Stress and Its Impact on Organizations - Essay Example

?Stress and its impact on organisations Introduction Stress is one of the major challenges which organizations are faced. For some members of organizations, it can be a debilitating condition, compromising in its impact on their work, their social relations, and their family life. Stress can cause a variety of effects on organizations, reducing quality and quantity of outputs, causing emotional outburst and irritable attitudes, as well as high turnover rates of employees. Various theories have been established explaining stress and its impact on organizations, and these theories help to provide a clearer understanding of stress. This paper seeks to establish the impact of stress on organizations. It shall also discuss and critically evaluate the latest theories and research on this topic through appropriate scholarly discussions on the subject matter. This paper is being undertaken in order to establish clear guidelines for organizations on the importance of managing stress for their organizations and how they can effectively manage such stress for their members. Body Stress, as was already established during the duration of this course is “an adaptive response to a situation that is perceived as challenging or threatening to the person’s well-being; it is also a physiological and psychological condition that prepares us to adapt to hostile or noxious environmental conditions”. Stress, in other words is the body’s response to an unnatural or unexpected occurrence or event, one which challenges the body to adjust to these unnatural conditions. The stress can be as traumatic as a car accident or as tame as being spooked by a frightening scene in a horror movie. Regardless of their magnitude, stress can cause a temporary and immediate manifestation of the fight or flight response and depending on the nature of the stress, this stress can have a short-term of a long-term impact on the person (Berridge and Cooper, 1993). In the workplace, stress can be a persistent occurrence depending on the nature of the work, the capabilities of the employee, and other circumstances surrounding the work setting. In effect, under these conditions, it would not be out of place to see employees looking harried, acting irritable, crying, getting angry, not sleeping, and getting ulcers. These are classic signs of stress (Berridge and Cooper, 1993). As discussed in the lectures, stress can have three general effects on an individual: physiological, behavioural, and psychological. Physiological effects refer to the effects of stress on the biological processes of an individual; behavioural can refer to the actions of the individual in response to the stress; and the psychological effects refer to the mental and emotional impact of stress (Sonnentag and Frese, 2003). Physiological effects include the manifestation of diseases like hypertension, peptic ulcers, as well as colds, flu, migraine, heart attacks, strokes, back and neck tension, dizziness, ringing in the ears, and asthma (Ongori and Agolla, 2008). Behavioural issues may manifest as irritability, loss of enjoyment in life and all other activities, job dissatisfaction, isolation, moodiness, loneliness, anger, and nervousness. Feelings of restlessness, jumpiness, loss or increase of appetite may also manifest in the individual (Ongori and Agolla, 2008). The stressed employee may also manifest feelings of impulsiveness, hyperactivity, aggressiveness, decreased sex drive, and in some instances use of drugs/alcohol. Psychologically and mentally, he may suffer from mental lapses, may be unable to make decisions, be very critical of himself, may have rigid attitudes, and have trouble concentrating (Ongori and Agolla, 2008). In general, occupational stress is linked to various health issues, with studies in the US indicating that about 465 of health costs has mostly been allocated to stress, and these figures have also been apparent in the UK (Goetzel, et.al., 1998). Moreover, studies in the UK and the US indicate that about half of work time is often lost to stress and such absenteeism has often been known to cost the organizations much profit and resources (Cox, Griffiths, and Rial-Gonzales, 2000). Stress can be categorized in terms of functions affected in a person’s life, including the following: physical, work-related job stress, role stressors, social stressors, time-related, career-related, traumatic events, and stressful change processes (Sonnentag and Frese, 2003, p. 6). Physical stressors involve harsh working conditions, including poor ergonomic conditions in the workplace. Work-related stress often manifests if the task being performed is highly complex. Role stressors are related to task vagueness and conflicts in functions. Social stressors are seen in unfavourable social interactions in the workplace. They also include incidents of sexual harassment and bullying (Zapf, Knorz, and Kulla, 1996). Time-related stress is usually related to shift changes and long work hours. For career-related stress, job insecurities and the lack of job choices and options are a major source for this type of stress. Traumatic stress involves single incidents, including accidents and dangerous activities. Many soldiers, policemen, and fire fighters suffer from this type of stress (Corneil, et.al., 1999). In some organizations, mergers, downsizing, and other organizational change can cause stress. Various theories help explain the manifestation of the above stressful conditions. Models can be used in order to describe the manifestation of the stress and the models often help explain the pathways. This paper shall focus on two main models: the transactional stress model and the cybernetic model (Sonnentag and Frese, 2003, p. 10). The transactional stress model by Lazarus discusses that psychological stress refers to the interactions between the individual and his environment which is assessed by the individual as beyond his capacity to endure and is harmful to his general well-being (Lazarus and Folkman, 1984). The cognitive assessment is important under this model. Primary and secondary assessment can be distinguished from each other. With primary appraisal, encounters can be described as irrelevant, benign-positive, or stressful. With secondary assessments, individuals assess what can actually be done in response to a stressor (Sonnentag and Frese, 2003, p. 11). Based on such primary and secondary appraisals, individuals often begin to cope with their situation and this can lead to continued assessments of their condition. With the cybernetic model, it has been discussed that stress is an anomaly in the employee’s perceived status and his actual desired state, with the anomaly being treated as important by the employee (Edwards, 1992, p. 245). Stress therefore is seen when there is a gap between what the individual sees and what he wants to achieve. The belief or perception is based on the physical and personal qualities of the individual (Maltby, Day and Macaskill, 2010). Gaps in the expected and actual outcomes often affect his general wellness and his ability to cope with his daily activities. Coping may also affect the individual, as well as his general situation, his desires and the importance attributed to such stress (Maltby, Day, and Macaskill, 2010). Theoretical models on the link between stressful events and strains can also used to explain stress in the workplace. The person-environment fit theory, the job demand-job control model, the vitamin model, and the effort-reward imbalance model also help explain stress in organizations (Sonnentag and Frese, 2003, p.12). The person-environment fit theory discusses that stress happens due to the mismatch between individuals and the environment (Edwards, 1998). In this case, the individual and the situation cannot be considered the main cause of stress and strains. The misfit in this case may involve initially, a mismatch in the demands of the environment and the actual competency of the individual; and second, a mismatch of the needs of the person and the actual resources from his environment (Edwards, 1998). In the workplace, mismatch in personality associated with the feeling that a person does not have the resources or capacity to fulfil the demands can lead to major social and work anxiety (Maltby, et.al., 2003). As the lack of resources of limited capacity increases, the gap between the resources also increases, thereby causing the individual much stress and strain. The job demand-job control model differentiates between the two basic elements of work, which may include job demands and job decision latitude (Karasek, 1979). Job demands would include the actual work demands placed on the employee, and job latitude, on the other hand, focuses on the employee’s authority to make decisions (Sonnentag and Frese, 2003). Karasek (1979) discusses that high demands in the work coupled with the low ability to make decisions in highly stressful work is not favourable for people’s general health. However, high demands coupled with high capability in decision-making may not harm a person’s health. The vitamin model is another theory which helps explain stress in organizations. Warr (1987) discusses that under this model, the relationship of stressors and employee’s health can be established, and that there is a non-linear relationship between qualities of work and employee outcomes. Under this model, a high amount of job autonomy, social support, and task feedback is favourable for employees, however extremely high levels of these same qualities can lead to stressful conditions (Warr, 1987). For the effort-reward imbalance model, Siegrist (1996) explains that when there is no reciprocity in the costs and rewards of the workplace, stressful conditions often result. Moreover, the extent to which a person’s activities are rewarded is important to a person’s general health. With intrinsic and extrinsic motivators, a greater effort may be expressed by an individual, and vice versa. Extrinsic motivators may be the obligations which are already apparent in the job; and the intrinsic motivators may be seen from the need to exert control and approval (Sonnentag and Frese, 2003). Rewards may include monetary compensation and bonuses, esteem, job security, and job promotion. According to this model, in conditions where high efforts exerted do not lead to high rewards, emotional stress often results. In some studies, incidents where high effort did not lead to high rewards, reports of health issues and incidents of cardiovascular heart conditions were often seen (De Jonge, et.al., 2000). Similar studies also indicated similar patterns in health affectations among stressed employees, with incidents of coronary heart disease being one of the most common affectations (Sonnentag and Frese, 2003). Sonnentag and Frese (2003) discuss various ways of evaluating the impact of stress on organizations. Stressors which can have a concurrent impact on stress include work load, role conflicts, and ambiguity. These stressors have been known to cause depressed symptoms, burnout, and fatigue during leisure days (McShane and VonGlinow, 2005). The lagged impact of stressful work conditions has included anxiety, depression, and exhaustion, as well as cardiovascular diseases, and psychosomatic complaints. These lagged effects have often been seen in instances where high workloads were expected and when there was a significant time pressure to finish a work (Sonnentag and Frese, 2003). Empirical evidence also suggests that job demands and job control has an additive impact on the manifestations of stress. In effect, employees occupying highly stressful work have low health well-being scores and often suffer from various illnesses (Sonnentag and Frese, 2003). However, studies also indicate that with adequate job control, significant improvements in stress coping can be possible. Social support and work group factors also impact on the manifestations of stress and on the protection of individuals and their wellness (Maltby, et.al., 2010). Resources provided by others in terms of emotional and informational support have been known to improve a person’s coping as well as his ability to manage stress. For situations where there is limited social support, the impact of work difficulties and challenges can be significant and can lead to stressful events which can then impact negatively on individuals (Maltby, et.al., 2010). An individual’s ability to cope with stress can also impact on the actual effect of stress or strains on an individual. Favourable coping styles can help support a person’s general well-being (Maltby, et.al., 2010). Coping is the ability to change and adapt cognitive and behavioural efforts in order to help support specific demands which may exceed the resources of a person (Lazarus and Folkman, 1984, p. 141). In these cases, stress can compromise a person’s problem-solving ability, as well as his ability to manage his emotion. Aside from the above health effects, stress can also affect performance. Performance is related to an individual’s actions in relation to the achievement of organizational objectives (Campbell, et.al., 1993). Various reports indicate that stressors can often cause cognitive reactions including reduced attention and compromised working memory capacity (Wickens, 1996). This compromised working memory capacity is often seen with the lesser speed and accuracy manifested under stressful work conditions, especially when there is time pressure. Such reduced memory capacity also affects the individual’s ability to make decisions, often causing a person to choose the simplest decisions and opt for less mentally stimulating activities in the work place (Sonnentag and Frese, 2003). It is also important to note that stressors at the workplace have also been shown to increase the risk for errors and in some instances, malpractice. Stress in organizations also seems to lead to a decreased organizational commitment, as well as high turnover rates and higher levels of absenteeism (Sonnentag and Frese, 2003). Based on a meta-analysis of this situation, there is a direct relationship of role stressors and organizational commitment. In effect, where individuals find themselves in a more stressful work environment, they also report a lower commitment to the work and to the organization in general (Martocchio, et.al., 2000). Stress has also been known to cause increased incidents of absenteeism. A study of police officers indicated how work stress has often led them to be absent from work (Tang and Hammontree, 1992). Other workplaces also reported high incidents of absence in jobs with high psychological demands. For physical jobs, rate of absence was registered at 66% and above (Sonnentag and Frese, 2003). The threat of downsizing has also often driven many employees to be absent from work (Kivimaki, et.al., 1997). Stevenson and Harper (2006) also discuss that workplace stress among teachers often results to a reduced quality in the teaching, increased absences, and conflicts with students. Such stressful conditions in the teaching profession have also been known to impact on students through compromised learning. Ongori and Agolla (2008) also discuss that stress in organizations have been known to cause low morale, accidents, decreased job satisfaction, decreased quality in products, and conflicts in the workplace. Although an acceptable amount of stress can help enhance work performance, too much of it can compromise such performance (Stevenson and Harper, 2006). Stress has been known to cause work-related illnesses as well as accidents in both developed and developing nations. According to Sapountzi-Krepia (2003) stress is a major health issue in the current age because it can lead to psychosomatic illnesses, behavioural changes, as well as disturbances in a person’s emotional, social, and family life. Other analysts also discuss that workplace stress can cause high absenteeism and internal conflicts in the workplace (Christo and Pienaar, 2006). This confirms the previous declarations on workplace stress. Aside from its health impact, occupational stress can also be expensive, not just for the employers, but for the employees as well (McShane and VonGlinow, 2005). Corporations have been known to spend billions of dollars for stress-related issues. Moreover, employees often lose their income and jobs lost because of their inability to cope with stressful working conditions (Ongori and Agolla, 2008). Even if they do stay in their work, the quality of their work is often compromised. In some instances, highly skilled workers who produce quality work may even decide to quit because of the unfavourable working conditions they find themselves in (McShane and VonGlinow, 2005; Ongori and Agolla, 2008). Finally, with high turnover rates, corporations are forced to allocate funds for the retraining of new workers. All in all, these conditions present unfavourable work conditions within organizations. Conclusion Stress is one of the most significant issues which are being encountered by organizations. It affects them in various ways, especially their employees and members who suffer its physical, psychological, and behavioural effects. Stress impacts on organizations by affecting a person’s general health, causing high blood pressure, heart attacks, strokes, migraines, insomnia, and causing a person to manifest a host of other behavioural changes including irritability, aggression, hypersensitivity, as well as anger. It can also compromise the quality of work produced by the organization, eventually causing lesser profits and a compromised reputation for the corporation. It can increase employee turnovers as well as absenteeism in the organization, also causing a reduced output for the corporation as well as a decreased financial viability for the corporation. While the right amount of stress can improve corporate and employee performance, too much of it can lead to compromised outputs. For which reason, corporations need to manage stress levels and work conditions within their organizations. References Berridge J, Cooper C. (1993). Stress and coping in US Organisations. The role of the Employee Assistance Programme. Journal of Work & Stress, 7(1), 89-102 Campbell, J. P., McCloy, R. A., Oppler, S. H., & Sager, C. E. (1993). A theory of performance. In E. Schmitt, W. C. Borman, & Associates (Eds.), Personnel selection in organizations (pp. 35-70). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Christo, B. and Pienaar, J. (2006). South Africa Correctional Official Occupational Stress: The Role of Psychological Strengths. Journal of Criminal Justice, 34(1): 73-84. Corneil, W., Beaton, R., Murphy, S., Johnson, C., & Pike, K. (1999). Exposure to traumatic incidents and prevalence of posttraumatic stress symptomatology in urban firefighters in two countries. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 4, 131-141. Cox, T., Griffiths, A., & Rial-Gonzales, E. (2000). Research on work-related stress. Luxembourg: European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. de Jonge, J., Bosma, H., Peter, R., & Siegrist, J. (2000). Job strain, effort-reward imbalance and employee well-being: a large-scale cross-sectional study. Social Science and Medicine, 50, 1317-1327. Edwards, J. R. (1992). A cybernetic theory of stress, coping, and well-being in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 17, 238-274. Edwards, J. R. (1998). Cybernetic theory of stress, coping, and well-being. In C. L. Cooper (Ed.), Theories of organizational stress (pp. 122-152). Oxford: Oxford University Press Goetzel, R. Z., Anderson, D. R., Whitmer, R. W., Ozminkowski, R. J., Dunn, R. L., & Wasserman, J. (1998). The relationship between modifiable health risks and health care expenditures. Journal of Occupational and environmental Medicine, 40, 843-854. Karasek, R. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications for job redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 285-306. Kivimaki, M., Vahtera, J., Thomson, L., Griffiths, A., Cox, T., & Pentti, J. (1997). Psychosocial factors predicting employee sickness absence during economic decline. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 858-872. Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer. Maltby J, Day L, Macaskill A. (2010). Personality, Individual Differences and Intelligence, 2nd ed. London: Pearson Education. Martocchio, J. J., Harrison, D. A., & Berkson, H. (2000). Connections between lower back pain, interventions, and absence from work: A time based meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 53, 595-624. McShane, L. & VonGlinow, M. (2010). Organisational Behaviour, 5th ed. Emerging Knowledge and practise in the real world. New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin. Ongori, H. & Agolla, J. (2008). Occupational Stress in Organizations and Its Effects on Organizational Performance. Journal of Management Research, 8(3), 123-135. Sapountzi-Krepia (2003). Seeking the Attitudes and Perceptions of the Greek. Care Professionals on Voluntary Work Caring People with HIV/AIDS. Journal of Nursing Management, 11(4): 285-65. Siegrist, J. (1996). Adverse health effects of high effort/low reward conditions. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 1, 27-41. Sonnentag, S. & Frese, M. (2003) Stress in Organizations. University of Konstanz [online]. Available at: http://www.bschool.nus.edu.sg/Departments/ManagementNOrganization/publication/MichaelFreseJournal/sonnentag%20frese%20stress%20handbook%2003.pdf [accessed 12 April 2012]. Stevenson, A. and Harper, S. (2006). Work Stress and Student Learning Experience, Journal of Quality Assurance in Education. 14(2): 167-178. Tang, T. L. P., & Hammontree, M. L. (1992). The effects of hardiness, police stress, and life stress on police officers’ illness and absenteeism. Public Personnel Management, 21, 493-510. Warr, P. B. (1987). Work, unemployment, and mental health. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Wickens, C. D. (1996). Designing for stress. In J. E. Driskell & E. Salas (Eds.), Stress and human performance (pp. 279-295). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Zapf, D., Dormann, C., & Frese, M. (1996). Longitudinal studies in organizational stress research: A review of the literature with reference to methodological issues. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 1, 145-169. Read More