Ronald J. Burke
York University
Stig Berge Matthiesen
University of Bergen
Summary
This study examined motivation patterns associated with workaholism components (work involvement, feeling driven to work, joy in work) identified by Spence and Robbins (1992). Data were collected from 211 Norwegian journalists using anonymous self-report questionnaires. Two motivation patterns were considered: intrinsic and extrinsic. Journalists scoring higher on intrinsic motivations reported greater work involvement and greater work enjoyment; journalists scoring higher on extrinsic motivations reported lower work enjoyment. The motivation patterns were independent of levels of feeling driven to work because of internal needs.
Although workaholism in organizations has received considerable attention in the popular press, researchers have focused on it only over the past decade (see Burke, 2000a, and McMillan, O’Driscoll & Burke, 2003 for reviews). Only two measures of workaholism have been developed and used by small numbers of researchers (Robinson, 1998; Spence & Robbins, 1992). Several theories have been proposed to explain the development and maintenance of workaholism (e.g., McMillan, O’Driscoll, Marsh & Brady, 2001), but little research has been undertaken to examine the validity of any of them.
The present study contributes to our understanding of workaholism by examining work motivation patterns relationships underlying both workaholism components and workaholism types. Spence and Robbins (1992), based on an extensive literature review, distilled three workaholism components and developed reliable measures of each. These components were work involvement, feeling driven to work because of inner needs not external demands, and work enjoyment. It was predicted that (1) journalists scoring higher on intrinsic motivation would also report higher levels of work involvement and work enjoyment and lower levels of feeling driven to work because of inner pressures, and journalists scoring higher on extrinsic motivation would report higher levels of feeling driven to work because of inner pressures and lower levels of work enjoyment (Srivastava, Locke & Bartol, 2001).
Method
Respondents
Data were collected from 211 journalists working in the city of Bergen Norway. Two thirds of the sample were male (67%), most were married (70.4%), worked in permanent jobs (89.4%), were under 40 years of age (65.1%), worked between 31 and 40 hours per week (55.0%), had relatively low levels of job and organizational tenure (42.1% had 4 years or less organizational tenure and 46.2% had 2 years or less job tenure) and most had no supervisory responsibilities (74%).
Procedure
Four hundred and eighty-two questionnaires were mailed to potential respondents by the journalists union and returned to a university address. Data were collected from 211 journalists using anonymously completed questionnaires, representing a forty-four percent response rate. Measures originally appearing in English (e.g., motivation patterns) were translated into Norwegian by members of the research team; other measures (e.g., Spence and Robbins’ workaholism components) had already been translated into Norwegian from English and been used in previous research projects.
Measures
Workaholism Components
Spence and Robbins (1992) derive three workaholism components on the basis of an extensive literature review: work involvement, feeling driven to work and work enjoyment. Their measures were used in this study.
Work involvement ( α = .67) had eight items (e.g., “I get bored and restless on vacations when I haven’t anything productive to do”).
Feeling Driven to Work ( α = .80) had seven items (e.g., “I often feel that there’s something inside me that drives me to work hard”).
Joy in work ( α = .88) had seven items (e.g., “My job is more like fun than work”).
Motivation Patterns
Two work motivation patterns were considered. Respondents indicated on a five-point scale (1 = Of little importance, 5 = Very important) how important each item would be in their ideal job. Intrinsic motivation was measured by 3 items (α = .68). One item was “imagination and creativity”. Extrinsic motivation was also measured by 3 items (α = .71). One item was “money” These items were taken from the QPS Nordic Scale (Lindstrom, Dallner, Elo, Gemberale, Knardahl, Skogstad & Orkede, 1997).
Results and Discussion
Predictors of Workaholism Components
A model was developed to predict scores on the three workaholism components containing three blocks of predictor variables. The first block consisted of personal demographic characteristics (N=5) such as age, gender and level of education. The second block consisted of work situation characteristics (N=5) such as tenure as a journalist and size of work unit. The third block of predictors consisted of the work motivation patterns (N=2).
Table 1 shows the results of hierarchical regression analyses in which each of the three workaholism components was separately regressed on the three blocks of predictors. When a block of predictors accounted for a significant amount or increment in explained variance on workaholism components, individual measures within such blocks having independent and significant relationships with a workaholism component (p<.05) were identified.
The following comments are offered in summary. First, only one block of predictors (work motivation patterns) accounted for a significant increment in explained variance on Work Involvement. Journalists scoring higher on intrinsic motivation indicated greater Work Involvement (β=.22). Second, two blocks of predictors accounted for a significant amount or increment in explained variance on Feeling Driven (personal demographics and work motivation patterns). Men indicated higher levels of Feeling Driven than did women (β = -.21). Third, two blocks of predictors accounted for significant increments in explained variance on Work Enjoyment (work situation characteristics and work motivation patterns). Journalists reporting higher incomes also indicated more Work Enjoyment (β = .28). In addition, journalists indicating higher levels of intrinsic work motivation and journalists indicating lower levels of extrinsic work motivation indicated more Work Enjoyment (βs = .36 and -.15 respectively). Fourth, the three blocks of predictors accounted for only moderate levels of explained variance on the three workaholism components, no R2 exceeding .20.
The most interesting finding was the significant positive relationship of intrinsic work motivation with two of the three workaholism components (work involvement and work enjoyment) and the significant negative relationship of extrinsic work motivation with one (work enjoyment). Journalists scoring higher on these two workaholism components were motivated by challenge, growth and use of their skill is a mastery-oriented way. Other studies have shown that employees scoring higher on work enjoyment also report more positive work and career outcomes (Burke, 2001).
None of the work motivations were related to levels of Feeling driven however the workaholism component likely to be associated with adverse psychological health outcomes (Burke, 2000b).
Limitations
A few limitations of the study should be noted to help put the findings in context. First, all data were collected using self-report questionnaires raising the possibility of response set tendencies. Second, the data were collected at one point in time ruling out an examination of causality. Third, the data were collected from Norwegian journalists. It is not clear the extent to which our findings generalize to respondents from other countries or respondents working in other occupations.
Footnotes
1 Preparation of this manuscript was supported in part by the School of Business, York University and the Department of Psychology, University of Bergen. Lisa Fiksenbaum assisted with data analysis; Louise Coutu prepared the manuscript.
References
Burke, R. J. (2000b). Workaholism in organizations: Psychological and physical well-being consequences. Stress Medicine, 16, 11-16.
Burke, R. J. (2000a). Workaholism in organizations: Concepts, results and future directions. International Journal of Management Reviews, 2, 1-16.
Burke, R. J. (2001). Workaholism components, job satisfaction and career progress. Journal of Applied Social Psychology., 30, 637-645.
Lindstrom, K., Dallner, M., Elo, A. L., Gamberale, F., Knardahl, S., Skogstad, A. & Orhade, E. (1997). Review of Psychological and social factors at work and suggestions for the General Nordic questionnaire (QPS Nordic). Copenhagen: Nordic Council of Ministers.
McMillan, L. H. W., O’Driscoll, M. P., Marsh, N. V. & Brady, E. C. (2001). Understanding workaholism: Data synthesis, theoretical critique and future design strategies. International Journal of Stress Management, 8 (2), 69-91.
McMillan, L. H. W., O’Driscoll, M. P. & Burke, R. J. (2003). Workaholism: A review of theory, research and new directions. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (eds.), International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, New York: John Wiley, pp. 167-190.
Robinson, B. E. (1998). Chained to the desk: A guidebook for workaholics, their partners and children and the clinicians who treat them. New York: NYU Press.
Spence, J. T. & Robbins, A. S. (1992). Workaholism: Definition, measurement, and preliminary results. Journal of Personality Assessment, 58, 160-178.
Srivastava, A., Locke, E. A., & Bartol, K. M. (2001). Money and subjective well-being: It’s not the money, it’s the motives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 959-971.
Biographical Notes
Ronald J. Burke, PhD, University of Michigan, is currently Professor of Organizational Behavior, Schulich School of Business, York University in Toronto Canada. Burke was the Founding Editor of the Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences and has sat on the Editorial Boards of approximately 20 journals. His research interests include workand health, gender issues in organizations, human resource management practices and organizational effectiveness and career development processes in organizations. He has particpated in numerous executive development sessions and consults on human resource issues to both private and public sector organizations.
Contact: rburke@schulich.yorku.ca
Stig Mattheisen, PhD, is Professor of Psychology in the Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Bergen. His research interests include bullying in the workplace, work stress and strain, and leadership in organizations.
Contact: stig.matthiesen@psysp.uib.no