REVIEW OF LITERATURE
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
Background of the study
Stress has forever been an element of human life. There are many definitions of stress. The National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (1999) defines stress as: ‘The harmful physical and emotional responses that occur when the requirements of the job do not match the capabilities, resources, needs of the worker’. However, a cognitive definition focuses more on the perceptions of an individual. One example is: ‘Stress occurs when the perceived pressure exceeds your perceived ability to cope’ (Palmer et al, 2003).
The cognitive model is normally used in stress management training, stress coaching and counselling settings. From the 17th century itself its origin can be traced in the literature to the 17th Century when it was identified with hardship, straits, adversity or affliction as meant by the Latin word: Stringere. In the 18th and 19th Centuries, the denotation of stress changed to indicate force, pressure, strain or strong effort with reference to an object or person (Hinkle 1973). The first suggestion to Stress in humans was made by Selye (1936) who conceptualised it as a non-specific response of the body to any demand made upon. Lazarus, Cohen, Folkman, Kanner and Schaefer (1980) clarified that stress is not only a reaction, but also a function of individual judgment of the situation. People do not respond straight to a stimulus as such; they respond to meaning of the stimulus in relation to their discernment of the environment. Events can be stressful, only when they are perceived to be hostile. Stress is dependent on the individual evaluation of what is at risk and what resources are available for meeting the demands posed. What is stressful for one individual may be usual for others and vice versa. What is stressful for an individual in some situations may not be stressful for the same individual in other situations.
The contemporary view of stress is that it arises from a lack of fit between a person and his/her environment when there is an helplessness to cope with the demands made (Harrison 1978). Today, people are living in the ‘Age of Stress’ (Pestonjee 1999). Understanding the implication of stress, its nature and complexities, its causes and determinants are important for maintaining human wellbeing and efficiency in the organisational and non organisational contexts.
Stress is a part of our everyday life. Modest level of stress is in fact essential for an individual to stay alert and active. High level of stress, on the other hand, would lead to harm to human wellbeing and performance. Stress is additive. It is necessary to prevent increasing of stress to hold it within a reasonable limit for harnessing its benefits, while avoiding its perils.
"Without stress, there would be no life". -Hans Selye (1956;1974) defines stress as a state, manifested by a specific syndrome of biological events. But he claims stress is not nervous tension, not the discharge of hormones from the adrenal glands, not simply the occurrence of some negative occurrence, not an entirely bad event, Seyle believes that stress is the spice of life, and that the absence of stress is death.
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK OF ROLE
Role is the position one engages in a public classification, and is defined by the functions one execute in reaction to the opportunity of the important members of a community, and one’s own outlook from that position or office. Role and office (or positions) are detaching concepts. According to Kats and Kahn “Office is essentially a relational concept, defining each position in terms of its relationships to others and to the system as a whole.” While place of work is a relational and power-related concept, role is an obligation concepts.
A role is not distinct lacking the prospect of the task correspondent, counting the task occupant. The location of a personal executive may be shaped in an organization, but his responsibility will be clear by the prospect that diverse person’s have from the personnel manager, and the outlook that he, in turn, has from the position. In this sense, the position gets defined in each scheme by the role correspondent, including the role occupier. The notions of role are fundamental for the incorporation of the individual with an institute. The institutions have its own construction and objectives. Likewise, the person has his individuality and wants .All these features interrelate with one another other and to various degrees get included into a role. Role is an innermost idea in work incentive as it is only through this that the person and group work together with each other.
An organization can be defined as a system of roles. But, a role itself is a organization. From the individual’s point of view, there are two role classifications: the structure of various roles that the individual carries and execute, and the system of different tasks of which his role is an element. The initial can be termed as role space and the next, a role set.
Each individual plays several roles in an organisation. All these roles constitute the role space of that individual. The concept of role broadens the connotation of work and the association of the workers with other important people in the system. The concept of the work is more rigid in nature, while role includes more flexible part of the work. The centre of attention on roles can be useful in setting up organizational efficiency. Herzberg (1968) drew attention to the need for improving jobs and giving more decorum to them. The work redesigning group tinted the need for connecting job holders in work related decisions and giving them more independence in work related matters.
Current life is full of stress, at the same time as organizations become more multifaceted, the possibility for stress increase. Stress is a result of socio-economic complexity and to some extent, its stimulant as well. People experience stress as they can no longer have control over what happens in their lives. Several terms that are synonymous with stress, have been used. In order to avoid confusion, the term will be used as following: stressor for stimuli which induce stress; stress for the affective (emotional) part in the experience of incongruence; symptoms for the physiological, behavioural and conceptual responses or changes: and coping for any behaviour that deals with the emotional component in the experience of incongruence, (i.e. stress). The term stress will be used here to refer to such terms and concepts as strain, pressure, etc. even as stress is inevitable in today’s complex life. Organizational stress arises from interaction between people and their jobs. And this is characterized by changes within people that vigour them to stray from their normal functioning. (Bzeer and Nawman. 1978). There are several personal consequences of organizational stress which have been identified. These responses to organizational stress can be categories as physiological, psychological and behavioural, cardio vascular disease, Castro intestinal disorders, respiratory problem, cancer, arthritis, headaches, bodily injuries, skin disorders and death or some of the purported physiological responses. For example research report supports the following generalization regarding linkages between various stressful persons – “job interaction and coronary heart disease (CHD), (Brief, at al., 1981).
a. Physiological stress experience by a employee that may be experience by guilt, worry, exhaustion, depression or event exhilaration, low self esteem, hostility, unhappiness and feeling blue.
b. Physiological stress in which one or several bio-systems are critically loaded, resulting in high blood pressure or abnormal physiological responses such as a stroke or harm.
STRESS IN ORGANIZATIONAL ROLES
Performing in an organisational position always wants connections with a set of related roles inside or outside the organisation. Role occupant in these connected roles does have their prospect from the role in difficulty; they function as Role correspondent for the crucial role, influencing how the crucial role should function. The role occupier in the crucial role also has potential from his/her own role and functions as a role correspondent. The role correspondents for the focal role are input for defining the main role; shaping how the crucial role should function to the description of the job designated authority in the organisation. On the contrary, an Organisational Role (Pareek 1993) is defined by the expectations of its role senders, which includes the role occupant, the superior (or boss), the direct reports (or subordinates), the peers, and in some cases, customers, suppliers, partners, team members and ‘process owners’.
Role stress usually results from troubles encountered in role performance. When these problems are determined, the ensuing role stresses decrease. This in turn promotes enhanced performance and effectiveness at the individual and organisational levels. Homogeneity of role stress specifies that the same kind of problems is existing all through the organisation and the same kind of resolutions hold good for the organisation. Heterogeneity of role stress, on the other hand, implies that different kinds of problems are prevailing in different parts of the organisation and different kinds of solutions/interventions are required for different parts of these organisations. Understanding these differences is useful for preparing a incident model for enhancing organisational performance and effectiveness.
An employee comes across problems or issues during the course of his/her role performance. The employee is expected to execute and convey on his/her role expectations in spite of obstructions, such as the employee finds it difficult to interact with the related roles, He /she may not be clear about his/her role expectations, role involves conflicting expectations etc.
Role Space Conflicts
As mentioned earlier, role space is the dynamic relationship between the various roles an individual occupies and his/her self. It has three main variables: self, the role under question, and the other roles she/he occupies. These conflicts may take several forms.
1. Self-Role Distance: This stress arises out of the conflict between the self-concept and the expectations from the role, as perceived by the role occupant. If a person occupies a role that he may subsequently find to be conflicting with the self concept, they feel stressed.
2. Intra-role conflict: Since an individual learns to develop expectations as a result of his socializing and identification with significant others, it is quite likely she/he sees a certain incompatibility between different expectations (functions) of his roles. For example, a professor may see incompatibility between the expectations of teaching students and of doing research. These may not be inherently conflicting, but the individual may perceive these as incompatible.
3. Role stagnation: As an individual grows older, he also grows in the role that he occupies in an organization. With the individual’s advancement, the role changes; and with his change in role, the need for taking on a new role becomes crucial. This problem of role growth becomes acute especially when an individual who has occupied a role for a long time enters another role in which she/he feels less secure. The new role demands that an individual outgrows the previous one and takes charge of the new role effectively. In organizations that are fact expanding, and which do not have any systematic strategy of human resource development, managers are likely to experience this stress of role stagnation when they are prompted.
4. Inter-role distance: When an individual occupies more than one role there are bound to be conflict between them. For example, a lady executive often faces a conflict between her organizational role as an executive and her familial role as a wife and mother. The demands on her time by her husband and children may be incompatible with organizational demands. Such inter-role conflicts are quite frequent in a modern society, where an individual in increasingly occupying multiple role in various organizations and group.
Role Set Conflicts
The role set consists of important persons who have varying expectations from the role that an individual occupies. The conflicts which arise as a results of incompatibility among these expectations by the significant others (and by the individual himself) are referred to as role set conflicts. These conflicts take the forms mentioned below:
5. Role ambiguity: When an individual is not clear about the various expectations which people have from the individual’s role, he/she faces role ambiguity. Role ambiguity may be due to lack of information available to a role occupant, or his/her lack of understanding available to him. Role ambiguity may be in relation to activities, responsibilities, priorities, norms or general expectations.
6. Role expectation conflict: When there are conflicting expectations or demands by different role senders (persons having expectations from the role), the role occupant experiences this type of stress. The conflicting expectations may be from the boss, subordinates, peer or clients.
7. Role overload: when a role occupants feels that there are too many expectations from the significant others in his role sets, he experiences role overload. Role overload has been measured by asking questions about people’s feelings on whether they can finish work given to them during a modified work day and whether the amount of work they do might interfere with how well it is done. Most executive role occupants experience role overload.
8. Role erosion: A role occupant may feel that the functions he may like to perform are being done by some other role. Role erosion is individual’s subjective feeling that some important expectation that he has from a role are shared by other roles within the role set. Role erosion is likely to be experienced in an organization that is redefining its role and creating new roles. In one organization, a particular role was abolished and in its place two were created to cater to executive and planning needs. This led to great erosion, and a feeling that new roles were less important than the previous roles.
9. Resources inadequacy: Resources inadequacy stress is experienced when the resources required by a role occupant to perform his role effectively are not available. Resources may include information, people, material, finance or facilities.
10. Personal inadequacy: when a role occupant feels that he does not have enough knowledge, skills or training to undertake a role effectively, or that he has not had time to prepare for the assigned role he may experience stress. Persons who are assigned new roles without adequate preparation or orientation are likely to experience feelings of personal inadequacy.
11. Role isolation: In a role set, the role occupant may feel that certain roles are psychologically closer to him, while other are at a much greater distance. The main criterion of distance is the frequency and ease of interaction. When linkages are strong, the role isolation will be low and vice versa. Role isolation can therefore be measured in terms of existing and the desired linkages. The gap between them indicate the amount of role isolation. To sum up, in relation to organizational roles, the following ten stresses are worth considering:
1. Self role distance (SRD)
2. Inter-role distance (IRD)
3. Role stagnation (RS)
4. Role isolation (RI)
5. Role ambiguity (RA)
6. Role expectation conflict (REC)
7. Role overload (RO)
8. Role erosion (RE)
9. Resources inadequacy (RIn)
10. Personal Inadequacy (PIn)
EVOLUTION OF ROLE STRESS FRAMEWORK
Several frameworks have been developed for the measurement of role stress. The concept of role stress was introduced by Kahn, et al. (1964) who identified three role stressors (i.e., role conflict, role ambiguity and role overload). Based on the framework of Kahn, et al. (1964), a role conflict scale comprising of eight items, and a role ambiguity scale comprising of six items was developed by Rizzo, House and Lirtzman (1970). These two scales were extensively used for role stress research for a long time in spite of controversies about their validity.
Only two role stressors were measurable until Beehr, Walsh and Taber (1976) developed a role overload scale comprising three items. This condition existed before the contribution made by Pareek (1982), as until this contribution research on stress in organisational roles was confined to role conflict, role ambiguity and role overload, even though these three role stressors ill represented the complexities of performance in organisational roles. He developed the Your Feelings About Your Role (YFAYR) Scale, which comprises 40 items to measure inter role distance, role stagnation, role ambiguity, role erosion, role overload, role isolation, role inadequacy and self role distance. A comprehensive role stress measurement scale comprising 50 items for the measurement of ten role stressors was thus, realised. The new instrument was called the Organisational Role Stress (ORS) Scale (Pareek 1983).
Role stress refers to the conflict and tension due to the roles being enacted by a person at any given point of time. (Pareek, 2003). Enacted in the context of organizations, such role stresses are called organizational role stress. Any organization may be perceived as a system of roles. These roles are different from positions or offices in the organization.
Role stress is the stress experienced by the persons because of their role (job) in the organization. Stress experienced in roles is referred to as Role Stress. High role stress is the result of a poor role design or poor ‘person environment fit’. Work stress jeopardises the role performance and wellbeing of the role occupant.
Stress can be caused by a number of factors called stressors. Factors that create stress can be grouped into two major categories organizational and personal.
Organizations have no shortage of factors that can cause stress. Pressure to avoid errors or complete tasks in a limited time period, a demanding supervisor and unpleasant coworkers are a few examples. The discussion that follows organizes stress factors into five categories; task, role and interpersonal demands; organization structure and organizational leadership.
Task demands are factors related to an employee’s job. They include the design of the person’s job (autonomy, task variety, degree of automation), working conditions and the physical work layout. Work quotas can put pressure on employees when their outcomes are perceived as excessive. The more interdependence between an employee’s tasks and the tasks of others the more potential stress there is. Autonomy on the other hand, tends to lessen stress.
Role demands relate to pressures placed on an employee as function of the particular role he or she plays in the organization. Role conflicts create expectations that may be hard to reconcile or satisfy. Role overload is experienced when the employee is expected to do more than time permits. Role ambiguity is created when role expectations are not clearly understood and the employee is not sure what he or she is to do.
The concept of roles and classified role stresses ten dimensions. These individual stressors are measured using an Organizational Role Stress (ORS) scale. The Ten role stressors identified are as follows:
Interpersonal demands are pressure created by other employees. Lack of social support from colleagues and poor interpersonal relationships can cause considerable stress, especially among employees.
Organizations structure can increase stress. Excessive rules and an employee’s lack of opportunity to participate in decisions that affect him or her are examples of structural variables that might be potential sources of stress.Organizational leadership represents the supervisory style of the organization’s company officials .Some mangers create a culture characterized by tension, fear and anxiety. They establish unrealistic Pressures to perform in the short run impose excessively tight controls and routinely fire employees who don’t measure up. This style of leadership flows down through the organization and affects all employees.
Personal factors that can create stress include family issues, personal economic problems and inherent personality characteristics because employees bring their personal problems to work with them. A full understanding of employees stress requires a manager to be understanding of these personal factors.
CAREER JOB SATISFACTION
We all know people who, while they constantly complain about their jobs, make no effort to explore their other options. This is because, as much as they dislike their jobs, they are identified with their career roles and the money, status and other perks their jobs afford them. They fear that, if they took another position, they might lose their jobs or fail to perform as well, and they'd lose the benefits to which they're so attached. If you think of your career as if it were part of you, that doesn't necessarily mean you love it. In fact, the opposite is often true. Because identification creates a constant fear of loss, people who are identified with their jobs see work as a source of anxiety and frustration. Their work progresses slowly and painfully, as their anxiety has them second-guessing everything they do and obsessing about others' possible reactions.
The positive or negative affect associated with a job defines job satisfaction (Thurstone, 1931). Some of the ways organizations can create satisfied employees include offering flexible working hours, professional growth opportunities, interesting work (Hackman Oldham, 1976), autonomy, job security, a good supervisor, good benefits, competitive pay, and opportunities for promotion (Cranny, Smith, stone, 1992). It is important to note that what makes one worker satisfied may not make another worker satisfied. For some people, interesting work is paramount. Others place higher emphasis on having coworkers they like. Still others feel that the pay and benefits they receive are most important. Just as in the hiring process, a match between what you want and what the organization can provide will result in a successful outcome for both parties.
A recent survey found that listening to music at work leads to higher levels of reported employee satisfaction. About one-third of those participating in a Spherion Workplace Snapshot survey conducted by Harris Interactive in 2006 reported they listened to an iPod, MP3 player, or other personal music device while working (Spherion, 2006). Seventy-nine percent of the participants reported that listening to music improved their job satisfaction and/or productivity at work. Allowing workers to listen to music may become more and more popular in jobs where music does not interfere with co-workers, safety, or job performance. Having happy workers contributes to an organization’s success.
Career is one of the important parts of our daily lives which cause a great deal of stress. Due to the competitive nature of the job environment most of the people in the world are spending their time for job related work purposes resulting ignore the stressor those are influencing their work and life. Usually people are more worry about their outcome of their work that can even affect the way they treat other people and how they communicate with their peers and customers. Job stress is a common workplace problem experienced by all professionals irrespective of their nature of work; however, this phenomenon is more common in situations that are deadline driven. Software house is one such sector, which is affected profoundly by this challenge, and professionals serving these organizations are often observed under huge stress. Software professionals’ nature of job is highly time-bound, client-oriented and technology intensive. The trends in turn, coupled with many factors, contribute towards stress. These factors are extremely diverse, including change of technology, client interaction, fear of obsolescence, family support, long working hours, and work overload etc. Stress results from a mismatch between demands and pressures on the person, on the one hand and their knowledge and abilities, on the other. This includes not only the pressures of work exceeds the workers ability to cope but also where the workers knowledge and abilities are not sufficiently utilized and that is a problem for them.
Job Satisfaction is a yardstick for appraisal of the quality of work experiences as mentioned by Locke (1976). He also reported that over hundreds of articles have been compiled on this topic, and are still growing with exponential numbers. Among the most accepted definitions of job satisfaction is the one by Locke (1969) who defines job satisfaction as “a positive emotional feeling, a result of one’s evaluation towards his job and his job experience by comparing between what he expects from his job and what he actually gets from it”. Job satisfaction may also be discussed as the result of the interaction of the employees and his perception towards his job and work environment (Locke, 1976). The antecedents that affects the job satisfaction, may be a large number of, like work values, one’s maladjustment, work rewards, work ethics, personal attributes, hours of work, emotions, performance, threat to job stability, work environment, organizational social concern Ronald and Steade (1976); Fisher (2000); Ravinder and Browne (1977);Sekaran (1989); Clifford and Macue (1997); Eyupoglu and Saner (2009) and others studied by different scholars. In these different dimensions the rewards structure have strong relationship with job satisfaction (Clifford, 1985). Earlier Job rewards have been studied as set of the task itself, salary, promotions, behavior of supervisors and coworkers, cohesiveness of work groups, security, fringe benefits, and working environment (Locke 1976; Gruenberg, 1979). The demographic variables are also very important while a study is being conducted on relationship of work rewards with job satisfaction. The work of authors like Kalleberg and Loscocco (1983); Donald and Abdullah (1987); Douglas et al. (1991) demonstrated how age combines with work to produce differences in work-role.
RATIONAL OF THE STUDY
This research study seeks to find an empirical model for assessing the level of role stress and to know the areas which contribute for career satisfaction in IT professionals. The nature of the job of IT professionals’ is highly time-bound, client-oriented and technology concentrated. The trends in turn, coupled with many factors, contribute towards stress. These factors are extremely varied, including change of technology, client interaction, long working hours, and work overload etc. This study explores the nature of stress amongst IT professionals’, and endeavours to recognize the key factors responsible for creating role stress amongst these professionals, which limit their overall productivity. Rapid growth of technology and its wide use of these technologies in organisation has increased the competition diverse among organizations across the sphere, and the worker of the 21st century is facing more challenges than before.
These undeniable forces in the organizations are incessantly alter the business strategies, reshuffling the hierarchy and altering managerial practices, thus, forcing the organizations to adapt innovative business models .
The study of IT development belongs as much to the social sciences as it does to technology. Globalization and technological innovations are bringing about new challenges to the study of mental health and stress management. Record has confirmed that with each new technological innovation there have been reflective changes in the quality of life of human beings, societal changes follow suit the scientific changes. While each job has its own stress, IT jobs are somewhat different from our traditional and typical concept of secured employment: IT jobs are mostly contractual with less job security but high pay, and entail strong competitiveness, along with a globalized life style. There are a few evidences that IT jobs are offering an elevated standard of life, but taking tolls on the mental health and relationship aspects of the professionals (Bhattacharya and Jayanti, 2007).
COPING WITH ROLE STRESS AMONG IT POFESSIONALS
When an individual experience stress, they try to adopt ways of dealing or coping, with it as they cannot stay in a state of pressure. In IT sector the coping mechanism is very much required by the employees to beat the stress. Normally, effective coping strategies are those strategies, which deal with the problem of stress as a challenge, and enhance the ability of dealing with it.
Research has shown that social support helps a person to effectively cope with stress. On the other hand, studies have also shown that voluntary support may have negative consequences. Effective strategies of coping include efforts to increase physical and mental readiness to cope, creative diversions for emotional enrichment, strategies of dealing with the basic problems causing stress and collaborative work to solve such problems (Pareek, 2002).
It is helpful for both individuals and organizations to look at the approach that they are using to cope with stress. Lack of a coping strategy may lead to lack of productivity. Coping styles or strategies can either be seen as a general trait or a character appropriate to specific stress situations. People can be classified into two types on the basis of strategies employed to deal with stress. The first category consists of persons who decide to suffer, deny the experienced or avoidance strategy is termed dysfunctional styles of coping with stress situations. The second category consists of persons who face the realities of stress consciously, and take some action to solve problems either by themselves or with the help of other people. These active approaches are termed functional styles of dealing with stressful situations; these find favour with social scientist as they are supposed to be more effective and healthy than dysfunctional styles.(Pareek, 2002). Folkman et al. (1986) have proposed eight coping strategies based on factor analysis of an instrument: confrontive coping, distancing, self control, seeking social support, accepting responsibility, escape – avoidance, problem solving and positive reappraisal. Different approaches to the study of coping have been used in various investigations. Some have emphasized general coping traits styles or dispositions, while others have preferred to study active, ongoing coping strategies in particular stress situations. The former approach assumes that an individual will cope the same way in most stressful situations. A person’s coping style is typically assessed by personality tests. Whether the person actually behaves under stress as predicted by the tests, depend largely on the adequacy of the personality assessed and many other internal and external factors. That affects the person’s actions and reactions in any given situation. (Bardwell, 2002). On the other hand , those focussed on the active coping strategies rather to view an individual’s behaviour as it occurs in a stressful circumstances and then carry on to deduce the particular coping processes implied by the behaviour.
Coping strategies can be conventionalised as a product of a combination of externality, internality and mode of coping. Externality is the reaction that external factors are accountable for role stress, ensuing in hostility towards, and blaming of, these external factors. It may also indicate the tendency to expect and get a solution for the stress for the stress from within external sources. Externality may be high or low. Internality is quite the opposite. The respondent may perceive himself as responsible and may himself as responsible for the stress, and may therefore expect a solution for the stress from within. Internality may be high or low. Coping may take the form of avoiding the situation (reactive strategy) or confronting and approaching the problem (proactive strategy). This is a mode of coping. (Desai .T.P 2009, Pareek, U. 2002)
Combining the two aspects of each of the three dimensions, we have eight possible strategies for coping with stress. These concepts are borrowed from Rosenzweig (1978). Avoidance mode is characterized by (a) aggression and blame, (b) helplessness and resignation, (c) minimizing the significance of stress full situations by accepting it with resignation, (d) denying the presence of stress or finding an explanation for it. Such behaviours help a person in not doing anything in relation to the stress. On the other hand, the approach mode is characterized by (a) hope that things will improve, (b) effort made by the subject will help to solve the situation, (c) expectations that others will help, or asking for help in relation to stress, and (d) jointly doing something about the problem. (Desai .T.P 2009, Pareek, U. 2002) The awareness of these strategies will definitely help the IT professionals to deal with the stress level of work.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Unfortunately, stress is a common part of life as we see the current scenario – something few of us can avoid altogether. Stress is a many-faceted process that occurs in reaction to events or situation in our environment. Work related factor that can sometimes generate intense levels of stress involves performance appraisal, procedures used for evaluating employee’s performance among IT professionals. The present study investigates in understanding effect of role stress on career satisfaction among the IT professionals. An attempt has been made to review the literature pertaining to the studies on the role stress and career satisfaction. The literature review has contributed in understanding the variables, connecting the present study and shown a path for moving forward in the research.
The study on “Work-family interpersonal capitalization: Sharing positive work events at home”. In a 3-week experience-sampling study of 52 full-time employees, the researcher investigated the within-individual relationships among positive work events, affective states, and job satisfaction. They also examined the influence of work-family interpersonal capitalization (sharing work events with one's spouse or partner at home) on employees' job and relationship satisfaction. Results revealed that positive events influenced job satisfaction through positive effect, and work-family interpersonal capitalization on the most positive work event of the day positively impacted job satisfaction over and above the effects of the event's pleasantness and of the number of other positive work events experienced that day which was investigated by Remus Ilies et.al (2011)
One of the study highlighted women in senior IT jobs are more likely to be in management than men are: 36.9% of female IT leaders hold management jobs, compared with 19% of male IT leaders, according to the Anita Borg Institute, a non-profit group that works to increase the impact of women in technology. Researchers blame the midcareer departures most often on the feeling of being left out of the predominantly male IT department culture, a lack of mentors, work/life imbalance and little access to the same types of networks that men enjoy. It was investigated by Stacy Collett’s (2010) studied on “Women in IT: The Long Climb To the Top”.
A study on “ The Shrinking Female IT Workforce”, where IT staff also acquiesced to two weeks of unpaid vacation, while the rest of the company took one week of unpaid leave -- all to ensure that the four IT employees kept their jobs. Sheets like her work but she wonders what a job outside of IT would be like. Many women in IT found themselves in a similarly precarious position in 2009. In January, the unemployment rate for men held at 10%, while it hovered at 7.9% for women, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. Researchers blame the midcareer departures most often on isolation, a dearth of mentors, and a lack of access to the types of networks that men have, Catherine Ashcraft, senior research scientist, says. Stacy Collett (2010) studied that Companies are making strides toward closing the gap on women's pay and opportunities every day.
Cha, Jongseok et.al (2009) conducted a study on “ Person-career fit and employee outcomes among research and development professionals ” . One of the study aims to examine the effects of person-career (PC) fit on employee outcomes. It is based on a sample of 1128 research and development (RD) professionals and 222 project managers in 15 South Korean organizations. The results revealed that a managerial PC fit has a curvilinear relationship with job satisfaction and organizational commitment, and a technical PC fit has a curvilinear relationship with job satisfaction. For example, job satisfaction increased as career orientation increased toward career development opportunities, then decreased when career development opportunities exceeded career orientation. In addition, as expected, job satisfaction and organizational commitment are higher when career orientation and career development opportunities are both high rather than low. For work performance, contributions to organizations increased as managerial career orientations increased toward managerial career opportunities, then decreased when managerial career o pportunities exceeded managerial career o rientation.
The study called “Personality, Career Satisfaction, and Life Satisfaction: Test of a Directional Model” was carried out by John W. Lounsbury et.al (2009) where A conceptual model proposing paths from personality traits to career satisfaction and life satisfaction and from career satisfaction to life satisfaction was evaluated in a field study by structural equations modelling using LISREL 8. Participants were a convenience sample of 1,352 information science professionals. An exploratory maximum likelihood common factor analysis revealed two oblique personality factors, the first comprised of extraversion, optimism, assertiveness, openness, and emotional stability and the second consisting of conscientiousness and tough-mindedness. Results indicated a good fit for a two-factor personality model showing significant links between both personality factors and career satisfaction, between the second personality factor and life satisfaction, and between career and life satisfaction. Findings are discussed in terms of comparisons to previous research, limitations, and areas for further research, with emphasis on the importance of personality in relation to career satisfaction and the relationship between career and life satisfaction.
Survey questionnaires were sent to state government IT employees in the United States to analyze how job characteristics, work environment, pay satisfaction, and advancement opportunities influence IT employee job satisfaction. The study results showed that job clarity, effective communications with management, a participatory management approach, organizational support of career development, opportunities for advancement, and family-friendly policies are all significant variables affecting the job satisfaction of IT employees. The effect of pay satisfaction on IT employee job satisfaction was not significant. The study on “IT Employee Job Satisfaction in the Public Sector” Soonhee Kim (2009) also found gender differences in factors affecting IT employee job satisfaction. Job clarity was found to have a positive effect on male IT employees’ job satisfaction, but was not significant for female IT employees. Among female IT employees, available family-friendly policies were found to have a positive effect on job satisfaction but it showed no significant effect on job satisfaction among male IT employees.
Peng Wang, John J Lawler, Kan Shi (2010) conducted a study on “Work-Family Conflict, Self-Efficacy, Job Satisfaction, and Gender: Evidences From Asia” where they examined the relationships between two types of work-family conflict (work interfering with family [WIF] and family interfering with work [FIW]), job-related self-efficacy, work satisfaction, and supervisor satisfaction in China and India. Central to the analysis is a comparison of the authors' model between men and women, where important differences were projected to exist. Results showed that FIW was negatively associated with self-efficacy. WIF was negatively associated with work satisfaction. The relationships between WIF and work satisfaction and between FIW and self-efficacy were more negative for women than for men. No significant differences were found in any of these relationships between China and India. Implications and directions for future research are discussed.
Using a sample of 151 criminal justice graduates, this paper explores how education, measured both as a trait (focusing on quantity) and a situational characteristic (focusing on perceptions of quality of the education) influences career satisfaction. Results showed that level of education did not influence career satisfaction, but the measures assessing perceived quality of education did influence satisfaction. Criminal justice graduates who rated higher on satisfaction with skill development, satisfaction with social science/criminal justice knowledge, program satisfaction, and overall satisfaction were more likely to be very satisfied with their careers than those who scored lower on these measures. Furthermore, males were more likely to be very satisfied with their careers than females. “Exploring the Ties between Career Satisfaction and Education: Trait versus Situational Approaches” investigation was carried out by Brian Payne et.al (2010). Implications focus on balancing skills and social science frameworks in criminal justice curricula and expanding future career satisfaction research to more broadly define and measure education.
- Quote paper
- Vriti Vasudevan (Author)Dr. R. Subasree (Author)Sreehari Ravindranath (Author)Joseph Thomas R (Author), 2011, Influence of organizational role stress on career satisfaction among it professionals, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/285071