Emotional and Physiological Processes and Intervention Strategies, Volume 3 (Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being)

RESEARCH IN OCCUPATIONAL STRESS AND WELL BEING VOLUME 3 EMOTIONAL AND PHYSIOLOGICAL PROCESSES AND POSITIVE INTERVENTION...

Author: Pamela Perrewé | Daniel C Ganster

75 downloads 4371 Views 2MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

RESEARCH IN OCCUPATIONAL STRESS AND WELL BEING VOLUME 3

EMOTIONAL AND PHYSIOLOGICAL PROCESSES AND POSITIVE INTERVENTION STRATEGIES EDITED BY

PAMELA L. PERREWE´ Florida State University, USA

DANIEL C. GANSTER University of Arkansas, USA

2004

Amsterdam – Boston – Heidelberg – London – New York – Oxford – Paris San Diego – San Francisco – Singapore – Sydney – Tokyo

EMOTIONAL AND PHYSIOLOGICAL PROCESSES AND POSITIVE INTERVENTION STRATEGIES

RESEARCH IN OCCUPATIONAL STRESS AND WELL BEING Series Editors: Pamela L. Perrewé and Daniel C. Ganster Volume 1:

Exploring Theoretical Mechanisms and Perspectives

Volume 2:

Historical and Current Perspectives on Stress and Health

ELSEVIER Ltd The Boulevard, Langford Lane Kidlington, Oxford OX5 1GB, UK © 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. This work is protected under copyright by Elsevier, and the following terms and conditions apply to its use: Photocopying Single photocopies of single chapters may be made for personal use as allowed by national copyright laws. Permission of the Publisher and payment of a fee is required for all other photocopying, including multiple or systematic copying, copying for advertising or promotional purposes, resale, and all forms of document delivery. Special rates are available for educational institutions that wish to make photocopies for non-profit educational classroom use. Permissions may be sought directly from Elsevier Global Rights Department, PO Box 800, Oxford OX5 1DX, UK; phone: (+44) 1865 843830, fax: (+44) 1865 853333, e-mail: [email protected]. You may also contact Global Rights directly through Elsevier’s home page (http://www.elsevier.com), by selecting ‘Obtaining Permissions’. In the USA, users may clear permissions and make payments through the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, USA; phone: (+1) (978) 7508400, fax: (+1) (978) 7504744, and in the UK through the Copyright Licensing Agency Rapid Clearance Service (CLARCS), 90 Tottenham Court Road, London W1P 0LP, UK; phone: (+44) 207 631 5555; fax: (+44) 207 631 5500. Other countries may have a local reprographic rights agency for payments. Derivative Works Tables of contents may be reproduced for internal circulation, but permission of Elsevier is required for external resale or distribution of such material. Permission of the Publisher is required for all other derivative works, including compilations and translations. Electronic Storage or Usage Permission of the Publisher is required to store or use electronically any material contained in this work, including any chapter or part of a chapter. Except as outlined above, no part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission of the Publisher. Address permissions requests to: Elsevier Global Rights Department, at the mail, fax and e-mail addresses noted above. Notice No responsibility is assumed by the Publisher for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products liability, negligence or otherwise, or from any use or operation of any methods, products, instructions or ideas contained in the material herein. Because of rapid advances in the medical sciences, in particular, independent verification of diagnoses and drug dosages should be made. First edition 2004 A catalogue record from the British Library has been applied for. ISBN: 0-7623-1057-X ISSN: 1479-3555 (Series) ∞ The paper used in this publication meets the requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 (Permanence of Paper). Printed in The Netherlands.

CONTENTS OVERVIEW Pamela L. Perrewé and Daniel C. Ganster

vii

PERFORMANCE IMPACTS OF APPRAISAL AND COPING WITH STRESS IN WORKPLACE SETTINGS: THE ROLE OF AFFECT AND EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE Neal M. Ashkanasy, Claire E. Ashton-James and Peter J. Jordan 1 THE IMPACT OF DISPLAY RULES AND EMOTIONAL LABOR ON PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING AT WORK Russell Cropanzano, Howard M. Weiss and Steven M. Elias

45

AREAS OF WORKLIFE: A STRUCTURED APPROACH TO ORGANIZATIONAL PREDICTORS OF JOB BURNOUT Michael P. Leiter and Christina Maslach

91

FEELING VIGOROUS AT WORK? THE CONSTRUCT OF VIGOR AND THE STUDY OF POSITIVE AFFECT IN ORGANIZATIONS Arie Shirom

135

SOCIAL INFLUENCE AND JOB STRESS: DIRECT, INTERVENING, AND NON-LINEAR EFFECTS Wayne A. Hochwarter

165

BEYOND SELF-REPORT: USING OBSERVATIONAL, PHYSIOLOGICAL, AND SITUATION-BASED MEASURES IN RESEARCH ON OCCUPATIONAL STRESS Norbert K. Semmer, Simone Grebner and Achim Elfering

205

v

vi

EUSTRESS: AN ELUSIVE CONSTRUCT, AN ENGAGING PURSUIT Debra L. Nelson and Bret L. Simmons

265

DEMOCRACY AT WORK AND ITS RELATIONSHIP TO HEALTH Töres Theorell

323

EXECUTIVES: ENGINES FOR POSITIVE STRESS James Campbell Quick, David Mack, Joanne H. Gavin, Cary L. Cooper and Jonathan D. Quick

359

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

407

OVERVIEW

The quest to understand the experience of stress and how it affects our mental and physical well being continues to fill volumes of journals and books. Despite this fecundity we seem to be no closer to a comprehensive theory of the stress process, or even a common definition of what it is, than we were twenty years ago. This is true for the subfield of occupational stress as well. Thus arises the inchoate suspicion that all is not well in our field. Our view is more sanguine than some, however. We are quick to concede that there is not a useful comprehensive theory of work stress, but we also hasten to add that this is not a critical lack. We prefer to think of the study of work stress and well being as defining a constellation of theories and models that each attacks a meaningful process or phenomenon. In this sense, the term stress serves as a general rubric for a diverse set of research questions (and their associated theories) concerning workplace experiences, individuals’ reactions to those experiences, and workers’ well being in all its various manifestations. The field of work stress excites many of us because of the incredible diversity of disciplines that have entered the fray, each of them attacking the question of how our work lives determine our health, and using the unique theoretical perspectives and methods of their discipline. In this sense, we are all united in our interest in trying to understand how what happens in the workplace affects our mental and physical health, in spite of the range of specific questions, theories, and methodologies that characterize our research programs. In this, our third volume of the annual series Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, we offer a selection of papers that reflects the diversity of the field in terms of both independent and dependent variables. The theme for this volume is Emotional and physiological processes and positive intervention strategies. Several of the papers zero in on the central role that affective processes play in the etiology of well being. Finally, work stress first commanded our attention because of its putative negative impact on well being, with early studies noting the association of stressful work with such outcomes as deaths from coronary heart disease, hypertension, and depression. Several of the chapters in this volume reflect the opposite concern – namely, processes that promote positive experiences and mental and physical well being. vii

viii

In the first paper, Neal Ashkanasy, Claire Ashton-James and Peter Jordan discuss their model of how emotional responses mediate the effects of exposure to workplace stressors on well being outcomes. In so doing they examine the relatively new – and somewhat controversial – construct of emotional intelligence, and propose that it moderates the effects of stressors on individual reactions. In the next chapter, Russell Cropanzano, Howard Weiss and Steven Elias examine how the informal and formal norms in organizations regulate the display of emotions, the functions that these norms serve, and the consequences in terms of emotional labor. In their view, the operation of such display rules can have deleterious effects on employee well being, but they also argue that they can lead to positive outcomes. Whereas Ashkanasy et al. explore the mediating impact of emotions, Cropanzano et al. shift the focus to the management of emotions. Their paper provides an excellent discussion of different conceptual models of emotional labor and a critical assessment of different causal mechanisms linking emotional labor to both positive and negative outcomes. Michael Leiter and Christina Maslach continue the focus on the role of emotions in the experience of work stress when they present a new model of burnout. In their model, they describe six areas of work life and propose that one’s level of person-job fit with respect to these dimensions will lead to the different burnout stages. Burnout, in turn, mediates the effects of fit between the work characteristics and subsequent outcomes such as individuals’ commitment to their jobs and their evaluation of organizational change. In their paper, they present new scales for the job dimensions and tests of their mediation model. In the next paper, Arie Shirom turns the focus to what is, essentially, the opposite of burnout. In his paper, he reviews the existing literature on the affective response of vigor, which encompasses individuals’ feelings that they possess physical strength, emotional energy and cognitive liveliness. After reviewing the basic behavioral science literature on vigor, Shirom proposes a new model of vigor in the context of the workplace, articulating its antecedents and its impact on mental and physical health. He also presents a new scale for measuring a three-dimensional model of vigor along with data assessing its validity. In contrast to much of the research on work stress, Shirom’s vigor model adopts the positive psychology perspective. Departing from the theme of affect and emotions, Wayne Hochwarter’s chapter addresses the role of social influence processes in affecting stress at work. Specifically, he looks at how the use of upward influence tactics might help the influencer better cope with organizational and workplace conditions. Hochwarter reviews his recent work that has moved beyond the examination of the direct effects of influence tactics on stress and explores a host of more complex pathways involving multiple mediating and moderating variables. His

ix

paper raises many research questions that should inspire greater attention to this fertile area. In the next paper, Norbert Semmer, Simone Grebner and Achim Elfering give us a thorough and critical evaluation of alternative approaches for the measurement of both stressors and strains. In this paper, they help us navigate the complexities of the measurement challenges inherent in stress research, using the common self-report approach as a comparison standard. Using their own recent studies that compare different measurement methods, they demonstrate how each of the alternative methods (including physiological markers, direct observations, and event-based measures) entails its own sources of error and substantive variance, and in the end, that none can simply serve as a substitute for self-reports. They provide an excellent discussion of how the different methods can be used to complement one another, which should serve as an invaluable guide to job stress researchers. Debra Nelson’s and Bret Simmons’ chapter complements the positive psychology perspective of Arie Shirom’s chapter by tackling the construct of eustress. Their review of the eustress construct exposes its general lack of empirical development, despite the common reference to the term. They present their own model of eustress in the workplace and report a preliminary test of its factor structure and relationship to general health. They introduce the notion of “savoring” to distinguish the pursuit of positive emotional outcomes from the traditional emphasis on “coping” as a means of mitigating distress. Their paper offers myriad suggestions for both research and the practice of management. In his chapter on Democracy at Work, Tores Theorell reviews the extensive literature on workplace democracy in its various forms and its relationship to health. In particular, he recounts the rise and fall of workplace democracy over the last two decades in Sweden and concomitant shifts in indicators of worker well being. Beginning in the late 1990s, especially, he notes a loss of worker decision latitude and a corresponding increase in work-related psychological problems. He concludes with a discussion of various strategies for implementing workplace democratic structures and the promise they hold for improving the well being of workers. In the last chapter, Jim Quick, David Mack, Joanne Gavin, Cary Cooper and Jonathon Quick expand Theorell’s implementation theme into a full treatise on practical applications for improving the healthfulness of workplaces. In their promotion of the idea of humane work, Quick et al. continue the positive psychology theme of the earlier chapters by Shirom, Nelson and Simmons, and Theorell. Their recommendations cover principles that managers can use to promote positive, or eustress, workplaces for their employees as well as methods for promoting such outcomes for themselves.

x

We think the chapters in this year’s volume bring forth a wealth of new theoretical ideas that should inspire exciting new programs of research. They truly represent an interdisciplinary panoply of constructs, methodologies, and practices that mirrors the diverse and growing field of work stress and well being. We look forward to continue charting the progress of this important field of study in future volumes of this series. Pamela L. Perrewé and Daniel C. Ganster Series Editors

PERFORMANCE IMPACTS OF APPRAISAL AND COPING WITH STRESS IN WORKPLACE SETTINGS: THE ROLE OF AFFECT AND EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE Neal M. Ashkanasy, Claire E. Ashton-James and Peter J. Jordan ABSTRACT We review the literature on stress in organizational settings and, based on a model of job insecurity and emotional intelligence by Jordan, Ashkanasy and Härtel (2002), present a new model where affective responses associated with stress mediate the impact of workplace stressors on individual and organizational performance outcomes. Consistent with Jordan et al., emotional intelligence is a key moderating variable. In our model, however, the components of emotional intelligence are incorporated into the process of stress appraisal and coping. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the implications of these theoretical developments for understanding emotional and behavioral responses to workplace.

Emotional and Physiological Processes and Positive Intervention Strategies Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, Volume 3, 1–43 © 2004 Published by Elsevier Ltd. ISSN: 1479-3555/doi:10.1016/S1479-3555(03)03001-4

1

2

NEAL M. ASHKANASY, CLAIRE E. ASHTON-JAMES AND PETER J. JORDAN

INTRODUCTION Stress is a common feature of organizational life, across all occupational domains (Cooper, 1998; Hancock & Desmond, 2001). Attributed to workplace stressors such as job insecurity (Jordan, Ashkanasy & Härtel, 2002), role ambiguity (Beehr, 1987; Yousef, 2002), time pressures (Salas & Klein, 2001), and interpersonal conflicts (Narayanan, Menon & Spector, 1999), stress is nonetheless a psychological phenomenon that has generated much controversy with regard to its effect on individual and organizational outcomes (Koslowsky, 1997). While some studies have reported the deleterious effects of work stress on job performance (Reilley, Grasher & Schafer, 2002), other research has provided evidence to suggest a positive relationship between stress and productivity (Riley & Zaccaro, 1987). According to Cooper (1998), occupational stress is operationalized as a state of cognitive or physiological arousal or “readiness for action” and as such, variability in the performance in individuals under stress has been attributed to differential mental and physical workload capacities. Capacity theory (Woods & Patterson, 2001) provides an explanation of inter-individual differences in performance under stress based on differences in cognitive and attentional capacities. It does not, however, explain intra-individual differences in behavioral responses to stress. For example, why is it that an individual’s coping capacity fluctuates, such that an event or task in one situation is accepted as a challenge while, in another situation, the same event or task is seen as a threat? In this chapter, we offer an explanation of intra-individual (or within-person) differences in behavioral responses to workplace stress based on recent theoretical developments by Weiss and Cropanzano (1996) and Jordan et al. (2002). Specifically, we argue that behavioral responses to workplace stressors are contingent upon the nature of the individuals’ affective response to the stressor. As such, workplace stressors affect workplace performance depending on the individuals’ transitory emotional states. An important foundation of our theory is Weiss and Cropanzano’s Affective Events Theory (AET), which provides a detailed model of the way in which environmental conditions (daily “hassles and uplifts”) affect individuals’ emotional states and, in turn, their affective and behavioral responses to work stress. In particular, AET highlights the existence and significance of emotionality in the workplace. While emotions can enhance certain work-related tasks (Averill, 1999), however, it may also impinge upon an individual’s ability to meet other workplace demands (Baumeister & Heatherton, 1996). Thus, an important question, both for researchers and managers of emotions in the workplace, is how can individuals moderate the impact of emotional states on their performance at work?

Performance Impacts of Appraisal and Coping with Stress in Workplace Settings

3

In a recent development upon AET, moreover, Jordan, Ashkanasy and Härtel (2002) proposed that emotional intelligence, a dispositional variable, moderates the way in which individual employees’ cope with the experience of stress. Much controversy, however, surrounds the validity of emotional intelligence as a psychological construct that is distinct from general intelligence (see Becker, 2003; Jordan, Ashkanasy & Härtel, 2003). In addition, emotional intelligence has only recently begun to be developed theoretically and empirically, so that there is still little understanding of the nature of the unique cognitive processes that are mediated by this construct. In this respect, Jordan et al. (2002) articulated that their model was based on a theoretically sound content model of emotional intelligence developed by Mayer and Salovey (1997). Jordan et al. (2002), however, focused specifically on the moderating impact of emotional intelligence on employees’ emotional and behavioral responses to work-related stress (job insecurity). Hence, the impact of emotional intelligence on the psychological processes underlying the generation and modulation of emotions is yet to be addressed. In this chapter, therefore, we develop and integrate AET (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996) and emotional intelligence (Jordan et al., 2002; Mayer & Salovey, 1997) by proposing a process model of affective response formation and modulation, which explains the cognitive-affective processes that underlie emotional intelligence. The model provides a systematic explanation of emotional intelligence as a mediator of the way in which workplace stressors trigger emotional responses in employees, and whether these emotional responses have a positive or negative impact on workplace performance. Intra-individual differences in behavioral responses to workplace stressors have been attributed to task differences (Salas, Driskell & Hughs, 1996), audience characteristics (Schmitt, Gilovich, Goore & Joseph, 1986), and differential environmental conditions (Edwards, Caplan & Van Harrison, 1998). In each case, however, exogenous variables were used to explain intra-individual differences in task performance. As Weiss and Cropanzano (1996) pointed out in AET, however, differences in an individual’s performance of the same task at work under similar workplace conditions cannot be explained by exogenous variables alone. Weiss and Cropanzano suggest further that it is the individual’s affective response to the stressor that determines the quality of behavioral response. Furthermore, consistent with Lazarus and Folkman (1984), AET emphasizes that an individual’s affective stress response may vary from moment to moment. In this respect, stress is not wholly contingent upon stable environmental and personality variables, but upon the individual’s perception of affective events, or daily hassles and uplifts, that create transitory emotional states that may impact upon the individual’s performance (see Lazarus, 1991).

4


According to Jordan et al. (2002), the generation of emotions in response to workplace stressors and the impact of these emotions on behavioral performance is moderated by emotional intelligence. Emotional intelligence is therefore seen to moderate the relationships between affective events, affective responses, and behavioral responses described in AET, based on individual differences in the cognition of emotional information. In order to moderate these processes, they argue, emotional intelligence functions to mediate the perception of emotional cues in workplace events, the experience of emotion in response to these cues, and the way in which emotions are reduced, or coped with. Consequently, emotional intelligence in their model moderates the perceived significance of an affective event, the intensity of emotional stress associated with the affective response to the event, and the way in which the affective response mediates the behavioral response to the affective event. The Jordan et al. (2002) model represents a substantial advance on the existing literature on coping with workplace stress, which has not, until recently, considered the role emotional reactions as mediators of the effects of workplace stress on performance. Furthermore, the integration of emotional intelligence as a cognitive construct that facilitates the processing of emotional information is pivotal in the development of a critical understanding of the way in which emotion affects social cognition, and social cognition affects emotion. As noted above, however, an important and unresolved issue concerns the way in which emotional intelligence actually functions to moderate the affective response process; that is, the cognitive and affective structures underlying emotional intelligence. While Jordan et al. (2002) proposed emotional intelligence as the process that moderates the affective event – affective response – behavioral response linkages proposed in AET, the actual processes involved in emotional intelligence, have not yet been addressed. In this chapter, therefore, we attempt to provide insight into the processes underlying emotional intelligence, that moderate the affective impact of workplace stressors, the generation of emotion and the effect of emotional responses on coping efficacy. The chapter opens with a review of traditional approaches to the study of workplace stress and performance outcomes, highlighting the importance and neglect of emotions associated with stress in organizational research. In the following section, we outline recent research developments pertaining to the role of emotions in organizational behavior, including AET and emotional intelligence. Upon these conceptual foundations, the Jordan et al. (2002) model of emotional intelligence as a moderator of emotional and behavioral responses in the workplace will be discussed. Following this, interpretive developments upon the Jordan et al. model will be proposed, and the structures and processes underlying affective responses and emotional intelligence explained. Finally, the implications


5

of this research for the development of theory, research and practice pertaining to the management of stress and performance in the workplace will be considered.

STRESS AND ITS WORKPLACE EFFECTS Research suggests that the question of whether work stress has a positive or negative impact on workplace behavior has two answers: work-related stress increases motivation and performance (Driskell & Salas, 1996), and work-related stress is associated with decreased job satisfaction and work commitment (Yousef, 2002). Each of these results is equally valid and supported by a convincing line of empirical research (Cooper, 1998; Hockey, 2002; Salas & Klein, 2001). The nature of work stress, thus, is that it is neither definitively positive nor negative; the impact of stress on performance depends on the nature, intensity, duration, and resources available to the employee to respond adaptively (Riley & Zaccaro, 1987). While the nature of emotional stress responses varies between individuals depending on dispositional stress vulnerabilities (Lazarus, 1966), the intensity and duration of the emotion experienced may fluctuate within individuals depending on emotion-coping resource capabilities between situations and task demands (Hancock & Desmond, 2001). Thus, the impact of emotional responses to stress on performance varies not only between and within emotions (the nature vs. intensity of the emotion), but also between and within individuals (the disposition vs. situation of the individual). The purpose of this section is to provide an overview of the complex and multidimensional effects of stress on workplace behavior. A conceptual framework for understanding the various manifestations of stress is proposed to provide the conceptual basis for development of a model of the emotional stress response process, which is outlined in the following section.

The Nature of Stress Lazarus (1966) suggested that stress be treated as an organizing concept for understanding a wide range of processes involved in social adaptation. Stress, then, is not a unidimensional variable, but a construct or syndrome consisting of many variables and processes. As such, stress is a response process characterized by physiological, cognitive, behavioral, and emotional changes that function to alert the individual to the need to adapt to environmental demands in the interests of personal wellbeing. Personal well being is a mark of adaptive success, or a person-environment relationship that functions to promote the attainment of personal goals. Environmental demands, when perceived to exceed the person’s

6


adaptive resources, represent obstacles to that person’s ability to function adaptively in their environment, and hence present a potential threat to goal attainment. As obstacles to adaptive success, excessive environmental demands, which may be cognitive, behavioral, physical, or emotional, represent a source of strain, and are hence referred to as stressors. In response to a stressor, an individual may experience physiological, cognitive, behavioral, or emotional changes that function to mobilize the individual to respond to environmental demands in the interests of adaptive success. Seyle (1976) originally described this stress response (which he termed the “general adaptation syndrome”) as a three-stage process involving an initial alarm reaction, a second stage of coping (that Seyle, 1976, referred to as “resistance”), and a third stage involving physical or psychological burnout or exhaustion. Certainly, this theory had some validity, with research demonstrating that there are strong links between stress and illness, and stress and decreased performance outcomes (Siegrist, 1998). Unfortunately, however, as an explanation of the stress response process, this model has proved less useful. More recent research has revealed that the stress response is a more complex, multilevel process (Lazarus, 1999), and that there are positive as well as negative behavioral effects of stress (see Brockner, Grover, Reed & Dewitt, 1992). There are various physiological reactions to stress, each associated with an increase in activation or levels of arousal in a state of “readiness for action” (Hancock & Desmond, 2001). As such, the physiological stress response is indicated by increased skin conductance, heart rate, salivation, hormone output, respiration rate, and sweat gland activity, to name a few. Furthermore, individuals under stress may have heightened sensitivity to sensory stimulus, evidenced by increased reaction time, and awareness of novel bodily sensations (see also Seyle, 1976). Cognitive effects of the stress response may include distraction, narrowing of attention, tunnel vision, decreased search activity, response rigidity, longer reaction time to peripheral stimuli, increased information-processing errors, and memory deficits (Salas, Driskell & Hughs, 1996). In this respect, one of the betterestablished findings in the stress literature is that, as stress or arousal increases, the individual’s breadth of attention narrows (Combs & Taylor, 1952). For complex tasks in which the individual must attend to a relatively large number of task salient cues, this narrowing of attention may result in the elimination of relevant task information and task performance will suffer. Thus, stress may result in degraded overall performance on complex tasks because attention is narrowed in response to cognitive overload. Furthermore, with regard to decision making under-stress, Cohen (1952) found that stressful conditions lead to greater problem-solving rigidity – a tendency to persist with a set method of problem solving – when it ceases to provide a direct task solution. This process has more recently been


7

shown to be relevant in organizational studies. Dorner (1990), for example, found that individuals under stress were prone to “ballistic decision making”: making decisions without checking the consequences of their decision. Dorner concluded that ballistic decision making tends to increase concreteness of behavior, because evaluating the consequences of one’s action is an essential means of adapting responses to changing environmental demands (see also Staw, 1981). Behavioral characteristics of the stress response process include a reduction in the tendency to assist others, increased interpersonal aggression, neglect of social or interpersonal cues, and less cooperative behavior among team members (Patel & Arocha, 2002). Cohen (1980) noted that the narrowing of attention that occurs under stress may include a restriction of social cues as well, and that stress may lead to a neglect of social or interpersonal cues and sensitivity to others. A further consequence of attentional narrowing is a neglect of behavior monitoring, and hence an increase in self-regulation failure. As such, the stress response may interfere with effective behavioral control, which may have deleterious effects on physical or interpersonal work-related activities (Driskell & Salas, 1991). According to Lazarus (1991), the emotional reactions to stress gauge a person’s struggle to adapt to or cope with situational demands, emerging as a psychological response to apparent or anticipated threats to well being. As such, each stress emotion, be it anger, frustration, anxiety, guilt, fright, or fear, is an expression of the way in which a person appraises his or her current relationship with the environment, and how that person is coping with this adaptive transaction. Stress emotions are experienced and expressed physiologically, cognitively, and behaviorally (Lazarus, 1999). With regard to the experience of emotion on a physiological level, they may be experienced as tonic muscle seizure (tension), activation of the adrenal glands (anxiety), and/or heightened sensory awareness (fear). Cognitively, emotions are experienced as an appraisal or evaluation of a situation that describes the content of the felt emotions (for example, the thought “This situation is frightening!”). Furthermore, emotions may be experienced as behavioral intentions such as impulsivity and inhibition (associated with excitement and depression). Stress emotions are expressed physiologically via sweating, blushing, or shaking; cognitively as “I am anxious,” and behaviorally in the form of facial expression and posture.

Stress in the Workplace That the stress response can have a positive or negative effect on performance is explained, in part, by an inverted-U hypothesis, where the effect of stress on performance depends on the intensity of the stress experienced. This hypothesis is derived from Yerkes and Dodson’s (1908) famous theory that a curvilinear

8


relationship exists between physiological arousal (one component of stress) and performance. This theory, known as the Yerkes-Dodson Law, proposes that extremely low and extremely high levels of stress are both related to low performance outcomes. Moderate levels of stress and arousal, on the other hand, are more likely to be associated with optimal performance outcomes. The optimum level of stress for effective performance is not fixed, however. As Seyle (1976) has noted, optimum levels vary across individuals and between tasks. Furthermore, optimal arousal levels vary as a function of task difficulty (Hendy, East & Farrell, 2001). As task difficulty increases, the level of arousal considered for optimal performance decreases. Thus, it seems that the performance effects of stress depend not only on the intensity of the stress experienced, but also on the nature of the environmental demand, task, or stressor. Indeed, Beehr and Newman (1978) note that “the relationship between stress and measures of effectiveness may vary by type of stressor, and/or the type of performance measured” (p. 690). For example, one stressor, role uncertainty, typically decreases individual performance (Steiner, 1972), while stressors such as time pressures (deadlines) tend to increase individual performance (Riley & Zaccaro, 1987). Not only may the type of stressor affect differences in intra-individual performance, but also the intensity of the stress experienced. Individuals differ in the nature of their emotional responses to stress, and as a consequence, the impact of their emotions on their ability to cope under stress. Individuals also, however, each experience varying levels of emotional stress depending on their emotional vulnerability, which fluctuates with environmental contingencies. Thus, an individual may have the emotional resources to cope with job insecurity in the morning but, as the day progresses, and emotional coping resources are depleted, that same individual may be unable to regulate the intensity of his/her emotions, and hence it becomes more likely that affect will interfere with performance. Lazarus and Folkman (1984) contend that it is neither the stressor nor the intensity or duration of the stress that predicts the outcome of stress on performance. On the basis of a cognitive-motivational theory of the stress response process, Lazarus and Folkman proposed that it is the individuals’ appraisal of the stressor and method of coping with the stressor that determined the effects of stress on behavior. This leads us to our next topic, the role of appraisal in stress.

Appraisal and Stress Although certain environmental demands and pressures produce stress in substantial numbers of people, individual and group differences in the degree and kind of reaction are almost always evident. People and groups differ in their sensitivity


9

and vulnerability to experiencing stress in response to certain workplace events (Lazarus, 1979). Under comparable conditions, for example job insecurity, one employee may perceive that their well being is under threat, while another may feel challenged or motivated (see Jordan et al., 2002). Similarly, individuals can display varying responses to similar workplace stressors, depending on their evaluation of the situation, which may vary depending on a transitory emotional state or different environmental conditions (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996). For example, when in a positive mood, people are more likely to appraise stressors positively as challenges (Isen, 1999), whereas when in a negative mood, they are more likely to perceive workplace events as hassles, or obstacles to well being (see Fiedler, 2001). Lazarus and Folkman (1984) suggest further that, in order to understand differences in individuals’ experience of stress under comparable workplace conditions, individuals must take into account the cognitive appraisal process that intervenes between the encounter and the reaction, and the internal and external factors that affect the nature of this mediation. Lazarus and Folkman (1984) defined appraisal as a cognitive evaluation of an environmental stimulus that is internal or external to the individual, with respect to its significance for well being, or the attainment of personal goals. It is this cognitive process that gives meaning to situations and events that occur in the workplace. Lazarus and Folkman also distinguished between two forms of appraisal: primary appraisal, which functions to determine whether the stimulus has any affective significance (whether it affects one’s well being); and secondary appraisal, which functions to determine the individual’s coping potential. The primary appraisal establishes whether the event is a potential threat or stressor, while the secondary appraisal evaluates that whether the outcome of this event will be positive or negative (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). Lazarus and Folkman (1984) described three forms of primary appraisal: (1) irrelevant; (2) benign-positive; and (3) stressful. When a workplace event carries no implication for a person’s well being, it is appraised as irrelevant. The event will evoke no physiological, cognitive, behavioral, or emotional change in the person, for whom the event has no affective significance. That is, the event presents no perceived obstacle to the person’s values or goals and hence has no impact upon personal investment. The benign/positive appraisals occur if the event is perceived to preserve, to maintain, or to enhance a person’s situation. These appraisals often evoke positive emotional responses such as joy, happiness, relief, and/or excitement. Stress appraisals, on the other hand, include the perception of an event ensuing harm/loss, threat, or challenge to one’s psychological or social well being. While perceptions of harm or loss involve an appraisal of damage that has already taken place, the appraisal of threat concerns the perception of harms or losses that have not yet occurred, but are anticipated outcomes of the workplace

10 NEAL M. ASHKANASY, CLAIRE E. ASHTON-JAMES AND PETER J. JORDAN

event. As such, perceptions of threat mobilize anticipatory coping behaviors that function to prepare the individual for the need to adapt to changing environmental demands, or to prevent the actualization of the threat. The third kind of stress appraisal, challenge, has much in common with threat in that it also mobilizes the individual for adaptive functioning. The main difference is that challenge appraisals focus on the potential for gain or growth that potentially accompanies adaptive change, and hence functions to ensure the actualization of the anticipated environmental change. Furthermore, while threat is associated with emotions such as fear, anxiety, and anger, challenge is characterized by positive emotions associated with motivation, such as exhilaration. With regard to the effects of the stress experienced on performance outcomes, Lazarus and Folkman (1984) propose that a positive appraisal of the stressor, as a challenge or motivation, will result in increased effort and positive performance outcomes, while a negative appraisal of the stressor as a threat, will result in a defensive “fight or flight” response, similar to that described as resistance coping by Seyle (1976), which inevitably leads to exhaustion or burn out (see Schaufeli, Maslach & Marek, 1993). Thus, individuals who are, by nature, optimistic will tend to primarily appraisal situational cues as benign or positive, and hence experience positive affect. Furthermore, as noted by Isen (1999), a positive affective state can influence information processing such that either, negative emotional situational cues are undetected, or it is that potential stressors are interpreted otherwise. Stress appraisal is an adaptive process whereby the task of evaluating events with respect to the implications for personal well being is a continuing struggle to balance environmental realities and personal goals. The primary function of appraisal is, in effect, to integrate the two as effectively as possible for adaptive success. Individuals differ in their appraisal and integration of stressors, however, as both perceptions of environmental realities and personal goals are subject to individual differences. Although people perceive and understand their environments with remarkable objectivity (Patterson & Neufeld, 1987), the number of possible environmental cues significantly outweighs that which we are capable of perceiving and attending. Because situations are often ambiguous, individuals attend to and process them selectively, based on goal hierarchies and psychosocial beliefs or heuristics about themselves and their world. Furthermore, as mentioned above, situational demands may also be processed differentially between, and within individuals depending on the existence of stable or transient emotional states. The role of appraisal in the stress response process is therefore to identify situational cues that are relevant to personal goals, and then to evaluate the extent of the threat, challenge, harm, loss, or benefit. This secondary appraisal involves the evaluation of personal resources or coping capabilities. The size


11

of discrepancy between personal resources or capabilities and environmental demands corresponds to the quality or intensity of emotional responses to the stressor. Finally, the impact of emotional stress responses on cognitions and behaviors is influenced by the individual’s ability to access and to utilize personal resources effectively in order to modulate the emotional experience of stress into adaptive behavioral expressions under stress. We take up this issue in more detail next.

Stress and Coping Coping with stress and the behaviors associated with coping have been an area of significant interest for psychologists for many years (see Glass, 1986). Management scholars turned their attention to coping behaviors in the workplace when it was realized that reactions to stressful situations have an impact on performance. Since this realization, research has contributed to our understanding of this phenomenon, with the most notable being the research of Folkman and Lazarus (1988), who proposed the model of emotion-focused and problem-focused coping that we addressed in the previous section of this chapter. Recent research into coping, however, has covered a myriad of issues including coping and selfregulation (Carver & Scheier, 1999), coping difficulties and appraisal of stress (Zohar & Brandt, 2002), links between types of coping and psychological distress (Brown, Mulhern & Joseph, 2002), and gender differences and coping (Porter & Stone, 1995). There has also been a plethora of recent publications examining the link between coping and specific work issues such as coping and job insecurity (Jordan et al., 2002); coping and downsizing (Paterson & Cary, 2002); and coping and organizational change (Callan, Terry & Schweitzer, 1994). Finally, empirical studies into the impact of coping behaviors has been conducted on a range of occupational categories including firefighters (Brown, Mulhern & Joseph, 2002), nurses (Greenglass & Burke, 2000), police officers (Patterson, 1999), psychiatrists (Deary, Agius & Sadler, 1996), welfare supervisors (Erera-Weatherley, 1996), public sector workers (Terry, Tonge & Callan, 1995), and teleworkers (Norman, Collins, Conner & Martin, 1995). One result of this research is the emergence of a clear definition of coping. Muraven, Tice and Baumeister (1998) define coping as a reaction to feelings of stress and can be defined as a voluntary behavior involving emotion, cognition, and behavior in a process of self-regulation. In this instance, coping is essentially an act of self-regulation that emerges following the experience of cognitive strain and emotional strain. The process of coping thus involves the identification and implementation of strategies designed to reduce the stress experienced.


Coping Strategies Coping behaviors are intended to reduce job-related tension through amelioration of experienced stress. In this respect, Lazarus and Folkman (1984) identified two types of coping strategy. The first type, referred to as problem-focused coping, is intended to address the source of the stress directly. The second, emotion-focused coping, is aimed at minimizing the emotional ramifications of stress. Generally, problem-focused coping is seen as an effective strategy because it is task oriented and addresses the source of the stress. Emotion-focused coping, on the other hand, is perceived as less effective, because it merely ameliorates the appraisal of the stress so that the stress trigger still remains. The issue of which style is best, however, not clear-cut. Sears, Unizar and Garrett (2000), for instance, note that problem-focused strategies are appropriate in situations where individuals perceive the problem as changeable, but emotion-focused strategies are more appropriate where the problem cannot be changed. Working from the Lazarus and Folkman (1984) model of problem-focused and emotion-focused coping, Folkman, Lazarus, Dunkel-Schetter, DeLongis and Gruen (1986) identified eight basic strategies for coping. The first, confrontive coping, is described by Folkman and her colleagues as an aggressive effort to alter the situation. The second strategy involves distancing yourself from the stress amounting to an effort to detach oneself from the issue. The next strategy for coping is emotional self-control or attempts to regulate feelings. Another strategy identified by Folkman et al. involves seeking social support. They explain that this process involves an effort to acquire informational support to confirm perceptions about the situation. Folkman and her associates then go on to suggest that, for some individuals, accepting responsibility or acknowledging their own role in the situation can be a successful coping mechanism. This strategy allows individuals to accept the situation and then to try to put it behind them by acknowledging their role and ensuring that this does not happen again. The sixth strategy identified by Folkman et al. involves wishful thinking. Folkman and her associates have also called this strategy escape avoidance. This strategy can also involve the use of substances such as alcohol, drugs or medication in an attempt to minimize impact of the problem. “Planful” problem solving is a specific strategy involving the development of a deliberate plan designed to altering the stressful situation. Finally, positive reappraisal is an emotion-focused solution intended to create a positive meaning from the situation (Folkman et al., 1986). These strategies are separated into problem-focused and emotion-focused strategies. Problem-focused strategies include confrontive coping, seeking social support, and “planful” problem solving. Emotion-focused coping strategies include distancing, emotional self-control, accepting responsibility, wishful thinking (escape avoidance), and positive reappraisal (Folkman et al., 1986).


13

While this categorization is convenient, it overlooks the fact that there is some leakage between emotion-focused and problem-focused strategies. For instance the act of seeking social support is a problem-focused strategy, which may provide emotional support and therefore can also be seen as an emotion-focused strategy. An alternative model was postulated by Carver, Scheier and Weintraub (1989). They identified fourteen discrete methods of coping: active coping, planning, suppressing competitive activities, restraint coping, seeking social support for instrumental reasons, seeking social support for emotional reasons, positive reinterpretation and growth, acceptance, turning to religion, focusing on the venting of emotion, denial, behavioral disengagement, and alcohol drug disengagement. Subsequent factor analysis of this instrument by Lyne and Rogers (2000) suggested that these methods of coping can also be broadly categorized as active coping (intention to act to reduce the stressor), emotion-focused coping (attempts to ameliorate one’s feelings of stress), and avoidance coping (including denial and giving up). In terms of empirical findings in work settings, Sears et al. (2000) found a greater prevalence of emotion-focused coping than problem-focused coping. In fact, they found strong correlations between emotion-focused coping and role overload, role ambiguity, role boundaries and responsibility. On the other hand, there was a negative correlation between problem-focused coping and role ambiguity and role boundaries and no relationship between problem-focused coping and role overload and responsibility. Their findings indicated that problem-focused coping is more likely to be used to cope with the physiological, cognitive, and behavioral effects of stress; rather than the emotional effects of stress, which are associated with uncertainty in the workplace. Evidently, the effects of stress in the workplace are emotional, as well as physiological, cognitive, and behavioral. Thus, the distinct role of emotion in the stress appraisal and coping processes is important for understanding and managing workplace behavior. In summary, as an adaptation process, the concept of stress outlined so far in this chapter emphasizes the inter-relationship between person and environment, which takes into account the physical, cognitive, behavioral, and emotional resources of the person, on the one hand, and the nature of environmental demands on the other. Thus, stress is a process that unfolds in response to a perceived discrepancy between situational demands and personal resources or goals. The discrepant person-environment relationship triggers the stress response process in order to facilitate the adaptive changes required to achieve personal goals in the face of new environmental contingencies. Whether or not the physiological, cognitive, behavioral, and emotional changes associated with the stress response function to increase or interfere with performance efficacy, however, depends


on the individual’s evaluation of the significance of the stressor (appraisal) and coping capabilities. Finally, we note that emotion plays a key role within this model. Yet research into the effects of stress on workplace performance has predominantly focused on the physiological, behavioral, and cognitive effects of stress. In the remainder of this chapter, therefore, we focus our attention on the effects of stress-induced emotions in the workplace.

EMOTION AND STRESS IN THE WORKPLACE The role of emotional responses to stress in the workplace is a relatively neglected area of research, considering the pervasive effects of emotions on individual and organizational outcomes (Ashforth & Humphrey, 1995). We suggest three reasons for this. First, while physiological stress responses may be measured objectively, the emotional components of the stress response are not easily observed or quantified, and hence seem to defy empirical research. Second, the transitory and uncontrollable nature of emotions means that subjective reports of emotions are often unreliable, as they are most often retrospective and subject to bias (Ashforth & Humphrey). Third, because of their rapidly changing nature, emotions can be dependent variables as they are the effect of some event at work, and then immediately become independent variables as they are then the cause of some behavior or action by the person who experiences the emotion. Traditionally, however, psychological research has tended to focus on variables which are relatively static and which can be clearly categorized as independent or dependent rather than dynamic variables. Recent developments around the study of emotions at work, however, have laid the foundations for understanding of the causes and consequences of affective responses to workplace stressors on individual and organizational performance (see Ashkanasy, Härtel & Daus, 2002; Fisher & Ashkanasy, 2000). In this chapter, we focus on AET (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996) as an appropriate basis for understanding the role of stress and emotions.

Affective Events Theory Weiss and Cropanzano (1996) have proposed Affective Events Theory (AET), which emphasizes the importance of understanding emotion in terms of transactions and processes, rather than simple cause and effect. AET represents a unique development in emotions research that provides a model of the nature of affective


15

responses to workplace stressors and the direct relationship between various emotions and workplace behaviors. Weiss and Cropanzano posit in AET that environmental conditions, internal and external to the organization, determine the occurrence of discrete “affective events” that, in turn, lead to affective responses such as moods and emotions. A key component of AET is that work events (i.e. daily hassles and uplifts) are determined by elements of the work environment such as job characteristics, role stressors, and mental load. These work events lead to experiences of positive and negative emotions that have the effects on behaviors and attitudes that can lead to emotion-driven behavior. Typical emotion-driven behaviors include negative emotional outbursts such as anger, sadness, or even violence; but can also include positive emotional experiences of joy or pleasure, and altruistic behavior. Moreover, in the longer term, stable moods and emotions can accumulate to influence more stable workplace attitudes and behaviors such as job satisfaction and work involvement. It is these emotions, driven by workplace events, which lead to behavioral decision making that affects outcomes at an organizational level, such as decisions to quit, or to systematically engage in anti- or pro-social workplace behavior. AET is thus a unique development in organizational research. It presents a model of emotions that looks to the peculiarities of the individual’s work conditions for an understanding of person-environment transactions that may be contributing to the experience of emotion in the workplace, and determining whether these emotions have a positive or negative impact on individual and organizational outcomes. Research on AET is still at a relatively early stage of development. Nonetheless, research to date has supported the central tenets of AET: that affective states underlie much of the way that workers think and behave at work (Fisher & Ashkanasy, 2000; O’Shea, Ashkanasy, Gallois & Härtel, 1999); and that affective states are responses to workplace events that are perceived to promote or impinge upon personal well being (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996). For example, research has consistently demonstrated that positive affect predicts better creativity and cognitive flexibility (Isen & Daubman, 1984; Isen, Daubman & Nowicki, 1987). Furthermore, the data have also supported in general the hypothesis that positive affect is positively related to job satisfaction and work commitment, and thus leads to less turnover, more prosocial organizational behaviors and even improved performance (see Ashkanasy et al., 2002). Positive affect does not, however, consistently result in increased workplace performance. While it appears that positive mood facilitates performance on creative and interpersonal tasks, research suggests that people in positive moods will avoid tasks that may detract from their positive mood, and hence may be more likely to engage in procrastinating or avoidant workplace behaviors (Baumeister


& Heatherton, 1996). Furthermore, there are certain tasks for which a negative affect is desirable. People in a negative mood tend to be more careful and sensitive to stimulus details, and hence exhibit an analytic cognitive style that is best suited for abstract problem solving or tasks requiring attention to detail (Fiedler, 2001). Hence, individual effectiveness and organizational performance depends on an individual’s ability to cope with emotional reactions to workplace stressors. In effect, they must be able to moderate the generation of emotion and its effect on behavioral coping. In this respect, emotional intelligence describes the set of cognitive mechanisms for emotional information processing and control. Thus, as Jordan et al. (2002) suggest, emotional intelligence moderates affective responses to workplace stressors. Hence, it is argued in this chapter, consistent with Jordan et al., that emotional intelligence plays a critical role in employees’ abilities to moderate the emotional effects of stress and the impact of emotional stress of their workplace performance. In the following section, therefore, we examine the role of emotional intelligence in the workplace, followed by a detailed explanation of Mayer and Salovey’s (1997) structural model of emotional intelligence. Following this, we will introduce the Jordan et al. model of emotional intelligence as a moderator of affective responses to workplace stressors, upon the basis of which we will begin to deconstruct the contents, structures, and functions of emotional intelligence with a view to developing an understanding of the cognitive processes that underlie the affective response process.

EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR A key tenet of this chapter is that the individual difference construct of emotional intelligence (Mayer & Salovey, 1997; Salovey & Mayer, 1990) can contribute to our understanding of successful and unsuccessful coping behaviors in organizations. While there are many dispositional variables, including self-efficacy (Bandura, 1977) and locus of control (Rotter, 1960), that affect an employees’ ability to deal with stressful situations, we argue that the appraisal of stress results in emotional activation and emotional responses. It is appropriate therefore to consider an individual difference variable that deals with emotion. In this case, we argue that emotional intelligence is an emotional variable that is important to consider in the context of coping. Some authors have argued that positive and negative mood states, referred to by Watson, Clark and Tellegen (1988) as dispositional affectivity, have the potential to affect behavior. Subsequently, this variable has been researched extensively in organizational settings (e.g. George, 1991). Affectivity, however, applies to


17

emotional traits and states, rather than the manner by which individuals deal with emotions during stressful episodes. In this respect, Mayer and Salovey (1997) argue that emotional intelligence is differentiated from other forms of intelligence and personality because it deals directly with the way people recognize and deal with emotions and emotional content. The focus on recognizing and regulating emotion also differentiates emotional intelligence from impression management (Lennox & Wolfe, 1984; Snyder, 1979), which is primarily a social skill used in interpersonal relationships. The utility of emotional intelligence and its impact on organizational performance has been contentious for some time, however, and continues to attract controversy (see Jordan et al., 2003). Although not implicitly stated, an undertone of those who seek to downplay the role of emotional intelligence in determining behavior in organizations falls into two categories, those who consider general intelligence alone to have sufficient power for predicting performance (e.g. Becker, 2003) and those who see emotional intelligence as just another personality construct (Davies, Stankov & Roberts, 1998). Dealing with these two issues in more detail, the first argument considers that all behavior, including those behaviors that can be linked to the emotions can be considered as a function of cognition. Proponents of this view question the inclusion of emotional intelligence research within the area of organizational behavior and suggest that it is a fad that could be replaced by assessments of general intelligence (Becker, 2003). We concede that intelligence and cognition play a major role in determining behavior in the workplace. We note, however, that many researchers argue that both emotion and cognition play a role in decision making (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996). Indeed, research into organizational commitment (Allen & Meyer, 1990) demonstrates the importance of emotion in determining organizational behavior. To draw on Damasio (1994), human behavior cannot be understood fully without understanding its underlying emotional dimensions. Ashforth and Humphrey (1995) offer a similar view at an organizational level, arguing that work life is intrinsically emotional and value-based, and that ostensibly rational organizational behavior reflects the extent to which organizational members are able to deal with their emotions. Now we turn the argument that emotional intelligence is just another personality variable in organizational behavior research. As noted earlier, this opinion has some merit given the muddled constructs of emotional intelligence that emerge particularly from the populist literature. Jordan et al. (2003) clearly state that in order to overcome this perception that researchers need to adhere to the construct of emotional intelligence developed by Mayer and Salovey (1997). Indeed, we are probably at a crossroads in emotional intelligence research, where considered evidence-based research needs to overtake the populist conceptualizations


of emotional intelligence or the construct will be reduced to the status of a fad. Finally, Caruso and Wolfe (2001) argue that emotional intelligence in the workplace expands on the abilities employees have to improve their performance. In particular, they differentiate between emotional competencies in the workplace and emotional intelligence. In this instance, Caruso and Wolfe point out in particular that emotional competencies such as stress tolerance, empathy, and optimism are all really personality traits, which have been relabeled. As such, competencies do not provide new insights into the application of emotional intelligence in the workplace. On the other hand, emotional awareness, or ability to perceive their own and others’ emotions; ability to use emotions to generate ideas; understanding emotions and being able to see issues from other peoples’ perspectives; and managing those emotions constructively all provide a different set of skills which can enhance performance in organizations. In summary, we argue that emotional intelligence has a role in individual performance in organizations and more specifically that these skills contribute to coping in the workplace. In the next section, we discuss in detail the nature of emotional intelligence, and then outline existing research that has examined the link between emotional intelligence, stress appraisal and coping.

What is Emotional Intelligence? While Salovey and Mayer (1990) were the first to propose a model of emotional intelligence as a precursor of behavior, there has been a long history of research into the interaction of emotions and intelligence. Piaget (1954/1981) explored theoretical links between affectivity and intelligence, while Izard (1985), LeDoux (1989) and Lazarus (1982) have discussed the link between emotion and cognition in the 1980s. Examining the links between the current work on emotional intelligence and earlier work on emotions and cognition, Salovey and Mayer’s ideas on emotional intelligence can be linked to Thorndike’s (1920) work on social intelligence and Gardner’s (1983) work on multiple intelligences that included interpersonal and intra-personal intelligence. As we noted earlier, one problem that has dogged emotional intelligence research is the plethora of differing definitions that have emerged over the last ten years. Significantly, much of the new theoretical work on emotional intelligence has been conducted outside of academic literature (Bar-On, Brown, Kirkcaldy & Thome, 2000; Cooper & Sawaf, 1997; Goleman, 1995, 1998; Steiner & Perry, 1997; Weisinger, 1998). Mayer (2001) notes that, while these writings contribute to our understanding of multiple aspects of personality, they do not


19

really contribute to our understanding of emotional intelligence. Factors identified in these populist constructs of emotional intelligence include motivation, attitude, and empathy. Goleman (1995, 1998) and Bar-On (1997) included motivation in their research. Goleman also suggested that emotional intelligence is largely a set of (positive) attitudes (see also Cooper & Sawaf, 1997). Finally, both Goleman (1995, 1998) and Bar-On (1997) include empathy in their definitions of emotional intelligence. In line with Mayer’s position, however, we argue that to accept all these definitions only weakens the construct. Although these various constructs are interesting and may impact behavior in various ways, and may be related to emotional intelligence, they are not in themselves facets of emotional intelligence. In fact, only Mayer and Salovey’s (1997) model of emotional intelligence focuses solely on the link between the cognitive and emotional aspects of intelligence. As we have discussed, the other models of emotional intelligence, which incorporate emotional skills or competencies, personality traits, and attitudinal variables (Mayer, Caruso & Salovery, 1999), in many respects would seem to serve only to confound the construct. Consequently, Mayer and Salovey’s (1997) definition of emotional intelligence is the one we will employ in the remainder of this chapter. Mayer and Salovey’s (1997) definition is their most recent, and includes four components, or “branches”: perception, assimilation, understanding, and management of emotions. In the multidimensional model, perception provides a platform for assimilation that, in turn, provides a foundation for understanding, and understanding then contributes to emotional management. Using the Mayer and Salovey terminology of “branches,” we discuss each facet of emotional intelligence in the following paragraphs. Emotional Perception Mayer and Salovey (1997) outline emotional perception as the ability to be self-aware of emotions, and to be able to express emotions and emotional needs accurately to others. Mayer and Salovey also note that this includes an ability to distinguish between accurate and inaccurate expressions of emotions, and between honest and dishonest expressions of emotions by others. The issue of emotional awareness is particularly important when discussing the link between emotional intelligence and coping, because emotional self-awareness is a starting point for dealing with an appraisal of stress. In other words, employees’ feelings that emerge following the appraisal of stress drive the emotional and behavioral consequences that follow. The ability to recognize others’ emotions and the sincerity of those emotional expressions is also of use in dealing with stressful situations. For instance, as a part of an appraisal, individuals may compare their situation and their feelings in relation to that situation with others who are currently in the same situation or those who have experienced a similar situation in the past.


If following this comparison they observe that the other parties were genuinely stressed or distressed then this may contribute to their selection of an appropriate coping strategy. Emotional Assimilation This refers to the ability of an individual to distinguish between the different emotions they may be feeling and to prioritize those that are influencing their thought processes (Mayer & Salovey, 1997). During an employee’s appraisal of a situation, s/he may experience a range of emotions that may include frustration, anger, and fear. Emotional assimilation enables the employee to cognitively process why feelings are being experienced. In other words, employees can determine whether these emotions are reasonable in the situation. During the appraisal process, this is a skill that determines the level of stress one is going to endure. Assimilation can also act as a trigger for level of emotional management required in making a decision about which coping strategy to adopt. If the initial emotional reaction is out of proportion to the stressor, then the emotional control one asserts may need to be greater. A good example, with which we are all familiar, is a jammed photocopier. Generally, this type of incident will result in a range of reactions. These include just fixing the jam (problem-based strategy with good emotional control emanating from the assessment of a minor inconvenience) to a full-blown tantrum with swearing and kicking of the machine (emotion-focused strategy of blaming with poor emotional control emanating from the assessment of a major obstacle). Emotional assimilation can be of use in assessing the potential reaction and deciding how much emotional control needs to be applied in the situation to resolve the problem. This branch also includes the ability to adopt multiple perspectives to assess a problem from all sides, including pessimistic and optimistic perspectives. By adopting multiple perspectives, employees can determine the appropriate emotional state to facilitate the solution of the problem, or they can resolve the conflicting emotions they may be feeling. In the present context, adoption of multiple perspectives may provide a key process that may enable employees to break out of the cycle of negativity that can emerge as a result of feeling stressed. Emotional Understanding The third branch represents an ability to understand complex emotions such as a “double-bind,” or simultaneous feelings of loyalty and betrayal (Mayer & Salovey, 1997). This branch also refers to the ability of individuals to recognize the likely transitions between emotions, moving, for example, from feelings of fear over a threat to goal attainment to feelings of anger or hopelessness if the threat is appraised as insurmountable. Recognizing and analyzing the sequence of emotions that emerge from perceptions is another important tool in overcoming


21

negative responses to emotions. Just as generating multiple perspectives may assist in providing a hiatus in negative-coping cycles, emotional understanding can contribute to reconciliation of the feelings of emotional dissonance that can emerge from appraisals of stress. This branch also allows the individual to prepare for the likely emotions they may encounter during a stressful period. Just as understanding that the grief cycle can assist grieving individuals to work through a painful period in their lives, so understanding the varying emotions that can emerge during a stressful episode can assist individuals to overcome negative feelings and address the problem. Finally, emotional understanding also enables the individual to examine the reactions and motivations of other employees. In this case, emotional understanding allows the individual to assess the likely transitions other employees may experience during a stressful episode, thereby providing insight into others’ emotional expressions and behaviors. Recently, Kelly and Barsade (2001) completed research that demonstrated that emotions are contagious in the workplace. Both the positive and negative emotions that are expressed by fellow workers can infect other workers. From this research, we can see that understanding the emotions expressed by others and being able to track their source may be vital to coping with stress in the workplace. Emotion Management The fourth branch of emotional intelligence revolves around the regulation of emotions. This branch refers to the ability to connect or to disconnect from an emotion depending on its usefulness in any given situation (Mayer & Salovey, 1997). In the case of perceptions of stress, it may be useful to disconnect from feelings of frustration if such feelings are distracting the individual from completing tasks. For instance, Fitness (2000) found that open expressions of anger in the workplace could negatively affect relationships in the workplace and lead to unresolved conflict. Connecting with feelings of anger, on the other hand, may be useful if this feeling provides motivation. The emotional management dimension of emotional intelligence separates emotional intelligence from the personality domain, because emotional regulation can vary to suit specific personality traits (Mayer & Salovey, 1997). While the focus in much of the popular literature has been on emotional regulation as the suppression of emotion (e.g. Goleman, 1998), Salovey (2001) notes that both expressing and suppressing emotion can have a negative impact on health. He suggests that emotional management is really about focusing on actions that are best for one’s health. In other words, in line with the coping literature, there are times when emotion-focused strategies involving the expression of emotion will result in the best outcome and at other times


emotion-focused strategies involving the suppression of emotion will provide the best outcome. Emotional Intelligence and Stress Recent research by Ciarrochi, Deane and Anderson (2002) has explored the link between emotional intelligence and stress. Their findings suggest that there is a definite link between inability to manage one’s own emotions and feelings of hopelessness and depression. Ciarrochi and his colleagues concluded that individuals who are more emotionally perceptive might indeed be more vulnerable to stress. While this is an intriguing idea, the result does not discount that the possibility is, maybe, an artifact of the self-reporting measure used in the study. Examination of research into empathy (e.g. Davis, 1994) reveals that empathy can operate on a continuum from perspective taking, where an actor is able to see another person’s points of view, to personal distress, where actors essentially take on the other person’s distress. Emotional intelligence may have a similar curvilinear relationship with stress. In other words, being high in empathy may be as debilitating (for different reasons) as being low in empathy. Another issue, still to be explored, is that emotional intelligence is a complex set of skills. For instance, Ciarrochi and his associates (2002) found that having high emotional perception with low emotional control made the respondents more susceptible to stress. The underlying question here is whether an individual, who is high in one emotional intelligence skill, but low in another, can be considered emotionally intelligent. In essence, if an individual has excellent emotional self-awareness, but poor emotional control, can s/he be considered emotionally intelligent? Certainly if we take the example of alexithymic individuals, who can have excellent emotional control, such people are not considered emotionally intelligent (see Palmer, Donaldson & Stough, 2002). In the final part of this discussion of emotional intelligence, we examine some of the mechanisms whereby the branches of emotional intelligence contribute to effective coping. While it may seem intuitive that people with high emotional intelligence will have better coping behavior, examining the individual branches of emotional intelligence and how they contribute to this outcome allows us to increase our understanding of the emotional intelligence construct. Emotional Intelligence and Coping Existing literature in the area of coping discusses strategies to deal with stress and to improve work performance through the application of a general set of


23

problem-focused or emotion-focused strategies (Auerbach, 1989; Folkman & Lazarus, 1980). In other words, to cope with stress in an organizational setting, employees can either apply affective solutions or cognitive solutions. As noted earlier, affective solutions or emotion-based coping strategies assist employees to deal internally with the stressor. Cognitive solutions or problem-based strategies, on the other hand, address the source of the stress. In the lexicon of researchers within the coping paradigm, emotional intelligence may explain why some employees manage stress, while other employees allow stress to manage them. In other words, in the face of an appraisal of a stressful situation, why do some employees adopt positive behaviors such as seeking support, cognitive reappraisal and goal setting and successfully deal with stress, while others adopt negative behaviors such as avoidance and withdrawal and subsequently fail to adapt to stress over time? An explanation of behavior modified by emotional intelligence contributes to our understanding of why individuals in similar situations are not consistent in applying the positive emotional and problem-based coping strategies. Emotional intelligence provides this explanation by linking both emotional and cognitive elements to provide a holistic assessment of coping. While researchers working in the area of coping have focused on programs that either eliminate the stress or cognitively reappraise the stressor (Ivancevich, Matteson, Freedman & Phillips, 1990; Kahn & Byosiere, 1992; O’Driscoll & Cooper, 1996), they have yet to identify the antecedents of successful coping strategies to maintain high performance. To maintain performance, an individual difference variable needs to enable the individual to maintain the positive benefits of job-related stress and also to minimize the negative aspects of stress. To achieve this outcome, an emotional intelligence perspective suggests that affective influences on behavior will need to be addressed at differing points for each individual. Emotional intelligence therefore provides the ability to fine tune coping strategies to individual requirements.

Emotional Intelligence as a Moderator of Affective Responses to Stress In the Jordan et al. (2002) model, emotional reactions to workplace stressors lead to negative coping behaviors and poor performance outcomes. Specifically, Jordan and his colleagues proposed job insecurity as a case in point of a job stressor associated with divergent behavioral performance outcomes. They suggested that job insecurity triggers an emotional reaction that, like stress, can motivate positive or negative behavioral responses. They therefore proposed emotional intelligence as the variable that moderates the nature of affective responses to job insecurity, as well as the impact of the affective responses on motivated actions.


The foundation of the model outlined by Jordan et al. (2002) is a two-stage representation of the affective response process linking workplace stressors to workplace behavior. This approach conforms to Ortony, Clore and Collins’s (1988) theory of the cognitive processes involved in the generation of emotions. The first stage of the Jordan et al. model proposes that an emotional response emanates from an employee’s perception of an emotional cue or affective event in the workplace. They proposed further that cognitive evaluation of this perception (Ortony et al., 1988) results in effect in two inter-related affective reactions, involving cognitive and affective change. In response to the cognitive and affective changes instigated in the first stage of the affective response process, the second stage of the Jordan et al. model details the modulation of coping behaviors. The role of emotional intelligence in the affective response process is described as the moderation of: (1) the appraisal of the workplace stressor as an emotional cue, and hence the instigation of the affective response process; (2) the cognitive and affective change in response to the workplace stressor; and (3) the formulation of behavioral strategies to cope with affective and cognitive change. The critical implication of the Jordan et al. (2002) model therefore is that the branches of emotional intelligence moderate the effect of affective responses to workplace stressors on workplace behavior. This represents a substantial advance on the existing literature on coping with workplace stress previously discussed in this chapter. The model holds that high emotional intelligence employees are likely to be able to recognize and cope proactively with the emotional consequences of workplace stressors. Furthermore, Jordan et al. proposed that differences in emotional intelligence also provide an explanation of employees’ selection of coping mechanisms. For instance, in meeting deadlines, the same individual can adopt very different coping mechanisms even within similar situations. At one time s/he may leave a task until the last minute to allow time pressure to build and force urgent action to achieve results within the required timeframe. At another time, given a similar amount of warning, s/he may carefully prepare a schedule, which allows time to work towards completing the task. In this example, emotional intelligence functions to inform the individual’s decision making with regard to the management of stress. This requires an ability to monitor stress level (emotional perception and assimilation), and to understand the effects of increasing or decreasing stress levels on situational coping capabilities (emotional understanding and management). Earlier in this chapter, we discussed in detail the four branches of emotional intelligence as posited by Mayer and Salovey (1997), and the application of the branches in the Jordan et al. (2002) model. Nonetheless, it is important to point out that the unity of the emotional intelligence construct is still largely unresolved. Although Jordan et al. (2002) addressed the four branches with regard to their


25

individual effects on emotional and behavioral moderation, the inter-relationships between the components are still essentially unexplored, especially in a workplace context. The Jordan et al. model thus suggests that emotional awareness and emotional management are of primary importance as a moderator of job stress, but it fails to differentiate between the components in terms of basic processes of emotion generation and modulation. Based upon our earlier discussion of each component of emotional intelligence, we will consolidate what we have already established and further investigate the differential effects of the four branches of emotional intelligence, where each contributes to the moderation of affective responses to work stressors and subsequent impact on performance. This will involve a deconstruction of the processes involved in each of the components of emotional intelligence and the processes that they moderate in the affective response process.

AFFECTIVE RESPONSES TO WORKPLACE STRESSORS: A NEW PROCESS MODEL Weiss and Cropanzano (1996) describe affective events as the proximal cause of affective reactions. Affective reactions are thus social psychological responses constructed in the process of social development to facilitate effective responding to important social encounters (Ekman, 1992). In this way, affective responses have a direct influence on behaviors and attitudes. This is because, as Lutz and White (1986) note, affective responses are an integral part of a social psychological process that monitors the adaptive success of the self in social relations with the environment. Behavioral and attitudinal functioning are therefore regulated by emotional responses to social encounters in which the individual has inadequate social resources with which to respond (Keltner & Haidt, 2001). In this regard, emotions function as a negative feedback process that motivates the adaptive change in attitudinal and behavioral resources that, in turn, shapes relations with the environment (Bonanno, 2001; Gross, 1999). Affective responses are therefore conceptualized in our model as a process of social self-regulation, wherein social behaviors and attitudes that determine social relations are monitored according to their success in progressing the individual toward desired goals. If social input indicates that these resources are inadequate to meet the goals, an emotion is elicited that acts as an error signal Keltner & Haidt, 2001). This error signal thus becomes a resource for making subsequent adjustments to social functioning (Carver & Scheier, 1999). The model we present is shown in Fig. 1. In this model, we identify that the affective responses are a function of social self-regulation, wherein the affective


Fig. 1. A Process Model of Affective Response.

significance of events is appraised (Scherer, 2001) and with which it is coped (Carver & Scheier, 1999). Thus, social self-regulation initiates a process of emotional self-regulation. We propose that the appraisal of affective events involves the perception of a discrepancy in social functioning (Scherer, 2001) and an identification of the attitudes and behaviors, or social psychological resources, that are dissonant with social situational demands. This “social psychological dissonance” produces an emotional response that motivates the adjustment of social attitudes and behaviors (Erber & Erber, 2001). Consistent with Lazarus (1999), the emotion-motivational state generated by social psychological dissonance is then responded to, or coped with. Dissonance is accompanied by psychological discomfort or negative affect, because it indicates an error or deficit in social psychological resources for adaptive functioning. Thus, the appraisal component of social self-regulation triggers a negative emotional feedback response (Adolphs & Damasio, 2001). The psychological dissonance accompanying this emotional response feeds into the second phase of social self-regulation, coping, which utilizes the emotional feedback to formulate appropriate social psychological changes in attitudinal and behavioral functioning. Affective responses are therefore triggered by the appraisal of affective social information (Adolphs & Damasio, 2001) that, in effect, functions as a reference value for the extent of social self-regulation or coping needed (Gross, 1999). The model that we propose in Fig. 1 is based on the four branches of emotional intelligence as defined by Mayer and Salovey (1997). As such, and consistent


27

with the arguments developed earlier in this chapter, the model links two primary components: appraisal and coping.

Appraisal The first phase of an affective event in Fig. 1 is appraisal. As described earlier in the chapter, appraisal involves the perception of the event and evaluation of the demands upon personal resources that would be incurred in response to the event. In our model, the appraisal process has both involuntary and voluntary consequences for emotions (Frijda, 1993). The primary stage of appraisal involves that perception of events and detection of their relevance for social functioning (Scherer, 2001). This is an involuntary, or automatic psychological function based on the peripheral processing of social stimuli with reference to the social psychological resources of the individual (Scherer, 1997). Thus, primary appraisal is the mechanism through which the valence of social stimuli is implicitly perceived (Roseman, 2001). The identification of a stimuli-resource discrepancy triggers a reflex response, analogous to a psychophysiological orienting response that directs attentional resources to the affective event for further evaluation of its relevance or consequences for social adaptive functioning (Scherer, 2001). Social psychological resources thus shape the affective meaning of the event for the individual (King & Sorrentino, 1983). Social psychological resources are those physiological, cognitive, emotional, or behavioral patterns of responding to social demands that have been reinforced through social development and habituated for efficient person-environment interactions (Keltner & Haidt, 2001; Lazarus, 1991; Mesquita, 2001). Social psychological resources are deployed in everyday interactions in the workplace as a reference value for the regulation social functioning (Armor & Taylor, 1998). An affective event is thus perceived as a discrepancy between the social psychological resources, or tools for social functioning, required for successful completion of tasks, and the resources available to the person (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996). In this situation, either there is a deficit in the deployment of social psychological resources, which may be reversed by increasing social psychological capacities (Pyszczynski & Greenberg, 1992), or the conflict lies in the absence of available resources to respond to the demands of the affective event (Baumeister & Scher, 1988). The nature of the affective event, that is, whether the source of discrepancy is caused by a deficit of resource utilization or an absence of resource capabilities, is evaluated by the secondary appraisal component of social self-regulation. The secondary appraisal mechanism thus assesses the relationship between social goals, social functioning, and social outcomes in order for the individual to


understand whether the discrepancy between social goals and social outcomes is attributable to a deficit in social (cognitive and behavioral) functioning, or whether the discrepancy is between social goals and social functioning capabilities (Lazarus, 1999). Secondary appraisal is thus a comparative process wherein the consonance or dissonance between social cognitions, behaviors and the reality of social events or outcomes is evaluated. The outcome of this evaluation is an appraisal of the extent of discrepancy in social functioning and, hence, the extent of adaptive cognitive or behavioral change required for a renewal of adaptive functioning. In summary, the first step of social self-regulation is primary appraisal, in which implicit social cognitive processes detect an affective event, or social outcome that is discrepant with social goals and expectations (Gross, 1999). This discrepancy triggers an emotional reflex that orients attentional resources toward the affective event for further evaluation (Scherer, 2001). The secondary appraisal engages in a comparative evaluation process to identify the magnitude of the discrepancy (Lazarus, 1991). This is a process that we term social cognitive dissonance, wherein social cognitions conflict with goals or resources in the work context. Emotion Generation Social cognitive dissonance evokes heightened affectivity in individuals because discrepancy between social demands and social psychological resources undermines the requirement for effective functioning (Harmon-Jones, 2001). When perceptions about the environment or oneself are dissonant, decisions cannot be implemented, and protective or facilitative action may be impeded or inefficient. Dissonance is associated with negative affectivity most commonly, because it is an unstable psychological state that signals undesirable social relations (Jones & Gerard, 1967). The negative affective that results from dissonance motivates the individual to respond to the dissonance by either by adapting social psychological resources to meet social demands, which may mean a change in either behavior or attitudes, or a re-evaluation of the valence of the goal for which the social event is an obstacle (Carver & Scheier, 1999). Thus, the individual’s emotional reaction to social dissonance functions to motivate people to engage in information processing that may accomplish the goal of reducing negative affect and/or behaving adaptively (Erber & Erber, 2001). This view of dissonance fits with the views of emotion that posits that emotional states serve adaptive functions (Keltner & Haidt, 2001). Following Darwin (1872/1985), emotional scientists (e.g. Frijda, 1986; Izard, 1977) suggest that emotions serve the function of increasing chances of survival by organizing, motivating and sustaining behavior in response to significant events that impact upon their social success. The emotions associated with dissonance may serve


29

the function of motivating cognitive and behavioral changes that assist with the execution of adaptive behavioral and attitudinal change (Erber & Erber, 2001). That social dissonance causes an increase in negative affect is explained by the psychological uncertainty as to how to respond to the affective event. For instance, Festinger (1957) proposed that dissonance was “psychologically uncomfortable” (p. 3). Furthermore, more recent research has tested this idea and found that discrepancy can induce self-reported changes in negative affect (Elkin & Lieppe, 1986). The experience of negative affect associated with dissonance has been related to Seyle’s (1976) concept of the fight or flight response. As such, negative affect is explained as the felt experience of a drive state that is tied to physiological arousal (Brehm & Cohen, 1962). In summary, the social self-regulation model proposed in this chapter is an explanation of the function of emotional responses to affective, or stressful events. This is because the model proposes that affective reactions are in response to the comparative evaluation (secondary appraisal) of a perceived social discrepancy (primary appraisal). The social cognitive dissonance that arises from secondary appraisal causes an increase in negative affect, which is described as an adaptive motivational state in response to social psychological instability. Emotional Intelligence and Affective Responses At the core of our model lies the idea that an individual’s emotional intelligence, their ability to perceive, to assimilate, to understand, and to manage emotional information (Mayer & Salovey, 1997), can also represent the functionality of the processes we have described above. That is, emotional intelligence is presented in our model as involving social self-regulatory processes involved in the monitoring and adjustment of social functioning (Gross, 1999). Emotional intelligence thus represents the individual’s ability to execute the first stage of the social self-regulation process described above. As such, and consistent with Jordan et al. (2002), emotional intelligence, which measures individual differences in functioning ability, is a moderator of appraisal and coping. If this is so, then it follows that the nature of the emotions generated in response to the perception of an affective event, and the way in which these emotions are utilized in the modulation of cognitive and behavioral adaptive change, is a function of emotional intelligence. Consistent with Mayer and Salovey (1995), and as we discussed earlier, we propose that each component of emotional intelligence functions more or less interdependently in the process of social self-regulation. Thus, while the strength of one’s ability has resonance for the outcome of other emotional intelligence processes, it corresponds to the moderation of distinct processes and functions involved in the appraisal and coping processes. Our model therefore holds that emotion perception, the first component of emotional intelligence, is explainable


in terms of the processes involved in primary appraisal. In this respect, we posit that emotional assimilation represents the function of secondary appraisal. With regard to coping process (discussed later), we propose that emotional understanding is required for the first component of coping (reappraisal), and that emotion management corresponds to the individual’s ability to succeed in and to maintain social self-regulation. Appraisal and Emotional Intelligence Emotional perception is involved in the initial, involuntary affective appraisal of the event (Mayer & Salovey, 1997). Thus, the structure of emotional perception is mapped onto the structure of primary appraisal, and the social psychological processes underlying emotional perception involve the peripheral information processing of environmental stimuli and detection of cues that are inconsistent with existing social psychological response resources. Emotional intelligence thus moderates the perception of affective events (cf. Mayer & Salovey; Jordan et al., 2002). That is, according to this new process model, emotional perception describes the ability to process continuous environmental input and also accurately detects those stimuli that are relevant to the success of a person’s social functioning. By implication, people with high emotional intelligence will have more effective social self-regulation in that they will only respond emotionally to events that are relevant to their pursuit of social goals, while someone with low emotional perceptual intelligence is more likely to either be oversensitive to affective stimuli or insensitive to affective stimuli (Jordan et al., 2002). This is because social psychological attitudes and behaviors vary in their significance to individual well being depending on whether they are of current concern (Carver & Scheier, 1999). Thus, a hierarchy of need determines whether attentional resources should be pared in order to attend to affective environmental cues (Greenwald, 1980). Over-sensitivity as well as insensitivity to emotional cues are examples of low emotional intelligence (Gross, 1999; Mayer & Salovey, 1997), and hence social self misregulation. In the case that an individual is oversensitive to affective stimuli, this means that s/he is attending to social stimuli that are irrelevant to proximal goals. This may be because social psychological resources are limited, or simply that the individual has failed to work to his or her potential. As a result, such an individual is particularly vulnerable to affective response formation, because his or her self-regulation system is signaling a deficit in resources (emotions are the error signal). This brings us to the second phase of appraisal (secondary appraisal), which, we noted earlier, functions to establish the relevance of the emotional cue, or the nature of the discrepancy. Thus, we propose that this secondary appraisal component is explainable in terms of emotional assimilation. In this sense,


31

emotional assimilation defines the accuracy with which the social psychological resource discrepancy is evaluated. In the case above, environmental cues are being detected as being of affective significance due to the misregulation of social psychological perceptual processes. Each of these event perceptions triggers an emotional-orienting response that automatically draws social cognitive resources to the detected source of discrepancy, even though the social cues are affectively irrelevant. The secondary appraisal process identifies the source of discrepancy and evaluates its potential impact upon adaptive functioning with reference to the goals of existing social psychological behaviors and attitudes. If emotional assimilation ability is high, the secondary appraisal can modify primary appraisal. For instance, a goal that was perceived to be significantly affecting adaptive functioning, may not be seen to be relevant after secondary appraisal. If, however, the person who is low in emotional perception is also low with regard to emotional assimilation, the misregulation will not be identified. Instead, on the basis that an emotional cue has been drawn to one’s attention, it is evaluated as a significant problem for social adaptive functioning. Individual differences in emotional assimilation may also explain differences in the nature and intensity of an individual’s emotional reactions to the appraisal of affective events. Emotional assimilation abilities ensure that the person understands the meaning of the emotional cue: whether it is salient and reflects a need for social adaptive changes, or whether it has been detected erroneously because the person’s social psychological resources for coping with everyday hassles are being deployed for coping with another task. In the latter instance, they may not be readily available to facilitate a relatively automated behavioral or cognitive response to the social event. If emotional assimilation is accurate, the emotional reaction to the situational stimuli will reflect a social psychological discrepancy that is an impediment to social adaptive functioning. Furthermore, the intensity of the emotional response will reflect the urgency with which the individual must adjust social cognitive and behavioral functioning (Higgins, 2001). This is because emotions with high intensity are associated with greater dissonance, and hence greater motivational drive and response facilitation (Petty, DeSteno & Rucker, 2001). In summary of the appraisal phase of our model, we propose that emotion is generated through a process of event evaluation and discrepancy identification, leading to social psychological dissonance. Consistent with Jordan et al. (2002), we have cast this process in terms of Mayer and Salovey’s (1997) model of emotional intelligence, where emotional perception and assimilation moderate the nature and intensity of the emotions generated. The resulting affect motivates attitudinal and/or behavioral changes. This emotional modulation is dealt with in the second phase of our model, coping.


Coping As previously discussed, coping is the social self-regulation process whereby emotional reactions are modified and modulated in order to reduce negative affect (Harmon-Jones, 2001; Petty et al., 2001) and restore effective functioning (Carver & Scheier, 1999). We propose that coping involves two phases: reappraisal and coping appraisal (Folkman, Lazarus, Dunkel-Schetter, De Longis & Gruen, 1986). Both reappraisal and coping appraisal involve cognitive and emotional control (Lazarus, 1991). In contrast to the appraisal component of social self-regulation, which involves the monitoring and evaluation of emotional affective events, the coping component involves the evaluation and adjustment of affective reactions (Carver & Scheier, 1999). As such, in our model, coping involves social cognitive (attitudinal) and behavioral change, in the interests of decreasing negative affect and increasing the adaptive success of social psychological resources (social cognitive facilities and behavioral intentions). As noted earlier, secondary appraisal induces social dissonance as the individual strives to understand the genesis of the social cognitive discrepancy that has triggered his or her affective state (Erber & Erber, 2001). A heightened affective state results from this dissonance, signaling error in social self-regulation and a need to make adjustments to social psychological resource utilization (Carver & Scheier, 1999; Scherer, 1997). It is the task of reappraisal to determine the most appropriate social psychological adjustments to make (Folkman et al., 1986). Either the individual must increase social psychological resources, by making adjustments to social goal priorities, and in effect, redirecting resources allocations from other social tasks/concerns, or the individual must make adjustments to the social goal structure that is discrepant with his or her available resources to cope with events relevant to the attainment of this goal (Petty et al., 2001). Reappraisal requires an accurate understanding of the individual’s own resource capabilities in order to make either attitudinal or behavioral adjustments. If the discrepancy is caused by social psychological goals that cannot be met by personal resources, then the adaptive adjustment required is a change in attitudes regarding the affective significance of the social goals. That is, goal priorities must be adjusted such that the affective significance of an obstacle to its attainment is reduced. On the other hand, if the discrepancy in goal attainment is owing to inadequate social psychological resource deployment, the person affected can either increase resource output (behavioral) to cope with the demands of the social task, or reduce the affective significance of the social outcomes by making adjustment to social goals (attitudes). In this case, it would be maladaptive for the individual to adjust attitudes or goals rather than modulating the emotional response for the facilitation of behavioral change. In this way, reappraisal is the psychological


33

comparative process, analogous to primary appraisal, which functions to orient behavioral decision making. Whereas primary appraisal detects the discrepancy and instigates a process of evaluation for adaptive change, reappraisal is a comparative process of behavioral decision making that detects the most adaptive avenue for adaptive change. Based on this understanding, the individual develops a coping strategy and behavioral or attitudinal intention for the manifestation of adaptive change (cf. Folkman et al., 1986). It is thus the function of coping appraisal to develop the content of the attitudinal change, or the direction of behavioral action. For example, in the workplace, if job insecurity is the affective event, and it is perceived to be discrepant with an employee’s social psychological resources for understanding and functioning adaptively under these changed social environmental conditions, then an emotional response will be elicited. The nature and intensity of this response will, in turn, depend on the social dissonance associated with the secondary appraisal process. Ultimately, the employee will decide how to reduce heightened affect and to increase social functioning by either changing his attitude toward the job (reduced work commitment would reduce the affective significance of job insecurity), or by making adaptive changes to behavior (increased work performance will increase social psychological resources for coping with job insecurity and reduce the affective significance associated with this social event). Thus, coping appraisal formulates an adaptive coping strategy based on the orientation of adaptive change (behavioral or attitudinal) evaluated during reappraisal. The coping strategy developed through the processes of coping appraisal is therefore manifest as a behavioral or attitudinal intention (Forgas, 2001). In effect, our model posits a process of emotional self-regulation. That is, an emotional response mediates the impact of the affective event and emotional appraisal on social cognition and behavior (cf. Baumeister & Heatherton, 1996; Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996). As an emotion self-regulation process, coping involves the processing of emotional information generated by appraisal (a social self-regulation process) with reference to its meaning for adaptive functioning. The reappraisal process utilizes this emotional information as a reference value by which to formulate an understanding of what change in attitude or behavior is required, and this emotional information continues to provide feedback as to whether the attitudinal or behavioral intentions for change, formulated in the coping appraisal process, meet the requirements for adaptive functioning (Gross, 1999). That is, emotional feedback informs the person as to the success or adaptiveness of the behavioral intentions (Gross, 1999). Affect will be reduced as social psychological goals are regulated to fit social goals and social goals are regulated or modulated to meet social demands (Erber & Erber, 2001; Petty et al.,


2001). On the other hand, affective dissonance will maintain or increase if the individual’s attempt at emotional regulation (through behavioral and attitudinal change) is unsuccessful, or maladaptive (Trope, Ferguson & Raghunathan, 2001). The emotion self-regulation process of coping thus serves two roles. In the first instance, it acts to minimize the emotional consequences of affective events. Secondly, it acts to alert the individual to potentially maladaptive or negative coping response strategies. As such, coping can be seen as a process that involves the self-regulation of cognition, emotion and behavior. Coping and Emotional Intelligence Emotion-regulation in effect requires an understanding of the way in which cognitive and behavioral change can modulate emotional states. In this case, our model includes the notion that coping requires the ability of emotional understanding associated with emotional intelligence (Mayer & Salovey, 1997) for the effective adjustment of cognition and behavior in response to the affective reaction. As noted previously, emotional understanding involves an appreciation of the way in which emotions can affect behavior and cognitions negatively and positively; it encompasses the ability to modulate affective responses for the facilitation of social performance, rather than the decrement of performance (Mayer & Salovey, 1997). Thus, emotional understanding becomes the reappraisal process by which the individual can make an adaptive decision as to the direction of cognitive or behavioral change required to modify the affective response. The modification of affectivity arising from reappraisal signals progress toward adaptive social psychological resource utilization and social goal orientation (Scherer, 1997). We propose that the emotional intelligence ability, referred to as emotion management, functions to monitor the individual’s changing affective state as a gauge of adaptive change. If the coping strategies formulated in the coping appraisal process are maladaptive, negative coping responses (for example, a decision to make behavioral changes to meet goals that are either irrelevant to the priorities of social functioning or goals remain discrepant with the person’s social psychological coping capabilities), emotional management will function to detect the remaining discrepancy with reference to sustained or increased affectivity. Thus, our model incorporates the idea that coping requires a capacity for emotion management in order for the individual to maintain or to regain self-regulation of emotions and cognitions, and subsequently of their behavior. In parallel with Jordan et al. (2002), we see emotional intelligence as a moderator of coping as well as appraisal, in that it increases the accuracy of emotional understanding, and the efficacy of emotion management. In summary, the model that we propose is an elaboration of AET, where affective responses are described as a social self-regulatory feedback mechanism


35

to alert the individual to an error in social psychological resources for coping with the affective event. Furthermore, in our model, affective responses function also to motivate social adaptive change in the behaviors or attitudes that are discrepant with environmental demands. In this phase of social self-regulation, emotional responses to appraisal are modulated into adaptive attitudinal or behavioral changes. As in the first phase of self-regulation, autonomic affective responses correspond to errors in self-regulation, owing to self-regulation failure or misregulation. As such, emotions intensify or reduce depending on the adaptive success of the coping. We have cast the model in terms of the four branches of emotional intelligence as conceptualized by Mayer and Salovey (1997) to make the point that individuals, who vary in terms of their level of emotional intelligence, will have different capacities to appraise and to cope with the processes inherent in their affective responses to events in their environment. Accurate primary appraisal, thus, is a function of emotional perception, secondary appraisal is determined by emotional assimilation, the accuracy of reappraisal and subsequent attitudinal or behavioral change is the domain of emotional understanding, and the efficacy of coping, and the monitoring of the success of social psychological adjustments to affective responses can be explained in terms of emotional management.

Implications for Workplace Settings and Conclusion As Ashkanasy and his associates (Ashkanasy et al., 2002; Ashkanasy & Daus, 2002) point out, the principal theoretical and practical implication of AET is that it demonstrates how emotions are a “missing link” between the workplace environment and the behavior of employees (see also Fisher, 2000). AET therefore enables development of a more cogent framework for studying the environment-behavior nexus. In this presentation, we take the next step, and suggest a model of the workings of the “black box” within AET. We acknowledge that the propositions in our model have not yet been subjected to empirical testing, but we see the model as providing a potentially deeper explanation of the workings of AET, based on principles of emotional intelligence, psychosocial process, and emotional self-regulation. Furthermore, our model provides a more cogent explanation for the role of emotional intelligence as a moderator of affective responses, as proposed in Jordan et al. (2002). From a practical perspective, our model further reinforces the point that emotional events in organizations play a pivotal role in determining behavioral and attitudinal outcomes for employees. Employees face “hassles” from varied sources on a daily basis. Events can come from interactions with peers, subordinates, or supervisors, and from within or without the organization. Similarly, “uplifts,” can


be derived from exactly the same sources. In this respect, Fisher (2000) has noted that affective states do not so much derive from the intensity of a particular hassle or uplift, as from an accumulation of events. In other words, it is the frequency with which events occur that leads to the strongest effects. Fisher (2000) argues that employees can generally manage one or two negative events, even if quite intense, but they struggle when the hassles are unrelenting. But there is an upside implicit here, too. This is that negative affect can be ameliorated by a succession of uplifting events, including support by supervisors, colleagues, friends, and family (Grzywacz & Marks, 2000). The situation is much worse if there is an unremitting series of negative events. The implication here is that managers need to focus on developing a supportive climate that facilitates such ongoing positive interactions. Ashkanasy and Daus (2002) refer to this as “the new challenge for managers.” The model that we have proposed in this chapter represents an ambitious attempt to amalgamate three previously published models in organizational behavior and social psychology. Firstly, the model is an expansion of the Jordan et al. (2002) model of emotional intelligence as a moderator of the effects of job insecurity on work outcomes. The model is also founded in Affective Events Theory (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996) in that we represent stress as the result of environmental stimuli in the organization, where affective responses play a central mediating role. Finally, Mayer and Salovey’s (1997) four factor conceptualization of emotional intelligence, also represented in Jordan et al. (2002), is deconstructed using basic principles of appraisal and coping. The resulting model, deeply rooted in social psychological processes, provides a deeper explanation of the role of emotion in appraisal and coping with stress in workplace settings, and its effects on employee attitudinal and behavioral outcomes. As such, our model answers Ashforth and Humphrey’s (1995) call for understanding of the underlying roles of emotions in organizational settings. In conclusion, we have argued that AET and emotional intelligence provide a new perspective on our understanding of stress and coping in organizational settings. A review of the organizational stress literature demonstrates that responses to stress can be either emotion-focused or problem-focused. While this represents an important insight, and provides some understanding of coping mechanisms, it provides little insight into the mechanisms employees adopt when faced with stressful contingencies. Jordan et al. (2002) attempted to resolve this conundrum in part by proposing a model where emotional intelligence moderated the effect of job stress induced by job insecurity. That model, however, failed to provide a deep understanding of the mechanisms underlying coping and the role of emotional intelligence. In this chapter, we have attempted to address this shortcoming by providing a more detailed model, based on AET and the processes of stress coping, that provides a deeper understanding of the role of


37

emotional intelligence as a moderator of work stress. The model has implications for research in that it provides a framework for studying the interaction of personal characteristics and environment as determinants of behavior. From a practical perspective, the model implies that development of a supportive organizational climate that will facilitate positive interactions is an important goal for managers.

REFERENCES Adolphs, R., & Damasio, A. R. (2001). The interactions of affect and cognition: A neurobiological perspective. In: J. P. Forgas (Ed.), The Handbook of Affect and Social Cognition (pp. 27–49). Manwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 1–18. Armor, D. A., & Taylor, S. E. (1998). Situated optimism: Specific outcome expectancies and selfregulation. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 309–379. Ashforth, B. E., & Humphrey, R. H. (1995). Emotion in the workplace: A re-appraisal. Human Relations, 48, 97–125. Ashkanasy, N. M., & Daus, S. D. (2002). Emotion in the workplace: The new challenge for managers. Academy of Management Executive, 16, 76–86. Ashkanasy, N. M., Härtel, C. E. J., & Daus, C. S. (2002). Advances in organizational behavior: Diversity and emotions. Journal of Management, 28, 307–338. Auerbach, S. M. (1989). Stress management and coping research in the health care setting: An overview and methodological commentary. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 57, 388–395. Averill, J. R. (1999). Creativity in the domain of emotion. In: T. Dalgleish & M. Power (Eds), The Handbook of Cognition and Emotion (pp. 765–782). Chichester, UK: Wiley. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191–215. Bar-On, R. (1997). The Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ – i): A test of emotional intelligence. Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health Systems. Bar-On, R., Brown, J. M., Kirkcaldy, B. D., & Thome, E. P. (2000). Emotional expression and implications for occupational stress: An application of the Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ – i). Personality and Individual Differences, 28, 1107–1118. Baumeister, R. F., & Heatherton, T. F. (1996). Self-regulation failure: An overview. Psychological Inquiry, 7, 1–15. Baumeister, R. F., & Scher, S. J. (1988). Self-defeating behavior patterns among normal individuals: Review and analysis of common self-destructive tendencies. Psychological Bulletin, 104, 3–22. Becker, T. (2003). Is emotional intelligence a viable concept? Academy of Management Review, 28, 192–195. Beehr, T. (1987). The themes of social-psychological stress in work organizations: From roles to goals. In: A. Riley & S. Zaccaro (Eds), Occupational Stress and Organizational Effectiveness (pp. 71–102). New York: Praeger. Beehr, T., & Newman, J. E. (1978). Job stress, employee health and organizational effectiveness: A facet analysis, model and literature review. Personnel Psychology, 31, 665–699.

38 NEAL M. ASHKANASY, CLAIRE E. ASHTON-JAMES AND PETER J. JORDAN Bonanno, G. A. (2001). Emotion self-regulation. In: T. J. Mayne & G. A. Bonanno (Eds), Emotions: Current Issues and Future Directions. Emotions and Social Behavior (pp. 251–285). New York: Guilford Press. Brehm, J. W., & Cohen, A. R. (1962). Explorations in cognitive dissonance. New York: Wiley. Brockner, J., Grover, S., Reed, T. F., & Dewitt, R. L. (1992). Layoffs, job insecurity and survivors work effort: Evidence of an inverted-U relationship. Academy of Management Journal, 35, 413–425. Brown, J., Mulhern, G., & Joseph, G. (2002). Incident-related stressors, locus of control, coping, and psychological distress among firefighters in Northern Ireland. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 15, 161–168. Callan, V. J., Terry, D. J., & Schweitzer, R. (1994). Coping resources, coping strategies and adjustment to organizational change: Direct or buffering effects? Work and Stress, 8, 372–383. Caruso, D. R., & Wolfe, C. J. (2001). Emotional intelligence in the workplace. In: J. Ciarrochi, J. P. Forgas & J. D. Mayer (Eds), Emotional Intelligence in Everyday Life (pp. 150–167). Philadelphia, PA: Taylor and Francis. Carver, C. S., & Scheier, C. S. (1999). Stress, coping, and self-regulatory processes. In: L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds), Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research (pp. 553–575). New York: Guilford Press. Carver, C. S., Scheier, M. F., & Weintraub, J. K. (1989). Assessing coping strategies: A theoretically based approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 267–283. Ciarrochi, J., Dean, R. P., & Anderson, S. (2002). Emotional intelligence moderates the relationship between stress and mental health. Personality and Individual Differences, 32, 197–209. Cohen, E. L. (1952). The influence of varying degrees of psychological stress on problem-solving rigidity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 47, 512–519. Cohen, S. (1980). After-effects of stress on human performance and social behavior and health. Journal of Social Issues, 37, 36–70. Combs, A. W., & Taylor, C. (1952). The effect of the perception of mild degrees of threat on performance. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 16, 1–4. Cooper, C. L. (Ed.) (1998). Theories of organizational stress. New York: Oxford University Press. Cooper, R. K., & Sawaf, A. (1997). Executive EQ: Emotional intelligence in leadership and organizations. New York: Grossett/Putnam. Damasio, A. R. (1994). Descartes’ error: Emotion reason and the human brain. New York: G. P. Putnams Sons. Darwin, C. R. (1985). The expressions of emotion in man and animals. Chicago: Chicago University press (originally printed in 1872). Davies, M., Stankov, L., & Roberts, R. D. (1998). Emotional intelligence: In search of an elusive construct. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 989–1015. Davis, M. H. (1994). Empathy: A social psychological approach. Dubuque, IA: Brown and Benchmark. Deary, I. J., Agius, R. M., & Sadler, A. (1996). Personality and stress in consultant psychiatrists. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 42, 112–123. Dorner, D. (1990). The logic of failure. In: D. E. Broadbent, J. Reason & A. Baddeley (Eds), Human Factors in Hazardous Situations. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press. Driskell, J. E., & Salas, E. (1991). Group decision making under stress. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 473–478. Driskell, J. E., & Salas, E. (Eds) (1996). Stress and human performance. Manwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Edwards, J. R., Caplan, R. D., & Van Harrison, R. (1998). Person-environment fit theory. In: C. L. Cooper (Ed.), Theories of Organizational Stress. New York: Oxford University Press.


39

Ekman, P. (1992). An argument for basic emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 6, 169–200. Elkin, R. A., & Lieppe, M. R. (1986). Physiological arousal, dissonance and attitude change: Evidence for a dissonance-arousal link and a “don’t remind me” effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 55–65. Erber, M. W., & Erber, R. (2001). The role of motivated social cognition in the regulation of affective states. In: J. Forgas (Ed.), The Handbook of Affect and Social Cognition (pp. 275–292). Manwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Erera-Weatherley, P. (1996). Coping with stress: Public welfare supervisors doing their best. Human Relations, 49, 157–170. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Fiedler, K. (2001). Affective influences on social information-processing. In: J. Forgas (Ed.), The Handbook of Affect and Social Cognition (pp. 163–185). Manwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Fisher, C. D. (2000). Mood and emotions while working: Missing pieces of job satisfaction? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 185–202. Fisher, C. D., & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2000). The emerging role of emotions in organizational life: An introduction. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 123–129. Fitness, J. (2000). Anger in the workplace: An emotion script approach to anger episodes between workers and their superiors, co-workers and subordinates. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 147–162. Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1980). An analysis of coping in a middle-aged community sample. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 21, 219–239. Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1988). The relationship between coping and emotion: Implications for theory and research. Social Science and Medicine, 26, 309–317. Folkman, S., Lazarus, R. S., Dunkel-Schetter, C., DeLongis, A., & Gruen, R. J. (1986). Dynamics of a stressful encounter: Cognitive appraisal, coping, and encounter outcomes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30, 992–1003. Forgas, J. P. (2001). Affective intelligence: The role of affect in social thinking and behavior. In: J. Ciarrochi, J. P. Forgas & J. D. Mayer (Eds), Emotional Intelligence in Everyday Life (pp. 46–63). Philadelphia, PA: Taylor and Francis. Frijda, N. (1986). The emotions: Studies in emotion and social interaction. New York: Oxford University Press. Frijda, N. (1993). The place of appraisal in emotion. Cognition and Emotion, 7, 375–387. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind. New York: Basic Books. George, J. M. (1991). State or trait: Effects of positive mood on prosocial behaviors at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 299–307. Glass, G. V. (1986). Reactions to the stress-coping meta-analysis. Counseling Psychologist, 14, 550– 552. Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ. New York: Bantam. Goleman, D. (1998). Working with emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam Books. Greenglass, E. R., & Burke, R. J. (2000). The relationship between hospital restructuring, anger, hostility and psychosomatics in nurses. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 10, 155–161. Greenwald, G. A. (1980). The totalitarian ego: Fabrication and revision of personal history. American Psychologist, 35, 603–618. Gross, J. J. (1999). Emotion and emotion regulation. In: L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds), The Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research (pp. 525–552). New York: Guilford Press.

40 NEAL M. ASHKANASY, CLAIRE E. ASHTON-JAMES AND PETER J. JORDAN Grzywacz, J. G., & Marks, N. F. (2000). Reconceptualizing the work-family interface: An ecological perspective on the correlates of positive and negative spillover between work and family. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 111–126. Hancock, P. A., & Desmond, P. A. (Eds) (2001). Human factors in transportation: Stress, workload and fatigue. Manwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Hendy, K. C., East, K. P., & Farrell, P. S. E. (2001). An information-processing model of operator stress and performance. In: P. A. Hancock & P. A. Desmond (Eds), Human Factors in Transportation: Stress, Workload and Fatigue (pp. 34–80). Manwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Higgins, E. T. (2001). Promotion and prevention experiences: Relating emotions to non-emotional motivational states. In: J. Forgas (Ed.), The Handbook of Affect and Social Cognition (pp. 186–212). Manwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Hockey, R. (2002). Human performance in the working environment. In: P. Warr (Ed.), Psychology at Work (pp. 26–50). Hammondsworth, UK: Penguin. Isen, A. M. (1999). Positive affect. In: T. Dalgleish & M. Power (Eds), The Handbook of Cognition and Emotion (pp. 521–540). Chichester: Wiley. Isen, A. M., & Daubman, K. A. (1984). The influence of affect on categorization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 1206–1217. Isen, A. M., Daubman, K. A., & Nowicki, G. P. (1987). Positive affect facilitates creative problem solving. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 1122–1131. Ivancevich, J. M., Matteson, M. T., Freedman, S. M., & Phillips, J. M. (1990). Worksite stress management interventions. American-Psychologist, 45, 252–261. Izard, C. E. (1977). Human emotions. New York: Plenum Press. Izard, C. E. (1985). Emotion-cognition relationships and human development. In: C. E. Izard, J. Kagan & R. B. Zajonc (Eds), Emotions, Cognition, and Behavior (pp. 17–37). New York: Cambridge University Press. Jones, E. E., & Gerard, H. (1967). The foundations of social psychology. Chichester, UK: Wiley. Jordan, P. J., Ashkanasy, N. M., & Härtel, C. E. J. (2002). Emotional intelligence as a moderator of emotional and behavioral reactions to job insecurity. Academy of Management Review, 27, 361–372. Jordan, P. J., Ashkanasy, N. M., & Härtel, C. E. J. (2003). The case for emotional intelligence in organizational research. Academy of Management Review, 28, 195–197. Kahn, R., & Byosiere, P. (1992). Stress in organizations. In: M. Dunnette & L. Hough (Eds), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 571–650). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Kelly, J. R., & Barsade, S. G. (2001). Mood and emotions in small groups and work teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86, 99–130. Keltner, D., & Haidt, J. (2001). The social function of emotions. In: T. Mayne & G. A. Bonanno (Eds), Emotions: Current Issues and Future Directions (pp. 192–213). New York: Guilford Press. King, G. A., & Sorrentino, R. M. (1983). Psychological dimensions of goal-oriented interpersonal situations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 140–162. Koslowsky, M. (1997). Commuting stress: Problems of definition and variable identification. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 46, 153–173. Lazarus, R. S. (1966). Psychological stress and the coping process. New York: McGraw-Hill. Lazarus, R. S. (1979). Positive denial: The case for not facing reality. Psychology Today (November), 47–60. Lazarus, R. S. (1982). Thoughts on the relations between cognition. American Psychologist, 37, 1019– 1024.


41

Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. New York: Oxford University Press. Lazarus, R. S. (1999). Stress and emotion: A synthesis. New York: Springer. Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress appraisal and coping. New York: Springer. LeDoux, J. E. (1989). The emotional brain: The mysterious underpinnings of emotional life. New York: Simon and Schuster. Lennox, R. D., & Wolfe, R. N. (1984). Revision of the self-monitoring scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 1349–1364. Lutz, C. A., & White, G. (1986). The anthropology of emotions. Annual Review of Anthropology, 15, 405–436. Lyne, K., & Roger, D. (2000). A psychometric re-assessment of the COPE questionnaire. Personality and Individual Differences, 29, 321–335. Mayer, J. D. (2001). A field guide to emotional intelligence. In: J. Ciarrochi, J. P. Forgas & J. D. Mayer (Eds), Emotional Intelligence in Everyday Life (pp. 3–24). Philadelphia, PA: Taylor and Francis. Mayer, J. D., Caruso, D., & Salovey, P. (1999). Emotional intelligence meets traditional standards for an intelligence. Intelligence, 27, 267–298. Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (1995). Emotional intelligence and the construction and regulation of feelings. Applied and Preventive Psychology, 4, 197–208. Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotional intelligence? In: P. Salovey & D. J. Sluyter (Eds), Emotional Development and Emotional Intelligence: Educational Implications (pp. 3–31). New York: Basic Books. Mesquita, B. (2001). Culture and emotion: Different approaches to the question. In: T. Mayne & G. A. Bonanno (Eds), Emotions: Current Issues and Future Directions (pp. 214–250). New York: Guilford Press. Muraven, M., Tice, D. M., & Baumeister, R. F. (1998). Self-control as a limited resource: Regulatory depletion patterns. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 774– 789. Narayanan, L., Menon, S., & Spector, P. E. (1999). Stress in the workplace: A comparison of gender and occupations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 63–73. Norman, P., Collins, S., Conner, M., & Martin, R. (1995). Attributions, cognitions, and coping styles: Teleworkers’ reactions to work-related problems. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25, 117–128. O’Driscoll, M. P., & Cooper, C. L. (1996). Sources and management of excessive job stress and burnout. In: P. B. Warr (Ed.), Psychology at Work (pp. 203–228). Hammondsworth, UK: Penguin. Ortony, A., Clore, G. L., & Collins, A. (1988). The cognitive structure of emotions. New York: Cambridge University Press. O’Shea, M., Ashkanasy, N. M., Gallois, C., & Härtel, C. E. J. (1999). The relationship between the work environment and work attitudes/behaviors: A preliminary test of Affective Events Theory. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society of Australasian Social Psychologists, Coolum, Australia (May). Palmer, B., Donaldson, C., & Stough, C. (2002). Emotional intelligence and life satisfaction. Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 1091–1100. Patel, V. L., & Arocha, J. F. (2002). Decision making in healthcare: Theory, psychology, and applications. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 16, 239–240. Paterson, J. M., & Cary, J. (2002). Organizational justice, change anxiety, and acceptance of downsizing: Preliminary tests of an AET-based model. Motivation and Emotion, 26, 3–103.

42 NEAL M. ASHKANASY, CLAIRE E. ASHTON-JAMES AND PETER J. JORDAN Patterson, G. T. (1999). Coping effectiveness and occupational stress in police officers. In: J. M. Violanti & D. Paton (Eds), Police Trauma: Psychological Aftermath of Civilian Combat (pp. 214–226). Springfield: Charles C. Thomas. Patterson, R. J., & Neufeld, W. J. (1987). Clear danger: Situational determinants of the appraisal of threat. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 404–416. Petty, R. E., DeSteno, D., & Rucker, D. D. (2001). The role of affect in attitude change. In: J. Forgas (Ed.), The Handbook of Affect and Social Cognition (pp. 212–236). Manwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Piaget, J. (1981). Intelligence and affectivity: Their relationship during child development. T. A. Brown and C. E. Kaegi (Trans.). Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews. (Original work published 1954.) Porter, L. S., & Stone, A. A. (1995). Are there really gender differences in coping? A reconsideration of previous data and results from a daily study. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 14, 184–202. Pyszczynski, T., & Greenberg, J. (1992). Hanging on and letting go: Understanding to onset, progression and remission of depression. New York: Springer. Reilley, S., Grasher, A., & Schafer, J. (2002). Workload error detection and experienced stress in a stimulated pharmacy verification task. Perception and Motor Skills, 95, 27–46. Riley, A. W., & Zaccaro, S. J. (1987). Occupational stress and organizational effectiveness. New York: Praeger. Roseman, I. J. (2001). A model of appraisal in the emotion system: Integrating theory, research, and applications. In: K. R. Scherer & A. Schorr (Eds), Appraisal Processes in Emotion: Theory, Methods, Research (pp. 68–91). New York: Oxford University Press. Rotter, J. B. (1960). Generalized expectancies for internal vs. external control of reinforcement. Psychological Measurement, 80, 1–27. Salas, E., Driskell, J. E., & Hughs, S. (1996). The study of human stress and performance. In: J. E. Driskell & E. Salas (Eds), Stress and Human Performance (pp. 1–46). Manwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Salas, E., & Klein, G. (Eds) (2001). Linking expertise and naturalistic decision making. Manwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Salovey, P. (2001). Applied Emotional intelligence: Regulating emotions to become healthy, wealthy, and wise. In: J. Ciarrochi, J. P. Forgas & J. D. Mayer (Eds), Emotional Intelligence in Everyday Life (pp. 168–184). Philadelphia, PA: Taylor and Francis. Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 9, 185–211. Schaufeli, W. B., Maslach, C., & Marek, T. (Eds) (1993). Professional burnout: Recent developments in theory and research. Washington, DC: Taylor and Francis. Scherer, K. R. (1997). The role of culture in emotion-antecedent appraisal. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 902–922. Scherer, K. R. (2001). Appraisal considered as a process of multi-level sequential checking. In: K. L. Scherer & A. Schorr (Eds), Appraisal Processes in Emotion: Theory, Methods and Research (pp. 92–120). New York: Oxford University Press. Schmitt, B. H., Gilovich, T., Goore, N., & Joseph, L. (1986). Mere presence and social facilitation: One more time. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 17, 227–251. Sears, S. F., Unizar, G. G., & Garrett, D. E. (2000). Examining a stress coping model of burnout and depression in extension agents. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 56–62. Seyle, H. (1976). Stress in health and disease. London, UK: Butterworth Press.


43

Siegrist, J. (1998). Adverse health effects of effort-reward imbalance at work. In: C. L. Cooper (Ed.), Theories of Organizational Stress (pp. 190–204). New York: Oxford University Press. Snyder, M. (1979). Self-monitoring processes. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 12, 85– 128. Staw, B. M. (1981). The escalation of commitment to a course of action. Academy of Management Review, 6, 577–587. Steiner, I. (1972). Group processes and productivity. New York: Academic Press. Steiner, C., & Perry, P. (1997). Achieving emotional literacy: A program to increase your emotional intelligence. New York: Avon. Terry, D. J., Tonge, L., & Callan, V. J. (1995). Employee adjustment to stress: The role of coping resources, situational factors, and coping responses. Anxiety, Stress and Coping, 8, 1–24. Thorndike, E. L. (1920). Intelligence and its uses. Harpers Magazine, 140, 227–235. Trope, Y., Ferguson, M., & Raghunathan, R. (2001). Mood as a resource in processing self-relevant information. In: J. Forgas (Ed.), The Handbook of Affect and Social Cognition (pp. 256–274). Manwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070. Weisinger, H. (1998). Emotional intelligence at work. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass. Weiss, H. M., & Cropanzano, R. (1996). Affective events theory: A theoretical discussion of the structure, causes and consequences of affective experiences at work. Research into Organizational Behavior, 18, 1–74. Woods, D. D., & Patterson, E. S. (2001). How unexpected events produce an escalation of cognitive and coordinative demands. In: P. A. Hancock & P. A. Desmond (Eds), Human Factors in Transportation: Stress, Workload and Fatigue (pp. 290–304). Manwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Yerkes, R. M., & Dodson, J. D. (1908). The relation of strength of stimulus of rapidity of habitformation. Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology, 18, 459–482. Yousef, D. A. (2002). Job satisfaction as a mediator of the relationship between role stressors and organizational commitment: A study from an Arabic cultural perspective. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 17, 250–266. Zohar, D., & Brandt, Y. (2002). Relationships between appraisal factors during stressful encounters: A test of alternative models. Anxiety, Stress and Coping: An International Journal, 15, 149–161.

THE IMPACT OF DISPLAY RULES AND EMOTIONAL LABOR ON PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING AT WORK Russell Cropanzano, Howard M. Weiss and Steven M. Elias ABSTRACT Display rules are formal and informal norms that regulate the expression of workplace emotion. Organizations impose display rules to meet at least three objectives: please customers, maintain internal harmony, and promote employee well-being. Despite these valid intentions, display rules can engender emotional labor, a potentially deleterious phenomenon. We review three mechanisms by which emotional labor can create worker alienation, burnout, stress, and low performance. Though not as widely discussed, emotional labor sometimes has propitious consequences. We discuss the potential benefits of emotional labor as well.

INTRODUCTION At their core, business organizations are cooperative enterprises whereby groups of people collaborate in order to achieve some objective or collection of objectives.

Emotional and Physiological Processes and Positive Intervention Strategies Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, Volume 3, 45–89 Copyright © 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 1479-3555/doi:10.1016/S1479-3555(03)03002-6

45

46

RUSSELL CROPANZANO, HOWARD M. WEISS AND STEVEN M. ELIAS

Since many people are likely to be involved in these ventures, there is a necessity for some sort of administrative function with a capacity for coordination and control. In this way, the enterprise produces a product or service that one hopes is desirable to its clientele. Herein lies the predicament of emotion, which has the tendency to belie rational planning (Ashforth & Humphrey, 1995). Emotions can be powerful and chaotic. As a consequence, their activation has significant implications for work attitudes, individual performance, and ability to work with others. This chapter reviews the manner in which organizations manage emotional displays, and how these regulatory strategies harm and benefit employees. We will address these issues sequentially. First, we discuss the concept of display rules. These are the formal and informal norms used by organizations to manage emotional expression. These guidelines prescribe and proscribe the exhibition of certain emotions. We then describe why display rules are important. In particular, we identify three justifications for emotional regulations: Customer needs, maintain internal harmony among workers and facilitate employee well-being. While such workplace demands are often reasonable, they engender emotional labor. Doing so can be detrimental to workers. Fortunately, emotional labor can also have positive consequences. We shall discuss these benefits as well.

HOW ORGANIZATIONS REGULATE AND MANAGE OUR FEELING STATES Organizations manage emotions by imposing structures on their workforce. In her seminal book The Managed Heart, Hochschild (1983) referred to these as feeling rules. A few years later, Rafaeli and Sutton (1987) changed the name to display rules. This latter moniker is more general, since it does not imply that an organization specifies which emotional state a worker should experience. Rather, the term suggests only that firms regulate the particular state or states that are exhibited in the course of one’s job duties. Perhaps for this reason, “display rules” has entered into the academic lexicon, and we shall maintain consistency with this popular usage. Display rules can be both formal and informal. Formal regulations can be incredibly scripted. In one notable example, Rafaeli and Sutton (1987, p. 23) quote a handbook for supermarket cashiers. Employees are admonished to supply “A cheerful ‘Good Morning’ and ‘Good Evening’ followed by a courteous, attentive treatment, and a sincere ‘Thank you, please come again.’ ” The guidelines add: “A friendly smile is a must.” Clearly, little is left to the worker’s ingenuity or imagination. Likewise, a convenience store training program urges workers to “Smile!! Service with a smile and a friendly attitude will keep them [customers] coming back!” (Sutton & Rafaeli, 1988, p. 461).

The Impact of Display Rules and Emotional Labor

47

Though formal rules exist, and in fact are widely used, they are probably less efficient than spontaneously emerging informal norms (Barker, 1993; Van Maanen & Kunda, 1989). For this reason, firms attempt to establish a culture that inspires desired emotions while obviating others. One strategy is to regulate the mode of appropriate dress. Rafaeli (1989) found that when clerks were wearing uniforms they were more likely to express positive emotion to customers. Another (somewhat Orwellian) strategy is to establish norms governing language. Van Maanen and Kunda (p. 63) give the fascinating example of Disneyland: Customers at Disneyland . . . are “guests.” There are no rides . . . only “attractions.” Disneyland itself is a “park,” not an amusement center . . . Law enforcement personnel . . . are “security hosts.” Employees do not wear uniforms, but check out fresh “costumes” each working day from “Wardrobe.” And, of course, there are no accidents at Disneyland, only “incidents.”

While organizations seek to establish norms of “good conduct” (as they understand that idea), work teams often impose norms of their own. As an example, consider Santino’s (1990) study of Pullman Porters. These porters are service workers. As such, they are expected to be polite and helpful to passengers. Once on the job, however, porters have their own standards as to when customer demands have exceeded the limits of reasonableness. When these boundaries are crossed, deferent service is no longer called for. Resolute behavior then becomes acceptable (from the Porters’ point of view). Interestingly, Porters often learn these standards through sharing on-the-job stories with their coworkers. These anecdotes act as workplace parables, instructing employees as to the work team’s display rules. While these informal ground rules may appear pedantic, they exist because they serve important functions. Consider an example provided by Rafaeli and Sutton (1989, p. 3): The waitresses have to be nice to the bartenders because we need our drinks fast. The bartender has to be nice to us because if our customers complain it is his fault. The cooks are the least dependent on others, but they have to be nice to the waitresses to get the secret drinks we bring them from the bar.

This is a workable system indeed! Everyone gets what he or she needs, simply by being respectful to coworkers. While we suspect, or at least hope, that managers encourage acts of kindness, one can easily imagine such norms emerging spontaneously from the incentive structure of the situation.

Why Organizations Impose Display Rules Regardless, these examples should serve to illustrate the widespread use of display rules. And, in fact, the breadth and scope of display rules has become steadily more evident to scholars as the body of research has matured. Hochschild (1983)

48


emphasized occupations where emotional expression was part of the product or service that was being sold by the organization. Primarily, this involved service workers. Though service workers remain an important part of research (e.g. Abraham, 1999; Grandey & Brauburger, 2002; Pugh, 2001; Tracy, 2000), much recent work has added other occupations to consideration. This shifting emphasis may be partially driven by the fact that those who do “people-work” sometimes fail to show higher levels of emotional labor than those who have other sorts of jobs (e.g. Brotheridge & Grandey, 2002). In any case, it does seem to be true that the judicious expression of emotions can, at least in principle, serve a variety of organizational goals. Some of these objectives are strictly economic, but others are less so. To illustrate, let us consider three reasons why organizations maintain display rules. Reason No. 1: Customer Satisfaction/Altruism As Hochschild (1979, 1983) and others (e.g. Grandey & Brauburger, 2002; Kruml & Geddes, 2000a, b) have emphasized, in many jobs emotional displays are an important part of what the organization is supplying to consumers. In this context emotions can be viewed as commodities – things bought or sold in the marketplace. Tsai (2001) illustrates this issue in his field study of 290 clerks from 156 Taiwanese shoe stores. Tsai found that a climate for “service friendliness” led sales personnel to exhibit more positive affect. In this case, the display rules seem to have been effective. Regarding business outcomes, Tsai further found that when clerks displayed favorable emotion customers reported being more likely to return and also to speak highly of the store to friends. Actual mood shows less consistent relationships to performance. In a later study of salespeople Tsai and Huang (2002) went further and investigated the mediational mechanisms that lay between worker affective displays and shopper responses. They found that the affective delivery of salespeople caused customers to have better moods while in the story, view the employee as more friendly, and remain in the store for a longer period of time. Shoppers who were in a good mood, perceived their salesperson as friendly, and spent longer time in the store reported greater intentions to return to the store and to recommend the store to acquaintances. A similar argument has been made by Diefendorff and Gosserand (2002). Taking a control theory perspective, these authors suggest that specific display rules are generally more effective in promoting high job performance than are general display rules (see their Proposition 1 on p. 10). According to Diefendorff and Gosserand, this is because strict display standards work in a manner analogous to specific goals – they specify to workers exactly how they need to behave. An interesting aspect of Diefendorff and Gosserand’s control theory model is that these


49

authors also note that specific display rules have a cost. Strict guidelines require more effortful monitoring. They also promote a sense of disempowerment, because the employees own response is so heavily regulated. Consequently, Diefendorff and Gosserand maintain that “Overly strict display rules will lead to increased burnout and lower job performance” (see Proposition 2, p. 11). We shall have much more to say about the impact on emotional labor on well-being throughout this paper. Regardless, scholars seem to concur that properly specified emotional displayed rules can improve job performance, at least in many circumstances. Despite these salubrious effects, there are times when emotional management combines the iron discipline of Fredrick Taylor with the callow naivete of Gomer Pyle. Consider this example from Tracy’s (2000, p. 107) engaging study of cruise line workers: [T]wo copies of the service credo were adhered via a sticker to the inside of crew cabin and bathroom doors . . . [T]he program required employees to carry a service credo wallet card or wear a small lapel pin etched with the service program’s logo. Supervisors could “write up” crew if they caught them in a passenger area without the card or pin . . . [P]erhaps so its guidelines could permeate employees’ dreams, special laminated holding pockets were adhered just inches from the crew member’s headboard.

And, indeed, the supervisors in Tracy’s study were willing to tailor their recommendations to individual employees: When I asked what I could do to improve my chances at quick promotion, the cruise director said I needed more comments [positive customer evaluations that mention the worker by name]. Because I was from Wisconsin, he suggested I purchase and wear a foam hunk-of-cheese hat to my activities and tell passengers to call me “cheesehead” (p. 109).

Lest the reader think such droll propaganda an inevitable failure, consider its effect on a deputy cruise director (p. 109): “Paul performed cartwheels at all his activities in the hope that passengers would remember to name him in comment cards.” The specter of a grown man doing earnest cartwheels on his way to a shuffleboard game is unlikely to inspire sympathy for display rules. However, it is important to keep in mind that this cruise line represents only one type of occupation. There are other settings where display rules are no doubt more justifiable. Imagine, for example, how frustrating it can be to teach misbehaving students. Certainly, a room of five-years olds must occasionally try the patience of even the most affable kindergarten teachers! On the other hand, it is not unreasonable to expect teachers to manage their emotions so as to maintain the dignity and self-worth of the children under their care. As another example, consider the case of a psychologist handling a painful and difficult case. One can sympathize with, and probably even respect, an emphatic therapist who has an urge to break down and cry alongside the client. However, doing so might not be the best means of providing quality mental health

50


care. There are times when display rules seem silly, but there are other times when they are a vital means of performing a socially redeeming service. As far as customers go, it seems safe to assert that display rules usually call employees to behave positively (as in the case of the cruise line workers) or at least with a professional detachment (as in the case of a practicing psychologist). That having been said, there remain other situations in which clients are apt to seek more vituperative emotional displays. For example, in their ethnographic study of police detectives, Stenross and Kleinman (1989) observed that these officers were sometimes quarrelsome when dealing with criminals. Within certain strict limits, this could be seen as acceptable behavior if it facilitates quality law enforcement. Reason No. 2: Maintain Internal Harmony Emotions permeate all firms. Rivalries, face saving, selfishness, and other emotionally-laden processes impact organizational functioning (e.g. Mumby & Putnam, 1992; Pratt & Dutton, 2000; Putnam & Mumby, 1993). These processes can create disequilibrium potent enough to disrupt smooth business operations (such as the case of a “wildcat” strike, Fantasia, 1988). For this reason, workgroup effectiveness can be facilitated when emotions are expressed in an appropriate fashion. Martin, Knopoff and Beckman (1998) illustrated this issue in a study of retail workers. Martin and her colleagues encouraged participants to suppress emotions that might create problems for coworkers, while expressing others. These endeavors were helpful to the work group. Another relevant study was reported by Lewis (2000). In her experimental study Lewis had college undergraduates observe videotapes of professional actors playing the role of a Chief Executive Officer. The actors were either male or female. In addition, they manifested one of three types of displays: Neutral, sadness or anger. Relative to the neutral control, female leader/actors were viewed as less effective when they displayed either anger or sadness. Male actors, on the other hand, were viewed as less effective when they displayed sadness. This problem is especially profound because of the way that emotions proliferate throughout a work team. At times, feelings states spread from one person to another through a process of emotional contagion (Hatfield, Cacioppo & Rapson, 1994; Pugh, 2001). Consequently, the moods of group members tend to be interconnected (Totterdell, Kellet, Teuchmann & Briner, 1998). Like a virus, this interdependence means that emotions can distribute themselves throughout a group, touching many members and influencing how they feel. These observations suggest that affect in teams is communally constructed by the work group as a whole (Bartel & Saavedra, 2000). These group-level mood states have been shown to impact the effectiveness of work behavior (George & Bettenhausen, 1990).


51

This analysis contains a challenge and a possible payoff. If destructive (usually negative) emotions range unchecked, they can color (one might even say “contaminate”) the feelings of an entire team. Hence, the incentive to prevent inappropriate affect from spreading is quite large. For this reason, organizations navigate these turbulent waters by regulating the emotions employees are expected to display on the job and within their work teams (Kelly & Barsade, 2001). In this way, they help harmonize employees in a manner that promotes business goals, while eschewing the danger of unrestricted emotional expression. Reason No. 3: Display Rules Have the Potential to Promote Employee Well-Being Overview. Abiding by displays need not be universally negative. In fact, evidence suggests that it can sometimes have benefits. For example, in a study of 911 Dispatchers Shuler and Sypher (2000) found that workers sometimes sought a “detached concern” for callers and other potential victims. That is, they cared about the well-being of the people who contacted them, but they tried not to become overwhelmed by their emotions. Later in this paper, we shall have much more to say about Schuler and Syper. For now, the key point is that this sort of response is sometimes normal and healthy for human service workers (e.g. Miller, Birkholt, Scott & Stage, 1995; Miller, Stiff & Ellis, 1988). Even when emotions are gratifying, it is sometimes in our long-term interest to suppress them. Giving an impulsive free rein to one’s feelings, while satisfying in the short term, can create problems that haunt individuals later in life. A social structure that maintains a modicum of decorum can sometimes protect individuals from rash mistakes. Consider the case of Samuel Andrews. In the early years of Standard Oil, Andrews was a major shareholder. Chernow (1998, pp. 181–182) describes how Andrews terminated his relationship with the oil giant. Andrews was distressed by Rockefeller’s soaring ambition, his constant borrowing and spending . . . One day Andrews snapped at Rockefeller, “I wish I was out of this business.” Calling his bluff, Rockefeller replied . . . “What will you take for your holdings?” “I will take one million dollars,” Andrews shot back . . . Then Rockefeller . . . sold the same shares to William H. Vanderbilt for a quick $300,000 profit. When Andrews loudly cried foul, Rockefeller sent an emissary to tell Andrews that he could buy back his stock at the original share price. Embittered, Andrews spurned this fair offer and opted to keep the money. Had he kept the stock, it would have been worth $900 million by the early 1930s . . . This rash decision, motivated by pure pique and a bruised ego, kept him from becoming one of American’s richest men. A point of clarification and an important caveat. Scholars who seek to understand the causes of worker well-being face an important challenge. While

52


suppressing one’s emotions may be functional, if taken to the extreme this can also have dysfunctional consequences. For example, too much disengagement might make human service workers less effective. In their study of medical school students Smith and Kleinman (1989) found that too much distance between future doctors and their patients created various problems. Non-empathic doctors may be less attentive to their patients’ social and emotional needs, and these can be important for a full recovery. More relevant to this issue at hand, there is reason to believe that the denial of one’s feelings can be an ineffective way to manage stress. Various scholars have attempted to classify the strategies used by individuals to cope with stressful events (e.g. Carver, Scheier & Weintraub, 1989; Folkman & Lazarus, 1991). While these taxonomies often differ, one common strategy is to “disengage” or “deny” that something is wrong. Denial is often implemented through distraction. For instance, a person employing this method of coping might listen to music, engage in a pleasant activity, or even take mood elevating drugs (Gatchel, Baum & Krantz, 1989). When compared to other strategies, such as seeking social support or engaging in problem solving, denial/disengagement tends to be substantially less effective. In fact, people who cope by denying a problem tend to report more physical symptoms and poor psychological adjustment than do people who use other approaches (e.g. Aldwin & Revenson, 1987; Amirkhan, 1994; Frese, 1985; Hackett & Cassem, 1975; Kobasa, 1982; Lazarus & Folkman, 1991; Monat & Lazarus, 1991; Uchino, Kiecolt-Glaser & Cacioppo, 1993). Research on coping has seldom been directly applied to the literature on emotional labor. Despite this paucity, some tantalizing evidence exists. Most notable is a study of trainee teachers conducted by Totterdell and Parkinson (1999). Based upon their taxonomy of self-regulation strategies, these authors consider engagement and diversion responses. Teachers who used engagement strategies directly confronted their feelings. Specific tactics in this category included such things as seeking social support, reappraising an event, and cathartic venting. The diversion strategy was akin to using denial as a coping response. Teachers who used diversion strategies attempted to direct themselves away from their feelings. Specific tactics included distraction, relaxation, and avoidance. During the study, one group of teachers was instructed to make greater use of engagement, while the other was instructed to make greater use of diversion. Both of these strategies produced increased cheerfulness and calmness among the teacher trainees who employed them. However, engagement (but not diversion) also increased teachers’ energy levels. Based on findings such as these, it seems that organizations may encourage emotional labor as a way of supporting employees. However, to accomplish this successfully workers need to manage their feelings with effective coping strategies.


53

Three Types of Display Rules Various researchers have provided taxonomies of display rules (e.g. Ashforth & Humphrey, 1995; Grandey, 2000; Hochschild, 1983; Jones & Best, 1995). While there is some variation among these frameworks, they tend to be similar to the model offered by Wharton and Erickson (1993). According to these authors, all emotions can be divided into integrative and differentiating emotions. Integrative emotions – such as love, compassion, and happiness – pull people together. They tend to be hedonically positive. Differentiating emotions – such as hate, anger, and sorrow – tend to push people apart. They tend to be hedonically negative. From this recognition, Wharton and Erickson argue that there are three families of display rules: express integrative emotions, express differentiating emotions, and masking emotions (either integrative or differentiating). Display Rules for Positive Emotion Probably the most common display rule is a requirement to be nice, and to say nice things even when things aren’t going well. In one humorous example, aspiring Santas are trained to be mirthful “even when a kid who isn’t quite potty-trained has an accident” (Rafaeli & Sutton, 1989, p. 10). Likewise, clerks are often encouraged to be patient with customers (Rafaeli, 1989). The emphasis on displays of happiness was nicely captured by a manufacturing executive (cited in Ashforth & Humphrey, 1995, p. 107): Your degree of happiness is important. If someone is always pissing and moaning then that affects your evaluation of them . . . If you’re not happy in what you do, you can generate a synergism of apathy . . . Happy people are nicer to be around. It’s important to be an up person.

Display Rules for Negative Emotion Though possibly less common, there are times when it is deemed appropriate to express negative emotion. This is especially true when dealing with difficult or dangerous people. For instance, police officers can at times seem callous to outsiders because, as one officer told Van Maanen (1982, p. 137): “We don’t take any shit around here.” A similar example can be found in the case of bill collectors (Hochschild, 1983). In a thorough ethnography, Sutton (1991) found that bill collectors were expected not to express anger, even when provoked by petulant debtors. However, they were expected to convey a sense of urgency and firmness when asking for money. As one collector put it (Sutton, p. 253): You can tell I have a big mouth, my voice carries, people probably think I’m seven feet tall. So that comes across. That’s a big part of collections, how you come across over the phone. I know when I talk that way, my voice, it does project urgency, and that makes things happen. When I say that I’m going to do an asset search, they believe me. When I say that legal action will begin, they believe me.

54


Display Rules for Neutral Emotion A third process is masking. A masked emotion is not expressed at all. The individual simply takes on a dispassioned or neutral comportment (Kramer & Hess, 2002; Martin, Knopoff & Beckman, 1998). This was nicely captured in a quote presented by Rafaeli and Sutton (1987, p. 27): In my first months as a medical student, I was called a “softie” when I cried about patients; being a woman only made it worse. Classmates and physicians told me “You get too emotionally involved with patients. You will never be a ‘good’ doctor.”

In this example, peers and teachers caution a medical student not to feel, much less display certain manifestations of compassion (for related evidence see James, 1993; Smith & Kleinman, 1989). Notice that compassion is usually seen as a socially desirable emotional state, but in this circumstance it is viewed as potentially problematic. One can imagine a lot of times when it’s not considered a good thing to display affect. For instance, athletes learn to “play with pain” and judges try to appear as impartial as possible. All of these examples have in common the masking of negative emotion. However, situations sometimes call for the masking of positive feelings as well (Jones & Best, 1995). One would probably not (publicly) laugh at the misfortune of a disliked coworker, though the temptation might well be there. It might be similarly wise not to gloat (i.e. express too much pride) at one’s successes. One interesting example of proscribed positive feelings might be the case of office romance. Many organizations see romantic involvement between coworkers as disruptive. As a consequence, some firms have adopted policies to manage these sorts of relationships (e.g. Eyler & Baridon, 1992; Flax, 1989). Feelings of intimacy and affection are being regulated. In a similar fashion, the American Psychological Association restricts expressions of sexual attraction by mental health providers toward their clients (Dawes, 1994).

EMOTIONAL LABOR: THE DRAMATURGICAL MODEL AND CONSEQUENCES FOR WORKERS Through the use of display rules, organizations define an implicit stage upon which employees play out their roles (James, 1993). Disneyland makes this explicit. The park “is divided into ‘backstage,’ ‘staging,’ and ‘onstage’ regions” (Van Maanen & Kunda, 1989, p. 63). Many workers are cast into an organizational role, directed by a supervisor, and guided by formal (e.g. written job descriptions) and informal (e.g. corporate culture) scripts. Their costumes include the correct emotions.


55

This wonderfully Shakespearian view of our emotional work lives has been termed the dramaturgical model (Grove & Fiske, 1989). With respect to workplace display rules, Hochschild (1983) first articulated the dramaturgical model by extending Goffman’s (1959) classic work on self-presentation in everyday settings. In Hochschild’s view, employees can be seen as performers who portray a character (e.g. a bubbly aerobics instructor, a “can do” nurse, or a wily stockbroker). The dramaturgical model goes beyond these acts of emotional expression and regulation. It has something to say about the consequences. In particular, dramaturgical theorists assert that performing these acts sometimes causes burnout, greater job stress, and diminished well-being. There is a good deal of evidence consistent with this view (e.g. Adelmann, 1995; Brotheridge & Grandey, 2002; Glomb, Miner & Tews, 2002; Jones & Rohrer, 2002; Pugliesi, 1999; Schaubroeck & Jones, 2000; Wharton, 1993). Constant acting can gradually take its toll. Eventually, incessant performance demands lead to ill-heath and a lack of well-being. This view nicely captures the popular and influential idea of emotional labor. There are various definitions to emotional labor, and we will discuss the major ones in a moment. But for now, we can think of emotional labor as “the effort, planning, and control required to express organizationally desired emotions with interpersonal interactions” (Karabanow, 2000, p. 165). Emotional labor is a captivating idea. It has received several high quality reviews (e.g. Ashforth & Humphrey, 1993; Grandey, 2000; James, 1989; Mann, 1999a; Morris & Feldman, 1996, 1997; Rafaeli & Sutton, 1987; Wharton & Erickson, 1993), though only in the last decade has a plentiful body of high quality research evidence become available. What makes the construct so engaging is its unique perspective on affective display. Consider the case of an overworked and underpaid worker who is ordered to smile at customers. An emotional labor theorist would argue that too much work and too little pay is a bad thing, to be sure, but that having to smile through the pain is an additional stressor that exerts its own odious effect on well-being. In other words, it is not (only) that that the worker feels bad; it is also that he or she must pretend to be happy while feeling bad. To articulate and explore this distinctive view, we need at least two things. First, we must be able to define the construct of interest. Second, we need to provide a theoretical mechanism that articulates how emotions are regulated. As we shall see, this is not a simple undertaking.

Three Approaches to Defining Emotional Labor As in the case with many important social science concepts, the definition of emotional labor is hard to pin down. While there is a good deal of consensus among scholars, there are also grounds for disagreement. In fact, according to

56


Grandey (2000), there are at least three different ways that one can operationalize emotional labor. The first is the most straightforward. Emotional labor can be seen as the set of psychological activities that are required to maintain a certain affective appearance. The second definition is the most concrete. Here emotional labor is defined as the particular feelings that are displayed. The third definition is the broadest. Some scholars have defined emotional labor (partially) in terms of the organizational environments that are the most demanding. Based on the work of Grandey, we shall consider each of these definitions below. We will then discuss an integrative model that attempts to pull these different operationalizations together. Emotional Labor as Surface and Deep Acting: The Work of Hochschild (1983) In her seminal research, Hochschild’s (1979, 1983) proffers a concise conceptual definition. Emotional labor is “the management of feeling to create a publicly observable facial and bodily display” (Hochschild, 1988; p. 7). Many researchers have used this definition or something like it. For instance, Wharton and Erickson (1993, p. 458) quote Hochschild’s definition directly. In a similar fashion Morris and Feldman (1996, p. 987) define emotional labor as “the effort, planning, and control needed to express organizationally desired emotion.” Likewise, Kruml and Geddes (2000a, p. 177) state that “emotional or emotion labor is what employees perform when they are required to feel, or at least project the appearance of certain emotions.” Mann (1999b, p. 353) treats emotional labor as “the state that exists when there is a discrepancy between the emotional demeanor that an individual displays because it is considered appropriate, and the emotions that are genuinely felt but that would be inappropriate to display.” In broad outline, these conceptual approaches are consistent in that they all emphasize that emotional labor is something a person does. Brotheridge and Grandey (2002) label this perspective employee-focused emotional labor. Notice that this definition of emotional labor does not include the work environment, nor does it refer to the emotions that are actually displayed. Rather, emotional labor refers to the psychological strategies used to produce a given appearance or expression. Whether or not these strategies have the desired effect, and whether or not their use produces ill-consequences, is an empirical question. Several researchers have asserted that these regulatory processes can be divided into at least two types: surface acting and deep acting (e.g. Brotheridge & Lee, 1998; Grandey, 2000, 2003; Hochschild, 1983). Surface acting refers to modifying one’s expression in a way that is inconsistent with one’s actual feelings. In other words, the worker’s feeling states are unchanged. Deep acting refers to direct attempts to change one’s actual emotions. For instance, one might try to reappraise the importance of an injustice at work (Cropanzano, Weiss, Suckow & Grandey, 2000). Hochschild’s (1983) model specifies that there are two types


57

of deep acting. Active deep acting occurs when a worker labors to construct emotions that would otherwise not be present. Passive deep acting occurs when a worker actually feels the requisite emotions, but must still put forth some effort to guarantee a suitable display. The distinction between active and passive deep acting has not received much empirical attention (for an important exception see Kruml & Geddes, 2000b). We shall also discuss surface and deep acting in more detail below. For the time being, we should emphasize that surface acting and deep acting do seem to be separate constructs (Brotheridge & Lee, 1998; Grandey, 2000, 2003). Nevertheless, it is noteworthy that most scholars have not explored the distinction between passive and active deep acting. When one does so, the results become less clear. In one factor analytic study, Kruml and Geddes (2000b, Study 1) found that emotional labor could be divided into as many as three dimensions. While the third was weak and difficult to interpret, the first two were much clearer. Factor one seemed to have surface acting on one pole and passive deep acting on the other. Kruml and Geddes labeled this dimension emotive dissonance. Factor two, labeled emotive effort, contained items pertaining to active deep acting. Kruml and Geddes’ findings suggest it is useful to distinguish between (at least) active deep acting (or emotive effort) and surface acting. Passive deep acting, however, is less tractable. It may be highly correlated with surface acting. Emotional Labor as Expressed Emotion: The Work of Ashforth and Humphrey (1993) Ashforth and Humphrey (1993) take a second approach to emotional labor. These scholars suggest that emotional labor might better be defined as “the act of displaying the appropriate emotion” (p. 90). Ashforth and Humphrey explicitly note their definition is distinct from the one used by Hochschild, in that they “prefer to focus on behavior” (p. 90, italics in original). This approach is especially direct, in that the object of interest is concrete and observable, rather than an inferred psychological state. The problem with this definition is that it creates a good deal of overlap between the constructs of “emotional labor” and “emotional expression.” As a result, this definition might best fit with the material reviewed in the proceeding section, as it does not distinguish between manifested expressions and the psychological processes used to generate those expressions. If we wish to study emotional labor as a unique phenomenon, then we need to consider other definitions. Emotional Labor as Work Requirements: The Work of Morris and Feldman (1996) In her important book, Hochschild (1983) laid out a list of jobs that were presumed to be high in emotional labor (e.g. flight attendant). This list allows one to infer that it might be reasonable to define emotional labor partially in terms of job

58


characteristics. Brotheridge and Grandey (2002) referred to this perspective as jobfocused emotional labor. The job-focused approach to emotional labor is analogous to defining “worker stress” in terms of “stressful working conditions.” While this may or may not be a valid approach to stress, in the case of emotional labor it immediately raises a logical problem. If emotional labor is defined in terms of working conditions, then by definition it cannot exist outside of work. We know, of course, that this is not the case. People encounter emotional labor in their family lives (see, for example, the work of Wharton & Erickson, 1993). Indeed emotional regulation can even been experienced in laboratory settings (e.g. Gross, 1998a, b). If emotional labor can be experienced at all, it can be experienced outside of the workplace. Hence we must construe this definition not as narrow work requirements but more broadly as situational demands. These demands could be present in a variety of different contexts. Despite these concerns, there is some evidence attesting to the usefulness of this view. For example, Schaubroeck and Jones (2000) found that the amount of interpersonal interaction demanded in workers’ jobs was positively correlated with perceived demands to express positive emotions. Though statistically significant, this association was only a modest r = 0.17. Unfortunately, the relationship between interpersonal interaction and demands to suppress negative emotions was not significant. In a more recent study, Brotheridge and Grandey (2002) found that physical laborers and clerical workers used less surface acting than did employees in service and sales. Likewise, human service workers engaged in more deep acting than did laborers. At the very least it seems that attributes of the situation can be used to predict emotional mangement. An especially notable example of this can be found in the work of Morris and Feldman (1996). Morris and Feldman (see especially pp. 989–994) argue that emotional labor can be understood as having four dimensions: Frequency of emotional display, attentiveness to display rules (including both the duration and intensity of expressed emotions), variety of emotions, and emotional dissonance. Using the Morris and Feldman framework, Brotheridge and Lee (1998) designed a scale to measure these four dimensions. Consistent with the job-focused view, the first three dimensions – frequency, attentiveness, and variety – seem to be job requirements or attributes of the display rules (Kruml & Geddes, 2000b). The fourth dimension seems somewhat distinct from the other three. Emotional dissonance refers to the tension that results from displaying emotions that are inconsistent with one’s actual feelings (Mann, 1999b). In this regard, emotional dissonance seems to be closer to our first definition, in that it is employee-focused rather the job-focused. Given that frequency, attentiveness, and variety can be understood as aspects of the job, while emotional dissonance can be seen as the experiences of an


59

individual, it might be possible to specify a causal order among these constructs. In particular, emotional dissonance seems to be an outcome of employing the emotional regulatory process described in our first definition. One possible sequence could begin with surface acting. Since surface acting involves suppressing the expression of your true feelings and displaying some other emotion, this could produce emotional dissonance. Since the dissonance might then be perceived as a stressful state, workers might then seek ways to allay it. The contradiction between true and expressed feelings could be resolved by changing one’s true emotions. Thus, engaging in deep acting might sometimes occur as a reaction to emotional dissonance (for a similar view, see Grandey, 2000). Were such a sequence to occur, it would have some interesting consequences. Most notably, surface acting would be positively correlated with emotional dissonance. However, since deep acting is (when successful) a remedy for dissonance, then deep acting and emotional dissonance will tend to be negatively correlated. At the present time, such a model must be seen as speculative. However, it is at least not inconsistent with the available evidence. Generally speaking, job requirements do not predict criterion variables as well as measures of psychological processes (e.g. Brotheridge & Lee, 1998; Diefendorff & Richard, 2003; Grandey, 2003; Zerbe, 2000, Study 1). This is to be expected if we assume that frequency, attentiveness, and variety are antecedent to the emotional labor. We examine this possibility in more detail below.

Tactics of Emotional Regulation One can plausibly view display rules as a business decision made by an organization. By this we mean only that a firm has chosen to use emotional presentations as a means of achieving its business goals. Once this decision is made, the tactics by which emotional management is pursued often fall to the employee. In this regard, emotional labor researchers have only recently begun articulating the specific strategies taken by employees to manage their emotions. Building on the work of Gross (1998a, b; Richards & Gross, 1999), Grandey (2000) maintains that workers employ two basic regulatory strategies: antecedent-focused emotional regulation and response-focused emotional regulation. Antecedent-Focused Emotional Regulation Probably the easiest way to thwart an unwanted emotional expression is to shut down the circumstances that cause it to occur. Gross (1998a, b) and Grandey (2000) refer to this as antecedent-focused regulation. Antecedent-focused tactics do not change one’s emotional response as such. Rather, they adapt conditions to produce

60


positive responses and/or quell negative ones. These tactics can be divided into two broad families – those that focus on how we deploy our attention and those that focus on how we interpret events. Attentional deployment. Grandey (2000) compares attentional deployment to method acting. In order to “psych themselves up” for the day’s travails, workers can reflect on events that induce the desired emotions. Grandey (p. 99) provides the interesting example of “an aspiring opera singer I knew whistling arias while serving customers in a coffeehouse.” The music made her happy and, therefore, a better waitress. Cognitive change. Emotions are, to at least some extent, the result of cognitive appraisal processes. If the interpretation of the event changes, then so can the resulting emotion. For instance, Sutton (1991) found that bill collectors justified their actions by emphasizing that they were protecting the debtors’ credit ratings. Likewise, in a famous example, Hochschild (1983) observes that flight attendants are sometimes taught to think of surly customers as immature children who are unable to control themselves. In so doing, the flight attendant can forestall an angry response that might otherwise result from boorish passengers. This tactic of cognitive reappraisal seems to be a ubiquitous one. Evidence suggests that it is even used by workers to change their view of entire occupations. In a recent review, Ashforth and Kreiner (1999) consider individuals who are employed in low status “dirty work.” These authors observe that such workers engage in ideological re-framing and selection social comparison in order to maintain a positive self-identity. This evidence suggests that cognitive changes can be effective means of maintain worker well-being. Response-Focused Emotional Regulation We can take it as a given that employees cannot always influence affective events, or their interpretation of them. Workplaces are rich in emotions – both positive and negative. As a consequence, individuals often develop tactics for managing their responses. For example, some workers consume intoxicants that place them into socially desirable emotional states. These include such things as cocaine (Restak, 1994), tobacco (Parks, 1983), and Prozac (Kramer, 1994). Of course, the use of chemical supplements may have undesirable side effects, such as an addiction or physiological damage. As a result, mental health practitioners are likely to recommend more natural remedies, such as meditation or exercise (e.g. Benson, 1975; Quick, Quick, Nelson & Hurrell, 1997). At other times, employees can express or regulate their feelings in ways that are more socially acceptable or, at the very least, less likely to get them into trouble. For instance, Rafaeli (1989) and Rafaeli and Sutton (1990) found that bored cashiers often talked to customers as a way of breaking the monotony.


61

Consider also Van Maanen and Kunda’s (1989) study of Disneyland employees. These researchers discovered that employees had subtle ways of getting even with troublesome customers. For instance, one ride operator reported giving pesky customers a little “whack” when fastening a safety strap. Despite the availability of response-focused strategies, one’s feelings can become so over-whelming that it is best to simply withdraw. Wright and Cropanzano (1998) found that workers who reported high levels of emotional exhaustion were more likely to leave their jobs than were workers who reported lower levels. This would seem to be bad news – individuals lose their work and organizations lose their employees. Fortunately, there is a positive way to handle the problem of withdrawal. Research by Westman and Eden (1997) has found that even a temporary respite from work, such as a vacation or military service, can reduce levels of employee burnout.

HOW EMOTIONAL LABOR HARMS WELL-BEING: THREE POSSIBLE MECHANISMS The insightful social commentator, Wendy Kaminer (1992, p. 29) relates an interesting anecdote: Recovering substance abuser Kitty Dukakis once called a press conference to announce her descent into alcoholism and request respect for her privacy. It was shortly after her husband’s defeat in the 1988 presidential race, when she was less newsworthy than the pearls adorning Barbara Bush’s neck. I marveled only briefly at the spectacle of a woman seeking privacy in a press conference and public confession of an addiction. Some people, especially famous and formerly famous ones, seem to enjoy their privacy only in public.

This episode exemplifies an important attribute of American culture – talking about one’s feelings is a much lauded mechanism for promoting psychological health (Frum, 2000; Sommers, 2000). Conversely, a taciturn life is viewed as unhealthy “denial” (Kaminer, 1992; Sykes, 1992).1 When one takes this belief as a starting assumption, it is easy to see why one might bemoan emotional labor. These observations regarding popular culture provide a cautionary lens through which we can survey the literature on emotional labor. If we are not careful, the (social) “fact” that “everyone knows” it is unhealthy to contain your true feelings could engender a conceptual laxity. To prevent this, we need to obtain stronger evidence. A good start might be to survey the three mechanisms by which emotional labor is proposed to exert its ill-effects (Hochschild, 1979, 1983). First, emotional labor may lead to worker alienation. According to this model, a separation of one’s self from one’s authentic feelings creates an emotional

62


estrangement that is ultimately dysfunctional. Second, emotional regulation takes energy. For this reason, a “bottling up” of one’s true feelings can be exhausting and ultimately unhealthy. Third, display rules could produce a conflict of discourse such that individuals have no suitable guide for their actions. In the pages that follow we will review each of these possibilities.

The First Mechanism: Emotional Labor as Alienation One reason emotional labor is said to harm well-being is because it produces worker alienation. In particular, employees who are forced to display (or even feel) false emotions become alienated from their true selves, thereby engendering psychological damage. To explicate this view, it is helpful to recognize that the concept of alienation has a long history (see Kanungo, 1982; Sowell, 1985, for reviews), and it is helpful to consider this idea within its historical context. Perhaps the best known theorist of alienation is Karl Marx. Though the global collapse of communism (Fukuyama, 1992) has not been good for his intellectual progeny (Bethell, 1998; Bruce, 1999; Lemert, 1997), Marx remains an influential thinker within such disciplines as philosophy (Palmer, 1994) and sociology (Moore & Sinclair, 1995). In any case, the stress produced by emotional labor is said to result from a set of processes that parallel the Marxist view of alienated labor. To illustrate this point, we shall first review Marx’s thinking regarding worker alienation. Then we shall turn our attention to Hochschild’s (1983) view of emotional labor. The Marxist View on Alienation According to Marx, human consciousness is, in the main, determined by the social relationships within which people live their lives. Among these relationships, the “means of production” is of special importance. The means of production refers to the manner in which valued goods and services are produced. While the means of production have varied through different historical epochs, under capitalism the ability to produce wealth is controlled by a small class of wealthy individuals, aptly named “capitalists.” The worker class, or proletariat, lacks the resources necessary to produce products or deliver services. Indeed, workers do not even own their own tools! Thus, all that remains for the proletariat to sell is their labor. Consequently, we can say that labor is traded on the free market as a sort of commodity. Owners purchase it at bargain rates, intermix it with capital, and produce a product (Sowell, 1985). According to Marx, this system is exceedingly problematic for any number of reasons. However, of greatest concern here is that people often define themselves,


63

or at least would like to define themselves, by the fruits of their labor (Palmer, 1994). Now that capitalists have expropriated their labors, as well as the products of their work, the worker does not appear to be a producer as such. Rather, the production process – labor, machinery, investment, and all – is owned and directed by the capitalist. In effect, the workers have become a part of the equipment. This de-humanization engenders a sense of “alienation,” or the lack of an authentic identity (Kanungo, 1982). Emotional Labor and Alienation Let us turn the clock forward to the so-called post-Industrial era of our own times. We can see many changes that Marx could not have anticipated. Among these changes is a shift away from heavy industrial work (whereby the proletariat exchanged physical exertion for wages) and toward service work (whereby the new proletariat exchanges emotional expression for wages). Managers combine the “good feelings” of workers with their capital. This admixture allows firms to deliver some marketable service. For this reason, profits depend on workers maintaining a certain demeanor and composure. Herein lies Hochschild’s (1983) insight: Service work causes you to sell your feelings on the open market. Karabanow (2000, p. 165) states the matter succinctly: “The expression of emotions was once situated uniquely in the private realm and has now become a marketplace commodity.” Hence the name “emotional labor.” The interesting part is to try to understand how emotional labor impacts our sense of self (or “consciousness” as Marx might have put it). If emotions are deeply personal things, then selling them for wages might impact us in a fundamental way. We could well come to see ourselves as “alienated” from our feelings and emotionally estranged (Erickson & Ritter, 2001; Hochschild, 1983). As Abraham (1998, p. 69) puts it: “emotional dissonance in organizations leads to fragmentation of the self.” One of the most engaging implications of this idea is that the effects of emotional labor depend on one’s self-image. As Ashforth and Humphrey (1993) observe, some people see emotional restraint as part of their self-image. Others see it as hiding their true self. This has to do with how the self-concept is defined. Many people understand their identity by way of attachments to institutions. For these individuals, conforming to set standards, including standards for emotional expression, does not deny authenticity. Rather, it is a means of revealing their true selves. Ashforth and Humphrey term this first group “institutionals.” For other people, the true self is manifested through “volitional and spontaneous acts” (p. 100). For these “impulsives,” emotional labor should be more problematic. To illustrate these two types, Ashforth and Humphrey consider two cases presented by Gordon (1989, pp. 127–128).

64


In the first case, consider the reaction of a student who describes her confrontation with an authority figure: I did not allow my temper or stubbornness to overshadow my rationality. I was honest, coolheaded, and expressed my ability to debate and argue intelligently rather than fading into a whimpering and guilt-filled actress simply to dismiss the matter.

The words employed by this student are very interesting. Notice that she deliberately attempts to keep her emotions from “overshadow[ing]” her rationality, and she seems pleased with her “ability to debate and argue intelligently.” Perhaps most telling is the student’s description of what she would have become had she given her feelings free rein: “a guilt-filled actress” (italics added). If the student had not been reasonable, she would have seen herself as playing a role, rather than being her true self. These are the defining hallmarks of the institutionally-oriented individual. Let us now consider Ashforth and Humphrey’s (1993) second case. In this incident, a student with an impulsive self-concept describes his response after losing a basketball game: We lost and I was actually angry at some of the players. But I somehow was able to ignore my anger and act like the game was just another game. My real self wanted to walk over to some of the players and cuss them out. But what I really did was say how they played such a good game.

This individual’s “real self wanted to walk over . . . and cuss them out” (italics added). Here we see an impulsive style. His true identity is manifested in the free expression of emotion, not in its regulation. There is a critical point in these examples – Both students managed to control their feelings. Both implemented their socially prescribed roles. One might go so far as to say that the institutions succeeded in regulating their emotional expression. However, the two students felt differently about it. In the first case, the student’s authentic self appeared through the control of emotional states and through rational discourse with an authority figure. To have done otherwise would have been to become an “actress.” In the second case, the athlete’s “real self” (his words) was actively inhibited. The basketball player was inauthentic. Both students engaged in emotional labor, but only one experienced emotional estrangement. Before considering the empirical evidence for this model, it is important to discuss another point of note. The model tested proposed by Ashforth and Humphrey (1991) is somewhat unique in that it views identification and involvement as moderators of the relationship between emotional labor and physical symptoms. As we shall see in the next section, a few other researchers have treated job involvement and role identification (but not to our knowledge organizational


65

identification) as outcomes of emotional labor (e.g. Brotheridge & Lee, 1998; Kruml & Geddes, 2000a). These considerations do not, of course, invalidate Ashforth and Humphrey’s model. Instead, they provide an interesting avenue for conceptual integration between different conceptual approaches. While Ashforth and Humphrey’s (1993) ideas are compelling, it bears mention that only a few empirical studies have tested these ideas. Fortunately, the available evidence does provide at least some measure of support. One relevant study was reported by Schaubroeck and Jones (2000). These researchers examined the relationship between perceived demands to display positive emotions and reported physical symptoms. In particular, Schaubroeck and Jones anticipated that the most symptoms would be reported when employees felt compelled to display positive emotions, while simultaneously lacking identification with their employer or their job. Findings were supportive, and these are promising findings indeed. However, we should also consider some less consistent results. While Schaubroeck and Jones’ (2000) predictions were upheld for positive emotional displays, the same was not true for their negative counterparts. Perceived demands to display negative emotions interacted with neither organizational identification nor job involvement. In sum, the results for positive affective displays were consistent with Ashforth and Humphrey’s (1993) model, while the results for negative affective displays were not. Given this, the evidence cannot be taken as conclusive. Nevertheless, Ashforth and Humphrey’s model shows considerable promise. If such future research does support Ashforth and Humphrey’s (1993) model, this will have important implications for how we study emotional labor. It suggests that a fuller appreciation of the phenomenon requires that we first ascertain how individuals define their “authentic” self. This individual self-definition may or may not conform to the rules imposed by organizations or by society. For example, in a recent paper Simpson and Stroh (2003) studied the workplace display rules experienced by 303 alumni of a Human Resources program. Consistent with societal gender stereotypes (e.g. Fabes & Martin, 1991), female managers were more likely to report experiencing “feminine” display rules – expressing positive feelings and suppressing negative ones. Male respondents, on the other hand, were more likely to report experiencing stereotypically “masculine” display rules – expressing negative feelings and suppressing positive ones. Hence, display rules varied somewhat by gender. However, individuals’ responses to these rules, though not identical, showed an interesting similarity. For both men and women pressure to display the so-called “feminine” pattern led them to feel personally inauthentic. The ascribed roles society imposes (or attempts to impose) are not accepted by all of its members. In Simpson and Stroh’s study female managers felt less true to their identities when they adopted display rules that were considered stereotypically “appropriate” for their gender.

66


Surface acting, deep acting, and worker alienation. There have been a few empirical investigations of the emotional labor/alienation relationship. However, these are preliminary and have contented themselves with demonstrating an association between emotional labor and some indicator of alienation or estrangement. In perhaps the most direct test of this relationship, Grandey (1999) surveyed 168 administrative assistants. Grandey found that surface acting, but not deep acting, was positively related to emotional estrangement. Grandey further reported that emotional estrangement was negatively related to the expression of genuine emotions. These effects were significant beyond the impact of age and sex. In a later study, Kruml and Geddes (2000a) obtained somewhat more indirect evidence. According to Kanungo (1982), job involvement can be viewed as a positive pole on a continuum that includes alienation on the negative end. This is useful for our purposes here, as it allows us to (very) tentatively consider job involvement to be an aspect of worker alienation. In a field study, Kruml and Geddes operationalized emotional labor as having two dimensions, which the reader might recall from our earlier comments. The first dimension was emotive dissonance. As described by Morris and Feldman (1996), emotional dissonance referred to the size of the discrepancy between one’s actual feelings and the feelings the employee expressed on the job. As we saw earlier, Kruml and Geddes (2000b) reported that this dimension contains both surface acting and passive deep acting items. The second dimension, emotive effort, was much like Hochschild’s active deep acting. It referred to “the degree to which employees actively try to change their internal feelings to match those they must express to customers” (Kruml & Geddes, 2000a, p. 178). Consistent with predictions, they found that emotive dissonance (surface acting plus passive deep acting) was negatively associated with job involvement, while emotive effort (active deep acting) was positively associated. Brotheridge and Lee (1998) conducted a third study. These authors examined the relationship of emotional labor to “role identification.” However, their operationalization of role identification was similar to that used by Kruml and Geddes (2000a), in that Brotheridge and Lee adapted two items from the Lodahl and Kejner (1965) job involvement scale (see also Kanungo, 1982, for a review of this and other instruments). These authors operationalized emotional labor in a variety of ways, but of most relevance here were four dimensions: deep acting, surface acting, expression of genuine emotions, and emotional dissonance. Consistent with Kruml and Geddes, deep acting was positively correlated with role identification. Thus, those who actively changed their feelings were more involved in (and presumably less alienated from) their roles. As was found by Grandey (1999), genuine emotional expression showed a similar relationship. Consistent


67

Fig. 1. Relationship of Surface Acting and Deep Acting to Alternative Operationalizations of Worker Alienation.

with Kruml and Geddes (2000a) emotional dissonance was significantly related to role identification, though this effect was small (r = −0.12). Brotheridge and Lee did not obtain an appreciable association between surface acting and role identification. Generally speaking, these three studies seem to be telling a comparable study. Though the results are not perfectly identical, it seems that the similar constructs of surface acting, emotive effort, and emotional effort engender greater alienation. On the other hand, deep acting and emotive dissonance engender reduced alienation. Given the different operationalizations of the key constructions, we have illustrated these relationships in Fig. 1. Notice, however, that each of these studies measured “alienation” in a different way, either as emotional estrangement, job involvement, or role identification. It is not clear that these variables can be used interchangeably. Clearly, this work could benefit from a better specification of the alienation construct. Despite this, these findings are exceedingly promising. We will have more to say about surface acting when we discuss our second mechanism. Leaving these issues aside, there is another matter of importance. If we maintain that emotional labor causes alienation or, as stated above, emotional labor exerts its influence through the effect of alienation, then alienation becomes a mediator variable that lies between emotional labor and various work outcomes (for discussions of mediation, including appropriate statistical tests, see Baron & Kenny, 1986; Holmbeck, 1997; James & Brett, 1984.) Once again, the evidence is limited, but promising. Work by Parkinson (1991) and Erickson and Wharton (1997) suggests that perceptions of inauthenticity with the self mediate between emotional labor and worker responses.

68


A Second Mechanism: Emotional Labor as a Consequence of Affective Regulation Hochschild (1983) proposes a second mechanism. According to Hochschild, it takes a certain amount of energy to contain one’s emotions. Over time, the constant expenditure of effort may create wear and tear on a person’s body and adversely impact one’s physical and psychological health. As this model is similar to Freud’s (1936/1961) discussion of anxiety, it might have a somewhat dated feel about it. However, it is important to recognize that Hochschild is not proposing that we accept the full plethora of Freudian theory (e.g. an id, inappropriate toilet training, the Opedial complex, and so on). Rather, she is only borrowing a rather straightforward mechanism that seems to have some decent empirical support (Gross, 1998a, b). Building on Frijda’s (1986) concept of “action readiness,” Grandey (2000) provides a thorough description of how this process comes about. “Action readiness” can be viewed as a type of behavioral priming. Various emotions bring with them accompanying response tendencies. For example, anger primes us to fight, while fear primes us to flee. In social settings we often need to inhibit these tendencies or repress the feelings that give rise to them. Unfortunately, the responses are automatic. Thus, inhibition is an active process that takes effort. Grandey (p. 100) remarks succinctly, “This means that energy is not available for other tasks, such as the immune system.” Grandey’s (2000) contention is straightforward, but it has profound implications. If she is correct, then there should be at least three consequences. First, in laboratory settings scholars should be able to directly measure the physiological activation that accompanies the inhibition process. This has already been accomplished. Research suggests that when individuals inhibit their feelings, there are measurable physiological consequences (Gross, 1998a, b; Gross & Levenson, 1997; Pennebaker, 1985). A second consequence has been pointed out by Diefendorff and Gosserand (2002). Presumably, it takes less effort to close a small discrepancy than to close a large one. Thus, if effort is driving the ill-effects of emotional labor, then the greater the disparity between actual/felt emotions and prescribed/displayed emotions the more difficult it is to close the gap. Consequently, the greater the gap between felt and displayed emotions, then the greater is the ill-effects of emotional labor. Diefendorff and Richard (2003) tested this idea in a field study. These authors examined perceived demands to suppress negative and express positive emotions. Diefendorff and Richard also measured levels of extraversion (associated with experiencing positive emotions) and neuroticism (associated with experiencing negative emotions). As one would expect, workers


69

high in neuroticism perceived more demands to suppress them. These demands, in turn, produced lower job satisfaction (there was also a direct and negative effect of neuroticism on job satisfaction). Unfortunately, in the Diefendorff and Richard study, the findings for extraversion were less supportive than those for neuroticism. Hence, their model was not fully supported. The reader is cautioned to remember this study. We shall need to revisit this in a very short while. The third consequence may be the most important to organizational scholars. According to Grandey, suppressing one’s feelings should be associated with longterm health problems. Once more, the results favor her supposition. Relative to their more expressive counterparts, people who have difficulty releasing their emotions have higher blood pressure and a worse prognosis for cancer (e.g. Cox & McCay, 1982; Gross, 1989; King & Emmons, 1990). Perhaps the most compelling evidence comes from the influential work of Pennebaker (1982, 1985, 1989). In an extensive series of studies, including both laboratory and field investigations, Pennebaker has found that individuals who discuss and confide their experiences and traumatic events, tend to make superior recoveries than those who inhibit their experiences. In light of Pennebaker’s (1982, 1985, 1989) work, it is interesting to consider a recent study by Glomb et al. (2002). Using an experience sampling methodology, Glomb and her colleagues randomly surveyed 72 administrative workers four times a day for three weeks. Among other things, these authors found that when expressed emotions were inconsistent with experience emotions, this discordance was generally the result of repressing one’s genuine feelings. Put more loosely, emotional dissonance was not so much caused by the feelings one did expressed, but rather by the feelings that one didn’t express. Glomb et al.’s study is important, but it suggests that surface acting could exert its pernicious influences through emotional repression. With the work on Glomb and her colleagues (2002) in mind, let us now take a second look at Diefendorff and Richard’s (2003) findings. Demands to suppress negative emotion were negatively related to job satisfaction. Though awkward to state, this finding indicates that the more one was supposed to inhibit negative emotion, the less satisfied one was with their job. Interestingly, demands to express positive emotions were positively related to job satisfaction. That is, the more one was supposed to display positive emotions, the more satisfied one was with their job. In other words, the presumed labor to suppress negative emotion lowered job satisfaction, while the presumed labor to express positive emotion raised job satisfaction. These findings are consistent with those of Glomb et al., in that repression lowered job satisfaction but expression did not. In fact, expressing positive emotion improved satisfaction. While the work of Diefendorff and Richard (2003) does not contradict that of Glomb and her colleagues (2002), there is one important caveat. In the

70


Diefendorff and Richard study suppression was only paired with negative affect, while expression was only paired with positive affect. For this reason, it is unclear whether the different effects were due to the type of labor (that is, suppression or expression) or the object of that labor (that is, positive or negative feelings). Clearly, both possibilities are in need of additional inquiry. All of the evidence reviewed thus far offers support for Grandey’s (2000) model. Nevertheless, it is necessary to insert a note of caution. There is at least some evidence suggesting that repression can be useful in certain circumstances. For example, in a “double-blind” study of bereaved individuals, Bonanno (1995) found that those who repressed strong (negative) emotions were actually somewhat healthier than those who vented them. Similarly, in a survey of high school students, Bybee (1997) found that repressors tended to be better students and more popular than were their more expressive counterparts. In view of these data, it may be that expressing one’s feelings is dysfunctional in some cases but healthy in others. There might even be circumstances in which emotional work requirements are actually a good thing for employees! Unfortunately, we cannot yet answer this question. At the present we do not yet have enough information to specify the circumstances under which emotional expression is or is not helpful. We can offer at least one intriguing possibility, however, and it harkens back to our earlier discussion. If there are two types of emotional labor, they need not have the same effects. Consistent with the evidence presented earlier (e.g. Kruml & Geddes, 2000a), it may be that surface acting, or faking one’s true feelings, produces harmful effects. On the other hand, deep acting, or changing one’s feelings so that they match organizational display rules, might actually produce beneficial effects on well-being. Evidence is limited, but does seem consistent with this possibility. Some relevant evidence is presented in three laboratory studies reported by Richards and Gross (2000). These authors found that suppressing one’s emotion (similar to surface acting) results in impaired cognitive functioning. However, emotional reappraisal (similar to deep acting) produces no such ill-effects. This is a critical observation for emotional labor researchers. If this finding can be replicated in field settings, then it suggests that only surface acting, and not deep acting, is harmful for employee well-being. At the present time, this possibility is only suggestive, but there are some important field studies which help shed light on this possibility. Brotheridge and Grandey (2002) present evidence consistent with this possibility. Among other things, these authors were interested in predicting three dimensions of burnout – emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and diminished personal accomplishment. To assess this possibility, surface acting and deep acting were used as predictors, as were various control variables. Only surface


71

acting was related to all three burnout dimensions. That is, those who faked their true emotions reported more emotional exhaustion, more depersonalization, and a weaker sense of personal accomplishment. Perhaps most significant of all were the findings for coworker ratings of customer service. Administrative assistants who reported surface acting received lower customer service ratings from their peers. Conversely, administrative assistants who reported deep acting were given higher customer service ratings from their peers. These findings suggest that active inhibition in the form of surface acting is hazardous to one’s well-being and job performance. On the other hand, modifying one’s feelings is less hazardous and may even have some salutary consequences. Kruml and Geddes (2000a) and Brotheridge and Lee (1998) also obtained supportive results in their aforementioned studies. Kruml and Geddes found that emotive dissonance was associated with more emotional exhaustion, diminished personal accomplishment, and more depersonalization. Emotive effort, which is similar to deep acting or changing one’s emotions, was associated with less emotional exhaustion, greater personal accomplishment, and less depersonalization. Likewise, Brotheridge and Lee reported that emotional exhaustion was positively related to emotional dissonance and surface acting. However, contrary to other reported findings, Brotheridge and Lee found that those who engaged in deep acting reported more emotional exhaustion. Though the obtained effect was small (r = 0.17), the direction of this relationship was different from that obtained by Grandey (2003) and Kruml and Geddes (2000a). Despite the one positive association between emotional exhaustion and deep acting, the impact of the two dimensions of emotional labor seem to mirror one another. Actively repressing one’s authentic feelings seems to induce burnout, while changing one’s feelings seems to be beneficial or at least not as harmful. Somewhat more ambiguous findings are presented by Zerbe (2000, Study 2). Using a sample of over 400 airline employees, Zerbe did not observe appreciably negative effects for faking one’s emotions. It is difficult to reconcile these findings with those of Grandey (2003) and Kruml and Geddes (2000a). Zerbe cautions that his findings might be due to his methodology, particularly the use of difference scores to operationalize key constructs. Zerbe’s work, notwithstanding the evidence otherwise, suggests that faking is deleterious for well-being while actually changing one’s emotions has healthy consequences. Of course, more research is needed. Before closing this section, we should point out a recent and controversial explication of the deleterious effects of emotional regulation developed by Muraven and Baumeister (2000). The work of Muraven and Baumeister focuses on the effects of self regulation more generally, with emotional regulation being a specific type of self regulation. According to Muraven and Baumeister, self

72


regulation requires and uses its own pool of “regulatory resources.” These regulatory resources become depleted after regulatory activities, including emotional regulation. Consequently, after regulation of any sort, performance on subsequent tasks that require regulation will be degraded until enough time has based more the resources to be replenished. Muraven and Baumeister use the fatigue of a muscle as an anology to describe their regulatory resource idea. After exercise of a muscle, fatigue prevents efficient use of the same muscle until rest replenishes its strength. Muraven and Baumeister (2000) argue that regulatory resources are like a muscle in another important way as well. With a muscle, exercise might have a weakening effect in the short run but it has a strengthening effect over time. They suggest the same is true for regulatory resources. Exercise may have short term negative consequences through depletion but might build up the total pool of resources in the long run. Muraven and Baumeister (2000) have conducted a number of studies supporting the idea of regulatory depletion. In their basic paradigm, participants in experimental conditions are required to engage in a variety of self regulatory activities (controlling your emotional display while watching an emotion-generating movie clip, not eating a fresh baked cookie sitting in front of you, squeezing a hand grip for as long as you can). Subjects in control conditions are not. Subsequently, regulatory performance on unrelated tasks is shown to be worse for experimental as opposed to control subjects. The validity of Muraven and Baumeister’s (2000) position on regulatory resources has a number of implications for the study of emotional labor. First, it suggests that emotional regulation is not something different from self-regulation generally. Second, and related to the first point, is that the deleterious effects of emotional labor can show up on subsequent non-emotional regulatory tasks just as the effects of continued non-emotional regulatory engagement (goal setting, for example) can interfere with the ability to regulate one’s emotions. Finally, their position highlights the importance of time in studying these processes. The negative effects of depletion are immediate and transient. If Muraven and Baumeister’s idea about the strengthening of resources through exercise is correct, the long term effects may be more positive. Unfortunately, all research to date has focused on the short term consequences of depletion.

A Third Mechanism: Emotional Labor as Dueling Discourses In a recent paper, Tracy (2000) proposes a novel interpretation of emotional labor. Tracy is concerned with avoiding Hochschild (1983) duality between “public” and “private” emotions. According to Hochschild, public emotions are


73

often coerced through organizational display rules. The clash between authentic private emotions and feigned public emotions produces emotive dissonance. This dissonance is said to produce stress and have deleterious consequences for well-being. Notice that such an analysis depends on a “true” or authentic self and a “false” or assumed self. Hochschild (1983) is well aware of this. She notes explicitly: “we push the ‘real self further inside, making it more inaccessible” (p. 34). Likewise, she speaks explicitly of “estrangement between what a person senses as her ‘true self’ and her inner and outer acting” (p. 136). Of course, as Tracy observes, this is only one facet of Hochschild’s analysis. Still, it is an extremely important part and worthy of consideration. In contrast to Hochschild (1979, 1983) and others, Tracy (2000) is skeptical of this distinction between “true/private” and “false/public” emotion. She bases her critique on the work of the postmodernist philosopher Michel Foucault. Among other things, Foucault was interested in social institutions. Institutions, especially total institutions, contain a good deal of power over their wards. This power is created, transmitted, and manifested through discourse among individuals and between individuals and institutions. Discourse serves to explain and legitimize social power (Foucault, 1977, 1982). To understand Tracy’s (2000) critique of Hochschild (2000), it is critical to recognize how institutions retain control. Power shapes the self. Thus, control can be maintained by shaping individuals’ self-understanding in a manner congruent with institutional goals. Since the self is always constructed based on an individual’s interaction with the social environment, no “self” can be said to be any more or less “real” than any other. We all carry around multiple identities that manifest themselves in different settings (George & Brief, 1996). By extension, the publicly displayed emotions observed by Hochschild and others are not less real than the so-called “private” emotions of the “true” self. Since the self is necessarily shaped by institutional power arrangements, all emotions are equally real. As Tracy (2000) summarizes her position: From a Foucauldian point of view, the self is fragmented and constructed through a number of discourses; different selves emerge in contextually specific manners. The private self is no more real than the public self. “Real” emotion is constructed in public, organizational forums (p. 99).

In the interest of brevity and space, we have grossly simplified a complex philosophy. Most notably, Foucault (1982) noted that resistance was possible. The self is influenced by social institutions, but it is not imposed in a simple top-down fashion. Identity emerges from, as Tracy (2000, p. 99) eloquently puts it: “a dance of resistance and domination.” Regardless, when the construct of a true self is removed from consideration, it calls into question traditional interpretations

74


of emotional labor. In analyzing one of her own experiences, Tracy (p. 117) asserts: “My discomfort . . . did not arise from feeling one emotion and showing another (emotive dissonance) or disagreeing with the emotion labor norms (faking in bad faith).” At first glance, this analysis would seem to raise a problem. If there is no “real self,” and if identity is always constructed, then why should display rules ever cause discontent? Shouldn’t an employee simply create a new “self” each time he or she is called upon to do so? Tracy (2000) observes that the matter is not so simple as this. Since our self is “over-determined,” we typically gain self-understanding by drawing upon multiple identities. Moreover, we are often exposed to multiple sets of display rules. Emotional labor manifests itself when we try “to perform two acts at once” (p. 117). In other words, it is the clash of incongruous social acts, and not the clash of real and faked emotions, which produces discomfort. Postmodernism and Emotional Labor: Challenges and Opportunities To our knowledge, Tracy (2000) is the only emotional labor scholar who has taken this sort of postmodernist perspective. As she herself observes, these ideas are in need of further research and elaboration. Nevertheless, this perspective is intriguing. In this section we will try to analyze Tracy’s framework though the lens of what we have learned from other scholars. First, we shall consider surface acting, and then we turn to deep acting. Finally, we conclude with a few brief comments on emotional conflict. Surface acting and genuine emotions. It is interesting to consider Tracy’s (2000) framework in light of what is known about emotions. From the vantage point of this research, there may be grounds for distinguishing genuine from artificial emotion, as is done by Hochschild (1979, 1983). According to various scholars (e.g. Keltner & Anderson, 2000; Mascolo & Harkins, 1998) emotions can be seen as self-regulating networks of basic psychological processes. Mascolo, Harkins and Harakal (2000) observe that the “building blocks” for these syndromes include appraisal processes (how one responds cognitively), affective processes (how one feels), and overt behavior processes (e.g. one’s behavioral predisposition and facial expressions). While these three processes are conceptually distinct (e.g. Weiss, 2002), the presence of one tends to engender the other two, thereby creating a manifold composite with a high degree of inter-coordination (Mascolo & Griffin, 1998). If a “full blown” emotion consists of a tight network linking thoughts, feelings, and behaviors, then this has implications for Tracy’s (2000) model. We can illustrate these ramifications with an example of surface acting. Consider the case of a sales clerk working with an enraged and venomous customer. As the customer heaps abuse on the innocent clerk, the latter begins to experience ill-will (feelings) since she views his attacks as unfair (cognitive


75

evaluation). As a consequence, her heart rate increases, her muscles tense, and she has to suppress a legitimate urge to shout back at the customer (behavioral responses). Eventually, the embattled clerk forces a smile and says: “It was a real pleasure helping you, sir.” Notice that the clerk in this example has exhibited a more-or-less complete manifestation of an anger syndrome. On the other hand, her smile is only one part of a happiness syndrome. Furthermore, this facial expression is detached from the other parts of the happiness syndrome (which were not experienced in this situation), as well as, from the components of the anger syndrome that were experienced. In settings such as these it strains credulity to suppose that the public happiness is as “real” as the private ire. Since the clerk experiences virtually all of the attributes of one emotion, and only one attribute of another (and even then only with self-conscious effort), then Hochschild (1983) could plausibly claim that the rage is more genuine than the happiness. Tracy raises some valuable points about the nature of social power and the social construction of emotion. However, it seems that with respect to surface acting, the “faked” emotion can often be separated from the “genuine” or felt emotion. This is because the sham smile is out of sync with the rest of the psyche. Deep acting and the dynamics of the self. One might concede that surface acting is faking, since in so doing employees are actively trying to suppress or express some emotion that does not align with their actual feelings. However, Tracy’s (2000) analysis may have more to say regarding deep acting (i.e. actively changing one’s feelings). In their discussion of deep acting, several scholars (e.g. Grandey, 2003, 2000; Kruml & Geddes, 2000b; Morris & Feldman, 1996), including Hochschild (1983), have emphasized that deep acting creates emotions that are authentic. In other words, when engaging in deep acting employees do indeed align their feeling states to the display rules of the organization. Assuming the deep acting to be a success, these authors make no claim that one set of emotions is less real than the other set. Hence, there would seem to be a good deal of similarity between Tracy’s work and other perspectives. Does Tracy’s analysis have anything to add beyond these discussions? We think it does. The key difference between Tracy’s (2000) model and other work may have more to do with the self and less to do with emotion. Consistent with Foucault (1977, 1982), Tracy views the self as relatively fluid and likely to change across situations. Hochschild (1979, 1983) views the self as having somewhat more temporal and cross-situational consistency (for a similar view see Ashforth & Humphrey, 1995). For this reason, Hochschild allows that individuals can generate bona fide emotions that are incongruent with the self. Tracy, on the other hand, emphasizes situations where the self actually changes in response to display rules.

76


Notice that this distinction is not the same as surface vs. deep acting. There is no surface pretense in either of these positions. Instead, one might see each as a different sort of deep acting. In the first case, the self remains relatively fixed, and one’s sincere emotions (though assembled through deep acting) are in conflict with the self. In the second case, the one emphasized by Tracy (2000), the self is reconstituted in response to emotional demands. Both of these effects are likely. Future research should explore these ideas in more depth. When the clash of emotions brings benefits. Another problem has to do with the simultaneous expression of positive and negative emotion. Consistent with Tracy’s (2000) view, there is evidence that conflict over emotional expression can have deleterious consequence (e.g. King & Emmons, 1990). However, this may not always be the case. Though the research is limited, it may sometimes be the case that the clash of differing states could bring about beneficial consequences. In this regard, it is worthwhile to consider Baron’s (1976) incompatible response theory. Baron maintains that when two opposing feelings come together the stronger feeling state will supplant and eliminate the weaker. In one experimental test of these ideas, Baron (1984) had research participants negotiate with an experimental accomplice. For our purposes here, the most important conditions were those where subjects received a gift or viewed three humorous cartoons. Relative to a control group, individuals in these latter two conditions reported better moods, more favorable impressions of the accomplice and a greater willingness to use constructive conflict resolution procedures. Far from being conflicted by emotionally incompatible stimuli, in these experiments the positive mood “won out” and the participant was happier, had a friendlier outlook, and was even more cooperative. From these data it seems apparent that incompatible emotions do not necessarily have ill-effects, though they sometimes do. A better understanding of when discordant emotions are advantageous and when they are maleficent would provide a useful extension of Tracy’s postmodernist model.

A Lingering Methodological Concern No one disputes the fact that emotions impact work attitudes and behaviors (or if anyone does, they haven’t said so in print). However, emotional labor goes a step further. Emotional labor theory suggests that emotional management impacts work attitudes and behaviors, apart from the force of the emotions themselves. Emotional labor poses a fascinating conceptual possibility, but it poses some methodological challenges as well. The principal difficulty with this idea has to do with the fact that much (though by no means all, see Sutton, 1991) of our emotional management is directed toward


77

negative affect. For instance, one is not supposed to display anger or hostility. In other words, one is probably asked to restrain the expression of negative emotion more than the expression of positive emotions. Consequently, it is possible that there might be a significant correlation between negative affectivity and emotional labor. For this reason, there is a chance that negative affect and emotional labor tend to co-occur. Though, as we have emphasized, this correlation is far from perfect, it may be large enough for negative affectivity to act as a confounding third variable. For this reason, when studying the relationships between emotional labor and work outcomes, such as emotional exhaustion or job satisfaction, we need to rule out the confounding effects of the emotions themselves. In other words, it may not be that emotional labor has pernicious consequences. Rather, it might instead be the case that the negative affect is the actual culprit. This stringent condition is difficult, though not impossible to meet. It involves separating the labor from the emotions that one labors over. To our knowledge, Arbraham (1998) was the first scholar to explore this possibility. Abraham surveyed a sample of 110 service representatives. Her predictors were emotional dissonance and negative affectivity, while the outcome measures were job satisfaction and emotional exhaustion. Let us first consider the results for exhaustion. The zero-order correlation between emotional dissonance and emotional exhaustion was significant (r = 0.32, p < 0.001). However, dissonance was also associated with negative affectivity (r = 0.47, p < 0.001). Given these correlations, when negative affectivity and emotional dissonance were simultaneously used to predict emotional exhaustion, only the former was significantly correlated to the criterion variable. This is exactly the problematic situation described above, as the impact of emotional dissonance on emotional exhaustion was accounted for by a third variable – negative affectivity. This could suggest that it is not the act of emotional labor per se that produces disagreeable effects on worker well-being. Rather these effects might be produced by the negative emotions that some workers experience. The observed relationship between emotional labor and unhappy outcomes may simply be due to the fact that people labor over negative affect. Fortunately, Arbraham’s (1998) job satisfaction measure provided more supportive results. When negative affectivity was entered into the equation, emotional dissonance continued to predict job satisfaction. Interestingly, emotional dissonance and negative affectivity also interacted. There was a much stronger association between emotional dissonance and job satisfaction when negative affectivity was high (r = 0.54) than when it was low (r = 0.01). Regardless, Abraham’s findings for job satisfaction are encouraging. Partially supportive evidence was also obtained by Schaubroeck and Jones (2000). These authors used demands to express positive emotions and demands

78


to suppress negative emotions as predictors of physical symptoms. When trait negative affect was controlled, demands to express positive emotion remained a significant predictor. Demands to suppress negative emotions, however, were not significant. A recent study by Brotheridge and Grandey (2002)also confronted the possibility that negative affect might explain away the relationship between emotional labor and well-being. Brotheridge and Grandy used surface and deep acting to predict three dimensions of burnout – emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment. To test their hypotheses, they controlled for a variety of potentially confounding variables. These included negative affectivity, and two types of display rules (hide positive emotions and hide negative emotions). Hence, Brotheridge and Grandey conducted a conservative test of their predictions. When all of the control variables were included in their regression model, Brotheridge and Grandey found that surface acting was positively related to depersonalization and negatively related to personal accomplishment. Surface acting was marginally related to emotional exhaustion as well. Deep acting was positively related to personal accomplishment, but not to emotional exhaustion or to depersonalization. Finally, the Diefendorff and Richard (2003) study we considered earlier might provide insight onto this problem. As an indicator of emotional labor, Diefendorff and Richard measured self-perceptions of demands to express positive emotions and self-perceptions of demands to suppress negative emotions. According to their structural model, both of these indices predicted job satisfaction beyond the effects of extraversion, neuroticism, job requirements, and supervisory perceptions of display rules demands. As was the case with the Brotheridge and Grandey (2002), the Diefendorff and Richard’s study argues for the unique importance of emotional labor beyond the effect of negative emotions per se. Of course, these studies cannot be seen as fully conclusive and more research is needed on this issue. Nevertheless, these findings are certainly consistent with the idea that emotional management exerts a unique impact on various outcome variables.

HOW EMOTIONAL LABOR PROMOTES WELL-BEING: A NEW PERSPECTIVE In their insightful review, Kruml and Geddes (2000b) describe a common misinterpretation of Hochschild’s (1983) work. Contrary to what many seem to believe, Hochschild never stated that emotional labor was universally negative. As Kruml and Geddes show, Hochschild allowed that emotional labor could be a positive thing, depending on when and how it is performed. Various other scholars


79

have shared Hochschild’s view (e.g. Ashforth & Humphrey, 1993; Conrad & Witte, 1994; Diefendorff & Richard, 2003; Tolich, 1993; Wharton, 1993, 1999; Wouters, 1989). One re-occurring theme of this paper is that emotional labor is not necessarily bad. For example, we have already argued that a degree of professional detachment, so long as it is not carried to extremes, can be a healthy response for human service workers. Likewise, while the evidence reviewed herein suggests that surface acting has pernicious effects, deep acting seems to produce positive outcomes, at least for some workers at some times (e.g. Brotheridge & Grandey, 2002; Brotheridge & Lee, 1998; Grandey, 2003; Kruml & Geddes, 2000a). Shuler and Sypher (2000), through their interviews of 911 dispatchers and analysis of emergency calls, show how emotional labor may actually be sought out by workers. This is not to say that 911 dispatchers do not experience the harmful consequences of emotional labor, because they do. This is evident in the fact that many dispatchers report getting “burned out.” However, many dispatchers also view emotional labor as being fun, exciting, and in some instances, rewarding. Specifically, Shuler and Sypher discuss emotional labor as being positive through three mechanisms: comic relief, a “fix,” and altruistic service. Given the rarity with which emotional labor is discussed in positive terms, let us elucidate each of these three mechanisms in greater detail.

Mechanism No. 1: Comic Relief Not surprisingly, 911 dispatchers receive their fair share of “crazy” and “bizarre” calls. Such calls frequently elicit emotional labor because they require the dispatcher to suppress his or her emotions. This suppression is dictated by both administrative policy and socially dictated rules. For example, one dispatcher “hung her head, slapping her forehead with frustration” in response to a caller inquiring as to whether oral sex was illegal in their state. Although the dispatcher reported having no patience for the caller, she could not chastise him, or laugh at him, for his calling 911 with such a question. Rather, she had to suppress her emotions and deal with the caller in an appropriate manner. However, once the call ended the emotional labor turned into comic relief in that the dispatcher, as well as everyone else in the room, had something to joke about for the remainder of the night. Another example of emotional labor serving as comic relief to dispatchers can be seen in the caller known as “the lady with fog in her house.” This caller was a regular in that she called 911 every day with the complaint that people were putting smog in her home. One can imagine the stress and frustration of dealing with such a regular caller, given that every time she called, a dispatcher would have to take a report and send an officer to her residence. This caller did provide

80


some comic relief for the emotional labor she was causing the dispatchers to work through, which in turn made it easier for the dispatchers to cope. As one dispatcher reports, “One time she told me that I was breathing through the phone and I blew a puff of smoke in her face” (Shuler & Sypher, 2000, p. 71). This comment has provided comic relief for most dispatchers working in the organization.

Mechanism No. 2: A “Fix” In addition to calls that might provide comic relief, dispatchers frequently seek out calls that they know will greatly increase their emotional labor requirements. However, in this situation the calls are not humorous, but are rather extremely serious calls that provide an adrenaline fix. Calls that provide this adrenaline fix are those in which someone is in a life or death situation, or someone is reporting a crime in progress. Although such calls are emotionally draining, many dispatchers report being “adrenaline junkies” who get hooked on the fix associated with such calls. The need to engage in emotional labor so as to remain emotionally neutral contributes to making these highly charged calls “fun.” As one dispatcher reports, while “they do get your adrenaline going, you keep your head enough to keep, to get enough information and get officers going at the same time” (Shuler & Sypher, 2000, p. 74). Based on statements such as this, Shuler and Sypher concluded that being able to deal with the adrenaline rush, while “keeping your head,” is a source of pride for the dispatchers. It is examples such as this one that demonstrate how emotional labor, although challenging, can be exciting and positive rather than solely negative. The adrenalin fix that dispatchers receive from such intense emotional labor can be so positive that dispatchers frequently agree with the opinion that “when bad things happen, that’s when the job is interesting.” Although this might seem odd, dispatchers realize that most people would not understand their need for the fix. As one dispatcher put it, “It can be construed as demented. You know, ’cuz here we are, the day is boring unless something happens, and normally when something happens, it’s bad, and that’s kind of twisted and sick. You kind of get off on that sort of thing” (Shuler & Sypher, 2000, pp. 74). In this situation, emotional labor that most workers would find disturbing is actually sought out by some employees.

Mechanism No. 3: Altruistic Service Although some dispatchers enjoy emotional labor for the comic relief and adrenalin rush it provides, other dispatchers have more altruistic reasons for


81

enjoying such work. Specifically, the negative consequences of increased emotional labor (e.g. burn out) are often overridden by a sense of having accomplished something positive. This positive consequence of emotional labor can be thought of as altruistic because rarely do callers recognize the contributions of dispatchers. As one dispatcher commented, “There’s some gratification with, that comes with that, too, you know, you know you did something really well. Even if they don’t know you did it well, that fact that you know you did it well, that you helped” (Shuler & Sypher, 2000, p. 76). In some instances, dispatchers will go so far as to put their own jobs in jeopardy by performing altruistic emotional labor. For example, if dispatchers work at a facility that does not possess an emergency medical dispatch certification, they are not allowed to provide callers with medical advice. However, one dispatcher (a former paramedic) reported that should the circumstance arise, she would disregard the rules so as to help someone in a life-threatening situation. She preferred saving a man’s life much more than saving her own job. As Shuler and Sypher point out, this is clearly a case of altruistic emotional labor. Although the examples above do provide evidence that emotional labor can be positive, this is an area that is in dire need of further research. Although the mechanisms of comic relief, adrenalin fixes, and altruism do apply to 911 dispatchers, they may not apply to employees in other settings where emotional labor may be just as prevalent. For example, a computer technical support employee may frequently be provided with comic relief. However, one wonders if such an employee will ever receive an adrenalin rush due to a caller’s computer crashing while on the telephone. In response to this, it is important to examine the potentially positive facets of emotional labor in a wide variety of workplaces and contexts so as to have a better understanding of emotional labor in general.

CLOSING THOUGHTS Human behavior can be understood in reference to the social context in which it occurs. In this regard, the manifestation emotion is not unique. What is unique are the myriad ways that organizations shape our feelings and their expression. If one takes emotional labor research seriously, then the demands of emotional regulation do more than impact our stress levels. What may be most important of all is that these demands shape our sense of who we are. In so doing, this new sensibility is fit into the demands and needs of the work role. Though this may be economically efficient, it can leave us estranged from ourselves, feeling low levels of well-being, and perhaps physically ill. Our self may be taken, but it is not taken easily.

82


NOTE 1. It is difficult to know, though interesting to speculate, as to where this faith in public testimony emerged. One origin suggested by Kaminer (1992) is that humanistic psychology provided part of the foundation. According to Kaminer, thinkers such as Maslow (1954) and Rogers (1980) believed that human beings were fundamentally good, at least once their basic physiological requirements were met. Rogers stated: “I do not find that this evil is inherent in human nature.” Assuming one is living in an environment that supports personal growth, Rogers maintained that “I have never known an individual to choose the cruel or destructive path.” (Both of these quotes are taken from Myers, 1995, p. 487). Put loosely, good people became evil or sick because their authentic self is blocked by such things as bad parenting or an oppressive society. Honest testimony as to one’s feelings is one tool for coming to grips with one’s personal needs and authentic self. Given the strength of the public’s faith in emotional expression, however, one would suspect it must have even deeper roots. Perhaps the success of humanistic psychology was more a manifestation of a cultural assumption, rather than a cause of that assumption. This position was taken by Frum (2000). He suggests that the American penchant for emotional testimony may have sprung from religious revivalism from the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. In other words, it may be a secular manifestation of a religious belief. Frum’s hypothesis is plausible. Such revivals were emotional affairs (Packard, 1988), including sobbing, healing, speaking in tongues, writing on the ground, and an occasional snake handling.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would like to sincerely thank Alicia A. Grandey and Linda K. Stroh for their comments on an earlier draft of this chapter.

REFERENCES Adelmann, P. K. (1995). Emotional labor as a potential source of job stress. In: S. L. Sauter & L. R. Murphy (Eds), Organizational Risk Factors for Job Stress (pp. 371–381). Washington, DC: APA. Aldwin, C., & Revenson, T. A. (1987). Does coping help? A re-examination of the relation between coping and mental health. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 337–348. Amirkhan, J. H. (1994). Criterion validity of a coping measure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 62, 242–261. Abraham, R. (1998). Negative affectivity: Moderator or confound in emotional dissonance-outcome relationships? Journal of Psychology, 133, 61–72. Ashforth, B. E., & Humphrey, R. H. (1993). Emotional labor in service roles: The influence of identity. Academy of Management Review, 18, 88–115. Ashforth, B. E., & Humphrey, R. H. (1995). Emotion in the workplace: A reappraisal. Human Relations, 49, 97–125.


83

Ashforth, B. E., & Kreiner, G. E. (1999). “How can you do it?” Dirty work and the challenge of constructing a positive identity. Academy of Management Review, 24, 413–434. Baron, R. A. (1976). The reduction of human aggression: A field study of the influence of incompatible responses. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 6, 260–274. Baron, R. A. (1984). Reducing organizational conflict: An incompatible response approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 272–279. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. Bartel, C. A., & Saavedra, R. (2000). The collective construction of work group moods. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45, 197–231. Benson, H. (1975). The relaxation response. New York: Morrow. Bethell, T. (1998). The noblest triumph: Property and prosperity through the ages. New York: St. Martin’s Griffin. Bonanno, G. (1995). When avoiding unpleasant emotions might not be such a bad thing: Verbalautonomic response dissociation and midlife conjugal bereavement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 975–989. Brotheridge, C. M., & Grandey, A. A. (2002). Emotional labor and burnout: Comparing two perspectives of “people work”. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 60, 17–39. Brotheridge, C. M., & Lee, R. T. (1998, August). On the dimensionality of emotional labor: Development and validation of an emotional labor scale. Paper presented at the First Conference on Emotions in Organizational Life. San Diego, CA. Bruce, S. (1999). Sociology: A very short introduction. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. Bybee, J. (1997). Is repression adaptive? Relationships to socioemotional adjustment, academic performance, and self-image. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 6, 59–69. Carver, C. S., Scheier, M. F., & Weintraub, J. K. (1989). Assessing coping strategies: A theoretically base approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 267–283. Chernow, R. (1998). Titan: The life of John D. Rockefeller, Sr. New York: Random House. Conrad, C., & Witte, K. (1994). Is emotional expression repression oppression? Myths of organizational affective regulations. In: S. A. Deetz (Ed.), Communication Yearbook (Vol. 17, pp. 417–428). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Cox, T., & McCay, C. (1982). Psychosocial factors and psychophysiological mechanisms in the aetiology and development of cancers. Social Science and Medicine, 16, 381–396. Cropanzano, R., Weiss, H. M., Suckow, K. J., & Grandey, A. A. (2000). Doing justice to workplace emotion. In: N. M. Ashkanasy, C. E. J. Hartel & W. J. Zerbe (Eds), Emotions in the Workplace: Research, Theory, and Practice (pp. 49–62). Westport, CT: Quorum Books. Dawes, R. M. (1994). House of cards: Psychology and psychotherapy built on myth. New York: Free Press. Diefendorff, J. M., & Gosserand, R. H. (2002, August). A control theory conceptualization of the emotional labor process. In: R. J. Aldag (Chair), Emotions at Work: Types and Consequences. Symposium conducted at the 62nd Annual Academy of Management Meeting, Denver, CO. Diefendorff, J. M., & Richard, E. M. (2003). Antecedents and consequences of emotional display rule perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 284–294. Erickson, R. J., & Ritter, C. (2001). Emotional labor, burnout, and inauthenticity: Does gender matter? Social Psychology Quarterly, 64, 146–164. Erickson, R. J., & Wharton, A. S. (1997). Inauthenticity and depression: Assessing the consequences of interactive service work. Work and Occupations, 24, 188–213.

84


Eyler, D. R., & Baridon, A. P. (1992). Managing sexual attraction in the workplace. Business Quarterly, 53(3), 19–26. Fabes, R. A., & Martin, C. L. (1991). Gender and age stereotypes of emotionality. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 146–164. Fantasia, R. (1988). Cultures of solidarity: Consciousness, action, and contemporary American workers. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Flax, E. (1989). Should you outlaw romance in the office? Working Woman (August), 16. Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Coping and emotion. In: A. Monat & R. S. Lazarus (Eds), Stress and Coping: An Anthology (pp. 207–277). New York: Columbia University Press. Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punishment: The birth of the prison. New York: Vintage Books. Foucault, M. (1982). The subject and power. In: J. Dreyfus & P. Rabinow (Eds), Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics (pp. 208–226). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Frese, M. (1985). Stress at work and psychosomatic complaints: A causal interpretation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 314–328. Freud, S. (1936/1961). The problem of anxiety. New York: Psychoanalytic Quarterly Press. Frijda, N. H. (1986). The emotions. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Frum, D. (2000). How we got here: The 70s: The decade that brought you modern life – for better or worse. New York: Basic Books. Fukuyama, F. (1992). The end of history and the last man. Avon Books: New York. Gatchel, R. J., Baum, A., & Krantz, D. S. (1989). An introduction to health psychology. New York: Random House. George, J. M., & Bettenhausen, K. (1990). Understanding prosocial behavior, sales performance, and turnover: A group level analysis in a service context. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 698– 709. George, J. M., & Brief, A. P. (1996). Motivational agendas in the workplace: The effects of feelings on focus of attention and work motivation. In: B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds), Research in Organizational Behavior (Vol. 19, pp. 75–109). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Glomb, T. M., Miner, A. G., & Tews, M. J. (2002, April). An experience sampling analysis of emotional dissonance at work. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Anchor. Gordon, S. L. (1989). Institutional and impulsive orientations in selectively appropriating emotions to self. In: D. D. Franks & E. D. McCarthy (Eds), The Sociology of Emotions: Original Essays and Research Papers (pp. 115–135). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Grandey, A. A. (1999). The effects of emotional labor: Employee attitudes, stress and performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Colorado State University. Grandey, A. A. (2000). Emotion regulation in the workplace: A new way to conceptualize emotional labor. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 95–110. Grandey, A. A. (2003). When “the show must go on”: Surface acting and deep acting as determinants of emotional exhaustion and peer-rated service delivery. Academy of Management Journal, 46, 86–96. Grandey, A. A., & Brauburger, A. (2002). The emotion regulation behind the customer service smile. In: R. Lord, R. Klimoski & R. Kanfer (Eds), Emotions in the workplace: Understanding the Structure and Role of Emotions in Organizational Behavior (pp. 260–294). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Gross, J. (1989). Emotional expression in cancer onset and progression. Social Science and Medicine, 28, 1239–1248.


85

Gross, J. (1998a). Antecedent- and response-focused emotion regulation: Divergent consequences for experience, expression, and physiology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 224–237. Gross, J. (1998b). The emerging field of emotional regulation: An integrative review. Review of General Psychology, 2, 271–299. Gross, J., & Levenson, R. (1997). Hiding feelings: The acute effects of inhibiting negative and positive emotions. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 106, 95–103. Grove, S. J., & Fiske, R. P. (1989). Impression management in services marketing: A dramaturgical perspective. In: R. A. Giacalone & P. Rosenfeld (Eds), Impression Management in the Organization (pp. 427–438). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Hackett, T. P., & Cassem, N. H. (1975). Psychological management of the myocardial infarction patient. Journal of Human Stress, 1, 25–38. Hatfield, E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Rapson, R. L. (1994). Emotional contagion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hochschild, A. R. (1979). Emotion work, feeling rules, and social structure. American Journal of Sociology, 85, 551–575. Hochschild, A. R. (1983). The managed heart: Commercialization of human feelings. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Holmbeck, G. N. (1997). Toward terminological, conceptual, and statistical clarity in the study of mediators and moderators: Examples from the child-clinical and pediatric psychology literatures. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65, 599–610. James, N. (1989). Emotional labour: Skill and work in the regulation of feelings. Sociological Review, 37, 15–42. James, N. (1993). Divisions of emotional labor: Disclosure and cancer. In: S. Fineman (Ed.), Emotion in Organizations (pp. 94–117). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. James, L. R., & Brett, J. M. (1984). Mediators, moderators, and test for mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 307–321. Jones, R. G., & Best, R. G. (1995, August). Further examination of the nature and impact of emotional work requirement. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management. Vancouver, British Columbia. Jones, R. G., & Rohrer, A. (2002, April). Perceived display rules and burnout: A matter of disposition? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Toronto, Ontario. Kaminer, W. (1992). I’m dysfunctional, you’re dysfunctional: The recovery movement and other selfhelp fashion. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Kanungo, R. N. (1982). Work alienation: An integrative approach. New York: Praeger Publishers. Karabanow, J. (2000). The organizational culture of a street kid agency: Understanding employee reactions to pressures to feel. In: N. M. Ashkanasy, C. E. J. Hartel & W. J. Zerbe (Eds), Emotions in the Workplace: Research, Theory, and Practice (pp. 165–176). Westport, CT: Quorum Books. Kelly, J. R., & Barsade, S. G. (2001). Mood and emotions in small groups and work teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86, 99–130. Keltner, D., & Anderson, C. (2000). Saving face for Darwin: The functions and uses of embarrassment. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9, 187–191. King, L. A., & Emmons, R. A. (1990). Conflict over emotional expression: Psychological and physical correlates. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 864–877. Kobasa, S. C. (1982). Commitment and coping in stress resistance among lawyers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 707–717.

86


Kramer, M. W., & Hess, J. A. (2002). Communication rules for the display of emotions in organizational settings. Management Communication Quarterly, 16, 66–80. Kramer, R. D. (1994). Listening to prozac: A psychiatrist explores antidepressant drugs and the remaking of the self. New York: Simon & Schuster. Kruml, S. M., & Geddes, D. (2000a). Catching fire without burning out: Is there an ideal way to perform emotional labor? In: N. M. Ashkanasy, C. E. J. Hartel & W. J. Zerbe (Eds), Emotions in the Workplace: Research, Theory, and Practice (pp. 165–188). Westport, CT: Quorum Books. Kruml, S. M., & Geddes, D. (2000b). Exploring the dimensions of emotional labor: The heart of Hochschild’s work. Management Communications Quarterly, 14, 8–49. Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1991). The concept of coping. In: A. Monat & R. S. Lazarus (Eds), Stress and Coping: An Anthology (pp. 189–206). New York: Columbia University Press. Lemert, C. (1997). Postmodernism is not what you think. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Lewis, K. M. (2000). When leaders display emotion: How followers respond to negative expression of male and female leaders. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 221–234. Lodahl, T. M., & Kejner, M. (1965). The definition and measurement of job involvement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 49, 24–33. Mann, S. (1999a). Hiding what we feel, faking what we don’t. Shaftesbury, Dorset, UK: Element Books Limited. Mann, S. (1999b). Emotion at work: To what extent are we expressing, suppressing, or faking it? European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8, 347–369. Martin, J., Knopoff, K., & Beckman, C. (1998). An alternative to bureaucratic impersonality and emotional labor: Bounding emotionality at The Body Shop. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43, 429–469. Mascolo, W. F., & Griffin, S. (1998). Alternative trajectories in the development of anger-related appraisals. In: M. F. Mascolo & S. Griffin (Eds), What Develops in Emotional Development? (pp. 219–249). New York: Plenum Press. Mascolo, W. F., & Harkins, D. (1998). Toward a component systems model of emotional development. In: M. F. Mascolo & S. Griffin (Eds), What Develops in Emotional Development? (pp. 189–217). New York: Plenum Press. Mascolo, W. F., Harkins, D., & Harakal, T. (2000). The dynamic construction of emotion: Varieties in anger. In: M. D. Lewis & I. Granic (Eds), Emotion, Development, and Self-Organization: Dynamic Systems Approaches to Emotional Development (pp. 125–152). New York: Cambridge University Press. Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper. Miller, K. I., Birkholt, M., Scott, C., & Stage, C. (1995). Empathy and burnout in human service work: An extension of a communication model. Communication Research, 22, 123–147. Miller, K. I., Stiff, J. B., & Ellis, B. H. (1988). Communication and empathy as precursors to burnout among human service workers. Communication Monographs, 55, 250–265. Monat, A., & Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Introduction: Stress and coping – some current issues and controversies. In: A. Monat & R. S. Lazarus (Eds), Stress and Coping: An Anthology (pp. 1–15). New York: Columbia University Press. Moore, S., & Sinclair, S. P. (1995). Sociology. London, England: NTC Publishing Group. Morris, J. A., & Feldman, D. C. (1996). The dimensions, antecedents, and consequences of emotional labor. Academy of Management Review, 21, 986–1010. Morris, J. A., & Feldman, D. C. (1997). Managing emotions in the workplace. Journal of Managerial Issues, 9, 257–274.


87

Mumby, D. K., & Putnam, L. L. (1992). The politics of emotion: A feminist reading of bounded rationality. Academy of Management Review, 17, 465–486. Muraven, M., & Baumeister, R. F. (2000). Self regulation and depletion of limited resources: Does self-control resemble a muscle? Psychological Bulletin, 126, 247–259. Myers, D. G. (1995). Psychology (4th ed.). New York: Worth. Packard, W. (1988). Evangelism in American: From tents to TV. New York: Paragon House. Palmer, D. (1994). Looking at philosophy: The unbearable heaviness of philosophy made lighter (2nd ed.). Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing Company. Parkinson, B. (1991). Emotional stylists: Strategies of expressive management among trainee hairdressers. Cognition and Emotion, 5, 419–434. Parks, K. R. (1983). Smoking as a moderator of the relationship between affective states and absence from work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 698–708. Pennebaker, J. W. (1982). The psychology of physical symptoms. New York: Springer-Verlag. Pennebaker, J. W. (1985). Traumatic experience and psychosomatic disease: Exploring the roles of behavioral inhibition, obsession, and confiding. Canadian Psychology, 26, 82–95. Pennebaker, J. W. (1989). Confession, inhibition, and disease. In: L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 22, pp. 211–244). New York: Academic Press. Pratt, M. G., & Dutton, J. E. (2000). Owning up or opting out: The role of emotions and identities in issue ownership. In: N. M. Ashkanasy, C. E. J. Hartel & W. J. Zerbe (Eds), Emotions in the Workplace: Research, Theory, and Practice (pp. 103–129). Bridgeport, CT: Quorum Books. Pugh, S. D. (2001). Service with a smile: Emotional contagion in the service encounter. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 1018–1027. Pugliesi, K. (1999). The consequences of emotional labor: Effects on work stress, job satisfaction, and well-being. Motivation and Emotion, 23, 125–154. Putnam, L. L., & Mumby, D. K. (1993). Organizations, emotions, and the myth of rationality. In: S. Fineman (Ed.), Emotions in Organizations (pp. 36–57). London: Sage. Quick, J. C., Quick, J. D., Nelson, D. L., & Hurrell, J. J., Jr. (1997). Preventive stress management in organizations. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Rafaeli, A. (1989). When clerks meet customers: A test of variables related to emotional expressions on the job. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 385–393. Rafaeli, A., & Sutton, R. I. (1987). Expression of emotion as part of the work role. Academy of Management Review, 12, 23–37. Rafaeli, A., & Sutton, R. I. (1989). The expression of emotion in organizational life. In: L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds), Research in Organizational Behavior (Vol. 11, pp. 1–42). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Rafaeli, A., & Sutton, R. I. (1990). Busy stores and demanding customers: How do they affect the display of positive emotion? Academy of Management Journal, 33, 623–637. Restak, R. M. (1994). Receptors. New York: Batam Books. Richards, J., & Gross, J. J. (1999). Composure at any cost? The cognitive consequences of emotion suppression. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 1033–1044. Rogers, C. R. (1980). A way of being. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Santino, J. (1990). The outlaw emotions: Narrative expressions on the rules and roles of occupational identity. American Behavioral Scientist, 33, 318–320. Schaubroeck, J., & Jones, J. R. (2000). Antecedents of workplace emotional labor dimensions and moderators of their effects on physical symptoms. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 163–183.

88


Shuler, S., & Sypher, B. D. (2000). Seeking emotional labor: When managing the heart enhances the work experience. Management Communications Quarterly, 14, 50–89. Simpson, P. A., & Stroh, L. K. (2003). Gender differences in the content and effects of emotional expression in managerial jobs. Working Paper. Smith, A. C., & Kleinman, S, III (1989). Managing emotions in medical school: Students’ contacts with the living and the dead. Social Psychology Quarterly, 52, 56–69. Sommers, C. H. (2000). The war against boys: How misguided feminish is harming our young men. New York: Simon & Schuster. Sowell, T. (1985). Marxism: Philosophy and economics. New York: Quill. Stenross, B., & Kleinman, S. (1989). The highs and lows of emotional labor: Detectives’ encounters with criminals and victims. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 17, 435–452. Sutton, R. I. (1991). Maintaining norms about expressed emotions: The case of bill collectors. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 245–268. Sutton, R. I., & Rafaeli, A. (1988). Untangling the relationship between displayed emotions and organizational sales: The case of convenience stores. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 461–487. Sykes, C. J. (1992). A nation of victims: The decay of the American character. New York: St. Martin’s Press. Tolich, M. (1993). Alienating and liberating emotions at work: Supermarket clerks’ performance of customer service. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 22, 361–381. Totterdell, P., Kellet, S., Teuchmann, K., & Briner, R. B. (1998). Evidence of mood linkage in work groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1504–1515. Totterdell, P., & Parkinson, B. (1999). Use and effectiveness of self-regulation strategies for improving mood in a group of trainee teachers. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 4, 219–232. Tracy, S. J. (2000). Becoming a character for commerce: Emotion labor, self-subordination, and discursive construction of identity in a total institution. Management Communications Quarterly, 14, 90–128. Tsai, W.-C. (2001). Determinants and consequences of employee displayed positive emotions. Journal of Management, 27, 497–512. Tsai, W.-C., & Huang, Y.-M. (2002). Mechanisms linking employee affective delivery and customer behavioral intentions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 1001–1008. Uchino, B. N., Kiecolt-Glaser, J. K., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1993). Age-related changes in cardiovascular response as a function of a chronic stressor and social support. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 839–846. Van Maanen, J. (1982). Fieldwork on the beat. In: J. Van Maanen, J. M. Dabbs, Jr. & R. R. Faulkner (Eds), Varieties of Qualitative Research (pp. 103–151). Beverly Hill, CA: Sage. Van Maanen, J., & Kunda, G. (1989). “Real feelings”: Emotion expression and organizational culture. In: L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds), Research in Organizational Behavior (Vol. 11, pp. 43–103). Greenwhich, CT: JAI Press. Weiss, H. M. (2002). Deconstructing job satisfaction: Separating evaluations, beliefs and affective experiences. Human Resource Management Review, 12, 173–194. Westman, M., & Eden, D. (1997). Effects of a respite from work on burnout: Vacation relief and fade-out. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 516–527. Wharton, A. S. (1993). The affective consequences of service work. Work and Occupations, 20, 205– 232. Wharton, A. S. (1999). The psychosocial consequences of emotional labor. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 561, 158–176.


89

Wharton, A. S., & Erickson, R. J. (1993). Managing emotions on the job and at home: Understanding the consequences of multiple emotional roles. Academy of Management Review, 18, 457–486. Wouters, C. (1989). The sociology of emotions and flight attendants: Hochschild’s management heart, Theory, Culture. and Society, 6, 95–123. Wright, T. A., & Cropanzano, R. (1998). Emotional exhaustion as a predictor of job performance and voluntary turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 486–493. Zerbe, W. J. (2000). Emotional dissonance and employee well-being. In: N. M. Ashkanasy, C. E. J. Hartel & W. J. Zerbe (Eds), Emotions in the Workplace: Research, Theory, and Practice (pp. 189–214). Westport, CT: Quorum Books.

AREAS OF WORKLIFE: A STRUCTURED APPROACH TO ORGANIZATIONAL PREDICTORS OF JOB BURNOUT Michael P. Leiter and Christina Maslach ABSTRACT This chapter evaluates a model of the organizational context of burnout with direct reference to a new measure, the Areas of Worklife Scale (AWS). The model proposes a structured framework for considering six areas of worklife – workload, control, reward, community, fairness, and values – that have resonated through the literature on burnout over the previous two decades. The chapter presents extensive data on the AWS, testing a model of the six areas’ interrelationships as well as their overall relationship to the three aspects of burnout. The results of these analyses are discussed in reference to the psychometric qualities of the measure and the implications of a structured approach to work environments for future development of research on burnout. Implications for developing workplace interventions are also considered.

INTRODUCTION For several decades, the term “burnout” has been used to describe a fundamental disconnect between the worker and the workplace. The basic story goes like this: Emotional and Physiological Processes and Positive Intervention Strategies Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, Volume 3, 91–134 © 2004 Published by Elsevier Ltd. ISSN: 1479-3555/doi:10.1016/S1479-3555(03)03003-8

91

92

MICHAEL P. LEITER AND CHRISTINA MASLACH

the worker entered a job with positive expectations, enthusiasm, and the goal to be successful in the job. Over time, things changed – and now the worker has an overwhelming exhaustion; feelings of frustration, anger and cynicism; and a sense of ineffectiveness and failure. The initial flame has burned out. The experience impairs both personal and social functioning on the job, and thus carries some real costs for the individual worker, the people affected by him or her, and for the organization as a whole. While some people may quit the job as a result of burnout, others will stay on but will only do the bare minimum rather than their very best. Burnout was recognized as an important social problem by practitioners long before it became a focus of systematic study by researchers. Thus, it was more of a “grass-roots” phenomenon, grounded in the realities of people’s experiences in the workplace, rather than a topic derived from a scholarly theory and empirical studies. This pragmatic conceptual framework – of a social problem that needed to be solved – shaped the trajectory of the research on burnout. The early studies followed a “bottom-up” approach of describing and defining the phenomenon, and developing hypotheses about its causes and its effects. Later, this initial work was linked to a wide variety of theoretical perspectives and research literatures in social, clinical, and industrial/organizational psychology (see reviews by Maslach & Schaufeli, 1993; Schaufeli & Enzmann, 1998). An underlying theme of this pragmatic framework has been to discover solutions to the problem of burnout. From the beginning, the growing research literature was matched (or even outstripped) by a parallel literature of workshop and self-help materials. As burnout became more clearly identified as a form of job stress, it received increasing attention from administrators and policy makers in the workplace. It is thus fair to say that the field of job burnout has always had a primary thrust toward application, in addition to scholarly contributions. Our recent work has been explicitly designed to bridge the gap between basic and applied research on burnout. Our goal has been to design tools that can be used by both researchers and practitioners – the former to study hypotheses within the context of field studies, and the latter to assess the workplace within the context of organizational interventions. Toward that end, we have developed a new model that draws on the extant research literature on job stress and proposes that six areas of job-person mismatch are the critical sources of burnout (Maslach & Leiter, 1997). We have now developed a new tool to assess these six areas, which can be used as part of a program of organizational assessment and intervention (Leiter & Maslach, 2000). This chapter will provide a comprehensive analysis of our model and measures, and will demonstrate how we are using this approach both for empirical tests and applied interventions.

Areas of Worklife

93

BURNOUT AND ENGAGEMENT Burnout is defined as a psychological syndrome of exhaustion, cynicism, and inefficacy, which is experienced in response to chronic job stressors. This definition is a broader statement of the multidimensional model that has been predominant in the burnout field (Maslach, 1993, 1998; Maslach & Jackson, 1981). The original model emerged from research with workers in human service and educational occupations, and thus was framed in terms of the interpersonal relationships that characterize such jobs. However, more recent work has established that the basic model can be broadened to apply to any kind of occupation (Leiter & Schaufeli, 1996; Maslach et al., 1996). Of the three dimensions of burnout, the exhaustion component represents the basic individual stress experience. It refers to feelings of being overextended and depleted of one’s emotional and physical resources. The cynicism component represents the interpersonal context dimension of burnout. It refers to a negative, callous, or excessively detached response to various aspects of the job. It usually develops in response to the overload of exhaustion, and is self-protective, at first, as an emotional buffer of “detached concern.” But the risk is that the detachment can result in the loss of idealism and the dehumanization of others. This detachment, or distancing, is such an immediate reaction to exhaustion that a strong relationship from exhaustion to cynicism is found consistently in burnout research, across a wide range of organizational and occupational settings (Maslach et al., 1996). The third component of inefficacy represents the self-evaluation dimension of burnout. It refers to feelings of incompetence and a lack of achievement and productivity in work. In some instances, it appears to be a function, to some degree, of either exhaustion or cynicism, or a combination of the two (Byrne, 1993; Lee & Ashforth, 1996). A work situation with chronic, overwhelming demands that contribute to exhaustion or cynicism is likely to erode one’s sense of effectiveness. However, in other job contexts, inefficacy appears to develop in parallel with the other two burnout aspects, rather than sequentially (Leiter, 1993). Here the lack of efficacy seems to arise more clearly from a lack of relevant resources, while exhaustion and cynicism emerge from the presence of work overload and social conflict. Unlike acute stress reactions, which develop in response to specific critical incidents, burnout is a cumulative reaction to ongoing occupational stressors. With burnout, the emphasis has been more on the process of psychological erosion, and the psychological and social outcomes of this chronic exposure, rather than just the physical ones. Because burnout is a prolonged response to chronic interpersonal stressors on the job, it tends to be fairly stable over time. Burnout is one end of a continuum in the relationship people establish with their jobs. As a syndrome of exhaustion, cynicism, and inefficacy, it stands in

94


contrast to the energetic, involved, and effective state of engagement with work. Recently, the multidimensional model of burnout has been expanded to this other end of the continuum (Leiter & Maslach, 1998). Engagement is defined in terms of the same three dimensions as burnout, but the positive end of those dimensions rather than the negative. Thus, engagement consists of a state of high energy (rather than exhaustion), strong involvement (rather than cynicism), and a sense of efficacy (rather than inefficacy). Engagement is distinct from established constructs in organizational psychology such as organizational commitment, job satisfaction, or job involvement. Organizational commitment refers to an employee’s allegiance to the organization that provides employment. The focus is on the organization, whereas engagement focuses on the work itself. Job satisfaction is the extent to which work is a source of need fulfillment and contentment, or a means of freeing employees from hassles or dissatisfiers; it does not encompass the person’s relationship with the work itself. Job involvement is similar to the involvement aspect of engagement with work, but does not include the energy and effectiveness dimensions. Thus, engagement provides a more complex and thorough perspective on an individual’s relationship with work. In terms of application, the concept of engagement may be more functional than burnout. A worksetting that is designed to support the positive development of the three core qualities of energy, involvement, and effectiveness should be successful in promoting the well-being and productivity of its employees. Thus, we have found that a focus on what would promote engagement in the workplace is a better framework for developing effective interventions than a focus simply on what would reduce stress. Moreover, the former is more likely to change the job context, while the latter leads to strategies of changing the person.

The Organizational Context for Burnout and Engagement Job stress has been recognized as a significant occupational hazard, which can impair both health and work performance (e.g. Sauter & Murphy, 1995). The worker’s internal experience of stress is assumed to play a mediating role between the impact of external job demands (stressors) and work-related outcomes (such as absenteeism or illness). This basic mediation model should be especially true of the stress phenomenon of burnout, which involves a prolonged response to chronic interpersonal job stressors. Thus, organizational conditions should influence a worker’s experience of burnout or engagement, which in turn will determine outcomes of importance to both the worker and the organization. For example, assessments of employees’ level of experienced burnout or engagement

Areas of Worklife

95

have predicted clients’ evaluation of service quality (Leiter et al., 1998) and employees’ evaluation of organizational change (Leiter & Harvie, 1998). Two decades of research on burnout have identified a plethora of organizational risk factors across many occupations in various countries, as well as some work-related outcomes (see Maslach et al., 2001; Schaufeli & Enzmann, 1998). However, there has not been much research that directly tested the mediation model by including measures of all three model components: organizational factors, experienced burnout, and work-related outcomes. One of our recent studies was designed as a first approximation of such a test (Leiter & Maslach, 2003). In this chapter, we will present not only this initial study on the mediation model, but the psychometric research that led to the development of a key measure of organizational factors, the Areas of Worklife Scale. Our goal has been to develop research tools that are also appropriate for use in applied settings, and this requires measures that are relatively brief and easily accessible to a wide range of employees. The standard measure of burnout, the Maslach Burnout Inventory (Maslach et al., 1996), already meets those criteria. However, there was not a comparable tool that assesses the multiple job stressors that contribute to burnout, so our challenge was to devise a measure of these organizational factors.

Six Areas of Worklife In reviewing the proliferation of organizational correlates in many studies of burnout and job stress, we had identified six key domains: workload, control, reward, community, fairness, and values (Leiter & Maslach, 1999; Maslach & Leiter, 1997, 1999). The first two areas are reflected in the Demand-Control model of job stress (Karasek & Theorell, 1990), and reward refers to the power of reinforcements to shape behavior. Community captures all of the work on social support and interpersonal conflict, while fairness emerges from the literature on equity and social justice. Finally, the area of values picks up the cognitive-emotional power of job goals and expectations. Workload The most obvious, and most commonly discussed area of worklife is overload: job demands exceeding human limits. People have to do too much in too little time with too few resources. Increasing workload has a consistent relationship with burnout, especially with the exhaustion dimension (Cordes & Dougherty, 1993; Maslach et al., 2001; Schaufeli & Enzmann, 1998). Structural models of burnout have shown that exhaustion then mediates the relationship of workload with the other two dimensions of burnout (Lee & Ashforth, 1996; Leiter & Harvie, 1998).

96


This association reflects the relationship of work demands with occupational stress in the stress and coping literature (Cox et al., 1993). Both qualitative and quantitative work overload contribute to exhaustion by depleting the capacity of people to meet the demands of the job. The critical point occurs when people are unable to recover from work demands. That is, acute fatigue resulting from an especially demanding event at work – meeting a deadline or addressing a crisis – need not lead to burnout if people have an opportunity to recover during restful periods at work or at home (Shinn et al., 1984). When this kind of overload is a chronic job condition, not an occasional emergency, there is little opportunity to rest, recover, and restore balance. Such exhaustion can lead to a deterioration in the quality of the work and a disruption of collegial relationships. A sustainable workload, in contrast, provides opportunities to use and refine existing skills as well as to become effective in new areas of activity (Landsbergis, 1988). It builds involvement by opening new opportunities, and by removing concern about work overwhelming personal capacity. A sustainable workload stops the cycle of exhaustion that is a driving force in the experience of burnout for many people. Control The Demand-Control theory of job stress (Karasek & Theorell, 1990) has made the case for the enabling role of control. This area includes employees’ perceived capacity to influence decisions that affect their work, to exercise professional autonomy, and to gain access to the resources necessary to do an effective job. As human beings, people have the ability to think and solve problems, and want to have the opportunity to make choices and decisions. In other words, they want to have some input into the process of achieving the outcomes for which they will be held accountable. Control problems occur when workers have insufficient authority over their work or are unable to shape the work environment to be consistent with their values. A sense of efficacy is unlikely to occur when workers are feeling buffeted by circumstances or powerful people within the organization. A major control problem occurs when people experience role conflict. Many burnout studies have found that greater role conflict is strongly and positively associated with greater exhaustion (Cordes & Dougherty, 1993; Maslach et al., 1996). Role conflict arises from multiple authorities with conflicting demands or incongruent values, and people in this situation cannot exercise effective control in their job. Contradictory demands interfere with their capacity to set priorities or to commit themselves fully to their work. Role conflict is not simply an indicator of additional work demands, but is emotionally exhausting in itself (e.g. Siefert et al., 1991; Starnaman & Miller, 1992). Moreover, role conflict is, almost by definition, a direct signal of an authority problem at work. It means that

Areas of Worklife

97

a worker’s preferred role is out of sync with important qualities of the job, such as supervisors’ expectations, client demands, or ethical constraints. The critical issue is not the amount or even the type of work demands, but the consistency of those demands with the capacity to determine the job. Studies that examine role conflict usually also consider role ambiguity – the absence of direction in work. Generally, role ambiguity is associated with greater burnout, but the relationship is not nearly as consistent as that of role conflict (Cordes & Dougherty, 1993; Maslach et al., 1996). Ambiguity may enhance some work contexts by providing the freedom to pursue one’s values, while conflict directly inhibits a course of action. When people have more control in their work, their actions are more freely chosen – and this can lead to greater satisfaction with the job, and more commitment to it. The process of making a decision has an enduring impact on employees’ experience of participating in organizational life and the responsibility they take for its outcomes. Participative decision making is a cornerstone of job enrichment strategies (Hackman, 1986) as much because of its power to engender commitment as for its capacity to make good use of knowledge and experience within a group of colleagues. Active participation in organizational decision making has been consistently found to be associated with higher levels of efficacy and lower levels of exhaustion (Cherniss, 1980; Lee & Ashforth, 1993; Leiter, 1992). Reward The reward area of worklife addresses the extent to which rewards – monetary, social, and intrinsic – are consistent with expectations. Lack of recognition from service recipients, colleagues, managers, and external stakeholders devalues both the work and the workers, and is closely associated with feelings of inefficacy (Cordes & Dougherty, 1993; Maslach et al., 1996). When people feel neglected by the material and social reward system of an organization, they feel out of sync with its values. In contrast, consistency in the reward dimension between the person and the job means that there are both material rewards and opportunities for intrinsic satisfaction (Richardsen et al., 1992). Intrinsic rewards (such as pride in doing something of importance and doing it well) can be just as critical as extrinsic rewards, if not more so. What keeps work involving for most people is the pleasure and satisfaction they experience with the day-to-day flow of work that is going well (Leiter, 1992). An enjoyable workflow supports both psychological well being and physical health, and is also the source of recognition from others. The results of various studies have shown that insufficient reward (whether financial, institutional, or social) increases people’s vulnerability to burnout (e.g. Chappell & Novak, 1992; Glicken, 1983; Maslanka, 1996; Siefert et al., 1991).

98


Community Community is the overall quality of social interaction at work, including issues of conflict, mutual support, closeness, and the capacity to work as a team. People thrive in community and function best when they share praise, comfort, happiness, and humor with people they like and respect. In addition to emotional exchange and instrumental assistance, this kind of social support reaffirms a person’s membership in a group with a shared sense of values. Unfortunately, some jobs isolate people from each other, or make social contact impersonal. However, what is most destructive of community is chronic and unresolved conflict with others on the job. Such conflict produces constant negative feelings of frustration and hostility, and reduces the likelihood of social support. Burnout research has focused primarily on social support from supervisors, coworkers, and family members (Cordes & Dougherty, 1993; Greenglass et al., 1994; Greenglass et al., 1988; Maslach et al., 1996). Distinct patterns have been found for informal coworker support and supervisor support (Jackson et al., 1986; Leiter & Maslach, 1988). Supervisor support has been more consistently associated with exhaustion, reflecting the supervisors’ impact on staff members’ workload. Coworker support is more closely related to accomplishment or efficacy, reflecting the value staff members put on the expert evaluation by their peers. A sense of community has been found to buffer the impact of feelings of inequity at work (Truchot & Deregard, 2001). Regardless of its specific form, social support has been found to be associated with greater engagement (Leiter & Maslach, 1988; Schnorpfeil et al., 2002). Research on the social context of burnout has also attended to the broader issues associated with a sense of community in an organization (Drory & Shamir, 1988; Farber, 1984; Royal & Rossi, 1996). Research on community orientation (Buunk & Schaufeli, 1993) provides a distinct but consistent perspective. Both of these approaches consider ways in which the overall quality of personal interactions among people in an organization have an impact on the relationships people have with their work. The consistent finding through this research is that a lively, attentive, responsive community is incompatible with burnout. People’s subjective appraisal of their social context – their sense of community with colleagues or their communal orientation towards service recipients – reflects the extent to which the organizational community is consistent with their expectations. Fairness Fairness is the extent to which decisions at work are perceived as being fair and people are treated with respect. Fairness communicates respect and confirms people’s self-worth. Mutual respect between people is central to a shared sense of community. Unfairness can occur when there is inequity of workload or pay, or

Areas of Worklife

99

when there is cheating, or when evaluations and promotions are handled inappropriately. If procedures for grievance or dispute resolution do not allow for both parties to have voice, then those will be judged as unfair. Relevant research on procedural justice (e.g. Lawler, 1968; Tyler, 1990) has shown that people are more concerned with the fairness of the process than with the favorableness of the outcome. People use the quality of the procedures, and their own treatment during the decision making process, as an index of their place in the community. They will feel alienated from that community if they are subject to unfair, cursory, or disrespectful decision making. In contrast, a fair decision is one in which people have an opportunity to present their arguments and in which they feel treated with respect and politeness. Thus, fairness shares some qualities with community, as well as with reward. Fairness is also central to equity theory (Walster et al., 1973), which posits that perceptions of equity or inequity are based on people’s determination of the balance between their inputs (i.e. time, effort, and expertise) and outputs (i.e. rewards and recognition). This core notion of inequity is also reflected in the effort-reward imbalance model (Siegrist, 2002). Research based on these theoretical frameworks has found that a lack of reciprocity, or imbalanced social exchange processes, is predictive of burnout (e.g. Bakker et al., 2000; Schaufeli et al., 1996). Fairness has also emerged as a critical factor in administrative leadership (e.g. White, 1987). Employees who perceive their supervisors as being both fair and supportive are less susceptible to burnout, and are more accepting of major organizational change (Leiter & Harvie, 1997, 1998). It appears that employees value fairness in itself and consider it to be indicative of a genuine concern for the long-term good of the organization’s staff, especially during difficult times. When employees are experiencing stress, they look to management not only for problem solving, but for optimism, fairness, and high expectations for organizational and personal performance. They expect that management will give due consideration to people’s contributions and will allocate resources and opportunities equitably (and not to the personal advantage of privileged individuals or cliques). Values The values area is at the heart of people’s relationship with their work. It encompasses the ideals and motivations that originally attracted them to the job. It is the motivating connection between the worker and the workplace that goes beyond the utilitarian exchange of time for money or advancement. Contributing to a meaningful personal goal is a powerful incentive for individuals. When this work contributes as well to the organizational mission, people may be rewarded with additional opportunities for meaningful work. As such,

100


mutually compatible values produce a self-perpetuating dynamic that supports engagement. However, when there is a values conflict on the job, it can undermine people’s engagement with work. The greater the gap between individual and organizational values, the more often staff members find themselves making a trade-off between work they want to do and work they have to do. In some cases, people might feel constrained by the job to do things that are unethical and not in accord with their own values. For example, in order to make a sale or to obtain a necessary authorization, they might have to tell a lie or be otherwise deceptive or not forthcoming with the truth. People can also be caught between conflicting values of the organization, as when there is a discrepancy between the lofty mission statement and actual practice, or when the values are in conflict (e.g. high quality service and cost containment do not always co-exist). In other instances, there may be a conflict between their personal aspirations for their career and the values of the organization, as when people realize that they entered an occupation with mistaken expectations. One resolution of the tension resulting from value conflicts is to bring personal expectations in line with those of the organization (Stevens & O’Neill, 1983); another is to leave the organization in search of more fulfilling career opportunities (Pick & Leiter, 1991). The distress associated with value conflicts and the lengths to which people go to reduce the associated tension are indicative of their central role in the burnout and engagement process. Research has found that a conflict in values is related to all three dimensions of burnout (Leiter & Harvie, 1997).

MISMATCH BETWEEN PERSON AND THE JOB A consistent theme throughout this research literature is the problematic relationship between the person and the environment, which is often described in terms of imbalance or misalignment or misfit. For example, the demands of the job exceed the capacity of the individual to cope effectively, or the person’s efforts are not reciprocated with equitable rewards. There is a long history within psychology of trying to explain behavior in terms of the interaction of person and environment, and this is particularly evident within the fields of personality and of vocational psychology (e.g. see Chartrand et al., 1995; Walsh et al., 1992). Many of these interactional models view person and environment as independent entities, but characterize them along commensurate dimensions so that the degree of fit, or congruence, between person and environment can be assessed. This approach is evident in some of the earliest models of job-person fit (French et al., 1974, 1982), in which better fit was assumed to predict better adjustment and less stress.

Areas of Worklife

101

Subsequent theorizing continued to highlight the importance of both individual and contextual factors (see Kahn & Byosiere, 1992), and recent research continues to utilize this person-environment approach (e.g. Finnegan, 2000; Lauver & Kristof-Brown, 2001; O’Reilly et al., 1999). Thus, a model of job-person fit would seem to be an appropriate framework for understanding burnout. However, prior conceptualizations of job-person fit are limited in terms of their direct application to this phenomenon. For example, the “person” is usually framed in terms of personality or an accurate understanding of the job, rather than in terms of emotions or motivations or stress responses. Similarly, the “job” is often defined in terms of specific tasks, and not the larger situation or organizational context. The notion of “fit” is often presumed to predict such outcomes as choice of job/occupation or of organization (entry issues), or adjustment to the job (newcomer issues). In contrast, burnout involves a later point in the process, when the person has been working for a while and is experiencing a more chronic misfit between self and the job. Thus, the challenge is to extend the job-person paradigm to a broader and more complex conceptualization of the person situated in the job context. We have begun to address this challenge by formulating a model that focuses on the degree of experienced congruence between the person and the six domains of his or her job environment (Maslach & Leiter, 1997). We propose that the greater the perceived gap between the person and the job, the greater the likelihood of burnout; conversely, the greater the consistency, the greater the likelihood of engagement with work. One new aspect of this approach is the focus is on the enduring working relationship that people have with their job. This relationship is similar to the notion of a psychological contract (Rousseau, 1995). Problems arise when the process of establishing a psychological contract leaves critical issues unresolved, or when the working relationship changes to something that a worker finds unacceptable. A second new aspect of this model is that it specifies not one, but six areas in which this mismatch can take place. In each area, the nature of the job is not in harmony with the nature of people, and the result is the increased exhaustion, cynicism, and inefficacy of burnout. On the other hand, when better compatibility exists in these six areas, then engagement with work is the likely outcome.

The Areas of Worklife Scale Our goal was to develop a measure that would apply the concept of job-person fit to the assessment of the six key areas of worklife, in a generic format that could be utilized easily by a wide range of employees. We chose to focus on the fit

102


itself, rather than on the two component parts of person and of job, and thus asked respondents to rate their level of experienced congruence with the job within these six domains. This new measure, the Areas of Worklife Scale, has the potential to provide useful diagnostic information to organizations interested in interventions to deal with burnout (Leiter & Maslach, 2000). Description of the Measure The Areas of Worklife Scale (AWS) is comprised of 29 items that produce distinct scores for each of the six areas of worklife: workload (6), control (3), reward (4), community (5), fairness (6), and values (5). Each scale includes positively worded items, e.g. “I have enough time to do what’s important in my job” (workload) and negatively worded items, e.g. “Working here forces me to compromise my values” (values). Respondents indicate their degree of agreement with these statements on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree), through 3 (hard to decide), to 5 (strongly agree). The scoring for the negatively worded items is reversed. For each of the six subscales, the AWS defines a job-person fit or match as a high score (greater then 3.00), indicating a higher degree of congruence between the workplace and the respondent’s preferences; it defines a mismatch as a low score (less than 3.00), indicating more incongruence between the worker and the workplace. The AWS items were developed from a series of staff surveys conducted by the Centre for Organizational Research and Development (Leiter & Harvie, 1998; Maslach & Leiter, 1997) as a means of assessing the constructs underlying our analysis of the six areas of worklife. The developmental research found that the new scale had a consistent factor structure across these initial samples and showed consistently high correlations with the three burnout dimensions measured by the Maslach Burnout Inventory-General Scale (MBI-GS; which is the general version of the MBI that can be used with all occupations). The AWS is available through Leiter and Maslach (2000) or through Leiter and Maslach (2002). Samples The normative sample for the AWS was drawn from a variety of worksettings in the United States (English), Canada (English), Italy (Italian), and Finland (Finnish); the number of participants is noted in Table 1. For those for whom demographic information is available, there were 2,515 males and 5,139 females. In terms of employment status, 6,343 were full time, 1,005 part time, and 112 casual. In terms of age, participants were 18–29 years (650), 30–39 years (1,072), 40–49 years (1,375), 50–59 years (1,061), and 60 and over (139). In terms of supervisory status, the sample included non-supervisory employees (1,151), supervisors (1,545), and management (810).

Areas of Worklife

103

Table 1. Research Settings. Setting

Source

USA: University Library USA: University Student Services Canada: Teachers USA: University Library Finland: Post Office Italy: Hospital Canada: Public Service Employees Canada: Hospital Finland: Hospital USA: University Administrative Employees USA: Retail Italy: Hospital USA: Teachers Canada: Nurses Finland: University Employees Finland: Postal Workers Finland: Telecommunications

Maslach & Leiter Maslach & Leiter Leiter Maslach & Leiter Aro, Kärnä, Salmela-Aro Maslach, Leiter, & Aroasio Leiter Leiter Aro, Kärnä, Salmela-Aro Maslach & Leiter Maslach & Leiter Maslach, Leiter, & Aroasio

Total

Aro, Kärnä, Salmela-Aro Aro, Kärnä, Salmela-Aro Aro, Kärnä, Salmela-Aro

N of Participants 388 738 380 285 756 390 17 2,633 468 1005 385 295 39 80 230 57 193 8,339

Scale Properties Table 2 displays the means, standard deviations, Cronbach alphas, and correlations among the six areas of worklife and the three subscales of the MBI-GS. The alpha values for all scales meet the 0.70 criterion. All of the correlations among the subscales are significant. (The MBI-GS was not administered with every AWS sample, thus producing only 6,815 cases for the combined sample in contrast with the 7,574 cases for the AWS alone.) The highest correlation of the AWS and the MBI-GS was between Workload and Exhaustion (0.54) while the lowest was between Workload and Efficacy (0.04). The average of the 18 correlations of the AWS with the MBI-GS was |0.26|; the average of the 15 correlations among the AWS subscales was |0.20|. Principal Components Factor Analyses A principal components analysis of the normative sample provided evidence supporting a six-factor structure for the AWS. The scree plot determined that eigen values began leveling after six factors: 7.64, 2.53, 1.83, 1.60, 1.33, 1.24. The six factor structure (see Table 3) assigned all 29 items to the appropriate factor. Two items had loadings that were less than |0.50|: Workload6 loaded on Workload −0.46 with a second highest loading of 0.17 on control. Values5 loaded on Values at −0.44 with a second highest loading of −0.22 on Fairness. As the second

104

Table 2. Means, Standard Deviations, Cronbach Alphas, and Correlations: Normative Sample. S.D.

Alpha

Cynicism

Efficacy

Workload

Control

Rewards

Community

Fairness

Values

2.53 1.81 4.52 2.83 3.35 3.06 3.46 2.83 3.43

1.49 1.35 1.01 0.84 0.89 0.56 0.84 0.83 0.74

0.90 0.80 0.74 0.70 0.70 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.73

0.55

−0.15 −0.31

−0.53 −0.20 0.04

−0.32 −0.30 0.23 0.28

−0.24 −0.28 0.17 0.19 0.38

−0.29 −0.31 0.17 0.21 0.40 0.38

−0.33 −0.34 0.13 0.26 0.47 0.42 0.48

−0.21 −0.35 0.20 0.13 0.33 0.26 0.34 0.47

Note: N = 6,815, all correlations, p < 0.001.


Exhaustion Cynicism Efficacy Workload Control Rewards Community Fairness Values

Mean

Areas of Worklife

105

Table 3. Principal Components Factor Analysis.

Fair5 Fair4 Fair6 Fair3 Fair1 Fair2 Community3 Community4 Community2 Community1 Community5 Workload4 Workload1 Workload3 Workload5 Workload2 Workload6 Reward3 Reward4 Reward1 Reward2 Values1 Values3 Values4 Values2 Values5 Control3 Control1 Control2

Fairness

Community

Workload

Reward

Values

Control

−0.70 0.70 −0.67 0.65 0.64 0.54 0.14 0.18 0.13 0.26 −0.08 −0.09 −0.08 −0.14 0.07 −0.11 −0.06 −0.18 −0.18 0.13 0.19 0.16 0.11 0.25 0.05 −0.22 0.14 0.12 0.30

−0.16 0.15 −0.17 0.14 0.19 0.07 0.84 0.80 0.74 0.61 −0.57 −0.10 0.01 −0.13 0.04 0.02 0.09 −0.14 −0.10 0.19 0.21 0.11 0.08 0.08 0.07 −0.16 0.14 0.12 0.15

0.05 −0.09 0.09 −0.09 −0.14 −0.04 −0.07 −0.09 −0.01 −0.10 0.06 0.78 0.76 0.70 −0.63 0.62 −0.46 0.11 0.17 0.00 −0.03 0.02 0.04 −0.11 0.06 0.19 −0.04 −0.17 −0.11

−0.26 0.18 −0.28 0.16 0.10 −0.04 0.12 0.11 0.18 −0.02 −0.28 −0.17 −0.01 −0.21 0.02 −0.01 −0.02 −0.78 −0.73 0.72 0.69 0.05 0.10 0.05 0.05 −0.17 0.15 0.16 0.20

−0.11 0.22 −0.13 0.15 0.21 0.08 0.10 0.08 0.17 0.12 −0.07 −0.04 −0.07 −0.02 0.13 0.06 −0.07 −0.10 −0.05 0.11 0.15 0.78 0.77 0.66 0.60 −0.44 0.12 0.05 0.13

0.06 0.19 0.06 0.24 0.22 0.13 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.19 0.04 −0.02 −0.04 −0.03 0.27 0.10 0.17 −0.08 −0.05 0.23 0.30 0.07 0.07 0.11 0.03 −0.06 0.73 0.72 0.58

loadings for both items were considerably lower than the loading on the proper factor, the overall structure is acceptable. In contrast, a five-factor solution provided a worse fit with a structure that collapsed fairness and control into one factor. Both Workload6 and Values5 continued to have loadings less than 0.50. In addition all three control items loaded less than |0.50| on the combined Fairness/Control factor. A four-factor solution had a factor structure that scrambled items from control, reward, fairness, and values with 8 items having loadings less than |0.50| and one item loading at 0.34. To examine whether further differentiation of the scale was appropriate, a seven factor solution defined a new factor from the two negatively worded fairness items (Fair5 and Fair6) with the negatively worded Values5. Values5 continued to have a

106


relatively low factor loading (0.45) and Workload6 had a loading on Workload of 0.48. The seven-factor solution failed to improve the fit over a six-factor solution because: (1) it did not improve the factor loadings of the two weakest items; and (2) it introduced a factor that was contrary to the objective of combining negatively and positively worded items within most subscales of the AWS. Confirmatory Factor Analysis An EQS confirmatory factor analysis considered the factor structure of the AWS. This analysis freed the four most highly correlated errors between items within the subscales: Fairness5/Fairness6, Reward3/Reward4, Reward2/Reward1, Workload5/Workload1. Also, all co-variances among the factors were freed. The six factor solution was found to be an excellent fit to the data (␹2(358) = 5,138.98, CFI = 0.939, RMSEA = 0.042) with all factors loading significantly on the appropriate item. In contrast, a one-factor solution showed a very poor fit (␹2(373) = 25,514.14, CFI = 0.679, RMSEA = 0.094). A two-factor solution (assigning the workload, control, and community items to Factor 1 and the remaining items to Factor 2) also showed a very poor fit (␹2(372) = 23,364.14, CFI = 0.706, RMSEA = 0.090). The assignment of items to the appropriate subscales in the six-factor solution is displayed in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1. Confirmatory Factor Analysis.

Areas of Worklife

107

Table 4. Comparisons of Scores: Areas of Worklife Scale, Normative Sample.

Pair1 Pair2 Pair3 Pair4 Pair5 Pair6 Pair7 Pair8 Pair9 Pair10 Pair11 Pair12 Pair13 Pair14 Pair15

Pair

Mean Dif.

S.D.

t

Sig.

Workload – Control Workload – Rewards Workload – Community Workload – Fairness Workload – Values Control – Rewards Control – Community Control – Fairness Control – Values Rewards – Community Rewards – Fairness Rewards – Values Community – Fairness Community – Values Fairness – Values

−0.52 −0.23 −0.63 0.00 −0.60 0.29 −0.11 0.52 −0.08 −0.40 0.23 −0.37 0.63 0.03 −0.60

1.04 0.92 1.05 1.01 1.05 0.85 0.95 0.89 0.95 0.82 0.78 0.80 0.85 0.91 0.82

−40.95 −20.75 −49.44 0.20 −47.05 27.68 −9.82 48.00 −6.92 −40.44 24.48 −37.56 61.06 3.03 −60.65

0.01 0.01 0.01 n.s. 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01

Note: N = 6,815; df = 6,814.

Comparisons Among the Areas of Worklife Table 4 displays the contrasts among means of the six areas of worklife displayed in Table 2. All contrasts were significantly different except for the contrast of workload with fairness; these two areas of worklife were lower than the other four areas. Community had the highest rating overall (M = 3.46) followed closely by values (M = 3.43). Comparison Among Demographic Groups Gender differences were examined by a series of t-tests (see Table 5). Men rated workload, control, and fairness more positively than did women; in contrast, Table 5. Gender Differences. Variable

Male

Female

t

df

Sig. (2-Tailed)


2.31 1.87 4.58 3.02 3.45 3.09 3.49 2.90 3.40

2.62 1.79 4.50 2.79 3.30 3.05 3.45 2.79 3.46

−7.80 2.28 2.99 10.11 6.20 2.31 1.44 5.09 −2.65

6,289 6,289 6,289 6,289 6,289 6,289 6,289 6,289 6,289

0.01 0.05 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.05 n.s. 0.01 0.01

108


women scored more positively on values. The differences for community and reward did not attain the p < 0.01 level required for repeated t-tests. Differences among employment status (full time, part time, casual) were examined by a one-way analysis of variance with a Least Squares Difference (LSD) test for post-hoc comparisons for the 6,147 respondents for which this information was available (see Table 6). These groups did not differ on exhaustion or cynicism, but full time employees scored higher on efficacy. On workload, each group differed from the other two, with casual staff least positive about workload and part time staff most positive. On control, each group differed from the other two with full time staff most positive and casual staff least positive. The groups did not differ on reward or community. On fairness and values, full time staff reported less congruence than part time staff. Contrasts among supervisory level (no supervision, supervisor, management) were examined with a one-way analysis of variance with a LSD test for post-hoc comparisons for the 3,417 respondents for which this information was available (see Table 7). The comparisons indicate that front line supervisors were more exhausted and experienced less efficacy than either management or non-supervisory employees. Non-supervisory employees were the most cynical, while management reported the least cynicism. Management employees were least positive about their workload and most positive about their sense of control. Supervisors experienced the least congruence with rewards and reported the strongest sense of community, while non-supervisory employees reported the least sense of community. Non-supervisory employees also reported the lowest rating of fairness and the least congruence of personal and organizational values. In contrast, management employees reported the strongest congruence in values. These patterns are summarized in the graph in Fig. 2. Contrasts among age groups were examined with a one-way analysis of variance with a LSD test for post-hoc comparisons for the 3,438 respondents for which this information was available (see Table 8). For all six areas of worklife there was a significant F, but the pattern of differences varied (see Fig. 3). For reward, control, and values, there was a steady increase of positive ratings with age. In contrast, fairness and community started high, dropped in the middle range, and increased for older age groups. A sense of workload congruence steadily decreased with age. Validity Evidence for the validity of the items was providing by examining the correspondence of scores on the Areas of Worklife measure with written comments provided by participants in a hospital study (Leiter & Maslach, 2003). The overwhelming proportion of comments from the 1,443 participants who commented contained complaints. A qualitative analysis of the comments assigned comments

Areas of Worklife

109

Table 6. Employment Status Differences. Variable

Group

Exhaustion

Full time Part time Casual Total

6,147

2.54

1.49

Cynicism

Full time Part time Casual

5,345 711 91

1.82 1.80 1.75

1.35 1.30 1.33

Total

6,147

1.82

1.34

Efficacy


5,345 711 91

4.54 4.38 4.25

1.01 1.00 1.00

Workload

Control

Rewards

Community

Fairness

Values

N

Mean

S.D.

5,345 711 91

2.55 2.46 2.76

1.49 1.48 1.61

Total

6,147

4.52

1.01


5,345 711 91

2.84 2.94 2.63

0.82 0.84 0.82

Total

6,147

2.85

0.83


5,345 711 91

3.37 3.26 2.86

0.90 0.84 0.87

Total

6,147

3.35

0.89


5,345 711 91

3.07 3.07 2.98

0.56 0.57 0.57

Total

6,147

3.06

0.56


5,345 711 91

3.46 3.39 3.41

0.84 0.83 0.80

Total

6,147

3.45

0.84


5,345 711 91

2.80 2.89 2.74

0.84 0.77 0.80

Total

6,147

2.81

0.83


5,345 711 91

3.42 3.49 3.56

0.75 0.67 0.68

Total

6,147

3.43

0.74

F(2,6144)

Sig.

2.05

n.s.

0.17

n.s.

Group Differed From

Full time Full time 11.30

0.01 Part time, casual Full time, casual Full time, part time

8.00

0.01 Part time, casual Full time, casual Full time, part time

18.57

0.01

1.09

n.s.

1.81

n.s. Part time

4.07

0.05 Part time

3.98

0.05

110


Table 7. Supervisory Level Differences. Variable

Group

N

Mean

S.D.

Exhaustion

Non-supervisory Supervisor Management

803 1,341 703

2.50 2.21 2.50

1.46 1.35 1.47

Total

2,847

2.36

1.42


803 1,341 703

2.11 1.81 1.55

1.41 1.32 1.25

Total

2,847

1.83

1.34

Efficacy


803 1,341 703

4.66 4.37 4.62

1.02 1.05 0.95

Total

2,847

4.52

1.03

Workload


803 1,341 703

3.00 3.06 2.60

0.81 0.83 0.85

Total

2,847

2.93

0.85

Control


803 1,341 703

3.45 3.49 3.71

0.86 0.91 0.83

Total

2,847

3.53

0.88

Rewards


803 1,341 703

3.17 3.02 3.14

0.60 0.56 0.54

Total

2,847

3.10

0.57

Community


803 1,341 703

3.38 3.70 3.60

0.87 0.79 0.81

Total

2,847

3.58

0.83

Fairness


803 1,341 703

2.60 3.03 2.99

0.87 0.75 0.86

Total

2,847

2.90

0.83

Values


803 1,341 703

3.15 3.43 3.68

0.71 0.76 0.73

Total

2,847

3.41

0.76

Cynicism

F(2,2844)

Sig.

LSD Test: Group Differed From Supervisor Both Supervisor

14.85

0.01 Both Both Both

33.25

0.01 Supervisor Both Supervisor

24.94

0.01 Management Management Both

76.05

0.01 Management Management Both

20.97

0.01 Supervisor Both Supervisor

20.63

0.01 Both Both Both

39.30

0.01 Both Non-supervisory Non-supervisory

78.15

0.01 Both Both Both

97.49

0.01

Areas of Worklife

111

Fig. 2. Areas of Worklife as a Function of Supervisory Position.

from individuals to nodes, many of which were relevant to the six areas of worklife. Table 9 displays correlations of scores on the six areas of worklife with a binary indicator of whether an individual wrote a complaint within the various categories listed in the first column of Table 9. The second column of Table 9 indicates the area of worklife most directly relevant to each node. The pattern of correlations in Table 9 indicates that complaints were most strongly correlated with scores on the area of worklife to which it was most directly relevant. Non-English Translations of the AWS A confirmatory factor analysis assessed the extent to which the factor structure of the English version of the scale transferred to a Finnish translation (Aro Kärnä et al., 2001). The four Finnish samples noted in Table 1 included a range of occupational groups: health care, university education, postal workers, and telecommunications. This range of occupations requires a robust measure to span the diverse occupational issues faced in these occupations in all six areas of worklife. Table 10 displays the factor loadings of the six-factor solution. All 29 items loaded on the appropriate scale. As with the overall CFA, all correlations among the factors were freed as were the errors between four pairs of items within subscales: Workload1/Workload5, Reward3/Reward4,

112


Table 8. Age Group Differences. Variable

Group

N

Mean

S.D.

F(2,2844)

Sig.

Exhaustion

18–29 30–39 40–49 50–59 60+

488 891 1,122 843 94

2.14 2.28 2.35 2.42 2.39

1.26 1.39 1.43 1.47 1.51

3.43

0.01

Total

3,438

2.32

1.41

Cynicism

18–29 30–39 40–49 50–59 60+

488 891 1,122 843 94

1.93 1.87 1.82 1.90 1.97

1.30 1.35 1.39 1.38 1.52

0.82

n.s.

Total

3,438

1.87

1.37

Efficacy

18–29 30–39 40–49 50–59 60+

488 891 1,122 843 94

4.38 4.56 4.62 4.54 4.53

0.99 0.99 1.01 1.05 1.05

4.51

0.01

Total

3,438

4.55

1.02

Workload

18–29 30–39 40–49 50–59 60+

488 891 1,122 843 94

3.28 3.05 2.94 2.94 2.87

0.81 0.82 0.82 0.80 0.81

19.00

0.01

Total

3,438

3.01

0.82

Control

18–29 30–39 40–49 50–59 60+

488 891 1,122 843 94

3.41 3.47 3.46 3.51 3.72

0.87 0.86 0.92 0.91 0.79

2.71

0.05

Total

3,438

3.47

0.89

Rewards

18–29 30–39 40–49 50–59 60+

488 891 1,122 843 94

3.08 3.06 3.11 3.11 3.32

0.57 0.57 0.58 0.60 0.58

5.01

0.01

Total

3,438

3.10

0.58

Community

18–29 30–39 40–49 50–59 60+

488 891 1,122 843 94

3.66 3.63 3.52 3.53 3.69

0.86 0.87 0.84 0.82 0.79

4.47

0.01

Total

3,438

3.58

0.85

Areas of Worklife

113

Table 8. (Continued ) Variable

Group

N

Mean

S.D.

F(2,2844)

Sig.

Fairness

18–29 30–39 40–49 50–59 60+

488 891 1,122 843 94

2.96 2.91 2.79 2.87 3.14

0.77 0.81 0.88 0.86 0.84

6.81

0.01

Total

3,438

2.87

0.84

18–29 30–39 40–49 50–59 60+

488 891 1,122 843 94

3.28 3.32 3.32 3.40 3.56

0.72 0.74 0.80 0.76 0.84

4.49

0.01

Total

3,438

3.34

0.77

Values

Community3/Community4, and Values1/Values2. The overall fit of the model was good (␹2(358) = 897.00, CFI = 0.914, RMSEA = 0.047). A confirmatory factor analysis assessed the extent to which the factor structure of the English version of the scale transferred to an Italian translation (Leiter et al., 2002). The Italian hospital samples noted in Table 1 included a range of

Fig. 3. Areas of Worklife as a Function of Age.

114

Table 9. Correspondence With Qualitative Analysis. Area of Worklife

Workload on wards Workload (administrative) Patient care concerns Number of staff Clerical support Distribution of workload Timing of amalgamation Excessive/unproductive meetings Professional autonomy/control Flexible work times and place Positive feedback and appreciation Appreciation Accountability for work Fairness Educational opportunities Trust Working relationships Respect Fair distribution of rewards Staff involvement/input Social get-togethers/functions

Workload Workload Workload Workload Workload Workload Workload Control Control Control Reward Reward Community Fairness Fairness Fairness Fairness Fairness Fairness Values Values

Workload

Control

Rewards

Community

Fairness

Values

−0.14 −0.13 −0.09 −0.06 −0.08 −0.06 −0.10 −0.04 −0.06 0.02 −0.03 −0.05 −0.07 0.00 −0.04 0.01 −0.07 −0.05 −0.03 −0.03 −0.02

0.02 −0.06 −0.05 −0.04 0.07 −0.04 0.00 0.08 −0.08 −0.06 −0.02 −0.08 −0.02 −0.05 −0.03 −0.06 −0.06 −0.04 −0.07 −0.01 0.01

−0.05 −0.02 −0.06 −0.04 0.01 −0.06 0.00 0.06 −0.05 −0.01 −0.07 −0.11 −0.04 −0.12 −0.06 −0.06 −0.07 −0.11 −0.08 −0.03 0.05

0.00 −0.05 −0.07 −0.03 0.02 −0.06 0.01 0.00 −0.03 −0.01 0.01 −0.03 −0.10 −0.07 0.01 −0.04 −0.05 −0.07 −0.06 −0.04 0.03

−0.02 −0.03 −0.04 −0.06 −0.02 −0.04 −0.03 0.05 −0.07 −0.03 −0.03 −0.02 −0.05 −0.14 −0.08 −0.11 −0.10 −0.07 −0.08 −0.09 −0.02

0.02 −0.01 −0.04 0.01 0.04 −0.04 −0.02 0.05 0.00 0.00 −0.01 −0.07 −0.01 −0.07 −0.06 0.03 −0.03 −0.03 −0.02 −0.09 0.08


Category

Areas of Worklife

115

Table 10. CFA: Finnish Translation. Item Workload1 Workload2 Workload3 Workload4 Workload5 Workload6 Control1 Control2 Control3 Reward1 Reward2 Reward3 Reward4 Community1 Community2 Community3 Community4 Community5 Fair1 Fair2 Fair3 Fair4 Fair5 Fair6 Value1 Value2 Value3 Value4 Value5

␥

␧

r2

0.520 0.158 0.664 0.850 −0.493 −0.362 0.675 0.751 0.539 0.724 0.884 −0.481 −0.377 0.478 0.750 0.689 0.619 −0.437 0.688 −0.096 0.694 0.736 −0.575 −0.626 0.712 0.499 0.783 0.598 −0.548

0.854 0.987 0.748 0.527 0.870 0.932 0.738 0.661 0.842 0.690 0.468 0.877 0.926 0.879 0.661 0.725 0.785 0.899 0.726 0.995 0.720 0.677 0.818 0.780 0.702 0.866 0.622 0.801 0.836

0.270 0.025 0.440 0.722 0.243 0.131 0.455 0.563 0.291 0.524 0.781 0.231 0.142 0.228 0.563 0.474 0.384 0.191 0.473 0.009 0.482 0.542 0.331 0.391 0.507 0.249 0.614 0.358 0.300

health care workers, including direct service providers as well as administrative and support staff. Table 11 displays the factor loadings of the six-factor solution. All 29 items loaded on the appropriate scale. As with the overall CFA, all correlations among the factors were freed as were the errors between four pairs of items within subscales: Workload3/Workload4, Reward3/Reward4, Community1/Community2, and Fairness5/Fairness6. The overall fit of the model was good (␹2(358) = 802.37, CFI = 0.921, RMSEA = 0.046). Tests of the Mediation Model With the establishment of the AWS, we have met the first challenge of devising a measure of the organizational conditions variable in the basic mediation model of

116


Table 11. CFA: Italian Translation. Item Workload1 Workload2 Workload3 Workload4 Workload5 Workload6 Control1 Control2 Control3 Reward1 Reward2 Reward3 Reward4 Community1 Community2 Community3 Community4 Community5 Fair1 Fair2 Fair3 Fair4 Fair5 Fair6 Value1 Value2 Value3 Value4 Value5

␥

␧

r2

0.705 0.484 0.624 0.630 −0.582 −0.172 0.423 0.707 0.621 0.801 0.840 −0.590 −0.531 0.553 0.783 0.895 0.778 −0.463 0.655 0.642 0.679 0.689 −0.511 −0.547 0.660 0.057 0.573 0.744 −0.484

0.709 0.875 0.782 0.776 0.814 0.985 0.906 0.707 0.784 0.599 0.543 0.808 0.847 0.833 0.622 0.446 0.629 0.886 0.755 0.767 0.734 0.725 0.859 0.837 0.751 0.998 0.819 0.669 0.875

0.498 0.234 0.389 0.397 0.338 0.030 0.179 0.500 0.385 0.641 0.705 0.348 0.282 0.306 0.613 0.801 0.605 0.215 0.429 0.412 0.462 0.474 0.261 0.300 0.436 0.003 0.329 0.553 0.234

burnout. However, to test the model across multiple samples, we faced a second measurement challenge. We needed to identify a generic work-related outcome that would be relevant and significant for all respondents. We decided to measure employees’ evaluation of the general change within the organization – whether they saw things getting better or worse within the workplace. A positive perception of change is a central outcome in post-industrialized organizations that emphasize quality of service and must continually adapt to volatile environments. Organizational change is best viewed as a continuous process shaped by strategic decisions, in contrast with a model of rigidity disrupted on occasion by change agents (Weick & Quinn, 1999). The relevant question from the perspective of continuous change is the extent to which employees perceive the organization

Areas of Worklife

117

as changing for the better or worse, not whether they perceive any change at all. Especially important to employees’ capacity to function in a productive and fulfilling fashion are high performance management practices that pertain to job security, decision making, training, hiring, compensation, communication, and reduced status distinctions (Pfeffer, 1998). Employees’ evaluation of the direction of continuous change in these practices is an informative indicator of their overall relationship with their work, and, as such, a central outcome measure.

Hypotheses The basic hypothesis in our mediation model is that the greater the misfit between the person and the job in the six areas of worklife, the greater the likelihood of burnout; conversely, the greater the fit or match, the greater the likelihood of engagement with work. This would suggest a simple additive model, in which mismatches in each of the six areas would contribute separately to greater burnout. However, the research literature reviewed earlier suggests the possibility of more complex interrelationships between the six areas. Because control is so central to employees’ ability to influence the people and processes that determine the quality of worklife, we propose that it serves as the starting point in our mediation model and will influence the extent to which people can attain a match in the other areas, especially workload, reward, fairness, and community. The area of values plays an integrating role in the model, reflecting the overall consistency in the other areas of worklife. As such, it mediates the relationship of the other areas with the psychological experience of burnout or engagement. A match in values indicates that the organization’s central values are consistent with those of the employee. In a values match, individuals embrace the organization’s mission as a personal mission whose fulfillment is consistent with personal aspirations. In a significant mismatch on values, employees perceive the organization’s mission to be incompatible with their own well-being and that of the larger community. This conceptual analysis leads to the following hypotheses. The first set proposes the replication of the standard pathways among the three dimensions of burnout: exhaustion predicts cynicism, which in turn negatively predicts efficacy. Second, all three dimensions are proposed to predict the outcome of evaluation of change. The third set of hypotheses concerns the relationship of the six areas of worklife to the three dimensions of burnout. As discussed earlier, workload is predicted to have a direct path to exhaustion. Values is predicted to mediate the relationship of all areas (except workload) with the three dimensions of burnout. Control is predicted to be related to the other areas of workload, reward, fairness,

118


Fig. 4. Hypothesized Model.

and community. The combined set of hypotheses forms the Mediation Model depicted in Fig. 4.

Measures Three measures assessed the primary elements of the mediation model: the six areas of worklife, the three dimensions of burnout, and people’s evaluation of organizational change. The Areas of Worklife Scale (AWS) is the measure we developed to assess the six domains of organizational contributors to burnout; the details of the measure have been described earlier in this chapter. The Maslach Burnout Inventory-General Scale (MBI-GS; Schaufeli et al., 1996) was used to measure the three dimensions of the burnout-engagement continuum: exhaustion-energy, cynicism-involvement, and inefficacy-efficacy. The items are framed as statements of job-related feelings (e.g. “I feel burned out from my work,” “I feel confident that I am effective at getting things done”), and are rated on a 6-point frequency scale (ranging from “never” to “daily”). Burnout is reflected in higher scores on exhaustion and cynicism, and lower scores on efficacy, while the opposite pattern reflects greater engagement. Developed from the original MBI (Maslach & Jackson, 1981), which was designed for human service occupations, the MBI-GS is a 16-item measure that evaluates burnout among people in all occupations. Thus, the MBI-GS was appropriate for all employees within the participating organizations, providing comparative data among units and occupational groups. Evaluation of change was assessed by 11 items, of which the first three were used in the model testing. This measure has served as an outcome measure in previous research (Leiter & Harvie, 1998). Participants rated items on a five-point Likert-type scale from 1 (much worse) through 3 (no change) to 5 (much better), in response to an introductory sentence, “How do you perceive changes over the

Areas of Worklife

119

past six months in the following”: “services you provide,” “your involvement in decisions that affect your work,” and “your job security.” All three issues – services, decision making, and job security – have been the focus of concern in burnout research (Schaufeli & Enzmann, 1998) and were identified as critical challenges in the participating organizations. Pfeffer (1998) identified job security and decentralized decision making as basic conditions for employees’ positive evaluation of organizational change. The timeframe of six months was consistent with that of the MBI-GS, as well as with a reasonable span for employees to consider when evaluating their worksettings. Further, it provided a consistent metric across all the samples. The overall variable of evaluation of change is computed as the average rating across all of the change items.

Model Testing: Cross Sectional An EQS analysis assessed a cross-sectional model, using data from the same normative sample that was reported earlier for the psychometric research on the AWS. The model comprised sets of pathways representing the three sets of hypotheses in the Mediation Model (Fig. 4). In this analysis only three indicators were used as indicators of each of the latent variables: the three dimensions of burnout, the six areas of worklife, and perception of change. Limiting the number of indicators to three focuses the analysis primarily on the structural equation model, which is the primary focus of this study. This approach is in contrast to one in which scale reliability is considered solely in reference to overall inter-item consistency among the items. Structural equation analysis considers, in addition to high inter-correlations among the items within a latent construct, the consistency in the pattern of each indicator within that latent construct with the indicators within the model’s other latent construct (Bentler & Chou, 1987; Hayduk, 1987; Jaccard & Wan, 1996). Whereas each indicator added to the causal model makes a distinct demand on the predictive power of the model, a limit of three indicators for each construct yields the most parsimonious perspective on the structural model. A limit of three indicators also brings a rigor to measurement construction in that it requires that every item maintain a strong level of inter-item correlation with the other two items, and that all three items maintain a consistent pattern relative to the other constructs in the model. Selecting the first three indicators of each scale – rather than searching for the most auspicious items – emphasizes their strong inter-item consistency. The EQS analysis (maximum likelihood, robust) confirmed a good fit of the model to the data (␹2(304) = 3,618.32, CFI = 0.952, RMSEA = 0.039), with all paths at the 0.05 level of significance on the LM test (see Fig. 5). For this model

120


Fig. 5. Causal Model Coefficients: Normative Sample.

correlations of eight errors within scales were freed; such correlations occur frequently with measures as a function of the common response format in the scale (Byrne, 1994). Model Testing: Longitudinal A second set of EQS analyses was used to test a longitudinal model, utilizing data from an organization that had adapted our organizational assessment program (Leiter & Maslach, 2000). Background Data were collected from the administrative and support staff of a large North American university. The survey was conducted in an effort to systematically assess current organizational strengths and weaknesses from the point of view of the staff; to establish a baseline of data upon which to measure future gains; and to inspire improvement. The survey was executed three times: Time 1 in 2000, Time 2 in 2001, and Time 3 in 2002. Participation in the study was voluntary, anonymous and confidential. The survey was fully supported by top administration who, in their survey introduction, pledged that survey responses and comments would be considered in future discussions about how to improve the organization and operations. In addition, a Balanced Scorecard Strategic Planning Group, who steered the survey process, stated that they would be held personally accountable for ensuring that this occurred. During Time 1, responses were received from 1,005 of the possible 1,119 participants (90% response rate) who received the survey. At Time 2, a total of 992 responses of the possible 1,140 participants (87% response rate) were

Areas of Worklife

121

collected. At Time 3, a total of 812 responses of the potential 1,128 participants (72% response rate) were received. The present study compared data of Time 1 with Time 2 and of Time 2 with Time 3. Demographics: Time 1 to Time 2 Data from Time 1 and Time 2 were linked through an employee-generated code that permitted the researchers to link the data without knowing the identity of the person from whom the data were generated. Due to procedural changes, some elements of the code were lost between Time 1 and Time 2, resulting in linking only 207 of 800 participants’ data. Of the 207 participants for whom data were linked, there were 70 females and 134 males with three not identified. The age ranges were 18–29 (11), 30–39 (32), 40–49 (80), 50–59 (69), and 60 or older (11). The units for time of employment were less than six months (9), six months to 1 year (9), 1–2 years (28), 2–5 years (34), 5–10 years (10), 10–15 years (44), 15–20 years (27), 20–25 years (20), and more than 25 years (24). The positions included front line staff (164), front line supervisors (19), and management (18). They included 184 career employees and 16 casual employees. Demographics: Time 2 to Time 3 Unfortunately, the two sets of linked data draw from different groups in Time 2 because of challenges in the code for linking data between periods. Although the system of participant-generated codes provided a high degree of confidentiality, it also led to a large number of incomplete links as individuals failed to provide a consistent code across the various surveys. Of the 206 participants for whom data were linked, there were 105 females and 98 males with three not identified. The age ranges were 18–29 (30), 30–39 (41), 40–49 (63), 50–59 (57), and 60 or older (8). The units for time of employment were less than six months (34), six months to 1 year (27), 1–2 years (27), 2–5 years (34), 5–10 years (24), 10–15 years (23), 15–20 years (14), 20–25 years (10), and more than 25 years (7). The positions included front line staff (156), front line supervisors (28), and management (19). They included 178 career employees and 25 casual employees. Changes in MBI-GS and AWS Over Time Table 12 displays the correlations of the Time 1 MBI-GS and AWS subscales with their counterparts at Time 2, along with their means and standard deviations. A series of t-tests assess the changes over time. All correlations were significant. T-tests identified two changes over the assessment interval: fairness increased from Time 1 (M = 2.64) to Time 2 (M = 3.05) while values increased from Time 1 (M = 3.21) to Time 2 (M = 3.40).

122


Table 12. Changes Over Time: Administrative Services: Time 1 to Time 2. Variable


r

0.47 0.36 0.38 0.48 0.33 0.17 0.36 0.36 0.26

M

S.D.

Time 1

Time 2

Time 1

Time 2

2.19 1.75 4.88 2.97 3.40 3.20 3.32 2.64 3.21

2.17 1.96 4.64 3.11 3.52 3.26 3.45 3.05 3.40

1.33 1.27 0.93 0.82 0.94 0.52 0.85 0.87 0.73

1.42 1.33 1.06 0.78 0.90 0.51 0.88 0.81 0.71

t(203)

Sig.

0.15 −2.38 3.40 −1.25 1.99 1.05 2.64 2.89 2.45

n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. 0.01 0.01

Table 13 displays the parallel information for the participants matched from Time 2 to Time 3. Again, all correlations were significant between the measures from one assessment to the other. In this interval, exhaustion increased (Time 2, M = 2.10; Time 3, M = 2.38) as did cynicism (Time 2, M = 1.67; Time 3, M = 1.98). Community decreased (Time 2, M = 3.61; Time 3, M = 3.46), as did fairness (Time 2, M = 3.17; Time 3, M = 3.01). Table 14 displays the alpha levels for the two samples, indicating that the measures maintained an acceptable level of internal consistency at both assessments. The organization implemented a large number of interventions over each of the assessment intervals, which were intended to enhance the quality of the work environment. The increases from Time 1 to Time 2 suggest initial success, but the subsequent changes in the negative direction from Time 2 to Time 3 suggest that the organization encountered difficulty in the later stages. Table 13. Changes Over Time: Administrative Services – Time 2 to Time 3. Variable


r

0.61 0.52 0.49 0.57 0.56 0.41 0.52 0.60 0.51

M

S.D.

Time 2

Time 3

Time 2

Time 3

2.10 1.67 4.65 2.83 3.63 3.06 3.61 3.17 3.51

2.38 1.98 4.72 2.88 3.52 3.01 3.46 3.01 3.38

1.50 1.33 0.95 0.58 0.83 0.58 0.85 0.82 0.72

1.54 1.37 1.06 0.62 0.90 0.66 0.85 0.91 0.77

t(203)

Sig.

−2.99 −3.38 −1.03 −1.25 1.99 1.05 2.64 2.89 2.45

0.01 0.01 n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. 0.01 0.01 n.s.

Areas of Worklife

123

Table 14. Time 1 to Time 2: Cronbach’s Alpha. Measure Workload Control Rewards Community Fairness Values

Time 1

Time 2

0.76 0.76 0.82 0.84 0.83 0.70

0.73 0.70 0.80 0.85 0.80 0.71

Model Testing: Time 1 to Time 2 The EQS Model testing assessed the Mediation Model against data from this sample in two steps. In the first step, the model included all of the pathways and factor loadings in the Mediation Model with the variation that Time 1 Change was dropped and Time 2 Exhaustion, Cynicism, and Efficacy were added. At this step the only paths from Time 1 to Time 2 were those predicting a steady state: Time 1 Exhaustion to Time 2 Exhaustion, Time 1 Cynicism to Time 2 Cynicism, and Time 1 Efficacy to Time 2 Efficacy (see Fig. 6). The EQS analysis (maximum likelihood, robust) confirmed a good fit of the model to the data (␹2(565) = 887.47, CFI = 0.920, RMSEA = 0.041), with all paths at the 0.05 level of significance on the Lagrange Multiplier (LM) test. In the second step, this model was contrasted with one a-priori model (Burnout Lag Model) and one exploratory model (Areas of Worklife Lag Model). The Burnout Lag Model added to the Mediation model two paths: Time 1 Exhaustion to Time 2 Cynicism, and Time 1 Cynicism to Time 2 Efficacy. These paths

Fig. 6. Longitudinal: Time 1 to Time 2.

124


parallel the relationships among Time 1 constructs. Although the overall model retained the characteristics of a good fit data (␹2(563) = 885.27, CFI = 0.920, RMSEA = 0.041), neither of the new paths were significant, and they did not result in a significant improvement of Chi Square (dif␹2(2) = 2.20, n.s.). The Areas of Worklife Lag Model added to the Mediation Model one a-priori path (Time 1 Workload to Time 2 Exhaustion) and two pathways identified on the basis of Modification Indices: Time 1 Fairness to Time 2 Cynicism and Time 1 Values to Time 2 Efficacy. The resulting model maintained a good fit data (␹2(562) = 868.32, CFI = 0.926, RMSEA = 0.040), with all of the new paths significant, and together resulting in a significant improvement of Chi Square (dif␹2(3) = 19.15, p < 0.01). Model Testing: Time 2 to Time 3 With the data from Time 2 to Time 3, the EQS Model testing followed the sequence established for assessing Time 1 to Time 2: it assessed the Mediation Model against data from the organization in two steps. In the first step, the model included the pathways and factor loadings in the Mediation Model with Time 2 exhaustion, cynicism, and efficacy. At this step the only paths from Time 1 to Time 2 were those predicting a steady state: Time 1 Exhaustion to Time 2 Exhaustion, Time 1 Cynicism to Time 2 Cynicism, and Time 1 Efficacy to Time 2 Efficacy (see Fig. 7). The EQS analysis (maximum likelihood, robust) confirmed a good fit of the model to the data (␹2(565) = 984.46, CFI = 0.919, RMSEA = 0.044), with all paths at the 0.05 level of significance on the LM test. In the second step, this model was contrasted with the Burnout Lag Model and the Areas of Worklife Lag Model. The Burnout Lag Model added to the Mediation model two paths: Time 1 Exhaustion to Time 2 Cynicism, and Time 1 Cynicism to Time 2 Efficacy. Although the overall model retained the characteristics of a

Fig. 7. Longitudinal: Time 2 to Time 3.

Areas of Worklife

125

good fit data (␹2(563) = 981.18, CFI = 0.920, RMSEA = 0.044), neither of the new paths were significant, and they did not result in a significant improvement of Chi Square (dif␹2(2) = 3.28, n.s.). Areas of Worklife Lag Model added to the Mediation Model the paths from the previous analysis: Time 1 Workload to Time 2 Exhaustion, Time 1 Fairness to Time 2 Cynicism, and Time 1 Values to Time 2 Efficacy. The resulting model maintained a good fit data (␹2(562) = 978.29, CFI = 0.920, RMSEA = 0.044), but only the path from workload to exhaustion was significant, and the overall improvement in fit was not significant (dif␹2(3) = 6.17, n.s.). An exploratory analysis indicated that a Worklife Lag Model with three paths from Time 1 Workload – to Time 2 Exhaustion, Time 2 Cynicism, and Time 2 Efficacy – provided a good fit (␹2(562) = 969.00, CFI = 0.920, RMSEA = 0.044) that was a significant increase in fit (dif␹2(2) = 15.48, p < 0.01).

DISCUSSION Taken together, all of this research provides considerable support for our mediation model. The experience of burnout or engagement is the mediating link between the organizational context and work-related outcomes. It is not simply that burnout is an important psychological outcome in its own right, but that it is related to people’s commitment to their job and their evaluation of organizational change. The clear implication is that the burnout experience should be predictive of other job-related outcomes, such as work behaviors, and this should be the focus of future research. These analyses provide strong evidence for the utility of the Areas of Worklife Scale (AWS) as a means of assessing organizational life, which is a key factor in the mediation model. The scale produces a consistent factor structure, defining six areas of worklife of specific relevance to the continuum from burnout to engagement as assessed by the MBI-GS. The remarkable consistency of the psychometric data across a variety of occupations, organizational settings, national contexts and languages attests to the robust nature of the measure.

Implications for Research The pattern of empirical results has important implications for both the validity of the AWS measure, and the tests (both cross-sectional and longitudinal) of our conceptual model.

126


Properties of the AWS The factor structure identified in both the principal components analysis and the confirmatory factor analysis supports the six-factor solution including all 29 items. Despite a strong level of correlation among the six subscales, the individual items maintain their distinct status. The two items with loadings just below the ideal level of |0.50| did not show cross loadings on other factors but were clearly associated with the indicated factor. As they both were negatively worded items on their respective factors, it is important to retain them in the overall scale, as they help to avoid a strong unidirectional response set. It is a further confirmation of the factor structure that a good level of fit was established using only three items for each latent variable. The contrasts among the various subscales confirm that there are distinct normative levels for the various areas of worklife. The only two that did not differ were workload and fairness – the two areas that consistently received the lowest ratings across the various samples. To some extent the 3.00 level of the five-point scale provides a clear demarcation between the range of congruence (from 3.01 to 5.00) and the range of incongruence (1.00–2.99). The normative levels on these scales indicate that across a wide range of work settings, workload and fairness are incongruent for most people. In contrast, control, community, and values are generally congruent for most people, and rewards are at a neutral level. Further research may explore the extent to which these scores reflect fundamental qualities of worklife in post-industrial societies or whether – on a more modest scale – they are qualities of the AWS measure. At this point they indicate an important reference point in assessing the extent to which a work setting is confronting distinct challenges or whether it is contending with the general nature of work. Differences among the demographic levels provide another reference point. Many of these differences are quite small in absolute terms, becoming evident only in a large sample such as the combined normative sample used in this analysis. Overall, there was a high degree of consistency among the patterns of scores on the AWS and the MBI-GS. However, a gender pattern did emerge, with women reporting a more negative pattern than did men, with higher exhaustion, lower efficacy, and less congruence on workload, control, and fairness. The one element on which women were more positive than men was greater congruence on values. Another pattern emerged with regard to age, with older people reporting a greater congruence in most of the areas of worklife. This increasing congruence may reflect either a greater capacity to shape the workplace with experience or authority, or it may reflect a tendency to accommodate more readily to the qualities of a workplace over time. The one exception was workload, which showed a declining congruence for older workers. This pattern may reflect

Areas of Worklife

127

increasing demands for people with greater experience or authority, or a more constrained capacity of aging employees to manage work demands. In regard to employment status, the higher scores of full time staff on efficacy and on control are consistent with their increased time and commitment to their positions. The pattern of scores for casual staff is consistent with their somewhat marginal status with the organizations: they have a minimal authority and are generally called upon when workload is heavy. The more positive score on workload for part time employees is consistent with the lower demands associated with a reduced time commitment to the organizations. The more negative score on fairness for full time employees relative to part time employees is surprising and could suggest systematic problems with organizational justice or resource allocations associated with the factors that cause fairness to have a lower normative level of congruence than the other areas. Contrasts among supervisory level suggest widespread difficulties for front line supervisory positions, as indicated by higher scores on exhaustion and lower scores on efficacy. Supervisors reported the least congruence on rewards, despite a relatively strong sense of community, suggesting that there may be a benefit in reconsidering reward structures for front line supervisors. The pattern for managers suggests that their positional gains in control come at the price of increased work demands beyond their expectations for the position. Their relatively high scores on values are consistent with their greater capacity to shape the organizational agenda and the symbolic role of management in representing the organizational mission. Overall, these patterns indicate that people develop distinct perspectives on the six areas of worklife, which are related to their own positions in the organization and their personal characteristics. Tests of the Mediation Model The cross sectional analyses confirmed the central concepts of the mediation model. All three components of burnout mediated the relationship between the work setting (as assessed by the AWS) and the work outcome (evaluation of change). A striking aspect of the findings is the complex way in which the six areas of worklife predicted burnout. Workload and control each played critical roles (thus replicating conceptually the Demand-Control model) but were not sufficient. Reward, community, and fairness added further power to predict values, which in turn was the critical predictor of the three dimensions of burnout. The results revealed that this was not a simple additive model, but a more complicated mediation model in its own right. The strong pathways from control to reward, community, and fairness acknowledge the role of autonomy and participative decision making to empower people to shape other key areas of their work experience. The subsequent pathways from these three areas to values are

128


consistent with people integrating their job experiences on various fronts into a coherent perspective on their working life. The results of the longitudinal analysis provide additional support for the importance of considering areas of worklife and raise important points for consideration in further research. First, the interrelationships among the three dimensions of burnout were confirmed only within a single time period, and did not show a lagged pattern across time. For example, the well-established path from exhaustion to cynicism was seen at Time 1 and again at Times 2 and 3, but exhaustion at one time period did not predict cynicism at a later point. These findings suggest that the processes through which one component of burnout becomes aligned with the others occur relatively quickly. These relationships are already in place at the initial assessment and maintain a steady pattern of interrelationships through the subsequent assessment, as indicated by the horizontal paths from each burnout component to its subsequent state in Figs 6 and 7. Second, and even more intriguing, are the longitudinal results that show that some of the worklife areas (workload, fairness, and values) at Time 1 are predictive of burnout at Time 2. In a partial longitudinal replication, workload at Time 2 predicted burnout at Time 3. These lagged relationships clearly suggest that the connection between organizational factors and burnout has a longer time frame. Workload evidenced a consistent relationship with exhaustion across the one-year interval for both steps of the analysis. This path is in addition to that within Time 1 from workload to exhaustion and the subsequent step from Time 1 exhaustion to Time 2 exhaustion. This pattern implies that workload that is incongruent with a worker’s expectations may have both long term and short term implications. The other lagged relationships of areas of worklife with burnout suggest that these areas may operate on a similar time frame. The path from Time 1 fairness to Time 2 cynicism and from Time 1 values to Time 2 efficacy supplement existing paths within Time 1. The failure to replicate these lagged paths in the subsequent interval may indicate that these relationships are specific to transitory conditions within the work setting. In contrast, the confirmation of the predicted path from workload to exhaustion provides strong evidence for its enduring nature. Further progress in unraveling the key elements underlying burnout require a well thought out concept of organizational life. The AWS strikes a balance between becoming lost in the myriad elements of the organizational context on the one hand, and limiting the focus to one or two simple elements on the other. Initial research suggests the presence of consistent patterns of relationship among the six areas of worklife, but there are also indications of situation-specific patterns, as demonstrated by changes over the two steps of the longitudinal analysis. Greater clarification of the unique and enduring patterns among aspects of the

Areas of Worklife

129

organizational environment will provide a firmer basis for developing theory and for implementing interventions to enhance the quality of worklife.

Implications for Intervention By positing a complex framework through which people make sense of their work settings, the mediation model constitutes a major advance over simple listings of organizational characteristics. The set of organizational correlates of burnout has grown so diverse that its further adumbration does not appear constructive in itself. The mediation model identifies six distinct dimensions of work settings that encompass a large scope of burnout’s organizational correlates while remaining sufficiently focused to be manageable. The structure of their relationships in the mediation model – including the pivotal role of control, the relative independence of workload, and the pervasive influence of value congruence – define a psychological environment in which people perceive and experience the world of work. Underlying the model and the measures is the concept of people’s fit or match with their job environment. Rather than proposing an ideal job or the ideal employee, the model accepts a wide range of functional job environments and a wide range of personal aspirations and inclinations shaping the way people work. The focus of both our basic and applied research is examining the interactions of these two dynamic and complex entities. The mediation model opens avenues for interventions that will enhance the quality of people’s job experience. It defines leverage points for changing the key elements of burnout: the level of energy people bring to their jobs, the extent to which they are involved in their work, and their sense of efficacy in their work. These are deep-seated qualities of personal experience, not directly available to the influence of management or an immediate supervisor. It is difficult to conceive of how a manager would directly bestow additional energy, involvement, or efficacy upon an employee. The mediation model points towards the proper domain for organizational interventions: workplace policies and practices that will shape the six key areas of worklife. These areas will affect the cognitive and emotional experiences of employees (energy, involvement, efficacy), which in turn will affect their attitudes and behavior at work. The challenge for organizational interventions is being able to identify which areas need change, and this is where the AWS becomes an especially useful diagnostic measure. The AWS is a key element in our Organizational Checkup Survey (Leiter & Maslach, 2000), which has proved to be a powerful tool for mobilizing organizational self-reflection and change. The process of the organizational checkup is designed to inspire the full participation of all the employees, as indicated by

130


the strikingly high response rates in the organizations in which we have worked (e.g. Leiter & Maslach, 2003). The main intent of the survey is to generate a comprehensive profile of the organization’s workforce, which can be used to inform decisions about intervention. However, the participative nature of the checkup process can be viewed as an intervention in itself, which engages all employees in an organizational dialogue and prepares them to get involved in future change. The results of our work with several organizations (which are included in our normative sample for the AWS) propose two basic points of contact for intervention: workload and values. An organization can enhance the energy levels of employees by managing workload to be compatible with their expectations and capacity. This apparently simple advice holds huge implications for organizations operating in a fiercely competitive global market, or for public services attempting to address growing demand with shrinking resources. The challenge of managing workload is enormous. But the persistent relationship of unmanageable workload with exhaustion, of exhaustion with cynicism, and of both with performance problems, underscores the necessity to address this area of job-person mismatch. To address the second point of contact, values, organizations face the challenge of building a shared vision of the organization. Although most organizations in the post-industrial world have completed the initial steps of articulating a mission statement and core objectives, few have succeeded in making that vision permeate their policies and practices to the point that they affect everyone from senior management to front line employees. It has been argued that the capacity to imbue the organization with the core mission is a critical factor separating highly effective companies from those with more modest levels of accomplishment (Pfeffer & Sutton, 2000). The mediation model suggests that a fundamental issue for managing employees’ experiences is their capacity to shape their worklife and to participate in decisions. The position of control at the foundation of the model implies that significant gains or losses in autonomy or authority can have widespread implications for employees’ views of their job, their position on the continuum from burnout to engagement, and their performance or attitudes about their work. In addition to the overall themes of the model, the AWS provides the capacity to assess specific work settings in regard to the six areas of worklife. Although control or workload are key issues in general, a specific work setting may have greater difficulties with their procedures for recognizing excellent performance (reward), their internal processes for promotion (fairness), or the level of conflict within the workplace (community). The AWS not only directs the organization’s efforts to where they may have the greatest impact, it also provides a metric to

Areas of Worklife

131

assess the extent to which interventions had their intended impact on specific qualities of the work environment. The model and the measure make a major contribution to making burnout a problem that can be solved in better ways than having employees either endure the chronic stress or quit their jobs. For the individual employees, the organizations for which they work, and the clients whom they serve, the preferred solution is to build a work environment that supports the ideals to which people wish to devote their efforts. This is a formidable challenge, but one that becomes more possible with the development of effective measures and a conceptual framework to guide intervention.

REFERENCES Aro, A., Kärnä, P., Salmela-Aro, K., Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C. (2001). Development of the Finnish version of Areas of Worklife Survey. Unpublished data. University of Helsinki. Bakker, A. B., Schaufeli, W. B., Sixma, H. J., Bosveld, W., & van Dierendonck, D. (2000). Patient demands, lack of reciprocity and burnout: A five-year longitudinal study among general practitioners. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 425–441. Bentler, P. M., & Chou, C. P. (1987). Practical issues in structural modeling. Sociological Methods and Research, 16, 78–117. Buunk, B. P., & Schaufeli, W. B. (1993). Professional Burnout: A perspective from social comparison theory. In: W. B. Schaufeli, C. Maslach & T. Marek (Eds), Professional Burnout: Recent Developments in Theory and Research (pp. 53–69). Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis. Byrne, B. M. (1993). The Maslach Burnout Inventory: Testing for factorial validity and invariance across elementary, intermediate and secondary teachers. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 66, 197–212. Byrne, B. M. (1994). Structural equation modeling with EQS and EQS/Windows: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Chappell, N. L., & Novak, M. (1992). The role of support in alleviating stress among nursing assistants. Gerontologist, 32(3), 351–359. Chartrand, J. M., Strong, S. R., & Weitzman, L. M. (1995). The interactional perspective in vocational psychology: Paradigms, theories, and research practices. In: W. B. Walsh & S. H. Osipow (Eds), Handbook of Vocational Psychology (2nd ed., pp. 35–65). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Cherniss, C. (1980). Professional burnout in human service organizations. New York: Praeger. Cordes, C. L., & Dougherty, T. W. (1993). A review and integration of research on job burnout. Academy of Management Review, 18, 621–656. Cox, T., Kuk, G., & Leiter, M. P. (1993). Burnout, health, workstress, and organizational healthiness. In: W. Schaufeli, C. Maslach & T. Marek (Eds), Professional Burnout: Recent Developments in Theory and Research (pp. 177–193). Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis. Drory, A., & Shamir, B. (1988). Effects of organizational and life variables on job satisfaction and burnout. Group and Organization Studies, 13(4), 441–455. Farber, B. A. (1984). Stress and burnout in suburban teachers. Journal of Educational Research, 77(6), 325–331.

132


Finnegan, J. E. (2000). The impact of person and organizational values on organizational commitment. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73(2), 149–169. French, J. R. P., Jr., Caplan, R. D., & Harrison, R. V. (1982). The mechanisms of job stress and strain. Chichester, England: Wiley. French, J. R. P., Jr., Rodgers, W., & Cobb, S. (1974). Adjustment as person-environment fit. In: G. V. Coelho, D. A. Hamburg & J. E. Adams (Eds), Coping and Adaptation. New York: Basic Books. Glicken, M. D. (1983). A counseling approach to employee burnout. Personnel Journal, 62(3), 222–228. Greenglass, E. R., Fiksenbaum, L., & Burke, R. J. (1994). The relationship between social support and burnout over time in teachers. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 9, 219–230. Greenglass, E. R., Pantony, K.-L., & Burke, R. J. (1988). A gender-role perspective on role conflict, work stress and social support. In: E. Goldsmith (Ed.), Work and Family: Theory, Research, and Applications. [Special edition]. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 3, 317–328. Hackman, J. R. (1986). The psychology of self-management in organizations. In: M. S. Pallak & R. Perloff (Eds), Psychology and Work: Productivity, Change, and Employment. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Hayduk, L. (1987). Structural equation modeling with LISREL. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Jaccard, J. R., & Wan, C. K. (1996). LISREL approaches to interaction effects in multiple regression. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Jackson, S. E., Schwab, R. L., & Schuler, R. S. (1986). Toward an understanding of the burnout phenomenon. Journal of Applied Psychology, 7, 630–640. Kahn, R. L., & Byosiere, P. (1992). Stress in organizations. In: M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 571–650). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Karasek, R., & Theorell, T. (1990). Stress, productivity, and the reconstruction of working life. New York: Basic Books. Landsbergis, P. A. (1988). Occupational stress among health care workers: A test of the job demandscontrol model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 9(3), 217–239. Lauver, K. J., & Kristof-Brown, A. (2001). Distinguishing between employees’ perceptions of person – job and person – organization fit. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 59, 454–470. Lawler, E. E., III (1968). Equity theory as a predictor of productivity and work quality. Psychological Bulletin, 70, 596–610. Lee, R. T., & Ashforth, B. E. (1993). A further examination of managerial burnout: Toward an integrated model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 14, 3–20. Lee, R. T., & Ashforth, B. E. (1996). A meta-analytic examination of the correlates of the three dimensions of job burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 123–133. Leiter, M. P. (1992). Burnout as a crisis in professional role structures: Measurement and conceptual issues. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping, 5, 79–93. Leiter, M. P. (1993). Burnout as a developmental process: Consideration of models. In: W. Schaufeli, C. Maslach & T. Marek (Eds), Professional Burnout: Recent Developments in Theory and Research (pp. 237–250). Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis. Leiter, M. P., & Harvie, P. (1997). The correspondence of supervisor and subordinate perspectives on major organizational change. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 2, 1–10. Leiter, M. P., & Harvie, P. (1998). Conditions for staff acceptance of organizational change: Burnout as a mediating construct. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping, 11, 1–25.

Areas of Worklife

133

Leiter, M. P., Harvie, P., & Frizzell, C. (1998). The correspondence of patient satisfaction and nurse burnout. Social Science and Medicine, 47, 1611–1617. Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C. (1988). The impact of interpersonal environment on burnout and organizational commitment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 9(4), 297–308. Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C. (1998). Burnout. In: H. Friedman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Mental Health (pp. 347–357). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C. (1999). Six areas of worklife: A model of the organizational context of burnout. Journal of Health and Human Resources Administration, 21, 472–489. Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C. (2000). Preventing burnout and building engagement: A complete program for organizational renewal. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C. (2002). Areas of worklife scale manual. Centre for Organizational Research & Development, Acadia University, Wolfville, NS, Canada. Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C. (2003). A mediation model of job burnout. Unpublished manuscript. Leiter, M. P., Maslach, C., & Aroasio, J. L. (2002). Burnout among health care workers in northern Italy. Technical Report. Centre For Organizational Research and Development, Acadia University, Wolfville, NS, Canada. Leiter, M. P., & Schaufeli, W. B. (1996). Consistency of the burnout construct across occupations. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping, 9, 229–243. Maslach, C. (1993). Burnout: A multidimensional perspective. In: W. B. Schaufeli, C. Maslach & T. Marek (Eds), Professional Burnout: Recent Developments in Theory and Research (pp. 19–32). Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis. Maslach, C. (1998). A multidimensional theory of burnout. In: C. L. Cooper (Ed.), Theories of Organizational Stress (pp. 68–85). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1981). The measurement of experienced burnout. Journal of Occupational Behavior, 2, 99–113. Maslach, C., Jackson, S. E., & Leiter, M. P. (1996). Maslach burnout inventory manual (3rd ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. P. (1997). The truth about burnout. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. P. (1999). Burnout and engagement in the workplace: A contextual analysis. In: T. Urdan (Ed.), Advances in Motivation and Achievement (Vol. 11, pp. 275–302). Stamford, CT: JAI. Maslach, C., & Schaufeli, W. B. (1993). Historical and conceptual development of burnout. In: W. B. Schaufeli, C. Maslach & T. Marek (Eds), Professional Burnout: Recent Developments in Theory and Research (pp. 1–18). Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis. Maslach, D., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 397–422. Maslanka, H. (1996). Burnout, social support and AIDS volunteers. AIDS Care, 8(2), 195–206. O’Reilly, C. A., Chatman, J. A., & Caldwell, D. F. (1999). Managerial personality and performance: A semi-idiographic approach. Journal of Research in Personality, 33, 514–545. Pfeffer, J. (1998). The human equation. Boston: Harvard Business School. Pfeffer, J., & Sutton, R. I. (2000). The knowing-doing gap: How smart companies turn knowledge into action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Pick, D., & Leiter, M. P. (1991). Nurses’ perceptions of the nature and causes of burnout: A comparison of self-reports and standardized measures. The Canadian Journal of Nursing Research, 23(3), 33–48. Richardsen, A. M., Burke, R. J., & Leiter, M. P. (1992). Occupational demands, psychological burnout, and anxiety among hospital personnel in Norway. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping, 5, 62–78.

134


Rousseau, D. (1995). Psychological contracts in organizations: Understanding written and unwritten agreements. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Royal, M. A. m., & Rossi, R. J. (1996). Individual level correlates of sense of community: Findings from workplace and school. Journal of Community Psychology, 24(4), 395–416. Sauter, S. L., & Murphy, L. R. (Eds) (1995). Organizational risk factors for job stress. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Schaufeli, W. B., & Enzmann, D. (1998). The burnout companion to study and practice: A critical analysis. London: Taylor & Francis. Schaufeli, W. B., van Dierendonck, D., & van Gorp, K. (1996). Burnout and reciprocity: Towards a dual-level social exchange model. Work and Stress, 10, 225–237. Schnorpfeil, P., Noll, A., Wirtz, P., Schulze, R., Ehlert, U., Frey, K., & Fischer, J. E. (2002). Assessment of exhaustion and related risk factors in employees in the manufacturing industry – a cross-sectional study. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, 75, 535–540. Shinn, M., Rosario, M., Morch, H., & Chestnut, D. E. (1984). Coping with job stress and burnout in the human services. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 864–876. Siefert, K., Jayaratne, S., & Wayne, A. (1991). Job satisfaction, burnout, and turnover in health care social workers. Health and Social Work, 16(3), 193–202. Siegrist, J. (2002). Effort-reward imbalance at work and health. In: P. L. Perrewé & D. C. Ganster (Eds), Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being: Historical and Current Perspectives on Stress and Health (Vol. 2, pp. 261–291). Oxford: JAI. Stevens, G. B., & O’Neill, P. (1983). Expectation and burnout in the developmental disabilities field. American Journal of Community Psychology, 11, 615–627. Starnaman, S. M., & Miller, K. I. (1992). A test of a causal model of communication and burnout in the teaching profession. Communication Education, 41(1), 40–53. Truchot, D., & Deregard, M. (2001). Perceived inequity, communal orientation and burnout: The role of helping models. Work and Stress, 15, 347–356. Tyler, T. R. (1990). Why people obey the law. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Walsh, W. B., Craik, K. H., & Price, R. H. (Eds) (1992). Person-environment psychology: Models and perspectives. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Walster, E., Berscheid, E., & Walster, G. W. (1973). New directions in equity research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 25, 151–176. Weick, K. E., & Quinn, R. E. (1999). Organizational change and development. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 361–386. White, S. L. (1987). Human resource development: The future through people. Administration in Mental Health, 14(3–4), 199–208.

FEELING VIGOROUS AT WORK? THE CONSTRUCT OF VIGOR AND THE STUDY OF POSITIVE AFFECT IN ORGANIZATIONS Arie Shirom ABSTRACT While often used in everyday exchanges, feeling vigorous at work, that is individuals’ feelings that they have physical strength, emotional energy, and cognitive liveliness, has hardly been subjected to any conceptual inquiry or empirical research. In this chapter, I pursue the following objectives: (a) to review the range of behavioral science literature in which vigor has been considered as a distinct affect; (b) based on this review, to present a conceptual framework of vigor at work; (c) to explore the antecedents of vigor and its consequences, including vigor’s possible effects on individuals’ mental and physical health, and job performance; and (d) to describe a proposed measure of vigor at work and the results of an effort to construct validate the new measure. I conclude by pointing out a few open research questions that concern the study of vigor at work.

Emotional and Physiological Processes and Positive Intervention Strategies Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, Volume 3, 135–164 Copyright © 2004 by Elsevier Ltd. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 1479-3555/doi:10.1016/S1479-3555(03)03004-X

135

136

ARIE SHIROM

INTRODUCTION A striking introductory observation that one can make on feeling vigorous at work is that the term is ubiquitous in common language. Vigor, in its various forms, has long been the topic of literary accounts, artistic descriptions, and philosophical inquiries. The expressions “I feel energetic” or “I feel vigorous” appear widely in both lay psychology and narrative accounts of life in organizations. To illustrate, in research on leadership behavior, feeling vigorous is often associated with managerial effectiveness (e.g. Church & Waclawsk, 1998). As a prime example of a positive emotion, however, vigor has rarely been the topic of conceptual and integrative analysis. This stands in sharp contrast to the exponential growth in research on vigor’s negative counterpart, burnout at work. The popularity of burnout as a major topic of research appears to continue unabated (cf. Schaufeli & Enzmann, 1998, pp. 70–72). Burnout is often viewed as an affective reaction to ongoing stress whose core content is the gradual depletion over time of individuals’ intrinsic energetic resources, comprising of emotional exhaustion, physical fatigue, and cognitive weariness (Shirom, 1989, 2003). In this chapter, I focus on the opposite of burnout, namely on individuals’ feelings that they possess physical strength, emotional energy and cognitive liveliness, a set of interconnected affective experiences dubbed as vigor. Vigor is viewed as a core affect (Russell, 2003) attributed to one’s work milieu. That is, I present and elaborate the conceptual domain of vigor as an affective response in the context of work organizations. This is done by my pursuing the following objectives: (a) to review the range of behavioral science literature in which vigor has been considered as an affect; (b) based on this review, to present a conceptual framework of vigor at work; (c) to explore some of the organizational antecedents of vigor and its possible impact on individuals’ mental and physical health, and job performance; and (d) to describe a proposed measure of vigor at work and present results of a study that provides support for the new measure’s construct validity. Finally, I point out some of the open questions to be addressed in future research on vigor. Following Gray and Watson (2001), I define an emotion as a highly structured response to a specific type of events or environmental interactions that gives rise to a characteristic adaptive behavior, adaptive behavior that is relevant to the needs, goals, or survival of the organism. This definition includes the so-called basic emotions (e.g. fear, joy, love) and social emotions (e.g. guilt, jealousy). Gray and Watson (2001) used the dimensions of duration, focus on the situation, intensity, frequency, and function to differentiate between emotion and mood. They (Gray & Watson, 2001) viewed emotions as referring to short term, focused, intense, infrequent, and adaptive responses, while moods refer to long term and pervasive, unfocused, less intense, and continuous responses, and proposed the term affect to

Feeling Vigorous at Work

137

denote both emotions and moods. According to the cognitive theory of emotions developed by Lazarus and Folkman (1984, pp. 273–274, 284–285) cognitions and emotions are theoretically separable even though they tend to appear conjoined in nature, mutually affecting each other over time. Most theories regard emotions as indicating fundamental action tendencies whose purpose is to motivate behavior related to the survival of the species (e.g. Watson, 2002). The primary functions, or adaptive value, of emotional experiences are expressed in such activities as preparing for action, withdrawing from danger, and communicating with other members of the species. In this chapter, I refer to vigor as an affect; however, the basic features of this affect, as discussed in the definitional framework developed latter, may lead future researchers to regard it as an emotion. Vigor, like other basic emotions, represents an innate pattern of responses to environmental cues that has evolved because of its general functional significance.

PAST APPROACHES TO THE STUDY OF VIGOR Positive Emotions The construct of vigor represents one of the affective states referred to in the emerging area of study, the study of positive emotions (e.g. Kahneman, Diener & Schwartz, 1999; Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000; Snyder & Lopez, 2002). A leading model in this research area is the positive emotions model (PEM), which proposes that positive emotions, like happiness, joy, pride, and love (Lazarus & Cohen-Charash, 2001), have health-protecting physiological effects, including low autonomic reactivity relative to the effects of negative emotions (Fredrickson, 1998). The model also includes the enhancing effects of positive emotions on physical health and longevity (Salovey, Bedell, Detweiler & Mayer, 2000). The biological mechanisms underlying these effects of positive emotions are just beginning to be understood (Edwards & Cooper, 1988; Fredrickson, Mancuso, Branigan et al., 2000), but they are likely to include the enhancing the immune system’s capacity to mount an effective response to challenges and the adoption of healthy life-style habits like smoking abstention. Excluding job satisfaction and commitment, often conceptualized as attitude-based and not affect-based variables (Weiss & Brief, 2001), there is a scarcity of theory and research on the effects of positive affects on individuals’ performance and organizational health and productivity (cf. Weiss & Brief, 2001). Recently, researchers have begun to pay increasing attention to the effects of positive emotions on physical and psychological well being at work (Brief & Weiss, 2002; Fisher, 2002; Katwyk, Fox, Spector et al., 2000; King, 2001;

138

ARIE SHIROM

Tsai, 2001; Zerbe, 2000) and in general (e.g. Ashby, Isen & Turken, 1999; Ryff & Singer, 2002). A prominent example of a measure constructed to gauge positive and negative affects at work is the Katwyk et al. (2000) Job-Related Affective Well-Being Scale (JAWS). This measure (JAWS) was based on the work of Russell on the dimensional structure of emotions. Russell (1980, 2003) views emotions as systematically interrelated in a two-dimensional space defined by the orthogonal dimensions of pleasure and arousal (the circumplex model, described below). JAWS refers to pure affect, as opposed to the belief-oriented or attitude-based conceptualizations of job satisfaction (Weiss & Brief, 2001), and to context-specific affects experienced in response to job characteristics, as opposed to scales that were developed to gauge context-free emotional traits (e.g. Positive Affectivity Scale; cf. Weiss & Brief, 2001). The conceptualization of vigor follows that of JAWS in that vigor is regarded as an affective response experienced in the context of work. Katwyk et al. (2000) did not define vigor as a distinct affect. There is ample empirical support for the position that positive emotions comprise several components that may be weakly related and that researchers should move from attempts to measure them globally to component-specific approaches (Fredrickson, 2002; Lazarus & Cohen-Charash, 2001). This is the theoretical approach that I follow in this chapter.

Mood States Mood may be regarded as a prolonged core affect with no object (Russell, 2003, p. 147). The concept of mood tends to be fuzzy because in most definitions neither the duration of the mood nor its degree of stability is clearly defined (Russell, 2003). Oatley and Johnson-Laired (1987) argued that there is a close relation between mood and emotion, in that they represent object-less and object-directed versions of the same processes. I follow their lead and regard vigorous mood as a free-floating, object-free, and relatively long term version of the affective experience of vigor, representing a focused, spontaneous, quite intense, and relatively short-term response to work-related interactions. Vigor as a mood state and vigor as an affect state share many similarities, like being both positive affect, having an analogous approach function, being quite central and not peripheral affective experiences, and being controlled by similar processes. In past research, vigor has been studied predominantly as a mood state in clinical samples. The empirical studies that measured vigor as a mood state have influenced the construction of one of the vigor subscales, described below. Sometimes, mood states are defined for very short periods of time (e.g. POMS, described below). The affective experience of vigor at work differs from vigor as a mood in that it has


139

an object – personally meaningful interactions that occur at work as appraised by individuals, and lasts for a relatively short duration. However, in actual research practice, virtually identical techniques, such as gift-giving, were used for inducing positive moods as well as positive emotions (Fredrickson, 2002). The Profile of Mood States (POMS) The Profile o Mood States (POMS: McNair, Lorr & Dropleman, 1971) was one of the earliest measures of any positive mood, and included, among the six subscales of different moods, an eight-item subscale gauging vigor, using items like feeling cheerful, lively, alert, active and vigorous. The instructions ask the respondent to describe “How have you been feeling during the past week including today.” However, as with other affect measures, the timescale can be varied. The response scale for the items in the POMS range from 0 = not at all to 4 = extremely. In the studies using the POMS, results that concern the vigor subscale have often been reported. In the area of sports psychology, a recent meta-analysis of studies that have used the POMS in association with either athletic achievement or athletic performance (Beedie, Terri & Lane, 2000) found a moderate effect size between the POMS vigor subscale and performance outcomes. Studies that have used the POMS and its vigor subscale to predict physiological outcomes abound in the literature. For example, the vigor subscale was found to positively predict sleep quality (Bardwell, Berry, Ancoli-Israel & Dimsdale, 1999), as well as shorter duration of recovery from injury (Quinn & Fallon, 1999). As Payne (2001) noted, different aspects of the construct validity of this scale have been extensively studied, but primarily with clinical samples such as cancer patients, drug abusers and brief psychotherapy patients, with hardly any past use in work organizations. Other Measures of Vigor as a Mood State Yet another widely used measure of mood is the Activation-Deactivation Adjective Check List, available in short and long forms (Thayer, 1996). It includes a subscale that gauges energy level. Mood inventories developed by other researchers also include measures of vigor or energy levels. The UWIST Mood Adjective Checklist (Matthews, Jones & Chamberlain, 1990) includes a subscale of energetic arousal that contained eight items, including the four items of “active,” “energetic,” “alert,” and “vigorous” and also four tiredness items, like “sluggish,” “tired,” and “passive” (Payne, 2001). Matthews et al. (1990) reported that the subscale of energetic arousal was negatively correlated with workload and that it was the only mood measure sensitive to drugs. The Brunel University Mood Scale (Lane & Lane, 2002) includes a subscale that taps vigor, with items like “lively” and “energetic.” Investigators have also attempted to construct a mood state measures of energy level or vigor that is not part of a mood measurement inventory. For example,

140

ARIE SHIROM

Christensen and Duncan (1995) have constructed an energetic arousal scale that gauged energy level on a 5-point scale ranging from “not at all” (scale value of 1) to “extremely” (scale value of 5). Interestingly, Christensen and Duncan (1995) compared the discriminant validity of the POMS subscale of vigor, Thayer’s energy scale, their own measure of energetic arousal, and other general measures of negative (e.g. exhaustion) and positive affect in distinguishing depressed from non-depressed individuals. They (1995) found, using discriminant function analysis, that their own measure of energetic arousal and exhaustion, and to some extent also the POMS vigor scale, provided the greatest relative contribution to the overall discriminant function. This study’s findings are indicative of the potential promise of using vigor to predict individuals’ well being. The notion of vigor that emerges from the review of past attempts to define and measure this construct is that it has been conceptualized and measured primarily as a mood state assessed primarily in clinical-psychological studies, in contrast to the current focus on vigor as an affective experience at work. Most of the measures of vigor as a mood have been based on the theoretical position that vigor and burnout, or vigor and tiredness, are inversely related and cannot be experienced simultaneously, as reflected in the practice of reverse-scoring tiredness or fatigue items in the vigor-as-a-mood scales to arrive at a total score representing the positive mood of vigor. In contrast, as discussed below, I argue for the theoretical position that vigor and burnout are obliquely related and do not represent the extreme poles of the same continuum. The notion of vigor as a mood state in the above past attempts to define and measure it is rather limited to one form of energy, that of physical strength; it ignores other possible personal resources that are interwoven with physical strength, like emotional energy and cognitive liveliness.

Vigor and Engagement Analogous to the current report on the conceptualization of vigor, Maslach and her colleagues (Maslach, 1998; Maslach, Schaufeli & Leiter, 2001) have proposed a positive mirror-image of burnout, dubbed engagement, as representing the other pole in the continuum ranging from a state of burnout to a state of engagement. Maslach and her colleagues (e.g. Maslach, 1998) have defined burnout as a syndrome that includes three dimensions: exhaustion, cynicism, and reduced personal efficacy, and have constructed a widely used measure, the Maslach Burnout Inventory – General Survey (MBI-GS) to gauge it. The conceptualization of engagement reflects the positive poles of each MBI-GS dimension. Thus, engagement comprises of three components, high energy (the positive counterpart


141

of emotional exhaustion), strong involvement (the obverse of cynicism), and a sense of efficacy (vs. reduced personal accomplishment in the MBI-GS (Maslach, Jackson & Leiter, 1996). Engagement, as defined by Maslach et al. (2001), has yet to be conceptually validated in empirical research. Schaufeli and his associated (Demerouti, Bakker, de Jonge et al., 2001; Schaufeli, Martinez, Pinto et al., 2002a; Schaufeli, Salanova, Gonzalez-Roma et al., 2002b) have modified the original conceptualization of engagement in several important ways and have investigated the construct validity of the newly defined engagement construct. Therefore, the focus here is on engagement as defined by Schaufeli and his colleagues (2002a, b). Schaufeli and his colleagues viewed engagement and burnout as relatively independent of each other, thus accepting the bivariate view of positive and negative emotions. They have defined engagement as a positive-affective motivational state of fulfillment in employees, a state that comprises three components or dimensions: vigor, dedication, and absorption (Schaufeli et al., 2002a, b). Vigor refers to high level of energy, motivation to invest effort at work, and resilience, that is withstanding difficulties and persisting despite obstacles. Dedication refers to strong involvement in one’s work, accompanied by feelings of enthusiasm and significance. Absorption refers to a pleasant state of total immersion in one’s work, like the sensation of time passing quickly and being unable to detach oneself from the job (Maslach et al., 2001). Schaufeli and his colleagues have made a contribution in redefining the three engagement components thus to establish the discriminant validity of each relative to often-used constructs in the organizational sciences, such as job involvement and job inefficacy. Still, there are some difficulties with the conceptual domain of engagement as defined by Schaufeli and his colleagues. The three dimensions of engagement were not deducted theoretically, and therefore the underlying rationale of their inclusion in one syndrome has yet to be elaborated. Vigor, like most other positive affects, facilitates goal-directed behavior (Carver & Scheier, 1990) or approach behavior (Fredrickson, 2002; Watson, 2002) and therefore could be expected to prompt individuals to engage with their job and work environment. However, I argue that engagement behavior should be regarded as residing in a distinct conceptual domain that does not overlap with that of vigor. Several other internal states may function as signals encouraging individuals to engage with their environment, including positive emotions such as joy or contentment, sensory pleasures, optimistic orientation, and courage (Kahn, 1992; Watson, 2002). To illustrate this point, Fry’s (1995) study of executive women found that optimists, who expected gain or growth from their encounters with daily hassles, tended to be engaged more with the environment, in comparison to the withdrawal and distancing from the work environment found among the pessimists.

142

ARIE SHIROM

There are specific problems related to each of the components of engagement, as defined by Schaufeli and his colleagues (2002a, b). Absorption, gauging one’s immersion in one’s job, appears to overlap considerably with psychological presence at work, defined by Kahn (1992) to include the elements of being attentive, connected, integrated, and focused on work. Kahn (1992, p. 340) constructed a theoretical model in which psychological presence leads directly to engagement at work, defined in behavioral terms as referring to energetic task performance, being innovative and creative at work, and openly and freely expressing feelings and thoughts. Dedication, yet another component of the Schaufeli et al. (2002a, b) newly conceptualized construct of engagement, appears to overlap with the major dimensions of job involvement, that is, the extent to which a person identifies psychologically with his or her work and the importance of work to one’s total self-image (Brown, 1996). Vigor, as defined by this group of researchers, incorporates considerable extraneous conceptual content in that, in addition to the core meaning of high energy level, it includes motivational elements (e.g. willingness to invest effort) and resilience (e.g. persistence in the face of difficulties). Resilience has been defined as the maintenance of high levels of positive affect and well being in the face of significant adversity (Davidson, 2000). When resilient individuals experience negative affect, they are able to process information provided by the event causing it, learn from it, and control their biological systems in such a way as to minimize the effect of the negative affect that they have experienced (Davidson, 2000). Clearly, therefore, resilience is concerned with individuals’ response to a negative affect. The items used by Schaufeli and his colleagues (2002a, b) to gauge resilience in their engagement scale, like “I am very resilient, mentally, in my job,” and “I always persevere at my work, even when things do not go well,” probably reflect evaluative judgments that could be a behavioral response to feeling vigorous at work. An advantage of the conceptualization of vigor proposed in the following section is that it avoids the confounders described above by focusing on the positive core affect of vigor.

CONCEPTUALIZING VIGOR Vigor and Conservation of Resources Theory Vigor represents a positive affective response to one’s ongoing interactions with significant elements in one’s job and work environment that comprises the interconnected feelings of physical strength, emotional energy, and cognitive liveliness. Theoretically, this view of vigor is derived from Hobfoll’s (1989, 1998) Conservation of Resources (COR) theory. The COR theory’s central tenets are


143

that people have a basic motivation to obtain, retain and protect that which they value. The things that people value are called resources, of which there are several types, including material, social and energetic resources. In general, resources are those personal energies and characteristics, objects and conditions that are valued by individuals or that serve as the means for the attainment of other objects, personal characteristics, conditions or energies. Examples of internal resources are optimism, self-esteem and self-efficacy. Examples of external resources are employment, social support and economic status. The concept of vigor relates to energetic resources only, namely to physical, emotional and cognitive energies. It carries with it the connotation of these resources being augmented over time. Vigor represents an affective state that individuals attribute to their job and workplace when asked about it and do so spontaneously, in contrast to emotional traits like positive affectivity that refers to the tendency to experience positive affect across situations and times (cf. Fox & Spector, 2002). There are three reasons for the focus on the combination of physical strength, emotional energy and cognitive liveliness in the conceptualization of vigor. First, these forms of energy are individually possessed. The COR theory predicts that the three factors constituting vigor are closely interrelated (cf. Hobfoll & Shirom, 2000). The COR theory argues that personal resources affect each other and exist as a resource pool, and that an expansion of one is often associated with the other being augmented (Hobfoll, 1998). Second, the three forms of individually possessed energy included in the conceptualization of vigor represent a coherent set that does not overlap any other established behavioral science concept, like resilience or potency, or any aspect of the self-concept, such as self-esteem and self-efficacy, a point I will return to in a subsequent section. Third, the conceptualization of vigor clearly differentiates it from its likely consequences like engagement or job involvement or resilience. Feeling vigorous is probably directly related to one’s appraisal of relevant job demands and available coping resources, as proposed by Lazarus appraisal theory (Lazarus, 1999). The cognitive appraisals leading to feeling vigorous may as well include one’s assessment of one’s movement toward a goal and the pace of that movement, as proposed by Carver and Scheier’s (1990, 1998) theory of regulated behavior. This theory proposes that human experience is largely powered by goals toward which people progress and a self-regulation system that checks one’s current status in relation to one’s goal-determined reference values. It further postulates that the rate of progress toward goals gives rise to affect (Carver & Scheier, 1990, 1998). I expect self-assessed physical strength, as gauged by instruments such as the Physical Self-Perception Profile (Fox & Corbin, 1989), and various ergonomic measures of general muscle strength to be closely related to the physical strength subscale of vigor as an affective state.

144

ARIE SHIROM

Vigor and Sensory Pleasure An individual may derive sensory pleasure from any activity. To illustrate, listening to the fourth movement in Tchaikovsky’s Symphony No. 4, a stimulating and exciting piece, has been found to arouse feelings of vigor (Iwanaga & Moroki, 1999). Bodily activity, like engaging in sports activities or exercise, is often accompanied by physiological changes, including the secretion of endorphins into the blood stream, which induce vigor as a mood state (e.g. Hansen, Stevens & Coast, 2001; Lee, Goldberg, Sallis et al., 2001). What are the conceptual differences between the emotional experience of physical strength, a component of vigor, and the positive physical feeling accompanying physical exercises? Both vigor and the above sensory pleasures share the positive feeling that accompanies physiological changes. However, there are two major conceptual differences. First, vigor, or any component of it, does not depend on pleasurable body stimulation. Consider, for example, an employee who has successfully solved a client’s service problem, or who has found the right software solution to a vexing computer problem at work. He or she may appraise these situations or events in such a way as to develop the feelings of emotional energy, cognitive liveliness, or physical strength regardless of any pleasurable body stimulation. Second, according to Lazarus’ (1999) emotion theory, individuals’ positive emotional reactions follow their appraisal of the situation or event as personally meaningful and as beneficial. For most people, engaging in sport activities automatically creates a pleasurable sensation of fulfilling a basic bodily need to be physically active (Fredrickson, 2002).

Vigor and Other Types of Affect What is the relationship between vigor and other types of affect? To answer this query, I use Russell’s (1980) circumplex model of affect, one of the most widely studied multidimensional representations of affect (Remington, Fabrigar & Visser, 2000). The circumplex model was found to have cross-cultural validity (Russell, 1983) and has been supported by recent reviews (Russell & Carroll, 1999; Yik, Russell & Barrett, 1999). Russell (1980) showed that the interrelationships among a set of emotions can be represented by a spatial model in which affective concepts fall in a circle in the following order: pleasure (0◦ ), excitement (45◦ ), arousal (90◦ ), distress (135◦ ), displeasure (180◦ ), depression (225◦ ), sleepiness (270◦ ) and relaxation (315◦ ). The same circular order of emotions in a space defined by the two dimensions of pleasure- displeasure (misery) and arousal-sleepiness was replicated in five different cultures (Russell, 1983). Pleasure-displeasure is represented by the horizontal dimension and reflects the traditional view of emotional valence (e.g. Eaton & Funder, 2000). Arousal-sleepiness is represented


145

by the vertical dimension and reflects the traditional view of emotion as activation. Russell (1983, 2003) posits that each affective state can be identified and differentiated from other affective state by where it lies on the two-dimensional space. Vigor’s location on the two-dimensional space is postulated to be midway on dimension of arousal and in the first quadrant of the dimension of pleasure. That is, vigor represents a combination of moderate amount of arousal and some pleasure. As Gray and Watson (2001) argue, the existence of higher order dimensions is compatible with the existence of lower order specific affective states, and the encompassing structural model of Russell (1983) subsumes specific and discrete emotions. This view leads to the following question, dealt with next: is vigor the bipolar opposite of burnout?

VIGOR AND BURNOUT: BIPOLAR OR TWO INDEPENDENT AFFECTIVE STATES? Vigor in Stress Inventories Warr’s measure of job-related affective well being included, as one of the three dimension, the bipolar dimension labeled tiredness – vigor, but his original data was shown in a subsequent reanalysis using confirmatory factor analysis to better fit a model in which each pole was represented by a separate dimension (Payne, 2001). In the same vein, Daniels (2000), following the bipolar view of affective well being at work, measured vigor by the items of active, alert and full of energy, and tiredness by the three items of tired, fatigued and sleepy, but then reverse-scored the three tiredness items and averaged all six items to create a tiredness-vigor unidimensional affect scale. The same practice was followed in several of the mood measurement inventories reviewed above. Vigor is sometimes included in stress measurement inventories as a stress reaction representing the bipolar opposite of burnout. The Pressure Management Indicator (PMI: Williams & Cooper, 1998), a comprehensive self-report measurement inventory that covers job stress and also strain, includes as a stress reaction dubbed “Energy Levels.” This stress reaction refers to the amount of energy and vitality respondents feel they possess. It is measured on a scale that ranges from having less energy or feeling tired to having more energy or feeling less tired. This is another example of the theoretical position (cf. Maslach et al., 2001) that views vigor and burnout as the two extreme poles on the same continuum, representing a single dimension. The PMI has been used in several studies (e.g. Gill & Davidson, 2001; Kirkcaldy, Levine & Shephard, 2000). Does vigor represent the opposite pole of burnout on the same dimension? Are low levels of burnout associated with high levels of vigor, and vice versa?

146

ARIE SHIROM

Vigor and Burnout as Representing Different Biobehavioral Systems Burnout and vigor probably represent two subjective components of more general biobehavioral systems that have evolved to address very different types of tasks that humankind has had to face (Watson, Wiese, Vaidya & Tellegen, 1999). Burnout is probably an antecedent of the components of our withdrawal-oriented behavioral inhibition system. The essential purpose of this system is to keep the organism out of trouble by inhibiting behavior that might lead to physical danger, pain or some other undesirable consequences (Watson et al., 1999). Chronic exposure to job demands may result in the gradual depletion of persons’ energetic resources, namely may lead to physical fatigue, emotional exhaustion, and cognitive weariness, the three components of burnout as defined by Shirom (1989, 2003). According to COR theory (Hobfoll, 1989), employees often try to cope with such situations by minimizing net loss of resources. Therefore, a coping mechanism likely to be adopted by those who are particularly vulnerable to further loss of resources, namely those who are already burned-out, is that of psychologically and physically withdrawing from the sources of the threatening job demands, including by adopting cynical and detached attitudes toward their colleagues and service recipients. In burnout research, the subscale of cynicism (depersonalization) of the BMI-GS, that includes items tapping one’s tendency to emotionally distance oneself from one’s colleagues or service recipients. This is indicative of the psychological withdrawal process. The close association found between the emotional exhaustion and cynicism subscales of the MBI-GS (Schaufeli & Enzmann, 1998) is indicative of the relevance of the behavioral inhibition system to feelings of emotional exhaustion. Still, the emotional experience of burnout and its probable consequent coping behavior, people’s psychological withdrawal from their significant others at work, represent two distinct conceptual domains (cf. Shirom, 2003). In sharp contrast to burnout, vigor appears to be a component of the approachoriented behavior facilitation system (Watson et al., 1999). This system, according to Watson (2002), directs organisms toward situations and experiences that potentially may yield pleasure and reward and facilitates the procuring of resources like food, shelter and sexual partners–resources that are essential for the survival of both the individual and the species. Arguably, feeling vigorous may be most adaptive when the potential for rewards and additional resources following approach behaviors is very high. Positive emotions fulfill similar functions in other theories of emotions. Thus, Fredrickson’s (2002) broaden-and build theory posits that positive emotions tend to enhance activity levels while negative emotions have the opposite effect of narrowing activity levels. Carver and Scheier’s (1998) model of regulated behavior regards positive emotions as


147

resulting from advancement or doing better on goal attainment at a pace faster than expected. In line with these theoretical positions, I argue that feeling burnout may be most adaptive when the potential for risk, pain or loss of resources is very high. Furthermore, in the work context, situations and experiences that imply only gain and no loss or only loss and no gain are very rare and that most situations represent a combination of varying degrees of gain and loss potentials. Therefore, from a conceptual point of view, vigor and burnout are obliquely related and do not represent two poles of the same dimension. For most individuals, job-related tasks carry with them, when successfully accomplished, some potential of gain, as well as some potential of loss if performance is inadequate. Demanding work situation are likely to evoke negative feelings such as burnout, but also present opportunities to experience positive emotions like vigor when accomplishing tasks and attaining objectives (Dweck & Legget, 1988). Thus, Zapf et al. (Zapf, Vogt, Seifert, Martini & Isic, 1999) found that the explicit requirement for expressing positive emotions at work, involving employees who interact with customers, was associated with feelings of personal accomplishment but also with feelings of emotional exhaustion. Researchers investigating the role of emotions in explaining performance in sports have found that high performance is often associated with both negative feelings, related to the demands of the situation, and positive feelings, relating to the actual activity (Hanin, 2000). Brain research provides additional support for this bivariate view of the relationship between burnout and vigor: this point is further elaborated in a latter section in which I discuss the effects of vigor on physical health. Vigor and Burnout as Related to Positive and Negative Emotions Yet another school of thought among emotion theorists maintains that positive and negative emotions cannot fully and simultaneously coexist, and that they are inversely related. This theoretical position is referred to in the literature as the bipolar view (Diener, 1999). The empirical literature reviewed by Russell and Carroll (1999) clearly supports the bipolar view when momentarily experienced affects were assessed. However, when persons are asked to rate their affective experiences over a more extended period, then as Payne (2001) argued most people in normal environments will have experienced both positive and negative affective experiences. The mechanism that may account for the hypothesized incompatibility between positive and negative emotion has not been adequately identified, but it has been suggested that each type of emotions triggers diametrically opposite cognitive processes (Fredrickson, Mancuso, Branigan & Tugade, 2000). The bipolar view of vigor and burnout is implicit in the approach taken by Maslach et al. (2001), discussed above, and explicit in the PMI.

148

ARIE SHIROM

Reich and his colleagues (e.g. Reich & Zautra, 2002) have proposed an integrative model that posits that both theoretical positions are valid, depending on the contextual state of the person. They (e.g. Reich & Zautra, 2002) hypothesized that the central contextual factor is the degree of stress the person perceives to exist in his/her environmental interactions. High level of stress acts to reduce a person’s ability to process information, lead to cognitive simplification and in turn to failure to discriminate between affects. Therefore, a bipolar report on positive and negative affective states may result. Low level of stress, in turn, allows for optimal information processing, including the ability to distinguish and report independently on feelings of positive and negative emotions. Cacioppo and his colleagues (e.g. Cacioppo, Gardner & Bernston, 1999) have proposed a conceptually similar integrative model stipulating that either bipolarity or independence (bivariate relations) may result when underlying approach and avoidance activation systems are brought into play by any given set of environmental stimuli. However, they also argue that the two biological activation systems are basically independent (Cacioppo et al., 1999). This succinct review of the positions of emotion theorists lead me to conclude that researchers should regard the relationship between vigor and burnout as relatively independent, and therefore adopt separate and distinct measures of these two affective states. However, I also suggest that future research should not disregard the possibility that burnout and vigor may be found to be inversely correlated, thus supporting the bipolar view, under specific conditions like when individuals perceive themselves to be under high levels of stress.

ON THE CONSTRUCT VALIDITY OF VIGOR Vigor and Related Constructs This section attempts to clarify the relationships between vigor and neighboring constructs. In general, I expect vigor to be closely related to constructs reflecting the basic human motivation to be effective in relation to the environment, like resilience or toughness. I also expect vigor to be linked to constructs reflecting one’s inherent wish to self-regulate one’s actions, like potency and learned resourcefulness, and to a mastery orientation regarding tasks, like self-efficacy. For space consideration, only a sub-set of these neighboring constructs will be discussed. Self-Efficacy Self-efficacy has been defined as an individual’s confidence about his or her abilities to mobilize the motivation, energetic resources, and courses of action needed to successfully execute a specific task within a given context (Stajkovic &


149

Luthans, 1998). Therefore, self-efficacy involves a belief, not an affective state. The content of this belief includes, among other components, one’s assessment of one’s energetic resources. I expect vigor, as defined above to include one’s feelings of physical power, emotional energy, and cognitive liveliness, to be closely related to self-efficacy. Self-efficacy beliefs have been shown to influence which activities people engage in, how much effort they will expend and how long they will persevere in the face of adversity (Stajkovic & Luthans, 1998). Potency The construct of potency, as defined by Ben-Sira (1985), bears some similarities to that of self-efficacy since it refers to a person’s belief in her/his own capacities and is explained by successful coping experiences in the past. However, it also includes other components, like a commitment to the social environment and a perception of the social environment as basically ordered, predictable and meaningful. These additional components of potency are somewhat akin to Antonovsky’s (1987) conceptualization of the sense of coherence. However, the sense of coherence (Antonovsky, 1987) also includes manageability, defined as one’s confidence that one has the necessary coping resources to meet environmental demands. Both constructs of potency and sense of coherence do not include affective components, so there is hardly any overlap with the conceptual approach to vigor posited above. Learned Resourcefulness Learned resourcefulness refers to a set of well-learned skills and behaviors by which individuals self-regulate, or control, their behavior (Rosenbaum, 1990). Conceptually, it is regarded as a personality repertoire that includes the components of regressive, reformative, and experiential self-control. The construct is thus defined in terms of the mechanisms that individuals use to: (a) regulate internal responses such as pain or emotions (regressive self-control); (b) optimize the effectiveness of goal-directed behaviors (reformative self-control); and (c) optimize their enjoyment of pleasurable activities (experiential self-control). As an example, the more skilled a person is in planning future activities and in problem-solving strategies, the higher his/her score on reformative self-control. Learned resourcefulness emphases on self-control processes involving one’s skills and behaviors probably complement the emotion-focused definition of vigor.

Work-Related Predictors of Vigor It is quite possible that there are innate, genotypic differences that antecede phenotypic variations in vigor (cf. Watson, 2002). For instance, I expect that

150

ARIE SHIROM

men would experience higher levels of vigor than women, and would thus report these levels, since the accepted norms associated with the masculine gender role emphasize strength, independence, and invulnerability (Stanton, Parsa & Austenfeld, 2002). The literature on dispositional influences on affective states may lead to the expectation that those high on the personality trait of extraversion (or positive affectivity) are more likely to experience vigor relative to those high on the trait of neuroticism (cf. Brief & Weiss, 2002). Indeed, Matthews et al. (1990) found that the mood state of energetic arousal was related to extroversion. In this section, we focus on job features and organizational characteristics that may lead job incumbents to feel energetic. This is analogous to researchers’ efforts to explore the ways in which stress and overload are implicated in the development of burnout (Maslach et al., 2001; Shirom, 2003). As noted, employees’ work-related emotional experiences result from their appraisals of ongoing interactions with their job and work environments. Therefore, organizations do not have a direct way of eliciting specific emotional reactions in all employees. Organizations do attempt to regulate employees’ emotions, including by means of prescribing, neutralizing, buffering, or normalizing them (cf. Ashforth & Humphrey, 1995). In a similar vein, organizational decision makers may devise strategic interventions designed to modify or transform certain work elements in such a way as to increase the likelihood of employees feeling invigorated. Only a few of those work elements are discussed below. Job Redesign Hackman and Oldham (1980) have developed one of the most influential models explaining employee positive emotions, specifically job satisfaction, by job features and their resultant psychological states. The job characteristic model (Hackman & Oldham, 1980) posits that the higher the levels of five job characteristics – task autonomy, significance, feedback, identity and skill variety, the more pronounced the resultant psychological states. These resultant psychological states are knowledge of results, perceived meaningfulness of work, and felt responsibility for job outcomes. The resultant psychological states lead to higher employee job satisfaction and performance. Empirical research has shown that the most powerful predictors of employee job satisfaction and performance were job autonomy and feedback (Fried & Ferris, 1987). Brousseau (1983) has argued that autonomous jobs, namely jobs that allow employees to formulate more elaborated work plans and pursue self-determined goals, would enhance feelings of personal efficacy and thereby enhance their feelings of cognitive liveliness. Following this rationale, I expect vigor to be yet another mediator the effects of the five job characteristics on employee organizational commitment and job performance.


151

Multiple and/or Conflicting Roles Having multiple or conflicting roles in an organization has been regarded in the organizational behavior literature as inducing perceived role conflict among employees (Van Sell, Brief & Schuler, 1981). In contrast to this prevailing view, Marks (1977) has suggested that multiple and conflicting roles can lead to the creation of additional energetic resources. Drawing on similar situations in the physical sciences, Marks (1977) argued that role conflict might actually increase available energetic resources. The mechanism involved may include one’s exposure to many sources of information, one’s being able to adjust more flexibly to the demands of diverse role partners, one’s reduced level of boredom, and ones’ being able to develop cognitive skill like finding creative solutions that integrate diverse viewpoints. Again, vigor could be expected to mediate the relationship between multiple role, as appraised to those experiencing them, and augmented energetic resources. Work Groups Work groups tend to share emotions because of common socialization experiences and common organizational features, norms and regulations that govern the expression of emotions, task interdependence, and the phenomenon of emotional contagion (Brief & Weiss, 2002). It has been found that work teams characterized by mutual trust and high social support tend to be more cohesive and goal-directed, and that these qualities in turn lead to favorable employee morale and job-related well being (Karasek & Theorell, 1990). Specifically, work group cohesion was found to predict vigor, measured as a mood state (Terry, Carron, Pink et al., 2000). Leadership Style There are indications in the literature that leaders who feel energetic are likely to energize their followers (cf. Brief & Weiss, 2002). In a similar vein, the transformational leadership literature often makes the claim that transormational leaders exhibit energizing emotions in order to arouse similar emotional states among their followers (Avolio, 1999). Transformational leadership comprises four key elements: idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration (Avolio, 1999). Some of these elements could affect, directly or as mediated by another variable, the experience of vigor. For instance, individualized consideration, the expression of care and demonstration of empathy to followers, enhance their level of perceived social support, and inspirational motivation is likely to heighten followers’ self-efficacy. Intellectual stimulation, a component of transformational leadership which consists of encouraging followers to think creatively (Avolio, 1999),

152

ARIE SHIROM

is likely to have a direct positive effect on cognitive liveliness, a component of vigor.

The Relationships of Vigor with Employee Well Being The emotion work literature (e.g. Zapf et al., 1999) provides instances wherein displays of vigor may be mandated by the organization. Exploring the history of emotion research in organizational scholarship, Rafaeli and Worline (2001) have argued that it is impossible to treat emotions exclusively as an individual force in work organizations. They have further argued (Rafaeli & Worline, 2001) that in organizational research it is very difficult to distinguish between individually “felt” emotions and work-role mandated or organizationally required “displayed” emotions. Most organizations have explicit or implicit requirements concerning which emotions employees need to express, and how and when they should express them (cf. Ashforth & Humphrey, 1995). Displaying vigor is probably expected from employees in managerial roles (e.g. Church & Waclawsk, 1998). The extent to which actually “experienced” or “displayed” vigor has different consequences to individual well being and organizational health should be the target of future research efforts. For the sake of simplicity, I will assume that both “felt” and “displayed” vigor have similar consequences with respect to employee well being and organizational health. Since positive affective state are indicators of mental well being (e.g. Katwyk et al., 2000), individuals’ level of vigor may be considered as an indicator of their optimal psychological functioning. Many investigators defined the conceptual domain of health-related quality of life as including vigor. To illustrate, the operational definition of well being by the World Health Organization, used in their questionnaire, includes items like “I feel energetic,” “I feel active,” I feel vigorous,” and “I wake up feeling fresh,” items used in part in the measure of vigor described in the last section (WHOQOL Group, 1994). One of the subscales used in popular Medical Outcomes Survey Short-Form 36 (Ware & Sherbourne, 1992) is that of vitality, including two positively-toned and two negatively-toned affective items (i.e. feel full of pep, have a lot of energy, feel worn out, and feel tired). Fredrickson and Joiner (2002) found that positive emotions, including vigor, broaden the scope of cognition and enable flexible and creative thinking, in line with earlier findings (e.g. Ashby, Isen & Turken, 1999). They (Fredrickson & Joiner, 2002) further found that this process of cognitive broadening enhanced psychological resilience among their subjects and produced an upward spiral toward enhanced emotional well-being. Therefore, it is possible that positive emotions, including vigor, trigger a dynamic process of continuous improvement


153

in mental well-being among those experiencing them. This line of reasoning is further supported by Carver and Scheier’s (1990) theory of regulated behavior, in that the action tendencies linked to vigor are likely to include a tendency to explore, expand effort, and otherwise be active in one’s interactions with the immediate environment. These specific action tendencies associated with vigor are likely to lead to subsequent increases in one’s pool of enduring resources, resulting in one’s feeling further invigorated. While vigor’s likely effects on mental well-being are straight forward, its effects on physical well being are more complex. One of the limitations regarding the body of knowledge on the effects of positive emotions on physical health is that while we know that these effects tend to be positive in sign, the nature of the physiological pathways linking these two entities are hardly understood (Ryff & Singer, 2002). It has been suggested that positive emotions change the levels of brain dopamine (Ashby, Isen & Turken, 1999), thereby simultaneously expanding cognitive functioning and regulating cardiovascular activity. Brain research (e.g. Davidson, 2000) has revealed that when people are emotionally distressed, like when they are anxious or depressed, the most active sites in the brain are circuitry converging on the amygdala, part of the brain’s emotional centers, and the right prefrontal cortex, a brain region that controls hyper vigilance typically found among people under stress. By contrast, people who experience positive emotions, like feeling enthusiastic or energized, display heightened activity in the left prefrontal cortex while the right prefrontal cortex remains quiet. The ratio of the activity in each of the right and left prefrontal areas of the brain, relative to baseline level of activity, has been found to predict people’s affective state. The more this ratio tilts to the right, the more depressed or unhappy a person tends to be, while the more it tilts to the left, that is the more the activity in the left prefrontal area relative to a baseline level, the more enthusiastic and energized a person tends to be. A major finding that emerged from this area of research is that this ratio has a normal distribution, namely most people display a combination of some activity in the areas of the brain probably associated with both negative and positive emotions (cf. Davidson, 2000). This finding supports the proposition above that for most people, the bivariate model, which expects positive and negative affects to co-vary relatively independently of each other, is the valid one. Another possible physiological pathway is that linking positive emotions with improved immune function, as reflected in the psychoimmunological literature (e.g. Salovey et al., 2000). Yet, another possibility is that allostatic load mediates the relationship between positive emotions and physical health (Ryff & Singer, 2002). Allostatic load refers to a measure of cumulative wear and tear on several physiological systems, including the cardiovascular, metabolic,

154

ARIE SHIROM

hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis, and sympathetic nervous system (Ryff & Singer, 2002).

The Relationship Between Vigor and Job Performance Several emotion theorists have argued that certain affective states are associated with specific action tendencies (e.g. Frijda, Kuipers & Schure, 1989; Lazarus & Cohen-Charash, 2001). Fredrickson, in her broaden-and-build model of positive emotions (2002), has argued that positive emotions are accompanied by thought-action repertoires, that is an urge to think or act in a certain direction. It follows that feeling vigorous may generate a particular thought-action repertoire that expands activity, broaden the range of options, and promote creative solutions for work-related problems. Several studies have documented the role of positive emotions in promoting performance (Huy, 1999; Rafaeli & Worline, 2001; Staw, Sutton & Pelled, 1994; Worline, Wrzesiewski & Rafaeli, 2002). Indeed, performance is interwoven with emotion in organizational life. Positive emotions have been linked to several performance-related behaviors, including enhanced creativity, more effective decision-making, sales-related pro-social behaviors, and the use of more successful negotiation strategies (Baron, 1990; Forgas, 1998; George, 1991; Staw & Barsade, 1993). While vigor is not specifically referred to in the above literature, I assume that the relationship between vigor and job performance will be positive, and that it is likely to be reciprocal rather than recursive. Csikszentmihalyi (1990) suggested that individuals who engage in interesting activities that match their level of skills are likely to experience a variety of positive emotions, probably including vigor.

MEASURING VIGOR Developing the Shirom-Melamed Vigor Measure Without an instrument that operationalizes the preceding conceptualization of vigor, it would not be possible to probe its conceptual domain, explore its antecedent organizational conditions, etiology and effects on health. For this reason, a new measure that gauges the three factors that comprise vigor, namely physical strength, emotional energy, and cognitive vividness, the Shirom-Melamed Vigor Measure (SMVM), was developed and pretested for several aspects of its construct validity and is fully reproduced in Appendix.1


155

The SMVM asks respondents to report the frequency of recently experienced energetic feelings at work. It consists of 14 items, 5, 4, and 5 for respectively the physical strength, emotional energy and cognitive liveliness subscales (see Appendix for the detailed format). Each respondent is requested to indicate the frequency of experiencing each of the feeling states described during the last 30 workdays. All items are scored on a 7-point frequency scale, ranging from 1- almost never, to 7- almost always. A deductive approach (cf. Hinkin, 1998) was used to construct the subscale of physical strength. By a deductive approach, I mean that content validity considerations concerning this subscale were based on past research. The physical strength subscale is based upon Thayer’s work on moods (Thayer, 1989, pp. 6–7, 178–189, 1996, pp. 67–72, 215–220), and includes the items of “I feel energetic,” “I feel full of pep,” and “I feel vigorous.” Both the emotional energy and cognitive liveliness subscales were developed in several successive stages. A pool of items that sampled aspects of feeling vigorous relative to emotional and cognitive resources was compiled by asking samples of health professionals, teachers, and blue-collar employees to describe their feelings that concern these resources following their facing a challenge on the job. A challenge represents a positive appraisal, likely to be associated with positive emotions (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984, p. 23). Three independent judges independently assessed the relevancy of each item to each subscale, and those most relevant were subsequently administered to two samples of fully employed graduate students. We used exploratory factor analysis to select the six items with the highest loading on the cognitive liveliness subscale and the four items with the highest loading on the emotional energy subscale. The emotional energy subscale includes the items of: “I feel able to show warmth to others,” “I feel able to be sensitive to the needs of coworkers and customers,” and “I feel I am capable of investing emotionally in coworkers and customers.” The cognitive liveliness subscale includes the items of: “I feel I am able to contribute new ideas,” “I feel I can think rapidly,” and “I feel able to be creative.” The new SMVM was already tested for construct validity in two studies, with comparable results (Shirom, Melamed & Toker, 2003). For space considerations, only one of them is succinctly described.

Empirical Validation of the SMVM The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesized three-factor structure of the SMVM and to investigate the relationship among the subscales of the SMVM and those of the MBI-GS, thus subjecting to empirical test the bivariate theoretical position regarding the relationship between vigor and burnout. Participants were 87 employees in two Hi-Tech companies that completed a questionnaire

156

ARIE SHIROM

while at work. Respondents’ mean age was 42 years, mean job tenure 13 years. Respondents were primarily men (84%), mostly (74%) married, about a third employed in R&D, and a fifth each in support systems, management, and maintenance. The questionnaire included, among other scales, the Hebrew-language version of the MBI-GS, as validated by Etzion (2000), and the SMVM described above. Using exploratory factor analysis (principal components analysis, oblimin rotation, applying the scree test to retain factors with eigenvalues > 1.0), we (Shirom et al., 2003) extracted three factors for each the MBI-GS and the SMVM, with items loading largely conforming to the hypothesized factor structure for each of the measures. Based on the results of the factor analyses, we (Shirom et al., 2003) have constructed three MBI-GS subscales, namely emotional exhaustion (Cronbach’s Alpha = 0.81), cynicism (0.78) and lack of personal accomplishment (0.64), as well as three SMVM subscales, namely physical strength (0.95), emotional energy (0.88), and cognitive liveliness (0.72). The psychometric characteristics of the latter three scales largely supported the proposed structure of the construct of vigor. The results indicated that the average intercorrelation between the three subscales of the SMVM was 0.44, with the highest correlation found between physical strength and cognitive liveliness. The three SMVM scales tended to negatively correlate with the emotional exhaustion scale of the MBI-GS (mean r = −0.17, barely significant at the p < 0.10 level). Emotional exhaustion is widely noted to be the primary component of burnout (e.g. Perlman & Hartman, 1982; Shirom, 1989) and of the BMI-GS (e.g. Schaufeli & Enzmann, 1998). Lack of personal accomplishment had the highest correlations with all three SMVM subscales, on the average r = 0.47. The results of this study, largely replicated in the second study of 150 teachers, offered considerable support to the three-dimensional model of vigor and to the hypothesized bivariate relationship of burnout, represented here by the MBI-GS emotional exhaustion scale (cf. Maslach et al., 2001; Shirom, 2003), and vigor.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The suggested focus on vigor is in tune with the new development of the field of positive psychology (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000) and the emergence of positive organizational behavior (Luthans, 2002). Vigorous feelings at work possibly allow employees to effectively cope with work-related demands, and more importantly are likely to have a positive impact on their well-being. Researchers’ future efforts to increase our understanding of the antecedents and etiology of vigor at work may be aided by the conceptual framework of vigor and


157

its measure, as described in this chapter. This conceptual framework integrates past disparate efforts and allows researchers to pose new research questions and offer new theoretical interpretations. From the review of past attempts to assess vigor, primarily as a mood state, it appears that this core affect tends to promote goal-directed behavior likely to increase individuals’ personal resources. Hobfoll (1998) hypothesized that such increases in individuals’ pool of personal resources may initiate an upward spiral toward further increases in these individuals’ personal resources. Fredrickson and Joiner (2002) found that positive emotions broaden the scopes of attention and cognition and, by consequence, initiate upward spirals toward increasing emotional well-being. The augmented personal resources can be drawn on to cope with any work-related demand that may arise in one’s job. In work organizations, employee vigor should promote skill building and learning, prosocial behaviors, and organizational commitment, among other important aspects of organizational effectiveness. There are several open questions awaiting empirical clarification with regard to using the proposed measure of vigor in actual research. The first question has to do with what individuals actually do following their experiencing feelings of vigor. Are there individual differences in the ability to “intelligently” use vigor as a means of guiding and understanding one’s behavior? Feelings provide meaning to work-related employee experiences. In line with recent thinking on emotional intelligence, the ability to identify and regulate feelings and use the information provided by feelings are considered important for adaptive social behavior (Salovey, Mayer, Goldman, Turvey et al., 1995). If such differences are found to exist, do they reflect differences in the above skills, and can these skills be learnt? (Salovey, Bedell, Detweiler & Mayer, 2000). Emotional intelligence represents just one, albeit important, possible modulator of vigor’s relationship with behavioral responses. Yet, another open question has to do with the effects of vigorous feelings at work on organizations. In this chapter, the emphasis has been on job and work characteristics conducive to employee vigor, and on the influence of employee vigor on job performance. However, how does employee vigor affect the organization as a whole? Are there vigorous organizations, and if so – what are their inherent characteristics? The emphasis throughout this chapter has been on vigor at work. However, vigor may be experienced in and outside of work. That is, it may be experienced as an affective response to events and situations that individuals encounter outside of work. It is possible that vigor felt at work spills over to the family and other life domains and vice versa. These are open questions that need to be addressed in future research. The same is true regarding the possible reciprocal relations between

158

ARIE SHIROM

vigor and job performance or proactive behavior in organizations. Future research efforts on vigor need also consider methodological issues, like the timescale most appropriate for the measurement of vigor. In the SMVM, following other measures of affect at work (e.g. Katwyk et al., 2000) the timescale referred to was the respondents’ emotional experience over the last 30 workdays. Emotion researchers tend to use considerably shorter timescales (Gray & Watson, 2001), but some have argued that intense emotional experiences may last for weeks (Payne, 2001). The timescale used in the SMVM can be easily modified in future research, to test the assumption that individuals’ feelings of vigor are relatively stable over periods of days and weeks. A somewhat related aspect is the rate of change in the frequency of experienced feelings of vigor (cf. Eaton & Funder, 2000). Vigor represents an affect experienced at work. The proposed measure of vigor, the SMVM, clearly refers to experienced affect and is not confounded by cognitive components of attitudes or evaluative judgments. While available research on vigor at work is in its infancy, existing research on vigor as a mood state would suggest that it is strongly related to individuals’ well-being and health. Therefore, there exist a need for future research on vigor at work.

NOTES 1. The full scale is also available for downloading in Word format in: http:// recanati.tau.ac.il/faculty/shirom arie.htm

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to acknowledge the financial support of the Israel Science Foundation.

REFERENCES Antonovsky, A. (1987). Unraveling the mystery of health: How people manage stress and stay well. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Ashby, F. G., Isen, A. M., & Turken, A. U. (1999). A neuropsychological theory of positive affect and its influence on cognition. Psychological Review, 106, 529–550. Ashforth, B. E., & Humphrey, R. H. (1995). Emotions in the workplace: A reappraisal. Human Relations, 48, 97–125. Avolio, B. J. (1999). Full leadership development. London, UK: Sage. Bardwell, W. A., Berry, C. C., Ancoli-Israel, S., & Dimsdale, J. E. (1999). Psychological correlates of sleep apnea. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 47, 583–596.


159

Baron, R. A. (1990). Environmentally induced positive affect: Its impact on self-efficacy, task performance, negotiation, and conflict. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 20, 368–384. Beedie, C. J., Terry, P. C., & Lane, A. M. (2000). The profile of mood states and athletic performance: Two meta-analyses. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 12, 49–68. Ben-Sira, Z. (1985). Potency: A stress-buffering link in the coping-stress-disease relationship. Social Science and Medicine, 21, 397–406. Brief, A. P., & Weiss, H. M. (2002). Organizational behavior: Affect in the workplace. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 279–307. Brousseau, K. R. (1983). Toward a dynamic model of job-person relationship: Findings, research, questions, and implications for work system design. Academy of Management Review, 8, 33–45. Brown, S. P. (1996). A meta-analysis and review of organizational research on job involvement. Psychological Bulletin, 120, 235–255. Cacioppo, J. T., Gardner, W. L., & Brenston, G. G. (1999). The affect system has parallel and integrative components: Form follows function. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 839–854. Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1990). Origins and functions of positive and negative affect: A control-process view. Psychological Review, 97, 19–35. Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1998). On the self-regulation of behavior. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Christensen, L., & Duncan, K. (1995). Distinguishing depressed from non-depressed individuals: Using energy and psychosocial variables. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63, 495–498. Church, A., & Waclawsk, J. (1998). The relationship between individual orientation and executive leadership behavior. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 71, 99–127. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York, NY: Harper. Daniels, K. (2000). Measures of five-aspects of affective well-being at work. Human Relations, 53, 275–294. Davidson, R. J. (2000). Affective style, psychopathology, and resilience: Brain mechanisms and plasticity. American Psychologist, 55, 1196–1214. Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., de Jonge, J., Janssen, P. P. M., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2001). Burnout and engagement at work as a function of demands and control. Scandinavian Journal of Work and Environmental Health, 27, 279–286. Diener, E. (1999). Introduction to the special section on the structure of emotions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 803–804. Dweck, C., & Legget, E. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256–273. Eaton, L. G., & Funder, D. C. (2000). Emotional experience in daily life: Valence, variability, an rate of change. Emotion, 1, 413–421. Edwards, J. R., & Cooper, C. L. (1988). The impact of positive psychological states on physical health: A review and theoretical framework. Social Science and Medicine, 27, 1447–1459. Etzion, D. (2000). Validation of the Hebrew version of the MBI-General Survey on Israeli samples. Working Paper No. 14/2000. Tel Aviv, Israel: Israel Institute of Business Research, Tel Aviv University. Fisher, C. D. (2002). Antecedents and consequences of real-time affective reactions at work. Motivation and Emotion, 26, 3–30. Forgas, J. P. (1998). On feeling good and getting your way: Mood effects on negotiator cognition and bargaining strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 565–577.

160

ARIE SHIROM

Fox, K. R., & Corbin, C. B. (1989). The physical self-perception profile: Development and preliminary validation. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 11, 408–430. Fox, S., & Spector, P. E. (2002). Emotions in the workplace: The neglected side of organizational life-introduction. Human Resource Management Review, 12, 167–171. Fredrickson, B. L. (1998). What good are positive emotions? Review of General Psychology, 2, 300–319. Fredrickson, B. L. (2002). Positive emotions. In: C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds), Handbook of Positive Psychology (pp. 120–134). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Fredrickson, B. L., & Joiner, T. (2002). Positive emotions trigger upward spirals toward emotional well-being. Psychological Science, 13, 172–175. Fredrickson, B. L., Mancuso, R. A., Branigan, C., & Tugade, M. M. (2000). The undoing effects of positive emotions. Motivation and Emotion, 24, 237–257. Fried, Y., & Ferris, G. R. (1987). The validity of the job characteristic model: A review and a meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 40, 287–322. Frijda, N. H., Kuipers, P., & Schure, E. (1989). Relations among emotion, appraisal, and emotional readiness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 212–228. Fry, P. S. (1995). Perfectionism, humor, and optimism as moderators of health outcomes and determinants of coping styles of women executives. Genetics, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 121, 211–245. Gill, S., & Davidson, J. (2001). Problems and pressures facing lone mothers in management and professional occupations – a pilot study. Women in Management Review, 16, 383–399. George, J. M. (1991). State or trait: Effects of positive mood on prosocial behaviors at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 299–307. Gray, E., & Watson, D. (2001). Emotion, mood, and temperament: Similarities, differenced, and a synthesis. In: R. L. Payne & C. L. Cooper (Eds), Emotion at Work (pp. 21–45). Chichester, UK: Wiley. Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1980). Work redesign. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Hansen, C. J., Stevens, L. C., & Coast, J. R. (2001). Exercise duration and mood state: How much is enough to feel better? Health Psychology, 20, 267–275. Hinkin, T. R. (1998). A brief tutorial on the development of measures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods, 1, 104–121. Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44, 513–524. Hobfoll, S. E. (1998). The psychology and philosophy of stress, culture, and community. New York: Plenum. Hobfoll, S. E., & Shirom, A. (2000). Conservation of resources theory: Applications to stress and management in the workplace. In: R. T. Golembiewski (Ed.), Handbook of Organization Behavior (2nd rev. ed., pp. 57–81). New York: Dekker. Huy, Q. N. (1999). Emotional capability, emotional intelligence, and radical change. Academy of Mangement Review, 24, 325–345. Iwanaga, M., & Moroki, Y. (1999). Subjective and physiological responses to music stimuli controlled over activity and preference. Journal of Music Therapy, 36, 26–38. Kahn, W. A. (1992). To be fully there: Psychological presence at work. Human Relations, 45, 321–349. Kahneman, D., Diener, E., & Schwarz, N. (Eds) (1999). Well-Being: The foundations of hedonic psychology. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation. Karasek, R. A., & Theorell, T. (1990). Healthy work. New York: Basic Books.


161

Katwyk, P. T., van Fox, S., Spector, P. E., & Kelloway, E. N. (2000). Using the job-related affective well-being scale (JAWS) to investigate affective responses to work stresses. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 219–230. King, M. G. (2001). Emotions in the workplace: Biological correlates. In: R. Payne & C. Cooper (Eds), Emotions at Work (pp. 85–106). Chichester, UK: Wiley. Kirkcaldy, B. D., Levine, R., & Shephard, R. J. (2000). The impact of working hours on physical and psychological health of German managers. European Review of Applied Psychology, 50, 445–449. Lane, A. M., & Lane, H. J. (2002). Predictive effectiveness of mood measure. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 94, 785–791. Lazarus, R. S. (1999). Stress and emotion. New York, NY: Springer. Lazarus, R. S., & Cohen-Charash, Y. (2001). Discrete emotions in organizational life. In: R. L. Payne & C. L. Cooper (Eds), Emotions at Work (pp. 21–45). Chichester, UK: Wiley. Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer. Lee, R. E., Goldberg, J. H., Salis, J. F., Hickmann, S. A., Castro, C. M., & Chen, A. H. (2001). A prosepective analysis of the relationship between walking and mood in sedentary ethnic minority women. Women and Health, 32, 1–15. Luthans, F. (2002). The need for and meaning of positive organizational behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 695–706. McNair, D. M., Lorr, M., & Droppleman, L. F. (1971). Manual: Profile of mood states. San Diego, CA: Educational and Industrial Testing Service. Marks, S. R. (1977). Multiple roles and role strain: Some notes on human energy, time and commitment. American Sociological Review, 42, 921–926. Maslach, C. (1998). A multidimensional theory of burnout. In: C. L. Cooper (Ed.), Theories of Organizational Stress (pp. 68–85). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Maslach, C., Jackson, S. E., & Leiter, M. P. (1996). Maslach Burnout Inventory Manual (3rd ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 397–422. Matthews, G., Jones, D. M., & Chamberlain, A. G. (1990). Refining the measurement of mood: The UWIST Mood Adjective Checklist. British Journal of Psychology, 81, 17–42. Oatley, K., & Johnson-Laird, T. D. (1987). Towards a cognitive theory of emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 1, 29–50. Payne, R. L. (2001). Measuring emotions at work. In: R. L. Payne & C. L. Cooper (Eds), Emotions at Work (pp. 107–133). Chichester, UK: Wiley. Perlman, B., & Hartman, E. A. (1982). Burnout: Summary and future research. Human Relations, 35, 283–305. Quinn, A. M., & Fallon, B. J. (1999). The changes in psychological characteristics and reactions of elite athletes. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 11, 210–229. Rafaeli, A., & Worline, M. (2001). Individual emotion in work organizations. Social Science Information, 40, 95–125. Reich, J. W., & Zautra, A. J. (2002). Arousal and relationship between positive and negative affect: An analysis of the data of Ito, Cacioppo, and Lang (1998). Motivation and Emotion, 26, 209–222. Remington, N. A., Fabrigar, L. R., & Visser, P. S. (2000). Reexamining the circumplex model of affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 286–300. Rosenbaum, M. (Ed.) (1990). Learned resourcefulness: On coping skills, self-control, and adaptive behavior. New York, NY: Springer.

162

ARIE SHIROM

Russell, J. A. (1980). A circumplex model of affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 1161–1178. Russell, J. A. (1983). Pancultural aspects of the human conceptual organization of emotions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 1281–1288. Russell, J. A. (2003). Core affect and the psychological construction of emotion. Psychological Review, 110, 145–172. Russell, J. A., & Carroll, A. M. (1999). On the bipolarity of positive and negative affect. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 3–30. Ryff, C. D., & Singer, B. (2002). From social structure to biology: Integrative science in the pursuit of human health and well-being. In: C. R. Snyder & E. J. Lopez (Eds), Handbook of Positive Psychology (pp. 541–556). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Salovey, P., Bedell, B. T., Detweiler, J. B., & Mayer, J. D. (2000). Current directions in emotional intelligence research. In: M. Lewis & J. M. Haviland-Jones (Eds), Handbook of Emotions (2nd ed., pp. 504–520). New York, NY: Guilford. Salovey, P., Mayer, J. D., Goldman, S. L., Turvey, C. & Plafai, T. P. (1995). Emotional attention, clarity, and repair: Exploring emotional intelligence using the trait meta-mood scale. In: J. W. Pennebaker (Ed.), Emotion, Disclosure, and Health (pp. 125–154). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Salovey, P., Rothman, A. J., Detweiler, J. B., & Steward, W. T. (2000). Emotional states and physical health. American Psychologist, 55, 110–121. Schaufeli, W. B., & Enzmann, D. (1998). The burnout companion to study and practice: A critical analysis. Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis. Schaufeli, W. B., Martinez, I. M., Marques Pinto, A., Salanova, M., & Bakker, A. B. (2002a). Burnout and engagement in university students: A cross-national study. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33, 464–481l. Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., Gonzalez-Roma, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002b). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmation factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, 71–92. Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist, 55, 5–15. Shirom, A. (1989). Burnout in work organizations. In: C. L. Cooper & I. Robertson (Eds), International Review of Industrial and Organization Psychology (pp. 25–48). Chichester, UK: Wiley. Shirom, A. (2003). Job-related burnout: A review. In: J. C. Quick & L. E. Tetrick (Eds), Handbook of Occupational Health Psychology (pp. 245–265). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Shirom, A., Melamed, S., & Toker, S. (2003). Assessing the Construct Validity of the Shirom-Melamed Vigor Scale. Manuscript in preparation. Snyder, C. R., & Lopez, S. J. (Eds) (2002). Handbook of positive psychology. New York: Oxford University Press. Stajkovic, A. D., & Luthans, F. (1998). Self-efficacy and work-related performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 240–261. Stanton, A. L., Parsa, A., & Austenfeld, J. L. (2002). The adaptive potential of coping through emotional approach. In: C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds). Handbook of Positive Psychology (pp. 148–158). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Staw, B. M., & Barsade, S. G. (1993). Affect and performance: A test of the sadder-but-wiser vs. happier-and-smarter hypotheses. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 304–331.


163

Staw, B. M., Sutton, R. I., & Pelled, L. H. (1994). Employee positive emotion and favorable outcomes at the workplace. Organization Science, 5, 51–71. Terry, P. C., Carron, A. V., Pink, M. J., Lane, A. M., Jones, G. J. W., & Hall, M. P. (2000). Perceptions of group cohesion and mood in sport teams. Group Dynamics, 4, 244–253. Thayer, R. E. (1989). The biopsychology of mood and arousal. New York: Oxford University Press. Thayer, R. E. (1996). The origin of everyday moods. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Tsai, W.-C. (2001). Determinants and consequences of employee displayed positive emotions. Journal of Management, 27, 497–512. Van Sell, M., Brief, A. P., & Schuler, R. S. (1981). Role conflict an role ambiguity: Integration of the literature and directions for future research. Human Relations, 34, 43–71. Ware, J. E., & Sherbourne, C. D. (1992). The MOS 36-item short form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Medical Care, 30, 473–483. Watson, D. (2002). Positive affectivity: The disposition to experience pleasurable emotional states. In: C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds), Handbook of Positive Psychology (pp. 106–120). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Watson, D., Wiese, D., Vaidya, J., & Tellegen, A. (1999). Two general activation systems of affect: Structural findings, evolutionary considerations, and psychobiological evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 820–838. Weiss, H., & Brief, A. (2001). Affect at work: A historical perspective. In: R. L. Payne & C. L. Cooper (Eds), Emotions at Work (pp. 133–173). Chichester, UK: Wiley. WHOQOL Group. (1994). Development of the WHOQOL: Rationale and current status. International Journal of Mental Health, 23, 24–56. Williams, S., & Cooper, C. L. (1998). Measuring occupational stress: Development of the Pressure Management Indicator. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 3, 306–321. Worline, M., Wrzesiewski, A., & Rafaeli, A. (2002). Courage and work: Breaking routines to improve performance. In: R. Lord & R. Klimoski (Eds), Emotions in the Workplace: Understanding the Structure and Role of Emotions in Organizational Life. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Yik, S. M., Russell, J. A., & Barrett, L. F. (1999). Structure of self-reported current affect: Integration and beyond. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 600–619. Zapf, D., Vogt, C., Seifert, C., Martini, M., & Isic, A. (1999). Emotion work as a source of stress: The concept and development of an instrument. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8, 370–400. Zerbe, W. J. (2000). Emotional dissonance and employee well-being. In: N. M. Ashkenasy, C. E. J. Hartel & W. J. Zerbe (Eds), Emotions in the Workplace (pp. 189–214). Westport, CN: Quorum Books.

APPENDIX Shirom-Melamed Vigor Measure (SMVM) How Do You Feel at Work? Below are a number of statements that describe different feelings that you may experience at work. Please indicate how often, in the past 30 workdays, you have experienced each of the following feelings:

164

How Often have you Felt this Way at Work? Very Infrequently

Quite Infrequently

Sometimes

Quite Frequently

Very Frequently

Always or Almost Always

1 1

2 2

3 3

4 4

5 5

6 6

7 7

1 1 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4 4 4

5 5 5 5 5 5

6 6 6 6 6 6

7 7 7 7 7 7

1 1 1

2 2 2

3 3 3

4 4 4

5 5 5

6 6 6

7 7 7

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Notes: Items are followed by symbols that represent the three subscales of the Shirom-Melamed Vigor Measure (SMVM). The three subscales are: Phys = Physical Strength; EE = Emotional Energy; and CL = Cognitive Liveliness.

ARIE SHIROM

1. I feel full of pep [Phys] 2. I feel I have physical strength [Phys] 3. I feel vigorous [Phys] 4. I feel energetic [Phys] 5. A feeling of vitality [Phys] 6. I feel mentally alert [CL] 7. I feel I can think rapidly [CL] 8. I feel I am able to contribute new ideas [CL] 9. I feel able to be creative [CL] 10. A feeling of flow [CL] 11. I feel able to show warmth to others [EE] 12. I feel able to be sensitive to the needs of coworkers and customers [EE] 13. I feel I am capable of investing emotionally in coworkers and customers [EE] 14. I feel capable of being sympathetic to coworkers and customers [EE]

Never or Almost Never

SOCIAL INFLUENCE AND JOB STRESS: DIRECT, INTERVENING, AND NON-LINEAR EFFECTS Wayne A. Hochwarter INTRODUCTION They say Eve tempted Adam with an apple. But man I ain’t going for that. Pink Cadillac – Bruce Springsteen

All through history, individuals have spent considerable effort attempting to influence the behaviors and beliefs of others. As a principal issue in psychology (Forgas & Williams, 2001), social influence processes have been the subject of inquiry for a considerable length of time (Sherif, 1936) while Peterson (2001) argued that the manner in which individuals manipulate others represents the very core of social psychology. Extensive reviews of the social influence literature (e.g. Cialdini & Trost, 1998; Forgas & Williams, 2001) elucidate its powerful role in virtually all work and non-work domains. What is currently lacking in the existing body of literature, however, is a systematic investigation of the relationship between social influence processes and the tension one experiences on the job. In this review, multiple conceptualizations of the social influence – job tension association are examined. More specifically, this review examines the plausibility of direct, intermediate, and non-linear associations between social influence tactics and experienced job stress. Prior to this discussion, a review of the social influence literature is Emotional and Physiological Processes and Positive Intervention Strategies Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, Volume 3, 165–204 Copyright © 2004 by Elsevier Ltd. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 1479-3555/doi:10.1016/S1479-3555(03)03005-1

165

166

WAYNE A. HOCHWARTER

provided. This review is not intended to be comprehensive since these summaries currently exist (Cialdini, 1993; Ferris, Hochwarter, Douglas, Blass, Kolodinsky & Treadway, 2002). In addition, the social influence literature can best be described as voluminous suggesting that an inclusive examination would extend beyond the scope of this review. Instead, the goal of this section is to familiarize the reader with the elements of social influence that directly relate to experienced job stress.

What is Social Influence? Various definitions of social influence permeate the literature. Kelman (2001, p. 11) suggested that social influence “refers to a change in the actions, attitudes, and beliefs of a person (P) resulting from the induction by another person or group (O) – the influencing agent.” Turner’s (1991, p. 1) definition of social influence reflects the “processes whereby people directly or indirectly influence the thoughts, feelings, and actions of others.” Others (e.g. Stang & Wrightsman, 1981, p. 47) indicate that social influence is the “direct or indirect effects of one person on another.” Finally Baron and Byrne (1984, p. 248) described social influence as activities designed to alter subjects’ “behavior, attitudes, or feelings in ways we desire.” A synopsis of social influence definitions allows for a number of themes to emerge. First, attempts to influence others are purposeful and require some level of effort by the influencer. In this regard, influence is goal directed with the intention of changing or manipulating the perceptions and/or behaviors of others. Second, the objective of social influence is to establish some level of conformity between individuals (Cialdini & Trost, 1998; Turner, 1991). In essence, the influencer wishes to develop a sense of shared meaning with the target (Sederberg, 1984). Finally, social influence activities are designed to affect the attitudes, behaviors, and/or beliefs of others for the purpose of personal benefit, even if maintaining current environmental conditions or reducing adverse consequences represents gain. Building on these works, I define social influence as self-presentation activities undertaken to alter or manage the attitudes and actions of individuals and/or groups for the purpose of maximizing gain, maintaining the desired status quo, or minimizing loss.

Sociological Underpinnings of Social Influence All theories of social influence rest with the assumption that one individual endeavors to manipulate or modify the views of another individual(s).

Social Influence and Job Stress

167

Latane’s (1981; Latane & Nida, 1980) theory of social impact describes the effect that one individual may have on others during the influence process. According to Latane (1981, p. 343), social impact is defined as “the great variety of changes in physiological states and subjective feelings, motives, or emotions, cognitions and beliefs, values and behaviors that occur in an individual, human or animal, as a result of the real, implied, or imagined presence or actions of other individuals.” Latane further suggested that the impact of social influence consists of a multiplicative function of the strength, immediacy, and number of other individuals involved (i.e. either directly or indirectly). The strength of the source refers to its saliency, or intensity, whereas the immediacy of the source pertains to its proximity and lack of prevailing barriers (Turner, 1991). Social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979, 1986) can also be used to explain the underlying rudiments of social influence. The theory suggests that individuals interact with others to form a social identity (Tyler, 2001), which is characterized as the view that individuals have of themselves in a particular role (Trenholm, 1989). Research suggests that social identities serve as devices for action and as criteria used to judge subsequent performance (McCall & Simmons, 1966). Further, social identity theory maintains that interpersonal comparisons that are made to establish a positive self-evaluation, and to provide some level of distinctiveness between perceived ingroups and outgroups (Brewer, 1991; Turner, 1975). In general, individuals perceive members of their particular group favorably and members of outside groups inauspiciously (Brown, Condor, Mathews, Wade, & Williams, 1986; Tajfel, 1974). By developing this cognitive schema, individuals not only construct positive social identities, they also furnish explanations for their own attitudes and behaviors directed toward other groups (Nauta & Sanders, 2001). As evidence, Brown et al. (1986) found that individuals of subgroups were able to differentiate their contribution to effectiveness as each group tended to view their input as more important. The implication of social identity theory with regard to influence is that individuals potentially might use persuasion to maintain the propitious view of their group relative to how other groups are perceived. These influence tactics potentially could take one of several forms. On the one hand, individuals might make a concerted effort to ensure that their group is perceived in a complimentary way through the use of favorable group presentation (i.e. “our group sold more insurance policies last year”). On the other hand, individual residing in the perceived ingroup might decide that the best course of action is to cast a negative light on the contribution of other groups (i.e. “the other group sold more insurance policies, but they used disreputable tactics to do so”). Regardless of the tactics chosen, it is apparent that social influence can be used as a mechanism for ensuring that one’s group is viewed positively. A logical consequence of strengthening social identity

168

WAYNE A. HOCHWARTER

is the intensification of individual levels of self-worth that results as a consequence of the ingroup being perceived as superior to the outgroup (Tyler, 2001). Evolving from Tajfel and Turner’s (1979) theory of social identity, selfcategorization theory examines the relationship between self-concept and group behavior. More specifically, self-categorization theory outlines the cognitive methods that create social identity effects (Hogg & Abrams, 1999; Hogg & Terry, 2000; Hogg, Terry & White, 1995). Classification of self and others into ingroup and outgroup categories draws attention to the apparent similarities of the target to the applicable ingroup and outgroup prototype (Hogg & Terry, 2001). In this regard, targets do not necessarily symbolize individuals, per se. Instead, targets represent embodiments of the pertinent behavior that is patterned in a process that serves to depersonalize the target. Further, self-categorization theory argues that individuals will tend to emphasize the extent to which they perceive themselves as similar to the ingroup and divergent from outgroup members in instances where shared social identity becomes prominent (David & Turner, 2001). Studies indicate that individuals are more influenced by the ingroups that they perceive themselves belonging to than by outgroups (Hogg & McGarty, 1990; Mackie & Cooper, 1984). In addition, other research suggests that individuals correspond to the standards that demarcate their ingroup character where social identity is salient (Reicher, 1984; Turner, 1982). In sum, self-categorization is based largely on four basic principles (David & Turner, 2001). First, individuals expect to agree with those they categorize as similar when perceiving a comparable stimulus and to disagree with those perceived as different. Second, agreeing or disagreeing with members of either the ingroup or outgroup leads to the assurance that one’s judgment is correct (i.e. subjective validity). Third, uncertainty is produced in instances where individuals disagree with similar others and agree with dissimilar others. Fourth, doubt leads the individual to seek out ways to minimize uncertainty by recategorizing themselves and others. One way that individuals may redefine the stimulus situation is through the use of mutual influence in which the individual is both the influencer and the one being influenced (David & Turner, 2001). Social comparison theory (Festinger, 1954) can be used to explain why individuals participate in social influence. Festinger argued that individuals have an innate desire to evaluate their beliefs and abilities. In essence, this evaluative process is most frequently undertaken to reduce an individual’s uncertainty regarding his or her place in the world (Jones & Gerard, 1967). The greater the uncertainty, the greater the desire to seek out information that can serve to reduce ambiguity (Smith, 1982). In most cases, individuals will seek out the opinions of similar others to validate their own beliefs and attitudes (Trenholm, 1989), instead of those who would likely offer divergent views (Festinger, 1954). In addition to


169

providing information that may minimize uncertainty, relying on similar others might increase the level of social support that is needed to respond to the strain that is brought on by perceived ambiguity. It is apparent that the deliberate use of social influence can serve as a mechanism for reducing much of the uncertainty that one experiences. In addition to seeking out information to determine “how one stands” relative to similar others, individuals might actively seek to modify the opinions of others to more adequately fit their own cognitive belief system. As an instrument to enhance one’s self-concept (Cialdini & Trost, 1998; Epstein, 1973; Leary, 1995), social influence can encourage others to possess comparable attitudes and beliefs. For example, an individual might use flattery if it is perceived that doing so will lead to a level of commonness.

The Role of Self-Presentation Over 100 years ago, James (1890) employed the metaphor of multiple selves to depict human conduct. Instead of possessing a one-dimensional self-concept, James argued that individuals have multiple identities that are allowed to surface as dictated by the situation. Further, James asserted that individuals have “as many social selves as there are distinct groups of people about whose opinion he cares. He generally shows a different side of himself to each of these different groups” (1890, p. 294). James’ notion that individuals have at their disposal a number of selves, each of whom is thoughtfully demonstrated to maximize favor from a selected audience, greatly influenced later theorists (Leary & Kowalski, 1990; Schlenker, 1980). For example, Goffman’s (1959) seminal work suggested that examining the surface appearances individuals create for one another would reveal more than an assessment of one’s inner motives or personality. Goffman asserted that a complete understanding of human behavior requires researchers to spend considerable time examining the public images that one creates. Further, individuals have the capacity to control reactions by persuading others to define the situation in a way that best serves the influencer. Specifically, individuals can dictate how a situation is perceived by creating impressions that will make others voluntarily respond in agreement with their overriding intent. According to Goffman (1959, p. 4) “when an individual appears in the presence of others, there will usually be some reason for him to mobilize his activity so that it will convey an impression to others which is in his interests to convey.” Not only is self-presentation of utility to the individual, it ensures that appropriate interactions will result. Leary (1995) suggested that a basic understanding of one another (e.g. socioeconomic status, attitudes, competence, etc.) is required

170

WAYNE A. HOCHWARTER

before appropriate interactions can result (although this level of understanding rarely occurs). Display of one’s public persona can help fill in the gaps where an inadequate level of information exists, in that an impression of how one wishes to be treated can be created (and how they should subsequently treat others) (Goffman, 1959). Much of Goffman’s work (1955, 1967) examined self-presentation activities that were unsuccessful. In this case, interactions are disturbed when the impressions that are projected are disagreed with or questioned, and exchanges are not restored until the individual’s public representation is effectively re-established. Whereas Goffman’s work was based on anthropological field investigations, Jones (1964; Jones & Wortman, 1973) designed laboratory experiments that investigated variables proposed to affect self-presentation. Similar to Goffman, Jones (1990) was convinced that the perceptions of others are largely a function of activities undertaken to transmit a particular impression. Further, Jones (1990) maintained that it is impossible to garner an understanding of human interaction without examining the role of self-presentation – especially with respect to the ingratiatory tactics employed by individuals. Ingratiation represents the collective strategies that have the goal of making the influencer more liked or appear more attractive to others (Jones, 1990). More specifically, Jones (1964, p. 11) defined ingratiation as a “class of strategic behaviors illicitly designed to influence a particular person concerning the attractiveness of one’s personal qualities.” Jones (1964) originally hypothesized ingratiation as an illegitimate and oftentimes abhorrent side of influence development because these tactics were perceived to reside outside the tightly scripted domain of organizational functioning. More contemporary research, however, has offered a more balanced view of ingratiation (Ralston, 1985), suggesting it may serve as an effective means of exercising social influence (Liden & Mitchell, 1988). Taken one step further, ingratiation can have a significantly positive effect on social interactions. For example, by creating liking and positive feelings for others, ingratiation might counteract the cognitive tendencies to typecast, stigmatize, and undervalue individuals who are dissimilar (Allison & Herlocker, 1994; Rosenfeld, Giacalone & Riordan, 1995). By enhancing liking and perceived attraction, effective ingratiation can lead to an increased level of reciprocity behavior (Gouldner, 1960). According to Ralston (1985), ingratiatory behaviors may serve to build a unified work group by serving as the social adhesive that binds individuals in the absence of compatibility.

The Consequences of Social Influence – Conformity and Compliance Individuals participate in influence tactics for a host of reasons, most of which deal with the desire to persuade a target (Smith, 1982). Persuasion has been


171

defined as any effort that offers inducement for compliance (Knowles, Butler & Linn, 2001). Cialdini (1993) recognized six major objectives of social influence: authority, commitment and consistency, liking, reciprocity, scarcity, and social proof. Each of these purposes creates influence by promoting compliance. For example, reciprocity is undertaken to supplement interpersonal obligation, which, in turn, is posited to have a direct effect on compliance. Authority enhances compliance in that its goal is to build support for the influencer’s position. Further, Kelman (1961) suggested that target compliance is directly related to the means control of the influencer. Means control, according to Kelman, refers to the influencer’s ability to manipulate the resources needed by the target to achieve a desired outcome. Trenholm (1989) took a decidedly pejorative view, suggesting that compliance occurs only when a target’s behavioral options are restricted. Specifically, individuals might view public agreement as the only viable option when means to achieve desired ends are limited. Trenholm noted that employees will see little need to comply, if, for example, recognition can be achieved by alternative means (e.g. working hard, being conscientiousness, etc.). Conversely, compliance will conceivably occur if recognition can be realized only through the supervisor’s approval.

Social Influence in Organizations Organizations can best be described as an amalgamation of individuals (Rousseau, 1997) who are grouped together in a social environment for the purpose of achieving a common goal (Pfeffer, 1989). Given that much organizational functioning is based on the interactions among its members, the use of influence tactics and strategies is of critical importance (Kipnis, Schmidt & Wilkinson, 1980; Yukl & Falbe, 1990). From an individual perspective, success in influencing others has been shown to represent an important predictor of managerial success (Bass, 1990; Yukl, 1998; Yukl & Tracey, 1992). Much of the research examining managers’ self-presentation strategies has focused on the tactics used to influence subordinates (i.e. downward influence tactics). A related field of study has explored the effect of upward and lateral forms of influence, in addition to strategies directed downward (Schreisheim & Hinkin, 1990; Yukl & Falbe, 1990).

Classification and Measurement of Influence Tactics Various literatures have attempted to shed light on the way that individuals influence the behaviors, attitudes, and beliefs of others in organizational settings.

172

WAYNE A. HOCHWARTER

For example, previous work in the areas of organizational politics (Ferris, Russ & Fandt, 1989), political influence behavior (Judge & Bretz, 1994), impression management (Tedeschi & Melburg, 1984), and ingratiation (Gordon, 1996; Ralston, 1985) each suggest that individuals attempt to exert influence on others at work. Whether these tactics are effective depends on a number of factors including the social setting, the acuity of the influencer, and the appropriateness of the influence attempt (Ferris et al., 2002). In the following section, I describe the more extensively used behavioral classification schemes, as well as their subsequent means of measurement. Building on the work of French and Raven (1959), Kipnis et al. (1980) developed a classification scheme of influence tactics that has served as the foundation for much subsequent work (Ansari & Kapoor, 1987; Erez & Rim, 1982; Schreisheim & Hinkin, 1990; Yukl & Falbe, 1990). Their two-stage research study identified eight influence strategies which included: assertiveness (e.g. setting deadlines and being demanding), ingratiation (e.g. acting humble and making others feel important), rationality (e.g. providing reasons for requests), sanctions (e.g. threatening punishment or withholding rewards), exchange of benefits (e.g. sacrificing or bartering effort), upward appeal (e.g. using higher-ups in the organization as a source of influence), blocking (e.g. minimizing the potential of target’s efforts toward success), and coalitions (e.g. garnering the support of others). Kipnis and Schmidt (1982) refined the scale to include six upward influence tactics. With the exception of the assertiveness dimension, all other tactics were re-labeled: reason (previously rationality), friendliness (previously ingratiation), coalition-forming (previously coalitions), bargaining (previously exchange of benefits), and appeal to high authority (previously upward appeals). Schreisheim and Hinkin (1990) critically examined Kipnis et al.’s (1980) original conceptualization. Their review, and resultant scale refinement, provided empirical support for the original six-factor measure (i.e. assertiveness, ingratiation, rationality, exchange of benefits, upward appeal, and coalitions). Validity evidence for the conceptualization offered by Schreisheim and Hinkin (1990) can be found in subsequent investigations (Farmer & Maslyn, 1999; Farmer, Maslyn, Fedor & Goodman, 1997). Impression management, which is conceptually similar to many of the Kipnis et al.’s (1980) upward influence dimensions, has been a popular area of inquiry for the past few decades (Ashford & Northcraft, 1992; Gardner & Martinko, 1988; Wayne & Ferris, 1990). In terms of impression management taxonomies, the work of Jones and Pittman (1982) has been extremely influential. They identified five principal impression management strategies, including ingratiation (e.g. flattery and favor doing), self-promotion (e.g. advertising one’s accomplishments to others), exemplification (e.g. participating in extra-role activities


173

to appear dedicated), supplication (e.g. promoting one’s weaknesses to appear disadvantaged), and intimidation (e.g. threatening others). Bolino and Turnley (1999) provided strong validity evidence for Jones and Pittman’s (1982) taxonomy and subsequent research by Turnley and Bolino (2001) found that ingratiation and self-promotion were the most frequently used tactics. Finally, Wayne and Ferris (1990) found that their 24-item impression management scale factored into three distinct (yet related) factors: job-focused (e.g. working late), self-focused (e.g. ensuring that your efforts are viewed favorably by your supervisor), and supervisor-focused (e.g. directing praise or volunteering to assist the supervisor) tactics. A number of authors have suggested that individuals use a combination of influence activities instead of just a single tactic. For example, Kipnis and Schmidt (1988) found that individuals were more prone to cluster their influence tactics than to rely on the effects of one strategy exclusively. Their classification of cluster tactics included shotgun, tacticians, ingratiators, and bystanders. “Shotgun” tactics are reflected in the use of many, if not all, influence activities in an attempt to overwhelm the target with as many behaviors as possible. “Tacticians” often rely on rational persuasion, reason, and logic to influence others. “Ingratiators” are inclined to use flattery to appeal to the target. Finally, “bystanders” are those that choose not to participate in influence activity, opting instead to watch from the sidelines (Kipnis & Schmidt, 1988). Moreover, the Kipnis et al. (1980) typology has been summarized as consisting of three types of influence tactics: hard, soft, and rational (Kipnis, 1984; Kipnis & Schmidt, 1985). Assertiveness, upward appeal, and coalitions were identified by researchers as hard influence tactics (DeLuga, 1991; Farmer et al., 1997; Kipnis & Schmidt, 1985). However, there is some disagreement regarding the tactics comprising the soft and rational categories. Some researchers maintain that soft tactics include only ingratiation (DeLuga, 1991; Kipnis & Schmidt, 1985), whereas others assert that soft tactics include both ingratiation and exchange (Farmer et al., 1997). Rational tactics have been argued to include rationality and exchange (DeLuga, 1991; Kipnis & Schmidt, 1985) or merely rationality (Farmer et al., 1997). Notably, little empirical research has examined these competing higher-order factor structures with the exception of two studies (Castro, Douglas, Hochwarter, Ferris & Frink, in press; Farmer et al., 1997).

Political Activity as a Source of Social Influence A class of influence behaviors that has received a significantly less critical examination relative to the tactics outlined by Kipnis et al. (1980) is political

174

WAYNE A. HOCHWARTER

behavior (Hochwarter, in press; Mayes & Ganster, 1988). Kacmar and Baron (1999, p. 4) defined organizational politics as “. . . actions by individuals which are directed toward the goal of furthering their own self-interest without regard for the well being of others.” At the individual level of analysis, organizational politics researchers have sought to identify the tactics that individuals utilize in “getting their way.” From the research to date, three central research focuses can be gleaned. First, research has attempted to identify the behaviors deemed political in nature (Hochwarter, in press). Second, researchers have investigated whether behaviors differ as the hierarchical relationship with the actor changes (Hochwarter, Kacmar, Treadway & Watson, in press). Third, researchers have sought to identify the combinations of behaviors individuals use to gain resource and informational advantages in their organization (Kacmar & Baron, 1999; Kacmar & Carlson, 1998). Much of the research that has examined tactics employed to deal with organizational politics has focused on the strategies used to maintain or establish a sense of order (Dulebohn, 1997). Significant theoretical (Sutton & Kahn, 1986) and empirical work (Tetrick & LaRocco, 1987) supports the notion that workplace stressors, such as organizational politics, can be alleviated when individuals have the ability to actively manage the immediate work environment. For example, Witt, Andrews and Kacmar (2000) found that politics had the greatest negative impact on job satisfaction for those unable to participate in the decision-making process. Further, Dulebohn and Ferris (1999) found that political behaviors acted as a form of voice giving workers greater feelings of justice. With regard to the actual strategies used by incumbents to address politics, most research has examined the use of upward influence tactics (e.g. Harrell-Cook, Ferris & Dulebohn, 1999; Valle & Perrewé, 2000). This line of research is built on the theoretical foundation that the use of influence tactics can be used to reduce much of the uncertainty that permeates environments perceived to be political. Although employing the upward influence classification represents a useful typology for examining political behaviors in the workplace, doing so may fail to consider important elements of organizational behavior. First, individuals employ upward influence tactics for a variety of reasons (Kipnis et al., 1980; Rao, Schmidt & Murray, 1995; Thacker & Wayne, 1995), most of which have little do to with managing an environment perceived to be political. Kacmar and Carlson (1998) noted that managing the impressions of others represents only a small subset of activities that fall under the rubrics of organizational politicking. Hence, using upward influence tactics as a surrogate measure of the broader, more encompassing term may fail to capture the true objective of active politicking.


175

Second, measuring only upward influence tactics fails to take into account other levels of the hierarchy that may be important targets of politicking. Research supports the view that the use of downward or lateral influence strategies can be particularly useful in some settings (Yukl, Guinan & Sottolano, 1995; Yukl & Tracey, 1992). According to Kacmar and Baron (1999, p. 4), political behaviors “ . . . vary greatly, reflecting, in part, the varied motives from which such behavior may stem (e.g. furthering one’s own interest; “evening the score” with others for past injustice and other real or imagined wrongs, etc: Skarlicki & Folger, 1997).” In adopting this interpretation, it is assumed that “evening the score” may come at the expense of others who occupy equivalent positions (or lower level positions) in the organization’s hierarchy. Finally, upward influence tactics are typically viewed as innocuous attempts (e.g. rationality, ingratiation, coalition building, etc.) to manage the perceptions of others. As such, these behaviors are rarely perceived as injurious to either party. Conversely, political behaviors often are viewed in a negative light. For example, Hochwarter, Witt and Kacmar (2000) asserted that politicking might take the form of sabotaging the work efforts of co-workers who do not support your position. By focusing on upward influence tactics exclusively, researchers may have failed to take into account the “dark side” of organizational politics. Building on this view, Hochwarter (in press) developed a concise measure (i.e. “I am actively involved in politics at work,” “I do not participate in organizational politics” [reverse scored], and “I participate in organizational politics on a daily basis”) that focused directly on political behavior at work.

Social Influence Tactics and Work Outcomes Kipnis et al. (1980) and others (e.g. Yukl & Falbe, 1990; Yukl & Tracey, 1992) contend that workers, supervisors, and the organization as a whole have the potential to be the recipient of social influence attempts. Ferris et al. (2002) identified 36 studies exploring outcomes of influence tactics conducted over the past three decades (see Ferris et al., 2002 for an exhaustive review of influence tactics – work outcomes relationships). In general, these studies offer results that are either mixed or non-significant in many cases. For example, research has shown the relationship between assertiveness and performance assessment to be both negative (Thacker, 1999) and non-significant (Rao et al., 1995; Yukl & Tracey, 1992). Further, Orpen (1996) corroborated a direct relationship between ingratiation and promotions while Thacker and Wayne (1995) found support for an indirect association. A recent meta-analysis by Higgins, Judge and Ferris (2003) provided additional evidence of inconsistency across research settings. The analyses examined

176

WAYNE A. HOCHWARTER

seven commonly used influence tactics (i.e. assertiveness, coalitions, exchange, ingratiation, rationality, self-promotion, and upward appeal) across 26 studies, 41 samples, 85 correlations, and a total sample size of 13,442. Their results reported discrepancies for the predictive validity of various influence tactics. With respect to the effectiveness of particular influence tactics, only ingratiation, rationality, and upward appeals demonstrated non-zero relationships with examined work outcomes. Further, ingratiation and rationality were shown to possess the strongest associations with dependent variables. Given the inconsistent, and oftentimes non-significant associations between tactics and outcomes, Higgins et al. (2003) maintained that moderating variables, such as the interview setting and the work context, may be exhibiting influence. Specifically, self-promotion tactics appeared to be successful in an interview setting, but were viewed with disdain when used post-hire resulting in lower than expected performance evaluation scores. Hochwarter (in press) examined the interactive effects of politics perceptions and participation in political behavior on job satisfaction and affective commitment. It was hypothesized that those participating in politics would be more satisfied and committed to the job when perceived politics were high. This presumption received strong empirical support as it was shown that those actively engaged in politics reported lower levels of satisfaction and commitment in the absence of politics perceptions. It was suggested that environments deficient in organizational politicking would not allow those involved in politics the opportunity to distance themselves from others in that much of their social influence activities would go unnoticed (and thus unrecognized).

SOCIAL INFLUENCE AND JOB STRESS Definitions of workplace stress suffuse the literature. In it’s most rudimentary form, organizational stress has been described as “. . . a perceived dynamic state involving uncertainty about something important” (Schuler, 1984, p. 36). In his classic work, Selye (1975) noted that stress represents an organism’s reaction to an anxiety-provoking event that can take psychological, physiological, or behavioral forms. Beehr (1990) discussed job stress in terms of workplace features that cause the employee to experience discomfort. Further, workplace stress has been portrayed as the perception that the demands of the job exceed the individual’s belief in the ability to cope (Cropanzano, Howes, Grandey & Toth, 1997; Folkman & Lazarus, 1998). Further, Beehr and Glazer (2002) noted that occupational stress is exemplified by a situation or process in which stressors related to work accompany individual strain. Finally, Vigoda (2002)


177

characterized workplace stress an employee’s reaction to work-related stressors (see Beehr, 1995; Jex, 1998; Jex & Beehr, 1991 for reviews of the stress literature). Building on these works, I define workplace stress as occupation-relevant stimuli that lead to discomfort and/or cynicism having the potential to produce anxiety.

Political Activity as a Source of Stress One of the many job stressors elaborated upon in previous research is the politicking activity of others in the organization (Cropanzano et al., 1997; Ferris, Frink, Galang, Zhou, Kacmar & Howard, 1996; Ferris, Frink, Gilmore & Kacmar, 1994; Gilmore, Ferris, Dulebohn & Harrell-Cook, 1996; Jex & Beehr, 1991). Ferris et al. (1996) explicated the conceptual overlap between perception of workplace politics and experienced job tension. First, both stress (McGrath, 1976; Schuler & Jackson, 1986) and politics perceptions are construed as individually experienced phenomenon rather than an inherent characteristic of the work environment (Ferris et al., 1996). Consistent with Lewin (1936), individual’s perceptions of reality, instead of an objective index, represent assessments of both politics perceptions and job stress. Second, a fundamental source of politics perceptions and job stress is uncertainty. According to Ferris et al. (1996; Ferris et al., 1989), uncertainty exemplifies the conditions under which political behavior transpires, as well as a major predictor of politics perceptions. McGrath (1976) and others (i.e. Beehr & Bhagat, 1985; Schuler, 1980) note the utility in examining job stress as a phenomenon based largely on environmental uncertainty. In essence, understanding job stress requires a comprehension of the uncertainty that likely represents its primary antecedent (Schuler & Jackson, 1986). The last characteristic that serves to integrate politics and job stress is the recognition that either may serve as an opportunity or a threat (Caplan, Cobb, French, Harrison & Pinneau, 1975; Ferris et al., 1994, 1996). Schuler (1980) conceptualized stress as a condition under which individuals experience demands, constraints or opportunities. Further, job stress was suggested to lead to a host of affective outcomes including job anxiety (i.e. threat) or increased job satisfaction (i.e. opportunity). An environment laden with politics likely takes on similar dimensions in that these settings have been shown to have both “winners” and “losers” (Gandz & Murray, 1980; Hall, Hochwarter & Ferris, in press). Moreover, perceived politics have been associated with many of the same outcomes as job stress including increased levels of job satisfaction (Hochwarter, in press) and decreased levels of commitment (Vigoda, 2002).

178

WAYNE A. HOCHWARTER

As evidence of this association, research has shown job stress and politics perceptions to be significantly related. For example, Ferris et al. (1996) found that politics perceptions and job anxiety were highly correlated (i.e. r = 0.56) in a study of non-academic university employees. Vigoda (2002), utilizing three samples, reported correlations raging from 0.33 to 0.48 between organizational politics and distress. Other investigations have corroborated significant associations between these variables as well (Cropanzano et al., 1997; Ferris et al., 1994; Hochwarter, Perrewé, Ferris & Guerico, 1999, Kacmar, Bozeman, Carlson & Anthony, 1999; Valle & Perrewé, 2000). These results provide support for Baum’s (1989) assertion that organizational politics stimulate anxiety that has the potential to lead to dysfunctional outcomes (see Ferris, Adams, Kolodinsky, Hochwarter & Ammeter, 2002 for a thorough discussion of politics perceptions – work outcomes relationships).

Influence Tactics and Job Stress The relationship between the use of various social influence tactics and experienced job tension has been the subject of many empirical investigations. In general, these studies have either examined upward influence tactics (i.e. ingratiation, assetiveness, etc.) or political behavior (Hochwarter, in press; Mayes & Ganster, 1988). With regard to the examination of upward influence strategies, research, in general, has shown these tactics to be associated with job stress. Kipnis and Schmidt (1988) suggested two mechanisms support the recognition that influence (or its non-existence) leads to distress. First, research suggests that those possessing Type A personality traits are competitive and prone to anxiety and frustration (Booth-Kewley & Friedman, 1987). Stress, then, is inevitable for those who are unable to secure the outcomes they desire. Having a limited control over the immediate work environment, in this regard, is likely to amplify anxietyprovoking reactions. Second, Kipnis and Schmidt (1988) outlined the position that an individual’s inclination to influence others is largely a function of the absolute level of what one desires, as well as the perception that others are unwilling to provide desired resources (Hobbes, 1968; Pfeffer, 1981). Appropriately, May (1972) suggested that those who fail to exert influence at work are more prone to experience job stress. Empirical evidence substantiates an association between the use of upward influence tactics and job stress. For example, Kipnis and Schmidt (1988) found that those employing shotgun tactics (i.e. the use of the most influence tactics which emphasized assertiveness and bargaining) reported the highest levels of job tension, physical and psychological strain. Moreover, Nonis, Sager and


179

Kumar (1996), utilizing a sample of salespeople, found that all forms of upward influence behaviors were related to role conflict (with the exception of rationality) and role ambiguity (with the exception of upward appeal). Finally, Tadepalli (1991) found that the use of closed influence tactics was directly related to role conflict and role ambiguity. In this context, ingratiation and impression management represented closed influence strategies – tactics alleged to possess a hidden agenda (Weitz, 1981). Other research provides a decidedly different conceptualization of the upward influence – job stress relationship. For example, it has been suggested that influence tactics can act as an antidote, of sorts, to job stress (Thompson, 1981) by serving as a coping mechanism. For example, DeLuga (1989) found that higher levels of role conflict were associated with the increased use of six influence tactics (i.e. friendliness, bargaining, reason, assertiveness, higher authority, and coalition). Results failed to report any significant influence tactics – role ambiguity associations. Further, DeLuga (1991) found that health care manager’s interpersonal stress (as measured by the Responsibility for People subscale of the Stress Diagnostic Survey, Ivancevich & Matteson, 1980) was related to hard influence tactics (i.e. assertiveness, higher authority, and coalition). Neither the soft (i.e. friendliness) nor rational (i.e. bargaining and rationality) tactics predicted interpersonal stress.

Political Behavior as a Coping Mechanism More recently, Valle and Perrewé (2000) examined the potential of political behavior to influence the relationship between politics perceptions and a host of work outcomes (one of which was job tension). Their conceptualization of political behaviors included both proactive and reactive political strategies. Proactive tactics included the upward influence tactics developed by Kipnis et al. (1980), subsequently refined by Schreisheim and Hinkin (1990). Reactive strategies were those that represented defensive strategies in organizations (Ashforth & Lee, 1990). Results indicated that both proactive and reactive strategies were correlated with job stress. Furthermore, those responding to politics perceptions with reactive strategies were more apt to be dissatisfied at work, increasingly likely to turnover, and prone to experience job stress relative to individuals who decided not to use reactive tactics. Mayes and Ganster (1988) conceptualized political behavior as a “fight” response to job stress (relative to the exit, neglect, and loyalty responses outlined by Farrell, 1983; Hirschman, 1970). Based on previous work (Bacharach & Lawler, 1980), it was suggested that politicking represents a viable method for dealing with situations in the work environment perceived as distressful. Political

180

WAYNE A. HOCHWARTER

behavior was measured using Mayes’ (1978) Index of Personal Political Activity (“I rely on personally developed contacts to get my job accomplished,” and “I generate support for my ideas among my friends before making suggestions in meetings” represented scale items). Results confirmed a direct relationship between political activity and role conflict, but failed to detect a similar association for role ambiguity (although the correlation between these variables was 0.01 from significance at the 0.05 level). In addition, commitment moderated the relationship between role ambiguity and political behavior such that less committed employees were predisposed to act politically in response to role ambiguity. Finally, Treadway, Kacmar, Hochwarter and Ferris (manuscript under review) examined dispositional predictors and stress-related consequences of political behavior at work. Based largely on the authors’ intention to examine political behavior instead of upward influence, a six items measure was developed specifically for the study (Items included: “I spend time at work politicking,” “I use my interpersonal skills to influence people at work,” “I let others at work know of my accomplishments,” “I work behind the scenes to see that my work group is taken care of,” “Active politicking is an important part of my job” and “I use politicking at work as a way to ensure that things get done”). Results indicated that political skill, positive affect, need for achievement, and intrinsic motivation predicted political behavior. With regard to stress-related consequences, emotional labor was positive related to political behavior. Conversely, those opting to participate in political activity at work experienced less job-induced tension suggesting that these behavioral strategies may serve to ameliorate many of the harmful effects of workplace stress.

Exploring the Various Social Influence Job Stress Conceptualizations Previous research has attempted to reconcile the relationship between upward influence and job stress (DeLuga, 1989, 1989; Mayes & Ganster, 1988). In general, these empirical studies have sought to establish direct associations between the use of influence tactics and experienced job tension (i.e. the use of influence tactics → job stress, or job stress → the use of influence tactics) (Kipnis & Schmidt, 1988; Valle & Perrewé, 2000). The goal of the next section is to further this discussion by empirically re-examining relationships noted in previous work and to advance the existing body of literature by investigating relationships not previously considered. Utilizing multiple samples and a variety of measures assessing both influence tactics and job stress, the objective is to inform rather than to make any definitive statements regarding the relationship between these constructs, or to provide evidence of the efficacy of measures used in these investigations.


181

The following section examines a plethora of influence tactics – job stress relationships. The discussion of methods, measures and outcomes is intended to be brief. A more comprehensive discussion of research-related details is beyond the scope of this chapter.

Reassessing the Bivariate Associations Between Influence and Job Stress Previous research suggests a relationship between job stress and the use of influence tactics (DeLuga, 1989; Kipnis & Schmidt, 1988; Tadepalli, 1991). In general, this research suggests that individuals react to stressful stimuli by become more active in the social milieu (DeLuga, 1991; Nonis et al., 1996). Research Example 1 Data were gathered from 110 clerical employees of a large university. Job-focused, supervisor-focused, and self-focused influence tactics (Wayne & Green, 1993; Wayne & Ferris, 1990) were examined as well as two indices of job stress (i.e. role conflict and role ambiguity, Rizzo, House & Lirtzman, 1970). Results indicated that job-focused strategies were associated with both role conflict (r = −0.22, p < 0.05) and role ambiguity (r = −0.19, p < 0.05). Further, supervisor-focused tactics were also related to both role clarity (r = 0.23, p < 0.05) and role ambiguity (r = 0.20, p < 0.05). It is interesting to note that the form of relationship for jobfocused tactics (i.e. negative associations with role conflict and ambiguity) was opposite to that found for supervisor-focused strategies (i.e. positive associations with role conflict and ambiguity). Self-focused tactics had no relationship with either role clarity (r = −0.01, ns) or role ambiguity (r = 0.04, ns). Research Example 2 Employees of a large manufacturing plant were surveyed (N = 288). Other enhancement, opinion conformity, self-presentation, and favor rendering influence tactics (MIBOS, Kumar & Beyerlein, 1991) were examined as well as role clarity (Rizzo et al., 1970) and uncertainty (Cammann, Fichman, Jenkins & Klesh, 1979; Seashore, Lawler, Mirvis & Cammann, 1982). No influence tactics were associated with role clarity. Conversely, other enhancement (r = 0.12, p < 0.05) and favor rendering (r = 0.17, p < 0.01) possessed significant correlations with uncertainty. Opinion conformity (r = 0.02, ns) and self-presentation (r = 0.06, ns) were not related to uncertainty. Although previous research has tended to view the increased use of influence tactics as a result of experienced job stress, it may be that influence tactics lead to more stress as well. For example, one likely consequence of influence is

182

WAYNE A. HOCHWARTER

increased involvement at work. Since involvement at work has been shown to be a significant predictor of stress (Burke, 1999), the proximal nature of participation (i.e. the increased use of influence) may lead to tension. Research Example 3 University clerical and administrative personnel (N = 748) were asked to indicate their level of influence tactic use (Schreisheim & Hinkin, 1990), in addition to perceptions of job tension (House & Rizzo, 1972). Ingratiation, exchange, rationality, assertiveness, upward influence, and coalition building served as specific influence tactics. With regard to the prediction of job stress, exchange (␤ = 0.12, p < 0.05), rationality (␤ = 0.20, p < 0.01), and assertiveness (␤ = 0.19, p < 0.01) were significant while ingratiation (␤ = −0.04, ns), upward influence (␤ = 0.10, ns), and coalition building (␤ = 0.06, ns) were not. Results from the preceding three investigations largely substantiate an empirical relationship between influence tactics and experienced job tension. However, a number of questions remain. First, does the use of influence lead to job stress, or vice versa? Moreover, under what conditions do each of these factors have the greatest potential to influence one another? The examination of moderating variables represents a viable mechanism for addressing the two questions noted above.

Beyond Simple Bivariate Relationships: Influence as a Moderator A moderating variable is one that “affects the direction and/or strength of the relation between an independent or predictor variable and a dependent or criterion variable” (Baron & Kenny, 1986, p. 1174). Previous work has alluded to the fact that the use of influence can serve to diminish the harmful effects of job tension on work outcomes (DeLuga, 1989). However, this assertion has been empirically assessed in only a few investigations. Of these studies, Nonis et al. (1996) found that the use of certain upward influence tactics (i.e. assertiveness and ingratiation) actually exacerbated the adverse relationship between role ambiguity and two outcomes, satisfaction with supervision and propensity to leave. Thus, the question remains, can influence tactics help? Research Example 4 Two hundred and ten employees, comprising a wide variety of occupations (i.e. accountant, human resource manager, purchasing director), responded to a survey that asked for perceptions regarding perceived organizational support (POS, Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchison & Sowa, 1986), level of politicking


183

Fig. 1. The Interactive Effects of Perceived Organizational Support and Political Behavior on Job-Induced Tension.

(Hochwarter, in press), and job tension (House & Rizzo, 1972). With respect to main effects, results indicated that POS predicted tension (␤ = −0.17, p < 0.01), while political behavior did not (␤ = 0.06, ns). Moreover, the POS – political behavior interaction term explained an additional 3% of criterion variance (␤ = 0.07, p < 0.05). A graph of this significant interaction term is presented in Fig. 1. These results suggest that the increased use of political behavior can be particularly useful in terms of reducing tension when the job environment is deficient of organizational support (a potential stressor). Political behavior had only a minimal effect on experienced job tension in settings characterized with high levels of POS. Research Example 5 Employees of two professional organizations (N = 142) were asked to provide estimates of influence tactic use (i.e. other enhancement, opinion conformity, self-presentation, and favor rendering; MIBOS, Kumar & Beyerlein, 1991), uncertainty, and task ambiguity (Cammann et al., 1979; Seashore et al., 1982). Other enhancement (␤ = −0.36, p < 0.10), favor rendering (␤ = −0.24, p < 0.10), and opinion conformity (␤ = 0.47, p < 0.05) predicted task ambiguity while self-presentation (␤ = 0.20, ns) did not. The other enhancement – uncertainty interaction term – added incremental criterion variance (␤ = −0.35, p < 0.05, R 2 = 0.04). This relationship is shown in Fig. 2 and suggests that the use of other enhancement tactics served to reduce the adverse effect of uncertainty on task ambiguity.

184

WAYNE A. HOCHWARTER

Fig. 2. The Interactive Effects of Uncertainty and Other Enhancement on Task Ambiguity.

The Examination of More Complex Relationships Examining only one moderating variable may fail to consider the complexities of organizational life. In this following example, political skill is characterized as a construct which combines social astuteness with the capacity to adjust one’s behavior to different situational demands in a manner that controls the responses of others (Ammeter, Douglas, Gardner, Hochwarter & Ferris, 2002; Kolodinsky, Hochwarter & Ferris, 2001). As noted in previous research, political skill may serve to minimize the impact of work stress (Perrewé, Ferris, Frink & Anthony, 2000). Research Example 6 Alumni (N = 223) of a large university were surveyed to assess perceptions of political skill (Ferris, Kolodinsky, Hochwarter & Frink, 2001), negative affect (NA)(PANAS, Watson, Clark & Tellegen, 1988), affective commitment (Allen & Meyer, 1990), and job-induced tension (House & Rizzo, 1972). In the third step of the regression equation (steps 1 and 2 included the main effect and two-way interaction terms, respectively), the NA-affective commitment-political skill three-way interaction term was significant and explained incremental job tension variance (␤ = 0.51, R 2 = 0.02, p < 0.05). A graph of this significant interaction term is shown in Fig. 3. As shown, political skill had the strongest inverse relationship with tension for those with low levels of NA and high levels of affective commitment. Moreover, job tension did not significantly decrease for high NA – low commitment individuals when more political skill was exercised.


185

Fig. 3. The Interactive Effects of Political Skill, Negative Affect, and Affective Commitment on Job Tension.

The prior examples highlight the utility of examining single and multiple moderating variables. Certainly the factors reported here do not represent an exhaustive list of constructs theoretically appropriate to include as moderators. However, it is apparent that the thoughtful use of moderating variables characterizes a “better” way of conceptualizing the social influence – job tension relationship. Another important, yet underutilized, method of explaining incremental criterion variance is to assess the utility of incorporating theoretically relevant mediating variables.

Understanding as a Mediator of the Influence Tactics – Tension Relationship Research has failed to substantiate the underlying mechanisms that lead the use of influence tactics to minimize stress. Since increased understanding of workplace phenomena had been shown to ameliorate the harmful effects of many workplace stressors (Ferris et al., 1994; Gilmore et al., 1996; Kacmar et al., 1999; Tetrick & LaRocco, 1987; Thompson, 1981), this construct has the potential to mediate the relationship between influence outcomes and job tension. Research Example 7 Data were collected from 326 university administrators. Upward influence tactics (Schreisheim & Hinkin, 1990), understanding (Tetrick & LaRocco, 1987), and

186

WAYNE A. HOCHWARTER

job-induced tension (House & Rizzo, 1972) were assessed via survey. Baron and Kenny’s (1986) three-step method for determining mediation was used to assess the impact of understanding on the influence tactics – job tension relationship. Exchange, rationality, and assertiveness were shown to predict job tension. Understanding was shown to partially mediate the exchange – job tension relationship (␤ from 0.21 [p < 0.01] to 0.16 [p < 0.05]), partially mediate the rationality – job tension relationship (␤ from 0.24 [p < 0.01] to 0.17 [p < 0.05]), and fully mediate the assertiveness – job tension relationship (␤ from 0.19 [p < 0.05] to 0.12 [ns]) when included in the regression equation. Research has generally failed to consider mediating variables when examining social influence-job tension relationships. Findings reported here suggest that there is indeed some efficacy in doing so. Similar to research that has failed to consider mediating factors is subsequent studies that have examined linear relationships between social influence and job tension exclusively without consideration of more complex forms.

An Examination of Non-Linear Associations Baron (1986, 1989) and others (e.g. Kolodinsky et al., 2001) suggested that influence could be used too liberally causing unwelcome consequences for both others and oneself. The belief is that low levels of influence are not enough to be significant while excessive levels of persuasion are seen as burdensome leading to undesirable outcomes. It is at moderate levels that influence appears to have the most palatable effect suggesting a non-linear association (e.g. U-shape or inverted U-shape) between tactics and work outcomes. Research Example 8 As indicated above (e.g. Research example 3, N = 748), exchange, rationality, and assertiveness predicted job tension. In the second step of the regression analyses, each influence tactic2 term was entered. The rationality non-linear term was significant (␤ = 0.14, p < 0.01). However, the remaining influence tactic2 terms were not. The significant beta at this step suggests that the relationship between rationality and job tension is best represented by a U-shape (Stimson, Carmines & Zeller 1981), suggesting that moderate levels of influence lead to the lowest levels of job stress (a negative beta would imply an inverted U-relationship). Research Example 9 Full-time employees (N = 311) with at least five years of full-time work experience were surveyed (i.e. payroll clerk, librarian, distribution manager). Inclination


187

to participate in political activity (Hochwarter, in press) and job-induced tension (House & Rizzo, 1972) were examined. With regard to the linear association between these constructs, political behavior predicted tension (␤ = 0.06, p < 0.05). Further, the political behavior2 term was significant (␤ = 0.05, p < 0.01), explaining incremental tension variance (R 2 = 0.03, p < 0.01). Again, the positive beta in the second step indicates a significant U-shape, suggesting that utilizing too much or too little political behavior predicted increased job tension.

Summary of Empirical Examinations The preceding nine empirical investigations were initiated for two major reasons. First, previous work has tended to offer mixed results with respect to influence tactics –work outcomes relationships (Ferris, Hochwarter et al., 2002; Higgins et al., 2003). It was hoped that by undertaking additional investigations, affirmation (or rejection) of influence tactics – job stress relationships could be promoted if results offered unequivocal evidence to do so. Second, it was the intention to extend the existing body of literature by examining relationships that have received either little or no previous consideration. The role of influence, as a moderator of stressor-strain relationships, has received minimal research attention (Nonis et al., 1996). Further, the idea that influence tactics and job stress have a non-linear effect has acquired research attention best described as negligible. With respect to the question of the existence of a direct association between job stress and the use of influence tactics, the answer is a definite “sometimes.” Coupled with previous work (i.e. Ferris, Hochwarter et al., 2002; Higgins et al., 2003), results reported here suggest that assuming that these construct have the capacity to affect each other directly neglects to take into issue the sophistication of organizational life. The list of moderators with the potential to influence the relationship between independent and dependent variables is expected to be exhaustive, including both work environment conditions and factors inherent to the individual (Ferris, Hochwarter et al., 2002). In short, it may be time for researchers to relinquish the idea that job stress affects the use of influence tactics explicitly in isolation of other factors (and vice versa). Building on this assertion, results suggest the utility of assessing the influence of moderating variables. Findings reported above suggest that other enhancement and political behavior functioned to augment the relationship between perceived stressors and strains. In offering these results, it also needs to be unambiguously clear that the opinion conformity-, self-presentation-, and favor

188

WAYNE A. HOCHWARTER

rendering-uncertainty interactions failed to reach statistical significance. Why does this relationship exist for some influence tactics and not for others? The strong interactive association between political behavior and POS on job tension reaffirms the role of political behavior as a factor potentially adept at reconciling the relationship between organizational factors and affective outcomes. However, since previous research failed to support the effect of proactive political behaviors on stressor-strain relationships (Valle & Perrewé, 2000), investigating one moderating variable (without the inclusion of other important work and nonwork factors) may still not capture the intricacies of work life. It is apparent from this discussion that researchers must include an appropriate number of variables that take into account essential factors if the field has intentions of moving in a positive direction. As evidence, it was shown that including two moderators (e.g. NA and affective commitment) explained incremental criterion variance beyond that attributed to main effect and two-way interaction terms. This level of thought, which includes multiple predictors, likely represents the most appropriate way to conceptualize influence tactics – job stress relationships. Finally, it is proposed that those conducting research in the organizational sciences in general, and the influence - tension domain specifically, test for the possible contribution of non-linear associations. Much of what researchers examine in the organizational behavior realm cannot be fitted as a straight line. From the practical perspective, life, in general, does not lend itself to be adequately captured as a linear phenomenon. It is clear, based on the findings reported in the preceding two research examples, that exploring nontraditional relationships between influence and stress represents a viable research strategy.

DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH Research examining the relationship between influence and job stress began with the landmark work of Kipnis and Schmidt’s (1988). If this argument is indeed accepted, then this research stream has been undertaken for only 15 years. Relative to other more-established programs of research in the organizational sciences, it is clear that work in this area is still in its relative infancy. It is also apparent that much has been learned during this time. However, as is often the case, the more we learn the more we realize we need to learn. The following section outlines areas that need to be addressed with respect to the influence – job stress relationship with an emphasis on issues that have served to hinder the contribution of research in this area.


189

Conceptual and Methodological Consideration – Influence Tactics The most significant conceptual issue relates to the “what is social influence?” question. As noted earlier, a number of conceptualizations exist and the subdimensions of influence are often not consistent across studies. Even more fundamental is the issue of construct dimensionality. Previous research has conceptualized influence as a unidimensional construct as exemplified by the use of “shotgun” strategies (i.e. scoring high on all influence tactics) (Castro et al., in press; Kipnis & Schmidt, 1988) or by combining subdimensions to form an overall index of influence (Vigoda & Cohen, 2002). Conversely, other research (DeLuga & Perry, 1991; Farmer & Maslyn, 1999; Ringer & Boss, 2002) has opted to examine the effect of influence subdimensions. To a great extent, the use of either the unidimensional or multidimensional conceptualization has been more of an empirical issue than one based on sound theoretical reasoning. Another concern pertains to the adequacy of scales used to calculate influence tactics (Harrison, Hochwarter, Perrewé & Ralston, 1998; Kacmar & Valle, 1997). On the one hand, prior research has provided evidence of scale adequacy for Schreisheim and Hinkin’s (1990) measure (Farmer & Maslyn, 1999). Conversely, other studies assessing the construct validity of the scale have uncovered problematic issues such as lower than acceptable reliability estimates and unexpected item-factor correlations (Hochwarter, Pearson, Ferris, Perrewé, & Ralston, 2000). Moreover, a number of studies have failed to report satisfactory reliability estimates while continuing to use the subscales for prediction in substantive research. For example, Ringer and Boss (2002) reported scale reliability estimates of 0.43 for friendliness and 0.55 for upward appeal while Nonis et al. (1996) noted lower than acceptable reliabilities for rationality (e.g. 0.62), ingratiation (e.g. 0.51), and upward appeal (e.g. 0.62). A number of reasons have been proposed for these unacceptable psychometric results. The number of influence dimensions that need to be assessed, coupled with the concurrent need to minimize survey length, has mandated that scales contain as few items as possible (Hochwarter et al., 2000). For example, Schreisheim and Hinkin’s (1990) measure dedicates three items for each influence dimension. In this case, one problematic item can cause a scale to immediately become unacceptable. The “scale length vs. measurement sufficiency” issue is one that will evidently continue to challenge researchers given the importance of construct adequacy (Cronbach & Meehl, 1955; Korman, 1974). In a related concern, it may be that the lines of demarcation between the different influence tactics are much less distinct than expected. For example, where does bargaining end and assertiveness begin? Certainly the use of influence sub-classifications allows for the examination of tactic combinations (i.e. coupling

190

WAYNE A. HOCHWARTER

assertiveness and upward appeal, for example). However, it needs to be determined whether the current conceptualizations (Kipnis et al., 1980; Kumar & Beyerlein, 1991; Vigoda & Cohen, 2002; Wayne & Ferris, 1990) adequately tap influence in its entirety. One plausible endeavor is to expand the scope of operationalization to include additional influence tactics. For example, it may be useful to include citizenship behaviors as an additional subcategory of influence given the conceptual link between these tactics and impression management (Bolino, 1999). Moreover, it may be fruitful to examine forceful behaviors designed to harm others (Andersson & Pearson, 1999) as potential influence tactics. For example, Vigoda (2002) found that individuals facing politics in organizations were capable of responding with behaviors best described as “aggressive” (i.e. verbal and physical confrontations) (Baron & Neuman, 1996; Berkowitz, 1993). In this vein, it may be useful to ascertain the conceptual and empirical overlap between aggressive and assertive behaviors, for example. By expanding the scope, however, researchers will consequently face concerns regarding the demonstration of tolerable discriminant validity. Despite this inherent conundrum, researchers may find it useful to critically examine the underlying rudiments of social influence. The use of qualitative methods of research design and analysis may prove to be helpful in this regard. Finally, it needs to be determined when influence tactics can be best classified as either “good” or “bad.” For example, much of the literature suggests that assertiveness carries a negative connotation. Further, researchers (Spiro & Perreault, 1979; Tadepalli, 1991; Weitz, 1981) have previously classified ingratiation and impression management as negative elements of influence since the source of these behaviors is innately deceptive. However, ingratiation may also possess positive attributes (Ralston, 1985). For example, the use of ingratiation may be viewed positively if lobbying activities involving this tactic are successful in securing funding for a state university. In sum, influence tactics can be either positive or negative for individuals, groups, and organizations. For example, previous research has shown political behavior to both stifle (Hochwarter, in press) and exacerbate (Valle & Perrewé, 2000) the harmful effects of workplace stressors. Further, it is conceivable that influence tactics can be simultaneously good for individuals and bad for organizations if self-serving motives are attached to behavior (Kacmar & Carlson, 1998; Pfeffer, 1981). It is mandatory that researchers identify the contextual factors that lead influence to be labeled as positive, negative, or both.


191

Conceptual and Methodological Consideration – Job Tension The adequate measurement of job tension continues to be a legitimate concern of academicians (Kasl, 1987; Spector & Jex, 1998; Vagg & Spielbeger, 1998). Stress researchers encounter methodological issues that impact all studies – most notably the adverse impact of employing single-source data collection techniques (Frese & Zapf, 1994; Spector, Dwyer & Jex, 1988; Zellars, Hochwarter, Perrewé, Miles & Kiewitz, 2001) and trepidation regarding socially desirable responses (Cohen, Keesler & Gordon, 1995). These issues have particular salience for stress researchers. For example, a reliance of single-source data collection mandates that stressor and strain variables be collected on the same instrument. For example, Zellars et al. (2001) measured role conflict (a stressor) and exhaustion (a strain) on the same instrument. Moreover, Perrewé et al’s. (2002) nine-region study of crossnational tension measured role stressors and burnout concurrently. The prevailing concern is that the form of data collection significantly increases the potential for conceptual overlap leading to what Kasl (1978) classified as the “triviality trap.” Another concern relates to the choice of job stressor selected for examination. Despite the fact that stress can emanate from a virtually endless list of sources, researchers often focus attention on just one stressor (Hurrell, Nelson & Simmons, 1998). Research (Cox & Ferguson, 1994) suggests that individuals appraise stressors in their immediate work setting not only in terms of existence, but severity, frequency, and duration as well. In general, research has tended to focus on stressor frequency (see Spielberger, 1994 for an exception). Taken one step further, most indices of tension focus on stress induced by negative features (i.e. increasing levels of ambiguity, conflict, and overload) of the work environment (Hurrell et al., 1998) when, in fact, the non-existence of positive features can produce anxiety-provoking reactions (Kanner, Kafry & Pines, 1978). An example of an absence of positive work features leading to stress was the lack of perceived organizational support (POS) shown in Research example 4. The correlation between perceived support and job-induced tension was −0.23 (p < 0.01) indicated that decreased levels of support signified increased levels of tension. Similarly, the selection of measures used to assess job tension is an issue researchers must address, especially with respect to investigations that hypothesize influence tactics as plausible coping mechanisms (DeLuga, 1989). Just as there are many conceivable sources of job stress, the choice of tension-related outcomes is innumerable. For example, House and Rizzo’s (1972) Anxiety-Stress Questionnaire contained job-induced tension, somatic tension, and general fatigue and uneasiness as specific subdimensions. Moreover, researchers can use tension caused by poor relations with supervision as an outcome (Barnett &

192

WAYNE A. HOCHWARTER

Brennan, 1995), or can measure hostility or depression (Motowidlo, Packard & Manning, 1986) as indices of work-related stress. If social influence tactics are to be associated with decreased levels of stress, then the appropriate targets and outcomes need to be pursued. For example, it may be more constructive to examine the relationship between influence tactics directed toward one’s supervisor and stress caused by this target than by employing an overall index of tension as a dependent variable. Although supervisors represent important personifications of the organization, it is unlikely that a positive relationship with this agent can eliminate all of the stressors that come from a job fraught with high levels of ambiguity, conflict and overload. Although it may be that supervisor relations explain a significant amount of tension variance, a myriad of others factors likely exert a stronger influence on these scores.

Substantive Issues Involving the Influence – Job Stress Relationship A number of important questions, related to the relationship between job stress and influence, remain unrequited. These issues can be summarized as the “who,” “how,” and “when” of the influence tactics – tension relationship. With respect to the “who” issue, research has suggested that certain dispositional variables are associated with the use of influence (Delery & Kacmar, 1998; Ferris, Hochwarter et al., 2002; Grams & Rogers, 1990; Ringer & Boss, 2002). For example, Caldwell and Burger (1998) examined the relationship between six personality dimensions (i.e. neuroticism, extraversion, openness, agreeableness, conscientiousness, self-monitoring, and desirability for control) and six influence tactics (i.e. assertiveness, exchange, ingratiation, involvement, rational persuasion, and using others). Their results indicated that openness and neuroticism were not related to any influence tactic. Extraversion was associated with involvement and rational persuasion while agreeableness was related to assertiveness and exchange. Moreover, conscientiousness predicted exchange and involvement, whereas self-monitoring and desirability for control were linked with a measure of total influence. Further, Cable and Judge (2003) examined the relationship between the five-factor model of personality and managers’ upward influence tactics. Results indicated that those with high extraversion scores were more prone use inspirational appeals and ingratiation. Openness to experience was inversely associated with the use of coalitions. Emotional stability was directly related to rational persuasion and inversely related to inspirational appeals. Those scoring high on agreeableness were less apt to employ legitimization or pressure. Conscientiousness individuals were more likely to use rational appeals as an


193

influence tactic. Finally, the choice of upward influence tactics was dependent on the leadership style of the target (i.e. transformational vs. laissez-faire leader). Additionally, research has explored the personality dimensions more (or less) likely to predict the deployment of coping tactics (Brebner, 2001; Vollrath & Torgersen, 2000; Zellars & Perrewé, 2001). What has yet to be determined, however, is the manner in which dispositions interact with influence tactics to reduce tension. It would be interesting to see if there was an association between the magnitude of stress, the use of influence tactics, and personality. Specifically, are greater levels of stress best managed by those with strong personalities (i.e. high Machs) using tactics perceived as forceful (i.e. aggressive or assertiveness)? For environments possessing only modest levels of anxiety, perhaps accommodating personality traits (i.e. agreeableness) interact with more acceptable influence strategies (i.e. friendliness and reasoning) to minimize tension. Building on this point, it would be interesting to see how personality-influence tactic consistency can be used to gauge tension reduction. For example, conscientious individuals would be prone to employ influence tactics that are in accordance with their inherent personality, as would be the case if rational or reasoning behaviors were chosen. On the other hand, it may be difficult to reduce tension in the event that an agreeable individual (i.e. courteous and good natured; Barrick & Mount, 1991) uses hard tactics such as assertiveness (i.e. insistent and demanding). This mismatch between personality and influence tactics would likely be viewed with contempt by the target of such behavior. Given the dearth of research addressing personality-influence tactic consistency, these questions remain speculative until empirical investigations offer more definitive statements. Finally, Castro et al. (in press) found that positive affect (PA) interacted with upward appeal and coalition building to predict performance. It would be interesting to see if the same relationship exists when job tension is the outcome. Examining the “how” of the influence tactics – job stress relationship requires researchers to develop better models to explain the underlying processes that lead influence to serve as a coping mechanism. Failure to examine the intermediate linkages between influence tactics and tension may help explain the indefinite relationships between these constructs. One plausible research focus would be to establish the relationship between the various influence strategies and the choice of coping tactics (Jex, Bliese, Buzzell & Primeau, 2001). Coping tactics are often distinguished according to two dimensions: Problem-focused coping and emotion-focused coping. Problem-focused coping attempts to directly address the stressors responsible for producing anxiety-provoking situations, whereas emotion-focused coping deals with feelings that the stressful situation produces (Latack, Kinicki & Prussia, 1995, p. 328). It is possible that the choice of influence tactics occurs after determining which form of coping would be the

194

WAYNE A. HOCHWARTER

most appropriate. For example, it would be informative to see whether rationality tactics (e.g. making a case for job-relevant efficacy) evolve after problem-focused coping is judged to be the most suitable response. Moreover, perhaps ingratiatory tactics (e.g. increasing the level of liking for the influencer) relate directly to emotion-focused coping. Further, it would be interesting to see if bystanders (e.g. those who have made a conscious effort to withhold influence attempts) opt for avoidance coping (Jex et al., 2001) tactics, which are epitomized by distancing oneself from the stressful situation (Koeske, Kirk & Koeske, 1993). Likewise, research may find it useful to assess the relationship between influence tactics and an escalation of stress-reducing social support (Carlson & Perrewé, 1999; Dormann & Zapf, 1999). It is conceivable that the use of ingratiation directed at one’s immediate supervisor may predict subsequent increases in support from that target. Further, bargaining strategies aimed at those occupying similar positions may illicit higher levels of co-worker support. Extracting the exact influence tactics – social support relationship with job tension will require much theoretical forethought. Specifically, it is likely that direct and interactive associations are likely determined by factors inherent to the work context and the disposition of the influencer. Finally, the circumstances that lead influence and social support to work together and the situations in which influence substitutes for support needs to be established. The “when” issue relates to the conditions that lead influence to affect stress levels of the influencer and when manipulation tactics lead to stress for the target. Although some research has examined the effect of persuasion behaviors on targets, most studies have looked at the consequences returned to the influencer. For example, Wayne, Kacmar and Ferris (1995) investigated coworker responses to others’ ingratiation efforts. Further, Erez, Rim and Keider (1986) asked managers to serve as either agents or targets of influence behavior. Maslyn, Farmer and Fedor (1996) conceptualized upward influence as an episodic process. Their findings indicated that influence activities following a failed attempt could be predicted by goal importance, agent characteristics, and elements of the agent-target relationship. Too much influence is often construed negatively (Baron, 1986, 1989; Kolodinsky et al., 2001) by the target resulting in adverse consequences for the agent. Research has failed, however, to assess target level of tension caused by the excessive use of agent influence. It’s reasonable that a supervisor (or co-worker or subordinate) bombarded by unwarranted levels of influence is likely to experience strain from these interactions. In this regard, agent influence tactics are perceived as a stressor, which has the potential to cause a host of deleterious reactions. How do targets respond to this strain? What coping mechanisms are used? Do agents respond to this strain with influence tactics of their own?


195

CONCLUSION Social influence and job stress represent two of the most studied phenomenon in the organizational sciences. Given this accumulation of research, it is surprising that more work has not explored the intersection of the two. The goals of this chapter were to summarize research examining this research stream, identify areas of concern, and offer suggestions for future research to expand the field. A number of potential avenues were offered to supplement the existing body of literature including analytic strategies that incorporate potential moderators, mediators, and non-linear forms. Additionally, issues related to the measurement of both social influence and job tension were reported as areas requiring researchers’ attention before the field can proceed in an appropriate fashion. As is often the case, shedding light on issues in need of further investigation is easy. Disentangling these apparent quandaries, for the purpose of advancement, represents a greater challenge. Despite the concerns outlined in this chapter, it is invigorating to acknowledge that the vast majority of interesting and innovative work is still ahead of us.

REFERENCES Allen, N., & Meyer, J. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 3, 1–17. Allison, S., & Herlocker, C. (1994). Constructing impressions in demographically diverse organizational settings: A group categorization analysis. American Behavioral Scientist, 37, 637–652. Ammeter, A., Douglas, C., Gardner, W., Hochwarter, W., & Ferris, G. (2002). Toward a political theory of leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 13, 751–796. Andersson, L., & Pearson, C. (1999). Tit for tat? The spiraling effects of incivility in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 24, 452–471. Ansari, M. A., & Kapoor, A. (1987). Organizational context and upward influence tactics. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 40, 39–49. Ashford, S., & Northcraft, G. (1992). Conveying more (or less) than we realize: The role of impression management in feedback-seeking. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 53, 310–344. Ashforth, B., & Lee, R. (1990). Defensive behaviors in organizations: A preliminary model. Human Relations, 43, 621–648. Bacharach, S. B., & Lawler, E. J. (1980). Power and politics in organizations. San Francisco: JosseyBass. Barnett, R., & Brennan, R. (1995). The relationship between job experiences and psychological distress: A structural equation approach. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16, 259–277. Baron, R. A. (1986). Self-presentation in job interviews: When there can be “too much of a good thing.” Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 16, 16–28.

196

WAYNE A. HOCHWARTER

Baron, R. A. (1989). Impression management by applicants during employment interviews: The “too much of a good thing” effect. In: R. W. Eder & G. R. Ferris (Eds), The Employment Interview: Theory, Research and Practice (pp. 204–215). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Baron, R., & Byrne, D. (1984). Social psychology. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Baron, R., & Kenny, D. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. Baron, R., & Neuman, J. (1996). Workplace violence and workplace aggression: Evidence of their relative frequency and potential causes. Aggressive Behaviors, 22, 161–173. Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1–26. Bass, B. (1990). Bass and Stogdill’s handbook of leadership (4th ed.). New York: Free Press. Baum, H. (1989). Organizational politics against organizational culture: A psychoanalytical perspective. Human Resource Management, 28, 191–206. Beehr, T. (1990). Stress in the workplace: An overview. In: J. Jones, B. Steffy & D. Bary (Eds), Applying Psychology in Business (pp. 7–31). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. Beehr, T. (1995). Psychological stress in the workplace. London: Routledge. Beehr, T. A., & Bhagat, R. S. (1985). Human stress and cognition in organizations: An integrated perspective. New York: Wiley. Beehr, T., & Glazer, S. (2002). A cultural perspective of social support in relation to occupational stress. In: P. Perrewé & D. Ganster (Eds), Exploring Theoretical Mechanisms and Perspectives (pp. 97–142). Kingston, UK: Elsevier. Berkowitz, L. (1993). Aggression: Its causes, consequences, and control. New York: McGraw-Hill. Bolino, M. (1999). Citizenship and impression management: Good soldiers or good actors. Academy of Management Review, 24, 82–98. Bolino, M., & Turnley, W. (1999). Measuring impression management in organizations: A scale development based on the Jones and Pittman taxonomy. Organizational Research Methods, 2, 187–206. Booth-Kewley, S., & Friedman, H. (1987). Psychological predictors of heart disease: A quantitative review. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 343–362. Brebner, J. (2001). Personality and stress coping. Personality and Individual Differences, 31, 317–327. Brown, R., Condor, S., Mathews, A., Wade, G., & Williams, J. (1986). Explaining intergroup differentiation in an industrial organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 59, 273–286. Brewer, M. (1991). The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 475–482. Burke, R. (1999). It’s not how hard you work but how you work hard: Evaluating workaholism components. International Journal of Stress Management, 6, 225–239. Cable, D., & Judge, T. (2003). Managers’ upward influence tactic strategies: The role of manager personality and supervisor leadership style. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 197–214. Caldwell, D., & Burger, J. (1998). Personality characteristics of job applicants and success in screening interviews. Personnel Psychology, 51, 119–136. Cammann, C., Fichman, M., Jenkins, D., & Klesch, J. (1979). Michigan organizational assessment questionnaire. Unpublished manuscript, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Caplan, R., Cobb, S., French, J., Harrison, R., & Pinneau, S. (1975). Job demands and worker health. Washington, DC: NIOSH Research Report. Carlson, D., & Perrewé, P. (1999). The role of social support on the stressor-strain relationship: An examination of work-family conflict. Journal of Management, 25, 513–540.


197

Castro, S., Douglas, C., Hochwarter, W., Ferris, G., & Frink, D. (2003). The effects of positive affect and gender on the influence tactics – job performance relationship. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 10, 1–18. Cialdini, R. (1993). Influence: Science and practice (3rd ed.). New York: HarperCollins. Cialdini, R., & Trost, M. (1998). Social influence: Social norms, conformity, and compliance. In: D. Gilbert, S. Fiske & G. Lindzey (Eds), The Handbook of Social Psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 151–192). New York: McGraw-Hill. Cohen, S., Keesler, R., & Gordon, L. (1995). Studies for measuring stress in studies of psychiatric and physical disorders. In: S. Cohen, R. Keesler & L. Gordon (Eds), Measuring Stress: A Guide for Health and Social Scientists (pp. 3–28). New York: Oxford University Press. Cox, T., & Ferguson, E. (1994). Measurement of the subjective work environment. Work and Stress, 8, 98–109. Cronbach, L., & Meehl, P. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 281–302. Cropanzano, R., Howes, J. C., Grandey, A. A., & Toth, P. (1997). The relationship of organizational politics and support to work behaviors, attitudes, and stress. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 159–180. David, B., & Turner, J. (2001). Self-categorization principles underlying majority and minority influence. In: J. Forgas & K. Williams (Eds), Social Influence: Direct and Indirect Processes (pp. 293–314). Philadelphia, PA: Psychological Press. Delery, J. E., & Kacmar, K. M. (1998). Applicant and interviewer characteristics influence on the use of impression management tactics in the employment interview. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1649–1669. DeLuga, R. (1989). Employee-influence strategies as possible stress-coping mechanisms for role conflict and role ambiguity. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 10, 329–335. DeLuga, R. J. (1991). The relationship of upward-influencing behavior with subordinateimpression management characteristics. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21, 1145– 1160. DeLuga, R., & Perry, J. (1991). The relationship of subordinate upward influence behaviour, satisfaction and perceived superior effectiveness with leader-member exchanges. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 64, 239–252. Dormann, C., & Zapf, D. (1999). Social support, social stressors at work, and depressive symptoms: Testing for main and moderating effects with structural equations in a three-wave longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 874–884. Dulebohn, J. (1997). Social influence in justice evaluations of human resource system. In: G. Ferris (Ed.), Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management (Vol. 15, pp. 241–299). Greenwich, CT: JAI. Dulebohn, J., & Ferris, G. (1999). The role of influence tactics in perceptions of performance evaluations’ fairness. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 288–303. Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Huntington, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 500–507. Epstein, S. (1973). The self-concept revisited: Or a theory of a theory. American Psychologist, 28, 404–416. Erez, M., & Rim, Y. (1982). The relationship between goals, influence tactics, and personal and organizational variables. Human Relations, 35, 871–878. Erez, M., Rim, Y., & Keider, I. (1986). The two sides of the tactics of influence: Agents and targets. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 59, 25–39.

198

WAYNE A. HOCHWARTER

Farmer, S., & Maslyn, J. (1999). Why are styles of upward influence neglected? Making the case for a configuration approach to influence. Journal of Management, 25, 653–682. Farmer, S., Maslyn, J., Fedor, D., & Goodman, J. (1997). Putting upward influence strategies in context. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 17–42. Farrell, D. (1983). Exit, voice, loyalty, and neglect as responses to job dissatisfaction: A multidimensional scaling study. Academy of Management Journal, 26, 596–607. Ferris, G. R., Adams, G., Kolodinsky, R. W., Hochwarter, W. A., & Ammeter, A. P. (2002). Perceptions of organizational politics: Theory and research directions. In: F. J. Yammarino & F. Dansereau (Eds), Research in Multi-Level Issues: The Many Faces of Multi-Level Issues (Vol. 1, pp. 179–254). Oxford, UK: JAI/Elsevier. Ferris, G. R., Frink, D. D., Galang, M. C., Zhou, J., Kacmar, K. M., & Howard, J. L. (1996). Perceptions of organizational politics: Predictors, stress-related implications, and outcomes. Human Relations, 49, 233–266. Ferris, G. R., Frink, D. D., Gilmore, D. C., & Kacmar, K. M. (1994). Understanding as an antidote for the dysfunctional consequences of organizational politics as a stressor. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 1204–1220. Ferris, G., Hochwarter, W., Douglas, C., Blass, F., Kolodinsky, R., & Treadway, D. (2002). Social influence processes in organizations and human resources systems. In: G. Ferris & J. Martocchio (Eds), Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management (Vol. 21, pp. 65–128). Kidlington, UK: Elsevier. Ferris, G., Kolodinsky, R., Hochwarter, W., & Frink, D. (2001). Conceptualization, measurement, and validation of the political skill construct. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Washington, DC. Ferris, G., Russ, G., & Fandt, P. (1989). Politics in organizations. In: R. Giacalone & P. Rosenfeld (Eds), Impression Management in the Organization (pp. 143–170). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117–140. Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. (1998). Coping and emotion. In: A. Monat & R. Lazarus (Eds), Stress and Coping: An Anthology (pp. 207–227). New York: Columbia University Press. Forgas, J., & Williams, K. (2001). Social influence: Direct and indirect processes. Philadelphia, PA: Psychological Press. French, J., & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In: D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in Social Power (pp. 221–256). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. Frese, M., & Zapf, D. (1994). Methodological issues in the study of work stress: Objective vs. subjective measurement of work stress and questions of longitudinal studies. In: C. Cooper & R. Payne (Eds), Causes, Coping, and Consequences of Stress at Work (pp. 375–411). New York: Wiley. Gandz, J., & Murray, V. (1980). The experience of workplace politics. Academy of Management Journal, 23, 237–251. Gardner, W., & Martinko, M. (1988). Impression management in organizations. Journal of Management, 17, 321–338. Gilmore, D. C., Ferris, G. R., Dulebohn, J. H., & Harrell-Cook, G. (1996). Organizational politics and employee attendance. Group and Organization Management, 21, 481–494. Goffman, E. (1955). On facework. Psychiatry, 18, 213–231. Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. Garden City, NJ: Doubleday Anchor. Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual. Garden City, NJ: Doubleday Anchor. Gordon, R. (1996). Impact of ingratiation on judgments and evaluations: A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 54–70.


199

Gouldner, A. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25, 161–178. Grams, W., & Rogers, R. (1990). Power and personality: Effects of Machiavellianism need for approval, and motivation on the use of influence tactics. The Journal of General Psychology, 117, 71–82. Hall, A., Hochwarter, W., & Ferris, G. (in press). The dark side of organizational politics. In: R. W. Griffin & A. O’Leary-Kelly (Eds), The Dark Side of Organizational Behavior. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Harrell-Cook, G., Ferris, G., & Dulebohn, J. (1999). Political behaviors as moderators of the perceptions of organizational politics-work outcomes relationships. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 1093–1105. Harrison, A., Hochwarter, W., Perrewé, P., & Ralston, D. (1998). The ingratiation construct: An assessment of the validity of the measure of ingratiatory behaviors in organizational settings (MIBOS. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 932–941. Higgins, C., Judge, T., & Ferris, G. (2003). Influence tactics and work outcomes: A meta-analyses. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 89–106. Hirschman, A. (1970). Exit, voice, and loyalty: Responses to decline in firms, organizations, and states. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Hobbes, T. (1968). Leviathan. Hammondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin Books. Hochwarter, W. (in press). The interactive effects of pro-political behavior and politics perceptions on job satisfaction and affective commitment. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. Hochwarter, W., Kacmar, K. M., Treadway, D., & Watson, T. (in press). It’s all relative: The distinction and prediction and prediction of politics perceptions across levels. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. Hochwarter, W., Pearson, A., Ferris, G., Perrewé, P., & Ralston, D. (2000). A reexamination of Schriesheim and Hinkin’s (1990) measure of upward influenc. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60, 755–771. Hochwarter, W. A., Perrewé, P. L., Ferris, G. R., & Guercio, R. (1999). Commitment as an antidote to the tension and turnover consequences of organizational politics. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 55, 277–297. Hochwarter, W., Witt, L., & Kacmar, M. K. (2000). Perceptions of organizational politics as a moderator of the relationship between conscientiousness and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 472–478. Hogg, M., & Abrams, D. (1999). Social identity and social cognition: Historical background and current trends. In: D. Abrams & M. Hogg (Eds), Social Identity and Social Cognition (pp. 1–25), Oxford: Blackwell. Hogg, M., & McGarty, C. (1990). Self-categorization and social identity. In: D. Abrams & M. Hogg (Eds), Social Identity Theory: Constructive and Critical Advances (pp. 10–27). London: Harvester Wheatsheaf. Hogg, M., & Terry, D. (2000). Social identity and self-categorization processes in organizational contexts. Academy of Management Review, 25, 121–140. Hogg, M., & Terry, D. (2001). Social identity processes in organizational contexts. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press. Hogg, M., Terry, D., & White, K. (1995). A tale of two theories: A critical comparison of identity theory with social identity theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 58, 255–269. House, R. J., & Rizzo, J. (1972). Toward the measurement of organizational practices: Scale development and validation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 56, 338–396.

200

WAYNE A. HOCHWARTER

Hurrell, J., Nelson, D., & Simmons, B. (1998). Measuring job stressors and strains: Where have we been, where we are, and where do we need to go. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 3, 368–389. Ivancevich, J., & Matteson, M. (1980). Stress and work. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman. James, W. (1890). Principles of psychology. New York: Holt. Jex, S. (1998). Stress and job performance: Theory, research, and implications for managerial practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Jex, S. M., & Beehr, T. A. (1991). Emerging theoretical and methodological issues in the study of work-related stress. In: G. R. Ferris & K. M. Rowland (Eds), Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management (Vol. 9, pp. 311–365). Greenwich, CT: JAI. Jex, S., Bliese, P., Buzzell, S., & Primeau, J. (2001). The impact of self-efficacy on stressor-strain relations: Coping style as an exploratory mechanism. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 401– 409. Jones, E. (1964). Ingratiation. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. Jones, E. (1990). Interpersonal perceptions. New York: W. H. Freeman. Jones, E., & Gerard, H. (1967). Foundation of social psychology. New York: Wiley. Jones, E., & Pittman, T. (1982). Toward a general theory of strategic self-presentation. In: J. Suls (Ed.), Psychological Perspectives on the Self (pp. 231–262). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Jones, E., & Wortman, C. (1973). Ingratiation: An attributional approach. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press. Judge, T., & Bretz, R. (1994). Political influence behavior and career success. Journal of Management, 20, 43–66. Kacmar, K. M., & Baron, R. A. (1999). Organizational politics: The state of the field, links to related processes, and an agenda for future research. In: G. R. Ferris (Ed.) Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management (Vol. 17, pp. 1–39). Stamford, CT: JAI. Kacmar, K. M., Bozeman, D. P., Carlson, D. S., & Anthony, W. P. (1999). A partial test of the perceptions of organizational politics model. Human Relations, 52, 383–416. Kacmar, M. K., & Carlson, D. (1998). A qualitative analysis of the dysfunctional aspects of political behavior in organizations. In: R. Griffin, A. O’Leary-Kelly & J. Collins (Eds), Dysfunctional Behavior in Organizations (pp. 195–218). Stamford, CT: JAI. Kacmar, K., & Valle, M. (1997). Dimensionality of the Measure of Ingratiatory Behaviors in Organizational Settings (MIBOS) scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 57, 314–328. Kanner, A., Kafry, A., & Pines, A. (1978). Conspicuous in its absence: The lack of positive conditions as a source of stress. Journal of Human Stress, 4, 33–39. Kasl, S. (1978). Epidemiological contributions to the study of work stress. In: C. Cooper & R. Payne (Eds), Stress as Work (pp. 3–38). New York: Wiley. Kasl, S. (1987). Methodologies in stress and health: Past difficulties, present dilemmas, future directions. In: S. Kasl & C. Cooper (Eds), Stress and Health: Issues in Research Methodologies (pp. 307–318). New York: Wiley. Kelman, H. (1961). Processes of opinion change. Public Opinion Quarterly, 25, 57–78. Kelman, H. (2001). Ethical limits on the use of influence in hierarchical relationships. In: J. Darley, D. Messick & T. Tyler (Eds), Social Influence on Ethical Behavior in Organizations (pp. 11–20). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Kipnis, D. (1984). Technology, power, and control. In: S. B. Bacharach & E. J. Lawler (Eds), Research in the Sociology of Organizations (Vol. 3, pp. 125–156). Greenwich, CT: JAI. Kipnis, D., & Schmidt, S. (1982). Profile of organizational influence strategies. San Diego, CA: University Associates.


201

Kipnis, D., & Schmidt, S. (1988). Upward influence styles: Relationship with performance evaluations, salary, and stress. Administrative Science Quarterly, 33, 528–542. Kipnis, D., & Schmidt, S. M. (1985). The language of persuasion. Psychology Today, 4, 40–46. Kipnis, D., Schmidt, S., & Wilkinson, I. (1980). Intraorganizational influence tactics: Explorations in getting one’s way. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 440–452. Knowles, E., Butler, S., & Linn, J. (2001). Increasing compliance by reducing resistance. In: J. Forgas & K. Williams (Eds), Social Influence: Direct and Indirect Processes (pp. 41–60). Philadelphia, PA: Psychological Press. Koeske, G., Kirk, S., & Koeske, R. (1993). Coping with job stress: Which strategy works best. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 66, 319–336. Kolodinsky, R., Hochwarter, W., & Ferris G. (2001). The non-linearity of leader political skill. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Southern Management Association. New Orleans. Korman, A. (1974). Contingency approaches to leadership. In: J. Hunt & L. Larson (Eds), Contingency Approaches to Leadership (pp. 189–195). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press. Kumar, K., & Beyerlein, M. (1991). Construction and validation of an instrument for measuring ingratiatory behaviors in organizational settings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 619–627. Latack, J., Kinicki, A., & Prussia, G. (1995). An integrative model of coping with job loss. Academy of Management Review, 20, 311–342. Latane, B. (1981). The psychology of social impact. American Psychologist, 36, 343–356. Latane, B., & Nida, S. (1980). Social impact theory and group influence: A social engineering perspective. In: P. Paulus (Ed.), Psychology of Group Influence (pp. 3–34). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Leary, M. R. (1995). Self-presentation: Impression management and interpersonal behavior. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Leary, M., & Kowalski, R. (1990). Impression management: A literature review and two-component model. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 34–47. Lewin, K. (1936). Principles of topological psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill. Liden, R. C., & Mitchell, T. R. (1988). Ingratiatory behaviors in organizational settings. Academy of Management Review, 13, 572–587. Mackie, D., & Cooper, J. (1984). Attitude polarization: The effects of group membership. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 575–585. Maslyn, J., Farmer, S., & Fedor, D. (1996). Failed upward influence attempts: Predicting the nature of subordinate persistence in pursuit of organizational goals. Group and Organizational Management, 4, 461–480. May, R. (1972). Power and innocence. New York: Norton. Mayes, B. (1978). Development of the index of personal political activity (IPPA). Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Western Academy of Management, Sacramento, CA (March 16–18). Mayes, B., & Ganster, D. C. (1988). Exit and voice: A test of hypotheses based on fight/flight responses to job stress. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 9, 199–216. McCall, G., & Simmons, J. (1966). Identities and interactions. New York: Free Press. McGrath, J. E. (1976). Stress and behavior in organizations. In: M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (pp. 390–419). Chicago: Rand McNally. Motowidlo, S., Packard, J., & Manning, M. (1986). Occupational stress: Its causes and consequences for job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 618–629. Nauta, A., & Sanders, K. (2001). Causes and consequences of perceived goal differences between departments with manufacturing organizations. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74, 321–342.

202

WAYNE A. HOCHWARTER

Nonis, S., Sager, J., & Kumar, K. (1996). Salespeople’s use of upward influence tactics (UITs) in coping with role stress. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Sciences, 24, 44–56. Orpen, C. (1996). The effects of ingratiation and self-promotion tactics on employee career success. Social Behavior and Personality, 24, 213–214. Perrewé, P. L., Ferris, G. R., Frink, D. D., & Anthony, W. P. (2000). Political skill: An antidote for workplace stressors. Academy of Management Executive, 14, 115–123. Perrewé, P., Hochwarter, W., Rossi, A., Wallace, A., Maignan, I., Castro, S., Ralston, D., Westman, M., Vollmer, G., Tang, M., Wan, P., & Van Deusen, C. (2002). Are work stress relationships universal? A nine-region examination of role stressors, general self-efficacy, and burnout. Journal of International Management, 8, 163–187. Peterson, R. (2001). Toward a more deontological approach the ethical use of social influence. In: J. Darley, D. Messick & T. Tyler (Eds), Social Influences on Ethical Behavior in Organizations (pp. 21–36). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Pfeffer, J. (1981). Management as symbolic action: The creation and maintenance of organizational paradigms. In: L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds), Research in Organizational Behavior (Vol. 3, pp. 1–52). Greenwich, CT: JAI. Pfeffer, J. (1989). A political perspective on careers: Interests, networks, and environments. In: M. G. Arthur, D. T. Hall & B. S. Lawrence (Eds), Handbook of Career Theory (pp. 380–396). New York: Cambridge University Press. Ralston, D. (1985). Employee ingratiation: The role of management. Academy of Management Review, 10, 477–487. Rao, A., Schmidt, S., & Murray, L. (1995). Upward impression management: Goals, influence strategies, and consequences. Human Relations, 48, 147–167. Reicher, S. (1984). Social influence in a crowd: Attitudinal and behavioural effects of de-individualism in conditions of high and low group salience. British Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 341–350. Ringer, R., & Boss, R. (2002). Hospital professional’s use of upward influence tactics. Journal of Managerial Issues, 12, 92–108. Rizzo, J., House, R., & Lirtzman, S. (1970). Role conflict and ambiguity in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 15, 150–163. Rosenfeld, P., Giacalone, R., & Riordan, C. (1995). Impression management in organizations: Theory, measurement, practice. London: Routledge. Rousseau, D. M. (1997). Organizational behavior in the new organizational era. In: J. Spence, J. Darley & D. Foss (Eds), Annual Review of Psychology (pp. 515–546). Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews. Schlenker, B. (1980). Impression management: The self-concept, social identity, and interpersonal relations. Monterey, CA: Brooks-Cole. Schreisheim, C., & Hinkin, T. (1990). Influence tactics used by subordinates: A theoretical and empirical analysis and refinement of the Kipnis, Schmidt, and Wilkinson subscales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 246–257. Schuler, R. (1980). Definitions and conceptualization of stress in organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 25, 184–215. Schuler, R. (1984). Organizational stress and coping: A model and overview. In: A. Sethi & R. Schuler (Eds), Handbook of Organizational Stress and Coping (pp. 35–67). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger. Schuler, R., & Jackson, S. (1986). Managing stress through PHRM practices: An uncertainty interpretation. In: K. Rowland & G. Ferris (Eds), Research in Personnel And Human Resources Management (pp. 183–224). Greenwich, CT: JAI. Seashore, S., Lawler, E., Mirvis, P., & Cammann, C. (Eds)(1982). Observing and measuring organizational change: A guide to field practice. New York: Wiley.


203

Sederberg, P. C. (1984). The Politics of meaning: Power and explanation in the construction of social reality. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press. Selye, H. (1975). Stress without distress. New York: Signet. Sherif, M. (1936). The psychology of social norms. New York: Harper and Brothers. Skarlicki, D., & Folger, R. (1997). Retaliation in the workplace: The roles of distributive, procedural, and interactional justice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 434–443. Smith, M. (1982). Persuasion and human action. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Spector, P., & Jex, S. (1998). Development of four self-report measures of job stressors and strain: Interpersonal conflict at work scale, organizational constraints scale, quantitative workload inventory, and physical symptoms inventory. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 3, 356–367. Spector, P., Dwyer, D., & Jex, S. (1988). Relation of job stressors to affective, health, and performance outcomes: A comparison of multiple data sources. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 11–19. Spielberger, C. (1994). Professional manual for the Job Stress Survey (JSS). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. Spiro, R., & Perreault, W. (1979). Influence use by industrial salesmen: Influence strategy and situational determinants. Journal of Business, 52, 435–455. Stang, D., & Wrightsman, L. (1981). Dictionary of social behavior and social research methods. Monterey, CA: Brooks-Cole. Stimson, J., Carmines, E., & Zeller, E. (1981). Interpreting polynomial regression. In: P. Marsade (Ed.), Linear Models in Social Research (pp. 88–96). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Sutton, R., & Kahn, R. (1986). Prediction, understanding, and control as antidotes to organizational stress. In: J. Lorsch (Ed.), Handbook of Organizational Behavior (pp. 272–285). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Tadepalli, R. (1991). Perceptions of role stress and boundary role persons: An empirical investigation. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 27, 490–514. Tajfel, H. (1974). Social identity and intergroup behaviour. Social Science Information, 13, 65–93. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup behavior. In: W. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks-Cole. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behaviors. In: S. Worchel & W. Austin (Eds), The Psychology of Intergroup Relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago: Nelson-Allen. Tedeschi, J., & Melburg, V. (1984). Impression management in the organization. In: S. Bacharach & E. Lawler (Eds), Research in the Sociology of Organizations (Vol. 3, pp. 31–58). Greenwich, CT: JAI. Tetrick, L., & LaRocco, J. (1987). Understanding, prediction, and control as moderators of the relationship between perceived stress, satisfaction, and psychological well-being. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 538–543. Thacker, R. (1999). Perceptions of trust, upward influence tactics, and performance ratings. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 88, 1059–1070. Thacker, R., & Wayne, S. (1995). An examination of the relationship between upward influence tactics and assessments of promotability. Journal of Management, 21, 739–756. Thompson, S. (1981). Will it hurt less if I can control it? A complex answer to a simple question. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 89–101. Treadway, D., Kacmar, C., Hochwarter, W., & Ferris, G. (manuscript under review). Dispositional predictors and stress-related consequences of political behavior at work. Trenholm, S. (1989). Persuasion and social influence. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Turner, J. (1975). Social comparison and social identity: Some prospects for intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 5, 5–34.

204

WAYNE A. HOCHWARTER

Turner, J. (1982). Towards a cognitive redefinition of the social group. In: H. Tajfel (Ed.), Social Identity and Intergroup Relations (pp. 15–40). Cambridge: Cambridge University. Turner, J. (1991). Social influence. Milton Keynes, UK: Open University Press. Turnley, W., & Bolino, M. (2001). Achieving desired images while avoiding undesired images: Exploring the role of self-monitoring in impression management. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 351–360. Tyler, T. (2001). Procedural strategies for gaining deference: Increasing social harmony or creating false consciousness. In: J. Darley, D. Messick & T. Tyler (Eds), Social Influences on Ethical Behavior in Organizations (pp. 69–88). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Vagg, P., & Spielberger, C. (1998). Occupations stress: Measuring job pressure and organizational support in the workplace. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 3, 294–305. Valle, M., & Perrewé, P. (2000). Do politics perceptions relate to political behaviors? Test of an implicit assumption and expanded model. Human Relations, 53, 359–386. Vigoda, E. (2002). Stress-related aftermaths to workplace politics: The relationship among politics, job distress, and aggressive behavior in organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 571–591. Vigoda, E., & Cohen, A. (2002). Influence tactics and perceptions of organizational politics: A longitudinal study. Journal of Business Research, 55, 311–324. Vollrath, M., & Torgersen, S. (2000). Personality types and coping. Personality and Individual Differences, 29, 367–378. Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070. Wayne, S. J., & Ferris, G. R. (1990). Influence tactics, affect, and exchange quality in supervisorsubordinate interactions: A laboratory experiment and field study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 87–499. Wayne, S., & Green, S. (1993). The effects of leader-member exchange on employee citizenship and impression management behavior. Human Relations, 46, 1431–1440. Wayne, S., Kacmar, K., & Ferris, G. (1995). Coworkers response to others’ ingratiation attempts. Journal of Managerial Issues, 7, 277–289. Weitz, B. (1981). Effectiveness in sales interactions: A contingency framework. Journal of Marketing, 45, 85–103. Witt, L. A., Andrews, M., & Kacmar, K. M. (2000). The role of participation in decision-making in the organizational politics-job satisfaction relationship. Human Relations, 53, 341–358. Yukl, G. (1998). Leadership in organizations (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Yukl, G., & Falbe, C. (1990). Influence tactics and objectives in upward, downward, and lateral influence tactics. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 132–140. Yukl, G., Guinan, P., & Sottolano, D. (1995). Influence tactics used for different objectives with subordinates, peers, and superiors. Group & Organization Management, 20, 272–297. Yukl, G., & Tracey, B. (1992). Consequences of influence tactics used with subordinates, peers, and the boss. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 525–535. Zellars, K., Hochwarter, W., Perrewe’, P., Miles, A., & Kiewitz, C. (2001). Beyond self-efficacy: Interactive effects of role conflict and perceived collective efficacy. Journal of Managerial Issues, 4, 483–499. Zellars, K., & Perrewé, P. (2001). Affective personality and the content of emotional social support: Coping in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 459–467.

BEYOND SELF-REPORT: USING OBSERVATIONAL, PHYSIOLOGICAL, AND SITUATION-BASED MEASURES IN RESEARCH ON OCCUPATIONAL STRESS Norbert K. Semmer, Simone Grebner and Achim Elfering ABSTRACT The preponderance of studies that rely on self-report for both independent (e.g. stressors) and dependent (e.g. well-being) variables is often deplored, as it creates problems of common method variance, which may lead to inflated, or even spurious, correlations and predictions. It is sometimes suggested that alternative measures should yield more “objective” information on the phenomena under investigation. We discuss this issue with regard to: (a) observational measures of working conditions; (b) physiological measures of strain; and (c) event-based “self-observation” on a micro-level. We argue that these methods are not necessarily “objective.” Like self-report, they are influenced by a plethora of factors; and measurement artifacts can easily be produced. All this can make their interpretation quite difficult, and the conclusion that lack of convergence with self-report automatically invalidates self-report is not necessarily warranted. Especially with regard to Emotional and Physiological Processes and Positive Intervention Strategies Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, Volume 3, 205–263 Copyright © 2004 by Elsevier Ltd. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 1479-3555/doi:10.1016/S1479-3555(03)03006-3

205

206

NORBERT K. SEMMER, SIMONE GREBNER AND ACHIM ELFERING

physiological measures, one has to keep in mind that they refer to a different response level that follows its own laws and is only loosely coupled with psychological responses. Therefore, replacement is not a promising way to get more reliable estimates of stressor-strain relationships. We argue instead that each method contains both substantive and error variance, and that a combination of various methods seems more auspicious. After discussing advantages and pitfalls of observational, physiological, and self-observational measures, respectively, we report empirical examples from our own research on each of these methods, which are meant to illustrate both the advantages and the problems associated with them. They strengthen the overall conclusion that there is no “substitute” for self-report (which often is necessary to be able to interpret data from other methods, most notably physiological ones). They also illustrate that collecting such data is quite cumbersome, and that a number of conditions have to be carefully considered before using them, and we report some problems we encountered in this research. Altogether, we conclude that self-report measures, if carefully constructed, are better than their reputation, but that the optimal way is to complement them with other measures.

INTRODUCTION From early on, reviews in the area of occupational stress have criticized the pervasive tendency to measure both independent and dependent variables by self-report (e.g. Beehr & Newmann, 1978; Ganster & Schaubroeck, 1991; Kahn & Byosiere, 1992; Kasl, 1978, 1986). And although some progress can be detected in terms of using other measures as well, more recent work reiterates this criticism (Hurrell et al., 1998; Sonnentag & Frese, 2003). Behind this complaint, there is often considerable skepticism vis-à-vis the validity of self-reports. Other measures, such as task analysis by third parties who are subject matter experts or supervisors, or physiological measures, are asked for, sometimes with the more or less implicit argument that these would constitute “objective” measures of the phenomena in question, thus overcoming the subjectivity problem. In a similar vein, many authors of studies that use self-report make a somewhat defensive argument in the discussion section, cautioning about the problem of common method variance, and calling for studies that establish the phenomenon under study with more “objective” measures. That self-reports are used so often is quite understandable, given the multiplication of time and effort involved in using alternative measures. What sometimes is not appreciated fully is that such alternative measures are not at all the “objective” alternative to the “subjective” self-report measures (this

Beyond Self-Report

207

despite warnings by experts on these alternative measures – e.g. Fried, Rowland & Ferris, 1984, with regard to physiology, Semmer, Zapf & Greif, 1996, with regard to observational measures). Actually, such measures are plagued with methodological problems in their own right. They are often influenced by a plethora of factors; including measurement artifacts. All this can make their interpretation quite difficult. The conclusion that lack of convergence with self-report measures automatically invalidates self-report is not necessarily warranted. In this chapter, we want to draw on our own experience in using alternative measures to self-report in the assessment of both stressors and stress-reactions (strain). The first author has worked with observational measures of stressors in the workplace for a long time (see Greif, Bamberg & Semmer, 1991; Semmer, 1984; Semmer, Zapf & Dunckel, 1995; Semmer et al., 1996). More recently, our group has worked with physiological measures on the “strain” side (e.g. Grebner, 2001), and with another approach for assessing stressors, namely self-observation of stressful situations with an event-sampling approach (Grebner, Elfering, Semmer, KaiserProbst & Schlapbach, in press). In this chapter we want to draw on this experience to discuss both the advantages and the pitfalls of these so-called “objective” measures. We will begin with a short discussion of the major objections raised against self-report measures, and how some of these criticisms can be dealt with. We will then discuss three alternative measures, starting with the use of observational measures for assessing stressors at work. This will be followed by a consideration of physiological measures, concentrating on the measures that we have the most experience with (cortisol, catecholamines, and blood pressure). Finally, we will discuss situation-based methods. These also rely on self-report, in that they ask the participant to describe ongoing situations. But they differ considerably from the “traditional” self-report measures, which require people to present their appraisals integrated or “averaged” over a period of time. We close the chapter with a final section containing a summary and conclusions, although we also offer some conclusions as we go along. Our conclusions are complemented by a consideration of practical problems encountered when using observational, physiological, or situation-based measures in research on occupational stress. Note that we do not intend to give a systematic review on all possible alternatives to self-report. We will not, for instance, go into unobtrusive measurement (Webb, Campbell, Schwartz, Sechrest & Grove, 1981) or the use of archival data. And even within the concepts we do cover, we will be selective, in highlighting those measures that we have the most experience with. Since we are going to discuss a number of different concepts and their relations, it might be useful to illustrate our topics in a figure (see Fig. 1). Basically, we talk about aspects of the environment as independent variables. We refer to “stressors” in the figure, but resources or any other feature of the

208


Fig. 1. Multiple Measures of Stressors and Strain.

environment that might be of importance would also be conceived of as belonging in that category. On the person side, we emphasize well-being and strain, referring to the psychological aspects in the first, to physiological aspects in the second case. Our discussions will sometimes refer to issues of convergence, that is, relationships between measures within the “stressor” side (f and b) or the “person” side (i and e). At other times, they will refer to comparisons of different assessments of the environment in predicting outcomes. Thus, arrows a, b, and c refer to observational measures vs. self-reports of work factors in predicting self-reported well-being, while a, d, and e refer to self-reported work factors as predictors of self-reported well-being vs. physiological measures of strain. We will refer to this figure at various points in the manuscript. Before we start, however, a few remarks concerning the term “objective” are in order. Often, this term is not clearly defined in this discussion, but its use suggests that it is taken to mean something like “the true reality,” in contrast to its flawed reflection in subjective reports (see Frese & Zapf, 1988). It is this interpretation that we are arguing against. Another meaning of “objective” is simply that measures are independent of the perception and interpretation by a given individual (Frese & Zapf, 1988; Sonnentag & Frese, 2003). This type of “objectivity” is desirable, although not as a substitute for, but as a complement to, subjective reports.

PROBLEMS WITH SELF-REPORT MEASURES There are a number of different ways in which associations between self-reports about stressful working conditions and self-reports about well-being (used in a

Beyond Self-Report

209

broad sense here) may be spurious (Bailey & Bhagat, 1987). (1) They may reflect response styles (e.g. acquiescence, social desirability) rather than substantive relations. (2) They may reflect the respondents’ hypotheses about job stress and strain, for instance, by attributing experienced symptoms to job stress because this reflects plausible social stereotypes (Salancik & Pfeffer, 1979). (3) Responses may also reflect personality characteristics that determine the way in which life in general is experienced. Probably the most important candidate for such a characteristic is “negative affectivity” (Brief, Burke, George, Robinson & Webster, 1988; Burke, Brief & George, 1993; Chen & Spector, 1991; Watson, Pennebaker & Folger, 1987). People high on negative affectivity tend to experience more negative affect in general. It follows that they are more likely to experience both more stress at work (and, therefore, tend to describe their work as more stressful) and more negative affect and complaints, as captured by common measures of strain. Among the variables that are suspected of biasing results, it is NA that has received the almost attention. While almost everyone acknowledges its importance, there has been considerable debate about whether NA is, indeed, to be regarded as a bias. This would imply that NA distorts responses to questions, and since it does so for both stressors and strains, it inflates correlations or even creates spurious associations. One can also argue, however, that in many cases NA may operate not as a bias but rather as a substantive effect (Spector, Zapf, Chen & Frese, 2000). It could, for instance, foster selection into jobs with low autonomy, variety, etc. (Spector, Jex & Chen, 1995), it could “create” stressors (especially social stressors) through interactions that lack social skill, or it could be influenced by stress and thus be a valid measure of strain. Furthermore, Spector et al. (2000) demonstrate, with a number of analyses, that controlling for NA in many cases does not strongly reduce associations. This argues against NA having a strong biasing effect. Many of the potentially biasing effects can be dealt with by measuring the suspected biasing variable, such as NA, and partialling it out in the analyses. This is often done in longitudinal studies (see Zapf, Dormann & Frese, 1996). Such analyses do tend to yield small effects, not because controlling for initial strain symptoms reduces longitudinal associations but rather because many strain measures are rather stable, and there is not much change to be explained (which makes the seemingly small coefficient of 0.12, reported by Zapf et al. (1996), actually look quite substantial). On the other hand, to the extent that NA exerts its influence not as a bias but as a substantive mechanism, controlling for NA may well “overcorrect,” because true variance is partialled out of the associations. Ultimately, these problems can only be solved if measures that are not based on self-report are incorporated into the models.

210


Possible biasing effects of self-report, however, should not too quickly be attributed to self-report per se. There are vast differences in the wording of different self-report instruments. One pertinent problem concerns the assessment of both stressors and strains by way of formulations that show considerable overlap, because the stressor-related items are termed in such a way that they already incorporate an appraisal of the situation as stressful (e.g. Osipow & Spokane, 1984). Stanislav Kasl, who has consistently (e.g. 1978, 1986) criticized this “triviality trap,” mentions the example of a correlation between “role clarity” and “job tension,” where the latter measure contains items asking about being bothered by unclear responsibility, unclear evaluations, etc. (1978, p. 13 f.). Constructing items that are as neutrally worded, and thus as free of evaluation of the situation as possible should at least attenuate, albeit not eliminate, such problems (Frese & Zapf, 1988; Schonfeld, 2001; Semmer, Zapf & Dunckel, 1995; Semmer et al., 1996).

ASSESSING STRESSORS BY OBSERVATIONAL MEASURES Assessments by trained job analysts or similar approaches such as ratings by supervisors seem a natural way out of the dilemma of “subjectivity” of self-reports. Presumably, perceptual biases, or such factors as NA, of the incumbents can be avoided, and the “objective” work environment can directly be assessed. There are a number of studies that have used such measures. At least at first sight such studies have, however, often produced rather disappointing results. Convergence between “objective” and “subjective” measures often is rather modest, the percentage of variance typically ranging from about 10 to 30%. Furthermore, associations between these “objective” measures and outcome measures of strain have usually been rather low, certainly lower than for self-report measures, although there are examples where outside measures yield comparable (e.g. Bosma, Marmot, Hemingway et al., 1997) or even stronger (e.g. Greiner & Krause, 2000) associations. In any case, the pattern of associations tends to be very similar (Frese, 1985; Semmer et al., 1995; Spector, 1992; Zapf, 1989). There are several possibilities for interpreting such results, which, at first sight, are quite sobering. One possibility is that the “objective” work environment has little association with stress and stress symptoms, because it is the appraisal of the “objective” environment that is important, and because this appraisal is very individualistic and idiosyncratic. One could conclude from this that the “objective” environment cannot, and should not, be the major focus of organizational stress research, because, in the end, it is the interpretation of the situation by the individual

Beyond Self-Report

211

that decides whether or not there is stress. Lazarus (1999) has made that point over and over again, and a recent paper by Perrewé and Zellars (1999) has argued that it is the meaning of stressors for the individual, rather than their “objective” occurrence, that should be the focus and starting point of our analyses. To the extent that this interpretation is correct, it would be difficult to argue for general psychological guidelines for job design, except for some rather extreme conditions (Lazarus, 1995). Another interpretation could be that observational data may not simply represent the “true objective environment” (Greiner & Krause, 2000; Morgeson & Campion, 1997; Semmer et al., 1996; Spector, 1992). Observers typically have access only to a limited sample of what is going on. Except for jobs that are highly repetitive, such a sample is likely to miss important information such as approaching deadlines, breakdown of machinery, and the like. The less frequent and the less predictable such occurrences are, the more likely they will be missed by observers (see Harvey, 1991; Semmer, 1984; Zapf, 1989). Of course, some of this information may be retrieved by a combination of observation and interviews (see Greiner & Krause, 2000; Morsh, 1964; Semmer, 1984) but then, the interview information is not “objectively observed!” The more stable conditions are, on the other hand, the easier they can be observed. This is reflected in the fact that structural conditions such as complexity of activities, or decision latitude, typically yield higher associations between external ratings and self-reports than do more ephemeral conditions (Greiner & Krause, 2000; Spector, 1992; Zapf, 1989). In addition to problems of observability that arise from fluctuations over time, some aspects of job conditions such as mental demands are inherently difficult, or even impossible, to observe. Observability of the variable, therefore, is an important limitation for the validity of outside ratings, as elaborated by Zapf (1989). Closely related to this problem is the common finding that raters tend to make fewer differentiations than do incumbents (e.g. Jenkins, Nadler, Lawler & Camman, 1975; Semmer, 1984; Spector & Jex, 1991). They seem to over-generalize from limited information, “substituting” for the missing parts by using dominant information (e.g. halo-effect) or common stereotypes (Spector, Brannick & Coovert, 1989). While this is typical for the way people process information in general, part of this overgeneralization is unavoidable, due to the limited information that outside observers will inevitably have. A third source of error appears when observation is based on information taken from the job incumbent’s own work behavior. Observing somebody who behaves in a hectic way may induce the conclusion that his or her work is hectic. Information about the incumbent’s evaluation of his or her work – for instance, about his or her job satisfaction – has been shown to influence ratings of the work itself (Cellar,

212


Kernan & Barrett, 1985). Semmer and Zapf (1989) found that ratings of danger of accidents were influenced by knowledge about time pressure. There are similar problems for other types of “objective” information. For example, using job titles treats all jobs that fall into one classification as identical, which obviously misses important differences in individual job design (Morgeson & Campion, 1997; Schwartz, 2000) and personal job molding (Semmer & Schallberger, 1996). Using ratings by people who are familiar with the job, such as supervisors or peers, increases the danger of the incumbent influencing the judgments – for instance, because the others know how that person feels about the job (see the example above, about influence of knowledge about job satisfaction). This, in turn, might be influenced by “strategic behavior” on the part of the focal person – for instance by the incumbent trying to impress the supervisor by appearing not to be stressed in spite of high demands, or trying to trigger changes by making clear that one is stressed and needs relief from some duties (see Morgeson & Campion, 1997, on this issue of “impression management.”) Furthermore, supervisors may themselves be interested in emphasizing or downplaying certain stressors (see Schonfeld, 1992b). In light of these considerations it is somewhat astonishing that ratings by observers or supervisors so often are regarded as “objective” (hence, as “true”) in contrast to the “error-laden” information contained in self-reports. Just like self-reports, these so-called “objective” ratings are also prone to errors. This is not to say that information from such measurements is not useful, quite the contrary! All the arguments above imply is that, just like self-report, this type of information is likely to contain both true and error variance. To regard it as an “objective substitute” for the subjective self-report measures would not be justified. That both measures contain valid as well as error variance is, however, too global a conclusion. The most important issue here is the extent to which the errors contained in both measures are related to one another. If they are unrelated, then method variance will add “noise” into the data. Correlations across measures will be attenuated; hence associations will be underestimated. To the extent, however, that the errors are correlated, correlations will be inflated (see Semmer et al., 1996; Spector & Brannick, 1995; Zapf, 1989). Actually, of course, the picture is even more complicated. It is too simplistic to assume that a given source of bias will be reflected in a given method equally across all constructs. Rather, it is necessary to analyze potential sources of biases for each variable being studied (Spector & Brannick, 1995). Thus, social desirability might lead to exaggerated reports on variables such as time pressure, or uncertainty, if individuals “pride” themselves on having a “difficult and strenuous job.” The same individuals might present themselves as rather healthy, due also to social desirability, which in this case would support the self-presentation as

Beyond Self-Report

213

“stress-resistant.” Such a mechanism might well produce correlations between self-reports of work characteristics and well-being (arrow a in Fig. 1) that are lower than those between externally assessed work characteristics and self-reported well-being (arrow c). The general tendency, however, seems to be in the other direction, with correlations between self-report measures of both work characteristics and well-being tending to be inflated (Zapf, 1989). The main influence working towards inflated, rather than attenuated, correlations between work characteristics rated by “others” and self-reported well-being seems to be the reliance by raters, be they experts or supervisors, on the reports, behaviors, and attitudes of the people they are observing (Frese & Zapf, 1988; Greiner & Krause, 2000). Conversely, such factors as missing information, personal attributes of raters such as tendencies for, or avoidance of, extreme responses, biases such as halo-effects, or the like, are all unrelated to the method problems associated with self-reports. These, therefore, should attenuate correlations between external ratings and self-reports. The best way to avoid inflated correlations due to reliance on incumbent information or behavior is having the observer observe more than one incumbent holding the same job, having two observers rate a job with the same incumbent (assuming that they will be differentially influenced by that person’s reports and behaviors), or having different incumbents of the same job be observed by different raters. Note that observing different incumbents of the same job may reveal true differences, due, for instance, to person-specific task assignments. This will appear as error variance in analyses and render the estimates more conservative. Our reasoning implies that ratings by external experts or supervisors are by no means “objective” measures (hence “true”), as opposed to the “subjective” (hence “error laden”) self-reports. Rather, both contain error – but at the same time, both are likely to contain valid variance.1 It follows from this argument that the optimal way to study stressors is by using assessments both by self-report and by external observation, and to combine both in a joint analysis, e.g. by structural equation modeling. The next section will provide a few examples from our own research that can illustrate such an approach.

Research Examples Example 1: Individual Self-Report, Median of Individual Self-Report, and Observer Ratings as Indicators of Work Characteristics Our first examples refer to a test of various assumptions about the sources of variance contained in self-reports and observer ratings of work characteristics (Semmer & Zapf, 1989; see also Zapf, 1989). It therefore refers to arrow b

214


in Fig. 1. Participants were male blue-collar workers from different steel and automobile companies in Germany. Stress factors were assessed by the Instrument for Stress Oriented Task Analysis (ISTA, Semmer et al., 1995), both with a self-report version and an observer version, which are nearly identical, except for differences in wording regarding who is the responding person (such as “does your job imply . . .” vs. “does this job imply . . .” in the self-report and observer version, respectively), and for differences in the number of items (since items referring to aspects that cannot be observed within a reasonable time sample, such as conflicting instructions by supervisors, were left out of the rating-version). When there were three or more people with the same job, the median of the self-reports of people holding the same job was used as a third source of measurement. Note that this procedure regards true differences between positions that had the same job description as error. A sample of 274 cases was available where all three “scores” could be calculated. For more details on the sample and other study characteristics see Frese (1985) or Semmer and Zapf (1989). We tested three “models”: The most skeptical view would regard the results as reflecting only method variance. Based on this assumption, one can specify a measurement model that has only method factors; and all indicators load on these method factors, regardless of their intended content. The simple counterpart to this “Method model” makes the complementary assumption that all indicators reflect the constructs they are intended to measure, and nothing else. This would imply a “Trait model.” Finally, one could assume that indicators reflect both content and method, and specify an MTMM model where each indicator has two loadings, one on the construct in question, and one on its respective method (see Widaman, 1985; Zapf, 1989). There were five stressor constructs involved in the analysis: (1) Time Pressure; (2) Problems of Work Organization (e.g. poor quality of material or tools – see the “Organizational Constraints” scale by Spector & Jex, 1998, based on Peters & O’Connor, 1980); (3) Uncertainty (e.g. “how easily can even a small mistake cause large damage?”); (4) Danger of accidents; and (5) Environmental Conditions such as noise, heat, etc. Analyses were carried out using LISREL V (Jöreskog & Sörbom, 1981). Results showed, as expected, a poor fit for both the Trait Model and the Method Model. The ratio of Chi-Square to degrees of freedom was above 6 in both cases, and the highest fit-index was 0.73. An MTMM-model that assumed uncorrelated method factors was significantly better and fit quite well (Chi-Square/df = 1.62, GFI = 0.93, AGFI = 0.88, RMR = 0.05, rho = 0.96, delta = 0.90). Its fit was better than that of a model that assumed a lack of discriminant validity for the stressors (by constraining the highest correlation between two latent variables to 1), and it could not be improved by allowing method factors to be correlated. However, an inspection of

Beyond Self-Report

215

Fig. 2. LISREL Estimates of the Multitrait-Multimethod Model. Source: Semmer, N., & Zapf, D. (1989). Validity of Various Methods of Measurement in Job Analysis. In K. Landau & W. Rohmert (Eds.), Recent Developments in Job Analysis (pp. 67–78). London: Taylor & Francis. Reproduced with permission.

the modification indices revealed a misspecification for the observer indicator of danger. An additional free parameter of this indicator on the latent variable “Time Pressure” considerably improved the model. This final model is displayed in Fig. 2.

216


As Fig. 2 shows, each of the methods used has loadings both on the construct it is intended to measure and on the respective method factor. Thus, all methods have some inherent bias. The high loadings on the method factors for the observer data reflect the halo-effect that has often been found for this type of data (see above): Observers seem to have more difficulties differentiating between stressors than incumbents do. The analyses also indicate that it is possible to distinguish the stressors involved, although they correlate substantially with one another. The highest correlation between the latent variables is 0.77 (Time Pressure and Uncertainty); the lowest one is 0.28 (Problems of Work Organization and Danger). The loading of the observer-indicator for Danger on Time Pressure indicates the likelihood that observers to some degree inferred the risk of accidents from Time Pressure. This makes it clear that the question “are self-reports and/or observer data valid?” cannot be answered on a general level. Rather, one has to ask which method can assess information about which constructs in a reliable and valid way (i.e. which methods have convergent and discriminant validity for which constructs – see also Spector & Brannick, 1995). The analyses just reported refer to the issue of convergence between different measures. Zapf (1989) extended these analyses to relations with self-reported dependent variables. His analyses showed that the associations of these latent variables with Psychosomatic Complaints were lower than for self-report data but higher than for observer data (e.g. Time Pressure: r = 0.30 for self-report, 0.19 for the latent constructs, and 0.17 for the observer data). This indicates that, indeed, the self-report data overestimate the associations, while the observer data tend to underestimate them. Example 2: Analyses on the Level of Jobs: “Shared Job Strain” Semmer et al. (1996) extended these analyses beyond the level of the individual. Their argument was as follows: To the extent that symptoms of strain are indeed influenced by the work environment, and not only by personal variables such as Negative Affectivity, two workers holding the same job should, to some degree, “share” elements of well-being. Using the same data set as Semmer and Zapf (1989), they therefore carried out analyses on the level of the job. They used four indicators for the latent stressors: Self-reports of two workers, and ratings by two observers. These indicators should reflect the stress-level of the jobs in question. Furthermore, they used the values on Psychosomatic Complaints by the two workers as indicators of “shared job strain.” Note that this latent variable reflects only that part of Psychosomatic Complaints that the two workers have in common. Variance in Complaints that is due to individual influences such as personal background, private circumstances, etc., is regarded as error in this type of analysis.

Beyond Self-Report

217

This analysis also helps to shed light on an issue that has plagued the field of occupational stress for quite some time. Typically, correlations between stressors and strain are around 0.30, sometimes higher, often lower. While this does imply quite substantial differences in terms of relative risks – e.g. a three-fold risk of developing psychosomatic complaints under conditions of high vs. low stressors in the results reported by Frese (1985), a two- to fourfold risk of developing coronary heart disease in studies reported by Siegrist (2002) – the problem remains that the bulk of variance in well-being is not explained by occupational stressors. Of course, there are theoretical reasons why this should be so. After all, occupational stress is only one of many factors that influence well-being and health. Examples for other factors are influences from childhood and adolescence, personality, genetic influences, private circumstances, and stress from non-occupational settings. From that perspective it seems reasonable not to expect an overriding effect of occupational stress factors. Nevertheless, this argument is likely to sound somewhat defensive, and the suspicion may remain that occupational stress factors may simply have been poorly measured. Analyzing “shared job strain” implies, as already mentioned, that all influences on well-being that are not related to work but are idiosyncratic for a given individual will go into the error term. This, in turn, implies that the relation between stressors at work and “shared job strain” should approach unity to the extent that work stressors are well measured and there are no other systematic sources of shared strain. All other influences are considered as errors, so the shared variance in strain should be due to work characteristics, and only to those. Of course, perfect unity can never be expected, since, for instance, the measurement of job stressors reflects only momentary conditions, and these not in a perfect way. Furthermore, they only represent a part of the working conditions and not the full picture, which would imply a measure of all stressors and all resources that characterize the working environment of the participants. Nevertheless, under these assumptions the association between job stressors and “shared job strain” should be very high – if stressors have been measured in a reliable and valid way. Should, on the other hand, the association between stressors and “shared job strain” not be substantially higher than associations between stressors and individual strain, this would imply that stressors were not measured in a valid way. As in the first analysis, we specified a Trait (or Content) Model, a Method Model, and various MTMM Models. Again, the Trait and Method Models could not explain the data well, with fit indices being around 0.70. An MTMM Model that assumed equal loadings for the two workers and the two observers, respectively, on both the content and the method factors showed an adequate fit, and giving up these equality constraints did not improve the model substantially. Results are shown in Fig. 3.

Fig. 3. Multitrait-Multimethod Model with Measurement Errors as Well as Trait and Method Factor Loadings that are Pairwise Equal for Observer A and Observer B and for Questionnaire A and Questionnaire B. Source: Semmer, N., Zapf, D., & Greif, S. (1996). “Shared job strain”. A new approach for assessing the validity of job stress measurements. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 69, 293–310. Reproduced with permission.

Beyond Self-Report

219

Loadings for the stressors are higher for the observers, reflecting a higher agreement between raters than between workers. Loadings are highest for Environmental stressors for both observers (0.82) and workers (0.57). For Uncertainty, Problems of Work Organization, and Time Pressure, loadings are between 0.36 and 0.47 for incumbents, and slightly above 0.60 for observers. Loadings of the method factors are between 0.14 and 0.54 for the observation factors, and between 0.29 and 0.71 for the self-report factors. Thus, both substantive and method loadings are substantial. As mentioned above, the method variance reflects the idiosyncratic perspective of workers and observers. For the construct of “shared job strain” loadings are 0.44 for the content latent variable, and 0.29 for the method factor. Thus, 19% of the variance in the strain indicators can be considered to be due to the latent variable of shared job strain, 9% to the latent method factor. The remaining 72% reflect measurement errors, which include the idiosyncratic part of strain that is not related to the job. The intercorrelation between the latent stressor variables is substantial, ranging from 0.35 for Time Pressure and Problems of Work Organization to 0.87 for Time Pressure and Uncertainty. The most important result concerns the association between “Shared Job Strain” and the latent stressors, as this is central to our argument: To the extent that our measures are valid, these correlations should be considerably higher than the correlations usually found. As Fig. 3 shows, these correlations are between 0.44 and 0.72, and thus, indeed, substantially higher. The multiple correlation was 0.80, so about two thirds of the variance in shared job strain can be explained by the job stressors.2 The high association between stressors and “Shared Job Strain” supports the validity of the measurement. At the same time, these results have implications for the issue of why associations between stressors and individual well-being tend to be around 0.20–0.40. Our data suggest that associations of r = 0.40–0.45, or about 15–20% shared variance, would be a good estimate of the true relationship between stressful working conditions and individual strain. This would imply that, for practical purposes (since measurement is never perfect), the correlations typically found are just about what one can expect. That we cannot explain 50, 60, or more percent of the variance in well-being does not primarily indicate poor measurement, but rather the multi-causal etiology of well-being. It should be added that associations of 0.30 and even 0.20 by no means imply negligible risks. Using the same data, Frese (1985) showed that a correlation of r = 0.19 was associated with a three-fold risk of having high psychosomatic complaints when one is in the upper vs. the lower third with regard to stressors (see also Rosenthal, 1984). With regard to our overall topic, this analysis, again, supports the conclusion that both self-report and observer data contain true as well as method variance,

220


that none of them is “the” best measure but that a combination of the information they contain is most promising. Example 3: Attenuating Mono-Method-Bias by Averaging Data from Self-Report and Observation As the first two examples have shown, using structural equation models in a multi-trait multi-method approach seems most promising for combining information from different sources. In many cases, however, sample size may not be sufficient for such analyses. There is, however, a way to at least attenuate the problem of mono-method bias, and to compensate for the tendency of self-report measures to overestimate and the tendency of ratings to underestimate true relationships. Simply averaging the self-report and rating measures implies that method variance due to self-report, which is likely to lead to an overestimation of the true association, will be counteracted by method variance from the rating measure, which is more likely to lead to an underestimation of that relationship. So, at least to some extent the two sources of error are likely to cancel each other out, yielding a more adequate estimate of the true association. We would like to illustrate this with data from a project on young people entering the labor market in Switzerland (see Kälin et al., 2000). Participants come from five different occupations: nurses, sales assistants, cooks, bank clerks, and electronic technicians. The data we are reporting here are from an in-depth study on a sub-sample of the larger project. The first assessment was a few months after the participants had finished their vocational training and started “real work.” The second assessment was a year later (cf. Grebner, 2001; Grebner, Semmer & Elfering, 2003). Working conditions were assessed by observer rating and self-report, using, as in the analyses already cited, the ISTA (Semmer et al., 1995), the only difference being that a shortened version was used for the self-report instrument, as this contained many other questions, and we had to avoid endangering the motivation of participants by too long a questionnaire. To assess work characteristics, we used: (1) an overall index of task related stressors (averaging across Time Pressure, Concentration Demands, Uncertainty, Problems of Work Organization, and Interruptions); and (2) an Index of Control (combining Method Control and Time Control). The analyses refer only to participants who were employed at the time of both measurement occasions. With regard to convergence between self-report and ratings (arrow b in Fig. 1), correlations for these aggregated measures were r = 0.32 and r = 0.45 for control, and r = 0.65 and r = 0.70 for stressors, at times 1 and 2, respectively. With regard to associations with dependent variables (arrows a and c) correlations with Psychosomatic Complaints were about as expected: The pattern was the same, but coefficients were higher for self-report (S) than for ratings (R), with

Beyond Self-Report

221

the combined index (SR) being in-between, with respective values of r = 0.22 (p < 0.05), 0.03, and 0.18 for time 1, and r = 0.44 (p < 0.001), 0.25, and 0.34 (p < 0.05), for time 2. Regressing Psychosomatic Complaints on Stressors and Control, there was no longitudinal prediction from wave one to wave two. However, a regression model with Stressors and Control at time 2 as predictors did yield statistically significant results for stressors, after controlling for Psychosomatic Complaints at time 1. As expected, prediction was stronger for Self-report (␤ = 0.30, p < 0.01) than for Ratings (␤ = 0.18, ns), but the pattern was the same. For the combined SR measure of job stressors, ␤ was 0.28 (p < 0.01). Given that this measure contains both error that tends to overestimate associations (S) and error that tends to underestimate them (R), this coefficient is likely to be a more accurate estimate of the true association than each of the other two alone. Note that these are not simply cross-sectional results. Since the dependent variable at time 1 is controlled for, a causal interpretation becomes more plausible, arguing for relatively short-term effects of Stressors on Psychosomatic Complaints. This corresponds to the general picture in occupational stress research, both for people just entering a job (Schonfeld, 2001) and for the field in general (Sonnentag & Frese, 2003). Certainly, this method is less satisfying than structural equation modelling, as it does not allow modelling method factors and thus controlling their influence. It does, however, attenuate mono-method bias, in that influences from self-report, which tend to inflate correlations, and influences from ratings, which tend to reduce correlations, should cancel each other out. And since the results correspond very well to expectations, and are in line with the conclusions drawn from the MTMM-models, these data do make a stronger case for an association between work characteristics and Psychosomatic Complaints than data based on self-report alone.

Conclusions and Practical Considerations Altogether, several conclusions can be drawn. First, we feel that there is considerable support for the argument that observer ratings (or ratings by superiors or other subject matter experts) are a valuable source of information that should be used wherever possible. They are, however, best seen as a complement to self-reports, not as a substitute for them. Both types of measures contain substantive information in addition to method variance. Thus, substituting one for the other would sacrifice true variance. The second implication, therefore, is that both sources of information should be combined in analyses wherever possible – preferably in structural equation models, but where this is not possible, using the average of both

222


may still present an advantage over basing analyses on one source only. Third, in terms of the relation between work characteristics and well-being, results based on both sources of information do yield associations that are substantial. As expected, they tend to be lower than those for self-report only, but higher than those for ratings. They are not extremely high, but the reason for this is not likely to be due to poor measures but rather to the complex etiology of indicators of well-being. One implication of this finding is that Negative Affectivity is not likely to bias results to such a degree that self-reports become invalid (see Spector et al., 2000). In terms of practical considerations, we would like to reiterate that self-report items should be formulated as “neutral” as possible. This is easier in some cases (e.g. with regard to structural elements such as control) than in others (e.g. time pressure – Zapf, 1989). It is especially difficult with regard to social stressors (e.g. with regard to conflicts or unfair treatment – cf. the result by Spector et al., 2000, that it was social stressors that were most strongly influenced by NA). Nevertheless, even here one could avoid questions such as “How often do you feel treated in an unfair manner by your supervisor?” and ask instead something like “Does your supervisor apply the same standards of treatment to everyone?.” By such careful attention to wording of this kind, while one cannot completely avoid problems of common method variance one can mitigate them and avoid the “triviality trap” described by Kasl (1978), by which one runs the risk of correlating variants of the same concept with one another. With regard to observer ratings, there are a number of points that seem, from our experience, to be especially important (see Grebner, 2001, for a discussion of these points). One is, of course, the need for extensive training of observers. They have to get some experience with the tasks involved, but they also have to be very familiar with the psychological concepts being rated. It is our experience that conceptual clarity about what is meant by “Control,” “Problems of Work Organization,” and the like is extremely important. In many cases observers will, to some degree, depend on information given by incumbents. It is extremely important that they learn to use that information, but not in the sense of simply taking it at face value, but rather as a piece of information that they use for a judgment of their own. This implies: (a) that they focus on aspects that relate to the topic in question during their observation, trying to find further evidence for or against a certain conclusion; (b) that they ask questions in different wordings to see if answers change; but also (c) that they ask colleagues or supervisors, or consult job descriptions and archival material. Finally, observers need to be carefully trained in phrasing questions to incumbents. This refers to the issue of being clear and understandable. However, another issue seems at least as important to us: The area of stress is closely linked to threats to self-esteem. There is a fine line between having stressors around and not being able to cope with demands. (This can be seen most clearly in research

Beyond Self-Report

223

on social support, where seeking and accepting support may induce feelings of dependency or incompetence, and thus lead to negative, rather than positive, effects of support – see Elfering, Semmer, Schade, Grund & Boos, 2002). For instance, the reason for not being sure about what is expected (i.e. uncertainty) might be attributed either to those that generate the expectations (e.g. supervisors) or to the incumbent who is not competent enough. In our experience, not all potential observers will be able to adjust their questions and formulations spontaneously so that they convey neutrality and avoid defensiveness. A final point relates to sampling procedures. In order to get familiar with the job, an initial period of about 1.5–2 hours seems adequate for most jobs. (Of course, this refers to our purposes here, that is, a judgment of several stress related dimensions. For a detailed task analysis, as, for instance, in hierarchical task analysis (e.g. Shepard, 2001), much more time may be necessary.) After this initial observation (which is combined with an interview with the incumbent), we add additional time samples of observation. These can be rather short (about 15–20 minutes); what is more important is that they should be as different as possible with regard to timing, that is, they should be on another day and at another time of day, so that the danger of capturing peculiarities of, say, Monday morning, are minimized. As can be seen from this short discussion, problems are manifold, and doing observational studies requires much effort, both with regard to preparation and training and with regard to the logistics of doing observations (time schedules, etc.) and the skills involved in doing them. If one is willing to invest this effort, however, job observations can be a valuable tool in research on occupational stress.

ASSESSING STRESS REACTIONS BY PHYSIOLOGICAL MEASURES Just as observations and ratings by experts suggest themselves as an alternative to self-report in the measurement of stressors, physiological responses seem to provide an alternative to self-report for the measurement of stress reactions. After all, physiological mechanisms have always been regarded as a core element of stress responses. They were already central in the work of pioneers of stress research such as Cannon (1914) and Selye (1956), and the notion of arousal is still prominent in work on stress and emotions (e.g. Frankenhaeuser & Johansson, 1986; Russell & Carroll, 1999; Thayer, 1989; Warr, 1999, and many others). Physiological mechanisms are not only intricately linked to emotional experience and emotional behavior, they also are seen as a pathway by which psychosocial factors such as (occupational) stressors have effects on health. It therefore

224


comes as no surprise that they continue to play a role both in theory and in empirical research, both with regard to the possible consequences of stressors and resources at work (e.g. Frankenhaeuser & Gardell, 1976; Ganster & Fusilier, 1989; Kahn et al., 1964; Karasek & Theorell, 1990; Sonnentag & Frese, 2003; Warr, 1987) and with regard to finding predictors for specific health disorders such as cardiovascular disease (e.g. Karasek & Theorell, 1990; Landsbergis, Schnall, Belkic, Baker, Schwartz & Pickering, 2003; Theorell & Karasek, 1996), gastrointestinal functional disorder (Theorell, 2003), musculoskeletal disorders (Elfering et al., 2002; Hurrell, 2001; Theorell, 2003), upper respiratory infections (Cohen et al., 1998), or autoimmune disorders (Rabin, 2002). Physiological processes are thought to play a major role in both the initial development of disease and/or in the course it takes (cf. Steptoe, 1991a, b). Not only are physiological processes considered important for stress and emotions by virtually everyone, they also have the advantage of having no method variance in common with self-report in terms of response tendencies. Furthermore, although we can influence physiological reactions to some degree (e.g. through biofeedback, see Nakao, Yano, Nomura & Kuboki, 2003), they are not easily adjusted either to expectations of experimenters or to one’s own theories about stressful circumstances and well-being. No wonder, therefore, that physiological data are often viewed as “harder,” as more “objective” than self-report data (Fried et al., 1984). Just as with observation methods on the stressor side, however, physiological measures as indicators of the “stress” side have their problems that should not be overlooked (Fried et al., 1984). Some of these have to do with measurement issues that refer to reliability of measurement and implementation of rigorous measurement procedures. Although these problems are, of course, quite specific with regard to the parameter involved, they are comparable to measurement problems in observation studies on a more general level. With physiological parameters, however, there is a more fundamental problem: Physiological measures are not just another way of gathering data on stress. Rather, physiological systems are bodily sub-systems in their own right, and this has to be taken into account when discussing their validity as measures of stress. Although these issues refer to all kinds of physiological measures, we will mainly refer to selected parameters with which we have had the most experience. These are measures of: (a) the glucocorticoid cortisol produced by the adrenal cortex (hypothalamic pituitary adrenocortical axis, HPA-axis); (b) the catecholamines adrenaline and noradrenaline released by the adrenal medulla (sympathetic-adrenal medullary system, SAM system); and (c) blood pressure. Needless to say, this represents only part of the many and complex physiological parameters that are involved in the stress process (e.g. the immune system, cf.

Beyond Self-Report

225

Kiecolt-Glaser & Glaser, 1997; McEwen, 2002). What follows therefore is not intended to be in any way an exhaustive review of physiological parameters, their meaning, and their measurement. Rather, it is meant to highlight important issues – both conceptual and methodological – which are illustrated with regard to specific parameters. As before, we will also present some results of our own research, again with the intention to provide examples of both the insights that can be gained, and the problems and gaps that remain.

The Issue of Different Response Levels Ratings of work characteristics by trained experts, supervisors etc. represent an alternative way for assessing the very same construct that is also being assessed by self-report measures of work conditions. By contrast, physiological measures are much more than just another way to measure the same phenomena that are measured by self-report regarding well-being (arrow e in Fig. 1). Rather, physiological systems are subsystems of the organism that have their own characteristics and their own basic functions. They follow their own laws and are only loosely coupled with each other and with other response systems such as psychological and behavioral reactions to stress. The psychological, physiological and behavioral response levels therefore can be expected to covary only to a moderate degree (Hörhold, 1998). Even within the physiological response level, the various subsystems are only loosely coupled, and are subject to specific feedback mechanisms, rendering arousal a much less unitary phenomenon than is often assumed (Boucsein, 1991; Krantz & Falconer, 1997; Lacey, 1967). This loose coupling has many implications. For instance, there are different time dynamics for psychological experiences (e.g. anger) vs. physiological reactions (e.g. elevation of hormone levels), but also differences among the latter. Thus, cortisol secretion appears with a latency of approximately 10–30 minutes after stimulation (Kirschbaum, 1991; Kirschbaum & Hellhammer, 1994) whereas catecholamines react more quickly, and so does the cardiovascular system. Furthermore, physiological systems have their own rhythm over time, the most prominent one being the circadian rhythm. For instance, cortisol has a pronounced peak in the morning hours (Kirschbaum, 1991), whereas adrenaline and noradrenaline peak later in the day (e.g. Van der Beek, Meijman, Frings-Dresen, Kuiper & Kuiper, 1995) – and all this is, in addition, subject to interindividual differences (Kirschbaum & Hellhammer, 1994; Kohse & Wisser, 1987; Lacey, 1967). Time dynamics are also likely to be different in the long term. Symptoms of strain will not necessarily have the same time course at the physiological and the psychological level, and, again, this picture is complicated by differences among

226


parameters at each level as well. We will come back to this issue in one of our research examples. A further implication is that physiological responses are subject to a great number of influences. After all, their function is not restrained to the regulation of stress, but also to the regulation of very basic processes under “normal” conditions, such as supplying the energy needed to deal with demands that are not necessarily perceived as stressful. Since mental work and movement require energy, for instance, they are likely to influence physiological responses. This, in turn, implies, that an increase in, say, cardiovascular activity or catecholamine secretion may indicate “normal” reactions such as mental work and/or bodily movement rather than psychological stress.

The Issue of Response Patterns While the issue of response level and loose coupling of response systems is not a “problem to be resolved” but rather a phenomenon to be reckoned with, the issues to be discussed now deal with complex patterns of arousal and recovery that call for a more thorough understanding of the phenomena involved. Level, Reactivity, and Recovery Basically, physiological stress responses such as increases in blood pressure, catecholamines, or cortisol are necessary for the mobilization of energy in demanding situations (metabolic effects). They are, therefore, basically adaptive responses and by no means per se health damaging. Thus, cortisol and catecholamines stimulate mobilization of energy from storage tissues (e.g. fatty free acids from fat deposits and the liver). This promotes gluconeogenesis, providing blood sugar for muscles and brain, and improves blood circulation. Improved blood circulation in turn supplies tissue, muscles, organs and the brain with oxygen and nutriments (e.g. blood glucose; metabolic processes), removes carbon dioxyde and other products of decomposition (anabolic processes), and regulates body temperature. At the same time, cortisol restricts long-term anabolic processes (e.g. growth, digestion, and reproduction), which has the effect of saving energy. Furthermore, activation of the immune system is slowed down by cortisol, which avoids harmful effects by inhibiting overshooting production and effects of immune parameters (e.g. Munck, Guyre & Holbrook, 1984). Therefore, physiological arousal (the terms arousal, activation and reactivity will be used as synonyms here, although some authors do differentiate between them, e.g. Sanders, 1983) that is, the change in level between the baseline and the stimulus exposure, is considered a basic process that enables adequate response in

Beyond Self-Report

227

demanding situations and not per se an abnormal reaction (cf. Dienstbier, 1989; Linden, Earle, Gerin & Christenfeld, 1997; Sterling & Eyer, 1988). At the same time, however, aroused states should be followed by a return to basal levels after termination of arousing situations, in order to restore bodily resources and to keep the organism healthy (physiological recovery, unwinding or anabolism, cf. Linden et al., 1997; Sterling & Eyer, 1988). A balance between arousal and recovery over time is therefore regarded as a necessary prerequisite for health. This general principle of maintaining stability and balance of bodily systems within a narrow normal range is the well-known principle of homeostasis (cf. Cannon, 1935; Selye, 1956). Sterling and Eyer (1988) extended this principle by coining the term allostasis (see also McEwen, 1998). They assumed a broader range of adaptive responses, and, in line with Mason (1968), their focus is more strongly on involvement of the brain as target organ of stress hormones, beyond stereotyped local feedback loops, and thus on the mutual influence of the central nervous system (CNS) and peripheral arousal. An important aspect of the concept of allostasis, in comparison to homeostasis, is that the range or “deviations” from baseline levels that is considered adaptive is much larger – provided that it is followed by adequate recovery within an appropriate time span. Moreover, health is not defined in terms of the range of normal levels of physiological parameters (homeostasis), but as a state of responsiveness (cf. Sapolsky, 1999). It follows that the dynamics of arousal and recovery receive special attention in this view. It has, of course, always been assumed that the adaptive processes that are protective in the short term may have detrimental consequences if they are sustained over extended periods of time (Seyle, 1993). Processes of recovery have, therefore, been investigated in several studies, and “slow unwinding” is quite well established as an indicator of poor adjustment to stress (cf. Frankenhaeuser, 1991; Frankenhaeuser & Johansson, 1986; Johansson & Frankenhaeuser, 1972; Meijman, Mulder, van Dormolen & Cremer, 1992; Rau, Georgiades, Fredrikson, Lemne & de Faire, 2001; Rissler, 1979; Sapolsky, 1999). Besides being an indicator of poor adaptation in and of itself, slow unwinding may also be associated with increased vulnerability to additional stressors during the state of incomplete recovery. It is not surprising, therefore, that the “prolonged response” pattern is one of the “maladaptive” patterns in the concept of “allostatic load” (McEwen, 1998, 2002), and in this approach, in contrast to some other approaches (e.g. Dienstbier, 1989), it is seen as applying to a wide range of physiological parameters, including cortisol, catecholamines, and blood pressure. Whereas the concept of insufficient recovery has been discussed for a long time, the other side of the coin, that is, “insufficient mobilization,” has received attention only in recent years. If, the pattern of mobilization and recovery is, indeed, crucial,

228


however, it is plausible that a lack of mobilization may be maladaptive as well, reflecting a compromised, overtaxed system (Siegrist, 1998, p. 199) – although, as Siegrist points out, there is also the possibility that such unresponsiveness may be instrumental in protecting the system against excessive strain. In the allostatic load model, lack of reactivity is considered a maladaptive response pattern just as is the prolonged response pattern, and McEwen (1998) points out that this lack of mobilization may lead to compensatory (maladaptive) increases in other systems. Reduced responsivity has been found for instance, for cortisol (Heim, Ehlert & Hellhammer, 2000), heart rate, blood pressure, and skin temperature (Schaubroeck & Ganster, 1993). Although both insufficient recovery and hypo-responsivity have received some attention, the most prominent concept refers to hyper-responsivity, or hyperreactivity (e.g. Matthews, Weiss, Detre et al., 1989). It has been discussed for a long time as a mediator in the causal chain from stressors to the development of impaired well-being and health (including precursors of poor health such as hypertension and atherosclerotic vascular lesions, cf. Blaskovich & Katkin, 1995; McEwen, 1998; Panter-Brick & Pollard, 1999; Sapolsky, 1999; Siegrist, 1998). Excessive reactivity could be a sign of insufficient adaptation, which is another maladaptive response pattern in the concept of “allostatic load” (McEwen, 1998). The Meaning of Responsivity Each of the response patterns discussed is plausible, and there is evidence for the maladaptive character for each of them. And, of course, it seems reasonable that the possibilities for “disregulation” are manifold, so each of them is contained in the model of allostatic load (McEwen, 1998). While this model represents a step forward in its ability to integrate many diverse findings, it also reveals new ambiguities. These appear especially with regard to the meaning of response intensity, which has often been taken to imply greater risk (Brunner, 2002; Steptoe & Willemsen, 2002). Depending on the development that follows the initial response, however, high responsiveness may just as well be a sign of an adaptive response. If further information is lacking, especially about the time course, the meaning of reactivity by itself, remains ambiguous. And this picture is complicated further because lack of responsiveness may also signify a maladaptive response, as discussed above. Since in many studies people are compared to one another in a single sample, it is not impossible that what is classified as high (or low) reactivity in one study would be classified as “normal” in another study. Furthermore, there are good reasons to assume distinct stages, with excessive sympathoadrenal activation and, therefore, cardiovascular reactivity (CVR) during Stage I, but compensatory processes, possibly caused by down-regulation of receptors, associated with reduced CVR at Stage II (Siegrist, Klein & Matschinger,

Beyond Self-Report

229

1989; Siegrist & Klein, 1990). Since Stage II appears after prolonged exposure to stressors, results may be different depending on what stage an individual is in, and the same results may have different meaning in different stages. For instance, low responsivity could be a sign that an individual is not highly stressed. But it could also be a sign of the individual being in Stage II already. Obviously, this would imply resilience in the first, but lack of resilience in the second case. So it comes as no surprise that, for instance, both increased as well as decreased HPA activity have been found to be associated with chronic stress (see Pruessner, Hellhammer & Kirschbaum, 1999). Sometimes groups in high stress conditions show no difference in cortisol level at the first measure in the morning, but a stronger increase than controls for later measures (Schulz, Kirschbaum, Pruessner & Hellhammer, 1998), whereas in other studies they show lower levels but no stronger increase (Pruessner et al., 1999). Differences in Patterning and Meaning of Specific Parameters The picture becomes even more complicated when one considers that the patterns involved may well differ for different physiological parameters. Thus, many assume that high levels of cortisol are an indicator of strain, whereas high levels of catecholamines may be adaptive if followed by recovery (e.g. Dienstbier, 1989; Frankenhaeuser, 1991; Schaubroeck & Ganster, 1993). McEwen (1998), on the other hand, explicitly does not differentiate between different physiological parameters with regard to their significance, but assumes that each of them needs sufficient upwinding in demanding situations, followed by appropriate unwinding, including parameters of the HPA-axis (cf. Heim, Ehlert & Hellhammer, 2000). In addition to differences in patterns, there are also differences in sensitivity of various parameters with regard to specific influences. Cortisol seems to be especially sensitive to emotionally stressful stimulation (novel, ambiguous, unpredictable, uncontrollable stimulus situations – see Frankenhaeuser & Johansson, 1986), including the anticipation of such events (Kirschbaum, 1991; Kirschbaum, Wüst & Hellhammer, 1992; Mason, 1968; Smyth, Ockenfels, Porter et al., 1998). Adrenaline is primarily related to mobilization of mental resources, whereas noradrenaline is more strongly related to physical demands (cf. Mulder, Mulder, Meijman, Veldman & van Roon, 2000). Finally, these proceses may change with age and experience (cf. Kiecolt-Glaser & Glaser, 1997). Conclusions Future studies might help to clarify some of the complex issues involved in measuring and interpreting physiological measures by testing different conceptual models (e.g. Pollard, Ungpakorn, Harrison & Parkes, 1996), by using subjects of different ages, and by conducting studies using longitudinal multi-wave

230


designs. As of now, however, many results from physiological measures are quite ambiguous and can be interpreted only if one makes additional assumptions – for instance, about stages, recovery processes, and so on. Rather than yielding “hard” and “objective” data, with clearcut and unequivocal meanings, physiological measures are not only hard to get (see below: measurement problems) but also far from clear with regard to their meaning, due to the complexity of the processes involved. Often, interpretation of results depends on additional information about the specific circumstances, about appraisal and coping processes, or about personality variables. Part of this information can only be acquired by the very method the weaknesses of which led some to call for “harder” data – namely: Self-report.

Measurement Issues The above discussion has shown that physiological data often cannot be interpreted without ambiguity even if they were measured perfectly. Beyond that, however, physiological measures pose many complicated measurement issues with many potential pitfalls (see, for instance, Baum & Grunberg, 1997; Fried et al., 1984; Kiecolt-Glaser & Glaser, 1997; Krantz & Falconer, 1997). Physiological responses are influenced by so many factors – including, for example, circadian rhythms, food intake, physical movement, consumption of alcohol and drugs, oral contraceptives, cigarette smoking, momentary stressful events, current health status, and personality. Thus, use of physiological measures requires not only careful timing within the day but also concomitant measures of a broad variety of control variables, which can be assessed by self-report, interviews, or medical examinations. Only when the influence of such variables can be controlled – statistically or by excluding participants with specific attributes from the analyses – will the results be credible. Note, too, that different physiological parameters are subject to such influences in specific ways. Catecholamines, notably noradrenaline, are especially sensitive to movement; adrenaline reacts to general effort (mental demands), whereas cortisol seems to reflect emotional stress more directly (Baum & Grunberg, 1997; Frankenhaeuser, 1991). Assessment of such potentially confounding variables is cumbersome, not only for the researchers but often also for the participants. Especially when measures are taken at home or at work, participants not only have to do all or part of the measurement itself (e.g. provide urine samples) but also fill in a protocol about food, alcohol, or drug consumptions, and the like. Sometimes they are asked to refrain from certain behaviors, such as drinking alcohol or doing physical exercise. And, of course, the assessment itself may require the interruption of ongoing

Beyond Self-Report

231

activities, and so forth. All this implies that compliance with instructions may be a serious problem. In a recent study on early morning cortisol, for instance, a quarter of the participants failed to provide saliva samples within the time window prescribed, which resulted in significantly biased data for this group (Kudielka, Broderick & Kirschbaum, 2003). Our own data on stressful events recorded by a diary-type measure (see Grebner et al., in press) show that 2.4% of the events reported refer to stress due to the study protocol itself. Although this is not a high percentage, such issues deserve attention. The more controls and restrictions there are, the greater the danger of non-compliance, or even of refusals to continue to participate, resulting either in biased data or in biased samples. In our experience, keeping in close personal contact with participants helps to reduce these problems; but the trade-off between tight controls and commitment to participation remains. Somewhat related to this problem is the issue of “resting values” to which values under stress (or at work) are to be compared. Many of the influences mentioned above (e.g. food intake, physical activity) may also play a role when people are officially “at rest.” So might rumination about a recent stressful experience or the anticipation of an upcoming stressful event. People may want to engage in sports activities on a Sunday, or may have an argument with their spouse, and so forth. Again, such influences have to be carefully recorded, and if possible, some should be eliminated by instruction (e.g. sports). Only then can resting values (which sometimes are higher than values under stimulation) be meaningfully interpreted. All this, of course, further aggravates problems of compliance. A final problem we want to mention here refers to measurement devices. For instance, single blood pressure readings are known to be quite unreliable. This has been known for a long time, and techniques to deal with it (such as multiple readings, and careful training of personnel) are standard (Krantz & Falconer, 1997; Schnall, Belkic & Pickering, 2000). What is more disturbing are studies showing that laboratory assays (e.g. High Pressure Liquid Chromatography Analysis, HPLC, or Radioimmunoassay, RIA) may contain substantial measurement errors. In one study, salivary Cortisol levels analysed in five laboratories showed deviations between 0.64 and 1.67 nmol/l (Garde, Hansen & Nikolajsen, 2003). Salivary cortisol values were found to by 2.7 times higher when determined by an immunological assay method as compared to liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS) in a study by Jönsson, Malmberg, Amilon, Garde and Orbaek (2003). Analyses of urinary catecholamines may vary considerably between (Kohse & Wisser, 1987), and even within laboratories (Moleman, 1990). In many studies, this is not too great a problem as long as the deviations remain constant and any one study uses only one method, since correlations and differences between means will not be affected. Nevertheless, comparability across studies is hampered, and in cases where absolute values may be important (e.g.

232


when high or low levels are indicative of medical problems), additional checks are required. Research Examples In the following section, we will present some examples from our own research, as we did in the section on observational measures, to illustrate advantages and problems in the use of physiological measures. Example 1: Differences in Cortisol Levels on Work Days and on Resting Days If one assumes that work normally constitutes a higher “load” for the organism than rest, one should expect cortisol levels to be higher on workdays than on rest days, and to the extent that this is the case, it might be interpreted as a sign of good recovery (see above). In field studies, however, cortisol has not reliably been found to be higher on workdays than on rest days or evenings (Evans & Steptoe, 2001; Lundberg, Elfsberg Dohns, Melin et al., 1999). One reason for this could be habituation. Cortisol “should increase in response to various types of emotional stress [Kirschbaum & Hellhammer, 1989] but usually habituates to normal daily work stress” (Lundberg et al., 1999, p.253). Low stress at work, or successful habituation to work stressors may therefore account for findings in which levels on workdays are lower than, or equal to, levels on rest days. Another reason for such findings, however, may involve individual circumstances that do not foster recovery in evenings and on weekends (see Sonnentag, 2001) – either because there is not sufficient social support to counter the influences of work stress, or because conditions in private life contain high levels of stressors of their own, which induce a rise in cortisol levels on rest days. Since private (i.e. non-work related) stressors have been found to be appraised as more stressful than work stressors (Grebner et al., in press), their influence should not be underestimated. In a longitudinal field study, Grebner, Elfering and Semmer (1999) investigated relationships between job characteristics, indicators of well-being, and cortisol in saliva. Participants were middle-aged male instructors from public services. The investigation included three waves of measurement, with a time lag of 6 weeks between waves. Respondents filled in questionnaires about their work situation and well-being, at the beginning of the study. In each wave, cortisol was measured on a work day and a subsequent day off, usually the following Sunday. On these days, participants also provided information about their momentary mood. As was to be expected from some previous research, mean cortisol values on workdays were not consistently higher than on Sundays. Noon values, for example, were significantly higher at work only in wave 3; for wave 2, there was a trend, but in wave 1, there was no difference. The majority of participants did have higher values on workdays, but between 29 and 45% of them had higher values on Sundays than on workdays.

Beyond Self-Report

233

We tested the hypothesis that cortisol levels that were higher on work than on rest days are a sign of good recovery; they should therefore be associated with better well-being (arrow e in Fig. 1) and more favorable circumstances in terms of stressors and resources (arrow d). We identified people as “responders” when their work values were, indeed, higher than their “Sunday” values. In order to make sure that the difference was meaningful, we used a criterion suggested by Kirschbaum (1991) that classified people as “responders” only if their cortisol levels on work days were at least 2.5 nmol/l above their resting measure – which in Kirschbaum’s case was a laboratory measure, in our case a Sunday measure. The following analyses refer to cortisol values at noon. The first result that is of interest refers to consistency over time in responding. The people who did have higher values on workdays were not necessarily the same people across waves. We therefore created two groups of participants – those who were “responders” (as defined above) in none or one of the three waves (n = 15), and those who were “responders” in at least two of the three waves (n = 12). Results show that the “consistent high responders” reported more favourable values on a number of measures with regard to resources, and well-being. These differences can especially be found with regard to social resources – more social support by spouse, and also more “cooperation latitude” (freedom to decide with whom to cooperate) at work. The “consistent responders” also had lower values in “resigned attitude towards work,” as well as a tendency to report better recovery, based on measures of emotional spillover, and higher well-being in the evening. These results are noteworthy for a number of reasons. First, they indicate that work-rest differences in cortisol are a meaningful indicator of successful adaptation. In the literature, this pattern has been proposed mainly with regard to catecholamines but not cortisol (cf. Dienstbier, 1989; Frankenhaeuser, 1991; Schaubroeck & Ganster, 1993). Our results support the allostatic load model, which assumes the same pattern for a number of physiological parameters, including cortisol. Second, that our results are inconsistent across waves, and are meaningful only when consistency itself is considered in the analyses, implies that measures taken at a single time may potentially be misleading. Any pattern may appear at a single time, and only patterns that are fairly stable across a number of measurement occasions reveal meaningful associations. The value of extended measurements, preferably in longitudinal designs, is therefore vividly demonstrated by these data. Third, our results point to the special importance of social resources. Although the pattern for the consistent responders shows more positive values on a number of variables, they tend to be small and statistically insignificant for stressors but clear and significant for resources. And it was resources in private life that seemed to be the most important ones.

234


In regard to the more general topic of this paper, these data also show that the interpretation of physiological data depends to a large degree on additional information – most of which comes from self-reports. Example 2: Lagged Effects for Blood Pressure but Concurrent Effects for General Well-Being Time-related dynamics are among the issues that are most poorly understood in research on occupational stress (McGrath & Beehr, 1990). Conceptually, many different patterns are possible (see Frese & Zapf, 1988), including, for instance: (a) strain appearing and disappearing with onset and offset of stressors (“stressreaction model”); (b) strain reactions becoming chronic and persisting even after a decrease in stressors (“accumulation model”), often found with shift workers (Frese & Okonek, 1984; Frese & Semmer, 1986); (c) habituation processes (“adjustment model”); (d) increasing vulnerability (“dynamic accumulation model”); and (e) delayed reactions (“sleeper effect model”). See Frese and Zapf (1988) for a discussion of such models. These processes may be different for different indicators of strain. Researchers often implicitly assume that the time lags for symptom development are the same for all dependent variables (Beehr, 1995; Beehr & Bhagat, 1985; Beehr & Newmann, 1978; McGrath & Beehr, 1990). Insight into these processes requires longitudinal studies (Zapf et al., 1996). To the extent that there is evidence, or a strong theoretical basis about the time dynamics for a given parameter, one can choose time lags accordingly. In the absence of such knowledge, conclusions will be strengthened to the extent that there are multiple waves of measurement, with a lag between waves that is short enough to capture fast developments but with an overall series of measurements long enough to allow for cumulative developments or long latencies in strain responses (cf. Dormann & Zapf, 1999). Starting an investigation early – for instance, as people start their career – has special advantages, as it enhances the possibilities of capturing processes before symptoms may become chronic (cf. Schonfeld, 1992a; Zapf et al., 1996). The data we report here refer to the same study we mentioned under the heading “attentuating the common method problem.” In that study, we assessed work characteristics and strain shortly after people had completed vocational training and started work, with a follow-up measurement a year later (Grebner, 2001; Grebner, Elfering & Semmer, 2003). As described above, there was no indication of longitudinal effects of stressors and control on psychosomatic complaints, but synchronous analyses of time 2 data, with Psychosomatic Complaints at time 1 being controlled, indicated short-term effects of stressors (arrow a in Fig. 1). For a subset of these people (33 women and 19 men) we also have data on blood pressure, taken before the lunch break (noon measure), before the end of work

Beyond Self-Report

235

(afternoon measure), and in the evening of a workday, and at corresponding times on a day off. Since our analyses revealed somewhat different patterns for males and females, and since the results are not very reliable for males, due to the small sample size, we concentrate on the results for the women. Results show hardly any synchronous effects of work characteristics on blood pressure (arrow d in Fig. 1). However, job stressors (mean of five task stressor scales) predicted levels of systolic blood pressure one year later. This effect was statistically significant for three out of six measures of systolic blood pressure, that is, for the evening measure of a workday, and for the noon and afternoon measures of a rest day, with standardized regression coefficients between 0.35 and 0.42, explaining between 10 and 16% of the variance in systolic blood pressure. In these analyses, the effects of blood pressure readings one year earlier are controlled for. We also included into the model those from a list of potentially confounding variables (age, occupation, body mass index, intake of nicotine, alcohol and caffeine, hormonal contraceptives, and additional workload due to household chores) that were significantly related to the dependent variable. Finally, job control was controlled for as well. Note that the stressors represent the mean of self-report and observer ratings. To demonstrate what this means in terms of absolute differences, we ran an analysis of covariance, with stressor level at time 1 (median split) as a factor, and systolic blood pressure at time 1 and the above mentioned control variables as covariates. This yielded an estimate of 111 mm Hg for the low stressor group, and 122 mm Hg for the high stressor group (p < 0.005). Since the standard deviations for systolic blood pressure were between 11 and 14.3 mm Hg, this difference corresponds to almost a whole standard deviation. Of course, the absolute levels are far from the values that indicate hypertension or borderline hypertension (160 and 140 mm Hg, respectively). But these were young people, with a mean age of about 23 years at time 2. A shift of this size in basic levels of systolic blood pressure may well indicate a potentially problematic development in such a young sample. It may be interesting theoretically that the best prediction of any of the scales contained in the stressor index was for Concentration Demands, indicating that mental load played an important role in this development. With regard to time frames, note that there were hardly any synchronous associations between stressors and blood pressure. It evidently takes time for stressors to have their full impact on blood pressure, an effect that could be labelled as a “sleeper effect” according to Frese and Zapf (1988). This result is especially interesting in comparison to the effects of stressors on general psychological well-being (cf. Example 3 of part I). Those effects were mostly synchronous (controlling for well-being at time 1), indicating a rather quick

236


reaction of general psychological well-being to stressors, which, however, is not sustained if stressors do not stay high over time. The most appropriate model for these results, from the set posed by Frese and Zapf (1988), would therefore be the “stress-reaction model.” Both results – the rather immediate effects on psychological well-being and the lagged effects on blood pressure – are in line with the general thrust of the literature (Sonnentag & Frese, 2003). Our data indicate that time lags in response to stressors are quite different for psychological well-being and for blood pressure. This highlights the idea that the two sets of measures are of different response systems and cannot be assumed to show identical patterns of reactions. This also implies that lack of convergence cannot automatically be interpreted in terms of a lack of validity of measures. Such conclusions can only be drawn when one can be fairly certain about the time frames involved. This, of course, underscores once more the necessity for both multi-method and multi-wave studies. These could be used to explore associations between variables that are likely to covary, but keep in mind that the time-frame of the different variables involved may be different. Example 3: Self-Reported Low Back Pain and Catecholamines Pain is a very personal experience that cannot be measured directly, so self-report is basically the only source of information about it. It has long been assumed that low back pain, which is what we concentrate on here, is directly linked to morphological changes such as disc herniation. However, the percentage of people with morphological changes who do not report back pain is very high, up to more than 70% in people who are matched to patients in terms of age, gender, and major occupational risk factors such as heavy lifting, twisted positions, etc. (Boos et al., 1995, 2000). There are, however, models suggesting a specific link between work stressors, musculoskeletal pain and catecholamines, notably noradrenaline (Lundberg et al., 1999). Noradrenaline is closely associated with muscular strain (Boucsein, 1991). Chronically elevated muscle tension may cause muscular pain (Veiersted, Westgaard & Andersen, 1993). Therefore, catecholamine release may constitute an important link between psychosocial factors at work and musculoskeletal pain (Lundberg et al., 1999). These considerations, and the empirical evidence backing them, can be used as a guideline for selecting specific physiological measures that can be expected to be associated with low back pain. Nurses, especially nurses at the beginning of their career, have a high risk of developing low-back pain (Cust, Pearson & Mair, 1972; Garrett, Singiser & Banks, 1992). To study low back pain among young nurses therefore seems especially promising. Nursing is one of the occupations we investigated in our study of young people entering the workforce in Switzerland (Kälin et al., 2000), and we

Beyond Self-Report

237

have questionnaire data on work characteristics and back pain from the larger project, plus physiological data from an in-depth study with a smaller sample (Elfering, Grebner, Semmer & Gerber, 2002). A sample of 114 nurses filled in a questionnaire in their first year of practice and again one year later, and we attempted to predict back pain at follow up from baseline variables. As one would expect, back pain at baseline was the strongest predictor of the frequency of low back pain episodes (␤ = 0.48, p < 0.001). Change in biomechanical strain also yielded a statistically significant coefficient (␤ =−0.17, p < 0.05). Among the psychosocial work variables, Time Control emerged as a significant predictor (␤ = −0.21, p < 0.05). While this coefficient may seem small at first sight, it corresponds to a fourfold risk of being in the “frequent pain group” as compared to the “low pain group” (reporting pain episodes once more per month to daily vs. less than once per month, respectively). In a hierarchical logistic regression analysis, the corresponding odds ratio for lack of Time Control was 4.61 (CI = 1.42 − 15.03). For a test of the association between noradrenaline and pain (arrow e in Fig. 1), we have data from a sub-sample of 24 nurses who were studied intensively, assessing urinary catecholamines at noon, before the end of work, and in the evening, both on a working day and at corresponding times on a day off. Daily stressful experiences and daily mood were also recorded. In this group, levels of urinary norepinephrine were higher for those reporting more frequent episodes of back pain, the largest differences occurring before the end of work. Values were 3.18 pmol/min/kg vs. 5.17 pmol/min/kg for the low and high pain group, respectively (t = −3.24, p < 0.01). Also, control over stressful events at work as measured in daily stressful episodes was lower (p < 0.05), while exhaustion at the end of the workday (p < 0.05), and tension in the evening of the workday (p < 0.01; all tests one-tailed) was higher in this group. Differences between groups with regard to private stressful events and mood on rest days were in the same direction, but less pronounced. Note that these results held up when neuroticism was controlled for. These results have several implications. First, they underscore once more the importance of control in the area of occupational stress and health (Ganster & Fusilier, 1989; Terry & Jimmieson, 1999). Low Time Control emerged as a risk factor for back pain beyond the influence of biomechanical strain. In this context, it is theoretically interesting that it is time control that predicts back pain. Lack of time control implies that workload, as well as the timing of demands by doctors, patients, and the organization of the hospital routine, dictate the flow of activities. This type of external pacing has been called “customer paced” by Lundberg and Melin (2002). It has long been claimed that the construct of control should be measured in a focused way and broken down into more specific sub-types, such as

238


time control and method control (Ganster & Fusilier, 1989; Jackson, Wall, Martin & Davids, 1993; Semmer, 2000). Our results support this claim. To the extent that they can be replicated, they suggest that increasing time control might be an important focus for the prevention of back pain, certainly in young nurses, but possibly beyond that group. Second, although our results are not a direct test of the model by Lundberg et al. (1999), they certainly fit very well with it. Low control at work might increase the activity of the sympathetic-adrenal medullary system, which seems to play an important role in the development of musculoskeletal pain. It might do so partly because of the emotional strain connected to the experience of low control, but it might also be the case that the external pacing prevents people from taking rest pauses at the times when they need them, thus impairing recovery of the SAM and lowering of muscle tension. Finally, these results show a convergence of three different types of data. Work characteristics and pain were measured with classic self-report instruments in the main study. In the in-depth study, it was stressful events rather than overall characteristics, and it was momentary mood rather than general well-being that were reported. Although this is self-report as well, it has some quite distinct qualities, as we will argue in the next section. Self-report of pain was correlated both with characteristics of stressful situations (i.e. lower controllability) with momentary mood, and with higher levels of catecholamines. Although all this evidence is somewhat “indirect,” in our view the convergence of three different types of measures makes quite a convincing case for the importance of control, especially time control, in the development of low back pain.

Conclusions and Practical Considerations Just as in the case of observational measures, this section supports the conclusion that: (a) physiological measures can be a valuable source of information in research on occupational stress; but that (b) they are no panacea for all methodological problems. Quite the contrary! They introduce many new problems, both on the conceptual level and on the measurement level. Physiological data are not easy to come by. It is not easy to measure them reliably, and it often is not easy to interpret them. Depending on a myriad of factors, the same measure (e.g. level of reactivity) may mean very different things. In many cases, it is necessary for an interpretation to draw on additional information, and often this information will come from other types of measures – including self-report. Again, this argues for a combination of types of measures, rather than for a search for “the best measure.”

Beyond Self-Report

239

In contrast to observational measures, however, which are conceived of as just another way of measuring the same constructs, physiological measures are more than that, because the physiological system is a system in its own right (or, more precisely, a set of sub-systems), which are only loosely coupled with one another and with the psychological response level. This implies that perfect convergence could not be expected even with perfect measurement. It also implies that physiological measures are vital for understanding the processes involved in stress appraisals and symptom development, and for understanding the interplay between psychological and physiological factors. Given the state of knowledge in that area, and the many ambiguities involved, there is considerable need for studies that test different models, that have longitudinal designs, and that combine information from the psychological and the physiological systems. From the perspective of field studies, the issue of “resting” values deserves special attention. People’s activities on evenings and days off may reflect something very different from “baseline” conditions in a laboratory experiment (see Kallus, 1989). This is especially important because issues of mobilization and recovery are especially relevant in this type of research. Also, stressful conditions often take time before symptoms develop, and this time may be different for different parameters (see Example No. 2). More studies with several points of measurement over extended periods of time are therefore badly needed, so that the time course of stress-related changes in different parameters can be better understood. Finally, aspects of personality, and the related issue of person-specific response patterns, deserve more attention (Grebner et al., 2003). On the practical side, physiological measures require not only an understanding of the time processes involved and the many confounding factors such as effort, nutrition, etc. They also are cumbersome for the participants. They may require interruptions of ongoing activities, and restrictions in certain activities (e.g. sports) or habits (e.g. consumption of caffeine or nicotine). In field studies, compliance is, therefore, a problem. In our experience, close contact with participants is very important to ensure compliance: Personal instruction, reminders, and individualized feedback are essential here. On the other hand, we have had participants who resented phone calls that reminded them, as they perceived this as an attempt to control them. So there is a fine line between over-controlling and not keeping enough contact. Compliance can also be increased by the use of easy instructions and handling procedures that include feedback information. In collecting urine in order to assess catecholamines for instance, one can avoid errors in acidification by using colored hydrochloric acid and transparent urine containers, so that participants and researchers have a visual feedback on whether acidifying was executed as prescribed (Elfering, Grebner, Semmer, Byland & Gerber, in press). It is a good

240


idea to test the intended design schedule in a small pilot study, which helps to anticipate and manage problems in the main study. Also, where there are ambiguities about procedures of handling the samples (different laboratories sometimes give different advice here, and the information on the exact handling procedures is not always clear in empirical articles), a small pre-experimental trial may give important information on the effects of violations of the instructions with respect to collection and handling of the data. For instance, Elfering et al. (in press) tested the effects of storing urine samples at room temperature (25 ◦ C) and in refrigerators at 5 ◦ C rather than freezing them immediately, as is often recommended as absolutely necessary. Results suggest a high stability of catecholamines for at least 24 h without cooling, provided the samples are immediately acidified. Immediate freezing is not easily achieved under field conditions that are typical for research on stress at work. In our in-depth study, for instance, we had to collect urine samples from people’s homes and workplaces in a rather large area, implying rather long traveling times. The results of our study on different temperatures suggest that it may be possible to use such measures under conditions where it was thought not feasible until now. At times, when one does research in this area, one is inclined to feel that physiological measures are not only no panacea but are rather like Pandora’s box. Hoping for answers from these parameters, one runs into additional problems, with regard to conceptual issues as well as with regard to measurement issues and logistics in field studies. Nevertheless, although physiological measures do not provide simple answers to our problems, they are a fascinating and fruitful direction for study, provided they are combined with appropriate psychological measures and concepts, so that data from each response system can help to interpret those from the other one. It is no coincidence that our physiological data could be gathered only from a sub-sample. Physiological measures are not only more expensive, they also are more cumbersome, both for the research team and for the participants. In many studies, therefore, it is not possible to have physiological data for the whole sample. We feel that the combination of a questionnaire study with a larger sample, and an in depth study with physiological measures (and, in our case, event-based and observational measures), is a promising way out of the dilemma.

ASSESSING STRESSORS AND WELL-BEING BY SITUATIONAL MEASURES The third way of measuring variables in occupational stress research that we want to deal with involves situational measures, that is, measures that ask people to record

Beyond Self-Report

241

ongoing events and their feelings and actions, by means of an event-sampling or time sampling procedures (Perrez, 2001). As already mentioned in the introduction, these are themselves self-report measures, subject to many of the biases that other forms of self-reports are subject to. On the other hand, they rely much less than traditional self-report measures do on memory over extended periods of time, and on the integration over many situations and constellations into one overall judgment (cf. Perrez, 2001). Many advocates of this “micro-level approach” therefore argue that this type of assessment is less subject than the typical uses of self-report measures to retrospective biases (e.g. influence of memory, cf. Peeters, Buunk & Schaufeli, 1995a) than self-report measures of more stable conditions, which represent the typical way of assessment. For this reason, some authors (e.g. Perrez, 2001) refer to this type of measurement as “self-observation,” to distinguish it from the “traditional” self-report. We will use the terms “situational measurement” and “self-observation” as synonyms for the purpose of this article. The arguments in favor of the “self-observation” approach sound familiar: It is assumed to be less subject to bias, and therefore can be considered a “better” approach, not only for momentary, but also for more stable conditions, which, after all, can be conceived of as resulting from the totality of events that one experiences (Eckenrode & Bolger, 1997). We will examine this issue both from a conceptual and from a sampling point of view.

Conceptual Issues One advantage of “self-observation” over “traditional self-report” (i.e. on more stable conditions) rests on the assumption, just mentioned, that continuing or background conditions represent something like the total accumulation of single experiences, and that an aggregate of the single experiences yields a better estimate than do self-reports that ask directly for an estimate of the conditions integrated over a substantial period of time. Apart from sampling issues, which will be discussed later, there are also some conceptual problems with this position. We would argue, rather, that some features of one’s life might not classify as “events” yet might be important for the judgment of overall conditions. By the very nature of an “event,” one important precondition for attributing “event-character” to a situation would be that it has a beginning and an end. There are many stable conditions that are, in this sense, indeed the sum of single events. Being frequently interrupted at work would be a good example. There are other conditions, however, that cannot easily be conceived of in the same way. A person who is exposed to chronic quantitative overload, for example, may not report ongoing time pressure as an “event.” Only when the situation is aggravated by some specific occurrence,

242


such as an approaching deadline, an additional assignment, or the like, would these be reported as events. Note, however, that such events represent a deviation from a continuing or background condition. We have argued (Grebner et al., in press), that one might consider events as “figures,” with more stable conditions represented as “ground.” And it is this “ground”-aspect that is not likely to be captured by event-based measures. The implication of this argument is that event-based measures might miss these aspects of ground that do not manifest themselves in specific events. “Traditional” self-report measures should be better suited to capture this type of background condition. On the other hand, self-observation should ideally be suited for conditions that can be thought of as the “sum of events.” In addition, it can capture untypical events that may influence the individual without being representative of stable conditions, and not adequately represented in an “averaged” traditional self-report measure. It follows that, as in observational and self-report measures, lack of convergence cannot simply be attributed to one measure (self-report) being flawed. Rather, both measures should be expected to: (a) have considerable overlap but (b) also some unique aspects that each is better suited to capture than the other. We thus argue, just as we did with regard to observational measures of stressors and physiological measures of strain, that each measure should be looked at in terms of its specific advantages and disadvantages, not in terms of its alleged “superiority” over the other one. Not only, however, should situational and “chronic” measures to some degree capture different aspects; there is also the distinct possibility that they interact. Stable conditions are likely to represent the “background” against which an event is being appraised. They determine the level of resources that are available to deal with the event (Hobfoll, 2001; McGrath & Tschan, 2004). People that chronically suffer from a high level of stressors (e.g. time pressure) or from a lack of control should therefore not only report poorer momentary well-being (e.g. well-being measured before going to sleep, Sonnentag, 2001) but might also respond more strongly to a single stressful event than people with lower levels of stressors and/or higher levels of control. There is some, albeit limited, evidence on such effects. For instance, Pike, Smith, Hauger et al. (1997) found persons suffering from chronic life stress to be more responsive to laboratory stressors (reported distress, and catecholamine reactivity) than controls. Wüst, Federenko, Hellhammer and Kirschbaum (2000) found enhanced early morning salivary cortisol levels in chronically stressed individuals (high worries, high lack of social recognition, and high social stressors) in comparison to controls. And of course, as discussed with regard to physiological reactivity, a lack of response may also occur, possibly after extended exposure. In any case, such mechanisms imply that “background” information is necessary in order to interpret the momentary

Beyond Self-Report

243

reaction. Rather than replacing classic self-report, self-observation may, therefore, both add to it and depend on it.

Issues of Sampling and Measurement So far, we have argued that “self-observation” is not inherently “better” on conceptual grounds. Now we ask: To what extent can self-observational measures live up to their conceptual possibilities in the light of more practical issues of sampling and measurement? As already mentioned, situational measurement can be an indicator of more stable conditions only to the extent that the events reported are, indeed, representative of the events encountered (Eckenrode & Bolger, 1997), which in our case refers to stressful events. To the extent that they are, daily events should predict the level of habitual well-being (arrow g in Fig. 1), and this has been found in a number of studies (Cutrona, 1986; DeLongis, Coyne, Dakof, Folkman & Lazarus, 1982; Grund, 1997; Kanner, Coyne, Schaefer & Lazarus, 1981; Monroe, 1983). Of course, the argument that the habitual is an aggregate of the momentary can also be made for well-being. And, indeed, aggregated events measures have been found to predict the average of state (i.e. daily momentary) well-being (e.g. Eckenrode, 1984). This would correspond to arrow arrow j in Fig. 1. Nevertheless, the issue of sampling has to be carefully considered. Thus, during the sampling period some events may occur that are not typical for the overall situation of the participants – for instance, because they are very rare (e.g. a power breakdown) or are related to transient circumstances (e.g. moving from one office or building to another). Such rare events or transient circumstances may limit the representativeness of reported events. Of course, the representativeness of events will depend on the duration and density of the sampling period. Most studies have used sampling periods from a few days up to a few weeks. The longer this period, the more experience-based measures should reflect more stable conditions. Extension of the sampling period however, often is limited by practical considerations. In addition, the motivation of participants is likely to suffer if the sampling period is extended too far. To report every encountered stressful event over several weeks, for instance, requires considerable effort over and above normal daily duties. Therefore, participation is likely to decrease as the duration of the sampling period increases – either by people dropping out altogether, or by their increasingly failing to report events, or by their raising their threshold so that only events of increasingly high importance are being reported. In some of our data, the average number of situations reported decreases over time, which may be an indication that people are getting tired of

244


describing their experience. For instance, in the three-wave study on consistent individual differences in cortisol levels at work and rest days (Example 1 in the section on physiological measures), participants reported 145 events on workdays in wave 1, 113 in wave 2, and 69 in wave 3, and the pattern was similar for rest days. We have already encountered this problem in our discussion of physiological measures, and it now again turns up with situation-specific measures. And it points to a trade-off that is always there: The more precise, specific, and extended the measure, the more cumbersome the measurement itself becomes, and the more vulnerable is participants’ continued motivated participation. Finally, reports about a situation may themselves depend on the situation. Thus, having to meet a tight deadline may well induce people to abstain from reporting because of the very nature of the situation: There is simply no time to do it. People may also be reluctant to report on days when they do not feel well (perhaps feeling “stressed”), etc.

Self-Observation as a Unique Way to Gain Insight into Processes So far we have argued that situational measures should not simply be seen as an alternative to classic self-report, and that their limitations have to be taken into account as well. This was not intended to argue against such measures, quite the contrary. All we have argued so far is that they are not inherently better for assessing more stable aspects. They do contain information that cannot easily be assessed by classic self-report, however. So, just as we argued that physiological measures represent a response system in its own right, we also argue that situation-based measures should not be thought of as a surrogate for, but rather as a complement to, more traditional self-report measures. Research on more stable conditions can give only a rather global idea of what is behind this “chronic” state of affairs. We may know that a person encounters role conflict or time pressure rather often. We do not know from this research, however, exactly what kinds of experiences are behind these more global categories, how people perceive these stressors, how they cope with them, or if they are able to resolve the problems to their satisfaction. It is likely, however, that stress prevention and intervention could be substantially improved if they could be specifically tailored to situational characteristics (cf. Eckenrode & Bolger, 1997). A first question that arises is simply descriptive: We know rather little about the frequency and content of stressful events that people typically encounter. The few available studies show that individuals on average report between 0.5 and 1.8 stressful events per work day (Buunk & Verhoeven, 1991; Grund, 1997; Ockenfels, 1995; Peeters et al., 1995a, b; Reicherts & Pihet, 2000). The most

Beyond Self-Report

245

frequent stressful events at work, as reported in various studies, are quantitative overload; social conflicts with colleagues and/or superiors or clients; and problems with the organization of work processes (Bolger, DeLongis, Kessler & Schilling, 1989; Grebner et al., in press; Grund, 1997; Peeters et al., 1995a, b; Reicherts & Pihet, 2000). Further studies are needed in order to get a reliable picture about the frequency of stressful events and their content. It would also be useful to identify typical stressful events among different groups (e.g. occupations), and in different stages of life. For instance, newcomers at work are sometimes found to experience specific transition-related stressful events (Saks & Ashforth, 2000), although a recent study in Switzerland found that beginners do not differ from experienced jobholders in the types of stressful events they experience (Reicherts & Pihet, 2000), which might be because apprenticeship training seems to prepare people rather well for their new role (Kälin et al., 2000). In a similar vein, Grebner et al. (in press) found that the most frequent work related events concerned social stressors, followed by quantitative overload, cooperation problems and problems of work organization. Comparatively few events concerned qualitative overload, such as novelty of work tasks, which would be typical for newcomers. A further issue that deserves more attention is the specific types of stressful events that occur in different settings of daily life (e.g. at work and in private life). For instance, Reicherts and Pihet (2000) reported that social stressors, task-related events (e.g. difficulties in filling out forms), and self-related events (e.g. worries about debts) were the most frequent stressful events in private life of young people entering the work force. Apart from such descriptive issues, it seems important to know more about the immediate impact of stressful events. After all, leaving single traumatic experiences aside, studies that investigate the relationship between stressors and (habitual) well-being assume, at least implicitly, that it is the accumulation of situational (or state) stress reactions that, in the long run, leads to chronic effects in terms of impaired well-being (see Kanner, Coyne, Schaefer & Lazarus, 1981; Monroe, 1983). These immediate effects need to be demonstrated, however – not only in the laboratory but also in daily life (see, for instance, Sonnentag, 2001). Situational measures also allow more insight into ongoing processes, most notably coping attempts and their immediate effects. For instance, it has often been shown that problem-focused coping is associated with better and emotion-focused (palliative) coping with poorer well-being in general (see Semmer, 2003). It has to be demonstrated whether these findings also apply to the state-well-being in the immediate situation. Furthermore, it has long been assumed that problem-focused coping is more effective when controllability is high, and emotion-focused coping more effective when controllability is low (Folkman, 1992; Lazarus,

246


1999). Results supporting this assumption are typically based, however, on one single situation or major stressor, and the dependent variable is typically not well-being in the situation or coping success, but well-being in general (Forsythe & Compas, 1987; Vitaliano, Dewolfe, Maiuro, Russo & Katon, 1990). Reicherts and colleagues (Perrez & Reicherts, 1992; Reicherts, 1988; Reicherts & Pihet, 2000) have developed a number of “coping rules.” In addition to the influence of controllability just mentioned, which they specify as the “active coping rule,” they recommend palliative coping in situations where the stress level is very high, since whatever else is to be done can only be decided reasonably when emotions are not out of control (“palliative coping rule”). They can show that adherence to these rules is associated with better well-being in the stressful situation itself (Reicherts & Pihet, 2000). Empirical Example: Convergence and Divergence of Momentary and Habitual Measures of Stressors and Well-Being We have argued that aggregated measures of events people report reflect the habitual state of affairs to some extent. To the extent they do, they should converge with classic self-report measures of more stable conditions, such as the work characteristics assessed by ISTA (Semmer et al., 1995). We also argued, however, that each of these measures also carries unique true variance, because self-observational measures may catch situations better, whereas “chronic” measures should be more indicative of the general prevailing or background conditions. And, of course, each measure will also carry unique error variance, due to misrepresentations in the case of chronic measures, due to a lack of representativeness, or a failure to report, in the case of situational measures. It follows that both measures should converge to a moderate degree (arrow f in Fig. 1), but also that each of them should explain variance in dependent variables over and above the other one (due to its unique but substantive variance – arrows a and g, and h and j). If, however, the critics of the “classical self-report” are correct, event-based measures should be clearly superior in predicting dependent variables, leaving little room for traditional measures of stable conditions to explain variance in dependent variables. This was one of the issues we investigated in our in-depth study that we have mentioned several times already. This study included event-sampling of stressful situations over five days (Grebner et al., in press). Participants received several pocket “diaries,” based on the work by Reicherts (see Reicherts & Pihet, 2000). They were individually instructed about their use on the morning of the first day of measurement. Participants were asked to describe, in their own words, any stressful situation they encountered, as soon as possible after it occurred. The booklets then contained questions about the characteristics of the situation, such

Beyond Self-Report

247

as its stressfulness (“valence”) and its controllability, and about coping attempts, coping success, well-being in the situation, and the like. With regard to well-being in stressful situations, a multilevel-analysis (Hox, 2002) showed that, among the stable conditions, only a personality variable, Neuroticism, was related to situation-specific well-being, but stressors and control were not. It was situation-specific variables such as the characteristics of the situation and situation-specific coping that were associated with well-being in the situation, with valence and palliative coping showing negative, and controllability positive effects (arrow j in Fig. 1). However, stable job control was associated with another situation-specific variable, that is, successful calming down (B = 5.31, SE = 1.70). Furthermore, stable job control buffered the effect of chronic job stressors on successful calming down in stressful situations (B = 11.23, SE = 2.92), yielding a specific variant of the demands-control model (Karasek, 1979; Theorell & Karasek, 1996). This refers to arrow h in Fig. 1. These results point to possible insights that can be gained by using both stable and situational variables combined in one analysis (see Grebner et al., in press, for details). What we want to concentrate on here, however, is a result that refers to the relationships between stable measures (both of stressors and well-being) and aggregated situational measures, which may also be regarded as indicators of stable conditions. As argued above, if aggregated situational measures are, as some argue, a better measure than self-reports referring to stable conditions, they should be clearly superior in predicting well-being. Altogether, 77 participants reported 409 situations. The stressful events were weighted by their impact (“valence”) and aggregated over five working days for each participant, thus creating one indicator of stable conditions by aggregation. As a direct measure of stable conditions, we used the sum of five job stressors from the Instrument for Stress Oriented Task Analysis (ISTA, Semmer et al., 1995). The two measures were correlated significantly (r = 0.46, p < 0.001), indicating some but not perfect convergence (arrow f in Fig. 1). On the well-being side, we also had situation-based data, referring to tension in the evening. Again, these values were aggregated over five workdays. Furthermore, irritability (Mohr, 1991, 2000) was used as a “classic” measure of more stable wellbeing. The two measures were substantially correlated with one another (r = 0.52, p < 001), indicating, again, quite some convergence (arrow i in Fig. 1). The important issue we will address here is whether the aggregated measure of stressful events predicts well-being, if the direct measure of stressors predicts well-being, and which of the two retain their impact if the other one is controlled for. Specifically, it is the association “across” levels of measurement: How well does the aggregate measure of stressors predict a direct measure of rather stable

248


well-being, Irritability (arrow g in Fig. 1), and how well do stable stressors predict the aggregate of situation-specific well-being (arrow h)? As expected, both stable stressors and aggregated situational stressors predicted irritability when each was analyzed without the other, but with variables such as age, gender, occupation and neuroticism controlled. The coefficients were ␤ = 0.23 (p < 0.05) for aggregated stressful situations (arrow g in Fig. 1), and ␤ = 0.49, p < 0.001) for stable stressors (arrow a). Aggregated situational stressors, however, became insignificant when stable stressors were entered as well (arrow g, controlled for f and a). Stable stressors, on the other hand, retained statistical significance (␤ = 0.47, p < 0.001), even after controlling for aggregated stressful situations (arrow a, controlled for f and g). So, contrary to our expectations, we could not predict aggregated situational well-being from aggregated stressful situations (r = 0.14, ns). Stable stressors did, however, did predict aggregated situational well-being, regardless of whether aggregated stressors were in the model or not. Altogether, these data show that situation-specific measures are valuable, both in their own right (as demonstrated in the multilevel analyses with situationspecific dependent variables), and as aggregated measures. But there was not a superiority of aggregated situation-specific measures over self-report measures of chronic conditions. And again, these data show how both types of measures can complement each other and yield important information with regard to the other one, as shown in the interaction of chronic stressors and control in predicting situation-specific success in calming down.

Conclusions and Practical Considerations On a general level, the conclusions from our discussion of “self-observation” measures now will sound familiar to our readers: They are a valuable source of information, but they cannot be regarded as a method that is inherently better than “traditional” self-report. Event-based measures cannot be assumed to be just another measure of the same thing as traditional self-reports. Rather, events are something that can be distinguished from “background” characteristics. Even with perfect measurement, therefore, convergence can only be expected to be moderate, and each measure is likely to contain unique true variance over and above what is contained in the other. Our data supported the view that self-observation can, to some degree, predict habitual well-being, but not any better than self-report of stable conditions. Since self-observation does yield information in its own right, relating, for instance, to the nature of experiences that lead to chronic stress, to short term

Beyond Self-Report

249

reactions in terms of psychological (e.g. momentary well-being) and physiological (e.g. reactivity and recovery) responses, we certainly do urge that more investigations of this type be undertaken. They seem particularly suited to study emotions in the workplace, a topic that is receiving increased attention in recent years (e.g. Fisher, 2002; Grandey, Tam & Brauburger, 2002; Weiss, 2002). In terms of practical considerations, our conclusions are somewhat similar to those we drew with regard to physiological measures: Motivating participants is a crucial issue, requiring methods of assessment that are easy to handle (we have invested considerable effort in the layout of our booklets, so that they look professional, are small, and are easy to use), as well the personal contact that is also vital for physiological measures. A special problem relates to the threshold for reporting an event as “stressful.” This applies on the one hand to the problem of increasing thresholds over time that we mentioned above. While this can, at least to some degree, be mitigated by personal contact, we have not found a way to really overcome it, and we feel that there will always remain a trade-off between length of data collection and increasing thresholds. Using time-sampling rather than event-sampling might be a way out, for instance by using beepers. However, people at work might be somewhat reluctant to accept a device that: (a) “forces” them to respond; and (b) is apparent to the people around them. The problem goes further, however. One might expect that the initial threshold for reporting a situation as stressful, at least, should be rather low, since “stress” has become a fashionable concept in recent years. Our experience is quite to the contrary. The threshold seems to be rather high, and we go to pains in our instructions to make it clear that it is enough to be somewhat bothered by something for it to qualify as an entry in a booklet. We have some indications that the threshold problem is related to the issue we mentioned with regard to interviews that go with observation: Reporting something that is not drastically important as “stressful” might imply that the person is seen as being easily overwhelmed and not fit to cope with difficult situations. (Actually, we avoid the term “stress” in our instructions, using the German word “Belastung” instead, because it has a somewhat more neutral connotation. Literally, it can be translated as “load” as well as “burden”). This problem might be somewhat less in a clinical context, in which people define themselves as “clients” to begin with. In a population of basically healthy people – and in our experience the fact that they are working is for many the criterion for defining themselves as “healthy,” regardless of any particular symptoms of ill health or poor well-being – the danger of regarding the report of many stressful situations as a threat to one’s self should not be overlooked. We see these problems of data collection and participant motivation as the crucial ones in doing situation-based studies There are not as many conceptual problems involved here as for physiological studies. The main problem has, for

250


a long time, been the analysis of data on different levels, implying either loss of information by aggregating, or having poor estimates of standard errors by treating low-level variables (in our case, events) as the unit of analysis. This problem has, fortunately, been overcome by the development of multi-level methodology (Hox, 2002). Therefore, we would expect to see many more studies of that type in the future, and would see that as a promising development.

FINAL REMARKS We have made it clear throughout that, in our view, there is no “substitute” for self-report. Neither observational measures nor physiological measures nor “self-observational” measures yield data that are per se “objective,” as opposed to the “subjective” self-report of the “classic” kind, that is, asking for a general description of the state of affairs. These measures have their errors as well, and, at least in the case of physiological measures and “self-observation” they cannot be expected to yield perfect convergence even if measurement is perfect, because they are to some degree measuring different things: Events as opposed to “background” in the case of self-observation, different response systems in the case of physiology. For all of them, good measurement is difficult to achieve, and, especially for physiology, there are many conceptual problems that make results difficult to interpret, and often leave them ambiguous unless additional information can clarify their meaning (or, at least, provide plausible interpretations). It is no coincidence that much of such additional information will be based on the very method that some would like to find a substitute for, that is, self-report. The logic of Multitrait-Multimethod has been advocated long ago, in the now classic paper by Campbell and Fiske (1959). It allows one to regard any information as somewhat flawed yet to seek convergence between different methods that have different sources or patterns of error. This logic has led to what is called the “multiplist” perspective (Houts, Cook & Shadish, 1986). Combining as much information from different sources seems more promising to us than looking for “the” method. As we hope to have shown, in doing so one encounters many difficulties, one has to invest a lot of time and resources, and yet often the questions raised are more than the answers obtained. So, it happens that we find ourselves tempted to go back to the most common procedure, that is, running a cross-sectional self-report study and state in the discussion that it should be replicated in a longitudinal study with additional methods of measurement, rather than running the “desired” study ourselves. On the other hand, we personally do feel we have gained new insights, and we do believe that such a combination of methods is a good way to go. It should

Beyond Self-Report

251

not be done lightly, as one has to be able to invest resources, especially with regard to time. And it follows from our discussion that a study is not necessarily good just because it contains, say, physiological data. A good study with only self-report data is certainly preferable to a hasty addition of other methods. We started this paper with a discussion of the arguments against data based on self-report, which – although they continue to be used most frequently – do not have too good a reputation. We hope to have shown, not only that the hope for a substitute is inappropriate and in vain, but also that self-reports may not be as bad as their reputation. Such self-reports do contain valid information, and they often are needed in order to interpret other data, most notably with regard to physiological measures. Using good self-report measures, and investing in their development where necessary, therefore seems quite a fruitful undertaking as well. After all, self-rated health has consistently been shown to be a good predictor of mortality, over and above “numerous specific health status indicators and other relevant covariates known to predict mortality.” (Idler & Benyamini, 1997, p. 21).

NOTES 1. Of course, one can argue for greater objectivity of external experts if: (a) one allows for a very large time sample; and (b) if one restricts the analysis to purely descriptive, readily observable aspects of the work in question, without allowing any inferences, aggregating, or averaging steps by the raters. Thus, one could count how often someone is interrupted, how often one gets feedback from supervisors, etc. (see Harvey & Wilson, 2000). This is, however, likely to miss the meaning of events and constellations. In contrast to Lazarus (1999), however, we refer not only to the individual meaning. There is also a social meaning, which is common to a given (sub-) culture. There are cultural communalities in appraising the world (Erez & Earley, 1993; Triandis, 1994), and these include stress-appraisals. To cite just a few illustrating results: Arbitrary behavior by superiors induces less stress in cultures high in power-distance (Gudykunst & Ting-Toomey, 1988), presumably because that kind of behavior is more legitimate in such a culture. In the United States, the southern “culture of honor” is related to the propensity to feel insulted (Cohen, Nisbett, Bowdle & Schwarz, 1996), and the role of self-efficacy for coping with stress was shown to depend on the cultural context by Schaubroeck, Lam and Xie (2000), with collective efficacy being more important in a collective culture, and individual self-efficacy in an individual culture. Thus, the meaning of stressors cannot be unraveled by concentrating on the individual alone, their cultural meaning has to be taken into account as well. This social meaning goes beyond the attitudes and explanations given by the immediate surrounding, as postulated by social processing approaches (Pfeffer, 1998), as cultural norms and assumptions are internalized to a large degree and therefore not easily changed by information from the immediate social surroundings (Ostroff, Kinicki & Tamkins, 2003; see Semmer, 1992, for an extended discussion of this issue). This also implies that social cues given by the immediate surrounding may be important (Pfeffer, 1998), but the social meaning goes beyond the attitudes and explanation.

252


2. This result is based on three latent stressors, as a model with all four stressors did not converge due to multicollinearity problems.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Many colleagues, as well as students, have provided invaluable contributions to the empirical studies in this work. We cannot name them all, but we are especially indebted to the following people: Siegfried Greif, Dieter Zapf, Heiner Dunckel, Gisela Mohr, Michael Frese, Eva Bamberg, Hans Gerber, Wolfgang Kälin, Nicola Jacobshagen, Nadine Vogel, Daniel Birkhofer, Marie-Louise Schlapbach, Claudia Kaiser Probst, Pascale Clausen, Pascale Le Stanc, and Barbara Rüetschi. Moreover, we would like to thank all our participants, their supervisors and employers for active cooperation, administrative support, and continuing interest. We are especially grateful to Joe McGrath for his careful reading of an earlier version of this manuscript and the many thoughtful suggestions he made. We have profited from the work of, and discussions with, a number of colleagues, most notably Dieter Zapf, and Gunn Johansson. We are grateful to Zuzana Dérer for proofreading of the manuscript. Part of the studies reported were financially supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation and the Migros Kulturstiftung.

REFERENCES Bailey, J. M., & Bhagat, R. S. (1987). Meaning and measurement of stressors in the work environment: An evaluation. In: S. V. Kasl & C. L. Coopers (Eds), Stress and Health: Issues in Research Methodology (pp. 207–229). Chichester: Wiley. Baum, A., & Grunberg, N. (1997). Measurement of stress hormones. In: S. Cohen, R. C. Kessler & L. Underwood Gordon (Eds), Measuring Stress (pp. 175–192). New York: Oxford University Press. Beehr, T. (1995). Psychological stress in the workplace. London: Routledge. Beehr, T. A., & Bhagat, R. S. (1985). Introduction to human stress and cognition in organizations. In: T. A. Beehr & R. S. Bhagat (Eds), Human Stress and Cognition in Organizations (pp. 3–19). New York: Wiley. Beehr, T. A., & Newmann, J. E. (1978). Job stress, employee health, an organizational effectiveness: A facet analysis, model, and literature review. Personnel Psychology, 31, 665–699. Blaskovich, J., & Katkin, E. S. (1995). Cardiovascular reactivity to psychological stress and disease: Conclusions. In: J. Blaskovich & E. S. Katkin (Eds), Cardiovascular Reactivity to Psychological Stress and Disease (pp. 225–237). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Bolger, N., DeLongis, A., Kessler, R. C., & Schilling, E. A. (1989). Effects of daily stress on negative mood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 808–818.

Beyond Self-Report

253

Boos, N., Rieder, R., Schade, V., Spratt, K. F., Semmer, N., & Aebi, M. (1995). The diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging, work perception and psychosocial factors in identifying symptomatic disc herniations. Spine, 20, 2613–2625. Boos, N., Semmer, N., Elfering, A., Schade, V., Gall, I., Zanetti, M., Kissling, R., Buchegger, N., Hodler, J., & Main, C. (2000). Natural history of individuals with asymptomatic disc alterations in magnetic resonance imaging. Spine, 25, 1484–1492. Bosma, H., Marmot, M. G., Hemingway, H., Nicholson, A. C., Brunner, E., & Stansfeld, S. A. (1997). Low job control and risk of coronary heart disease in Whitehall II (prospective cohort) study. British Medical Journal, 314, 558–565. Boucsein, W. (1991). Arbeitspsychologische Beanspruchungsforschung heute – eine Herausforderung an die Psychophysiologie [Stress research in industrial and organizational psychology: A challenge for psychophysiology]. Psychologische Rundschau, 42, 129–144. Brief, A. P., Burke, M. J., George, J. M., Robinson, B., & Webster, J. (1988). Should negative affectivity remain an unmeasured variable in the study of job stress? Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 193–198. Brunner, E. (2002). Stress mechanisms in coronary heart disease. In: S. Stansfeld & M. Marmot (Eds), Stress and the Heart (pp. 181–199). London: BMJ Books. Burke, M. J., Brief, A. P., & George, J. M. (1993). The role of negative affectivity in understanding relations between self-reports of stressors and strain: A comment on the applied psychology literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 402–412. Buunk, B. P., & Verhoeven, K. (1991). Companionship and support at work: A microanalysis of the stress-reducing features of social interaction. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 12, 243–258. Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitraitmultimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 59, 81–105. Cannon, W. B. (1914). The interrelations of emotions as suggested by recent physiological researchers. American Journal of Psychology, 25, 256–282. Cannon, W. B. (1935). Stresses and strains of homeostasis. American Journal of Medical Sciences, 189, 1–14. Cellar, D. F., Kernan, M. C., & Barett, G. V. (1985). Conventional wisdom and ratings of job characteristics: Can observers be objective? Journal of Management, 11, 131–138. Chen, P. Y., & Spector, P. E. (1991). Negative affectivity as the underlying cause of correlations between stressors and strains. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 398–407. Cohen, S., Frank, E., Doyle, W. J., Skoner, D. P., Rabin, B. S., & Gwaltney, J. M., Jr. (1998). Types of stressors that increase susceptibility to the common cold in healthy adults. Health-Psychology, 17, 214–223. Cohen, D., Nisbett, R., Bowdle, B. F., & Schwarz, N. (1996). Insult, aggression, and the southern culture of honor: An “experimental ethnography”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 945–960. Cust, G., Pearson, J. C. G., & Mair, A. (1972). The prevalence of low back pain in nurses. International Nursing Review, 19, 169–179. Cutrona, C. E. (1986). Behavioral manifestations of social support: A microanalytic investigation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 201–208. DeLongis, A., Coyne, J., Dakof, G., Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1982). Relationship of daily hassles, uplifts, and major life events to health status. Health Psychology, 1, 119–136. Dienstbier, R. A. (1989). Arousal and physiological toughness: Implications for mental and physical health. Psychological Review, 96, 84–100.

254


Dormann, C., & Zapf, D. (1999). Social support, social stressors at work, and depressive symptoms: Testing for main and moderating effects with structural equation in a three-wave longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 874–884. Eckenrode, J. (1984). The impact of chronic and acute stressors on daily reports of mood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 907–918. Eckenrode, J., & Bolger, N. (1997). Daily and within-day event measurement. In: S. Cohen, R. C. Kessler & L. U. Gordon (Eds), Measuring Stress. A Guide for Health and Social Scientists (pp. 80–101). New York: Oxford University Press. Elfering, A., Grebner, S., Semmer, N., Byland, C., & Gerber, H. (in press). A comparison of two urinary catecholamine measurement indices for use in applied stress research: The effects of time and temperature until freezing. Human Factors. Elfering, A., Grebner, S., Semmer, N. K., & Gerber, H. (2002). Time control, catecholamines and back pain among young nurses. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health, 28, 386–393. Elfering, A., Semmer, N. K., Schade, V., Grund, S., & Boos, N. (2002). Supportive colleague, unsupportive supervisor: The role of provider-specific constellations of social support at work in the development of low back pain. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 7, 130–140. Erez, M., & Earley, P. C. (1993). Culture, self-identity, and work. New York: Oxford University Press. Evans, O., & Steptoe, A. (2001). Social support at work, heart rate, and cortisol: A self-monitoring study. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6, 361–370. Fisher, C. D. (2002). Antecedents and consequences of real-time affective reactions at work. Motivation and Emotion, 26, 3–30. Folkman, S. (1992). Making the case for coping. In: B. N. Carpenter (Ed.), Personal Coping: Theory, Research, and Application (pp. 31–46). Westport, CT: Praeger. Forsythe, C. J., & Compas, B. E. (1987). Interaction of cognitive appraisals of stressful events and coping: Testing the goodness of fit hypothesis. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 11, 473–485. Frankenhaeuser, M. (1991). The psychophysiology of sex differences as related to occupational status. In: M. Frankenhaeuser, U. Lundberg & M. Chesney (Eds), Woman, Work, and Health. Stress and Opportunities (pp. 39–61). New York: Plenum Press. Frankenhaeuser, M., & Gardell, B. (1976). Underload and overload in working life: Outline of a multidisciplinary approach. Journal of Human Stress, 2, 35–46. Frankenhaeuser, M., & Johansson, G. (1986). Stress at work: Psychobiological and psychosocial aspects. International Review of Applied Psychology, 35, 287–299. Frese, M. (1985). Stress at work and psychosomatic complaints: A causal interpretation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 314–328. Frese, M., & Okonek, K. (1984). Reasons to leave shiftwork and psychological and psychosomatic complaints of former shiftworkers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 509–514. Frese, M., & Semmer, N. (1986). Shiftwork, stress, and psychosomatic complaints: A comparison between workers in different shiftwork schedules, non-shiftworkers, and former shiftworkers. Ergonomics, 29, 99–114. Frese, M., & Zapf, D. (1988). Methodological issues in the study of work stress: Objective vs. subjective measurement of work stress and the question of longitudinal studies. In: C. L. Cooper & R. Payne (Eds), Causes, Coping, and Consequences of Stress at Work (pp. 375–411). Chichester, UK: Wiley. Fried, Y., Rowland, K. M., & Ferris, G. R. (1984). The physiological measurement of work stress: A critique. Personnel Psychology, 37, 583–615.

Beyond Self-Report

255

Ganster, D. C., & Fusilier, M. R. (1989). Control in the workplace. In: C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds), International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (pp. 235–280). Chichester: Wiley. Ganster, D. C., & Schaubroeck, J. (1991). Work stress and employee health. Journal of Management, 17, 235–271. Garde, A. H., Hansen, A. M., & Nikolajsen, T. B. (2003). An inter-laboratory comparison for determination of cortisol in saliva. Accreditation and Quality Assurance, 8, 16–20. Garrett, B., Singiser, D., & Banks, S. M. (1992). Back injuries among nursing personnel: The relationship of personal characteristics, risk factors, and nursing practices. American Association of Occupational Health Nurses Journal, 40, 510–516. Grandey, A. A., Tam, A. P., & Brauburger, A. L. (2002). Affective states and traits in the workplace: Diary and survey data from young workers. Motivation and Emotion, 26, 31–55. Grebner, S. (2001). Stress at work, well-being, blood pressure and cortisol: Two field studies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Berne, Switzerland. Grebner, S., Elfering, A., & Semmer, N. (1999). Personal and work-related predictors of consistent cortisol responding. Paper presented at Work, Stress, and Health: Organization of Work in a Global Economy, Baltimore, USA (11–13 March). Grebner, S., Elfering, A., & Semmer, N. K. (2003). Work experience, blood pressure, and well-being among young workers. Manuscript submitted for publication, University of Berne, Switzerland. Grebner, S., Elfering, A., Semmer, N. K., Kaiser-Probst, C., & Schlapbach, M.-L. (in press). Stressful situations at work and in private life among young workers: An event sampling approach. Social Indicators Research. Grebner, S., Semmer, N. K., & Elfering, A. (2003). Working conditions and different indicators of well-being among young workers. A longitudinal study of self-report and rating data. Manuscript submitted for publication, University of Berne, Switzerland. Greif, S., Bamberg, E., & Semmer, N. (1991). Psychologischer Stress am Arbeitsplatz (Psychological stress at the workplace). Göttingen: Hogrefe. Greiner, B., & Krause, N. (2000). Expert-observer assessment of job characteristics. Occupational Medicine: State of the Arte Reviews, 15, 175–183. Grund, S. (1997). Situationsbezogene Messung von Stressereignissen am Arbeitsplatz [Situationrelated measurement of stressful events at work]. Unpublished master’s thesis. University of Berne, Switzerland. Gudykunst, W. B., & Ting-Toomey, S. (1988). Culture and affective communication. American Behavioral Scientist, 31, 384–400. Harvey, R. J. (1991). Job analysis. In: M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 71–163). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Harvey, R. J., & Wilson, M. A. (2000). Yes Virginia, there is an objective reality in job analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 829–854. Heim, C., Ehlert, U., & Hellhammer, D. H. (2000). The potential role of hypocortisolism in the pathophysiology of stress-related bodily disorders. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 25, 1–35. Hobfoll, S. E. (2001). The influence of culture, community, and the nested-self in the stress process: Advancing conservation of resources theory. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 50, 337–421. Hörhold, M. (1998). Die Analyse psychophysiologischer Kopplungs-Entkopplungs-Prozesse: Kritische Anmerkungen und alternative Strategien [The analysis of psychophysiological coupling-decoupling processes: Critical remarks and alternative strategies]. Psychologische Rundschau, 49, 2–9.

256


Houts, A. C., Cook, T. D., & Shadish, W. R. (1986). The person-situation debate: A critical multiplist perspective. Journal of Personality, 54, 52–105. Hox, J. J. (2002). Multilevel analysis. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Hurrell, J. J. (2001). Psychosocial factors and musculoskeletal disorders. In: P. L. Perrewé & D. C. Ganster (Eds), Exploring Theoretical Mechanisms and Perspectives (Research in Occupational Stress and Well-being, Vol. 1, pp. 233–256). Amsterdam: JAI. Hurrell, J. J., Nelson, D. L., & Simmons, B. L. (1998). Measuring job stressors and strains: Where we have been, where we are, and where we need to go. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 3, 368–389. Idler, E. L., & Benyamini, A. (1997). Self-rated health and mortality: A review of twenty-seven community studies. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 38, 21–37. Jackson, P. E., Wall, T. D., Martin, R., & Davids, K. (1993). New measures of job control, cognitive demand, and production responsibility. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 753–762. Jenkins, G. C., Nadler, D. A., Lawler, E. E., III, & Camman, C. (1975). Standardized observations: An approach to measuring the nature of jobs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 171–181. Johansson, G., & Frankenhaeuser, M. (1972). Temporal factors in sympatho-adrenomedullary activity following acute behavioral activation. Reports from the Psychological Laboratories, University of Stockholm. 1972 June; 1–11. Jönsson, B. A. G., Malmberg, B., Amilon, A., Garde, A. H., & Orbaek, P. (2003). Determination of cortisol in human saliva using liquid-chromatography-electrospray tandem mass spectrometry. Journal of Chromatography, 784, 63–68. Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1981). LISREL V: Analysis of linear structural relationships by maximum likelihood and least squares methods. Uppsala, Sweden: University of Uppsala. Kälin, W., Semmer, N. K., Elfering, A., Tschan, F., Dauwalder, J.-P., Heunert, S., & Crettaz de Roten, F. (2000). Work characteristics and well-being of Swiss apprentices entering the labor market. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 59, 272–290. Kallus, K. W. (1989). Effects of initial state on psychophysiological stress reactions: Experimental evidence. In: H. Weiner, I. Florin et al. (Eds), Frontiers of Stress Research. Neuronal Control of Bodily Function: Basic and Clinical Aspects (Vol. 3, pp. 379–382). Kirkland, WA: Hans Huber Publishers. Kahn, R. L., & Byosiere, P. (1992). Stress in organizations. In: M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (2nd ed., pp. 571–650). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. 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. Kanner, A. D., Coyne, J. C., Schaefer, C., & Lazarus, R. S. (1981). Comparison of two modes of stress measurement: Daily hassles and uplifts vs. major life events. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 4, 1–39. Karasek, R. A. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications for job redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 285–308. Karasek, R. A., & Theorell, T. (1990). Healthy Work: Stress, productivity, and the Reconstruction of Working life. New York: Basic Books. Kasl, S. V. (1978). Epidemiological contributions to the study of work stress. In: C. L. Cooper & R. Payne (Eds), Stress at Work (pp. 3–48). Chichester, UK: Wiley. Kasl, S. V. (1986). Stress and disease in the workplace: A methodological commentary on the accumulated evidence. In: M. F. Cataldo & T. J. Coates (Eds), Health and Industry. A Behavioral Medicine Perspective (pp. 52–85). New York: Wiley.

Beyond Self-Report

257

Kiecolt-Glaser, J. K., & Glaser, R. (1997). Measurement of immune response. In: S. Cohen, R. C. Kessler & L. U. Gordon (Eds), Measuring Stress: A Guide for Health and Social Scientists (pp. 213–229). New York: Oxford University Press. Kirschbaum, C. (1991). Cortisolmessung im Speichel – Eine Methode der Biologischen Psychologie [Cortisol measurement in saliva. A method of biological psychology]. Bern: Huber. Kirschbaum, C., & Hellhammer, D. H. (1989). Salivary cortisol in psychobiological research: An overview. Neuropsychobiology, 22, 150–169. Kirschbaum, C., & Hellhammer, D. H. (1994). Salivary cortisol in psychoneuroendocrine research: Resent developments and applications. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 19(4), 313–333. Kirschbaum, C., Wüst, S., & Hellhammer, D. (1992). Consistent sex differences in cortisol responses to psychological stress. Psychosomatic Medicine, 54, 648–657. Kohse, K. P., & Wisser, H. (1987). Problems of quantitative urine analysis. Annales de Biologie Clinique, 45, 630–641. Krantz, D. S., & Falconer, J. J. (1997). Measurement of cardiovascular responses. In: S. Cohen, R. C. Kessler et al. (Eds), Measuring Stress: A Guide for Health and Social Scientists (pp. 193–212). London: Oxford University Press. Kudielka, B. M., Broderick, J. E., & Kirschbaum, C. (2003). Compliance with saliva sampling protocols: Electronic monitoring reveals invalid cortisol daytime profiles in non-compliant subjects. Psychosomatic Medicine, 65, 313–319. Lacey, J. I. (1967). Somatic response patterning and stress: Some revisions of activation theory. In: M. H. Appley & R. Trumbull (Eds), Psychological Stress: Issues in Research. New York: Appleton Century Crofts. Landsbergis, P. A., Schnall, P. L., Belkic, K. L., Baker, D., Schwartz, J. E., & Pickering, T. G. (2003). The workplace and cardiovascular disease: Relevance and potential role for occupational health psychology. In: J. C. Quick & L. E. Tetrick (Eds), Handbook of Occupational Health Psychology (pp. 265–287). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Lazarus, R. S. (1995). Psychological stress in the workplace. In: R. Crandall & P. L. Perrewé (Eds), Occupational Stress: A Handbook (pp. 3–14). London: Taylor & Francis. Lazarus, R. S. (1999). Stress and emotion: A new synthesis. London: Free Association Books. Linden, W., Earle, T. L., Gerin, W., & Christenfeld, N. (1997). Physiological stress reactivity and recovery: Conceptual siblings separated at birth? Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 42, 117–135. Lundberg, U., Elfsberg Dohns, I., Melin, B., Sandsjö, L., Palmerud, G., Kadefors, R., Ekström, M., & Parr, D. (1999). Psychophysiological stress responses, muscle tension, and neck and shoulder pain among supermarket cashiers. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 4, 245–255. Lundberg, U., & Melin, B. (2002). Stress in the development of musculoskeletal pain. In: S. J. Linton (Ed.), New Avenues for the Prevention of Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain and Disability (pp. 165–179). Amsterdam: Elsevier. Mason, J. W. (1968). Organisation of psychoendocrine mechanisms. Psychosomatic Medicine, 30, 565–588. Matthews, K. A., Weiss, S. M., Detre, T., Dembroski, T. M., Falkner, B. Manuck, S. B., & Williams, R. B. (Eds) (1989). Handbook of stress, reactivity, and cardiovascular disease. New York: Wiley. McEwen, B. (1998). Protective and damaging effects of stress mediators. New England Journal of Medicine, 338, 171–179. McEwen, B. (2002). Protective and damaging effects of stress mediators. The good and bad sides of the response to stress. Metabolism, 51, 2–4.

258


McGrath, J. E., & Beehr, T. A. (1990). Time and the stress process: Some temporal issues in the conceptualization and measurement of stress. Stress Medicine, 6, 93–104. McGrath, J. E., & Tschan, F. (2004). Temporal matters in social psychology. Washington DC: American Psychological Association. Meijman, T. F., Mulder, G., van Dormolen, M., & Cremer, R. (1992). Workload of driving examiners: A psychophysiological field study. In: H. Kragt (Ed.), Enhancing Industrial Performance (pp. 245–258). London: Taylor & Francis. Mohr, G. (1991). Fuenf Subkonstrukte psychischer Befindensbeeintraechtigungen bei Industriearbeitern: Auswahl und Entwicklung [Five subconstructs of psychological strain in industrial personnel: Selection and development]. In: S. Greif, E. Bamberg & N. K. Semmer (Eds), Psychischer Stress am Arbeitsplatz (pp. 91–119). Göttingen: Hogrefe. Mohr, G. (2000). The changing significance of different stressors after the announcement of bankruptcy: A longitudinal investigation with the special emphasis on job insecurity. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 337–359. Moleman, P. (1990). Effect of diet on urinary excretion of unconjugulated catecholamines and some of their metabolites in healthy control subjects and depressed patients. Clinica Chimica Acta, 189, 19–24. Monroe, S. M. (1983). Major and minor life events as predictors of psychological distress. Further issues and findings. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 6, 189–205. Morgeson, F. P., & Campion, M. A. (1997). Social and cognitive sources of potential inaccuracy in job analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 627–655. Morsh, J. E. (1964). Job analysis in the United States Air Force. Personnel Psychology, 17, 7–17. Mulder, G., Mulder, L. J. M., Meijman, T. F., Veldman, J. B. P., & van Roon, A. (2000). A psychophysiological approach to working conditions. In: R. W. Backs & W. Boucsein (Eds), Engineering Psychophysiology. Issues and Applications (pp. 139–159). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Munck, A., Guyre, P. M., & Holbrook, N. J. (1984). Physiological functions of glucocorticoids in stress and their relation to pharmacological actions. Endocrine Reviews, 5, 25–44. Nakao, M., Yano, E., Nomura, S., & Kuboki, T. (2003). Blood pressure lowering effects of biofeedback treatment in hypertension: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trias. Hypertension Research, 26, 37–46. Ockenfels, M. (1995). Der Einfluss von chronischem Stress auf die Cortisolkonzentration im Speichel. Gesamtkonzentration, Tagesprofil und Cortisolreaktivitaet auf alltaegliche Stressoren [The effect of daily hassles on salivary cortisol]. Muenster, Germany: Waxmann. Osipow, S. H., & Spokane, A. R. (1984). Measuring occupational stress, strain, and coping. In: S. Oskamp (Ed.), Applied Social Psychology Annual 5: Applications in Organizational Settings (S. 67–86). London: Sage. Ostroff, C., Kinicki, A. J., & Tamkins, M. M. (2003). Organizational culture and climate. In: W. C. Borman, D. R. Ilgen & R. J. Klimoski (Eds), Handbook of Psychology, Volume Twelve: Industrial and Organizational Psychology (p. 565). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Panter-Brick, C., & Pollard, T. M. (1999). Work and hormonal variation in subsistence and industrial contexts. In: C. Panter-Brick & C. M. Worthman (Eds), Hormones, Health, and Behavior. A Socio-Ecological and Lifespan Perspective (pp. 139–183). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Perrewé, P. L., & Zellars, K. L. (1999). An examination of attributions and emotions in the transactional approach to the organizational stress process. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 739–752.

Beyond Self-Report

259

Perrez, M. (2001). Coping assessment. In: N. J. Smelser & P. B. Baltes (Eds), The International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences (Vol. 4, pp. 2766–2770). Oxford, UK: Elsevier. Perrez, M., & Reicherts, M. (1992). Stress, coping, and health. A situation-behavior approach. Theory, methods, applications. Bern: Hogrefe & Huber. Peeters, M. C. W., Buunk, B. P., & Schaufeli, W. B. (1995a). Social interactions, stressful events and negative affect at work: A micro-analytic approach. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 391–401. Peeters, M. C. W., Buunk, B. P., & Schaufeli, W. B. (1995b). A micro-analytic exploration of the cognitive appraisal of daily stressful events at work: The role of controllability. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping, 8, 127–139. Peters, L. H., & O’Connor, E. J. (1980). Situation constraints and work outcomes: The influences of a frequently overlooked construct. Academy of Management Review, 5, 391–397. Pike, J. L., Smith, T. L., Hauger, R. L., Nicassiol, P. M., Patterson, T. L., McClintick, J., Costlow, C., & Irwin, M. R. (1997). Chronic life stress alters sympathetic, neuroendocrine, and immune responsivity to an acute psychological stressor in humans. Psychosomatic Medicine, 59, 447–457. Pfeffer, J. (1998). Understanding organizations: Concepts and controversies. In: D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske et al. (Eds), The Handbook of Social Psychology (4th ed., Vol. 2, pp. 733–777). New York: McGraw-Hill. Pollard, T. M., Ungpakorn, G., Harrison, G. A., & Parkes, K. (1996). Epinephrine and cortisol responses to work: A test of the models of Frankenhaeuser and Karasek. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 18, 229–237. Pruessner, J. C., Hellhammer, D. H., & Kirschbaum, C. (1999). Burnout, perceived stress, and cortisol responses to awakening. Psychosomatic Medicine, 61, 197–204. Rabin, B. S. (2002). Understanding how stress affects the physical body. In: H. G. Koenig & H. J. Cohen (Eds), The Link Between Religion and Health: Psychoneuroimmunology and the Faith Factor (pp. 43–68). London: Oxford University. Rau, R., Georgiades, A., Fredrikson, M., Lemne, C., & de Faire, U. (2001). Psychosocial work characteristics and perceived control in relation to cardiovascular rewind at night. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6, 171–181. Reicherts, M. (1988). Diagnostik der Belastungsverarbeitung [Diagnosis of coping with stress]. Bern: Huber. Reicherts, M., & Pihet, S. (2000). Job newcomers coping with stressful situations: A micro-analysis of adequate coping and well-being. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 59, 303–316. Rissler, A. (1979). A psychological approach to quality of working life. Costs of adjustment to quantitative overload. In: R. G. Sell & P. Shipley (Eds), Satisfaction in Work Design: Ergonomics and Other Approaches (pp. 113–119). London: Taylor & Francis. Rosenthal, R. (1984). Meta-analytic procedures for social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Russell, J. A., & Carroll, J. M. (1999). On the bipolarity of positive and negative affect. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 3–30. Saks, A. M., & Ashforth, B. E. (2000). The role of dispositions, entry stressors, and behavioural plasticity theory in predicting newcomers’ adjustment to work. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 43–62. Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1979). A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 224–253. Sanders, A. F. (1983). Towards a model of stress and human performance. Acta Psychologica, 53, 61–97.

260


Sapolsky, R. M. (1999). Hormonal correlates of personality and social contexts: From non-human to human primates. In: C. Panter-Brick & C. M Worthman (Eds), Hormones, Health, and Behavior. A Socio-Ecological and Lifespan Perspective (pp. 18–46). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Schaubroeck, J., & Ganster, D. C. (1993). Chronic demands and responsivity to challenge. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 73–85. Schaubroeck, J., Lam, S. S. K., & Xie, J. L. (2000). Collective efficacy vs. self-efficacy in coping responses to stressors and control: A cross-cultural study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 512–525. Schonfeld, I. S. (1992a). A longitudinal study of occupational stressors and depressive symptoms in first-year female teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 8, 151–158. Schonfeld, I. S. (1992b). Assessing stress in teachers: Depressive symptoms scales and neutral self-reports of the work environment. In: J. C. Quick, L. R. Murphy & J. J. Hurrell (Eds), Stress and Well Being at Work (pp. 270–285). Washington, DC: American Pschological Association. Schonfeld, I. S. (2001). Stress in 1st-year women teachers: The context of social support and coping. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 127, 133–168. Schnall, P., Belkic, K., & Pickering, T. G. (2000). Assessment of the cardiovascular system at the workplace. Occupational Medicine: State of the Art Reviews, 15, 189–202. Schulz, P., Kirschbaum, C., Pruessner, J., & Hellhammer, D. (1998). Increased free cortisol secretion after awakening in chronically stressed individuals due to work overload. Stress Medicine, 14, 91–97. Schwartz, J. (2000). Imputation of job characteristics scores. Occupational Medicine: State of the Arte Reviews, 15, 172–175. Semmer, N. (1984). Stressbezogene Tätigkeitsanalyse [Stress-oriented analysis of work: Psychological studies on the analysis of stress at work]. Weinheim und Basel: Beltz. Semmer, N. (1992). One man’s meat, another man’s poison? Stressors and their cultural background. In: M. V. Cranach, W. Doise & G. Mugny (Eds), Social Representations and the Social Bases of Knowledge (pp. 153–158). Bern: Huber. Semmer, N. K. (2000). Control at work: Issues of specifity, generality, and legitimacy. In: W. J. Perrig & A. Grob (Eds), Control of Human Behavior, Mental Processes, and Consciousness (pp. 555–574). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Semmer, N. K. (2003). Individual differences, work stress, and health. In: M. J. Schabracq, J. A. Winnubst & C. L. Cooper (Eds), Handbook of Work and Health Psychology (2nd ed., pp. 51–86). Chichester: Wiley. Semmer, N., & Schallberger, U. (1996). Selection, socialization, and mutual adaptation: Resolving discrepancies between people and their work. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 45, 263–288. Semmer, N., & Zapf, D. (1989). Validity of various methods of measurement in job analysis. In: K. Landau & W. Rohmert (Eds), Recent Development in Job Analysis (pp. 67–78). London: Taylor & Francis. Semmer, N. K., Zapf, D., & Dunckel, H. (1995). Assessing stress at work: A framework and an instrument. In: O. Svane & C. Johansen (Eds), Work and Health – Scientific Basis of Progress in the Working Environment (pp. 105–113). Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. Semmer, N. K., Zapf, D., & Greif, S. (1996). “Shared job strain”: A new approach for assessing the validity of job stress measurements. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 69, 293–311.

Beyond Self-Report

261

Selye, H. (1956). Stress and disease. New York: McGraw-Hill. Seyle, H. (1993). History of the stress concept. In: L. Goldberger & S. Breunitz (Eds), Handbook of Stress: Theoretical and Clinical Aspects (2nd ed., pp. 7–17). New York: Free Press. Shepard, A. (2001). Hierarchical task analysis. London: Taylor & Francis. Siegrist, J. (1998). Adverse health effects of effort-reward imbalance at work: Theory, empirical support, and implications for prevention. In: C. L. Cooper (Ed.), Theories of Organizational Stress (pp. 191–204). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Siegrist, J. (2002). Effort-reward imbalance at work and health. In: P. L. Perrewé & D. C. Ganster (Eds), Historical and Current Perspectives on Stress and Health (Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, Vol. 2, pp. 261–291). Amsterdam: JAI. Siegrist, J., & Klein, D. (1990). Occupational stress and cardiovascular reactivity in blue-collar workers. Work and Stress, 4, 295–305. Siegrist, J., Klein, D., & Matschinger, H. (1989). Occupational stress, coronary risk factors and cardiovascular responsiveness. In: H. Weiner & I. Florin (Eds), Frontiers of Stress Research. Neuronal Control of Bodily Function: Basic and Clinical Aspects (Vol. 3, pp. 323–335). Kirkland, WA: Hans Huber Publishers. Smyth, J., Ockenfels, M. C., Porter, L., Kirschbaum, C., Hellhammer, D. H., & Stone, A. A. (1998). Stressors and mood measured on a momentary basis are associated with salivary cortisol secretion. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 23, 353–370. Sonnentag, S. (2001). Work, recovery activities, and individual well-being: A diary study. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6, 196–210. Sonnentag, S., & Frese, M. (2003). Stress in organizations. In: W. C. Borman, D. R. Ilgen & J. R. Klimoski (Eds), Handbook of Psychology, Vol. 12: Industrial and Organizational Psychology (pp. 453–491). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Spector, P. E. (1992). A consideration of the validity and meaning of self report measures of job conditions. In: C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds), International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology 1992 (Vol. 7, pp. 123–151). Chichester: Wiley. Spector, P. E., & Brannick, M. T. (1995). The nature and effects of method variance in organizational research. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 10, 249–274. Spector, P. E., Brannick, M. T., & Coovert, M. D. (1989). Job analysis. In: C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robinson (Eds), International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology 1989 (Vol. 4, pp. 281–328). London: Wiley. Spector, P. E., & Jex, S. M. (1991). Relations of job characteristics from multiple data sources with employee affect, absence, turnover intentions, and health. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 46–53. Spector, P., & Jex, S. (1998). Development of four self-report measure of job stressors and strain: Interpersonal Conflict at Work Scale, Organizational Constraints Scale, Quantitative Workload Inventory, and Physical Symptoms Inventory. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 3, 356–367. Spector, P. E., Jex, S. M., & Chen, P. Y. (1995). Relations of incumbent affect-related personality traits with incumbent and objective measures of characteristics of jobs. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16, 59–65. Spector, P. E., Zapf, D., Chen, P. Y., & Frese, M. (2000). Why negative affectivity should not be controlled in job stress research: Don’t throw out the baby with the bath water. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 79–95.

262


Steptoe, A. (1991a). The links between stress and illness. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 35, 633–644. Steptoe, A. (1991b). Psychological coping, individual differences and physiological stress responses. In: C. L. Cooper & R. Payne (Eds), Personality and Stress: Individual Differences in the Stress Process (pp. 205–233). Chichester: Wiley. Steptoe, A., & Willemsen, G. (2002). Psychophysiological responsivity in coronary heart disease. In: S. Stansfeld & M. Marmot (Eds), Stress and the Heart (pp. 168–180). London: BMJ Books. Sterling, P., & Eyer, J. (1988). Allostasis: A new paradigm to explain arousal pathology. In: S. Fisher & J. Reason (Eds), Handbook of Life Stress, Cognition and Health (pp. 629–649). Chichester: Wiley. Terry, D. J., & Jimmieson, N. L. (1999). Work control and employee well-being: A decade review. In: C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds), International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (Vol. 14, pp. 95–148). Chichester: Wiley. Thayer, R. E. (1989). The biopsychology of mood and arousal. London: Oxford University Press. Theorell, T. (2003). To be able to exert control over one’s own situation: A necessary condition for coping with stressors. In: J. C. Quick & L. E. Tetrick (Eds), Handbook of Occupational Health Psychology (pp. 201–219). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Theorell, T., & Karasek, R. A. (1996). Current issues relating to psychosocial job strain and cardiovascular disease research. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 1, 9–26. Triandis, H. C. (1994). Cross-cultural industrial and organizational psychology. In: H. C. Triandis, M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (2nd ed., Vol. 4, pp. 103–172). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Van der Beek, A. J., Meijman, T. F., Frings-Dresen, M. H., Kuiper, J. I., & Kuiper, S. (1995). Lorry drivers’ work stress evaluated by catecholamines excreted in urine. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 52, 464–469. Veiersted, K. B., Westgaard, R. H., & Andersen, P. (1993). Electromyographic evaluation of muscular work pattern as a predictor of trapezius myalgia. Scandinavian Journal of Work Environment and Health, 19, 284–290. Vitaliano, P. P., DeWolfe, D. J., Maiuro, R. D., Russo, J., & Katon, W. (1990). Appraised changeability of a stressor as a modifier of the relationship between coping and depression: A test of the hypothesis of fit. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 582–592. Warr, P. (1987). Work, unemployment and mental health. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Warr, P. (1999). Well-being and the workplace. In: D. Kahneman, E. Diener & N. Schwarz (Eds), Well-being. The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology (pp. 393–412). New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Watson, D., Pennebaker, J. W., & Folger, R. (1987). Beyond negative affectivity: Measuring stress and satisfaction in the work place. In: J. M. Ivancevich & D.C. Ganster (Eds), Job Stress: From Theory to Suggestion (pp. 141–157). New York: Haworth Press. Webb, E. J., Campbell, D. T., Schwartz, R. D., Sechrest, L., & Grove, J. B. (1981). Nonreactive measures in the social sciences (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Weiss, H. M. (2002). Introductory comments: Antecedents of emotional experiences at work. Motivation and Emotion, 26, 1–2. Widaman, K. F. (1985). Hierarchically nested covariance structure models for multitrait-multimethod data. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9, 1–26.

Beyond Self-Report

263

Wüst, S., Federenko, I., Hellhammer, D. H., & Kirschbaum, C. (2000). Genetic factors, perceived chronic stress, and the free cortisol response to awakening. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 25, 707–720. Zapf, D. (1989). Selbst- und Fremdbeobachtung in der psychologischen Arbeitsanalyse [Self-report and observation rating in psychological job analysis]. Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe. Zapf, D., Dormann, C., & Frese, M. (1996). Longitudinal studies in organizational stress research: A review of the literature with reference to methodological issues. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 1, 145–169.

EUSTRESS: AN ELUSIVE CONSTRUCT, AN ENGAGING PURSUIT Debra L. Nelson and Bret L. Simmons ABSTRACT This chapter proposes a more holistic approach to understanding work stress by incorporating eustress, the positive response to stressors. We begin by casting the study of eustress as part of a contemporary movement in both psychology and organizational behavior that accentuates the positive aspects of human adaptation and functioning. We discuss the development of the concept of eustress, and provide extensive evidence, both psychological and physiological, for the purpose of developing an explicit construct definition. An exploratory study of hospital nurses is presented as an initial test of our holistic model of stress. We conclude by asserting that there must exist a complement to coping with distress such that rather than preventing or resolving the negative side of stress, individuals savor the positive side of stress.

INTRODUCTION Despite the variety of approaches to conceptualizing stress, the literature is generally in agreement that certain stressors can elicit responses in individuals that, over time, can have adverse impacts on their health. These physical or psychological stimuli to which the individual responds are commonly referred to as either stressors or demands. The negative response to stressors is commonly termed Emotional and Physiological Processes and Positive Intervention Strategies Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, Volume 3, 265–322 Copyright © 2004 by Elsevier Ltd. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 1479-3555/doi:10.1016/S1479-3555(03)03007-5

265

266

DEBRA L. NELSON AND BRET L. SIMMONS

distress, and it is distress that is commonly studied for its relationship to adverse health outcomes (Quick, Quick, Nelson & Hurrell, 1997). Distress, as such, is negative and dysfunctional (i.e. bad stress). The most important outcome variables associated with the study of stress are health and well being, which are positive states (Ganster & Schaubroeck, 1991; Quick et al., 1987; Quick et al., 1997), yet researchers have accentuated the negative side of stress, focusing on outcomes such as behavioral disorders, psychological maladies, and medical problems. Interestingly, some have suggested that there is also good stress, which Selye (1976a, b) termed eustress. Quick et al. (1997) described eustress as being associated with healthy, positive outcomes. Unfortunately, the positive response to stressors and the associated health benefits of these responses has received little attention in the literature. For example, Quick et al. (1997) defined preventive stress management as “an organizational philosophy and set of principles that employs specific methods for promoting individual and organizational health while preventing individual and organizational distress” (p. 149). Like that of other stress researchers, the overwhelming focus of their approach is on the prevention of the negative, that being distress. While they acknowledged the importance of promoting the positive (i.e. eustress), they offered little research or practical support for this position. Although their model incorporated eustress, they presented a discussion of stress in which eustress, although conceptually distinct, is operationally merely the absence of distress. Is this simplistic model of stress accurate, or is a more complex model of stress possible? Spector (1997), in describing the great stress “muddle,” argued that stress researchers have come to use the word “stress” as simply a negative stimulus, and have confounded stimulus (stressor) with response (strain). He noted further that stressors should be identified as normotensive (leading to neutral states or no strain change), benetensive (leading to adaptive change), or maltensive (leading to maladaptive change), and that strains (neuronal, endocrine and immune responses) must be characterized as neutral, adaptive, and maladaptive. In a more complex model of stress, eustress would be operationalized as well as conceptualized as more than just the absence of distress. A more complex model suggests that the presence/absence of the positive as well as the presence/absence of the negative is necessary to fully appreciate the stress response. Consider the metaphor of a bathtub to illustrate this point. As a minimum, we are concerned about two things when we settle in for a bath – the level of water in the tub and the temperature of water in the tub. Essentially two things determine the level of water in the bathtub – the flow of water into the bathtub and the flow of water out of the bathtub over time. Likewise, the simultaneous flow of both hot and cold water into the bathtub determine the temperature of the water in the tub. If we liken the study of stress to the study of water in the bathtub, our

An Elusive Construct, an Engaging Pursuit

267

current approach is like studying a bathtub with a single water faucet – cold water, representing distress. We know a lot about the sources of cold water, and we can tell individuals how to either decrease the flow of cold water into or increase the flow of cold water out of their bathtub. We also know quite a bit about the physiological, behavioral, and psychological consequences of sitting in a tub of cold water for a prolonged period of time. Our knowledge of cold water (distress) is important, but does not present a complete understanding of the water (stress) in the bathtub. A more complete model of stress would acknowledge that the bathtub does indeed have two faucets – hot and cold – and both are necessary to get the level and temperature of the water just right for a comfortable bath. The study of eustress presents an enormous opportunity to contribute to our knowledge of stress. The challenge then becomes conceptualizing and operationalizing eustress in terms that distinguish it from distress, examining how eustress and distress are related, and exploring their differential contributions to the health of individuals, in particular, their health related to work. In this chapter, our aim is to help researchers to gain ground in this eustressful endeavor. We begin by casting the study of eustress as part of a contemporary movement in both psychology and organizational behavior that accentuates the positive aspects of human adaptation and functioning. Next, we develop and present a more holistic model of stress, focusing specifically on eustress as a positive response. We then turn to a study of nurses that represents a first attempt at identifying the positive states that serve as indicators of eustress as it relates to perceptions of health. We move from there to the presentation of savoring, a unique extension of the eustress concept. We believe that most individuals not only prefer eustress, they actually savor, or enjoy with appreciation, this positive response to aspects of demands they encounter at work. In the final sections of the chapter, we explore the implications of this more positive approach for managers, researchers, and the future.

HEALTH AND POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY ROOTS The roots of the positive psychology movement can be traced to early writings on health as more than the absence of disease. Ryff and Singer (1998) highlighted philosophy’s focus on the positive in terms of human thriving and flourishing. Aristotle established the notion of eudaemonia, defined as the realization of one’s true potential (Rothman, 1993). Russell (1958) identified three causes of happiness as zest, work, and affection. Antonovsky’s (1987) description of sense of coherence includes its relationship with salutogenesis, the development of health and well-being (as opposed to pathogenesis, development of disease or disorder). Many writers, including Ryff and Singer (1998), in their proposition of positive

268


human health, lamented that researchers and practitioners, while paying lip service to the idea of health as the presence of the positive, have not adopted this positive approach to health in their work. Based on their philosophical analysis, Ryff and Singer further argued that the goods that are essential for positive human health include purpose in life, quality connections to others, self-regard, and mastery, and that examining the physiological processes underlying the relationship between these goods and health constitutes the most critical research endeavor. Ryff and Singer (2002) urged researchers to examine a more complete view of health, which would encompass both wellness and mind-body concepts. Such a view, they argued, should incorporate the neurobiology associated with psychological flourishing. Consistent with a focus on health, researchers have called for a more positive approach to psychology. Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi (2000), as champions of positive psychology, proposed that psychology’s focus on pathology was a product of history, including World War II, and its focus, appropriately, was on healing human suffering. Even during WWII there were individuals who retained their integrity and purpose in those chaotic times, as these authors noted. Individual attributes such as courage, optimism and capacity for flow served as buffers against mental and physical illnesses normally associated with trauma. Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi defined positive psychology as a “science of positive subjective experience,” that focuses on positive individual characteristics and positive institutions. They emphasized the need to investigate the neurochemistry and anatomy of positive individual experiences and traits. Researchers have answered this call, and have conducted studies of traits associated with health and well-being. Some of the individual characteristics investigated include positive affect (Folkman & Moskowitz, 2000), optimism (Peterson, 2000), self-determination (Ryan & Deci, 2000), and hope (Snyder, 2002), to name a few. Positive psychology is thus the study of human resilience and flourishing. A more positive approach to stress has roots in positive psychology, along with positive organizational behavior.

POSITIVE ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR ROOTS Organizational behaviorists and occupational health psychology researchers have extended the ideas of positive psychology and have adapted them to the world of work organizations. Luthans (2002a, b) proposed a positive approach to organizational behavior (POB), with a focus on lifting up strengths rather than altering weaknesses. Positive organizational behavior is “the study and application of positively-oriented human resource strengths and psychological capacities


269

that can be measured, developed, and effectively managed for performance improvement in today’s workplace” (Luthans, 2002a, p. 59). Luthans further proposed that the most promising approach for POB is to identify states that are: (1) positive psychological capacities; which should also be; (2) validly measured; and (3) amenable to development in order to improve performance. He also suggested that confidence, hope, and resiliency are states that should be studied as part of POB. Some researchers have attempted to define “healthy work” and its characteristics. Turner et al. (2002), for instance, stated that healthy work means promoting both psychological and physical well-being. These authors developed a model of healthy work including work redesign, teamwork, and transformational leadership. These three practices assist employees in developing more flexible role orientations, which then promote employee resilience and optimism. These practices can also indirectly affect positive outcomes through trust, interpersonal justice, and organizational commitment. The authors argue that the identification and study of healthy work is an important part of positive psychology. Other studies have focused on individuals who remain healthy under stressful situations. Britt et al. (2001) studied individuals deployed in a peace-keeping mission in order to examine the relationship between the meaning of work and hardiness. Hardiness is the tendency to find meaning in events, especially stressors that challenge individuals. Soldiers were surveyed midway through a year-long deployment, and again several months after. Individuals who were hardy also reported engagement in meaningful work, and they derived benefits from the deployment long after it ended. Soldiers who were hardy identified with their peacekeeping role, believed in the importance of their mission, and were personally engaged in that mission. Britt et al.’s (2001) study demonstrated that individuals confronted with distressful situations can gain positive outcomes, and that traits such as hardiness may facilitate this process. Other characteristics that can promote health and well being include self-reliance (Quick, Nelson & Quick, 1987), character (Quick, 2002), and sense of calling (Wrzesniewski, 2002). Following the traditions of positive psychology and positive organizational behavior, we developed a more positive view of stress. In the next section, we will review the evidence for the eustress concept and present our approach for studying eustress.

A POSITIVE APPROACH TO STRESS The concept of eustress shares its origin with the concept of human stress. It is rare to find a stress study that even considers the concept of eustress, but when

270


eustress is considered, it is almost always presented in its original conceptual form. Because this concept has received very little attention, it is underdeveloped. The literature review will present evidence that represents advancement of the concept of eustress, even though the advancements were rarely identified with eustress by the researchers. Based on this evidence, a new definition of the constructs of eustress and distress will be suggested. These new definitions will facilitate a new research strategy for the assessment of eustress.

Origins of Eustress Hans Selye (1976b) incorporated the term eustress as an element of his theory of human stress. While Selye was the first to write extensively about stress in humans, the concept of stress can be traced back much further. The term stress has its origins in Latin as a verb meaning “to injure, molest, or constrain” and has been in the English language a long time (Kahn & Byosiere, 1992). As long ago as the 18th century, the term stress was associated with a force or pressure exerted upon a material object or person. In physics, the term stress is used to describe an internal resisting force of a solid body in response to the application of an external force. Other individuals made noteworthy contributions to our understanding of human stress prior to Hans Selye’s work. Lovallo (1997) credited the physiologist Claude Bernard (1961/1865) with establishing the foundation of the modern human stress concept. Bernard (1961/1865) asserted that both the external environment and the internal environment determine the functions of complex living organisms. In his view, the maintenance of life is critically dependent on keeping the internal environment constant in the face of a changing external environment. Bernard was the first to suggest that physical challenges to the integrity of an organism provoke responses to counteract those threats. Quick et al. (1997) began their historical view of the stress concept with the Yerkes-Dodson Law (Yerkes & Dodson, 1908) which attempts to describe the relationship between stress and performance. This law can be illustrated graphically by visualizing stress on a horizontal axis and performance on a vertical axis. Stress is quantitative and represents a force or demand that an individual is confronted with. The relationship between stress and performance takes the shape of an inverted U. This law holds that individuals perform best under some pressure or when there is a challenge to be met. For each performance activity and each person, there is a given amount of pressure that will produce optimal performance. If individuals are pushed beyond the optimal point, performance declines and they gradually shut down.


271

Walter Cannon was concerned with the specific mechanisms of response to changes in an individual’s external environment that provided optimal bodily function (Cannon, 1929). His research focused on the sympathetic-adrenal system of the body, which is responsible for the production of the catecholamines adrenaline and noradrenaline. Cannon used the term homeostasis to describe the body’s process of attempting to maintain internal stability in the face of environmental change. He posited that failure to meet challenges to the homeostasis of the body could result in tissue damage or death if not countered with adequate responses to return the internal environment to normal. Cannon’s work looked at the effect of physical challenges as well as the effect on the person of psychologically meaningful stimuli (Cannon, 1935). He also identified the fight or flight response as the initial phase of the response to an external threat. This essentially states that when faced with a threat to survival, we must either fend off the threat or flee the dangerous situation in order to survive. Hans Selye is widely credited as the first to note the existence of human stress, describe its qualities, define the concept, and give the phenomenon a name. While Walter Cannon focused his research on the sympathetic-adrenal system, Selye’s research focused on the pituitary-adrenal system and its production of cortisol. Selye clearly viewed stress as a physiological response which was associated with the process of adaption. Selye’s (1976a) most widely accepted definition of stress is: “. . . the non-specific response of the body to any demand, whether it is caused by, or results in, pleasant or unpleasant conditions” (p. 76b). Selye proposed that stress could be associated with both pleasant and unpleasant experiences. Note that the physiological stress level is lowest during indifference but never goes down to zero (that would be death). Pleasant as well as unpleasant emotional arousal is accompanied by an increase in physiological stress (but not necessarily distress) (Selye, 1974, p. 32). Selye’s use of the term distress will be explained shortly. He clearly intended stress to refer to those altered physiological states, and he proposed stressor as the term designating the variety of demands capable of evoking the stress response. “All endogenous or exogenous agents that make such demands are called stressors. Distinguishing between their widely differing specific effects and the common biological response that they elicit is the key to a proper understanding of biologic stress,” (Selye, 1976a, p. 14). The use of the term non-specific in his definition is important. From this perspective, the stress response is non-specific both in terms of cause and effect. Anything that changes conditions for the body, to which it must then adapt, produces stress. Inherent in this concept is the notion that the human body does not recognize the distinction between pleasant and unpleasant circumstances (i.e. pleasure and pain). Both change the circumstances under which the body must operate; therefore, both positive and negative stimuli produce an undifferentiated stress response in

272


Fig. 1. Selye’s Concept of Stress.

the body. According to Selye’s conceptualization of stress, all of these situations, pleasant and unpleasant, would produce a non-specific response. This stress response, in turn, has the potential to affect nearly every system of the human body. While “stress” is the term Selye uses for the biologic response to a stressor, he used the terms distress and eustress to denote the effects of the non-specific response. The relationship between stressors, stress, eustress, and distress is shown in Fig. 1. Selye (1976a) wrote: In everyday life we must distinguish two types of stress effects, namely, eustress (from the Greek eu or good – as in euphony, euphoria, eulogy) and distress (from the Latin dis or bad – as in dissonance, disease, dissatisfaction). Depending upon conditions, stress is associated with desirable or undesirable effects. In view of these conditions it is also quite obvious that there cannot be different types of stress, although the effects of stressors are almost invariably different (p. 15).

Interestingly, Selye’s own writings have been a source of confusion in the field. In the following passage representing his earlier thoughts on the issue, he attempted to separate the response from its effects, but the terminology is much less clear. Selye (1976b) wrote: We must, however, differentiate within the general concept of stress between the unpleasant or harmful variety, called distress . . . and eustress . . . During both eustress and distress the body undergoes virtually the same non-specific responses to the various positive or negative stimuli acting upon it. However, the fact that eustress causes much less damage than distress graphically demonstrates that it is “how you take it” that determines, ultimately, whether one can adapt successfully to change (p. 74).

In the above passage, he did not explicitly identify distress and eustress as stress effects. In fact, in one part of this passage he used the terms eustress and distress to distinguish different types of stress; in another they are identified as causal agents. Along this same line Selye (1976c) noted: “When applied to everyday problems, this understanding should lead to choices most likely to provide us the pleasant eustress . . . involved in achieving fulfillment and victory, thereby avoiding the self-destructive distress of frustration and failure” (p. 13).


273

Fig. 2. Selye’s Four Basic Variations of Stress (Selye, 1983).

In a later writing, Selye (1983) added yet another twist to his concept by suggesting that there are four different varieties of stress (see Fig. 2). Selye (1983) explained: The stress of life has four basic variations, although in their most characteristic nonspecific manifestations they all depend on the same central phenomenon. Our goal should be to strike a balance between the equally destructive forces of hypo- and hyperstress, to find as much eustress as possible, and to minimize distress. Clearly, we cannot run away timidly from every unpleasant experience; in order to achieve our purposes, we must often put up with unhappiness, at least for a time. Here, faintheartedness would in the long run prove even more distressing by depriving us of the joy of ultimate success. Unnecessary or too much distress – all distress, in general, that does not hold promise of eustress – is what is to be avoided (p. 18).

To demonstrate how influential Selye’s concept of stress, defined as a physiological response has been, Quick et al. (1997) offered the following definition of the stress response: “The stress response is the generalized, patterned, unconscious mobilization of the body’s natural energy resources when confronted with a demand, or stressor” (p. 3). They defined eustress as the “healthy, positive, constructive outcome of stressful events and the stress response” (p. 4). When elaborating on the stress response, they wrote:

274


The diverse organizational demands and stressors . . . lead to one common result: the stereotypical psychophysiological reaction known as the stress response. Each individual exhibits the same basic response, although the immediate and long-term consequences of the stress response vary greatly among individuals. The variance among individuals is influenced by a number of modifiers of the stress response. These modifiers affect whether the stress response is channeled into positive and constructive outcomes (eustress) or negative and destructive outcome (distress) (p. 41).

Although Quick et al. (1997) identified eustress, their work represents little theoretical or empirical advancement of the concept presented by Selye. For Quick et al. (1997) eustress was essentially good health and high performance. In their model, the path to good health and high performance is the application of preventive stress management principles and methods. When they invoked the term “preventive stress,” it is clear that they meant the prevention of distress. They offered no recommendations for the promotion of eustress beyond the prevention of distress. While their model incorporated eustress as a separate and distinct effect, eustress is essentially the absence of distress. As distress is commonly associated with disease, this is consistent with their conceptualization of health, which is “freedom from disease,” (Quick et al., 1987, p. 20). In contrast, others believe that “health is more than the absence of disease,” (Sutherland & Cooper, 1990, p. 2). Tetrick (2002), for example, proposed that ill health and positive health are not opposite ends of the same continuum, drawing support from the literature on positive and negative affect. While Quick et al. (1997) defined eustress as the effect of the stress response being “channeled into positive and constructive outcomes” (p. 41), they offered little specific guidance on how this is supposed to occur. Expanding on the YerkesDodson law presented earlier, they graphically represented eustress as the optimum level of exposure to a stressor (stimulation) for an individual (see Fig. 3). According to this concept, maximum performance results when individuals are stressed at this optimum level. While eustress was defined as an effect, it is represented in this case as a quantity of stressor. This relationship between degree of demand and degree of effective performance has been found in professors (Wilke, Gmelch & Lovrich, 1985) as well as little league baseball players (McGrath, 1976). Milsum (1985) proposed a very similar concept in his model of the eustress system for health and illness. Milsum (1985) stated that “eustress implies a correct, right, or optimal level, and therefore implicitly recognizes that this is a regulatory system in the same way as all the other major homeostatic organ systems of our organism” (p. 185). The quantitative approach described above is one way to distinguish eustress from distress. Allen (1983) asserted that eustress and distress could also be differentiated by qualitative characteristics. From this perspective, the same quantity of stress may serve as eustress or distress, depending on how one interprets events triggering it. Interpreting Selye’s work, he writes:


275

Fig. 3. An Expanded Yerkes-Dodson Curve (adapted from Quick et al., 1997, p. 156). According to Selye, the critical difference is whether one interprets stressors as challenge or threat. He believes that if we consider life’s stressors to be threats, then damaging results will occur. If, however, we look at the same events as challenges, they foster growth. Selye’s personal strategy for stress management does not involve a reduction of stress. Rather, he views stressors as challenges – healthy, growth-promoting opportunities (p. 14).

This is indeed a compelling account, but it too is confusing. Recall that in Selye’s concept of stress, stressors are directly associated with the stress response, which is non-specific with respect to its cause and physiological manifestations. Selye seems to suggest that the mind differentiates between pleasant and unpleasant stressors but the body does not. If the individual can differentiate stressors as either threatening (negative) or challenging (positive), and eustress/distress is determined by this evaluation of the stressor, then the relationship between stressors and eustress and distress cannot be mediated by a non-specific physiological response. The stress response itself must be more complex than simple non-specific physiological arousal.

Development of the Concept of Eustress As evidenced by the work of Quick et al. (1997), little has been done to advance the concept of eustress beyond its original presentation by Hans Selye. Although Selye described eustress as the positive effect of the non-specific physiological stress response, neither Selye nor others who used his framework have adequately

276


described how this positive effect of the stress response occurs. Few will argue that Selye accurately described an aspect of how the endocrine system responds when confronted with a demand. Based on his research on one biological subsystem, the definition of stress as a non-specific response, with eustress and distress as effects of this response, was born and remains influential still today. This is problematic because it is difficult to explain how a non-specific response fully mediates the relationship between non-specific causes and specific effects. Some researchers have identified this problem and have taken issue with Selye’s definition of stress, suggesting that the stress response is more complex and more specific than Selye asserts. If this is true, then the concepts of eustress and distress as Selye presents them are also subject to reevaluation. A more holistic conceptualization of the stress response would expand to encompass knowledge of the human system beyond the endocrine subsystem. With a holistic representation of the stress response, it is possible to make qualitative assessments (i.e. good/bad, positive/negative, healthy/damaging) of the response that were previously reserved for the effects of the response. This would suggest the possibility to conceptualize eustress and distress as positive and negative aspects of the stress response itself instead of positive and negative aspects of the effects of the stress response; consequently, this could resolve the conflict presented by Selye’s definitions. The literature provides both psychological and physiological support for a more holistic model of the stress response and subsequent redefinition of the concepts of eustress and distress. The psychological support will be presented first, because it forms the basis for the research model that will be presented at the end of this section. The physiological support will then be presented in considerable detail. The physiological support is critical because the study of stress originated from this perspective and its basic assumptions still persist.

Psychological Support for Eustress Much of the early work that established the foundation for the medical perspective of stress was done through experimentation with animals. From this perspective, the stress response is fundamentally similar between as well as within species. Lazarus (1966) took issue with the medical perspective when establishing the basis for his approach to psychological stress. He noted that the psychological structure of an animal that behaves primarily in accordance with instinctual mechanisms must be thought of differently than humans, whose behavior depends more on learning and higher-level cognitive processes. Lazarus (1966) posited that in humans, psychological processes intervene between the stress stimuli and stress response. He utilized the term threat to


277

express the condition of the person when confronted with a stimulus that the person appraises as endangering important values and goals. Lazarus (1966) posited the response to appraised threat could be psychological (e.g. affective disturbances), behavioral, and physiological. Elaborating on the concept of appraisal, Lazarus (1966) wrote: For threat to occur, an evaluation must be made of the situation, to the effect that a harm is signified. The individual’s knowledge and beliefs contribute to this. The appraisal of threat is not a simple perception of the elements of the situation, but a judgment, an inference in which the data are assimilated to a constellation of ideas and expectations. . . . The mechanism by which the interplay between the properties of the individual and those of the situation can be understood is the cognitive process of appraisal, a judgment about the meaning of future significance of a situation based not merely on the stimulus, but on the psychological makeup (p. 44).

In contrast to the medical perspective, Lazarus (1966) suggested that whether and how an individual responds to the presence of a stimulus depends upon what the individual thinks and believes about the stimulus and the situation in which it is presented. While Lazarus’ (1966) initial formulation of the concept of appraisal explicitly concerned threat and the resulting adverse responses, he suggested that the appraisal/response relationship could be broader: If some anticipated future state or condition is irrelevant to the individual’s goals or values, it will not lead to threat appraisal, since the future condition will not harm the individual. If the future condition involves the realization of goals without thwarting of others, the cue indicating it will result in a positively toned emotion (p. 56, emphasis added).

Although the concept of appraisal was developed to explain the negative response of psychological distress, the above passage suggests that individuals may also have positive responses to situations or events. Lazarus (1966) did not elaborate on the positive response, and he did not use the term eustress to identify this response; however, this positive psychological response is consistent with the notion that eustress is “good stress” (Quick et al., 1997; Selye, 1976a). The fundamental difference is that the stress response is presented as multidimensional, capable of psychological and behavioral manifestations as well as physiological manifestations. As such, it is possible to conceive of eustress and distress as ways to describe multidimensional positive and negative responses, as opposed to positive and negative effects of a stereotypical physiological response. Lazarus and Folkman (1984) extended the concept of appraisal and observed that appraisals and their resulting responses can be complex and mixed. They presented what can be interpreted as two basic categories of appraisal: positive and negative. Positive appraisals can occur if the outcome of an encounter is construed as positive or favorable to an individual’s well being. They suggested that pleasurable or positive emotional responses would be indicators of a degree of positive appraisal.

278


They noted, however, that totally positive appraisals should be rare. For most situations and events, most people can always conceive that things are not totally perfect or that something could change and the desirable state could be adversely affected. The other category of appraisals is labeled stress appraisals, which can be interpreted as negative appraisals (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). They subcategorized negative appraisals as those involving harm/loss, threat, and challenge. In harm/loss, some damage to the person has already occurred (e.g. injury, illness, loss of a loved one, damage to self-esteem). Threat involves harms or losses that have not yet occurred but are anticipated. Challenge appraisals occur if the outcome of an encounter holds the potential for gain or growth. As indicators of challenge appraisals, they suggested looking for some of the same positive or pleasurable psychological states they identify as indicators of the positive response. They suggested that “to be challenged means feeling positive about demanding encounters” (p. 34). Discussing the difference between challenge and threat appraisals, Lazarus and Folkman (1984) stated: “The main difference is that challenge appraisals focus on the potential for gain or growth inherent in an encounter and the are characterized by pleasurable emotions such as eagerness, excitement, and exhilaration, whereas threat centers on the potential harms and is characterized by negative emotions such as fear, anxiety, and anger” (p. 33, emphasis added). Lazarus and Folkman (1984) did not view challenge and threat as poles of a single continuum. They believed that challenge and threat responses were not mutually exclusive and could occur simultaneously, as the result of the same stressor, and should be considered as separate but related constructs. Importantly, they stated that “it is possible that the psychological stress response to challenge is different from that in threat,” (p. 34). While threat is clearly a negative appraisal, challenge is better conceived as a positive appraisal (they share the same indicators). Lazarus and Folkman (1984) showed that the immediate psychological effects of appraisals are positive or negative feelings (see Fig. 10.4, p. 308). When discussing separate components of appraisal, Lazarus (1993) again noted that the feelings or emotions that result from appraisal are essentially positive and negative. Lazarus (1993) contended that “stress cannot be considered in terms of a single dimension such as activation . . . such a recognition involves considering diverse emotional states, some negative, some positive” (p. 5). He reminded readers that eustress is the good kind of stress, associated with positive feelings and healthy bodily states, while distress is bad stress, associated with negative feelings and disturbed bodily states. As such, the reasoning Lazarus and Folkman (1984) applied to the distinction between challenge and threat can be extended to the higher levels of positive and


279

negative appraisal. Following the reasoning on threat and challenge, positive and negative appraisals result in separate but related stress responses. Accordingly, positive and negative responses can occur simultaneously, as a result of the same stressor, and should be considered separate but related constructs. Thus, for any given stressor, an individual can have both a degree of positive and a degree of negative response. Folkman and Lazarus’s (1985) study of students in an undergraduate psychology course supported this conclusion. They examined the students’ emotions at three stages of a midterm exam: before the exam, before the grades were announced, and after the grades were announced. They inferred appraisals of threat or challenge and outcomes of benefit and harm by assessing emotions. They found clear support for the existence of both positive and negative emotions as a result of the encounter. They also found that the greater the ambiguity of the situation, the greater the probability that people would experience both positive and negative emotions concurrently. Conversely, when evaluating an outcome that has already transpired, people were likely to feel either positive or negative emotions. Positive and negative outcome emotions became increasingly negatively correlated as the encounter unfolded to its conclusion. Because most work situations involve a degree of ambiguity, we can expect individuals to experience both positive and negative responses at the same time. Folkman’s (1997) longitudinal study of caregivers of men with AIDS provided strong additional support for the contention that positive and negative responses can occur simultaneously and as a result of the same stressor. She found that in addition to negative psychological states, the caregivers also experienced positive psychological states in the midst of caregiving and bereavement. Her study found covariation around high mean levels of both negative and positive states, and with the exception of the weeks surrounding the death of the patient, the frequency of the caregivers’ positive affect was never significantly lower than the frequency of their negative affect. If positive and negative psychological states can co-occur in the midst of enduring and profoundly demanding circumstances, then it is reasonable to expect them exhibit a degree of co-occurrence for any given stressor. Lazarus and Folkman (1984) also supported their view that appraisals and their resulting stress responses are complex and mixed with evidence from research that challenged Selye’s concept of stress as non-specific physiological response. They concluded that any psychophysical theory of stress that views the response as unidimensional disequilibrium or arousal is untenable or at least grossly incomplete. Aspects of the research they examined as well as additional research along these same lines will be presented in the next section. In summary, this psychological support provides an opportunity to reconceptualize eustress as a positive response to a cognitively appraised stressor.

280


The concept of stress as response to appraisal is established and accepted as a valid explanation of degrees of negative responses, which have commonly been labeled distress. The Holistic Stress Model, presented later in this section, extends Lazarus and Folkman’s (1984) work on the positive response to appraisal and provides it with the label eustress. This extension reflects the view that the stress response itself is multidimensional and can be categorized along the higher order dimensions of positive and negative. Cognitive appraisal explains why the response itself is not unidimensional and how the qualitative characteristics of the separate and specific responses arise. Selye’s original labels eustress and distress are retained and applied as descriptors of the higher order dimensions of the stress response. In other words, eustress and distress are recast as descriptors of the stress response instead of descriptors of the effects of a unidimensional response. In the next section, we review the physiological support for this view.

Physiological Evidence for Eustress To appreciate the foundation of the psychological perspective of stress (Lazarus, 1966; Lazarus & Folkman, 1984), it is necessary to examine how researchers from the medical perspective of stress challenged the assumptions of its founder, Hans Selye (1976a). This section will present clear evidence that the physiological response to stress is more complex and specific than some researchers have presented it. All of the research presented in this section attributes the complexity of the stress response to cognitive appraisal of the stressor. Recall that cognitive appraisal was shown in the previous section as being primarily either positive or negative. Accordingly, the physiological research suggests that a more complex stress response can be qualitatively characterized along the primary dimensions of positive and negative. This sets the stage for identifying eustress and distress with the positive and negative affective, behavioral, and physiological manifestations of the stress response, not as effects of the stress response. It will be useful at this point to review some common terms and concepts used in neuroendocrine stress research. Most research on the endocrine (hormonal) effects of work stress has focused primarily on two major systems. Figure 4 provides a schematic representation of pathways from the brain to the adrenal systems involved in stress (Frankenhauser, 1986). The first system is the sympathetic-adrenal system studied by Walter Cannon relates to changes in the catecholamines or epinephrine and norepinephrine, also known as adrenaline and noradrenaline. Catecholamines have a major influence on a variety of bodily functions such as heart rate and blood pressure. A large number of environmental factors seem to be capable of provoking changes in


281

Fig. 4. Schematic Representation of Pathways from the Brain to the Adrenal Systems Involved in Stress (adapted from Frankenhauser, 1986).

catecholamines. They are easily perturbed and can change rapidly even with pleasurable stimuli. “Catecholamines may be viewed as hormones of vigilance, attention, or involvement. When individuals are interacting more intensely with their environment, either positively or negatively, there seems to be an increase in catecholamines” (Rose, 1987, p. 133). The second system involved in stress is the hypothalamic-pituitatary-adrenal system studied by Hans Selye that produces cortisol. While the release of cortisol is not as easily stimulated as catecholamines, cortisol has been found to be responsive to a variety of different environmental challenges (Rose, 1987). While cortisol acts on a variety of the body’s organs, its primary effect is to increase the supply of glucose and fatty acids in the bloodstream. Cortisol can also have harmful effects on the body’s digestion, immune response, and muscular-skeletal system (Quick et al., 1997).

282


Mason (1971) was among the first to take issue with Selye’s concept of stress with his specificity concept, emphasizing the susceptibility of several neuroendocrine systems to the emotional component in different environmental conditions. He reviewed research that showed the pituitary-adrenal cortical system was actually very sensitive to psychological influences. He asserted that there are extensive anatomical linkages, which provide points of contact for neural and psychological influences upon a variety of endocrine systems (Mason, 1968a). He proposed that higher level psychological integrative mechanisms rather than lower level physiological or biochemical mechanisms, as proposed by Selye, acted as the first mediator of the relationship between environmental stimuli and the individual’s response to stress (Mason, 1975). Mason (1975) stated, Of all the known responses of higher organisms, emotional arousal is certainly one of the most ubiquitous or relatively “non-specific” reactions common to a great diversity of situations (p. 25). Selye (1976a, p. 13) seemed to interpret this statement by Mason to be an implicit explanation of the distinction between eustress and distress. Mason also believed that the stress response was complex and could not be adequately represented by lines of research that focused exclusively on one physiological system as Selye had done. Mason (1968a, b) wrote: “different hormones are closely interdependent, often bearing antagonistic, synergistic, additive, or permissive relationships to each other, which suggests that the activity of any given metabolic process at any given moment must be a resultant of the overall balance between cooperating and opposing hormonal influences playing upon it” (p. 571). Mason (1975) noted: We have not found evidence that any single hormone responds to all stimuli in absolutely nonspecific fashion, as implied by Selye’s present definition of “stress” as occurring in response “to any demand.” The picture emerging so far from our study of multihormonal patterns, in fact, is one suggesting that such patterns are organized in a rather specific or selective manner, depending upon the particular stimulus under study, and probably in relation to the complex interdependencies in hormonal actions at the metabolic level (p. 27).

In his review of Mason’s (1975) work, Selye (1975) stood firm on his original conceptualization of stress. He reasserted that he believes the stress syndrome is non-specific in its causation, but conceded that the same stressor can elicit different manifestations in different individuals. Whereas Mason (1975) explained these differences as being due to psychological mechanisms, Selye (1975) did not concur. For Selye (1975) these “conditioning factors” that can selectively enhance or inhibit the stress effect (not the response), are either biological (e.g. age, sex, genetic predisposition) or external (e.g. drugs, diet, treatment with certain hormones). According to Selye, these conditioning factors selectively influence the reactivity of certain organs, resulting in the possibility that the same stressor


283

can elicit different manifestations in different individuals. As such he continued to maintain that eustress is a specialized manifestation of a single stereotyped response as a result of these selective conditioning factors. Nevertheless, “it seems increasingly likely that the response is not so universal as concluded by Selye” (Mason, 1968b, p. 800). Frankenhauser (1979, 1983, 1986) provided additional support for the concept that different psychological processes affect the physiological response pattern in different ways. Through a series of experiments, she and her colleagues consistently found that two components of psychological arousal determined cortisol and catecholamine responses. The psychological state characterized by positive emotions was labeled “effort,” and the psychological state characterized by negative emotions was labeled “distress.” Indicators of effort were variables labeled effort, tenseness, and concentration, while indicators of distress were variables labeled boredom, impatience, tiredness, and lack of interest (Lundberg & Frankenhauser, 1980). Frankenhauser (1979) noted the general resemblance of these two factors and the “cortisol factor” and “catecholamine factor” reported by Ursin, Baade and Levine (1978) in their study of parachute trainees. A graphical representation of Frankenhauser’s (1986) findings is presented in Fig. 5. Effort (positive emotions) and distress (negative emotions) may be experienced either singularly or in combination, and they seem to be differentially associated with catecholamine and cortisol secretion. Effort without distress is a positive, joyous state that results from high job involvement and a high degree of personal control. It is accompanied by increased catacholamine secretion and the suppression of cortisol. Effort with distress is the state typical of the hassles of daily work life, and is accompanied by an increase in both catecholamine and cortisol secretion. Distress without effort is a very negative psychological state that implies feeling helpless or losing control. Increased cortisol secretions generally accompany it, but catecholamines may be elevated also. Elsewhere, Frankenhauser (1991) described these three states as activity paired with positive affect, activity paired with negative affect, and passivity paired with negative affect, respectively. Frankenhauser (1983) asserted that these findings support the notion that psychologically different conditions produce a selective response. “In short, pituitary-adrenal activation was associated with the negative feelings of distress in the low control situation, and sympathetic-adrenal activation was associated with the positive feeling of effort in the high-control situation.” (p. 94, emphasis added). Frankenhauser (1981) emphasized that “neuroendocrine responses to the psychosocial environment are determined by the individual’s cognitive appraisal of the situation and the emotional impact of the stimuli rather than by their objective characteristics” (p. 493). Thus, cognitive appraisal of the situation produces positive and negative emotions, as well as a differential physiological response.

284


Fig. 5. Schematic Representation of Adrenal-Medullary and Adrenal-Cortical Responses to Effort and Distress (Adapted from Frankenhauser, 1986).

Rose’s (1987) longitudinal study of air traffic controllers (ATCs) provides a slightly different picture of how cognitive appraisals affect the stress response. Over a three-year period, the cortisol values of 201 men were measured every twenty minutes for five hours on three or more days and compared to both objective and subjective assessments of workload. While the increases in cortisol for all levels of workload were slight, the men who showed the highest increase in cortisol to increased work reported themselves as more satisfied and were regarded by peers as more competent. These high cortisol responders also showed less frequent illness than those with lower cortisol levels, who for any given level of work tended to have more minor health problems. Rose described the men whose cortisol increased in response to challenging work as engaged rather than stressed. Elsewhere, the happiness derived from engagement in mindful challenge has been termed “flow” (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). In their review of Rose’s study, Ganster and Schaubroeck (1991) described the healthy state of physiological arousal experienced by the engaged workers as eustress. Lovallo (1997) concurred that the effect of a stressor depends heavily on the way the person interprets the situation at hand. He contended that two situations


285

that are equally physically demanding could have different consequences for the individual based on the interpretation of the situation and the accompanying emotions. To illustrate this point, two studies were conducted that called on human volunteers to perform tasks with nearly identical physical requirements but having substantial differences in their psychological components (Lovallo, Pincomb & Wilson, 1986; Lovallo et al., 1985). In one study, young adult men were asked to perform a simple psychomotor task to avoid two adverse stimuli, noise and electric shock (Lovallo et al., 1985). The task was a simple, variable-interval reaction time task in which subjects pressed a response key whenever a red light in front of them came on. The shocks were brief and mild (harmless), yet enough to be unpleasant. The noise was brief and safe, but intense enough to produce a strong degree of startle. From the subjects’ point of view, the task involved anxiety, fear, and uncertainty about the timing and source of an aversive event. The subject also had to maintain continuous attention for the duration of the exercise (15 minutes). The subjects reported the task as being activating (increased concentration, effort, interest, and tenseness), as well as being unpleasant (less control and more impatience and irritation). The cardiovascular patterns of the subjects showed increased systolic and diastolic blood pressure. The subjective and cardiovascular changes were also accompanied by alterations in the neuroendocrine function. Both norepinephrine and cortisol levels increased significantly. Because the subjects were seated in a relaxed position for the entire study, their findings suggest that the rises in norepinephrine and cortisol resulted from responses related to negative emotions and not from elevated energy expenditure. In the second study, subjects were presented with a rewarding, non-aversive version of the same reaction time task (Lovallo et al., 1986). The major difference was that instead of noise or shock, subjects received a $0.50 bonus for each rapid response they could perform. Subjects self-reported that the task was primarily activating and non-aversive. The subjects experienced the same pattern of cardiovascular and norepinephrine increases as with the aversive task; however, the cortisol patterns were different. In this situation, there was no change in cortisol secretion from baseline. The lack of increase in cortisol was attributed to the non-aversive nature of the task. They interpreted these results as showing that activation of attentional and motor response centers in the brain can lead to substantial activation of cardiovascular function, even in the absence of significant muscular activity. Both tasks prompted self-reports suggesting that the subjects were actively engaged in the effort of performing as well as possible regardless of the nature of the incentives. The cardiovascular changes, therefore, seem most closely related to the effortful aspect of the task. In contrast, the pattern of endocrine changes,

286


Fig. 6. Major Steps in the Generation of Physiological Responses Based on Perceptions and Interpretations of Events (Adapted from Lovallo, 1997, p. 82).

especially the cortisol response, appears to be determined by the emotional component of a task. Lovallo (1997) offered a neurophysiological explanation of responses based upon the appraisal of events (see Fig. 6). The purpose of presenting this somewhat complex explanation is to provide further support for the notion that the stress response is complex as opposed to non-specific. Although these mechanisms will not be explained with the same detail presented by Lovallo (1997), the details that illustrate the body’s potential to respond differentially based upon whether a stressor is perceived as positive or negative will be highlighted. Information gathered by our senses is relayed through the thalamus, which acts as the initial gathering point for most incoming information. Raw sensory information is elaborated with stored information related to that sensory modality. In the prefrontal cortex, meaning or significance is attached to the information


287

we receive. At this point, information from the various senses is integrated into a unified whole to provide an accurate picture of the external environment. Events receive meaning and significance based upon how they are appraised. The frontal cortex is at the beginning of the chain of events resulting in normal emotional responses and perhaps leading to physiological stress responses. The next step involves the physiological formulation of emotions. Emotions formed in response to environmental events arises from a transaction between the prefrontal areas and the hippocampus and amygdala located in the temporal lobe of the brain. The hippocampus is involved in memory storage and in associating new information with prior experience. The amygdala enables us to have emotions in connection with present knowledge and to modify our actions based on those emotions and knowledge of the past. The amygdala is important for matching environmental appraisals with negative emotions such as disgust, fear, or anger. The amygdala then sends signals both to the hypothalamus and to the brainstem. The amygdala, therefore, is the focal point of transition between sensory input and appraisals of our environment on the one hand and our formulation of autonomic and endocrine responses on the other. The brainstem response subsystem is important in organizing such things as cardiovascular reflexes and skeletal motor functions. Additionally, the brainstem feedback system serves to coordinate the level of arousal and behavioral state of the entire central nervous system in response to the commands of the amygdala or other lymbic systems. These subsystems coordinate the entire system whether the situation appraised calls for fight-flight, approach, avoidance, or sleep. The hypothalamic area controlling emotional responses (HACER) coordinates the autonomic nervous system and endocrine aspect of the stress response. The HACER causes the pituitary to secrete corticotropin releasing factor (CRF). CRF then causes secretion of ␤ endorphin and adrenocorticotropin (ACTH). ACTH in turn causes the adrenal cortex to secrete cortisol. Cortisol is one of the most commonly studied physiological indicators of distress. ␤ endorphins may serve as transmitters or modulators in neuronal systems for the mediation of satisfaction or reward (Stein & Belluzzi, 1978). They have been associated with pleasurable or euphoric states, such as the “runner’s high.” As such, ␤ endorphins may be a chemical indicator of eustress. Lovallo (1997) presented two explanations for how appraisals and their associated emotions come to differ among persons. The first explanation arises from the increasing awareness that positive and negative emotions are served by different subsystems in the frontal and temporal lobes of the brain. Gray (1987, 1991) proposed two distinct frontal lobe systems responsible for the interpretation of incoming events and formulation of responses. One is associated with the

288


septal area of the limbic system, often referred to as the pleasure center of the brain, which has connections to and from the amygdala and hippocampus. He posited that this pleasure center might assist in associating material in working memory with a positive or negative emotional valence. The second he termed the behavioral inhibition (withdrawal) system, which he believes plays a central role in anxiety. This system seems to organize autonomic and behavioral responses to stimuli appraised as aversive. Lane et al. (1997) provided support for this view in a study that confirmed that there are both common and unique components of the neural networks mediating pleasant and unpleasant emotion in healthy women. This study demonstrated physiologically that positive and negative emotions are separate and not merely opposite ends of a single dimension (Spiegel, 1999). The second explanation for individual differences in appraisal is the notion that the frontal lobes may be asymmetric for the generation of emotions and that individuals may differ in the degree to which they characteristically activate structures on one side or the other. Gray (1987, 1991) also suggested a behavioral approach system that responds to appetitive stimulation and is linked to positive emotions and motivates exploration and desirous behavior. Cacioppo and Berntson (1994) suggested that Gray’s approach system originates primarily in the left hemisphere of the brain and that the withdrawal system originates primarily in the right hemisphere. As such, the right hemisphere of the brain differentially activates negative emotions associated with adverse events. The behavioral approach and inhibition systems can motivate behaviors and physiological responses in conjunction with appraisal of events and their associated positive and negative emotions. The research presented in this section provided evidence that the stress response is more complex and less specific than Selye (1976a) originally hypothesized. In general, researchers consistently found at least two differential physiological response patterns, which they explained resulted from a cognitive appraisal of the positive and negative aspects of a situation. The end of this section provided an explanation of the physiological mechanisms underlying the psychological process of appraisal. Although the concept of eustress was rarely dealt with explicitly in either of the preceding sections, the research made it clear that a definition of eustress as a good or positive stress effect is subject to revision. The research evidence also supports the possibility of describing the complex stress response as qualitatively in terms of eustress (positive) and distress (negative), as well as providing a solid explanation of how the eustress response and distress response result from cognitive appraisal of the stressor. The following section presents the current state of the concept of eustress.


289

CURRENT STATE OF THE CONCEPT OF EUSTRESS The concept of eustress remains underdeveloped. Although the opportunity to improve the current notion of eustress is evident, few efforts have been made to do so. There are a few empirical studies of bungee jumpers, rock climbers, and outdoor adventure participants that explicitly attempt to incorporate the concept of eustress (Bunting, Little, Tolson & Jessup, 1986; Henning, Laschefski & Opper, 1994; Priest, 1992). While it is encouraging to see empirical studies incorporate the term eustress, the conceptual development of eustress is limited. Although eustress has not been studied empirically in occupational health psychology, one important paper provided a theoretical review of the eustress that represents an advancement of the concept (Edwards & Cooper, 1988). This section will briefly review empirical findings from several studies outside of the field of occupational psychology, as well as the theoretical advancement within the field. This section will conclude with the presentation of the Holistic Stress Model. One empirical study performed a factor analysis of the Dimensions of an Adventure Experience (DAE) survey on the responses of first and second year students engaged in a ropes course program (Priest, 1992). The DAE is a semantic differential of twenty-four bipolar adjectives concerned with perceptual changes in risk and competence that may occur from participating in adventure experiences. Adventures are defined as having uncertain outcomes, being a state of mind, involving intrinsic motivation, and a perception of free choice. Results showed that the DAE scale measuring risk formed three factors, which were labeled eustress, distress, and fear. The adjectives from the DAE that formed the eustress factor were excitement, challenge, stimulation, tension, and positivity; for distress uncertainty, threat, and difficulty; and for fear potential harm, exposure, danger, and hazard. The incremental value added by this study is that eustress was associated with positive states of mind and distress was associated with negative states of mind. Another study of 12 novice bungee jumpers investigated both emotional and physiological changes induced by this acute psychological stressor (Henning, Laschefski & Opper, 1994). They found that subjective ratings of anxiety increased prior to the jump and dropped significantly after the jump. Cortisol also increased after the jump and declined to baseline within the next hour. In contrast, self-report ratings of positive feelings (well-being, wakefulness, and euphoria) increased significantly after performing the jump and remained highly elevated for the next thirty minutes, while ratings of anxiety decreased. An increase of more than 200% in ␤-endorphin was observed after the jump. After the jump, positive feelings were significantly correlated with ␤-endorphin levels but not with cortisol levels. The researchers termed the positive feelings and elevated ␤-endorphin levels eustress.

290


Bunting et al. (1986) used the term eustress liberally, sometimes associating it with the stressor and other times associating it with the stress response. They studied twelve male students engaged in a series of three-hour rock climbing/rappelling session, which they defined as the eustress treatment. This is problematic because the stressor was physical as well as psychological, and the psychological perception of the stressor was not assessed. They administered the Spielberger Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), and also measured epinephrine, norepinephrine, and heart rate responses before and after two adventure sessions. Results showed that STAI did not correlate with changes in any of the physiological measures. They did find that perceived anxiety as measured by the STAI dropped during the adventure sessions, which they attributed “to the eustress experienced during these activities, rather than the subjects being aware of the unpleasant feelings that are normally associated with anxiety” (p. 19). They suggested that eustress is a positive response, operationalized as essentially the absence of distress. Hoffman-Goetz (1994) examined the relationship between exercise, as a natural way to enhance immunity, and cancer, focusing specifically on tumor metastasis. Most previous studies of exercise focused on its role as simply a way to balance energy by increasing energy expenditure. Hoffman-Goetz proposed that it is important to assess whether exercise is acting to produce distress or eustress, because the hormonal and immunological implications of distress and eustress are quite different. She noted that distress produces an increase in glucocorticoid hormones, while eustress produces more blunted glucocorticoid responses. Exercise, by producing a eustress response, may produce an increase in natural immune response (i.e. production of natural killer (NK) cells and macrophages), thereby limiting tumor metastasis. She also suggested that it is critical to include psychological perceptions in the studies in order to understand whether exercise produces a eustress or a distress state. Berk et al. (2001) conducted a series of five studies of healthy individuals to determine the efficacy of mirthful laughter as a modulator of neuroimmune parameters. Subjects viewed a humor video for one hour, and blood samples were taken 10 minutes prior to, 30 minutes into, 30 minutes after, and 12 hours after, the viewing of the video. Increases were found in natural killer cell activity, immunoglobulins G, A, and M, activated T cells, and helper T cells, among a host of other neuroimmune parameters. The modulation effects of many of the neuroimmune parameters lasted 12 hours after the video. The researchers concluded that the humor-associated eustress of laughter may provide beneficial effects on health and wellness. These studies highlight the paucity of empirical research that incorporates the concept of eustress. None of the studies attempted to assess eustress directly, yet


291

all of the studies labeled as eustress positive aspects of the psychological response in subjects. Also, none of the studies were grounded in occupational psychology. As such, the opportunity exists to develop the theory and measurement of eustress at work. Edwards and Cooper (1988) pointed out that while much research has focused on the impacts of negative psychological states, relatively little research has examined the effects of positive psychological states. They attributed this to the inadequate theoretical and methodological development of positive psychological states and their impact on important outcomes such as health. They associated eustress with positive psychological states and distress with negative psychological states. They concurred with the evidence that positive assessment of stressors produces a differential physiological response. They also suggested that positive and negative psychological states may represent two distinct constructs, which would require separate indices for their measurement. The basis for this assumption is the research into self-reported mood, which suggests that measures of positive and negative affect are often uncorrelated (Diener & Emmons, 1984; Watson & Tellegen, 1985). Watson, Pennebaker and Folger (1987) suggested a two-factor model of stress (negative feelings) and satisfaction (positive feelings) based upon similar research of mood states. Accordingly, Edwards and Cooper (1988) suggested that the measurement of eustress could involve the assessment of positive psychological states. Positive psychological states would include but not be limited to satisfaction, happiness, and positive affect. They also suggested that it is imperative to establish the presence of the positive psychological states, rather than merely establishing the absence of negative psychological states. Examples of negative psychological states are more numerous and include but are not limited to anxiety, hostility, and negative affect. Folkman (1997) operationalized positive psychological states of mind with the six-item Positive States of Mind (PSOM) scale developed by Horowitz et al. (1988). The questions on this scale represent positive emotions by asking respondents to how much trouble they have, if any, in having several states of mind (e.g. “Feeling able to attend to a task you want or need to do, without many distractions from within yourself,” “Feeling of being able to stay at work until a task is finished, do something new to solve a problem or express yourself creatively”). Negative states of mind were operationalized a depressive symptomatology as assessed with the 20-item Centers for Epidemiological Studies – Depression measure (CES-D) (Radloff, 1977). She also assessed positive and negative affect in her study. She found that both positive and negative psychological states occurred as a result of caregiving and bereavement of terminally ill patients. Folkman (1997) theoretically framed her study as one of distress and did not associate positive psychological states with eustress; consequently, the concept of

292


eustress was not advanced theoretically in her study. Her study is important but could be extended by expanding the operationalization of psychological states to include a multivariate assessment of work attitudes and not just emotions, as well as applying a theoretic framework that associates positive psychological states with eustress and negative states with distress. While Edwards and Cooper (1988) suggested that eustress cannot be operationalized as simply the absence of distress, this remains a question that requires empirical justification. Accordingly, this review of the literature has reached a stage where the formal definitions of eustress and distress can be reintroduced and refined, the research questions can be reiterated, and the formal research model can be presented.

THE HOLISTIC STRESS MODEL This review of the literature has provided support for the proposed definitions for eustress and distress presented in the introduction. Recall that eustress was defined as a positive response and distress as a negative response, both resulting from the individual’s evaluation of a stressor. We now propose a model that to advance our understanding of eustress by guiding future research. The first objective is to show that for any given stressor, an individual can have both positive and negative responses that are separate and distinct. The second objective, after establishing the presence of separate responses, is to examine the differential effects of the responses on positive outcome variables, such as individual health and well-being. Manifestations of the positive/negative response could be physiological, psychological, or behavioral. A full model of eustress and distress should incorporate indicators of all of these manifestations, as well as a broad range of stressors, important outcome variables in addition to health (e.g. performance), and moderators of the response and the effects of the response. Such a model is beyond the scope of this research. Consistent with Edwards and Cooper (1988), our research will be limited to psychological states as manifestations of eustress and distress, and for logistical reasons will examine a single stressor and a single outcome variable. Accordingly, the operational definitions of eustress and distress proposed for our study are as follows: Eustress. A positive psychological response to a stressor, as indicated by the presence of positive psychological states. Distress. A negative psychological response to a stressor, as indicated by the presence of negative psychological states.


293

Fig. 7. The Holistic Stress Model.

The Holistic Stress Model is now presented in Fig. 7. Eustress and distress are modeled as second order latent variables, indicated by established positive and negative psychological states, themselves latent variables. In the next section of the chapter, we will elaborate upon the model and present evidence from a study of nurses that provides support for the model, and the holistic approach to studying stress that incorporates eustress.

PRELIMINARY EVIDENCE: A STUDY OF HOSPITAL NURSES Our first attempt to validate what we believe is a more holistic approach to stress was a cross-sectional field study of 158 hospital nurses (Simmons, 2000). Our results were mixed. We were able to identify four positive psychological states that made up a second-order factor that we labeled eustress, and eustress

294


performed as hypothesized with respect to our stressor and outcome variable. We were not, however, successful in identifying a second-order factor for distress; consequently, we used a single first-order measure of distress as a proxy in the model. The following section will describe our study in detail.

Stressor: Interpersonal Trust Quick et al. (1997) identified four major categories of stressors: physical stressors, task demands, role demands, and interpersonal demands. An interpersonal demand was chosen for this study, interpersonal trust, which has not previously been identified and studied as an interpersonal stressor. Interpersonal trust is defined as the willingness of a party to be vulnerable to the actions of another party (Mayer et al., 1995, p. 712). This is consistent with the description of interpersonal stressors at work as “concerned with the demands of the normal course of social, personal, and working relationships in the organization” (Quick et al., 1997, p. 34). Interpersonal stressors come from the demand of relationships at work, and interpersonal trust is established in the context of relationships. The psychological state of trust as a willingness to be vulnerable forms in the trustor is a result of the appraisal of trustworthiness in the trustee. This study focused on the individual’s trust in their supervisor. Trust in this relationship is salient because supervisors are in a unique position to be a source of stress for their employees (Quick et al., 1997). While this study did not directly assess cognitive appraisal, the psychological state trust represents a subjective stressor that was formed through appraisal. In appraisal, “the person evaluates whether her or she has anything at stake in this encounter” (Folkman et al., 1986). Using this definition of trust as a stressor is entirely consistent with cognitive appraisal’s relational approach to stress, where stress “cannot be defined as an environmental agent but represents a particular kind of relationship between a stimulus and a vulnerable person” (Lazarus & Folkman, 1986, p. 70). In fact, interpersonal trust is listed as one potential causal antecedent in illustrations of the system variables for the stress rubric (Lazarus, Delongis, Folkman & Gruen, 1985; Lazarus & Folkman, 1986). Intuitively, a positive relationship between trust and eustress, and a negative relationship between trust and distress should be expected. Trust increases as the trustor perceives that the trustee increasingly exhibits ability, benevolence, and integrity. The increased willingness to be vulnerable reflects the positive assessment of the trustee, and should be accompanied by both an increase in eustress and a decrease in distress. Lack of trust reflects a negative appraisal of


295

the relationship with the trustee, and should be accompanied by both a decrease in eustress and an increase in distress. A study of the relationship between trustworthiness and breach of the psychological contract provides some confirmation of the positive and negative influences of trust (Robinson, 1996). Robinson (1996) found that employees with a low initial assessment of the employer’s trustworthiness experienced a greater decline in this perception following a breach of the psychological contract than did employees with a high initial assessment of their employer’s trustworthiness. She concluded that high trustworthiness leads people to experience other aspects of the relationship in a positive light, while low trustworthiness leads individuals to interpret other events in the relationship in the most unfavorable light and thus confirm their prior appraisal. The intuitive nature of the relationship between the stressor trust in the supervisor and eustress/distress is credible and supported by some evidence. Accordingly, these relationships are as follows: H1. There is a positive relationship between the stressor trust in the supervisor and eustress. H2. There is a negative relationship between the stressor trust in the supervisor and distress.

Perception of Health Not all aspects of the stress process reflect actual response to the stressor. Some responses are clearly linked to the stressor, and therefore constitute true responses. In this model, eustress and distress are the true responses directly linked to the stressor interpersonal trust. Other states associated with stress, such as well-being, illness, or fatigue, are more appropriately viewed as products or effects of the stress response (Baum & Singer, 1987). Lazarus and Folkman (1986, see Fig. 2, p. 73) provided an illustration of the variables for the stress rubric in which interpersonal trust is a causal antecedent, affect (positive/negative response) is an immediate effect, and health and well-being are a long-term effects. Accordingly, an individual’s perception of health was selected as an appropriate outcome variable of the stress response for this study. The fact that distress is not healthy is well established. “Heart attack, stroke, cancer, peptic ulcer, asthma, diabetes, hypertension, headache, back pain, and arthritis are among the many diseases and symptoms that have been found to be caused or worsened by stressful events” (Quick et al., 1997, p. 77). Ganster and Schaubroeck (1991) reviewed the literature on work stress and found that

296


although there is not convincing evidence that stressors associated with the job cause health effects, the indirect evidence strongly suggests a work stress effect. Recent evidence has confirmed that job strain (distress) is associated with increased report of medical symptoms and health damaging behavior in men (Weidner, Boughal, Connor, Peiper & Mendell, 1997). There was no evidence to suggest that distress was associated with an improvement in health. Not surprisingly, there is less evidence concerning the relationship between eustress and health. Edwards and Cooper (1988) speculated that eustress might improve health directly through physiological changes or indirectly by reducing existing distress. They reviewed findings from a variety of sources and found that the bulk of the evidence suggests a direct effect of eustress on health. They noted that this evidence is merely suggestive rather than conclusive, and that only one study was able to demonstrate that eustress is associated with an improvement in physiological functioning rather than just a reduction in damage. There was no evidence to suggest that eustress was associated with a deterioration in health. Accordingly, the relationships between eustress and distress and health are as follows: H3. There is a positive relationship between eustress and an individual’s perception of health. H4. There is a negative relationship between distress and an individual’s perception of health. A final hypothesis is proposed in order to satisfy the rigor of the approach to modeling relationships between constructs employed in this study. Kelloway (1998) advises researches using structural equation models to theoretically develop every relationship in the model, including those thought to be zero. This satisfies James, Muliak and Brett’s (1982) condition number 10, which requires that unestimated parameters are confirmed to be zero. The one possible remaining relationship in this model would be a direct relationship between the stressor trust and the outcome variable health. In the research on stress and health, the relationship between stressors and long-term health outcomes is always represented as being fully mediated by the stress response. There is no theoretical support suggesting that the relationship between a stressor and a long-term health outcome is only partially mediated by the stress response. Accordingly, the relationship between trust in the supervisor and perception of health is as follows: H5. There is no direct relationship between the stressor trust in the supervisor and an individual’s perception of health after accounting for eustress and distress.


297

Positive Psychological States: Indicators of Eustress Eustress reflects the extent to which cognitive appraisal of a situation or event is seen to either benefit an individual or enhance their well being. The indicators of eustress should be positive psychological states, for example attitudes or emotions. Stable dispositional variables are not acceptable indicators of eustress, which must be subject to change according to changes in cognitive appraisal of stressors. The constructs selected for this study were positive affect (PA), hope, meaningfulness, and manageability, because they were deemed most appropriate to the purposes of this study. Other items could also be indicators of eustress (e.g. satisfaction, esteem, happiness), but these were more general and less specific to the work setting and therefore less appropriate to the study. Hope Hope has been identified as a positive emotion reflecting a degree of expected benefit resulting from an evaluation of a particular situation (Lazarus, 1993; Smith et al., 1993). Hope was defined as a cognitive set that is based on a sense of successful goal directed determination and planning to meet goals (Snyder et al., 1996). The state hope scale thus provides a snapshot of a person’s goal-directed thinking. All six items of this new scale were retained for use in this study. This represents the first use of this measure in occupational psychology. Meaningfulness and Manageability These two constructs are part of a new scale developed by a nurse to measure situational sense of coherence (Artinian, 1997). Sense of coherence (SOC) was a term developed to denote factors that promote a healthy response to stressful situations (Antonovsky, 1987). It has traditionally been measured as a trait variable, but was adapted by Artinian (1997) as a situational or state measure. Two of three subscales are included in this study. Meaningfulness is the extent to which one feels that life makes sense emotionally, that problems and demands are worth investing energy in, are worthy of commitment and engagement, and are challenges that are welcome. Manageability is the extent to which one perceives that resources are at one’s disposal that are adequate to meet the demands posed by the situation. Both meaningfulness and manageability are measured with seven point scales and contain four and five items respectively. Positive Affect Positive affect (PA) is a state of pleasurable engagement and reflects the extent to which a person feels enthusiastic, active and alert (Watson, Clark & Tellegen, 1988). PA can be measured as a state or trait, with state PA capturing how one feels

298


at given points in time, whereas the trait represents stable individual differences in the level of affect generally experienced (George & Brief, 1992; Watson & Pennebaker, 1989). State and trait PA are both conceptually and empirically distinct, and state PA is also a separate factor from negative affect (George & Brief, 1992). The ten items from the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) are included in this study to measure state PA (Watson et al., 1988).

Negative Psychological States: Indicators of Distress In contrast to eustress, distress reflects the degree to which cognitive appraisal of a situation or event identifies the possibility for undesirable or harmful consequences to result. The indicators of distress are negative psychological states. The state measures employed in this study as indictors of distress are common in stress research. It was surprisingly difficult to identify measures of distress that were non-proprietary. The indicators selected for this study were negative affect (NA), job alienation, anger/hostility, and anxiety. As with the indicators of eustress, this set is not exhaustive of the types of possible indicators of distress. Negative Affect (NA) In contrast to PA, NA is a general dimension of subjective distress and unpleasurable engagement (Watson et al., 1988). NA is a common variable in studies not just as an indicator of distress, but also because of the possibility that NA may affect the measurement of and substantive relationships between stressors and strains in general (Hurrell, Nelson & Simmons, 1988). State NA was measured with the ten items from the PANAS scale (Watson et al., 1988). Alienation Job alienation reflects an individual’s separation from their job, insofar as the job is perceived to lack the potential for satisfying one’s salient needs and expectations of the job (Kanungo, 1982). Job alienation is a specific belief about the present job, in contrast to work alienation, which refers to a general belief about work. Job alienation is a cognitive belief that is descriptive of a worker’s relations to their present jobs and is determined by stimuli in their present work environment. The separation from the job reflected in job alienation is a psychological state indicative of a degree of negative response to stimuli in the work environment. Alienation was measured with a two item graphic scale (Kanungo, 1982). While a two-item scale should be expected to be less reliable, this scale met with significant approval from hospital personnel from the research sites. They found that the graphical items provided some relief from the tediousness of a lengthy survey.


299

Anxiety Anxiety is a transitory state that reflects feelings of danger or threat of loss as a result of cognitive appraisal. Beck et al. (1987) developed 12 items for an anxiety subscale as part of their Cognition Checklist (CCL). Only six of the items were retained for use in this study in an attempt to address concerns about the length of the survey. The items retained were ones with the greatest factor loadings from the original subscale. Anger/Hostility Anger and hostility is a subscale of the original Symptom Distress Checklist (SCL) that was developed to assess self-reported neurotic symptoms. Three items from the four-item subscale were retained for this study. The item “I have impulses to beat, injure, or hurt someone,” was determined inappropriate for a study of nurses. The items are: (1) I feel critical of others; (2) I feel easily annoyed or irritated; and (3) I have temper outbursts I could not control.

Interpersonal Stressor: Trust Trust in the supervisor was measured with Mayer and Davis’ (1999) four-item trust scale. The scale was adjusted to reflect the relationship with the supervisor and the hospital context. The item “I would be comfortable giving top management (supervisor) a task or problem which was critical to me, even if I could not monitor their actions,” was identified as confusing by hospital personnel and graduate students that reviewed the survey. The item was changed to read, “I am comfortable discussing with my supervisor concerns I have about my ability to do my job.” In an attempt to improve the scale’s marginal reliability (0.60), two items were added to the scale. These items were intended to reflect the willingness to be vulnerable when discussing the working relationship and suggestions for workplace improvements with the supervisor. Both of these issues would be reflective of a degree of trust between the nurse and the supervisor.

Outcome Variable: Perception of Health An individual’s current perception of their health was measured with four items from a ten-item subscale of the Health Perceptions Questionnaire (Ware, Davies-Avery & Donald, 1978). They report that general health ratings are valid measures of health status as they significantly correlated with other a variety of other health measures (e.g. physician’s assessment). Others have used a

300


single item version of this scale with nurses (How would you rate your overall health at the present time?) and found it acceptable (Pender, Walker, Sechrist & Frank-Stromborg, 1990). Nurses are knowledgeable of health issues and tend to see their physicians more often, which enhances the validity of health perception. All ten items were included in initial versions of the survey, but a POC found the redundancy of the items annoying and asked for the scale to be shortened. The four most representative items were retained.

Control Variables The most common causes of stress among nurses are included as control variables. Gray-Toft and Anderson (1981b) developed a 34 item nursing stress scale to measure death and dying, conflict with physicians, lack of support, conflict with other nurses, and work load. Workload and death and dying were found to be the most significant sources of stress (Gray-Toft & Anderson, 1981a). Three items from the death and dying subscale and four items from the workload subscale that had the best factor loadings (greater than 0.59) were included in this study. Role ambiguity has also been found to be a significant source of stress for nurses (Revicki & May, 1989). Conversations with a hospital POC confirmed that confusion over expectations is a source of stress for nurses. Following Schaubroeck, Ganster, Sime and Ditman (1993), items from Rizzo, House and Lirtzman (1970) were used to measure role ambiguity. A pilot study was conducted for the purpose of assessing the psychometric properties of the research instrument. The sample size for the pilot study was 102 hospital nurses from two separate hospitals not included in the main study. All of the scales used in the survey were previously established and found to have acceptable psychometric properties, but some of the scales were altered for the purpose of this study. Most of the changes involved incorporating the hospital as the research setting. As such, the rigorous pretest procedures required for new scale development were not necessary and a single pretest was deemed sufficient. All of the scales performed adequately in the pretest, with coefficient alphas ranging from 0.73 to 0.92.

Data Collection Surveys were administered to a total of 450 RNs and LPNs in two separate hospitals. The response rates for each of the hospitals were 47% (47 out of 100) and 32% (111 out of 350), with an overall response rate of 35% (158 out


301

of 450). Most of the respondents were female (92%) registered nurses (91%). Exactly half of the nurses practiced in intensive/critical care areas, while the other 50% practiced in other areas of the hospital. A total of 79% of respondents had practiced nursing for at least six years, and 39% had more than 15 years of nursing experience. Eight percent reported working 51 or more hours per week, 7% less than 20 hours per week, 44% between 31 to 40 hours per week, and 41% reported working between 41 to 50 hours per week.

Results LISREL 8.30 was used to analyze a series of models to determine the factor structure of the four positive and four negative psychological states used as indicators of eustress and distress. A description of the models as well as the fit statistics and results of the ␹2 difference model comparison test are presented in Table 1. The first model was the measurement model for the eight latent variables of positive and negative psychological states and their forty-six manifest indicators. All of the indicators loaded positively and significantly on their intended latent variables. Examination of both the RMSEA and ECVI statistics indicate that the model represented a good fit to the data. The CFI is relatively low at 0.74, but that was not unexpected with such a complex model. The correlations among the eight latent variables are presented in Table 2. Examination of the correlations shows that the positive and negative psychological states related to each other as expected, with the exception of job alienation, which did not perform at all as expected except for its relationship with PA. Part of the problem with job alienation may be that it was the only variable in the study with only two indicators, which would tend to reduce its reliability. The four positive indicators “hung together” relatively well, while the four negative indicators did not “hang together” as well. The second model run was the hypothesized second-order factor structure of eustress and distress. The fit indices for this model were similar to the first model and indicated a good fit to the data. Comparing the ␹2 of model 2 to the ␹2 of model 1 (T = 0.968) also indicated very good model fit. The factor loadings of the latent variable indicators on their hypothesized second-order variables are presented in Table 2 as well. As hypothesized, two second-order factors were confirmed, with most of the indicators loading significant and in the expected direction. Accordingly, the two second-order factors could be labeled eustress and distress. The one exception to indicator performance was job alienation, which did not load significantly on the second-order factor distress. Due to its poor performance, job alienation was dropped as an indicator in all

302

Table 1. Results of the Second Order CFA. Description

1 2 3 4 5

Measurement model with 8 latent variables Two correlated higher-order factors with 8 latent variable indicators Measurement model with 7 latent variables Two correlated higher-order factors with 7 latent variable indicators Unidimensional higher-order factor with 7 latent variable indicators

1 2 3 4 5 ∗p

␹2

df

1710.35 1766.34 1589.63 1621.73 1622.06

961 982 881 894 895

RMSEA (90% CI) 0.076* 0.078* 0.077* 0.078* 0.078*

(0.07, 0.081) (0.072, 0.083) (0.072, 0.083) (0.073, 0.084) (0.073, 0.084)

ECVI (90% CI)

CFI

13.16 (12.41, 13.95) 13.44 (12.67, 14.25) 12.24 (11.52, 13.01) 12.42 (11.69, 13.21) 12.39 (11.65, 13.17)

0.74 0.73 0.75 0.74 0.74

T

Compare

Significant Difference?

Favor

5 to 4

No**

5

0.968 0.980 0.980

< 0.05 (test of close fit – RMSEA < 0.05). ␹2 difference between these two models is 0.33, with 3.84 representing a significant difference of p < 0.05.

∗∗ The


Model

Factor Loadings (Standardized) 1 1. Meaningfulness 2. Manageability 3. Hope 4. PA 5. NA 6. Anger/Hostility 7. Anxiety 8. Job alienation

0.92* 0.76* 0.57* −0.34* −0.50* −0.34* −0.02

2

0.66* 0.45* −0.43* −0.51* −0.31* −0.02

3

0.45* −0.32* −0.21* −0.32* −0.10

4

0.08 −0.31* −0.23* −0.34*

5

0.22* 0.26* −0.04

6

0.10 −0.03

7

Model 2

Model 3

Model 4

1.02* 0.92* 0.74* 0.55* 0.41* 0.49* 0.39*

1.02* 0.92* 0.74* 0.55* −0.37* −0.46* −0.36*

−0.05

0.94* 0.94* 0.75* 0.55* 0.42* 0.49* 0.40* −0.05


Table 2. Second-Order CFA Correlations Among Latent Variables and Factor Loadings on Hypothesized Second-Order Factors.

Notes: The correlations were obtained from the PHI matrix in model 1, and the factor loadings of the latent variables indicators on their hypothesized second-order factor were obtained from the standardized GAMA matrix in models 2–4. ∗ p < 0.05.

303

304


subsequent analyses. Finally, examination of the PHI matrix indicated a significant correlation between the two second-order factors (−0.91), which suggested that a unidimensional second-order factor might fit the data better. It must be noted at this point that the measurement model fit the data better than the model with higher-order factors. This was expected because even when a higher-order model is able to theoretically explain effectively the factor covariations, the empirical goodness-of-fit of the higher-order model can never be better than the corresponding first-order measurement model (Marsh & Hocevar, 1985). Because the purpose of the study was to investigate the stress response as a second-order factor, the higher-order model was favored over the measurement model. The third model represented a new measurement model with job alienation removed and seven latent variables remaining. This model was necessary to allow for computation of the T statistic. This index, called the target coefficient (T), is the ratio of the chi-square of the first-order model to the chi-square of the more restrictive higher-order model. The idea is that the basic first-order model provides a target or optimum fit for the higher-order model because the fit of the higher-order model will never be better than the first-order measurement model. The target coefficient has an upper limit of 1, which would be possible if the relations among the first-order factors could be totally accounted for in terms of the higher-order factors. This index has the advantage of separating the lack of fit due to the second-order structure from lack of fit in the definition of the first-order factors. One limitation of this index is that T will generally be higher as the number of parameters in the higher-order model increases. Although the distributional properties of T are unknown, the highest T obtained by Marsh and Hocevar (1985) was.95 in a model with 1379 degrees of freedom. A high of T = 0.93 was obtained in a study with a model that contained two correlated higher-order factors (Avolio, Bass & Jung, 1999), and a high of T = 0.89 in a study with three higher-order factors (Farmer, Maslyn, Fedor & Goodman, 1997). All of the indicators loaded positively and significantly on their intended latent variables. Examination of both the RMSEA and ECVI statistics indicated that the third model represented a good fit to the data. The fourth model represented the hypothesized second-order factor structure (two factors) with the elimination of job alienation as an indicator of distress. Examination of the fit statistics and factor loadings for this model again supported the hypothesized two-factor structure of eustress and distress. Comparing the ␹2 of model 4 to the ␹2 of model 3 produced a T = 0.980, another indication of good fit. Examination of the PHI matrix revealed that eustress and distress remained significantly correlated (−0.92); consequently, a test of a unidimensional second-order factor structure was warranted.


305

The fifth model represented a unidimensional second-order factor with all seven positive and negative latent variables as indicators. For this model, RMSEA, CFI, and T remained the same, while ECVI was slightly worse. Because models 4 and 5 were nested, a ␹2 difference test was performed as a basis for comparison. This test revealed a ␹2 difference of 0.33, which is non-significant (3.84 at p < 0.05 with 1 degree of freedom). Because there was no significant difference between the models, the more parsimonious unidimensional second-order factor model (more degrees of freedom) was favored. Further inspection of this single second-order factor showed that not surprisingly, the positive indicators loaded positively and the negative indicators changed direction and loaded negatively on this factor. The factor loadings of the positive indicators were also stronger than the factor loadings of the negative indicators. A reasonable conclusion is that this factor behaved as a positive factor because of the strength of the positive indicators relative to the negative indicators. In support of this conclusion, if the positive indicators were removed from the model one at a time, the factor loadings on both the positive and negative indicators changed direction when only one (any one) positive factor was left with the three negative indicators; consequently, the labeling of this single second-order factor was problematic. Because of the presence of the negative states as indicators, it is inconsistent with the proposed theory to label this factor eustress. A neutral labeling for this new factor (e.g. stress response) was not supported by the proposed theory, and the performance of this factor in any subsequent structural analyses would be difficult to interpret. Accordingly, this single second-order factor with both positive and negative indicators was not subjected to any further analysis. One alternative at this point was to abandon the investigation of second-order factors of the stress response and to consider the seven latent variable indicators at the first-order level. This was undesirable for two reasons. First, the objective of obtaining parsimony in order to bring the number of estimated parameters in the model in line with the sample size would not be accomplished. Second, and most importantly, because the objective of this study was not to investigate these specific indicators, any analyses would not be guided by the proposed theory and therefore would be essentially exploratory. Since the second-order CFA failed to support two distinct second-order factors of eustress and distress, but instead favored a single second-order factor that behaved positive due to the relatively poor performance of the negative indicators, a reasonable compromise at this point was to simplify this second-order factor. If the negative indicators were removed from this factor, leaving only positive indicators, this factor could be interpreted, consistent with theory, as eustress.

306


Yet to remain consistent with Edwards and Cooper’s (1988) recommendation that eustress should not be considered in isolation of distress, at least one first-order level indicator of distress must be retained for the structural analyses. Because NA has ten manifest indicators, if it was selected as this single indicator of distress the number of estimated parameters in the structural model would still exceed the sample size. If, however, either anxiety (six indicators) or anger (three indicators) were selected to represent distress, then the number of estimated parameters would be less than the sample size. Anger was selected because it had the smallest number of indicators. Although the decision to select anger instead of either anxiety or NA as a proxy for distress was a practical one, the selection of anger as a proxy remains consistent with the theoretical foundations of the model. Lazarus (1999) considers anger one of the core “nasty” emotions. Because high levels of experienced anger have been found to interfere with interpersonal relationships (Spielberger, 1991) and to be strongly related to self-reported health behaviors (Martin, Wan, David, Wegner, Olson & Watson, 1999), the variable anger may have particular efficacy in a model that incorporates interpersonal trust and perceptions of health. A revised model with anger acted as a proxy for, rather than an indicator of, distress was subjected to structural analysis. This measurement model had 145 estimated parameters, thereby stabilizing the parameter estimates relative to sample size.

Structural Analyses A first-order CFA was conducted with the ten first-order latent variables of the revised model and their forty-four manifest indicators. All of the indicators loaded positively and significantly on their intended latent variables. Examination of both the RMSEA (0.058) and ECVI (12.87) statistics indicated that the model represented a good fit to the data. The CFI was again relatively low at 0.80, but that continued to be expected with such a complex model. As a basis for calculation of T, ␹2 = 1808.77 with 1130 degrees of freedom. The correlations of the ten latent variables, taken from the PHI matrix, are presented in Table 3. The four latent variables indicators of eustress continued to “hang together” well. The strongest correlation occurred between the variables meaningfulness and manageability (0.90), and the next highest correlation was between meaningfulness and hope (0.76); consequently, multicollinearity concerns were not warranted. The strongest correlation with the outcome variable health occurred with the variable hope (0.52), and the stressor of interest trust was most strongly correlated with manageability (0.47). Two other stressors also found their

1 1. Health 2. Trust 3. Hope 4. PA 5. Meaningfulness 6. Manageability 7. Anger 8. Workload 9. Death 10. Role ambiguity a Correlations b Correlations ∗p

0.07 0.52* 0.20* 0.41* 0.34* −0.06 0.03 0.09 −0.28*

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Eustressb 0.54* 0.60*

0.23* 0.24* 0.33* 0.47* −0.12 −0.08 0.13 −0.26*

0.45* 0.76* 0.65* −0.21* −0.09 0.31* −0.60*

0.57* 0.45* −0.30* −0.09 0.06 −0.36*

0.90* −0.48* −0.23* 0.13 −0.56*

−0.49* −0.57* 0.10 −0.64*

0.47* 0.05 0.26*

0.21* 0.34

−0.05


Table 3. Correlations Among Latent Variables Included in the Structural Model.a

−0.32* −0.33* 0.22* −0.70*

from the ten first-order latent variables were obtained from the measurement model. with eustress were obtained from a second baseline model.

< 0.05.

307

308


strongest correlations with manageability, workload (−0.57) and role ambiguity (−0.64). The directions of all the relationships were consistent with the hypotheses except for the variable death. The direction of the relationship between death and the positive indicators was positive, and negative between death and role ambiguity. The relationship between death and hope was both positive and significant. Before analyzing the complete structural model, a second baseline model was run that incorporated the second-order factor eustress in order to obtain the zero-order correlations between eustress and the other first-order variables in the model. These correlations are also reported in Table 4. All four of the first-order indicators of eustress loaded positively and significantly on the second-order factor. Eustress was significantly correlated with all of the first-order variables, and all of the relationships were in the expected direction except for the variable death, which is positive. Eustress was most strongly correlated with role ambiguity (−0.70), trust (0.60), and health (0.54).

Table 4. Results of the Structural Analysis. Eustress

Anger

Trust

Health

Fit Statistics

Model 1: Completely standardized factor loadings: Tests of hypothesized relationships Meaningfulness 0.94* ␹2 = 1875.59* ; df = 1155; RMSEA = 0.060* (0.055, Manageability 0.92* Hope 0.82* 0.065); ECVI = 13.07 (12.36, PA 0.55* 13.84); CFI = 0.79; T = 0.964 Eustress 0.17* 0.50* Anger −0.08 0.13 Workload −0.14 0.43* Role ambiguity −0.57* 0.08 −0.06 Death 0.20* Model 2: Completely standardized factor loadings: Residual errors of eustress and anger allowed to correlate ␹2 = 1864.77* ; df = 1154; Meaningfulness 0.95* * RMSEA = 0.060* ; ECVI = Manageability 0.92 13.02; CFI = 0.79; T = 0.970 Hope 0.80* PA 0.56* Eustress 0.17* 0.53* Anger −0.07 0.18 Trust Workload −0.10 0.44* Role ambiguity −0.58* 0.08 −0.03 Death 0.19* ∗p

< 0.05.


309

A series of competing structural models was run to test Hypotheses 1–5, and the results are presented in Table 4. Model 1 was the hypothesized structural model. Model 2 allowed the residual errors of eustress and anger to correlate, which tested the assumption that there are other predictors of eustress and anger that were not included in the model. Model 3 added a direct path from trust to health in model 2 in order to test Hypothesis 5 and confirm that the direct relationship between trust and health is nonsignificant. Inspection of the fit indices for model 1 indicated that the model provided a reasonably good fit to the data. The value RMSEA of 0.06 was significant and fell within a relatively tight 90% confidence interval (0.055–0.065). The ECVI value of 13.07 was good and fell within its 90% confidence interval, and the CFI value of 0.79 was as good as any of the models evaluated so far. The ratio of ␹2 /degrees of freedom was an acceptable 1.62, and T = 0.964. All of the latent variable indicators of eustress loaded positively and significantly on the second-order factor. Hypothesis 1 stated that the relationship between the stressor trust and eustress would be positive and significant, and Hypothesis 2 stated that the relationship between stressor trust and anger (distress) would be negative and significant. Inspection of the factor loadings showed that the relationship between trust and eustress was positive and significant, providing support for Hypothesis 1. The relationship between trust and anger was negative and nonsignificant, so Hypothesis 1 was not supported. Hypothesis 3 stated that the relationship between eustress and health would be positive and significant, while Hypothesis 4 stated that the relationship between distress and health would be negative and significant. The relationship between eustress and health was positive and significant, providing support for Hypothesis 3. Hypothesis 4 was not supported because the relationship between anger and health was not significant, and was unexpectedly positive. It is unclear why the direction of the relationship between health and anger changed in the structural model, because the zero-order correlation between these two variables, while still non-significant, was negative as expected. Model 2 allowed the residual errors of eustress and anger to correlate to test the assumption that there might be other predictors of eustress and anger not included in the model. The correlation between the residuals of eustress and anger was significant (−0.23). All of the conclusions about substantive relationships between variables supported by model 1 remained unchanged in this model. The fit statistics were nearly identical with model 1, with a slight improvement of T to 0.97. A ␹2 difference test between models 2 and 1 (10.82, 1df) favors the more complex model 2 that allows the residual errors of eustress and anger to correlate. The presence of correlated residuals between eustress and anger suggested that there are other significant predictors of these variables (i.e. stressors) that were

310


not included in the present model. Because of the strength of the relationship between eustress and health, it is unlikely that the inclusion of additional stressors as control variables would affect the significance of this relationship. Yet because the relationship between trust and eustress was marginally significant (t = 1.96), the inclusion of additional stressors might affect the significance of this relationship. The final Hypothesis is a test that satisfies James, Muliak and Brett’s (1982) condition number 10, which requires that unestimated parameters be confirmed to be zero. In this study, the only theoretically significant path hypothesized to be zero was between trust and health. To test Hypothesis 5, model 3 was evaluated that included an extra path between trust and health. The path between trust and health was negative and not significant, and there was no change in the significant paths from model 1. Although it was not hypothesized, the direction of the relationship between trust and health would have been reasonably expected to be positive. Interestingly, the strength of the positive relationship between eustress and health actually increased in this model. While the fit statistics between models 2 and 3 were nearly identical, a ␹2 difference test between the two models (1.91, 1df) favored the more parsimonious model 2, thereby providing additional support for Hypothesis 5 that confirms a non-significant direct relationship between the stressor trust and health.

Discussion of Results This study demonstrated that the positive stress response may best be represented by a higher-order construct, eustress, and also demonstrated the effectiveness of several established first-order variables as indicators of this second-order construct. Although the theoretical justification for a similar higher-order construct for distress was provided, the empirical justification for this construct was not established in this study. The positive psychological states used as indicators of eustress in this study were much more effective in establishing this construct than the negative psychological states were at establishing distress. As a result, the full two-factor model of eustress and distress could not be tested. Although the hypothesized relationship between eustress and distress could not be tested, the other substantive relationships in the model were tested by using the first-order variable anger as a proxy for distress while retaining the second-order structure of eustress. It was demonstrated that the stressor trust in the supervisor was a legitimate interpersonal demand in this sample of hospital nurses in that it was sufficient to elicit a significant response even in the presence of other significant stressors. Trust


311

in the supervisor was positively related to eustress, but the negative relationship between trust and the single indicator for distress was not significant. As expected, the willingness to be vulnerable was related to an aspect of engagement in work represented by the positive psychological states used to represent eustress. The willingness to be vulnerable related a negative but non-significant level of anger and hostility in this sample of nurses. Because this study was unable to demonstrate that the interpersonal demand represented by trust produces a significant negative stress response while simultaneously producing a positive stress response, trust as a stressor may be less neutral than anticipated. Another important finding of this study was the strong positive relationship between eustress and the perception of health in this sample of nurses. The only indicator other than the four positive psychological states and eustress that had a significant zero-order correlation with health was role ambiguity (−0.28). The variable anger had significant zero-order correlations with the eustress (−0.32) and the stressors workload (0.47) and role ambiguity (0.26). Contrary to expectations, the relationship between anger (distress) and health in the structural model was not significant. Although a strong positive relationship of 0.43 between workload and anger was confirmed in the structural model, this distress response was not strong enough in this sample of nurses to elicit a significant effect in their perception of health. Finally, the direct relationship between trust and health was confirmed to be non-significant. While all the zero-order correlations between health and the four indicators of eustress were significant, none were high enough to elicit concerns about multicollinearity. The strongest zero-order correlation with health occurred with the variable eustress (0.54) and its indicator hope (0.52), and the weakest occurred with the variable positive affect (0.20). Role ambiguity had a strong zero-order correlation with both eustress (−0.70) and its indicator hope (−0.60), and this stressor was significantly correlated with every other variable in the study except the stressors death and workload. This finding suggests a potential specific link between role ambiguity and health through the eustress of hope. While the focus of this study was on the relationship between trust and eustress, these findings suggest that to promote eustress, supervisory efforts may be more effectively directed at clarifying roles for employees than in building trust. Although not part of the formal hypotheses, the relationships between the stressors used as controls and eustress and anger are also interesting. The expected direction of the relationship between these stressors should be negative for eustress and positive for anger. The variable workload performed in the directions expected, but was only significant with anger. This variable was more a measure of how effectively the individual could focus on the essential tasks at work than a measure of the amount of workload. Role ambiguity also performed

312


in the expected directions, but was only significant with eustress. Contrary to expectations, the variable death/dying had a significant, positive relationship with eustress and a non-significant, negative relationship with anger. When the nurses in this study were faced with the demand of dealing with death/dying in their patients, they apparently became significantly more engaged in their work. The holistic model of stress presented in this study is an important departure from established models of stress. The development of a model of stress that incorporates eustress is important because there may be little incremental understanding we can gain from the simplistic model of stress, distress, and disease. The comprehensive hypothesized holistic model of eustress and distress as second-order constructs in a reciprocal relationship was strongly suggested by the data but not confirmed. Two separate higher-order factors were confirmed as hypothesized, but the two-factor model failed a significance test against a unidimensional model. The higher-order factor eustress was incorporated in the structural model, and it behaved exactly as hypothesized.

Limitations The most important limitations of this study were sample size, fit of the model, performance of the indicators of distress, and design of the study. While adequate for simpler models involving more standard data analysis techniques, the resulting sample size of 158 imposed several restrictions on the analysis of the data and must be strongly considered in any interpretation of the results. Although the model subjected to LISREL structural analysis estimated fewer parameters than the sample size, the resulting fit indices suggest that sample size also had a significant impact on model fit. Although RMSEA, ECVI, and T, all indicated acceptable fit of the final structural model, the CFI indicated a substantial lack of fit. This measure of fit is sensitive to both small sample size and model complexity, and both of these were significant factors in this study. Examination of the modification indices for the final model also indicated that some of the manifest indicators might have been significantly correlated, which would also contribute to problems with fit. These conditions are not entirely unexpected in a complex model with many variables, even using established measures. The lack of parsimonious model fit is the primary reason why the results of this study must be interpreted with caution. The weak performance of the indicators of distress employed in this study may be an important reason why the hypothesized second-order factor of distress that was confirmed along with eustress in the first CFA lost its significance in a test against a unidimensional model. Although significantly correlated with other


313

variables in the model, the four negative psychological states did not correlate well with each other, and job alienation was only significantly correlated with PA. Because most of the best indicators of distress are proprietary, which is why they were not selected for use in this study, with the exception of NA, these indicators all represented somewhat of a compromise in the initial design of the study. While the use of multiple proprietary indicators of negative psychological states in studies with large sample sizes may discourage replication, it may be the only way to persuasively establish the second-order factor structure of distress. In addition to the indicators of distress, the design of the study had several other shortcomings that have been previously acknowledged but merit further consideration. Care has been taken when discussing the results of the study not to imply the demonstration of causal links among the significant constructs. Because of the lack of true random sampling, cross-sectional design, and the use of a single informant, the best that can be said is that in this sample of nurses, there appears to be several significant relationships among the variables. This is an acceptable limitation, because the establishment of causal inferences was never a goal of this somewhat exploratory study. Although the stressors employed in this study were specific to nurses, the theory of eustress, distress, and their relationship to health are legitimate in all populations of workers. Considerations of sample size and design not withstanding, the generic nature of the theory of stress response and the strong positive relationship between eustress and health suggest that this specific finding may be generalizeable in samples other than nurses.

SAVORING: AN EXTENSION OF THE EUSTRESS CONCEPT In the literature on distress, much attention has focused on coping, which is a cognitive and behavioral process of mastering, tolerating, or reducing internal and external demands (Folkman & Lazarus, 1980). In line with our focus on a more positive view of stress, we argue that there must exist a complement to coping with distress such that rather than preventing or resolving the negative side of stress, individuals promote or prolong the positive side of stress. Savoring, in everyday parlance, means enjoying something with appreciation or dwelling on it with great delight. We believe that most individuals not only prefer eustress, they actually savor, or enjoy with appreciation, this positive response to aspects of demands they encounter at work. Athletes speak of being in the zone or at the top of their game; performing artists recognize a state of “flow” or complete immersion in the performance and attunement with the audience.

314


Descriptions such as these are often accompanied by a desire to experience that positive, productive state more frequently, or for longer periods of time. In organizations, engagement is the motivational state that arises when workers are enthusiastically involved in and pleasurably occupied by the demands at hand (Britt et al., 2001; Simmons & Nelson, 2001). Engagement represents a degree of vigor and persistence in the behavior of workers, even in the presence of significant demands, that goes beyond simple preference. Because workers savor eustress, they engage themselves with work demands that they appraise as meaningful, significant, and challenging. In situations where jobs have a high degree of control, individuals might savor eustress by enhancing their exposure to the aspects of demands that they believe precipitated the responses recognized as positive. For example, if an individual identifies a trusting relationship with a supervisor as a source of hope for them at work, then the individual might engage in behaviors that make themselves more trustworthy in the eyes of the supervisor. Individual differences may play a role in savoring. Some people may be more prone to savoring eustress than others. We propose that there are several individual differences that are relevant for savoring, including optimism, locus of control, and hardiness. Optimism leads individuals to view situations positively, internal locus of control gives individuals the sense that they control their outcomes, and hardy people approach demands with commitment, view problems as challenges, and possess a sense of control. Individuals with these characteristics are likely to frame demands positively, which is the prerequisite for savoring eustress. While eustress represents the positive response to demands, not all eustress would necessarily be savored. Recall that for any given stressor, we believe that an individual can have simultaneous positive and negative responses. Some demands may be significantly distressful that although workers respond with vigor and engagement to the challenge, nonetheless, the demand is to be avoided. For example, nurses we have studied report a high degree of hope, even when exposed to the stress of the death of a patient. We have found that ICU nurses, whose work involves significantly greater exposure to the stressor death and dying, were even more engaged in their work than their colleagues in other parts of the hospital (Simmons & Nelson, 2001; Simmons, Nelson & Neal, 2001).

IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCHERS: REFINING THE CONSTRUCTS The study of eustress brings with it many opportunities and challenges for those researchers willing to venture into new territory. Primary among the challenges is


315

the need to refine the constructs of eustress and of savoring. Our study of nurses represents a first attempt at identifying the state indicators of eustress. The positive psychological states used in this study as indicators of eustress were selected for their ability to represent an aspect of engagement in work, which the literature suggested was an important characteristic of the eustress response. Engaged workers should be enthusiastically involved in and pleasurably occupied by the demands of the work at hand. The positive psychological states examined in our study appear to be good indicators of eustress in this sample of nurses. Meaningfulness, manageability, hope, and positive affect were part of the second-order factor eustress. Accordingly, they may be good indicators of the state of active engagement in work commonly associated with eustress. With the exception of positive affect, each of these indicators makes its debut in the work stress literature in this chapter. The indicator with the strongest factor loading on eustress was meaningfulness, which was defined as the extent to which one feels that work makes sense emotionally, that problems and demands are worth investing energy in, are worthy of commitment and engagement, and are challenges that are welcome. Again, the theme of engagement appears to be an important one for future research. Other studies that focus on a wider array of indicators are needed. In addition, measures of savoring must be developed. Perhaps the most fruitful way to extend our knowledge of eustress would be to create multi-disciplinary research teams that can combine their knowledge of the psychological and physiological aspects of eustress. Medical scientists will need to more firmly establish that the eustress response has its own pattern of unique neuroimmune parameters, in addition that go beyond its ability to modulate those neuroimmune parameters that are characteristic of the distress response. Another challenge is the identification of work conditions that are the antecedents of eustress at work. This task is consistent with occupational health psychology’s focus on “healthy work.” What could be healthier than work that is eustressful? There may be job characteristics (i.e. autonomy, variety) as well as organizational characteristics (supportive climate, adaptive culture) that promote eustress among workers. Although health and well-being are the natural outcomes of eustress, we must also examine its relationship with outcomes traditionally studied in management and organizational behavior. Job satisfaction, intent to remain, job involvement, and organizational commitment are outcomes that may well be associated with eustress. One might predict that eustressed workers are more satisfied, intend to stay, are more involved with their jobs, and are more committed to the organization. And, although it is tempting to assume that eustress would be associated with high levels of performance, this needs to be established empirically. Another

316


potentially interesting outcome that may be associated with eustress is organizational citizenship behavior. With its attendant positive emotions, eustress may lead workers to engage in more discretionary helping behaviors within the organization.

IMPLICATIONS FOR MANAGERS: EUSTRESS GENERATION For managers recognizing that healthy workers are more productive workers, our study suggested that workers might have a positive response to even the most demanding work environments, and this positive response is significantly related to employee health. We offer the concept of eustress generation to managers as a complement to distress prevention. In teaching managers how to manage stress, the focus has been on how to prevent and/or resolve distress, the negative consequence of stress. Quick et al. (1997) presented a comprehensive model with roots in medicine that takes a three-tiered approach to distress prevention, focusing on the elimination of stressors, strengthening the individual in terms of resilience, and obtaining professional help to manage symptoms of distress. Our belief is that in order to comprehensively manage stress at work, leaders must also engage in eustress generation. One way that leaders can generate eustress is by creating an environment at work that allows individuals to experience the eustress response. For example, consider the variable hope. The ability to generate hope among an organization’s members may be particularly important during radical change efforts, which the nurses in our study were facing. When people believe that their actions will lead to positive results, they may be more willing to accept difficult and uncertain challenges. Managers can generate hope by establishing goals that are meaningful to all members, allocating the organizational resources necessary for individuals to excel at their jobs, and maintaining a frequent and inspirational dialogue with their employees. Another initial step in this effort might be to identify which aspects of the work employees find most engaging, and then more importantly identify why individuals find the work pleasurable and what managers can do to enhance the positive aspects of the work experience. As a specific example with respect to meaningfulness, why do they feel that work makes sense emotionally, that problems and demands are worth investing energy in, are worthy of commitment and engagement, and are challenges that are welcome? By doing so, managers can demonstrate that their employees are worth investing energy in, are worthy of commitment and engagement from managers, and that the challenges of improving the employee’s work experience are welcome. Managers should also


317

explore opportunities to improve policies, procedures, and the physical work environment in an effort to enhance the employee’s exposure to work that they find engaging and to eliminate potential impediments to eustress.

THE FUTURE IS EUSTRESSFUL A movement toward the positive in stress research is a welcome shift in perspective, and it is consistent with the goals of positive psychology and positive organizational behavior. A legitimate contribution to positive psychology will shift from an exclusive focus on pathology to the independent and direct effects of positive psychological states on important indicators of well being as well as disease (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). The theory of eustress presented in this chapter thus makes a legitimate contribution to the advancement of a positive psychology. The study of eustress can inject new energy into this important research field, and we hope our chapter compels researchers to focus their efforts on the positive aspects of stress. The nature, causes and consequences of eustress at work, as well as the complex interactions potentially present in our model, should keep both researchers and managers engaged in pleasurable discovery for some time to come. The study of eustress also gives new hope to managers for creating and sustaining a more positive workplace. We foresee a eustressful future for both managers and researchers.

REFERENCES Allen, R. J. (1983). Human stress: Its nature and control. Minneapolis, MN: Burgess Publishing Company. Antonovsky, A. (1987). Unraveling the mystery of health: How people manage stress and stay well. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Artinian, B. M. (1997). Situational sense of coherence: Development and measurement of the construct. In: B. M. Artinian & M. M. Conger (Eds), The Intersystem Model: Integrating Theory and Practice (pp. 18–30). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Avolio, B. J., Bass, B. M., & Jung, D. I. (1999). Re-examining the components of transformational and transactional leadership using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 72, 441–462. Baum, A., & Singer, J. E. (1987). Handbook of psychology and health. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Beck, A. T., Brown, G., Steer, R. A., Eidelson, J. I., & Riskind, J. H. (1987). Differentiating anxiety and depression: A test of the cognitive content-specificity hypothesis. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 96, 179–183.

318


Berk, L. S., Felten, D. L., Tan, S. A., Bittman, B. B., & Westengard, J. (2001). Modulation of neuroimmune parameters during the eustress of humor-associated mirthful laughter. Alternative Therapies, 7, 62–76. Bernard, C. (1961). An introduction to the study of experimental medicine. H. C. Greene (Trans.). New York: Collier (Original work published in 1865). Britt, T. W., Adler, A. B., & Bartone, P. T. (2001). Deriving benefits from stressful events: The role of engagement in meaningful work and hardiness. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6, 53–63. Bunting, C. J., Little, M. J., Tolson, H., & Jessup, G. (1986). Physical fitness and eustress in the adventure activities of rock climbing and rappelling. Journal of Sports Medicine, 26, 11–29. Cacioppo, J. T., & Berntson, G. G. (1994). Relationship between attitudes and evaluative space: A critical review, with emphasis on the separability of positive and negative substrates. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 401–423. Cannon, W. B. (1929). Bodily changes in pain, hunger, fear, and rage (2nd ed.). New York: Appleton. Cannon, W. D. (1935). Stresses and strains of homeostasis. American Journal of Medical Sciences, 189, 1–14. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper & Row. Diener, E., & Emmons, R. A. (1984). The independence of positive and negative affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 1105–1117. Edwards, J. R., & Cooper, C. L. (1988). The impacts of positive psychological states on physical health: A review and theoretical framework. Social Science Medicine, 27, 1147–1459. Farmer, S. M., Maslyn, J. M., Fedor, D. B., & Goodman, J. S. (1997). Putting upward influence strategies in context. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 17–42. Folkman, S. (1997). Positive psychological states and coping with severe stress. Social Science Medicine, 45, 1207–1221. Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1980). An analysis of coping in a middle-aged community sample. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 21, 219–239. Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1985). If it changes it must be a process: Study of emotion and coping during three stages of a college examination. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 150–170. Folkman, S., Lazarus, R. S., Dunkel-Schetter, C., DeLongis, A., & Gruen, R. J. (1986). Dynamics of stressful encounter: Cognitive appraisal, coping, and encounter outcomes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 992–1003. Folkman, S., & Moskowitz, J. T. (2000). Positive affect and the other side of coping. American Psychologist, 55, 647–654. Frankenhauser, M. (1979). Psychobiological aspects of life stress. In: S. Levine & H. Ursin (Eds), Coping and Health (pp. 203–223). New York: Plenum Press. Frankenhauser, M. (1981). Coping with stress at work. International Journal of Health Services, 11, 491–510. Frankenhauser, M. (1983). The sympathetic-adrenal and pituitary-adrenal response to challenge: Comparison between the sexes. In: T. M. Dembroski, T. H. Schmidt & G. Blumchen (Eds), Biobehavioral Bases of Coronary Heart Disease (pp. 91–105). New York: Karger. Frankenhauser, M. (1986). A psychobiological framework for research on human stress and coping. In: M. H. Appley & R. Trumbull (Eds), Dynamics of Stress: Physiological, Psychological, and Social Perspectives (pp. 101–116). New York: Plenum Press. Frankenhauser, M. (1991). The psychophysiology of workload, stress, and health: Comparison between the sexes. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 13, 197–204.


319

Ganster, D. C., & Schaubroeck, J. (1991). Work stress and employee health. Journal of Management, 17, 235–271. George, J. M., & Brief, A. P. (1992). Feeling good-doing good: A conceptual analysis of mood at work-organizational spontaneity relationship. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 310–329. Gray, J. A. (1987). The psychology of fear and stress (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Gray, J. A. (1991). Neural systems, emotion, and personality. In: J. Madden (Ed.), Neurobiology of Learning, Emotion, and Affect (pp. 273–306). New York: Raven. Gray-Toft, P., & Anderson, J. G. (1981a). Stress among hospital nursing staff: Its causes and effects. Social Science Medicine, 15, 639–647. Gray-Toft, P., & Anderson, J. G. (1981). The nursing stress scale: Development of an instrument. Journal of Behavioral Assessment, 3, 11–23. Henning, J., Laschefski, U., & Opper, C. (1994). Biopsychological changes after bungee jumping: ␤-endorphine immunoreactivity as a mediator of euphoria? Neuropsychobiology, 29, 28–32. Hoffman-Goetz, L. (1994). Exercise, natural immunity, and tumor metastasis. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 26, 157–163. Horowitz, M., Adler, N., & Kegeles, S. (1988). A scale for measuring the occurrence of positive states of mind: A preliminary report. Psychosomatic Medicine, 50, 477–483. Hurrell, J. J., Jr., Nelson, D. L., & Simmons, B. L. (1988). Measuring job stressors and strains: Where we have been, where we are, and where we need to go. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 3, 368–389. James, L. R., Muliak, S., & Brett, J. (1982). Causal analysis: Assumptions, models, and data. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Kahn, R. L., & Byosiere, P. (1992). Stress in organizations. In: M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 571–650). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Kanungo, R. (1982). Work alienation: an integrative approach. New York: Praeger. Kelloway, E. K. (1998). Using LISREL for structural equation modeling: A researcher’s guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Lane, R. D., Reiman, E. M., Bradley, M. M., Lang, P. J., Ahern, G. L., Davidson, R. J., & Schwartz, G. E. (1997). Neuroanatomical correlates of pleasant and unpleasant emotion. Neuropsychologia, 35, 1437–1444. Lazarus, R. S. (1966). Psychological stress and the coping process. New York: McGraw-Hill. Lazarus, R. S. (1993). From psychological stress to the emotions: A history of changing outlooks. In: L. W. Porter & M. R. Rosenzweig (Eds), Annual Review of Psychology (Vol. 44, pp. 1–21). Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews. Lazarus, R. S. (1999). Stress and emotion: A new synthesis. New York: Springer. Lazarus, R. C., DeLongis, A., Folkman, S., & Gruen, R. (1985). Stress and adaptational outcomes: The problem of confounded measures. American Psychologist, 40, 770–779. Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer. Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1986). Cognitive theories of stress and the issue of circularity. In: M. H. Appley & R. Trumbull (Eds), Dynamics of Stress: Physiological, Psychological, and Social Perspectives (pp. 63–80). New York: Plenum Press. Lovallo, W. R. (1997). Stress and health: Biological and psychological interactions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Lovallo, W. R., Pincomb, G. A., & Wilson, M. F. (1986). Predicting response to a reaction time task: Heart rate reactivity compared with Type A behavior. Psychophysiology, 23, 648–656.

320


Lovallo, W. R., Wilson, M. F., Pincomb, G. A., Edwards, G. L., Tompkins, P., & Brackett, D. (1985). Activation patterns to aversive stimulation in man: Passive exposure vs. effort to control. Psychophysiology, 22, 283–291. Lundberg, U., & Frankenhauser, M. (1980). Pituitary-adrenal and sympathetic-adrenal correlates of distress and effort. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 24, 125–130. Luthans, F. (2002a). The need for and meaning of positive organizational behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 695–706. Luthans, F. (2002b). Positive organizational behavior: Developing and managing psychological strengths. Academy of Management Executive, 16, 57–72. Marsh, H. W., & Hocevar, D. (1985). Application of confirmatory factor analysis to the study of selfconcept: First- and higher order factor models and their invariance across groups. Psychological Bulletin, 97, 562–582. Martin, R., Wan, C. K., David, J. P., Wegner, E. L., Olson, B. D., & Watson, D. (1999). Style of anger expression: Relation to expressitivity, personality, and health. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 1196–1207. Mason, J. W. (1968a). The scope of psychoendocrine research. Psychosomatic Medicine, 5, 565–575. Mason, J. W. (1968b). “Overall” hormonal balance as a key to endocrine organization. Psychosomatic Medicine, 5, 791–808. Mason, J. W. (1971). A re-evaluation of the concept of “non-specificity” in stress theory. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 8, 323. Mason, J. W. (1975). A historical view of the field: Part II. Journal of Human Stress, 2, 22–36. Mayer, R. C., & Davis, J. H. (1999). The effect of the performance appraisal system on trust for management: A field quasi-experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 123–136. Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 3, 709–734. McGrath, J. E. (1976). Stress and behavior in organizations. In: M. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (pp. 1351–1395). Chicago: Rand McNally. Milsum, J. H. (1985). A model of the eustress system for health/illness. Behavioral Science, 30, 179–186. Pender, N. J., Walker, S. N., Sechrist, K. R., & Frank-Stromborg, M. (1990). Predicting healthpromoting lifestyles in the workplace. Nursing Research, 39, 326–332. Peterson, C. (2000). The future of optimism. American Psychologist, 55, 44–55. Priest, S. (1992). Factor exploration and confirmation for the dimensions of an adventure experience. Journal of Leisure Research, 24, 127–139. Quick, J. C. (2002). Self-reliance: The implications of character in building effective networking. Presentation at the Academy of Management annual meeting, Denver, CO. Quick, J. D., Horn, R. S., & Quick, J. C. (1987). Health consequences of stress. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 8, 19–36. Quick, J. C., Nelson, D. L., & Quick, J. D. (1987). Successful executives: How independent? Academy of Management Executive, 1, 139–145. Quick, J. C., Quick, J. D., Nelson, D. L., & Hurrell, J. J. (1997). Preventive stress management in organizations. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Radloff, L. S. (1977). The CES-D: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 385–401. Revicki, D. A., & May, H. J. (1989). Organizational characteristics, occupational stress, and mental health in nurses. Behavioral Medicine (pp. 30–36). Rizzo, J. R., House, R. J., & Lirtzman, S. I. (1970). Role conflict and ambiguity in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 15, 150–163.


321

Robinson, S. L. (1996). Trust and breach of the psychological contract. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 574–599. Rose, R. M. (1987). Neuroendocrine effects of work stress. In: J. C. Quick, R. S. Bhagat, J. E. Dalton & J. D. Quick (Eds), Work Stress: Health Care Systems in the Workplace (pp. 130–147). New York: Praeger. Rothman, J. C. (1993). Aristotitle’s eudaemonia, terminal illness, and the question of life support. New York: P. Lang. Russell, B. (1958). The conquest of happiness. New York: Liveright. (Original work published 1930). Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78. Ryff, C. D., & Singer, B. (1998). The contours of positive human health. Psychological Inquiry, 9, 1–28. Ryff, C. D., & Singer, B. (2002). From social structures to biology: Integrative science in pursuit of human health and well-being. In: C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds), Handbook of Positive Psychology (pp. 541–555). New York: Oxford University Press. Schaubroeck, J., Ganster, D. C., Sime, W. E., & Ditman, D. (1993). A field experiment testing supervisory role clarification. Personnel Psychology, 46, 1–25. Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology. American Psychologist, 55, 5–14. Selye, H. (1974). Stress without distress. Philadelphia: Lippincott. Selye, H. (1975). Confusion and controversy in the stress field. Journal of Human Stress, 2, 37–44. Selye, H. (1976a). Stress in health and disease. Boston: Butterworths. Selye, H. (1976b). The stress of life: Revised edition. New York: McGraw-Hill. Selye, H. (1976c). Stress and distress. Frontiers in Medicine, Special issue (pp. 9–13). Selye, H. (1983). The stress concept: Past, present, and future. In: C. L. Cooper (Ed.), Stress Research: Issues for the Eighties (pp. 1–20). Chichester, UK: Wiley. Simmons, B. L. (2000). Eustress at work: Accentuating the positive. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Oklahoma State University. Simmons, B. L., & Nelson, D. L. (2001). Eustress at work: The relationship between hope and health in hospital nurses. Health Care Management Review, 26, 7–18. Simmons, B. L., Nelson, D. L., & Neal, L. J. (2001). A comparison of the positive and negative work attitudes of home health care and hospital nurses. Health Care Management Review, 26, 63–74. Smith, C. A., Haynes, K. N., Lazarus, R. S., & Pope, L. K. (1993). In search of the “hot” cognitions: Attributions, appraisals, and their relation to emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 916–929. Snyder, C. R. (2002). Handbook of hope. San Diego: Academic Press. Snyder, C. R., Sympson, S. C., Ybasco, F. C., Borders, T. F., Babyak, M. A., & Higgins, R. L. (1996). Development and validation of the state hope scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 321–335. Spector, N. H. (1997). The great Hans Selye and the great “stress” muddle. Developmental Brain Dysfunction, 10, 538–542. Spielberger, C. D. (1991). State-trait anger expression inventory: Revised research edition. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. Spiegel, D. (1999). Healing words: Emotional expression and disease outcome. Journal of the American Medical Association, 281, 1328–1329. Stein, L., & Belluzzi, J. D. (1978). Brain endorphins and the sense of well-being: A psychobiological hypothesis. In: E. Costa & M. Trabucchi (Eds), Advances in Biochemical Psychopharmacology (Vol. 18, pp. 299–311). New York: Raven Press.

322


Sutherland, V. J., & Cooper, C. L. (1990). Understanding stress. London: Chapman and Hall. Tetrick, L. E. (2002). Individual and organizational health. In: P. L. Perrewe & D. C. Ganster (Eds), Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being: Historical and Current Perspectives on Stress and Health (pp. 117–142). Oxford, UK: Elsevier. Turner, N., Barling, J., & Zacharatos, A. (2002). Positive psychology at work. In: C. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds), Handbook of Positive Psychology (pp. 715−728). New York: Oxford University Press. Ursin, H., Baade, E., & Levine, S. (1978). Psychobiology of stress. New York: Academic Press. Ware, J. E., Davies-Avery, A., & Donald, C. A. (1978). Conceptualization and measurement of health for adults in the health insurance study: General Health Perceptions (Vol. V). Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation. Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070. Watson, D., Pennebaker, J. W., & Folger, R. (1987). Beyond negative affectivity: Measuring stress and satisfaction in the workplace. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 8, 141–157. Watson, D., & Pennebaker, J. W. (1989). Health complaints, stress and distress: Exploring the central role of negative affectivity. Psychological Review, 96, 234–254. Watson, D., & Tellegen, A. (1985). Toward a consensual structure of mood. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 235–291. Weidner, G., Boughal, T., Connor, S. L., Peiper, C., & Mendell, N. R. (1997). Relationship of job strain to standard coronary risk factors and psychological characteristics in women and men of the family heart study. Health Psychology, 16, 239–247. Wilke, P. K., Gmelch, W. H., & Lovrich, N. P. (1985). Stress and productivity: Evidence of the inverted U-function. Public Productivity Review, 9, 342–356. Wrzesniewski, A. (2002). It’s not just a job: Shifting meanings of work in the wake of 9/ll. Journal of Management Inquiry, 11, 230–234. Yerkes, R. M., & Dodson, J. D. (1908). The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit formation. Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology, 18, 459–482.

DEMOCRACY AT WORK AND ITS RELATIONSHIP TO HEALTH Töres Theorell ABSTRACT This chapter departs from a specific Swedish perspective on structural changes which took place during the 1990s in Sweden. Before this period Sweden had a long period of improving democracy at work. From the start of the 1990s a number of structural changes were – according to national surveys – associated with increasing psychological demands at work. According to the same sources this was followed during the three last years of the 1990s by a reduced decision latitude. The prevalence of work-related psychological problems started to rise when decision latitude started to decrease. A discussion of concepts related to work democracy is followed by a review of the literature on work democracy and health. Finally, strategies for improving democracy and possible health promoting effects of such improvement are discussed.

INTRODUCTION Democracy means that the people are in command. Accordingly democracy in the workplace means that the employees have power in the decision making at work. It is difficult to create workplaces that are managed entirely by the employees. However, the more influence the employees have, the more democratic the workplace is. How beneficial is democracy? Can democracy in our Emotional and Physiological Processes and Positive Intervention Strategies Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, Volume 3, 323–357 Copyright © 2004 by Elsevier Ltd. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 1479-3555/doi:10.1016/S1479-3555(03)03008-7

323

324

¨ TORES THEORELL

workplaces improve public health? In this chapter I shall speculate on these themes using Sweden as an empirical example. Our country has been in the forefront in developing workplace democracy but went through a major crisis during the 1990s. The changes that followed have stimulated a broad discussion on workplace democracy that may also have applications in other similar countries. I shall start describing the Swedish situation from a public health perspective during the changes of the 1990s discussing whether democracy changes could explain some of the changes in sick leave rates. After this I shall go into a more theoretical discussion trying to illuminate to what extent democracy at work may have theoretical significance in the observed relationships. The next part contains a discussion about epidemiological and physiological studies relating democracy at work to health. After this there will be a discussion about interventions aiming at improved democracy and their evaluations. My own point of departure is that the individual’s possibility to exert control over his or her own situation is of fundamental importance to health. In a worksite lacking democracy, the individuals can be exposed to a multitude of humiliations which could provoke psychophysiological reactions. If these are repeated for long periods, illnesses may arise. Conversely, there are examples of workplaces that have tried to introduce improved democracy and subsequently experienced improved health and productivity. The scientific hardcore evidence for this, however, is scant. A frequent comment has been that it may be anxiety-provoking for many workers to make decisions and that a certain proportion of workers simply do not want to make decisions and “want to be told what to do.” Such “decision anxiety,” however, may have arisen due to previous experiences. If an individual has never had any possibility to influence the work situation he or she may internalize the thought that others have to decide. Sweden has gone through a pronounced structural change during the 1990s. There is evidence that this crisis has affected democracy in our workplaces adversely. This change took place after two decades of increasing work democracy that may have placed Sweden in one of the top positions in the world with regard to formalized work democracy. In addition, Sweden has had a very good position with regard to the production of repeated high quality population surveys of health and living conditions. Accordingly, the development can be followed closely. All of this motivates a closer look at the changes in working conditions and health in Sweden. In addition, there is a growing body of research on the relationship between various aspects of working conditions related to democracy in relation to health. This makes it possible to find a frame of reference for interpretations of the development.

Democracy at Work and its Relationship to Health

325

A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE During the 1970s and 1980s, Swedish work places became more and more democratic, at least in the sense that random samples of Swedish working men and women reported that they experienced more and more possibility to influence their work (working tempo, planning of work). During the same period they also reported that their work became more and more intellectually challenging (increasing possibility to learn new things at work) (Stockholms Läns Landsting, 1991). That work entails increased possibility to learn new things means that the employees develop better possibilities to exert control. According to the national survey of living conditions (ULF), the percentage of working men and women who felt that they could influence work tempo increased progressively during the period 1977–1980 to 1985–1988 from 90 to 93% (men) and from 85 to 90% (women) respectively (Stockholms Läns Landsting, 1991). During the same period the percentage of workers who reported possibility to influence planning of work increased from 79 to 88% (men) and from 76 to 85% (women) respectively. Furthermore, the percentage reporting possibilities to learn new things at work increased from 59 to 67% (men) and from 45 to 57% (women) respectively. These numbers are based upon representative samples of the Swedish working population, with at least 20,000 men and 20,000 women in each number and participation rates always exceeding 75%. During the transition from the 1980s to the 1990s there was a change in this development. The national survey of working conditions (AMU) is based upon representative samples of working men and women every second year. The average number of respondents (women and men together) is 14,000 for each year. The participation rate has been lower than in the Survey of Living Conditions – between 60 and 70%. The changes that are reported below are, however, too large to be explained by the attrition. The questionnaire in the Survey of Working conditions contains questions about possibilities to influence various aspects of work, such as work tempo and planning of work. The responses have been summed into an index that corresponds to authority over decisions at work in general. Those who reported a sum score below a certain level were operationally defined as having lack of decision authority. The percentage of subjects who reported lack of decision latitude at work in 1991, 1993, 1995, 1997 and 1999 is displayed in Fig. 1. Data for women (1a) and men (1b) are displayed separately. The graphs show that the development has been unfavourable since 1997 particularly for employees in counties and communities (or municipalities). The only sector that showed an improvement was the governmental sector. Women reported worse conditions than men with regard to decision authority and skill discretion (represented by possibilities to learn new things).

326

¨ TORES THEORELL

Fig. 1 Percentage of (a) Women and (b) Men with Reported Lack of Decision Latitude at Work in Different Sectors (Government, Municipalities, Counties, Trade and Industry) during the 1990s According to the National Surveys of Working Conditions in Sweden (AMU). Source: Arbetsmiljöundersökningarna (Surveys of Working Conditions) 1991–1999. National Agency for Health and Social Welfare and Statistics Sweden: Negativ stress och ohälsa (Negative Stress and Ill Health. Information om utbildning och arbetsmarknad (Information on education and labour market) 2001:2.


327

Psychological demands increased during the whole decade of the 1990s. Figure 2 shows the percentage of working men and women who reported “too high demands” in 1991, 1993, 1995, 1997 and 1999 in the Survey of Working Conditions (see above). Both for men and women there was a continuous increase during the whole decade of approximately 10% in the proportion of subjects who reported too high demands. Accordingly, during the late 1990s there has been a combination of continued increase in demand and a decrease in decision authority for most working men and women in Sweden. The worst development was seen for women employed in counties and municipalities. Since there has been an unfavorable development with regard to demands and decision authority, particularly during the later half of the 1990s, it is interesting to study possible changes in illness patterns during this period. Figure 3 shows the development of total sick leave from 1955 to 2001 in Sweden according to official statistics. The Swedish state insurance system includes everybody. Hence the statistics are based upon all working men and women in Sweden during these years and there is no attrition. The average number of sick leave days was increasing progressively from 1955 to the 1970s. During the 1980s the situation was less stable. A moderate increase in unemployment during the early 1980s was associated with a lowered sick leave rate but a peak was reached towards the end of the 1980s during which a difference between men and women also became evident. Before this point no differences were observed between men and women but from then on, the sick leave rates were higher among women than among men (Official Statistics, Board of Public Insurances, 2002). During the 1990s the situation was very unstable. During the first half of the decade the average number of sick leave days decreased substantially. During these years there was a sharp increase in unemployment from an average level of 3% to a steady 10%. In addition there was a major crisis in Sweden’s economy. Sweden entered the European Union and was adjusting its financial conditions to this event. There was a sharp increase in demands for effectiveness and money saving. In practice, social security decreased. Most of the dramatic differences in average number of sick leave days, however, could be explained by restrictions in sick leave benefits. Most of these were temporary. When the Swedish economy recovered during the last half of the 1990s these restrictions were taken away. During the latter half of the 1990s the average number of sick leave days increased again, particularly for women. For them sick leave reached the same level as during the late 1980s. Sick leave is influenced by a number of factors ranging from illness to benefits and attitudes to work solidarity. It is important to emphasise that the peak during the late 1990s contains a higher proportion of long term spells than the late 1980 peak, and the number of premature retirements for medical reasons has also increased. This means

328

¨ TORES THEORELL

Fig. 2. Percentage of (a) Women and (b) Men Who Reported “Too High Demands” at Work in Different Sectors (Government, Municipalities, Counties, Trade and Industry) in 1991, 1993, 1995, 1997 and 1999 in Sweden According to the National Survey of Working Conditions.


329

Fig. 3. Average Number of Sick Leave Days per Working Person and Year in Sweden for Each Year 1955–2001. Separate Data for Men and Women Respectively.

that the female peak during the late 1990s has a much more serious implication than the one during the late 1980s. Who are these women with excess long-term sick leave? During the late 1990s the long term sick leave increased mainly in the groups who reported the most pronounced loss of control at work, namely women employed in counties and communities, i.e. women employed in health care, care of the elderly, and education. This could be interpreted as a confirmation of the hypothesis that worsened democracy at work would lead to increased illness rates. There are many loopholes in such a conclusion, however. Sick leave is influenced by many other conditions and degree of democracy is not the only factor that changed during the 1990s in Sweden. It should be pointed out, however, that reduced benefits (which were effected during the first half of the 1990s and which were followed by reduced sickleave) may result in increased long term sickness. The mechanism behind this is that workers who go to work when they are sick may expose their physiology to wear and tear causing regulatory disorders resulting in long term illness (see below). “Sickness presenteeism” has been studied in our country (Aronsson, 1985). The results of this research show that sickness presenteeism and high sick leave rate often exist in the same occupations. In health care, for instance, it is common

330

¨ TORES THEORELL

Fig. 4. Work-Related Mental Ill Health Symptoms. Prevalence in Working Swedish Men and Women.

that employees feel that they cannot stay at home when they have a cold because workmates may be forced to work excessively. Mortality (including completed suicides) and incidence of myocardial infarction have not been dramatically affected yet. The observed effects of worsened democracy are confined mainly to mental symptoms. The analysis presented so far does not show that democracy development has a clear relationship with development of health except possibly for long term sick leace in women in the public sector. These are other national sources, however. The prevalence of “mental symptoms” (worried, stressed or bullied) due to work – which is followed every year in the official statistics (Arbetskraftsundersökning, AKU, labour force survey) would also be used. This is shown in Fig. 4. The prevalence of “mental symptoms due to work” is stable in the early 1990s but rises steeply during the second half, both for men and women. This coincides with the development of “lack of control,” the prevalence of which starts to rise during this period. In addition, the mental symptoms rose more sharply in those branches that had the most unfavorable development of “lack of control” (health care and education). Finally it should be pointed out that women have reacted with more long term sick leave than men. One of the reasons for this may be that women often


331

have more obligations at home than men. The combination of an adverse home situation and an increasingly uncontrollable situation at work with increasing demands may become unbearable. This may explain why women have had a more adverse development of health and sick leave than men since unpaid work is still more extensive for women than for men.

What is the Longer Retrospective Perspective? Sweden has had good conditions for the development of work democracy. Demographic statistics were established early in this country – already in the 17th century. This is an important condition for demographic reforms. In addition surveys of social conditions and level of living were started early (1968) in Sweden. There has been agreement about the importance of this in Sweden (Björnsson, 1981; Gilljam & Holmberg, 1995; Vogel, 1997). Laws governing the right of each citizen to participate in general elections, freedom of expression, and freedom to participate in meetings were instituted in the beginning of the 20th century. It should be remembered, however, that working life in Sweden a hundred years ago was repressive and far from democratic. Despite this, the conditions for democratic work life development were better in Sweden than in many other countries. One of the important prerequisites for development of work democracy is the labor union. The labor movement obtained a strong position early in Sweden and the percentage of unionised workers has been very high by international standards. In addition, a sense of collaboration, the Spirit of Saltsjöbaden (a suburb of Stockholm where a historically important negotiation between the Employers’ Federation and the Central Labour Union took place in 1938), was developing between employers and employees. This means that questions related to work democracy had a high priority among leading ideologists. Employer and employee organizations agreed that money would be allocated to work environment research. This resulted in the creation of the Work Environment Fund (a research fund) and the National Institute for Work Environment Research. By international standards these national institutions had a relatively influential position in the Swedish society.

The Golden Age of Work Democracy During the 1970s and 1980s Sweden was regarded internationally, together with Finland and Norway, as a top position country with regard to work democracy development. The Swedish research was very active, with leading researchers Marianne Frankenhaeuser, Lennart Levi and Bertil Gardell. The

332

¨ TORES THEORELL

demand-control-support model (Karasek & Theorell, 1990) was introduced very early in Swedish research. Karasek, who introduced it, was working in our country for several years. His basic idea (which he shared with many other researchers) was that participation, democracy and worker influence are good for both the productivity and the health of the employees. By combining a stress research paradigm (increasing demands increase stress) with a classical work psychology/alienation theory (alienation increases stress) he created a three-dimensional model that has had a profound influence on research and production of national work environment statistics in our country. His theory states that psychological demands are harmful to employee health mainly when they are combined with lack of decision latitude and lack of support from workmates and superiors. On the other hand, a relatively high level of psychological demands may be beneficial if decision authority and skill discretion (their combination is labelled decision latitude) are high. The role of work democracy in this theory is of course important. Expectations started to rise. Industry started to build factories that were constructed in such a way that the work democracy ideas could be practiced in reality. Three-car production centres, a SAAB factory in Södertälje, a suburb south of Stockholm, and two Volvo factories in the western part of Sweden (Uddevalla & Skövde) were built according to democratic principles. The overriding principle was that the labor process should not be divided into small parts. The workers should work in a more integrated way sharing as a group the responsibility for a larger part of the car. They would accordingly obtain more overview and feel more participation in the total process (Norstedt, 1970; Wallin & Wright, 1986). The buildings were adapted to this principle of production. A study that was published later has shown (Melin et al., 1999) that such a reform is indeed associated with beneficial changes in psychological and physiological reactions to the work situation. The new ideas were introduced also in other sectors of working life. There was increasing talk about the importance of flattening hierarchies, that is, to decrease the number of intermediate levels in decision making. This mostly meant reduction of the number of managers and foremen on intermediate levels. The executive chairman of the Scandinavian Airlines System, for intstance, published a book on this theme (Carlzon & Lagerström, 1985).

The 1980s and 1990s – A Beginning Backlash? There have always been critics of some of the basic ideas underlying the work democracy movement but the critical voices became stronger towards the end of the 1980s. Follow-up of effects of the democratic reforms started and there


333

was disappointment among many decision makers. As described above, sick leave rates were high and even increased (short spells were relatively more predominant during this peak than during the subsequent sick leave peak of the late 1990s). Employers had hoped that the democracy reforms would reduce this problem. It did not turn out to be that simple and critics started saying that the democracy solution was not to be recommended. A study performed by the Institute for Social Research at the University of Stockholm utilized data from participants in the Survey of Level of Living (LNU) in 1991. The LNU is a cohort study of a representative sample of adult Swedes. This study was combined with interviews of leading persons in the workplaces where the participants had been working when the LNU was performed (Le Grand, Szulkin & T˚ahlin, 1993). Accordingly it was possible to compare information regarding decision authority and other aspects of work democracy from employees with statements by leaders in the same workplaces. The results indicated first of all that leaders in the public sector had been less willing to accept ideas about democratic leadership than leaders in the private sector – which is of relevance to the development of decision authority in different sectors (see above). Second, employees in workplaces where hierarchies had been flattened were not reporting improved possibilities to influence their work situation. Flattened hierarchy did not necessarily lead to increased democracy. In the public sector the responsibility for the economy was laid upon smaller units than previously. In practice this quite often meant reduced flexibility, and hence the reduction of the number of intermediate decision levels did not lead to increased decision authority. Taking away intermediate supervisors and managers could also mean that power over details was concentrated at higher levels, and this could lead to frustrations on lower levels. During this period the Japanese concept of “Lean Production” was also beginning to influence management philosophy. One of the key ideas in lean production is that each employee should have a high degree of responsibility for the totality. But the crucial point is that the flow of production should be efficient and that unnecessary loss of time should be eliminated. One way of achieving this is to make the individual employee more responsible for production (Westerlund, Theorell & Alfredsson, 2002). But the economical arguments are strengthened and the end result will not necessarily be increased democracy. The lean production philosophy has gained ground both in the private and the public sector in Sweden. The labor market was also affected by the crisis in the economy. The unemployment rate rose from an average of 3% to an average of 10% during the first half of the 1990s. This has also threatened work democracy. If the employees are afraid of losing their jobs they are less willing to complain about and to discuss working conditions.

334

¨ TORES THEORELL

What happened on the political level? During the 1970s work democracy had high priority. Bertil Gardell had great influence since he and his collaborators had formulated a hypothesis that was attractive both to employers and employees: A decrease in the instrumental attitude to work will reduce ill health and increase productivity (Gardell, 1971). One way of decreasing the instrumental attitude would be to give the employees more influence over their own work. But during the 1980s the disappointment was visible also on the political level. The union of Metal Industry Workers (Metall) had put considerable energy into the project “Det Goda Arbetet” (Good Work) and the evaluations indicated that there were some beneficial effects, but they were not as pronounced as expected (Metallarbetareförbundet, 1985). The unions’ interest in work democracy furthermore diminished somewhat during these years since the new work environment law now contained formulations regarding work democracy (paragraph 22) and the unions felt that once this goal had been reached they could not do much more on the political level. In the Federation of Employers there was disappointment because of the lack of immediate effects of democracy reforms on sick leave rates, particularly in women. The lack of effects on women may of course have had reasons outside the work sphere, but in the employers’ central organization there was a widespread feeling that work democracy defendants had promised too much. The atmosphere changed and there was an increasing feeling that the new car factories (see above) represented a failure. The production changed again in the direction of conventional solutions. Others, however, argued that the small effect on sick leave could have been due to factors outside the work organization. One argument was that a sharp increase in production demands (number of cars to be produced) meant that the buildings could not be used in the way that was intended, and this in fact spoiled the democracy intentions. Volvo’s factory in Uddevalla was laid down but the reasons behind that had to do with the world market (too many cars were produced in the world) and with regional politics. It was more important to retain jobs in the big regional city Goteborg than in the smaller city Uddevalla and hence the new factory in Uddevalla rather than the older one in Goteborg was laid down when there was overproduction. Accordingly, there was a confused debate regarding the events in the car industry, and since there was no possibility to make any firm conclusions the forces that were against further work democracy reforms may have gained in public debate. There is a need for more research in this field. The financial crisis during the late 1980s preceded not only an elevation of the unemployment but also a number of other structural changes (Välfärdsbokslut/S000:3, 2000). It turned out that the key words influence, participation and democracy at work could be used in ways other than those for which they had been introduced. For instance, one of the branches that were heavily influenced by the structural changes was health care. This resulted in an average


335

of a 20% reduction of staff in Swedish hospitals during the 1990s. In this situation politicians tried to stimulate privatization of health care using, among others, the argument that privatization would increase participation. This did occur to some extent, particularly in health care centers in large cities. The privatization of a health care center, however, mostly started by means of a bidding procedure. The bidding group offering the lowest price won the competition. Minimum price means minimum costs for salaries, which means the management of the same volume of care with a reduced number of working hours (Gustavsson, 1994). Reduction of staff below a certain level in relation to volume of demanded care means diminished staff time for planning and participation in work organization. It is impossible to exert influence over working conditions if the work volume is very high. Influence could also mean influence over salary. During the latter half of the 1990s the effort-reward model (Siegrist, 1996, 2002) began to gain influence in work and health research. This relates in a complicated way to the work democracy and health discussion. Material reward is an important part of the reward concept and there have been participants in the debate stating that adverse health effects of a bad work environment could be eliminated if salaries are increased. A fair routine for negotiating salaries based upon a democratic procedure could certainly mean a fair distribution of material rewards. Reward also includes sociological and psychological rewards, however. Such rewards could also increase if democracy increases. The demand-control-support model and the effort-reward models could be used jointly in both research and the exploration of working conditions. The most important conclusion of the critical democracy discussion during the 1980s and 1990s is probably that real strengthening of democracy does not automatically occur if simple formal changes on intermediate levels are instituted. Higher level changes in attitudes among company leaders and politicians are needed.

Brave New World – The New Labor Market The development of new information technology has been going on for several decades, but pronounced effects of this on everyday working life were not visible until the late 1980s. Sweden was one of the first countries in this development. The possibility to send messages and even documents electronically and to have telephone meetings with many individuals at the same time spurred expectations that work in the future would mean a comfortable life in a chair. Such expectations also correspond to the feeling that workers in the new information technology branch have had–that they can make all the relevant decisions about their work themselves. This, however, has turned out to be a myth. Information technology has

¨ TORES THEORELL

336

been extremely globalized and competitive. Accordingly, this branch of the labour market has been unpredictable and undemocratic. Conditions that are completely unforeseeable can make it necessary to lay down a company. This was confirmed during the early part of the 2000s when many information technology companies were closed down. Myths regarding possibilities to influence decisions at work may make it difficult to measure and to understand democracy in a workplace. How is work democracy conceptualized and assessed?

Concepts Related to Work Democracy Many concepts are used in this field. It is impossible to cover them all. The reader is referred to reviews by Ganster and Fusilier (1989) and others. According to the terminology proposed by Karasek, the overriding concept referring to possibilities that the work environment gives the employees the ability to make decisions regarding their own situation is decision latitude. This has two components: The first component corresponds directly to everyday democracy at work, authority over decisions. This is first related to the possibility that the employee can influence work tempo, timing of pauses and meals and other conditions directly related to the work day, and second, to everyday decisions regarding work, such as who is appointed as supervisor or workmate. An important part of authority over decisions is regular department meetings that aim to provide information about ongoing changes and that give the employees the opportunity to discuss important aspects of their work. The second component is skill discretion or intellectual discretion. The employee who has the opportunity to develop relevant competence may exert control over unexpected situations at work. The two components in decision latitude were both reduced for the workers in the development of the principles of scientific management according to Frederic Taylor (1967). Decision latitude is closely related to power distribution at work. If the boss has all the power, he or she will be troubled by the amount of decisions that he or she has to make, and the subordinates will be frustrated by the many situations in which the activity is hindered by the fact that the boss does not have time to make a decision. There is a substantial difference between micro and macro perspectives in decision latitude. The micro perspective could be referred to as “control in” the work situation whereas the macro perspective corresponds to “control over.” It is more difficult to measure control over and few studies have dealt with the macro perspective. It has been pointed out recently that the framework for creating justice and resolving conflicts may be a crucial aspect of this, and one study has shown


337

a relationship between organizational justice and health of employees (Kivimaki et al., 2003).

Many Other Concepts are Useful in the Discussion of Democracy at Work Locus of Control Locus of control refers to the individual’s perception of possibility to exert control over a situation (Rotter, 1966). According to this terminology, internal locus of control refers to the individual’s feeling that he or she can control most situations, while external locus of control means that the individual expects persons in the environment to take care of the problem. Locus of control accordingly corresponds to an attitude toward problem solving. Both extremes may be harmful since an extremely internal locus of control may create a destructive feeling of self-blaming in situations that the individual – for external reasons – cannot possibly deal with. An extremely external locus of control may correspond to passivity and fatalism. A large epidemiological twin study has shown that locus of control is determined to a great extent by experiences in adult life and only to a lesser extent by genetic factors and childhood experiences (Pedersen, Gatz, Plomin, Nesselroade & Mc Clearn, 1989). Locus of control has a counterpart in work psychology – work locus of control (Spector, 1988) – which has been shown to differ in managers across countries in the world. In the Western Hemisphere work locus of control was shown to be more internal in managers than it was in managers in Asia and Africa (Spector, 1988). This finding indicates that locus of control is influenced by tradition and culture. One interpretation is that countries with strong democratic work traditions may give their citizens the feeling that they can influence their own work situation. Locus of control is only one aspect of coping. There are also other aspects of coping that may be influenced by working conditions. The degree of openness in coping with situations that implied unfair treatment at work was studied in an epidemiological study of working men and women in Stockholm. Questions were made about what the participants would typically do if they were treated in an unfair way at work. Subjects with a covert coping pattern would not show the person who treated them in this way what they thought whereas those with the open pattern would do so. Participants who reported that they had a poor decision latitude at work typically reported covert coping patterns (Theorell et al., 2000a, b). These examples amplify the potential importance of the work environment in the development of coping patterns. A democratic environment stimulates more open coping patterns and possibly also a more internal work locus of control.

338

¨ TORES THEORELL

Fig. 5. The Demand-Control-Support Model. Source: R. A. Karasek (1979), Job demands, job decision latitude and mental strain: Implications for job redesign. Adm. Sci. Qu. 24, 285–307.

Lack of Control in Combination with High Psychological Demands and Lack of Social Support at Work The demand-control-support model was introduced by Karasek (see Karasek, 1979; Karasek & Theorell, 1990) who later developed the theory behind the model with Theorell and Johnson. The model has three dimensions, psychological demands (including quantitative as well as qualitative demands), decision latitude (see above, this is the model dimension that relates most closely to democracy at work), and social support from work mates and superiors (see Fig. 5). All these dimensions are conceptualized as environmental factors and all of them could be improved by means of organizational changes. The level of psychological demands should be reasonable. This means that the number of employees and the competence of the employees should be appropriate for the tasks. If the load is too demanding staff resources should increase or demands decrease. Decision latitude can be improved in several ways (see below). When subjects work for longer periods in these different kinds of working conditions, there is also a time dimension. Working in job strain means an accumulation of psychological strain that could in itself inhibit learning. This could mean that employees who have been living for a long time with high demands and poor decision latitude (high degree of democracy) may have difficulties in obtaining benefits from an improved work organization. Such a workplace needs


339

a long time for the adaptation to an improved situation. Conversely the active work place (high demands and high decision latitude) may make it possible for the employees to improve their coping strategies. This means that the employees in such a workplace may develop improved coping strategies. Accordingly they may be able to manage in a better way than employees in other workplaces to cope with a temporary deterioration of the working conditions. Social support is often associated with good friendship at work and good relations between work mates and between superiors and subordinates. It is emphasized that the employees should have high ability to solve conflicts. Education in the solution of conflicts is often arranged in order to improve social support at work. Social support is not a matter only of group psychology, however. For instance, it is important that the employees have a joint image of the goals of the production/activity in the workplace. If they have such an image it will be more possible for them to give support. The goals could be discussed with the employees at regular intervals. Principles for raising salaries should be based upon principles that are accepted by the majority and understood by all employees. Otherwise a poor social climate and low support may arise. As indicated by Johnson (1989), the concepts of decision latitude and support are close to one another, especially when they are regarded in a collective perspective. If the employees give one another good support they may also collectively obtain more influence over decisions at work – mainly because they understand one another and may be able to unify. The ideal workplace thus has reasonable demands, good social support, and good decision latitude for the employees. There are many studies that show that employees in workplaces with these characteristics have better health. The most pronounced health problems mostly exist in workplaces with job strain, the combination of high psychological demands and poor decision latitude. In many studies a joint effect of demands and decision latitude on objective health outcomes – such as myocardial infarction incidence/prevalence or mortality – has been found in the sense that using both demands and decision latitude adds precision to predictions. Multiplicative interaction or synergy has been found in a couple of studies, but in most studies of objective health outcomes this has not been tested and in several studies only additive effects have been found. With regard to social support the situation is even less clear. There is evidence indicating that adding the dimension social support at work to the model adds precision in predictions of objective health outcomes but it has not been established whether this is a main effect or not. Joint effects of social support and decision latitude on objective health outcomes have also been shown in some studies. With regard to myocardial infarction risk the decision latitude component seems to be the most important one in the model (for a review see Belkic et al., 2000).

340

¨ TORES THEORELL

The active work (high psychological demands and good decision latitude) may also imply health risks. During later years several studies have shown that younger white collar workers who report an active work situation may have a high prevalence of health problems (see for instance Hasselhorn et al., 2001b). Extremely high levels of psychological demands may by themselves decrease the possibility to exert control. Some groups in the modern labour market may believe that they have good decision latitude despite small real possibilities to influence decisions. One such group may be information technology workers who typically report that they have a very high level of decision latitude. It has been discussed in the literature whether it is the perceived or the objective decision latitude that is important for health. There is evidence for instance in the Whitehall study (Bosma et al., 1997) and in the imputation studies (for instance Alfredsson, Spetz & Theorell, 1985) that the objective assessments are almost as good predictors as the subjective ones. Since there is a considerable measurement error in all “objective” measures it could be expected that they would not do quite as well as the subjective ones. Research results so far show that both objective and subjective aspects are important.

HOW TO ASSESS DEMOCRACY IN THE WORKPLACE Conceptualization and assessment are two different things. Although a concept may be theoretically clear it may be very difficult to assess it in practice. In particular it is very difficult to separate the individual component from the organizational. The most commonly used methodology is to ask the employees themselves about different aspects of democracy in their workplaces. Standardized questionnaires are mostly used in these assessments. This makes it impossible to eliminate the individual’s interpretation of the situation and this interpretation could be flavored by experiences that may have nothing to do with the work situation. An alternative way is to ask experts to do ratings. They could be external experts who make judgments on the basis of general knowledge about working conditions. They could also be occupational health staff with experience in psychosocial assessment who are asked to rate different aspects of authority over decisions and intellectual discretion. A third way is to use imputed assessments from national surveys. The latter possibility has been used in several publications. It means that decision latitude is assessed on the basis of means from all individuals in a given occupation who have participated in the national survey. The imputed measures are specified not only on the basis of occupation but also on the basis of age (older and younger workers), number of years in the occupation and gender. Such assessments are of course crude. The underlying assumption behind “imputation” (the average


341

Table 1. Self-Rated and Expert-Assessed Decision Latitude for Men and Women Divided into Age Groups and White/Blue Collar Workers. Men/Women

Social Group

Men

Blue collar

White collar

Women

Blue collar

White collar

Age

Number

Mean Subjective/ Expert Ratings

Standard Deviation of Subjective/ Expert Ratings

19–24 25–34 35–44 45–54 55–66 19–24 25–34 35–44 45–54 55–66

91 266 246 295 146 24 293 337 410 165

48.8/35.0 57.6/42.2 56.9/40.7 57.9/39.7 58.0/39.8 66.9/64.8 75.8/66.1 77.3/68.6 76.8/72.5 73.4/73.9

21.3/25.2 18.2/25.1 18.6/25.9 18.2/25.0 17.2/25.7 14.8/28.5 15.2/26.1 12.6/22.3 12.4/18.9 14.1/18.4

19–24 25–34 35–44 45–54 55–66 19–24 25–34 35–44 45–54 55–66

68 98 67 89 35 50 267 341 385 131

40.9/22.4 45.9/22.8 50.2/23.2 47.1/27.2 51.1/27.0 64.8/56.2 67.5/59.1 71.2/59.5 72.8/59.4 69.6/58.4

16.2/14.6 16.9/16.8 16.6/19.6 18.8/20.2 15.2/18.5 15.2/25.9 16.1/25.6 15.0/22.1 15.8/20.3 16.5/20.4

Note: Scores have been transformed in such a way that possible scores range from 0 to 100 in order to facilitate comparisons between the different kinds of scores. Source: WOLF Stockholm, Hasselhorn et al. (2002).

from the national survey is used as measure of decision latitude for this particular group) is for instance that all male carpenters above age 45 who have been working in this occupation for less than five years have the same decision latitude (Fredlund, Hallqvist & Diderichsen, 2002). Table 1 shows a comparison between self-ratings and expert ratings of decision latitude (Hasselhorn et al., 2001a, b) for blue collar and white collar workers in Stockholm. In this case, the expert ratings were made by occupational health care staff. Although there was a highly significant correlation between expert ratings and self ratings for decision latitude (for instance 0.56 for men – which means that 31% of the variance in self ratings overlaps that of the expert ratings) it is quite clear that self ratings and expert ratings represent two different ways of describing this phenomenon. A closer look at the table shows that decision latitude rises with age although the increase stops in upper middle age both for men and women and

¨ TORES THEORELL

342

a slight decrease may even take place. White-collar workers have higher scores than blue-collar workers and women lower scores than men. Interestingly there is a discrepancy in blue-collar workers but not in white collar workers – the experts rate the decision latitude lower than the individuals themselves in blue-collar groups. This is not seen in white-collar workers. The type of rating that best represents the truth is a matter of opinion. Thus, it cannot be judged whether blue-collar workers are overestimating their decision latitude or if the experts are understimating it. Despite the relatively low correlations between expert ratings and self ratings these are higher for decision latitude than they are for psychological demands. In the Stockholm WOLF study, the expert ratings were performed by occupational health care staff. Judging from comparisons between expert ratings and expert ratings made by other groups of experts, the occupational health care staff seem to rate in a way that is more similar to the self ratings (Westerberg & Theorell, 1997). Systematic observations of particular aspects of decision latitude have been developed (Greiner, 1998; Hacker, 1978; Landsbergis & Theorell, 2000; Rau, 2001).

Questionnaires Authority over decisions has been assessed by means of two types of questions. The first type of question deal with the influence that the employees have over what they should do at work and how it should be done. These are very general questions. The other types of questions deal with special conditions such as the appointment of workmates, working hours, vacations etc. The general questions of the first type are included in the most widely used questionnaire, the Job Content Questionnaire, JCQ, but also in the Swedish shorter version. The more specific questions have been included in some national surveys such as the Swedish ones referred to above (Arbetsmiljöverket och Statistiska Centralbyr˚an, 2001) and also in American surveys (Ganster, 1989). Intellectual discretion is usually illuminated by means of questions about monotony and repetitions, about possibilities to learn new things and whether work requires creativeness, etc. JCQ includes such questions. The NIOSH questionnaire also includes such questions. It should be pointed out that the higher level decision latitude which relates to long term planning and decisions of profound importance, control over work (Aronsson, 1985), has not been assessed extensively in research. The JCQ includes such questions but they have not been used in many studies. The framework relating to possibilities to create justice has been assessed in a newly constructed Finnish questionnaire (Kivimaki et al., 2003). Accordingly it is possible to illuminate several aspects of democracy. The different kinds of assessments are useful for different purposes. The more objective


343

observations (systemtic observations, expert ratings, imputations) have the advantage that they are not influenced by irrelevant individual experiences. Self-ratings, on the other hand, are of course more true from the individual’s point of view but may be less relevant from a job organizational point of view. As we do have assessments of work democracy we can ask ourselves to what extent democracy is related to health.

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DEMOCRACY AND HEALTH There are many situations in which we react physiologically because we fear that we are losing control. This may be an important reason for the consistent and strong relationships between loss of control and illness onset. Such situations arise for instance in job loss. There are several studies indicating that illness risk increases when there is threat of unemployment and when employees lose their jobs (Hammarström & Olofsson, 1998; Janlert, 1997) although there is also a discussion regarding the direction of this relationship. There is agreement that both forewards and backwards associations exist together. Thus, there is both an increased risk among employees with illness of becoming unemployed and an increased risk of becoming ill after the onset of unemployment (Hallsten, 1998; Isaksson, Hellgren & Pettersson, 2000). Even when subjects have a job they may, of course, lose possibilities to exert control at work. This could also be of significance to illness risk. This has recently been explored in two different epidemiological studies of the risk of coronary heart disease. One was a prospective examination of state employees in England (Bosma et al., 1997). Health was measured by means of registers and self reported data. Biological data such as serum lipids and blood pressure were also measured. All these measurements were performed approximately at two-year intervals. Among other things the participants were asked how much decision latitude they had at work. It could be shown that subjects who had lost a significant amount of decision latitude at work between two examinations had a significantly greater risk of developing new coronary heart disease (without having had symptoms previously) during follow-up. The risk was approximately doubled even after adjustment for accepted biological risk factors such as smoking habits, serum lipids and blood pressure. The other study was a case control study of first myocardial infarctions in Stockholm, the so-called SHEEP (Stockholm Heart Epidemiology Program). All men and women in the ages 45–65 who had suffered a first myocardial infarction (Theorell et al., 1998) in the greater Stockholm region were invited. A matched group of men and women without coronary heart disease were invited as referents.

344

¨ TORES THEORELL

The myocardial infarction patients were examined within three months after the infarction. The same medical and psychosocial examinations were performed on all subjects. Occupation was recorded for every year during the whole working career. This made it possible to impute a measure of decision latitude for each year and subject (specified with regard to occupation, gender, age and duration of employment in the occupation) from the Swedish classification system (Fredlund, Hallqvist & Diderichsen, 2002). The hypothesis was tested that subjects who had lost decision latitude during the ten years preceding the examination would have a greater likelihood of belonging to the myocardial infarction group than others. There was support for this hypothesis in men and particularly so in the age group 45–54. Significantly lowered decision latitude was operationally defined to have occurred among the 25% who had had the least favourable (lowered) decision latitude during the period. After adjustment for accepted biological risk factors, the odds ratio of belonging to the myocardial infarction in this group was 1.8. Thus there was almost a doubled risk of having a first myocardial infarction in this group. Among men between 55 and 65 there was no such excess risk associated with lost decision latitude at work. This difference between the middled aged and the older men could be due to expectations – after the age of 55 men in the modern world of working could expect decreasing decision latitude rather than increasing. Accordingly a decreased level of decision latitude may be perceived as “normal” and not such a negative event as it could be in men below age 55. Another explanation could be that a large proportion of men between the age of 55 and 65 have stopped working and thus those remaining in the working population may be a selected group. That loss of decision latitude may have importance also for the risk of developing acute neck/shoulder pain has been illustrated in a recent case control study of low back pain and neck/shoulder pain (Fredriksson, 2000). In this study physical as well as psychosocial conditions were examined at work as well as outside work. During an interview the participants described their situation at the time of the examination. Afterwards they were asked to assess whether the situation had changed with regard decision latitude at work during the past five years. Those who reported that they had experienced decreased decision latitude had an increased likelihood of belonging to the neck/shoulder pain group even after adjustment for a number of possible confouders such as previous neck/shoulder pain episodes, socioeconomic status and age. In this particular study the associations between loss of decision latitude and illness risk were stronger than the one between a low level of decision latitude and illness risk. That loss of decision latitude may induce increased illness risk is something to consider when jobs are reorganised. If many persons go through work changes that mean less decision latitude, lower status, and less possibility for development


345

of competence there is obviously an increased risk that the prevalence of certain illnesses will arise. Accordingly there is reason to contact those who are in these risk situations and try to help them find new meaningful and dignified tasks. Another possibility is to explore whether a low level of decision latitude, per se, is associated with increased risk of developing illness – without any loss of decision latitude. In the longitudinal study of state employees in England one has tried in a systematic way to illuminate this question (Bosma et al., 1997). There were several questions about the work environment on several occasions approximately every second year. On these occasions a medical examination was performed and blood samples were drawn for the assessment of serum lipids and other relevant biological parameters. The part of decision latitude that has been studied in this examination has been authority over decisions. In men as well as in women a significant relationship was found between a low level of authority over decisions and increased risk of developing new coronary heart disease during the follow-up period. In this study it was possible not only to adjust for accepted biological risk factors. Socioeconomic factors (education and social class) and a number of individual psychological characteristics could also be adjusted for. The most important psychological trait was “negative affectivity,” which is the tendency to complain about conditions in general. The excess risk associated with low authority over decisions was in the order of 50%. Interestingly the corresponding excess risk associated with authority over decisions according to expert assessments was of the same order of magnitude (40%) as the one associated with self-rated authority over decisions. In a study of the long term effects of exposure to low decision latitude (Johnson et al., 1996) the working career in a large number of Swedes was related to risk of dying a cardiovascular death during follow-up. The subjects had participated in a survey study that is performed by the governmental Statistics Sweden (Survey of Living Conditions, ULF). They had responded to a question regarding what occupation they had had during each year of their working career. By means of the classification system decision latitude was imputed for each individual for each year. The results indicated that there may have been a cumulated beneficial effect of high decision latitude that was evident up to a period of 15–20 years. After 20 years there was no additional cumulative effect. Thus, in the British study of state employees as well as in the Swedish study of cardiovascular deaths in the general working population, there was evidence of a protective effect of high decision latitude on the risk of developing cardiovascular disease. Most studies of the association between low decision latitude have been focused upon the combination of low decision latitude and a high level of psychological demands (job strain). The demand control model (Karasek & Theorell, 1990)

346

¨ TORES THEORELL

stipulates that this combination is particularly dangerous in relation to illness risk. The results of these studies have been summarised recently by Belkic and others (Belkic et al., 2000). Several of these studies show no association between psychological demands and the risk of cardiovascular disease. But in most of the studies the precision of the predictions increase when psychological demands and decision latitude are combined compared to when decision latitude is studied separately. The excess risk associated with job strain is between 40 and 150% in most of the studies that are based upon self-ratings. In studies based upon imputed scores, when the only information available has been occupation, the excess risk has been lower – between 20 and 100%. The strongest explanatory factor has been decision latitude. Three different studies in the Nordic countries have shown similar results with regard to etiologic fraction (Alfredsson, Spetz & Theorell, 1985; Olsen & Sodergaard-Kristensen, 1988; Theorell et al., 1998). According to the most recent one, namely, the SHEEP study, the proportion of myocardial infarctions occurring in the working population that could be prevented if the work environment among those 25% with the most pronounced job strain could be improved to the level of the remaining 75% is in the order of 7% for men and 13% for women. This was shown after adjustment for accepted biological risk factors and social class. In men below age 55 the etiological fraction was 11%. Job strain has been more consistently associated with heart disease risk in studies of blue collar workers than among white collar workers. There are more studies of men than of women, and the associations are less clear for women than for men (Belkic et al., 2000). The relationship between low decision latitude and the risk of developing musculoskeletal disorders has not been as strong and consistent as the one between decision latitude and cardiovascular disease risk. The relationship seems to vary between different study populations and may also vary between men and women as well as between social groups and occupational groups (Anonymous, 1996). There may also be differences in the relationship between different types of musculoskeletal disorders (neck/shoulder pain or low back pain are the largest groups). In some studies psychological demands are more important and in others one of the two basic aspects of decision latitude are. In a recent study (Ving˚ard et al. and the MUSIC-Norrtälje Study Group, 2000) lack of decision latitude (in particular the intellectual discretion component according to a systematic interview) was associated with low back pain in men and also with elevated interleukin-6 concentration in serum (Theorell et al., 2000a, b). Interleukin-6 is related to inflammatory activity in tissues and also to stress reactions. In women, on the other hand, the patterns of associations were different. There were also different patterns of associations for neck/shoulder pain than for low back pain in this large case-control study. An interesting observation


347

in this examination was that, particularly in women, the most powerful predictions were made when there were both physical and psychosocial adverse working conditions. The likelihood of having low back pain, for instance, was three-fold among women who reported both job strain and physical load compared to women without this combination. Women with the combination of low decision latitude and physical load had a doubled risk compared to those without these joint loads. Lack of decision latitude may thus be significant in combination with other factors in the etiology of low back pain. Functional gastrointestinal disorders such as dyspepsia or irritable bowel syndrome have also been related to low decision latitude at work (Nyrén, 1995; Westerberg et al., 1997). In summary, lack of decision latitude has been related to the risk of developing cardiovascular disease and functional gastrointestinal disorders. It may also have importance to the development of musculoskeletal disorders. Conversely, a high level of decision latitude may be protective. But how do these relationships arise? The relative risks associated with low decision latitude may not be very great but since low decision latitude is a widespread phenomenon at work the association does have considerable impact on public health.

DEMOCRACY AND PHYSIOLOGICAL REACTIONS In principle there are two ways in which decision latitude could influence illness risk. The first one is related to life style factors, such as smoking and dietary habits as well as use of alcohol and drugs. Such life style factors could be influenced by psychosocial factors at work as well as by factors outside work. The second path is related to direct effects of psychosocial factors on endocrine systems and metabolism. There are divided opinions regarding the relative importance of these paths among researchers. Israeli studies of a large cohort of industrial workers have indicated that there are significant effects of decision latitude on smoking habits (Melamed, 1995) and there are similar findings in a study in Sweden (Jonsson et al., 1999). Other studies have shown that there are such relationships between lack of physical exercise and low decision latitude (Johansson, Johnson & Hall, 1991). Despite these results there are many studies which have shown that the relationship between low decision latitude and cardiovascular illness risk remains after adjustment for life style factors (Bosma et al., 1997; Theorell et al. & the SHEEP Study Group, 1998), and there are even studies that indicate a strengthened relationship after adjustment for such factors (Haynes, 1991). This indicates that the second pathway may be of importance. Fighting for control should be reflected in physiological reactions. There is considerable support for this notion (Belkic et al., 2000; Theorell, 1997). Lack of

348

¨ TORES THEORELL

decision latitude makes it necessary to mobilize energy in order to restore control in many situations. In such situations those systems are activated that supply us with fuel in the threatening situation. At the same time those systems are activated that facilitate our adaptation to a physically demanding situation. Sensitivity to pain is diminished, coagulation of blood is facilitated and water and salt are retained in order to keep the blood volume intake during the fighting stage. In this situation mobilization of energy and adaptation to physical effort are given the highest priority at the expense of anabolism – the body’s processes aiming at restoration and repairing of worn out cell functions. There is a continuous breakdown of bodily tissues. The muscles and the skeleton are being constantly rebuilt in order to be adapted to the needs created by our pattern of bodily movements. Muscle cells are worn out and have to be replaced. There are corresponding processes going on in the white blood cells for instance. If the anabolism is neglected the condition of these organ systems will deteriorate and, accordingly, the risk of injury will increase. Anabolism is stimulated by deep sleep (stage IV) in particular. Therefore deep sleep is essential to the anabolism. In the long run this is very important to our protection against damage in periods of crisis. Furthermore there is a relationship between anabolism and reproduction. Partly the same hormones are responsible for these functions. The most obvious example is the sex hormones in men and women. It has been shown that the serum concentration of testosterone decreases in white collar workers when their level of job strain (demands in relation to decision latitude) inccreases (Theorell, Karasek & Eneroth, 1990). Police superintendents who lost their jobs had a lowered serum testosterone concentration when this happened. Their concentration was normalized three years later when most of them had new similar jobs (Grossi et al., 1999). In a corresponding way female caring personnel had a lowered oestradiol one year after they had been subjected to downsizing and reorganization in a large regional hospital in Sweden (Hertting & Theorell, 2002) – a situation in which they lost control over part of the caring process. The mobilization of energy is mirrored in many ways in the body (Theorell, 2000). The acute mobilization could be assessed as elevated heart rate and blood pressure but also in increased electromyographic activity in the muscles. There is also elevated excretion of adrenalin and noradrenalin in blood and urine. As soon as the activation has been going on for some minutes the HPA (hypothalamo pituitary adrenocortical) axis is activated. This could be measured as an elevation of the concentration of cortisol in blood and saliva. If the mobilization of energy is pronounced and repeated frequently during a long period of at least several months other changes may arise, so called disturbances of regulation. This could be summarized under the umbrella term allostasis (McEwen, 1998). Some examples with particular relevance to the exertion of control:


349

(1) The normal regulation of the serum concentration of cortisol is disturbed. Under normal conditions the cortisol concentration is high in the morning and low in the evening. Under normal conditions there is also an elevation of the excretion of cortisol in situations that require mobilization of energy (Rubin et al., 1987). When there is a disturbance of regulation this does not function in the normal way. One such disturbance is common in subjects who suffer from a classical psychiatric depression – the concentration of cortisol is high in saliva and blood both in the morning and the evening as if the inhibition mechanism is not functioning. The opposite pattern – low concentration both in the morning and the evening with small variations in relation to stressful situations – is frequently observed in the chronic fatigue syndrome (Demitrack et al., 1991). In the latter case the accelerator function seems to be disturbed. (2) Effects on coagulation. Several different epidemiological studies have shown that the concentration of fibrinogen in blood plasma is elevated in subjects with a low level of decision latitude at work. This seems to be particularly true when indirect assessment (imputation of scores from national surveys or expert assessments) is used (Brunner et al., 1996; Tsutsumi et al., 1999). There seem to be direct relationships between lack of decision latitude and the activities in the immune system as well. Higher serum concentrations of interleukin-6 were found in men who reported a low decision latitude than in other men in a Swedish study (Theorell et al., 2000a, b). A longitudinal study of spontaneous variations in the relationship between psychological demands and decision latitude showed that such variations were associated with variations in the serum concentration of immunoglobulin G – when job strain increased a concomitant elevation of immunoglobulin G concentration was observed (Theorell, Orth-Gomér & Eneroth, 1990). The most extensive studies on a physiological function in relation to decision latitude has been the studies of blood pressure. Blood pressure elevation during daily activities – recorded by means of fully automated equipment – has been shown to be related to a combination of high demands and low decision latitude in several studies both of men and women (Schnall, Landsbergis & Baker, 1994). In these studies the combination of high demands and low decision latitude has turned out to be crucial. There has been no consistent relationship between job strain or decision latitude on one hand and blood pressure measured in the conventional way (in the supine position in the doctor’s office) on the other hand. But when blood pressure during normal activities has been measured a more consistent relationship between job conditions and blood pressure has been found.

350

¨ TORES THEORELL

WHAT CAN BE DONE FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF DECISION LATITUDE? The feeling of being in control stands for something fundamental. Several attempts have been made to increase the authority over decision making at work. Evaluations of such attempts have been made. These studies investigated if there is any relationship between change in the experience of control at work and improved health of the employees. For example, in one study (Jackson, 1983) hospital outpatient facilities were randomly allocated to an experimental and a control population. In order to increase decision latitude for the employees the frequency of staff meetings was increased to two per month. In order to improve social support, the staff was trained in participatory group problem techniques. Follow-up data in the two groups after six months showed that there was a significant drop in role ambiguity and role conflict in the experimental group but not in the control group. As a result, the staff in the experimental population experienced significantly reduced emotional strain, job dissatisfaction, absenteeism and intentions to leave the job. In another study which represents a less conclusive but useful kind of evaluation (Edling & Wahlstedt, 1997; Theorell & Wahlstedt, 1999) mail deliverers were offered the possibility to move to a new postal office in the same region – an adaptation to a marked increase in the size of the population in the area. The employees in both stations were subjected to a follow-up study. When the new station started a number of psychosocial work environment changes were instituted aiming at increased decision latitude and improved social climate for the employees – for instance more responsibility for a particular area for the working group aiming at increased cohesiveness. The results indicated that the development of physical ergonomic conditions did not differ between the groups during the year of follow-up but that social climate improved more in the new station. Possibly as a consequence, the prevalence of symptoms from the neck/shoulder region decreased in the new station but not in the old one. In a third study (Orth-Gomér et al., 1994), the occupational health care team offered a two day course in psychosocial stress for the employees in offices and also explored the psychosocial work environment as well as individual conditions by means of standardized questionnaires. On the basis of the findings a number of changes involving the employees were started, all aiming at improved decision latitude and social support. The findings after eight months indicated significantly improved autonomy and intellectual discretion as well as almost significantly improved social climate in the experimental group and no changes in the control group. No significant changes in personal habits (such as smoking and diet) were found. Despite this a significantly improved serum lipid pattern was found, indicative of reduced coronary heart disease risk, in the experimental group but


351

not in the control group. There are several other experiences in the field (Kompier & Cooper, 1999; Le Grand et al., 1993; Lökk & Arnetz, 1997) which indicate that psychosocial improvements of this kind take time, usually several months, and that collective feedback and support belong to the necessary conditions for successful organizational changes. A new British study was designed specifically to test the effect of increased employee participation in decisions (Bond & Bunce, 2001). After a screening phase, work sites with poor scores indicating a problematic psychosocial work situation were identified. Two of those work sites were randomly selected to belong to the experimental group and two were allocated to the control group. During several months the program (Participation Activation Research, PAR) was instituted, and the employees in the two groups were examined before and after the year of intervention with regard to sick leave and (by means of questionnaires) mental symptoms as well as self-reported effectiveness. There were significant two-way interactions for all the three outcomes, with improved mental health and effectiveness as well as decreased sick leave in the intervention but not the control work sites. Usually, simple organizational solutions constitute the framework of the changes. One example would be an attempt to change the role of a foreman to become more of a coordinator rather than a supervisor, or (as in the first example described above) introducing regular structured meetings for organized information exchange. There have been attempts to increase cohesiveness in a work team by allowing the group to take responsibility over a large number of diverse tasks in the working process – accordingly less specialization – as in the second example. A common result with such an approach is an improvement in perceived authority over decisions as well as improved social support. Thus, whereas several studies have evaluated the health effects of psychosocial interventions involving the whole staff and also interventions focusing on foremen, no studies have evaluated the employee health effects of interventions specifically focused on higher level managers. In a study of an insurance company there was an anxiety-provoking social situation at the company during the spring of 1998. The whole company was affected by a thorough discussion about the basic conditions. A program for the improvement of the managers’ psychosocial competence was started. It lasted from August 1998 until May 1999. Participation in the program was mandatory for the managers, who had to attend 30-minute lectures every second week. The lectures were followed by group discussions lasting for 90 minutes based upon the themes discussed by the seminar leaders. The two week intervals were intended to be periods of practical application of the knowledge in the organization. Psychosocial processes always take time to develop. The program was evaluated

¨ TORES THEORELL

352

by means of a follow-up of managers and their employees in the experimental division as well as in a comparison sample in the same company (where no similar program was ongoing). There were 300 participants in the evaluation. The results indicated that compared to the levels preceding the experimental period, authority over decisions had improved after one year in the experimental group (in managers as well as in other employees). During the same period the serum cortisol concentration had decreased in the experimental group – not among the managers themselves but among the other employees. No similar changes had taken place in the comparison group. Since the work demands and the tempo in this organization were high, the interpretation was that the lowered cortisol level in the experimental group reflected a lowered physiological arousal level (Theorell et al., 2001). The examples that I have described illustrate that it is possible to improve decision latitude. Social climate and support may change at the same time and it is often very difficult to disentangle these effects from one another. In addition it may be very difficult to know whether it is the organizational effects that are important or whether effects on individual coping pattern are responsible for the beneficial effects. When such improvement efforts are planned it is important to be systematic. If there are problems in a work site one has to discuss how to do the initial exploration and all parties have to be sympathetic to it. After this the use of the results of the exploration should be actively planned. There must be resources and time for follow-up (not only week and months but actually years) and possible redesign efforts. The results of the exploration should be fed back to the work sites both to the managers and to the employees. After this, those responsible should be aware that there will always be discussions and conflicts regarding the solution of practical problems. One has to work with the redesign in a structured way – groups have to be selected for formulating solutions. The planning includes deadlines and feedback to managers. The feedback should be thoroughly planned. Attention both to individual and organizational aspects of the psychosocial working conditions seems to be important in improvement efforts. This always makes it more difficult to evaluate which components beneficial. On the other hand practical experiences have indicated that the likelihood of success increases when individual and organization attention is combined (Karasek & Theorell, 1990).

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work was made possible by a grant from VINNOVA. Gabriel Oxenstierna has given valuable comments and contributions to the text which is gratefully acknowledged.


353

REFERENCES Alfredsson, L., Spetz, C.-L., & Theorell, T. (1985). Type of occupation and near-future hospitalizaiton for myocardial infarction and some other diagnoses. International Journal of Epidemiology, 14, 378–388. Anonymous (1996). Muscloskeletal disorders: Work-related risk factors and prevention – Scientific committee for musculoskeletal disorders of the international commission on occupational health (ICOH). International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health, 2, 378–388. Arbetsmiljöverket och Statistiska Centralbyr˚an (National Board of Work Environment and Statistics, Sweden) (2001). Negativ stress och ohälsa (Negative stress and ill health). Information om utbildning och arbetsmarknad (Informaton on education and labour market), 2. Aronsson, G. (1985). Work contents – decision latitude – stress reactions. Theories and field studies. Part I. Doctoral thesis. Department of Psychology, University of Stockholm. Belkic, K., Landsbergis, P., Schnall, P., Baker, D., Theorell, T., Siegrist, J., Peter, R., & Karasek, R. (2000). Psychosocial factors: Review of the empirical data among men. In: P. Schnall, K. Belkic, P. Landsbergis & D. Baker (Eds), Occupational Medicine. The Workplace and Cardiovascular Disease (pp. 24–57). Philadelphia: Hanley & Belfus. Björnsson, A. (1981). Fr˚an unders˚ate till medborgare (From subordinate to citizen). Stockholm: Ordfront. Bond, F. W., & Bunce, D. (2001). Job control mediates change in work organization intervention for stress reduction. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6, 290–302. Bosma, H., Marmot, M., Hemingway, H., Nicholson, A., Brunner, E., & Stansfeld, S. (1997). Low job control and risk of coronary heart disease in Whitehall II study. British Medical Journal, 314, 558–565. Brunner, E., Davey Smith, G., Marmot, M., Canner, R., Beksinska, M., & O’Brian, J. (1996). Childhood social circumstances and psychosocial and behavioural factors as determinates of plasma fibrinogen. Lancet, 347, 1008–1013. Carlzon, J., & Lagerström, T. (1985). Riv pyramiderna!: En bok om den nya människan, chefen och ledaren (Tear down the pyramids: A book about the new human being, thet manager and the leader). Stockholm: Bonnier. Demitrack, M. A., Dale, J. K., Straus, S. E., Lune, I., Listwak, S. J., Kruesi, M. J. P., Chrousos, G. P., & Gold, P. W. (1991). Evidence for impaired activation of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology Metabolism, 73, 1224–1234. Edling, C., & Wahlstedt, K. (1997). Organizational changes at a postal sorting terminal: Their effects upon work satisfaction, psychosomatic complaints and sick leave. Work and Stress, 11, 279–291. Fredlund, P., Hallqvist, J., & Diderichsen, F. (2002). Psykosocial yrkesexponeringsmatris (Psychosocial job exposure matrix). En uppdatering av ett klassifikationssystem för yrkesrelaterade psykosociala exponeringar (An updated version of a classification system for work-related psychosocial exposure). Arbete och hälsa, vetenskaplig skriftserie (Scientific series), 11, Arbetslivsinstitutet. Fredriksson, K. (2000). On causes of neck and shoulder pain in the general population. Arbete och hälsa, 14. Stockholm: National Institute for Working Life Research. Ganster, D. C. (1989). Worker control and well-being: A review of research in the workplace. In: S. L. Sauter, J. J. Hurrell, Jr. & C. L. Cooper (Eds), Job Control and Worker Health (pp. 3–23). Chichester, UK: Wiley.

354

¨ TORES THEORELL

Ganster, D. C., & Fusilier, M. R. (1989). Control of the work place. In: C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds), International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 235–280). Chichester, UK: Wiley. Gardell, B. (1971). Produktionsteknik och arbetsglädje (Production technique and work satisfaction). Stockholm: Personaladministrativa R˚adet. Gilljam, M., & Holmberg, S. (1995). Väljarnas val (The election of the electorate) (Valundersökningar (Election surveys) 15). Stockholm: Fritzes. Greiner, B. A. (1998). Contrasting objective and subjective measures of stress in regard to hypertension. Second International Conference on Work Environment and Cardiovascular Diseases, Tel Aviv, Israel. Grossi, G., Theorell, T., Jürisoo, M., & Setterlind, S, (1999). Psychophysiological correlates of organizational change and threat of unemployment among police inspectors. Integrative Physiological and Behavioral Science, 30–42. Gustavsson, R. (1994). Köp och sälj, var god svälj! (Buy and sell, please swallow!) Arbetsmiljöfonden (Work Enviornment Fund), Stockholm. Hacker, W. (1978). Allgemeine Arbeits- und Ingenieurpsychologie (General psychology of work and engineering). Bern: Huber. Hallsten, L. (1998). Mental health and unemployment. Mental health selection to the labour market. Arbete och hälsa, 7, 1–224. Hammarström, A., & Olofsson, B. L. (1998). Health and drug use – relations to unemployment and labour market position. In: I. Julkunen & J. Carle (Eds), Young and Unemployed in Scandinavia – a Nordic Comparative Study (Vol. 14, pp. 93–114). Nordic Council of Ministers. Hasselhorn, H.-M., Theorell, T., Hammar, N., Alfredsson, L., Westerholm, P., & WOLF Study Group (2001a). Vad p˚averkar hjärtkärl-riskfaktorer: “upplevelsen” eller de objektiva arbetsförh˚allandena? Minisymposium i WOLF-projektet 8 februari 2001 (Mini Symposium in the WOLF project, February 2001). Arbete och hälsa, vetenskaplig skriftserie 2000:7, Arbetslivsinstitutet (National Insitute for Working Life), Solna 2000. Hasselhorn, H.-M., Theorell, T., Hammar, N., Alfredsson, L., Westerholm, P., & WOLF-studiegruppen (2001b). Olika sätt att mäta psykologiska krav och kontroll p˚a arbetsplatsen. In: Psykosocial belastning och riskfaktorer för hjärt-kärlsjukdom (Different ways of assessing psychological demands and decision latitude in the work site). In: P. Westerholm (Ed.), Red. Mini symposium in the WOLF project 8th of February, 2001. ALI, Arbete och hälsa (Work and Health), vetenskaplig skriftserie (scientific series). Nr. 2002:7. ISBN 91-7045.641-0, pp. 15–19. Haynes, S. G. (1991). The effect of job demands, job control, and new technologies on the health of employed woman: A review. In: M. Frankenhaeuser, U. Lundberg et al. (Eds), Women, Work, and Health: Stress and Opportunities (Vol. 271, pp. 157–169). The Plenum series on stress and coping. New York, NY: Plenum Press. Hertting, A., & Theorell, T. (2002). Physiological changes associated with downsizing of personnel and reorganization in the health care sector. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 71, 117–122. Isaksson, K., Hellgren, J., & Pettersson, P. (2000). Repeated downsizing: Attitudes and well-being for surviving personnel in a Swedish retailcompany. In: K. Isaksson, C. Hogstedt, C. Eriksson & T. Theorell (Eds), Health Effects of the New Labor Market (pp. 85–101). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. Jackson, S. (1983). Participation in decision making as a strategy for reducing job related strain. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 3–19.


355

Janlert, U. (1997). Unemployment as a disease and diseases of the unemployed. Scandinavian Journal of Work-Environment and Health, 3, 79–83. Johansson, G., Johnson, J. V., & Hall, E. M. (1991). Smoking and sedentary behaviour as related to work organization. Social Science and Medicine, 32, 837–846. Johnson, J. V. (1989). Collective control: Strategies for survival in the workplace. International Journal of Health Services, 19, 469–480. Johnson, J., Stewart, W., Hall, E., Fredlund, P., & Theorell, T. (1996). Long-term psychosocial work environment and cardiovascular mortality among Swedish men. American Journal of Public Health, 86, 324–331. Jonsson, D., Rosengren, A., Dotevall, A., Lappas, G., & Wilhelmsen, L. (1999). Job control, job demands and social support at work in relation to cardiovascular risk factors in MONICA 1995, Göteborg. Journal of Cardiovascular Risk, 6, 379–385. Karasek, R. A. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications for job redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 285–307. Karasek, R. A., & Theorell, T. (1990). Healthy work. New York: Basic Books. Kivimaki, M., Elovainio, M., Vathera, J., & Ferrie, J. E. (2003). Organisational justice and health of employees: Prospective cohort study. Occupational Environmental Medication, 60(1), 27–33. Kompier, M., & Cooper, C. (1999). Preventing stress, improving productivity. European case studies in the workplace. London and New York: Routledge. Landsbergis, P., & Theorell, T. (2000). Measurement of psychosocial workplace exposure variables. In: P. Schnall, K. Belkic, P. Landbergis & D. Baker (Eds), Occupational Medicine. The Workplace and Cardiovascular Disease (pp. 163–171). Hanley & Belfus. Le Grand, C., Szulkin, R., & T˚ahlin, M. (1993). Sveriges arbetsplatser – organisation, personalutveckling, styrning (Workplace in Sweden – organisation, personal development, steering). Studieförbundet Näringsliv och Samhälle (Study corporation Industry and Society), Stockholm. Lökk, J., & Arnetz, B. (1997). Psychophysiological concomitants of organizational change in health care personnel: Effects of a controlled intervention study. Psychother Psychosom, 66, 74–77. McEwen, B. S. (1998). Protective and damaging effects of stess mediators. Seminars in Medicine of the Beth Israel Daconess Medical Centre, 338, 171–179. Melamed, S. (1995). Repetitive work, work underload and coronary heart disease risk factors among blue-collar workers: The Cordis study. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 39, 19–29. Melin, B., Lundberg, U., Söderlund, J., & Granqvist, M. (1999). Psychophysiological stress reactions of male and female assembly workers: A comparison between two different forms of work organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 47–61. Metallarbetareförbundet (Swedish Union of Metal Workers) (1985). Det goda arbetet (The Good Work). Metallarbetareförbundet (Swedish Union of Metal Workers), Stockholm. Norstedt, J. P. (1970). Arbetsorganisation och arbetsutformning vid SAAB-SCANIA i Södertälje (Work organization and work design at SAAB-Scania in Södertälje). Arbetsmiljö i utveckling (Work Environment in development) No. 1, Svenska Arbetsgivareföreningen (Swedish Employers’ Federation), Stockholm. Nyrén, O. (1995). Non-ulcer dyspepsia – Studies in epidemiology, pathophysiology, and therapy. Doctoral Thesis, Uppsala. Olsen, O., & Sodergaard-Kristensen, T. (1988). Cardiovascular illness and work environment. Part 3. What relative importance has the work environment to cardiovascular illness in Denmark? Copenhagen, Arbejdsmiljofonden. Orth-Gomér, K., Eriksson, I., Moser, V., Theorell, T., & Fredlund, P. (1994). Lipid lowering through work stress reduction. International Journal of Behavioral Medic, 1, 204–214.

356

¨ TORES THEORELL

Pedersen, N. L., Gatz, M., Plomin, R., Nesselroade, J. R., & Mc Clearn, G. E. (1989). Individual differences in locus of control coping during the second half of the life span for identical and traternal twins reared apart and reared together. Journal of Gerontology, 44(4), 100–105. Rau, R. (2001). Arbeit – Erholung – Gesundheit. Ein Beitrag zur Occupational Health Psychology. Habilitationsschrift. University of Dresden. RFV-statistik (Official statistics from the National Board of Public Insurance) (2002). riksforsakringsverket.se Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectations for internal vs. external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, General and Applied, 80(1), 1–28. Rubin, R. T., Poland, R. E., Lesser, I. M., Winston, R. A., & Blodgett, A. L. (1987). Neuroendocrine aspects of primary endogenous depression. I. Cortisol secretory dynamics in patients and matched controls. Archives of General Psychiatry, 44, 328–336. Schnall, P. L., Landbergis, P. A., & Baker, D. (1994). Job strain and cardiovascular disease. Annuls of Rev Public Health, 15, 381–411. Siegrist, J. (1996). Adverse health effects of high-effort/low-reward conditions. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 1, 27–41. Siegrist, J. (2002). Effort-reward imbalance at work and health. In: P. Perrewé & D. Ganster (Eds), Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being. Vol. 2: Historical and Current Perspectives on Stress and Health (pp. 261–291). Amsterdam: Elsevier. Spector, P. E. (1988). Development of the work locus of control scale. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 61, 335–340. Stockholms Läns Landsting (Stockholm County): Arbetshälsorapport (Work Health Report) (1991). Yrkesmedicinska kliniken, Karolinska sjukhuset, Stockholm. Taylor, F. (1967). The principles of scientific management. Norton: New York. Theorell, T. (1997). Fighting for and losing or gaining control in life. In: B. Folkow, T. Schmidt & K. Uvnäs-Moberg (Eds), Stress, Health and the Social Environment (Vol. 640, pp. 107–111). James P. Henry’s Ethologic Approach to Medicine, Reflected by Recent Research in Animals and Man. Acta Physiologica Scandinavia. Theorell, T. (2000). Neuroendocrine mechanisms. In: P. L. Schnall, K. Belkic, P. Landbergis & D. Baker (Eds), The Workplace and Cardiovascular Disease (pp. 139–146). Philadelphia: Hanley & Belfus. Theorell, T., Alfredsson, L., Westerholm, P., & Falck, B. (2000a). Coping with unfair treatment at work – What is the relationship between coping and hypertension in middle-aged men and women? Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 69, 86–94. Theorell, T., Emdad, R., Arnetz, B., & Weingarten, A.-M. (2001). Employee effects of an educational program for managers at an insurance company. Psychosom. Med., 63, 724–733. Theorell, T., Hasselhorn, H.-M., Ving˚ard, E., Andersson, B., & the MUSIC-Norrtälje Study Group (2000b). Interleukin 6 and cortisol in acute musculoskeletal disorders: Results from at case-referent study in Sweden. Stress Medicine, 16, 27–35. Theorell, T., Karasek, R. A., & Eneroth, P. (1990). Job strain variations in relation to plasma testosterone fluctuations in working men – a longitudinal study. Journal of International Medicine, 227, 31–36. Theorell, T., Orth-Gomér, K., & Eneroth, P. (1990). Slow-reacting immunoglobulin in relation to social support and changes in job strain. Psychosom. Med., 52, 511–516. Theorell, T., Tsutsumi, A., Hallquist, J., Reuterwall, C., Hogstedt, C., Fredlund, P., Emlund, N., Johnson, V. J., & the SHEEP Study Group (1998). Decision latitude, job strain, and myocardial infarction: A study of working men in Stockholm. American Journal of Public Health, 88, 382–388.


357

Theorell, T., & Wahlstedt, K. (1999). Sweden. Mail processing. In: M. Kompier & C. Cooper (Eds), Preventing Stress, Improving Productivity. European Case Studies in the Workplace (pp. 195–221). London & New York: Routledge. Tsutsumi, A., Theorell, T., Hallqvist, J., & Reuterwall, C. (1999). Association between job characteristics and plasma fibrinogen in a normal working population: A cross sectional analysis in referents of the SHEEP study. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 53, 348–354. Välfärd vid vägskäl (Welfare at crossroads) (2000). Utvecklingen under 1990-talet (The Development during the 1990:s). Comission. Välfärdsbokslut/SOU 2000:3 (Welfare Audit), Stockholm. ˚ Theorell, T., Waldenström, M., Wigaeus Ving˚ard, E., Alfredsson, L., Hagberg, M., Kilbom, A., Hjelm, E., Wiktorin, C., Hogstedt, C., & the MUSIC-Norrtälje Study Group (2000). To what extent do current and past physical and psychosocial occupational factors explain care-seeking for low back pain in a working population? Results from the Musculoskeletal Intervention Center-Norrtälje Study. Spine, 493–500. Vogel, J. (1997). Sverige och EU: Marknaden, välfärdsstaten och familjen (The market, the welfare state and the family). Chapter 33 i SCB: Välfärd och ojämlikhet i 20-˚arsperspektiv 1975–1995 (Welfare and inequality in a 20-year perspective 1975–1995). Statistiska Centralbyr˚an (Statistics Sweden) No. 91, Stockholm. Wallin, L., & Wright, I. (1986). Psychosocial aspects of the work environment: A group approach. Journal of Occupational Medicine, 28, 384–393. Westerberg, L., & Theorell, T. (1997). Working conditions and family situation in relation to functional gastrointestinal disorders. The Swedish Dyspepsia Project. Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care, 15, 76–81. Westerlund, H., Theorell, T., & Alfredsson, L. (2002). Organisational instability and cardiovascular risk factors in white-collar employees. European Journal of Public Health (in press).

EXECUTIVES: ENGINES FOR POSITIVE STRESS James Campbell Quick, David Mack, Joanne H. Gavin, Cary L. Cooper and Jonathan D. Quick ABSTRACT The occupational stress and well-being literature often focuses on specific causes of stress as health risk factors to be managed, on attributes of work environments that are stressful and/or risky, or on prevention and intervention strategies for managing these causes of stress as well as individual stress responses at work (Quick & Tetrick, 2003). The occupational stress literature has not focused on how executives and organizations can cause positive stress for people at work. In this chapter, we explore a principle-based framework for executive action to create positive, constructive stress for people at work. The first major section of the chapter discusses seven contextual factors within which the principle-based framework is nested. The second major section of the chapter develops nine principles for executive action. The third and concluding section of the chapter turns the focus to a set of guidelines for executive action in managing their personal experience of stress.

INTRODUCTION As leaders at work, executives are expected to produce and oversee the creation of useful work (Zaleznik, 1990). As such, they have a central responsibility to

Emotional and Physiological Processes and Positive Intervention Strategies Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, Volume 3, 359–405 Copyright © 2004 by Elsevier Ltd. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 1479-3555/doi:10.1016/S1479-3555(03)03009-9

359

360

JAMES CAMPBELL QUICK ET AL.

lead and influence other organizational members. As the leadership literature has shown, this can be done in either positive, constructive ways or in negative, destructive ways (Pfeffer, 1977). McGregor (1960) was very clear that management’s first responsibility was to manage the enterprise, and that there were two broad sets of alternative assumptions about individuals that managers might make. These have become best known as Theory X and Theory Y. This chapter investigates and analyzes how executives manage occupational stress, and utilizes this critical analysis to discuss how executives can most positively and humanely lead people at work. We aim to link research and theory to practice, going beyond any straitjacket of normal science (Daft & Lewin, 1990). Our premise is that executives in today’s organizations have the responsibility to create and manage positive, constructive stress at work so as to create compassionate and humane work environments for organizational members. The failure to create and manage stress is a failure of responsibility, and the research evidence is clear that not all stress is bad (see for example the Nelson & Simmons contribution to this volume.). According to Selye (1976), stress is both the spice of life and the kiss of death. With this in mind, Levi (2000) explored how the European Commission might set strategies for the art and science of humane work through Guidance on work-related stress. The Yerkes-Dodson Law suggested that there is an optimum stress and arousal level that leads to higher performance than either very low or very high levels of stress (Yerkes & Dodson, 1908). More importantly, our current stereotypic perspective on the word “stress” too often globalizes the usage to only the distressful and negative outcomes of stressful events. The core of our thinking is reflected in Fig. 1, which suggests that stress is a positive, linear function of pressure and work demands generated by executives. There is an optimal range (illustrated on Fig. 1 between points A and B) where performance is maximized. Much of the occupational stress literature has focused on the upper end of the continuum presented in the figure, working to identify high stress factors and situations that pose a health risk to individuals and managers at work (Quick & Tetrick, 2003). However, as Fig. 1 suggests, more stress is not necessarily better and there is a point (B) beyond which increasing stress, resulting from increasing pressure and work demands, is associated with declining performance. Whereas this is suggested by nearly a century of stress science, identifying points A and B, for both individuals and groups, is the challenge of management and is best left in the hands of the skilled executive. Therefore, we counter any pejorative view of stress and offer a more positive perspective on the notion of stress and its role in human growth, development, and performance. To achieve this, we organized the chapter into three major sections. The first section offers a contextual framework for our thinking about executive stress, health, and well-being in humane work. The second major section is the

Executives: Engines for Positive Stress

361

Fig. 1. The Effects of Executive Pressure on Stress and Performance.

heart of our model for executives, and provides a set of nine principle-based guidelines for executives in the creation of positive stress in the workplace. These guidelines are anchored in the research on stress management. The third and final section offers a set of personal guidelines for executives in terms of managing their own stresses and strains.

CONTEXTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR HUMANE WORK Most research and scholarship on stress in organizations aims to identify its causes, detail its adverse consequences, and/or test prevention or intervention strategies for stress management. We take a distinctly different tack in this chapter on executive stress and we suggest that executives have a responsibility to be a source of positive stress for people at work. The hidden implication in much of the research literature is that less stress is better. This often unstated implication proceeds from the medical evidence that stress is directly or indirectly implicated as a causal or contributing factor in seven of the ten leading causes of death in the industrialized world (Cooper & Quick, 2003; Quick, Quick, Nelson & Hurrell, 1997). Hence, Selye’s notion that stress can be the kiss of death (Selye, 1976 as cited in Levi, 2000). However, there is another side to the stress story. We believe that there is a fallacy in the logic underlying any leap from this medical evidence to the conclusion that less stress is better. Therefore, we want to confront this fallacy and set forth

362


a case for executives to draw on the positive force of stress-induced energy in the workplace. To begin with, in this opening framework, we set out seven a priori points and caveats for our case. These seven contextual assertions and caveats are: (1) Executives do and should cause stress for people at work. (2) Human behavior is the greatest source of variance in organizations. (3) Healthy human development demands task mastery and positive social support. (4) Causing stress and pressure for people is not the same as abuse. (5) Management is an art; we learn from experience. (6) Cooperation leads to the alignment of individual and organizational effort. (7) Open communication is the basis for “working together.”

Executives as a Source of Stress Our a priori premise that executives do and should cause stress for people at work is based in the leadership literature on power and influence in organizations (Bass, 1990). There is parallel research on healthy power and influence in the literature on families as well (Curran, 1985). As organizational leaders, executives have a responsibility to exercise power and influence in constructive ways to achieve positive organizational outcomes and the failure to do so is a failure of leadership. Inherent in the exercise of power and influence is the notion of pressure and stress. At the heart of this influence dynamic is the social exchange between the leader and follower(s). Hirschhorn (1990) argued for a very active, dynamic exchange through this relationship in which the leader is open and vulnerable while accepting his or her responsibility, and the follower is assertive and challenging while being respectful of the authority of the leader. The stress caused by executives for other organizational members comes through a dynamic influence process (Mack, Nelson & Quick, 1998). Executives should create pressure and influence behavior, enhance growth and performance, and generate mutually beneficial outcomes for themselves, for other organizational members, and for the organization as an independent entity. If executives are not doing this and are not creating stress at work, then they are abdicating their responsibility for the ultimate performance and results of the organization. The distinguishing feature of executives in organizations goes to the primary responsibility identified by McGregor (1960) nearly 50 years ago. That responsibility is to manage the organization. In all organizations, the health of the enterprise is intertwined with the health of the individual members and it is neither easy to separate these interests nor to prioritize them.


363

In a parallel role to that of a commanding general, who has the responsibility of an entire army or air force, an executive has the responsibility for the whole organization. This entails guiding and shaping individual behavior into unity of action for the common good (Aristotle, 1998) through the exertion of pressure, influence, and direction. There is undoubtedly a level of stress that is associated with these actions.

Variance in Human Behavior Schein (1996a, b) has made a careful study of organizational cultures, and in particular the executive culture with its inherent assumptions. Herein lies a core dilemma for executives who are responsible for people at work, yet often feel their employees are somewhat of a necessary evil. This is a conundrum for the executive. Because they have primary responsibility for the organization, executives have a tendency to depersonalize the management process and work to reduce the variance in a whole range of system functions. They believe that controlling the variance and the processes within the system will allow them to control the outcomes, results, and returns from the system. One of the great masters of this form of systemic control and variance management was Alfred P. Sloan Jr. (Farber, 2002). Whereas this might work very effectively when dealing with a wide variety of organizational resources in the material and financial domains, it does not work well when it comes to leading people. The broad scope of nomothetic research in the behavioral sciences tends to produce relatively small R-squares in terms of the amount of variance in human behavior than any one or one set of variables is able to explain. This suggests that there is a significant amount of unexplained variance in human behavior in organizations (Daft & Lewin, 1990). Even within the normal and healthy ranges of human behaviors at work, predictive powers are limited. When it comes to dysfunctional behavior at work, either violent or non-violent, the story can become more complex (Griffin, O’Leary-Kelly & Collins, 1998). This suggests that the greatest variance in many organizations may be in the people and in human behavior at work. Part of this is because individuals are autonomous and independent in much of their functioning, not mindlessly complying with the pressures and influence attempts that executives direct at them (Levinson, 1990). There are two ways to approach this source of variance in human behavior at work. One is through control and the other is through insight and understanding. If executives approach human behavior as something to be controlled at work, then the logical extension of this approach is to reduce or eliminate the variance in behavior. To do this puts executives in a continuing struggle with people at work, much like the pitched battle Frederick Taylor (1912) described to the U.S.

364


Congress committee collecting information on scientific management. Taylor detailed for the committee his several years as a gang boss at Midvale Steel Company in which he was constantly pressuring the men for more production only to encounter strong resistance, and even hostility, anger, and violence. This is clearly not a form of positive stress as we have alluded to above. In fact, it is just the reverse and leads to distressful, inhumane work. Alternatively, if executives approach human behavior as something to be understood and influenced, then the logical extension of this approach is to use a clinical and diagnostic (dia = through, gnosis = knowledge of) approach to people at work (Kets de Vries & van de Loo, 2000). This is the approach used by successful, clinical executive coaches like Karol Wasylyshyn, who work developmentally with senior executives (Foxhall, 2002). There is still a place for the executive to be assertive, or even confrontational, within this clinical approach to people at work, and indeed this approach is at the heart of what we mean by the “art” of crafting a humane work organization through management and leadership. When we refer to management as an art, we do not mean to imply that management is soft or in any way casual. Although there is a science to management, it does not have the precision of the natural sciences, nor one with rules that apply in all situations or with all individuals, because of the amount of variance in human behavior (Buckingham, 1999). Successful managers understand this and understand that they must often learn their craft as they go along, and be willing to adjust to ever-changing challenges. It is this aspect of management that we refer to as an art.

Task Mastery and Positive Social Support In making our case for executives to create and manage positive stress in the workplace, we use a developmental perspective for individuals based on Ainsworth and Bowlby’s (1991) ethological approach to personality. Specifically, we accept as primary in human nature two instinctual drives, which are manifest in exploratory behavior aimed at mastering the world and attachment behavior aimed at achieving a sense of felt security when faced with stress, threat, and danger (Staw, Sandelands & Dutton, 1981). Although Ainsworth and Bowlby (1991) evolved their approach based on extensive research in children, our own subsequent research with executives, managers, basic military trainees, military officer candidates, and students has indicated that these drives, especially attachment behavior, extend into the adulthood years (Joplin, Nelson & Quick, 1999; Quick, Joplin, Nelson, Mangelsdorff & Fiedler, 1996; Quick, Nelson & Quick, 1990).


365

These two instinctual drives, although somewhat intractable, are both essential for healthy, balanced human development. In the adulthood years, these drives lead to the desire for task mastery and competence, and are complemented by the desire for positive, supportive interpersonal relationships. These drives are also at the root of Freud’s description of the healthy life as one characterized by the capacity to work and to love. For executives, this translates into an expectation that individuals at work become competent in the performance of their duties while in turn expecting positive, supportive affirmation for their accomplishments. Whereas Ainsworth and Bowlby’s (1991) ethological approach to personality is the basis for healthy human development during the childhood years, it also serves as a positive framework for adulthood learning and growth. Executive demands for task mastery, skill development, and performance cause reasonable and necessary stress for individuals at work, but this stress and pressure can cause them to exhibit threat-rigidity responses, as described by Staw and his associates (1981). When pressure and demands are accompanied by affirmation and positive interpersonal support, however, they lead to a growth opportunity and not to mean-spiritedness.

Positive Stress vs. Abuse The notion of “causing” stress for another person can carry with it a connotation of abuse and mistreatment. Certainly bullying behavior, sexual harassment, workplace violence, and anger outbursts directed at employees by executives fall into the category of abusive behaviors, which are stressful and distressing (Bell, Quick & Cycyota, 2002). Abusive behaviors and the mistreatment of people at work cause significant emotional pain, as Frost and Robinson (1999) eloquently pointed out, and should be distinguished from the creation of positive stress, healthy demands, and challenging opportunities through which employees grow, produce, and are valued in the workplace. The distinction between abuse and challenge lies at the center of human learning. Differences in learning styles and personality preferences are important factors contributing to the large human variance in organizations (Hough & Furham, 2003) and executives can benefit from an understanding of these individual differences. When executives approach individuals and groups within their framework, or even their language, they go a long way in building relationship and creating the opportunity for positive influence. For example, when a group of Hispanic managers had some complaints in their work environment, a senior Anglo executive began his meeting with them by speaking in Spanish, demonstrating his desire to interact with them at their level. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator is one example of a commonly used personality assessment

366


measure that provides information about individual preferences for sources of energy and information, for decision-making strategies, and for orientation to the external world (Nelson & Quick, 2003). Executives can, and should, make use of such tools to learn more about the employees that they manage.

Management as an Art: Political Skills and Learning from Experience As our subtitle suggests, we conceptualize management as both art and science. These terms are euphemisms for gaining knowledge through either natural scientific inquiry or through idiographic scientific inquiry (Behling, 1980; Quick, 1997). In addition, they break any boundary between the community of scholars and those who apply the discipline (Daft & Lewin, 1990). Boettinger (1975) argued that the three essential skills of the artistic process are craft, vision, and communication. He went on to argue that one of the primary responsibilities of senior executives is to teach and guide. The process of teaching, guiding, and mentoring is not a scientific one but rather an artistic one that is akin to the apprentice and journeymen processes used by craft guilds in the Middle Ages. This process requires dynamic interaction and relies on examining the results of actions; hence, learning from experience. Political skill plays importantly into this dimension of the management process. According to Perrewé and her associates (2000), political skill is an interpersonal style that manifests itself in social astuteness and the ability to engage in behaviors that give impetus to feelings of confidence, trust, and sincerity. As a skill that represents a type of interpersonal control, political skill enables executives to personally cope more positively with chronic workplace stressors such as ambiguity, accountability, and interpersonal relationships while fostering a work context of trust and positive interpersonal relationships. This process, and the associated behaviors of political skill, are employed through the art of management and not in the scientific, calculating or manipulative manner discussed by Niccolo Machiavelli in his well known work The Prince (1961). Political skill lays the groundwork for collaborative work behavior and cooperation.

Cooperation vs. Competition Another framing point for our approach to executive stress is that cooperation and working together are essential ingredients to the alignment of individual and organizational purposes (Quick, Gavin, Cooper & Quick, in press). This point does not preclude conflict nor does it preclude competitive behavior as both can be essential to healthy organizational performance and achievement. However,


367

healthy competition in organizations requires well-managed competition with clear rules of engagement; otherwise the competition degenerates into internecine warfare in which various fiefdoms within the systems are at odds with each other (Mack & Quick, 2002). This latter form of competition leads to increasingly defensive behavior that drains energy and resources away from productive and achievement-oriented results. Our point here should not be construed as an argument for passive or submissive behavior on the part of executives and other organizational members, because this is ultimately a form of defensiveness (Wells, 1980). It is also not an argument for totalitarian management, for that is aggressively defensive in nature (Schwartz, 1990). Although business organizations are authority-based systems that rely upon an orderly system of power, authority and responsibility, when authority is taken to the extreme, it can override reality-based information and lead to organizational decline and decay. In contrast, there is no place for authority in science (Bowlby, 1988). In scientific and professional organizations, scientific knowledge must prevail, and that can mean protracted unresolved conflicts and debates about what is true and valid within the science. The effort to stifle this sort of conflict can inhibit more accurate approximations to the truth about man and the world in which we live.

Open Communication The final framing assertion in our executive stress context is that collaborative work behavior and cooperation are best nurtured and cultivated in an organizational culture of open communication, where executives exhibit positive political skills that build trust (see Perrewé et al., 2000; Wells, 1980). Open communication is the basis for “working together” (Quick et al., in press) and is the antithesis of organizational cultures that encourage closed, hidden, and defensive communications. Such organizations are fertile breeding grounds for hidden agendas, personal vendettas, and dysfunctional organizational politics. One of the unintended consequences of hidden agendas in closed organizational cultures is the bad feelings and toxic emotions that all too often result. Open cultures are ones in which individuals are able to express both their feelings and their ideas without risk of recrimination or retribution. Frost (2002) argued that when the pain of toxic emotions is ignored, as it inevitably is within a closed organizational culture, it can poison the workplace, hamper productivity, and threaten the bottom line. Alternatively, when the ubiquitous emotional pain at work is openly acknowledged and managed, it can be transformed from an emotional obstacle to a constructive force for change. This ultimately contributes to a more

368


open, positive, supportive, compassionate, and humane work environment for all. Frost (2002) further suggested that executives should work to institutionalize compassion in a world run on human capital because this world requires human responses to harsh business realities. Two of the pathways to a culture of open communication are through reflective listening and through non-defensive communication (Athos & Gabarro, 1978; Wells, 1980). Reflective listening is a communication skill that focuses the listener’s attention on the speaker’s message. Jablin (1979) found that the best supervisors and managers are those who listen empathetically to their followers, are sensitive to their feelings, and respectful of their ego defenses. At the same time, executives who build open communication cultures become good information managers, ensuring that followers receive the important and essential information they need to do their work. These executives speak openly and expressively, in non-defensive ways, and they tend to neither attack or defend. They express their ideas, beliefs, and positions in assertive and declarative ways when appropriate, while maintaining open, receptive postures for responses from their followers.

CREATING POSITIVE STRESS AT WORK: A PRINCIPLE-BASED FRAMEWORK FOR EXECUTIVE ACTION We identify nine principle-based dimensions in a framework for executive action intended to create a positive stressful environment at work. These principles for executive action complement the seven contextual framework assertions discussed in the first section of the chapter. Selye (1976 as cited in Levi, 2000) argued that, in the extreme, the absence of stress is death. From this point of departure, we suggest a more modest and calibrated approach to enhance stress for positive personal and organizational outcomes. Therefore, our core premise is that very low levels of stress lead to very low levels of performance and achievement, accompanied by boredom and indolence. Very low levels of stress are unhealthy just as are very high levels of stress, though in different ways and for different reasons. This was captured in Fig. 1 at the outset of the chapter. The corollary is that in the optimum zone of pressure, stress, and work demands, effective executives can create the highest levels of performance and achievement. We suggest that there are nine principle-based dimensions of positive stress at work, and these nine dimensions are captured in Table 1. The table identifies each dimension, includes a description of executive action based on the principle, and provides one or two key behavioral science references. These principles can be used for executive action to regulate stress at work and craft healthy, positive environments.

Executive Actions

1. Craft challenging goals

Negotiate with employees to establish goals that a stretch challenges. Treat failure to meet challenging goals as an opportunity for analysis and growth. Align personal and organizational goals to achieve unity of action.

Latham and Locke (1990) and Drucker (1954)

2. Create trusting relationships

Act in ways that display an observable link between positive intention and action. Be willing to be vulnerable, approached, and questioned for understanding. Trustworthiness sets a stage for trust and invites trusting responses.

Farson and Keyes (2002) and Cannon and Edmonson (2001)

3. Encourage learning culture

Examine failures as opportunities for learning and development. Be slow to punish, but do so swiftly and clearly when appropriate. Positively reinforce the generation of new ideas, then test ideas against reality.

Forward, Beach, Gray and Quick (1991) and Senge (1990)

4. Communicate openly

Invite feedback and responses to ideas and initiatives in the workplace. Engage in nondefensive communication rather than defensive communication. Develop empathetic listening skills to compliment effective speaking skills.

Scott and Mitchell (1976) and Penley et al. (1991)

5. Encourage exploratory behavior

Allow employees to take actions and see results without sanctions. Support self-correction actions when problems are encountered at work. Practice extinction, or the nonconsequencing of behavior, whenever possible.

Weick (1988) and Olson (1990)

6. Celebrate small wins and success

Positively reinforce achievements and successes, especially the small ones. Practice positive organizational behavior to reinforce successes. Focus on positive, short term effects as successive approximations to goals.

Luthans (2002) and Komaki, Coombs and Schepman (1996)

7. Capitalize on diversity at work

Build alliances with diverse constituencies and individuals in the workforce. Seek out diverse opinions and perspectives, looking for the devil’s advocate. Value qualifications and expertise, emphasizing employee strengths and skills.

Joplin and Daus (1997) and Cox and Blake (1991)

8. Accept constructive conflict

Frame conflicts around problems and ideas, not around persons. Value conflicts as opportunities to explore new ideas or ways to doing business. Confront unresolved conflicts by talking through difficult conversations.

De Dreu and Van de Vliert (1997) and Wall and Callister (1995)

9. Select for goodness of fit

Test for individual differences to identify strengths and interests; train for skills. Seek alignment of individual skills, abilities, and interests with work requirements. Reinforce upward, positive dynamic interactions between person and environment.

Hough and Furham (2003) and Edwards (1996)

369

Principle


Table 1. Principles for Positive Executive Stress.

370


Principle 1: Craft Challenging Goals The positive effects of goal setting and goal-oriented behavior on performance are among the most robust in all of the management and organizational literature (Latham & Locke, 1990). Whereas goal-setting is anchored in the practice and research of Frederick W. Taylor at the dawn of the twentieth century, Drucker (1954) was the management philosopher who embedded goal-setting activities into the executive ranks at Ford Motor Company through his approach to management by objectives (MBO). Within his framework, goal setting was a self-regulatory activity that Drucker captured in the aptly titled eleventh chapter: “Management by Objective and Self-Control.” The subsequent research of Locke and others (Latham & Locke, 1990) has repeatedly demonstrated the power of challenging, difficult, and demanding goals to bring forth the very best performance and achievement in a wide variety of occupational contexts. The robust, positive linear relationship between challenging goals and performance is shown in Fig. 2. Although there is some debate as to whether unachievable goals serve to motivate behavior and performance, there is little debate about the nature of the positive, linear relationship throughout the remainder of the continuum. Challenging goals serve a central function of increasing stress with its attendant task motivation for performance achievement. This appears to be true whether the goals are arrived at through a mutual, participatory process or assigned in an authoritative manner. Locke’s (1968) original thinking hinged not on mutually agreed or assigned goals, but on the acceptance of the goals by the individual. Drucker (1954), on the other hand, is clear that the process of objective setting

Fig. 2. The Relationship Between Challenging Goals and Performance.


371

should be a participatory one in which there is mutual input and exchange. Substantial amounts of research on goal setting clearly indicates that challenging goals increase stress. There is a second stress-related function of goals, and that is to reduce the ambiguity and uncertainty associated with the work process (Quick, 1979; Quick et al., 1997). The early research on goal setting in industry found that there has never been 100% agreement between an executive and a manager over what the manager’s job really was (Odiorne, 1979). The discrepancy between what an executive thought a manager’s job was and what the manager thought the job was might be as much as 25%. By using a goal-oriented approach to work, this discrepancy could be reduced to as little as 5%, while still leaving the manager some real discretionary latitude. The participative process of arriving at challenging goals for work thus reduces the level of stress a manager would experience from confusion, uncertainty, and ambiguity associated with the work. Combined with challenging goals, participation allows for the channeling and direction of energy along productive pathways. The cueing and directing function of goals for stress-induced energy and behavior can break down if the individual or group rejects, or is in conflict with, the goals (Kegan & Lahey, 2001) and thus Locke’s (1968) original premise still holds, that goals must be accepted to be actionable. Although this is rather straightforward and somewhat simplistic in the abstract, and is based on valid and reliable behavioral science, the executive’s task for implementing a goal-oriented approach to management is much more complex based on its concrete nature. Thus, there is a clear element of art and craft entailed in setting the right level of challenging goals for followers and employees. Very recent research by Bell and Kozlowski (2002) suggested that ability, and in particular cognitive ability, is an important individual variable to factor in when engaging in goal setting for personnel management. Goals and ability can interact in a way that requires the executive to consider the follower’s ability, along with the difficulty level of the goal, in arriving at the right challenge for the individual or group. In particular, goal setting in high stress work situations can have very positive effects, when it is executed well, in the context of the executive-follower relationship (Steele-Johnson & Beauregard, 2000). Challenging goals enhance stress in a positive way when the follower or employee has a “line-of-sight” to the goal, and/or instrumental support and feedback on progress to achieve the goal(s). Therefore, executives cannot disengage from followers once challenging goals are set. They have a responsibility to stay engaged as problem-solving resources, as sources of feedback and support, and as scorekeepers within the system. This entails an interdependent relationship where boundaries and responsibilities are clear so that there is separation as well as relationship.

372


Beyond the dyadic relationship between executive and follower, executives must pay particular attention to the alignment of personal or individual goals with organizational outcomes for the goal-setting process to be most fruitful. In addition, this alignment process can be central to the avoidance of tension, conflict, and counterproductive behavior on the part of followers. Therefore, executives should work to enhance the congruence between personal and perceived team mastery and performance goals in their work environments (Kristof-Brown & Stevens, 2001). The consideration of personal goals in this process, and the effects of self-efficacy on personal goals, is important for executives to factor into their thinking and interactions with followers (Vancouver, Thompson & Williams, 2001). The failure to help followers achieve a positive integration between personal goals and organizational outcomes, to achieve congruence between personal and organizational goals, and to act in alignment with the collective best interests of the organization can lead to conflict and significant losses in productive energy. For example, when followers have hidden commitments to alternative goals at work, this creates an inner conflict that prevents their full energy being directed at achieving even mutually agreed upon, challenging goals (Kegan & Lahey, 2001). Even within the work context, people often work toward multiple goals and objectives, requiring individuals to prioritize various goals while examining the interrelationship and alignment of these multiple goals. Executives aid in this process when they, through open and trusting relationships, help people achieve clarity and focus with regard to their work and personal goals. Inattention to this balance between the work and non-work life domains leads to dysfunctional stress, regardless of the clarity of challenging goals.

Principle 2: Create Trusting Relationships Healthy relationships are vital to leading a functional, healthy life, and their absence poses significant health risks with adverse medical consequences for the individual (Lynch, 2000). Whereas most people understand the need and desire for interpersonal relationships in their personal lives, it is equally important to have healthy, trusting relationships professionally. Wherever these relationships occur, one element critical to all successful relationships is a foundation of trust. Trust has received substantial attention in the research literature over the last half century. More recently, the issue of clearly understanding what is truly meant when we discuss trust in relationships has been examined. Although trust has been defined and measured from many different angles and perceptions, a recent crossdiscipline review of the trust literature by Rousseau and her associates (1998) suggested that “Trust is a psychological state comprising the intention to accept


373

vulnerability based upon positive expectations of the intentions or behaviors of another” (p. 395). What this and most other definitions of trust have in common is this idea of a “willingness to be vulnerable” (Mayer, David & Schoorman, 1995). The relationship that individuals share with the leaders of their organization is the critical element that makes people willing to be vulnerable (Dirks & Ferrin, 2001). Employees need to feel confident in the support their immediate supervisors are willing to give and they need to have an equal amount of confidence in the locality and commitment of top executives. In examining the literature on trust and leadership, Dirks and Ferrin (2002) found that trust in the workplace is divided into two perceptual areas. The first is a relationship-based perspective, and it deals with the relationship between employees and their direct supervisors. This perspective focuses on the nature of the leader-follower relationship and is often described as a social exchange relationship that deals with issues of the care and consideration of each member of the exchange for the others (Konovsky & Pugh, 1994). Because of the personal and reciprocal nature of this relationship, trust is easier to develop and maintain. The second perspective of trust in organizations focuses on the relationship between individual employees and top management, and Dirks and Ferrin (2002) refer to this type of trust as “character-based.” It focuses on the perception of the leader’s character and how it influences a follower’s sense of vulnerability. Individuals must evaluate their trust-related concerns about the character of the top executive, because the leader might have the power to make or influence important decisions that have a direct impact on such things as the individual’s goals, promotions, pay and/or layoffs. Because of the lack of direct contact, employees must draw inferences about such leader character traits as integrity, dependability, and fairness through the leader’s behaviors and attitudes (Jones, James & Bruni, 1975). The challenge of building trust between individuals who rarely have personal contact is a daunting one. Because one-on-one contact is often impractical, and sometimes impossible, for most executives, we offer several options as to how to accomplish this task. First, executives must make themselves vulnerable to their subordinates (Hirschhorn, 1990). Although this might be a disconcerting prospect for many leaders, it is essential that they initiate the process or their employees will be unwilling to make themselves vulnerable to them. Leaders must be willing to reveal their passions, fears, and values very early in the relationship, so their followers can begin to establish an understanding of their character. Once employees come to believe they know and trust the leader, they will become willing to reciprocate that trust and become vulnerable themselves. In addition to sharing personal insight, executives must be willing to share with employees their vision for the organization and the value system for attaining this vision.

374


Although building trust has never been easy, in today’s business environment it has become even more challenging. The seeming explosion of top executives, who have chosen their own personal gain over that of the members of the organization, has created a national environment of distrust and suspicion. This situation produces an even greater need for men and women of ethical character in positions of power and influence. In times such as these, it is easy for executives to state their moral position of honesty and integrity, but it is much harder to achieve acceptance of, and trust in, these values by employees. For these reasons, many executives are being judged by their actions and behaviors instead of their words. Trust in leaders, especially in times of systemic distrust, comes from their action and behaviors rather than from their words. Trust is given as the result of a perception that the leader is making decisions or behaving in a way that recognizes and protects the rights and interests of other people (Hosmer, 1995). The leader’s focus must be on what is good for the organization and its members and not tied solely to personal gain or the betterment of a select few individuals. Leaders of character must be seen as directing their behaviors at the betterment of all involved, and organization members must believe that the executive is acting on behalf of them and the organization. In examining the link between the perception of a leader’s character and the observation of the leader’s behaviors, Simons (1999) suggested the concept of “behavioral integrity.” Simons defined behavioral integrity as the perceived degree of congruence between the values expressed by words and those expressed through actions. A later restatement of the construct offers that behavioral integrity is the perceived pattern of alignment between an actor’s words and deeds (Simons, 2002). When employees sense that top management is not living the behaviors they espouse for the organization as a whole, all trust is broken. People want to be led by those who are not willing to ask others to do what they are not willing to do themselves. When employees see top management making decisions and following through with behaviors that embody the vision and goals of the organization, they begin to get a sense of the integrity of the executives. When this happens, the employees begin to perceive their leaders have ethical characters and are more willing to explore building a trusting relationship with them. Through the growth of trust, employees begin engaging in the kinds of behaviors that the organization desires from them. They have increased commitment to the organization, they engage in more citizenship behaviors, and their performance improves (Korsgaard, Brodt & Whitener, 2002). Employees are willing to be vulnerable to the leadership of the organization and focus their attention and efforts on creating a better organization.


375

Principle 3: Encourage a Learning Culture The next dimension of a positive stress work environment for employees is creating a culture of learning. This type of culture establishes an atmosphere where failure is embraced as an experience from which to learn (Farson & Keyes, 2002). Whereas this aspect of the work environment is proposed as an independent element, it is highly dependent on the previous dimension of trust. Trust in direct and organizational leadership is at the very foundation of a learning culture (Forward, Beach, Gray & Quick, 1991). Before investigating how an executive can develop a learning culture, we must clearly understand what this culture entails. Historically, culture has been defined as an amalgam of beliefs, ideologies, language, ritual, and myth (Pettigrew, 1979). These beliefs and ideologies are not, however, the formalized procedures of the organization. What clearly distinguishes culture from other forms of management is that culture is conveyed through the expression of sentiments, beliefs, and attitudes (Pfeffer, 1981). For many, culture has been seen as a mechanism of control, a tool for management to use to gain cooperative acceptance of management’s values and goals (Ray, 1986). These shared goals and values often attempted to establish an environment of “morality” in what ought to be done, as well as norms on how it should be done (Durkheim, 1965 as cited in Ray, 1986). These cultural norms spoke of how the members of the organization ought to go about attaining success for the organization. The idea of failure was rarely considered, much less mentioned. In the last decade, a new type of organizational culture has attracted attention. It is a culture of learning that has, at its very core, the idea that failures and mistakes are going to happen, and the only real tragedy is if the individual, and ultimately the organization, does not learn from these mistakes (Elliott, Smith & McGuinnes, 2000). Among the elements critical to developing a learning organization are a framework that rewards prudent risk taking, a high pain tolerance for mistakes, and a willingness to pay the financial price for those mistakes (McCune, 1997). The very hallmark of a learning organization is its ability to learn from “intelligent” failures (Leonard-Barton, 1992). In a learning culture, individuals are encouraged to try new ideas and there is a fundamental belief that achievement and success are only attained by taking calculated risks (Leonard-Barton, 1992). It involves creating an environment where there is not only an emphasis on learning, but also on human development and risk taking (Forward et al., 1991). Those organizations that have successfully implemented such a culture have benefited greatly, but developing a learning culture is not without its challenges and unique obstacles. At the individual level, barriers to full participation in the learning culture include our lifelong socialization of striving for success (Cannon & Edmonson,

376


2001). Throughout our lives we are rewarded for success and penalized for failure, and to suddenly embrace failure as a learning experience is difficult for most adults. We are also limited by our self-perceptions, but when we admit and embrace our failures we are forced to re-examine our self-image. We spend much of our developmental lives engaging in activities that enable us to maintain or enhance our self-concept and self-esteem. When we openly focus on our failures, we challenge that image and undermine our self-efficacy, leading to discouragement and poor performance. Organizational level barriers stem mostly from a position of fear (Cannon & Edmonson, 2001). This is generated by a suspicion that the organization will not truly accept failure and creates concern about how such failure will actually be perceived. People fear being seen throughout the organization as a failure, not as having had a failed project or plan. They fear losing promotions, additional compensation, bonuses, or other organizational rewards. Although these concerns affect people throughout the organization, recent research by Lee (2001) showed that concerns about failure are strongest in those employees working at lower status levels of the organization, where they experience the greatest need for protection from reprisal. There are ways to address these concerns and fears and overcome the obstacles that prevent effective learning cultures. In one of the earliest works on developing a learning culture, Senge (1990) stated that a primary goal of leadership is to develop a “creative tension.” This tension occurs when the leader realistically points out where the company is and where it wants to be. The drive to close the gap between the two realities creates the tension, or positive stress, that drives the organization to succeed. Senge (1990) also offered a model for the new role that leaders of learning organizations must play. One aspects of this role requires the leader to become the designer of the “new organization” they are leading. Leaders also function as teachers; they must lead by example, and then teach people throughout the organization to do the same. Leadership in a learning organization also entails being a steward; a steward of the people and of the larger purpose that underlies the very existence of the organization. Johnson (1998) adds two other roles that leaders of the organization must play to successfully create a learning culture. The first is visioning or the ability to create a collective vision of the future with the members of the organization. The second is the empowerment of employees. Here the leader must create an environment where everyone shares in decision making and ultimately shares in the control of work outcomes. It is in this empowerment process that the leader must truly connect with individuals and earn their trust in order to give them the freedom to do what needs to be done for the organization. A major element to this


377

ongoing developmental process is the courage to take necessary and calculated risks and this is where leaders face one of their greatest challenges. Leaders must find a way to convince followers that mistakes and failures are not only acceptable but also encouraged. A “failure-tolerant” leader knows that failures are an integral part of success (Farson & Keyes, 2002). Failure tolerant leaders understand that failure is very personal, and that employees need more than just written policies and procedures to reassure them that failure will not create negative consequences. These leaders help people overcome their fears of failure through their words, actions, and often the acknowledgment of their own failures. They help people see that without some failures, there would never be successes, which is a realization that often enables individuals to take the necessary risks to ensure success. Leaders like Jack Welch of General Electric, and Charles “Boss” Kettering of General Motors demonstrated through word and deed that they had created a risk-friendly environment, and that failures along the road to success were forgiven (Farson & Keyes, 2002). There is no question that this type of support from top management is crucial to the success of any culture. However, support from all management levels is just as critical in a learning environment. The strongest message from upper management can be either enhanced or undermined by middle managers, supervisors, or team leaders. Because of the direct influence supervisors have over their employees, those that do not embrace the ideals of the culture can have profound effects on the organization. These variations in supervisor buy-in can create variations in the amount of fear experienced by individuals through the organization (Cannon & Edmonson, 2001). These managers must be identified and retrained to truly share the culture of learning or fear of failure will continue to limit the growth of the organization. Middle managers that embrace the learning culture can enhance the environment by offering effective coaching, giving clear direction, and creating a supportive work context (Cannon & Edmonson, 2001). Direct supervisors also can help reduce the fear associated with the culture by creating trust through reciprocal relationships. The reinforcement of top management’s commitment to a learning environment by all managers will greatly enhance the commitment, and reduce the fears, of all organization members functioning in such a culture.

Principle 4: Communicate Openly Communication plays a critical part in the process of crafting a positive organizational culture through executive stress management. Open communication helps to regulate levels of stress, tension, and anxiety at work. Although managers at all

378


levels profess that open, effective communication is essential to the management process, the reality is that communication is often very poorly handled, or at best is one-sided and inconsistent. This is not a particularly new phenomenon (Harlow, 1957). A perfect example of this is the manager who proudly states that “we have an open door policy,” but never wonders why no one ever comes through that door. The research literature provides solid support for the relationship between effective management and good communication (Penley et al., 1991). It is evident, from this research, that communication is an essential part of managing an organization where stress is intentionally created, and that communication, like many other management responsibilities, must be systematically and purposefully organized. There are four main aspects that are critical regarding communication in this regard: (1) (2) (3) (4)

Effective communication is used to introduce stress into the organization. Effective communication is used to maintain the appropriate level of stress. Effective communication is used to reduce the negative impacts of stress. Effective communication is used as a “safety valve” to prevent serious damage and identify employees who are not equipped to work in a stressful environment.

Each of these aspects is important, and none can be ignored if the management of an organization is to be successful in appropriately using stress to achieve desired outcomes. Taylor and Van Every (1999) suggested that organization emerges in communication; that is, organization is realized through routine, ritualized, and regular discourse in which members engage. In the more traditional model of the communication process, communication involves a five-step model that begins with the individual with a message to communicate, and ends with the receiver for whom the message is intended (Berlo, 1960). One additional part of this model is the feedback loop that allows the sender to determine if the message was received as intended. This is perhaps the most critical part of the process and one that is often overlooked or ignored. In an organization where stress is being purposefully introduced to achieve a desired level of performance, each part of the process is important, but the feedback loop is absolutely critical with regard to the four aspects described above. There are many barriers to effective communication that can, and often do, get in the way. These include selective perception, filtering, language, status and gender differences, and so forth, which have been well covered in the research literature. Managers must be aware of these barriers, monitor when they may be factors, and consciously seek out ways to counteract them. Stress itself can


379

become an inhibitor of effective communication and cause employees to become defensive and shut down their receptiveness to input (Wells, 1980). Obviously, communication cannot be a one time or a one way event. It must take place constantly and be continually retooled to accommodate changes that take place within the organization, as well as within the individuals that work in the organization. Stress is introduced to the members of an organization by the communication of desired performance levels and the measurement of resultant desired organizational outcomes. As stated earlier, an effective way of doing this is through goal setting. Goal setting, in and of itself, is not a difficult process but communicating goals can be quite challenging. Well thought-out and motivating goals are totally useless when employees are unaware of them or misunderstand them. It is essential that all members of the organization fully understand, not only the goal itself, but the reasons behind the goal and the outcome that is to be realized when the goal is achieved. It is also essential that members understand the consequences of not achieving the goals (Latham & Locke, 1990). Management by Objectives (MBO) is a very effective tool in this regard, because it involves the employees in the goal-setting process and often facilitates their buy-in and acceptance of the goals (Drucker, 1954). It also helps in establishing the point in time where the goal was determined and the point in time when the goal must be achieved. The discrepancy or disconnect between these two points is what creates stress and tension. By setting goals that are quantitative, the members of the organization have a means by which to measure their progress toward achieving the goals. Whether the members are involved in the goal-setting process or not, care must be taken to make sure that they fully understand what is being expected of them, and it is here that the feedback loop is first used. Simply stating the goals is not enough; there must be a method by which management ensures that the goals have been understood and accepted. The next aspect that we are concerned with is maintaining the level of desired stress. This is done through regular checkpoint meetings where it is clearly communicated what progress has been made (if any), what yet needs to be done, what challenges were not anticipated that may affect the outcome, and a re-evaluation of the means by which the goal will be achieved. Ideally, the checkpoint meetings will not involve any surprise information. Having an effective reporting mechanism in place, which is accessible to all members of the organization, facilitates this. Once again, this is an instance where it is desirable to have the members involved in the goal-setting process. When employees have ownership for goals, they often will be motivated to monitor their progress in an ongoing manner. The key challenge for management is to take the temperature of the group, and ensure that the desired level of stress is being maintained. This brings us to the third aspect of communication with which we are concerned: reducing the

380


negative impact of stress. Management must constantly be on the lookout for signs that the level of stress has escalated to a point where it is causing negative outcomes. This might evidence itself in a number of ways, such as a seeming lack of interest in the work and avoidance of personal interaction to outright hostility. When these signs begin to appear, it is important to take immediate action to head off any escalation of these behaviors. Social support is a well established moderator of the effects of stress and encouraging employees to share their feelings with management, as well as fellow workers, can facilitate building social support. The manager also must face the fact that goals might need to be adjusted due to changes in the environment that are beyond the control of the organization. Continuing to pursue a goal that has become unrealistic and unattainable is at best counter-productive and is at worst damaging to the organization and its members. The final aspect of communication that we are concerned with is the “safety valve.” There are two issues that we are concerned with here. The first is creating a mechanism by which the individual members can communicate their concerns and feelings with management. The second is the identification of those individuals that are improperly equipped to work in a stressful environment. It is not enough to simply let the members know that they should feel comfortable in approaching management with concerns regarding the level of stress they are experiencing. Management must create ways in which to draw this information out. We have discussed the importance of trust in regard to the relationship between the employees and management and nowhere is this more critical than in this situation. The employees must feel safe and secure in being able to surface their concerns or they will withdraw from the organization both emotionally and physically. It might be prudent to have an outside source of contact, such as a Human Resources Management professional or even an outside consultant that employees might look upon as a neutral party in which to confide. The difficulty here is in ensuring that the employee does not face retribution for voicing concerns. This makes the second part of this issue (i.e. identifying those who are ill-equipped to work in this environment) even more difficult and management must work with these individuals to help them realize that the existence of stress is necessary and is not likely to change. Employees must be helped to realize that they are not defective, but simply have the wrong “fit” for this particular organization. Although this might be very challenging and time consuming for the manager, it is effort that must be expended. Simply eliminating employees will only send a message to their co-workers that they should not surface any concerns that they might have. Once again, this is an instance where an outside party could be beneficial in helping employees realize that they should not be part of this organization.


381

When we examine the complexity and depth of involvement that must occur in the above discussion, it is easy to see why communication is such a critical issue and why it is often poorly utilized. The good news is that communication is an acquired skill – it can be learned. The successful manager in this environment must realize that it is not an optional skill.

Principle 5: Encourage Exploratory Behavior Executives should realize, but often do not, that stress is a dynamic process rather than a static, stationary factor. Similarly, treating employees as if they are static and stationary rather than dynamic and active is problematic. Monat and Lazarus (1991), Folkman, Schaefer and Lazarus (1979), Heaney et al. (1993), and Ashford (1988) all proposed that the management of stress involves three distinct aspects: The employee can affect behavior(s) that will have a direct impact on the stressor itself; The employee can affect behavior(s) aimed at changing the way the stressor is perceived; and Failing either of the above, the employee can attempt to deal with the emotional arousal caused by the stress response and attempt to minimize the negative effects. As discussed earlier, Mack et al. (1998) proposed a new paradigm of the stress process as a dynamic one, that takes into consideration the importance of the interaction of each individual with the stressor. The model proposed includes three distinct components in the “stress response process”: the stressor; the perception of the stressor; the individual’s reaction to the perception of the stressor, in terms of the stress response and subsequent behavior. Past research has examined each of these components in some detail, but seldom are all considered together (Schwartz et al., 1996). As each component is an integral and vital part of the overall, it is important to examine the process in a more holistic manner. The model begins with any event that has the potential to be a stressor. Each individual evaluates the event by filtering it through his or her own unique perceptual process, and a determination is made of the potential impact and whether it is a threat or a challenge. Lau and Woodman (1995) proposed that this determination is based on the individual’s “schema” of what the event is supposed to be, and

382


the individual’s general attitude towards it. This schema is the way in which the individual cognitively organizes and integrates information. If the event is determined to have a negative impact, it is classified as a threat and an anticipated positive impact would be classified as a challenge. Threats tend to result in negative stress responses and challenges in more positive responses. Employee behavior is then directed toward addressing the effects of the stress response. For example, when individuals encounter feelings of stress, they will first evaluate the cause of the feelings, evaluate the potential impact, and then take action to address it. There are three distinct actions that are likely: Those that address the stressor itself; Those that address the perception; Those that address the stress response. The model also includes feedback loops that cycle back from the action taken to each of the components discussed above: the stressor, the perception process, and the stress response. An action that affects the stressor, changes it, causing it to be re-evaluated by the perception process and that in turn creates a new stress response. A behavior that alters the perception of the stressor, creates a different evaluation of it and hence another stress response, and so on. Edwards (1992) described this as the negative feedback loop. A single action is not likely to successfully address or relieve any particular stress response. Instead, it is the ongoing, cyclical nature of the dynamic process, which includes feedback loops, that ultimately brings about a resolution. A similar concept was proposed by Weick (1979, 1988). He suggested that individuals utilize a process called enacted sense making, whereby people literally think and learn by acting. They “often do not know what the appropriate action is until they take it and see what happens” (Weick, 1988, p. 306). Often the individual does not know what to do in response to the experience of stress in their workplace and taking some action, or any action, due to the cyclical nature of the model, produces some differences in the process, and generates feedback. It may not be until an action is taken, and the outcome evaluated, that individuals know if they chose properly. If individuals believe they have the ability to affect the stressor, they might be more likely to have the courage to initiate corrective action (Olson, 1990) and consequently reduce the negative impact.

Principle 6: Celebrate Small Wins, Success, and Achievement as They Happen When a stressful work environment is created, it is important to understand that perception is often as important as reality. Indeed, it is probably safe to state


383

that, in this case, perception essentially is reality and thus it is the perception, and the individual’s interpretation of that perception, that is the key issue. To influence the perception of stress in the workplace, interventions must focus on positioning the challenges that the organization faces as opportunities and increasing individual self-efficacy to enhance the employees belief in their ability to meet those challenges. Breaking tasks into smaller parts can allow for small wins that tend to increase self-efficacy and small losses that tend to reduce fear of failure. Success can be a strong antidote to stress. When employees feel that they have the ability to be successful, they often are more comfortable about facing new challenges. Therefore, an important function of management should be a willingness to celebrate success and to recognize employees for their contributions along the way toward achieving desired goals, and not just when the final goal is realized. An additional motivation to celebrate small wins is suggested by reinforcement theory (Komaki, Coombs & Schepman, 1996). When a manager rewards those employee behaviors that result in progress toward goal achievement, it is expected that employees would want to continue to perform in the same manner and thus bring about further rewards. If this is not done at many intervals along the way, the employee may feel uncertainty as to whether the “right” actions have been attempted and whether their contribution is recognized.

Principle 7: Capitalize on Diversity at Work A diverse workforce is a source of stress, strength, and challenge in contemporary organizations. Executives have a rich opportunity to capitalize on the skills that a diverse workforce provides in increasingly competitive global markets (Joplin & Daus, 1997). Diversity at work may either be viewed as a problem or as a challenge and opportunity. The research and scholarship on diversity usually focuses on issues of gender, race, and national origin, but not on dimensions of personality (Hough & Furham, 2003). We will examine the personality dimension when we address Principle 9 later in the chapter. Joplin and Daus (1997) suggested that executives face six challenges as they capitalize on diversity at work. These challenges are:

Shifting power dynamics; Diversity of opinions; Lack of empathy; Tokenism; Participation; Overwhelming inertia.

384


The negative response by executives to this changing reality is one of intolerance, whereas the middle of the road response is one of tolerance or acceptance. Both of these responses are defensive and reflect a tendency to revert to a “threat-rigidity” response when confronted by changing and stressful circumstances. The alternative to these less functional or dysfunctional responses is a much more positive, proactive, healthy response of appreciation. Because we are in a second great period of globalization (Friedman, 1999), there is an urgency for organizations to be increasingly redesigned with diversity in mind as one of the essential design features. The positive, proactive approach by executives to designing systems, units, and work teams with diversity in mind capitalizes on the inherent human variance within any organization. This design approach also capitalizes on demographic trends within the world’s population coupled with the opening of new systems and markets. Joplin and Daus (1997) suggested a variety of very positive actions that executives might employ to capitalize on workforce diversity. These executive actions are ones that reflect a basic posture of appreciation for diversity, as opposed to a more homogeneous approach to designing and building a workforce for the present and future. Six examples of executive actions are: Manage through constructive alliance-building; Seek out diverse opinions and perspectives, looking for the devil’s advocate; Make informal contacts and build relationships with work teams and employees; Value qualifications and expertise, emphasizing employee strengths and skills; Establish or reinforce routines, systems, and processes for employee inputs; Recognize and reward employees and teams for diversity achievements. Most systems have mechanisms to reject elements with which they are not familiar, much like the human body attacks bacteria, viruses, and other possibly harmful agents that threaten its homeostasis. Organizations have similar mechanisms that enable them to maintain their own homeostatic functioning. Diversity within a workforce runs the risk of being wrongly identified as a threat to the organization, rather than as an opportunity for competitive advantage and success by the organization. Cox and Blake (1991) have shown how organizations can achieve competitive advantages in cost structures and through high quality human resources retention when executives attract, retain, and motivate people from diverse cultural backgrounds. They further argue that there are other benefits from capitalizing on diversity at work, including competitive advantages in creativity, problem solving, and flexible adaptation to change.


385

Principle 8: Accept Constructive Conflict Conflict has probably existed ever since man began to form social ties with others and any experienced manager can tell us that conflict exists in every organization. It is a natural occurrence that can, and quite often does, create tough management challenges. There is a substantial amount of literature regarding conflict in organizations. Prior to World War II, conflict was always considered to be a negative factor that management should strive to avoid at all cost (Pondy, 1967). This was a rather simplistic approach to managing conflict because all that was required was to identify the source of conflict and eliminate it. After World War II, a more Human Relations approach surfaced (Fox, 1966), which suggested that conflict was unavoidable and in some cases actually could be beneficial. In the mid- to late-1970s, it became apparent that, not only was some conflict desirable, but effective managers sometimes must actually introduce conflict into the organization, in order to motivate the members and encourage creativity and innovation (De Dreu & Van de Vliert, 1997). Despite what has been learned from the research cited above, there is still substantial debate regarding conflict in organizations. One side of the debate says that conflict should never be tolerated, and the other says that it can, and should, be used to enhance the performance of group members. One thing that both sides agree on is that conflict can be a destructive factor if not carefully monitored and controlled. Because the premise of this chapter is the utilization of “induced stress” as a motivator, and because stress can, and often does, play a factor in conflict, it requires our attention. Keeping in mind the two points of view expressed above, it is best to view conflict as a two-edged sword. It is evident from most of the more recent literature that certain amounts and types of conflict are productive in organizations. In most of this work, it appears that only moderate levels of conflict have the potential for positive effects and, at these levels, conflict can actually improve efficiency and productivity (Cosier & Dalton, 1990; Derr, 1978). Lower levels of conflict might actually be stimulating for organization members (Filley, 1978), but excessive conflict is almost always viewed as counterproductive. Unchecked, excessive levels of interpersonal conflict can quickly become not only counter-productive but potentially destructive. In some cases the damage may be irreparable. There is evidence that stress can elevate the level of conflict in organizations (Derr, 1978) and this appears to be particularly important with interpersonal conflict. Therefore, it is important to use caution regarding conflict in those situations where stress has been intentionally introduced. The manager’s role is to closely monitor conflict and ensure that its productive aspects don’t lead to

386


destructive ones. This philosophy is most closely related to the approach that we have discussed in this chapter. The belief that conflict should be valued is more prevalent in western cultures and differs greatly among others, particularly the Japanese (Hahm, 1986). As organizations become increasingly more diverse in the global environment in which we currently work, it is important to understand these differences. Although the potential for positive creative outcomes is enhanced by creating diverse work groups, the potential for increased conflict is also a factor that must be dealt with (Cox & Blake, 1991; Donnellon & Kolb, 1994). The fact that different cultures view conflict differently only adds to the management challenge. There is some evidence that using goal setting as a motivational technique might lead to conflict (Wong, Tjosvold & Lee, 1992). This is particularly true when difficult goals are set for the members of one group, and there is a perception that members of another group may get in the way of goal attainment (March & Simon, 1958; Pruitt & Rubin, 1986). One positive aspect of this is that groups who perceive they are in conflict with other groups often will become more cohesive (Wall & Callister, 1995). However, competition between groups can cause conflict to increase to the point where overall organization goals are endangered at the expense of an individual group’s goals. Management should never tolerate this type of activity and thus it is essential to monitor the level of conflict that is occurring and move decisively when it becomes counter-productive. Managers must constantly communicate the organization’s goals and ensure that members of the organization understand not only their own goals, but also how those goals fit into the overall goals of the organization. MBO lends itself very well to this approach (Drucker, 1954). Stress itself is often a source of conflict (Derr, 1978). Left unchecked, stress-induced conflict can rapidly escalate and lead to undesirable outcomes, up to and including violence (Mack, Shannon, Quick & Quick, 1998; Sternberg & Dobson, 1987). Close attention must be paid to the early symptoms of rising levels of conflict to ensure that escalation does not occur. Communication can help to alleviate this. However, there is some evidence that too much communication itself might lead to conflict (Putnam & Poole, 1987). Often when individuals in groups have worked together for a considerable amount of time, they become very familiar with each other and are more willing to express their annoyance with other members of the group (Ephross & Vassil, 1988). A manager can diminish the impact of this by emphasizing the need for group cohesion and an absolute intolerance for destructive behaviors. Conflict has a tendency to escalate on its own (Fisher, 1990). Mack et al. (1998) proposed a model of the stress response that was cyclical and could often result in escalating spirals that lead to greater and greater levels of negative stress response.


387

It can easily be seen how conflict could contribute to and enhance the intensity of these spirals. Without a safety valve, these spirals can end without positive resolution, and harm can easily result to both the individual and the cohesiveness of the group. If goal setting has been utilized to motivate workers, it might be necessary to revise the goals that have been established in an attempt to de-escalate the intensity of conflict and reduce the levels of stress to a more manageable level (Wall & Callister, 1995). Sometimes all that is required is to revisit the true intention of the goals. Regardless, goals should never be perceived to be unchangeable, and they must be adjusted on an ongoing basis to accommodate unanticipated changes in the environment (e.g. escalating levels of stress). A key issue is being able to determine what is functional and what is dysfunctional conflict (Jehn, 1995). Jehn suggested that there are three different categories of conflict with which management should be concerned: process conflict, task conflict and interpersonal conflict. Although some process and task conflict can be functional, Jehn’s work indicates that interpersonal conflict is the least helpful and has the potential to be the most harmful. Therefore, the greatest care must be taken when dealing with issues that have the potential to create interpersonal conflict. Stress can create difficulty with relationships and lead to interpersonal conflict in an organization (Wall & Callister, 1995), and what we are proposing in this chapter has the potential to lead to destructive conflict. Putnam and Poole (1987) suggested that communication is key in any conflict situation. In light of this, we want to reinforce the importance of keeping lines of communication open. Effective managers must constantly monitor the level and type of conflict that is occurring in their organization through regular communication with employees. If they determine that interpersonal conflict is becoming harmful, they must be prepared to quickly step in and act to diminish the negative effects. Having said that, it should not be overlooked that allowing some task and process conflict, or even intentionally introducing it, might increase the level of stress in the organization and lead to productive and creative results. Once again, caution must be exercised to ensure that the level of stress does not become excessive. As stated above, this is where the double-edged sword comes into play. Despite the positive benefits that can be realized from conflict, the potential damage that can be done to the relationships between the members of the organization can be significant and can occur rather rapidly. As social support is a recognized moderator of the effects of stress, reducing or even eliminating the sources of social support within the organization has the potential to create a situation where, not only is the organization itself damaged, but also the individual members might be damaged as well. Emphasis in conflict resolution should be on the root causes, and not on the personalities involved (Hocker & Wilmot, 1995; Rahim & Bonoma, 1979).

388


When we discuss management as an art, there may be no area where it is more apparent than when dealing with conflict. The manager must be careful not to intervene in normal productive conflict. Trying to step in and resolve disputes that are in the process of being worked out by the group members on their own can result in more damage than good (Rubin, 1994). Allowing conflict to escalate to the point of destructive behavior is obviously undesirable. Introducing conflict into the organization is not a task that should be undertaken lightly and it should not be undertaken by the inexperienced. This is a skill that is learned painstakingly over time and should never be approached in a casual manner. Done properly, it can enhance performance and improve results which are a primary goal of all managers. Done poorly, it can cause real damage to the organization and the individuals that work there.

Principle 9: Select for Goodness of Fit The ninth principle of positive stress management for executives is to achieve a goodness of fit between a person and his or her work environment. The personenvironment fit approach to stress at work has proved quite fruitful from a research perspective (Edwards, 1996), and holds much promise for executives from an applied perspective. One of the ways in which this is being applied proactively in graduate business education is through career planning classes, which provide graduate students with the opportunity to complete in-depth testing coupled with industry explorations. This approach is based on research related to individual differences and diversity primarily based on personality. The in-depth testing includes personality preferences, tested using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI); interpersonal needs, tested using the Fundamental Interpersonal Relations Orientation – Behavioral (FIRO-B); emotional competence, tested using the Emotional Competence Inventory (ECI); and career-related interest, tested using the Strong Vocational Interest Inventory (Nelson & Quick, 2003). Industry exploration is conducted through informational interviews, conducted by graduate students, with managers, specialists, and senior executives in various occupational tracks. The underlying premise for this approach to graduate business education is that people are different and maximize their potential best when they self-select into occupational and work contexts that fit their preferences, interests, skills, and abilities. Further, individuals are working from positions of strength and ability when they are in the right place, doing the right thing, and finding success and satisfaction doing so. This is not a static view of person-environment fit, however. The dynamic, process model of stress, which we have referred to earlier (Mack et al., 1998), incorporates a discussion of dynamic effect spirals in which the


389

person and environment interact in such a way as to create either upward or downward stress spirals. An upward dynamic effect stress spiral would be one in which there are positive changes occurring within the person through growth and skill acquisition coupled with flexibility and change within the environment. Alternatively, a downward dynamic effect stress spiral is one in which the experience of threat and rigidity escalate, and dysfunctional coping responses become manifest in the form of alcohol or substance abuse, withdrawal, and similar negative coping responses. Selection for fit aims to set the stage for upward and positive dynamic effect interactions between the person and the environment, enabling the person to move increasingly toward a better goodness of fit with his or her environment.

STRESS FOR EXECUTIVES: RISKS AND PREVENTION The last section in the chapter presents and develops a principle-based framework of nine dimensions through which executives could take action to create positive stress at work. Whereas executives have a responsibility to be a source of constructive, positive stress for others at work, so too do they have a responsibility to themselves and others who depend upon them to manage their own stress. As a result of sweeping changes in the nature of work and in the workplace, executives are increasingly subject to stress and pressure themselves. This calls for a balanced attention to their own stress, self-care, and personal stress management (Cooper et al., 1989; Watts & Cooper, 1992). This section refocuses on this counterpoint position in order to examine the causes of stress for executives along with the prevention and coping strategies that executives may use to manage their personal stress. The pioneering work of Laird (1929), in part stimulated through his collaboration with the Ford Motor Company, aimed to help executives apply psychological principles to reduce fatigue, enhance personal development, and encourage loyal morale while ensuring profitability of the firm. The failure to successfully manage the stresses to which executives are subject can have tragic consequences, such as in the untimely suicide of Enron’s J. Clifford Baxter (Quick, Cooper, Quick & Gavin, 2002). Research by a wide range of international investigators has found several common sources of stress for executives and has isolated a set of prevention strategies, positive practices, and healthy habits that can contribute to successful coping (APEX, 2002; Cooper, Dewe & O’Driscoll, 2001; Perrewé et al., 2000; Quick et al., 2002). For many executives, stress is no longer a humorous issue as it once was but rather has been translated into the pain and suffering that manifest in anxiety, depression, and hypertension as presented to their physicians

390


and corporate psychologists. We first address four leading causes of stress for executives, and then turn to four preventive and coping strategies.

Causes of Stress for Executives The body of research on executive stress, either among executives in the private sector or in public service, is somewhat limited. However, there is both direct and indirect empirical and epidemiological evidence as well as biographical research to draw on to understand the causes of stress for executives (APEX, 2002; Cartwright & Cooper, 1997; Cooper et al., 2001; DeFrank & Ivancevich, 1998; Perrewé et al., 2000; Quick et al., 2002). The impacts of increased economic competition, the substantial downsizing and delayering within organizations and the changing nature of work have led to increased stress for many executives. The four causes of stress that emerge from the research are work overload, time pressure and travel, work-family-work conflicts, and organizational politics. Each of these places unique pressure on executives at work. Work Overload In 1996, the public service of Canada downsized its most senior public service executives by 35% (APEX, 2002). Therefore, it is not surprising that work overload became the most commonly cited source of workplace stress for these senior Canadian executives. There are two different types of work overload. Quantitative overload refers simply to having too much work to do. Qualitative overload refers to work that is too difficult for an individual. Quantitative overload often leads to working longer hours. The number of hours worked is a significant factor in executive health. Work overload may contribute to sleep disturbances, as in the case of the Canadian executives. A U.S. study of light industrial workers found that individuals under 45 years of age who worked more than 48 hours a week had twice the risk of death from coronary heart disease as did similar individuals working a maximum of 40 hours a week (Breslow & Buell, 1960). In the case of the Canadian public service executives, it was found subsequent to the major downsizing of 1996 that 20% (1 in 5) had cardiovascular disease as manifest, for example, in hypertension. Long working hours can create conflict and resentment at home as well as affect the quality of time spent with family. Working long hours has become the norm for many executives, either because of the perceived demands of the workload or because the culture of the organization dictates that working late is symbolic of an executive’s commitment. Although the average weekly hours worked by blue-collar and manual workers in Europe have


391

decreased over time as a result of industrial legislation, white-collar “executive” working hours have actually increased in the U.S. and Europe. A 10-hour working day is not uncommon despite research evidence that productivity declines beyond 40 work hours a week. Executive women are particularly vulnerable to overload (Nelson & Burke, 2000). Women often find themselves taking on too much work, on the belief that they have to be seen to be as good at their jobs or better than male colleagues in similar positions if they are to gain promotion. Furthermore, it is still not uncommon for female executives to have primary responsibility of home, childcare arrangements, and care giving for her partner. These multiple role demands – executive, mother, wife – mean that working women effectively have two jobs, and can work as many hours at home as they do at the office or factory (Lundberg & Frankenhaeuser, 1999). Maintaining the “superwoman” image has both adverse physiological and health cost consequences. Time Pressure and Travel One of the inevitable consequences of work overload, especially the quantitative overload that results from employment downsizing, is increasing time pressure. While work overload and time pressure may share some common variance as sources of stress for executives, they each have separate variance as well. For example, executive travel was identified as a major cause of stress and health risk in two independent studies of executives (APEX, 2002; Veiga, 2000). High travel demands also contribute to the time pressure, and work-family conflicts to which executives are subject. DeFrank and Ivancevich (2000) identify independent sources of stress and health risk in the pre-trip, during-trip, and post-trip phases of executive travel. Time pressures and excessive working hours to manage workload demands were central contributors to the experience of executive burnout and work-family conflicts among Volvo executives and managers in the late 1990s (Bendtsson, 2003). However, not all time pressure originates in the work environment. As in the Volvo case, some time pressure is self-induced by the Type A executive who is in a constant competitive struggle to succeed. This sense of time urgency may be reinforced by the organization even if its origins are not wholly within the work environment. Osler (1910) was among the first to identify time urgency as a contributing factor in cardiovascular problems. Since the 9–11 terrorist attack on America, the stress associated with air travel in particular has increased along several dimensions. These include the fear and uncertainty of repeat offenses, time demands for heightened security measures enacted at airports throughout North America (most European airports had higher levels of security already established as early as the 1990s), and the anxiety

392


experienced by the executive’s family and loved ones out of fear for the safety and well-being of the executive. Work-Family-Work Conflicts Work-family and family-work conflicts are a source of stress for executives, both men and women alike. The dynamics, however, differ by gender. With two out of every three managers in most developed countries involved in two-earner families, the pressure of lack of work-family balance and family tension are high amongst executives. There is also literature, for example by Campbell-Moore (1988), suggesting strategies and coping mechanisms specifically for the inevitable conflicts that arise. Judge, Boudreau and Bretz (1994) studied job and life attitudes of executives and found they had to isolate their analysis to males given the small number of female executive respondents in their sample. Within the 1,388 (39% response rate) male respondents, they isolated independent effects of work-family conflict and family-work conflict. Specifically, work-family conflict was a significant contributor to job stress for these male executives as well as a source of decreased life satisfaction. These effects were much stronger than the effects of family-work conflict, which was still significantly related to job stress, though not significantly related to job satisfaction. Hence, work-family conflict and family-work conflict are important causes of job stress for male executives. The dynamics for executive women is somewhat different. Hewlett (2002) found disturbing evidence in her new study of executive women suggesting that the notion that women can have it all is a false myth. Her sobering data indicate that high-achieving and corporate women are much more likely to be childless and are much less likely to be married at ages 41–55. In addition, her data found that among high-achieving men and women, the women are still significantly more likely to have a variety of primary child care and household responsibilities. For women, this is a very costly imbalance that Hewlett (2002) suggests challenges young women to make clear, proactive decisions as opposed to allowing for a creeping non-choice that may lead to regret. Hence, for the female executive, there may well be a harsh reality behind the myth that women can have it all if they simply try hard enough. These differing conflicting issues for male and female executives also play out on an organizational stage. Organizations are not uniformly responsive to work-family-work conflicts. Milliken, Martins and Morgan (1998) found that there were significant differences across industries with regard to work-family responsiveness. Further, they did not find the percentage of women employed by a company to explain unique variance in responsiveness. However, they did find that organizations were more likely to offer benefits when work and family issues were salient to senior human resource staff and these were likely to impact


393

the organization’s performance if unaddressed. Hence, the individual experience in senior male and female executives can be instrumental in an organization’s response to work-family-work conflict. Such was the case at Hewlett-Packard some time after Lewis Platt lost his first wife to illness. Subsequently as Chairman and CEO, Mr. Platt led a number of women-friendly and family-friendly initiatives within the HP culture (Nelson & Quick, 2003). Organizational Politics Organizational politics is among the more important sources of stress for executives, and one of the least well researched. Political behavior, in contrast to its positive characterization within the Aristotelian Greek-ideal, frequently degenerates into conflict and disharmony in the upper reaches of U.S. and European corporations. Perrewé et al. (2000) found political behavior most prevalent in these upper reaches. An example of the win-lose dynamics of political power struggles occurred at the top of Citigroup, which resulted from the merger of Travelers and Citicorp. Sanford Weill of Travelers and John Reed of Citicorp became co-CEOs of Citigroup. In early 2000, Weill took out Reed in a messy power struggle, though the victor (Sandy Weill) has not found it easy to manage the merger-made monster with its 240,000 employees. While this political power struggle was highly visible on Wall Street and Main Street, many of the political power struggles in corporations are much less visible. Male and female executives alike are subject to organizational politics. Because of its lack of formal sanction within the organization, political behavior often grows up in informal networks. Women have often been excluded from informal male networks and therefore left out of the political “games” that often go on in corporations. Over time that has changed and women are more politically engaged. In one early, large-scale study of men and women in the human resource profession, the focus was on the causes of stress, experiences of strain, and coping mechanisms between the genders (Nelson, Hitt & Quick, 1989; Nelson, Hitt, Quick & Moesel, 1990). The human resource profession has been among the most hospitable to women and the results found that there was only one significant difference between men and women with regard to sources of stress. This difference was in organizational politics, with women experiencing slightly, but significantly, more stress than men. Interestingly, there was no gender difference in stress from work-home conflict, or any of the other thirteen causes of stress examined.

Preventive and Coping Strategies What do, or what can, executives do to manage the inevitable stress to which they are subject? The stress literature is filled with preventive, coping, and therapeutic

394


strategies for the stress of work and life (Quick et al., 1997), for executives as well as others at work (Nelson et al., 1989). While there is somewhat less research focused exclusively on male and female executives, when it comes to physical fitness and exercise, supportive relationships, positive perspectives, and early warning signs and treatment interventions, there is some evidence-based research with executives. We discuss each of these four preventive and coping strategies for executive stress. Physical Fitness and Exercise Physical fitness and exercise are among the best-researched stress management strategies. One early study of executives found that increased physical fitness activity was one factor leading to an increase in health, fitness, and zest among the executives (Cathcart, 1977). Kenneth Cooper’s 30-year old campaign to enhance physical fitness through aerobic exercise has had significant effects, especially among executive populations. For example, one of Cooper’s post-doctoral fellows, who became the executive fitness director at the National Defense University at Fort Leslie McNair, Washington, DC, has seen dramatic improvements in the health behaviors of general officers and senior federal executives as physical fitness has become an increasingly ingrained feature of the executive culture. Neck and Cooper (2000) more recently suggest that the first key to physical fitness is exercise. The three components of an effective executive exercise program are endurance, strength, and flexibility. Their approach is adjusted appropriately for male and female executives, but addresses both sexes. Endurance emerges from aerobic activity, such as walking or rowing, which leads to a strengthening of the cardiovascular system. The strength key aims at arresting or reversing the loss of muscle tissue, while the flexibility key aims at reversing the effects of the muscle tension generated as one component of the stress response. Supportive Relationships The importance of supportive relationships in preventing distress and strain and in coping with work or life challenges has become increasingly clear over the past quarter of a century. There is also now evidence for the positive role of supportive relationships at the executive level. APEX (2002) found that social support from supervisors and from colleagues played a very positive and important role in work-related stress outcomes for public service executives in Canada. Interestingly, family support did not factor in as an important coping resource for these executives when it came to work-related stress. In small-scale, in-depth research that explored the causes, consequences, and coping strategies for stress among male and female executives, Nelson, Quick and Quick (1989) found that supportive relationships were the only common preventive and coping strategy for all executives. Each of the other preventive and


395

coping strategies examined (for examples, exercise, time management, planning and goal setting, relaxation, prayer or meditation) was only used selectively by a subgroup of the executives studied. These results reinforce the importance of supportive relationships and social support as a preventive and coping strategy for executives. Lynch’s (2000) research on the adverse psychological and physiological effects of social isolation, as in the problem of the loneliness of command for executives, has also focused on executives. The counter for social isolation is found in communication and supportive social relationships. Lynch (2000) draws attention to the physiological, and in particular the cardiovascular, effects of supportive relationships. Hence, supportive relationships are a central element in a comprehensive, healthy strategy for preventive stress management among executives. Positive Perspectives A positive perspective is a preventive strategy for coping with the inevitable jagged edges of work and life. For example, an appropriate response to threatened colleagues requires a positive attitude on an executive’s part. Seligman (1990) has labeled this non-negative interpretative style of thinking learned optimism. Learned optimism can be manifest in constructive self-talk or a positive perspective (Quick et al., 1997). The way executives talk to themselves may range from positive and optimistic to harshly condemning and pessimistic. Negative and pessimistic self-talk often achieves little and certainly serves to reinforce or maintain a high level of stress and physiological arousal, both of which dissipate emotional energy. This is not to argue against realistic thinking about serious or anticipated problems. While optimists may be healthier and perform better over time, pessimists sometimes display a better grip on reality. Hence, non-negative thinking and a positive perspective need to be tempered with a clear reality orientation. Constructive self-talk can lead to a positive perspective, high level of achievement and task outcomes, and healthy psychological and physiological results. Examples of constructive self-talk that can lead to a positive perspective are included in Table 2. All these constructive examples seek to turn bad experiences into potentially positive ones, especially in an executive’s relationships with colleagues. Learned optimism and a positive perspective lead to thinking differently about stressful situations, and to gaining greater control over one’s responses and, therefore, the situation itself. Executives trapped in defensive coping and negative thinking are ones who have adverse effects on their professional and personal relationships, and often worsen the situation rather than improve the situation.

396


Table 2. Constructive Self-talk in Dealing with Difficult Colleagues at Work. Situation

Negative Mental Monologue

Constructive Self-Talk

Colleague hides important business file

“He’s a nasty person, I’ll just avoid him and hide material from him as well.” “I’ll fight him every turn, preparing myself with more damaging material to undermine him.” “If that’s the game he wants to play, just watch my memos.”

I wonder why he is doing this. I will make an effort to get to know him’.

Colleague always “puts you down” at meetings, especially when the boss is present. Memos sent to other colleagues highlighting one of your business mistakes

“I let myself get disturbed too much by this colleague, may be something’s bothering him. I’ll see if I can find out what it is.” “Why did he need to send that memo. He must feel threatened by me. Have I done something to hurt him? How can I improve my relationship with him?”

Early Warning Signs and Treatment Intervention Any comprehensive preventive stress management strategy must include early detection and early treatment intervention components. Early warning signs of distress and strain are powerful signals to engage early treatment intervention before serious or irreversible problems result. This is especially true in the case of depression, one of the two most common presenting stress-related complaints. Kline and Sussman (2000) find that the inability to recognize depression and the stigma attached to it prevent most depressed individuals from seeking treatment. This is especially true for executives, whom the researchers say face the reality of major depression. Untreated depression is a major risk factor for suicide, two very publicly visible cases of which were those of Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Jeremy M. (Mike) Boorda in 1996 and Enron’s J. Clifford Baxter in 2002. Depression is among the hidden and under-identified stress-related problems for executives who are also subject to the social stigma that continues to be associated with mental health issues in general. Kline and Sussman (2000) suggest that executives should be sensitive to the conflicting demands of the law and humane concerns, especially when it comes to dealing with their employees. The authors have four prescriptions for this important arena for preventive and treatment intervention. First, educate themselves and their organizations about depression in order to overcome prejudices and stigma. Second, get help from health professionals because depression is one of the most treatable of the mental health problems in the workplace. Third, foster awareness of the symptoms and early warning signs of depression. Fourth, promote effective treatment for depression and other stress-related disorders and problems.


397

DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH The first two major sections of the chapter set forth contextual factors and action principles for executives aimed at causing positive stress in the workplace. The contextual factors and principles in Table 1 were developed based upon a review of the existing scientific evidence, research, and management theory. What is now required is the movement of these frameworks into testable hypotheses with the aim of examining the effects of executive-caused stress on employees, both in terms of their health and well-being as well as their achievement and productivity. Secondly, the APEX (2002) epidemiological model for research on executives should be extended to examine the deeper level systemic effects of the stress and pressure on executives. Just as the human body may refer pain from a point of injury to other organs and systems within the body, executives may refer their own pain and strain to other members of the organization, with resulting adverse effects and suffering. This also requires more organizational learning about public health and preventive medicine, whose basic science is epidemiology (i.e. the study of disease epidemics). A third avenue of inquiry is to take lessons from biographical research on executive health (e.g. Quick et al., 2002) and study the modeling and mirroring of executive behavior and how stress-resistant behavior can evolve. For example, the Kennedy clan modeled behavior down through several generations, unfortunately not all of it healthy behavior. The contrasting model was J. P. Morgan Jr. who mirrored, rather than modeled, the behavior of his flamboyant father J. P. Morgan, Sr. Much human behavior is learning through such a modeling or mirroring process, yet we know very little about these processes in a scientifically systematic way. Finally, how do we encourage positive attitudes and behavior within executives that are stress-resistant and serve as healthy models for others in the organization? We suggest building on single case studies and extending these into programs of systematic nomothetic (natural scientific) research paradigms. Luthans (2002) has extended the mission of positive psychology to build on human strength, in contrast to the missions of preventing mental health problems or repairing damage (for example, through therapy). What we are suggesting is to take this to the executive level, look at positive single cases, and then build natural scientific research paradigms around the core constructs. Two examples of these single case studies that might be extended in new scientific research would be those of Theodore Roosevelt and Herb Kelleher. In the case of Theodore Roosevelt, he is well known for his emphasis on the physically strenuous life and as a hearty individualist. He also was a strong advocate of character and the virtues. Roosevelt considered character of far

398


greater importance than physical health or psychological strength. This offers researchers the challenge of defining executive character, measuring executive character, and examining the effect of character, virtuous behavior, and personal integrity in the workplace. Does an executive’s character have positive effects on an executive’s health and well-being? Does an executive’s character have positive effects on the health and well-being of others within the organization? In the case of Herb Kelleher, he is well known for his antics and the humor he injected into the culture of Southwest Airlines. How is humor spread within an organization and what are its effects? Are they all positive? Does humor function as an immunizing agent for executives, making them more stress-resistant in their actions and behavior.

CONCLUSION We have offered in this chapter a new paradigm for executive stress, one based on a contextual and content-based framework for executives as “sources” of stress for people at work. Executives are not, nor do we believe they should be, passive agents within organizations. Rather, they are active agents who have important responsibility for the health of the organization and the well-being of individuals under their care. As such, they must act in ways that guide, direct, and cause stress for people at work while at the same time offering encouragement and support to individuals. Organizations should not be sweatshops in which the lash is used to drive employees but learning systems in which individuals can grow to their full potential, feel valued, be productive, serve others, and contribute to important work in the world. While executives are active agents causing stress at work, they also are subject to the inevitable forces, pressures, and stress of organizational life. As such, they have a personal responsibility to understand their sources of their own stress, their unique stress response patterns, and the healthy habits that enable them to be positive forces at work. There is now an emerging body of research with male and female executives in this regard.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors express their appreciation to Joel A. Quintans for his graphic artistry in preparing the figures, Elena Radeva for her preparation of the references in support of the text, and Sheri Schember Quick for the comments and suggestions on the near final draft of the chapter.


399

REFERENCES Ainsworth, M. D. S., & Bowlby, J. (1991). An ethological approach to personality. American Psychologist, 46, 333–341. APEX (2002). Study on the health of executives in the Public Service of Canada. Ottawa: Association of Professional Executives of the Public Service of Canada. Aristotle (1998). The Nicomachean ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ashford, S. J. (1988). Individual strategies for coping with stress during organizational transitions. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 24(1), 19–36. Athos, A. G., & Gabarro, J. J. (1978). Interpersonal behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass and Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and managerial applications (3rd ed.). New York: Free Press. Behling, O. (1980). The case for the natural science model for research in organizational behavior and organizational theory. Academy of Management Review, 5, 483–490. Bell, B. S., & Kozlowski, S. W. I. (2002). Goal orientation and ability: Interactive effects on self-efficacy, performance, and knowledge. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 497–506. Bell, M. P., Quick, J. C., & Cycota, C. (2002). Assessment and prevention of sexual harassment: An applied guide to creating healthy organizations. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 10(1/2), 160–167. Bendtsson, K. (2003). To prevent burnout – the Volvo approach. In: L. Levi (Chair), Symposium on European Approaches to Stress Prevention – from Theory to Practice. Fifth Interdisciplinary Conference on Occupational Stress and Health, Toronto, Canada (21 March). Berlo, D. K. (1960). The process of communication. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Boettinger, H. M. (1975). Is management really an art? Harvard Business Review, 53(1), 54–64. Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base: Clinical applications of attachment theory. London: Routledge. Breslow, L., & Buell, P. (1960). Mortality from coronary heart disease and physical activity of work in California. Journal of Chronic Diseases, 11, 615–625. Buckingham, M. (1999). First, break all the rules. New York: Simon & Schuster. Campbell-Moore, B. (1988). Successful women: Angry men. London: Arrow. Cannon, M., & Edmonson, A. (2001). Confronting failure: Antecedents and consequences of shared beliefs about failure in organizational work groups. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22, 161–177. Cartwright, S., & Cooper, C. L. (1997). Managing workplace stress. London: Sage. Cathcart, L. M. (1977). A four year study of executive health risk. Journal of Occupational Medicine, 19, 354–357. Cooper, C. L., Dewe, P., & O’Driscoll, M. (2001). Organizational stress: A Review and critique of theory, research and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Cooper, C. L., Makin, P., & Cox, C. (1989). Managing people at work. London: Routledge (in association with the British Psychological Society). Cooper, C. L., & Quick, J. C. (2003). FAST FACTS: Stress, Second edition (clinical monograph). Oxford, England: Health Press (Original work, 1999). Cosier, R. A., & Dalton, D. R. (1990). Positive effects of conflict: A field assessment. International Journal of Conflict Management, 1, 81–92. Cox, T., & Blake, S. (1991). Managing cultural diversity: Implications for organizational competitiveness. Academy of Management Executive, 5(3), 45–56. Curran, D. (1985). Stress and the healthy family. San Francisco: Harper. Daft, R., & Lewin, A. (1990). Can organization studies begin to break out of the normal science straitjacket? An editorial essay. Organization Science, 1(1), 1–9.

400


De Dreu, C. K. W., & Van de Vliert, E. (1997). Using conflict in organizations. London: Sage. DeFrank, R. S., & Ivancevich, J. M. (1998). Stress on the job: An executive update. Academy of Management Executive, 12, 55–66. Derr, C. B. (1978). Managing organizational conflict: Collaboration, bargaining, power approaches. California Management Review, 21, 76–83. Dirks, D., & Ferrin, D. (2001). Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 611–628. Dirks, D., & Ferrin, D. (2002). The role of trust in organizational settings. Organization Science, 12(4), 450–467. Donnellon, A., & Kolb, D. M. (1994). Constructive for whom? The fate of diversity disputes in organizations. Journal of Social Issues, 50(1), 139–155. Drucker, P. F. (1954). The practice of management. New York: Harper & Bros. Durkheim, E. (1965). The elementary forms of the religious life. New York: Free Press. Edwards, J. R. (1992). A cybernetic theory of stress, coping, and well-being in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 17(2), 238–274. Edwards, J. R. (1996). An examination of competing versions of the person-environment fit approach to stress. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 292–339. Elliott, D., Smith, D., & McGuinnes, M. (2000). Exploring the failure to learn: Crises and the barriers to learning. Review of Business, 21(3), 17–24. Ephross, P. H., & Vassil, T. V. (1988). Groups that work: Structure and process. New York: Columbia University Press. Farber, D. (2002). Sloan rules: Alfred P. Sloan and the triumph of General Motors. University of Chicago Press. Farson, R., & Keyes, R. (2002). The failure-tolerant leader. Harvard Business Review, 80(8), 3–8. Filley, A. C. (1978). Some normative issues in conflict management. California Management Review, 21(2), 61–66. Fisher, R. J. (1990). The social psychology of intergroup and international conflict resolution. New York: Springer-Verlag. Folkman, S., Schaefer, C., & Lazarus, R. S. (1979). Cognitive process as mediators of stress and coping. In: V. Hamilton & D. M. Warburton (Eds), Human Stress and Cognition (pp. 265–298). Chichester, England: Wiley. Forward, G., Beach, D., Gray, D., & Quick, J. C. (1991). Mentofacturing: A vision for American industrial excellence. Academy of Management Executive, 5(3), 32–44. Fox, A. (1966). Industrial sociology and industrial relations, Research Paper No. 3. Royal Commission on Trades Unions and Employee Associations, HMSO, London. Foxhall, K. (2002). More psychologists are attracted to the executive coaching field. APA Monitor on Psychology, 33(4), 52–53. Friedman, T. (1999). The Lexus and the olive tree. HarperCollins. Frost, P. (2002). Toxic emotions at work: How compassionate managers handle pain and conflict. Harvard Business School Publishing. Frost, P., & Robinson, S. (1999). The toxic handler: Organizational hero – and casualty. Harvard Business Review, 77, 97–106. Griffin, R. W., O’Leary-Kelly, A. M., & Collins, J. (Eds) (1998). Dysfunctional behavior in organizations: Violent and deviant behavior. Monographs in Organizational Behavior and Industrial Relations (Vol. 23, Parts A and B). Stamford, CT: JAI Press. Hahm, P.-C. (1986). Korean jurisprudence, politics and culture. Seoul: Yonsei University Press. Harlow, R. F. (1957). Looking around. Harvard Business Review, 35(6), 145–153.


401

Heaney, C. A., Israel, B. A., Schurman, S. J., Baker, E. A., House, J. S., & Hugentobler, M. (1993). Industrial relations, worksite stress reduction, and employee well-being: A participatory action research investigation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 14, 495–510. Hewlett, S. A. (2002). Executive women and the myth of having it all. Harvard Business Review, 80, 66–73. Hirschhorn, L. (1990). Leaders and followers in a postindustrial age: A psychodynamic view. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 26(4), 529–542. Hocker, J. L., & Wilmot, W. W. (1995). Interpersonal conflict (5th ed.). Madison, WI: Brown and Benchmark. Hosmer, L. (1995). Trust: The connecting link between organizational theory and philosophical ethics. Academy of Management Review, 20(2), 379–403. Hough, L. M., & Furham, A. (2003). Use of personality variables in work settings. In: W. C. Borman, D. R. Ilgen & R. J. Klimoski (Eds), Handbook of Psychology (Vol. 12, pp. 131–169). New York: Wiley. Jablin, F. M. (1979). Superior-subordinate communication: The state of art. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 1201–1222. Jehn, K. A. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 256–282. Johnson, J. (1998). Embracing change: A leadership model for the learning organization. International Journal of Training and Development, 2(2), 141–150. Jones, A., James, L., & Bruni, J. (1975). Perceived leadership behavior and employee confidence in the leader as moderated by job involvement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 146–149. Joplin, J., & Daus, C. S. (1997). Challenges of leading a diverse workforce. Academy of Management Executive, 11, 32–47. Joplin, J. W., Nelson, D. L., & Quick, J. C. (1999). Attachment behavior and health: Relationships at work and home. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 783–796. Judge, T. A., Boudreau, J. W., & Bretz, R. D., Jr. (1994). Job and life attitudes of male executives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 767–782. Kegan, R., & Lahey, L. L. (2001). The real reason people won’t change. Harvard Business Review, 79(10), 84–92. Kets de Vries, M., & van de Loo, E. (2000). The clinical paradigm. European Management Journal, 18, 2–17. Kline, J., & Sussman, L. (2000). An executive guide to workplace depression. Academy of Management Executive, 14(3), 103–114. Komaki, J., Coombs, T., & Schepman, S. (1996). Motivational implications of reinforcement theory. In: R. M. Steers, L. W. Porter & G. A. Begley (Eds), Motivation and Leadership at Work (pp. 34–52). New York: McGraw-Hill. Konovsky, M., & Pugh, D. (1994). Citizenship behavior and social exchange. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 656–669. Korsgaard, M., Brodt, S., & Whitener, E. (2002). Trust in the face of conflict: The role of managerial trustworthy behavior and organizational context. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 312–319. Kristof-Brown, A. L., & Stevens, C. K. (2001). Goal congruence in project teams: Does the fit between members’ personal mastery and performance goals matter? Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(6), 1083–1096. Laird, D. A. (1929). Psychology and profits. New York: B. C. Forbes.

402


Latham, G. P., & Locke, E. A. (1990). A theory of goal setting and task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Lau, C., & Woodman, R. W. (1995). Understanding organizational change: A schematic perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 537–554. Lee, F. (2001). The fear factor. Harvard Business Review, 79(1), 29–30. Leonard-Barton, D. (1992). The factory as a learning laboratory. Sloan Management Review, 34(1), 23–38. Levi, L. (2000). Guidance on work-related stress. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission. Levinson, H. (1990). Executive: The guide to responsive management. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Locke, E. A. (1968). Toward a theory of task motivation and incentives. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 3, 157–189. Lundberg, U., & Frankenhaeuser, M. (1999). Stress and workload of men and women in high-ranking positions. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 2, 142–151. Luthans, F. (2002). Positive organizational behavior: Developing and managing psychological strengths. Academy of Management Executive, 16(1), 57–72. Lynch, J. J. (2000). A cry unheard: New insights into the medical consequences of loneliness. Baltimore, MD: Bancroft. Mack, D. A., Nelson, D. L., & Quick, J. C. (1998). The stress of organizational change: A dynamic process model. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 47, 219–232. Mack, D. A., & Quick, J. C. (2002). EDS: An inside view of a corporate life cycle transition. Organizational Dynamics, 30, 282–293. Mack, D. A., Shannon, C., Quick, J. D., & Quick, J. C. (1998). Stress and the preventive management of workplace violence. In: R. W. Griffin, A. O’Leary-Kelly & J. Collins (Eds), Dysfunctional Behavior in Organizations – Volume 1: Violent Behavior in Organizations (pp. 19–141). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. March, J. G., & Simon, H. (1958). Organizations. New York: Wiley. Mayer, R., David, J., & Schoorman, F. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, 709–734. McCune, J. (1997). Making lemonade. Management Review, 86(6), 49–53. McGregor, D. M. (1960). The human side of enterprise. New York: McGraw-Hill. Milliken, F. J., Martins, L. L., & Morgan, H. (1998). Explaining organizational responsiveness to work-family issues: The role of human resource executives as issue interpreters. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 580–592. Monat, A., & Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Stress and some of its effects. In: A. Monat & R. S. Lazarus (Eds), Stress and Coping: An Anthology (3rd ed.). New York: Columbia University Press. Neck, C. P., & Cooper, K. H. (2000). The fit executive: Exercise and diet guidelines for enhancing performance. Academy of Management Executive, 14(2), 72–83. Nelson, D. L., & Burke, R. J. (2000). Women executives: Health, stress, and success. Academy of Management Executive, 14(2), 107–121. Nelson, D. L., Hitt, M. A., & Quick, J. C. (1989). Men and women of the personnel profession: Some differences and similarities in their stress. Stress Medicine, 5, 145–152. Nelson, D. L., Hitt, M. A., Quick, J. C., & Moesel, D. (1990). Politics, lack of career progress, and work/home conflict: Stress and strain for working women. Sex Roles, 23, 169–185. Nelson, D. L., & Quick, J. C. (2003). Organizational behavior: Foundations, realities, and challenges (4th ed.). Mason, OH: South-Western, a Division of Thomson.


403

Nelson, D. L., Quick, J. C., & Quick, J. D. (1989). Corporate warfare: Preventing combat-stress and battle fatigue. Organizational Dynamics, 18, 65–79. Odiorne, G. (1979). MBO II: A system of managerial leadership. Center for Effective Performance. Olson, E. E. (1990). The transcendent function in organizational change. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 26(1), 69–81. Osler, W. (1910). The Lumleian lectures on angina pectoris. Lancet, 1, 839–844. Penley, L. E., Alexander, E. R., Jernigan, I. E., & Henwood, C. (1991). Communication abilities of managers: The relationship to performance. Journal of Management, 17(1), 57–77. Perrewé, P. L., Ferris, G. R., Frink, D. D., & Anthony, W. P. (2000). Political skill: An antidote for workplace stressors. Academy of Management Executive, 14(3), 115–123. Pettigrew, A. (1979). On studying organizational cultures. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(2), 570–581. Pfeffer, J. (1977). The ambiguity of leadership. Academy of Management Review, 2(1), 104–113. Pfeffer, J. (1981). Management as symbolic action: The creation and maintenance of organizational paradigms’. In: L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds), Research in Organizational Behavior (Vol. 3, pp. 1–52). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Pondy, L. R. (1967). Organizational conflict: Concepts and models. Administrative Science Quarterly, 12, 296–320. Pruitt, D. G., & Rubin, J. Z. (1986). Social conflict: Escalation, stalemate and settlement. New York: Random House. Putnam, L. L., & Poole, M. S. (1987). Conflict and negotiation. In: F. M. Jablin, L. L. Putnam, K. H. Roberts & L. W. Porter (Eds), Handbook of Organizational Communication (pp. 549–599). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Quick, J. C. (1979). Dyadic goal setting within organizations: Role making and motivational considerations. Academy of Management Review, 4, 369–380. Quick, J. C. (1997). Idiographic research in organizational behavior. In: C. L. Cooper & S. E. Jackson (Eds), Creating Tomorrow’s Organizations (pp. 475–492). London: Wiley. Quick, J. C., Gavin, J. H., Cooper, C. L., & Quick, J. D. (in press). Working together: Balancing head and heart. In: N. G. Johnson, R. H. Rozensky, C. D. Goodheart & R. Hammond (Eds), Psychology Builds a Healthy World. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Quick, J. C., Joplin, J. R., Nelson, D. L., Mangelsdorff, A. D., & Fiedler, E. (1996). Self-reliance and military service training outcomes. Military Psychology, 8, 279–293. Quick, J. C., Nelson, D. L., & Quick, J. D. (1990). Stress and challenge at the top: The paradox of the successful executive. New York: Wiley. Quick, J. C., Quick, J. D., Nelson, D. L., & Hurrell, J. J., Jr. (1997). Preventive stress management in organizations. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association (original work in 1984 by Quick & Quick). Quick, J. C., & Tetrick, L. E. (2003). Handbook of occupational health psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Quick, J. D., Cooper, C. L., Gavin, J. H., & Quick, J. C. (2002). Executive health: Building selfreliance for challenging times. In: C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds), International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (Vol. 17, pp. 187–216). Chichester, England: Wiley. Rahim, A., & Bonoma, T. V. (1979). Managing organizational conflict: A model for diagnosis and intervention. Psychological Reports, 44, 1323–1344.

404


Ray, C. (1986). Corporate culture: The last frontier of control. Journal of Management Studies, 23(3), 287–297. Rousseau, D., Sitkin, S., Burt, R., & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 393–404. Rubin, J. Z. (1994). Models of conflict management. Journal of Social Issues, 50, 157–178. Schein, E. H. (1996a). Culture: The missing concept in organization studies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 229–240. Schein, E. H. (1996b). Three cultures of management: The key to organizational learning. Sloan Management Review, 38, 9–20. Schwartz, H. S. (1990). Narcissistic process and corporate decay: The theory of the organization ideal. New York: University Press. Schwartz, J. E., Pickering, T. G., & Landsbergis, P. A. (1996). Work-related stress and blood pressure: Current theoretical models and considerations from a behavioral medicine perspective. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 1, 287–310. Seligman, M. E. P. (1990). Learned optimism. New York: Knopf. Selye, H. (1976). The stress of life (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Senge, P. (1990). The leaders’ new work: Building learning organizations. Sloan Management Review, 32(1), 7–23. Simons, T. (1999). Behaviroal integrity as a critical ingredient for transformational leadership. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 12(2), 89–97. Simons, T. (2002). Behavioral integrity: The perceived alignment between managers’ words and deeds as a research focus. Organization Science, 13(1), 18–35. Staw, B. M., Sandelands, L. E., & Dutton, J. E. (1981). Threat-rigidity effects in organizational behavior: A multilevel analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, 501–524. Steele-Johnson, D., & Beauregard, R. (2000). Goal orientation and task demand effects on motivation, affect, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(5), 724–739. Sternberg, R. J., & Dobson, D. M. (1987). Resolving interpersonal conflicts: An analysis of stylistic consistency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 794–812. Taylor, F. W. (1912). Hearings before special Committee of the House of Representatives to investigate the Taylor and other systems of shop management under authority of House Resolution 90, III, 1377–1508. Taylor, J. R., & Van Every, E. J. (1999). Emergent organization: Communication as its site and surface. Manwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Vancouver, J. B., Thompson, C. M., & Williams, A. (2001). The charming signs in the relationships among self-efficacy, personal goals, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(4), 605–621. Veiga, J. F. (2000). AME’s Executive Advisory Panel goes for a check-up. Academy of Management Executive, 14(2), 25–27. Wall, J. A., & Callister, R. R. (1995). Conflict and its management. Journal of Management, 21, 515–558. Watts, M., & Cooper, C. L. (1992). Relax: Dealing with stress. London: BBC Books. Weick, K. E. (1979). The social psychology of organizing (2nd ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Weick, K. E. (1988). Enacted sense making in crisis situations. Journal of Management Studies, 25(4), 305–317. Wells, T. (1980). Keeping your cool under fire: Communicating nondefensively. New York: McGrawHill.


405

Wong, C. L., Tjosvold, D., & Lee, F. (1992). Managing conflict in a diverse work force. Small Group Research, 23, 302–321. Yerkes, R. M., & Dodson, J. D. (1908). The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit-formation. Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology, 18, 459–482. Zaleznik, A. (1990). The leadership gap. Academy of Management Executive, 4, 7–22.

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Neal M. Ashkanasy has a Ph.D. in Social and Organizational Psychology from the University of Queensland, and has research interests in leadership, organizational culture, and business ethics. In recent years, his research has focused on the role of emotions in organizational life. He has published his work in journals such as the Academy of Management Review, the Academy of Management Executive, and the Journal of Management, and is co-editor of three books: The Handbook of Organizational Culture and Climate (Sage) and Emotions in the Workplace; Theory, Research, and Practice (Quorum); Managing Emotions in the Workplace (ME Sharpe). He is a past Chair of the Managerial and Organizational Cognition Division of the Academy of Management. Claire E. Ashton-James is completing an Honors degree in Business Management through the University of Queensland Business School. Her undergraduate degree majors were in philosophy, music, and psychology. Her present research interest is in the role of the impact of cognitive information processing capacity on emotion regulation and social functioning. Cary L. Cooper is Professor of Organizational Psychology and Health, Lancaster University Management School, Lancaster University. He is the author of over 80 books and over 300 academic journal articles. He is Founding Editor, Journal of Organizational Behavior; Co-Editor, medical journal Stress & Health; and former Co-Editor, International Journal of Management Review. He is a Fellow of the British Psychological Society, The Royal Society of Arts, The Royal Society of Medicine, The Royal Society of Health, and an Academician of the Academy for the Social Sciences. He is President of the British Academy of Management and a Companion of the (British) Institute of Management. He is a Fellow of the (American) Academy of Management and recipient of its 1998 Distinguished Service Award. Professor Cooper was awarded a CBE (Commander of the Excellent Order of the British Empire) in the Queen’s Birthday Honours List for his contribution to health. 407

408

Russell Cropanzano is Professor of Organizational Behavior in the Department of Management and Policy of the University of Arizona. Dr. Cropanzano is a member of the Academy of Management, the American Psychological Society, and the Society of Organizational Behavior. He is a fellow in the Society of Industrial/Organizational Psychology. Dr. Cropanzano is also active internationally, having given talks in Australia, France, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom. His research interests include workplace emotions and organizational justice. Achim Elfering is research fellow for the psychology of work and organizations at the University of Berne, Switzerland. He graduated with a Masters degree in psychology from the University of Wuerzburg, Germany. He received his Ph.D. in general psychology at the University of Frankfurt, Germany. His research interests include job stress, physiological stress responses, and in particular associations between psychosocial work factors and low back pain. His other research interests include personality, social support, job satisfaction, socialization and selection. In 2001, he received the 3rd Annual SPINE Journal Young Investigator Research Award. Steven M. Elias is an Assistant Professor of Social Psychology at Western Carolina University. Dr. Elias is a member of both the American Psychological Association and the American Psychological Society. Currently, Dr. Elias publishes empirical research in several areas related to perceived self-efficacy and social power. Joanne H. Gavin is Assistant Professor in the School of Management, Marist College, Poughkeepsie, New York. She was the recipient of the Otto Alois Faust Doctoral Fellowship in Character and Health (2000–2002) and earned her Ph.D. in organizational behavior at the University of Texas at Arlington. Ms. Gavin earned her M.B.A. and B.S. in Business Administration at the University of New Orleans. Her research interest is in the area of personal character, decision making and executive health. She is co-author of articles appearing in the Academy of Management Executive, Applied Psychology: International Review and the Academy of Management Journal. Dr. Gavin is also co-author of several chapters in books such as International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology and Psychology Builds a Healthy World. In 2001, she presented a paper entitled “Transcendent decision-making: Defining the role of virtue-based character in the decision-making process” at the Society for Business Ethics. Simone Grebner is senior research fellow for the psychology of work and organizations at the University of Berne, Switzerland. She graduated with a

409

Master’s degree in psychology from the University of Wuerzburg, Germany. She earned her Ph.D. in work psychology from the University of Berne. Her primary research interests include job stress, job analysis, emotion work, and well-being, with a particual emphasis on psychoneuroendocrine and cardiovascular stress responses. Wayne A. Hochwarter is Associate Professor of Management at Florida State University. Prior to this appointment, Dr. Hochwarter was on the faculty at Mississippi State University and the University of Alabama. He has published over 70 articles and book chapters in the areas that include organizational politics, social influence, job stress, and dispositional factors. His work has appeared in the Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Management, Journal of Vocational Behavior, and Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management. Dr. Hochwarter’s current research interests include social influence in organizations, accountability, and the attitudinal consequences of job insecurity of layoff survivors. Peter J. Jordan is a Senior Lecturer in the School of Management at Griffith University, Australia. He gained his Ph.D. in management at the University of Queensland. Peter’s current research interests include emotional intelligence, emotions in organizations, team performance and conflict. He has published in a range of international journals including the Academy of Management Review, Human Resource Management Review, and Advances in Developing Human Resources. He has also been invited to deliver presentations to a number of business groups across South East Asia. Prior to entering academia he worked in strategic and operational planning for the Australian Government. Michael P. Leiter is Professor of Psychology and Vice President (Academic) of Acadia University in Canada. He is Director of the Center for Organizational Research & Development that applies high quality research methods to human resource issues confronting organizations. He received degrees in Psychology from Duke University (BA), Vanderbilt University (MA), and the University of Oregon (Ph.D.). He teaches courses on organizational psychology and on stress at Acadia University. The research center provides a lively bridge between university studies and organizational consultation for himself and his students. Dr. Leiter has received ongoing research funding for 20 years from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada as well as from international foundations. He is actively involved as a consultant on occupational issues in Canada, the USA, and Europe. The primary focus of his research and consulting work is the relationships that people develop with their work. This work addresses strategies for preventing dysfunctional relationships, such as burnout, as well as for building productive engagement with work.

410

David A. Mack is Assistant Dean for Program Development at the University of Texas at Arlington’s College of Business Administration. He received his Ph.D. from UT Arlington in May 2000. Dr. Mack earned an MBA in Entrepreneurship from DePaul University in 1993. Dr. Mack has published a number of articles and book chapters on job stress, workplace violence, and small business. His Organizational Dynamics article “EDS: An Inside View of a Corporate Life Cycle Transition” examined the spin-off of EDS from General Motors Corporation. He has had extensive management experience in the insurance industry and is co-owner, with his wife, of a financial services marketing/management business in the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex. Dr. Mack teaches undergraduate and graduate courses at UT Arlington and has taught graduate business courses at both DePaul University and Texas Wesleyan University. Christina Maslach is Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education and Professor of Psychology at the University of California at Berkeley. She received her A.B. in Social Relations from Harvard-Radcliffe College, and her Ph.D. in Psychology from Stanford University. She has conducted research in a number of areas within social and health psychology. However, she is best known as one of the pioneering researchers on job burnout, and the author of the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), the most widely used research measure in the burnout field. In addition to numerous articles, she has written several books on this topic. She has also received numerous teaching awards, and in 1997 she received national recognition from the Carnegie Foundation as “Professor of the Year.” Debra L. Nelson, Ph.D. is The CBA Associates Professor of Business Administration and Professor of Management at Oklahoma State University. She holds a Ph.D. from the University of Texas at Arlington. Dr. Nelson’s research has been published in the Academy of Management Executive, Academy of Management Journal, Academy of Management Review, MIS Quarterly, Journal of Organizational Behavior, and other journals. Her books include Stress and Challenge at the Top: The Paradox of the Successful Executive, Advancing Women in Management, Preventive Stress Management in Organizations, Gender, Work Stress and Health, and Organizational Behavior: Foundations, Realities, Challenges among others. Her primary research interests are workplace stress and gender issues at work. James Campbell (Jim) Quick is Professor of Organizational Behavior and Director, Doctoral Program in Business Administration, The University of Texas at Arlington. The American Psychological Foundation honored him with the 2002 Harry and Miriam Levinson Award as an outstanding consulting psychologist. He is a Fellow of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, the American Psychological Association (APA), the American Institute of Stress,

411

and was awarded a 2001 APA Presidential Citation. He was Founding Editor of APA’s Journal of Occupational Health Psychology and was APA’s stress expert to the National Academy of Sciences (1990). He is co-author with Debra L. Nelson of Organizational Behavior: Foundations, Realities, and Challenges, 4th Edition (Thompson/Southwestern). He is listed in Who’s Who in the World (7th Edition). He was awarded The Maroon Citation by the Colgate University Alumni Corporation, and The Legion of Merit by the U.S. Air Force. He is married to the former Sheri Grimes Schember. Jonathan D. Quick is Director, Essential Drugs and Medicines Policy (EDM) for the World Health Organization, Geneva. EDM works to ensure for people everywhere access to safe, effective, good quality essential drugs that are prescribed and used rationally. He joined WHO in 1995 after 20 years in international health, serving in Pakistan, Kenya, and over 18 other countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. He has authored or edited ten books, including as senior editor of Managing Drug Supply (1997/1978), and over 40 articles and chapters on essential drugs, public health, and stress management. He is a Diplomat of the American Board of Family Practice, and a Fellow of both the Royal Society of Medicine (UK) and the American College of Preventive Medicine. He earned an A.B. degree magna cum laude from Harvard University and a M.D. degree with distinction in research and a M.P.H. from the University of Rochester. Norbert Semmer is professor for the psychology of work and organizations at the University of Berne, Switzerland. He earned his Ph.D. from the Technical University of Berlin and worked for the Technical University of Berlin, and the German Federal Health Office in Berlin before moving to Berne. He has a long standing interest in stress at work and its relationship to health, in recent years with a special emphasis on low back pain. He has also published about job satisfaction, the development of efficient strategies in groups, on human error, and on the transition of young people into work. He is a member of the editorial board of the European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, the Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, the Zeitschrift für Arbeits- und Organisationspsychologie, and the Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health, and he served as Associate Editor for Applied Psychology. An International Review from 1992 to 1998, and for the Psychologische Rundschau from 1995 to 1998. Arie Shirom is Professor of Organizational Behavior and Health Care Management at the Faculty of Management, Tel Aviv University. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Wisconsin, Madison. He has published several reviews on burnout, burnout and health, organization development, and the impact of stress

412

on employee health, each including a section describing his past research in the respective area. These reviews are downloadable from his internet site at Tel Aviv University. He is currently funded by the Israel Science Foundation to conduct a large scale, four-year study on the effects of positive emotions, including vigor, on employee health. Bret L. Simmons is Assistant Professor of Management in the College of Business at North Dakota State University. He received his Ph.D. in Management from Oklahoma State University. Dr. Simmons is a member of the Academy of Management, the American Psychological Association, and the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. His research interests include eustress and positive psychology at work. Tores Theorell, M.D., Ph.D. is a world-renowned lecturer and widely published pioneer in psychosocial factors research. He is Director of the National Institute for Psychosocial Factors and Health and Professor of Psychosocial Medicine, Department of Public Health Sciences, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden. His research interests include psychosocial factors, health, and occupational stress. Howard M. Weiss is Professor of Psychological Sciences at Purdue University. He is also co-director of Purdue’s Military Family Research Institute, which is funded by the Department of Defense and dedicated to studying the relationships between quality of life and job satisfaction, retention and performance. He received his Ph.D. from New York University. His research interests focus on the emotions in the workplace and on job attitudes.

Emotional and Physiological Processes and Intervention Strategies, Volume 3 (Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being)

Exploring Interpersonal Dynamics, Volume 4 (Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being) (Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being)

Employee Health, Coping and Methodologies (Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, Volume 5)

Occupational Therapy: Performance, Participation, and Well-Being

New Developments in Theoretical and Conceptual Approaches to Job Stress (Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being)

Well-Being and Death

Well-Being and Death

Well-Being and Death

Fostering Emotional Well-being in the Classroom

Preferences and Well-Being

Stress: perspectives and processes

A Rights-Based Preventative Approach for Psychosocial Well-being in Childhood (Childrens Well-Being: Indicators and Research, Volume 3)

Emotional Health and Well-Being: A Practical Guide for Schools

Emotional Health and Well-Being: A Practical Guide for Schools

Your Key to Lasting Happiness, ... and Emotional Well-Being

Emotional Health and Well-Being: A Practical Guide for Schools

Ecology and Human Well-Being

Technology and Psychological Well-being

Ageing, spirituality, and well-being

Jobs, Training, and Worker Well-being (Research in Labor Economics)

Work, Leisure and Well-being

Ageing, Spirituality and Well-being

Emotion Regulation and Well-Being

Loneliness, Stress and Well-Being: A Helper's Guide

Mental Health and Well-Being in Animals

Carbon Dioxide and Environmental Stress (Physiological Ecology)

Gender and Well-Being in Europe

Health and Well-being in Early Childhood

Occupational Injury: Risk, Prevention And Intervention

Pain: theory, research, and intervention

Literary Research and British Modernism: Strategies and Sources (Literary Research: Strategies and Sources, Volume 7)

Emotional and Physiological Processes and Intervention Strategies, Volume 3 (Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being)

Exploring Interpersonal Dynamics, Volume 4 (Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being) (Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being)

Employee Health, Coping and Methodologies (Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, Volume 5)

Occupational Therapy: Performance, Participation, and Well-Being

New Developments in Theoretical and Conceptual Approaches to Job Stress (Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being)

Well-Being and Death

Well-Being and Death

Well-Being and Death

Fostering Emotional Well-being in the Classroom

Preferences and Well-Being

Stress: perspectives and processes

A Rights-Based Preventative Approach for Psychosocial Well-being in Childhood (Childrens Well-Being: Indicators and Research, Volume 3)

Emotional Health and Well-Being: A Practical Guide for Schools

Emotional Health and Well-Being: A Practical Guide for Schools

Your Key to Lasting Happiness, ... and Emotional Well-Being

Emotional Health and Well-Being: A Practical Guide for Schools

Ecology and Human Well-Being

Technology and Psychological Well-being

Ageing, spirituality, and well-being

Jobs, Training, and Worker Well-being (Research in Labor Economics)

Work, Leisure and Well-being

Ageing, Spirituality and Well-being

Emotion Regulation and Well-Being

Loneliness, Stress and Well-Being: A Helper's Guide

Mental Health and Well-Being in Animals

Carbon Dioxide and Environmental Stress (Physiological Ecology)

Gender and Well-Being in Europe

Health and Well-being in Early Childhood

Occupational Injury: Risk, Prevention And Intervention

Pain: theory, research, and intervention

Literary Research and British Modernism: Strategies and Sources (Literary Research: Strategies and Sources, Volume 7)

Recommend Documents