Relationship of role conflict and role ambiguity to selected job dimensions among joint appointees

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine perceptions of role conflict and role ambiguity experienced by nurse faculty in joint academic-clinical appointments and non-joint-appointed faculty (traditional faculty), and to examine the relationships of these two constructs with social support, job satisfaction, and propensity to leave the joint appointment. Scholarly productivity of the two groups was also examined. Five hypotheses were proposed. The sample (N = 113) was drawn from the five Canadian university nursing faculties with the largest proportion of joint academic-clinical appointees. Findings indicate that assuming a joint appointment does not necessarily lead to an increase in role conflict and role ambiguity, and that joint appointees do not differ from traditional faculty in levels of role conflict and role ambiguity, scholarly productivity levels, or job satisfaction. Within the joint-appointee group (N = 33), role conflict was significantly higher than role ambiguity, both role conflict and role ambiguity had an adverse effect on job satisfaction and are determinants of intent to leave the joint appointment. In addition, social support was found to have a buffering effect on role conflict.