Role Characteristics and their Relationships to Job Attitudes Among Workers in Maryland Adolescent Behavioral Treatment Centers Michael J. Walk University of Baltimore

Introduction

The Research Setting Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DHMH) operates three Regional Institutes for Children and Adolescents (RICA). Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DHMH) operates three Regional Institutes for Children and Adolescents (RICA). Treatment staff types Treatment staff types  Direct-Care (residential)  Clinical (therapists)  Administrative

Importance of This Research Residential adolescent mental health treatment requires a continuum of care including consistent and diligent staff. Residential adolescent mental health treatment requires a continuum of care including consistent and diligent staff. Current reports suggest high turnover rates and low levels of job satisfaction among employees treating emotionally disturbed adolescents, especially direct-care workers. Current reports suggest high turnover rates and low levels of job satisfaction among employees treating emotionally disturbed adolescents, especially direct-care workers.

Theoretical Background and Hypotheses Role Ambiguity Role Ambiguity Role Conflict Role Conflict Role Overload Role Overload Job Satisfaction Job Satisfaction Organizational Commitment Organizational Commitment Turnover Intentions Turnover Intentions + -

Hypotheses (continued) Differences between position types: Differences between position types:  Direct-care experiences more Role Ambiguity  Direct-care experiences more Role Conflict  Administrative experiences less Role Overload.

Method

Measures – Independent Variables Role Ambiguity (11 items) Role Ambiguity (11 items)  House, Schuler, and Levanoni (1983) Role Conflict (7 items) Role Conflict (7 items)  House, Schuler, and Levanoni (1983) Role Overload (6 items) Role Overload (6 items)  New  e.g., “I am expected to do too much in too little time”

Measures – Dependent Variables Job Satisfaction (3 items) Job Satisfaction (3 items)  Hackman and Oldham’s (1975) Job Diagnostic Survey Organizational Commitment (9 items) Organizational Commitment (9 items)  Cook and Wall (1980) Turnover Intentions (3 items) Turnover Intentions (3 items)  Michigan Organizational Assessment Questionnaire

Measures – Participant Variables Participant Variables Participant Variables  Age  Tenure  Education  Gender  Position Type  Direct care  Clinical  Administrative

Method (cont’d) Procedure

Procedure Obtained complete employee roster Obtained complete employee roster Stratified by position type Stratified by position type Systematic sampling Systematic sampling  Every 3 rd employee 340 contacted (intra-institutional mail) 340 contacted (intra-institutional mail) Completed during work hours Completed during work hours 2-week follow ups 2-week follow ups 300 returned surveys (88% response rate) 300 returned surveys (88% response rate)

Results

Participants by Gender and Position

Hypothesized Factor Structure RA1 RC1 RC7 RO1 RO6 JS1 JS2 OC1 OC9 TI1 RA11 Role Ambiguity Role Conflict Role Overload Job Satisfaction Org. Commitment Turnover Intentions TI3 JS3 TI2 OC2

Model Testing RA1 RC1 RC7 RO1 RO6 JS2 OC9 TI1 RA11 Role Ambiguity Role Conflict Role Overload Job Satisfaction Org. Commitment Turnover Intentions TI3 JS3 TI2 OC2 RO2

Common Method Bias RA1 RC1 RC7 RO1 RO6 RA11 Role Ambiguity Role Conflict Role Overload JS2 OC9 TI1 Job Satisfaction Org. Commitment Turnover Intentions TI3 JS3 TI2 OC2 Method Bias Final Measurement Model

Model Fit Indices Modelχ2χ2 dfRMSEAGFICFI Null Hypothesized Respecified Model a Revised (Final) Model b Unconstrained Revised Model c Model with Method Factor d a Role overload item 1 was allowed to load on the role conflict factor in addition to the role overload factor. b Role overload item 1 was deleted from the model. c Role overload item 6 was allowed to load on the turnover intentions factor in addition to the role overload factor. d A method factor was added to the model; all items were allowed to load on the method factor.

Results by Gender

Results by Position Type

VariablesMSD Role Ambiguity Role Conflict Role Overload Job Satisfaction Organizational Commitment Turnover Intentions Hypothesis Testing

Job Satisfaction Regression Analyses

Regression: Job Satisfaction Participant characteristics Participant characteristics  F(5, 296) = 7.12, p <.01, R 2 =.11  Staff position: β =.21, p <.01

Regression: Job Satisfaction Role Ambiguity Role Ambiguity  F(6, 293) = 10.34, p <.01, R 2 =.18  Fchange(1, 293) = 23.73, p <.001, ΔR 2 =.07  β = -.31, p <.001 (Staff position: β =.09, ns) Role Conflict Role Conflict  F(6, 293) = 8.64, p <.001, R 2 =.15  Fchange(1, 293) = 14.62, p <.001, ΔR 2 =.04  β = -.23, p <.001 Role Overload Role Overload  F(6, 293) = 7.97, p <.001, R 2 =.14  Fchange(1, 293) = 11.04, p <.01, ΔR 2 =.03  β = -.20, p <.01

Regression: Job Satisfaction Role Characteristics as a Set Role Characteristics as a Set  F(8, 291) = 8.66, p <.001, R 2 =.19  Fchange(3, 291) = 10.13, p <.001, ΔR 2 =.08  Role Ambiguity  β = -.22, p <.01

Organizational Commitment Regression Analyses

Regression: Org. Commitment Participant Characteristics Participant Characteristics  F(5, 294) = 14.75, p <.001, R 2 =.20  Tenure  β =.24, p <.001  Position Type  β =.27, p <.001

Regression: Org. Commitment Role Ambiguity Role Ambiguity  F(6, 293) = 26.88, p <.001, R 2 =.36  Fchange(1, 293) = 70.14, p <.001, ΔR 2 =.15  β = -.46, p <.001  Position type: β =.08, ns Role Conflict Role Conflict  F(6, 293) = 22.22, p <.001, R 2 =.30  Fchange(1, 293) = 47.80, p <.001, ΔR 2 =.11  β = -.37, p <.001

Regression: Org. Commitment Role Ambiguity & Role Conflict as a Set Role Ambiguity & Role Conflict as a Set  F(7, 292) = 27.18, p <.001, R 2 =.40  Fchange(2, 292) = 46.76, p <.001, ΔR 2 =.19  Tenure:  β =.17, p <.01  Role Ambiguity  β = -.37, p <.001  Role Conflict  β = -.24, p <.001

Turnover Intentions Regression Analyses

Regression: Turnover Intentions Participant Characteristics Participant Characteristics  F(5, 294) = 11.94, p <.001, R 2 =.17  Tenure  β = -.27, p <.001  Position Type  β = -.17, p <.05

Regression: Turnover Intentions Role Ambiguity Role Ambiguity  F(6, 293) = 22.37, p <.001, R 2 =.31  Fchange(1, 293) = 62.11, p <.001, ΔR 2 =.15  β =.45, p <.001  Position Type: β =.01, ns Role Conflict Role Conflict  F(6, 293) = 13.39, p <.001, R 2 =.22  Fchange(1, 293) = 17.34, p <.001, ΔR 2 =.05  β =.24, p <.001  Position Type: β = -.10, ns

Regression: Turnover Intentions Role Ambiguity and Conflict as a Set Role Ambiguity and Conflict as a Set  F(7, 292) = 19.60, p <.001, R 2 =.32  Fchange(2, 292) = 32.39, p <.001, ΔR 2 =.15  Role Conflict:  β =.09, ns  Role Ambiguity:  β =.41, p <.001  Tenure:  β = -.20, p <.001

Discussion

Summary Negative role characteristics were found to be associated with low levels of positive job attitudes. Negative role characteristics were found to be associated with low levels of positive job attitudes. Direct-care staff and males reported higher levels of negative role characteristics and lower levels of positive job attitudes. Direct-care staff and males reported higher levels of negative role characteristics and lower levels of positive job attitudes.

Possible Actions Role Characteristics Role Characteristics  Improve communication and evaluation procedures.  Make all expectations clear, complementary, and congruent.  Give special attention to improving the psychological climate of direct-care staff and males in order to achieve the biggest organizational gains.

Q & A