Date post: | 30-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | freya-hardy |
View: | 26 times |
Download: | 0 times |
1
MANAGERS’ AND TEACHERS’ BURNOUT ACCORDING TO STEVAN HOBFOLL’S
CONSERVATION OF RESOURCES THEORY
Anna Hełka & Elzbieta LisowskaWarsaw School of Sciences and Humanities
IAREP/SABE 2008 ROME
2
STEVAN HOBFOLL’S CONSERVATION OF RESOURCES (COR) THEORY
Burnout (Hobfoll, 1988, 1989, 2001) process of expenditure, loss and depletion of
resources, which develops quite slowly. It occurs when the resources cannot be replenished as cognitive, physical and emotional abilities.
Resources what is valuable and we obtain, keep, protect and
promote. resources =>
probability of loosing them chances of gaining.
The efforts are concentrated more on protecting the resources than on obtaining rewards (Hobfoll, 1998)
3
MAIN HIPOTHESIS
Burnout = drain to the resources. 1. Trying to fight the stressors by intensive resources
investment (Shirom,1989; Ezrahi,1985).
2. Lack of effects => agitation and frustration, defense (COR).
3. Emotional exhaustion, depersonalization and sense of loss, anxiety and even depression.
4. Loss of resources lower stressing factor than the lack of anticipated gain from resources investment.
According to these assumptions we predict that: H1: Long-lasting personal resources loss (as
cognitive, emotional, physical abilities) and impossibility of immediate replenishment is the fundamental cause of burnout.
4
OTHER HIPOTHESIS
There are differences between abilities of coping with difficult situations regarding social and economical status between teachers and managers, so we predict: H2: Teachers experience more resources loss
and less gain than the managers. Gender may be connected with the burnout
(e.g.: Malkinson et al., 1997), but there is lack of empirical evidence for the relationship between gender and resources loss and gain. On the ground of previous results we predict: H3: Women are more exposed to resources
loss and less to gaining resources than men.
5
PARTICIPANTS
Teachers and managers from different cities in Poland.
From 509 people extracted” 31 burnout, 31 non-burnout teachers 27 burnout, 32 non-burnout managers.
Gender*: Burnout - 47 women, 21 men, Non-burnout - 40 women and 23 men*Over-representation of women teachers.
24-55 years old. 2-32 years of work experience.
6
METHOD AND INSTRUMENTS
Maslach Burnout Inventory (Maslach, Jackson 1996): 22 items on 7-level scale ("never" – "every day") 3 subscales (aspects of syndrom):
Emotional Exhaustion Depersonalization Lowered personal accomplishment satisfaction
The Questionnaire of Gain and Loss Self-esteem (Dudek, Koniarek, Gruszczyńska): 2 parts
1. Importance of 40 resources on a 5-level scale2. Gain and loss of 40 resources on the 5-level scale.
5 resources group: hedonistic and vital, spiritual, family,
political - economical and power and prestige.
7
RESULTSBurnout and the resources
ResourcesBurnout
Resources gain F(5,120)=51,600, (p<0,001),
Eta2=0,697
Resources loss(F(5,120)=21,423, p<0,001,
Eta2=0,489
Mean Gain effect Mean Loss effect
HedonisticNo 5,693 F(1,120)=207,603,
p<0,001
1,165 F(1,120)=96,348, p,0,001Yes ,565 6,197
SpiritualNo 2,035
Insignificant,520 F(1,120)=37,6,
p<0,001Yes ,559 2,595
Family No 4,780
Insignificant,192 F(1,120)=37,6,
p<0,001Yes 2,487 2,325
Economical- political
No 2,632Insignificant
4,295insignificant
Yes 1,224 6,284
Power and prestige
No 3,010 F(1,120)=56,383, p<0,001
,282insignificant
Yes ,330 ,865
8
RESULTSWorkplace and the resources
Resources Work place
Resources gainF(10,120)=2,119,
p=0,03, Eta2=0,175
Resources lossF(10,120)=4,646,
p<0,001, Eta2=0,317
Mean Gain effect Mean Loss effect
Hedonistic
Managers 0,726
insignificant
4,515 F(2,120)= 10,629, p<0,001Primary school 0,449 7,803
Second. School 0,250 8,578
Spiritual
Managers 0,701
insignificant
1,149 F(2,120)=16,665, p<0,001Primary school 0,418 4,038
Second. School 0,204 4,438
Family
Managers 2,047
insignificant
,892 F(2,120)=17,796, p<0,001Primary school 2,473 3,882
Second. School 2,981 3,834
Economical - political
Managers 1,621F(2,120)=5,72,
p=0,006,
4,525 F(2,120)=10,435, p<0,001Primary school 0,612 7,353
Second. School 0,847 8,407
9
RESULTSGender and resources
ResourcesBurnout
Gender
Resources gain (Gender/interaction)
F(5,120)=6,829, p<0,001, Eta2=0,234
F(5,120)=3,759, p=0,002, Eta2=0,14
Resources loss (Gender/Interaction)
F(5,120)=2,798, p=0,02, Eta2=0,111
F(5,120)=4,119, p=0,002, Eta2=0,15
MeanGender /
Interaction effectMean
Gender / Interaction effect
Hedonistic
NoWoman 5,100 G: F(1/120)=
6,98, p=0,009
1,174 G: F(1/120)= 8,45, p=0,004Man 6,642 1,354
YesWoman 0,451 I: F(1/120)= 3,86,
p=0,05
7,525 I: F(1/120)= 10,8, p=0,001Man 0,678 4,545
Spiritual
NoWoman 1,422 G: F(1/120)=
19,1, p<0,001
0,706 G: F(1/120)= 12,2, p=0,001Man 3,368 0,223
YesWoman 0,471 I: F(1/120)= 16,1,
p<0,001
3,446 I: F(1/120)= 4,13 p=0,044Man 0,557 1,614
1010
RESULTSGender and resources
ResourcesBurnout
Gender
Resources gain (Gender/interaction)
F(5,120)=6,829, p<0,001, Eta2=0,234
F(5,120)=3,759, p=0,002, Eta2=0,14
Resources loss (Gender/Interaction)
F(5,120)=2,798, p=0,02, Eta2=0,111
F(5,120)=4,119, p=0,002, Eta2=0,15
MeanGender /
Interaction effectMean
Gender / Interaction effect
Family
NoWoman 3,997 G:F(1/120)= 5,05,
p=0,026
0,132 G: F(1/120)= 9,0, p=0,003Man 6,261 0,331
YesWoman 2,525 I: F(1/120)= 9,9,
p=0,002
3,250 I: F(1/120)=13,09 p<0,001Man 2,148 1,121
Economical- political
NoWoman 1,703 G:F(1/120)= 32,4,
p<0,001
4,193 G: F(1/120)= 7,5, p=0,007Man 4,111 4,199
YesWoman ,870 I: F(1/120)= 9,25,
p=0,003
7,201 I: F(1/120)= 7,61, p=0,007Man 1,601 4,637
1111
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
We have confirmed main hipothesis based on Hobfoll’s COR theory:The burnout people's resources loss
is much bigger and consequently their gain much smaller than non-burnout people's.
The loss of resources is disproportionately more meaningful than gain and leads to burnout.
Possessing resources = insurance policy preventing from burnout.
1212
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
Differences between professions with different social-economical status:The biggest resources loss occurs in
secondary school teachers which may be caused by:
the specificity of this kind of school (maturing time).
The managers had smaller loss and bigger gain in the majority of resource, which may be caused by:
trainings and courses preparing for the job, better financial situation, which helps to manage
the resources more effectively but also helps to deal with difficult situations.
1313
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
Gender has a significant role in this context The biggest loss were observed in
burnout womenThe smallest loss were observed in non-
burnout menPossible explanation:Women take serious responsibilities of
combining many social roles, which might be in conflict.
1414
Thank you for your kind attention