JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT, AND

ENGAGEMENT

A study examining the relationships between job insecurity, work engagement,

burnout, and the moderator role of employability and gender.
Yutong Wei (6363504)
Utrecht University

Word count: 5565

Reviewer: Veerle Brenninkmeijer
Second Reviewer: Jan Fekke Ybema
Date: 28-8-2019
Made publicly accessible: yes
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT, AND
ENGAGEMENT

Introduction...........................................................................................................1
Employee wellbeing...............................................................................................3
Moderating role of employability............................................................................4
Moderating role of gender.........................................................................................5
Proposed Model....................................................................................................6
Method ...................................................................................................................7
Respondents...........................................................................................................7
Measures................................................................................................................8
Statistical analysis..................................................................................................10
Results ..................................................................................................................10
Analysis of the study variables.............................................................................10
Regression analyses job insecurity ......................................................................11
Moderating role of employability....................................................................12
Moderating role of gender................................................................................14
Discussion.............................................................................................................15
Job insecurity and employee wellbeing .............................................................15
Moderating role of employability........................................................................15
Moderating role of gender...................................................................................17
Implications of the study.....................................................................................18
Limitation and suggestions for future research ..........................................19
Conclusion ...........................................................................................................20
Reference ....................................................................................................................21
Appendix ....................................................................................................................27
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

Abstract
Job insecurity is being seen as an increasing tendency in the global job market,
and job insecurity might lead to some undesired effects for the employees. The
present study investigated the relationships between employability, gender, job
insecurity, burnout and engagement of employees. Additionally, the buffering effect
of employability and gender in the relationship between job insecurity and burnout
and engagement were also investigated. The participants of this study included 159
female employees and 90 male employees who are currently employed in The
Netherlands. Regressions and moderation analysis were conducted to analyse the data.
The results of the study show a positive association between quantitative job
insecurity and burnout, along with a significant negative relationship between both
qualitative and quantitative job insecurity and engagement. Furthermore, external
employability appeared to have a moderating effect on the relationship between 1)
qualitative job insecurity and burnout; 2) quantitative job insecurity and engagement,
while internal employability did not have a moderating effect. No moderating effects
of gender appeared. The results have implications for practitioners and future
research.
Keywords: job insecurity, employability, gender, burnout, engagement

1
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

Introduction
Job insecurity
Job insecurity refers to a sense of uncontrollability of individuals about their
future in an organisation, whereby they are concerned about the stability of their
current job and are worried that they cannot maintain their current position in the
organisation (Greenhalgh & Rosenblatt, 2010; Stander & Rothmann, 2010). Job
insecurity is increasing in the worldwide economy, due to factors such as
globalisation and the introduction of new technologies, as well as organisational
restructuring and downsising (De Witte et al., 2012). The detrimental impact of job
insecurity has been noted in the current literature, with researchers finding that it
contributes to increased turnover (Cuyper, Bernhard-Oettel, Berntson, Witte and
Alarco, 2008) and emotional exhaustion (burnout) (Witte, 1999), and decreased work
performance (Cupyer et al., 2008) and employee engagement (Witte & Alarco, 2008).
It is also common that workers who experience feelings of job insecurity will also
become burnt out (Schaufeli & Greenglass, 2001; Bosman, Rothmann, & Buitendach,
2005).
The present study aimed to investigate the correlation between job insecurity and
burnout and engagement. Furthermore, it was investigated whether employability
could moderate the adverse consequences of job insecurity. Lastly, the moderating
effect of gender was also of interest to the present study.
In this study, job insecurity was studied on two dimensions: 1) qualitative job
insecurity and 2) quantitative job insecurity. Qualitative job insecurity is defined as
the features of the job, for example, job salary, the nature of the job and autonomy,
while quantitative job insecurity refers to stress an individual experience when they
perceive that they may lose their job, either in the present or the future (De Witte et al.,
2010).
Currently, there is a paucity of research investigating these relationships.
Previous research has tended to focus on the various variables individually. As such,
this study will contribute to the existing literature since little is known about the

2
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

associations between job insecurity, gender, employability, engagement, and burnout.

As well as this, the negative health-related outcomes which occur as a result of job
insecurity (such as burnout) need to be highlighted and studied further (László,
Pikhart, Kopp, Bobak, Pajak, Malyutina, & Marmot, 2010). Lastly, few studies have
investigated the combined effects of job insecurity and individual employability (Silla,
De Cuyper, Gracia, Peiró and De Witte, 2009). Thus, it is evident that the present
study addresses many gaps in the literature which have not received sufficient
attention as of yet.
Employee wellbeing
In the present study, employee wellbeing is measured by burnout and engagement.
Burnout refers to the stress and exhaustion perceived by the individual in the
workplace (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004). On the contrary, engagement is generally
defined as an employee’s willingness to contribute to one’s organisation and a general
sense of involvement in their work (Langelaan, Bakker, Van Doornen, & Schaufeli,
2006). Burnout occurs when employees experience difficulty coping with a stressful
work environment and resultingly become overwhelmed by their stress (Maslach,
Schaufeli, & Leiter, 2001). Low job security has been repeatedly found to be
negatively related to individual wellbeing (Cheng et al., 2005). Previous research has
also found that individuals who are continuously exposed to feelings of job insecurity
may be at risk of experiencing a higher degree of burnout (Witte, 1999). Additionally,
it was found that employees who perceive more uncertainty regarding the future of
their job may be less engaged and less motivated during their work lives. Employees
who are engaged in their organisations may extend themselves to meet the needs of
the organisation, take proactive actions, and strengthen and support the culture and
values of the organisation (Macey, 2006), thereby positively impacting the
organisation. However, job insecurity may stifle the employee’s ability to do so.
Consequently, employee engagement is also a variable of interest to the present study.
The negative relationship between job insecurity and individual wellbeing is often
highlighted in the extant literature (e.g., De Witte 1999; Hellgren et al. 1999; Hellgren

3
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

& Sverke 2003; Cheng et al., 2005; Ferrie et al., 2005). Therefore, we hypothesise the
following:

Hypothesis 1a (H1a): Job insecurity is positively related to burnout.

Hypothesis 1b (H1b): Job insecurity is negatively related to engagement.

Moderating role of employability

Employability refers to the capability of employees to acquire work-related skills
and adapt to the changes in the labour market (De Vos, De Hauw, & Van der Heijden,
2011). Employability is often conceptualised on the psychosocial level, which
consists of both subjective and objective factors. In this study, we focus on the
subjective dimension of employability – that is, how employees perceive their own
employability (Van der Heijde & Van der Heijden, 2006). Also, in this study,
employability contains two dimensions: 1) internal employability and 2) external
employability. Internal employability refers to the intention and capability of
individuals to keep their current job in their organisations, while external
employability is defined as the likelihood of an individual finding employment in
other organisations (Juhdi, Pa’Wan, Othman & Moksin, 2010).
Having a positive perception of one’s employability has often been found to have
a positive impact on an individual’s wellbeing. First, employability enables
employees to adapt to the changes proactively (e.g., Crant, 1995). Aybas (2015)
observed that employees who regard themselves of a higher chance of being hired
could better deal with the obstacles they encounter in their work, compared to those
who perceive themselves less employable (as cited in De Cuyper et al., 2008). A
study conducted by Hobfoll (2003) showed that employees generally have the
intention to develop themselves and to acquire new knowledge with the aim of
improving their employability to retain their job. Additionally, employees with high
employability perceive a sense of control over their work, which may reduce
uncertainty and positively impact their wellbeing (Fugate et al. 2004).

4
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

Moreover, it has been proven that employability has a buffering effect on the
adverse health-related outcomes of job insecurity, for instance, anxiety (Mohr et al.,
2000). In a similar vein, a study which focuses on the role of employability in the job
insecurity-burnout relationship suggests that employees who believe they are
competent to be hired may have lower levels of burnout than those who think they are
incompetent (Berntson et al., 2010). Notably, positive perceptions of employability
have been conceptualised as a new protective factor against the adverse consequences
of job insecurity (such as burnout). This is because as perceptions of employability
increase, job insecurity may decrease (Forrier & Sels, 2003b).
As well as this, employability has also been found to impact employee
engagement. Salanova and Llorens (2008) suggest that high employability may have a
positive effect on engagement, as it enables employees to fit in, and they might be
more capable of working in their current jobs. Considering the existing research, it
seems likely that employability may have a potential moderating effect on the
relationship between job insecurity and burnout (Aybas, Elmas, & Dündar, 2015).
The purpose of this study is to analyse whether employability has a moderating role in
the effect of job insecurity on burnout and engagement. In this respect, the primary
hypothesis of the research is as follows:

Hypothesis 2a (H2a): Employability moderates the relationship between job

insecurity and burnout, in the sense that the positive relationship between job
insecurity and burnout is weaker among individuals with high (vs. low) levels of
employability.
Hypothesis 2b (H2b): Employability moderates the relationship between job
insecurity and engagement in the sense that the negative relationship between job
insecurity and burnout is weaker among individuals with high (vs. low) levels of
employability.
Moderating role of gender

5
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

Certain demographic characteristics, such as tenure, age, and gender, have been
shown to have an influence (both positive and negative) on feelings of job insecurity
(Richter, 2011). In regard to gender, it has been noted that women who have more
parenting responsibilities are more likely to work part-time, which can harm their
future career (Plantenga and Remery, 2015). Although unemployment is undoubtedly
stressful for both men and women, it has been found that unemployment is
particularly stressful for single women and women who are the sole earner in their
family (Warr, 1984). Additionally, compared to men, women may find it difficult to
obtain employment after unemployment (McMullin & Berger, 2006; Weller, 2007).
However, the research results on the impact of gender on job insecurity are
inconsistent (Richter,2011). Some of the studies show that job insecurity is more
stressful for men rather women, while some research indicates that women suffered
more from job insecurity (De Witte, 1999; Ferrie, Shipley, Marmot, Stansfeld, &
Smith, 1998; Mauno & Kinnunen, 1999; Näswall, Sverke, & Hellgren, 2001;
Rosenblatt et al., 1999). Therefore, in an attempt to address these inconsistencies,
gender should be further investigated to bring more direction to the variety of findings
that previous research has produced regarding the role of gender in the context of job
insecurity (Westman, 2000).
As the reasoning showed above, no particular favour direction was given.
Therefore, the research focused on the following research questions:

Question 1: Whether the relation between job insecurity and burnout was
moderated by gender?
Question 2: Whether the relation between job insecurity and engagement was
moderated by gender?

Proposed model
Taken together, the present study focuses on an area which is ripe with
opportunity for research. The purpose of the present study was to contribute to the

6
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

literature by investigating the following: a) the relationship between job insecurity

and employee wellbeing; b) the potential moderating effect of employability on this
relationship; and, c) the potential moderating effect of gender on this relationship. The
proposed research model is displayed in Figure1 below:

Method
Respondents
A total of 344 individuals participated in this study. 95 records were deleted
people were excluded because they did not complete the questionnaire. The final
sample consisted of 249 participants, with 159 female participants (63.9%) and 90
male participants (36,1%). Respondents worked 35 hours a week on average (SD =
6.7). Other demographics statistics are shown in Table 1 and Table 2.
Table1. Managerial, sort of contract of the research participants.
Category Options % of the participants
Yes 22.9
Managerial
No 77.1
Permanent contract 69.1
Sort of contract Temporary contract 24.9
Other 6
Table2. Organisation sectors of the research participants.
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Percent

7
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

Administrative and support

12 4.8 4.8 4.8
services

Art, entertainment and

18 7.2 7.2 12.0
recreation

Construction industry 7 2.8 2.8 14.9

Education 20 8.0 8.0 22.9

Financial activities and

14 5.6 5.6 28.5
insurance

Health and welfare care 34 13.7 13.7 42.2

Industry 10 4.0 4.0 46.2

Information and
17 6.8 6.8 53.0
communication

Liberal professions and

8 3.2 3.2 56.2
scientific activities

Other services 31 12.4 12.4 68.7

Otherwise, namely 23 9.2 9.2 77.9

Public administration and

42 16.9 16.9 94.8
defense

Transport and storage 6 2.4 2.4 97.2

Wholesale and retail trade 7 2.8 2.8 100.0

Total 249 100.0 100.0

To collect data, this study applied online questionnaires on the website called
‘Qualtrics’. The purpose of this study was sent to participants with an introduction. In
the introduction, the anonymity, confidently, and importance of the study is also
explained.
Measures
The questionnaire included, among other things, the following measures.
Job insecurity. To measure job insecurity, two dimensions of job insecurity were
measured. The first dimension is the quantitative job insecurity, measured with the
Job Insecurity Scale developed by De Witte (2000). It consists of four items: ‘‘There
is a chance that I will soon lose my job’’, ‘‘I am sure I can keep this job (reversed)’’,
‘‘I feel uncertain about the future of my job’’, and ‘‘I think I might lose the job

8
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

shortly’’. Respondents were asked to rate these items on a 5-point Likert type scale,
ranging from 1 (‘‘completely disagree’’) to 5 (‘‘totally agree’’), the reversed question
was scaled from 1 (“totally agree”) to 5 (“completely disagree”). Cronbach’s α was
0.86.
The other dimension is the qualitative job insecurity, the questionnaire is
designed by Handaya and De Witte (2007). The questionnaire contains eleven items
(reversed) referred to different aspects of the work situation. For example, the extent
to which the participants expect a change in the salary, the promotion opportunities of
one’s current job, the content of the job, to what degree an employee has the
autonomy in their work tested. Respondents should fill in the questionnaire by
choosing the number “1” (strong deterioration) to “5” (strong improvement) which
indicates the chance that the assessed aspect will improve or deteriorate in the future.
All items were recoding from “1” (strong improvement) to “5” (strong deterioration)
since a strong improvement indicates lower qualitative job insecurity, while a strong
deterioration implies higher qualitative job insecurity. Cronbach’s α was 0.79.
Employability. To measure employability, an eight items scale adopted from De
Cuyper and De Witte (2008) was used; the scale consists of internal and external
employability. The internal dimension consists of four items: “In my current work I
can be used for different types of work”, “I am able to move on to other positions at
my current employer”, “I can get higher in my current job”, and “I could grow to a
better position within my current organization”. As for the external dimension, “I
easily find a new job if I lose my current job”, “I could quickly find other work if I
searched for it”, “I can find a better job at another company if I look for one” and “I
could find another, better job if I wanted to” were asked. Respondents should rate
these items on a 5-point Likert type scale, ranging from 1 (‘‘completely disagree’’) to
5 (‘‘totally agree’’). Cronbach’s α was 0.87.
Burnout. For assessing burnout, the Burnout Assessment Tool (BAT) was used
(Schaufeli, De Witte and Desart, 2019). BAT has 34 items in total, and each item is
related to how the individuals experience their work. For example, “I feel mentally

9
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

exhausted at work” and “when I get up in the morning, I miss the energy to start the
workday”. By selecting from “1” (never) to “5” (always), the respondents could
indicate how often do they have the corresponding feelings. The Cronbach’s α of the
overall questionnaire was 0.85
Work engagement. The Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (Schaufeli, Bakker &
Salonova, 2006) was used in this study. The scale contains nine statements concern
how the employee feels at work. For example, “When I work I feel fit and strong”, “I
am completely absorbed in my work”, “I feel mentally exhausted at work”. The
respondents decide if they ever have such feelings about their jobs. If they have never
had this feeling, cross the ‘0’ (never) in the space after the statement. And if they do,
they should indicate how often they feel it by crossing the number (from 0 to 6) that
best describes how frequently they feel that way. A higher score means a higher
degree of psychological empowerment. Cronbach’s α was 0.87.
Statistical analysis
The research question will be tested by using multiple regression with the aid of
the Statistical Program for Social Sciences (SPSS version 25), and macro of
Preacher& Hayes was used (Field, 2013). Regressions analyses were used to test
Hypothesis 1. To test Hypothesis 2 and Hypothesis 3, regression analyses and the
macro of Preacher& Hayes were used.
Results
Analysis of the study variables
Table 1: Correlations, means and standard deviations of all variables.

M SD 2 3 4 5 6 7
1. Gender
1.36 0.48 -0.12 0.05 0.18** -0.01 -0.04 0.02
(1=female;2=male)
2. QualJis 2.70 0.38 0.19** -0.31** -0.39** -0.24** 0.05
3. QuanJis 1.86 0.92 0.19** -0.16* -0.20** -0.23** 0.32**
4. Extemploy 3.52 0.92 -0.31** -0.16* 0.29** 0.08 0.05
5. Intemploy 3.44 1.02 -0.39** -0.20** 0.29** 0.20** -0.18**
6. ENG 4.18 0.93 -0.24** -0.23** 0.08 0.20** -0.49**
7. BUT 1.79 0.50 0.05 0.32** 0.05 -0.18** -0.49**

10
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

Note: QualJis= Qualitative job insecurity; QuanJis= Quantitative job insecurity;

Extemploy= External employability; Intemploy= Internal employability; ENG=
Engagemnt; BUT= Burnout.
**significant when P<.01, *significant when P<.05
Table 1 shows the means (M), standard deviations (SD), and the correlations (r)
of the variables. A positive significant correlation was found for gender with external
employability, indicating that the female participants of this study perceive a high
level of external employability. Qualitative job insecurity showed a significant
positive relation with qualitative job insecurity, along with negative correlations with
external employability, internal employability and engagement. Quantitative job
insecurity showed significant negative correlations with external employability,
internal employability and engagement, but positively related to burnout. External
employability is positively correlated with internal employability. Furthermore,
internal employability showed a significant positive correlation with engagement, and
a negative correlation with burnout.
Regression analyses job insecurity
In the following part, the impact of qualitative, quantitative job insecurity on
engagement and burnout, and the moderating effect of external, internal employability
and gender are listed below.
Table 2. Unstandardised and standardised regression coefficients, and standard error for predictors of

job insecurity.
Engagement Burnout
B SE β B SE β
QualJis -0.43 0.17 -0.18* -0.04 0.09 -0.03
QuanJis -0.19 0.06 -0.18** 0.17 0.03 0.32**
Extemploy -0.02 0.07 -0.02 0.08 0.04 0.14*
Intemploy 0.09 0.06 0.10 -0.08 0.03 -0.17*
Gender -0.09 0.12 -0.04 -.02 0.06 -0.03

Note: B= Unstandardised regression coefficients; β= Standardised regression; SE=

standard error; QualJis= Qualitative job insecurity; QuanJis= Quantitative job
insecurity; Extemploy= External employability; Intemploy= Internal employability.

11
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

**significant when P<.01, *significant when P<.05

In Table 2, quantitative job insecurity was found to be significant predicator of
burnout (β = .32, p <.01), along with external employability (β = .14, p <.05) and
internal employability (β = -.17, p <.05). Hence, H1(a) was partly confirmed for
quantitative job insecurity. And both qualitative (β = -.18, p <.05) and quantitative job
insecurity (β = -.18, p <.01) were found to be significant predicators of engagement.
Therefore, H1(b) was confirmed.
Moderating role of employability
In H2 it was expected that employability might have a weakening effect on the
positive relationship between job insecurity and burnout, and the negative relationship
between job insecurity and engagement.
First, the analysis was conducted for qualitative job insecurity and external
employability. The interaction between qualitative job insecurity and external
employability was found significant on burnout (β = -.17, 𝑅2 = .02, F (1,245) = 5.58,
p <.05) (see Figure 1). This result indicates that participants with a low level of
external employability experienced higher levels of burnout when qualitative job
insecurity is increasing, whereas a reversed pattern was found for participants who
have a high level of external employability. Second, the analysis was conducted for
quantitative job insecurity and external employability. A non-significant interaction
was found between quantitative job insecurity and burnout when external
employability acted as the moderator (β = .01, p = .79).

12
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

Figure 1. Interaction effect between qualitative job insecurity and external

employability on burnout.
After that, the correlation between qualitative job insecurity and internal
employability was also examined. No significant result was found for the interaction
between qualitative job insecurity and internal employability on burnout (β = .03, p
= .72). The interaction between quantitative job insecurity and internal employability
was also found non-significant on burnout (β = -.002, p=.95).
To test H2(b), the interaction between qualitative job insecurity and external
employability on engagement was first examined. A non- significant was found (β
= .15, p =.25). However, the interaction between quantitative job insecurity and
external employability was found to be significant on engagement (β = .14, 𝑅2 = .02,
F (1,245) = 5.39, p <.05) (see Figure 2). This result indicates that participants with a
low level of external employability experienced lower levels of engagement when
quantitative job insecurity is increasing compared with participants who have a high
level of external employability.

13
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

Figure 2. Interaction effect between quantitative job insecurity and external

employability on engagement.
When examining the relationship between qualitative, quantitative job insecurity
and internal employability, the data indicates similar results as above. The interaction
between qualitative, quantitative job insecurity and internal employability have not
bring distinct effects on engagement, with β = .11, p =.41 and β = -.002, p =.97
respectively.
Moderating role of gender
We also explored moderating effects of gender. Firstly, the interaction between
qualitative job insecurity and burnout with gender as a moderator was examined. No
significant interaction effect was found (β = .21, p =.22). Secondly, the interaction
between quantitative job insecurity and burnout was examined, however, no
significant was found (β = - .09, p = .17).
Then, analyses were conducted for qualitative, quantitative job insecurity and
engagement. According to the results, no significant interactions were found between
qualitative job insecurity (β = -.15, p =.64), or with quantitative job insecurity (β = .08,
p =.52). Hence, no significant results were found for the interaction between job
insecurity on burnout or engagement with gender as a moderator.

14
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

Discussion
In the present study, the correlation between job insecurity and burnout and
engagement was investigated. In addition, the moderating effects of employability
and gender on this relationship were tested. The present study culminated with a total
of 249 individuals who work in the Netherlands. The results will be discussed in the
following part.
Job insecurity and employee wellbeing
First, a positive relationship between job insecurity and burnout and a negative
relationship between job insecurity and engagement were expected. The hypothesis
(H1a) was partly confirmed for the positive relationship between quantitative job
insecurity and burnout. H1(b) was confirmed because both qualitative and
quantitative job insecurity were found to be significant predictors of engagement.
According to previous studies, quantitative job insecurity may contribute to more
serious health-related problems and higher burnout (De Witte et al., 2010). The
possible explanation for this may be that quantitative job insecurity causes the
individual to worry excessively about retaining their job, causing them to disregard
other qualitative factors (as cited in De Witte, Vander Elst, & De Cuyper, 2015). Also,
quantitative job insecurity seems to be more threatening than qualitative job insecurity
because quantitative implies a potential loss of work-related financial, social, and
emotional resources, which may lead to than qualitative job insecurity (De Witte et al.,
2010).
As for qualitative job insecurity, it may be more concerned about work-related
attitudes since the individual may not lose his/her employment (De Witte et al., 2015).
Hellgren (1999) suggested that the relationship between qualitative job insecurity and
wellbeing is weaker compared to that of quantitative job insecurity and wellbeing (as
cited in De Witte et al., 2010). In sum, the explanations stated before may be the
reason why a higher level of burnout was only confirmed in the quantitative
dimension.
Moderating role of employability

15
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

Concerning employability, it was hypothesised that a higher level of

employability would weaken the positive relationship between job insecurity and
burnout in H2(a). The result is consistent with H2(a); participants with a lower level
of external employability experienced higher level of burnout when qualitative job
insecurity is increasing, while a reversed pattern was found for participants who have
a low level of external employability. In H2(b), it was hypothesised that a high level
of employability would weaken the negative relationship between job insecurity and
employee engagement. The result is consistent with H2(b); participants with a low
level of external employability experienced a lower level of engagement when
quantitative job insecurity is increasing, compared with participants who have a high
level of external employability. As such, our results are in line with an earlier study
which shows that external employability could moderate the adverse effects caused by
job insecurity, for example, the job strain experienced by the individual in the
organisation (De Cuyper, Mäkikangas, Kinnunen, Mauno and Witte, 2012).
Based on the analysis, significant findings were found on the qualitative job
insecurity- burnout and quantitative job insecurity- engagement relation with external
employability as a moderator, however, no significant interactions were found on the
qualitative job insecurity- engagement and quantitative job insecurity- burnout
relation. A possible explanation may be the contract type difference. Employment
contract types may have impact on the relationship between job insecurity and
wellbeing (De Cuyper et al., 2010). In the current research, the contract types mostly
consist of a permanent or temporary contract, with permanent contract accounting for
the majority. De Cuyper (2006) suggested that employees may have different
expectations when it comes to fixed-term and short-term contract. Study shows that
more wellbeing-related problems were experienced by permanent employees rather
than temporary employees (Kirves, De Cuyper, Kinnunen, & Nätti, 2011). And job
insecurity may be more influential for employees with permanent contract than
temporary contract (De Cuyper and De Witte, 2006). Therefore, the contract- based
difference possibly influenced the findings of this study, and the contract difference

16
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

should be taken into consideration in future studies.

It should be noted that only for external employability a moderating effect was
found in this study. External employability refers to the possibility that the individual
could obtain new employment in a different organisation when they feel they might
lose their current job (Juhdi et al., 2010). Internal employability refers to the intention
and capability of individuals to keep their current job in their organisations (Juhdi,
Pa’Wan, Othman & Moksin, 2010). The moderating effects of internal employability
on burnout and engagement still need further investigations.
Moderating role of gender
As for gender as a moderator, the correlations between job insecurity, burnout
and engagement was studied. According to the results, no significant results were
found.
Analysing Question 1, no significant interactions were found between job
insecurity and burnout with gender as a moderator. Lindblom (2006) found that
women are more likely to experience a higher degree of burnout than men, but the
effects of different gender roles on burnout may disappear under different pressures
and work factors. Moreover, the attributes of a job itself may influence burnout due to
differing levels of job autonomy (Norlund et al., 2010). The attributes of the positions
in this study are diverse as participants came from different types of organisational
sectors. Hence, the difference of organisational sectors may be a potential cause of the
non-significant results.
The results investigating gender as a moderating variable on the relationship
between job insecurity and engagement (Question 2) were also non-significant. The
underlying cause may be that job insecurity is negatively related to working attitudes
of females when compared with males, in terms of things such as commitment,
turnover intention, and job performance (as cited in Giunchi, 2016; Rosenblatt et al.,
1999). However, conflicting results were found in another study which investigates
the relationship between job insecurity and engagement. This research suggests that
male employees are likely to perceive a higher level of job insecurity, and this has

17
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

more serious negative impacts on their work behaviour (Giunchi, Emanuel, Chambel,
& Ghislieri, 2016). The conclusions imply that more research is needed on the gender
differences in the job insecurity–engagement linkage, as there may be underlying
variables that have not yet been identified which are obscuring the reality of the
situation.
Implications of the study
Although the results of the present study did not achieve the ideal outcome, the
research still contributes to the literature.
Firstly, the aim of this study was to examine the relationship between job
insecurity and burnout and engagement, and the moderating effect of employability
and gender on the relationship. The results of this study have provided different
perspectives and conclusions to the extant literature, thus presenting new avenues for
future research.
Secondly, differing from previous studies, this study focused on two dimensions
of job insecurity: qualitative and quantitative. As well as this, employability was
studied in both an external and internal dimension. For this reason, the present study
is granted a degree of individuality that has eluded previous research.
Thirdly, quantitative job insecurity has been proved to be predictor of burnout.
This is consistent with an earlier study by Bosman (2005). Further, both qualitative
and quantitative job insecurity were found a significant predictor of engagement.
Other findings of the present study suggest that external employability has a
moderating effect on the relationship between qualitative job insecurity, burnout and
quantitative job insecurity, engagement, but internal employability did not have a
moderating effect between qualitative and quantitative job insecurity and engagement.
And the moderating effects of gender did not show up.
The practical implication is that, according to the conclusions, job insecurity
indeed is positively related to burnout and negatively associated with engagement.
This suggests that employers should pay more attention to the negative effects of job
insecurity. When an employee senses insecurity and uncertainty in an organisation,

18
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

they may choose to leave the company. Thus, the employer may attempt to increase
its popularity and lower employee turnover intention by, for instance, improving the
working climate and creating a sense of psychological safety, to avoid such
withdrawal of their employees (Berntson, Näswall, & Sverke, 2010).
As for the effect of gender as a moderator variable, despite that no significant
results were found between the job insecurity and burnout and engagement, literature
has shown that female employees experienced more job insecurity when compared
with male employees (Mauno & Kinnunen, 2002). The results suggest that women are
exposed to more job insecurity than men, as well as other organisational factors which
are associated with gender differences in wellbeing-related consequences, such as
absenteeism (Landsbergis, Grzywacz, & LaMontagne, 2014). Therefore, it is essential
for employers to make efforts to create a working environment suitable for both
gender groups.
Limitations and suggestions for future studies
As with all research, the present study is not without limitations.
Firstly, the gender distribution of the sample was unbalanced in this study. The
sample size of female subjects was nearly twice as large as that of male subjects. In
this study, gender is regarded as an important moderating variable, and the
imbalanced sample size may negatively influence the data analysis and interpretation.
To explore the actual buffering impact of gender on the job insecurity-burnout and job
insecurity-engagement relationships, future researchers should strictly control the
gender balance of respondents.
Secondly, the respondents of this study possessed different types of contract, with
permanent contracts occupying the largest chunk of responses, followed by temporary
contracts. As stated before, a permanent contract and a temporary contract may play a
different role in the way job insecurity affects employee burnout and engagement, as
well as with the influence of employability and gender as moderators (Kirves, De
Cuyper, Kinnunen, & Nätti, 2011). Therefore, the impact of different types of

19
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

contracts on the relationship between job insecurity and burnout and engagement
should be taken into consideration if future research in this area is to be carried out.
What's more, in this study, the background of participants differs; they come
from different companies, various work fields and different positions. Therefore, their
job content, working hours, and workloads vary. This may lead to varying perceptions
of job insecurity and may also contribute to unsatisfactory outcomes. Also, the
moderating variable gender may play a different role (Lindblom, Linton, Fedeli and
Bryngelsson, 2006). For this reason, it may be the case that more attention should be
paid to demographic composition in future research.
The present study utilised a cross-sectional approach, thus the causal direction of
the relations between job insecurity and burnout and engagement cannot be drawn to
conclusions as this approach only allows for correlative deductions to be made
(Cuyper, Bernhard‐Oettel, Berntson, Witte and Alarco, 2008). Future studies should

be conducted longitudinally, allowing the direction of the relationship between job

insecurity and burnout and engagement to be determined in a more definitive manner.
Finally, the single use of self-reported questionnaires might undermine results
because the observed relationships can be exaggerated as respondents tend to answer
questions consistently (Aybas, Elmas and Dündar, 2015). However, in this study
self-reported questionnaires were the most appropriate method because employees’
subjective perceptions of job insecurity, burnout, and engagement were of interest.
Further studies could adopt the combination of self-reported questionnaires and other
measurements (such as qualitative interviews).

Conclusion
The present study has provided different perspectives on the associations between
job insecurity, burnout and engagement. The moderating roles of burnout and gender
were explored. The results show that job insecurity is positively related to burnout
and negatively with engagement. Furthermore, external employability presented
moderating effect on the qualitative job insecurity- burnout and quantitative job

20
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

insecurity- engagement relation. This study shows that job insecurity might lead to
burnout and engagement, and the potential factors that affect the interactions between
these variables. Job insecurity should be taken seriously by both employers and
employees. Because of the constant change of the external environment, job
insecurity may be a phenomenon in the future.

References
Aybas, M., Elmas, S., & Dündar, G. (2015). Job insecurity and burnout: The
moderating role of employability. European Journal of Business and
Management, 7(9), 195-203.
Bosman, J., Rothmann, S., & Buitendach, J. H. (2005). Job insecurity, burnout and
work engagement: the impact of positive and negative effectivity. SA Journal of
Industrial Psychology, 31(4), 48-56.
Berntson, E., Näswall, K., & Sverke, M. (2010). The moderating role of
employability in the association between job insecurity and exit, voice, loyalty
and neglect. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 31(2), 215-230.
Cheng, Y., Chen, C. W., Chen, C. J., & Chiang, T. L. (2005). Job insecurity and
itsassociation with health among employees in the Taiwanese general
population. Social Science & Medicine, 61, 41–52.
Cuyper, N. D., Bernhard‐Oettel, C., Berntson, E., Witte, H. D., & Alarco, B. (2008).
Employability and Employees’ Well‐Being: Mediation by Job Insecurity
1. Applied Psychology, 57(3), 488-509.
Cheng, G. H. L., & Chan, D. K. S. (2008). Who suffers more from job insecurity?
A-meta‐analytic review. Applied Psychology, 57(2), 272-303.
Çetin, C., & Turan, N. (2013). The relationship between qualitative job insecurity and
burnout. Management, 21, 28.
De Witte, H. (2000). Arbeidsethos en jobonzekerheid: meting en gevolgen voor
welzijn, tevredenheid en inzet op het werk.

21
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

De Witte, H. (2005). Job insecurity: Review of the international literature on

definitions, prevalence, antecedents and consequences. SA Journal of Industrial
Psychology, 31(4), 1-6.
De Cuyper, N., & De Witte, H. (2006). The impact of job insecurity and contract type
on attitudes, well‐being and behavioural reports: a psychological contract
perspective. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 79(3),
395-409.
De Cuyper, N., & De Witte, H. (2008). Gepercipieerde kans op een baan versus een
betere baan: Relaties met arbeidstevredenheid en welzijn. [Perceived chance of a
job versus a better job: The relationships with job satisfaction and well-being].
Gedrag & Organisatie, 21(4), 475–492.
De Witte, H., De Cuyper, N., Handaja, Y., Sverke, M., Näswall, K., & Hellgren, J.
(2010). Associations between quantitative and qualitative job insecurity and
well-being: A test in Belgian banks. International Studies of Management &
Organization, 40(1), 40-56.
De Cuyper, N., De Witte, H., Kinnunen, U., & Nätti, J. (2010). The relationship
between job insecurity and employability and well-being among Finnish
temporary and permanent employees. International Studies of Management &
Organization, 40(1), 57-73.
De Cuyper, N., Mäkikangas, A., Kinnunen, U., Mauno, S., & Witte, H. D. (2012).
Cross‐lagged associations between perceived external employability, job
insecurity, and exhaustion: Testing gain and loss spirals according to the
conservation of resources theory. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33(6),
770-788.
De Witte, H., De Cuyper, N., Vander Elst, T., Vanbelle, E., & Niesen, W. (2012). Job
insecurity: Review of the literature and a summary of recent studies from
Belgium. Romanian Journal of Applied Psychology, 14(1), 11-17.
De Witte, H., Vander Elst, T., & De Cuyper, N. (2015). Job insecurity, health and
well-being. In Sustainable working lives (pp. 109-128). Springer, Dordrecht.

22
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

De Cuyper, N., & De Witte, H. (2008). Job insecurity and employability among
temporary workers: A theoretical approach based on the psychological
contract. The individual in the changing working life, 88-107.
De Vos, A., Dewettinck, K., & Buyens, D. (2009). The professional career on the
right track: A study on the interaction between career self-management and
organizational career management in explaining employee outcomes. European
Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 18(1), 55-80.
De Vos, A., De Hauw, S., & Van der Heijden, B. I. (2011). Competency development
and career success: The mediating role of employability. Journal of vocational
behavior, 79(2), 438-447.
Ellenbroek, M. C. M. (2018). The Relationship between Job Insecurity, Burnout,
Engagement, and Performance and the Moderating Role of Regulatory Focus
and Gender (Master's thesis).
Forrier, A., & Sels, L. (2003). The concept employability: a complex
mosaic. International journal of human resources development and
management, 3, 102-124.
Fugate, M., Kinicki, A. J., & Ashforth, B. E. (2004). Employability: A psycho-social
construct, its dimensions, and applications. Journal of Vocational
behavior, 65(1), 14-38.
Field, A. P. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS Statistics: and sex and
drugs and rock 'n' roll (4th edition). London: Sage Publications.
Greenhalgh, L., & Rosenblatt, Z. (1984). Job insecurity: Toward conceptual
clarity. Academy of Management review, 9(3), 438-448.
Gaunt, R., & Benjamin, O. (2007). Job insecurity, stress and gender: The moderating
role of gender ideology. Community, Work and Family, 10(3), 341-355.
Greenhalgh, L., & Rosenblatt, Z. (2010). Evolution of research on job
insecurity. International Studies of Management & Organization, 40(1), 6-19.

23
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

Giunchi, M., Emanuel, F., Chambel, M. J., & Ghislieri, C. (2016). Job insecurity,
workload and job exhaustion in temporary agency workers (TAWs) Gender
differences. Career Development International, 21(1), 3-18.
Hillage, J., & Pollard, E. (1998). Employability: developing a framework for policy
analysis.
Heijde, C. M. V. D., & Van Der Heijden, B. I. (2006). A competence‐based and
multidimensional operationalization and measurement of employability. Human
Resource Management: Published in Cooperation with the School of Business
Administration, The University of Michigan and in alliance with the Society of
Human Resources Management, 45(3), 449-476.
Juhdi, N., Pa’Wan, F., Othman, N. A., & Moksin, H. (2010). Factors influencing
internal and external employability of employees. Business and Economics
Journal, 11, 1-10.
Kompier, M., Ybema, J. F., Janssen, J., & Taris, T. (2009). Employment contracts:
cross-sectional and longitudinal relations with quality of working life, health and
well-being. Journal of occupational health, 0903130062-0903130062.
Kirves, K., De Cuyper, N., Kinnunen, U., & Nätti, J. (2011). Perceived job insecurity
and perceived employability in relation to temporary and permanent workers’
psychological symptoms: A two samples study. International archives of
occupational and environmental health, 84(8), 899-909.
Keim, A. C., Landis, R. S., Pierce, C. A., & Earnest, D. R. (2014). Why do employees
worry about their jobs? A meta-analytic review of predictors of job
insecurity. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 19(3), 269.
Langelaan, S., Bakker, A. B., Van Doornen, L. J., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2006). Burnout
and work engagement: Do individual differences make a difference? Personality
and individual differences, 40(3), 521-532.
Lindblom, K. M., Linton, S. J., Fedeli, C., & Bryngelsson, L. (2006). Burnout in the
working population: relations to psychosocial work factors. International journal
of behavioral medicine, 13(1), 51-59.

24
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

László, K. D., Pikhart, H., Kopp, M. S., Bobak, M., Pajak, A., Malyutina, S., ... &
Marmot, M. (2010). Job insecurity and health: a study of 16 European
countries. Social science & medicine, 70(6), 867-874.
Landsbergis, P. A., Grzywacz, J. G., & LaMontagne, A. D. (2014). Work
organization, job insecurity, and occupational health disparities. American
journal of industrial medicine, 57(5), 495-515.
Lin, Y. C. (2015). Are you a protean talent? The influence of protean career attitude,
learning-goal orientation and perceived internal and external
employability. Career Development International, 20(7), 753-772.
Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual review of
psychology, 52(1), 397-422.
Macey, W. H., (2006). Toward a definition of engagement. Paper presented at the
Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 21st Annual Conference,
May, Dallas, TX.
Norlund, S., Reuterwall, C., Höög, J., Lindahl, B., Janlert, U., & Birgander, L. S.
(2010). Burnout, working conditions and gender-results from the northern
Sweden MONICA Study. BMC public health, 10(1), 326.
Plantenga, J., & Remery, C. (2015). The Policy on Gender Equality in the
Netherlands. Policy Department C: Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs.
Brussels: European Parliament.
Reisel, W. D., Probst, T. M., Chia, S. L., Maloles, C. M., & König, C. J. (2010). The
effects of job insecurity on job satisfaction, organizational citizenship behavior,
deviant behavior, and negative emotions of employees. International Studies of
Management & Organization, 40(1), 74-91.
Richter, A. (2011). Job insecurity and its consequences: Investigating moderators,
mediators and gender (Doctoral dissertation, Department of Psychology,
Stockholm University).
Schaufeli, W. B., & Greenglass, E. R. (2001). Introduction to special issue on burnout
and health. Psychology & health, 16(5), 501-510.

25
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2003). Utrecht work engagement scale:

Preliminary manual. Occupational Health Psychology Unit, Utrecht University,
Utrecht, 26.
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: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational
and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 25(3), 293-315.
Salanova Soria, M., & Llorens Gumbau, S. (2008). Estado actual y retos futuros en el
estudio del burnout.
Silla, I., De Cuyper, N., Gracia, F. J., Peiró, J. M., & De Witte, H. (2009). Job
insecurity and well-being: Moderation by employability. Journal of Happiness
Studies, 10(6), 739.
Stander, M. W., & Rothmann, S. (2010). Psychological empowerment, job insecurity
and employee engagement. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 36(1), 1-8.
Salanova, M., Schaufeli, W. B., Xanthopoulou, D., & Bakker, A. B. (2010). The gain
spiral of resources and work engagement: Sustaining a positive worklife. Work
engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research, 118-131.
Schaufeli, H. B., & Salanova, M. (2010). 33 How to improve work engagement?
Handbook of employee engagement: Perspectives, issues, research and practice,
399.
Sundaray, B. K. (2011). Employee engagement: A driver of organizational
effectiveness. European Journal of Business and Management, 3(8), 53-59.
Schaufeli, WB, De Witte, H. & Desart, S. (2019). Burnout Assessment Tool (BAT)
manual. KU Leuven, Belgium: Internal report.
Vander Elst, T., De Witte, H., & De Cuyper, N. (2014). The Job Insecurity Scale: A
psychometric evaluation across five European countries. European Journal of
Work and Organizational Psychology, 23(3), 364-380.
Wagenaar, A. F., Kompier, M. A., Houtman, I. L., van den Bossche, S., Smulders, P.,
& Taris, T. W. (2012). Can labour contract differences in health and

26
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

work-related attitudes be explained by quality of working life and job insecurity?

International archives of occupational and environmental health, 85(7),
763-773.
Witte, H. D. (1999). Job insecurity and psychological well-being: Review of the
literature and exploration of some unresolved issues. European Journal of work
and Organizational psychology, 8(2), 155-177.
Appendix
Job insecurity
Quantitative Job Insecurity

Baan(on)zekerheid
De volgende uitspraken gaan over uw (on)zekerheid over uw baan. Kies bij iedere stelling
het antwoord dat op u van toepassing is.
1 2 3 4 5
helemaal mee mee oneens neutraal mee eens helemaal mee
oneens eens

1 De kans bestaat dat ik binnenkort mijn baan verlies 1 2 3 4 5

2 Ik weet zeker dat ik deze baan kan behouden 1 2 3 4 5

3 Ik voel me onzeker over de toekomst van mijn baan 1 2 3 4 5

4 Ik denk dat ik mijn baan zal verliezen in de nabije toekomst 1 2 3 4 5

Qualitative Job Insecurity

Geef voor de volgende items aan wat de kans is dat het beoordeelde aspect zal verbeteren of
verslechteren in de toekomst.
Let op: als u geen leidinggevende, collega's etc. hebt, vul hier dan niks in.
1 2 3 4 5
sterk verslechteren niet veranderen
verbeteren sterk verbeteren
verslechteren

1 Uw loon 1 2 3 4 5

27
 JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

2 Uw werkzekerheid 1 2 3 4 5

3 De mate waarin u uw deskundigheid kan gebruiken in uw

1 2 3 4 5
werk

4 De inhoud van uw baan 1 2 3 4 5

5 De omgang met uw directe leidinggevende 1 2 3 4 5

6 De omgang met uw collega's 1 2 3 4 5

7 Uw promotiekansen 1 2 3 4 5

8 De mate van autonomie in uw werk 1 2 3 4 5

9 De werkdruk 1 2 3 4 5

10 De werkuren 1 2 3 4

11 De fysieke werkomstandigheden 1 2 3 4 5

Engagement

Welbevinden (1)
De volgende uitspraken gaan over de manier waarop u uw werk beleeft en hoe u zich daarbij
voelt. Wilt u aangeven hoe vaak iedere uitspraak op u van toepassing is door steeds het best
passende getal te omcirkelen?

nooit bijna nooit af en toe regelmatig dikwijls zeer dikwijls altijd

0 1 2 3 4 5 6
nooit een paar keer eens per een paar keer eens per week een paar keer elke
per jaar of maand of per maand per week dag
minder minder

16 Op mijn werk bruis ik van energie. VIT01 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

17 Ik vind het werk dat ik doe nuttig en zinvol. TOE01 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

18 Als ik aan het werk ben, dan vliegt de tijd voorbij.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6
ABS01

19 Als ik werk voel ik me fit en sterk. VIT02 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

20 Ik ben enthousiast over mijn baan. TOE02 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

28
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

21 Als ik werk vergeet ik alle andere dingen om me heen.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6
ABS02

22 Mijn werk inspireert mij. TOE03 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

23 Als ik 's morgens opsta heb ik zin om aan het werk te 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

gaan. VIT03

24 Wanneer ik heel intensief aan het werk ben, voel ik 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

mij gelukkig. ABS03

25 Ik ben trots op het werk dat ik doe. TOE04 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

26 Ik ga helemaal op in mijn werk. ABS04 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

27 Als ik aan het werk ben, dan kan ik heel lang

0 1 2 3 4 5 6
doorgaan. VIT04

28 Mijn werk is voor mij een uitdaging. TOE05 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

29 Mijn werk brengt mij in vervoering. ABS05 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

30 Op mijn werk beschik ik over een grote mentale 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

(geestelijke) veerkracht. VIT05

31 Ik kan me moeilijk van mijn werk losmaken. ABS06 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

32 Op mijn werk zet ik altijd door, ook als het tegenzit.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6
VIT06

Burnout

Welbevinden (2)
De volgende uitspraken gaan over de manier waarop u uw werk beleeft en hoe u zich daarbij
voelt. Wilt u aangeven hoe vaak iedere uitspraak op u van toepassing is door steeds het beste
antwoord te kiezen.
1 2 3 4 5
zelden soms
nooit vaak altijd

1 Op het werk voel ik me geestelijk uitgeput 1 2 3 4 5

2 Alles wat ik doe op mijn werk, kost mij moeite 1 2 3 4 5

29
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

3 Ik raak maar niet uitgerust nadat ik gewerkt heb 1 2 3 4 5

4 Op het werk voel ik me lichamelijk uitgeput 1 2 3 4 5

5 Als ik 's morgens opsta, mis ik de energie om aan de werkdag

1 2 3 4 5
te beginnen

6 Ik wil wel actief zijn op het werk, maar het lukt mij niet 1 2 3 4 5

7 Als ik me inspan op het werk, dan word ik snel moe 1 2 3 4 5

8 Op het einde van de werkdag voel ik me mentaal uitgeput en

1 2 3 4 5
leeg

9 Ik kan geen belangstelling en enthousiasme opbrengen voor

1 2 3 4 5
mijn werk

10 Op mijn werk denk ik niet veel na en functioneer ik op

1 2 3 4
automatische piloot

11 Ik voel een sterke weerzin tegen mijn werk 1 2 3 4 5

12 Mijn werk laat mij onverschillig 1 2 3 4 5

13 Ik ben cynisch over wat mijn werk voor anderen betekent 1 2 3 4 5

14 Op mijn werk heb ik het gevoel geen controle te hebben over

1 2 3 4 5
mijn emoties

15 Ik herken mezelf niet in de wijze waarop ik emotioneel

1 2 3 4 5
reageer op mijn werk

16 Tijdens mijn werk raak ik snel geïrriteerd als de dingen niet

1 2 3 4 5
lopen zoals ik dat wil

17 Ik word kwaad of verdrietig op mijn werk zonder goed te

1 2 3 4 5
weten waarom

18 Op mijn werk kan ik onbedoeld te sterk emotioneel reageren 1 2 3 4 5

19 Op het werk kan ik er mijn aandacht moeilijk bijhouden 1 2 3 4 5

20 Tijdens mijn werk heb ik moeite om helder na te denken 1 2 3 4 5

21 Ik ben vergeetachtig en verstrooid tijdens mijn werk 1 2 3 4 5

30
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

22 Als ik aan het werk ben, kan ik me moeilijk concentreren 1 2 3 4 5

23 Ik maak fouten in mijn werk omdat ik er met mijn hoofd 'niet

1 2 3 4 5
goed bij ben'

24 Mijn gewicht schommelt zonder dat ik op dieet ben 1 2 3 4 5

25 Ik heb problemen met inslapen of doorslapen 1 2 3 4 5

26 Ik heb de neiging om te piekeren 1 2 3 4 5

28 Ik voel me angstig en/of heb last van paniekaanvallen 1 2 3 4 5

29 Ik heb moeite met drukte en/of lawaai 1 2 3 4 5

30 Ik heb last van hartkloppingen of pijn in de borststreek 1 2 3 4 5

31 Ik heb last van maag- en/of darmklachten 1 2 3 4 5

32 Ik heb last van hoofdpijn 1 2 3 4 5

33 Ik heb last van pijnlijke spieren, bijvoorbeeld in de nek,

1 2 3 4 5
schouder of rug

34 Ik word snel ziek 1 2 3 4 5

Employability

De volgende stellingen gaan over de mogelijkheden die u hebt in uw loopbaan. Kies bij
iedere stelling het antwoord dat op u van toepassing is
1 2 3 4 5
helemaal mee mee oneens neutraal mee eens helemaal mee
oneens eens

1 Ik vind gemakkelijk een baan als ik mijn huidige baan verlies.

1 2 3 4 5
EXTEMPLOY1

2 Ik zou snel ander werk kunnen vinden, als ik daarnaar zou

1 2 3 4 5
zoeken. EXTEMPLOY2

3 Ik ben in staat om bij een ander bedrijf een betere baan te

1 2 3 4 5
vinden als ik daarnaar zou zoeken. EXTEMPLOY3

4 Ik zou een andere, betere baan kunnen vinden als ik dat zou
1 2 3 4 5
willen. EXTEMPLOY4

31
JOB INSECURITY, GENDER, EMPLOYABILITY, BURNOUT AND
ENGAGEMENT

5 Ik ben in mijn huidige werk inzetbaar voor verschillende

1 2 3 4 5
soorten werk. INTEMPLOY1

6 Ik ben in staat om bij mijn huidige werkgever door te stromen

1 2 3 4 5
naar andere functies. INTEMPLOY2

7 Ik kan in mijn huidige baan hogerop komen. INTEMPLOY3 1 2 3 4 5

8 Ik zou binnen mijn huidige organisatie door kunnen groeien

1 2 3 4 5
naar een betere baan. INTEMPLOY4

32