The Mediating Effect of Organizational Stress on Organizational Culture and Time Management: A Comparative Study With Two Universities

Abstract

This research was designed to investigate whether organizational stress had an intermediary role in the effect of Hofstede cultural dimensions on time management. Near East University from Cyprus, which represents the individual culture, and Hakkari University from Turkey representing the collectivist culture were selected for the research analyses. In all, 638 administrative and academic members from both universities were interviewed face-to-face on a voluntary basis, and data were collected by the simple random sampling method. The research findings suggest that time should be managed after identifying the type of culture—individualistic or collectivist—to decrease the level of stress experienced by university staff. In other words, Hofstede’s cultural dimension has an impact on time management, and organizational stress has a partial mediation effect on this dimension. Although the variables in the study have been studied in the literature together with many different factors, Hofstede is significant in terms of determining the role of organizational stress in the effect of cultural dimensions on time management. The effectiveness of Hofstede’s cultural dimensions through organizational stress in time management allows business and project plans to be carried out in a way that manages individual, team or departmental performances taking into account the organizational stress elements. It is considered that this study will particularly be effective in medicine, project management, and independent auditing.

Keywords

Hofstede’s organizational culture time management organizational stress Hakkari University Near East University

Introduction

Time management is a phenomenon that requires a certain set of skills and in parallel with today’s technological developments, especially employees in the professional business world should be taught and trained in this field. The skills required for time management must be either innately present in the individual or should be taught to serve the individual in a specific plan. From this point of view, time management has found its place in the micro-scale theories in the organizational field.

In this vein, time management well reveals the clues to coping with stress. Thus, certain studies that demonstrate the existence of the relationship between time management and stress management (Dierkes et al., 2003; Özer, 2010) explain skilled management ways to cope with stress, while tips on developing skills for time management are also revealed. In this context, adhering to the argument that the behavioral school may be productive in the case of meeting individual social needs (O’Connor, 1999), it can be uttered that micro-scale theories such as time and stress management pave the way for the development of social.

The above-mentioned small-scale theories may undoubtedly vary depending on the type and origin of the cultural environment of the organization. Therefore, organizational culture is directly influenced by both time and stress management styles, or it is influenced by both forms of management (Festjens & Janiszewski, 2015; Galetzka et al, 2018; Leslie & Gelfand, 2012). While there are resources indicating that organizational culture mediates perceived ethics and small- and medium-sized enterprise (SME) performance (Gorondutse & Hilman, 2016), it also mediates the formation of innovation and leadership values (Abdullah et al., 2013) and organizational culture has a mediating effect in transformative leadership structure and institutional resource planning. However, there is not any study in the literature that defines the types of administrative concepts where the organizational stress has a mediating effect. Moreover, there are only few studies indicating that job stress has a mediating effect in this field.

In this respect, this study strives to close the gap in the literature by revealing the following research questions: Under what circumstances does organizational stress depend on an organization’s culture and how it helps manage time? Do employees’ stress levels change the relationship between these two concepts? If so, how does this change take place? Depending on this problem, although some organizational stress-related studies are not built on intermediary effect, these studies focus on the fact that organizational efficiency mediates the mental health, professional stress and organizational climate of employees (Artnez et al., 2011); or that stress has an intermediary effect between interventional leadership and organizational citizenship behavior (Mahmood & Kareem, 2018); or work activities such as the mediation of work stress between the business demands and work performance (Alhomayan, 2013), and all these studies further focus on work stress rather than organizational stress.

Depending on this problematic of the research, the literature on time management was primarily reviewed with a focus on the gap pertaining to organizational culture and stress management. Thanks to the variables determined after methodical editing, a research model was proposed to obtain original results.

Time Management

Time management harmonizes time by means of planning, programing, and listing priorities together with establishing objectives, and determining priority jobs with a view to determining and meeting needs (Smythe & Robertson, 1999). In short, it refers to certain techniques such as making to-do things, planning activities and using various types of techniques to prepare such to-do-lists (Claessens et al., 2009). However, some researchers indicate that time not only has a physical dimension, but also a psychological dimension (Boslough, 1990). Awareness and each psychological situation or point refers to the psychological dimension; the part of time expressed in the form of hours refers to the physical dimension (Passing, 2007: 38). While many organizations employ advanced systems to account for every penny spent, they are not aware of the value of effective time management (Oshagbemi, 1995). Management of time is not related to creating more time, it is about ensuring the best use of the time we have (Hansen, 2011; Moore, 2014).

In the time management process, materials are used such as activity books, action plans, priority to-do lists, personal goal setting, effective programming, and general repetitions that prevent the postponing of tasks in the time management process and facilitate decision making in regard to business priorities (Rivera, 2007). The main factors determining or affecting effective management of organizational time can be listed as determining priorities, planning, effective communication, decision making, delegation of authority, managing time of subordinates, managing senior managers, eliminating interruptions, and so on (Toksoy & Ayyildiz, 2010: 3578). Factors that are caused by personal and cultural characteristics and lead to time losses or the ineffective use of time are called time traps (Hickox, 2006).

Time is unstoppable and cannot be stored. Therefore, the value of time varies depending on whether it is used correctly or incorrectly. People know that it is better to use time correctly rather than wasting it and to have control over time while sparing time for activities. People who learn that the value of time changes depending on its use are often more aware of how to use time effectively (Festjens & Janiszewski, 2015). In other words, people are aware of the fact that the value of time has changed. The changing value of time according to usage and knowing its importance indicate that there is a greater need for time management (Juhnke et al., 2013). The dominant attitude in Anglo-Saxon organizational cultures is that time has a cash value. American and Canadian businessmen expect to start negotiations on time. Beginning late or delaying negotiations is considered to be inappropriate and rude. This cultural attitude concerning time is also related to other aspects of the cultures in question. In the United States, wages are time-dependent and the efficiency of employees is not surprising due to the high value attributed to time. Time is perceived as an opportunity to further production and increase income. Therefore, organizational culture also refers to planned time (Sofyalıoğlu & Aktaş, 2001). Therefore, organizational culture refers to both planned time (Walsh, 2008, pp. 7–10) and possible or random developments (Adams & Blair, 2019).

Studies conducted on time management concentrate upon topics such as academic achievement (Abdulghani et al., 2014; Britton & Tesser, 1991; Varışoğlu & Yılmaz, 2012) variables based on demographic variables such as gender, age, and so on (Guoqing & Yongxin, 2000: 38-39; Hoobler et al., 2009; Küçükaltan et al., 2013); time management in sports students (Juhnke et al., 2013); work performance (Barling et al., 1996; Macan, 1994); stress and anxiety (Mirenda et al., 2015: 122, 124; Misra & Mckean, 2000; Nonis & Hudson, 2006; Trueman & Hartley, 1996); stress (Macquet & Skalej, 2015); self-regulation (Baothman et al., 2018); and unrecognized personal behavior (Scherer et al., 2017).

Organizational Culture

Understanding organizational culture as a whole will allow understanding the organizational/professional life (Alvesson, 2013). As they are open systems, cultures are interacting with the societies in which they operate. National cultures in which organizations exist have an impact on people involved in those organizations (Leslie & Gelfand, 2012). Of course, it cannot be expected that an organizational culture that consists of common meanings and symbols shared within itself (Alvesson, 2013; Hofstede, 2001) can avoid being affected by other cultures.

In a sense, organizational culture is a historical product affecting interpretations and behaviors (Yin et al., 2014). Employees within an organization transfer organizational culture during their socialization process by means of elements such as stories, traditions, symbols, and organizational jargon (Güçlü, 2003). A set of shared values within organizational culture also affect the internal dynamics and achievements of organizations (Koçel, 2005), and they determine whether organizational culture is considered weak or strong (Robbins, 2000). Considered from this perspective, organizational culture represents the organizational learning process (Argyris, 1995; Dauber, Fink, & Yolles, 2012: 13-14).

In this study, many approaches and classifications were used, particularly Hofstede’s (1984a) culture model, to identify organizational culture. According to this model, which consists of four dimensions, individuals making up organizational culture also reflect the characteristics of the national culture to which the organization belongs. In this study, individualism and collectivism as cultural variables were taken into consideration to conduct a comparative study.

Individualism—Collectivism

The values and norms of an organization refers to whether it meets individual or social demands, how these demands are reflected (Sığrı & Tığlu, 2006) and the individual’s level of integration with groups (Hofstede & Bond, 1988). Societies in which group interests are prioritized over individual interests are called collectivist/socialist (Gonzalez & Rime, 2005). It has been observed that Western countries have achieved high individualism scores, whereas Eastern and Latin countries have demonstrated collective behavioral tendencies (Kağıtçıbaşı, 2001).

Hofstede (1984) explained individualism and collectivist dimensions buy stating that Individualism is valid in societies where inter-individual bonds are not strict; each individual is obliged to look after himself and his family. Collectivism, on the other hand, is valid in societies where individuals feel belonging and loyalty to powerful and connected groups from the moment they are born.” The individualist pattern is opposite to the concept of collectivism. In some cultures, people assign too much importance to individualistic needs and desires whereas in other cultures, the needs of society are prioritized according to individual needs (Triandis, 1982). Individualism centralizes the person’s objective and freedom, whereas societal characteristics remain at the periphery. Collectivism refers to a form of existence in which a group and its members are separated from other groups and their members and connections are formed among group members establishing mutual liability (Sakal & Yıldız, 2015).

Uncertainty Avoidance

It refers to an uncorrected or irreparable situation of uncertainty in a community or organization (Rogovsky & Schuler, 1997). It is assumed that uncertainty, which is one of the fundamental sources of concern for humans, affects the social culture (Hofstede, 1984). It includes many variables such as risk appetite, future anxiety, wages, job safety, career opportunities, retirement, and work stress (Hofstede, 2011). In societies with high levels of anxiety due to uncertainty, the individuals’ level of expressing themselves is more advanced. The use of hand-arm movements while talking, excessive mimic movements and tone amplification behaviors are not tolerated (Savicki, 1999, 244).

Power Distance

Based on inequality in society, this dimension examines the process of inequality-based conflict (Hofstede et al., 2010). It tries to determine social power distances by means of examining the acceptance of differentiation and distinction between people with different levels of power or expectations of differentiation. The level of acceptance of this inequality differs based on the society. While narrow power distances are observed more in Western countries, greater distances are seen in Asian countries. Societies with wide power distances contain solid hierarchical lines based on military structures.

Masculinity—Femininity

They refer to the status of individuals and relationships between individuals. In this approach, while the negative aspects of masculine culture are generally shown, feminine culture contains positive elements. Gender roles are transferred to every stage of social life through socialization (Hofstede, 2001). In an organization where masculine culture is dominant, passion for ascension, autocratic and oppressive attitudes, importance of competition, ambition of monetization and materialistic tendencies can often be seen (Şekerli & Gerede, 2011). While individuals living in masculine cultures demonstrate a power and success-oriented structure, avoidance of conflict, harmony and synchronization are prioritized in feminine cultures.

Long–Short Term Orientation

Since people have a long- or short-term orientation, they are interested in values that societies attribute to the past and future (Hofstede, 2001). Due to the different perception of time in Western and Eastern societies, differences have also occurred in long- or short-term plans and orientations. While Western societies consider time as more linear, planned, standardized and measurable, time in Eastern societies is evaluated from a traditional perspective that is multidimensional, cyclical and covers the whole life (Hofstede, 2011). While short-term oriented firms expect to immediately from every activity, long-term oriented firms expect profit as a result of certain processes and after completion of these processes (Roath et al., 2002).

Organizational Stress

This term was developed by Selye in 1950s. Stress is defined as the situation that people experienced when they are confronted with things that they evaluate as threats (Atkinson et al., 1987) to their self-esteem or well-being (Kyriacou & Sutciffe, 1978). Stress is examined under three groups, namely stress sources, psychological and physiological effect of stress sources on the person, and the assessment of current stress sources as threatening or harmful (Hansen & Sullivan, 2003).

As a mental and physical condition that may affect individual efficiency, effectiveness, health and quality of work directly and negatively (Gill et al., 2006), stress can be triggered to activate a wide variety of hormonal secretions in the sympathetic nerve system in the form of tension when an individual is faced with a difficult situation or with tension (Cartwright & Cooper, 1997). It is associated with a variety of chronic health problems including work stress and cardiovascular diseases. It leads to hypertension, musculoskeletal system and psychological disorders, reproductive disorders, and mental and neurological problems (Swanson, 2000). When people believe that there is little they can do to change a stressful situation, they tend to use emotion-oriented coping, and when they believe that they have the power to change something, they use problem-oriented coping mechanisms (Völlink et al., 2013). The behaviors of employees and management in the workplace are not only based on their own motives and needs, but also as a result of their perceptions of everyone in that organization (Harris & Hartman, 2002).

Organizational stress is considered to be one of the major issues in managerial terms as a factor affecting the working performance of each member of staff, ranging from new workers to the highest-level officers (Ross, 1997). The sources of organizational stress were gathered under four headings by Luthans (1989). These include organizational policies, structural characteristics of an organization, physical working conditions, and organizational processes. Based on an overall assessment, it can be seen that researchers concentrate on workers’ functional environment while grouping organizational stress sources.

Tools and Methods

Sample

The research universe consisted of university employees who were working at Near East University and Hakkari University in Turkey and voluntarily participated in the research. A total of 638 university employees including 76 women (11.90%) and 562 men (88.1%) participated in the study. Participants’ ages varied between 18 and 63, and it was observed that the average age range was 31 to 40 years (42.5%). Furthermore, 303 of the academicians and administrative staff had work experience of 0 to 10 years (47.5%), 175 of them had 11 to 20 years (27.4%) of experience, 154 of them had 21 to 30 years (24.1%) of experience and 6 of them had more than 30 years (0.9%) of experience. Near East University was selected to represent individualist culture, and Hakkari University was chosen to represent collectivist culture using random or probability method.

Data Collection Tools

Demographic information form

It is a form developed by the researchers to obtain various socio-demographic information about the participants, such as age, gender, work title, and total work experience.

Time Management Scale: To measure time management, a survey was used that was originally developed by Britton and Tesser (1991), received intense interest in the field and was translated to Turkish by different researchers (Alay & Koçak, 2002). The scale consists of three sub-dimensions, including time-planning (ZP), time attitudes (ZT), and time-consuming (ZTU). By adhering to the original form of the questionnaire created by our researchers, the participants were requested to make evaluations on a 5-point Likert-type scale including Never (1), Rarely (2), Sometimes (3), Frequently (4), and Always agree (5). Cronbach’s alpha value was found to be .823 as a result of the analyses conducted, and according to the results of confirmatory factor analysis, the χ²/df value was found to be 2.624, the root mean square error approximation (RMSEA) value. 071, the Normed Fit Index (NFI) value .908, the Relative Fit Index (RFI) value .923; the Incremental Fit Index (IFI) value .951, the Tucker–Lewis Index (TLI) value .944, the Comparative Fit Index (CFI) value .964, the PCLOSE value .068, and the HOLTER value was found to be 202.

Organizational Stress Scale (OSS)

The Organizational Stress Scale developed by Theorell et al. (1988) and adapted into Turkish was used to measure organizational stress levels. This scale consists of 17 questions and contains three main sub-scales: the “Workload” sub-scale, which consists of 5 questions; the “Control” sub-scale, which consists of 6 questions; and the “Social Support” sub-scale, which consists of 6 questions (Alves et al., 2004: 2-5). Participants were requested to evaluate expressions in the sub-scales related to organizational stress levels based on a 5-item scale including “Never (1); Very Rarely (2); Sometimes (3); Most of the Time (4), and Always (5).” Expressions related to some items on the scale were scored reversely. The total score of the sub-dimensions was calculated by adding the scores of each sub-dimension. Accordingly, individuals with high scores tended to have higher organizational stress levels. High scores showed high workload, high social support, high skill utilization, and high decision-making freedom. Cronbach’s alpha value was found to be .813 as a result of the analyses conducted, and according to the results of confirmatory factor analysis, the χ²/df value was found to be 2.815; the RMSEA value .077; the NFI value .938; the RFI value .900; the IFI value .950; the TLI value .919; the CFI value .950; and the PCLOSE value .052 and the HOLTER value was found to be 204.

Organizational Culture Scale

The scale that Hofstede used to determine cultural dimensions and validity-reliability that was tested by Lei and Wu (2007) was used in the study. In the scale in question, which was in 5-point Likert-type, there were five dimensions including masculinity (ER), power distance (GM), uncertainty avoidance (BK), individualism (BI), and long-term focus (UZ). Cronbach’s alpha value was found to be .836 as a result of the analyses conducted, and according to the results of confirmatory factor analysis, the χ²/df value was found to be 1.794, the RMSEA value .035, the NFI value .997, the RFI value .961, the IFI value .999, the TLI value .982, the CFI value .999, the PCLOSE value .474, and the HOLTER value was found to be 1365.

Hypotheses

Hypotheses developed in accordance with the purpose of the research are as follows:

Hypothesis 1 (H1): Organizational stress has a partially intermediary role in the effect of Hofstede culture on time management.

Hypothesis 1.1 (H1.1): Hofstede culture has an effect on time management.

Hypothesis 1.2 (H1.2): Hofstede culture has an effect on organizational stress.

Hypothesis 1.3 (H1.3): Organizational stress has an effect on time management.

Data collection

Data required for the research was collected through the face-to-person survey method, since this method offered significant advantages in terms of a high answering rate and allowing many questions to be asked (Ayten, 2016). Survey applications were carried out under the guidance of researchers at the locations where their employees worked. A prepared informed consent text was given to the voluntary participants prior to the application and they were asked questions after approval had been received. Since the validity and reliability tests for all surveys were successfully completed, no questions were excluded from the forms. After determining the effects between the variables based on the research model, the role of mediation was examined in accordance with the methodology developed by Baron and Kenny (1986).

Analysis of data

For the data analysis, Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) 25.0 and Analysis of Moment Structures (AMOS) 24.0 package programs were used. At the end of the analyses, χ²/DF, RMSEA, HOELTER, PCLOSE, NFI, NFI, RFI, IFI, TLI, and CFI goodness of fit indices related to the model were examined.

Findings

Basic information about time management, Hofstede culture and organizational stress scale in the research survey applied to the group in terms of gender, age, and work experience described in the sample section is shown in Table 1.

Table 1.

Base Statistics for Variables.

Variables	Cronbach’s alpha	N	M	SD	Variance
Time Management	.823	638	3.1626	.44,348	.197
Hofstede culture	.836	630	3.2784	.54,000	.292
Organizational stress	.813	621	3.5993	.52,031	.271

In the literature, studies aimed at analyzing statistical intermediary role have continuously improved from the early stages until today. Discussions primarily focusing on causality and intermediation patterns (Baron & Kenny, 1986; Maccorquodale & Meehl, 1948; MacKinnon et al., 2000) did not include bootstrap-based tests. MacKinnon et al. (2002) and Shrout and Bolger (2002) tested the significance of indirect effects in intermediary role test and conducting studies using bootstrap-based analysis, while the use of structural equation model has been popularized as an analysis method using measurement errors (Byrne, 2006). In structural equation modeling, processes are performed by assuming that there are linear relations among latent variables and between observed and latent variables (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007).

In the first model, time management was taken as the dependent variable, and the Hofstede organizational culture scale and sub-dimensions were taken as the independent variables. Thus, the first impact identified by Baron and Kenny (1986) was examined.

In the second model, time management was taken as the dependent variable, and the Holfstede organizational culture scale and organizational stress tool were taken as intermediary variables (Figure 2).

In Table 2, root mean square error of approximation (RMESA), NFI, RFI, IFI, TLI, and CFI values are examined. NFI is associated with a positive number of samples. NFI, RFI, IFI, TLI, and CFI have values between 0.00 and 1.00. If a model as an RMSEA value between 0.05 and 0.08, it is assumed to be in an acceptable fit (Hair et al., 2010; Şimşek, 2007; see Tables 3 and 4).

Table 2.

Fit indices of Scales.

Criteria	Perfect fit	Acceptable fit	Model 1	Model 2
CFI	.970 ≤ CFI ≤ 1.000	.950 ≤ CFI ≤ .970	.971	.972
HOELTER	≥200	75 ≤ HOELTER ≤ 200	328	363
IFI	.950 ≤ IFI ≤ 1.000	.900 ≤ IFI ≤ .950	.971	.973
NFI	.950 ≤ NFI ≤ 1.000	.900 ≤ NFI ≤ .950	.959	.958
PCLOSE	≥0.05		.170	.359
RFI	.900<RFI ≤ 1.000	.850<RFI ≤ .900	.888	.901
RMSEA	.000 ≤ RMSEA ≤ .050	.050 ≤ RMSEA ≤ .080	.061	.053
TLI	.95 ≤ TLI≤1.000	.900 ≤ TLI ≤ .950	.919	.934
χ²/df	.000 ≤ χ²/df ≤ 2.000	2 ≤ χ²/df ≤ 5	3.344	2.789

Note. CFI = comparative fit index; IFI = Incremental Fit Index; NFI = Normed Fit Index; RFI = Relative Fit Index; RMSEA = root mean square error approximation; TLI = Tucker–Lewis Index; PCLOSE= RMSEA associated p value; HOELTER= Hoelter’s Critical N.

Table 3.

Regression Coefficients of Relations between Variables.

Model	Observation variable		Latent variable	Standardized estimated value	Standard error	Critical value	p
Model 1	Time Man.	←	H. Culture	.477	.056	8.488	.000
Model 2	Org. Stress	←	H. Culture	.378	.042	8.894	.000
Model 2	Time Man.	←	H. Culture	.307	.049	6.184	.000
Model 2	Time Man.	←	Org. Stress	.457	.049	9.381	.000

Table 4.

Direct and Indirect Effect Analysis Results for Intermediary Role of Model 2.

Effects	Time management
Direct effect	.457	Organizational Stress
Standardized direct effect	.406
Indirect effect	.170
Standardized indirect effect	.102

Analyzing the table above, it can be said that both models developed in the study provided fit indices; therefore, the necessary conditions were met for deciding on the mediation effect with structural equation modeling. If the effect of an independent variable on a dependent variable is decreased or destroyed, it is concluded that the variable in the developed model is an intermediary variable (Baron & Kenny, 1986). When Table 2 is examined, H1.1 “Hofstede culture has an effect on time management” H1.2 “Hofstede culture has an effect on organizational stress,” and H1.3 “Organizational stress has an effect on time management” were all accepted.

Analyzing Tables 2 and 3 above, it can be fairly stated that organizational stress has a partially intermediary role in the effect of organizational culture on time management. When Figures 1 and 2 with Tables 2 and 3 are evaluated together, it is possible to discuss the partially mediating role of organizational stress on the effect of organizational culture on time management. Therefore, H1 propounding that “organizational stress has a partial role in the effect of Hofstede culture on time management,” is accepted.

Figure 1.

Test results of Model 1.

Figure 2.

Test results of Model 2.

Discussion and Conclusion

Although there are many studies in the literature dwelling upon the same variables as this study, it is found that there is no any study measuring the effect of organizational stress on organizational culture as well as scrutinizing the intermediary role of organizational stress in the effect of Hofstede culture dimensions on time management. In this vein, Terzi (2004) stated in his research that that male and female students differ according to the Hofstede cultural dimensions, and that models specific to our society should be created in both organizational and managerial fields. Moreover, significant differences were found between the groups analyzed in terms of gender, income level, size of the cities they were born and raised, status in workplace, and the typologies of organizational culture in Hofstede (2016).

In the literature, Copper (2002) further examined anxiety, weak motivation, and depression attributed to factors related to experience of adverse emotional situations such as frustration, business dissatisfaction, decreased business commitment, and anxiety based on organizational stress. In addition, Nel et al. (2004) examined the amount of work performance, absence, and turnover reducing quality as a result of organizational outcomes of stress, while Bellingrath (2009) investigated the relationship between chronic work stress, depletion based on organizational stress, and allostatic load in women. Boehlko (2009) examined stress based on giving new supervisors new responsibilities, increasing economic concerns, political and managerial pressures, lack of ability to participate in decisions, reward and punishment methods, and failure in being autonomous. On the other hand, Gökgöz and Altuğ (2014) analyzed the effects of medium level of organizational stress they found among academic staff, while Balyer and Gündüz (2014) pointed out to stress levels experienced by educational inspectors due to their duties. In the same vein, Macquet and Skalej (2015) investigated how time management affects elite athletes and their decision-making processes. Yamuç and Türker (2015) reviewed sources of organizational stress, while Grissom et al. (2015) examined how managers with developed time management skills showed high performance by sparing less time in interpersonal relationships. Ayaz and Batı (2017) investigated the relationship between organizational stress and organizational trust and Monteiro et al. (2017) looked into how a family-friendly organization culture decreases work stress and ability to compromise. Uğurlu Aldoğan and Aykora (2017) focused on organizational stress and time management; Develi et al. (2017) elaborated on the sources or underlying reasons of organizational stress as well as conscious awareness; and Çolak (2017) examined organizational stress and organizational creativity. However, as specified above, no studies in the literature have been found to dwell upon Hofstede’s culture scale, time management, and organizational stress.

The findings obtained in this study suggest that organizational stress might well contribute to reducing various difficulties at workplace by the influence of Hofstede’s culture on time management. Therefore, the general proposition in the study was verified as a result of the test, and it showed that academic and administrative staff working in universities have an individualist or collectivist culture, which is effective in time management. The effectiveness of Hofstede’s cultural dimensions through organizational stress in time management allows business and project plans to be carried out in a way that manages individual, team or departmental performances by taking into account the organizational stress elements. It is considered that this finding will be particularly effective in medicine, project management, and independent auditing.

Research Limitations and Recommendations for Further Research

Apart from the aforementioned strengths of the research, there are certain limitations to point out to propose various recommendations for further research. First, this research was conducted only on a working group of university employees who worked at Near East University in Cyprus and Hakkari University in Turkey and volunteered to participate in the research. Therefore, it would be rather useful to repeat validity and reliability analyses on data obtained from different sample groups. Furthermore, it should not be overlooked that our scale is based on Hofstede’s cultural dimensions. Outside the university environment, there may well be a need to provide academic contributions to the measuring power of the model.

Recommendations for Practitioners

Strategies that play a proactive and complementary role in adapting to the changes that organizations face are a dynamic structure developed through specific analyses (Yalcın & Seker, 2016). Therefore, processes within organizations should be managed by means of effective communication channels formed by different cultures (Fang et al., 2011) on the basis of reflection of organizational culture on social culture, and the fact that these cultures emerge over time according to common meanings within an organization (Lee et al., 2015).

It is important that managers approach the organizational problems they face when performing their management functions from the “organizational behavior” perspective (Bayram, 2017; Şeker et al., 2019). This will be the cornerstone for the strategies and policies to be developed to ensure the continuity of organizations under today’s competitive conditions.

In this regard, several solid mechanisms should be developed to enable educators with high focus of internal control and personal creativity to take initiative against constraints and negativities (Çayırdağ, 2017). Therefore, leaving the authority of the manager to other employees at the university to support group processes and collaborations is also an expression of respect and trust toward those who work at the university. Thus, the university’s current leadership capacity should be improved (Chamberland, 2009).

On the other hand, there is a need to develop political and legal mechanisms in educational activities, and they should be encouraged at universities. In this sense, using the expertise and skills of academicians, organizations will be stronger with joint decisions made as a result of strategic alliances through effective and efficient communication channels with stakeholders from the business world involved in problem solving with functional teams. In this way, managers who are both authorized and responsible in corporate and official affairs will have less burdens.

Consequently, practitioners should develop practices to implement business plans and reduce organizational stress by keeping in mind how cultural values affect behaviors and why individuals in a culture behave in a certain way.

Recommendations for Future Researchers

Similar to our research, future studies using intermediate variables on outputs such as success level, which would have an intermediary effect on culture, will have great contribution to the literature in this field. Thus, there is a need for conducting in-depth studies via different research models including several variables such as employees’ psychological capital, motivation and burnout levels, job satisfaction, and variables pertaining to the “self” such proficiency, cognitive and sensory characteristics, emotional or organizational intelligence, internal control focuses, multicultural educational practices, addictions, non-functional attitudes, corporate culture, and interaction with stakeholders.

In this vein, the quantitative nature of the research is expected to pave the way for qualitative research on culture and performance as well. Considering that this research model cannot be applied as a standard in every institution and is designed only according to the institution given in the study (tailor-made), the necessity of qualitative studies in the harmonization stages is further understood.

Conclusively, future studies with comparative evaluation of management and leadership styles based on performance indicators as well as the role of culture in the management styles of organizations that have achieved success in their fields of activity will provide greater contribution to the field, while also investigating the ways how cooperation is developed between human resources and other stakeholders who achieve success in addition to determining how leadership styles emerge.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Hikmet Yaşar

References

Abdulghani

H. M.

Al-Drees

A. A.

Khalil

M. S.

Ahmad

Ponnamperuma

G. G.

Amin

(2014). What factors determine academic achievement in high achieving undergraduate medical students? A qualitative study. Medical Teacher, 36(1), 43–48.

Abdullah

Ab Hamid

M. R.

Mustafa

Idris

Surad

N. R. M.

(2013). Mediating effect of organisational culture between leadership values on innovation: A partial least squares (PLS) path-modeling. Jurnal Teknologi, 63(2), 101–105.

Adams

R. V.

Blair

(2019, January-March). Impact of time management behaviors on undergraduate engineering students’ performance. SAGE Open. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244018824506

Alay

Koçak

(2002). Validity and reliability of time management questionnaire. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 22, 9–13.

Alhomayan

A. M.

(2013). The mediating-moderating effects of job stress and organizational support on the relationship between job demands resources and nurses’ job performance in Saudi public hospitals [Masters’ thesis]. Malaysia.

Alves

M. G. M.

Chor

Faerstein

Lopes

C. S.

Werneck

G. L.

(2004). Short version of the “job stres scale”: A Portuguese-language adaptation. Revista de saude publica, 38(2), 164–171.

Alvesson

(2013). Understanding organizational culture. Sage.

Argyris

(1995). Action science and organizational learning. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 10(6), 20–26. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683949510093849

Artnez

B. B.

Lucal

Artnez

J. E.

(2011). Organizational climate, occupational stress, and employee mental health: Mediating effects of organizational efficiency. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine/American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 53(1), 34–42.

10.

Atkinson

R. L.

Atkinson

R. C.

Smith

E. E.

Hilgard

E. R.

(1987). Introduction to psychology (9th ed.). Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

11.

Ayaz

Batı

(2017). The relationship between organizational trust and stress in tourism enterprises: The case of kitchen department employees. Journal of Business Research Turk, 9(1), 527–541.

12.

Ayten

A. M.

(2016). Strategic sustainable site management in higher education institutions. Journal of Higher Education, 6(3), 142–154.

13.

Balyer

Gündüz

(2014). Examining education supervisors’ stress level they experience due to their duties. Education and Science, 39(174), 325–337.

14.

Baothman

Aljefri

Agha

Khan

M. A.

(2018). Study habits of health science students at King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for health sciences, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. SAGE Open, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244018778092

15.

Barling

Cheung

Kelloway

E. K.

(1996). Time management and achievement striving interact to predict car sales performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(6), 821–826.

16.

Baron

R. M.

Kenny

D. A.

(1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.

17.

Bayram

(2017). Human energy at work: Theoretical framework. Hitit University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 10(2), 1021–1042.

18.

Bellingrath

Weigl

T. K.

Brigitte

(2009). Chronic work stress and exhaustion is associated with higher allostastic load in female school teachers. Stress, 12(1), 37–48.

19.

Boehlko

(2009). What are causes of stress? Journal of Physiology, 45(2), 1–12.

20.

Boslough

(1990). The enigma of time. National Geographic, 177(3), 109–132.

21.

Britton

B. K.

Tesser

(1991). Effects of time-management practices on college grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 405–410.

22.

Byrne

B. M.

(2006). Structural equation modeling with EQS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Lawrence Erlbaum.

23.

Cartwright

Cooper

C. L.

(1997). Managing workplace stress. Sage.

24.

Çayırdağ

(2017). Creativity fostering teaching: Impact of creative self-efficacy and teacher efficacy. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 17, 1959–1975.

25.

Chamberland

(2009). Distributed leadership: Developing a new practice An action research study [Doctoral dissertation]. Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Database. (UMI No. 3367708).

26.

Claessens

B. J. C

Roe

Rutte

C. G.

(2009). Time management: Logic, effectiveness and challenges. In Roe

R. A.

Waller

M. J.

Clegg

S. R.

(Eds.), Time in organizational research (pp. 23–41). Routledge.

27.

Claessens

B. J. C.

van Eerde

Rutte

C. G.

Roe

A. R.

(2007). A review of the time management literature. Journal of Personnel Review, 36(2), 255–276.

28.

Çolak

(2017). The effect of organizational stress on organizational creativity in success focused corporations. Journal of the Human and Social Science Researches, 6(2), 799–812.

29.

Copper

C. L.

(2002). Psychosocial stress and cancer. John Wily.

30.

Dauber

Fink

Yolles

(2012). A configuration model of organizational culture. SAGE Open. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244012441482

31.

Develi

Güğerçin

İplik

(2017). Mindfulness and source of organizational stress: The case of banking personnel. Social Sciences Studies Journal, 3(5), 44–51.

32.

Dierkes

Antal

A. B.

Child

Nonaka

(2003). Handbook of organizational learning and knowledge. Oxford University Press.

33.

Fang

S. R.

Fang

S. C.

Chou

C. H.

Yang

S. M.

Tsai

F. S.

(2011). Relationship learning and innovation: The role of relationship-specific memory. Industrial Marketing Management, 40(5), 743–753.

34.

Fernández

M. E.

Torres

M. V. T.

Montero

E. F. M.

Páez

J. M.

Ortíz

C. E.

Engüix

(2015). Psychological and psychobiological stress in the relationship between basic cognitive function and school performance. Anales de Psicología, 31(1), 120–126.

35.

Festjens

Janiszewski

(2015). The value of time. Journal of Consumer Research, 42(2), 178–195.

36.

Galetzka

Pruyn

van Hagen

Vos

Moritz

Gostelie

(2018). The psychological value of time. Transportation Research Procedia, 31, 47–55.

37.

Gill

A. S.

Flaschner

A. B.

Shachar

(2006). Mitigating stress and burnout by implementing transformational-leadership. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 18(6), 469–481.

38.

Gökgöz

Altuğ

(2014). A research into the effect of organizational stress on the performance of teaching staffs. Ege Academic Review, 14(4), 519–530.

39.

Gonzalez

J. L.

Rime

(2005). Cultural dimensions, socioeconomic development, climate, and emotional hedonic level. Cognition and Emotion, 16(1), 103–125.

40.

Gorondutse

A. H.

Hilman

(2016). Mediation effect of organizational culture on the relationship between perceived ethics and SMEs performance. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 9(2), 505–529.

41.

Grissom

J. A.

Loab

Mitani

(2015). Principal time management skills: Explaining patterns in principals’ time use, job stress, and perceived effectiveness. Journal of Educational Administration, 53(6), 773–793.

42.

Güçlü

(2003). Organizational culture. Kyrgyzstan Manas University Social Sciences Journal, 6, 147–159.

43.

Guoqing

Yongxin

(2000). Gender differences of China’s managers in time management. Women in Management Review, 15(1), 33–40.

44.

Haffner

Stock

(2010). Time management training and perceived control of time at work. The Journal of Psychology, 144(5), 429–447.

45.

Hair

J. F. J.

Black

W. C.

Babin

B. J.

Anderson

R. E.

(2010). Multivariate data analysis 7th ed. Prentice Hall.

46.

Hansen

B. A.

Sullivan

B. A.

(2003). Assessment of workplace stress: Occupational stress, its cons and common causes of teacher stress. In Wallet

J. E.

Walz

G. R.

(Eds.), Measuring up: Assessment issues for teachers, counselors, and administrators.

47.

Harris

O. J.

Hartman

S. J.

(2002). Organizational behavior. Best Business Books.

48.

Hickox

(2006). Time: Friend or foe? Rex Publishing.

49.

Hofstede

(1984a). Cultural differences in management and planning. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 1, 81–99.

50.

Hofstede

(1984b). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values (2nd ed.). Sage.

51.

Hofstede

(2001). Culture’s Consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Sage.

52.

Hofstede

(2006). What did globe really measure? Researchers’ minds versus respondents’ minds. Journal of International Business Studies, 37(6), 882–896.

53.

Hofstede

(2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1014

54.

Hofstede

Bond

(1988). The Confucius connection: From cultural roots to economic growth. Organizational Dynamics, 16, 4–21.

55.

Hofstede

Gofstede

G. J.

Minkov

(2010). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. 3rd ed. McGraw-Hill.

56.

Hoobler

J. M.

Wayne

S. A.

Lemmon

(2009). Bosses’ perceptions of family-work conflict and women’s promotability: Glass ceiling effects. Academy of Management Journal, 52(5), 939–957.

57.

Juhnke

G. B.

Juhnke

G. A.

Henderson

(2013). The homework identification plan: A solution-focused activity to promote student-athletes’ time management skills. Journal of Creativity in Mental Health, 8(2), 186–202.

58.

Koçel

(2005). Business management (10th ed.). Arıkan Publications.

59.

Küçükaltan

Karalar

Keskin

(2013). Time gaps preventing the managers from effective time management practices: A research on the managers of textile factories in Edirne city centre. Karamanoğlu Mehmetbey University Social and Economic Researches Journal, 15(24), 65–73.

60.

Kyriacou

Sutciffe

(1978). A model of teacher stress. Educational Studies, 4, 1–6.

61.

Lee

S. J.

Kim

Park

B. I.

(2015). Culture clashes in cross-border mergers and acquisitions: A case study of Sweden’s Volvo and South Korea’s Samsung. International Business Review, 24(4), 580–593.

62.

Lei

P. W.

(2007). Introduction to structural equation modeling: issues and practical considerations. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 26(3), 33–43.

63.

Leslie

L. M.

Gelfand

M. J.

(2012). The cultural psychology of social influence: Implications for organizational politics. In. Ferris

G. R.

Treadway

D. C.

(Eds.), Politics in organizations: Theory and research considerations (pp. 411–447). Taylor & Francis.

64.

Luthans

(1989). Organizational behavior. McGraw-Hill.

65.

Macan

T. H.

(1994). Time management: Test of a process model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 381–391.

66.

Maccorquodale

Meehl

P. E.

(1948). On a distinction between hypothetical constructs and intervening variables. Psychological Review, 55, 95–107.

67.

MacKinnon

D. P.

Krull

J. L.

Lockwood

C. M.

(2000). Equivalence of the mediation, confounding and suppression effects. Prevention Science, 1, 173–181.

68.

MacKinnon

D. P.

Lockwood

C. M.

Hoffman

J. M.

West

S. G.

Sheets

(2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7, 83–104.

69.

Macquet

Skalej

(2015). Time management in elite sports: How do elite athletes manage time under fatigue and stress conditions? Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 88, 341–363. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12105

70.

Mahmood

Y. R.

Kareem

J. R.

(2018). Mediating role of stress between entrepreneurial leadership and organizational citizenship behavior a case of entrepreneurial ventures in Iraq [Special issue]. International Journal of Entrepreneurship, 22, 1–13.

71.

Misra

Mckean

(2000). Collage students’ academic stress and its relation to their anxiety, time management and leisure satisfaction. American Journal of Health Studies, 16(1), 41–51.

72.

Monteiro

Pereira

Daniel

Silva

A. G.

Matos

F. R. N.

(2017). The influence of organizational reconciliation policies and culture on workers stress perceptions. Brazilian Administration Review, 14(3), http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1807-76922017000300304

73.

Moore

J. C.

(2014). Cognitive, learning and study strategy predictors of student-athlete academic success and academic progress rates. https://ir.ua.edu/handle/123456789/2030

74.

Nel

Van Dyk

Schultz

Werner

(2004). Human resource management. Halfway House: Southern Book Publishers.

75.

Nonis

S. A.

Hudson

G. I.

(2006). Academic performance of college students: Influence of time spent studying and working. Journal of Education for Business, 81, 151–158.

76.

O’Connor

(1999). Minding the workers: The meaning of “human” and “human relations” in Elton Mayo. Organization, 6(2), 223–246.

77.

Oshagbemi

(1995). Management development and managers’ use of their time. Journal of Management Development, 14(8), 19–34.

78.

Özer

M. A.

(2010). Time management for effective organizational management. Cement Employer Journal, 24(1), 1–20.

79.

Rivera

(2007). Time management. Global Media, Sahih Al-Bukhari.

80.

Roath

A. S.

Miller

S. R.

Cavusgil

S. T.

(2002). A conceptual framework of relational governance in foreign distributor relationships. International Business Review, 11, 1–16.

81.

Robbins

S. P.

(2000). Essentials of organizational behavior. Prentice Hall.

82.

Rogovsky

Schuler

R. S.

(1997). Managing human resources across cultures. Business & The Contemporary World, 9(1), 63–75.

83.

Ross

G. F.

(1997). Career stress responses among hospitality employees. Annals of Tourism Research, 24(1), 41–51.

84.

Sakal

Ö.

Yıldız

. (2015). Relations of individualism and collectivism values and career anchors and career satisfaction. Journal of Yasar University, 10(40), 6612–6623.

85.

Savicki

(1999). Cultural work values for supervisors and managers: A crosscultural look at child and youth care agencies. Child & Youth Care Forum, 28(4), 239–255.

86.

Scherer

Talley

C. P.

Fife

J. E.

(2017). How personal factors influence academic behavior and GPA in African American STEM students. SAGE Open, 7(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244017704686

87.

Şeker

Özsoy

Yaşar

(2019). Interaction between emotional intelligence and environmental sensitivity: 2014-2017 Kayseri in Turkey’s top 500 in the year a research on companies. Eurasian Journal of Social and Economic Research, 6(2), 332–348.

88.

Şekerli

E. B.

Gerede

(2011). The effects of culture on CRM programs: A study investigating Turkish pilots in terms of cultural dimensions suggested by Hofstede. Is, Guc: Industrial Relations and Human Resources Journal, 13(1), 17–38.

89.

Shrout

P. E.

Bolger

(2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7, 422–445.

90.

Sığrı

Ü.

Tığlı

. (2006). The effect of Hofstede’s cultural dimension of uncertainty avoidance on managerial-organizational processes and consumer behavior in terms of marketing. Marmara University Economic and Administrative Sciences Journal, 21(1), 327–342.

91.

Şimşek

Ö. F

. (2007). Introduction to structural equation modeling, core principles and applications in LISREL. Ekinoks Publications.

92.

Smythe

J. A.

Robertson

I. T.

(1999). On the relationship between time management and time estimation. British Journal of Psychology, 90, 333–347.

93.

Sofyalıoğlu

Ç.

Aktaş

. (2001). The effect of cultural differences on international businesses. Management and Economy Journal, 7(1), 75–92.

94.

Swanson

G. N.

(2000). Journal of the American Women’s Medical Association, 55, 76–79.

95.

Tabachnick

B. G.

Fidell

L. S.

(2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Pearson Education.

96.

Terzi

A. R.

(2004). A research on University students’ perceptions of power distance and uncertainty avoidance. Afyon Kocatepe University Social Sciences Journal, 6(2), 65–76.

97.

Theorell

Perski

Akerstedt

Sigala

Ahlberg-Hultén

Svensson

Eneroth

(1988). Changes in job strain in relation to changes in physiological state. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 14,189–196.

98.

Toksoy

Ayyildiz

(2010). Measuring the marketing performances of state forest enterprises in Turkey. African Journal of Biotechnology, 9, 3577–3588.

99.

Triandis

H. C.

(1982). Review of culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Human Organization, 41(1), 86–90.

100.

Trueman

Hartley

(1996). A comparison between the time-management skills and academic performance of mature and traditional-entry university students. Higher Education, 32(2), 199–215.

101.

Uğurlu Aldoğan

Aykora

. (2017). Examination of organisational stress and time management of health organisation personnel: Sample of Bitlis province. Journal of Bitlis Eren University Institute of Social Sciences, 6(1), 41–56.

102.

Varşıoğlu

Şeref

İ.

Yılmaz

İ.

(2012). A study on time management skills and attitudes of prospective Turkish teachers. Journal of Turkish Research Institute, 47, 75–86.

103.

Völlink

Bolman

C. A. W.

Eppingbroek

Dehue

(2013). Emotion-focused coping worsens depressive feelings and health complaints in cyberbullied children. Journal of Criminology, 2013 (2013), Article 416976.

104.

Walsh

(2008). Time management: Proven techniques for making every minute count (2nd ed.). F&W Publications.

105.

Yalcin

Seker

(2016). Examination of interaction and statistical differences between information and communication within internal control and managers’ perceived communication skills. European Scientific Journal, 12(8), 240–257.

106.

Yamuç

V. A.

Türker

(2015). Analyzing the antecedents of organizational stress: A study on the female and male employees of a manufacturing company. Journal of Administrative Sciences, 13(25), 389–423.

107.

Yin

Yang

Jing

(2014). Organizational culture evolution: An imprinting perspective. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 27(6), 973–994.