See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/341211360

Association among Covid-19 parameters, occupational stress and employee

performance: An empirical study with reference to Agricultural Research
Sector in Hyderabad Metro

Article · May 2020

CITATIONS READS

0 24

2 authors:

Kdv PRASAD Xxx Rajesh Vaidya

International Crops Research Institute for Semi Arid Tropics Shri Ramdeobaba Kamla Nehru Engineering College
44 PUBLICATIONS   66 CITATIONS    32 PUBLICATIONS   51 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Part of Research Paper publications View project

Inventing a new Tool for measuring the People's Performance with M Mruthyanjaya Rao View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Kdv PRASAD Xxx on 13 May 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Sustainable Humanosphere
ISSN: 1880 - 6503, | May 2020
Volume: 16 Issue: 2

Association among Covid-19 parameters,

occupational stress and employee
performance: An empirical study with
reference to Agricultural Research Sector in
Hyderabad Metro
Dr. KDV Prasad1, Dr. Rajesh W. Vaidya2
1
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT),
Patancheru 502324, Telangana, India
2
Assistant Professor
Faculty In-charge Training and Placement, (DMT)
*Shri Ramdeobaba College of Engineering & Management*,
Ramdeo Tekdi, Gittikhadan, Katol Road, Nagpur 440 013.

Abstract—Purpose of the study: Several organizations across the industry opted for remote
working after the Government of India announced lockdown on 24 th March 2020 to mitigate
the spread of infection. There is a visible occupational stress among the employees across all
the sectors, a result Covid-19 and its associated parameters. This empirical study was carried
out to report the effect of Covid-19 parameters and occupational stress factors on employee
performance in agricultural research sector. The independent Covid-19 parameters with five
subscales— workplace isolation, lack of peer advise, lack of communication, family
distractions and role overload; occupational stress causing factors—workload, role
ambiguity, role conflict, social support, career, job-control and dependent factor performance
with six subscales—task competence, employee motivation, commitment, non-job
assignments, integrity, and co-workers were measured to study the cause and effect. All the
independent factors were measured using five-point Likert type scale whereas the dependent
factor performance was measured applying a scale based on Taxonomy of Higher-Order
Performance Dimensions Model developed by Campbell. A research instrument, survey
questionnaire was used, where all the statements were systematically mixed to avoid bias.
The authors applied descriptive statistics, correlations studies, reliable statistics and multiple
regression analysis to draw inferences from the study. The Covid-19 parameters workplace
isolation, lack of communication, family distractions, role overload and occupational stress
factors role ambiguity, role conflict, career, Job-control are statistically significant and are
good predictors of the performance. There are no significant gender differences were
observed, however the post-hoc comparisons reveal significant age group difference with the
group 20-30 years employees experiencing more stress. The authors suggested that the

235
 Sustainable Humanosphere
ISSN: 1880 - 6503, | May 2020
Volume: 16 Issue: 2

organizations should develop strategies on remote working onlong-term basis to mitigate the
employee stress and enhance performance.

Keywords: Occupational stress, Covid-19 pandemic,employee performance, reliability

statistics, multiple regression analysis.
__________________________________________*****___________________________________

I. INTRODUCTION
Occupational stress or job stress is a pressure on employee caused by the factors
associated with the employment. An employee experience stress when the available resources
are less when compared with demands put on him/her. The occupational stress is the product
of globalization, technical advancement, stiff competition, job demands and enhanced
workload. Several physiological disorders like corpus tunnel syndrome, neck and back pain,
insomnia, irritation, anxiety, frequent headaches, and psychological disorders— depression,
panic attacks, mood disorders, enhance heart rate shortness of breath are some of the causes
of occupational stress experienced by employees. The contribution of researchers over the
last two decades to stress has been recognized as significant due to the ongoing social
changes, changes in the lifestyle and cultural atmosphere of working societies, and is
disrupting the work-life balance, the output of workers and, in effect, the profitability of the
company. However, the quantum of stress experienced will different individual to individual
as withstanding capacity of stress varies from person to person [1].

The Austrian born endocrinologist coined the term ―Stringere‖ a Latin word means,
difficulty, unpleasant, and discomfort. Hans Selye [2] suggested General Adaptation
Syndrome (GAS) and described stress as "the body's non-specific reaction to any request
made to it". In general, stress inflicts or hurts on people in a variety of ways, but not all
human stress is catastrophic in nature. An acceptable amount of stress can give rise to interest
or thirst for work in a individual, tap talents and spark inquisitiveness into work. Stress is a
continuous and changing, unpredictable situation where a person is confounded with an
opportunity, high peremptory demands, or resources related to what the individual wanted,
and the outcome is considered to be uncertain and significant [3]. An employee can
experience stress if he is assigned disliked work [4]. Occupational stress, if not managed, can
lead to poor physical well-being and burn-out (of one's career). The effect of stress at work is
primarily determined by the temperament, perception and attitude of the workplace.

Role overload, estimates the degree to which the job requirement exceeds resources
(personnel and workplace) and the degree to which an individual is capable of performing
workloads ([5], [6]). Role uncertainty is an occupational stress component that occurs when a
person is not clear about the various expectations that people have of this position, this is role
ambiguity as part of an employee. The lack of knowledge on one's position and the activities
of one's job causes occupational stress.

236
 Sustainable Humanosphere
ISSN: 1880 - 6503, | May 2020
Volume: 16 Issue: 2

A. Occupational stressors at Agricultural research sector

The researchers has identified several occupational stress components intrinsic to the
job however limited their study at agricultural research sector to the factors— workload, time
pressure, role overload; Career – job insecurity, obsolete skills; Organizational climate
stressors – Co-workers; group pressures, harassment, job control; Roles in the organisation –
role ambiguity, role conflict, Relations at the work place, Peer-Relation, Support from Peers,
Social support: appraisal support; backup support from family and emotional support. Prasad
et al. [7] carried out a study using most of the above mentioned occupational stress factors
and reported that moderate level stress at work place of International Agricultural Research
Institute, Hyderabad. Prasad et al. [8] reported in a similar study, using a comparative
analysis study on the causes of stress between IT sector and IARI in Hyderabad city,
established moderate level stress in both the sectors of the employees, and effecting the
performance. Prasad et al. [7] conducted a study using most of the above-mentioned
occupational stress factors and recorded moderate stress at the work place of the International
Agricultural Research Institute, Hyderabad. Prasad et al. [9] stated in a similar study, using a
comparative analysis study of the causes of stress between the IT sector and IARI in
Hyderabad City, that moderate stress rates were identified in both the employees' sectors and
that the output was affected. Not all the stressors are bad, but some quantum of stress will
increase the motivation, work as a catalyst and an employee put his/her best to achieve the
goal.

II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE

A. Occupational stress
The Occupational stress or employment stress, a silent killer is now widely
recognized problem by the social scientists. Hans Selye [2], an Endocrinologist from Austria
introduced the thought of stress into life sciences. The word stress has several meanings and
defined differently according to the related subjects – stress defined as external force or
pressure in mechanical sciences [10]. Hans Selye [11] defined it as ―unspecific response of
the body to any demand for change‖. The stress is a discomfort causing threat. Selye
subsequently created a new concept, stressor, and stress is a reaction of an individual to a
stressor. In 1988, Zimbardo [12] defined stress as a series of specific and non-specific
reactions by an organism to catalyze events that disrupted its equilibrium and taxed or
exceeded its ability to cope. Whereas the stimulus event thus included a wide range of
internal and external situations can be collectively referred to as stressors. The job and
organization, refers to work environment and climate, social sector is the social and cultural
characteristics of an individual life, and intra-psychic sectors are the personal and individual
characteristics, are the three major factors from which the stress can originate [10] Prasad et.
al. (2016)[1] reported that female teachers and experience more stress than male teachers.
The women employees will experience more stress when compared to male colleagues
because of their dual role employee/mother/wife in IT sector [2]. Prasad et. al. [7,9] in study
conducted in agricultural research sector employees reported no significant difference among
men and women employees experiencing occupational stress.

237
 Sustainable Humanosphere
ISSN: 1880 - 6503, | May 2020
Volume: 16 Issue: 2

Anbazhagan and Soundar Rajan[13] in their study on occupational stress and coping
strategies concluded that the research has shown that high level of stress seriously effect the
performance of employees and psychological well-being. The organizational restructuring,
layoffs, downsizing, and mergers and the stressors of the organizations. A descriptive study
was carried out by Shanthi A [14] to assess the factors causing stress with the primary data of
173 employees was collected using a structured questionnaire administered to the. The
regression analysis indicated that revealed several factors such as inconvenient working
hours, role conflict and patient behaviour were major stressors. Tan, J.S.T. [15] carried out a
study focusing on stress levels using demographic and education-related in the Philippines
public university faculty. Results indicated part-time and full-time employment, age, job
satisfaction and negative religious coping as significant predictors of faculty stress. A
significant negative correlations observed among job satisfaction and stressors related to
reward, recognition and departmental influence. Prasad et al.[17] using the multiple
regression analysis results reported independent factors peer, role ambiguity, organization
climate and job satisfaction are significantly influencing the psychological wellbeing of the
employees in Information Technology Industry. This study further reveal minor statistically
significant gender and age group differences which are effecting the psychological wellbeing
of employee observed. The researchers opined however possible, the remote working options
need to be worked out by the employer, in all the sectors to reduce the stress and enhance the
psychological wellbeing of employees.

B. Performance
Performance is accomplishment of a given assignment measured against outcome, which is
predetermined with known standards of accuracy, completeness, using available optimal
possible and speed. Performance is considered to be the accomplishment of a commitment,
in a manner that releases the performer from all accountabilities under the contract. It is a
construct to deal employee management. Performance in some sense is ability to achieve
goals, targets with a set of benchmarks. i.e vision and mission of an organization.
Performance is the desired behaviours and the valuable outcomes produced by those
behaviours. Performance is also effected by the complexities of the job. The job performance
is defined in different ways depending on the different stages and complexities of the job
[18]. Abilities and skills which are inherent to an individual possess and motivation to use
those inherent characteristics of an individual to perform a better job will result the
performance.

Performance all of the behaviour employee engaged in a job work or assignment.

However, people will be engaging themselves in work without any relation to job
performance. Performance is an important principle for organizational achievements and
success, and job performance as a person-specific variable, or something a single individual
carry out. Performance is a collection of behaviour of employees engaged in work, and that

238
 Sustainable Humanosphere
ISSN: 1880 - 6503, | May 2020
Volume: 16 Issue: 2

behaviour should contribute to the attainment of organization’s vision, mission and goals
[19]. Prasad et al. [7] reported occupational stress effecting employee performance at
moderate level in a study with international agricultural research institute. Prasad et. al.
(2018)[20] in a study on association among Occupational Stress factors and Performance at
workplace among Agricultural Research Sector Employees at Hyderabad, India reported
statistically significant association between occupational stress factors like working
hours/week, social support, job insecurity which are effecting the performance.

C. Covid-19 Pandemic
The world has turned into remote working or work from home concept wherever
possible due to Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) an infectious disease caused by a
severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) a mutated virus which is
less virulent in India. The availability of tools like team viewer, splashtop, Microsoft remote
desktop, zoom, Microsoft teams, and owl are some of the communication tools essential for
remote working, work prioritization are reported and solutions were provided [21] The
SCIKEY MindMatch study reported that 99.8% workforce in IT sector incapable of remote
working as reported in Economic Times[22].

D. Covid-19 parameters
Workplace isolation: An employee experience stress due to absence of colleagues, routine
interactions, fun, chats, etc. categorized under workplace isolation.
Lack of peer advise: Employees routine take the suggestions of peer on performing their tasks
and peer’s experience considered valuable. An employee feel stressed lack of peer advise
once he/she has struck and unable to move ahead on his/her assignment
Lack of communication: Communication is important for remote working employees.
Sometimes may experience stress because of absence of one to one communication with peer
though the new technologies like, zoom, Microsoft Team, Blujeans, etc. available
Family distractions: Working from home will have the challenge of family distractions
because of sudden sickness, family visitors, etc. Therefore, the work get disturbed and an
employee will experience stress.
Role overload: An employee experience stress because of role overload— multiple roles as
father, husband, etc. working at home.

E. Research question
Is there any correlation between Covid-19 parameters and occupational stress factors on
employee performance on agricultural research sector?

F. Research Gap
The Union Government announced first lock down on 24 March 2020 extended to the third
phase till 17th May. The lockdown is necessary to mitigate the spread of infection to the
minimal as the most of the employees work remotely at home. The Covid-19 Pandemic was

239
 Sustainable Humanosphere
ISSN: 1880 - 6503, | May 2020
Volume: 16 Issue: 2

first reported during December 2019, there no specific literature, reviews or articles which
studied the effect of Covid-19 parameters, occupational stress and its effect on employee
performance. There is very limited literature available in the similar situations of swine-flu
pandemic on occupational stress but not related to India. Further not a single report was
reported on effect of employees’ performance during the epidemic type of situations
Therefore, the authors considered to carry out this study surveying agricultural research
sector employees in Hyderabad Metro during March 24 to 5 Nay April 2020 and reported the
outcome of the study.

III. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

 To study the effect of Covid-19 parameters and occupational stress and remote
working on employee performance in the agriculture research sector
 To study if there are gender and age differences that influence the performance of
employees in the agriculture research sector

IV. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

A. Theoretical Framework

The author followed theoretical framework proposed by Prasad, et al. .[1],[22], [24]) on
occupational stress, remote working performance presented in Figure 1).

,
Figure 1. Theoretical frame work – Occupational stress, Covid-19 parameters,
and performance

240
 Sustainable Humanosphere
ISSN: 1880 - 6503, | May 2020
Volume: 16 Issue: 2

B. Hypotheses

After reviewing the literature and identifying the problem, the following hypotheses were
framed:

Ha1: Effect of occupational stress and Covid-19 parameters are statistically significant on
employee performance of agricultural research sector

Ha2:There are significant gender and age differences among the respondents on occupational
stress and Covid-19 parameters affecting the employee performance in agricultural research
sector

C. Estimation of sample size

As the population size is unknown the researchers used Cochran [26] formula to estimate the
sample size for this empirical study.

z2pq
no= ------
e2
Where no is the sample size, z is the selected critical value of desired confidence level, p is the
estimated proportion of an attribute that is present in the population, q 1 p and e is the desired
level of precision and this formula was used as IT sector where population is unknown
assuming the maximum variability which is equal to 50% (p=0.5) and taking 95% confidence
level with ±5% precision, the required sample size is:
p = 0.5 and hence q = 1-0.5 = 0.5; e = 0.05 and z = 1.96

(1.96)2(0.5)(0.5)
no = -------------------- = 384.16 = 384
(0.05)2

Therefore, we have chosen a sample size of > 384 i.e. 400

The sample demography and description are presented in Tables 1 and 2 and the study
variables both dependent and independent are presented in Table 3.

Table 1. Demography of the sample

Gender Frequency Per cent
Men 228 57
Women 172 43
Total 400 100
Source: Primary data

241
 Sustainable Humanosphere
ISSN: 1880 - 6503, | May 2020
Volume: 16 Issue: 2

Table 2. Sample description

Age group Number of respondents
20-30 140
31-40 120
41-50 65
51-60 75
Source: Primary data

Table 3. Study variables – Covid-19 parameters, occupational stress factors and

performance
Factor Description No. of items
Covid-19
1 Workplace isolation 4
2 Lack of peer advise 5
3 Lack of communication 3
4 Family distractions 5
5 Role overload 6
Occupational stress
1 Workload 5
2 Role ambiguity 6
3 Role conflict 4
4 Social support 5
5 Career 4
6 Job-control 5
Performance
1 Task competence 3
2 Employee motivation 4
3 Commitment 3
4 Non-job assignments 3
5 Integrity 4
6 Co-workers 3
Source: Primary data

D. Research Instrument
Measurement of occupational stress and Covid-10 factors: A survey questionnaire based on
five-point Likert-type scale, with rating scale of Strongly agree=5; Agree = 4; Neutral =3;
Disagree =2; Strongly disagree 1 were used to measure the 5 Covid-19 parameters and 6
independent occupational stress causing factors as per the model of Prasad, et al. (2016,
2018[1],[20]). The total items measured are 52.

242
 Sustainable Humanosphere
ISSN: 1880 - 6503, | May 2020
Volume: 16 Issue: 2

Measurement of performance: The performance was measured based on the Taxonomy of

Higher-Order Performance Dimensions model proposed by Campbell [19]. There are 20
statements covering six factors of employee performance. The tool contains very relevant
items statements drawn in relation to the dimensions of performance. It was a 9-point Likert
type scale, with values ranging from +4 to -4. These values converted to a 5-point scale for
ease in measurement; +4 and +3 scored as 5, +2 and +1 scored as 4, 0 scored as 3; -1 and -2
scored as 2; -3 and -4 scored as 1. The scores range from 5(strongly agree) to 1(strongly
disagree). There are 15 are true keyed and 5 reverse keyed.

V. DATA ANALYSIS

The researchers have applied appropriate statistical techniques on the respondents data
recorded for the study to draw the inferences and conclusions from primary data. The
researchers used descriptive statistics, Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), multiple regression
analysis and post-hoc (Tukey Kramer) comparisons. All the data analysis was carried out
using statistical package for social sciences version 26[23].

A. Reliability methods
For internal consistency and .validity, reliability of the questionnaire was measured using
Cronbach alpha reliability statistic [24] and the values in the Table 4 indicate that the survey
instrument applied on the respondentswas reliable and consistent.

Table 4. Study variables – Covid-19 parameters occupational stress

factors and performance
Factor Description Cronbach alpha
Covid-19
1 Workplace isolation 0.67
2 Lack of peer advise 0.70
3 Lack of communication 0.74
4 Family distractions 0.65
5 Role overload 0.77
Occupational stress
1 Workload 0.62
2 Role ambiguity 0.74
3 Role conflict 0.72
4 Social support 0.71
5 Career 0.80
6 Job-control 0.63

243
 Sustainable Humanosphere
ISSN: 1880 - 6503, | May 2020
Volume: 16 Issue: 2

Performance
1 Task competence 0.74
2 Employee motivation 0.72
3 Commitment 0.83
4 Non-job assignments 0.80
5 Integrity 0.81
6 Co-workers 0.83

VI. RESULTS

A. Results of multiple regression analysis

Multiple regression analysis to predict the performance with occupational stress and Covid-
19 parameters

Table 5: Model summary for occupational stress components

and performance in terms of overall sample (n=400)
Std. Error
Adjusted Durbin-
Mode R R Square of the
R Square Watson
Estimate
1 .688a 0.473 0.463 0.18589 1.812
Predictors: (Constant), Workplace isolation, Lack of peer advise,
Lack of communication, Family distractions, Role overload,
Workload, Role ambiguity, Role conflict, Social support, Career,
Job-control
b. Dependent Variable: Performance

A multiple regression is run to predict a continuous dependent variable performance based on

occupational stress components, and Covid-19 parameters, the multiple independent
variables. The multiple correlation coefficient, R, is a Pearson correlation coefficient between
the scores predicted by the regression model (i.e., the predicted scores) and the actual values
of the dependent variable (i.e., the performance). The value of R indicates the strength of the
linear association between these dependent and independent variables and can give an
indication as to the goodness of the model fit with a value which can range from 0 to 1, and
the higher the value indicating a stronger linear association and value of 0 (zero) indicating
no linear association. A value of 0.688 in this example, indicates a moderate to strong level of
association.

The R2 is the variability caused or explained by the addition of independent variables

expressed as proportion and percent equal to 0.473 (Table 5). This means that all the
occupational stress factors added to as the regression model explained 47% of the variability
of our dependent variable, Performance (compared to the mean model). The adjusted R 2

244
 Sustainable Humanosphere
ISSN: 1880 - 6503, | May 2020
Volume: 16 Issue: 2

value is .463 and the model predicts 46% variance in the dependent variable performance
which is a significant effect according to Cohen [25].

Table 6: ANOVA summary of the occupational stress independent

variable and performance dependent variable for overall sample
Sum of Mean
Model df F Sig.
Squares Square
Regression 22.97 11 1.641 47.482 .000b
1 Residual 25.604 388 0.035
Total 48.574 400
a. Dependent Variable: Performance
Predictors: (Constant), Workplace isolation, Lack of peer advise, Lack of
communication, Family distractions, Role overload, Workload, Role
ambiguity, Role conflict, Social support, Career, Job-control

The ANOVA results (Table 6) indicate that occupational stress factors and Covid-19
parameterssignificantly predicted the performance in the sample, F(11, 388) = 47.482 , p <
.001 (Table 6).

Table 7: Coefficients from regression analysis for the occupational stress factors and
Covid-19 parameters to predict performance in terms of overall sample (n=400)
Unstandardized Standardized Collinearity
Coefficients Coefficients Statistics
Model t Sig.
Std.
B Beta Tolerance VIF
Error
(Constant) 2.014 0.135 14.935 0
Workplace isolation 0.143 0.015 0.427 9.863 0 0.379 2.636
Lack of peer advise -0.006 0.019 -0.013 -0.31 0.757 0.411 2.435
Lack of
-0.063 0.017 -0.122 -3.783 0 0.686 1.458
communication
Family distractions 0.114 0.023 0.239 5.018 0 0.313 3.192
Role overload 0.133 0.016 0.295 8.129 0 0.539 1.854
Workload 0.022 0.025 0.03 0.911 0.363 0.675 1.481
Role ambiguity -0.219 0.021 -0.518 -10.561 0 0.296 3.384
Role conflict 0.086 0.029 0.101 2.983 0.003 0.616 1.623
Social support -0.004 0.009 -0.016 -0.448 0.654 0.549 1.82
Career 0.051 0.014 0.214 3.697 0 0.211 4.73
Job-control -0.053 0.015 -0.178 -3.428 0.001 0.265 3.773
a. Dependent Variable: Performance

The regression equation for performance in terms of overall sample can be written as:

245
 Sustainable Humanosphere
ISSN: 1880 - 6503, | May 2020
Volume: 16 Issue: 2

Performance = 2.014+0.143(workplaceisolation)-0.006(lackofpeeradvise)-
0.063(lackofcommunication)+0.114(familydistractions)+0.133(roleoverload)+0.022(workload)-
0.219(roleambiguity)+0.086(roleconflict)-0.004(socialsupportt)+0.051(career)-0.053(jobcontrol)

The assumptions for running the multiple regression analysis were met. The covid-10 factors
workplace isolation, lack of communication, family distractions, role overload and
occupational stress factors workload, role ambiguity, role conflict, career, and Job-control are
statistically significant and influencing the performance and five of the standardized beta
values are >0.2 statistically significant, and influencing the outcome variable performance.
For example, the coefficient value of occupational stress causing component role ambiguity
is negative represents the change in the dependent variable performance, for one unit change
in the independent variable role ambiguity. For one unit of increase of role ambiguity, an
occupational stress component 0.219 units of performance will be decreased. Similarly, if we
consider standardized coefficients a beta value of 0.518 for role ambiguity indicates that a
change of one standard deviation in the independent variable role ambiguity results in a 0.518
standard deviations performance will be decreased. Similarly, for job control one unit change
the independent variable decreases the performance by 0.053 units keeping all other
parameters constant in the model. If beta value for standardized beta value is considered, one
standard deviation change in independent variable job control decreases the 0.178 standard
deviation of performance when keeping all other parameters constant, and so on (Table 7).

The Covid-19 parametersworkplace isolation, lack of communication, family distractions,

role overload and occupational stress factors role ambiguity, role conflict, career, job-control
are statistically significant and are good predictors of the performance.

Comparison of the occupational stress factors to predict the performance among male and
female using multiple regression analysis (n= 400)

Table 8: Model summary- occupational stress factors and Covid-19 parameters

with performance among male and female employees of the sample
Std. Error
Adjusted R Durbin-Watson
Model R Square of the
R Square Statistic
Estimate
Female 0.889 0.79 0.782 0.12018 1.596
Male 0.888 0.799 0.781 0.10821 1.179
Predictors: (Constant), Workplace isolation, Lack of peer advise, Lack of
communication, Family distractions, Role overload, Workload, Role ambiguity,
Role conflict, Social support, Career, Job-control Dependent Variable: Performance

246
 Sustainable Humanosphere
ISSN: 1880 - 6503, | May 2020
Volume: 16 Issue: 2

A multiple regression is run to predict a continuous dependent variable performance based on

occupational stress components the multiple independent variables to predict the gender
differences among the overall sample (Table 8)
For Female the R 0.889 indicates a high level of association. The R2 is equal to 0.79
from the Table 8. This means that all the occupational stress factors an addition of
independent variable to the regression model explained 79% of the variability of our
dependent variable, Performance (compared to the mean model). The adjusted R 2 value is
0.782 and the model predicts 78% variance in the dependent variable performance.
For Male the R 0.888 indicates a high level of association. The R2 is equal to 0.789
from the Table 8. This means that all the occupational stress factors an addition of
independent variables to the regression model explained 79% of the variability of our
dependent variable. The adjusted R2 value is 0.781 and the model predicts 78% variance in
the dependent variable performance. The variance in both male and female models are
similar.

Table 9: ANOVA summary of the occupational stress and Covid-19 parameters

independent variable and performance dependent variable among male and
female employees
Mean
Model Sum of Squares df F Sig.
Square
Regression 19.935 11 1.424 98.592 .000c
Female Residual 5.286 160 0.014
Total 25.221 171
Regression 15.793 11 1.128 96.331 .000
Male Residual 4.216 216 .012
Total 20.009 227
a. Dependent Variable: Performance;
c. Predictors: (Constant), Workplace isolation, Lack of peer advise, Lack of
communication, Family distractions, Role overload, Workload, Role ambiguity, Role
conflict, Social support, Career, Job-control
For Female, from the above ANOVA table it can be observed that occupational stress
factors significantly predicted the female employee performance, F(11, 160) = 98.592 p <
.001 Table 9.
Similarly for men sector it can be observed that occupational stress factors
significantly predicted the male employee performance F(11,216) =96.331, p<.001.
For both male and female ANOVA results indicate that occupational stress factors
significantly predicted the performance (Table 9)

247
 Sustainable Humanosphere
ISSN: 1880 - 6503, | May 2020
Volume: 16 Issue: 2

Table 10: Coefficients from regression analysis for the occupational stress
factors among male and female to predict the performance
Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients
Model t Sig.
Std.
B Beta
Error
(Constant) 2.49 0.124 20.146 0
Workplace isolation 0.114 0.017 0.367 6.751 0
Lack of peer advise 0.161 0.022 0.387 7.163 0
Lack of
-0.068 0.017 -0.13 -4.058 0
communication
Family distractions 0.047 0.024 0.107 1.931 0.054
Female Role overload -0.012 0.019 -0.023 -0.604 0.546
Workload 0.198 0.027 0.244 7.448 0
Role ambiguity -0.18 0.022 -0.44 -8.232 0
Role conflict 0.085 0.027 0.094 3.124 0.002
Social support 0.035 0.01 0.144 3.588 0
Career 0.011 0.014 0.044 0.801 0.424
Job-control -0.015 0.017 -0.053 -0.904 0.366
(Constant) 2.346 .135 17.325 .000
Workplace isolation .145 .013 .392 11.181 .000
Lack of peer advise -.125 .019 -.256 -6.589 .000
Lack of .078 .017 .166 4.649 .000
communication
Family distractions .032 .022 .063 1.424 .155
Male Role overload .237 .019 .614 12.763 .000
Workload -.174 .022 -.263 -7.823 .000
Role ambiguity -.083 .025 -.191 -3.267 .001
Role conflict .190 .029 .257 6.583 .000
Social support -.040 .009 -.174 -4.245 .000
Career .101 .013 .460 7.828 .000
Job-control .024 .015 .075 1.567 .118
a. Dependent Variable: Performance

The Table 10 it can be observed the Covid-19 parameters and occupational stress factors
workplace isolation, lack of peer advise, lack of communication, are statistically significant
and common to both male and female employees are influencing the performance in terms of
overall sample. Whereas the occupational stress causing factors workload, role ambiguity,
role conflict and social support are both common to male and female statistically significant
are good predictors of the performance.

248
 Sustainable Humanosphere
ISSN: 1880 - 6503, | May 2020
Volume: 16 Issue: 2

For male and female employees the beta vales are >0.2 for workplace isolation, lack
of peer advise, role overload, are highly influencing the performance. From the Table 10,
coefficient value of occupational stress causing component Role ambiguity -0.18 for women
and -0.083 for male indicate for one unit change in the dependent variable performance will
be decreased 0.18 and 0.083 respectively for female and male employees because of role
ambiguity keeping other parameters constant. If we consider for role ambiguity, standardized
coefficients a beta value of -0.44 for female and -0.191 indicates that a change of one
standard deviation in the independent variable occupational stress results a decrease of 0.44
and 0.191 standard deviations performance will be effected respectively because of role
ambiguity, and so on. Further female employees are benefitted by having social support and
social support is positively effecting the performance. Whereas in case lack of support
performance negatively correlated with the social support. For example in male employees of
one unit decrease of social support decreases the performance by 0.04 units when all the other
factors were kept constant. The regression analysis explain that most of the occupational
stress causing factors for Male and Female are similar (Table 10).

Post-hoc comparisons for age group differences in performance, covid-19 parameters and
occupational stress factors

Table 11: Post-hoc comparisons for age group differencesin performance factors (Tukey HSD)
Performance A B C D F Sig
Factor (n = 140) (n = 120) (n = 65) (n = 75)
Task 3.16 ± 0.0393b 3.04 ± 0.0291c 3.49 ± 0.041a 3.25 ± 0.0591b 25.67 <.0001
competence
Employee 3.55 ± 0.0332 3.56 ± 0.027 3.51 ± 0.0237 3.53 ± 0.0614 0.458 0.712
motivation
a
Commitment 4.05 ± 0.0365 3.12 ± 0.0274b 3.18 ± 0.0362b 2.58 ± 0.0657c 236.47 <.0001
Non-job 3.29 ± 0.0224a 3.19 ± 0.021b 3.25 ± 0.0205ab 2.91 ± 0.0443c 30.20 <.0001
assignments
Integrity 4.31 ± 0.0431a 3.87 ± 0.0273b 3.85 ± 0.0311b 3.57 ± 0.0942c 46.53 <.0001
c b b a
Co-workers 2.4 ± 0.0389 2.65 ± 0.0234 2.72 ± 0.0321 2.95 ± 0.0444 35.613 <.0001
a c b d
Task 3.46 ± 0.0121 3.24 ± 0.012 3.33 ± 0.0131 3.13 ± 0.0443 61.12 <.0001
competence
Values are means ± SEM.

One-way ANOVA and Tukey Kramer post host test results for means without a common superscript
alphabet differ (p<0.05)

Age group Years A: 20-30; B:31-40; C:41-50; D:50-60

Tukey-Kramer Post-hoc test was not carried out on Motivation as the value is not significant

Explanation: Tukey-Kamer post hoc results will be presented in simple table (This method
was developed by Assaad et al.,[27]. The Tukey HSD post-hoc analysis was carried out to
find out which group is significantly differing from other groups. The results are presented in

249
 Sustainable Humanosphere
ISSN: 1880 - 6503, | May 2020
Volume: 16 Issue: 2

table 11 where statistically significant groups are superscripted. The results in the Table 11
can be read as, for example for Task proficiency, there were statistically significant
differences observed for the age group 20-29 with 30-35 and 36-40 age groups; Similarly,
age group 30-35 with 36-40 and >40; whereas 36-40 with all the other groups. Though the
for age group d: >40 there were statistically significant differences between the age groups b:
30-35 and c: 36-40 age groups no superscript was indicated because this group d: >40 already
been indicated in the group b: 30-35 and c: 36-40 with superscripting the group d:>40 years
age group. Assaad, H.I. et. al. [27]

Table 12: Post hoc comparisons to study the group differences between the age
groups for Covid-19 parameters and occupational stress factors – Tukey HSD
Occupational A B C D F Sig.
stress factor (n = 226) (n = 265) (n = 173) (n = 92)
Workplace 3.19 ± 0.0522c 3.68 ± 0.0392b 4.14 ± 0.0422a 3.99 ± 0.0627a 75.292 <.0001
isolation
Lack of peer 2.63 ± 0.0318c 3.07 ± 0.037b 3.21 ± 0.0306a 3.25 ± 0.0394a 60.311 <.0001
advise
Lack of 2.76 ± 0.0336 2.79 ± 0.0355 2.73 ± 0.0305 2.76 ± 0.0359 0.543 0.653
communicati
on
Family 3.86 ± 0.0402a 3.27 ± 0.0206c 3.51 ± 0.0261b 3.05 ± 0.0475d 101.498 <.0001
distractions
Role 2.91 ± 0.0522c 3.04 ± 0.0286b 3.14 ± 3.29 ± 0.0405a 12.201 <.0001
overload 0.0245ab
Workload 3.49 ± 3.56 ± 0.0202b 3.71 ± 0.0266a 3.46 ± 0.0347c 18.876 <.0001
0.0196bc
Role 2.88 ± 0.0484c 3.52 ± 0.0196b 3.67 ± 0.0248a 3.77 ± 0.0442a 125.477 <.0001
ambiguity
Role conflict 3.44 ± 0.0157a 3.44 ± 0.0149a 3.26 ± 0.0264b 3.12 ± 0.0314c 46.147 <.0001

Social 1.9 ± 0.0487c 2.29 ± 0.0658b 2.75 ± 0.0943a 2.7 ± 0.0803a 28.335 <.0001
support
Career 2.04 ± 0.0706c 2.66 ± 0.0505b 3.54 ± 0.0585a 3.55 ± 0.067a 123.59 <.0001

Job-control 2.34 ± 0.0464d 3.11 ± 0.0404c 3.72 ± 0.0258b 4.15 ± 0.0182a 303.548 <.0001

Occupational 2.87 ± 0.0318c 3.1 ± 0.0192b 3.36 ± 0.0166a 3.35 ± 0.0151a 83.290 <.0001
Stress
Values are means ± SEM.
One-way ANOVA and Tukey Kramer post host test results for means without a common superscript
alphabet differ (p<0.05)
For Peer no post-hoc test is carried as ANOVA values are not significant

In the similar way the Covid-19 parameter workplace isolation, from the ANOVA Table
F(14,741) = 75.292 is significant at 0.01 level. The Tukey HSD post-hoc results (Table 12)
indicate it can be observed statistically significant differences for age group 20-29 with all
other age groups (p=0.01, 36-40 scored higher mean result Covid-19 parameter workplace
isolation followed by >40, 30-35, and 20-29 years age groups. The Statistically significant
differences were observed between the groups except age groups of 36-40 and >40 in terms

250
 Sustainable Humanosphere
ISSN: 1880 - 6503, | May 2020
Volume: 16 Issue: 2

of workplace isolation. Comparing the mean age group 36-40 experience more occupational
stress due to workplace isolation.

Similarly the for occupational stress factor role ambiguity, from the ANOVAA table the
value of F(14, 741) =125.477 is significant at 0.01 level and indicating significant differences
in the age groups in terms of role conflict. The mean score is higher for the age group >40.
The Tukey HSD post hoc test was applied to identify the which age groups different
significantly in terms of role conflict. There were significant differences between all the age
groups and age group except 36-40 and >40 (p=0.397). The age group >40 reveal more
occupational stress due to role ambiguity (Table 12).

VII. DISCUSSION

Several studies were carried out on occupational stress and its effect on performance, and its
associated health effects. The literature on Covid-19 parameters and occupational stress
effects on performance are rare as the Covid-19 pandemic reported during December 2019.
Therefore, the researchers have carried out this study surveying the agricultural research
sector employe using a questionnaire during the period 24 March to 5 May 2020. The
developed research survey instrument was published on google form and a link was sent to
the respondents. Though, this is the first such type of study our results are in line with the
similar studies (Perstling, [28]; Prasad et. al. [20]; Oskrochi, et al. 2018[29]; Leite A, et al.
2019[30]; and Prasad et. al. [16,17]) using the multiple regression analysis. The reliability
statistics Cronbach alpha indicats the survey instrument was reliable and consistent. The
study used the Taxonomy of Higher-Order Performance Dimensions Model developed and
standardized by Campbell [19] a 9-point scale which is accepted well across the social
scientists to measure performance. There were no significant gender differences however the
post-hoc comparisons reveal age group differences, and in particular the younger age group
(20-30 years) will have more stress due to Covid-19 parameters and occupational stress
factors. This is due to inexperience of this age group employees. There some issues like
workplace isolation, family distractions, peer absence, lack of suggestions to the employees,
and working too much. However, the positive side is stay @ home and stay safe as life is
precious and bigger than moderate effect on performance. The other pleasing factors
commuting time saved, flexi-working hours, enhanced job control, use of new technologies
for communication, saving resources like office space cost, and other opportunity costs.

VIII. CONCLUSION

The authors suggest that more studies need to be carried out on this subject on effect of
performance due to Covid-19 pandemic as this is an add onto the existing occupational stress

251
 Sustainable Humanosphere
ISSN: 1880 - 6503, | May 2020
Volume: 16 Issue: 2

in various other sectors as stress exists everywhere. The Covid-19 pandemic is severely
effecting in particular health sector, sanitation workers, a deep dive into these areas to
mitigate the causes of occupational stress will be necessary. The future research should
include to develop the strategies on the employee career and development, training and
retraining aspects of remote, how live with the Covid-19 type pandemics, with appropriate
changes the organization policies is need of the hour.

IX. ACKNOWLEDGMENT
We thank all the respondents to our survey questionnaire during Covid-19 Pandemic Period.

REFERENCES

[1] Prasad, K.D.V., Vaidya, R., & Kumar, V.A. (2016). Teacher’s Performance as a Function
of Occupational Stress and Coping with Reference to CBSE Affiliated School Teachers in
and around Hyderabad: A Multinomial Regression Approach. Psychology, 7(13), 1700-1718
[2] Selye, H. (1956). The general adaptation syndrome and the diseases of adaptation.
Journal of Clinical Endocrinology. 2, 117-230.
[3] Schuler, R.S. (1980). Definition and Conceptualization of Stress in Organizations.
Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 25, 184-215.
[4] Tread Gold, R. (1999). Transcendent Occasions: Their Relationship to Stress, Depression
and Clarify of Self Concept. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 39, 81-
105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022167899391010.
[5] Osipow, S. H., and Spokane, A. R. (1987). Manual for occupational stress inventory:
Research version. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, 46-67.
[6] Osipow, S. H. (1998). Occupational Stress Inventory Manual (Professional Version).
Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
[7] Prasad, K. D. V., Vaidya, R., & Anil Kumar, V. (2015). A study on causes of stress
among the employees and its effect on the employee performance at the workplace in an
International Agricultural Research Institute, Hyderabad, Telangana, India. International
Journal of Management Research and Business Strategy, 4(4), 68-82.
[8] K.D.V. Prasad, Rajesh Vaidya and V Anil Kumar, Study on The Causes of Stress Among
The Employees In It Sector and Its Effect on The Employee Performance at The Workplace
With Special Reference To International Agricultural Research Institute, Hyderabad: A
Comparative Analysis. International Journal of Management, 7(4), 2016, pp.76–98.
[9] Prasad, K.D.V., Vaidya, R., & Kumar, V.A. (2016). Teacher’s Performance as a Function
of Occupational Stress and Coping with Reference to CBSE Affiliated School Teachers in
and around Hyderabad: A Multinomial Regression Approach. Psychology, 7, 1700-1718
[10] Pestonjee, D.M. (1999). Stress and coping: The Indian Experience (2 nd Edition). Sage
Publications India Pvt. Ltd. (1999) New Delhi, Pages 216-229.
[11] Selye H. 1976. Stress in health and disease Butterworth’s, Inc. Boston, MA.
[12] Zimbardo P.G. (1988). Psychology and life (12th ed.) Glenview IL. Scott, Foresman
[13] Anbazhagan, A., Rajan, L. S., &Ravichandran, A. (2013). Work stress of hotel industry
employees in Puducherry. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing & Management Review
ISSN, 2319, 2836.

252
 Sustainable Humanosphere
ISSN: 1880 - 6503, | May 2020
Volume: 16 Issue: 2

[14] Shanthi, A. (2017). A study on antecedents and consequences of stress among the
employees in service sectors.
[15] Tan, J.S.T. (2017). Factors Affecting Stress among Faculty Members of Public
Universities in the Philippines: A Multiple Regression Analysis. International Journal of
Psychological Studies, 9(3), 64.
[16] Prasad KDV, Rajesh Vaidya, & Mruthyanjaya Rao, M. (2020). Effect of Occupational
Stress and Remote Working on Psychological Wellbeing of Employees: An Empirical Study
During Covid-19 Pandemic with Reference to Information Technology Industry in
Hyderabad. Indian Journal of Commerce and Management Studies 11(2),1-20
[17] Prasad, K.D.V., Mruthyanjaya Rao, M., Vaidya, R., & Muralidhar, B. (2020). Remote
Working:Organizational Climate, Opportunities, Challenges and Psychological Wellbeing of
the Employees During Covid-19 Pandemic: A General Linear Model Approach with
Reference to IT Industry in Hyderabad. International journal of Advanced Research in
Engineering & Technology (IJARET). 11(4), 372-389
[18] June, S., & Mahmood, R. (2011). The relationship between person-job fit and job
performance: A study among the employees of the service sector SMEs in
Malaysia. International Journal of Business, Humanities and Technology, 1(2), 95-105.
[19] Campbell, C. H., Ford, P., Rumsey, M. G., &Pulakos, E. D. (1990). Development of
Multiple Job Performance Measures in a Representative Sample of Jobs. Personnel
Psychology, 43, 277-300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1990.tb01559.
[20] Prasad K.D.V., Vaidya, R., and Anil Kumar. (2018. Association among Occupational
Stress factors and Performance at workplace among Agricultural Research Sector Employees
at Hyderabad, India. Pacific Business Review International 10(7):27-36.
[21] Melanie Pinola. 2020.The 7 biggest remote work challenges (and how to overcome
them). https://zapier.com/blog/remote-work-challenges/
[22] SCIKEY MindMatch. 2020. 99.8% workforce in IT sector incapable of remote working:
Study. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/ites/99-8pc-workforce-in-it-sector-
incapable-of-remote-working-study/articleshow/75080948.cms
[23] IBM Corp. Released 2018. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 26.0. Armonk,
NY: IBM Corp.
[24] Cronbach, L.J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of
tests. psychometrika, 16(3), 297-334.
[25] Cohen, S., and McKay, G. (1984). Social support, stress and the buffering hypothesis: A
theoretical analysis. Handbook of psychology and health, 4, 253-267.
[26] Cochran, W. G. (1977). Sampling Techniques: 3d Ed. New York: Wiley.
[27] Assaad, H. I., Zhou, L., Carroll, R. J., & Wu, G. (2014). Rapid publication-ready MS-
Word tables for one-way ANOVA. SpringerPlus, 3(1), 474.
[28] Perstling, M., &Rothmann, S. (2012). Secondary traumatic stress, psychological
wellbeing and life satisfaction of social workers in Namibia. Journal of Psychology in
Africa, 22(1), 1-9.
[29] Oskrochi, G., Bani-Mustafa, A., &Oskrochi, Y. (2018). Factors affecting psychological
well-being: Evidence from two nationally representative surveys. PloS one, 13(6).
[30] Leite, A., Ramires, A., MOURA, A. D., Souto, T., &Maroco, J. (2019). Psychological
well-being and health perception: predictors for past, present and future. Archives of Clinical
Psychiatry (São Paulo), 46(3), 53-60.

253
View publication stats