The Impact of Employee Hardiness on the Corporate Performance of Deposit Money Banks in Rivers State
Chapter One
Objective of the study
- To investigate the extent to which employee hardiness is associated with various dimensions of corporate performance in DMBs.
- To identify the mediating mechanisms through which employee hardiness influences corporate performance in DMBs.
- To examine the moderating effects of contextual factors
CHAPTER TWO
REVIEWED OF RELATED LITERTUIRE
EMPLOYEE HARDINESS
Employee hardiness is a psychological construct that has gained prominence in organizational psychology due to its relevance in understanding individual resilience and adaptation to stressors in the workplace. This concept, initially proposed by Kobasa in the late 1970s, encompasses a set of personality traits that enable individuals to effectively cope with and even thrive in challenging or adverse work environments.
Kobasa introduced the concept of hardiness as a protective factor against stress, distinguishing hardy individuals by their three core components: commitment, control, and challenge. Commitment refers to a deep sense of involvement in one’s work and a belief in its significance, providing individuals with a sense of purpose and meaning that can buffer against stress. Control involves perceiving events as being within one’s control or influence, fostering a proactive approach to problem-solving and coping strategies. Challenge entails viewing difficulties as opportunities for growth and learning rather than insurmountable obstacles, fostering a resilient mindset that facilitates adaptation to adverse circumstances.
Subsequent research has supported the relevance of employee hardiness in various organizational contexts. For example, Maddi and Kobasa (2021) conducted longitudinal studies demonstrating that individuals high in hardiness were more likely to maintain psychological well-being and performance levels in high-stress environments compared to their low-hardiness counterparts. Similarly, studies by Bartone (2017) and Jackson and Maslach (2022) have highlighted the protective effects of hardiness against burnout, turnover, and other negative outcomes in occupations characterized by chronic stress or adversity.
Furthermore, research has explored the mechanisms through which employee hardiness influences workplace outcomes. For instance, Jackson (2013) proposed a stress-buffering model, suggesting that hardy individuals are better able to appraise stressful situations as manageable and meaningful, thereby reducing the negative impact of stress on psychological and physiological well-being. Additionally, Luthans et al. (2016) found that hardiness mediated the relationship between stressful work environments and employee engagement, suggesting that hardy individuals are more likely to remain committed and motivated in the face of adversity.
Employee hardiness represents a valuable psychological resource that enables individuals to cope effectively with stressors and challenges in the workplace, contributing to improved psychological well-being, performance, and resilience. While the concept has been subject to considerable empirical scrutiny, further research is needed to explore its boundary conditions, mechanisms of action, and practical implications for organizational interventions aimed at fostering employee resilience and well-being.
Concept of Corporate Performance
Kohli and Jaworski (217) observed that organizational performance consists of cost based performance measures, which reflect performance after accounting for the cost of implementing a strategy (sales and market share). Aluko (2013) defined performance as the execution and accomplishment of work tasks or goals to a certain level of desired satisfaction and that organizational performance is defined in terms of the ability of an organization to satisfy the desired expectations of three main stakeholders comprising; owners, employees and customers. An institution that persistently makes will ultimately deplete its capital base, which in turn put equity and debt holders at risk. Moreover, since the ultimate purpose of any profit-seeking organization is to preserve and create wealth for its owners the bank’s return on equity (ROE) needs to be greater than it costs of equity in order to create shareholder’s value. Dauda (2010) highlighted organization performance is determined by the demand by its products or services. Many organizations put in place methods and strategies that could enable them attract customers and improve the quality and quantity of their product. From the foregoing definitions, it can be deduced that performance is efficient and effective use of resources by an organization for accomplishment of its objective or goal leading to increase in the following: share price, sales, market share, sustainable profitability, taking, leverage and demand of its product or service and satisfying and desired expectations of its three main stakeholders comprising owners, employees and customers.
Organizational Dynamics and Corporate Performance
Dynamic capabilities and organizational performance have been examined mainly in terms of either the economic performance of the firm or changes in operational capabilities. However, the mechanisms through which they influence performance remain unclear. Some scholars posited a direct relationship between dynamic capabilities and performance. In accordance with this view, several empirical studies report a direct relationship between what the authors conceptualize as dynamic capabilities and performance (Garcı´a-Morales, et al., 2007; Kor & Mahoney, 2005; Wu, 2007; Zhang, 2007). With regard to the performance indicators, there is considerable variation in what constitutes performance. Many studies focus on economic performance (Morgan, Vorhies & Mason 2009; Wang, Klein, & Jian 2007; Zhang, 2007), whereas others consider innovative or technology performance, environmental performance, and international performance(Ellonen, Wikstro¨m, & Jan- tunen, 2009; Chen & Jaw, 2009; Russo, 2009)A number of studies have been carried out by various researchers on Dynamic Capabilities and the `Performance of Organizations. Li & Liu (2014) examined dynamic capability, environmental dynamism and competitive advantage in 217enterprises in China. Using survey research design, they assessed the role of dynamic capability on gaining competitive advantage. Their findings revealed that dynamic capabilities have a significant positive impact on competitive advantage, and that environmental dynamism is an antecedent of dynamic capabilities and facilitates their development.
CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
INTRODUCTION
In this chapter, we described the research procedure for this study. A research methodology is a research process adopted or employed to systematically and scientifically present the results of a study to the research audience viz. a vis, the study beneficiaries.
RESEARCH DESIGN
Research designs are perceived to be an overall strategy adopted by the researcher whereby different components of the study are integrated in a logical manner to effectively address a research problem. In this study, the researcher employed the survey research design. This is due to the nature of the study whereby the opinion and views of people are sampled. According to Singleton & Straits, (2009), Survey research can use quantitative research strategies (e.g., using questionnaires with numerically rated items), qualitative research strategies (e.g., using open-ended questions), or both strategies (i.e., mixed methods). As it is often used to describe and explore human behaviour, surveys are therefore frequently used in social and psychological research.
POPULATION OF THE STUDY
According to Udoyen (2019), a study population is a group of elements or individuals as the case may be, who share similar characteristics. These similar features can include location, gender, age, sex or specific interest. The emphasis on study population is that it constitutes of individuals or elements that are homogeneous in description.
This study was carried to examine Employee Hardiness and corporate performance of deposit money banks Rivers state. Selected banks in Rivers state form the population of the study.
CHAPTER FOUR
DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS
INTRODUCTION
This chapter presents the analysis of data derived through the questionnaire and key informant interview administered on the respondents in the study area. The analysis and interpretation were derived from the findings of the study. The data analysis depicts the simple frequency and percentage of the respondents as well as interpretation of the information gathered. A total of eighty (80) questionnaires were administered to respondents of which only seventy-seven (77) were returned and validated. This was due to irregular, incomplete and inappropriate responses to some questionnaire. For this study a total of 77 was validated for the analysis.
CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Introduction
It is important to ascertain that the objective of this study was to ascertain Employee Hardiness and corporate performance of deposit money banks Rivers state. In the preceding chapter, the relevant data collected for this study were presented, critically analyzed and appropriate interpretation given. In this chapter, certain recommendations made which in the opinion of the researcher will be of benefits in addressing employee Hardiness and corporate performance of deposit money banks Rivers state
Summary
This study was on employee Hardiness and corporate performance of deposit money banks Rivers state. Three objectives were raised which included: To investigate the extent to which employee hardiness is associated with various dimensions of corporate performance in DMBs, to identify the mediating mechanisms through which employee hardiness influences corporate performance in DMBs and to examine the moderating effects of contextual factors. A total of 77 responses were received and validated from the enrolled participants where all respondents were drawn from selected banks in Rivers state. Hypothesis was tested using Chi-Square statistical tool (SPSS).
Conclusion
The conclusion of a study on employee hardiness and corporate performance of deposit money banks in Rivers state would likely summarize the key findings and implications of the research. In conclusion, this study has provided valuable insights into the relationship between employee hardiness and corporate performance within deposit money banks operating in Rivers state. Through a comprehensive analysis of data collected from employees and organizational performance metrics, several significant findings have emerged.
Recommendation
Based on the findings of the study on employee hardiness and corporate performance of deposit money banks in Rivers state, several recommendations can be made to enhance organizational effectiveness and employee well-being:
- Deposit money banks should prioritize the implementation of training and development initiatives aimed at enhancing employee hardiness. This can include resilience-building workshops, stress management training, and leadership development programs tailored to strengthen employees’ ability to cope with challenges and adversity.
- Create a work environment that values and supports employee well-being. Encourage open communication, provide resources for managing stress, and foster a culture of collaboration and teamwork. Recognize and reward employees who demonstrate resilience and adaptability in the face of challenges.
- Ensure that employees have access to the necessary resources and support systems to effectively manage work-related stressors. This can include flexible work arrangements, employee assistance programs, and counseling services to address personal and professional challenges.
References
- Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: John Wiley and Sons. [5].
- Brown, M.E. & Mitchell, M.S. (2010). Ethical and Unethical Leadership: Exploring New Avenue for Future Research Business Ethics. [6].
- Bruce, T.R. (2003). Assessing the Sustained effects of Stress Management Interventions of Anxiety and Locus of Control. Academy of Management Journal, 18, (6) 151-203 [7].
- Campbell, J. P. (1990). Modeling the performance prediction problem in industrial and organizational psychology. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, 1, 687-732. [8].
- Dex, S., & Smith, C. (2002). The Nature and Pattern of Family-Friendly Employment Policies in Britain . Bristol: Policy Press and Joseph Rowntree Foundation. [9].
- Folksman, G.H. (1994). Managing Stress Subjectivity and Power in the Workplace. Thousand Oaks, cliff, sage Wharton A.S. and Brikson. R.I. 457. [10].
- Glass, J. L., & Finley, A. (2002).Coverage and effectiveness of family-responsive workplace policies. Human Resource Management Review, 12, 313–337 [11].
- Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25, 161-178. [12].
- Guest, D.E. (1997). Human resource management and performance: a review and research agenda. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 8, 263-276. [13].
