How the Structure and Culture of the Organization in which We Work Affects the Level of Stress Experienced - Essay Example

Introduction Stress is a phenomenon that many employees at different workplaces experience and is largely inescapable. Arnold et al (2005) define job stress as the result of destructive physical and emotional responses that occur among individuals (workers) when the requirements of their jobs do not match their competencies, resources or needs. As seen from this definition, most effects of stress are harmful and can lead to poor health and even injury, not to mention the organizational losses that are likely to occur due to the low productivity of staff. Nevertheless, some authors [such as Thomson (1993)] have argued that moderate stress can be a motivating factor in achieving and adapting to new situations. As highlighted above, stress has significant impacts on staff and the result is eventually noted on companies. Companies incur immense losses due to stress-related instances among staffs, which are reflected in absenteeism, accidents, healthcare expenses and a general decline in productivity (Handy 1999). It is worth noting that most occurrences of workplace stress are related to the events that take at different levels of the organization. It could be due to conflict among employees or between employees and their managers; or due to poor allocation of duties, which result in overburdening of some staff. Hence, stress at the workplace can be attributed to two broad attributes of the organization: the organization structure and organization culture. Generally, the distribution of work roles at the workplace affects the performance of employees since it determines whether they will be motivated or demoralized. This is the aspect of organizational structure. How work is distributed in terms of working hours, amount of work, incentives for the work, adherence to deadlines and so on all affect the level of stress among individuals. The kind of environment created by employees, managers and all players at the workplace also affect the level of stress experienced by the aforementioned figures. This is the role played by organization culture in impacting on stress. It is undisputable that conflicting demand from different organizational stakeholders would affect greatly the performance staff, if not impose different levels of stress to them. Additionally, personal conflicts among employees are not a good picture in the purview of organizations. This paper will evaluate how the structure of organizations affects worker performance. As mentioned above, the manner in which duties are assigned (based on the organization’s hierarchy) may impose significant stress on individuals. Additionally, the organization culture in terms of how the staffs relate is vital in moderating stress. The effects of stress cannot be gainsaid, and as discussed in this paper, the consequences of stress such as anxiety, absenteeism, lower productivity and aggression only serve to aggravate an already bad situation in the light of organizations. The paper gives a blow-by-blow analysis of how structure and culture of an organization affects stress, with particular emphasis on the negative attributes of stress among individuals. Note that at the workplace, we are all affected by stress in one way or another and this paper therefore gives a generalization of the conditions in which we work. How organizational structure affects the level of stress experienced by individuals Organization structure refers to the prescribed distribution of work roles and duties within an organization coordinating the various duties or subsystems in order to achieve efficiently the organization’s set targets (Handy 1999). The structure represents an organized set of subsystems that play different roles but with an objective to accomplish the organization’s targets. All these are intended to be achieved by way of division of labour, definitions of authority relationships, presence of proper lines of communication, and well-defined responsibilities of different staffs and how the different subsystems of the organization relate with each other. Perhaps only an ideal organization (which can be presumed not to exist) can be said to be entirely stress-free. This is because at various levels within any organization stress is bound to occur. From time immemorial, large organizations were generally hypothesised to expose employees to high levels of occupational stress (Thomson 1993). This seems to be true given that most large organizations have bureaucratic systems, which are characterised by impersonal treatment of workers. In addition, such organizations usually have reduced communication among employees, with most communication being done through notices and web postings. Regrettably, the reduced communication is accompanied by an increased amount of job per individual (Thomson 1993). As large organizations do not embrace personal levels of communication, it is noteworthy that inadequate communication leads to isolation and alienation of workers due to lack of predictability and comprehension of the incidents in the work environment. If employees stay worried about when their jobs could end, it is obvious that the stress will affect their performance. A common feature of organizations is to use rules and regulations that govern the various subsystems of the organizations. However, if such rules and regulations are too detailed, employees may be demoralized in their efforts to achieve the set goals, particularly in customer related organizations (Bratton 2007). In such situations, employees are torn between satisfying the customers and maintaining their job, which subjects them to significant stress. It is obvious that most markets are competitive and organizations have to strive to survive in the dynamic field. Heightened competition necessitates organizational structure adjustments to match the various needs of various organizations (Thomson 1993). However, these adjustments may not favour the employees. For instance, employees who were formally used to light jobs may all of a sudden be forced to put their hands on highly tasking jobs. The outcome may be detrimental as the employees may not be as productive due to the extra burden they have to bear. In addition to new tasks, the various departments of an organization may have to work on tighter deadlines in order to meet new standards and objectives. Regrettably, most of these structural adjustments in organizations may come without substantial or commensurate emoluments. In addition, apart from working under strict deadlines worker may be overworked by being given too much work at a time or being forced to work for longer durations. If, for instance an employees was working for, say seven hours a week and is suddenly introduced to a program in which he or she has to work for eight to nine hours, stress is likely to mount since the new schedule affects other programs as well as the mental condition of the employee. Another feature of organizational structure that affects the level of stress experienced by employees is the level of opportunities in the organization. It is obvious that employees would be motivated to work more and better if the future looks promising. This is in terms of opportunities to rise through promotions or through further training (Thomson 1993). It is evident that employees who remain in their positions for too long may be affected more by stress than those who constantly rise and attend refresher courses (Thomson 1993). As stated previously in this paper, stress results from an employee’s perception that his or her competencies do not match a particular job’s needs. Therefore, if employees see no hope of advancing their careers, they are likely to be eaten up by stress out of the feeling that they can do nothing to ameliorate their capabilities. Closely related to career advancement is change in technology. Along this line, it is true that as an organization widens its scope, it has to embrace new technologies in order to cope with the dynamic market (Arnold et al 2005). However, improved technology may imply in a way increased stress to the employees. This is because new technologies come with new challenges. For instance, a secretary that was used to using a typewriter when suddenly introduced to a computer may be stressed by the idea of learning how to use word processors, spreadsheets and so forth. Hence, while new technology improves an organization’s efficiency, its initial stressor effects cannot be gainsaid. Changes in management structures in organizations also affect the level of stress experienced by staff. For example, a new manager of a company may introduce totally new regulations in management. Although the measures may be for the good of the company, their impact may be detrimental in the purview of employees as they may encompass involvement in new stressing tasks. How organizational culture affects the level of stress experienced by individuals Organizational culture is a depiction of the workplace environment from the interaction of the employees in the workplace (Handy 1999). It is a characteristic of all life experiences, strengths, weaknesses, education level and so fort of the employees. The culture in essence constitutes the values, norms and beliefs, which are shared by the employees of an organization (Handy 1999). In most organizations, managers play roles in defining the organizational culture by their leadership, whereas employees contribute to the organization culture. How the two sets of participants interact therefore affects levels of stress greatly. According to Arnold et al (2005), poor work organization due to conflict in performance between executive leaders and their juniors may result in creation of unsatisfactory working conditions. This may result in employees not being in control of their tasks due to clouds of stress hovering over them. Any conflict between managers and employees results in poor communication, general poor leadership and lack of responsibility for one’s task. This eventually leads to blame games with the managers heaping blame on their juniors for whatever hardship that befalls an organization. Conflicts between the leadership and their subjects may also be characterised by bullying, violence and harassment (Thomson 1993). To say the least, these are some of the vices whose outcome is enormous stress on the victims. Organizational settings that are characterized by conflicts between managers and employees are portrayed by solitary work and no agreed mechanisms for solving problems or dealing with complaints. Consequently, employees are made to bear emotional stress as they strive to avoid falling out with their managers (Thomson 1993). Even among the employees, conflicts are bound to occur. Personal conflicts include accusations that some employees are not performing well, blaming others for one’s mistakes or insistence on collective responsibility even when particular individuals are obviously culpable for some mistakes. If the organization culture states that mistakes shall be weighed collectively, employees who are smart in their jobs only end up being blamed for others’ mistakes and this is a reliable source of stress. In organizations that are not well managed, decision-making is bestowed upon particular individuals. The decisions may not encompass the feelings of all employees and this heightens stress among individuals whose needs or issues are not addressed. In such cases, the lack of support in situations that require pooling of ideas, results in high levels of stress due to feelings of emptiness among employees or even their managers (Bratton 2007). Structure and culture act in combination It may not be easy limit stress to particular aspects of organizational structure or organizational culture as the two aspects may act in combination. However, the combined effects of anomalies in structure or culture have the effect of increasing stress in different perspectives as described below. Physiologically and behaviourally, stress is characterised by headaches, stomach ulcers and so on, which eventually lead to absenteeism, workplace aggression and low productivity (Arnold et al 2005). These symptoms are usually bound to recur if the immediate causes of stress are not identified and sorted out. Psychologically, the harsh environment at the workplace (due to both structure and culture) causes anxiety, anger, moodiness and dissatisfaction (Arnold et al 2005). Nevertheless, it is important to note that these symptoms only serve to aggravate the levels of stress. Hence, once created, stress tends to revolve around the workplace and repeatedly engulfs the affected individuals. Conclusion Problems arising in the structure and culture of organizations cause or affect stress levels differently. The distribution of work roles affects stress among individuals due to poor communication, stagnation in some positions, more work and tighter deadlines, changes in technology and so on. Conflicts among employees and between the employees and their managers also raise stress levels. Nevertheless, stressor factors due to organizational structure and culture act in combination. Therefore, we experience stress because of both phenomena. References Arnold, J; Silvester, J; Patterson, F; Robertson, I; Cooper, C & Burness B 2005, Work psychology: Understanding human behaviour in the workplace, Prentice Hall, London Bratton J 2007, Work and organisational behaviour, Palgrave, London Handy, C 1999 Understanding organizations, Penguin, London Thomson, R 1993, Managing people. Butterworth Heinemann, London Read More