DIFFERENCES IN PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR STATUS AND ROLE IN THE WORKPLACE
The purpose of the study is to empirically substantiate the status and role differences in professional responsibility in the workplace. Methods: theoretical, empirical, mathematical statistics. Research results are based on the use of mathematical and statistical procedures, differences in the professional responsibility of workers with different status-role positions in the workplace are substantiated. These differences indicate, according to the authors, that leadership positions require greater responsibility, in contrast to the positions of subordinate personnel, since the head has the responsibility to regulate, control, organize, motivate, delegate the authority and activities of subordinates. It is shown that in comparison with subordinates, managers have a greater level of personal resources, a balance of their life achievements and failures, a higher adaptive potential and less stress vulnerability.
The presented results showed that among subordinates, but especially among managers, professional responsibility is most clearly manifested at the cognitive and behavioral levels, and to a lesser extent at the affective, emotional level.
In addition, it has been shown that managers are characterized by a significantly greater variety of socially determined career incentives, in particular, orientation to professional competence, management, autonomy, challenge, and entrepreneurship. Subordinates are more inclined to consider their work as service and are focused on the integration of various areas of their lives and on self-realization on this basis.
The results obtained suggest that the personal foundations of the subject of responsibility discovered by the authors, on the one hand, show the degree of “rooted” responsibility as a personality trait, and on the other hand, they are the most important mechanisms for the implementation of responsible human behavior in the workplace.
Collins F. (2013). The Spesial Responsibility of Engeneers. The Social Responsibility of Engeneers. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. Vol. 196 (10), 55-68.
Davis W. L. (2017). Internal-external control and attribution of responsibility for success and failure. Journal of personality. 40, 123-136.
Helkama K. (2010). Toward a cognitivie-developmental theory of attribution of responsibility. Helsinki, 220 .
Ladd J. (2015). Philosophical Remarks and Professional Responsibility in Organizations. Applied Philosophy. Vol. 1 (2), 45-50.
Phares E. J. (1976). Locus of Control in Personality, Morristown. N. J. : General Learning Press. 217.
Rotter J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external locus of control of reinforcement: Psychological Monographs Text. 328.
Sadova M. A. (2018). Psykholohichni skladovi profesiinoi vidpovidalnosti osobystosti [Psychological components of professional responsibility]. Odessa : Vydavets Bukaiev Vadym [in Ukrainian].
Sadova M.A. (2018). Empirical structure of professional responsibility of personality by factor analysis. Innovative solutions in modern science. Dubai, №6 (25), 112-122.
Copyright (c) 2020 SOCIALIZATION & HUMAN DEVELOPMENT" INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.