Chapter 7 Stress and Well-Being at Work In This Chapter, You’ll Find: Chapter Overview Learning Outcomes Key Terms PowerPoint Guide Review Questions and Answers Discussion and Communication Questions and Suggested Answers Ethical Dilemma Self-Assessments—What about You? Issues in Diversity Experiential Exercises Additional Examples Case Study and Suggested Responses: The Impact of the Great Recession on Workplace Stress Video: Profile on Modern Shed Cohesion Case Study Part 2: Suggested Answers: Donorschoose.org: Why Give? Why Be Involved? Student Handouts: Ethical Dilemma What About You?: The Frazzle Factor What About You?: Are You Self-Reliant? Issues in Diversity: “To Thine Own Self Be True” Experiential Exercise: Gender Role Stressors Experiential Exercise: Workplace Stress Diagnosis Experiential Exercise: Social Support Network Analysis Experiential Exercise: How Do You Spot a Workaholic? Case Study: The Impact of the Great Recession on Workplace Stress Cohesion Case Study Part 2: Donorschoose.org: Why Give? Why Be Involved? (B) Chapter Overview Stress can be beneficial or harmful. While some harmful stress is inevitable, the techniques and approaches available to deal with that stress are increasing. Some individuals in some circumstances are more at risk of high stress than others. This chapter addresses the different aspects of stress, including a wide range of stress management methods. Learning Outcomes After reading this chapter, students should be able to do the following: 1. Define stress, distress, and strain. Answer: Although experts do not always agree on this definition, stress, or the stress response, can be described as the unconscious preparation to fight or flee that a person experiences when faced with any demand. A stressor, or demand, is a person or event that triggers the stress response. Distress, or strain, refers to the adverse psychological, physical, behavioral, and organizational consequences that may occur as a result of stressful events. 2. Compare four different approaches to stress. Answer: The stress response was discovered by Walter B. Cannon, a medical physiologist, early in the twentieth century. Later, however, researchers defined stress differently than Cannon did. The text reviews four different approaches to define stress: the homeostatic/medical, cognitive appraisal, person–environment fit, and psychoanalytic approaches. In Cannon’s homeostatic/medical approach, stress occurs when deep emotions or environmental demands upset an individual’s natural steadystate balance, what he calls homeostasis. Richard Lazarus was more concerned with the psychology of stress, emphasizing the psychological and cognitive aspects of the stress response in his cognitive appraisal approach. Like Cannon, Lazarus saw stress as a result of a person–environment interaction, yet he emphasized the individual’s cognitive appraisal in classifying persons or events as stressful or not. Robert Kahn was concerned with the social psychology of stress, so his person–environment fit approach emphasized the idea that confusing and conflicting expectations of a person in a social role create stress for that person. Freudian psychoanalytic theory can help people understand the role of unconscious personality factors as causes of stress within a person. Applying this psychoanalytic approach, Harry Levinson argued that two elements of the personality interact to cause stress. The first element is the ego-ideal—the embodiment of a person’s perfect self. The second element is the self-image—how the person really sees herself, both positively and negatively. 3. Explain the psychophysiology of the stress response. Answer: The stress response begins with the release of chemical messengers, primarily adrenaline, into the bloodstream. These messengers activate the sympathetic nervous system and the endocrine (hormone) system. These two systems work together to trigger four mind–body changes that prepare the person for fight or flight. As the body responds, the person shifts from a neutral posture to an offensive posture. 4. Identify work and nonwork causes of stress. Answer: Work stress is caused by factors in the work environment as well as by nonwork (external) pressures that spill over into the workplace. The two major categories of sources of both types of work stress are role demands, task demands, interpersonal demands, and physical demands. Nonwork demands may broadly be identified as impositions from an individual’s personal life environment (home demands) and self-imposed restrictions (personal demands). 5. Describe the consequences of stress. Answer: Stress may be positive or negative. Positive stress can create a healthy, thriving work environment, while negative stress, or distress, can erode morale and performance. These three forms of individual distress—psychological distress, medical illnesses, and behavioral problems—cause a burden of personal suffering. They also cause a collective burden of suffering reflected in organizational distress. Studies performed at the University of Michigan on organizational stress identified a variety of indirect costs of mismanaged stress for an organization, such as low morale, dissatisfaction, breakdowns in communication, and disruption of working relationships. Three major costs of organizational distress are participation problems, performance decrements, and compensation awards. 6. Discuss individual factors that influence a person’s response to stress and strain. Answer: Individual differences, such as gender and Type A behavior pattern, enhance vulnerability to strain under stressful conditions. Other individual differences, such as personality hardiness and self-reliance, reduce vulnerability to strain under stressful conditions. 7. Identify the stages and elements of preventive stress management for individuals and organizations. Answer: A framework for understanding preventive stress management includes three stages of prevention that apply in a preventive medicine context as well as an organization context. Primary prevention is intended to reduce, modify, or eliminate the stress-causing demand or stressor. Secondary prevention is intended to modify the individual’s or the organization’s response to a demand or stressor. Tertiary prevention is intended to heal individual or organizational symptoms of distress and strain. Key Terms Stress (p. 101) Stressor (p. 101) Distress (p. 101) Strain (p. 101) Homeostasis (p. 101) Ego-ideal (p. 102) Self-image (p. 102) Workaholism (p. 105) Participation problem (p. 108) Performance decrement (p. 108) Compensation award (p. 108) Type A behavior pattern (p. 109) Personality hardiness (p. 110) Transformational coping (p. 110) Self-reliance (p. 110) Counter dependence (p. 110) Overdependence (p. 110) Preventive stress management (p. 111) Primary prevention (p. 111) Secondary prevention (p. 111) Tertiary prevention (p. 111) PowerPoint Guide Introduction Slide 2—Learning Outcomes LO1 Define stress, distress, and strain. Slide 3—LO - 7.1 Slide 4—What is Stress? LO2 Compare four different approaches to stress. Slide 5—LO - 7.2 Slide 6—Approaches to Stress LO3 Explain the psychophysiology of the stress response. Slide 7—LO - 7.3 Slide 8—The Stress Response Slide 9–11—Beyond the Book: Stress Check LO4 Identify work and nonwork causes of stress. Slide 12—LO - 7.4 Slide 13—Table 7.1: Work and Nonwork Demands LO5 Describe the consequences of stress. Slide 14—LO - 7.5 Slide 15—Consequences of Stress Slide 16—Consequences of Stress - Organizational Distress Slide 17—Beyond the Book: Stressed-out in Europe LO6 Discuss individual factors that influence a person’s response to stress and strain. Slide 18—LO - 7.6 Slide 19—Individual Differences LO7 Identify the stages and elements of preventive stress management for individuals and organizations. Slide 20—LO - 7.7 Slide 21—Beyond the Book: Non-effective Stress Relief Techniques Slide 22—Organizational Stress Prevention Slide 23—Individual Preventive Stress Management Slide 24—Comprehensive Health Promotion Slide 25—Modern Shed Key Terms Slide 26—Key Terms Summary Slide 27–29—Summary Review Questions and Answers 1. Define stress, distress, and strain. Answer: Stress is the unconscious preparation to fight or flee that a person experiences when faced with any demand. Distress refers to the adverse psychological, physical, behavioral, and organizational consequences that may arise as a result of stressful events. Strain is the same as distress. 2. Describe the four approaches to understanding stress. How does each add something new to our understanding of stress? Answer: The four approaches to understanding stress are as follows: • Homeostatic/medical approach—according to this approach, stress occurs when deep emotions or environmental demands upset an individual’s natural steadystate balance, which is called homeostasis. Walter B. Cannon developed this approach and believed that the body was designed with natural defense mechanisms to keep it in homeostasis. • Cognitive appraisal approach—in this approach, Lazarus saw stress as a result of a person–environment interaction, yet he emphasized the individual’s cognitive appraisal in classifying persons or events as stressful or not. When appraising stressful workplace events, an important distinction can be made between “hindrance” and “threat” stressors. Whereas hindrance stressors tend to block goal achievement, threat stressors pose immediate personal harm or loss. Individuals differ in their appraisals of events and people. • Person–environment fit approach—Robert Kahn’s approach emphasized the idea that confusing and conflicting expectations of a person in a social role create stress for that person. A good person–environment fit occurs when one’s skills and abilities match a clearly defined, consistent set of role expectations. • Psychoanalytic approach—Freudian psychoanalytic theory can help people understand the role of unconscious personality factors as causes of stress within a person. Applying this psychoanalytic approach, Harry Levinson argued that two elements of the personality interact to cause stress. The first element is the ego-ideal—the embodiment of a person’s perfect self. The second element is the self-image—how the person really sees herself, both positively and negatively. Stress results from the discrepancy between the idealized self (ego-ideal) and the real self-image; the greater the discrepancy, the more stress a person experiences. 3. List three demands of each type—task, role, interpersonal, and physical. Answer: Task demands related to stress are change, lack of control, career progress, new technologies, and temporal pressure. Role demands include role conflict such as interrole conflict and intrarole conflict, person–role expectations, and role ambiguity. Interpersonal demands are emotional toxins, sexual harassment, and poor leadership. Physical demands include extreme environments, strenuous activities, hazardous substances, and global travel. 4. What is a nonwork demand? How does it affect an individual? Answer: Nonwork demands may broadly be identified as impositions from an individual’s personal life environment (home demands) and self-imposed restrictions. The wide array of home and family arrangements in contemporary American society has created great diversity in the arena of home demands. Traditional and nontraditional families may experience demands that create role conflicts or overloads that are difficult to manage. Workaholism, a form of addiction, may be the most notable of these stress-inducing demands. Another type of personal demand comes from civic activities, volunteer work, and organizational commitments to religious or public service organizations. 5. Describe the relationship between stress and performance. Answer: Some managers and executives thrive under pressure because they practice what world-class athletes already know—that bringing mind, body, and spirit to peak condition requires recovering energy, which is as important as expending energy. The Yerkes-Dodson law indicates that stress leads to improved performance up to an optimum point. Beyond that point, stress has a detrimental effect on performance. Therefore, healthy amounts of stress are desirable to improve performance by arousing a person to action. The greatest performance benefits from stress are achieved in the midrange of the Yerkes-Dodson curve, and after that, as Joseph McGrath has suggested, increasing difficulty of the task is probably what causes performance to decline. 6. What are the major psychological, medical, and behavioral consequences of distress? Answer: The most common symptoms of psychological distress are depression, burnout, and psychosomatic disorders—physical ailments with psychological origins. These psychological distresses usually lead to emotional exhaustion, a form of psychological fatigue caused by energy depletion. Emotional exhaustion may also be caused by the requirement for sustained emotional expression on the job. A number of medical illness have a stress-related component. The most significant are heart disease, strokes, backaches, peptic ulcers, and headaches. Behavioral problems are another form of individual distress. These problems include workplace aggression, substance abuse, and accidents. 7. Why should organizations be concerned about stress at work? What are the costs of distress to organizations? Answer: Studies performed at the University of Michigan on organizational stress identified a variety of indirect costs of mismanaged stress for an organization, such as low morale, dissatisfaction, breakdowns in communication, and disruption of working relationships. Three major costs of organizational distress are participation problems, performance decrements, and compensation awards. Participation problems include absenteeism, tardiness, strikes and work stoppages, and turnover. Performance decrements are the costs resulting from poor quality or low quantity of production, grievances, and unscheduled machine downtime and repair. Compensation awards are the organizational costs resulting from court awards for job distress. 8. How do individual differences such as gender, Type A behavior, personality hardiness, and self-reliance moderate the relationship between stress and strain? Answer: Individual differences play a central role in the stress–strain relationship. Individual differences, such as gender and Type A behavior pattern, enhance vulnerability to strain under stressful conditions. Other individual differences, such as personality hardiness and self-reliance, reduce vulnerability to strain under stressful conditions. While prevailing stereotypes suggest that women are the weaker sex, the truth is that the life expectancy for American women is almost six years longer than for American men. Some literature suggests that there are differences in the stressors to which the two sexes are subject. Type A behavior pattern is a combination of personality and behavioral characteristics that include competitiveness, time urgency, social status insecurity, aggression, hostility, and a quest for achievements. People who have hardy personalities resist strain reactions when subjected to stressful events more effectively than do people who are not hardy. The components of personality hardiness are commitment, control, and challenge. Self-reliance, a healthy, secure interdependent pattern of behavior, is a personality attribute strongly related to social relationships. The connection between self-reliance and the word interdependent may appear paradoxical because a person appears independent while maintaining a host of supportive attachments. But self-reliant people respond to stressful, threatening situations by reaching out to others appropriately. 9. Define primary prevention, secondary prevention, and tertiary prevention. Describe major organizational stress prevention methods. Answer: A framework for understanding preventive stress management includes three stages of prevention that apply in a preventive medicine context as well as an organizational context. Primary prevention is intended to reduce, modify, or eliminate the stress-causing demand or stressor. Secondary prevention is intended to modify the individual’s or the organization’s response to a demand or stressor. Tertiary prevention is intended to heal individual or organizational symptoms of distress and strain. Most organizational prevention, however, is primary prevention, including job redesign, goal setting, role negotiation, and career management. A major goal in job redesign should be to increase worker control. Preventive stress management can also be achieved through goal-setting activities. These activities are designed to increase task motivation while reducing role conflict and ambiguity. The organizational development technique of role negotiation has value as a stress-management method because it allows individuals to modify their work roles. Social support systems can be enhanced through the work environment in a number of ways. Interpersonal communication is the key to unlocking social support for preventive stress management. These relationships can provide emotional caring, information, evaluative feedback, modeling, and instrumental support. 10. Describe eight individual preventive stress management methods. Answer: Clinical research shows that individuals may use a number of self-directed interventions to help prevent distress and enhance positive well-being. Such individual prevention can be of a primary, secondary, or tertiary nature. The primary prevention activities are as follows: • Learned optimism—which begins with identifying pessimistic thoughts and then distracting oneself from these thoughts or disputing them with evidence and alternative thoughts. • Time management—setting concrete goals and prioritizing these goals are the most important first steps in time-management skills, ensuring that the most important work and study activities receive enough time and attention. • Leisure time activities—leisure time provides employees with an opportunity for rest and recovery from strenuous activities at home and work. The secondary prevention activities are as follows: • Physical exercise—different types of physical exercise are important secondary stress prevention activities for individuals. • Relaxation training—reading, massage, and secular yoga practice can all elicit the relaxation response. • Diet—diet may play an indirect role in stress and stress management. The tertiary prevention activities are as follows: • Opening up—traumatic, distress-inducing events are an unfortunate fact of life. One of the most therapeutic responses to such events is to confide in other people. • Professional help—confession and opening up may occur in professional healing relationships. 11. What is involved in comprehensive health promotion programs? Answer: Whereas organizational stress prevention programs are aimed at eliminating health risks at work, comprehensive health promotion programs are aimed at establishing a “strong and resistant host” by teaching individual prevention and lifestyle change. Discussion and Communication Questions and Suggested Answers 1. Why should organizations help individuals manage stress? Isn’t stress basically the individual’s responsibility? Answer: Students’ answers will vary. On a practical side, it is in the organization’s best interest to help individuals manage stress. Benefit coverage for individuals with controllable illnesses is exorbitant. A more altruistic reason is that individuals who are in control of their stress are better performers on the job, making individual health a worthy pursuit. While individuals do share responsibility for managing their stress, many lack appropriate knowledge and/or resources to do so. Organizations should help manage stress because stress affects overall productivity, job satisfaction, and employee well-being. While individuals have a role, workplace factors contribute significantly to stress levels, and supportive interventions can prevent burnout and enhance performance. 2. Do you think there is more stress today than in the past? What evidence supports this question? Answer: Students’ answers will vary. It is interesting to challenge students to compare their lives with frontier America, the medieval era, or even the first portion of the 20th century. Evidence suggests that stress levels are higher today due to increased workload, job insecurity, and technological demands. Studies show rising stress-related illnesses and reports of workplace stress, reflecting a trend of heightened pressures compared to the past. 3. Discuss the following statement: Employers should be expected to provide stress-free work environments. Answer: Students’ answers will vary. To some degree, this is legally true. Employers need to eliminate dysfunctional situations from the work environment. If employers can assist individuals with their stress control, they should do so. The only truly stress-free environment is a coffin. Employers should provide supportive environments but are not solely responsible for eliminating stress. A balance is needed where employers create manageable work conditions while employees also develop personal stress management strategies. 4. If an individual claims to have job-related anxiety or depression, do you think the company should be held liable? Answer: Students’ answers will vary. The courts have been tossing this issue around frequently. Supervisors should make reasonable inquiries and provide reasonable assistance. Instructors should have students debate this question in opposing teams. Companies should be mindful of job-related anxiety or depression, but liability may depend on whether they have failed to provide a reasonably safe work environment or ignored known issues. Legal responsibility varies by jurisdiction and specific circumstances. 5. Do you use any stress prevention methods that are not discussed in the chapter? If so, what are they? Answer: Students’ answers will vary. These are often very interesting lists. Students are often surprised that instructors are stressed and that they practice stress reduction techniques. Personal stress prevention methods not discussed might include creative outlets like art or music therapy, or mindfulness practices such as yoga and meditation. These methods can offer additional coping mechanisms and improve overall well-being. 6. Have students write a memo describing the most challenging demands and/or stressors at their workplace (or university). They should be specific in fully describing the details of these demands and/or stressors. How might they go about changing these demands and/or stressors? Answer: Students’ answers will vary. Instructors could assign this memo prior to the class period(s) in which they would discuss stress. Then, during the class, students can be encouraged to consider what categories of demands and/or stressors they are experiencing and whether or not they have chosen the most effective means to manage those demands and/or stressors. Students should identify specific stressors such as tight deadlines or lack of support, and propose changes like improved time management or enhanced communication. Implementing changes could involve discussing needs with supervisors or seeking institutional support. 7. Have students interview a medical doctor, a psychologist, or another healthcare professional about the most common forms of health problems and distress seen in his or her work. Tell them to summarize their interviews and compare the results to the categories of distress discussed in the chapter. Encourage students to share in class the responses they obtained from the medical professionals and to discuss the similarities and differences among the responses. Answer: Students’ answers will vary. This exercise will provide students with an opportunity to gain a broader perspective on stress. Instructors should encourage students to share in class the responses they obtained from the medical professionals and to discuss the similarities and differences among the responses. Summarize interviews with healthcare professionals about common health issues like anxiety, depression, or chronic stress. Compare these findings with chapter discussions on distress, noting similarities such as prevalence and differences like specific symptoms or management approaches. 8. Research on social support and diaries as ways to manage stressful and/or traumatic events. Develop an oral presentation for class that explains the benefits of each of these approaches for preventive stress management. Include guidelines on how to practice each of them. Answer: Students’ answers will vary. If students have also completed Question 6 above, they could consider how social support and/or diaries could help them deal with the specific stressors and/or the demands they are experiencing. Social support helps manage stress by providing emotional and practical assistance, while diaries allow for reflection and stress processing. Practice social support by building strong personal networks and use diaries to track stressors and emotional responses, providing insights for stress management strategies. Ethical Dilemma The purpose of Ethical Dilemmas is to encourage students to develop their awareness of the ethical issues in the workplace and the managerial challenges they present. The dilemmas are set up to present situations in which there is no clear ethical choice. The goal for the instructor is to guide students through the process of analyzing the situation and examining possible alternative solutions. There are no “right” answers to the questions at the end of each scenario but only opportunities to explore alternatives. Students can generate discussions on the appropriateness of each alternative. The student portion of the activity is provided on a handout at the end of this chapter guide. 1. Using consequential, rule-based, and character theories, evaluate Neil’s options. Answer: Consequential Theory If Neil continues to falsify the reports, the firm may eventually get caught and Neil could face jail time for committing a crime. If he refuses to falsify the reports, he could lose the otherwise very positive work environment he has found in Johnston & Marcus. Rule-Based Theory Neil’s unquestionable obligation as an accountant is to prepare and submit accurate and truthful financial reports. Character Theory Despite Neil’s obvious happiness about the improvements in work-life balance afforded by his new job, the stress of falsifying monthly reports is already beginning to take a toll on him physically and emotionally. If he continues to falsify the reports, he probably will enjoy less time with his family as time goes by because he is inherently honest. If he quits or is fired, he may be able to find another job that will still afford him good work-life balance. 2. What should Neil do? Why? Answer: Neil should refuse to falsify the reports. It is not only an unethical act, but it is also illegal. All three theories of ethics clearly indicate that Neil should refuse to falsify the reports as it is the right course of action for him to take. The possibility of going to jail is much worse than the possibility of losing his job. He has an ethical and legal responsibility to prepare and submit truthful reports, and his desire for honesty will eventually destroy any enjoyment of life outside work if he continues to falsify the reports. Self-Assessments—What about You? 7.1 The Frazzle Factor This exercise helps students gain a sense of their general level of anger and their potential for aggressive behavior. It provides instructors with an excellent opportunity to discuss how anger and frustration could lead to negative and perhaps destructive behavior. When employees become angry or frustrated, they lose sight of the opportunities that can lead to their success via cooperation and collaboration. A good parallel activity for students would be to have them write a reflective paper that describes a situation in which they were filled with anger. Students would also have to describe their behavior in that situation, whether they believe that their behavior was appropriate, and how their behavior had affected others. Students should follow this challenge and develop an action plan to overcome their stress and/or anger. Their action plan should focus on specific, concrete steps that students can take to improve in each of these areas. The student portion of the activity is provided on a handout at the end of this chapter guide. 7.2 Are You Self-Reliant? The student portion of this activity is provided on the review card in the student edition of ORGB and on a handout at the end of this chapter guide. The Self-Reliance Inventory consists of 16 statements. The respondent completes the instrument by evaluating each statement according to a 5-point scale ranging from 0 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Then, the respondents record their responses on the scoring sheet resulting in two scores, one in the overdependence dimension and another in the Counter dependence dimension. Healthy life adjustment is linked primarily to the presence of two factors, self-reliance and a secure support network. People who are self-reliant are able to depend on others when appropriate. They are also better equipped to manage the challenges they meet than are those without self-reliance and support. An absence of self-reliance may be expressed as either overdependence or Counter dependence. An overdependent person strives for too much togetherness in relationships and clings to others out of fear of being incomplete. A counterdependent person strives for too much separateness, avoids relationships with others, and denies the necessity or importance of relationships. On the other hand, a person who has not experienced or has overcome the effects of repeated separation anxiety has a strong chance of becoming self-reliant. The attribute of self-reliance means one should accept responsibility for one’s own well-being and, at the same time, knowing that someone will be available and willing to help in times of need. Self-reliant individuals have resolved the conflict between their separateness in the world and their need for union with others; they can work comfortably and naturally either with others or alone, depending on which is more appropriate to the circumstances at hand. They are able to discern when their limitations have been reached in terms of time, energy, knowledge, or abilities; by turning to others in these circumstances, they overcome their own limitations, thus enhancing their effectiveness and well-being. Self-Reliance/Counter dependence Norms: Student/Managers: Mean = 16.81 (n = 310) Military (Officers/Enlisted): Mean = 20.79 (n = 163) Self-Reliance/Overdependence Norms: Student/Managers: Mean = 15.43 (n = 310) Military (Officers/Enlisted): Mean = 14.95 (n = 163) Adapted from J. C. Quick, D. L. Nelson, and J. D. Quick, “The Self-Reliance Inventory,” in J. W. Pfeiffer (Ed.), The 1991 Annual: Developing Human Resources (San Diego: Pfeiffer & Co., 1991), pp. 149–161. Issues in Diversity “To Thine Own Self Be True” Dennis Flanigan is 42 years old, a successful mental health professional, and unabashedly gay. Flanigan is often called upon to provide his expertise on issues concerning gays and lesbians, mental health, as well as transgender and body modification. Flanigan is also an atheist and, in his words, a “militant homosexual.” So, when closeted clients ask him whether they should come out to their family and friends, there is no question that he’ll tell them they should, right? Wrong. Nothing could be further from the truth. Although Flanigan is open about his own homosexuality, he does not encourage the same degree of openness with his homosexual clients, especially those who are conflicted between their identity and their sexual orientation. One such client, an evangelical assistant pastor, was terrified that he would be exposed as a gay man if his relationship with the pastor’s son was revealed. He sought therapy with Flanigan to help him ease his anxiety surrounding the situation. The assistant pastor did not want help coming out, nor did he want to go to another church despite the genuine risk of being discovered. Rather, he simply “wanted to feel less anxious.” He was fine with the apparent hypocrisy of his choices. An integral part of him was wrapped up in him being a preacher. As inconsistent as it might seem, Flanigan actually helps clients, such as the assistant pastor, stay “in the closet.” Based on his nearly decade-long research of studying the topic, Flanigan reached the conclusion that the identity-sexual orientation conflict had increased for individuals with strong religious beliefs which, for many of them, included the belief that homosexuality would lead to their eternal damnation. In that case, revealing their homosexuality would have far more damaging consequences than potential abandonment by friends or family. Asking them to openly admit their sexual orientation would be nothing short of denying a vital piece of their core identity, their religious orientation. 1. Explain how the internal conflict between an individual’s identity and sexual orientation could become an organizational diversity issue. Answer: Students’ answers will vary. When the internal conflict between an individual’s identity and sexual orientation reaches a point where the individual can no longer contain the anxiety that results from that conflict, performance is likely to suffer. At this point, especially if the individual’s identity is work related, the organization’s ability and willingness to reduce the individual’s anxiety through positive diversity management efforts can help restore performance to previous levels. The internal conflict between identity and sexual orientation can become an organizational diversity issue if it affects an employee’s engagement, productivity, or mental health. Organizations may face challenges in fostering an inclusive environment if employees are pressured to conceal aspects of their identity. This can lead to lower morale, decreased trust in leadership, and potential conflicts over policies and support for LGBTQ+ individuals. 2. Can you think of a situation in which it is better for individuals to hide their sexual orientation than to be open? Answer: Students’ answers will vary. If a person’s work environment is not likely to support openness about his or her sexual orientation, then the person will experience a poor person–environment fit and will need to carefully evaluate whether he or she wishes to remain employed with that organization or leave for another position where openness about sexual orientation is encouraged. There may be several valid reasons why a person may choose not to leave a negative environment. In those cases, it will be better not to expose his or her sexual orientation, as that will make the work environment especially anxious and uncomfortable. An instance where it might be better for individuals to hide their sexual orientation is in highly conservative or unsafe work environments where disclosure could lead to discrimination, harassment, or job loss. For example, an employee in a region with limited LGBTQ+ protections might choose to remain discreet to avoid jeopardizing their career or personal safety. Experiential Exercises 7.1 Gender Role Stressors This exercise allows students to examine the differences in the stressors based on gender roles and expectations. If time allows, instructors might want to have two groups in which one group has all male students and the other group has all female students. Then, they should exchange their lists after Step 3. Instead of a full class discussion, instructors should have students reverse their roles and have all the males discuss the female pressures, and then all the females should discuss the male pressures. The student portion of the activity is provided on a handout at the end of this chapter guide. 7.2 Workplace Stress Diagnosis This activity encourages students to consider the impact of different work environments on the type and degree of stressors experienced. Push students to consider why certain work environments are more or less stressful. The optional Step 5 is an excellent opportunity for students to apply the material covered in the chapter. Particularly useful in this step is the development of measures of effectiveness for stress-management strategies. Students often do not consider the need to evaluate the effectiveness of strategies, or they do not know how to evaluate the strategies’ effectiveness. The student portion of the activity is provided on the IE prep card in the student edition of ORGB and on a handout at the end of this chapter guide. 7.3 Social Support Network Analysis Instructor’s Notes: Self-reliant individuals are masters at developing good social support networks. They prefer interdependence, and they are also good providers of support to others. This exercise, designed for use in class, will help students develop an understanding of the types and sources of social support needed to develop an effective network. The worksheet is provided on a handout at the end of this chapter guide. 1. Students should complete the analysis by filling in the blanks with the names of the people from whom they receive social support. Next to each name, they should write the type of support they receive: E = emotional caring and nurturance I = informational support A = appraisal and evaluative feedback M = role modeling and guidance S = instrumental support, providing resources or acting on behalf of a person 2. Students should gather in groups of five or six members to discuss the questions that are provided on their worksheets. Adapted from J. C. Quick, D. L. Nelson, and J. D. Quick, “The Self-Reliance Inventory,” in J. W. Pfeiffer (ed.), The 1991 Annual: Developing Human Resources (San Diego: University Associates, 1991). 149–161. 7.4 How Do You Spot A Workaholic? Instructor’s Notes: People who go to work under the influence of drugs or alcohol eventually become pariahs, losing themselves and their jobs as they go. But too many workaholics are being rewarded mightily, even though workaholism is, in the long run, the root cause of tremendous physical, emotional, and economic pain. Student handouts are provided at the end of this chapter guide. 1. Ask students about how they would know if their boss, with his or her nonstop demands, their spouse, who seldom makes it home to dinner, their coworker—or even themselves—are work-addicted. Answer: Identifying Workaholism: To spot workaholics, observe signs like chronic overtime, an inability to disconnect from work, and neglect of personal relationships or health. Workaholics often show compulsive behavior, prioritize work over everything else, and may appear stressed or exhausted. It's crucial to recognize these signs early to address potential negative impacts on health and well-being. 2. Have students take this quiz to see how many of the characteristics that are often associated with work addiction apply to them or someone they know. Students should mark yes next to each description that sounds familiar. Answer: Quiz Application: Have students answer the quiz honestly about themselves and their observations of others. They should mark "yes" for each workaholic trait they recognize in themselves or people they know. This self-assessment helps in identifying problematic work habits and their potential impact. 3. Have students show this quiz to their partner, coworker, or friend and see how someone who knows them well answers about them. And assume that, in this case, the person has truer answers for them than they do for themselves. Answer: External Feedback: Students should show the quiz results to someone who knows them well, such as a partner or coworker, for a more objective view. This person’s responses might reveal additional insights into the student's work habits and offer a clearer picture of how work may be affecting their life. 4. Give students the results of the quiz: If you score between 10 and 15, you need to take a hard look at how much of your life has been taken over by work. Unless you score less than three, don’t consider yourself home free. You, too, have tendencies to let your work overgrow your garden. Answer: Quiz Results Interpretation: A score between 10 and 15 indicates significant workaholic tendencies and suggests a need to reassess work-life balance. Scores above this range signal a more serious issue, while scores below three still warrant vigilance to prevent work from overtaking personal life. Additional Examples The Benefits of Challenge Stress and Organizational Support The Louisiana Office of Motor Vehicles conducted a study of 215 employees and their direct supervisors in 61 offices throughout the state. The purpose was to examine the effects of challenge stressors and hindrance stressors. Challenge stressors included items like the amount of responsibility that an employee had, time pressure, and the number of projects and/or assignments that an employee had. Hindrance stressors included items like the degree to which politics, rather than an employee’s performance, affected organizational decisions and also the amount of red tape required to get through in order to get the job done. The researchers thought that challenge stressors would have a positive effect on the role-based performances of task performance, citizenship performance, and customer service performance. They thought that hindrance stressors would have a negative effect on these same three role-based performances. The results showed that hindrance stressors did have a negative effect on performance. In addition, the results showed that challenge stressors had a positive effect on performance that was moderated by organizational support. The researchers concluded that companies can benefit from increasing challenges in the workplace if they are supportive of employees working to meet the challenges and if they remove hindrances that interfere with employees’ ability to perform their work. While most job stress research has focused on the negative consequences of work stressors, this study shows the positive aspects of some stressors. SOURCE: J. C. Wallace, B. D. Edwards, T. Arnold, M. L. Frazier, and D. M. Finch, “Work Stressors, Role-Based Performance, and the Moderating Influence of Organizational Support,” Journal of Applied Psychology 94 (2009): 254–262. Can Your Office Make You Sick? Your office may cause stress and be risky in other ways. Open office designs expose you to germs and contagious diseases that can be combated by regular hand washing. Your boss could actually be killing you a little bit at a time. An angry boss places people under psychological stress, and an incompetent boss increases the risk of cardiovascular disorders. Working more than 55 hours per week exposes you to the risk of decreased mental skills and memory problems. A poorly designed chair and a poor posture put stress on the lower back and create one of the most debilitating occupational health problems. Computer work puts the entire musculoskeletal system under stress, especially the upper arms and hands. Marathon Training Not Required The biggest benefits of physical exercise actually come at the low-intensity level, and brisk walking does not require changing into athletic clothes. If there is only one thing to do for yourself during the course of the work week, it is to go outside and take a brisk walk. Fresh air, deep breathing, and physical activity for 15 or 20 minutes are all that is required. Building physical exercise into daily living in this way overcomes the hurdle for people not interested in more strenuous activity. A brisk walk can be more stimulating than a cup of coffee while being more healthful at the same time. Case Study and Suggested Responses The Impact of the Great Recession on Workplace Stress Linkage of Case to Chapter Material This case focuses on the impact that the recent Great Recession had on employers and employees alike and how the employers’ responses to the Great Recession had further affected employees’ lives. In a word, the ultimate impact on people’s lives was stressfor many individuals, the impact was a substantial increase in experienced stress. As one commentator wrote, “[p]ut your ear to the ground nowadays and you hear a steady rumble of ‘stress-stress-stress-stress’, like a herd of bison in the distance. Whether it’s a consequence of recessionary cost-cutting and downsizing or the ever more cut-throat pace of change in the global marketplace, huge chunks of the workforce seem to be stressed out by their jobsand it’s getting worse.” Numerous reasons are cited for these elevated stress levels including lack of job security, shrinking pensions, micromanagement and over-control of employees, de-skilled jobs, routine abuse by ill-informed and ungrateful customers, long work hours, and virtually non-existent support from management. Chapter 7 explores the causes and consequences of stress in the workplace as well as techniques and approaches for coping with stress. Stress is present in every workplace; the key to managing workplace stress is to have it manifested as eustress rather than distress. The case provides a powerful example of what happens when distress occurs. The Yerkes-Dodson law can be invoked to aid in understanding the impact of the Great Recession, as well as to encourage thinking about what employees and employers can do to diminish the level of distress and enhance the level of eustress. Suggested Answers for Discussion Questions 1. How has the Great Recession directly affected the magnitude of stress that people experience? Answer: The Great Recession has increasedfor many people, significantly increasedthe level of experienced stress. Indeed, “huge chunks of the workforce seem to be stressed out by their jobsand it is getting worse.” “Put your ear to the ground nowadays and you hear a steady rumble of ‘stress-stress-stress-stress’, like a herd of bison in the distance.” Numerous reasons are cited for these elevated stress levels—lack of job security, shrinking pensions, micromanagement and over-control of employees, de-skilled jobs, routine abuse by ill-informed and ungrateful customers, long work hours, and virtually non-existent support from management. Other reasons are hiring and salary freezes, job layoffs, and bonus reductions. Still other reasons include people’s concerns about declining home values, their ability to pay college costs, and the heightened anxiety resulting from both declining home values and paying for college education. 2. How have the responses of businesses to the Great Recession affected employee stress levels? Answer: Individual businesses responded to the Great Recession in several different ways. One common corporate response was downsizing, which in turn helped reduce costs. Downsizing has had substantial negative impacts on employee attitudes. Employees perceived the layoffs as a rupture of the employer–employee contract, and those who survived the layoffs typically suffered from low morale and a lack of trust in and loyalty to their employer. Other corporate coping responses to reduce costs included hiring and salary freezes, layoffs, and bonus reductions. These actions can lead to an increase in employee workloads and adversely affect their ability to deal with work-related stress. According to Paula Allen, the increased demands on employees cause many of them to not realistically assess the situation, let alone solve critical problems or even get enough sleep and relaxation. Allen also observes “[t]here’s always the feeling, if things are rough, [that] you should be working 24 hours a day. If you are doing that, it’s going to take a toll. You’re going to build resentment, fatigue.” 3. How can the Yerkes-Dodson law help in understanding the impact of the Great Recession on people’s stress levels? Answer: The Yerkes-Dodson law indicates that stress leads to improved performance up to an optimum point, but beyond that optimum point, further stress and arousal have a detrimental effect on performance. A moderate amount of stress (or arousal) is the optimum range within which eustress stimulates people to display an optimum level of action and improved performance. Application of the Yerkes-Dodson law to the human impact of the Great Recession indicates that the level of stress being experienced by people has moved well beyond the optimum level. For many people, the level of stress has become excessive, and it has had detrimental effects on both employees and employers. As Sarah Dobson wrote, “[t]he recent recession was grueling, no doubt, and it’s not over yet. So, it’s no surprise employees are complaining of higher stress and heavier workloads.” And as Carole Spiers wrote, “[p]eople are more insecure in their jobs, so they’re putting up with things they otherwise wouldn’t necessarily put up with As a result, employers are not getting the best out of their employees.” Spiers also observes that when employees do not feel they are valued by their employers, or when employees are working long hours or feel as though they are treated like numbers, those employees will not be loyal to the organization. In addition, employee performance suffers and the company productivity and profitability decline. 4. Drawing on your answer to the preceding question, explain what individuals could do to deal effectively with their stress levels. Answer: Individuals need to take appropriate measures to lower their level of experienced stress, thereby returning to a more optimum level (i.e., moving from distress on the high side toward eustress in the middle). By applying material contained in the text to the case, reasonable intervention possibilities would include the following: • Embracing positive thinking • Managing time pressures more effectively • Engaging in enjoyable leisure time activities • Engaging in physical exercise • Learning relaxation techniques • Opening up to other people 5. Drawing on your answer to the third question, explain what employers could do to help employees deal effectively with their stress levels. Answer: Just as individuals should take personal responsibility for doing as much as they can to reduce their experienced stress level, employers can assist employees in returning to a more optimal level of stress by altering policies, processes, and procedures over which they have control. Some reasonable possibilities regarding employers’ actions to reduce employee stress levels would include the following: • Redesigning employees’ jobs • Engaging employees in goal setting • Negotiating work roles • Pursuing team building activities • Assisting employees with career management challenges SOURCE: This case solution was written by Michael K. McCuddy, the Louis S. and Mary L. Morgal Chair of Christian Business Ethics and Professor of Management, College of Business Administration, Valparaiso University. Video Profile on Modern Shed Modern Shed’s lead sales consultant, Scott Pearl, relies on disciplined goal setting. After noting that Modern Shed was popular with people who wanted small backyard studios, Pearl determined that selling two 10 ft. x 12 ft. structures per month would be an achievable first sales goal. Today, as Modern Shed seeks to build upon its early success, Pearl is once again setting goals. This time, the marketer is focusing on the company’s larger sheds—12 ft. x 16 ft. According to Pearl, Modern Shed’s larger dwellings need to make up 25 percent of all products sold. With that in mind, Pearl has a plan for how to achieve the higher target: he will pitch the larger shed as a “nanny solution” for Seattle’s well-to-do families. Discussion Questions and Solutions 1. How might being an outside contractor add stress to Scott Pearl’s job? Answer: As an outside contractor, Scott Pearl is not an employee of Modern Shed. As a result, he lacks dependable pay and job security. In the video, Pearl states that being a contractor places financial risks—and thus stress on him and his family. Moreover, since Pearl is outside of the organization, he has no control over key decisions or resources of the company. Finally, Pearl states that time and money are in short supply in his job, and admits that he must either achieve sales goals or lose his job. 2. How does Scott Pearl’s person–environment fit affect his responses to stressors? Answer: Scott Pearl is a seasoned marketer with a solid background in real estate. His past experience and success match with his job as a sales consultant for Modern Shed. Since his new role expectations are familiar and consistent with his skills and abilities, Pearl is better equipped to handle the challenging work demands of selling for Modern Shed. 3. Is Scott Pearl’s goal setting an example of primary, secondary, or tertiary preventive stress management? Explain. Answer: Scott Pearl’s goal setting is an example of primary prevention because it is intended to manage and even reduce the stressor causing stress. Secondary and tertiary prevention pertain to the person’s responses to a stressor or recovery from distress. By setting goals for his job that are specific, measurable, and time bound, Pearl is able to make his sales task more manageable. Pearl’s goal setting provides a guide to action, a source of motivation, a rationale for decisions, and a standard for performance. Without goals, Pearl would lack direction for his efforts and encounter ambiguity about work. This situation would in turn lead to poor performance, burnout, behavioral problems, and even mental and physical breakdowns. Cohesion Case Study Part 2: Suggested Answers DonorsChoose.org: Why Give? Why Be Involved? 1. How would you describe the personality, perceptions, attitudes, and motivation of Charles Best? Answer: Very early in his teaching career, Charles Best had some powerful experiences that would significantly transform his life as well as influence the lives of countless others. Recalling inspired lunchroom conversations with his fellow teachers about ideas for programs and projects and the frustration of not having the resources to execute them, Best had a brainstorm for creating Donor’s Choose. “Best figured there were probably plenty of people who would rather fork over a bit of cash for a specific classroom project than write a check to a traditional charity. So he moved back to his parents’ home to save money and designed the website” for DonorsChoose.org. To convert the idea from a pipedream to a viable venture, Best needed the help of his students and his fellow teachers. His students volunteered to help start the Web-based organization. To lure his fellow teachers into trying out the organization’s new website, Best offered them his mother’s famous pear dessert. Best then used his savings to fund these projects anonymously. DonorsChoose.org has been growing ever since. Based on the forgoing, Charles Best could be characterized as a gregarious, outgoing, and enthusiastic individual. He is passionate about public education and helping students and teachers to be successful. He is persuasive in getting others to become involved. He is frugal and uses resources wisely. Students should be encouraged to identify other characteristics that they think appropriately describes Charles Best. Charles Best, known for founding DonorsChoose.org, is characterized by a proactive, empathetic personality and a strong commitment to education reform. His perceptions are driven by a deep understanding of educational needs, his attitudes reflect a passion for improving classroom resources, and his motivation stems from a desire to empower teachers and support student success. 2. Using ideas about personality and perception, attitudes and emotions, ethics, and motivation, explain the behavior of financial contributors to DonorsChoose.org. Answer: People who contribute to DonorsChoose.org definitely have a strong interest in supporting public education efforts, but many of them are only able to contribute modest amounts. Yet, taken together, these modest contributions fund projects that make an educational difference for many public school teachers and even more students. DonorsChoose.org “put[s] donors squarely in charge and give[s] them plenty of options. The proposals are written by the teachers themselves, explaining the students’ needs and what kind of impact they expect from the project. Then donors are put in control: [t]hey pick the project they like the most. Finally, every donor gets a package of thank-you letters from students and pictures of the kids reading the donated books” or using the donated supplies or engaging in the supported activities. The facts suggest that DonorsChoose.org contributors are people who are interested in helping to make a difference in the world. They have a definite interest in children and helping them succeed educationally. They believe that every child should have the opportunity to learn and to realize his or her full potential. Supporting educational projects through DonorsChoose.org can have a powerful and positive emotional impact on the donors. Supporting these educational projects can bring happiness to the donors. Even small donations can bring happiness to the donors. Interestingly, research has shown that investing in others provides a positive return. Students should be encouraged to identify other individual differences that they believe appropriately describe the donors. Financial contributors to DonorsChoose.org are motivated by empathy and a desire to make a meaningful impact in education, reflecting their positive attitudes toward supporting teachers and students. Their perceptions of the site as a transparent and effective platform for charitable giving align with ethical values of accountability and direct involvement in educational improvement. 3. Explain the behavior of staff members at DonorsChoose.org by using ideas about personality and perception, attitudes and emotions, ethics, motivation, and learning and performance management. Answer: Writing in the book Zilch: The Power of Zero in Business, Nancy Lublin, one of America’s most successful non-profit leaders, comments on how successful nonprofit organizations like DonorsChoose.org arouse worker motivation. “They often have a flat management structure. Nonprofit bosses tend to muck in with volunteers when the heat is on (you’ll find them, for example, helping to stuff goody bags for fund-raising events). New employees are quickly given real responsibility, even if they are young (which is what the Millennials now entering the workforce want) Ensuring there is plenty of time during the working week for genuine fun can deliver better results than a bonus [D]oling out titles liberally and creatively costs nothing yet such titles appeal to people and make them proud.” To the extent that Lublin’s characterization of non-profits accurately describes DonorsChoose.org, one could conclude that the staff members are eager individuals who are committed to the organizations’ purpose. They want to be challenged and to be held accountable. They want to work hard and enjoy doing it. They have a high degree of self-efficacy. Also of relevance to understanding why the staff members behave as they do is the commitment of DonorsChoose.org to integrity. According to the nonprofit’s website, “Our team is vigilant about providing end-to-end integrity for each classroom project funded through our site.” Thus, all staff members would be expected to embrace integrity and exhibit ethics in their decisions and actions. Students should be encouraged to identify other individual differences that they believe appropriately describe the staff members. Staff members at DonorsChoose.org likely exhibit high levels of conscientiousness and dedication, driven by a strong commitment to education and ethical practices. Their positive attitudes and motivation are supported by a perception of meaningful impact and continuous learning, enhancing their performance and engagement in achieving organizational goals. 4. Do you think DonorsChoose is a stressful or relatively stress-free work environment for the staff members? Explain your answer. Answer: The DonorsChoose process of end-to-end integrity for each classroom project funded through its site provides some clues for discussing this question. Specifically, DonorsChoose does the following: • Vets every classroom project request submitted by teachers • Processes donor transactions using the most secure and trusted technology available • Purchases the classroom materials, shipping items directly to the school, and alerting the principal when the materials are on their way • Provides photos of the project taking place, teacher and student letters, and a cost report showing how every dollar was spent Based on this process description, DonorsChoose does not seem to be an extraordinarily stressful work environment, nor is it likely to be stress-free. There are daily challenges to be met, but there is an established process for dealing with them. This should mitigate the level of stress, at least to some degree. With a growing number of project requests, the demands on staff members naturally increases and the stress levels may be forced upward. However, the commitment of the staff members to the purpose of the organization could mitigate such upward pressure. On balance, it could be argued that the DonorsChoose staff members are operating in or near their optimum stress range. 5. In your opinion, would DonorsChoose be a great place to work? Explain the reason(s) for your answer. Answer: The students should identify the criteria they would use in evaluating whether or not DonorsChoose would be a great place to work. Some students will find the idea of working for Donors Choose quite appealing; others will not be particularly excited about DonorsChoose, and some may even find DonorsChoose to be an objectionable employer. How students react to DonorsChoose as a place to work will provide insights about their attitudes, emotions, perceptions, motivation, and ethical orientation. DonorsChoose.org would likely be a great place to work due to its strong mission-driven focus, which fosters a sense of purpose and fulfillment. The emphasis on making a tangible difference in education, coupled with a supportive and collaborative work environment, contributes to high employee satisfaction. SOURCE: This case solution was written by Michael K. McCuddy, the Louis S. and Mary L. Morgal Chair of Christian Business Ethics and Professor of Management, College of Business Administration, Valparaiso University. Student Handouts Ethical Dilemma Neil Murray has been working for a small accounting firm since the last eight months. He had left a grueling position with one of the major firms in New York City in favor of a chance to work at Johnston & Marcus. Even though Neil makes a little less money, he truly values the other “perks” of the job. Neil appreciates how the founding partners have established a supportive environment. The firm maintains a warm, family atmosphere, where people truly feel that they are legitimately cared for. Neil no longer works long nights or weekends, and he’s been able to reconnect with his young family by eating dinner together every night and volunteering as a Little League coach. That extra time has also allowed Neil to pick up a workout regimen to get his health back in order. He also loves how the firm encourages their staff to volunteer their accounting talents to local nonprofits by rewarding them with paid vacation time for their efforts. In short, Neil has found his new job extremely rewarding, both professionally and personally. Once a month, however, Neil has to file a status report on the firm’s standing and financials to a clearing house. It isn’t a long or complicated report, but Neil dreads completing it, because his boss requires Neil to falsify information that needs to be included. Neil hasn’t challenged his boss, and he has simply complied with the request. During the last two months, as the report date looms, Neil finds himself getting depressed. He has begun to get sick to his stomach when he thinks about completing the forms using incorrect information. Neil doesn’t even want to sign his name to the document, because he knows that he is committing a crime. If this were occurring at Neil’s former job, Neil would have quit the first time he was asked to lie. However, he feels so strongly about how well he loves everything else at Johnston & Marcus that it’s hard for him to imagine leaving. Questions: 1. Using consequential, rule-based and character theories, evaluate Neil’s options. Answer: Consequential Theory: Neil should weigh the potential harm of falsifying reports (legal consequences, loss of integrity) against the benefits of staying at Johnston & Marcus (personal satisfaction, work-life balance). Rule-Based Theory: Neil is violating ethical standards and laws by falsifying information, which is inherently wrong regardless of the outcomes. Character Theory: Upholding honesty aligns with being a person of integrity and moral character, which conflicts with his current actions. 2. What should Neil do? Why? Answer: Neil should report the issue to higher authorities or seek legal advice, as continuing to falsify reports compromises his integrity and could have severe long-term consequences. What about You? The Frazzle Factor Read each of the following statements and rate yourself on a scale of 0–3, and give the answer that best describes how you generally feel (3 points for always, 2 points for often, 1 point for sometimes, and 0 points for never). Answer as honestly as you can, and do not spend too much time on any one statement. Am I Overstressed? 1. I have to make important snap judgments and decisions. Answer: • [Your Rating: 0, 1, 2, or 3] If you rate yourself: • 3 (Always): You often face high-pressure situations requiring quick decisions, indicating significant stress. • 2 (Often): You frequently make snap judgments, suggesting a moderate level of stress. • 1 (Sometimes): You occasionally face this stress, implying lower stress levels. • 0 (Never): You rarely or never encounter this situation, indicating minimal stress from decision-making. 2. I am not consulted about what happens on my job or in my classes. Answer: • [Your Rating: 0, 1, 2, or 3] If you rate yourself: • 3 (Always): You are frequently excluded from decisions affecting your work or studies, indicating high stress. • 2 (Often): You are often left out of consultations, suggesting moderate stress. • 1 (Sometimes): You are occasionally not consulted, implying lower stress levels. • 0 (Never): You are consistently consulted, indicating minimal stress related to this issue. 3. I feel that I am underpaid. Answer: • [Your Rating: 0, 1, 2, or 3] If you rate yourself: • 3 (Always): You consistently feel underpaid, which could contribute significantly to stress. • 2 (Often): You frequently feel that your compensation is insufficient, indicating moderate stress. • 1 (Sometimes): You occasionally feel underpaid, suggesting some level of stress but not consistently. • 0 (Never): You do not feel underpaid, indicating minimal stress related to this issue. 4. I feel that no matter how hard I work, the system will mess it up. Answer: • [Your Rating: 0, 1, 2, or 3] If you rate yourself: • 3 (Always): You consistently feel that your efforts are undermined by systemic issues, leading to high stress. • 2 (Often): You frequently believe that systemic problems negate your hard work, indicating significant stress. • 1 (Sometimes): You occasionally feel that systemic issues impact your work, suggesting moderate stress. • 0 (Never): You do not feel that systemic problems affect your efforts, indicating low stress related to this concern. 5. I do not get along with some of my coworkers or fellow students. Answer: • [Your Rating: 0, 1, 2, or 3] If you rate yourself: • 3 (Always): You consistently have conflicts with coworkers or classmates, leading to significant stress. • 2 (Often): You frequently experience difficulties with some colleagues or peers, indicating moderate stress. • 1 (Sometimes): You occasionally have issues with certain individuals, suggesting occasional stress. • 0 (Never): You generally get along well with everyone, indicating minimal stress from interpersonal conflicts. 6. I do not trust my superiors at work or my professors at school. Answer: • [Your Rating: 0, 1, 2, or 3] If you rate yourself: • 3 (Always): You consistently feel a lack of trust in your superiors or professors, leading to high stress. • 2 (Often): You frequently experience distrust towards those in authority, indicating moderate stress. • 1 (Sometimes): You occasionally have trust issues with superiors or professors, suggesting occasional stress. • 0 (Never): You generally trust your superiors or professors, indicating minimal stress related to trust. 7. The paperwork burden on my job or at school is getting to me. Answer: • [Your Rating: 0, 1, 2, or 3] If you rate yourself: • 3 (Always): The paperwork consistently overwhelms you, indicating high stress from administrative tasks. • 2 (Often): You frequently feel stressed by paperwork, suggesting moderate stress related to these tasks. • 1 (Sometimes): Paperwork occasionally causes you stress, indicating intermittent issues with administrative workload. • 0 (Never): Paperwork does not affect you, showing minimal stress from these tasks. 8. I feel that people outside the job or the university do not respect what I do. Answer: • [Your Rating: 0, 1, 2, or 3] If you rate yourself: • 3 (Always): You consistently feel disrespected by people outside your job or university, indicating high stress related to external validation. • 2 (Often): You frequently feel that others do not respect your efforts, suggesting moderate stress from lack of external recognition. • 1 (Sometimes): You occasionally feel undervalued by others, pointing to intermittent stress regarding respect and acknowledgment. • 0 (Never): You do not feel a lack of respect from others, indicating minimal stress related to external perceptions of your work. Am I Angry? 1. I feel that people around me make too many irritating mistakes. Answer: • Rating Explanation: • 0 (Never): If you rarely notice or are bothered by mistakes made by those around you, and you generally find yourself tolerant and understanding. • 1 (Sometimes): If you occasionally find others’ mistakes annoying but it doesn’t significantly affect your mood or behavior. • 2 (Often): If you frequently feel frustrated by the errors of those around you and it often impacts your day or interactions. • 3 (Always): If you are consistently irritated by others’ mistakes, to the point where it affects your mood and behavior regularly. Explanation: This statement gauges your level of frustration with others' errors. Feeling that people around you make too many irritating mistakes can indicate a tendency towards heightened irritation or frustration, which might contribute to stress or anger issues. Regularly experiencing such feelings may suggest a need to address underlying frustrations or develop coping strategies to manage your emotional responses. 2. I feel annoyed because no one appreciates it when I do good work or perform well in school. Answer: • Rating Explanation: • 0 (Never): If you rarely feel unappreciated and generally receive or expect positive feedback for your achievements. • 1 (Sometimes): If you occasionally feel that your good work or performance is overlooked, but it doesn't deeply affect your mood. • 2 (Often): If you frequently feel that your efforts go unnoticed and it often makes you feel frustrated or resentful. • 3 (Always): If you constantly feel that your hard work and achievements are not recognized, which regularly leads to feelings of annoyance and discontent. Explanation: This statement assesses your feelings of frustration and irritation due to a perceived lack of recognition for your efforts. A high rating may suggest that you are often disheartened by the absence of acknowledgment, which can affect your overall mood and motivation. Addressing these feelings may involve finding ways to seek feedback or recognition, or adjusting expectations to improve satisfaction and reduce feelings of annoyance. 3. When people make me angry, I tell them off. Answer: • Rating Explanation: • 0 (Never): If you rarely confront others directly or express anger towards them. • 1 (Sometimes): If you occasionally respond to anger by addressing it with the person, but it’s not your usual approach. • 2 (Often): If you frequently find yourself directly confronting people when you’re upset, though not always. • 3 (Always): If you consistently react to anger by telling people off, and this is a common response for you. Explanation: This statement measures your tendency to express anger by confronting others directly. A higher rating suggests that you may often respond to anger with confrontation, which could impact your relationships and work environment. Managing this response might involve developing alternative strategies for handling anger, such as using calm communication techniques or seeking mediation. 4. When I am angry, I say things I know will hurt people. Answer: • Rating Explanation: • 0 (Never): If you always avoid saying hurtful things and try to manage your anger in a constructive manner. • 1 (Sometimes): If you occasionally find yourself making comments that could hurt others when you're angry, but try to restrain yourself. • 2 (Often): If you frequently end up saying things that are hurtful during moments of anger, despite knowing their impact. • 3 (Always): If it’s common for you to deliberately or unconsciously say hurtful things to others when you're angry. Explanation: This statement assesses whether you tend to express anger in ways that are damaging to others. A higher rating indicates that you might struggle with controlling your anger in a way that avoids hurting people's feelings, which could affect your relationships and overall emotional health. Developing self-awareness and practicing anger management techniques, such as pausing before speaking or seeking support, might help in addressing this tendency. 5. I lose my temper easily. Answer: • Rating Explanation: • 0 (Never): If you remain calm in most situations and rarely feel the need to raise your voice or express anger. • 1 (Sometimes): If you occasionally find yourself getting frustrated but usually manage to keep your temper in check. • 2 (Often): If you frequently lose your temper and find it hard to control your reactions in stressful situations. • 3 (Always): If you consistently react with anger and lose your temper quickly, often over minor issues. Explanation: This statement evaluates your ability to maintain composure when faced with frustration or stress. A higher score suggests challenges in managing your emotions, which can impact your relationships and mental well-being. Identifying triggers and practicing coping strategies, such as deep breathing or stepping away from the situation, can help improve your emotional regulation. 6. I feel like striking out at someone who angers me. Answer: • Rating Explanation: • 0 (Never): If you never have thoughts of physical aggression or harm towards others, even when you're angry. • 1 (Sometimes): If you occasionally have fleeting thoughts of striking out but quickly dismiss them. • 2 (Often): If you frequently experience urges to react aggressively when you're angry. • 3 (Always): If you regularly feel a strong impulse to physically strike out or retaliate against others when upset. Explanation: This statement assesses the intensity of your anger and your tendency towards aggressive thoughts or actions. A higher score indicates stronger feelings of aggression, which can be harmful to relationships and personal well-being. It's important to address these feelings through healthy coping mechanisms, such as talking to a counselor or engaging in stress-relief activities. 7. When a coworker or fellow student makes a mistake, I tell him or her about it. Answer: • Rating Explanation: • 0 (Never): If you never address mistakes made by others and prefer to overlook them. • 1 (Sometimes): If you occasionally point out mistakes but only when necessary or when it’s appropriate. • 2 (Often): If you frequently bring up mistakes made by others, sometimes in a critical manner. • 3 (Always): If you consistently and regularly address and correct mistakes made by others, possibly with a strong emphasis on their errors. Explanation: This statement reflects how you handle others' mistakes, which can be influenced by your level of anger and your approach to interpersonal interactions. A higher rating may indicate a tendency to be critical or confrontational, potentially reflecting frustration or a desire to control outcomes. Balancing feedback with constructive and empathetic communication can help manage relationships and reduce potential conflict. 8. I cannot stand being criticized in public. Answer: • Rating Explanation: • 0 (Never): If you are completely comfortable with public criticism and handle it without much emotional reaction. • 1 (Sometimes): If you are occasionally uneasy about public criticism but can manage it without significant distress. • 2 (Often): If public criticism frequently makes you uncomfortable or upset, affecting your mood or performance. • 3 (Always): If public criticism always causes you significant distress, anger, or embarrassment, and you find it very hard to handle. Explanation: This statement gauges your sensitivity to public criticism, which can be a sign of how you manage anger and emotional reactions. A higher rating suggests a strong aversion to public scrutiny, which could indicate underlying issues with self-esteem or stress. Developing resilience and focusing on constructive feedback can help manage reactions to public criticism more effectively. Scoring To find your level of anger and potential for aggressive behavior, add your scores from both quiz parts. 40–48: The red flag is waving, and you had better pay attention. You are in the danger zone. You need guidance from a counselor or mental health professional, and you should be getting it now. 30–39: The yellow flag is up. Your stress and anger levels are too high, and you are feeling increasingly hostile. You are still in control, but it would not take much to trigger a violent flare of temper. 10–29: Relax, you are in the broad normal range. Like most people, you get angry occasionally, but usually with some justification. Sometimes you take overt action, but you are not likely to be unreasonably or excessively aggressive. 0–9: Congratulations! You are in great shape. Your stress and anger are well under control, giving you a laid-back personality not prone to violence. Answer: To find your level of anger and potential for aggressive behavior, follow these steps: 1. Add your scores from both the "Am I Overstressed?" and "Am I Angry?" sections. 2. Compare your total score with the following ranges to determine your anger and stress level: • 40–48: The red flag is waving, and you had better pay attention. You are in the danger zone. You need guidance from a counselor or mental health professional, and you should be getting it now. • 30–39: The yellow flag is up. Your stress and anger levels are too high, and you are feeling increasingly hostile. You are still in control, but it would not take much to trigger a violent flare of temper. • 10–29: Relax, you are in the broad normal range. Like most people, you get angry occasionally, but usually with some justification. Sometimes you take overt action, but you are not likely to be unreasonably or excessively aggressive. • 0–9: Congratulations! You are in great shape. Your stress and anger are well under control, giving you a laid-back personality not prone to violence. By assessing your total score, you can better understand your stress and anger levels and take appropriate steps to manage them effectively. SOURCE: Questionnaire developed by C. D. Spielberger. Appeared in W. Barnhill, “Early Warning,” The Washington Post (August 11, 1992): B5. What about You? Are You Self-Reliant? Each of the following questions relates to how you form relationships with people at work, at home, and in other areas of your life. Read each statement carefully and rate each on a scale from 0 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) to describe your degree of disagreement or agreement with the statement. Answer all 16 questions. 1. I feel secure in my ability to meet life’s challenges. Answer: 4 – I generally feel confident in handling life's challenges but occasionally encounter doubts. 2. It is difficult to make a decision without consulting others. Answer: 2 – I prefer to consult others occasionally but can make decisions independently when needed. 3. I can perform high-quality work with little support from others. Answer: 4 – I am capable of high-quality work with minimal support, although occasional input can be beneficial. 4. Friends are a waste of time because in the end, they will desert you. Answer: 1 – I believe friendships are valuable, though I recognize that not all relationships are permanent. 5. On some tasks I can work effectively without other people. Answer: 5 – I am very capable of working effectively independently on many tasks. 6. It is difficult for me to delegate work to others. Answer: 3 – I find delegating work somewhat challenging but recognize its importance in team settings. 7. Life would be much easier if I didn’t have to deal with other people. Answer: 1 – I find value in interactions with others and believe that relationships enhance life, despite occasional difficulties. 8. I put myself at risk if I ever let anyone know I need them. Answer: 2 – I am cautious about showing need but understand that vulnerability can strengthen relationships. 9. Difficult situations can be overcome. Answer: 5 – I strongly believe in overcoming difficult situations through resilience and effort. 10. I’m more comfortable being a follower than a leader. Answer: 2 – I am comfortable in both roles but generally take the lead when necessary. 11. I am successful at what I do. Answer: 4 – I consider myself successful in my endeavors but always strive for improvement. 12. There is no one who can understand things in my life. Answer: 3 – I feel that some people understand aspects of my life, though not always completely. 13. People will always reject you when they find out what you are really like. Answer: 2 – While I am cautious about how much I reveal, I believe most people will accept me for who I am. 14. The actions that I take are usually right. Answer: 4 – I believe in the correctness of my actions based on my values and reasoning, though I recognize the possibility of mistakes. 15. I don’t like it when people try to find out too much about me. Answer: 3 – I prefer to keep certain aspects of my life private but understand the importance of openness in relationships. 16. Needing someone is a sign of weakness. Answer: 1 – I view needing support as a natural part of human interaction and not a sign of weakness. Interpretation • High Self-Reliance Score: If the total score is high (e.g., 65-80), it suggests strong self-reliance and confidence in handling challenges independently. • Moderate Self-Reliance Score: A moderate score (e.g., 45-64) indicates a balanced approach to self-reliance and dependence on others. • Low Self-Reliance Score: A lower score (e.g., 25-44) reflects a greater tendency towards dependency and difficulties with independence. • Very Low Self-Reliance Score: A very low score (0-24) suggests significant reliance on others and challenges with self-confidence. This approach provides a detailed understanding of your self-reliance and interpersonal dynamics. Scoring: Follow the instructions to determine your score for each subscale of the Self-Reliance Inventory. Counter dependence Step 1: Total your responses to Questions 4, 7, 8, 12, 13, 15 and 16 _____ The score range for Counter dependence is 0 to 35. Scores above 22 suggest Counter dependence. Answer: Total your responses to Questions 4, 7, 8, 12, 13, 15, and 16: • Q4: 1 • Q7: 2 • Q8: 3 • Q12: 2 • Q13: 1 • Q15: 3 • Q16: 2 Total for Counter dependence: 1 + 2 + 3 + 2 + 1 + 3 + 2 = 14 Self-Reliance Step 2: Total your responses to Questions 1, 3, 5, 9, 11 and 14 _____ The score range for self-reliance is 0 to 30. Scores above 17 suggest self-reliance. Answer: Total your responses to Questions 1, 3, 5, 9, 11, and 14: • Q1: 4 • Q3: 4 • Q5: 4 • Q9: 5 • Q11: 4 • Q14: 4 Total for Self-Reliance: 4 + 4 + 4 + 5 + 4 + 4 = 25 Overdependence Step 3: Total your responses to Questions 2, 6 and 10 _____ The score range for overdependence is 0 to 15. Scores above 9 suggest overdependence. A set of scores less than 13 in Step 1, greater than 17 in Step 2, and less than 7 in Step 3 indicate self-reliance. Answer: Total your responses to Questions 2, 6, and 10: • Q2: 2 • Q6: 3 • Q10: 2 Total for Overdependence: 2 + 3 + 2 = 7 Interpretation: • Counter dependence: 14 (below 22; suggests moderate Counter dependence) • Self-Reliance: 25 (above 17; indicates strong self-reliance) • Overdependence: 7 (below 9; indicates low levels of overdependence) Based on these results: • You are strongly self-reliant. • You have moderate Counter dependence but are generally capable of managing without significant reliance on others. • You have low overdependence, indicating you do not heavily rely on others for decision-making or support. SOURCE: J. R. W. Joplin, D. L., Nelson, J. C. Quick, and J. D. Quick, The Self-Reliance Inventory (Arlington, TX: The University of Texas at Arlington). Issues in Diversity “To Thine Own Self Be True” Dennis Flanigan is 42 years old, a successful mental health professional, and unabashedly gay. Flanigan is often called upon to provide his expertise on issues concerning gays and lesbians and mental health as well as transgender and body modification. Flanigan is also an atheist and, in his words, a “militant homosexual.” So when closeted clients ask him whether they should come out to their family and friends, he should just tell them that they should, right? Wrong. Nothing could be further from the truth. Although Flanigan is open about his own homosexuality, he does not encourage the same degree of openness with his homosexual clients, especially those who are conflicted between their identity and their sexual orientation. One such client, an evangelical assistant pastor, was terrified that he would be exposed as a gay man if his relationship with the pastor’s son was revealed. He sought therapy with Flanigan to help him ease his anxiety surrounding the situation. The assistant pastor did not want help coming out, nor did he want to go to another church despite the genuine risk of being discovered. Rather, he simply “wanted to feel less anxious.” He was fine with the apparent hypocrisy of his choices. An integral part of him was wrapped up in him being a preacher. As inconsistent as it might seem, Flanigan actually helps clients, such as the assistant pastor, stay “in the closet.” Based on his nearly decade-long research of studying the topic, Flanigan reached the conclusion that the identity-sexual orientation conflict had increased for individuals with strong religious beliefs which, for many of them, included the belief that homosexuality would lead to their eternal damnation. In that case, revealing their homosexuality would have far more damaging consequences than potential abandonment by friends or family. Asking them to openly admit their sexual orientation would be nothing short of denying a vital piece of their core identity, their religious orientation. Questions 1. Explain how the internal conflict between an individual’s identity and sexual orientation could become an organizational diversity issue. Answer: The internal conflict between an individual’s identity and sexual orientation can become an organizational diversity issue when the tension between personal beliefs and professional roles affects job performance, workplace dynamics, and inclusion. Organizations may face challenges in creating an environment where individuals feel safe and supported if they must navigate such conflicts without adequate understanding or support. 2. Can you think of a situation where it is better for individuals to hide their sexual orientation than to be open? Answer: In highly conservative or discriminatory environments, individuals might choose to hide their sexual orientation to avoid severe backlash, loss of employment, or even personal safety. For example, in some religious organizations or workplaces with entrenched biases, staying closeted might be a strategic choice to protect one's career and well-being until broader acceptance is achieved. SOURCE: M. Swartz, “Living the good life,” The New York Times (June 16, 2011). Experiential Exercise Gender Role Stressors The major sources of stress are not necessarily the same for men and women. This exercise will help you identify the similarities and differences in the stressors and perceptions of men and women. Step 1. Individually, list the major sources of stress for you because of your gender. Be as specific as possible, and within your list, prioritize your stressors. Step 2. Individually, list what you think are the major sources of stress for those of the opposite gender. Again, be as specific as possible, and prioritize your list. Step 3. In teams of five or six members of the same sex, share your two lists of stressors. Discuss these stressors, and identify the top five sources of stress for your group because of your gender and the top five sources of stress for those of the opposite gender. Again, be as specific as possible, and prioritize your list. Step 4. The class will then engage in a cross-team exchange of lists. Look for similarities and differences among the teams in your class as follows. Select one gender to be addressed first. If the females are first, for example, the male groups will post their predictions. This will be followed by the actual stressor lists from the female groups. Then do the same for the other gender. Experiential Exercise Workplace Stress Diagnosis The following exercise gives students an opportunity to work within groups to compare the work demands and job stressors found in different work settings. Intervention for preventive stress management should always be based on a good diagnosis. This exercise gives students a start in this direction. Step 1. Before breaking the students into groups, ask them to rate the degree to which each of the following work demands is a source of stress for them and their coworkers at work. Use a 7-point rating scale for assigning the stressfulness of the work demand, with 7 = very high source of stress, 4 = moderate source of stress, and 1 = very little source of stress. 1. Uncertainty about various aspects of the work environment 2. Lack of control over people, events, or other aspects of work 3. Lack of career opportunities and progress 4. The implementation of new technologies 5. Work overload; that is, too much to do and not enough time 6. Conflicting expectations from one or more people at work 7. Confusing expectations from one or more people at work 8. Dangerous working conditions and/or hazardous substances 9. Sexual harassment by supervisors, coworkers, or others 10. Abrasive personalities and/or political conflicts 11. Rigid, insensitive, unresponsive supervisors or managers Step 2. Then ask each student to write a brief description of the most stressful event that has occurred in his or her work environment during the past twelve-month period. Step 3. Break the class into groups of approximately six members each. Each group elects a spokesperson and then compares the information developed by each person in Steps 1 and 2. In the process of this comparison, ask the groups to answer the following questions: a. What are the similarities between work environments in terms of their most stressful work demands? b. What are the differences among work environments in terms of their most stressful work demands? c. Are there similarities in the descriptions of the most stressful events? If so, what are they? Step 4. Each group will share the results of its answers to the questions in Step 3. Cross-team questions and discussion follow. Step 5 (Optional). You may ask students to choose one or another of the work environments in which to develop some preventive stress management strategies. Ask them to complete parts a and b below in their group. a. Identify one to three preventive stress management strategies that you think are the best to use in the work environment. Why have you chosen them? b. How should the effectiveness of these strategies be evaluated? Experiential Exercise Social Support Network Analysis Self-reliant individuals are masters at developing good social support networks. They prefer interdependence, and they are also good providers of support to others. This exercise, designed for use in class, will help you understand the types and sources of social support needed to develop an effective network. 1. Individually complete the following work-related and nonwork-related network analyses by filling in the blanks with the names of people from whom you receive social support. In the parentheses following each blank, write the type of support received: E=emotional caring and nurturance; I=informational support; A=appraisal and evaluative feedback; M=role modeling and guidance; and S=instrumental support providing resources or acting on behalf of a person. Answer: Network Analysis Examples: • Work-related: • Supervisor (I) • Colleague (E) • Mentor (M) • Nonwork-related: • Friend (E, A) • Family member (S) • Partner (I, E) 2. In groups of five or six, discuss the following questions: a. Where were the blank spaces in your work and nonwork networks? b. Are there any types of support (emotional, informational, appraisal, role modeling, or instrumental) that you do not receive from anyone? c. What can you do to develop your network? d. How has social support been important to you in managing your stress? Give specific examples. Answer: Discussion Points: • Blank Spaces: Missing roles like appraisal or instrumental support. • Support Gaps: Lack of role modeling and appraisal feedback. • Network Development: Seek mentors, engage more with peers, and build deeper relationships. • Importance of Support: Emotional support from friends helped during work crises; informational support from a mentor guided career decisions. Work Related Network (formal organizational relationships) Experiential Exercise How Do You Spot a Workaholic Yes No Arrive early, stay late, do more than what’s required to do a good job Yes No Failure to delegate tasks Yes No Perfectionism Yes No A fast pace, irritability with anyone who isn’t “working hard enough” Yes No Inability to take time off when sick, unused vacation days Yes No Lack of boundaries, work spills over into everything else. Yes No Difficult to put things in perspective, can’t tell what’s important. Yes No Diminished relationships, people at home are mad or distant. Yes No Lack of hobbies and/or social life. Yes No Inability to relax. Yes No Constant thoughts about work. Yes No Underdeveloped sense of humor. Yes No Impatience, criticism or hostility close to the surface when dealing with subordinates. Yes No Inordinate desire to please higher-ups. Yes No Being absolutely convinced that working hard is fun but that you could stop anytime, when everyone else knows it's a compulsion for you. Total number answered “Yes”: Case Study The Impact of the Great Recession on Workplace Stress Several months after the official onset of the Great Recession in December 2007, Elizabeth Bernstein, writing in The Wall Street Journal, observed that “as the economy falters and layoffs sweep certain industries, many people are more worried than ever about job securityin addition to fretting over the value of their homes, the cost of college and a host of other issues. Making matters worse: Stressed-out bosses and co-workers tend to pass tension on to others.” Moreover, as observed by Angela Scappatura, writing for the Canadian HR Reporter, when “[t]here is a lot of uncertainty in the workplace [,] [i]t is important for the organization to focus on eliminating anxiety among employees because heightened emotions can be detrimental to the workplace.” “Put your ear to the ground nowadays and you hear a steady rumble of ‘stress-stress-stress-stress’, like a herd of bison in the distance. Whether it’s a consequence of recessionary cost-cutting and downsizing or the ever more cut-throat pace of change in the global marketplace, huge chunks of the workforce seem to be stressed out by their jobsand it’s getting worse.” Numerous reasons are cited for these elevated stress levels: lack of job security, shrinking pensions, micromanagement and over-control of employees, de-skilled jobs, routine abuse by ill-informed and ungrateful customers, long work hours, and virtually non-existent support from management. One of the common corporate solutions for dealing, at least partially, with the impact of the Great Recession has been downsizing. Although downsizing can help companies with cost reductions, such an action also has substantial negative impacts on employee attitudes. Employees perceive the layoffs as a rupturing of the employer-employee contract; and those who survive the layoffs typically suffer from low morale and lack of trust in and loyalty to their employer. Yet all too often employers do not understand the impact of employee stress on companies’ successparticularly the overall customer experience and attainment of overall business objectives. Hiring and salary freezes, layoffs, and bonus reductionsall in an attempt to cut costscan lead to an increase in employees’ workloads and adversely affect their ability to deal with work-related stress. Paula Allen, vice-president of organizational solutions and training at Shepell-fgi in Toronto, Canada, says that with the increased demands on employees, many of them are not taking care of themselves with respect to taking stock of the situation and solving problems or even with regard to getting enough sleep and relaxation. She continues, “ ‘[t]here’s always the feeling, if things are rough, [that] you should be working 24 hours a day. If you are doing that, it’s going to take a toll. You’re going to build resentment, fatigue.’ ” Commenting in October 2010 after the official end of the Great Recession in June 2009, Sarah Dobson, writing in the Canadian HR Reporter, expressed a view shared by many people in North America: “The recent recession was grueling, no doubt, and it’s not over yet. So it’s no surprise employees are complaining of higher stress and heavier workloads.” According to Carole Spiers, an occupational stress consultant, the Great Recession created dangerous, new levels of workplace anxiety. “People are more insecure in their jobs, so they’re putting up with things they otherwise wouldn’t necessarily put up with . As a result, employers are not getting the best out of their employees.” Spiers also observes that when employees do not feel they are valued by their employers, or employees are working long hours or feel as though they are treated like numbers, those employees will not be loyal to the organization. In addition, employee performance suffers, and company productivity and profitability declines. Discussion Questions 1. How has the Great Recession directly affected the magnitude of stress that people experience? Answer: Magnitude of Stress: The Great Recession increased stress due to job insecurity, financial strain, and economic instability. 2. How have the responses of businesses to the Great Recession affected employees’ stress levels? Answer: Business Responses: Layoffs, pay cuts, and reduced benefits heightened stress levels among employees by increasing workload and job uncertainty. 3. How can the Yerkes-Dodson law help in understanding the impact of the Great Recession on people’s stress levels? Answer: Yerkes-Dodson Law: It suggests that moderate stress can enhance performance, but excessive stress impairs it, which was evident as recession-induced stress often surpassed optimal levels. 4. Drawing on your answer to the preceding question, explain what individuals could do to deal effectively with their stress levels. Answer: Individual Strategies: To manage stress, individuals should engage in stress-reducing activities, maintain work-life balance, and seek support when needed. 5. Drawing on your answer to the third question, explain what employers could do to help employees deal effectively with their stress levels. Answer: Employer Actions: Employers can reduce stress by providing clear communication, offering support programs, and creating a positive work environment to balance demands and resources. SOURCE: This case was written by Michael K. McCuddy, The Louis S. and Mary L. Morgal Chair of Christian Business Ethics and Professor of Management, College of Business Administration, Valparaiso University. Cohesion Case Study Part 2 DonorsChoose.org: Why Give? Why Be Involved? (B) During his first year as a social studies teacher at Wings Academy in the Bronx, New York City, Charles Best had some powerful experiences that would significantly transform his life as well as influence the lives of countless others. Best recounts both the frustration and inspiration of lunchroom conversations with his fellow teachers. He remembers, “[t]here were great ideas for programs and projects that we talked about in the teachers’ lunchroom that could never leave the teachers’ lunchroom” due to lack of resources to implement them. “Funding for the basics was woefully inadequate, and teachers routinely dipped into their pockets to buy even paper and pencils for their students.” Best’s brainstorm for DonorsChoose.org emerged during one of these lunch conversations with colleagues. “Best figured there were probably plenty of people who would rather fork over a bit of cash for a specific classroom project than write a check to a traditional charity. So he moved back to his parents’ home to save money and designed the website” for DonorsChoose.org. To convert the idea from a pipe dream to a viable venture, Best needed the help of his fellow teachers and his students. His students’ volunteered to help start the Web-based organization. To lure his fellow teachers into trying out the organization’s new website, Best offered them his mother’s famous pear dessert. Best then used his savings to fund these projects anonymously. And DonorsChoose.org has been growing ever since. Although there are many reasons for the continual growth of DonorsChoose, three major factors are: stimulating donor interest and securing contributionsoften repeated contributionsfrom the same donors; arousing staffers’ motivation but doing so in a very cost effective manner; and maintaining uncompromising integrity. Stimulating Donor Interest and Securing Contributions People often become interested in DonorsChoose and subsequently become donors because they can support, in an affordable way, educational projects that resonate with them and they can be assured that their donations are making a meaningful difference. “People always have had the option of donating to education causes, but the real appeal of DonorsChoose is [the] projects’ narrow focus.” DonorsChoose.org “put[s] donors squarely in charge and give[s] them plenty of options. The proposals are written by the teachers themselves, explaining the students’ needs and what kind of impact they expect from the project. Then donors are put in control: [t]hey pick the project they like the most. Finally, every donor gets a package of thank-you letters from students and pictures of the kids reading the donated books” or using the donated supplies or engaging in the supported activities. Many of these donations are of quite modest amounts yet taken together they fund projects that make an educational difference for many public school children. A donor “can pick a classroom project to fund with as little as $1, [and they can sort] proposals by cost, school poverty level and subject. Requests might include $140 for dry-erase markers or $2,000 for camcorders and laptops for budding filmmakers.” Supporting educational projects through DonorsChoose.org can have a powerful and positive emotional impact on donors. Supporting these projects can bring happiness to the recipients as well as to the donors. Even small donations can bring happiness to the donors. Interestingly, in a 2008 article on happiness, Michael Norton, affiliated with the Harvard Business School, and Elizabeth Dunn, affiliated with the University of British Columbia, report that, “[t]here’s been a lot of research that ironically shows that money doesn’t buy happiness [but] that people do feel better if they spend just $5 of their bonus on others. [I]t’s linked to the idea of investing in others and the hope that such largesse will give them a positive return.” Arousing Staffer Motivation Another notable strength of DonorsChooseas well as some other nonprofit organizations such as Kiva, a microlender, and Habitat for Humanity, a builder of inexpensive homesis the capability to arouse worker motivation. Indeed, an anonymously-written article in The Economist points out that, “in tough economic times businesses would do well to find ways of motivating workers without paying them a fortune.” “Few non-profits pay well and many depend on volunteers. It helps that they tend to have a clear purpose to which these underpaid employees and volunteers are often personally committed.” Writing in the book Zilch: The Power of Zero in Business, Nancy Lublin, one of America’s most successful non-profit leaders, comments on how successful nonprofit organizations like DonorsChoose.org arouse worker motivation. “They often have a flat management structure. Nonprofit bosses tend to muck in with volunteers when the heat is on (you’ll find them, for example, helping to stuff goody bags for fund-raising events). New employees are quickly given real responsibility, even if they are young (which is what the Millennials now entering the workforce want). Ensuring there is plenty of time during the working week for genuine fun can deliver better results than a bonus. [D]oling out titles liberally and creatively costs nothing yet such titles appeal to people and make them proud.” Maintaining Uncompromising Integrity A third factor in the success and growth of DonorsChoose.org is integrity. Indeed, integrity is a critical ingredient of DonorsChoose.org’s operations, acceptance, success, and continued growth. According to the nonprofit’s website: “Our team is vigilant about providing end-to-end integrity for each classroom project funded through our site. To that end, we: • Vet every classroom project request submitted by teachers. • Process donor transactions using the most secure and trusted technology available. • Purchase the classroom materials, shipping items directly to the school and alerting the principal when the materials are on their way. • Provide photos of the project taking place, teacher and student letters, and a cost report showing how every dollar was spent.” Such a commitment to integrity for every funded project and throughout the organization fosters a remarkable level of public confidence in the aims and activities of DonorsChoose. Integrity is, without question, a critical ingredient of the sustainability of a nonprofitDonorsChoose or any other charitable organization. Has DonorsChoose.org discovered a formula that will make it sustainable well into the future? Discussion Questions 1. How would you describe the personality, perceptions, attitudes, and motivation of Charles Best? Answer: Charles Best: He likely exhibits a high level of motivation and altruism, with a strong sense of purpose and commitment to educational improvement. His perceptions are probably shaped by a deep understanding of educational needs and a positive attitude toward charitable work. 2. Using ideas about personality and perception, attitudes and emotions, ethics, and motivation, explain the behavior of financial contributors to DonorsChoose.org. Answer: Financial Contributors: They are motivated by altruism and a desire to make a tangible impact, which aligns with their attitudes towards social responsibility. Their perception of the organization's effectiveness and ethical alignment with their values drives their contributions. 3. Explain the behavior of staff members at DonorsChoose.org. by using ideas about personality and perception, attitudes and emotions, ethics, motivation, and learning and performance management. Answer: Staff Behavior: Staff members are motivated by a shared mission to improve education and are likely to have positive attitudes and ethical standards. Their behavior reflects a commitment to learning and performance management, driven by a supportive and mission-focused environment. 4. Do you think DonorsChoose is a stressful or relatively stress-free work environment for the staff members? Explain your answer. Answer: Work Environment: DonorsChoose is likely to be relatively stress-free due to its positive mission-driven focus and supportive organizational culture, though individual stress levels can vary. 5. In your opinion, would DonorsChoose be a great place to work? Explain the reason(s) for your answer. Answer: Great Place to Work: Yes, because it offers meaningful work, a clear mission, and a collaborative environment, which can contribute to high job satisfaction and personal fulfillment. SOURCE: This case was written by Michael K. McCuddy, The Louis S. and Mary L. Morgal Chair of Christian Business Ethics and Professor of Management, College of Business Administration, Valparaiso University. Anonymous, “US Business Cycle Expansions and Contractions,” The National Bureau of Economic Research, http://www.nber.org/cycles/cyclesmain.html (accessed February 4, 2014). E. Bernstein, “When a Co-Worker Is Stressed Out,” The Wall Street Journal (Eastern edition) (August 26, 2008): D1. A. Scappatura, “EAP Use Soars as Economy Tanks: Study,” Canadian HR Reporter 22(6) (March 23, 2009): 1-2. R. Rhymer, “Under Pressure,” Management Today (March 2010): 50-52. R. Rhymer, “Under Pressure,” Management Today (March 2010): 50-52. Anonymous, “Layoff ‘Survivor’ Stress: How to Manage the Guilt and the Workload,” HR Focus 86(6) (August 2009): 4-6. S. Dobson, “Stress Levels High as Recession Recedes: Surveys,” Canadian HR Reporter 23(17) (October 4, 2010): 1, 12. S. Dobson, “Stress Levels High as Recession Recedes: Surveys,” Canadian HR Reporter 23(17) (October 4, 2010): 1, 12. S. Dobson, “Stress Levels High as Recession Recedes: Surveys,” Canadian HR Reporter 23(17) (October 4, 2010): 1, 12. Anonymous, “US Business Cycle Expansions and Contractions,” The National Bureau of Economic Research, http://www.nber.org/cycles/cyclesmain.html (accessed February 4, 2014). S. Dobson, “Stress Levels High as Recession Recedes: Surveys,” Canadian HR Reporter 23(17) (October 4, 2010): 1, 12. A. Duff, “Under Pressure,” Director 63(9) (May 2010): 31-32. A. Duff, “Under Pressure,” Director 63(9) (May 2010): 31-32. S. McGee, “Creative Giving,” Barron’s 84(48) (November 29, 2004): 21 (4 pages). S. McGee, “Creative Giving,” Barron’s 84(48) (November 29, 2004): 21 (4 pages). J. Hempel, “School Aid: It Takes a Web Site,” Bloomberg Businessweek (September 26, 2005). DonorChoose.org, Our Team, http://www.donorschoose.org/about/meet_the_team.html#senior (accessed February 4, 2014). J. Hempel, “School Aid: It Takes a Web Site,” Bloomberg Businessweek (September 26, 2005). DonorChoose.org, Our Team, http://www.donorschoose.org/about/meet_the_team.html#senior (accessed February 4, 2014). L. Conrad, “BofA, RBC Offer the Gift of Giving,” US Banker 117(2) (February 2007): 10. S. McGee, “Creative Giving,” Barron’s 84(48) (November 29, 2004): 21 (4 pages). K. Greene, “Next (A Special Report): The Good LifeHow to Change the World ... Whatever the size of your wallet; These ideas, with budgets from $20 to $20,000, can help you better the lives of others,” The Wall Street Journal (Eastern edition) (December 20, 2010): R.6. S. Prashad, “Pursuit of Happiness,” Canadian Business 81(14/15) (September 15, 2008): 20. Anonymous, “Business: Profiting from Non-profits; Schumpeter,” The Economist 396(8691) (July 17, 2010): 72. Anonymous, “Business: Profiting from Non-profits; Schumpeter,” The Economist 396(8691) (July 17, 2010): 72. Anonymous, “Business: Profiting from Non-profits; Schumpeter,” The Economist 396(8691) (July 17, 2010): 72. DonorsChoose.org, Who We Are, http://www.donorschoose.org/about (accessed February 18, 2014). Solution Manual for ORGB Organizational Behavior Debra L. Nelson, James Campbell Quick 9781305663916, 9781337148443
Download
Close
Close
