LifeHub

“He has no enemies, but is intensely disliked by his friends.”

Oscar Wilde

How much social support do men and women report?

How dissatisfied are they with their sources of social support?

Differences in Social Support Between Men and Women

We took a look at some results from our stress and health risk assessment called StressScan by analyzing availability, utility and satisfaction of social support by gender. We tested gender differences by using a statistical test called Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and found some interesting differences in gender with a sample of almost 800 professional working men and women.

1. In general, women reported greater availability and use of their social support network (supervisor/boss, colleagues/co-workers, partner, family and friends) then their male counterparts (all p’s < .01).

2. Women reported using their boss or supervisor significantly more frequently then men. This is surprising as research doesn’t support that mentoring has been found to be more strongly related to men’s career success than women’s. In general, successful women tend to indicate that mentoring is less important to their career advancement than do less successful women.

3. Women reported significantly more availability, use and satisfaction with their friends compared to males. They also reported greater availability and use of their partners, families and friends (all p’s < .01) which is consistent to what Shelly Taylor, Ph.D. has suggested as part of the female “tend and befriend” response to coping with work and life stress (Taylor, S. E., Klein, L.C., Lewis, B. P., Gruenewald, T. L., Gurung, R. A. R., & Updegraff, J. A. Behaviorial Responses to Stress: Tend and Befriend, Not Fight or Flight” Psychol Rev, 107(3):41-429).

In our statistical analysis of social support for professional men and women we were able to determine the relative amount of dissatisfaction with specific sources of social support. Men and women (N= 785) rated they were either “Not at All” or only “Slightly” satisfied with the following sources to meet their emotional and instrumental support needs:

• Boss/Supervisor 31.0%
• Colleagues/Co-Workers 16.8%
• Family 13.0%
• Partners/Significant Others 9.9%
• Friends 8.3%

With respect to work, the Gallup Organization’s survey of over five million employees suggests that employee satisfaction increases by about 50% when they have close relationships at work. If they have strong relationships with their boss employees reported to be more than 2.5 times more likely to be engaged with their jobs.

Having a strong social support network and being satisfied appears to be associated with their level of self-reported stress and well-being. Men and women in our sample who reported greater overall social support also reported significantly:

• Lower Stress (correlation r= .35, p < .01)
• Greater Resilience/Hardiness (correlation r= .47, p < .01)
• Greater Happiness (correlation r= .58, p < .01)

We know strong social support for both sexes is significantly associated with longevity, physical health, and psychological well being.

But, remember that getting married still seems to be the leading cause of divorce so, if you aren’t willing to go to marriage counseling with your boss or colleague then go hug a friend…..Be well….

So, if your aren’t willing to go to marriage counseling with your boss or colleague then go hug a friend…..Be well….

Kenneth Nowack, Ph.D. is a licensed psychologist (PSY13758) and President & Chief Research Officer/Co-Founder of LifeHub www.getlifehub.com, is a member of the Consortium for Research on Emotional Intelligence in Organizations, and is a guest lecturer at the Anderson School of Management. Ken also serves on the editorial board of Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research. His recent book Clueless: Coaching People Who Just Don’t Get It is available at http://www.envisialearning.com/clueless_book

Kenenth Nowack, Ph.D.

All of us experience stressors at work and home each day but how we perceive these events determines whether or not they are experienced as stressful.

Our own research suggests that 40% to 60% of all employees express a moderately high level of stress on the job. Our work and non-work lives are very permeable with most of us taking work stress home and home stress to our job ((Nowack, K. (2006). Optimising Employee Resilience: Coaching to Help Individuals Modify Lifestyle. Stress News, International Journal of Stress Management, Volume 18, 9-12)). The contributors to stress are varied and is is logical that we take work stress home with us as well as import the pressures from family challenges back to the job ((Nowack, K. (2008). Coaching for Stress: StressScan. Editor: Jonathan Passmore, Psychometrics in Coaching, Association for Coaching, UK, pp. 254-274)).

The American Psychological Association (APA) in their 2011 survey of American’s perceptions of stress found that women, compared to men, reported higher levels of stress (5.4 vs. 4.8, respectively, on a scale of 1 to 10 where 1 is little or no stress and 10 is a great deal of stress).

In the APA survey all respondents reported an increase in overall stress from last year and more people reported increased symptoms of stress including fatigue, anger/irritability, depression and headaches.

We were interested in seeing whether results from our own personal stress and health risk appraisal called StressScan would help to identify what professional working employees reported being stressed about and how it compares to the recent 2011 APA survey. StressScan measures 14 psychosocial scales that have been shown to be associated with diverse individual (e.g., job burnout, depression, physical health) and organizational (e.g., absenteeism) outcomes.

Stress is conceptualized as the experience of major and minor irritants, annoyances, and frustrations (hassles) of daily living over a three-month period. This brief measure of work/life stress was based upon factor analytic research of the original Hassles scale ((AD Kanner, A, Coyne, J., Schaefer, C.; & Lazarus, R. (1981). Comparison of two modes of stress measurement: Daily hassles and uplifts. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 4, 1573-3521)). StressScan measures the extent to which respondents experience daily hassles in six distinct factor areas including:

1. Health
2. Work
3. Personal Finances
4. Family
5. Social Obligations
6. Environmental and World concerns

We analyzed differences by gender across these six StressScanscales (ANOVA) using requests for free trials for this assessment over the last few years (N=149). In general, women reported significantly higher levels of stress compared to males (mean for woman = 16.48 versus mean for men = 15.35, p

We found only two stress categorieswere rated as significantly more challenging by women compared to their male counterparts (p

• Financial Stressors (mean for women 3.15 versus mean for men 2.72)
• Family Stressors (mean for women 3.08 versus mean for men 2.70)

However, we found no significant differences in self-reported work, health, social or environmental stressors. In our sample, professional working women continue to report more hassles and life challenges around family issues and finances than men (note: we don’t gather marital status on our demographics but this would be useful to know in analyzing these differences).

These findings support the recent APA stress survey as well as confirm that women may indeed still perceive they have two full-time jobs–one at work and the other when they leave.

If you are interested in finding out your own level of work and life stress let me know at ken@envisiaonline.com and I will set up a complimentary free trial for you.

Well, it’s time to take a break and get some exercise….Be well…

Kenneth Nowack, Ph.D.

We all know that negative moods are associated with poor physical health and psychological well-being (Nowack, K. (2008). Coaching for Stress: StressScan. Editor: Jonathan Passmore, Psychometrics in Coaching, Association for Coaching, UK, pp. 254-274). Happy individuals tend to have more responsive immune systems, less hormonal reactions to stress and are more likely to utilize health lifestyle practices that can make a difference in long term health and well-being (Nowack, K. M. (1989). Coping style, cognitive hardiness, & health status. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 12, 145-158).

The Link Between Positive Emotions and Health

In a study of 2,873 healthy British adults conducted by Dr. Andrew Steptoe, those who reported more positive emotions during the day had significantly lower levels of the stress hormone cortisol that is typically associated with increased blood pressure, immune suppression and obesity (Steptoe, A. et al. (2007). Neuroendocrine and inflammatory factors associated with positive affect in healthy men and women: The Whitehall study II. American Journal of Epidemiology, 167, 96-102).

Among women, but not men in this study, positive emotions were significantly lower as well as important cardiovascular inflammation markers including C-reactive protein and interleukin-6.

Gathering key new information and using modern research methods to study 1,500 Californians across eight decades, health scientists Dr. Howard S. Friedman and Dr. Leslie R. Martin from UC Riverside found that those with the most optimism and cheerfulness die younger than their less positive counterparts. It was the conscientious people—careful, sometimes even neurotic, but not catastrophizing—who lived longer.

Part of the explanation lies in studying the health behaviors of the study subject — the cheerful, happy-go-lucky kids tended to take more risks with their health across the years (Friedman, H. & Martin, L. (2011). The Longevity Project: Surprising Discoveries for Health and Long Life from the Landmark Eight-Decade Study. Hudson Street Press). It turns out that overly-optimistic people tend to put themselves in harm’s way — they just don’t see risks as clearly as people who are prone to some level of caution/pessimism. So, it seems that it is important to be happy but maybe not too happy if you want to live longer.

These findings support the idea that happiness is protective.

When Are You Most Happiest?

A pair of researchers from Cornell University are the latest to mine social networks looking for trends. Scott Golder and Michael Macy analyzed 509 million Twitter messages posted over a period of two years by 2.4 million users across 84 different countries. From this data, they have gleaned that people have the same daily cycle of moods, regardless of their culture or language.

The results showed people tend to be happier in the morning and during weekends. The Twitter messages revealed that they wake up happy and slowly grow more dissatisfied as the day goes on. This behavior happens on both weekdays and weekends (the weekend tweets usually start approximately two hours later most likely because people are sleeping in.

Even in countries where the weekend is not Saturday and Sunday (e.g., United Arab Emirates), these patterns were still clear.

Out of that work came a website, www.timeu.se, that allows people to see how often a particular word is used at different times of the day and week.

This research suggests that happiness is an ultradian rhythm (shorter than 24 hours) much like body temperature, concentration, eye blinks) which is maximized in the morning hours….No word yet if you miss out all together if you are a “night owl”….Be well….

Kenneth Nowack, Ph.D.

 Perceptions of stress at work are quite high with several recent studies by Envisia Learning Inc. suggesting that 40% to 65% of all executives and employees rate their jobs as being very or extremely stressful with significant impact on work/family balance and overall health ((Nowack, K. (2000). Occupational stress management: Effective or not? In P. Schnall, K. Belkie, P. Landensbergis, & D. Baker (Eds.), Occupational Medicine: State of the Art Reviews, Hanley and Belfus, Inc., Philadelphia, PA., Vol 15, No. 1, pp. 231-233)).

In a poll by Reston, Virginia based TrueCareers, more than 70% of workers do not think there is a healthy balance between work and their personal lives. More than 50% of the 1,626 respondents reported they are exploring new career opportunities because of the inability to manage both work and family stressors. Not only that, a Monster.com survey found that 79% of all job holders said they had increased their search for new jobs since the economy weakened more than a year and a half ago.

We were interested in seeing whether results from our own personal stress and health risk appraisal called StressScan would help to identify what professional working employees reported being stressed about and why some stay healthy in the face of work and life challenges and stressors. StressScan measures 14 psychosocial scales that have been shown to be associated with diverse individual (e.g., job burnout, depression, physical health) and organizational (e.g., absenteeism) outcomes ((Nowack, K. (2008). Coaching for Stress: StressScan. Psychometrics in Coaching Association for Coaching, UK, pp. 254-274)).

Stress is conceptualized as the experience of major and minor irritants, annoyances, and frustrations (hassles) of daily living over a three-month period. This brief measure of work/life stress was based upon factor analytic research of the original Hassles scale. StressScan measures the extent to which respondents experience daily hassles in six distinct factor areas including: 1) Health; 2) Work; 3) Personal Finances; 4) Family; 5) Social Obligations; and 6) Environmental and World concerns.

We analyzed differences by gender across these six StressScan scales (ANOVA) using requests for free trials for this assessment over the last few years (N=149). In general, women reported significantly higher levels of stress compared to males (mean for woman = 16.48 versus mean for men = 15.35, p < .01). No other significant differences were found across gender for quality/quantity of sleep, social support network (availability, use and satisfaction) or happiness.

We found only two stress categories were rated as significantly more challenging by women compared to their male counterparts (p < .01) using a 1 to 5 scale where 1 = Never, 3 = Sometimes and 5 = Always):

• Family Stressors (mean for women 3.08/mean for men 2.70)
• Financial Stressors (mean for women 3.15/mean for men 2.72)

So, why do some talent in the face of work and life stress experience job burnout, depression and physical illness and others remain physically and psychologically healthy? Our research has found three distinct coping patterns in the face of work and life stressors: 1) Hot reactors (those who get sick in the battle of stress, challenge and change); 2) Sustainers (those who get sick after the “letdown” with the battle); and 3) The Hardy (those who are resilient and experience stress and challenge free from illness and distress).

Hot Reactors: About 1 in 5 executives can be described as “hot reactors” on the basis of how they react to stress and the effects on their long term health. Hot reactors are most likely to experience physical illness, job burnout and psychological distress during stressful and challenging projects, assignments and heavy workloads. Behaviorally they are prone to demonstrating impatience, irritability, frustration with incompetence, mood swings and anger. In our research, these hot reactors are highly correlated with typical measures of Type A behavior characterized by a relentless drive for success as well as cynical mistrust of those around them.

Hot reactors seem to be biologically “wired” to react to stress with exaggerated physiological and behavioral responses. These executives are often resistant to changing their basic coping style as most truly believe their ability to work long hours, suppress fatigue and feel energized by stress is a key to his/her career success. Such executives seem to chronically be exhibiting the classic “fight or flight” response almost to the point of exhaustion and burnout. Most are high risk for long term cardiovascular disorders including high blood pressure, high cholesterol and heart disease.

Sustainers: Talent who find themselves feeling the symptoms of a cold coming on right after a big project has been completed or getting away for a much deserved vacation are experiencing the clinical “let down effect.” Such individuals are shifting from a high state of activation to a lower state rapidly making their immune system “let down” from its normal “high stress” protective state and leading to increased vulnerability to get sick in the short term.

Sustainers are used to prolonged periods of high stress states and are able to suppress fatigue and “get up” for the battle in order to succeed. Their vulnerability comes not during the battle but after. By using relaxation strategies to manage the chronic stress response these executives can stay healthy both during stressful times and when things slow down. By recognizing the signs and symptoms of stress, tension and anxiety when they first appear, executives can begin to utilize a wide range of behavioral and cognitive strategies to avoid the chronic “race horse” condition that is characteristic of most “high flyers.” These “sustainers” truly do pay the price of being able to hang in during very stressful situations, challenges and times without breaking down physically or emotionally.

The Hardy: The resilient and hardy talent in our research are the ones who experience high levels of stress, work/life unbalance and critical demands but maintain a high level of physical health and psychological well-being. In our research, these individuals are less likely to report job burnout, absenteeism due to illness, anxiety, sleep problems, and depression.

Resilient talent appear to maintain and practice specific lifestyle behaviors that become part of his/her daily routine and utilize coping habits that help translate stress into positive challenges that energize, rather than, compromise the immune system and well-being ((Nowack, K. (1994). Psychosocial Predictors of Health and Absenteeism: Results of Two Prospective Studies. Paper presented at the American Psychological Association Annual Convention, September 1994, Los Angeles, CA)). We can’t always avoid some chronic (high level of work demands or child care issues) or acute (injury, child illness) stressors but those who are hardy appear to cope and manage them in a manner that minimize negative health outcomes.

Profile of Hardy Talent

• Experience and report less work and family stress on a daily basis
• Maintain a high level of physical activity/exercise despite travel and work/family demands (e.g., work out at least 3 days a week for 60 minutes).
• Maintain heart healthy eating/nutrition habits (e.g., eat breakfast, avoid convenience food, and manage weight).
• Are non-smokers and drink alcohol in moderation (e.g., no more than 2 alcoholic drinks per day).
• Consistently maintain an adequate level of sleep and practice sound sleep hygiene (e.g., avoid building a sleep debt and get adequate sleep required to avoid being inappropriate sleepy during the day).
• Minimize hostile, impatient and aggressive behaviors towards others that are associated with eliciting the “fight or flight” response.
• Practice some type of daily mental or physical activity that elicits the “relaxation response” (e.g., meditation or yoga) reversing stress activation.
• Cultivate and utilize a strong social and professional support network by spending time with those who are satisfying to be around and avoiding those who are “energy zappers” in our life.
• Possess a hardy outlook on life including viewing change as a challenge, identifying and spending time on his/her passions and develop an external set of attributions for failures ((Greene, R. and Nowack, K. (1996). Stress, hardiness and absenteeism: Results of a 3-year longitudinal study. Work and Stress, 9, 448-462)).
• Identify and emotionally express strong feelings in writing or verbally to others on a daily basis.
• Stop obsessive thoughts that create tension and explore action plans to resolve the stressor.
• Minimize the use of defeating and perfectionist “self-talk” (e.g., constantly using the words “must” or “always”).
• Actively ruminate and express gratitude for his/her life situation
• Identify and act on his/her signature strengths to maximize career and life satisfaction.

Being resilient isn’t something that we are necessarily born with although there appears to certainly be a genetic predisposition to possessing biological wiring favoring the release of neuropeptide Y and other hormones that may damper the stress response. We have also seen in our own research and others the capacity to develop hardiness or resilience:

Hardy talent appear to develop an ongoing commitment to maintain a lifestyle that enables them to balance the demands at work and home while remaining energized, productive and healthy.

If you are interested in seeing how resilient you are and would like a free trial of StressScan (www.getlifehub.com/stress_scan) just email me at ken@envisiaonline.com and I will be happy to set you up! Be well….

Kenneth Nowack, Ph.D.

Maybe to achieve happiness and success it’s desirable to cultivate skills and abilities that are somewhere between excesses and deficiencies.  Some new research actually exists to support this premise.

Achievement Striving and Job Performance

Compared to talent who are low in achievement striving (conscientiousness in the “Big Five”) high flyers tend to be more motivated to perform well on the job and more likely to achieve higher performance due to their goal setting, drive, careful planning and persistence to move through obstacles and challenges.  But, after a certain point, high achievers become pretty rigid, frozen to make decisions, inflexible, and almost compulsive perfectionists.  Too much achievement orientation might result in  paying too much attention to the small stuff, overlooking bigger goals and having rigidity might actually interfere with ongoing professional development.

It appears that there is indeed a threshold level of conscientiousness that once crossed, actually interferes with high performance (Le, H. et al., (2011).  Too much of a good thing: Curvilinear relationships between personality traits and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96-113-133).  In a new study exploring the association between achievement striving and performance it appears that for higher level complexity jobs (engineer, scientist) more is indeed better compared to low complexity jobs.  Indeed, a curvilinear relationship was found between conscientiousness and performance for low complexity jobs where deliberate, cautious, diligent and rigid attributes of high flyers leads to people to waste time influencing both speed and accuracy. 

These findings support a U-shaped relationship—high achievement will initially lead to better performance but the relationship will become weaker and then eventually disappear after it reaches a certain point and this relationship depends on just how complex the job is.  One implication of this finding is that for more routine roles where innovation and intellectual thinking isn’t critical it might be a mistake to hire those on “potential” and drive alone.  In fact, they might do fail in these roles but really shine in more complex positions.

Stress and Job Performance

On the surface, it would appear that the ability to manage emotions, remain calm under pressure and experience less negative states like anxiety would always be desirable.  Researchers have for a long time predicted an “inverted U-shape curve” between stress and performance (Yerkes-Dodson law) but perhaps this curvilinear relationship can explain the modest correlations seen between emotional stability and job performance in the literature.

As emotion (e.g., anxiety) rises, people tend to focus more and concentrate but at higher levels it may interfere with critical thinking, judgment and decision making.  Again, an optimal level of concentration is required to perform well but might be wasted and no longer be helpful.  In a study by Le et al., 2011, the researchers again found a curvilinear relationship between emotional stability, job performance and organizational citizenship behavior.  This research tends to support the notion that there is an optimal midrange level (threshold) of personality and job performance.

Optimism, Self-Efficacy/Self-Esteem

Believing that things will turn out positively and that one gets results based on effort and confidence sounds like it’s a formula for success and productivity. However, new research supports the idea that an “optimal level of optimism” is  desirable because at high levels it would appear that optimism encourages riskier behaviors and expectations that are difficult to meet (Grant, A. & Schwartz, B. (2011).  Too much of a good thing: The challenge and opportunity of the inverted U.  Perspectives in Psychological Science, 6, 61-76).

According to research, sometimes quitting may actually be better for your health. Psychologist’s Gregory Miller and Carsten Wroshch have found that people who are able to feel comfortable quitting when faced with unattainable goals even when they were optimistic they could complete them may actually have better mental and physical health than those who persevere and push themselves to succeed (Miller, G. & Wrosch, C. (2007). You’ve Gotta Know When to Fold ‘Em: Goal Disengagement and Systemic Inflammation in Adolescence. Psychological Science, 18, 773-777).

This study was based on their previous research which found that those persistent individuals in the face of uncontrollable goals actually experienced higher levels of an inflammatory protein called C-reactive protein (an indicator of stress) as well as increased cortisol. Contrary to what we might have been taught, it appears that it might be in our best interests to “cut our losses” in the face of unattainable goals and life challenges and actually disengage from the goal to ensure optimum well-being and potentially long-term health.

Happiness/Life Satisfaction

The happier one is in life the more successful they are right?  Not necessarily.  Longitudinal studies from UK, Germany and Australia suggest that life satisfaction actually has an inverted-U-shaped relationship with income 5 to 15 years later (Oishi, S., Diener, E. & Lucas (2007).  The optimum level of well-being: Can people be too happy?  Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2, 346-360). In fact, people with the highest levels of happiness achieved lower education and engaged in less political participation that those who were moderately satisfied in life.

Angus Deaton, an economist at the Center for Health and Well-being at Princeton Deaton and Daniel Kahneman reviewed surveys of 450,000 Americans conducted in 2008 and 2009 for the Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index that included questions on people’s day-to-day happiness and their overall life satisfaction.  Happiness got better as income rose but the effect leveled out at $75,000 but their overall life satisfaction continued to rise as their earnings grew beyond that point (Kahneman, D. & Deaton, A. (2010). High income improves evaluation of life but not emotional well-being. PNAS, 107, 16489-16493).

So, it appears that the “inverted-U-curve” is a pretty prevalent phenomenon in psychology and life and helps to answer just how much or too little is needed to be healthy, happy and successful in life.

 I’m sure like all Blogs, there is also an inverted-U-curve about length and attention so off to get my guide dog puppy Rocco out for a training walk…Be well….

Kenneth Nowack, Ph.D.

Perceptions of stress at work are quite high with several recent studies by Envisia Learning Inc. suggesting that 40% to 65%of all executives and employees rate their jobs as being very or extremely stressful with significant impact on work/family balance and overall health (Nowack, K. (2000). Occupational stress management: Effective or not? In P. Schnall, K. Belkie, P. Landensbergis, & D. Baker (Eds.), Occupational Medicine: State of the Art Reviews, Hanley and Belfus, Inc., Philadelphia, PA., Vol 15, No. 1, pp. 231-233).

In a poll by Reston, Virginia based TrueCareers, more than 70% of workers do not think there is a healthy balance between work and their personal lives. More than 50%of the 1,626 respondents reported they are exploring new career opportunities because of the inability to manage both work and family stressors. Not only that, a Monster.com survey found that 79% of all job holders said they had increased their search for new jobs since the economy weakened more than a year and a half ago.

We were interested in seeing whether results from our own personal stress and health risk appraisal called StressScan would help to identify what professional working employees reported being stressed about and why some stay healthy in the face of work and life challenges and stressors. StressScan measures 14 psychosocial scales that have been shown to be associated with diverse individual (e.g., job burnout, depression, physical health) and organizational (e.g., absenteeism) outcomes (Nowack, K. (2008). Coaching for Stress: StressScan. Psychometrics in Coaching Association for Coaching, UK, pp. 254-274).

Stress is conceptualized as the experience of major and minor irritants, annoyances, and frustrations (hassles) of daily living over a three-month period. This brief measure of work/life stress was based upon factor analytic research of the original Hassles scale. StressScan measures the extent to which respondents experience daily hassles in six distinct factor areas including: 1) Health; 2) Work; 3) Personal Finances; 4) Family; 5) Social Obligations; and 6) Environmental and World concerns.

We analyzed differences by gender across these six StressScan scales (ANOVA) using requests for free trials for this assessment over the last few years (N=149). In general, women reported significantly higher levels of stress compared to males (mean for woman = 16.48 versus mean for men = 15.35, p < .01). No other significant differences were found across gender for quality/quantity of sleep, social support network (availability, use and satisfaction) or happiness.

We found only two stress categories were rated as significantly more challenging by women compared to their male counterparts (p < .01) using a 1 to 5 scale where 1 = Never, 3 = Sometimes and 5 = Always):

• Financial Stressors (mean for women 3.15/mean for men 2.72)
• Family Stressors (mean for women 3.08/mean for men 2.70)

So, why do some talent in the face of work and life stress experience job burnout, depression and physical illness and others remain physically and psychologically healthy? Our research has found three distinct coping patterns in the face of work and life stressors: 1) Hot reactors (those who get sick in the battle of stress, challenge and change); 2) Sustainers (those who get sick after the “letdown” with the battle); and 3) The Hardy (those who are resilient and experience stress and challenge free from illness and distress).

Hot Reactors: About 1 in 5 executives can be described as “hot reactors” on the basis of how they react to stress and the effects on their long term health. Hot reactors are most likely to experience physical illness, job burnout and psychological distress during stressful and challenging projects, assignments and heavy workloads. Behaviorally they are prone to demonstrating impatience, irritability, frustration with incompetence, mood swings and anger. In our research, these hot reactors are highly correlated with typical measures of Type A behavior characterized by a relentless drive for success as well as cynical mistrust of those around them.

Hot reactors seem to be biologically “wired” to react to stress with exaggerated physiological and behavioral responses. These executives are often resistant to changing their basic coping style as most truly believe their ability to work long hours, suppress fatigue and feel energized by stress is a key to his/her career success. Such executives seem to chronically be exhibiting the classic “fight or flight” response almost to the point of exhaustion and burnout. Most are high risk for long term cardiovascular disorders including high blood pressure, high cholesterol and heart disease.

Sustainers: Talent who find themselves feeling the symptoms of a cold coming on right after a big project has been completed or getting away for a much deserved vacation are experiencing the clinical “let down effect.” Such individuals are shifting from a high state of activation to a lower state rapidly making their immune system “let down” from its normal “high stress” protective state and leading to increased vulnerability to get sick in the short term.

Sustainers are used to prolonged periods of high stress states and are able to suppress fatigue and “get up” for the battle in order to succeed. Their vulnerability comes not during the battle but after. By using relaxation strategies to manage the chronic stress response these executives can stay healthy both during stressful times and when things slow down. By recognizing the signs and symptoms of stress, tension and anxiety when they first appear, executives can begin to utilize a wide range of behavioral and cognitive strategies to avoid the chronic “race horse” condition that is characteristic of most “high flyers.” These “sustainers” truly do pay the price of being able to hang in during very stressful situations, challenges and times without breaking down physically or emotionally.

The Hardy: The resilient and hardy talent in our research are the ones who experience high levels of stress, work/life unbalance and critical demands but maintain a high level of physical health and psychological well-being. In our research, these individuals are less likely to report job burnout, absenteeism due to illness, anxiety, sleep problems, and depression.

Resilient talent appear to maintain and practice specific lifestyle behaviors that become part of his/her daily routine and utilize coping habits that help translate stress into positive challenges that energize, rather than, compromise the immune system and well-being (Nowack, K. (1994). Psychosocial Predictors of Health and Absenteeism: Results of Two Prospective Studies. Paper presented at the American Psychological Association Annual Convention, September 1994, Los Angeles, CA). We can’t always avoid some chronic (high level of work demands or child care issues) or acute (injury, child illness) stressors but those who are hardy appear to cope and manage them in a manner that minimize negative health outcomes.

Profile of Hardy Talent

• Experience and report less work and family stress on a daily basis
• Maintain a high level of physical activity/exercise despite travel and work/family demands (e.g., work out at least 3 days a week for 60 minutes).
• Maintain heart healthy eating/nutrition habits (e.g., eat breakfast, avoid convenience food, and manage weight).
• Are non-smokers and drink alcohol in moderation (e.g., no more than 2 alcoholic drinks per day).
• Consistently maintain an adequate level of sleep and practice sound sleep hygiene (e.g., avoid building a sleep debt and get adequate sleep required to avoid being inappropriate sleepy during the day).
• Minimize hostile, impatient and aggressive behaviors towards others that are associated with eliciting the “fight or flight” response.
• Practice some type of daily mental or physical activity that elicits the “relaxation response” (e.g., meditation or yoga) reversing stress activation.
• Cultivate and utilize a strong social and professional support network by spending time with those who are satisfying to be around and avoiding those who are “energy zappers” in our life.
• Possess a hardy outlook on life including viewing change as a challenge, identifying and spending time on his/her passions and develop an external set of attributions for failures (Greene, R. and Nowack, K. (1996). Stress, hardiness and absenteeism: Results of a 3-year longitudinal study. Work and Stress, 9, 448-462).
• Identify and emotionally express strong feelings in writing or verbally to others on a daily basis.
• Stop obsessive thoughts that create tension and explore action plans to resolve the stressor.
• Minimize the use of defeating and perfectionist “self-talk” (e.g., constantly using the words “must” or “always”).
• Actively ruminate and express gratitude for his/her life situation
• Identify and act on his/her signature strengths to maximize career and life satisfaction.

Being resilient isn’t something that we are necessarily born with although there appears to certainly be a genetic predisposition to possessing biological wiring favoring the release of neuropeptide Y and other hormones that may damper the stress response.

Hardy talent appear to develop an ongoing commitment to maintain a lifestyle that enables them to balance the demands at work and home while remaining energized, productive and healthy. If you are interested in seeing how resilient you are and would like a free trial of StressScan (www.getlifehub.com/stress_scan) just email me at ken@envisiaonline.com and I will be happy to set you up! Be well….

[tags] stress, resilience, hardiness, lifestyle modification, personality hardiness, anxiety, depression, workload, pressure, ken nowack, envisia, kenneth nowack [/tags]

Kenneth Nowack, Ph.D.

I just got back from a short holiday in Yosemite, California and I ran into a professional couple who had just arrived and expressed how they were so looking forward to the beauty of this majestic National Park to do some hiking and other outdoor activities. One member of the family mentioned to me that they as soon as they left the house they began to feel low energy and “something coming on” and he feared he was going to get sick as he so often did when they got away. Vacations are supposed to be a way to get away from our stresses, unwind and energize our battery.

America is the land of “relaxation deficit disorder” and even when we need a vacation we are often reluctant to take one. Even worse is when we do, we might even get sick because of it.

According to monster.com, 61% of workers in the United States take less than 15 days of vacation per year. US employees don’t clock the most hours at work — Korean workers are actually higher. Comparison studies suggest we work 100 hours more than professional workers in Europe and the average work week in the United States is a bit more than 44 hours.

A recent survey of 2,082 workers by Hudson suggested that more than half of the respondents said they do not use all of their vacation time and 30% indicated that they use less than half of their allotted personal time. Interestingly, 30% also reported feeling more comfortable taking sick time rather than vacation.

So, why do some leaders get sick in the heat of the battle, others after the battle and some are just plain resilient in the face of work and life stress ((Nowack, K. (2006). Resilience: How Hardy are you?. Personal Excellence, October 2006, p.8))?

It appears that all you Type A leaders who abruptly take a break might actually be at risk for getting sick! Yep, you are on that plane just ready to take a long deserved break and all of a sudden you begin to feel lousy. You think, “No, not now — I don’t need to get sick during my vacation!”

Of course, you were the same students who head home after finals week and after creating a huge sleep deficit (OK, partying will definitely add to that), eating more poorly then you typically do, and feeling some final exam pressure (surely at least once class got you fired up) you head home for that long awaited break only to basically find yourself in bed the entire time sicker than a dog (not really sure how this saying began).

Just when I thought vacations were advised, recommended and a stress reliever I had a chance to chat with a dear colleague and friend of mine who is on faculty at the UCLA School of Medicine — Marc Schoen, Ph.D. who has been researching and writing about this exact mind-body connection in his new book, “When Relaxation is Hazardous to Your Health.”

The Let Down Effect

When you’re straining and struggling under the burden of work or family pressures, your body releases a number of chemicals — including stress hormones — which mobilize your immune system against illness. But when the stressful period ends, your immune system pulls back its troops, and the body becomes less vigilant in weeding out invaders. At the same time, says Schoen, a reservoir of body chemicals called prostaglandins, left over from the stress response, tends to produce inflammation, and can trigger problems like arthritic pain and migraines.

Here are some options recommended by Schoen to minimize the Let Down Effect:

1. Schoen suggests techniques that activate the immune system just a little bit to keep it from slowing down too rapidly after a period of acute or chronic stress at work or home. Try physical activity/exercise — even 10-15 minutes in length — which can stimulate the immune-system in a positive manner. “Walk up and down the stairs in your office building,” says Schoen. “Or after a stressful day at work, instead of coming home and vegging-out in front of the TV, take a brisk walk for a few minutes.”

2. Try some challenging mental problem solving exercises to stimulate cognitive activity in the brain such as computer games, puzzles, under time constraints. “Several studies show that doing mathematical computations at a rapid pace actually increases immune-system activity,” says Schoen.

3. Practice mental and physical relaxation techniques such as meditation, yoga, or deep breathing, which can give your mind and body a rest stop from the day’s anxieties. Focus on breathing slower, inhaling deeply and exhaling naturally. Tune into the gentle rising and falling of your abdomen. This deep breathing can reduce your cardiac rate, stimulate relaxation centers in your brain and reduce your blood pressure. This type of relaxation is easy to apply particularly when you feel hurried, impatient or cognitively preoccupied.

By following his advice, I know I won’t be needing to take another vacation just to recover from my original vacation….Be well….

[tags]the let down effect, stress, well-being, vacations, relaxation, immune system, health promotion programs, employee wellness, stress management, psychoneuroimmunology, resilience, hardiness, meditation, yoga, breathing, kenneth nowack, ken nowack, nowack[/tags]

Kenneth Nowack, Ph.D.

Research by Sylvia Ann-Hewlett and Carolyn Luce shows that 62% of high-earning individuals work more than 50 hours per week, 35% work more than 60 hours a week and 10% work more than 80 hours (Hewlett, A. & Luce, C. (2006). Extreme jobs. The dangerous allure of the 70-hour workweek. Harvard Business Review, December 2006, pp. 1-12). Their findings suggest that more than 70% of professionals reported not getting enough sleep.

Leaders and others know that the sleep-deprived are typically moody, miserable, and just not much fun to be around. New research from UC Berkeley using MRI technology helps explain why for the first time.

The study is the first to show exactly what areas of the brain are affected by sleep deprivation (Yoo, S., Gujar,N., Hu,P., Jolesz, F., & and Walker, M. (2007). The human emotional brain without sleep — a prefrontal amygdala disconnect. (Current Biology. Vol 17, R877-R878, 23 October 2007).

In the UC Berkeley study of 26 young adults, half of the subjects were kept awake for 35 hours straight and the other half were allowed a normal night’s sleep in that same time period. Then all of the subjects were hooked up to an MRI and shown a number of images while the researchers monitored what happened in their brains as each image was shown.

The sleep-deprived subjects showed significant activity in the amygdala (the section of the brain that puts the body on alert to protect itself and control emotions), and simultaneously, showed slowed activity in the prefrontal cortex (which controls logical reasoning). On the other hand, subjects who got a full night of sleep showed normal brain activity.

Americans are among the most sleep-deprived people in the world with 40% of Americans getting less than seven hours of sleep a night, according to a 2005 poll conducted by the National Sleep Foundation. Additionally, 75% of Americans reported having some sort of sleep disorder one or two nights a week (http://www.sleepfoundation.org/).

What this means for most people is that a sleepless night or very poor quality of sleep can cause employees to overreact to emotional challenges that they would otherwise be able to tolerate without any trouble.

So, if you have sleep-deprived talent and leaders who lack emotional intelligence — look out — their amygdala is already compromised….Be well…

 

[tags]insomnia, sleep, fatigue, depression, sleep disorders, fatigue countermeasures, REM, NREM, circadian rhythms, stress, health, job burnout, kenneth nowack, ken nowack, nowack[/tags]

Kenneth Nowack, Ph.D.

You may not know about Ajax, the current guide dog puppy my wife and I are raising and our commitment to this volunteer puppy raiser program.   We have been in involved in for about 15 years and it has been a great experience in every way. Not long ago we got a call from the organization, Guide Dogs of America, telling us that our first guide dog puppy was now “retired” and moving on to another family. Ernie (that’s what we called him until the woman he worked with decided to exert her independence and renamed him “Journey”) was about 7.5 years old making him in his late ages in human years (I had no idea the accuracy of “dog calculators” was hotly debated!).

What does a retired guide dog do in retirement? Who doesn’t want to retire earlier?

In fact, according to an annual census survey of key economic and social characteristics (American Community Survey 2006) Americans are actually delaying retirement. The results of this survey suggested that 23.2% of all Americans between 65 and 74 years of age were still working in 2006 (up from 19.6% in 2000).

Is work so much more fun that employees just can’t leave voluntarily? Our own research suggests that 40% t0 65% of all employees report they often feel pressure and stress on the job (Nowack, K. (2006). Optimising Employee Resilience: Coaching to Help Individuals Modify Lifestyle. Stress News, International Journal of Stress Management, Volume 18, 9-12). Experts on retirement and financial planning point out that all of us need to earn more to pay for longer retirements, increases in health care costs and increasing longevity. In 1993 overall life expectancy was 75.5 years according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention–in 2003 it had increased to 77.4 years.

In a recent retirement study by Merrill Lynch (New Retirement Survey), the new career paradigm of job security being replaced by employability security seems to have really shifted feelings about retirement. Some of their findings suggest:

1. Men describe “retirement” as a period where leisure activities increase and more time can be spent with their partner. Women of the same age cohort view retirement as a time for their own career development (particulary those who have “off ramped”), volunteering and personal growth.
2. 37% of those in the survey indicated that finances were a key driver of delaying retirement, 67% reported that work is actually challenging and motivating providing a sense of identify and meaning.
3. When asked about their preferred work arrangement when they retire 42% ideally would like to “cycle” between work and play, 15% prefer part-time employment, 13% want to initiate that dormant “entrepreneurial gene” and 6% didn’t really see retirement as an option.

In light of these figures, the hierarchy of the world of work seems to apply–jobs, careers and passions. So, identify those “signature strengths” of yours and find creative and new ways to “work to live.”

As Malcom Forbes once said, “Retirement kills more people than hard work did.”  Be well……
[tags]surveys, Envisia, Envisia Learning, retention, talent management, retirement, career management, longevity, kenneth nowack, ken nowack, nowack[/tags]

Kenneth Nowack, Ph.D.

News alert (in case you might have not known already) — Work-related stress can be a direct cause of clinical depression and anxiety among employees.

A recent finding in Psychological Medicine finding comes from the Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study, which has followed a group of 1000 children born in 1972-73 in Dunedin, New Zealand throughout their lives. The study subjects have been assessed at the ages of 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 18, 26, and most recently at the age of 32, in 2004-05.

The study included 406 women and 485 men. All were asked at age 32 about their perceptions of work stress. In general, men reported higher psychological job demands, lower social support, and higher physical job demands than women.

High psychological job demands, such as long hours, heavy workload, or poor relations with one’s boss, were found to be associated with clinical depression, anxiety, or both in both women and men.

It was found that women who reported high psychological job demands (using a standard approach to measuring work load and decisional control over things on the job), such as working long hours, working under pressure or without clear direction, were 75 per cent more likely to suffer from clinical depression or general anxiety disorder than women who reported the lowest level of psychological job demands.

Men with high psychological job demands were 80 per cent more likely to suffer from depression or anxiety disorders than men with lower demands. Men with low levels of social support at work were also found to be at increased risk of depression, anxiety or both.

This study shows that high levels of workplace stress may be an important contributor to common mental disorders, such as depression and anxiety. These disorders certainly contribute directly to employer costs for medical claims, absenteeis, presenteeism and disability.

It’s seems so easy to just begin to suggest individually based remedies to help employees cope more effectively with stress on the job. However, a recent review of stress management interventions suggests that inidivudally based approaches, without targeting the organization, are unlikely to have sustain impact over time (Nowack, K. (2000). Occupational stress management: Effective or not?. In P. Schnall, K. Belkie, P. Landensbergis, & D. Baker (Eds.), Occupational Medicine: State of the Art Reviews, Hanley and Belfus, Inc., Philadelphia, PA., Vol 15, No. 1, pp. 231-233).

Looking for a place to start?

In his book Primal Leadership, Dan Goleman states “Roughly 50 to 70 percent of how employees perceive their organizational climate can be traced to the actions of one person: the leader. More than anyone else, the boss, creates the conditions that determine people’s ability to work well.”

If that doesn’t work, there is always the Serenity Prayer….Be well….

 

[tags] stress, burnout, job demands, anxiety, depression, workload, pressure, ken nowack, envisia, kenneth nowack [/tags]