OBIORAH, LAURETTA CHIKA

PG/M.SC/08/47315

MANAGING OCCUPATIONAL STRESS IN

THE BANKING SECTOR

DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT

UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA, ENUGU CAMPUS

A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT,, FACULTY OF

BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA, ENUGU CAMPUS

Webmaster

Digitally Signed by Webmaster‟s Name

DN : CN = Webmaster‟s name O= University of Nigeria, Nsukka

OU = Innovation Centre

SEPTEMBER 2011

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

The workplace of the 21st century is a fast-paced, dynamic, highly stimulating environment which

brings a large number of benefits and opportunities to those who work within it. The ever-changing

demands of the working world can increase levels of stress, especially for those who are

consistently working under pressure such as bank workers. Whilst pressure has its positive side in

raising performance, if such pressure becomes excessive, it can lead to stress which has negative

consequences (Santiago, 2003).

According to the Oxford Advanced learner‟s Dictionary 6th Edition, stress could among other

things, refer to pressure, tension or worries arising from problematic situations in an individual‟s

life. Where the incidence of such stress is traceable to a job or work situation, it is known as job

stress (Narayanan et al (2000). According to Narayanan et al (2000) job stress could in fact be

identified with almost any aspect of a Job or work situation such as: extremes of heat, noise and

light or too much or too little responsibility etc. According to Irene (2005) “job stress is a pattern of

reactions that occurs when workers are presented with work demands that are not matched to their

knowledge, skills or abilities, and which challenge their ability to cope”. It is evident from this Irene

definition that job stress is mostly associated with under employment.

Stress at work is a relatively new phenomenon of modern lifestyles. The nature of work has gone

through drastic changes over the last century and it is still changing at whirlwind speed. They have

touched almost all professions, starting from an artist to a surgeon, or a commercial pilot to a sales

executive. With change comes stress, inevitably. In most cases, occupational stress is attributable to

negative situation such as formal reprimand by ones superior for poor performance. Pleasant

circumstances could also bring about job stress, such as job promotion and transfer to another

location. Job stress has attracted considerable attention in recent times especially within the context

or organizational behaviour (Kazmi et al 2008, Shahu and Gole 2008, Nilufar et al 2009).

The Nigerian banking system as a whole has been under serious pressure from internal and external

factors in the last few years. Following the National Poverty Eradication Program (NAPEP‟s) new

policy, the national coordinator of NAPEP Dr. Magnus Kpakol has charged commercial banks to

intensify efforts in their support in poverty Eradication. This means more efforts on the side of the

banks employees‟. The involvement of commercial banks in the policy has led the management and

staffs of the banking sector to work under a great deal of stress to see that the aim and objectives of

this policy are achieved.

Bank management must necessarily react to changes if it must remain in business and avoid the

pains of distress or outright failure. Management responses to cope with these changes are diverse.

It ranges from re-engineering, rationalization of branches and business lines, increased working

hours, staff education and retraining or sometimes retrenchment and complete re-organization. Bank

workers who are victims of management reactions are equally susceptible to stress. This is perhaps

true in that the operational framework of the bank require bank workers to resume early and close

very late, the introduction of weekend banking (Saturday banking), while some of them are also

required to update themselves academically within a set time, which makes must of category of

worker to register for degree/diploma weekend programmes (Giga et al 2002).

The emphasis in the stress management literature has been on individual techniques and practices

for reducing levels of stress in the workplace. The individual has been the focus of attention and the

psychological dimensions of stress has been the primary focus of research. Cooper (2003) suggests

however, that there is a need to counter-balance these social-psychological studies with sociological

and critical management research concerned with the wider social and power relations of the

workplace. This Empirical study is based in a developing country where contextual socio-political

issues and structural-economic conditions impact upon operational practice and workplace stress.

Limited telecommunication networks, skill levels and educational attainment of staff, governmental

policies and world events, all combine to create a very different business environment to

comparable banking organizations in more highly industrialized countries (Mahdi and Dawson,

2007).

It is therefore important that both bank worker and management should be well acquainted with the

important issue that affect not only workers effectiveness in the work place, but there life in general.

1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Occupational stress is not a private matter for the employee to deal with alone and in isolation. Job

stress produces negative effects for both the organization and the employee. For the organization,

the results are disorganization in the work place, disruption in normal operations, lowered

productivity and lower margins of profit. For the employee, the effects are three fold which

includes; increased physical health problems, psychological distress and behavioral changes.

Bankers, especially in commercial banks are under a great deal of stress related to a variety of

occupational stressors which may be in form of day-to-day worries, major events or prolonged

problematic work situations or they may arise from certain ideas, thoughts and perceptions that

evoke negative emotions like the idea that one may not reach the position that one aspires. These

occupational stressors contribute to organizational inefficiency, high staff turnover, absenteeism due

to sickness, decreased quality and quantity of work, increased costs of health care, and decreased

job satisfaction. One of the organizational outcomes that are affected by occupational stress is job

performance.

Competition for survival among banks for customers coupled with bank consolidation has led the

banks to setting high target for their workers. Some of the targets are so high that they are

unachievable by the work force. This puts intense pressure on the work force for fear of losing their

jobs in this period of global unemployment, downsizing of companies and global economic

meltdown; this brings psychological trauma, fear and mental agony on the workforce. Under this

circumstances, mistake are made, staff become sick and often may die on the job.

1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The specific objectives of this study are:

1. To analyze the causes of stress that employees in the banking sector encounter.

2. To evaluate the extent to which occupational stress affect job performance.

3. To analyze the various strategies adopted by the banking sector to reduce occupational

stress.

4. To evaluate the impacts of stress on employee job performance.

1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

This study will focus on answering the following research questions;

1. What are the causes of stress that employees in the banking sector encounter?

2. To what extent does occupational stress affect job performance?

3. What are the various strategies adopted by the banking sector to reduce occupational stress?

4. What are the impacts of stress on employees‟ job performance?

1.5 RESEARCH HYPOTHESES

1. Ho: Pressures of responsibilities and pressure to work longer hours are

not some of the causes of stress that employees in the banking sector encounter.

Hi: Pressures of responsibilities and pressure to work longer hours are some of the

causes of stress that employees in the banking sector encounter.

2. Ho: Occupational stress does not significantly affect job performance.

Hi: Occupational stress significantly affects job performance.

3. Ho Redesigning job to increase challenge or reduce work load cannot be a strategy for

reducing occupational stress.

Hi: Redesigning job to increase challenge or reduce work load can be a strategy for

reducing occupational stress.

4. Ho: Absenteeism, low morale and reduced out put are not negative impacts of stress on

employee job performance.

Hi: Absenteeism, low morale and reduced out put are negative impacts of stress on

employee job performance.

1.6 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

This study is significant in a number of ways:

Banking industry contributes a great deal in the development of the Nigerian society. This is

true because it plays a very important role in our society in terms of the numerous financial

assistance it renders to the society at large. Therefore, a study on occupational stress in the

sector is considered significant.

The study will help management and employees of banks to know how to deal and cope

with occupational stress.

It will also help management and employees of banks to know the causes of occupational

stress and devices for reducing them. The study will be of immense benefit to other sectors

of the economy. Finally, the study will help future researchers that will conduct research in

this field.

1.7 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The study is delimited to managing occupational stress in commercial banks: The study

focuses on types of occupational stress, Sources of occupational stress, Consequences of

occupational stress and how to deal with occupational stress. The banks selected for the

study include; First Bank of Nigeria Plc, United Bank for Africa Plc, Zenith Bank Plc,

Oceanic Bank Plc and Intercontinental Bank Plc.

1.8 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

The major constraints of the study include time, finance and attitude of the respondents.

Time: Due to the limited time given for the study, the researcher could not visit all the

places where data and information relevant to the study could be obtained.

Financial Constraints: A lot of money is required in data collection, analysis, and

interpretation. The researcher is constrained financially. Owing to these constraints, the

researcher could not cover all banks in Enugu but selected a number of them.

Attitude of the Respondents: Some of the respondents were unwilling to co-operate with

the researcher since they derive no financial benefit from the study.

1.9 DEFINITION OF RELEVANT TERMS

Anxiousness: A relative permanent state of uneasiness, worry or dread occurring in a variety of

mental disorder usually accompanied by compulsive behaviour or attacks of panic (Schemerhorn,

1984).

Aggressiveness: It is a mode of communication and behaviour where one expresses their feelings,

needs and rights without regard or angry and behaving in a threatening way, ready to attack

(Greenberg 1990).

Boredom: Is an emotional and mental state experienced during periods when activity are lacking or

when individual are uninterested in the opportunities surrounding them (Carsten and Moberg,

2000).

Distress: It is an aversive, negative state in which coping and adaptation processes fail to return an

individual to physiological and/or psychological homeostasis (Carsten and Moberg, 2000).

Depression: It is a whole body illness involving the body, mood and thoughts (Mc Hugh, 1993).

Eustress: It is a positive stress that is achieved when the brain and body feel challenged and want to

extend it in order to respond to a situation (Carsten and Moberg, 2000).

Impulsiveness: It is a personality trait characterized by the inclination of an individual to initiate

behaviour without adequate fore-thought as to the consequences of their actions (Carsten and

Moberg, 2000).

Job performance: This is the employee‟s contribution to the achievement of organizational goals

and objectives. (Schemerhorn, 1984).

Job Strain: Job strain is high psychological demands and low decision latitude on the job. (Mc

Hugh, 1993).

Passiveness: Submission to others or to outside influences or the trait of remaining inactive (Steber,

1998).

Work Environment: It is the social and professional environment in which a person interacts with

a number of people (Greenberg 1990).

Stress: Is the harmful physical and emotional responses that occur when the requirements of the job

do not match the capabilities, resources or needs of the worker (NIOSH, 1999).

Stressors: are things that causes stress (Schemerhorn, 1984).

REFERENCES

Greenberg, J.S., (1990) Comprehensive Stress management (3rd

edition). Dubuque. 1A Wm.C.

Brown Publishers.

Di Martino V. Hotel, and Copper, C.L (2003) Violent and Harassment in the work place: A review

of literature, Report commissioned by the European foundation for the improvement of

living and working conditions, Dublin.

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, NIOSH, (1999) Stress. Cincinnati, Ohio

Author.

Rice, P.L. (1992), Stress and Health (2nd

edition), Pacific Grove, California Brooks/Cole publishing

company.

Steber, W. R., (1998) Occupational Stress among Frontline Corrections Workers. Menomonie,

University of Wisconsin – Stout.

European Agency for Safety and Health at work (2002) Fact sheet on work related stress, facts (22)

available at on line.

Karasek, R. & Theorell, T. (1990) Healthy Work: Stress Productivity and the Reconstruction of

Working Life, New York: Basic Books.

Landy, F., Quick, J.C. & Kasl, S. (1994) “Work, Stress and Well-being”. International Journal of

Stress Management 1(1).

FSU (2000) Work place. Finance sector union, available at htt//:www.fsunion.org.an/article.asp.

Giga, S Faragher, B and Cooper, C.L (2002) Identification of practice in stress

prevention/management: a state of the art review. University of Wisconsin-Stout.

Murphy, L.R. (1995) Managing Job stress: An Employee Assistance/Human Resource Management

Partnership: personnel review 24(1).

Houkes, J. Jansen P, De J. Nijhuis, F (2002) Work and individual determinants of intrinsic work

motivation, emotional exhaustion and turnover intention: Multi-sample Analysis.

International journal of stress management 8(4):257-283.

Schor, E. (1991) the Overworked American: The Unexpected Decline of Leisure; New York:

Prentice Hall.

Poali P and Merlie D (2001) Third European survey on working conditions 2000. European

foundation for the improvement of living and working conditions. Dublin.

Carsten, E & Moberg, G. P., (2000) Recognizing Pain and Distress in Laboratory Animals. ILAR.

J. 200; 41(2).

CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1 THE CONCEPT OF OCCUPATIONAL STRESS

According to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) of United States,

Stress occurs when job demand cannot be met, relaxation has turned to exhaustion and a sense of

satisfaction has turned into feelings of tension. In short, the worker feels overly taxed both

psychologically and physically and the stage is set for illness, injury and job failure. Beehr and

Newman (1998) define occupational stress as “a condition arising from the interaction of people

and their jobs and characterized by changes within people that force them to deviate from their

normal functioning”.

According to Cobb, (1995) “the responsibility load creates severe stress among workers and

managers”. If the individual manager cannot cope with the increased responsibilities it may lead to

severe physical and psychological disorders among them. Brook, (1993) stresses that qualitative

changes in the job create adjust mental problem among employees. The interpersonal relationship

within the department and between the departments creates qualitative difficulties within the

organization to a great extent. The use of role concepts suggests that job related stress is associated

with individual, interpersonal and structural variables (Katz and Kahn, 1978; Whetten, 1978). The

presence of supportive peer groups and supportive relationships with supervisors are negatively

correlated with.

There is evidence that role incumbents with high levels of role ambiguity also respond to their

situation with anxiety, depression, physical symptoms, a sense of futility or lower self esteem, lower

levels of job involvement and organizational commitment and perceptions of lower performance on

the part of the organization, of supervisors and of themselves (Brief and Aldag, 1976: Greene,

1972). Rees, (1997) is of the opinion that occupational stress is the inability to cope with the

pressures in a job because of a poor fit between someone‟s ability and his/her work requirements

and conditions. It is also a mental and physical condition which affects an individual‟s productivity,

effectiveness, personal health and quality of work (Comish & Swindle, 1994).

According to Ivancevich and Matteson (1980) “Lack of group cohesiveness may explain various

physiological and behavioural outcomes in an employ desiring such sticks together”. Workplace

interpersonal conflicts and negative interpersonal relations are prevalent sources of stress and are

existed with negative mood depression and symptoms of ill health (Dewe, 1993: Lang 1984; Long

et al, 1992). According to French and Caplan, (1975), “Pressure of both qualitative and quantitative

overhead can result in the need to work excessive hours, which is an additional source of stress”.

Having to work under time pressure in order to meet deadlines is an independent source of stress.

Studies shows that stress levels increase as difficult deadlines draw near.

Stress is often developed when an individual is assigned a major responsibility without proper

authority and delegation of power. Interpersonal factors such as group cohesiveness, functional

dependence, communication frequency, relative authority and organizational distance between the

role sender and the focal persons are important topics in organizational behaviour (Vansell, et al,

1979). Occupational stress is an increasingly important occupational health problem and a

significant cause of economic loss. Occupational stress may produce both overt psychological and

physiologic disabilities. However it may also cause subtle manifestation of morbidity that can

affect personal well being and productivity (Quick, et al 1992).

A job stressed individual is likely to have greater job dissatisfaction, increased absenteeism,

increased frequency of drinking and smoking, increased in negative psychological symptoms and

reduced aspirations and self esteem (Jick & Payne 1980). The use of role concepts suggests that

occupational stress is associated with individual, interpersonal and structural variables ((kutz and

Kahn, 1978). Green and Walkey (1988) opine that because employees spend roughly one third of

their lives working in an organizational goal setting, employee mental health is of particular

importance. Two people exposed to the same threatening situation may differ substantially in the

magnitude and duration of stress responses and stress related health problems might emerge in

several contrasting ways both physically and mentally. Some of these variations result from

differences in temperament, social resources and the effectiveness of the coping responses that the

individual brings to bear on the stressful transaction. According to Stansfield et al (2000) work

related stress can affect individuals when they feel an inability to cope or control demands placed

on them within their work environment and can eventually contribute to the development of

adaptive behaviors such as drinking and smoking and health conditions such as depression, anxiety,

nervousness, fatigue and heart disorder.

Occupational stress has become one of the major influences on the health and well being of

employees in the modern workplace. Although there is clearly a personality component in an

individuals‟ susceptibility to workplace stress. For instance, stress has been viewed as a person‟s

physical, chemical or emotional response to tension or pressure in the work place (Lazarus, et al

1985). It is none-the-less a long accepted fact that the workplace is a major source of socio-

psychological stressors, strain‟s and subsequent ill-health (Margolis, et al 1974). The accumulation

of stressful events can lead to psychopathology real illness.

2.2 THEORIES OF STRESS

The Cognitive theory of Lazarus, 1989, Roy Adaptation Model (RAM), 1984 and Selye Systematic

Stress theory, 1976, provides the theoretical framework for this study.

2.2.1 LAZARUS COGNITIVE RELATIONAL THEORY: The Lazarus cognitive theory also

known as psychological stress contrary to earlier work on stress proposed that stress and the stress

response were not static. Rather, stress and the person‟s response was a dynamic process. The

process was transactional as the person interacts with internal and external environments as these

environments continue to change moment-by-moment and event-by-event. The process was

cognitive as the person appraised each event or stressor to determine if the stressor is harmful,

threatening or a challenge. Appraisal referred to the cognitive process whereby the person evaluated

the strength of the stressor in relation to the available resources. A stressor was harmful if harm had

already occurred. A stressor was threatening if harm had not yet occurred but was possible due to

lack of resources.

A stressor was a challenge if resources were available to meet and master the demand and thus

produce growth in the individual. Lazarus defined two types of coping; Interventions to alter the

relationship between person and environment made up the first group of coping strategies referred

to as problem-focus coping. These interventions centered on taking such action such as seeking

information or altering. Emotion-focused coping related to reducing the emotions associated with

the person-stressor interaction. These strategies focused on avoiding or changing the meaning

assigned to the event.

According to Lazarus, Psychological stress refers to a relationship with the environment that the

person appraises as significant for his or her well being and in which the demands tax or exceed

available coping resources (Lazarus and folkman 1986). This definition points to two processes as

central mediators within the person-environment transaction cognitive appraisal and coping. The

concept of appraisal, introduced into emotion research by Arnold (1960) and elaborated with

respect to stress processes by (Lazarus 1966, and Launier, 1978), is a key factor for understanding

stress relevant transactions. This concept is based on the idea that emotional processes (including

stress) are dependent on actual expectances that persons manifest with regard to the significance

and outcome of a specific encounter. This concept is necessary to explain individual differences in

quality, intensity and duration of an elicited emotion in environments that are objectively equal for

different individuals. It is generally assumed that the resulting state is generated maintained and

eventually altered by a specific pattern of appraisals. These appraisals, in turn, are determined by a

number of personal and situational factors. The most important factors on the personal side are

motivational dispositions, goals, values, and generalized expectancies. Relevant situational

parameters are predictability, controllability, and imminence of a potentially stressful event.

Lazarus (1991), in his monograph on emotion and adaptation, developed a comprehensive emotion

theory that also includes a stress theory of Lazarus 1993. This theory distinguishes two basic forms

of appraisal, primary and secondary appraisal. These forms rely on different sources of information.

Primary appraisal concerns whether something of relevance to the individual‟s well being occurs,

whereas secondary appraisal concerns coping options within primary appraisal, three components

are distinguished, goal relevance describes the extent to which an encounter refers to issues about

which the person cares. Goal congruence defines the extent to which an episode proceeds in

accordance with personal goals. Type of ego-involvement designates aspects of personal

commitment such as self-esteem, moral values, ego-ideal, or ego-identity. Likewise, three

secondary appraisal components are distinguished: blame or credit results from an individual‟s

appraisal of who is responsible for a certain event.

By coping potential Lazarus means a person‟s evaluation of the prospects for generating certain

behavioral or cognitive operations that will positively influence a personally relevant encounter.

Future expectations refer to the appraisal of the further course of an encounter with respect to goal

congruence or incongruence. Specific patterns of primary and secondary appraisal lead to different

kinds of stress. Three types are distinguished harm, threat and challenge (Lazarus and Folkman

1984). Harm refers to the (psychological) damage or loss that has already happened. Threat is the

anticipation of harm that may be imminent. Challenge results from demands that a person feels

confident about mastering. These different kinds of psychological stress are embedded in specific

types of emotional reactions, thus illustrating the close conjunction of the fields of stress and

emotions; Lazarus (1991) distinguishes 15 basic emotions. Nine of these are negative (anger, fright,

anxiety, guilt, shame, sadness, envy, jealousy and disgust), whereas four are positive (happiness,

pride, relief, and love). Two more emotions, hope and compassion, have a mixed valence. At a

molecular level of analysis the anxiety reaction for example, is based on the following pattern of

primary and secondary appraisals: there must be some goal relevance to the encounter.

Furthermore, goal incongruence is high, i.e. Personal goals are thwarted. Finally, ego involvement

concentrates on the protection of personal meaning or ego – identity against existential threats. At a

more molar level, specific appraisal patterns related to stress or distinct emotional reactions are

described as core relational themes. The theme of anxiety, for example, is the confrontation with

uncertainty and existential threat. The core relational theme of relief, however, is a distressing goal-

incongruent condition that has changed for the better or gone away (Lazarus 1991). Coping is

intimately related to the concept of cognitive appraisal and hence to the stress relevant person

environment transaction.

2.2.2 ROY ADAPTATION MODEL (RAM): Roy, (1984) used the work of Lazarus as one of the

foundations in developing the adaptation model (Philips et al, 1998). Roy viewed the person as

holistic and complex adaptive system. In the RAM, the environment (stimulus or stressor) and the

person (adaptation level) provided the system input. The response control processes were the coping

mechanism, regulator subsystem (physiologic adaptation), and cognator subsystem (cognitive and

emotional appraisal). Effectors were physiological function, self-concept, role function and

interdependence. System output is either adaptation to the stimulus or ineffective response. The

output then provided feedback as the adaptation level of system input.

2.2.3 SELYE SYSTEMATIC STRESS THEORY: Selye‟s theory, the popularity of the stress

concept in science and mass media stems largely from the work of the endocrinologist Hans Selye.

In a series of animal studies he observed that a variety of stimulus events (e.g., hot, cold, toxic

agents) applied intensely and long enough are capable of producing common effects, meaning not

specific to either stimulus events. Besides these nonspecific for example, produces vasodilatation

and cold vasoconstriction. According to Selye, these nonspecifically caused changes constitute the

stereotypical, i.e., specific, response pattern of systematic stress. Selye (1976 pg.64) defines this

stress as „a state manifested by a syndrome which consists of all the nonspecifically induced

changes in a biologic system‟. This stereotypical response pattern, called the General Adaptation

syndrome (GAS), proceeds in three stages:

The alarm reaction comprises an initial shock phase and a subsequent count shock phase.

The shock phase exhibits autonomic excitability, an increased adrenaline discharge and

gastro-intestinal ulcerations. The count shock phase marks the initial operation of defensive

processes and is characterized by increased adrenocortically activity.

If noxious stimulation continues, the organism enters the stage of resistance, in this stage,

the symptoms of the alarm reaction disappear, which seemingly indicates the organism‟s

adaptation to the stressor. However, while resistance to the noxious stimulation increases,

resistance to other kinds of stressors decreases at the same time.

If the aversive stimulation persists, resistance gives way to the stage of exhaustion. The

organism‟s capability of adapting to the stressor is exhausted, the symptoms of stage;

reappear, but resistance is no longer possible. Irreversible tissue damages appear, and if the

stimulation persists, the organism dies.

Although Selye‟s conception of stress as a reaction to a multitude of different events had the fatal

consequence that the stress concept became the melting pot for all kinds of approaches. Thus, by

becoming a synonym for diverse terms such as, for example, anxiety threat, conflict, or emotional

arousal, the concept of stress was a danger of losing its scientific value (Engel 1985). Besides this

general reservation, specific critical issues have been raised. One criticism was directed at the

theory‟s core assumption of a nonspecific causation of the GAS.

Mason (1975) pointed out that the stressors observed as effective by Selye carried a common

emotional meaning: they were novel, strange, and unfamiliar to the animal. Thus, the animal‟s state

could be described in terms of helplessness, uncertainty, and lack of control. Consequently the

hormonal GAS responses followed the specific emotional impact of such influences rather than the

influences as such. In accordance with this assumption, Mason (1975) demonstrated that in

experiments where uncertainty had been eliminated no GAS was observed. This criticism lead to a

second, more profound argument: unlike the physiological stress investigated by Selye, the stress

experienced by humans is almost always the result of a cognitive mediation (Arnold 1960, Janis

1958, Lazarus 1966 and 1974). Selye, however, fails to specify those mechanisms that may explain

the cognitive transformation of objective noxious events into the subjective experience of being

distressed. In addition, Selye does not take into account coping mechanisms as important mediators

of the stress-outcome relationship. Both topics are central to psychological stress theories as for

example, elaborated by the Lazarus group.

2.3 TYPES OF STRESS

We encounter many different types of stressors. These are biological (toxins, heat, cold),

psychological (threats to self-esteem, depression), sociological (unemployment, death of a love one,

birth of a child), and philosophical (use of time, purpose in life). In any case, regardless of the

stressor, the body‟s reaction will be the same (Greenberg, 1990).

Stressors most common to our lives involve the adaptation to change or the experience of daily

hassles. Thomas Holmes and Richard Rahe, (1987) found that the more significant changes a

person had in his or her life, the greater the chance that he or she would contract some physical or

psychological illness. Since they conceptualized stress as adapting to change.

Experts recognize two (2) types of stress, negative and positive sides. Negative aspect, which is

distress, concerns events that produce life-threatening outcomes. This aspect is what is called

clinical psychologists. Ezenwa, (2007) classifies as bad. Positive aspect of stress called eustress,

concerns stressful events that produce healthy, friendly, and stable outcomes. Sauter and Murphy,

(1995) describe eustress as the stress experience in moderation, enough to activate and motivate

people so that they can achieve goals, change their environment, and succeed in their life

challenges. This aspect of stress is what Ezenwa classifies as good. The good type, he argues are

those that make you pursue legitimate causes such as studying for examination, working to make a

living, taking care of the sick etc (Stephen and Mary, 2007).

This is saying that some level of stress is necessary in the workplace. However, Mc-Shane et al

claim that employees frequently experience enough stress to hurt their job performance and increase

their risk of mental and physical health problems.

2.4 SOURCES OF OCCUPATIONAL STRESS

Among life situations, the workplace stands out as a potentially important source of stress, purely

because of the amount of time that is spent in this setting (Erkutlu & Chafra, 2006). Over the years,

a large number of workplace stressors of varying degree of gravity have been identified:

According to Hurrell et al, (1988) in Murphy, (1995), common organizational and individual

stressors could be classified into five (5) groups:

2.4.1 Individual Task Demands: The stress caused by the job itself. Some occupations are more

stressful than others. Managing employees is more stressful than being a receptionist.

Nevertheless, low level jobs can be more stressful than high level jobs because employees

often have less control over their lives and thus less work satisfaction. Being a high-speed

word processor or doing telemarketing phone sales, for instance can be quite stressful.

There is also considerable stress caused by worries over the prospective loss of a job. Recent

surveys indicate that employees frequently worry about being laid off. Job security is an

important stressor to manage because it can result in reduced job satisfaction, organizational

commitment and performance.

2.4.2 Individual Role Demand: The stress created by others‟ expectations of you. Roles are sets

of behaviours that people expect of occupants of a position. Stress may come about because

of role overload, role conflict and role ambiguity.

Role Over Load: Role overload occurs when managers have too many responsibilities and

activities to perform. That is, when others‟ expectations exceed one‟s ability. At this point

you might be thinking that role overload is part and parcel of most managers‟ job. Managers

do have multiple responsibilities and at times, these can become excessive, resulting in high

level of stress.

Role Conflict: Role conflict occurs when there is a conflict or friction between expected

behaviours. That is, when one feels torn by the different expectations of important people in

one‟s life. In performing the roles of spokes person and information disseminator, managers

may find their responsibility to transmit accurate information to be at odds with their

responsibility to promote a positive image for the organization in the eyes of the public. In

performing the roles of a leader and resource allocator, managers may experience conflict

between their responsibility to motivate organizational members and rewards high

performance and their responsibility to allocate scarce resources (including money for raises

and bonuses).

Role Ambiguity: Role ambiguity occurs when others‟ expectations are unknown. That is,

when you find your job description and the criteria for promotion vague, a complaint often

voiced by new comers to an organization.

2.4.3 Group Demands: the stress created by co-workers and managers. Even if you don‟t

particularly care for the work you do but like the people you work with, that can be a great

source of satisfaction and prevent stress. When people don‟t get along, that can be a great

stressor.

In addition, managers can create stress for employees in a number of ways; Exhibiting

inconsistent behaviours, failing to provide support, showing lack of concern, providing

inadequate direction, creating a demanding and high productivity environment, focusing on

negatives while ignoring good performances. People who have bad managers are five times

more likely to have stressed induced headaches, upset stomachs and loss of sleep.

2.4.4 Organizational Demands: Stress created by the environment and culture. The physical

environments of some jobs are great sources of stress. Such jobs are; Poultry processing,

asbestos removal, coal mining, fire fighting, police work, ambulance driving and so on.

Even white collar work can take place in a stressful environment, with poor lighting, too

much noise, improper placement of furniture and no privacy. An organizational culture that

promotes high pressure work demands on employee will fuel the stress response. Research

shows preliminary support for the idea that organizational stress can be reduced by

participatory management.

2.4.5 Non-work Demands: The stress created by forces outside the organization. As anyone

knows who has had to cope with money problems, divorce, support of elderly relatives or

other serious non-work concerns. The stress outside one‟s work life can have a significant

effect on work and people with lower incomes, education level and work statuses are

particularly apt to have higher stress. But even people with ordinary lives can find the stress

of coping with family life rugged going.

Burke (1988) in Lu et al, (2003) group job stressors into the following six (6) categories: physical

environment, role stressors, organizational structure and job characteristics, relationship with others,

career development and work-family conflict. While Copper et al, (1988) in Lu et al, 2003)

identified six (6) sources of stress at work; factors intrinsic to the job, management role, relationship

with others, career and achievement, organizational structure and climate, and home/work interface.

More simply, Antoniou et al (2006), point that specific conditions that make jobs stressful can be

categorized either as exogenous (i.e. unfavorable occupational conditions, excessive workload, lack

of collaboration etc) or endogenous pressures (i.e. individual personality characteristics etc.).

When we add the complexity and turbulence of contemporary business environment and

organizational life, altogether, causes of occupational stress are grouped into two (2).

Job related stressors, with three major subgroups namely environment specific, organization

specific and job specific stressors.

Individual related stressors which can be either a consequence of individual characteristics

or a consequence of individual life circumstances as the below table depicts.

Table 2.1 Sources of Occupational Stress

JOB RELATED STRESSORS

Environment Specific Organization Specific Job Specific

Economic conditions, increased

levels of competition

Changes within organization Poor fit between abilities and skills

needed to perform job effectively.

Market changes Re-organizations, delayering,

layoffs

Work overload

Technological development,

changes in production and

products

Organizational structure Pressure to work longer hours

New reforms of organization and

product development

Organization culture/climate Job characteristics

Drive for greater cost

effectiveness

Mergers, acquisitions and

similar changes of company

ownership

Conflicting job demands

Networks Workforce diversity Unclear job expectations

Multinationals Reward systems Pressures of responsibility

General public concerns for the

environment etc

Promotion policies Time pressures

Job security Lack of resources to perform job

Leadership style Lack of information

More training needed etc Lack of collaboration

Relations with subordinate co-

workers and superiors, working

conditions, physical danger, over or

under promotion, insufficient training

etc

Individual Characteristics Individual Life Circumstances

Personality traits Work/life conflict

Demographic characteristics Family problems

Coping skills, etc Personal problems, social problems, financial difficulties

etc

Source: Cooper and Marshall (1976)

According to Burke, (1988), other sources of occupational stress include:

Infrequent rest breaks.

Long work hours and demanding work shifts.

Hectic and routine tasks that have little inherent meaning do not utilize a worker‟s skills and

provide little sense of control.

Management style- a lack of participation by workers in decision making, poor

communication in the organization, lack of family friendly policies.

Interpersonal relationships- poor social environment, lack of support or help from co-

workers and supervisors.

Work roles- conflicting or uncertain job expectations, too much responsibility, too many

“hats to wear”

Career concerns– job insecurity, lack of growth opportunity, rapid changes for which

workers are unprepared.

Environmental conditions– unpleasant physical conditions such as crowding, noise, air

pollution, ergonomic problems.

Work conditions that pose risk to health and safety.

Short-Lived episodes of stress pose little risk. But if stressful situations go unresolved, the body

can suffer from wear and tear, and the ability of a Peron‟s body to repair and defend itself can

become seriously compromised.

2.5 WORKER CHARACTERISTICS THAT CAN CAUSE STRESS

According to Brief and Schular, (1979), worker characteristics that can cause job stress include:

2.5.1. A need to be in control: under this we have;

The worker feels a need to be in control at all times

The worker views lack of control as a sign of weakness

The worker has difficulty delegating assignments to others.

The worker avoids showing signs of weakness or nervousness.

2.5.2 A lack or perceived lack of competence

The worker feels his or her work is inferior compared to others.

The worker feels he or she makes poor judgments

The worker feels a lack of common sense.

The worker feels doubts about his or her competence and ability to do the job.

2.5.3 A desire to please people

The worker relies on favorable opinions and input from others as a basis for building self

esteem.

The worker fears he or she may disappoint others.

The worker cares more about others needs than his or her own.

The worker avoids communications and actions that would displease others.

2.5.4 A need to be perfect (perfectionism)

The worker feels under pressure to achieve.

The worker is highly self-critical

The worker feels a job well done could have been done even better.

The worker sacrifices pleasure in order to excel and achieve.

2.6 CONSEQUENCES OF OCCUPATIONAL STRESS

Over time, stress may lead to burnout or a state emotional, mental and even physical exhaustion,

expressed as listlessness, indifference or frustration. Clearly, the greatest consequence of negative

stress for the organization is reduced productivity. Over stressed employees are apt to call in sick,

miss deadlines, take longer lunch breaks and show indifference to performance. However, some

may put in great number of hours at work without getting as much accomplished as previously.

Mental health experts estimate that 10% of the workforce suffers from depression or high levels of

stress that may ultimately affect job performance. In addition, researchers estimate that in a recent

year stress caused 11% of all cases of employee absenteeism.

High level of stress can take a toll on managers. Stress can be especially damaging when it lasts for

a long time although, reactions to stress differ across individuals.

Stresses produce a range of undesired, expensive and debilitating consequences which affect both

individuals and organizations. In organizational setting, stress is nowadays becoming a major

contributor to health and performance problems of individuals and unwanted occurrence and costs

for organizations (Rose, 2005). Consequences of occupational stress can be grouped into those of

individual and those of organizational level. On the individual level, there are three (3) main

subgroups of stress; unwanted feelings and behaviors, physiological consequences and

psychological consequences.

2.6.1 Unwanted Feelings and Behaviors:

Such as job dissatisfaction, lower motivation, low employee morale, less organizational

commitment, lowered overall quality of work life, absenteeism, turnover, intention to leave the job,

lower productivity, decreased quantity and quality of work, inability to make sound decisions, more

theft, sabotage and work stoppage, occupational burnout, alienation and increased smoking and

alcohol intake.

2.6.2 Physiological Consequences (Poor Physical Health):

Physiological diseases of stress range from mild to severe. Sleep disturbances, sweaty palms,

feeling flushed, headaches, stomachaches, backaches, nausea, skin problems, injuries and fatigue

are some physical reactions to stress, as high blood pressure, heart attack cardiovascular diseases,

and impaired functioning of the immune system. The relationship between levels of stress and these

physiological consequences is complicated. Some people tend to experience more of these

physiological consequences than others and different people experience different kinds of

consequences. What does seem to be clear is that the most severe consequences of stress as high

blood pressure and heart attacks are likely to occur when excessive levels of stress are experienced

over an extended period of time.

2.6.3 Psychological Consequences (Poor Emotional (Mental) Health):

Psychological distress, depression, anxiousness, passiveness/aggressiveness, boredom, lose of self-

confidence and self esteem, lose of concentration, feelings of futility, impulsiveness and

disregarding of social norms and values, dissatisfaction with job and live, losing of contact with

reality and emotional fatigue. These negative feelings carry over into work attitudes such as lower

levels of work job satisfaction and organizational commitment. At some point, all workers are likely

to experience these psychological Consequences. When stress levels become too high for too long a

time, however, these negative feelings can become over whelming.

On the organizational level consequences of occupational stress, stress can be grouped into two (2)

major subgroups; organizational symptoms and organizational costs.

2.6.4 Organizational Symptoms:

Such as discontent and poor morale among the workforce, performance/productivity losses, low

quality products and services, poorer relationships with clients, suppliers, partners and regulatory

authorities, losing customers, bad publicity, damage to the corporate image and reputation, missed

opportunities, disruption to production, high accident and mistake rates, high labour turnover, loss

of valuable staff, increased sick leave, permanent vacancies, premature retirement, diminished

cooperation, poor internal communications, more internal conflicts and dysfunctional workplace

climate.

2.6.5 Organizational Costs:

Such as costs of reduced performance/productivity (lack of added value to product and/or service),

high replacement costs in connection with labour turnover (increase in recruitment training and

retraining costs), increased sick pay, increased health-care costs and disability payment, higher

grievance and litigation/compensation costs, and costs of equipment damage.

As evident from the above, consequences of occupational stress, both on individual and

organizational level are a real cost to organization. Because of its significant economic

implications, stress is not only a huge burden but one of the fastest growing concerns to

contemporary organizations, especially given the high levels of competition and environmental

turbulence which do not allow organizations to bear costs such as those caused by stress (Ben-

Bakr et al, 1995). However, costs which are a consequence of stress are hardly ever assessed or

calculated either in human or financial terms. Despite the apparent need for measuring costs of

stress. It seems that till date, relatively limited number of organizations estimated those enormous

indirect costs (McHugh, 1993).

Finally, it is important to stress that contrary to popular belief; stress can be associated with both

pleasant and unpleasant events and only becomes problematic when it remains unresolved (Erkutlu

& Chafra, 2006). In other words, one could argue that not all stress is dysfunctional and that, in

fact, stress is not inherently bad, while a limited amount of stress combined with appropriate

responses actually can benefit both the individual and the organization (Chusmir & Franks, 1988).

2.7 DEALING WITH OCCUPATIONAL STRESS

The harmful and costly consequences of stress demonstrate the need for strategies to limit stressors

within the organization as well as to deal with stress that already occurred (Comish & Swindle,

1994). Namely, those organization which fully address the issue of work related stress through

problem recognition and problem solving activities will be better placed to deal with the demands of

a rapidly changing world and thus enhance their chance of gaining competitive advantage,

fortunately, there are ways of dealing with occupational stress (Mc Hugh, 1993: 30).

Firstly, organizations and their employees should become more aware of the degree to which stress

is an unnecessary cost, and a cost which they must seek to eliminate if their organizations are to

survive and grow. Naturally, this awareness must start at top management level where the

estimated cost of stress is sufficient to generate organizational commitment to subsequence action

(Mc Hugh 1993, 31).

Secondly, work-related stress should become an issue which increasingly features on the agenda of

efficient managers (Mc Hugh, 1993, 18). In an increasingly competitive and fast changing business

world, efficient managers should feel compelled to address the issue of work-related stress through

counting the costs and taking appropriate action so as to minimize its effects (Mc Hugh, 1993, 19).

Managers should expend their efforts in reducing the significant sources of stress, as this leads to a

higher employee satisfaction, increase the productivity of the workforce and reduces negative

consequences of stress, which at the end results in higher profits (Blake et al, 1996).

Thirdly, training and employee assistance programs dealing with stress should be on employees‟

disposal. Various workshops, seminars and conferences should increase employee‟s awareness of

the costs associated with employee stress, and should teach them how to cope with stressful

situations and states. As Shuttle worth (2004) explains, training can have a positive impact on

tackling stress in the workplace, as it helps employees become more resilient towards stress, enables

them to tackle the root causes of any problems, and helps managers who not only need to manage

their own stress levels, but are responsible for their direct reports. Considering the organizational

and personal costs of high stress, there is certainly an implied pay off in training managers and

employees to recognize organizational factors that contribute to stress and to take steps to alleviate

them (Chusmir & Franks, 1988).

According to Angelo and Brain, (2003), there are different kinds of buffers or administrative

changes that managers can make to reduce the stressors that lead to employee burnout. Example;

Extra staff or equipment at peak periods, increased freedom to make decisions, recognition for

accomplishment, time off for rest personal development, assignment to a new position. Three-to-

five-day employee retreats at offsite locations for relaxation and team-building activities. Sabbatical

leave programs to replenish employees‟ energy desire to work.

Some general strategies according to Angelo and Brain for dealing with unhealthy stressors are as

follows:

Create a supportive organizational climate: Job stress often results because organizations

have evolved into large, informal and inflexible bureaucracies. Whenever possible, it is

better to try to keep the organizational environment less formal, more impersonal and more

supportive.

Make jobs interesting: Stress also results when jobs are routinized, and boring. Better to try

to structure jobs so that they allow employees some freedom.

Make career counseling available: Some companies make career planning available, which

reduces the stress that comes when employees do not know what their career options are and

where they are headed.

2.8 STRESS REACTIONS AT WORK

Stress reactions at work can be conveniently grouped into three (3) places namely: emotional

experiences, Behavior and physiological reactions.

It is obvious that different reactions within each category and between categories often coincide.

For example, a worker can experience anxiety and depression which can cause increase alcohol

consumption and react with disturbed stomach functions, all at the same time. These types of

reactions, though under different headings, all are aspects of one and the same process, being, the

interaction between the worker and the job.

2.8.1 Emotional Experiences

The expression “emotion” is derived from Latin, “exmovere”, to move out, disturb, stir up, excite.

Clearly, this original meaning comes rather close to today‟s psychological concepts of activation

and arousal, and to the everyday meaning of the word as “agitation of the passions or sensibilities of

as any strong feelings, as of joy, sorrow, reverence, hate or love, arising subjectively rather than

through conscious mental effort” (Lennart, 1981). The author in his repeated emphasis, concluded

that, the physiological concomitants of the subjective reaction can also be seen as adaptive, i.e., by

preparing the organism for muscular activity, such as fight or flight (or sex)

Furthermore, for social reasons, in modern times we often have to repress many of our emotional

outlets. This creates a situation that might very well involve a discrepancy between the subjective

elements of emotion, the hormonal concomitants of emotion, and the gestures and facial expressions

likely to accompany such emotions (Lenart, 1981). For example, a worker may feel anxiety or

aggression in a work setting without showing it by facial expression or through verbal behavior.

Briefly, then distress can be a subjective element of a stress reaction.

According to (Allarf, 1975) quoted in (Lennart, 1981) 58% and 45% respectively, of a random

sample of Swedish women and men reported anxiety symptoms of type or another. The author

observed that corresponding Danish, finish and Norwegian figures were even higher.

Pinneau, (1976) points out that until recently there has been relatively little research on the positive

side of our social existence and calls for attention to the expected benefit we tend to reap from

supportive social relationships. As regards to the issue, the researcher‟s result showed that support

from outside the organization or even at home had little effect on job stress, while support from

supervisors and co-workers both had numerous effects on a variety of stress measures. Employees

with high support from either supervisor or co-workers generally reported low role conflict, low

role ambiguity, and low future ambiguity, high participation and good utilization of skills.

2.8.2 Behaviour

Behaviour is another general aspect of stress reactions. It is certain that workers experiencing stress

at work may react or response to it in various ways. Some may turn to alcohol abuse or increase the

level of their tobacco consumption. Others may start taking drugs not prescribed by doctors or dose

higher than prescribed. In some cases, others exhibit risk taking behaviors in the occupational

settings, or even in traffic. Though there are cases where such behaviours are not quite dramatic, but

can still have a considerable impact on those affected. Thus, behaviours can be categorized into;

Active behaviours: (e.g. Grievances, go-slows, strike, turnover, reluctant to take on certain

jobs).

Passive behaviours: (e.g. Resignation, low motivation, indifference to produce quality,

absenteeism) in cases with, social spillovers effects (low life satisfaction, lower political and

cultural activity). (Lennart, 1981:75).

As a matter of course, all this has a very considerable impact on the health and wellbeing of

workers, directly and indirectly. In all parts of the world, where there are no strong religious

restrictions against alcohol consumption, alcohol abuse is a great problem. Although, this incidence

varies from country to country, the abuse is so common that it constitute one of the biggest social

and medical problems in the world.

2.8.3 Physiological Reactions

A misfit between a worker‟s ability and needs on the one hand and environmental demands and

opportunities on the other, as well as conflicts between competing roles and else where, all provoke

a complex of patterns of not only emotional and behavioural but also physiological reactions

(Lennart, 1981). The most basic ones of the latter type comprise the central nervous system as well

as the ductless (endocrine) glands. The author observes that, the biologically active agents of these

glands, the hormones, together with nervous impulse, influence virtually almost every cell in the

organisms, every organ and organ system. The hormones secreted by the thyroid gland increase the

turnover of carbohydrates, fats, calcium and magnesium, the heart rate and contractility and total

peripheral resistance. The adrenal gland secreting critical hormones, regularly among other things,

the metabolism of water, carbohydrates and minerals in the body.

It is important at this point to mention secondary physiological reactions. For instance, a worker is

exposed to unjustified criticism from his or her superior; this may cause him or her to react with

increased or irregular heart rate, muscular tension, with subsequent pain in the neck, dryness of

throat and month, over production of gastric juice etc.

In a study by (Levi, 1972 quoted in Lennart, 1981), to demonstrate such reactions, an experiment

was carried out using several groups of male and female volunteers who were exposed to a stressful

seventy-two hours vigil. Results revealed that adrenalin excretion increased considerably over

control levels and remained high throughout the vigil. Free fatty acid and cholesterol increased, as

well as protein bound iodine (which reflects the secretion of thyroxin from the thyroid gland). The

propensity of white blood capsules to kill bacteria decreased significantly.

It is obvious that these changes were transitory, disappearing with discontinuation of this stressful

exposure. However, life itself does not stop exposing us to potent stressors after such relatively

short period of time but goes on for weeks, months, even years. It seems like such prolonged

exposures may provoke the same type of reactions, which in the long run may become disease

provoking.

In his research, Selye, (1989) cited in Greenberg, (1990) he summarized stress reactivity as a three

(3) phase process termed the general adaptation syndrome (GAS).

Phase 1: Alarm Reaction: The body shows the changes characteristics of the first exposure to

stressor. At the same time, its resistance is diminished and if the stressor is sufficiently strong

(severe burns, extremes of temperature), death may result.

Phase 2: Stage of Resistance: Resistance ensures if continued exposure to the stressor is

compatible with adaptation. The bodily signs characteristic of the alarm reaction have virtually

disappeared and resistance rises above normal.

Phase 3: Stage of Exhaustion: Following long continued exposure to the stressor to which the body

had become adjusted, eventually adaptation energy is exhausted. The signs of the alarm reaction

reappear, but now they are irreversible and the individual dies.

2.9 COPING WITH OCCUPATIONAL STRESS

It is unrealistic to think that you can eliminate stress from either your personal life or your

professional life, yet you do not have to be the victim of stress, for you can recognize how you are

being affected by it and can make decisions about how to think, feel and behave in stressful

situations. You can become aware of your destructive reactions to stress and Learn constructive

ways of coping with it. In short, you can help to manage and control stress rather than being

controlled by it (Corey and Corey, 1993). Matheny, et al (1986) designed a major study that

attempted to synthesize the research on methods of coping. They define coping as any effort,

healthy or unhealthy conscious or unconscious, to prevent, eliminate or weaken stressors, or to

tolerate their effects in the least harmful manner. Their model includes both preventive and

combative strategies. There are three (3) general strategies for preventing stress according to

Matheny, et al (1986).

Avoiding or reducing stressors, such as physically removing oneself from the stressful

situation.

Altering stress-inducing behaviours patterns, by decreasing “Type A” behaviours and self-

destructive thinking.

Developing coping resources, to include a sense of physical health, cognitive assets and

social support.

The integrative model of coping also outlines five combative strategies which include the following;

Firstly, monitoring stressors and symptoms; being aware of those situations which one finds

stressful and then react to them.

Secondly, marshaling ones‟ resources; drawing on ones resources and developing an effective plan

of attack for the stressors.

Thirdly, lowering stressful arousal; relaxation methods and leisure can be most useful in reducing

tension.

Fourthly, using problem-solving methods such as assessing the problem, finding out relevant

information, challenging limiting assumptions and identifying alternative behaviours and

Finally, learning to tolerate those stressors that cannot be eliminated, cognitive restructuring can be

used to combat ones negative self-talk and “catastrophic” thinking (Matheny, et al, 1986).

Since not all stress are dysfunctional and can never be totally eliminated from a person‟s life, either

off the job or on the job. Managers are concerned with reducing the stress that leads to

dysfunctional work behaviour. These they achieve through controlling certain organizational factors

to reduce organizational stress and to a more limited extent, offering help for personal stress

(Stephen & Mary, 2007).

Things that managers can do in terms of organizational factors begin with employee selection.

Managers need to make sure that employee‟s abilities match the job requirements. When employees

are in over their heads their stress levels typically will be high. A realistic job previews during the

selection process can also minimize stress by reducing ambiguity over job expectations. Improved

organizational communications will keep ambiguity – induced stress to a minimum. Similarly, a

performance planning programme such as MBO will clarify job responsibilities, provide clear

performance goals and reduce ambiguity through feedback. Job redesign is also a way to reduce

stress. If stress can be traced to boredom or to work overload, jobs should be redesigned to increase

challenge or to reduce the work load. Redesigns that increase opportunities for employees to

participate in decision and to gain social support have also been found to reduce stress (Corey and

Corey 1993).

Stress from an employee‟s personal life raised two (2) problems. First, it is difficult for the

managers to control directly. Second, there are ethical considerations. Specifically, does the

manager have the right to intrude – even in the most subtle ways in an employee‟s personal life? If

a manager believes its ethical and the employee is receptive, there are a few approaches manager

can consider. Employee counseling can provide stress relief, employee often want to talk to some

one about their problems, and the organization through its managers. In-house human resource

counselors or free or low cost outside professional help can meet that need. A time management

programs can help employees whose personal lives suffer from a lack of planning that in turn,

creates stress may help them sort out their priorities. Still, another approach is organizationally

sponsored wellness programmes. For example, an organization offering its employees a large –

square foot fitness facilities or an organization provides its employees with a nurse advocate

programme to help them remain healthy.

According to (Jackson, 1983), there have been a number of laboratory studies and field studies

findings that lead to some specific suggestions of ways to reduce work related stress. He opined

that Researchers have found that employee involvement significantly reduces job related strain.

Employee participation in decision making lowers workers stress level (Landy, et al (1994).

Ivancevich and Donally (1985) found that employees in firms with flats organizational structures

reported greater levels of job satisfaction and self-actualization. Researchers have also found that

ability to cope with stressful situations is directly related to the individual‟s perceived ability to

control the situation (Latack, et al 1995). Another study of the effects of increased job control on

employee stress by karasek (1990) revealed that increased job control exhibited, a significant

positive association with reduced worker stress, absenteeism, depression and heart disease.

Recognizing that perceptions of occupational stress are as important as the actual event precipitating

that stress, it is necessary to intervene in these perceptions. Greenberg (1990) offers the following

suggestions that could help reduce stress.

First, look for the humor in your stressor at work. A resourceful teacher, frustrated by inane memos

from the principal with which she was repeatedly harassed, kept a file of these memos and

eventually wrote a very humorous and successful book based upon them.

Secondly, try to see things for what they really are. Publishers are notorious for requesting

manuscripts from authors by certain firm deadlines, unfortunately, too often these manuscripts sit

on some editor‟s desk before being processed. Publisher‟s deadlines are not really deadlines.

Rather, they are dates close to when they would like to receive a manuscript and knowing that many

authors will be late with their submissions, these editors have selected dates with a margin for

delay.

Thirdly, distinguish between need and desire. “I must get this task completed” might be more

truthful stated as “I wish I would get this task completed”. Fourthly, separate your self-worth from

the task. If you fail at a task, it does not mean you are a failure and finally, identify situations and

employ the appropriate style of coping.

Lazarus and Folkman, (1984) have differentiated between problem-focused coping and emotion-

focused coping. Problem focused coping is the use of activities specific to getting the task

accomplished (researching and discussing the writing of a thesis paper), whereas emotion focused

coping is the use of activities to feel better about the task (joking about an assignment or discussing

your feelings with a friend).

According to Jones and George, 2000, people manage or deal with stress in two (2) basic ways;

Problem-Focused coping and Emotion-Focused coping. Problem-focused coping is the actions

people take to deal directly with the source of their stress. Emotion-focused coping is the actions

people take to deal with their stressful feelings and emotions.

Although individuals may cope with stress somewhat differently, here we look at two problem-

focused strategies (time management and getting help from a mentor) and three emotion-focused

strategies (exercise, meditation and social support) that managers can use. We also look at how

emotional intelligence may help managers cope with stress as well as be more effective.

2.9.1 Problem-Focus Coping

Time Management: Time management can be an especially useful strategy for managers

trying to cope with numerous and sometimes conflicting demands. Time management

includes various techniques that help people to make better use of and accomplish more with

their time making lists of what needs to be accomplished in a certain relatively short period

(such as a day or week), prioritizing tasks to clarify which ones are most important and

which ones could be delegated or put off and estimating how long it will take to accomplish

tasks and dividing one‟s day(s) accordingly.

Getting Help from a Mentor: Seeking the advice and guidance of a mentor can be an

effective problem-focused strategy for managers at all levels. A mentor is likely to have

faced a problem (threat or opportunity) similar to the problem the manager is currently

facing and thus will be in a good position to comment on what are especially effective or

ineffective ways of dealing with it. In any case, receiving advice from someone who has had

more experience and also is less personally involved in the issue at hand can be helpful.

2.9.2 Emotion Focus Coping

Exercise: Many managers jog, swim or use exercise machines such as Nordic tracks, rowing

machines or treadmills in their homes or offices. Physical exercise is among the most

effective ways to deal stressful feelings and emotions. Regular exercise also can improve

cardiovascular functioning and contribute to a general sense of well-being and relaxation.

Meditation: Temporarily putting every day care aside by being in a quite environment and

focusing on some soothing mental or visual image or verbal phrase also can be an effective

means of emotional-focused coping. Akin to meditation are special breathing techniques that

can be used to combat stressful feelings. In some countries, many managers practice special

breathing techniques (such as breathing slowly and shallowly) in a variety of positions (such

as standing, bending and squatting to improve their life force and energy. They believe that

doing this improves their health and stamina, alleviates stress and allows them to remain in

control and even to stay youthful.

Social support: There is more than a grain of truth in the old saying that sometimes all you

need is a shoulder to cry on. Social support, the availability of other people (such as friends,

relatives, co-worker or supervisors) to talk to, discuss problems with or receive advice from,

can alleviate stressful feelings and emotions. Managers often seek social support from their

families or from co-workers in similar kinds of positions. Mentors can also be a good source

of social support as well as practical advice for dealing with actual sources of stress.

When coping is successful, opportunities and threats responsible for stress are dealt with

directly and stressful feelings and emotions do not get out of hand. Sometimes, when people

are unable to cope effectively with the stress they are experiencing, help from trained

experts such as a psychologist can be beneficial.

2.9.3 Emotional Intelligence

In addition to problem-focused and emotional-focused coping, emotional intelligence also

helps managers cope with stress. Emotional intelligence is the ability to understand and

manage one‟s own moods and emotions of other people. Managers with a high level of

emotional intelligence are more likely to understand how they are feeling and why, and are

more able to effectively manage their feelings. When managers are experiencing stressful

feelings and emotions such as fear or anxiety, emotional intelligence enables them to

understand why and manage these feelings so that they do not get in the way of effective

decision making.

Emotional intelligence also can help managers perform their interpersonal roles (figure

head, leader and liaison) and many of their other important roles. Understanding how

subordinate feel, why they feel that way, and how to manage these feelings is central to

developing strong interpersonal bonds with them. Emotional intelligence is often an

important ingredient for managerial success at all levels in the organization (Jones and

George, 2000).

2.10 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INDIVIDUAL CHARACTERISTICS AND

OCCUPATIONAL STRESS

Individual differences affect our perceptions and interpretations of events around us. They

contribute to our experience of stresses (Primary appraisal), and our decisions of what to do to deal

with the stressor- our choice of coping process (secondary appraisals) Moran, (1998). As Lu et al

(2003:481) explain, vast individual differences in vulnerability to stress alter an individual‟s

perception of a potential source of stress, (direct effect), impact on the transformation of perceived

stress into various consequences of stress (indirect effect), and ameliorate these stress consequences

(direct effect).

The personality variables that have been linked to stress include loss of control, self-esteem, type A

behaviour pattern, hardiness and negative affectivity (Ganster & Schaubroeck, 1991). Demographic

variables that are proven to relate to someone‟s job stressor/health relationship include gender, age,

marital status, job tenure, job title and hierarchical level among which gender, age and hierarchical

level were found to be the most significant, as further explanations reveal (Dua, 1994; Lind & Otte,

1994; Murphy, 1995).

A general tendency exists in the literature according to which females experience higher levels of

occupational stress regarding gender-specific stressors and have different ways of interpreting and

dealing with problems related to their work environment (Offerman and Armitage, 1993 in

Antoniou et al 2006).

For example, Sharpley et al (1996) found that males have statistically significant lower job stress

scores. Davidson et al (1995) in fotinatos-ventouratos & Cooper, 2005) found that female managers

are under much more pressure that their male counterparts and Antoniou et al (2006) found that

female teachers experienced significantly higher levels of occupational stress compared to their

male counterparts.

Ganster and Schaubroeck (1991) point that women experience the greater level of stress as they are

more vulnerable to the demands of work to the extent that they often have more non-work demands

than men. Gregory (1990) notifies that for the female professional gender stereotyping in the

workplace add to the role conflict stress experiences, while Comish and Swindle (1994) explains

that role demands such as that of being wife, mother and professional provoke role conflict.

Finally, the results of the bevariate analysis conducted by Fotinatos-Ventouratos and Copper (2005)

revealed significantly differences in terms of physical and psychological well being amongst male

and female sample concerning the relationship between age and occupational stress. The ability to

handle stress associated with job and organization was found to increase with age (experience)

(Sager, 1990). For example, researchers revealed that younger staff members reported more job

stress than older staffs, that employee who are less than 30 years old experience the highest levels

of stress (Dua, 1994).

(Ben Bakr et al, 1995), observe that staff between the ages 31 and 40 suffered the most from job

stress. Younger teachers experienced higher levels of burnout, specifically in terms of emotional

exhaustion and disengagement from the profession (Antoniou et al 2006). The major explanation

for such a finding is that older employees have often reached a stage where career development is

not their major concern, and hence a number of job characteristics which may cause stress to

younger staff, who have their career ahead of them, do not cause stress to older staff (Dua 1994,

75).

Lastly, staff employed at the higher job levels were found to be less stressed than those employed at

the lower job levels (Dua, 1994). As well, different levels of management influence preference for

stress coping styles, specifically, as it is progressed towards the more senior levels of management,

delegation and maintaining style relationships are considered the most useful forms (Kirkcaldy &

Furnham, 1999).

2.11 OCCUPATIONAL STRESS AND JOB PERFORMANCE

Several authors attributed the lack of progress in the area of stress research in organization to the

fact that stress seemed to be related to such a large number of conditions which prevented a

systematic focus. Beehr used a very general definition in which „anything about an organizational

role that produces adverse consequences for the individual‟ was called role stress. They proceeded

to the conclusion that a condition termed role overload was viable and this correlated positively

with job stress. Stress indicators related to role ambiguity in the study indicated low motivation to

work.

Schuler, (1998), sees stress in organization as an increasingly important concern in both

organizational research and practice. An interesting finding by Beehr, (1998), was that even if there

was role stress, people with situational characteristics did not suffer as greatly from it. Job

performance is the result of three factors working together: skill, effort and the nature of work

conditions. Skills include knowledge, abilities and competencies the employee brings to the job;

effort is the degree of motivation the employee puts forth toward getting the job done; and the

nature of work conditions is the degree of accommodation of these conditions in facilitating the

employee‟s productivity.

The documented consequences of stress on employees include: alcohol and drug abuse,

interpersonal relationship difficulties, depression, anxiety and suicide. Other studies have also

shown that stress can be detrimental to bankers or professional‟s academic achievement,

effectiveness in delivering bank services by decreasing attention span, concentration, decision

making skills, and ability to establish employee – customers relationship. In addition to affecting

psychological and emotional well being, stress can also result in a decrease in physical health such

as the development of hypertension, heart disease, and immune deficiency disorders (Beehr 1998).

Quality banking services is an important goal of the banking sectors and employees performance

has been shown to be closely related to the quality of service a customer receive. A study conducted

by Abu Al-Rub indicated a curvilinear (U-shaped) relationship between job stress and job

performance; employees who reported moderate levels of job stress believed that they performed

their jobs less well than did those who reported low or high levels of job stress.

2.12 GENDER AND OCCUPATIONAL STRESS

Do job stressors affect men and women differently? This question has only recently been addressed

in the job stress literature. In fact, the word gender does not even appear in the index of the first

edition of the Handbook of Stress nor does it appear in the indices of such major reference books as

Job Stress and Blue Collar Work (Cooper and Smith 2002). Moreover, in a 1992 review of

moderator variables and interaction effects in the occupational stress literature, gender effects were

not even mentioned (Halt 1992). One reason for this state of affairs lies in the history of

occupational health and safety psychology, which in turn reflects the pervasive gender stereotyping

in our culture, With the exception of reproductive health, when researchers have looked at physical

health outcomes and physical injuries, they have generally studied men and variations in their work.

When researchers have studied mental health outcomes, they have generally studied women and

variations in their social roles.

As a result, the available evidence” on the physical health impact of work has until recently been

almost completely limited to men (Hall 1992). For example, attempts to identify correlates of

coronary heart disease have been focused exclusively on men and on aspects of their work;

researchers did not even inquire into their male subjects‟ marital or parental roles (Rosenman et al.

1975). Indeed, few studies of the job stress-illness relationship in men include assessments of their

marital and parental relationships (Caplan et al. 2001.In contrast, concern about reproductive health,

fertility and pregnancy focused primarily on women. Not surprisingly, “the research on

reproductive effects of occupational exposures is far more extensive on females than on males”

(Poalli and Merlie 2001). With respect to psychological distress, attempts to specify the

psychosocial correlates, in particular the stressors associated with balancing work and family

demands, have centered heavily on women.

By reinforcing the notion of „separate spheres” for men and women, these conceptualizations and

the research paradigms they generated prevented any examination of gender effects, thereby

effectively controlling for the influence of gender. Extensive sex segregation in the workplace also

acts as a control, precluding the study of gender as a moderator. If all men are employed in men‟s

jobs” and all women are employed in “women‟s jobs”, it would not be reasonable to ask about the

moderating effect of gender on the job stress-illness relationship: job conditions and gender would

be confounded. It is only when some women are employed in jobs that men occupy and when some

men are employed in jobs that women occupy that the question is meaningful. (Houkes et al 2001).

Controlling is one of three strategies for treating the effects of gender. The other two are ignoring

these effects or analyzing them (Hall 1991). Most investigations of health have either ignored or

controlled for gender, thereby accounting for the dearth of references to gender as discussed above

and for a body of research that reinforces stereotyped views about the role of gender in the job

stress-illness relationship. These views portray women as essentially different from men in ways

that render them less robust in the workplace, and portray men as comparatively unaffected by non-

work experiences. The main promise of this line of inquiry is to challenge stereotyped views of

women and men. The main pitfall is that conclusions about gender difference can still be drawn

erroneously. Because gender is confounded with many other variables in our society, these variables

have to be taken into account before conclusions about gender can be inferred. For example,

samples of employed men and women will undoubtedly differ with respect to a host of work and

non-work variables that could reasonably affect health outcomes. Most important among these

contextual variables are occupational prestige, salary, part-time versus full-time employment,

marital status, education, employment status of spouse, overall work burdens and responsibility for

care of younger and older dependents. In addition, evidence suggests the existence of gender

differences in several personalities, cognitive, behavioural and social system variables that are

related to health outcomes. These include: sensation seeking; self-efficacy (feelings of competence);

external locus of control; emotion-focused versus problem-focused coping strategies; use of social

resources and social support; harmful acquired risks, such as smoking and alcohol abuse; protective

behaviours, such as exercise, balanced diets and preventive health regimens; early medical

intervention; and social power (Walsh et al 2000). The better one can control these contextual

variables the closer one can get to understanding the effect of gender per se on the relationships of

interest, and thereby to understanding whether it is gender or other, gender-related variables that are

the effective moderators.

To illustrate, in one study job changes among white-collar workers were less likely to be associated

with negative health outcomes if the changes resulted in increased job control. This finding was true

for men, not women. Further analyses indicated that job control and gender were confounded. For

women, one of “the less aggressive (or powerful) groups in the labour market” (Karasek 1990),

white-collar job changes often involved reduced control, whereas for men, such job changes often

involved increased control. Thus, power, not gender, accounted for this interaction effect. Such

analyses lead us to refine the question about moderator effects. Do men and women react

differentially to workplace stressors because of their inherent (i.e., biological) nature or because of

their different experiences?

Although only a few studies have examined gender interaction effects, most report that when

appropriate controls are utilized, the relationship between job conditions and physical or mental

health outcomes is not affected by gender. In other words, there is no evidence of an inherent

difference in reactivity. (Giga and Cooper 2002). Findings from a random sample of full-time

employed men and women in dual-earner couples illustrate this conclusion with respect to

psychological distress. In a series of cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses, a matched pairs

design was used that controlled for such individual-level variables as age, education, occupational

prestige and marital-role quality, and for such couple-level variables as parental status, years

married and household income (Barnett et al. 1999). Positive experiences on the job were associated

with low distress; insufficient skill discretion and overload were associated with high distress;

experiences in the roles of partner and parent moderated the relationship between job experiences

and distress; and change over time in skill discretion and overload were each associated with change

over time in psychological distress. In no case was the effect of gender significant. In other words,

the magnitude of these relationships was not affected by gender.

REFERENCES

Beehr, T.A. & Newman, J.E. (1998) Job Stress, Employee Health and Organizational Effectiveness;

A fact analysis model and literature review. Personal Psychology, 31(2).

Caplan, R.O, & Jones, K.W. (1975) “Effects of Work Load, Role Ambiguity, and Type A

Personality on Anxiety, Depression, and Heart Rates”. Journal of Applied

Psychology”, 60(1).

Dewe, P.J. (1989) “Examining the Nature of Work Stress, Individual Evaluations, of Stressful

Experiences and Coping.” Journal of Human Relations, vol. 42(11).

Ivancevich, J.M. & Matteson, M. T. (1980) Stress and Work, A managerial Perspective.

Scottforesman & Co., Cylen view Illinois.

Ivancevich, J.M. Matteson, M.T. and Preston (1982) Occupational Stress: Type A Behaviour and

Physical Wellbeing. A.M.J., 25, 2, 373 – 391.

Portello, J.Y. and Long, B.C. (2000) “Appraisals and Coping with Work Place Interpersonal Stress:

A model for women managers”. Journal of Counseling Psychology, vol. 48(2).

Vansell, M., Brief, A.P. and Schuler, R.S. (1981) “Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity: Integration of

the literature and directions for future research”. Journal of Human Reactions, vol.

34(1).

Lazarus, R.S. Delongis, A, Folkman, S. & Gruen, R. (1985) Stress and Adaptation Outcomes: The

problem of confounded measures. American psychologist 40 (2).

Margolis, B. L. Kroes, W. H & Quinn, R.R. (1974) “Job Stress, An Unlisted Occupational

Hazards”.Journal of Occupational Medicine. 16(1).

Greenberg J.S. (1990), Comprehensive Stress Management (3rd

edition). Dubuque. I. A: Wm C.

Brown Publishers.

Holmes, T. H., & Rahe, R.H. (1987) “The Social Readjustment Rating Scale”. Journal of

Psychosomatic research, 11(2).

Matheny, K.B., Aycock, D.W. Pugh, J.L Curette & Canella, K.A. (1986) Stress Coping; A

Qualitative and Quantitative Synthesis with Implications for Treatment. The

Counseling Psychologist, 14 (4).

Stephen P.R. & Mary C. (2007) Management; eight editions, Prentice Hall of India, private Limited

New Delhi.

Antoniou, A.S., Polychromic, F, Vlachakis, A.N. (2006) “Gender and Age Differences in

Occupational Stress and Professional Burnout between Primary and High School

Teachers in Greece”. Journal of Managerial psychology, vol. 21(7).

Ben–Bakr, K.A., Al-Shammari, I. S, Jefri, O.A. (1995) “Occupational Stress in Different

Organizations”. A Saudi Arabian Survey. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 10(5).

Blake, C. G., Saleh, S. D., Whorms, H.H. (1996) “Stress and Satisfaction as a Function of

Technology and Supervision Type”. International Journal of Operations & Production

Management, 16(5).

Chusmir, L.H. Franks, V. (1988) “Stress and the Woman Manager, Training and Development”.

Journal, 42 (10).

Comish, R., Swindle, B. (1994) Managing Stress in the Workplace. National Publics Accountant,

39(9).

Cooper, C.L, Marshal, J. (1976) “Occupational Sources of stress, A Review of the Literature

Relating to Coronary Heart Disease and Mental ill Health”. Journal of occupational

psychology, 49(1).

Dua, J.K. (1994) “Job Stressors and Their Effects on Physical Health, Emotional Health, and Job

Satisfaction in a University”. Journal of Educational Administration, 32(1).

Erkutlu, H.V., Chafra, J. (2006) Relationship between Leadership Power Base and Job Stress of

Subordinates: Example from Boutique Hotels, Management Research News, 29(5).

Fotinatos–Ventouratos, R., Cooper, (2005) “The Role of Gender and Social Class in Work Stress”

.Journal of Managerial Psychology, 20(1).

Ganster, D, C. Schaubroeck, J. (1991) “Work Stress and Employee Health”. Journal of

Management, 17(2).

Gregory, A. (1990) “Are Women Different and Why are Women Thought to be Different?”

Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives. Journal of Business Ethnics, 9(4/5).

Kirkcaldy, B. Furnham, A. (1999) “Stress Coping Styles among German Managers”. Journal of

workplace Learning, 11(1).

Lind, S.L. Otte, F.L. (1994) Management Styles, Mediating Variables, and Stress among HRD

Professionals. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 5(4).

Lu, L. Cooper, C.L. kao, S.F., Zhou, Y. (2003) “Work Stress, Control Beliefs and Well-being in

Greater China”. An exploration of Sub-cultural Differences between the PRC and

Taiwan. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18(6): 479 – 510.

Mc. Hugh M. (1993) Stress at Work: Do Managers really Count the Costs? Employee relations,

15(1).

Moran, C.C. (1998) Stress and Emergency Work Experience: A non-linear relationship, Disaster

Prevention and Management, 7(1).

Murphy, L.R. (1995), Managing Job Stress; An Employee Assistance/Human resource Management

partnership, Personnel Review, 24(1).

Rees, W.D. (1997), Managerial Stress; dealing with the causes not the symptoms, Industrial and

Commercial training, 29(2).

Ross, G.F. (2005), “Tourism Industry Employee Work Stress” A Present and Future Crises. Journal

of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 19(2/3).

Sager, J.K. (1990) “Reducing Sales Manager Job Stress”. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 7(4).

Sharpley, C.F. Reynolds, R., Acosta, A. Dua, J.K. (1996) “The Presence, Nature and Effects of Job

Stress on Physical and Psychological Health at a Large Australian University”. Journal

of Educational Administration, 34 (4): 73 – 86.

Obinna, C.C. (2007), Management and Organization. Choby, Press Enterprises, Enugu. Enugu

State Nigeria.

Shuttleworth, A. (2004) Managing Workplace stress: how training can help industrial and

commercial training, 36(2).

Lennart, Levi M.D. (1981) Preventing works stress; Addison – Wesley series of Occupational

Stress.

Pinneau, S.R. Jr. (1976) “Effects of Social Support on Occupational Stress and Strain”. Paper

Presented at a Symposium at 84th

Annual Convocation of the American Psychological

Association, Institute of Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Schemerborn, Jr. R.J. (1994) Management for Productivity; John Wiley Sons Inc. P. 702 – 709.

Gareth, R. L., Jennifer, M. G and Charles, W. L (2000) Contemporary management. 2nd

edition.

Irwin Mc Graw-Hill, United States of America.

Angelo, K and Brain, K. W. (2003), management, a practical introduction. Arizona State

University. Mc Graw Hill. United State of America.

CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter constitutes the overall plan guiding the process of data collection. Specifically, this

chapter shows the research design, sources of data, population and sample size determination,

description of research instrument, data analysis techniques, validity and reliability of research

instrument.

3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN

Research design is the frame work which specifies the type of information to be collected, the

sources of data and the collection procedure. It is the basic plan for data collection and analysis of

the study. The design used for this study was survey research design.

3.2 SOURCES OF DATA

(a) Primary Source: Data were collected through the administration of questionnaire,

observation and the holding of personal interview which are instruments of the survey

method of research.

(b) Secondary Source: Secondary data were collected from several sources which include

books, journals, annual reports, magazines, newspapers and internet.

3.3 POPULATION OF THE STUDY

The target population of this study includes the Senior and Junior employees of the following banks

which were located in Enugu: First Bank of Nigeria Plc, United Bank for Africa Plc,

Intercontinental Bank Plc, Zenith Bank and Oceanic Bank Plc. A total of five (5) branches of First

Bank was selected with a total number of 400 employees, five (5) branches of United Bank for

Africa was also selected with a total of 450 employees, four (4) branches of Intercontinental Bank

was studied with a total of 200 employees, five (5) branches of Zenith Bank and Oceanic Banks

each was also selected with a total number of 300 and 350 employees respectively.

Table 3.1 Population Distribution

ORGANIZATIONS MGT/SENIOR

STAFF

JUNIOR STAFF TOTAL

First Bank of Nigeria Plc 150 250 400

United Bank for Africa Plc 200 250 450

Intercontinental Bank Plc 40 160 200

Zenith Bank Plc 120 180 300

Oceanic Bank Plc 160 190 350

Total 670 1030 1700

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

3.4 SAMPLE SIZE DETERMINATION

The actual population of the study is one thousand seven hundred (1700). Based on this population,

a normal confidence level of 95% and error tolerance of 5% was used.

We therefore, determine the sample size using Taro Yamane‟s formula. This mathematical method

is given as:

n = N

1 + N (e)2

Where

n = Sample size

N = Population

e = Error of tolerance

1 = Statistical constant

i.e

N = 1700

e = 5% or 0.05%

Therefore: 1700

n =

1 + 1700 (0.05)2

n = 1700

1 + 1700(0.0025)

n = 1700

1 +4.25

n = 1700

5.25

n = 323.8

This gives a sample size of 324

A stratified sampling method was adopted so as to give a proper representation to the designated

banks in the ratio of 5:4:3:2:1 using proportionality formula. A stratified sampling method involves

division of the population into classes or groups with each group or stratum having some definite

(similar) characteristics or features.

Thus: Q = A/N x n/1

Where:

Q = the number of questionnaire to be allocated to each bank.

A = the population of each bank.

N = the total population of all the banks.

n = the estimated sample size used in the study.

Thus:

First bank of Nigeria

Proportion of mgt/senior staff to be sampled

Q= 150 x 324

1700 1 =29

Number of junior staff to be sampled

Q= 250 x 324

1700 1 = 48

United Bank for Africa

Number of mgt/senior staff to be sampled

Q= 200 x 324 =38

1700 1

Number of junior staff to be sampled

Q= 250 x 324 =48

1700 1

Intercontinental bank:

Proportion of mgt/senior staff to be sampled

Q= 40 x 324 =8

1700 1

Number of junior staff to be sampled

Q= 160 x 324 =30

1700 1

Zenith Bank:

Number of mgt/senior staff to be sampled

Q= 120 x 324 =23

1700 1

Number of junior staff to be sampled

Q= 180 x 324 =34

1700 1

Oceanic Bank:

Proportion of mgt/senior staff to sampled

Q= 160 x 324 =30

1700 1

Number of junior staff to be sampled

Q= 190 x 324 =36

1700 1

Sample Size = 324

Table 3.2 Break down of the Sample Size

Organizations Population (A) Questionnaire (Q)

First Bank of Nigeria 400 77

United Bank for Africa 450 86

Intercontinental Bank 200 38

Zenith Bank 300 57

Oceanic Bank 350 66

Total 1700 324

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

3.5 DESCRIPTION OF RESEARCH INSTRUMENT

The major research instruments used for data gathering for this study were a structured

questionnaire and oral interview. The questionnaire was formulated considering the research

questions that were raised in the first chapter of this study. The questionnaire has two (2) sections.

Specifically, all the questions in section A were on general information of the respondents while the

remaining questions in section B were meant to directly address the research questions. In the

design of the questionnaire, five (5) point likert scale method was adopted. The questionnaire was

distributed to senior and junior staff of the selected banks. The researcher conducted oral interview

with the staff in other to obtain relevant information which could not be obtained from the

questionnaire.

3.6 DATA ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES

Data generated from the study were presented and analyzed in tables and percentages. Hypotheses

one and three were tested using chi-square (X2), while hypotheses two and four were tested using

Multiple Linear Regression (MLR).

3.7 VALIDITY OF THE RESEARCH INSTRUMENT

To make sure that the research instrument applied in this work are valid, the researcher ensured that

the instrument measure the concept they are supposed to measure. A proper structuring of the

questionnaire and a conduct of a pre-test of every question contained in the questionnaire was

carried out to ensure that they are valid.

3.8 RELIABILITY OF THE RESEARCH INSTRUMENT

To test for reliability of the research instrument, a test re-test method was adopted in which 25

copies of the questionnaire was distributed to the Banks understudy (five copies) for each bank.

After some days, the instrument was collected and re-administered for the second time. The

questionnaire distributed were completed and returned. Pearson‟s product moment correlation

coefficient of reliability was used to test the result. The result gave reliability coefficient of r =0.98

showing that there is consistency in the items of the survey.

The reliability was calculated as follows:

Table 3.3 Reliability Test

ORGANIZATIONS FIRST

RESPONSE

(X)

SECOND

RESPONSE

(Y)

XY X2 Y2

1 4 5 20 16 25

2 5 4 20 25 16

3 3 4 12 9 16

4 4 5 20 16 25

5 5 5 25 25 25

TOTAL 21 23 97 91 107

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

= 1942

1983.9

:. r = 0.98

n∑xy – (∑x) (∑y)

[n∑x2

– (x)2 ] [n∑y

2 – (y)

2 ]

Formula:

25 (97) – (21) (23)

[25 (91) – (21)

2] [25 (107) – (23)

2 ]

Thus:

2425 - 483

(2275 – 441) (2675 – 529)

1942

(1834) (2146)

1942

3935764

CHAPTER FOUR

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

The essence of this chapter is to present and analyze the data collected for the study. The

presentation and interpretation of data were based on questionnaire administered to the staff of the

selected commercial Banks in Enugu. A total of three hundred and twenty four (324) copies of the

questionnaire were distributed to the respondents. A total of two hundred and ninety (290) copies

were returned and used while thirty four copies (34) were not returned.

Table 4.1 Distribution and Return of the Questionnaire

Organizations No.

Distributed

% No.

Returned

% No. not

Returned

%

First Bank 77 23.8 65 20.1 15 4.6

United Bank 86 26.5 79 24.4 7 2.2

Intercon. Bank 38 11.7 36 11.1 2 0.6

Zenith Bank 57 17.6 50 15.4 6 1.9

Oceanic Bank 66 20.4 60 18.5 4 1.2

Total 324 100 290 89.5 34 10.5

Sources: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

Table 4.1 above shows that 89.5% of the distributed copies of the questionnaire were returned and

used, 10.5% were not returned and was not used.

Table 4.2: Sex Distribution of Respondents

ORGANIZATIONS

First Bank United

Bank

Intercon.

Bank

Zenith

Bank

Oceanic

Bank

Sex Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Freq %

Male 15 29 21 25 4 16 11 15 15 18 169 58

Female 12 16 13 19 3 10 9 14 11 14 121 42

Total 27 45 34 44 7 26 20 29 26 32 290 100

Sources: Researcher‘s Field Survey 2010

From the above table, it is observed that 169 respondents representing 58% were males while 121

respondents representing 42% were females. The implication is that males are more than females in

the organization.

Table 4.3: Age Distribution of Respondents

ORGANIZATIONS

First Bank United

Bank

Intercon.

Bank

Zenith

Bank

Oceanic

Bank

Age Range Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Freq %

20-30 15 21 19 26 3 14 11 17 12 13 151 52

30-40 8 16 11 12 4 9 9 10 6 11 96 33

40& above 4 8 4 6 - 3 - 2 8 8 43 15

Total 27 45 34 44 7 26 20 29 26 32 290 100

Sources: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

From table 4.3 above 151 respondents representing 52% were between the age of 20 – 30, 96

respondents with 33% were within the age bracket of 30 – 40 and 43 respondents representing 15%

were 40 years and above. This implies that greater proportion of the respondents fall within the ages

of 20-30 years.

Table 4.4: Marital Status of Respondents

ORGANIZATIONS

First Bank United

Bank

Intercon.

Bank

Zenith

Bank

Oceanic

Bank

Marital Status Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Freq %

Married 18 20 23 31 4 15 13 16 10 18 168 58

Single 9 25 11 13 3 11 7 13 16 14 122 42

Total 27 45 34 44 7 26 20 29 26 32 290 100

Sources: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

Table 4.4 shows that 58% of the respondents were married while the remaining 42% were single.

This implies that many of the respondents are married.

Table 4.5: Educational Qualification

ORGANIZATIONS

First Bank United

Bank

Intercon.

Bank

Zenith

Bank

Oceanic

Bank

Qualification Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Freq %

M.Sc 4 2 5 3 1 - 5 2 6 1 29 10

MBA 6 15 8 11 3 14 10 4 8 4 83 29

MA & above 5 2 9 2 - 1 1 - 2 - 22 8

B.Sc / HND 12 18 12 15 3 7 4 16 10 16 113 38

NCE / OND - 8 - 13 - 4 - 7 - 11 43 15

SSCE / GCE - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 27 45 34 44 7 26 20 29 26 32 290 100

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

Table 4.5 above reveals that 29 respondents representing 10% were holders of M.Sc, 83 respondents

representing 29% were holders of MBA, 22 respondents representing 8% were holders of MA and

above, 113 respondents representing 38% were holders of B.Sc/HND and NCE/OND constitute

15% of the respondents. This implies that majority of the respondents hold B.Sc/OND followed by

MBA holders.

Table 4.6: Respondents Department

ORGANIZATIONS

First Bank United Bank Intercon.

Bank

Zenith Bank Oceanic

Bank

Departments Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Freq %

Acc &Clearing 1 5 14 3 1 1 3 5 2 7 42 14

Cash Service - 13 2 15 - 12 4 1 - - 47 16 Retail Credits 2 11 4 6 - 7 10 3 5 5 53 18 Customer

Service 12 6 8 17 2 2 1 13 11 5 77 27

Operations 10 2 2 - 3 - 2 1 8 3 31 11 Marketing 2 8 4 3 1 4 - 6 - 12 40 14

Total 27 45 34 44 7 26 20 29 26 32 290 100

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

From the above table, it is seen that 42 respondents representing 14% were in Account and clearing

department, 47 respondents representing 16% belongs to cash service department, Retail credit

department has 53 respondents with 18%, customer service department has 77 respondents with a

representation of 27%, operations department has 31 respondents with a representation of 11% and

marketing department has 40 respondents with a representation of 14%. This implies that customer

service department has the highest percentage of staff.

RESEARCH QUESTION 1: What are the causes of stress that employees in the banking sector

encounter?

Question 6: Lack of encouragement from superior can cause stress to an employee.

Table 4.7: The causes of stress that employees in the banking sector encounter

ORGANIZATIONS

First Bank United Bank Intercon.

Bank

Zenith

Bank

Oceanic

Bank

Rating Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Freq %

S. Agree 10 25 13 25 4 15 11 13 10 27 153 53

Agree 12 15 17 9 2 6 3 9 9 5 87 30

Undecided 1 5 - 10 - 5 2 7 2 - 32 11

Disagree 4 - 4 - 1 - 3 - 3 - 15 5

S.Disagree - - - - - - 1 - 2 - 3 1

Total 27 45 34 44 7 26 20 29 26 32 290 100

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

Table 4.7 indicated that 53% of the respondents indicated strongly agree, 30% of the respondents

indicated agree, 11% of the respondents were undecided, 5% of the respondents indicated disagree

while 1% of the respondents indicated strongly disagree. This implies that lack of encouragement

from superior can cause stress to an employee.

Question 7: Work overload is a common occupational stressor

Table 4.8: The causes of stress that employees in the banking sector encounter

ORGANIZATIONS

First Bank United

Bank

Intercon.

Bank

Zenith

Bank

Oceanic Bank

Rating Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Freq %

S. Agree 15 30 19 21 6 13 15 27 17 19 182 63

Agree 10 10 12 15 1 10 5 - 9 6 78 27

Undecided 2 5 3 8 - 3 - 2 - 7 30 10

Disagree - - - - - - - - - - - -

S.Disagree - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 27 45 34 44 7 26 20 29 26 32 290 100

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

Table 4.8 indicated that 63% of the respondents indicated strongly agree, 27% of the respondents

indicated agree while 10% of the respondents were undecided. There were no responses for disagree

and strongly disagree. The implication is that work overload is a common occupational stressor.

Question 8: Pressure to work longer hours could result to stress.

Table 4.9: The causes of stress that employees in the banking sector encounter

ORGANIZATIONS

First Bank United

Bank

Intercon.

Bank

Zenith

Bank

Oceanic

Bank

Rating Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Freq %

S. Agree 19 25 21 27 7 18 15 11 20 19 182 63

Agree 8 20 13 17 - 8 5 18 6 13 108 37

Undecided - - - - - - - - - - - -

Disagree - - - - - - - - - - - -

S. Disagree - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 27 45 34 44 7 26 20 29 26 32 290 100

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

Table 4.9 indicated that 63% of the respondents indicated strongly agree while 37% of the

respondents indicated agree. There were no responses for undecided, disagree and strongly disagree.

This implies that pressure to work longer hours could result to stress.

Question 9: Lack of growth opportunities or rapid changes for which workers are unprepared can

cause occupational stress.

Table 4.10: The causes of stress that employees in the banking sector encounter

ORGANIZATIONS

First Bank United

Bank

Intercon.

Bank

Zenith

Bank

Oceanic Bank

Rating Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Freq %

S. Agree 15 27 22 21 6 12 15 18 20 19 175 60

Agree 10 13 11 14 - 7 3 9 2 8 77 27

Undecided 2 5 1 9 1 7 1 2 3 5 36 12

Disagree - - - - - - 1 - - - - 1

S. Disagree - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 27 45 34 44 7 26 20 29 26 32 290 100

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

Table 4.10 indicated that 60% of the respondents indicated strongly agree, 27% of the respondents

indicated agree, 12% of the respondents were undecided while 1% of the respondents indicated

disagree. There was no response for strongly disagree. This implies that lack of growth

opportunities or rapid changes for which workers are unprepared can cause occupational stress.

Question 10: Unpleasant physical working condition can cause stress.

Table 4.11: The causes of stress that employees in the banking sector encounter

ORGANIZATIONS

First Bank United

Bank

Intercon.

Bank

Zenith

Bank

Oceanic

Bank

Rating Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Freq %

S. Agree 10 26 19 30 5 9 14 18 15 11 157 54

Agree 8 10 8 12 - 7 3 7 5 10 70 24

Undecided 7 9 3 2 - 10 2 4 1 11 49 17

Disagree 2 - 4 - 2 - 1 - 5 - 14 5

S. Disagree - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 27 45 34 44 7 26 20 29 26 32 290 100

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

Table 4.11 indicated that 54% of the respondents indicated strongly agree, 24% of the respondents

indicated agree, 17% of the respondents were undecided while 5% of the respondents indicated

disagree. There was no response for strongly disagree. This implies that unpleasant physical

working condition can cause stress.

Question 11: Un-prompted payment of salaries and lack of resources to perform job are common

occupational stressor

Table 4.12: The causes of stress that employees in the banking sector encounter

ORGANIZATIONS

First Bank United

Bank

Intercon.

Bank

Zenith

Bank

Oceanic

Bank

Rating Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Freq %

S. Agree 21 39 25 33 7 17 15 19 13 20 209 72

Agree 6 6 9 11 - 9 5 10 13 12 81 28

Undecided - - - - - - - - - - - -

Disagree - - - - - - - - - - - -

S. Disagree - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 27 45 34 44 7 26 20 29 26 32 290 100

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

Table 4.12 shows that 72% of the respondents indicated strongly agree while 28% of the

respondents indicated agree. There were no responses for undecided, disagree and strongly disagree.

The implication is that unprompt payment of salaries and lack of resources to perform job are

common occupational stressors.

Having exhaustively analyzed the questions administered for testing hypothesis one, a compressed

result of the six (6) individually analyzed questions are presented below in accordance with the

category of respondents and the organizations respectively.

Table 4.13: Condensed outcome of the six questions administered for testing

Hypothesis one.

Source: Researchers Field Survey 2010

Having gotten a grand total from the compressed analyses, aggregate responses from the five

organizations are presented below in accordance with the category of staff to determine the

expected frequency of each observation.

Table 4.14: Aggregate response for the five organizations

Category of

staff Strongly

agreed

Agreed Undecided Disagreed Strongly

Disagreed

Freq %

Senior 424 195 31 31 3 684 39

Junior 634 306 116 - - 1056 61

Grand Total 1058 501 147 31 3 1740 100

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

Table 4.15: Expected frequencies for Hypothesis one

Category of

staff

Strongly

agreed

Agreed Undecided Disagreed Strongly

Disagreed

Freq %

Senior 416 197 58 31 3 705 41

Junior 642 304 89 - - 1035 59

Grand Total 1058 501 147 31 3 1740 100

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

Organizations Category

Of staff

Strongly

Agreed

Agreed Undecided Disagreed Strongly

Disagreed

Total

First Bank Senior 90 54 12 6 - 162

Junior 172 74 24 - - 270

United Bank Senior 119 70 7 8 - 204

Junior 157 78 29 - - 264

Intercon. Bank Senior 35 3 1 3 - 42

Junior 84 47 25 - - 156

Zenith Bank Senior 85 24 5 5 1 120

Junior 106 53 15 - - 174

Oceanic Bank Senior 95 44 6 9 2 156

Junior 115 54 23 - - 192

Grand Total 1058 501 147 31 3 1740

RESEARCH QUESTION 2: To what extent does occupational stress affect job performance?

Question 12: Stress level impedes on your performance.

Table 4.16: The extent to which occupational stress affects job performance

ORGANIZATIONS

First Bank United

Bank

Intercon.

Bank

Zenith

Bank

Oceanic

Bank

Rating Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Freq %

S. Agree 17 29 15 30 4 18 16 21 20 11 181 62

Agree 10 16 19 14 3 8 4 8 6 21 109 38

Undecided - - - - - - - - - - - -

Disagree - - - - - - - - - - - -

S. Disagree - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 27 45 34 44 7 26 20 29 26 32 290 100

Sources: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

Table 4.16 reveals that 62% of the respondents indicated strongly agree while 38% of the

respondents indicated agree. There were no responses for undecided, disagree and strongly disagree.

This implies that stress level impedes on employees performances.

Question 13: Employee‟s productivity is proportional to the level of stress in an organization.

Table 4.17: The extent to which occupational stress affects job performance

ORGANIZATIONS

First Bank United Bank Intercon.

Bank

Zenith

Bank

Oceanic

Bank

Rating Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Freq %

S. Agree 13 19 12 21 6 15 9 14 13 11 133 46

Agree 7 11 8 16 1 10 7 8 5 10 83 29

Undecided 5 9 7 6 - 1 4 5 3 7 47 16

Disagree 2 6 7 1 - - - 2 5 4 27 9

S. Disagree - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 27 45 34 44 7 26 20 29 26 32 290 100

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

Table 4.17 shows that 46% of the respondents indicated strongly agree, 29% of the respondents

indicated agree, 16% of the respondents were undecided while 9% of the respondents indicated

disagree. There was no response for strongly disagree. This implies that employees‟ productivity is

proportional to the level of stress in an organization.

Question 14: Employee‟s indifference to performance is as a result of high level of stress.

Table 4.18: The extent to which occupational stress affects job performance

ORGANIZATIONS

First Bank United

Bank

Intercon.

Bank

Zenith

Bank

Oceanic

Bank

Rating Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Freq %

S. Agree 12 15 11 21 3 14 19 25 15 20 155 53

Agree 8 21 7 10 1 3 1 1 4 7 63 22

Undecided 1 3 5 2 - 4 - 2 4 5 26 9

Disagree 3 4 8 6 2 3 - 1 3 - 30 10

S. Disagree 3 2 3 5 1 2 - - - - 16 6

Total 27 45 34 44 7 26 20 29 26 32 290 100

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

Table 4.18 reveals that 53% of the respondents indicated strongly agree, 22% of the respondents

indicated agree, 9% of the respondents were undecided, 10% of the respondents indicated disagree

while 6% of the respondents indicated strongly disagree. This implies that employees‟ indifference

to performance is as a result of high level of stress.

Question 15: Depression suffered by the employees‟ in an organization which adversely affect their

output is the consequences of high level of stress.

Table 4.19: The extent to which occupational stress affects job performance

ORGANIZATIONS

First Bank United

Bank

Intercon.

Bank

Zenith

Bank

Oceanic

Bank

Rating Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Freq %

S. Agree 11 14 16 21 2 13 19 17 12 18 143 49

Agree 7 9 6 8 1 4 1 5 6 9 56 19

Undecided 1 8 3 7 2 3 - 3 1 1 29 10

Disagree 5 7 6 8 1 4 - 3 6 3 43 15

S. Disagree 3 7 3 - 1 2 - 1 1 1 19 7

Total 27 45 34 44 7 26 20 29 26 32 290 100

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

Table 4.19 indicated that 49% of the respondents indicated strongly agree, 19% of the respondents

indicated agree, 10% of the respondents were undecided, 15% of the respondents indicated disagree

while 7% of the respondents indicated strongly disagree. This implies that the depression suffered by

employees‟ in an organization which adversely affect their output is the consequences of high level

of stress.

Having exhaustively analyzed the questions administered for testing hypothesis two, a compressed

result of the four individually analyzed questions are presented below in accordance with the

category of the respondents and the organizations respectively.

Table 4.20: Condensed outcome of the four questions administered for testing hypothesis two

Source: Researcher’s Field survey 2010

The table above presents a grand total from the compressed analysis; the aggregate responses for the

five organizations are presented below in accordance with the category of respondents.

Table 4.21: Aggregate Response for the five organizations

Category of staff

Rating Senior staff Junior staff Grand total percentages

Strongly agreed 245 367 612 52.8

Agreed 112 199 311 26.8

Undecided 36 66 102 8.8

Disagreed 48 52 100 8.6

Strongly

disagreed

15 20 35 3.0

Total 456 704 1160 100

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

Organizations Category

of staff

Strongly

Agreed

Agreed Undecided Disagreed Strongly

Disagreed

Total

First Bank Senior 53 32 7 10 6 108

Junior 77 57 20 17 9 180

United Bank Senior 54 40 15 21 6 136

Junior 93 48 15 15 5 176

Intercon. Bank Senior 15 6 2 3 2 28

Junior 60 25 8 7 4 104

Zenith Bank Senior 63 13 4 - - 80

Junior 77 22 10 6 1 116

Oceanic Bank Senior 60 21 8 14 1 104

Junior 60 47 13 7 1 128

Grand Total 612 311 102 100 35 1160

RESEARCH QUESTION 3: What are the various strategies adopted by the banking sector to reduce

occupational stress?

Question 16: Management by objective (MBO) which clarifies job responsibilities, provides clear

performance goals and reduce ambiguity through feed back reduces work stress.

Table 4.22: The various strategies adopted by the banking sector to reduce occupational stress

ORGANIZATIONS

First Bank United

Bank

Intercon.

Bank

Zenith

Bank

Oceanic

Bank

Rating Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Freq %

S. Agree 19 13 21 31 6 11 16 15 20 22 174 60

Agree 8 14 9 10 1 7 4 10 6 4 73 25

Undecided - 8 4 2 - 5 - 3 - 3 25 9

Disagree - 9 - 1 - 3 - 1 - 3 17 6

S. Disagree - 1 - - - - - - - - 1 0

Total 27 45 34 44 7 26 20 29 26 32 290 100

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

Table 4.22 reveals that 60% of the respondents indicated strongly agree, 25% of the respondents

indicated agree, 9% of the respondents were undecided, 6% of the respondents indicated disagree

while 0% of the respondents indicated strongly disagree. This implies that Management by

objective (MBO) which clarifies job responsibilities, provides clear performance goals and reduce

ambiguity through feed back reduces work stress.

Question 17: Redesigning job to increase challenges or reduce work load helps in reducing stress.

Table 4.23: The various strategies adopted by the banking sector to reduce occupational stress

ORGANIZATIONS

First Bank United

Bank

Intercon.

Bank

Zenith

Bank

Oceanic Bank

Rating Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Freq %

S. Agree 22 31 29 20 7 19 17 25 15 20 213 73

Agree 5 14 5 16 - 7 3 4 11 12 77 27

Undecided - - - - - - - - - - - -

Disagree - - - - - - - - - - - -

S. Disagree - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 27 45 34 44 7 26 20 29 26 32 290 100

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

Table 4.23 shows that 73% of the respondents indicated strongly agree while 27% of the

respondents indicated agree. There were no responses for undecided, disagree and strongly disagree.

The implication is that redesigning job to reduce challenge or reduce work load helps in reducing

stress.

Question 18: Time management programme if properly initiated goes a long way to reduce work

stress.

Table 4.24: The various strategies adopted by the banking sector to reduce occupational stress

ORGANIZATIONS

First Bank United

Bank

Intercon.

Bank

Zenith

Bank

Oceanic

Bank

Rating Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Freq %

S. Agree 12 19 20 18 4 11 20 16 18 12 150 52

Agree 15 10 14 9 3 4 - 8 8 7 78 27

Undecided - 7 - 12 - 5 - 5 - 10 39 13

Disagree - 9 - 5 - 6 - - - 3 23 8

S. Disagree - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 27 45 34 44 7 26 20 29 26 32 290 100

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

Table 4.24 indicated that 52% of the respondents indicated strongly agree, 27% of the respondents

indicated agree 13% of the respondents were undecided while 8% of the respondents indicated

disagree. There was no response for strongly disagree. This implies that time management

programme if properly initiated goes a long way to reduce work stress.

Question 19: Improved organizational communication exhibited a significant positive relationship

with reduced workers stress.

Table 4.25: The various strategies adopted by the banking sector to reduce occupational stress

ORGANIZATIONS

First Bank United

Bank

Intercon.

Bank

Zenith

Bank

Oceanic

Bank

Rating Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Freq %

S. Agree 12 15 14 30 3 17 13 18 6 16 144 50

Agree 3 6 2 4 1 2 - 2 15 7 42 14

Undecided 1 8 11 5 2 4 6 9 5 6 57 20

Disagree 6 10 7 3 1 2 1 - - 3 33 11

S. Disagree 5 6 - 2 - 1 - - - - 14 5

Total 27 45 34 44 7 26 20 29 26 32 290 100

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

Table 4.25 shows that 50% of the respondents indicated strongly agree, 14% of the respondents

indicated agree, 20% of the respondents were undecided, 11% of the respondents indicated disagree

while 5% of the respondents indicated strongly disagree. The implication is that improved

organizational communication exhibited a significant positive relationship with reduced workers

stress

Having exhaustively analyzed the questions administered for testing hypothesis three, a compressed

result of the four individually analyzed questions are presented below in accordance with the

category of respondents and the organizations respectively.

Table 4.26: Condensed outcome of the four questions administered for testing hypothesis three.

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

The table above represents the grand total of the response from the five organizations in a

compressed form. Aggregate responses from the five organizations are presented below in

accordance with the category of staff.

Table 4.27: Aggregate response for the five organizations

Category of

staff

Strongly

agreed

Agreed Undecided Disagreed Strongly

Disagreed

Freq %

Senior 294 113 29 15 5 456 39

Junior 387 157 92 58 10 704 61

Grand

Total

681 270 121 73 15 1160 100

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

Organizations Category

Of staff

Strongly

Agreed

Agreed Undecided Disagreed Strongly

Disagreed

Total

First Bank Senior 65 31 1 6 5 108

Junior 78 44 23 28 7 180

United Bank Senior 84 30 15 7 - 136

Junior 107 39 19 9 2 176

Intercontinental

Bank

Senior 20 5 2 1 - 28

Junior 58 20 14 11 1 104

Zenith Bank Senior 66 7 6 1 - 80

Junior 74 24 17 1 - 116

Oceanic Bank Senior 59 40 5 - - 104

Junior 70 30 19 9 - 128

Grand Total 681 270 121 73 15 1160

Table 4.28: Expected frequencies for Hypothesis three

Category of

staff

Strongly

agreed

Agreed Undecided Disagreed Strongly

Disagreed

Freq %

Senior 267.7 106.1 47.6 28.7 5.9 456 39

Junior 413.3 163.9 73.4 44.3 9.1 704 61

Grand

Total

681 270 121 73 15 1160 100

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

RESEARCH QUESTION 4: What are the impacts of stress on employees‟ job performance?

Question 20: Stress can cause absenteeism in employee.

Table 4.29: The impacts of stress on employees job performance

ORGANIZATIONS

First Bank United

Bank

Intercon.

Bank

Zenith

Bank

Oceanic

Bank

Rating Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Freq %

S. Agree 10 32 14 23 5 11 17 19 23 28 182 63

Agree 15 8 18 20 2 7 - 6 2 - 78 27

Undecided 2 5 2 1 - 8 3 4 1 4 30 10

Disagree - - - - - - - - - - - -

S. Disagree - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 27 45 34 44 7 26 20 29 26 32 290 100

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

Table 4.29 indicated that 63% of the respondents indicated strongly agree, 27% of the respondents

indicated agree while 10% of the respondents were undecided. There were no responses for disagree

and strongly disagree. This implies that stress can cause absenteeism in employee.

Question 21: Stress drastically reduces output.

Table 4.30: The impacts of stress on employees job performance

ORGANIZATIONS

First Bank United

Bank

Intercon.

Bank

Zenith

Bank

Oceanic

Bank

Rating Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Freq %

S. Agree 4 14 9 13 - 25 17 21 18 30 151 52

Agree 15 21 22 29 4 1 - 1 4 2 99 34

Undecided 1 5 1 1 2 - 2 4 2 - 18 6

Disagree 7 5 2 1 1 - 1 3 2 - 22 8

S. Disagree - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 27 45 34 44 7 26 20 29 26 32 290 100

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

Table 4.30 reveals that 52% of the respondents indicated strongly agree, 34% of the respondents

indicated agree, 6% of the respondents were undecided while 8% of the respondents indicated

disagree. There was no response for strongly disagree. The implication is that stress drastically

reduces output.

Question 22: With high level of stress employees‟ work in error

Table 4.31: The impacts of stress on employees job performance

ORGANIZATIONS

First Bank United

Bank

Intercon.

Bank

Zenith bank Oceanic

Bank

Rating Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Freq %

S. Agree 15 23 19 29 2 18 13 17 10 15 161 56

Agree 12 22 15 14 5 7 7 10 15 13 120 41

undecided - - - - - - - - 1 3 4 1

Disagree - - - 1 - 1 - 2 - 1 5 2

S. Disagree - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 27 45 34 44 7 26 20 29 26 32 290 100

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

Table 4.31 reveals that 56% of the respondents indicated strongly agree, 41% of the respondents

indicated agree, 1% of the respondents were undecided while 2% of the respondents indicated

disagree. There was no response for strongly disagree. This implies that with high level of stress

employees‟ work in error.

Question 23: Stress reduces employee‟s morale at work.

Table 4.32: The impacts of stress on employees job performance

ORGANIZATIONS

First Bank United

Bank

Intercon.

Bank

Zenith

Bank

Oceanic

Bank

Rating Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Sen.

Staff

Jun.

Staff

Freq %

S. Agree 14 31 15 20 3 11 15 17 21 16 163 56

Agree 10 5 18 19 2 9 4 9 2 8 86 30

Undecided 3 9 - 5 - 6 - 3 - 8 34 12

Disagree - - 1 - 2 - 1 - 3 - 7 2

S. Disagree - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 27 45 34 44 7 26 20 29 26 32 290 100

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

Table 4.32 shows that 56% of the respondents indicated strongly agree, 30% of the respondents

indicated agree 12% of the respondents were undecided while 2% of the respondents indicated

disagree. There was no response for strongly disagree. The implication is that stress reduces

employees‟ morale at work.

Having exhaustively analyzed the questions administered for testing hypothesis four, a compressed

result of the four individually analyzed questions are presented below in accordance with the

category of respondents and the organizations respectively.

Table 4.33: Condensed outcome of the four questions administered for testing hypothesis four

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

Having gotten a grand total from the compressed analyses, aggregate responses from the five

organizations are presented below in accordance with the category of staff to determine the

expected frequency of each observation.

Table 4.34: Aggregate responses from the five organizations

Category of staff Strongly

agreed

Agreed Undecided Disagreed Strongly

Disagreed

Freq %

Senior 244 172 20 20 - 456 39

Junior 413 211 66 14 - 704 61

Grand Total 657 383 86 34 - 1160 100

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

Organizations Category

Of staff

Strongly

Agreed

Agreed Undecided Disagreed Strongly

Disagreed

Total

First Bank Senior 43 52 6 7 - 108

Junior 100 56 19 5 - 180

United Bank Senior 57 73 3 3 - 136

Junior 85 82 7 2 - 176

Intercon.Bank Senior 10 13 2 3 - 28

Junior 65 24 14 1 - 104

Zenith Bank Senior 62 11 5 2 - 80

Junior 74 26 11 5 - 116

Oceanic Bank Senior 72 23 4 5 - 104

Junior 89 23 15 1 - 128

Grand Total 657 383 86 34 - 1160

TESTING OF HYPOTHESIS

In analyzing the four (4) hypotheses stated in chapter one as earlier stated, the test statistics of

Multiple Linear Regression (MLR) and Friedman‟s Chi-square tests aided by computer Microsoft

special package for social science (SPSS) were used to test the hypothesis. Multi Linear Regression

(MLR) was used in testing hypothesis two and four to determine the extent to which one research

variable affects the other and in testing the significance of the correlation coefficient while

Friedman‟s chi-square analysis was used in testing hypothesis one and three. Below are the

analysis and the testing of the hypothesis formulated to answer the research questions asked to

guide the study.

HYPOTHESIS ONE

Ho: Pressures of responsibilities and pressure to work longer hours are not causes of stress which

bank employees encounter.

H1 Pressures of responsibilities and pressure to work longer hours are causes of stress which

bank employees encounter.

Questions 7 – 12 were designed and administered to validate or disprove the above hypothesis.

The Test

Our goal is to analyze the causes of stress that employees in the five selected banks encounter.

Based on the outcome of three questions in the questionnaire administered to test hypothesis one,

Friedman‟s chi-square test was employed using the relevant area of the computer special package

for social science (SPSS) as related to research question one and hypothesis one respectively. The

result below emerged.

NPar: Tests

Table 4.35: Descriptive Statistics

N Mean

Std.

Deviation Minimum Maximum

Do you agree that work overload is a

common occupational stressor? 290 1.4759 .67668 1.00 3.00

Do you agree that pressure to work

for longer hours could result to stress? 290 1.3724 .48428 1.00 2.00

Do you agree that un-pleasant

physical working condition can cause

stress?

290 1.7241 .91116 1.00 4.00

Source: Microsoft SPSS

Friedman Test

Table 4.36: Ranks

Mean Rank

Do you agree that work overload is a common occupational stressor? 1.93

Do you agree that pressure to work for longer hours could result to stress? 1.80

Do you agree that un-pleasant physical working condition can cause stress? 2.27

Source: Microsoft SPSS

Table 4.37: Test Statistics (a)

N 290

Chi-Square 104.256

df 2

Asymp. Sig. .000

A Friedman Test

Source: Microsoft SPSS

Decision Rule:

The decision rule that governs the acceptance or rejection of the null hypothesis is that if the

calculated Chi-Square value is greater than the tabulated Chi-Square value, or if the sig. value is

lesser than the critical value at which the test was carried, the null hypothesis should be rejected;

otherwise the null should be accepted.

With a Pearson Chi-Square (X2) calculated value of 104.256, which is greater than the tabulated

chi-square value (X2) (at df = 2) of 5.991, the null hypothesis should be rejected. This result is also

strengthened by the asymptotic significance value of 0.000 which is lesser than the critical value of

0.05 at which the test was carried out. Hence, pressure of responsibilities and pressure to work

longer hours are causes of stress that bank employees encounter.

HYPOTHESIS TWO

Ho: Occupational stress does not significantly affect job performance.

H1: Occupational stress significantly affects job performance.

Questions 13 – 16 were considered relevant for testing the validity of the above hypothesis.

The Test

Our aim is to evaluate the extent to which occupational stress affect job performance. Based on the

analysis outcome of the four questions in the questionnaire administered for testing hypothesis two,

multiple linear regression analysis was employed using the area of the computer special package for

social science (SPSS) as related to research question two and hypothesis two. The result below

emerged.

Regression

Table 4.38 Descriptive Statistics

Mean

Std.

Deviation N

Job performance 1.3759 .48518 290

level of stress 1.8897 .99213 290

indifference to performance as a result of high level of stress 1.9276 1.23876 290

depression 2.1000 1.33115 290

Source: Microsoft SPSS

Table 4.39 Correlations

Job

performance

Level of

stress

indifference

to

performance

as a result of

high level of

stress depression

Pearson Correlation Job performance 1.000 .812 .748 .826

Level of stress .812 1.000 .787 .855

employee's

indifference to

performance as a

result of high level of

stress

.748 .787 1.000 .905

depression .826 .855 .905 1.000

Sig. (1-tailed) Job performance . .000 .000 .000

Level of stress .000 . .000 .000

employee's

indifference to

performance as a

result of high level of

stress

.000 .000 . .000

depression .000 .000 .000 .

N Job performance 290 290 290 290

Level of stress 290 290 290 290

employee's

indifference to

performance as a

result of high level of

stress

290 290 290 290

depression 290 290 290 290

Source: Microsoft SPSS

Table 4.40 Model Summary (b)

Mode

l R R Square

Adjusted R

Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

Durbin-

Watson

1 .851(a) .724 .721 .25617 .348

a. Predictors: (Constant), depression, level of stress, indifference to performance as a result of high level

of stress

b. Dependent Variable: job performance

Source: Microsoft SPSS

Table 4.41 ANOVA (b)

Mode

l

Sum of

Squares df

Mean

Square F Sig.

1 Regression 49.263 3 16.421 250.226 .000(a)

Residual 18.769 286 .066

Total 68.031 289

a. Predictors: (Constant), depression, level of stress, indifference to performance as a result of high level

of stress

b. Dependent Variable: job performance

Source: Microsoft SPSS

Table 4.42 Coefficients (a)

Mode

l

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

1 (Constant) .638 .033 19.559 .000

Level of stress .195 .029 .398 6.637 .000

employee's indifference

to performance as a

result of high level of

stress

-.010 .029 -.026 -.356 .722

Depression .186 .032 .509 5.873 .000

a. Dependent Variable: job performance

Source: Microsoft SPSS

JP = 0.638 + 0.195LS – 0.010EI + 0.186D

(t = 6.637) (t = -0.356) (t = 5.873)

Where; JP = Job Performance

LS = Level of stress

EI = Employee Indifference

D = Depression

R = 0.851; R2 = 0.724; Ř

2 = 0.721; F = 250.226; D.W = 0.348

From the above model, JP is the summation of the constant, 0.638 and the products of 0.195 and

LS, -0.010 and EI, and 0.186 and D.

The ANOVA table tests the acceptability of the model from a statistical perspective. The

Regression row displays information about the variation accounted for by the model, while the

Residual row displays information about the variation that is not accounted for by the model.

The regression sum of squares (49.263) is greater than the residual sums of squares (18.769) which

indicate that more of the variation in JP is explained by the model. The significance value of the F

statistic (0.000) is lesser than 0.05, which means that the variation explained by the model is not due

to chance.

Though the ANOVA table is a useful test of the model's ability to explain any variation in the

dependent variable, it does not directly address the strength of that relationship. The model

summary table reports the strength of the relationship between the model and the dependent

variable.

R, the correlation coefficient, is the linear correlation between the observed and model-predicted

values of the dependent variables. The correlation coefficient of 0.851 indicates that there is a

strong positive relationship between JP and the independent variables.

R Square, the coefficient of determination, is the squared value of the correlation coefficient. This

shows that 72.4% of the variation in JP is explained by the model. With the linear regression

model, the error of the estimate is very low, with a value about 0.25617.

Therefore from the above results, the null hypothesis should be rejected and the alternate accepted.

Hence, occupational stress significantly affects job performance.

HYPOTHESIS THREE

Ho: Redesigning job to increase challenge or reduce work load cannot be a strategy for reducing

occupational stress

H1: Redesigning job to increase challenge or reduce work load can be a strategy for reducing

occupational stress

Questions 17 – 20 were designed and administered to validate or disprove the above hypothesis.

The Test

Our goal is to analyze the various strategies adopted by the selected banks to reduce occupational

stress. Based on three of the questions in the questionnaire administered for testing hypothesis

three, Friedman‟s chi-square test statistics was employed using the relevant area of the computer

special package for social science (SPSS) as related to research question three and hypothesis three.

The result below emerged.

NPar Tests

Table 4.43 Descriptive Statistics

N Mean

Std.

Deviation Minimum Maximum

Do you agree that management by objective

(MBO) which clarifies job responsibilities,

provides clear performance goals and reduce

ambiguity through feed back reduces work

stress?

290 1.6138 .89741 1.00 5.00

Do you agree that redesigning job to increase

challenges or reduce work load helps in

reducing stress?

290 1.2655 .44237 1.00 2.00

Do you agree that improved organizational

communication exhibited a significant

positive relationship with reduced workers

stress?

290 2.0690 1.25423 1.00 5.00

Source: Microsoft SPSS

Friedman Test

Table 4.44 Ranks

Mean Rank

Do you agree that management by objective (MBO) which clarifies job

responsibilities and provides clear performance goals and reduce ambiguity through

feed back reduces work stress?

1.94

Do you agree that redesigning job to increase challenges or reduce work load helps in

reducing stress? 1.62

Do you agree that improved organizational communication exhibited a significant

positive relationship with reduced workers stress? 2.43

Source: Microsoft SPSS

Table 4.45 Test Statistics (a)

N 290

Chi-

Square 222.782

df 2

Asymp.

Sig. .000

a. Friedman Test

Source: Microsoft SPSS

Decision Rule:

The decision rule that governs the acceptance or rejection of the null hypothesis is that if the

calculated Chi-Square value is greater than the tabulated Chi-Square value, or if the sig. value is

lesser than the critical value at which the test was carried, the null hypothesis should be rejected;

otherwise the null should be accepted.

With a Pearson Chi-Square (X2) calculated value of 222.782, which is greater than the tabulated

chi-square value (X2) (at df = 2) of 5.991, the null hypothesis should be rejected. This result is also

strengthened by the asymptotic significance value of 0.000 which is lesser than the critical value of

0.05 at which the test was carried out. Hence, redesigning job to increase challenge or reduce

work load can be a strategy for reducing occupational stress.

HYPOTHESIS FOUR

Ho: Absenteeism, low morale and reduced output are not negative impacts of stress on employee

job performance.

H1: Absenteeism, low morale and reduced output are negative impacts of stress on employee job

performance

Questions 21 – 24 were designed and administered to validate or disprove the above hypothesis.

The Test

Our target is to analyze the impacts of stress on employee‟s job performance. Based on the four

questions in the questionnaire for testing hypothesis four, multiple linear regression test statistics

was employed using the relevant area of the computer special package for social science (SPSS) as

related to research question four and hypothesis four respectively. The result below emerged.

Regression

Table 4.46 Descriptive Statistics

Mean Std. Deviation N

Job performance 1.3759 .48518 290

Absenteeism 1.4759 .67668 290

Stress 1.6931 .89149 290

work in error 1.4931 .61831 290

morale 1.6034 .78788 290

Source: Microsoft SPSS

Table 4.47 Correlations

Job

performance Absenteeism Stress

Work in

error morale

Pearson

Correlation

Job performance 1.000 .708 .596 .764 .771

Absenteeism .708 1.000 .771 .686 .842

Stress .596 .771 1.000 .589 .733

work in error .764 .686 .589 1.000 .765

morale .771 .842 .733 .765 1.000

Sig. (1-tailed) Job performance . .000 .000 .000 .000

Absenteeism .000 . .000 .000 .000

Stress .000 .000 . .000 .000

work in error .000 .000 .000 . .000

morale .000 .000 .000 .000 .

N Job performance 290 290 290 290 290

Absenteeism 290 290 290 290 290

Stress 290 290 290 290 290

work in error 290 290 290 290 290

morale 290 290 290 290 290

Source: Microsoft SPSS

Table 4.48 Model Summary (b)

Mode

l R R Square Adjusted R Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

Durbin-

Watson

1 .821(a) .674 .669 .27903 .446

a. Predictors: (Constant), morale, stress, work in error, absenteeism

b. Dependent Variable: job performance

Source: Microsoft SPSS

Table 4.49 ANOVA (b)

Mode

l

Sum of

Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 45.842 4 11.460 147.197 .000(a)

Residual 22.189 285 .078

Total 68.031 289

a. Predictors: (Constant), morale, stress, work in error, absenteeism

b. Dependent Variable: job performance

Source: Microsoft SPSS

Table 4.50 Coefficients (a)

Mode

l

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

1 (Constant) .414 .045 9.225 .000

Absenteeism .104 .050 .145 2.088 .038

Stress -.004 .030 -.008 -.141 .888

work in error .318 .042 .405 7.660 .000

morale .212 .045 .345 4.727 .000

a. Dependent Variable: job performance

Source: Microsoft SPSS

JP = 0.414 + 104A – 0.004S + 0.318WE + 0.212M

(t = 2.088) (t = -0.141) (t = 7.660) (4.727)

Where; JP = Job Performance

A = Absenteeism

S = Stress

WE = Work in Error

M = Morale

R = 0.821; R2 = 0.674; Ř2 = 0.669; F = 147.197; D.W = 0.446

From the above model, JP is the summation of the constant, 0.414 and the products of 0.104 and A,

-0.004 and S, 0.318 and WE, and 0.212 and M.

The regression sum of squares (45.842) is greater than the residual sums of squares (22.189) which

indicate that more of the variation in JP is explained by the model. The significance value of the F

statistic (0.000) is lesser than 0.05, which means that the variation explained by the model is not due

to chance.

R, the correlation coefficient, of 0.851 indicates that there is a strong positive relationship between

JP and the independent variables.

R Square, the coefficient of determination, shows that 67.4% of the variation in JP is explained by

the model. With the linear regression model, the error of the estimate is very low, with a value

about 0.27903.

Therefore from the above results, the null hypothesis should be rejected and the alternate accepted.

Hence, absenteeism, low morale and reduced output are impacts of stress on employees’ jobs

performance.

4.4 DISCUSSION OF RESUTLS

The study was evaluated through the use of questionnaire with questions tailored towards managing

occupational stress in the banking sector. All the four hypotheses were subjected to statistical test

of significance at 95% confidence internal and 2 degree of freedom for hypothesis 1 and 3 and

ANOVA (R) for hypothesis 2 and 4 respectively. Four different tests statistics were employed:

Friedman‟s chi-square statistics, Pearson‟s correlation coefficient, multiple linear regression (MLR)

and Analysis of variance (ANOVA). Computer aided Microsoft social package for social science

(SPSS) were used to aid analysis to ensure accuracy and eliminate mistake arising from manual

computations.

Hypothesis one was tested with Friedman‟s chi-square test to analyze the various causes of stress

encountered by bank employees. It was discovered that all the variables listed that causes stress for

these employees actually are common occupational stressors. Hence, pressure of responsibilities

and pressure to work longer hours are causes of stress that bank employees encounter based on a

computed chi-square of 104.256 against the tabulated chi-square value of 5.991. This result is in

line with what French and Chaplan 1975 postulated in the literature review. They pointed out that

pressure of both qualitative and quantitative overload can result in the need to work excessive

hours; they also mentioned that having to work under time pressure in order to meet deadlines is an

independent source of stress. Vansell, et al 1970 also pointed out that stress is often developed when

an individual is assigned a major responsibility without proper authority and delegation of power.

Hypothesis two was tested using multi linear regression analysis to evaluate the extent to which

occupational stress affect job performance. To further validate the result of the test additional test

statistics of ANOVA was conducted to test the significance of the correlation coefficient (r). With

the regression sum of squares (49.263) which is greater than the residual sums of square (18.769).

The null hypothesis was rejected giving rise to the conclusion that occupational stress significantly

affects job performance. Following this result, Beehr 1998 was of the opinion that stress can be

detrimental to bankers‟ effectiveness in delivering bank services by decreasing attention span,

concentration, decision making skills and ability to establish employee-customer relationships. In

other words, Beehr agreed to the fact that occupational stress significantly affects job performance.

Again, Hypothesis three was tested using Friedman‟s chi-square test to analyze the various

strategies adopted by the selected banks to reduce occupational stress. With a computed chi-square

value of 222.782 against a tabulated value of 5.991, the study again rejected the null hypothesis.

Accordingly, the study concluded that all the various strategies adopted by the banking sector to

reduce occupational stress actually help in stress reduction. Hence, redesigning job to increase

challenge or reduce work load can be a strategy for reducing occupational stress. This result agrees

with Corey and Corey 1993. They stated that job redesign is a way to reduce stress if stress can be

traced to boredom or to work overloads. They are of the view that jobs should be redesigned to

increase challenge or to reduce the work load.

Lastly, hypothesis four sought to analyze the impact of stress on employee‟s job performance. This

hypothesis was tested using multiple linear regression analysis to determine the relationship

between job performance and the variables that impact on it. To further validate the result of the

test, additional test statistics of ANOVA was conducted to test the significance of the correlation

coefficient (r). With the regression sum of squares (45.842) which is greater than the residual sum

of square (22.189). Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected giving rise to the conclusion that all

the variables that impacts on job performance actually has negative effects on employees job

performance. Hence, absenteeism, low morale and reduced output are impacts of stress on

employees‟ job performance. In line with this result, Jick and Payne 1980 stresses that job stresses

individual is likely to have greater job dissatisfaction, increase frequency of drinking, low morale

and reduced aspirations and self esteem. Again, Quick, et al 1992 postulated that stress may cause

subtle manifestation of morbidity that can affect personal well being and productivity. In other

words, their opinion is in line with the fact that absenteeism, low morale and reduced output are all

impacts of stress on employees‟ job performance.

CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

Findings at the end of the research investigation include the following:

1. Pressure of responsibilities and pressure to work for longer hours are some of the causes of stress

that bank employees encounter. Test of hypothesis one confirmed this; 104.256>5.991.

2. Occupational stress significantly affects job performance. Test of hypothesis two confirmed this;

49.263>0.851.

3. Redesigning job to increase challenge or reduce work load can be a strategy for reducing

occupational stress. Test of hypothesis three confirmed the result; 222.782>5.991.

4. Absenteeism, low morale and reduced output are negative impacts of stress on employees‟ job

performance. Test of hypothesis four confirmed this; 45.842>0.851.

5.2 CONCLUSIONS

The study concludes that employees experience a lot of stress when the pressure in their

responsibilities and pressure to work for a longer period of time is high; stress is developed when an

employee is assigned a major responsibility without proper authority and delegation of power. A job

stressed employee is likely to have greater job dissatisfaction, increased absenteeism and low

morale for work; finally, stress is a major contributor to health and performance problems of

employees and unwanted occurrences and costs for organizations.

5.3 RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the major findings, the following recommendations were made:

The environment of the work place should be made conducive for the employees so as to reduce

stress.

Management by Objective (MBO) should be adopted by organizations because employee stress

level tends to reduce when he/she participate in decisions making.

Finally, the employees should be trained properly in their respective fields so as to reduce the stress

caused by role ambiguity.

5.4 CONTRIBUTIONS TO KNOWLEDGE

In the course of this study, a model for managing occupational stress was developed. Occupational

stress is the harmful physical and emotional responses that occur when the requirements of the job

do not match the capabilities, resources or needs of the employee. The model shows that when

stress is properly managed in the organization by considering all the various strategies adopted in

stress reduction, it will lead to job satisfaction.

Fig. 5.1 A Model for Managing Occupational Stress

Stressors: Stressors are the things that cause stress to an employee. This includes stress arising

from factors intrinsic to the job e.g. having too much work to do and having to work longer hours, a

lack of power and influence, ambiguity, conflicting tasks and demands arising from multiple roles

that the employee plays; relationship with other people such as lack of support from colleagues and

lack of encouragement from superiors; in achievement it means how valued employees‟ feels and

whether or not they are satisfied with their opportunities for advancement at work; the structure or

climate of an organization in terms of inadequate guidance from superiors, poor quality training and

development programmes, evidence or discrimination or favoritism; the home/work interface,

which may include things like having to take work home or the inability to forget about work when

the individual is at home.

Strategies Stressors

Outcomes Intrinsic factors

Role ambiguity

Relationships

Achievement

Structure

Home/work

Achievement

Clear Role

Structure

Processes

Relationships

Job satisfaction

Physiological

Psychological

Behavioural

MBO Training

Counseling

Job Design

Communication

Source: The Researcher

Outcomes: These are the consequences which have generally been linked to the experience of

stressful events. They are classified under the headings of physiological, psychological and

behavioural outcomes. In this study, physiological symptoms include headaches, indigestion,

increase in blood pressure, feelings of exhaustion. Psychological manifestation of stress includes

inability to think clearly, feeling restless, and irritability. The behavioural stress symptoms include

changes in eating drinking, smoking patterns and sleeping patterns.

Strategies: These are the various strategies adopted by the organization to reduce employees stress

level. Management by objective (MBO) is the process whereby the employee is given the

opportunity to air his/her views in the organization by way of contributing in making decision. It is

observed that by proper training of employee, the stress inherent in their job is also reduced.

Counseling is also a strategy that helps in stress reduction of the employees because it gives them a

clear view of what is expected of them. Finally, it is observed that job redesigning and improved

organizational communication helps in reducing employees stress level.

Job Satisfaction: In the model above, it is observed that when all the various strategies adopted by

the organization to reduce the stress an employee encounters are successful the employee will be

satisfied with his/her job. By achievement; employees‟ are satisfied with their job when they are

satisfied with their opportunity for advancement at work. Clear role; is the ability of the employee

to know what their role demands from them. Structure; when the structure of the organization is

clear and adhered to, it goes a long way in helping the employee to be satisfied with their job.

Processes have to do with the ability of the employee to know the procedures of their job and

finally, an employee is satisfied with his\her job when they work in teams and also when they

receive support from their superiors.

5.6 SUGGESTED AREA FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

A comparative study that will analyze employee‟s performance in stressful conditions (Distress)

and unstressful condition (Eustress) should be done.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

TEXT BOOKS PUBLICATIONS

Angelo, K and Brain, K. W. (2003), management, a practical introduction. Arizona State

University. Mc Graw Hill. United State of America.

Beehr, T.A. & Newman, J.E. (1998), Job Stress, Employee Health and Organizational

Effectiveness; A fact analysis model and literature review. Personal Psychology, 31(2).

Comish, R., Swindle, B. (1994), Managing Stress in the Workplace. National publics Accountant,

39(9).

Carsten, E & Moberg, G. P., (2000) Recognizing Pain and Distress in Laboratory Animals. ILAR.

J. 200; 41(2).

Erkutlu, H.V., Chafra, J. (2006) Relationship between Leadership Power Base and Job Stress of

Subordinates: Example from Boutique Hotels, Management Research News, 29(5).

Gareth, R. L., Jennifer, M. G and Charles, W. L (2000) Contemporary management. 2nd

edition.

Irwin Mc Graw-Hill, United States of America.

Greenberg, J.S., (1990) Comprehensive Stress management (3rd

edition). Dubuque. 1A Wm.C.

Brown Publishers..

Giga, S Faragher, B and Cooper, C.L (2002) Identification of practice in stress

prevention/management: a state of the art review. University of Wisconsin-Stout.

Ivancevich, J.M. & Matteson, M. T. (1980) Stress and Work. A managerial Perspective. Scott

foresman & Co., Cylen view Illinois.

Ivancevich, J.M. Matteson, M.T. and Preston (1982) Occupational Stress: Type A Behaviour and

Physical Wellbeing. A.M.J., 25, 2, 373 – 391.

Karasek, R. (1979) Job Demands, Job Decision Latitude, and Mental Strain: Implications from Job

redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly 24(2).

Karasek, R. & Theorell, T. (1990) Healthy Work: Stress Productivity and the Reconstruction of

Working Life, New York: Basic Books.

Lazarus, R.S & Folkman, S.C, (1984) Stress Appraisal and Coping. New York, Springer.

Lazarus, R.S, Delongis, A., Folkman, S. & Green, R. (1985) Stress and Adaptation Outcomes: The

Problem of Confounded Measures. American Psychologist 40(2).

Lennart, Levi M.D. (1981) Preventing works stress; Addison – Wesley series of Occupational

Stress.

Lind, S.L. Otte, F.L. (1994) Management Styles, Mediating Variables, and Stress among HRD

Professionals. Human Resource Development, Quarterly, 5(4).

Matheny, K.B., Aycock, D.W. Pugh, J.L Curette & Canella, K.A. (1986) Stress Coping; A

Qualitative and Quantitative Synthesis with Implications for Treatment. The

Counseling Psychologist, 14 (4).

Mc. Hugh M. (1993) Stress at Work: Do Managers really Count the Costs? Employee Relations,

15(1).

Moran, C.C. (1998) Stress and Emergency Work Experience: A non-linear relationship, Disaster

Prevention and Management, 7(1).

Murphy, L.R. (1995) Managing Job stress: An Employee Assistance/Human Resource Management

Partnership: personnel review 24(1).

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, NIOSH, (1999) Stress. Cincinnati, Ohio,

Author.

Nelson, D.L. Quick, J.C., & Quick, J.D. (1989) Corporate Warfare: Preventing Combat Stress and

Baste Fatigue; Organizational Dynamics 18(1).

Obinna, C.C. (2007) Management and Organization. Choby, Press Enterprises, Enugu, Enugu State

Nigeria.

Poali P and Merlie D (2001) Third European survey on working conditions 2000. European

foundation for the improvement of living and working conditions. Dublin.

Rees, W.D. (1997), Managerial Stress; dealing with the causes not the symptoms, Industrial and

Commercial training, 29(2).

Rice, P.L. (1992), Stress and Health (2nd

edition), Pacific Grove, California Brooks/Cole publishing

company.

Schor, E. (1991) the Overworked American: The Unexpected Decline of Leisure; New York:

Prentice Hall.

Schemerhorn, R. J. (1994) Management for Productivity, John Wiley and Sons Inc.

Shuttleworth, A. (2004) Managing Workplace stress: how training can help industrial and

commercial training, 36(2).

Steber, W. R., (1998) Occupational Stress among Frontline Corrections Workers. Menomonie,

University of Wisconsin – Stout.

Stephen P.R. & Mary C. (2007) Management; eight editions, Prentice Hall of India, private Limited

New Delhi.

Wachtel, P.L. (1989) The Poverty of Affluence: A psychological Portrait of the American way of

Life, Philadelphia: New Society Publishers

JOURNALS PUBLICATIONS

Antoniou, A.S., Polychromic, F, Vlachakis, A.N. (2006) “Gender and Age Differences in

Occupational Stress and Professional Burnout between Primary and High School

Teachers in Greece”. Journal of Managerial psychology, vol. 21(7).

Ben–Bakr, K.A., Al-Shammari, I. S, Jefri, O.A. (1995) “Occupational Stress in Different

Organizations”. A Saudi Arabian Survey. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 10(5).

Blake, C. G., Saleh, S. D., Whorms, H.H. (1996) “Stress and Satisfaction as a Function of

Technology and Supervision Type”. International Journal of Operations & Production

Management, 16(5).

Caplan, R.O, & Jones, K.W. (1975) “Effects of Work Load, Role Ambiguity, and Type A

Personality on Anxiety, Depression, and Heart Rates”. Journal of Applied

Psychology”, 60(1).

Chusmir, L.H. Franks, V. (1988) “Stress and the Woman Manager, Training and Development”.

Journal, 42 (10).

Cooper, C.L, Marshal, J. (1976) “Occupational Sources of stress, A Review of the Literature

Relating to Coronary Heart Disease and Mental ill Health”. Journal of occupational

psychology, 49(1).

Dewe, P.J. (1989) “Examining the Nature of Work Stress, Individual Evaluations, of Stressful

Experiences and Coping.” Journal of Human Relations, vol. 42(11).

Dua, J.K. (1994) “Job Stressors and Their Effects on Physical Health, Emotional Health, and Job

Satisfaction in a University”. Journal of Educational Administration, 32(1).

Di Martino V. Hotel, and Copper, C.L (2003) Violent and Harassment in the work place: A review

of literature, Report commissioned by the European foundation for the improvement of

living and working conditions, Dublin.

European Agency for Safety and Health at work (2002) Fact sheet on work related stress, facts (22)

available at on line.

FSU (2000) Work place. Finance sector union, available at htt//:www.fsunion.org.an/article.asp.

Fotinatos–Ventouratos, R., Cooper, (2005) “The Role of Gender and Social Class in Work Stress”

.Journal of Managerial Psychology, 20(1).

Ganster, D, C. Schaubroeck, J. (1991) “Work Stress and Employee Health”. Journal of

management, 17(2).

Gregory, A. (1990) “Are Women Different and Why are Women Thought to be Different?”

Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives. Journal of Business Ethnics, 9(4/5).

Holmes, T. H., & Rahe, R.H. (1987) “The Social Readjustment Rating Scale”. Journal of

Psychosomatic research, 11(2).

Houkes, J. Jansen P, De J. Nijhuis, F (2002) Work and individual determinants of intrinsic work

motivation, emotional exhaustion and turnover intention: Multi-sample Analysis.

International journal of stress management 8(4):257-283.

Kirkcaldy, B. Furnham, A. (1999) “Stress Coping Styles among German Managers”. Journal of

workplace Learning, 11(1).

Landy, F., Quick, J.C. & Kasl, S. (1994) “Work, Stress and Well-being”. International Journal of

Stress Management 1(1).

Lu, L. Cooper, C.L. kao, S.F., Zhou, Y. (2003) “Work Stress, Control Beliefs and Well-being in

Greater China”. An exploration of Sub-cultural Differences between the PRC and

Taiwan. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18(6): 479 – 510.

Margolis, B.L., Kroes, W.H. & Quinn, R.R. (1978) “Job Stress”: An Unlisted Occupational Hazard;

Journal of Occupational Medicine 16(1):659 – 661.

Portello, J.Y. and Long, B.C. (2000) “Appraisals and Coping with Work Place Interpersonal Stress:

A model for women managers”. Journal of Counseling Psychology, vol. 48(2).

Ross, G.F. (2005), “Tourism Industry Employee Work Stress” A Present and Future Crises. Journal

of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 19(2/3).

Sager, J.K. (1990) “Reducing Sales Manager Job Stress”. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 7(4).

Sharpley, C.F. Reynolds, R., Acosta, A. Dua, J.K. (1996) “The Presence, Nature and Effects of Job

Stress on Physical and Psychological Health at a Large Australian University”.

Journal of Educational Administration, 34 (4): 73 – 86.

Vansell, M., Brief, A.P. and Schuler, R.S. (1981) “Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity: Integration of

the literature and directions for future research”. Journal of Human Reactions, vol.

34(1).

PAPER PRESENTATION

Pinneau, S.R. Jr. (1976) “Effects of Social Support on Occupational Stress and Strain”. Paper

Presented at a Symposium at 84th

Annual Convocation of the American Psychological

Association, Institute of Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

APPENDIX I

QUESTIONNAIRE

School of Postgraduate Studies,

Department of Management,

Faculty of Business Administration,

University of Nigeria,

Enugu Campus, (UNEC).

………………………………..

……………………………….

……………………………….

Dear Respondent,

Please the researcher is a student of the above institution. I am conducting a research on

“Managing Occupational Stress in the Banking Sector”. A case study of selected commercial

banks in Enugu, and your bank were among those selected.

I therefore appeal to you to read and complete the attached questionnaire. Your responses will be

treated confidentially and be used for research purpose, which is purely academic. I therefore,

solicit for your sincerity and honesty in responding to the questions.

Thanks, for your anticipated cooperation.

Yours Sincerely,

Obiorah, Lauretta Chika.

Please tick (√) appropriately which ever is chosen.

SECTION A: BACKGROUND INFORMATION

1. Sex

(a) Male [ ] (b) Female [ ]

2. Age Group

(a) 20 – 30 years [ ] (b) 30 – 40 years [ ] (c) 40 years and above [ ]

3. Marital Status

(a) Single [ ] (b) Married [ ]

4. Academic Qualification

(a) M. Sc [ ] (b) MBA [ ] (c) MA and above [ ] (d) B. Sc / HND [ ]

(e) NCE / OND [ ] (f) SSCE / GCE [ ]

5. Which Department of the Bank do you work with?

(a) Account and clearing department [ ] (b) Cash service department [ ]

(c) Retail credit department [ ] (d) Customer service department [ ]

(e) Department of operation [ ] (f) Marketing department [ ]

SECTION B

NOTE: The options to select are in the following scale. Please indicate your view by ticking the

number which most closely matches your opinion in the table below.

(a) Strongly Agree (SA)

(b) Agree (A)

(a) Undecided (U)

(b) Disagree (D)

(c) Strongly Disagree (SD)

QUESTIONNAIRE

SA A U D SD

A Causes of Stress Employee’s encounter

6. Lack of encouragement from superiors can cause stress to an

employee.

7. Work over load is a common occupational stressors.

8. Pressure to work for longer hours could result to stress.

9. Lack of growth opportunities or rapid changes for which worker

are unprepared can cause occupational stress.

10. Un-pleasant physical working condition can cause stress.

11. Un-prompt payment of salaries and lack of resources to perform job

are common occupational stressors.

B Extent to which Occupational Stress affect Job Performance.

12. Stress level impedes your performance.

13. Employees‟ productivity is proportional to the level of stress in an

organization.

14. Employees‟ indifference to performance is as a result of high level

of stress.

15. The depression suffered by the employees‟ in an organization which

adversely affects their output is the consequences of high level of

stress.

C Strategies for Reducing Occupational Stress

16. Management by objectives (MBO) which clarifies job

responsibilities, provides clear performance goals and reduce

ambiguity through feedback reduces work stress.

17. Redesigning job to increase challenges or reduce work load helps in

reducing stress.

18. Time management programmes if properly initiated goes a long

way to reduce work stress.

19. Improved organizational communication exhibited a significant

positive relationship with reduced workers stress.

D Impacts of Stress on Job Performance.

20. Stress can cause absenteeism in employees.

21. Stress drastically reduces output.

22. With high level of stress, employees work in error.

23. Stress reduces employees‟ morale at work.

APPENDIX II

INTERVIEW QUESTIONS

1. Do you encounter stress at work?

2. What is the nature of stress that you encounter?

3. Does stress affect your job performance?

4. To what extent does stress affect your performance at work?

5. Does your organization manage stress?

6. Is there any strategy mapped out by your organization for managing stress?

7. Are the strategies mapped out by your organization to manage stress effective?

8. Is stress gender related?

9. Which sex undergoes stress more than the other?

10. What is the nature of stress women encounter?

11. How will stress women undergo be reduced?

12. In your own view, what do you think the management of your organization should do to

reduce stress?

APPENDIX III

The Selected Commercial Banks in Enugu State and their Locations.

FIRST BANK OF NIGERIA PLC

S/N BANKS LOCATIONS

1 First Bank of Nigeria Okpara Avenue (Main Branch)

2 First Bank of Nigeria Presidential Road

3 First Bank of Nigeria Agbani Road

4 First Bank of Nigeria Ogui Road

5 First Bank of Nigeria New Haven

6 First Bank of Nigeria Ogbete Main Market

7 First Bank of Nigeria Emene Branch

8 First Bank of Nigeria Agbakpa Branch

9 First Bank of Nigeria Okpara Avenue

10 First Bank of Nigeria Uwani Branch

11 First Bank of Nigeria Nite Mile

Source: Researcher’s field survey 2010

UNITED BANK FOR AFRICA PLC

S/N BANKS LOCATIONS

1 United Bank for Africa Admin. Building, Ogbete Market

2 United Bank for Africa 10, Station Road

3 United Bank for Africa 399, Agbani Road (Garki)

4 United Bank for Africa University of Nigeria (UNN)

5 United Bank for Africa Independent Layout

6 United Bank for Africa 53, Okpara Avenue

7 United Bank for Africa 36, Kenyatta, Uwani

8 United Bank for Africa Plot 2, Ebeano Housing Estate

9 United Bank for Africa 20, Okpara Avenue

10 United Bank for Africa University of Nigeria, Enugu Campus

11 United Bank for Africa 143, Agbani Road

12 United Bank for Africa 49, Nike Lake Resort

13 United Bank for Africa Plot R23 Community Ekulu

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

INTERCONTINENTAL BANK PLC

S/N BANKS LOCATIONS

1 Intercontinental Bank Okpara Avenue

2 Intercontinental Bank Ogui Road

3 Intercontinental Bank Agbani Road

4 Intercontinental Bank Garden Avenue (Regional office)

5 Intercontinental Bank ESUT, Branch

6 Intercontinental Bank Kenyatta, Uwani

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

ZENITH BANK PLC

S/N BANKS LOCATIONS

1 Zenith Bank Okpara Avenue

2 Zenith Bank Presidential Road

3 Zenith Bank Ogui Road

4 Zenith Bank Zik Avenue

5 Zenith Bank Trans Ekulu

6 Zenith Bank Nite Mile

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

OCEANIC BANK PLC

S/N BANKS LOCATIONS

1 Oceanic Bank Agbani Road

2 Oceanic Bank Garden Avenue

3 Oceanic Bank Emene Branch

4 Oceanic Bank Market Road

5 Oceanic Bank Nite Mile

6 Oceanic Bank University of Nigeria, Nsukka Branch

7 Oceanic Bank Nsukka ,Main Branch

8 Oceanic Bank Obolafor, Branch

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey 2010

MANAGING OCCUPATIONAL STRESS IN THE

BANKING SECTOR

BY

OBIORAH, LAURETTA CHIKA

PG/M.Sc/08/47315

DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT

FACULTY OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA

ENUGU CAMPUS

SEPTEMBER, 2011

TITLE PAGE

MANAGING OCCUPATIONAL STRESS IN

THE BANKING SECTOR

BY

OBIORAH, LAURETTA CHIKA

PG/M.Sc/08/47315

A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF

MANAGEMENT, FACULTY OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION,

UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA, ENUGU CAMPUS IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT

OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF MASTER OF SCIENCE

(M.Sc) IN MANAGEMENT

SUPERVISOR: DR C.A. EZIGBO

SEPTEMBER, 2011

APPROVAL PAGE

This Dissertation has been approved for the Department of Management, Faculty of

Business administration, University of Nigeria, Enugu Campus, by:

_________________________ ________________

SUPERVISOR HEAD OF DEPARTMENT

DR. C. A. EZIGBO DR. C. A. EZIGBO

CERTIFICATION

Obiorah, Lauretta Chika, A postgraduate student in the department of Management

has satisfactorily completed the requirements for the award of Master of Science (M.Sc) in

Management. The work embodied in this dissertation is original and has not been

submitted in part or full for any other diploma or degree of this university.

_________________________

STUDENT

OBIORAH, LAURETTA CHIKA

DEDICATION

This dissertation is wholly dedicated to my parents, brothers and sister who supported me

in acquiring a higher degree. Above all, this dissertation is dedicated to Almighty God for

keeping me alive to see this day and for guiding me throughout my educational pursuit.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I thank the almighty God for giving me the ability to pursue and complete a higher degree despite

the numerous odds. It is indeed a great testimony. To him I give all the glory.

I am highly indebted to a number of people who in one way or another contributed to the successful

completion of this work. First and foremost, my profound and sincere gratitude goes to my

wonderful supervisor Dr. C.A Ezigbo, who despite her huge administrative responsibilities was able

to give this work a speedy and critical attention. Your advice, constructive criticism and

approachable gesture made this work possible.

I am equally grateful to all the lecturers in the department of Management, University of Nigeria,

Enugu Campus (UNEC) for their role in instilling in me the virtues of hard work.

I also sincerely and deeply appreciate my parents Mr. and Mrs. Dominic Obiorah for their total

support all through my academic endeavor. Without them, there neither would have been me nor

this project. Thanks for always been there for me. I thank my brothers and sister, Jane, Malachy,

Polycarp, Anthony and Martins Obiorah for their love and warm thoughts.

I must not to fail to acknowledge the unalloyed support of my Aunt and her family, Mr. and Mrs.

Jonathan Odah who encouraged me in every aspect and their children, Chukwuebuka and Daberechi

Odah.

I deeply appreciate the encouragement and support of my friends and well wishers. They include;

Elochukwu Onyiorah, Obiora Nweke Micheal, Anokete Lukeson, Mrs. Ofordile.N, Ajuonuma

Ihuoma, Ogbonna Nnenna, Adigwe Blessing, Uche Ayogu, Adaora Ufondu, Anusi Adaeze

Precious, Uchenna Ujunwa and Ben Etim Udoh.

Once again, I thank the Almighty God for sparing my life and for giving me the strength and

wisdom to surmount all odds to acquire a higher degree.

Obiorah, Lauretta Chika.

PG/M.Sc/08/47315

ABSTRACT

This study is on Managing Occupational Stress in the Banking sector. The objectives of this study

are to: analyze the causes of stress which bank employees‟ encounter; evaluate the extent to which

occupational stress affect job performance; analyze the various strategies adopted by the banking

sector to reduce occupational stress and to analyze the impacts of stress on employee job

performance. The design for this study is survey research design. The population for the study was

one thousand seven hundred (1700) obtained from the selected commercial banks in Enugu State.

From this, a sample size of three hundred and twenty four (324) was drawn, using Taro Yamane

formula. Data were obtained from primary and secondary sources. To ensure that the research

instruments are valid, a conduct of a pre-test of every question in the questionnaire was carried out.

For reliability of the research instruments, a test-re-test method was adopted using Pearson‟s

Product Moment Correlation Coefficient of reliability to calculate the result and the result gave

reliability coefficient of 0.98. Four hypotheses proposed were tested using Friedman Chi-square

(X2) and Multiple Linear Regression (MLR). The findings reveal that pressure of responsibilities

and pressure to work longer hours are some of the causes of stress which bank employees‟

encounter; occupational stress significantly affect job performance; redesigning job to increase

challenge or reduce work load can be a strategy for reducing occupational stress and that

absenteeism, low morale and reduced output are negative impacts of stress on employees‟ job

performance. The study recommends that the environment of work place should be made conducive

so as to reduce stress; management by objective (MBO) should be adopted by organizations

because employee stress level tend to reduce when he\she participate in decision making and

finally, the employee should be trained properly in their respective fields so as to reduce the stress

caused by role ambiguity.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Page……………………………………………………………………………………………i

Approval page……………………………………………………………………………………….ii

Certification……………………………………………………………….........................................iii

Dedication……………………………………………………………………………………………iv

Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………………………….v

Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………………..vi

Table of Contents………………………………………………………………………..………….vii

List of tables………………………………………………………………………………………….x

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study……………………………………………………………………1

1.2 Statement of the Problem……………………………………………………………………3

1.3 Objectives of the Study……………………………………………………………………..3

1.4 Research Questions………………………………………………………………………….4

1.5 Research Hypotheses……………………………………………………………………….4

1.6 Significance of the Study…………………………………………………………………...4

1.7 Scope of the Study………………………………………………………………………….5

1.8 Limitation of the Study……………………………………………………………………..5

1.9 Definition of relevant Terms………………………………………………………………..5

References…………………………………………………………………………………..7

CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1 The Concept of Occupational Stress………………………………………………………8

2.2 Theories of Stress…………………………………………………………………………10

2.3 Types of Stress…………………………………………………………………………….14

2.4 Sources of Occupational Stress……………………………………………………………14

2.5 Worker Characteristics that can Cause Stress……………………………………………..19

2.6 Consequences of Occupational Stress……………………………………………………..20

2.7 Dealing with Occupational Stress…………………………………………………………22

2.8 Stress Reactions at Work………………………………………………………………….24

2.9 Coping with Occupational Stress…………………………………………………………27

2.10 Relationship between individual Characteristics and Occupational

Stress………………………………………………………………………………………32

2.11 Occupational Stress and Job Performance………………………………………………...34

2.12 Gender and Occupational stress…………………………………………………………..35

References…………………………………………………………………………………38

CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Research Design………………………………………………………. ………………..42

3.2 Sources of Data………….……………………………………………………………....42

3.3 Population of the Study …………………………………………………………………42

3.4 Sample Size Determination……………………………………………………………....43

3.5 Description of Research Instrument……………………………………………………..46

3.6 Data Analysis Techniques……………………………………………………………….46

3.7 Validity of the Research Instrument……………………………………………………..46

3.8 Reliability of the Research Instruments…………………………………………………46

CHAPTER FOUR

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA………………..48

CHAPTER FIVE

5.1 Summary of Findings…….………………………………………………………….78

5.2 Conclusions…………………………………………………………………………..78

5.3 Recommendations…………………………………………………………………….78

5.4 Contributions to Knowledge…………………………………………………………..79

5.5 Suggested Area for Future Research………………………………………………….80

Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………..81

Appendix I……………………………………………………………………………87

Appendix II…………………………………………………………………………….90

Appendix III…………………………………………………………………………...91

LISTS OF TABLES

TABLES

2.1 Sources of Occupational Stress………………………………………………… 18

3.1 Population Distribution of the five Selected Organizations…………………… 43

3.2 Break Down of the Sample Size………………………………………………… 46

3.3 Reliability Test………………………………………………………………… 47

4.1 Distribution and Return of the Questionnaire…………………………………… 48

4.2 Sex Distribution of Respondents………………………………………………… 48

4.3 Age Distribution of Respondents………………………………………………… 49

4.4 Marital Status of Respondents…………………………………………………… 49

4.5 Educational Qualification……………………………………………………….... 50

4.6 Respondents Department…………………………………………………………. 50

4.7 The causes of stress that employees in the banking sector encounter……………….. 51

4.8 The causes of stress that employees in the banking sector encounter………. 51

4.9 The causes of stress that employees in the banking sector encounter………. 52

4.10 The causes of stress that employees in the banking sector encounter……… 52

4.11 The causes of stress that employees in the banking sector encounter……… 53

4.12 The causes of stress that employees in the banking sector encounter……… 53

4.13 Condensed outcome of six questions administered for research question 1... 54

4.14 Aggregate response for the five organizations ……………………………… 54

4.15 Expected frequency for research question 1………………………………… 54

4.16 The extent to which occupational stress affects job performance………….. 55

4.17 The extent to which occupational stress affects job performance………….. 55

4.18 The extent to which occupational stress affects job performance………….. 56

4.19 The extent to which occupational stress affects job performance………….. 56

4.20 Condensed outcome of four questions administered for research question 2... 57

4.21 Aggregate response for the five organizations …………………………… 57

4.22 The various strategies adopted by the banking sector to reduce occupational stress 58

4.23 The various strategies adopted by the banking sector to reduce occupational stress 58

4.24 The various strategies adopted by the banking sector to reduce occupational stress 59

4.25 The various strategies adopted by the banking sector to reduce occupational stress 59

4.26 Condensed outcome of four questions administered for research question 3... 60

4.27 Aggregate response for the five organizations ……………………………… 60

4.28 Expected frequency for research question 3……………………………………….. 61

4.29 The impacts of stress on employees job performance………………………………. 61

4.30 The impacts of stress on employees job performance………………………………. 61

4.31 The impacts of stress on employees job performance……………………………….. 62

4.32 The impacts of stress on employees job performance………………………………. 62

4.33 Condensed outcome of four questions administered for research question 4 ….. 63

4.34 Aggregate response for the five organizations……..……………………………… 63

4.35 Descriptive Statistics ………………………………………………………………. 65

4.36 Friedman test table…………………………………………………………………. 65

4.37 Test statistics……………………………………………………………………….. 65

4.38 Descriptive statistics…………………………………………………………………….. 66

4.39 Correlation table…………………………………………………………………….. 67

4.40 Model summary…………………………………………... …………………………… 67

4.41 ANOVA table…………………….......................................................................... …….. 68

4.42 Coefficients table ……………………………………………………………………. 68

4.43 Descriptive statistics………………………………………………………………….. 70

4.44 Friedman test table…………………………………………………………………. 71

4.45 Test statistics……………………………………………………………………….. 71

4.46 Descriptive statistics………………………………………………………………….. 72

4.47 Correlation table…………………………………………………………………….. 73

4.48 Model summary…………………………………………...…………………… 73

4.49 ANOVA table…………………….......................................................................... 73

4.50 Coefficients table ……………………………………………………………………. 74

LIST OF FIGURE

5.1 A Model for Managing Occupational Stress ………………………………………. 79