1,592 publications from this institution
▪ Abstract Burnout is a prolonged response to chronic emotional and interpersonal stressors on the job, and is defined by the three dimensions of exhaustion, cynicism, and inefficacy. The past 25 years of research has established the complexity of the construct, and places the individual stress experience within a larger organizational context of people's relation to their work. Recently, the work on burnout has expanded internationally and has led to new conceptual models. The focus on engagement, the positive antithesis of burnout, promises to yield new perspectives on interventions to alleviate burnout. The social focus of burnout, the solid research basis concerning the syndrome, and its specific ties to the work domain make a distinct and valuable contribution to people's health and well-being.
No abstract is provided for this article.
This study investigated the distinctiveness between workaholism and work engagement by examining their longitudinal relationships (measurement interval=7 months) with well-being and performance in a sample of 1,967 Japanese employees from various occupations. Based on a previous cross-sectional study (Shimazu & Schaufeli, 2009), we expected that workaholism predicts future unwell-being (i.e., high ill-health and low life satisfaction) and poor job performance, whereas work engagement predicts future well-being (i.e., low ill-health and high life satisfaction) and superior job performance. T1-T2 changes in ill-health, life satisfaction and job performance were measured as residual scores that were then included in the structural equation model. Results showed that workaholism and work engagement were weakly and positively related to each other. In addition, workaholism was related to an increase in ill-health and to a decrease in life satisfaction. In contrast, work engagement was related to a decrease in ill-health and to increases in both life satisfaction and job performance. These findings suggest that workaholism and work engagement are two different kinds of concepts that are oppositely related to well-being and performance.
Managers are increasingly concerned about managing the conflicts experienced in fulfilling the responsibilities of work and family. The problem of balancing these domains arises from work to home interference, which reflects a mutual incompatibility between the demands of the work role and the demands of the home life. The central idea underlying the theoretical model of this study, is that work and home demands lead to work strain and decreased feelings of engagement, while work and home resources lead to increased feelings of engagement and reduced burnout. Work to home interference mediates these relationships. An innovation of the present study was to assess both home demands and positive aspects of work to home interference. Data were collected from 69 newspaper managers. Results indicated that negative interference mediated between demands and outcomes, and positive interference mediated between resources and outcomes. This study highlights the importance of measuring positive concepts in terms of constructing a more balanced picture of work and home interference.
The study examined the factor structure of burnout, as measured with the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory. The participants were 235 employees of a public administration agency who assessed their burnout online for 10 consecutive working days. Two models were tested with multilevel confirmatory factor analysis, assuming the same one or two-factor structure at the within- and between-person levels. Both models showed a reasonable fit to the data, but due to a strong correlation between exhaustion and disengagement and low within-person reliability for disengagement, a unidimensional model seems more valid. A cross-level invariance was not confirmed for either of the structures, showing that factor loadings for the same items differ significantly between the levels. This suggests that burnout is not the same latent variable at each level; rather, there are factors other than daily burnout that influence person-level scores and ignoring these across-level discrepancies may lead to biased conclusions.
Most studies report a positive relationship of work engagement with health and job performance, but, occasionally, a "dark side of engagement" has also been uncovered. The current study examined two hypotheses: whether work engagement has (1) a U-shaped curvilinear relation with psychological distress and (2) an inverted U-shaped curvilinear relation with job performance (i.e., in-role performance and creative behavior). A two-wave longitudinal Internet survey with a time lag of seven months was conducted among 1,967 Japanese employees. To test our hypotheses, we used a two-wave panel design and examined the lagged and concurrent relations between work engagement and both outcomes. The results confirmed that work engagement had a curvilinear relation with psychological distress concurrently; a favorable effect was found initially, but this disappeared at intermediate levels of work engagement, and, at higher levels, an adverse effect became prominent. In addition, work engagement had a curvilinear relation with in-role performance both concurrently and longitudinally; the higher the levels of work engagement, the stronger the favorable effects on in-role performance. However, contrary to our expectations, work engagement had a linear relation with psychological distress longitudinally and with creative behavior both concurrently and longitudinally. Hence, our results suggest that work engagement plays a different role in health enhancement compared to performance enhancement. Leveling-off and adverse effects of high work engagement were observed for psychological distress in the short and not in a long run. In contrast, no leveling-off effect of high work engagement was observed for job performance. Thus, except for the short-term effect on psychological distress, no dark side of work engagement was observed for psychological distress and job performance.
Although the origin of the term is not entirely clear, most likely in its present usage employee engagement was coined by the Gallup Organization in the 1990s as a result of 25 years of interviewing and surveying employees (Buckingham & Coff man, 1999). Please note that the terms employee engagement and work engagement are typically used interchangeably, albeit that the former seems to be preferred in business and consultancy, and the latter in academia. In this chapter the term work engagement is used because it is more specifi c and refers to the relationship of the employee with his or her work. Employee engagement, in contrast, also includes the relationship with the organization, which might explain its popularity in business and consultancy.