Stress level and its influencing factors among employees in a plastic manufacturing and the implication towards work performance

Tags: performance, individual, job satisfaction, Stress, Workplace Bullying, job performance, research, hygiene factors, relationship, Job stress, Occupational Stress, Organizational Behavior, working conditions, motivating factors, United State, Maslow, organizational climate, Herzberg Theory, motivation, work performance, James Harry Harris, Sector Education and Training Authority, Sage Publication, McGraw Hill, Betty Jane Punnett, Journal of Nursing Management, Adult Bullying, Elizabeth M. Altmaier, Education Training & Development Practices, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Imtiaz Ahmad Dogar, Multiple regression in behavioral research, Clinton B. Walker, level of stress, level stress, employee stress, Robert J. Lichtman, Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, National Law Journal, Michael G. Rumsey, Workplace Stress, Randall R. Ross, Sage Publication Ltd, New York, Ushus Journal of Business Management, Herzberg, Theory Vroom, hygiene factor, motivation factors, organization design, organization climate, Susan Cooper, satisfaction, stress profile, employee dissatisfaction, Motivational factors, motivation factor, Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Global Management, Stress Research Sciences, Stress Research Section, Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, Mark E. Mendenhall, Health Administration Press, meaningful recognition, individuals, expectancy theory, Workplace Stress Management, Motivation and Personality
Content: 5932
Azizi Yahaya et al./ Elixir Psychology 41 (2011) 5932-5941
Available online at (Elixir International Journal)
Elixir Psychology 41 (2011) 5932-5941
Stress level and its influencing factors among employees in a plastic manufacturing and the implication towards work performance Azizi Yahaya1, Noordin Yahaya2, Abdul Talib Bon3, Sharifuddin Ismail2 and Tan Chui Ing1 1Faculty of Education , Universiti Technologi Malaysia. 2University Teknologi Mara Melaka, Malaysia. 3Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia.
ARTICLE INFO Article history: Received: 27 September 2011; Received in revised form: 2 December 2011; Accepted: 15 December 2011; Keywords Stress, Factors, Employees, Manufacturing, Work performance.
ABSTRACT Stress has been viewed as an inevitable consequence of work life. A worker will fell stress when his or her does not match their job requirements. Work stress come from a variety of sources and it can affect people in different ways. In the report The Scale of Occupational Stress (Smith et al., 2000 in Jeremy, 2005) it was estimated that there were 5 million workers suffering the high level of stress at work. The study shows the important outcomes that approximately one in five workers reported stress arising from work. There were cause by excessive workloads or lack of managerial support, ill health and back pain, together with certain health related activities such as smoking and alcohol intake. © 2011 Elixir All rights reserved.
Introduction Stress is caused by an existing stress-causing factor or "stressor". Work stress is a chronic disease caused by conditions in the workplace that indirectly affect an individual`s performance and overall his or her healthy body. In facts of employee stress is negatively correlated to their work performance. More the level of the stress, lower of the performance was. Today it is believed that even a little bit of stress will slow down employees' work performance. Job stress is considered increasing and has become challenge for the employer and because high level stress is results in low productivity, increased absenteeism and collection to other employee problems like alcoholism, drug abuse, hypertension and host of cardiovascular problems (Meneze, 2005). Sometimes, organization gives an unrealistic expectations, especially in the time of corporate reorganizations, puts unhealthy and unreasonable pressures on the employee. Automatically it can be a great source of stress and suffering. Increased workload, extremely long work hours and intense pressure to perform at peak levels all the time leave an employee physically and emotionally drained. Jane & Alyssa, 2005 stated the Health, Safety and the Environment (HSE) brought in tough rules that require to monitor and tackle stress at work. If an organization fails to meet the requirements, they will face harsh financial penalties. It can cause the level of stress in the workplace. According to Mohamad Khan et al, (2005), manufacturing sector reported the highest number of industrial accidents from 1999 to 2003 compared to other industries. Siegrist and Klien in James, (2005) examined occupational stress and cardiovascular reactivity in blue worker. The three indicators were used to measure occupational stress: cumulated workload, worsening of job condition and high demand and low demand job security. Tele: E-mail addresses: [email protected] © 2011 Elixir All rights reserved
Robbins (2001) defines stress as a dynamic condition in which the individual is confronted with an opportunity, constraint, or demand related to what he or she desires and for which the outcome is perceived to be both uncertain and important. Stress can be caused by environmental, organizational, and individual variables (Matteson & Ivancevich, 1999; Cook & Hunsaker, 2001). Organizationalbased factors have been known to bring the job stress for employees at the workplace (Greenhaus and Beutell, 1985). Among the numerous organizational sources of stress, only two variables were investigated in this study namely organizational climate and workplace bullying. Malaysia, as a developing country that relies on manufacturing industries is facing the similar. Creating a high performance organization is a popular theme in any training and development field. To survive in these competitive times, companies can't afford anything less. Creating a high performance organization requires companies understand what factors influence employee's work performance. Thus, an evaluation on stress among the blue collar worker is really important towards the work performance. Work performance and occupational both indicate workers' appraisal toward the workplace and work itself. Organization is always facing problem changing worker after a training provided. Unhealthy organizational culture such as absenteeism, intention to leave and not committed to the organization's goal. Azizi, el 2009, found out that an organization needs to increase job satisfaction by reducing occupational stress. By reducing the level of stress, companies can reduce the intention to leave and absenteeism. Individual work performance is a core concept within work and organizational psychology. Every organization needs highly performing from the individuals in order to meet the goal, to
Azizi Yahaya et al./ Elixir Psychology 41 (2011) 5932-5941
deliver the products and finally achieve competitive advantage. Performance is behaviour. It is something that people actually and it can observed (Frank & Jeffrey, 2010). In the work setting, it only can be described with the help of individual worker. In the working setting, performance includes only those action or behaviours that are relevant to the organization's goal and can be measured in terms of each individual's proficiency. Thus, performance is what the organization hires an employee to do and to do well. Since the early 1980's and up until today many organizations have realized the important of paying more and more the strategic planning. Employees are an important part in the success of organizations. In a working environment, dangerous tasks or work settings, high noise level, Toxic chemicals, dust, overcooling, unpleasant odours, and other stressful factors can lead to illness or disease. Assembly line work is associated with stress because it is repetitious, monotonous, noisy, and lacks challenge and control (Lapierre, 2006). A study of 662 blue collar workers in the Netherlands found that 30% of the workers in factory jobs, farming, and highway transport dealing with physical stressors, such as excessive noise (Siegall, 2000). The stressors which cause them stress have had a great impact influence toward the work performance. Workplace bullying is increasingly being recognized as a serious problem within the work environment. Previous studies in European countries have reported the dominant of workplace bullying and its association with poor mental health, using the Negative Acts Questionnaire-Revised (NAQ-R: Einarsen & Hoel, 2001). Literature review Job Stress Job stress is "a situation in which some characteristics of the work situation are thought to cause poor psychological or physical health, or to cause risk factors making poor health more likely." Job stress arises when demands exceed abilities, while job-related strains are reactions or outcomes resulting from the experience of stress (Westman, 2005). Job stress is a chronic disease caused by conditions in the workplace that negatively cause an individual`s performance and or overall well-being of his body and mind. In some cases, job stress can be disabling. In chronic cases a psychiatric consultation is usually required to validate the reason and degree of work related stress. The U.S.A's NIOSH define job stress as the harmful physical and emotional responses that occur when the requirement if the job do nor match the capabilities, resources or need of the worker (Salih, 2003). In one investigating of industry worker in United State, Brewlow and Buell, 1966 found that individual under 45 years old of age who worked more 48 hours a week had twice in risk of death of coronary hearth disease (Susan & Cary, 1997). For this study, job stress is defined as the experienced discrepancy between the stressors of the environment and job performance of the individual. Work performance Normally, job performance refers an expectation company in term of quality and quantity from each employee. Performance is an extremely important criterion that related to organization outcome and success. Among the most commonly accepted theories of job performance comes from the work of John P. Campbell and colleagues (1993). Coming from psychological perspective, Campbell describes job performance as an individual level variable. This means that a single person gives rise to performance which is concept totally different from
organizational performance or national performance because they are at a higher level than job performance (Campbell et al., 1993). The process of being evaluated and appraised can be experience for all. It must be recognized that performance appraisals are anxiety provoking, both individual being examined and someone doing judging and appraising. Sometimes, the person making performance judgement faces the threat in some cases, as well as interpersonal strains and the responsibility of making decisions which can affect an individual's livelihood (Susan & Cary 1997). For the purposes of this study, the term "work performance" refers to a general principle underlying most human behavior, namely that in all social relationships the co-workers give and expect something. Organizational Climate Organizational climate as known as Corporate Climate is the process of quantifying the "culture" of an organization. It is a set of properties of the work environment, perceived directly or indirectly by the employees, that is assumed to be a major force in influencing employee behavior. Ekvall (1987) states that the organizational climate arises in the confrontation between the individuals and the organizational situation. Forehand and Gilmer (1964) defined Organizational Climate as a `set of characteristics that (a) describe an organization and distinguish it from other organizations (b) are relatively enduring over time and (c) it will influence their behavior in the organization.' Gregopoulos, 1963 defined Organizational Climate as a `normative structure of attitudes and behavioral standards which provided a basis for interpreting the situations and act as a source of pressure for directing activities.' Organization climate has been measured as a perceptual evaluation in term of attitude in term of attitudes and need satisfaction opportunities in the organization. Variables included in the study of organization climate are organization design, individual job characteristic, co-worker relationship, direct supervision, culture/work environment, work processes, communication, technology and customer satisfaction. The organizational climate in an organisation is important as it plays a large role in how individuals work together and may also significantly impact upon core aspects of employment such as job satisfaction and work performance. Organizational climate may identified by observing how employees interact with each other, the outcome and quality of end products, time management skills and values, workplace rules and the conflict at work, senior direction and control within the work environment. Workplace bullying Workplace bullying is about a personalized, often sustained attack on one colleague by another colleague using behaviours which are emotionally and psychologically punishing (Arynne, 2009). Workplace bullying constitutes any persistent behaviours, unwanted, offensive, humiliating behaviours towards an individual or group of employees. According Heather, workplace bullying is a essentially an aggressive act, usually involve psychological violence but sometimes minor physical aggression. It is important to note that bullying may have extremely serious and possibly life-threatening. Many researchers distinguished many types of bullying. Work related bullying versus person related bullying. The former includes the behaviours as giving unreasonable deadline or unmanageable workloads. Person related bullying consists of
Azizi Yahaya et al./ Elixir Psychology 41 (2011) 5932-5941
such behaviours as making insulting remarks, teasing, spreading gossip and playing practical jokes (Einarsen, 2001). According to American Psychological Association, 2005, the definition of a typical bully is a person whom exhibits "aggressive behavior" that is intended to cause harm or distress, occurs repeatedly over time, and occurs in a relationship in which there is an imbalance of power or strength. In this study, the term of bullying in this study refers to a situation in which one or more individuals perceive they are subjected to the persistent and repetitive negative acts that are meant to harm. This study is concerned with investigating the relationship among organizational climate, workplace bullying, job stress and employees' job performance, organizational climate will measured by variances, organization design, individual job characteristic, co-worker relationship, direct supervision, culture/work environment, work processes, communication, technology and customer satisfaction. Workplace bullying measured by NAQ-R: Einarsen & Hoel, 2001 with variances person and work related bullying and physical or psychological Intimidation Bullying. This research also measured the level of stress with three variances of physical environment, job requirement and conflict at work by NIOSH. Before investigating in details, is useful to review the theories which will support the discussion in further chapter. In the case of this study, basically Theory Maslow is important contribute an overall understanding of what people need before they perform well in their job. Theory Herzberg developed by Frederick Herzberg believed that when an organization satisfies a worker's lower-order needs, the worker will reach "zero-level" of motivation (Mark et. al., 2009). Theoretical Framework of the Study Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs In 1954, Maslow first published Motivation and Personality, which introduced his theory about how people satisfy a variety of personal needs in the context of their work. He hypothesized, based on his observations as a humanistic psychologist, that there is a general pattern of needs recognition and satisfaction that people follow in generally the same sequence. He also theorized that a person could not recognize or pursue the next higher need in the hierarchy until his or her currently recognized need was substantially or completely satisfied, a concept called prepotency. Maslow's hierarchy of needs is shown in Table 1. It is often illustrated as a pyramid with the survival need at the broad-based bottom and the selfactualization need at the narrow top. Figure 1 Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs Maslow proposed five differences set of needs and arranged them hierarchically. Physiological needs were the lowest and self-actualization needs were the highest among the five categories. Physiological needs generally refer to basic need and are satisfied such as food, water and sleep. The category of security needs refer to an individual produce a secure environment. Love and social needs are associated with interpersonal factors refer to an individual's desire to be
accepted by other. Esteem needs are associated with being respected for capabilities. Self-actualization needs refer to the desire on the part of individual to develop her or his capacities to the fullest (Frank & Jeffery, 2010). Although Maslow's theory has not stood up under actual testing. It teaches supervisors one important lesson: unfulfilled needs, not fulfilled ones, motivate an individual. Effective supervisors understand that an individual is motivated by a unique combination of unfilled needs. Challenging and worthwhile jobs and meaningful recognition tend to enhance self-esteem lever probably presents supervisors with the greatest opportunity to motivate better performance (Carlene, 2010). According to various literature on motivation, individuals often have problems consistently articulating what they want from a job. Therefore, employers have ignored what individuals say that they want, instead telling employees what they want, based on what managers believe most people want under the circumstances. Frequently, these decisions have been based on Maslow's needs hierarchy, including the factor of prepotency. As a person advances through an organization, his employer supplies or provides opportunities to satisfy needs higher on Maslow's pyramid. Herzberg's Theory of Motivators and Hygiene Factors Since Maslow's five factor need theory was introduced psychologists have suggested a number of modifications. One of them was proposed by Herzberg that there were really two basic needs and not five. The two needs are called "hygiene needs" (Maslow's physical and security needs) and the "motivators need" (Maslow's social, esteem, and actualization needs) (Frank & Jeffery 2010). Herzberg`s theory combined motivating and hygiene factors, which assisted in determining job satisfaction. Maslow's need approach has been considerably modified by Frederick Herzberg and his associates. Their research purports to find two-factor theory of motivation. In one group of needs are such as company policy and administration, supervision, working conditions, interpersonal relations, salary, status, job security and personal life. In the second group, Herzberg listed certain satisfiers all related to job content. They included achievement, recognition, challenging work, advancement, and growth in the job (Koontz & Weihrich, 2008). Herzberg (1959) constructed a two-dimensional paradigm of factors affecting people's attitudes about work. According to this theory, people are influenced by two factors. Satisfaction and psychological growth was a factor of motivation factor. Dissatisfaction was a result of hygiene factor. Herzberg developed this theory to 200 accountants and engineers in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA. to find out what made them satisfied and dissatisfied in their job. The replied showed that the experiences they regarded as satisfying were not just the opposite of those that gave rise to dissatisfaction. An individual may have dislikes the job because of poor working conditions or indecisive management (Adrian Machay, 2006). Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory divides motivation and job satisfaction into two groups as known as motivation factors and hygiene factors. According to Herzberg, the motivating factors are the achievement, recognition, work itself, advancement, responsibility and possibility of growth. (Ruthankoon, 2003). Hygiene factors related to the environmental factors and are met by physical and psychological conditions in the workplace salary, working conditions, job security, co-workers and the management structure. Dissatisfaction will occur if these conditions are not met (Christine, 2001).
Azizi Yahaya et al./ Elixir Psychology 41 (2011) 5932-5941
Motivational factors are job centered. They relate directly to the job itself. That is, the individual's job performance, the job responsibilities, and the growth and recognition obtained from the job. Maintenance factors are peripheral to the job and are more related to the external environment of work (John & Thomas, 2002). From the two factors combining, it can result in fours scenarios. There is high hygiene with high motivation: the ideal situation where employees are highly motivated and have few complaints. High hygiene with low motivation: An employee has a few complaints but not high motivated. The job is perceived as a paycheck. Low hygiene with high motivation: An employee is motivated but has a lot of complaints. A situation where the job existing and challenging but salaries and work conditions not up to par. Low hygiene with low motivation: the worst situation, unmotivated employees with lots of complaints. In contrast, he determined from the data that the motivators were elements that enriched a person's job; he found five factors in particular that were strong determiners of job satisfaction: achievement, recognition, the work itself, responsibility, and advancement. These motivators (satisfiers) were associated with long-term positive effects in job performance while the hygiene factors produced only short-term changes in job attitudes and performance, which quickly fell back to its previous level. In summary, satisfiers describe a person's relationship with what she or he does, many related to the tasks being performed. Dissatisfiers, on the other hand, have to do with a person's relationship to the context or environment in which she or he performs the job. The satisfiers relate to what a person does while the dissatisfiers relate to the situation in which the person does what he or she does. From the pyramid the needs proposed by Maslow. As Adams (Frank and Jeffery, 2009) explain: Before you can hope to motivate employees you must understand their hierarchy of needs. An employee will not develop a need for things at the higher levels of the pyramid until they have totally satisfied their needs at lower levels (Sources: Adams 1996) (Frank and Jeffery. 2009). In this study, researcher based on this Herzberg Theory, stressors such as organizational climate grouped as hygiene factors and workplace bullying in motivating factors. Is there any significant for the stressors and the variables wowards job stress and job performance. Theory Vroom 1964 Vroom (Mukherjee, 2010) proposed the expectancy theory specifically in the context of work motivation. His model is based on three key variables: valence, instrumentality and expectancy. More specifically, outcome is usually considered as the end result or what people can expect from their job. Valence is the strength of an individual's preference for a reward, expectancy is the probability that particular action will lead to a desired reward and instrumentality shows an individual's estimate that performance will result in achieving the reward.
Expectancy refers to the extent, to which the person believes that his efforts will lead to the first level outcome. Instrumentality refers to the perceived relationship between the two level of outcomes. Motivation is the product of valance, expectancy and instrumentality. These three factors in the expectancy model may exist in an infinite number of combinations depending upon the range of valence and the degrees of expectancy and instrumentality. The combination that produces the strongest motivation is high positive valence, high expectancy and high instrumentality. If all the three are low, the resulting motivation will be weak. In other cases, motivation will be moderate. Similarly, the strength of avoidance behaviour will be determined by the negative valence and expectancy and instrumental factors. So, the motivational force will be highest when expectancy, instrumentality and valence are all high. The management must recognize factors for behaviour modification, so that these three elements achieve the highest value individually. An employee worker may exhibit a poor behaviour due to low effort-performance expectancy. He/she may lack the necessary skills and training to believe that his/her extra efforts will lead to better performance. The management could provide the relationship between efforts and performance. Low performance-reward instrumentality relationship is similar performance may not lead to similar rewards. The reward policy may be inconsistent and may depend upon factor other than performance, which the worker may not be aware of or may not consider fair. The management must re-evaluate the appraisal techniques and formulate policies that strengthen performancereward relationship as just and equitable. The important contribution of Vroom's model is that it explains how the goals of individuals influence their efforts and that the behaviour individuals select depends upon their assessment of the probability that the behaviour will successfully lead to the goal. For instance, all people in an organization may not place the same value on such job factors as promotion, high pay, job security and working conditions. In other words, they may rank them differently. Broom is of the opinion that what is important is the perception and value the individual places, high value on salary increase and perceives superior performance as instrumental in reaching that goal. According to broom, this individual will attempt towards superior performance in order to achieve the salary increase. One the other hand, another individual may highly value promotion and perceive political behaviour as instrumental in achieving it. This individual is not likely to emphasize superior performance to achieve the goal. In essence, Vroom emphasizes the importance of individual perception and assessment to organizational behaviour. What is important here is that what the individual perceives as the consequence of a particular behaviour is far more important than what the manager believes the individual should perceive. Thus, Vroom's model attempts to explain how individual's goals influence his efforts and like need-based models reveal that individual's behaviour is goal-oriented. Heinz 2008 stated the great attractions of the Vroom Theory is it recognizes the importance of individual needs and motivations. It thus difference of the simplistic features of the Maslow and Herzberg approaches. Vroom's theory sees more realistic. It fits the concept of harmony of objectives. An individual have personal goal that are different from the organizational goals, these can be harmonized. Furthermore, it is completely consistent with the system of managing by objectives.
Azizi Yahaya et al./ Elixir Psychology 41 (2011) 5932-5941
Justification for Herzberg Theory as Research Model It is important to lead employees to do what employers or customers want and to give satisfaction to employees in the workplace for improved productivity. Herzberg (1959) conducted a study to determine which factors in an employee's work environment caused satisfaction or dissatisfaction. He published his findings in a book entitled: The Motivation to Work. Herzberg's studies involved interviewing employees to understand what pleased or displeased employees about their work environment. Specifically, Herzberg inquired about the factors in their work environment that caused them satisfaction and what factors caused them dissatisfaction. He developed motivation hygiene theory to explain his results. Herzberg (1968) summarized that factors that cause job satisfaction (motivators) are different than the factors that caused job dissatisfaction (hygiene factors). He described hygiene in the sense that there are maintenance factors necessary to avoid employee dissatisfaction but alone do not provide satisfaction. Herzberg's (1968) mentioned that there are psychological needs can be fulfilled by money such as food and shelter. And that there is a psychological need to achieve and to grow, and this need is thus fulfilled by ones activities that cause them to grow. Herzberg explained that individuals in the workplace are intrinsically motivated by challenge, interesting work, recognition of achievement, growth and increasing responsibility. Extrinsic factors such as company policy, administration, supervision, interpersonal relationships, working conditions, status and security can cause dissatisfaction towards employee in the organization. In practical application of job enrichment the motivator factors had to be translates into more concrete terms (Herzberg et al. 2009). Achievement is a quality performance has been the most frequent factor leading job satisfaction. The behaviour and performance lead to satisfaction and positive attitudes. Recognition gives accurate feedback on performance, it takes on hygiene dynamics, is seen as interpersonal evaluation, and is frequently a dissatisfier. The client relationship, often the frequent source of satisfaction with the work itself in service jobs and in well-designed manufacturing jobs. Herzberg (1959) has reasoned that some type of work conditions act as satisfiers while others may act as dissatisfiers if not met in an appropriate manner. Factors discovered to be dissatisfiers relate to the characteristics of the context in which the work done. These factors are: interpersonal relationship, working condition, supervision, administration of company policies, company policies job security, effects on the worker's personal life and salary. In this case, the satisfiers relate to the actual job. For the motivators, it included achievement, the work itself, responsibility, recognition and advancement. The factors such as work itself, responsibility and advancement are generated associated with long term change in job attitude. Achievement and recognition are associated with short term changes. Herzberg determined that management must provide hygiene factors to avoid employee dissatisfaction, and also must provide factors intrinsic to the work itself in order for employees to be satisfied with their jobs and perform at a high level. In this research, factors such as organization climate and workplace bullying play a role to provide a satisfaction environment to the employees. The key to let the employee "feels" right in a good cultural fits they enjoy to the climate of organization that surrounds them at work all the time.
This distinguishes bullying from isolated behaviors and other forms of job stress and allows the term workplace bullying to be applied in various contexts and to behaviors that meet these characteristics. Many observers agree that bullying is often a repeated behavior. The individual who has developed a positive behavior and make a trust and motivated directly increase their work performance and the productivity. To better understand employee motivation and attitude, researcher used the Herzberg Theory to perform the studies and to determine which factors in an employee's work environment caused satisfaction and dissatisfaction. In this study, a quantitative method used and researcher concentrates in factors organizational climate with variances organization design, individual job characteristic, co-worker relationship, direct supervision, culture/work environment, work processes, communication, technology and customer satisfaction.and factor workplace bullying those causing job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction. All the factors can affect job stress and work performance. Management must provide hygiene factors to avoid employee dissatisfaction. It also must provide intrinsic to the work itself in order for employees to be satisfied with their job. A good organization climate design to let the employee shows their ability and increasing levels of responsibility. The supervision has to concern the cases that causing employee cannot utilized to perform well and there will be a motivation problem. Preferably, the two approaches, hygiene and motivation, must be carried out at once. Treat people so they obtain a minimum of dissatisfaction. Use people so they achieve, get recognition, grow and advance in their careers. Based on Maslow's Hierarchy, Herzberg et al. 1959 theorised that the factors that motivate the worker or are likely to satisfy their needs, lead to positive job attitudes. Studies on Work Performance During the 1980s, much research in the field of workplace stress suggested six major sources of pressure at work (Cooper, Cooper, & Eaker 1988). Although we can find each of the sources implicated to individual's stress profile or, indeed, in organization's profile. The factors vary in a degree which they are found to be causally linked to stress in a particular job or organization. There were many stressors research studied by researcher such as working condition (Cooper & Smith, 1985), work overload (French & Caplan, 1972), Work pressure (Susan Cooper & Cartwright, 1997) and Co-worker support (Randall and Elizabeth, 1994). Individual can perform well with an interesting work, good working conditions, the chance to partake in the social surrounding of work and to fell valued. Stressful comes with a boring situation, repetitive work patterns, poor physical working conditions, harassment from supervision staff to meet deadlines effect directly on individual's job performance. When people feel their contribution to the organization's success is undervalued, it shows the poor productivity, ineffective decision making, poor time keeping and absenteeism (Jeremy, 2005). In many organizations, junior are expected to work long hours and undertake a range of projects and assignments in order to prove their worth to the organization. Many job and career reviews, are badly conducted and can be stressful for employees. Example of how stress can affect an organization include increased accidents, increased staff turnover, increase level of absenteeism and increased complaint from clients (Jeremy, 2005).
Azizi Yahaya et al./ Elixir Psychology 41 (2011) 5932-5941
Foreign workers have increased over the past decade due to sustained ECONOMIC GROWTH and the tight labour market situation. As a long term measure to ensure sustainable growth as well as minimise socio-economic implications, a medium to longer-term policy on foreign workers will be devised with the view to reducing the over-dependence on foreign workers while attracting the more skilled and trained professionals. Studies on Job stress Recent studies in this area show that the ability of employees to manage their physiological and psychological stresses may have a significant impact on job satisfaction (Fairbrother & Warn, 2003; Snelgrove, 1998; Swanson et al., 1998). Job satisfaction is widely described as a result of employees' perception or appraisal of their jobs that may create a satisfying or emotional state. According to Cooper and William (1991), the blue collar workers are exposed more to the health risk related to work as compared to the white collar and professional workers. Besides that, the blue collar workers also are exposed to noise, air pollution, physical burden, shift work, long working period, poor social interaction at the workplace and bad relationship with the superiors (McLean, 1974). Raeda, 2003 in study of the relationships between job stress, job performance, and social support among hospital nurses. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the effect job-related stress on job performance among hospital nurses; and the effect of social support from co-workers and supervisors on the stress performance relationship. the finding of the present study showed that stress was moderately negatively associated (r = - .16, p< .01) with social support from supervisors. This meant the nurses who perceived having more support form supervisors experienced less stress. The important of the study was the positive impact of social support, especially that the supervisor, on enhancing job performance as well as on decreasing job stress of staff nurses. Nurse managers and nurse administrators should adopt strategies that give more support for their nurses. Several studies have tried to determine the link between stress and job satisfaction. Job satisfaction and job stress are the two hot focuses in human resource management researches. According to Stamps & Piedmonte (1986) job satisfaction has been found significant relationship with job stress. A survey by UNISION (1997), found that based on 760 responses, those labelled themselves bullied were not significantly different in term of gender, position, sector, age or race. One study found that old employees reported more exposure to victimisation that younger employees. Einarsen and Skogstad, 1996 (Heather, 1999). Past research has shown the idea that satisfied employees are more productive held through the 1970s. However, it was difficult to obtain support for the view that job satisfaction has a significant effect on job performance. Similarly, organizational studies of the sales force in marketing invariably find that the relationship between job performance and job satisfaction is weak (Bagozzi 1980; Brown and Peterson 1993). As Brown and Peterson (1993) note, if the effect of job performance on job satisfaction is insignificant, firm actions designed to increase job performance should not have a direct effect on job satisfaction and related outcomes, such as employee turnover. Kumarasen, 2005, with his study: Organizational stressors and job stress among managers: the modering role of neoroticism. The purpose of the study was to determine the effects of organizational stressors (conflict, blocked career, alienation, work overload, and unfavorable work environment)
on job stress among managers within the electronics sector of Malaysia and, to test whether these relationships vary according to their level of neuroticism. The regression results from this investigation indicated that three out of five organizational variables namely conflict, blocked career, and alienation had positive relationships with job stress. There were positive relationship between conflict and job stress which those obtained by Robert ,1997. Studies on Workplace Bullying The literature revealed that poor ergonomics workstation environment is among the major contributor to the work stress problems. Zafir Mohamed Makhbul, National University Malaysia (2009) did a research issues in Malaysia to examine the relationship between ergonomics workstation factors and the work stress outcomes. The major finding shows that ergonomically designed workstation is an important strategy in minimizing the work stress outcomes in organizations. According to The Workplace Bullying Institute did a U.S. Workplace Bullying Survey, 37% of all U.S. workers have been targets of workplace bullies. Unfortunately, organizational leaders either do not recognize the damaging effects of workplace bullying, or they do not know how to productively occur (Salin, 2003). As a result, bullies continue their control of terror, and victims worry about the bully, lose trust in the company, or leave their workplace. In 2008, Dr. Judy Fisher-Blando wrote a doctoral research dissertation on Aggressive Behavior: Workplace Bullying and Its Effect on Job Satisfaction and Productivity. The data in this study determined that 75% of participants reported witnessing mistreatment of coworkers sometime throughout their careers, 47% have been bullied during their career, and 27% admitted to being a target of a bully in the last 12 months. This study also examined the most frequent negative acts by workplace bullies as reported by the participants. Einarsen, Hoel, Zapf, & Cooper, 2003 stated that the cases of workplace bullying needs to be explored in a sustained and systematic way because all the organizations have a responsibility to protect their employees from the psychological harassment of a workplace bully. Additionally, workplace bullying has a negative impact on a company's profitability and organizational leaders have to cure this issue effectively which can help the organizations to meet their goals (Keashly & Jagatic, 2003). Workplace bullying is a deleterious problem leading physical, emotional, and psychological damages to employees. Additionally, organizations incur damage such as decrease of performance, employee lack of morale, and monetary costs due to this problem (Cheryl, 2009). U.S. organizations are struggling to recognize and alleviate the problem of workplace bullying (Alexia, 2011). In this study, a qualitative approach explored the problem of workplace bullying from a theoretical perspective. This study found that organizational cultures make worse the problem when the leaders either do not understand workplace bullying or discharge it as hard management. The study concluded that a systems approach to designing a training program that addresses the root causes, involves all individuals from all levels, and provides skills for dealing with this phenomena can promote a harmonious working environment. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 146 million Americans were employed in July. The statistics showed 54 million Americans have been bullied at work with 37 percent rate (Cheryl, 2009). Vartia, 2001 investigated the effects of workplace bullying and the psychological work environment on the well-being and stress of the targets and observers of
Azizi Yahaya et al./ Elixir Psychology 41 (2011) 5932-5941
bullying. Stress and psychological ill-health were measured, and the causes of reported stress were analyzed for country employees. This study confirmed the results of earlier studies showing that being bullied at work is a threat to the psychological well-being of bullied employees. The respondents who were subjected experienced of bullying. To note that bullying at work appears to not only have negative effects on the wellbeing of the victims, but also on the observers of bullying, who reported more general stress and mental stress reactions than those from the workplaces without bullying. Judith, 2008 with her research workplace bullying: Aggressive Behaviour and its effect on job satisfaction and productivity. The research showed how the bullying behaviour affects a individuals ability to perform their jobs, which can impact the morale of employees and the financial performances of an organization. The central findings of this study to show the frequency of workplace bullying, to examine the specific types of mistreatment and negative acts experienced by targets, to determine physical and mental stress associated with bullying, and to reveal a relationship between workplace bullying and its effect on job satisfaction and productivity. The data in this study found that 75% of participants reported witnessing mistreatment of co-workers throughout their careers, 47% have been bullied during their career, and 27% admitted to being a target of a bully in the last 12 months. This study also examined the most frequent negative acts by workplace bullies as reported by the participants. Studies on Organizational Climate Robert, 2007 with research focuses on supply chain managers of purpose to examine how organizational climate factors, such as opportunity for personal growth, development, advancement, etc., influence the degree that supply chain managers perceive their work situation as facilitating their giving their best effort (performance) to their work. It was hypothesized, based on past research, that supply chain managers who perceived a supportive climate in their organization would feel that their work facilitates their giving their "best effort" at work while those supply chain managers who perceived their organizational climate as unsupportive would perceive their work situation as not conducive to their putting forth their best effort at work. The results indicated that of the six climate questions dealing with self fulfil, advancement, interpersonal relations, etc., supply chain managers who reported that their work environment facilitates putting forth their best effort indicated that they perceived their organization as providing a high degree of opportunity to achieve these factors. Whereas, supply chain managers who perceived their organization as not supportive of these six factors perceived that their work environment did not facilitate their putting forth their "best effort." Christopher et, al. 2003 with the study climate perceptions and work outcomes by using a meta-analytic review to examine the relationships between individual-level (psychological) climate perceptions and work outcomes such as employee attitudes, psychological well-being, motivation, and performance. Their review of the literature generated 121 independent samples in which climate perceptions were measured and analyzed at the individual level. These studies document considerable confusion regarding the constructs of psychological climate, organizational climate, and organizational culture and reveal a need for researchers to use terminology that is consistent with their level of measurement theory, and analysis. They were findings indicate that
psychological climate, operationalized as individuals' perceptions of their work environment, does have significant relationships with individuals' work attitudes, motivation and performance. Structural equation modelling analyses of the meta-analytic correlation matrix indicated that the relationships of psychological climate with employee motivation and performance are fully mediated by employees' work attitudes. Future Research Cooper, 1984 did a study investigating sources of stress among executives in 10 countries, Japanese executives suffered particularly from pleasure to "keep up with new technology". Britain, second a high percentage of executives found that keeping up with new technology is a great source of pleasure at work. In the future study, do Malaysia as a developing countries fell pleasure due to emphasizing on technology, it can do a research whether there is significant relationship between organizational stress and new technology. However, over the past decade, the advances in technology have improved rapidly. This improvement has changed the virtual environment and given it a completely fresh look. The virtual environment has become fast, very reliable, and highly secure. It is offered with more excitement and more advanced technologies than ever before. Chen & Nath, 2008 stated people are willing to sacrifice their time, resources, personal lives, and families to complete their tasks. With the job market declining in recent years, workers have seen mass layoffs, pay cuts, and outsourcing happening everywhere around the globe. That means fewer jobs, more unemployed workers, and jobs become more demanding. During this economic downsizing, many people feel more job insecurity, so they are willing to take on additional job responsibilities, which give them the sense of job security. But working excessively long hours increases stress levels and takes a heavy toll on family life and social relationships (Weaver, 2003). Weaver 2003 also stated that the Japanese government has reported 10,000 cases a year of manager, executives and engineers died because of overwork. According to the NIOSH study, the U.S. reported from full or part-timers that high job stress rose to 45 percent in 2002 from 37 percent the year before. 40 percent of U.S. workers reported they felt very or extremely stressful with their job. References Abramis DJ, 1994, Relationship of job stressors to job performance: Linear or an Inverted-U. Psychological Report No: 7809330 Adrian Machay, 2006. Motivation, Ability and Confidence Building in People. Butterworth Heimannam. Britain. American Psychological Association, 2005. Bullying. Retrieved July 8, 2006, from Anuradha Sharma, 1986, Management and Job performance, Gian Publishing House, Delhi p.54 ­ 55 Aryanne Oade, 2009. Managing Workplace Bullying. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. P.2-3 Attorney Amy Delpo, March 2007. The Performance Appraisal Handbook. 2nd Edition. Consolidated Printers, INS. USA. Azizi Yahaya, Shahrin Hashim, Jamaludin Ramli, Yusof Boon, Abdul Rahim Hamdan, 2006. Menguasai Penyelidikan Dalam Pendidikan: Teori, Analisis dan Interpretasi Data, PTS Proffesional. Kuala Lumpur.
Azizi Yahaya et al./ Elixir Psychology 41 (2011) 5932-5941
Bagozzi, Richard P. 1978, "Sales Force Performance and Satisfaction as a Function of Individual Difference, Interpersonal, and Situational Factors," Journal of Marketing Research, 15 (November), 517­31. Bakker, A.B., Demerouti, E., & Verbeke, W. (2004). Using the Job Demands-Resources model to predict burnout and performance. Human Resource Management, 43, 83-104. Beehr, Terry A. 1995, Psychological Stress in the Workplace, Routledge London and New York. Campbell, J. P., Mc Cloy, R. A., Oppler, S. H., & Sager, C. E, 1993. A theory of performance: In N. Schmitt & W. C. Borman (Eds.), Personnel Selection in Organizations (pp. 35-70). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Caplan, R.D., Cobb, S., French, J.R.P., Jr., Harrison, R.V., and Pinneau, S.R., 1975. "Job Demands and Worker Health", HEW Publication No. (NIOSH), pp. 75-160. Caplan, R. D. et al., 1975, Job Demands and Worker Health: main effective and Occupational Differences, Washington, D. C. U.S. Government Printing Office. Carlene Cassidy, Bob Kreitner, Robert Kreitner, 2010. Supervision: Setting People Up For Success. Southern Western Cengage Leaning USA. Chen, L., & Nath, R. (2008, March). A socio-technical perspective of mobile work. Information Knowledge Systems Management, 7(1/2), 41-60. Retrieved from Business Source Complete database. Cheryl Lentz, 2009. The Refractive Thinker: An Anthology of higher Learning, Volume 1. The Lentz Leadership Institute LLC. Christine Hodson, 2001. Psychology and Work, Taylor and Francis Group. New York. Christopher P. Parker, Boris B. Baltes, Scott A. Young, Joseph W. Huff, Robert A. Altmann, Heather A. Lacost and Joanne E. Roberts,2003 , Journal of Organizational Behavior , J. Organiz. Behave. 24, 389, Published online in Wiley Inter Science ( Cook, C.W., and Hunsaker, P.L., 2001. Management and Organizational Behavior. 3rd Ed. New York : McGraw Hill. Cooper, C. L., & Williams, J. 1991. A Validation Study of the OSI on a Blue-Collar Sample. Stress Medicine. 7: 109-112. Craig Cochran, 2003. Customer Satisfaction: Tools, Techniques, and Formulas for Success. United states America. Damon, Nadia, 2008. `Reducing The Risks', Training and Coaching Today, United Kingdom, pg.14. Dixon Southworth, 2009. A human Resources Framework for the public sector, printed in United State America. Dollard, Maureen F. and Jacques C. Metzer. 1999. "Psychological research, practice, and production: The occupational stress problem." International Journal of stress management. October. Vol. 6, no. 4, p.241-253. Ekvall, Goran, 1987, "The Climate Metaphor in Organization Theory", in Bernard M. Bass and Pieter S.D. Drenth, An International Review, Sage Publications. Einarsen, S., & Hoel, H. (May, 2001). The Negative Acts Questionnaire: Development, validation and revision of a measure of bullying at work. Work presented at the 10th European Congress on Work and Organizational Psychology, Prague. Einarsen. S, Cary L. Cooper, Helge Hoel, Dieter Zapf. 2003. Bullying and Harassment in the Workplace: Development in
Theory, Research and Practice. 2nd edition. Taylor and Francis Group. United State. Einarsen, S. (2000). Harassment and Bullying at Work: A review of the Scandinavian approach. Aggression and Violent Behaviour, 4, 379-401. Einarsen, S., & Hoel, H. 2001. The Negative Acts Questionnaire: Development, validation and revision of a measure of bullying at work. Work presented at the 10th European Congress on Work and Organizational Psychology, Prague. Einarsen, S., Hoel, H., Zapf, D., & Cooper, C.L., 2003. The concept of bullying at work. The European tradition. In S. Einarsen, H. Hoel, D. Zapf, & C.L. Cooper (Eds.), Bullying and emotional abuse in the workplace. International perspectives in research and practice (pp. 3-30). London: Taylor & Francis. Einarsen, S., Matthiesen, S.B., & Skogstad, A., 1998. Bullying, burnout and well-being among assistant nurses. Journal of Occupational Health and Safety ­ Australia and New Zealand,14, 263-268. Einarsen, S., & Raknes, B.I. ,1997. Harassment in the workplace and the victimization of men. Violence and Victims, 12, 247263. Einarsen, S., 1997, "Bullying at Work Some Theoretical Perspectives", Norwegian Journal of Organizational Psychology, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 28-39. Fairbrother, K., & Warn, J., 2003. Workplace Dimensions, Stress & Job Satisfaction. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18 (1), 8-21. Forehand, G. A., Gilmer, B. V. H.,1964, "Environmental Variation in Studies of Organizational Behaviour", Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 62, No. 6, pp. 361-382. Frank J. Landy and Jeffrey M. Conte. 2010. Work in the 21st Century: An Introduction to Industrial and Organizational. United State. America. Frederick Herzberg, Bernard Mausner, Barbara Bloch Snyderman, 2009. The Motivation to Work. Twelfth Printing. Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, New Jersey. Greenberg JS, 1999. Occupational Stress. In: Comprehensive Stress Management, 6th ed (Leigh H, ed). New York: Division of Macmillan. Greenhaus, J.H., and Beutell, N.J., 1985. Sources of Conflict Between Work and Family Roles. Academy of Management Review, 12(6), 120-128. Gregopoulos, B. (1965), Normative Structure Variables and Organizational Behaviour, Human Relations, Vol. 18, pp. 115-170. Hackman, J. R. and Oldham, G. R., 1980. Work Redesign, Addison-Wesley, Massachusetts. Hadjifotiou, H., 1983, Women and Harassment at Work, Pluto Press, London. Harold Koontz & Heinz Weihrich, 2008. Essentials of Management: An International Perspective. Tata McGraw- Hill Publishing Company limited. Health and Safety Execitive. 2001. Tackling Work Related Stress: A Managers' guide to Improving and Maintaining Employee Health and Wellbeing. Sudbury; Health and Safety Executive. Health and Safety Executive. Real solutions, Real People: a Managers' guide to Tackling Work Related Stress. 2004; Sudbury; Health and Safety Executive. Healther Falconer, 2004. IRS Managing Conflict in the Workplace. Reed Elsevier (UK) Ltd. United Kingdom.
Azizi Yahaya et al./ Elixir Psychology 41 (2011) 5932-5941
Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. B. ,1959. The Motivation to Work (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons. Hunsaker, P.L., 2005. Management: A Skills Approach. (2nd ed.) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. Hurrell, J. J. Jr., & McLaney, M. A., 1988. Exposure to job stress- A new psychometric instrument. Scand J Work Environ Health, 14:27-27. Jacqueline R., 2006, Workplace Bullying in the NHS, Radcliffe Publishing Ltd. United Kingdom. Jane Cranwell-Ward, Alyssa Abbey, 2005. Organizational Stress. Palgrave Macmillan. United State. Jeremy Stranks, 2005. Stress at Work Management and Prevention, Great Britain by Biddles Ltd, King's Lynn, Norfolk. John M. Ivancevich, Thomas N. Duening., 2002. Managing Einsteins: Leading High-tech Workers in the Digital Age. McGraw Hill Companies. United State. Judith Lynn Fisher-Blando, 2008. Workplace Bullying: Aggressive Behavior And Its Effect Ob Job Satisfaction And Productivity. A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Management in Organizational Leadership. Heinz Weihrich, Mark V Cannice, Harold Koontz, 2008. Management: A Global and Entrepreneurial Perspective. Tata McGraw Hill Education Private Limited. New Delhi. Kayworth, T. R., & Leidner, D. E., 2001. Leadership Effectiveness in Global Virtual Teams. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(3), 7-40. Retrieved from Business Source Complete database. Keashly, L. & Jagatic, K., 2003. American Perspectives on Workplace Bullying. In Stale Einarsen, Helge Hoel, Dieter Zapf & Cary Cooper (Eds.), Bullying and Emotional Abuse in the Workplace: International Perspectives in Research and Practice (pp.31-62). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis. Kessler, R. C., Barber, C., Beck. A., Berglund, P., Cleary, P. D., McKenas, D., et al., 2003. The World Health Organization Health and Work Performance Questionnaire (HPQ). Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine 45(2), 156-174. Kessler, R., C., Ames, M., Hymel, P. A., Loeppke, R., McKenas, D. K., et al., 2004. Using the World Health Organization Health and Work Performance Questionnaire (HPQ) to evaluate the indirect workplace costs of illness. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 46(6), 523-537. KumKum Mukherjee, 2009. Principles of Management and Organizational Behaviour. 2nd Edition. Tata McGraw-Hill Education Private Limited. New Delhi. Laurie Pawlik, 2007. Workplace Bullying - Coping With Bullies Work a32987#ixzz1Fv01RVvt Leach, F.J., Westbrook, J.D, 2000. Motivation and Job Satisfaction in One Government research and Development Environment. Engineering Management Journal. Vol.12, Issue. 4; pg. 3-9. La Dou J. 1997, Occupational Stress. In: Occupational & Environmental Medicine, 2nd ed (Seward JP, ed) Stamford, Connecticut: Appleton & Lange, 1997. Lapierre LM, Allen TD., 2006. Work-supportive family, family supportive supervision, use of organizational benefits, and problem-focused coping: implications for work-family conflict and employee well-being. J Occupation Health Psychology. 2006; 11: 169-81. McLean, A. A. (Ed.). (1974). Occupational Stress. Springfield, Illinois: Thomas.
Stamps, P.L., & Piedmonte,E.B. 1986. Nurses and work satisfaction: An index formeasurement. Ann Arbor, MI: Health Administration Press Perspectives. Encyclopedia Dictionaries & Gloserries. Mark E. Mendenhall, Betty Jane Punnett, David A. Ricks.1995. Global Management, Blackwell Publisher. United State. Marthew. J, 2007. Importance of Organizational Climate in Contemporary Management; Organizational Climate. Ushus Journal of Business Management. Matteson, M. T., and Ivancevich, J. M., 1999. Organizational Behavior and Management. 5th Ed. New York : McGraw Hill. Maslow, A.H. (1970). Motivation and Personality. New York: Harper and Row. Meneze M. M, 2005, The Impact of Stress on productivity at Education Training & Development Practices: Sector Education and Training Authority. Michael G. Rumsey, Clinton B. Walker, James Harry Harris, 1994. Personnel Selection and Classification. Lawrence Eribaum Associates. Inc. United State. America. Michie S., 2002 Causes and management of Stress at Work. Occupational Environment Med 59: 67­72 Mimura, C and Griffiths, 2003 `The Effectiveness of Current Approaches to Workplace Stress Management in the Nursing Profession: an evidence based literature review', Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Volume 60,Pages 10-15. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). Division of Behavioral and Biomedical Sciences. Motivation and Stress Research Sciences. Motivation and Stress Research Section. Cincinnati, Ohio. Nunnallym J.C. 1978. Psychometric theory, New York: McGraw-Hill. Palmer S., Cooper C., 2007. How to Deal with Stress. Kogan Page Limited. Great Britain and America. Pedhazur, E. J. (1997). Multiple regression in behavioral research: Explanation and prediction. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning. Randall, P., 1997. Adult Bullying: Perpetrators and Victims. London: Routledge. Randall, P., 2001. Bullying in adulthood: Assessing the Bullies and Their Victims. New York: Brunner-Routledge. Randall R. Ross and Elizabeth M. Altmaier, 1994. Intervention in Occupational Stress. Sage Publication Ltd, Califonia. Rayner, C. and Hoel H., 1998. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology "A Summary Review of Literature Relating to Workplace Bullying" December. Vol. 7, Issue 3, p.181-191 Ringer, Robert J. (2004). To Be or Not to Be Intimidated?: That Is the Question. M Evans & Co Inc. Robbins SP, 2001. Organizational Behavior. 9th ed. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Robert Ho, 2006. Handbook of Univariate and multivariate: Data Analysis and Interpretation with SPSS. Printed in United State at America. Roberts JA, RA Lapidus and LB Chonko, 1997. "Salesperson and Stress: The Moderating Role of Locus of Control on Work Stressors and Felt Stress". Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol 5 No 3, pp 93-108 Robert J. Lichtman, 2007. Effects of an organization's climate on performance of supply chain managers in Michigan: A Perception Study Central Michigan University International
Azizi Yahaya et al./ Elixir Psychology 41 (2011) 5932-5941
Journal of Quality and Productivity Management Lichtman. Vol. 07, No.01. Ruthankoon, R., Ogunlana, S.O., 2003. Testing Herzberg's TwoFactor Theory in the Thai Construction Industry. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management. Vol.10, Iss. 5; pg. 333-342. Salih Kusluvan, 2003. Managing employee attitude and behaviours in the tourism and hospitality. Nova Science Publisher. P.379. Salin, D., 2003. Ways of Explaining Workplace Bullying: A Review of Enabling, Motivating and Precipitating Structures and Processes in the Work Environment. Human Relations, 56(10) Samborn R. 1990. Many American Find Bias at work. National Law Journal. Sheelagh Strawbridge, Ray Woolfe, Windy Dryden, 2010. Handbook of Counseling Psychology. Third Edition. Sage Publication Inc. California. Snelgrove, S.r., 1998. Occupational Stress andJob Satisfaction: A comparative study of health visitors, districts nurses and community psychiatric nurses. Journal of Nursing Management, 6(2), 97-104. Sumaira Kousar, Imtiaz Ahmad Dogar, Saima Ghazal, Idrees Khattak, 2006. Occupational Stress and Job Performance, Original Article. Article :Page 93, July-December 2006 Volume 3 Number 2 Swanson, R. A., & Holton, E. F., III. (2005). Research in organizations: Foundations and methods of inquiry. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler
Swanson, V., Power, K., & Simpson, R.,1998. A Comparison of Stress and Job Satisfaction in Female and Male GPS and Consultants. Stress Medicine, 12(1), 17-26 Siegall M., 2000. Putting the Stress Back into Role Stress: Improving the Measurement of Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity. J Manage Psychology 2000;15: 5427- 35. Susan Cartwright, Cary L. Cooper, 1997. Managing Workplace Stress. Sage Publication Ins. Unites Stated. Swanson, R. A., & Holton, E. F., III. (2005). Research in organizations: Foundations and methods of inquiry. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. Vartia MA-L. 2001. Consequences of Workplace Bullying withRrespect to the Well-being of Its Targets and the Observers of Bullying. Scand J Work Environment Health 2001; 27(1):6369. Weaver, J., 2003. Job Stress Burnout on the Rise Layoffs, Long Hours Taking Their Toll on Workers. Retrieved from MSNBC website: Westman, M.,2005. Crossover of Stress and Stain between Spouses, a Sloan Work and Family Encylopedia Entry: Retrieved on March 5, 2007, from the Sloan Work and Family ResearchwebSite: hp?id=1961&area=academics Zafir Mohamed Makhbul, 2009. Journal. Malaysia Labour Review. vol. 3, no. 2:13-26, 2009.

File: stress-level-and-its-influencing-factors-among-employees-in-a.pdf
Title: Microsoft Word - 41 _2011_ 5932-5941.doc
Author: Elixir
Published: Fri Jul 20 15:21:19 2012
Pages: 10
File size: 0.22 Mb

This old man, 11 pages, 0.22 Mb

Native American, 17 pages, 0.22 Mb

, pages, 0 Mb

, pages, 0 Mb
Copyright © 2018