Do intensified job demands predict burnout? How motivation to lead and leadership status may have a moderating effect.

Objectives: The aim of this longitudinal study was to investigate how intensified job demands (job-related planning demands, career-related planning demands, and learning demands) are associated with burnout. We explored whether affective-identity motivation to lead moderates this association and, thus, functions as a personal resource regardless of leadership status. We further investigated whether the possible buffering effect is stronger for those professionals who became leaders during the follow-up. Methods: Our sample consisted of highly educated Finnish professionals (n = 372): part of them (n = 63, 17%) occupied a leadership position during the 2-year follow-up while the rest maintained their position without formal leadership duties. Results: The results of hierarchical linear modeling indicated that intensified learning demands were associated with later burnout. High affective-identity motivation to lead was not found to buffer against the negative effects of intensified job demands - instead, it strengthened the connection of intensified job- and career-related demands to burnout. Nevertheless, among the whole sample, professionals with high affective-identity motivation to lead reported lower burnout when job demands were not highly intensified. The leadership status also played a role: High affective-identity motivation to lead strengthened the connection of career-related demands to burnout in those professionals who became leaders during the follow-up. Conclusions: Altogether, we propose that in certain circumstances, affective-identity motivation to lead might help professionals, with and without formal leadership duties, to be more ready to lead their own work and well-being. However, in order to promote sustainable careers, the vulnerability role of high affective-identity motivation to lead should be considered as well.

MOCSE Centered on Students: Validation of Learning Demands and Teacher Support Scales.

Based on The Educational Situation Quality Model (MOCSE, acronym in Spanish) framework, the primary objective of this study is to test the factorial validity and reliability of two MOCSE measure instruments referred to the preactional-decisional phase, specifically to learning demands and teacher supports perceived by students to overcome such demands in the classroom context. The participants were 357 Spanish undergraduate students. The data obtained by exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses revealed that the "Learning Demands Scale" (MOCSE-LDS) has a two-factor structure: perceived desirability and feasibility of demands. The data also revealed that the "Teacher Support Questionnaire" (MOCSE-TSQ) is composed of ten independent factors or subscales with good psychometric validity and reliability properties. Finally, the Student's t-test generally indicated that the constructs considered in the instruments did not differ in gender terms. In short, the results obtained for the validity and reliability of the two tested instruments were good. Thus, the application of instruments MOCSE-LDS and MOCSE-TSQ is satisfactorily supported by empirical data. The resulting scales can be useful for researchers and teachers. On the one hand, this study provides researchers with two valid and reliable tools that may contribute to investigate students' motivation in the university classroom context based on MOCSE postulates. On the other hand, the two tested instruments may provide teachers and school psychologists with important information to implement preventive or intervention actions to improve students' intention to learn. Teachers may also use them to evaluate their own teaching and to research their own classrooms. The implications for education according to MOCSE postulates are discussed.

Feeling Weary? Feeling Insecure? Are All Workplace Changes Bad News?

Prior research indicates that workplace changes can have both positive and negative consequences for employees. To explore the mechanisms that trigger these different outcomes, we propose and test a mediation model, which builds on the premises of the challenge-hindrance model of work stress. Specifically, we suggest that whereas workplace changes can engender positive outcomes (e.g., learning outcomes) through an increase in learning demands, they can also enhance negative outcomes (e.g., emotional exhaustion) through increased perceptions of qualitative job insecurity. While we made these specific assumptions, we also analyzed the reversed causation relationships. Two-wave data obtained from 1366 Dutch employees were used to test the study hypotheses. The results showed that the reciprocal causation model had the best fit for the data. However, whereas emotional exhaustion was only mediated by qualitative job insecurity, no mediation was found by learning demands. In addition to the hypothesized effects, several reversed causation effects emerged from the analyses, indicating that the relationships between workplace changes and employee learning and strain are not unidirectional. This underscores the need for a broader view on the causes and effects of workplace changes, as the traditional causation relationships (i.e., perceptions of workplace changes impacting employee learning and strain experiences) are insufficient to explain the complex dynamics between the studied phenomena.

The influence of change-oriented leadership on work performance and job satisfaction in hospitals - the mediating roles of learning demands and job involvement.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this paper is to examine the mechanisms through which change-oriented leadership in hospitals influences job performance and employee job satisfaction. The authors examine the direct and the mediating effects of perceived learning demands and job involvement. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: This cross-sectional study is based on a survey of four public hospitals in a regional health authority in Norway. FINDINGS: The findings illustrate how change-oriented leadership directly and indirectly influences work performance and job satisfaction. Learning demands and job involvement play mediating roles. Higher levels of change-oriented leadership decrease learning demands and increase job involvement, work performance and job satisfaction. Learning demands have a negative influence on work performance and job satisfaction. Job involvement has a positive influence on work performance and job satisfaction. The strongest relationship in the structural modelling is between change-oriented leadership and job involvement. RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS: This study is based on cross-sectional data. Future studies should therefore explore this further using a longitudinal design. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: The practical implication of the study is to show how leaders by change-oriented behaviour can influence work performance and job satisfaction by reducing learning demands and increasing job involvement. SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS: This study illustrates different paths towards influencing job performance and job satisfaction from change-oriented leadership. It is important to use the potential of reducing learning demands and increasing job involvement, to improve job performance and job satisfaction. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: The authors have developed and validated a new theoretical mediational model explaining variance in job performance and job satisfaction, and how this is related to change-oriented leadership, job involvement and learning demands. This knowledge can be used to increase the probability of successful change initiatives.

Thriving on challenge stressors? Exploring time pressure and learning demands as antecedents of thriving at work.

In the conceptualization of thriving at work, it is emphasized that employees' learning and vitality are two equally important components of thriving and that thriving is facilitated by contextual features and available resources. In this study, we examined the effects of two challenge stressors (time pressure and learning demands) on thriving at work. Based on the literature on challenge and hindrance stressors, we proposed that challenge stressors positively affect learning and negatively affect vitality. To uncover underlying mechanisms, we measured challenge appraisal and hindrance appraisal of work situations in a diary study. A sample of 124 knowledge workers responded to three daily surveys (before the lunch break, during the afternoon, and at the end of the workday) for a period of five workdays. Results indicate that the indirect effects of learning demands and time pressure on learning are mediated by challenge appraisal, whereas indirect effects of learning demands on vitality are mediated by hindrance appraisal. Overall, our study shows that challenge stressors have a positive total effect on learning but no total effect on vitality. These differential relationships call for a finer distinction between the two components of thriving at work in future research.