This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (9) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Schabracq, M. J. Articles by Cooper, C. L. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Toward a Phenomenological Framework for the Study of Work and Organizational Stress

Department of Industrial and Organizationai Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Cary L. Cooper

Manchester School of Management, University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology, P.O. Box 88, Manchester M60 1QD, United Kingdom.

In this article, elements from different stress models are embedded in a phenomenological framework for work and organization stress based on practical insights on the one hand and ideas and methods from ethology, microsociology, and cultural anthropology on the other. The framework is compatible with most of the existing research and theoretical views, and pays attention to some lacunas in these views. The central concept is integrity, i.e., the ways in which the process of situated individual functioning is organized in a niche, consisting of a limited set of situations. Integrity refers to the internal integration of individual functioning and the integration of the individual in his or her niche (and thereby in an organization and society at large). Integrity is a multileveled process with considerable individual variation, characterized by signification, morality, and individual experiences, which, with the help of four auxiliary verbs, can be analyzed in terms of individual options for action. Inadequate integrity may result from underdevelopment, decay, change, and intrusions by external events or an ongoing stress process. These can be described as (overlapping, and often coinciding) stress sources. In this respect, the framework makes a distinction between stressors that primarily affect the task itself and stressors that disturb the immediate environment of the task. All these stressors can be described as a matter of too much or too little on a great number of variables, of which usually only the medium range is conducive to adequate integrity. Lastly, attention is paid to stress reactions, which can act as stressors in their own right.

Key Words: stress-strain relationship • integrity • phenomenology • figure-ground principle • locus of control • social network

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. A. Armenakis, J. B. Bernerth, J. P. Pitts, and H. J. Walker Organizational Change Recipients' Beliefs Scale: Development of an Assessment Instrument Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, December 1, 2007; 43(4): 481 - 505. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Rodriguez-Calcagno and E. W. Brewer Job Stress Among Hispanic Professionals Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, November 1, 2005; 27(4): 504 - 516. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. A. Armenakis and A. G. Bedeian Organizational Change: A Review of Theory and Research in the 1990s Journal of Management, June 1, 1999; 25(3): 293 - 315. [Abstract] [PDF]