The relationship between the Five-Factor Model facets and burnout

Full text

(1)COPYRIGHT AND CITATION CONSIDERATIONS FOR THIS THESIS/ DISSERTATION. o Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use. o NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.. o ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.. How to cite this thesis Surname, Initial(s). (2012) Title of the thesis or dissertation. PhD. (Chemistry)/ M.Sc. (Physics)/ M.A. (Philosophy)/M.Com. (Finance) etc. [Unpublished]: University of Johannesburg. Retrieved from: https://ujcontent.uj.ac.za/vital/access/manager/Index?site_name=Research%20Output (Accessed: Date)..

(2) The relationship between the Five-Factor Model facets and Burnout by. Kathleen Jenna Brennan De Vine. Minor Dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of M Phil in Industrial Psychology at the College of Business and Economics University of Johannesburg. Supervisor: Dr Brandon Morgan.

(3) DECLARATION OF ADHERENCE: ETHICS IN RESEARCH. I certifiy that the minor dissertation submitted by me for the degree Master of Philosophy (Industrial Psychology) at the University of Johannesburg is my independent work and has not been submitted by me for a degree at another University. ______Katheen Jenna Brennan De Vine_____________. 1.

(4) ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. After an inspiring journey of intensive learning, I would like to thank the following individuals who have made the completion of my dissertation possible.. Firstly, I would like to thank my supervisor, Dr Morgan, for guiding and supporting me through the year. I am beyond grateful to have had you as my supervisor, your knowledge and expertise is inspiring. Thank you for being so patient with me and willing to help me at any point. Thank you for developing me and pushing me beyond limits to do better, I would not have been able to complete my dissertation without you.. I would also like to thank the organisations for allowing me to administer my questionnaires and the participants for completing my questionnaires. Thank you for taking the time and effort in contributing towards my dissertation.. To JvR, thank you for allowing me with the opportunity to administer the BTI. Without the Basic Traits Inventory (BTI) I would not be able to conduct the study, nor have gained the insight that the results have presented.. To my university, the University of Johannesburg, thank you for providing me with the opportunity to conduct this study and gain the exposure and insight into my topic.. Finally, I would like to thank my boyfriend Daniel, my mother, my sister, and my friends in being so patient with me throughout this period. Your constant support and continuous encouragement is what got me through the long nights and early mornings. Thank you for believing in me, for being so understanding and for pushing me to reach my goals. I will forever be grateful.. 2.

(5) ABSTRACT. Burnout remains a popular area of research because of its costs to employers and employees. Research has shown that burnout occurs when there are high demands and low resources available in the workplace. But the development of burnout is dependent on both the work environment and individual factors. It is therefore necessary to consider both aspects when investigating burnout. In this study the focus is on the individual by investigating the relationship between burnout and personality traits. Two objectives were formulated: (a) to investigate the relationship between the five personality factors (i.e. Neuroticism,. Extraversion,. Openness. to. Experience,. Agreeableness. and. Conscientiousness) and burnout (emotional exhaustion and cynicism), to gain a specific understanding of which of the five-factors are related to burnout and to determine if the results replicate what was found in previous studies, and (b) to investigate the relationship between each five-factor facets and burnout (emotional exhaustion and cynicism). These two objectives hold important implications for understanding potential causes of burnout.. To investigate the relationship between the five-factor facets and burnout the Maslach Burnout Inventory-General Scale and The Basic Traits Inventory were administered to 127 adults in South Africa. Pearson’s correlation coefficients and multiple regression were used to analyse the relationships between the variables. These analyses showed that Neuroticism had a positive relationship with emotional exhaustion and cynicism. There was also evidence that Conscientiousness was negatively related to emotional exhaustion and cynicism and that Openness to Experience was positively related to cynicism. At the facet level, all of the facets of Neuroticism were positively related to emotional exhaustion and cynicism. Extraversion as a whole was not related to burnout but at the facet level positive affectivity had a negative relationship with emotional exhaustion and excitement seeking had a positive relationship with emotional exhaustion. Results show that for Openness to Experience the facet of values had a positive relation to cynicism. The overall trait of Agreeableness had a non-statistically significant relationship with burnout, however, the facet of straightforwardness was negatively related to cynicism. 3.

(6) The results for Conscientiousness show that the facet of self-discipline and order had a negative relationship to emotional exhaustion and cynicism. Overall, the results show that there is merit in looking at both the broad personality traits as well as looking in-depth into the facets when examining the relationship between burnout and personality. Furthermore they suggest that there are specific behaviours at the facet level that are related to burnout and that behaviours associated with these facets warrant further research attention in burnout research. Implications for theory and practice are presented.. Key words: Burnout, personality, five-factor model, five-factor facets, traits. 4.

(7) TABLE OF CONTENTS. Page CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Introduction and rationale. 9. 1.2 Problem statement. 10. 1.3 Aim and objectives. 12. 1.4 Preview of content. 13. CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Introduction. 14. 2.2 Burnout. 14. 2.2.1 Definition of burnout. 14. 2.2.2 The three-factor structure of burnout. 15. 2.2.3 Measuring burnout. 17. 2.3 Theories about the causes of burnout. 17. 2.3.1 Cherniss’s burnout process model. 18. 2.3.2 Etzion’s burnout process model. 18. 2.3.3 Hallsten burnout process model. 18. 2.3.4 The JD-R model. 19. 2.4 The JD-R model. 19. 2.4.1 Description of the JD-R model. 19. 2.4.2 Psychological processes. 20. 2.5 Personal resources. 22. 2.5.1 Self-efficacy, organisation-based self-esteem, and optimism. 22. 2.5.2 Job crafting as a personal resource. 23. 2.6 Personality as a personal resource. 24. 2.7 The five-factor model of personality. 24. 2.7.1 Definitions of personality traits. 25. 2.8 Theoretical models of personality traits. 25 5.

(8) 2.8.1 Allport and Odbert. 26. 2.8.2 Eysenck. 26. 2.8.3 Cattell. 27. 2.9 The five-factor model. 27. 2.9.1 The Neo Personality Inventory. 27. 2.9.2 The Basic Traits Inventory. 28. 2.9.3 Neuroticism. 28. 2.9.4 Extraversion. 29. 2.9.5 Openness to Experience. 30. 2.9.6 Agreeableness. 31. 2.9.7 Conscientiousness. 32. 2.10 The relationship between burnout and personality. 34. 2.10.1 Neuroticism. 34. 2.10.2 Extraversion. 35. 2.10.3 Openness to Experience. 36. 2.10.4 Agreeableness. 37. 2.10.5 Conscientiousness. 38. 2.11 Summary. 39. CHAPTER 3: METHOD 3.1 Introduction. 41. 3.2 Research approach and design. 41. 3.3 Sample. 41. 3.4 Procedure. 42. 3.5 Measuring instruments. 43. 3.5.1 The MBI-GS. 43. 3.5.2 The BTI. 43. 3.6 Analysis. 44. 3.7 Ethical considerations. 45. 6.

(9) CHAPTER 4: RESULTS 4.1 Introduction. 46. 4.2 Descriptive statistics. 46. 4.3 Correlation coefficient. 47. 4.3.1 Facets of Neuroticism. 48. 4.3.2 Facets of Extraversion. 49. 4.3.3 Facets of Openness to Experience. 49. 4.3.4 Facets of Agreeableness. 49. 4.3.5 Facets of Conscientiousness. 49. 4.4 Multiple Regression. 51. 4.4.1 Multiple regression for the five-factor model and exhaustion. 51. 4.4.2 Multiple regression for the five-factor model and cynicism. 52. CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 5.1 Introduction. 54. 5.2 Aim and objectives of the study. 54. 5.3 The relationship between the five factors of personality and burnout. 54. 5.4 The relationship between five-factor facets and burnout. 57. 5.4.1 Facets of Neuroticism and burnout. 57. 5.4.2 Facets of Extraversion and burnout. 57. 5.4.3 Facets of Openness to Experience and burnout. 58. 5.4.4 Facets of Agreeableness and burnout. 59. 5.4.5 Facets of Conscientiousness and burnout. 59. 5.4.6 Summary. 60. 5.5 Theoretical implications. 60. 5.6 Practical implications. 61. 5.7 Limitations and recommendations for future research. 62. 5.8 Conclusion. 63. 5.9 References. 64. 7.

(10) LIST OF TABLES. Page Table 1: Descriptive statistics of the MBI-GS and the BTI scale scores. 46. Table 2: Correlation Coefficients for the Five-Factors and Burnout. 48. Table 3: Correlation Coefficients for the Five Facets. 50. Table 4: Multiple Regression for Burnout and Exhaustion. 51. Table 5: Multiple Regression for Burnout and Cynicism. 53. 8.

(11) CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY. 1.1 Introduction. Research on burnout emerged in the 1970s and remains a topic undergoing intense study. Its importance to practitioners and researchers can be seen in the more than 6 000 books, articles, and journals published on the topic (Schaufeli, Leiter, & Maslach, 2009). Despite its importance, questions remain on the causes of burnout (Hakanen & Bakker, 2017). Broadly speaking, it is known that burnout can occur when there are high demands and low resources in the work environment (Demerouti, Bakker, Nachreiner, & Schaufeli, 2001). Indeed, the Job Demands-Resource (JD-R) model posits that high demands and low resources can lead to an individual experiencing job strain or fatigue, which can, in turn, lead to an employee burning out (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007; Demerouti et al., 2001). However, Maslach, Leiter, and Schaufeli (2008) and Taris and Schaufeli (2016) also emphasise the importance of the individual level (i.e., factors within a person in addition to the environment). Therefore, the individual cannot be ignored in burnout research.. Individual differences comprise innate psychological characteristics, such as personality, motivation, and intelligence, among others (Maslach et al., 2008; Taris & Schaufeli, 2016). Personality has especially received a lot of attention in relation to research on burnout (Maslach et al., 2008) and general stress (Vollrath, 2001). It has been shown, for example, that locus of control (Jones, 2015), the type A behaviour pattern (Alarcon, Eschleman, & Bowling, 2009), and the five-factor model of personality (Hurt, Grist, Malesky, & McCord, 2013) are related to burnout. In this study, the focus is on the fivefactor model of personality (i.e., Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to Experience, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness; Costa & McCrae, 1992a, 1992b). The five-factor model of personality is used in this study because it is a popular model of personality and provides diverse and orderly concepts that define personality (Digman, 1990; McCrae & Costa, 1997; Pervin & John, 2001). 9.

(12) 1.2 Problem statement Broadly, an individual’s behaviour is caused by an interaction between individual difference variables (such as personality) and the environment (Ryckman, 2012). The environment not only influences the behaviour and attitudes of individuals, but individuals’ unique characters, perceptions, and traits also influence the work environment (Maslach, Schaufeli, & Leiter, 2001). This implies that people’s personality at work can have an impact on work-related outcomes such as burnout (Taris & Schaufeli, 2016; Xanthopoulou, Bakker, Demerouti, & Schaufeli, 2007).. The relationship between personality and burnout can be positioned in the JD-R model as a resource or, more specifically, as a personal resource (Taris & Schaufeli, 2016; Xanthopoulou et al., 2007). Personal resources are psychological variables over which an individual has control and can use to positively influence the work environment. They can also assist an individual in attaining goals, and they encourage growth and enhancement and reduce burnout (Schaufeli & Taris, 2014; Xanthopoulou et al., 2007). This means that investigating personality and how it interacts with the environment can deepen our understanding of how burnout occurs and the conditions under which it occurs at work (Taris & Schaufeli, 2016). In relation to the five-factor model of personality, Neuroticism has the strongest relationship to burnout. However, evidence shows that all five factors have a relationship with burnout (Morgan & de Bruin, 2010; Schaufeli & Buunk, 2003). What appears to be missing is an understanding of how personality facets, which are more specific elements of the trait view of personality, are related to burnout.. Hogan and Roberts (1996, cited in Ones & Viswesvaran, 1996) argue that personality can be viewed either broadly (e.g., the five broad factors) or more specifically (e.g., the facets underlying each of the five broad factors). In personality research, there are two opposing views. Ones and Viswesvaran (1996) argue that it is better to measure the broad personality traits of the five-factor model when examining job performance or work 10.

(13) behaviour because they are inclusive of or general to all employees. Paunonen, Rothstein, and Jackson (1999), in contrast, argue that it is better to measure the specific facets under each trait when examining job performance and work behaviour because it allows for specific traits that are related to certain behaviours to be identified. In support, Goldberg (1999) argued that there is value in looking at the facets when examining the five-factor model, as suggested by Paunonen and Ashton (2001), because the facets share common elements with the overall traits, which makes it easier to understand the causes of certain behaviours. The facets of each of the five personality factors also have some unique variance over and above the variance explained by their respective general factors (Vorster, 2016). This means that there might be merit in investigating relationships of personality with external variables, such as burnout, at the broad five-factor level or at the more specific facet level.. Despite knowing that these five factors are related to burnout, little is known about the facet level and its relation to burnout, as only a select few articles have been published (Hurt et al., 2013; Periard & Burns, 2014; Roccas, Sagiv, Schwartz, & Knafo, 2002). These studies have mostly shown that Neuroticism and its facets are the best predictors of burnout. A study by Hurt et al. (2013) is the only one that was found that examined the relationship between all the facets of the five-factor model as measured by the Neo Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R; Costa & McCrae, 1992a) and burnout. Hurt et al.’s (2013) results show briefly that the facets of Neuroticism were positively related to emotional exhaustion and cynicism and that the facets of Extraversion were negatively related to cynicism. Periard and Burns (2014) measured the relationship of Agreeableness and Conscientiousness facets with burnout and found that some but not all of the facets were related to burnout.. These two studies show that there might be merit in investigating the relationship between personality facets and burnout, so as to gain a deeper understanding of how personality is related to burnout. What is missing is that little is known about the facet level of the five-factor model and its relationship with burnout. While these two studies help us understand the relationship, it remains a relatively poorly investigated topic, and 11.

(14) given the arguments of Ones and Viswesvaran (1996) and Paunonen et al. (1999), there is merit in furthering our understanding of these relationships in order to gain a better understanding of how burnout is developed among people in the workplace. It might also assist in answering whether the broad traits or specific facets should be used in measuring personality in burnout research1. Therefore, this study sets out to examine the relationship between the five personality factors and its facets with burnout in order to determine if the five factors and the facets provide similar or different results when examining burnout.. 1.3 Aim and objectives of the study. Given the aforementioned, the study aims to investigate the relationship between broad and specific personality traits and burnout. There are two objectives: (a) to investigate the relationship between the five personality factors (i.e., Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to Experience, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness) and burnout (emotional exhaustion and cynicism) in order to gain a specific understanding of which of the five factors are related to burnout and to determine if the results replicate those found in previous studies, and (b) to investigate the relationship between each of the five-factor facets as measured by the Basic Traits Inventory (BTI; Taylor & de Bruin, 2006) and burnout (emotional exhaustion and cynicism). Investigating the relationship between personality and burnout at the facet level can: (a) provide information on how facets might be related to burnout, (b) help in practical settings by indicating which facets matter most, and (c) further theory on personality and its relationship to burnout in the workplace.. 1. Prediction implies prediction of variance and not causation, in this dissertation.. 12.

(15) 1.4 Preview of content of chapters. In chapter 2, pertinent literature is given. Specifically, an outline on burnout, the Job Demands-Resource model, the trait view of personality and the five-factor model with its facets, and the relationship between personality and burnout is given. In Chapter 3, the method is presented, including a discussion of the research design, sample, procedure, measuring instruments, statistical analyses employed, and ethical considerations of the study. In Chapter 4, the results are presented. In Chapter 5, a discussion of the results, implications of the research for theory and practice, limitations and recommendations for future research, and a conclusion are presented.. 13.

(16) CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW. 2.1 Introduction. In this chapter, burnout, the Job Demands-Resource (JD-R) model, and the five-factor model of personality are presented. In the first section, burnout is defined, the three-factor structure of burnout given, and some psychometric instruments used to measure burnout discussed. Lastly, several theories on the causes of burnout are presented, leading into a discussion of the JD-R model. In the second section, the JD-R model is presented, followed by a discussion of the psychological processes and personal resources that can be seen within the JD-R model. Lastly, the relationship between personality and the JD-R model is presented. In the last section, the five-factor model of personality is presented. The traits and the different theoretical views on these traits are discussed, followed by a description of each factor within the Basic Traits Inventory (BTI). Lastly, the relationships between personality traits and burnout are presented.. 2.2 Burnout. 2.2.1 Definition of burnout. The term burnout appeared in the 1970s owing to the work of Freudenberger (1974) and Maslach (1976). It has been extensively used in the literature ever since (Demerouti, Bakker, de Jonge, Janssen, & Schaufeli, 2001; Schaufeli & Buunk, 2003; Schaufeli & Enzmann, 1998; Schaufeli & Salanova, 2007). Research on burnout was initially carried out through the use of interviews, questionnaires, and observations in the caregiving and human services (Maslach et al., 2008). Because of the topic’s popularity and the increase in research on burnout, several definitions of burnout emerged (Maslach et al., 2008).. 14.

(17) Freudenberger (1974) and Maslach (1976) described burnout as a decline in the quality of work of employees. Maslach and Jackson (1981) argue that it can lead to turnover, low self-esteem, absenteeism, and, therefore, personal distress in the workplace (Maslach & Jackson, 1981). From the elicited attention to and focus on burnout as a topic, a golden thread emerged in the definition of burnout, namely that burnout is a psychological experience that occurs at the individual level, and that burnout has negative consequences for the individual (Maslach, 1982). The most popular definition of burnout is by Maslach and Jackson (1981). They define burnout as “a syndrome of emotional exhaustion, depersonalisation and reduced personal accomplishment that can occur amongst individuals who do ‘people work’ of some kind” (Maslach & Jackson, 1981, p. 1). Although this definition is the most popular definition of burnout, other definitions of burnout exist. For example, Pines and Aronson (1988) defined burnout as “a state of physical, emotional and mental exhaustion caused by long term involvement in situations that are emotionally demanding”. It is, however, clear that this definition is similar to Maslach and Jackson’s (1981) definition of burnout.. 2.2.2 The three-factor structure of burnout Maslach and Jackson’s (1981) definition of burnout illustrates a three-factor structure of burnout consisting of: (a) emotional exhaustion, (b) depersonalisation, and (c) reduced personal accomplishment. Cynicism and reduced personal efficacy was added to the definition of burnout by Schaufeli, Leiter, Maslach, and Jackson (1996) to describe burnout in relation to the experience in an organisation. Therefore, the second and third dimensions. are. depersonalisation/cynicism. and. reduced. personal. accomplishment/efficacy, respectively.. Emotional exhaustion is defined as the point at which an individual cannot manage stressors in the workplace. It refers to the stress dimension of burnout, as not being able to manage workplace stressors, and results in the depletion of psychological resources (Maslach & Jackson, 1981). Exhaustion, therefore, results in the individual being both emotionally and cognitively non-responsive to the needs of their work (Maslach et al., 15.

(18) 2001). Depersonalisation/cynicism refers to detachment towards the work (cynicism) or towards clients (depersonalisation). Depersonalisation develops when negative and cynical attitudes are formed around an individual’s job (Maslach, Jackson, & Leiter, 1997; Schaufeli & Salanova, 2014). These cynical attitudes are described as being dehumanised in that the relationship between employees and clients are negatively influenced. Due to having cynical attitudes, an employee may feel that their negative behaviour towards clients is somewhat justified (Maslach et al., 1997; Schaufeli & Salanova, 2014). Cynicism refers to interpersonally and cognitively distancing oneself from work (Maslach et al., 2001; Maslach et al., 2008).. Reduced personal accomplishment/efficacy refers to the negative self-reflections of an individual’s abilities in relation to their job roles and accomplishments (Maslach, 1993). Although burnout has historically been divided into these three aforementioned factors, it is not clear if reduced personal accomplishment/efficacy should be included as a dimension in burnout (Lee & Ashforth, 1996; Maslach et al., 2008; Morgan, de Bruin, & de Bruin., 2014; Schaufeli & Salanova, 2007). It has been suggested that emotional exhaustion and depersonalisation/cynicism are the core dimensions of burnout (Green, Walkey, & Taylor, 1991; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004; Schaufeli & Taris, 2005).. Lee and Ashforth (1996), Schaufeli and Enzmann (1998), and Schaufeli, Martínez, Marqués-Pinto, Salanova, and Bakker (2002a) have argued that personal efficacy, in turn, is generally more positive for the individual and probably more related to work engagement. Therefore, personal efficacy can be seen as a positive aspect of an individual’s personality that reinforces control and motivation, rather than being a predictor of burnout (Lee & Ashforth, 1996; Schaufeli & Enzmann, 1998; Schaufeli, Martanez, Marques Pinto, Salanova, & Bakker, 2002a). Given the above, in this study, burnout is defined as a two-dimensional structure consisting of exhaustion and depersonalisation/cynicism.. 16.

(19) 2.2.3 Measuring burnout. The Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI; Maslach & Jackson, 1981) is the most used measure of burnout. There are three main versions of the MBI. The MBI-HSS (Human Services Survey; Maslach & Jackson, 1996) and the MBI-ES (MBI Educators Survey; Maslach, Jackson, & Schwab, 1996) measure burnout in people-oriented work environments (Maslach & Jackson, 1986), and the MBI-GS (MBI-General Survey; Maslach & Jackson, 1986) measures burnout in the general work environment.. All three versions measure similar components, namely emotional exhaustion, depersonalisation/cynicism, and reduced personal accomplishment/efficacy (Maslach et al., 2008). Other measures of burnout do exist, such as the Burnout Measure that was developed by Pines and Aronson (1988), the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (Kristensen, Borritz, Villadsen, & Christensen, 2005) and the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory (Demerouti & Bakker, 2008; Demerouti & Nachreiner, 1998). These measures do have some similarities and differences to the three MBI scales, but are seldom used in burnout research and are, therefore, neither used in this study nor further discussed in this section. The reader is referred to the studies cited above for more information on these alternative burnout measures.. 2.3 Theories about the causes of burnout. Various theories and models have been postulated to explain the antecedents of burnout (Schaufeli & Enzmann, 1998). However, the JD-R model (Demerouti et al., 2001) has emerged as the most popular model used to explain the causes of burnout. In this section, three early models that were used to explain the development of burnout are briefly discussed because of their similarities to the JD-R model. Hereafter, the JD-R model, the theoretical framework used in this study, is presented.. 17.

(20) 2.3.1 Cherniss’s burnout process model. According to Schaufeli and Buunk (2003), Cherniss (1980a) described burnout as a longterm process of changes in an individual’s behaviour and attitudes that occur in three stages. The first stage is defined as the stress stage, which occurs when an individual feels stressed due to the imbalance between demands and resources in the organisation (Cherniss, 1980a). The second stage is the strain phase, where an individual experiences strain due to feelings of emotional exhaustion and fatigue. The third stage is the defensive coping stage. This stage involves a change in an individual’s behaviours and attitudes towards clients. This, in turn, can lead to indulgence in one’s own needs rather than focusing on the importance of clients and their needs (Cherniss, 1980a). Cherniss emphasised that job demands are the antecedent of burnout. These are enforced due to individuals using coping mechanisms of withdrawal and avoidance to deal with demands in the workplace (Cherniss, 1980b). 2.3.2 Etzion’s burnout process model. According to Schaufeli and Buunk (2003), Etzion (1987) argued that the development of burnout is also related to job demands. He suggested that burnout is a process that slowly develops without an individual realising that he or she is burnt-out. He or she will then suddenly, without warning, feel exhausted, and be unable to effectively cope with these negative emotions (Schaufeli & Buunk, 2003). Etzion, therefore, described the development of burnout as an unrecognised process that arises as a result of a misfit between personal and environmental resources. He further argued that the development of burnout slowly erodes an individual without their noticing notice the negative effects or consequences (Schaufeli & Buunk, 2003). 2.3.3 Hallsten’s burnout process model. According to Schaufeli and Buunk (2003), Hallsten (1993) suggested that the development of burnout is a contribution of the psychological state of an individual. An 18.

(21) individual will experience feelings of depression or being unable to cope with demands or stressors in the workplace. It is suggested that the process of burning out is evoked by the misfit of a self-enriching job role, which is disturbed or threatened by a substitutive role. This means that burnout develops when additional job roles influence the performance of meaningful job tasks because an individual finds it difficult to cope or identify with the tasks (Schaufeli & Buunk, 2003).. 2.3.4 The Job-Demands Resource Model. The JD-R model, which has emerged as the most popular model of the development of burnout, shares similarities with the aforementioned models. The JD-R model examines the negative effects that job demands have on an individual in a work environment. These demands can include the social, organisational, or psychological aspects of the job, which are related to psychological or physical costs (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004). Job demands on their own might own might not always be negative; however, if there is an imbalance between demands and resources available (e.g., more demands than resources) at work, an individual may be at risk of burnout (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007; van Woerkom, Bakker, & Nishii, 2016).. 2.4 The Job Demands-Resource Model. 2.4.1 A description of the JD-R model. The JD-R model describes the work environment through two categories. The two categories are job demands and job resources (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004). Job demands are defined by Demerouti et al. (2001, p. 501) as “those physical, social, or organisational aspects of the job that require sustained physical or mental effort and are therefore associated with certain physiological and psychological costs”. Examples of these demands include pressure, social demands, and expectations (Demerouti et al., 2001). Job resources are defined as “those physical, social, or organisational aspects of the job that may do any of the following: (a) be functional in achieving work goals; (b) reduce job 19.

(22) demands and the associated physiological and psychological costs; and (c) stimulate personal growth and development” (Demerouti et al., 2001, p. 501). Examples of job resources include job clarity, autonomy, and social support (Demerouti et al., 2001). Karasek’s job demand-control model (JDCM) and Hobfoll’s conservation of resources theory (COR) theory focus on the idea and the role of job demands and job resources in the development of burnout, which relates back to the JD-R model (Karasek, 1979; Hobfoll, 2002). Job demands and job resources play a role in determining either job strain and burnout, or wellbeing and engagement in the workplace (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007; van der Doef & Maes, 1999; Xanthopoulou et al., 2007). The role of demands within the JD-R model can also be viewed from Karasek’s model of the job demand-control model (JDCM; Karasek, 1979), as it stipulates that strain develops in the workplace when there are excessive demands and low control. This is similar to the JD-R model, where an individual will experience strain when there are high demands and low resources in the workplace (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007; van der Doef & Maes, 1999). The importance of resources in the development of burnout can be seen in Hobfoll’s (2002) COR theory. The JD-R model and Hobfoll’s COR theory both emphasise the role of resources in that when an individual has access to resources, these resources generate additional resources (Hobfoll, 2002; Xanthopoulou et al., 2007). Attainment of additional resources can, in turn, decrease the strain caused by demands in the workplace, and generate positive outcomes. These positive outcomes include wellbeing and engagement, rather than fatigue and burnout. The role of resources is shown in the motivational process of the JD-R model, which will be discussed below (Hobfoll, 2002; Xanthopoulou et al., 2007).. 2.4.2 Psychological processes. According to the JD-R model, the work environment elicits two psychological processes. These are: the health impairment process and the motivational process (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007). The health impairment process describes a work environment where 20.

(23) high demands require additional effort from an individual. As a result of high demands, an individual may experience depletion of his or her mental and physical resources. The depletion of resources can lead to negative consequences such as exhaustion or the development of health-related issues (Xanthopoulou et al., 2007).. Schaufeli and Bakker (2004) describe the health impairment process in terms of Hockey’s (1977) model of compensatory control. Briefly, Hockey’s model of compensatory control describes the development of burnout through excessive demands exhausting the mental and physical energy of an individual (Hockey, 1977; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004). Employees can use performance-protection strategies in order to decrease the demands in the workplace. These strategies are done through either active coping responses or passive coping responses. Active coping responses include an individual investing all their energy in keeping up with the demands. As a result, an individual experiences physical or psychological fatigue (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004). Passive coping responses include an individual reducing their energy level, resulting in disengagement (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004).. The motivational process focuses on the importance of job resources in the workplace (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004). Resources play an essential role in enhancing either intrinsic motivation or extrinsic motivation; therefore, they have motivational potential in that they can increase engagement, reduce cynicism, and improve performance. Intrinsic motivation includes personal growth, advancement, and commitment. Extrinsic motivation consists of improving one’s work role and performance in order to achieve work goals (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004). Schaufeli and Bakker (2004) make reference to DeCharms (1968), White (1959), and Baumeister and Learly (1995), who suggest that job resources fulfil the basic human needs, such as autonomy, ability, and empathy. Intrinsic motivation allows for employees to achieve autonomy and empathy. This is in contrast to extrinsic motivation which provides individuals with the opportunity to display abilities in the workplace. This process allows for enhanced meaning and increased engagement due to employees either achieving their basic human needs or meeting work goals (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004). 21.

(24) Furthermore, the JD-R model emphasises the importance of the interaction (e.g., moderation or mediation) between job demands and job resources because if there are many job resources, they may protect against the strain of demands, including that of burnout (Bakker, Demerouti, Taris, Schaufeli, & Schreurs, 2003). It is important to note that burnout develops from an imbalance of demands and resources in the workplace. That is, burnout develops when there are high demands and low resources in the workplace; however, if there is a balance between the demands and resources in the workplace, burnout is unlikely to develop. Therefore, job resources can reduce or eliminate the experience of burnout by generating motivation or engagement (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007).. 2.5 Personal resources. 2.5.1 Self-efficacy, organisational-based self-esteem, and optimism as a personal resource. Schaufeli and Taris (2014) and Xanthopoulou et al. (2007) add the idea of personal resources to the JD-R model. Resources can be at the organisational level and at a personal level (Schaufeli & Taris, 2014; Xanthopoulou et al., 2007). Personal resources have been described as the psychological aspects most commonly related to resilience where an employee has the control to positively influence one’s work environment (Schaufeli & Taris, 2014; Xanthopoulou et al., 2007). There are three types of personal resources that are currently positioned within the JD-R model. Hobfoll (2002) has acknowledged these as: self-efficacy (Bandura, 1989), organisational-based self-esteem (Pierce, Gardner, Cummings & Dunham, 1989), and optimism (Scheier & Carver, 1985). Self-efficacy is defined as the ability of an individual to perceive the possibility of overcoming the demands in the workplace (Chen, Gully, & Eden, 2001; Bandura, 1989; Xanthopoulou et al., 2007). Organisational-based self-esteem refers to the belief that an individual can meet organisational goals (Pierce et al., 1989). Optimism is defined as the ability to generate positive feelings and experiences in the work environment (Scheier & 22.

(25) Carver, 1985). These three resources create a sense of resilience, which impacts on the work performance of an individual (Xanthopoulou et al., 2007). Essentially, self-efficacy, organisational-based self-esteem, and optimism can be viewed as personality constructs; suggesting, therefore, that personality can be a personal resource in the JD-R model (Xanthopoulou et al., 2007).. 2.5.2 Job crafting as a personal resource. Another potential type of personal resource is job crafting (Tims, Bakker, & Derks, 2012). Job crafting allows for an individual to adapt and adjust the job demands and job resources in the work environment and, therefore, allows opportunities for an individual to adjust to demands by using organisational and personal resources (Tims et al., 2012; Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001). Organisational resources include obtaining feedback after performing a task, having access to coaching by a professional to guide work behaviours, increasing work autonomy, and creating new work opportunities to develop and challenging oneself by taking on new tasks and reducing workload (Tims et al., 2012; Wingerden, Bakker, & Derks, 2016). Personal resources include one’s personality and positive traits that reinforce work engagement, satisfaction, motivation, and one’s work passion (Tims et al., 2012). Thus, job crafting can be viewed as one type of personal resource used to buffer demands in the workplace, as individuals can optimise their work environment (Wingerden et al., 2016). Tims et al. (2012) explain job crafting from within the JD-R model. They argue that employees can adapt their job tasks and the limitations of these tasks by altering the balance between the demands and resources in the workplace (Tims et al., 2012). Moreover, through job crafting, employees gain the opportunity to increase engagement and work performance which, in turn, reduces the amount of demands in the workplace and can prevent burnout. Job crafting, therefore, allows for employees to create a better fit between their demands and resources by satisfying personal needs, abilities, and motivations (Bakker, Oerlemans, & ten Brummelhuis, 2013; Wingerden et al., 2016).. 23.

(26) 2.6 Personality as a personal resource. As previously mentioned, personality may be considered as a personal resource that can help to manage demands and promote wellbeing in the workplace (Taris & Schaufeli, 2016). Personal and job resources promote and motivate goal attainment behaviours (Taris & Schaufeli, 2016; Xanthopoulou et al., 2007). It may, therefore, be important that an individual use personal resources to help improve work experiences and decrease the probability of developing burnout. According to Chen et al. (2001), Pierce et al. (1989), and Scheier and Carver (1985), the availability of personal resources decreases strain and stressors in the workplace. Therefore, a resource-intensive work environment may harvest positive work-related emotions that will promote the physical and emotional wellbeing of employees (Chen et al., 2001; Pierce et al., 1989; Scheier & Carver, 1985).. Because personality is related to coping behaviours, it is possible that personality can be a resource used to buffer demands in the workplace (Hogan, 2013; Xanthopoulou et al., 2007). Hogan (2013) explains the idea of strategic self-awareness, which refers to the importance of an individual being aware of his or her capabilities and to behave accordingly in the workplace. Through understanding his or her capabilities and the manner in which he or she can perform or behave to get the best positive outcome, the individual may be able to reduce the experience of burnout. Furthermore, Xanthopoulou et al. (2007) introduce the idea of personality as a personal resource, as an individual will be able to balance resources to cope with work demands. This means that, similar to Hogan’s view of personality, personality can be viewed a personal resource.. 2.7 The five-factor model of personality. In this section, the five-factor model of personality will be presented, which includes a discussion of the three major trait theorists’ views on personality and the contribution that these trait theorists had on the development of the five-factor model. Lastly, a definition of the five factors and their facets is provided.. 24.

(27) 2.7.1 Definition of personality traits. The five-factor model of personality is a trait-model of personality (Ryckman, 2012). Pervin and John (2001, p. 225) define personality traits as individual differences in the way that people “behave, think and feel”. McCrae and Costa (1990, p. 23) described traits as “dimensions of individual differences in tendencies to show consistent patterns of thoughts, feelings and actions”. According to Pervin and John (2001), traits in personality research serve three major purposes: (a) to summarise, (b) to predict, and (c) to explain a person’s behaviour. Traits suggest that the behaviour is determined by the inherent characteristics of a person rather than by the situation (Pervin & John, 2001). From the trait perspective, people possess wide-ranging predispositions to respond in a specific manner and, therefore, a person’s behaviour can be predicted by the way in which one thinks and feels (McCrae & Costa, 1997; Ryckman, 2012). Briefly, these trait perspectives are based on the five-factor model of personality, also referred to as the Big Five personality traits, which people identify mostly with. Broadly speaking, this model posits that there are five factors that define personality: (a) Neuroticism, (b) Extraversion, (c) Openness to Experience, (d) Agreeableness, and (e) Conscientiousness (Costa & McCrae, 1992a).. 2.8 Theoretical models of personality traits. The trait theory of personality is based on the lexical and factor analytic traditions (McCrea & John, 1992). For Goldberg (1990), words in the English language could be used to formulate personality, with these words encompassing the whole of personality. Wiggins (1979) describes personality attributes as traits that are visible and that are directed at describing a person’s behaviour. Therefore, researchers can use personality lexicon in order to describe and understand behaviour. Allport (1961), Cattell (1979), Norman (1963), and Goldberg (1990) stated that the most prominent social differences among people become encoded into a person’s language, and the significance of this individual uniqueness determines whether it is encoded into a single word. Personality lexicon therefore indicates the most predictable attributes of an individual that others 25.

(28) identify with most (Allport, 1961; Cattell, 1979; Norman, 1963; Goldberg, 1990). Three of the major proponents of the trait theory are discussed below.. 2.8.1 Allport and Odbert Allport and Odbert (1936, p. 26) described traits as “the generalized and personalized determining tendencies” in which an individual adapts to the environment. Behaviour is shaped and determined by the given environment. Allport (1961) describes traits as the distinctive characteristics that are unique to a person. Traits are driven by both the mental processes and the motivational aspects of an individual, as humans grow with each situation and mature with experiences in life. Therefore, the environment plays an essential role in shaping behaviour through lived experiences (Allport, 1961). Allport’s (1961) theory stipulates that personality develops through the concept of the self. The self develops from childhood up until death, and adapts with life experiences (Allport, 1961). Allport describes the development of personality as becoming. This means that it takes time and exposure to different environments for the personality to develop into one’s own self-realisation (Ryckman, 2012). Allport’s trait theory is similar to the five-factor model, in that traits are viewed as the determinants of one’s behaviour, and because he stipulated that a person’s personality is made up of multiple traits or facets (Ryckman, 2012).. 2.8.2 Eysenck. According to Pervin and John (2001), for Eysenck, personality can be arranged in a hierarchy. He suggested that the simplest behaviours derive from the simplest responses, and that these transfer habits into certain behaviours. In other words, when an individual constantly acts in the same way within a given environment, it results in predictable actions turning into stable behaviours (Eysenck, 1990; Pervin & John, 2001). Eysenck defined traits as constant characteristics that are organised as types when combined. Traits are viewed as innate, meaning that they are biologically and environmentally 26.

(29) shaped; it is traits that determine behaviour (Eysenck, 2013). Through factor analysis, Eysenck formulated three factors to describe personality, which are labelled: extraversion/introversion,. stability/neuroticism. and. impulse. control/psychoticism. (Eysenck, 2013).. 2.8.3 Cattell The basic element for Cattell’s (1979) factor analytical trait approach to personality is the view that traits are predispositions. This means that traits occur in a similar pattern in different situations (Cattell, 1979). Cattell defines traits as permanent and as the core essence that makes up one’s personality. This theory stipulates that these traits can be altered with learning experiences (Ryckman, 2012). Cattell used factor analysis, known as the R technique, to generate specific and unique traits (Ryckman, 2012). He began by examining adjectives in the English language, which lead to his narrowing them down from 4,500 traits to 16 traits. The five-factor model of personality is an extension of these 16 traits (Ryckman, 2012).. 2.9 Five-factor model. The five-factor model of personality was developed from the personality insight of the three-trait theorist mentioned above. The five factors originated from the lexical and factor analysis tradition in that personality traits are central to human behaviour, and these traits need to be encoded into the English language (McCrae & Costa, 1997).. 2.9.1 The Neo Personality Inventory. According to McCrae and Costa (1997), many psychologists, including Digman (1990), suggest that the five-factor model is the best representation of the trait structure in personality. Personality traits that individuals identify mostly with are the five basic factors known to be Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to Experience, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness. Each of these five factors have smaller, more specific facets that 27.

(30) make up the overall factor, and these are assessed in the Revised Neo Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R; Costa & McCrae, 1992a). In other words, personality can be organised broadly as consisting of five overarching traits and, more specifically, in terms of the facets that underlie each of the five factors. The NEO-PI-R was developed to analyse the five-factor model by measuring an overall of 30 facets, which include six facets for each the five factors (Costa & McCrae, 1992a).. 2.9.2 The Basic Traits Inventory. In this study, the Basic Traits Inventory (BTI) is used to measure personality traits. The BTI was developed by Taylor and de Bruin (2006) to measure the five-factor model of personality and the facets of these five factors in the South African context. The BTI therefore measures the five factors of (a) Neuroticism, (b) Extraversion, (c) Openness to Experience, (d) Agreeableness, and (e) Conscientiousness. The five factors in the BTI all consist of five facets, except for Neuroticism, which contains four facets (Metzer, de Bruin, & Adams, 2014; Taylor, 2004). The structure of the BTI questionnaire is based on the NEO-PI-R five factors and facets (Costa & McCrae, 1992a). Therefore, the definitions of the factors and the facets in both the NEO-PI-R and the BTI are similar; however, in some cases, the names of the facets differ.. 2.9.3 Neuroticism. Neuroticism, according to the NEO-PI-R, encompasses the traits of ineffectively coping with negative emotions, sadness, anger, and/or anxiety (Pervin & John, 2001). Individuals who score high on Neuroticism have the tendency to be more distressed and anxious, which can lead to irrational thinking, negative coping styles, low self-esteem, and poor control of impulses (McCrae & Costa, 1987; McCrae & John, 1992; Pervin & John, 2001). They are also likely to be nervous, feel inadequate, have constant changes in emotions, and worry over situations. Those who score low on Neuroticism are more likely to be relaxed, detached, and calm because they tend not to have negative emotions (McCrae & Costa, 1987; McCrae & John, 1992; Pervin & John, 2001). 28.

(31) Costa and McCrae (1992a) defined six facets to describe Neuroticism in the NEO-PI-R, namely anxiety, self-consciousness, depression, vulnerability, impulsiveness, and angry hostility. Anxiety refers to the anxious or worried state of mind of an individual. Selfconsciousness refers to an individual who is nervous or shy in front of others (Costa & McCrae, 1992a). Depression refers to an individual who feels lonely, despondent, and/or has a low mood. Vulnerability refers to the inability to cope in stressful situations. Impulsiveness refers to being unable to effectively cope with dangerous temptations. Angry hostility relates to anger, antagonism, and resentment (Costa & McCrae, 1992a).. Neuroticism, according to the BTI, has four facets. These include anxiety, depression, self-consciousness, and affective instability (Taylor, 2004). According to the BTI, anxiety (similar to anxiety in the NEO-PI-R) refers how nervous, tense, or stressed an individual is. Depression (similar to depression in the NEO-PI-R) refers to the experience of feeling guilty, despondent, and discouraged. Self-consciousness (similar to self-consciousness in the NEO-PI-R) measures how sensitive an individual is to criticism and feelings of embarrassment. Affective instability (similar to angry hostility in the NEO-PI-R) measures how easily an individual can get upset and experience feelings of resentment and irritation (Taylor, 2004).. 2.9.4 Extraversion. Extraversion, according to the NEO-PI-R, describes individuals who tend to be assertive, vigorous, and enthusiastic (Costa & McCrae, 1992a). Costa and McCrae’s (1992a) view of Extraversion is very broad, given that there are multiple adjectives to describe traits of Extraversion in the English language. An individual who scores high in Extraversion is considered to be gregarious, vocal, positive, energetic, ambitious, and caring. Individuals who are described as being low in Extraversion are more likely to be reserved, taskoriented, quiet, and aloof (McCrae & John, 1992a; Pervin & John, 2001). McCrae and John (1992a) suggests that, according to lexical literature, those people who score low on Extraversion are likely to be quite, shy, and reserved. 29.

(32) Costa and McCrae (1992a) defined six facets to describe Extraversion in the NEO-PI-R, namely gregariousness, activity level, assertiveness, excitement-seeking, positive emotions, and warmth. Gregariousness describes someone who is sociable and friendly. Activity level refers to being active with high energy levels and high participation in tasks (Costa & McCrae, 1992a). Assertiveness refers to a confident and dominant presence in an individual. Excitement-seeking refers to risk-takers and adventure-seeking individuals. Positive emotions measure optimistic, cheerful, and joyful traits. Warmth measures enthusiasm and kindness (Costa & McCrae, 1992a).. Extraversion, according to the BTI, has five facets. These include gregariousness, positive affectivity, ascendance, excitement-seeking, and liveliness. Gregariousness (similar to gregariousness in the NEO-PI-R) refers to the need for constant social and human interaction (Taylor, 2004). Positive affectivity (similar to positive emotions in the NEO-PI-R) refers to an individual who regularly experiences positive emotions such as happiness, love, fervour, and joyfulness. Ascendance (similar to assertiveness in the NEO-PI-R) refers to an individual that derives satisfaction from entertaining people and taking charge of large groups of people. Excitement-seeking (similar to excitementseeking in the NEO-PI-R) refers to an individual who enjoys stimulating activities. Liveliness (similar to activity level in the NEO-PI-R) refers to how energetic and active an individual is (Taylor, 2004).. 2.9.5 Openness to Experience. Openness to Experience, according to the NEO-PI-R, describes individuals who tend to be proactive, daring, creative, and sensitive, and who tend to explore the unknown. Individuals with a larger score on this trait are also more likely to be creative, curious, intelligent, logical, and imaginative, and have broad interest areas (Digman, 1990; Ghorpade, Lackritz, & Singh, 2007; McCrae & John, 1992; Pervin & John, 2001). Individuals who score low on Openness to Experience are described as being conservative, having narrower interests, and being more down to earth (Digman, 1990; 30.

(33) Ghorpade et al., 2007; McCrae & John, 1992; Pervin & John, 2001).. Costa and McCrae (1992a) defined the six facets to describe Openness to Experience in the NEO-PI-R as fantasy, ideas, actions, values, feelings, and aesthetics. Fantasy measures imagination and creativity. Ideas measures openness to new ideas, learning, and growing knowledge (Costa & McCrae, 1992a). Action refers to openness to new experiences. Values measures openness to exploring and testing existing values, norms and religions. Feelings refer to the openness of evaluating one’s feelings and emotions. Aesthetics measures interests in art and culture (Costa & McCrae, 1992a).. Openness to Experience, according to the BTI, has five facets. These include aesthetics, actions, values, ideas, and imagination. Aesthetics (similar to aesthetics in the NEO-PI-R) refers to an individual that sees the beauty in objects and enjoys music, poetry, and art, without necessarily being artistically talented (Taylor, 2004). Actions (similar to actions in the NEO-PI-R) refer to an individual that is open to trying new activities. Values (similar to values in the NEO-PI-R) refer to the degree to which an individual is open to re-think religious, social, and political values without conforming to authority. Ideas (similar to ideas in the NEO-PI-R) refer to the likeliness to which an individual enjoys intellectually challenging him- or herself and is open to unconventional ideas. Imagination (similar to fantasy in the NEO-PI-R) refers to the likeliness to which an individual is creative and enjoys fantasies (Taylor, 2004).. 2.9.6 Agreeableness. In terms of the NEO-PI-R, Graziano and Eisenberg (1997) describe an individual who scores high on Agreeableness to possess traits such as being likable, friendly, and compliant (Graziano & Eisenberg, 1997). Digman (1990) describes those who score high on Agreeableness to be more humane, because these individuals are more likely to be nurtured, thoughtful, selfless, and emotionally supportive. Heaven, Ciarrochi, Leeson, and Barkus (2013) describe an individual who scores high on Agreeableness to be more soft-hearted, trusting, loving, straightforward, forgiving, and good-natured. In contrast, 31.

(34) according to Digman (1990), those who score lower on Agreeableness are likely to be self-centred, envious, and malicious. Heaven et al. (2013) suggest that individuals who score low on Agreeableness may be cynical, suspicious, rude, manipulative, uncooperative, and irritable.. Costa and McCrae (1992a) defined the six facets to describe Agreeableness in the NEOPI-R as straightforwardness, trust, altruism, modesty, tender-mindedness, and compliance. Straightforwardness refers to one’s level of honesty (Costa & McCrae, 1992a). Trust refers to individual’s views on others and their perceptions of how trustworthy others are. Altruism measures generosity and being concerned with helping others. Modesty measures the level of humility of an individual. Tender-mindedness is a measure of how compassionate someone is. Compliance refers to the ability to forgive others (Costa & McCrae, 1992a).. Agreeableness, according to the BTI, has five facets. These include straightforwardness, compliance, modesty, tender-mindedness, and prosocial tendencies (Taylor, 2004). Straightforwardness (similar to straightforwardness in the NEO-PI-R) refers to the degree to which an individual is honest, genuine, and forthright. Compliance (similar to compliance in the NEO-PI-R) refers to the degree to which an individual complies with others and constrains aggression and anger towards others. Modesty (similar to modesty in the NEO-PI-R) refers to the humbleness of an individual. Tender-mindedness (similar to tender-mindedness in the NEO-PI-R) refers to the degree of sympathy that an individual has for others. Prosocial tendencies (similar to altruism in the NEO-PI-R) refer to an individual that is kind, caring and considerate (Taylor, 2004).. 2.9.7 Conscientiousness. According to the NEO-PI-R, those scoring high on Conscientiousness are perceived to be motivated, determined, and reliable, and have goal-driven behaviour (Periard & Burns, 2014). According to McCrae and John (1992), Conscientiousness can therefore be seen as describing a personality dimension that distinguishes between individuals that are good 32.

(35) versus bad. This factor distinguishes between individual differences, whereas McCrae and Costa (1987) suggest that individuals with a larger score on Conscientiousness are likely to be thorough, neat, organised, and hard-working. Pervin and John (2001) describe an individual who scores high on Conscientiousness as organised, self-disciplined, ambitious, persevering, and hardworking. On the other hand, McCrae and Costa (1987) describe those who score low on Conscientiousness as more disorganised, untidy, and unenthusiastic. Pervin and John (2001) suggest that an individual who scores low on Conscientiousness is more unreliable, careless, lazy, self-indulgent, and purposeless.. Costa and McCrae (1992a) define the six facets to describe Conscientiousness in the NEO-PI-R as self-discipline, competence, dutifulness, order, deliberation, and achievement-striving. Self-discipline refers to the degree to which a person completes tasks once started even if faced with a certain level of difficulty. Competence refers to a person’s level of efficacy. Dutifulness measures the degree of an individual’s compliance to ethical procedures and moral responsibilities (Costa & McCrae, 1992a). Order refers to how neat, organised, and orderly an individual is. Deliberation refers to careful consideration before making decisions, and achievement-striving measures how determined an individual is to reach goals (Costa & McCrae, 1992a).. Conscientiousness, according to the BTI, has five facets. These include order, selfdiscipline, dutifulness, effort, and prudence (Taylor, 2004). Order (similar to order in the NEO-PI-R) measures one’s ability to keep things neat and organised, to put things back in place, and to work systematically. Self-discipline (similar to self-discipline in the NEO-PI-R) refers to the ability of an individual to complete tasks once started and to selfmotivate when faced with difficult or demanding tasks. Dutifulness (similar to dutifulness in the NEO-PI-R) refers to an individual that is likely to be reliable, to follow principles, and to accomplish moral or ethical duties. Effort (similar to achievement striving in the NEO-PI-R) refers to an individual who sets goals and is hard-working. Prudence (similar to deliberation in the NEO-PI-R) refers to an individual that is likely to think things through, referring back to facts before acting (Taylor, 2004).. 33.

(36) 2.10 The relationship between burnout and personality. Several studies have investigated the relationship between the five-factor model of personality and burnout. In this section, these findings are summarised. The most consistent findings show that Neuroticism and Extraversion are strongly related to burnout; however, evidence does show that all five factors are associated with burnout (Bakker, van der Zee, Lewig, & Dollard, 2006; Morgan & de Bruin, 2010; Schaufeli & Buunk, 2003).. 2.10.1 Neuroticism According to Langelaan, Bakker, van Doornen, and Schaufeli (2006), Zellars, Perrewe, and Hochwarter (2000), and Schaufeli and Enzmann (1998), Neuroticism is the best predictor and has the strongest relation to burnout. Numerous studies have indicated a positive relationship between burnout and Neuroticism. More specifically, Neuroticism has. shown. to. be. positively. related. to. emotional. exhaustion. and. depersonalisation/cynicism (Bakker, Van der Zee, Lewig, & Dollard, 2006; Bühler & Land, 2003; Hills, Francis, & Rutledge, 2004; Kokkinos, 2007; Vallerand, Paquet, Phillippe, & Charest, 2010). Bühler and Land (2003) found that there was a positive relationship between Neuroticism and emotional exhaustion and cynicism. The relationship between Neuroticism with exhaustion and cynicism have been supported by many other researchers (Deary et al., 1996; Hills & Norvell, 1991; LePine, LePine, & Jackson, 2004; Zellars et al., 2000), suggesting that people who score high on Neuroticism also tend to score high on emotional exhaustion and depersonalisation. Schaufeli and Enzmann (1998) suggest that individuals who score high on Neuroticism are most likely to negatively react to stressful work environments, owing to the cynical attitudes formed around job roles and towards clients. These cynical attitudes can result in employees creating negative self-evaluations of their own capabilities (Schaufeli & Enzmann, 1998). This is supported by Schneider (2004), who suggests that individuals that score high on Neuroticism may form negative emotions in the workplace, which may lead to performing poorly, as one becomes more cautious in the workplace (Tokar, 34.

(37) Fischer, & Subich, 1998).. Bolger and Schilling (1991) and Heppner, Cook, Wright, and Johnson (1995) suggest that individuals who score high on Neuroticism show more emotional distress when in a stressful environment, and Bolger and Schilling (1991), and McCrae and Costa (1986) suggested that these individuals are most likely to use negative coping strategies, such as denying the situation, using self-criticism to bring oneself down, and holding cynical attitudes towards a situation, which leads to employees being vulnerable to burnout (Bolger & Schilling, 1991; McCrae & Costa, 1986). In support of the above, Bakker et al. (2010) suggest that Neuroticism is positively related to job demands and psychological strain.. At the facet level, Hurt et al. (2013) show that anxiety, anger, depression, selfconsciousness, and vulnerability show small to medium correlations with emotional exhaustion; and anxiety, anger, and depression show small to medium correlations with cynicism. This suggests that some or all Neuroticism facets are related to burnout.. 2.10.2 Extraversion. Studies have generally indicated that there is a negative relationship between burnout and Extraversion (van den Broeck, Vansteenkiste, de Witte, & Lens, 2008). More specifically, research has demonstrated that there is a negative relationship between Extraversion and exhaustion and cynicism (van den Broeck et al., 2008). Kim, Shin, and Swanger (2009) suggest that there is a negative relationship between Extraversion and exhaustion, as employees who are highly Extraverted are more likely to be energetic and social, which creates positive work environments, relationships, and social support. Costa and McCrae (1992) suggest that individuals with a larger score on Extraversion tend to socially interact with others because they have a greater need for stimulation and have a greater need for optimism. Therefore, these individuals are most likely to use rational coping strategies and have positive reviews about themselves due to the positive emotional state that they are in (Dorn & Matthews, 1992; Watson & Hubbard, 1996). 35.

(38) Van den Broeck et al. (2008) suggest that an individual who scores high on Extraversion will be able to use their positive traits of optimism, self-efficacy, and social interactions as resources to buffer the demands and stressors of the work environment and, therefore, such an employee is less likely to feel exhausted and more likely to feel energetic (van den Broeck et al., 2008). In addition, Xanthopoulou et al. (2007) support the above by finding that self-efficacy, optimism, and organisational self-esteem are positively associated with job resources and work engagement, and Bakker et al. (2010) suggest that Extraversion is positively related to job resources and organisational commitment. In contrast to the studies mentioned above, some researchers have shown that Extraversion is unrelated to burnout (Zellars et al., 2000) or that there is a positive relationship between Extraversion and burnout (Bühler & Land, 2003). At the facet level, according to Hurt et al. (2013), two of the six facets of Extraversion, namely friendliness and cheerfulness, have a negative small to medium correlation with exhaustion. Five of the six facets of Extraversion, namely friendliness, gregariousness, assertiveness, activity level, and cheerfulness, have a negative small to medium correlation to cynicism (Hurt et al., 2013).. 2.10.3 Openness to Experience. Research has shown that there is a positive relationship between Openness to Experience and burnout (Deary et al., 1996; Roccas et al., 2002; Zellars et al., 2002). Roccas et al. (2002) describe that an individual who scores high on Openness to Experience is likely to set motivational goals for self-direction in the workplace. This may be in order to gain autonomy, to develop new ideas, or to be accepting and open to subordinates’ ideas within the workplace (Roccas et al., 2002). Therefore, these employees will most likely experience conflicts with their goals in relation to conformity to the organisation and security in the organisation. These may create conflict with the status quo as well as the avoidance of new and different environments (Roccas et al., 2002). These conflicts can lead to an employee having cynical attitudes towards the organisation in which he or she 36.

(39) works, which can lead to this employee being vulnerable to burnout (Roccas et al., 2002). Deary et al. (1996) and Zellars et al. (2002) found a positive relationship between Openness to Experience and depersonalisation/cynicism. In that, according to Deary et al. (1996), individuals who have more approachable personalities were more likely to experience emotional exhaustion. Hurt et al. (2013) found no statistically significant relationships between the facets of Openness to Experience and emotional exhaustion or cynicism.. 2.10.4 Agreeableness. Meier, Robinson, and Wilkowski (2006) argue that Agreeableness and burnout have a negative relationship. This negative relationship arises, as employees who score high on Agreeableness might not be affected by the negative stimuli in the work environment, which results in an individual developing high self-control and less work demands. This is due to these employees who score high on Agreeableness being self-controlled and actively being aware of negative work environments that are too demanding. These employees, therefore, can moderate these effects by removing themselves from the negative work environment or avoiding feelings of anger or aggression by removing themselves from the situation (Ahadi & Rothbart, 1994; Heaven et al., 2013).. Eisenberg et al. (2002) have emphasised that those who score high on Agreeableness may benefit from pro-active skills which are self-regulated and self-motivated. Moreover, Kohn and Schooler (1982) argue that job and personal resources play a mutual role in the shaping of a person’s learning through lived experiences and encounters, and by a person understanding the strength of their personality trait, they can create a resourceful work environment (Kohn & Schooler, 1982). Xanthopoulou et al. (2007) indicate that employees who score high on Agreeableness are more likely to focus on their job resources than their job demands, as they enjoy helping others in the workplace. This positive energy can allow these individuals to self-regulate their own thoughts and behaviours and to avoid any negative outcomes in the workplace, which will decrease exhaustion (Xanthopoulou et al., 2007). 37.

(40) In contrast to the above, Zellars et al. (2002) found a weak negative relationship between Agreeableness. and. depersonalisation/cynicism,. and. no. relationship. between. Agreeableness and emotional exhaustion.. In relation to the facet level, Periard and Burns (2014) indicate that the facets of altruism, tender-mindedness, and compliance, are negatively related to emotional exhaustion. According to Hurt et al. (2013), the facet of trust is negatively correlated to exhaustion, and the facet of modesty is positively correlated to exhaustion.. 2.10.5 Conscientiousness. Studies have indicated a negative relationship between burnout and Conscientiousness (McCrae & John, 1992; Kim et al., 2009). More specifically, Conscientiousness has been shown to have a negative relationship to emotional exhaustion and cynicism. McCrae and John (1992) identified two aspects of Conscientiousness which are contributors to the negative relationship between burnout and Conscientiousness. Firstly, an individual that scores high on Conscientiousness is viewed as being proactive, which describes the will to achieve motivational goals. Secondly, an individual that scores high on Conscientiousness is able to inhibit him- or herself, which describes the action of holding impulsive behaviours in check. Moreover, a negative relationship is formed as these traits of capability, achievement striving, and self-control, can be viewed as antecedents for having the motivation to resist job strain in the workplace (Taris & Schaufeli, 2016).. Kim et al. (2009) suggest that employees who score high on Conscientiousness tend to be more motivated and goal-oriented. These individuals represent traits of positive work engagement, which include vigour, commitment, and involvement; thus illustrating a negative relationship with burnout, as these individuals will be able to use resources and personal resources in order to prevent any impulsive behaviour through their self-control (Kim et al., 2009). According to Periard and Burns (2014), the facets of dutifulness and self-discipline negatively correlate with emotional exhaustion and cynicism. Hurt et al.’s (2013) research suggests that the facet of dutifulness correlates negatively to cynicism. 38.

(41) Moreover, there is evidence from Periard and Burns’ (2014) research that the facet of self-discipline is the best predictor of emotional exhaustion. This may be because an individual that scores high on the facet of self-discipline is likely to self-motivate and remain determined to complete tasks (Periard & Burns, 2014).. 2.11 Summary In summary, the literature shows that burnout is a multifaceted syndrome which develops over time among employees (Freudenberger, 1974; Maslach, 1976). Burnout develops when an employee is emotionally exhausted, experiencing cynical thoughts and feelings towards his or her work and clients, and questioning his or her capability to perform the work role (Maslach & Jackson, 1981). The JD-R model places emphasis on the role of demands and resources in the workplace, and how the availability of these two factors can determine whether a person is burnt out (Demerouti et al., 2001).. The development of burnout is dependent on both environmental and individual factors. Environmental factors include the demands in the workplace. These are out of the control of the individual because when there are high demands and low resources, an individual will feel overwhelmed by strain and stress, which may cause burnout (Demerouti et al., 2001). Individual factors consist of the resources available to an individual. These can include those personality traits or facets that determine behaviour that could buffer the demands and create a positive work environment. In using these resources, an employee is more motivated, setting and reaching organisational goals as well as greater belief in his or her own abilities, which creates a sense of resilience (Taris & Schaufeli, 2016; Xanthopoulou et al., 2007).. It is evident in the literature that personality can be viewed as a personal resource, and that it is the traits and facets of one’s personality that predicts one’s behaviour. The fivefactor model of personality can be a measure used to predict burnout amongst employees by examining their traits and facets. However, when viewing personality, little research has been done in relation to the facets of the five-factor model and burnout. From the trait perspective, it can be concluded that Neuroticism and Extraversion are mostly related to 39.

(42) burnout; however, there is evidence that all five factors have a relationship with burnout (van der Zee et al., 2006; Morgan & de Bruin, 2010; Schaufeli & Buunk, 2002).. 40.

(43) CHAPTER 3 METHOD. 3.1 Introduction. The research method is presented in this chapter. The research approach and design are described, and a description of the sample given. This is followed by the research procedure, and the instruments used to measure burnout and personality. A discussion on the statistical analyses is then provided, followed by an overview of the ethical considerations in this study.. 3.2 Research approach and design. A quantitative research approach was used in this study. Quantitative research consists of measuring variables numerically and interpreting results using statistical analyses (Wienclaw, 2015). Within the quantitative paradigm, the study used a non-experimental cross-sectional survey design and a correlational design. The former design measures data gathered from a population within a certain time frame (Mann, 2003). The latter is concerned with the relationships between variables (Brink & Wood, 1998). The benefits of using a non-experimental cross-sectional survey design in this study are that the study sought to investigate relationships between variables as they naturally exist in the environment. Indeed, Sedgwick (2014) suggests that a cross-sectional study is necessary when having to approximate behaviour in a population.. 3.3 Sample. The sample consisted of 127 adults in South Africa. Participants were obtained using non-probability convenience sampling, in which the sample from the population was not randomly selected, i.e., with probability sampling (Gravetter & Forzano, 2012). An attempt was made to obtain participants from different organisations and working environments in order to enhance the generalisability of the results. The small sample 41.

No results found