Analysing the impact of Mentoring on Job Burnout-Job Satisfaction Relationship: An Empirical Study on Indian Managers
Post on 30-Apr-2023
0 Views
Preview:
Transcript
Analysing the impact of Mentoring on Job Burnout-Job Satisfaction Relationship: An
Empirical Study on Indian Managers
Abstract
The purpose of the study is to explore the relationship between Job Burnout-Job Satisfaction as
moderated by Mentoring. The present study was done on a sample of 300 Managers belonging to
Private Sector Organizations of Delhi and MP States. Variables in the study were assessed using
three validated Instruments. Descriptive statistics, Factor Analysis, Pearson Product Moment
Correlation and Hierarchical regression analysis was used to analyze the data. It was found that
Job Burnout was negatively related to Job Satisfaction and Mentoring moderated the Job
Burnout and Job Satisfaction relationship. Talent management is critical for India to maintain its
economic growth and competitive advantage and to address the talent gap, it is essential for the
Oganisations to strengthen their Mentoring policy leading to low Job Burnout and thus more satisfaction
with the job. By understanding the relationship between these variables, the organisations should
conduct training programmes to actively manage their Human capital.
Key Words: Research Paper, Job Burnout, Job Satisfaction, Mentoring, Private sector managers.
Analysing the impact of Mentoring on Job Burnout-Job Satisfaction
Relationship: An Empirical Study on Managers
Introduction
The concept of formal mentoring is not new, but the ways in which smart companies
conceptualize, track, and leverage these relationships is constantly evolving. Research shows that
diverse groups have reduced access to mentors when compared to their colleagues, and that most
organizations are not taking full advantage of mentoring for career development or taking
adequate steps to ensure strategic metrics and accountability measures are in place. Seventy-one
percent of companies reported having a formal mentoring program; India-HQ companies (79
percent) more than India-Subsidiary companies (68 percent).( Sarah,et al.,2010)
India is on threshold of an economic boom and shortage of middle management is
already hurting. While there would focus on providing organizations with talent like any search
firm , the key emphasis of the firm is to provide mentoring, guidance enabling long term career
development. Chief executive officers of companies around the world are increasingly concerned
about managing new economic realities and tackling talent issues.
An individual's attitude about his or her job should have meaningful implications about
how he or she does it. Many human-relations era researchers sought to establish job satisfaction
as a driver of performance (e. g. McGregor, 1960). Brayfield & Crockett (1955), however, cited
conflicting research results and questioned this view. Porter & Lawler (1968) espoused the
contrary view that performance leads to job satisfaction. This has become the generally accepted
view. Even so, the strength of the relationship appears to be very weak (Iaffaldo & Muchinsky,
1985).
Job satisfaction has been the subject of research at least since the Hawthorne studies of
the 1920s (Roethlisberger & Dickson, 1939). Job satisfaction is defined as the "pleasurable or
positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one's job or job experiences" (Locke,
1976 p. 1300). Churchill, et al., (1974 p. 225) define job satisfaction for salespeople as "all
characteristics of the job itself and the work environment which salesmen find rewarding,
fulfilling, and satisfying, or frustrating and unsatisfying.”
Job Burnout
Job burnout, termed by some as ‘the malady of our age’ (Modic, 1989) is a relatively new
variable of interest to researchers. Job burnout is characterised by (1) emotional exhaustion; (2)
depersonalisation and (3) a decreased sense of personal accomplishment (Cordes & Dougherty,
1993; Maslach & Jackson, 1981; Lee & Ashforth, 1990). Emotional exhaustion involves feelings
of being overextended and drained by work duties, helplessness, hopelessness and depression
(Pines, Aronson & Kafry, 1981). The second component, depersonalisation, is often associated
with a decrease in the awareness of the human attributes of others and a loss of humanity in
interpersonal interaction (Pines, Aronson & Kafry, 1981). Depersonalization is a reaction to job
related stress that results in workers becoming increasingly detached emotionally from work, co-
workers, clients, and treating clients in dehumanizing ways (Maslach, 1976). Finally, the third
component of burnout, diminished personal accomplishment is associated with a sense of
constant and repeated failures, defeat and hopelessness (Cordes & Dougherty, 1993). Left
unchecked, job burnout could lead to self, family, and even work place abuse (Cherniss, 1980).
In line with previous studies on job burnout, it is hypothesized in this research that burnout will
adversely affect the effectiveness of the manager.
Mentoring
Greek mythology identified the important need for the training and the development of young,
less experienced individual (Hardy, 1994). Mentor was the wise servant that Odysseus entrusted
while he was away on his famous adventures to oversee the care and development for his son,
Telemachus (O’Neill, Horton, & Crosby, 1999).Today, literature on mentoring indicates that
there is not one specific definition for mentoring, mentor, or protégé (Pastore, 2003). Ragins and
McFarlin (1990) generalized the definition of mentoring as a relationship by which individuals
with advanced experience and knowledge are committed to providing upward support and
mobility to aprotégés career.
Kram’s (1988) Mentor role theory summarized mentor functions into two broad categories.
Mentors provide both career-related functions and psychosocial functions. A mentor is able to
provide career-related functions due to the very nature of his or her occupational experience,
organizational rank, and influence in the organizational or occupational structure. While
psychosocial functions are due to the interpersonal relationship between the mentor and protégé
that cultivates trust. In business, mentorships are important for young adults striving to become
successful managers. Middle-aged individuals that have reached a career advancement plateau
also benefit from a mentorship. Sharing experiences with a mentor that has encountered the same
dilemmas can help a protégé ascertain how to adjust to his or her organizational fate.
Review of Literature
Job Burnout and Job Satisfaction
Job satisfaction and burnout have been studied in several industrial countries for decades, but
have only been investigated in some developing countries in the past 2 decades (Arafa, 2003;
Zuraikat et al., 1986; Misener ,1996).
In the previous research by Shirom et al., (2006), the relationship between job satisfaction and
burnout syndrome was viewed from two perspectives – the perspective of causes and the
perspective of consequences and their effect on attitudes, mental and physical health,
productivity, and absence from work, fluctuation, and other different forms of work behaviour.
Majority of studies have confirmed that job dissatisfaction is one of the most significant factors
contributing to the burnout syndrome (Cam O’2001) Negative correlation between job
satisfaction, emotional exhaustion, and depersonalization, and the positive correlation between
job satisfaction and reduced personal accomplishment have also already been confirmed in some
previous studies (Hudek et al., 2006; Friscic, 2006; Kalliath et al., 2002; Marriott et al., 1994).
Emotional Exhaustion was the only burnout component that accounted for unique variance in job
satisfaction when the three burnout components were considered simultaneously (Sarmiento et
al., 2004). EE was taken into account; the other burnout components provided no new
information in understanding the impact of burnout on job satisfaction. This finding is consistent
with the view of many scholars that EE is the core component of burnout (Burke & Greenglass
1995, Cordes et al. 1997, Moore 2000).
Mentoring and Job Burnout
Burnout is increasingly recognized as a very serious occupational health hazard, often associated
with employee dissatisfaction, lowered productivity, absenteeism and turnover (Gianakos, 2000;
Maslach et al., 2001). Typically, coping assistance to reduce negative employee outcomes can be
expected to be provided for by a mentor. The meta-analysis of Viswesvaran et al. (1999) showed
coping assistance to lessen the seriousness of burnout. Generally, coping assistance studies
support the direct effects model of coping assistance to reduce the consequences of adverse
working conditions (Baruch-Feldman et al., 2002; Lee and Ashforth, 1990; slach et al.,2001;
Rafferty et al., 2001; Schaufeli et al., 1993). Studies also support for role of mentoring to reduce
the negative effects of adverse working conditions on employee outcomes (Himle et al., 1991;
Koniarek and Dudek, 1996).
Mentoring and Job Satisfaction
Bahniuk (1990) and Allen (1997) have proven that the mentoring program enhances the job
satisfaction of the mentees. During the mentoring process, mentors would often assign
challenging and learning tasks to mentees in order to improve the mentees’ knowledge and skills,
provide career guidance, support the advancement of job position, help in resolving task-related
problems, and further promote their overall growth. In this way, mentees improve their
knowledge and skills and have a clear picture about their career development and position
advancement (Fawcett ,2002;Gibson et al.,2005; Tourigny et al.,2005).The knowledge and
experience exchange and learning opportunities in the mentorship were found to increase the
mentees’ sense of confidence toward their job, decrease their anxiety for the future, satisfy their
career development needs and further create a high level of job satisfaction (Salt et al.,2008;
Scandura et al .,2001; Underhill ,2006).
Koberg et al. (1994) investigated the correlates and consequences of protégé mentoring in 635
full-time working professional in a large, private general hospital in a major Western city in the
United States. Results indicated that mentoring was a strong predictor of job satisfaction among
the sample surveyed indicating that the presence of a mentor relationship increased a protégés
job satisfaction. Four-hundred and forty business-school graduates from two large state
universities in the United States took part in a study conducted on mentoring in men and women
in managerial, professional, and technical positions (Dreher & Ash, 1990). To explain the
differences in career outcomes such as satisfaction this study incorporated the extent of
mentoring experiences as an independent variable.Results indicated those individuals who
reported more extensive mentoring relationships were more satisfied with their pay and benefits
than individuals experiencing less extensive mentoring relationships (Dreher & Ash, 1990).
Burke & McKeen (1997) also found that managerial women who received more mentor
functions reported more career satisfaction. Thus, mentoring functions play a large role in both
organizational and occupational satisfaction, which can lead to a decrease in turnover intentions.
Hypotheses Development:
An examination of the relevant literature allowed for some specific hypothesis to be formed in
the study. Following hypotheses have been formulated for empirical testing:
Figure 1: Relationship between Job Burnout and Job Satisfaction
Independent Variable Dependent Variable
Based on the framework, it can be hypothesized that:
H1: There is a significant relationship between Depersonalisation and Job Satisfaction
H2: There is a significant relationship between Personal Accomplishment and Job
Satisfaction
H3: There is a significant relationship between Emotional Exhaustion and Job
Satisfaction
Figure 2: Relationship between Mentoring and Job Satisfaction
Depersonalisation
Personal Accomplishment
Emotional Exhaustion
Job Satisfaction
H3: There is a significant relationship between Mentoring and Job Satisfaction
Figure 3: Mentoring moderates the relationship between Job Burnout and Job Satisfaction
Independent Variable Moderating Variable Dependent Variable
Based on the framework, it can be hypothesised that:
H5: Mentoring significantly moderates the relationship between Depersonalisation and Job
Satisfaction
H6: Mentoring significantly moderates the relationship between Personal Accomplishment
and Job Satisfaction
H5: Mentoring significantly moderates the relationship between Emotional Exhaustion
and Job Satisfaction
Job Burnout
Depersonalisation
Personal Accomplishment
Emotional Exhaustion
Job Satisfaction
Mentoring
Mentoring Job Satisfaction
Method:
Participants in the study consisted of Managers attached to thirty randomly selected private
sector organizations located in Delhi and Madhya Pradesh region. The participants were all
males with the mean age of 38 years. They were all working as Middle level managers’ .Out of
350 questionnaires, 300 usable responses were obtained from Private Sector Organizations The
response rate obtained was 85.72%.
The data was collected day administering questionnaires mainly during office hours, with the
consent of relevant representatives of the employer as well as the respondents. The participants
were chosen randomly from each organization and belonged to different departments of the
organization. Most of the participants showed their willingness to participate in the study after a
short meeting. To improve upon the quality of the survey and minimise the measurement errors,
standardised measurements were used and reliability of the instruments were taken care of.
Methods of Analysis
A Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) was used to analyze the questionnaire data.
Firstly, exploratory factor analysis (varimax rotation) and confirmatory factor analysis (i.e.,
Kaiser Meyer Olkin, Bartlet’s test of sphericity, eigenvalues, variance explained and Cronbach
alpha) were used to assess the validity and reliability of measurement scales (Hair et al., 2006).
Secondly, Pearson correlation analysis and descriptive statistics were conducted to assess the
research variables and the usefulness of the data set (Foster et al., 1998; Yaacob, 2008). Finally,
a hierarchical regression analysis, as recommended by Cohen & Cohen (1983), was used to
measure the moderating effect of Mentoring in the hypothesized model. Moderating effect is an
interaction that shows the degree of relationship between the independent variables and
dependent variables and that will change if other variables exist in the relationship (Cohen &
Cohen, 1983; Jaccard et al., 1990).
Five personal variables (age, gender, marital status, working experience and job tenure) were
controlled in statistical analysis following previous researchers (Roberts et al., 1997; Smith et al.,
1998; Rashed 2001.,Cooper at al.,1994).Since gender and marital status were categorical in
nature, these variables were initially dummy coded. The hypotheses were tested using a four-step
hierarchical regression (Cohen& Cohen, 1975) where the controlled variables were entered in the
first step, followed by the main effects of Job Burnout on Job Satisfaction in the second step.
Mentoring was added in the equation in the third step. In the final step, the interaction term was
added into the regression equation. The change in the F-value and the significance of the
individual parameter was observed. If interaction term was found to be significant, Mentoring is
said to moderate the relationship between Job Burnout and Job Satisfaction.
Measures:
Questionnaire measures were used to obtain data on three variables included in the study: Job
Satisfaction, Job Burnout and Mentoring. Job Satisfaction was conceptualized as dependent
variable whereas, Job Burnout and Mentoring as Independent variables. Self-report measures
were used to obtain the data. The measures used in this study were borrowed from their original
source and adapted from Indian work setting.
Job Burnout Scale (MBI): The revised Maslach Burnout Inventory (Maslach,C., &
Jackson,S.1981 b) was used to measure the level of professional burnout perceived by the
managers. The MBI consists of 22 statements of feelings related to work and involves three
independent aspects of the burnout syndrome: emotional exhaustion (9 items), the personal
accomplishment (8 items), and depersonalization (5 items). Every item in the Maslach Burnout
Inventory is rated on a 6-point Likert type scale ranging from 1 (A Few Times a Year) to 6
(Everyday). A value of zero is scored if the subject indicates that he/she has never experienced
the particular feeling or attitude described.
This measure was chosen because it is the most established measure of the three
dimensions of burnout. It exhibits adequate internal consistency reliability (α > .72; Jackson,
Schwab, & Schuler, 1986; Lee & Ashforth, 1993). Several confirmatory factor analyses showed
that the factor structure of the responses corresponds to the conceptual model (Lee & Ashforth,
1993; Maslach & Jackson, 1981).For the three subscales, Cronbach coefficient alpha of .86 was
registered for emotional exhaustion, .78 for personal accomplishment, .75 for depersonalization
(Maslach & Jackson, 1981). Sample items from the scale include “I feel emotionally drained
from my work,”“1 deal very effectively with the problems of my clients,” and “I feel some
clients blame me for some of their problems.”)
Job Satisfaction survey (JSS): The Scale was developed by Paul E.Spector (1985).It is a 36
item, nine facet scale to assess employee attitudes about the job and aspects of the job. A
summated rating scale format is used, with six choices per item ranging from “strongly disagree”
to “strongly agree”. The JSS Scale had a Cronbach alpha of .80 and good concurrent and
predictive validity and reliability. Nine broad facets of JSS were covered by this measurement,
they were as follows: Pay, Promotion, Supervision, Fringe benefits, Contingent Rewards,
Operation Procedures, Coworkers, Nature of work, Communication.
Mentoring Scale (MS): Level of mentoring experience assessed as the extent to which the
protégés believed or perceived the mentors provided career development and psychosocial
functions to them was measured by means of a modified version of the 15-item Mentoring Scale
(MS) by Scandura and Viator (1994). The MS was constructed on a 5-point Likert scale ranging
from 1 = Strongly disagree to 5 = Strongly agree, higher scores representing higher level of
mentoring experience. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.87 was obtained for the
mentoring scale. Adequate validity has been reported for this widely used measure by Scandura
and Viator (1994) who carried out a factor analysis on the mentoring scale employing a varimax
orthogonal rotation and identified three mentoring functions: career development, social support
and role modeling. The present author also carried out a factor analysis on the Viator (1994) and
identified the same three mentoring functions. The present study used the mentoring scale as a
unidimensional scale that gave a single score as it was opined by Scandura and Viator (1994) that
it could be used as a unidimensional scale. The scale was used to obtain a single score for the
analysis in this study.
Validity and Reliability Analyses for Measurement Scales
Table 1shows the results of validity and reliability analyses for measurement scales. A factor
analysis with the varimax rotation was first done for five variables with 73 items. After that,
Kaiser-Mayer- Olkin Test (KMO) which is a measure of sampling adequacy was conducted for
each variable and the results indicated that it was acceptable. Relying on Hair et al., (2006) and
Nunally & Bernstein’s (1994) guideline, these statistical analyses showed that (1) the value of
factor analysis for all items that represent each research variable was 0.5 and more, indicating the
items met the acceptable standard of validity analysis, (2) all research variables exceeded the
acceptable standard of Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin’s value of 0.6, were significant in Bartlett’s test of
sphericity, (3) all research variables had eigen values larger than 1, (4) the items for each
research variable exceeded factor loadings of 0.50 (Hair et al., 2006), and (5) all research
variables exceeded the acceptable standard of reliability analysis of 0.70 (Nunally & Bernstein,
1994). These statistical analyses confirm that measurement scales have measured the same
constructs and met the acceptable standard of construct validity and reliability analyses as shown
in Table 2.
Table 1: Results of Validity and Reliability Analyses for Measurement Scales
Variable Item Factor KMO Bartlett’ Eigen Variance Cronbach α
Loading Test of Value explained
Spherecity 1 Depersonalisation 5 .72 .74 214.16 ** 2.24 60.24 .75 2 Personal 8 .87 .77 308.38** 3.16 58.38 .78 Accomplishment 3 Emotional 9 .69 .82 476.16** 2.18 73.36 .86 Exhaustion 4 Mentoring 15 .76 .73 324.12** 3.38 62.12 .87 5 Job 36 .68 .76 218.22** 3.36 64.18 .80 Satisfaction Note: significant at .05 levels
Table 2 also shows the results of testing the relationship between Job Burnout deviance and Job
Satisfaction. First, Depersonalisation significantly correlated with Job Satisfaction (r=-.48,
p>0.01), therefore H1 was supported. Second, Personal Accomplishment significantly correlated
with Job Satisfaction (r=-.36, p<0.01), therefore H2 was supported. The third hypothesis that
Emotional Exhaustion is significantly correlated with Job Satisfaction is also proved in the
present study(r=-.48, p<0.01), These statistical results showed that Depersonalisation, Personal
Accomplishment and Emotional Exhaustion are important predictors of Job Satisfaction, in the
organizational sector sample. The results also depicts that Mentoring is significantly and
positively related to Job Satisfaction (r=.54, p>0.01), which further proves the fourth hypothesis
of the present study.
Table 2: Pearson Correlation Analysis and Descriptive Statistics
Variable Mean SD Pearson Correlation Coefficients 1 2 3 4 5 Depersonalisation 13.22 2.28 1 Personal Accomplishment 24.24 3.24 .46** 1 Emotional Exhaustion 27.72 4.13 .35* .45** 1 Mentoring 38.26 12.82 .42** .56** .44** 1 Job Satisfaction 46.22 14.34 -.48** -.36* - .48** .54** 1
Note: ** p < 0.01; * p < 0.05
Outcomes of Testing Research Hypotheses Table 3 shows the results of testing hypotheses using a hierarchical regression analysis. It shows
that demographic variables were entered in Step 1 and then followed by entering independent
variable (Job Burnout) in Step 2,and moderating variable (Mentoring) in step 3 and interaction
(between Job Burnout and Mentoring) in Step 4. Job Satisfaction was used as the dependent
variable. An examination of multi -colinearity shows that the tolerance values for the
relationships: (1) between Depersonalization and Job Satisfaction was .72, and (2) between
Personal Accomplishment and Job Satisfaction was .85. and (3) between Emotional Exhaustion
and Job Satisfaction was .78. While, the tolerance values for the relationships: (1) between
Depersonalization, Mentoring and Job Satisfaction were .74, (2) between Personal
Accomplishment, Mentoring and Job Satisfaction was .79 and (3) between Emotional
Exhaustion, Mentoring and Job Satisfaction was.72. These tolerance values were more than
tolerance value of .20 (as a rule of thumb), indicating the variables were not affected by multi-
collinearity problem (Fox, 1991; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001).
Table 3: Hierarchical regression analysis
Variables Beta R² Adj R² R² Change F Change
Step 1 Control Variables . 0.228 0.332 0.228 0.000 Gender 0.062 Marital Status 0.246 Age 0.016 Work Experience 0.164** Job Tenure 0.062**
Step 2 Model Variable Depersonalisation - 0.426** Personal Accomplishment -0.314** Emotional Exhaustion -0.462** 0 .452 0 .416 0 .224 0 .000
Step 3 Moderating Variables Mentoring .546** . 0.614 0.554 0.162 0.000
Step 4
Interaction Depersonalisation .664** * Mentoring Personal Accomplishment .423** *Mentoring
Emotional Exhaustion .512** * Mentoring
0.716 0.624 0.102 0.000
Note: ** p < 0.01; * p < 0.0
As shown in table 3, when the five personal variables were entered into the regression analysis in
the first step, the coefficient of determination (R2) was found to be 0.23 indicating that 23% of
Job Satisfaction is explained by demographic variables. In step 2, to test whether Job Burnout
serves as an independent variable, a second regression was undertaken. By adding Job Burnout
as independent variables, the R2 increased to 22.4%. This R
2 change (0.22) is significant. This
implies that the additional 22.4% of the variation in Job Satisfaction is explained by Job Burnout.
The F-statistics is significant (p = 0.000) suggesting that the proposed model was adequate.
From the second regression model, it can be observed that Control variables (Work experience
and Job tenure) did have a significant influence on Job Burnout at 0.05 level. As for the
Independent variables, Depersonalisation (β=-.43, p < 0.01) and Personal Accomplishment (β=-
.31, p < 0.01) and Emotional Exhaustion (β=-.46, p < 0.01) were found to have a negative and
significant impact on Job Satisfaction at 0.05 levels. This result provided full support for the
first three hypotheses of the study.
In the third step, Mentoring was entered into the equation in order to gauge its impact on the
dependent variable. It also showed a positive and significant impact on Job Satisfaction (β=-.55,
p < 0.01) .Hence, the fourth hypothesis of the present study is also proved. The R2 increased
from 45.2% to 61.4% indicating a change of 16.2%, which is significant at .01 levels.
In the fourth and final step, the interaction terms was entered into the model. Model 4 revealed
that the interaction between Depersonalisation and Mentoring positively and significantly
correlated with Job Satisfaction (ß=3.16, p<0.01), therefore H5 was supported, Similarly, the
relationship between Personal Accomplishment and Mentoring positively and significantly
correlated with Job Satisfaction (ß=2.14,p>0.01), therefore H6 was also supported. Likewise,
Emotional Exhaustion and Mentoring positively and significantly correlated with Job
Satisfaction (ß=3.12, p<0.01), therefore H6 was supported. Statistically, the result demonstrates
that interaction between Job Burnout and Mentoring has increased Job Satisfaction. It can be
seen that the additional variance explained by the interaction term of 10.2% was significant at
.01 levels. Thus; the study confirms that Mentoring does act as a significant moderating variable
in the relationship between Job Burnout and Job Satisfaction.
Discussion
The Major objectives of the present research were to find out the impact of Job Burnout on Job
Satisfaction and investigate the moderating effect of Mentoring in their relationship. Findings of
the study suggest a strong support for the hypotheses set in the study. The outcome derived from
the study do suggests that Job Burnout has a negative and significant impact on Job Satisfaction.
Negative correlation between job satisfaction, emotional exhaustion, and depersonalization, and
the positive correlation between job satisfaction and reduced personal accomplishment have also
already been confirmed in some previous studies (Hudek et al., 2006; Friscic, 2006; Kalliath et
al., 2002; Marriott et al., 1994). Moreover, victims of Job Burnout are more likely to suffer from
stress-related problems and show a relatively decreased productivity, lost work time,
dissatisfaction and a relatively high turnover rate (Peterson, 2002a)). Thus, there is great
incentive, financial and otherwise, for organizations to prevent and discourage Job Burnout
symptoms within their walls.
Mentor relationships in a professional environment lead to benefits that are pronounced
for both mentors and protégés. It has also been derived from the study that Mentoring has a
positive and significant impact on Job Satisfaction. The result is supported by the previous
studies which stated that Mentor relationships are a critical career resource for employees in any
organizational dynamic that can aid in organizational advancement, increase in salary, and job
satisfaction (Ragins & Cotton, 1999; Scandura & Ragins, 1993). Protégés are provided with
support, guidance, and feedback regarding their personal development and career direction
(Fagenson, 1992; Pastore, 2003). Mentoring has been linked to career advancement,increased job
and career satisfaction, positive organizational socialization, and reduced turnover intentions
(Dreher& Ash; Viator & Scandura, 1991; Weaver & Chelladurai, 2002).Protégés that are
involved in mentor relationships within any organizational dynamic demonstrate increases in
advancement, salary, and job satisfaction (Ragins & Cotton, 1999; Scandura & Ragins, 1993).
The moderating role of Mentoring, has not received much attention in earlier studies. The
impetus for the growing interest in Mentoring is the increasing prevalence of Job Burnout in the
workplace and the enormous costs associated with such behavior. Burnout is clearly identified as
problems in the area of human services that need to be addressed. Moreover, from the results of
testing the hypotheses, mentoring appears to be an important tool to improve positive employee
outcomes and to reduce burnout when employees are confronted. with adverse working
conditions. Nevertheless, most researchers and practitioners believe that job satisfaction can be
optimized and burnout minimized to enhance the quality of services to clients (Lovgren et al.,
2002; Kalliath et al., 2002,; Misener, 1996)
Given the highly competitive nature of today's economy, the head of the Organisation
need to realise that managers should perceive organisation as supportive in order to make them
more committed to organisation. The implications is that that there is a need of
organisational/Industrial psychologist to design programmes on Mentoring to incorporate a
feeling of commitment leading to satisfaction so as to compete with the challenges .Young
managers may be supported by senior managers by discouraging them for engaging in deviant
activities .
The available literature shows that this paper is the first to consider the moderating effect
of Mentoring on Job Burnout and Job Satisfaction relationship
Limitations
The findings of this study are subject to several limitations. First, the samples of this
study are only limited to only private sector Managers. Although the gender distribution of the
samples in this consistent with that of the population, the results of this study might suffer from
the generalisation of the findings to other industries that have equal gender distribution. The
sample in this research is restricted to Managers; future research should examine other
occupations/professions as well as determining the applicability of these results to different
levels in the organization. The sample size is not sufficient enough to reflex the factual image of
the Private organisations in context with effectiveness.
Contribution of the current study
This study adds to researcher’s efforts to understand the moderation effect of Mentoring on the
relationship between Job Burnout and Job Satisfaction in Private sector organisations. The study
is the first of its kind to relate the moderating effect of Mentoring on Job Burnout and Job
Satisfaction relationship. The study contributed new directions in the research of management by
opening up a debate on the importance of this dimensions on Job Satisfaction. The fact that
statistically significant correlations and regression results are indicating that Mentoring has a
significant impact on Job Satisfaction
Managerial Implications
The study gives a view that Mentoring acts as a moderating agent between two important
variables i.e. Job Burnout and Job Satisfaction. Therefore, the Management needs to realize that
the environment of the organization should be such that the mangers perceive it as supportive in
order to experience less Job burnout. Attention to mentoring can help reducing the effect of Job
Burnout on Job Satisfaction. It helps the Managers more effective. To increase the satisfaction
with the Job, managers are encouraged to enhance its negative correlate identified in the study.
Directions for Future Research
Longitudinal studies to establish the causal relationship between the variables could be included.
To enhance external validity, future research efforts should obtain a representative sample from
more organisations. More personality dimensions should be used to assess Job Satisfaction with
increased statistical power. Measures with few items are more prone to unreliability than
summated measures with greater no. of items.(Spector,1992). Only Male managers were
considered for the present study. A further research can be done to compare the gender
differences for the study variables.
References
1. Allen TD, Russell JEA, Maetzke SB: Formal peer mentoring: Factors related to protégés
satisfaction and willingness to mentor others. Group Organization Manag 1997, 22:488-
507.
2. Arafa MA et al. Predictors of psychological well-being of nurses in Alexandria, Egypt.
International journal of nursing practice, 2003, 9:313–20.
3. Bahniuk MH, Dobos J, Kogler Hill SE: The impact of mentoring, collegial support, and
information adequacy on career success: A replication.J Soc Behav Pers 1990, 5:431-451.
4. Baruch-Feldman, C., Brondolo, E., Ben-Dayan, D. and Schwartz, J. (2002), “Sources of
social support and burnout, job satisfaction, and productivity”, Journal of Occupational
Health Psychology, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 84-93.
5. Brayfield,, A. H., & W. C. Crockett (1955). "Employee Attitudes and Employee
Performance." Psychological Bulletin, (52), 5 396-424.
6. Burke R.J. & Greenglass E. (1995). A longitudinal study of psychological burnout in
teachers. Human Relations 48, 187–203.
7. Burke, R. J., & McKeen, C. A. (1997). Benefits of mentoring relationships among
managerial and professional women: A cautionary tale. Journal of Vocational Behavior,
51, 43 – 57.
8. Cam O. The burnout in nursing academicians in Turkey. Int J Nurs Stud. 2001;38:201–7.
doi: 10.1016/S0020-7489(00)00051-1.
9. Cherniss, C., (1980), Staff burnout: Job stress in the human services, Beverly Hills, CA:
Sage Publications.
10. Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the
behavioural sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
11. Cohen, J., and Cohen, P. (1975). Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for
theBehavioral Sciences. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
12. Cooper, C. L., Kirkaldy, B. D., and Brown, J. (1994). A Model of Job Stress and
PhysicalHealth: The Role of Individual Differences. Personality and Individual
Differences,16(6), 653-655.
13. Cordes C.L., Dougherty T.W.& Blum M. (1997) Patterns of burnout among managers and
professionals: a comparison of models. Journal of Organizational Behavior 18, 685–701.
14. Cordes, C.L. and Dougherty, T.W., (1993), A review and an integration of research on job
burnout, Academy of Management Review, 18, 4, pp. 621-656.
15. Cordes, C.L. and Dougherty, T.W., (1993), A review and an integration of research on job
burnout, Academy of Management Review, 18, 4, pp. 621-656.
16. Dreher, G. F., & Ash, R. A. (1990). A comparative study of mentoring among men
andwomen in managerial, professional, and technical positions. Journal of
AppliedPsychology, 5, 539 – 546.
17. Fagenson, E. A. (1992). Mentoring – Who needs it? A comparison of proteges’ and
nonproteges’ needs for power, achievement, affiliation, and autonomy. Journalof
Vocational Behavior, 41, 48 – 60.
18. Fawcett DL: Mentoring–what it is and how to make it work. Association of Operating
Room Nurses 2002, 75:950-954.
19. Foster, D.P., Stine, B., & Waterman, R. (1998). Business analysis usingregression: A
casebook. US: Springer-Verlag.
20. Friščić Lj. Factors of professional stress and burn-out in the work of social workers in the
center of social care Zagreb. Ljetopis studijskog centra socijalnog rada. 2006;13:347–70.
21. Gianakos, I. (2000), “Gender roles and coping with work stress”, Sex Roles, Vol. 42, pp.
1059-79.
22. Gibson T, Heartfield M: Mentoring for nurses in general practice: An Australian study.
Journal of Interprofessional Care 2005, 19:50-62.
23. Kalliath T, Morris R. Job satisfaction among nurses: a predictor of burnout levels.
Journal of nursing administration,2002, 32(12):648–54.
24. Lovgren G et al. Working conditions and the possibility of providing good care. Journal
of nursing management, 2002,10:201–9.
25. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998).Multivariate Data
Analysis (5th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice HallInternational.
26. Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L., & Black, W.C. (2006). Multi- variate data
analysis . New Jersey: Prentice Hall International, Inc
27. Hardy, C. J. (1994). Nurturing our future through effective mentoring: Developing roots
as well as wings. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 6, 196 – 204.
28. Hudek-Knežević J, Krapić N, Kardum I. Burnout in dispositional context: the role of
personality traits, social support and coping styles. Rev Psychol. 2006;13:65–73.
29. Jaccard, J., Turrisi, R., & Wan, C.K. (1990). Interaction effects in multiple regression, 72.
Newsbury Park, California: SAGE Publications, Inc.
30. Jiang, J. J., & Klein, G. (1999 – 2000). Supervisor support and career anchor impact
onthe career satisfaction of the entry-level information systems professional. Journalof
Management Information Systems, 16, 219 – 240.108
31. Koberg, C. S., Boss, R. W., Chappell, D., & Ringer, R. C. (1994). Correlates
andconsequences of protégé mentoring in a large hospital. Group &
OrganizationalManagement, 19, 219 – 239.
32. Kram, K. E. (1988). Mentoring at work: Developmental relationships in organizational
life. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, Inc.
33. Laffaldo, Michelle T., & Paul M. Muchinsky (1985). "Job Satisfaction and Job
Performance: A Meta-Analysis." Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 97, No. 2, 251-273.
34. Lee, R.T. and Ashforth, B.E., (1990), On the meaning of Maslach’s three dimensions of
burnout; Journal of Applied Psychology, 75. pp. 743-747
35. Locke, E.A. 1976. The nature and causes of job satisfaction. M.D. Dunnette (Ed.),
Handbookof Industrial and Organizational Psychology: 1297-1349. New York: John
Wiley.
36. Marriott A, Sexton L, Staley D. Components of job satisfaction in psychiatric social
workers. Health Soc Work. 1994;19:199–205
37. Maslach, C and Jackson, S.E., (1981), The measurement of experienced burnout, Journal
of Occupational Behaviour, 3, pp. 99-113.
38. Maslach, C., (1976), Burned-out, Human Behavior, 5(9), pp.16-22.
39. Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W.B. and Leiter, M.P. (2001), “Job burnout”, Annual Review of
Psychology,Vol. 52 No. 397-422.
40. McGregor, D. (1960). The Human Side of Enterprise. New York: McGraw Hill.
41. Misener T et al. Toward an international measure of job satisfaction. Nursing research,
1996, 45(2):87–91.
42. Modic, S.J., (1989), Surviving burnout, Industry Week, Feb 20, pp. 29-34.
43. Moore J.E. (2000). Why is this happening? A causal attribution approach to work
exhaustion consequences. Academy of Management Review, 25, 335–349
44. Mowday, Richard T., C. S. Koberg, & A. W. McArthur (1984). "The Psychology of the
Withdrawal Process:A Cross-Validational Test of Mobley's Intermediate Linkages Model
of Turnover in Two Samples, Academy of Management Journal, 27 (March 1984), 79-94.
45. Nunally, J.C., & Bernstein, I.H. (1994).Psychometric theory . New York:McGraw-Hill
46. Nunnally, Jum C. (1978). Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
47. O’Neill, R. M., Horton, S., & Crosby, F. J. (1999). Gender issues in developmental
relationships. In A. J. Murrell, F. J. Crosby, & R. J. Ely (Eds.), Mentoring dilemmas:
Developmental relationships within multicultural organizations (pp.63 – 80). Mahwah,
NJ: Erlbaum.
48. Pastore, D. L. (2003). A different lens to view mentoring in sport management. Journal of
Sport Management, 17, 1 – 12.
49. Pastore, D. L. (2003). A different lens to view mentoring in sport management. Journalof
Sport Management, 17, 1 – 12.110
50. Pines, A., Aronson, E., and Kafry, D., (1981), Burnout: From tedium to personal growth,
New York: The Free Press
51. Porter, L. W., & R. M. Steers (1973). "Organizational, Work, and Personal Factors in
Employee Turnover and Absenteeism." Psychological Bulletin, 80, 151-176.
52. Porter, Lyman W., Richard M. Steers, & Richard T. Mowday (1974). "Organizational
Commitment, Job Satisfaction, and Turnover among Psychiatric Technicians." Journal of
Applied Psychology, 59 (5), 603-609.
53. Ragins, B. R., & Cotton, J. L. (1999). Mentor functions and outcomes: A comparisonof
men and women in formal and informal mentoring relationships. Journal ofApplied
Psychology, 84, 529 – 550.
54. Ragins, B. R., & McFarlin, D. B. (1990). Perceptions of mentor roles in cross-
gendermentoring relationships. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 37, 321 – 339.
55. Rashed, A. A. (2001). The Effect of Personal Characteristics on Job Satisfaction: A
StudyAmong Male Managers in the Kuwait Oil Industry. International Journal of
Commerce& Management, 11(3), 91-111.
56. Roberts, J. A., Lapidus, R. A., and Chonko, L. B. (1997). Salesperson and Stress : The
Moderating Role of Locus of Control on Work Stressors and Felt Stress. Journal
ofMarketing Theory and Practice, 5(3), 93-108.
57. Rothlisberger, F., & Dickson, W. (1939). Management and the Worker. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
58. Salt J, Cummings G, Profetto-McGrath J: Increasing retention of new graduate nurses: A
systematic review of interventions by healthcare organizations. J Nurs Adm 2008,
38:287-296.
59. Sarah Dinolfo, and Julie S. Nugent, Making Mentoring Work (Catalyst, 2010); Nancy M.
Carter, and Christine Silva, Mentoring: Necessary But Insufficient for Advancement
(Catalyst, 2010).
60. Sarmiento T.P. , Laschinger H.K.S. & Iwasiw C:Nurse Educators’ Workplace
Empowerment, burnout, And Job Satisfaction: Testing Kanter’s Theory ;Issues And
Innovations In Nursing Education. (2004) Journal of Advanced Nursing 46(2), 134–143
61. Scandura TA, Williams EA: An Investigation of the moderating effects of gender on the
relationships between mentorship initiation and protégé perceptions of mentoring
functions. J Vocat Behav 2001, 59:342-363.
62. Scandura, T. A., & Ragins, B. R. (1993). The effects of sex and gender role orientation on
mentorship in male-dominated occupations. Journal of Vocational Behavior,43, 251 –
265.
63. Shirom A, Nirel N, Vinokur AD. Overload, autonomy, and burnout as predictors of
physicians' quality of care. J Occup Health Psychol. 2006;11:328–42. doi:
10.1037/1076-8998.11.4.328
64. Smith, C. Ann, Dennis W. Organ, & Janet P. Near (1983). "Organizational Citizenship
Behavior: Its Nature and Antecedents." Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, No. 4,653-
663.
65. Smith, P.L., Stanley, S. J., and Frank, H. (1998) Employee Work Attitudes: The Subtle
Influence of Gender. Human Relations, 51(5), 649-667.
66. Tourigny L, Pulich M: A critical examination of formal and informal mentoring among
nurses. The Health Care Manager 2005, 24:68-76.
67. Underhill CM: The effectiveness of mentoring programs in corporate settings: A meta-
analytical review of the literature. J Vocat Behav 2006,68:292-307
68. Viator, R. E., & Scandura, T. A. (1991). A study if mentor-protégé relationships in large
public accounting firms. Accounting Horizons, 5, 20 – 30. We report descriptive statistics
that are not statistically significantly different but illustrative to capture baseline
information regarding the presence of formal mentoring programs in the India-HQ and
India-Subsidiary companies.
69. Viswesvaran, C., Sanchez, J.I. and Fisher, J. (1999), “The role of social support in the
process of work stress: a meta-analysis”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 54 No. 2,
pp. 314-34.
70. Weaver, M. A., & Chelladurai, P. (2002). Mentoring in intercollegiate athletic
administration. Journal of Sport Management, 16, 96 – 116.
71. Yaacob, M.R. (2008). SPSS for business and social science students. Malaysia:Pustaka
Aman Press Sdn. Bhd.
72. Zuraikat N, McCloskey J. Job satisfaction among Jordanian registered nurses.
International nursing review, 1986,33(5):143–7.
top related