Common Organizational Stressor Known As Work Overload example essay topic

This paper will examine the common organizational stressor known as work overload. To begin, the stressor will first be defined and explained in terms of its causes. The paper will then focus on how to deal with the stressor by suggesting a variety of organizational approaches. Individuals who have specialized training in the field of work overload will then be introduced. Unique approaches designed by these professionals as a method of dealing with work overload will be examined. The paper will conclude by describing how scientific literature and research might be of assistance to the specialists.

Having too much to do with too little time to do it is a common perception in the workplace. This problem, often referred to as work or role overload, can be caused by a variety of factors. Things such as unrealistic deadlines, lack of appropriate break periods, and increasingly heightened expectations are common causes of work-related stress that exist throughout a wide variety of occupations (Shimazu & Kosugi, 2003). Other harmful factors that are related to work overload include rapid change, disordered multitasking, uncertainty, and interruptions during work. While it is possible for many hours of concentration on a well-defined job to have a positive effect on a person's mental state, it is also possible for less than an hour of chaos in the workplace to have a hazardous effect on a person's health (Zohar, 1999). People who serve as managers and supervisors are most susceptible to work overload.

One potential explanation for this is the open-ended nature of the managerial job (Johns & Saks, 2001). The difficulties encountered when trying to juggle the demands of superiors with the needs of subordinates has the potential to provoke a lot of stress. Different personality types can also result in different ways of handling a heavy workload. For example, research indicates that introverts have notably different coping mechanisms for stress than extroverts (Dormann & Zapf, 2002). These mechanisms can vary in effectiveness when handling organizational stressor's such as work overload. Another factor that relates to how people are influenced by heavy workloads is sex.

For males, work stress is more strongly related to concerns about roles in the power structure of an organization, whereas female employees experience more severe stress when a conflict exists between job requirements and family relationships (Vagg, Spielberger, & Wasala, 2002). Early warning signs of work overload include headaches, sleep problems, difficulty concentrating, short temper, upset stomach, and low job satisfaction (Dormann & Zapf, 2002). These symptoms are common among anyone who is subjected to high levels of stress. However, if the stressor is allowed to develop a variety of more serious conditions can surface.

These conditions can be psychological (anxiety, depression, anger), physical (headaches, hypertension, ulcers), behavioral (sleeping disorders, emotional outbursts, violence and aggression), and even organizational (absenteeism, low morale, reduced productivity) (Ettner & Grzywacz, 2001). When left unchecked, these consequences can debilitate a person. This is why it is essential to effectively be able to deal with work overload. There are a variety of approaches that can be used to deal with excessive work demands. Research suggests that one of the most essential techniques is to identify the causes and symptoms of job stress (Shimazu & Kosugi, 2003).

It is important to recognize personal responses to stressor's such as work overload so that solutions can be tailored to specific problems. One such solution to the problem of having excessive work is to speak to management or colleagues before work overload becomes a serious problem (Ettner & Grzywacz, 2001). This type of communication can help to eliminate unnecessary stress. Another solution involves pacing work based on potential (Ettner & Grzywacz, 2001). This requires taking on tasks that do not exceed ability as well as working at a rate that is comfortable. Maintaining a balance between work and personal life is also essential (Ettner & Grzywacz, 2001).

The problem of excessive work demands can also be remedied by an entirely different approach. Instead of learning how to deal with work overload as it happens, steps can be taken to avoid the stressor altogether. For example, one technique is to speak to superiors and understand what kind of output is expected from certain positions (Shimazu & Kosugi, 2003). In this way, it becomes easy to understand when certain tasks are out of the realm of expectation. This can help to develop motivation and a positive outlook on work. As a final resort after trying all of the stress management techniques, the best option may be to leave the stressful environment when demands become unreasonable (Ettner & Grzywacz, 2001).

This may involve quitting the job or taking a leave of absence. In addition to these methods, author and scholar Dr. Piotr Wozniak has developed some simple techniques that can be used to cope with excessive workloads. These techniques can be very effective because Wozniak has designed them to handle specific situations. For instance, work overload may occur when superiors are constantly assigning new projects without considering work that has to be done on current tasks.

Similarly, subordinates may constantly hinder work progress by making various inquiries about needs of their own. In cases like these, Wozniak stresses the importance of discussing the inefficiencies related to constant change and interruptions by co-workers. It is suggested that a set of rules be proposed to co-workers in order to regulate when interruptions can occur and when it is appropriate to assign new projects (P. Wozniak, personal communication, March 12th, 2004). Another common cause of work overload are situations where some sort of unfortunate incident sparks the need to chart an emergency plan. Under these circumstances, Wozniak asserts that it is important to accept the possibility that a complete change in work may be necessary as a result of uncertainties.

In this way, a person must learn to effectively plan for a variety of situations and change priorities if necessary (P. Wozniak, personal communication, March 12th, 2004). The most fundamental cause of work overload has always been the idea of having too much work to do at once. This is when multitasking becomes chaotic and stress levels begin to peak. At times like these, Wozniak claims that it is best to 'focus' and 'specialize' because attempting to complete too many tasks at the same time is bound to affect quality (P. Wozniak, personal communication, March 12th, 2004). At this point, it may be important to learn to delegate jobs to others. Author and motivational speaker Dr. Alexis Artwohl suggests a slightly different approach regarding the issue of job stress.

The focus of Artwohl's method centers on making individuals more emotionally resilient at work (A. Artwohl, personal communication, February 16th, 2004). This means that individuals are taught things such as the realities of interpersonal power. For example, Artwohl emphasizes building trust at work, harnessing the ability to solve or avoid conflict, valuing diversity, and negotiating. Furthermore, Artwohl believes that it is important for people to comprehend and be involved in office politics (A. Artwohl, personal communication, February 16th, 2004).

Once understood, all of these factors combine to enhance a person's communication, conflict management, and leadership skills. The fundamental difference between the coping strategies proposed by Wozniak and the method proposed by Artwohl is that Wozniak seeks to combat work overload by offering a variety of solutions to specific situations while it is Artwohl's intent to make people stress resistant so that excessive amounts of work will not be a problem. Although both techniques may be effective in certain situations, scientific literature exists that may help to further develop the coping systems designed by Wozniak and Artwohl. For instance, it has been found that employees at higher organizational levels experience stress more often while making critical decisions and dealing with crisis situations than workers at lower levels. Moreover, research indicates that employees at lower organizational levels experience the most amount of stress as a result of inadequate salary and lack of opportunity for advancement (Vagg et al., 2002). One important conclusion that can be reached as a result of this information is that a positive correlation exists between organization level and risk of work overload.

With this in mind, it may be beneficial to tailor methods of dealing with work overload to specific jobs. By doing this, employees at lower organizational levels would not be subjected to unnecessary training while managers and supervisors could gain more experience in making critical decisions and dealing with crisis situations. On a similar note, research also suggests that men and women experience work-related stress in two very different ways (Vagg et al., 2002). This finding helps to strengthen the argument that coping techniques for work overload may be more effective if they are directed towards specific types of people. The strategies introduced by Wozniak and Artwohl remain the same regardless of variables such as organizational level and sex. It is possible that certain aspects of their coping systems would be more effective if different parts were emphasized for different people.

For example, since research supports the idea that female employees experience more severe stress when there is a conflict between job requirements and family relationships (Vagg et al., 2002), Artwohl could develop her training to teach women how to effectively negotiate between the two aspects of life. With these examples in mind, it seems that scientific research has the ability to modify the techniques that can help to manage excessive work demands. In addition to this, such literature may be useful in revolutionizing how stress management is taught. A recent psychological study indicates that the type of non-active coping (avoidance strategies) that individuals combine with active coping (person-environment transaction) can be critical in determining health outcomes in more complex and effortful coping situations (Shimazu & Kosugi, 2003). Consideration of the coping combinations, not merely the situational context, is important in explaining how the work environment influences employees' psychological distress. In relation to this, the strategy proposed by Wozniak can be viewed as a form of active coping, as it evokes a person-environment transaction.

Conversely, Artwohl's approach can be interpreted as non-active coping, as it promotes the idea of making people stress resistant. Based on the research, it seems that Artwohl's technique will be most effective during more effortful coping situations while Wozniak's methods will be most effective when coping situations do not require as much effort. The common link between all of these studies is that there appears to be no single method that is the most effective for dealing with work overload. Rather, research indicates that the best coping techniques vary depending on both the individual involved and the situational context.

Hopefully future studies will help to clarify which coping combinations work best and which have the least effect.

Bibliography

Dormann, C., & Zapf, D. (2002).
Social stressor's at work, irritation, and depressive symptoms: Accounting for unmeasured third variables in a multi-wave study. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 75, 33-58. Ettner, S.L., & Grzywacz, J.G. (2001).
Worker's perceptions of how jobs affect health: a social ecological perspective. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6,101-113. Johns, Gary & Saks, Alan M. (2001).
Organizational Behaviour: Understanding and managing life at work. Toronto: Addison, Wesley, Longman. Shimazu, A., & Kosugi, S. (2003).
Job stressor's, coping, and psychological distress among Japanese employees: interplay between active and non-active coping. Work & Stress, 17, 38-51. Vagg, P.R., Spielberger, C.D., & Wasala, C.F. (2002).
Effects of organizational level and gender on stress in the workplace. International Journal of Stress Management, 9,243-261. Zohar, D. (1999).