上海論文網是一家老字号代寫網站,專業提供代寫碩士畢業論文服務。

挑戰性壓力源對組織承諾的企業管理影響研究--工作旺盛感的中介作用

發布時間:2019-08-29 09:36 論文編輯:vicky 價格: 所屬欄目:企業管理 關鍵詞: 企業管理論文挑戰性壓力源組織承諾

本文是一篇企業管理論文, 本文通過強調在參與增強個人和專業能力而不是消耗資源的活動時保留重要資源的重要性,擴展了資源保護理論的理論貢獻。結果顯示工作場所中壓力源與發展中壓

本文是一篇企業管理論文, 本文通過強調在參與增強個人和專業能力而不是消耗資源的活動時保留重要資源的重要性,擴展了資源保護理論的理論貢獻。結果顯示工作場所中壓力源與發展中壓力源之間存在正相關關系,這導緻了解組織内自我決定的個人認為壓力挑戰不是挑戰,而是可以幫助他們在工作場所繁榮的機會。此外,結果表明,當員工獲得他們認為對自我發展和職業成長至關重要的知識和活力時,組織承諾是高的。

Chapter 1: Overview of the research

1.1.  Introduction
Talent  management,  recruitment  management,  supply  change  management,  marketing management and human resource management all have something in common. Not the fact that they  all serve  an  important  function  in management  and  success  of  an  organization,  but  the workforce  or  employees  that  are  employed  in  each  of  these divisions  serve  a  significant  and meaningful role in the organization and frankly speaking without these people the organization word  crumble  and  seize  to  exist.  Employees  have  a  significant  role  in  every  organization,  one that cannot be ignored and has been researched for years because of the effect and contribution that their talent, creativity, commitment and dedication has on organization success.
The  ever-changing  business  environment  has  birthed  turbulence  in  workplaces  that  can only  be  survived  by  those who  are  psychologically  fit  for  the  fight.  Highly  demanding,  highly stressful, burnout, high productivity, too much learning are some of the responses employees use to explain their day at work. Everyone joins an organization with the aim of excelling in their job and tasks and are partially ready for the intensity and demands of the job as informed during the interview or induction process. Once on board they get to discover the challenges, stressors and pressure that  come  with being  part  of  the  organization.  Challenge  stressors  are  also  deemed  as good stressor that employees experience which allows them  to introspect and ask why they are partaking in the particular task, who will benefit the most from this task, how this task will affect them  and  their  future  goal  and  lastly,  what  exactly  do  they  get  from  this  task.  Indicating that individual’s hard work and dedication is usually at the ether if the task at hand is beneficial for accomplishing both personal and organizational goals. If not, an individual usually does the bear minimum.  
.........................

1.2Research question
Challenge  stressors  encompasses  of  multitudes  of  stressors  that  individuals  encounter within an organization, stressors such as workover load, team ambiguity, employee nonsupport, unstructured work plan, lack of support etc.  The above stated according to authors can be used to  evaluate  challenge  stressors  encountered  by  employees  in  the organization. These  challenge stressors are experienced differently by individuals depending on their personality, achievements, experience,  personal  goals  and  psychological  well-being  which  are  intertwined  with  the organization goals, mission and vision. Hence, this level of understanding between an employee and  their  work  environment  can  breed  committed employees,  while  the  opposite  can  be  true. Those  whose  personal  goals  are  not  linked  to  the  organizations  vision or  goals  do  the  bear minimum  and  do  not  commit  to  the  organization  beyond  a  level  higher  than  what  is expected, which  decreases  their  performance  and  engagement,  and  ultimately  their  commitment  and  the organizations turnover.
This notion leads to the following research questions:
1.  Can challenging stressors influence employee’s organizational commitment?
2.  How will challenging stressors influence organizational commitment?
........................

Chapter 2: Literature Review

2.1  Organizational Commitment
Commitment  is  a  word  used  to  explain  an  individual’s  loyalty,  trust  and  affection  in  a relationship, friendship, organization and close environment.  According to (Mowday et al. 1982) organizational  commitment  is  a  strong confidence in  an  organization’s  values  and  goals,  a preparedness  to  apply  extensive  effort  on  behalf  of  an  organization  and  a desire  to maintain membership  in  the  organization.  In  addition,  (Meyer  &  Allen’s,  1997)  defines  organizational commitment  as  a  psychological  state  that  symbolizes  the  employee’s  relationship  with  an organization  and  its influence  on  their  decision  to  extend  and  continue  membership  in  the organization.  Furthermore,  (Klein,  Molloy, Cooper,  2009)  expresses  that  organizational commitment  is  an  individual  intentional  attachment  to  an  organization. Meaning  organization commitment is an act and process that occurs when an individual resonates with an organization and sees  beneficial  value  in  being  part  of  the  organization.  In  summarizing  organizational commitment  (Martin,  2007) states  that  organizational  commitment  has  the  following characteristics:
1.(identification) Identifying with the values, goals and mission of an organization,
2.(loyalty) A keen desire to maintain and retain investment within an organization,
3. (involvement) A preparedness  to  work extra hard in  order to  achieve the organization goals and objectives.
All  of  the  above  stated  have  a  positive  attribute  towards  organizational  commitment  but commitment  can  have  a positive  or  negative  effect  on  the  organization.  Its  negative  impact is seen  in  low  organizational  commitment  (under commitment)  and  positive  in  high  commitment known  as  over  commitment  (Cohan,  2003).  Employees  who  are unproductive,  loaf around  at work and continuously exhibit tendencies of under-committed are perceived to have low levels of commitment. Under commitment is characterized by persistent procrastination, fear of failure, fear  of  success  and no  persistent  achievement  (Cohan,  2003).  While,  over  commitment  is characterized  by  high  energy  levels,  job  and occupational  burnout,  pressure  to succeed and uncontrollable patterns at work.
..........................

2.2 Challenge Stressors
2.2.1 Concept
Individual nonsupport,  job ambiguity,  autonomy, job stress, personality and job overload are a few driving forces when an employee leaves an organization. Can these also be the reason why employees remain within an organization? Could these factors have the potential to assist in achieving personal  goals and organizational  goals, is employee stress bad  or  good for personal and organizational growth and development? Stress consist of two forms eustress known as good stress  and distress  known  as  bad  stress  (Selye,  1956).  However,  stress  on  job-related  level  can result  in  exhaustion,  sickness, and  high  turnover  (Hakanen,  Bakker,  &  Schaufeli,  2006).  In addition,  (Kyriacou,  2001)  found  that  continued  stress had  negative  behavioral,  physical  and mental  effects  on  employees  and  can  have  a  negative  effect  on  organization turnover  and commitment. The above mentioned indicates that stress has a negative influence on an individual and the activities they must partake in thus challenging their personality, working style and level of organizational commitment. According to occupational stress literature, stress has two factor models namely challenge stressors and hindrance stressors (Cavanaugh, Boswell, Roehling and Boudreau, 2000). According to  (McCualey  et al., 1994) challenge stressors have positive work results that can be linked to organizational needs such as work overload, time pressure, job scope and increased responsibility. In support (Cavanaugh et al., 2000) states, challenge stressors refer to workplace aspects that are demanding such as job complexity and ambiguity which have the potential to positively influence organization success (e.g., job satisfaction, job performance and creativity)  (  Le Pine,  Podsakoff,  &  Le Pine,  2005).  While,  hindrance  stressors  is connected  and aligned  with  negative  work  outcome  which  include  job  uncertainty,  workplace  politics, bureaucracy and job  anxieties  (McCauley  et  al.,  1994).  The  above  indicates  the  positive  and negative relation of stressors on employees.