What impact does workaholism hold upon the person?
The word ‘workaholism’ should non be new to people in the present universe. Peoples who are workaholic are normally considered to be addicted to work and working longer hours than what they expected to. However. to give a more accurate definition for the word ‘workaholism’ . harmonizing to Spence and Robbins ( 1992 ) . a existent workaholic is being described as people who are keen on making their occupations. yet has no passion and love in it. the occupation is done due to the interior force per unit area of oneself. Workaholism is non merely debatable for workaholic people themselves. but besides brings negative impact to everyone who related to them. such as their households. employers and even the society as a whole ( Robinson. 2000. 2001 ; Salmela-Aro & A ; Nurmi. 2004 ) . This essay is traveling to discourse the impact that workaholism have upon the person in three dimentions: results of work. quality of societal relationships and perceived wellness. It is besides traveling to show the pros and cons of being workaholic as an person and the influences that resulted by workaholism. It will eventually make a decision about how workaholism impact on the persons.
Before to get down the treatment. there is one thing to detect about. which is the type of workaholism. Not all types of workaholism are considered as bad. Spence and Robbins ( 1992 ) demo a two-factor attack to workaholism. they classify people who considered being workaholic into two groups: partisans workaholic or non-enthusiasts workaholic. As it says. people who are related to workaholic partisans would work longer hours merely because they love their occupation and genuinely bask the procedure of finishing their plants. Therefore. this group of persons is less likely to hold negative mental or physical cost due to their workaholic behavior. Conversely. people who are non-enthusiasts workaholic are those extremely driven to work. nevertheless. have low degree of enjoyment in their on the job procedure. This is to state that these persons are working longer hours because of their interior force per unit area and they are forced to make so because of the internal emphasis. This group is more likely to see mental or physical unwellness. due to larger sum of work but less public-service corporation gained from it.
Behaviour Pattern and Impact on Individual:
Scott. Moore. and Miceli provided a more elaborate categorization of workaholism in the twelvemonth of 1997. where they criticised the definition made by Spence and Robbins ( 1992 ) that they think workaholism should affect more stable behavioral forms. Therefore they present the types of workaholic behavior forms. The form has sort workaholic types into three classs. which are compulsive-dependent workaholics. perfectionist workaholics and achievement-orientated workaholics.
Harmonizing to Scott et Al ( 1997 ) . compulsive-dependent workaholics are already cognizant of they are overworking. nevertheless. they can non mentally and physically command themselves from working compulsively. Perfectionist workaholics have non much difference to the compulsive-dependent workaholics. They besides making inordinate sum of work and shows marks of personality upset. nevertheless. they are more eager for seeking control of themselves and are more meticulous. Perfectionist workaholics happen it is really hard to work with their co-workers and portion their work with them. and are highly discreet on unimportant inside informations. These behaviors are really harmful to some of their societal relationships at work with their colleagues and can besides do serious inefficiency at work.
Finally. the achievement-oriented workaholics have a really competitory feature and really emulative. These people have strong desire to success in their calling and ego established end. and therefore they work inordinate hours to accomplish their purpose. Due to the emulative nature of these persons. they are likely non merely mentally and physically burnout themselves. they are besides likely to pass over out the relationship between their colleagues. friend. and even their household ( Avani. Mark. Jennifer & A ; Scott. 2012 ) .
For all these workaholics. although they are different in types and may hold different features. they are all fighting with the exclusion of other societal or life activities due to their over-indulgence in work activities ( Robinson. 1997 ) .
Results of Work:
It seems that workaholics are working harder than other non-workaholics worker since they are working longer clip. they should be more productive and efficient in their work outcomes ; nevertheless. the research shows a different consequence. Burke ( 2001 ) states that the workaholics are working harder yet receive less wages for their attempts. This statement is supported by the thought of Spence & A ; Robbins ( 1992 ) . that it is non the external incentives makes workaholics work. but the strong interior thrust of workaholics. From these two statements. workaholism does non hold ideal positive impact on persons who are workaholics. However. some research workers view workaholism as a positive phenomenon. as they think on an organisational degree. employers would be happy to use a workaholic to for them ( Scott. Moore. & A ; Miceli. 1997 ) . Many organisational leaders normally are addicted to work themselves ( Shimazu & A ; Schaufeli. 2009 ) . Besides Korn. Pratt and Lambrou ( 1987 ) address the workaholics ‘hyper-performers’ on an organisational point of position.
Korn. E. R. . Pratt. G. J. . & A ; Lambrou. P. T. ( 1987 ) . Hyper-performance: The A. I. M. scheme for let go ofing your concern potency. New York: John Wiley.
Robinson. B. ( 2000 ) . Workaholism: Bridging the spread between workplace. sociocultural. and household research. Journal of Employment Counseling. 37. 31-47. hypertext transfer protocol: //dx. Department of the Interior. org/10. 1002/j. 2161-1920. 2000. tb01024. ten
Robinson. B. ( 2001 ) . Workaholism and household operation: A profile of familial relationships. psychological results. and research considerations. Contemporary Family Therapy: An International Journal. 23. 123-135. hypertext transfer protocol: //dx. Department of the Interior. org/10. 1023/A:1007880301342
Robinson. B. E. ( 1997 ) . Work dependence and the household: Conceptual research considerations. Early Child Development and Care. 137. 77-92.
Salmela-Aro. K. . & A ; Nurmi. J. ( 2004 ) . Employees’ motivational orientation and wellbeing at work: A person-oriented attack. Journal of Organizational Change Management. 17. 471-489. hypertext transfer protocol: //dx. Department of the Interior. org/10. 1108/09534810410554498
Scott. K. S. . Moore. K. S. . & A ; Miceli. M. P. ( 1997 ) . An geographic expedition of the significance and effects of workaholism. Human Relations. 50. 287–314.
Shimazu. A. . & A ; Schaufeli. W. B. ( 2009 ) . Is workaholism good or bad for employee well- being? The peculiarity of workaholism and work battle among Nipponese employees. Industrial Health. 47. 495-502.