Burnout and Job Satisfaction in Online Student Support Staff

Burnout and Job Satisfaction in Online Student Support Staff
A dissertation submitted
by
Lisa Marie Haas
to
Benedictine University
in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education
in
Higher Education and Organizational Change
Lisle, Illinois
Burnout and Job Satisfaction in Online Student Support
Staff
A dissertation submitted
by
Lisa Marie Haas
to
in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education
in
Higher Education and Organizational Change
This dissertation has been accepted for the faculty

of Benedictine University
____________________________ Eileen Kolich, Ph.D. __________

Dissertation Committee Director & Chair Date
____________________________ Cassandra Sheffield, Ed.D. ___________

Dissertation Committee Reader Date
____________________________ Seung Won Yoon, Ph.D. ________

Dissertation Committee Reader Date
____________________________ Sunil Chand, Ph.D. ________

Program Director, Faculty Date
____________________________ Ethel Ragland, Ed.D., M.N., R.N. ________

Dean, College of Education and Health Services Date
Copyright © by Lisa Marie Haas, 2015
All rights reserved.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my deepest gratitude to everyone who supported me
throughout my doctoral journey. First, I want to thank Dr. Kolich for guiding and
mentoring me throughout the program and through my dissertation. Her continuous
support, advice, and knowledge were an invaluable resource. I would not have made it to
this point without her being a great director and chair.
I also want to thank the rest of my committee for their guidance and direction
throughout my study. Dr. Sheffield would always send an encouraging e-mail at the right
time to help me focus on the big picture. Dr. Yoon provided me with the statistical
expertise that I needed to explore my topic successfully. I cannot say thank you enough.
My sincerest thanks also go out to Dr. Chand, the Benedictine University Higher
Education and Organizational Change faculty, and my classmates who assisted me on my
journey. Your experience, advice, and feedback greatly influenced me. I have learned to
embrace my progressive thinking instead of shy away from it. I appreciate the thought-
provoking discussions and the ways you challenged me so I could strengthen my
arguments. You would not let me settle for less than I was capable of achieving. You
inspired me to set challenging goals and to continue my leadership journey in higher
education.
Last, but not least, I want to thank my family for supporting me throughout my
education. I learned my work ethic from them and know that anything worth working for
requires sacrifice. My time with them was more limited during my studies. I am also
iv
very grateful for the encouragement from my mom to have my own career and to tackle
any obstacles in my way. Yes, Dad, I am finished with my education—at least for the
time being. While my Nana and Poppy are not around to see me finish, I know that I
would make you proud.
v
DEDICATION
This dissertation is dedicated to all higher education professionals who were ever
burned out due to caring too much about the success of students. Thank you for your
perseverance and service.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................ iv
List of Tables ...................................................................................................................... x
List of Figures .................................................................................................................... xi
Abstract ............................................................................................................................. xii
Chapter 1: Introduction ....................................................................................................... 1
Burnout, Job Satisfaction, and Online Education ......................................................... 1
Statement of the Problem .............................................................................................. 5
Purpose of the Study ..................................................................................................... 6
Research Questions ....................................................................................................... 6
Significance of Study .................................................................................................... 7
Definitions..................................................................................................................... 7
Limitations .................................................................................................................... 8
Delimitations ................................................................................................................. 8
Chapter 2: Literature Review .............................................................................................. 9
Burnout ......................................................................................................................... 9
Job Satisfaction ........................................................................................................... 16
Online Education ........................................................................................................ 23
Student Support Staff .................................................................................................. 25
Chapter 3: Methodology ................................................................................................... 31
Research Design.......................................................................................................... 31
Population and Sample ............................................................................................... 32
Instrumentation ........................................................................................................... 33
vii
Demographic Information ..................................................................................... 33
Maslach Burnout Inventory .................................................................................. 33
Job Satisfaction Survey ............................................................................................... 35
Data Collection ........................................................................................................... 37
Data Analysis .............................................................................................................. 38
Research Question 1 ............................................................................................. 38
Chapter 4: Findings ........................................................................................................... 41
Restatement of Purpose and Research Questions ....................................................... 41
Data Collection ........................................................................................................... 42
Demographics of Respondents ................................................................................... 43
Research Questions ..................................................................................................... 45
Summary ..................................................................................................................... 53
Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations ............................................................... 55
Summary ..................................................................................................................... 55
Conclusions ................................................................................................................. 57
viii
Implications for Practice ............................................................................................. 60
Recommendations for Future Research ...................................................................... 61
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 63
Appendix A Consent Form ............................................................................................... 78
Appendix B Demographic Information ............................................................................ 79
Maslach Burnout Inventory ........................................................................................ 80
Questions from the Maslach Burnout Inventory-Human Services Edition ................ 80
Job Satisfaction Survey ............................................................................................... 82
ix
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Instructions for Scoring the Job Satisfaction Survey .......................................... 36
Table 2. Norms for Higher Education in the United States .............................................. 37
Table 3. Ages of Participants ............................................................................................ 43
Table 4. Length of Time Worked at the Institution .......................................................... 44
Table 5. Highest Level of Education Participants Completed .......................................... 44
Table 6. Participants' MBI Scores ..................................................................................... 46
Table 7. Indication of Burnout per Category .................................................................... 46
Table 8. Participants Who Scored in a Burned Out Range ............................................... 47
Table 9. Functional Work Areas in the Burned-Out Group.............................................. 48
Table 10. Participants’ Job Satisfaction Scores ................................................................ 49
Table 11. Intercorrelations Between Burnout and Job Satisfaction .................................. 50
Table 12. Block-Entry Multiple Regression Analyses Predicting Job Satisfaction From
Demographic Information and Emotional Exhaustion, Depersonalization, and Inefficacy
........................................................................................................................................... 52
Table 13. Block-Entry Multiple Regression Coefficients Predicting Job Satisfaction From
Demographic Information and Emotional Exhaustion, Depersonalization, and Inefficacy
........................................................................................................................................... 53
x
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Student services web. ........................................................................................ 26
Figure 2. Relationship among technology, student affairs, and distance learners. ........... 30
xi
ABSTRACT
This study measured burnout and job satisfaction in online student support staff at higher
education institutions. Online education continues to grow, but the effects on staff
members have not been studied. Data were collected online and the Maslach Burnout
Inventory—Human Services Survey was used to measure burnout and its components
exhaustion, cynicism, and self-inefficacy; the Job Satisfaction Survey was used to
measure job satisfaction and nine facets of it; and a general demographics questionnaire
was used to gather background information. Burnout emerged as an emotional reaction,
while job satisfaction was an attitudinal response. The findings indicated that
approximately 57% of the participants showed indications of burnout and, in general, had
an ambivalent attitude toward job satisfaction. There was a strong relationship between
burnout and job satisfaction among the participants, and the strongest correlation was
among emotional exhaustion and job satisfaction. The Maslach Burnout Inventory
variables emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and inefficacy, when combined with
demographic variables, predicted about 60% of the variance of job satisfaction.
xii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Burnout, Job Satisfaction, and Online Education
Professional burnout can be devastating and can lead to negative consequences
for individuals and their employers, coworkers, customers, and families. Burnout can
occur in any organization and across industries, but it occurs most often in service
organizations such as in the medical and educational fields (Maslach, Jackson, & Leiter,
2010). Burnout is a major concern because most of the individuals who experience job
burnout work with others in various capacities. Burnout is a three-dimensional problem
involving emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment
(Maslach, Jackson, et al., 2001). People who experience burnout will start detaching
themselves from others and cannot give all their attention to their work, which can be
detrimental for the individual and for any customers or clients whom they serve.
When burnout occurs in higher education, students are often the ones who do not
receive the best advice and answers. When student support staff, such as academic and
financial aid advisors, become burned out, they cannot deliver the best service, which can
negatively affect their information or satisfaction levels. Psychologically and physically,
the support staff detach themselves from their situation as a coping method (Maslach et
al, 2001). Everyone suffers as a result.
Over the past five years, there has been more emphasis and pressure on higher
education. Government and organizational leaders are placing more importance on
retention, graduation, and completion rates, and President Obama made it a goal to
increase the number of college graduates in the United States, with a goal of becoming
the country with the most college graduates by 2020 (U.S. Department of Education,
1
2011). Online education is one method students choose to complete their education.
According to I. E. Allen and Seaman (2011), “Online courses are those in which at least
80 percent of the course content is delivered online” (p. 7). According to a study by the
Sloan Consortium, which tracks online education trends in the United States by surveying
all higher education institutions, more than 6.1 million students, or about 31% of the
students pursuing higher education in 2010, are taking at least one online course (I. E.
Allen & Seaman, 2011). This rate of increase exceeds the growth of enrollment in higher
education (I. E. Allen & Seaman, 2011). Online education had become part of the long-
term strategy for 65% of the institutions that participated in the study, and the percentage
has been increasing for several years (I. E. Allen & Seaman, 2011).
In online higher education, student support staff who serve students on a full-time
basis are critical to student success. Some agencies such as the Commission on Colleges:
Southern Association of Colleges and Schools make support staff and support services a
requirement for accreditation, as the online programs need to be similar to traditional
programs (Commission on Colleges of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools,
2010). Support staff provide students with the ancillary information they need tobe
successful in college such as planning classes, facilitating the financial aid process,
finding employment, and coaching students (Floyd & Casey-Powell, 2004). When staff
members are burned out, the quality of their work may be negatively affected. They
detach themselves from work and the students as a coping mechanism, which can
negatively affect the job satisfaction rate of employees and result in lower service and
higher turnover (Maslach & Leiter, 2008). If an institution or specific program has
limited staffing, one individual’s departure can put the service within the overall program
2
at risk (K. Betts, personal communication, July 16, 2012). Dalziel and Payne (2001)
noted, “Providing effective, efﬁcient online student services is an enormous challenge for
higher education administrators” (p. 5). When coupled with burnout, quality service can
be even harder to provide.
Christina Maslach is one of the leading researchers on professional burnout.
Through several studies, she has shown that people in service professions such as
education or health care (Maslach, Schaufeli, & Leiter, 2010) have higher tendencies to
burn out. Student support staff fall into this category. The researcher has witnessed the
burnout of several support staff members over the past 10 years working as both a
support staff member and as an administrator. The researcher also had the opportunity to
talk with advising administrators at other institutions who expressed similar experiences
with their employees. The trend is alarming, and with the increase in online education,
research is needed to explore the burnout and satisfaction of online student support staff.
Brewer and Clippard (2002) inquired into the school support staff at higher
education institutions. They believed that burnout is higher in these staff members
because of the depth and the amount of contact with students. In several institutions,
customers (students) expect quick responses (Maslach, 2003). As a result, the
environment increases the pressure on the employees and can cause burnout. The chronic
stress and environmental factors also can increase the risk of burnout. When it increases,
engagement decreases, which can also lead to lower job satisfaction (Maslach & Leiter,
2008).
Job satisfaction and engagement are important to many organizations within and
outside of higher education, as an engaged and happy staff is often more productive
3
(Vance, 2006). Researchers for organizations such as the Society for Human Resource
Management (SHRM) and Gallup regularly conduct research on job satisfaction and
engagement to look at trends (Mendes, 2011; SHRM, 2011; Vance, 2006). Organizations
also hire consultants and consulting firms to survey their employees on job satisfaction.
There may be a plethora of reasons behind the trend, including the desire to decrease
absenteeism and turnover or to increase the well-being of their employees (Vance, 2006).
No matter the reason, job satisfaction is important to higher education.
A difficult aspect of research on job satisfaction is that there is not one, concrete
definition or description. Most descriptions classify job satisfaction as the way
employees feel about their job (Spector, 1997). Each theory branches in different
directions from the others.
Spector (1997) described job satisfaction as a collection of feelings toward a job.
He measured satisfaction based on nine facets: pay, promotion, supervision, benefits,
contingent rewards, operating procedures, coworkers, nature of work, and
communication (Spector, 1997). Spector created the Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS) to
evaluate job satisfaction in human service positions, and the instrument has since been
validated and normed across different types of organizations.
One of the most widely accepted theories is Locke’s range of affect theory, which
considers job satisfaction as what one values in a job compared to what one has in a job
(Locke, 1976). The focus of Locke’s theory was the value of specific facets of what an
individual enjoys (Locke, 1976). This theory is vastly different from Herzberg’s two-
factor theory, which is also known as the motivator–hygiene theory. According to the
two-factor theory, certain aspects motivate an employee to do well such as the work and
4
responsibility, and other factors lead to dissatisfaction, including supervision and
organizational policy (Herzberg, Mausner, & Snyderman, 1959).
Approximately 71% of employees are disengaged or not completely engaged in
their work (Blacksmith & Harter, 2011). As a result, these employees leave
organizations, which can be costly (Blacksmith & Harter, 2011). According to Mendes
(2011), only 87.5% of employees are satisfied with their employment, which had lowered
due to the downturn in the economic situation in the United States. While the job
satisfaction of professors trended on the higher end of the job satisfaction scale despite
the recent recession, research on support staff is limited (Bozeman & Gaughan, 2011;
Jump, 2010).
Statement of the Problem
There are several studies on burnout or job satisfaction in higher education
(Bozeman & Gaughan, 2011; Brewer & Clippard, 2002; Guthrie, Woods, Cusker, &
Gregory, 2005; Love, Tatman, & Chapman, 2010; Perrakis, Galloway, Hayes, &
Robinson-Galdo, 2011). The researchers of these studies focused on faculty, students,
presidents, and other leadership positions. Other studies are qualitative, and the
researchers explored the perceptions of burnout (Gross, Kmeic, Worell, & Crosby, 2001;
Simpson, 2001; Zhang, DeMichele, & Connaughton, 2004). There have also been
several studies on how the online environment affects faculty members (McCann & Holt,
2009; McLawhon & Cutright, 2012; Saterlee, 2010). However, no one had linked
burnout and job satisfaction in online support staff at online higher education institutions.
Spector (1997) linked the two variables: “where job satisfaction is an attitudinal response,
5
burnout is more of an emotional response to the job” (p. 65). Research was needed on
online student support staff, focusing on the link between burnout and job satisfaction.
By using the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) to gauge the burnout of online
support staff and correlating it to job satisfaction measured by the JSS, higher education
leaders can address the problem of burnout for their institution and for individuals. This
study has the potential to benefit support staff and their well-being to increase the quality
of services students receive, which may lead to higher student retention, satisfaction, and
completion rates.
A survey to gather “attitudes, opinion, behaviors, or characteristics of the
population” (Creswell, 2008, p. 388) can be a useful step to understand better the
relationship between burnout and online staff members’ job satisfaction. Several
departments fall within the support staff realm, including Academic Advising, Career
Services, Student Accounts, Financial Aid, Registrar’s Office, Learning Center,
Academic Support, and Quality Assurance. The different departments mainly interact
with students and communication is completed at a distance.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to apply Maslach’s theory of burnout and examine
the relationship between perceived exhaustion, cynicism, and self-inefficacy and job
satisfaction according to the JSS in online student support staff in higher education
institutions located in the United States.
Research Questions
The research questions and hypotheses for the research study were as follows:
6
RQ1: To what extent does support staff feel burned out in an online higher
education environment?
RQ2: How satisfied are support staff members who work in an online higher
RQ3: What is the relationship between burnout and job satisfaction in online
support staff?
RQ4: How well does burnout predict job satisfaction in online student support
staff?
Significance of Study
As online education continues to grow, administrators need research to help guide
their staffing decisions. Very little research has been conducted on staff members at
online higher education institutions. As a result, this research can set the foundation for
burnout and job satisfaction in higher education. Specifically, this study can provide
leaders in higher education the information to reduce burnout and improve the job
satisfaction of their employees.
Definitions
Burnout: Burnout is a “prolonged response to chronic emotional and interpersonal
stressors on the job, and is defined by the three dimensions of exhaustion, cynicism, and
inefficacy” (Maslach et al., 2001, p. 397).
Engagement: Engagement is “an energetic state of involvement with personally
fulfilling activities that enhance one’s sense of professional efficacy” (Maslach & Leiter,
2008, p. 498).
7
Job satisfaction: Job satisfaction “is the extent to which people like (satisfaction)
or dislike (dissatisfaction) their jobs” (Spector, 1997, p. 2).
Student support staff: Student support staff “includes all personnel whose primary
responsibility is to support the academic program of students. It includes all pedagogical
support staff, as well as other professional support staff employed” (Organisation for
Economic Co-operation and Development, 2002, p. 12) in higher education institutions.
Limitations
This research study was limited to the student support staff at institutions located
in the United States. It was limited to the feelings toward burnout and job satisfaction at
one moment in time. These feelings may have changed over time or with any
interventions that the institutional leaders may have implemented to increase employee
morale. The study was also limited to the staff members who participated in the study.
Delimitations
The study included several delimitations. The researcher used a convenience
sample to collect data from a large number of participants during a 1-month period. As a
result, the participants did not represent all types of institutions or programs. The
researcher chose to solicit participants through social media, e-mail, and organizational
electronic mailing lists that were available. The results were also limited to the
measurements of the MBI and the JSS.
8
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
Burnout
Professional burnout occurs in many professionals, especially in the helping
professions. It is defined as “a prolonged response to chronic emotional and
interpersonal stressors on the job, and is defined by three dimensions of exhaustion,
cynicism, and inefficacy” (Maslach et al., 2001, p. 397). It can also be defined as
“overwhelming exhaustion, feelings of cynicism and detachment from the job, and a
sense of ineffectiveness and lack of accomplishment” (Maslach et al., 2001, p. 399).
Gorkin (n.d.) noted that a person who is burned out does not see the results, does not feel
adequately recognized for the work or rewarded properly, and does not see any end in
sight. Haddad (1998) noted that burnout makes employees irritable and increases apathy.
Historically, burnout has gone through many revisions and theories. In the 1960s,
people started gaining interest in burnout. The interest started with a pioneering phase,
where psychologists viewed burnout as emotional stress, and the coping strategies
included job identity (Maslach et al., 2001). Burnout was thought only to occur in social
services industries such as the medical field. In the pioneering phase, researchers found
that depersonalization occurred naturally in people who were burned out. It was a coping
strategy to help people distance themselves from the emotions of their jobs (Maslach et
al., 2001). In the helping professions, the constant negative feedback from clients made
this aspect worse.
After the pioneering phase, the empirical phase added new insights into
professional burnout. The revised theory added job fulfillment and commitment and their
effects on job turnover (Maslach et al., 2001). Around this time, psychologists were
9
starting to consider the psychological effects of job stress. They believed that only the
best and most idealistic employees ever experienced burnout after a long exposure to job
stressors (Maslach et al., 2001).
According to Maslach et al. (2001), psychologists also started to evaluate
situational factors, quantitative demands, and occupational characteristics and started to
look at the amount of workload that a person was supposed to accomplish and the
pressure that the person experienced daily. After this, the psychologists started to
evaluate job role and any conflicts within positions, which led them to investigate the
social support from coworkers and managers. They found that workers who did not have
support had fewer resources, which led to an increased burnout level.
No matter what theory anyone chooses, burnout has numerous negative effects on
individuals. The negative effects include job withdrawal, lower productivity,
absenteeism, tardiness, and employee turnover (Maslach et al., 2001). It also has
negative effects on one’s health, including increased stress, depression, and
gastrointestinal problems (Maslach et al., 2001).
According to recent studies, burnout is more likely to occur for people who fit
into a combination of demographic characteristics, including age, marital status,
educational level, and personality type (Cordes & Dougherty, 1993; Lee & Ashforth,
1996; Maslach et al., 2001). Employees who are in their 20s, are single, and have at least
a baccalaureate degree are more likely to get burned out because they want to do well and
have fewer obligations outside of the professional environment (Maslach et al., 2001).
Furthermore, these employees are more at risk to burn out if they have a Type A
personality, which indicates that they like to be in control and strive for perfectionism
10
(Maslach et al., 2001). Employees are also more likely to burn out if they are newcomers
to an organization or in their career (Dunford, Shipp, Boss, Angermeier, & Boss, 2012;
Tull 2006). Tull (2006) noted, “The culture of an organization, particularly in higher
education, has the potential to influence a new professional’s retention” (p. 465) and
burnout rates.
Personality may also play a role in burnout. Swider and Zimmerman (2010) have
explored the five personality traits and their relationship to burnout: neuroticism,
extraversion, agreeableness, openness, and conscientiousness. Neurotic individuals show
signs of being depressed, fearful, insecure, anxious, and nervous (Digman, 1990). They
often see the negative side of situations, which manifests in depersonalization (Swider &
Zimmerman, 2010). Extroverts are less likely to burn out compared to introverts due to
their optimism and hopefulness in situations (Layman & Guyden, 1997; Swider &
Zimmerman, 2010). People who are open tend to have lower levels of exhaustion and
depersonalization and higher levels of efficacy by working positively through ambiguity
(Swider & Zimmerman, 2010). Conscientious individuals typically have a strong work
ethic, persevere throughout obstacles, and are goal-orientated; as a result, they have lower
levels of burnout, since they do not detach themselves from the situation (Swider &
Zimmerman, 2010).
All past research and demographics have led to the newest theories on burnout.
Maslach’s theory has three phases and six dimensions to address professional burnout.
The three phases are exhaustion, cynicism, and inefficacy (Maslach et al., 2001; Angerer,
2003).
11
The first stage of burnout is exhaustion. This stage includes constant fatigue from
stressors in the workplace. Angerer (2003) indicated that multitasking has become
normal, which increases the amount of work that employees are expected to perform.
Multitasking also adds to the exhaustion phase because employees cannot complete the
required amount of work within the time allotted. Maslach (2003) stated that exhaustion
is the first outward symptom of too much stress in the professional environment.
Employees also feel that recovery is impossible. This starts the cycle of burnout.
When employees reach the second phase or the cynicism phase, they start to
detach themselves from the work environment. As noted in previous studies, this is the
body’s natural defense to burnout (Maslach et al., 2001). A person detaches from clients
or the work environment as a way to eliminate some of the chronic stressors. Most
employees do not realize that they are acting this way. After employees reach this phase,
they usually share their negative thoughts and actions with others. This can be
contagious to other employees who may start to feel burned out as well (Maslach et al.,
2001).
The third and final stage of Maslach’s theory of burnout is inefficacy. When
employees are in this phase, they are dissatisfied with their job and with their enjoyment
of it. The employees also suffer from a decrease in productivity (Maslach et al., 2001).
At this stage, if an intervention is not provided, employees will start to look for another
job. The only way to overcome burnout at this stage is to increase engagement, as
discussed later in the literature review (Maslach et al., 2001).
12
Along with the stages of professional burnout, six dimensions are the underlying
causes of burnout. Although there are six dimensions, it only takes imbalance in one or
two aspects for an employee to become burned out.
The first two dimensions include workload and control. If employees have too
much to do within their scheduled workday hours, they begin to feel that they cannot
accomplish anything. If employees feel that there is no end to the work, recovery
becomes impossible (Maslach et al., 2001). Technology has increased workloads, as
customers expect very quick turnarounds with e-mail and other forms of technology
(Leiter & Maslach, 2001). In higher education, this expectation is no different from
students or parents as the customer. The workload can be, and often is, the start of
burnout. The next area that often accompanies workload is control. Employees prefer to
make decisions about their work and the way they perform it. When employees feel they
have lost control, and their managers have more control, the employees lose balance.
Focus starts shifting away from individuals and onto teams, which results in a greater
need for organization and coordination, which can decrease the control individuals have
over their work (Leiter & Maslach, 2001). Additional factors such as operations and
technology have also decreased an individual’s control (Leiter & Maslach, 2001). When
employees have less control of their work, their chances of burnout increase.
The next two areas of professional burnout are reward and fairness. Employees
want to be rewarded fairly for their work. It varies for each individual, but a fair reward
usually includes fair pay, recognition from managers and peers, and any other benefits of
the profession (Maslach et al., 2001). A fast-paced environment can take away from the
time to enjoy personal rewards in the workplace (Leiter & Maslach, 2001). If this area is
13
out of balance, employees usually have a lower job satisfaction rate. If employees do not
feel that they are treated fairly, they will have an increased rate of cynicism. Employees
may feel that they are treated unfairly if other employees are treated better than they are
or if they feel they are being singled out in a negative way. The intense pace in work
environments increases the intensity of fairness; if an individual feels that the
environment is not fair, those feelings will create an “intense emotional impact” (Leiter &
Maslach, 2001, p. 50) for the individual, which will lead to burnout.
The last two areas include community and values. If employees feel that their
values do not match the values of an organization, or if they feel the services or products
are unethical, the employees will be more cynical and will start to detach from their work
(Maslach, Schaufeli, & Jackson, 2001). Technology has increased the pace of work and
can result in people losing their connection to their work (Leiter & Maslach, 2001).
Employees are also expected to increase their productivity, which can lead to a
compromise in their values (Leiter & Maslach, 2001).
The final area of burnout is community. Employees need to feel that they have a
social network at work with coworkers or management. If employees feel that there is no
one to talk to, they are more likely to feel exhausted. However, this area may also be
unbalanced if an employee is already burned out. The sense of community has increased
due to technology. Virtual communities such as Facebook and LinkedIn can increase a
sense of belonging but can compromise the connection with people locally (Leiter &
Maslach, 2001). Detachment from work will cause an employee to lose touch with the
local community.
14
After investigating and researching burnout for many years, Maslach and Jackson
created the MBI in 1976 (Maslach, Jackson, et al., 2001). The survey includes 22
questions relating to the three dimensions and six areas of burnout. The survey includes a
5-point Likert-type scale with ratings ranging from never to almost always (Maslach,
Jackson, et al., 2001). The survey underwent three revisions between 1976 and 2015.
There are also three different inventories. The first and original survey addressed burnout
in social service organizations such as in the medical industry. The second survey is the
Educational Survey, designed for professionals in education. The third inventory is
general and addresses burnout in any other industry (Maslach, Jackson, et al., 2001).
An individual dealing with burnout, like someone suffering from any negative,
long-term experience, needs to cope with the situation. Over the years, many suggestions
have emerged for coping with professional burnout. However, no longitudinal studies
have dealt with coping strategies for burnout. Almost all current coping strategies
include working with an individual on stress management or with the exhaustion phase of
burnout (Maslach et al., 2001). Almost none of the coping techniques have dealt with the
cynicism or inefficacy phases of burnout. The most effective coping strategy is working
individually with a burned out employee to cope with individual factors and to see what
management may be able to change about the working conditions.
The newest strategy is to engage employees in their position. According to
Maslach (2003), engagement is the “antithesis of burnout” (p. 190), as it includes creating
energy for work, involvement in the position and with the work, and increasing
effectiveness. Each company can work with individuals experiencing burnout by
15
combining educational resources, changes in the job environment, and managerial styles
(Maslach et al., 2001).
Job Satisfaction
Job satisfaction refers to the way employees feel about their jobs (Spector, 1997),
which can lead to employee behavior that affects organizational performance. Job
satisfaction has been assessed and researched for years and is often measured through
questionnaires (Spector, 1997). There is a plethora of research and differing perspectives
on job satisfaction.
Every few years, organizations and associations such as the Gallup Organization
survey American workers to see how they feel about their jobs (Spector, 1997). Like
burnout, job satisfaction is multidimensional. Some of the common facets include
“appreciation, communication, co-workers, fringe benefits, job conditions, nature of work
itself, organization itself, organizational policies and procedures, pay, personal growth,
promotion opportunities, recognition, security, supervision” (Spector, 1997, p. 3).
From a business or educational perspective, employees’ job satisfaction can affect
business goals. As a result, human resources staff and other organizational leaders study
job satisfaction. The Society of Human Resource Management (SHRM) conducts
periodic assessments of employees’ job satisfaction. SHRM (2011) reported, “The best-
performing employers know that taking their employees’ pulse and linking it to their
business goals will help companies succeed and put them at a competitive advantage” (p.
3).
A well-known job satisfaction theory is Locke’s theory of affectiveness, which
divides job satisfaction into four categories: rewards, other people, nature of work, and
16
organizational context. Locke noted, “Job satisfaction results from the perception that
one’s job fulfills or allows the fulfillment of one’s important job values” (as cited in
Henne & Locke, 1985, p. 222). According to Henne and Locke (1985), people want
fairness in regard to pay, to earn enough money to cover expenses, clarity, and
availability for promotions. They also want to work in a convenient and safe
environment (Henne & Locke, 1985).
According to the job characteristics theory, the “content and nature of job tasks
themselves” (Spector, 1997, p. 31) can lead to an increase or decrease in job satisfaction.
This knowledge led Herzberg (1974) to the theory that job design is one way to increase
job satisfaction. Hackman and Oldham (1976) found that people who have intrinsic
motivation are more likely to do the job well. This theory can also be traced back to the
Hawthorne studies when paying attention to employees caused them to perform better
(Spector, 1997). However, in 2010, only 53% of the population stated the work itself is
an important factor in their job satisfaction (SHRM, 2011).
The job characteristic theory shows that there are five characteristics of any job:
skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, and job feedback (Spector, 1997).
The five characteristics cause three psychological states: meaningfulness of work,
responsibility, and knowledge of results of products (Hackman & Oldham, 1976). If all
three are met, an employee will be motivated to perform well. It also states that people
who prefer a challenge in their work will be happier in jobs that are more complex. This
theory was developed into the Job Descriptive Survey (Spector, 1997).
Herzberg offered another perspective of job satisfaction. Herzberg divided
factors into two groups: motivators and hygiene factors. Motivators describe the work
17
itself and lead to high job satisfaction (Herzberg, 1974). Motivators include
“achievement, recognition for achievement, interesting work, increased responsibility,
growth, and advancement” (Herzberg, 1974, p. 18). Contrarily, hygiene factors describe
the work context and when not present lead to job dissatisfaction; they describe how well
people are treated (Herzberg, 1974). Hygiene factors include “[company] policy and
administration practices, supervision, interpersonal relationships, working conditions,
salary, status, and security” (Herzberg, 1974, p. 18).
People in the United States are typically happy with the nature of the work that
they do, but are not satisfied with the rewards and pay (Spector, 1997). According to
SHRM (2011), 83% of U.S. employees are satisfied with their jobs. About 41% said that
they were very satisfied, and 42% said that they were somewhat satisfied. This is a
downward trend since 2009 (SHRM, 2011). Many employees rated the ability to use
their skills and abilities as one of the top reasons for their job satisfaction (SHRM, 2011).
Age is another demographic feature that may influence job satisfaction.
Generally, job satisfaction increases with age, which may be due to changed expectations
(Spector, 1997). According to SHRM (2011), employees over 67 were more likely to be
very satisfied than younger employees. Wright and Hamilton (1978) assumed that the
expectations become lower as a person ages, or older workers have better jobs and are
more skilled than their younger counterparts are.
Different countries have different levels of job satisfaction, which shows that
culture can influence job satisfaction. For example, Japan has lower job satisfaction than
the United States, and the Dominican Republic has a higher overall satisfaction (Spector,
1997). The differences fall within the different facets of job satisfaction. The United
18
States falls lower with pay and promotion. Spector (1997) noted, “Americans tend to
believe they should advance at work. When they do not, they are likely to be dissatisfied
with promotion opportunities” (p. 24). SHRM found the same information. Employees
who are under 30 or who are in middle-level management have the expectation that
promotional opportunities will be available to them (SHRM, 2011). The promotion or
lack of promotions affects their job satisfaction. People in the United States also feel that
pay is in the top five characteristics that lead to their job satisfaction (SHRM, 2011).
According to SHRM (2011), the direct supervisor rates among the top five
reasons for job satisfaction. It ranks higher than benefits and compensation (SHRM,
2011). Nearly three fourths of employees were satisfied with this aspect (SHRM, 2011).
Several antecedents may influence job satisfaction. In 2010, employees viewed job
security as the most important facet of their job satisfaction (SHRM, 2011). The
weakened economy or the aging population may influence this phenomenon. The
economy affects job turnover, which is a consequence of job satisfaction. Job turnover
and job satisfaction are highly correlated at a time when unemployment is low and less
correlated during times of higher unemployment (Spector, 1997).
Organizational constraints can also be antecedents to job satisfaction. There have
been higher relationships between job constraints, job performance, and job satisfaction
(Spector, 1997). Some of these aspects include the budget, tools, supervisors, training,
and work environment (Spector, 1997). The employee workload may also be an
antecedent for job satisfaction. Both quantitative and qualitative work may have an
impact, as well as the control that employees have on their day-to-day work functions.
Control can range from being able to make decisions to autonomy (Spector, 1997).
19
Role ambiguity and conflict can also affect job satisfaction (Singh, Goolsby, &
Rhoads, 1994; Spector, 1997). Role ambiguity means that individuals are unsure of the
demands of their supervisor (Spector, 1997). Role conflict occurs when there are
competing demands upon an employee (Spector, 1997). Conflict can also occur between
competing obligations such as work and family. These types of uncertainty can decrease
job satisfaction. Other items may increase job satisfaction such as flexible scheduling
(Thomas & Ganster, 1995). Pay did not have as large an influence on job satisfaction as
fairness in pay did (Henne & Locke, 1985; Spector, 1997).
Job stress can negatively influence job satisfaction. Job stressors are items that
require the employee to adapt (Jex & Beehr, 1991). For example, customers yelling at an
employee can cause long-term job dissatisfaction. Job strain is a response to a job
stressor, which manifests in behavioral reactions such as quitting a job, physical reactions
such as health concerns, or psychological reactions such as frustration (Jex & Beehr,
1991).
Staw and Ross (1985) indicated that job satisfaction is partly due to personality.
The locus of control is one of the determinates of satisfaction, which is how individuals
feel about various sectors of their life. Some people also have negative affectivity if they
tend to feel depressed and have negative emotions in other areas of their life, they may
also have lower job satisfaction. There is also person–job fit, where employees will be
less satisfied if they do not want or like some aspect of their job (Staw & Ross, 1985).
One of the potential effects of job satisfaction is organizational citizenship
behavior, which is a “behavior by an employee intended to help coworkers or the
organization” (Spector, 1997, p. 57). A few examples are being on time, wanting to
20
improve things, and helping others. Job satisfaction can increase organizational
citizenship behavior, which most supervisors do not tie into performance (Spector, 1997).
Another effect is hostility. When job satisfaction is low, hostility is increased (Chen &
Spector, 1992).
Job satisfaction is also related to burnout. The difference is that job satisfaction is
an attitudinal response and burnout is an emotional response. Spector (1997) noted,
“Burnout correlates significantly with job satisfaction in that dissatisfied employees are
likely to report high levels of burnout” (p. 66). Lee and Ashforth (1993) also found
stronger relationships between job satisfaction and emotional exhaustion than with
personalization.
Henne and Locke (1976) noted that employees can increase their satisfaction by
changing the way that they think about the job. It is possible that an individual has
misinterpreted a situation such as a disagreement with a manager, and it affected their
satisfaction towards their job. An employee would also be able to change job values for a
situation, which might lead to an increase in job satisfaction.
There are several different questionnaires to assess job satisfaction. Some are
based on different facets of job satisfaction, and others are based on overall job
satisfaction. There are positives and negatives about using the different scales.
The most common assessment is the Job Descriptive Index, which has 72
questions that assess five facets of job satisfaction: work, pay, promotion, supervision,
and coworkers (Spector, 1997). The scale lists a variety of adjectives about aspects of the
job, and the participants say if the word describes their job or not. The scale does not rate
21
job satisfaction overall but only individual aspects (Bowling Green State University,
1997).
The JSS is a survey that assesses nine different facets of job satisfaction and
measures more facets than the Job Descriptive Index (Spector, 1997). The facets are pay,
promotion, supervision, fringe benefits, contingent rewards, operating conditions,
coworkers, nature of work, and communication (Spector, 1997). Spector (1985) designed
it to evaluate job satisfaction in human services personnel, as other questionnaires were
not specific to that industry.
The Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire assesses 20 facets of job satisfaction.
The facets include “achievement, activity, advancement, authority, compensation,
creativity, security, social service, moral values, supervision, and variety” (University of
Minnesota Department of Psychology, n.d.). There is a long and a short version of the
scale. The long version has 100 questions with five questions for each facet. The shorter
version only has 20 questions (Spector, 1997). The negative to this scale is that the
different facets are highly correlated, which means that several of the questions assess the
same thing (Spector, 1997).
The Job Diagnostic Survey is another assessment that focuses more on the human
side of job satisfaction. The focus of the survey is on the nature of the job and the task,
the person’s motivation, personality, and psychological states (Spector, 1997). The Jobs
in General Assessment focuses on satisfaction overall. It does not focus on specific
facets within the survey.
22
Online Education
Online education has become a large influencing factor in higher education. It
was expected to be the largest form of education by 2015 (Ambient Insight, 2010).
Although online education is new, distance education is not. According to the U.S.
Distance Learning Association (2012), distance learning is “the acquisition of knowledge
and skills through mediated information and instruction, encompassing all technologies
and other forms of learning at a distance” (para. 3). Online education falls into this
category and is only one medium for delivering online education. In 2008,
approximately 4,277,000 people in the United States had taken at least one online course
(National Center for Education Statistics, 2011). This trend will continue as more
students advance their education, as online programs offer convenience, flexibility, and
access to postsecondary classes while not interfering with one’s outside obligations and
responsibilities (Taylor & Holley, 2009).
Distance learning in higher education took root in the 1800s as correspondence
classes and then television classes (Perry & Pilati, 2011). By the mid-1990s, distance
learning transformed into online learning. In 2002, approximately 1.6 million students
were enrolled in online courses, and this number tripled by 2008 (I. E. Allen & Seaman,
2010). Online learning offers several benefits that correspondence classes could not
offer, such as synchronous and asynchronous communications across different platforms
to bridge any gaps in the time zone (Perry & Pilati, 2011). Technology is continuing to
transform online learning. Part of the appeal for students is they can take courses when
they normally would not be able to attend in person (Perry & Pilati, 2011).
Administrators tend to like online learning because it can be cost effective if done
23
correctly (Perry & Pilati, 2011). To increase the success, online institutions should use a
business model instead of an education model (Cox, 2009).
Since 2012, the students taking online courses have been from different
generations. About 47% of students who take online courses are traditional-aged
students (18 to 25 years old), and 47% are non-traditional-aged students (Instructional
Technology Council, 2012). The students will need a variety of resources to be
successful in the environment, such as technology support (Hornak, Akweks, & Jeffs,
2010). The support that one student needs will be different from the support another
student needs.
Due to the self-directed nature of the online environment, attrition levels are 10-
20% higher than in traditional classrooms (Perry & Pilati, 2011). Nash (2005) found that
the main reason students stop attending online courses is time management. A few other
reasons include the classes being too difficult, not being able to get the help when they
needed it, or taking on too much (Nash, 2005). Other studies have reported that the lack
of family support, increased job demands, and curriculum relevance may be reasons why
students leave classes (Martinez, 2003; Park & Choi, 2009).
Students still need collaboration and support while taking online courses, since
satisfaction is also lower in an online environment compared to a face-to-face
environment (Hiltz, Coppola, Rotter, Toroff, & Benbunan-Fich, 2000; Levy, 2005). To
increase retention, institutions need to increase student satisfaction levels (M. Allen et al.,
2002). One of the main reasons for lowered satisfaction is the feeling of isolation and the
lack of a sense of belonging to institution, which may stem from the physical void of
attending a campus (Alston et al., 2005; Buchanan, Myers, & Hardin, 2005; Owens,
24
Hardcastle, & Richardson, 2009). Song, Singleton, Hill, and Koh (2004) found that 71%
of students who were not as satisfied with online learning felt a lack of community
support. Learners need to feel like they are part of a community and part of the
classroom, which will increase their engagement at the institution (Perry & Pilati, 2011).
Some of these resources include advising, library services, and areas for social activity,
such as learning communities (Angelino, Williams, & Natvig, 2007).
One way to prevent attrition in online environments is to provide the right
services, which student support staff often run. According to Hughes (as cited in
Angelino et al., 2007),
Information that should be available for students includes assessments,

educational counseling, administrative process such as registration, technical
support, study skills assistance, career counseling, library services, students’
rights and responsibilities, and governance. In order to maximize participation in
student government, all meetings should be available in electronic format in an
effort to engage distance learners. (p. 8)
Student retention is important for universities, as it is less expensive to retain a student
than to replace a student (Hu, 2012). Accrediting bodies, such as the Western
Association of Schools and Colleges and the Accrediting Council of Independent
Colleges and Schools, are also looking at student retention as one of the factors for
accreditation (Accrediting Council of Independent Colleges and Schools, 2010; Fain,
2012; Western Association of Schools and Colleges, 2012). One of the ways to improve
retention is to increase involvement with the help of student support staff.
Student Support Staff
According to the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education
Cooperative for Educational Technologies (WCET, 2002), student services in an online
environment are all about the people. Students expect the same level and quality of
25
services as students who attend a traditional campus. Taylor and Holley (2009) noted,
“Effective student affairs practice in an online environment is oriented toward facilitating
student learning rather than simple service delivery” (p. 82). Additionally, a university
cannot achieve full student success in an online environment until student services are
fully implemented (WCET, 2002). Student support services, student services, and
student support staff are phrases used interchangeably and may mean something different
to each campus. Figure 1 shows what student services may look like for an online
student (WCET, 2002). A few of the departments that students regularly interact with are
advising, registrar, technical support, placement services, and the library (Pullan, 2010;
WCET, 2002).
Figure 1. Student services web. From “Guidelines for Creating Student Services Online”
(p. 3), by Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education Cooperative for
Educational Technologies, 2002, http://www.acswasc.org/pdf_general/WASC
_CriteriaSamplePrompts_Cat_C.pdf. Copyright 2002 by WCET.
26
Students who take online classes typically expect just-in-time services to get the
information that they want or need when they want it (Pullan, 2010; WCET, 2002). They
also want customized and personalized services to meet their needs (Cain, Marrara, Pitre,
& Armour, 2003; Shea, 2005). In 2009, Taylor and Holley found that students taking
online programs desired student support throughout their program. According to Astin
(1999), “The amount of student learning and personal development associated with any
educational program is directly proportional to the quality and quantity of student
involvement in that program” (p. 519). The student services that students receive directly
affects their success, as students are involved in the process.
Student support staff is critical to the student learning process. They help students
grow emotionally, personally, and cognitively while supporting the mission of the college
or university (Sandeen & Barr, 2006). The staff also fulfill the need for academic and
psychosocial support that students in online programs need, as the students feel isolated
(Cain et al., 2003). As distance learning grows, student services staff members are
becoming generalists in the institution, as students want a single point of contact (Hirt,
Cain, Bryant, & Williams, 2003; Schwitzer, Horton-Parker, & Jurgens, 2002). They are
also the link between the students, the faculty, other departments, and institutional leaders
(Hu, 2012; Schwitzer et al., 2002).
In 2011, a survey of colleges showed that student services is one area where
colleges have decreased services (Instructional Technology Council, 2012). Hu (2012)
noted, “At many universities, funding cuts, shrinking recruitment budgets, added
responsibilities and growing technology . . . have made their jobs increasingly
challenging” (p. 18). University leaders are trying to budget wisely with the funding that
27
they have. The area that college administrators find most challenging is how to provide
the best services for students taking classes online (Instructional Technology Council,
2012).
Support services are also becoming more important because regional accrediting
bodies are requiring distance learning programs to provide services equal to their on-
campus counterparts (Chau, 2012; Dare, Zapata, & Thomas, 2005). However, higher
education professionals are starting to find that equal services do not provide the same
level of support; therefore, the programs need to be designed for distance learners issues
and concerns (Dare et al., 2005).
Student support staff are directly responsible for student satisfaction from the time
students inquire about a program through graduation. The recruitment or enrollment
teams are the “gatekeepers of incoming” (Hu, 2012, p. 18) students heading up the
communication between the student and the university and between university
departments. Student support departments are also blending online programs to provide
the best support for learners. Enrollment services often include admissions, financial aid,
and registration, as distance learners do not want to talk to many different departments
(Hirt et al., 2003; Shea, 2005).
Student support services in an online environment can be stressful. Students want
services synchronously and asynchronously (Pullan, 2010). They also expect immediate
responses. Pullan (2010) stated, “Given the demand and the response, it is apparent that
education is becoming a commodity, and students are the consumers” (p. 242). This
phenomenon puts extra stress on student support staff to respond to e-mails quickly while
still providing a high-touch service so students feel as if they are connected to the
28
institution (Dare et al., 2005; SchWeber, 2008; Schwitzer et al., 2002). E-mail, social
media, and message boards are replacing face-to-face interaction; they are the standard in
distance education (National Center on Disability and Access to Education, 2007). The
staff members may also work varied hours, as students who attend classes online have
many responsibilities, live in various time zones, and are not always available during the
day (Cain et al., 2003). The staff members are also constantly multitasking, prioritizing,
and communicating to different constituents (Schwitzer et al., 2002). The fast-paced
environment can lead to added stress and burnout (Leiter & Maslach, 2001).
Shea (2005) outlined that student services in an online environment need to meet
student expectations. Students want on-demand services personalized for them, which
include the right messaging at the right time (Shea, 2005). They also want two-way
communication in multiple modalities. If the students are from a low socioeconomic
background, they may have additional needs, as they are more likely to be academically
unprepared for higher education, and they are more likely to succeed with extra guidance
and support from a community of their peers and support from the institution (Engstrom
& Tinto, 2008). One way to achieve this extra support is through learning communities
based on particular subjects by combining social integration with tutoring (Angelino et
al., 2007; Muilenburg & Berge, 2005).
In general, there is a lack of research on student affairs and student support
services in online and distance education (Dare et al., 2005). As shown in Figure 2, the
relationship between student affairs, distance education, and technology is still evolving.
29
Figure 1. Relationship among technology, student affairs, and distance learners. From
“Assessing the Needs of Distance Learners: A Student Affairs Perspective” by L. A.
Dare, L. P. Zapata, and A. G. Thomas, 2005, New Directions for Student Service,
2005(112), p. 40.. Copyright 2005 by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Student support services can increase enrollment, decrease attrition, and provide
for a holistic educational experience (LaPadula, 2005). As a result, more research is
needed on student support services in distance education, as it can improve student
learning and increase graduation rates.
30
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY
Research Design
The Maslach theory of burnout predicts that employees burn out due to several
factors with symptoms of exhaustion, depersonalization, and self-inefficacy, which leads
to disengagement in the workplace. As a result, employees may have lowered job
satisfaction in one category or with overall job satisfaction. Burnout and job satisfaction
have been studied in higher education and student support staff. However, no researchers
have shown how burnout or job satisfaction is correlated for student support staff who
work in an online environment. As online education continues to grow, it is important
that there is research to better support employees.
For this study, the research questions were as follows:
RQ1: To what extent do support staff feel burned out in an online higher
support staff?
staff?
To answer the research questions, this study included the correlational research
design with a survey as a data collection tool. As Creswell (2009) noted, “Survey
research provides a quantitative or numeric description of trends, attitudes, or opinions of
31
a population by studying a sample of that population. From the sample results, the
research generalizes or makes claims about the population” (p. 145).
The selected design was beneficial for several reasons. First, this study included
validated and reliable survey instruments: the MBI and the JSS. The study included a
cross-sectional, convenience sampling described in more detail later in this chapter.
This study used the Mind Garden Transform system to administer the survey and
to collect results online. Mind Garden is the company that owns the rights to the MBI—
Human Services Survey (HSS). There were several convenience factors, such as
automatic scoring for the MBI-HSS to avoid error. The system also protected the privacy
of the participants, as no personally identifying information was collected.
Population and Sample
For this study, participants primarily worked with students who were taking
online courses. The study included a cross-sectional sample of participants from two
institutions.
The goal was to collect at least 100 completed surveys. There is not a typical
response rate for online questionnaires. In recent years, response rates for online surveys
have been higher than paper-based surveys (Greenlaw & Brown-Welty, 2009; Kiernan,
Kiernan, Oyler, & Gilles, 2005). Online surveys reach a larger number of people in a
short amount of time. As of 2012, about 85% of Americans used the Internet and about
91% of those checked e-mail regularly (Pew Internet & American Life Project, 2012).
The aim of this study was to reach a large demographic of participants, so the online
survey was the best option for this type of research. The researcher sent the questionnaire
32
to different organizational electronic mailing lists such as the Distance Educational group
of the National Academic Advising Association and on social media.
Instrumentation
The survey was divided into three aspects. The first portion contained the MBI-
HSS, which was used to measure burnout. The second portion contained the JSS, which
measured job satisfaction. The third portion contained demographic questions.
Demographic Information
This study obtained demographic information by looking at contributing factors
of burnout and job satisfaction. Past studies reported that gender, age, and marital status
have larger correlations with burnout, whereas salary, age, and nationality have larger
correlations with job satisfaction (Spector, 1997). This study also asked for the main
service area of the employee. The researcher included a question to find out the length of
time the participant had been at the institution and the highest education level for
correlational and tracking purposes.
Maslach Burnout Inventory
As shown in Chapter 2, the MBI is the leading instrument to measure and assess
burnout in a variety of industries. This study used the MBI-HSS, as it was designed for
human services positions. The MBI-HSS has been validated and is reliable across several
subgroups, including postsecondary education (Maslach, Jackson, & Leiter, 2010). This
survey instrument was the most appropriate for this study, as this study looked at student
support staff, which was a human services field. It also complemented the JSS well since
both were designed for human services employees.
33
The MBI-HSS consisted of 22 statements that measured the subareas of burnout
including emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment (self-
efficacy) and the overall levels of burnout. The questions on the MBI-HSS asked about
feelings an employee had at work such as feeling depressed or that he/she felt worthwhile
at work (Maslach et al., 2010). The scale ranged from “0” meaning the participant never
felt that specific way to “6” that he/she felt that way every day (Maslach et al., 2010).
There were nine items to measure emotional exhaustion, five items to measure
depersonalization, and eight items to assess personal accomplishment (Maslach et al.,
2010). Burnout was categorized as scoring high on the emotional exhaustion and
depersonalizations subscales and low on the personal accomplishment subscale (Maslach
et al., 2010). The high range was considered to be in the top third of the range, normative
is the middle third, and low is the bottom third of the ranges (Maslach et al., 2010).
Several studies have shown the reliability and validity of the MBI-HSS.
“Internal consistency was estimated by Cronbach’s coefficient alpha from more than one
thousand respondents. The reliability coefficients for the subscales were the following:
.90 for Emotional Exhaustion, .79 for Depersonalization, and .71 for Personal
Accomplishment” (Maslach et al., 2010, p. 12). Nunnally (1978) stated that anything
above .7 is acceptable. Cortina (1993) suggests that any scale with more than 14 items
was reliable at .7. The test-retest also showed reliability significance (Maslach et al.,
2010).
The MBI-HSS has been validated in several ways. First, the scores were
“correlated with behavioral ratings made independently by a person who knew the
individual well” (Maslach et al., 2010, p. 12). It was also validated through the presence
34
of certain job characteristics and outcomes, such as emotional attitudes toward work or
dealing with others. The burnout study was also validated externally by coworkers and
spouses on an individual’s behavior at work and at home (Jackson & Maslach, 1982;
Maslach & Jackson, 1979).
Job Satisfaction Survey
The JSS was the third part of the survey. Spector designed the JSS to assess job
satisfaction in the human services professions. The JSS assessed nine categories of job
satisfaction: pay, promotion, supervision, fringe benefits, contingent rewards, operating
conditions, coworkers, nature of work, and communication (Spector, 1997). This survey
had 36 comprehensive questions to assess the nine components. The JSS uses a 6-point
Likert-type scale, where 1 = disagree very much, 2 = disagree moderately, 3 = disagree
slightly, 4 = agree slightly, 5 = agree moderately, and 6 = agree very much. There is no
neutral option, so participants had to choose one way or another.
Each question on the survey had up to 6 points (Spector, 1997). If the question
was worded positively, the chosen number represented the score for that question and
was added together to obtain an overall job satisfaction score. If the question was worded
negatively, the points were reversed (Spector, 1997). For example, if the participant
answered 5 for a negatively worded question, the participant would earn 2 points. Table
1 shows how the questions relate to each category of job satisfaction.
The negatively worded items were “2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 19, 21, 23, 24,
26, 29, 31, 32, 34, 36” (Spector, 1999, para. 4). If a participant did not answer a specific
question, Spector suggested that to preserve the accuracy of the data, the mean of the
35
remaining areas of that specific facet should be used to answer that question (Spector,
1999).
Table 1
Instructions for Scoring the Job Satisfaction Survey
Subscale Item numbers

Pay 1, 10, 19, 28
Promotion 2, 11, 20, 33
Supervision 3, 12, 21, 30
Fringe benefits 4, 13, 22, 29
Contingent rewards 5, 14, 23, 32
Operating conditions 6, 15, 24, 31
Coworkers 7, 16, 25, 34
Nature of work 8, 17, 27, 35
Communication 9, 18, 26, 36
Total satisfaction 1-36
Note. From Instructions for Scoring the Job Satisfaction Survey, JSS, by P. Spector,
2011, retrieved from http://shell.cas.usf.edu/~pspector/scales/jssscore.html. Copyright
2011 by Paul E. Spector. Reprinted with permission.
The JSS has been shown to be reliable on two fronts. It has a high internal
consistency. The coefficient alpha for the nine facets ranged from .62 to .91 (Spector,
1997). While two facets were less than acceptable, the other seven categories were in an
acceptable range to show reliability (Spector, 1997). The test–retest reliability “takes into
account errors produced by differences in conditions” (Aiken, 1994, p. 85) and showed
how reliable the scale was over time. The coefficients ranged from .37 to .74, which is a
lower range. However, the sample was small and occurred at an organization that had
several organizational changes over an 18-month period (Spector, 1997). Reliability
tends to be lower when measuring the affective domain compared to the cognitive
domain (Ravid, 2011).
The JSS has been validated against the Job Descriptive Index, which was the most
carefully validated scale of job satisfaction (Spector, 1997). The coefficients ranged from
36
.61-.80 for the nine categories. The JSS has been normed for higher education as
demonstrated in Table 2.
Table 2
Norms for Higher Education in the United States
Facet 𝑋̅ 𝑋̅w SD
Salary 11.9 12.3 1.8
Promotion 11.5 11.9 1.6
Supervision 18.9 18.7 1.6
Benefits 15.3 15.1 1.4
Contingent rewards 14.1 14.2 1.4
Conditions 13.6 13.7 1.1
Coworkers 18.1 18.2 1.5
Work itself 19.7 19.7 1.3
Communication 14.6 14.6 2.1
Note. Number of samples =14; N = 3,764. From Job Satisfaction Survey Norms, by P.
Spector, 2011, retrieved from http://shell.cas.usf.edu/~pspector/scales/jssnorms.html.
Copyright 2011 by P. Spector. Adapted with permission.
Data Collection
The researcher used an online survey for a few reasons, including saving postage
costs and saving time stuffing envelopes and data entry (Greenlaw & Brown-Welty,
2009; Sue & Ritter, 2012). The online survey assisted in a quicker turnaround for data
collection. Greenlaw and Brown-Welty (2009) showed that most online surveys are
completed within a 2-week period.
When creating the consent form, the researcher alluded to researching the work
environment instead of studying burnout and job satisfaction. According to Maslach et
al. (2010), the MBI-HSS is labeled the Human Services Survey to avoid any bias that
participants may have when hearing about burnout phenomena. For the same reason, this
study did not mention burnout or job satisfaction in the name of the survey or the consent
form.
37
The researcher worked with Mind Garden to send out the surveys. The company
holds the rights to several surveys, including the MBI (Mind Garden, 2015). The
researcher collaborated with Mind Garden to add a demographic questionnaire and the
JSS (see Appendices A and B). The company did not collect any identifying information
to protect anonymity. Mind Garden scored the categories of burnout, overall job
satisfaction, and the facets of satisfaction. This step reduced the potential for error from
data entry and on the scoring piece. The researcher was able to download an Excel
document with all the survey responses and calculated ranges.
Data Analysis
When the results came in, the researcher uploaded the data into SPSS for
statistical analysis. Afterward, the researcher checked the SPSS file for missing data and
excluded any data where there was too much information missing to get an accurate
result. If more than one question per subscale was not answered for either the JSS or the
MBI-HSS, the researcher would exclude the data for the corresponding survey prior to
statistical analysis.
Research Question 1
RQ1 was as follows: To what extent do support staff feel burned out in an online
higher education environment? To answer the first research question on the frequency of
burnout in the online environment, the researcher used descriptive statistics to state “what
the data shows” (Trochim, 2006, para. 2). The researcher used a frequency and tendency
distribution to look at the burnout rates and for different demographic information such
as age range and ethnicity. The researcher analyzed the frequency of each subscale
(exhaustion, depersonalization, and self-inefficacy) of burnout to describe the data. The
38
mean, standard deviation, and relationship between burnout and job satisfaction were
analyzed and compared to the norms of the higher education field.
Research Question 2
RQ2 was as follows: How satisfied are support staff members who work in an
online higher education environment? Similar to the previous research question, the
researcher used descriptive statistics to analyze job satisfaction for the same population.
This study used frequency distribution to analyze the facets of job satisfaction compared
to the norms for higher education.
Research Question 3
RQ3 was as follows: What is the relationship between burnout and job
satisfaction in online support staff? The focus of the third research question was on the
relationship between burnout and job satisfaction. A correlational analysis was used to
assess the mean, standard deviation, and relationship between burnout and job
satisfaction. The researcher explored the individual categories of burnout, including
exhaustion, cynicism, and self-inefficacy, and the relationships between the facets
(Maslach, Jackson, et al., 2001) of the JSS. The correlational coefficients showed the
strength of the relationships between the variables. Only relationships with a significance
level of .05, which meant that there was a 95% chance that the relationship exists outside
of chance, were discussed (Ravid, 2011). The results are displayed in an
intercorrelational matrix.
Research Question 4
RQ4 was as follows: How well does burnout predict job satisfaction in online
student support staff? The researcher performed a multiple regression to investigate how
39
well burnout predicted job satisfaction. A block entry model was used with the
demographic variables entered in the first block and the burnout categories entered in the
second block. Overall job satisfaction was the dependent variable. The researcher
evaluated the significance of the relationships and calculated the variance explained by
the independent variables.
40
CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS
Restatement of Purpose and Research Questions
The purpose of this quantitative study was to apply Maslach’s theory of burnout
and to examine the relationship between perceived exhaustion, cynicism, self-inefficacy,
and job satisfaction per the JSS to online student support staff in higher education
institutions located in the United States.
This chapter includes a description of the data analysis of the four research
questions, which were as follows:
support staff?
staff?
The researcher used the Mind Garden Transform survey system to collect the
survey results. No identifying information was gathered during the survey. The
questionnaire was programmed where each respondent had to answer every question.
There was an option to select “Choose not to answer.” It was also arranged that each IP
address could only take the questionnaire once. As a result, each click on the survey
counted for one of the licenses.
41
Data Collection
The researcher used social media sites Facebook and LinkedIn and electronic
mailing lists to solicit participation in the survey. The researcher posted a status update
on Facebook and LinkedIn asking for higher education student support professionals to
help with research and a link to a web page outlining the full description of the study and
qualifications to participate in the study. The web page included an informed consent
section that if the person qualified and agreed to the study, they would click on the
hyperlink to begin the questionnaire.
The researcher posted similar information in the Online Learning Consortium, the
Association for the Study of Higher Education, and Higher Education Online LinkedIn
groups, which are areas where members voluntarily join based on particular topics. The
Online Learning Consortium group had over 5,000 members and is designed to support
the quality of online learning through research and development (Online Learning
Consortium LinkedIn Group, 2014). The Association for the Study of Higher Education
group had over 5,000 members who support higher education research as a field of study
(Association for the Study of Higher Education LinkedIn Group, 2014). The Higher
Education Online group had over 2,500 members who work in online education (Higher
Education Online LinkedIn Group, 2014).
The researcher sent individual messages to professional connections through
LinkedIn, asking them to participate in the research study if they qualified. The message
was sent to over 400 contacts. The message also asked them to share the study with their
colleagues. The researcher also messaged the National Academic Advising Association
Distance Learning electronic mailing list, which consists of academic advisors who work
42
with online students. The message is located in Appendix A. The survey was left open
for 1 month to collect responses. In that month, 130 people clicked on the survey, and
107 participants completed it. No respondents started the questionnaire and did not finish
it, and all questions were answered.
Demographics of Respondents
After the close of the survey, the researcher used descriptive statistics to calculate
the demographics of the participants. Sixty-five percent of the respondents were female
(n = 70) and 32% were male (n = 34). Three respondents chose not to answer. The
respondents fell into multiple age ranges, as outlined below in Table 3.
Table 3
Ages of Participants
Age f %
20-30 25 23.40
31-40 40 37.40
41-50 18 16.80
51-60 20 18.70
61-70 4 3.70
About 79% (n = 85) of the respondents had been in higher education less than 15
years. A majority of the respondents had been at their institutions between 1 and 10
years. About 33.6% (n = 36) of the respondents had been at their institution for 1-5
years, and 32.7% (n = 35) had been at their institutions for 6-10 years. About 18.7% (n =
18.7) had been with their institution for 11-15 years. Very few respondents were at their
institutions more than 15 years, as shown in Table 4.
43
Table 4
Length of Time Worked at the Institution
Length of time at the institution f %

<1 year 10 9.30
1-5 years 36 33.60
6-10 years 35 32.70
11-15 years 20 18.70
16-20 years 2 1.90
20+ 3 2.80
Prefer not to answer 1 0.90
Total 107 100.00
The respondents worked in a wide variety of areas in higher education. The three
areas with the most representation were in academic/student advising (n = 39), academic
support (n = 21), and other. Participants were able to choose “other” as an option.
Being in higher education, a majority of the participants had higher levels of
education. Only seven participants did not have at least a bachelor’s degree. About 57%
of the respondents had a master’s degree. The complete breakdown appears in Table 5.
Table 5
Highest Level of Education Participants Completed
Highest education completed f %

Some college 2 5.71
Bachelor's 14 40.00
Master's 15 42.86
Doctoral 4 11.43
Total 35 100.00
The income of the respondents ranged from under $24,000 to over $70,000. The
range with the highest frequency was $30,000-$40,000 with 23 participants. A higher
percentage of participants chose not to answer the income question (n = 16; 15%).
The participants were not highly diverse with regard to ethnicity and marital
status. About 81% were White. The other ethnicity groups (i.e., Asian, Black, Hispanic)
44
all had fewer than 5% of the respondents. About 72% of the respondents were married or
living with another. About 15% were single, and the rest identified were divorced
(7.5%), separated (1.9%), or prefer not to answer (3.7%).
Research Questions
Research Question 1
RQ1 was as follows: To what extent does support staff feel burned out in an
online higher education environment? To answer the question, the researcher used
descriptive statistics to analyze the data.
Burnout was categorized by having scores high in emotional exhaustion and
depersonalization, and low scores in personal accomplishment or self-inefficacy
(Maslach, Schaufeli, & Leiter, 2010). The survey did not measure an overall burnout
score. According to the results for postsecondary education, the top third of the
normative scale represents burnout, which is an emotional exhaustion (EE) total score
≥24, a depersonalization (DP) score ≥9, and a personal accomplish (PA) score ≤35
(Maslach, Schaufeli, et al., 2010).
The higher education norms were calculated by cumulative results from 635
postsecondary educators and personnel in 1990 (Maslach, Schaufeli, et al., 2010). The
norms might have changed since they were calculated almost 20 years ago. Little
information was known about the personnel. Additionally, the higher education
environment has changed.
The means from this study were all in the normal range, as shown in Table 6,
which suggested the participants in this study were not burned out compared to the
previous postsecondary norms of burnout. However, the standard deviation was large
45
enough in all categories to suggest that people were burned out. Furthermore, emotional
exhaustion was the category that was most correlated to burnout and had the largest
variance requiring additional analysis (Maslach, Schaufeli, et al., 2010).
Table 6
Participants' MBI Scores
Burnout category N Min. Max. 𝑋̅ SD Higher education norms

Emotional exhaustion 107 1 49 19.991 11.2287 ≥24
Depersonalization 107 0 24 7.523 6.1894 ≥9
Self-inefficacy 107 7 48 36.86 8.0041 ≤35
When looking at the data on a more granular level, 38% of the participants scored
high or in the burnout range on the emotional exhaustion subcategory, 36% scored high
on the depersonalization subcategory, and 36% scored low on the personal
accomplishment scale, as shown in Table 7.
Table 7
Indication of Burnout per Category
No indication of burnout Indication of burnout

Category n % n %
Emotional exhaustion 66 62 41 38
Depersonalization 69 64 38 36
Self-inefficacy 69 64 38 36
Although the scores for the subscales could not be combined into a single score,
the count of participants who scored in different categories could be calculated. As such,
42.06% of the participants did not score high in any subscales, whereas 16.82% scored
high on one subscale, 14.02% scored high on two subscales, and 27.10% scored high on
all three subscales as shown in Table 8.
46
Table 8
Participants Who Scored in a Burned Out Range
Number of categories f % Cum. %

No burnout 45 42.06 42.06
1 category 18 16.82 58.88
2 category 15 14.02 72.90
3 category 29 27.10 100.00
According to the data, 57.94% (n = 62) of the participants were within the range
indicating burnout in at least one category, which indicated that burnout might be a
problem in online education for student support staff.
The researcher looked at the demographics of the participants who had burnout
indicators in two or three categories to look for trends. This group size consisted of 35
participants and is referred to as the burned-out group. The vast majority of the
participants in the burned-out group were White (82.8%). About 65.7% of the people in
the group were female. A majority of the participants in the burned-out group (88.5%)
were between the ages of 20 and 40. Approximately 82% of the burned-out group had a
bachelor’s (n = 14, 40%) or master’s (n = 15, 42.86%) degree. Sixty percent of the
burned-out group was married, compared to 25.7% who identified themselves single.
Regarding demographic information about their employment, just under 50% of
the participants who were burned out had worked at their institution between 6 and 10
years. Only 5% of the burned-out group had been with the institution between 16 and 20
years. Participants in the burned-out group worked in a variety of functional areas,
including advising (n = 9, 25.7%) and academic support (n = 6, 17.1%). Table 9 shows
the breakdown in all areas. Incomes were dispersed among all ranges.
47
Table 9
Functional Work Areas in the Burned-Out Group
Functional work area f %

Advising 9 25.71
Academic support 6 17.14
Other 5 14.29
Career services 3 8.57
Financial aid 3 8.57
Registrar 3 8.57
Prefer not to answer 3 8.57
Learning services 2 5.71
Quality assurance 1 2.86
Grand total 35 100.00
Research Question 2
online higher education environment? Unlike the MBI, the JSS measured an overall
satisfaction and subscale satisfaction. According to Spector (2007),
Translated into the summed scores, for the 4-item subscales with a range from 4
to 24, scores of 4 to 12 are dissatisfied, 16 to 24 are satisfied, and between 12 and
16 are ambivalent. For the 36-item total where possible scores range from 36 to
216, the ranges are 36 to 108 for dissatisfaction, 144 to 216 for satisfaction, and
between 108 and 144 for ambivalent. (para. 3)
The larger scale data showed that the job satisfaction for participants ranges from
79, which demonstrated there were dissatisfied employees to very satisfied employees
who scored 198. However, the mean was 138, which fell within the ambivalent range.
The data are displayed in Table 10.
Looking at the mean of the facets, participants were satisfied with supervision, the
nature of work, coworkers, and fringe benefits, since the mean was greater than 16 and
less than 24. Participants were ambivalent toward contingent rewards, operating
conditions, and communication due to a mean between 12 and 16. They were dissatisfied
48
with pay and promotional opportunities since the mean was lower than 12. The mean
among employees in higher education institutions in previous studies also showed that
employees were satisfied with the work itself and supervision.
Table 10
Participants’ Job Satisfaction Scores
JSS subscale Min. Max. 𝑋̅ SD 𝑋̅ -Postsecondary education

Total satisfaction 79.0 198.0 138.682 27.7283 137.2
Pay 4.0 22.0 11.850 4.7718 11.9
Promotion 4.0 22.0 11.290 4.3762 11.5
Supervision 4.0 24.0 19.757 4.7995 18.9
Fringe benefits 5.0 24.0 16.215 4.7285 15.3
Contingent rewards 5.0 24.0 13.935 4.8976 14.1
Operating conditions 6.0 24.0 14.047 3.9295 13.6
Coworkers 6.0 24.0 17.710 4.3589 18.1
Nature of work 6.0 24.0 19.103 4.2713 19.7
Communication 4.0 24.0 14.776 4.9341 14.6
Note. N = 107.
Research Question 3
satisfaction in online student support staff? The researcher answered this question by
correlating the relationship between emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and self-
efficacy to total job satisfaction and the facets of job satisfaction. Table 11 depicts the
intercorrelation among all MBI and Job Satisfaction variables.
Emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and self-efficacy had a significant
relationship to other MBI variables to a .01 significance level. Emotional exhaustion and
depersonalization both had significant relationships to all facets of job satisfaction and
total job satisfaction. Self-efficacy had a significant relationship to all facets of job
satisfaction except operating conditions.
49
Table 11
Intercorrelations Between Burnout and Job Satisfaction
Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Emotional exhaustion 1 .673** -.299** -.370** -.367** -.602** -.226* -.576** -.567** -.627** -.544** -.543** -.725**
Depersonalization 1 -.462** -.296** -.298** -.467** -.206* -.407** -.310** -.566** -.645** -.470** -.602**
Inefficacy 1 .309** .206* .239* .195* .193* .052 .355** .707** .231* .408**
Pay 1 .581** .203* .414** .575** .266** .193* .374** .369** .662**
Promotion 1 .340** .242* .633** .331** .299** .363** .473** .704**
Supervision 1 .134 .455** .300** .554** .406** .423** .632**
Fringe benefits 1 .413** .183 .133 .323** .270** .521**
Contingent rewards 1 .423** .513** .381** .591** .829**
Operating conditions 1 .360** .162 .513** .570**
Coworkers 1 .571** .547** .683**
Nature of work 1 .516** .673**
Communication 1 .778**
Total satisfaction 1
*p < 0.05 level (2-tailed). **. p < 0.01 level (2-tailed).
There was a very strong, negative, and statistically significant relationship
between emotional exhaustion and total job satisfaction (r = -.725, p <.05). This
correlation was the strongest relationship among the MBI and JSS variables. Emotional
exhaustion was the variable that had the strongest relationships with JSS variables. The
only variable that did not have a strong positive or negative relationship was fringe
benefits, which had a weak negative relationship (r = -.226, p < .05).
There was a strong, negative relationship between depersonalization and job
satisfaction (r = -.602, p < .01). There were also strong, negative relationships between
depersonalization and supervision, contingent rewards, coworkers, the nature of work,
and communication. There was a weak, negative relationship between depersonalization
and pay, promotion, and fringe benefits. A number of significant correlations implied
that depersonalization was an important variable to consider when assessing the
relationships among all facets.
There was a strong, positive relationship that was statistically significant between
self-inefficacy and total job satisfaction (r = .408, p <.01). All relationships among self-
inefficacy and job satisfaction variables were positively correlated. However, they were
50
not as strong as the relationships among emotional exhaustion and depersonalization and
the variables. The only very strong positive relationship with self-inefficacy was with the
nature of work (r = .707, p < .05). The moderately strong relationships included pay and
promotion, whereas the weak relationships included promotion, supervision, and
communication. There was a negligible relationship with fringe benefits, contingent
rewards, and operating conditions. These relationships indicated that relationships with
self-inefficacy were not as strong with job satisfaction as other MBI variables.
There were strong to very strong relationships between the independent variables
emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and self-inefficacy and the variable job
satisfaction. All these variables were significant predictors of total job satisfaction.
Research Question 4
student support staff? A block-entry, multiple regression analysis was conducted to
examine the predictors or independent variables of burnout and the dependent variable
job satisfaction. Demographic variables (income, marital status, work area, age, gender,
time at the institution, ethnicity, education, and time in higher education) were entered
into the first block and the MBI variables (emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and
self-inefficacy) were entered into the second block. Together these variables made a very
strong impact on total job satisfaction.
The first model with just the demographic information only accounted for 14.6%
of the variance in job satisfaction (R2 = .146), whereas the second model, which included
the demographic and MBI variables, accounted for 60.2% of the variance (R2 = .602).
The Durbin-Watson value (d = 1.915) concluded that there were no first-order auto-
51
correlations among the independent variables (University of Texas, n.d.). Model 2, as
shown in Table 12, is the better model for predicting burnout, since it explains a higher
percentage of the variance.
Table 12
Block-Entry Multiple Regression Analyses Predicting Job Satisfaction From
Demographic Information and Emotional Exhaustion, Depersonalization, and Inefficacya
Model R R2 R2 (Adj.) Standard error estimate

b
1 .383a .146 .067 26.7804
2c .776b .602 .551 18.5784
a
Dependent variable: JSS total satisfaction. b Predictors: (constant), income, marital status, work area, age,
gender, time at the intuition, ethnicity, education, time in higher education. c Predictors: (constant), income,
marital status, work area, age, gender, time at the institution, ethnicity, education, time in higher education,
emotional exhaustion, personal accomplishment, depersonalization.
Table 13 displayed the multiple regression coefficients predicting job satisfaction
from burnout and demographic characteristics. The F ratio F(3, 94) = 11.83, p = .000
showed the model was statistically significant to predict job satisfaction. Emotional
exhaustion (β = -1.611) was negatively associated with job satisfaction and was the only
significant predictor of it. The other variables had an impact on job satisfaction but alone
were not significant enough to predict job satisfaction.
52
Table 13
Block-Entry Multiple Regression Coefficients Predicting Job Satisfaction From
Demographic Information and Emotional Exhaustion, Depersonalization, and Inefficacya
Unstandardized Standardized
coefficients coefficients Correlations
Model 𝛽 E 𝛽 t p Zero-order Partial Part
1 (Constant) 111.668 19.235 5.806 .000
Gender -5.977 5.435 -.111 -1.100 .274 -.104 -.111 -.103
Age 6.202 2.976 .257 2.084 .040 .314 .207 .195
Time at institution 1.136 2.696 .048 .421 .674 .133 .043 .040
Time in higher education .474 2.942 .021 .161 .872 .235 .016 .015
Education 5.562 3.282 .190 1.695 .093 .221 .170 .159
Work area -.335 .804 -.041 -.417 .678 -.060 -.042 -.039
Ethnicity -.253 1.674 -.017 -.151 .880 -.025 -.015 -.014
Marital status -.005 2.685 .000 -.002 .999 -.113 .000 .000
Income -1.490 1.563 -.106 -.953 .343 .019 -.096 -.089
2 (Constant) 150.906 17.465 8.641 .000
Gender .105 3.928 .002 .027 .979 -.104 .003 .002
Age -.310 2.229 -.013 -.139 .890 .314 -.014 -.009
Time at institution -2.697 1.950 -.113 -1.384 .170 .133 -.141 -.090
Time in higher education 1.559 2.088 .070 .747 .457 .235 .077 .049
Education 1.566 2.433 .053 .643 .521 .221 .066 .042
Work area -.051 .576 -.006 -.089 .929 -.060 -.009 -.006
Ethnicity -.373 1.178 -.025 -.317 .752 -.025 -.033 -.021
Marital status -.638 1.876 -.027 -.340 .734 -.113 -.035 -.022
Income 1.478 1.131 .105 1.307 .194 .019 .134 .085
Emotional exhaustion -1.611 .246 -.652 -6.554 .000 -.725 -.560 -.427
Depersonalization -.438 .488 -.098 -.897 .372 -.602 -.092 -.058
Personal accomplishment .466 .288 .134 1.618 .109 .408 .165 .105
a
Dependent variable: JSS total satisfaction.
Summary
This study found evidence that employees working at online higher education
institutions in the United States were burned out. Most of the group that was burned out
was between the ages of 20 and 40 and had a bachelor’s or master’s degree. Employees
were satisfied with their careers, were dissatisfied with their pay and promotional
opportunities, and satisfied with the work itself and supervision. In general, employees
were satisfied with their careers, the work itself, and supervision; however, they were
dissatisfied with their salary and promotional opportunities. All independent variables
showed a strong correlation between total job satisfaction with the strongest, negative
53
correlation among emotional exhaustion and job satisfaction. The study also showed that
60% of the variance in job satisfaction can be explained by demographic information and
the MBI variables emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and self-inefficacy.
54
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary
The growth of online education has resulted in an increase of student support staff
to support students taking online courses. The purpose of this quantitative research study
was to apply Maslach’s theory of burnout and to examine the relationship between
burnout and job satisfaction measured by the JSS among online student support staff in
higher education institutions in the United States. In general, researchers have measured
burnout and job satisfaction in higher education and for specific populations within
higher education. However, research measuring student support staff in online
environments was lacking.
The overall research question examined the perceived exhaustion, cynicism, and
self-inefficacy and job satisfaction as measured by online student support staff in higher
education institutions. The following research questions guided the research study:
support staff?
RQ4: How well does burn out predict job satisfaction in online support staff?
The study included a quantitative methodology and a correlational research design
to investigate the relationship between the independent variables perceived exhaustion,
depersonalization, and self-inefficacy and the dependent variables job satisfaction and its
55
subcategories. The researcher used a questionnaire consisting of three parts to collect
data: the MBI-HSS, the JSS, and a demographic section. The survey was deployed using
the Mind Garden Transform system, which was a web-based tool. Both the MBI and the
JSS were preexisting surveys with established reliability and validity measures. The
researcher chose participants based on convenience by sending messages to electronic
mailing lists, social media groups, and colleagues. The survey was available for one
month. One hundred seven responses were collected.
The researcher used SPSS for statistical analysis. Descriptive statistics was used
to describe the demographic information about the participants and to answer RQ1 and
RQ2. The results were described using the mean and standard deviation for continuous
variables and frequency for categorical variables. The researcher used Pearson’s
correlation coefficient (r) to answer RQ3 and a block-entry multiple regression analysis
to investigate RQ4. The analysis was two-tailed to a .05 significance level.
The research study showed that burnout is a phenomenon in online student
support staff in online environments. About 57% of the participants showed indications
of burnout in at least one subcategory. Employees who were burned out were typically
between the ages of 20 and 40 with a master’s degree. In general, employees were
satisfied with their jobs in higher education. However, there was a high correlation
between the facets of burnout and job satisfaction among staff members who were burned
out. The data also showed that about 60% of the variance of job satisfaction can be
explained by demographic data and the subcategories of burnout, with emotional
exhaustion being the most significant.
56
Conclusions
Research Question 1
RQ1 was as follows: To what extent does support staff feel burned out in an
online higher education environment? The results of this research study supported
previous research studies. Just less than 60% of the total sample rated themselves as
burned out in at least one indicator. About 88.5% of the burned-out group (those who
showed indications of burnout in at least two categories) in this study were between the
ages of 20 and 40, and 65.7% of them were female. According to Maslach et al. (2001),
people who are typically in their 20s, females, and single people are more likely to burn
out. This research study also supported that females and people who are younger were
more burned out, as were people who had not worked in the field or their institution as
long. However, this study differed from previous studies in that 60% of the burned out
group were married.
The mean scores of emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and inefficacy were
below the normative ranges of other higher education professionals. This result was not
surprising, as Leiter and Maslach (2001) noted that technology may increase burnout
level, as recovery is not possible. Staff members working in online higher education
constantly use technology to interact with their students. As there have not been any
studies regarding burnout in online student support staff at online institutions, the data
cannot be compared to other studies with a similar population.
Research Question 2
online higher education environment? In general, the findings for this research question
57
corroborated the results from previous studies. The results showed that the participants
were ambivalent in their job satisfaction range. Participants were satisfied with the
nature of their work and supervision and dissatisfied with pay and promotional
opportunities, which was similar to Spector’s (1997) research.
The total job satisfaction mean for this survey was 138.6, which was close to the
mean of postsecondary education of 137.2 (Spector, 2011). The standard deviation was
27.7, which showed that the range of satisfaction varied among the participants. Factors
not measured in this survey may have an influence on job satisfaction, such as the survey
being deployed during a recession in the United States, cultural backgrounds, and type of
work environment.
Research Question 3
satisfaction in online student support staff? The data showed a strong relationship
between burnout and job satisfaction. Several previous studies also found similar results
(Lee & Ashforth, 1993; Spector, 1997). This study showed similar relationships among
the MBI variables and job satisfaction that Lee and Ashforth (1993) found in a prior
educational study.
This study showed a very strong negative relationship between emotional
exhaustion and job satisfaction. This result was not surprising, as mentally tired
individuals would be less satisfied until they were able to recover (Maslach & Leiter,
2011). The role of technology could make it harder for an employee to recover from
burnout, which may have been the case in this study, but it was measured.
58
There was a positive correlation among all facets of job satisfaction and total
satisfaction in this research. The lowest correlation was among pay and total satisfaction.
According to Spector (1997), workers in the United States feel that they deserve higher
salaries and promotions. This study indicated that pay among online student support staff
does not relate to job satisfaction as much as other variables do.
There was also a strong relationship between depersonalization and self-
inefficacy and total job satisfaction. The relationship was stronger with depersonalization
than with inefficacy. Based on previous research, there is a stronger relationship
between depersonalization and emotional exhaustion, which would indicate a stronger
relationship to job satisfaction than to inefficacy (Maslach et al, 2010).
Research Question 4
student support staff? The results of this survey showed that approximately 60% of the
variance in job satisfaction could be explained by demographic factors, emotional
exhaustion, depersonalization, and inefficacy. Emotional exhaustion had the strongest
beta weight among the variables for predicting job satisfaction. The factors were not
surprising, as previous research studies had shown that people with a combination of
personality and demographic characteristics were more likely to be burned out, and
burnout may influence job satisfaction (Cordes & Dougherty, 1993; Lee & Ashforth,
1996; Maslach et al., 2001; Spector, 1997). The data in this research study showed that
an employee who had worked in a support role in online education for less than 10 years,
earned a bachelor’s or master’s degree, and was emotionally exhausted had a lower job
satisfaction rating.
59
Implications for Practice
The researcher felt that burnout and job satisfaction were important elements to
research, as more online programs and classes are moving online. As a result, more
students are taking classes online. Most research studies focused on students or faculty
members, but not the support staff. In some institutions, the support staff work later
hours or on weekends to meet the needs of the students. The online environment also
creates a need for increased technology and increased demands on the support staff. This
shift in education creates a different work environment than in the past.
These data indicated that almost 60% of the sample showed burnout in at least
one category and that the overall job satisfaction ratings showed that employees were
ambivalent about their work. These findings indicated that burnout may be a larger issue
in online education than in other areas of higher education.
Managers and higher education institutions should consider the outcomes of this
study. If their support staff members are burned out, they may not be providing the best
service to students, as distancing themselves from students is a coping mechanism.
Burnout also leads to higher absenteeism, more tardiness, and higher turnover (Vance,
2006). Job satisfaction was also ranked in the ambivalent range. The combined factors
can lead to turnover, which can cost an institution time and money along with providing
less than satisfactory service to its students.
Managers can monitor the emotional exhaustion levels of their employees and can
implement interventions to help them recover. Emotional exhaustion can be assessed
through conversations and observations. If managers discover environmental factors
60
(work situation, hours, caseload, etc.) are contributing to burnout, they may be able to
implement changes to help their employees.
Recommendations for Future Research
The data showed that a relationship exists between burnout and job satisfaction in
higher education, student support staff, who work in the online environment. However,
there are opportunities for further research to develop the knowledge. The focus of this
study was online student support staff and the study included a convenience sample.
Further research should include larger studies based on specific populations and the type
of institution (i.e., proprietary, 2-year colleges, 4-year colleges), the age range of
participants, role within the organization, and environmental factors. It would also be
beneficial to research burnout and job satisfaction based on the level of student that a
support staff member primarily works with, such as first-time students, undergraduate
students, or transfer students. This population is important, as organizational leaders may
be able to minimize burnout by changing the internal structures within the organization.
As forms of online education are continuing to grow (Lokken & Mullins, 2015), a
qualitative research study would provide more insights into the burnout phenomenon.
Such areas would include an in-depth analysis of the characteristics of staff members
who are burned out compared to those who are not burned out. The study should also
explore how environmental factors affect employees and their burnout levels.
Future researchers can investigate how burned out employees in online education
recover. Such a study would include what coping mechanisms they use or what changes
they made to ease their burnout. The literature shows that time off can help an employee
recover, but that is not always an option (Leiter & Maslach, 2001). This research could
61
provide benefits to higher education institutions, as the employees would care about the
work they are doing and thus the students of the institution.
This study was limited to participants’ feelings at one point in time. A
longitudinal study would provide insight into how staff’s burnout and job satisfaction
changes over a longer period. Qualitative data added to the longitudinal study can show
how intended or unintended interventions and events influence the variables. Events
would include raises, changes in employment duties, and changes in leadership.
62
REFERENCES
Accrediting Council for Independent Colleges and Schools. (2010). Retention and
placement. Retrieved from http://www.acics.org/accreditation/content.aspx?id
=2328
Aiken, L. R. (1994). Psychological testing and assessment (8th ed.). Needham Heights,
MA: Simon & Schuster.
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2010). Learning on demand: online education in the United
States, 2009. Retrieved from http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/survey/pdf
/learningondemand.pdf
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2011). Going the distance: Online education in the United
States, 2011. Retrieved from http://www.onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports
/goingthedistance.pdf
Allen, M., Bourhis, J., Mabry, E., Emmers-Sommer, T., Titsworth, S., Burrel, N., . . .
Wells, S. (2002). Comparing student satisfaction of distance education to
traditional classrooms in higher education: a meta-analysis. American Journal of
Distance Education, 16, 83-97. doi: 10.1207/S15389286AJDE1602_3
Alston, M., Allan, J., Bell, K., Brown, A., Dowling, J., Hamilton, P., . . . Williams, R.
(2005). 'SERPS Up': Support, engagement and retention of postgraduate
students—A model of postgraduate support. Australian Journal of Adult
Learning, 45, 172-190. Retrieved from Website: http://www.ala.asn.au
Ambient Insight. (2010). The U.S. market for mobile learning products and services:
2010-2015 forecast and analysis. Retrieved from http://www.ambientinsight.com
63
/Resources/Documents/Ambient-Insight-2010-2015-US-Mobile-Learning-
Market-Executive-Overview.pdf
Angelino, L. M., Williams, F., & Natvig, D. (2007). Strategies to engage online students
and reduce attrition rates. Journal of Educators Online, 4(2). Retrieved from
http://www.thejeo.com
Angerer, J. (2003). Job burnout. Journal of Employment Counseling, 40(3).
doi:10.1002/j.2161-1920.2003.tb00860.x
Association for the Study of Higher Education LinkedIn Group. (2014). Group profile:
About. Retrieved from http://www.linkedin.com
Astin, A. W. (1999). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education.
Journal of College Student Personnel, 40, 518-529. Retrieved from
http://www.myacpa.org/journal-college-student-development
Blacksmith, N., & Harter, J. (2011). Majority of American works not engaged in their
jobs. Retrieved from http://www.gallup.com/poll/150383/Majority-American-
Workers-Not-Engaged-Jobs.aspx
Bowling Green State University. (1997). Job descriptive index. Retrieved from
http://www.bgsu.edu/departments/psych/io/jdi/page54696.html
Bozeman, B., & Gaughan, M.(2011). Job satisfaction among university faculty:
individual, work, and institutional determinants. Journal of Higher Education, 82,
154-186. doi: 10.1353/jhe.2011.0011
Brewer, E. W., & Clippard, L. (2002). Burnout and job satisfaction among student
support services personnel. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 13, 169-
186. doi: 10.1002/hrdq.1022
64
Buchanan, E. A., Myers, S. E., & Hardin, S. L. (2005). Holding your hand from a
distance: Online mentoring and the graduate library and information science
student. Journal of Educators Online, 2(2). Retrieved from
http://www.thejeo.com/
Cain, D. L., Marrara, C., Pitre, P. E., & Armour, S. (2007). Support services that matter:
An exploration of the experiences and needs of graduate students in a distance
learning environment. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance
Education, 18(1), 42-56. Retrieved from http://www.cade-aced.ca
Chau, A. (2012, April 24). Distance-learning survey shows growing concern for student
services. Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com
Chen, P. Y., & Spector, P. E. (1992). Relationships of work stressors with aggression,
withdrawal, theft and substance use: An exploratory study. Journal of
occupational and organizational psychology, 65(3), 177-184. doi:10.1111/j.2044-
8325.1992.tb00495.x
Commission on Colleges: Southern Association of Colleges and Schools. (2010). The
principles of accreditation: Foundations for quality enhancement. Retrieved
from http://www.sacscoc.org/pdf/2010principlesofacreditation.pdf
Cordes, C. L., & Dougherty, T. W (1993). A review and an integration of research on job
burnout. Academy of Management Review, 18, 621-656.
doi:10.5465/AMR.1993.9402210153
Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and
applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 98-104. doi:10.1037/0021-
9010.78.1.98
65
Cox, J. C. (2009). Background: What the states created. New Directions for Higher
Education, 2009(146), 5-10. doi:10.1002/he.340
Creswell, J. W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating
quantitative and qualitative research (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Dalziel, C., & Payne, M. (2001). Quality enhancing practices in distance education:
Student services. Washington, DC: Instructional Telecommunications Council.
Dare, L. A., Zapata, L. P., & Thomas, A. G. (2005). Assessing the needs of distance
learners: A student affairs perspective. New Directions for Student Services,
2005(112), 39-54. doi:10.1002/ss.183
Digman, J. M. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor model. Annual
review of psychology, 41(1), 417-440. doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.41.020190.002221
Dunford, B. B., Shipp, A. J., Boss, R., Angermeier, I., & Boss, A. D. (2012). Is burnout
static or dynamic? A career transition perspective of employee burnout
trajectories. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 637-650. doi:10.1037/a0027060
Engstrom, C., & Tinto, V. (2008). Access without support is not opportunity. Change:
The Magazine of Higher Learning, 40, 46-50. doi:10.3200/CHNG.40.1.46-50
Fain, P. (2012). Where are all the adults? Inside HigherEd. Retrieved from
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/07/11/accreditor-will-require-
colleges-stop-ignoring-adult-student-retention
66
Floyd, D. L., & Casey‐Powell, D. (2004). New roles for student support services in
distance learning. New directions for community colleges, 2004(128), 55-64.
doi:10.1002/cc.175
Gorkin, M. (n.d). The four phases of burnout. Retrieved from http://www.stressdoc.com/
Greenlaw, C., & Brown-Welty, S. (2009). A comparison of web-based and paper-based
survey methods: Testing assumptions of survey mode and response cost.
Evaluation Review, 33, 464-480. doi:10.1177/0193841X09340214
Gross, R., Kmeic, J., Worell, J., & Crosby, F. (2001). Higher education institutional
affiliation and satisfaction among feminist professors: Is there an advantage to
women's colleges? Psychology of Women Quarterly, 25, 20-26.
doi:10.1111/1471-6402.00003
Guthrie, V. L., Woods, E., Cusker, C., & Gregory, M. (2005). A portrait of balance:
Personal and professional balance among student affairs educators. College
Student Affairs Journal, 24, 110-127. Retrieved from http://www.sacsa.org
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of
a theory. Organizational behavior and human performance, 16(2), 250-279.
doi:10.1016/0030-5073(76)90016-7
Haddad, A. (1998). Sources of social support among school counsellors in Jordan and its
relation to burnout. International Journal for the Advancement of Counselling, 20,
113-121. doi:10.1023/A:1005324405249
Henne, D., & Locke, E. A. (1985). Job dissatisfaction: What are the consequences?
International Journal of Psychology, 20, 221. doi:10.1080/00207598508247734
67
Herzberg, F. (1974). Motivation-hygiene profiles: Pinpointing what ails the organization.
Organizational Dynamics, 3(2), 18-29. doi:10.1016/0090-2616(74)90007-2
Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. (1959). The motivation to work. New York:
Wiley.
Higher Education Online LinkedIn Group. (2014). Group profile: About. Retrieved from
http://www.linkedin.com
Hiltz, S. R., Coppola, N., Rotter, N., Toroff, M., & Benbunan-Fich, R. (2000). Measuring
the importance of collaborative learning for the effectiveness of ALN: A multi-
measure. Online Education: Learning effectiveness and faculty satisfaction, 1,
101-119.
Hirt, J. B., Cain, D., Bryant, B., & Williams, E. (2003). Cyberservices: What's important
and how are we doing? NASPA Journal, 40(2). doi:10.2202/0027-6014.1225
Hornak, A. M., Akweks, K., & Jeffs, M. (2010). Online student services at the
community college. New Directions for Community Colleges, 150, 79-87.
doi:10.1002/cc.407
Hu, H. (2012). A stunning admission. Diverse: Issues in Higher Education, 29(20), 18-
19. Retrieved from http://diverseeducation.com/
Instructional Technology Council. (2012). 2011 Distance education survey results:
Trends in eLearning. Retrieved from http://www.itcnetwork.org/attachments
/article/87/ITCAnnualSurveyMarch2012.pdf
Jackson, S. E., & Maslach, C. (1982). After-effects of job-related stress: Families as
victims. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 630-640. doi:10.1037/0021-
9010.71.4.630
68
Jex, S. M., & Beehr, T. A. (1991). Emerging theoretical and methodological issues in the
study of work-related stress. Research in personnel and human resources
management, 9(31), l-365. Retrieved from
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/series/rphr
Jump, P. (2010). Worldwide academic job satisfaction. Inside HigherEd. Retrieved from
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/07/02/morale
Kiernan, N. E., Kiernan, M., Oyler, M. A., & Gilles, C. (2005). Is a web survey as
effective as a mail survey? A field experiment among computer users. American
Journal of Evaluation, 26, 245-252. doi:10.1177/1098214005275826
LaPadula, M. (2003). A comprehensive look at online student support services for
distance learners. American Journal of Distance Education, 17, 119-128.
doi:10.1207/S15389286AJDE1702_4
Layman, E., & Guyden, J. A. (1997). Reducing your risk of burnout. The Health Care
Manager, 15(3), 57-69. Retrieved from
http://journals.lww.com/healthcaremanagerjournal/pages/default.aspx
Lee, R. T., & Ashforth, B. E. (1993). A longitudinal study of burnout among supervisors
and managers: Comparisons between the Leiter and Maslach (1988) and
Golembiewski et al.(1986) models. Organizational behavior and human decision
processes, 54(3), 369-398. doi:10.1006/obhd.1993.1016
Lee, R. T., & Ashforth, B. E. (1996). A meta-analytic examination of the correlates of the
three dimensions of job burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 123-133.
doi:10.1037/0021-9010.81.2.123
69
Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C. (2001). Burnout and quality in a speed-up world. Journal
for Quality & Participation, 24(2), 48. Retrieved from http://asq.org/pub/jqp/
Levy, Y. (2005). Comparing drop-outs and persistence in e-learning courses. Computers
& Education, 48, 185-204. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2004.12.004
Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M. Dunnette (Ed.),
Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1297-1349). Chicago,
IL: Rand McNally.
Lokken, F., & Mullins, C. (2015). 2014 Distance Education Survey results. Retrieved
from http://www.itcnetwork.org/attachments/article/1171
/AnnualSurvey2014PublishedApril2015FinalWeb.pdf
Love, K. M., Tatman, A. W., & Chapman, B. P. (2010). Role stress, interrole conflict,
and job satisfaction among university employees: The creation and test of a
model. Journal of Employment Counseling, 47, 30-37. doi:10.1002/j.2161-
1920.2010.tb00088.x
Martinez, M. (2003). High attrition rate in e-learning: Challenges, predictors, and
solutions. eLearning Developers Journal, 1-7.
Maslach, C. (2003). Job burnout: New directions in research and intervention. Current
Directions in Psychological Sciences, 12(5).doi: 10.1111/1467-8721.01258
Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1979). Burned-out cops and their families. Psychology
Today, 12(12), 59-62. doi:10.1111/1467-8721.01258
Maslach, C., Jackson, S., & Leiter, M. (2010). Maslach burnout inventory manual (3rd
ed.). Menlo Park, CA: Mind Garden, Inc.
70
Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. P. (2008). Early predictors of job burnout and engagement.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 498-512. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.93.3.498
Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of
Psychology, 52, 397-422. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.397
McCann, J., & Holt, R. (2009). An exploration of burnout among online university
professors. Journal of Distance Education, 23(3), 97-110. Retrieved from
http://www.jofde.ca/index.php/jde/article/view/620
McLawhon, R., & Cutright, M. (2012). Instructor learning styles as indicators of online
faculty satisfaction. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 15, 341-353.
Retrieved from http://www.ifets.info/journals/15_2/29.pdf
Mendes, E. (2011). U.S. job satisfaction struggles to recover to 2008 levels. Retrieved
from http://www.gallup.com/poll/147833/Job-Satisfaction-Struggles-Recover-
2008-Levels.aspx
Mind Garden. (2015). Home page. Retrieved from http://www.mindgarden.com/.
Muilenburg, L. Y., & Berge, Z. L. (2005). Student barriers to online learning: A factor
analytic study. Distance education, 26(1), 29-48.
doi:10.1080/01587910500081269
Nash, R. (2005). Course completion rates among distance learners: Identifying possible
methods to improve retention. Online Journal of Distance Learning
Administration, 8(4). Retrieved from
http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/winter84/nash84.htm
National Center for Education Statistics. (2011). Fast facts. Retrieved from
http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=80
71
National Center on Disability and Access to Education. (2007). NCDAE tips and tools:
Online communication tools. Retrieved from
http://ncdae.org/resources/factsheets/communication.php
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Online Learning Consortium LinkedIn Group. (2014). Group profile: About. Retrieved
from http://www.linkedin.com
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2002). Academic support
for students. Retrieved from http://stats.oecd.org/glossary/detail.asp?ID=11
Owens, J., Hardcastle, L., & Richardson, B. (2009). Learning from a distance: The
experience of remote students. Journal of Distance Education, 23(3), 53-74.
Retrieved from http://www.jofde.ca/index.php/jde/article/view/596
Park, J.-H., & Choi, H. J. (2009). Factors influencing adult learners' decision to drop out
or persist in online learning. Educational Technology & Society, 12(4), 207-217.
Retrieved from http://www.ifets.info/others/
Perrakis, A. I., Galloway, F. J., Hayes, K. K., & Robinson-Galdo, K. (2011). Presidential
satisfaction in higher education: an empirical study of two- and four-year
institutions. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 33, 57-66.
doi:10.1080/1360080X.2011.537012
Perry, E. H., & Pilati, M. L. (2011). Online learning. New Directions for Teaching and
Learning, 128, 95-104. doi:10.1002/tl.472
Pew Internet & American Life Project. (2012). Trend data (adults). Retrieved from
http://www.pewinternet.org/Trend-Data-(Adults)/Online-Activities-Daily.aspx
72
Pullan, M. C. (2010). Student support services for millennial undergraduates. Journal of
Educational Technology Systems, 38, 235-251. doi:10.2190/ET.38.2.k
Ravid, R. (2011). Practical statistics for educators (4th ed.). London, UK: Rowman &
Littlefield.
Sandeen, C., & Barr, M. J. (2006). Critical issues for student affairs: Challenges and
opportunities. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Saterlee, A. G. (2010). Online faculty satisfaction and quality enhancement initiatives.
Paper presented at the 2010 IABR & ITLC Conference Proceedings. Retrieved
from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED520956.pdf
SchWeber, C. (2008). Student learning and student services: Policy issues. Journal of
Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12(2), 67-72. Retrieved from
http://files.eric.ed.gov.libweb.ben.edu/fulltext/EJ837479.pdf
Schwitzer, A. M., Horton-Parker, R. J., & Jurgens, J. C. (2002). A work sample approach
to hiring student personnel administrators for distance education programs.
NASPA Journal, 39, 371-383. doi:10.2202/0027-6014.1174
Shea, P. A. (2005). Serving students online: Enhancing their learning experience. New
Directions for Student Services, 2005(112), 15-24. doi:10.1002/ss.181
Simpson, B. (2001, July). "Can't you lighten up a bit?" Black women administrators in
the academy. Paper presented at the Annual National Conference of the National
Association of African American Studies and the National Association of
Hispanic and Latino Studies (Houston, TX, February 21-26, 2000), p. 1 – 25
Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov.libweb.ben.edu/?id=ED455350
73
Singh, J., Goolsby J. R., & Rhoads, G. K. (1994). Behavioral and psychological
consequences of boundary spanning burnout for customer service representatives.
Journal of Marketing Research, 31, 558-569. doi:10.2307/3151883
Society of Human Resource Management. (2011). 2011 employee job satisfaction and
engagement. Retrieved from http://www.shrm.org/research/surveyfindings
/articles/documents/11-0618%20job_satisfaction_fnl.pdf
Song, L., Singleton, E. S., Hill, J. R., & Koh, M. H. (2004). Improving online learning:
Student perceptions of useful and challenging characteristics. The internet and
higher education, 7(1), 59-70. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2003.11.003
Spector, P.E. (1999). Instructions for scoring the job satisfaction survey. University of
South Florida. Retrieved from
http://shell.cas.usf.edu/~pspector/scales/jssscore.html
Spector, P.E. (2007). Interpreting satisfaction scores with the job satisfaction survey.
University of South Florida. Retrieved from
http://shell.cas.usf.edu/~pspector/scales/ jssinterpretation.html
Spector, P. E. (1997). Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, causes and
consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Spector, P.E. (2011). Job satisfaction survey norms. University of South Florida.
Retrieved from http://shell.cas.usf.edu/~pspector/scales/ jssnorms.html
Spector, P. E. (1985). Measurement of human service staff satisfaction: Development of
the job satisfaction survey. American journal of community psychology, 13(6),
693-713. doi:10.1007/BF00929796
74
Staw, B. M., & Ross, J. (1985). Stability in the midst of change: A dispositional approach
to job attitudes. Journal of Applied psychology, 70(3), 469. doi:10.1037/0021-
9010.70.3.469
Sue, V. M., & Ritter, L. A. (2012). Conducting online surveys (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Swider, B. W., & Zimmerman, R. D. (2010). Born to burnout: A meta-analytic path
model of personality, job burnout, and work outcomes. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 76, 487-506. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2010.01.003
Taylor, B., & Holley, K. (2009). Providing academic and support services to students
enrolled in online degree programs. College Student Affairs Journal, 28, 81-102.
Retrieved from http://www.sacsa.org/
Thomas, L. T., & Ganster, D. C. (1995). Impact of family-supportive work variables on
work-family conflict and strain: a control perspective. Journal of applied
psychology, 80(1), 6. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.80.1.6
Trochim, W. M. K. (2006). Descriptive statistics. Retrieved from
http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/statdesc.php
Tull, A. (2006). Synergistic supervision, job satisfaction, and intention to turnover of new
professionals in student affairs. Journal of College Student Development, 47, 465-
480. doi:10.1353/csd.2006.0053
University of Minnesota Department of Psychology. (n.d.). Minnesota Satisfaction
Questionnaire. Retrieved from http://www.psych.umn.edu/psylabs/vpr
/msqinf.htm
75
University of Texas. (n.d.). Strategy for regression analysis. Retrieved from
http://www.utexas.edu/.../MultipleRegression_Complete_Analysis.ppt
U.S. Department of Education. (2011). Meeting the nation’s 2020 goal: State targets for
increasing the number and percentage of college graduates with degrees.
Retrieved from http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/completion
_state_by_state.pdf
U.S. Distance Learning Association. (2012). About us. Retrieved from
http://www.usdla.org/html/aboutUs/vmd.htm
Vance, R. J. (2006). Employee engagement and commitment: A guide to understanding,
measuring and increasing engagement in your organization. Retrieved from
https://shrm.org/about/foundation/research/Documents/1006EmployeeEngagemen
tOnlineReport.pdf
Western Association of Schools and Colleges. (2012). Category C: Support for student
personal and academic growth. Retrieved from http://www.acswasc.org
/pdf_general/WASC_CriteriaSamplePrompts_Cat_C.pdf
Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education Cooperative for Educational
Technologies. (2002). Guidelines for creating student services online. Retrieved
from http://wcet.wiche.edu/wcet/docs/beyond/overview.pdf
Wright, J. D., & Hamilton, R. F. (1978). Work satisfaction and age: Some evidence for
the ‘job change' hypothesis. Social Forces, 1140-1158. Retrieved from
http://sf.oxfordjournals.org/
Zhang, J. J., DeMichele, D. J., & Connaughton, D. P. (2004). Job satisfaction among
mid-level collegiate campus recreation program administrators. Journal of Sport
76
Behavior, 27, 184-212. Retrieved from:
http://www.southalabama.edu/colleges/artsandsci/psychology/Journal_of_Sport_
Behavior.html
77
APPENDIX A
CONSENT FORM
Dear Participant,
I am a doctoral candidate at Benedictine University in the Higher Education and

Organizational Change program. As online education continues to grow, it is important
to research the effects that the environment has on staff that support online students. If
you support an online educational program, you can participate in this study. Follow the
link below to start the questionnaire assessing your feelings and attitudes about working
with students in the online environment. Your participation will help provide insight on
the topic.
There are three parts to this survey and should take about 25-30 minutes to
complete. Participation is voluntary and responses are collected anonymously. The risks
to your physical, emotional, professional, or financial well-being are considered minimal.
Submission of the completed survey will be interpreted as your informed consent to
participate and that you are at least 18 years of age.
The link will provide more information about the study and a link to the
questionnaire. http://bit.ly/1cT58sj
This research project is overseen by the Higher Education and Organizational
Change Department at Benedictine University. If you have any questions about the
research, please contact Lisa Haas at Lisa_Haas@ben.edu or Dr. Eileen Kolich at
ekolich@ben.edu. If you would like a summary of the findings, please contact Lisa Haas
at the email address above.
Sincerely,
Lisa Haas
Doctoral Candidate
78
APPENDIX B
DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
Gender:
____Male ____Female
Age:
____<20 ____20-30 ____31-40 ____41-50 ____51-60 ____61-70 ____70+
Length of time at the institution:

____<1 year ____1-5 ____6-10 years ____11-15 years ____16-20 years ____20+
Length of time in higher education:

_____0-5 years _____6-10 years _____11-15 years _____16-20 years _____20+
What is the highest level of education you have completed?
____High school or equivalent ____Some college ____Bachelor’s degree ____Master’s

Degree ____Doctoral degree ____Professional degree (MD, JD, etc) ____Other
In which area are your main work responsibilities?
____Academic/Student Advising ____Academic Support ____ Bursar/Accounts

____Career Services ____Financial Aid ____Learning Services ____Registrar
Services ____Quality Assurance ____Other
How would you classify yourself?
___Asian/Pacific Islander ____Caucasian/White ____Hispanic ____Black ____Middle

Eastern
____Latino ____Multiracial ____Would rather not say ____Other
What is your current marital status?
____Divorced ___Married ____Single ___Living with another ___Separated

____Widowed
What is your income for your current position?
____<$24,000 ____$24,001-30,000 ____$30,001-$40,000 ____$40,001-$50,000

____$50,001-60,000 ____$60,001-$70,000 ____$>70,001
79
Maslach Burnout Inventory
Questions from the Maslach Burnout Inventory-Human Services Edition
80
81
Job Satisfaction Survey
(The JSS is provided free for non-commercial educational and research purposes.
Job Satisfaction Survey, copyright Paul E. Spector, 1994, All rights reserved.)
JOB SATISFACTION SURVEY
Paul E. Spector
Department of Psychology
University of South Florida
Copyright Paul E. Spector 1994, All rights

reserved.
Agree very much

Disagree slightly
Agree slightly
Disagree very
PLEASE CIRCLE THE ONE NUMBER FOR
moderately
moderately
EACH QUESTION THAT COMES CLOSEST
Disagree
Agree
TO REFLECTING YOUR OPINION
much
ABOUT IT.
1 I feel I am being paid a fair amount for the work I 1 2 3 4 5 6
do.
2 There is really too little chance for promotion on 1 2 3 4 5 6
my job.
3 My supervisor is quite competent in doing his/her 1 2 3 4 5 6
job.
4 I am not satisfied with the benefits I receive. 1 2 3 4 5 6
5 When I do a good job, I receive the recognition for 1 2 3 4 5 6

it that I should receive.
6 Many of our rules and procedures make doing a 1 2 3 4 5 6
good job difficult.
7 I like the people I work with. 1 2 3 4 5 6
8 I sometimes feel my job is meaningless. 1 2 3 4 5 6
9 Communications seem good within this 1 2 3 4 5 6
82
organization.
10 Raises are too few and far between. 1 2 3 4 5 6
11 Those who do well on the job stand a fair chance 1 2 3 4 5 6

of being promoted.
12 My supervisor is unfair to me. 1 2 3 4 5 6
13 The benefits we receive are as good as most other 1 2 3 4 5 6

organizations offer.
14 I do not feel that the work I do is appreciated. 1 2 3 4 5 6
15 My efforts to do a good job are seldom blocked by 1 2 3 4 5 6

red tape.
16 I find I have to work harder at my job because of 1 2 3 4 5 6
the incompetence of people I work with.
17 I like doing the things I do at work. 1 2 3 4 5 6
18 The goals of this organization are not clear to me. 1 2 3 4 5 6
83

Burnout and Job Satisfaction in Online Student Support Staff

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Burnout and Job Satisfaction in Online Student Support Staff

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Burnout and Job Satisfaction in Online Student Support Staff

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Burnout and Job Satisfaction in Online Student Support Staff

Lisa Marie Haas

This dissertation has been accepted for the faculty

____________________________ Eileen Kolich, Ph.D. __________

____________________________ Cassandra Sheffield, Ed.D. ___________

____________________________ Seung Won Yoon, Ph.D. ________

____________________________ Sunil Chand, Ph.D. ________

____________________________ Ethel Ragland, Ed.D., M.N., R.N. ________

All rights reserved.

I would like to express my deepest gratitude to everyone who supported me

mentoring me throughout the program and through my dissertation. Her continuous

this point without her being a great director and chair.

Education and Organizational Change faculty, and my classmates who assisted me on my

provoking discussions and the ways you challenged me so I could strengthen my

inspired me to set challenging goals and to continue my leadership journey in higher

would make you proud.

perseverance and service.

List of Tables ...................................................................................................................... x

List of Figures .................................................................................................................... xi

Abstract ............................................................................................................................. xii

Chapter 1: Introduction ....................................................................................................... 1

Burnout, Job Satisfaction, and Online Education ......................................................... 1

Statement of the Problem .............................................................................................. 5

Purpose of the Study ..................................................................................................... 6

Research Questions ....................................................................................................... 6

Significance of Study .................................................................................................... 7

Chapter 2: Literature Review .............................................................................................. 9

Job Satisfaction ........................................................................................................... 16

Online Education ........................................................................................................ 23

Student Support Staff .................................................................................................. 25

Chapter 3: Methodology ................................................................................................... 31

Population and Sample ............................................................................................... 32

Maslach Burnout Inventory .................................................................................. 33

Job Satisfaction Survey ............................................................................................... 35

Data Collection ........................................................................................................... 37

Data Analysis .............................................................................................................. 38

Research Question 1 ............................................................................................. 38

Research Question 2 ............................................................................................. 39

Research Question 3 ............................................................................................. 39

Research Question 4 ............................................................................................. 39

Chapter 4: Findings ........................................................................................................... 41

Restatement of Purpose and Research Questions ....................................................... 41

Data Collection ........................................................................................................... 42

Demographics of Respondents ................................................................................... 43

Research Questions ..................................................................................................... 45

Research Question 1 ............................................................................................. 45

Research Question 2 ............................................................................................. 48

Research Question 3 ............................................................................................. 49

Research Question 4 ............................................................................................. 51

Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations ............................................................... 55

Research Question 1 ............................................................................................. 57

Research Question 3 ............................................................................................. 58

Research Question 4 ............................................................................................. 59

Implications for Practice ............................................................................................. 60

Recommendations for Future Research ...................................................................... 61

Appendix A Consent Form ............................................................................................... 78

Appendix B Demographic Information ............................................................................ 79

Maslach Burnout Inventory ........................................................................................ 80

Questions from the Maslach Burnout Inventory-Human Services Edition ................ 80

__________________ Eileen Kolich, Ph.D.

__________________ Cassandra Sheffield, Ed.D. _

____________________ Seung Won Yoon, Ph.D.

____________________ Sunil Chand, Ph.D.

____________________ Ethel Ragland, Ed.D., M.N., R.N.