Workaholic and work engaged employees: dead ringers or worlds apart?

Abstract

Building on Deci and Ryan's Self-Determination Theory and Meijman and Mulder's Effort-Recovery Model, the present study examined the nature, antecedents, and consequences of working hard (i.e., workaholism and work engagement) in a Dutch convenience sample of 1,246 employees. A confirmatory factor analysis showed that workaholism and work engagement were two largely independent concepts. Crossing these two concepts yielded four types of workers: workaholic employees, engaged employees, engaged workaholics, and nonworkaholic/nonengaged employees. MANOVA and subsequent ANOVAs were used to compare these four groups regarding their motivation, working hours, and levels of burnout. As expected, study results revealed that workaholic employees were driven by controlled motivation, whereas engaged employees were driven by autonomous motivation. Engaged workaholics were driven by both controlled and autonomous motivation. In addition, the results revealed that engaged workaholics spent most time on working. Unlike workaholic employees, engaged workaholics did not experience the highest levels of burnout, suggesting that high engagement may buffer the adverse consequences of workaholism. The present study emphasizes the importance of differentiating among at least three categories of employees who work hard: workaholic employees, engaged employees, and-for the first time-engaged workaholics.