The availability of personal and external coping resources: Thier impact on job stress and employee attitudes during organizational restructuring

Shaw, James B.; Fields, Mitchell W.; Thacker, James W.; Fisher, Cynthia D.

doi:10.1080/02678379308257064

Cited by 85 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Öhrming, 2008). That role stress does not always increase with a change has also been shown in other studies (Olson & Tetrick, 1988;Shaw et al, 1993).…”

Section: Difference In Ownership and The Consequences For Employeessupporting

confidence: 79%

“…Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). The uncertainty associated with organizational change has, in previous research, been shown to be associated with negative consequences for employees, such as more stress, poorer health and more negative work-related attitudes, such as lower job satisfaction and an increased willingness to resign (Ashford, 1988;Bordia et al, 2004;Olson & Tetrick, 1988;Shaw, Fields, Thacker, & Fisher, 1993). For example, the initial phase of an organizational change poses the greatest uncertainty and has been shown to be more adverse to health than the change itself, and rumors of possible layoffs have been shown to give worse health consequences than when a dismissal is realized (Dekker & Schaufeli, 1995;Ferrie, Shipley, Marmot, Stansfeld, & Smith, 1995;Paulsen et al, 2005).…”

Section: Consequences For Employeesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Social status is relevant in the organizational context because it is so strongly associated with access to resources and opportunity to feel a sense of control (Geyer et al, 2006;Henry, 2005) and, although in a more complex way, is linked to demands. Access to resources and the ability to feel a sense of control are important determinants of health in life in general (Marmot, 2004;Wilkinson, 2005), but these factors are perhaps of greatest importance in situations where a person could feels threatened, as with organizational changes (Martin et al, 2005;Shaw et al, 1993). It is particularly critical when a person does not feel that she or he has the resources needed to cope with a situation (cf.…”

Section: The Importance Of Social Statusmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

How Privatization and Corporatization Affect Healthcare Employees' Work Climate, Work Attitudes and Ill-health: Implications of Social Status

Falkenberg¹

2010

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Political liberalization and increased public costs have placed new demands on the Swedish public sector. Two ways of meeting these novel requirements have been to corporatize and privatize organizations. With these two organizational changes, however, comes a risk of increased insecurity and higher demands on employees; the ability to handle these changes is likely dependent on their social status within an organization. The general aim of the thesis is to contribute to the understanding of how corporatization and privatization might affect employees' work climate, work attitudes and ill-health. Special importance is placed on whether outcomes may differ depending on the employees' social status in the form of hierarchic level and gender. Questionnaire data from Swedish acute care hospitals were used in three empirical studies. Study I showed that physicians at corporatized and privatized hospitals reported more positive experiences of their work climate compared with physicians at a public administration hospital. Study II showed that privatization had more negative ramifications for a middle hierarchic level (i.e., registered nurses) who reported deterioration of work attitudes, while there were no major consequences for employees at high (physicians) or low (assistant nurses) hierarchic levels. Study III found that although the work situation for women and men physicians were somewhat comparable (i.e., the same occupation, the same organization), all of the differences that remained between the genders were to the detriment of women. The results of this thesis suggest that corporatizations and privatizations do not necessarily imply negative consequence for employees. However, the consequences appear to differ between groups with different social status. Employees whose immediate work situation is affected but who do not have sufficient resources to handle the requirements associated with an organizational change may perceive the most negative consequences.

show abstract

“…Öhrming, 2008). That role stress does not always increase with a change has also been shown in other studies (Olson & Tetrick, 1988;Shaw et al, 1993).…”

Section: Difference In Ownership and The Consequences For Employeessupporting

confidence: 79%

Section: Consequences For Employeesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Importance Of Social Statusmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How Privatization and Corporatization Affect Healthcare Employees' Work Climate, Work Attitudes and Ill-health: Implications of Social Status

Falkenberg¹

2010

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Within the context of organizational change, support from co-workers has been linked empirically to members' ability to cope with organizational change (e.g., Shaw, Fields, Thacker, & Fisher, 1993;Terry, Callan, & Santori, 1996). Specifically, Shaw et al reported that increased perceived personal control within and outside the organization were crucial to minimizing the harmful effects of organizational changes, while Terry et al showed that the availability of social support enhanced employees' adjustment to a variety of stressors in a change setting.…”

Section: Change Internal Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

An International Study of Organizational Change: A Simultaneous Analysis of Process, Context, and Individual Attributes

Jung¹

2003

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Because organizational change by its very nature is not linear, the most frequent psychological state resulting from organizational change is uncertainty (see Ashford, 1988;Begley, 1998;Callan, 1993;Carnall, 1986;Gemmil & Smith, 1985;Jick, 1985 Indeed, employees are likely to experience uncertainty over many different facets of a changing work environment. For instance, Shaw, Fields, Thacker, and Fisher (1993) argued that role stress is likely to result from uncertainty associated with organizational change. Role conflict may be particularly prevalent during organizational change, given that the expectations of the new organization may be in direct contrast to the expectations of the old organization.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Longitudinal Study of Employee Adaptation to Organizational Change: The Role of Change-Related Information and Change-Related Self-Efficacy.

Jimmieson

Terry

Callan

2004

Journal of Occupational Health Psychology

282

247

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined the role of information, efficacy, and 3 stressors in predicting adjustment to organizational change. Participants were 589 government employees undergoing an 18-month process of regionalization. To examine if the predictor variables had long-term effects on adjustment, the authors assessed psychological well-being, client engagement, and job satisfaction again at a 2-year follow-up. At Time 1, there was evidence to suggest that information was indirectly related to psychological well-being, client engagement, and job satisfaction, via its positive relationship to efficacy. There also was evidence to suggest that efficacy was related to reduced stress appraisals, thereby heightening client engagement. Last, there was consistent support for the stress-buffering role of Time 1 self-efficacy in the prediction of Time 2 job satisfaction.Organizational change is typically activated by a relevant environmental shift that, once recognized by the organization, leads to an intentionally generated response (Porras & Silvers, 1991). In this respect, organizational change is intended to alter key organizational variables that then affect the members of the organization and their work-related behaviors, resulting in changes in a variety of organizational outcomes. Thus, organizational change can be viewed as a critical life event, which has the potential to evoke stress reactions and other negative consequences in employees. In this respect, employees are confronted with a unique set of workplace stressors resulting from a changing work environment. Because organizational change by its very nature is not linear, the most frequent psychological state resulting from organizational change is uncertainty (see

show abstract

The availability of personal and external coping resources: Thier impact on job stress and employee attitudes during organizational restructuring

Cited by 85 publications

References 28 publications

How Privatization and Corporatization Affect Healthcare Employees' Work Climate, Work Attitudes and Ill-health: Implications of Social Status

How Privatization and Corporatization Affect Healthcare Employees' Work Climate, Work Attitudes and Ill-health: Implications of Social Status

An International Study of Organizational Change: A Simultaneous Analysis of Process, Context, and Individual Attributes

A Longitudinal Study of Employee Adaptation to Organizational Change: The Role of Change-Related Information and Change-Related Self-Efficacy.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About