Intense work can take a toll on employee well-being, regardless of the job. Peer pressure, tight deadlines, or physically demanding tasks can all contribute to the strain. However, not all employees react the same way.
According to recent research by ESCP Business School, individual motivation plays a significant role in determining who thrives under intense work conditions and who seeks to leave. So, which employees relish the challenge, and which ones look for the exit? The answer, it seems, is complicated and multifaceted.
Intense work
From wielding an axe to stacking shelves, every job has the potential to be described as intense. Work intensity, however, is not measured by the length of time spent working but rather the level of physical and mental exertion required, the degree of multitasking involved, and the amount of time available for rest and recovery between tasks.
The issue at hand is that work intensity not only leads to a decline in work quality and productivity, but it is also strongly associated with reduced job satisfaction and an increased likelihood of leaving one’s job. Moreover, intensive work has been found to have adverse effects on employee well-being, including elevated levels of stress and anxiety, physical symptoms such as back pain and insomnia, and a heightened risk of suicide.
Exploring resistance to and vulnerability to work intensity is therefore imperative to address the negative consequences it has on both the individual and the workplace as a whole.
A fact of working life
Given the unlikelihood of tight deadlines or pressure to work overtime disappearing anytime soon, is there any way to mitigate the negative impact of work intensity on job satisfaction and workers’ well-being?
The research, which is based on empirical evidence, suggests that employees who engage in intensive work exhibit varying abilities to cope, especially in cases where jobs offer flexibility in terms of task performance and scheduling.
“Yet, while job discretion—a characteristic of the work environment—may buffer some of the adverse effects of work intensity, it only partially accounts for the observed variance in employee well-being attributable to intensive work,” the authors explain.
Coping with pressure
To gain a better understanding of how individuals cope with intensive work, the researchers suggest widening the focus from job characteristics to individual motivations for engaging in such work. To accomplish this, they apply self-determination theory to the domain of work intensity.
Self-determination theory identifies two forms of motivation: extrinsic and intrinsic. Extrinsic motivation is driven by a desire to achieve an external outcome, such as a tangible reward or the avoidance of punishment. In contrast, intrinsic motivation is more autonomous and arises from a personal interest or enjoyment in the activity.
When it comes to extrinsic motivation, employees may work intensively to manage unavoidable job demands or an excessive workload. For instance, understaffed companies may rely on their employees to work intensively to compensate for labor shortages. However, work intensity driven by explicit or implicit incentives, such as the desire to earn a bonus, reflects greater autonomy.
Finally, some employees may be intrinsically motivated to work hard because they find their job interesting or enjoy the challenge it presents. According to self-determination theory, these types of motivation are linked to varying levels of work-related well-being.
“The greater the degree of perceived relative autonomy, the more positively a motivation type should be associated with employee well-being,” the researchers explain.
This pattern has been observed across occupations, from gas-station employees to members of a finance-sector trade union. Intrinsic motivation is associated with positive well-being, whereas extrinsic motivation is associated with negative well-being.
Influencing happiness
The researchers argue that when intensity at work is driven by either overt or covert incentives, it is more likely to result in higher levels of engagement and happiness at work, and consequently a lower likelihood of resigning than when the work intensity was driven by job requirements.
Conversely, they argued that work intensity propelled by intrinsic motivations generates more favorable employee job satisfaction and diminished intent to resign than work intensity motivated by explicit or implicit incentives.
To validate their hypothesis, the researchers conducted a survey of over 600 employees across 15 branches of a prominent Greek supermarket chain, an environment characterized by elevated work intensity. Adjusting their findings for the impact of job discretion, the researchers discovered conclusive evidence to support their hypotheses.
Passion matters
In other words, the mantra that loving our job makes it not appear like work has an element of truth to it, as this passion helps us to reduce any suffering associated with the intensity of the job.
“When considering a high-intensity job, workers could benefit from developing some notion of their anticipated motives for intensive work,” they explain. “From the standpoint of subjective well-being, jobs in which an employee believes they would be intrinsically motivated to work hard seem preferable to jobs in which the employee feels they could only be motivated to do so by incentives or job demands.”
The importance of work intensity, and its motivational aspects, should not be overlooked by employers. To cultivate intrinsic motivation, employers can strive to create job roles and tasks that are inherently engaging and stimulating.
Additionally, during the recruitment process, emphasis can be placed on identifying candidates who possess a natural inclination towards working diligently, possibly due to the alignment of their interests with the job requirements. Doing these things can help employees better cope with a stressful and intense job.
