Search results

The purpose of this study is to investigate the extent to which a sample of the Australian cybersecurity industry is impacted by burnout.

Based on the review of the literature, this research investigates the following three hypotheses. Gender will significantly predict burnout scores. Those who identify as women will score higher on average than those who identify as men (because of being in a male-dominated industry). Self-reported burnout will differ across job roles. In addition, the authors expect these relationships to hold across the three dimensions of burnout, namely, emotional exhaustion, depersonalisation and professional efficacy. Sleep quality will be associated with burnout.

Gender and job role were significant predictors of emotional exhaustion, but not depersonalisation or professional efficacy. The interaction between gender and job role was also significant. Senior managers experienced poorer quality sleep, and poorer sleep quality was associated with greater reported emotional exhaustion at work. For emotional exhaustion, female respondents who worked in security consultant roles tended to score higher than their male counterparts.

Left unaddressed, the high level of workplace burnout may add to the well-being and retention problems developing within the cybersecurity community. These results indicate that organisations should look to measure the well-being of their own cyber workforce and implement meaningful changes if they wish to keep their cyber talent and enable them to thrive at work.

This research paper is an extension of a previous paper by the same authors which is titled “Is Your CISO Burnt Out Yet”. This paper examined the demographic differences in workplace burnout among cybersecurity professionals.

The purpose of this case study was to complement existing weeding and retention criteria beyond the most used methods in academic libraries and to consider citation counts in the identification of important scholarly works.

Using a small sample of items chosen for withdrawal from a small liberal arts college library, this case study looks at the use of Google Scholar citation counts as a metric for identification of notable monographs in the social sciences and mathematics.

Google Scholar citation counts are a quick indicator of classic, foundational or discursive monographs in a particular field and should be given more consideration in weeding and retention analysis decisions that impact scholarly collections. Higher citation counts can be an indicator of higher circulation counts.

The authors found little indication in the literature that Google Scholar citation counts are being used as a metric for identification of notable works or for retention of monographs in academic libraries.