Transformational Leadership and Business Performance: An Insight From Technology-based SMEs in Malaysia


Burnout syndrome resulting in dissatisfaction and physical illnesses due to continuous and long-term stress exposure at work is a common problem at governmental institutions in Turkey. A survey was carried out in 2015 on 121 staff at Bingöl University, Turkey to measure the burnout level and compare Maslcah Burnout Inventory (MBI) and Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI) scales. Descriptive statistics, ANOVA, regressions and correlations methods are used to analyze data. All items of the survey had 0.915 Cronbach Alfa reliability score and MBI and CBI groups had 0.799 and 0.904 Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. The total mean of all items was 2.45 with 1.48 minimum from “Impersonal objects item” and 3.826 maximum from “Have enough energy during leisure time”. Moreover, strong correlations were found between EE (Emotional Exhaustion) and DP (Depersonalization), WRB (Work-related Burnout) and PB (Personal Burnout) - CRB (Clients-related Burnout) groups and DP has strong correlations with WRB and PB-CRB groups. Position and working more hours had a significant relationship with burnout syndrome while other important factors such as experience, age, gender and having children had moderate effects on burnout. Moreover, the CBI scale was found to be more suitable to measure burnout with higher reliability and validity values.

Keywords: InstitutionalizationMaslcah Burnout InventoryCopenhagen Burnout InventoryBingöl University


Burnout Syndrome (BS) is a chronic stress in the workplace, which is characterized by exhaustion and depersonalization (negativism/cynicism), and is found predominantly in caring and social professions (e.g. social workers, teachers, nurses, doctors, dentists) (Weber & Reinhard, 2000, p.512). It is seen as the main cause of depression and some physical illnesses. For years, many nurses and other professionals like over-worked employees and homemakers are facing this syndrome mainly due to heavy patient loads, lack of staff and higher stress levels and generally, job dissatisfaction. Moreover, social professionals are facing a stressful lifestyle due to the following working conditions: overworked or under-challenged, time-pressured, and social conflicts with colleagues are seen as the main cause of illnesses. Emotional exhaustion, alienation from job-related activities and inefficient performance are the main symptoms of that syndrome. Furthermore, people having low self-esteem, hopelessness, and suicidal tendencies are more often suffering from BS and depression. It is known that about 10 % of Turkish people have visited the hospitals due to physiological reasons and the great percentage of these visits is due to BS related to their working life. Past psychosocial studies about burnout from different organizations and university staff to increase productivity and decrease costs due to BS are applied in that study in order to compare with new findings.

Competitiveness through a high consumerist lifestyle has been increasing with industrialization, which results in intense struggles among people in modern societies. In addition, these intense struggles triggered by technology-based innovations increase both physical individuals’ burnout as well as negative impact on their socio-psychological well-being. In this study, the working life of the individual "burning" and "exhaustion" are examined from the BS. The study firstly examined through literature and then, a research was validated through a study on 121 Bingöl University staff. The study data were subjected to statistical analysis and interpreted based on Maslcah Burnout Inventory (MBI) and Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI) scales to measure the burnout level among Bingöl University staff and both scales were compared to find the one most suited to Turkish culture. Moreover, dimensions (factors) of both questionnaires are compared in order to identify the relationships between them.

Review of Related Literature

Busy and stressful work life leads to both physical and psychological exhaustion and negatively affects emotions of people. However, BS related to working life is present in both social sciences and health sciences. It is significant to note that BS is prevalent across societies and cultures as manifested in various studies written on the issue.

Therefore, the literature on BS is extensive. This term was first used by Freudenberger and Maslach (Dağlı & Gündüz, 2008, p.14). Burnout is described as the wear and severe exhaustion due to fear of failure and high demand on the power and resource. Burnout is defined by Dolan as "exhaustion of the personal resources, having constant negativity and hopelessness in the face of daily events, running out of energy" (Aksu & Baysal, 2005, p.9). Furthermore, Freudenberger defined burnout as "failure, worn, energy and power loss or depletion of the situation resulting from unmet demands of man" (Çelikkaleli, 2011, p.39). This generally manifests in two ways. The first is physical exhaustion with headache, nausea, and manifests itself with symptoms of dizziness and the other is emotional exhaustion (Langballe; 2009, p.179). Emotional or socio-symptoms of psychological exhaustion in general are as follows: anger explosion, depression, constant tension, confusion, indecisions, constant worry, prolonged feelings of inadequacy, low self-perception, hopelessness, substance abuse, inability to focus on work, blaming others in the form of frustration for their own problems, responsibility and panic attacks (Kan; 2008, p.432). Moreover, observed burnout results are usually depression, permanent hopelessness, low motivation, low achievement, high occupational risk, breakage studies perseverance, taking tendency of medical report, high rates of absence at work and resignation of personnel (Dağlı & Gündüz; 2008, p.15; Sabbah et al., 2012, p.644-652). In a study by Gürbüz et al. (2009), BS is accompanied by negative attitudes at work such as tiredness, insomnia, carelessness, lack of motivation to work and in general, indifferent against rules and duties, lack of interest against organizational goals, and private life problems. Starting to smoke and drink alcohol are other major results of burnout (Gürbüz et al., 2009). Burnout at the individual level varies according to socio-demographic factors namely; age, gender, educational level and experience (Khan, 2015,p.234). However, it is noteworthy that intervening variables such as working hours, managers' attitudes and behaviors, satisfaction provided by the work, and organizational support services provided by the group are features that significantly affect burnout level (Kayabaşı, 2008, p.153; Friesen & Sorros, 1989, p.180).

Maslach has evaluated the burnout level in accordance with psycho-emotional factors from three angles; emotional exhaustion, depersonalization and reduced personal accomplishment (Gündüz' 2005, p.153). Emotional exhaustion ranked as a major factor causing burnout and is the aspect most clearly noticeable. Complex burnout due to emotional exhaustion leads to people’s tearing themselves or others, loss of energy, fatigue or exhaustion (Schwarzer, Hallum, 2008: 155) Desensitization [depersonalization] is characterized by lose of idealism and enthusiasm among employees, causing their alienation from their work and their self. (Zaidi et all., 2011: 830) Not to care about the people they serve, and engaging in negative reactions are the most frequent behaviors including hostility. Research reveals that there is a significant relationship between emotional desensitization and depersonalization. (Weisberg & Sagie; 1999:334) People with BS who felt emotional and physical exhaustion, find it difficult to meet the demands required by their jobs and will have negative attitude towards themselves and others, resulting to a lack of personal accomplishment and the feeling of incompetence. In this sense, the reduction of personal sense of accomplishment is seen with the two other situations. In other words, reduction of business goals, the reduction of personal responsibility for work, loss of idealism and an emotional break from work are regular signs of this burnout type. (Hughes, 2001: 288) A study shows that there is an association between burnout and fast food consumption, wherein, higher consumption on fast food, alcohol, painkiller and lack of exercise leads to higher risk of having a burnout syndrome (Alexandrova et al., 2016).

BS is common among those whose work involve intense social interactions such as nurses, cops and teachers (Byrne, 1993:197; Cemaloğlu & Şahin; 2007:467). These three occupational groups are intensely interacted with people and are faced with continuously variable problems. The continuous increasing people's expectations and increasing variability makes people centered professions more risk-based. In this context, teachers and university staffs can also be considered in this category. There are lots of burnout researches about teachers in the literature like music teacher and infant school burnouts carried out by Otacıoğlu (2008) and by Tuğrul & Çelik (2002) respectively in Turkey. In addition, the primary teacher burnouts were studied by (Gündüz, 2005) and (Kayabaşı, 2008). Moreover, teaching profession and motivational resources studies by Yazıcı (2009) and issues involving academicians burnout studies by (Zakaria et al.; 2015: 42, Kahya; 2015:534) are available in the literature. Burnout common among teachers are due to their personality, social environment, economic reasons and working hours. Some other bases are crowded classrooms, inadequate wages, intolerable parents, more stationary life style, problems with co-workers and managers, family, and healthcare problems (Kayabaşı, 2008: 153 ; Zaidi, 2011:830)). The perceived failures among teachers on their efficiency as teaching professionals can lead to burn out. (Nir, 2002:337) Motivations among both teachers and students and the advancement of educational reforms are crucial factors to avoid burnout. Motivated teachers play an important role on the realization of educational reforms, implementation of emerging changes, and generally, business success and life satisfaction. (Yazıcı, 2009:36) In the case of Turkey, the causes of burnout among teachers and academicians are things such as heavy workload, lack of democratic participation in job-related decisions, and the lack of rewarding system in the workplace (Dağlı & Gündüz, 2008: 16). In another study, organizational factors affecting burnout are as follows: organizational conflict, inability to participate in the decision, the length of working hours, organizational communication, lack of social support, role conflict, role ambiguity, adverse physical conditions of the work area, lack of advancement opportunities, emotional and sexual harassment in the workplace like mobbing, lack of job security, unsuitable types of leadership of organizational structure, the lack of business standardization and organization culture (Ardıç & Polatçı; 2008: 72). Academicians being unable to find a position have higher rate of burnout syndrome at Marmara University from 339 academicians study since temporal positions create more worries in academicians that they may not find a position after they finish their PhD. Life, health and productivity of people are threatened by burnout and mobbing. “Harassing”, “ganging up on someone” or “psychologically terror” named as mobbing have high correlation with burnout syndrome performed on 517 health staffs in Afyon city, Turkey. Preventing communication, social isolation, spreading rumors, affecting occupational situation and affecting physical health of victims are types of mobbing methods. Excessive workload, insufficient wages and even increasing violence were found reasons of burnout at work place with not receiving treatment they deserve and not having satisfactory living conditions (Türkan & Kiliç, 2015). According to Social Security Institution (SGK) statistics, a worker loses his life every 10.9 hours. Moreover, there is a work accident per seven minutes and worker has a accident resulting in incapability of working per 5.5 hours. Job security scale developed by Heyes et all.(1998 ) consisting of job security, colleague safety, security, control, management, security and safety programs and safety policies was applied to 303 workers from Kocaeli University Research and Training Hospital and there is a statistically significant negative relationship between lower level dimensions of occupational safety and depersonalization and emotional exhaustion. Preventing accidents, increasing safety issues, having settled working hours, having lower stress, having improved work safety culture, allowing workers to improve their capabilities and having better working conditions decrease the burnout level (Yiğit et al., 2016; Hayes et al., 1998:145–161). Academicians of Atatürk University have felt harsh against people since they started to work when compared with Anadolu and Osmangazi university academicians from a study of 108 lectures by MBI scale. Academicians at Atatürk University sated that their work restricts them when compared with other two universities. Moreover, academicians at Atatürk University sates that their work worn them out (Gürbüz et al., 2009). There is no significant relationship between cigarette and alcohol usage, to burnout syndrome from 560 state railways workers in Turkey,. Moreover, it is found in a study at Izmir airport that there is a positive correlation of emotional exhaustion with depersonalization burnouts and negative correlation with individual successes (Deliorman et al., 2009).

How to prevent the burnout syndrome causing both physical and socio-psychological exhaustion is an important question to be answered and several suggestions are suggested by experts like Maslach (1982:90-107) and Maslach suggested the following issues to be considered in order to overcome BS, this include the following : Having realistic goals, trying to do business in different ways, giving short-term breaks while doing business , avoiding depersonalizing things at work and in the business., thinking about success sides in business, know yourself well, obtaining hobbies and spending time with friend to relax and despite all efforts still If experiencing burnout, changing job. In another study, Bektaş & Peresadko (2013) have presented a model of recovery from burnout syndrome. Model mainly focused on individual and organizational factors. Individual factors are positive thinking as optimists having better health, low rate of depression, anxiety, and obesity; and stronger immune systems (Rosen; 2004; 34) with lower stress by yoga and better brain functioning, the behavior of creativity having positive correlation with positive thinking and determination and compliance integrating within working place (Hasmukh et al. 2010:21; Bird; 2006:67). The organizational factors are supports of workmates sharing basis for more robust and flexible trust and organizational cohesion with support of friends and effective leadership (Adler et al.; 2011:100; Babakuş et al.; 2011:21), support of manager for creating supportive work environment to prevent stress and satisfy the needs of staffs (Chan & Wan; 2012:122; Chen & Yang; 2012:107) and organizational atmosphere creating a positive intrinsic motivation to make a positive need and guide for a sense of achievement (Mohanty & Rath; 2012: 65). Moreover, making moderate sports decreases the level of burnout. (Deliorman et al., 2009) Furthermore, job satisfaction, intrinsic satisfaction and affective commitment are lower for experienced staffs than unemployed persons during economical crisis with higher EE score (Markovits, et al., 2016). Hence, the experienced staffs are keen to more BS during hard times.

Methodology and Analysis

Maslach Burnout Inventory and Copenhagen Burnout Inventory scales are compared in the study to find out the more suitable scale for the Turkish culture based on reliability values. Moreover It also aimed to find out the burnout level of the University staffs of Bingol University by comparing it with existing studies which have been done in Turkey and other international results. The questionnaire was employed to the University staffs during the 2nd-3rd quarter of 2015. Using the sample calculator (2016), the calculated sample to be taken out of the 500 staffs is 116. This calculated sample has 95% confidence level with 8% confidence interval (margin error). Hence, 121 staffs who were subjected to the data gathering process, is a fairly enough sample to test the BS and make some generalized results from the case of the Bingol University staffs.

This is a quantitative study employing questionnaires in the course of collecting and gathering the data of the respondents. The socio-demographic profile of the University staffs such as their age, gender, civil status, occupation and work experience were included in the questionnaires. MBI scale composed of 22 items with three factors: emotional exhaustion with 9 items, reduced sense of personal accomplishment with 8 items, and depersonalization with 5 items as shown in Table 1 , developed by Maslach and Jackson (1981). Moreover, CBI scale is used to measure burnout level. CBI with 18 items is categorized into three factors named as personnel factor, work related factor and students-clients related factor. A five-level likert scale ranging from 1 to 5. (1: never, 5: always) is used to rate items. To check the reliability of data, Cronbach Alfa and KMO (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin) methods are used. Factor analysis is used to categorize items under groups and descriptive statistics to compare items according to means, One Way-ANOVA to find differences according demographic factors, correlation to find relationships between MBI and CBI factors and regressions methods to find the most effective factors on burnout level and equations are applied to the study to analyze items and groups.

Hypothesizes of Study:

H 1 : There is a significant relationship between BS and Gender: It is found from extensive studies done in different fields such as healthcare, education, universities etc. that there are not relationship between burnout syndrome and genders. However, it was found in a study at Dokuz Eylül University, Turkey from 265 academicians and Çukurova University, Turkey from 283 academicians that women academicians have a higher level of burnout syndrome especially for emotional burnout dimension. Nevertheless, it is found in a study done at Density Faculty of Cumhuriyet University, Turkey from three years study and Ankara University, Turkey from 199 academicians that men have higher level of burnout syndrome. Turkish culture is raised by a patriarchal society where men dominate the public sphere, and women are mostly found in the domestic household as full time housewives. Moreover, the management at organizations is mainly men and women have the difficulty of presenting themselves. Hence, women are mostly faced to mobbing or BS due to these difficulties. Furthermore, they mainly care children at home and make house works with increasing the possibility of being burnout. (Deliorman et al., 2009) It is found that males have higher rate of depersonalization but low level of emotional burnout than females by MBI scale from 190 academicians from all faculties in Konya city of two universities in Turkey. ( Sünbül , 2014) Moreover married women nurses and nurses working at private hospitals have more BS. Highest personal compliments are seen at public hospitals nurses and depersonalization is seen more at night and rotating shift nurses. (Sabbah et all.,2012) The burnout level is higher for women at lower level positions since the management of BU is mainly men. Hence, they have also the problem of less presentation at top management.

H 2 : There is a significant relationship between BS and Age: The findings of the study done by Akdeniz University from 141 nurses showed that young nurses have higher rate of burnout syndrome. Moreover, it is found in a study done to 515 primary school teachers that 50+ older teachers have higher rate of burnout and depersonalization. In generally, a negative correlation between burnout and age except individual success is found. (Deliorman et al., 2009) The life at universities is more theoretical and young university graduates are keener to BS since the working life is different and more difficult. Difficulties at working life can be managed by having more trainees and universities-industry cooperation. Hence, it is expected that young people are at higher tendency of having BS. Older people have the problem of not being used to new technologies, age related illnesses and being lonely. Hence, they are also risk age group for BS. However, burnout is seen more between 30-39 age groups. (Sabbah et al.,2012)

H 3 : There is a significant relationship between BS and social status: It is found in a study done at Selçuk University to Business and Administration faculty that married academicians have lower level of BS. Moreover, it is found that married people with children have more individual successes. The highest rate of BS is found in widowed teachers from a 515 teachers study carried out at Ankara city. (Deliorman et al., 2009) Being married is more tiring and difficult for women academicians than men in Turkey. They have to manage academic career and family life together.

H4: There is a significant relationship between BS and position (Teaching/faculty ranks):

From a study of Karadeniz Technical University over 160 academicians from five faculty, it is found that professors have higher rate of individual successes and Assist. Professors have higher rate of emotional and depersonalization burnout syndrome. In general, lower hierarchy level academicians have higher level of BS and it is found that experienced academicians and staffs have lower BS in Turkey. (Deliorman et al., 2009) Only professors and associate professors have more secure positions at universities and they have the least BS while lower level positions like research assistants have the highest level of burnout. Assistants professors and lectures have to renew the contract every 2 or 3 years in the universities of Turkey. Hence, many professors and associated professors apply mobbing to lower hierarchy who are not obeying them or different in politics and sects. Lack of fairness is found one of the most important factors affecting BS in Turkish universities. ( Sünbül , 2014) Lower levels of organizational support, organizational justice and unfair decisions cause higher level of burnout and workplace conflicts from a study of 151 employees survey at Alexandru Ioan Cuza University,Romania. More efficient training programs to increase knowledge about the relationship among organizational climate, workplace conflicts and burnout phenomenon can help to decrease the BS. (Maidaniuc-Chirilă T. ,& Constantin T., 2016)

H5: There is a significant relationship between BS and staffs with children or not:

Different from past studies that academicians without children have lower level of BS. Due to high workloads of children on women at home, they have higher level of BS. (Deliorman et al., 2009)

H 6 : There is a significant relationship between MBI and CBI dimensions: Maslcah Burnout Inventory (MBI) measuring emotional exhaustion, depersonalization and personal accomplishment and Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI) measuring personal burnout, work related burnout and client related burnout are widely used around the world. According to Kristensen et al. (2005:193-194), MBI scale is mainly used in service sector and cannot be applicable to every country due to economical and cultural differences. Borritz et al. (2006: 50) stated that CBI scale is more applicable and can measure BS better. It is found by Yıldırım & İçerli (2005) that there is a positive correlation between CBI and MBI from a study applied over 166 healthcare workers. In some cultures MBI scale is more suitable while in some cultures CBI scale is more applicable. The decision of scale is based on reliability and validity scores. It is aimed to find the more suitable scale for BS in that study for Turkey.

Results of Study

From 121 respondents, 24.8% of them (30) are female and 91 respondents are male. 37.2 % of participants are public servant, 34.7% of them are research assistants, 13.2 % of them are assist professors and 12.4% of them are lecturers and just three of respondents are professors. 52.1% of them have children and 63.6 % of them are married. The mean age of 121 respondents is 32.40 years with maximum 52 years and minimum 22 years age. The average of working at Bingöl University (BU) is 40 months (3.3 years) and the most experienced person has 8 years work experience at the university. The mean of working hours per week is 40.4 hours with 10 minimum working hours and 70 maximum working hours. The most experienced person at government institutions has 15 years working experience and the average of experience is 5.82 years. It can be said that the staffs do not have enough experience at both BU and other organizations.

Table 1 -
See Full Size >

The total mean of all items is 2.45 with 1.48 minimum from “Impersonal objects” item and 3.826 maximum value from “Have enough energy during leisure time” item and MBI and CBI groups has 2.602 and 2.26 means respectively. Workers think that they find the best solutions to students’ problems with mean of 3.69 and believe that they influence students’ life positively. They fell rarely emotionally drained and feel seldom used up at work return. They want to work with students and they feel that “I give more that I get back when working with students”. Moreover, they feel that they do not work hard and they sometimes fulfill their targeted goals. “They wonder how long they will be able to continue working with students” item mean is 2.1. Furthermore, they state that it is hard to work with students. In conclusion, staffs are rarely at end of their rope, which is high when about 500 staffs at BU are considered. Most staffs cannot reach their aims and the management and staffing policies play a crucial role in front of that negative result while promotions are mainly done according to torpedoes and grouping but not according to abilities and successes. Thus, many staffs search other universities and government organizations at where they can have better opportunities to transfer their payroll.

Cronbach's Alpha is 0.915 for all 40 items and MBI and CBI groups have 0.788 and 0.915 Cronbach Alfa values greater than 0.7. As it is seen in Table 1 all survey questions have high reliability even an item is deleted. Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy is 0.851 which is greater than 0.7 value. MBI and CBI groups have 0.799 and 0.904 Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. First 6 components explain 64.579% variance for MBI group by Principal Component Analysis method and first three components explains 48,391% variance in that group. 60.79% of total variance explained is given by first three components for CBI group as shown in Appendix section.

By Varimax with Kaiser Normalization method, three groups are created through including values greater than 0.5. MBI(0.766), MBI2(0.721), MBI3(0.686), MBI6(0.547), MBI8(0.765), and MBI13(0.650) are included in EE group while MBI14(0.432 first group score), MBI16 (0.347 first group score-0.525 third group score) and MBI18(0.706 second group score) are excluded from that group. MBI4(0.568), MBI7(0.702), MBI9(0.664), MBI12(0.623), MBI17(0.673), MBI19(0.674) and MBI21(0.528) items are included in PA group while just MPI21(0.494) is excluded from that group. MBI5(0.591), MBI10(0.769), MBI11(0.588) and MBI15(0.677) items are included in DP group while MBI22(0.396) is excluded from that group and it falls in another-sixth group not measuring any dimension with 0.597 score. CBI5(0.553), CBI7(0.633), CBI8(0.684), CBI9(0.532), CBI11(0.743), CBI12(0.679), CBI13(0.85), CBI14(0.817) and CBI15(0.617) are included in the first group named as PB-CRB group. CBI1(0.732), CBI3(0.825), CBI4(0.774), CBI6(0.636), and CBI10(0.622)) are included in the second group named as WRB.

Figure 1: Means of groups for both scales
Means of groups for both scales
See Full Size >

From 121 respondents, the highest mean comes from personal accomplishment and the lowest mean is from DB group. Personal and clients related burnout score is high. Emotional exhaustion is about 2 and this value is high again when 500 workers are considered, which shows that about 10-20% of staffs are emotionally burned out.

One Way- ANOVA according to age: There are no significant changes according to age by One-Way ANOVA with 95% significance level. However, respondents between 41-46 ages have higher EE score as shown in Figure 2 , DP score, PB and CRB score and WRB score. The highest personal burnout is seen at age 46. In generally, older people have lower burnout group scores.

Figure 2: EE mean according to age
EE mean according to age
See Full Size >

According to years spend at Bingöl University with Sig. Greater than 0.05, there are no significant differences and all respondents look the factors/groups in the same manner. However, males with 2.20 score have higher mean than women for EE while women have 3.62 PA score than 3.52 score of male for that group. Furthermore, females and males have 1.67 and 1.73 mean scores respectively for DB group. Females have higher mean of WRB score with 1.92 mean than males with 1.88 mean.

Table 2 -
See Full Size >

The highest EE score is given by civil servants, lectures and research assistants respectively as shown below and the lowest emotional exhaustion scores are given by Assist, and Assoc professors. As a result, as the title increases at Bingöl University, they are less inclined to burnout and mobbing. The main reason of burnout is mobbing among hierarchies since staffing according to sects and races are common at BU. Every sect tries to employee staffs from their sects without considering qualifications and equity at evaluation and they support staffs from their groups in all ways. Moreover, the positive monetary benefits and supports are given to their members by these sects and communities. This creates more burnout among people not including in these sects or groups. Civil servants and research assistants have the lowest mean scores for PA while assist and assoc professors have higher PA scores. The highest DP group scores are given by Assist. Prof, civil servants, lectures and res. assistant respectively. The highest WRB score are given by civil servants, assist profs, lectures and research assistant respectively as shown in Table 2 . The highest scores of PB-CRB group is seen in lectures, civil servants, Assist professors and research assistants in order. Research assistants have the least work load mainly at Bingöl university and there are more workload on lectures with high weekly teaching hours as assistant professors. Civil servants also have to come work daily and do works given by their management. Research assistants are just completely at the BU when there are exams and they do not attend lab teachings or repeating classes as done by some other universities in Turkey.

Figure 3: Mean according to position
Mean according to position
See Full Size >

According to have children or not, there are no significant changes by One-Way ANOVA with 95% significance level at BU. However, respondents without children have higher EE, DB, WRB and PB-CRB group scores. This shows that respondents with children have more tendencies to burnout syndrome. According working hours, there are significant differences for EE, WRB and PB-CRB groups while there are not significant differences for other groups. As there are more working hours, there are higher rate of EE and PB-CRB groups mainly after 40 hours work per week. It is interesting that there are no significant differences for experience statistically. But when plots are analyzed, more experienced staffs have higher DP score as shown in Figure 4 . WRB, PB-CRB groups and DP mean scores mainly decrease with higher experience.

Figure 4: Mean of PA according to experience (years)
Mean of PA according to experience (years)
See Full Size >

Furthermore, there are not significant differences statistically according to social status with one way ANOVA. However, married people have higher EE score, PA, DP scores than single respondents by 0.03, 0.25, 0.1 mean differences while single respondents have higher WRB and PB-CRB groups means.

Correlations of Groups: With Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) test, there are strong correlation between EE and DB,WRB and PB-CRB groups as shown in Table 3 and there is a weak negative correlation between EE and PA whereas, DB has strong correlations with WRB and PB-CRB groups. So, it can be said that CBI tests also measures burnout. From reliability and KMO values, CBI seems more suitable to measure the burnout syndrome in Turkey. However, even both scales measure the same thing; there are significant differences among questions and dimensions. It is found by Yıldırım & İçerli (2010) that there are high r=0. 774 score between EE and WRB. Moreover, there is a r=0. 537 score between DP and PB.

Table 3 -
See Full Size >

Regression of Burnout: Feeling burnout due to work (CBI1) with 0. 815 R value and Sig=0.000 less than 0.05 is a significant model. Other groups are excluded in the model as shown below. As a result, Work related burnout and emotional exhaustion are the most effective factor on burnout due to work.

CBI1= -0.313 +0.926 WRB+0.278.EE (Model 1)

Second model by including demographic variables is also significant with R=0.822 value and Sig. less than 0.05. PA, DB, PB-CRB, age, working years at Bingöl University, having Children or not, working hours weekly, experience, occupation and social status are excluded in that model that they have sig. values greater than 0.05.

CBI1= 0.207 +0.912*WRB+0.292*EE-0.3*Gender (Model 2)

“Cannot take it anymore” (CBI10) dependent variable model is significant with R=0.793 and ANOVAs sig value. In this model, EE,PA, and PB-CRB groups are excluded from model. WRB is the most effective factor for staffs to continue their work. Hence, WRB and DB scores are to be positively increased that staffs have more motivation to work at BU in future.

CBI10= -0.181+0.745WRB+0.291DB (Model 3)

In the second model of CBI10, R value is 0.829 and sig. values is less than 0.005 are shown in Table 4 with model unstandardized coefficients. In this model, constant value is excluded from model while it has 0.859 sig. value. Age and working hours are effective demographic factors on CBI10 dependent variable. EE, PA, Experience at BU, Having children or not, occupation, experience, social statue, and gender are excluded from that model.

Table 4 -
See Full Size >

Results of Hypothesizes: At BU, positions have direct affect on BS while higher level positions have less BS. Lack of institutionalization is the main deficiency at BU and there are huge problems due to unfair decisions. For example, fewer lectures are given to some academicians while they are from different sects and they do not have good relationships with department, faculty or university management. They are isolated or are not included in decision making of department and faculty. Moreover, important tasks are not given them and they are not included in important project of university. Even projects are given to these isolated staffs, they have been faced by many difficulties like not getting enough financial supports or the reports related to project may not be fairly evaluated and projects can be aborted while the projects of privilege classes from the same sect are accepted with enough supports. Promotions are not done according to successes, capabilities or positions but based on being close to university management. These kinds of unfair and illogical decisions create huge burnout and the university staffs have low age average, which makes them weaker while experienced staffs have lower level of BS.

Table 5 -
See Full Size >

Discussion and Further Studies

Open communication climate can decrease uncertainty at organizations and positive organizational environment can increase working motivation with fair supervising. Communication can build trust within an organization or university. It is found that managers spend 20% of their working hours to solve conflicts. 60% of conflicts are related to superiors of workers (Maidaniuc-Chirilă T. & Constantin T., 2016). Occupational burnout and mobbing of health staff are higher for single staffs having an independent risk factor with high emotional exhaustion (Türkan & Kiliç, 2015). Removing mobbing and conflicts, enforcing creative works, preventing monotony, providing health work environment, avoiding stress, and protecting human psychological situation are ways of overcoming BS (Gürbüz et all., 2009). The level burnout has a high substantial degree at BU. Being a government university and not having supports like projects equipment, lab equipment etc. for diligent academicians and civil officers are main problems of burnout. The university management is mainly composed from some groups named as community (cemaat) or some other political groups in Turkey. Hence, the management of all faculties and departments are created according to being a member of that community or not and the qualifications and efforts of other staffs are ignored at promotions. Hence, some staffs feel burnout due to these inequalities. Moreover, staffs trying to improve their capabilities are obstructed by management of university by giving supports just to their community members. In conclusion, about half of staffs feel separated and assimilated from university financial sources. This can be a reason why the burnout level is high at the BU. Another reason is mobbing applied by management and people at higher hierarchies. Especially, some academicians are tried to be excluded from projects and obstacles are put in front to prevent them for improving their qualifications and having better positions. The main strategy applied by management is to secure their positions and staffing.

Findings shows that poorer academic outcomes results to a higher level of BS due to low self-esteem and the failure to gain desirable results.. (Seibert et al., 2016: 120-127) Hence, high BS level decreases the academic performance of BU staffs. More realistic goals,, not personalizing events every time against other academicians, concentrating on success side, being positive, being fair at promotions, respecting other academicians private life, not making inequalities according to sects and ethnicity, caring women workers requirements, building swimming pools and other sport centers to support staffs making sports and spending leisure times in order to rise organizational cohesion among staffs and being able to communicate with top management of university by electronic and registered systems to increase the trust level, creating supportive work environment to prevent stress and satisfy the needs of staffs with increasing positive intrinsic motivation and allow academicians to search their rights can help to decrease the burnout level among staffs at BU.

The study was applied to 121 staffs in 2015. A new study could be employed by 2017 to learn the burnout level of the management with the new administrators of the University. Moreover, this study is not conclusive among all universities in Turkey, considering the regional context in both the local and regional dynamics in the different universities of the country. While, universities at big cities like Istanbul are more institutionalized and the burnout level is to be less however, not having open positions and expensive life can be other sources of burnout at these universities. Hence, many staffs are to come less developed universities and has to face their chronically problems, resulting in higher level of burnout. Furthermore, another study to examine students’ perception/opinion on the sources of their BS is noteworthy, to parallel one of the findings of this study, wherein, teaching staffs think that students are among the major source of their burnout.


The mean age of 121 respondents is 32.40 showing that the university staffs are mainly young with low average 3.3 years experience. The minimum mean comes from “Impersonal objects” item with 1.48 and the maximum value comes from “Have enough energy during leisure time” item with 3.826. Most staffs cannot reach their aims and the management and staffing policies play a crucial role in front of that while promotions are mainly done according to torpedoes and grouping but not according to abilities and successes. Thus, many staffs search other universities and government organizations at where they have better opportunities to transfer their payroll.

MBI and CBI groups have 0788 and 0.915 Cronbach Alfa and MBI and CBI groups have 0.799 and 0.904 Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. Hence, the survey has high level of reliability and validity. Finally, CBI scale is more suitable to measure burnout level at Turkey from these values. Age and working hours are effective demographic factors on CBI10 dependent variable with regression method. WRB, working hours, age, DB, PB and CRB factors have effect on “Cannot take it anymore” dependent variable in model. Thus, work and students related problems are to be eliminated to decrease the burnout level at BU. Moreover, a more transparent and measurable system is to be developed to decrease the BS at BU by management with behaving all staffs in the same manner and decreasing priorities given to any sects or races. The main concentration of performance measurement at the University is to be given to projects and successful works carried out by academicians through giving priority usage of university financial resources to them than close friends and groups relationships.


My profound thanks to my graduate student FUAT YENIGÜN for helping me in conducting the survey and YASMIRA P. MONER,Instructor, Political Science department, MSU-Iligan Institute of Technology, Iligan City, Philippines for checking the language of the article.


  1. Adler P., Charles Heckscher, Laurance Prusak (2011) Building a Collaborative Enterprise, Harvard Business Review, July-August, 94-103.
  2. Aksu Ali, Asuman Baysal (2005).İlköğretim Okulu Müdürlerinde Tükenmişlik”, Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 41, s. 7-24.
  3. Ardıç Kadir, Sema Polatcı(2008) .Tükenmişlik Sendromu, Akademisyenler Üzerinde Bir Uygulama (GOÜ Örneği), Gazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 10 / 2, 69-96.
  4. Babakus Emin, E., Ugur Yavas, Nicholas J.(2011). Service Worker Burnout and Turnover Intentions: Roles of Person-Job Fit, Servant Leadership, and Customer Orientation, Services Marketing Quarterly, 32, 17–31.
  5. Bektaş Çetin, Peresadko Galyna(2013) Frame of workplace guidance how to overcome burnout syndrome: a model suggestion, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 84, 879-884.
  6. Bird Jim ( 2006) Balance Requires Evolving Skills. ASTD, May, 66-69.
  7. Byrne Barbara M. (1993)The Maslach Burnout Inventory: Testing for Factorial Validity and Invariance Across Elementary, Intermediate and Secondary Teachers, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 66, 197-21
  8. Borritz Marianne Reiner Rugulies, Jakob B. Bjorner, Ebbe Villadsen, Ole A. Mikkelsen & Tage S. Kristensen. (2006).Burnout Among Employees in Human Service Work: Design and Baseline Findings of the PUMA Study, Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 34, 49-58.
  9. Çelikkaleli Ö. (2011)Yetişkin Eğitimcisi Öğretmenlerin Tükenmişlik ve Mesleki Yetkinliklerinin İncelenmesi, Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 3(4), 38-53.
  10. Cemaloğlu Necati, Dilek Erdemoğlu Şahin; “Öğretmenlerin Mesleki Tükenmişlik Düzeylerinin Farklı
  11. Değişkenlere Göre İncelenmesi”, Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 2007, 15,2, 465-484.
  12. Chan Kimmy Wa & Echo Wen Wan(2012). How Can Stressed Employees Deliver Better Customer Service? The Underlying Self-Regulation Depletion Mechanism, Journal of Marketing, 76, 119–137.
  13. Chen Chin-Yi &Chin-Fang Yang(2012) .The Impact of Spiritual Leadership on Organizational Citizenship Behavior: A Multi-Sample Analysis, Journal of Business Ethics, 105, 107-114.
  14. Dağlı Abidin, Huriye Gündüz (2008). Yatılı İlköğretim Bölge Okullarında Görev Yapan Yönetici Ve Öğretmenlerin Tükenmişlik Düzeyleri (Diyarbakır İli Örneği), D.Ü.Ziya Gökalp Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 10, 12,5.
  15. Deliorman Refika Bakoğlu, İlknur Taştan Boz, İhsan Yiğit, Selahattin Yıldız. (2009) .Tükenmişliği Ölçmede Alternatif bir Araç: Kopenhag Tükenmişlik Envanterinin Marmara Üniversitesi Akademik Personeli Üzerine Uyarlanması, İ.Ü. Yönetim Dergisi, Yıl:20, Sayı:63,77-98.
  16. Frıesen David, James C. Sarros (1989). Sources of Bumout among Educators, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 10, 179-188.
  17. Gregory S. Seibert G.S, Ross W. May R.W., Michael C. Fitzgerald M.C., Frank D. Fincham F.D.(2016). Understanding school burnout: Does self-control matter?, Learning and Individual Differences, 49, 120–127.
  18. Gündüz Bülent(2005). İlköğretim Öğretmenlerinde Tükenmişlik, Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1,1, 152-166.
  19. Gürbüz H., Tutar H., Başpınar N.Ö (2009) .Burnout levels of executive lecturers: a comparative approach in three universities, Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 18, pp-83.
  20. Hayes, Bob E; Perander, Jill; Smecko, Tara ve Jennifer Trask (1998), Measuring Perceptions of Workplace Safety: Development and Validation of the Work Safety Scale, Journal of Safety Research, 29 (3), 145–161.
  21. Hasmukh Adhia, H. R. Nagendra, B. Mahadevan(2010). Impact of Adoption of Yoga Way of Life on the Reduction of Job Burnout of Managers, Vikalpa, 35, 21-35.
  22. Hughes R. Eugene (2001). Deciding to Leave But Staying: Teacher Burnout, Precursors and Turnover, Int. J. of Human Resource Management, 12,2, 288-298.
  23. Kahya Cem (2015). Örgütsel Sessizlik Ve Tükenmişlik Sendromu İlişkisi, Electronic Turkish Studies, 10,10, 523-546.
  24. Kan Ümit Deniz (2008). Bir Grup Okul Öncesi Öğretmeninde Tükenmişlik Durumunun İncelenmesi, Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 6, 2, 431-438.
  25. Kayabaşı Yücel (2008). Bazı Değişkenler Açısından Öğretmenlerin Mesleki Tükenmişlik Düzeyleri, Gazi Üniversitesi, Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 20, 191-212.
  26. Karamanova A. A. , Todorova I. , Montgomery A., Panagopoulou E., Costa P., Baban A., Davas A., Milosevic M. , Mijakoski D., (2016) .Burnout and health behaviors in health professionals from seven European countries. Int Arch Occup Environ Health, DOI 10.1007/s00420-016-1143-5.
  27. Kristensen, Tage.S., Marianne Borritz, Ebbe Villadsen, & Karl B. Christensen. (2005). The Copenhagen Burnout Inventory: A New Tool for the Assesment of Burnout, Work Stress, July- September 19(3), 192-207.
  28. Khan Faisal, Amran MD R., Rosman Md Yusoff, Aqeel Ahmad (2015). Do Demographic Make a Difference to Job Burnout Among University Academicians?, International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 5,1, 229-237.
  29. Langballea Ellen Melbye, Siw Tone Innstrandd, Knut Arne Hagtvetc, Erik Falkuma,Olaf Gjerløw(2009).The Relationship between Burnout and Musculoskeletal Pain in Seven Norwegian Occupational Groups, Work, 32, 179-188.
  30. Maslach Christina (1982). Burnout The Cost Of Caring, New Jersey: Prentice- Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, 1982.
  31. Mohanty Jagannath, Bhabani P. Rath (2012).Influence of Organizational Culture on Organizational Citizenship Behavior: A Three-Sector Study, Global Journal of Business Research, 2012, 6, 65-78.
  32. Markovits Y. , Boer D., Gerbers S., Dick R.V.(2016) .Employee Attitudes and Burnout in Times of Economic crisis . Symposium : Surviving the financial recession in Greece, Greece.
  33. Maidaniuc-Chirilă T. ,& Constantin T. (2016) . does workplace conflicts mediate the Organizational climate burnout relationship? A study on university employees, Romanian Journal of Experimental Applied Psychology, 7,( 2). DOI: 10.15303/rjeap.2016.v7i2.a3.
  34. Nır Adam E (2002). School-Based Management and Its Effect on Teacher Commitment, Int. J. Leadershıp In Education, 2002, 5, 4, 323-341.
  35. Otacıoğlu Sena Gürşen(2008). Müzik Öğretmenlerinde Tükenmişlik Sendromu ve Etkileyen Faktörler, İnönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 2008, 9,15, 103-116.
  36. Rosen Kelly (2004). I Need To Find A New Way To Relax, Now That I'm Injured And Can't Do Sports, Delicious Living, 2004, 20, 30-36.
  37. Ibtissam Sabbah, Hala Sabbah, Sanaa Sabbah, Hussein Akoum, Nabil Droubi(2012) “Burnout among Lebanese nurses: Psychometric properties of the Maslach Burnout Inventory-Human Services Survey (MBI-HSS)”, Health Vol.4, No.9, 644-652 (2012) , DOI:
  38. Sample Calculator(2016) “Sample Size, Date: 16.06.2016)
  39. Schwarzer Ralf, Suhair Hallum(2008). Perceived Teacher Self-Efficacy as a Predictor of Job Stress and Burnout: Mediation Analyses, Applied Psychology: An International Revıew, 152-171.
  40. Sünbül A.M. (2014). Burnout of university academic staff in Turkey, Proceeding of International Conference on Postgraduate Research (ICPR 2014) (e-ISBN 978-983-3048-98-4 ). 1-2 December 2014, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
  41. Tuğrul Belma, Eylem Çelik(2002) .Normal Çocuklarla Çalışan Anaokulu Öğretmenlerinde Tükenmişlik, Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 2, 12, 1-11.
  42. Türkan A.H., & Kiliç İ. (2015) .The Effect of Mobbing on Burnout Syndrome at Workplace: An Application on Health Staff in Turkey, Journal of Business Research-Türk, 7/3 , 7-21.
  43. Weisberg Jacob, Abraham Sagie (1999). Teachers’ Phisical, Mental and Emotional Burnout:Impect on Intention to Quit, The Journal of Psychology, 333-339.
  44. Yazici Hikmet(2009). Öğretmenlik Mesleği, Motivasyon Kaynakları ve Temel Tutumlar: Kuramsal Bir Bakış, Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 17, 33-46.
  45. Yildirim M.H.& İçerli L.(2010) . Tükenmişlik Sendromu: Maslach ve Kopenhag Tükenmişlik Ölçeklerinin Karşilaştirmali Analizi, Organizasyon ve Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt 2, Sayı 1, ISSN: 1309 -8039.
  46. Yiğit İ., Akpınar A.T. , Taş Y. (2016) . İş güvenliğinin tükenmişliğe etkisini belirlemeye yönelik Üniversite hastanesinde bir araştırma”, Kastamonu Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Nisan 2016,
  47. Sayı:12. Zaidi Nayyar Raza, Rana Abdul W., Farheen B. Zaidi(2011) . Relationship between Demographic Characteristics and Burnout among Public Sector University Teachers of Lahore, Interdisciplinary Journal Of Contemporary Research In Business, 2011, 3,4, 229-245
  48. Zakaria Sabarudın, Nurhaya Oma, Asmawı Arnifa(2015). Work Responsibilities Stress among Academicians in Private Universities in Malaysia, International Foundation for Research and Development (IFRD), 6,2, 42-47.

Copyright information

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

About this article

Publication Date

30 November 2016

eBook ISBN



Future Academy



Print ISBN (optional)


Edition Number

1st Edition




Business, management, behavioural management, macroeconomics, behavioural science, behavioural sales, behavioural marketing

Cite this article as:

Arshad, A. S., Rasli, A., Arshad, A. A., & Zain, Z. M. (2016). Transformational Leadership and Business Performance: An Insight From Technology-based SMEs in Malaysia. In R. X. Thambusamy, M. Y. Minas, & Z. Bekirogullari (Eds.), Business & Economics - BE-ci 2016, vol 17. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences (pp. 34-42). Future Academy.