You are on page 1of 30

BURNOUT AND WORK-LIFE BALANCE AMONG UNIVERSITY TEACHERS IN

NORTH CYPRUS: A CASE STUDY

Emmanuel Anaele
Institute of Science and Technology, Girne American University

Abstract: Burnout is one of the problems faced by organizations and it has affected the input

capacity and productivity among individual. Among teachers, it continues to be an everyday

issue as the profession is one that requires demanding energy. It is believed that its effect if not

taken care of will lead to inadequate academic attendance and poor academic achievement,

which has resulted to the evaluation of level of burnout among university lecturers in North

Cyprus. The analysis was done using Christina Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) measurement

process. The result obtained shows that the university lecturers show high level of burnout under

emotional exhaustion. However a few numbers show the same attitude under personal

accomplishment while a lot show a negative response toward depersonalization. The research

concluded that based on emotional exhaustion, university lecturers in North Cyprus experience

burnout.

Key words: Burnout, Emotional Exhaustion, Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), input capacity,

productivity
INTRODUCTION

It is always joyful choosing a career based on promising benefits which most of us have done but

is the work/job environment supporting the self-motivation of the individual effort and concerns?

The reality of job and proposed profiting benefits has diminished among workers, over a long-

run, with an absent mindedness of the presence of burnout, disappointment sets in, dissatisfaction

manifest, creating room for increase growth of burnout which has incubated. The adverse effect

known here as impacts reproduce undesirable outcome like lower emotional exhaustion, lower

cynicism, limiting the potentials of efficiency (Greenglass and Burke, 2000) not just on the

individual but also reflect on the organization. To find a work life balance means finding

equilibrium between our daily work activities and our other personal life activities. In-practice,

working policies are important to enable employee to achieve the work life balance in their day

to day activities as a close look at the phenomenon, stress is a major concern in trying to find

work-life balance and burnout becomes the effects. In different settings, prolonged stress and

burnout reflect on an individual input as well as the organization’s turnover therefore designing a

work flow process which will allow an employee to find a balance to other personal desire is

important.

The teaching profession indeed has many job demands and coping with the pressure of time and

the job demands create streams of stress and significantly result to burnout. Educators are seen as

the profession with the highest burnout level compared to workers in all other human service and

white collar jobs (Hakanen et al., 2006). Many teachers laying down the profession due to

workload and dissatisfaction, limited personal control over their teaching, decrease funding, low

level return of input and lack of societal commitment. It has been estimate that one quarter of

211 teachers feel burnout at any given time (Truch, 1980).


Job stress like high job demands - work overload and time pressure (Kalimo & Hakanen, 2000)

and everyday activities to balance our achievements and comfort in life has posed us mostly with

dissatisfaction, low job turnover (De Jonge et al., 2008), aims and objectives of the organization

difficult to achieve, and emotional exhaustion followed by depersonalization (Vachon M., Berger

A. M., Portenoy R. K., Weissmen D. E., 2002; Vahey et al., 2004) all contribute to burnout in

teachers. In some cases the problem is compounded by people working with them and their

social life as an individual, all making it difficult to create work life balance.

Burnout is considered as a complex result of transaction between personal needs and resources

and work environment factors as two individuals could experience burnout in different ways

even while working under same environmental factors/conditions. To find a work life balance

means finding equilibrium between our daily work activities and our other personal life

activities. In-practice, working policies are important to enable employee to achieve the work life

balance in their day to day activities as a close look at the phenomenon, stress is a major concern

in trying to find work-life balance and burnout becomes the effects. In different settings,

prolonged stress and burnout reflect on an individual input as well as the organization’s turnover

therefore designing a work flow process which will allow an employee to find a balance to other

personal desire is important.

Job stress among teachers is said to be control by Demand Control Model (DCM) and research

on burnout and its related factors has shown that DCM contain most of the inherent factors of

burnout. Example considered- emotional demand which could result from the misbehavior of

pupils is listed as a factor inside DCM and as an indicator of job stress.


In the study of Schaufeli and Bakker (2004), Job Demand-Resource model was used to classify

job stress and level of burnout among teachers and assumes that job demands and job resources

may include different issue related burnout processes like,

 An energetic process of wearing out in which high job demands exhaust employee

mentally and physically,

 A motivational process in which job resources foster engagement and concomitant

organization commitment.

Understanding the two most important features in teaching - energetic features where the job

demands results to health problems through manifestation as burnout and the second

motivational in which job resources are important predictor of organization commitment through

work engagement (Demerouti et al., 2001),

Thus the energetic and motivational dimension mentioned as the most important features in

teaching may intertwine since job resources and demands are likely to exist differently

(Halbesleben and Buckley, 2004).

All these research uses the theory of JD-R model to classify existence of burnout in teaching

profession indicating that the energetic feature is more related to burnout than the motivational

feature. However understanding of the features will include the use of Conservation of Resource

Theory (CRO), (Hobfoll, 1989), which suggests that psychological strain occurs under one of

these three conditions:

 When resources are threatened,

 When resources are lost, and

 When individuals invest resources do not gain the expected level of return.
This therefore means that poor job resources will lead to burnout. Without doubt the theoretical

exploration of this research worth recommendation.

However, the research did not detailed variable application of these resources and how poor

resources could contribute to burnout. Therefore it calls for further research in the area (Hobfoll,

1989).

Different researches, Dworkin, (1985, 1987); Hock, (1988); Jenkins and Calhoun, (1991);

Brouwers and Tomic (2000); Guglielmi and Tatrow (1998); Jepson and Forrest (2006), focusing

on burnout and stress among teachers has been carried out knowing that burnout decrease

commitment and job demand factors and subunits of perceived factors has been regarded as a

major problem in teaching. Teaching involves certain high level of commitment because it

includes academic research, and further external studies and the responsibility of teachers to

students is on schedule making the teachers to continue to teach even when they are burned out

(Huberman, 1993). Burnout has been considered to result in behavioural changes and/or mental

illness among teachers therefore effort in preventing burnout should be of primary concern

considering the health status and level of emotional attachment and job demand of teachers.

Burnout is that point at which one can no longer withstand pressure, stress, or depression as a

result of working in an un-enabling environment. From the first time burnout was describe as a

pressing problem among workers (Freudenberger,1976; Maslach,1976) scientific research has

been adopted to define its parameters and causes. Interestingly over these years, there has not

been a general agreed definition on burnout. This is because there are various factors which

contribute to it and which can be characterized by an individual. However it has been known that
burnout results more from the work environment and social life we as an individual are exposed

to.

There are various factors which could contribute to this, ranging from work-environmental

factors to work life balance factors. This could be later classified into internal and external

factors as more details will be unveil in this research. However the dominating factors classified

under work-environmental factors is mismatch of job activity with an individual, which does not

only reflect conflicts of interest but inferring to dissatisfaction with work life balance because the

internal interest of willingness of performing a job is absence. And the other dominating factors

from work life balance classified as over-achieving by an individual, turns to make life more

difficult than easier. And understanding of factors of burnout intends examining different work

groups and professions. This is because specific factor could vary across occupations and

professions but the root of burnout is in work environment and coping to find balance in work-

life for an individual.

Many studies have separately studied burnout and factors contributing to it in different ideal

situations and although some studies have been conducted on the impelling effects of burnout

among professional workers in North Cyprus, there have been few studies on burnout among

Turkish high school teachers except Aydogan et al. (2009), who focused on secondary school

Turkish teachers and Yaratan and Uludag (2012) whose study, represent the version of burnout

among student in North Cyprus by examining the load on student and their feelings on burnout.

However as effort is made to minimize impacts of burnout among individuals, different studies

have called for proper understanding of how these factors leads to burnout, and the potential risk

a person may face when exposed to this (Aguayo et al., 2011). This is because burnout factor for

individuals may vary depending on the situation.


Thus this study on determining how burnout affect teachers, and to what extents statistically does

this affect them and its relation to academic excellence and this was carried out by the

application of the Maslach burnout inventory measurement as well as factor analysis to measure

the factors rates to help determine and measure burnout factors among university teachers in

North Cyprus.

Burnout and Working Environment

Burnout could manifest in different ways. Those who have experienced this syndrome describe it

in different ways either as tired, drained, or without enthusiasm which cause most people to feel

unappreciated, unimportant or even unrecognized. Occupational hazards are induced by distress.

Individuals subdued to this circumstance cannot be stable to make rational decision and it is

faced with worst danger than job burnout.

Since burnout is connected to stress, pressure, or depression as a result of working in an un-

enabling environment, a work environment controlled by laws and policies which balances work

load, creates the right and healthy working conditions for the employee is important. By this

implication, an employee will have time and the opportunity to meet other personal or family

demands. And since there is need for staffs to be satisfied and be provided with better working

conditions (Graber et al, 2008), working environment with rigorous work disorders, increased

workload, insufficient reward and many more, reflects on the performance of the employee and

generally affects their other part of life and self-obligation to family and friends.

Burnout can results from stress due to students attitude and behavior which include hostility to

teacher, noisiness, not paying attention in class (Geving, 2007; Sorenson, 2007), level of

administrative support in planning, organizing and working out modalities which govern the
academic environment (Blase et al, 2008), work load characterize in job demand (Maslach,

1976), over fatigue (Blase et al., 2008), lack of important job resources to meet the job demands

(Hakanen et al, 2006), long-term situation that are emotionally demanding and inability to cope

with stress (Schaufeli and Greenglasss, 2001; Lazarus and Folkman, 1984), employees not being

satisfied with their reward/compensation and professional recognition (Graber et al, 2008;

Hanushek et al., 2001), the various changes occurring within a work place which has made so

many subsections of jobs to be eliminated, thus increasing the work load for others, job

insecurity, resulting to anger, cynicism and hostility in workers (Schaufeli et al., 1996),

organizational roles like job classification, conflict management (Schwab et al., 1983), which is

why it is important that individuals build up self-standard which could sustain stress and help

them return to original well-being (Bakker et al, 2006).

Christina Maslach, one of the pioneer researchers on burnout classified burnout into three

dimensions- ―emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced personal accomplishment‖

(Maslach, 1982). This has been found to be correlated to burnout and led to a valid acceptance of

the Maslach burnout inventory as a measurement of burnout (Gold et al., 1992). There has been a

call for mixed sequential and parallel development model, as whether emotional exhaustion and

personal accomplishment are independent or either parallel, rather than following each other. A

research by Leiter and Maslach (1988); Van Dierendonck, Schaufall and Sixua (1994, p89)

indicate that emotional exhaustion came first in the process model of burnout, which then

diminish the workers humor of personal accomplishment but Cordes & Dougherty (1993); De

Ryk, Le Blanc & Schaweli (1988), Lee & Ashforth (1996;P124) argue and challenge these

process model of burnout. It is also noted that professional uncertainty has both been indicated in

Maslach burnout inventory (Aiken et al, 2001).


Bakker et al (2006) in their research on the big five personality factors and burnout examine the

relationship between burnout as measured by Maslach burnout Inventory and the five basic

personality factors. The research describes personality in five basic factors as follows:

1. Extroversion versus Introversion

2. Agreeableness versus Hostility

3. Conscientiousness versus Lack of Conscientiousness

4. Emotional Stability versus Neuroticism and

5. Introversion

Extroversion for instance, is characterized by rational problem solving (Dorn and Matthew,

1992; Watson & Hubbard, 1996), active, self-confidence, dominants and excitement seeking,

positive emotions and higher frequency and personal interaction with people and studies have

shown negative relationship between extroversion and emotional exhaustion (Eastburg et

al.,1994. While introversion is a personality factor which prone a person to dissatisfaction like

negatively dissatisfied at every point in time, dissatisfied with job demand, working

environmental condition etc which has been described in Maslach studies on depersonalization.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Population, Sample Size & Data collection

The study was carried out within two major universities in North Cyprus - Eastern Meditation

University and Girne American University. The research adopted a non-probability approach, as

the available sample members represent the subset of the population used in this research. The

minimum sample size was extracted using the standard normal distribution set at 95%

confidence interval (1.96), percentage picking a choice or response (20% =0.20), and the
confidence interval (0.05 = ±5) and the research sample size of 12.29, aggregated to120 was

realized. The following formula is used in this calculation.

( )( )

Z = Standard normal distribution set at 95% confidence level

P = percentage picking a choice set at 20% = 0.20

C = confidence interval (0.05)

Statistical analysis and Data collection

The survey data was analyzed with SPSS statistical tool for an in-depth and quick statistical

evaluation of the mean, standard deviations and factor analysis of the descendant factors of

burnout principal factoring with iteration and varimax rotation and ANOVA for the mean

variance of the elements identified as factors contributing to burnout among lecturers.

Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) comprising of 22 question items on a 7 point scale

representing how often the feeling (0=never, 1=a few times a year, 2=once a month or less, 3=a

few times a month, 4=once a week, 5=a few times a week, 6=every day), was used as the

measurement tool to evaluate the perceived feeling of burnout among professional teachers in

North Cyprus. This is based on its general acceptance in the theoretical study of burnout. Survey

research was administered by self and the corresponding feed-back collected after some days.

Maslach Burnout Inventory (Measurement Scale)

Maslach Burnout Inventory was developed by Maslach in conjunction with Susan E. Jackson

(Maslach and Jackson, 1981). As one of the pioneer in the study of burnout, Maslach has
classified burnout into three classical dimensions in which all experience of burnout falls into

one of the dimensions:

Emotional Exhaustion: measure the feeling of being emotionally over stretched and exhausted

doing one’s work like feeling of not be appreciated enough,

Depersonalization: measures unfeeling and impersonal response towards recipient of one’s

service, care, treatment or instruction and

Reduced Personal Accomplishment: expresses the feeling of competences, and stressful

work/job demand like self evaluation among work group or in work environment.

These dimensions represent a true measure of burnout among professional workers as burnout

has been found to be correlated with self-reported indexes of personal dysfunction and other job

disorders.

RESULTS

Table 1 summarizes the background characteristics of the respondents. Out of 120 respondents,

78 (65%) were female, 42 (35%) were male. Most of the respondents were Masters Degree

holder with 48 (40%) followed with a close range of 42 (35%), those with Doctorate Degree and

then Associate Professors, 18 (15%) and Professors, 12 (10%). A look at the age again tells us

that the level of degree and the age bracket of the respondents are closely related. This therefore

means that if the survey yields a positive relation to increased level of burnout, then the most

affected lecturers are those within the following class.

Table 1: Demography Response Rate


Respondents Frequency percent Valid Cumulative
percent Percent
Gender
Male 42 35.0 35.0 35.0
Female 78 65.0 65.0 65.0
Total 120 100.0 100.0 100.0
Class of Degree
Masters Degree 48 40.0 40.0 40.0
Doctorate 42 35.0 35.0 75.0
Associate Professor 18 15.0 15.0 90.0
Professor 12 10.0 10.0 100.0
Total 120 100.0 100.0
Age
23-30 4 3.3 3.3 3.3
31-35 8 6.7 6.7 10.0
36-40 48 40.0 40.0 50.0
41-45 20 16.7 16.7 66.7
46-50 16 13.3 13.3 80.0
50+ 24 20.0 20.0 100.0
Total 120 100.0 100.0
Country
Turkish Cypriot 54 45.0 45.0 45.0
Cypriot 37 30.8 30.8 75.8
Ukraine 6 5.0 5.0 80.8
Russsia 6 5.0 5.0 85.8
Sweden 12 10.0 10.0 95.8
Nigeria 5 4.2 4.2 100.0
Total 120 100.0 100.0

Table 2 shows the data reliability test to indicate the internal data consistency and reliability of

each dimension and the item total statistics based on the reliability test to evaluate the

consistency when each of the items are deleted in Table 3 shows that at any point when an item

is deleted, the other factors are reliable and the consistency is strong. This means that the scale

used for the survey is a reliable one and represent a valid measure of the in different sections.

Table 2: Reliability Test

Cronbach’s Number of
Alpha items
Emotional Exhaustion .922 9
Personal Accomplishment .519 8
Depersonalization .625 5

Table 3: Item Total Statistics Based on Cronbach Alpha

Scale Mean Scale Corrected Cronbach's


if Item Variance if Item-Total Alpha if
Deleted Item Deleted Correlation Item Deleted
A) Emotional Exhaustion
Emotionally drained 28.53 77.226 .656 .918
Used up 28.60 75.368 .692 .915
Morning fatigue 29.03 75.924 .631 .918
Working with people 29.04 70.897 .591 .925
Burned out 28.66 72.529 .815 .908
Job frustration 28.78 70.025 .797 .908
Working too hard 29.03 73.343 .794 .909
Directly working with people 29.17 68.078 .842 .904
End of rope 28.63 64.755 .793 .910
B) Personal Accomplishment
I deal effectively 26.3000 34.951 .435 .443
Positively influencing 26.0917 35.613 .281 .476
Energetic 26.2583 34.042 .535 .421
Relaxed atmosphere 25.6917 23.677 .123 .721
Accomplishment 26.0667 35.760 .407 .454
Deal with emotion calmly 26.1167 35.684 .403 .454
Feel exhilarated 26.3083 38.081 .178 .506
Easily understand 26.0000 37.378 .285 .484
C) Depersonalization
Treat one as impersonal object 5.08 5.095 .384 .569
Callous towards people 4.90 4.830 .448 .535
Hardening me emotionally 4.74 4.933 .394 .564
Never care 4.62 5.045 .336 .596
Feel of external blame 4.77 5.592 .338 .592

Table 4 shows the corresponding mean and variances of each item enlisted to measure emotional

exhaustion and personal accomplishment. The mean, and variance of the item list were measured

based on the respondent score value. The mean description shows a close relationship among

items which is used to measure the personal accomplishment and emotional exhaustion of

individual within the working environment. The variance between the item list in emotional

exhaustion shows that ―end of the rope‖ has a large gap difference among other elements in
emotional exhaustion and the variance among the mean group of personal accomplishment

shows that the mean value of ―ability to create a relaxed atmosphere‖ is very high than the

others.

As the variance indicated how closely these factors are to the mean value and can be used to

measure burnout, there is an indication that creating a relaxed atmosphere is simply not one to

be used to consider as an indicator to predict burnout level as it has a high variance of 13.904

against other figures. We believed that in spite of all odds, the lecturers are able to create a

relaxed atmosphere for themselves which has been able to help them control most of the effect of

burnout experienced day after day. Other result are shown below which will help us understand

more if personal accomplishment can be used as a measure of burnout in the present

circumstances.

Table 4: Descriptive Statistics Based on Mean and Variance

N Mean Standard Variance


deviation
A) Emotional Exhaustion
Emotionally drained 120 3.91 1.037 1.076
Used up 120 3.83 1.133 1.283
Morning fatigue 120 3.41 1.177 1.386
Working with people 120 3.39 1.667 2.778
Burned out 120 3.78 1.177 1.386
Job frustration 120 3.66 1.375 1.891
Working too hard 120 3.40 1.148 1.318
Directly working with people 120 3.26 1.447 2.092
End of rope 120 3.80 1.757 3.086
Valid N (listwise) 120
B) Personal Accomplishment
I deal effectively 120 3.5333 1.12969 1.276
Positively influencing 120 3.7417 1.36274 1.857
Energetic 120 3.5750 1.08977 1.188
Relaxed atmosphere 120 4.1417 3.72882 13.904
Accomplishment 120 3.7667 1.05904 1.122
Deal with emotion calmly 120 3.7167 1.07831 1.163
Feel exhilarated 120 3.5250 1.17368 1.378
Easily understand 120 3.8333 1.03171 1.064
Valid N (listwise) 120

Table 5: Descriptive Analysis of Response Rate on Each Item Element under Emotional

Exhaustion Factors

Valid Frequency percent Valid Cumulative


percent Percent
Emotionally Drained
0 4 3.3 3.3 3.3
3 30 25.0 25.0 28.3
4 51 42.5 42.5 70.8
5 35 29.2 29.2 100.0
Total 120 100.0 100.0
Used up
0 4 3.3 3.3 3.3
1 1 0.8 0.8 4.2
3 42 35.0 35.0 39.2
4 32 26.7 26.7 65.8
5 41 34.2 34.2 100.0
Total 120 100.0 100.0
Morning fatigue
0 2 1.7 1.7 1.7
1 10 8.3 8.3 10.0
2 6 5.0 5.0 15.0
3 41 34.2 34.2 49.2
4 41 34.2 34.2 83.3
5 20 16.7 16.7 100.0
Total 120 100.0 100.0
Working with people
0 13 10.8 10.8 10.8
1 8 6.7 6.7 17.5
2 7 5.8 5.8 23.3
3 25 20.8 20.8 44.2
4 25 20.8 20.8 65.0
5 42 35.0 35.0 100.0
Total 120 100.0 100.0
Burned out
0 7 5.8 5.8 5.8
3 29 24.2 24.2 30.0
4 54 45.0 45.0 75.0
5 30 25.0 25.0 100.0
Total 120 100.0 100.0
Job frustration
0 10 8.3 8.3 8.3
2 1 0.8 0.8 9.2
3 37 30.8 30.8 40.0
4 34 28.3 28.3 68.3
5 38 31.7 31.7 100.0
Total 120 100.0 100.0
Directly working with people
0 8 6.7 6.7 6.7
1 15 12.5 12.5 19.2
2 9 7.5 7.5 26.7
3 5 4.2 4.2 30.8
4 72 60.0 60.0 90.8
5 11 9.2 9.2 100.0
Total 120 100.0 1000
End of rope
0 17 14.2 14.2 14.2
1 1 0.8 0.8 15.0
2 7 5.8 5.8 20.8
3 1 0.8 0.8 21.7
4 32 26.7 26.7 48.3
5 62 51.7 51.7 100.0
Total 120 100.0 100.0

Table 6: Descriptive Analysis of Response Rate on Each Item Element under Personal

Accomplishment

Valid Frequency percent Valid Cumulative


percent Percent
I deal effectively
0.00 2 1.7 1.7 1.7
1.00 4 3.3 3.3 5.0
2.00 12 10.0 10.0 15.0
3.00 37 30.8 30.8 45.8
4.00 40 33.3 33.3 79.2
5.00 25 20.8 20.8 100.0
Total 120 100.0 100.0
Positively influencing
0.00 2 1.7 1.7 1.7
1.00 4 3.3 3.3 5.0
2.00 8 6.7 6.7 11.7
3.00 34 28.3 28.3 40.0
4.00 40 33.3 33.3 73.3
5.00 31 25.8 25.8 99.2
12.00 1 0.8 0.8 100.0
Total 120 100.0 100.0
Energetic
0.00 2 1.7 1.7 1.7
1.00 5 4.2 4.2 5.8
2.00 7 5.8 5.8 11.7
3.00 36 30.0 30.0 41.7
4.00 48 40.0 40.0 81.7
5.00 22 18.3 18.3 100.0
Total 120 100.0 100.0
Relaxed atmosphere
0.00 2 1.7 1.7 1.7
1.00 2 1.7 1.7 3.3
2.00 5 4.2 4.2 7.5
3.00 31 25.8 25.8 33.3
4.00 47 39.2 39.2 72.5
5.00 31 25.8 25.8 98.3
6.00 1 0.8 0.8 99.2
43.00 1 0.8 0.8 100.0
Total 120 100.0 100.0
Accomplishment
0.00 2 1.7 1.7 1.7
2.00 10 8.3 8.3 10.0
3.00 34 28.3 28.3 38.3
4.00 40 33.3 33.3 71.7
5.00 34 28.3 28.3 100.0
Total 120 100.0 100.0
Deal with emotion calmly
0.00 2 1.7 1.7 1.7
1.00 3 2.5 2.5 4.2
2.00 5 4.2 4.2 8.3
3.00 37 30.8 30.8 39.2
4.00 44 36.7 36.7 75.8
5.00 28 23.3 23.3 99.2
6.00 1 0.8 0.8 100.0
Total 120 100.0 100.0
Feel exhilarated
0.00 2 1.7 1.7 1.7
1.00 6 5.0 5.0 6.7
2.00 12 10.0 10.0 16.7
3.00 32 26.7 26.7 43.3
4.00 43 35.8 35.8 79.2
5.00 25 20.8 20.8 100.0
Total 120 100.0 100.0
Easily understand
1.00 3 2.5 2.5 2.5
2.00 10 8.3 8.3 10.8
3.00 27 22.5 22.5 33.3
4.00 44 36.7 36.7 70.0
5.00 36 30.0 30.0 100.0
Total 120 100.0 100.0

Table 7: Descriptive Analysis of Response Rate on Each Item Element under

Depersonalization

Valid Frequency percent Valid Cumulative


percent Percent
Treat as impersonal object
0 44 36.7 36.7 36.7
1 40 33.3 33.3 70.0
2 34 28.3 28.3 98.3
3 2 1.7 1.7 100.0
Total 120 100.0 100.0
Callous towards people
0 28 23.3 23.3 23.3
1 57 47.5 47.5 70.8
2 29 24.2 24.2 95.0
3 4 3.3 3.3 98.3
4 2 1.7 1.7 100.0
Total 120 100.0 100.0
Hardening me emotionally
0 26 21.7 21.7 21.7
1 43 35.8 35.8 57.5
2 42 35.0 35.0 92.5
3 9 7.5 7.5 100.0
Total 120 100.0 100.0
Never care
0 14 11.7 11.7 11.7
1 60 50.0 50.0 61.7
2 33 27.5 27.5 89.2
3 10 8.3 8.3 97.5
4 2 1.7 1.7 99.2
5 1 0.8 0.8 100.0
Total 120 100.0 100.0
Feel of external blame
0 18 15.0 15.0 15.0
1 55 45.8 45.8 60.8
2 45 37.5 37.5 98.3
3 2 1.7 1.7 100.0
Total 120 100.0 100.0
Level of Satisfaction and Importance of working conditions

Figure 1: Level of satisfaction

Figure 2: Level of importance

The level of satisfaction and importance of working condition among North Cyprus university

lecturers as shown in figure 1 indicated that a high number of the respondents have not been
satisfied with the working conditions which include working hours, commeasurable salary,

physical working conditions, opportunities provided by the universities which tells us that

achieving a work enabling environment has been difficult and thus has caused most lecturers to

be burned out. Also the presentation in figure 2 indicated that working hour, satisfying salary,

good working condition and good opportunities are all important factors which spin the lecturer

desire to work as a lecturer as most of respondents consented to this as we can see with the high

score of level of importance.

DISCUSSION

It was found in this research that burnout of university lecturers are rated high but has not

degraded the system of teaching or influenced their personal character or attitude towards their

recipient. From the results, 71.7% of the respondents indicated being emotionally drained due to

the nature of the job, 60.9% feels they are being used up, 50.9% feel fatigue in the morning as a

result of stress and pressure and 55.8% indicated that working with people prone them to stress

and depression leading to burnout. Also 70% of the population indicated completely burned out

while 60% have the feeling of being frustrated by their job due to work load and work

conditions. When respondents were asked if they have gotten at the end of the road in relation to

being emotionally exhausted, 78.4% answered that they feel they are at the end of the road every

day and once in a week. Thus, since lecturers in North Cyprus are emotionally exhausted, which

create the bases for experiencing burnout, they do experience burned out.

Interestingly, measuring their personal accomplishment, 54.1% indicated ability to deal

effectively with problems of their recipient, 56.6% indicated a good feeling of exhilarated after

encounter with their recipient, 66.7% indicate the ability to easily understand how their students

feel and help them manage the problems, 59.9% indicated that they have positively influence the
lives of their recipient, 88.3 % indicated that they maintain a feeling of being energetic, 61.6%

indicated among all odd they have been able to achieve worthwhile things within their work

environment, however only 26.6% indicated ability to create a relaxed atmosphere within the

work environment and 24.1 % that they have been able to deal with emotional problems calmly.

Conclusion

This research conclude that burnout is a situation to watch out among university lecturers as the

result from our analysis indicated that they face serious emotional exhaustion, engraved by work

condition, work load, etc. Therefore it is important that extensive procedure be taken to help

prevent increase rate of burnout and effectively minimize its impacts (Schaufeli and Greenglasss,

2001) before it get out of hand or affect the organization goals. In an encounter with some

lecturers while the research survey was being sampled, serious complains on managerial

decisions and administration has cause many lecturers to lose interest in teaching. Some of the

pronounced complaints include absence of providing teaching materials like classroom

projectors, office desktop computers, internet services, feel of disappointment after finding out

that salaries paid are not in terms of the offer of agreement, no provision of health care scheme.

It was made to understand that it is discouraging to a teacher to buy his projector to use in the

class, share his mobile data in order to have access of internet, and carry bags of laptops, books

and lunch.

There are various ways that burnout level can be mitigated, as the root of burnout is job

dissatisfaction. Several sources of job dissatisfaction among lectures have been identified to

include staffing inadequacy, work schedule, lack of fairness, lack of involvement in decision

making, lack of support from administration, interpersonal conflict and inadequate pay.

Therefore institutions and organizations should focus on creating a healthy work environment in
which teachers and lecturers will feel supported by their peers, their supervisors, and recipients.

In addition, organizations should make available stress management workshops and other

educational programs that target lecturers' psychosocial well-being and interpersonal skills.

Engaging in lifelong learning is another way to help combat burnout. Continuing education in

areas or work force management can help infuse energy into lecturers and help them renew their

passion for the profession.

Recommendation

Based on the statistical result, we understand that respondents are emotionally burned-out

because of work environmental conditions associated with work over load, lack of control over

one’s work, and insufficient reward for one’s contribution. Thus it is recommended that to

mitigate the increase level of burnout, work load must be reduced. This requires employing more

teachers who will share in the labor, ratio of class work to a teacher will reduce. Also creating

self-involvement is important, this has been restricted among lecturers due to lack of control over

one’s work. We must understand that the nature of man most times are based on theories of

motivation especially in a work environment, therefore providing sufficient rewards for one

contribution is important.

As lecturers spend more time at work than at home, providing them with the amenities that

should make life in the university more relaxed and comfortable one is very important, this can

be done by providing necessary infrastructures needed which will promote effective teaching,

improve competency, resourcefulness and efficiency through training, capacity building and

motivation is necessary and more providing them with a reserved refectory. Providing proper

administration and supervision to estimate performance and recommend possible solution is


important. The administration should set a monitory team responsible for finding out teachers’

needs and behavior toward policies, burnout level and provide possible solution to each problem

identify in other to provide an enabling work environment.

REFERENCES

Aguayo, R., Vargas, C., De la Fuente, E., & Lozano, L. M. (2011). A meta-analytic reliability

generalization study of the Maslach Burnout Inventory. International journal of clinical

and health psychology, 11(2), 343-361.

Aiken, L. H., Clarke, S. P., Sloane, D. M., Sochalski, J. A., Busse, R., Clarke, H. & Shamian, J.

(2001). Nurses’ reports on hospital care in five countries. Health affairs, 20(3), 43-53.

Aydogan, I., Dogan, A. A., & Bayram, N. (2009). Burnout among Turkish high school teachers

working in Turkey and abroad: A comparative study. Electronic Journal of Research in

Educational Psychology, 7(3), 1249-1268. http://www.investigacion-

psicopedagogica.org/revista/new/english/LeerArticulo.php.

Bakker, A. B., Van Der Zee, K. I., Lewig, K. A., & Dollard, M. F. (2006). The relationship

between the big five personality factors and burnout: A study among volunteer

counselors. The Journal of social psychology, 146(1), 31-50. DOI: 10.3200/

SOCP.146.1.31-50.

Bandura, A. (1992). Exercise of personal agency through the self-efficacy mechanism. In This

chapter includes revised and expanded material presented as an invited address at the

annual meeting of the British Psychological Society, St. Andrews, Scotland, Apr 1989..

Hemisphere Publishing Corp.


Blasé, J., Blasé, J., & Du, F. (2008). The mistreated teacher: A national study. Journal of

Educational Administration, 46(3), 263-301.

Brouwers, A., & Tomic, W. (2000). A longitudinal study of teacher burnout and perceived self-

efficacy in classroom management. Teaching and Teacher education, 16(2), 239-253.

Carr, J. L. (2006). Healthy Nurse: Escape Burnout and Discover the Ultimate Life/Work

Balance. Columbus, IN: Matilda Publishing; 2006.

Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1987). Neuroticism, somatic complaints, and disease: Is the bark

worse than the bite?. Journal of personality, 55(2), 299-316.

De Jonge, J., Le Blanc, P. M., Peeters, M. C., & Noordam, H. (2008). Emotional job demands

and the role of matching job resources: A cross-sectional survey study among health care

workers. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 45(10), 1460-1469.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2007.11.002.

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

resources model of burnout. Journal of Applied psychology, 86(3), 499-512.

Dhaniram, Nirasha (2009) Stress, burnout and salutogenic functioning amongst community

service doctors in Kwazulu-Natal hospitals, University of South Africa, Pretoria,

http://hdl.handle.net/10500/1526.

Dorn, L., & Matthews, G. (1992). Two further studies of personality correlates of driver stress.

Personality and Individual Differences, 13(8), 949-951.

Douglas research institute (2009). www.douglas.qc.ca


Dworkin, A. G. (1985). When Teachers Give Up: Teacher Burnout, Teacher Turnover and Their

Impact on Children (78713–7998). Austin, TX: Hogg Foundation for Mental Health.

Dworkin, A. G. (1987). Teacher Burnout in the Public Schools: Structural Causes and

Consequences for Children, State University of New York Press.

Eastburg, M. C., Williamson, M., Gorsuch, R., & Ridley, C. (1994). Social support, personality,

and burnout in nurses. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24(14), 1233-1250.

Erenstein, C. F., & McCaffrey, R. (2007). How healthcare work environments influence nurse

retention. Holistic Nursing Practice, 21(6), 303-307.

Evans, G. D., Bryant, N. E., Owens, J. S., & Koukos, K. (2004, October). Ethnic differences in

burnout, coping, and intervention acceptability among childcare professionals. In Child

and Youth Care Forum (Vol. 33, No. 5, pp. 349-371). Kluwer Academic Publishers-

Plenum Publishers.

Freudenberg H. J. (1976) staff burnout, journal of social issues 30(1)159-165.

Freudenberg, H. J. (1989). Burnout: contemporary issues, trends and concerns. Anchor press,

New York pp23-28

Geving, A. M. (2007). Identifying the types of student and teacher behaviors associated with

teacher stress. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(5), 624-640.

Gold, Y., Roth, R. A., Wright, C. R., Michael, W. B., & Chin-Yi, C. (1992). The factorial

validity of a teacher burnout measure (Educators Survey) administered to a sample of

beginning teachers in elementary and secondary schools in California. Educational and

Psychological Measurement, 52(3), 761-768.


Graber, J. E., Huang, E. S., Drum, M. L., Chin, M. H., Walters, A. E., Heuer, L., ... & Quinn, M.

T. (2008). Predicting changes in staff morale and burnout at community health centers

participating in the health disparities collaboratives. Health services research, 43(4),

1403-1423.

Greenglass, E. R., & Burke, R. J. (2000). The relationship between hospital restructuring, anger,

hostility and psychosomatics in nurses. Journal of Community & Applied Social

Psychology, 10(2), 155-161.

Guglielmi, R. S., & Tatrow, K. (1998). Occupational stress, burnout, and health in teachers: A

methodological and theoretical analysis. Review of educational research, 68(1), 61-99.

Hakanen, J. (2002). From burnout to job engagement—validation of the Finnish version of an

instrument for measuring job engagement (UWES) in an educational organization]. Tyo¨

ja Ihminen, 16, 42 – 58.

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

teachers. Journal of school psychology, 43(6), 495-513.

http://www.wilmarschaufeli.nl/publications/Schaufeli/246.pdf.

Halbesleben, J. R., & Buckley, M. R. (2004). Burnout in organizational life. Journal of

management, 30(6), 859-879.

Hanushek, E. A., Kain, J. F., & Rivkin, S. G. (2001). Why public schools lose teachers. NBER

Working Paper Series, 8599, 1-24. http://www.nber.org/papers/w8599.pdf

Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress.

American psychologist, 44(3), 513-524.


Hock, R. R. (1988). Professional burnout among public school teachers. Public personnel

management, 17(2), 167-189.

Hoffman, A. J., & Scott, L. D. (2003). Role stress and career satisfaction among registered

nurses by work shift patterns. Journal of Nursing Administration, 33(6), 337-342.

Huberman, M. (1993). Burnout in teaching careers. European Education, 25(3), 47-69.

Jenkins, S., & Calhoun, J. F. (1991). Teacher stress: Issues and intervention. Psychology in the

Schools, 28(1), 60-70.

Jepson, E., & Forrest, S. (2006). Individual contributory factors in teacher stress: The role of

achievement striving and occupational commitment. British Journal of Educational

Psychology, 76(1), 183-197.

Kristensen, T. S., Hannerz, H., Høgh, A., & Borg, V. (2005). The Copenhagen Psychosocial

Questionnaire-a tool for the assessment and improvement of the psychosocial work

environment. Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health, 438-449.

Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. Springer publishing

company.

Leiter, M. P. (1993). Burnout as a developmental process: Consideration of models. W. B.

Schaufeli, C. Maslach, & T. Marek (Eds.), Professional burnout: Recent developments in

theory and research (pp. 237 – 250). Washington, DC7 Taylor & Francis.

Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C. (1988). The impact of interpersonal environment on burnout and

organizational commitment. Journal of organizational behavior, 9(4), 297-308.


Leone, S. S., Huibers, M. J., Knottnerus, J. A., & Kant, I. J. (2007). Similarities, overlap and

differences between burnout and prolonged fatigue in the working population. QJM,

100(10), 617-627.

Leone, S. S., Huibers, M. J., Knottnerus, J. A., & Kant, I. J. (2008). The prognosis of burnout

and prolonged fatigue in the working population: a comparison. Journal of Occupational

and Environmental Medicine, 50(10), 1195-1202.

Maslach C. (1982). Burnout: The Cost of Caring. Cambridge, MA: Malor Books; 2003.

Maslach, C. (1976, September). Burned-out. Human Behavior, 9 (5), 16-22.

Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1981). The measurement of experienced burnout. Journal of

organizational behavior, 2(2), 99-113. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.4030020205.

McHugh, M. D., Kutney-Lee, A., Cimiotti, J. P., Sloane, D. M., & Aiken, L. H. (2011). Nurses’

widespread job dissatisfaction, burnout, and frustration with health benefits signal

problems for patient care. Health Affairs, 30(2), 202-210.

Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship

with burnout and engagement: A multi‐sample study. Journal of organizational Behavior,

25(3), 293-315. doi: 10.1002/job.248

Schaufeli, W. B., & Greenglass, E. R. (2001). Introduction to special issue on burnout and

health. Psychology & Health, 16(5), 501-510.

Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., González-Romá, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement

of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal
of Happiness studies, 3(1), 71-92.

http://www.wilmarschaufeli.nl/publications/Schaufeli/178.pdf.

Schaufeli, W.B., Leiter, M.P., Maslach, C. & Jackson, S.H. (1996). MBI-General Survey. In: C.

Maslach, S.E. Jackson, & M.P. Leiter (Eds.), Maslach burnout inventory Manual (3rded.).

Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc.

Schwab, R. L., Iwanicki, E. F., & Pierson, D. A. (1983). Assessing role conflict and role

ambiguity: A cross validation study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 43(2),

587-593.

Schwarzer (Ed.), Self-efficacy: Thought control of action (pp. 3-38). Washington, DC:

Hemisphere.

Shanafelt, T. D., Boone, S., Tan, L., Dyrbye, L. N., Sotile, W., Satele, D.& Oreskovich, M. R.

(2012). Burnout and satisfaction with work-life balance among US physicians relative to

the general US population. Archives of internal medicine, 172(18), 1377-1385.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/archinternmed.2012.3199.

Sorenson, R. D. (2007). Stress Management in Education: Warning Signs and Coping

Mechanisms. Management in Education, 21(3), 10-13.

Spânu, F., Băban, A., Bria, M., Dumitraşcu, D.L. (2012). What happens to health professionals

when the ill patient is the health care system? Understanding the experience of practicing

medicine in the Romanian socio‐cultural context. [ORCAB Special Series] British

Journal of Health Psychology, 18(3), pp. 663-679. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bjhp.12010.

Truch, S. (1980). Teacher Burnout and What to do about it. http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED194464


Vahey, D. C., Aiken, L. H., Sloane, D. M., Clarke, S. P., & Vargas, D. (2004). Nurse burnout

and patient satisfaction. Medical care, 42(2 Suppl), II57-II66.

Watson, D., & Hubbard, B. (1996). Adaptation style and dispositional structure: Coping in the

context of the Five‐Factor model. Journal of personality, 64(4), 737-774.

Yaratan, H., & Uludag, O. (2012). The impact of verbal aggression on burnout: An empirical

study on university students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 41-46.