INTRODUCTION

STRESS

Stress is a state of tension that affects both your body and mind. Any event or thought
that causes a person to feel irritated, furious, or anxious can trigger it. The body's
response to an action, a challenge, or a demand is stress. In other words, stress can
sometimes be good, such when it makes it easier to avoid danger or achieve a
deadline.

Stress, in this sense, can be defined as our response to pressure or threat. It typically
occurs when we are in a precarious position that we don't feel we have any control
over.

When we feel stressed, it may be because of things like:

• Having numerous obligations that you are finding difficult to handle or control.

• For instance, Part of Group, if your family is going through a trying moment, like a
death in the family or financial issues.

• As an illustration, choose Part of Community if you are a member of a religious

organisation that is subject to discrimination.

• As an illustration, a citizen during a natural disaster or a situation like the

coronavirus pandemic.

As a member of a larger group, a person may experience stress in a variety of ways.

Even if the stressor is the same, this is still possible.

Sometimes it is also believed that a modest amount of stress can boost our energy and
help us feel more powerful. However, stress can also become an issue if it persists for
a long period or is extremely intense. Stress occasionally has an impact on a person's
physical and mental well-being.

ORGANISATIONAL TRUST

Any workforce's faith in the company's activities is referred to as an organisational

trust. This includes trust in team members, managers, or individuals, but it also
includes organisational aspects like: • The company's mission • Senior leadership's
vision
• The ideals and culture of the company.
• Diversity, inclusiveness, and equality in the workplace; • Process ethics and fairness
Not all trust-related qualities appear as frequently. If anything, having faith in your
immediate and long-term futures is what organisational trust is all about. After all, a
worker might not make it through the year if they are unhappy with their management
or team. However, if they lack faith in the organisation, they are also inclined to
leave.

. And they almost certainly won’t put in max effort while they’re there.

The more you can do to boost confidence in all aspects of the employee experience,
the more tightly knit your organization will be.

LEADERSHIP

The capacity to influence and direct followers or other members of an organisation is

referred to as leadership.

Making wise — and occasionally challenging — decisions, defining and

communicating a clear vision, setting realistic goals, and empowering subordinates
with the information and resources they need to reach those goals are all aspects of
leadership.

Most facets of society, including business, politics, local communities, and nonprofit
groups, demand leaders.

Leadership needs people to possess some critical attributes, such as good

communication skills, charm, assertiveness, and empathy. "Leadership is the art of
getting someone else to do something you want done because he wants to do it."

While many people are born with certain leadership qualities, most people must learn
most, if not all, of the qualities that make someone a good leader.

Similar to this, leadership experts hold that there are various types of leadership
styles, some leaders possess a dominating single style, while other leaders use various
styles depending on the situation or the followers they are leading. And it's pretty
certain that they won't give it their all when they're there.

Your organisation will be more cohesive the more you can do to increase employee
confidence in all facets of the employee experience.
LITERATURE REVIEW

LEADERSHIP

In the past, various leadership philosophies, including transformational leadership,

charismatic leadership, and visionary leadership, as well as their characteristics and
impacts on the followers, have been identified and investigated (Avolio & Bass, 1995;
Conger & Kanungo, 1987; Klein & House, 1995). Scholars have focused on the
importance of the leaders' authenticity ever since authentic leadership was first
mentioned in the literature (Luthans & Avolio, 2003). When it comes to their
thoughts, feelings, and behaviour, authentic leaders maintain consistency between the
three areas (Avolio & Gardner, 2005). According to this theory, a CEO who supports
corporate social responsibility will probably take part in philanthropic activities. Real
leaders are self-conscious, have strong moral beliefs, and are aware of their values.
They often have high moral values (Luthans & Avolio, 2003).

Supervisor trust would influence organisational trust, according to the study's trust
transfer theory (Yeon-Kook Jeong, Yong-Ki Lee, & Sally Kim, 2017). According to
their argument, trust is transferred from the supervisor (a more well-known source) to
the latter because employees (subordinates) know their supervisor better than they do
the organisation (a lesser-known target).

The trust transfer theory is supported by the finding that supervisory trust has a
significant influence on organisational trust. According to their research, employee
perceptions of the organisation are significantly influenced by interpersonal
interactions. In other words, employees draw conclusions about the organisation
based on their interactions with the boss.

Autocratic type of leadership

In an autocratic system of government, often known as a dictatorship, the leaders are
the centre of power and are viewed as having absolute authority (Burke et al., 2006;
Vigoda-Gadot, 2007). The transactional theory, which emphasises the connections
between leaders and their followers, is where the style got its start. In this instance,
followers comply due to the reward or penalty systems (Burke et al., 2006; Rad &
Yarmohammadian,2006). It would seem that the drawbacks of an authoritarian
leadership style exceed their benefits. The authoritarian leadership style is therefore
unpopular with employees (and coworkers) in the majority of organisations. Leaders
in organisations could unintentionally employ it. According to the literature,
democratic leadership is the total antithesis of autocratic leadership.

Laissez-faire Leadership Style

Regarding the laissez-faire leadership style, the leader does not regularly
communicate with or solicit feedback from the team members, nor does he or she
personally supervise them. In particular, it gives the group members complete liberty
and self-rule to decide how to complete the assignment (Eagly, Johannesen-Schmidt
& Van Engen, 2003; MacBeath, 2005; Rad &Yarmohammadian, 2006).

However, the leader is readily ready to provide direction whenever the group
members need it (Eagly, Johannesen-Schmidt & Van Engen, 2003) a transformational
style of leadership.

Transformational Leadership style

Burns proposed the transformational leadership theory in 1978, and it has since
garnered a lot of study interest, according to Gumusluoglu and Ilsev (2009). Four
components make up transformational leadership: charismatic role modelling,
individualised care, inspirational drive, and intellectual stimulation (Gumusluoglu &
Ilsev, 2009:462). First, leaders who are charismatic emphasise having a single,
common mission and incite respect, veneration, and allegiance. Second, leaders who
take individual variations, wants, abilities, and preferences into account build their
own relationships with followers.
Thirdly, inspirational motivation occurs when a leader effectively conveys the future
vision, exemplifies how objectives may be met, and ignites followers' passion for
achieving objectives. Last but not least, leaders broaden followers' perspectives,
improve their welfare, and inspire them to be highly innovative through intellectual
stimulation. The transactional leadership style may supplement the transformational
leadership style's effectiveness. The transactional leadership style is discussed in the
following subsection.

Transactional Leadership Style

The two types of leadership—transactional and transformational—work well together,

but there are some important distinctions (Bass & Avolio, 1993). Managerial
leadership is another name for the first leadership approach. A follower may be
encouraged to accomplish a task to gain rewards or preferences, for example. This is a
style in which the leader assures conformity or reverence of the staff by employing
both rewards and penalties (Hayward, Goss & Tolmay, 2004; Vigoda-Gadot, 2007;
Yang, 2007; Nielsen et al., 2008). To maintain organisational commitment and
collectivism, transformational leaders, on the other hand, put a strong emphasis on
connections (Einarsen, Aasland & Skogstad, 2007; Gumusluoglu & Ilsev, 2009;
Bushra, Usman & Naveed, 2011). These leaders make an effort to understand their
followers' needs and inspire them to achieve predetermined goals. Thus,They can
therefore be identified by their adaptability in making decisions and implementing
adjustments as followers strive to get the desired results.

Charismatic Leadership Style

The charismatic leadership style has its roots in an extreme or bold personality trait
that is more or less of celestial origin (Burke et al., 2006; Avolio, Walumbwa &
Weber, 2009). One of the leadership philosophies advanced by Max Weber in 1947
was this one. It is predicated on the idea that charisma and grace attract large
followings, self-belief is a fundamental need of leaders, and members adhere to those
leaders they hold in high regard rather than any other kind of authority (Chen &
Silverthorne, 2005; Lee, 2005; Hannah et al., 2008). In church organisations, the
charismatic leadership style is highly prevalent.
Democratic Leadership Style

The transformational theory is the source of the democratic leadership style, often
referred to as participative leadership style (Burke et al., 2006; Rad &
Yarmohammadian, 2006; Vigoda-Gadot, 2007). This leadership approach puts an
emphasis on visionary leadership, change, and improving both human and
organisational outcomes. Members have the opportunity to develop their leadership
abilities, take part in leadership, and make decisions (Vigoda-Gadot, 2007). It can be
argued that this leadership approach is more effective than autocratic leadership
(MacBeath, 2005). Employees believe their views, recommendations, and ideas are
taken into account. Despite the fact that members have a certain amount of autonomy,
the laissez-faire leadership style works best in environments where employees are
highly trained, passionate, and content with their work.

Visionary Leadership

Luhrmann and Eberl (2007); Yukl (2006)), and it is significant to emphasise that
transformational actions and traits are exhibited by visionary leaders. However,
visionary leaders also exhibit traits that are "necessary for followers themselves to
have the knowledge, skills, and abilities" (p. 129) to accomplish organisational goals,
claim Sashkin and Sashkin (2002). These traits include confidence, pro-social power
behaviours, and organisational capabilities. Visionary leaders create their own unique
vision before combining it with their colleagues' visions. What motivates others to
take action is the vision's communication. People typically don't act because the
vision hasn't been clearly expressed; instead, they spend their time trying to figure out
which way to go, which exhausts them and makes them unresponsive (Heath and
Heath,2010).

Situational Leadership

According to their subordinates' level of commitment, this sort of leadership requires

that leaders modify their behaviour and management style. 2009's Kindle Task
behaviour, worker dedication, and relational behaviour are all components of
situational leadership. According to studies, these three elements must be combined
for the situational leadership style to be successful; this ensures employee decision-
making is independent and competent while also allowing for open communication
between leaders and members. To know which leadership style to utilise with a
follower, a situational leader strives to learn about that person's traits. 2012 (Farmer)

Servant leadership

Servant leaders operate invisibly behind the scenes and positively receive criticism.
The qualities of a servant leader are patience, kindness, gentleness, empathy, and
persuasion. A servant leader does not become defensive when challenged (Sendjaya et
al., 2008). (Covey, 2006). Altruism, humility, trust, vision, empowerment, service,
and agape love are among the various elements of servant leadership, according to
Carroll and Patterson (2014). A servant leader upholds the organization's goals and
methods by taking a moral position for them. This contributes to creating a culture
that embraces and upholds core principles (Sendjaya et al., 2008).

Participative leadership

High levels of cognitive trust in subordinates should be fostered through participatory

leadership, since its provision is likely to have an impact on how they perceive their
supervisor's expertise in handling task-related issues. For instance, supervisors should
encourage their subordinates to participate in decision-making so that they feel more
competent and secure in their capacity to direct task performance (Dirks & Ferrin
2002). When two people are in a relationship, emotional attachments form as a result
of their participation in a process of reciprocal social exchange. This is referred to as
affective trust (Schaubroeck, Lam, & Peng 2011). Participatory leaders should foster
affective trust in their subordinates by giving them the chance and encouragement to
take ownership of and participate in decision-making. This will result in a strong
emotional connection between the two parties (Huang et al. 2010). This should
encourage employees to participate in decision-making and offer suggestions, and it
should encourage them to return the favour by exhibiting work-related behaviours that
the manager values, such as job performance.

ORGANISATIONAL TRUST

Supervisor trust would influence organisational trust, according to the study's trust
transfer theory (Yeon-Kook Jeong, Yong-Ki Lee, & Sally Kim, 2017). According to
their argument, trust is transferred from the supervisor (a more well-known source) to
the latter because employees (subordinates) know their supervisor better than they do
the organisation (a lesser-known target). The trust transfer theory is supported by the
finding that supervisory trust has a significant influence on organisational trust.
According to their research, employee perceptions of the organisation are
significantly influenced by interpersonal interactions. In other words, employees draw
conclusions about the organisation based on their interactions with the boss.

Deep but narrow competencies result from individual specialisation and

organisational focus on core competencies. Consequently, complementing knowledge,
tools, and abilities are required. Sthle (1998, 85 and 86) emphasises how individuals
in a system55 are interdependent on one another by pointing out that although actors
are always a part of social systems, they can only become actualized through
relationships with other people. Social actors must be able to connect with one
another in order to acquire and transfer knowledge, and in order to do that, they must
develop trust. Additionally, according to Luhmann (1995, 112), each system evaluates
the relationship of trust before beginning to process meaning. According to Arrow
(1974), we draw the conclusion that the capacity to establish trust is a crucial (even
though insufficient) precondition of interactions in a social system (network).

Because only people can establish trust and determine if someone is trustworthy,
personal and organisational trust are inextricably linked. However, objects of trust can
be both people and organisations. Building trust is built on both interpersonal and
organisational trust. Giddens' Theory of Structuration serves as the foundation for a
model of structure and action (1984). According to the three-dimensional
conceptualization of trust, the model is structured (competence, goodwill and
behavior). T rust construction is an iterative and cyclical process, where the issues
(bases, sources, or objects for trust) are examined iteratively and at both static and
dynamic state. The concepts utilised as bases for trust in this tentative model are
picked from pertinent literature and reflection. For instance, managerial philosophy
might be viewed as having a moral or constructive goal when it is learned via a
company presentation. However, it manifests itself, for instance, in a contractual
dispute.

Organizational trust highlights how crucial both individuals and groups are to a
company's operations. Researchers put out a variety of definitions and dimensions
from various angles to examine how organisational trust develops. Organizational
trust was categorised by Anderson et al. (2012) into five dimensions. (1) Individual
psychological states were considered to include organisational trust. (2) Perceived
experiences were used to describe organisational trust. (3) The term "organisational
trust" was used to describe the confidence and expectation that one party has in the
assets of another. (4) The decision to aggressively take risks was motivated by
organisational trust. (5) As conditions evolve, organisational trust will too.

Organizational trust in schools is split into two categories by Cerne et al. (2014): (1)
individual trust, which may be influenced by an individual's developmental
experiences, personality type, and cultural background; and (2) institutional trust. (3)
Competence trust, which refers to organisational members' ability to perform
appropriate behaviours expected by the organisation, and (4) Institutional trust, which
emphasises the general trust of organisational members (such as staff, directors, and
principals in schools) in the organisation (Narang Leenu & Lakhwinder, 2011).
Interpersonal trust, which includes trust in coworkers, bosses, and the entire
organisation, is understood to exist between individuals.Cognition-based trust and
affect-based trust are the major factors in interpersonal trust. The dimensions and
definitions are described as below (Aburoub et al., 2011).

The two main components of interpersonal trust are cognition-based trust and affect-
based trust. Below is a description of the dimensions and definitions (Aburoub et al.,
2011).

1. Cognition-based trust: Cognition-based trust is the decision to believe that someone

is trustworthy after considering the supporting evidence. Such evidence includes traits
like personality, history, intention, capability, and actions that are consistent with
words. Consideration of such evidence is a cognitive process, and the type of trust that
results from this process is known as cognition-based trust (Zhao et al., 2012).

2. Affect-based trust: This type of trust is based on an individual's ability to elicit

positive emotions from the trusting party. Interpersonal trust would be strengthened
through emotional interaction. However, this kind of trust does not surface right away
in interpersonal relationships; instead, it develops through time as people get along
and become closer to one another. Certain dependency would gradually develop after
fully comprehending the other party's goodwill, dependability, and dependability in
the ongoing cooperation. Such dependence is interactive, thus one-sided trust would
jeopardise trust's ability to be flexible (Lee et al., 2013).

STRESS

As was already established, a stressful work atmosphere will negatively impact and
harm an employee's mental and physical health. Work-family disputes also have an
impact on raising employees' stress levels, according to Anderson (2002). When an
employee realises that the demands of a circumstance are greater than they can handle
and when those situations persist for an extended amount of time, stressful situations
might arise. (Selye, 2006). The fact that various people would react differently to the
same scenario is one of the distinctive aspects of stress. Some people will adjust or
respond poorly. However, other folks won't be able to cape in the same circumstance.
According to Naturale (2007), stress is a situation where one person responds to or
faces a new opportunity differently. According to Steve (2011), stress is the result of
an employee's reaction to demands, pressures, and professional requirements at work
that don't match their knowledge levels. This presents a challenge and a threat to the
employee's capabilities, which in turn would lead to a struggle for survival in terms of
having a job. Any employment can be deemed healthy if it is likely to be acceptable
in light of the employee's skills, resources, and degree of control over the position.
Thus, it can receive support from those who are important to them.

The impacts of stress on business performance are evident, and they have been
recognised from an individual perspective. Every time studies on the impacts of stress
have been conducted, the focus has been on the performance of the individual. The
most extensively researched pattern of the relationship between stress and
performance, according to Newstroom (2007), is an inverted U relationship. That
means that a moderate amount of stress encourages the body to function. It implies
that excessively low or high stress have a negative impact on performance. The
inverted U pattern, according to Robbins (2003), may also be used to explain how the
body responds to stress over time and as it varies in intensity. "Many
researchers[9,10] agree that stress has negative impacts on people and subsequently
has an impact on how well companies work.

Both nurses and health care administrators have always been concerned about role
stress. However, Western cultures have been the focus of the majority of research on
role stress in nurses. There hasn't been much study done in this area of Asian cultures,
particularly Japan. It is unknown what impact job pressures, coping methods, and
demographic factors have in the physical and mental health of Japanese hospital
nurses because the position of the hospital nurse in Japan differs greatly from the role
of the hospital nurse in Western cultures and other Asian cultures. Therefore, this
study chose to examine, in Japanese hospital nurses: The relationships between
different workplace stressors, coping mechanisms, demographic traits, and physical
and mental health are discussed in sections A and B, respectively. Also discussed is
which workplace stressors, coping mechanisms, and demographic traits were the best
predictors of both physical and mental health. 310 nurses who completed four
questions provided the data. Significant correlations between the variables were
discovered in large numbers. The best predictors of physical health were found to be
workload and the number of occupants in the home. The chance of leaving the current
nursing post, a lack of support at work, and escape-avoidance coping were the best
indicators of mental health.

Stress levels in Organizations and their Impact on Employee Behavior, P.S.

Swaminathan & Rajkumar S. (2013). They carried out a study that looked at the levels
of stress among different age groups, professions, types of occupations, working
hours, and the impact of the workplace on how stressed out employees are.
Employees experience stress on an individual basis. According to this study, there is
an ideal level of performance for each person, and three factors—role overload, role
self-distraction, and role stagnation—have been identified as causes of workplace
stress.

Viljoen and Rothmann looked into the connection between "workplace stress, illness,
and organisational commitment" (2009). They discovered that stress at work has a
significant impact on employee health and engagement. Physical and mental illness
were caused in part by stress regarding job security. Five stresses, including work-life
balance, overload, control, job elements, and pay, were found to be predictive of low
employee commitment to the company.
References:

B. J. Avolio, B. M. Bass, et al (1995). Consideration of the individual at several levels

of analysis: a multi-level framework for analysing transformational leadership's
spread. 199–218 in The Leadership Quarterly, 6(2).

Berkeley: Berrett-Koehler.

B. J. Avolio, W. L. Gardner, et al (2005). Finding the source of effective leadership

practises is the goal of authentic leadership development. 16, 315-338, The
Leadership Quarterly.

F. Luthans, B. J. Avolio (2003). Genuine leadership: A proactive approach to growth.

Positive organisational scholarship, edited by K. S. Cameron, J. E. Dutton, and R. E.
Quinn (pp. 241–261).

Yong-Ki Lee, Sally Kim, and Yeon-Kook Jeong (2017): Authentic leadership and its
impact on travel agents: true or false? Journal of Travel Research in the Asia Pacific,
DOI: 10.1080/10941665.2017.1331921

B. J. Avolio, W. L. Gardner, F. O. Walumbwa, F. O. Luthans, and D. R. May (2004).

Unlocking the Mask: A look at how real leaders influence the attitudes and actions of
their followers. 15, 801-823 The Leadership Quarterly
Salas, E., Goodwin, G. F., Klein, C., Burke, C. S., Stagl, K. C., and Halpin, S. M.
2006. What styles of leadership are effective in groups? a meta-analysis 288–307. The
Leadership Quarterly, 17 (3). A. H. Eagly, M. C. Johannesen-Schmidt, and M. L. Van
Engen 2003

A comparison of women and men's transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire

leadership trajectories. 129(4), 569, Psychological Bulletin.

L. Gumusluoglu and A. Ilsev. 2009. Organizational innovation, creativity, and

transformational leadership. 62(4), 461-473, Journal of Business Research.

Q. Hayward, M. Goss, and R. Tolmay 2004 the link between employee loyalty and
transactional and transformational leadership. Report about business at Rhodes
University. Grahamstown. P. Kirkbride (2006) The full range leadership approach is
used in the development of transformative leaders. 38 (1): 23–32. Industrial and
Commercial Training. L. S. Leach (2005). organisational dedication and
transformational leadership in nursing. 35(5):228-237, Journal of Nursing
Administration.

J. MacBeath (2005). Distributed leadership is a question of practise. 25 (4): 349-366

School Leadership and Management

J. MacBeath (2005). Distributed leadership is a question of practise. 25(4):349-366 in

School Leadership and Management. 2007; Vigoda-Gadot, E. Employee performance,
organisational politics, and leadership style: An empirical comparison of two
opposing hypotheses.

Yukl, G. 2008. How leadership affects a company's effectiveness.

19(6):708-722 The Leadership Quarterly

N. Luhmann (1995) social structures Stanford University Press, Stanford, California

Limits of Economic Organization, by Arrow K. (1974). Norton, New York

The Constitution of Society by Giddens A. The Polity Press, Cambridge.

Lambert and Ito (2004) Employer stress, coping mechanisms, and demographic traits
as indicators of physical and mental health. 85–97 are covered by International
Journal of Nursing Studies 41(1).