Role Characteristics and their Relationships to Job Attitudes Among Workers in Maryland Adolescent Behavioral Treatment Centers

Michael J. WalkMichael J. WalkUniversity of BaltimoreUniversity of Baltimore

Introduction

The Research Setting Maryland Department of Health and Mental Maryland Department of Health and Mental

Hygiene (DHMH) operates three Regional Hygiene (DHMH) operates three Regional Institutes for Children and Adolescents Institutes for Children and Adolescents (RICA).(RICA).

Treatment staff typesTreatment staff types Direct-Care (residential)Direct-Care (residential) Clinical (therapists)Clinical (therapists) AdministrativeAdministrative

Importance of This Research

Residential adolescent mental health Residential adolescent mental health treatment requires a continuum of care treatment requires a continuum of care including consistent and diligent staff.including consistent and diligent staff.

Current reports suggest high turnover rates Current reports suggest high turnover rates and low levels of job satisfaction among and low levels of job satisfaction among employees treating emotionally disturbed employees treating emotionally disturbed adolescents, especially direct-care workers.adolescents, especially direct-care workers.

Theoretical Background and Hypotheses

Role AmbiguityRole Ambiguity Role ConflictRole Conflict Role OverloadRole Overload

Job SatisfactionJob Satisfaction Organizational Organizational

CommitmentCommitment

Turnover Turnover IntentionsIntentions

+

-

Hypotheses (continued)

Differences between position types:Differences between position types: Direct-care experiences more Role AmbiguityDirect-care experiences more Role Ambiguity Direct-care experiences more Role ConflictDirect-care experiences more Role Conflict Administrative experiences less Role Administrative experiences less Role

Overload.Overload.

Method

Measures – Independent Variables

Role Ambiguity (11 items)Role Ambiguity (11 items) House, Schuler, and Levanoni (1983)House, Schuler, and Levanoni (1983)

Role Conflict (7 items)Role Conflict (7 items) House, Schuler, and Levanoni (1983)House, Schuler, and Levanoni (1983)

Role Overload (6 items)Role Overload (6 items) NewNew e.g., “I am expected to do too much in too little e.g., “I am expected to do too much in too little

time” time”

Measures – Dependent Variables

Job Satisfaction (3 items)Job Satisfaction (3 items) Hackman and Oldham’s (1975) Job Hackman and Oldham’s (1975) Job

Diagnostic SurveyDiagnostic Survey Organizational Commitment (9 items)Organizational Commitment (9 items)

Cook and Wall (1980)Cook and Wall (1980) Turnover Intentions (3 items)Turnover Intentions (3 items)

Michigan Organizational Assessment Michigan Organizational Assessment Questionnaire Questionnaire

Measures – Participant Variables Participant VariablesParticipant Variables

AgeAge TenureTenure EducationEducation GenderGender Position TypePosition Type

Direct careDirect careClinicalClinicalAdministrativeAdministrative

Method (cont’d)

ProcedureProcedure

Procedure Obtained complete employee rosterObtained complete employee roster Stratified by position typeStratified by position type Systematic samplingSystematic sampling

Every 3Every 3rdrd employee employee 340 contacted (intra-institutional mail)340 contacted (intra-institutional mail) Completed during work hoursCompleted during work hours 2-week follow ups2-week follow ups 300 returned surveys (88% response rate)300 returned surveys (88% response rate)

Results

Participants by Gender and Position

Hypothesized Factor StructureRA1

RC1

RC7

RO1

RO6

JS1

JS2

OC1

OC9

TI1

RA11

Role Ambiguity

Role Conflict

Role Overload

Job Satisfaction

Org. Commitment

Turnover Intentions

TI3

JS3

TI2

OC2

Model TestingRA1

RC1

RC7

RO1

RO6

JS2

OC9

TI1

RA11

Role Ambiguity

Role Conflict

Role Overload

Job Satisfaction

Org. Commitment

Turnover Intentions

TI3

JS3

TI2

OC2

RO2

Common Method BiasRA1

RC1

RC7

RO1

RO6

RA11

Role Ambiguity

Role Conflict

Role Overload

JS2

OC9

TI1

Job Satisfaction

Org. Commitment

Turnover Intentions

TI3

JS3

TI2

OC2Method

Bias

Final Measurement Model

Model Fit Indices

Model χ2 df RMSEA GFI CFI

Null 20653.80 666

Hypothesized 775.95 614 .03 .88 .99

Respecified Modela 647.33 613 .01 .90 1.00

Revised (Final) Modelb 627.20 579 .02 .90 1.00

Unconstrained Revised Modelc 620.59 578 .02 .90 1.00

Model with Method Factord 576.83 544 .01 .90 1.00

aRole overload item 1 was allowed to load on the role conflict factor in addition to the role overload factor.bRole overload item 1 was deleted from the model.cRole overload item 6 was allowed to load on the turnover intentions factor in addition to the role overload factor.dA method factor was added to the model; all items were allowed to load on the method factor.

Results by Gender

Results by Position Type

Variables M SD 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

1. Role Ambiguity 4.94 .93 ---

2. Role Conflict 5.02 .81 .52 ---

3. Role Overload 4.50 .99 .51 .44 ---

4. Job Satisfaction 3.92 1.26 -.39 -.32 -.30 ---

5. Organizational Commitment 4.05 .84 -.56 -.48 -.42 .28 ---

6. Turnover Intentions 3.57 1.45 .52 .35 .41 -.28 -.43

Hypothesis Testing

Job Satisfaction

Regression AnalysesRegression Analyses

Regression: Job Satisfaction

Participant characteristicsParticipant characteristics FF(5, 296) = 7.12, (5, 296) = 7.12, pp < .01, < .01, RR22 = .11 = .11 Staff position: Staff position: ββ = .21, = .21, p p < .01< .01

Regression: Job Satisfaction Role AmbiguityRole Ambiguity

FF(6, 293) = 10.34, (6, 293) = 10.34, p p < .01, < .01, RR22 = .18 = .18 FchangeFchange(1, 293) = 23.73, (1, 293) = 23.73, p p < .001, Δ< .001, ΔRR22 = .07 = .07 ββ = -.31, = -.31, p < p < .001 (.001 (Staff position: Staff position: ββ = .09, = .09, nsns))

Role ConflictRole Conflict FF(6, 293) = 8.64, (6, 293) = 8.64, p p < .001, < .001, RR22 = .15 = .15 FchangeFchange(1, 293) = 14.62, (1, 293) = 14.62, p p < .001, Δ< .001, ΔRR22 = .04 = .04 β = -.23, β = -.23, p p < .001< .001

Role OverloadRole Overload FF(6, 293) = 7.97, (6, 293) = 7.97, p p < .001, < .001, RR22 = .14 = .14 FchangeFchange(1, 293) = 11.04, (1, 293) = 11.04, pp < .01, Δ < .01, ΔRR22 = .03 = .03 β = -.20, β = -.20, p p < .01< .01

Regression: Job Satisfaction Role Characteristics as a SetRole Characteristics as a Set

FF(8, 291) = 8.66, (8, 291) = 8.66, p p < .001, < .001, RR22 = .19 = .19 FchangeFchange(3, 291) = 10.13, (3, 291) = 10.13, pp < .001, Δ < .001, ΔRR22 = .08 = .08 Role AmbiguityRole Ambiguity

β = -.22, β = -.22, p p < .01 < .01

Organizational Commitment

Regression AnalysesRegression Analyses

Regression: Org. Commitment Participant CharacteristicsParticipant Characteristics

FF(5, 294) = 14.75, (5, 294) = 14.75, p p < .001, < .001, RR22 = .20 = .20 TenureTenure

β = .24, β = .24, p p < .001< .001 Position TypePosition Type

β = .27, β = .27, p p < .001 < .001

Regression: Org. Commitment Role AmbiguityRole Ambiguity

FF(6, 293) = 26.88, (6, 293) = 26.88, p p < .001, < .001, RR22 = .36 = .36 FchangeFchange(1, 293) = 70.14, (1, 293) = 70.14, p p < .001, Δ< .001, ΔRR22 = .15 = .15 β = -.46, β = -.46, p p < .001< .001 Position type: β = .08, Position type: β = .08, nsns

Role ConflictRole Conflict FF(6, 293) = 22.22, (6, 293) = 22.22, p p < .001, < .001, RR22 = .30 = .30 FchangeFchange(1, 293) = 47.80, (1, 293) = 47.80, p p < .001, Δ< .001, ΔRR22 = .11 = .11 β = -.37, β = -.37, p p < .001< .001

Regression: Org. Commitment Role Ambiguity & Role Conflict as a SetRole Ambiguity & Role Conflict as a Set

FF(7, 292) = 27.18, (7, 292) = 27.18, p p < .001, < .001, RR22 = .40 = .40 FchangeFchange(2, 292) = 46.76, (2, 292) = 46.76, p p < .001, Δ< .001, ΔRR22 = .19 = .19 Tenure:Tenure:

β = .17, β = .17, p p < .01< .01 Role AmbiguityRole Ambiguity

β = -.37, β = -.37, p p < .001< .001 Role ConflictRole Conflict

β = -.24, β = -.24, p p < .001< .001

Turnover Intentions

Regression AnalysesRegression Analyses

Regression: Turnover Intentions Participant CharacteristicsParticipant Characteristics

FF(5, 294) = 11.94, (5, 294) = 11.94, p p < .001, < .001, RR22 = .17 = .17 TenureTenure

β = -.27, β = -.27, p p < .001< .001 Position TypePosition Type

β = -.17, β = -.17, p p < .05 < .05

Regression: Turnover Intentions Role AmbiguityRole Ambiguity

FF(6, 293) = 22.37, (6, 293) = 22.37, p p < .001, < .001, RR22 = .31 = .31 FchangeFchange(1, 293) = 62.11, (1, 293) = 62.11, p p < .001, Δ< .001, ΔRR22 = .15 = .15 β = .45, β = .45, pp < .001 < .001 Position Type: β = .01, Position Type: β = .01, nsns

Role ConflictRole Conflict FF(6, 293) = 13.39, (6, 293) = 13.39, p p < .001, < .001, RR22 = .22 = .22 FchangeFchange(1, 293) = 17.34, (1, 293) = 17.34, p p < .001, Δ< .001, ΔRR22 = .05 = .05 β = .24, β = .24, p p < .001< .001 Position Type: β = -.10, Position Type: β = -.10, nsns

Regression: Turnover Intentions Role Ambiguity and Conflict as a SetRole Ambiguity and Conflict as a Set

FF(7, 292) = 19.60, (7, 292) = 19.60, p p < .001, < .001, RR22 = .32 = .32 FchangeFchange(2, 292) = 32.39, (2, 292) = 32.39, p p < .001, Δ< .001, ΔRR22 = .15 = .15 Role Conflict:Role Conflict:

β = .09, β = .09, nsns Role Ambiguity:Role Ambiguity:

β = .41, β = .41, p p < .001< .001 Tenure:Tenure:

β = -.20, β = -.20, p p < .001 < .001

Discussion

Summary

Negative role characteristics were found to Negative role characteristics were found to be associated with low levels of positive job be associated with low levels of positive job attitudes.attitudes.

Direct-care staff and males reported higher Direct-care staff and males reported higher levels of negative role characteristics and levels of negative role characteristics and lower levels of positive job attitudes.lower levels of positive job attitudes.

Possible Actions Role CharacteristicsRole Characteristics

Improve communication and evaluation Improve communication and evaluation procedures.procedures.

Make all expectations clear, Make all expectations clear, complementary, and congruent.complementary, and congruent.

Give special attention to improving the Give special attention to improving the psychological climate of direct-care staff psychological climate of direct-care staff and males in order to achieve the biggest and males in order to achieve the biggest organizational gains.organizational gains.

Q & A