Page 91 - Biobehavioral Resilence to Stress

68 Biobehavioral Resilience to Stress

This model relates specifically to work-related stress and holds that individ-

uals are most likely to experience strain from high job demands (D) when
they feel unable to control (C) their work-related tasks or infl uence their
work procedures (i.e., when they have little decision latitude). Th e reason-
ing behind this argument is that high work demands create anxiety about

performance, which in turn can be reduced or offset only by the percep-

tion of control over significant aspects of the work environment (Cooper
et al., 2001: 135–136). Other researchers (e.g., Johnson & Hall, 1988) have
expanded upon Karasek’s original model to argue that social support (S)
may also reduce the strain of high work-related demands. For example,
colleagues and supervisors can provide social support in the form of help
and feedback (e.g., instrumental, emotional, informational, and appraisal
support; see also House, 1981).
In the context of the D–C–S model, resilience might be understood
as potentially helpful to the perception of control or use of social support.
Specific characteristics of resilience (e.g., willingness to improvise and

determination) bear obvious relevance to control and thus may facilitate expe-

rience and perception of control. A similar effect is implied in our analysis
of the Four Process model with respect to cognitive reactions to stress. Th e
second contribution of the D–C–S model is its proposition that social sup-

port serves to buffer the expected effects of extreme demands. If this idea is

correct, it suggests an additional avenue by which resilient individuals might
benefit. Guided by their determination to make use of all potential resources,

resilient people may be more willing and more active in seeking social sup-
port (e.g., Walsh, 2002). In fact, the proposition that social support can play

a significant role in buffering against strain suggests the need to recognize

an additional and potentially important marker of resilience itself. As indi-
viduals seek social support, they may strengthen and reinforce their own and
others’ (e.g., family or unit) capacity for resilience.
Although not every study has demonstrated that social support serves

to buffer stress (e.g., Schaubroeck & Fink, 1998), many studies have (see
Cooper et al., 2001: 140–149 for a brief review). Walsh’s (2002) work in the
area of family resilience certainly supports the idea that social support may

play a significant role in buffering against stress. The potential benefi cial

effect of social support introduces the need to expand our consideration of
how an effective leader might increase the resilience of his or her followers.

Certainly, extraordinary personal qualities and behavior are important
and perhaps even essential under demanding or hostile conditions. How-
ever, the D–C–S model suggests that leaders might increase or reinforce
followers’ resistance on a daily basis simply by performing conventional
interactions effectively. By engaging fully in various ordinary, daily inter-

actions with followers who seek resources and support, an eff ective leader

1/21/2008 4:49:25 PM
CRC_71777_Ch004.indd 68
CRC_71777_Ch004.indd 68 1/21/2008 4:49:25 PM