Department

University of Tennessee at Chattanooga. Dept. of Psychology

Publisher

University of Tennessee at Chattanooga

Place of Publication

Chattanooga (Tenn.)

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to contribute to the understanding of how job stressors, specifically, challenge-hindrance (C-H) stressors, can negatively impact employee turnover. C-H stressors can be defined as perceptions of a work environment related to level of demands in such that challenge stressors (e.g., responsibility, job complexity, etc.) are viewed as potential opportunities for growth or mastery and hindrance stressors (e.g., conflict, ambiguity, etc.) are viewed as potential constraints or barriers to one’s goal or growth (Zhang et al., 2014). The hypotheses guiding this study were that (a) challenge and (b) hindrance stressors at Time 1 would positively and significantly predict turnover intentions at Time 1 (H1a-b). Additionally, (a) challenge and (b) hindrance stressors at Time 1 would positively and significantly predict turnover intentions at Time 2 (H2a-b). Participants were recruited to partake in a survey administered at two separate time points, 3-months apart, via Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (MTurk). A total of 518 individuals participated in the Time 1 survey. Of those participants, 301 responded to the Time 2 survey. Participants received compensation for completing the survey. Participants were predominantly white (79.1%), female (57.8%), and were on average 37.36 years of age (SD = 9.78). On average, participants worked 41.86 (SD = 6.07) hours per week. Multiple linear regression was used to examine how C-H stressors related to overall turnover intentions. All assumptions were met prior to running the analyses. Results indicated that C-H stressors at both time points significantly predicted turnover intentions, (H1a-b) F (2,515) = 55.60, p < .001, R2 = .18; (H2a-b) F (2,298) = 20.00, p < .001, R2 = .12. In support of H1b and H2b, hindrance stressors had a positive and significant relationship with turnover intentions, (H1b) β = .70, se = .07, t (517) = 10.30, p <.001; (H2b) β = .56, se = .09, t (300) = 6.22, p <.001. Alternatively, challenge stressors were negatively and significantly related to turnover intentions, (H1a) β = -.42, se = .07, t (517) = -5.72, p <.001; (H2a) β = -.27, se = .10, t (300) = -2.80, p =.006, partially supporting hypothesis 1a and hypothesis 2a. These findings suggest that to attract and, importantly, retain talent, organizations should aim to reduce hindrance stressors such as task ambiguity, administrative hassles, red tape policies, etc. Further suggestions are provided.

Subject

Industrial and organizational psychology

Document Type

posters

Language

English

Rights

http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/

License

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Download

Share

COinS
 

Stressed out and clocking out: Analyzing challenge-hindrance stressors as predictors of turnover intentions

The purpose of this study was to contribute to the understanding of how job stressors, specifically, challenge-hindrance (C-H) stressors, can negatively impact employee turnover. C-H stressors can be defined as perceptions of a work environment related to level of demands in such that challenge stressors (e.g., responsibility, job complexity, etc.) are viewed as potential opportunities for growth or mastery and hindrance stressors (e.g., conflict, ambiguity, etc.) are viewed as potential constraints or barriers to one’s goal or growth (Zhang et al., 2014). The hypotheses guiding this study were that (a) challenge and (b) hindrance stressors at Time 1 would positively and significantly predict turnover intentions at Time 1 (H1a-b). Additionally, (a) challenge and (b) hindrance stressors at Time 1 would positively and significantly predict turnover intentions at Time 2 (H2a-b). Participants were recruited to partake in a survey administered at two separate time points, 3-months apart, via Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (MTurk). A total of 518 individuals participated in the Time 1 survey. Of those participants, 301 responded to the Time 2 survey. Participants received compensation for completing the survey. Participants were predominantly white (79.1%), female (57.8%), and were on average 37.36 years of age (SD = 9.78). On average, participants worked 41.86 (SD = 6.07) hours per week. Multiple linear regression was used to examine how C-H stressors related to overall turnover intentions. All assumptions were met prior to running the analyses. Results indicated that C-H stressors at both time points significantly predicted turnover intentions, (H1a-b) F (2,515) = 55.60, p < .001, R2 = .18; (H2a-b) F (2,298) = 20.00, p < .001, R2 = .12. In support of H1b and H2b, hindrance stressors had a positive and significant relationship with turnover intentions, (H1b) β = .70, se = .07, t (517) = 10.30, p <.001; (H2b) β = .56, se = .09, t (300) = 6.22, p <.001. Alternatively, challenge stressors were negatively and significantly related to turnover intentions, (H1a) β = -.42, se = .07, t (517) = -5.72, p <.001; (H2a) β = -.27, se = .10, t (300) = -2.80, p =.006, partially supporting hypothesis 1a and hypothesis 2a. These findings suggest that to attract and, importantly, retain talent, organizations should aim to reduce hindrance stressors such as task ambiguity, administrative hassles, red tape policies, etc. Further suggestions are provided.