You are on page 1of 5

Procedia

Social and
Behavioral
Sciences

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

Procedia
- Social
and Behavioral
Sciences
33 (2012)
1047 000000
1051
Procedia
- Social
and Behavioral
Sciences
00 (2011)

www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

PSIWORLD 2011

Assertiveness and Organizational Trust as predictors of


mental and Physical Health in a Romanian Oil Company
S. Tnase a *, C.Manea b , M.Chraif c, M.Anei d
V.Cobla e
a,b

Titu Maiorescu University, Romania

c,d,e

University of Bucharest,Koglniceanu 36-46 street, Bucharest, 050107, Romania, Titu Maiorescu University

Abstract
In this paper a model validation was designed on assertiveness and organizational trust with the criteria mental health
and physical health. The participants were 128 employees, aged between 25 and 52 years old (m= 37.18; S.D.=6.52),
male and female, oil company from Romania, Bucharest. The instrument was CAPES (Aniei & Chraif, 2010).
Applying linear regression model stepwise, standardized coefficients highlight that assertiveness, organizational
trust and their subscales are predictors for mental and physical health (p<0.05). Therefore, a high level of
assertiveness has a strong positive statistically significant correlation with work overloaded (r=0.37; p<0.05) and a
strong negative statistically significant multiple correlation with mental and physical health.

peer-review
under
responsibilityofofPSIWORLD
PSIWORLD2011
2012
2011 Published
Published by
byElsevier
ElsevierB.V.
Ltd. Selection
Selection and/or
and peer-review
under
responsibility
2011
Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.

Keywords: asertivness, organizational trust, mental health, physical health;

1. Theoretical foundation
Assertiveness and organizational trust were for decades the bases of organizational performances
(Avram & Cooper, 2007). Living in a high competitive environment, mental and physical health took an
important place in the organizational life. Judge, Thoreson, Bono, & Patton (2001) highlighted that the

* Sorin Tnase. Tel.: +40730606478


E-mail address: tanase.sorin@utm.ro

1877-0428 2012 Published by Elsevier B.V. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of PSIWORLD2011
Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.01.282

1048

S. Tanase
et al.
/ Procedia
- Social
Behavioral
Sciences
33 (2012)
1047 1051
S.Tnase
et all/
Procedia
- Social
andand
Behavioral
Sciences
00 (2011)
000000

relationship between trust and job performance was as strong as or stronger than the relationships with
other attitudes.
Some authors show, in textual analysis, that the basic aspect for reaching success is trust: the success of
any company is indirectly connected to the degree in which leaders are to be trusted (Kets de Vrie, 2001).
People have confidence in themselves, in their peers, in the relationships between them, in the groups and
organizations they are part of, in the relationships between the groups and the organizations they are part
of and the groups and organizations which exist in the surrounding environment (Pnioar, O.
&Pnioara, G., (2005); Judge, Bono, Erez, & Locke, 2005). For Zaheer et al. (1998), individual trust is
about the expectations that individuals have concerning the networks of relationships and organizational
behaviours. Chraif & Stefan (2010) highlites that trust, ethics, couterproductive behavior are predictors of
organizational performances, Pitariu & Chraif (2009a) and Pitariu, Radu & Chraif (2009) and Pitariu &
Chraif (2009) evidenced procedures of validating organizational psychological tests and how to make job
analysis and Job description in order to establish a corelation between employee abilities and skills profile
and his performances at workplace.
Mishra (1996), who identifies four distinct dimensions of trust: competence, openess, concern/care,
congruence. Shockey-Zalabak et al. (2000), starting from the studies in literature concerning
communication and satisfaction in work, have added a fifth dimension: identification. In this way, if
individuals identify themselves with the organization, then they will have higher levels of organizational
trust and of efficiency. This dimension reveals the fact that trust is a inevitable result of communication
and of interpretation processes, within the context of this dimension, leaders and members from the
organization are more likely to communicate and strengthen trust (Shockey-Zalabak et al., 2000).
Knowing the dimensions of trust in organizations has a double significance: on one hand, a theoretical
one, which offers conceptual instruments of analysis for phenomena that have a significance in the
organizations life, and, on the other hand, a methodological one, imposing the design of research and
intervention methods (Zlate & Avram, 2005).
2. Objectives and Hypothesis
2.1. Research Objectives
x In this paper a validation model was designed on assertiveness and organizational trust with the
criteria mental health and physical health;
x To emphasize the correlation between assertiveness, organizational trust and the criteria mental
health and physical health.
2.2. Hypothesis
Assertiveness and organizational trust are predictors of the criteria mental health and physical health
3. Method
3.1. Participants
The participants were 128 employees, aged between 25 and 52 years old (m= 37.18; S.D.=6.52), male
and female, oil company from Romania, Bucharest.

1049

S. Ta
et al.
Procedia
- Social
and
Behavioral
Sciences
3300
(2012)
1047
1051
S.nase
Tnase
et /al/
Procedia
- Social
and
Behavioral
Sciences
(2011)
000000

3.2. Instruments
Fromthe CAPES questionnaire (Aniei & Chraif, 2010) we selected four dimensions: assertiveness,
organizational trust, criteria mental health and physical health.
3.3. Experimental design
For the correlation statistical test the dependent variables are: assertiveness, organizational trust,
criteria mental health and physical health.
For the regression model the Independent variables are the following: assertiveness and organizational
trust. The dependent variables are: criteria mental health and physical health.
4. Results
Table 1. Descriptive statistics (N=44)
Variables

Mean

Std. Deviation

communication styles

12.1818

1.35153

Health

1.9886

.50530

org trust

2.7364

.29022

Organizational trust b

3.2898

1.15976

Organizational trust c

3.5455

1.08809

justice

2.8409

.77619

Appreciating health a

3.3258

.33614

Appreciating health b

2.9848

.56126

Table 1 shows the means and the standard deviations for the dependent variables - physical health and
mental health and the independent variables: work and for the organizational culture, assertiveness, trust,
health.
Table 2 represents the bivariate correlation matrix between the variables of the regression model,
where r is the coefficient of the multiple correlation from the variables shown. Statistically significant
correlations can be observed between the independent variable communication styles and health (r=204;
p<0.05); communication styles and organizational trust (r=279; p<0.05); communication styles and
organizational trust b (r=.340; p<0.05); communication styles and justice (r=.301; p<0.05);
communication styles and appreciating health a (r=.165; p<0.05); stiluri de comunicare i aprecierea
VQWii b(r=-.190; p<0.05);
Table 2 Correlation matrix between vriables
1
1 Comunication
styles

1.000

1050

S. Tanase et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 33 (2012) 1047 1051
S.Tnase et all/ Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 00 (2011) 000000
2. Health 3
3 organizational
trust a
4 Organizational
trust c
5 Organizational
trust c
6 Justice
7 Health
perception A
8 Health
perception B

.204**

1.000

.279**

-.068

1.000

.340**

-.425**

.359**

1.000

.326**

-.252**

.568**

.413

1.000

.301**

-.433**

.597**

.957**

.483**

1.000

.165*

.667**

.209**

-.291**

-.134

-.399**

-.190*

.609**

-.401**

-.758**

-.303** -.417**

1.000
.394**

1.000

Table 3. Model sumay

Model Summary(c)

.641a

Change Statistics
Adjusted
R
Std. Error of
R
F
Square
the Estimate R Square
df1 df2
Square
Change Change
0.411 0.396
8.95056
0.411
29.247 1 42 0

.685b

0.469 0.444

Model R

8.59423

0.059

4.555

41

Sig. F Change

0.039

a. Predictors: (Constant),organizational trust


b. Predictors: (Constant), organizational trust, comunication styles
c. Dependent Variable: performante
Table 4. Regression model: standardized coeficients
Coefficients

Unstandardized Coefficients

Model

Std. Error

(Constant)

60.807

11.892

Organizational trust c

7.672

1.274

Comunication styles

-2.190

1.026

Standardized
Coefficients

Sig.

5.113

.000

.725

6.020

.000

-.257

-2.134

.039

Beta

a. Dependent Variable: performances

For the model from table 4, which includes the variables: organizational trust and communication
styles it is revealed that these are statistically significant (p< 0.05). Considering this, these coefficients
will be retained, and therefore the variable they are referring to will be retained, in the final regression
equation. Hence, we will have the following regression equation, according to the table:
Y=60.807+0.725* organizational trust 0,257* communication styles

S. Ta
et al.
Procedia
- Social
and
Behavioral
Sciences
3300
(2012)
1047
1051
S.nase
Tnase
et /al/
Procedia
- Social
and
Behavioral
Sciences
(2011)
000000

Obtaining the rezults from table 4, the reseach hipothesis has been confirmed. Thus, organizational trust
and assertiveness are predictors of physical and mental health.
5. Conclusions
This study emphasizes the fact that the communication styles of employees both with clients and with
members of the team, is an indicator of a high performance, with long-term effects. Establishing a longterm relationship with clients is essential for a small company, with limited resources that does not have
the funds or the workforce in order to invest in an aggressive marketing, focused on attracting clients.
Results showed a very strong and positive correlation between communication styles and health (r=204;
p<0.05); communication styles and organizational trust (r=279; p<0.05); communication styles and
organizational trust b (r=.340; p<0.05); communication styles and justice (r=.301; p<0.05). Regression
model highlighted that organizational trust and assertiveness are predictors of physical and mental health
(p<0.05). Therefore, the communication style integrated by the organizational consultants is essentially
for the development and the growth of the organization analyzed.
References
Avram, E. & Cooper, (2007). Organizational-managerial psychology. Actual tendences, [Psihologie organizational-manageriala.
Tendinte actuale], Iai: Polirom.
Chraif, M. & Stefan, C. (2010). A practical model for the development of public servants competitiveness and professional
performance, Romanian Journal of Applied Experimental Psychology, 1 ( 1), 44-57
Judge, T. A, Bono, J. E., Erez, A., & Locke, E. A. (2005) Core self-evaluations and job and life satisfaction: The role of selfconcordance and goal attainment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 257-268
Judge, T. A., Thoresen, C. J., Bono, J. E., & Patton, G. K. (2001). The job satisfaction-job performance relationship: A qualitative
and quantitative review. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 376-407
Kets de Vries, M. (2001), The leadership mystique a users manual for the human enterprise. Prentice Hall. London.
Mishra, A. K. (1996). "Organisational Responses to Crisis: The Centrality of Trust." R. M. K. &. T. R. Tyler, ed., Sage, Thousand
Oaks, CA, 261-287.
Pnioar, O. & Pnioar, G. (2005). Human Resources management, [Managementul resurselor umane], Ia i: Polirom.
Pitariu H. D.&Chraif M. (2009). Work Analysis. Designing job descriptions, Supplement for The Journal of Human Resources
Psychology, Editura Asociaiei de tiine Cognitive, Cluj.
Pitariu H. D, Radu I.& Chraif M., (2009). Selection and psychological evaluation of personnel, Supplement for The Journal of
Human Resources Psychology, Editura Asociaiei de tiine Cognitive, Cluj.
Pitariu H.D.&Chraif M. (2009). Assessing professional performance, Supplement for The Journal of Human Resources Psychology,
Editura Asociaiei de tiine Cognitive, Cluj.
Shockley-Zalabak, P., Ellis, K., Winograd, G. (2000), Organizational trust: What it means, why it matters, Organizational
Developement, 18, 35- 48.
Zaheer, A., B. McEvily, and V. Perrone. (1998). Does trust matter? Exploring the effects of interorganizational and interpersonal
trust on performance, Organization Science, 9(2), 141-159.
Zlate M., Avram E., (2005), Increderea organizationala - cateva probleme teoretice, Revista de psihologie organizationala, 5, (1),
11-30

1051

You might also like