ArticlePDF Available

The link between burnout and job performance: a meta-analysis

European Journal of Work and Organisational Psychology

May 2023
32(1):1-18

DOI:10.1080/1359432X.2023.2209320

Authors:

Andreea Corbeanu

University of Bucharest

Dragos Iliescu

University of Bucharest

Andrei Ion

University of Bucharest

PRISMA flow diagram for the study selection process. Note. * Studies were rejected based on the following criteria: (1) studies had to be set in an organizational environment, (2) to include a measure of burnout, (3) an objective or subjective measure of performance and (4) to offer information concerning the link between burnout and job performance, irrespective of whether it was the main aim of the study or not.

…

Funnel plot for publication bias for the exhaustion dimension of burnout and job performance, on 41 independent samples.

…

Funnel plot for publication bias for the depersonalization dimension of burnout and job performance, on 21 independent samples.

…

Funnel plot for publication bias for the inefficacy dimension of burnout and job performance, on 19 independent samples.

…

Moderation analysis with categorical variables for depersonalization and job performance.

…

Figures - uploaded by Andreea Corbeanu

Content may be subject to copyright.

Content uploaded by Andreea Corbeanu

Content may be subject to copyright.

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=pewo20

European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/pewo20

The link between burnout and job performance: a

meta-analysis

Andreea Corbeanu, Dragoș Iliescu, Andrei Ion & Roxana Spînu

To cite this article: Andreea Corbeanu, Dragoș Iliescu, Andrei Ion & Roxana Spînu (2023): The

link between burnout and job performance: a meta-analysis, European Journal of Work and

Organizational Psychology, DOI: 10.1080/1359432X.2023.2209320

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2023.2209320

View supplementary material

Published online: 16 May 2023.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 57

View related articles

View Crossmark data

The link between burnout and job performance: a meta-analysis

Andreea Corbeanu

, Dragoș Iliescu

a,b

, Andrei Ion

and Roxana Spînu

Department of Psychology and Cognitive Science, University of Bucharest, Bucuresti, Romania;

Department of Industrial Psychology, Stellenbosch

University, Stellenbosch, South Africa

ABSTRACT

This study addresses the link between burnout and job performance. Following a systematic literature

review, 45 studies were selected based on the inclusion criteria: (1) set in an organizational environment,

(2) including a measure of burnout, (3) including an objective or subjective measure of performance and

(4) oering information concerning the link between burnout and job performance. A random-eects

model yielded meta-analytic correlations of −.17 for exhaustion (k = 18019 aggregated participants), −.16

for depersonalization (k = 8561 aggregated participants) and −.23 for inecacy (k = 7281 aggregated

participants) and job performance. Four potential moderators were examined: the type of (1) perfor-

mance measured, (2) performance report, (3) burnout measure, and (4) participant occupation. Our

analyses indicate that the burnout measure exerted a moderating eect, but only with respect to

exhaustion (r = −.19 for MBI; −.10 for OLBI), but not for depersonalization. Participant occupation was

a signicant moderator for exhaustion (r =-.21 for corporate roles; −.22 for customer-facing roles),

depersonalization (r = −.28 for corporate roles; −.31 for customer-facing roles), and inecacy (r = −.41

for corporate roles; −.23 for customer-facing roles). The type of performance measure and the type of

performance report did not exert any signicant moderating eects.

ARTICLE HISTORY

Received 22 August 2021

Accepted 26 April 2023

KEYWORDS

Burnout; exhaustion;

depersonalization; in-role

performance, extra-role

performance; job

performance

Burnout has been associated with a wide range of negative

consequences, and numerous physical or psychological health

problems (Hakanen & Schaufeli, 2012; Shirom, 2005; W. Schaufeli

& Enzmann, 1998), and is today more prevalent than ever. In its

broadest denition, it refers to a syndrome of chronic exhaustion

and negative attitudes towards work (Freudenberger, 1974), and

encompasses three core dimensions: exhaustion, depersonaliza-

tion, and inecacy (W. B. Schaufeli et al., 2009).

Recently, a survey of about 7,500 full-time workers revealed

that nearly two-thirds of employees are confronted with burn-

out at work, with 23% of respondents stating they felt burnt out

at work very often or always, and an additional 44% reporting

feeling burnt out sometimes (Wigert & Agrawal, 2018). Burnout

has recently been acknowledged in the 11

Revision of the

International Classication of Diseases (ICD-11), as an occupa-

tional phenomenon (World Health Organization [WHO], 2019).

Evidence suggests that burned-out employees are signicantly

more likely to experience depression, anxiety, sleep distur-

bances or various forms of physical health complaints

(Peterson et al., 2008). Apart from individual health outcomes,

burnout has been linked with various job-relevant aspects, such

as job performance (e.g., Bakker & Heuven, 2006; Wright &

Bonett, 1997), safety (e.g., Nahrgang et al., 2011), absenteeism

(e.g., W. B. Schaufeli et al., 2009), or team-level performance

(Bakker et al., 2008). The associated organizational costs are not

to be ignored: it is estimated that an organization spends

$3,400 (or 34%) for every $10,000 of salary with disengaged

employees (Wigert & Agrawal, 2018), while healthcare costs of

job-related burnout are thought to be somewhere between

$125 and $190 billion in the US alone (Wigert & Agrawal, 2018).

Although burnout has been linked with a plethora of nega-

tive outcomes in the world of work, its negative impact on job

performance has been the central topic of a relatively large

number of empirical investigations (Brandes et al., 2008;

Halbesleben & Buckley, 2004; W. B. Schaufeli & Buunk, 2004).

Considering the large volume of empirical investigations and

their relatively non-overlapping conclusions, it becomes

imperative to conduct a review to shed more light on the

nature of the relationships between burnout and job perfor-

mance. In terms of the inconsistencies in the burnout-job per-

formance relationship (Swider & Zimmerman, 2010) while

burnout has been expected to negatively relate to job perfor-

mance, results from empirical studies are equivocal (Bakker

et al., 2003; Firth & Britton, 1989; Halbesleben & Buckley, 2004;

Riolli & Savicki, 2006). Some studies report the expected nega-

tive relationship (e.g., Parker & Kulik, 1995; Wright &

Cropanzano, 1998), but others show no relationship (e.g., Abd

Razak et al., 2019) or even positive correlations (e.g., Dodson

et al., 2019; Keijsers et al., 1995; Randall & Scott, 1988).

Consequently, considering the partly conicting results of the

previous investigations focusing on the burnout-job perfor-

mance link, on top of their potentially confusing implications

for both theory and practice, we address this gap through

a systematic review and meta-analysis of the burnout – job

performance relationship. It includes the three dimensions of

burnout, dierent types of job performance, as well as several

moderators, which will be discussed below.

CONTACT Dragoș Iliescu dragos.iliescu@fpse.unibuc.ro Department of Psychology and Cognitive Science, University of Bucharest, Bucuresti, Romania

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2023.2209320.

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF WORK AND ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY

https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2023.2209320

The overarching purpose of the present article is to re-examine

the current state of aairs on the burnout-job performance rela-

tionship. To this end, we pursue two specic objectives. The rst

objective and contribution this paper brings is building on pre-

vious meta-analytic ndings (Swider & Zimmerman, 2010; Taris,

2006) and updating the current understanding of the burnout-job

performance relationship. This is achieved through

a comprehensive review of empirical investigations, focusing on

the specic relationships between the three core components of

burnout (exhaustion, depersonalization, and inecacy) and job

performance. Although the review conducted by Taris (2006)

retrieved signicant associations between depersonalization and

job performance and concluded that the other dimensions have

little relevance with respect to job performance, revisiting these

ndings based on the research evidence accumulated over the

past 15 years is warranted for several reasons. First, the previous

conclusions were derived from the relatively scarce number of

empirical investigations available at the respective moment,

greatly limiting the generalizability of the ndings. More speci-

cally, the median sample size for the 16 studies included in the

review is 71.5 participants, a sample size that is generally consid-

ered insucient for an accurate detection of small to medium

eect sizes. To exemplify, the relationship between depersonaliza-

tion and in-role performance was estimated based on two empiri-

cal investigations having N = 146 and N = 73, respectively. Second,

the generalizability of the previous review is hampered not only

by the relatively underpowered studies, but also by the sample

composition. For example, one-third of the studies included

nurses or medical personnel, while the study with the largest

sample size (Priebe et al., 2005) included 580 patients enrolled in

mental illness treatment programs, further limiting our under-

standing in this domain. Taking into account all these limitations,

Taris (2006) concluded that the relationships between various

burnout dimension and performance is inconclusive.

Finally, the second objective is to expand the work con-

ducted by previous meta-analyses (e.g., Collins, 2000; Swider

& Zimmerman, 2010; Taris, 2006; Weng, 2005) by investigating

the potential moderators of the burnout-job performance rela-

tionship. An in-depth understanding of the burnout-job perfor-

mance relationship should also account for potential

moderating eects, and we focus on four of these, namely: (1)

the type of performance report (i.e., self- vs. other rating), (2)

the type of performance measured (i.e., in-role vs extra role), (3)

the type of burnout report (i.e., MBI vs. OLBI), (4) the participant

occupation (customer facing vs. non-customer facing roles).

Taken together, identifying these potential moderating

eects of the four variables outlined above, enables us to

understand whether burnout’s negative impact on job perfor-

mance generalizes across the types of job performance, the

sources of job performance ratings, occupations, and burnout

measures. In what follows, we present our arguments related to

the relevance of each of the selected moderators individually,

as well as the contributions they bring to the scientic

literature.

Type of performance report. Studying this moderator con-

tributes to the literature by identifying whether burnout is

typically associated with a reduction in self-perceived job per-

formance or, alternatively, a decrease in those aspects of job

performance that are visible to others. Meta-analytic ndings

(Harris & Schauabroek, 1988) revealed a small to moderate (r

= .35) correlation between self-reports (i.e., subjective mea-

sures) and supervisor ratings (i.e., objective reports), which is

the lowest reported association between dierent sources of

performance assessment, suggesting there are indeed dier-

ences in the perception of job performance between the two

mentioned stakeholders. Given that the two reect rather dif-

ferent aspects of job performance (Andrews et al., 2006), unco-

vering these potentially dierential eects could lead to

a better understanding of whether burned-out employees

tend to engage in reducing the others-observed vs. self-

observed aspects of job performance, behaviours that could

have dierent underlying mechanisms.

Type of performance measured. Some evidence (e.g.,

Petitta & Vecchione, 2011; Yavas et al., 2013) found that there

is a dierent link between burnout components and in-role

versus extra-role performance, respectively. Task performance

(also known as in-role performance) refers to a formal require-

ment of one’s job and includes behaviours and tasks that are

directly related to the strategic aims of the organization

(Motowidlo & Van Scotter, 1994). Contextual (or extra-role)

performance encompasses the sum of discretionary behaviours

employees engage in outside the formal scope of their roles,

which still have an overall benecial impact across the psycho-

logical and social environment of the workplace (Sonnentag &

Frese, 2005). As there seems to be no consensus on the dier-

ential associations between the dierent dimensions of job

performance and burnout, we contribute to the literature by

identifying whether the potential negative eects of burnout

over job performance are conned, as it can be expected, to the

formal performance requirements, as reected by in-role per-

formance measures, or whether they extend to those discre-

tionary behaviours as well.

Type of burnout report. It is relevant to get a deeper look

into the inuence dierent measures have over job perfor-

mance, as they are often based on dierent conceptualizations

of the same construct. By examining which measure more

closely relates to which dimensions of performance, we may

draw a number of inferences around the way in which nuances

of burnout – for instance, the physical versus emotional aspects

which are covered in the OLBI (Halbesleben & Demerouti, 2005)

vs. the MBI (Maslach & Jackson, 1981), respectively – inuence

job performance.

Participant occupation. As a moderator, this variable will

reveal whether there are any dierences between customer-

facing and non-customer facing roles. It has been suggested in

the literature that those employees who are dealing with

higher emotional requirements in their job are more vulnerable

towards developing burnout (Hochschild, 1979). This could be

more so the case of customer-facing roles, where employees

might face irate customers, have no solution to customer pro-

blems, be time-pressed to give accurate responses or have to

caretake a number of patients, all the while outwardly exhibit-

ing positive emotions (Bhave & Glomb, 2016). Then, on

a general note, the relationship between burnout and job

performance does not generalize widely across jobs, profes-

sions and/or other performance criteria besides the ones con-

sidered in Taris’ review (Taris, 2006). As acknowledged by the

author himself, this single meta-analytical review drew on

2A. CORBEANU ET AL.

empirical studies employing rather small sample sizes and

included mainly professions related to teaching and caregiving,

severely hampering the generalizability of the burnout-job

performance relationship.

Beyond the theoretical implications that our study may

have, the current paper might also be particularly relevant for

organizational practice. To this day, the majority of burnout

research is still centred around self-reports and the work char-

acteristics that the employees nd themselves into. However,

certain work aspects (such as job control, performance feed-

back, or caseload) could to a greater extent be inuenced by

the organization (Day et al., 2017; McCarthy & Garavan, 2001).

Yet, burnout as a psychological phenomenon will only seriously

appear on the management’s agenda when it provably plays

a part in poor business performance (W. B. Schaufeli, 2003). Our

paper addresses this gap by directly investigating the link

between burnout and employee performance.

To conclude, throughout the past fteen years, a lot of ink

has been spilled on the phenomenon of burnout and how its

consequences impact job performance. The topic is of great

interest to both scholars and organizations, and as such an

update on this topic is warranted.

The construct of burnout

Burnout is a syndrome of chronic exhaustion and negative

attitudes towards work. In one of its early denitions

(Freudenberger, 1974) it was described as a work-related con-

dition of mental and physical exhaustion, in which individuals

lose their dedication and involvement in their jobs. The two

core dimensions of burnout that are present in its various

denitions (e.g., Demerouti et al., 2003; Maslach et al., 2001;

Shirom and Melamed, 2006) are emotional exhaustion (or sim-

ply exhaustion), and depersonalization (or cynicism). Some

authors (e.g., W. B. Schaufeli et al., 2009) also include inecacy

(or reduced personal accomplishment) as a main dimension of

the construct. Exhaustion is a feeling of loss of energy due to

continuous exposure to highly demanding working conditions,

which leaves one feeling too drained to address anything or

anyone (Maslach et al., 2008). Depersonalization is a state of

personal detachment from one’s work, accompanied by irrit-

ability, inappropriate attitudes and withdrawal (Maslach et al.,

2001), and inecacy represents the interpersonal and self-

evaluative dimensions of burnout (Leiter & Maslach, 2016),

and refers to a sense of lack of accomplishments, which is

often associated with low productivity and an inability to

cope (Maslach et al., 2001).

Two conceptual frameworks, and subsequently two instru-

ments for the measurement of burnout are particularly well

established in the literature. The rst (Maslach & Jackson, 1981)

views burnout as a multidimensional construct, based on

a three-factor structure: exhaustion, depersonalization, and

reduced personal accomplishment. In this conceptualization,

burnout is thought to be a direct consequence of job stressors,

i.e., appears when a person must manage a high workload,

conicting or ambiguous demands, or is pressed for time

(Bakker & Demerouti, 2007; Guthier et al., 2020). The other

model, put forth by Bakker and Demerouti (2017) is largely

similar to the rst, with the major dierence of having only

two main components, exhaustion and disengagement/deper-

sonalization (without it including inecacy). The authors

stretch the exhaustion dimension to include cognitive and

physical exhaustion, alongside emotional exhaustion (which is

already the main focus of the MBI), which aids the application

of the measure to workers engaged in physical work, as well as

those whose role mainly require information processing

(Bakker & Demerouti, 2007).

The underlying mechanisms that could lead to burnout have

been described within various theoretical frameworks. Two of

the most inuential burnout-relevant models are the

Conservation of Resources Theory (COR; Hobfoll, 1989) and

the Job Demands-Resources Theory (JD-R; Bakker &

Demerouti, 2007). COR posits that individuals are fundamen-

tally driven to build, keep, and protect resources they nd

valuable. These can range from social to material, or energetic

resources, and take the shape of objects, environmental condi-

tions, or energetic contexts that help people reach their goals.

According to this theory, burnout is the consequence of either

losing one’s resources, or an inability to replenish them. For an

in-depth review of the COR theory and its tenets, we refer to

Hobfoll and Shirom, (2000). The other dominant framework is

the JD-R Model (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007), which asserts that

every role has a particular set of attributes that are viewed in

terms of job demands and job resources. Within the JD-R

framework, burnout is driven by exposure to high levels of

job demands and a lack of job resources, to mitigate it.

Burnout and job performance

The idea that employee emotionality impacts job performance

has been studied extensively (e.g., Cho et al., 2016; Goodwin

et al., 2011; Reizer et al., 2019). As a syndrome of chronic

exhaustion and negative attitudes towards work, burnout is

expected to have a generally negative impact on job-relevant

outcomes, including, but not limited to job performance. The

mechanisms through which burnout can lead to impaired job

performance can also be explained through the COR Theory

(Hobfoll, 1989). As mentioned above, within this framework,

burnout is seen as a strain that manifests in those contexts

where an actual or perceived loss of resources occurs. As

employees look to either protect their existing resources and

acquire new ones (Hobfoll, 2001), if those are lost, in peril, or

simply overcome by demands, workers will likely experience

strain, subsequently leading to employees becoming emotion-

ally exhausted, disengaged and with low inecacy (Harris et al.,

2009), which are all associated with impaired job performance.

Extant research suggests not only burnout as a global con-

struct has detrimental eects on job performance, but also its

various facets. The exhaustion dimension might impact indivi-

duals on an emotional, and also physical level. Firstly, in the

case of emotional exhaustion, individuals are not keen to rein-

vest their decient resources, yet they also defensively attempt

to guard their remaining ones (Hobfoll, 2001). It is possible that,

in the face of a dearth of resources, workers will experience

a decrease in both their in-role and extra-role performance

records, as follows: rst, emotional exhaustion might leave an

individual too depleted to properly engage in and complete

their work tasks, and thus submit sloppy or incomplete work

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF WORK AND ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY 3

(Boekhorst et al., 2017), a direct reection of decient in-role

performance; second, employees might have just enough

energy left to complete only the essential tasks or aspects of

their roles, or only those tasks that had previously yielded the

best return (Baltes, 1997) and consequently there could be

a decrease in their extra-role performance. Secondly, the phy-

sical aspect of exhaustion may have a negative impact at the

level of brain circuitry, more specically the hippocampus and

the prefrontal cortex (Arnsten, 2009; Radley et al., 2004). Burned

out employees reported impairments in aspects such as non-

verbal memory, auditory and visual attention (Sandström et al.,

2005), sustained attention (van der Linden et al., 2005) and

cognitive speed (Österberg, Karlson, & Hansen, 2009) as well

as decits in working memory (Miyake et al., 2001), dual task

performance (Monsell & Driver, 2000), or control of thought and

behaviour (Braver & Barch, 2002). As everyday work tasks often

imply attentional and cognitive demands, diminished execu-

tive control may cause decreases in both in-role and extra-role

performance.

Moreover, depersonalization is thought to be an initial

defensive mechanism, acting as an emotional buer, in the

form of “detached concern” (Maslach et al., 2001). As indivi-

duals become less and less engaged in (i.e., emotionally buf-

fered from) their work, their in-role performance might

decrease. The same goes for their extra-role performance,

which might be subject to the workers’ detachment, as they

are less interested in performing any behaviours which are not

directly specied by their role requirements.

Finally, people experiencing inecacy tend to progressively

lose faith in their ability to do what is required of them, which

may lead to a self-imposed verdict of failure (Leiter & Maslach,

2016). In turn, this could become a downward spiral (Wright &

Cropanzano, 2004) and translate into reduced in-role perfor-

mance, as individuals might stop performing their duties as

well as before. Concerning extra role performance, inecacy

could also lead to impairments on this front. Specically, the

lack of self-trust brought about by the feeling of reduced

personal accomplishment could lead to decreased motivation

to engage in constructive behaviours outside of what is speci-

cally listed as the job requirements (Wright & Cropanzano,

2004).

Considering that theoretical arguments propose a negative

relationship between burnout and job performance, yet the

ndings on this topic are non-systematic, we put the following

hypothesis forth:

H1(a, b, c): All three dimensions of burnout (exhaustion,

depersonalization, inecacy) will be negatively associated

with job performance.

Potential moderators of the link between burnout

and job performance

Type of performance. Researchers have only rather recently

started to distinguish between in-role and extra-role perfor-

mance in their burnout studies (Bakker et al., 2004). In-role or

task performance consists of the behaviours and results that are

directly connected to the organization’s objectives (Motowidlo

& Van Scotter, 1994), maintaining the organization running at

an eective functioning pace (Behrman & Perreault, 1984).

However, in most contemporary work environments perfor-

mance is also heavily reliant upon social interactions, employ-

ees needing to conform to social norms and collaborate

companionably with their peers (Hogan & Holland, 2003). Extra-

role, or contextual performance, is comprised of discretionary

behaviours that uphold the eective functioning of individuals,

teams and the organization, but are not directly related to any

formally established goal (Borman & Motowidlo, 1997; Organ,

1997; P. M. Podsako & MacKenzie, 1994) - all those organiza-

tional citizenship behaviours (OCB) employees engage in out-

side the formal constraints of their jobs, with an overall positive

impact on the social and psychological environment of their

organization (Morrison, 1994; Sonnentag & Frese, 2005).

In direct contrast to in-role performance – a formal require-

ment, intensely monitored in many organizations – extra-role

performance is not directly linked to one’s job-related rewards

and penalties. What is more, individuals may be unable to

decrease their quota or quality of work-output as an eect of

their exhaustion or their feelings of reduced personal accom-

plishment. In lieu, they might decide to suppress discretionary

behaviours, which would not typically result in explicit reper-

cussions (Schnake, 1991). Given this, we expect the relationship

between the exhaustion and inecacy dimensions of burnout

and job performance to be stronger for extra-role performance.

H2a: The negative relationship between exhaustion/ine-

cacy and job performance will be stronger for extra-role per-

formance, compared to in-role performance.

On the other hand, depersonalization is a state of hostile

detachment from one’s work, accompanied by irritability, inap-

propriate attitudes, and withdrawal (Maslach et al., 2001). It

could have a direct and evident impact on the way individuals

carry out the tasks they’re assigned, resulting in lower in-role

performance. Additionally, depersonalized employees might

be at risk of losing their interest in the organization, becoming

more irascible and losing their trust in management and peers

(W. Schaufeli & Enzmann, 1998), setting the stage for lower

levels of in-role performance. Consequently, we expect that:

H2b: The negative relationship between depersonalization

and job performance will be stronger for in-role performance,

compared to extra-role performance.

Type of performance report. Subjective measures are the

most popular way of assessing job performance, and often

considered more feasible, compared to objective measures

(Dai et al., 2018; Wall et al., 2004). Despite this, the consensus

is that this type of data is sensitive to the inuence of

a variety of biasing factors (N. P. Podsako et al., 2013),

such as social desirability eects (Kuncel & Tellegen, 2009;

Paulhus, 1991) or acquiescent responding (Weijters et al.,

2013). Objective measures of job performance are not free

of criticism either. For instance, an inherent problem with

4A. CORBEANU ET AL.

objective ratings may be the inability to distinguish between

meaningful uctuation caused by environmental change, and

pure transient error (Sturman et al., 2005). This is especially

true in higher-complexity jobs, where work outcomes are

a result of multiple independent work processes (Bol &

Smith, 2011). It has also been argued that, as long as the

measures are reliable and valid, how the concepts were

measured is irrelevant (Kompier, 2005).

We included both subjective and objective measures in the

current analysis and have tested whether there are signicant

dierences in the relationship between burnout and job per-

formance, when the latter was measured through subjective or

objective reports. We anticipate that subjective measures will

have a stronger association with burnout, as participants’ per-

ceptions of their level of performance might be more strongly

correlated with their levels of burnout, as opposed to objective

measures, which are not as strongly related to participants’ self-

assessments (Pransky et al., 2006). Based on the above explana-

tion, we advance the following hypothesis:

H3: Subjective measures of job performance, as opposed to

objective measures, will be more strongly associated with burn-

out, in each of its three dimensions.

Type of burnout report. The two most widely used self-report

measures of burnout are the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI;

Maslach & Jackson, 1981) and the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory

(OLBI; Halbesleben & Demerouti, 2005). Though built on similar

conceptual models, the two measures address burnout slightly

dierently. The MBI (Maslach & Jackson, 1981) was designed

around a three-factor structure, with emotional exhaustion,

depersonalization, and personal accomplishment as subscales,

whereas the OLBI (Halbesleben & Demerouti, 2005) consists of

only two dimensions, exhaustion, and depersonalization. These

are similar and correlate highly with the emotional exhaustion

and depersonalization dimensions of the MBI (Buckley et al.,

2014), however, there are a number of dierences.

Within the OLBI (Halbesleben & Demerouti, 2005), exhaustion

is dened as a consequence of intensive physical, aective, and

cognitive strain (i.e., as a long-term consequence to prolonged

exposure to certain job demands), and also includes the physical

and cognitive facets of the construct, as opposed to the MBI

(Maslach & Jackson, 1981), which is focused rather on the emo-

tional aspect of exhaustion. Similarly, depersonalization (i.e., dis-

engagement) as conceptualized in the OLBI refers to distancing

oneself from one’s work, fostering negative attitudes towards the

work content, or towards the job in general (Demerouti et al.,

2003; Shirom, 2005). Whereas the MBI depersonalization scale

includes emotions that have a direct reference to recipients (e.g.,

becoming impersonal, callous, hardening), the OLBI disengage-

ment (i.e., depersonalization) scale refers to emotions towards

the work task (e.g., uninteresting, no longer challenging, but also

“disgusting”), as well as to a devaluation and mechanical execu-

tion of work (Buckley et al., 2014). Similarities also exist between

the OLBI disengagement (i.e., depersonalization) scale and the

MBI depersonalization scale; however, the items in the former are

more restricted in their content, mainly referring to a lack of

interest in the job, as well as one nding no meaning in their

job (Halbesleben & Demerouti, 2005). Finally, the OLBI includes

both negatively and positively worded items, representing not

only one but both ends of the continuum.

We expect a higher association between burnout measured

with the OLBI and job performance, because the OLBI is based

on a broader conceptualization of the phenomenon and cap-

tures a deeper spectrum of burnout. Based on the above, we

introduce the following hypotheses:

H4: When measured with the OLBI, there will be a stronger

association between burnout and job performance, for both

exhaustion and depersonalization, as compared to the MBI.

Participant occupation. Several systematic reviews and

meta-analytic studies investigating determinants of burnout

highlighted the inuence of individual characteristics or

context factors, such as the occupation of the participants,

in the case of the relationship between burnout and various

outcomes. On one hand, ndings seem to report that client-

facing occupations are more prone to burnout, as analyses

of data obtained among teachers yielded stronger burnout-

personal accomplishment associations (Brown, 2012) com-

pared to those conducted among workers of other occupa-

tions (Alarcon et al., 2009).

On the other hand, there is also evidence of the contrary:

a meta-analytic study examining the relationship between

burnout and secondary traumatic stress for employees indir-

ectly exposed to traumatic material (Lee et al., 2013) yielded

weaker associations for those directly exposed to trauma at

work. Similarly, a paper that studied the correlates of physician

burnout suggested that the link between burnout and

a number of mental health outcomes diered across special-

ities, depending on whether the doctors saw their patients in

a hospital vs. non-hospital settings (Cieslak et al., 2014), in the

direction of weaker associations for those directly exposed to

trauma.

Given these ndings, there are grounds for believing

that participant profession plays a systematic role in the

strength of the relationship between burnout and job

performance, though the evidence is mixed. We argue

that the strongest association will be for customer-facing

roles, due to the nature of the tasks one has to carry out.

In these types of jobs, the quality of stakeholder interac-

tions plays a direct role in the measure of one’s level of

performance (Wang & Sengupta, 2016). When suering

from burnout, it is likely that one might act more disagree-

ably towards customers, or might disregard them, leading

to a less sympathetic and more contemptuous attitude

towards them (McTiernan and McDonald, 2014). Yet, it is

often a requirement for people working in frontline roles

to exhibit positive emotions (such as smiles or friendli-

ness), while suppressing their negative ones, an occurrence

known as emotional labour (Hochschild, 1979). Within the

scientic literature, notably strong correlations were

observed between this phenomenon and burnout, particu-

larly with the exhaustion component (e.g., Goldberg &

Grandey, 2007; Mikolajczak et al., 2007). Therefore, our

expected hypothesis is as follows:

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF WORK AND ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY 5

H5: In the case of customer-facing roles, as opposed to non-

customer facing roles, there will be a stronger negative associa-

tion between job performance and burnout.

Method

Search strategy

Two complementary approaches were used to identify relevant

strategies. For testing the link between burnout and job per-

formance, a systematic review of the burnout and job perfor-

mance literature was carried out.

The search string used was: “(burnout) OR (exhaustion) OR

(depersonalization) OR (cynicism) OR (inecacy) OR (reduced

personal accomplishment) OR (employee burnout) OR (chronic

exhaustion) AND (job performance) OR (extra-role perfor-

mance) OR (in-role performance) OR (contextual performance)

OR (task performance) OR (work performance)”. The construct

of organizational citizenship behaviour (OCB) was not explicitly

included in the search string. This is because we consider it

distinct from extra-role performance (Vigoda-Gadot, 2006), and

as such expect the majority of studies using OCB to operatio-

nalize the construct according to its own denition, and not

that of extra-role performance. In the infrequent cases where

a paper using OCB did follow the denition listed here, it is

usually easily pinpointed, as it is very likely to also contain any

of the synonyms to OCB (i.e., performance, extra-role perfor-

mance, contextual performance) somewhere in the text or in

the abstract. The following databases were searched, between

2019 and the beginning of 2021: PsychINFO, Web of

Knowledge, ProQuest, Scopus, ScienceDirect.

Additionally, an ancestor search was conducted, to examine

the references of inuential articles on the burnout-job perfor-

mance topic (i.e., Taris, 2006), in search for additional papers to

include in the meta-analysis. Databases were also searched for

unpublished research (i.e., dissertations), in order to minimize

the potential impact of publication bias.

A number of 126 articles were downloaded from the

searched databases, after the online title and abstract screen-

ing process. Twenty-four duplicates were identied and elimi-

nated, and a nal total of 102 studies were retrieved. Twelve

articles were further excluded after an in-depth abstract screen-

ing process. The 90 remaining papers were further analysed

against the set inclusion and exclusion criteria (see below).

Overall, 45 articles were excluded during this step. The 45

remaining papers were included in the nal analysis.

Selection of studies

The main researcher performed the database search, and the

initial screening of titles and abstracts. The selected articles

were individually read by the main researcher and an indepen-

dent rater, against the inclusion criteria, to narrow down eligi-

ble studies. Potential disagreements were openly discussed

between the main researcher and the independent rater, until

consensus was reached, and the argument resolved.

Coding

Coding was done independently by the main researcher and

the fourth author. Data was coded in an excel spreadsheet, and

the information collected was as follows: the main aim of the

study; sample size; sample characteristics (e.g., the profession

of the participants), study design, the burnout measure, the

measure of performance (i.e., objective or subjective perfor-

mance), the type of performance measured (i.e., in-role, extra-

role, or a global score), as well as the correlation coecients

between each burnout dimension and job performance.

Participant occupation was initially grouped and analysed start-

ing with three broad categories, namely customer-facing, non-

customer-facing and mixed roles. Based on the information

reported in the papers, samples were further grouped into

corporate roles, customer facing roles, roles in education,

healthcare, law enforcement, aviation and sales. To a degree,

this was also possible because some studies reported dierent

associations between burnout and job performance, as they

used several dierent samples (e.g., Halbesleben & Bowler,

2007). Potential disagreements were discussed and resolved

by consensus between the two raters. Where additional infor-

mation was required, all eorts were made to nd and include

the missing information. Finally, the overall inter-rater consis-

tency was calculated using the Kappa statistic (Cohen, 1960),

and was Kappa = .77 (p < .000).

Inclusion/Exclusion criteria

The following four criteria were used for study inclusion. Firstly,

the study should have been conducted in an organizational

environment. All studies targeting students have been

excluded, however we did include samples of working stu-

dents, as long as the research was conducted in an organiza-

tional environment. Application of this criterion led to the

exclusion of a number of 2 studies.

Secondly, studies should have reported the level of burnout,

either as a global score, or any of its core facets. Application of

this criterion led to the exclusion of 5 studies.

Thirdly, papers should have included a measure of job

performance, irrespective of an objective or a self-report

measure. As such, a number of 17 studies were excluded

from the analysis. For studies that reported both an objec-

tive and a self-report measure, both were considered in the

analysis. We also included studies targeting either in-role

performance, extra-role performance, or both. The construct

of extra-role performance is, in some cases, interchanged

with OCB, whereas other authors view these as two distinct

constructs (Vigoda-Gadot, 2006). While there is an overlap in

conceptualizations, traditional OCB includes those self-

initiated, authentic, and spontaneous behaviours that arise

from the benevolence of the individual (Organ, 1997), while

extra-role performance more readily refers to informal work

activities, that are outside of one’s actual job description

(Kwantes et al., 2008; Vigoda-Gadot, 2006). In the current

meta-analysis, we only included studies that reported the

relationship between OCB and burnout if it reected the

denition listed in our manuscript. No constraints were

placed on the type of measure used to determine the

6A. CORBEANU ET AL.

level of performance, as we found that the performance

measures were too diverse, and it would have led to

a considerable reduction of the available research pool.

A similar reasoning was applied to justify the decision to

include both studies reporting individual and group mea-

sures in the analysis.

Fourth, the papers should have included information

regarding the strength of the association between burnout

and job performance (even though we included studies that

did not primarily target this relationship), e.g., in the form of

a correlation matrix. Application of this criterion led to the

exclusion of 21 studies.

Considering all the above-mentioned inclusion criteria, this

meta-analysis excluded 45 papers (see Figure 1).

Data analysis

Individual study data was pooled, and eect sizes were

computed for each study, based on the sample and corre-

lation values. The results were converted into Fisher’s Z,

due to the non-normal distribution of Pearson’s r. Multiple

eect sizes for individual studies were accounted for by

using robust variation estimation. The Z’s (in other words,

the standardized eect sizes) were then weighted with the

respective sample size and used to create a weighted

mean Z. We conducted several random-eects meta-

analyses, using the metafor package in R (Viechtbauer,

2010), as well as with the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis

software (version 2.2.047), for each of the three burnout

components and job performance. The random eects

model assumes that data from the included papers

comes from populations with a distinct eect size.

Further, the heterogeneity of the obtained eect sizes

was assessed using a Q-test and I2 values (Borenstein

et al., 2011). The Q-statistic represents the weighted sum

of squared dierences between the observed eect and

the weighted average eect, and points to a true hetero-

geneity in eect studies, beyond random error. I

a measure for the proportion of observed variance, which

reects in real dierences in eect size. Unlike Q, it is not

a measure that is sensitive to the number of studies

included in the analysis (Borenstein et al., 2011). We con-

sidered a signicant Q-test result and an I

value greater or

equal to 75% to be meaningful. For results above this

Records idenﬁed through

database searching

(n = 126)

ScreeningIncluded Eligibility Iden!ﬁca!on

Addional records idenﬁed

through other sources

(n = 0 )

Records a!er duplicates removed

(n = 102)

Records screened

(n = 102)

Records excluded

(n = 12)

Full-text arcles assessed

for eligibility

(n = 90)

Full-text arcles excluded,

with reasons*

(n = 45)

Studies included in

qualitave synthesis

(n =45)

Studies included in

quantave synthesis

(meta-analysis)

(n = 45)

Figure 1. PRISMA ﬂow diagram for the study selection process. Note. * Studies were rejected based on the following criteria: (1) studies had to be set in an

organizational environment, (2) to include a measure of burnout, (3) an objective or subjective measure of performance and (4) to oﬀer information concerning the link

between burnout and job performance, irrespective of whether it was the main aim of the study or not.

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF WORK AND ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY 7

threshold, we examined the dispersion of the true eect

size, as well as its determinants. To this end, we performed

moderator analyses.

We also employed a one-study-removed sensitivity analysis

for detecting any potential outliers, or any study majorly inu-

encing the obtained results. Lastly, we examined funnel plots to

determine the existence of publication bias.

Methodological quality assessment

The quality of the included studies was assessed using the AXIS

tool (Downes et al., 2016). This critical appraisal tool addresses

the quality of cross-sectional studies, and includes reports on

the study quality, as well as the study risk of bias. The ratings

scale consists of 20 items, targeting study quality in objectives,

design, selection process, internal and external validity, con-

founded variables, the reporting of the results and the quality

of the discussion.

Results

Characteristics of the studies

The analysis included 45 studies, with a total of 52 unique

samples provided, the number of participants ranging from

44 to 1145 (with a total N of 12,504 participants). Seven studies

aimed to directly study the link between burnout and job

performance, while each of the studies reported at least an

exhaustion measure of burnout. The majority of the studies (k

= 31studies; 65.95%) employed the Maslach Burnout Inventory

to measure burnout, while Oldenburg Burnout Inventory was

used in 10 papers (21.27%). About 13% of the included papers

used another measure of burnout. The burnout scales had

acceptable reliability in all cases, with most studies reporting

alphas of .80 or higher. In terms of job performance, 2 studies

reported a single, global measure of performance, while the

rest measured in-role and extra-role performance separately.

About 57% of the studies (k = 27) reported a subjective mea-

sure of performance, while 20 studies used an objective

measure.

Methodological quality

The analysis reveals predominantly negative scores for the

items that assess the process of participant selection, as well

as confounded variables and response rates. This does not

aect the statistical results per se, however there is a strong

possibility that all the fundamental errors observed in the

primary studies may be carried forward in the meta-analysis

and pose a threat to the validity of conclusions. In addition, we

mention that all studies included in this analysis were cross-

sectional, which does constrict the possibility to draw strong

causal conclusions from the results. The full results are available

in the online supplementary material.

Overall eect size

The results of the random model analysis on the link between

the exhaustion component of burnout and job performance,

on 41 independent samples, resulted in a signicant negative

relationship (r = −.17; p < .00), with 95% CI ranging from −.17 to

−.24. The Q-statistic of the overall eect was signicant, with

a large amount of heterogeneity (Q (55) = 1095.40, l

= 94.97; p

< .00). The results of the analysis conducted on the relationship

between depersonalization and job performance, on 21 inde-

pendent samples, display a signicant negative association (r =

−.16, p < .00), the 95% CI ranging from −.26 to −.05; Q (27) =

652.00, p < .00, l

= 95.85. Lastly, an analysis performed on 19

independent samples, yielded a negative relationship (r = −.23,

p = .009), between inecacy and job performance, 95% CI =

[−.38; −.06] (Q (26) = 1392.26, p < .00, l

= 90.82). We concluded

that the available data supported H1(a, b, c).

Moderator eects

A high degree of heterogeneity was identied within all burn-

out dimensions, which signals the existence of potential impor-

tant moderators. Consequently, we tested whether the type of

performance measured (i.e., in-role, extra role, global), the type

of performance report (i.e., subjective or objective measures),

burnout measure (i.e., MBI, OLBI or adapted measures), or the

participant occupation (i.e., corporate roles, customer facing

roles, roles in education, healthcare, law enforcement, aviation,

sales) were categorical moderators on the strength of the

relationship between burnout and job performance, using

a mixed-eect model, where the eect sizes are taken as

a random-eects variable. Further, following a qualitative

assessment of the studies across the dierent levels of all 4

moderator variables, we determined that they are relatively

equal across comparison groups. The eects are discussed

below. Detailed information regarding the results of the mod-

erator analysis for each burnout dimension is available in Tables

1, 2 and 3.

Type of performance measured

The type of performance measured did not moderate the

correlation between job performance and either exhaustion

[Q(2) = 1.24, p = .53), depersonalization [Q(2) = 5.37, p = .06], or

inecacy [Q(2) = .29, p = .86].

Type of performance report

The type of performance report did not moderate the relation-

ship between job performance and burnout either, with an

observed Q(1) = 0.24, p = .61 for inecacy, Q(1) = 1.86, p = .17

for depersonalization, and Q(1) = .81, p = .36 for exhaustion.

Burnout measure

The burnout measure seemed to be a moderator in the case of

exhaustion [Q(3) = 15.87, p = .001], with stronger associations

for the MBI, which does not support our initial hypothesis (i.e.,

H4). The burnout measure was not a signicant moderator for

depersonalization [Q(2) = .33, p = .84].

8A. CORBEANU ET AL.

Participant occupation

Finally, data suggests that participant occupation is

a signicant moderator for all burnout dimensions [Q(10) =

35.87, p = .00 for exhaustion, Q(2) = 19.73, p = .003 for ine-

cacy]. For the inecacy dimension of burnout, the stronger

negative relationship seems to be for corporate roles.

Participant occupation was also a signicant moderator deper-

sonalization [Q(4) = 5.02, p = .028]. The results partially sup-

ported our hypothesis (i.e., H5).

Publication bias

In order to investigate whether publication bias was present,

we generated and examined funnel plots, as well as computed

the trim-and-ll procedure (Duval & Tweedie, 2000), with

a random eects model. Publication bias analyses were per-

formed for all three burnout dimensions.

For exhaustion, the trim-and-ll procedure estimated 12 stu-

dies, with eect sizes lower than the mean, which did not sig-

nicantly inuence the mean, r = −.07, 95% CI = [−.15; .00], Q =

1853.27. This is consistent with the funnel plot, which displayed

asymmetry, suggesting missing studies, with eect sizes over the

mean, and the possibility of obtaining under-inated estimates

regarding the true dierences (see Figure 2).

For depersonalization, the trim-and-ll estimated 2 studies,

with an eect size below the mean, which did not signicantly

inuence the mean, r = −.268, 95% CI = [−.35; −.17], Q = 186.87.

This is in accordance with the funnel plot, which displayed

asymmetry, suggesting missing studies with eect sizes

above or below the mean, and the possibility of obtaining

slightly inated estimates in regard to the true dierences

(see Figure 3).

In regard to inecacy, the trim-and-ll procedure estimated

no study with eects above or below the mean, which could

modify the estimate of the true dierences (see Figure 4).

Table 1. Moderation analysis with categorical variables for exhaustion and job performance.

Moderator Moderator Level N r CI p Q p

Type of performance extra-role 15 −.21 [−.36; −.05] .009 1.24 .538

global 5 −.08 [−.25; .10] .382

in-role 36 −.16 [−.24; −.07] .000

Type of performance report objective 26 −.20 [−.32; −.08] .001 0.81 .368

subjective 30 −.14 [−.22; −.05] .002

Type of burnout report MBI/ 44 −.19 [−.27; −.10] .000 15.87 .001

OLBI 11 −.10 [−.24; .05] .187

Participant occupation corporate roles 22 −.21 [−.33; −.09] .000 35.87 .000

customer facing roles 14 −.22 [−.32; −.11] .000

roles in education 5 .06 [−.43; .53] .801

roles in healthcare 6 −.26 [−.42; −.07] .006

roles in law enforcement 4 −.25 [−.62; .21] .290

roles aviation 1 .40 [−.01; .09] .176

roles in sales 3 −.13 [−.28; .03] .117

Table 2. Moderation analysis with categorical variables for depersonalization and job performance.

Moderator Moderator Level N r CI p Q p

Type of performance extra-role 3 −.35 [−.51; −.18] .000 5.37 .068

global 3 .01 [.24; .27] .916

in-role 10 −.25 [−.36; -,13] .000

Type of performance report objective 12 −.80 [−.27; .12] .434 1.86 .174

subjective 16 −.23 [−.32; −.13] .000

Type of burnout report MBI 22 −.12 [−.29; −.03] .015 0.33 .848

OLBI 5 −.13 [−.25; −.00] .036

Participant occupation corporate roles 5 −.28 [−.39; −.16] .000 5.02 .028

customer facing roles 5 −.31 [−.50; −.10] .003

roles in education 1 −.17 [−.30; −.03] .016

roles in healthcare 3 −.01 [−.27; .25] .920

roles in sales 2 −.20 [−.29; −.10] .000

Table 3. Moderation analysis with categorical variables for ineﬃcacy and job performance.

Moderator Moderator Level N r CI p Q p

Type of performance extra-role 8 −.28 [−.56; .04] .089 0.29 .862

global 5 −.27 [−.42; .11] .239

in-role 14 −.22 [−.44; .03] .084

Type of performance report objective 12 −.18 [−.44; .10] .016 0.24 .619

subjective 15 −.27 [−.46; −.05] .008

Participant occupation corporate roles 10 −.41 [−.55; −.26] .000 19.73 .003

customer facing roles 6 −.23 [−.59; .21] .303

roles in education 5 −.13 [−.21; .46] .448

roles in healthcare 1 −.12 [−.10; .33] .287

roles in law enforcement 1 −.27 [−.44; −.07] .006

roles in sales 3 −.28 [−.05; −.07] .120

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF WORK AND ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY 9

Overall, the obtained results point towards no or very little

evidence of publication bias in the included sample, in either of

the three burnout dimensions examined.

Discussion

The overarching objective of our investigation was to shed

light onto the burnout-job performance relationship. We

expanded the current scientic understanding in this

domain in several ways: (1) we drew from larger datasets,

increasing the generalizability of our ndings; (2) we illu-

strated how burnout might impact dierent aspects of job

performance, such as in-role or extra-role performance,

which that were not previously investigated; (3) we

explored whether various moderators could signicantly

alter the relationship between burnout and job perfor-

mance, while (4) considering dierent measures for burn-

out. The current meta-analysis revealed that there is

a negative, small to medium association between all

three dimensions of burnout (namely exhaustion, deperso-

nalization, and inecacy) and job performance. This rela-

tionship is moderated (i.e., strengthened) by the type of

burnout measure and by the participant occupation.

Further analyses revealed that neither the type of perfor-

mance measured (i.e., in-role vs. extra-role), nor the type of

performance report (i.e., self- vs. other-report) were asso-

ciated with the eects of burnout on job performance.

These ndings expand the previous conclusions (Taris,

2006), as we obtained signicant, albeit small-medium

associations between job performance and the

Figure 2. Funnel plot for publication bias for the exhaustion dimension of burnout and job performance, on 41 independent samples.

Figure 3. Funnel plot for publication bias for the depersonalization dimension of burnout and job performance, on 21 independent samples.

10 A. CORBEANU ET AL.

depersonalization and inecacy dimensions of burnout,

whereas the results of Taris (2006) were inconclusive.

Theoretical contribution

Our analyses describe negative and signicant, albeit small,

associations between all three dimensions of burnout and job

performance. Exhaustion represents the core dimension of

burnout, and the fact that at high levels it is associated with

impaired performance is consistent with the scientic literature

on the topic (Aboagye et al., 2019; Maslach et al., 2001).

Contrary to previous, more ambiguous, conclusions (Taris,

2006), our data suggests that both depersonalization and inef-

cacy have a clear, negative relationship with job performance.

From an empirical standpoint, our ndings consolidate the

previously established strong link between exhaustion and job

performance (Taris, 2006), and support the importance of the

other two components of burnout namely inecacy and

depersonalization, whereas previous literature on the topic

reported mixed, inconsistent results (Taris, 2006). One of the

main ndings of this paper, which was consistent across per-

formance criteria and burnout reports, suggests that deperso-

nalization is a central component of burnout, its role more

important than previously believed. As an “emotional buer”

(Maslach et al., 2001), depersonalization can be a last resort for

employees, in protecting themselves from the demands of their

job. Based on the JD-R framework (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007),

burnout is the product of increased job demands, without the

necessary resources to mitigate them. Furthermore, the litera-

ture suggests that depersonalization includes a pervasive lack

of motivation, while exhaustion points towards a lack of energy

to approach or full one’s work tasks. In this context, our

ndings further consolidate the idea that both lack of energy

and lack of motivation play a critical role in decreasing job

performance, as they are both associated with not performing

one’s work duties.

Focusing on all three burnout dimensions may add to the

completeness of the scientic literature. It has been noted that

there are signicantly more studies examining exhaustion and

work exposure factors, compared to papers concerning deper-

sonalization and inecacy (Aronsson et al., 2017). Our inclusion

of all three dimensions of burnout – and the relationships

revealed for all three – may be relevant in the discussion

around the propensity to reduce burnout to merely its exhaus-

tion component in clinical diagnosis (Aronsson et al., 2017).

Moderators of the burnout-job performance eects. Two

interesting moderator eects were detected by our analysis:

participant occupation and the measure of burnout used. The

other moderators that were tested yielded negative eects:

contrary to our expectations, neither the type of performance

report (i.e., self- vs. other-report), nor the type of performance

measured (i.e., in- vs. extra-role) produced any signicant mod-

erating eects. The former is somewhat inconsistent with the

scientic literature, where the consensus was that subjective

measures of job performance provide ample opportunity for

bias (Taris, 2006).

First, the results of the moderation analyses suggested that

participant occupation was a signicant moderator in all three

burnout dimensions. For the inecacy dimension of burnout,

the negative association was stronger for corporate roles, com-

pared to customer facing roles. This implies that, in the case of

individuals working in corporate roles, employees suering

from inecacy are more likely to reach a decline in their levels

of performance, compared to those in customer facing roles. As

inecacy refers to one’s feelings of decreased personal accom-

plishment, the nding suggests that this feeling is more

strongly correlated with one’s corporate role. For the other

two burnout dimensions (exhaustion and depersonalization),

the dierences in strength of association with performance

between customer-facing roles and corporate roles is very

small. This nding is consistent with most of the scientic

literature (e.g., Cordes & Dougherty, 1993; W. B. Schaufeli &

Buunk, 2004), where it is believed that employees who are

forced to juggle the opposing expectations of their roles and

of their customers’ will experience strain, and ultimately, burn-

out (Mulki et al., 2008). In contrast, those employees who are

Figure 4. Funnel plot for publication bias for the ineﬃcacy dimension of burnout and job performance, on 19 independent samples.

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF WORK AND ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY 11

not exposed to customer demands as often may have more

opportunities to gain resources and escape this negative spiral,

and thus still keep their levels of performance up. Our ndings

add to the literature by establishing stronger associations

between occupation, burnout, and job performance, where

previous evidence was mixed (e.g., Brown, 2012; Lee et al.,

2013).

Second, the measure of burnout (i.e., MBI vs. OLBI) signi-

cantly moderated the relationship for exhaustion, but not for

depersonalization (the inecacy component is not measured

by both these measures, so it was excluded from this compar-

ison). These ndings can be viewed through the dierent con-

ceptualizations of the exhaustion component of burnout in the

two measures. Though built on two similar conceptual models,

all three MBI (Maslach & Jackson, 1981) subscales are worded in

the same direction (the items in the personal accomplishment

scale are exclusively worded positively, while those in the

exhaustion and depersonalization scales, negatively), and

solely focus on the aective components of exhaustion. In

contrast, the OLBI (Halbesleben & Demerouti, 2005) includes

a balance of positively and negatively worded questions, as

well as items for the cognitive and physical components of

exhaustion. Several explanations could account for this signi-

cant moderating eect. First, the two instruments measure

exhaustion dierently: the OLBI items tap into three facets of

exhaustion (physical, mental, and emotional), while the MBI

items capture only the aective elements of burnout. This

becomes particularly relevant for explaining dierences in job

performance for those occupations or roles where actually

performing physical tasks is not a core component of perfor-

mance, such as the jobs included in our review. Second, the fact

that a higher association was observed for the MBI suggests

that the aective component of exhaustion might be more

relevant in accounting for between-individual dierences in

job performance. This nding signies that the emotional

aspect of exhaustion may be more relevant for one’s perfor-

mance. In other words, an employee’s perceived level of emo-

tional exhaustion, rather than the perception of physical

exhaustion might have higher importance in explaining dier-

ences in job performance. Third, the actual number of studies

and the dierences in sample sizes might be an alternative

explanation for this eect, the MBI measure being employed

in 22 dierent studies, while the OLBI in only ve empirical

investigations. If replicated, this nding can lead to a shift in

how researchers and practitioners approach burnout, by recog-

nizing the paramount importance of an employee’s emotions

on job performance. One caveat we feel compelled to reveal in

this instance is that, due to the occupational composition of the

current sample, a possibility is that this nding may only be

applicable to emotionally draining roles and thus may not be as

generalizable as initially presumed. In the case of depersonali-

zation, the measure was not a signicant moderator, as the MBI

and OLBI are highly similar in their conceptualization of this

component of burnout.

We additionally feel the need to somewhat qualify one of

our conclusions: one potential explanation for the rejection of

Hypothesis 4 may relate to the consistency of the sample in

terms of occupations. The current meta-analysis included

mostly employees who are exposed to high levels of emotional

demands. As such, it can be stated that for them, exhaustion is

particularly relevant. In this case, our conclusion that the nd-

ings give more weight to the denition of burnout proposed by

the MBI over that proposed by the OLBI should be viewed with

caution.

Finally, as mentioned above, neither the type of perfor-

mance report (i.e., self- vs. other-report), nor the type of perfor-

mance measured (i.e., in- vs. extra-role) were signicant

moderators of the burnout-job performance relationship.

Similar results were reported in the meta-analysis conducted

by Taris (2006). Moreover, this nding is in line with previous

research showing that employees experiencing disengage-

ment and exhaustion (essential components of burnout) are

less likely to achieve their formal work/role requirements (in-

role performance) while also being less likely to engage in

behaviours typically associated with extra-role performance

(e.g., Demerouti et al., 2014; Palenzuela et al., 2019). Recent

investigations suggest that burnout-related lower cognitive

functioning mediated the burnout-job performance relation-

ship (Lemonaki et al., 2021). Moreover, cognitive failures aect-

ing task performance were signicantly associated with peer-

rated contextual performance (Lemonaki et al., 2021), unveiling

one of the possible explanations for this negative association.

We interpret these ndings through the explanatory lenses of

the JD-R framework (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007). JD-R describes

two basic psychological processes: (1) a stress process, where

a high level of job demands lead to negative individual (e.g.,

poor health) or organizational outcomes (e.g., poor perfor-

mance or absenteeism) via exhaustion, and (2) a motivational

process where depersonalization mediates the relationship

between lack of resources and individual and organizational

outcomes (Demerouti et al., 2001). Consequently, our ndings

are not surprising if interpreted through the lens of the JD-R

framework (Demerouti et al., 2001), more specically, both

exhaustion and depersonalization are expected to have

a detrimental eect over in-role and extra-role performance,

but via the two pathways outlined above.

Practical contributions

Our ndings also suggest valuable practical recommendations.

Consistent with the common ndings reported in the burnout

literature, our study conrmed that client facing professions,

such as frontline ocers or call centre employees are more

impacted by burnout, although the syndrome is omnipresent

in all occupations–- from telecom employees in Pakistan

(Shaukat et al., 2017) to human resource workers in Germany

(Baier et al., 2018) and managers all around (Lundqvist et al.,

2013). Given the importance of the aective component burn-

out has over job performance, especially in the current context

of the ever-increasing prevalence of this phenomenon

(Shanafelt et al., 2015), we highlight an imperative need to re-

assess all the individual and organizational factors that lead

employees to become emotionally exhausted. Among risk fac-

tors, scientic literature includes high job demands, low con-

trol, no supportive relations and an imbalance between one’s

invested eort and the quality of the reaped rewards

(Oosterholt et al., 2015).

12 A. CORBEANU ET AL.

The perceived and emotional aspect of burnout seems to

weigh stronger in employees’ level of performance, as is sug-

gested by the fact that, when measured with the MBI, burnout

is more strongly associated with job performance, especially

when it comes to exhaustion. One important practical implica-

tion for this lies in the choice of measures used to assess

burnout. Our ndings bring clarity into the nuances of both

MBI and OLBI, and in which cases the selection of one versus

the other is preferable, both in academic and organizational

settings. As explained in the moderators’ section, the MBI bet-

ter captures the aective aspect of burnout, with its items

worded to reect respondent’s intensity of emotions and per-

spectives towards themselves and that which inuences them

directly, whereas OLBI views burnout as a product of assiduous

physical, aective, and cognitive exertion.

The fact that, in our paper, inecacy seemed to yield the

strongest association with job performance, implies that any

organizational interventions designed to reduce burnout (and

subsequently increase job performance) should primarily

address inecacy, as a key aspect of this construct. However,

one of the reasons inecacy is more strongly related to perfor-

mance could be because for many theorists it is considered an

outcome, or a performance indicator (e.g., Lepold et al., 2018),

as opposed to a core dimension of burnout, in which case it

may play a lesser role than initially stated. Furthermore, it’s

possible that organizations may start to view inecacy as the

potential source of certain attitudes and behaviours, such as

a lack of belief in one’s abilities, and to point their employees

towards an intervention tailored to alleviate it. In other words,

rather than dismissing aloof or demotivated employees or

attributing their conduct to counterproductive work beha-

viours and sanctioning them, burnout can be recognized as

an important factor at play, and behavioural symptoms may be

approached in this context.

General limitations and guidelines for future research

As with any systematic review and meta-analysis, this paper has

also carried over some limitations from the primary studies that

were included. Firstly, the primary studies used in our analysis

employed cross-sectional designs; causal inferences cannot

therefore be drawn from these ndings. As noted, our study

conceptually explores a unidirectional eect, from burnout to

performance, although the reverse could also be applicable. It

is plausible, for instance, that poor performance might contri-

bute to increased feelings of lack of personal accomplishment,

or more pronounced behaviours in the spectrum of cynicism

(Kim et al., 2017). In a related manner, another limitation of the

cross-sectional studies included lies in their inability to detect

delayed consequences of burnout, such as the subtle, gradual

erosion of job performance over time, rather than at any given

moment. It seems, based on the currently available literature on

the topic of burnout and job performance, that research in this

area is still relatively weak. Additionally, the quality of the

research designs could be improved, for example by including

higher numbers of participants and prioritizing more powerful

research designs. As a conclusion, we strongly call for more

experimental and longitudinal studies, which are needed in

order to gain a deeper insight into the signicance and

strength of the eects of burnout and job performance.

Another important research tangent here could be focused

on identifying specic burnout thresholds, beyond which per-

formance is seriously impaired.

A second limitation of the current analysis is the fact that we

did not correct for reliability in either the burnout variables, or

in job performance. This may produce a downward bias in the

observed eect sizes, compared to their population counter-

parts (Raju & Brand, 2003; Wiernik & Dahlke, 2020). Finally,

separately coding the relationships among the dierent burn-

out components and job performance criteria would widen our

understanding of the burnout-job performance relationship,

potentially having important practical and theoretical implica-

tions. Consequently, future investigations should estimate the

unique eects of each burnout dimension on various job per-

formance criteria, establishing whether professional inecacy

truly is a core component of burnout. Future meta-analyses

could focus on this aspect as well.

To conclude, the current paper reviews and presents an

updated overview of the available literature on burnout and

job performance. Despite its methodological limitations, its

clear strengths lie in systematically analysing a large number of

independent samples and drawing clear conclusions on the

topic. The two main theoretical ndings we highlighted are the

centrality of the aective component of burnout, and the impor-

tance of depersonalization, in relation to job performance.

Overall, our ndings suggest that the link between burnout

and performance is a solid topic for future research and

a target for intervention which could have benets for increasing

well-being and productivity among workers.

Disclosure statement

No potential conict of interest was reported by the authors.

ORCID

Dragoș Iliescu http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5958-3920

References

Abd Razak, A. Z. A., Yeop Yunus, N. K. Y. Y., Samsudin, N., Ab Wahid, H., &

Wahid, Z. W. (2019). Social support moderating eect between

work-family conict and health and stress of working students in UPSI.

International Business Education Journal, 12, 25–38. https://doi.org/10.

37134/ibej.vol12.3.2019

Aboagye, E., Björklund, C., Gustafsson, K., Hagberg, J., Aronsson, G.,

Marklund, S., Leineweber, C., & Bergström, G. (2019). Exhaustion and

impaired work performance in the workplace: Associations with presen-

teeism and absenteeism. Journal of Occupational and Environmental

Medicine, 61(11), 438–444. https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.

0000000000001701

Alarcon, G., Eschleman, K. J., & Bowling, N. A. (2009). Relationships between

personality variables and burnout: A meta-analysis. Work & Stress, 23(3),

244–263. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370903282600

Andrews, R., Boyne, G. A., & Walker, R. M. (2006). Subjective and objective

measures of organizational performance: An empirical exploration.

Public Service Performance: Perspectives on Measurement and

Management, 14–34. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511488511.002

Arnsten, A. F. (2009). Stress signalling pathways that impair prefrontal

cortex structure and function. Nature reviews. Neuroscience, 10(6), 410–

422. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2648

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF WORK AND ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY 13

Aronsson, G., Theorell, T., Grape, T., Hammarström, A., Hogstedt, C.,

Marteinsdottir, I., & Hall, C. (2017). A systematic review including meta-

analysis of work environment and burnout symptoms. BMC Public

Health, 17, 1–13.

*Ashill, N. J., Rod, M., & Gibbs, T. (2015). Coping with stress: A study of retail

banking service workers in Russia. Journal of Retailing and Consumer

Services, 23, 58–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2014.12.006

*Ashill, N. J., Rod, M., Thirkell, P., Carruthers, J., & Mukherjee, A. (2009). Job

resourcefulness, symptoms of burnout and service recovery perfor-

mance: An examination of call centre frontline employees. The Journal

of Services Marketing, 23(5), 338–350. https://doi.org/10.1108/

08876040910973440

*Babakus, E., Yavas, U., & Ashill, N. J. (2009). The role of customer orientation

as a moderator of the job demand–burnout–performance relationship:

A surface-level trait perspective. Journal of Retailing, 85(4), 480–492.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2009.07.001

*Baier, N., Roth, K., Felgner, S., & Henschke, C. (2018, August 20). Burnout

and safety outcomes - a cross-sectional nationwide survey of

EMS-workers in Germany. BMC Emergency Medicine, 18(1). https://doi.

org/10.1186/s12873-018-0177-2 .

Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The job demands‐resources model:

State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(3), 309–328. https://

doi.org/10.1108/02683940710733115

Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2017). Job demands–resources theory: Taking

stock and looking forward. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 22

(3), 273–285. https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000056

Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., de Boer, E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2003). Job

demands and job resources as predictors of absence duration and

frequency. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 62(2), 341–356. https://doi.

org/10.1016/S0001-8791(02)00030-1

*Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Sanz-Vergel, A. I. (2014). Burnout and work

engagement: The JD–R approach. Annual Review of Organizational

Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1), 389–411. https://doi.org/

10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091235

Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Verbeke, W. (2004). Using the job

demands-resources model to predict burnout and performance.

Human Resource Management, 43(1), 83–104. https://doi.org/10.1002/

hrm.20004

*Bakker, A. B., & Heuven, E. (2006). Emotional dissonance, burnout, and

in-role performance among nurses and police ocers. International

Journal of Stress Management, 13(4), 423–440. https://doi.org/10.1037/

1072-5245.13.4.423

*Bakker, A. B., Van Emmerik, H., & Van Riet, P. (2008). How job demands,

resources, and burnout predict objective performance: A constructive

replication. Anxiety, Stress & Coping, 21(3), 309–324. https://doi.org/10.

1080/10615800801958637

*Baltes, P. B. (1997). On the incomplete architecture of human ontogeny:

Selection, optimization, and compensation as foundations of develop-

mental psychology. The American Psychologist, 52(4), 366–380. https://

doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.52.4.366

*Bang, H., & Reio Jr, T. G. (2017). Examining the role of cynicism in the

relationships between burnout and employee behavior. Revista de

Psicología del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones, 33(3), 217–227. https://

doi.org/10.1016/j.rpto.2017.07.002

*Behrman, D. N., & Perreault, W. D. (1984). A role stress model of the

performance and satisfaction of industrial salespersons. Journal of

Marketing, 48(4), 9–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224298404800402

Bhave, D. P., & Glomb, T. M. (2016). The role of occupational emotional labor

requirements on the surface acting–job satisfaction relationship. Journal

of Management, 42(3), 722–741. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2778583

Boekhorst, J. A., Singh, P., & Burke, R. (2017, August). Work intensity, emo-

tional exhaustion and life satisfaction. Personnel Review, 46(5), 891–907.

https://doi.org/10.1108/pr-05-2015-0130

Bol, J. C., & Smith, S. D. (2011). Spillover eects in subjective performance

evaluation: Bias and the asymmetric inuence of controllability. The

Accounting Review, 86(4), 1213–1230. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr-

10038

Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P., & Rothstein, H. R. (2011).

Introduction to meta-analysis. John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.

1002/9780470743386

Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1997). Task performance and contextual

performance: The meaning for personnel selection research. Human

Performance, 10(2), 99–109. https://doi.org/10.1207/

s15327043hup1002_3

Brandes, P., Castro, S. L., James, M. S. L., Martinez, A. D., Matherly, T. A.,

Ferris, G. R., & Hochwarter, W. A. (2008). The interactive eects of job

insecurity and organizational cynicism on work eort following a layo.

Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 14(3), 233–247. https://

doi.org/10.1177/1071791907311967

Braver, T. S., & Barch, D. M. (2002). A theory of cognitive control, aging

cognition, and neuromodulation. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews,

26(7), 809–817.

Brown, C. G. (2012). A systematic review of the relationship between

self-ecacy and burnout in teachers. Educational and Child Psychology,

29(4), 47. https://doi.org/10.53841/bpsecp.2012.29.4.47

Buckley, M. R., Halbesleben, J. R. B., & Wheeler, A. R.Eds. 2014. About the

authors. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management. Vol.

32. pp.305–310. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.

1108/S0742-730120140000032012

*Castanheira, F., & Chambel, M. J. (2010). Reducing burnout in call centers

through HR practices. Human Resource Management, 49(6), 1047–1065.

https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20393

*Celik, K. (2013). The eect of role ambiguity and role conict on perfor-

mance of vice principals: The mediating role of burnout. Eurasian Journal

of Educational Research, 51, 195–213. https://doi.org/10.1080/EJ1059818

*Ceschi, A., Demerouti, E., Sartori, R., & Weller, J. (2017). Decision-making

processes in the workplace: How exhaustion, lack of resources and job

demands impair them and aect performance. Frontiers in Psychology, 8,

313. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00313

*Chen, C. -F., & Kao, Y. L. (2012). Investigating the antecedents and con-

sequences of burnout and isolation among ight attendants. Tourism

Management, 33(4), 868–874. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2011.

09.008

*Cho, M., Bonn, M. A., Han, S. J., & Lee, K. H. (2016). Workplace incivility and

its eect upon restaurant frontline service employee emotions and

service performance. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality

Management, 28(12), 2888–2912. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijchm-04-

2015-0205

Cieslak, R., Shoji, K., Douglas, A., Melville, E., Luszczynska, A., & Benight, C. C.

(2014). A meta-analysis of the relationship between job burnout and

secondary traumatic stress among workers with indirect exposure to

trauma. Psychological Services, 11(1), 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1037/

a0033798

*Cohen, A., & Abedallah, M. (2015). The mediating role of burnout on the

relationship of emotional intelligence and self-ecacy with OCB and

performance. Management Research Review, 38(1), 2–28. https://doi.org/

10.1108/MRR-10-2013-0238

*Cordes, C. L., & Dougherty, T. W. (1993). A review and an integration of

research on job burnout. Academy of Management Review, 18(4),

621–656. https://doi.org/10.2307/258593

*Cropanzano, R., Rupp, D. E., & Byrne, Z. S. (2003). The relationship of

emotional exhaustion to work attitudes, job performance, and organiza-

tional citizenship behaviors. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(1),

160–169. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.1.160

*Dai, N. T., Kuang, X., & Tang, G. (2018). Dierential Weighting of Objective

versus Subjective Measures in Performance Evaluation: Experimental

Evidence. European Accounting Review, 27(1), 129–148. https://doi.org/

10.1080/09638180.2016.1234402

Day, A., Crown, S. N., & Ivany, M. (2017, December). Organisational change

and employee burnout: The moderating eects of support and job

control. Safety Science, 100, 4–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.03.004

Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., & Leiter, M. (2014). Turnout and job perfor-

mance: The moderating role of selection, optimization, and compensa-

tion strategies. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 19(1), 96–107.

https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035062

*Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., Nachreiner, F., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2001). The job

demands-resources model of burnout. The Journal of Applied Psychology,

86(3), 499–512. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.499

Demerouti, E., Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., Vardakou, I., & Kantas, A. (2003).

The convergent validity of two burnout instruments. European Journal of

14 A. CORBEANU ET AL.

Psychological Assessment, 19(1), 12–23. https://doi.org/10.1027//1015-

5759.19.1.12

*Demerouti, E., Veldhuis, W., Coombes, C., & Hunter, R. (2019). Burnout

among pilots: Psychosocial factors related to happiness and perfor-

mance at simulator training. Ergonomics, 62(2), 233–245. https://doi.

org/10.1080/00140139.2018.1464667

*Demerouti, E., Verbeke, W. J. M. I., & Bakker, A. B. (2005). Exploring the

relationship between a multidimensional and multifaceted burnout

concept and self-rated performance. Journal of Management, 31(2),

186–209. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206304271602

Dodson, K. M., Appelbaum, N. P., Lee, N., Amendola, M., & Kaplan, B. (2019).

Otolaryngology Resident Well-Being and Perceptions of the Clinical

Learning Environment. Ear, Nose & Throat Journal, 98(7), 409–415.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0145561319840125

Downes, M. J., Brennan, M. L., Williams, H. C., & Dean, R. S. Development of

a critical appraisal tool to assess the quality of cross-sectional studies

(AXIS). BMJ Open, 6(12), e011458. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-

2016-011458.x

Firth, H., & Britton, P. (1989). ‘Burnout’, absence and turnover amongst

British nursing sta. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 62(1), 55–59.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.1989.tb00477.x

Freudenberger, H. J. (1974). Sta Burn-Out. The Journal of Social Issues, 30

(1), 159–165. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1974.tb00706.x

*Fritz, C., & Sonnentag, S. (2005). Recovery, health, and job performance:

Eects of weekend experiences. Journal of Occupational Health

Psychology, 10(3), 187–199. . https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.10.3.187

Goldberg, L. S., & Grandey, A. A. (2007). Display rules versus display auton-

omy: Emotion regulation, emotional exhaustion, and task performance

in a call center simulation. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 12

(3), 301.

*Goodwin, R. E., Groth, M., & Frenkel, S. J. (2011). Relationships between

emotional labor, job performance, and turnover. Journal of Vocational

Behavior, 79(2), 538–548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2011.03.001

Guthier, C., Dormann, C., & Voelkle, M. C. (2020). Reciprocal eects between

job stressors and burnout: A continuous time meta-analysis of long-

itudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 146(12), 1146–1173. https://doi.

org/10.1037/bul0000304

*Hadzibajramovic, E., Schaufeli, W., & De Witte, H. (2020). A Rasch analysis of

the Burnout Assessment Tool (BAT). PloS One, 15(11). https://doi.org/10.

1371/journal.pone.0242241

*Hakanen, J. J., Bakker, A. B., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2006). Burnout and work

engagement among teachers. Journal of School Psychology, 43(6),

495–513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2005.11.001

Hakanen, J. J., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2012). Do burnout and work engagement

predict depressive symptoms and life satisfaction? A three-wave

seven-year prospective study. Journal of Aective Disorders, 141(2–3),

415–424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2012.02.043

Halbesleben, J. R. B., & Bowler, W. M. (2007). Emotional exhaustion and job

performance: The mediating role of motivation. The Journal of Applied

Psychology, 92(1), 93–106. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.1.93

*Halbesleben, J. R. B., & Buckley, M. R. (2004). Burnout in organizational life.

Journal of Management, 30(6), 859–879. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jm.

2004.06.004

Halbesleben, J. R. B., & Demerouti, E. (2005). The construct validity of an

alternative measure of burnout: Investigating the English translation of

the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory. Work & Stress, 19(3), 208–220. https://

doi.org/10.1080/02678370500340728

Harris, K. J., Harvey, P., & Kacmar, K. M. (2009). Do social stressors impact

everyone equally? An examination of the moderating impact of core

self-evaluations. Journal of Business and Psychology, 24(2), 153–164.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-009-9096-2

Harris, M. M., & Schaubroeck, J. (1988). A meta‐analysis of self‐supervisor,

self‐peer, and peer‐supervisor ratings. Personnel Psychology, 41(1), 43–

62.

*Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources a new attempt at concep-

tualizing stress. The American Psychologist, 44(3), 513–524. https://psy

cnet.apa.org/10.1037/0003-066X.44.3.513

Hobfoll, S. E. (2001). The inuence of culture, community, and the nested‐

self in the stress process: Advancing conservation of resources theory.

The Journal of Applied Psychology, 50(3), 337–421. https://doi.org/10.

1111/1464-0597.00062

Hobfoll, S. E., & Shirom, A. (2000). Conservation of resources theory:

Applications to stress and managemnent in the workplace, In

R. T. Golembiewski (Eds.), Handbook of organizational berhavior. (2 nd

ed, pp. 57–80). https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0003-066X.44.3.513

Hochschild, A. R. (1979). Emotion Work, Feeling Rules, and Social Structure.

The American Journal of Sociology, 85(3), 551–575. https://doi.org/10.

1086/227049

Hogan, J., & Holland, B. (2003). Using theory to evaluate personality and

job-performance relations: A socioanalytic perspective. The Journal of

Applied Psychology, 88(1), 100–112. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.

88.1.100

*Janssen, O., Lam, C. K., & Huang, X. (2009). Emotional exhaustion and job

performance: The moderating roles of distributive justice and positive

aect. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(6), 787–809. https://doi.org/

10.1002/job.614

Karatepe, O. M. (2011). Core self-evaluations, exhaustion, and job outcomes:

A study of frontline hotel employees in Iran. Tourism and Hospitality

Research, 11(4), 248–257. https://doi.org/10.1177/1467358411418898

*Karatepe, O. M. (2013). The eects of work overload and work‐family

conict on job embeddedness and job performance: The mediation of

emotional exhaustion. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality

Management, 25(4), 614–634. https://doi.org/10.1108/

09596111311322952

*Karatepe, O. M., & Anumbose Nkendong, R. (2014). The relationship

between customer-related social stressors and job outcomes: The med-

iating role of emotional exhaustion. Economic Research-Ekonomska

Istraživanja, 27(1), 414–426. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2014.

967533

*Karatepe, O. M., & Tekinkus, M. (2006). The eects of work‐family conict,

emotional exhaustion, and intrinsic motivation on job outcomes of

front‐line employees. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 24(3),

173–193. https://doi.org/10.1108/02652320610659021

*Karatepe, O. M., & Uludag, O. (2008). Role stress, burnout and their eects

on frontline hotel employees’ job performance: Evidence from Northern

Cyprus. International Journal of Tourism Research, 10(2), 111–126. https://

doi.org/10.1002/jtr.645

*Kattenbach, R., Demerouti, E., & Nachreiner, F. (2010). Flexible working

times: Eects on employees’ exhaustion, work‐nonwork conict and job

performance. Career Development International, 15(3), 279–295. https://

doi.org/10.1108/13620431011053749

*Keijsers, G. J., Schaufeli, W. B., Le Blanc, P. M., Zwerts, C., & Miranda, D. R.

(1995). Performance and burnout in intensive care units. Work & Stress, 9

(4), 513–527. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678379508256897

*Kim, W. H., Ra, Y. -A., Park, J. G., & Kwon, B. (2017). Role of burnout on job

level, job satisfaction, and task performance. Leadership & Organization

Development Journal, 38(5), 630–645. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-11-

2015-0249

*Klein, D. J., & Verbeke, W. (1999). Autonomic Feedback in Stressful

Environments: How Do Individual Dierences in Autonomic Feedback

Relate to Burnout, Job Performance, and Job Attitudes in Salespeople?

The Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(6), 911–924. https://doi.org/10.

1037/0021-9010.84.6.911

Kompier, M. (2005). Assessing the psychosocial work environment - “sub-

jective” versus “objective” measurement. Scandinavian Journal of Work,

Environment & Health, 31(6), 405–408. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.946

Kuncel, N. R., & Tellegen, A. (2009). A conceptual and empirical reexamina-

tion of the measurement of the social desirability of items: Implications

for detecting desirable response style and scale development. Personnel

Psychology, 62(2), 201–228. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2009.

01136.x

Kwantes, C. T., Karam, C. M., Kuo, B. C., & Towson, S. (2008). Culture’s

inuence on the perception of OCB as in-role or extra-role.

International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 32(3), 229–243. https://

doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2008.01.007

Lee, R. T., Seo, B., Hladkyj, S., Lovell, B. L., & Schwartzmann, L. (2013).

Correlates of physician burnout across regions and specialties: A

meta-analysis. Human Resources for Health, 11(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/

10.1186/1478-4491-11-48

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF WORK AND ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY 15

Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C. (2016). Latent burnout proles: A new approach

to understanding the burnout experience. Burnout Research, 3(4),

89–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.burn.2016.09.001

Lemonaki, R., Xanthopoulou, D., Bardos, A. N., Karademas, E. C., & Simos, P.

G. (2021). Burnout and job performance: A two-wave study on the

mediating role of employee cognitive functioning. European Journal of

Work & Organizational Psychology, 30(5), 692–704.

Lepold, A., Tanzer, N., & Jiménez, P. (2018). Expectations of Bank Employees

on the Inuence of Key Performance Indicators and the Relationship

with Job Satisfaction and Work Engagement. Social Sciences, 7(6), 99.

https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci7060099

Linden, D. V. D., Keijsers, G. P., Eling, P., & Schaijk, R. V. (2005). Work stress

and attentional diculties: An initial study on burnout and cognitive

failures. Work & Stress, 19(1), 23–36.

Lundqvist, D., Reineholm, C., Gustavsson, M., & Ekberg, K. (2013, October).

Investigating Work Conditions and Burnout at Three Hierarchical Levels.

Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine, 55(10), 1157–1163.

https://doi.org/10.1097/jom.0b013e31829b27df

Lyddy, C. J., Good, D. J., Bolino, M. C., Thompson, P. S., & Stephens, J. P.

(2021). The costs of mindfulness at work: The moderating role of mind-

fulness in surface acting, self-control depletion, and performance

outcomes. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 106(12), 1921–1938.

https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000863

Maslach, C. (2011). Engagement research: Some thoughts from a burnout

perspective. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 20

(1), 47–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2010.537034

Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1981). The measurement of experienced

burnout. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 2(2), 99–113. https://doi.

org/10.1002/job.4030020205

Maslach, C., Leiter, M. P., & Schaufeli, W. (2008). Measuring Burnout. Oxford

University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199211913.003.

0005

Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job Burnout. Annual

Review of Psychology, 52(1), 397–422. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.

psych.52.1.397

McCarthy, A. M., & Garavan, T. N. (2001, February 1). 360° feedback process:

Performance, improvement and employee career development. Journal

of European Industrial Training, 25(1), 5–32. https://doi.org/10.1108/

03090590110380614

McTiernan, K., & McDonald, N. (2014, December 9). Occupational stressors,

burnout and coping strategies between hospital and community psy-

chiatric nurses in a Dublin region. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental

Health Nursing, 22(3), 208–218. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpm.12170

Merchant, K. A., Stringer, C., & Theivanthampillai, P. (2010). Relationships

Between Objective and Subjective Performance Ratings. University of

Southern California. Department of Accountancy and Business Law

Working Paper series number 17. https://doi.org/10.1111/145569724

Mikolajczak, M., Menil, C., & Luminet, O. (2007, October). Explaining the

protective eect of trait emotional intelligence regarding occupational

stress: Exploration of emotional labour processes. Journal of Research in

Personality, 41(5), 1107–1117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2007.01.003

Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Rettinger, D. A., Shah, P., & Hegarty, M. (2001).

How are visuospatial working memory, executive functioning, and spa-

tial abilities related? A latent-variable analysis. Journal of Experimental

Psychology: General, 130(4), 621.

Monsell, S., & Driver, J. (Eds.). (2000). Control of cognitive processes:

Attention and performance XVIII (Vol. 18). MIT Press.

Morrison, E. W. (1994). Role denitions and organizational citizenship beha-

vior: The importance of the employee’s perspective. Academy of

Management Journal, 37(6), 1543–1567. https://doi.org/10.5465/256798

Motowidlo, S. J., & Van Scotter, J. R. (1994). Evidence that task performance

should be distinguished from contextual performance. The Journal of

Applied Psychology, 79(4), 475–480. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.

79.4.475

Mulki, J. P., Lassk, F. G., & Jaramillo, F. (2008). The eect of self-ecacy on

salesperson work overload and pay satisfaction. Journal of Personal

Selling & Sales Management, 28(3), 285–297. https://doi.org/10.2753/

PSS0885-3134280305

Nahrgang, J. D., Morgeson, F. P., & Hofmann, D. A. (2011). Safety at work: A

meta-analytic investigation of the link between job demands, job

resources, burnout, engagement, and safety outcomes. The Journal of

Applied Psychology, 96(1), 71–94. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021484

*Nailul Munna Abang Abdullah, D., & Chui Yuen, F. (2011, September 25-

28). The impact of job burnout towards job performance among nurses

[Paper presentation]. IEEE Symposium on Business, Engineering and

Industrial Applications, Langkawi, Malaysia. https://doi.org/10.1109/

ISBEIA.2011.6088836

*Ng, S. I., Sambasivan, M., & Zubaidah, S. (2011). Antecedents and outcomes

of ight attendants’ job satisfaction. Journal of Air Transport

Management, 17(5), 309–313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2011.

03.007

*Oosterholt, B. G., Maes, J. H. R., Van der Linden, D., Verbraak, M. J. P. M., &

Kompier, M. A. J. (2015). Burnout and cortisol: Evidence for a lower

cortisol awakening response in both clinical and non-clinical burnout.

Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 78(5), 445–451. https://doi.org/10.

1016/j.jpsychores.2014.11.003

Organ, D. W. (1997). Organizational Citizenship Behavior: It’s Construct

Clean-Up Time. Human Performance, 10(2), 85–97. https://doi.org/10.

1207/s15327043hup1002_2

Österberg, K., Karlson, B., & Hansen, Å. M. (2009). Cognitive performance in

patients with burnout, in relation to diurnal salivary cortisol: Original

research report. Stress, 12(1), 70–81.ISO 690.

Palenzuela, P., Delgado, N., & Rodríguez, J. A. (2019). Exploring the relation-

ship between contextual performance and burnout in healthcare

professionals. Revista de Psicología del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones,

35(2), 115–121. https://doi.org/10.5093/jwop2019a13

Parker, P. A., & Kulik, J. A. (1995). Burnout, self- and supervisor-rated job

performance, and absenteeism among nurses. Journal of Behavioral

Medicine, 18(6), 581–599. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01857897

*Paulhus, D. L. (1991). Measurement and Control of Response Bias. In

J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of

Personality and Social Psychological Attitudes (pp. 17–59). Academic

Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-590241-0.50006-X

Peterson, U., Demerouti, E., Bergström, G., Samuelsson, M., Åsberg, M., &

Nygren, Å. (2008). Burnout and physical and mental health among

Swedish healthcare workers. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62(1), 84–95.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04580.x

Petitta, L., & Vecchione, M. (2011). Job burnout, absenteeism, and extra role

behaviors. Journal of Workplace Behavioral Health, 26(2), 97–121. https://

doi.org/10.1080/15555240.2011.573752

*Petrou, P., Demerouti, E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2015). Job crafting in changing

organizations: Antecedents and implications for exhaustion and

performance. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 20(4),

470–480. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039003

Podsako, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (1994). An examination of the psycho-

metric properties and nomological validity of some revised and reduced

substitutes for leadership scales. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(5),

702–713. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.79.5.702

*Podsako, N. P., Whiting, S. W., Welsh, D. T., & Mai, K. M. (2013). Surveying

for “artifacts”: The susceptibility of the OCB–performance evaluation

relationship to common rater, item, and measurement context eects.

The Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(5), 863–874. https://doi.org/10.

1037/a0032588

Pransky, G., Finkelstein, S., Berndt, E., Kyle, M., Mackell, J., & Tortorice, D.

(2006, July 1). Objective and self‐report work performance measures:

A comparative analysis. International Journal of Productivity and

Performance Management, 55(5), 390–399. https://doi.org/10.1108/

17410400610671426

Prentice, C., Chen, P. -J., & King, B. (2013). Employee performance outcomes

and burnout following the presentation-of-self in customer-service

contexts. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 35, 225–236.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.06.007

Priebe, S., Fakhoury, W. K. H., Homann, K. et al. (2005). Morale and job

perception of community mental health professionals in Berlin and

London. Soc Psychiat Epidemiol, 40, 223–232. https://doi.org/10.1007/

s00127-005-0880-7

Radley, J. J., Sisti, H. M., Hao, J., Rocher, A., McCall, T., Hof, P. R., & Morrison, J.

H. (2004). Chronic behavioral stress induces apical dendritic reorganiza-

tion in pyramidal neurons of the medial prefrontal cortex. Neuroscience,

125(1), 1–6.

16 A. CORBEANU ET AL.

*Rahim, A., & Cosby, D. M. (2016). A model of workplace incivility, job

burnout, turnover intentions, and job performance. Journal of

Management Development, 35(10), 1255–1265. https://doi.org/10.1108/

JMD-09-2015-0138

*Rajan, M. V., & Reichelstein, S. (2009). Objective versus Subjective

Indicators of Managerial Performance. The Accountancy Review, 84(1),

209–237.

Raju, N. S., & Brand, P. A. (2003). Determining the signicance of correlations

corrected for unreliability and range restriction. Applied Psychological

Measurement, 27, 52–71. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621602239476

Randall, M., & Scott, W. A. (1988). Burnout, job satisfaction, and job

performance. Australian Psychologist, 23(3), 335–347. https://doi.org/10.

1080/00050068808255616

Rehman, S. U., Qingren, C., Latif, Y., & Iqbal, P. (2017). Impact of psycholo-

gical capital on occupational burnout and performance of faculty

members. International Journal of Educational Management, 31(4),

455–469. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-01-2016-0011

*Reizer, A., Brender-Ilan, Y., & Sheaer, Z. (2019). Employee motivation,

emotions, and performance: A longitudinal diary study. Journal of

Managerial Psychology, 34(6), 415–428. https://doi.org/10.1108/jmp-07-

2018-0299

Riolli, L., & Savicki, V. (2006). Impact of fairness, leadership, and coping on

strain, burnout, and turnover in organizational change. International

Journal of Stress Management, 13(3), 351–377. https://doi.org/10.1037/

1072-5245.13.3.351

Sandström, A., Rhodin, I. N., Lundberg, M., Olsson, T., & Nyberg, L. (2005).

Impaired cognitive performance in patients with chronic burnout syn-

drome. Biological Psychology, 69(3), 271–279.

Schat, A. C. H., & Frone, M. R. (2011). Exposure to psychological aggression

at work and job performance: The mediating role of job attitudes and

personal health. Work & Stress, 25(1), 23–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/

02678373.2011.563133

Schaufeli, W. B. (2003). Past performance and future perspectives of burn-

out research. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 29(4), 1–15. https://doi.

org/10.4102/sajip.v29i4.127

Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their

relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi‐sample study.

Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(3), 293–315. https://doi.org/10.

1002/job.248

Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Van Rhenen, W. (2009). How changes in job

demands and resources predict burnout, work engagement, and sick-

ness absenteeism. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30(7), 893–917.

https://doi.org/10.1002/job.595

Schaufeli, W. B., & Buunk, B. P. (2004). Burnout: An overview of 25 years of

research and theorizing. In M. J. Schabracq, J. A. M. Winnubst, &

C. L. Cooper (Eds.), The Handbook of Work and Health Psychology (pp.

383–425). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/0470013400.

ch19

Schaufeli, W., & Enzmann, D. (1998). The burnout companion to study and

practice: A critical analysis. Taylor & Francis.

Schaufeli, W. B., & Taris, T. W. (2005). The conceptualization and measure-

ment of burnout: Common ground and worlds apart. Work & Stress, 19

(3), 256–262. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370500385913

Schnake, M. (1991). Organizational citizenship: A review, proposed model,

and research agenda. Human Relations, 44(7), 735–759. https://doi.org/

10.1177/001872679104400706

Shanafelt, T. D., Hasan, O., Dyrbye, L. N., Sinsky, C., Satele, D., Sloan, J., &

West, C. P. (2015). Changes in burnout and satisfaction with work-life

balance in physicians and the general us working population between

2011 and 2014. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 90(12), 1600–1613. https://doi.

org/10.1016/j.mayocp.2015.08.023

Sharma, J., & Dhar, R. L. (2016). Factors inuencing job performance of

nursing sta: Mediating role of aective commitment. Personnel

Review, 45(1), 161–182. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-01-2014-0007

*Shaukat, R., Yousaf, A., & Sanders, K. (2017). Examining the linkages

between relationship conict, performance and turnover intentions:

Role of job burnout as a mediator. International Journal of Conict

Management, 28(1), 4–23. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCMA-08-2015-0051

*Shirom, A. (2003). Job-related burnout: A review. In J. C. Quick & L. E. Tetrick

(Eds.), Handbook of occupational health psychology (pp. 245–264).

American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10474-012

Shirom, A. (2005). Reections on the study of burnout. Work & Stress, 19(3),

263–270. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370500376649

Shirom, A., & Melamed, S. (2006). A comparison of the construct validity of

two burnout measures in two groups of professionals. International

Journal of Stress Management, 13(2), 176–200. https://doi.org/10.1037/

1072-5245.13.2.176

Singh, J., Goolsby, J. R., & Rhoads, G. K. (1994). Behavioral and Psychological

Consequences of Boundary Spanning Burnout for Customer Service

Representatives. Journal of Marketing Research, 31(4), 558–569. https://

doi.org/10.1177/002224379403100409

Sonnentag, S., & Frese, M. (2005). Performance Concepts and Performance

Theory. In S. Sonnentag (Ed.), Psychological Management of Individual

Performance (pp. 1–25). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/

0470013419.ch1

Sturman, M. C., Cheramie, R. A., & Cashen, L. H. (2005). The impact of job

complexity and performance measurement on the temporal consis-

tency, stability, and test-retest reliability of employee job performance

ratings. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(2), 269–283. https://doi.

org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.2.269

Swider, B. W., & Zimmerman, R. D. (2010). Born to burnout: A meta-analytic

path model of personality, job burnout, and work outcomes. Journal of

Vocational Behavior, 76(3), 487–506. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2010.

01.003

Taris, T. W. (2006). Is there a relationship between burnout and objective

performance? A critical review of 16 studies. Work & Stress, 20(4),

316–334. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370601065893

Viechtbauer, W. (2010). Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor

Package. Journal of Statistical Software, 36(3). https://doi.org/10.18637/

jss.v036.i03

Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2006, November 10). Redrawing the boundaries of OCB?

An empirical examination of compulsory extra-role behavior in the

workplace. Journal of Business and Psychology, 21(3), 377–405. https://

doi.org/10.1007/s10869-006-9034-5

Vîrgă, D., Schaufeli, W. B., Taris, T. W., van Beek, I., & Sulea, C. (2019).

Attachment Styles and Employee Performance: The Mediating Role of

Burnout. The Journal of Psychology, 153(4), 383–401. https://doi.org/10.

1080/00223980.2018.1542375

*Viswesvaran, C. (2002). Assessment of individual job performance:

A review of the past century and a look ahead. In N. Anderson,

D. S. Ones, H. K. Sinangil, & C. Viswesvaran (Eds.), Handbook of industrial,

work and organizational psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 110–126). Sage

Publications Ltd.

Wall, T. D., Michie, J., Patterson, M., Wood, S. J., Sheehan, M., Clegg, C. W., &

West, M. (2004). On the validity of subjective measures of company

performance. Personnel Psychology, 57(1), 95–118. https://doi.org/10.

1111/j.1744-6570.2004.tb02485.x

Wang, H. M. D., & Sengupta, S. (2016, December). Stakeholder relationships,

brand equity, rm performance: A resource-based perspective. Journal

of Business Research, 69(12), 5561–5568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.

jbusres.2016.05.009

Weijters, B., Baumgartner, H., & Schillewaert, N. (2013). Reversed item bias:

An integrative model. Psychological Methods, 18(3), 320–334. https://doi.

org/10.1037/a0032121

Wiernik, B. M., & Dahlke, J. A. (2020). Obtaining unbiased results in

meta-analysis: The importance of correcting for statistical artifacts.

Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 3(1),

94–123. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245919885611

Wigert, B., & Agrawal, S. (2018, July 12). Employee burnout, part 1: The 5 main

causes. Gallup. https://www.gallup.com/workplace/237059/employee-

burnout-part-main-causes.aspx

World Health Organisation (2019, May 28). Burn-out an occupational phe-

nomenon”: International Classication of Diseases. Retrieved from https://

www.who.int/news/item/28-05-2019-burn-out-an-occupational-phe

nomenon-international-classication-of-diseases

Worley, J. A., Vassar, M., Wheeler, D. L., & Barnes, L. L. B. (2008). Factor

Structure of Scores from the Maslach Burnout Inventory: A Review and

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF WORK AND ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY 17

Meta-Analysis of 45 Exploratory and Conrmatory Factor-Analytic

Studies. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68(5), 797–823.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164408315268

Wright, T. A., & Bonett, D. G. (1997). The contribution of burnout to work

performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18(5), 491–499. doi:

https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199709)18:5<491:AID-

JOB804>3.0.CO;2-I

*Wright, T. A., & Cropanzano, R. (1998). Emotional exhaustion as a predictor

of job performance and voluntary turnover. The Journal of Applied

Psychology, 83(3), 486–493. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.83.3.486

*Wright, T. A., & Hobfoll, S. E. (2004). Commitment, psychological well-being

and job performance: An examination of conservation of resources (COR)

theory and job burnout. Journal of Business & Management, 9(4), 389–406.

*Yavas, U., Babakus, E., & Karatepe, O. M. (2013). Does hope moderate the

impact of job burnout on frontline bank employees’ in‐role and extra‐

role performances? International Journal of Bank Marketing, 31(1), 56–70.

https://doi.org/10.1108/02652321311292056

Zhang, Y., LePine, J. A., Buckman, B. R., & Wei, F. (2014). It’s not fair . . . or is it?

The role of justice and leadership in explaining work stressor–job per-

formance relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 57(3),

675–697. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.1110

*Zivnuska, S., Carlson, J. R., Carlson, D. S., Harris, R. B., & Harris, K. J.

(2019). Social media addiction and social media reactions: The

implications for job performance. The Journal of Social Psychology,

159(6), 746–760. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2019.1578725

18 A. CORBEANU ET AL.

Turning strain into gain: leveraging manager compassion to promote team innovation and customer satisfaction in response to teams’ emotional exhaustion

Article

Nov 2024
EUR J WORK ORGAN PSY

When Leaders Are Safe Havens: How Secure Base Leadership Buffers the Impact of Emotional Demands on Exhaustion

Article

Full-text available

Jan 2025

Based on attachment theory, this research explores Secure Base Leadership’s (SBL) efficacy in mitigating the negative impact of emotional demands on employee exhaustion, with an aim to reduce burnout rates and improve workplace well-being. A survey sample of 428 Spanish employees from various sectors was collected, and Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) was used to test the research model. Emotional demands were found to significantly increase employee exhaustion, whereas SBL reduced and moderated these effects, proving its protective function. Furthermore, increased exhaustion was associated with longer tenure and employment in private organizations. Findings support integrating SBL in leadership development to foster a supportive environment, mitigate burnout, and boost employee well-being. Highlighting the application of attachment theory in organizational settings, this study contributes to understanding SBL’s effectiveness against emotional demands, guiding leadership practices to enhance organizational health.

Burnout and Its Impact on Employee Performance: A Comprehensive Systematic Review

Chapter

Full-text available

Jan 2024

This study conducts a comprehensive analysis of the relationship between employee burnout and performance, using a methodological framework that combines comparison, alignment, and argumentative investigations. By conducting a comprehensive examination of the available scholarly works, this research endeavors to identify pivotal elements that contribute to burnout and evaluate their influence on both organizational productivity and the well-being of employees. The methodology used in this study is a comprehensive analysis of peer-reviewed scholarly publications, reports, and case studies, with a specific emphasis on various sectors and cultural settings. The use of this complete approach guarantees a nuanced comprehension of the multifaceted nature of burnout and its diverse impacts on performance within various work settings. The review’s findings reveal a noteworthy inverse relationship between burnout and employee performance, whereby emotional weariness, depersonalization, and diminished personal achievement notably have adverse effects. The data further demonstrates that the ramifications of burnout transcend individual performance, exerting an impact on team dynamics and the overall efficacy of the business. Furthermore, the study highlights the significance of contextual variables, including job requirements, workplace assistance, and organizational culture, in shaping the association between burnout and performance. In conclusion, the research underscores the need of companies implementing comprehensive and proactive approaches to effectively tackle burnout. It promotes a comprehensive strategy that includes treatments at the individual, team, and organizational levels. The results indicate that the successful management of burnout necessitates not only the mitigation of its symptoms, but also the identification and resolution of its underlying causes via the establishment of supportive work environments, provision of sufficient resources, and cultivation of good organizational cultures. The implementation of this method is of utmost importance in order to improve the overall welfare of employees and achieve long-term organizational success.

From workaholism to work performance through burnout and self-undermining

Article

Full-text available

Dec 2024

Workaholism is a widely spread phenomenon that affects the lives and work performance of thousands of employees. Based on the Job Demands-Resources and Conservation of Resources theories, this study aimed to analyze the serial mediation effect of burnout and self-undermining behaviors on the relationship between workaholism and work performance. We collected data from 175 employees who worked in different areas and tested a serial mediation model. Our results suggest that there is no direct relationship between workaholism and performance, but this relation is fully mediated. Burnout and self-undermining mediated this relationship separately as well as serially. These results show that employees need effective ways of dealing with and preventing workaholism before it can lead to burnout or self-undermining and affect their well-being and their performance at work.

Strategii de prevenire a burn-out-ului în rândul studenților din ani IV-V-VI la arhitectură cu accent pe disciplina de atelier

Chapter

Full-text available

Dec 2024

Introducere: Burn-out-ul este un fenomen ocupațional care apare în urma expunerii cronice la stres la locul de muncă și se manifestă prin epuizare fizică și mintală, insatisfacție și scăderea eficacității în activitatea profesională. Deși burn-out-ul este legat în special de activitatea profesională, multe studii arată că acest fenomen apare și în rândul studenților, putând influența negativ motivația, performanța și starea de bine a acestora. În România, facultatea de arhitectură este cotată ca una dintre cele mai dificile facultăți, activitatea de proiectare de la atelier fiind dintre cele mai solicitante. Obiectiv: Lucrarea își propune identificarea unor strategii specifice de prevenirii a burn-out-ului în rândul studenților arhitecți din anii IV-V-VI, cu accent pe disciplina de atelier din cadrul Departamentului Sinteza Proiectării de Arhitectură de la Facultatea de Arhitectură, UAUIM. Materiale și metode: Cercetarea este de tip review-narativ, cu un caracter interdisciplinar arhitectură-medicină-psihologie. Rezultate: Cauzele burn-out-ului la studenții arhitecți din anii mari la disciplina de atelier pot fi dezechilibre care țin de: încărcarea în activități, control, recompense, comunitate, corectitudine și valori. Managementul de proiect este esențial, etapizarea cercetării, corecturile stabilite de fiecare atelier, posibilele predări parțiale. Performanța academică se obține dintr-un echilibru între cerințele cadrului didactic către student și resursele acestuia, furnizate de profesor dar și acumulate prin studiu individual de student. Orice dezechilibru între cerințe și resurse reprezintă un risc de burn-out. Studenții la arhitectură experimentează stres în special în timpul predărilor care presupune presiunea timpului dar și în timpul desfășurării proiectelor, fiind mereu preocupați pentru a ajunge la soluții care să le răspundă propriilor așteptări dar să fie apreciate și de profesori. Au fost identificate o serie de strategii eficiente anti-burn-out precum: învățarea colaborativă, stimularea interactivității, jocurile educaționale non-divertisment, conectarea permanentă cu realitatea concretă a profesiei de arhitect, psihoeducația, intervenții specifice psihoterapiei cognitiv-comportamentale, activitatea fizică și integrarea competențelor socio-emoționale. Concluzii: Învățământul de arhitectură este vocațional și deopotrivă solicitant. Se recomandă ca instituțiile de învățământ superior de arhitectură să nuanțeze constant măsuri de precauție pentru diminuarea riscului de burn-out în rândul studenților, în scopul creșterii performanței academice, consolidării rezilienței în viitoarea etapă de practicare a profesiei și a unei stări de bine. Constituirea unui departament de consiliere psihologică pentru studenții arhitecți ar reprezenta o măsură eficientă de gestionare a burn-out-ului. Este necesară o consolidare a strategiilor pedagogice specifice pentru învățământul de arhitectură care să gestioneze echilibrul dintre cerințele academice și resursele studenților, promovând o experiență educațională sănătoasă și eficientă. Cuvinte cheie: burn-out, învățământ de arhitectură, atelier, student, interdisciplinaritate

Burnout and Quality of Work Life on Job Performance: Mediating Role of Job Satisfaction Among Financial Services Employees

Article

Oct 2024

The ability of company management to sustain employee job performance in the pursuit of organizational objectives is critical due to the intense competition among financial service companies. This study investigates the relationship between burnout, work life quality, job satisfaction, and job performance, examining how job satisfaction mediates the relationship between these factors. The study was conducted to 200 employees of financial services companies in Indonesia. Data was obtained by distributing questionnaires. The method employed is quantitative analysis utilizing SEM PLS analysis. The research findings indicated that: (1) Burnout has a negative and significant impact on employees job performance; (2) Quality of Work Life has a positive and significant impact on employees job performance; (3) Job satisfaction has a positive and significant impact on employees job performance; (4) There is a significant indirect impact of Burnout on Job Performance with Job Satisfaction; (5) There is a significant indirect impact of Quality of Work Life on Job Performance with Job Satisfaction.

A meta-analysis of the relationship between burnout and psychological protective variables among Korean preschool teachers

Article

Apr 2025

Effective strategies for reducing pilots' job burnout: cognitive reappraisal guided by high resilience with perceived stress as a mediator

Article

Feb 2025
INT J OCCUP SAF ERGO

The aviation industry is acknowledged for its high-risk, high-pressure nature, where pilots' job burnout has adverse effects on well-being and industry performance. Understanding solutions to pilot job burnout is crucial for addressing the aforementioned challenges. Cognitive reappraisal, a double-edged sword, has yet to be proven effective in its application to this specific population, and there is a lack of research explaining why cognitive reappraisal can reduce job burnout. This empirical study, collecting data from 106 pilots, reveals cognitive reappraisal's efficacy in reducing burnout by lowering perceived stress (R2 = 0.497). The reduction is modulated by pilots' psychological resilience, indicating higher resilience enhances cognitive reappraisal's effectiveness. Additionally, perceived stress mediates differently in emotional exhaustion compared to dehumanization or reduced personal accomplishment. This research not only proposes, for the first time, a theoretical model depicting the impact relationships of pilot job burnout but also provides practical and targeted recommendations for reducing pilot job burnout.

Psychology and Work Today

Book

Feb 2025

A higher illuminance reduces momentary exhaustion in exhausted employees: Results from a field study

Article

Feb 2025

The Effect of Role Ambiguity and Role Conflict on Performance of Vice Principals: The Mediating Role of Burnout

Article

Full-text available

Apr 2013
EGIT ARAST

Kazim Celik

Problem Statement: Role ambiguity and role conflict are considered issues that affect performance and lead to burnout. While numerous studies have analyzed role ambiguity or role conflict in relation to burnout or performance, few studies have studied all of these issues together. Since vice principals are expected to carry out a variety of responsibilities as principals and educators, it is predicted that they frequently experience role ambiguity, role conflict, and burnout. However, there is a dearth of studies researching how vice principals in schools are affected by this situation. Purpose of the Study: The study aims to investigate the effects of role ambiguity and role conflict on the burnout of head vice principals and vice principals and on job performance indirectly and directly. Methods: Two hundred vice principals working at elementary and high schools in the city centers of Denizli and Manisa were contacted. The Maslach Burnout Inventory, Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity Questionnaire, and Job Performance Scale were used. In line with the purpose of the study, the model was tested to analyze the cause and effect relationship between variables. SPSS 17 and AMOS 7.0 were used to analyze the data. Findings and Results: The indirect and direct effects of role ambiguity on job performance were significant. In terms of the effect of role ambiguity on job performance, full mediation of emotional exhaustion and partial mediation of personal accomplishment were found. The direct and indirect effects of role conflict on job performance were also significant. The full mediation of emotional exhaustion and the partial mediation of depersonalization resulted from the effect of Role Conflict on job performance. Conclusions and Recommendations: According to the results of the study, the direct effect of role ambiguity and role conflict on job performance is higher than the indirect effect. It was found that role ambiguity decreases job performance indirectly and directly. While the direct effect of role conflict increases job performance, the indirect effect of role conflict decreases job performance. Emotional exhaustion fully mediates both role ambiguity/job performance and role conflict/job performance relationships. While personal accomplishment plays a partially mediating role in the relationship between role ambiguity and job performance, depersonalization partially mediates the relationship of role conflict and job performance. Based on the results of the study, it can be said that determining the mission, authority, and responsibilities of vice principals might increase their performance. Descriptors: Assistant Principals, Burnout, Role Conflict, Administrator Characteristics, Performance, Administrator Responsibility, Elementary Schools, High Schools, Foreign Countries, Questionnaires, Statistical Analysis, Ambiguity (Context), Administrator Attitudes, Structural Equation Models

The Costs of Mindfulness at Work: The Moderating Role of Mindfulness in Surface Acting, Self-Control Depletion, and Performance Outcomes

Article

Full-text available

Feb 2021

By and large, research in organizational behavior and psychology has emphasized that mindfulness should have positive implications for employee well-being and performance, largely through benefits to self-control. Although some have noted that mindfulness could also have a "dark side," researchers have yet to examine the potential costs of being mindful at work. Building on prior studies that have found that mindfulness leads to lower levels of surface acting, we investigate the possibility that when mindful employees engage in surface acting, it may contribute to greater self-control depletion, which in turn, results in undesirable performance outcomes. Using six field studies, we collected data at multiple points in time from both employees and their supervisors to test our theoretical model. In two Study 1 samples, we found that mindfulness moderated the relationship between surface acting and self-control depletion, such that this relationship was stronger for more mindful individuals. In four Study 2 samples, we replicated our Study 1 results and found that the mediated relationship between surface acting and five dimensions of employee performance via self-control depletion is moderated by mindfulness at the first stage, such that this mediated relationship is stronger for more mindful individuals. We discuss the implications of this work for future investigations of mindfulness, self-control, emotional labor, and performance outcomes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Social Support Moderating Effect between Work-Family Conflict and Working Students' Health and Stress in UPSI

Article

Full-text available

Nov 2019

Many studies have been done in addressing work-family conflict (WFC) among employees working in organizations. Thus, the focus of this study is to address WFC that has been faced by currently working and studying adults, and examine its relationship with their health and stress condition. In addition, this study examines the moderating effect of social support between WFC and working student's health and stress condition. The sample for this study consists of working students enrolling in part-time programs in Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris, Malaysia. Questionnaires were distributed to students pursuing part-time programs in Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris. The questionnaire was developed based on past literature and proposed research framework. The questionnaire comprised of questions regarding WFC, stress, health, social support and demographic questions. Findings from the research indicated that WFC, faced by working students in UPSI, were significantly related to stress, health, and social support. As for the moderation effect, this study found that social support significantly moderated the relationship between WFC and working students' stress condition, but not with health. Suggestions on actions needed to be constructed in unravelling WFC matters among working students. Policies and plans on how to mitigate WFC were suggested. Such suggestions might benefit policymakers and government in introducing relevant initiatives so that working adults' special needs could be fulfilled, consequently reduced WFC faced by them.

A Rasch analysis of the Burnout Assessment Tool (BAT)

Article

Full-text available

Nov 2020
PLOS ONE

Burnout as a concept indicative of a work-related state of mental exhaustion is recognized around the globe. Numerous studies showed that burnout has negative consequences for both individuals and organizations but also for society at large, especially in welfare states where sickness absence and work incapacitation are covered by social funds. This underlines the importance of a valid and reliable tool that can be used to assess employee burnout levels. Although the Maslach Burnout Inventory is by far the most frequently used questionnaire for assessing burnout, it is associated with several shortcomings and has been criticized on theoretical as well as empirical grounds. Thus, there is a need for an alternative questionnaire with a strong conceptual basis and proper psychometric qualities. This challenge has been taken up by introducing the Burnout Assessment Tool (BAT), according to which burnout is conceived as a work-related state of exhaustion among employees, characterized by extreme tiredness, reduced ability to regulate cognitive and emotional processes, and mental distancing. Given that the BAT is a new measure of burnout, its psychometric properties need to be evaluated. This paper focuses on an evaluation of the internal construct validity of the BAT using Rasch analysis in two random samples (n = 800, each) drawn from larger representative samples of the working population of the Netherlands and Flanders (Belgium). The BAT has sound psychometric properties and fulfils the measurement criteria according to the Rasch model. The BAT score reflects the scoring structure indicated by the developers of the scale and the BAT’s four subscales can be summarized into a single burnout score. The BAT score also works invariantly for women and men, younger and older respondents, and across both countries. Hence, the BAT can be used in organizations for screening and identifying employees who are at risk of burnout.

Reciprocal Effects Between Job Stressors and Burnout: A Continuous Time Meta-Analysis of Longitudinal Studies

Article

Full-text available

Oct 2020

Results from longitudinal studies are ambiguous regarding the direction of effects between job stressors and burnout over time. We meta-analyzed possible reciprocal relations between job stressors and burnout in k = 48 longitudinal studies (N = 26,319), accounting for variation of time intervals in primary studies by using continuous time meta-analysis. Additionally, we analyzed whether country-level job resources (job control & job support; k = 31 European studies, N = 17,747) moderated the effect of job stressors on burnout (stressor-effect) and the effect of burnout on job stressors (strain-effect). Further, we analyzed the replicability of the primary studies by assessing between-study heterogeneity, publication bias, and statistical power. Reciprocal effects between job stressors and burnout exist. The stressor-effect is small, whereas the strain-effect is larger and moderated by job control and job support. Analyses of the different burnout symptoms (emotional) exhaustion and depersonalization/cynicism demonstrated that reciprocal relations between emotional exhaustion and job stressors exist, but depersonalization/cynicism is not directly related to job stressors. Between-study heterogeneity was comparable to other psychological studies, whereas statistical power of primary studies was comparatively large. Conclusions are limited because few primary studies used time intervals of less than 12 months, more than two measurement occasions, and objective measures of stressors. Overall, results imply the need for extended job stress models and new job stress interventions that help employees cope with burnout symptoms.

Employee motivation, emotions, and performance: a longitudinal diary study

Article

Full-text available

Aug 2019

Purpose Numerous studies have focused on the effect of motivation on performance in the workplace. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the somewhat overlooked role of positive and negative emotions as potential mediators of this critical association. Design/methodology/approach The longitudinal study employed multilevel modeling for assessing the effects of motivation, emotions and work satisfaction on job performance. In total, 116 respondents provided 1,044 responses at nine consecutive measurement points. Findings Findings indicated that positive emotions and job satisfaction mediate the positive association between autonomous motivation and performance. Concurrently, negative emotions and decreased job satisfaction mediated the negative associations between controlled motivation and job performance. Research limitations/implications The results address only the within-subject and between-subject analysis of temporal variations in emotions and behavior. Future studies can include higher levels of analysis, such as group, team and organizational contexts. Originality/value This research contributes to self-determination theory by highlighting the role of emotions in understanding how motivation shapes workplace performance.

Burnout and job performance: a two-wave study on the mediating role of employee cognitive functioning

Article

Feb 2021

This two-wave study examined whether job burnout relates negatively to employees’ performance in executive functions (i.e., working memory, inhibition capacity, cognitive flexibility, reasoning, problem solving, and planning – assessed through psychometric tests) and positively to everyday cognitive failures (rated by colleagues) over time. Furthermore, based on cognitive reserve and self-regulation theories, we hypothesized that poor cognitive functioning mediates the negative relationship between burnout and job performance (i.e., task and contextual performance), as rated by employees and their close colleagues. The study was conducted among 102 employees and their colleagues, who were followed up over a period of about a year. Structural equation modelling analyses revealed that burnout related to lower performance on working memory and inhibition capacity and to more cognitive failures over time, while reduced cognitive flexibility was associated to higher burnout over time. Moreover, results showed that poor working memory and cognitive failures mediated the negative relationship between burnout and task performance. These findings suggest that burnout prevents optimal utilization of cognitive resources limiting cognitive functioning and consequently, job performance.

Control of Cognitive Processes: Attention and Performance XVIII

Book

Oct 2000

The thirty-two contributions discuss evidence from psychological experiments with healthy and brain-damaged subjects, functional imaging, electrophysiology, and computational modeling. One of the most challenging problems facing cognitive psychology and cognitive neuroscience is to explain how mental processes are voluntarily controlled, allowing the computational resources of the brain to be selected flexibly and deployed to achieve changing goals. The eighteenth of the celebrated international symposia on Attention and Performance focused on this problem, seeking to banish or at least deconstruct the "homunculus": that conveniently intelligent, but opaque, agent still lurking within many theories, under the guise of a central executive or supervisory attentional system assumed to direct processes that are not "automatic." The thirty-two contributions discuss evidence from psychological experiments with healthy and brain-damaged subjects, functional imaging, electrophysiology, and computational modeling. Four sections focus on specific forms of control: of visual attention, of perception-action coupling, of task-switching and dual-task performance, and of multistep tasks. The other three sections extend the interdisciplinary approach, with chapters on the neural substrate of control, studies of control disorders, and computational simulations. The progress achieved in fractionating, localizing, and modeling control functions, and in understanding the interaction between stimulus-driven and voluntary control, takes research on control in the mind/brain to a new level of sophistication. Bradford Books imprint

Obtaining Unbiased Results in Meta-Analysis: The Importance of Correcting for Statistical Artifacts

Article

Jan 2020

Most published meta-analyses address only artifactual variance due to sampling error and ignore the role of other statistical and psychometric artifacts, such as measurement error variance (due to factors including unreliability of measurements, group misclassification, and variable treatment strength) and selection effects (including range restriction or enhancement and collider biases). These artifacts can have severe biasing effects on the results of individual studies and meta-analyses. Failing to account for these artifacts can lead to inaccurate conclusions about the mean effect size and between-studies effect-size heterogeneity, and can influence the results of meta-regression, publication-bias, and sensitivity analyses. In this article, we provide a brief introduction to the biasing effects of measurement error variance and selection effects and their relevance to a variety of research designs. We describe how to estimate the effects of these artifacts in different research designs and correct for their impacts in primary studies and meta-analyses. We consider meta-analyses of correlations, observational group differences, and experimental effects. We provide R code to implement the corrections described.

Exhaustion and Impaired Work Performance in the Workplace: Associations With Presenteeism and Absenteeism

Article

Aug 2019

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the association between presenteeism and absenteeism during the previous year and the current levels of exhaustion and impaired work performance in a Swedish university setting. Methods: In a study of 3525 employees, an ordinal logistic regression and general linear model was used to examine the association between presenteeism and absenteeism during the previous year and the current exhaustion and impaired work performance, respectively. Results: Presenteeism, but not absenteeism, during the previous year independently increased the risk of having moderate or severe exhaustion. Presenteeism, absenteeism, and exhaustion remained positively associated with impaired work performance when health status and other confounders had been adjusted for. Conclusions: Presenteeism, but not absenteeism, was associated with exhaustion. Both presenteeism and absenteeism were the salient correlates of impaired work performance.