Month: November 2024

Based on the Psychologytoday.com Type A Personality Test results, I learned I am generally warm and tolerant when interacting with others. Still, at times I can be tinged with impatience and hostility. This can lead me to lash or stew in anger or frustration, especially whenever I am stressed or frustrated. I would agree with this assessment but would add the caveat that this has only been true in the last three years since I returned to school to pursue my bachelor’s degree in business administration. Most noticeably the last term because I am taking two classes that can be overwhelming with the amount of learning materials and assignments they give. Before that, and hopefully, after I am done with my degree, I can get back to being the optimist and happy-go-lucky self that I have always been. The report later explains that even at my moderate Type A Personality Test score of 46, it still has health implications such as putting me at risk for heart disease. At the end of the report, it goes further and explains that while it can be harmful, there are other causes unrelated to the personality type that can lead to health problems such as poor diet, lack of exercise, and smoking among other things. This behavior pattern can also be harmful to relationships.

Based on the Psychologytoday.com results of the Coping & Stress Management Skills Test results, I learned the problem-focused strategies I use when coping with stress are generally effective when dealing with situations where the stressor is controllable. In instances where the stressor is not controllable, my problem-focused strategies are ineffective at dealing with stress. This led the results to say that in certain cases, it is a good idea to take action to modify or take charge of a stressor to better come with it. This is sound advice given my personality because I would prefer to manage my stress as opposed to letting it linger or take over. The only downside to this approach I have found is those times when I cannot manage the stressor. Sometimes in these situations, I may grow impatient or frustrated.

The Holmes-Rahe Life Stress Inventory test score for the past year is well below the 150-point mark. This indicates I have a low amount of life change and a low susceptibility to stress-induced health breakdown. While this score is low, the biggest thing I can do to progress through my professional career to help manage stress is to finish my Business Administration degree. This is the biggest source of stress currently affecting my life. Once this is done, I hope to add more outdoor adventures to my life and find a job where I do not feel as stressed as I do in class. I can also try to get better sleep than what I am currently getting due to the large amount of work needed for my classes. I can also add healthier food to my diet whether I find better places to go and eat or whether it is cooking healthier alternatives to the food I currently eat. Lastly, I can make sure to add time for an exercise routine to be able to manage my health risks due to my moderate Type A Personality Test score. This will also be an additional coping and stress management skill for me to use.

A 2022 Harvard Business Report by Meister, Cheng, Dael, and Krings addresses post-COVID-19 employee problems such as being stressed, feeling burnt out, and feeling tense. They also talk about the increased employee demand for discretionary Employee services such as Employee Assistance Programs (EAP), and family-friendly (work-life) benefits. These programs include mental health support, stress management, and flexible work arrangements. However, they note that providing all these services does not work if the employee does not actually recover from stress. They suggest five strategies organizations can use to help their employees manage their health, cope with stress, and recover. They first emphasize the importance of detaching psychologically from work and how even thinking about their job can detract from the employee’s ability to recover. Second, they address the importance of taking 10-minute “micro-breaks” throughout the work day and how they can be effective at recovering from daily work stress and various job demands. Third, they talk about the importance of doing a recovery activity, but choosing the activity that best fits your recovery approach. This is because what might be a good recovery approach for someone else might not be necessarily good for you. The fourth strategy mentioned in the article has to do with doing high-effort or higher-dedication recovery activities rather than passive or low-effort activities. They say that while counterintuitive to general belief, studies have shown that more demanding activities whether physically or mentally are more effective for recovery. The last recommended strategy deals with employees shaping their environment for optimal recovery. They mention that direct exposure to nature such as exposure to daylight and taking a walk at a park during a lunch break can help with the stress recovery process in as little as 10 minutes. They can also contribute to the employee’s well-being and reduce the likelihood of feelings or burnout.

References:

Holmes-Rahe Stress Inventory. (n.d.-c). https://www.stress.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Holmes-Rahe-Stress-inventory.pdf

How to recover from work stress, according to Science. Harvard Business Review. (2022, July 7). https://hbr.org/2022/07/how-to-recover-from-work-stress-according-to-science

Sussex Publishers. (n.d.-a). Coping & Stress Management Skills Test. Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/tests/career/coping-stress-management-skills-test

Sussex Publishers. (n.d.-b). Type A personality test. Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/tests/personality/type-personality-test

The continued praise, good performance reviews, and subsequent pay raises for completing large quantities of work led to a situation where a coworker’s behavior was not the intended behavior my previous employer designed to elicit. The reward system was intended to compensate workers for their efforts. The problem with this system was the employee’s perception of what was actually being rewarded. My coworker must have understood that the quantity of work alone was the item being rewarded instead of the overall quality or amount of hard work in their efforts. Many times, during maintenance cycles, my coworker would sign off on work as being complete when he did not even look at the equipment needing repair or maintenance. To him, having his name on as many items as possible on sign-off sheets was the behavior our supervisors were looking for and rewarded. As long as the equipment did not break down or otherwise fail until its next maintenance cycle, he would be off the hook for not getting the maintenance or repair work done.

The first problem with this reward system is that for someone like me who wants to make sure their name on the sign-off sheets represents great effort and good quality of work, this compensation only encourages reduced work effort, dishonesty, and self-serving behaviors. Another problem with this reward system has to do with our efforts not being easily verified and the added competition for receiving the limited amount of pay increases budgeted each year. Our supervisors thought they could trust their employees to behave the way the reward system intended, but in this case, it failed miserably due to the misaligned perception of the behavior being rewarded. A better approach to this scenario would be to have the supervisors more directly involved in the maintenance cycle, verify the work being done, and if the equipment takes longer to break down, as my coworker always hoped form, they need to adjust the maintenance schedule to reflect that. Otherwise, the system will continue to reward the wrong behavior.

An ineffective way for me to learn at my previous employer had to do with receiving packets filled with procedures called training modules on how to do every step of my job at work. Some of the training modules had images with arrows and circles pointing out items that were meant to be important for the procedures while others relied only on descriptions. Several training modules referenced other training modules which we had to find and learn at the same time. The company wanted the trainees not to make mistakes and also intended to put in writing their expert employee’s knowledge so as not to lose it if they left the company, but all they accomplished was to confuse new employees with so many training modules. While these may have been best practices for the job procedures, handing people packets to read as a training method is not ideal for everyone. Also, being so strict with each step of the process and procedures reduces individuality and creativity, which can help employees find new and better ways to do their jobs.

A more effective way I found to learn and train someone compared to handing people paper stacks of learning material is by using a hands-on approach. For many, the best and only way to learn a new skill is by doing it themselves, which was my experience at my last job. According to an article on the Forbes website, we will not know if someone is capable of doing a task unless they do it (Ellevate, 2021). The website goes on to say that learning by doing also increases engagement and trainees get to put into practice what they are learning, which helps with learning retention (Ellevate, 2021). Making mistakes is also an important part of training because it becomes immediate feedback which a trainee can use to do better in future attempts. By working with someone and doing the tasks myself, I was able to learn my job faster than if I had to read and follow all the training modules without something tangible to show for at the end. There was also no way of knowing if I did the procedure right or wrong.  

References:

Ellevate. (2021, October 7). Why hands-on training is the key to maximizing job success. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/ellevate/2021/10/07/why-hands-on-training-is-the-key-to-maximizing-job-success/

The last company I worked for was a large conglomerate that had companies in the chemical, aerospace, glass, and paint industries. This company was large enough to have an HR Department at its headquarters, but there were no HR personnel stationed at the facility where I was applying for a job. The person tasked to do the hiring process for my position as an operator/engineering technician was the department head/engineering manager at the facility although, during the interview, he was aided by the other department head at the facility to help with questions and provide their opinion. The company used a structured approach to the interview process among other tactics.

To help the company in the recruitment process, they asked the Oregon Employment Department, where I found the job listing, to filter out the candidates interested in the position. Before I could get the information about who the employer was, I had to answer a couple of job-related questions. After I answered the questions to their satisfaction, I was able to apply for the job. This allowed the company to meet one of the recruitment goals, which was to establish a pool that maximizes the best possible candidates for the position they were trying to fill. Although the size of the pool of candidates interviewed for the position when I was hired is unknown to me, an old coworker who was hired a year later told me that he was one of the candidates interviewed and considered when I was hired.

The company used a structured approach to the interview which seemed to consist of standardized and behavioral questions which I assume were asked to candidates. The interview included questions that gauged my general cognitive and reasoning abilities in areas such as math. They also asked job-related questions where I had to explain the type of work I did with my previous employer who is in a similar industry. Lastly, I was asked behavioral questions where I had to tell them about specific examples of how I approached certain situations when performing a task at my previous employer. The interviewers were able to build rapport with me and did not add to my already feeling nervousness about the process which allowed me to be more open about my knowledge and experience than I would have otherwise. However, I still remember being nervous enough to forget the name of an aspect of the job. The interviewer noticed, quickly said the name, and accurately categorized my forgetfulness as me just being nervous.

The interviewer then took me to the area where other employees in the same department where I would be working were working and left me to talk with them, ask questions about the job, and see the type of work I would be doing if hired. The employees also get to ask questions about the candidate and their job experience. This is a critical step in the interview process because after the candidate leaves, the interviewer will come back to ask about the employee’s opinions of the candidate. This is a great approach to the interview process because the candidate does not know the employees will later be asked about them and the candidate usually lets their guard down and behave more like themselves instead of the type of person they want the interviewer to see. It would also be my understanding that the engineering manager would also consult with the other department head who aided in the interview process to give their opinion about me or whoever the candidate was.

Overall, I believe the combination of structured approaches in their recruitment, selection, and interview methods used by my last employer gives great reliability, validity, and utility to their process of finding the best candidate for this particular position they are trying to fill. Because the company is large enough to have an HR department that has probably trained its hiring managers well in the hiring process, there is nothing I would advise them to improve the effectiveness of their interview process for the position for which I was hired. They go to these lengths because they want to keep the turnover rate of this employee level as low as possible because hiring, training, and bringing up to speed such employee takes about a year and is very costly. They do not use this same process for employees at their lowest employee level. For those employees, the process is more streamlined, less costly, and finding replacements is much easier because the qualifications needed to do the job are few.