Department of Work and Organizational Psychology, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
J Occup Health Psychol. 2011 Oct;16(4):468-82. doi: 10.1037/a0024392.
Building on Deci and Ryan's Self-Determination Theory and Meijman and Mulder's Effort-Recovery Model, the present study examined the nature, antecedents, and consequences of working hard (i.e., workaholism and work engagement) in a Dutch convenience sample of 1,246 employees. A confirmatory factor analysis showed that workaholism and work engagement were two largely independent concepts. Crossing these two concepts yielded four types of workers: workaholic employees, engaged employees, engaged workaholics, and nonworkaholic/nonengaged employees. MANOVA and subsequent ANOVAs were used to compare these four groups regarding their motivation, working hours, and levels of burnout. As expected, study results revealed that workaholic employees were driven by controlled motivation, whereas engaged employees were driven by autonomous motivation. Engaged workaholics were driven by both controlled and autonomous motivation. In addition, the results revealed that engaged workaholics spent most time on working. Unlike workaholic employees, engaged workaholics did not experience the highest levels of burnout, suggesting that high engagement may buffer the adverse consequences of workaholism. The present study emphasizes the importance of differentiating among at least three categories of employees who work hard: workaholic employees, engaged employees, and-for the first time-engaged workaholics.
基于 Deci 和 Ryan 的自我决定理论以及 Meijman 和 Mulder 的努力-恢复模型，本研究在一个荷兰便利样本中，对 1246 名员工的努力工作（即工作狂和工作投入）的本质、前因和后果进行了研究。验证性因素分析表明，工作狂和工作投入是两个基本独立的概念。将这两个概念交叉产生了四种类型的员工：工作狂员工、投入型员工、投入型工作狂和非工作狂/非投入型员工。MANOVA 和随后的 ANOVA 用于比较这四个组的动机、工作时间和倦怠水平。正如预期的那样，研究结果表明，工作狂员工的动机是受控制的，而投入型员工的动机是自主的。投入型工作狂的动机受控制和自主的双重驱动。此外，结果表明，投入型工作狂在工作上花费的时间最多。与工作狂员工不同，投入型工作狂没有经历最高水平的倦怠，这表明高投入可以缓冲工作狂的不利后果。本研究强调了区分至少三种努力工作的员工类型的重要性：工作狂员工、投入型员工和——这是第一次——投入型工作狂。
