The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.

Research Article

Examining Occupational Stress, Sources of Stress and Stress Management Strategies through the Eyes of Management Consultants: A Multiple Correspondence Analysis for Latent Constructs

Sofia von Humboldt

Corresponding Author

Research Unit in Psychology and Health, R&D, ISPA, Instituto Universitário, Lisbon, Portugal

Correspondence: Sofia von Humboldt, Research Unit in Psychology and Health, R&D, ISPA, Instituto Universitário, Rua Jardim do Tabaco, 34, 1149‐041 Lisbon, Portugal.

Email: sofia.humboldt@gmail.com

Search for more papers by this author
Isabel Leal

Research Unit in Psychology and Health, R&D, ISPA, Instituto Universitário, Lisbon, Portugal

Search for more papers by this author
Tito Laneiro

Autonomous University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal

Search for more papers by this author
Patrícia Tavares

University Institute of Economy and Management, Technical University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 11 February 2013
Cited by: 2

Abstract

To date, little research has yet focused in broad assessment for management consultancy professionals. This investigation aims to analyse management consultants' self‐perceptions of occupational stress (SPoOS), sources of stress (SoS) and stress management strategies (SMS) and to find latent constructs that can work as major determinants in consultants' conceptualization of SPoOS, SoS and SMS. Measures were completed, including demographics and interviews. Complete data were available for 39 management consultants, 53.8% male and aged between 23 and 56 years (M = 38.0; SD = 9.2). The data were subjected to content analysis. Representation of the associations and latent constructs were analysed by a multiple correspondence analysis. Results indicated that ‘intellectual disturber’ (31.4%) was the most referred SPoOS, ‘high workload’ (15.1%) was identified as the most prevalent perceived SoS and ‘coaching’ (19.0%) was the most mentioned SMS. No significant differences between the two gender groups were found regarding the three total scores. SPoOS was explained by a two‐factor model: ‘organization‐oriented’ and ‘person‐oriented’. A three‐dimension model formed by ‘job concerns’, ‘organizational constraints’ and ‘career expectations’ was indicated as a best‐fit solution for SoS, and SMS was best explained in a three‐dimension model by ‘group dynamics strategies’, ‘organizational culture strategies’ and ‘individual support strategies’. This research makes a unique contribution for a better understanding of what defines SPoOS, SoS and SMS for management consultants. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Number of times cited according to CrossRef: 2

  • , Personal and occupational factors contributing to biomechanical risk of the distal upper limb among dairy workers in the Lombardy region of Italy, Applied Ergonomics, 10.1016/j.apergo.2018.12.013, (2019).
  • , Perceived stress in human–machine interaction in modern manufacturing environments—Results of a qualitative interview study, Stress and Health, 35, 2, (187-199), (2019).