Chapter 1: Overview of the research
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. ?
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
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.