Crafting a Stronger Workforce: An Exploration of Mindset, Personality, and Stress for a Work Resiliency Framework at Bataan Peninsula State University

Crafting a Stronger Workforce: An Exploration of Mindset, Personality, and Stress for a Work Resiliency Framework at Bataan Peninsula State University

Rosemarie C. Farro, Candida S. Punla

Bataan Peninsula State University Dinalupihan Campus

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.909000648

Received: 06 October 2025; Accepted: 12 October 2025; Published: 24 October 2025

ABSTRACT

High performance standards in the ever-changing academic environment can cause stress and burnout, even in resilient people. The Bataan Peninsula State University (BPSU) recognizes that in order to maintain faculty productivity and well-being, a supportive work environment is necessary. This study adopts a descriptive-correlational approach to examine the relationship between mindset, personality, and stress among 149 teaching personnel, aiming to design a robust work resiliency framework. Findings reveal that stress (β = -0.26, p=.002), personality (β = 0.111, p=.013), and mindset (β = 0.313, p<.001) significantly contribute to resiliency. Stress mediates the link between mindset and resiliency (β = 0.327, p<.001). The framework integrates strategies to nurture a growth mindset, enhance positive traits, and manage stress, fostering faculty excellence.

Keywords: Framework, SEM, Strategies, Work Resiliency

INTRODUCTION

In a country where natural disasters are a common occurrence, Filipinos have developed a reputation for resilience. However, this trait is not limited to overcoming calamities but also extends to navigating challenges in the workplace. Despite this, the concept of work resilience among Filipino workers in economic industries remains relatively unexplored. This is concerning, given the recent increase in voluntary attrition rates of 1.31 percent in 2000 and a 73 percent increase in 2021 due to changes in working arrangements, lack of work-life balance, and mental health issues (Manila Bulletin, 2022).

To cultivate work resilience, according to members of American Heart Association (AHA) in 2016 considered the traits and skills that could build up how to “withstand, recover, and grow in the face of challenging demands” in the workplace. With this, a resilient employee will develop a particular pattern of problem-solving, be able to adapt to changes and maintain their performance to provide an optimal contribution to the organization. Moreover, a resilient workforce benefits the organization in many ways, making people more motivated, capable of dealing with stress or change, and less susceptible to burnout.

However, in the educational setting, the process of teaching students is incredibly difficult. The adversities of the profession sway effective teachers into social and emotional instability, eventually leading to burnout and wanting to leave the job. To prevent burnout, educators teach, practice, and instill skills of well-being and plant a seed of resilience through program intervention associated with adapting and enduring adversities (Spurgeon & Thompson, 2018).  Similarly, teaching has always required resilience; motivation, self-determination, personal values, and capability approach are anchored on the theory of resilience. Research showed using a case study conducted where teachers’ resilience influences their commitment and effectiveness in teaching, and there should be a supportive relationship between and among faculty, students, and stakeholders in the school community (Lacaba et al., 2020).

With this, the proposed study aims to delve into the mindset, personality, and stress levels of faculty members at Bataan Peninsula State University to create a Work Resiliency Framework. This framework will help identify which indicators have the potential to influence work resiliency and contribute to the success of the organization. Moreover, the study’s findings will also benefit other educational institutions facing similar challenges in promoting work resiliency among faculty members. By developing a framework that can be used in other organizations, the study will contribute to the body of knowledge on work resiliency and its impact on organizational success.

RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

Resilience is the ability to overcome adversity and stressful events and experiences. Over the past decade, resilience has become a familiar concept in both research and mental health practice. There are factors may influence resilience, personality traits, self-esteem, age, secure attachment, the presence of a role model, family stability, and culture (Camitan & Bajin, 2021)

However, employees are at risk in many aspects which may affect work resiliency. Work stress is one of the problems faced by every employee in everyday life as well as in the work environment. Stress is described as tension or distress and there is a disproportion between job demands and an individual’s ability (Sariwulan, 2018). As reported by the American Heart Association in 2016, stress is one of the significant risks and affects the resiliency among employees in the workplace across the globe. Forty percent of employees reported and found to be high and unrelenting and said they often experience absenteeism and reduced engagement to work.

Specifically, it was reported by the Global Organization for Stress in 2020 there are 80% of workers experience stress in the workplace, out of 10 there are 6 workers in major global economies experiencing increased workplace stress.  In the Philippines setting there are 27 percent of Filipinos stated that they regularly experience stress in their daily lives. Cases of stress increase because of the growing population and it is more common among lower-income countries like the Philippines.

As stated in the study on Stress and the Resiliency of Teachers, student behaviors, colleagues, and administration are the main causes of teachers’ stress. With the teachers with high scored stress on emotional exhaustion of MBI-ES, 50% reported having no school support, and with this the ability to be resilient decreases. (Abiyou, 2017).

Furthermore, recognizing one’s personality traits is one of the determining factors for work resiliency according to some researchers; this is the first step in successfully achieving goals. Being able to identify strengths and weaknesses is the cornerstone of success. In the workplace, personality traits are important to create a diverse work environment where creativity and varying ideas can flourish; these include the characteristics or traits of an individual. In hiring employees, personality is taken into consideration which can foster an inclusive, positive, and resiliency in the workplace. According to Eley, Cloninger, Walters, Laurence, Synnott, and Wilkinson (2013), resiliency was associated with the personality traits of being mature, optimistic, persevering, and cooperative. With this, the findings support inclusive resilience as a component of optimal functioning and well-being in a profession.

As stated in the study “Relationship between Resilience and Personality Traits in Paramedics”, using the five dimensions of personality these are conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, neuroticism, and openness. There were 252 emergency medical staff participated and found a very high level of resilience associated with personality conscientiousness. It is shown that professionals in the medical field can make effective decisions, organize their work well, discern, think before taking any action, and finally resilience to retain rather than leave the job (Froutan, Mazlom, Malekzadeh, and Mirhaghi, 2017). Similarly, the personality trait of extraversion was significantly and directly correlated with resiliency which revealed that people with stronger public relations were endowed with higher levels of resilience, extraverted individuals can also experience more pleasant events in a way that can bring about more positive emotions and lead to the adoption of active coping and social support mechanism.

Moreover, mindset also serves as a determinant factor of resiliency which is defined as possessing assumptions about self, basic belief toward flexibility of personal qualities, and dictates the ways of thinking to achieve goals to determine work success and failure. With this, research shows mindset can influence the nature of experiences in the workplace. according to Hatcher (2018), the role of educators are integral part of influencing positive mindsets among students, so it is beneficial for educators to reflect on their mindset as this can affect not only the way they teach but also the way their students interpret feedback. Similarly, Rattan et al. (2011) mentioned by Hatcher (2018) incorporated quantitative analysis and determined that teachers with a fixed mindset are more likely to label a student as having low ability after assessment. Classroom teachers attempt to build confidence in students through comforting statements and praise, educators must be aware of how struggling students have low assessment and by giving feedback, positive or negative. With this, the responsibility of developing a positive mindset falls among educators.

Nowadays, due to challenges and demands on work, more employees affect their quality of work-life, they may experience burnout, become emotionally unstable and stagnant may lead to vulnerability, inability to engage in work activities, and increase along with the complexity of living and the risks heighten as one transition to a new phase of life experiences or when faced with life-changing events.  As such, employees worldwide are at great risk of poor performance, immobility, and inability to handle stressful events and concerns as they venture into challenging work demands.

Related Theories

This study anchored on positive psychology which was described by Seligman as the science of positive subjective experience towards work. This explores the positive emotions, positive traits, and positive institutions that are linked with the improvement of health, well-being, longevity, and greater quality of life. According to Seligman, people thrive when they are happy. When mood becomes brighter, people set higher goals and persist longer, when experiencing less fatigue and show better team cooperation and problem-solving (Desmond, 2020). In this study of human strengths, contentment, optimism, and happiness are all essential components of what may be considered a good life of well-being. In addition, an optimistic mindset helps individual buffer against depression through the promotion of positive emotions and increased life satisfaction. Building resilience through positive cognition, an increase in positive emotions, and higher life satisfaction, may improve personal and organizational well-being (Spurgeon and Thompson, 2018).

This theory is relevant to the present study since it serves as the basis for pointing out the importance of positive traits and mindset, the influence of emotions, and one’s cognitive ability to build resilience in the formulation of a framework.

Furthermore, stress, response-oriented theory, and hardiness theory serve as the basis of this study stated by Walinga (2019). In the response-oriented theory, stress has been viewed as responses, a response model describes a psychological response pattern and is generally captured in general adaptation syndrome. This model describes stress as a dependent variable and has three concepts: stress is a defensive mechanism; stress follows the three stages of alarm, resistance, and exhaustion; and if the stress is prolonged or severe, it could result in decreases in adaptation. This was initially introduced by Hans Selye in 1956. Selye’s idea of stress response could result in positive or negative results based on cognitive interpretations of the symptoms or physiological experience. Positive (eustress) and negative (distress) experiences of stress are considered physiological constructs or responses. The response model of stress incorporates coping within the model. However, Kabosa (1979) presented the Hardiness theoretical model which illustrates resilient stress response patterns in individuals and groups. According to Kabosa, stress is associated with personal growth and development that can enhance an individual’s resilience or hardiness.

With this theory as the basis, the study determined the level of stress of the employees about work and its environment. The thoughts, feelings, emotions, and behaviors towards stressful events as being described are considered factors to determine the resiliency of a person.

The theory of mindset is an additional basis for this study, according to Carol Dweck this theory relates to the belief that a person can improve at a given task. Dweck identifies two distinct kinds of mindset, it is growth and fixed. People with a fixed mindset will tend to think of intelligence as a fixed thing, which has absolute beliefs around ability. However, in growth mindset assumes that people can improve, cultivate skills and knowledge, and along the way improve as desired and believed to be achieved (Healy, n.d.).

The present study is anchored on this theory because of its applicability to the range of variables that are associated with resiliency as a determining factor due to the beliefs that a person can cope, improve one’s ability, and believe in achieving goals.

Research Objectives

The following objectives sought to answer:

1. To describe the demographic profile of the respondents in terms of:

    1.1. Age;

    1.2. Sex;

    1.3. Campus;

    1.4. Civil Status;

    1.5. Highest educational attainment;

2. To determine the level of mindset, personality, stress, and resiliency.
3. To determine if Mindset, Personality, Stress, and Work Resiliency significantly vary considering the profile of the respondents.
4. To determine if Mindset, Personality, Stress, and Work Resiliency are significantly correlated.
5. To identify which among Mindset, Personality, and Stress is the best determinant of Work Resiliency.
6. To present how the Structural Equation Model be presented.

Research Output

To come up with Work Resiliency Farmwork based on the findings of the study

METHODOLOGY

Research Design. This study utilized the descriptive-correlation approach. The Descriptive-Correlational research Design was the most appropriate tool for the study since the analysis of the relationships from different variables was highlighted, emphasizing the key determinants or being influenced by the respondents’ profile and work resiliencies. By utilizing this design, the researchers aimed to gain deep insights into factors such as mindset, personality, and stress, ultimately leading to the development of a framework for work resiliency.

Respondents. This study involved the faculty members of the Bataan Peninsula State University, which had six campuses located in Abucay, Balanga, Bagac, Dinalupihan, Main, and Orani,

Instrumentation. The researchers adopted the tools and sought permission from the authors of the tools internationally, except personality test because it was purchased by the researcher. However, as the tool is purchased and borrowed internationally, the settings of the respondents must be the topmost priority, hence the tool with the consent of the author and the ethical considerations being identified and followed as well as the ethical procedures by the institution. None of the tools were used solely by the researcher for commercial purposes, the consent was used for research purposes only. No plagiarism or copyright issues were compromised with the current study on hand.  The instruments were standardized with no modification applied. The reliabilities of the instruments are all set.

Sampling Design. In the process of selecting respondents for the study, the researchers employed a sampling technique called simple random sampling. This technique is a probability sampling method that ensures each member of the population has an equal chance of being selected for the study.

Sample Size. 149 faculty members participated in the survey by completing the questionnaire across various campuses of the Bataan Peninsula State University.

Data Gathering. The researchers sought the approval of the University President of Bataan Peninsula State University. Once the request was approved, the researchers, in coordination with the Campus Directors and Deans, distributed copies of the questionnaire to the respondents and retrieved them on the agreed-upon day.

Ethical Consideration. The researchers had gone through the process of obtaining informed consent, which referred to a situation in which all potential participants received and understood all the information they needed to decide whether they wanted to participate. This included information about the study’s benefits, risks, funding, and institutional approval. Confidentiality meant that all participants had a right to privacy and their data had to be protected and secured. Furthermore, they were not coerced or forced to participate, and they were aware that the study was solely for research purposes. Compensations were not provided to them, and all these details were explained to them through the informed consent form, which was presented as a separate page from this paper.

Statistical Treatment of Data.  The data collected through the questionnaire and psychological standardized test were encoded and statistically processed using SPSS software. The gathered data was analyzed using descriptive statistical tools, including frequency counts, percentages, means, Kruskal-Wallis Test, Mann-Whitney U Test, Multiple Regression, Spearman Rho Moment Correlation, and Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Part I. Profile of the Respondents

The demographic profile of the respondents, out of 149 respondents, the distribution across campuses indicates that the Main Campus has the largest portion with 49 or 32.89%, which aligns with its larger population. Notably, the number of faculty members with 34 or 22.82% are ages between 48 – 54 years old. The majority of the participants are female with 85 or 57.05%, and a significant proportion of 88 or 59.06%, are married. Additionally, 76 or 51.01% have acquired a master’s degree.

This demographic distribution of the current study aligns with broader statistics in the Philippines. According to the Philippine Statistics Authority’s 2020 data, the larger employed persons in the country are in the age group of 25-34, accounting for 27.6% of the population. Furthermore, a report from CEIC published in the World Bank released data indicating that there were 51.860% female Filipino teachers in 2017. These statistics corroborate the sex representation observed in the study

Likewise, Regalado’s (2017) study published in the Asia Pacific Society for Public Affairs mostly of the teachers are married with 71.01%. Furthermore, the policy of the Commission on Higher Education (CHEd) requiring teachers in Philippine Higher Educational Institutions to have postgraduate degrees to become tenured or regular employees is highlighted in the discussion. This policy is aimed at ensuring that individuals with the necessary academic qualifications and teaching skills are allowed to teach in tertiary schools in the country. The Philippine government has mandated this policy and it has been upheld by the Supreme Court, as reported by Aning (2013) in the Philippine Daily Inquirer.

Part II. Mindset, Personality, Stress, and Resiliency

In this study, mindset contains two sub-variables: the fixed mindset and the growth mindset. The findings reveal that on average respondents either agree or disagree in terms of fixed mindset (Mean=3.87, SD=1.34), while on average they quite agree on the indicators of growth mindset (Mean=5.71, SD=0.81).

The findings above suggest that respondents generally agree with statements reflecting growth-oriented attitudes and behaviors. This indicates an inclination among respondents towards embracing challenges, persisting through setbacks, and valuing learning and improvement. As supported by the literature, In the educational setting, according to Hatcher (2018) the role of the educators is an integral part of influencing positive mindsets among students, so it is beneficial for educators to reflect on their mindset as this can affect not only the way they teach but also the way their students interpret feedback.

In terms of personality, respondents claim that their neuroticism (Mean=3.17, SD=0.87); extraversion (Mean=2.75, SD=0.73); openness (Mean=3.03, SD=0.75); agreeableness (Mean=2.75, SD=0.75); conscientiousness (Mean=3.04, SD=0.88) is average.

As a result, despite the overall average perception of personality among respondents, neuroticism stands out as the trait with the highest mean. It implies that respondents may perceive themselves as being somewhat more prone to negative emotions such as anxiety, stress, or worry compared to other personality traits assessed.  As to the study conducted by Hasan (2017), the focus was on exploring the relationship between teachers’ personality traits and specific dimensions of personality, namely extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness. The research aimed to investigate how these personality traits might influence teachers’ performance and effectiveness in their professional roles.

Data also reveals that as to stress, the respondents’ responses on average indicate that they are rarely stressed (Mean=2.30, SD=0.59). Findings show that faculty members from Bataan Peninsula State University suggest a relatively low prevalence of stress. This finding contrasts with the study of Kyriacou (2001) cited by Rosenberg (2010) mentioned that the main sources of stress facing teachers are lack of motivation among students, maintaining discipline, time pressure, work overload, coping with change, being evaluated by others, self-esteem and status, dealing with colleagues, administration and management, role conflict and ambiguity, and poor working conditions including facilities and lack of resources.

It can also be gleaned from the results that respondents claim that they are often resilient (Mean=4.05, SD=0.42). This finding suggests that teaching personnel within this academic community exhibit a strong sense of adaptability and possess the ability to navigate challenges and adversities. Similarly, teaching has always required resilience; motivation, self-determination, personal values, and capability approach are anchored on the theory of resilience. With this, a case study was conducted where teachers’ resilience influences their commitment and effectiveness in teaching, and there should be a supportive relationship between and among faculty, students, and stakeholders in the school community (Lacaba et al., 2020).

Part III. Mindset, Personality, Stress, and resiliency of the respondents considering their profile.

Mindset considering the respondents’ profile It was disclosed in the data that there is enough evidence to claim that there exists a significant difference in the mindset of the respondents in terms of growth mindset (H=15.16, p=0.01) when grouped according to campus. However, it is noteworthy that there is no significant difference in both fixed mindset and growth mindset when respondents are grouped according to age, sex, civil status, and educational attainment.

This finding indicates the distinct variation in mindset among faculty members from different campuses, highlighting the factor of institutional environment on mindset among individuals. Therefore, the findings supported by the study of Murphy and Reeves (2019) as stated the significance of organizational mindset within the culture. According to their research, organizational mindset plays a pivotal role as core beliefs can profoundly influence people’s behavior and interactions, thus establishing a self-reinforcing cycle. Organizational mindset not only shapes individuals’ perceptions and beliefs about the organization’s mindset but also influences their behaviors. These behaviors, in turn, contribute to shaping the practices and policies of the organization, creating a symbiotic relationship between organizational mindset and organizational dynamics. This highlights the crucial role of fostering a positive and growth-oriented organizational mindset to promote a conducive and adaptive organizational culture.

Personality considering the respondents’ profile

A significant difference is found in the personality of the respondents, in terms of Neuroticism show significant differences when grouped according to age (H=25.39, p=0.01), sex (U=1607.00, p=0.01), civil status (H=14.24, p=0.01), and educational attainment (H=25.39, p=0.01). These findings suggest that age, sex, civil status, and educational attainment are influential factors in developing neuroticism levels among respondents.

Moreover, extraversion demonstrates a significant difference based on sex (U=2125.50, p=0.01), while openness shows significant differences when grouped by sex (U=2063.00, p=0.01) and civil status (H=10.15, p=0.04), suggesting that sex and civil status influence openness levels of personality among respondents.

As to agreeableness, it shows a significant difference when respondents are grouped according to campus (H=14.16, p=0.01). This finding suggests that the institutional environment plays a crucial role in shaping agreeableness traits among individuals. This insight underscores the impact of organizational culture, policies, and interactions within the campus setting on fostering agreeable behaviors and attitudes among respondents. According to Mungure (2021), agreeableness plays a crucial role in fostering a caring atmosphere for job performance within an organization. Employees with the agreeableness trait tend to become friendly, cooperative, and compassionate, which enables the organization to create a supportive environment conducive to effective work.

On the other hand, according to Kawamoto et al. (2015) explored the effects of age on the mean level of Big Five personality traits. The study found that they are positively associated with age, particularly among agreeableness and conscientiousness. While the study of Gonzatti, da Cunha, and Bastos (2017) stated that adults (30-39 years old) were more likely to obtain high scores in neuroticism compared to the elderly group (60-80 years old). Therefore, it predicts that higher risk of issues related to anxiety, self-criticism, and impulsivity.

Disney’s (2011) study, revealed significant differences in scores on facets of neuroticism, agreeableness, extraversion, openness, and conscientiousness across three groups: divorced, never married, and married. The analyses conducted in the study contribute to ongoing research exploring the crucial distinctions among marital groups and their impact on personality. Alexescu et al. (2022) concerning the relationship between neuroticism and socio-demographic characteristics specifically educational level. The study revealed that individuals with a high school education consistently exhibited significantly lower neuroticism scores over time compared to those with a university education.

Stress considering the respondents’ profile

Data shows that there exists a significant difference in the stress (H=12.43, p=0.01). differences are found when grouped according to age. However, there is no evidence to claim a difference in stress levels based on campus, sex, civil status, or educational attainment. This finding suggests that individuals of different age groups may experience and cope with stress differently, possibly due to varying life experiences, responsibilities, and coping mechanisms associated with different life stages.

As a worker, some factors affect the working conditions especially correlated to age level. According to Hsu (2018) in the study “Age Differences in Work Stress, Exhaustion, Well-Being, and Related Factors from an Ecological Perspective” younger workers reported greater work stress, while older workers are more resilient in adapting to changing environments.

Resiliency considering the respondents’ profile

The results of the study reveal a significant difference in resilience levels (H=10.08, p=0.01) based on educational attainment. This finding suggests that individuals with varying levels of education demonstrate different levels of resilience, highlighting the potential influence of educational background on resilience development.

However, no significant difference in resilience is observed when respondents are grouped according to their campus, age, sex, and civil status. This indicates that factors such as campus location, age, gender, and civil status may not directly impact resilience levels among the respondents in this study.

These findings underscore the importance of considering educational attainment as a relevant factor in understanding and promoting resilience among individuals. Educational attainment is associated with resilience, a study conducted by Drzewiecki, et al., (2020) revealed the purpose of the association between educational attainment and resilience to natural-induced disasters in St. Kitts and Nevis. The participants of the study were selected via convenience sampling and there were 343 adults. The study used a logistic regression model to analyze the data. The results disclosed that adults with a professional education were significantly more resilient, in contrast, the odds of resilience among adults with more than secondary school education compared to the referent group were not significant.

Part IV. Association between Mindset, Personality, Stress, and Resiliency

The part of the study presents the significant association between respondents’ mindset, personality, stress, and resiliency result of the analysis using Spearman Rho Moment Correlation signifies the correlation between Neuroticism and Growth Mindset (r=-.230, p=0.005); Extraversion and Neuroticism (r=-.224, p=0.006); Openness and Fixed Mindset (r=-.265, p=0.001); Openness and Neuroticism (r=-.181, p=0.027); Openness and Extraversion (r=.343, p>0.001); Agreeableness and Neuroticism (r=-.165, p=0.045); Agreeableness and Extraversion (r=.199, p=0.015); Agreeableness and Openness (r=.261, p=0.001); Conscientiousness and Growth Mindset (r=.203, p=0.013); Conscientiousness and Neuroticism (r=-.574, p>0.001); Conscientiousness and Extraversion (r=.267, p=0.001); Conscientiousness and Openness (r=.318, p>0.001); Conscientiousness and Agreeableness (r=.310, p>0.001); Stress and Growth Mindset (r=-.172, p=0.036); Stress and Neuroticism (r=-.258, p=0.002); Stress and Conscientiousness (r=-.265, p=0.001); Resiliency and Growth Mindset (r=.306, p>0.001); Resiliency and Neuroticism (r=-.304, p>0.001); Resiliency and Neuroticism (r=-.304, p>0.001); Resiliency and Conscientiousness (r=.230, p=0.005); Resiliency and Stress (r=-.267, p=0.001), since the p-values are lesser than the alpha of .05, thus, rejecting the null hypothesis.

The current findings support Berlin’s (2019) study, which demonstrated a positive association between a growth mindset and resilience. The study also indicated that resilience is positively linked to psychological well-being. Another study, “Relation between Resilience and Personality Traits: The Role of Hopelessness and Age” (Alessandri et al., 2014, as cited by Nieto et al., 2022), further supports the relationship between personality and resilience. It suggests that a resilient personality is characterized by high levels of extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, openness, and a low level of neuroticism. Positive associations were found between resilience and extraversion, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness, while a negative association was found between resilience and neuroticism. On the other hand, On the Berlin (2019) study, demonstrated a positive association between a growth mindset and resilience

On another side of the story in terms of the stressors faced by professionals in the study entitled “Stress and the Resiliency of Teachers”, students’ behaviors, colleagues, and administration are the main causes of teachers’ stress. Of the teachers who high scored stress on emotional exhaustion of MBI-ES, 50% reported having no school support, and having no support means a decline in resiliency as the support is needed to equip one in the psychological development and mental growth (Abiyou, 2017). As the professionals are drawn to becoming more resilient and less stressed another culprit could be identified in this case such that personality has been indicted as the main propeller of stress.

Part V. Structural Equation Model (PLS-SEM)

The model shown in Figure 1 reflects the diagram of the standardized parameter estimates.  The study employed the partial least squares-structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) to investigate the relationship among the variables under consideration, specifically in testing the research null hypotheses

Figure 1. PLS-SEM

PLS-SEM is a component-based approach using a type of principle components analysis to construct latent variables. This contrasts with traditional covariance-based SEM, which uses a type of common factor analysis to create latent variables. While latent variables are traditionally conceptualized as common factors, a construct might also be a component, which is what they are in PLS-SEM. (Garson, 2016).

In addition, PLS path modeling, according to Monecke & Leisch (2012), is referred to as a soft-modeling technique with minimum demands regarding measurement scales, sample sizes, and residual distributions. The PLS-SEM package provides the capability to estimate PLS path models within the R programming environment. Different setups for the estimation of factor scores can be used. Furthermore, it contains modular methods for the computation of bootstrap confidence intervals, model parameters, and several quality indices.

The model was evaluated in a two-step process as suggested by Ravand & Baghaei, (2016). The first step was the evaluation of the measurement model and then of the structural model.

Table 1 Path Coefficients of the Model

f² is the Cohen’s (1989) effect size: .02=small; .15=medium; .35=large, SE=standard error; β=standardized path coefficient

As shown in the Path Coefficients Model, stress (β = -0.26, p=.002) significantly contributes negatively to the resiliency of the respondents. On the other hand, it can be gleaned that personality (β = 0.111, p=.013), and mindset (β = 0.313, p<.001) have significantly contributed to the resiliency of a person. Similarly, it is also shown on the Path Model that stress (β = 0.327, p<.001), has a mediating effect between mindset and resiliency.

The findings of the study align with previous research, particularly concerning the importance of the growth mindset and personality traits as predictors of resilience. The significance of mindset about resilience is highlighted in the study by Boullion, Withers, and Lippmann (2021), they believed that mindset refers to belief about the malleability of attribution and serves as a mediator for the association to resilience. The results suggest that a growth mindset facilitates psychological resilience for the individual having experienced emotional neglect and emotional abuse.

Furthermore, Burtaverde et al. (2021) emphasized that personality traits represent an important category of predictors of resilience. Those individuals with high on extroversion, agreeableness, or emotional stability reported a high level of resilience (Oshio et al,, 2018). Also, researchers found a positive relationship between openness to experience and conscientiousness to resilience (Wolf et al., 2012).

Mansfield et al. (2016) focus on how to harness teachers to remain in the profession, navigate through challenges, and consequently develop resilience and thrive to survive in their work. Concerning the result found out and agreed that the place to start building resilience lies in teacher education, especially in assisting develop personal resources and strategies for managing particular challenges.

Table 2 Model Fit and Quality Indices

In the evaluation of the structural model, it can be gleaned from Table 2 that the structural model as a whole showed strong statistical evidence that the estimates of the structural equation model were acceptable. It can be gleaned that the following goodness of fit and quality indices were within the acceptable range: Average path coefficient (APC)=0.215, p=0.002; Average R-squared (ARS)=0.244, P<0.001; Average adjusted R-squared (AARS)=0.223, P<0.001; Average block VIF (AVIF)=1.089, acceptable if <= 5, ideally <= 3.3; Average full colinearity VIF (AFVIF)=1.114, acceptable if <= 5, ideally <= 3.3; Tenenhaus GoF (GoF)=0.365, small >= 0.1, medium >= 0.25, large >= 0.36; Sympson’s paradox ratio (SPR)=1.000, acceptable if >= 0.7, ideally = 1; R-squared contribution ratio (RSCR)=1.000, acceptable if >= 0.9, ideally = 1; Statistical suppression ratio (SSR)=1.000, acceptable if >= 0.7; Nonlinear bivariate causality direction ratio (NLBCDR)=1.000, acceptable if >= 0.7.

CONCLUSION

This study underscores the significance of mindset, personality, and stress in formulating a work resiliency framework aimed at fostering a vibrant work environment that promotes the well-being and performance of invaluable faculty members. The findings reflect a significant presence of experienced faculty members, with a larger proportion being female, married, and possessing advanced educational qualifications.

Moreover, there is a noticeable tendency among faculty members to embrace challenges, persist through setbacks, and prioritize learning and improvement. However, they also exhibit a higher susceptibility to negative emotions such as anxiety, stress, and worry due to the demands of their work. Despite this, the prevalence of stress is relatively low among the faculty members.

RECOMMENDATION

As to the findings of the study, the following recommendations are made for the institution, student welfare section, and researchers:

For Institution

1. Specified Interventions: Based on the differences observed in mindset, personality, stress, and work resiliency among individuals with varying profiles such as campus, age, sex, civil status, and educational attainment, interventions can be tailored to address the specific needs of different groups. Targeted programs and support systems can develop a growth mindset, foster a positive personality, reduce stress, and enhance resilience based on these characteristics.
2. Growth Mindset Promotion: Encouraging the development of a growth mindset among faculty members can be beneficial. Training programs and workshops can be implemented to cultivate beliefs in the importance of learning from mistakes and the potential for personal and professional growth through effort and perseverance.
3. Personality Development Programs: Institutions can consider offering personality development programs that focus on enhancing conscientiousness, extraversion, and neuroticism traits among faculty members. These programs can provide individuals with strategies to improve their work style, interpersonal interactions, and overall well-being.
4. Stress Management Initiatives: Although no major sources of stress significantly impact the well-being of faculty members, it is still important to promote stress management initiatives. Institutions can provide resources and workshops on stress management techniques, time management, and interpersonal conflict resolution to support faculty members in maintaining a healthy work-life balance.

For Researchers

Future studies may be done to look for different variables to assess mindset, personality, stress, and resiliency. However, researchers may be continuing to measure the existing intervention programs aligned with the resiliency program of the university.

REFERENCES

1. Abiyou, M. L. (2017). Stress and the Resiliency of Teachers. https://core.ac.uk/display/217322836?recSetID=
2. Alexescu, T.-G., Nechita, M.-S., Maierean, A.-D., Vulturar, D.-M., Handru, M. I., Leucuța, D.-C., . . . Doina Adina Todea, D. (2022). Change in Neuroticism and Extraversion among Pre-University Education Employees during the COVID-19 Pandemic. PubMed Central, 58(7): 895.
3. Aning, J. (2013, February 18). College profs must have master’s degrees, SC rules. INQUIRER.Net. https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/360281/college-profs-must-have-masters-degrees-sc-rules
4. American Heart Association (AHA). (2016). Resilience in the workplace. Retrieved from February 20, 2022. https://ceoroundtable.heart.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/ucm_496856.pdf
5. Berlin, K. (2019). The relationship between growth mindset and students’ psychological well-wellbeing. Retrieved May 17, 2023 from https://etd.ohiolink.edu/apexprod/rws_etd/send_file/send?accession=dayton1548856024417893&disposition=inline
6. Boullion, A., Withers, M. C., and Lippmann, M. (2021). Mindset: Investigating resilience. ScienceDirect. Volume 174, May 2021, 110669. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.110669
7. Camitan, D. S., & Bajin, L. N. (2021). The Importance of Well-Being on Resiliency of Filipino Adults During the COVID-19 Enhanced Community Quarantine: A Necessary Condition Analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 908. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.558930
8. Drzewiecki, D. M., Wavering, H. M., Milbrath, G. R., Freeman, V. L., & Lin, J. Y. (2020). The association between educational attainment and resilience to natural hazard-induced disasters in the West Indies: St. Kitts & Nevis. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 47, 101637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101637
9. Eley, D. S., Cloninger, C. R., Walters, L., Laurence, C., Synnott, R., & Wilkinson, D. (2013b). The relationship between resilience and personality traits in doctors: Implications for enhancing well being. PeerJ, 1. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.216
10. Froutan, R., Mazlom, R., Malekzadeh, J., & Mirhaghi, A. (2018). Relationship between resilience and personality traits in paramedics. International Journal of Emergency Services, 7(1), 4–12. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJES-12-2016-0028
11. Global Organization for Stress. (2020). Stress Facts. Retrieved from June 20, 2022. http://www.gostress.com/stress-facts/
12. Hatcher, L. (2018). Case Study: Changes in Elementary Student Mindset After Mathematics Anxiety and Growth Mindset Teacher Training. https://core.ac.uk/display/327228580?recSetID=
13. Hasan, B. (2017). Big five personality traits as the predictor of teachers’ organizational psychological capital. Retrieved May 24, 2023 from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED578029#:~:text=Research%20results%20showed%20that%20there,psychological%20capital%20scale%2C%20and%20that
14. Healy, C. (n.d.). Mindset Theory. MPHC. Retrieved October 15, 2020, from https://mphc.ie/2017/12/mindset-theory/
15. Hsu, H.-C. (2018). Age Differences in Work Stress, Exhaustion, Well-Being, and Related Factors From an Ecological Perspective. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(1), 50. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16010050
16. Lacaba, T. V. G., Lacaba, A. B., & Caliwan, M. A. (2020). Teachers’ Resilience: A Challenge Of Commitment And Effectiveness. International Journal of Research -GRANTHAALAYAH, 8(4), 79–88. https://doi.org/10.29121/granthaalayah.v8.i4.2020.10
17. Jones, D. E., Ord, A., Jones, K., Duchac, N., Dern, M., & Montiel , L. (2022). Big Five Factor Personality Differences by Academic Major. Journal of School Counseling, 26.
18. Kawamoto, T., Oshio, A., Abe, S., Tsubota, Y., Hirashima, T., Ito, H., and Tani, I. (2015). Age and Gender Differences of Big Five Personality Traits in a Cross-Sectional Japanese Sample. The Japanese Journal of Developmental Psychology. Volume 26 Issue 2 Pages 107-122. https://doi.org/10.11201/jjdp.26.107
19. Mansfield, C. F., Beltman, S., Broadley, T., & Weatherby-Fell, N. (2016). Building resilience in teacher education: An evidenced informed framework. Teaching and Teacher Education, 54, 77–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.11.016
20. Mungure, D. M. (2021). Major personality traits that relates to the life outcomes of an individual in the big five theory of personality: A review of literature. https://doi.org/10.37948/ensemble-2021-0301-a008
21. Murphy, M. C., & Reeves, S. L. (2019). Personal and organizational mindsets at work. Research in Organizational Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2020.100121, Vol 39.
22. Nieto, M., Visier, M. E., Silvestre, I. N., Navarro, B., Serrano, J. P., and Martinez-Vizcaino, V. (2022). Relation between resilience and personality traits: The role of hopelessness and age. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 64,1,p.53-59. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12866
23. Oshio, A. Taku, K., Hirano, M. & Saeed, G. (2018). Resilience and big five personality traits: A meta-analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, Vol.127, 54-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.01.048
24. Regalado, M. (2017). Career Mobility and Gender: A Descriptive Study of Selected DepEd Teachers in Iligan City. Asia Pacific Society for Public Affairs.
25. Sariwulan, T. (2018). The Effect of Personality, Work and Work Stress and Decision Making to Organizational Commitment at Limited Company of Bhumyamca Sekawan in in South Jakarta. https://doi.org/10.21009/IJHCM.02.01.05
26. Spurgeon, J. & Thompson, L. (2018). Rooted in resilience: A framework for integration of well-being in teacher education programs. Master of Applied Positive Psychology (MAPP) Capstone Projects. 144. https://repository.upenn.edu/mapp_capstone/144
27. Walinga, J. (2019). 12.3 Stress and Coping. In Introduction to Psychology. University of Saskatchewan Open Press. https://openpress.usask.ca/introductiontopsychology/chapter/stress-and-coping/