Stress in the Work-Place

Evidence for the efficacy of secondary interventions, in particular is inconsistent. Stress management training is often generic in nature, rather than targeting specific work related stressors, and there may be little preliminary diagnosis of the needs of employees or the organisation. Employee assistance programmes which typically incorporate counseling and support services for employees have shown more promising approach in dealing with stressors.

Berridge and Cooper (1993) defined EAP as: “A programmatic intervention at the workplace, usually at the level of the individual employee, using behavioral science knowledge and methods for the control of certain work related problems (notably alcoholism, drug abuse and mental health) that adversely affect job performance, with the objective of enabling the individual to return to making her or his full contribution and to attaching full functioning in personal life”

Eastern Pennsylvania Business Journal, Editorial, April 1992: " While it may seem like yet another expense tugging at your straining purse strings, consider the words of a prominent member of our business community - "the cost of doing nothing is far greater… If you haven't got an EAP, look into it. It could be the best cost saving program you ever implemented." 

Counseling is slowly becoming more widely available to employees within many organisations. This form of intervention aims to help individuals develop an insight into their problems, by assisting them with their symptoms of stress before they spiral into a catastrophe (in some extreme cases).  The basis of this method is talking privately about problems.  To this effect, confidentiality as an issue becomes imperative, paving the way for a deferential, trusting relationship developing between the client (employee) and the counsellor.  Normally although supportive, the counsellor gives not very much advice but rather, encourages the clients to draw on their own resources.  They are placing the employee in a better position to deal more effectively with his or her own life in future, doubts have been raised by several schools of thought, concerning the notion of using stress counseling as a means of curbing stress.  Firstly these skeptics propose that, employees should gear themselves up instead of being offered counselling.  They are of the view that, this form of therapy discourages self-reliance.  This argument is however ill founded, for the basis of this form of therapy is to equip employees with tools enabling them to withstand the test of time.  Thus in other words, allowing employees to develop their own potential.  

Recent findings by ISMA suggest that, only one in three issues dealt with by councelling sessions are actually work-related.  The rest are attributed to the employee’s private life.  If these findings are conclusive then it can be inferred that, introducing stress management programmes to the work place is sarcasm and a waste of resources, since the objective of this scheme is to combat job stress and not stress from outside of work.  However this argument is counterbalanced by the fact that, realizing problems in employees’ private lives may help management to become more aware of the employees’ situation and may help to explain factors such as absenteeism or a poor attitude.

Regardless of its negative aspects, counseling is slowly becoming more available to employees within many organisations.  Studies have shown that organisations where councelling exist, for example the Post Office, positive results have been reaped.  It is reported that staff who took advantage of this programme (at the Post Office) has decreased their distress levels, resulting in an increases in motivation, productivity and of course large financial savings.  

From the above analysis, it can safely be said that councelling as a mechanism for combating stress is of utmost paramount importance.  Statistics in the 1990’s evidences the fact that people seeking councelling is on the rise.  The reality of the situation is that, more and more organisations are realizing the mere fact that the positive side of the scheme and the effectiveness over-whelming over shadows its negative aspects.  With this in mind, then the notion of what counselling is about becomes known and accepted.

In conclusion, it can be agreed that the process of counselling is both a powerful weapon in fighting stress in the workplace and also a productive experience.  It also offers a whole new horizon of personal learning and growth.  It has been said that many who have taken advantage of these sessions have gone through a life changing experience.  If this is the case then why has this form of programmes attracted so much criticism?  The problem with these sceptics is that, they seem to take a subjective view.  It is time for these detractors to take an objective view of it and realize that as said earlier, counselling arms the individual with the ammunition needed to stand the test of times.

 

Organisation orientated interventions have proved more well-liked within organisations than primary level interventions or dealing with the sources of the job stress for many reasons, namely for the reason that of the cost benefits and the analysis of such programmes has produced some notable results also the professional ‘interventionists’ the counsellors, physicians and clinicians liable for health care feel more comfortable with changing individuals than changing organisations also it is well thought-out to be easier and less disruptive to business to change the individuals than to embark on an extensive and potentially expensive organisational development programme, the outcome of which be uncertain

3 Stress Management Training (SMT) and its effectiveness

Employee assistance programmes deal explicitly with employees with elevated levels of psychological distress such as extreme anxiety and depression. They are treatment focused and serve a curative function. Stress-management training programmes on the other hand are essentially preventive in orientation because they are directed at employees who do not have specific stress related problems.

The outcome of organisational stress coping and management strategies could lead to the:

1. Effective instrumental coping may eliminate the source of stress by directly altering the perceptions involved and thus, reduce the need to mobilise action and the physiological adaptive response that has been associated with disease (see Selye, 1956) (Edwards, 1988; Harrison, 1976; Lazarus, 1976). Unfortunately, the assessments of such dynamics are difficult to assess (Lazarus, 1976).

2. The strain outcome itself may serve as a coping strategy in that for example, illness may lead to seeking medical treatment that is maintained because of secondary gains (Whitehead, Fedoravicius, Blackwell & Wooley, 1979).

In conclusion, there appears to be no single recipe or point of intervention to be recommended for the management of stress in all persons, in all organisations, and in all circumstances (Newman & Beehr, 1979 p.39). Therefore, it seems that neither organisational nor individual action alone will yield optimum preventive stress management in an organisation. Rather, a carefully integrated approach (that moves away from the view that stress is an individual problem) is needed to bring about psychological stability and well being to employees. It involves the introduction of stress management courses, normally in the form of information, training and advice.  SMT’s are normally conducted by external providers, and in contrast to EAPs delivered to a group of employees as opposed to a one to one session.  They are seen as a preventative measure rather than a curative one (EAPs).

SMTs normally include a variety of skills including; time management, relaxation techniques, coping, and assertiveness as mentioned by R.Briner.  Organisations must not only concern themselves on the psychological aspects of stress but also on the physical health of employees.  Medical science supports the view that, the body and mind are inseparable.  Subsequently it follows that, psychological problems can be created by a physical cause and vice versa. In an attempt to promote physical health, training sessions on healthy lifestyle is conducted.  This campaign focuses on programs such as fitness exercises and anti-smoking, and is believed to be effective.  This is evidenced by the research findings of Carol Johnson, a validated ISMA (UK) trainer in the areas of health, fitness and stress management.  

The research conducted in 1998 amongst the staff at Staffordshire Probation Service, sought to assess the impact of SMTs in the workplace.  The findings were quite impressive.  Of the 87% of staff who suffered from job stress, an amazing 62% of them felt they were more productive at work after undergoing a series of training sessions ranging from relaxation skills to dietary advice.  However encouraging these figures may seem, SMTs have attracted negative comments from several quarters.  These critics argue that, such programs because they are voluntary, are not actually attended by those who are prone to stress.  This may be due to the fact that, these individuals may fear the results of their stress profile being used against them, thus hindering their prospects of promotion.  These critics furthermore contend that, those who attend these sessions are those employees who do not need this training.

This line of thinking is however ill founded.  This is because, since SMT is a preventive measure, trained individuals will benefit themselves as well as their firms in the long run although it comes at a cost to organisations in the short run.  

Furthermore critics also argue that for an SMT to succeed, it must at least possess the following characteristics; initial assessment of training needs, training designed to change behaviour, a supportive environment, and finally evaluation.  Clearly, SMTs according to these critics do not satisfy these criteria.  For such training schemes to be effective, it is suggested that there must be an uninterrupted cycle of assessment, intervention and evaluation, and also employers should be educated on the benefits of their investment on this scheme.  The last form of a SMT under evaluation in this essay is the reduction of employee exposure to stress.

4 Reducing Employee Exposures to Stress

Against a backdrop of global markets and new technologies, major transformations have taken place on the shop floor within the past decade, and the trend looks set to continue.  A report published by the HSE found that these changes often failed to achieve the expected organisational benefits and also on many occasions had a detrimental effect on the mental health of those involved.  Research has shown that there are many work factors, which can cause stress.  The report says that one important way to prevent or reduce employee exposure to stress is to re-design the way that jobs are structured, such as increasing workers’ discretion to make their own decisions.  Key elements that emerge from the research done in the report mentioned above are that: Work design can reduce stress and promote a healthy, effective workforce, particularly by increasing employees’ control over their tasks and ensuring clearly defined work roles. Work designs should be suitable for the situation (i.e. introducing team-working where there is little need for employees to co-operate together can be worse than no change at all). A participative approach to managing change is likely to make it more acceptable to employees and ultimately more successful for the organisation.

Thus it can be seen that employers can help to change or reduce stressors, by adopting the above suggestions.  As a result, it is important that managers are trained in stress-symptom identification, e.g. the stress caused from long hours.  One example of where employers attempted to reduce employee exposure to stress was seen at Lloyds TSB Bank.  The Bank recently introduced a work option policy, which gives its employees more choice over working patterns.  Staff can now opt for job sharing, shorter working weeks or teleporting.  The company has recognised that a burnt-out workforce is an unproductive workforce.  Research among the existing workforce confirmed that staff had had enough of working long hours, “Our staff were saying we only get one crack at this thing called life and we want to have a bash at it”.

Arguably removing the source of the problems that people are experiencing seems the most appealing course of action.  After all prevention is better than cure.  Yet logically this approach is probably the least common, as it can be costly to initiate such radical changes.  Job redesign and task restructuring usually happen for business reasons other than tackling stress.  However it has been seen at times that this approach does not work. As R.Briner mentions in his article “A recent review that I carried out with Shirley Reynolds concluded: The available evidence suggests that these interventions often have little or no effect.  Where they do have effects, these may include both positive and negative ones”.

Consequently, it has been seen that, these methods have been known to work in the past, however while short-term improvements are common after jobs are redesigned, few of them remain six months down the line, meaning both a waste of time and money for the firm involved.

5 Conclusion

From the above discussions, it can arguably be inferred that, stress will never be eliminated from all occupations and working environments.  However having said this, organisations are under an obligation to provide SMTs in the workplace, otherwise the result will be confrontation with the law or trade unions resulting in large pay outs to employees.  

This is evidenced in a recent case where a teacher from South Wales was awarded £250,000 as a result of job stress.  

The Health and Safety Executive Guidelines (HSE) highly recommends stress audit as a good starting line for employers seeking to prevent job stress.  This program helps a lot by showing that the employer acknowledges stress as not a personal problem, but an issue which management and the organisation are committed to tackling.  

Another recommendation is that, specific stress-related problems must be addressed using specific solutions.  For example if there is a problem of inflexible work schedule, employers must see if there is scope for flexible work patterns.  The basis of this recommendation is that, there are several causes of stress and each of these must be tackled individually instead of using one method as a panacea for solving all the causes and symptoms of stress.

Furthermore, employers can reduce stress in the workplace by regularly conducting appraisals, thus getting feedback from employees.  The former must always praise the latter for efficiency, taking reasonable time and self-care to complete a task.  Recent finding have proved that, job redesign such as increasing workers discretion over their work, acts as a catalyst in the reduction of stress and the promotion of a healthy, effective workforce.  

Finally, companies such as Motorola have reaped several benefits as a result of the implementation of some of these methods.  This company has for instance made provision for group discussions on topics such as the safety and respect of the individual in the workplace.  In addition to this, on a three-month basis employees are asked among other things what their current needs are, and whether they get sufficient recognition.  If this strategic approach used in Motorola and the above recommendations at combating stress is not enough then what is?

Nevertheless there is scope for improvement. Organisations must not rest until a lasting solution to this menace in the workplace is eventually discovered. Although this may come at a cost to the organisation in question, in the long run the benefits will far outweigh the cost of this investment.

Nearly one-half of large companies in the United States provide some type of stress management training and Employee Assistance Plans (EAPs) for their workforces. Workers learn about the nature and sources of stress, the effects of stress on health, and personal skills to reduce stress – for example, time management or relaxation exercises. EAPs provide individual counseling for employees with both work and personal problems. Stress management training may rapidly reduce stress symptoms such as anxiety and sleep disturbances. It is inexpensive and easy to implement. However, these programs have two major disadvantages: The beneficial effects on stress symptoms are often short-lived. They often ignore important root causes of stress because they focus on the worker and not the environment.

Organisational Change

Some companies try to reduce job stress by bringing in a consultant to recommend ways they might improve working conditions. This approach is the most direct way to reduce stress at work. It involves the identification of stressful aspects of work (e.g., excessive workload, conflicting expectations) and the design of strategies to reduce or eliminate the identified stressors. Thus, these programs deal directly with the root causes of stress at work. However, managers are sometimes uncomfortable with this approach because it can involve changes in work routines, production schedules, or organisational structure.

As a general rule, actions to reduce job stress should give top priority to organisational change to improve working conditions. But even the most conscientious efforts to improve working conditions are unlikely to eliminate stress completely for all workers. For this reason, a combination of organisational change and stress management is often the most useful approach for preventing stress at work.

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

• Arnold, J. et al(2005) 4th ed. Work Psychology 
• Gross, Richard D. [1993] Psychology: The science of mind and behaviour [2nd edition] published by Hodder and Stoughton
• Hayes, Nicky [1994] Foundations of Psychology published by Routledge
• Peter Warr [2002]; Fifth edition Psychology at work
• Lecture Slides by Irene Greenwood

---