Scholarly interest in workaholism has increased dramatically in recent years. This research has underscored the detrimental effects of workaholism for employees, their families, and the organizations that employ them. Despite drastic improvements in the quality of studies examining workaholism over the past several decades, researchers continue to almost exclusively rely on older measures of workaholism or new measures derived from these original measures. In the present study, we outline why a new measure is needed and propose a multidimensional conceptualization of workaholism that encompasses motivational, cognitive, emotional, and behavioral dimensions. We then develop and validate a new multidimensional measure of workaholism: the Multidimensional Workaholism Scale (MWS). Evidence from 5 samples representing individuals working in a wide variety of occupations and industries throughout the United States (total N = 1,252) provides support that (a) our proposed 4-factor structure replicates and fits better than alternative models; (b) the measure demonstrates high reliability and content validity; (c) the measure demonstrates evidence for convergent and discriminant validity with constructs in workaholism's nomological network; (d) the measure demonstrates incremental validity in the prediction of important outcomes over and above prior measures of workaholism; and (e) the different dimensions demonstrate incremental validity in the prediction of specific outcomes over and above other dimensions of the MWS. Overall, results from the present study suggest that the MWS is a reliable and valid measure that can advance a more nuanced approach to research and practice relating to workaholism. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

The current study aimed to test how workload, via workaholism, impacts job performance along with the complex interplay of perfectionistic concerns and work engagement in this mediated relationship. A two-wave, first and second stage dual-moderated mediation model was tested in an SEM framework. Results based on a sample of 208 workers revealed a complex and nuanced relationship among the studied constructs, such that the simple mediation model was not significant, but the indirect effect was negative, nonsignificant, or positive conditional on both moderators. The results offer interesting theoretical and practical implications for future studies to be conducted in this area of research. In particular, lower levels of perfectionistic concerns were associated with a positive relationship between workload and workaholism, and lower levels of work engagement were related to a negative link between workaholism and job performance. Findings suggest work engagement should be monitored and promoted by managers, especially when workload, and consequently, the possible risk of workaholism, cannot be avoided.

The Workplace Health Group (WHG) was established in 1998 to conduct research on worker health and safety and organizational effectiveness. This multidisciplinary team includes researchers with backgrounds in psychology, health promotion and behavior, and intervention design, implementation, and evaluation. The article begins with a brief history of the team, its guiding principles, and stages of team formation and development. This section provides examples of the roles, team composition, structure, processes, cognition, leadership, and climate played in the various stages of team development, as well as how they influenced team effectiveness. The WHG formed with functional diversity-variety in knowledge, skills, and abilities-in mind, and the impact of this diversity is discussed throughout the article. Illustrations of how the functional diversity of the WHG has led to real-world impact are provided. The article concludes with some lessons learned and recommendations for creating and sustaining multidisciplinary teams based on the WHG's 20 years of experience and the team science literature.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine the mediating role of appraisals in three stressor–well-being relationships: (1) the mediating role of challenge appraisals in the relationship between daily skill demands and daily work engagement, (2) the mediating role of hindrance appraisals in the relationship between daily interruptions and daily depletion and (3) the mediating role of threat appraisals in the relationship between daily emotional demands and daily anxiety. We also examined the moderating influence of conscientiousness on the daily skill demands–challenge appraisal relationship, the moderating role of extraversion on the daily interruptions–hindrance appraisal relationship and the moderating influence of neuroticism on the daily emotional demands–threat appraisal relationship. Supplemental analyses also examined the moderating influence of the aforementioned personality traits on the respective direct effects of stressors on well-being outcomes.Design/methodology/approach: We tested our hypotheses using a 5-days experience sampling design in a sample of 114 working adults and employed multilevel modeling.Findings: All hypothesized mediating mechanisms were supported, however, the majority of moderation hypotheses were not supported.Originality/value: We sought to extend the relatively recent advancement in the challenge–hindrance framework to provide additional evidence of the utility of distinguishing between challenge, hindrance and threat stressors. Although not supported, this is the one of the first papers to test the moderating influence of personality traits on the stressor–appraisal relationship.

Purpose: Report the results of a randomized, controlled trial of Live Healthy, Work Healthy (LHWH), a worksite translation of the Chronic Disease Self-Management Program (CDSMP). Design: 14 worksites were randomly assigned to LHWH, standard CDSMP (usual care) or no-intervention (control) group. Setting: The diverse set of work organizations centered around a rural community in SE US. Subjects: 411 participants completed baseline data with 359 being included in the final analyses. Intervention: LHWH had been adapted to fit the unique characteristics of work organizations. This translated program consists of 15 sessions over 8 weeks and was facilitated by trained lay leaders. Measures: The primary outcomes including health risk, patient-provider communication, quality of life, medical adherence and work performance were collected pretest, posttest (6 mos.) and follow-up (12 mos.). Analysis: Analyses were conducted using latent change score models in a structural equation modeling framework. Results: 79% of participants reported at least one chronic condition with an average of 2.7 chronic conditions reported. Results indicated that LHWH program demonstrated positive changes in a most outcomes including significant exercise (uΔ = 0.89, p < .01), chronic disease self-efficacy (uΔ = 0.63, p < .05), fatigue (uΔ = −1.45, p < .05), stress (uΔ = −0.98, p < .01) and mentally unhealthy days (uΔ = −3.47, p < .001). Conclusions: The translation of LHWH is an effective, low cost, embeddable program that has the potential to improve the health and work life of employees.

The prevalence of chronic health conditions is increasing, with over half the current workforce attempting to manage one or more chronic conditions. The Live Healthy, Work Healthy (LHWH) program is a version of the Chronic Disease Self-Management Program translated to the workplace, with the goal of improving and sustaining the health, well-being, and productivity of employees living with chronic health conditions. Using organizational support theory as a theoretical framework and a clustered randomized controlled trial design, this article demonstrates how the LHWH program positively impacts work-related quality of life, orientations toward the organization, and organizational cognitions and behaviors. Participants in the program experienced increases in perceived organizational support (POS), with a large intervention effect. Direct intervention effects were also found for burnout, work engagement, work ability, affective organizational commitment, and organizational citizenship behaviors. Within-person changes in POS during the intervention was a key mechanism through which participants of the program experienced changes in organizationally relevant outcomes. Finally, offering the program on work time strengthened these effects indirectly through greater changes in POS during the intervention period. This article provides evidence to researchers and organizational decision-makers that offering the LHWH program not only improves the health and well-being of employees but also improves important organizational outcomes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).