See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/306345591

Managing Stress: Human Resource Management Interventions for Distress and

Eustress

Article · January 2016

CITATIONS READS

0 2,468

3 authors:

M. Blake Hargrove Debra F. Hargrove

Shippensburg University, John L. Grove College of Business Dickinson College
17 PUBLICATIONS   54 CITATIONS    5 PUBLICATIONS   12 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Wendy S Becker
Shippensburg University
52 PUBLICATIONS   332 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by M. Blake Hargrove on 20 August 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Managing Stress: Human Resource Management Interventions for
Distress and Eustress

Blake Hargrove
Shippensburg University

Debra Hargrove
Dickinson College

Wendy S. Becker
Shippensburg University

ABSTRACT

Despite its importance, workplace stress is not well understood in terms of its impact on
employees. Workers experience stressful circumstances all the time--including working
conditions, work expectations, and interpersonal interactions. People experience stress both
psychologically and physically--as a stimulus, a reaction, and as a cognitive/affective/
physiological state. We review three distinct concepts that influence stress at work: stressors,
stress response, and stress-related outcomes. Stress-related outcomes are described as either
eustress--a healthy, positive outcome of stress, and distress--outcomes associated with
negative stress. A case study presents two organizations and how managers differentially
experienced stress, providing a resource to better understand the key role of HRM in
workplace stress.

Keywords: HR case study, eustress, distress, stress management, preventive stress management

INTRODUCTION
Managing stress is nothing new. For more than a century, leaders have recognized that
stress is a significant factor in the workplace (Cannon, 1915/1929; Quick, Wright, Adkins, Nelson,
& Quick, 2013). Stress affects a broad range of issues salient to organizational leaders; for
example, Quick et al. (2013) demonstrate the relationship between workplace stress and
performance, job attitudes, psychological well-being, worker health, absenteeism, turnover, and
other workplace behaviors. As key strategic players in modern organizations, human resource

Journal of Human Resources Education 25 Volume 10, No. 2, Spring 2016

professionals must help manage workplace stress by minimizing negative stress and optimizing
positive stress.

Despite its importance, stress has been ambiguously defined because it impacts workers in
a variety of ways (Kahn, 1987). Workers experience stressful circumstances all the time such as
working conditions, work expectations, and interpersonal interactions (Hargrove, Nelson, &
Cooper, 2013). Workers also experience stress when responding to certain stimuli; for example,
the coping process, allocating energy in response to stimuli, requires individuals to mobilize
internal and external resources to deal with stressful conditions (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984).
Finally, stress is often seen as an outcome response; people talk about being “stressed-out” or
being “in the zone.” Thus people experience stress both psychologically and physically. In
summary, workers experience stress as a stimulus, a reaction, and as a cognitive, affective,
physiological state. It is important to note that these stressful stimuli, reactions, and outcomes are
not necessarily negative or positive. Stress in and of itself is neither good nor bad. Rather it is the
quality and quantity of stress that predict its positive or negative valence.

We refer to stress using three distinct concepts: stressors, stress response, and stress-related
outcomes. This conceptualization of stress relies heavily on the Theory of Preventive Stress
Management (TPSM) in which individuals experience a variety of stressors that produce stress
responses and a variety of stress-related outcomes (Hargrove, Quick, Nelson, & Quick, 2011;
Quick & Quick, 1979). Stressors are seen as either positive or negative. Similarly, stress responses
are either positive or negative. Finally, stress-related outcomes are described as either eustress or
distress (Quick et al.; 2013). Distress is seen as “outcomes associated with negative stress which
cause a deviation from healthy physiological, psychological and affective functioning” (Quick et
al.; 2013, p.156). Eustress is described as “the healthy, positive outcome of stressful events and
the stress response” (Quick et al.; 2013, p. 4).

It is the purpose of this paper to provide a resource for teachers who wish to explore the
key role of HRM in managing stress in an organizational setting. We begin by providing a
theoretical basis of the understanding of workplace distress and eustress. We next discuss a
framework for managing stress using HRM interventions. Next, we present two short cases. These
cases describe two very different organizations – one dominated by distress and the other by
eustress. Finally, we provide notes, questions, and assignments designed to facilitate student
exploration into the role of HRM in managing organizational stress.

Distress in the Workplace

HR managers ignore distress at their peril. Distress is associated with important

organizational factors including performance, workplace deviance, absenteeism, presenteeism and
voluntary turnover (Quick et al., 2013). Additionally, distress is positively associated with serious
negative health consequences including cardio-vascular disease and depression (Quick et al.,
2013). Workplace distress also creates a serious financial problem costing employers up to $190
billion annually (Blanding, 2015). Given the extent of these issues, HR managers have both an
institutional and moral obligation to minimize distress in the organizations in which they serve.

Journal of Human Resources Education 26 Volume 10, No. 2, Spring 2016

 One possible avenue for the reduction of distress involves decreasing the quantity of
identified negative stressors. Within the TPSM, this approach is termed a primary intervention
(Hargrove, et al., 2011). Hindrance stressors are defined as sources of stress that are “appraised
as barriers or obstacles to the accomplishment of job tasks and the personal development of the
individual” (Podsakoff, 2007, p. 88). Seven workplace stimuli are likely to be experienced as
hindrance stressors: role ambiguity, role conflict, organizational politics, resource inadequacies,
administrative hassles, interpersonal conflict, and job insecurity. Each of these stressors is linked
to the experience of distress in the workplace (Podsakoff, LePine, & LePine, 2007). Reducing
hindrance stressors is an important primary intervention at the disposal of HR managers. The
literature contains many alternate taxonomies of stressors; many of the stressors described in other
taxonomies might also cause hindrance stress. In this article, however, we will focus on these seven
stressors as the basis of discussion.

Eustress in the Workplace

Stress exists in every workplace and is not in bad in itself. In fact, stress is a useful and
necessary human reaction to stimuli. Our ancestors evolving on the savannahs of Africa would
not have survived long without the ability to make appropriate psychological, affective, and
physiological responses to often dangerous stressors. Though workers in modern organizations
are not typically faced with the life and death consequences faced by early humans, modern
workers share the same biology and continue to react to the stressors they encounter at work. In
the subsequent paragraphs, we will discuss the ways HRM can capitalize on the healthy responses
to stressors. We will offer specific suggestions to how HRM can serve to generate eustress within
the workplace.

The challenge for HR managers and other organizational leaders is to try to optimize the
stressors that employees face in order to maximize eustress. Research indicates that workers
experiencing eustress are more likely to get into the flow of their work and savor the challenges
that they face (Nelson & Simmons, 2011). The positive relationships between eustress and
important individual outcomes within organizations include performance, citizenship behavior,
and psychological well-being (Quick et al., 2013). Simmons & Nelson (2001) found that eustress
was a significant predictor of positive individual outcomes including hope. HR managers can help
optimize stressors both to reduce distress and to proactively generate eustress.

Challenge stressors are the precursors of positive stress responses and stress-related
outcomes. Challenge stressors are defined as “appraised as promoting accomplishment of job
tasks and the personal development of the individual” (Podsakoff, 2007, p. 87). Podsakoff (2007)
identified four workplace stimuli which employees are likely to appraise as challenge stressors:
workload, work pace, job complexity, and job responsibility. Firmly within the realm of positive
organizational behavior, the HR Eustress Model (Hargrove, Becker, & Hargrove, 2015) provides
guidance for HR professionals wishing to manage positive stress within organizations (Figure 1).
The importance of primary prevention for the management of both positive (challenge) and
negative (hindrance) stressors is identified as an intervention by HRM.

Journal of Human Resources Education 27 Volume 10, No. 2, Spring 2016

 PRIM ARY HRM INTERVENTIONS

• Job Analysis/Design
• Recruitment/Selection
• Training & Development
• Communication

Challenge Stressors
• Work pace Positive Outcomes
• Work load • Wellbeing
• Job complexity • Commitment
• Job responsibility Eustress • Identification
• Performance
• Citizenship
• Engagement

Stress Response (if in excess)

Negative Outcomes
• Burnout
Hindrance Stressors • Physical symptoms
• Role Ambiguity • Counterproductive
Distress
• Role Conflict Behaviors
• Organizational Politics • Absenteeism
• Resource Inadequacy • Turnover
• Administrative
Hassle/Red Tap
• Interpersonal Conflict
• Job insecurity

Figure 1. Limiting Distress and Generating Eustress

Drawing from the larger stress literature, the HR Eustress Model specifies four specific
sets of primary HR interventions capable of generating worker eustress: job analysis and job
design, recruitment and selection, training and development, and communication. These four sets
of interventions are not an exhaustive list. For example, compensation systems which stimulate
workers also have the potential to generate eustress if properly designed and distress if poorly
designed. Despite the model’s positive focus, these same interventions have been theoretically
and empirically demonstrated to be effective for reducing distress. Each of these interventions
should be focused on optimizing challenge stressors and minimizing hindrance stressors.

Job analysis and job design comprise the first set of primary HR interventions (Landy &
Conte, 2016). Both of these activities contribute to the management of challenge and hindrance
stressors. Good job analysis activities include comprehensive studies of the tasks which comprise
jobs and careful review of data gathered by these studies. Job design then rests on the foundation
of job analysis. As a positive intervention, job design is critical to ensure that workload and work
pace are set at realistic and achievable levels. Similarly, good job design seeks to find the golden
mean for job responsibility and job complexity. Careful job design provides an opportunity for
HR managers to build the appropriate scope, variety, and accountability to stimulate employees to

Journal of Human Resources Education 28 Volume 10, No. 2, Spring 2016

rise to challenges at work. Good job design also ensures that employees are not given
overwhelming expectations. Employees who are given too little to do or too much time to do it
will not be challenged and are more likely to be bored than invigorated by eustress. On the other
hand, employees given too much to do or too little time to do it are likely to be overwhelmed rather
than challenged. The same is true for the challenge stressors job responsibility and job complexity.
Employees should not be given too much or too little variety, scope, or accountability.
Job analysis and job design also function as pathways for HR managers to make primary
interventions which minimize hindrance stressors. Good job design is an especially important tool
with regard to minimizing role ambiguity, role conflict, resource inadequacies, and administrative
hassles. Role ambiguity is largely a function of poor job design; failing to specify required and
optional job requirements (Armstrong & Taylor, 2014). Similarly good job design minimizes role
conflict, resource inadequacies, and administrative hassles by clarifying different individuals’
roles within an organizational structure and ensuring the flow of resources, feedback and autonomy
(Armstrong & Taylor, 2014). For example, employees experiencing role conflict should be clearly
aware of both the priorities of the tasks expected in their job and a path to resolve conflicts.

Recruitment and selection are potentially the most important primary HR stress
interventions. Finding and hiring the right people is critical. Once jobs have been analyzed and
designed, it is the HR manager’s role to ensure that the capacities of a newly hired employee match
the requirements of the position and assure “fit” with the organization. In order to perform this
function, HR needs to possess the proper selection tools (e.g. testing, portfolio review, or interview
methods) to accurately assess the capabilities of their applicants. Selecting individuals whose
capacities fit with the requirements of a position places new employees in jobs that challenge them
in terms of work load, pace, complexity, and responsibility. Similarly, avoiding the selection of
applicants with poor fit serves to minimize hindrance stressors like organizational politics and
interpersonal conflicts. Effective selection techniques, which emphasize selection based on
objective criteria vs. personality and network connections, will help avoid placing persons in
positions in which favoritism or personality conflicts will be problematic. Effective primary stress
prevention is impossible without effective selection practices.

Training and development (T&D) also help HR professionals challenge their employees
and minimize negative stressors. Organizations can help generate eustress by expanding the
capabilities of their employees with regard to load, pace, complexity, and responsibility. Effective
T&D programs change the nature of stressors perceived by employees. Work stressors once
experienced as overwhelming will become challenging as capabilities are expanded and as workers
feel the effects of professional development. T&D programs also serve as effective HR primary
preventions to minimize hindrance stressors. Effective orientation and job training programs
reduce role ambiguity and role conflict. Conflict, politics, resource inadequacies, and conflict can
all be reduced by HR practices which develop employees. For example, managers who are plagued
by interdepartmental squabbling should be able to reach out to HR for coaching and counseling on
how to resolve interpersonal conflict. Other management training programs offered by HR might
help train organizational leaders on the importance of providing resources and avoiding favoritism.
By expanding worker capacity, T&D functions as an effective HR primary intervention for both
positive and negative stressors.

Journal of Human Resources Education 29 Volume 10, No. 2, Spring 2016

 Communication is the final primary prevention which HR managers should use to address
organizational stress. Communication addresses organizational stress by providing clear, accurate,
and timely guidance to employees giving them the necessary information to appropriately appraise
stressors. Both in order to challenge workers and avoid hindering workers, organizations must
provide information that creates clear linkages between goal completion and work expectations.
For example, for employees to be challenged by time and led to eustress, they must understand
how and why the pace of work is important. They must be provided with sufficient information
to understand that the speed at which they work is critically connected to the goal of task
completion. If the linkage is less than clear, employees are more likely to experience frustration
than flow. Similarly the lack of clear and timely information can enlarge rather than minimize
challenge stressors. Job insecurity, as a perception rather than an objective condition, can be
managed by the provision of accurate and timely information. Downsizing rumors are an
understandable source of distress. This stress is especially tragic when rumors are not true. In the
unfortunate situation in which lay-off rumors are true, effective organizational communication can
serve to replace hearsay and innuendo with fact. Literature reviews indicate that the stress caused
by job uncertainty, both to those who are laid off and to the “survivors” who keep their jobs, is an
important source of distress (Hargrove, Cooper, & Quick, 2012). Uncertainty is in of itself a
stressor. Providing good information can serve to both optimize challenge stressors and limit
hindrance stressors.

In the subsequent sections of this article, readers are presented with two brief cases which
address workplace stress. In the first case, a struggling organization presents a new manager with
barriers to her and to her department’s success. In the second case, a new manager is presented by
stressors which challenge her to meet organizational and personal goals. Following these cases,
discussion questions and class activities are presented.

A TALE OF TWO ORGANIZATIONS: STRESS IN THE WORKPLACE

Call Center Manager at New World Software Solutions, Inc.

New World Software Solutions, Inc. has been operating since 1987. Over the next ten
years it grew from its original location in Baltimore and opened offices in Silicon Valley and
Austin, Texas. Sales steadily increased and reached a peak of $16 million in 1999. By 2000, New
World employed 700 people at its three locations. Unfortunately, the Internet bubble hit New
World hard. Sales were flat in the early 2000s and actually decreased during the last decade.
Today, the company has less than $10 million in expected revenue, employs 275 workers, and has
closed both the California and Maryland locations. Though New World still possesses a cadre of
committed professionals, its rapid contraction has forced significant austerity measures including
a two-year pay freeze.

Maria is head of the customer service call center at New World Software Solutions,
Inc. She manages two shifts of approximately 20 employees, each reporting to a shift
supervisor. While Maria has only been at New World for one year, her shift supervisors have both
been employed at New World for more than ten years. Before leaping in to making structural
changes in her department, Maria decided to spend her first three months at New World getting to
know people and systems. After this, she felt comfortable taking a more active management role.

Journal of Human Resources Education 30 Volume 10, No. 2, Spring 2016

She identified several major challenges: a high rate of turnover among her call center employees,
a high degree of absenteeism among her call center employees, and a poor working relationship
between her two shift supervisors. She decided to focus on these three problems and try and find
some solutions.

Her first stop was the HR office. She hoped to discuss a way of redesigning and
reorganizing her department. She intended to focus on the poor staffing decisions that she
suspected were at the heart of turnover and absenteeism. While meeting with HR, she learned that
there was no money to add positions, change the recruiting procedure, or adjust compensation.
She left the office frustrated. She was even more frustrated the next week when she found out that
HR had approved three new positions for the Marketing Director who she learned was a fishing
buddy of the HR manager who had told her “no.”

She went to her boss, Sheila, the head of operational support, and Sheila told her “that’s
just the way it is.” She then learned from Sheila that the company’s financial position was even
worse than was rumored and that employees hadn’t had a raise in the last two years. She indicated
that if things did not turn around soon there could be another lay-off and department consolidation.
Sheila ended the meeting by reminding Maria of her high expectations for the customer service
call center.

Her reorganization plans thwarted, Maria focused instead on motivating the existing team
to work more efficiently. She called a special meeting at a time when both shifts could be present
and bought pizza for the department out of her own money. At the meeting, everyone seemed to
be on the same page about what needed to be done. After that meeting, she called her two shift
supervisors into her office. They seemed to all agree about the operational objectives, but Maria
could not help notice the tone of the conversation. The two shift supervisors seemed to snipe at
any suggestion made by the other.

Maria was not a quitter. For the next six months she worked long hours trying to build her
team. Despite her efforts things did not improve. In fact, for Maria they got worse. She started
getting headaches, gained fifteen pounds, and was having trouble sleeping. Before long she was
calling in sick herself. It was sad because she couldn’t remember the last time she had ever missed
work before she started at New World.

Team Leader at Arlington Energy Services Co.

Arlington Energy Services Co. supplies specialized heavy equipment and supplies to the
oil and gas industry. Founded in southern Louisiana in 1975, Arlington originally focused on
offshore oil production. Through careful managerial discipline, the company has weathered the
many ups and downs of the cyclical energy market. Throughout the late 1900s, Arlington focused
on a strategy of rapid growth. From 1975 to 2000, sales grew from $600,000 to just over $80
million. The company started with only ten employees but had grown to employ 320 workers by
the turn of the century. In 2001, a new CEO took over and refocused Arlington on the emerging
natural gas fracking industry. In addition, the CEO committed the company to a long-term
sustainable growth strategy. Since 2001, the company has maintained a workforce between 300
and 350 employees and has grown steadily to annual sales of $110 million. Today, Arlington

Journal of Human Resources Education 31 Volume 10, No. 2, Spring 2016

operates in four states and continues to reinvest profits in the company to ensure its long-term
viability.

Alexis has been a team leader at Arlington Energy Services Co. for one year. She really
likes her job and is excited to go to work even though she is on second shift. She thought she
would dislike working the odd hours, but she adjusted quickly. The dispatch center at Arlington
is an energetic place. Lots of moving parts have to come together if the strict timetables were to
be met. As team leader in the dispatch department, it is Alexis who ensures that the trucks get the
supplies to the customers on time. She worked so hard that time flew by when she was at work.
Her job causes her to use all her skills, and she often has to go the extra mile to make things work.

She finds this hard work rewarding. Oftentimes, customers call and thank her for taking
care of their needs. At the last middle-management meeting, one of the vice presidents noted that
meeting customer delivery schedules was a key part of the company’s ongoing success.

Recently Joe, the service manager, challenged both dispatch managers to improve the
bottom line by looking for operational efficiencies. Alexis wasn’t sure where to start, so she asked
to meet with Joe. Joe was really patient and helpful. He helped her see the big picture and offered
to help her find the resources for any positive changes she might suggest. Alexis feels proud that
Joe trusts her and supports her. She likes the creative possibilities involved in finding new
solutions in her area.

QUESTIONS FOR REFLECTION

1. What kind of stress is Maria experiencing at New World? What are the primary stressors?

2. What kind of stress is Alexis experiencing at Arlington? What are the primary stressors?

3. What are some concrete steps that HR managers at New World can take to improve
organizational stress management?

4. What are some concrete steps that managers at Arlington appear to have taken to manage
organizational stress?

5. Use theory to explain the differential stress outcomes at these two companies.

6. How can HR managers help to train and develop organizational leaders to better manage
organizational stress?

7. Think of a time when you personally experienced challenge stressors. What made this
experience positive rather than negative? How can you use this personal experience to
inform your behavior as a manager?

8. Think of a time when you personally experiencing distress at work. How could your
managers have intervened to reduce your distress? What lessons can you take from this
experience to reduce distress among your coworkers?

Journal of Human Resources Education 32 Volume 10, No. 2, Spring 2016

 IN-CLASS DISCUSSION

This case is best discussed in small groups (six or fewer). To begin, groups should be
asked to identify hindrance and challenge stressors in their own lives. The instructor should
emphasize how the student-provided examples either promote or hinder “task accomplishment” or
“personal goal advancement.” Secondly, the teams can use Figure 1 to talk about primary
intervention tactics that HR managers can use to limit hindrance stressors and optimize challenge
stressors. While walking around the class and listening to the groups work, the instructor can ask
which types of interventions might or might not be effective. Each small group should suggest
two immediate action steps for New World. Finally, each group should provide two suggestions
for Maria which might help her promote eustress on her team.

Following the group work, the instructor may want to bring the class back together to
discuss the groups’ findings. One person from each group can present their group’s proposed
action steps for New World. The class can discuss and provide peer-review of these steps. Next,
a different person from each group should present their advice for Maria. The instructor can guide
a discussion of primary interventions that are likely to generate eustress. Finally, the instructor
may want to summarize the role of HR managers in creating more positive organizations by
managing stress.

For online or hybrid classes, the instructor might wish to adapt the small group discussion
to discussion board. Students could be broken into small teams. A discussion prompt with an
action item could be given to each team. Team members would be asked to make multiple iterative
contributions to the discussion board responding both to the prompt and to their peers’ responses.
Each team would be tasked with providing a collective response and specific action items to be
shared with the class as a whole.

INDIVIDUAL HOMEWORK ASSIGNMENT

Take on the role of an HR manager at New World. Identify one stress-related problem at
New World. Write an email to Maria which will provide her some guidance on how to deal with
that problem. This email should be clear and concise. Additionally, the email must propose a
concrete action on the part of the department head. In the email, you must:

 briefly describe the problem

 clearly relate the issue to an HR concern (e.g. performance, absenteeism, or health)

 provide a clear and concrete suggestion for action

 describe specifically how HR can support this course of action

Journal of Human Resources Education 33 Volume 10, No. 2, Spring 2016

 TEACHING NOTES

Summary

Two experienced, mid-level managers work for two very different organizations. Each
manager experiences significant workplace stress which affects her workplace attitudes and
behaviors. The types of stress in the organizations are very different. In the first, the presence of
hindrance stressors results in significant distress. In the second, the presence of challenge stressors
results in significant eustress. In this case, students must identify challenge and hindrance stressors
in the two organizations. Additionally, students must provide concrete courses of actions at both
companies.

Some Responses to Reflection Questions

1. What kind of stress was Maria experiencing at New World? What were the primary
stressors?

Maria is experiencing distress—or more specifically, hindrance stress—at New World

Software. Maria’s primary stressors include serious resource limitations, interpersonal
conflict, and job insecurity. Maria identified three specific problems to focus on in her
efforts at New World: the high rate of turnover, high rate absenteeism, and the poor
working relationship between two shift supervisors.

2. What kind of stress was Alexis experiencing at Arlington? What were the primary
stressors?

In contrast, Alexis is experiencing eustress—specifically, challenge stressors—at

Arlington Energy Services. Alexis’ primary stressors include work load, work pace, and
the varied responsibilities of her job. It is important to note that Alexis is motivated by the
challenges that the increased work load, work pace and increased responsibilities provide.
Alexis is engaged and empowered by the eustress created by these challenges.

3. What are some concrete steps that HR managers at New World can take to improve
organizational stress management?

The Theory of Preventive Stress Management (TPSM) proposes that HR managers identify
and manage stress at each of the three levels in which it occurs: stressors, stress response,
and stress-related outcomes. First, negative stressors should be eliminated or minimized.
For example, HR managers could re-design work schedules to eliminate fatigue and
employee burnout. Second, HR managers should identify additional resources for those
experiencing stress. For example, Employee Assistance Programs (EAP) offer wellness
and health-related programs. Finally, tertiary preventions should be provided to address

Journal of Human Resources Education 34 Volume 10, No. 2, Spring 2016

 stress-related outcomes. An example would be comprehensive medical plans that help
employees address stress-related outcomes such as depression or anxiety.

4. What are some of the concrete steps that managers at Arlington appear to have taken to
manage organizational stress?

Arlington appears to be committed to long-term sustainability and growth in its operations

which helps management minimize organizational stress. Alexis sought support from her
manager and found that he was receptive to her ideas. As her job increases in complexity,
Alexis is energized by her new responsibilities because she feels that she is working as part
of a team.

5. Use theory to explain the differential stress outcomes at these two companies.

Both companies experienced rapid growth in operations and yet New World appears to be
overwhelmed by an uncertain business environment and increasing hindrance stressors for
managers and employees. Many of the theorized hindrance stressors are present at New
World, such as role ambiguity, role conflict, interpersonal conflict, politics, and inadequate
resources. Arlington, on the other hand, has dealt with business growth by helping
individuals achieve job task accomplishment and personal development, which in turn
helps employees deal positively with increased workload, work pace, job complexity and
job responsibility. Because Arlington’s employees are equipped to deal with business
growth, they experience eustress, rather than distress and are able to accomplish new goals
as a team.

6. How can HR managers help to train and develop organizational leaders to better
manage organizational stress?

HR managers can champion the identification of organizational stressors and help leaders
to be aware of how these stressors impact the work environment. HRM can help train and
develop managers to be sensitive to the impact that work stressors have on employees.

7. Think of a time when you have personally experienced challenge stressors. What made
this experience positive rather than negative? How can you use this personal experience
to inform your behavior as a manager?

As students share their personal experiences, the instructor should help students to apply
the concept of eustress and challenge stressors as presented in this paper. Students might
be asked about getting into flow or “the zone.” Students might need to be pressed in order
to generate concrete examples of positive stress.

Journal of Human Resources Education 35 Volume 10, No. 2, Spring 2016

 8. Think of a time when you were personally experiencing distress at work. How could your
managers have intervened to reduce your distress? What lessons can you take from this
experience to reduce distress among your coworkers?

As students share their personal experiences, the instructor should help students to apply
the concept of distress and hindrance stressors as presented in this paper. An emphasis
should be placed on helping students understand how past negative experiences are
opportunities for growth as a management professional.

What to Expect in Class

When teaching this subject, we often find that students have little basis for understanding
stress in organizations. Typically students confuse stressors, stress response, and stress outcomes.
We find it helpful to make sure that they can distinguish between these at work. In the first case
described above, we point out the difference between the interpersonal conflict (stressor) in
Maria’s department with her reaction (stress response) to the conflict and the health issues
(outcomes) that Maria began to experience.

Students participating in this exercise may also be skeptical of the concept of positive
stress. Eustress is largely ignored in the popular media, so students typically have little prior
knowledge of the concept. We find it helpful to use examples from the natural world such as a
zebra’s positive stress response to smelling a lion (heightened senses, increased blood flow,
cessation of digestion). Another helpful explanation of eustress might be related to students’
experiences of “butterflies” before performances or “getting in the zone” during physical exercise
or a game activity. Once students recognize the ubiquitous nature of stressors and the potential
positive results, we find they are fascinated by how this applies to their own lives.

Finally, students understand the importance of individual coping but often fail to recognize
stress management as a managerial or organizational issue. The two cases, the discussion on stress
and the exercises are all designed to help students recognize the importance of stress management
for all managerial professionals.

CONCLUSION

The purpose of this article is to provide a learning resource for instructors teaching
university-level management and human resource management courses. Specifically, this paper
provides a conceptual framework for investigating issues in workplace stress and also provides
materials which will encourage critical thinking about this important issue. In this article, readers
are introduced to basic theories that address organizational stress and provide them a conceptual
context for further inquiry and discussion. Another contribution is the emphasis on eustress rather
than a focus on distress. Readers are provided with two brief case studies that serve to launch a
learning conversation into managing workplace stress. Finally this paper facilitates instruction by

Journal of Human Resources Education 36 Volume 10, No. 2, Spring 2016

providing reflective questions, suggestions for in-class and online learning activities, and teaching
notes.
_______________

Dr. Blake Hargrove received his M.A. in Management from Webster University and his Ph.D. in Management from
the University of Texas at Arlington. His principal research interests include promoting positive organizational
behavior, preventive stress management, business ethics, and psychometrics. Contact: mbhargrove@ship.edu.
Debra Hargrove is Associate Vice President of Human Resource Services at Dickenson University. She is
responsible for developing and managing all programs and policies pertaining to Human Resources. Contact:
hargrove@dickenson.edu.

Wendy S. Becker is an associate professor of management at Shippensburg University and a visiting professor at the
Management Law Center, Innsbruck, Austria. Becker’s research interests are in applied psychology, team processes,
and social responsibility. She earned her Ph.D. in industrial-organizational psychology from Penn State. Previously,
she served as editor of The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist (TIP). Contact: wsbecker@ship.edu.

REFERENCES

Armstrong, M., & Taylor, S. (2014). Armstrong's handbook of human resource management
practice. Kogan Page Publishers.

Blanding, M. (January 26, 2015). Workplace Stress Responsible For Up To $190B in Annual
U.S. Healthcare Costs. Forbes.

Cannon, B. (1915/1929). Alternative satisfactions for the fighting emotions. Bodily changes in
pain, hunger, fear and rage: An account of recent researches into the function of
emotional excitement. New York: Appleton.

Hargrove, M. B., Becker, W. S., & Hargrove, D. F. (2015). The HR eustress model: Creating
work challenge through positive stress. Human Resource Development Review, 14 (3),
279-298.

Hargrove, M. B., Cooper C. L, & Quick, J. C. (2012). Individual outcomes resulting from
downsizing related stress. In C. L. Cooper, A. Pandey, & J. C. Quick (Eds.) Downsizing:
Is less still more? (pp. 293-325) Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Hargrove, M. B., Nelson, D. L., & Cooper, C. (2013). Generating eustress by challenging
employees: helping people savor their work. Organizational Dynamics, 42 (1), 61-70.

Hargrove, M. B., Quick, J. C., Nelson, D. L., & Quick, J. D. (2011) The theory of preventive
stress management: A 33-year review and evaluation. Stress & Health: Journal of the
International Society for the Investigation of Stress. 27 (3), 182-193.

Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at

work. Academy of Management Journal, 33 (4), 692-724.

Landy, F. J., & Conte, J. M. (2016). Work in the 21st century. Hoboken: Wiley.

Journal of Human Resources Education 37 Volume 10, No. 2, Spring 2016

 Nelson, D. L., & Simmons, B. L. (2011). Savoring eustress while coping with distress: The
holistic model of stress. In J. C. Quick, & L. E. Tetrick, Handbook of Occupational
Health Psychology (pp. 55-74). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Podsakoff, N. P. (2007). Challenge and hindrance stressors in the workplace: Tests of linear,
curvilinear, and moderated relationships with employee strains, satisfaction, and
performance. Dissertation, University of Florida

Podsakoff, N. P., LePine, J. A., & LePine, M. A. (2007). Differential challenge stressor-
hindrance stressor relationships with job attitudes, turnover intentions, turnover, and
withdrawal behavior: a meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92 (2), 438.

Quick, J. C., & Quick, J. D. (1979). Reducing stress through preventive management. Human
Resource Management, 18 (3), 15–22.

Quick, J. C., Wright, T. A., Adkins, J. A., Nelson, D. L., & Quick, J. D. (2013). Preventive stress
management in organizations (2nd ed.). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological
Association.

Simmons, B. L., & Nelson, D. L. (2007). Eustress at work: Extending the holistic stress model.
Positive Organizational Behavior, 40-53.

Journal of Human Resources Education 38 Volume 10, No. 2, Spring 2016

View publication stats