Impact of role efficacy and interpersonal trust on organizational role stress and job satisfaction of employees

THESIS SuBnniTTEO FOR THE AWARD OF THE Dbi^Ktg Or Boctor of ^fitlosopfip IN PSYCHOLOGY BY ^ " ^ NAZIA MEHMOOD Under the supervision of DR. ASHA PARVEEN (Associate Professor) DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY ALIGARH (INDIAN 1 Abstract The purpose of the present study is to examine the "impact of role efficacy and interpersonal trust on organizational role stress and job satisfaction of employees".The purpose of the present study is to examine the "impact of role efficacy and interpersonal trust on organizational role stress and job satisfaction of employees". The chapter-I of the thesis incorporates the introduction of the dependent and independent variables i.e. organizational role stress, job satisfaction, role efficacy and interpersonal trust. Organizational role stress is an important factor for the • • I I "• c organizations that is experienced by the ernployees. It can produce strain which is V.' . V . detrimental for the human resources in the-.orgaiiization. It has negative economic implications such as poor quality of work, low productivity^ absenteeism, etc. when organizations tried to manage this stress then it will result in improved performance, work satisfaction, involvement and productivity. The concept of role and the two role systems that is, role space and role set have a builtin potential for conflict and stress. Role Space has three main variables: 1Self, 2The role under question, and 3The other roles one occupy. Any conflict among these is referred to as role space conflict. These conflicts may take several forms such as: 1) Self-role distance 2) Role stagnation 3) Inter-role distance Role set is the role system within the organization of which roles are part and by which individual roles are defined. Role set conflicts take the forms of: 1. Role Ambiguity 2. Role expectation conflict 3. Role overload 4. Role erosion 5. Resource inadequacy 6. Personal inadequacy 7. Role isolation The most used research definition of job satisfaction is given by Locke (1976). According to him job satisfaction is "a pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one's job or job experiences". In this definition he gives importance to both affect or feeling, and cognition or thinking. It means if we think about something then we have feelings for that. Conversely we can say if we have feelings then we think about what we feel. Hence cognition and affect are inter-linked with each other. Therefore when we evaluate the job then both thinking and feeling are involved. The working environments such as friendly work group, supportive boss, accomplishing goals, etc. are good resources in enhancing job satisfaction. A job that provides safisfaction to the employee is a part of the 'total compensation' which an employee receives i.e. a worker with high job satisfaction is often willing to accept a lower wage payment. In Indian context Uday Pareek (1974, 1980a, 1980b, 1987, and 1993) pioneered the concept of role efficacy. Role efficacy means the potential effectiveness of an individual occupying a particular role in an organization. Role efficacy and other organizational correlates look at organizational roles in the total configuration of organizational processes. It explores the relationship between role efficacy as a central concept both at the individual level and at the macro level. Role efficacy has several aspects. The more these aspects are present in a role, the higher the efficacy of that role is likely to be. These aspects can be classified into three groups, or dimensions. 1Role making 2Role centring 3Role linking Under role making four sub dimensions come: (a)Self-role integration (b)Proactivity (c)Creativity (d)Confrontation Role centring covers three sub dimensions: (e)Centrality (f)Influence (g)-Personal growth In the last role linking is consisted the other three sub dimensions. (h)Inter-role Linkage (i)Helping Relationship (])Superordination In the organizations interpersonal relations between the employees are centred around interpersonal trust. Interpersonal trust is a kind of perception an individual has that other person will not do anything that harms his interest. Trust is emotional as well as logical act. Emotionally, it is where the individual expose his vulnerabilities to people, but believing they will not take advantage of his openness. Logically, it is where the individual has assessed the probabilities of gain and loss, calculating expected utility based on hard performance data, and concluded that the person in question will behave in a predictable manner. An interpersonal relationship is an association between two or more people. This association may be based on love, regular business interactions, or some other type of social commitment. Interpersonal relationships are formed in the context of social, cultural and other influences. Trust is a central ingredient in human relationships, and thus, in organizational dynamics. According to Solomon (1960), "trust refers to expectations of benevolence, whereas suspicion refers to expectation of malevolence". Interpersonal trust at work has two dimensions: 1. Faith in the trustworthy intentions of others, and 2. Confidence in the ability of others (Cook and Wall, 1980). According to Argyris (1965), organizational trust is a behaviour that induces members to take risks and experiment, and distrust as a behaviour that restricts and inhibits members from taking risks and experimenting. In the II chapter review of literature related with variables was discussed. All the relevant studies associated with organizational role stress, job satisfaction, role efficacy and interpersonal trust are incorporated. Chapter-Ill of the thesis discusses the methodology adopted. The study was carrying out on a sample of 400 employees. 200 employees were from the government insurance company (LlC) while the other 200 were from the private insurance companies. The sample was further divided hierarchy wise. There were four hierarchies and each hierarchy consisted of 50-50 employees from both government and private insurance sectors, that is, 50/50 branch managers, 50/50 administrative officers / sales managers, 50/50 assistants / operational staff, and 50/50 clerical staff/ agents. Employees were drawn from the various government and private insurance companies in Aligarh city and near by cities of Aligarh district. Four scales were used to collect the required information: 1Role efficacy scale (RE Scale) by Uday Pareek 2Interpersonal trust scale (IPT Scale) by S.C. Gupta and Vinita Mathur 3Organizational Role Stress Scale (ORS Scale) by Udai Pareek 4Job Satisfaction Questionnaire (JSQ) by Shailendra Singh The data was collected from 400 employees working in insurance companies. 200 employees were working in government sector whereas the remaining 200 were working in private sector. During the process of data collection the above mentioned scales were distributed among 470 employees, out of them 430 employees returned the questionnaires that were completed in every respect, 40 questionnaires were incomplete so these were rejected. Thus remaining 400 employees constituted as the sample of the present study. Proper instructions were given to the employees to obtain adequate responses. The researcher assured all the respondents that complete confidentiality of their responses be maintained and it will be used for research purpose only. The respondents were requested to read each statement carefully and give response on each and every item. It was also mentioned that there is no right or wrong answer. In the IV chapter of the thesis data was analyzed in three phases. In the first phase t-test was used to determine the difference between four groups of employees of both government and private insurance companies. The main findings of t-test were: 1'Role overload' was the dimension on which the branch managers of both the sectors were differing significantly (table-4.1). The branch managers of government and private insurance companies found to differ significantly in terms of their overall organizational role stress. The higher mean score of branch managers of private sector shows their high level of stress as compared to branch managers of government sector. 2The administrative officers of government insurance company and sales managers of private insurance companies differ significantly on 'role overload ', 'role ambiguity and 'resource inadequacy' (table-4.2). Both the groups found to differ significantly in terms of their overall organizational role stress. Sales managers scored high mean value on overall organizational role stress because they experience high level of stress. 3Table 4.3 is showing that 'role overload' and 'self-role distance' were the two dimensions on which the assistants of government insurance company and operational staff of private insurance companies differ significantly. Significant difference is found between both the groups in terms of their overall organizational role stress. The operational staff scored high mean value on overall organizational role stress. 4It is evident from table-4.4 that the clerical staff of government insurance company and agents of private insurance companies differ significantly on 'role overload', 'role isolation' and 'role ambiguity'. A significant difference between two groups in terms of their overall organizational role stress was found. The organizational role stress found high among the agents of private sector. 5The facets of job satisfaction on which the branch managers of government and private insurance companies differ significantly were, 'physical work conditions', 'your immediate boss', 'amount of responsibility you are given', 'your rate of pay', 'your hours of work', 'the amount of variety in your job', 'power and prestige in the job', and 'opportunity to make decisions' (table-4.5). Both the groups found to differ significantly in terms of their overall j