Article Summary Homework
jefwan
article_9.pdf
Employees’ Perception of Organizational Change: The Mediating Effects of Stress Management Strategies By Ming-Chu Yu, PhD
This study explores employees’ perception of organizational change and how those perceptions are shaped by trust and stress management strategies. Four hundred and five analyzable surveys were received from employees of four Taiwanese governmental departments undergoing change. These surveys were conducted within the Ministry of National Defense, the Coast Guard Administration, the National Police Agency, and the National Fire Agency. Results showed that organizational change had a significant negative influence on employees’ trust and job involvement. However, stress management strategies and an understanding of organizational change can positively influence employees’ organizational identification and job involvement. As a result, it is suggested that stress management workshops be instituted within an organization undergoing change in order to provide strategies for stress relief and to improve employees’ organizational identification and job involvement.
O rganizational change is the process whereby an organization converts from
an existing state to a hoped-for future state in order to increase its effective-
ness. For employees, organizational change may produce negative effects,
such as ambiguous role responsibilities, unemployment, a lowering of social status,
and family and job conflicts.
Schweiger and DeNsi1 and Hellriegel, Slocum, and Woodman2 have pointed out
that organizational changes can be viewed as the greatest source of stress on the job
and, perhaps, in an employee’s life. Kotter3 has pointed out that, while each is
important, the core problems of organizational changes are never strategy, structure,
culture, or system. Rather, the real problems arise when deciding how to help
employees adapt to the change. Schabracq and Cooper4 believe that employees’ stress
rises because positions and technical skills may be changed or altered. When
employees cannot make necessary technical adjustments, a sense of uncertainty arises
about the future, which, in turn, creates stress. This uncertainty can affect employees’
job commitment and job satisfaction.
Public Personnel Management Volume 38 No. 1 Spring 2009 17
at UNIV OF THE INCARNATE WORD on February 9, 2016ppm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Furthermore, trust is an important foundation of cooperative relationships between
people. Once an organization begins changing, its employees may face threats to their
jobs, roles, positions, and resources, and these threats can lower employees’ trust in
their organization as a whole. This reaction can negatively manifest in employees’
attitudes toward their work.5 When individuals contemplate the stress of organizational
change, their perceptions, choice of reaction strategies, and working attitudes all
strongly influence whether the change will be successful and whether the newly
reconstituted organization will function efficiently.
To address changes in the world economy and national political realities during
the 1990s, the Executive Yuan of Taiwan presented a plan to merge some central
government organizations and eliminate hundreds of federal jobs. These changes were
intended to increase operating efficiencies and lower expenditures from the treasury.
Police and military organizations, including the Ministry of National Defense, the Coast
Guard Administration, the National Police Agency, and the National Fire Agency, all
faced large staff reductions. According to Hui and Lee,6 the government’s
announcement of the mergers and staff reductions produced strong shocks in the
affected organizations.
This study uses the uncertainty of expected organizational change to explore
employees’ perceptions of external changes, as well as the relationships among
employee trust, stress management, organizational identification, and job involvement.
It is hoped that the conclusions can serve as a reference point for governmental
departments initiating changes.
Literature Review and Hypotheses To survive and expand, organizations must quickly adapt to changes in their
environment. If organizations do not change, they lose their ability to compete. When
the environment changes and the niche originally filled by the organization either
becomes unimportant or is superseded, the organization must change or die. Hodge
and Johnson7 believe that when change has the potential to lower a person’s position
or change the person’s job description or freedom, the person is likely to resist the
change. The studies of Storseth showed that job insecurity is related to individuals’
perceptions of changes: The greater the threat is perceived to be, the greater the
perception of job insecurity.8 Role stress is the uncertainty of change. Role stress
includes role ambiguity, role conflict, and role pressure.9
Change in an organization will produce some uncertainty, frustration, and anxiety
among employees that will have long-term effects on employees’ attitude and
psychology.10 Hui and Lee found that the expectation of changes led employees to
experience psychological uncertainty about the potential loss of current position,
unemployment, role pressure, and reduction of available resources. Employees may
also lose trust in the organization as a whole.11 Dekker and Schaufeli12 pointed out that
there is an inverse relationship between perception of job insecurity and trust.
Liaw, Fan, and Wu13 believe that when employees doubt whether they can adapt
to a change by their organization—or whether their positions, workload, and
Public Personnel Management Volume 38 No. 1 Spring 200918
at UNIV OF THE INCARNATE WORD on February 9, 2016ppm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
workplace will be changed—those doubts will influence the employees’ trust and
relationships with their organization and also with their superiors and peers.
Based on the findings from earlier studies of how employees perceive and react to
organizational change, that the study described in this article was conducted to
determine whether employees’ uncertainty about a change in their organization is
associated with lowered levels of trust in their organization.
Hypothesis 1: The greater the uncertainty associated with a perceived change, the
less trust an employee has for the organization.
Stress refers to the physical and emotional reactions of an individual faced with
external psychological and physical stimulation that the individual cannot control or
know the outcome of.14 George and Jones15 believe that stress management strategies
can be used to change perceptions and behavior when external and internal demands
exceed personal resources. Such strategies can be divided into personal problem-
oriented strategies and emotion-oriented strategies.
After an organization changes, employees will suffer from stress brought about by
uncertainty, threat of job loss, changes in responsibilities, and transfers of authority.16
Stress causes a reduction in the effectiveness of the organization, high desertion rates,
low morale, and low job satisfaction.17 Therefore, stress management should be used
to resolve and relieve stress. Chen pointed out that the privatization of state-owned
businesses resulted in insecurity, role conflict, and work pressure for employees, which
could be lessened by developing positive interpersonal relationships, good time
management skills, and personal self-control.18 Apparently, the stronger the negative
perceptions an employees has of the change being made at his or her organization, the
greater the stress will be and the greater the need for stress management strategies will
be.
Hypothesis 2: The greater the uncertainty of organizational change, the greater
the need for stress management strategies.
Organizational identification has been defined as “perceived oneness with an
organization and the experience of the organization’s success or failures as one’s
own.”19 When employees face organizational changes, they easily lose confidence in
the change because they do not receive proper information, resulting in a reduction of
identification and job satisfaction.20 The greater the employee’s understanding of
organizational changes, the greater the employee’s identification and job involvement
will be, and the greater the influence on organizational effectiveness.21 Uncertainty
about the nature and outcomes of organizational change leads to greater job insecurity
and decreased job satisfaction and commitment. Job insecurity results in emotional
stress and creates resignation tendencies, resulting in a lowering of organizational
identification and of job involvement.22 Furthermore, role stress created by
organizational change can also lower organizational morale.23 Hence, when an
Public Personnel Management Volume 38 No. 1 Spring 2009 19
at UNIV OF THE INCARNATE WORD on February 9, 2016ppm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
organization threatens its employee with job insecurity or uncertainty, employees will
not be likely to develop high levels of organizational commitment.24
Hypothesis 3-1: The greater the uncertainty of organizational changes, the lower
employees’ organizational identification.
Hypothesis 3-2: The greater the uncertainty about the nature and outcome of
organizational changes, the lower levels of job involvement employees will have.
Trust refers to the willingness of an individual to believe and rely on another
party.25 Based on the research of Deluga,26 trust can be divided into organizational
trust, superior trust, and peer trust. George and Jones found that good stress
management strategies have a significant positive effect on stress, and the greater the
level of trust of employees, the greater the influence of stress management strategies in
response to job stress.27 Lindsay28 pointed out that employees can relieve stress by
developing more open relationships with co-workers and supervisors. Stress
management strategies such as involving employees in planning, encouraging
communication and open discussions, and encouraging trust in the organization are
also effective in reducing the stress brought on by changes in the work environment.
Hypothesis 4: The greater the trust of employees in the organization, the greater
the use of stress management strategies in response to stress.
An organization can provide employees with opportunities to develop job-related
skills, give them support in problem solving, and provide communication support,
thus satisfying employees’ needs for professional growth and organizational trust.
When an organization provides such opportunities, employees’ identification with the
organization will increase.
Rajnandini, Schriesheim, and Williams29 have suggested that the expression of
trust between managers and employees is directly related to job commitment and job
satisfaction. Nyhan’s research on governmental organizations found that interpersonal
trust between managers and subordinates can increase productivity and
commitment.30 As can be seen, strong positive relationships underlie strong
organizational trust, job commitment, and job satisfaction.31
Hypothesis 5-1: The greater the trust employees have in their organization, the
greater the employees’ identification with their organization.
Hypothesis 5-2: The greater the trust employees have in their organization, the
greater the job involvement of employees.
Stress management strategies are actions taken by individuals when they believe
there are internal or external demands that are burdensome and which can only be met
with resources outside of those currently available to them. These actions can be
Public Personnel Management Volume 38 No. 1 Spring 200920
at UNIV OF THE INCARNATE WORD on February 9, 2016ppm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
divided into problem-oriented coping strategies and emotion-oriented coping
strategies.32 Stress management can bring about high employee job satisfaction by
preventing stress.33 If an organization has stress management plans, stress can be
reduced, and employees’ morale and job involvement can be improved.34,35 Also, when
employees face stress from organizational change, if stress management response
methods are used to relieve stress, then job involvement and satisfaction can be
improved.36
Hypothesis 6-1: If employees utilize stress management strategies, then their
organizational identification will increase.
Hypothesis 6-2: If employees utilize stress management strategies, then their job
involvement will increase.
When an organization is greatly changed, different employees will react in
individual ways. Some employees will feel increased stress as a result of an increased
workload. Such employees are likely to feel increased job insecurity, which will
negatively affect their job performance and the organization’s achievement of goals.
Other employees will view the change as an opportunity for growth, working
harder and even increasing their organizational identification and job involvement. A
difference in levels of organization trust explains these opposing reactions.37 Also,
because a sense of uncertainty will arise when employees expect organizational
changes, organizational trust will act as a mediating factor in employees’ reactions.38
Ou39 found that the greater the level of organizational trust employees feel, the
greater the prevalence of positive, supportive attitudes when organizations make
changes. From this, it can be inferred that employees resist organizational change
because of the have strong feelings of job insecurity, yet trust in the organization can
lower employees’ resistance to change.
Hypothesis 7-1: Employees’ organizational trust will mediate the relationship
between perceptions of organizational change and organizational identification.
Hypothesis 7-2: Employees’ organizational trust will mediate the relationship
between perceptions of organizational change and job involvement.
Employees facing the uncertainty of change will often become anxious, easily
perceiving the uncertainty as stress. Under the long-term influence of anxiety,
employees’ job involvement will inevitably be negatively affected.40
Tan41 believes that change and stress management are closely related and that
when employees face change, if they can make use of stress management strategies,
their motivation to work and their loyalty to the organization will increase. The
uncertainty of change will increase stress, while at the same time lowering employees’
satisfaction and organizational commitment.42 If stress management strategies are
used, then job satisfaction and involvement of employees can be increased.43
Public Personnel Management Volume 38 No. 1 Spring 2009 21
at UNIV OF THE INCARNATE WORD on February 9, 2016ppm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Hypothesis 8-1: Stress management strategies will mediate the relationship
between employees’ perceptions of organizational change and their
organizational identification.
Hypothesis 8-2: Stress management strategies will mediate the relationship
between employees’ perception of organizational change and their job
involvement.
Method
Procedure This study focused on Taiwanese government organizations undergoing change.
Samplings of employees with the Ministry of National Defense, the Coast Guard
Administration, the National Police Agency, and the National Fire Agency were
surveyed, with the approval of each agency’s personnel office. Five hundred
questionnaires were distributed amongst these four government organizations. All
participants completed surveys voluntary, and questionnaire responses were submitted
without individually identifying information.
A total of 405 analyzable questionnaires were returned, making the response rate
81%. Of the respondents, 80.7% were men. The largest percentages of returned
surveys came from the Ministry of National Defense (55.1%), followed by the National
Police Agency (35.6%), the National Fire Agency (5.12%), and the Coast Guard
Administration (4.2%). A large majority of respondents (77.7%) were between 31 and
55 years of age.
Measures
Perception of organizational change
Perception of organizational change was measured using 13 items adapted from Wu44
and from Hui and Lee.45 These items represent the three dimensions of loss of status,
job insecurity, and role load.
Loss of status was measured using three items asking about the level of
expectation among employees of position loss from organizational change. Participants
used a 1–5 rating scale on which 1 = strongly disagree, 3 = neither agree nor disagree,
and 5 = strongly agree. Total loss of status scores could range from 3 to 15, with higher
scores indicating higher the perceived loss of status (� = 0.852).
Job insecurity was assessed using six items asking about the certainty a person
had about his or her future job and career security. Participants used a 1–5 rating scale
on which 1 = strongly disagree, 3 = neither agree nor disagree, and 5 = strongly agree.
Total job insecurity scores could range from 6 to 30, with higher scores indicating
higher job insecurity (� = 0.841).
Role load was assessed using four items designed to revealed the degree of
respondents’ role conflict, role pressures, and reduction of resources resulting from
Public Personnel Management Volume 38 No. 1 Spring 200922
at UNIV OF THE INCARNATE WORD on February 9, 2016ppm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
organizational change. Participants used a 1–5 rating scale on which 1 = strongly
disagree, 3 = neither agree nor disagree, and 5 = strongly agree. Total role load scores
could range from 4 to 20, with higher scores indicating greater role load (� = 0.843).
Employee Trust
Employee trust refers to the trust of employees for the organization, their superiors,
and their peers in the midst of a possible organizational change. Employee trust was
measured using 14 fourteen items developed by Mayer, Davis, and Schoorman,46 and
by Wu.47 These included the three dimensions of organization trust, superior trust, and
peer trust. Each item was answered by using a 1–5 rating scale numbered from 1 =
strongly disagree through 5 = strongly agree. A higher score indicated a higher level of
trust (organization trust � = 0.928; superior trust � = 0.815; peer trust � = 0.89).
Stress Management Strategy
Stress management strategy refers to personal problem-oriented coping strategies and
emotion-oriented coping strategies employees use when they feel stress. The
strategies were measured using seven items from George and Jones48 and from Chen.49
Personal problem-oriented coping strategies include time management techniques,
while emotion-oriented coping strategies include relaxation techniques such as
contemplation, hypnosis, and meditation. Participants used a 1–5 rating scale on which
1 = strongly disagree, 3 = neither agree nor disagree, and 5 = strongly agree. A higher
score indicated greater effectiveness of stress management strategies (problem-
oriented coping strategies � = 0.766; emotion-oriented coping strategies � = 0.666).
Organizational Identification
Organizational identification refers to survey respondents defined themselves in terms
of their particular employment with their organization. Seven items adapted from Mael
and Ashforth were used to assess this construct.50 These included the two dimensions
of cohesion and loyalty. Participants used a 1–5 rating scale on which 1 = strongly
disagree, 3 = neither agree nor disagree, and 5 = strongly agree. Total organizational
identification scores could range from 7 to 35, with higher scores indicating stronger
organizational identification (cohesion � = 0.74; loyalty � = 0.836).
Job Involvement
Job involvement refers to the sense of duty respondents felt toward their current work,
the sense of accomplishment respondents derived from their current work, and the
satisfaction respondents derived from the rewards they received from doing their
current work. Job involvement was measured using nine items adapted from Blau and
Boal,51 and from Kanungo.52 These included the two dimensions of job obligation and
satisfaction and accomplishment. Participants used a 1–5 rating scale on which 1 =
strongly disagree, 3 = neither agree nor disagree, and 5 = strongly agree. Total job
identification scores could range from 9 to 45, with higher scores indicating more job
involvement (job obligation � = 0.792; satisfaction and accomplishment � = 0.791).
Public Personnel Management Volume 38 No. 1 Spring 2009 23
at UNIV OF THE INCARNATE WORD on February 9, 2016ppm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Reliability Test Confirmatory factor analysis was also employed to confirm the heterogeneity of
organizational change, trust, stress management strategies, organizational
identification, and job involvement. AMOS 3.6 was used as a calculation tool, using
maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) to proceed with variable calculation in order to
observe the suitability of the various constructs. It was found that the �2, GFI, AGFI,
RMR and CFI of the various constructs are as shown in Table 1. The outcomes of the
confirmatory analysis provide support for the heterogeneity of these constructs.
Survey Results Table 2 and Figure 1 provide the results of the hypotheses testing. While the result of
the �2 test was not excellent, other evaluative statistics indicate that organizational
change, trust, stress management strategies, organizational identification, and job
involvement are related (�2 = 157.482, df = 43, GFI = 0.934, CFI = 0.921, NFI = 0.896).
As can be seen in Table 2, the perceived uncertainty of organizational change
exerts a strong negative influence on trust (�11 = –0.46, p < .05). Thus, H1 was
supported. When employees expect a loss of social status and staff reductions, and
when employees face the possibility that their workloads will increase, employees’
trust in their organization and peers is greatly reduced.53,54
Public Personnel Management Volume 38 No. 1 Spring 200924
Table 1: Results of the Confirmatory Factor Analysis
Construct � �2 df GFI AGFI RMR CFI
Perception of Organizational Change Loss of status 0.852 Job insecurity 0.841 164.917 62 0.944 0917 0.053 0.958 Role load 0.843
Employee Trust Organizational trust 0.928 Supervisory trust 0.815 225.357 101 0.935 0.913 0.047 0.961 Peer trust 0.890
Stress Management Strategies Problem-oriented coping 0.766 21.374 8 0.983 0.954 0.031 0.968 Emotion-oriented coping 0.666
Organizational Identification Cohesion 0.740 117.517 32 0.948 0.910 0.044 0.933 Loyalty 0.836
Job Involvement Job obligation 0.792 57.598 26 0.968 0.945 0.048 0.951 Satisfaction and accomplishment 0.791
Note. GFI = Goodness of Fit Index; AGFI = Adjust Goodness of Fit Index; CFI = Comparative Fit Index; RMR =Root Mean Square Residual.
at UNIV OF THE INCARNATE WORD on February 9, 2016ppm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Perception of organizational change shows significant positive influence on stress
management strategies (�12 = 0.483, p < .05), which supports H2 and shows that
when employees face the increased job stress of organizational change, they will
prioritize work tasks in order of importance while using relaxation techniques to
reduce their stress. Such results are consistent with those of George and Jones.55
The causal coefficient of perception of organizational change on organizational
identification did not reach significance (�13 = –0.208, p > .05), so H3-1 was not
supported. This result is not consistent with the one found by Griffeth, Gaertner, and
Sager.56 A possible explanation for this is that the Taiwanese central government
employees surveyed for this study were members of the military and police and have
received long-term training to be highly loyal to the country. Such training would tend
to make respondents willing to stick to their jobs in times of organizational change and
to do their duty regardless of uncertainty. As a result, the respondents’ loyalty to their
organizations would not diminish easily.
On the other hand, organizational change shows a significant negative influence
on job involvement (�14 = –0.236, p < .05), supporting H3-2. This indicates that when
members of the military and police face the stress of uncertainty and role loads
associated with organizational change, they will experience a reduced sense of job
satisfaction and job accomplishment despite not experiencing any change in their
loyalty. This result is consistent with that of a study by Ashfore, Lee, and Bobko.57
Public Personnel Management Volume 38 No. 1 Spring 2009 25
Table 2: Results of LISREL Testing
1. Key Parameter Estimates
Hypothesized paths Direct Critical effects ratio
Perception of organizational change�employee trust (�11) –0.460 –6.077a
Perception of organizational change�stress management strategies (�12) 0.483 3.986a
Perception of organizational change�organizational identification (�13) –0.208 –1.548 Perception of organizational change�job involvement (�14) –0.236 –2.037a
Employee trust�stress management strategies (�12) 0.705 5.416a
Employee trust�organizational identification (�13) 0.021 0.125 Employee trust�job involvement (�14) 0.017 0.125 Stress management strategies�organizational identification (�23) 0.993 5.791a
Stress management strategies�job involvement (�24) 0.912 6.585a
2. Fit Indices for the Structural Model
�2 = 157.482 (p = .000) GFI = 0.934 AGFI = 0.881 RMR = 0.032 CFI = 0.921 NF1 = 0.896 Note. GFI = Goodness of Fit Index; AGFI = Adjust Goodness of Fit Index; CFI = Comparative Fit Index; RMR =Root Mean Square Residual. aCritical ratio > 1.96; using a significance level of 0.05, critical ratios that exceed 1.96 are significant
at UNIV OF THE INCARNATE WORD on February 9, 2016ppm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
In terms of the relationship between employee trust, stress management,
organizational identification, and job involvement, it can be seen in Table 2 that the
employee trust has a significant positive influence on stress management strategies
(�12 = 0.705, p < .05), which supports H4. This indicates that when employees trust
their organization, their superiors, and their peers, they will organize their work tasks
by category and importance and also performing time management. At the same time,
employees may use meditation and relaxation to relieve work stress resulting from
organizational change.
Employee trust did not show a significant influence on either organizational
identification (�13 = 0.021, p > .05) or job involvement (�14 = 0.017, p > .05). Thus,
H5-1 and H5-2 is not supported. These results are not consistent with those of Nyhan58
and Armstrong-Stassen, Cameron, Mantler, and Horsburgh.59
The lack of a positive relationship between employee trust, organizational
identification, and job involvement shows that when the Taiwanese government put
forth its plan for organizational change, and despite the honesty of the organizations to
workers and the mutual support of co-workers, the identification and job involvement
of the employee for the organization could not be improved. This could have been
because organization members felt that, as members of the military and police, they
must follow their nation’s leaders. As a result, the establishment of trust did not
improve organizational identification and job involvement.
Additionally, stress management had a significant positive influence on both
organizational identification (�23 = 0.993, p < .05) and job involvement (�24 = 0.912,
p < .05), supporting H6-1 and H6-2. These results are consistent with those of
Hannigan, Edward, and Burnard.60 If employees possess appropriate stress
management plans, they will use effective time management and emotional control to
respond to work stress. When stress is relieved, employees will readjust their attitudes
and continue to support the organization, thus increasing their sense of duty and
satisfaction in their work.
Figure 1 depicts the results of the path analysis and demonstrates the
relationships among the exogenous and endogenous variables. It can be seen in the
figure that perception of organizational change has a direct effect on employee trust
(�11 = –0.46, p < .05), but perception of organizational change does not have a direct
effect on organizational identification (�13 = –0.208, p > .05). At the same time,
employee trust does not have a direct effect on organizational identification (�13 =
0.021, p > .05).
These results suggest that perception of organizational change does not influence
organizational identification through the construct of employee trust, so H7-1 is not
supported. Also, although organizational change has an indirect effect on job
involvement, organizational trust does not have a direct effect on job involvement (�14
= 0.017, p > .05), which suggests that perception of organizational change does not
influence job involvement through the mediating effect of employee trust. Thus, H7-2
is not supported.
In addition, survey results show that perception of organizational change does
not have a direct effect on organizational identification (�13 = –0.208, p >.05), but
Public Personnel Management Volume 38 No. 1 Spring 200926
at UNIV OF THE INCARNATE WORD on February 9, 2016ppm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
perception of organizational change does have a direct effect on stress management
strategies (�12 = 0.483, p < .05). At the same time, stress management strategies have
a direct effect on organizational identification (�23 = 0.993, p < .05), and the indirect
effect organizational change has on organizational identification is 0.48 (�12�23 =
0.483*0.993). It can be seen from this that if employees can make use of stress
management strategies when facing the uncertainty of organizational change,
organizational identification among employees can be improved, which supports H8-1.
Perception of organizational changes has a direct effect on job involvement (�24
= 0.912, p < .05), so perception of organizational change acts indirectly on job
involvement through the agent effect of stress management strategy. This indirect
influence is 0.44 (�12�24 = 0.483*0.912). Apparently, employees have decreased job
involvement when facing the uncertainty of organizational change, but through
appropriate use of stress management strategies, employees’ job involvement can be
significantly raised. Thus, H8-2 is supported.
Public Personnel Management Volume 38 No. 1 Spring 2009 27
Figure 1: Structural Equation Model
Note. The dotted line indicates a nonsignificant path. Values shown are parameter estimates. * p < .05
Employee Trust
Organization Indentification
Job Involvement
Stress Management Strategy
Perception of Organizational
Change
�11 = -.046* �12 = 0.705*
�13 = -0.208
�14 = -0.236
�12 = 0.483*
�23 = 0.993*
�14 = 0.017
�24 = 0.912*
�13 = 0.021
at UNIV OF THE INCARNATE WORD on February 9, 2016ppm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Discussion This study was conducted with a primary starting point of employee being uncertain
about the nature and outcomes of organizational change,61 and it combined the stress
evaluation theory of Lazarus and Folkman62 to explore the influence of uncertainty
about organizational change on employee trust, stress management strategies,
organizational identification, and job involvement. A survey of employees of Taiwanese
central government agencies that were undergoing questions revealed that the
uncertainty public sector employees have about how organizational change will affect
job security and workloads are negatively related to employee trust. A possible reason
for this is that the work of public sector employees is generally quite stable and orderly.
In facing massive changes in work modes and the prospect of increased workloads,
employees had reduced trust in superiors and peers. This result is consistent with that
of Hui and Lee.63
When public sector employees have a negative perception of organizational
changes, massive work stress will arise. If such stress cannot be relieved, employee’
work attitudes and performance will inevitably be affected. This study found that there
is a positive relationship between organizational changes and stress management,
consistent with the research of George and Jones.64 If members of an organization can
prioritize work tasks and estimate the time needed for the completion of each task,
utilize relaxation techniques, and seek the comfort and support of friends, family, and
co-workers, they can effectively relieve the stress produced by organizational changes.
Stress management strategies, therefore, show a significant positive effect on
organizational change-related stress.
This study found that there was no significant relationship between employee
trust and organizational identification or employee trust and job involvement, a result
that is inconsistent with that the findings of Griffeth, Gaertner, and Sager,65 and of
Rajnandini, Schrieshein, and Williams.66 A possible reason the difference in the findings
from this study could be that this study involved a survey of military and police
personnel. In the training and work of such personnel, loyalty to the nation is highly
emphasized. Also, if employees have strong self-confidence and are affected by external
factors to a lesser degree, and they have better self-control in the face of the
psychological fear brought on by uncertainty about organizational change.
Through overall pattern theory analysis it was found that stress management
strategies play an important role in the process of organizational change. Perception of
organizational change has a significant positive direct influence on stress management
strategies. At the same time, uncertainty about organizational change indirectly affects
organizational identification and job involvement. When employees expect problems
such as loss of position, job insecurity, and increased workloads, employees can relieve
stress by using personal stress management strategies. When employees do so, the
result is an increase in organizational identification and job involvement. It can be
inferred from this that government agencies should train employees in stress
management strategies during the process of organizational change. Whether an
Public Personnel Management Volume 38 No. 1 Spring 200928
at UNIV OF THE INCARNATE WORD on February 9, 2016ppm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
organization can raise organizational identification and job involvement in employees
is closely related to the use of stress management strategies.
This study’s findings have important implications. First, when public
organizations undertake change efforts, they should encourage and guide employees
in using stress management strategies, establish psychological support mechanisms,
and provide employees with methods of dealing with the stress brought on by
organizational changes. Employees and their families should be encouraged to form
support groups, so that when the employees face stress from organizational change,
they can make use of stress management strategies. Doing so will help limit the loss of
loyalty caused by mismanagement of stress and will also help prevent a loss of a sense
of duty. By extension, the training employees to use stress management strategies will
prevent the loss of efficiency and effectiveness within the organization.
Furthermore, when public organizations are pursuing changes, it is
recommended that organizations highlight the urgency and necessity of those changes
in simple, easy-to-understand terms. Organizations should also establish a change
leadership team that includes employee representatives who must be trustworthy,
possess technical skills, good interpersonal relationships, and official authority.
Following this, and consistent with the goals of the change, organizations should
articulate logical, clear, and concise strategies for making the desired change and
present those strategies to employees using simple language. Doing so will reduce
negative feelings about loss of position, job insecurity, and excessive workloads among
employees, and instead foster understanding of the changes and a sense of esprit de
corps among employees. It will also release and stimulate the potential of many
employees, encouraging them to actively take part in the change and to be willing to
share in the vision of the organization. Thus, employees will maintain high
organizational identification and job involvement throughout the process of change,
thereby helping to achieve the goals of the organizational change.
Finally, when public organizations are pushing for change, it would be
appropriate to strengthen employee trust by motivating employees to choose proper
stress management strategies. The formation of employee perceptions of
organizational change is strongly related to the decisions and behaviors of superiors.
The quality of management and the leadership of superiors will affect the atmosphere
within the organization, influencing trust between employees. As a result, when a
government is reorganizing or merging agencies, the government must establish fair,
transparent, benevolent, and uniform methods for implementing its change plan and
also foster correct perceptions, engage in two-way communication, and ensure the
consistent action of managers. It is also important to examine whether the distribution
and planning of personnel and workloads go against the interests and fair principles of
affected organizations. Managers who are unable to perform up to standard should
have their duties adjusted in order to maintain high trust for the organization among
employees. By doing this, it will be possible to clearly ascertain the causes and qualities
of any stress employees experience because of organizational change without incurring
a lack of employee trust. The most appropriate and correct stress management
strategies can then be chosen and employed.
Public Personnel Management Volume 38 No. 1 Spring 2009 29
at UNIV OF THE INCARNATE WORD on February 9, 2016ppm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Notes 1 Schweiger, D. M., & DeNisi, A. S. (1991). Communication with employees following a merger: A
Longitudinal field experiment. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 110–135.
2 Hellriegel, D., Slocom, J. W., & Woodman, R. W. (2001). Organizational behavior (9th ed).
Cincinnati, Ohio: South-Western College.
3 Kotter, J. P., & Cohen, D. S. (2002). The heart of change: real-life stories of how people change
their organizations. Boston: Harvard Business Review School Press.
4 Schabracq, M., & Cooper, C. (1998). Toward a phenomenological framework for the study of
work and organizational stress. Human Relations, 51, 625–648.
5 Wu, C. C. (2001). An empirical study of the relationships between uncertain anticipated of
organizational change and the employee’s working reactions. Unpublished master’s thesis,
Graduate School of Management Resources, National Defense Management College, National
Defense University, Taipei, Taiwan.
6 Hui, C., & Lee, C. (2000). Moderating effects of organization-based elf-esteem on organizational
uncertainty: Employee response relationships. Journal of Management, 2, 215–232.
7 Hodge, B. J., & Johnson, H. J. (1970). Management and organizational behavior: A
multidimensional approach. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
8 Storseth, F. (2004). Maintaining work motivation during organizational change. International
Journal of Human Resource Management, 4, 267–287.
9 Cluskey, G. R. Jr., & Vaux, A. (1997). Vocational misfit: Source of occupational stress among
accountants. Journal of Applied Business Research, 13, 43–54.
10 Doby, V. J., & Caplan, R. D. (1995). Organizational stress as threat to reputation: Effects on
anxiety at work and at home. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 1105–1123.
11 Hui, C., & Lee, C. (2000), op cit.
12 Dekker, S. W., & Schaufeli, W. B. (1995). The effects of job insecurity on psychological health
and withdrawal: A longitudinal study. Australian Psychologist, 30, 57–63.
13 Liaw, G. F., Fan, M., & Wu, C. C. (2002). An empirical study of the relationships between
uncertain anticipation of organizational change and the employee’s working reaction. NTU
Management Review, 13, 227–256.
14 Daft, R. L., & Noe, R. A. (2001). Organization behavior. Orland, FL: Harcourt College.
15 George, J. M., & Jones, R. J. (2002). Understanding and managing organizational behavior.
(3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
16 McHugh, M. & Brennan, S. (1994). Managing the stress of change in the public sector.
International Journal of Public Sector Management, 7, 29–41.
17 Jimmieson, N. L., Terry, D. J., & Callan, V. J. (2004). A longitudinal study of employee adaptation
to organizational change: The role change-related information and change-related self-efficacy.
Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 9, 11–27.
18 Chen, T. H. (2000). The study of survivor’s employee job stress for privatization of government
enterprise: The case of Taiwan fertilizer company employee. Kaohsiung, Taiwan: Institute of
Human Resource Management, National Sun Yat-Sen University.
19 Mael, F., & Ashforth, B. E. (1992). Alumni and their alma mater: a partial test of the
reformulated model of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13,
103–123.
20 Reichers, A., Wanous, J. P., & Austin, J. T. (1997). Understanding and managing cynicism about
organizational change. The Academy of Management Executive, 11, 48–66.
Public Personnel Management Volume 38 No. 1 Spring 200930
at UNIV OF THE INCARNATE WORD on February 9, 2016ppm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
21 Griffeth, R. W., Gaertner, S., & Sager, J. K. (2000). Taxonomic model of withdraw behaviors: the
Adaptive Response Model. Human Resource Management Review, 9, 577–590.
22 Ashford, S. J. (1984). Individual strategies for coping with stress during organizational
transitions. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 24, 19–36.
23 Baba, V. V., & Harris, M. J. (1989). Stress and absence: A cross-cultural perspective. In Nedd, A.,
Eerris, G. R., & Rowland, K. M. (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resource
management: Vol. 8 (Suppl. 1, pp. 317–337). Greenwich, Connecticut, Jai Press Inc.
24 Hui, C., & Lee, C. (2000), op cit.
25 Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational
trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, 709–734.
26 Deluga, R. J. (1994). Supervisor trust building, leader–member exchange and organizational
citizenship behavior. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 67, 315–327.
27 George, J. M., & Jones, R. J. (2002), op cit.
28 Lindsay, C. (1980). Stress, work and management’s role. Work & People, 6, 24–28.
29 Rajnandini, P., Schriesheim, C. A., & Williams, E. S. (1999). Fairness perceptions and trust
transformational and transactional leadership: A two-sample study. Journal of Management, 25,
897–933.
30 Nyhan, R. C. (2000). Changing the paradigm: trust and its role in public sector organizations.
American Review of Public Administration, 30, 87–109.
31 Armstrong-Stassen, M., Cameron, S. J., Mantler, J., & Horsburgh, M.E. (2001). The impact of
hospital amalgamation on the job attitudes of nurses. Canadian Administrative Sciences, 18,
149–162.
32 Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer.
33 Hannigan, B., Edwards, D., & Burnard, P. (2004). Stress and stress management in clinical
psychology: Findings from a systematic review. Journal of Mental Health, 13, 235–245.
34 Kindler, Herbert S. (1984). Time out for stress management training. Training & Development
Journal, 38, 64–66.
35 Elloy, D., & Anderson, K. S. (1990). Burnout among dual career and single career families.
Journal of Organizational Change Management, 3, 57–64.
36 Chen, Y. C. (2003). A research on the relationship of work attitude, stress management
strategy, stressors for expatriate and domestic managers. Unpublished master’s thesis,
Graduate School of Business Administration, Chang Jung Christian University, Tainan, Taiwan.
37 Mishra, A. K., & Spreitzer, G. M. (1998). Explaining how survivors respond to downsizing: The
role of trust, empowerment justice, and work design. The Academy of Management Review, 23,
567–588.
38 Liaw, G. F., Fan, M., & Wu, C. C. (2002), op cit.
39 Ou, W. S. (2003). To investigation the relationship between internal labor market and
employee’s attitude of change: The mediating effects of organizational trust. Unpublished
master’s thesis, Graduate School of Shipping & Transportation, National Taiwan Ocean
University, Keelung, Taiwan.
40 Saks, A. M. (1990). Moderating effects of self-efficacy for the relationship between training
method and anxiety and stress reactions of newcomers. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
15, 639–654.
41 Tan, T. N. (2005). Maximizing human resource potential in the midst of organizational change.
Singapore Management Review, 27, 25–35.
Public Personnel Management Volume 38 No. 1 Spring 2009 31
at UNIV OF THE INCARNATE WORD on February 9, 2016ppm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
42 Hui, C., & Lee, C. (2000), op cit.
43 Chen, Y. C. (2003), op cit.
44 Wu, C. C. (2001), op cit.
45 Hui, C., & Lee, C. (2000), op cit.
46 Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995), op cit.
47 Wu, C. C. (2001), op cit.
48 George, J. M., & Jones, R. J. (2002), op cit.
49 Chen, Y. C. (2003), op cit.
50 Mael, F., & Ashforth, B. E. (1992), op cit.
51 Blau, G. J., & Boal, K. B. (1987). Conceptualizing how job involvement and organizational
commitment affect turnover and absenteeism. Academy of Management Journal, 12, 288–300.
52 Kanungo, R. N. (1982). Measurement of job and work involvement. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 67, 341–349.
53 Hui, C., & Lee, C. (2000), op cit.
54 Liaw, G. F., Fan, M., & Wu, C. C. (2002), op cit.
55 George, J. M., & Jones, R. J. (2002), op cit.
56 Griffeth, R. W., Gaertner, S., & Sager, J. K. (2000), op cit.
57 Ashford, S. J., Lee, C., & Bobko, P. (1989). Content cause and consequence of job insecurity: A
theory-based measure and substantive test. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 803–829.
58 Nyhan, R. C. (2000), op cit.
59 Armstrong-Stassen, M., Cameron, S. J., Mantler, J., & Horsburgh, M.E. (2001), op cit.
60 Hannigan, B., Edwards D., & Burnard, P. (2004), op cit.
61 Hui, C., & Lee, C. (2000), op cit.
62 Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984), op cit.
63 Hui, C., & Lee, C. (2000), op cit.
64 George, J. M., & Jones, R. J. (2002), op cit.
65 Griffeth, R. W., Gaertner, S., & Sager, J. K. (2000), op cit.
66 Rajnandini, P., Schriesheim, C. A., & Williams, E. S. (1999), op cit.
Author Ming-Chu Yu, PhD
33 Sec. 2, Shu-Lin St., Tainan City, Taiwan 700
R.O.C.
(886) 6-213-1111
Ming-Chu Yu, PhD, is an associate professor in the department of public administra-
tion and management at the National University of Tainan, Taiwan. His teaching and
research interests include human resources management and strategic management.
Public Personnel Management Volume 38 No. 1 Spring 200932
at UNIV OF THE INCARNATE WORD on February 9, 2016ppm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
