telephonic interviews were conducted (Barry et al. 2006).

Research design and data collection intervals

Randomised field study designs were used to investigate the intervention effect between experimental and control conditions (Caplan et al. 1989; Vinokur et al. 1995a; Vuori et al. 2002). Programmes that made use of a randomised field study design had three to four interval times, namely pre-intervention (two weeks before the programme), post-intervention (directly after the programme), post-post-intervention (between two and six months after the programme) and long-term follow-ups, varying from 12 to 32 months after the intervention (Barry et al. 2006; Brenninkmeijer & Blonk 2011; Vinokur et al. 1991a). Other programmes only tested pre-intervention and post-intervention to determine the impact of the programme (Lee & Vinokur 2007; Shirom et al. 2008).

Process evaluation

To determine the internal validity and the strength and integrity of the JOBS programmes, two types of analysis were generally conducted. These process measures consisted of testing the integrity of randomisation and strength of the programme (Vinokur et al. 1995a).

Effectiveness of randomisation

The first check to determine the validity of the programme was to determine whether the statistical analyses were conducted on a randomised (true) experimental design. This was established by comparing the demographic and other tested variables of the experimental and control conditions at baseline to identify possible differences. In cases where differences were found, these variables were controlled for in further analyses (Vinokur et al. 1995a).

Manipulation checks, integrity and strength of the intervention

The second test was to test the strength and integrity of the intervention through self-reported questionnaires at the end of each session. Participants were asked to evaluate their experience of facilitators and the programme. These evaluations were used to determine whether various intervention elements had been implemented and had operated as designed (Vinokur et al. 1995a). Participants who scored high on these measures also reported higher levels of internal control and job-seeking self-efficacy (Choi et al. 2003), decreases in depression and anger, and increases in self-esteem and quality of life (Caplan et al. 1989). Also, trainer skills (one of the evaluated variables) exhibited during group interactions contributed to increased re-employment, even at the 12-month follow-up (Reynolds et al. 2010).

Two additional methods were used to ensure the quality of the programme and a high level of trainer adherence to the protocol. Firstly, members of the research team frequently observed programme trainers: after each session, constructive feedback was given to trainers. Secondly, the facilitators met weekly to discuss skill-related topics they encountered during their sessions (Vinokur et al. 1995b).

Impact evaluation

The positive outcomes of the JOBS programme were documented amply. Below are some of the most prominent findings related to the two core objectives of the JOBS programmes: prevention of poor mental health and promotion of re-employment, and other post-hoc outcomes.

Prevention of poor mental health: Participation in the intervention resulted in increased self-esteem, self-efficacy and social assertiveness among participants; consequently, participants also showed improved psychological and mental health and well-being (Lee & Vinokur 2007; Reynolds et al. 2010). Furthermore, long-term effects of the programme revealed that participants experienced lower symptoms of depression (Price et al. 1992; Vuori & Silvonen 2005), improved self-esteem (Reynolds et al. 2010) and an enhanced ability to deal with setbacks. A noteworthy finding is that participants screened for showing higher risk for depression seemed to benefit the most in terms of mental health and re-employment outcomes (Vinokur et al. 1995b).

Promotion of re-employment: Several programmes demonstrated increased rates of re-employment, with an average of 46% after the intervention, compared to the control group, with an average of 18% (Brenninkmeijer & Blonk 2011; Caplan et al. 1989; Donaldson 2012; Shirom et al. 2008; Vuori et al. 2005). Programme participants also showed higher motivation to persist in job search efforts (Caplan et al. 1989), were employed in better jobs (in terms of earnings and job satisfaction) (Vinokur et al. 1991b), were employed faster, had less recurring episodes of unemployment (Vinokur & Price 2015) and experienced reduced economic hardship after being employed (Barry et al. 2006). Results remained over time, as long-term effects of the programme revealed that participants, compared to their counterparts, experienced higher re-employment (Brenninkmeijer & Blonk 2011). Another crucial finding is that both the Työhön and the Netherland's JOBS programmes confirmed the effectiveness of the intervention to help even the more vulnerable long-term unemployed gain employment (Brenninkmeijer & Blonk 2011; Vuori et al. 2002).

Consequential outcomes: Finally, the JOBS programme demonstrated substantial cost-benefit effectiveness because the higher earnings led, on average, to higher tax revenues and decreased welfare grants for governments (Vinokur et al. 1991b).

The purpose of this study was to review literature regarding the JOBS programme and variations of it, with the intention of developing a framework that could guide the successful implementation and evaluation of the JOBS programme within the South African context. To gain a better understanding of the components related to the implementation of the JOBS programme, the contexts in which the programme have previously been implemented and the targeted population, as well as aspects regarding the programme, were studied. Based on the findings of the systematic review, as well as context-specific matters, a framework is proposed for the implementation and evaluation of the JOBS programme within the South African context (see Appendix 2 ).

In terms of contextual differences between developed countries (where the JOBS programme has previously been implemented), and developmental countries (e.g. South Africa), some differences are crucial to consider when implementing an employment programme, such as the JOBS intervention. While the unemployment rates of the involved developed countries averaged 12%, more than 27% (37.3% when including those who have stopped looking for employment; Stats SA 2018) of South Africans are currently unemployed. Moreover, it has been reported that 69% of these individuals have been unemployed for longer than a year (Stats SA 2018). In South Africa, unlike the other countries, unemployment grants safeguarding people from financial hardship are not available. Also, the unemployed are generally situated in rural areas isolated from major economic activity. With limited job opportunities, jobseekers feel discouraged, and deprived of a chance to compete in the labour market (Du Toit et al. 2018). Fortunately, the JOBS programme is specifically designed to deal with such conditions, yet it remains important to be cognisant of the impact of contextual factors on potential participants' state of mind.

With regard to participant-related matters, the reviewed literature showed that young and old, educated and less educated participants had previously benefitted from the JOBS interventions. However, it is important to note that South Africa has a youth unemployment rate of 52% (aged between 15 and 24; Stats SA 2018); 62% of the unemployed population have never even held a job before (Stats SA 2017); and 57% of South Africans have an education of less than matric (Grade 12). Therefore, although the unemployed in general could benefit from the programme, it is suggested to target vulnerable populations, such as younger, less educated and long-term unemployed individuals, as it may yield promising results.

Furthermore, participants from previous studies were reached at employment services offices. Because unemployment grants are not available in South Africa, participants cannot be reached on a large scale in a similar way. Therefore, different strategies of reaching the intended population should be considered. Suggestions include making use of newspaper and radio advertisements, and government agencies working with jobseekers, or working with youth and community leaders. One programme in particular tested the effectiveness of forced versus voluntary participation. Findings revealed that enforced participation did not increase re-employment and impaired the positive mental health impact of the programme (Malmberg-Heimonen & Vuori 2005). Giving participants the autonomy to participate voluntarily in the programme seems to yield more positive benefits. This may be an important finding for policymakers, as a precondition for receiving unemployment grants is often enforced attendance of a job search programme. Yet responsibility also rests with workshop trainers to be particularly devoted in creating an environment to which participants choose to return.

Considering the possibility that participants showing a preference to partake in employment programmes may be somewhat more intrinsically motivated, at the same time, it is those who show a higher risk of depressive symptoms that may benefit more (Vinokur et al. 1995a). Thus, careful attention should be paid to recruitment measures, ensuring that both the motivated and those who may be at risk of depressive symptoms are reached through recruitment methods, as they are equally important in achieving intended programme outcomes. Similarly, some programmes made use of screening questionnaires to identify participants at risk of poor mental health (Vinokur et al. 1995b); those who scored exceptionally high on depression symptoms or showed major signs of mental illness were omitted from the programme (Brenninkmeijer & Blonk 2011). As previously mentioned, given that many of the unemployed in South Africa may be severely discouraged, it is recommended to refrain from screening participants to identify high-risk cases, as it may result in the exclusion of participants who may benefit from the programme.

The next implementation aspect investigated related to programme-related matters. In line with previous adaptations of the JOBS programme, it is suggested to tailor the content of the manuals and activities to better suit the context and to increase cultural acceptability (Barry et al. 2006; Brenninkmeijer & Blonk 2011). Due to slow economic growth and the lack of skills in specific disadvantaged populations, changes in conditions of obtaining a job may be difficult (Vinokur & Price 2015). A solution that may fill both of these voids could be to consider fostering an entrepreneurial mindset among programme participants. People working in the informal sector often have a lower education level (although not lower wages) compared to those employed in the formal sector (Kim 2002), which may be a suitable solution within the South African context.

Furthermore, the ability to facilitate and understand group processes, build feelings of competence and create an environment of unconditional acceptance were essential requirements for facilitators. Yet education levels of the facilitators were not reported as particularly important. Due to the great demand for social work in South Africa, a shortfall of qualified social workers exists, which often results in employing people at social services offices who are less skilled and experienced (Collin 2017). Failure to grasp the importance of, and means of executing, the principal components of the programme may be problematic for the successful execution of the programme. Consequently, involving trainers knowledgeable and experienced in this area, while at the same time having the ability to relate to participants, should be considered. These may typically include individuals with higher degrees, coming from a similar background, who can also serve as role models for participants. Additionally, trainers should have the ability to adopt an individual-focused training approach, aimed at the enhancement of active learning among participants, instead of taking on the traditional role of teacher.

A noteworthy lesson was that the success of the programme lies greatly in the adherence to the designed protocols, as fewer of the anticipated outcomes were achieved when the protocol was neglected (Shirom et al. 2008). The majority of workshops included between 12 and 18 participants per group, as it was effective and economical. Ideally, delivery was guided by two training facilitators, as two were more capable of monitoring the behaviour and reactions of participants (Vinokur & Price 2015). Also, five half-day sessions, compared to longer two-week sessions, seemed to be more effective in keeping participants engaged. A vital lesson could be learned from the Finnish study that allowed for a debriefing day. During this session former appointed employees had an opportunity to deal with negative emotions caused by their dismissals (Vuori et al. 2005). Providing participants with such a venting opportunity may have made them more receptive to the programme.

Lastly, the founders of the JOBS programme strongly advised involving an effective champion, advocating for the programme at the policy level from the outset. It was also suggested that service delivery agencies be included that were open to applying innovative initiatives. Furthermore, a continuous flow of resources and funding seemed fundamental to the success and sustainability of large-scale programmes (Price & Vinokur 2014). In the South African context, economic development departments in local governments, supported by training providers, could act as champions of the JOBS programme.

This study also explored three elements (methodology, process and impact) related to the evaluation of the JOBS programme. The investigated studies were either conducted with a randomised field or quasi-experiment design as the chosen methodology, with self-reported questionnaires as the main data collection method. Considering the effectiveness of these designs in reporting the effectiveness and changes over time, it is suggested to use a similar approach. Furthermore, attrition was a pervasive problem experienced by most of the studies. However, offering incentives and recruiting more participants due to anticipated dropouts yielded higher attendance rates (Caplan et al. 1989; Shirom et al. 2008).

Aspects contributing to the process evaluation of the intervention included randomisation and manipulation checks of the studies included. To ensure internal validity, comparisons between the control and experimental groups' demographic and other variables were tested for possible biases. Furthermore, the strength and integrity of the various interventions were assessed by means of self-reported questionnaires at the end of each workshop. Several benefits can be gained from delivering a programme that is valid and reliable. Firstly, as mentioned earlier, adhering to programme protocols is strongly recommended, as the intended outcomes are achieved through reliable practices. Secondly, ensuring that participants experience the programme positively has previously been shown to increase engagement and, consequently, has led to other outcomes, such as decreased depression and anger, increased internal control, job-seeking self-efficacy and self-esteem (Vinokur et al. 1995a; Vinokur & Schul 1997).

With regard to the JOBS programme's impact, one of the most significant findings was the beneficial re-employment outcomes for those who had been unemployed for a moderate length of time (longer than a year; Brenninkmeijer & Blonk 2011; Vuori et al. 2002). Likewise, findings from examined literature also showed beneficial mental health and re-employment outcomes, particularly for high-risk participants (Vinokur & Schul 1997). These findings are valuable as it was found in a South African study that approximately 70% of the unemployed population was categorised as desperate or discouraged (Van der Vaart et al. 2018). The unemployed in both clusters generally came from poor socio-economic backgrounds, had relatively low levels of education, had limited opportunities for odd jobs or temporary employment, and were quite pessimistic. Given the capability of the JOBS programme to produce significant outcomes for high-risk participants, it appears that it could hold valuable outcomes, also for those who have been unemployed for long periods and may be truly discouraged.

Limitations and recommendations

Some limitations of this study need to be considered. Firstly, only peer-reviewed articles and book chapters that were written in English were included in the current study. Since the JOBS programme has been implemented in the Netherlands, Israel, Finland and China, where other official languages occur, the possibility of excluding potential articles exists. Secondly, access to some articles (Jobs in China project and Työhön trainers' manual) was limited, or they could not be found, resulting in their omission from the review (i.e. Fang & Ling 2001; Mäkitalo, Tervahartiala & Saarinen 1997; Price 2001). In the third place, due to the nature of intervention studies, it is possible that only studies yielding significant results were published. Although all versions of the JOBS programme known to the developers were reported, it is possible that there may be unpublished efforts. Consequently, meaningful lessons that could have been learnt from these papers were not available. However, much effort was invested in systematically searching for and including all possible studies. Lastly, the study did not include articles where the JOBS programme had been applied in work-to-school and organisational contexts. Although these programmes may have yielded valuable findings, these studies were omitted, as the aim of this study was to specifically focus on the most effective methods to assist the unemployed.

This study reviewed literature about the JOBS programme as a means of extending our knowledge of applying such a job search intervention in a South African context. Therefore, core aspects regarding the implementation and evaluation of the JOBS programme and variations of it were investigated. Specifically, implementation features such as contextual factors, participant characteristics and programme aspects were studied, while evaluation features included impact and process evaluation components.

Evidently, the success of the JOBS programme largely depended on following the protocol. Thus, studying the previously performed methods and outcomes of the JOBS programme, in various contexts, may serve as a valuable guideline to prescribe possible best practices. The integration of included literature and important aspects regarding the South African context produced a framework that could be valuable in the implementation and evaluation of the JOBS programme in South Africa.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Experiences of Unemployment Research Project funded by the Flemish Interuniversity Council - University Development Cooperation (VLIR-UOS). We are truly grateful for this opportunity.

Competing interests

The authors have declared that no competing interest exists.

Authors' contributions

This publication was based on the PhD thesis of R.P. H.D.W., S.R. and A.V.d.B. were co-authors as well as supervisors of the project. R.B. made conceptual contributions to the manuscript.

Funding information

Flemish Interuniversity Council - University Development Cooperation (VLIR-UOS), ZEIN2013PR397.

Data availability statement

The main aspects regarding the implementation and evaluation of the JOBS programme and variations of it were tabulated. A summary table can be requested from the first author. The literature review comprised 34 studies; these articles can be requested from the first author.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any affiliated agency of the authors.

Curran, J., Wishart, P. & Gingrich, J., 1999, JOBS: A manual for teaching people successful job search strategies , University of Michigan, Institute for Social Research, Michigan Prevention Research Center, Ann Arbor, MI.         [  Links  ]

Donaldson, S.I., 2012, 'Evaluation of the winning new jobs program', in S.I. Donaldson (ed.), Program theory-driven evaluation science: Strategies and applications , pp. 93-112, Routledge, New York.         [  Links  ]

Donaldson, S.I., Gooler, L.E. & Weiss, R., 1998, 'Promoting health and well-being through work: Science and practice', in X.B. Arriaga & S. Oskamp (eds.), Addressing community problems: Psychological research and interventions , pp. 160-194, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.         [  Links  ]

Donaldson, S.I. & Gooler, L.E., 2002, 'Theory-driven evaluation of the Work and Health initiative: A focus on winning new jobs', American Journal of Evaluation , 23(3), 341-346.         [  Links  ]

Fang, L. & Ling, W., 2001, Jobs in China: A seven city project , Institute of Psychology, National Academy of Sciences, Beijing.         [  Links  ]

Independent Evaluation Group, 2013, Youth employment programs: An evaluation of World Bank and international finance corporation support , World Bank Publications, Washington, DC.         [  Links  ]

Mäkitalo, M., Tervahartiala, T. & Saarinen, M., 1997, Työhön Työhöohjelma Ohjaajan käsikirja [Työhön program trainers' manual] , Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Helsinki.         [  Links  ]

McCarthy, P., 2008, South Africa's 'door knockers': Young people and unemployment in metropolitan South Africa , Centre for Development and Enterprise, Johannesburg.         [  Links  ]

Michigan Prevention Research Center (MPRC), 2013, The JOBS project for the unemployed: Update , Michigan Prevention Research Center, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.         [  Links  ]

Price, R.H., 2001, 'Winning new jobs in China. Preface' in L. Fang & W. Ling (eds.), Jobs in China: A seven city project , Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, Republic of China.         [  Links  ]

Price, R.H., Choi, J.N., & Lim, S., 2006, 'Beyond the iron rice bowl: Life stage and family dynamics in unemployed Chinese workers', in M. Warner & G. Lee (eds.), Unemployment in China , pp.123-142, Routledge, London, UK.         [  Links  ]

Price, R.H., Friedland, D.S., Choi, J. & Caplan, R.D., 1998, 'Job loss and work transitions in a time of global economic change', in X. Arriaga & S. Oskamp (eds.), Addressing community problems , pp. 195-222, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.         [  Links  ]

Price, R.H., Van Ryn, M. & Vinokur, A.D., 1992, 'Impact of preventive job search intervention on the likelihood of depression among the unemployed', Journal of Health and Social Behavior 33(2), 158-167.         [  Links  ]

Price, R.H. & Vinokur, A.D., 2014, 'The JOBS program: Impact on job seeker motivation reemployment, and mental health', in U. Klehe & E.A.J. van Hooft (eds.), Oxford handbook of job loss and job search , pp. 575-590, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.         [  Links  ]

Ravallion, M., 2008, Evaluation in the practice of development , Working paper No. 4547, World Bank Publications, Washington, DC.         [  Links  ]

Richards, J.C. & Schmidt, R., 2002, Longman dictionary of applied linguistics and language teaching , Longman, Harlow.         [  Links  ]

Statistics South Africa (Stats SA), 2017, Quarterly labour force survey: Quarter 1, 2017 , viewed 21 January 2020, from www.statssa.gov.za/publications/P0211/P02111stQuarter2017.pdf .         [  Links  ]

Statistics South Africa (Stats SA), 2018, Quarterly labour force survey: Quarter 1, 2018 , viewed 21 January 2020, from www.statssa.gov.za/?p=11129 .         [  Links  ]

Statistics South Africa (Stats SA), 2019, Quarterly labour force survey: Quarter 3, 2019 , viewed 21 January 2020, from www.statssa.gov.za/?p=12689 .         [  Links  ]

Vinokur, A.D. & Price, R.H., 2015, 'Promoting reemployment and mental health among the unemployed', in J. Vuori, R. Blonk & R. Price (eds.), Sustainable working lives. Aligning perspectives on health, safety and well-being , pp. 171-186, Springer, Dordrecht.         [  Links  ]

Vinokur, A.D., Price, R.H., Caplan, R.D., Van Ryn, M. & Curran, J., 1995a, 'The jobs I preventive intervention for unemployed individuals: Short-and long-term effects on reemployment and mental health', in L.R. Murphy, J.J. Hurrell Jr, S.L. Sauter & G.P. Keita (eds.), Job stress interventions , pp. 125-138, American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.         [  Links  ]

Received: 28 Feb. 2019 Accepted: 06 Nov. 2019 Published: 25 Feb. 2020

The context of the countries and states in which the JOBS programme have been implemented.

The overall findings regarding the implementation and evaluation of the JOBS programme.