Overwork climate scale: psychometric properties and relationships with working hard

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate whether employees’ tendency to work excessive hours is motivated by the perception of a work environment that encourages overwork (overwork climate). Thus, this study introduces a self-report questionnaire aimed at assessing the perception of a psychological climate for overwork in the workplace.

Design/methodology/approach

In Study 1, the overwork climate scale (OWCS) was developed and evaluated using principal component analysis (n=395) and confirmatory factor analysis (n=396). In Study 2, the total sample (n=791) was used to explore the association of the overwork climate with opposite types of working hard (work engagement and workaholism).

Findings

Two overwork climate dimensions were distinguished, namely, overwork endorsement and lacking overwork rewards. The lack of overwork rewards was negatively associated with engagement, whereas workaholism showed a strong positive association with overwork endorsement. These relationships remained significant after controlling for the impact of psychological job demands.

Research limitations/implications

The findings rely on self-report data and a cross-sectional design.

Practical implications

The perception of a work environment that encourages overwork but does not allocate additional compensation seems to foster workaholism. Moreover, the inadequacy of overwork rewards constitutes a lack of resources that negatively affect employees’ engagement.

Originality/value

This study represents one of the first attempts to develop a questionnaire aimed at assessing a psychological climate for overwork and to explore whether the perception of this type of climate may be significantly related to workaholism and work engagement.

Citation

Mazzetti, G., Schaufeli, W.B., Guglielmi, D. and Depolo, M. (2016), "Overwork climate scale: psychometric properties and relationships with working hard", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 880-896. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-03-2014-0100