http://cdp.sagepub.

com/
Science
Current Directions in Psychological
http://cdp.sagepub.com/content/12/5/189
The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1111/1467-8721.01258
2003 12: 189 Current Directions in Psychological Science
Christina Maslach
Job Burnout: New Directions in Research and Intervention

Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
On behalf of:

Association for Psychological Science

can be found at: Current Directions in Psychological Science Additional services and information for

http://cdp.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Email Alerts:

http://cdp.sagepub.com/subscriptions Subscriptions:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Reprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Permissions:

What is This?

- Oct 1, 2003 Version of Record >>

at CLARKSON UNIV LIBRARY on October 9, 2013 cdp.sagepub.com Downloaded from at CLARKSON UNIV LIBRARY on October 9, 2013 cdp.sagepub.com Downloaded from at CLARKSON UNIV LIBRARY on October 9, 2013 cdp.sagepub.com Downloaded from at CLARKSON UNIV LIBRARY on October 9, 2013 cdp.sagepub.com Downloaded from at CLARKSON UNIV LIBRARY on October 9, 2013 cdp.sagepub.com Downloaded from
Copyright 2003 American Psychological Society
CURRENT DIRECTIONS IN PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE 189

Garlick, D. (2002). (See References)
Kolb, B., & Whishaw, I.Q. (1998). (See
References)
Neisser, U., Boodoo, G., Bouchard,
T.J., Jr., Boykin, A.W., Brody, N.,
Ceci, S.J., Halpern, D.F., Loehlin,
J.C., Perloff, R., Sternberg, R.J., &
Urbina, S. (1996). (See References)

Note

1. Address correspondence to Den-
nis Garlick, Department of Psychology,
University of Sydney, New South
Wales, 2006, Australia.

References

Bourgeois, J.-P., Goldman-Rakic, P.S., & Rakic, P.
(2000). Formation, elimination, and stabiliza-
tion of synapses in the primate cerebral cortex.
In M.S. Gazzaniga (Ed.),

The new cognitive neu-
rosciences

(2nd ed., pp. 4553). Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
Brody, N. (1992).

Intelligence

(2nd ed.). San Diego,
CA: Academic Press.
Cattell, R.B. (1987).

Intelligence: Its structure, growth
and action.

Amsterdam: North Holland.
Elman, J.L., Bates, E.A., Johnson, M.H., Karmiloff-
Smith, A., Parisi, D., & Plunkett, K. (1996).

Re-
thinking innateness: A connectionist perspective
on development.

Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Garlick, D. (2002). Understanding the nature of the
general factor of intelligence: The role of indi-
vidual differences in neural plasticity as an ex-
planatory mechanism.

Psychological Review,
109

, 116136.
Huttenlocher, P.R. (1994). Synaptogenesis, syn-
apse elimination, and neural plasticity in hu-
man cerebral cortex. In C.A. Nelson (Ed.),

Threats to optimal development: Integrating bio-
logical, psychological, and social risk factors

(pp.
3554). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Jensen, A.R. (1998).

The g factor.

Westport, CT:
Praeger.
Katz, L.C., & Shatz, C.J. (1996). Synaptic activity
and the construction of cortical circuits.

Sci-
ence,



274

, 11331138.
Kolb, B., & Whishaw, I.Q. (1998). Brain plasticity
and behavior.

Annual Review of Psychology,



49

,
4364.
Mackintosh, N.J. (1998).

IQ and human intelligence.

Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
McClelland, J.L., & Jenkins, E. (1991). Nature, nur-
ture, and connections: Implications of connec-
tionist models for cognitive development. In
K. VanLehn (Ed.),

Architectures for intelligence:
The twenty-second Carnegie Mellon symposium on
cognition

(pp. 4173). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
McLeod, P., Plunkett, K., & Rolls, E.T. (1998).

Intro-
duction to connectionist modelling of cognitive
processes.

Oxford, England: Oxford University
Press.
Neisser, U., Boodoo, G., Bouchard, T.J., Jr., Boykin,
A.W., Brody, N., Ceci, S.J., Halpern, D.F.,
Loehlin, J.C., Perloff, R., Sternberg, R.J., & Ur-
bina, S. (1996). Intelligence: Knowns and un-
knowns.

American Psychologist,



51

, 77101.
Nelson, C.A. (1999). Neural plasticity and human
development.

Current Directions in Psychologi-
cal Science,



8

, 4245.
Neville, H.J., & Bavelier, D. (2000). Specificity and
plasticity in neurocognitive development in
humans. In M.S. Gazzaniga (Ed.),

The new cog-
nitive neurosciences

(2nd ed., pp. 8398). Cam-
bridge, MA: MIT Press.
Poliakov, G.I. (1959). Progressive neuron differen-
tiation of the human cerebral cortex in ontoge-
nesis. In S.A. Sarkisov & S.N. Preobrazenskaya
(Eds.),

Development of the central nervous system

(pp. 1126). Moscow: Medgiz.

Job Burnout: New Directions in
Research and Intervention

Christina Maslach

1

Psychology Department, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, California

Abstract

Job burnout is a prolonged
response to chronic emotional
and interpersonal stressors on
the job and is defined here by
the three dimensions of ex-
haustion, cynicism, and sense
of inefficacy. Its presence as a
social problem in many human
services professions was the
impetus for the research that is
now taki ng pl ace i n many
countries. That research has es-
tablished the complexity of the
problem and has examined the
individual stress experience
within a larger social and orga-
nizational context of peoples
response to their work. The
framework, which focuses at-
tention on the interpersonal
dynamics between the worker
and other people in the work-
place, has yielded new insights
into the sources of stress, but
effective interventions have yet
to be developed and evaluated.

Keywords

work stress; organizational be-
havior; job engagement; job-
person fit
Job burnout is a psychological
syndrome that involves a pro-
longed response to stressors in the
workplace. Specifically, it involves
the chronic strain that results from
an incongruence, or misfit, be-
tween the worker and the job. Per-
haps the best-known fictional ex-
ample of job burnout comes from
the novel

A Burnt Out Case

(Greene,
1961), in which a spiritually tor-
mented and disillusioned architect
quits his job and withdraws into
the African jungle. Other literature,
both fictional and nonfictional, has
described similar phenomena, in-
cluding extreme fatigue and the
loss of idealism and passion for
ones job. What is noteworthy is
that the importance of burnout as a
social problem was identified by
both workers and social commen-
tators long before it became a focus
of systematic study by researchers.
Thus, the trajectory of burnout
research began with a real social
problem rather than with deriva-
tions from scholarly theory. In
other words, it followed a grass-
roots, bottom-up path rather than a
top-down one. The origin of this
research had some initial liabilities,
as early studies were dismissed as
190 VOLUME 12, NUMBER 5, OCTOBER 2003

Published by Blackwell Publishing Inc.

flimsy popular psychology. How-
ever, a substantial, international
body of empirical work and theo-
retical models has now laid to rest
early questions about research
schol arshi p i n t hi s f i el d ( see
Schaufeli & Enzmann, 1998, for the
most recent comprehensive cita-
tion of this research literature). The
advantage of this trajectory has
been that burnout research has
been clearly grounded in the reali-
ties of peoples experiences in the
workplace, and this has led to a
comprehensive understanding of
the environmental context of this
phenomenon, as well as to new
ideas for intervention.

A MULTIDIMENSIONAL
MODEL OF JOB BURNOUT

To study the problem of j ob
burnout, my colleagues and I be-
gan with extensive interviews of
workers in many human service
occupations, and then developed a
multidimensional model of the
burnout phenomenon. The three
key dimensions of this stress re-
sponse are an overwhelming ex-
haustion, feelings of cynicism and
detachment from the job, and a
sense of ineffectiveness and lack of
accomplishment. This multidimen-
sional model stands in contrast to
more typical unidimensional con-
ceptions of stress because it goes
beyond the individual stress expe-
rience (exhaustion) to encompass
the persons response to the job
(cynicism) and to him- or herself
(feelings of inefficacy). The cyni-
cism dimension, in particular, is
not found in the traditional job-
stress literature, but it represents a
basic hallmark of the burnout ex-
periencethe negative, callous, or
excessively detached response to
other people and other aspects of
the job.
The exhaustion dimension rep-
resents the basic stress response
that is studied in other stress re-
search, and it shows the expected
positive correlation with workload
demands and with stress-related
health outcomes. However, the fact
that exhaustion is a necessary crite-
rion for defining burnout does not
mean it is sufficient. Rather, ex-
haustion leads workers to engage
in other actions to distance them-
selves emotionally and cognitively
from their work, presumably as a
way to cope with work demands.
In burnout research, a strong rela-
tionship between exhaustion and
cynicism is found consistently,
across a wide range of organiza-
tional and occupational settings.
The relationship of a sense of inef-
ficacy to the other two dimensions
of burnout is more complex. In
some cases, feelings of inefficacy
appear to be a consequence of ex-
haustion or cynicism, but in other
cases, such feelings seem to de-
velop in parallel with the other two
dimensions, rather than sequen-
tially. Although there have been
several hypotheses about how
burnout develops within the indi-
vidual over time, there has been lit-
tle research to test them, given the
inherent difficulties of conducting
longitudinal studies.
The three dimensions of burn-
out are related to workplace vari-
ables in different ways. In general,
exhaustion and cynicism tend to
emerge from the presence of work
overl oad and soci al conf l i ct ,
whereas a sense of inefficacy arises
more clearly from a lack of re-
sources to get the job done (e.g.,
lack of critical information, lack of
necessary tools, or insufficient
time). The combinations of varia-
tions on these three dimensions
can result in different patterns of
work experience and risk of burn-
out. For example, one job situation
might involve a lot of difficult
working relationships with co-
workers (leading to exhaustion and
cynicism) but provide good oppor-
tunities to achieve success (leading
to a sense of efficacy). In another
case, the job might involve a lot of
heavy work demands (leading to
exhaustion and cynicism) but a
lack of clear goals (leading to a
sense of inefficacy). These and
other possible patterns underscore
the complexity of the work envi-
ronment and its differential im-
pact on people. Our model also
suggests that effective interven-
tions to deal with burnout should
be framed in terms of these three
dimensions (e.g., what changes
will reduce the risk of exhaustion?
what changes will promote the
sense of efficacy?).
After we identified the three di-
mensions of burnout in the early
exploratory phases of our research,
we developed a measure to assess
them, the Maslach Burnout Inven-
tory (MBI). The MBI was originally
desi gned for use wi t h peopl e
working in the human services and
health care, because burnout ap-
peared to be a particularly signifi-
cant problem in these occupations.
We then developed a slightly re-
vised version for people working
in educational settings. More re-
cently, given the increasing interest
in burnout within occupations that
are not so clearly people oriented,
we developed a general version of
the MBI for use with any occupa-
tion (see Maslach, Jackson, & Leiter,
1996, for the most recent edition).
The MBI has been translated into
many languages, and is the com-
mon tool used internationally in re-
search on burnout.
Another new development in
the conceptualization of burnout
has been a focus on its positive an-
tithesisjob engagement. Some re-
searchers define engagement as the
opposite end of the three burnout
dimensionsenergy, involve-
ment, and sense of efficacy. Others
conceptualize engagement in its
own terms, rather than as an oppo-
site to burnout, and so define it as a
persistent, positive motivational
state of fulfillment in employees
Copyright 2003 American Psychological Society
CURRENT DIRECTIONS IN PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE 191

that is characterized by vigor, dedi-
cation, and absorption (see Maslach,
Schaufeli, & Leiter, 2001, for a com-
parison of these approaches). Re-
gardless of the definition adopted,
one of the important implications
of the research on engagement is
that interventions may be more ef-
fective if they are framed in terms
of building engagement rather
than reducing burnout.

THE INTERPERSONAL
CONTEXT OF JOB STRESS

The significance of the multidi-
mensional model of burnout is that
it goes beyond the traditional focus
on just the individual stress experi-
ence by embedding it within a so-
cial context. This interpersonal
framework emerged from the early
research on caregiving and service
occupations, in which the core of
the job was the relationship be-
tween provider and recipient. This
interpersonal context of the job
meant that, from the beginning,
burnout was studied not so much
as an individual stress response,
but rather in terms of an individ-
uals transactions with other peo-
ple in the workplace. Moreover,
this interpersonal context focused
attention on the individuals emo-
tions, and on the motives and val-
ues underlying his or her work
with service recipients.
The conceptual impact of this in-
terpersonal framework is perhaps
best seen in the cynicism dimen-
sion of burnout. Peoples attempts
to distance themselves from as-
pects of their job can be viewed as
individual coping responses to
stress. However, when viewed
through the lens of interpersonal
context, such responses can be seen
to have dysfunctional or negative
consequences for other people
(such as a workers clients or col-
leagues). The person who is experi-
encing a high level of cynicism
tends to withdraw from the job and
do the bare minimum, rather than
strive to do the very best.
Because of this emphasis on the
context of the job environment,
burnout researchers have focused
more on situational variables (e.g.,
workload demands, social support
from colleagues) than on individ-
ual variables such as personality
(e.g., Type A) and physical health
(e. g. , cardi ovascul ar di sease),
which were the focus of prior re-
search on stress. Consequently,
burnout research has contributed
little to current understanding of
the connection between stress and
health, but has had more to say
about the connection between
stress and various job factors. It is
worthy of note that the primary re-
searchers in the burnout field have
come from social and organiza-
tional psychology, and that their
t heoret i cal perspect i ves have
shaped the contextual framework
of the research to a large degree.
Among the general public, the
conventional wisdom about burn-
out is that the problem lies within
the person. Some people argue that
the person who burns out is trying
too hard and doing too much,
whereas others believe that the
weak and incompetent burn out.
However, research results have not
supported the argument that burn-
out is related to a persons disposi-
tion. Although there are some per-
sonal variables that have been
linked to burnout, the demon-
strated relationships have not been
large in size and sometimes vary
from one study to another. Demo-
graphic analyses show that burn-
out tends to be higher for people
who are single than for people who
are married and for younger em-
ployees than for older employees.
In addition, men score slightly higher
on cynicism than do women. Burn-
out has also been linked to the per-
sonality dimension of neuroticism
(which is defined as anxiety and
emotional instability) and to lower
levels of hardiness and self-esteem.
The research case is much stron-
ger for the contrasting argument
that burnout is more a function of
the situation than of the person.
Many studies, across many occu-
pations and in different countries,
have identified the consistent im-
pact on employee burnout of a
range of job characteristics (see
Schaufeli & Enzmann, 1998). For
example, chronically difficult job
demands, an imbalance between
high demands and low resources,
and the presence of conflict (whether
between people, between role de-
mands, or between important val-
ues) are consistently found in situa-
tions in which employees experience
burnout.
Recently, we have attempted to
bring some conceptual order to the
literature on burnout and job stress
by analyzing burnout in terms of
six key domains of work life: work-
load, control, reward, community,
fairness, and values. The first two
areas are reflected in the demand-
control model of job stress (Karasek
& Theorell, 1990), according to
which job stress results from the
combination of a high level of
workload demands and a low level
of autonomy and control over the
job. Reward refers to the power of
positive reinforcements to shape
behavior. The area of community
refers to social relationships in the
workplace, and the impact they
can have on the worker in terms of
social support or interpersonal con-
flict. Fairness includes any work pol-
icies or procedures that affect peo-
ples sense of equity and social
justice. Finally, the area of values
picks up the cognitive-emotional
power of job goals and expectations
(see Leiter & Maslach, in press).
A consistent theme throughout
the burnout literature is the prob-
lematic relationship between the
person and the work environment,
which is often described in terms
of imbalance or misfit. For exam-
192 VOLUME 12, NUMBER 5, OCTOBER 2003

Published by Blackwell Publishing Inc.

ple, the demands of the job may ex-
ceed the capacity of the individual
to cope effectively, or the persons
efforts may not be met with equita-
ble rewards. Within the field of
psychology, there is a long history
of trying to explain behavior in
terms of the interaction of person
and environment, and this work
has included models of job-person
fit. Such a model might be a better
framework for understanding job
burnout than are approaches that
consider personal and situational
factors separately.

APPROACHES TO
INTERVENTION

As noted earlier, the work on
burnout began with a focus on a
social problem in the workplace.
An underlying theme of that prag-
matic framework has been to dis-
cover solutions to that problem.
From the beginning, the growing
research literature was matched (or
even outstripped) by a parallel lit-
erature of workshop and self-help
materials. As burnout became
more clearly identified as a form of
job stress, it received increasing at-
tention from administrators and
policymakers in the workplace. It
is thus fair to say that the field of
job burnout has always had a pri-
mary thrust toward application, in
addition to scholarship.
Nevertheless, research on inter-
ventions to deal with burnout has
been limited. The primary reason
for the small number of such stud-
ies has been not a lack of interest,
but the major difficulties involved
in designing an intervention, find-
ing an opportunity to implement it,
and being able to do longitudinal
follow-up studies.
Interestingly, most discussions
of burnout interventions focus pri-
marily on individual-centered ap-
proaches, such as removing an in-
dividual worker from the job or
training the individual to change
work behaviors or strengthen his
or her internal resources. This type
of approach is paradoxical given
that researchers have found that
situational and organizational fac-
tors play a bigger role in burnout
than do individual ones. Individu-
ally oriented approaches may help
alleviate exhaustion, but may not
affect the other dimensions of
burnout. In addition, individual
strategies are relatively ineffective
in the workplace, where people
have much less control over stres-
sors than in other domains of their
life. However, there are both philo-
sophical and pragmatic reasons for
the predominant focus on the indi-
vidual, including notions of indi-
vidual causality and responsibility
and the assumption that it is easier
and cheaper to change people than
organizations (Maslach & Gold-
berg, 1998).
Recently, however, we have at-
tempted to develop an organiza-
tional approach to assessing burn-
out and developing strategies for
change (Leiter & Maslach, 2000).
The program is based on our ap-
plied research on burnout and uti-
lizes tools that can be used by both
researchers and organizational
practitionersthe former to study
hypotheses within the context of
field studies and the latter to assess
the workplace within the context of
organizational interventions. The
program builds on the latest re-
search developments in the field,
such as the positive focus on job
engagement, the six areas of work
life, and a model of job-person fit.
It is still too early to evaluate the ef-
fectiveness of this program, but the
potential exists to translate the re-
search on job burnout into success-
ful application.

Recommended Reading

Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W.B., & Leiter,
M.P. (2001). (See References)
Schaufeli, W. B. , & Enzmann, D.
(1998). (See References)
Schaufel i , W. B. , Masl ach, C. , &
Marek, T. (Eds.). (1993). Profes-
sional burnout: Recent developments
in theory and research. Washington,
DC: Taylor & Francis.

Note

1. Address correspondence to Chris-
tina Maslach, Office of the Chancellor,
200 California Hall, University of Cali-
fornia, Berkeley, CA 94720-1500.

References

Greene, G. (1961).

A burnt out case.

New York: Vi-
king Press.
Karasek, R., & Theorell, T. (1990).

Stress, productiv-
ity, and the reconstruction of working life.

New
York: Basic Books.
Leiter, M.P., & Maslach, C. (2000).

Preventing burn-
out and building engagement: A complete program
for organizational renewal.

San Francisco: Jos-
sey-Bass.
Leiter, M.P., & Maslach, C. (in press). Areas of
worklife: A structured approach to organiza-
tional predictors of job burnout. In P.L. Per-
rewe & D. C. Ganster (Eds. ),

Research i n
occupational stress and well-being

(Vol. 3). Ox-
ford, England: Elsevier.
Maslach, C., & Goldberg, J. (1998). Prevention of
burnout: New perspectives.

Applied and Pre-
ventive Psychology,



7

, 6374.
Maslach, C., Jackson, S.E., & Leiter, M.P. (1996).

The Maslach Burnout Inventory

(3rd ed.). Palo
Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W.B., & Leiter, M.P. (2001).
Job burnout.

Annual Review of Psychology,



52

,
397422.
Schaufeli, W.B., & Enzmann, D. (1998).

The burnout
companion to study and practice: A critical analy-
sis.

London: Taylor & Francis.