Organizational Psychology - Essay Example

How Organizational Psychology has represented advances in learning about Stress Name Instructor’s Name Date Introduction Organizational psychology is the scientific study of human behavior during working times and at the workplace. Organizational psychology employs numerous psychological principles and theories to organizations. Organizational psychologists influence the organization’s success through the improvement of well-being of its employees, champions health and safety, and creates avenues of improvement of performance and employee satisfaction (Wood & Beckmann, 2006). Through conducting extensive research on employee attitudes and behaviors, it enables an organization to device and implements strategies and measures towards improving management systems, employee feedback, training programs and hiring practices (Buitendach & De Witte, 2005). Moreover, it enables the creation of effective organizational development measures and encourages embracement of change. The roots of organizational psychology are traced to the late 1870s and may be attributed to Wilhelm Wundt. Wundt was able to train other psychologists on the importance of organizational psychology (Holman et al., 2005). In the USA and especially in 1919, the American Psychological Associated elected a pro-organizational psychologist, who advanced the requirements and expectations of organizational psychology (Lumley et al., 2011). Since this period, the requirements of employees have been analyzed and continued to be discussed with the purpose of determining the appropriate strategy to advance the requirements of employees. Frameworks, theories, and principles premised on the workplace have been developed. Hence, the changing requirements of the workplace have ensured review of organizational psychology is analyzed. In Australia, the population plays an important role in the workplace. Populations cannot exist without occupations, and the use of organizational psychology advances the requirements of the population. In such working environments, stress is inherent from different perspectives (Holman et al., 2005). Whether the difficulty of the work or the working conditions, stress has to be addressed. Through organizational psychology, it is possible to determine stress agents and seek measures to counter these threats (Faragher, Cass & Cooper, 2005). The requirement of any population is health promotion and through organizational psychology, it is possible to determine stress and the earliest level (Machin, Fogarty & Bannon, 2009). If such problems are not identified, the conditions may worsen resulting in other medical challenges, such as depression. Stress at Work Job Demand Model Job demand model is an occupational stress model, which states that strain is directly associated with the imbalance between resources and demands on the individual (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007). The demands of an occupation are different, and some of the demands push an individual resulting in stress (Buitendach & De Witte, 2005). Some of the components, which contribute to job demand, include organizational aspects of the job, social aspects, psychological aspects, and physical aspects. For example, emotional demands and work pressure influences the way an individual can accomplish the requirements of the workplace and the related stress. The strengths of job demand model understand the underlying reasons, which may contribute to stress. It reviews the requirements or design of the job and the expected outcome (Buitendach & De Witte, 2005). It enables the management of an organization to device appropriate designs to sustain the requirements of the organization. In addition, it is easier to determine ineffectiveness at the workplace, since what is required understands the requirements of the position and the behavior of the employee. Therefore, the entire process of reviewing the challenges an individual faces becomes easier. However, the limitations of the job demand model are a lack of considering other variables (Boekaerts, Maes & Karoly, 2005). For example, the job may be demanding but other variables, such as compensation may be high. Therefore, looking at the demand is inappropriate; rather the larger picture should be seen. In addition, the theory does not provide measures, which can be employed in addressing the problem. For example, stating the problem only does not solve the problem. For instances, the theory should state the problem and provide mechanisms of advice of addressing the problem. In summary, the research is effective in the advancement of the requirements of stress and the components associated with stress (Robbins et al., 2013). It presents the job demand association job requirements but does not address other variables associated with the job. Job Fit Model The job fit model states the individual and organization has specific personality traits. The workplace satisfaction and productivity increases when the traits between the organization and the person match or are closer (Boekaerts, Maes & Karoly, 2005). The personality traits define the personality type of an individual. Some of the common personalities based on numerous variables with matching job position include social – helping to mentor others; conventional – employees enjoy rules, order, and regulation, as some examples. The job fit model is important in balancing the requirements of an organization and determining the motivational factors. However, employment and organizational requirements cannot operate on a single platform. The strength of the job fit model is an improvement of satisfaction and improvement of work productivity (Buitendach & De Witte, 2005). Therefore, creating the link between job description and personality trains reduces the chances of stress and other psychological problems (Faragher, Cass & Cooper, 2005). The shortcoming of the problem is that an organization operates based on numerous components and legal frameworks. Hence, job fit model cannot suffice without the support of other variables. For example, the theory aims in improving job satisfaction but does not consider whether the individual has the characteristics or perquisites to sustain the requirements of the job. Furthermore, it does not consider the role of other stakeholders, such as other employees in advancing the requirements of the job description. Internal conflicts may arise, for example, but the theory cannot incorporate such aspects. Hence, job fit model is appropriate in assigning positions and duties (Holman et al., 2005). The aim of any organization is to motivate the employees and to position the employees in positions requiring improvement based on the characteristic of the individual. Therefore, balancing the requirements of the personality and the nature of the position are important to the success of any strategic obligation (Robbins et al., 2013). Individual Difference The workplace brings together people with different characteristics and expectations (Buitendach & De Witte, 2005). Each of these individuals has unique features and characteristics, which may be different from other employees. It results in individual difference premised on the personality difference (Faragher, Cass & Cooper, 2005). Some of the difference may negate the expectations of the position. The strength of the individual difference model understands the underlying variables in an individual (Holman et al., 2005). Understanding an employee is important because measures can be undertaken to prevent conflict. Moreover, since employees have to work together, the individual difference model ensures acknowledgment of the employees’ differences. It also incorporates personality differences, which can be due to cultural requirements, meaning that an organization can strategize through understanding these requirements. However, the model cannot apply in all situations (Boekaerts, Maes & Karoly, 2005). It is acceptable individual difference exists but should not be used as a basis for assigning duties and responsibilities. For example, globalization makes organizations to employ people from different cultural backgrounds and looking only at individual difference, it makes the entire process of human resource demanding. An organization can avoid the problem through championing human resource policy rather than addressing the requirements of individual employees. Individual difference in the workplace and other positions is inherent but the important requirement is ensuring the employees can work together to advance the requirements of the workplace (Hakanen, Schaufeli & Ahola, 2008). Hence, mitigating the weaknesses and shortcomings of the different employees ensure a common positioned is arrived to advance the requirements of the organization and employees. Management of Stress Primary Theories These are the theories, which are important to understanding the requirements of the organizations and employees (Wood & Beckmann, 2006). They are the defining theories that address the requirements of expectations of stress at the work (Buitendach & De Witte, 2005). It brings together a collection of theories and fundamentals of an individual and the society. For example, the role of working is to fulfill the requirements of basic needs as directed by Maslow Theory (Faragher, Cass & Cooper, 2005). The individual can withstand any stress until achievement of this requirement. However, the continued stressful environment may break down an individual resulting in ineffectiveness. The strength of such strategies understands the requirements of the employees about the expectation of the organization (Crano & Prislin, 2011). The theories were developed during a period in which technologies were not playing an important role. Therefore, the theories reflected the requirements of employees in advancing their work. Moreover, the management theories aimed at bringing together different people to advance the requirements of the organization. However, a single theory/theories, which do not conclude the requirements of organization and employees (Boekaerts, Maes & Karoly, 2005). Hence, numerous primary theories should be incorporated in advancing the requirements of organizational psychology. The theories were introduced during a period in which technological and cultural changes had not taken place. Therefore, the theories may not be appropriate in current situations in which technology and cultural diversities drive the societies. Secondary Theories The secondary theories advance the requirements of primary theory (Faragher, Cass & Cooper, 2005). For example, theories of management, leadership, which are relevant to the requirements of the business as, incorporate to the success of an organization while addressing the challenges that may arise (Boekaerts, Maes & Karoly, 2005). The strength of the approach is creating an umbrella of theories to advancing the requirements of the employees and organizations in general (Wood & Beckmann, 2006). It provides a mechanism of understanding a different perspective. It widens the scope of stress management through viewing an image through the use of different lenses. For example, the use of two theories to review a stressful situation means that a better understanding can be achieved. The weakness is concentration on the management/business theories rather than the general impact of few theories to address the requirement of the employees and organizations (Buitendach & De Witte, 2005). The theories should the aspects, which influences people rather than focusing on the management requirements. For example, an individual cannot address stress without considering the social cultural variables, which are possible through the use of social theories and psychological theories. Therefore, numerous theories on organizations and management exist but the limits are not effective (Robbins et al., 2013). Some of the approaches and application of the theories are not conclusive in nature. There are areas, which require additional tuning to ensure the effectiveness of the processes and success of stress management. Tertiary Theories Tertiary theories bring together theories from different background depending on the nature of the occupation (Lewis, 2006). Employees work in different environments ranging from engineering to the service industry. The tertiary theories allow correlating numerous theories and approaches to advance the requirements of the employees, address the challenges in the workplace, and ensure stress is managed effectively (Wood & Beckmann, 2006). The strengths of the tertiary theories are the breadth and depth of information, which can be used. For example, the stresses associated with engineering workplace are different from challenges in the service industry. Therefore, different theories can be employed to address a fundamental issue related with the organization. It ensures the right decisions are made based on the available information and data. Hence, the source and analysis of data is large contributing to effective decision-making processes. However, the limitations of the theory are concentrating on a specific workplace, and other variables may exist that makes it difficult to be employed in a wider environment (Ellonen, Blomqvist & Puumalainen, 2008). For example, cultural diversity may affect the theories because difficult cultures are motivated by different factors. Moreover, an issue may be pertinent but the individual addressing the issue may use complicated strategies and theories negating the requirements of the problem. Therefore, a single theory can solve a problem easily rather than the use of numerous theories. Future Implications Stress is unavoidable in the workplace because of the numerous variables associated. The employees’ requirements are different from the organization requirements. It means the designing of the job and assigning the duties may raise numerous complications. Different factors contribute to stress, and it sometimes, depend on personality traits. Hence, organizations have to understand the requirements of the employees and define measures to address any stressful situation. The research has informed on the significance of organizational psychology towards psychology (Buitendach & De Witte, 2005). The aim and purpose of the psychology are to understand the behavior of an individual about environmental pressures (Cennamo & Gardner, 2008). Understanding the requirements of the employees is integral to the success of any organization (Crano & Prislin, 2011). Organizational psychology helps to appreciate the challenges and measures, which can be used to advance the requirements of the organization and employees (Renee & Bradley, 2007). Moreover, reducing the stressful events contributes to health promotion rather than taking the approach of medicinal. Without effective management of stress or prevention of stress, it can become expensive to the socioeconomic environment of the population. The organizational psychology theories are important in understanding the behaviors, characteristics and factors influencing the way people operate and fulfill their respective duties (Buitendach & De Witte, 2005). There is no single approach, which may be employed in addressing the stressful situations at the workplace. However, the theories do not apply in different situations (Crano & Prislin, 2011). For example, at the workplace, numerous components have to be analyzed before determining the reasons, which contribute to stressful problems. A psychologist may think about using job-fit model, but the situations may be different meaning the approach, is not effective (Boekaerts, Maes & Karoly, 2005). Moreover, the lack of background knowledge on a working environment may inhibit effective collection of appropriate information. For example, a psychologist may have a better understanding of a medicine environment but lacks similar knowledge in engineering. Hence, employing the job fit model in addressing workplace stress-related challenges. For the future address of organizational psychology, it is imperative for the psychologists and other stakeholders to develop a framework and principles, which informs on psychology issues. For example, the numerous theories are aimed to address the factors contributing to stress at the workplace, but it is difficult to collate the information (Crano & Prislin, 2011). If a single framework existed, it is possible to collect information, which can be reliable and valid in the long run (Wood et al., 2010). Use of different framework negates the requirements and purpose of the research. Therefore, the future should address the development a single or few frameworks to advance the requirements of organizational psychology. References Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The job demands-resources model: State of the art. Journal of managerial psychology, 22(3), 309-328. Boekaerts, M., Maes, S., & Karoly, P. (2005). Self‐Regulation Across Domains of Applied Psychology: Is there an Emerging Consensus? Applied Psychology, 54(2), 149-154. Buitendach, J. H., & De Witte, H. (2005). Job insecurity, extrinsic and intrinsic job satisfaction and affective organisational commitment of maintenance workers in a parastatal. South African Journal of Business Management, 36(2), 27-37. Cennamo, L., & Gardner, D. (2008). Generational differences in work values, outcomes and person-organization values fit. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23(8), 891-906. Crano, W. D., & Prislin, R. (Eds.). (2011). Attitudes and attitude change. Psychology Press. Ellonen, R., Blomqvist, K., & Puumalainen, K. (2008). The role of trust in organisational innovativeness. European Journal of Innovation Management, 11(2), 160-181. Faragher, E. B., Cass, M., & Cooper, C. L. (2005). The relationship between job satisfaction and health: a meta-analysis. Occupational and environmental medicine, 62(2), 105-112. Hakanen, J. J., Schaufeli, W. B., & Ahola, K. (2008). The Job Demands-Resources model: A three-year cross-lagged study of burnout, depression, commitment, and work engagement. Work & Stress, 22(3), 224-241. Holman, D., Wall, T. D., Clegg, C. W., Sparrow, P., & Howard, A. (Eds.). (2005). The essentials of the new workplace: A guide to the human impact of modern working practices. John Wiley & Sons. Lewis, S. E. (2006). Recognition of workplace bullying: A qualitative study of women targets in the public sector. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 16(2), 119-135. Lumley, E. J., Coetzee, M., Tladinyane, R., & Ferreira, N. (2011). Exploring the job satisfaction and organisational commitment of employees in the information technology environment. Southern African Business Review, 15(1), 100-118. Machin, M. A., Fogarty, G. J., & Bannon, S. F. (2009). Predicting employees' commitment to and support for organisational change. The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Organisational Psychology, 2, 10-18. Renee BB., & Bradley, L. (2007). The impact of organisational support for career development on career satisfaction. Career development international, 12(7), 617-636. Robbins, S., Judge, T. A., Millett, B., & Boyle, M. (2013). Organisational behaviour. Pearson Higher Education AU. Wood, J., Zeffane, R., Fromholtz, M., Wiesner, R., & Creed, A. (2010). Organisational behaviour: core concepts and applications 2nd ed. John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd. Wood, R. E., & Beckmann, N. (2006). Personality architecture and the FFM in organisational psychology. Applied Psychology, 55(3), 453-469. Read More

Job Fit Model The job fit model states the individual and organization has specific personality traits. The workplace satisfaction and productivity increases when the traits between the organization and the person match or are closer (Boekaerts, Maes & Karoly, 2005). The personality traits define the personality type of an individual. Some of the common personalities based on numerous variables with matching job position include social – helping to mentor others; conventional – employees enjoy rules, order, and regulation, as some examples.

The job fit model is important in balancing the requirements of an organization and determining the motivational factors. However, employment and organizational requirements cannot operate on a single platform. The strength of the job fit model is an improvement of satisfaction and improvement of work productivity (Buitendach & De Witte, 2005). Therefore, creating the link between job description and personality trains reduces the chances of stress and other psychological problems (Faragher, Cass & Cooper, 2005).

The shortcoming of the problem is that an organization operates based on numerous components and legal frameworks. Hence, job fit model cannot suffice without the support of other variables. For example, the theory aims in improving job satisfaction but does not consider whether the individual has the characteristics or perquisites to sustain the requirements of the job. Furthermore, it does not consider the role of other stakeholders, such as other employees in advancing the requirements of the job description.

Internal conflicts may arise, for example, but the theory cannot incorporate such aspects. Hence, job fit model is appropriate in assigning positions and duties (Holman et al., 2005). The aim of any organization is to motivate the employees and to position the employees in positions requiring improvement based on the characteristic of the individual. Therefore, balancing the requirements of the personality and the nature of the position are important to the success of any strategic obligation (Robbins et al., 2013). Individual Difference The workplace brings together people with different characteristics and expectations (Buitendach & De Witte, 2005).

Each of these individuals has unique features and characteristics, which may be different from other employees. It results in individual difference premised on the personality difference (Faragher, Cass & Cooper, 2005). Some of the difference may negate the expectations of the position. The strength of the individual difference model understands the underlying variables in an individual (Holman et al., 2005). Understanding an employee is important because measures can be undertaken to prevent conflict.

Moreover, since employees have to work together, the individual difference model ensures acknowledgment of the employees’ differences. It also incorporates personality differences, which can be due to cultural requirements, meaning that an organization can strategize through understanding these requirements. However, the model cannot apply in all situations (Boekaerts, Maes & Karoly, 2005). It is acceptable individual difference exists but should not be used as a basis for assigning duties and responsibilities.

For example, globalization makes organizations to employ people from different cultural backgrounds and looking only at individual difference, it makes the entire process of human resource demanding. An organization can avoid the problem through championing human resource policy rather than addressing the requirements of individual employees. Individual difference in the workplace and other positions is inherent but the important requirement is ensuring the employees can work together to advance the requirements of the workplace (Hakanen, Schaufeli & Ahola, 2008).

Hence, mitigating the weaknesses and shortcomings of the different employees ensure a common positioned is arrived to advance the requirements of the organization and employees.

Read More