Abstract:
For many decades, organization research scholars have been trying to find answers as to why
individuals behave in a certain way at work and what consequences it can have for the individual
and the organizations. In their quest for finding answers to such questions, they have mostly
studied a variety of behaviours and also observed reasons for why people absent themselves
from work (absenteeism) or chose to come to work (presenteeism) in spite of certain conditions
when they shouldn’t do so. While a plethora of research is available on understanding the
meanings and reasons of absenteeism, still its counterpart presenteeism does not enjoy the same
attention of organizational scholars and has been limited to the attention of medical researchers
and practitioners due to its narrowly defined nomenclature of ‘coming to work while ill’. An
intriguing question here would be if people can absent themselves for all sorts of reasons other
than health related and absenteeism can manifest into different meanings at the workplace, then
presenteeism can also be due to different reasons and can have different meanings.
Today’s work environment is dynamic and the challenges faced by individuals in
contemporary organizations are countless; be it changing information technology, fierce
competition at both local, national and global level, the shift in the paradigm of business from
product oriented to service oriented, demographics changes, the changing nature of internal
organizational structures and even the traditional understanding of a job as a set of fixed tasks.
At the heart of all such changes is the individual who has to put in all efforts to meet
organization sumptuous expectations of maximum productivity and long term success which has
apparently little interest in an individual’s well-being. These challenges create stress for the
individuals, they chose to be present at work but their mental energies are not focused on the task
at hand and they are distracted. This type of psychological strain has been conceptualised by
certain researchers as stress-related presenteeism. Though research on presenteeism has been overwhelmed by sickness-related presenteeism,
researchers have started to raise important concerns about the understanding of sickness related
presenteeism and how it can be measured. This study therefore, employed stress-related
presenteeism which is an understudied construct and more relevant to the context of Pakistan
which has a collectivist culture where there are strong norms of reciprocity, social bindings, and
citizenship pressures due to which individuals may feel more pressures, thereby creating stress
which can lead to distraction at work and can have devastative effects on their well-being.
The field of presenteeism is quite a theoretical. Lack of theory is an important challenge
while studying presenteeism. Most studies on the different types of presenteeism have used the
job demands resource theory to explain how presenteeism manifests at the workplace where job
demands have been seen as a crucial antecedent of presenteeism. The most popular model by
Gary Johns also explicates that job demands can lead to presenteeism at the work place. Keeping
in line with this theorizing, the current study used the Job Demands-resource (JD-R) model and
the conservation of resource theory to investigate the differential effects of challenging
(workload) and hindering (emotional demands and, cognitive load) job demands on stress-related
presenteeism and outcomes (psychological well-being and procrastination).
In an attempt to investigate how individuals can cope with stress-related presenteeism,
individual personal resources of psychological capital and mindfulness were also included as
moderating variables. Data was collected at two time waves from 298 employees of the banking
industry of Pakistan. For analysis of data, stepwise regression analysis in SPSS and
bootstrapping mediation analysis techniques were used.The results of this study confirmed the relationship between workload and cognitive
demands with stress-related presenteeism. However, no support was found for emotional
demands. As proposed, the findings also supported the moderating role of psychological capital
and mindfulness on cognitive job demands and not on emotional job demands. In the end, results
of the study have been explained based on past literature and theory and also practical
implications for managers have been discussed at the end.