Design Work to Prevent Burnout

A new model for improving work design supports change that increases employee engagement and reduces stress.

Reading Time: 17 min 

Topics

Permissions and PDF

Tang Yau Hoong

Managers are responsible for keeping employee morale and productivity high. Yet when they try to reduce burnout and improve worker well-being, many report not knowing where to start or what to do.

Absent clear solutions, they tend to focus on fixing the person, such as by offering the overworked employee productivity tips and encouragement to assert healthy boundaries, or providing stressed-out workers with training in mindfulness techniques or yoga classes at lunchtime. However, fix-the-worker strategies do little to resolve stress caused by long hours and unreasonable workloads.

The problem is not new but remains urgent and costly. HR leaders are painfully aware that disengagement and burnout are significant threats to productivity and talent retention. In the U.S., 67% of workers report feeling disengaged from their work, and 49% intend to leave their current job.1 Meanwhile, burnout is rampant. In a 2023 survey of U.S. adults, the American Psychological Association found that younger workers, especially, are at risk: Fifty-eight percent of 18-to-34-year-olds said that their daily level of stress is overwhelming.2 Disengaged, stressed-out employees do not perform at their best, and when one of them quits, it costs an estimated 30% to 200% of that employee’s salary to recruit and train their replacement.3

A better approach is to create healthier and more sustainable jobs through good work design. Decades of research show that when jobs include positive characteristics such as autonomy, variety, and social support, employees are more satisfied, motivated, and committed to the organization, and they perform better.4 Meanwhile, minimizing work characteristics that harm people, like excessive time pressure, is crucial to preventing burnout.

But herein lies the challenge: Really improving work design requires leaders to consider more than three dozen positive and negative work characteristics. This level of detail enables them to gain a nuanced understanding of work design, but deciding which characteristics are most important to address can be overwhelming. Furthermore, the two most common models for designing work are difficult to apply and are incomplete in crucial ways.

The Job Characteristics Model, first introduced by organizational psychologists Greg R. Oldham and J. Richard Hackman in 1976, identified five important characteristics for work motivation and well-being.5 However, many more characteristics have since been identified, and the model does not cover job demands that drive burnout, such as workload.

Topics

References

1.State of the Global Workplace: 2024 Report,” PDF file (Washington, D.C.: Gallup, 2024), www.gallup.com.

2.Stress in America 2023: A Nation Recovering From Collective Trauma,” American Psychological Association, November 2023, www.apa.org.

3. K. Luc, “Understanding and Calculating the Cost of Employee Turnover,” Culture Amp, Feb. 7, 2023, www.cultureamp.com.

4. S.K. Parker, “Beyond Motivation: Job and Work Design for Development, Health, Ambidexterity, and More,” Annual Review of Psychology 65 (2014): 661-691.

5. J.R. Hackman and G.R. Oldham, “Motivation Through the Design of Work: Test of a Theory,” Organizational Behavior & Human Performance 16, no. 2 (August 1976): 250-279.

6. E. Demerouti, A.B. Bakker, F. Nachreiner, et al., “The Job Demands-Resources Model of Burnout,” Journal of Applied Psychology 86, no 3 (June 2001): 499-512; and W.B. Schaufeli and T.W. Taris, “A Critical Review of the Job Demands-Resources Model: Implications for Improving Work and Health,” in “Bridging Occupational, Organizational, and Public Health: A Transdisciplinary Approach,” ed. G.F. Bauer and O. Hämmig (Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer, 2014), 43-68.

7. S.K. Parker and C. Knight, “The SMART Model of Work Design: A Higher Order Structure to Help See the Wood From the Trees,” Human Resource Management 63, no. 2 (March/April 2024): 265-291.

8. “State of the Global Workplace.”

9. L.J. Iles, M. Askovic, C. Deng, et al., “Changing Work Design to Improve Mental Health in the Healthcare and Social Assistance Industry,” PDF file (Centre for Transformative Work Design at Curtin University and the University of Sydney Business School, April 2024), www.transformativeworkdesign.com.

10. S. Schell and N. Bischof, “Change the Way of Working. Ways Into Self-Organization With the Use of Holacracy: An Empirical Investigation,” European Management Review 19, no. 1 (spring 2022): 123-137.

11. S.K. Parker and G. Grote, “Automation, Algorithms, and Beyond: Why Work Design Matters More Than Ever in a Digital World,” Applied Psychology 71, no. 4 (October 2022): 1171-1204.

12. M. Tims, M. Twemlow, and C.Y.M. Fong, “A State-of-the-Art Overview of Job-Crafting Research: Current Trends and Future Research Directions,” Career Development International 27, no. 1 (2022): 54-78.

13. Find free resources about the model at www.transformativeworkdesign.com/smart-work.

Reprint #:

66206

More Like This

Add a comment

You must to post a comment.

First time here? Sign up for a free account: Comment on articles and get access to many more articles.

Comment (1)
Stuart Roehrl
Very well explained.  From this information one can trace why one might be feeling burnt out.  
The chart and the key paragraphs immediately following define the main ideas very clearly.
Stuart Roehrl