Research on antisocial behavior at UPS VietNam

Research on antisocial behavior at UPS VietNam Research on antisocial behavior at UPS VietNam Research on antisocial behavior at UPS VietNam luận văn tốt nghiệp,luận văn thạc sĩ, luận văn cao học, luận văn đại học, luận án tiến sĩ, đồ án tốt nghiệp luận văn tốt nghiệp,luận văn thạc sĩ, luận văn cao học, luận văn đại học, luận án tiến sĩ, đồ án tốt nghiệp

MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION



RESEARCH PROJECT

(BMBR5103) RESEARCH ON ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR

AT UPS VIETNAM

ADVISOR’S NAME & TITLE: NGUYEN THE KHAI, DBA

ADVISOR’S ASSESSMENT

ADVISOR’S SIGNATURE

AUGUST 2016

NGUYEN THE KHAI, DBA

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

It is with greatest veneration and respect, I would like to extend my sincere thanks to Dr Nguyen The Khai for his dedicated lectures during the last semester of OUM MBA program at HUTECH University I have gained a lot of knowledge of Business Research Method and it is beneficial to the development of my career and studies in the future And with Dr Khai’s valuable guidance and supervision, I have completed my first research project in my life - A research on antisocial behavior

at UPS Vietnam

I would like to express my appreciation to managers, supervisors and employees who are working in different departments at UPS Vietnam for providing me necessary data to carry out this research successfully

Lastly, this research would not have been completed without the support and motivation from my beloved family, lecturers, classmates and friends who has been with me through thick and thin during the time I have been pursuing this MBA program

Ho Chi Minh City, August 1 st , 2016

NGUYEN DINH HOA

ABSTRACT

One of the most studied areas within the field of human resource management that has received considerable interest in the literature recently is antisocial behavior Although several environmental variables have been related to the development of antisocial behavior, this research has focused on some factors that would increase the probability of engaging in antisocial behavior including

satisfaction with my supervisor, control & complexity, social support and job stress scale

This study hopes to understand why employees engage in high levels of antisocial behavior across time and context The term antisocial behavior refers to disruptive behaviors, most often aggressive, that have in common transgressions against social norms The purpose of this research is to help managers of organizations understand the factors associated with antisocial behavior The

interpretation of collected data will be followed by the researcher’s discussion and

recommendations

In spite of unavoidable limitations, the outcomes of this research are expected to be a possibly constructive source for managers to refer in coming up with interventions dealing with antisocial behaviors in organizations

Table of Content

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 1

ABSTRACT 2

PART I: INTRODUCTION 8

1 About UPS Vietnam 8

2 Motivation of the Research 16

3 Research Objective 17

4 Research Scope 17

5 Significance of Research 18

6 Limitation of Research 18

PART II: LITERATURE REVIEW 19

1 Antisocial Behavior 19

2 Satisfaction with My Supervisor 19

3 Control & Complexity 20

4 Social Support 21

5 Job Stress Scale 22

PART III: RESEARCH MODEL AND HYPOTHESES 24

1 Research Model 24

1.1 Dependent Variables 24

1.2 Independent Variables 25

2 Research Hypotheses 26

2.1 Satisfaction with My Supervisor (H1) 26

2.2 Control and Complexity (H2) 26

2.3 Social Support (H3) 27

2.4 Job Stress Scale (H4) 27

3 Instruments 28

4 Research Participants 28

5 Procedure for Data Collection and Analysis 29

5.1 Data Collection Progress 29

5.2 Data Analysis 30

PART IV: RESULTS and FINDINGS 31

1 Reliability Analysis 31

2 Descriptive Analysis 33

3 Correlation of all Variables Statistics 33

4 Hypothesis Testing 34

4.1 Hypothesis 1 Testing Result 35

4.2 Hypothesis 2 Testing Result 36

4.3 Hypothesis 3 Testing Result 37

4.4 Hypothesis 4 Testing Result 37

PART V: DISCUSSION 39

1 Key Findings and Implications 39

2 Limitations 40

REFERENCES 42

APPENDIX A: Antisocial Behavior Survey at UPS Vietnam 45

APPENDIX B: Research Project Presentation 50

List of Figures and Tables

Figure 1: UPS Corporation Organization Structure 10

Figure 2: UPS Vietnam JSC Service Portfolio 13

Figure 3: UPS Vietnam JSC Air Freight Outbound Network 15

Figure 4: UPS Vietnam JSC Ocean Outbound Transit Time 16

Figure 5: Proposed Research Model of Antisocial Behavior at UPS Vietnam 24

Table 1: UPS Global Presence 8

Table 2: UPS Vietnam JSC Operating Locations 12

Table 3: UPS Vietnam JSC Retail Access Points 12

Table 4: UPS Vietnam JSC Enhanced Services & Technology 14

Table 5: UPS Vietnam JSC Key Export Countries & Commodities 14

Table 6: UPS Vietnam JSC Key Import Countries & Commodities 15

Table 7: Time table for Data Collecting Progress 29

Table 8: Cronbach’s Alpha – Internal Consistency 31

Table 9: Reliability Test for Satisfaction with My Supervisor (SMS) 31

Table 10: Reliability Test for Control & Complexity (CC) 32

Table 11: Reliability Test for Social Support (SS) 32

Table 12: Reliability Test for Job Stress Scale (JSS) 32

Table 13: Reliability Test for Antisocial Behavior (AB) 33

Table 14: Descriptive Statistics 33

Table 15: Correlation Statistics 34

Table 16: Model Summary of H1 35

Table 17: Coefficient of H1 35

Table 18: Model Summary of H2 36

Table 19: Coefficient of H2 36

Table 20: Model Summary of H3 37

Table 21: Coefficient of H3 37

Table 22: Model Summary of H4 38

Table 23: Coefficient of H4 38

PART I: INTRODUCTION

1 About UPS Vietnam

United Parcel Service (UPS), Inc is the world's largest package delivery company and a

provider of supply chain management solutions The global logistics company is headquartered in Sandy Springs, Georgia, which is part of the Greater Atlanta metropolitan area UPS delivers more than 1.5 million packages a day to more than 7.9 million customers in more than 220 countries and territories around the world UPS is known for its brown delivery trucks and uniforms, hence the company nickname "Brown" UPS also operates its own airline and air cargo delivery service based

in Louisville, Kentucky

On August 28, 1907, James Casey founded the American Messenger Company with fellow teenager Claude Ryan in Seattle, Washington, capitalized with $100 in debt In 1913, the first delivery car appeared, a Model T Ford Casey and Ryan merged with a competitor, Merchants Parcel Delivery Consolidated delivery was also introduced, combining packages addressed to a certain neighborhood onto one delivery vehicle In 1930, a consolidated service began in New York City, and soon after in other major cities in the East and the Midwest In 1937, the logo was redesigned to reflect the company's new name United Parcel Service From 1940, the company acquired "common carrier" rights to deliver packages between all addresses, any customer, private and commercial In

1991, UPS moved its headquarters to Sandy Springs, Georgia, a suburb of Atlanta On November

10, 1999, UPS became a public company

UPS GLOBAL PRESENCE

Founded August 28, 1907 in Seattle, Washington, USA

Founder James E Casey

Headquarters Atlanta, Georgia, USA

Key people

 Scott Davis (Chairman)

 David Abney (CEO)

Key services Logistics and transportation of parcel and freight

through air, ocean, ground and rail

2014 Revenue US$ 58.232 billion

Number of employees 401,000 (318,000 in US and 83,000 International)

Key services Logistics and transportation of parcel and freight

through air, ocean, ground and rail Service area More than 220 countries and territories

UPS jet aircraft 237 in service

Daily flight segments Domestic – 940; International – 1,015

Operating facilities

 1,990 for package

 528 for supply chain (30.9 million sq ft.)

 213 service centers for freight Customers 9.4 million daily

Subsidiaries

 The UPS Store

 UPS Supply Chain Solutions

Table 1: UPS Global Presence

Organization Structure

Figure 1: UPS Corporate Organization Structure

Worldwide web address www.ups.com

David Abney Chief Executive Officer 2014 60 Richard Peretz Chief Financial Officer 2015 53 Teri McClure Chief HR Officer, Senior VP 2016 51 Alan Gershenhorn Executive VP and CCO 2014 57

UPS Vietnam JSC is extending its express delivery service to all 63 provinces in Vietnam and offer later pick-up and cut-off times UPS’s Intra-Asian and global network gives Vietnam businesses access to over 220 countries and territories worldwide UPS’s innovative technology enables Vietnam businesses to streamline their shipping operations for greater efficiency and ease For example, UPS Paperless Invoice reduces customs delays and improves productivity by eliminating redundant data entry

In 2013, UPS Vietnam JSC became the first 100%-owned foreign company operating in express delivery service industry

Kate Gutmann Senior VP, Worldwide Sales 2014 46 James Barber Senior VP, UPS International 2013 54 Teresa Finley Senior VP, Global Marketing 2015 53 Myron Gray Senior VP, US Operations 2009 57 Mark Wallace Senior VP, Engineering 2015 52

UPS Vietnam JSC Operating Locations

Table 2: UPS Vietnam JSC Operating Locations

UPS Vietnam JSC Retail Access Points

Table 3: UPS Vietnam JSC Retail Access Points

UPS Vietnam JSC Service Portfolio

Figure 2: UPS Vietnam JSC Service Portfolio

UPS Vietnam JSC Enhanced Services & Technology

Table 4: UPS Vietnam JSC Enhanced Services & Technology

UPS Vietnam JSC Key Export Countries & Commodities

Table 5: UPS Vietnam JSC Key Export Countries & Commodities

UPS Vietnam JSC Key Import Countries & Commodities

Table 6: UPS Vietnam JSC Key Import Countries & Commodities

UPS Vietnam JSC Air Freight Outbound Network

Figure 3: UPS Vietnam JSC Air Freight Outbound Network

UPS Vietnam JSC Ocean Outbound Transit Time

Figure 4: UPS Vietnam JSC Ocean Outbound Transit Time

2 Motivation of the Research

Vietnam has exhibited as one of the countries with highest rates of economic growth and poverty reduction in the region and in the world Vietnam has been able to sustain this progress for over two decades thanks to the effective implementation of economic reform policies One of the most important factors that has helped Vietnam grow its national economy is ability to consistently attract foreign direct investment (FDI) A strong sense of social solidarity and equity has also contributed to effective policy and implementation, as well as continued investment in human development, leading to significant improvements in human capital, thus enabling people to take advantage of market opportunities

Joining Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) has brought more opportunities to increase trading activities for Vietnam, and it is especially good for delivery companies doing business in Vietnam UPS Vietnam is a 100% FDI-company It is one of the top companies that provides delivery services

in Vietnamese market currently with average annual growth rate approximately 40% Due to the

growing, the company is increasing its labor force and the need to retain the employees has become one of the most important tasks of company managers

Along with sound policies on compensation, training and developing, and retain the people, managers at UPS Vietnam also realize the importance of understanding employees’ antisocial behaviors to prevent potential harm to individuals and/or the company as well as creating a good working environment for its employees

3 Research Objective

The purpose of this research is to investigate the impact of satisfaction with my supervisor, control & complexity, social support and job stress scale on UPS Vietnam’s employee antisocial behavior

This research includes three phases as follows

 Phase 1: search related information and try to define what antisocial behavior means at UPS Vietnam

 Phase 2: come up with a research model and test related factors to examine influence between factors to antisocial behaviors at UPS Vietnam

 Phase 3: discussing and proposing recommendation to managers at UPS Vietnam to improve the effectiveness of preventing employees’ antisocial behavior

4 Research Scope

The scope of this research is for the entire employees at UPS Vietnam, including company managers, supervisors and employees working in all department at UPS Vietnam subsidiary The research does not include the employees who are under probation period or on maternity leave The contents of this research include only factors that influence the antisocial behaviors and are limited to determine the perception of the respondents on satisfaction with supervisors, control & complexity, social support and job stress scale

organization and encourage employee to contribute to the company growth

6 Limitation of Research

Although this research was well prepared and instructed by dedicated lecturer, it has also some limitations because the survey was conducted in a short period of time and only focus on UPS Vietnam employees, so it cannot generalize for the whole logistics industry In addition, the language was used in the questionnaire is only English and it can create confusion for the respondents

PART II: LITERATURE REVIEW

1 Antisocial Behavior:

The prevention of antisocial actions in organizations is increasingly important to managers and organizational scholars since there is a good reason for them to have a closer view on these actions Some researches show that as many as 42% of women have been victims of sexual harassment at work (Gruber, 1990), as many as 75% of employees have stolen from their employers (McGurn, 1988), and that 33% to 75% of all employees have engaged in behaviors ranging from insubordination to sabotage (Harper, 1990) These actions stand for some of the most serious forms

of antisocial behavior

Initial researches in this area have been used different names to depict these action For instance, deviant behavior (Robinson and Bennett, 1995), aggressive work behavior (O’Leary-Kelly, Griffin, and Glew, 1996), and organizational misbehavior (Vardi and Wiener, 1996) In the area of this research, however, I use the broad term “antisocial behavior” to depict negative behaviors in firms since it captures a wide range of actions and also catches the harmful nature of these acts The fact that they have the potential to cause harm to individuals and/or the property of an organization (Giacalone & Greenberg, 1996) This dimension of potential harmfulness is the critical focus of most definitions of related constructs (Robinson and Greenberg, 1998)

Currently, antisocial behaviors in firms have been examined from diverse theoretical perspectives For instance, applying social learning theory (Bandura, 1977), identified a number of individual and environmental antecedents (O’Leary-Kelly et al.), working on theft (Greenberg’s, 1990), researching on retaliation (Skarlicki and Folger’s, 1997) These well-grounded in established theory approaches have resulted in crucial progresses in apprehending of why and when employees commit in antisocial behavior

2 Satisfaction with My Supervisor

Training & development directors, HR managers, and corporate executives agree that the supervisors play an important role in managing organizations (Bittel & Ramsey, 1983; Walker & Gutteridge, 1979) The involvement of supervisory in career planning and development of a subordinate is a key factor in the effectiveness of career planning and development programs of organizations (Walker & Gutteridge, 1979) Finally, experts in labor relations agree that a positive relationship between a supervisor and a subordinate is a necessary condition for the effectiveness of

an union-management relationship (Stepp, Baker, & Barrett, 1982) Research of behavioral in labor relations also shows that along with compensation package, fringe benefits, and the security of job, dissatisfaction with one’s supervisor is a main reason of unionization (Getman, Goldberg, & Herman, 1976) Moreover, in a research completed with nearly 88,000 sales, and technical staff of Sears & Roebuck, Hamner & Smith (1978) found that the strongest forecaster of unionization attempts was the dissatisfaction of employees to their immediate supervisors

3 Control & Complexity

Many theories and researches within organizational behavior and industrial and organizational psychology suggest that characteristics of work influence the attitudes and behaviors of an individual Employee’s motivation is affected by characteristics of work (Hackman & Oldham, 1976), they are also socialized by characteristics of work (occupational socialization; Frese, 1982) and by management (organizational socialization; Van Maanen, 1976), and they are trained to fulfill the job (Latham, 1989)

Work characteristics should include an effect on control orientation More specifically speaking, control aspirations are reduced by lack of control, as suggested by the helplessness model (Seligman, 1975) Lack of options and thwarting control leads to helplessness which produces negative motivational consequences because the organism stops trying to control the environment when it does not expect any positive outcomes (Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995; Rothbaun et al., 1982; Seligman, 1975) Abramson, Seligman, and Teasdale (1978) have shown that helplessness can be broadly generalized The helplessness effect appears even if there are short-lived opposite effects as well, such as the reactance effect: Wortman and Brehm (1975) combined reactance and helplessness theories by showing that in the short term, lack of control and options increase aspiration for control,

as reactance theory suggests However, if attempts to increase control and options get thwarted over

a Personal Initiative 10 long period of time, learned helplessness develops - thus, in the long run, reduced control aspirations result

The complexity of job, on the other hand, put high demand on workers’ skills for a variety of reasons (Wood, 1986) Strain may derive from the number of tasks and number of decisions required (Wood, 1986; Jovanovic et al., 1995), from the uncertainty characterizing causal relationship or expected outcomes from choices and often the number or types of alternative courses of action (March and Simon, 1958), from the informational needs linked to problem solving involving finding solutions to complex problems (Payne, 1976; Campbell and Gingrich, 1986; Hunter, 1986; Sweller, 1988; van Merriënboer and Sweller, 2005), or from the need to use and integrate information from many different source (Steinmann, 1976) Learning will take place while workers face these challenges and master them (Anzai and Simon, 1979; Eraut, 2004; Berings et al., 2005; Pankhurst, 2010); through the efforts devoted to find effective solutions to problems arising from non-routine work situations Work itself then becomes a source of learning (Jovanovic et al., 1995)

If jobs put strain on workers’ skills and afford broad learning opportunities organizations may become learning environments in which human capital can support the product market strategy and can be regarded as a firm-level resource conferring some degree of competitive advantage (Boxall and Purcell, 2011; Ployhart and Moliterno, 2011; Beaudry et al., 2013; Sterling and Boxall, 2013; Sung and Ashton, 2015) The Resource Based View (RBV) posits that the knowledge and the skills accumulated within organisations are rare (specific), valuable, and hard to imitate (Barney, 2001; Hult et al., 2005; Ketchen et al., 2007) They are an intangible asset for the organization (Beaudry et al., 2013), one that contributes to organisational success (Molloy et al., 2011; Smithey Fulmer and Ployhart, 2014) The link between human capital and business success is known to managers; they rank know-how and knowledge as the second most important intangible assets after the reputation of the organisation or of the product (brand asset) Managers are also keenly aware of the time needed

to build human capital and that the capital is subjected to depreciation: managers estimate that it takes about 5 years to build a satisfactory knowledge base (Hall, 1992) and consider training (investment in human capital) to remain valid for about 3 years (Awano et al., 2010)

4 Social Support

There is an increasingly number of researches not only examining formal human resource policies but also informal perceptions of employees of support at work For instance, early work–family (W–F) research emphasized how employees’ access and use of formal workplace supports (i.e., work–family policies, such as on site child care) can reduce work–family conflict (e.g., Goff, Mount, & Jamison, 1990; Kossek & Nichol, 1992), in recent years, the field has shifted to emphasize informal workplace support, such as a supervisor sympathetic to work–family issues (Hammer, Kossek, Yragui, Bodner & Hanson, 2009; Thomas & Ganster, 1995) or a positive work–family organizational climate (Allen, 2001)

To date, many new human resource management trends heightening workplace stress have made

it crucial for psychologists and managers to better understand informal workplace social support connections to work–family conflict These include changing labor market demographics to involve more workers that value work–life flexibility; rising work hours and workloads distributed on 24–7 operating systems, sharpening the pace and intensity of work; and escalating financial, market and job insecurity from the global economy (Kossek & Distelberg, 2009)

The concept of workplace social support is derived from the broader social-support literature It

is typically viewed as a global construct (House, 1981) with a range of definitional dimensions that fluctuate in meaning One of the most widely used and earliest definitions comes from Cobb (1976), who defined social support as an individuals’ belief that she is loved, valued, and her well-being is cared about as part of a social network of mutual obligation Others have viewed social support as involving perceptions that one has access to helping relationships of varying quality or strength, which provide resources such as communication of information, emotional empathy, or tangible assistance (Viswesvaran, Sanchez, & Fisher, 1999) Workplace social support is defined as the degree to which individuals perceive that their well-being is valued by workplace sources, such as supervisors and the broader organization in which they are embedded (Eisenberger, Singlhamber, Vandenberghe, Sucharski, & Rhoades, 2002; Ford et al., 2007), and the perception that these sources provide help to support this well-being

5 Job Stress Scale

Job stress scale can be defined as an individual’s reaction to characteristics of the work environment that seem emotionally and physically (Jamal, 2005) It points to a poor fit between the individual’s capabilities and his or her work environment, in which excessive demands are made of the individual or the individual is not fully prepared to handle a particular situation (Jamal, 1997) In general, the higher the imbalance between demands and the individual’s abilities, the higher will be experienced stress (Jamal, 2005) Job performance can be viewed as an activity in which an individual is able to accomplish successfully the task assigned to him or her, subject to the normal constraints of the reasonable utilization of available resources (Jamal, 1984)

According to Parker and Decotiis (1983), there were two dimensions related to job stress One dimension is time stress (feelings of being under constant pressure) and the second dimension is anxiety (job-related feelings of anxiety) Time pressure relates to employee’s perception of insufficient time to accomplish the demands of their job On the other hand, anxiety is an unpleasant emotional state that has adaptive or maladaptive consequences Anxiety, therefore, relates to tensions or pressures experienced by employees brought on by their job requirements Anxiety is context-related and should be distinguished from trait anxiety (Raffety, Smith & Ptacek, 1997), which is a predisposition toward anxiety regardless of the situation or context Examining stress as a multidimensional construct is important because, for example, whereas time pressure is expected to

be positively related to job involvement an eustress, it is anticipated that there will be a negative relationship between anxiety (distress) and job involvement

PART III: RESEARCH MODEL AND HYPOTHESES

1 Research Model

The primary goal of this research is to investigate the impacts of satisfaction with my supervisor, control & complexity, social support and job stress scale on employees’ antisocial behavior at UPS Vietnam and it is specifically described in the proposed research model in Figure 1 as follows

Figure 5: Proposed Research Model of Antisocial Behavior at UPS Vietnam

1.1 Dependent Variables

Antisocial Behavior (AB): This measure was developed by Robinson and O’Leary-Kelly (1998), describes employees’ negative behaviors with potential harm to individuals and/or the company There are some activities that can be considered as antisocial behaviors such as breaking company’s rules or regulations, damaging company’s property, hurting other co-workers, arguing with colleagues, and being impolite or vilifying an immediate supervisor or the organization There are 9 items with this measure

1.2 Independent Variables

Satisfaction with My Supervisor (SMS): This measure was developed by Scarpello and Vandenberg (1987) It describes an employee’s satisfaction with his or her immediate supervisor The measure includes 18 items, but I selected only 10 items to build up the questionnaires since there are some items that not suitable with the company culture, management style and Vietnamese workers For example, in Vietnam a worker will not frequently get a pat on the back for doing a good job

Control & Complexity (CC): This measure developed by Frese, Kring, Soose, and Zemple (1996) It assesses the control & complexity in a job in term of the ability of an employee to influence working conditions and work strategies The complexity of work

is measured in terms of how difficult an individual job decisions are (Frese et al., 1996)

If an employee has low levels of control at work and expects that nothing can be done due to lacking of control, he or she is unlikely to persist in the face of setbacks Conversely, decision-making power increases the feeling of a worker of empowerment and sense of responsibility for a job Moreover, the complexity of work generally leads to the development and practice of a high level of knowledge and skills that help a worker overcome the barriers and setbacks This measure includes 2 groups of items and 4 items

in each group

Social Support (SS): This measure developed by Caplan et al (1975) It includes subscales that describe the support that an employee perceives is available from his or her colleagues, supervisor, spouse, family and friends It depicts an extent that these three sources go out of their way to support an employee and therefore an employee can rely

on when things become tough on the job These social support source are also willing to proactively listen to an employee’s personal issues These kinds of support have been described as emotional and instrumental This measure includes 4 items and three subscales in each However, I selected only one subscale, other people at work, to come

up with the questionnaires because I only wanted to see the impact of co-worker and other people at work on employee’s antisocial behavior in the scope of this research

Job Stress Scale (JSS): This measure was developed by Parker and Decotiis (1983) It includes two dimensions, time stress and anxiety There are 13 items in this measure, however, I selected only 8 items to measure both time stress and anxiety

2 Research Hypotheses

2.1 Satisfaction with My Supervisor (H1)

Hypothesis 1 (H1): Satisfaction with My Supervisor is negative related to Antisocial Behavior

Colquitt et al (2001) showed that employees who are treated fairly during their interactions with their supervisors are more likely to view their job and job experiences as more satisfying than those who are treated unfairly Research has established that dissatisfied employees may engage in deviant behavior as a cathartic means of restoring control over the job (Benneth & Robinson, 2003) Alternatively, deviance can be seen as a form of withdrawal there employees engage in behaviors to reduce job inputs (Hulin, 1991) In this paper, we would consider a hypothesis that opens up another area of research, though it includes many of the previous-studied constructs at a different level of analysis Specifically,

we proposed a negative relationship between satisfaction with my supervisor and antisocial behavior

2.2 Control and Complexity (H2) Hypothesis 2 (H2): Control & Complexity is positive related to Antisocial Behavior

Researchers have shown burnout is inversely related to perceived job control (Lee & Ashforth, 1996) Job control is a central characteristic of the work situation (Karasek & Theorell, 1990) There is extensive research that demonstrates a link between low levels of perceived job control and organizational outcomes, such as mental and physical ill-health, job dissatisfaction, sickness absence, and poor job performance (e.g., Bond & Bunce, 2001; 2003; Bosma, Stanfield, & Marmot, 1998) One more recent stress model, Conversation of