Job-related wellbeing and health

Job satisfaction. Job satisfaction has been defined as an emotional response to the workplace (CRANNY et al., 1992). Other researchers have described job satisfaction as “an attitude toward one’s job” (BRIEF, 1998). Attitudes are defined as both affec-tive and cogniaffec-tive responses related to an object, for example a person’s job (WEISS, 2002).

Job satisfaction is a central variable in organizational research and is an important dependent variable in leadership issues. Therefore, it is not surprising that job satis-faction has taken a prominent place in work and organizational psychology as it is regarded as important in determining an employee’s experience and behaviour in the workplace. A meta-analysis by JUDGE and PICCOLO (2004) revealed an estimated true score correlation of .58 between transformational leadership and follower job satisfaction based on 18 studies. The estimated true score correlation was even higher for transactional contingent reward leadership (.64, based on six studies). In contrast, the correlation was -.28 between follower job satisfaction and laissez-faire leadership. Interesting findings by WOLFRAM et al. (2010) imply that transformation-al leadership is only related to job satisfaction for mtransformation-ale leaders. When the supervisor was female, transformational leadership and job satisfaction were unrelated (see chapter 6). Moreover, job satisfaction affects both physical and psychical health (SIX et al., 2004).

Job stress. Stress is conceptualized as an imbalance between high demands and low personal resources which is experienced as unpleasant (GREIF, 1991). Different models hypothesize a relation between leadership variables and job stress. Accord-ing to the Job Demand Control (JDC) model (KARASEK, 1979) job stress follows from high job demands and a low level of job control.

SOSIK and GODSHALK (2000) examined the relationship between leadership and job-related stress in mentor-protégé dyads. Transformational leadership behaviour by the mentor was positively related to mentoring functions received by the protégé and both were negatively related to protégé stress. Moreover, transformational leadership behaviour was more positively related to mentoring functions received by the protégé than was transactional contingent reward behaviour. Laissez-faire leadership was negatively related to received mentoring functions. More specifically, post-hoc tests revealed that psychosocial support was positively related to idealized influence, inspi-rational motivation and individualized consideration, but also to contingent reward leadership.

Burnout. Burnout is a consequence of prolonged job stress and is most often charac-terized by exhaustion, cynicism, and reduced professional efficacy (MASLACH et al., 1996). Exhaustion represents the individual strain dimension of burnout, describing feelings of fatigue and depletion of emotional energy (MASLACH et al., 1996). Cyni-cism and reduced professional efficacy go beyond the individual stress experience by adding the employee’s attitude to the job (cynicism) and to the self (feelings of ineffi-cacy) into the conceptualization of burnout (MASLACH, 2003). The component of cynicism refers to a distant and cynical attitude towards one’s work, whereas reduced professional efficacy describes loss of competence and productivity, and the tenden-cy to negatively evaluate one’s past and present accomplishments at work (MASLACH et al., 1996).

Job-related situational factors are considered to be the prime correlates of burnout (MASLACH et al., 2001). In previous studies of various job-related situational factors, both job demands and resources have been related to burnout symptoms, and par-ticularly to exhaustion, whereas cynicism and reduced professional efficacy have been related in particular to lack of job resources (e.g. LEE & ASHFORTH, 1996).

The meta-analysis by LEE and ASHFORTH (1996) examined predictors and conse-quences of burnout revealing job demands like role clarity, role conflict, role stress, stressful events, workload and work pressure as important correlates and potential predictors of emotional exhaustion. Also support by supervisor (-.37) and team cohe-sion (-.22) were significantly related to emotional exhaustion. Results on depersonal-ization are parallel. It is important to note that a causal interpretation of these correla-tions is not justified.

As indicated by the meta-analytical results, different researchers have found inverse relationships between supervisory support and symptoms of burnout. These results suggest that a considerate leadership style may prevent burnout. IVERSON and col-leagues (1998) found that burnout components emotional exhaustion and deperson-alization were both negatively correlated with supervisory support (-.22 and -.20) in a sample of employees at a hospital (IVERSON et al., 1998). WILK and MOYNIHAN (2005) observed a correlation of -.27 between supervisory support and emotional exhaustion in a study on call centre agents. LEITER and colleagues (2010)

investi-gated the relation between burnout and supervision in a sample of physicians and nurses. Supervision included the delegation of authority, consultation with subordi-nates, and the encouragement of innovation and displayed significant relationships to all three burnout scales (For nurses: exhaustion: -.20, cynicism: -.33, efficacy: .15; for physicians: exhaustion: -.21, cynicism: -.22, efficacy: .15).

HETLAND et al. (2007) assessed the relation between subordinates’ burnout symp-toms and the direct supervisor’s leadership style. Burnout was measured with the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MASLACH et al., 1986). Passive-avoidant leadership style was linked to burnout’s components emotional exhaustion and cynicism. Trans-formational leadership displayed significant relationships to professional efficacy but, interestingly, also to cynicism. These results indicate that transformational leadership may have an ambiguous relation to burnout. Transformational leadership may consti-tute a buffer against burnout in terms of professional efficacy but may also promote it in terms of cynicism. Of course, these cross-sectional data do not allow conclusions about cause-effect relationships. Transactional leadership was unrelated to burnout components in the study by HETLAND et al. (2007).

TEPPER (2000) investigated consequences of abusive supervision and besides oth-er outcomes also considoth-ered burnout. Abusive supoth-ervision is conceptualized as “the sustained display of hostile verbal and nonverbal behaviour, excluding physical con-tact” (TEPPER, 2000, p.178). Abusive supervision displayed a correlation to emo-tional exhaustion of .36 indicating a medium high association.

It can thus be concluded, that supervisory support may prevent burnout while the study of transformational leadership and burnout yielded ambiguous results. A clear effect was found regarding abusive leadership which seems to promote burnout.

Burnout can also be considered a mediator variable in the relation between leader-ship and other outcomes, including organizational outcome variables. In their meta-analysis, LEE and ASHFORTH (1996) found emotional exhaustion to be related to turnover intentions (.44), organizational commitment (-.43), and control coping (-.30).

Depersonalization displayed significant correlations to turnover intentions (.31), or-ganizational commitment (-.42), job satisfaction (-.44), control coping (-.28), and pre-ventive coping (-.37). Professional efficacy was related to control coping (.52), turno-ver intentions (-.16), and attitudes towards workplace climate (.28). Of course a causal interpretation of these correlations is not appropriate.

Irritation. Irritation is conceptualized as a state of mental exhaustion occurring at work before the onset of mental illness (MOHR, 1986). When reaching this state, short daily breaks are not sufficient for recovery, though for example longer breaks or changes in task assignments still make recovery possible (MOHR et al., 2006). Irrita-tion has been increasingly applied as a dependent variable in organizaIrrita-tional research (e.g. MOHR et al., 2008). DORMANN and ZAPF (2002) have assessed irritation as a mediator in the relation between social stressors and depressive symptoms in a lon-gitudinal study. Results indicate that the effect of social stressors on depressive symptoms is in fact fully mediated via irritation. The analysis of time lags revealed that quite a long exposure time is necessary, indicating that the hypothesized pro-cesses take some time to develop (MOHR, 1986). DORMANN and ZAPF (2002)

suggest that exposure times of “at least two years are required to demonstrate the effects” (p. 33).

Some researchers have investigated irritation as an outcome in leadership research revealing some interesting findings. MOHR and WOLFRAM (2008) found that verbal consideration expressed by a leader led to decreased emotional irritation of his sub-ordinates. Interestingly, this effect was only found for male leaders (see chapter 6).