Organisational Role Stress and its Impact on Public and Private Sector

Employees: A Comparative Study

Aman Verma, Dr. Namrata Parashar
Department of Humanities & Social Science
Motilal Nehru National Institute of Technology, Allahabad

Abstract
Stress has become a very common term in our daily life and an unavoidable
consequence of the ways in which society has changed. This change has
occurred in terms of science and technology, industrial growth, urbanization,
modernization, and automation on one hand; and an expanding population,
unemployment, and stress on the other.
The aim of this study is to find the differences in job-related stress pertaining to
employees of both public and private sector, based on certain role stressors.
Attempt is also made to establish certain relationship between role stress and
demographic variables like age, educational qualification, marital status, work
experience on the stress levels of both public and private sector employees.
Survey method is adopted in this study and data are collected from various
private sector employees and employees of the public sector organizations of
Uttar Pradesh. The responses are analysed according to an occupational role
stress scale. Sampling method adopted in this study is convenient sampling
which is a non-probability sampling method. It is found that both public and
private sector employees face moderate levels of stress. Further, there is no
significant difference overall between public and private sector employees in
terms of total stress levels in accordance with certain individual stressorssuch
as work experience and educational qualifications. The major limitation of this
study is that it was conducted in Uttar Pradesh alone, while the work culture of
organizations other than in Uttar Pradesh may vary. We have also used
secondary data provided in the literature review.
Keywords- Role Stress, Public sector, Private Sector, Employee

1. Introduction

Stress has become a very common phenomenon of routine life, and an

unavoidable consequence of the ways in which society has changed. This
change has occurred in terms of science and technology, industrial growth,
urbanization, modernization, and automation on one hand; and an expanding
population, unemployment, and stress on the other. The term stress was first
used by Selye (1936) in the literature on life sciences, describing stress as the
force, pressure, or strain exerted upon a material object or person which resist
these forces and attempt to maintain its original state. Stress can also be
defined as an adverse reaction that people experience when external demands
exceed their internal capabilities (Waters & Ussery, 2007).

Organizations are an important source of stress, and employees workloads and

professional deadlines have increased manifold. These advancements have
created stress among employees in the form of occupational stress, which Sauter,
Lim, and Murphy (1996) define as the harmful physical and emotional
responses that arise when the demands of a job do not match the workers
abilities, resources, or needs. Occupational stress is further defined as a
condition arising from the interaction of people and their jobs, and characterized
by changes within people that force them to deviate from their normal
functioning (Beehr & Newman, 1978).

The perception of the effects of stress on an individual has changed. Stress is

not always dysfunctional in nature, and, if positive, can prove one of the most
important factors in improving productivity within an organization (Spielberger,
1980). If not positive, stress can create a number of physical and psychological
disorders among employees, and can be responsible for frustration, haste, and
job dissatisfaction. As a result, the lack of work may cause complacency within
the organization. Stress is, therefore, multidimensional, and its results depend
on whether employees perceive it as a problem or a solution.
For our purposes, public sector organizations are considered those that are
government-owned and -operated. Such organizations are considered to focus
primarily on the administration of essential services and the control and
maintenance of a countrys social and economic conditions. In contrast, private
sector organizations are considered either profit-making enterprises or

community service groups that operate independently of the government

(Macklin, Smith, & Dollard, 2006).

Different studies have classified occupational stress in terms of physical

environment, role stressors, organizational structure, job characteristics,
professional relationships, career development, and work-versus-family conflict
(see Burke, 1993). Cooper and Marshall (1976) add to this list factors intrinsic
to a job, the managements role, and professional achievements. Based on these
complexities, stressors can be grouped into two main categories: (i) job-related
stressors, and (ii) individual-related stressors.
Strategies for Managing Stress
Organizational strategies for managing stress are encouraging more of
organizational communication with the employees so that there is no role
ambiguity/conflict. Effective communication can also change employee views.
Managers and Higher ranking officials can use better signs and symbols which
are not misinterpreted by the employees; Encourage employees participation in
decision-making. This will reduce role stress; Grant the employees greater
independence, meaningful and timely feedback, and greater responsibility; the
organizational goals should be realistic, stimulating and particular. The
employees must be given feedback on how well they are heading towards these
goals; Encourage decentralization; Have a fair and just distribution of incentives
and salary structure; Promote job rotation and job enrichment; Create a just and
safe working environment; Have effective hiring and orientation procedure;
Appreciate the employees on accomplishing and over-exceeding their targets;
Individual strategies for managing stress are The employees should make a todo list daily, prioritize the acts in the list and plan the acts accordingly. Take
regular breaks during work to relax you. By effective time management, the
employees can achieve their targets timely and can meet work pressures and,
thus, avoid stress; Do hard work. Strive to achieve your goals but do not do it to
the harm of family, health, or peer; indulge in physical exercises. It helps in
effective blood circulation, keeps you fit, diverts mind from work pressures;
encourage a healthy lifestyle. Take a regular sleep, have plenty of water, have
healthy eating habits. Promote relaxation techniques such as yoga, listening
music and meditation; the employees should have optimistic approach about
their work. They should avoid connections with negative approach employees;
the employees should have emotional intelligence at workplace. They should
have self-awareness, self-confidence and self-control at workplace; the
employees should build social support. They should have close connections

with trustworthy peer who can listen to their problems and boost their
confidence level. This social network will help the employees to overcome
stress; Employee counselling is a very good strategy to overcome employee
stress. Through counselling, employees can become aware of their strengths and
how to develop those strengths; their weaknesses and how to eliminate them;
and they can develop strategies for changing their behavior. Employees are also
given career counselling which helps in reducing their ambiguities with regard
to career; Find a fun way to release stress, such as, cracking jokes, playing
tennis, golf, etc. and Do not remain pre-occupied with yourself. Turn your focus
outwards. Help others. This will release some stress.

2. A Review of the Literature

Sharma (1987) focuses on the managers and supervisors of public and private
pharmaceutical organizations to ascertain the role of a motivated climate on
four psychological variables: (i) job satisfaction, (ii) participation, (iii)
alienation, and (iv) role stress. The studys sample comprises 150 respondents,
including 75 managers and 75 supervisors. Sharmas findings indicate that
employees of public sector organizations score lower than and differ
significantly from those of private sector organizations. However, public sector
employees score significantly higher in terms of role stagnation.
Ahmad, Bharadwaj, and Narula (1985) assess stress levels among 30 executives
from both the public and private sector, using an ORS scale to measure ten
dimensions of role stress. Their study reveals significant differences between
public and private sector employees in three dimensions of role stressrole
isolation, role ambiguity, and self-role distance. The authors also establish the
insignificant effect of several background factors, such as age, level of
education, income, marital status, and work experience.
Jha and Bhardwajs (1989) empirical study of job stress and motivation among
120 frontline managers from both the public and private sector finds that the
latter score more than the former in factors such as the need for achievement
and total motivation. Chaudhary (1990) probes the relationship between role
stress and job satisfaction among bank officers. The authors results indicate
that role erosion and resource inadequacy act as dominant stressors while role

ambiguity and role expectation conflict are remote contributors to role stress in
the sample population.
Srivastava (1991) surveys 300 employees of the Life Insurance Corporation and
reports that there is a significant positive correlation between various
dimensions of role stress and symptoms of mental ill health. Stress arising from
role ambiguity and role stagnation is the most intensively correlated with
anxiety. Finally, Dwivedi (1997) assesses the magnitude of trust, distrust, and
ORS to determine the extent of this relationship among public and private sector
organization. Surveying 55 executives from the public sector and 62 from the
private sector, the author finds that stress levels are low in high-performance
organizations and high in low-performance organizations.
2.2. Studies at the International Level
Lewig and Dollard (2001) find that public sector employees are subject to
greater work-related stress than private sector employees. Dollard and Walsh
(1999), however, report that private sector workers in Queensland, Australia,
had made twice as many stress claims as public sector workers. Macklin et al.
(2006) survey 84 public and 143 private sector employees to assess any
significant difference in their stress levels. They conclude that there is no
significant difference between employees on the basis of sector, but that there is
a significant difference between genders, i.e., female employees are subject to
greater stress than males.
Organizational Role Stress among Public and Private Sector Employees
DAleo, Stebbins, Lowe, Lees, and Ham (2007) examine a sample of 559 public
and 105 private sector employees to assess their respective risk profiles. They
find that public sector employees face more stress than private sector employees.
Malik (2011) collects data on 200 bank employees in Quetta, Pakistan, of which
100 work in public sector banks and the remaining 100 in private sector banks.
The author finds that there is a significant difference in the level of stress to
which both groups are subject, and that public sector bank employees face a
high level of occupational stress.
It is clear that different studies have generated different results on the basis of
their particular contexts. Some studies argue that public sector employees are
subject to greater stress while others argue the opposite. The literature review
shows that work-related stress is almost equal in both the public and private
sector, and that research on this topic remains a popular field of enquiry.

Objectives
To study the causes of stress among employees. To analyze the level of stress
on employees.
To study the effects of stress on the health of employees. To study the effect of
stress on productivity of an organization.
To study the effect of over load on the stress level of private and public sector
employees.
To analyze the importance of interventional strategies at organizational level to
manage stress among employees.
To study the role of stress in interpersonal relationship. To study effectiveness
of stress management programme organized by the banks.
Research Design
The study was of explanatory in nature. The sample size is 50. It was collected
from the employees of various private and public sector situated in Allahabad.
UP. Data was collected through self-structured questionnaire. Books, internet
web sites, journals etc. were used as a source of secondary data. MS-Excel was
used to list and store the data. Percentage Analysis method was used to analyze
and interpret results and achieves research objectives
Findings and Conclusion
Most of the employees fear with the fact that lack quality in their work puts
stress on them. It is found that maximum number of employees in public sector
and Private sector remains in stress. 70% employees in the Private sector feel
that they are overloaded with work. While55% employees in the public sector
feel that they are overloaded with work. 44% employees in private sector and
40% in public sector feel tensed due to their non-achievement of their target of
work. 55% in private sector employees and 40% of public sector employees
accepted that they will obey the order of their boss by sacrificing their important
domestic function. It indicates fear and stress among employees both in public
sectors that is public and private sector. 55% in public sector and 50% in private
sector employees feel stress due to their family related problems. It means such
employees feel greater level of stress as compared to other employees. Half of
the employees in both private sector and public sector accepted that there is
conflict among the employees. It is a concern for top management. Only 35%
employees in public sector and 40% of private sector employees feel that
strategies used by administration to manage stress of employees are effective.
Majority of the employees in both the sectors try to find solution to relieve them

from stress.50% of both the private and public sector employees use YOGA or
other ways to relieve them from stress. In spite of stress, majority of the
employees balance in their social life.
Suggestions
As most of the employees feel that they feel stress at work, Managers and
Higher ranking officials should take positive steps to make their employees free
from stress so that they can work with optimum efficiency and effectiveness.
Employees of the public and private sector should be made free from not only
fear of quality of performance but also from other types of fear generating in
their minds. Guidance and counseling, quality consciousness awareness
programs, psychological support can be provided to employees. The concept of
five day week working can be implemented in the private sector so that the
employees can give more time to themselves and their family and discharge
other social responsibilities. Bothe the public sector and private sector
functionaries should arrange YOGA camp, meditation camp, entertaining
programs etc. The working environment should be made clean and safer. There
should be proper work division in all departments especially in public sector.
There should be friendly environment from colleagues and especially boss.
Employees should try for quality of performance rather than fear from it.

Limitations of Study
The time period for carrying out the research was short as a result of which
many facts have been left unexplored. Lack of time and other resources as it
was not possible to conduct survey at large level. Total50 employees responded
positively. The study is limited to the employees of selected private sector and
public sector of Allahabad district in UP and therefore the findings of the study
cannot be extended to other areas. During collection of the data many
employees were unwilling to fill the questionnaire due to lack of time.
Respondents were having a feeling of wastage of time for them. Convenient
sampling has been used in the study and it has its own limitations. Personal bias
of the respondents might have crept in while answering a few questions. Results
of the study may not be generalized.
Scope for Further Studies
Area of present study can be increased from district level to state level, national
level, as well as international level; Sample size can be increased; other
demographic details can be added in the future research and various other
statistical tests can be used for comprehensive analysis & findings.

S no.
1

Statement
Are you satisfied with the
performance you give at your
work?

Do you fear about your quality of

performance?

3
4

Do you work more than 8 hours?

5
6

Do you worry about your colleague

opinion about you?
Do you feel stress some time?
Is workload the reason of ur stress?

Do you discuss your problem with

your spouse or friend or any other
person close to you?

Do you get tensed at non

Achievement of your target?

Is there any effect of work on

your health?

10

Do you plan your work before

doing?

11

You have an important function at

your home and if your boss asks
for overtime, will you agree?

12
13
14

Is there any conflict among

Is the conflict resolved in time?
Do employees support each
other?

15

Are the strategies effective that are

used by your bank to manage stress
of employees?

16
17

Is your social life balanced?

Are you stressed because of
your family problem?

18

Do you try to find any solution for

the problem of your Stress?

19

(IF YES) Do you practice yoga or

use any therapy for reducing
stress?

20

Do you regularly spend time on

Entertainment?

Responses in %
Yes No
Cant
say
100

74

20

86

14

38

56

80

18

50

42

78

20

44

44

12

54

38

96

38

30

32

48

32

20

74

12

14

84

48

18

34

90

24

64

12

82

10

50

44

76

20

References
Agarwala, U. N., Malhan, N. K., & Singh, B. (1979). Some clarifications of
stress and its applications at work. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 15(1),
4150.
Ahmad, S., Bharadwaj, A., & Narula, S. (1985). A study of stress among
executives. Journal of Personality and Clinical Studies, 1(12), 4750.
Beehr, T. A., & Newman, J. E. (1978). Job stress, employee health, and
organizational effectiveness: A facet analysis model and literature review.
Personnel Psychology, 31(4), 665699.
Chaudhary, A. (1990). A study of the relationship between job satisfaction and
role stress of bank officers. Unpublished Masters thesis, University of
Rajasthan, India..
Dwivedi, R. K. (1997). Trust and role stress. In D. M. Pestonjee & U. Pareek
(Eds.), Studies in organizational role stress and coping. New Delhi: Rawat.
Jha, P. K., & Bhardwaj, G. (1989). Stress and motivation: An empirical study
on front line managers. Unpublished manuscript.
Work and Stress, 15(2), 179190.
Malik, N. (2011). A study on occupational stress experienced by private and
public sector bank employees in Quetta city. African Journal of Business
Management, 5(8), 30633070.

Pareek, U. (1983). Role stress scale: ORS scales booklet, answer sheet, and
manual. Ahmadabad: Naveen Publications.
Sharma, T. (1987). Differential effects of organizational climate on job
satisfaction, sense of participation, alienation and role stress. Unpublished
doctoral thesis, Gujrat University, India.
Srivastava, A. K. (1991). A study of the role stress-mental health relationship as
a moderator by adopting coping strategies.

The Khanka, S.S.(2009). Organizational Behavior, Chand, New Delhi, 319

Dr. K. Chandrasekhar (2011), "Workplace environment and its impact on

organizational performance in public sector organizations", International
Journal of Enterprise Computing and Business Systems, Vol. 1, Issue 1, January
2011.
Garg P., (Sep 2010), Case Study, Vol 3, Punjab, 52-58 Kathirvel N,(2009), The
IUP Journal of Management Research, Vol. VIII, No. 11, 28-44
Neelamegam R and Asrafi S, (2010IUP Journal of Management Research, Vol.
IX, No. 5, 57-69