HR1
“Engagement” – Academic Perspectives II, Burnout, Work Engagement and the Job Demands-Resources model
Agenda for today
Burnout and engagement
Schaufeli et al. (2002) –
the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale
The Job-Demands-Resources Model
Extension of the JD-R Model (Xanthopoulou et al 2007)
2
Burnout and ‘engagement
Group of researchers concerned with “burnout”
Maslach, Leiter, Schaufeli, Bakker, Salanova, Demerouti
“Burnout is a psychological syndrome of emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced personal accomplishment …”
Maslach et al 1997, 192
Maslach-Burnout Inventory (MBI)
Exhaustion is related to stress at work and creates an emotional distance between the employee and his/her work
Cynicism is a reaction to exhaustion employees develop a cynical attitude towards their work
Professional inefficacy - employees become discouraged and less willing to get involved in their tasks
Maslach et al. (2001)
Burnout is negatively related to:
Workload
The feeling of having control on the job
Recognition & rewards for hard work
A supportive environment
Organisational justice
Maslach and Leiter (1997)
Engagement
“is an energetic state in which one is dedicated to excellent performance of work and confident of one's effectiveness.”
consists of energy, involvement and efficacy – the opposite of burnout
Is measured by the MBI - lower levels of burnout = higher levels of engagement
I.e. ‘engagement’ = ‘not burnout’ (the opposite of burnout)
The Oldenburg Burnout Inventory (OLBI) (Demerouti et al 2001)
OLBI – alternative to MBI
Technical critique
Different operationalization of burnout
two dimensions:
exhaustion
disengagement from work
‘engagement’ is the opposite of burnout
Lack of resources leads to disengagement
Schaufeli, Bakker and the UWES
Schaufeli & Bakker (2003)
Burnout and engagement different not simply opposites
Offered a definition of “work engagement”
Developed the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES)
UWES – widely used in research
Work Engagement
“engagement is defined as a positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption. … [It] … refers to a more persistent and pervasive affective-cognitive state that is not focused on any particular object, event, individual, or behavior.”
(Schaufeli et al 2002, 74)
9
Work Engagement
Vigour - by high levels of energy and mental resilience while working, the willingness to invest effort in one’s work, and persistence even in the face of difficulties.
Dedication - being strongly involved in one's work and experiencing a sense of significance, enthusiasm, inspiration, pride, and challenge.
Absorption, - being fully concentrated and happily engrossed in one’s work, whereby time passes quickly and one has difficulties with detaching oneself from work.
(Schaufeli et al 2002, 74-5)
Work Engagement – conceptual developments
Two major developments after initial proposals
Discovery that work engagement levels varied over short times (Sonnentag 2011)
‘trait’ vs. ‘state’ engagement debate
Integration with the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R model of stress)
Job-Demands Resources model
Adapted from Bakker & Demerouti 2008, p. 218
The JD-R Model: job demands
physical, social or organisational aspects of the job that involved physical or mental effort and are related to exhaustion
Examples: workload, mental demands, emotional demands, emotional dissonance, negative work-home interference
The JD-R Model: demands and resources
The greater the employee’s effort to deal with the job demands, the greater the exhaustion and burnout
Employees use job resources in order to maintain their health, mental and physical order
Initial JD-R Model - resources
Organizational resources
Job control, autonomy, development opportunities, participation, job variety, performance feedback
Social resources
Support from colleagues, family, peer groups
The JD-R Model: job resources
Job resources – anything that
helps employees to achieve their work goals,
reduces demands and the associated costs;
enhances personal growth & development
Facilitate work engagement (Schaufeli et al., 2009; Mauno et al., 2007.; Hakanen et al., 2006; Demerouti et al., 2001)
Expanded JD-R model (Xanthopoulou et al., 2007)
Personal resources
positive self-evaluations that are related to resiliency and the employee’s feeling of their ability to exercise control on their environment
Expansion of the JD-R model (Xanthopoulou et al., 2007)
Three personal resources included
Self-efficacy
Individuals’ perceptions of their ability to meet demands
Organizational-based self-esteem
Belief that needs can be satisfied by participating in organizational roles
Optimism
Tendency to believe one will experience good outcomes
Job-Demands Resources model
Adapted from Bakker & Demerouti 2008, p. 218
JD-R model – Basic assumptions
job resources
start a motivational process leading to work engagement, and consequently to higher performance.
job resources become more important when employees are confronted with high job demands
job & personal resources are
mutually related and
can be independent predictors of work engagement
The JD-R Model - criticism
Contradictory findings re job demands and engagement
Demands do not always predict work engagement
Time pressure both is and is not positively related to work engagement
Some demands are negatively related to work engagement; others are positively related!
See Crawford et al 2010, for these arguments
Recent development – job demands (Podsakoff et al., 2007)
Stress researchers distinguish
Challenging stressors
Stressful demands that potentially promote growth, mastery, personal gains
High workload; high responsibility
Stressful stressors (hindrances)
Stressors that can hinder growth etc.
Role conflict and ambiguity; red tape etc.
Work engagement and personal engagement – can they be synthesized?
Aspects of cognitive, emotional and physical engagement (May et al 2004) correspond to the three dimensions of vigour, dedication and absorption
But Rich et al. (2010 p.623) suggest the UWES measure is not the same
Sonnentag 2011 – “the identification element is common” (p. 31)
References
Bakker, A.B. and Demerouti, E., 2008. Towards a model of work engagement. Career development international, 13(3), pp.209-223.
Crawford, E.R., LePine, J.A. and Rich, B.L., 2010. Linking job demands and resources to employee engagement and burnout: a theoretical extension and meta-analytic test. Journal of applied psychology, 95(5), p.834.
Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., Nachreiner, F., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2001). The job demands-resources model of burnout. Journal of Applied psychology, 86(3), 499.
Maslach, C., S. E. Jackson, and M. P. Leiter. 1997, ‘Maslach Burnout Inventory 3rd Edition.’ In Evaluating Stress: A Book of Resources, edited by C.P. Zalaquett and R.J. Wood, 191–218. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, http://rci.rutgers.edu/~sjacksox/PDF/EvaluatingStress.pdf.
Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual review of psychology, 52(1), 397-422.
May, D. R, R. L Gilson, and L. M Harter. ‘The Psychological Conditions of Meaningfulness, Safety and Availability and the Engagement of the Human Spirit at Work’. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 77, no. 1 (2004): 11–37.
Podsakoff, N. P., LePine, J. A., & LePine, M. A. (2007). Differential challenge stressor-hindrance stressor relationships with job attitudes, turnover intentions, turnover, and withdrawal behavior: a meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(2), 438.
Rich, B. L., Lepine, J. A., & Crawford, E. R. (2010). Job engagement: Antecedents and effects on job performance. Academy of management journal, 53(3), 617-635.
Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., Gonzalez-Roma, V., and Bakker, A. B., 2002, The measurement of engagement and burnout: a two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach, Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, 71-92.
Schaufeli, W.B. & Bakker, A.B., 2003. UWES: Utrecht Work Engagement Scale. Preliminary Manual [Version 1.1], Utrecht: Occupational Health Psychology Unit, University of Utrecht. Available at: http://www.schaufeli.com/.
Schaufeli, Wilmar, and Marisa Salanova. ‘Work Engagement: On How to Better Catch a Slippery Concept’. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 20, no. 1 (2011): 39. doi:10.1080/1359432X.2010.515981.
Sonnentag, S., 2011 Research on work engagement is well and alive, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 20: 1, 29 — 38
Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2007). The role of personal resources in the job demands-resources model. International journal of stress management, 14(2), 121.
Next week
The multidimensional approach by Saks (2006)
Measuring engagement