Perceived stress, coping strategies, and emotional intelligence: A cross-sectional study of university students in helping disciplines.

BACKGROUND: Post-secondary students in training for helping profession disciplines, including nursing, may be at elevated risk for high stress levels. Stress among students has been linked with adverse physical and psychological health. In addition to the common stressors associated with post-secondary education, sources of stress for students in the helping professions include balancing academic and clinical demands. Previous research indicates perceived stress levels are correlated with emotional intelligence (EI) and with the coping strategies employed by students. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to examine (1) the relationship between EI and perceived stress, and (2) the potential mediating role of coping responses. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey design was employed. SETTING: Participants were recruited from a public university in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: A sample of 203 undergraduate and graduate students majoring in psychology, nursing, and social work was recruited. METHOD: Participants were recruited on-campus and through campus online resources and completed an online survey or a paper-and-pencil version of the survey. Descriptive statistics and mediation analyses were used to test the study hypotheses. RESULTS: Higher EI was associated with lower perceived stress, and this association was partially mediated by both adaptive and maladaptive coping responses. Higher EI was associated with greater use of adaptive coping and lower use of maladaptive coping, and these, in turn, were negatively and positively (respectively) associated with perceived stress. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that interventions aimed at increasing emotional intelligence may help to reduce perceived stress for students in the helping disciplines.

Designing multiple-choice test items at higher cognitive levels.

In the midst of a nursing faculty shortage, many academic institutions hire clinicians who are not formally prepared for an academic role. These novice faculty face an immediate need to develop teaching skills. One area in particular is test construction. To address this need, the authors describe how faculty from one course designed multiple-choice test items at higher cognitive levels and simultaneously achieved congruence with critical-thinking learning objectives defined by the course.

Putting leadership back into strategy.

In recent decades an infusion of economics has lent the study of strategy much needed theory and empirical evidence. Strategy consultants, armed with frameworks and techniques, have stepped forward to help managers analyze their industries and position their companies for strategic advantage. Strategy has come to be seen as an analytical problem to be solved. But, says Montgomery, the Timken Professor of Business Administration at Harvard Business School, the benefits of this rigorous approach have attendant costs: Strategy has become a competitive game plan, separate from the company's larger sense of purpose. The CEO's unique role as arbiter and steward of strategy has been eclipsed. And an overemphasis on sustainable competitive advantage has obscured the importance of making strategy a dynamic tool for guiding the company's development over time. For any company, intelligent guidance requires a clear sense of purpose, of what makes the organization truly distinctive. Purpose, Montgomery says, serves as both a constraint on activity and a guide to behavior. Creativity and insight are key to forging a compelling organizational purpose; analysis alone will never suffice. As the CEO--properly a company's chief strategist--translates purpose into practice, he or she must remain open to the possibility that the purpose itself may need to change. Lou Gerstner did this in the 1990s, when he decided that IBM would evolve to focus on applying technology rather than on inventing it. So did Steve Jobs, when he rescued Apple from a poorly performing strategy and expanded the company into attractive new businesses. Watching over strategy day in and day out is the CEO's greatest opportunity to shape the firm as well as outwit the competition.

The Board's missing link.

If a dam springs several leaks, there are various ways to respond. One could assiduously plug the holes, for instance. Or one could correct the underlying weaknesses, a more sensible approach. When it comes to corporate governance, for too long we have relied on the first approach. But the causes of many governance problems lie well below the surface--specifically, in critical relationships that are not structured to support the players involved. In other words, the very foundation of the system is flawed. And unless we correct the structural problems, surface changes are unlikely to have a lasting impact. When shareholders, management, and the board of directors work together as a system, they provide a powerful set of checks and balances. But the relationship between shareholders and directors is fraught with weaknesses, undermining the entire system's equilibrium. As the authors explain, the exchange of information between these two players is poor. Directors, though elected by shareholders to serve as their agents, aren't individually accountable to the investors. And shareholders--for a variety of reasons--have failed to exert much influence over boards. In the end, directors are left with the Herculean task of faithfully representing shareholders whose preferences are unclear, and shareholders have little say about who represents them and few mechanisms through which to create change. The authors suggest several ways to improve the relationship between shareholders and directors: Increase board accountability by recording individual directors' votes on key corporate resolutions; separate the positions of chairman and CEO; reinvigorate shareholders; and give boards funding to pay for outside experts who can provide perspective on crucial issues.