Role of perceived organizational support on stress

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH Online Open Access publishing platform for Management Research

© Copyright by the authors - Licensee IPA- Under Creative Commons license 3.0

Research Article ISSN 2229 – 3795

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH 153

Volume 3 Issue 1, 2012

Role of perceived organizational support on stress-satisfaction relationship:

An empirical study Deepti Pathak

Associate, Professor, Jagan Institute of Management Studies, Rohini, Sec-5, India

[email protected]

ABSTRACT

The present study examined the relationship between organizational stress and job

satisfaction level of an individual and whether Perceived Organizational Support moderates

the relationship between both. The results indicates negative correlation between

organizational stress and job satisfaction level among employees; perceived organizational

support as a powerful moderator lessens amount of stress experienced and thus leads to

higher job satisfaction.

Purpose: The aim of this study is to deepen the understanding of the relationship between

Organizational Role Stress and job satisfaction and to test the moderating effect of Perceived

Organizational Support on their relationship.

Design/Methodology/Approach: The present study was done on a sample of 200 managers

belonging to Private Sector Organizations of Delhi/NCR region. Variables in the study were

assessed using three validated Instruments. Descriptive statistics, Pearson Product Moment

Correlation and Hierarchical regression analysis was used to analyze the data.

Findings: The results show that Organizational Role Stress is negatively & significantly

related with job satisfaction. Perceived Organizational Support was found to lessen the stress

level of the employees, thereby indirectly affecting job satisfaction. In addition, the results of

the hierarchical multiple regression analysis support the moderating effect of Perceived

Organizational Support with regard to the relationship between organizational role stress &

job satisfaction.

Research Implications: The study highlights the importance of providing stress free

environment to employees in order to foster their levels of job satisfaction & commitment to

the organization. Results confirm the importance of organizational climate & harmonious

relationships as factors affecting the Job satisfaction and the organizational stress faced by

the employees. It shows that the psychological contract between organization & employee

may influence the stress levels faced by employees in their respective jobs. By understanding

the role and importance of individual & organizational variables in reducing the

organizational stress, employers can increase the employee satisfaction level which will

indirectly generate affective commitment of employees decreasing the employee absenteeism

and turnover.

Key Words: Research Paper, Perceived Organizational Support, Organizational Stress, Job

Satisfaction & Private Sector Managers.

Role of perceived organizational support on stress-satisfaction relationship: An empirical study

Deepti Pathak

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH


154

1. Introduction

A major concern of organizational theorists & practitioners is for achieving organizational

effectiveness. The willingness of employees to go beyond the formal specification of job

roles, termed extra-role behaviours (Organ, 1990; Tepper, Lockhart, & Hoobler, 2001). Faced

with new challenges, corporate are today increasingly realizing the fact that their human

resources, are the only source of competitive advantage. This has resulted in a renewed focus

on HR strategies that can ensure retention, commitment, as well as continued growth and

effectiveness of the managerial personnel.

Organizational Stress is receiving increasing attention in the academic literature and has

become a salient issue for the organizations. Job life is one of the important parts of our daily

lives which cause a great deal of stress. Usually people are more worry about their outcome

of their work that can even affect the way they treat other people and how they communicate

with their peers and customers. For example, people with a higher percentage of occupational

stress may not be satisfied with their job and therefore they will not feel happy working in the

organization. They may feel frustrated or “burned out” when they are having problems with

other employees or customers. This may leave a negative impact to the organization itself.

Survey of the literature on occupational stress reveals that there are a number of factors

related to job which affect the behaviour of the employees and as a result of it, normal life is

disturbed (McLean, 1974; Brief, Schular and Vansell, 1981).

Job-satisfaction has been defined as the positive orientation of an individual towards the work

role which he is presently occupying (Vroom, 1964). Many Western studies indicate that

among the determinants of job satisfaction, leadership behavior (Cheng & Yang, 1977; Euske

& Jackson, 1980 as cited by Darwish, 2000) and perceived organizational support (Burke &

Greenglass, 2001; Burke, 2003) are viewed as important predictors and play a central role.

Rude (2004) suggest that perceived organizational support is strongly related to leadership

behavior, hence insufficient support from leader is one of important factor to employees’

dissatisfaction and burnout (Maslach et al., 2001) which the results are same with the lack of

support from organization (Rude, 2004). The dissatisfaction of employee will lead them to

less work commitment and high turnover from the organization, as well as physical

withdrawal or they may retreat from the organization emotionally or mentally. On the other

hand, job dissatisfaction not only increases intention to quit but also reduce the contribution

of the employee to the organization (Lok & Crawford, 2003). Perceived Organizational

Support (POS) refers to the perception that one is valued and treated well by the organization

(Eisenberger et al.,1986). Despite evidence (e.g. Quine, 2001) that various forms of

workplace support (e.g. support from colleagues) moderate the relationship between bullying

& propensity to leave the organization, the moderating effects of POS are yet to be examined.

This study therefore investigates the moderating effects of POS on the relationship between

Organizational role stress & job satisfaction levels of individuals by using a sample of private

sector employees in Delhi/NCR region.

According to Eisenberger, Huntingdon, Hutchinson and Sowa (1986:501), individuals tend to

“form global beliefs concerning the extent to which the organization values their

contributions and cares about their well-being.” These beliefs that are exchanges between an

employee and employing organization are called perceived organizational support and is used

to define in this study. High levels of perceived organizational support creates feelings of

obligation, to the employers as well as makes them feel they have to return the employers’

commitment by engaging in behaviors that support organizational goals. From the social


Deepti Pathak



155

exchange perspective, research has revealed that perceived organizational support is

positively related to job attendance and measures of job performance (Eisenberger et al.,

1986).

From a social exchange perspective, it can be argued that employees who perceive a high

level of support from the organization are more likely to feel an obligation to repay the

organization in terms of affective commitment (Eisenberger et al., 1986; Shore & Wayne,

1993). According to Eisenberger, Fasolo and Davis-LaMastro (1990), employees who feel

supported by their organization and care about the organization would engage in activities

that help to further the organization’s goals.

Cooper and Marshal (1976) stated that occupational stress includes the environmental factors

or stressors such as work overload, role ambiguity, role conflict and poor working conditions

associated with a particular job. Orpen (1991) observed that major source of stress is derived

from the occupational environment; proponents of this view tend to argue that role holders in

certain occupation, irrespective of individual differences, are much more likely to experience

stress. Here, the emphasis is on the individual demands of various jobs that have the capacity

over a period of time to exhaust the physical and psychological resource of employees in the

organisation.

According to Organ (1990), when employees are asked about job satisfaction they typically

think about fairness in terms of work conditions, pay and supervision. A comparison takes

place involving what they expect and what they actually receive. Job satisfaction is defined as

the employee's affective response to various aspects of the job or organization (Locke, 1976).

Research conducted by Judge et al. (1998) explored the effects of core evaluations on job

satisfaction and life satisfaction. By using self-reporting of work attitudes and personality

traits they determined there was a significant relationship between self-esteem, generalized

self-efficacy, and locus of control and neuroticism and work outcomes (job and life

satisfaction and perceived work characteristics). They concluded the way people perceive

themselves impacts their job and their personal lives.

Numerous studies found that job stress influences the employees’ job satisfaction and their

overall performance in their work. Because most of the organizations now are more

demanding for the better job outcomes. In fact, modern times have been called as the “age of

anxiety and stress” (Coleman, 1976).The stress itself will be affected by number of stressors.

Nevertheless, Beehr and Newman (1978) had defined stress as a situation which will force a

person to deviate from normal functioning due to the change (i.e. disrupt or enhance) in

his/her psychological and/or physiological condition, such that the person is forced to deviate

from normal functioning. From the definition that has been identified by researchers, we can

conclude that it is truly important for an individual to recognize the stresses that are facing by

them in their career. Some demographic factor may influence the way a university academic

staff act in their workplace.

Management role of an organization is one of the aspects that affect work-related stress

among workers (Alexandros-Stamatios et. al., 2003).Workers in an organization can face

occupational stress through the role stress that the management gave. Role stress means

anything about an organizational role that produces adverse consequences for the individual

(Kahn and Quinn, 1970). Management will have their own role that stands as their related.

Role related are concerned with how individuals perceive the expectations other have of them

and includes role ambiguity and role conflict (Alexandros-Stamatios et. al., 2003).


Deepti Pathak



156

According to Lasky (1995) demands associated with family and finances can be a major

source of ‘extra-organisational’ stress that can complicate, or even precipitate, work-place

stress. Russo & Vitaliano (1995) argued that the occurrence of stressors in the workplace

either immediately following a period of chronic stress at home, or in conjunction with other

major life stressors, is likely to have a marked impact on outcome.

Several studies have highlighted the deleterious consequences of high workloads or work

overload. According to Wilkes et al. (1998) work overloads and time constraints were

significant contributors to work stress among community nurses. Workload stress can be

defined as reluctance to come to work and a feeling of constant pressure (i.e. no effort is

enough) accompanied by the general physiological, psychological, and behavioral stress

symptoms .

Al-Aameri AS. (2003) has mentioned in his studies that one of the six factors of occupational

stress is pressure originating from workload. Alexandros-Stamatios G.A. et al. (2003) also

argued that “factors intrinsic to the job” means explore workload, variety of tasks and rates of

pay. Employees in any organization face changing demands within the dynamic

environments of business and Technology development. Due to the competitive nature of the

job environment most of the people in the world are spending their time for job related work

purposes resulting ignore the stressor those are influencing their work and life. Such constant

changes create stressful working situations, as a result, the job satisfaction of employees is

usually low and their job turnovers are high. Previous studies focused on job stress and job

satisfaction of employees. High levels of work stress are associated with low levels of job

satisfaction (Landsbergis, 1988; Terry et al., 1993) and job stressors are predictive of job

dissatisfaction and a greater propensity to leave the organisation (Cummins, 1990).

This study examined the relationship between organizational role stress and job satisfaction

levels of employees. It covers the impact of different dimensions of organizational role stress

i.e. Self-role distance, role ambiguity, role isolation & role inadequacy on the job satisfaction

of the employees. It further examined whether Perceived Organizational Support moderates

the relationship between Role Stress & Job Satisfaction.

2. Review of Literature

2.1 Organizational stress

In the past three decades, empirical researches on the theme of stress have increased many

folds. Researchers have focused their attention on causal factors of stress, stress

manifestations, moderators of stress-strain relationship, and types of stresses experienced by

diverse work populations, and various coping strategies adopted by organizational entities to

cope with stress (Pestonjee, 1992). The large organizations, like other settings, exert its own

set of unique forces on the individual. Through the application of these forces, the

organization is able to channel the individual’s behavior towards certain goals and to direct

his/her interactions towards certain people and away from others.

Job stress and Burnout have become two of the buzzwords of the present century influencing

job-satisfaction of the employees. (Banet, Plint and Clifford, 2005, Verma, 2008). Stress in

the work place is increasingly a critical problem for employees, employers and the society.

Researchers who study stress have demonstrated the direct and indirect costs of stress.

(Matteson & Ivancevich,1987). There are many variables which have been related to

organizational stress. Ivancevich and Matteson (1980) proposed a model of organizational


Deepti Pathak



157

stress research that outlined the major antecedents of work stress. They noted the importance

of individual differences as moderators of stress and detailed possible outcomes of stress at

work.

Stress is associated with impaired individual functioning in the workplace. A number of

aspects of working life have been linked to stress. Aspects of work itself can be stressful,

namely work overload (Defrank & Ivancevich, 1998; Sparks & Cooper, 1999, Taylor et al.,

2005) and role-based factors such as lack of power, role ambiguity, and role conflict (Burke,

1988; Nelson and Burke, 2000). Emsley (2003) in their research study multiple goals and

managers’ job-related tension and performance suggested that job-related tension and

performance deteriorate as managers pursue multiple goals although the relationship seems to

be non-linear. Manshor, Fontaine and Chong Siong Choy (2003) in their study examined the

sources of occupational stress among Malaysian managers working in multi-national

companies (MNCs).It was found that workloads, working conditions, and relationship at

work were the main concern of the managers that lead to stress at the work place.

Pareek (1983) has pioneered work on role stress by identifying as many as ten different types

of organizational role stresses namely: IRD, RS, REC, RE, RO, RI, PI, SRD, RA, & RIn.

Stress has become one of the most serious health issues of the twentieth century—a problem

not just for individuals in terms of physical and mental morbidity, but for employers,

governments and the society at large who have started to assess the financial damage (ILO,

1993). The problem of occupational stress is also relevant for countries undergoing enormous

economic and social changes.

Occupational stress has been of great concern to the management, employees, and other

stakeholders of organizations. Occupational stress researchers agree that stress is a serious

problem in many organizations (Cooper and Cartwright, 1994; Varca, 1999; Ornelas and

Kleiner 2003). The cost of occupational stress is very high in many organizations. For

instance, the International Labor Organization (ILO) reports that inefficiencies arising from

occupational stress may cost up to 10 percent of a country.s GNP (Midgley, 1996). At a

personal level, occupational stress might lead to increased morbidity and mortality (Mark,

Jonathan and Gregory, 2003). Rapidly changing global scene is increasing the pressure of

workforce to perform maximum output and enhance competitiveness. Indeed, to perform

better to their job, there is a requirement for workers to perform multiple tasks in the

workplace to keep abreast of changing technologies (Cascio, 1995; Quick, 1997). The

ultimate results of this pressure have been found to one of the important factors influencing

job stress in their work. A study in UK indicated that the majority of the workers were

unhappy with the current culture where they were required to work extended hours and cope

with large workloads while simultaneously meeting production targets and deadlines

(Townley, 2000).

Role ambiguity is another aspect that affects job stress in the workplace. According to Beehr

et al. (1976), Cordes & Dougherty (1993), Cooper (1991), Dyer & Quine (1998) and

Ursprung (1986) role ambibuity exists when an individual lacks information about the

requirements of his or her role,how those role requirements are to be met, and the evaluative

procedures available to ensure that the role is being performed successfully. Jackson &

Schuler (1985) and Muchinsky (1997) studies found role ambiguity to lead to such negative

outcomes as reduces confidence, a sense of hopelessness, anxiety, and depression.


Deepti Pathak



158

Many sources of stress in organizations cannot be changed. These might include situations

like a prolonged recessionary period, new competitors, or an unanticipated crisis.

Organizational members generally have little control over these kinds of stressors, and they

can create extended periods of high-stress situations. People who adjust to these stressors

generally use a form of perceptual adaptation, where they modify the way in which they

perceive the situation.

A number of aspects of working life have been linked to stress. Aspects of the work itself can

be stressful, namely work overload (DeFrank and Ivancevich, 1998; Sparks and Cooper,

1999, Taylor et al., 1997) and role-based factors such as lack of power, role ambiguity, and

role conflict (Burke, 1988; Nelson and Burke, 2000). The quality of the social environment in

the workplace is associated with stress (Sparks and Cooper, 1999) as are certain behaviours

of the leader (Carlopio et al., 1997; Cooper and Marshall, 1976). Threats to career

development and achievement, including threat of redundancy, being undervalued and

unclear promotion prospects are stressful (Nelson and Burke, 2000). The conflict between

home and work and the work impact on personal relationships is stressful (Sparks and

Cooper, 1999). Also, physical conditions such as high noise levels, overcrowding in the

workplace or a lack of privacy have been associated with stress (Burke, 1988).

Stress is associated with impaired individual functioning in the workplace. Negative effects

include reduced efficiency, decreased capacity to perform, dampened initiative and reduced

interest in working, increased rigidity of thought, a lack of concern for the organisation and

colleagues, and a loss of responsibility (Greenberg and Baron, 1995; Matteson and

Ivancevich, 1982). Stress has been associated with important occupational outcomes of job

satisfaction, organisational commitment and employee withdrawal behaviour (Naumann,

1993; Sullivan and Bhagat, 1992; Tett and Meyer, 1993; Williams and Hazer, 1986).

Satisfaction and commitment have invariably reported a negative relationship to intent to

leave and turnover (Arnold and Feldman,1982; Hollenbeck and Williams, 1986). High levels

of work stress are associated with low levels of job satisfaction (Landsbergis, 1988; Terry et

al., 1993) and job stressors are predictive of job dissatisfaction and a greater propensity to

leave the organisation (Cummins, 1990).

An important step in reduction of stress is establishing one's priorities. (Williams and Huber,

1986). The demands of many managerial positions cause the neglect of other areas of one's

life, such as family, friends, recreation, and religion. This neglect creates stress, which in turn

affects job performance and health. Value clarification is linked to time management, since

we generally allocate our time according to our priorities. By setting personal priorities,

managers and subordinates can reduce this source of stress. It is typically the first step in any

stress reduction program.

2.2 Job Satisfaction

Job-satisfaction has been defined as the positive orientation of an individual towards the work

role which he is presently occupying (Vroom, 1964). There are a variety of factors that can

influence a person’s level of job-satisfaction like pay, promotion system, working conditions,

leadership, social relationship and the job-itself. Job-satisfaction is basically an individual

matter and refers to what one expects from his or her job and when there is mismatch

between what is expected and what is received and if there is some disparity then

dissatisfaction occurs. It has been seen that a psychosocial interplay between personality,

power, status and service and intellectual challenge , forms the career dilemma of attorneys’

conflicts and trade-offs originating with the individual occupational choice are played out in a


Deepti Pathak



159

multitude of settings perpetuating tension as old as profession itself. It has been concluded in

the American Bar Association Survey (1999) that hours of work, competition, time for self

and family, financial rewards and gender bias contribute towards the job dissatisfaction.

Locke (1976) stated job satisfaction as a pleasurable positive state resulting from one's job

and job experience. Individuals show pleasurable positive attitudes when they are satisfied

with their job. Drever (1964) described job satisfaction ''as an end state of feeling." Singh

(1990) pointed out that the job satisfaction is a part of life satisfaction, the nature of one's

environment off- the- job. Similarly, a job is an important part of life, job satisfaction

influences one's general life satisfaction as an effective reaction, feeling of employees with

job, supervision, coworkers, salary/pay and his/her current and future career progress. The

causes of employees' satisfaction are restricted to implant factors alone but they sum the

whole gamut of men's needs and aspirations. Job satisfaction is a general attitude which is the

result of many specific attitudes (Reddy and Rajasekhar ,1990).

In Locke's (1969) research, three fundamentals of job satisfaction were discussed: (1)

evaluating the characteristics of the job; (2) determining a value standard for comparison of

satisfaction; and (3) determining the level of agreement among an employee's perception of

job satisfaction and an employee's value standard. An employee's interpretation of values

may vary regarding satisfaction or dissatisfaction. For example, some employees may feel a

sense of accomplishment in their jobs while other employees may not. Hackman and

Oldham's (1980) research results were congruent. They surveyed blue and white collar

workers and determined that completing interesting tasks was not as important as job security

and compensation for blue-collar employees.

Job satisfaction can be a leading contributor to the success or failure in any organization.

Satisfied employees lead to satisfied customers. Another benefit of job satisfaction is reduced

turnover. By focusing on what contributes to job satisfaction, an organization can reduce

turnover. Ohlin and West (1993) stated that turnover rates were reduced among housekeepers

because of high levels of job satisfaction. Research has also shown that satisfied employees

are more likely to stay in the organization than those who are dissatisfied (Mobley, Griffeth,

Hand and Megliano, 1979).

Vroom (1964) postulated a model of job satisfaction which reflects valence of the job for its

incumbent. He argued that the strength of the force on a worker to remain on his job is an

increasing function of valence on his job. Srivastava and Pratap (1984) studied job

satisfaction and organizational climate among executives and supervisors, reported a

significant positive relationship between the overall climate and job satisfaction. Job

satisfaction was also found related to various individual dimensions of organizational climate

such as leadership, communication, interaction, influence in decision making, goal-setting

and control.

2.3 Organizational Stress & Job satisfaction

Several studies have tried to determine the link between stress and job satisfaction. Job

satisfaction and job stress are the two hot focuses in human resource management researches.

These studies generally indicate that job stress & satisfaction are inversely related (e.g.,

Hollon & Chesser, 1976; Miles, 1976; Miles & Petty, 1975). According to Stamps &

Piedmonte (1986) job satisfaction has been found significant relationship with job stress. One

study of general practitioners in England identified four job stressors that were predictive of

job dissatisfaction (Cooper, et al., 1989). In other study, Vinokur-Kaplan (1991) stated that


Deepti Pathak



160

organization factors such as workload and working condition were negatively related with job

satisfaction. Fletcher & Payne (1980) identified that a lack of satisfaction can be a source of

stress, while high satisfaction can alleviate the effects of stress. This study reveals that, both

of job stress and job satisfaction were found to be interrelated. Job satisfaction can be an

important indicator of how employees feel about their jobs and predictor of work behavior

such as organizational relationship and turnover. (Wegge, Schmidt, Parks &Dick, 2007;

Koustelios & Tsigillis, 2005; Organ& Ryan, 1995; Saari & Judge, 2004 and Verma, 2008).

Any business can achieve success when the problem of satisfaction and dissatisfaction can be

felt, understood and solved. If specialists do not feel supported by colleagues and by

organization their satisfaction level falls (Freeborn, 2001) .The promotion of personal growth

and security in finance and employment influences satisfaction levels positively (Murray,

1997).

Kemery, Mossholder, and Bedeian (1987) employed Lisrel to test three models, (e.g., Beehr

& Newman, 1978; Locke, 1976; Schuler, 1982) that postulate causal relationships among role

ambiguity, role conflict, and organizationally valued outcomes such as job satisfaction,

physical symptoms, and the turnover intentions. Using 370 employees, (e.g., faculty,

administrators, staff), from a large southeastern university, Kemery & associates found that

the role comflict & ambiguity exert a direct influence on job satisfaction and physical

symptoms, which in turn influence turnover intentions. The study of Landsbergis (1988) and

Terry et al. (1993) showed that high levels of work stress are associated with low levels of

job satisfaction. Moreover, Cummins (1990) have emphasized that job stressors are

predictive of job dissatisfaction and greater propensity to leave the organization. Sheena et al.

(2005) studied in UK found that there are some occupations that are reporting worse than

average scores on each of the factors such as physical health, psychological well-being, and

job satisfaction due to workplace stressors. The research literature supports the prediction that

workplace factors will have direct effects on stress and job satisfaction as well as stress

influencing job satisfaction (Kirkcaldy et al., 1999; Leong et al., 1996; Lyne et al., 2000).

Despite the strength of such findings, interpretation of the relationships is still data and not

theory driven (Sutton and Staw, 1995). Lacking is a theoretical basis on which to explain why

the associations have been found. This atheoretical approach creates difficulty in predicting

which factors in a specific workplace will contribute to stress and which to job satisfaction. In

the absence of an integrated theory, the implication of the recommendation by Sparks and

Cooper (1999) is that the prominence of workplace factors in the experience of stress may

depend on occupational groupings or particular aspects of the workplace. For instance, in a

study on occupational stress among senior civil servants, mental ill health was predicted by

the pressure associated with the role of management, and a low level of perceived control (i.e.

externality), whereas job dissatisfaction was predicted by organizational climate,

organizational influence and job constraints (Bogg and Cooper, 1995).

Most researchers have studied the relationship between job satisfaction and occupational

stress and have found that role conflict and role ambiguity are negatively related to job

satisfaction (Futrell, 1982, Jagdish & Srivastava, 1984; Moore & Robert, 1984 and Verma,

2008). Occupational stress was found to be significantly related to job satisfaction the greater

the stress the lower the satisfaction (Sahu & Gole, 2008 and Verma, 2008). Stress is

inevitable in the practice of law. In a study of more than 100 occupations, lawyers had the

highest rate of depression (Eaton, Mandel & Garrison, 1990 and Verma, 2008). The increase

in number of lawyers led to increased competition and diminishing personal relationship with

other lawyers. (Daicoff, 1997 and Verma, 2008.


Deepti Pathak



161

2.4 Perceived Organizational Support

According to organizational support theory, the development of POS is encouraged by

employees’ tendency to assign the organization humanlike characteristics (Eisenberger et al.,

1986). Organizational support theory also addresses the psychological processes underlying

consequences of POS. First, on the basis of the reciprocity norm, POS should produce a felt

obligation to care about the organization’s welfare and to help the organization reach its

objectives. Second, the caring, approval, and respect connoted by POS should fulfill

socioemotional needs, leading workers to incorporate organizational membership and role

status into their social identity. Third, POS should strengthen employees’ beliefs that the

organization recognizes and rewards increased performance (i.e., performance-reward

expectancies). These processes should have favorable outcomes both for employees (e.g.,

increased job satisfaction and heightened positive mood) and for the organization (e.g.,

increased affective commitment and performance, reduced turnover).

Organizational theorists and researchers have frequently alluded to employment as the trade

of effort and loyalty for such impersonal benefits as pay and fringe benefits and such

socioemotional benefits as esteem and approval (e.g., Angle & Perry, 1983;March & Simon,

1958; Mowday, Porter, & Steers, 1982). Social exchange theory, developed to explain the

initiation, strengthening, and continued maintenance of interpersonal relationships, provides a

possible conceptual basis for understanding relationships between individuals and their work

organization. Central to social exchange theory is the norm of reciprocity, which obligates

people to respond positively to favourable treatment received from others (Blau, 1964;

Gouldner, 1960).

The norm of reciprocity requires employees to respond positively to favorable treatment from

one's employer. Consistent with this view, Rousseau (1989, 1990) found that many

employees believed that they and their work organization had reciprocal obligations that

exceeded formal responsibilities by both parties. Rousseau characterized this psychological

contract as an implicit understanding by employees that they and their employer will consider

each other's needs and desires when taking actions that affect the other. Continued

reciprocation of resources beyond those required by formal agreements would strengthen the

psychological contract; in contrast, the employer's failure to fulfill the terms of the

psychological contract would reduce employees' inclination to work beyond their explicit job

responsibilities (Robinson & Morrison, 1995; Rousseau & Parks, 1993).

Employees anthromorphise their organizations according to how their organizations treat

them (e.g. Rhoades and Eisenberger, 2002) After assigning human like characteristics (eg.

Caring nature, considerate nature) to their organizations, employees develop a set of beliefs

on the extent to which their organizations value their contributions and care about their well-

being. These beliefs have been labeled Perceived Organizational Support, which comprises

three forms of favourable treatment: 1) organizational rewards & job conditions; 2) fairness;

and 3) supervisor support (Eisenberger et al., 1986).

Factors that influence organizational rewards and conditions include pay, recognition,

promotions, job security, autonomy, role stressors and training. POS is increased by

voluntary actions (eg. Training) taken by the organization that benefit employees rather than

by actions that benefit employees rather than by actions that are compulsory as a result of

external factors (e.g. legislation; Eisenberger et al., 1986). Furthermore, POS increases

when organizations are seen by their employees to be fair & just. POS is increased also by


Deepti Pathak



162

perceptions that one’s supervisor is supportive because supervisors are often considered by

employees to be acting on behalf of the organization and are seen to be closely associated

with senior management. Employees generally rely heavily on their supervisors’ orientation

towards them as an indicator of organizational support (Eisenberger et al., 2002).

2.5 POS as Moderator

POS has been shown consistently to be associated with outcomes that are favourable to the

organization. For instance, there is evidence that POS is correlated positively to

organizational commitment (e.g. Shore & Wayne, 1993), long-term obligations,

organizational identification among employees, loyalty (e.g. Rhoades & Eisenberger,2002),

in-role performance (e.g. Eisenberger et al., 1986, 1990), trust in organizations (e.g. Chen et

al., 2005), organizational citizenship behavior (e.g. Moorman et al., 1998), job satisfaction &

intent to remain (e.g. Stamper & Johlke, 2003). Furthermore, there is evidence that POS is

correlated negatively to absenteeism (e.g. Eisenberger et al., 1986) and withdrawl (e.g. Allen

et al., 2003). One important issue is to differentiate perceived organizational support from job

satisfaction (Zagenczyk, 2001). Previous study by Shore and Tetrick (1991) disputes that

perceived organizational support and job satisfaction conception are distinct but related.

Perceived organizational support is a measure of employer commitment and set of beliefs

about how much the organization cares for the staff well-being, whereas job satisfaction

focuses on different sides or viewpoints of work and is the affective response to these

different aspects of work situation. In summary, many previous studies have shown that

perceived organizational support was positively associated with levels of job satisfaction,

high level of perceived organizational support resulted higher level of job satisfaction (Burke

& Greenglass, 2001; Burke, 2003; Stamper & Johlke, 2003; Armstrong-Stassen, Cameron &

Horsburgh, 1996).

According to social exchange theory, the favorableness of job conditions should contribute to

POS more substantially if believed to be the result of voluntary action by the organization,

thereby reflecting the organization's valuation of the employee (cf. Eisenberger et al., 1986;

Shore & Shore, 1995). In contrast, the favorableness of job conditions over which employees

believe the organization has low control should exert little influence on POS.

A meta-analysis by Rhoades & Eisenberger (2002) indicated that 3 major categories of

beneficial treatment received by employees (i.e., fairness, supervisor support, and

organizational rewards and favorable job conditions) were associated with POS. POS, in turn,

was related to outcomes favorable to employees (e.g., job satisfaction, positive mood) and the

organization (e.g., affective commitment, performance, and lessened withdrawal behavior).

These relationships depended on processes assumed by organizational support theory:

employees' belief that the organization's actions were discretionary, feeling of obligation to

aid the organization, fulfilment of socioemotional needs, and performance-reward

expectancies.

POS has been hypothesized to influence employees’ general affective reactions to their job,

0including job satisfaction and positive mood. Job satisfaction refers to employees’ overall

affectladen attitude toward their job (Witt, 1991). POS should contribute to overall job

satisfaction by meeting socioemotional needs, increasing performance-reward expectancies,

and signaling the availability of aid when needed. Positive mood differs conceptually from

job satisfaction in that it involves a general emotional state without a specific object (George,

1989). Mood has been proposed as the state component of affectivity, influenced by


Deepti Pathak



163

environment (George & Brief, 1992). POS may contribute to employees’ feelings of

competence and worth, thus enhancing positive mood (Eisenberger et al., 2001; cf. George &

Brief, 1992).

3. Purpose of the Study

The purpose of the present study is to find out the Moderating effect of Perceived

Organizational Support on relationship between Organizational Stress and Job Satisfaction.

Method:

The sample consisted of 200 Managers from Private Sector Organizations of Delhi/NCR

region. The employees were males in the 25-50 years of age group, and has spent at least two

year in the same organization. The participants were chosen randomly from each organization

and belonged to different departments of the organization. The data were collected through

administering questionnaire from respondents during office hours with required consent from

top management. Most of the participants showed their willingness to participate in the study.

Instrumentation:

Three instruments were used in the study to assess Job Satisfaction, Perceived Organizational

Support, and Organizational Role Stress. Job satisfaction was conceptualized as dependent

variable whereas, Organizational Role Stress as Independent variables and, Perceived

Organizational Support as Moderating Variable. Self-report measures were used to obtain the

data. The measures used in this study were borrowed from their original source and adapted

from Indian work setting. Job Satisfaction was measured through a questionnaire developed

by Paul E. Spector (1985) consisting of 36 items divided into nine dimensions. Perceived

Organizational Support was measured through a questionnaire developed by Eisenberger et

al.(1986), consisting of 36 items.

Organizational role stress was measured through a questionnaire developed by Udai Pareek,

consisting of 50 items divided into 10 dimensions.

Perceived Organizational Stress (POS) : Eisenberger et al.’s (1986) scale was used to

measure POS, which involved selection of seven highest loading items of the 36 items of the

original scale. The POS scale has chronbach alpha of .87. The items in this scale were

modified slightly for the use in current study, as this scale was designed originally for

teaching profession. Specifically, the ‘organization’ was substituted for the ‘school’.

According to Rhoades and Eisenberger (2002), the use of shorter versions of the POS scale is

not problematic because the original scale is unidimensional and has high internal reliability.

Organisational Role Stress (ORS): This scale was developed by Udai Pareek (1983).The

ORS scale is used to measure 10 role stresses. It is a 5-point scale (0 to 4), containing five

items for each role stress and a total of 50 statements. The scale is reported to have

satisfactory reliability as well as validity. The ten role stressors are as follows:

1. Inter-role distance (IRD)

2. Role Stagnation (RS)

3. Role expectation conflict (REC)

4. Role Erosion (RE)

5. Role overload (RO)


Deepti Pathak



164

6. Role conflict (RC)

7. Personal Inadequacy (PI)

8. Self-role distance (SRD)

9. Role ambiguity (RA)

10. Resource Inadequacy (RIn)

The present study yielded only four factors significant on factor analysis. These were: Self-

role distance (α=.84), Role conflict (α=.76), Role ambiguity(α=.90), and Role

Inadequacy(α=.89).

Job Satisfaction survey (JSS): The Scale was developed by Paul E. Spector (1985).It is a 36

item, nine facet scale to assess employee attitudes about the job and aspects of the job. A

summated rating scale format is used, with six choices per item ranging from “strongly

disagree” to “strongly agree”. The JSS Scale had a Cronbach alpha of .74 and good

concurrent and predictive validity and reliability. Nine broad facets of JSS were covered by

this measurement, they were as follows: Pay, Promotion, Supervision, Fringe benefits,

Contingent Rewards, Operation Procedures, Coworkers, Nature of work, Communication.

Hypotheses:

H1: There is a negative relationship between Organisational Role Stress and Job

Satisfaction

H2: Perceived Organizational Support moderates the relationship between Organisational

Role Stress and Job Satisfaction

In order to test the hypotheses, following research model was made.

Hypothetical Research Model

-

+

+

4. Research Findings

Table 1: Reliabilities of the variables

Variables Factors No. Of Items Cronbach α

ORS SRD 5 .84

RC 5 .76

RA 5 .90

RIn 5 .89

Organisational Role Stress

(IV)

Job Satisfaction

Perceived Organizational

Support (MV)

Interaction (IV*MV)


Deepti Pathak



165

POS POS 7 .87

JS JS 36 .74 ORS=Organisational Role Stress, SRD=Self-role distance, RC=Role conflict, RA=Role ambiguity, RIn=Role

inadequacy, POS=Perceived Organizational Support, JS=Job Satisfaction

Table 2: Means, Standard Deviations and Correlations among the Variables (N=224)

Variables Mean SD

SRD 2.51 0.77

RC 2.47 0.73

RA 2.36 0.72

RIn 3.58 0.80

POS 4.12 1.09

JS 42.32 14.34

As seen from Table-1, the instruments used in this study were reliable, with coefficients

ranging from 0.74 to 0.90, which exceeded the minimum acceptance level of 0.70. The mean

score for each study variable can be seen from Table-2. From Table-2, it can be observed that

the mean value for each of the dimensions of ORS ranges from 2.36 to 3.58, with the

standard deviation of 0.72 to 0.80. The mean score computed for POS was 4.12 & standard

deviation was 1.09. The mean for overall job satisfaction was 42.32with a standard deviation

score of 14.34.

Regression Results

Equation: JS=a+bX+bY+bXY

Where,

JS=Job Satisfaction (DV)

X=Organisational Role Stress (IV)

Y=Perceived Organizational Support (MV)

XY=Interaction (IV*MV)

Job Satisfaction =Intercept +Coefficient (Organisational Role Stress) + Coefficient

(Perceived Organizational Support) + Coefficient (Interaction of IV&MV)

One regression equation was used for analysis. Equation included one Independent variable

(Organisational Role Stress), one Dependent Variable (Job Satisfaction) and one Moderating

Variable (Perceived Organizational Support )

Research Model with Regression Results


Deepti Pathak



166

Table 3: Hierarchical Regression Results with Internal Locus of Control as a

Moderating Variable

Variables

Std

Beta

Step 1

Std Beta

Step 2

Std Beta

Step 3

Independent Variable

SRD

RC

RA

RE

-64**

-.36**

-1.02*

-.52**

-.82*

-.72**

-2.21*

-.65**

Moderating Variable

Perceived Organizational Support

2.24**

2.58**

Interaction Term

SRD x POS

0.130

RI x POS

0.121

RA x POS

0.293

RE x POS

0.126

R² 0.224 0.614 0.746

Adj. R² 0.536 0.619 0.681

R² Change 0.142 0.168 0.332

F Change 23.428* 2.342 0.285

Note: ** p < 0.01; * p < 0.05

As shown in Table 2, when Organisational role stress was entered into the regression analysis

in the first step, the coefficient of determination (R2) was found to be 0.224 indicating that

22.4% of Job Satisfaction is explained by the Independent Variable .In step 2, to test whether

Perceived Organizational Support serves as an independent variable, a second regression was

undertaken. By adding Perceived Organizational Support as independent variables, the R2

increased to 61.4%. This R2

change (0.536) is significant. This implies that the additional

53.6% of the variation in Job Satisfaction is explained by Perceived Organizational Support.

The F-statistics is significant (p = 0.000) suggesting that the proposed model was adequate.

As can be seen from Table 3, Perceived Organizational Support had a positive relationship

with Job Satisfaction.

From the first regression model, it can be observed that Role Ambiguity (β = -1.02), had a

significant and negative relationship with Job Satisfaction at 0.05 level. Additionally, self-

role distance (β =-.64), role conflict (β =-.36) & resource inadequacy (β =-.52) had a

significant effect on job satisfaction but at 0.01 level. These results provided full support for

the first hypothesis of the study. To examine the moderating effects of Perceived

Organizational Support, a third regression model was developed by adding the interaction


Deepti Pathak



167

terms. As shown in Table 3, the R2 increase of 33.2% is significant. This means that

Perceived Organizational Support did serve as a moderator in seeing the effect of

organisational role stress variables on Job Satisfaction. Thus, our second hypothesis is also

proved.

5. Discussion and Conclusion

The study attempts to find out the impact of Organizational Stress on Job satisfaction and

investigate moderating impact if/any of perceived organizational support between the two.

For the purpose, a sample of 200 managers was selected to examine the postulated

hypotheses. Through this study an attempt was made to identify the impact of perceived

organizational support on the relationship between job satisfaction and organizational role

stress.

Stressful work fosters decisions to leave the employer (e.g., Firth, Mellor, Moore, & Loquet,

2004), increases absenteeism (Brun & Lamarche, 2006) and affects employee productivity

(Jex, 1998; Motowidlo, Packard, and Manning, 1986).

As per our first result, it is being analysed that organizational role stress is negatively related

to job satisfaction. In other words, employees who are able to tackle with stress in a positive

way will be more satisfied with his/her job as compared to those who consider stress as a

barrier. It is consistent with previous findings (e.g. Le Rouge et al.,2006), job satisfaction

was related to stressful work. It also finds indirect support in the works of Schabracq and

Cooper 2000; concluding that occupational stress contributes to low motivation and morale,

decrease in performance, high turnover, sick leave, accidents, low job satisfaction.

Another study done by (Sahu & Gole, 2008 and Verma, 2008) says that Occupational stress

was found to be significantly related to job satisfaction; the greater the stress the lower the

satisfaction.

Results shows that the role-ambiguity has the strongest relationships with the job satisfaction.

Another study by Joachim Quah & Kathleen Campbell (2004) found that role conflict & role

ambiguity were positively & significantly related to work stress and work stress was

negatively & significantly related to job satisfaction.

Second hypothesis that the perceived organizational stress moderates the relationship

between job satisfaction and organizational stress is also proved by our results. The results

are finding support with the studies done earlier. Hussami (2008) in his research found that

job satisfaction & organizational commitment were significantly related. And, the employees

strongest attitude towards job satisfaction were the feelings of strong perceived organizational

support. Further, Christina C. Stamper & Mark C. Johlke (2003) in their research reached to a

conclusion that perceived organizational support moderates the relationship between role

stress and job satisfaction. They found that perceived organizational support has strong

effects on role ambiguity & role conflict as well as job satisfaction and intent to remain.

According to Eisenberger, Fasolo and Davis-LaMastro (1990), employees who feel supported

by their organization and care about the organization would engage in activities that help to

further the organization’s goals. In another study by Shore & Tetrick (1991), it was found that

there is strong & positive relationship between perceived organizational stress and overall job

satisfaction. On the whole, the obtained results indicate that private jobs involve high levels

of organizational stress for various reasons. Occupational stress if not managed properly may


Deepti Pathak



168

lead to increase in absentee rates, internal conflicts and low employee morale (Christo and

Pienaar,2006). Acceptable level of stress helps to improve the individual’s performance

whilst excessive amounts of stress can lead to decreased performance (Stevenson and Harper,

2006).

As expected, the study findings confirm the moderating role of perceived organizational

support in the relationship between Job Satisfaction and Organizational Stress. The findings

of this study suggests that Employees who perceive that organization considers their goals

and cares about their satisfaction & opinions will face less organizational stress in their work

areas and will be more satisfied with their jobs.

5.1 Contribution of the current study

The study reveals that the stress is the dynamic condition that can manifest itself in both the

aspects. Stress found among the employees has become a major concern of the modern times

which can harm to employees' health and performance both. At the end of the study, we can

conclude that though there are signs of stress among the employees & such stress is affecting

their behaviors, but it can be controlled & reduce effectively. This can be done by giving

counselling, incorporating the suggestions given by the employees, aligning the goals of

employees with the overall organizational goals and caring about the well-being of

employees. HR must implement these commitments so that the ideals of the enterprise and

deeds of its employees are congruent to ensure a consistent flow of trained & satisfied

manpower in the future.

5.2 Limitations of the study

The results of this study should be viewed with a small number of limitations. Caution should

be made that findings of this preliminary study should not be generalized to the larger

population due to its small sample size. A bigger sample would be needed to represent the

general population. The method used in the present study to collect the data is very common

as the questionnaire method was used. A comparative study between Managers of Public and

Private sector organisations should have been given a better to the research work.

5.3 Directions for Future Research

To enhance external validity, future research efforts should obtain a representative sample

from more organisations in different geographical areas. Measures with few items are more

prone to unreliability than summated measures with greater no. of items (Spector,1992). A

further research can be done to compare the perceived organizational support among public

& private sector manager & its impact on the level of stress & overall satisfaction.

6. References

1. Alexandros-Stamatios G. A., Matilyn J.D., and Cary L.C., (2003), Occupational

Stress, Job satisfaction, and health state in male and female junior hospital doctors in

Greece, Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18(6), pp 592-621.


Deepti Pathak



169

2. Allen, D., Shore, L. and Griffeth, R. (2003), The role of perceived organizational

support and supportive human resource practices in the turnover process. Journal of

Management, 29, pp 99–118.

3. American Bar Association Survey (1999).

4. Angle, H.L. & Perry, J.L. (1983), ‘Organizational Commitment: Individual and

organizational influences , Work and Occupations, 10(2), pp 123-146.

5. Armstrong-Stassen, M.;Cameron, S.J.; Horsburgh, M.E., (1996), The impact of

organizational downsizing on the job satisfaction of nurses, Canadian Journal of

Nursing Administration, 9(4), pp. 8-32.

6. Arnold, H.J. and Feldman, C.C. (1982), A multivariate analysis of the determinants of

job turnover, Journal of Applied Psychology, 67(3), pp 350-60.

7. Banet, Plint and Clifford, (2005), Reducing stress and avoiding burnout: A collection

of activities for prescholars, 11(2), pp. 28-32.

8. Beehr, T.A. and Newman, J.E. (1978), Job stress, employee health, and

organizationaleffectiveness: a facet analysis, model and literature review, Personnel

Psychology, 31(4), pp 665-99.

9. Beehr, T.A., Walsh, J.T., & Taber, T.D. (1976), Perceived situational moderators of

the relationship between subjective role ambiguity and role strain, Journal of Applied

Psychology,61, pp 35-40.

10. Blau, P. (1964), Exchange and Power in Social Life, New York: Wiley.

11. Bogg, J. and Cooper, C. (1995), “Job satisfaction, mental health, and occupational

stress among senior civil servants”, Human Relations, 48 (3), pp 327-41.

12. Burke, R. J. (1988), Sources of managerial and professional stress in large

organizations. In C. L.Cooper & R. Payne (Eds.), Causes, coping and consequences of

stress at work, pp. 77–114,New York & Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.

13. Burke, R.J. (2003), Nursing Staff Attitudes Following Restructuring: The Role of

Perceived Organizational Support, Restructuring Processes and Stressors,

International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 23(8/9), pp 129-157.

14. Burke, R.J., Greenglass, E.R. (2001), Hospital restructuring and nursing staff

wellbeing: the role of perceived hospital and union support, Anxiety, Stress and

Coping: An International Journal, 14(3), pp 93-115.

15. Brun, M.C., Turnley, W.H., & Bloodgood, J.M. (2002), Citizenship behaviour and the

creation of social capital in organizations, Academy of Management Review, 27(4),

505-522.

16. Carlopio, J., Andrewartha, G. and Armstrong, H. (1997), Developing Management

Skills in


Deepti Pathak



170

17. Australia, Addison Wesley Longman, Sydney, pp 63-64.

18. Cascio, W.F., (1995), Wither industrial and organizational psychology in a Changing

world?, American Psychologist, 50, pp 928-939.

19. Chen, Z., Aryee, S. and Lee, C. (2005), Test of a mediation model of perceived

organizational support, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66, pp. 457–470.

20. Christina, L. Stamper & Johalke, C. Mark, 2003, The impact of POS on relationship

between Boundary Spanner Role Stress & Work Outcomes, Journal of Management,

29(4), pp 569-588.

21. Christo, B. and Pienaar, J. (2006), South Africa correctional official occupational

stress: The role of psychological strengths, Journal of Criminal Justice, 34(1), pp 73-

84.

22. Coleman J.C. (1976), Abnormal Psychology and Modern Life (Indian reprint),

Taraporewalla,Bombay.

23. Cooper, C.L., (1991), Stress in organizations, In M. Smith (Ed.). Analysing

Organisational Behaviour, London: MacMillan.

24. Cooper, C. L. and Cartwright, S. (1994), Stress management interventions in the

workplace: stress counselling and stress audits, British Journal of Guidance and

Counselling, 22(1), pp 65-73.

25. Cooper, C., U. Rout and B. Faragher, (1989), Mental Health, Job Satisfaction, and Job

Stress Among General Practitioners, B Medical Journal, 298, pp. 366-370.

26. Cooper, C.L. and Marshal, J., (1976), Occupational sources of stress: A review of the

literature relating to coronary heart disease and mental health, Journal of Occupational

Psychology, 49, pp 11-28.

27. Cordes, C.L. and Dougherty, T.W., (1993), A review and an integration of research

on job burnout, Academy of Management Review, 18(4), pp 621-656.

28. Curnmins, R. (1989), Locus of control and social support: Clarifiers of the

relationship between job stress and job satisfaction, Journal of applied psychology, 19,

pp.772-786.

29. Cummins, R.C. (1990), Job stress and the buffering effort of supervisory support,

Group and Organizational Studies, 15 (1), pp 92-104.

30. Daicoff (1997), Lawyers, Know Thyself: A review of empirical research on Attorney

attributes bearing on professionalism, American University Law Review, 46(1), pp 3-

14.

31. Darwish, A.Y. (2000), Organizational Commitment: a mediator of the relationships of

leadership behavior with job satisfaction and performance in a non-western country,

Journal of Managerial Psychology, 15, pp 6-28.


Deepti Pathak



171

32. DeFrank, R.S. and Ivancevich, J.M. (1998), Stress on the job: an executive update,

Academy of Management Executive, 12 (3), pp 55-66.

33. Drever, J. (1964), A dictionary of psychology, Penguin Books, Middlesex.

34. Dyer, S., and Quine, L., (1998), Predictors of job satisfaction and burnout among the

direct care staff of a community learning disability service, Journal of Applied

Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 11 (4), pp 320-332.

35. Dyer, S., & Quine, L.,(1998), The effects of job demands and control on employee

attendance and satisfaction, Journal of Organisational Behaviour, 12, pp 596-608.

36. Eaton, W.W., Mandel, W. and Garrison, R. (1990). Occupations and the Prevalence

of Major

37. depressive Disorders, Journal of Occupational Medicine, 32, pp 1083-1132.

38. Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S. and Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived

organizational support, Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, pp 500–507.

39. Eisenberger, R., Fasolo, P. and Davis-LaMastro, V. (1990), Perceived organizational

support and employee diligence, commitment, and innovation, Journal of Applied

Psychology, 75, pp 51–59.

40. Emsley, David (2003), Multiple goals and managers’ job-related tension and

performance, Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18 (4), pp 345-356.

41. Firth, L. Mellor, D. Moore, K. & Loquet, C. (2004), How can Managers reduce

employee intent to quit?, Journal of Management Psychology, 19, pp 170-187.

42. Freeborn, D.K. (2001), Satisfaction, commitment, and psychological well-being

among HMO physicians, Journal of West Medicine, 174, pp 9-13.

43. Futrell, C. M., and Schuller, R.S. (1982), Impact of clarity of goals and role

perceptions on jobsatisfaction, Perceptual and Motor skills, 52(1), pp 27-32.

44. George, J. M., & Brief, A. P. (1992), Feeling good—doing good: A conceptual

analysis of the mood at work—organizational spontaneity relationship, Psychological

Bulletin, 112, pp 310–329.

45. Gole, S.V. and Sahu, R. (2008). Effect of job stress and job satisfaction on

performance: An Empirical Study, 2(3), pp.237-246

46. Greenberg, J. and Baron, R.A. (1995), Behaviour in Organizations: Understanding

and Managing the Human Side of Work, 5th ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

47. Gouldner, A. (1960), The norm of reciprocity: a preliminary statement, American

Sociological Review, 25, pp 161–178.


Deepti Pathak



172

48. Hackman, J. and Oldham, G, (1980), Work redesign, Massachusetts: Addison-

Wesley Publishing.

49. Hollenbeck, J.R. and Williams, C.R.,(1986), Turnover functionally versus turnover

frequency: a note on work attitudes and organizational effectiveness, Journal of

Applied Psychology, 71, pp 606-11.

50. Hollon, C.J., & Chesser, R.J.,(1976), The relationship of personal influence

dissonance to job tension, satisfaction, and involvement, Academy of Management

Journal, 19, pp308-314.

51. Hussami, Mahmoud- AL, (2008), A Study of Nurses' Job Satisfaction The

Relationship to Organizational Commitment, Perceived Organizational Support,

Transactional Leadership, Transformational Leadership, and Level of Education,

European Journal of Scientific Research, 22(2), pp.286-295

52. ILO, (1993), World Labour Report, New York: ILO.

53. Ivancevich, J. & Matteson, M., (1980), Stress at Work, Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.

54. Ivancevich, J. & Matteson, M.T., (1987), Stress at Work: A managerial perspective,

Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.

55. Jackson, S.E., & Schuler, R.S.,(1985), A meta-analysis and conceptual critique of

research on role ambiguity and role conflict in work settings, Organisational Behavior

and Human Decision Processes, 36, pp 16-78.

56. Jagdish and Srivastava, A.K. (1984), Perceived role stress and job satisfaction:

Perspective in Psychology Researches, 6, pp 101-104.

57. Jex, S.M. & Gudanowski, D.M. (1992), Efficacity Beliefs & Work Stress: An

Exploratory Study, Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 13, pp 509-517.

58. Judge, T., Locke, E., Durham, C., and Kluger, A. (1998), Dispositional effects on job

sat- isfactions and life satisfaction: The role of core evaluations, Journal of applied

psychology, 83, pp 17-34.

59. Kahn, R.L., & Quinn, R.P.,(1970), Role stress: A framework for analysis, In A.

McLean (Ed.),Occupational mental health, New York: Wiley.

60. Kemery, E.R., Mossholder, K.W., & Bedeian, A.,(1985), Role stress, physical

symptomatoloty, and turnover intentions: A causal analysis of three alternative

specifications, Journal of Occupational Behaviour, 8, pp 11-23.

61. Kirkcaldy, B., Cooper, C.L. and Furnham, A.F., (1999), The relationship between

type A, internality-externality, emotional distress and perceived health, Personality

and Individual Differences, 26, pp 223-35.


Deepti Pathak



173

62. Lasky, R.G, (1995), Occupational stress: a disability management perspective, In D.E.

Shrey & M. Lacerete (Eds.), Principles and Practices of Disability Management in

Industry, pp 370-409.

63. Landsbergis, P.A. (1988), Occupational stress among health care workers: A test of

the jobdemands-control model, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 9, pp 217-239.

64. Leong, C.S., Furnham, A., Cary, L. and Cooper, C.L. (1996), The moderating effect

of organizational commitment on the occupational stress outcome relationship,

Human Relations 9(10), pp 1345-63.

65. Lerouge, C., Nelson A., & Blanton, J. (2006), The Impact of Role Stress fit and Self-

Esteem on the job attitudes of It professionals, Information & Management, 43, pp

928-936.

66. Locke, E. (1969), What is job satisfaction, Organizational behavior and human

performance, 4, pp 309-336.

67. Locke, E. (1976), The nature and causes of job satisfaction, In M.D. Dumette (Ed.),

book of industrial and organizational psychology, Illinois: Rand McNally.

68. Lok, P., Crawford, J. (2003), The effect of organizational culture and leadership style

on job satisfaction and organizational commitment: A cross-national comparison,

Journal of Management Development, 23, pp 321-338.

69. Lyne, K.D., Barrett, P.T., Williams, C. and Coaley, K. (2000), A psychometric

evaluation of the occupational stress indicator, Journal of Occupational and

Organisational Psychology, 73, pp 195-220.

70. Manshor, A. T., Fontaine, R., Choy, Chong Siong, (2003), Occupational stress among

managers: a Malaysian survey, Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18(6), pp 622-628.

71. March, J .G. , Simon, H . A .,( 1958), Organizations, New York, Wiley.

72. Mark, L. F., Jonathan and Gregory, S. K. (2003), Eustress, Distress and Interpretation

in Occupational Stress, Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18(7), pp 726-744.

73. Maslach, C.; Schaufeli, W.; Leiter, M.P. (2001), Job burnout. Annual Review of

Psychology, 52, pp 397-422.

74. Matteson, M.T. and Ivancevich, J.M. (1982), Managing Job Stress and Heath: The

Intelligent Person’s Guide, The Free Press, New York, NY.

75. McLean, A., (1974), Occupational stress and strain, Springfield, Illinois. Thomas.

76. Midgley, S. (1996), Pressure Points (managing job stress), Journal of People

Management, 3(14), pp 36-37.


Deepti Pathak



174

77. Miles, R. H., & Petty, M.M.,(1975), Relationship between role clarity, need for clarity,

and job-tension and satisfaction for supervisory & non-supervisory roles, Academy

of Management Journal, 18, pp 877-883.

78. Miles, R. H.(1976), A comparison of the relative impacts of role perceptions of

ambiguity and conflict by role, Academy of Management Journal, 19,pp 25-35.

79. Mobley, W., Griffeth, R., Hand, H., and Megliano, B., (1979), Review and conceptual

analysis of the employee turnover process, Psychological bulletin, 86, pp493-522.

80. Moore, J. and Robert (1984), The effect of role conflict and role ambiguity on the use

of pioneer, job-satisfaction and casual attributions, Dissertation Abstracts

International, 42, pp 233.

81. Moorman, R., Blakely, G. and Niehoff, B. (1998), Does perceived organizational

support mediate the relationship between procedural justice and organizational

citizenship behavior? Academy of Management Journal, 41, pp 351–357.

82. Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. M., (1982), Employee-organization

linkages: The psychology of commitment, absenteeism, and turnover, New York:

Academic Press.

83. Motowidlo, S.P., Packard, J.S. & Manning, M. (1986), Occupational Stress: Its causes

and consequences for job performance, Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, pp 618-

629.

84. Muchinsky, P.,(1997), Psychology applied to work: An introduction to industrial and

organizational psychology (5th Ed.), Pacific Grove, CA: Brookes/Cole Publishers.

85. Murray, J.E., (1997), Physician job satisfaction: developing a model using qualitative

data, International Journal of Medicine, 12, pp 14-71.

86. Naumann, E. (1993), Antecedents and consequences of satisfaction and commitment

among expatriate managers, Group & Organization Management, 18(2), pp 153-87.

87. Nelson, D.L. and Burke, R.J., (2000), Women executives: health, stress, and success,

Academy of Management Executive, 14 (2), pp 107-121.

88. Ohlin, J., and West, J., (1993), An analysis of the effect of fringe benefit offerings on

the turnover of hourly housekeeping workers in the hospitality industry, International

journal of hospitality management, 12,pp 323-336.

89. Organ, D. (1990), The subtle significance of job satisfaction, Clinical laboratory

management review, 1, pp 94-98.

90. Ornelas, S. and Kleiner, B. H. (2003), New Development in Managing Job Related

Stress, Journal of Equal Opportunities International,2(5), pp 64-70.

91. Orpen, C., (1991), Occupational Stress and Personal Strain: A conceptual model,

Management and labour studies, 16 (1), pp 11-21.


Deepti Pathak



175

92. Pareek, U., (1993), Motivating Organisational Roles: Role Efficacy Approach, Jaipur:

Rawat Publication.

93. Pestonjee, D.M. (1992), Stress and Coping: The India experience, New Delhi, Sage

Publication.

94. Quah, J., & Campbell, K. M., (1994), Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity as Factors in

Work Stress among Managers in Singapore: Some Moderator Variables, Research

and Practice in Human Resource Management, 2(1), pp 21-33.

95. Quine, L., (2001), Workplace bullying in nurses, Journal of Health Psychology, 6, pp.

73–84.

96. Reddy, K.S. and Rajasekhar, K.S.(1990), Job satisfaction, job involvement and work

involvement of permanent and temporary employees, Indian Journal of Applied

Psychology, 28 (1), pp5-10.

97. Rhoades, L. and Eisenberger, R. (2002), Perceived organizational support: a review of

the Literature, Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, pp 698–714.

98. Robinson, S.R., & Morrison, E.W.,(2000), The development of psychological contract

breach and violation: A longitudinal study, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, pp.

525-546.

99. Rousseau, D.M., (1989), Psychological and implied contracts in organizations,

Employee Rights and Responsibilities Journal, 2, pp121-139.

100. Rousseau, D.M. (1990), New hire perceptions of their own and their employer’s

obligations: A study of psychological contracts, Journal of Organizational Behavior,

11, pp.389-400.

101. Rousseau, D. M., & Parks, J. M. (1993), The contracts of individuals and

organizations, In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational

behavior, pp.1-47, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

102. Russo, J., & Vitaliano, P.,(1995), Life events as correlates of burden in spouse

caregivers of persons with Alzheimers disease, Experimental Ageing Research, 21, pp

273-294.

103. Rude, W., (2004), The connection between servant leadership and job burnout,

Servant Leadership Research Roundtable, Trinity Western University, School of

Leadership Studies.

104. Saari, L.M., and Judge, T.A., (2004), Employees’ attitudes and job satisfaction,

Human Resource Management, 43, pp 395-407.

105. Schabracq, M. J. and Cooper, C. L. (2000), The Changing Nature of Work and Stress,

Journal of Managerial Psychology, 15(3), pp 227-42.


Deepti Pathak



176

106. Schuler, R.S. (1982), An integrative transactional model of stress in

organizations,Journal of Occupational Behaviour, 3, pp. 5-19.

107. Sheena J., Cary C., Sue C., Ian D., Paul T., Clare M.,(2005), The expereince of work-

related stress across occupations, Journal of Managerial Psychology, 20(2), pp 178-187.

108. Shore, L. and Tetrick, L.,(1991), A construct validity study of the survey of perceived

organizational support, Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, pp 637–643.

109. Shore, L. and Wayne, S. (1993), Commitment and employee behavior: comparison of

affective commitment and continuance commitment with perceived organizational

support, Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, pp774–780.

110. Singh, S. (1990), Organizational Stress and Executive Behaviour, Sri Ram Centre for

Industrial Relations and Human Resources, New Delhi.

111. Sparks, K. and Cooper, C.L. (1999), Occupational differences in the work-strain

relationship: towards the use of situation specific models, Journal of Occupational and

Organisational Psychology, 72, pp 219-29.

112. Spector, P. E.,(1992), A consideration of the validity and meaning of self-report

measures of job conditions. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International

review of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 123–151), Chichester: John

Wiley & Sons.

113. Srivastva, S. K. and Pratap, S. (1984), Perception of Job Satisfaction and

Organizational Climate, Perspectives of Psychological Research, 7, pp 41-43.

114. Stamper, C.L., Johlke, M.C., (2003), The Impact of Perceived Organizational Support

on the Relationship between Boundary Spanner Role Stress and Work Outcomes,

Journal of Management, 29, pp 569-588.

115. Stevenson A, Harper S, (2006), Workplace stress and the student learning experience,

Quality assurance education, 14(2), pp 167-178.

116. Sullivan, S.E. and Bhagat, R.S. (1992), Organizational stress, job satisfaction and job

performance: where do we go from here?, Journal of Management, 18(2), pp 353-74.

117. Sutton, R.L. and Staw, B.M. (1995), What theory is not, Administrative Science

Quarterly, 40 (3), pp 371-84.

118. Taylor, S.E., Repetti, R.L. and Seeman, T. (1997), Health psychology: what is an

unhealthy environment and how does it get under the skin, Annual Review of

Psychology, 48,pp. 411-47.

119. Taylor, C., Graham, J., Potts, H. W. W., et al (2005), Changes in mental health of UK

hospital consultants since the mid 1990s, Lancet, 366, pp 742 -744

120. Tepper, B. J., Lockhart, D., & Hoobler, J. (2001), Justice, citizenship, and role

definition effects, Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, pp.789-796.


Deepti Pathak



177

121. Terry, D.J., Nielsen, M. and Perchard, L. (1993), Effects of work stress on

psychological wellbeing and job satisfaction: the stress-buffering role of social support,

Australian Journal of Psychology, 45 (3), pp 168-75.

122. Townley, G.,(2000), Long hours culture causing economy to suffer, Management

Accounting, 78 (6), pp3-5.

123. Tett, R.P. and Meyer, J.P. (1993), Job satisfaction, organizational commitment,

turnover intention, and turnover: path analyses based on meta-analytic findings,

Personnel Psychology, 46, pp 259-93.

124. Ursprung, A.W.,(1986), Incidence and correlates of burnout in residential service

settings, Rehabilitation Counselling Bulletin, 29, pp 225-239.

125. Van Sell, M., Brief, A. P., & Schuler, R. S. (1981), Role conflict and role ambiguity:

Integration of the literature and directions for future research, Human Relations, 34, pp

43 - 71.

126. Varca, P. E. (1999), Work Stress and Customer Service Delivery, Journal of Services

Marketing, 13(3), pp 229-241.

127. Verma, S., (2008),Stress Questionnaire for Lawyers: Implications of Burnout and

Psychosocial Stressors for the job satisfaction among male and female lawyers,

Unpublished M.Phil Thesis, Himachal Pradesh University, Shimla, (India).

128. Vinokur-Kaplan J.X.,(1991), Job Satisfaction among Social Workers in Public and

Voluntary Child Welfare Agencies, Child Welfare, 155, pp 81-91.

129. Vroom, V.R.,(1964), Work and Motivation, New York: John Willey.

130. Wegge, J., Schimedit, K. Parker, E., and Van Dick, K.,(2007), Taking a sickic: job

satisfaction and job-involvement as interactive predictor of absenteeism in a public

organization, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 80, pp 77-89.

131. Williams, J. C., and Huber, G. P.,(1986), Human Behavior in Organizations,

Cincinnati, OH: South-Western Publishing.

132. Williams, L.J. and Hazer, J.T. (1986), Antecedents and consequences of satisfaction

and commitment in turnover models: a reanalysis using latent variable structural

equation methods, Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(2), pp 219-31.

133. Wilkes, L., Beale, B., Hall, E., Rees, E., Watts, B., Denne, C. (1998), Community

nurses descriptions of stress when caring in the home, International Journal of

Palliative Nursing, 4(1), pp 14-20.

134. Zagenczyk, T.J. (2001), A social influence analysis of perceived organizational

support, Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.

Role of perceived organizational support on stress

Documents

Transcript of Role of perceived organizational support on stress