Identification of Individual Factors that Predict Structurational Divergence Among Nurses: A Secondary Analysis
Date
2012-07-17
Authors
Conway-Morana, Patricia
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
Structurational Divergence (SD) occurs when an individual reaches a “nexus”, this point of being in the position of needing to satisfy two sets of equally interpenetrating, but contradictory social rules, practices, cultures, or structures, as well as the resulting cycle of communication breakdowns (unresolved conflict, erosion of personal and professional development, and immobilization) that occur when the individual is unable to satisfy both structures (Nicotera & Clinkscales, 2010; Nicotera, Mahon, & Zhao, 2010). The purpose of this cross sectional, non-experimental, secondary analysis was to examine data from 713 registered nurses from a large community hospital to determine if there were subsets of individual factors or communication attributes that predict SD. Correlations and simple linear regressions were used. SD was regressed with six individual factors and five communications attributes. Gender was a weak predictor of SD (r = -0.100; R2 = 0.010; adj. R2 =.009; p = .008); but age, clinical specialty, ethnicity, experience, and education were not predictors. The Conflict Styles of Non-confrontational (r = 0.160; R2 = 0.026; adj. R2 = 0.024; p = 0.000) and Controlling (r = 0.162; R2 = 0.026; adj. R2 = 0.025; p = 0.000) were predictors of SD, but Solution-Orientation was not a predictor. Verbal aggression (r = 0.161; R2 = 0.026; adj. R2 = 0.025; p = 0.000), and ambiguity intolerance (r = 0.233; R2 = 0.054; adj. R2 = 0.053; p = 0.000) were predictors of SD, but argumentativeness was not a predictor. Taking conflict personally (R2 = 0.054; adj. R2 = 0.053; p = 0.000) was a predictor of SD, as well as all of the subscales of Taking Conflict Personally (Personalization (R2 = 0.010; adj. R2 = 0.008; p = 0.009), Persecution (R2 = 0.078; adj. R2 = 0.077; p = 0.000), Stress Reaction (R2 = 0.034; adj. R2 = 0.033; p = 0.000), Positive Relational Effects (R2 = 0.009; adj. R2 = 0.007; p = 0.013), and Negative Relational Effects (R2 = 0.010; adj. R2 = 0.009; p = 0.007)) were weak predictors of SD. This analysis supports findings by Nicotera, Mahon, and Zhao (2010), that SD is a systemic phenomenon. While much research has been conducted on the work environment, this is one of the earliest studies that specifically examine SD within the nursing population. Further exploration related to the presence and severity of SD in relation to organizational structures is required.
Description
Keywords
Structurational divergence, Communication, Work environment, Conflict