The current study introduces an ultra-short, 3-item version of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale. Using five national samples from Finland ( N = 22,117), Japan ( N = 1,968), the Netherlands ( N = 38,278), Belgium/Flanders ( N = 5,062), and Spain ( N = 10,040) its internal consistency and factorial validity vis-à-vis validated measures of burnout, workaholism, and job boredom are demonstrated. Moreover, the UWES-3 shares 86–92% of its variance with the longer nine-item version and the pattern of correlations of both versions with 9 indicators of well-being, 8 job demands, 10 job resources, and 6 outcomes is highly similar with an average, absolute difference between correlations of only .02. Hence, it is concluded that the UWES-3 is a reliable and valid indicator of work engagement that can be used as an alternative to the longer version, for instance in national and international epidemiological surveys on employee’s working conditions.

The aim of the present study is to demonstrate the empirical distinctiveness of workaholism and work engagement by examining their relationships with well-being in a sample of 776 Japanese employees. We expected that workaholism is associated with unwell-being (i.e., high psychological distress and physical complaints, low job and family satisfaction, and low job performance), whereas work engagement is associated with well-being. Well-validated questionnaires were used to measure workaholism (DUWAS), work engagement (UWES), and well-being (BJSQ, HPQ). Structural Equation Modeling showed that, as expected, workaholism was positively associated with ill-health (i.e., psychological distress and physical complaints) and negatively associated with life satisfaction (i.e., job and family satisfaction) and job performance. In contrast, work engagement was negatively associated with ill-health and positively associated with life satisfaction and job performance. These findings suggest that workaholism and work engagement are two different kinds of concepts, which are negatively and positively related to various indicators of well-being, respectively.

This study investigated the distinctiveness between workaholism and work engagement by examining their longitudinal relationships (measurement interval=7 months) with well-being and performance in a sample of 1,967 Japanese employees from various occupations. Based on a previous cross-sectional study (Shimazu & Schaufeli, 2009), we expected that workaholism predicts future unwell-being (i.e., high ill-health and low life satisfaction) and poor job performance, whereas work engagement predicts future well-being (i.e., low ill-health and high life satisfaction) and superior job performance. T1–T2 changes in ill-health, life satisfaction and job performance were measured as residual scores that were then included in the structural equation model. Results showed that workaholism and work engagement were weakly and positively related to each other. In addition, workaholism was related to an increase in ill-health and to a decrease in life satisfaction. In contrast, work engagement was related to a decrease in ill-health and to increases in both life satisfaction and job performance. These findings suggest that workaholism and work engagement are two different kinds of concepts that are oppositely related to well-being and performance.