Workaholism

Although the popular press has paid considerable attention to workaholism, very little research has been undertaken to further our understanding of it. It should come as no surprise, then, that opinions, observations, and conclusions about workaholism are both varied and conflicting. Some researchers, such as Marilyn Machlowitz, view workaholism positively from an organizational perspective, finding workaholics to be satisfied and productive. Others, such as Barbara Killinger and Gayle Porter, view workaholism negatively, equating workaholism with other addictions and depicting workaholics as unhappy, obsessive, tragic figures who are not performing their jobs well and are creating difficulties for their coworkers.

Wayne Oates, generally acknowledged as the first person to use the term workaholic, described a workaholic as someone with such an excessive need for work that it creates a disturbance with the workaholic’s physical, psychological, and social well-being. Kimberly Scott, Keirsten Moore, and Marcia Miceli proposed three elements of workaholism: the extent to which an individual (1) spends discretionary time in work activities, (2) thinks about work when not working, and (3) works beyond organizational requirements. Finally, Janet Spence and Ann Robbins describe the workaholic as a person who is highly involved in work, feels “driven” to work because of internal pressures yet experiences relatively little enjoyment at work. Most writers view workaholism as a stable individual characteristic, and there have been suggestions that workaholism may be increasing.

Some researchers have proposed the existence of different types of workaholic behavior patterns, each having potentially different determinants and different effects on job performance and other work and life outcomes. Scott, Moore, and Miceli suggest three types of workaholic behavior patterns: compulsive-dependent, perfectionist, and achievement oriented. They propose that compulsive-dependent workaholism will be associated with high job performance, high job satisfaction, and high life satisfaction; that perfectionist workaholism will be associated with high stress, extensive physical and psychological problems, hostile interpersonal relationships, low job satisfaction, low job performance, and voluntary turnover and absenteeism; and that achievement-oriented workaholism will be associated with physical and psychological health, high job and life satisfaction, high job performance, low voluntary turnover, and pro-social (altruistic) behaviors.

Spence and Robbins found three workaholic patterns—Work Addicts, Work Enthusiasts, and Enthusiastic Addicts—based on their three workaholism components (work involvement, feeling driven to work, and work enjoyment). Work Addicts were highly involved in work, felt driven to work, and were low on work enjoyment. Work Enthusiasts were high on work involvement and work enjoyment and low on feeling driven to work. Enthusiastic Addicts were high on all three components of workaholism. The existence of different types of workaholic patterns might help reconcile the conflicting observations and conclusions in the literature.

There has been considerable speculation regarding the work behaviors likely to be exhibited by workaholics. This list includes an extensive number of hours worked per week, a high level of job involvement, extensive job stress, nondelegation of job responsibilities to others, high levels of interpersonal conflict, and a lack of trust.

Most studies of workaholic behaviors have compared the three workaholism types identified by Spence and Robbins. In general, there are no differences between Work Addicts, Enthusiastic Addicts, and Work Enthusiasts in the number of hours worked per week (although the three workaholism types work more hours than nonworkaholics). Work Addicts report greater job stress than Enthusiastic Addicts, and both report greater job stress than Work Enthusiasts. Both Enthusiastic Addicts and Work Enthusiasts report greater job involvement than Work Addicts, and Work Addicts have a greater unwillingness to delegate than the other types. Enthusiastic Addicts not surprisingly are more perfectionist than Work Enthusiasts.

Three potential determinants of workaholism have received some conceptual and research attention. Two of these, family of origin and personal beliefs and fears, are the result of socialization practices within families and society at large. The third—organizational support for work-personal life balance—represents organizational values and priorities.

Family of Origin

Bryan Robinson has written about work addiction as a symptom of a diseased family system. Work addiction, similar to other addictive behaviors, is intergenerational and passed on to future generations through family processes and dynamics. In this view, work addiction is seen as a learned addictive response to a dysfunctional family of origin system.

Personal Beliefs and Fears

Ronald Burke examined the relationship of personal beliefs and fears with workaholism. Beliefs and fears are a reflection of values, thoughts, and interpersonal styles. He found that Work Addicts scored higher than Work Enthusiasts and Enthusiastic Addicts on this measure and concluded that workaholism emerges in response to feelings of low self-worth and insecurity.

Organizational Values

Organizations differ in the extent to which their culture supports work-personal life balance. Burke compared perceptions of the supportiveness of organization culture across the three Spence and Robbins workaholism types. He found that Work Addicts saw their workplaces as less supportive of work-personal life balance than both Work Enthusiasts and Enthusiastic Addicts.

It is likely that different types of workaholics will report varying work and career satisfactions. In support of this, Scott and her colleagues found that Work Enthusiasts and Enthusiastic Addicts were more satisfied with their jobs than Work Addicts, and Work Enthusiasts perceived brighter career prospects than Work Addicts. Not surprisingly, Work Addicts had a stronger intention to quit their organization than Work Enthusiasts.

There is considerable consensus in the workaholism literature on the association between workaholism and poor psychological and physical well-being. Work Enthusiasts have fewer psychosomatic symptoms—and more positive lifestyle behaviors—than both types of Work Addicts, and Work Enthusiasts and Enthusiastic Addicts have more favorable emotional well-being than Work Addicts.

A number of writers have hypothesized that workaholism is likely to impact negatively on family functioning. The comparisons of the workaholism types on three measures of life or extrawork satisfactions have provided moderate support for the hypothesized relationships. First, Work Addicts were less satisfied with their family lives than the two other types. Second, Work Addicts were less satisfied with their relationships with friends than Work Enthusiasts. Third,Work Enthusiasts experienced greater satisfaction with their community than did Work Addicts and Enthusiastic Addicts.

The relationships between specific workaholism components (work enjoyment, work involvement, feeling driven to work) and various types of outcome variables are interesting and complex. Work enjoyment was the only component related to all work outcomes. Employees reporting greater work enjoyment also experienced more job satisfaction, more optimistic future career prospects, more career satisfaction, and a lower intent to quit their organization. Moreover, both work enjoyment and feeling driven to work were related to indicators of psychological well-being but in opposite directions. Individuals reporting greater work enjoyment and lesser feelings of being driven to work reported higher levels of psychological health.

There is a large speculative literature suggesting ways to reduce levels of workaholism. One part of this work focuses on individual and family therapy, and a second part emphasizes organizational and managerial interventions.

Individual Counseling

Workaholics Anonymous chapters have sprung up in some North American cities. These groups, patterned after Alcoholics Anonymous self-help groups, endorse the 12-step approach common to the treatment of a variety of addictions. Killinger and Robinson include chapters outlining actions an individual might pursue to reduce levels of workaholism.

Family Therapy

Robinson, consistent with his clinical and consulting perspective, focuses on treatment, both individual and family. This is not surprising, given the central role he gives to both family of origin and current family functioning in the development, maintenance, and intergenerational transmission of workaholism. The treatment recommendations Robinson offers are similar to those offered to alcoholic families.

Denial is common among workaholics and their family members. Workaholics define their behavior and symptoms in a favorable light, and family members are reluctant to complain. Parental expectations of children, often unrealistic, should be addressed as should family members’ collusion with the workaholic parent. Family members need help in expressing their negative feelings to the workaholic. Families also need to learn to set boundaries around the amount of time they work together and talk about work. Family members can set goals regarding communications, roles, and expressions of feelings to improve family dynamics.

Workplace Interventions

How can employers help workaholics and help workaholics help themselves? Employers should pay attention to the performance and work habits of employees and be alert to warning signs of workaholism. They should ensure that employees take vacation time away from work. Finally, job insecurity, work overload, limited career opportunities, and lack of control can make employees feel compelled to work longer. If these factors exist, employers should try to minimize their impact on the atmosphere within the organization.

Robinson also highlights the role that managers can play in assisting their workaholic employees to change. Workaholic employees should be referred to an employee assistance program or a recovery program to start treatment processes. Managers should help prioritize projects for employees as long-term and short-term assignments. Workaholics must be encouraged and helped to delegate their work. At the end of each day, the manager should meet with the employee to discuss what has been accomplished during that day and to plan (down to short intervals) for the following day. The employee should be given specific times to take breaks and to leave work. It may also be possible to reduce the negative effects of workaholism (particularly on impaired well-being and poor health) through stress management training. The development of workplace values that promote new, more balanced priorities and healthier lifestyles will support those workaholics who want to change their behaviors.

See also:

• Employee assistance programs
• Job involvement
• Stress at work
• Type A behavior pattern

References:

1. Burke, R. J. 2000. “Workaholism in Organizations: The Role of Personal Beliefs and Fears.” Anxiety, Stress and Coping 13:53-64.
2. Burke, R. J. 2001. “Workaholism in Organizations: The Role of Organizational Values.” Personnel Review 30:637-645.
3. Killinger, B. 1991. Workaholics: The Respectable Addicts. New York: Simon & Schuster.
4. Machlowitz, M. 1980. Workaholics: Living with Them, Working with Them. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
5. Oates,W. 1971. Confessions of a Workaholic: The Facts about Work Addiction. New York: World.
6. Porter, G. 1996. “Organizational Impact of Workaholism: Suggestions for Researching the Negative Outcomes of Excessive Work.” Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 1:70-84.
7. Robinson, B. E. 1998. Chained to the Desk: A Guidebook for Workaholics, Their Partners and Children and the Clinicians Who Treat Them. New York: New York University Press.
8. Scott, K. S., Moore, K. S. and Miceli, M. P. 1997. “An Exploration of the Meaning and Consequences of Workaholism.” Human Relations 50:287-314.
9. Spence, J. T. and Robbins, A. S. 1992. “Workaholism: Definition, Measurement, and Preliminary Results.” Journal of Personality Assessment 58:160-178.