managers’ and teachers’ burnout according to stevan hobfoll’s conservation of resources theory

14
1 MANAGERS’ AND TEACHERS’ BURNOUT ACCORDING TO STEVAN HOBFOLL’S CONSERVATION OF RESOURCES THEORY Anna Hełka & Elzbieta Lisowska Warsaw School of Sciences and Humanities IAREP/SABE 2008 ROME

Upload: freya-hardy

Post on 30-Dec-2015

27 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

IAREP/SABE 2008 ROME. MANAGERS’ AND TEACHERS’ BURNOUT ACCORDING TO STEVAN HOBFOLL’S CONSERVATION OF RESOURCES THEORY. Anna Hełka & Elzbieta Lisowska Warsaw School of Sciences and Humanities. STEVAN HOBFOLL’S C ONSERVATION OF RESOURCES (COR) THEORY. B urnout (Hobfoll, 1988, 1989, 2001) - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: MANAGERS’ AND TEACHERS’ BURNOUT ACCORDING TO STEVAN HOBFOLL’S CONSERVATION OF RESOURCES THEORY

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

Page 2: MANAGERS’ AND TEACHERS’ BURNOUT ACCORDING TO STEVAN HOBFOLL’S CONSERVATION OF RESOURCES THEORY

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)

Page 3: MANAGERS’ AND TEACHERS’ BURNOUT ACCORDING TO STEVAN HOBFOLL’S CONSERVATION OF RESOURCES THEORY

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.

Page 4: MANAGERS’ AND TEACHERS’ BURNOUT ACCORDING TO STEVAN HOBFOLL’S CONSERVATION OF RESOURCES THEORY

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.

Page 5: MANAGERS’ AND TEACHERS’ BURNOUT ACCORDING TO STEVAN HOBFOLL’S CONSERVATION OF RESOURCES THEORY

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.

Page 6: MANAGERS’ AND TEACHERS’ BURNOUT ACCORDING TO STEVAN HOBFOLL’S CONSERVATION OF RESOURCES THEORY

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.

Page 7: MANAGERS’ AND TEACHERS’ BURNOUT ACCORDING TO STEVAN HOBFOLL’S CONSERVATION OF RESOURCES THEORY

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

Page 8: MANAGERS’ AND TEACHERS’ BURNOUT ACCORDING TO STEVAN HOBFOLL’S CONSERVATION OF RESOURCES THEORY

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

Page 9: MANAGERS’ AND TEACHERS’ BURNOUT ACCORDING TO STEVAN HOBFOLL’S CONSERVATION OF RESOURCES THEORY

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

Page 10: MANAGERS’ AND TEACHERS’ BURNOUT ACCORDING TO STEVAN HOBFOLL’S CONSERVATION OF RESOURCES THEORY

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

Page 11: MANAGERS’ AND TEACHERS’ BURNOUT ACCORDING TO STEVAN HOBFOLL’S CONSERVATION OF RESOURCES THEORY

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.

Page 12: MANAGERS’ AND TEACHERS’ BURNOUT ACCORDING TO STEVAN HOBFOLL’S CONSERVATION OF RESOURCES THEORY

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.

Page 13: MANAGERS’ AND TEACHERS’ BURNOUT ACCORDING TO STEVAN HOBFOLL’S CONSERVATION OF RESOURCES THEORY

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.

Page 14: MANAGERS’ AND TEACHERS’ BURNOUT ACCORDING TO STEVAN HOBFOLL’S CONSERVATION OF RESOURCES THEORY

1414

Thank you for your kind attention