Article
JournalofOrganizationalBehavior,
J.Organiz.Behav.36,94–111(2015)Publishedonline12September2014inWileyOnlineLibrary()DOI:10.1002/job.1949 Adouble-edgedsword:Themoderatingroleofconscientiousnessintherelationshipsbetweenworkstressors,psychologicalstrain,andjobperformance WEIPENGLIN1,
2,JINGJINGMA2,LEIWANG2*ANDMOWANG3 1DepartmentofHumanResourceManagement,BusinessSchool,NankaiUniversity,Tianjin,China2DepartmentofPsychology,PekingUniversity,Beijing,China3DepartmentofManagement,UniversityofFlorida,Gainesville,Florida,
U.S.A. Summary Althoughconscientiousnessmonlyviewedasatypeofpersonalresourcetohelpindividualsreducestrainormitigatetheimpactsofstressors,empiricalresearchdemonstratedmixedresults.Basedonthepersonalresourceallocationperspective,wepositedthatratherthanfunctioningaspersonalresourceperse,conscientiousnessmayactasakeyfactorinfluencinghowindividualsallocatetheirpersonalresources.Thecurrentstudyexaminedthemoderatingrolesofconscientiousnessintherelationshipsthatworkstressors(i.e.,challengestressorsandhindrancestressors)havewithemployeepsychologicalstrainandjobperformancebyusingmulti-source,time-laggeddatacollectedfrom250employeesworkingatpanies.Theresultsshowedthatbothchallengestressorsandhindrancestressorswerepositivelyrelatedtopsychologicalstrain.Conscientiousnessmoderatedtherelationshipsbetweenbothstressorsandpsychologicalstrain,suchthatthepositiverelationshipswerestrongerforindividualswithhighconscientiousness.Conscientiousnessalsomoderatedtherelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsandperformance,suchthattherelationshipwaspositiveforindividualswithhighconscientiousnessbutnegativeforthosewithlowconscientiousness.Altogether,thefindingssuggestthatconscientiousnessactsasadouble-edgedswordthatbothpromotesperformanceandexacerbatesthestressreactionofemployeeswhentheyareconfrontedwithstressfulsituations.Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd. Keywords:challengestressors;hindrancestressors;psychologicalstrain;performance;conscientiousness;personalresource;resourceallocation Introduction Conscientiousness,ponentofthefive-factorpersonalitymodel(Costa&McCrae,1988;Costa&McCrae,1992),describestheextenttowhichindividualsaredutiful,hardworking,persevering,andself-disciplinedandtendtostriveforachievement(Barrick&Mount,1991).Becauseithasbeenshowntobeastronganduniversallyvalidpredictorofavarietyofsignificantesintheworkcontext,suchasjobperformance(Barrick&Mount,1991;Mount,Barrick,&Strauss,1999),jobattitudes(Erdheim,Wang,&Zickar,2006;Judge,Heller,&Mount,2002),anizationalcitizenshipbehavior(Hackett&Lapierre,2007),conscientiousnessisarguablythemostimportantfactoramongpersonalitytraits(Barrick,Mount,&Strauss,1993;Roberts,Chernyshenko,Stark,&Goldberg,2005). Inthestressliterature,conscientiousnessisalsooneofthemostsalienttraitfactorsaffectinghowindividualsreacttoworkstressors.Undertheconservationofresourcesframework(Hobfall,1989,2001),researchersgenerallydeemconscientiousnessasatypeofpersonalresourcethatmayhelpindividualsresistthedeleteriouseffectsofstress *Correspondenceto:LeiWang,DepartmentofPsychology,PekingUniversity,Beijing100871,China.E-mail:leiwang@ Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd. Received03April2013Revised23June2014,epted26July2014 CONSCIENTIOUSNESSASADOUBLE-EDGEDSWORD95 (e.g.,Perry,Witt,Penney,&Atwater,2010;Zellars,Perrewé,Hochwarter,&Anderson,2006).However,existingresearchhasdemonstratedinconsistentfindingsregardingtheviewthatconscientiousnessisatypeofpersonalresource(e.g.,Armon,Shirom,&Melamed,2012;Grant&Langan-Fox,2007;Nandkeolyar,Shaffer,Li,Ekkirala,&Bagger,2014;Zellarsetal.,2006).Forexample,althoughNandkeolyarandcolleagues(2014)foundthatconscientiousnessmitigatesthenegativerelationshipbetweenabusivesupervisionandemployeeperformance,GrantandLangan-Fox(2007)foundthatthenegativerelationshipbetweenroleconflictandjobsatisfactionisstrongerforemployeeswithhigherlevelsofconscientiousness.Theseresultssuggestthattheextraeffortinvestedbyconscientiousindividualsintheirjobsmayleadtodepletionofresourcesandthustheseindividualsmaysuffermorefromstrain.Inotherwords,conscientiousnessmaynotserveasatypeofpersonalresourcepersetohelpindividualsresistthedetrimentaleffectsofworkstressors.Rather,basedonthepersonalresourceallocationperspective(Grawitch,Barber,&Justice,2010),conscientiousnessmayinsteadinfluencehowandwhereindividualsallocatetheirpersonalresources,whichinturninfluenceshowindividualsreacttoworkstressors. ordingtothepersonalresourceallocationframework(Grawitchetal.,2010),theamountofpersonalresourcesisfinite.Whetherindividualsarecapableofhandlingstressfulsituationsdependsonhoweffectivelytheyallocatetheirpersonalresources.Inaddition,thepersonalresourceallocationframeworkalsopositsthatpersonalitywouldinfluencetheresourceallocationprocesses.Basedonthesearguments,weinferredthatindividualswithhighlevelsofconscientiousness,whohaveapredispositiontosethighergoalsandstriveforachievement(Barrick&Mount,1991;Barricketal.,1993),wouldbemorewillingtodirectpersonalresourcestomeetperformancerequirementsaspriority.Thiswouldimplythatunderstressfulworkcontexts,conscientiousindividualsmaydirectpersonalresourcesprimarilyintofulfillingtheirhighperformancestandard,leavingthemwithinsufficientresourcestomitigatetheimpactofworkstressorsontheirpsychologicalstrain. Insum,conscientiousnessshouldserveasaguideforindividualstodirecttheirresourceallocations(ratherthantheresourceperse).ordingtothisargument,thisallocationstrategywouldhavesignificantimpactonperformanceandpsychologicalstrainsimultaneouslywhenemployeesencounterworkstressors.Inthecurrentresearch,wesoughttoexaminebothperformanceandpsychologicalstrainasesinasinglemodelsoastoseewhetherconscientiousindividuals’maintenanceofhighperformanceesattheexpenseofincreasedpsychologicalstrainwhenfacingstressors.Indeed,tothebestofourknowledge,noempiricalresearchhasexaminedthemoderatingeffectsofconscientiousnessontherelationshipsthatstressorshavewithperformanceandpsychologicalstrainsimultaneously,whichlimitsourunderstandingoftherolethatconscientiousnessplaysintheworkstresscontext. Inordertoprovideaclearerpictureofhowconscientiousnessinfluencesthestressors-reactionprocess,thecurrentresearchexaminedthemoderatingroleofconscientiousnessontherelationshipsbetweendifferenttypesofworkstressorsandes.Specifically,weemployedthetwo-dimensionmodelofworkstressors(i.e.,challengeandhindrancestressors)proposedbyCavanaugh,Boswell,Roehling,andBoudreau(2000)andfocusedonbothjobperformanceandpsychologicalstrainatthesametime.Basedonthepersonalresourceallocationframework(Grawitchetal.,2010),weproposedthat,ononehand,conscientiousnesswouldstrengthenthepositiverelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsandjobperformance,butmitigatethenegativerelationshipbetweenhindrancestressorsandperformance.Ontheotherhand,conscientiousnesswouldexacerbatethepositiverelationshipsbetweenbothstressorsandpsychologicalstrain(Figure1). Inmakingthesepredictions,weprovideseveralimportantcontributionstothepersonalityandworkstressliterature.First,althoughconscientiousnessmonlyviewedasatypeofpersonalresourcethathelpsindividualsdealwithstressfulevents,theinconsistentresultsofpreviousresearchsuggestthat,ratherthanatypeofresourceperse,conscientiousnessisinsteadakeyfactorthatimpactstheallocationofpersonalresources.Ourresearchsupportsthisargumentbyshowinghowindividualswithdifferentlevelsofconscientiousnessreacteddifferentlytoworkstressorsintermsoftheirperformanceandpsychologicalstrain,whichprovidesnewinsighttounderstandingtheroleofconscientiousnessinthestressliterature. Second,wepresentamorenuancedmodeloftheeffectsofconscientiousnessbyconsideringhowindividualconscientiousnessinteractswithworkstressorstoimpactes.Inaddition,wedemonstratethatthesamepersonalitytraitcaneitherfacilitatethefavorableeffectsorexacerbatetheadverseeffectsofworkstressors,dependingon Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd.
J.Organiz.Behav.36,94–111(2015)DOI:10.1002/job 96W.LINETAL. Figure1.Expectedtheoreticalrelationships theeunderconsideration(e.g.,performanceorpsychologicalstrain).Itisthefirstattempttodemonstratethedouble-edgedeffectofconscientiousnessinasinglemodelandhighlightstheneedtoconsidernotonlytheworkenvironmentandindividualdifferences,buttheesaswell. Challengestressors,hindrancestressors,andes Therehasbeenatraditionintheliterature(e.g.,Selye,1974)todistinguishbetween“good”stress(eustress)and“bad”stress(distress).Similarly,ithasbeensuggestedthattheremaybemeritsindistinguishingamongformsofstressorsinworkplaces(Jex,1998),consideringthatstressorsinworkplaceshavebeendemonstratedtobedifferentiallyassociatedwithaffectiveandbehavioralresponses(e.g.,Beehr,Glaser,Canali,&Wallwey,2001;Dwyer&Ganster,1991;Fritz&Sonnentag,2009;Ivancevich,Matteson,&Preston,1982;Jex&Yankelevich,2008;Shultz,Wang,&Olson,2010;Stamper&Johlke,2003). Cavanaughandcolleagues(2000)proposedatwo-dimensionalworkstressorframework(i.e.,challenge–hindrancestressors)anddemonstratedthatrelationshipsbetweenstressorsandworkesdependonthenatureofdifferentstressors.Intheirstudy,Cavanaughetal.surveyedmanagers’workstressusingitemsselectedfromseveralmeasurements(Caplan,Cobb,French,Harrison,&Pinneau,1975;Ivancevich&Matteson,1983;Sandman,1992).Resultsoffactoranalysisshowedthatitemscanbecategorizedintotwofactors.Thefirstfactorconsistedofitemssuchasworkload,timepressure,andresponsibilityandwasnamedchallengestressorsbecausetheseitemsreflectedstressorsthathelptofacilitategoalachievementandpersonalgrowth.Thesecondfactorconsistedofitemssuchasroleambiguity,roleconflict,anizationalpoliticsandwasnamedhindrancestressorsbecausetheseitemsreflectedstressorsthatthreatengoalachievement.SubsequentanalysisinCavanaughetal.’sstudy,aswellasagrowingbodyofresearch,supportsthetwo-dimensionalframeworkofchallenge–hindrancestressors,whichalltogethersuggestthatchallengestressorsleadtodesirableworkattitudesorbehaviorssuchasjobsatisfaction(Beehretal.,2001;Podsakoff,LePine,&LePine,2007;Webster,Beehr,&Love,2011),mitment(Boswell,Olson-Buchanan,&LePine,2004;Podsakoffetal.,2007),andworkself-efficacy(Webster,Beehr,&Christiansen,2010),whilehindrancestressorsresultinundesirableonessuchasturnoverintention(Boswelletal.,2004;Podsakoffetal.,2007;Websteretal.,2011)andwithdrawal(Podsakoffetal.,2007). Notsurprisingly,therefore,challengeandhindrancestressorshavealsobeendemonstratedtohaveobverserelationswithemployeetaskperformance.InagreementwithCavanaughetal.(2000),empiricalstudies(e.g.,LePine,LePine,&Jackson,2004;LePine,Podsakoff,&LePine,2005;Pearsall,Ellis,&Stain,2009;Wallace,Edwards,Arnold,Frazier,&Finch,2009)aswellasmeta-analysis(LePineetal.,2005)haveconsistentlyidentifiedapositiverelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsandperformancebutanegativeonebetweenhindrancestressors Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd.
J.Organiz.Behav.36,94–111(2015)DOI:10.1002/job CONSCIENTIOUSNESSASADOUBLE-EDGEDSWORD97 andperformance.Itisarguedthatbecauseindividualsbelievethattheyaremoreabletomeetthechallengeworkdemandsandvaluedeswilluraftertheycopewiththem,challengestressorsevokeahigherlevelofmotivation(LePineetal.,2004;LePineetal.,2005),thusleadingtomoreengagementandbetterperformance.Incontrast,hindrancestressorsreduceperformancebecausethesestressorsaresituationalconstraintsthatmakeitdifficultforemployeestoplishjobtasks(Cavanaughetal.,2000).Besides,giventhatindividualsaremorelikelytobelievethatnoreasonablelevelofeffortisadequatetodealwithhindranceworkdemands,theytendtohavealowerlevelofmotivation.Thus,hindrancestressorsaresupposedtoreduceperformance(LePineetal.,2004;LePineetal.,2005). Despitethedifferentrelationshipsbetweenchallengeandhindrancestressorswithattitudinalandbehaviorales,researchrevealsthatbothofthesestressorsarepositivelyassociatedwithpsychologicalstrain(e.g.,Boswelletal.,2004;Lee&Ashforth,1996;LePineetal.,2004;LePineetal.,2005;Podsakoffetal.,2007;Websteretal.,2011).Thisargumentisbasedonresearchsuggestingthatallstressfuljobdemandsaresubjecttothesamepsychologicalprocess(i.e.,appraisalandcoping),whichrequiresemotionalandcognitiveeffort(Cooper,Dewe,&O’Driscoll,2001;Lazarus&Folkman,1984)andthusresultsinformsofstrainsuchasanxiety,fatigue,andexhaustion(Jex,1998;Schaubroeck,Cotton,&Jennings,1989).Evenchallengingstressors,whichareappraisedaspositiveandincreasejobsatisfaction,willleadtomorestrainbecauseoftheincreasedeffortassociatedwiththeappraisalofdemandsandcopingwiththem(Crawford,LePine,&Rich,2010;Podsakoffetal.,2007).Insum,bothchallengeandhindrancestressorsarepositivelyassociatedwithpsychologicalstrain. Themoderatingroleofconscientiousness Inthepresentstudy,wegobeyondpreviousresearchbyexaminingtheinteractionsbetweenchallenge–hindrancestressorsandtheindividualdifferenceofconscientiousness.Wedrawuponthepersonalresourceallocationframework(Grawitchetal.,2010)andpastresearchtounderstandthemoderatingeffectsofconscientiousnessontherelationshipsthatchallenge–hindrancestressorshavewithemployees’psychologicalstrainandperformance. Thepersonalresourceallocationframeworksuggeststhatthereexistvariousdemandsinlifedomains,suchasworkloadandhouseholdchores,andpersonalresourcesareneededtomeetthesedemands.ordingtothepersonalresourceallocationframework,therearethreebroadcategoriesofpersonalresources:time,energy(physical,mental,and/oremotional),andfinancialresources.Inordancewiththeconservationofresources(COR)theory(Hobfall,1989,2001),thetotalamountofresourcesonepossessesisfinite.Thus,individualshavetochoosewhere,when,andhowtoallocatetheirresourcestodealwiththedemands,andtheresultsofresourceallocationdeterminemanyimportantes.Forinstance,notallocatingenoughresourcestopletionofworktaskswouldleadtoreducedjobperformance(Wang,Liao,Zhan,&Shi,2011;Witt&Carlson,2006).Resourceallocationdiffersfromsimilarconceptssuchascoping,whichisdirectedatspecifictargets(e.g.,copingwithproblemsorcopingwithemotions;Folkman&Lazarus,1980,1985).Ontheotherhand,resourceallocationisabroaderprocessthatincludeschoicesaboutwhere,when,andhowtospendresources. ordingtothepersonalresourceallocationframework,peoplehavedifferentstrategiestoallocatetheirresources(Lee,Kelly,&Edwards,2006;Rabinovich,Morton,&Postmes,2010),andpersonalitytraitswouldgreatlyimpacthowindividualsallocateresources(Witt&Carlson,2006).Asoneofthefivehigh-ordertraitsinthefivefactormodelofpersonality(Costa&McCrae,1988),conscientiousnessstandsforatendencytobepersevering,hardworking,self-disciplined,dutiful,andanized(Costa&McCrae,1992).Ithasbeenwidelydemonstratedthatthepersonalitytraitofconscientiousnesshassignificantinfluenceanizationalsettings(Meyer,Dalal,&io,2009;Shi,Lin,Wang,&Wang,2009;Taylor,Bedeian,&Kluemper,2012).Here,wepositthatconscientiousnessmayplayanimportantroleininfluencingemployees’resourceallocationwhentheyencounterchallengestressorsorhindrancestressorsinworkplaces. Conscientiousindividualsattachgreaterimportancetopersonalachievement(Barrick,Stewart,&Piotrowski,2002),aremoreconcernedabouthighqualityofwork(Moon,2001),andaremoremotivated(Judge&Ilies, Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd.
J.Organiz.Behav.36,94–111(2015)DOI:10.1002/job 98W.LINETAL. 2002),andarehardworking(Barricketal.,1993;Renn,Allen,&Huning,2011).ordingly,highlyconscientiousindividualsverymuchvalueachievement-relatedconditions,suchasasenseofplishment(Raja,Johns,&Ntalianis,2004),andtendtospendefforttoconquerthework-relatedproblemsthattheyencounter(Wang&Erdheim,2007;Watson,Clark,&Harkness,1994).Thus,whenexperiencingchallengestressorsthatarebeneficialtoachievement,highlyconscientiousindividualswouldallocatemoreresources(e.g.,spendingmoretimeandenergy)theyhaveintodealingwiththesestressors,inordertomeettheperformancerequirementsandgainthesenseofplishment,thusleadingtobetterperformance.Forinstance,theymayspendlongerhoursonjobtasks,workovertime,andtakefewerbreakstodealwiththehigherworkload.Incontrast,forlessconscientiousemployees,becausetheydonotcareaboutachievementatworkverymuch,theywouldnotallocatesomuchoftheirresourcesintodealingwiththesestressors.ordingly,weproposethatthepositiverelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsandperformanceshouldbestrongerforemployeeswithhigherlevelsofconscientiousness. Hypothesis1a:Conscientiousnessmoderatestherelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsandjobperformance,suchthatthepositiverelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsandjobperformanceisstrongerforemployeeswithhigherconscientiousness. Unlikechallengestressors,hindrancestressorsarestressfuldemandsthatarehardtodealwithpersonallyandthathinderachievementandpersonalgrowth(Cavanaughetal.,2000;LePineetal.,2005;Podsakoffetal.,2007).Nevertheless,extantresearchhassuggestedthathighlyconscientiousindividualsarelikelytorespondtoadverseworksituationsinmoreproductiveways.Employeeswithhighconscientiousnessaremorelikelytofocusontheirjobdutiesevenwhenanizationalconstraints(Bowling&Eschleman,2010)orinterpersonalinjustice(Yang&Diefendorff,2009).Giventhatindividualswithhighconscientiousnessaremoremotivatedandambitious(Judge&Ilies,2002),weproposethatinordertomaintaintheirhighlevelofperformance,theseindividualsmaydirectmoreresources(e.g.,timeandenergy)todealwithhindrancestressor,whichoffsetsthenegativeeffectofthesestressorsonperformance.Incontrast,individualswithlowconscientiousnessarelessmotivatedtoallocatetheirresourcestodealwithhindrancestressors,becausetheydonotcaremuchaboutthedecreaseofperformance.Thus,theirlevelsofperformancearevulnerabletohindrancestressors.ordingly,forhighlyconscientiousemployees,theimpactofhindrancestressorsonperformancewouldbelessseverethanthosewithlowerconscientiousness.Thishypothesisisinordancewitharecentfindingshowingthatconscientiousnesswouldweakenthenegativeinfluenceofabusivesupervisiononperformance(Nandkeolyaretal.,2014). Hypothesis1b:Conscientiousnessmoderatestherelationshipbetweenhindrancestressorsandjobperformance,suchthatthenegativerelationshipbetweenhindrancestressorsandjobperformanceisweakerforemployeeswithhigherconscientiousness. Althoughconscientiousnesswouldhelpemployeestoget/maintainhigherlevelsofperformanceunderstressfulworksituations,here,wearguethatitwouldactasa“detrimental”factorinstrengtheningthestressor–psychologicalstrainrelationship.Asstated,whenconfrontingchallengestressors,highlyconscientiousindividualstendtoallocatemoreresourcesintomeetingtheirhighperformancestandardsoastogetmoreachievement.Becausethetotalamountofpersonalresourcesisfinite,theirresourceallocationstrategywillgraduallydepletetheirpersonalresources.ordingtotheCORtheory,thedepletionofpersonalresourceswouldleadtoexperienceofstressandstrain(Hobfall,1989,2001).Ithasbeendemonstratedthattheemotionalandcognitiveeffortsputtodealwithstressfuldemandswouldresultinformsofstrainsuchasanxiety,fatigue,andexhaustion(Jex,1998;Schaubroecketal.,1989).So,byallocatingtimeandenergytomeetwiththechallengestressors,highlyconscientiousemployeessacrificetheirwell-beinginexchangeforgoodperformance(Sonnentag&Frese,2012).Whileforthosewithlowconscientiousness,becausetheydonotcaremuchaboutgainingachievement,theywouldnotallocatesuchhighlevelsofresourcesinjobaschallengestressorsincrease.ordingly,theyarelesslikelytodemonstratesignificantpsychologicalreactionswhenconfrontedwithchallengestressors. Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd.
J.Organiz.Behav.36,94–111(2015)DOI:10.1002/job CONSCIENTIOUSNESSASADOUBLE-EDGEDSWORD99 Hypothesis2a:Conscientiousnessmoderatestherelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsandpsychologicalstrain,suchthatthepositiverelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsandpsychologicalstrainisstrongerformoreconscientiousemployees. Similarly,asforthehindrancestressors,highlyconscientiousemployeeswouldallocatemoreresourcestodealwiththeminordertooffsettheirnegativeinfluenceonperformance.Spendingtoomuchtimeandenergyonworkwouldbringaboutadepletionofpersonalresources;thus,thisallocationstrategywouldleadtomorepsychologicalstrainashindrancestressorsincrease.Whilethosewithlowerconscientiousnessarelessmotivatedaboutwork,theyareevenpronetopsychologicallydetachfromtheirjobs(Sonnentag&Fritz,2007).So,theywouldbelessconcernedaboutwhethertheirjobdutiesarehinderedbysituationalfactorsandwouldallocatefewerresourcesintowork.Thus,theywouldsufferfromlessstrainashindrancestressorsincrease.Thisargumentisconsistentwithpreviousresearchshowingthatconscientiousnessstrengthensthenegativeeffectofroleconflictonjobsatisfaction(Grant&Langan-Fox,2007).ordingly,wehypothesizedthat: Hypothesis2b:Conscientiousnessmoderatestherelationshipbetweenhindrancestressorsandpsychologicalstrain,suchthatthepositiverelationshipbetweenhindrancestressorsandstrainisstrongerformoreconscientiousemployees. Method Participantsandprocedure Wecollecteddatafromtwopanies:arestaurantpanyandaconsultingfirm.Randomsamplingmethodwitha30percentsamplingratewasusedtocollectdatafromemployeesinthesepanies.Thissamplingrateensuresadequatesamplesizeandgoodcoverageofvariousdemographiccharacteristics,joblevels,andworkunits. Datawerecollectedintwophases,2weeksapart,inordertoreducemonmethodvarianceproblem(Podsakoff,MacKenzie,Lee,&Podsakoff,2003).Inthefirstsurvey,participantsreportedtheirperceptionsofworkstressors(i.e.,challengeandhindrancestressors),theirpersonalitytraitofconscientiousness,anddemographicinformation.Inthesecondsurveyconducted2weekslater,participantsdescribedtheirpsychologicalstrain,andtheirsupervisorsratedparticipants’overallperformance.Weusedanidentificationcodeonthequestionnairetolinkthequestionnairesfromthetwophases.Theuseofthecodesallowedustoexcludeparticipants’names,ensuringtheconfidentialnatureofthesurvey. Intherestaurantpany,thesurveysweredistributedto156employees.Amongthem,140(89.74percent)respondedtothefirstsurvey,andofthese140participants,136(97.14percent)respondedtothesecondsurvey.Intheconsultingfirm,thesurveysweredistributedto133employees.Amongthem,120(90.23percent)respondedtothefirstsurvey,andofthese120participants,114(95.0percent)respondedtothesecondsurvey.Atotalof26directsupervisorsofemployeeswereaskedtoprovideemployees’performanceratings.Allofthem(100percent)respondedtothesurvey.Toinvestigatethepotentialimpactofattrition,differencesonstressors(i.e.,challengeandhindrancestressors)andconscientiousnessweretestedbetweenparticipantspletedalltheassessmentatbothtimesandparticipantspletedonlyTime1assessment.Nosignificantdifferencesemergedforanyofthesevariables.Thefinalsamplesizewas250.Jobtitlesforthissamplewerequitevaried,includingsales,marketingspecialists,projectmanagers,executivemanagers,planners,procurementspecialists,ountants,qualitycontrolspecialists,humanresourcespecialists,customerrepresentatives,systemarchitects,andsystemadministrators.Theseindividualswereresponsibleforthemanagementandday-to-dayfunctioningoftherestaurant Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd.
J.Organiz.Behav.36,94–111(2015)DOI:10.1002/job 100W.LINETAL. managementandconsultingfirms.Inbinedsample,51.20percentweremale,andtheaverageageoftherespondentswas25.74years(SD=4.24);0.4percentdidnotreceiveajuniorhighschooldiploma,41.6pletedjuniorhighschooleducation,8.0percenthadahighschooldiploma,and50.0percenthadanassociatedegreeorabove;andtheaveragejobtenureoftherespondentswas1.47years(SD=1.69). Measures Themeasuresforchallenge–hindrancestressorsandconscientiousnesswereoriginallypublishedinEnglish.Wefollowedtheconventionalprocedureoftranslation–backtranslation(Brislin,1980)totranslatethemintoChinese.First,aChinesegraduatestudentwhomajoredinEnglishtranslatedalltheEnglishscalesintoChinese.Then,anothergraduatestudentwhomajoredinEnglishandwasblindtotheoriginalquestionnairetranslatedthembacktoEnglish.Finally,thetwoEnglishversionsofallthescalesparedwitheachothertoreviewanyarisinginconsistencies.Ahighlevelofagreement(94.7percent)wasachievedinback-translateditems.Minordiscrepanciesbetweentheoriginalandback-translatedversionsweresolvedthroughdiscussionbetweenthetranslatorsandaprofessorofpsychology. ChallengeandhindrancestressorsChallengeandhindrancestressorsweremeasuredwithCavanaughetal.’s(2000)11-itemscale.Employeeswereaskedtoindicatetheextenttowhichthestatementsproducedstressatworkonascalerangingfrom1(nostress)to5(agreatdealofstress).Challengeitems(sixitems;Cronbach’sα=.93)included“TimepressureIexperience”and“ThenumberofprojectsandorassignmentsIhave,”whilehindranceitems(fiveitems;Cronbach’sα=.83)included“Thedegreetowhichpoliticsratherthanperformanceanizationaldecisions”and“TheamountofredtapeIneedtogetthroughtogetmyjobdone.” ConscientiousnessWemeasuredconscientiousnessusingtheMini-MarkersdevelopedbySaucier(1994)(Cronbach’sα=.71inthecurrentresearchfortheconscientiousness).Mini-MarkersisashortenedversionofGoldberg’sunipolarBig-FiveMarkers(Goldberg,1992),whichhasbeendemonstratedtohavestrongcorrelations(rangingfrom.54to.70)withtheNEOFive-FactorInventory(Mooradian&Nezlek,1996).Itconsistsof40adjectivemarkers.TheConscientiousnessscalecontainseightadjectivemarkers(fourpositiveadjectivessuchas“Practical”andfournegativeadjectives[reversedcoded]suchas“Sloppy”).RespondentsratedeachmarkerusingaLikertscalerangingfrom1(extremelyurate)to5(extremelyurate). PsychologicalstrainWeusedthe12-itemversionoftheGeneralHealthQuestionnaire(GHQ-12)revisedbyWangandLin(2011)toassessemployees’psychologicalstrain(Cronbach’sα=.89inthecurrentresearch).TheGHQ-12wasoriginallydevelopedbyGoldbergandWilliams(1988)andhasbeenwidelyusedasascreeningmeasureforgeneralpsychologicalstrain(e.g.,Lin,Wang,&Chen,2013).Respondentswereaskedtoratetheiragreementona7-pointscale(1=stronglydisagree,7=stronglyagree).Anexampleitemis“I’munhappyanddepressed.”Higherscoresrepresenthigherpsychologicalstrainafterwereversedthescores. JobperformanceEmployees’jobperformancewasratedbytheirsupervisorsusingafour-itemscaletakenfromFarhandCheng(1997)(Cronbach’sα=.96inthecurrentresearch).Supervisorswereaskedtoratetheiragreementona7-pointscale(1=stronglydisagree,7=stronglyagree).Anexampleitemis“Thisemployeemakesasignificantcontributiontotheoverallperformanceofourworkunit.” Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd.
J.Organiz.Behav.36,94–111(2015)DOI:10.1002/job CONSCIENTIOUSNESSASADOUBLE-EDGEDSWORD101 ControlvariablesParticipants’demographiccharacteristics,includinggender,age,education,andjobtenurewerecontrolledbecausepreviousstudiessuggestedthatthesestatusvariablesmightinfluenceindividuals’perceptionsofworkstressors,psychologicalstrain,andperformance(e.g.,Ang,VanDyne,&Begley,2003;Cavanaughetal.,2000;Ely,2004;Lobel&St.Clair,1992;Perrewéetal.,2004;Vigoda,2002;Wallaceetal.,2009).Inordertopanydifference,wealsopanytypeasadummyvariablecoded“1”fortherestaurantpanyand“2”fortheconsultingfirmintheregressionanalysis. Results Themeans,standarddeviations,andcorrelationsamongthevariablesarepresentedinTable1.Asexpected,hindrancestressorswerepositivelycorrelatedwithpsychologicalstrain(r=.25,p<.01)andnegativelycorrelatedwithjobperformance(r=À.17,p<.01).However,challengestressorswereonlymarginallycorrelatedwithpsychologicalstrain(r=.12,p=.06)anddidnotsignificantlypredictjobperformance(r=.08,p>.10). Testingmeasurementmodel Toexaminewhethertheconstructsmeasuredaredistinguishablefromeachother,weconductedconfirmatoryfactoranalysisusingLISREL8.80(Jöreskog&Sörbom,2006).Themaximumlikelihoodestimationprocedurewasusedtoestimatemodelfit.Resultsshowedthatthefive-factormodel(i.e.,challengestressors,hindrancestressors,conscientiousness,psychologicalstrain,andjobperformance)fitthedatawell,χ2(550)=1422.74,p<.01,CFI=0.90,TLI=0.90,RMSEA=0.08.Allitemsloadedsignificantlyontheircorrespondingfactors.CorrelationsamongfactorsrangedfromÀ.38to.35.Thismeasurementmodelfitthedatabetterthanall10constrainedmodelsinwhichanytwoofthefivefactorsbined(345.36≤Δχ2[Δdf=4]≤2162.86,ps<.01).Theseresultsprovidedsupportforthehypothesizedmeasurementmodel. Testingmoderationeffects Becausesupervisorsprovidedratingsformorethanoneemployee,thesemultipleratingsfromsupervisorsandtheassociatednestingofemployeeswithinworkgroupsviolatethedataindependenceassumptionsofordinaryleastsquaresregressionmodels(Bliese,2000;Klein&Kozlowski,2000).Thus,weusedhierarchicallinearmodeling(HLM)totestourhypotheses.ModelestimationwasconductedusingHLM6.08(Raudenbush,Bryk,&Congdon,2007).AseriesofHLMmodelswereestimatedsoastoexaminetheamountofvarianceinthedependantvariablesexplainedbycontrolvariables,maineffects,andinteractioneffects,respectively.Thefirstmodelincludedonlyanintercept.Inthesecondmodel,controlvariableswereentered.Inthethirdmodel,themaineffectsofstressorsandconscientiousnesswereadded.Inthefinalmodel,theinteractiontermsbetweenstressorsandconscientiousnesswereadded.Allpredictorvariablesweregrandcenteredbysubtractingtheirmeans.AlthoughwewereinterestedinmodelingLevel1variance,randomslopesacrossgroups/supervisorsweretestedusingchi-squaretestsoastoensuretheappropriatenessofthespecificationofourmulti-levelmodel.Becausenoneoftherandomeffectsweresignificant,wetreatedslopesasfixed. TheresultsofthefirstHLMmodelshowedthatthewithinsupervisor(orindividuallevel)varianceonperformanceratingswas1.30,whereasthebetween-supervisorvariancewas0.33.Thechi-squaretestindicatedthatthebetween-supervisorvariancewassignificant,χ2(25)=117.26,p<.01.Theintra-classcorrelationforperformanceratingswas.20,indicatingthatapproximately20percentofthevarianceexistedbetweensupervisors/groups.For Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd.
J.Organiz.Behav.36,94–111(2015)DOI:10.1002/job 102W.LINETAL. Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd. Table1.Descriptivestatisticsforstudyvariables. Variable
M SD
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
1.Gender2.Age3.Education4.Jobtenure5.Companytype6.Challengestressors7.Hindrancestressors8.Conscientiousness9.Jobperformance10.Psychologicalstrain 1.4925.743.521.471.462.82 2.773.944.992.56 0.50 – 4.24À.02 – 1.43 .30** .42** – 1.69À.02 .37** .10 – 0.50 .28** .45** .91** .14* – 1.16 .08 .31** .62** .15* .68**
(.93) 1.04 .06 .01 .11 À.01 .12 .30**(.83) 0.54À.07 .28** .17** .14* .13* .00 À.25**(.71) 1.33À.05 .13* .04 .26** .03 .08 À.17** .17**(.96) 0.98À.09 À.09 À.11 .00 À.11 .12 .25**À.29**.07(.89) Note:Genderwascoded“1”formenand“2”forwomen.Educationwascoded“1”for“nodegree,”“2”for“highschooldiploma,”“3”for“associatedegree,”“4”for“bachelordegree,”“5”for“masterdegree,”and“6”for“doctordegree.”Companytypewascoded“1”forrestaurantpanyand“2”forconsultingfirm.ValuesinparenthesesonthediagonalareCronbach’salphacoefficients.*p<.05,**p<.01.
J.Organiz.Behav.36,94–111(2015)DOI:10.1002/job CONSCIENTIOUSNESSASADOUBLE-EDGEDSWORD103 theeofpsychologicalstrain,theindividuallevelvariancewas.96,whereasthebetween-groupvariancewas.01.Thechi-squaretestindicatedthatthebetween-groupvariancewasnotsignificant,χ2(25)=29.95,p>.10.Theintraclasscorrelationforpsychologicalstrainwas.01,indicatingthatonly1percentofthevarianceexistedbetweengroups. Afterountingforsupervisoryeffects,thecontrolvariablesexplained5.5percentand0.2percentofthewithingroupvarianceinjobperformanceandpsychologicalstrain,respectively.Theadditionofthemaineffectsofstressorsandconscientiousnessexplainedincremental0.8percentand15.3percentofthewithin-groupvarianceinjobperformanceandpsychologicalstrain,respectively.Finally,theadditionoftheinteractioneffectsbetweenstressorsandconscientiousnessexplainedadditional6.8percentand4.2percentofthewithin-groupvarianceinjobperformanceandpsychologicalstrain,respectively.Consequently,thefinalmodelexplained13.1percentand19.7percentofthewithin-groupvarianceinjobperformanceandpsychologicalstrain,respectively.TheresultsofthefinalmodelarepresentedinTable2. Resultsshowedthataftercontrollingforthebetween-groupeffects,bothchallengeandhindrancestressorswerepositivelyrelatedtopsychologicalstrain(γ=.19,p<.01,andγ=.15,p<.05,respectively),meaningthatthemorestressors(eitherchallengeorhindrance)employeesperceived,theworsetheirpsychologicalstatuswas.However,neitherchallengestressorsnorhindrancestressorsweresignificantlyrelatedtojobperformance(γ=.01,p>.10andγ=À.07,p>.10,respectively).Table2alsoshowsthatconscientiousnessmoderatedtherelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsandjobperformanceasexpected(γ=.49,p<.05),suchthatthepositiverelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsandjobperformancewasstrongerforemployeeswithhighconscientiousness(Figure2).However,therelationshipbetweenhindrancestressorsandperformancewasnotmoderatedbyconscientiousness(γ=À.05,p>.10). Inaddition,conscientiousnesssignificantlymoderatedeachoftherelationshipsbetweenworkstressorsandpsychologicalstraininthepredicteddirection(challengestressors,γ=.22,p<.01;andhindrancestressors,γ=.20,p<.01).Theseresultsdemonstratedthatpositiverelationshipsbetweenworkstressorsandemployeepsychologicalstrainwerestrongerforemployeeshigh,ratherthanlow,inconscientiousness(Figures3and4).WealsousedtheonlinecalculatorforprobinginteractionsdevelopedbyPreacher,Curran,andBauer(2006)toestimatesimpleslopes,whichdescribetherelationshipsbetweenworkstressorsandesatvaryinglevelsofconscientiousness.Specifically,highconscientiousnesswasdesignatedas1SDabovethemean,averageconscientiousnesswasthemean,andlowconscientiousnesswas1SDbelowthemean.Fortherelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsand Table2.Hierarchicallinearmodelingresultsforpredictorofsupervisor-ratedperformanceandpsychologicalstrain. Jobperformance Psychologicalstrain InterceptSexAgeEducationJobtenureCompanytypeChallengestressorsHindrancestressorsConscientiousnessChallengestressors×conscientiousnessHindrancestressors×conscientiousnessLevel1ponentLevel2ponentχ2(df=25) 5.20**(0.17)0.02(0.17)0.02(0.02) 0.22**(0.09)0.12**(0.04)À1.05**(0.39) 0.01(0.08)À0.07(0.05) 0.16(0.28)0.49*(0.24)À0.05(0.17)1.130.33136.25** 2.62**À0.09 0.000.030.000.540.19**0.15*À0.46**0.22**0.20**0.770.0227.58 (0.07)(0.13)(0.02)(0.09)(0.03)(0.33)(0.08)(0.08)(0.15)(0.08)(0.09) Note:Genderwascoded“1”formenand“2”forwomen.Educationwascoded“1”for“nodegree,”“2”for“highschooldiploma,”“3”for“associatedegree,”“4”for“bachelordegree,”“5”for“masterdegree,”and“6”for“doctordegree.”Companytypewascoded“1”forrestaurantpanyand“2”forconsultingfirm.*p<.05,**p<.01. Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd.
J.Organiz.Behav.36,94–111(2015)DOI:10.1002/job 104W.LINETAL. Figure2.Interactionbetweenchallengestressorsandconscientiousnessonemployeejobperformance Figure3.Interactionbetweenchallengestressorsandconscientiousnessonemployeepsychologicalstrain jobperformance,theslopewassignificantlypositiveforindividualswithhighconscientiousness(simpleslope=.27,p<.01)butsignificantlynegativeforindividualswithlowconscientiousness(simpleslope=À.25,p<.01).Forindividualswithaverageconscientiousness,theslopewasnotsignificant(simpleslope=.01,p>.10).Fortherelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsandpsychologicalstrain,theslopesweresignificantlypositiveforindividualswithhighconscientiousness(simpleslope=.31,p<.01),withaverageconscientiousness(simpleslope=.19,p<.01),andwithlowconscientiousness(simpleslope=.07,p<.01).Fortherelationshipbetweenhindrancestressorsandpsychologicalstrain,theslopesweresignificantlypositiveforindividualswithhighconscientiousness(simpleslope=.26,p<.01)andwithaverageconscientiousness(simpleslope=.15,p<.01),butitwasnotsignificantforindividualswithlowconscientiousness(simpleslope=.04,p>.10).TheseresultsprovidedsupportforHypotheses1a,2a,and2b. Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd.
J.Organiz.Behav.36,94–111(2015)DOI:10.1002/job CONSCIENTIOUSNESSASADOUBLE-EDGEDSWORD105 Figure4.Interactionbetweenhindrancestressorsandconscientiousnessonemployeepsychologicalstrain Discussion Thegoalofthecurrentresearchwastoexpandliteratureonstressbyexaminingthedegreetowhichaparticularvariableofpersonalitytrait,conscientiousness,moderatedtherelationshipsthatworkstressorshadwithemployeepsychologicalstrainandjobperformance.Usingtime-laggedandmulti-sourcedata,ourresultsdemonstratethedouble-edgedswordeffectofconscientiousness,whichsuggeststhat,ratherthanactingasatypeofpersonalresource,conscientiousnessmightserveasaguideforindividualstodirecttheirresourceallocations. Thecurrentresearchshowedthemoderatingeffectsofconscientiousness,suchthattherelationshipsthatbothworkstressors(i.e.,challengeandhindrance)hadwithemployeepsychologicalstrainwerestrongerforthosehighinconscientiousness.Inaddition,therelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsandperformancewaspositiveforindividualswithhighconscientiousnessbutnegativeforthosewithlowconscientiousness.Fromthepersonalresourceallocationperspective,thismaybeduetothatthehighlyconscientiousindividualsaremorewillingtochanneltheirpersonalresourcestowardsmaintainingtheirperformancestandards,leadingtoinsufficientresourcestoresisttheincreaseoftheirpsychologicalstrain.Itisworthnotingthatalthoughconscientiousindividualshadlowerlevelsofpsychologicalstrainonaverageduetothenegativerelationshipbetweenconscientiousnessandpsychologicalstrain(Table2),theirlevelsofpsychologicalstrainincreaseddramaticallywhenthelevelsofstressorsincreased.Thisresultsuggeststhatthewell-beingofhighlyconscientiousindividualsfluctuatemoredramaticallythanthatofthosewithlowconscientiousness,reflectingthedarksideofconscientiousnessbecausepreviousresearchhasshownthatsuchincreaseinstrainwouldcausesevereessuchashigherriskofsufferingfromdepression(e.g.,Stansfeld,Shipley,Head,&Fuhrer,2012;Wang,Schmitz,Dewa,&Stansfeld,2009).Therefore,ourfindingsdemonstratethedouble-edgedswordeffectofconscientiousness. Ofnote,weexpectedthemoderatingeffectofconscientiousnessintherelationshipbetweenhindrancestressorsandperformance,suchthathindrancestressorswouldbemoredetrimentaltoperformanceforemployeeslow,ratherthanhigh,onconscientiousness.However,nosupportwasfoundforthishypothesis.Apossibleexplanationisthathindrancestressors,suchasroleambiguityanizationalpolitics,aresomewhatoutofthecontroloftheemployees.So,evenforemployeeswithhighlevelsofconscientiousness,hindrancestressorsaredifficultforthemtodealwith.Althoughtheytendtospendmoreefforttryingtodealwiththesestressorsandmaintaintheirlevelofperformance,theyjustcannotessfullymeetthedemandsofthehindrancestressors.Thus,hindrancestressors Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd.
J.Organiz.Behav.36,94–111(2015)DOI:10.1002/job 106W.LINETAL. woulddirectlyreduceperformancebecausetheymakeitdifficultforemployeestoplishjobtasks(Lepineetal.,2005).Therefore,conscientiousnessfailedtomitigatetherelationshipbetweenhindrancestressorsandperformance. Theoreticalimplications Thecurrentresearchmakesseveralcontributionstotheexistingbodyofliterature.First,conscientiousnessmonlyviewedasatypeofpersonalresourcethatisbeneficialforindividuals.However,previousresearchhasnotsupportedthisargumentconsistently,asithasbeenfoundthattherearesomesituationswhereconscientiousnesswouldactasacatalystthatexacerbatesindividuals’stressreactions.Therefore,ratherthanviewingconscientiousnessasatypeofpersonalresource,wearguethatconscientiousnesshelpsdirectingindividuals’resourceallocationsbasedonthepersonalresourceallocationperspective(Grawitchetal.,2010).Specifically,wepositthatconscientiousnesschannelsresourcestowardsdealingwithworkstressorssoastomeetperformancerequirementsoreventohelptheindividualstriveforgreaterachievement.Asaresult,highlyconscientiousindividualsmaybeleftwithinsufficientresourcestomitigatethenegativeimpactofworkstressorsontheirpsychologicalwell-being.Consistentwiththesearguments,ourresultsshowedthatalthoughconscientiousnesswouldfacilitateindividuals’jobperformanceunderstressfulsituationsthatwereperceivedaschallenging,itwouldalsoexacerbateindividuals’psychologicalstrainatthesametime.Assuch,thecurrentresearchnotonlyprovidesanovelapproachtoaddresssomeconflictingfindingsfromthecurrentstressliteraturebutalsohighlightsanewperspectivetounderstandtherolethatconscientiousnessplaysintheworkcontext.Tothebestofourknowledge,itisalsothefirsttimethatthedoubleedgedswordeffectofconscientiousnesshasbeendemonstratedinthesamemodel,whichsignificantlycontributestothedomainofpersonalityresearch. Second,thepersonalresourceallocationperspective(Grawitchetal.,2010)positsthathowindividualsdealwithdemandsdependsonhoweffectivelytheyallocatetheirfinitepersonalresources,andpersonalitywouldinfluencetheresourceallocationprocesses.Althoughitisawell-arguedperspective,littleworkhasbeencarriedouttotestthevalidityofthepersonalresourceallocationperspective.Inthecurrentresearch,weprovidesupportforthisperspectivebyrevealingthedouble-edgedswordeffectofconscientiousnessinthatwhenfacedwithstressors,highlyconscientiousindividualsmaybeinclinedtomaintaintheirsuperiorlevelsofjobperformanceattheriskofturbulenceintheirpsychologicalwell-being. Third,althoughpreviousfindingssuggestthatchallengingworkdemandspromoteworkperformance(e.g.,LePineetal.,2004;LePineetal.,2005;Pearsalletal.,2009;Wallaceetal.,2009),ourfindingsshowthatthisisnotalwaysthecase.Byexaminingthemoderatingeffectsofconscientiousnessontherelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsandperformance,ourresearchfoundthatchallengestressorspromotejobperformanceforhighconscientiousnessemployeesbutdamageperformanceforthoselowinconscientiousness.Thesefindingsextendthestressliteraturebyclarifyingtheboundaryconditionsofthechallengestressors–performancerelationship,whichhighlightstheimportanceofconsideringindividualdifferencesinthestressmanagementarea. Finally,ourfindingsareconsistentwiththeperson–environmentinteractionperspectiveinunderstandingpsychologicalandbehavioralreactionstostressfulsituations(Endler&Magnusson,1976).Theperson–environmentinteractionperspectivesuggeststhatpersonality(e.g.,conscientiousness)interactswithsituations(e.g.,challenge/hindrancestressors)indeterminingattitudesandbehaviors.Basedonthisperspectiveandtheextentthatindividualsdifferinresourceallocationstrategy,personalityshouldinfluencehowindividualsallocatetheirresourcesandhowtheyreactpsychologicallyandbehaviorally(e.g.,psychologicalstrainandperformance)tothestressfulworksettings. Practicalimplications Thecurrentresearchalsoprovidessomeguidanceformanagerialpractice.First,giventhathindrancestressorswerepositivelyrelatedtoemployees’psychologicalstrain,anizationsshouldmakeeveryefforttoreducethe Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd.
J.Organiz.Behav.36,94–111(2015)DOI:10.1002/job CONSCIENTIOUSNESSASADOUBLE-EDGEDSWORD107 urrenceofhinderingworkenvironments.Forexample,anizationscouldhelpemployeestoclarifytheirworkrolesanddealwithemployeerelationsinamoreharmoniousway. Second,ourresultsshowedthattherelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsandperformancewaspositiveforhighlyconscientiousindividualsbutnegativeforlow-conscientiousones.Theseresultssuggestthatitiscrucialanizationsorsupervisorstoconsiderthepersonalitytraitsofemployeeswhenassigningtasks,workloads,orresponsibilities.Forconscientiousemployees,providingchallengeworkdemandsmaypromotetheirperformance.Incontrast,anizationsshouldprovidemoresupportandguidanceforlowconscientiousnessemployeestomeettheperformancerequirementswhentheyarefacingheavyandchallengingworkdemands. Third,althoughourresultsshowedthatemployeeswithhighconscientiousnesswouldperformbetterwhenconfrontedwithchallengestressors,weshouldnotethattheyaremorepsychologicallyvulnerableintermsoftheincreaseinpsychologicalstrainundereithertypeofstressfulworksituations(i.e.,challengeorhindrancestressors).Thus,anizationsshouldpaymoreattentiontothehealthstatusofemployeeswhoarehighinconscientiousnessandprovidethemwithadditionalresourcesto
J.Organiz.Behav.36,94–111(2015)Publishedonline12September2014inWileyOnlineLibrary()DOI:10.1002/job.1949 Adouble-edgedsword:Themoderatingroleofconscientiousnessintherelationshipsbetweenworkstressors,psychologicalstrain,andjobperformance WEIPENGLIN1,
2,JINGJINGMA2,LEIWANG2*ANDMOWANG3 1DepartmentofHumanResourceManagement,BusinessSchool,NankaiUniversity,Tianjin,China2DepartmentofPsychology,PekingUniversity,Beijing,China3DepartmentofManagement,UniversityofFlorida,Gainesville,Florida,
U.S.A. Summary Althoughconscientiousnessmonlyviewedasatypeofpersonalresourcetohelpindividualsreducestrainormitigatetheimpactsofstressors,empiricalresearchdemonstratedmixedresults.Basedonthepersonalresourceallocationperspective,wepositedthatratherthanfunctioningaspersonalresourceperse,conscientiousnessmayactasakeyfactorinfluencinghowindividualsallocatetheirpersonalresources.Thecurrentstudyexaminedthemoderatingrolesofconscientiousnessintherelationshipsthatworkstressors(i.e.,challengestressorsandhindrancestressors)havewithemployeepsychologicalstrainandjobperformancebyusingmulti-source,time-laggeddatacollectedfrom250employeesworkingatpanies.Theresultsshowedthatbothchallengestressorsandhindrancestressorswerepositivelyrelatedtopsychologicalstrain.Conscientiousnessmoderatedtherelationshipsbetweenbothstressorsandpsychologicalstrain,suchthatthepositiverelationshipswerestrongerforindividualswithhighconscientiousness.Conscientiousnessalsomoderatedtherelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsandperformance,suchthattherelationshipwaspositiveforindividualswithhighconscientiousnessbutnegativeforthosewithlowconscientiousness.Altogether,thefindingssuggestthatconscientiousnessactsasadouble-edgedswordthatbothpromotesperformanceandexacerbatesthestressreactionofemployeeswhentheyareconfrontedwithstressfulsituations.Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd. Keywords:challengestressors;hindrancestressors;psychologicalstrain;performance;conscientiousness;personalresource;resourceallocation Introduction Conscientiousness,ponentofthefive-factorpersonalitymodel(Costa&McCrae,1988;Costa&McCrae,1992),describestheextenttowhichindividualsaredutiful,hardworking,persevering,andself-disciplinedandtendtostriveforachievement(Barrick&Mount,1991).Becauseithasbeenshowntobeastronganduniversallyvalidpredictorofavarietyofsignificantesintheworkcontext,suchasjobperformance(Barrick&Mount,1991;Mount,Barrick,&Strauss,1999),jobattitudes(Erdheim,Wang,&Zickar,2006;Judge,Heller,&Mount,2002),anizationalcitizenshipbehavior(Hackett&Lapierre,2007),conscientiousnessisarguablythemostimportantfactoramongpersonalitytraits(Barrick,Mount,&Strauss,1993;Roberts,Chernyshenko,Stark,&Goldberg,2005). Inthestressliterature,conscientiousnessisalsooneofthemostsalienttraitfactorsaffectinghowindividualsreacttoworkstressors.Undertheconservationofresourcesframework(Hobfall,1989,2001),researchersgenerallydeemconscientiousnessasatypeofpersonalresourcethatmayhelpindividualsresistthedeleteriouseffectsofstress *Correspondenceto:LeiWang,DepartmentofPsychology,PekingUniversity,Beijing100871,China.E-mail:leiwang@ Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd. Received03April2013Revised23June2014,epted26July2014 CONSCIENTIOUSNESSASADOUBLE-EDGEDSWORD95 (e.g.,Perry,Witt,Penney,&Atwater,2010;Zellars,Perrewé,Hochwarter,&Anderson,2006).However,existingresearchhasdemonstratedinconsistentfindingsregardingtheviewthatconscientiousnessisatypeofpersonalresource(e.g.,Armon,Shirom,&Melamed,2012;Grant&Langan-Fox,2007;Nandkeolyar,Shaffer,Li,Ekkirala,&Bagger,2014;Zellarsetal.,2006).Forexample,althoughNandkeolyarandcolleagues(2014)foundthatconscientiousnessmitigatesthenegativerelationshipbetweenabusivesupervisionandemployeeperformance,GrantandLangan-Fox(2007)foundthatthenegativerelationshipbetweenroleconflictandjobsatisfactionisstrongerforemployeeswithhigherlevelsofconscientiousness.Theseresultssuggestthattheextraeffortinvestedbyconscientiousindividualsintheirjobsmayleadtodepletionofresourcesandthustheseindividualsmaysuffermorefromstrain.Inotherwords,conscientiousnessmaynotserveasatypeofpersonalresourcepersetohelpindividualsresistthedetrimentaleffectsofworkstressors.Rather,basedonthepersonalresourceallocationperspective(Grawitch,Barber,&Justice,2010),conscientiousnessmayinsteadinfluencehowandwhereindividualsallocatetheirpersonalresources,whichinturninfluenceshowindividualsreacttoworkstressors. ordingtothepersonalresourceallocationframework(Grawitchetal.,2010),theamountofpersonalresourcesisfinite.Whetherindividualsarecapableofhandlingstressfulsituationsdependsonhoweffectivelytheyallocatetheirpersonalresources.Inaddition,thepersonalresourceallocationframeworkalsopositsthatpersonalitywouldinfluencetheresourceallocationprocesses.Basedonthesearguments,weinferredthatindividualswithhighlevelsofconscientiousness,whohaveapredispositiontosethighergoalsandstriveforachievement(Barrick&Mount,1991;Barricketal.,1993),wouldbemorewillingtodirectpersonalresourcestomeetperformancerequirementsaspriority.Thiswouldimplythatunderstressfulworkcontexts,conscientiousindividualsmaydirectpersonalresourcesprimarilyintofulfillingtheirhighperformancestandard,leavingthemwithinsufficientresourcestomitigatetheimpactofworkstressorsontheirpsychologicalstrain. Insum,conscientiousnessshouldserveasaguideforindividualstodirecttheirresourceallocations(ratherthantheresourceperse).ordingtothisargument,thisallocationstrategywouldhavesignificantimpactonperformanceandpsychologicalstrainsimultaneouslywhenemployeesencounterworkstressors.Inthecurrentresearch,wesoughttoexaminebothperformanceandpsychologicalstrainasesinasinglemodelsoastoseewhetherconscientiousindividuals’maintenanceofhighperformanceesattheexpenseofincreasedpsychologicalstrainwhenfacingstressors.Indeed,tothebestofourknowledge,noempiricalresearchhasexaminedthemoderatingeffectsofconscientiousnessontherelationshipsthatstressorshavewithperformanceandpsychologicalstrainsimultaneously,whichlimitsourunderstandingoftherolethatconscientiousnessplaysintheworkstresscontext. Inordertoprovideaclearerpictureofhowconscientiousnessinfluencesthestressors-reactionprocess,thecurrentresearchexaminedthemoderatingroleofconscientiousnessontherelationshipsbetweendifferenttypesofworkstressorsandes.Specifically,weemployedthetwo-dimensionmodelofworkstressors(i.e.,challengeandhindrancestressors)proposedbyCavanaugh,Boswell,Roehling,andBoudreau(2000)andfocusedonbothjobperformanceandpsychologicalstrainatthesametime.Basedonthepersonalresourceallocationframework(Grawitchetal.,2010),weproposedthat,ononehand,conscientiousnesswouldstrengthenthepositiverelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsandjobperformance,butmitigatethenegativerelationshipbetweenhindrancestressorsandperformance.Ontheotherhand,conscientiousnesswouldexacerbatethepositiverelationshipsbetweenbothstressorsandpsychologicalstrain(Figure1). Inmakingthesepredictions,weprovideseveralimportantcontributionstothepersonalityandworkstressliterature.First,althoughconscientiousnessmonlyviewedasatypeofpersonalresourcethathelpsindividualsdealwithstressfulevents,theinconsistentresultsofpreviousresearchsuggestthat,ratherthanatypeofresourceperse,conscientiousnessisinsteadakeyfactorthatimpactstheallocationofpersonalresources.Ourresearchsupportsthisargumentbyshowinghowindividualswithdifferentlevelsofconscientiousnessreacteddifferentlytoworkstressorsintermsoftheirperformanceandpsychologicalstrain,whichprovidesnewinsighttounderstandingtheroleofconscientiousnessinthestressliterature. Second,wepresentamorenuancedmodeloftheeffectsofconscientiousnessbyconsideringhowindividualconscientiousnessinteractswithworkstressorstoimpactes.Inaddition,wedemonstratethatthesamepersonalitytraitcaneitherfacilitatethefavorableeffectsorexacerbatetheadverseeffectsofworkstressors,dependingon Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd.
J.Organiz.Behav.36,94–111(2015)DOI:10.1002/job 96W.LINETAL. Figure1.Expectedtheoreticalrelationships theeunderconsideration(e.g.,performanceorpsychologicalstrain).Itisthefirstattempttodemonstratethedouble-edgedeffectofconscientiousnessinasinglemodelandhighlightstheneedtoconsidernotonlytheworkenvironmentandindividualdifferences,buttheesaswell. Challengestressors,hindrancestressors,andes Therehasbeenatraditionintheliterature(e.g.,Selye,1974)todistinguishbetween“good”stress(eustress)and“bad”stress(distress).Similarly,ithasbeensuggestedthattheremaybemeritsindistinguishingamongformsofstressorsinworkplaces(Jex,1998),consideringthatstressorsinworkplaceshavebeendemonstratedtobedifferentiallyassociatedwithaffectiveandbehavioralresponses(e.g.,Beehr,Glaser,Canali,&Wallwey,2001;Dwyer&Ganster,1991;Fritz&Sonnentag,2009;Ivancevich,Matteson,&Preston,1982;Jex&Yankelevich,2008;Shultz,Wang,&Olson,2010;Stamper&Johlke,2003). Cavanaughandcolleagues(2000)proposedatwo-dimensionalworkstressorframework(i.e.,challenge–hindrancestressors)anddemonstratedthatrelationshipsbetweenstressorsandworkesdependonthenatureofdifferentstressors.Intheirstudy,Cavanaughetal.surveyedmanagers’workstressusingitemsselectedfromseveralmeasurements(Caplan,Cobb,French,Harrison,&Pinneau,1975;Ivancevich&Matteson,1983;Sandman,1992).Resultsoffactoranalysisshowedthatitemscanbecategorizedintotwofactors.Thefirstfactorconsistedofitemssuchasworkload,timepressure,andresponsibilityandwasnamedchallengestressorsbecausetheseitemsreflectedstressorsthathelptofacilitategoalachievementandpersonalgrowth.Thesecondfactorconsistedofitemssuchasroleambiguity,roleconflict,anizationalpoliticsandwasnamedhindrancestressorsbecausetheseitemsreflectedstressorsthatthreatengoalachievement.SubsequentanalysisinCavanaughetal.’sstudy,aswellasagrowingbodyofresearch,supportsthetwo-dimensionalframeworkofchallenge–hindrancestressors,whichalltogethersuggestthatchallengestressorsleadtodesirableworkattitudesorbehaviorssuchasjobsatisfaction(Beehretal.,2001;Podsakoff,LePine,&LePine,2007;Webster,Beehr,&Love,2011),mitment(Boswell,Olson-Buchanan,&LePine,2004;Podsakoffetal.,2007),andworkself-efficacy(Webster,Beehr,&Christiansen,2010),whilehindrancestressorsresultinundesirableonessuchasturnoverintention(Boswelletal.,2004;Podsakoffetal.,2007;Websteretal.,2011)andwithdrawal(Podsakoffetal.,2007). Notsurprisingly,therefore,challengeandhindrancestressorshavealsobeendemonstratedtohaveobverserelationswithemployeetaskperformance.InagreementwithCavanaughetal.(2000),empiricalstudies(e.g.,LePine,LePine,&Jackson,2004;LePine,Podsakoff,&LePine,2005;Pearsall,Ellis,&Stain,2009;Wallace,Edwards,Arnold,Frazier,&Finch,2009)aswellasmeta-analysis(LePineetal.,2005)haveconsistentlyidentifiedapositiverelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsandperformancebutanegativeonebetweenhindrancestressors Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd.
J.Organiz.Behav.36,94–111(2015)DOI:10.1002/job CONSCIENTIOUSNESSASADOUBLE-EDGEDSWORD97 andperformance.Itisarguedthatbecauseindividualsbelievethattheyaremoreabletomeetthechallengeworkdemandsandvaluedeswilluraftertheycopewiththem,challengestressorsevokeahigherlevelofmotivation(LePineetal.,2004;LePineetal.,2005),thusleadingtomoreengagementandbetterperformance.Incontrast,hindrancestressorsreduceperformancebecausethesestressorsaresituationalconstraintsthatmakeitdifficultforemployeestoplishjobtasks(Cavanaughetal.,2000).Besides,giventhatindividualsaremorelikelytobelievethatnoreasonablelevelofeffortisadequatetodealwithhindranceworkdemands,theytendtohavealowerlevelofmotivation.Thus,hindrancestressorsaresupposedtoreduceperformance(LePineetal.,2004;LePineetal.,2005). Despitethedifferentrelationshipsbetweenchallengeandhindrancestressorswithattitudinalandbehaviorales,researchrevealsthatbothofthesestressorsarepositivelyassociatedwithpsychologicalstrain(e.g.,Boswelletal.,2004;Lee&Ashforth,1996;LePineetal.,2004;LePineetal.,2005;Podsakoffetal.,2007;Websteretal.,2011).Thisargumentisbasedonresearchsuggestingthatallstressfuljobdemandsaresubjecttothesamepsychologicalprocess(i.e.,appraisalandcoping),whichrequiresemotionalandcognitiveeffort(Cooper,Dewe,&O’Driscoll,2001;Lazarus&Folkman,1984)andthusresultsinformsofstrainsuchasanxiety,fatigue,andexhaustion(Jex,1998;Schaubroeck,Cotton,&Jennings,1989).Evenchallengingstressors,whichareappraisedaspositiveandincreasejobsatisfaction,willleadtomorestrainbecauseoftheincreasedeffortassociatedwiththeappraisalofdemandsandcopingwiththem(Crawford,LePine,&Rich,2010;Podsakoffetal.,2007).Insum,bothchallengeandhindrancestressorsarepositivelyassociatedwithpsychologicalstrain. Themoderatingroleofconscientiousness Inthepresentstudy,wegobeyondpreviousresearchbyexaminingtheinteractionsbetweenchallenge–hindrancestressorsandtheindividualdifferenceofconscientiousness.Wedrawuponthepersonalresourceallocationframework(Grawitchetal.,2010)andpastresearchtounderstandthemoderatingeffectsofconscientiousnessontherelationshipsthatchallenge–hindrancestressorshavewithemployees’psychologicalstrainandperformance. Thepersonalresourceallocationframeworksuggeststhatthereexistvariousdemandsinlifedomains,suchasworkloadandhouseholdchores,andpersonalresourcesareneededtomeetthesedemands.ordingtothepersonalresourceallocationframework,therearethreebroadcategoriesofpersonalresources:time,energy(physical,mental,and/oremotional),andfinancialresources.Inordancewiththeconservationofresources(COR)theory(Hobfall,1989,2001),thetotalamountofresourcesonepossessesisfinite.Thus,individualshavetochoosewhere,when,andhowtoallocatetheirresourcestodealwiththedemands,andtheresultsofresourceallocationdeterminemanyimportantes.Forinstance,notallocatingenoughresourcestopletionofworktaskswouldleadtoreducedjobperformance(Wang,Liao,Zhan,&Shi,2011;Witt&Carlson,2006).Resourceallocationdiffersfromsimilarconceptssuchascoping,whichisdirectedatspecifictargets(e.g.,copingwithproblemsorcopingwithemotions;Folkman&Lazarus,1980,1985).Ontheotherhand,resourceallocationisabroaderprocessthatincludeschoicesaboutwhere,when,andhowtospendresources. ordingtothepersonalresourceallocationframework,peoplehavedifferentstrategiestoallocatetheirresources(Lee,Kelly,&Edwards,2006;Rabinovich,Morton,&Postmes,2010),andpersonalitytraitswouldgreatlyimpacthowindividualsallocateresources(Witt&Carlson,2006).Asoneofthefivehigh-ordertraitsinthefivefactormodelofpersonality(Costa&McCrae,1988),conscientiousnessstandsforatendencytobepersevering,hardworking,self-disciplined,dutiful,andanized(Costa&McCrae,1992).Ithasbeenwidelydemonstratedthatthepersonalitytraitofconscientiousnesshassignificantinfluenceanizationalsettings(Meyer,Dalal,&io,2009;Shi,Lin,Wang,&Wang,2009;Taylor,Bedeian,&Kluemper,2012).Here,wepositthatconscientiousnessmayplayanimportantroleininfluencingemployees’resourceallocationwhentheyencounterchallengestressorsorhindrancestressorsinworkplaces. Conscientiousindividualsattachgreaterimportancetopersonalachievement(Barrick,Stewart,&Piotrowski,2002),aremoreconcernedabouthighqualityofwork(Moon,2001),andaremoremotivated(Judge&Ilies, Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd.
J.Organiz.Behav.36,94–111(2015)DOI:10.1002/job 98W.LINETAL. 2002),andarehardworking(Barricketal.,1993;Renn,Allen,&Huning,2011).ordingly,highlyconscientiousindividualsverymuchvalueachievement-relatedconditions,suchasasenseofplishment(Raja,Johns,&Ntalianis,2004),andtendtospendefforttoconquerthework-relatedproblemsthattheyencounter(Wang&Erdheim,2007;Watson,Clark,&Harkness,1994).Thus,whenexperiencingchallengestressorsthatarebeneficialtoachievement,highlyconscientiousindividualswouldallocatemoreresources(e.g.,spendingmoretimeandenergy)theyhaveintodealingwiththesestressors,inordertomeettheperformancerequirementsandgainthesenseofplishment,thusleadingtobetterperformance.Forinstance,theymayspendlongerhoursonjobtasks,workovertime,andtakefewerbreakstodealwiththehigherworkload.Incontrast,forlessconscientiousemployees,becausetheydonotcareaboutachievementatworkverymuch,theywouldnotallocatesomuchoftheirresourcesintodealingwiththesestressors.ordingly,weproposethatthepositiverelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsandperformanceshouldbestrongerforemployeeswithhigherlevelsofconscientiousness. Hypothesis1a:Conscientiousnessmoderatestherelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsandjobperformance,suchthatthepositiverelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsandjobperformanceisstrongerforemployeeswithhigherconscientiousness. Unlikechallengestressors,hindrancestressorsarestressfuldemandsthatarehardtodealwithpersonallyandthathinderachievementandpersonalgrowth(Cavanaughetal.,2000;LePineetal.,2005;Podsakoffetal.,2007).Nevertheless,extantresearchhassuggestedthathighlyconscientiousindividualsarelikelytorespondtoadverseworksituationsinmoreproductiveways.Employeeswithhighconscientiousnessaremorelikelytofocusontheirjobdutiesevenwhenanizationalconstraints(Bowling&Eschleman,2010)orinterpersonalinjustice(Yang&Diefendorff,2009).Giventhatindividualswithhighconscientiousnessaremoremotivatedandambitious(Judge&Ilies,2002),weproposethatinordertomaintaintheirhighlevelofperformance,theseindividualsmaydirectmoreresources(e.g.,timeandenergy)todealwithhindrancestressor,whichoffsetsthenegativeeffectofthesestressorsonperformance.Incontrast,individualswithlowconscientiousnessarelessmotivatedtoallocatetheirresourcestodealwithhindrancestressors,becausetheydonotcaremuchaboutthedecreaseofperformance.Thus,theirlevelsofperformancearevulnerabletohindrancestressors.ordingly,forhighlyconscientiousemployees,theimpactofhindrancestressorsonperformancewouldbelessseverethanthosewithlowerconscientiousness.Thishypothesisisinordancewitharecentfindingshowingthatconscientiousnesswouldweakenthenegativeinfluenceofabusivesupervisiononperformance(Nandkeolyaretal.,2014). Hypothesis1b:Conscientiousnessmoderatestherelationshipbetweenhindrancestressorsandjobperformance,suchthatthenegativerelationshipbetweenhindrancestressorsandjobperformanceisweakerforemployeeswithhigherconscientiousness. Althoughconscientiousnesswouldhelpemployeestoget/maintainhigherlevelsofperformanceunderstressfulworksituations,here,wearguethatitwouldactasa“detrimental”factorinstrengtheningthestressor–psychologicalstrainrelationship.Asstated,whenconfrontingchallengestressors,highlyconscientiousindividualstendtoallocatemoreresourcesintomeetingtheirhighperformancestandardsoastogetmoreachievement.Becausethetotalamountofpersonalresourcesisfinite,theirresourceallocationstrategywillgraduallydepletetheirpersonalresources.ordingtotheCORtheory,thedepletionofpersonalresourceswouldleadtoexperienceofstressandstrain(Hobfall,1989,2001).Ithasbeendemonstratedthattheemotionalandcognitiveeffortsputtodealwithstressfuldemandswouldresultinformsofstrainsuchasanxiety,fatigue,andexhaustion(Jex,1998;Schaubroecketal.,1989).So,byallocatingtimeandenergytomeetwiththechallengestressors,highlyconscientiousemployeessacrificetheirwell-beinginexchangeforgoodperformance(Sonnentag&Frese,2012).Whileforthosewithlowconscientiousness,becausetheydonotcaremuchaboutgainingachievement,theywouldnotallocatesuchhighlevelsofresourcesinjobaschallengestressorsincrease.ordingly,theyarelesslikelytodemonstratesignificantpsychologicalreactionswhenconfrontedwithchallengestressors. Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd.
J.Organiz.Behav.36,94–111(2015)DOI:10.1002/job CONSCIENTIOUSNESSASADOUBLE-EDGEDSWORD99 Hypothesis2a:Conscientiousnessmoderatestherelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsandpsychologicalstrain,suchthatthepositiverelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsandpsychologicalstrainisstrongerformoreconscientiousemployees. Similarly,asforthehindrancestressors,highlyconscientiousemployeeswouldallocatemoreresourcestodealwiththeminordertooffsettheirnegativeinfluenceonperformance.Spendingtoomuchtimeandenergyonworkwouldbringaboutadepletionofpersonalresources;thus,thisallocationstrategywouldleadtomorepsychologicalstrainashindrancestressorsincrease.Whilethosewithlowerconscientiousnessarelessmotivatedaboutwork,theyareevenpronetopsychologicallydetachfromtheirjobs(Sonnentag&Fritz,2007).So,theywouldbelessconcernedaboutwhethertheirjobdutiesarehinderedbysituationalfactorsandwouldallocatefewerresourcesintowork.Thus,theywouldsufferfromlessstrainashindrancestressorsincrease.Thisargumentisconsistentwithpreviousresearchshowingthatconscientiousnessstrengthensthenegativeeffectofroleconflictonjobsatisfaction(Grant&Langan-Fox,2007).ordingly,wehypothesizedthat: Hypothesis2b:Conscientiousnessmoderatestherelationshipbetweenhindrancestressorsandpsychologicalstrain,suchthatthepositiverelationshipbetweenhindrancestressorsandstrainisstrongerformoreconscientiousemployees. Method Participantsandprocedure Wecollecteddatafromtwopanies:arestaurantpanyandaconsultingfirm.Randomsamplingmethodwitha30percentsamplingratewasusedtocollectdatafromemployeesinthesepanies.Thissamplingrateensuresadequatesamplesizeandgoodcoverageofvariousdemographiccharacteristics,joblevels,andworkunits. Datawerecollectedintwophases,2weeksapart,inordertoreducemonmethodvarianceproblem(Podsakoff,MacKenzie,Lee,&Podsakoff,2003).Inthefirstsurvey,participantsreportedtheirperceptionsofworkstressors(i.e.,challengeandhindrancestressors),theirpersonalitytraitofconscientiousness,anddemographicinformation.Inthesecondsurveyconducted2weekslater,participantsdescribedtheirpsychologicalstrain,andtheirsupervisorsratedparticipants’overallperformance.Weusedanidentificationcodeonthequestionnairetolinkthequestionnairesfromthetwophases.Theuseofthecodesallowedustoexcludeparticipants’names,ensuringtheconfidentialnatureofthesurvey. Intherestaurantpany,thesurveysweredistributedto156employees.Amongthem,140(89.74percent)respondedtothefirstsurvey,andofthese140participants,136(97.14percent)respondedtothesecondsurvey.Intheconsultingfirm,thesurveysweredistributedto133employees.Amongthem,120(90.23percent)respondedtothefirstsurvey,andofthese120participants,114(95.0percent)respondedtothesecondsurvey.Atotalof26directsupervisorsofemployeeswereaskedtoprovideemployees’performanceratings.Allofthem(100percent)respondedtothesurvey.Toinvestigatethepotentialimpactofattrition,differencesonstressors(i.e.,challengeandhindrancestressors)andconscientiousnessweretestedbetweenparticipantspletedalltheassessmentatbothtimesandparticipantspletedonlyTime1assessment.Nosignificantdifferencesemergedforanyofthesevariables.Thefinalsamplesizewas250.Jobtitlesforthissamplewerequitevaried,includingsales,marketingspecialists,projectmanagers,executivemanagers,planners,procurementspecialists,ountants,qualitycontrolspecialists,humanresourcespecialists,customerrepresentatives,systemarchitects,andsystemadministrators.Theseindividualswereresponsibleforthemanagementandday-to-dayfunctioningoftherestaurant Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd.
J.Organiz.Behav.36,94–111(2015)DOI:10.1002/job 100W.LINETAL. managementandconsultingfirms.Inbinedsample,51.20percentweremale,andtheaverageageoftherespondentswas25.74years(SD=4.24);0.4percentdidnotreceiveajuniorhighschooldiploma,41.6pletedjuniorhighschooleducation,8.0percenthadahighschooldiploma,and50.0percenthadanassociatedegreeorabove;andtheaveragejobtenureoftherespondentswas1.47years(SD=1.69). Measures Themeasuresforchallenge–hindrancestressorsandconscientiousnesswereoriginallypublishedinEnglish.Wefollowedtheconventionalprocedureoftranslation–backtranslation(Brislin,1980)totranslatethemintoChinese.First,aChinesegraduatestudentwhomajoredinEnglishtranslatedalltheEnglishscalesintoChinese.Then,anothergraduatestudentwhomajoredinEnglishandwasblindtotheoriginalquestionnairetranslatedthembacktoEnglish.Finally,thetwoEnglishversionsofallthescalesparedwitheachothertoreviewanyarisinginconsistencies.Ahighlevelofagreement(94.7percent)wasachievedinback-translateditems.Minordiscrepanciesbetweentheoriginalandback-translatedversionsweresolvedthroughdiscussionbetweenthetranslatorsandaprofessorofpsychology. ChallengeandhindrancestressorsChallengeandhindrancestressorsweremeasuredwithCavanaughetal.’s(2000)11-itemscale.Employeeswereaskedtoindicatetheextenttowhichthestatementsproducedstressatworkonascalerangingfrom1(nostress)to5(agreatdealofstress).Challengeitems(sixitems;Cronbach’sα=.93)included“TimepressureIexperience”and“ThenumberofprojectsandorassignmentsIhave,”whilehindranceitems(fiveitems;Cronbach’sα=.83)included“Thedegreetowhichpoliticsratherthanperformanceanizationaldecisions”and“TheamountofredtapeIneedtogetthroughtogetmyjobdone.” ConscientiousnessWemeasuredconscientiousnessusingtheMini-MarkersdevelopedbySaucier(1994)(Cronbach’sα=.71inthecurrentresearchfortheconscientiousness).Mini-MarkersisashortenedversionofGoldberg’sunipolarBig-FiveMarkers(Goldberg,1992),whichhasbeendemonstratedtohavestrongcorrelations(rangingfrom.54to.70)withtheNEOFive-FactorInventory(Mooradian&Nezlek,1996).Itconsistsof40adjectivemarkers.TheConscientiousnessscalecontainseightadjectivemarkers(fourpositiveadjectivessuchas“Practical”andfournegativeadjectives[reversedcoded]suchas“Sloppy”).RespondentsratedeachmarkerusingaLikertscalerangingfrom1(extremelyurate)to5(extremelyurate). PsychologicalstrainWeusedthe12-itemversionoftheGeneralHealthQuestionnaire(GHQ-12)revisedbyWangandLin(2011)toassessemployees’psychologicalstrain(Cronbach’sα=.89inthecurrentresearch).TheGHQ-12wasoriginallydevelopedbyGoldbergandWilliams(1988)andhasbeenwidelyusedasascreeningmeasureforgeneralpsychologicalstrain(e.g.,Lin,Wang,&Chen,2013).Respondentswereaskedtoratetheiragreementona7-pointscale(1=stronglydisagree,7=stronglyagree).Anexampleitemis“I’munhappyanddepressed.”Higherscoresrepresenthigherpsychologicalstrainafterwereversedthescores. JobperformanceEmployees’jobperformancewasratedbytheirsupervisorsusingafour-itemscaletakenfromFarhandCheng(1997)(Cronbach’sα=.96inthecurrentresearch).Supervisorswereaskedtoratetheiragreementona7-pointscale(1=stronglydisagree,7=stronglyagree).Anexampleitemis“Thisemployeemakesasignificantcontributiontotheoverallperformanceofourworkunit.” Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd.
J.Organiz.Behav.36,94–111(2015)DOI:10.1002/job CONSCIENTIOUSNESSASADOUBLE-EDGEDSWORD101 ControlvariablesParticipants’demographiccharacteristics,includinggender,age,education,andjobtenurewerecontrolledbecausepreviousstudiessuggestedthatthesestatusvariablesmightinfluenceindividuals’perceptionsofworkstressors,psychologicalstrain,andperformance(e.g.,Ang,VanDyne,&Begley,2003;Cavanaughetal.,2000;Ely,2004;Lobel&St.Clair,1992;Perrewéetal.,2004;Vigoda,2002;Wallaceetal.,2009).Inordertopanydifference,wealsopanytypeasadummyvariablecoded“1”fortherestaurantpanyand“2”fortheconsultingfirmintheregressionanalysis. Results Themeans,standarddeviations,andcorrelationsamongthevariablesarepresentedinTable1.Asexpected,hindrancestressorswerepositivelycorrelatedwithpsychologicalstrain(r=.25,p<.01)andnegativelycorrelatedwithjobperformance(r=À.17,p<.01).However,challengestressorswereonlymarginallycorrelatedwithpsychologicalstrain(r=.12,p=.06)anddidnotsignificantlypredictjobperformance(r=.08,p>.10). Testingmeasurementmodel Toexaminewhethertheconstructsmeasuredaredistinguishablefromeachother,weconductedconfirmatoryfactoranalysisusingLISREL8.80(Jöreskog&Sörbom,2006).Themaximumlikelihoodestimationprocedurewasusedtoestimatemodelfit.Resultsshowedthatthefive-factormodel(i.e.,challengestressors,hindrancestressors,conscientiousness,psychologicalstrain,andjobperformance)fitthedatawell,χ2(550)=1422.74,p<.01,CFI=0.90,TLI=0.90,RMSEA=0.08.Allitemsloadedsignificantlyontheircorrespondingfactors.CorrelationsamongfactorsrangedfromÀ.38to.35.Thismeasurementmodelfitthedatabetterthanall10constrainedmodelsinwhichanytwoofthefivefactorsbined(345.36≤Δχ2[Δdf=4]≤2162.86,ps<.01).Theseresultsprovidedsupportforthehypothesizedmeasurementmodel. Testingmoderationeffects Becausesupervisorsprovidedratingsformorethanoneemployee,thesemultipleratingsfromsupervisorsandtheassociatednestingofemployeeswithinworkgroupsviolatethedataindependenceassumptionsofordinaryleastsquaresregressionmodels(Bliese,2000;Klein&Kozlowski,2000).Thus,weusedhierarchicallinearmodeling(HLM)totestourhypotheses.ModelestimationwasconductedusingHLM6.08(Raudenbush,Bryk,&Congdon,2007).AseriesofHLMmodelswereestimatedsoastoexaminetheamountofvarianceinthedependantvariablesexplainedbycontrolvariables,maineffects,andinteractioneffects,respectively.Thefirstmodelincludedonlyanintercept.Inthesecondmodel,controlvariableswereentered.Inthethirdmodel,themaineffectsofstressorsandconscientiousnesswereadded.Inthefinalmodel,theinteractiontermsbetweenstressorsandconscientiousnesswereadded.Allpredictorvariablesweregrandcenteredbysubtractingtheirmeans.AlthoughwewereinterestedinmodelingLevel1variance,randomslopesacrossgroups/supervisorsweretestedusingchi-squaretestsoastoensuretheappropriatenessofthespecificationofourmulti-levelmodel.Becausenoneoftherandomeffectsweresignificant,wetreatedslopesasfixed. TheresultsofthefirstHLMmodelshowedthatthewithinsupervisor(orindividuallevel)varianceonperformanceratingswas1.30,whereasthebetween-supervisorvariancewas0.33.Thechi-squaretestindicatedthatthebetween-supervisorvariancewassignificant,χ2(25)=117.26,p<.01.Theintra-classcorrelationforperformanceratingswas.20,indicatingthatapproximately20percentofthevarianceexistedbetweensupervisors/groups.For Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd.
J.Organiz.Behav.36,94–111(2015)DOI:10.1002/job 102W.LINETAL. Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd. Table1.Descriptivestatisticsforstudyvariables. Variable
M SD
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
1.Gender2.Age3.Education4.Jobtenure5.Companytype6.Challengestressors7.Hindrancestressors8.Conscientiousness9.Jobperformance10.Psychologicalstrain 1.4925.743.521.471.462.82 2.773.944.992.56 0.50 – 4.24À.02 – 1.43 .30** .42** – 1.69À.02 .37** .10 – 0.50 .28** .45** .91** .14* – 1.16 .08 .31** .62** .15* .68**
(.93) 1.04 .06 .01 .11 À.01 .12 .30**(.83) 0.54À.07 .28** .17** .14* .13* .00 À.25**(.71) 1.33À.05 .13* .04 .26** .03 .08 À.17** .17**(.96) 0.98À.09 À.09 À.11 .00 À.11 .12 .25**À.29**.07(.89) Note:Genderwascoded“1”formenand“2”forwomen.Educationwascoded“1”for“nodegree,”“2”for“highschooldiploma,”“3”for“associatedegree,”“4”for“bachelordegree,”“5”for“masterdegree,”and“6”for“doctordegree.”Companytypewascoded“1”forrestaurantpanyand“2”forconsultingfirm.ValuesinparenthesesonthediagonalareCronbach’salphacoefficients.*p<.05,**p<.01.
J.Organiz.Behav.36,94–111(2015)DOI:10.1002/job CONSCIENTIOUSNESSASADOUBLE-EDGEDSWORD103 theeofpsychologicalstrain,theindividuallevelvariancewas.96,whereasthebetween-groupvariancewas.01.Thechi-squaretestindicatedthatthebetween-groupvariancewasnotsignificant,χ2(25)=29.95,p>.10.Theintraclasscorrelationforpsychologicalstrainwas.01,indicatingthatonly1percentofthevarianceexistedbetweengroups. Afterountingforsupervisoryeffects,thecontrolvariablesexplained5.5percentand0.2percentofthewithingroupvarianceinjobperformanceandpsychologicalstrain,respectively.Theadditionofthemaineffectsofstressorsandconscientiousnessexplainedincremental0.8percentand15.3percentofthewithin-groupvarianceinjobperformanceandpsychologicalstrain,respectively.Finally,theadditionoftheinteractioneffectsbetweenstressorsandconscientiousnessexplainedadditional6.8percentand4.2percentofthewithin-groupvarianceinjobperformanceandpsychologicalstrain,respectively.Consequently,thefinalmodelexplained13.1percentand19.7percentofthewithin-groupvarianceinjobperformanceandpsychologicalstrain,respectively.TheresultsofthefinalmodelarepresentedinTable2. Resultsshowedthataftercontrollingforthebetween-groupeffects,bothchallengeandhindrancestressorswerepositivelyrelatedtopsychologicalstrain(γ=.19,p<.01,andγ=.15,p<.05,respectively),meaningthatthemorestressors(eitherchallengeorhindrance)employeesperceived,theworsetheirpsychologicalstatuswas.However,neitherchallengestressorsnorhindrancestressorsweresignificantlyrelatedtojobperformance(γ=.01,p>.10andγ=À.07,p>.10,respectively).Table2alsoshowsthatconscientiousnessmoderatedtherelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsandjobperformanceasexpected(γ=.49,p<.05),suchthatthepositiverelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsandjobperformancewasstrongerforemployeeswithhighconscientiousness(Figure2).However,therelationshipbetweenhindrancestressorsandperformancewasnotmoderatedbyconscientiousness(γ=À.05,p>.10). Inaddition,conscientiousnesssignificantlymoderatedeachoftherelationshipsbetweenworkstressorsandpsychologicalstraininthepredicteddirection(challengestressors,γ=.22,p<.01;andhindrancestressors,γ=.20,p<.01).Theseresultsdemonstratedthatpositiverelationshipsbetweenworkstressorsandemployeepsychologicalstrainwerestrongerforemployeeshigh,ratherthanlow,inconscientiousness(Figures3and4).WealsousedtheonlinecalculatorforprobinginteractionsdevelopedbyPreacher,Curran,andBauer(2006)toestimatesimpleslopes,whichdescribetherelationshipsbetweenworkstressorsandesatvaryinglevelsofconscientiousness.Specifically,highconscientiousnesswasdesignatedas1SDabovethemean,averageconscientiousnesswasthemean,andlowconscientiousnesswas1SDbelowthemean.Fortherelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsand Table2.Hierarchicallinearmodelingresultsforpredictorofsupervisor-ratedperformanceandpsychologicalstrain. Jobperformance Psychologicalstrain InterceptSexAgeEducationJobtenureCompanytypeChallengestressorsHindrancestressorsConscientiousnessChallengestressors×conscientiousnessHindrancestressors×conscientiousnessLevel1ponentLevel2ponentχ2(df=25) 5.20**(0.17)0.02(0.17)0.02(0.02) 0.22**(0.09)0.12**(0.04)À1.05**(0.39) 0.01(0.08)À0.07(0.05) 0.16(0.28)0.49*(0.24)À0.05(0.17)1.130.33136.25** 2.62**À0.09 0.000.030.000.540.19**0.15*À0.46**0.22**0.20**0.770.0227.58 (0.07)(0.13)(0.02)(0.09)(0.03)(0.33)(0.08)(0.08)(0.15)(0.08)(0.09) Note:Genderwascoded“1”formenand“2”forwomen.Educationwascoded“1”for“nodegree,”“2”for“highschooldiploma,”“3”for“associatedegree,”“4”for“bachelordegree,”“5”for“masterdegree,”and“6”for“doctordegree.”Companytypewascoded“1”forrestaurantpanyand“2”forconsultingfirm.*p<.05,**p<.01. Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd.
J.Organiz.Behav.36,94–111(2015)DOI:10.1002/job 104W.LINETAL. Figure2.Interactionbetweenchallengestressorsandconscientiousnessonemployeejobperformance Figure3.Interactionbetweenchallengestressorsandconscientiousnessonemployeepsychologicalstrain jobperformance,theslopewassignificantlypositiveforindividualswithhighconscientiousness(simpleslope=.27,p<.01)butsignificantlynegativeforindividualswithlowconscientiousness(simpleslope=À.25,p<.01).Forindividualswithaverageconscientiousness,theslopewasnotsignificant(simpleslope=.01,p>.10).Fortherelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsandpsychologicalstrain,theslopesweresignificantlypositiveforindividualswithhighconscientiousness(simpleslope=.31,p<.01),withaverageconscientiousness(simpleslope=.19,p<.01),andwithlowconscientiousness(simpleslope=.07,p<.01).Fortherelationshipbetweenhindrancestressorsandpsychologicalstrain,theslopesweresignificantlypositiveforindividualswithhighconscientiousness(simpleslope=.26,p<.01)andwithaverageconscientiousness(simpleslope=.15,p<.01),butitwasnotsignificantforindividualswithlowconscientiousness(simpleslope=.04,p>.10).TheseresultsprovidedsupportforHypotheses1a,2a,and2b. Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd.
J.Organiz.Behav.36,94–111(2015)DOI:10.1002/job CONSCIENTIOUSNESSASADOUBLE-EDGEDSWORD105 Figure4.Interactionbetweenhindrancestressorsandconscientiousnessonemployeepsychologicalstrain Discussion Thegoalofthecurrentresearchwastoexpandliteratureonstressbyexaminingthedegreetowhichaparticularvariableofpersonalitytrait,conscientiousness,moderatedtherelationshipsthatworkstressorshadwithemployeepsychologicalstrainandjobperformance.Usingtime-laggedandmulti-sourcedata,ourresultsdemonstratethedouble-edgedswordeffectofconscientiousness,whichsuggeststhat,ratherthanactingasatypeofpersonalresource,conscientiousnessmightserveasaguideforindividualstodirecttheirresourceallocations. Thecurrentresearchshowedthemoderatingeffectsofconscientiousness,suchthattherelationshipsthatbothworkstressors(i.e.,challengeandhindrance)hadwithemployeepsychologicalstrainwerestrongerforthosehighinconscientiousness.Inaddition,therelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsandperformancewaspositiveforindividualswithhighconscientiousnessbutnegativeforthosewithlowconscientiousness.Fromthepersonalresourceallocationperspective,thismaybeduetothatthehighlyconscientiousindividualsaremorewillingtochanneltheirpersonalresourcestowardsmaintainingtheirperformancestandards,leadingtoinsufficientresourcestoresisttheincreaseoftheirpsychologicalstrain.Itisworthnotingthatalthoughconscientiousindividualshadlowerlevelsofpsychologicalstrainonaverageduetothenegativerelationshipbetweenconscientiousnessandpsychologicalstrain(Table2),theirlevelsofpsychologicalstrainincreaseddramaticallywhenthelevelsofstressorsincreased.Thisresultsuggeststhatthewell-beingofhighlyconscientiousindividualsfluctuatemoredramaticallythanthatofthosewithlowconscientiousness,reflectingthedarksideofconscientiousnessbecausepreviousresearchhasshownthatsuchincreaseinstrainwouldcausesevereessuchashigherriskofsufferingfromdepression(e.g.,Stansfeld,Shipley,Head,&Fuhrer,2012;Wang,Schmitz,Dewa,&Stansfeld,2009).Therefore,ourfindingsdemonstratethedouble-edgedswordeffectofconscientiousness. Ofnote,weexpectedthemoderatingeffectofconscientiousnessintherelationshipbetweenhindrancestressorsandperformance,suchthathindrancestressorswouldbemoredetrimentaltoperformanceforemployeeslow,ratherthanhigh,onconscientiousness.However,nosupportwasfoundforthishypothesis.Apossibleexplanationisthathindrancestressors,suchasroleambiguityanizationalpolitics,aresomewhatoutofthecontroloftheemployees.So,evenforemployeeswithhighlevelsofconscientiousness,hindrancestressorsaredifficultforthemtodealwith.Althoughtheytendtospendmoreefforttryingtodealwiththesestressorsandmaintaintheirlevelofperformance,theyjustcannotessfullymeetthedemandsofthehindrancestressors.Thus,hindrancestressors Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd.
J.Organiz.Behav.36,94–111(2015)DOI:10.1002/job 106W.LINETAL. woulddirectlyreduceperformancebecausetheymakeitdifficultforemployeestoplishjobtasks(Lepineetal.,2005).Therefore,conscientiousnessfailedtomitigatetherelationshipbetweenhindrancestressorsandperformance. Theoreticalimplications Thecurrentresearchmakesseveralcontributionstotheexistingbodyofliterature.First,conscientiousnessmonlyviewedasatypeofpersonalresourcethatisbeneficialforindividuals.However,previousresearchhasnotsupportedthisargumentconsistently,asithasbeenfoundthattherearesomesituationswhereconscientiousnesswouldactasacatalystthatexacerbatesindividuals’stressreactions.Therefore,ratherthanviewingconscientiousnessasatypeofpersonalresource,wearguethatconscientiousnesshelpsdirectingindividuals’resourceallocationsbasedonthepersonalresourceallocationperspective(Grawitchetal.,2010).Specifically,wepositthatconscientiousnesschannelsresourcestowardsdealingwithworkstressorssoastomeetperformancerequirementsoreventohelptheindividualstriveforgreaterachievement.Asaresult,highlyconscientiousindividualsmaybeleftwithinsufficientresourcestomitigatethenegativeimpactofworkstressorsontheirpsychologicalwell-being.Consistentwiththesearguments,ourresultsshowedthatalthoughconscientiousnesswouldfacilitateindividuals’jobperformanceunderstressfulsituationsthatwereperceivedaschallenging,itwouldalsoexacerbateindividuals’psychologicalstrainatthesametime.Assuch,thecurrentresearchnotonlyprovidesanovelapproachtoaddresssomeconflictingfindingsfromthecurrentstressliteraturebutalsohighlightsanewperspectivetounderstandtherolethatconscientiousnessplaysintheworkcontext.Tothebestofourknowledge,itisalsothefirsttimethatthedoubleedgedswordeffectofconscientiousnesshasbeendemonstratedinthesamemodel,whichsignificantlycontributestothedomainofpersonalityresearch. Second,thepersonalresourceallocationperspective(Grawitchetal.,2010)positsthathowindividualsdealwithdemandsdependsonhoweffectivelytheyallocatetheirfinitepersonalresources,andpersonalitywouldinfluencetheresourceallocationprocesses.Althoughitisawell-arguedperspective,littleworkhasbeencarriedouttotestthevalidityofthepersonalresourceallocationperspective.Inthecurrentresearch,weprovidesupportforthisperspectivebyrevealingthedouble-edgedswordeffectofconscientiousnessinthatwhenfacedwithstressors,highlyconscientiousindividualsmaybeinclinedtomaintaintheirsuperiorlevelsofjobperformanceattheriskofturbulenceintheirpsychologicalwell-being. Third,althoughpreviousfindingssuggestthatchallengingworkdemandspromoteworkperformance(e.g.,LePineetal.,2004;LePineetal.,2005;Pearsalletal.,2009;Wallaceetal.,2009),ourfindingsshowthatthisisnotalwaysthecase.Byexaminingthemoderatingeffectsofconscientiousnessontherelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsandperformance,ourresearchfoundthatchallengestressorspromotejobperformanceforhighconscientiousnessemployeesbutdamageperformanceforthoselowinconscientiousness.Thesefindingsextendthestressliteraturebyclarifyingtheboundaryconditionsofthechallengestressors–performancerelationship,whichhighlightstheimportanceofconsideringindividualdifferencesinthestressmanagementarea. Finally,ourfindingsareconsistentwiththeperson–environmentinteractionperspectiveinunderstandingpsychologicalandbehavioralreactionstostressfulsituations(Endler&Magnusson,1976).Theperson–environmentinteractionperspectivesuggeststhatpersonality(e.g.,conscientiousness)interactswithsituations(e.g.,challenge/hindrancestressors)indeterminingattitudesandbehaviors.Basedonthisperspectiveandtheextentthatindividualsdifferinresourceallocationstrategy,personalityshouldinfluencehowindividualsallocatetheirresourcesandhowtheyreactpsychologicallyandbehaviorally(e.g.,psychologicalstrainandperformance)tothestressfulworksettings. Practicalimplications Thecurrentresearchalsoprovidessomeguidanceformanagerialpractice.First,giventhathindrancestressorswerepositivelyrelatedtoemployees’psychologicalstrain,anizationsshouldmakeeveryefforttoreducethe Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd.
J.Organiz.Behav.36,94–111(2015)DOI:10.1002/job CONSCIENTIOUSNESSASADOUBLE-EDGEDSWORD107 urrenceofhinderingworkenvironments.Forexample,anizationscouldhelpemployeestoclarifytheirworkrolesanddealwithemployeerelationsinamoreharmoniousway. Second,ourresultsshowedthattherelationshipbetweenchallengestressorsandperformancewaspositiveforhighlyconscientiousindividualsbutnegativeforlow-conscientiousones.Theseresultssuggestthatitiscrucialanizationsorsupervisorstoconsiderthepersonalitytraitsofemployeeswhenassigningtasks,workloads,orresponsibilities.Forconscientiousemployees,providingchallengeworkdemandsmaypromotetheirperformance.Incontrast,anizationsshouldprovidemoresupportandguidanceforlowconscientiousnessemployeestomeettheperformancerequirementswhentheyarefacingheavyandchallengingworkdemands. Third,althoughourresultsshowedthatemployeeswithhighconscientiousnesswouldperformbetterwhenconfrontedwithchallengestressors,weshouldnotethattheyaremorepsychologicallyvulnerableintermsoftheincreaseinpsychologicalstrainundereithertypeofstressfulworksituations(i.e.,challengeorhindrancestressors).Thus,anizationsshouldpaymoreattentiontothehealthstatusofemployeeswhoarehighinconscientiousnessandprovidethemwithadditionalresourcesto
声明：
该资讯来自于互联网网友发布，如有侵犯您的权益请联系我们。
