Do you think that the events in your life - getting hired or getting fired, falling in or out of love, moving from one city to another - are due to your actions or some outside power? How you answer predicts your job satisfaction, stress levels, and how high up you're likely to climb in an organization. Psychologists call it your locus of control. Here's my latest research paper on Locus of Control’s Harmonization Effect on Organizational Role Stress and Managerial Effectiveness. This study is based on a sample of 75 managers working with private organizations belonging to the pharmaceutical, energy and textile sectors. The main objective of the study was to analyze the consequences of the Organizational Role Stress and its impact on management efficiency and the role of Locus of control in balancing in between organizational stress and management efficiency. Looking forwards for your comments and feed backs on it..

1.
www.theinternationaljournal.org>
RJEBS
:
Volume:
07,
Number:
03,
January
2018
Page
90
Locus Of Control’s Harmonization Effect On Organizational Role Stress And
Managerial Effectiveness
KRISHNA NAND TRIPATHI
9820723621,kntrip76@gmail.com
SCHOLAR OF JJTU UNIVERSITY-RAJASTHAN
Abstract
“People are at the heart of any business. They devote their time and effort to the business and
move the business forward. Corporate companies are increasingly aware of the fact that they are the
only source of competitive advantage. Human personality plays an important role in determining its
effectiveness or inefficiency in dealing with everyday stresses prevailing in an organization. It was
found during the review of the literature that, from a psychological point of view, private sector
researchers have insufficient research into their effectiveness. This study is based on a sample of 75
managers working with private organizations belonging to the pharmaceutical, energy and textile
sectors. The main objective of the study was to analyze the consequences of the Organizational Role
Stress and its impact on management efficiency and the role of Locus of control in balancing in
between organizational stress and management efficiency. Multiple regression hierarchical analysis is
performed to find the results. It has been found that the pursuit of an organizational role is
antagonistic to management efficiency, and the internal locus of control plays a balancing effect
between the stress of organizational role and management efficiency.”
Keywords: Organisational Role Stress, Managerial Effectiveness, Locus of Control,
Introduction
A role is a position that occupies a social order and is defined by the functions performed in
response to the expectations of the important members of the social system and its own expectations
from job role. The role and expectation are said to have different concepts, but two sides to one coin.
"The job role is essentially a relational concept that defines each position in terms of its relationship
with others and with the system as a whole," Katz and the priest said. Although the job role is a
relational concept and is associated with authority, the role is a mandatory concept. The organization is
defined as a role system. There are two types of role systems, that is, the role of the role, which is the
system of the different roles that the individual carries out, and the role, which is the system of
different roles whose role part is of. As the organization becomes more complex, the potential for
tension also increases. Stress is an inevitable consequence of changing social, economic and
technological changes. Behr and Newman defined stress as a situation that would force a person to
deviate from normal functioning because of his psychological and physiological changes so that a
person is forced to deviate from normal work. According to the priest and Quinn, stress plays the role
of anything about an organizational role that produces negative consequences for the individual and
includes mystery role and role conflict. Several terms have been used as synonymous with stress. It is
said that stress is a stimulant that stimulates stress and stress is the emotional or emotional part.
The stress of the organizational function has two role systems, that is, role space and set of
functions. Under that there are three variables, that is, the distance of your own role, the distance of the
Inter role and the stagnation of the role. The distance of your own role is derived from the conflict
between the concept of oneself and the expectations of the role of the occupant role. The stagnation of
the function arises when an individual plays a role for a long time and goes into another less secure
role. The new role that occupies the individual demands that it exceeds the previous one and takes care
of the new role effectively and this produces stress in an individual. The inter role distance occurs
when an individual finds a conflict between their organizational role as an employee in the
organization and non-organizational roles and their family role.

2.
www.theinternationaljournal.org>
RJEBS
:
Volume:
07,
Number:
03,
January
2018
Page
91
The conflict of functions assumes the form of conflicts of ambiguity, conflict of hope of roles,
overload of roles, erosion of the role, insufficient resources, personal inadequacy and isolation of the
role. The ambiguity of the function occurs when an individual is not clear about the various
expectations that the person has of their role. The role-expectation conflict arises when there are
conflicting expectations on the part of different role-issuers. These conflicting expectations may be
from the boss, subordinates, colleagues or clients. Overloading of functions occurs when the occupant
role considers that there are too many other significant expectations in its set of functions. The erosion
of the role occurs when a role occupant considers that the functions they want to perform are carried
out for another role. The stress of insufficient resources occurs when resources necessary to carry out
the role such as information, people, materials, finances and facilities are not available. The stress of
personal inadequacy occurs when a role occupant considers that he has no knowledge, skills or training
to play an effective role. The isolation of the role arises when the role of the occupant considers that
certain roles are psychologically closer to him, while others are much farther away.
Locus Of Control
In the psychological literature, Locus of Control is one of the most important personality
variables in various work and organizational contexts. Locus of Control refers to the generalized
expectation of reinforcement, in which the individual identifies the events of his life according to his
behavior and therefore under his control (Internal) Out of his control (external). The Theory of Locus
of Control by Julian Rotters, studying the theory of social learning defined the role of a person in
developing a person's power to act as a substitute for behavior (Rotter 1966, Levenson, 1972)
According to Rotter, some people believe that the extent of reinforcements are referred to as
internal ones, and those who believe that the gains they receive are random, random or other powerful,
which are referred to as external. Rotter believes that internal and external are in a continuum that
changes with time and situation. The conceptualization of Rotter considered the place of control as a
dimension, i.e. internally or externally. According to another researcher, Levenson Locus's control
concept consists of three dimensions. Levenson (1972) shared the outer part of the scale in two, that is,
opportunity and the others powerful. Several studies on the concept of the control point were carried
out. The LOCO inventory is an instrument for measuring the locus control. This instrument has been
developed for use in organizations. The Levenson Locus concept of control (1972) was used to
develop the Loco inventory.
Review Of Literature
Hamid (1994) found that from a collectivist society like China there was more external control
than people from individualist countries such as New Zealand. Studies conducted by Spector et al 2001
found that compared with 24 different countries, it was found that the Taiwanese people had a more
external control place and had the sixth largest locus of control test survey score.
Rahim and Psenicka (1996) made a study to understand the moderate effect of control and
social support on stress and tension. The study reveals that this is the personal variable control spot,
explains the difference between stress and tension rather than social support. They suggest that the
organization should try to recruit people with more internal control in stressful jobs.
Pestonjee(1992), Over the last three decades, empirical studies on the subject of stress have
increased many times. Researchers have conducted research into causation factors of stress, stress and
tension moderators, types of stress experienced by different groups, and types of coping strategies.
According to Spector (1982), internal locus of control are trying to control the following areas:
workflow, task execution, operational procedures, work tasks, relationships with supervisors and

3.
www.theinternationaljournal.org>
RJEBS
:
Volume:
07,
Number:
03,
January
2018
Page
92
subordinates, working conditions, goal setting, work schedule and organizational policy. Majumder,
MacDonald, and Greever (1977) found that the locus of control was linked to the supervisor’s
performance rating.
The focus of control is significantly associated with workplace participation, with inward
persons showing greater involvement (Reitz and Jewell, 1979; Nair, 1988). A laboratory study by
Anderson and Schneider (1978) reveals that (a) Internals locus of control are more inclined to appear
as group leaders, (b) Groups led by internal locus of control performing better than those guided by
external locus of control individuals, and (c) External locus of control leaders were more socially
oriented.
Data Collection
The sample consisted of 75 managers from private sector organisations comprising of Textiles,
Power and Pharma sector. The organisations within the private sector were situated in Mumbai and it’s
suburbs. The sample size contains 58 percentage of male and 42 percentage of female employees,
having age range in between 23 to 50 years of age group. Participants are randomly selected from
each organization and belong to different departments within the organization. Most participants show
their willingness to participate in the study after a brief meeting.
Data Collection Tools
For collecting the key information three research questions are used to get information on three
variables of effective managerial effectiveness, organizational role stress, and location control. The
effectiveness of managemential concepts as dependent variable while the stress on the Organization
role, and the locus of control mind independent variable. Self-help steps are used to get the data.
Effectiveness of the excavation is measured by a question adopted from Gupta (1986), comprising of
45 items divided into 16 dimensions. The organizational role of tension is measured by a question
developed by Udai Pareek, comprising of 50 items divided into 10 dimensions. Against the control of
the area a questionnaire developed in Udai Pareek consists of 30 items divided into 3 sizes
Hypotheses
H1: The Organisational role stress has antagonistically associated with the Managerial effectiveness
H2: Locus of Control modest the consequence of organisational role stress on Managerial
effectiveness.
Data Analysis & Results
As can be seen from Table 1, the tools used in this they are reliable, with odds ranging from
0.71 Up to 0.94, which exceeds the minimum acceptance level by 0.70. The average result for each
variable can be seen From Table 1.
Table 1 also shows that the average for each of the dimensions of the stress of the
organizational role, it varies from 2.12 to 3.56 with the standard deviation of 0.52 to 0.79. The average
score is calculated for the internal locus of control is 4.68 and the standard deviation is 1.24. Best of
all, the average management efficiency is 41.32 Standard deviation of 13.84.

4.
www.theinternationaljournal.org>
RJEBS
:
Volume:
07,
Number:
03,
January
2018
Page
93
Table 1: Mean Scores and Standard Deviations of the Variables
Variables Mean Standard Deviation
Self-role Distance 2.26 0.63
Resource Inadequacy 2.32 0.71
Role Ambiguity 3.56 0.79
Role Expectation Conflict 2.54 0.78
Role Erosion 2.24 0.76
Resource Inadequacy 2.12 0.54
Internal Locus of Control 4.68 1.34
Overall Managerial Effectiveness 41.32 13.84
Table 2: Hierarchical Regression Results
Independent Variables Std Beta
(Model 1)
Std Beta
(Model 2)
Std Beta
(Model 3)
Model Variables
Self-role Distance -0.68** -0.81*
Role Isolation -0.36** -0.70**
Role Ambiguity -1.10* -2.40*
Role Expectation
Conflict
-0.50** 0.67**
Role Erosion -0.32* 0.59*
Resource Inadequacy -2.53** 3.56
Moderating Variable
Internal Locus of Control 2.43** 2.80**
Interaction Self-role Distance×
Internal Locus of Control
0.129
Resource Inadequacy×
Internal Locus of Control
0.126
Role Ambiguity× Internal Locus of
Control
0.340
Role Expectation Conflict× Internal
Locus of Control
0.121
Role Erosion× Internal Locus of
Control
0.069
Resource Inadequacy×
Internal Locus of Control
0.136
R² 0.248 0.726 0.780
Adj. R² 0.546 0.621 0.630
R² Change 0.143 0.186 0.353
F Change 24.323* 2.435 0.286
** p < 0.01; * p < 0.05

5.
www.theinternationaljournal.org>
RJEBS
:
Volume:
07,
Number:
03,
January
2018
Page
94
Table 2 shows, when six organizational string variables are introduced in the first phase of
regression analysis, it is found that the determination accompanying (R2) was 0.248, indicating that
24.6% management skills are explained by independent variables (Oranisational Role Stress) ) In order
to verify whether the internal locus of control works as an independent variable for variables, a second
regression N is made. Adding internal space to control as individual variables, R2 increased 72.6%.
These R2 changes (0.546) are notable. This indicates that 54.6% of the increase in the efficiency of the
manager has been explained by the internal position of additional control. Proposed F-statistic notable
(P = 0.000) suggested that the model was adequate. As seen from Table 2, the internal position of the
control was a positive relationship with the managerial effectiveness
.
From the first regression model, there is significant and negative linking of the role ambiguity
(-1.10) and the role erosion (-0.32) 0.05 level operated functionality. In addition, there was a
significant impact on the self-role distance, (-0.66), role isolation (-0.38), roles expectation conflict (-
0.50) and resource inadequacy (-0.253), but the results of this study at the 0.01 level for the first
hypothesis full support
To test the medium effect of internal locus of control was developed by a third regression
model, R2 shown as interaction conditions added 35.2% increase is significant. It means internal locus
of control as a moderator to see the impact of Organizational role stress on the managerial performance
effectiveness. So, our second hypothesis is proven
Discussion
It is analyzed that the stress of the organizational role is negatively related to the management
efficiency. In other words, a manager who can cope with stress in a healthy and positive way will be
more effective than the manager who thinks stress is a barrier. This is supported by previous studies.
Ahmed Abdel-Halim (1978) explores the relative importance of each of the three role variables - the
role of conflict, ambiguity and congestion - as sources of stress and dissatisfaction among staff of
management personnel. The results show that the ambiguity of roles has the strongest relationship with
role responses in the intended directions. Whenever the internal locus of control acts as a moderator,
the impact of stress on efficiency is to a certain extent reduced. A manager with a place of internal
locus of control takes on the role of stress in a healthy way and will try to understand and solve the
controversial expectations of others in a mature way. The same goes for personal inadequacy
If a manager realizes that he is not enough, he will try to overcome it and be more effective.
The new theory suggests that individual performance work influences not only on individual efforts
and abilities, but also through situational deficiencies. Focusing on lack of work deficiencies as a
precondition for the situation, assumed that lack of job shortcomings not only intervene in the
relationship between individual effort and ability (on the one hand) and individual performance ( on
the other), but there is a direct impact on effort and ability. (Bacharach and Bamberger,2002).
Summary
It can be concluded from the study's point of view of the locus of control, representing an
important dimension of personality, consisting of manager's effectiveness As foretold, managers
within the body are seen to be higher than Overall effectiveness in managing. In order to be effective
as managers, it is important that managers should strive to reduce the tension faced by organizational
changes. The learning of this study are very important for HR practitioners The results of this study
also show that it is possible to identify the potential of existing employees for higher level managerial
jobs based on their locus of control beliefs and thereby improving career plans for them. Those who
know this study can help the administrators and policy makers to provide an attractive working climate
to reduce the impact of additional and increase the work stress of managers. With better understanding

6.
www.theinternationaljournal.org>
RJEBS
:
Volume:
07,
Number:
03,
January
2018
Page
95
of the current situation, managers can develop strategies to mitigate the stress associated with them.
There should be more social and organizational support as well as better resources and opportunities.
To provide collaborative relationship with managers and development of accurate strategies to cope
with and eventually other forms of possible interventions are considered appropriate.
References
1. Ahmed A. Abdel-halim, (1978), “Employee Affective Responses to Organisational Stress:
Moderating Effects of Job Characteristics,” Personnel Psychology,31. 3, pp.561 - 579.
2. Anderson CR. & Schneier C.E. (1978), "Locus of Control, Leader Behaviour and Leader
Performance Among Management Students, "Academy of Management Journal, 21, 690-698
3. Bacharch, S. B., and Bamberger, P. A., (2000), “Boundary Management Tactics and Logics of
Action: The Case of Peer Support Providers,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 45, pp.704 - 736.’
4. Gupta S. (1996), "Managerial Effectiveness: Conceptual Framework and Scale Development,"
Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 31, No. 3, January.
5. Hamid PN (1994),” Self Monitoring, locus of control and social encounters of Chinese and
Newzealand students,” Journal of Cross cultural Psychology, 25pp, 3-68
6. Luthans F. (1988), "Successful vs. Effective Real Managers," Academy of Management Executive,
May, pp. 127-32.
7. Majumder R.K., MacDonald A.P. & Greever K.B. (1977), "A Study of Rehabilitation Counsellors:
Locus of Control and Attitudes Toward the Poor," Journal of Counselling Psychology, 24, 137-141
8. Nair S.K. (1997)' "Relationship Between Locus of Control and Job Characteristics Model
Dimensions," Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 32, No.4,April
9. Nair S.K. (1997)' "Relationship Between Locus of Control and Job Characteristics Model
Dimensions," Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 32, No.4,
10. Pestonjee, DM (1992),Stress and Coping : The India Experience, Sage Publications, New Delhi.
11. Rotter J B(1967) , “ A new scale for the measurement of Interpersonal trust”, Journal of
Personality, 35, 651-655.
12. Reitz H.J. & Jewell L.N. (1979), "Locus of Control, and Job Involvement: A Six country
investigation” Academy of Management Journal, 22, 72-80.
13. Spector P.E. (1982), "Behaviour in Organisations as a Function of Employee's Locus of Control,"
Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 91, No. 3, 482-497
14. Udai Pareek (2002)” Training Instruments in HRD and OD”- Tata Mc-Graw-Hill, pages 95-
133,477-492,548– 551.
15. Valecha G.K. (1972), Construct Validation of Internal - External Locus of Reinforcement Related
to Work- related Variables," Proceedings of the 80th Annual