CHAPTER – I

RESEARCH DESIGN AND EXECUTION OF THE STUDY

1.1 INTRODUCTION

Stress is a common problem and a burning issue in modern society. The effect of stress is a

deviation from the existing physical and psychological condition of human life. Stress is

regarded as an inevitable consequence of employee functionality. Hans Selye first

introduced the concept of stress in the field of life science in 1936. He defined 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."

The word “stress” is derived from the Latin word “stringer”, meaning to draw tight. From

the viewpoint of Physical Sciences, the phenomena of stress are evident in all materials

when they are subjected to “force, pressure, strain or strong-front”. Every material-steel,

rock or wood has its own limit up to which it can withstand stress without being damaged.

Similarly human beings can tolerate certain level of stress. Stress is highly individualistic in

nature. Some people have high levels of stress tolerance and thrive very well in the face of

several stressors in the environment. In fact, some individuals will not perform well unless

they experience a level of stress which activates and energizes them to put forth their best

results. For every individual, there is an optimum level of stress under which he or she will

perform to full capacity. If the stress experience is below the optimum level, then the

individual gets bored, the motivational level of work reaches a low point and it results in

careless mistakes, forgetting to do things and thinking of things other than work during

working hours and also leads to absenteeism which may ultimately lead to turnover.

If on the other hand, stress experience is above the optimum level, it leads to too many

conflicts with the supervisor or leads to increase of errors, bad decisions and the individual

may experience insomnia, stomach problems, and psychosomatic illness. The present world

is fast changing and there are lots of pressures and demands at work. These pressures at

work lead to physical disorders. Stress refers to individual’s reaction to a disturbing factor in

the environment. It is an adaptive response to certain external factor or situation or what can

be called environmental stimuli as reflected in an opportunity, constraint, or demand the

outcome of which is uncertain but important.

In short, stress is a response to an external factor that results in physical, emotional,

behavioural deviations in a person. Stress is an all pervading modern phenomenon that takes

a heavy toll of human life. Different situations and circumstances in people personal life and

in their job produce stress. They can be divided into factors relating to organization and

factors related to person which include his experience and personality traits. Job related

factors are work overload, time pressures, poor quality of supervision, insecure political

climate, role conflict and ambiguity, difference between company values and employee

values. Person related factors are death of a spouse, or of a close friend, family problems,

change to a different line of work, prolonged illness in the family, change in social activities

and eating habits.

1.1.1 Occupational Stress

Occupational stress can be defined as the harmful physical and emotional responses that

occur when the requirements of the job do not match the capabilities, resources, or needs of

the worker.

Selye [1936] defines stress as “a dynamic activity wherein an individual is confronted with

an opportunity, constraint or demand”. The concept of occupational stress is often confused

with challenge, but these concepts are not the same. Challenge energizes workers

psychologically and physically, and it motivates workers to learn new skills and master their

occupations. When a challenge is met, workers feel relaxed and satisfied (NIOSH,1999).

Thus, challenge is an important ingredient for healthy and productive work. The importance

of challenge in people’s work lives is probably what people are referring to when they say a

little bit of stress is good. Occupational stress is that which derives specifically from

conditions in the work place. These may either cause stress initially or aggravate the stress

already present from other sources. In today’s typical workplace, stress is seen as becoming

increasingly more common. People appear to be working longer hours, taking on higher

level of responsibilities and exerting themselves even more strenuously to meet rising

expectations about occupational performance.

According to United States National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati,

(1999), Job stress can be defined as “the harmful physical and emotional responses that

occur when the requirements of the job do not match the capabilities, resources, or needs of

the worker. Job stress can lead to poor health and even injury. According to a discussion

document presented by United Kingdom Health and Safety Commission, London, (1999),

“Stress is the reaction people have to when excessive pressures or other types of demand

placed on them”.

On the basis of experience and research, NIOSH favours the view that working condition

plays a primary role in causing Occupational stress. However, the role of individual factors

is not ignored. According to NIOSH view, exposure to stressful working conditions (called

Occupational stressors) can have a direct influence on worker safety and health.

1.1.2 Causes of occupational stress

Nearly everyone agrees that occupational stress results from the interaction between worker

and the conditions of work. Views differ, however, on the importance of worker

characteristics versus working conditions as the primary cause of occupational stress. These

differing viewpoints are important because they suggest different ways to prevent stress at

work. According to one school of thought, differences in individual characteristics such as

personality and coping style are more important in predicting whether certain occupational

conditions will result in stress. In other words, what is stressful for one person may not be a

problem for someone else. This viewpoint leads to prevention strategies that focus on

workers and the ways to help them cope with demanding occupational conditions. Although

the importance of individual differences cannot be ignored, scientific evidences suggest that

certain working conditions are stressful to most people. Such evidence argues for a greater

emphasis on working conditions as the key source of Occupational stress, and for

Occupational redesign as a primary prevention strategy.

The workplace is an important source of both demands and pressures causing stress and

structural and social resources to counteract stress. The workplace factors that have been

found to be associated with stress and health risks can be categorized as those to do with the

content of work and those to do with the social and organizational context of work.

These factors that are intrinsic to job include long hours, work overload, time pressure,

difficult or complex tasks, lack of breaks, lack of variety and poor work conditions (for

example, space, temperature, light). Under work or conflicting roles and boundaries can

cause stress. The possibilities for job development are important buffers against current

stress, with under promotion, lack of promotion, lack of training and job insecurity being

stressful. There are two other sources of stress or buffers against stress, relationship at work

and the organizational culture. Managers who are critical, demanding, unsupportive create

stress, whereas a positive social dimension of work and good team working reduces it

(Causes and Management of Stress at Work, Michie, 2002).

1.1.3 Symptoms of work-related stress

Defining a clear link between occupational causes, and the resulting symptoms is much

harder for a condition. Because many of the symptoms of stress are generalized such as

increased anxiety, or irritability, it is easy for them to be ascribed to a characteristic of the

worker, rather than to a condition of the work. However, there is a mounting scientific and

medical evidence that certain types of work and work organization do have a measurable

and verifiable impact on the health of workers.

The range of symptoms includes physical symptoms, mental health symptoms,

psychological symptoms, asthma, irritability, smoking, ulcers, depression, heavy drinking,

heart disease, anxiety, eating disorders, diabetes, burnout, increased sickness, thyroid

disorders and low self esteem.

Some degree of stress is a normal part of life and provides part of the stimulus to learn and

grow, without having an adverse effect on health. When stress is intense, continuous or

repeated, as is often the case with occupational stress, it can result in ill health

(Hazards,1994). The experience of stress can affect the way individual’s think, feel and

behave, and can also cause physiological changes. Many of the short and long term illnesses

caused by stress can be accounted for by the physiological changes that take place when the

body is placed under stress. From the documented evidence, it is clear that as far as work

life is concerned extreme stress is so aversive to employees that they will try to avoid it by

withdrawing psychologically (through disinterest or lack of involvement in the occupation).

Excessive stress can destroy the quality of life and also affect family life.

In jobs where work overload is the cause of stress, the workers find that they have to take

time off to deal with stress, only to return to work to find that the already unmanageable

workload has substantially increased in their absence, thereby increasing the source of stress

and fuelling a vicious cycle which may ultimately lead to a complete breakdown in health

(Selye,1976).

1.1.4 Impact of employee stress

Both physical and psychological stressors have a tremendous impact on not only the

employees' health, but also the organizations. Some of the impacts of employee stress are as

follows.

Absenteeism

One of the grave impacts of employee stress is absenteeism. Employees under stress do not

feel motivated to work and therefore take more number of leaves citing different reasons.

As more and more employees cite ill health as the reason, the cost would all be added to the

organization as medical reimbursements. Employees might be absent from work to use it as

a coping mechanism against stress. Frequent employee absenteeism not only costs millions

to the organizations, but it also affects the overall productivity.

Loss of Judgement

A stressed out employee loses focus on his work. Due to this, the employee misses out the

vital information signals leading to ineffective decision making. Further, various research

studies have proved that stress also slows down the thinking process. According to

researchers, the enzyme - endorphins released under stress, slow down the ability to think

and affect the ability of judgement in an individual.

Employee conflicts

Stress also might have an impact on the interpersonal relationships at workplace. A person

under stress tends to be easily irritated leading to troubled relationships with his colleagues.

Workplace Accidents

Stress results in poor concentration and pre-occupation of the mind leading to workplace

accidents. It is generally reported that in their drive to attain deadlines and accomplish tasks,

employees tend to ignore safety rules leading to accidents.

According to a research conducted by Workers’ Occupational Health Services conclude

workers under stress are thirty per cent more likely to be involved in accidents than those

experiencing low levels of stress. In addition to all the above mentioned problems,

organizations would also face high turnover rates of employees, high replacement costs, loss

of intellectual capital and increasing grievances. Many organizations have realized the

serious impacts of employee stress and have started taking steps to combat it. The

responsibility of making a workplace employee friendly and healthy lies with both with the

employer and the employees.

1.2 MODELS AND THEORIES OF OCCUPATIONAL STRESS

1.2.1 French, Caplan and Kahn’s Person – Environment Fit (PE-Fit) theory

French, Caplan, Kahn and their colleagues (French and Caplan, 1972; French et al., 1982;

French and Kahn, 1962; Kahn et al., 1964) subsequently incorporated Lewin’s concepts of

stress and strain in their Person – Environment Fit (PE-Fit) theory, which is widely accepted

as a major conceptual framework for research on occupational stress (Chemers et al., 1985;

Edwards and Cooper, 1990). In the context of this theoretical orientation, occupational

stress is defined in terms of job characteristics that pose a threat to the individual resulting

from a poor match between the abilities of the employee and the demands of the job (French

and Caplan, 1972). The workplace stress that occurs as a result of incompatible person–

environment fit produces psychological strain that may contribute to stress-related physical

disorders (French et al., 1982).

1.2.2 Stress at Work Model

Cooper and Marshall’s (1976; Marshall and Cooper, 1979) Stress at Work model is similar

to PE-Fit theory, but is more specific in identifying five major categories of job pressure and

lack of organizational support in the workplace that contribute to occupational stress: (1)

pressures intrinsic to the job; (2) the employee’s role in the organisation; (3) interpersonal

relationships at work; (4) limitations in career development; and (5) organizational structure

and climate.

1.2.3 Karasek’s Demand–Control Model

Karasek’s (1979) Demand–Control model focuses on interactions between the objective

demands of the work environment and the decision latitude of employees in meeting these

demands (Karasek and Theorell, 1990). According to this model, ‘the greatest risk to

physical and mental health from stress occurs to workers facing high psychological

workload demands or pressures combined with low control or decision latitude in meeting

those demands’. (Schnall, 1998, p. 1) The combination of high job demands with relatively

little control contributes to lowered productivity and a greater risk of health-related

problems (Theorell and Karasek, 1996). The Demand–Control model also recognizes the

beneficial effects of social support from supervisors and co-workers. (Karasek et al., 1982;

Schnall, 1998)

1.2.4 Lazarus’ Transactional Process Model

Lazarus’ (1966) Transactional Process model of psychological stress and coping

conceptualizes stress as a process that involves a complex transaction between a person and

her/his environment (Lazarus and Folkman, 1984). In applying this model to occupational

stress, Lazarus (1991) emphasizes the distinction between the sources of stress (‘stressors’)

in the workplace and the emotional reactions that are evoked when a particular stressor is

cognitively appraised as threatening. Three types of appraisal mediate the effects of

stressors on emotional reactions. Primary appraisal occurs when a stressor is evaluated in

terms of its immediate impact on a person’s wellbeing. Secondary appraisal takes into

account the resources of the employee for coping with the stressor.

The third type, reappraisal, incorporates new information resulting from the worker’s

appraisal of the effectiveness of her/his efforts to cope with a particular stressor.

1.2.5 National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Model

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) defines job stress in terms

of ‘the harmful physical and emotional responses that occur when the requirements of the

job do not match the capabilities, resources, or needs of the worker. (NIOSH, 2002) This

definition of job stress, as well as the resulting model developed by NIOSH, was primarily

influenced by PE-Fit theory. The NIOSH model explicitly recognizes that exposure to

stressful working condition plays a primary role in causing job stress and influencing

worker safety and health, while ‘individual and other situational factors can intervene to

strengthen or weaken this influence’. However, the NIOSH model gives little attention to

the significant influence of the employee’s cognitive appraisal of sources of stress in the

workplace.

1.2.6 Spielberger’s State–Trait Process (STP) Model

Spielberger’s State–Trait Process (STP) model of occupational stress focuses on the

perceived severity and frequency of occurrence of two major categories of stressor events,

job pressures and lack of support. (Spielberger et al., 2002) The STP model builds on the

PE-Fit and Transactional Process models by endeavouring to integrate these models with the

conception of anxiety, anger and depression as emotional states and personality traits

(Spielberger, 1972; Spielberger et al., 1983; Spielberger et al., 1988). The STP model gives

greater emphasis than other models to the effects of individual differences in personality

traits in determining how workplace stressors are perceived and appraised.

1.3 JOB STRESS, JOB SATISFACTION AND WELLBEING

During the last 25 years various research studies of job stress have provided substantial

evidence supporting the notion that exposure to work stressors has a negative impact on a

worker’s mental and physical health and job satisfaction (Ganster and Schaubroeck, 1991).

Other research findings report some evidence of work stress leading to higher health care

costs, more insurance claims, higher rates of absenteeism (Gupta & Beehr, 1979; Spector,

Dwyer, & Jex, 1988), greater turnover (Gupta & Beehr, 1979), and decreased job

performance (e.g., Motowidlow, Packard, and Manning, 1986; Spector et al., 1988).

Compared with the outcome variables that deal with employees’ mental and physical

wellbeing, however, there has been less attention given to the effect that job stressors have

on work performance (e.g., see Beehr, 1995; Jex, 1998 for reviews). The relationship

between work stress and job performance has been neglected primarily because job

performance is a rather complex, multi dimensional variable that is often difficult to

measure accurately. More specifically, there is often low variability in performance

criterion measures due to a substantial amount of error in ratings. In essence, even though

employees may actually perform at different levels, they often receive similar performance

evaluations. Thus, the effect that stressors have on performance outcomes may appear

weaker than it actually is. Furthermore, it is difficult to obtain multiple measures of

performance that include more objective indicators (Beehr, Jex, Stacy & Murray, 2000).

As a result, researchers have focused more on outcomes that supposedly affect the

functioning of the individual worker’s performance (e.g. substance abuse, mood states,

depression, various health indicators) rather than on performance outcomes themselves.

It is generally assumed that the form of the stressor – performance relationship is linear.

However, because stressors may increase physiological arousal (e.g., see Fox, Dwyer &

Ganster, 1993; Ganster & Schaubroeck, 1991), the relationship between an individual’s

physiological reactivity and performance may take the form of an inverted U-shaped

function as originally described by the Yerkes-Dodson Law (Yerkes and Dodson, 1908).

Recently, Xie and Johns (1995) found nonlinear, U-shaped effects in a study in which they

examined the relationship between job complexity and mental health problems. Despite this

finding, the vast majority of occupational stress studies assume linear relationships.

1.4 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Today workplace stress is becoming a major issue and a matter of concern for the

employees and the organizations. It has become a part of life for the employees, as life

today has become so complex at home as well as outside that it is impossible to avoid stress.

Occupational stress arises due to lack of person- work environment fit. When occupational

stress is mismanaged, it affects the human potential in the organization. It further leads to

reduced quality, productivity, health as well as wellbeing and morale.

At workplace, stress related to the role performed by the employee in the organization is one

of the important determinants of successful adjustment and subsequent performance of an

employee. The stress induced due to roles performed by individuals as employees has been

a potent organizational stressor. (Kahn et al., 1964; Srivastava, 2007) Its outcomes have

been found to be costly to the organization. (Fisher and Gitelson, 1983)

One of the pioneers of research on organizational role stress, Pareek (1993) has reiterated

that the performance of a role in an organization has built in potential for conflict due to

which stress may start rearing its head. Such stress can contribute to various dysfunctional

outcomes for the organization like job related tensions, job dissatisfaction and lower

performance (Behrman and Perreault, 1984; Singh, 1992; Shahu & Gole, 2008).

Occupational stress can be inadvertently linked to success or failure at one’s job. The

general impression about occupational stress is the feeling of failure due to work overload.

But if this is the case and so simple a problem then merely by reducing the amount of work,

occupational stress could have been done away with. Stress is a part of everyone’s daily

life. It means that the person cannot cope with the demands put forward by his or her work,

which is opposite to their expectations of rewards and success. It affects both the person

concerned and the relationships he or she forms in the society be it with family or friends.

In this present era of cutthroat competition, the idea of being perfect becomes very

necessary to strive and become successful. The worker has to be perfect in his job or else he

will be replaced or at least lag behind in his work leading to stress. In India, the problem of

stress management is gaining more and more importance due to the new privatized nature of

the economy.

People are leaving behind the cozy atmosphere of government jobs and joining the private

sector where there is no end to the amount of work that a person can undertake. In this

environment coping with stress becomes very important. One has to be aware of the

problem well in advance to be able to deal with it.

During the past decade, the banking industry had undergone rapid and striking changes like

policy changes due to globalization and liberalization, increased competition due to the

mushrooming of more private sector banks and the introduction of new technologies. Owing

to these changes, the employees in the banking industry, particularly public sector bank

employees are experiencing a high level stress. The advent of technological revolution in all

occupations coupled with globalization, privatization policies has drastically changed

conventional patterns in all sectors. The banking industry is no exception to this changing

phenomenon.

Existing literature reveals that more than sixty per cent of the public sector employees have

one or more problem directly or indirectly related to these drastic changes. Along with other

sectors, the banking industry is also leaning towards the policy of outsourcing and

compulsive rewarding option of voluntary retirement scheme. All these factors are

prospective attributes to cause occupational stress and related disorders among the

employees. Although many studies have been conducted on the psycho social side of the

new policy regime in many sectors, there are only few studies, as far as the banking sector is

concerned, while the same sector has been drastically influenced by the new policies.

The elevated stress levels of employees in banking industry are associated with increased

absenteeism, sickness, reduced productivity, job dissatisfaction and low morale. In such

circumstances, efforts to sustain a high level of work performance over time can be a

tedious task for organizations as well as for employees.

Considering occupational stress as a debilitating syndrome, this study has been undertaken

with an aim to systematically investigate the factors causing occupational stress amongst

public sector bank employees. Banks are among the top ten high stress workplaces in India.

Elucidating the causes of occupational stress and its impact on job satisfaction is important

not only for its potential implications for stress management at banks but also for enhancing

an understanding of strategic human resource management. With this aim, the study makes

an effort to identify the sources of occupational stress experienced by the employees of

public sector banks.

At this juncture, the present study is undertaken to address the specific problems of bank

employees related to occupational stress and job satisfaction. This throws light into the

pathogenesis of various problems related to occupational stress and its impact on job

satisfaction among public sector bank employees in Thiruvarur district of Tamilnadu.

1.5 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The occupational stress adversely affects the health, performance and job satisfaction of the

employees of an organization. Workers who are stressed are also more likely to be

unhealthy, poorly motivated, less productive and less safe at work. Their organizations are

less likely to be successful in a competitive market. Stress can be brought about by

pressures at home and at work.

Employers cannot usually protect workers from stress arising outside work, but they can

protect them from stress that arises through work. Stress at work can be a real problem to

the organization as well as for its workers. Good management and good work organization

are the best forms of stress prevention.

In general, occupational stress determines the level of job satisfaction, which in turn affects

the wellbeing of employees. Hence, this study throws light on the pathogenesis of various

problems related to occupational stress experienced by the public sector bank employees.

The study is helpful in assessing the extent of stress experienced and its effect on the job

satisfaction of the employees in the public sector banks. This study will also be helpful to

draw up further policy on related fields and act as a secondary data for further research.

1.6 RESEARCH QUESTION

The following research questions are answered in this study.

1. What are the various factors that act as stressors to the employees?

2. What are the levels of occupational stress and job satisfaction of the employees in the

study units?

3. What is the relationship among occupational stress, job satisfaction and subjective

wellbeing of the employees?

4. Is there any significant relationship between the individual demographic variables

(age, sex, income, experience, educational qualifications and designation) and

occupational stress experienced by the employees?

5. Is there any significant relationship between the individual demographic variables

and the level of job satisfaction of the employees?

1.7 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The present research work is intended:

1. To find out the factors that act as stressors to the employees of public sector banks in

the study area.

2. To analyze the coping strategies practiced by the study units.

3. To study the occupational stress experienced by the employees and their level of job

satisfaction.

4. To analyze the effects of occupational stress on job satisfaction and subjective

wellbeing of the employees

5. To offer some viable and practical suggestions on the basis of the findings of study.

1.8 HYPOTHESES

Based on the objectives, the hypotheses formulated for the study are:

1. Irrespective of categories, all the respondents experience the same level of

occupational stress.

2. There is no significant difference between individual demographic variables and the

occupational stress experienced by the respondents.

3. There is no positive correlation between overall occupational stress and the different

sources of stress.

4. Irrespective of categories, all the respondents experience the same level of job

satisfaction.

5. There is no significant difference between the individual demographic variables and

the level of job satisfaction of the respondents.

6. There is no correlation between the overall job satisfaction and the job satisfaction

factors.

7. There is no significant association between occupational stress and job satisfaction.

8. There is no significant difference between the categories of the respondents and their

status of subjective wellbeing.

9. There is no significant difference between demographic variables and the status of

subjective wellbeing of the respondents.

10. The subjective wellbeing of the employees is not affected by occupational stress and

job satisfaction.

1.9 METHODOLOGY

1.9.1 Research Design

The present study is exploratory as well as descriptive in nature in context of public sector

banks. Here the researcher on the one hand, has attempted to lay down the theoretical

ground for occupational stress and tried to explore its theories, models and various studies

related to it. On the other hand the researcher has tried to describe the level of occupational

stress and job satisfaction of bank employees through the scale called OSI (Occupational

Stress Index).

1.9.2 Area of the study

The study was conducted in Thiruvarur district of Tamilnadu. Thiruvarur district is one of

the 32 districts in the Tamilnadu state of India. The district occupies an area of 2161 km². It

lies between Nagapattinam district on the east and Thanjavur district on the west, and is

bounded by the Palk Strait on the south. The district headquarters is Thiruvarur town. The

district has a population of 1,268,094 (as of 2011). It is 20.29% urbanized. It has a literacy

of 76.90%, slightly higher than the state average.

The Thiruvarur district, along with the Nagapattinam district was part of the Thanjavur

district before 1991. After that, the present Taluks of Thiruvarur district and Nagapattinam

district were separated from Thanjavur district, and formed the Nagapattinam district. The

present Thiruvarur district was formed in 1997 by trifurcating the then Thanjavur district.

Thiruvarur district is made up of 7 Taluks namely Kudavasal, Mannargudi, Nannilam,

Needamangalam, Thiruthuraipoondi, Thiruvarur and Valangaiman. Due to potential growth,

more number of public and private sector banks have established their branches in this

district and there is intense competition between public and private sector banks to tap the

rural market. Hence, this district is purposively selected by the researcher to analyse the

occupational stress and job satisfaction of the public sector employees.

1.9.3 Population

The population of the study constitutes public sector bank employees in the Thiruvarur

district of Tamilnadu. The population includes officers, clerks and sub staff working in the

selected public sector banks.

1.9.4 Sample size determination

For the purpose of the analysis, the employees are classified as officers, clerical staff and

sub staff. The branch managers and field officers and cash officers are considered as

officers, clerks and recovery marketing officers are considered clerks and messengers,

sweepers and watchmen are viewed as sub staff. Among the public sector banks functioning

in Tiruvarur district, Indian Overseas bank, Indian bank and State bank of India play a

prominent role.

Therefore, Indian Overseas Bank, Indian Bank and State Bank of India are selected for the

study. They have established 20, 19 and 18 branches respectively in the district, ten

branches from each bank are purposively selected for the study. There are 855 employees

working in Indian Overseas Bank, Indian Bank and State Bank of India in the selected

branches, of which 177 are officers, 444 are clerks and 234 are sub staff. The sample size

was calculated to guarantee a sufficient number of respondents in each branch of the bank.

Thus, the following formula has been used to estimate the population sample size (The

Survey System, 2007):

t² * p * (1-p) Minimum Sample Size (n) = −−−−−−−−−−−

m² Where:

n = required sample size (minimum size) t = Confidence level at 95% (standard value of 1.96) p = Estimated fractional population of subgroup, expressed as

decimal (0.5 used for sample size needed) m = Margin of error at 5% (standard value of 0.05)

n = 1.962 x 0.5 x (1-0.5) ∕ 0.052 = 384

Correction for Finite Population

SS New SS = -----------------

SS-1 1 + --------- Pop

Where: pop = population

SS = Sample size

384New SS = ------- = 265

384-1 1 + --------

855

As per the formula the required total sample size is 265, which constitutes 31 per cent of the

total population. Therefore, 31 per cent from each category is drawn on the basis of

stratified random sampling method. The universe and sample size is given below.

TABLE - 1.1

LIST OF PUBLIC SECTOR BANKS FUNCTIONING IN THIRUVARUR

DISTRICT

S.No. Name of the Bank No. of Branch01 Allahabad Bank 0102 Bank of Baroda 0103 Bank of India 0204 Canara Bank 0105 Central Bank of India 0106 Indian Bank 1907 Indian Overseas Bank 2008 Punjab National Bank 0109 State Bank of India (SBI) 1810 Syndicate Bank 0111 Vijaya Bank 01

TABLE - 1.2

SAMPLE SIZE

Name of the bank No. of employeesOfficers Clerks Sub

staffTotal Sample

(31%)Indian overseas Bank

1. Koothanallur 05 15 09 29 092. Thiruvarur 15 38 15 68 213. Mannargudi 07 16 11 34 104. Valangaiman 03 15 08 26 075. Muthupet 05 16 12 33 106. Kodikalpalayam 04 12 07 23 087. Nannilam 06 19 13 38 128. Kulikkarai 03 06 05 14 049. Adiyakkamangalam 05 09 06 20 0610. Athikadai 03 06 03 12 04Total 56 152 89 297 92

Indian Bank1. Mannargudi, 07 16 07 29 092. Muthupet, 05 15 06 25 083. Needamangalam, 06 16 07 28 094. Thiruthuraipoondi, 07 18 08 32 105. Thiruvarur, 13 35 15 62 196. Koothanallur 04 12 06 21 077. Vaduvur 03 07 05 14 048. Gopalsamudram 03 04 04 10 039. Kollumangudi 04 06 06 15 0510. Budamangalam 03 05 05 12 04Total 55 134 69 248 77

State Bank India1. Nannilam 06 18 09 33 102. Mannargudi 05 22 09 36 113. Thiruthuraipoondi 07 17 10 34 114. Thiruvarur 19 42 21 82 255. Vadapathimangalam 04 13 04 21 076. Koothanallur 06 13 05 24 077. Needamangalam 07 15 06 28 098. Kodavasal 04 11 04 19 069. Peralam 05 12 05 22 0710. Adichapuram 03 05 03 11 03

Total 66 168 76 310 96Grand Total 177 444 234 855 265

1.9.5 Required data set

In order to achieve the objectives of this research, data were collected both from the primary

and secondary sources. The primary data were collected from the respondents through a

structured questionnaire. A well developed and widely used Occupational Stress Index

(OSI) in the Indian context (Srivastava and Singh, 1981) was chosen to assess the

occupational stress of the sample. The questionnaire consisted of 48 statements with five

alternative responses e.g., 5 scores for absolutely true, 4 for almost true, 3 for partially true,

2 for almost false and 1 for absolutely false. The statement with asterisk should be scored

inversely, e.g., 5 for absolutely false and 1 for absolutely true.

Job Descriptive Index developed by Smith and Kendal (1966), was used to assess the job

satisfaction of the sample. The job descriptive index contains a series of statements for each

of these five areas and the individuals were asked to mark “Yes” (Y) or “No” (N) or

doubtful (?) related to job. Positive statements get a score of 2 for yes, 1 for doubtful and 0

for No. Negative statements get 2 for No, 1 for doubtful and 0 for yes. Only the total score

obtained for the five areas was considered as a measure of job satisfaction. High score

indicates high job satisfaction.

Subjective wellbeing inventory (SWBI) by Nag Pal and Sell (1984) was used for gauging

the subjectively perceived mental and physical health status of employees. Wellbeing was

used as one of the constituent factors in the measurement of success of the organization.

The subjective wellbeing is scored by attributing the values 3, 2, 1 to response categories of

the positive items and 1, 2 and 3 to the negative items. The minimum and maximum scores

that can thus be obtained are 40 and 120 respectively.

The total score can be interpreted summarily in the light of three broad score ranges: 40 –

60, 61 – 80 and 81-120 to have an overall picture of wellbeing status. If the respondents

secure the mean score between 40 and 60 their status of wellbeing is low, the mean score

between 61 and 80 indicates the moderate status of wellbeing and the mean score between

81 and 120 expresses higher status of wellbeing.

The secondary data have been collected from the sources like books related to stress

management, previous research studies, national and international journals and online

journals.

1.9.6. Statistical Analysis

Descriptive and inferential techniques such as cross tabulations, chi-square test, correlation,

and t-test were used for the analysis of data and testing the hypotheses in accordance with

the objectives.

1.9.7 Pilot study

Before the field survey was conducted, the consistency of the information has become

essential and a pilot survey was conducted for this purpose. In this study, widely used

structured questionnaires were used. So, the validation of the questionnaire is not required.

The researcher also has conducted a pilot study, for which the standardized questionnaire

was supplied to 25 respondents and this was tested for extracting the tentative results. The

results of the pilot study indicate that the respondents have experienced stress to a certain

extent, which induced the researcher to conduct the full fledged research on this topic.

1.9.8 Period of the study

The study was conducted from 2009 to 2012.

1.10 CONCEPTUAL DEFINITIONS

1.10.1 Stress

In medical terms, stress is described as, "a physical or psychological stimulus that can

produce mental tension or physiological reactions that may lead to illness."

Stress is defined as "the result produced when a structure, system or organism is acted upon

by forces that disrupt equilibrium or produce strain"1.

Hans Selye is one of the founding fathers of stress research. In his view, (1956) stress is not

necessarily something bad – it all depends on how you take it. The stress of exhilarating,

creative successful work is beneficial, while that of failure, humiliation or infection is

detrimental. Selye believed that the biochemical effects of stress would be experienced

irrespective of whether the situation was positive or negative. According to Shanmugham

(1981) stress is any condition that strains the coping capacities of the person.

1.10.2 Occupational stress

Beehr and Newman (1978) define occupational stress as "A condition arising from the

interaction of people and their jobs and characterised by changes within people that force

them to deviate from their normal functioning."

The occupational stress refers to "the harmful physical and emotional responses that occur

when the requirements of the job do not match the capabilities, resources, or needs of the

worker. Job stress can lead to poor health and even injury"2

It simply means that workplace stress generally arises when there is a mismatch between the

1 Taber's Cyclopedic Medical Dictionary2 United States National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, 1999

nature or magnitude of the job to be done and the employee’s desires and capabilities.

Further, the definition also categorizes workplace stress into physical stress and

psychological or emotional stress.

1.10.3 Perceived stress

Perceived stress refers to an individual’s perceived response to interaction with his or her

social environment.3

1.10.4 Job satisfaction

The Harvard Professional Group (1998) sees job satisfaction as the key radiant that leads to

recognition, income, promotion, and the achievement of other goals which ultimately leads

to a general feeling of fulfillment. Job satisfaction has been defined as a pleasurable

emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job.4

1.10.5 Subjective wellbeing

"Wellbeing has been defined by individual characteristics of an inherently positive state

(happiness). It has also been defined as a continuum from positive to negative, such as how

one might measure self-esteem. Wellbeing can also be defined in terms of one's context

(standard of living), absence of wellbeing (depression), or in a collective manner (shared

understanding)." 5

Subjective wellbeing can be simply defined as the individual’s current evaluation of

happiness. Such an evaluation is often expressed in affective terms; when asked about

3 A Robin L. Walton “Comparison of Perceived Stress Levels and Coping Styles of Junior and Senior Students inNursing And Social Work Programs” (2002)4 Locke, 1976 cited in Brief, A. P., & Weiss, H. M. (2001). 5 Pollard and Lee (2003) p.60.

subjective wellbeing, participants will often say, I feel good” Subjective wellbeing is thus, at

least in part, a proxy for a global affective evaluation.6

1.11 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

The research study has the following limitations:

The study is carried out in selected public sector banks, i.e. Indian Bank and State Bank of

India in Tiruvarur District of Tamilnadu. Thus, its findings cannot be generalized for other

public sector banks and private sector banks.

In the study, the researcher has not developed any scale. Instead readily available structured

and standardized scales are used as these are widely and universally accepted for measuring

occupational stress and job satisfaction.

The study is purely based on the respondents’ opinion. The researcher felt that the

respondents might express biased opinions which limit the validity of the study.

Individuals’ stress susceptibility varies over time. The environment can also vary in its

conditions. Since stress is a complex and dynamic process presented in different areas of

life, this research focuses only on the stress at work place due to occupational stress. In this

study an attempt to identify basic stress management strategies is applied to public sector

bank employees in a work situation. However, this approach restricts the findings to a

specific kind of experience in the given work environment.

Respondents’ opinion may change from time to time and the responses are also subject to

variations depending upon the situation and attitude of the respondents at the time of the

survey. In this study, occupational stress experienced by the employees, is alone considered

and the perceived stress (arising from outside the working place) is not taken into account.

6 Schwartz & Strack, 1999.

In this study, primary data were collected only from the permanent workers, the opinion of

the temporary, causal and contract workers was not taken into account.

In this research, the researcher has mainly focused on occupational stress, and the level of

job satisfaction of the employees in the study unit. The impact of stress on work related

behaviour of employees, such as absenteeism, loss of judgment, employee conflicts and

work place accidents is not analyzed in this study. It is directed for future research.

1.12 ORGANISATION OF THESIS

This study is organized into six chapters.

Chapter I: This chapter describes the empirical aspect of this study including scope,

objectives, methodology used to collect data, sample parameters and limitations.

Chapter – II: This chapter examines the state of the existing literature. This chapter

reviews the literature relating to occupational stress, job satisfaction and subjective

wellbeing.

Chapter III: This chapter describes the stress management strategies and techniques

practiced by the public sector banks.

Chapter IV: This chapter analyses the occupational stress and job satisfaction of the

employees.

Chapter V: This chapter deals with the subjective wellbeing and its relationship with stress

and job satisfaction.

Chapter VI: This Chapter summarizes the findings of the study and presents suggestions

to cope with the employees’ stress and to improve the mental and physical health of the

workforce for the betterment of the banking industry.

1.13 CONCLUSION

This chapter examined the key dimensions of occupational stress index and relationship

between Job satisfaction and occupational stress. The background for the research is

discussed and the research questions in this study raise the propositions to be tested.

Research problem is discussed with the objectives for the study and the variables associated

with hypothesis, significance of the study are defined and the following chapter will review

the literature of previous studies.