8/3/2019 Key Singh

1/14

1

An Assessment Of Sources And Moderators Of Stress For Project Managers

Author: Chitra SinghAffiliation Associate member, AIPMAddress 26, Dunbar Rd, Claremont 6010, Western Australia,Phone (08) 9385 3006Email chitra.singh@watercorporation.com.au

1 INTRODUCTION

A certain amount of stress is associated with almost all occupations. Project management, however, canexpose managers to more stress than most with endless list of demands, deadlines, and problems (Dinsmoreet al.1997: 54). Stress is a big occupational health problem (Veysey 2001: 15-17; Fletcher & Jones 1994;Kenny et al. 2000: 397). The cost of unmanaged stress is extraordinarily high for individuals as well asorganisations (Weiskkott 2001:88; Beder 2001: 44; Veysey 2001: 15-17; Whetten & Cameron 1991:100;Fletcher & Jones 1994; Kenny et al. 2000: 397). Stress in employees costs organisations not only throughdirect absence but also through lost time because of indirect absence due to reduced productivity and

turnover (Weiskkott 2001:88; Beder 2001: 44; Veysey 2001: 15-17; Whetten & Cameron 1991:100; Fletcher& Jones 1994; Kenny et al. 2000: 397).

A better understanding of sources of stress can help to manage problems of stress at individual as well asorganisation level.

This study was conducted to find the answers to the following questions:

What are the common sources of stress for project managers? Why, under similar situations, are some project managers more stressed than others?

2 STUDY METHODOLOGY

The literature was reviewed to determine the existing body of knowledge regarding sources of stress ingeneral and construction project management in particular.

The data for the study was gathered by structured interviews conducted with total seventeen projectmanagers from private and public types of client organisations involved with the construction industry. Eightproject managers were from a public organisation and nine from a private organisation. A qualitativeapproach was adopted which enabled the researcher to capture the subjective nature of the human behaviourand study reality from inside. It facilitated in getting the respondents comments on the existing body of knowledge in addition to their own initial responses.

3 LITERATURE REVIEW

A literature review on the subject of 'stress' in the areas of project management, construction management,business management and psychology was conducted. It was found that in the literature on projectmanagement, cursory references are made to sources of stress and identification of stress situations. It lacksexplanation of questions like why one person feels stress in a particular situation whereas another doesn't.The literature in other areas provided an understanding to what is stress, what are the occupational sources of stress and what factors act as moderators that determine how these sources of stress impact a person. Theterm stressor is used extensively in the literature. Stressors are defined as "Events or circumstances that weperceive as threatening or harmful, thereby producing feelings of tension." (Sarafino 1994: 74).

About 75 stressors, and 22 moderators were compiled from all the literature reviewed. They are discussedlater in section 4.

8/3/2019 Key Singh

2/14

2

What is stress?

There are three views to explain stress. The first view considers stress as the property of the environment andis described as a stimulus in a person as a consequence of the environment (Sarafino 1994: 74; Mathews etal. 2000: 162). The stressors could be catastrophic events such as drought or floods, major life events such asloss of spouse and chronic circumstances such as the nature of the job.

The second view perceives stress as the persons response to a stressor and is within a person (Quinn et al.1996: 272, Sarafino, 1994 #20: 74, Mathews, 2000 #18: 162). The response in the person could bepsychological, physiological and behavioural (Sarafino 1994: 74, Sutherland, 2000 #21: 47). For example if a person is stressed at the time of giving a speech, the physiological component consists of pounding of heart, dry mouth, tight stomach, perspiration and the psychological component is thoughts and emotions likewhen a person feels nervous (Sarafino 1994:74)

The third view explains stress as a process. According to this definition, stress is the condition in a personthat results when we perceive a discrepancy between the demands and availability of the amount of our

biological, psychological and social (biopsychosocial) resources that the stressors in the situation appear torequire to cope (Sarafino 1994: 74; Sutherland & Cooper 2000: 56; Fletcher & Jones 1994).]. For example,biopsychosocial resources required by an individual when he/ she is injured in an accident (Sarafino 1994:74).

Thus, the personal meaning of the situation determines the emotional experience and tendencies towardsaction (Lazarus 1991). Specifically, stress reactions depend on the person's appraisals of environmentaldemands, and of their own competence in coping with those demands. A stressor is only stressful to theindividual if it is appraised as likely to tax or exceed the person's coping skills (Lazarus & Folkman 1984).Hence, stress is not only a property of external stimuli, because appraisals of stimuli will vary across peopleand contexts (Mathews et al. 2000). Likewise, stress is not simply a response, because it reflects a dynamicinteraction between the person and environmental pressures (Mathews et al. 2000: 162). This view does not

imply that emotion is necessarily the result of prolonged, conscious deliberation (Mathews et al. 2000: 162).It is likely that at least some of the appraisal processes involved are unconscious, and there may be severaldistinct processing systems involved. (Mathews et al. 2000: 162).

4 THE STUDY

Interview results on sources of Stress in Project Management

When project managers were asked if they had ever experienced work- related stress, all of them answered inthe affirmative.

When asked what did they think are the sources of stress in project management, the number of sourcesidentified by the respondents were in the range of 4-15 against 75 identified in the reviewed literature. Later,when suggesting the sources from the list compiled from the literature review, the respondents gave theircomments based on their first hand experiences, or experiences of others which were in their knowledge. Itappeared that most of the respondents were not consciously aware of the factors contributing to stress. Theresults of the interviews were entered into a spreadsheet for analysis. Table 1 presents the list of stressorscompiled from literature review and the interview responses against each stressor.

Categories of stressors in project management

Fletcher and Jones (1994:594) have suggested work-factors that lead to stress. It was found that most of thestressors identified through literature review could be grouped within the work-factors suggested by theseauthors. However, some of the stressor identified were related to project environment and project managersskills and experience which couldnt be grouped within these work-factors. Also, the analysis revealed that

8/3/2019 Key Singh

3/14

3

in the context of project management, some of these factors could be further grouped in broader areas. Thus,all the identified stressors were grouped in the following categories:

Workload Project Environment Time Pressure Project Manager's role factors

Job discretion/ autonomy Work Conditions Responsibility Job dissatisfaction Finance/ resources

Project organisation factors Role conflict / ambiguity Change

Interpersonal demands Organisational Lack of experience/ skills

Table 1: Responses regarding sources of stressSources of Stress Response in

%Area Factors Stressors Public Privat

eAttempting to do too much 100 100Having innumerable roles 75 67Risks associated with project management 75 67

Technological change 88 44Necessity for perfection 75 67Having to manage innumerable diverse aspects likeengineering, procurement, construction, finance, cost,time, quality

75 56

Necessity to keep up with information explosion,technological breakthrough

25 56

Attempt to get back on track due to change in schedule. 100 44

Workload

Multiple shifts in project execution 63 33

100 56100 56100 56100 56

ProjectEnvironment

Having to manage inflexible constraints in:CustomerEnvironmentPolitical issues such as government rulingSocial issuesTechnological 100 56

Deadlines 100 56Sudden panics of work 100 67Irregular workload 75 44Unsocial work hours 75 44

Time Pressure Project

Attempt to catch-up the delay. 100 56Cutting down the project resources but expected todeliver the project on schedule

100 56

Project manager working with ill-defined authority 100 22

Inability to get right people in project team 88 78

ProjectManager's rolefactors

Job discretion/ autonomy

Arbitrary work rules 88 44

8/3/2019 Key Singh

4/14

4

Table 1: Responses regarding sources of stressSources of Stress Response in

%Area Factors Stressors Public Privat

eInsufficient control over various features of job such aswork procedures.

88 22

Office policies 88 11Decision-making latitude regarding assigned tasks 100 33Limited authority over project resources 75 56Restriction of choices like project staffing 75 33Having to share personnel with other projects 63 33Conflict is likely to result from the decision 100 44Unpleasant working conditions 88 11Work ConditionsIn the physical environment there is high level of noise,temperature, humidity, illumination

75 56

Responsibility without authority 88 66Full responsibility of desired results with no scapegoat

in case of failure

75 44

88 7888 6788 56

Project manager feels pressure if the circumstances of making decision constitute:

not enough time to make decisionlack of relevant informationdecision is importantdecision is time-bound 88 33

Responsibility

Responsibility for the action of team members 75 44Financial insecurity 75 78Not getting well-deserved promotion 75 67Change in responsibility without consultation orexplanation

88 66

Relocation 75 67Long hours due to over-utilisation 100 44Self paid or salaried 63 56Taken for granted 75 44Undervalued 63 56Inadequate advancement like no career prospects 63 56Inadequate recognition 63 33No opportunity to learn 50 33

ProjectManager's rolefactors

Job dissatisfaction

Capabilities not fully utilised 38 22Lack of resources 88 0Cost constraints 75 0

Finance/ resources

Increased costs and competition 38 0Project team members responsible to different peoplefor different things

88 89Role conflict/ ambiguity

Staff working for project manager and departmentmanager at the same time.

75 67

Projectorganisation

Change Change in the project organisation structure duringproject life cycle

88 67

Dependency on:superiors 88 66subordinates 88 66peers 88 66

Having to deal with suppliers, subcontractor, internaland external customer, government

100 67

Task & people oriented approach simultaneously 63 67

Interpersonaldemands

The superior is :

8/3/2019 Key Singh

5/14

5

Table 1: Responses regarding sources of stressSources of Stress Response in

%Area Factors Stressors Public Privat

eabrasive 100 89overcritical 100 89insensitive to others needs 100 78

The peers are:abrasive 100 67overcritical 100 67insensitive to others' needs 100 67

Having to deal with variety of support personne l 25 44Time away from home 100 67Micro management for top ranks 75 67Restructuring and downsizing 100 78Rapid discontinuous change 50 89Internal and external business processes 75 56

Organisational

High level of inter-group conflict in the organisationcauses pressure.

100 56

No consistent set of procedures and techniques tomanage the work

100 56

Inability to see early signs of forthcoming issues 100 67

Lack of experience/ skills

Misinterpretation of the signs of issues 88 56

8/3/2019 Key Singh

6/14

6

Most common stressors identified by respondents in both types of organisations

The five most commonly identified sources of stress by project managers in both types of organisations areas shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Five most commonly identified sources of stressResponse in %StressorsPublic Private

Attempting to do too much 100 100Restructuring and downsizing in organisation 100 78Sudden panics of work 100 67Inability to see early signs of forthcoming issues 100 67Time away from home 100 67

All interviewed project managers identified excessive workload as a stressor. One respondent explained it bydrawing a graph showing that the performance of a project manager improves as the work increases to amaximum point after which the slightest increase in work can cause a steep drop in the performance because

projects are target driven. This could be because work overload causes a feeling of being burnt-out leading tostress (Sutherland & Cooper 2000; Smith & Lipsedge 1995). The role overload was also identified as astressor. As one respondent from the private organisation put it, "Having to deal with issues like humanresources, industrial relations, technical issues, government approvals, uncooperative suppliers and corporatemanagement can lead to stress".

Restructuring and downsizing is a common condition in modern organisations leading to stress (Meredith &Mantel 1995; Smith & Lipsedge 1995).

Fletcher & Jones (1994) are of the opinion that, much work in bursts and irregular workload acts as stressorsbecause it brings sudden panic of work. Interestingly one respondent said that some people thrive in theseworking conditions.

The majority of the respondents said that inability to see early signs of issues might eventually lead tostressful situations. (Dobson 2001) supports this view when he says that if the project manager isinexperienced, the project manager may find himself or herself in panic because he/she might miss the earlysigns of the forthcoming issues or misinterpret them with the result that the issue may worsen.

One respondent stated that time away from home is particularly hard in the case of project managers withyoung families.

Comparison of most common stressors identified by respondents in both types of organisations

It was noted that other than as listed in Table 2, generally the most commonly identified sources of stressamong project managers of the two types of organisations were different. The results are shown in Tables 3and 4. In each table, the most common stressors listed for that type of organisation are shown in bold, and thecomparative figures for the other type of organisation in italics.

Table 3: Most commonly identified sources of stress (public organisation)Response in %Stressors

Public PrivateDeadlines 100 56 Attempt to catch-up delay. 100 56 Project manager working with ill-defined authority 100 22Decision-making latitude regarding assigned tasks 100 33Conflict is likely to result from the decision 100 44Cutting down the project resources but expected to deliver theproject on schedule

100 56

8/3/2019 Key Singh

7/14

7

Table 3: Most commonly identified sources of stress (public organisation)Response in %StressorsPublic Private

Having to deal with social, environmental, political andtechnological issues

100 56

High level of inter- group conflict in organisation 100 56

Long hours due to over-utilisation 100 44No consistent set of procedures and techniques to manage thework

100 56

Superior and peer are overcritical, abrasive and insensitive toothers needs

100 67-69

Table 4: Most commonly identified sources of stress (private organisation)Response in %StressorsPublic Private

Project team members responsible to different people for differentthings88

89Rapid discontinuous change 50 89Inability to get right people in project team 88 78Not enough time to make decision 88 78Financial insecurity 75 78lack of relevant information 88 67Change in the project organisation structure during project lifecycle

88 67

Risks associated with project management 75 67Necessity for perfection 75 67Staffs working for project manager and department manager at thesame time.

75 67

Micro-management for top ranks 75 67Relocation 75 67Well-deserved promotion 75 67Task & people oriented approach simultaneously 63 67

From Tables 3 and 4 it is evident that more project managers from public organisation identified the sourcesof stress than their counter parts in private. Also that generally only 22-56% of the respondents from privateorganisation identified the sources of stress that were most commonly identified by the project managersfrom public type of organisation.

Further, generally a very high percentage of project managers from public organisation identified the sourcesof stress that were most commonly identified by the project managers from private organisation.

It was observed that the majority of the stressors identified by respondents from public organisation wereregarding constraints in executing the project and issues regarding work related conflict. As one respondentpointed out that gaining all the necessary approvals relating to project funding, environment, public andgovernment can become stressful because the processes involved are rigid. Another respondent from thesame type of organisation said that scope changes, contractual problems, variations, forecasting, post- andpre-award contract negotiation and getting necessary approvals when all put together can become stressful.

In comparison, the commonly identified stressors by respondents from private organisation were related to arange of factors. These stressors were mainly related to issues regarding project organisation, their perceived

job dissatisfaction, competing project factors such as time versus quality and the associated risks. Onerespondent said that having to deal with people not having the appropriate skills could be stressful. Anothersaid that because the company is focused on profit and the project manager is focused on the success of the

8/3/2019 Key Singh

8/14

8

project, at times it could cause conflict with the top management, which can be stressful. Six out of nineproject managers in the private organisation said that the interface with people over whom there is no control(e.g. of different companies, corporate management, staff, government agency etc) is a source of stress. Onerespondent said that relocation could be stressful if its not expected.

The majority of the respondents identified that not getting well-deserved promotion, being undervalued andreceiving inadequate advancement and recognition are stressors. Some of the respondents said that thesefactors could be frustrating but are not stressors. One respondent said that inadequate advancement andrecognition could be a stressor for particularly young people. Two schools of thought were found in theliterature on stressors related to job satisfaction. Sales (1971) states that the degree of perceived work satisfaction can contribute significantly to stress in the work place, whereas Theorell (1971) states that thereis no consistent association between measures of job satisfaction and the incidences of stress-related heartdisease.

The reason for less recognition of work-related stressors among respondents from private organisation couldbe because, as one participant put it, Because of the past hard experiences, the organisation has now put in avery structured project management system to ensure that there is front end planning with robustengineering, cost estimates and a project schedule in place". Another added that in their organisation, sincerobust project management procedure are in place, stress levels are down because it ensures sound projectdefinition and thorough front-end planning.

Regarding working long hours, two respondents were of the opinion that it is a symptom of stress rather thana stressor.

Personality Traits as Moderators to stress

When asked if in their opinion experience of stress is affected by a person's personality,16 of a total of 17respondents replied in the affirmative. The respondent who disagreed said that instead of the personality trait,it is the self-esteem and mental health of a person that makes the difference.

Table 5 shows all the identified personality traits from reviewed literature that make a person susceptible tostress and corresponding response rate.

Table 5: Identified personality traits that make a person susceptible to stressResponse in %Personality traits making susceptible to stressPublic Private

Low self-confidence/ self-esteem/ assertiveness 100 100High defensiveness 100 78High need for power 88 33Aggressiveness, strong and sudden hostility 88 44Impatience and irritable 88 89High need for affiliation 88 67Task-oriented attitude 63 22Responding to time pressures 63 44Competitive drive 63 78Live around goals, objectives, deadlines 50 56High need of achievement 50 67Low self-disclosure 50 78Low display of feelings 50 78Low emotional involvement 13 33

8/3/2019 Key Singh

9/14

9

Table 6 shows the most commonly identified personality traits by project managers from both types of organisations that make a person susceptible to stress.

Table 6: The five most commonly identified personality traits that make a personsusceptible to stress

Response in %Personality traits making susceptible to stressPublic Private

Low self confidence/ self esteem/ assertiveness 100 100High defensiveness 100 78Impatience and irritable 88 89High need for affiliation 88 67Competitive drive 63 78

It was noted that 88% of respondents from public type of organisation identifiedhigh need for power, aggressiveness, strong and sudden hostility as personality trait that may make a personmore susceptible to stress. In contrast, only 33 to 44% respondents from private type of organisationidentified these factors.

In contrast, 78% of respondents from private type of organisation identified low self-disclosure and lowdisplay of feelings as personality factors that may make a person more susceptible to stress whereas only50% of their counterpart from public type of organisation identified these factors.

Table 7 shows all the identified personality traits from the literature review that make a person resilient tostress with corresponding response rate. It is worth noting that majority of the respondents identified thesefactors.

Table 7: Responses regarding personality traits making a person resilient to stressResponse in %Personality traits making resilient to stress

Public PrivateAbility to adapt in situations of uncertainty and ambiguity. 100 89

Calm & easygoing 100 89High internal control instead of feeling powerless 100 89Strong personal commitment & involvement in what one choosesto do.

88 89

Viewing change as a challenge instead of as a threat to securityand comfort.

88 89

It was observed that in addition to the factors listed in Table 5 & Table 7, about 70% of the respondents inboth types of organisations mentioned experience as a factor which could make a person more susceptibleor resilient to stress.

Family and Social conditions as Moderators to stress

When asked if, in their opinion, family and social conditions impact stress, all the respondents replied in theaffirmative. One respondent went to the extent that he felt that stress is not driven by the job but by thefamily conditions. Another participant said, " Any family issue, whether its a fight, break-up or death, preysin people's mind to the extent that work suffers".

Table 8 shows the factors related to family conditions that act as moderators to stress with the response rate.

Table 8: Responses regarding family conditions as moderators to stress

8/3/2019 Key Singh

10/14

10

Response in %Family conditions as moderators to stressPublic Private

Pressure when demands of work and family get mixed. 100 100Family can be source of stress when there is:

Interpersonal conflict with other family member. 100 100Sickness in the family 100 100

Disability in the family 100 100Death in the family. 100 100Financial issues 38 44

Support when there is stable family life 50 67

It is interesting to note that whereas the majority of the respondents concurred on certain family conditionsthat may compound the work-related stress, contradictory views were observed on the issue of supportprovided by the family during stress conditions. One participant said, "If you have a major problem at work,you may get limited relief at home, but I don't think you have a cure". Alternatively another participant said,"family and social factors are the drivers for success in business and work. We need family to live a happylife".

Sixteen out of seventeen interviewed respondents stated that our social conditions provide support when wefeel stress. This is consistent with Cohen (1984) who says that social resources can provide emotionalsupport boosting self-esteem and sense of belonging. Social support provides a sense of acceptance andworthiness that leads to a belief of personal control (Avison & Gotlib 1994: 158-159). Interestingly, onlyone participant said that social conditions could impact on the level of stress in a negative way: "I don't think social conditions help with work related stress; it may make it worse".

5 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Respondents from public organisation identified more sources of stress than their counterparts from private.

The most common stressors identified by the respondents from both types of organisations were attemptingto do too much, restructuring and downsizing in organisation, sudden panics of work, inability to see earlysigns of forthcoming issues, and time away from home.

Respondents from public organisation most commonly (100%) identified stressors related to lack of jobdiscretion and autonomy, time pressure due to deadlines, management of constraints due to inflexible social,environmental, political and technological issues and interpersonal demands from superiors and peers.However, less than 56% of the project managers from the private organisation identified these as stressors.

Respondents from private organisation most commonly (67 - 89%) identified stressors related to rapiddiscontinuous change, project organisational change, interpersonal demands due to team members

responsible to different people for different things, decision making with lack of information and time and job dissatisfaction due to financial insecurity, relocation or not getting well deserved promotion. A similarrange of respondents from public organisation identified these factors as stressors.

All project managers from both types of organisations stated that the occupational stress is related to anindividual's personality as well as family and social conditions.

Further, all project managers interviewed said that low self-confidence, self-esteem and assertiveness make aperson more susceptible to stress. 88% of project managers from public type of organisation and a negligiblenumber from the private type said that high need for power, aggressiveness and high need for affiliationmake a person more vulnerable to stress.

It was further noted that majority of the respondents in both types of organisations identified experience asa potential source of stress as well as moderator to stress.

8/3/2019 Key Singh

11/14

11

Additionally, all respondents from both types of organisations said that an ability to adapt in situations of uncertainty and ambiguity, a calm and easygoing disposition, and high internal control make a personresilient to stress. In their view, attitudes such as strong personal commitment and involvement in what wedo and not feeling threatened by changes make us resistant to stress. All the project managers identifiedsituations as stressful where demands of work and family become competing. Also in relation to family,interpersonal conflict, sickness, disability, and death were acknowledged to be major sources of stress. Mostof the project managers believe that friends and associations with groups and clubs act as a buffer to stress.

Contrary to the project managers from the public organisations, the majority of their counterparts from theprivate organisation believe that a stable family life provides support when in stress.

Fletcher and Jones (1994: 594) proposed a model demonstrating the relationship between the occupationalstressors, personality an domestic background leading to stress symptoms and ultimately to diseased. Basedon the literature review and this study, for project managers, an integrated view of various factors that lead tostress condition is depicted in figure 1.

8/3/2019 Key Singh

12/14

12

Figure 1: An integrated view of various factors leading to stress condition in Project Managers

6. REFERENCES

Adam, J. R. & Kirchof, N. S. 1997, 'Conflict management for project managers', in Principles fo project management , ed. Pennypacker, J. S., Project managment Institute, Sylva, USA.

Stressors

Issues related to: Workload

Project environment Time pressure Project managers role factors

Job discretion/ autonomy Work conditions Responsibility Job dissatisfaction Finance/ resources

Project organisation Role conflict/ ambiguity Change

Interpersonal demands Organisational Lack of experience/skills

Job related moderators

Experience

Stress symptoms

Self related moderators

Personality Family and social

support/ constraints

8/3/2019 Key Singh

13/14

13

Antonovski, A. (ed.) 1987, Unraveling the mystery of health: How people manage stress and stay well ,Plenum Press, New York.

Avison, W. R. & Gotlib, I. H. (eds.) 1994, Stress and mental health: contemporary issues and prospects for the future , Plenum Press, New York.

Baum, A. 1990, 'Stress, intrusive imagery and chronic distress', in Health Psychology: Biopsychosicial Interaction , ed. Sarafino, E. P., John Wiley and Sons, New York, p. 74.

Beder, S. 2001, 'Working long hours', The magazine of Institution of Australia: Engineers Australia, Civil Edition, vol. 73, no. 3.

Brumagim, A. L. 2000, 'An emprical investigation of the sources of major project problems: A projectmanager's perspective', in Project management research at the turn of the millennium , Projectmanagement institute, inc., Paris.

Byrne, D. G. 2000, 'The frustration of success: Type A behaviour, occupational stress and cardiovasculardisease', in Stress and Health: Research and clinical application , eds. Kenny, D. t., Carlson, J. G.,Mcguigan, F. J. & Sheppard, J. L., Harwood academic publisher, Amsterdam.

Cleland, D. I. & King, W. R. 1988, Project Management Handbook, 2nd edn, Van Nostrand Reinhold, NewYork.

Cohen, S. & Mackay, G. (eds.) 1984, Social support, stress and the buffering hypothesis: A theoretical analysis , Plenum Press, New York.

Cottington, E. M., Mathews, K. A., Talbot, E. & Kulle, L. H. 1986, 'Occupatinal stress, suppressed anger andhypertension', in Health Psychology: Biopsychosociol Interactions , 2nd edn, ed. Sarafino, E. P., JohnWiley & Sons, New York, p. 89.

Coyne, J. C. & Holroyd, K. 1982, 'Stress, coping and illness: A transactional perspective', in Health Psychology: Biopsychosicial Interaction , ed. Sarafino, E. P., John Wiley & Sons, New York, p. 74.

Davidson, J. 2001, 'Reducing stress through mediation', The National Public Accountant, Washington, vol.46, no. 2, pp. 42-43.

Dinsmore, P. C., Martin, M. D. & Huettel, G. T. 1997, Principles of Project Management , ProjectManagement Institute, USA.

Dobson, M. S. 2001, Project management for the technical professional , Project Management Instititue,Pennsylvania.

Fletcher, B. C. & Jones, F. 1994, 'Stress at work', in Hunter Diseases of Occupations , 8th edn, eds. Raffle, P.A. B., Adams, P. H., Baxter, P. J. & Lee, W. R., Edward Arnold Publisher, London.

Frame, J. D. 1995, Managing projects in organistions: How to make the best use of time, techniques and people , Jossey- Bass Publishers, San Francisco.

Gulan, B. 1999, Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling and Controlling .Hamlin, S. 1993, How to talk so people listen: What works, what doesn't and why , Harper Collins Publishers,Glasgow.

Harrison, F. L. 1993, Advanced project management, 3rd edn, Gower Publishing Company Lts, Aldershot.Haynes, S. G., Feinleib, M. & Kannel, W. 1980, 'The relationship of psychological factors to coronary heart

disease in the Framingham study: III. Eight year incidence of CHD.', in Stress and Health: Research and clinical application , eds. Kenny, D. t., Carlson, J. G., Mcguigan, F. J. & Sheppard, J. L., Harwoodacademic publisher, Amsterdam, p. 471.

Haynes, S. G., Feinleib, M., Levine, S., Scotch, N. & Kannel, W. B. 1978, 'The relationship at psychosocialfactors to cotonary heart disease: II Prevalence of coronary heart disease.', in Stress and Health: Research and clinical application , eds. Kenny, D. t., Carlson, J. G., Mcguigan, F. J. & Sheppard, J.L., Harwood academic publisher, Amsterdam, p. 417.

Hobfoll, S. E. 1989, 'Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualising stress', in Health

Psychology: Biopsychosicial Interaction , ed. Sarafino, E. P., John Wiley and Sons, New York, p. 74.Holahan, C. J. 1994, 'Life stressors and mental health', in Stress and mental health: contemporary issues and prospects for the future , eds. Avison, W. R. & Gotlib, I. H., Plenum Press, New York, p. 213.

Kenny, D. T., Carlson, J. G., Mcguigan, F. J. & Sheppard, J. L. (eds.) 2000, Stress and Health: Research and clinical application , Harwood academic publisher, Amsterdam.

Kerzner, H. 1992, Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling and Controlling, 3rdedn, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, New York.

Kobasa, S. C. 1982, 'Commitment and coping in stress resistance among lawyers', in Stress and mental health: contemporary issues and prospects for the future , eds. Avinson, W. R. & Gotlib, I. H., PlenumPress, New York, p. 216.

Kobasa, S. C., Maddi, S. R. & Kahn, S. 1982, 'Hardiness and health', in Stress and mental health: contemporary issues and prospects for the future , eds. Avinson, W. R. & Gotlib, I. H., Plenum Press,New York, p. 216.

Langford, D., Hancock, M. R., Fellows, R. & Gale, A. W. 1997, Human resources management in consruction , Longman Group Ltd, Edinburgh Gate, U.K.

8/3/2019 Key Singh

14/14

14

Lazarus, R. S. 1991, 'Emotion and adaption', in Human peformance: Cognition, stress and individula differences , eds. Mathews, G., Davies, D. R., Westerman, S. J. & Stammers, R. B., PsychologyPress, Philadelphia, USA, p. 169.

Lewis, J. P. 1995, Project planning, scheduling and control: A hands- on guide to bringing projects on time and on budget , McGraw- Hill, USA.

Mackay, C. & Cox, T. 1978, 'Stress at work', in Health Psychology: Biopsychosociol Interactions , ed.Sarafino, E. P., John Wiley & Sons, New York, p. 89.

Magnus, K., Matroos, A. W. & Strackel, J. 1983, 'The self employed and the self driven: Two coronary pronesub- populations from the Zeist study', in Stress and Health: Research and clinical application , eds.Kenny, D. T., Carlson, J. G., Mcguigan, F. J. & Sheppard, J. L., Harwood academic publisher,Amsterdam, p. 417.

Mathews, G., Davies, D. R., Westerman, S. J. & Stammers, R. B. 2000, Human peformance: Cognition,stress and individula differences , Psychology Press, Philadelphia, USA.

Mathews, J. 1996, Health and safety at work, 2nd edn, Pluto Press Australia Ltd, New South Wales.Menaghan, E. G. (ed.) 1994, The Daily Grind Work Stressors, Family Pattterns and Intergenerational

Outcomes , Plenum Press, New York.Meredith, J. R. & Mantel, S. J. 1995, Project Management: A Managerial Approach , John Wiley & Sons,

Inc., Brisbane.Miller, J. S. C., Kohn, M. L. & Miller, K. A. (eds.) 1979, Women and work: thw psychological effects of

occupational conditions , Plenum Press, New York.Mulenberg, G. M. 2000, 'Report of research examining the characteristics of mangers of complex

contemporary projects in the national aeronautics and space administration', in Project management research at the turn of the millennium , Project management institute, inc., Paris.

PMI 1996, Project Management Body of Knowledge , Project Management Institute, USA.Quick, J. C. & Quick.J.D. 1984, 'Organisational stress and perceived management', in Health Psychology:

Biopsychosociol Interactions , 2nd edn, ed. Sarafino, E. P., John Wiley & Sons, New York, p. 89.Quinn, R. E., Faerman, S. R., Thompson, M. P. & McGrath, M. R. 1996, Becoming a Master Manager, 2nd

edn, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.Rhodewalt, F., Hays, R. B., Chemers, M. M. & Wyscocki, J. (eds.) 1984, Type A behaviour, perceived stress,

and illness: A person-situation analysis , Plenum Press, New York.Sales, S. M. & House, J. 1971, 'Job dissatisfaction as a possible risk factor in coronary heart disease', in

Stress and Health: Research and clinical application , eds. Kenny, D. T., Carlson, J. G., Mcguigan, F.J. & Sheppard, J. L., Harwood academic publisher, Amsterdam.

Sarafino, E. P. 1994, Health Psychology: Biopsychosicial Interaction, 2nd edn, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., NewYork.Scheier, M. F., Weitraub, J. K. & Carver, C. S. (eds.) 1986, Coping with stress: Divergent strategies of

optimists and pessimists. , Plenum Press, New York.Shabi, R. 2001, 'Stressed up, nowhere to go?', Financial Management, London , no. March, p. 42.Smith, G. & Lipsedge, M. S. 1995, 'Stress, alcohol, and drug abuse', in Fitness for work , eds. Cox, R. A. F.,

Edwards, F. C. & McCallum, R. I., Oxford university press, Oxford.Suls, J. G., Gastrof, J. W. & Witenberg, S. H. (eds.) 1979, Life events, psychological distress and type A

coronary- prone behaviour pattern , Plenum Press, New York.Sutherland, V. J. & Cooper, C. L. 2000, Strategic stress management: an organisational approach ,

Macmillan, Basingstoke.Theorell, T. & Rahe, R. H. 1971, 'Psychosocial factors and myocardial infarction: I An in-patient study in

Sweden', in Stress and Health: Research and clinical application , eds. Kenny, D. T., Carlson, J. G.,

Mcguigan, F. J. & Sheppard, J. L., Harwood academic publisher, Amsterdam, p. 420.Turner, J. R. 1999, The handbook of project based management, 2nd edn, McGraw Hill, Birkshire, England.Verma, V. K. 1995, The human aspect of project management: Organising projects for success , Project

Management Institue, Pennsylvania, USA.Veysey, S. 2001, 'Risk managers urged to face stress', Business Insurance, Chicago, vol. 35, no. 17, pp. 15-

16.Voydanoff, P. & Donnelly, B. W. (eds.) 1989, Economic Distress and mental health: the tole of family coping

resources and behaviours , Plenum Press, New York.Weiskkott, G. N. 2001, 'Managing Stress', Progressive Grocer, NewYork, vol. 80, no. 3, p. 88.Wheaton, B. (ed.) 1994, Sampling the stress universe , Plenum Press, New York.Whetten, D. A. & Cameron, K. S. 1991, Developing Management Skills, 2nd edn, Harper Collin Publishers

Inc., NewYork.