Stressful work life is so integrated into our lives that we don’t recognize the impacts of stress on us until we face the critical point of burnout. International Union of Psychological Science has found that job demands are the main predictors of burnout and the primary demand for exhaustion is the workload (732). It is common to attribute a high level of job stress to a poorly managed stress response mechanism. But to actively and positively deal with work-related stress can be a delicate and on-going project for everyone. This paper will discuss the nature of the perennial problem and conclude with some effective measures conducive to a less stressful, more productive career.
In a collection of different working conditions, stress-related burnout can happen in most situations in every job. As a long-term result of aversive working conditions, burnout is characterized by the collateral experience of exhaustion and disengagement from a job (Demerouti, 1106). In her study, Demerouti further explores the definition of exhaustion as the long-term negative outcome of intensive physical, affective, and cognitive strain because of the drawn-out exposure to extensive job demands (1106).
It is typical for employees to feel they are constantly at the edge of burnout if high job demands and limited resources are normal. A stressful working environment may result in the diminishing effort and willingness of employees to devote to work tasks and this negative experience, according to Demerouti, is inherent in the burnout state of employees (1107). In an extreme situation, job stress can be exacerbated by no promising career development, thus burnout happens. In addition, as a salient job stressor, job insecurity is common in the current workplace.
International Union of Psychological Science finds out that in difficult economic conditions, effective strategies must be in place if organizations want to counter the negative influences of job insecurity so as to encourage employees to stay engaged and productive in their work (738). The following section will then discuss how to effectively cope with job stress so as to achieve optimization in efficiency and productivity of work.
Many types of research have meaningful findings on coping strategies. Zimmer-Gembeck and Skinner point out that people’s reactions and measures are taken to deal with adversity and stressful situation can have material meanings to their subsequent development
(1). Regulating emotional response and experiences is usually the first and foremost aim of coping. Two common ways to achieve this purpose are changing one’s own responses and adjusting the stressor that led to the emotional reaction (Zimmer-Gembeck and Skinner, 11).
Demerouti holds a similar opinion regarding the relations between coping and emotional experience. She suggests that different types of coping can result in burnout, but in general, burnout happens more often if the coping strategies are avoidance and emotion-focused, compared to active and problem-focused coping (1107). Also, problem-focused response and positive self-appraisal are mutually reinforcing and contribute to the positive coping of stress situations. When stress is being discussed, a mental health issue is never far away.
According to Zimmer-Gembeck and Skinner, an additional set of appraisals, coping self-efficacy, can play a crucial role in coping with job stress (10). As a complex mechanism, the fundamental human adaptive process always involves the regulation of multiple subsystems (Zimmer-Gembeck and Skinner,
(2). Recovery from stressful situations, which is known as the process of an individual’s functioning rebounds to a pre-stressor level where a new balanced status of physiological and psychological performance, usually occurs when the stressor is no longer present (Demerouti, 1107). This process involves mainly detachment from work, relaxation, and social activities that are beneficial in diminishing the daily stress in work, as well as the risk of burnout over time (Demerouti, 1107). As complicated as the coping mechanism can be, researchers manage to explain relations among stressors and other elements from similar yet different perspectives.
Successful management of job stress means different things to different people but common measures can be explored. Gerhardt points out three types of coping – psycho-physiological, psychological, and social – that denote measures of dealing with major stress, challenges, or life-events (209). His proposed life-event approach conceptualizes psychological forces in many different ways, were coping as defined by ‘resistance resources’ and stress is resulted from the absence of effective tension management (Gerhardt, 202).
The stressful situation primarily arises because of the existence of threatening stimulus and the identification of its configurational patterns and individual’s sense of competence are the