The relationships between leadership style and employee

burnout

With the mediating role of intention to quit

Annuschka Mahamoed

University of Amsterdam

Amsterdam Business School

Page | 2

Amsterdam, 26 January 2015

This document is written by student Annuschka Mahamoed (10443096) who declares to take

full responsibility for the contents of this document. I declare that the text and the work

presented in this document is original and that no sources other than those mentioned in the

text and its references have been used in creating it. The Faculty of Economics and Business

is responsible solely for the supervision of completion of the work, not for the contents.

First reader:

Dr. ir. B.A.C. (Bianca) Groen

Faculty of Economics and Business,

specialization Accounting

Second reader:

Dr. ir. S.P. (Sander) van Triest

Faculty of Economics and Business,

specialization Accounting

Page | 3

ABSTRACT

This study has attempted to increase the knowledge whether the leadership style of a

manager could have an influence on employee burnout. This is done by exploring the direct

and indirect effects influencing employee burnout. Particular attention is set on the

transformational and transactional leadership style. Within this study several hypotheses were

tested by using a survey study in the form of a questionnaire. This questionnaire is filled in by

104 employees of a Big 4 Auditing firm in the Netherlands. The results of the regression

analysis show that the transformational leadership style of a manager reduces the intention to

quit by employees. Furthermore, that the intention to quit is seen as a mediator influencing

employee burnout.

Keywords: transformational leadership, transactional leadership, job resources, job

demands, intention to quit, burnout.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This research was supported by a Big 4 audit firm. Special acknowledgement to the

employees who participated by filling in the online questionnaire. Moreover, special thanks to

the first supervisor of the research, Dr. ir. B.A.C. Groen with her continuous feedback and

Dr. ir. S.P. (Sander) van Triest for his role as second supervisor.

Page | 4

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 5

2. Literature review............................................................................................................... 8

2.1 Theoretical background: leadership 8

2.1.1 Transactional-transformational leadership 10

2.2 Job demands-resources model 11

2.3 Burnout 13

2.3.1 Transactional-transformational leadership and burnout 15

2.4 Intention to quit 16

2.4.1 Transactional-transformational leadership and the intention to quit 16

2.4.2 Burnout and the intention to quit 17

3. Research method ............................................................................................................. 19

3.1 Sample 19

3.2 Data collection 19

3.3 Data analyses 21

4. Results .............................................................................................................................. 22

4.1 Descriptive statistics 24

4.2 Transactional leadership and burnout 24

4.3 Transformational leadership and burnout 25

4.4 Transactional leadership and intention to quit 25

4.5 Transformational leadership and intention to quit 25

4.6 Burnout and intention to quit 26

5. Discussion ......................................................................................................................... 27

5.1 Discussion 27

5.2 Theoretical implications 28

5.3 Practical implications 29

5.4 Limitations and future research 29

5.5 Conclusion 30

References ............................................................................................................................... 32

Appendix A ............................................................................................................................. 39

Appendix B .............................................................................................................................. 43

Page | 5

1. INTRODUCTION

The above citation, is from an internal letter of a Big 4 audit firm in the Netherlands

where this study is conducted. The employees of this firm experienced pressure. When

employees experience pressure occurs stress. Stress is seen as a precondition of employee

burnout (Maslach, 1982). When employees facing stress they are less able to perform.

Employees in audit organization are known to have a high intention to quit (Hasin & Omar,

2007). Which role does a coaching leadership style play in this? This study will examine the

direct impact of the managers leadership style in relation to obtain employee burnout during a

change situation, and the mediating role of intention to quit.

Leadership plays a vital role in achieving collective change (Yukl, 2009). Leadership can

be classified in different leadership styles. Often a distinction is made between transactional

and transformational leadership. Transactional Leadership is based on a simple exchange

between the leader and his followers of reward for applied effort. Transactional leaders are

keeping their followers productive. These leaders use disciplinary power and incentives to

motivate employees to perform at their best. Transactional refers to the leader who motivates

subordinates by exchanging rewards for performance (Bass & Avolio, 1991). These managers

are concerned with routine jobs and make sure everything flows smoothly each day. A

transformational leader goes beyond managing daily operations by developing strategies for

“This audit season will be one of the most turbulent in the history. Our quality lies under

a magnifying glass - the demand to improve our audit quality is more urgent than ever. At

the same time, we are changing from customers and within teams. This is due to new

rules of rotation resulting from the WTA and the ViO. Furthermore many hours will go to

proposals. The paradox is that proposals that we win, leads to first year audits that require

a more than average effort from us”.

”We can achieve good quality only as a team. Therefore managers will spend

substantially more time with audit teams; time spent on quality and coaching on the job.

These times ask for involved managers throughout the audit”.

”I fully realize that these turbulent times demands a lot from you. How do we keep it

even fun, is a frequently asked question. A question I also suggest me personally. The

feeling that rules seem to prevail, leads the professional space is perceived as too

limited."

Page | 6

their company or work project to perform above expectations. A transformational leader

works as a motivator by empowering subordinates. The transformational leader sets goals and

incentives at a personal level to perform above expectations and to let the individual

professional grow on a personal level (Bass & Avolio, 1991; Brymann, 1992). The

transformational leader has an idealized influence, intellectually stimulates and considers

subordinates individually. The transformational leadership style is seen as the most effective

form of leadership (Tims, Bakker, & Xanthopou, 2011). Since transformational leadership is

positively related to many important organizational outcomes (Tims, Bakker, & Xanthopou,

2011; Bass & Avolio, 1991).

This study will measure the effect from de managers leadership style in relation to

obtaining employee burnout. A burnout is characterized as “a syndrome of emotional

exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced personal accomplishment that can occur among

people who do people work of some kind. Emotional exhaustion refers to feelings of being

overextended and exhausted refers to feelings of one’s work” (Demerouti, Nachreiner,

Bakker, & Schaufeli, 2001). Little attention has been obtained about which role the leadership

style of a manager could have in reducing employee burnout (Demerouti, Nachreiner, Bakker,

& Schaufeli, 2001). In some research the transformational leadership style reduces employee

burnout, however no clear and compelling study have shown a relationship between

transactional leadership and the effects on employee burnout (Kamariah, Wafa, Tajammal, &

Syed, 2011). We determine the role of the managers leadership style on employee burnout,

this will be our theoretical value in this study.

The aim of this study is to get further insight regarding the impact of the leadership style

of a manager and the mediation effect of subordinate’s intention to quit. Studies indicate that

turnover intentions are an outcome of stress and burnout (Kemery, Bedeian, & Mossholder,

1985; Williams, Konrad, & Scheckler, 2001). This means that employee burnout is an

important factor which could lead to higher intention to quit. On the opposite side, recent

studies mention the intention to quit as a stressor that predicts employee burnout (Dai,

Collins, Yu, & Fu, 2008; Himle, Srinika, & Thyness, 1986; Jackson, Schwab, & Schuler,

1986). According to the study of Jackson et al. (1986) the intention to quit is an identifiable

and important phenomenon related to employee burnout (Jackson, Schwab, & Schuler, 1986).

For this reason, this study should provide empirical evidence that the intention to quit is a

precondition of employee burnout.

For this research survey data is collected among employees within an Big 4 accounting

firm in the Netherlands. The subordinates of the manager will fill-in a questionnaire (see

Page | 7

Appendix A) about their supervisor, their job demands and available resources within the

accounting firm.

This study entails a relatively new topic in accounting. Accounting firms are known to

have a high intention to quit rate (Boselie & van der Wiele, 2002). Due to the costs in terms of

health and organizational consequences it is important to conduct this study in this

environment (Cherniss, 1995). Most research regarding auditing firms deal with tenure, size

and the quality of disclosure (Johnson, Khurana, & Reynolds, 2002; Francis & Yu, 2009). But

there are no studies in accounting which cover the role of the manager during change. This

research will therefore attempt to contribute to the many existing scientific literature about

leadership style in large companies for preventing the intention to quit and burnout in

accounting firms.

This study is structured as follows. Chapter 2 portrays an first an empirical model,

which will be tested in this study. Subsequently, all relevant theories will be described. The

research method is presented in Chapter 3. The sample is explained and how the survey data

is collected and analyzed. Chapter 4 presents the obtained survey results. Chapter 5 addresses

the discussion. Subsequently, the limitations of this study and further suggestions given for

further research. The report will conclude with the reference list.

Page | 8

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

The literature review discusses the main theories for this research. First there will be a

clarification on the concept of leadership, consisting transformational and transactional

leadership. We further discuss the Job Demands-Resources model. This theoretical model can

be used for determining burnout. Burnout will also be examined in depth within the literature

review. Finally the intention to quit and the relationship with burnout is threaded. The main

concepts come together in a theoretical model, see Figure 1. The most important relationships

between these concepts and the hypotheses are shown. Intention to quit can be seen as a

mediator between leadership style and burnout.

Figure 1. Theoretical model

2.1 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND: LEADERSHIP

What is the definition of a leader? What makes a leader successful in terms of

(re)vitalizing an organization, where he creates a place where people want to contribute their

best (Sashkin, 1993). People assumed that the secret of leadership was attributable to

unidentified natural-born characteristics. This assumption has been knocked down by the

study of Stogdill, he found no clear evidence that leaders are evidently different from non-

leaders (1950). As a result of this research the focus of researchers within the theories of

change has moved to personality characteristics of leaders (Sashkin, 1993; Fedor, Herold, &

Caldwell, 2006) .

Leadership theories are rejuvenated several times from 1970. However all these

theories share a common acknowledgment: “leadership is a perceptual phenomenon” (King,

1990). Leadership perspectives concerned with the charismatic (Conger & Kanungo, 1987;

Burnout Leadership style

Intention to quit

H2a +

H2b -

H1a +

H1b -

H3a +

Page | 9

House, Spangler, & Woycke, 1991), transformational (Bass & Avolio, 1991) and visionary

(Conger & Kanungo, 1987) leadership theories focus on the perceptual processes. A “natural

born” leader could develop characteristics during life, by naturally falling into leadership at a

younger age playing leadership roles at school, or a sports team; assuming team leader roles

and having the ability to empower and motivate others. Social ability, self-confidence,

assertiveness and boldness are seen as some characteristics of natural born leaders (Conger &

Kanungo, 1987). Social ability concerns with natural people skills (Kessler, Price, &

Wortman, 1985). Natural leaders are more extrovert, outgoing, understanding, generous and

sympathetic towards others. Natural leaders easily connect with others. Self-confidence is the

characteristic of all natural leaders that drives social ability and the courage to take on new

and high risk challenges and changes (House, Spangler, & Woycke, 1991; Conger &

Kanungo, 1987).

Leading change is a key aspect of leadership, some could even argue a defining aspect

of leadership (Van Knippenberg, Van Knippenberg, & Bobbio, 2007). For achieving

collective change, leadership takes a vital role for managing followers to contribute to the

change process (Conger & Kanungo, 1987; Bass & Avolio, 1991). The change process starts

with the communication of a vision, where the leader spells to act towards a desired situation

towards his followers (Bass & Avolio, 1991; Conger & Kanungo, 1987; Holladay & Coombs,

1993). By expressing a vision followers could identify with the presumed change a leader

expresses. Within companies the formulation of a vision could contribute, motivating

followers to work towards goals (Conger & Kanungo, 1987; Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1996).

Organizational change begins at the personal level, the individual needs to break down

uncertainty and surrender control (Markus & Robey, 1988). Changes are necessary to stay

competitive, profitable and efficient. Empowering leaders are those leaders who can achieve

real change in organizations, they have the courage to change (Fiol, 2002). Empowerment is

the feeling that followers can make a difference to enact towards the vision (Conger &

Kanungo, 1987) and have confidence in their own capabilities. For achieving change leaders

need to take serious risks, however they are willing to take this risk because it is the correct

thing to do (Fiol, 2002). The greater the individual risk of the leader, the higher the trust,

satisfaction and esteem subordinates hold for their leader (Conger & Kanungo, 1987). To take

uncertainty away and for realizing action, these previous steps are a requirement for achieving

collective change. (Conger & Kanungo, 1987; Fiol, 2002; Awamleh & Gardner, 1999).

Page | 10

2.1.1 TRANSACTIONAL-TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP

The most common distinction in managing leadership, is the distinction between

transactional leadership and transformational leadership (Bass, Avolio, & Jung, 1999). This

distinction is introduced by Burns (1978). According to Burns transformational leadership

entails a broader range of leadership behaviour than the transactional leadership (Vera &

Crossan, 2004; Bass & Avolio, 1991). Transactional leadership is a style of leadership that

focuses on the transactions between leaders and their followers (Bass & Avolio, 1991).

Transformational leadership, on the other hand, is a leadership style which causes change in

individuals (Bass & Avolio, 1991; Vera & Crossan, 2004). Understanding the difference

between transactional and transformational leadership is vital in getting the concept of

transformational leadership theory (Bass & Avolio, 1991).

Transactional leadership focuses on a result-oriented style of leading (Sarros &

Santora, 2001). Transactional leadership style is very useful when the organization is in a

stable position and the learning objectives aim “to refine and restore balance” (Bucic,

Robinson, & Ramburuth, 2010). Transactional leaders manage teams by means of social

exchange; they offer financial rewards for productivity or deny benefits for the lack thereof.

According to Burns (1978) this exchange process between leader and subordinate exists of

three components: contingent reward (based on performance) “active management-by-

exception” (controlling performance errors and immediately restore/ fix them) and “passive

management-by-exception” (wait for errors before action is taken). The transactional

leadership style is not about deeper relationships with subordinate for achieving a higher goals

(Burns, 1978).

Leadership theories reveal that transformational leadership starts with communicating

the vision (Baum, Locke, & Kirckpatrick, 1998; Westley & Mintzberg, 1989). The vision is

defined as an ideal that represents the shared values to which the organization should aspire, it

is “an ideal and unique image of the future” (McClelland & Burnham, 1976). In the

entrepreneurship and business strategy literatures, the importance of the communication of the

vision and its effects on organization-level performance has been stressed in theoretical

discussions as well as in empirical research. According to Bass (1985) transformational

leadership, is defined as a process in which a leader tries to increase followers’ awareness of

what is right and important. Transformational leadership recognizes individual talents and

builds team-task enthusiasm with emotions, values and beliefs. Transformational leadership

Page | 11

tries to motivate followers to perform beyond expectation (Bass & Avolio, 1991; Yukl, 2009).

Transformational leaders usually display their behaviours associated with four characteristics;

1. Idealized Influence, this is when a leader is being a role model for his subordinates. The

leader empowers followers to share a common vision and work towards common goals by

expressing a clear vision. 2. Inspirational motivation, this occurs when a manager tries to

definite the importance of goals in simple ways. The manager communicates his expectations

and the managers provides followers’ with tasks that are meaningful and challenging. 3.

Managers aims to intellectually stimulate followers for bringing out ideas for problems. 4.

finally individual consideration concerns with the time teaching and coaching followers by

treating followers based by individual characteristics (Bass & Avolio, 1991; Bass, Avolio, &

Jung, 1999).

Transactional leadership has not only positive effects in an organization. Transactional

leadership motivates followers by appealing to their own self-interest. Its principles are to

motivate by the exchange process. This leads to transactional leadership having a positive

impact on 'perceived fairness, trust in the leader and role clarity (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, &

Bommer, 1996). However transactional leadership has a negative effect on absenteeism

among employees, it limits enthusiasm and no positive effects are found in the self-

development of employees (Judge & Piccolo, 2004). Furthermore Rowold & Schlotz (2009)

indicate that one aspect of transactional leadership - management-by-exception passive - was

positively associated with indicators of chronic stress. Management-by-exception passive

enhances chronic stress, most likely because managers exclusively intervene if standards are

not met or if errors are detected. In this case only negative feedback will be provided to

employee, leading to dissatisfaction and other aspects of chronic stress (Rowold & Schlotz,

2009; Lerner, et al., 2004). According to a study of Himle et al. (1986) emotional support

from supervisors was interrelated with job satisfactions, lower levels of work stress and

employee burnout (Himle, Srinika, & Thyness, 1986).

2.2 JOB DEMANDS-RESOURCES MODEL

The Job Demands-Resources model (JD-R model) is a theoretical model which is

develop in the late 90’s by Bakker, Demourati and Schaufeli (Demerouti, Bakker, Nachreiner,

& Schaufeli, 2001). The JD-R model is now an internationally recognized model which is

tested in the following European countries; Belgium, Finland, Germany, Greece, Italy,

Norway, Spain and Sweden. The model is used as a tool by human resource management. The

Page | 12

JD-R model determines the strengths and weaknesses of individuals, workgroups,

departments and organization (Demerouti, Nachreiner, Bakker, & Schaufeli, 2001). Besides

that the model can also be used for factors influencing organizational performance such as

employee engagement and employee burnout. The model states that two processes play an

important role in predicting work engagement or burnout, namely job resources and job

demands (Demerouti, Nachreiner, Bakker, & Schaufeli, 2001).

Job demands are described by Demerouti et al. (2001) as “those physical, social, or

organizational aspects of the job that require sustained physical or mental effort and are

therefore associated with certain physiological and psychological costs. For instance work

pressure, heavy lifting, interpersonal conflict and job insecurity. Work requirements are not

necessarily stressful, however, when efforts meet the requirements and the recovery time is

insufficient, work requirements could be an influence of stress. (Demerouti, Bakker,

Nachreiner, & Schaufeli, 2001).

Job resources are seen as sources of energy. Job resources are defined as “those

physical, social, or organizational aspects of the job that may do any of the following: (a) be

functional in achieving work goals; (b) reduce job demands and the associated physiological

and psychological costs; (c) stimulate personal growth and development” (Demerouti,

Bakker, Nachreiner, & Schaufeli, 2001). Within an organization this could include feedback

and social support. Previous studies have shown that job resources (Bakker, Tuckey, &

Dollard, 2012) is an important motivational potential for work engagement.

These two contra dictionary processes play a role in the development of job strain or

motivation. Exhaustion, this process takes place when poorly designed jobs or chronic job

demands exhaust the employee on both the mental as well as the physical element. Once this

occurs this might lead to the depletion of energy and to severe interpersonal problems

(Demerouti, Nachreiner, Bakker, & Schaufeli, 2001). On the opposite side, the motivational

process could occur when job resources exert their motivating potential. This could lead to

high work engagement, low cynicism, and excellent performance. Job resources could play

either an intrinsic or an extrinsic motivational role (Demerouti, Nachreiner, Bakker, &

Schaufeli, 2001). The JD-R model assumes that whereas every occupation may have its own

specific working characteristics, these characteristics can be classified in two general

categories (job demands and job resources). Virtually all models on occupational health and

well-being focus exclusively on job stress and the resulting strain, thereby neglecting the

potentially positive effects of work such as engagement (Schaufeli, Bakker, & Rhenen, 2009).

The JD-R model emphasises the unique role of job resources as main predictors of

Page | 13

motivation/learning-related outcomes. The JD-R model tries to explain the negative (burnout)

as well as positive (work engagement) aspects of well-being by linking it to a strain

(Demerouti, Nachreiner, Bakker, & Schaufeli, 2001; Schaufeli, Bakker, & Rhenen, 2009).

Findings support the general notion that burnout is a response to work overload. Within this

change situation a higher degree of audit quality is demanded from the employees of the “Big

4” audit firm. Quantitative job demands have been studied by many burnout researchers, the

findings support the general notion that burnout is a response to work overload. According to

Maslach (1982) time pressure is consistently related to burnout, particularly with the

exhaustion dimension of employee burnout (Maslach & Leiter, 2001).

2.3 BURNOUT

Burnout was initially a vague concept there was no description of it, although there

was a diversity of opinions about what it was and what could be done about burnout

(Demerouti, Bakker, Nachreiner, & Schaufeli, 2001). As a consequence, several different

people used the term burnout to mean very different things, so there was not always a basis

for constructive communication about this issue nor were there solutions for treatment

(Demerouti, Bakker, Nachreiner, & Schaufeli, 2001). Maslach (1982) developed a model

were the three core dimensions of the burnout experience came together. This model is still is

the predominant one in the burnout field (Demerouti, Nachreiner, Bakker, & Schaufeli, 2001).

A burnout is characterized as “a syndrome of emotional exhaustion, depersonalization,

and reduced personal accomplishment that can occur among people who do people work of

some kind. Emotional exhaustion refers to feelings of being overextended and exhausted

refers to feelings of one’s work” (Demerouti, Nachreiner, Bakker, & Schaufeli, 2001).

Depersonalization is an anomaly of self-awareness. It contains of a feeling of watching

oneself act, while having no control over a particular situation. At last reduce personal

accomplishment concerns with that one is no longer effective in working with recipients,

achieving goals and fulfilling job responsibilities (Maslach, 1982).

Maslach (2001) describes three dimensions of burnout; exhaustion, cynicism and

ineffectiveness. Exhaustion is the most widely reported and is analysed comprehensively. The

strong identification of exhaustion with burnout has led some to argue that the other two

aspects of the syndrome are incidental or unnecessary (Shirom, 1989). Yet, the fact that

exhaustion is an essential condition for burnout does not mean it is sufficient. If looking at

burnout out of context and focussing on the individual exhaustion component, one would lose

Page | 14

sight of the entire phenomenon of burnout (Shirom, 1989). Studies indicate that those in the

serving professions are most at risk for burnout (Cherniss, 1995; Maslach & Leiter, 2001)

One of the characteristics of service professions is that the employees have daily interactions

with people, both employees as well as clients. The exhaust dimension of burnout reflects

with the stress one is facing. However, exhaustion is not something that is easily experienced

or recognized. To cope with workloads, one is taking distance emotionally and cognitively

(Demerouti, Bakker, Nachreiner, & Schaufeli, 2001). Maslach states that job demands are

better manageable when they are considered as “impersonal objects of one’s work” (Maslach,

1982; Leiter & Maslach, 2001). When people are exhausted or are depressed from work they

develop a distance or a cynical attitude towards others. Distancing leads to depersonalization

which is affects burnout (Maslach, 1982). The third dimension, ineffectiveness, which deals

with the reduced personal accomplishment is harder to define. Lee & Ashforth (1996) say that

this “appears to be a function, to some degree, of either exhaustion, cynicism, or a

combination of the two” (Lee & Ashforth, 1996). Within a situation at work with are huge

demands where exhaustion or cynicism is likely to occur, it is in line with expectations that

the effectiveness of one will be affected. Moreover it is hard to gain a sense of

accomplishment when feeling exhausted (Lee & Ashforth, 1996). Concluding: The absence

of efficacy seems to arise due to a lack of relevant job resources, whereas exhaustion and

cynicism rise from the presence of work overload and social conflicts (Demerouti,

Nachreiner, Bakker, & Schaufeli, 2001).

There are several negative effects concerning burnout. The performance of employees

is key for business. Hence, the quality of employees is detrimental to an organization. Hiring

and training new employees is an extra cost for an organization, not only due to an increase in

training expenses, but also in structuring relationships with other employees in the

organization. The organization should realize that an environment which promotes burnout,

more frequently needs to hire and train employees. ‘Some burnout sufferers stay on the job

for various personal, financial, or geographic reasons” (Harris, James, & Boonthanom, 2005).

Subordinates who involuntarily stay in position instead of leaving the organization, are also

negatively influencing the organization; “working to minimum standards, coming in late to

avoid the situation, and withdrawing from others” (Harris, James, & Boonthanom, 2005).

Burnout could affect the most innovative and productive employees causing poor

performance, carelessness, and ambivalence at work. Moreover burnout is related to health

problems. Eventually, people give up on the situation that caused their condition and they

withdraw or actually quit their job (Harris, James, & Boonthanom, 2005).

Page | 15

2.3.1 TRANSACTIONAL-TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND BURNOUT

The JD-R model assumes that the presence of resources at work leads to inspiration,

motivation and a positive attitude; an absence of resources leads to the exhaustion component

if burnout (feeling of exhaustion). Some examples of job resources are: intrinsic motivation,

empowerment, daily coaching, social support from the manager, social support from

colleagues, social support from the private environment, autonomy (self-determination),

feedback, participation and communication (Schaufeli, Bakker, & Rhenen, 2009). According

Schaufeli et al. burnout and work engagement are negatively related to each other (Schaufeli,

Bakker, & Rhenen, 2009).

One the abilities of a transformational leader is to “influence attitudes, assumptions

and building a commitment for the organizations’ mission” (Yukl, 2009). This process is

regularly mediated due to other factors, such as support (Twigg, Fuller, & Hester, 2008).

During social exchange, a strong link between commitment and perceived organizational

support is evident (Eigenberger, Huntington, Hutchison, & Sowa, 1986) Perceived

Organizational Support is defined as employees’ “global beliefs about the extent to which the

organization cares about their well-being and values their contributions”. When employees

perceive more organizational support, they feel that they are respected in the organization.

Perceived support leads to an increase in performance (Chen, Eisenberger, Johnson, &

Sucharski, 2009) and organizational support from the manager is related to greater job

satisfaction, lower stress leading to lower employee burnout (Lee & Ashforth, 1996; Lewin &

Sager, 2008; Penn, Romano, & Foat, 1988). Employees expect that their superior performance

will be rewarded. This attitude causes a strong sense of belonging to the organization

(Morrison, Jones, & Fuller, 1997).

Several studies have shown that there is a negative relationship between

transformational leadership and employee burnout (Corrigan, Diwan, Campion, & Rashid,

2002; Leithwood, Menzies, Jantzi, & Leithwoood, 1996; Stordeur, D’hoore, &

Vandenberghe, 2001). Transformational leadership entails leadership with individual attention

to subordinates. Transformational managers give support by learning, teaching and providing

feedback to their subordinates (Den Hartog & Hoogh, 2009). In previous studies a positive

relationship between transformational leadership and the availability of job resources is found

(Syrek, Apostel, & Antoni, 2013).On the other hand transactional leadership is about

achievements and performance, they are key in the relationship between manager and

employee (Den Hartog & Hoogh, 2009). Overall, it is expected that a transactional leader

Page | 16

increases the risk of employee burnout. In addition, it is expected that a transformational

leader reduces the risk of burnout.

Hypothesis 1a. Transactional leadership is positively related to burnout

Hypothesis 1b. Transformational leadership is negatively related to burnout

2.4 INTENTION TO QUIT

Intention to quit deals with the “conscious and deliberate wilfulness of the employees

to leave the organization” (Tett & Meyer, 1993) and it is “individual own estimated subjective

possibility or probability of leaving the organization or profession in the near future”

(Bigliardi & Dormio, 2005). Intentions are, according to Ajzen and Fishbein (2010), the most

immediate determinants of actual behaviour. These can be used as accurate indicators of

subsequent behaviour, however the reasons for these intentions are often unknown (Firth,

2004). Various researchers (Kramer, Callister, & Turban, 1995; Kalliath T. B., 2001;

Bluedorn, 1982; Saks, 1996) have attempted to answer the matter of what determines

people's intention to quit. Van Dick et al. (2004) agree that the phenomenon is far from being

fully understood, especially because some of the psychological processes underlying the

withdrawal from the organisation are still unclear (Van Dick, Christ, Stellmacher, & Wagner,

2004).

2.4.1 TRANSACTIONAL-TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND THE

INTENTION TO QUIT

Many studies have been conducted how the transformational leader could reduce the

employees' absence and the intention to quit of an employee (Kamariah, Wafa, Tajammal, &

Syed, 2011; Avey, Luthans, Smith, & Palmer, 2010). Firth (2004) suggest that to ameliorate

intention to quit, managers need to actively monitor workloads and the relationship between

supervisor and subordinates needs to be managed in proper way (Firth, 2004). Research from

Ekkirala et al. (1998) revealed that transformational leadership could influence the

employee’s effort and attitudes in the organization. Key aspects for employee satisfaction,

effort and commitment are feedback, inspiration and guidance (Rotham, Diedericks, & Swart,

2013). In this study these aspects are seen to be crucial aspects in determining turnover

intentions. This study revealed empirical evidence that transformational leadership has a

negative relationship with the intention to quit subordinates (Ekkirala & Kumar Goute, 1998).

Page | 17

Leadership is an important determinant of involvement. These concepts are often

positively associated with each other. According to Bass and Avolio (Bass, Avolio, & Jung,

1999) a transformational leader is trying to inspire and motivate followers, to increase

involvement and work engagement. Work engagement includes absorption and dedication.

Work engagement can lead to a sense of significance, enthusiasm, inspiration, pride and

challenge (Schaufeli, Dierendonck, & Bakker, 2009). Work engagement could lead to

employee dedication, which is known to reduce the employee’s intention to quit (Schaufeli,

Bakker, & Rhenen, 2009). The transformational leader creates more personal involvement

between himself and his followers, by setting a common vision, mission and goals and

involve them in decision making. A transactional leader on the other hand not so much

focused on the bond with his or her followers, but more on the exchange relationship.

Concluding, the expectation is that transactional leaders increase the intention to quit, while

transformational leaders should decrease the intention to quit.

Hypothesis 2a. Transactional leadership increases intention to quit.

Hypothesis 2b. Transformational leadership decreases intention to quit.

2.4.2 BURNOUT AND THE INTENTION TO QUIT

Stress has been proven to influence the intention to quit (Rowold & Schlotz, 2009) and

dissatisfaction of the employees work leads to the intention to quit (Bigliardi & Dormio,

2005). Job satisfaction is a construction from the field of organisational behaviour. Job

satisfaction measures employee’s attitudes towards their work. Job satisfaction is a popular

topic in Human Resources research because of its potential effects on the behaviours and

wellbeing of professionals. Dissatisfaction of jobs has been related to a number of workplace

withdrawal behaviour, such as absenteeism and the intention to quit. Dissatisfaction is seen as

one of the main influences for nurse turnover (Halawi, 2014). In addition, dissatisfaction is

linked with individual greater risk of burnout, anxiety and depression (Rouleau, Fournier,

Phili, & Dumont, 2012).

Several studies have examined the relationship between the intention to quit towards

employee burnout (Moreno-Jiménez, Gálvez-Herrer, Rodríguez-Carvajal, & Sanz Vergel,

2012). Several studies showed the relationship between stress, burnout and turnover intention

by examining the level of commitment (Peters, Bhagat, & O'Connor, 1981). As commitment

breaks down, an employee is likely to engage in possible job search behavior either in the

present or in the near future. The intention to quit concerns with the individual who may be

Page | 18

thinking about quitting a job, however is not willing to actually quit his job (Firth, 2004).

Turnover intentions are about actually quitting the organizations, while intention to quit is

thinking about quitting a job but not actually quit. Studies indicate that turnover intentions are

an outcome of stress and burnout (Kemery, Bedeian, & Mossholder, 1985; Williams, Konrad,

& Scheckler, 2001). This means that employee burnout is an important factor which could

lead to higher turnover intentions. The leadership style of the manager could reduce

employee’s intention to quit. However recent studies mention intention to quit as a stressor

that predicts employee burnout (Dai, Collins, Yu, & Fu, 2008; Himle, Srinika, & Thyness,

1986; Jackson, Schwab, & Schuler, 1986). According to the study of Jackson et al. (1986) the

intention to quit is an identifiable and important phenomenon related to employee burnout

(Jackson, Schwab, & Schuler, 1986). Thus, the second hypothesis supposes that an intention

to quit is positively related to employee burnout. Weisberg (1994) suggests that intention to

quit could be an important factor influencing productivity, commitment and possible burnout.

Therefore, based on previous studies, we hypothesis that the intention to quit is positively

related to employee burnout.

Hypothesis 3. Intention to quit is positively related to burnout.

Page | 19

3. RESEARCH METHOD

This study seeks to answer the question for the whole population of the Big 4 audit firm.

Therefore it was decided to conduct survey research. This chapter describes how the research

is done. In paragraph 3.1 we discuss the composition of the sample and in paragraph 3.2 the

data collection. Paragraph 3.3 described the measurement methods of the constructs

leadership style, burnout and intention to quit. This chapter concludes with paragraph 3.4,

data analysis.

3.1 SAMPLE

The study was conducted in a Big 4 Audit firm in the Netherlands. This audit firm is a

multinational professional services network. The audit firm has a great variety of service lines

to help and counsel companies with assurance, tax laws and advisory (e.g. Strategy,

Performance improvement, Business Recovery). In the Netherlands the company is an

independent part and is established in more than 10 different cities. The corporate ambition of

the Dutch branch of audit firm is to play a leading role in the field of business services. The

audit firm aims to provide the best services and solutions and audit quality for their clients.

A total number of 121 employees of the Big 4 accounting firm participated in the

research on a voluntary basis. A total number of 121 responses were received; 17 respondents

did not fully complete the questionnaire. Thus, the final sample used in the model consisted of

104 responses: 31% females (N=32) and 69% males (N= 72). The respondents were on

average employed 2.5 years by the audit firm and they had worked with 3.69 managers during

the obligated change. Within this study we asked about the function level of the respondent.

There respondents were divided in the following functions SA4 (1), SA3 (1), SA2 (12), SA1

(35), A2 (38) and A1 (17).

3.2 DATA COLLECTION

The questionnaire was developed with the information of the literature and my

supervisor. To test the understand ability and readability of the questionnaire, the survey was

distributed among three employees of the Big 4 accounting firm. They could fill in the

questionnaire without any complaints. Based on a seven point Likert-scale, sixty-two

questions were asked in order to measure the variables of the research. To determine whether

a leader has a transactional or a transformational leadership style the Multifactor Leadership

Page | 20

Questionnaire (MLQ) is used. The MLQ identifies the characteristics of a transformational or

transactional manager and helps individuals discover how they measure up in their own eyes

and in the perspective of those with whom they work (Avolio, Bass, & Jung, 1999). The

Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire, is usually administered to subordinates who rate how

frequently their leader uses each type of behaviour (Yuk, 1999). The Multifactor Leadership

Questionnaire consists of 32 Likert scale questions. The job demands and job resources items

are adopted from the JD-R model of Schaufeli et al. The Job Demands-Resources model

(Demerouti, Bakker, Nachreiner, & Schaufeli, 2001) can be used to predict employee burnout

and engagement, and consequently organizational performance.

Transformational and transactional leadership involve different leadership behaviour.

Transactional leadership consisted of management-by-exception passive, management-by-

exception active and contingent reward. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for transactional

leadership is 0.91 in this research. Transformational leadership consisted of 5 subjects,

idealized influence (attributed), idealized influence (behaviour), inspirational motivation,

intellectual stimulation and intellectual stimulation. In this research a Cronbach’s alpha of

0.96 is found.

Intention to quit was measured using an expanded version of a propensity to leave

scale (Lyons, 1971). This is a three-item scale asking respondents how likely they are to stay

at the job or leave (Keil, Armstrong-Stassen, & Camerson, 2000). The Cronbach’s alpha

coefficient for the intention to quit is 0.95 in this research.

The items of transactional leadership, transformational leadership, job demands, job

resources and intention to quit are rated on a seven point Likert scale with anchors 1: strongly

disagree; 2: moderately disagree; 3: slightly disagree; 4: neutral; 5: slightly agree; 6:

moderately agree; and 7: strongly agree. The items of burnout are rated on a six point Likert

scale with anchors 1: never; 2: once a year; 3: once a month; 4: once a week; 5: more than

once a week; 6: on a daily basis. The intention to quit is the psychological process that an

individual goes through when they are considering employment options due to some measure

of dissatisfaction with their current job situation. The intention to quit concerns employees

who intend to quit, but do not. The intention to quit can be useful in explaining job behaviors.

Mobley have developed a 3-point Likert scale for measuring the intention to quit (Mobley,

Horner, & Hollingsworth, 1978).

To assess burnout, the Utrechtse Burnout Schaal is adopted (Schaufeli, Dierendonck,

& Bakker, 2009). This scale is adapted and tested from the English version of de Maslach

Burnout Inventory. This is the most used instrument to measure burnout, which is measured

Page | 21

by exhaustion, detachment and competence (Schaufeli, Bakker, & Rhenen, 2009). These

variables are used as a control variable. Next to these control variables some general questions

were asked about the employee setting: how many years he or she works at the audit firm and

how many managers he or she had during the change period.

The survey instrument was web-based. During this study all the attendees from

various offices, were asked if they could help fill-in this questionnaire. The attendees could

fill-in the online questionnaire using a link of a web page containing the survey.

3.3 DATA ANALYSES

Also a multiple regression analysis is conducted to assess the relationships between

components of leadership, as independent variable and those of employee burnout as a

dependent one. The relationship between the intention to quit and several independent

variables. Within this research we accept when the p ≤ 0.05 as an acceptable level. During this

study we make us of the stepwise regression analysis. Stepwise regression is an automated

process in the exploratory stages of model building to identify a useful subset of predictors. In

this study different control variables are used, these control variables are: gender, number of

managers during the change, job tenure and job function. These variables are included in the

survey because they can lead to possible alternative insights and declarations. We analyzed if

the intention to quit has a mediating role between the leadership style of the manager and

employee burnout. In this study the step-wise regression method from Baron & Kenny is used

for determining this relationship (Baron & Kenny, 1986).

Page | 22

4. RESULTS

Within this chapter the results of this study will be discussed. Table 1 presents the descriptive

statistics from this study. The Cronbach’s alpha of the constructs is also presented in this

table. The Pearson correlations are shown in table 2. Table 3 and 4 stresses with the

regression analysis of the dependent variable intention to quit. Table 5 and 6 are regression

analysis regarding the dependent variable burnout.

Because many constructs correlate with each other a linear regression analysis is

conducted with the intention to quit as a dependant variable and with burnout as a dependant

variable (Table 3 and Table 4).

Table 1: Descriptive Statistics

N Minimum Maximum Mean

Std.

Deviation

Items Reliability

Coefficient

Transactional (TA) 121 47 84 69,12 7,39 12 0,91

Transformational (TF) 121 38 136 91,19 20,36 20 0,96

Job demands (JD) 105 4 25 17,20 3,44 4 0,72

Job resources (JR) 104 9 28 18,16 4,52 4 0,78

Intention to quit (ITQ) 104 3 19 10,81 5,55 3 0,95

Burnout (BURN) 104 35 76 59,35 10,48 15 0,84

QTY of managers 104 1 6 3,69 1,26 1 -

Tenure 104 1 8 2,57 1,21 1 -

Function 104 2 7 5,54 0,99 1 -

Gender 104 1 2 1,31 0,46 1 -

Table 2: Bivariate Correlations

TA TF JD JR ITQ

Transformational 0,06

Job demands -0,11 -0,17

Job resources 0,17 0,63** -0,28**

Intention to quit -0,14 -0,28* 0,35** -0,57**

Burnout -0,22** -0,50** 0,50** -0,17** 0,80**

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Page | 23

Table 3: Model Summary intention to quit

Model R

R

Square

Adjusted

R Square

Std. Error

of the

Estimate

Change Statistics

Durbin-

Watson

R

Square

Change F Change df1 df2

Sig. F

Change

1 0,47a 0,22 0,21 5,04 0,22 28,97 1 102 0,000

2 0,55

b 0,30 0,29 4,81 0,08 11,38 1 101 0,001

3 0,59

c 0,34 0,32 4,68 0,04 6,39 1 100 0,013

4 0,61

d 0,37 0,35 4,60 0,03 4,64 1 99 0,034 2,06

a. Predictors: (Constant), qtymangers

b. Predictors: (Constant), qtymangers, Transformsum

c. Predictors: (Constant), qtymangers, Transformsum, function

d. Predictors: (Constant), qtymangers, Transformsum, function, tenure

e. Dependent Variable: Intentiontoquitsum

Table 4: Coefficients Intentiontoquit

B SE-b Beta Pearson r

Partial

correlation

(Constant) 62,88 15,52

Qtymangers -1,84 0,39 -0,41 -0,47* -0.43

Transformational -0,08 0,02 -0,28 -0,30* -0,32

Function -5,31 1,93 -0,93 -0,42* -0,27

Gender -3,44 1,60 -0,75 0,39** -0,21

a. Dependent Variable:

Intentiontoquit

**p<0.05

* p<0.01

Table 5: Model Summary Burnoutsum

Model R

R

Square

Adjusted

R Square

Std. Error

of the

Estimate

Change Statistics

Durbin-

Watson

R

Square

Change

F

Change df1 df2

Sig. F

Change

1 0,81a 0,66 0,65 7,77 0,66 194,39 1 102 0,000

2 0,85

b 0,72 0,72 7,00 0,07 24,67 1 101 0,000

3 0,86

c 0,74 0,73 6,84 0,02 5,77 1 100 0,018

4 0,87

d 0,75 0,74 6,72 0,01 4,64 1 99 0,034 1,59

a. Predictors: (Constant), Intentiontoquitsum

b. Predictors: (Constant), Intentiontoquitsum, Jobresourcesum

c. Predictors: (Constant), Intentiontoquitsum, Jobresourcesum, Transformsum

d. Predictors: (Constant), Intentiontoquitsum, Jobresourcesum, Transformsum, Gender

e. Dependent Variable: Burnoutsum

Page | 24

4.1 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS

In table 1 the reliability analysis is revealed. Before this table was constructed some

variables were recode due to a negative manner of questioning. Afterwards the model was

tested for outliers with the Z-score method. No outliers were found.

The Cronbach’s alpha of job resources has been constructed, low levels for two items

belonging towards Job resources were removed, due to a severe influence on the Cronbach’s

alpha. From the job resources scale item 9 and 14 were removed, resulting the Cronbach’s

alpha has risen from 0,48 towards 0,78. Item 37 of job demands also negatively affected the

Cronbach’s alpha of this scale, after excluding this variable the Cronbach’s alpha has risen

from 0,67 towards 0,72. A total number of three questions were excluded from the complete

model. All other measurement scales showed acceptable Cronbach’s alpha coefficients: the

Cronbach’s alpha coefficient met the rule of thumb of 0,70 or higher. Table 1 presents ranges,

means, standard deviations, number of items in the final scales and reliability coefficients.

4.2 TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND BURNOUT

Table 2 presents the correlation matrix for the variables. The results show that

transactional leadership will lead to less employee burnout (r = - 0,22, p<0.05). Meaning that

transactional leadership reduces employee burnout. Therefore we found no support for

hypotheses H1a.

Table 6: Coefficients Burnoutsum

B SE-b Beta Pearson r

Partial

correlation

(Constant) 62,40 6,50

Intentiontoquitsum 1,41 0,14 0,61 0,81* 0,49

Jobresourcesum -0,69 0,20 -0,24 -0,68* -0,17

Transformsum -0,11 0,04 -0,18 -0,45* -0,15

Gender -3,25 1,51 -0,11 -0,16** -0,11

a. Dependent Variable:

Burnoutsum

**p<0.05

* p<0.01

Page | 25

4.3 TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND BURNOUT

Consistent with our expectations, we have found (table 2) a strong negative

association between transformational leadership and burnout (r = -0,50; p<0.01). Therefore

we found support for hypotheses H1b, meaning that transformational leadership reduces

employee burnout. A strong positive relationship between transformational leadership and the

availability of job resources has been found (r = 0,63; p<0.01). No significant relationship

between transformational leadership and perceived job demands has been found (r = -0,17).

Within this study we found a strong positive relationship between job demands and employee

burnout (r = 0,50; p< 0.01).

4.4 TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND INTENTION TO QUIT

No significant relationship between transactional leadership and intention to quit has

been found. Therefore we are not able to conclude wheatear the transactional leadership leads

to a higher intention to quit by employees. Therefore hypotheses H2a is rejected. Other

research have found that an higher level of contingent reward, offered by the leader, reduces

the intention to quit by the employee. Furthermore the higher the passive management-by-

exception, the higher the intention to leave (Bozeman, 2005; Rowold & Schlotz, 2009).

Management-by-exception passive is the most negative side of transactional leadership.

4.5 TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND INTENTION TO QUIT

The intention to quit was primarily predicted by the quantity of managers and the

leadership style of the manager. Hypothesis H2b expected that transformational leadership

decrease the intention to quit. Table 2 gives support to this relationship (r = -0,28; p<0.05).

The regression analysis shown in table 4 supports this relationship as well (ß = -0,28; p<0.01).

Therefore hypotheses H2b is accepted.These findings are in line with other studies, which

found that transformational leadership negatively correlates with employee intention to quit

(Bozeman, 2005).

Intention to quit was predicted by the amount of managers and is also influenced by

the leadership style of the manager. The amount of managers received the strongest weight in

the model followed by the transformational leadership style of the manager. The prediction

model contained four of the six predictors and was reached in four steps. One variable were

excluded, namely gender and quantity of managers. The model was statistically significant

(F(4, 99) = 14,63, p<0.001) and accounted for approximately 35% of the variance of burnout

Page | 26

(R2 = 0,37, Adjusted R

2 = 0,35). The Anova table of the intention to quit can be found in

Appendix B Table 7.

4.6 BURNOUT AND INTENTION TO QUIT

Burnout was primarily predicted by the intention to quit of employees and to a less

extent by higher levels of the availability of job resources. The prediction model contained

four of the six predictors and was reached in four steps with two variables removed, namely

gender and quantity of managers (see table 5). The correlation table (table 2) show that

intention to quit positively correlates with employee burnout (r = 0,80; p <0.01). The model

was statistically significant (F(4,99) = 74,34, p<0 .001, and accounted for approximately 74%

of the variance of burnout (R2 = 0,75, Adjusted R

2 = 0,74). The Anova table for burnout can

be found in Appendix B Table 8.

The leadership style of the manager has also an effect on employee burnout, see table

6. Hypothesis H3 expected that the intention to quit would be positively related to burnout.

The results of table 2 support this (r = 0,80; p<0.01). The regression analysis supports this

connection (ß = 0,61; p<0.01). The raw regression coefficients of the predictors together with

their correlations with employee burnout are shown in Table 6. The intention to quit received

the strongest positive weight in the model (ß = 0,61; p<0.01). The availability of job resources

(ß = -0,24; p<0.01) and the transformational leadership style (ß = -0,18; p<0.01) are

negatively influencing employee burnout. Because of the findings from table 6 we conclude

that the relationship between transformational leadership, intention to quit and employee

burnout is partially mediated. Because the relationship between transformational and

intention to quit are both significantly predicting employee burnout. These finding support

partial mediation as stated by (Baron & Kenny, 1986).

Page | 27

5. DISCUSSION

5.1 DISCUSSION

The purpose of this study was to study the relationship between transformational and

transactional leadership and employee burnout, and the extent of intention to quit influencing

this relationship. It was expected that transformational leadership negatively affect employee

burnout and that the intention to quit would be a predictor of burnout. Moreover transactional

leadership was expected to be positively correlated with employee burnout. The results in this

study show that the transformational leadership style leads to lower levels of employee

burnout. Contrary to our expectations the results in this study give evidence that transactional

leadership decreases employee burnout. No significant relationship has found for the

influence of transactional leadership and the mediating role of intention to quit on burnout.

Therefore this relationship could also be further explored in the future. The transformational

leadership style is strongly negatively related to employee burnout. The transformational

leadership style strives towards high levels of performance, however within this study it does

not lead to higher levels of burnout by subordinates. Transformational leaders focus on the

communication of a long-term vision which is based on shared values and common goals.

Consequently, it might be argued that transformational leadership helps establishing a

meaningful - stress-preventing - frame for everyday work. Concluding, transformational

leaders aims for superior levels of performance successfully, but on the other hand their

subordinates do not perceive an increased level of burnout. These findings imply that

transformational leaders could increase performance without adding stress to their

subordinates. Within this research we did not measure job performance, therefore we cannot

say that transformational leadership is a more efficient leadership style. The transformational

leadership style has also a positive influence on the availability of job resources. This is in

line with earlier findings (Bass & Avolio, 1991).

Earlier research about leadership theory manly addresses the relationship between

transformational leadership and employee burnout. However, there are limited studies that try

to understand the process of transactional leadership and the influence on employee burnout.

This study tried to explain the relationship between leadership style on employee burnout.

Findings imply that transactional leadership negatively affects employee burnout. This is in

line with earlier research (Ori & Roth, 2011). In other studies (Rowold & Schlotz, 2009) there

has found a positive relationship between one particular aspect of transactional leadership,

Page | 28

namely management-by-exception. This part of transactional leadership is seen as the most

negative side of transactional leadership.

The JD-R model supposes when job demands are high, they are positively associated with

the exhaustion component of burnout. Job resources are mainly and negatively associated

with disengagement leading towards lower employee burnout. The results of the regression

analysis imply that the availability of job resources negatively influence possible employee

burnout. The more resources ones get, the less burnout he possesses. It can therefore be

concluded that the relationship of transformational leadership influences the availability of job

resources. Job resources reduce the degree of burnout by employees. Furthermore we find that

job demands are a precondition of employee burnout. These findings are consistent with the

proposed JD-R model of Schaufeli et. al (2009).

The intention to quit is one of the main predictors of employee burnout. Within this study

we found that the transformational leadership style reduces the intention to quit by employees.

No significant relationship between transactional leadership and the intention to quit has been

found.

5.2 THEORETICAL IMPLICATIONS

From both theoretical and practical point of view, the results of this study are

interesting. The results of this study contribute to the scientific study of leadership. Not only

because this study focuses specifically on accountancy firms, but also because of the

explanation of the impact of leadership style on employee burnout. Theorists state that a

vision is a precondition to achieve effective organizational change (Conger & Kanungo, 1987;

House, Spangler, & Woycke, 1991). They emphasize that the implementation of change starts

with a leader who formulates a vision associated with a desired organizational outcome

(Nanus, 1992). Theorist also states that transformational leadership has a positive influence on

reducing employee burnout. However theorists do not have a clear and congruous

explanation regarding the relationship between transactional leadership and employee

burnout. Within this research both leadership styles have shown a positive relationship

reducing employee burnout. Leadership function may vary by organizational level, discipline

or employee. In order to met all these demands a combination of the transactional as well as

the transformational leadership style should be adopted (Aarons, 2006). For gaining better

audit quality, managers need to take multiple hurdles to change the organization.

Page | 29

5.3 PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

The managers main role is to collaborate and communicate with subordinates in order to

achieve constructive a relationship with subordinate(s). The internal letter of the Big 4 Audit

firm stated that employees within the organization need to “learn, adopt and communicate”

with each other. Teams with transformational managers perform better and the degree of

burnout by employees is lower (Schaufeli, Dierendonck, & Bakker, 2009). Burnout and

engagement exhibit different patterns of possible causes and consequences. As Schaufeli et al.

(2009) mentioned “different intervention strategies be used when burnout is to be reduced or

engagement is to be enhanced” (Schaufeli, Dierendonck, & Bakker, 2009). A major role for

achieving this is for the HR department of the company. The HR department should realize

that an employee who is “engaged” is one who is fully absorbed - and enthusiastic – about

their work. To increase the effectiveness of the organization and to lower health costs the HR

department of the organization should focus on optimizing the leadership style of the

managers. By embracing a transformational leadership style, employees remain longer in the

organization and show less exhaustion. The organization will prove to work more effectively.

5.4 LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH

The research methodology used during this study had some impact on the findings

during this study. First, the change has been introduced in October 2014 the outcomes and

consequences during business season (January until June) were not visible when the

questionnaire has been sent in December. Therefore employees could not see all the outcomes

of the change when the questionnaire was send.

Because of the direct involvement of the researcher - an employee of the Big 4 Audit

firm - the outcomes could be biased because the respondents could give pleasing answers.

Moreover, people who generally have a very positive perception of their leadership more

likely the questionnaire are very positive to be completed and for people who think negatively

about their managerial vice versa. During this study respondents knew that their response

would be anonymous and reliable processes, however it is likely that employees feared that

their answers would be used for other purposes.

The quantitative data could be processed quickly and a large group of possible

respondents could be reached. This study is conducted in one particular organization – a Big

4 accounting firm in the Netherlands, this makes it complex to generalize beyond these

boundaries. Due to the type of research no causality conclusions can be made, this is a general

limitation of (behavioural) questionnaires (Yukl, 2009). To determine causality the

Page | 30

independent variable should be manipulated by means of an experiment or by longitudinal

research.

Future research should focus on the manager which could fill-in a questionnaire

regarding his subordinates. When there are differences between the perception of leader and

follower these difference could be overtaken for achieving better fit.

The theoretical model used in this study could be extended with the variable “support

of the obligated change”. By applying such a model the role of the manager could be taken

apart and the resistance to change could further be determined. Future research could also

discuss leader group prototypicallity. Leader group prototypicallity describes the extent to

which the leader is representative for the group (Van Knippenberg, Van Knippenberg, &

Bobbio, 2007; van Knippenberg & van Schie, 2000). Prototypicallity prescribes beliefs,

attitudes, norms, values and behavior. We believe that when an employee represents the group

values, norms, standards, feelings and perceptions, the intention to quit of possible employee

burnout will be reduced. A follow-up study could be extended with multiple dependent

variables - such as prototypicallity and support - to test whether several independent variables

influence a dependent variable resulting in positive or negative effects, furthermore it is

possible to check for interaction effects.

Future research could distinguish transactional leadership and the management-by-

exception separately to check for opposite results for employee burnout. Management-by-

exception positively effects employee burnout, while transactional leadership itself decreases

employee burnout. An explanation for this phenomenon is that employees know what is

expected from them and how they are rewarded for their achievements. Management-by-

exception passive leaders wait until issues occur, when standards are not met expectations

they intervene. Instead of rewards, punishment is a response for unacceptable performance.

5.5 CONCLUSION

In this master thesis, the effect of the transactional as well as the transformational

leadership style on employee burnout is exposed. A negative relationship between these two

concepts has been found, meaning that the transactional as well as the transformational

leadership style reduces employee burnout. The Big 4 Dutch accounting firm state in their

internal document that employees should “learn, develop, innovate and communicate”. Taken

this study into account, this desired situation is understandable for preventing the intention to

Page | 31

quit. Intention to quit is seen as a precondition of employee burnout. By reducing the intention

to quit of employees the burnout should reduce as well.

Page | 32

REFERENCES

Aarons, G. A. (2006). Transformational and Transactional Leadership: Association With

Attitudes Toward Evidence-Based Practice. Psychiatric Services , 1162–1169.

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (2010). Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action

approach. New York: Psychology Press.

Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. (1989). Social Identity Theory and the Organization. Academy of

Management Review , 20-39.

Avey, J. B., Luthans, F., Smith, R. M., & Palmer, N. F. (2010). Impact of Positive

Psychological Capital on Employee Well-Being Over Time. American Psychological

Association , 17-28.

Avolio, B., Bass, B., & Jung, D. (1999). Re-examining the components of transformational

and transactional leadership using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Journal of

Occupational and Organizational Psychology , 441–462.

Awamleh, R., & Gardner, W. (1999). Perceptions of leader charisma and effectiveness: the

effects of vision, content, delivery and organizational performance. Leadership Quarterly ,

345-373.

Bakker, E., Tuckey, M., & Dollard, M. (2012). Empowering Leaders Optimize Working

Conditions for Engagement: A Multilevel Study. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology

, 15-27.

Baron, R., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social

psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology , 1173-1182.

Bass, B. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press.

Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1991). The transformational and transactional leadership

behavior of management women and men as described by the men and women who directly

report to them. Binghamton, NY: State University of New York at Binghamton.

Bass, B., Avolio, B., & Jung, D. (1999). Re-examing the components of transformational and

transactional leadership using the multifactor leadership questionnaire. Journal of

Occupational and organizational Psychology , 441-462.

Baum, J., Locke, E., & Kirckpatrick, S. A. (1998, Vol 83). A Longitudinal Study of the

Relation of Vision and Vision. Journalk of Applied Psychology , pp. 43-54.

Bigliardi, B., & Dormio, A. I. (2005, 26 (6)). Organizational socialization, career aspirations

and turnover intentions among design engineers. Leadership & Organization Development

Journal , pp. 424 - 441.

Page | 33

Bluedorn, A. (1982). unified model of turnover from organizations. Human Relations ,

135‐153.

Boselie, P., & van der Wiele, T. (2002). Employee perceptions of HRM and TQM, and the

effects on satisfaction and intention to leave. Managing Service Quality: An International

Journal , 165 - 172.

Bozeman, W. C. (2005). An Analysis of the Relationships Between Job Satisfaction,

Leadership, and ... Louisville: University of Louisville.

Brymann, A. (1992). Charisma and leadership in organizations. London: Sage Publications.

Bucic, T., Robinson, L., & Ramburuth, P. (2010). Effects of leadership style on team learning.

Journal of Workplace Learning , 228-248.

Burns, J. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.

Campbell, J. D., Trapnell, P., & Heine, S. (1996). Self-concept clarity: Measurement,

personality correlates, and cultural boundaries. ournal of Personality and Social Psychology,

70(1), 141-156 , 141-156.

Chen, Z., Eisenberger, R., Johnson, K., & Sucharski. (2009). Perceived Organizational

Support and Extra-Role Performance: Which Leads to Which? Journal of Social Psychology ,

119-124.

Cherniss, C. (1995). Beyond burnout. New York: NY: Routledge.

Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1987). Toward a Behavioral Theory of Charismatic

Leadership in Organizational Settings. Academy of Management Review , 637-647.

Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1987). Towards a behavioral theory of charismatic

leadership in organizational settings.

Corrigan, P., Diwan, S., Campion, J., & Rashid. (2002). Transformational Leadership and the

mental health team. . Administration and Policy in Mental Health , 97-108.

Dai, J., Collins, S., Yu, H., & Fu, H. (2008). Combining job stress models in predicting

burnout by hierarchical multiple regressions: a cross-sectional investigation in Shanghai.

American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine , 785-790.

Demerouti, E., Bakker, A., Nachreiner, F., & Schaufeli, W. (2001). The job demands

resources model of burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology , 499-512.

Demerouti, E., Nachreiner, F., Bakker, A., & Schaufeli, W. (2001). The Job Demands-

Resources model of Burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology , 499-512.

Den Hartog, D., & Hoogh, D. (2009). Empowerment and leader fairness and integrity:

Studying ethical leader behavior: From a levels-of-analysis perspective. European Journal of

Work and Organizational Psychology , 199-230.

Page | 34

Eigenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived Organizational

support. Journal of Applied Psychology , 500-507.

Ekkirala, V., & Kumar Goute, A. (1998). The Role of Transformational and Transactional

Leadership in Contextual Performance. Hong Kong: Asia Academy of Management meeting.

Fedor, D., Herold, D., & Caldwell, S. (2006). The effects of organizational changes on

employee commitment: a multilevel investigation. Personnel Psychology , 1-30.

Fiol, C. M. (2002, 12 1). Capitalizing on Paradox: The Role of Language in Transforming

Organizational Identities. Organizational Science , pp. 653-666.

Firth, L. (2004). How can managers reduce employee intention to quit? Journal of managerial

psychology , 170-187.

Francis, J. R., & Yu, M. D. (2009, 09 01). Big 4 Office Size and Audit Quality. The

Accounting Review , pp. 1521-1552.

Halawi, A. (2014, June 1). Stimuli and effect of the intention to leave. European Scientific

Journal , pp. 184-197.

Harris, K., James, M., & Boonthanom, R. (2005). Perceptions of organizational politics and

cooperation as moderators of the relationship between job strains and intent to turnover.

Journal of Managerial Issues, XVII , 26-42.

Hasin, H. H., & Omar, N. H. (2007). An Empirical Study on Job Satisfaction, Job‐Related

Stress and Intention to Leave Among Audit Staff in Public Accounting Firms in Melaka.

Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting , 21 - 39.

Himle, D., Srinika, J., & Thyness, P. (1986). Predictors of job satisfaction, burnout and

turnover among social workers in Norway and the USA: a cross-cultural study. International

Social Work. , 323-34.

Holladay, S., & Coombs, W. (1993). Communicating visions: an exploration of the role of

delivery in the creation of leader charisma. Management Cummncation Quarterly , 405-427.

House, R. J., Spangler, W. D., & Woycke, J. (1991). Personality and Charisma in the U.S.

Presidency: A Psychological Theory of Leader Effectiveness. Administrative Science

Quarterly, Vol. 36, No. 3 , 364-396.

International Labour Office. (1993). Report World Labo. Geneva: International Labour

Office.

Jackson, S., Schwab, R. L., & Schuler, R. (1986). Toward an understanding of the burnout

phenomenon. Journal of Applied Psychology , 630-640.

Johnson, E., Khurana, I. K., & Reynolds, K. (2002). Audit-Firm Tenure and the Quality of

Financial Reports. Contemporary Accounting Research , 637-660.

Page | 35

Judge, T., & Piccolo, R. (2004). Transformational and transactional leadership: a meta-

analytic test of their relative validity. Journal of Applied Psychology , 755-68.

Kalliath, T. B. (2001). Is the path to burnout and turnover paved by a lack of supervisory

support: a structural equations test. New Zealand Journal of Psychology , 72-8.

Kalliath, T., & Beck, A. (2001). Is the path to burnout and turnover paved by a lack of

supervisory support: a structural equations test. New Zealand Journal of Psychology , 72-8.

Kamariah, I., Wafa, K., Tajammal, H., & Syed, K. A. (2011). Perceptions for

Transformational leadership, Followers’ Psychological Capital and Intent to Leave in

Pakistan: an insight from Medical and Engineering Sector Interdisciplinary. Journal of

Research in Business , 49-61.

Keil, J., Armstrong-Stassen, M., & Camerson, S. J. (2000). Part-time nurses: the effect of

work status congruency on job attitudes. Applied psychology , 227-236.

Kemery, E., Bedeian, A., & Mossholder, K. (1985). Outcomes of role stress: A multisample

constructive replication. Academy of Management Journal , 363-375.

Kessler, R., Price, R., & Wortman, C. (1985). Social Factors in Psychopathology: Stress,

Social Support, and Coping Processes. Annual Review of Psychology , 531-572.

King, A. S. (1990, April-Juni). Evalutation of leadership. Northern Illinois University,

DeKalb , pp. 43-54.

Kirkpatrick, S. A., & Locke, E. A. (1996). Direct and indirect effects of three core charismatic

leadership components on performance and attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology , 36-51.

Kramer, M., Callister, R., & Turban, D. (1995). . Information‐receiving and information

giving during job transitions. Western Journal of Communication , 151-70.

Kramer, M., Callister, R., & Turban, D. (1995). Information‐receiving and informationgiving

during job transitions. Western Journal of Communication , 151-70.

Lane, N., & Crane, A. (2002). Revisiting Gender role stereotyping in the sales profession.

Journal of Business Ethics , pp. 121-132.

Lee , R., & Ashforth, B. (1996, 01 01). A meta-analytic examination of the correlates of the

three dimensions of job burnou. Journal of Applied Psychology , pp. 123-133.

Leiter, M., & Maslach, C. (2001). Burnout and quality in a sped-up world. The Journal for

Quality and Participation , 48-51.

Leithwood, K., Menzies, T., Jantzi, D., & Leithwoood, J. (1996). School restructuring,

transformational leadership and the amelioration of teacher burnout. Anxiety, Stress and

Coping: An International Journal , 199-215.

Page | 36

Lerner, D., David, A., Adler, M., Hong, C., Lapitsky, L., Hood, M., et al. (2004).

Unemployment, Job Retention, and Productivity Loss Among Employees With Depression.

Psychiatric Services , 50-62.

Lewin, J., & Sager, J. K. (2008). Salesperson burnout: A test of the coping of social support. .

Journal of Personnel Selling & Sales Management XXVIII , 233-246.

Lyons, T. (1971). Role clarity, need for clarity, satisfaction, tension, and withdrawal.

Organizational Behavior and Human Performance , 99-110.

Markus, L., & Robey, D. (1988). Information Technology and Organizational Change: Causal

Structure in Theory and Research. Management Science , 583-598.

Maslach, C. (1982). Understanding burnout: definitional issues in analyzing a complex

phenomenon. In M. C., Job Stress and burnout (pp. 29-40). Beverly Hills, CA: WS Pain.

Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. (2001). Burnout and quality in a speed-up world. Journal for

Quality & Participation , 48–51.

McClelland, D., & Burnham, D. (1976). Power is the Great Motivato. Harvard Business

Review , 100-110.

Mobley, W., Horner, S., & Hollingsworth, A. (1978). An evaluation of the precursors of

hospital employee turnover,. Journal of Applied Psychology , 408–414.

Moreno-Jiménez, B., Gálvez-Herrer, M., Rodríguez-Carvajal, R., & Sanz Vergel, A. I.

(2012). A study of physicians’ intention to quit: The role of burnout, commitment and

difficult doctor-patient interactions. Psicothema , 263-270.

Morrison, R., Jones, L., & Fuller, B. (1997). The relation between leadership style and

empowerment on satisfaction of nurses . J Nurs Adm , 27-34.

Nanus, B. (1992). Visionary leadership: Creating a compelling sense of direction for you

organization. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Ori, E., & Roth, G. (2011). Principals' leadership and teachers' motivation: Self‐determination

theory analysis. Journal of Educational Administration , 256 - 275.

Penn, M., Romano, J. L., & Foat, D. (1988). The relationship between job satisfaction and

burnout: A study of human service professionals. Administration in mental health , 157-165 .

Peters, L., Bhagat, R., & O'Connor, E. (1981). An examination of the independent and joint

contribution of organizational commitment and job satisfaction on employee intention to quit.

Group and Organization Studies , 73-82.

Podsakoff, P., MacKenzie, S. B., & Bommer, W. H. (1996). Meta-analysis of the

relationships between Kerr and Jermier’s substitutes for leadership and employee job

attitudes, role perceptions, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology , 380-399.

Page | 37

PriceWaterhouseCoopers. (2014). Wat we samen kunnen en moeten doen. Eindhoven:

Pricewaterhouse.

Reilly, N. P. (1994). Exploring a paradox: Commitment as a moderator of the stressor

relationship. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, , 397-414.

Rome, K. (2000). The palliative effect of leadership agents on reactions to

workplacestressors. Dissertation Abstracts International , US:Univ Microfilms International.

Rotham, S., Diedericks, E., & Swart, J. (2013). Manager relations, psychological need

satisfaction and intention to leave in the agricultural sector. SA Journal of Industrial

Psychology/SA Tydskrif vir Bedryfsielkunde, , 39-50.

Rouleau, v., Fournier, P., Phili, A., & Dumont, A. (2012). The effects of midwives’ job

satisfaction on burnout, intention to quit and turnover: a longitudinal study in Senegal. Human

Resources for Health , 1-14.

Rowold, J., & Schlotz, W. (2009). Transformational and Transactional Leadership and

Followers’ Chronic Stress. Leadership Review , 35-48.

Saks, A. (1996). The relationship between the amount of helpfulness of entry training and

work outcomes. Human Relations , 429-51.

Saks, A. (1996). The relationship between the amount of helpfulness of entry training and

work outcomes. Human Relations , 429-51.

Sarros, J., & Santora, J. (2001). The transformational-transactional leadership model in

practice. Leadership and organization deverlopment journal , 393-393.

Sashkin, m. (1993). A New Vision of Leadership. Washington, DC: Journal of Management

Development.

Schaufeli, W., Bakker, A., & Rhenen, v. W. (2009). How changes in job demands and

resources predict burnout, work engagement, and sickness absenteeism. Journal of

Organizational Behavior , 893-917.

Schaufeli, W., Dierendonck, v. D., & Bakker, A. (2009). Burnout: prevalentie, risicogroepen

en risicofactoren. Utrecht: Schaufeli.

Shamir, B., Zakay, E., Brainin, E., & Popper, M. (2000). Leadership and social identification

in military units: Direct and indirect relationships. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 30 ,

612–640.

Shirom, A. (1989, 01 01). Burnout in work organizations. International Review of Industrial

and Organization Psychology , pp. 25-48.

Sosik, J. J., & Godshalk, V. M. (2000). Does Mentor-Protégé Agreement on Mentor

Leadership Behavior Influence the Quality of a Mentoring Relationship? Group &

Organization Management, , 291-317.

Page | 38

Stogdill, R. M. (1950). Leadership, membership and organization. Psychological Bulletin , 1-

14.

Stordeur, S., D’hoore, W., & Vandenberghe, C. (2001). Leadership, organizational stress, and

emotional exhaustion among hospital nursing. Journal of Advanced Nursing , 533-542.

Syrek, C., Apostel, E., & Antoni, C. (2013). Stress in highly demanding IT jobs:

transformational leadership moderates the impact of time pressure on exhaustion and work-

life balance. J Occup Health Psychol , 252-61.

Tett, R., & Meyer, J. (1993, 46). Job satisfaction, organizational commitment, turnover

intention and turnover: path analysis based on analytic findings. Personnel Psychology , pp.

259-93.

Tims, M., Bakker, A., & Xanthopou, D. (2011). Do transformational leaders enhance their

followers' daily. The Leadership Quarterly , 121–131.

Twigg, N., Fuller, J., & Hester, K. (2008). Transformational Leadership in Labor

Organizations: The Effects on Union Citizenship Behaviors. Journal of Labor Research , 27-

41.

Van Dick, R., Christ, O., Stellmacher, J., & Wagner. (2004). Should I stay or should I go?

Explaining turnover intentions with organizational identification and job satisfaction. British

Journal of Management , 351–360.

van Knippenberg, D., & van Schie, E. (2000). Foci and correlates of organizational

identification. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology , 137-147.

Van Knippenberg, D., Van Knippenberg, B., & Bobbio, A. (2007). Leaders as agents of

continuity. Rotterdam: Erasmus Universiteit.

Vera, D., & Crossan, M. (2004). Strategic leadership and organizational learning. Academy of

Management review , 222-240.

Weisberg, J. (1994). Measuring Workers′ Burnout and Intention to Leave. International

Journal of Manpower , 4 - 14.

Westley, F., & Mintzberg, H. (1989). Visionary leadership and strategic management.

Strategic management journal , 17-32.

Williams, E., Konrad, T., & Scheckler, W. (2001). Understanding physician intentions to

withdraw from practice: The role of job satisfaction, job stress, mental and physical health. .

Health Care Management Review , 7-19.

Yuk, G. (1999). An evaluation of conceptual weakness in transformational and charismatic

leadership theories. Leadership Quarterly , 285–305.

Yukl, G. (2009). Leading organizational learning: reflectrions on theory and research.

Leadership Quarterly , 49-53.

Page | 39

APPENDIX A

Likert scale TA/ TF leadership (all items are rated on a seven point Likert scale with anchors

1 = strongly disagree; 2 = moderately disagree; 3 = slightly disagree; 4 = neutral; 5 = slightly

agree; 6 = moderately agree; and 7 = strongly agree)

1. This manager provides others with assistance in exchange for their efforts

2. This manager re-examines critical assumptions to question whether they are

appropriate

3. This managers fails to interfere until problems become serious

4. This manager focus his attention on irregularities, mistakes, exceptions and deviations

from standards

5. This manager talks about his most important values and beliefs

6. This manager seeks differing perspectives when solving problems

7. This manager talks optimistic about the future

8. This managers instills pride in others for being associated with him

9. This manager discusses in specific terms who is responsible for achieving

performance targets

10. This managers wait for things to go wrong before taking action

11. This manager talks enthusiastically about what needs to be accomplished

12. This manager specifies the importance of having a strong sense of purpose

13. This manager spends time teaching and coaching

14. This manager makes clear what one can expect to receive when performance goals are

achieved

15. This manager shows that he/ she is a firm believe that “if it ain’t broken, don’t fix it”

16. This manager goes beyond self-interest for the good of the group

17. This manager treat others as individuals rather than just as a member of a group

18. This manager demonstrate that problems must become chronic before he takes action

19. This manager act in a way that build others’ respect for me

20. This manager concentrates his full attention on dealing with mistakes, complaints and

failures

21. This manager considers the moral and ethical consequences of decisions

22. This managers keeps track of all mistakes

Page | 40

23. This manager displays a sense of power and confidence

24. This manager articulates a compelling vision of the future

25. This manager directs my attention towards failures to meet standards

26. This manager considers me as an individual as having different needs, abilities and

aspirations from others

27. This manager get others to look at problems from many different angles

28. This manager helps others to develop their strengths

29. This manager suggests new ways of looking at how to complete assignment

30. This manager the importance of having a collective sense of mission

31. This manager expresses satisfaction when I meet expectations

32. This managers expresses confidence that goals will be achieved

Job demands (all items are rated on a seven point Likert scale with anchors 1 = strongly

disagree; 2 = moderately disagree; 3 = slightly disagree; 4 = neutral; 5 = slightly agree; 6 =

moderately agree; and 7 = strongly agree)

33. My work physically demands a lot of me

34. I get carried away when I’m working

35. The contact with people to whom I provide a service requires a lot of me

36. It is physically hard for me to get used to my working hours

37. My physical working conditions are good (think of the work climate, light, sound,

design of the workplace and the equipment)

38. I often think about leaving this organization

Intention to quit (all items are rated on a seven point Likert scale with anchors 1 = strongly

disagree; 2 = moderately disagree; 3 = slightly disagree; 4 = neutral; 5 = slightly agree; 6 =

moderately agree; and 7 = strongly agree)

39. I think a lot about leaving this organization

40. I am actively searching for an acceptable alternative to this organization

41. When I can, I will leave the organization.

Page | 41

Job resources (all items are rated on a seven point Likert scale with anchors 1 = strongly

disagree; 2 = moderately disagree; 3 = slightly disagree; 4 = neutral; 5 = slightly agree; 6 =

moderately agree; and 7 = strongly agree)

42. I get enough feedback about my performance

43. My performance are well rewarded

44. I can decide how I want to do my work

45. Only the board decides what everyone should do

46. The threat of losing my job is very low

47. My manager keeps distance from his / her employees

Burnout (all items are rated on a six point Likert scale with anchors 1: never, 2: once a year 3:

once a month 4: once a week 5: more than once a week 6:on a daily basis)

48. I feel mentally exhausted by my work

49. I doubt about the usefulness of my work

50. Working all day at my work is a heavy for me

51. I know how to manage with the problems in my work adequately

52. I feel 'burnt' due to my work

53. I notice that I have got too much space from my work

54. I'm not as enthusiastic as before about my work

55. I think I do my job well.

56. If I finish a task at work, this cheers me on

57. At the end of a working day I feel empty

58. I learned many valuable things with my work

59. I just want to do my job and not be further harassed

60. I feel tired when I get up in the morning and a new day of work

61. I have become cynical towards my work

62. In my work I’m self-confident

General questions

63. How many managers have you had during the change?

64. How many years have you been employed?

65. What is your function?

a. Assistant Manager

b. SA4

Page | 42

c. SA3

d. SA2

e. SA1

f. A2

g. A1

66. What is your gender?

a. Men

b. Woman

Page | 43

APPENDIX B

Table 7 ANOVAa

Model

Sum of

Squares df

Mean

Square F Sig.

1 Regression 737,08 1 737,08 28,97 ,000b

Residual 2595,14 102 25,44

Total 3332,22 103

2 Regression 999,93 2 499,97 21,65 ,000c

Residual 2332,29 101 23,09

Total 3332,22 103

3 Regression 1139,99 3 380,00 17,33 ,000d

Residual 2192,23 100 21,92

Total 3332,22 103

4 Regression 1238,11 4 309,53 14,63 ,000e

Residual 2094,11 99 21,15

Total 3332,22 103

a. Dependent Variable: Intentiontoquitsum

b. Predictors: (Constant), qtymangers

c. Predictors: (Constant), qtymangers, Transformsum

d. Predictors: (Constant), qtymangers, Transformsum, function

e. Predictors: (Constant), qtymangers, Transformsum, function, tenure

Page | 44

Table 8 ANOVAa

Model

Sum of

Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 11746,91 1 11746,91 194,394 ,000b

Residual 6163,70 102 60,43

Total 17910,62 103

2 Regression 12956,91 2 6478,45 132,09 ,000c

Residual 4953,71 101 49,05

Total 17910,62 103

3 Regression 13227,11 3 4409,04 94,14 ,000d

Residual 4683,51 100 46,84

Total 17910,62 103

4 Regression 13436,96 4 3359,24 74,34 ,000e

Residual 4473,65 99 45,19

Total 17910,62 103

a. Dependent Variable: Burnout2sum

b. Predictors: (Constant), Intentiontoquitsum

c. Predictors: (Constant), Intentiontoquitsum, Jobresourcesum

d. Predictors: (Constant), Intentiontoquitsum, Jobresourcesum, Transformsum

e. Predictors: (Constant), Intentiontoquitsum, Jobresourcesum, Transformsum, gender