1
CHAPTER-1
INTRODUCTION, CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
AND REVIEW OF LITERATURE
“Stress is nothing more than a socially acceptable form of mental
illness,” was once observed by Richard Carlson. This distinctly brings to
light the understated appalling truth flowing as an undercurrent all
through the economic circuits. Men ostensibly for making a living have
actually forgotten how to live. Each human today seems to be living in an
abysmally ignorant state, striding blindly towards making it big in life.
Every effort, every penny, every miniscule second of time is seen in
terms of investment and is very unsurprisingly weighed against the
returns it is likely to yield before all else. Any minute “wasted” is
corroborated with money lost. An individual’s personal life, relations,
leisure pursuits and all the like seem to have taken a backseat while the
mad rush towards a bigger brighter future is in the fore. All this has
resulted in money rich-time poor individuals. This in the long run is a
penny wise pound foolish situation, because the riches and the accolades
actually come at the cost of the individual’s physical and psychological
well-being, as is, ironically, also vouched by the common phrase ‘there
are no free lunches in the corporate world’.
2
Today, corporate world is no more a ‘nine to five’ scene. It has
registered radical transformations over the past years accredited to
globalization, liberalization, greater freedom to private sector,
technological revolution especially extensive use of computers and
enormous ‘gadgetization’ in general. Product of the aforesaid is increased
and erratic work hours, heightened expectations from workforce, rigid
deadlines and work targets, pressing work environments, constant
demands so on and so forth. This, in turn, takes a toll on the executives
and as a result ‘This job is killing me’ has become a common phrase at
workplace. Sadly so, this is not just an expression, citing data from the
World Health Organization; heart disease is projected to account for 35%
of deaths among India’s working age population between 2000 and 2030
as compared to about 12% in the United States, 22% in China and 25% in
Russia. A growing body of evidence also suggests that job stress is
associated with a wide variety of physical ailments, including
cardiovascular disease, musculoskeletal disorders and psychological
illness. ‘We live longer than our forefathers; but we suffer more from a
thousand artificial anxieties and cares. They fatigued only the muscles,
we exhaust the finer strength of the nerves’, wise saying by Edward
George Bulwer-Lytton, every bit of which is true to the core.
3
Job stress, undoubtedly, is a key driver of health care costs but, the
true price tag is far greater. Employee productivity and well-being is
compromised by stress in numerous ways: absenteeism; litigation in
workers compensation system and employer-employee relations;
grievances; accidents due to narrowing of attention and preoccupation;
errors of judgment and action due to concern about troublesome issues;
conflict and interpersonal problems arising from diverse work-force and
increased use of teams in our increasingly service-based economy;
violence caused by interpersonal challenges and conflicts, combined with
the fact that many people are operating just below their “boiling point”
creates a potentially volatile situation; resistance to change as humans are
intrinsically “hardwired” to revert to familiar routines and behaviour
patterns when stressed; loss of intellectual capital, i.e., lack of
appreciation of combined knowledge, know-how, proprietary expertise,
and wisdom of a work-force due to executives merely trying to survive in
stressful situations and not caring about excellence and innovation; and
categorically customer service problems. Having stressed-out and
depleted employees, serve the public, virtually guarantees alienated
customers. This can have very serious implications in the service
industry, especially in an essentially customer-oriented field such as
banking.
4
Competitive edge in the 21st century economy can be attained
essentially depending upon the human capital in an organization.
Corporate survival in the present knowledge and information age is fail-
safe largely if there is periodic measurement of real value and assessment
of total performance of human capital, followed by bona fide efforts to
retain and maintain quality human capital. Work-force needs to be
qualified, seasoned, sound mentally and physically, should take initiative,
bear a team spirit, etc. But, most importantly it is the attitude and the
enthusiasm that counts, i.e., employee morale takes the center stage.
Executives high on morale will continue to work with an ardent zeal
towards organizational goal attainment, will infuse a positive vibe into
the organization, will be co-operative and willing to work in teams, will
positively contribute to the organization’s competence and knowledge
pool and would be bliss for the customers. Roots go deeper still; the level
of morale borne by an employee will further depend upon various
tangible and intangible factors associated with one’s job. Therefore, it
assumes utmost importance that definite tickers for executives’
motivation and morale are known with certainty. This would facilitate
reaching a pragmatic equation between employer and employee ensuring
win-win situation for both wherein organizations get to possess
competent work-force and employees too feel well provided for and
cherished, bear a high morale, have a sense of belongingness and
involvement.
5
Job involvement, indeed, has earned colossal worth thanks to its
associated by-products such as improved performance levels, elevated
productivity levels, greater profitability, advanced customer-focus, safety,
lower absenteeism, higher retention levels and overall furtherance of
organization's interests, to name a few. The extent to which an executive
is involved or alienated from one’s job has serious consequences not just
for the individual himself but for the whole organization in entirety.
Unquestionably, the aforementioned highlights the relevance of job
involvement especially in the consumer centered domain such as banking.
This, consequently, evokes the interest of organizations, executives and
behavioural scientists alike.
In a customer sovereign economy such as ours, organizations have
begun to realize that the stakes being high an effective way to affect the
firm's stock price is by making use of leverage of intellectual assets
especially human resource. Job stress among executives has virtually
achieved the status of epidemic and has begun to be viewed as an
antecedent for all bad that happens in the organization. It more often than
not has an influence on employees’ morale and other psychological
aspects, job involvement being one. All the three variables, viz. job stress,
employee morale and job involvement have been discussed further one
after another.
6
JOB STRESS
Job stress is the strain, anxiety or the pressures that an individual
faces at workplace while coping with the incessant and numerous
demands or expectations put before him. Situation worsens when the
capabilities fall short of the expectations or demands. Job stress is the
product of mismatch between potential of an individual and the job
demands made upon him; it is manifested in the form of harmful physical
and mental reaction. It could also be a result of poor match between
resources and requirements of an individual at work. Job stress results
from the interaction of the worker and the conditions of work. Each
employee will react differently to a given job condition depending upon
one’s personality and coping skills. Although the importance of
individual differences cannot be ignored but certain working conditions
are stressful to most people, viz. increase in work intensity, working at
high speeds, working against tight deadlines, working very long hours,
layoffs, harassment, a person's status in the workplace and finally greater
competition and higher expectations from employees emanating from the
productivity boon attributable to computer and communications
revolutions.
Job stress is widely prevalent, omnipresent and a costly issue.
Every third executive at workplace reports a high level of stress and every
fourth employee views his job as the principal cause of stress in his life.
7
Job stress is also a costly problem in today's workplace as evidence
suggests that stress is the major cause of turnover in organizations. Job
stress is omnipresent because it is very much a reality for those who have
very little influence to those who make major decisions for the
organization.
Job stress-associated disorders cover an extensive range of
conditions, ranging from psychological disorders; depression, anxiety,
etc. emotional strain; dissatisfaction, fatigue, tension, etc. maladaptive
behaviours; aggression, substance abuse, etc. and cognitive impairment;
concentration and memory problems. In turn, these conditions may bring
about poor work performance, injury and various biological reactions that
may lead ultimately to compromised health or in extreme cases death.
However, primary prevention strategy would include focusing on workers
and job redesign.
Good Stress Vs. Bad Stress
Stress has time and again been misconstrued to be just negative,
while rarely so its positive significance and utility comes to the fore.
Given that total avoidance of stress is practically impossible, telling apart
good from bad stress gets all the more important if one wishes to shun the
bad (together with all its associated physical and psychological issues)
and capitalize on the good (for the better it does).
8
Stress can actually be of four types, viz. eustress, distress,
hyperstress and hypostress. These have been discussed as follows:
(i) Eustress
This is a positive form of stress, which gets an employee ready
mentally and physically to deal with the forthcoming challenges and
gives the employee an opportunity for attaining inspiration and courage.
(ii) Distress
This is a negative form of stress. This occurs when an employee
fails, mentally and physically, to deal with a change and normally occurs
when things do not go as planned. This may be acute, i.e., intense but
short lived or chronic, i.e., persisting over a longer time span.
(iii) Hyperstress
This is another negative form of stress. This happens due to an
employee’s inability to deal with workload. Example: An employee
finding it difficult to handle long duration of work hours. This type of
stress suffered by an employee usually projects itself by way of sudden
emotional outbreaks over trivial issues.
(iv) Hypostress
This is also a negative form of stress. This arises when a person
finds nothing worthwhile of doing and constantly feels bored and
9
uninterested. Like other two negative forms of stress hypostress should
also be discouraged to avoid productivity and alertness losses, instead job
rotation and other innovative methods should be deployed for making
mundane jobs interesting.
EMPLOYEE MORALE
Employee morale is the degree of willingness or enthusiasm with
which an individual is ready to strive towards attainment of the
organizational goals. Employee morale is a measure of an individual’s
attitude towards his work, the organization and the work fraternity.
Employee morale is representative of an individual’s zeal towards
organizational goal attainment. Morale is a state of mind, it is a depiction
of an employee’s resolution, courage and hope. It is also the confidence
and loyalty with which an employee works and contributes in an
organization.
Positive or high employee morale is a connotation of prevalence of
decent human resource policies in an organization. Employee morale is
also indicative of the degree of satisfaction an individual is drawing from
one’s job and the nature of the organizational image borne by an
employee. The kind of equation an employee shares with others in the
organization, especially the higher ups, is also projected in the employee
morale. Employee morale is also a reflection of the expected career
10
progression in the organization and the extent to which an employee’s
psychological and material needs are validated.
Employee morale is determined by a number of factors and job
satisfaction is one with prime significance. Job satisfaction measures the
contentment degree an employee attains from one’s job. Some
researchers are of the opinion that employee morale is the same as job
satisfaction, while others feel that job satisfaction is a sub-set of
employee morale. Latter approach has been used for the purpose of this
study wherein job satisfaction is considered as a vital indicator of
employee morale.
JOB INVOLVEMENT
Job involvement is the extent to which an individual identifies with
one’s job, i.e., the extent to which an employee thinks of one’s job as an
important part of one’s self-concept. How significant the job is in
defining who the employee is. How well a job projects one’s self-image.
The amount of time one is willing to consecrate towards one’s job,
towards its betterment and growth. It is the dedication with which one
absorbs oneself in the job.
Usually, there prevails a certain obscurity about the three terms:
job involvement, job engagement and workaholism. However, these
11
terms have been discussed here to have their clear understanding. Job
involvement in point of fact is different and in many ways superior than
job engagement and workaholism. While job engagement is merely
concerned with execution of an assigned job, job involvement depicts the
dedication and sincerity with which an assigned job will be done.
Workaholism is an addiction or obsession for work where the executives
feel an innate compulsion to do it, but despite logging in an extraordinary
amount of hours and sacrificing their health and loved ones for their jobs,
workaholics are normally ineffective on their jobs. On the other hand, a
job involved person exhibits devotion and loyalty towards the job and a
keenness for efficient job completion. A job involved person wilfully
spends considerable time on the job but accompanied with perseverance
for precision.
Job involvement is discernible by improved performance,
productivity and profitability. It is also marked by readiness to take up
extra work and devote additional time to it. Other perquisites attributable
to job involvement include superior customer attention, security, better
attendance and presence, improved retention, and by and large betterment
of organization's welfare.
12
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Although it is difficult to define the three terms exactly, best effort
has been made to draw some conclusions on the basis of views given by
several credible authors. Various authors and dictionaries have given the
meanings of these variables in their own way which have been discussed
as follows.
Job Stress
Broad-spectrum perceptible idea about job stress is the strain
associated with one’s work and workplace. Even so, our thorough
understanding of the concept of job stress is of immense significance as it
underlies all studies and theories regarding its behaviour. Different
behavioural scientists have approached the problem of defining job stress
in different ways.
The word ‘stress’ is defined by the Oxford Dictionary
(www.oxforddictionaries.com, 2011) as ‘a state of mental or emotional
strain or tension resulting from adverse or demanding circumstances’. A
condition or circumstance (not always adverse), which can disturb the
normal physiological and psychological functioning of an individual. In
medical parlance ‘stress’ is defined as a perturbation of the body`s
homeostasis. This demand on mind-body occurs when it tries to cope
with incessant changes in life. A ‘stress’ condition seems ‘relative’ in
13
nature. Extreme stress conditions, psychologists say, are detrimental to
human health but in moderation stress is normal and, in many cases,
proves useful. Stress, nonetheless, is synonymous with negative
conditions.
As was given by NIOSH (1999), “Workplace stress is the harmful
physical and emotional response that occurs when there is a poor match
between job demands and the capabilities, resources, or needs of the
worker”.
Causes of Job Stress
An approach was adopted by Caplan and Jones (1975) where
identification was done of four different types of role conflict: 1. Intra-
sender role conflict; 2. Inter-sender role conflict; 3. Person-role conflict;
and 4. Role overload. The use of role concepts suggests that job related
stress is associated with individual, interpersonal, and structural variables.
The presence of supportive peer groups and supportive relationships with
supervisors are negatively correlated with role conflict.
Beehr and Newman (1978) defined occupational stress as “a
condition arising from the interaction of people and their jobs and
characterized by changes within people that force them to deviate from
their normal functioning.”
14
It was reported by Sreelatha (1991) that qualitative changes in the
job create adjustment problem among employees. The interpersonal
relationships within the department and between the departments create
qualitative difficulties within the organization to a great extent.
According to Van Sell et al. (1976), “Stress is often developed
when an individual is assigned a major responsibility without proper
authority and delegation of power. Interpersonal factors such as group
cohesiveness, functional dependence, communication frequency, relative
authority and organizational distance between the role sender and the
focal persons are important topics in organizational behavior.”
While Beehr and Newman and Van Sell et al. underscore the
importance of people’s interaction and interpersonal relationships in job
stress, Pestonjee (1992) opined that “the responsibility load creates severe
stress among workers and managers.” If the individual manager cannot
cope with the increased responsibilities it may lead to several physical
and psychological disorders among them.
As was given by Caplan and Jones (1975), “Lack of participation
in the decision-making process, lack of effective consultation and
communication, unjustified restrictions on behaviour, office politics and
no sense of belonging are identified as potential sources of stressors. Lack
of participation in work activity is associated with negative psychological
15
mood and behavioral responses, including escapist drinking and heavy
smoking.”
According to French and Caplan (1972), “Pressure of both
qualitative and quantitative overload can result in the need to work
excessive hours, which is an additional source of stress.” Having to work
under time pressure in order to meet deadlines is an independent source
of stress. Studies show that stress levels increase as difficult deadlines
draw near.
Another report said common causes of excessive workplace stress are:
a) Fear of layoffs
b) Increased demands for overtime due to staff cutbacks
c) Pressure to perform to meet rising expectations but with no
increase in job satisfaction
d) Pressure to work at optimum levels – all the time!
(www.helpguide.org, 2010).
As per one report it was stated that job stress might be caused by a
complex set of reasons. Some of the most visible causes of workplace
stress are:
a) Job insecurity
b) Reorganizations, takeovers, mergers, downsizing and other
changes have become major stressors for employees.
c) High demand for performance
16
d) Unrealistic expectations, especially in the time of corporate
reorganizations, which, sometimes, puts unhealthy and
unreasonable pressures on the employee, can be a tremendous
source of stress and suffering.
e) The expansion of technology—computers, pagers, cell phones, fax
machines and the Internet—has resulted in heightened expectations
for productivity, speed and efficiency, increasing pressure on the
individual worker to constantly operate at peak performance levels.
f) Adjusting to the workplace culture, whether in a new company or
not, can be intensely stressful.
“Stress develops when an individual feels he is not competent to
undertake the role assigned to him effectively. The individual feels that
he lacks knowledge, skill and training on performing the role. Personal or
family problems are also stress augmenters. Employees going through
personal or family problems tend to carry their worries and anxieties to
the workplace. When one is in a depressed mood, his unfocused attention
or lack of motivation affects his ability to carry out job responsibilities”
(www.lifepositive.com, 2005).
Symptoms of Job Stress
The signs of job stress vary from person to person, depending on the
particular situation, how long the individual has been subjected to the
17
stressors, and the intensity of the stress itself. Typical symptoms of job
stress can be:
a) Insomnia
b) Loss of mental concentration
c) Anxiety, stress
d) Absenteeism
e) Depression,
f) Substance abuse,
g) Extreme anger and frustration,
h) Family conflict
i) Physical illnesses such as heart disease, migraine, headaches,
stomach problems and back problems (www.lifepositive.com,
2005).
Implications of Job Stress
According to Brief and Aldag (1976), “There is evidence that role
incumbents with high levels of role ambiguity also respond to their
situation with anxiety, depression, physical symptoms, a sense of futility
or lower self-esteem, lower levels of job involvement and organizational
commitment, and perceptions of lower performance on the part of the
organization, of supervisors, and of themselves.”
18
Ivancevich et al. (1982) stated, “Occupational stress is an
increasingly important occupational health problem and a significant
cause of economic loss. Occupational stress may produce both overt
psychological and physiologic disabilities. However, it may also cause
subtle manifestation of morbidity that can affect personal well-being and
productivity”.
According to Katz and Kahn (1978), “A job stressed individual is
likely to have greater job dissatisfaction, increased absenteeism, increased
frequency of drinking and smoking, increase in negative psychological
symptoms and reduced aspirations and self-esteem. The use of role
concepts suggests that occupational stress is associated with individual,
interpersonal and structural variables.”
Studies on burnout found that, it is related to exhaustion and work
over load factors in various organizations, as was given by Chermiss
(1980). Stress on the job is costly for employers, reflected in lower
productivity, reduced motivation and job skills, and increased accidents.
Women and Job Stress
“Women may suffer from mental and physical harassment at
workplaces, apart from the common job stress. Sexual harassment in
workplace has been a major source of worry for women since long.
Women may suffer from tremendous stress such as ‘hostile work
19
environment harassment’, which is defined in legal terms as ‘offensive or
intimidating behaviour in the workplace’. This can consist of unwelcome
verbal or physical conduct. These can be a constant source of tension for
women in job sectors. Also, subtle discriminations at workplaces, family
pressure and societal demands add to these stress factors”
(www.lifepositive.com, 2005).
It is clear from the above that job stress is an individual’s physical
and mental reaction to demands made upon him which supersede his
capacity to oblige. In a nutshell, the main elements of job stress are as
follows:
• It is a state of affair involving demand on physical or mental
energy, which can disturb the normal physiological and
psychological functioning of an individual.
• It is associated with individual, interpersonal, and structural
variables.
• It is also associated with authority-responsibility issues and
personal and family issues.
• Lack of participation in the decision-making, lack of consultation
and communication, unjustified restrictions are augmenters of job
stress.
20
• Quantitative and qualitative work overload, job insecurity,
unrealistic expectations and pressures, unfavourable work culture
and reorganization are all job stressors.
• It manifests itself normally in the form of depression, anxiety,
absenteeism, lack of concentration, insomnia, substance abuse,
family conflict, extreme anger, frustration and physical illnesses.
• Its implications include compromised performance and
productivity, increased accidents, lack of motivation and low
organizational commitment.
• It also leads to employee burnout, i.e., total emotional,
psychological or physical exhaustion of executives.
• It adds to the health costs and so is a significant cause of economic
loss for both individual and the organization.
• Women bear the brunt of it in the form mental and physical
harassment; sexual harassment, hostile work environment
harassment, offensive or intimidating behaviour in the workplace,
unwelcome verbal or physical conduct, subtle discriminations,
family pressure and societal demands.
Employee Morale
Employee morale portrays an employee’s intrinsic enthusiasm
about and drive to accomplish work. Each individual being unique
21
responds distinctively to offered stimuli. Hence, boosting an employee’s
morale would by and large entail permutation and combination of various
factors; some universal ones include fulfilling the employee's needs and
expectations from work and workplace. Deeper and broader
understanding of the concept of employee morale was facilitated by
meanings of the variable given by various authors, which have been
discussed in the following part of the study.
Allport (1944), the famous psychologist, provided a basic
understanding of morale. He recognized that “morale like health and
sanity has to do with the background condition in living. It is found on
the fringe rather than in the focus of consciousness. It has to do with the
individual effort in a group endeavor.”
Flippo (1961) described morale as “a mental condition or attitude
of individuals and groups which determines their willingness to co-
operate. Good morale is evidenced by employer enthusiasm, voluntary
conformance with regulations and orders, and a willingness to co-operate
with others in the accomplishment of an organization’s objectives. Poor
morale is evidenced by surliness, insubordination, a feeling of
discouragement and dislike of the job, company and associates’.
However, Dale (1972) considered morale as “a feeling, somewhat
related to esprit the corps, enthusiasm or zeal.”
22
In their article, examining the importance of employee-
management relationship closeness, McKnight et al. (2001) defined
morale in the context of workplace as “the degree to which an employee
feels good about his or her work and work environment.” The authors
say morale serves as a broad term that encompasses smaller concepts
including intrinsic motivation, job satisfaction, experienced work
meaningfulness, organizational commitment, and pride in one’s work.
Spriegel and Lansburgh (1957) said that morale is depressed by:
a) A too fine division of authority and responsibility.
b) Too many supervisors.
c) An improper selection of personnel for new expanded duties.
d) Too much reliance on organizational charts.
Roach (1958) reaffirmed the concept of workers’ perception towards
the satisfactory or unsatisfactory nature of existing factors. He listed
twelve factors; general bias or “halo” factor, general attitude toward
supervision, pride in company, intrinsic job satisfaction, and satisfaction
with each of the following eight conditions – setting up and enforcing job
standards, supervisory consideration, work load and pressure, interest in
and treatment of the individual, administration of salaries,
communications, development and progress, and co-workers, that
influence the level of morale. The more favourable these were perceived
the higher was the morale.
23
Applewhite (1965) reduced the number of factors to five. He states
that the components of morale are: the image of the company in the
employee’s mind, the general quality of supervision received by the
employee, the financial rewards or the material satisfaction granted to the
workers and the friendliness of fellow employees and their ability to work
together without friction; and the level of intrinsic job satisfaction.
As per McFarland (1978), various factors can have a bearing on
morale. Some of the important ones are:
a) The attitudes of the executives and managers towards their
subordinates;
b) Working conditions, including pay, hours of work and safety rules;
c) Effective leadership and an intelligent distribution of authority and
responsibility on the organization;
d) The design of the organization’s structure which facilitates the flow
of work; and
e) The size of the organization.
McFarland believed that high morale exists when employer attitudes are
favourable to the total situation of a group and to the attainment of its
objectives. Low morale exists when attitudes inhibit the willingness and
ability of an organization to attain its objectives.
In another report, it was emphasized that in order to improve
employee productivity and morale, it is important for managers to allow
24
employees to help set department or organizational goals. Employees will
work harder to reach goals if they're involved in setting them (Library
Personnel News, 1998).
Tschohl (1999) insisted that employees need to seek out as much
training as possible to be happy and successful in their work. In addition,
he suggested employees improve their work environment by developing a
sense of humour, setting goals, developing a healthy self-image and
empowering themselves.
In her article on reviving staff spirit, Scott (2001) referred to
another type of management style that is usually thought of negatively by
employees – micro-managing. Scott argues that micro-managing is the
“surest way to kill staff spirit and commitment.” Managers need to
clarify the goals and ground rules, and then get out of their employee's
way. A work environment should be given where management supports
professional growth and makes employees feel that the company is
committed to them. Scott claims that employees are less focused on the
immediate paycheck if they feel they work in an organization that
encourages growth and provides opportunities for training and education
and skill improvement. The researcher urges managers not to follow the
current trend of many companies drastically reducing their education
budget and creating a workplace that produces overworked employees
who have no time for learning and reflection.
25
According to Messmer (2001), employees resent being left out of
the loop, especially when changes are going on, which can cause them to
be cynical about future endeavours, their supervisors, and the company.
If kept uninformed, they may also assume the worst – that their jobs are
at risk. Managers need to stress both positive and negative aspects of
change and be honest about the company’s future. Open communication
should especially be a priority when introducing any new initiatives.
In his article on the effects of restructuring and downsizing on
hospital staff, Burke (2002) stated this concept in a nutshell: “The degree
to which a facility supports its employees during transition directly
affects staff satisfaction and well-being”.
Fuimano (2005) indicated that employee retention shows
significant improvement when managers express value of their staff.
When managers recognize an employee’s hard work and dedication, the
job suddenly has a greater sense of meaning. Employees want an
opportunity to give their best and often when employees keep filtering
through jobs to find better pay, the true driving force really lies in a lack
of appreciation from management. To further promote excellent
employees, managers should focus upon good traits and spread them
around to others. If others see an employee getting rewards, they will
want to follow the lead and may feel more a part of the team. Fuimano
26
adds that a lot of successful management coaching focuses on the
individual employee rather than on his or her performance.
For Lubans (2000), morale matters because low morale affects
process. In libraries, the process usually involves clients and staff.
Because of the strong service tradition, with many points of service,
librarians are especially vulnerable to the impact of low morale.
McManus (2005) found that the best performing companies
consider their internal customer survey a key tool for identifying
improvement needs and a key indicator of performance challenges and
opportunities. They believe that higher levels of employee satisfaction
lead to higher levels of quality, customer service, and performance.
On the basis of views expressed above by various authors, it can be
said that employee morale is an amalgamation of a whole matrix of
factors that make an employee either enthusiastic or apathetic towards the
job. The apparent characteristics of employee morale from above have
been condensed as follows:
• It is an individual’s willingness or enthusiasm to co-operate or
contribute to a group effort towards organizational goal attainment.
• It is somewhat related to ‘esprit de corps’, i.e., team spirit.
27
• It is reflective of an employee’s intrinsic motivation, job
satisfaction, experienced work meaningfulness, organizational
commitment, and pride in one’s work and work environment.
• It is dampened by rigidity of rules and too fine a division of
authority and responsibility and also by micro management and
derogatory address of employees by higher ups.
• It is associated with general bias, relation with supervisors and
fellow workers and also overall satisfaction with one’s work and
work environment.
• It is dependent on the material and psychological rewards such as
appreciation granted to the employees, level of participation of
employees allowed in decision-making, employees’ self-image and
opportunity for learning and growth.
• It is boosted by open communication and support during transition.
• It when perceived positively leads to better retention, focus,
process, quality, customer service and performance.
Job Involvement
In a broad context, job involvement is the extent to which an
employee’s job occupies his central life interest, i.e., the limit to which an
employee is willing to dedicate oneself to one’s job. Job involvement
28
would also be defined by the significance attached to one’s job by an
employee, i.e., in his ideology how crucial is his job in meeting all his
vital needs in life. Various authors have probed into this variable and
have illuminated dimensions to it as discussed ahead.
Gurin et al. (1960) described job involvement as the extent to
which individuals seek some expression and actualization of the self in
their work. Their concept of job involvement was further illustrated by
Lodahl and Kejner (1965) who defined job involvement in terms of the
degree to which people are identified psychologically with their work and
the importance of work in the individual's self-image.
Rabinowitz and Hall (1977) also concluded from their evaluation
of research on job involvement that the data is consistent with this
“psychological identification with work” definition of job involvement
provided by Lodahl and Kejner.
Mckelvey and Sekaran (1977) aptly defined job involvement as
“the merging of a person's ego identity with his or her job.” It, thus,
concerns the degree to which employees take their identity from their job.
Mckelvey and Sekaran’s concept of job involvement has been the
mainspring energizing the symbiotic relationship between job
involvement, performance, and the quality of working life, because
individuals who have their ego development tied into the jobs have a
29
higher stake in performing well and there is often a strong desire to
satisfy the need for ego identity and development in their jobs.
Elankumaran (2004) approached job involvement by saying that
job involvement as an attitude is an important variable that helps in
maximizing organizational effectiveness. The higher the degree of job
involvement of the members of an organization, the greater its
effectiveness. In order to improve the degree of job involvement, one
must have a realistic view of what determines it. Among the various
views on job involvement, the most realistic one would be that it is a
function of personality and organizational climate. To identify the
personality types, an inventory was developed based on the Indian theory
of psychological forces—the guna dynamics. Based on the analysis of the
data collected, the concluding observation of the study was: “the less
‘tamasic’ a person, the more will he be involved in his job”.
Findings by Carmeli (2005) indicate that both situational and
personal-related factors predict job involvement. It has been shown that
the relationship between perceived external prestige and job involvement
is mediated by affective commitment, and that the relationship between
protestant work ethic and job involvement is mediated by normative
commitment.
According to Kanungo (1979), all behaviour, including behaviour
in work situations, springs from need states of the individual and is
30
directed towards obtaining outcomes for the satisfaction of salient needs.
Thus, the degree of job involvement will depend upon the extent to which
an individual perceives his salient needs as capable of being met on the
job. The author, therefore, operationally defined job involvement as, “a
generalized cognitive state of psychological identification with work, in
so far as work is perceived to be instrumental in satisfying one's salient
needs and expectations”.
Brown (1996) suggested that job involvement is influenced by
personality and situational variables and that it is strongly related to job
and work attitudes but not to role perceptions, behavioural work
outcomes, negative “side effects” or demographic variables.
Importance of job involvement was supported by the findings of
Parks et al. (2007) who stated that the employee involvement is used
successfully by management and has enabled frontline staff to contribute
their knowledge to their work.
It can be concluded from the above that job involvement is an effect of
personal and situational variables and it leads to more positive attitude
and behaviour such as increased organizational commitment. In totality,
we arrive at the following conclusions regarding job involvement:
• It is the degree to which an employee seeks expression and
actualization of oneself in his work.
31
• It is also the extent of psychological identification with one’s work
and the importance of work in the employee’s self-image.
• It is also expressed in terms of merger of a person's ego identity
with one’s job, i.e., the extent to which an individual draws one’s
identity from one’s job.
• It is a function of an employee’s personality and organizational
climate, i.e., personal and situational factors predict job
involvement.
• Its positivity ensures better organizational effectiveness and greater
contribution of knowledge by an employee to his/her work.
• It is dependent upon an individual’s perception about the likelihood
of his salient needs being met.
• It is strongly related to job and work attitudes.
An employee’s attitude cannot be isolated from his physical and
psychological state. This implies in the event of an employee
experiencing high job stress level is most certain to have its bearing on
his attitudinal exposition as well. Therefore, employees’ morale level and
the extent of their job involvement come into the closest proximity of
being influenced by adverse job stress endured by an employee. This
study is an attempt to find a definite relationship between psychological
32
variables such as job stress and attitudinal variables such as employee
morale and job involvement which intuitively and empirically are known
perpetrators of behavioural outcomes of employees such as productivity,
proficiency, co-operation, contribution towards organizational goals,
absenteeism, turnover intent, organizational commitment, organizational
effectiveness, etc. Knowledge of a precise equation between the three
variables; job stress, employee morale and job involvement, would go a
long way in the growth and profitability of an organization.
33
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
The review of related available studies in variables job stress,
employee morale and job involvement was done with a view to delve and
obtain some guidelines for the present research work. A number of
studies were available individually on the three variables taken up in this
study, and a few studies were also available where only two variables
have been taken up together. The purpose of this segment of the study is
to have a peep into the former researches in the field, to analyze and
critically examine them, and to connect the present knowledge with the
earlier studies in order to decide about the general framework of this
study. The literature on the variables in question has been reviewed below
systematically.
Studies on Job Stress
Job stress has more often than not been taken to be just negative,
while rarely so it’s positive significance and utility comes to the fore.
Having acknowledged the importance of positive job stress in the
beginning of the chapter, for the purpose of this study job stress has been
taken as negative.
As per Cherry’s (1978) study in a “community cohort” of 1415,
twenty-six year old men in mixed occupations, “nervous strain” (a self-
34
report single item) was predicted by occupational status but not by social
class of origin. After accounting for occupational status, and neuroticism,
five work tasks made a significant contribution to nervous strain. These
were supervision, teaching, driving, skilled machine operation and people
contact. It was also found that both neuroticism and specific work
stressors separately contributed to a “nervous strain variable”. There was
neither evidence of an interaction between these variables, nor was there
evidence that stressful jobs were held particularly by anxiety-prone
subjects.
A study by Jackson and Maslach (1982), of 142 police couples is
reported, illustrating the effects of job stress on family life. In a survey
study, police officers and their wives described family interactions.
Officers, who were experiencing stress, as measured by the Maslach
Burnout Inventory, were more likely to display anger, spend time off
away from the family, be uninvolved in family matters, and to have
unsatisfactory marriages. An examination of the coping patterns used to
deal with the stress of police work highlights differences between coping
strategies used by husbands versus wives.
A model of job stress that focused on organizational and job-
related stress was presented by Parker and DeCotiis (1983). Job stress
was conceived of as a first-level outcome of the organization and job; it is
a feeling of discomfort that is separate and distinct from second-level
35
outcomes or consequences of job stress. The second-level outcomes may
include varying levels of satisfaction, organizational commitment,
motivation, and performance. A partial test of the model examines
relationships between hypothesized stressors and experienced job stress.
Survey data obtained from 367 managers of a large restaurant chain was
used with the results generally supporting the model. Factor analysis
supported the concept that job stress is multidimensional. Two distinct
dimensions of job stress were identified: time stress and anxiety. Both job
stress dimensions were significantly related to each of the model's five
organizational stressor categories, but not all of the independent variables
within the categories were significantly related to job stress. Moreover,
the specific stressors associated with each dimension of job stress proved
to be substantially different.
Similarly, as per Brenner et al. (1985), “Teaching ‘stressful
students’ early in the school year predicted poor mental health in the
latter part of the year in another sample.”
A more detailed study by Jackson et al. (1986), of the relation of
work stress variables to the “burnout” subscales (in another teacher
sample), found “role conflict” alone predicted “emotional exhaustion,”
only two “support variables” predicted “poor accomplishment”, while
there were no predictors of “depersonalization.”
36
In a combined study, done by Aro and Hasan (1987), of 900 blue-
and white-collar industrial workers studied over 5 and 10 years, stressors
at work predicted mental stress symptoms, poor perceived health and
absenteeism; mental stress symptoms in turn predicted smoking, drinking,
and absenteeism.
According to Taylor and Cooper (1989) variables such as
personality are also crucial; their effects may be complex and are often
poorly assessed. Personality firstly seems to be an independent risk factor
for both depression and burnout, irrespective of exposure to work
stressors.
Another study by Kawakarmi et al. (1990) revealed that in factory
and blue-collar workers studied over 3 years, in Japan (N = 468), “lack of
control overwork,” “unsuitable jobs” and “poor workplace relations”
predicted depression (Zung scale). Furthermore, the latter two work
variables also predicted depressive disorder diagnosed clinically by a
psychiatrist in a nested cohort of this sample; these relationships were
significant even after controlling covariates and initial depressive
symptoms.
In a study by Phelan et al. (1991), the effect of stressors of different
‘origins’ (those at work and those outside it) had also been assessed. Both
work stress and domestic stress predicted depression both in married
professionals even after controlling potential confounders.
37
Glickman et al. (1991) stated that the pathways linking work
stressors and depression may not be direct since in a study of blue-collar
workers neither initial life events nor “work strain” (economic
difficulties, work overload) directly predicted later depression: they did,
however, predict subsequent life events and work strain, both of which
correlated with depression at that time. This study also revealed a
reciprocal relationship; initial depression also predicted subsequent life
events and work strain.
Revicki et al. (1993) stated that in relation to medical specialties
for instance, work-related stress and specifically, “low task–role clarity”
predicted later depression in emergency medicine residents.
A model to look at various job components that affect individual
well-being and health was developed by Carayon (1993) drawing from
the job design and job stress literature. Briefly stated, the model proposed
job control to be a primary causal determinant of the stress outcomes. The
effects of perceived demands, job content and career/future concerns
were hypothesized to influence the stress outcomes only to the extent of
their influence on job control. This was tested in a population of
government office employees in various clerical, professional, and
managerial jobs all of which involve the use of computers. Results
indicated that job control was not a crucial determinant of the stress
outcomes, that job demands and career/future concerns were consistent
38
determinants of the stress outcomes, and that job content, demands, and
career/future concerns did not influence the stress outcomes through job
control as described by the proposed model. The differentiation of job
control levels to define specific relationships with stress outcomes and
other job elements were shown to be useful because different levels of job
control were associated with different stress outcomes and job elements.
Fenwick and Tausig (1994) tested a model that conceptually links
research on macroeconomic causes of stress with research on job
structure causes of stress among employed workers. Overall, results
suggest that macroeconomic changes, such as recessions, can affect
individual stress because they lead to changes in routine job structures
that represent increased and continued exposure to stressful conditions.
Noor (1995), in her study, revealed that in working women, while
work overload predicted psychological disorder, surprisingly perhaps
their family role stressors did not: high occupational status furthermore
diminished the impact of work overload on psychological disorder.
In more experienced teachers (Burke and Greenglass, 1995),
burnout was predicted by both “work setting” and specific “work stress.”
However, the effect of these variables was not direct, but operated by
influencing both the work setting and work stress at the subsequent
assessment. Specific work variables predicting burnout were poor social
39
support outside the organization, personal characteristics, and “red tape”
and “disruptive students”.
In a 4-year Finnish study by Romanov et al. (1996) (N=15530),
records linkage was used to access psychiatric morbidity data (suicides,
hospitalization, prescription of psychotropic drugs). Interpersonal conflict
at work predicted “physician-diagnosed” psychiatric morbidity (relative
risk=2.18) even after controlling social class, prior health and prior
“mental instability/stress” (i.e., neuroticism, hostility, life stress, low self-
assurance).
As per Rout et al. (1996), in “General Practitioners’ routine work
administration, job demands, interference with family and interruptions
with work, predicted their negative mental well-being.”
In a well-designed albeit, cross-sectional study, by Prosser et al.
(1997), of mental healthcare workers involving principal components
analysis of work stress, some 28% of variance in “depression” and 42%
in burnout were explained by work stress factors, in particular; poor
staffing resources, work overload and career dissatisfaction were related
to depression.
According to Heinisch and Jex (1997) in managerial employees
(N=442), two of the four work-related stressors that were assessed (work
load and role ambiguity) predicted depressive symptoms. This association
40
furthermore was potentiated by “negative affectivity,” but only in
females.
Briner (1997) and Cooper & Cartwright (1997), in their studies,
reviewed stress interventions in the workplace and emphasized the need
to distinguish primary interventions (organization/structural change),
secondary interventions (stress management/coping strategies) and
tertiary interventions (interventions targeted for those actually stressed).
Secondary and tertiary interventions appear to have short-term effects
only (in the order of 3 months), and indeed these interventions may be
treating morbidity due to non-occupational stressors (Reynolds, 1997).
Improvement may be seen in a range of psychological outcomes
including psychological symptoms, self-esteem and perceptions of work
stress. Primary intervention studies report inconsistent findings. While
job satisfaction may improve with ‘intervention’, mental health may not
and absenteeism or staff turnover can indeed increase (Gordery et al.,
1991).
As per the study by Mills and Huebner (1998), in school
psychologists all burnout subscales were predicted by personality
(neuroticism), but only “emotional exhaustion” and poor
“accomplishment” were predicted by self-reported “work stressors.” The
relation between work stressors and burnout was furthermore found to be
41
reciprocal, and when initial burnout was controlled, work stressors did
not predict subsequent burnout.
Watson (1998), in his annual survey of integrated disability
management programmes, found that incidents of disability are
increasingly related to slowly developing, chronic conditions and work-
induced stress. In this survey, musculoskeletal problems such as carpal
tunnel syndrome and repetitive motion complaints (50 per cent) exceeded
injuries (44 per cent) as the most common condition triggering an
occupational disability expense. The survey also found that mental
health-related disabilities are on the rise. As many as 45 per cent and 58
per cent of employers respectively, expressed growing concern about
mental illness as a source of occupational disabilities and non-
occupational disabilities. Moreover, one-third of survey respondents
characterized the management of mental illness in the workplace as very
difficult.
Similarly, Taris (1999), in his study, demonstrated a reciprocal
relation between “job resources” (autonomy, variety, skill utilization) and
mental health. It is argued that multi-panel prospective studies with
“objective” work stressor indices, preferably using structural equation
approaches, can best address this issue (Zapf et al., 1996).
In a five-year prospective study by Borg et al. (2000), of 5000
employees drawn from a Danish population register, changes in repetitive
42
work, job insecurity, high demands and low support all predicted a single
“self-rated” health item.
In a study by Weinberg and Creed (2000), both work and non-work
stressors, on being assessed using a life events interview, contributed to
depression in medical personnel. Even when vulnerability factors and
non-work stressors were controlled, work stress still contributed towards
depression.
According to a study by Schaufeli and Peeters (2000), it appeared
that the most notable stressors for correctional officers are role problems,
work overload, demanding social contacts (with prisoners, colleagues,
and supervisors), and poor social status. It is concluded that particularly
improving human resources management, professionalization of the CO's
job, and improvement of the social work environment seem to be a
promising avenue for reducing job stress and burnout in correctional
institutions.
A recent report from Health Canada (2002) suggested that
employees who experience work stress (caused by interpersonal, job
control and management problems) are six times more likely than others
to be absent from work for six or more days.
Another study by Larson (2004) used the Ivancevich and Matteson
Stress Diagnostic Survey to gather data concerning job stress for a large
national sample of internal auditors in the USA. Survey respondents
43
indicated that the organizational job stressors in their work environment
were more a source of stress than the so-called individual job factors.
Specifically, respondents would like to be paid more and participate more
in the decision-making processes relating to their jobs. Company politics
and lack of training and development opportunities were other major
sources of stress. Implications for the profession are clear. Internal audit
managers should be aware of the job stress inherent in the nature of the
work of an internal auditor and take appropriate steps to reduce
organizational job stressors rather than face the risk of increased staff job
turnover.
Gyllensten and Palmer (2005) took up a review with the aim to
evaluate research relating to the role of gender in the level of workplace
stress. The stressors having particular relevance to working women were
reviewed. These stressors included, multiple roles, lack of career progress
and discrimination, and stereotyping. Major databases were searched in
order to identify studies investigating gender and workplace stress. A
range of research designs were included and no restrictions were made on
the basis of occupations of the participants. Much of the research
indicated that women reported higher levels of stress compared to men.
However, several studies reported no difference between the genders.
Furthermore, the evidence for the adverse effects of multiple roles, lack of
career progress and discrimination, and stereotyping was inconsistent.
44
The current review concluded that the evidence regarding the role of
gender in workplace stress and stressors was inconsistent.
Landsbergis and Vaughan (2006), in their study, evaluated the
impact of an intervention which was based on organizational
development, action research and Karasek's job strain model. Employee
committees conducted problem diagnosis, action planning, and action
taking in two departments in a public agency. Waiting list control
departments and pre- post- and follow-up assessment were utilized.
Results indicated a mixed impact of the intervention in one department,
but a negligible or negative impact in the other. Obstacles to the effective
implementation of the intervention strategy are discussed. These included
a limited focus for the committees (department-wide rather than agency-
wide), the negative impact of major agency reorganization, and the lack
of a more formal management and labour commitment to maintaining the
stress reduction and organizational change process.
Feilder et al. (2008) revealed that work-related stress is a major
concern for employers, and the UK Health and Safety Executive has
introduced Management Standards for employers to support them in
managing stress in the workplace. Managers have a key role to play in
minimizing stress-related risks for their staff. Management behaviour has
a direct impact on staff well-being – managers can prevent or cause stress
in those they manage. Managers also act as “gatekeepers” to their
45
employees' exposure to stressful working conditions and are vital to the
identification and tackling of stress in the workplace. This means that
managers need to understand what behaviours they should show in order
to manage their employees in a way that minimizes work-related stress.
The behaviours identified were grouped into themes to create a
framework of 19 management “competencies” for preventing and
reducing stress at work.
Studies on Employee Morale
Employee morale is the result of various personal and
organizational factors. It is determined by the individual’s perception
about various facets associated with one’s job and the workplace. As
mentioned earlier, job satisfaction is a sub-set of employee morale and is
considered as its vital indicator, therefore, has also been included in this
review. Quite a few studies have been noticed wherein employee morale
has been studied individually or along with other factors.
Mayo (1947) carried out Hawthorne experiments between 1927 to
1932 which consisted of introducing purposefully such psychological
differences as rest pauses, snacks, reduction of hours of work and others
on six girls engaged in assembling relays. Strict records were kept of their
behaviour, conversation, health, social habits, etc. The girls were also
46
consulted and informed about the changes to be introduced in accordance
with the research plan. The atmosphere, thus, created was so free that the
workers lost the apprehension of authority. Their behaviour was normal
but their morale was high. Throughout these changes both positive and
negative output went up constantly and finally in the last period of the
experiment, all improvements were suppressed. Output was expected to
be at its lowest, but it reached its highest.
The study undertaken by Ansbacher (1950) showed that slave
labour groups in World War-II displayed low personal happiness and
high achievement levels.
While some researchers were optimistic and felt that there is
enough evidence to link morale as a factor in improving employee
performance others like Brayfield and Crockett (1953) concluded that
there is little, if any, relationship between employee morale and
performance.
Bose (1958) stated that more the subordinates participate in the
planning of change in their work; greater is the production after the
change is made. The workers in higher production units display greater
skills in group interaction have greater group pride and loyalty, and more
often use group decision to deal with work related problems.
47
Studies by Ganguli (1961), Chatterjee (1961), Sinha & Nair (1965)
and studies at SITRA are some of the works where a positive link
between job satisfaction or morale and productivity has been found.
In the Indian setting, Bose (1965) studied the relationship between
morale and supervision. His study shows that a high pride and morale of
the work group leads to greater productivity.
Choudhry and Pal (1968) also attempted to study the effect of
technology on morale. Two textile mills are compared; one which
frequently alters the type of cloth produced and has a more elaborate
system of management and the other with the same kind of production
plan for a long period. The study provided that the worker satisfaction
was higher in the second mill because it has a less elaborate organization
and reporting structure.
In India, some relevant studies have been carried out by the Central
Labour Institute (1970). These studies have revealed that high worker
morale may not lead to high productivity.
An interesting socio-metric study called ‘Social Relations and
Morale in Small Groups” was carried out by Gardner and Thompson
(1972) from the Syraouse University. Scales which measure each
individual’s estimate of his associate’s potentialities for satisfying several
social needs in groups of not more than eight were developed. It was
found that groups high on this scale had a high morale level and also a
48
high achievement level. However, this may not be true of groups which
are not voluntary in nature.
According to Harris (1976), one of the more evasive and
controversial topics concerning worker behaviour is that of worker
morale. There has been no universal position taken concerning the effects
of morale on worker performance, nor has there been even a complete
comprehensive definition of what it is. A helpful approach to the analysis
of morale is to view it as the workers’ perception of the existing state of
their well-being. Morale is said to be high when conditions or
circumstances appear favourable and low when unfavourable.
In a study by Rusbult and Farrell (1983), it was stated that greater
job satisfaction resulted from high job rewards and low job costs;
whereas strong job commitment was produced by high rewards, low
costs, poor alternative quality, and large investment size. Impact of job
rewards on satisfaction and commitment remained relatively constant.
Iaffaldano and Muchinsky (1985), in their study on job
satisfaction-job performance showed that (1) the best estimate of the true
population correlation between satisfaction and performance was
relatively low (.17); (2) much of the variability in results obtained in
previously research was due to the use of small sample sizes, while
unreliable measurement of the satisfaction and performance constructs
has contributed relatively little to this observed variability in correlations;
49
and (3) the nine variables coded (composite vs. one-dimensional criteria,
longitudinal vs. cross-sectional measurement of performance relative to
satisfaction, the nature of the performance measure, self-reports vs. other
sources, use of specific performance measures, subjectivity or objectivity
of measures, specific-facet satisfaction vs. global satisfaction, well-
documented vs. researcher-developed measurement, and white-collar vs.
blue-collar) were only modestly related to the magnitude of the
satisfaction-performance correlation.
Agho (1993), in his study, found that the degree to which
employees like their job is influenced by a combination of characteristics
of the environment (opportunity), the job (routinization and distributive
justice), and personality variables (positive affectivity and work
motivation).
In a study that explored the relationship between employee self-
esteem and different types of management styles – referred to here as
“supervisor powers” – Fedor et al. (2001) examined the uses of reverent
power (power based upon the manager’s attractive characteristics), expert
power (power based upon the manager’s expertise and knowledge), and
coercive power (power based on the manager’s ability to inflict aversive
outcomes or punishments). While the hypothesis of the study that the use
of coercive power negatively affects employee morale proved
inconclusive, the researchers were able to conclude that when supervisors
50
exercised expert or referent power, both of which require effective
communication to be successful, the impact on employee self-esteem was
positive.
In a study on employer/employee commitment, Bragg (2002)
explored how commitment on the part of both employees and employers
can contribute to a supportive work environment and high morale. Bragg
described four types of commitment exhibited by both employees and
employers: want to, have to, ought to, and uncommitted. The type of
commitment that both sides should strive for is “want to” commitment,
where the employees want to work for the company and give it their all,
and the company values its employees and shows it by investing in their
growth and training.
In his study, the author reiterates the arguments found in much of the
literature that managers can boost employee morale by encouraging
employee involvement and communication, keeping employees informed
of major business decisions, offering extensive training, and encouraging
a balance between work and home life. Bragg also agrees that employees
should be just as responsible for their own morale and shouldn’t rely
solely on management to provide the supportive work environment they
seek. Finally, he insists that in order to provide a positive work
environment that maintains high morale, both employees and
management must follow a common set of rules, including:
51
a) Do what you say you will do
b) Be consistent
c) Maintain confidence
d) Be a role model of the behaviour you want others to display.
As per Linz et al. (2006) among the workers participating in their
study, expectation of receiving a desired reward contributes to high
morale, with expected monetary rewards having a higher influence that
expected non-monetary rewards, but praise for a job well done and a
feeling of accomplishment also contribute positively to employee morale.
There was a significant correlation between positive attitudes toward
work and morale, and a positive correlation between performance
assessment and morale. Demographic characteristics (age and gender)
have no discernible influence on morale when controls are included for
work experience.
Studies on Job Involvement
Job involvement, i.e. the importance associated by an employee to
one’s job and degree to which he/she is willing to put in one’s time and
energy to it, is crucial in improving quantity and quality of work and in
enrichment of the organization and further bears implications for the
employee as well. The studies on this aspect have mainly been in the
foreign scene and only a few touching an Indian prospect.
52
Rabinowitz et al. (1977), in their study, examined the relative
importance of job scope and individual differences in explaining job
involvement. The researchers further examined whether these variables
have independent or interactive effects. Results indicate that job scope
and the individual difference measures all have about equal importance in
explaining the variance in job involvement.
Results of a recent study of over 200 middle and senior level
managers by Misra and Kalro (1981) supported the notion that the
attitude of job involvement is a function of the level of satisfaction of
one's salient needs, be they intrinsic or extrinsic. Job Involvement was
higher for those whose salient needs were met as compared to those
whose salient needs were not met.
According to Pathak’s (1983) findings, job involvement concerns
the degree to which employees identify with their job. It may be
influenced by the level of satisfaction of one's needs, be they intrinsic or
extrinsic. Utilizing a sample of 150 bank officers from four major public
sector banks in India, the present study investigated this stipulated
relationship between job involvement and need satisfaction, but did not
find any strong relationship. The important finding that emerged was that
the bank officers, regardless of their job involvement, wanted more
“decision making authority”, “opportunity for personal growth and
development”, and “recognition for good work done”. One factor of
53
importance for job involvement appeared to be satisfaction vis-a-vis
“recognition for good work done”. Recommendations based on the
findings include adequate feedback and incentives for good work,
widening the area of responsibility, larger delegation of authority, and
tangible as well as symbolic modes of recognition for raising need
satisfaction and job involvement.
A study by Ron and Graham (1987) of employee involvement in
the management and ownership of NVC Australia Pty Ltd. indicated high
levels of work satisfaction, job security, decision influence, productivity,
communication, commitment and involvement. Although only one
organization has been analyzed, it is clear that employee ownership and
participation provide interesting alternatives for organizations to face the
challenges of the present social and economic situations.
Another study by Gomez-Mejia (1990) suggested that while gender
differences in work values exist (as measured by task-oriented, contextual
and job involvement scales), the magnitude and significance of the
observed differences between men and women decrease as occupation
and length of socialization are partialled out.
The relationships among a cluster of attitudes toward work and job
were investigated by Knoop (1995) using a sample of 171 nurses. The
hypothesis was that involvement in work and job, commitment to the
employing organization, and satisfaction with the job (over all, and with
54
specific facets of the job) would be significantly correlated. The results
showed that involvement was not related to overall satisfaction but only
to two specific facets, satisfaction with work and promotion
opportunities. In contrast, the degree of relationship between overall and
various facets of satisfaction and commitment and between involvement
and commitment was moderately high.
In a study of hospital nurses (N=154), Jernigan et al. (2002)
examined the influence of dimensions of work satisfaction on types of
organizational commitment. Significant results were found for the two
affective commitment types tested but not for the instrumental type
evaluated. The results indicate that satisfaction with professional status
was a significant predictor of moral commitment. Dissatisfaction with
organizational policies, autonomy, and professional status were
significant predictors of alienative commitment. None of the dimensions
of work satisfaction were predictors of calculative commitment. The
results of this study suggest that understanding how various factors
impact the nature and the form of an individual’s organizational
commitment is worth the effort. If managers do not know what causes an
attitude to take on a particular form, they cannot accurately predict what
behaviour might follow.
A study by Freund and Carmeli (2003) examined the relationships
between five work commitments: protestant work ethic, career
55
commitment, job involvement, continuance commitment and affective
commitment. Based on Morrow's concept of five universal forms of
commitment, their inter-relationships were tested in regard to a
population of lawyers either employed by, or partners in law firms. The
results presented a reconstructed model. The following findings were
unique to this reconstructed model: job involvement and career
commitment appeared as mediating variables, although, unlike previous
models, job involvement was found to be directly related to affective
commitment.
In a U.S. invested enterprise in China, the receptivity of Chinese
employees to a participative work environment was examined by Scott et
al. (2003). Structural equation analysis indicated support for a model in
which job satisfaction mediates the relationships between elements of a
participative work environment (i.e., tasks performed, the relationships
individuals had with their work groups and the nature of the decision-
making processes) and employee willingness to co-operate with co-
workers and intention to quit. Task interdependence also had a direct
relationship with willingness to co-operate.
The relationship between the big five of personality and work
involvement was investigated by Bozionelos (2004) in a questionnaire
study with a sample of 279 white-collar workers, who were employed on
a full-time basis in clerical, administrative and managerial positions.
56
Hypotheses were tested by means of hierarchical regressions that
controlled for the effects of demographics and human capital. Overall, the
findings suggest the existence of an, albeit not strong or extensive,
relationship between the big five of personality and work involvement.
A study by Mudrack (2004) was designed specifically to elaborate
upon and to explore the proposal that workaholism may result from a
combination of high job involvement with an obsessive-compulsive
personality. Both obsessive-compulsive personality and workaholism,
however, seem to be multidimensional rather than one-dimensional
variables and their multidimensional nature needed clarification before
the study could proceed. Obsessive-compulsive personality consisted of
six distinct traits: obstinacy, orderliness, parsimony, perseverance,
rigidity, and superego. Workaholism was operationalized as having two
behavioural components: tendencies both to engage in non-required work
activities, and to intrude actively on the work of others. This study
predicted specifically that high job involvement coupled with high scores
on the obstinacy, orderliness, rigidity, and superego traits would lead to
high scores on tendencies to engage in non-required work. These four
predictions received some support in data emerging from a sample of 278
employed persons, although support was strongest for the obstinacy and
superego traits. These results add to understanding of the work attitude of
job involvement given its associations with some obsessive-compulsive
57
traits, suggest the relevance of obsessive-compulsive personality in non-
clinical settings, and add to understanding of the phenomenon of
workaholism as behavioural tendencies.
Results of a study done by Cortis and Cassar (2005) indicated no
differences between job involvement and work-based self-esteem of male
and female managers. On the other hand, both male employees and
students seem to hold more stereotypical attitudes towards women in
management than their female counterparts.
A study by Rotenberry and Moberg (2007) attempted to provide
another test of job involvement's association with performance. Its
findings state that the employees’ self-reported job involvement
significantly predicted certain supervisor performance ratings above and
beyond work centrality.
The job involvement of customer contact personnel was
significantly correlated with customer satisfaction, profit and productivity
in Emery and Barker (2007) study. There was a significant difference
between the team and non-team structures for job involvement, but not
for the organizational commitment of customer contact personnel.
The purpose of the paper by Boon et al. (2007) was to examine the
perceptions of individual employees on the influence of eight elements of
HRM/TQM (i.e., leadership, training and development, employee
participation, reward and recognition, customer focus, empowerment,
58
teamwork, and communication) on employees’ job involvement in six
major Malaysian semiconductor contract manufacturing organizations.
The results of the study revealed that teamwork, empowerment, customer
focus, reward and recognition and communication are positively
associated with employees’ job involvement. Where empowerment was
found to be a dominant practice, strong associations with employees’ job
involvement existed.
Yet another paper (HRM International Digest, 2008) described the
importance of work-life balance. The findings indicate that flexible
working helps to keep the staff motivated. The policy has also enhanced
the company's reputation with both clients and employees.
Kuruuzum et al. (2009), in their paper, aimed to determine the
structural relationships between job involvement, job satisfaction, and
three dimensions of organizational commitment (i.e., affective
commitment, normative commitment, and continuance commitment) in
the Turkish hospitality industry. The findings stated that the research
model, which was structured by taking related literature as the base, was
revised and a new path model was gathered as a result of this study.
Results showed that job involvement, affective commitment, and
normative commitment increase job satisfaction; and job involvement
affects affective and normative commitment.
59
Studies on Job Stress and Employee Morale
While studying job stress it’s important to take into consideration
its relationship with employee morale since an employee’s morale cannot
be isolated from the stress the employee experiences in one’s job. Review
of literature shows that these two variables (job stress and employee
morale) are of great interest in industrial psychology. A few authors have
studied these two variables together.
Ganster and Schaubroeck (1991) reviewed and summarized the
literature on work stress with particular emphasis on those studies that
examined the effects of work characteristics on employee health.
Although there is not convincing evidence that job stressors cause health
effects, the indirect evidence is strongly suggestive of a work stress effect.
This evidence comes from occupational studies that show differences in
health and mortality that are not easily explained by other factors and
within-subject studies that demonstrate a causal effect of work
experiences on physiological and emotional responses.
According to Poulin and Walter (1993), in social workers, change
in burnout over time was independently predicted by job stress, poor
supervisor support, low satisfaction with clients and poor self-esteem;
together however they accounted for only 28% of the variance.
60
In middle-aged medical graduates, generally, the effects of
psychological job demands, patient demands, physician resources and
work control were studied by Johnson et al. (1995); high job demands
were associated with both “work dissatisfaction” and psychological
disorder (GHQ) in univariate analyses. Regression analysis showed that
lack of control over work was independently associated with both
dissatisfaction and psychological disorder.
In a study by Schonfeld (1996), three self-reported work stress
indices predicted post-employment depression (CESD scale) and job
dissatisfaction, even when initial depression and personality were
controlled.
Relationships between work stressors and work climate, and job
morale and functioning were examined by Schaefer and Moos (1996).
Initial and 8-month follow-up data was obtained from 405 staff in 14
long-term care facilities. Relationship and workload stressors were
related to less job satisfaction and intent to stay in the job, and more job-
related distress, depression, and physical symptoms. Patient care task
stressors were associated with better outcomes. More positive work
climates were linked to higher job morale. Initial work stressors predicted
poorer functioning, and coworker cohesion predicted more intent to stay
in the job at follow-up.
61
A paper by Chen and Miller (1997) summarized research on both
organizational and individual characteristics positively correlated to
teacher stress. Organizational characteristics are time constraints,
workload, job demands, role conflict, role ambiguity, income, resources,
class size, administrative bureaucracy, autonomy/participation in
decision-making, collegiality, student discipline and interaction, reward
and recognition, and career advancement. Individual characteristics are
age, marital status, and gender. Teachers found stress increased by time
factors, workloads, role conflict and ambiguity, inadequate income and
resources, low autonomy, and issues related to the classroom
environment. Individual characteristics contributing to stress included
age, experience, gender, and marital status. Recommendations for
administrators and teachers include: wider knowledge of the
organizational and individual characteristics to help school systems and
administrators develop systemic interventions to alleviate teacher stress;
and greater teacher awareness of stress factors, which will lead teachers
to have greater compassion for themselves, resulting in enhanced coping
effectiveness.
Hotopf and Wessely (1997) revealed that the implications of work-
related stress include the effects on worker satisfaction and productivity,
their mental and physical health, absenteeism and its economic cost, the
wider impact on family function and finally, the potential for employer
62
liability. While depression is the most likely adverse psychological
outcome, the range of other possible “psychological” problems include
“burnout”, alcohol abuse, unexplained physical symptoms,
“absenteeism”, chronic fatigue and accidents, sick building syndrome and
repetitive strain injury.
In a national survey of physicians done by Kaplan et al. (1999),
comparison was made of physician morale, job stress, perceived time
pressures, practice volume and sense of autonomy over practice, to the
quality of physicians' communication with patients. It was found that the
impact of current pressures on physicians to increase productivity may
come at some cost to the morale of the physician workforce and may in
turn have undesirable consequences for the quality of interpersonal care
they provide. Other research has documented the relationship of quality
of interpersonal care to patients' health outcomes.
In another study, Bliese and Britt (2001) examined the degree to
which individuals' reactions to stressors were influenced by the quality of
their shared social environments. Based on social support theory, they
proposed that individuals in positive social environments would show
lower levels of strain when exposed to stressors than would individuals in
negative social environments. The quality of the shared social
environment was assessed by measuring the degree of consensus among
group members about an issue of importance to the group, namely, about
63
the group leadership. Social influence theory provides compelling reasons
to believe that this measure of consensus should be a strong indicator of
the quality of the social environment within the groups. In multilevel
analyses using a sample of 1923 soldiers who were members of 52
Companies deployed in Haiti, they found that the quality of the social
environment moderated relationships between (a) work stressors and
morale; and (b) work stressors and depression.
The findings by Redfern et al. (2002) revealed a staff group with a
fairly high level of job dissatisfaction and stress, who were, nevertheless,
very committed to the nursing home. The morale of the residents was
good although the residents rated the home atmosphere lower than the
staff did. Significant correlations emerged in the expected direction,
between satisfaction, commitment, stress and quality of care perceived by
staff. The correlations between home atmosphere perceived by residents,
and their morale and mental health were low; further investigation is
needed with a larger sample.
According to Lewandowski (2003), “inadequate communication
and unrealistic expectations result in staff overload and feelings of
isolation”. When employees feel isolated and that they lack power,
frustration emerges. Employees may sink into a work depression.
Supervisors and managers need to connect with employees by inviting
64
conversation and suggested improvements that could help reduce
workplace frustration.
A leading organizational psychologist argues poor organizational
culture, workplace morale and leadership are much more likely to result
in employee stress claims than specific stressful events or excessive
workloads. Programmes that deal with organizational health and morale -
rather than ones that try to eliminate specific stressors - will consequently
be far more effective in reducing an organization’s stress claims said
Cotton (2003).
In yet another study by Dale (2004) it was found that when army
leaders fail to control battlefield stress, they lose as many soldiers to
combat stress as they do to enemy bullets. Even when they are well
trained, these soldiers are more likely to collapse in the face of great
stress. Units with high morale and esprit de corps, however, lose only
10% as many troops to stress. The training and preparation are important,
but the high sense of teamwork makes all the difference.
In their study, Calsyn and Roades (2006) tested the following
hypotheses: (1) Stress has more of a negative impact on the life
satisfaction of those under age 75 than those over age 75; (2) social
support has more of a positive effect on life satisfaction in those under
age 75 than those over age 75; and (3) the buffering effect of social
65
support is stronger in the under age 75 group than the over age 75 group.
None of the three hypotheses was supported, contrary to prior research.
Studies on Job Stress and Job Involvement
It was observed that there was hardly any study that exhibited
direct relationship between these two variables. However, directions for
further research on the given variables were available in some of the
studies.
One element of the work-non-work interface is the conflict a
person may experience between the work role and other life roles. Kahn
et al. (1964) identified such interrole conflict as a significant source of
strain for nearly one-third of the men in their national sample.
The literature concerning dual-career family stress and coping was
reviewed by Skinner (1980). Although acknowledging stressful aspects of
dual-career living, it was found that most participants defined their life-
style positively. Achieving a balance between the advantages and
disadvantages of the life-style appears to be the overriding concern of
most dual-career couples.
An examination by Greenhaus and Beutell (1985) of the literature
on conflict between work and family roles suggests that work-family
conflict exists when: (a) time devoted to the requirements of one role
66
makes it difficult to fulfil requirements of another; (b) strain from
participation in one role makes it difficult to fulfil requirements of
another; and (c) specific behaviours required by one role make it difficult
to fulfil the requirements of another.
This “spillover” effect of work stressors on mood at home was
found to be greater than the “spillover” effect of stressors at home on
mood at work in a study conducted by Leiter and Durup (1996).
Studies on Job Stress, Employee Morale and Job Involvement
There has been hardly any study showing a direct relationship
among these three variables. However, scope for future research in some
of the works hinted at having such a study on the subject.
Organizational and individual changes resulting from severe
environmental stress in three research and development organizations
were studied by Hall and Mansfield (1971) at the beginning and the end
of a 20-month period. The changes were examined with both longitudinal
and independent sample data. The greatest changes occurred in the way
researchers perceived their jobs and their organizations rather than their
self-perceptions or attitudes toward their work. Despite the greatly
decreased satisfactions experienced by the researchers, their job
involvement and aspiration levels did not change greatly, and their
67
intrinsic motivation decreased in one of the two samples studied. It was
concluded that this lack of expected individual coping behaviour must be
associated with high levels of internal strain for the researchers, although
some strain was probably reduced by becoming alienated from the
organization.
The results of a study by Billingsley and Cross (1992) suggested
that work related variables, such as leadership support, role conflict, role
ambiguity, and stress are better predictors of commitment and job
satisfaction than are demographic variables. Generally, the findings were
similar for general and special educators.
In a community-based study by Frone et al. (1995), of 795
employed adults, work pressure, lack of autonomy and role ambiguity
predicted subsequent depression but job involvement did not. Besides,
there was only limited support for job involvement having any stress
moderating influence on the relationships between role ambiguity and
both physical health and alcohol use. There was no evidence for a
moderating effect on depression. In two earlier studies, one in nurses
(Firth and Britton, 1989) found some moderating effect, while another in
supermarket managers (Batlis, 1980) did not.
Results of a study by Babin and Boles (1996) suggested that
employee perceptions of co-worker involvement and supervisory support
can reduce stress and increase job satisfaction. Other results indicated a
68
positive relationship between role conflict and job performance, a
positive relationship between job performance and job satisfaction, and
that job performance mediates effects of role stress on satisfaction.
In a study by Shadur et al. (1999) data was collected using a survey
of 269 employees of an information technology company. The authors
argued that employee involvement is composed of three essential
variables, namely, participation in decision-making, teamwork, and
communications. Three hierarchical regression analyses were carried out
with each of the employee perception of involvement variables as
dependent variables. Employee demographic data, employee affective
attitudes (job satisfaction, commitment, and stress), and three dimensions
of organizational climate (bureaucracy, innovation, and support) were
entered into the regression analyses. The results showed that supportive
climates and commitment significantly predicted each of the employee
involvement variables.
In a study by Burke (2000) on “workaholism”, job involvement did
not correlate with measures of psychological distress/well-being. In
relation to employee factors and the impact on psychological health, that
of the three components of “workaholism” studied (job involvement,
personal drive and lack of enjoyment), only the latter two variables
correlated with poor health indices in MBA graduates as per Burke’s
study.
69
The study carried out by Chiu et al. (2005) provided the results that
global job satisfaction influences turnover intentions, and organizational
commitment is more for internals than externals. The individuals who
believe they are in control are called internals, and people who believe
external forces (luck, fate or powerful others) are in control are called
externals. Organizational commitment influences turnover intentions
similarly for both internals and externals. Furthermore, the influence of
perceived job stress on job satisfaction and organizational commitment
was stronger for externals than internals. Finally, leadership support
influences job satisfaction more for internals than externals.
The purpose of a study by Burke et al. (2006) was to examine
potential consequences of workaholism among 98 women business
graduates in early careers. The findings indicated that workaholism
components generally had significant relationships with the validating job
behaviours, work outcomes and indicators of psychological well-being
but not with extra work satisfactions.
Another research by Abdel-Halim (2007) examined the moderating
or buffering effects of two social support variables - support from the
work group and from the supervisor - on the relationships of role conflict
and ambiguity to intrinsic job satisfaction, job involvement and job
anxiety. Data was collected from a sample of 89 middle-lower managerial
personnel in a large, heavy equipment manufacturing firm in the
70
Midwest. The moderated regression technique was used in data analysis.
Significant interactions were obtained between the role variables and both
social support variables. The results were in the predicted direction for
positive work outcomes (i.e., job satisfaction and involvement) and
contrary to prediction for negative work outcome (i.e., job anxiety).
From the aforementioned review of literature, it is clear that many
authors have undertaken the three variables, viz. job stress, employee
morale and job involvement in their studies separately, while certain
studies have been conducted taking two variables together, and still some
of the researchers have even studied all the three variables collectively.
However, it is also evident that the banking sector has not been explored
fully in this regard. Hence, there exists enough scope for more research in
the field.
NEED FOR THE STUDY
In the light of dearth of empirical literature, the present research
work gains greater importance to fill the gap in the study of the three
variables, viz. job stress, employee morale and job involvement
especially in the Indian banking sector. The studies already conducted in
this field provide only a partial understanding of the subject. In a high-
stress, disempowering environment quality of human resource is bound to
devalue. The downward spiral of high stress, weakened performance, and
negative consequences creates more stress. Consequently, it results in a
71
gradual erosion of an organization's intellectual assets especially human
resource. Employees bear the brunt of job stress, paying with their
physiological and psychological health. This is then most commonly
exhibited by way of low employee morale and is most likely to have its
effect on other personality and situation governed variables such as job
involvement. Investing in conditions that are conducive to fostering
appropriate levels of job stress among employees can be an effective
strategy to improve employee morale and job involvement. Employees
working under apt pressure, positive employee morale and considerable
job involvement are a sure formula for extracting greater contribution
from employees, enhanced organizational effectiveness and therefore,
growth and profitability of the organization.
Majority of the former studies discussed the casual cause and effect
of the three variables chiefly focusing on health aspects, productivity,
efficiency, absenteeism and turnover concerns evading the psychological
facet of the same. Most of our knowledge about the psychological side of
these variables especially in relation to each other is derived from our
day-to-day experiences and hearsay rather than a comparative, systematic
scientific analysis. This study, therefore, attempts an objective view of
job stress, employee morale and job involvement, and a comprehensive
study of their relationship especially in perspective of the Indian banking
sector.
72
Banking sector in India is one of the key constituents of service
sector which thrives on serving the customers well. For beating
competition banks require high morale bearing employees to deal with
customers positively, amicably and effectively. Also, for bank’s
efficiency, dedicated and job involved employees would prove to be an
asset bearing in mind the present scenario of rising costs, falling budgets
and employee shortages. However, over a period the sector has had to
deal with immense stress in coming to terms with the whirlwind of
change associated to policy amendments, globalization and liberalization,
ingress of private and MNC competitors, rapid technological advances
especially computerization, changed work patterns, downsizing, rigid
target completion schedules, enormous work overload, heightened
performance expectations, etc. The mayhem of increased stress has
resulted in serious repercussions on the social, economical and
psychological domains of the bank employees and their relations, most
probable ones including employee morale and job involvement issues.
Somehow, this sector has not been tapped much in terms of job stress,
employee morale and job involvement studies despite it providing an
enormous scope for an explicit analysis of the kind of impact job stress
has on employee morale and job involvement. It also provides the
divergence for study across three sectors of banks along with aiding in a
gender based comparison of bank executives on the basis of selected
variables.
73
Today, women are scaling new heights in all spheres of life;
personal and professional. Feathers of pleasing adjectives are endlessly
being added to their caps; multi-tasking, role juggling, multi-managing to
name a few. But along comes a corresponding package of associated job
stress and other personality and situation related issues like employee
morale and job involvement. However, literature review suggests that
women studies on these variables have been rather few, if not totally
absent. This study therefore, also attempts to draw a gender based
comparison in the banking sector on the basis of job stress, employee
morale and job involvement so as to have a better insight into the
prevalent position.
In sum, India being the second largest human resource bank in the
world needs to manage and eradicate stress and related issues so as to
save the worst nightmare that the future can become for all sectors
including banks. This study, thus, is beneficial for human resource in
general and the banking sector employees in particular as benefits could
be reaped from the study’s findings to eradicate detrimental human
resource policies and to further incorporate policies leading to optimum
level of job stress, higher level of employee morale and appropriate level
of job involvement leading to more productive and efficient workforce.
Findings from this study could also act as secondary data for further
research.
References
Abdel-Halim, Ahmed A. (2007) Affective Responses to Job S Behavior, Vol. 3, No. Agho, Augustine O. (1993) An Empirical Test of a Causal Model”, No. 8, pp. 1007-1027. Allport, Gordon W. (1944) for the Psychological Study of Social Issues Boston, p. 22. Ansbacher, H.L. (1950), “Testing Management & Workers Reactions in Germany during World Vol. 5, pp. 38-49. Applewhite, Phillip B. (1965) Cliffs Prentice-Hall, Inc., N. Aro, S.; and Hasan J. (1987) and Morbidity”, Annual Clinical Research 68. Babin, Barry J.; and Boles Co-worker Involvement Role Stress, Performance and Job S Vol. 72, No. 1, pp. 57 Batlis, N.C. (1980), “Job Invol Moderators of Role-perception/Individual Psychology Report, 46, pp. 111Beehr, T.A.; and Newman, J.E. Organizational Effectiveness: A Facet Analysis, Model and Literature Review”, Person Billingsley, Bonnie S.; and Commitment, Job Satisfaction, and Intent to Stay in Tea Comparison of General and Special Educators”, Special Education, Vol.
74
(2007), “Social Support and Managerial Responses to Job Stress”, Journal of Organizational
No. 4, pp. 281-295.
(1993), “Determinants of Employee Job Satisfaction: Empirical Test of a Causal Model”, Human Relations, Vol.
1027.
(1944), Civilian Morale: II Year Book of the Society Psychological Study of Social Issues, Houghton Mifflin Co.
22.
“Testing Management & Workers Reactions in Germany during World War-II”, American Psychological Review
(1965), Organizational Behavior, Englewood Hall, Inc., N. Jersey, p.25.
(1987), “Occupational Class, Psychosocial Snnual Clinical Research, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 62
8.
Boles, James S. (1996), “The Effects of Perceived worker Involvement and Supervisor Support on Service P
Stress, Performance and Job Satisfaction”, Journal of Retailing, pp. 57-75.
“Job Involvement and Locus of Control as perception/Individual-outcome Relationships”, 46, pp. 111-119.
Newman, J.E. (1978), "Job Stress, Employee Health and Organizational Effectiveness: A Facet Analysis, Model and
Personnel Psychology, Vol. 31, pp. 665
, Bonnie S.; and Cross, Lawrence H. (1992), “Predictors of Job Satisfaction, and Intent to Stay in Teaching: A General and Special Educators”, The Journal of
, Vol. 25, No. 4, pp. 453-471.
anagerial Journal of Organizational
atisfaction: , Vol. 46,
Civilian Morale: II Year Book of the Society , Houghton Mifflin Co.,
22.
“Testing Management & Workers Reactions in American Psychological Review,
, Englewood
, “Occupational Class, Psychosocial Stress , pp. 62-
8.
erceived and Supervisor Support on Service Provider
Journal of Retailing,
elationships”,
Health and
665-669.
(1992), “Predictors of ching: A
The Journal of
75
Bliese, Paul D.; and Britt, Thomas W. (2001), “Social Support, Group Consensus and Stressor-Strain Relationships: Social Context Matters”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 22, No. 4, pp. 425-436. Boon, Ooi Keng; Arumugam, Veeri; Safa, Mohammad Samaun; and Bakar, Nooh Abu (2007), “HRM and TQM: Association with Job Involvement”, Personnel Review, Vol. 36, No. 6, pp. 939-962. Borg, V.; Kristensen, T.S.; and Burr H. (2000), “Work Environment and Changes in Self-rated Health: A Five-year follow up Study”, Stress Medicine, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 37-47. Bose, S.K. (1958), “A Psychological Approach to the Productivity Movement”, Indian Journal of Psychology, No.2, pp. 195-204. Bose, S.K. (1965), “Employee Morale & Supervision”, Indian Journal of Psychology, No. 30, pp.117-125. Bozionelos, Nikos (2004), “The Big Five of Personality and Work Involvement”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 69-81. Bragg, Terry (2002), “Improving Employer/Employee Commitment”, Occupational Health & Safety, Vol. 71, No. 1, pp. 14-16. Brayfield, Arthur; and Crockett, Walter (1953), “Employer Attitude and Employee Performance”, Psychological Bulletin, Sept., p. 22. Brenner, S.O.; Soerbom, D.; and Wallius, E. (1985), “The Stress Chain: A Longitudinal Confirmatory Study of Teacher Stress, Coping and Social Support”, Journal of Occupational Psychology, Vol. 58, No.1, pp. 1-13. Brief, A.P.; and Aldag, R.J. (1976), “Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity: Integration of the Literature and Directions for Future Research”, Journal of Human Relations, Vol.34, No.1, pp. 43-66. Briner, R.B. (1997), “Improving Stress Assessment: Toward an Evidence-based Approach to Organizational Stress Interventions”, Journal of Psychosomatic Research, Vol. 43, No. 1, pp. 61-71.
76
Brown, Steven P. (1996), “A Meta-analysis and Review of Organizational Research on Job Involvement”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 120, No. 2, pp. 235-255. Burke, R.J. (2000), “Workaholism in Organizations: Psychological and Physical Well-being Consequences”, Stress Medicine, Vol. 16, No.1, pp. 11-16. Burke, R.J.; and Greenglass, E.R. (1995), “A Longitudinal Study of Psychological Burnout in Teachers”, Human Relations, Vol. 48, No.2, pp. 187-202. Burke, Ronald J.; Burgess, Zena; and Fallon, Barry (2006), “Workaholism among Australian Female Managers and Professionals: Job Behaviors, Satisfactions and Psychological Health”, Equal Opportunities International, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 200- 213. Burke, Ronald J. (2002), “The Ripple Effect”, Nursing Management, Vol. 33, No. 2, pp. 41-42. Calsyn, Robert J.; and Roades, Laurie A. (2006), “Stress, Social Support,
and Morale: Failure to Replicate Age Effects”, Journal of Community Psychology, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 373-377.
Caplan, R.D.; and Jones, K.W. (1975), "Effects of Work Load, Role Ambiguity, and Type A personality on Anxiety, Depression, and Heart Rate", Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 60, pp. 713-719. Carayon, Pascale (1993), “Job Design and Job Stress in Office Workers”, Ergonomics, Volume 36, No. 5, pp. 463-477. Carmeli, Abraham (2005), “Exploring Determinants of Job Involvement:
An Empirical Test Among Senior Executives”, International Journal of Manpower, Vol. 26, No. 5, pp. 457-472.
Central Labour Institute (1970), Yearly Report Industrial Psychology Division, Bombay. Chatterjee, A. (1961), Satisfaction and Productivity, Ph.D. Thesis, Submitted to Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore.
77
Chen, Margaret; and Miller, Geri (1997), “Teacher Stress: A Review of the International Literature”, http://eric.ed.gov, Retrieved on 12 May, 2009. Chermiss, C. (1980), Staff Burnout: Job Stress in Human Service, Sage, Beverly Hills, pp. 254-260. Cherry, N. (1978), “Stress, Anxiety and Work: A Longitudinal Study”, Journal of Occupational Psychology, Vol. 5, No.3, pp. 259-70. Chiu, Chou-Kang; Chien, Chi-Sheng; Lin, Chieh-Peng; and Hsiao, Ching Yun (2005), “Understanding Hospital Employee Job Stress and Turnover Intentions in a Practical Setting: The Moderating Role of Locus of Control”, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 24, No.10, pp. 837-855. Choudhry, K.; and Pal, A.K. (1968), “Production Planning and Organizational Morale”, in A.H. Rubenstein and C.J. Habertroh (eds.), Some Theories of Organization, Homewood III, Richard D. Irwin, pp. 185-196. Cooper, C.L.; and Cartwright, S. (1997), “An Intervention Strategy for Workplace Stress”, Journal of Psychosomatic Research, Vol. 43, No.1, pp. 7-16. Cortis, Rachelle; and Cassar, Vincent (2005), “Perceptions of and about Women as Managers: Investigating Job Involvement, Self-esteem and Attitudes”, Women in Management Review, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 149-164. Cotton, Peter (2003), “Poor Leadership and Morale Responsible For Employee Stress”, www.actu.asn.au, Retrieved on 6 June, 2009. Dale, Collie (2004), “Control Stress with High Morale”, www.ambafrance-do.org, Retrieved on 14 October, 2009. Dale, Yodder (1972), Personnel Management and Industrial Relations, Prentice-Hall of India, N. Delhi, p. 527. Elankumaran, S. (2004), “Personality, Organizational Climate and Job Involvement: An Empirical Study”, Journal of Human Values, Vol. 10, No.2, pp. 117-130.
78
Emery, Charles R.; and Barker, Katherine J. (2007), “Effect of Commitment, Job Involvement and Teams on Customer Satisfaction and Profit”, Team Performance Management, Vol. 13, No. 3 / 4, pp. 90-101. Fedor, Donald B.; John, M. Maslyn; Walter, D. Davis; and Kieran, Mathieson (2001), “Performance Improvement Efforts in response to Negative Feedback: The Roles of Source Power and Recipient Self- esteem”, Journal of Management, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 79-96. Feilder, Emma Donaldson; Yarker, Jo; and Lewis, Rachel (2008), “Line Management Competence: The Key to Preventing and Reducing Stress at Work”, Journal of Strategic HR Review, Vol. 7, No.2, pp. 11-16. Fenwick, Rudy; and Tausig, Mark (1994), “The Macroeconomic Context of Job Stress”, Journal of Health and Social Behaviour, Vol. 35, pp. 266-282. Firth, H.; and Britton, P. (1989), ‘‘Burnout, Absence and Turnover Amongst British Nursing Staff”, Journal of Occupational Psychology, Vol. 62, No.1, pp. 55-59. Flippo, E.B. (1961), Principles of Personnel Management, McGraw- Hill, N. York, pp. 416-417. French, P.Jr.; and Caplan, R.D. (1972), “Organizational Stress and Individual Strain”,The Failure of Success, AMACOM, New York. Freund, Anat; and Carmeli, Abraham (2003), “An Empirical Assessment: Reconstructed Model for Five Universal Forms of Work Commitment”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 18, No. 7, pp. 708-725. Frone, M.R.; Russell, M.; and Cooper, M.L. (1995), “Job Stressors, Job Involvement and Employee Health: A Test of Identity Theory”, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 68, No. 1, pp. 1-11. Fuimano, Julie (2005), "Harness the Power of Praise", Nursing Management, Vol. 36, No. 1, pp. 8-9.
79
Ganguli, H.C. (1961), Industrial Productivity and Motivation, Asia Publishing House, Bombay. Ganster, Daniel C.; and Schaubroeck, John (1991), “Work Stress and Employee Health”, Journal of Management, Vol. 17, No.2, pp. 235-271. Gardner, E.F.; and Thompson, G.G. (1972), Social Relations and Morale in Small Groups, Syraouse University, Appleton Century Crofts Inc. Glickman, L.; Tanaka, J.S.; and Chan, E. (1991), “Life Events, Chronic Strain and Psychological Distress: Longitudinal Causal Models”, Journal of Community Psychology, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 283-305. Gomez-Mejia, Luis R. (1990), “Women's Adaptation to Male-dominated Occupations”, International Journal of Manpower, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 11-16. Gordery, J.L.; Mueller, W.S.; and Smith, L.M. (1991), “Attitudinal and Behavioural Effects of Autonomous Group Working: A Longitudinal Study”, Academy Management Journal, Vol. 34, pp. 464-76. Greenhaus, Jeffrey H.; and Beutell, Nicholas J. (1985), “Sources of Conflict Between Work and Family Roles”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 20, No.1, pp. 76-88. Gurin, G.; Veroff, J.; and Feld, S. (1960), Americans View their Mental Health, Basic Books, New York. Gyllensten, Kristina; and Palmer, Stephen (2005), “The Role of Gender in Workplace Stress: A Critical Literature Review”, Health Education Journal, Vol. 64, No.3, pp. 271-288. Hall, Douglas T.; and Mansfield, Roger (1971), “Organizational and Individual Response to External Stress”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 16, No.4, pp. 533-547. Harris, O.J. (1976), Managing People at Work, John Wiley and Sons, N. York, pp. 237-38. Health Canada (2002), Report on Mental Illness in Canada, October.
80
Heinisch, D.A.; and Jex, S.M. (1997), “Negative Affectivity and Gender as Moderators of the Relationship between Work-related Stressors and Depressed Mood at Work”, Work Stress, Vol.11, No.1, pp. 46- 57. Hotopf, M.; and Wessely, S. (1997), “Stress in the Workplace: Unfinished Business”, Journal of Psychosomatic Research, Vol. 43, No.1, pp. 1-6. HRM International Digest (2008), “Happy Employees have a Good Work-Life Balance: Staff Trusted to Balance Personal Needs with Employment Responsibilities”, Vol. 16, No. 6, pp. 27-28. Iaffaldano, Michelle T.; and Muchinsky, Paul M. (1985), “Job Satisfaction and Job Performance: A Meta-analysis”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 97, No.2, pp. 251-273. Ivancevich, J.M.; Matteson, M.T.; and Preston, C. (1982), "Occupational Stress: Type A Behaviour and Physical Well-being", The Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 25, No.2, pp. 373-391. Jackson, S.; Schwab, R.; and Schuler, R. (1986), “Toward an Understanding of the Burnout Phenomenon”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 61, pp. 630-40. Jackson, Susan E.; and Maslach, Christina (1982), “After Effects of Job- related Stress: Families as Victims”, Journal of Occupational Behaviour, Vol. 3, No.1, Special Issue [Current Issues in Occupational Stress: Theory, Research and Intervention], pp. 63-77. Jernigan, I.E.; Beggs, Joyce M.; and Kohut, Gary F. (2002), “Dimensions of Work Satisfaction as Predictors of Commitment Type”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 17, No. 7, pp. 564-579. Johnson, J.V.; Hall, E.M.; Ford, D.E.; Mead, L.A.; Levine, D.M.; Wang, N.Y.; and Klag, M.J. (1995), “The Psycho-social Work Environment of Physicians: The Impact of Demands and Resources on Job Dissatisfaction and Psychiatric Distress in a Longitudinal Study of Johns Hopkins Medical School Graduates”, Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Vol.37, No. 9, pp. 1151-59. Kahn, R. L.; Wolfe, D. M.; Quinn, R.; Snoek, J. D.; and Rosenthal, R. A. (1964), Organizational Stress, Wiley, New York.
81
Kanungo (1979), “The Concepts of Alienation and Involvement Revisited”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 86, pp. 119-38. Kaplan, S.H.; Greenfield, S.; Supran, S.; and Wilson, I.B. (1999), “Compromised Physician Morale, Time Pressures and the Quality of Interpersonal Care”, An Abstract, Association for Health Services Research, p. 408. Katz, Daniele; and Kahn, Robert (1978), The Social Psychology of Organizations, Wiley, N. York. Kawakarmi, N.; Araki, S.; and Kawashima, M. (1990), “Effects of Job Stress on Occurrence of Major Depression in Japanese Industry: A Case-control Study Nested in a Cohort Study”, Journal of Occupational Medicine, Vol. 32, No.8, pp. 722-725. Knoop, Robert (1995), “Relationships among Job Involvement, Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment for Nurses”, Journal of Psychology, Vol. 129, No.6, p. 643. Kuruuzum, Ayse; Cetin, Emre Ipekci; and Irmak, Sezgin (2009), “Path Analysis of Organizational Commitment, Job Involvement and Job Satisfaction in Turkish Hospitality Industry”, Tourism Review, Vol. 64, No.1, pp. 4-16. Landsbergis, Paul A.; and Vaughan, Eleanor Vivona (2006), “ Evaluation
of an Occupational Stress Intervention in a Public Agency”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 29-48.
Larson, Linda Lee (2004), “Internal Auditors and Job Stress”, Managerial Auditing Journal, Vol. 19, No.9, pp. 1119-1130. Leiter, M.P.; and Durup, M.J. (1996), “Work, Home, and in-between: A Longitudinal Study of Spillover”, Journal of Applied Behaviour/ Science, Vol. 32, No.1, pp. 29-47. Lewandowski, Cathleen (2003),"Organizational Factors contributing to Worker Frustration: The Precursor to Burnout", Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare, Vol. 30, No. 4, pp. 175-185. Library Personnel News (1998), “Employee Tips: What Motivates Employees?”, Library Personnel News, 12 (1-2), pp. 4-7.
82
Linz, Susan J.; Good, Linda K.; and Huddleston, Patricia (2006), “Worker Morale in Russia: An Exploratory Study”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 21, No. 5, pp. 415-437.
Lodahl, T.M.; and Kejner, M. (1965), “The Definition and Measurement of Job Involvement”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 49, pp. 24- 33. Lubans, John (2000), “"I'm So Low, I can't Get High": The Low Morale Syndrome and What to Do about It”, Library Administration & Management, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 218-221. Mayo, Elton G. (1947), The Human Problems of an Industrial Civilization, Harvard University, Boston. McFarland, D.F. (1978), Management Principles and Practices, Norton & Co., N. York, p. 517. Mckelvey, B.; and Sekaran, U. (1977), “Toward a Career-based Theory of Job Involvement: A Study of Scientists and Engineers”, Administrative Science Quarter, Vol. 22, pp. 281-305. McKnight, D. Harrison; Ahmad, Sohel; and Schroeder, Roger G. (2001), “When do Feedback, Incentive Control, and Autonomy Improve Morale? The Importance of Employee-Management Relationship Closeness”, Journal of Managerial Issues, Vol. 13, No. 4, pp. 466- 481. McManus, Kevin (2005),"Ask and Learn", Industrial Engineer, Vol. 37, No. 1, p. 18. Messmer, Max (2001), “Leading Your Team Through Change”, Strategic Finance, 83, No.4, pp. 8-10. Mills, L.B.; and Huebner, E.S. (1998), “A Prospective Study of Personality Characteristics, Occupational Stressors, and Burnout Among School Psychology Practitioners”, Journal of School Psychology, Vol. 36, No.1, pp. 103-20. Misra, S.; and Kalro, A. (1981), “Job Involvement of Intrinsically and Extrinsically Motivated Indian Managers: To Each According to his Need”, Human Relations, Vol. 34, pp. 419-26.
83
Mudrack, Peter E. (2004), “Job Involvement, Obsessive-compulsive Personality Traits, and Workaholic Behavioural Tendencies”, Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 17, No. 5, pp. 490-508. NIOSH (1999), “Stress at Work”, Department of Health and Human Services, U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Publication No. 99-101. Noor, N.M. (1995), “Work and Family Roles in relation to Women’s Well-being: A Longitudinal Study”, British Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 34, No.1, pp. 87-106. Parker, Donald F.; and DeCotiis, Thomas A. (1983), “Organizational Determinants of Job Stress", Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, Vol. 32, No. 2, pp. 160-177. Parks, Carole; Scully, Judy; West, Michael; and Dawson, Jeremy (2007), “High Commitment Strategies: It ain't what you do; it's the way that you do it”, Employee Relations, Vol. 29, No. 3, pp. 306-318. Pathak, R. D. (1983), “Job Involvement and Need Satisfaction of Bank Officers in India”, Research Note, Vol. 8, No. 4. Pestonjee, D.M. (1992), Stress and Coping the Indian Experience, Sage Publications, New Delhi. Phelan, J.; Schwartz, Je; Bromet, E.J.; Dew, M.A.; Parkinson, D.K.; Schulberg, H.C.; Dunn, LO; Blane, H.; and Curtis, E.C. (1991), “Work Stress, Family Stress and Depression in Professional and Managerial Employees”, Psychosom Med, Vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 999- 1012. Poulin, J.; and Walter, C. (1993), “Social Work Burnout: A Longitudinal Study”, Social Work Resource Abstract, Vol. 29, No. 4, pp. 5-11. Prosser, D.; Johnson, S.; and Kuipers, E. (1997), “Perceived Sources of Work Stress and Satisfaction Among Hospital and Community Mental Health Staff, and their Relation to Mental Health, Burnout and Job Satisfaction”, Journal of Psychology Research, Vol. 43, No.1, pp. 51-59.
84
Rabinowitz, Samuel; Hall, Douglas T.; and Goodale, James G. (1977), “Job Scope and Individual Differences as Predictors of Job Involvement: Independent or Interactive ?”, The Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp. 273-281. Rabinowitz, S.; and Hall, D.T. (1977), “Organization Research on Job Involvement”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 84, pp. 265-88. Redfern, Sally; Hannan, Shirina; Norman, Ian; and Martin, Finbarr (2002), “Work Satisfaction, Stress, Quality of Care and Morale of Older People in a Nursing Home”, Health & Social Care in the Community, Vol.10, No.6, pp. 512-517. Revicki, D.A.; Whitley, T.W.; Gallery, M.E.; and Allison, E.J. (1993), “The Impact of Work Environment Characteristics on Work-related Stress and Depression in Emergency Medical Residents: A Longitudinal Study”, Journal of Community Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 273-84. Reynolds, S. (1997), “Psychological Well-being at Work: Is Prevention Better than Cure?”, Journal of Psychosomatic Research, Vol. 43, No.1, pp. 93-102. Roach, Darrel E. (1958), “Dimensions of Employee Morale”, Personnel Psychology, Vol.2, No.3, pp. 419-431. Romanov, K.; Appelberg, K.; Honkasalo, M.L.; and Koskenvuo, M. (1996), “Recent Interpersonal Conflict at Work and Psychiatric Morbidity: A Prospective Study of 15,530 Employees Aged 24-64”, Journal of Psychosomatic Research, Vol.40, No.2, pp. 169-76. Ron, L. Cacioppe; and Graham, K. Kenny (1987), “Work Attitudes in an Employee-owned Company: Comparing Managers with Non- managers”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 17-22. Rotenberry, Paul F.; and Moberg, Philip J. (2007), “Assessing the Impact of Job Involvement on Performance”, Management Research News, Vol. 30, No. 3, pp. 203-215. Rout, U.; Cooper, C.L.; and Rout, J.K. (1996), “Job Stress Among British General Practitioners: Predictors of Job Dissatisfaction and Mental Ill Health”, Stress Med, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 155-66.
85
Rusbult, Caryl E.; and Farrell, Dan (1983), “A Longitudinal Test of the Investment Model: The Impact on Job Satisfaction, Job Commitment, and Turnover of Variations in Rewards, Costs, Alternatives, and Investments”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 68, No. 3, pp. 429-438. Schaefer, Jeanne A.; and Moos, Rudolf H. (1996), “Effects of Work Stressors and Work Climate on Long-term Care Staff's Job Morale and Functioning”, Research in Nursing & Health, Vol.19, No.1, pp. 63-73. Schaufeli, Wilmar B.; and Peeters, Maria C.W. (2000), “Job Stress and Burnout among Correctional Officers”, International Journal of Stress Management, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 19-48. Schonfeld, I.S. (1996), “Relation of Negative Affectivity to Self-reports of Job Stressors and Psychological Outcomes”, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, Vol.1, No.4, pp. 397-412. Scott, Dow; Bishop, James W.; and Chen, Xiangming (2003), “An Examination of the Relationship of Employee Involvement with Job Satisfaction, Employee Cooperation and Intention to Quit in U.S. Invested Enterprise in China”, International Journal of Organizational Analysis, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 3-19. Scott, Gail (2001), “Reviving Staff Spirit: A Key to Impressive Service”, Journal of Healthcare Management, Vol. 46, No. 5, pp. 293-295. Shadur, Mark A.; Kienzle, Rene; and Rodwell, John J. (1999), “The Relationship between Organizational Climate and Employee Perceptions of Involvement : The Importance of Support”, Group & Organization Management, Vol. 24, No. 4, pp. 479-503. Sinha, D.; and Nair, K.R. (1965), “A Study of Job Satisfaction in Factory Workers”, Indian Journal of Social Work, Vol. 26, pp. 1-8. Skinner, Denise A. (1980), “Dual-Career Family Stress and Coping: A Literature Review”, Family Relations, Vol. 29, No. 4, pp. 473-481. Spriegel, W.; and Lansburgh, E. (1957), Industrial Management, Asia Publishing House, Bombay. Sreelatha, P. (1991), “Stress: A Theoretical Perspective”, Stress: Sources, Effects, and Resolution Strategies and Stress Research Indian Perspective in Organizational Stress, Sage Publishing House, New Delhi, pp. 6-163.
86
Taris, T.W. (1999), “The Mutual Effects Between Job Resources and Mental Health: A Prospective Study Among Dutch Youth”, Genetic, Social and General Psychology Monographs, Vol. 125, No. 4, pp. 433-50. Taylor, H.; and Cooper, C.L. (1989), “The Stress-prone Personality: A Review of the Research in the context of Occupational Stress”, Stress Med, Vol. 5, pp. 17-27. Tschohl, John (1999), “The Qualities of Successful People”, Managing Service Quality, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 78-80. Van Sell, Brief and Schuller (1976), "Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity: Integration of the Literature and Directions for Future Research," Journal of Human Relations, Vol.34, No.1, pp. 43-66. Watson, Wyatt (1998), “Disability Management: The Key to Staying @ Work”, 2nd Annual Survey Report, Watson Wyatt Worldwide and Washington Business Group on Health. Weinberg, A.; and Creed F. (2000), “Stress and Psychiatric Disorder in Health Care Professionals and Hospital Staff”, Lancet, 355(9203), pp. 533-537. Zapf, D.; Dormann, C.; and Frese, M. (1996), “Longitudinal Studies in Organizational Stress Research: A Review of the Literature with reference to Methodological Issues”, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, Vol. 1, No.2, pp. 145-69.