Upload
ankita-sinha
View
231
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/6/2019 Ankita.project on Role Clarity
1/21
ROLE AMBIGUITY AND ROLE CLARITY: A COMPARISION OF
ATTITUDES IN GERMANY AND THE UNITED STATES
JEFFREY C. BAUER JOSEPH SPENCER
University of Cincinnati Clermont Belhaven CollegeBusiness Division College of Business Administration
4200 Clermont College Drive 1500 Peachtree Street
Batavia, OH 45255 USA Jackson, MS 39202 USA
Phone: (513) 732-5257 Phone: (318) 348-1108Fax: (513) 732-5304
E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected]
Track : Organizational Development
Type : Original Paper
8/6/2019 Ankita.project on Role Clarity
2/21
ROLE AMBIGUITY AND ROLE CLARITY: A COMPARISION OF
ATTITUDES IN GERMANY AND THE UNITED STATES
Abstract
The cultural and organizational influences on attitudes toward role ambiguity and role
clarity are evaluated in this paper. Specifically, need for clarity and perceptions of role
ambiguity are analyzed for members of two organizations, one in Germany and the other
in the United States. A global perspective is employed which evaluates the cultural
positioning of respondent's attitudes in diverse settings. The results partially support the
hypothesis that the German respondents would demonstrate a greater need for clarity
than their U.S. counterparts, but are perhaps confounded by between group differences
unrelated to ambiguity. The role ambiguity measures showed no difference in reported
ambiguity levels within the organizations representing the two countries. The possible
effects of technological advances as they relate to role ambiguity are reviewed, along
with the implications of cultural diversity in the workplace. In addition, the evolving and
flatter organizational structures common to organizations and the resulting
communications methodologies are examined. Finally, future research
recommendations that seem to flow from the global management and role ambiguity
literature are outlined for the reader.
2
8/6/2019 Ankita.project on Role Clarity
3/21
Role ambiguity has been described by Kahn, Wolfe, Quinn, Snoek, and Rosenthal
(1964) as the single or multiple roles that confront the role incumbent, which may not be
clearly articulated (communicated) in terms ofbehaviors (the role activities or
tasks/priorities) orperformance levels (the criteria that the role incumbent will be judged
by). Naylor, Pritchard, and Ilgen (1980) state that role ambiguity exists when focal
persons (role incumbents) are uncertain about product-to-evaluation contingencies and
are aware of their own uncertainty about them. Breaugh & Colihan (1994) have further
refined the definition of role ambiguity to be job ambiguity and indicate that job
ambiguity possesses three distinct aspects: work methods, scheduling, and performance
criteria.
Most research suggests that role ambiguity is indeed negatively correlated with
job satisfaction, job involvement, performance, tension, propensity to leave the job and
job performance variables (Rizzo, House, & Lirtzman 1970; Van Sell, Brief, & Schuler
1981; Fisher & Gitelson 1983; Jackson & Schuler 1985; Singh 1998). Typically, the role
ambiguity and role conflict constructs are discussed together. The present analysis
focuses primarily on role ambiguity, because the literature has shown that role ambiguity
and role conflict have different causes (Keller, 1975) and therefore potentially different
remedies. Sawyer (1992) has even hypothesized that different types of role ambiguity
may have different causes, and Singh & Rhoads (1991) believe that role ambiguity is
more amenable to managerial "intervention", that is implementing programs to diminish
role ambiguity may be less difficult to conduct than interventions for role conflict.
3
8/6/2019 Ankita.project on Role Clarity
4/21
According to Banton (1965), a role can be defined as a set of norms or
expectations applied to the incumbent of a particular position by the role incumbent and
the various other role players (role senders) with whom the incumbent must deal to fulfill
the obligations of their position. Kahn et al. (1964) further clarify the role model by
stating that to adequately perform his or her role, a person must know (a) what the
expectations of the role set are (e.g., the rights, duties, and responsibilities), (b) what
activities will fulfill the role responsibilities (means-end knowledge), and (c) what the
consequences of role performance are to self, others, and the organization. According to
Schaubroeck, Ganster, Sime, and Editman (1993), the episodic role-making process is
complicated by poor communication between role senders and role receivers as well as
from turbulence within the task environment, which requires continual modifications in
sent roles. Thus the "role-making" process begins for the role incumbent and the role
senders and is a continual process.
The multidimensional approaches to the study of role ambiguity began with
Bedeian and Armenakis (1981) and have continued with Sawyer (1992) and Singh,
Verbeke, and Rhoads (1996). Based on their findings and the foundation provided by
these works there are four (4) widely accepted dimensions to role ambiguity, which may
be experienced by the role incumbents, and are based on the role incumbents perspective.
The dimensions include:
1) Goal/Expectation/Responsibility Ambiguity - What is expected? What should I be
doing?
2) Process Ambiguity - How to get things done. The ways of achieving organizational
objectives.
3) Priority Ambiguity - When things should be done and in what order.
4
8/6/2019 Ankita.project on Role Clarity
5/21
4) Behavior Ambiguity - How am I expected to act in various situations? What
behaviors will lead to the needed or desired outcomes?
Kahn, et. al. (1964) hypothesized that the presence of three organizational
conditions contributes to an environment of ambiguity: the amount of organizational
complexity, rapid organizational or technological change, and management's philosophy
about intra-company communications. Hofstede (1980) echoes these same concerns
regarding uncertainty in organizations by describing the rationale for his uncertainty
avoidance construct, which he described as "(in)tolerance for ambiguity". According to
Hofstede (1980), "The concept of uncertainty is often linked to the concept of
environment; the "environment" which usually is taken to include everything not under
direct control of the organization is a source of uncertainty for which the organization
tries to compensate."
The type of services that an organization provides may also influence the level of
conflict or role ambiguity. According to Rogers & Molnar (1976), organizations
supplying human services tend to employ larger numbers of specialists than organizations
supplying services with less uncertainty about the appropriate treatment or technique.
This draws one to conclude that professional roles are permitted greater discretion and
are supported by the authority of professional codes of conduct, which would reduce
ambiguity levels, but may increase conflict.
This leads us to the inevitable position of ultimately attempting to determine
whether or not the presence of ambiguity should be considered a "bad" thing. Ambiguity
can be both "good" (resulting in productive stress), also called eustress by Selye (1976)
5
8/6/2019 Ankita.project on Role Clarity
6/21
and "bad" (the lack of stress or too much stress which results in dysfunction), also known
as distress (Selye, 1976). As the concept of stress is considered to be highly individual in
nature, we must attempt to determine the point at which ambiguity causes distress. One
avenue to consider is in evaluating an individuals need for clarity. Lyons (1971) defines
role clarity as the "subjective feeling of having as much or not as much role relevant
information as the person would like to have."
Culture has been shown to impact organizations and interpersonal
communications, which affect ambiguity levels and tolerance for ambiguity (Hofstede,
1980). The construct of role ambiguity has been shown to have relationships with several
of the cultural variables that Hofstede proposed and measured. Specifically, uncertainty
avoidance may be related to roles and role ambiguity and to a lesser extent, individualism
and power distance. Hofstede (1994) defined uncertainty avoidance as "the degree to
which people in a country prefer structured over unstructured situations."
The present study will rely upon the foundational work of Hofstede in developing
and testing hypotheses with cultural attributes to determine if the participants from
Germany and the United States who were surveyed possess a differing need for clarity
and hold differing perceptions about roles and role ambiguity. The power distance
variable defined by Hofstede (1994) reflects "the degree of inequality among people,
which the population of a country considers as normal". In organizational situations this
often is related to the inherent position power of managers and those in leadership roles.
Employees in high power distance cultures often look to management to solve problems.
6
8/6/2019 Ankita.project on Role Clarity
7/21
In low power distance cultures, like both Germany and the United States, the reduction of
ambiguity is part of the way that supervisors promote subordinate performance.
The selection of Germany as an area to study was influenced by the importance of
the European Economic Community (EC) in global trade and the German's influence
over EC trade issues. According to Peterson et. al. (1995), recent decades have seen a
steady increase in multinational organizations and in the frequency with which
organizations do business far from home. Multinational corporations (MNCs) are
domiciled and foreign direct investment (FDI) occurs in both countries, which will
continue to bring these cultures together within organizational confines. In addition, this
type of comparative study can be used to develop predictions about the ways in which
people and managers from different cultures handle uncertainty. This is supported by
Senkar & Zeira (1992) who state that "The examination of role conflict and role
ambiguity theories in a multinational context can be fruitful for at least two reasons:
First, it may serve to extend the scope and relevance of role theory beyond the
uninational corporation. Second, such examination is likely to increase the theoretical
depth of international management studies, and therefore our knowledge of an
increasingly popular form of organization." An assessment of employee's need for clarity
is crucial to enhance our understanding of the importance or lack of importance of clear
role communications.
A final area for interest is in making distinctions between persons occupying
technical vs. managerial roles. Management roles have historically been viewed as
predominantly boundary spanning in nature (Singh 1998), where technical roles with
7
8/6/2019 Ankita.project on Role Clarity
8/21
greater clarity are less subject to ambiguity, but in some cases having greater conflicting
roles and responsibilities. According to Miles (1976), persons occupying interunit and
interorganizational boundary-spanning roles between differentiated systems may be
expected to experience greater degrees of role conflict than persons linking different
levels of a hierarchy within the same organizational context. On the other hand, persons
occupying internal, buffered roles, especially non-supervisory scientists and engineers,
would not be exposed to conflicting pressures or task ambiguities as persons in linking
roles.
The purpose of this paper is to review the global role ambiguity findings available
to date, to compare two similar organizations in two cultures, to compare managerial and
technical staffers on the perceived need for clarity and tolerance for ambiguity, and to
define parameters for continuing the study of role ambiguity and role clarity in both
domestic and international settings. This study while limited in scope is global in nature
and while its generalizability may be limited the consequences of the findings will
hopefully enhance and shape our understanding of the cultural implications of role
processes.
Method
Sample and Procedure
Respondents for this study consisted of engineering, information systems, project
management professionals, and support personnel employed by two medium sized
organizations (one in Germany and the other in the United States) that maintain
relationships with governmental agencies and commercial businesses. These
8
8/6/2019 Ankita.project on Role Clarity
9/21
8/6/2019 Ankita.project on Role Clarity
10/21
30 were returned. None of the questionnaires were determined to be unusable due to
incomplete responses. A total of 58 surveys were included in the final analysis, thus
constituting a usable response rate of approximately 58%.
Instrumentation
The instruments used in this study were selected after an extensive review of the
literature on role ambiguity and role clarity. For each of the instruments and questions
selected, operationalized constructs were adopted from the research. In each case
multiple item scales were used to evaluate the constructs. The role ambiguity scale
(known as the Rizzo, House & Lirtzman or RHL scale) developed by Rizzo, et al. (1970)
has been the most widely used (used in 85% of the studies according to Jackson &
Schuler 1985) by researchers studying role stress (role ambiguity, role conflict, and role
overload). The RHL questionnaire consists of 30 items, 15 of which deal with role
ambiguity and 15 with role conflict. According to Schuler, Aldag, and Brief (1977) the
RHL scales have been shown to have sufficient reliability and construct validity to
warrant continued use.
The present study employed 12 of the original role ambiguity questions from the
Rizzo, et. al. (1970) work. The respondents were given five alternatives ranging from
"Never" to "Nearly all of the time" with a Likert type scale. One item was duplicated in
the original study and therefore omitted, and the other two omitted items have been
shown to not adequately measure the intended construct. The reported Cronbach alpha
levels for the modified scale have been reported as ranging from .65 to .82 (See
References). Additional instruments were utilized to evaluate role clarity and need for
10
8/6/2019 Ankita.project on Role Clarity
11/21
clarity. The instruments used to measure these role clarity constructs were developed and
tested by Lyons (1971). The Role Clarity Index (alpha = .70) is composed of four five-
alternative items ranging from "Never" to "Nearly all of the time" and the Need-for-
Clarity Index (alpha = .82) consists of four questions, each again with five-alternatives
ranging from "Not important at all" to "Very important". The instruments employed in
this project are contained in the attached appendices A and B.
Hypotheses
The following discussion is used to propose hypotheses for study. Drawing upon
the role ambiguity and role clarity literature and keeping Hofstede's (1980) work in mind,
the following propositions are offered.
Hypothesis # 1 - The role ambiguity levels for the German respondents and the
American respondents will show no difference in reported
ambiguity levels.
Hypothesis # 2 - The role clarity levels for the German respondents and the
American respondents will show no difference in reported role
clarity levels.
Hypothesis # 3a - The need for clarity levels will demonstrate a difference in
perceived need for clarity between the German and U.S.
respondents.
11
8/6/2019 Ankita.project on Role Clarity
12/21
Hypothesis # 3b - Need for clarity will be greater in Germany than in the United
States.
Hypothesis # 4a - Need for clarity will be greater for the technical/analytical
respondents than for the managerial respondents.
Hypothesis # 4b - The reported role ambiguity levels will be higher for those
respondents in managerial positions than for the respondents in
technical positions.
Results
The tool employed in the data analysis was the Analysis of Variance model or
(ANOVA). This model was chosen to assist in determining whether differences in the
means of the self-reported items exist. The ANOVA model evaluates the differences
within each group and then evaluates the differences between groups. For this
hypotheses enumerated above several groupings were used. First, the German and U.S.
groups were identified, and second the managerial and technical/analytical groups were
identified and evaluated. The ANOVA printouts are attached in the appendices. An
alpha level of .05 is assumed throughout the analysis and presentation of findings.
Hypothesis #1 was affirmed. In evaluating the differences in the mean responses
for questions 1 13, which evaluated role ambiguity levels, no significant differences in
reported role ambiguity levels between the German and U.S. respondent pools were
found.
12
8/6/2019 Ankita.project on Role Clarity
13/21
Hypothesis #2 was affirmed. After comparing the mean responses for questions
14, 15, and 16, no statistically significant differences were found between the German
and U.S. groups in their current levels of clarity about their roles within the organization.
Hypothesis #3a was partially supported. The German respondent group reported
greater need for clarity on item twenty, which measured the importance of knowing how
well the role incumbent was performing. The mean values for questions 17, 18, and 19
showed no difference between the German and U.S. groups on self-reported need for
clarity. Hypothesis #3b was weakly supported by the findings addressed above.
Hypothesis #4a received partial support in the responses to question nineteen.
The managerial respondents did report greater need for clarity for that item, however, no
statistically significant difference between the managerial and technical/analytical group
was found for questions 17, 18, and 20.
Hypothesis #4b was partially supported. Weak support was provided by the mean
responses in question twelve. The managerial group did report having to work with
vague directives and orders more often than the technical/analytical group.
Discussion
This research project affirmed that reported role clarity and role ambiguity levels
are similar in Germany and the U.S. This speaks partially to the globalization of
management models and to the perceptions and training of the professionals surveyed for
this project. Weak and partial support was found to demonstrate that the German
respondents prefer clarity. This finding is somewhat counter to the findings of Hofstede
13
8/6/2019 Ankita.project on Role Clarity
14/21
8/6/2019 Ankita.project on Role Clarity
15/21
noted by Witt (1992), PDM efforts have been based on the notions that workers want to
participate and that the outcomes of such participation are good for both the organization
and the worker and, at least in some nations, for the society as well. Further work in this
area needs to address these linkages - especially as relates to PDM, job satisfaction, and
role ambiguity.
In addition, we must determine if technological advances such as e-mail,
teleconferencing, Internet and Intranet activities contribute to role ambiguity and/or if
they can assist in the delivery of role clarification. Lim & Teo's (1999) findings support
the notion that rapid technological changes have resulted in significant changes in the
expectations placed on workers today.
One has to wonder what impact technology will have on role ambiguity. Will
opportunities like e-mail, teleconferencing, and information access via company Intranets
or the Internet (on-line) provide employees with information that will help to reduce or
moderate their levels of role ambiguity or will ambiguity only be worse? This is an
important question, since the level of information available today is cited in most stress
studies as being a major contributor to role ambiguity (Sawyer, 1992).
The ever-changing demographics of the workplace have had a profound impact
on organizations and these effects will probably continue in the future (Johnson, 1994).
The research in the area of role stress/ambiguity and cultural diversity must be updated to
reflect this moving target. As role incumbents become more diverse the question
becomes: What will be the impact on role ambiguity? Clearly, one would have to guess
that greater communication and/or understanding problems will occur. As our view of
15
8/6/2019 Ankita.project on Role Clarity
16/21
role ambiguity is remolded by these demographic variables, one has to wonder if current
ambiguity remedies may need to be modified for this new mix of incumbents? Work in
this area has only just begun to take shape.
Summary
As reported by Lyons (1971) "The need for clarity is a general need, and the
relationships found here might be applicable to other populations in other situations."
This statement supports the generalizability of the findings presented here and presents us
with challenges for future research, which are detailed below.
To summarize, the stated purpose of this paper was to review the global role
ambiguity findings to date, to compare two similar organizations in two cultures, to
compare managerial and technical staffers on the perceived need for clarity and tolerance
for ambiguity, and to define parameters for continuing the study of role ambiguity and
role clarity, to define the parameters for continuing study, and to explore the nature and
need for clarity in organizations and organizational communications. The review and
discussion has posed some interesting questions that need further research and study.
Future Research
The impact of technology on work roles, role senders, role incumbents, and role
ambiguity needs to be researched further. Many studies have been conducted in the area
of roles, and role stress, but the characteristics and behaviors of the role senders seem to
have gotten lost. We need to begin studying the nature of role senders and their influence
on the role incumbents and the impact of their participation, or lack thereof, on role
ambiguity.
16
8/6/2019 Ankita.project on Role Clarity
17/21
The implications of the changing mix of people in organizations must be
investigated further as it relates to roles and role clarity. At present, one can only guess,
based on common-sense notions, that differences in backgrounds can cause
miscommunications and differing expectations. The issue of role ambiguity is significant
and warrants continued study. It has been found to exist in a wide variety of
organizations and remains an on-going problem. Fisher and Gitelson (1983) note that the
consequences of role stress have potentially important cost implications for
organizations. They further note that whereas the costs of turnover and substandard
performance are obvious, the costs of attitudinal difficulties are less direct and just
beginning to be understood.
Role transitions as studied by Black (1988) are another area, which warrants
further study. As roles evolve and change over time within the same organization and
perhaps job classification levels of ambiguity and conflict will rise and fall naturally.
Black (1988) notes that throughout the course of a career, an individual must make
numerous role transitions, domestic transfers, promotions, company reorganizations, and
inter-company job changes. He further argues that individuals can adjust by altering the
new role that they are faced with to better match themselves or by altering their own
attitudes and behaviors to better match the new role expectations. An additional area of
interest would be an evaluation of reported need for clarity and the participant's
personality type. Personality type has been studied in depth, but few if any linkages have
been made between need for clarity or ambiguity tolerance and personality style. This
17
8/6/2019 Ankita.project on Role Clarity
18/21
type of study could illuminate further avenues for managerial intervention in trying to
avoid the detrimental effects of ambiguity.
As organizations continue to adopt self-managed or self-directed work teams,
additional research will be necessary to determine whether or not role ambiguity is
strictly an individual construct or one that can be employed in the study of teams. Would
the introduction of self-directed teams impact reported ambiguity levels? In addition, the
possible moderating effects of working in a team based environment and the removal of
the formal hierarchical structure and reporting lines would likely have an effect on
ambiguity and should be explored.
18
8/6/2019 Ankita.project on Role Clarity
19/21
REFERENCES
Banton, M. (1965). Roles: An introduction to the study of social relations. New York:Basic Books, Inc.
Bedeian, A. G. & Armenakis, A. A. (1981). A path-analytic study of the consequences ofrole conflict and ambiguity. Academy of Management Journal, 24, 417 - 424.
Black, J. S. (1988). Work role transitions: A study of American expatriate managers inJapan. Journal of International Business Studies, XX, 277 - 294.
Breaugh, J. A. & Colihan, J. P. (1994). Measuring facets of job ambiguity: Constructvalidity evidence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 191 - 202.
Fisher, C. D. & Gitelson, R. (1983). A meta-analysis of the correlates of role conflict and
ambiguity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 320 - 333.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's Consequences. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Hofstede, G. (1994). Management scientists are human. Management Science, 40, 4 -
13.
Jackson, S. E. and Schuler, R. S. (1985). A meta-analysis and conceptual critique of
research on role ambiguity and role conflict in work settings. Organizational Behaviorand Human Decision Processes, 36, 16 - 78.
Johnson, S. J. (1994). Connecting diversity efforts in the workplace with business
mission, goals, and objectives. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 7, 31 - 39.
Kahn, R. L., Wolfe, D. M., Quinn, R. P., Snoek, J. D., & Rosenthal, R. A. (1964).
Occupational stress: Studies in role conflict and ambiguity. New York: Wiley.
Keller, R. T. (1975). Role Conflict and Ambiguity: Correlates with job satisfaction and
values. Personnel Psychology, 28, 57 - 64.
Lim, V. K. G., & Teo, T. S. H. (1999). Occupational stress and IT personnel in
Singapore: Factorial dimensions and differential effects. International Journal ofInformation Management, 19, 277 - 291.
Lyons, T. F. (1971). Role clarity, need for clarity, satisfaction, tension, and withdrawal.
Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 6, 99 - 110.
Miles, R. H. (1976). Role requirements as sources of organizational stress. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 61, 172 - 179.
19
8/6/2019 Ankita.project on Role Clarity
20/21
Naylor, J. C., Pritchard, R. D., & Ilgen, D. R. (1980). A theory of behavior inorganizations. New York: Academic Press.
Peterson, M. F., Smith, P. B., Akande, A., Ayestaran, S., Bochner, S., Callan, V. (1995).
Role conflict, ambiguity, and overload: A 21-nation study. Academy of Management
Journal, 38, 429 - 445.
Rizzo, J. R., House, R. J., & Lirtzman, S. I. (1970). Role conflict and ambiguity in
complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 15, 150 - 163.
Rogers, D. L., & Molnar, J. (1976). Organizational antecedents of role conflict and
ambiguity in top level administrators. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21, 598 - 610.
Sawyer, J. E. (1992). Goal and process clarity: Specification of multiple constructs of
role ambiguity and a structural equation model of their antecedents and consequences.Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 130 - 142.
Schaubroeck, J., Ganster, D. C., Sime, W., & Editman, D. (1993). A field experiment
testing supervisory role clarification. Personnel Psychology, 46, 1 - 25.
Schuler, R. S., Aldag, R. J., & Brief, A. P. (1977). Role conflict and ambiguity: A scale
analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 20, 111 -128.
Selye, H. (1976). The stress of life. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.
Singh, J. (1998). Striking a balance in boundary-spanning positions: An investigation ofsome unconventional influences of role stressors and job characteristics on job outcomes
of salespeople. Journal of Marketing, 62, 69 - 86.
Singh, J. and Rhoads, G. K. (1991). Boundary role ambiguity in marketing oriented
positions: A multidimensional, multifaceted operationalization. Journal of MarketingResearch, 28, 328 - 338.
Singh, J., Verbeke, W., and Rhoads, G. K. (1996). Do organizational practices matter in
role stress processes? A study of direct and moderating effects for marketing-oriented
boundary spanners. Journal of Marketing, 60, 69 - 91.
Shenkar, O., & Zeira, Y. (1992). Role conflict and role ambiguity of chief executive
officers in international joint ventures. Journal of International Business Studies, 23, 55- 73.
Smith, P. B., Peterson, M. F., & Wang, Z. M. (1995). The manager as mediator ofalternative meanings: A pilot study from China, the U.S. and U.K. Journal of
International Business Studies, XX, 115 - 137.
20
8/6/2019 Ankita.project on Role Clarity
21/21
Van Sell, M., Brief, A. P., & Schuler, R. S. (1981). Role conflict and role ambiguity:
Integration of the literature and directions for future research. Human Relations, 34, 43
- 71.
Witt, A. L. (1992). Exchange ideology as a moderator of the relationships between
importance of participation in decision making and job attitudes. Human Relations, 45,73 - 84.