Reflections, summaries, and insights from the most recent burnout and culture research.

Burnout: Who needs an introduction? We’ve all felt it…the apathy, the extra few minutes spent in your car as you delay walking into work, the constant questioning of the value you bring... Most of us have been there, and it’s not a place we want to revisit. Yet, when we re-approach burnout from a research-based perspective, we can shed light on how we can overcome it.

 

The Research

Burnout first became relevant in academia during the 1980s, when Maslach and Jackson created the first research-based inventory to measure and diagnose employee burnout. The MBI (Maslach Burnout Inventory) became the tool for understanding burnout among a myriad of professions, and soon enough, the literature was bursting with data on careers that proved ripe with burnout. 

 

The MBI measures three core components of burnout. The authors of the inventory and other researchers the literature generally agree that burnout is characterized by: 

• Emotional Exhaustion

• Depersonalization (an absence of empathy)

• Low feelings of Personal Accomplishment (low self-efficacy)

 

The MBI, and other burnout inventories that have since been created, typically take a measure of each aspect and give you a score for each. To be considered “burnt out,” one must score high in emotional exhaustion, high in depersonalization, and low in personal accomplishment. 

 

Throughout the more than 40 years of research, helping professionals, such as nurses, teachers, and social workers, have been found to have higher levels of and rates of burnout than most other professions at the time…so much so, that they each have their own inventories with domain-specific vocabulary for each one. Forty years later, this is unfortunately still the case, despite the plethora of research on the subject. 

 

Burnout Causes

The research on burnout documents not only documents the rates of burnout among professionals; it attempts to nail down its causes. Some research has taken the individualistic approach, asserting that burnout is caused in part by a person’s personality. This research maps burnout incidence to the Big Five (OCEAN) personality types, asserting that people who are more neurotic and more conscientious are more burdened by burnout than those who are not. 

 

Other research has explored the organizational factors that contribute to burnout, using a model called the demands-resources model. The idea is that burnout is correlated with both higher demands and lower resources provided to staff. For example, a nurse who is asked to manage the office caseload (high demands) while two other staff members call out sick (low resources) will have higher burnout than those who are supported with resources, or than those who face lower occupational demands. 

 

While the above demands-resources model is beneficial to consider in the context of burnout, it certainly does not tell the whole story. In the teaching profession, the demands placed on a teacher and the resources provided might remain consistent across a large district, while burnout rates could vary. How could this be the case? Organizational culture. 

 

Imagine this: You show up to work, mind full of the to-do lists that line your desk. You walk down the hallway, and are greeted by your colleague, who smiles and makes a comment about your local football team. You laugh and concur, turning the corner to head to your hallway. Here comes your principal, who warmly greets you and stops to pull you aside. “Hey, I noticed your bulletin boards in the hallway just now. It’s clear you, and your students, put a lot of effort in. I love that your boards highlight your student growth and thinking process. Thank you for working hard as a member of this school family.” You thank them, continue the conversation and then continue down the hallway to your room. You walk in, sighing happily, having connected with a colleague, and felt appreciated by an administrator, and the day hasn’t even begun. You sit down at your desk and work through a few to-do list items before the bell rings for arrival.

 

Alternative scenario: You show up to work, mind full of the to-do lists that line your desk. You walk down the hallway, quickly saying hi to a colleague passing by. Turning the corner to head to your room, you see your principal. They do not make eye contact as you walk by. You sigh, tired and disconnected from your colleague and administrator. You sit down at your desk, take a big gulp of coffee, and begin your day, already feeling depleted. 

 

Organizational culture appears, and is continuously shaped, in the small moments: the norms of our interactions are constantly either underscoring or altering culture. Just like the two individuals you interacted with in the scenarios above, both the coworker and the administrator impact the culture. Now, of course we could assert the administrator is more responsible for setting the cultural tone, and personally, I believe that to be the case. Yet, we are all forces that have the potential to change the culture of our own organizations, and the first-person in this scenario had the opportunity to be that positive, connecting force as well. We all live within various “bubbles” of culture; we are a part of countless microcultures. 

 

And how does this relate to burnout, you might ask? The cultures we reside in can either protect against, or amplify burnout conditions. Going back to our first scenario, we felt a very different energy from the environment that we walked into, one that appreciated, connected, and energized us. Despite the demands that we face and the resources that we lack, we gain meaning and value from the environments in which we feel appreciated, respected, trusted, and connected.

 

My research, published in December 2024, highlights these aspects of culture that can protect against burnout. Something to keep in mind though: a “good culture” is not a free pass to lay on the demands and strip away the resources. Healthy, low-burnout cultures provide the support that employees are saying they need; in other words: low-burnout cultures respect employees’ needs, building trust and connection through listening and following through on requested support.

 

Summary

So what can we take away from this “re”-introduction to burnout? 

Burnout is: 

• Measurable;

• Influenced by many factors; 

• Much less common in organizational cultures grounded in trust, appreciation, and connection;

• And therefore, preventable.

 

When my research was published in late 2024, it was one of two published action research studies on burnout. Both studies determined that burnout is impacted by action research. This is powerful, considering the detrimental effects of it…so detrimental, and so far-reaching, that they deserve their own blog post, so we’ll save that for another day. 

 

Thank you for being here. Stay tuned for updates, insights, and musings on this critical topic. In the meantime, go do something that fills you up today.

 

Your partner in culture change,

 

Dr. Calabretta-Crandell