1. INTRODUCTION

“Pressure and stress is the common cold of the psyche”

-Andrew Denton

According to Ivancevich and Matteson (1980), stress is “an adaptive response, mediated by individual characteristics and/or psychological processes, that is a consequence of any external action, situation or event that places special physical and/or psychological demands upon a person”. Job life, wherein, employees spend about more than 10-12 hours daily is the major source of satisfaction of their various needs, as well as of frustration and stress. Employees spend majority of their waking lives at work than they do with their friends or family. Hence, the quality of their work lives has direct effect on their quality of life as a whole than any other factor. Though stress is known for its deteriorating effects on performance, up to a certain point of intensity, stress is found to be useful in nurturing performance by providing a sense of alertness and preparedness and thereby, helps to gain a winning edge. However, if the intensity of stress rises above the optimal level, stress can be damaging and hinder performance. Consistently increasing rate of psychosomatic diseases and psychological disorders in modern societies well reflect the high stress being experienced by people in present day world. It is generally assumed that unchecked stress of job life reduces performance, job satisfaction and morale and causes absenteeism and turnover.

Job stress has been defined by Beehr and Newman (1978) 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”. The extent to which an employee experiences stress depends on the personal characteristics of the individual as well as his cognitive appraisal of the job factors. It is found that two employees subject to similar work conditions experience different levels of stress. Individual’s response to work pressures, is therefore, influenced to a large extent by his inherent traits. The psychological make up of the employee as well as his behavioural patterns have been found to develop and promote stress. Stress originates when an employee tries to fulfill the requirements of a job role but fails to do so due to some inadequacies and thus giving rise to several role stresses. Several factors related to organization structure, climate and culture also cause stress to the employees.

It has been concluded by majority of stress researchers that occupational stress is undesirable and acts as a negative force, which dominantly focuses on the physiological, psychological and behavioural patterns of the employee. More over, emphasis is given on the health outcomes of the employees subject to severe stressful situation. As a result, it has been observed that although mild level of stress enhances the performance level as well as the problem-solving capability of the focal person but sustained and intense stress adversely affect the competency of the employee. Burnt out executives do not have the emotional reserves or the clarity of thought to stay ahead of the challenges. Poor businesses as well as personal decisions come from the same myopic place. Several aspects of job behaviour like performance, job satisfaction, absenteeism and turnover are also influenced by prolonged high level of stress and thus giving rise to a variety of psychosomatic diseases.

The Indian service sector is turbulent with heavy workloads, late working hours and different types of customers with different demands. The pressure of work leaves the employees exhausted both physically and mentally. It also affects productivity, efficiency at work and relationship with colleagues. Thus, in the above context, the present study is being undertaken in the service sector to analyze the causes and consequences of occupational stress and thus to provide remedial guidelines to make effective use of the strategies and interventions. This will have impact on employees’ performance and productivity. In the present day competitive global market, the study will have tremendous economic significance.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW:

According to Pines and Aronson (1981), “burnout” occurs due to chronic job stress. It has been considered as the extreme consequence of consistent job stress. It has three parts: physical, emotional and mental.

· Employees suffering from physical exhaustion, report intense weariness, symptoms of low energy, chronic fatigue, weakness and inability to sleep.

· Emotional exhaustion of the employees leads to feelings of depression, helplessness and hopelessness. They experience lower satisfaction from job and life.

· Mentally exhausted employees show negative attitude towards work, clients and fellow-workers.

A dehumanising aspect of these attitudes develops, thereby, preventing the employees to respond to the feelings of others. This negative attitude and dehumanising tendency might spill over to family and friends. Pine noted that Burnout Stress Syndrome (BOSS) could lead to depletion of energy, lowered resistance to illness, increased dissatisfaction and pessimism, increased absenteeism and inefficiency at work. Workaholics are people who often are perfectionists and worriers, derive their self-esteem from work, keep overly busy, neglect their health, postpone vacations and over-schedule their lives. Workaholics generally burnout.

Akerstedt (1976) and Schuler (1980) have identified alienation, high rate of absenteeism and turnover of the employees as symptoms of stress. Through absenteeism and turnover, employees attempt to cope with the stressful situation by withdrawing from the stressful situation itself. Both behaviours, absenteeism and turnover represent serious costs to the organization. The costs include the money required to recruit, select and train a new employee as well as additional costs incurred because of reduction in productivity due to induction of a new employee. Srivastava and Sinha (1983) also studied the effect of ego-strength and job involvement on the experience of role stress (i.e. role overload, role conflict and role ambiguity) in a sample of middle level management employees. The study revealed that high level of ego-strength and job involvement mitigate the role stress of the employees arising from role overload and role ambiguity.

Das, Priyanka and Srivastav, Alok Kumar (2015) conducted a study to determine the factors of work-related stress by different demographic variables among the Bank employees of West Bengal. The findings showed that there was no significant difference in work stress level in terms of demographic factors and there was significant relationship between the organizational factors and the work stress level. According to this study the overall work stress level was moderate among all respondents. Ementa, CN (2015) conducted a study to measure the causes of perceived stress among the bank secretaries, the effect stress on the performance and the strategies to cope with it. The study revealed that the secretaries of bank were affected by stress resulting in a fall in productivity. There was a need to adopt strategies to cope with stress. The work of bank secretaries involved many administrative and clerical functions, which created stress. Samartha, Vishal, Begum, Mushtiary et al. (2014) their study stated that stress was an unavoidable thing in banking, as in all occupations. The study revealed that the pressure to perform, lack of planning in the workplace, resistance to change, demands of the family and inadequate capable manpower could put a lot of stress on the executives of bank. (Masood, September 2013) The author has discussed that employees try to work with determination even if they are not provided with the support, they need to perform their tasks with honesty. They are more focused to avoid stress at their work place.

3. OBJECTIVE:

The main objective of the current study is:

· to assess the importance of different attributes causing stress among employees

· to examine the impact of different variables measuring occupational stress on the employees of Kolkata.

· to suggest stress management interventions

4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:

The present study is exploratory and empirical in nature. The study identifies the importance of different attributes causing stress in selected service sector units like bank, insurance and education. The study is based on mainly the information available through a structured questionnaire among selected respondents of different categories of employees related to major service sector in and around Kolkata by stratified sampling technique. Different sectors are treated as different strata. Moreover, available information on this context published in different journals, books, magazines, dailies and websites is taken into consideration for the study as secondary source. The structured questionnaire is formed with the help of psychometric instrument like Occupational Stress Index (Srivastava and Singh, 1988). Likerts’ Summated scale is adopted for qualitative analysis data. Primary data is assembled using convenience sampling approach. Data have been gathered through Google forms and face – to -face survey by handing over questionnaire to the respondents. 160 questionnaires were distributed out of which 10 incomplete responses were rejected. Hence 150 completed responses have been considered in this study. The number of respondents i.e. completed questionnaires collected from employees of bank, insurance and education sector are 55, 45 and 50 respectively. The primary data is mainly collected from northern and southern parts of Kolkata. The time taken for data collection procedure was two months. Data were analysed through SPSS package by using different statistical tools like descriptive statistics, analysis of variance etc.

4. FINDINGS OF THE STUDY:

In this section data have been analysed from the responses received by administering questionnaire to 150 employees of various service sectors like bank, insurance and educational institutions of Kolkata.

General Profile of the Respondents:

150 respondents were interviewed comprising of 60% male and 40% female. They belong to age group varying between 30 to 55 years. Respondents belong to different public and private sector organisations of Kolkata.

The study is based on the primary data collected by interviewing significant representative sample from among employees of service sector to find out the actual picture. In order to collect primary information from the employees, a structured questionnaire is drafted initially and a pilot survey is done to finalize it. The questionnaire is formed with the help of psychometric instruments like Occupational Stress Index (Srivastava and Singh, 1981), Job Anxiety Scale (Srivastava, 1985), Stress Resistant Cognitive Behavioral Patterns Scale (Srivastava, 1997) and Coping Strategies Scale (Srivastava and Singh, 1988).

Important Characters:

A five-point scale has been designed to measure the degree of importance of the questions to the respondents where 1 denotes ‘Not important at all’, 2 denotes ‘Not very important’, 3 denotes ‘Somewhat important’, 4 denotes important and 5 denotes ‘Extremely important’

Table 2: Importance of the Attributes under the Stress Resistant Cognitive Behavioural Patterns Scale of the Respondents.

Attributes	Rank	Mean	Std. Deviation
Nip in the bud petty things that may cause problems in future	1	4.73	0.589
Support from friends	2	4.64	0.606
Take situation as a challenge and work harder	3	4.64	0.566
Delegate responsibilities	4	4.57	0.681
Never try to do too much in too little time	5	4.51	0.723
Practice deep breathing and Asanas	6	4.51	0.631
Weekend relaxations restore energy	7	4.5	0.607
Compare not only with those better-off but also with less happy	8	4.48	0.722
Systematically collect information before coming to a decision	9	4.48	0.512
Practice meditation	10	4.45	0.757
Music acts as a stress reliever	11	4.44	0.624
Annual holidays compulsory	12	4.43	0.563
Prioritize responsibilities	13	4.42	0.718
Long-term solution of problems	14	4.41	0.824
Deal confidently in any difficult situation	15	4.37	0.76
Facilities of physical exercises in the organizational premises	16	4.36	0.704
Seek help from God	17	4.34	0.714
Do not expect or depend on others	18	4.32	0.859
Possess optimistic attitude	19	4.32	0.824
Accept the reality and modify behaviour accordingly	20	4.32	0.609
Confine needs within capabilities	21	4.31	0.731
Try to come out of uncertainty as early as possible	22	4.31	0.81
Segregate job life and personal life	23	4.26	0.683
Discharge duties with competence but do not try for perfection	24	4.23	0.856
Follow proper balanced diet	25	4.22	0.676
Seek help from psychological counselors	26	4.21	0.822
Exercise regularly	27	4.21	0.733
Go for regular medical check-up	28	4.19	0.739
Consider the outcomes before taking decision	29	4.18	0.869
Complete tasks within due time	30	4.15	0.801
Believe in Gita's philosophy of work and not to expect of outcomes	31	4.14	0.854
Learn from failures	32	4.11	0.789
Maintain co-ordination among family, professional and social roles.	33	4.02	0.867

Source: ‘The Author’

The respondents believe they try to nip in the bud such petty things that may in due course cause serious problems scored as the most important character while they maintain co-ordination among family, professionals and social roles scored as the least important character.

Different variables measuring occupational stress depend on various factors.

The different variables used in the analysis are as follows: -

BEHAVI: Behavioural Stress Symptoms

COPSTR: Coping Strategies

FEMALE: Stress Related Factors Experienced by Females only

JOBANX: Job Anxiety

OCUPST: Occupational Stress Index

PERSON: Personality Characteristics

PHASES: Important Phases of Life

PHYSIC: Physical Symptoms of Stress

PSYCHO: Psychological Symptoms of Stress

STRCBP: Stress Resistant Cognitive Behavioural Patterns.

The detailed statistical analysis of different variables and their interpretations are given as follows:

With the help of Analysis of Variance, it is found that different variables like symptoms of stress, job anxiety, etc. depend on various factors, which are shown in the following tables.

Table 3: F-values and p-values based on ANOVA of different variables measuring occupational stress on different service sectors.

Variables	F	p-value
BEHAVI	7.013	0.000
COPSTR	0.507	0.771
FEMALE	7.463	0.000
JOBANX	1.226	0.296
OCUPST	6.742	0.000
PERSON	1.772	0.118
PHASES	4.655	0.000
PHYSIC	5.058	0.000
PSYCHO	2.766	0.018
STRCBP	1.061	0.382
STRSYM	4.624	0.000

Source: ‘The Author’

The table reveals that the observed value (F=7.013 and p-value=0.000) shows that the behavioural symptoms of stress of the respondents highly vary among different sectors, that is, behavioural symptoms are not equal across the sectors. Again the extent of stress experienced by working women also differs from one sector to the other, that is, nature of the job highly influences the level of stress (F= 7.463 and p-value =0.000). It is also clear from the table that different physical symptoms of stress are shown by respondents belonging to different sectors (F = 5.058 and p-value = 0.000). However, it has been found that the overall occupational stress experienced by the respondents are strongly varying across the sectors (F = 6.742 and p-value =0.000), whereas, the other variables show moderate to lower variations owing to difference in sectors. It has been found that changes in the organizational set up give rise to stress to the employees working in the insurance sector. It is generally found that employees suffer from the anxiety of being transferred to a location far from their residence.

Table 4: F-values and p-values based on ANOVA of different variables measuring occupational stress on gender.

Variables	F	p-value
BEHAVI	12.429	0.000
COPSTR	2.200	0.139
JOBANX	2.180	0.141
OCUPST	1.006	0.317
PERSON	3.465	0.064
PHASES	0.052	0.820
PHYSIC	6.463	0.011
PSYCHO	5.998	0.015
STRCBP	0.407	0.524
STRSYM	2.572	0.110

Source: ‘The Author’

The above table shows that the behavioural symptoms of stress strongly vary across male and female respondents (F = 12.429 and p-value = 0.000), that is, they show different behavioural outcomes owing to stress. It also shows that the physical symptoms stress is highly dependent on gender (F = 6.463 and p-value = 0.011). This indicates that men and women suffer from different physical symptoms of stress. Again the psychological symptoms of stress also differ among male and female respondents (F = 5.998 and p-value = 0.015) that is, stress affects their psychology in different manner. However, the other variables like coping strategies, job anxiety, stress resistant cognitive behavioural patterns, different phases of life do not show significant variation due to gender difference.

Table 5: F-values and p-values based on ANOVA of different variables measuring occupational stress on types of organization.

Variables	F	p-value
BEHAVI	0.368	0.692
COPSTR	7.114	0.001
FEMALE	0.566	0.568
JOBANX	1.061	0.347
OCUPST	2.995	0.051
PERSON	9.771	0.000
PHASES	2.537	0.081
PHYSIC	7.565	0.001
PSYCHO	3.265	0.039
STRCBP	0.060	0.942
STRSYM	5.067	0.007

Source: ‘The author’

The observed value of F = 7.114 (p-value = 0.001) reveals that the coping strategies adopted by the respondents depend on the type of organizations, like public, private and foreign; that is, the nature of the organization influences their ways to handle stress. An interesting feature is found that the personality characteristics of the respondents strongly vary across the types of organizations (F = 9.771, p-value = 0.000). Personality characteristics include tolerance, patience, locus of control, level of competitiveness, convincing ability, risk taking ability and so on. Hence, different personality characteristics are found among the respondents working in different types of organizations. Again, the physical symptoms of stress of the respondents are highly dependent on the types of organization (F = 7.565 and p-value =0.000). It is found that employees belonging to banking and insurance sectors suffer from lack of proper allocation of duties.

Table6: F-values and p-values based on ANOVA of different variables measuring occupational stress on education.

Variables	F	p-value
BEHAVI	9.091	0.000
COPSTR	2.536	0.057
FEMALE	5.685	0.001
JOBANX	0.907	0.438
OCUPST	3.748	0.011
PERSON	1.041	0.374
PHASES	1.210	0.306
PHYSIC	4.276	0.006
PSYCHO	3.117	0.026
STRCBP	0.014	0.998
STRSYM	4.789	0.003

Source: ‘the Author’

The above table shows that the behavioural symptoms of stress strongly vary across the level of education among the respondents, that is, different education levels (Secondary, Higher Secondary, Graduation and Post Graduation qualifications) of the respondents influence their behavioral symptoms of stress. It is also found that the physical symptoms of stress are moderately dependent on levels of education among respondents (F = 4.276 and p-value =0.006) as well as the psychological symptoms of stress also moderately vary across the levels of education among the respondents (F=3.117 and p-value = 0.026). The other variables show lower dependence on the levels of education among the respondents.

CONCLUSIONS:

An important conclusion is “Afraid of false allegation” scored as the most important character under the Job Anxiety scale. It can be concluded that the behavioural symptoms of stress of the respondents highly vary among different sectors, that is, behavioural symptoms are not equal across the sectors. It is also clear that different physical symptoms of stress are shown by respondents belonging to different sectors. The study indicates that men and women suffer from different physical symptoms of stress. An interesting feature is found that the personality characteristics of the respondents strongly vary across the types of organizations (F = 9.771, p-value = 0.000). Personality characteristics include tolerance, patience, locus of control, level of competitiveness, convincing ability, risk taking ability and so on. Hence, different personality characteristics are found among the respondents working in different types of organizations. It is found that the behavioural symptoms of stress strongly vary across the level of education among the respondents, that is, different education levels (Secondary, Higher Secondary, Graduation and Post Graduation qualifications) of the respondents influence their behavioural symptoms of stress. It is also found that the physical symptoms of stress are moderately dependent on levels of education among respondents (F = 4.276 and p-value =0.006) as well as the psychological symptoms of stress also moderately vary across the levels of education among the respondents (F=3.117 and p-value = 0.026). It can be concluded that respondents belonging to different age groups, suffer from different types of physical symptoms of stress.

SUGGESTIONS:

Each and every individual suffers from stress. Similarly, every employee faces stress evolving from job related matters. But, because of human instinct, employees undergoing stress try to get rid of or cope up with the stressful situation. Several techniques and strategies are being used by various job occupants depending on their cognitive patterns and work conditions. “Stress management” is a globally accepted connotation guiding the subjects to cope up with stress for a better healthy life. Several strategies are coined by stress researchers studying their effectiveness on the physical and emotional health of the employees. Hence, prevention and management of stress related problems could be undertaken at individual level as well as organizational level.

In today’s knowledge-driven business, quality of human resource assumes even greater significance. It is generally seen that a healthy and committed workforce ensures increased efficiency and productivity for organizations. Since stress triggers each and every individual, one should be well equipped to manage stress. Various stress researchers have evolved several techniques for the management of stress of job life as well as personal life. The degree of stress to be experienced by an individual depends on how he perceives the situation and tries to control the situation. An inventory of stress-resistant cognitive behavioural patterns in the form of rating scale has been prepared by Srivastava (1997). It can be used as a significant tool in cognitive intervention programme to train the employees to develop these cognitive patterns to prevent or cognitively cope with their occupational stress. The following stress resistant cognitive patterns are suggested in the inventory:

1. Consider difficult, adverse or demanding job situations as inevitable part of job life.

2. Perceive stressful job situation as a temporary phase of the job.

3. Rationalize the situation of stress and its consequences.

4. Consider the demanding situation as an opportunity to learn, develop new skills and to enhance self-confidence.

5. Take the excessive job demands as a challenge.

6. Assess the severity of your job stresses with reference to the others who are facing with similar or more severe stresses in their jobs.

7. Objectively think about why this situation of stress should have not arisen.

8. Believe that life is a mixture of sorrow and happiness.

9. Think that time itself takes care of such situations.

10. Accept the situations of stress thinking that there is nothing you can do to change them.

11. While dealing with the situation of stress, think about its positive outcomes.

12. Believe that every problem ultimately has some remedy.

13. Keep in mind that no one is totally free from stresses.

14. Accept the situations of stress as realities of life.

15. React to the hardships of job life with optimistic and positive effect.

16. Remind yourself that job is not everything.

17. Believe in Gita’s philosophy that “your right is to do your job only, not to the fruit thereof”.

18. Accept the situations of stress as God’s will.

19. Have faith in God and His kindness.

Individual’s line of thinking is translated into his action. Just like the proverb “morning shows the day”, an individual’s thoughts influence his behaviour. Hence an employee’s stress resistant cognitive patterns would help him to make specific modifications in his habits and thus adopting certain behaviour patterns to prevent job life stress. Employees generally find it difficult to change the existing behaviour patterns but self-imposed behaviour modification techniques can be imparted by stress management practitioners.

Stresses arising due to role overload and conflicts can be prevented through effective time management and prioritizing job responsibilities. Supervisors can assist the employees in clarifying specific job expectations and thereby, train them to make proper allocation of time according to tasks. Prioritization of job activities will help the employees to spend the time allocated for a particular task more productively. Apart from priorities at work, employees should prioritize among their roles on and off-the-job. While determining priorities, employee should take into consideration their career goals and values. Thus employees should be equipped to conserve and control time by identifying “time robbers” like meetings, visitors, paper work, phone calls etc.

Stress resistant preventive interventions should be adopted at the organizational level. Stress caused due to misfit between employee and his task demands can be prevented by selecting suitable personnel and imparting training to fulfill the requirements of the job. Needs, values and attitudes of the employees should be assessed along with the assessment of their skills and aptitudes. While selecting employees, “job characteristics” approach to task-design can be applied to achieve the congruence between employee and his task. In the job design approach, the individual is linked to the job characteristics, with expected outcomes of high intrinsic motivation, high performance and job satisfaction and low absenteeism. Proper job design along with job enrichment can prevent or reduce stress to a great extent.

Adequate training to the new employees as well as periodical training to the existing employees can prevent the occurrence of stress. Training should be imparted to help the individuals to cope with stress, to make the managers aware of the importance of job design and to make the employees aware of the job factors that increase the risk of psychological disorders.

There should be effective utilization of manpower considering their efficiency and qualification. A favourable working environment should be maintained since an employee spends about 10-12 hours in the workplace. Performance appraisal system should be strengthened and feedback from the employees should be taken from time to time so that their attitude and feelings about the job could be known. In order to keep the organizational stress under control, management should constantly monitor and review the stress management interventions and the results so that they could be changed and modified with time. Stress management interventions may be effective with a particular group of job occupants but may be ineffective with another group. Likewise, it may be applicable in one type of organization but it fails in another working environment. Hence, management of the organizations should be dynamic, innovative and imaginative in application of stress management interventions.

As more and more organizations have become aware of the detrimental effects of stress, they have introduced Employee Assistance Programme for employees who may experience problems arising either from the job environment or from their personal lives. Managing time intelligently can help one to maximize productivity. An employee should learn when to say no, otherwise he will be in the danger of stretching himself too thin. A job occupant should know the boundaries of his job. Separating work duties from home related ones, will allow one to keep one’s mind on work when he is there and in turn, procrastinate less, feel less overwhelmed and accomplishment.

REFERENCES:

1. Akerstedt, T. Shift Work and Health: Interdisciplinary aspects. In P.G. Rentos and R.D. Shepard (Eds.), Shift Work and Health, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Govt. Printing Office. 1976

2. Beehr, T. A. and Newman, J. E. Job stress, employee health and organizational effectiveness: A facet analysis, model and literature review, Personal Psychology. 1978; 31: 665-69.

3. Das P and Srivastav AK. A Study on Stress among Employees of Public Sector Banks in Asansol, West Bengal. International Journal of Science and Research. 2015; 4: 108 -113.

4. Ementa, CN. Secretaries Perceived Strategies for Coping with Occupational Stress in Banks in Anambra State. An International Multidisciplinary Journal. 2015; 9(3): 88 -98.

5. Ivancevich, J. M. and Donnelly, H. H. Relation of organizational structure to job satisfaction, anxiety and performance: Measures, research and contingencies. Administrative Science Quarterly. 1975; 20: 272-80.

6. Ivancevich, J. M. and Matteson, M. T. Stress and Work: A Managerial Perspective, Gleinview, IL, Scott Foresman. 1980

7. Ivancevich, J. M. and Matteson, M. T. Organizational level stress management interventions. In J.M. Ivancevich (Ed.), Job Stress: From Theory to Suggestions, New York, The Hawarth Press. 1987

8. Masood, A. Effects of Job Stress on Employee Retention: A Study on Banking Sector of Pakistan. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications. 2013; 3(9): 1-8.

9. Pines, A. M. and Aronson, E. Burnout: From Tedium to Personal Growth, New York, Free Press. 1981

10. Samartha V and Begum M. A comparative analysis of occupational stress among the employees in public and private sector banks in dakshina kannad district. Bank Management. 2014; 2(2).

11. Schuler R.S. Definition and conceptualization of stress in organizations, Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance. 1980; 24: 115-130.

12. Srivastava, P. K. and Sinha, M. M. Perceived Role Stress as a Function of Ego strength and Job Involvement of Managerial Personnel. Psychological studies. 1983; 28: 8-12.

13. Srivastava, A. K. Moderating effect of job attitudes on occupational stress-mental health relationship. Indian Journal of Applied Psychology. 1990; 27: 98-102.

14. Srivastava, A. K. Self-management of occupational stress: A cognitive-behavioural approach. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations. 1997; 32: 487-95.

15. Srivastava, A. K. Stress-resistant cognitive-behavioural paterns scale. 1997

16. Srivastava, A. K. and Singh, H. S. Modifying effects of coping strategies on the relation of organizational role stress and mental health. Psychological Reports. 1988; 62: 1007-1009.

17. Srivastava, A. K. (1985): Moderating effect on n-Ach on role stress job anxiety relationship, Psychological Studies, 30, 8-14.

18. Srivastava, A. K. and Singh, H. S. Modifying effects of coping strategies on the relation of organizational role stress and mental health. Psychological Reports. 1988; 62: 1007-1009.

19. Srivastava, Avinash Kumar. Coping Strategy for Role Stress Across Management Levels. The ICFAI Journal of Organizational Behavior. 2006; 5(3): 65-73.

20. Srivastava, P. K. and Sinha, M. M. Perceived Role Stress as a Function of Ego strength and Job Involvement of Managerial Personnel. Psychological studies. 1983; 28: 8-12.

21. Sujatha, B. A Review of Organizational Stress Assessment Instruments, Stress Audit, Concepts and Cases, The ICFAI University Press. 2006: 117-125.

22. Talib, Parvaiz and Aziz, Mohsin. Strategic Approach to Manage Organizational Stress: A Conceptual Model. The ICFAI Journal of Organizational Behaviour. 2006; 5(2): 12-19.

Received on 10.01.2025 Revised on 12.05.2025

Accepted on 14.07.2025 Published on 29.07.2025

Available online from August 05, 2025

Asian Journal of Management. 2025;16(3):239-246.

DOI: 10.52711/2321-5763.2025.00036

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Creative Commons License.

Attributes	Rank	Mean	Std. Deviation
Afraid of false allegations	1	4.56	0.619
Undergo tension during supervisor's observation	2	4.49	0.689
Feels lack of efficiency	3	4.42	0.807
Lack of performance appraisal	4	4.39	0.693
Colleagues do not express happiness on one's success	5	4.31	0.751
Co-workers misunderstand	6	4.31	0.793
No one to confide among colleagues	7	4.24	0.82
Arguments with boss make anxious	8	4.19	0.859
Lack of job security	9	4.11	0.718
Worry for family if turned out of job	10	4.07	0.707