To install StudyMoose App tap and then “Add to Home Screen”
Save to my list
Remove from my list
Attitude towards work and interpersonal relations as factor in job performance
Statement of the problem:
This study aims to determine the relationship of attitude towards work and interpersonal relations to the job performance of the employees.
Specifically, this study seeks to answer the following questions: 1. What is the profile of the Employees in Drug Maker Company in terms of the following personal circumstances? 2.1 Age and Sex
2.2 Civil Status
2.3 Educational Attainment
2.4 Years of Experience
2. Do attitude towards work and interpersonal relations affect job performance? 3. To what extent do the work attitudes affect the job performance? 4. To what extent do the interpersonal relations affect the job performance? 5. What is the perception of the employees towards work attitude and interpersonal relation? 6. Is there any significant relationship between attitudes toward work, interpersonal relations and job performance?
WORK ATTITUDE AND INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIP
QUESTIONNAIRES
Personal Information
Name:________________________________________
Gender:MaleFemale
Age: 20 yrs. and below 41-50 years
21-30 years 51 and above
31-40 years
Civil Status:
Single
Married
Widow
Educational Attainment:
High School Graduate
College Graduate
Course: _______________________________________________
Year of Experience:
1-5 years
6-10 years
11-15 years
16-20 years
Others please specify: _____________________________________
Direction: Please check the appropriate answers to the item questions.
Verified writer
Proficient in: Attitude
5 (204)
“ She followed all my directions. It was really easy to contact her and respond very fast as well. ”
The following are the symbols/letters use:
SYMBOLS | |
SD| Strongly Disagree|
D| Disagree|
SA| Strongly Agree|
A| Agree|
| SD D SA A|
A. Work Attitudes:|
1. Your current hob is interesting and challenging.| | | | | 2. The qualifications you possess are appropriate and relevant to the job.| | | | | 3. The skills required match the tasks to be performed and consistent with the job description.| | | | | 4. The efforts demanded by the job are commensurate to the pay received.| | | | | 5. The responsibilities assumed in the job are well defined and clearly delineated| | | | | 6. The working condition (illumination, ventilation, temperature and humidity, etc.) in the office is conducive to work.| | | | | 7. There is close supervision by the office head to ensure efficiency of performance in the job assigned.
| | | | | 8. You dislike your job and looking forward to a better employment elsewhere.| | | | | 9. The routine or daily task is dull, boring and monotonous.| | | | | 10. You consider work as something natural and necessary in life. | | | | | 11. The job provides you a sense of responsibility in performing the duties.| | | | | 12. A feeling of
satisfaction is attained as a result of completing the task (sense of achievement).| | | | | 13. The job offers opportunities for promotion in position as well as pay increase based on merits.| | | | | 14. The remuneration for the job position in just and position is just and fair with the nature of the work being undertaken.| | | | | 15. The interaction in the office among co-workers is cordial and harmonious.| | | | | 16. The job itself becomes a means for personal growth and professional advancement (self-actualization/Self-fulfillment).| | | | | 17. The office head being very supportive and tolerant enables you to feel confident in the job. | | | | | 18. There were opportunities for a right job which you missed by working in the present set-up. | | | | | 19. In the present job, there is no chance to improve and learn more in terms of better aptitudes and new skills.| | | | | 20. The need for recognition is much felt in the office.| | | | | B. Interpersonal relationship with peers and heads:|
1. The office head is very flexible and approachable making so easy for the workers to have closer interpersonal relationship with him/her.| | | | | 2. The working relationship within the office is formal and cautious (careful) between the head and the rank and file. Resulting in uneasy situation.| | | | | 3. The need for others to turn to for advice and direction is the reason for maintaining a particular group to interrelate with.| | | | | 4. Interpersonal relationship is part and parcel of a work place in order to establish harmony and foster cooperation with fellow workers.| | | | | 5. The head picks or chooses somebody personally close to him/her to interrelate with group.| | | | | 6. You feel insecure with group activity whether work related or personal interaction.| | | | | 7. Your admiration and respect for the office head draws you further apart from him/her.| | | | | 8. Due to office interpersonal relationship with other workers, job dissatisfaction arises as an outcome of comparison or jealousy/envy.| | | | | 9. An informal group consisting of selected employees is intended to establish some type of conformity to ideas, beliefs, personal activities which may serve mutual interests.
Thus, ostracizing or excluding others.| | | | | 10. Interpersonal relationship is resorted by you with colleagues as a form of recognition and acceptance of personal identity in your part (Feeling of importance).| | | | | 11. The latest gossip or rumor is the mutual bound for interpersonal relationship. | | | | | 12. The office head or superior maintains aloofness or distancing himself/herself thus, creating gap in terms of interpersonal relationship with the rank and file.| | | | | 13. The saying that “intimacy breeds contempt” really applies between a head and subordinates in close interpersonal relationship.| | | | | 14. You prefer to be on your own; a loner or introvert, and do not establish any relationship with others.| | | | | 15. Camaraderie or comradeship makes you to experience sense of belonging by sharing common interests. This way, the informal group is the basis for interpersonal relationship.| | | | | 16. You feel nervous and insecure in the presence of the office head. As a consequence a very impersonal and uncomfortable situation in the office becomes evident.| | | | | 17. You stick to the present job or stay on because of the interpersonal relationship with loyal friends within the institution or work area.| | | | | 18. Interpersonal relationship among your peers or co-workers for solidarity or a total sense of group allegiance for a common purpose.| | | | | 19. The interpersonal relationship that exists in the institution is factional or consisting of small fragmented, splintered groups having each its own motives and objectives.| | | | | 20. Interpersonal relationship may become a recourse or outlet to confide problems and an avenue to express opinions on work related issues. | | | | |
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK:
Work AttitudeRespectfulnessCommitmentInnovationHelpfulnessInterpersonal RelationsWork ethicsChemistryFriendshipLoyalty| INDEPENDENT VARIABLESDEPENDENT VARIABLES
Job PerformanceAccuracy of workQuality of workQuantity of workTimeliness|
The effect of attitudes on interpersonal relationships in the workplace is
well documented in scholarly psychology literature. However, opinions regarding the types of effects that result from different attitudes vary somewhat. Regardless of the opinion of scholars, it does help for business owners to know how attitudes affect these relations among workers so that they can hire the right kinds of people and also head off any potential problems among existing employees. 1. Cooperation
* One way in which attitudes affect interpersonal work relationships is evident in the way a positive attitude can engender a sense of cooperation among workers. The tendency to think positively and approach each task with a "can-do" attitude can be infectious. When it comes to collaborating on projects, the positive attitude can spill over into the way employees cooperate with one another. Those who start projects with the expectation of completing the project on time and correctly will find no excuses for not getting the work done. Those who cooperate with one another on these types of projects will generally have more positive relations with one another. Division
* Workers with a poor attitude about work and the tasks they are required to complete will have a negative effect on those around them. Just as a positive attitude is infectious and spreads to others, so too do poor attitudes have a negative effect on worker relations. This can cause division in the workplace, making it difficult for employees to collaborate with one another, as the poor attitudes spill over into how they treat one another. * Sponsored Links
* 3-Minute Chakra Test
Take the Free Chakra Test to Find Out Which of Your Chakras Are Weak www.ChakraHealing.com
Similarity
* Studies show that workers who have similar attitudes, positive or negative, will inevitably attract people with similar attitudes. A 2010 article published in the International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology reveals that workers tend to develop relationships with colleagues who share the same outlook on the world. The recognition that
others have similar attitudes and values will inevitably lead to the establishment of potentially long-term relations with these employees. The article points out that the establishment of such relationships has the reciprocal effect of elevating self-esteem and strengthening the beliefs and values of those who did the attracting. Communication
* Shared attitudes and values can strengthen interpersonal relations among workers by opening up the lines of communication. Communication is essential for the growth of relationships among people, regardless of whether they are colleagues. Those who have positive attitudes and are open to interpersonal communication with others will be more effective in developing positive interpersonal work relationships. Those with a negative attitude can be harder to communicate with because of their tendency to shut down or close themselves off from interacting with others. In short, the communication necessary for interpersonal relations is affected by the attitudes of the workers.
Abstract
Purpose – Through the lens of social exchange theory and organisation support theory, the purpose of this paper is to examine the passive, aggressive, and assertive styles of managers/supervisors that influence perceived supervisory support and to test whether the support increases employees’ satisfaction with the communication of supervisors and their organisation-based self-esteem. It also assesses whether employees’ communication satisfaction and their self-esteem influence employees’ performance, commitment and absenteeism.
Design/methodology/approach – In total, 400 employees from ten manufacturing firms in India were studied through questionnaire survey. Standard instruments were used to assess the constructs. A scale was developed to measure the communication style of managers and a single item to assess absenteeism.
Findings – Results revealed that assertive style of communication lends maximum support to employees. Perceived supervisory support at the workplace enhances employees’ satisfaction with communication of supervisors and organisation-based self-esteem. Satisfaction with communication fosters a strong emotional bond with organisations and the emotional bond with organisations reduces employees’ absenteeism.
Originality/value – The paper shows that employees’ organisation-based self-esteem increases their job performance. Organisations can conduct training programs to develop an assertive communication style in their managers/supervisors to increase the support to subordinates; thereby its positive consequences will follow in increasing employees’ performance and commitment and reducing absenteeism.
Introduction
Today we are faced with the pre-eminent fact that, if civilization is to survive, we must cultivate the science of human relationships (Roosevelt, 1945). Interpersonal relationships including social relations with one another are an essential part of organisational life and sustainable success. As far as communication is concerned, words are only superficial aspects. Without human function, words can never convey the exact meaning to the other person. Effective communication builds relationships. Wyatt (2006) stated the following: Effective communication is the lifeblood of a successful organization. It reinforces the organization's vision, connects employees to the business, fosters process improvement, facilitates change, and drives business results by changing employee behaviour (p. 6). Managerial communication drives relationships and frames the attitudes and behaviours of employees in the workplace. Attitude has three components: affective, cognitive, and behavioural. While the cognitive component represents the evaluation of stimuli in the mind, behaviours are actions or reactions that occur in response to those stimuli. In measuring attitudes, only affective/feeling components are assessed in connection with communication, organisations, managers, and situations. Positive attitudes manifest in well-adjusted behaviours and negative attitudes lead to the reverse. An historical overview of managerial communication shows that the way managers communicated with subordinates is markedly different from how they do today. While employees were previously regarded as the greatest
asset of an organisation, the asset metaphor has been elevated to a new level. Organisations have started recognising employees as human capital owners and investors (Davenport, 1999). As a result, the emphasis on communication “content” has shifted to “behaviour” as a part of the communication process because employees’ interpretation of supervisory communication depends not only on “what” is said but also on “how” it is said. A people-centred strategy is an important source of competitive advantage because, unlike technology, costs, or new product development, it is difficult to imitate (Pfeffer, 1998). Managers can create an environment through communication where employees feel happier and more passionate about their jobs and exhibit attitudes and behaviours necessary for improved organisational performance. Background
Blau's (1964) social exchange theory is among the most influential conceptual paradigms for understanding workplace behaviours. Social exchange theory is based on a central premise that the exchange of social and material resources is a fundamental form of human interaction. When two parties who are in a state of reciprocal interdependence interact with each other, obligations are generated (Saks, 2006). Organisational support theory, derived from social exchange theory, explains how the support of organisations affects the behaviours of employees (Eisenberger et al., 1986). It suggests that employees form a global perception of the extent to which the organisation cares about their well-being and demonstrates appreciation, called perceived organisational support (POS). Supervisors are regarded as representatives of the organisation. If employees perceive the supervisor/organisation as supportive, they feel an obligation to return this support (Rhoades and Eisenberger, 2002) in the form of favourable attitudes and behaviours that promote employees’ performance. POS manifests in increase in in-role and extra-role performance and decrease in stress and withdrawal behaviours such as absenteeism and turnover. Assessing such constructs quantitatively, the effects of managerial communication on employees’ attitudes and behaviours can be gauged. Although relational concerns have been at the heart of management research for decades, the power of relationships has become even more salient both for employees and organisations. Accordingly, going beyond the social exchange theory (Blau,
1964) and organisation support theory (Eisenberger et al., 1986; Rhoades and Eisenberger, 2002; Shore and Shore, 1995), this study investigates the impact of perceived managerial communication styles on employees’ attitudes and behaviours through perceived supervisory support (PSS) vis-à-vis POS. Social exchange theory suggests that if a superior (on behalf of the organisation) confers a social gift on a subordinate, the latter will feel obligated to reciprocate. POS is defined as employees’ perceptions about the degree to which the organisation cares about their well-being and values their contributions. Organisation support theory suggests that the development of POS is the employees’ tendency to assign humanlike characteristics to the organisation (Rhoades and Eisenberger, 2002). POS represents an indispensable part of the social exchange relationship between employees and the employer because it implies what the organisation has done for its employees. The supervisor on behalf of the organisation extends support to subordinates. Subordinates perceiving support of supervisors vis-à-vis organisations cultivate positive attitudes and engage in extra-role behaviours. Subordinates are unlikely to hold favourable attitudes and behaviours when the treatment is negative or neutral (Rhoades and Eisenberger, 2002). Reciprocity and strong mutual care are emphasised in Indian culture (Srivastava et al., 2008).
Indian culture stresses interdependence, sharing, and harmony with the surrounding world. While horizontal orientation and rationalism are valued by Indians, hierarchical orientation and emotionalism are also being valued (Sinha and Kanungo, 1997). The family structure in India is a close knit unit. Decisions are made only after prior consultation with the family members. Making important decisions without talking to the family is considered offensive and implies a lack of respect. These human aspects of Indian culture may have implications in the workplace. This study stresses the “human function” of managerial communication, a concept neglected in communication style research. The human function embedded in communication of managers/supervisors can affect the work relationships that can facilitate or retard employees’/subordinates’ attitudes and behaviours (Varona, 2002). While human relations practices play a key role in developing and maintaining the exchange relationship between the employee and the organisation (Aggarwal and Bhargava, 2009), extant research offers little insight on appropriate managerial communication style that can help to build high levels of support. The role of social relationships is yet to be explicitly investigated. An issue that needs to be addressed is the specific styles of managerial communication that can promote or demote relationship building. To address this issue, one potentially helpful approach is to establish a link between the effective managerial communication styles and development of positive supervisor-subordinate relationships.
Review of literature and development of hypotheses
Communication styles
Management is a process of working with and through others to achieve organisational objectives in an efficient manner (Lwehabura and Matovelo, 2000). Managing employees is enacted through communication (Holladay and Coombs, 1993). “The way one verbally, non-verbally and para-verbally interacts to signal how literal meaning should be taken, interpreted, filtered or understood, is known as the communication style” (Norton, 1983, p. 58). Norton (1983) classifies communication styles into ten different types – dominant, dramatic, contentious, animated, impression-leaving, relaxed, attentive, open, friendly, and precise. McCallister (1992), combining Norton's (1983) styles, classifies communication styles into noble, reflective, and socratic. Comstock and Higgins (1997), merge Norton's styles to four clusters of communication styles – cooperative, apprehensive, social, and competitive. Analogous to McCallister's threefold typology of communication styles, Heffner (1997) groups the communication styles into aggressive, passive, and assertive (Ibrahim and Ismail, 2007). Noble style is directive and straightforward and may be equated with aggressive style. Reflective style is non-directive and may be parallel with passive style. Socratic style emphasises on analysis of details and debates and may be similar to assertive style. To understand the human aspects of managerial communication and the formation of interpersonal relations in organisations, Heffner's classification of communication styles can be adopted to study perceived managerial communication styles. Heffner's communication styles appear simpler and emphasise more on human relations in workplace than McCallister's communication styles. Managers practice various communication styles. However, often one type dominants and becomes habitual.
In passive communication style, managers avoid to express their needs, feelings, and feel shy to protect their rights. In aggressive communication style, managers express their feelings and opinions and advocate for their needs in a way that violates the rights of employees. While passive managers are usually unable to convey the full thrust of their message, causing irritation, delays, and rework, aggressive managers tend to be less concerned with moving things along than in preserving their own status and power over employees, though they may be successful in completing short-term goals (Newbold, 1997). Between these two extreme styles, is the assertive style. Assertiveness is a behaviour that enables managers to act in their own best interest and to stand up for themselves without denying rights of others (Arredondo, 2003). It facilitates good interpersonal interaction (Lwehabura and Matovelo, 2000) and is characterised by honesty, objectivity, openness, tolerance, accuracy, self-expression, and respect for self and others. Assertiveness can be used for creating mutual understanding and fulfilling objectives (Lwehabura and Matovelo, 2000). Assertive managers respect the needs of employees and go through the mental process of assessing what they need to know and how. Assertive managers also have the skills and confidence to challenge ambiguity and misunderstanding (Newbold, 1997). When the communication style of managers is straightforward and accurate, employees view managers as trustworthy (Tschannen-Moran and Hoy, 2000).
This openness facilitates employees’ understanding of tasks and enables responsible decision making (Moye and Henkin, 2006). Assertive managers differ from aggressive managers. Aggressive managers attack or ignore employees’ opinions in favour of their own. They usually react to the given situation in a rude, derogatory, and sarcastic manner which escalates employees’ anxiety. On the other hand, assertive managers state their opinions while being respectful to employees. While aggressive managers fail to establish relationships with their employees, assertive managers build long-term relationships. The assertive communication style enables a manager to express his/her opinions and thoughts in a direct way without attacking others, refuse an unreasonable request without feeling guilty, give employees “constructive feedback” instead of “criticism”, give recognition and praise to employees at the right time and create a motivational climate, deliver a firm message by asking “questions” through a clever approach or
ask effective questions to probe for facts and provoke for ideas, trust employees, and create a collaborative and congenial working environment. Employee attitudes can make or break business profitability and sustainability efforts. Although it can be difficult to change the atmosphere in a toxic workplace, it's possible with positive thinking and actions. Listening to employee complaints and offering constructive feedback and resolutions encourages positive thinking. Learning how to appease and motivate employees can salvage talent from even the most negative work environments. Once you manage to change employee attitudes, your business can move in a positive direction.
Today’s business world has just one constant--change. No matter what industry your company competes in, the business environment is always evolving. In order to survive, your business must also evolve. Too often your employees will encounter these environmental changes and respond with a negative attitude. Poor employee attitudes can derail your business efforts. This makes the managing of employee attitudes a critical management function.
A negative attitude in the workplace is expressed as cynicism about job tasks, a disinterest in working with others and insubordination toward authority. The negative attitude may be subtle; for example, the employee may come in late or make frequent sarcastic comments. Both overt and discreet expressions have ramifications on an office environment. Dorene Ciletti, author of "Market Yourself," states that a worker who exudes a negative attitude tends to be monitored carefully and is unlikely to be promoted. Coworkers also express caution about working with an individual who may weigh the project down with his bad attitude.
An employee with a positive attitude shows enthusiasm and curiosity about her job. She is invested in the outcome of projects and the company as a whole. Harold Wallace, author of "Personal Development for Life and Work," explains that an employee with a positive attitude has the potential to electrify the entire workplace. Such an attitude has the potential to increase worker productivity and overall job satisfaction.
Attitude Towards Work. (2016, Mar 19). Retrieved from https://studymoose.com/attitude-towards-work-essay
👋 Hi! I’m your smart assistant Amy!
Don’t know where to start? Type your requirements and I’ll connect you to an academic expert within 3 minutes.
get help with your assignment
