Abstract
The objective of the present work was to specify a model for the study of work stress, considering a review of the literature that emphasizes three components related to exhaustion, neglect, and frustration. A non-experimental, cross-sectional, and correlational study was carried out with a selection of 100 workers from a public hospital, considering their working hours, as well as their seniority. A structural equation model was established in which exhaustion was the hegemonic component that explained the highest percentage of variance with 27%, although the research design limited the results to the research scenario, suggesting its extension to another. context.
Keywords: Work Stress; Emotional Exhaustion; Job Depersonalization and Professional Frustration
Introduction
Work stress understood as the somatization of an occupational
disease and indicated by high levels of exhaustion and resistance,
negligence and commitment, as well as frustration and violence
has been a central theme and theme of the organizational agenda
[1]. Work stress understood as the somatization of an occupational
disease and indicated by high levels of exhaustion and resistance,
negligence and commitment, as well as frustration and violence has
been a central theme and theme of the organizational agenda [2]. It
is an adaptive syndrome and it develops in three phases;
1. Resistance to the increase in demands and the reduction
of psychological and organizational resources,
2. Alarm or intensification of the work rhythm, as well as a
disproportionate increase in objectives, tasks and goals,
3. Exhaustion or maximization of individual functions and
resources, as well as low performance and increased errors [3].
Since the work stress process is a complex problem, this work
approaches it from a theoretical approach of its components,
emphasizing the link with organizations and their central actors
such as leaders, talents, peers and operatives [4]. Next, the models
and instruments that measure occupational stress are addressed,
highlighting the environment, the individual and the organization
as central axes of reducing demands and increasing resources to
prevent the syndrome [5].
Theory of Occupational Stress
Productive and health care organizations are prone to develop a
stress structure or, in the opposite case, a happiness structure, both
derived from a structure of group dynamics, organizational climate
and conflicts. homework and relationships [6]. Done and hospitals
in both entities’ prevention of diseases and attention to health,
stressful relationships develop between their representatives and
employees [7]. Psychological studies around stress have shown
the existence of a three-dimensional structure in which three
factors converge: emotional exhaustion, job depersonalization and
professional frustration. These investigations shown that stress
is influenced by interpersonal and intergroup relations. In this
sense, group dynamics has been identified as the main mechanism
of influence that, from conflicts, modifies the work structure of an
organization [8].
In the case of stress, relationship conflicts and task conflicts are
the main causes of emotional exhaustion and job depersonalization.
Some studies show that the conflict in relationships influences
this last (García, 2020d). Others argue that organizational climate
would not have a significant effect on emotional exhaustion or in professional frustration [9]. However, it is evident that the factors
that make up a structure of job happiness are determinants of
professional frustration [10]. Such causal variables are dedication,
enjoyment, and work vigor [11]. As happiness factors at work
increase, professional frustration decreases. However, these
studies show causal relationships between factors without having
demonstrated their structure [2]. Therefore, this research is to
goose demonstrate the three - dimensional structure supported by
the theory of job stress [12].
The theory of work stress raises three explanatory dimensions
of exhaustion, frustration and neglect observed in health and
education professionals predominantly in their occupational field
[13]. These are three components that by themselves suggest a
prevalence of stress, although together they denote a mental illness
known as the syndrome of overwork and which is indicated by
high levels of conflict within the organization [14]. It is assumed
that in occupational settings, since occupational health is focused
on people rather than organizations, there are signs of exhaustion,
as would be the case of those who carry out exhaustive work based
on their degree of competence, relationship with superiors or peers
[15]. These types of workers suffer from exhaustion due to their
function, although as they gather the merits to perform another
function they continue to act with occupational sacrifice, assuming
that their merits are not enough [16]. It is a very common condition
in vertical organizations, focused on traditional leadership,
unilateral communication and normative motivation [17].
Negligence is often assimilated as a strategy or response to the
increase in an increasingly expensive and complex labor demand in
terms of effort and cooperation, being deferred to the person least
capable or motivated to carry out the management, production or
translation. of homework [18]. The developing syndrome is often
indicated by solipsistic communication, self-centered motivation,
and absence of goals and objectives, always attributable to the
organization, leaders, or peers [19]. The most significant component
of the work stress syndrome is the frustration that when associated
with violence is a pending issue for organizations [20]. It is a common
problem in companies dedicated to the efficiency, effectiveness and
effectiveness of their processes and products, such as optimization
and innovation [18]. The condition develops and develops in talents
rather than leaders or peers, as well as other types of logistics or
operational personnel [21]. Studies of work stress and systematic
reviews of occupational health have shown the prevalence of these
three factors, as well as the hegemony of exhaustion as a visible
factor in the syndrome of overwork associated with occupational
diseases and accidents [22].
Studies of Occupational Stress
In the framework of the strategic alliances between
organizations and institutions for the labor insertion of talents, the models and instruments that measure the problem have focused
their attention on the skills determined by self-confidence, selfefficacy
and self-esteem [23]. The Stress Control Scale states that
the worry of error and the somatization of anxiety are determinants
of skills and is in the prevention of an accident [24]. The Perceived
Stress Scale includes reagents alluding to stressors; assessment of
the situation, resources and environment, as well as emotional and
behavioral responses, associated with sociodemographic variables
as determinants of the physiology of somatization of disease,
although it only refers to working hypotheses to be tested in
differential situations of resources and demands [25]. Both models
generalize their relationships from considering that the demands
of the environment affect the resources of organizations, including
the psychological resources of those who suffer from stress [26].
In a more specific sense and continuing with this principle of
external influence on biomedical aspects [27]. The Psychological
Stress Scale sets out to differentiate chronic and acute levels to
establish its relationship with the metabolic syndrome, indicated by
the waist circumference, and the level of trigricerides, cholesterol,
glucose and pressure [28]. This biomedical model links the internal
factors of the individual with molecular biomedical aspects [29].
The three models with their corresponding instruments seem to
demonstrate that the work environment even affects biomedical
aspects that would indicate a level of resistance, alarm or
exhaustion [30]. Consequently, the measurement of factors related
to this process of internalization of demands and externalization
of effects involves at least three components that would make up a
robust structure [31].
Method
Sample. He interviewed or 100 employees (M = 35,4 SD = 2,3 and M = 1’324,31 SD = 243,56 USD) of the hospital General of the city of Cuernavaca, Morelos (Mexico).
Instrument
Is utilize the Scale Job Stress, that measurement exhaustion, depersonalization and frustration of staff. It includes 138 items, with four response options ranging from 0 = “strongly disagree” to 5 = “strongly agree”.
Procedure
Respondents were informed that the results of the study would not positively or negatively affect their contractual employment status with the institutes where they work. Once solved the questionnaire, the trend of answers and verified, in cases where its response or he focused on a choice, he asked the participants to write on the back the reasons for their decisions. The data was processed in the SPSS and LISREL software, in their student versions [32-41].
Results
A normality analysis was performed to establish the distribution
of the answers to the questions and questions of the instrument. The
selection criteria included the values that are between - 3 to +3. The
items and questions excluded for exceeding the allowable range.
Subsequently, exploratory factor analysis of main components with
varimax rotation to corroborate the three - dimensional structure.
The selection criteria reagent was configured factors higher
correlation 0 300 between each reagent and the appropriate factor.
The first factor, referred to emotional exhaustion, explained 27%
of the variance; the second, related to labor depersonalization, 7%,
and the third, which refers to the frustration staff, the 5 %. Finally,
the reliability of the underlying factors was established. The values
of normality and reliability of the subscales that measure the factors
found. The factor of emotional exhaustion scored low reliability,
which means the heterogeneity of results in relation to the
systematization of interviews with the same subjects. In contrast,
the factors that allude to job depersonalization, professional
frustration and work stress obtained enough reliability values.
Once the normality, validity and reliability of the subscales were
demonstrated, a correlation was carried out between the factors
to establish their direct and significant associative relationships.
It shows three significant associations between the factors. Only
in the established one between professional frustration and
depersonalization is there a negative relationship. In other words, as
the lack of achievement increases, personalized attention increases.
In this sense, the lack of socialization is to link with stress at work.
Finally, another contributing factor to stress is lack of achievement.
Associative relationships are preliminary to causal relationships.
Therefore, a successive step multiple linear regression analysis
was performed to establish the main effect of the exposed factors.
The causal relationships between the factors. From the successive
step’s technique, it was established that the factor corresponding to
personal frustration has a direct positive and significant effect on
work stress. In a second moment, the factor that alludes to personal
depersonalization turned out to be the determining variable in
work stress. In this sense, the negative and significant association
between the factors suggests the absence of effects of variables not
included in the model. However, to demonstrate non-collinearity, a
covariance analysis was performed.
The analysis of covariances was carried out with the LISREL
software. Consider is to r on the “phi” parameters and “zeta” to
establish the absence or presence of collinear relationship and the
effect of other variables inferred by the level of disturbance. Twodimensional
structure of work stress. The covariance parameter
“phi” is very high, which means that the effect of other variables
not included in the model is minimal and with it the probabilities
of collinearity. However, it is noted that the disturbance parameter
is very high, evidenced in the incidence of other variables. In order
to observe the structure of axes, trajectories and relationships
between the three established factors and their indicators, we
proceeded to estimate a model of structural equations.
A structure of reflective relationships is observed between the
factors with respect to their indicators, as well as the prevalence
of the total variance explained by the exhaustion factor. The
adjustment parameters ⌠χ = 24,3 (12 df) p > ,05; GFI = ,997; CFI =
,995; RMSEA = ,007⌡suggest the non-rejection of the hypothesis
regarding the theoretical relationships reported in the literature
regarding the findings observed in the present work.
Discussion
The contribution of this work to the state of knowledge lies in
the establishment of an exploratory factor structure as evidence
of validity and reliability of the instrument that measures the
axes, trajectories, and relationships between exhaustion, neglect,
and frustration proposed in the work stress model. However, the
research design has limitations regarding the findings, which are
not generalizable and are confined to the surveyed sample, as well
as the suggestion to extend the work to other samples in order
to contribute to the validity of the instrument. In relation to the
models and instruments reviewed, the present work notes the
same prevalence of the exhaustion factor, although the validity is
less than that reported by the other studies. The construction of
an instrument with greater reliability and validity will allow us to
discuss the scope of this phenomenon as part of occupational health
in the face of contingencies in which demands are exacerbated and
resources are scarce. Thus, with regard to the work environment as
a determinant of the asymmetries between demands and resources,
as well as its effects on the syndrome of overwork, it is necessary to
establish the factors that most influence occupational health and its
consequences on stress and The depletion.
In the case of organizational variables such as work environment,
training and training centered on objectives, tasks and goals,
indicators of job demand, this study indicates that its effects must
be observed in exhaustion. As goals become more complex, tasks
are intensified, and goals are prolonged, work-related stress seems
to fall on the exhaustion of those who are responsible for carrying
out the strategies and tasks to achieve these ends. Regarding the
effects of stress and exhaustion on performance, competitiveness
and innovation, this study has shown a 27% variance explained
by this factor, which suggests the inclusion of other factors such as
neglect or frustration. Research lines concerning external factors
as determinants of other variables concomitant to exhaustion
will allow us to explain occupational risks and their effects on
occupational health.
Conclusion
The structure of work stress is two-dimensional. Professional frustration and job depersonalization are the main determining factors. Although first is the leading cause of work -related stress, the effect of other variables is evident , including: the exhaustion emotional in the case of stress ; he dedication, enjoyment and vigor at work in the case of happiness at work ; and leadership, task conflicts and relationships in the case of group dynamics at work. In other words, under a stressful structure a structure of individual happiness and group dynamics could underlie. The influence of structural factors in each of them could demonstrate the ambivalence that characterizes productive organizations.
References
- GarcíaC (2020) Model of intangible assets and capitals in organizations. Journal of Neurology Psychiatry and Brain Research 1(1): 1-9.
- Garcia C (2019) Administration of social work model for local cooperativism. Journal of Strategy Management 8(2): 35-48
- Adams S(2020) Academic framework of social entrepreneurship. International Journal of Research Aspects of Engineering & Management 16(2): 1-5.
- García C (2020) Reliability and validity of an instrument that measures corporate social responsibility. Social Science & Humanities Journal 4(2): 1781-1789.
- Molina MR (2020) Exploratory algorithmic factorial structure of occupational health. Advanced Research Journal of Multidisciplinary Discoveries 10(5): 40-50.
- García C (2020) Specification a model for study of entrepreneurship. Advanced Research Journal of Multidisciplinary Discoveries 49(1): 1-4.
- Juárez M (2020)Specification a model for study of corporate assistance. Global Journal of Archeology & Anthropology11(2): 50-54.
- KorstanjeM(2020)Academic framework of knowledge management. International Journal of Engineering Technology and Management Research 7(2): 1-6.
- Elizarraráz G (2020)Metanalytical validity of the technology utility perception scale. International Journal of Psychiatry Research3(8): 1-7.
- García C (2020) Specification a model for study of knowledge management. International Journal of Neurobiology2(1): 1-3.
- QuirozCY(2020) Specification a model of digital entrepreneurship. Current Research in Psychology & Behavioral Science1(1): 1-4.
- Bermudez G (2019) Meta-analytical validity of the social entrepreneurship inventory: a study of random effects size. Global Journal of Management & Business Research 19(10): 15-19.
- Carreon J (2019) Categorical exploratory structure of intellectual capital formation in its phase of intangible organizational assets. Journal of Social Science Research6(8): 1-6.
- García C (2019) Exploratory dimensions of the attitude toward occupational health. Entrepreneurship Dimension 7(3): 1-8.
- AguilarJA(2019)Specification a model for study of utility perception. Journal of Communication & Health 9 (2): 47-54.
- García C (2019) Exploratory factor structure of professional training expectations. 25(32): 252-270.
- CarreonJ (2019) Exploratory categorical structure of employment expectations. Journal of Social Science Research6(8): 1-6.
- CarreonJ (2019) Model of fixed effects of diffuse variables in the formation of intellectual capital. International Journal of Engineering Research & Development 15(19): 1-7.
- Hernandez J (2019) Exploratory factor structure of well-being. Applied Environment Research 6(1): 1-5.
- García C (2020) Specification a model for study of knowledge management. International Journal of Neurobiology2(1): 1-3.
- Elizarraráz G (2020)Metanalytical validity of the technology utility perception scale. International Journal of Psychiatry Research3(8): 1-7.
- García C (2020) Specification a model for study of occupational health. Global Journal of Management and Business Research 20(1): 1-6.
- GarcíaC (2020)Specification a model of community health. Global Journal of Addiction & rehabilitation Medicine 6(5): 63-66.
- Carreon J (2019) Model of the determinants of human capital. International Journal of Advances in Social Science & Humanities 7(8): 1-5.
- Garcia C(2019)Specification a model for study of a local entrepreneurship model.Earth & Environmental Science Research & Review 2(5): 1-3.
- Martínez E (2019) Hybrid determinant model of the coffee entrepreneurship. Interconnecting 4(8): 111-143.
- García C (2019) Specification a model for study of local development. Saudi Journal of Business & Management Studies4(11): 1-4.
- García C (2019) Specification a model for study of quality of life governance. Saudi Journal of Business & Management Studies 4(2): 1-4.
- Sanchez A (2019) Specification a model for the study of management culture. Spirals 3(31): 1-11.
- Hernandez TJ(2019) Specification a model for study of vocational training. Journal Education & Social Policy 6(2): 1-4.
- Garcia C (2019)Specification a model for study of social entrepreneurship. Global Advanced Research Journal of Medicine & Medical Science 8(1): 1-4.
- García C (2019) Specification of a self-care model. Lux Medica 42(1): 15-25.
- GarcíaC (2020) Model of intangible assets and capitals in organizations. Journal of Neurology Psychiatry and Brain Research 1(1): 1-9.
- AguilarJA(2019)Specification a model for study of utility perception. Journal of Communication & Health 9 (2): 47-54.
- Bermudez G (2019) Meta-analytical validity of the social entrepreneurship inventory: a study of random effects size. Global Journal of Management & Business Research 19(10): 15-19.
- Carreon J (2019) Model of the determinants of human capital. International Journal of Advances in Social Science & Humanities 7(8): 1-5.
- Carreon J (2019) Specification of a local entrepreneurship model. Saudi Journal of Business and Management Studies 4(11): 856-859.
- Espinoza F (2019) Governance of migratory flows from establishment of identity and agenda of occupational health. Migration 4(7): 139-171.
- Martínez E (2019) Hybrid determinant model of the coffee entrepreneurship. Interconnecting 4(8): 111-143.
- MartinezE (2019)Model of the determinants of vocational training. International Journal of Advances in Social Science & Humanities 6(7): 1-5.
- Quiroz CY (2019) Specification a model of culture knowledge. Global Advanced Research Journal of Agricultural Science 8(10): 1-4.