Selasa, 01 Mei 2012

Time to move on? Staying in a job you hate is bad for you AND your employer

Time to move on? Staying in a job you hate is bad for you AND your employer

  • Employees who stay on out of 'loyalty' or fear experience exhaustion
  • Can cause illness and 'burnout'
  • Companies should make effort to offer training and 'move' employees to counter 'drained' feeling

By Rob Waugh

PUBLISHED: 09:06 EST, 1 May 2012 | UPDATED: 09:06 EST, 1 May 2012

Many people stay in jobs they hate, because of loyalty or fear - but a new study John Molson School of Business Study suggests they are causing harm both to themselves, and their companies

Many people stay in jobs they hate, because of loyalty or fear - but a new study John Molson School of Business Study suggests they are causing harm both to themselves, and their companies

Many people stay in jobs they hate, because of misguided loyalty or fear - but a new study suggests they are causing harm both to themselves, and their companies.

People who stay on out of misguided loyalty experience exhaustion, then burn out - and often leave the company without warning.

Researchers based their findings on a study of 260 workers from a variety of industries.

The 'drained' physical and mental state of workers who stay on out of loyalty means they can leave abruptly - leaving their companies with the problem of finding new staff without warning.

‘Employees often stay with their organization because they feel that they have no other option,' says Alexandra Panaccio, an assistant professor in the Department of Management at Concordia's John Molson School of Business., ‘Then they are more likely to experience emotional exhaustion. This feeling, in turn, may lead them to leave the organization.

Instead, the researchers suggest, companies should focus on training and moving staff within an organisation so that fewer of their staff are staying on simply because they 'feel they should'.

Published in the journal Human Relations, the study found that people who stay in their organizations because they feel an obligation towards their employer are more likely to experience burnout.

The same applies when employees stay because they don't perceive employment alternatives outside their organization.

‘Our study examined whether some forms of commitment to an organization could have detrimental effects, such as emotional exhaustion and, eventually, turnover,’ says co-author

'The implication is that employers should try to minimize this 'lack of alternatives' type of commitment among employees by developing their competencies, thus increasing their feeling of mobility and, paradoxically, contributing to them wanting to stay with the organization.’

Panaccio and her colleagues surveyed 260 workers from various industries, including information technology, health services, engineering and architecture. Participants were, on average, 34 years old; 33 per cent held managerial positions, while 50 per cent worked in the public sector.

The research team measured various types of organizational commitments, such as whether emplo yees identified with a company's goals and values and whether they felt an obligation to stay.

‘It may be that, in the absence of an emotional bond with the organization, commitment based on obligation is experienced as a kind of indebtedness - a loss of autonomy that is emotionally draining over time,’ says Panaccio.


 

Here's what other readers have said. Why not add your thoughts, or debate this issue live on our message boards.

The comments below have not been moderated.

  • Newest
  • Oldest
  • Best rated
  • Worst rated

I don't stay on my job out of loyalty, I stay because my children need feeding!! My bosses are useless and moral is very low, but of course if you say anything youre just a moaner and get accused of 'bringing the team sprit down'.

Report abuse

I think in fairness, most people stuck in jobs they hate do it because there are no jobs our there, and we have to put up with what we can get. I don't think it's a case of loyalty!

Report abuse

Sorry but when there are only very few jobs and the majority are equally dire, I do not see any easy answers here. One hectoring manager once gave an accounts team I worked in a rather threatening lecture about motivation (or rather our perceived lack of it). When he finally stated that anyone who didn't want to work there should be "helped" to move on nobody dared ask exactly what he meant by "helped." I suspect it was an Orwellian double-speak term, much as the current government talk about "helping" the unemployed into work. What some employers ( I mean the larger ones who really could do more) are doing is simply adding to a climate of fear and offering very little in the way of alternatives.

Report abuse

When I went to collage one of the first things my tutor said to me. If you cannot get up for work in the morning change your job. I have used this for most of my working life having moved around the country including Scotland. I left my last full time job because one of the staff started moaning about everything as soon as I started work in the morning, after a time it started to drag me down also so I left. Nothing is worth making you ill over including a company pension.

Report abuse

I work with different people week to week, it's very stressful to be on with someone you don't like or have no respect for.

Report abuse

Should be noted that these people are awful to work with and can destroy a team with their attitude. I just wish several of my colleagues would move on too.

Report abuse

People stay in jobs they hate because there is nothing else out there at the moment so they don't have another option.

Report abuse

The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.

Diposting oleh di Tidak ada komentar:

Planet for rent - but hurry up! Worlds may become suitable for life

Planet for rent - but hurry up! Worlds may become suitable for life

By Eddie Wrenn

PUBLISHED: 09:16 EST, 1 May 2012 | UPDATED: 09:25 EST, 1 May 2012

From what we know of the universe, the requirements for life on a planet are liquid water, an atmosphere, and a stable orbit close enough to a star to provide enough heat and warmth.

Once this narrow remit, along with a dozen other variables have been met, then life - on planet Earth at least - can flourish, and the planet becomes a habitable home.

But now researchers suggest that a planet needs the presence of life to remain habitable - and they suggest 'it is in our interest to get our heads around this soon' - especially if we wish to colonise the universe.

Homes to rent: Without complex life forms on-board, planets may not remain habitable for long

Homes to rent: Without complex life forms on-board, planets may not remain habitable for long

Speaking on recent discoveries, showing that rocky, Earth-like planets are abundant in the universe, Dr Charley Lineweaver, lead researcher for the Australian National University Planetary Science Institute, said: 'Determining whether these planets are habitable has become the new holy grail of astronomy.

'The new-found abundance of planets, combined with the much larger range of inhabited terrestrial environments suggests that habitable planets are common.

'This increases the probability of finding some kind of extraterrestrial life.'

But in a warning to mankind, he added: 'Habitability is not just a question of abiotic environmental conditions - the presence of life may be required to maintain the habitability of a planet over billions of years.

'Planetary habitability is a complex and confusing concept that we are only beginning to get our heads around, but as a species that wants to survive, it is in our interest to get our heads around it soon.

'Life, by managing its own environment, makes a planet habitable. It has produced adaptive features as a result of Darwinian evolution to live in colder and warmer environments

'It's kind of like an adult can live in a higher range of temperatures than a baby can.'

Earth 2.0? Gliese 667 Cc may have liquid water - although it is 22 light years away

Earth 2.0? Gliese 667 Cc may have liquid water - although it is 22 light years away

Lineweaver, along with fellow researcher Aditya Chopra, said the two most important factors for life are the presence of water and a temperature range of between -20°C and 122°C.

Lineweaver said: 'Over the past few decades our exploration of the Earth has turned up life in all kinds of weird environments where we didn't think life could be in, and we're finding all types of extraterrestrial environments that we didn't know about before.

'As these two groups expand they start to overlap in big ways, and that's where habitable planets will be found.'

The two authors also speculate on the possibility of habitable planets that don't contain life. They say that the conditions for life to form are much narrower than the conditions needed for life to survive.

Lineweaver said we must hunt for planets on which humans could survive - and then set up colonies there, and compared cynics to those who criticised Christopher Columbus' proposed trip across the Atlantic Ocean.

He said: 'It's a bit like the Europeans in 1450 saying: "Hey what does it matter whether we go exploring the rest of the world?'

Lineweaver said mankind must keep studying the skies for a future home: 'The next step will be to develop a satellite that can look at the atmospheres of these planets, which will be able to give us some information about whether there is life there or not.

'And if we don't find one [a suitable planet to colonise], maybe we'll go extinct.'

Diposting oleh di Tidak ada komentar:

Senin, 30 April 2012

Overweight women 'lose out in the hunt for jobs' and once employed are lower paid

Overweight women 'lose out in the hunt for jobs' and once employed are lower paid

  • Researchers say 'fat discrimination' is widespread in the workplace
  • Many bosses assume overweight staff are lazy of gluttons

By Daily Mail Reporter

PUBLISHED: 19:22 EST, 30 April 2012 | UPDATED: 19:22 EST, 30 April 2012


Fat discrimination: Many bosses assuming overweight staff are lazy

Fat discrimination: Many bosses assuming overweight staff are lazy

Overweight women are far less likely to be selected for jobs than slimmer rivals, claim scientists.

And, once employed, they tend to be lower paid and given more menial tasks.

The researchers say ‘fat discrimination’ is widespread in the workplace, with many bosses assuming overweight staff are lazy or gluttons.

Scientists at the University of Manchester and Australia’s Monash University asked 102 students to look at the CVs and photos of what they thought were 12 different women.

In fact, it was six women with the photos taken before and after weight-loss surgery.

The students were asked to rate the candidates on their leadership potential, whether they would be likely to select them for a job and what sort of starting salary they would offer.

They were also asked to rank them in terms of how successful they thought they would be.

The findings, published in the International Journal of Obesity, show that the overweight candidates were overall rated far lower than those who were slimmer.

Missing out: Job opportunities are more likely to go to slimmer rivals

Missing out: Job opportunities are more likely to go to slimmer rivals

The students awarded them lower salaries and predicted that they would be far less successful within the company.

Lead researcher Kerry O’Brien, from Monash University, said: ‘Our findings show that there is a clear need to address obesity discrimination, particularly against females who tend to bear the brunt of anti-fat prejudice.’

Dr O’Brien said the prejudices were in part a reflection of how people felt about themselves.

Here's what other readers have said. Why not add your thoughts, or debate this issue live on our message boards.

The comments below have not been moderated.

  • Newest
  • Oldest
  • Best rated
  • Worst rated

In the workplace, the advantage of being goodlooking will always place you above a non-goodlooking candidate with equal qualifications and experience. That goes for men and women. Employers are responding in exactly the same way the rest of us do when we interest ourselves in useless celebrities whose good looks are the only thing that raises them above the level of a bath sponge with legs. It's not fair, but is what it is. So fat people had better just get to grips with it and do something about themselves.

Report abuse

As someone who would have to pay for that person's healthcare (via insurance premiums etc) I would hire the person who was A) qualified and B) didn't look like a walking heart attck.

Report abuse

I've been fat, skinny, in between. I'm currently thin. but I never say never anymore. I feel better about myself thin...BUT i was always a good employee, no matter where I worked. I used to and still do, run rings around others in my field earning the same, etc. BUT I am also judgemental. MY mom is in ICU and has been for a while now. I see the Nurse changes, I watch..because I'm there every waking moment I can be, and some sleeping ones. I myself used the term FatA$$ to mention certain RN's. But tonight, the RN is overwt, but she's spot on, wonderful, funny and everything I want for my mom. Earlier I had skinny minny who was an uncaring imbecile. SO i'm guilty of same. Fatti-ness, does not mean slow or lazy. It simply means they are ugly/unattractive and perhaps not very healthy. I have learned something, I will try very hard not to judge.

Report abuse

And who wants Cheeto stains on the TPS reports. NO ONE!

Report abuse

Well, DUH! Here is an idea, diet and exercise!

Report abuse

Well the fat employees sure can't keep up when walking in a group. And Heaven forbid should they drop anything because they can't bend down to pick it up.

Report abuse

The before-and-after photos were not of exactly the same women. The women in the "after" photos had taken ontrol of their lives. The women in the "before" pictures were out of control.

Report abuse

The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.

Diposting oleh di Tidak ada komentar:

Stress levels and smoking: Why your dad's bad habits may have wrecked your genes

Stress levels and smoking: Why your dad's bad habits may have wrecked your genes

By John Naish

PUBLISHED: 20:40 EST, 30 April 2012 | UPDATED: 20:40 EST, 30 April 2012


For years, scientists and doctors have blamed illnesses on our parents, showing how conditions such as blindness and deafness can be passed down genetically, and bad lifestyle habits can put babies at risk of heart defects.

But medicine is increasingly pointing the finger specifically at fathers, with studies showing how male genes and even men’s diets and stress levels can create serious health problems for their offspring, including diabetes, depression and obesity.

This latest finding is part of a larger picture where scientists are starting to discover diseases passed from man to boy through the Y chromosome

This latest finding is part of a larger picture where scientists are starting to discover diseases passed from man to boy through the Y chromosome

It seems that the Bible warning holds true for health: the sins of the fathers really do plague their children â€" and this effect may pass on to their grandchildren, too.

The latest evidence in this newly emerging jigsaw comes from research that shows a common genetic flaw may increase a son’s risk of heart disease by 50 per cent.

Scientists at Leicester University who analysed samples from more than 3,000 men found that those with a common group of genetic traits (called haplogroup I) had a 50 per cent higher risk of coronary artery disease than men in other genetic groups.

This genetic flaw is at the centre of male genetic identity; it’s carried in the Y chromosome, responsible for determining that babies are born as boys (chromosomes are found in all cells and carry our genetic blueprint) â€" so it’s passed only from fathers to sons.

It is thought that as yet unidentified genetic flaws in men’s immune systems may cause chronic inflammation in their arteries, which can lead to heart disease.

The British Heart Foundation, which funded the study, said the findings could lead to new tests and treatments for coronary problems.

And while men can’t change their genes, they could benefit from learning if they have inherited this danger, says research scientist Lisa Bloomer, one of the study’s authors.

Indeed, while there are no tests for this haplogroup yet, if your father and uncles have had heart troubles, it is sensible to assume there is a strong chance you may be affected.

‘You can reduce your risk if you mitigate the effects of other dangers, such as your weight, blood pressure and cholesterol levels,’ says Ms Bloomer.

This latest finding is part of a larger picture where scientists are starting to discover diseases passed from man to boy through the Y chromosome.

‘It has already been found genes on this chromosome can increase people’s risk of being born with autism and for contracting HIV,’ says Ms Bloomer.

‘We need to do more work to understand how these problems occur.’

Men can pass on addictive behaviours and stress-related depression

Men can pass on addictive behaviours and stress-related depression

Scientists are also learning how the bad effects of men’s lifestyle habits, such as their diet, stress levels, weight and smoking, can be transmitted through the genes in their sperm.

Just as disturbingly, it seems that men can pass on addictive behaviours and stress-related depression.

Here, it is not only sons who are affected but daughters, too, because these problems are passed on through genes that are not on the Y sex chromosome.

Early clues to this have been found by Washington University researchers who studied the sperm of a group of male heroin addicts.

The men’s sperm contained genes that had been changed from normal and would affect the development of any children they had.

These changes are called ‘epigenetic’ â€" alterations to a person’s genes that are caused by their lifestyle habits.

Significantly, the researchers found epigenetic changes that boosted the activity of OPRM1, a g ene that controls how the body responds to its own  heroin-like feel-good hormones.

This change is believed to be a factor in making people more liable to develop addictions.

In a similar fashion, men may transmit stress-related diseases across generations.

Scientists at New York’s Mount Sinai School of Medicine say lab experiments on rats have found epigenetic changes in the semen of males who show signs of stress and anxiety after being isolated or threatened.

Their studies show that baby rats sired by these fathers show an increased vulnerability to stress, and become anxious and depressed more quickly than normal. They also have higher levels of stress hormones.

This is despite the fact that their mothers showed no such problems, according to the study published in the journal Biological Psychiatry.

This may offer one explanation as to why depression can run in families.

Even smok ing when very young can affect men’s sperm â€" and surprisingly, this may make their sons prone to becoming overweight.

The discovery was made using survey results from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children â€" an investigation into the health of 14,000 mothers and their children in the Bristol area.

It began in 1991 and is the most comprehensive study of its kind.

Professor Marcus Pembrey, a clinical geneticist at the Institute of Child Health in London, found men who smoked before puberty had sons who were fatter by the age of nine, even when other lifestyle factors were taken into account. There was no similar effect among women.

‘It seems that before puberty, our genes are tuned to suit the environment we are living in. It is these genetic changes that are passed down the male line,’ says Professor Pembrey.

Perhaps the most important factor in determining a man’s legacy to his children c omes from his dietary habits.

This takes us into a newly emerging field of science called nutri- epigenomics â€" the study of how food can alter our genes.

‘Rather than “you are what  you eat”, this science shows “you are what your dad ate”,’ says Anne  Ferguson-Smith, professor of developmental genetics at Cambridge University.

She points to research that showed fathers who eat high-fat diets and are obese tend to have daughters with a high risk of developing diabetes.

These girls are born with low insulin levels and glucose intolerance â€" classic signs of the disease.

The research, published in the journal Nature, concluded that the problems seem to be transmitted through the father’s sperm.

Professor Ferguson-Smith warns in the journal Cell Metabolism that these studies show the problem of ill-health being passed from parents to children ‘is not only just maternal territory.
< /p>

The father’s nutritional and metabolic status merits attention, too, if we are to optimise the health of his children and grandchildren’.

Parents must understand that having healthy offspring is a joint enterprise if their babies are to inherit healthy genes.

This is most starkly illustrated by a study that found obese mothers produced sons at risk of being morbidly overweight.

These boys grew up to father daughters who, in turn, had an inherited tendency to be perilously overweight.

The Biblical prediction turns out to be more complex than anyone thought: the lifestyle sins of both parents can be visited on their children and are passed on in ways we are only beginning to understand.

Diposting oleh di Tidak ada komentar:
Langganan: Komentar (Atom)