1. Study suggests willingness to support corporate social responsibility initiatives contingent on perception of boss’ ethics

    November 14, 2017 by Ashley

    From the University of Vermont press release:

    A new study shows that people who perceive their employer as committed to environmental and community-based causes will, in turn, engage in green behavior and local volunteerism, with one caveat: their boss must display similarly ethical behavior.

    The forthcoming study in the Journal of Business Ethics by Kenneth De Roeck, assistant professor at the University of Vermont, and Omer Farooq of UAE University, shows that people who work for socially and environmentally responsible companies tend to identify more strongly with their employer, and as a result, increase their engagement in green and socially responsible behaviors like community volunteerism.

    “When you identify with a group, you tend to adopt its values and goals as your own,” says De Roeck. “For example, if you are a fan who identifies with the New England Patriots, their objective to win the Super Bowl becomes your objective too. If they win it, you will say ‘we,’ rather than ‘they,’ won the Super Bowl, because being a fan of the New England Patriots became part of your own identity.”

    That loyalty goes out the window, however, if employees don’t perceive their immediate supervisor as ethical, defined as conduct that shows concern for how their decisions affect others’ well-being. Results show that the propensity for the company’s environmental initiatives to foster employees’ green behaviors disappears if they think their boss has poor ethics. Employees’ engagement in volunteer efforts in support of their company’s community-based initiatives also declines if they believe their boss is not ethical, though not as dramatically.

    “When morally loaded cues stemming from the organization and its leaders are inconsistent, employees become skeptical about the organization’s ethical stance, integrity, and overall character,” says De Roeck. “Consequently, employees refrain from identifying with their employers, and as a result, significantly diminish their engagement in creating social and environmental good.”

    Companies as engines for positive social change

    Findings of the study, based on surveys of 359 employees at 35 companies in the manufacturing industry (consumer goods, automobile, and textile), could provide insight for companies failing to reap the substantial societal benefits of CSR.

    “This isn’t another story about how I can get my employees to work better to increase the bottom line, it’s more about how I can get employees to create social good,” says De Roeck, whose research focuses on the psychological mechanisms explaining employees’ reactions to, and engagement in, CSR. “Moreover, our measure of employees’ volunteer efforts consists of actions that extend well beyond the work environment, showing that organizations can be a strong engine for positive social change by fostering, through the mechanism of identification, a new and more sustainable way of life to their employees.”

    De Roeck says organizations wanting to boost their social performance by encouraging employee engagement in socially responsible behaviors need to ensure that employees perceive their ethical stance and societal engagement as authentic. To do so, and avoid any perception of greenwashing – the promotion of green-based initiatives despite not practicing them fully – organizations should strive to ensure consistency between CSR engagement and leaders’ ethical stance by training supervisors about social and ethical responsibility. Organizations should also be cautious in hiring and promoting individuals to leadership positions who fit with the company CSR strategy and ethical culture.

    “Organizations should not treat CSR as an add-on activity to their traditional business models, but rather as something that should be carefully planned and integrated into the company strategy, culture, and DNA,” says De Roeck. “Only then will employees positively perceive CSR as a strong identity cue that will trigger their identification with the organization and, as a result, foster their engagement in such activities through socially responsible behaviors.”


  2. Study suggests empowered employees are more proactive … even when they don’t trust their leader

    November 8, 2017 by Ashley

    From the Frontiers press release:

    New research confirms that employees with empowering leaders are more proactive and, for the first time, shows that this effect occurs by increasing “role breadth self-efficacy” — defined as the confidence to do a variety of tasks beyond the job description. The research further shows that when subordinates trust the leader’s competency, the leader’s power sharing behavior increases the subordinates’ role breadth self-efficacy. However, contrary to what might be expected, the researchers propose that when subordinates trust the leader’s competency, it is less necessary for the leader to share their power to motivate proactive behaviors. The study, published today in Frontiers in Psychology, provides practical recommendations on empowering leadership for managers and organizations.

    “Despite the well-documented benefits of proactive behavior, the question of how to promote employee proactivity in the workplace is relatively under-explored,” says one of the study’s authors, Dr Yungui Guo from China’s Zhoukou Normal University, School of Economic and Management. “Our research elaborates a theoretical model that explains why, and when, empowering leadership might promote this.”

    A proactive workforce can strongly influence business effectiveness and competitiveness. Several studies demonstrate that proactive behaviors — like taking charge, seeking feedback and building social networks — can improve organizational creativity, processes and job satisfaction, among other benefits.

    Proactive behavior has been associated with empowering leadership, where managers share power with their subordinates and grant them a fair amount of autonomy. However, the details of how empowering leadership influences proactivity have not previously been investigated.

    “Most studies on empowering leadership focused at the team rather than the individual level, and did not separate out the influence of the leader from the employee’s personality,” says Guo. “The mechanism by which empowering leadership encourages proactivity has also not been studied in detail.”

    To provide deeper insight into this, the researchers surveyed 280 leader-follower dyads from a large state-owned Chinese company. The surveys assessed the level of empowering leadership in supervisors, while subordinates were assessed for proactive behavior, trust in leader competence, proactive personality and role breadth self-efficacy.

    The data confirm that empowering leadership is positively related to proactive behavior, even after controlling for proactive personality. The researchers also show how this works: sharing power leads to higher role breadth self-efficacy in subordinates, which in turn encourages their proactive behavior.

    The research additionally shows that the mediating effect of role breadth self-efficacy is stronger when employees have high trust in their leader’s competence.

    “When you think your leader is capable, you may view their sharing of power as an opportunity to learn new things,” explains Guo. “This gives you confidence to go beyond your job description — which increases your experience and mastery of different skills.”

    “In contrast, a low level of trust might make you suspect that delegating power is a way for the leader to shift responsibility. In this case you may be less willing to take on additional tasks.”

    However, contrary to what might be expected, the research suggests that it is less necessary for trusted leaders to share their power in order to motivate subordinates’ proactive behaviors.

    “If you view your leader as incompetent, you may prefer to make your own decisions than follow what he or she tells you to do,” explains Guo. “Therefore, empowered employees with lower level of trust in leader competency are more likely to seize opportunities to exert more proactive behaviors.”

    The findings have several implications for management.

    “Leaders can foster proactivity by sharing power and adopting empowering behaviors, such as advising subordinates to search for solutions themselves or as a team,” says Guo. “Organizations could also train leaders on how to effectively empower employees, or even selectively recruit and promote managers with a higher tendency to empower their subordinates.”

    Organizations could also improve proactivity by paying attention to role breadth self-efficacy.

    “Role breadth self-efficacy could be used as a selection criterion in the hiring process. Organizations can also foster this by encouraging job rotation and information sharing,” says Guo.

    One limitation of the study is that it only assessed Chinese leaders and subordinates — so the findings may not be applicable across all countries and cultures.

    “China was especially suitable for our empirical setting, because it is a country where employees’ work behaviors are significantly influenced by their leaders,” says Guo. “Future studies should utilize a larger and multinational sample to validate our findings.”


  3. Study examines workplace incivility: the silent epidemic

    November 6, 2017 by Ashley

    From the Texas A&M University press release:

    Workplace incivility is taking over our organizations, professional relationships and everyday interactions. According to Dr. Jia Wang, associate professor of human resource development, understanding why incivility happens and how to address it starts with awareness.

    “When we think about incivility we think about something major, but it doesn’t have to be,” explained Dr. Wang. “Most of the time it’s the little things accumulated in your daily life that make a huge impact.”

    When incivility happens and it affects enough employees, it can impact productivity and, eventually, an organization’s bottom line. Uncivil acts, also termed microaggressions, have been cited as a major cause of employee turnover, poor workplace climate and job dissatisfaction.

    “Many people experience incivility, but they choose not to speak up because they need the job or worry about retribution,” stated Dr. Wang. “I want to help people to be courageous and say ‘this is not right and it needs to stop.'”

    So, what can an organization do to reduce and prevent incivility in the workplace?

    Define Acceptable Behavior

    It starts with the organization’s leadership. To make a change in the workplace, leaders need to develop behavior statements. These statements define what qualifies as uncivil on both the personal and organizational level.

    “If I was holding a workshop session, I would have [an employer] sit down and brainstorm as many statements as they could. I would have them think about things they have observed and experienced and what they would consider uncivil,” explained Dr. Wang.

    Engage with Employees

    It is also important for leadership to take a look at their own actions and determine whether they are being civil to their employees. A leadership team has to be willing to engage in conversations with and take feedback from colleagues.

    Unfortunately, a lot of people — including CEOs and corporate leaders — are not willing to discuss uncivil behavior because it is uncomfortable and often confrontational.

    Recognize Behavior Patterns

    Dr. Wang recommends making small, daily changes such as starting a meeting to discuss bad behavior a company wants to stop and good behavior that deserves recognition.

    “To me, incivility is a culture thing and culture change does not happen overnight. But, you can educate people to be culturally aware and culturally competent.”

    Stay Accountable

    Human resource professionals can play a key role in this process by playing the role of executive coach. This relationship can support cultures and policies that measure behavior and hold individuals accountable.

    “What kind of culture do you want to foster in your organization? How do you translate that? The leadership really needs to be serious and sincere about that… being their coach is very important.”

    Reinforce your Values

    Dr. Wang says setting clear behavioral expectations is not enough to stem the flow of uncivil behavior, especially when they are only posted in hallways or addressed once a year.

    Continually reviewing and talking about an organization’s behavior statements shows employees that the leadership team isn’t just checking off a box, but that they really care about changing the climate.


  4. Study suggests workers may ‘choke’ under pressure of non-monetary incentives

    October 22, 2017 by Ashley

    From the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville press release:

    Competition for non-monetary awards can have adverse effects on performance and may cause employees to “choke” under pressure, according to a new study by a University of Arkansas economist.

    Raja Kali, professor of economics in the Sam M. Walton College of Business, and colleagues at HEC Montreal, a business school in Canada, examined the performance of elite U.S. golfers between 2006 and 2012 and found that players underperformed when trying to qualify for the U.S. Ryder Cup team, which does not compensate them for participating.

    The findings, published in the Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, challenge historical findings indicating that non-monetary incentives like plaques, rings and “employee-of-the-year” competitions motivate employees to perform better.

    “In terms of broader impact or relevance to the way firms do business, these findings are important, because managers and firms in general probably do not realize that some non-monetary efforts to build morale or boost performance may not be helping,” Kali said. “In fact, they may be counterproductive.”

    The researchers focused on performances of elite golfers in PGA of America tournaments that qualified them for the Ryder Cup, the competition between U.S. and European golfers. Being part of an elite group of golfers and the opportunity to represent one’s country were identified as primary incentives for participating in the Ryder Cup.

    The Ryder Cup qualifying point system allocates a number of points to each PGA Tour tournament. During the qualifying period, which is typically two years, two editions of the same PGA Tour have a different value of Ryder Cup points. One year — the year previous to the Ryder Cup — there are few points, and the next year — the year of the Ryder Cup — there are many points, while all other aspects of the tournament are the same.

    The researchers’ strategy was to compare the performance of players across the same tournament in two subsequent years. By focusing on blocks of the PGA Tour tournament with similar economic incentives (prize money) but different glory incentives (Ryder Cup points), they could measure the effect of the latter.

    “We found significant evidence that the desire to attain glory — which, in this case, we defined as the effects of status, social esteem and respect — was a burden for player performance,” Kali said. “Furthermore, the players who underperformed the most were those who were in more desperate need of Ryder Cup points.”

    The researchers wanted to understand and add to the literature on non-monetary incentives, which are widely used by firms and are generally assumed to have a positive impact on worker performance. The new study is the first to examine non-monetary incentives in a competitive, entrepreneurial setting.

    It is also the first study to find evidence of diminished performance or failure — popularly referred to as “choking,” especially in the context of sports — when explicitly competing for non-monetary incentives.

    Choking under pressure, rather than risk-taking or intimidation by superstars, seems to be the reason behind underperformance, especially when the competitive pressure intensifies,” Kali said.


  5. Study suggests middle managers sometimes turn to unethical behavior to face unrealistic expectations

    October 15, 2017 by Ashley

    From the Penn State press release:

    While unethical behavior in organizations is often portrayed as flowing down from top management, or creeping up from low-level positions, a team of researchers suggest that middle management also can play a key role in promoting wide-spread unethical behavior among their subordinates.

    In a study of a large telecommunications company, researchers found that middle managers used a range of tactics to inflate their subordinates’ performance and deceive top management, according to Linda Treviño, distinguished professor of organizational behavior and ethics, Smeal College of Business, Penn State. The managers may have been motivated to engage in this behavior because leadership instituted performance targets that were unrealizable, she added.

    When creating a new unit, a company’s top management usually also sketches out the unit’s performance routines — for example, they set goals, develop incentives and designate certain responsibilities, according to the researchers. Middle managers are then tasked with carrying out these new directives. But, in the company studied by the researchers, this turned out to be impossible.

    “What we found in this particular case — but I think it happens a lot — is that there were obstacles in the way of achieving these goals set by top management,” said Treviño. “For a variety of reasons, the goals were unrealistic and unachievable. The workers didn’t have enough training. They didn’t feel competent. They didn’t know the products well enough. There weren’t enough customers and there wasn’t even enough time to get all the work done.”

    Facing these obstacles, middle management enacted a series of moves designed to deceive top management into believing that teams were actually meeting their goals, according to Treviño, who worked with Niki A. den Nieuwenboer, assistant professor of organizational behavior and business ethics, University of Kansas; and Joa?o Viera da Cunha, associate professor, IESEG School of Management.

    “It became clear to middle managers that there was no way their people could meet these goals,” said Treviño. “They got really creative because their bonuses are tied to what their people do, or because they didn’t want to lose their jobs. Middle managers exploited vulnerabilities they identified in the organization to come up with ways to make it look like their workers were achieving goals when they weren’t.”

    According to the researchers, these strategies included coopting sales from another unit, portraying orders as actual sales and ensuring that the flow of sales data reported in the company’s IT system looked normal. Middle managers created some of these behaviors on their own, but they also learned tactics from other managers, according to the researchers, who report their findings in Organization Science, online now.

    Middle managers also used a range of tactics to coerce their subordinates to keep up the ruse, including rewards for unethical behavior and public shaming for those who were reluctant to engage in the unethical tactics.

    “Interestingly, what we didn’t see is managers speaking up, we didn’t see them pushing back against the unrealistic goals,” said Treviño. “We know a lot about what we refer to as ‘voice’ in an organization and people are fearful and they tend to keep quiet for the most part.”

    The researchers suggested that the findings could offer insights into other scandals, such as the Wells Fargo and the U.S. Veteran Administration hospital misconduct. They added that top management in organizations should do more in-depth work to institute realistic goals and incentives.

    “Everybody has goals and goals are motivating, but there are nuances,” said Treviño. “What goal-setting theory says is that if you’re not committed to the goal because you think it’s unachievable, you’ll just throw your hands up and give up. Most front-line employees wanted to do that. But the managers intervened, coercing them to engage in the unethical behaviors.”

    This type of deception can harm an organization in several ways, including its bottom line through the awarding of bonuses based on this deceptive performance, but also because upper management made strategic decisions and allocated resources based on the unit’s feigned success.

    “How can you lead a company if the performance information you get is fake? You end up making bad decisions,” den Nieuwenboer said.

    One of the researchers gathered data for over a year as part of an ethnographic study, a type of study that requires researchers to immerse themselves in the culture and the lives of their subjects. In this case, the ethnographer studied the implementation of a new unit in the telecom company. As part of the data collection, the researcher spent 273 days shadowing workers, 20 days observing middle managers, listened to approximately 15 to 22 informal — lunch or watercooler — breaks between workers per week and conducted 105 formal interviews. Interactions on the phone, through email and in face-to-face meetings were observed and documented.

    “One of the advantages that this kind of data affords you is the opportunity to observe what’s going on across hierarchical levels,” said Treviño. “The middle management role is largely an invisible role. As a researcher, you just don’t get to see that role very often.”


  6. Coping with stressful organizational change

    October 4, 2017 by Ashley

    From the Inderscience press release:

    Stress is not a recent phenomenon, but the modern work environment seems to highlight its detrimental effects on employees. This is no more obvious than during times of organisational change. Research published in the International Journal of Work Organisation and Emotion, considers the impact of such changes on workers in a healthcare authority in New Zealand, highlighting the problems that any organization might face under such circumstances and pointing to possible methods to cope and remediate employee stress.

    Stress is present to some degree in any organizational context as employees, including managers, grapple with a host of work demands, suggests Roy Smollan of the Department of Management, at Auckland University of Technology. Individuals all have different coping strategies although ultimately not everyone copes. It all depends on the specific stressors, the individual’s personality, emotional intelligence, and their social identity. Moreover, specific stressors need tailored coping strategies, suggests Smollan. He reports that stress is exacerbated when processes such as organizational change exist in a cloud of ambiguity and uncertainty, when those processes are undertaken without consultation with employees, and when changes are either miscommunicated or not communicated at all.

    Smollan’s case study of a New Zealand healthcare authority undergoing major restructuring represents a quite unique qualitative examination of the stresses of work life as those involved are caught up in the tumultuous processes of organizational change. It focused on how individuals attempted to maintain their psychological wellbeing during these changes and learned to cope with the stress. Fundamentally, while many people involved eschewed help from others and relied more on their strengths, in part for fear of appearing weak, accessing support networks was critical for others. For all involved being proactive in problem solving and managing one’s thoughts and emotions during stressful times were nevertheless important for everyone involved.

    “Managers have a key role to play in anticipating when organizational change may elicit stress and in helping those affected to cope with it,” concludes Smollan.


  7. Seeking feedback not always sufficient for stimulating creativity

    by Ashley

    From the Universiteit van Amsterdam (UVA) press release:

    It is widely believed that seeking feedback from colleagues, managers, friends and family enhances employees’ creativity. But is this always the case? No, a positive effect depends on the work environment. This is the conclusion of new joint research study led by UvA work and organizational psychologist Roy Sijbom. The team’s findings were recently published in the Journal of Organizational Behavior.

    The notion that obtaining external feedback about one’s ideas is essential for increasing creativity is deeply rooted in society. For example, entrepreneurs are encouraged to engage customers in order to ascertain whether their business model is viable and academics attend conferences to obtain feedback on their research results. An implicit assumption is that individuals who have obtained feedback will also actually (be able to) utilize it.

    ‘The idea is simple: seeking feedback from different sources – also known as feedback source variety — benefits one’s creativity since it leads to a greater diversity of viewpoints’, says Sijbom. ‘And the more diverse the viewpoints, the more it benefits one’s creativity because by combining and integrating all the different viewpoints new perspectives will emerge that in turn will result in more creativity. The question, however, is whether these beneficial effects always occur.’

    The researchers examined how specific characteristics of the immediate work environment influence the relationship between feedback source variety and creative performance. They hereby focused on two elements that are typical for contemporary work environments: the perceived rate of change of performance standards (performance dynamism) and the extent to which employees feel they have sufficient time to develop creative ideas at work (experienced creative time pressure). ‘We discovered an exponential relationship between the search for input from a variety of feedback sources and creativity, but only when performance standards within an organization are changing and when a relatively low creative time pressure is experienced‘, says Sijbom.

    Sijbom offers several recommendations: ‘The most important is that when an organization stimulates feedback seeking, it needs to ensure that the work environment is optimal enough to utilize the benefits of feedback. In a more concrete sense, organizations can, for example, consider using feedback workshops in which employees are encouraged to reflect on diverse feedback and equipped with techniques and strategies on how to incorporate feedback in their daily work. In addition, managers should not only stimulate their employees to actively cultivate relationships with potential feedback sources within and outside the organization, but also provide sufficient time to process the feedback obtained from these relationships.’

    The research project consisted of two studies. In the first study, the researchers used online questionnaires to obtain data from 1,031 employees who work in consultancy. In the second study, 181 ‘caretakers’ — nurses and other care professionals — in hospitals were asked to complete a survey, but the creative achievements were assessed by their direct managers.


  8. Study suggests abusive bosses may feel good – but only for a while

    October 3, 2017 by Ashley

    From the Michigan State University press release:

    Being a jerk to your employees may actually improve your well-being, but only for a short while, suggests new research on abusive bosses co-authored by a Michigan State University business scholar.

    Bullying and belittling employees starts to take its toll on a supervisor’s mental state after about a week, according to the study, which is published in the Academy of Management Journal.

    “The moral of the story is that although abuse may be helpful and even mentally restorative for supervisors in the short-term, over the long haul it will come back to haunt them,” said Russell Johnson, MSU associate professor of management and an expert on workplace psychology.

    While numerous studies have documented the negative effects of abusive supervision, some bosses nevertheless still act like jerks, meaning there must be some sort of benefit or reinforcement for them, Johnson said.

    Indeed, the researchers found that supervisors who were abusive felt a sense of recovery because their boorish behavior helped replenish their mental energy and resources. Johnson said it requires mental effort to suppress abusive behavior — which can lead to mental fatigue — but supervisors who act on that impulse “save” the mental energy that would otherwise have been depleted by refraining from abuse.

    Johnson and colleagues conducted multiple field and experiments on abusive bosses in the United States and China, verifying the results were not culture-specific. They collected daily survey data over a four-week period and studied workers and supervisors in a variety of industries including manufacturing, service and education.

    The benefits of abusive supervision appeared to be short-lived, lasting a week or less. After that, abusive supervisors started to experience decreased trust, support and productivity from employees — and these are critical resources for the bosses’ recovery and engagement.

    According to the study, although workers may not immediately confront their bosses following abusive behavior, over time they react in negative ways, such as engaging in counterproductive and aggressive behaviors and even quitting.

    To prevent abusive behavior, the researchers suggest supervisors take well-timed breaks, reduce their workloads and communicate more with their employees. Communicating with workers may help supervisors by releasing negative emotions through sharing, receiving social support and gaining relational energy from their coworkers.

    Co-authors are Xin Qin from Sun Yat-sen University, Mingpeng Huang from the University of International Business and Economics, Qiongjing Hu from Peking University and Dong Ju from Communication University of China.


  9. Study suggests managers can help prevent employees from working while sick

    August 24, 2017 by Ashley

    From the Wiley press release:

    A new study indicates that managerial support can help prevent employees who work extremely hard out of an obsessive drive (‘workaholics’) from forcing themselves to attend work when feeling sick. Such support from managers can also help address work-family conflict in workaholics.

    Increasing the awareness of supervisors of the harmful consequences and costs associated with showing up to work while ill (presenteeism) could allow them to recognise the value of rest and recovery. This could help prevent employees from feeling unable to cope efficiently with obligations pertaining to work and family.

    Managers should be trained to develop supportive leadership skills that are able to function as a protective factor buffering the detrimental association between an overwhelming compulsion to work and presenteeism,” said Dr. Greta Mazzetti, lead author of the International Journal of Psychology study.


  10. Study suggests teacher burnout can be contagious

    July 30, 2017 by Ashley

    From the Michigan State University press release:

    Burnout among young teachers appears to be contagious, indicates a new study led by Michigan State University education scholars.

    The study found a significant link between burnout among early-career teachers and exposure to both a school-wide culture of burnout and burnout among the young teachers’ closest circle of colleagues.

    Surprisingly, the link was stronger to the school-wide culture of burnout than it was to burnout among close colleagues.

    “If you are surrounded by people who are downcast or walking around under a pall of burnout, then it has a high chance of spilling over, even if you don’t have direct contact with these folks,” said Kenneth Frank, professor of measurement and quantitative methods in MSU’s College of Education.

    “This study,” Frank added, “is one of the first to provide evidence that the organizational culture in schools can make a notable difference for early-career teachers’ burnout levels.”

    Frank co-authored the study with Jihyun Kim, an MSU doctoral student, and Peter Youngs, a former MSU scholar who’s now an associate professor at the University of Virginia. Their findings appear in the journal Teaching and Teacher Education.

    The researchers analyzed the survey data on burnout of 171 teachers who were in their first four years in the profession and 289 experienced teachers who served as the young teachers’ mentors or close colleagues.

    Kim, lead author on the paper, said she was interested in investigating teacher burnout based on her experiences as an early-career teacher in her native Korea, where she worked long days and weekends.

    Early-career teachers are particularly vulnerable to stress and burnout as they adjust to working full-time and respond to school and district expectations, she said. Further, schools often fail to provide teachers with enough resources, including the appropriate teaching materials, assistant teachers, professional development and preparation time.

    “These resources are critical not only for reducing teacher burnout, but also for closing gaps in students’ learning,” said Kim, who will begin work in the fall as an assistant professor of education at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania.

    Frank said teacher burnout is also tied to the current education policy environment. Controversial policies such as evaluating teachers based primarily on student test scores, merit pay for teachers and lack of voice in assignment of students to teachers can bring added pressure.

    “We know that early career teachers are susceptible to burnout because of the significant demands placed on them. It is also clear that the introduction of new reforms in K-12 education on a frequent basis adds to the pressures they experience,” Frank said.

    “If school administrators and policymakers are serious about promoting retention and reducing burnout among novice teachers, they should be aware not just of the curriculum they are advocating, or their rules and policies for teachers. They should also attend to how the organizational culture in their schools can have direct effects on burnout levels of their faculty.”