THE IMPACT OFWORK RELATED STRESS AND ORGANIZATION COMMITMENT ON EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE BYADAM KHANROLL NO. SUBMITTED TOMr. ADIL SALEEM INSTITUTE OF BUSINESS STUDIES AND LEADERSHIPABDUL WALI KHAN UNIVERSITY MARDANIntroductionIn this 21stcentury, there is a lot of competition within the society, every individualperson is striving hard to perform his duties well within the organization, inorder to have good results due to this increased competition every person orthe employees who are working in different organizations are fully stressed dueto the pressure incorporated by their senior managers or directors (Gomes,2012). Competition within in the market has led the employees to workefficiently in accordance with the set of policies set forth by theorganization. Mostly the employees are working under highly stress-fullenvironment which makes their mind exhausted and also puts bad impact on theirphysical and mental health (Imilia, 2012).
Work related stress is a form ofstress which is confronted by the working class of the society who are workingin different sector organizations. Work related stress is now globally acceptedby the people belonging to different countries, sects cast and creed as it isaffecting all professions and alltypes of workers, as well as families (Judge, 2012). Stress has been observedto affect its victims in a variety of ways. Workforce has been seen withproblems with work efficiencies, performance is greatly destroyed, and mistakesare quite common and often lead to expensive mistakes. Health related issueshave been observed to cause financial and time related losses to both theemployer and employee (Kabir, December-2011).
Each accident because of stressnot only causes financial loss that organization at that given time intervalbut also affects its public image, which puts a negative impact on futurebusiness opportunities. And even the loss of a skillful worker absent becauseof a stress related accident causes the employer to waste time which is veryessential to any organization as time translates to money. Health related costsare even more among stressful workforce (Kramer, 2012). This research focuseson the conditions and factors responsible for work-related stress and alsodiscusses that how an employee’s performance is affected by stress in anorganization.
This type of stress overload canlead to the physiological and psychological problems. The reactions which arethe result of the chronic stress are more dangerous and severe as compared tothe results of the acute stress because of the manner the body gives reactionand responses to the stress. Stress creates demands that construct an imbalancein the body’s energy supply that is challenging to reestablish or restore. Thebody responds with a special physiological response in order to restore thediscrepancy, commonly stated to as the stress response.
Stress can lead toillness, high blood pressure, heart diseases, andpsychological damage and employees get so much disturb and are unable to performwell, there are a lot of problems which are faced by the employees which arethe outcomes due to stress.ProblemStatementKeeping in viewthe foundation of the study, the problem statement is: To study the phenomenonof work-related or occupational stress among the employees of the banks ofRawalpindi Islamabad and Abbottabad.Rationale of StudyWork-related stress is an advanced phenomenon in corporate world.The study has witnessed and analyzed that which level of stress is useful forthe employees’ i.
e. stress of low level, medium level, or stress of high level.Another reason for conducting this research is to check that how employees’performance in an organization is affected by work-related stress. And what arethe terms, conditions which affect the behavior and overall performance of anemployee working in an organization.
This research emphasizes the positivityand the negativity of the stress named as wok related stress and alsoencounters the health issues faced by the employees who are working understress.Purpose of Study Thebasic objective or the purpose of this study is to observe and analyze that howa new form of stress i.e. work-related stress is affecting employees andorganization. This research has clearly depicted that feeling stressed out atthe work place is not restricted to the specific occupations or the levelswithin the various organization.
Each employee reacts in a differentperspective and under different circumstances, situations and times. In 1995 asurvey was conducted by HSE which encountered the aspect that there aremillions of people who are suffering from stress, depression, nervousness, hopelessness panic outbreaksor panic attacks, headaches, high blood pressure which is made even worse dueto the work done under stressful environment.Research StatementThe research statement is “Effect of work-related stress onemployees’ performance”.Research QuestionsKeeping in view the research statement, the questions to exploreare: How work-related stress affects employees’ performance in an organization? What are the key factors and conditions which creates a stressful scenario for employees in a working environment? What are the negative effects of work-related stress on employees’ performance?ResearchObjectives Following are the objectives of this study: To find how an employee’s performance is affected by stress i.e.
work-related stress? To find how the employees’ performance decreases with varied levels of stress in a working environment? To find the factors that contributes in creating a stressful working environment for employees? To seek how work-related stress can be minimized? Literature ReviewWork Related StressResearchers have done a lot of research on the work related stressin order to signify its positive and negative points which can affect theemployee or any individual working in the organization in one way or the other.There is an Increase in the percentage of absenteeism because of the highpercentage of stress level employees are facing on daily basis which throw anegative impact on them as well as on their health (Mead,2000). Work related stress or the occupational stress is further encounteringfour main categories which depicts their relationship with the employee andunder what conditions the employee is being affected.at first, the major pointis the working conditions or the environment under which the employee issupposed to work, inadequate working hours which makes the employee fullystressed out, inappropriate remuneration plans, discrimination withinthe organization can also be a major reason for the increase in the level ofstress, with the discrimination safety is also regarded as most particularissue which is not taken into account in many organizations (Angle , 1994).Secondly, relationships with the staff, peer group, subordinates and managersare a point of concern. Good and valuable relations within the organizationgive a positive environment to the employee which increases his level ofcompetence. Bad relations tend to divert the performance of an employee towardsstress and poor productivity (Baran , 2013).
Thirdly undefined duties, rolesand undefined work within the organization is again another vital aspect ofstress which can never be ignored as it confuses the individual regarding hisactual job details ( Bolon , 1997).At last, the communication gap between employees and seniorprofessionals is a matter of consideration and also the policies which areimplemented within the workplace, culture and importance of employees indecision making process well define the structure of that particularorganization (Evelyn Kortum, 2000). Other than all these four factors there isanother factor which clearly depicts the level of stress the employee is facingduring the work and that are nature and the type of the job which can lead theemployee towards a lot of tiredness and exhaustion(Evelyn Kortum, 2010).Fourdifferent perspectives were also given by Beehr and Franz (1987) regarding theoccupational stress which signified that under what circumstances andsituations the work related or occupational stress can be approached. (1)Organizational psychology (2) medical (3) clinical counselling (4) engineeringpsychology. The distinctive feature of the medical is to ensure that how muchthe health of an employee is affected in one way or the other through stressand what level of percentage is contributed in the health and illness of theindividual. The clinical counselling approach determines the impact of stressover the minds of people and how their mind is affected because of the stressthey are facing on daily basis. This approach also elaborates to highlystressful environment which gives birth to depression, anxiety and poorperformance.
Beehr and Franz (1987) also pointed out that,as compared to the other approaches this approach is inclined towards treatmentrather than the research. Engineering psychology elaborates that how there isan increase in the level of stress because of the physical working conditions,this might include the nature and the pace of work the employee is dealing withon routine basis. Organizational psychology encounters two basic concepts,relations and interactions of employees with their seniors and other staffmates and the environment under which they are working.In this 21st century it has been proven thatbecause of the enhancement in trade, new and innovative production techniques,there is an increase in the percentage of stress because changes intechnologies give a rise to increased competition within the market (Salancik& Pfeffer, 1977). Due to this increased competition the structure of thejob as well as the nature of the jobs are changing which diminishes thecapabilities and the skills of the employees and also gives a negative impactover the security of the employees (Baker and Karasek,1995; Baker andSchottenfeld, 1995). Every factor which can affect the employee in one way orthe other should be under proper consideration and thought for example his mindsetup, psychological profile of an employee, relations with the staff members,subordinates, supervisors and senior managers, nature and type of the job whichencounters the physical conditions of the work such as level of noise andpoisonous disclosures (Elo, 1994). Mind stress or the mental stress was firstrecognized for workers compensation in 1960s and 1970s.
It was later found outthat 75 percent of absenteeism of employees was due to the increase in thelevel of stress.ResearchMethodology3.1 Typeof StudyThis type of study is termed as the quantitative study. The datafor this particular study was generated through the questionnaires. Thisresearch was conducted in the field in order to verify and check therelationship between work related stress and employees performance, the workrelated stress is working as an independent variable and the employee’sperformance as the dependent. Furthermore, the indicators of the employee’sperformance properly illustrate its affected zone because of the stress atwork. The indicators of employee performance are work satisfaction andorganizational commitment.
This particular research is cross sectional for thereason that the data is gathered at one definite point of interval in a periodof four months.3.2 Populationand SampleThe banking sector is chosen forthis study, because this sector is regarded as the most convenient andappropriate sector for the collection of data. One of the other reason forselecting this sector is that the supervisors and the senior managers of thebanks have uninterrupted and direct relation with their staff members,subordinates and the workers etc. And they are also capable of giving thefeedback to their subordinates on daily basis. The unit of analysis for thisparticular research are the individuals of the bank, individuals encounters therelationship of supervisors and the subordinates, supervisor facilitates theemployee outcomes; task performance and their level of organizationalcommitment along with their own moral competence (Kim & Kim, 2011). Workrelated stress has significant and large effect on the employee’s performance(R. Anderson, 2003).
While collecting the data, the major characteristics of theemployees that have been addressed includes gender, age, education anddesignations or departments and the management level. These levels areaddressed in order to verify and seek the results on individual basis, and inorder to examine the effect of work related stress on each management levelthat is: upper, middle and lower. 3.3 Sampling TechniqueThe most suitable technique which has been chosen forthis particular research is the convenient sampling as this technique isregarded as the most suitable and appropriate in order to collect the data.Leedy (1993) satisfied the researchers that the convenience sampling is the onein which the sample is selected according to the obtainability of theresearcher. For the purpose of this adequate research, theconvenience sampling is being used to gather data from the banks of Pakistan(Rawalpindi, Islamabad, and Abbottabad). This specific type of sampling wasadopted because of the lack of time and adequate resources.
3.4 Data Collection TechniqueThe data for this research is collected with the help ofquestionnaires; there were total 300 questionnaires which were circulated within the branches of the banks in order to collect the adequate result.3.
5 Reliability of InstrumentIn order toverify and check the reliability of the,Cron bach Alpha reliability statistic has been used in order to check thedata for internal constancy. One of the most popular reliability statistics intoday use is Cronbach’s alpha (Cronbach, 1951). The reliability estimates wereall greater than 0.6 which is appropriate for further statistical analysis(Sekeran, 2005).
The results are given in table below Variable Cronbach? No. of Items Work related stress 0.906 55 Organizational commitment 0.811 10 Work satisfaction 0.800 15 ResultsDescriptiveStatistics Table 4 depicts the descriptive statistics(means and SD).The mean for work related stress is 3.
541(SD =0.2888),organizational commitment 2.9080(SD =0.49290), work satisfaction 3.0047(SD=0.45231).
Table: Mean, StandardDeviations and Correlations of Variables of Interest Mean SD 1 2 3 1. Work Related Stress 3.541 0.2888 2. Organizational Commitment 2.9080 0.49290 – 0.204** 3.
Work Satisfaction 3.0047 0.45231 -0.204** 0.384** **.
Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). The bivariatecorrelation analysis Thebivariate correlation analysis disclosed that work related stress has strongsignificant negative correlation with employees performance (organizationalcommitment) (r = -0.204, p <.01).
This simply means that the work related stress has negative impact onorganizational commitment. Depicting that employee commitment towards theorganization decreases when work related stress increases. Likewise, workrelated stress has a strong negative and significant correlation with employeesperformance (work satisfaction) (r=-0.204, p < .01).This envisages the strong negative influence of workrelated stress on work satisfaction .In the same manner the work satisfaction decreaseswith the increase in the work related stress.Regression AnalysisTable: Regression Analysisof negative relationship between work related stress and organizationalcommitment: Model Summary Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std.
Error of the Estimate 1 .204a .042 .039 .
48330 a. Predictors: (Constant), WRS Coefficients Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig. B Std. Error Beta 1 (Constant) 4.144 .344 12.049 .000 WRS -.
349 .097 -.204 -3.605 .000 a. Dependent Variable: OC Anova Model Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 3.035 1 3.035 12.994 .000b Residual 69.606 298 .
234 Total 72.641 299 a. Dependent Variable: OC b. Predictors: (Constant), WRS Regression analysis shows the resultof R = 0.204 (R is the square root of R-Squared and is the correlation betweenthe observed and predicted values of dependent variable). This depicts a strongrelationship between work related stress and employees performance(organizational commitment). Whereas R² measures the amount ofthe variation or change in the dependent variable that is explained byvariations in the independent variables.
As above results tells us that R² =0.42 that indicate us 42% variation is determined.Table: Regression Analysis of negative relationship between workrelated stress and work satisfaction: Model summary Model R R square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 .204a .041 .038 .44359 a.
Predictors: (Constant), WRS Coefficients Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig. B Std. Error Beta 1 (Constant) 4.134 .316 13.
096 .000 WRS -.319 .089 -.204 -3.
588 .000 a. Dependent Variable: WS ANOVA Model Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig. 1 Regression 2.534 1 2.534 12.
877 .000b Residual 58.637 298 .197 Total 61.171 299 a.
Dependent Variable: WS b. Predictors: (Constant), WRS Regression analysis shows the result of R = 0.204 (R is the squareroot of R-Squared and is the correlation between the observed and predictedvalues of dependent variable). This depicts a strong relationship between workrelated stress and employees performance (work satisfaction). Whereas R² measures the amount of the variation or change in the dependentvariable that is explained by variations in the independent variables.
As aboveresults tells us that R² = 0.41 that indicate us 41% variation isdetermined. ReferencesAngle,H. L., & Perry, J. L. (1981).
“An empirical assessment of organizationcommitment and organizational effectiveness”. Administrative ScienceQuarterly, 26, 1-13. Angle,H.L. & Perry, J.L. (1983) “Organizational commitment: Individual andorganizational influences”. Work and Occupations, 10, 123-146.
Anxiety,Depression, and Heart Rate. Journal ofApplied Psychology, Volume pp. 713-719.
Bateman,T. & Strasser, S. (1984). “A longitudinal analysis of the antecedentsof organizational commitment”. Academy of Management Journal, 21, 95-112. Baugh,S. & Roberts, R.
(1994). “Professional and organizational commitmentamong engineers: conflicting or complementing?” Engineering Management,41, 2, 108-114. Caplan,R.D., and Jones, K.W. (1975).
Effects of Work Load, Role Ambiguity, and Type APersonality on DeCotis,T. & Summers, T. (1989). “A path analysis of a model of theantecedents and consequences of organizational commitment”.
HumanRelations, 40, 445- 470. Dollard,Maureen F. and Jacques C. Metzer.
1999. “Psychological research, practice,and production: The occupational stress problem.” International Journal ofStress Management. October. Vol. 6, no.
4, p. 241-253.Erickson,J., Pugh, W.M., and Gunderson, E.K.E.
(1972). Status Congruency as a Predictorof Job Satisfaction and Life Stress.Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol 56, pp.523-525. Florkowski,G & Schuster, M. (1992) “Support for profit sharing and organizationalcommitment: A path analysis”.
Human Relations, 45, 5, 507-523. French,J.R.P.
, Jr., and Caplan, R.D. (1972). Organizational Stress and IndividualStrain. in A.J. Marrow,ed.
, The Failure of Success, AMACOM, New York, New York,. Gellatly,Ian (1995). “Individual and group determinants of employee absenteeism:test of a causal model”. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16, 5,469-485. Hall,Douglas. (1977) “Organizational identification as a function of careerpattern and organizational type”. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17,340-350.
Ivancevich.J.M.& Matteson.M.T. “Organizational Behavior and Management”, 6thed., Library of Congress Cataloging,pp.
270-271JamalM. (1984). Job Stress and job Performance controversy: an empirical assessmentin two countries. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 33:1-21. Kahn,R. L.
, Wolfe, D. M., Quinn, R. P., Snoek, J. D.
, & Rosenthal, R. A. (1964).Organizational stress: Studies in role conflict and ambiguity. New York: Wiley Lawrence,P., &Lorsch, J.
(1967). Organization and Environment: ManagingDifferentiation and Integration.Harvard University Press, Cambridge,Massachusetts. Margolis,B.L., Kroes, W.
H., & Quinn, R.P. (1974). Job Stress: An UnlistedOccupational Hazard. Journal of Occupational Medicine, Vol, pp.
659-661. Niehoff,B.P., Enz, C.A.
, & Grover, R.A. (1990) The impact of top-management actionson employee attitudes and perceptions. Group & Organization Studies, 15, 3,337- 352. O’Reilly,III, C.
, and Chatman, J. (1986). “Organizational Commitment andPsychological Attachment: The Effects of Compliance, Identification andInternalization on Prosocial Behavior”. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71,3, 492-499. Perry,James (1997).
“Antecedents of Public Service Motivation”. Journal ofPublic Administration Research and Theory, 7, 2, 181-197. Reichers,Arnon (1985). “A review and reconceptialitzion of organizationalcommitment”.
The Academy of Management Review¸10, 3, 465-476. Salancik,G.R.; & Pfeffer, An examination of need satisfaction models of jobattitudes.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 1977, 22, 427-456. VanDyne, L. & Ang, S. (1998). “Organizational Citizenship Behavior ofContingent Workers in Singapore” Academy of Management Journal, 41, 6,692-703. Weiner,Y. (1982).
“Commitment in Organization: A Normative View”. Academy ofManagement Review, 7, 418-428.