Authors: Alexandrya H. Cairns1, Danielle Earnest2, Stephanie M. Singe3

1PhD, ATC, Assistant Professor, Department of Health and Movement Sciences, Southern Connecticut State University

2BS, Athletic Training Student, Department of Kinesiology University of Connecticut

3PhD, ATC, FNATA, Professor, Department of Kinesiology, University of Connecticut

 

Corresponding Author:

[email protected]

ABSTRACT 


Purpose: The culture of National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA) Division I (DI) athletics can stimulate a culture that appears to “greedy” placing high demands on the time and energy of those working within the sport organization. These intense demands create the potential for experiences of work addiction, burnout, and work-family conflict among sport professionals. We aimed to examine the overall experiences of work addiction, burnout, and work-family conflict within the NCAA DI sport organization. Methods: We used an online cross-sectional survey (Qualtrics, Provo, UT) composed of demographics, measurement tools for work addiction, burnout, and work-family conflict. Each of the scales have strong internal consistency as reported by Cronbach’s alpha scores. The study was distributed to certified athletic trainers (AT), coaches, and sport performance coaches (SPC) working full-time in their position at an NCAA DI institution. Results: There was no significant difference in reported scores on the BWAS between athletic trainers and coaches (U = 3952.00, p = .160), and no significant difference was found between sport performance coaches and athletic trainers (U = 5894.00, p = .879). A significant difference of burnout levels between athletic trainers and coaches was revealed (U = 3559.50, p = .017) andno significant difference discovered in the reported levels of burnout between athletic trainers and sport performance coaches (U = 5483.00, p = .313). There was no significant difference between athletic trainers and coaches for work-family conflict (U = 4483.00, p =.939), or sport performance sport performance coaches and athletic trainers (U= 5576.50, p = .416). Conclusions: Our results indicate that work addiction and work-family conflict are experienced similarly across the sport organization. Athletic trainers were found to experience higher levels of burnout compared to coaches, but similar levels to sport performance coaches. Application in Sport: Implementing policies that address work and family strain coaches, athletic trainers, and sport performance coaches can face working in sport is important. Although overall burnout was low, athletic trainers were at greater risk; thus addressing the factors causing them to have greater levels of burnout than other 2 stakeholder groups is important.

Key Words: stress, role strain, workplace dynamics, organization conflict

INTRODUCTION 

Working within a collegiate sport organization places high demands on an individual, regardless of the role they play within that organization. The demands of the individual working in sport can include long working hours (+40 hours a week) that extend into nights and weekends (Laskowski & Ebben, 2016; Mazerolle et al., 2011; Scriber & Alderman, 2005; Singe et al., 2023b). Working hours are often accompanied by the need to be physically present, limiting flexibility and autonomy over work scheduling (Laskowski & Ebben, 2016; Mazerolle et al., 2011; Scriber & Alderman, 2005; Singe et al., 2023b). Organizational culture represents the underlying beliefs, values, and assumptions within an organization (Schein, 2010). The culture within sport organization has been described as one that is influenced by commercialization which has led to pressures to win at all costs due to the financial implications (Pope & Pope, 2014). Coaches, athletic trainers, and others working in sport organizations can feel the pressures associated with this culture, which can increase their stress, and influence their perceptions of work saliency, work-family conflict, and burnout.

Work addiction is a preoccupation with work (Andreassen, 2014; Robinson, 1999); and can be conceptualized as an individual who prioritizes their work over other responsibilities, which can lead to work-family conflict (Eason et al., 2022). Working in sport may have an influence on experiences of work addiction, particularly if the expectations around success and commitment hinge on prioritizing work. Coaches, athletic trainers, and sport performance coaches all contribute to the mission of the sport organization yet have very different and unique roles. Thus, the level of work addiction each of these individuals working in sport may demonstrate could vary, as well as the influence it may have on burnout and work-family. Research has examined experiences of burnout and work-family conflict among coaches and athletic trainers, independently, but not simultaneously (Graham & Smith, 2021; Singe et al., 2022). Organizational factors unique to sport are perhaps keys to understanding why burnout and work-family conflict occur, and better understanding if the role assumed in the sport organization can contribute.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Working Within the Sport Organization

The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) is the governing body that administers intercollegiate athletics in the United States. The NCAA is subdivided into three different divisions to create a fair playing field where teams are competing with schools at a similar level. Many factors separate the three subdivisions including media attention, airtime, and of course resources centered around finances and scholarship (Overview, n.d.). The NCAA Division I (DI) schools typically house the largest student bodies and possess the greatest number of athletic scholarship opportunities largely attributed to their large athletic budgets. Working within the NCAA DI setting comes with increased pressures and stress (Singe et al., 2022; Taylor et al., 2019) , particularly for coaches as they must produce through wins as well as retain students in their programs (Norris et al., 2017; Singe et al., 2022). The NCAA DI programs have large budgets which has the potential to play a significant role in the pressures and stress faced by those who are employed in the division.

At the NCAA Division II (DII) level student-athletes are offered scholarships to participate, but the number per sport is much less than the NCAA DI setting (Our Division II Story, n.d.).The expectations of those student-athletes participating at this level are somewhat less than the NCAA DI level, as time demands are slightly less (Our Division II Story, n.d.). The overall philosophy of the NCAA DII setting is one about balance, in which student-athletes are pushed to excel in their sport, but also in the classroom and campus community (Our Division II story, n.d.).

The NCAA Division III (DIII) level does not award scholarships generated from athletic participation (Our Three Divisions, n.d.), and has been described as a setting that encourages student first, and athlete second. Since there are no athletic scholarships offered, the budgets within these programs are much less than the other two divisions. The demands and expectations within the NCAA DIII setting are much less than and considered to be the most well-balanced collegiate experience (Our Division III Story, n.d.).

Working in the intercollegiate setting has been described as high-pressure, demanding, and one that can increase feelings of stress. Work addiction, burnout, and challenges with work-life balance have been found to occur for those working in intercollegiate sport, including coaches, athletic administrators, sports information specialists, and athletic trainers (Dixon & Bruening, 2005; Eason et al., 2022; Graham & Smith, 2022; Hatfield & Johnson, 2012). Causative factors linked to these challenges of working in sport include culture expectations within the workplace, time demands, inflexible work schedules, travel, and role incongruence. Sport is founded on the premise of teamwork and each member of the team has a critical role to support team success. Coaches, athletic trainers, and sport performance coaches are key members within the intercollegiate setting with unique roles supporting the student-athlete. Each has different roles, responsibilities, and expectations, and evidence that suggests those working in the intercollegiate setting are challenged to push beyond their work saliency leaving them vulnerable to work addiction, burnout, and work-family conflict. 

Work Addiction and Sport

Workaholism is conceptualized as something that occurs when a person becomes completely engulfed in their work, investing their time and energy in their work life (McMillan et al., 2003). Those who display characteristics of a workaholic are prone to experiences of increased stress, burnout, and work-family conflict (Clark et al., 2016; Eason et al., 2022). One’s career has been associated with higher experiences of workaholism, such as sport as the culture is one of sacrifice, expectations to put in long work hours, and choosing work over one’s personal life (Dixon & Bruening, 2005; Graham & Dixon, 2014). Workaholics have a high involvement in their work (i.e. working long hours), have a hard time disengaging from work, and feel compelled or driven to work (McMillan et al., 2003). Working harder than perhaps their job requires workaholics will then start neglecting their lives outside of their jobs (Schaufeli et al., 2008).

Coaches, athletic trainers, and sport performance coaches all must work long hours; in fact, athletic trainers have reported working 60+ hour work weeks, extending into nights and weekends (Bruening & Dixon, 2007; Singe et al., 2023b; Snarr & Beasley, 2022). These long working hours reported by individuals working in sport have been attributed to burnout and work-family conflict (Eason et al., 2022), and recently have been suggested to be perhaps driven by work addiction ( Eason et al., 2022) or associated with it (Taylor et al., 2019). Work addiction can be explained as an individual factor that can be attributed to one’s experiences of work-family conflict or burnout, and job demands such as long hours can be an organizational construct that influences work-family conflict or burnout (Cayton & Valovich McLeod, 2020; Eason et al., 2022). What is unknown is the aspects such as the navigation of long working hours and personal attributes of a coach, athletic trainer, or sport performance coach necessary to be successful members working in intercollegiate athletics.

Work addiction has seven core components or symptoms: salience, mood modification, tolerance, withdrawal, conflict, relapse, and problems. These symptoms have been developed into a scale, the Bergen Work Addiction Scale (BWAS) as outlined by Andreassen et al. (2014) salience (the activity dominates thinking and behavior), tolerance (increasing amounts of the activity are required to achieve initial effects), mood modification (the activity modifies/improves mood), relapse (tendency for reversion to earlier patterns of the activity after abstinence of control), withdrawal (occurrence of unpleasant feelings when the activity if discontinued or suddenly reduced), conflict (the activity comes into conflict with personal life, needs, and relationships), and problems (caused by being greatly engaged in the activity).

Experiences of Burnout in Athletics

Burnout is one of the many identified stressors of those working in athletics largely attributed to the long working hours, high workloads, and demands (Singe et al., 2023b). Burnout has been defined as the degree of physical and psychological fatigue experienced by a person that can be attributed to personal, work, or client-related stress (Cairns et al., 2023; Kristensen et al., 2005). Organizational factors have been identified in being the greatest influence over experiences of burnout (Barrett et al., 2016). Individual factors such as personality have also been observed to influence burnout as well. Burnout has been positively associated with role strain, neuroticism, and work-family conflict (Barrett et al., 2016; Cayton & Valovich McLeod, 2020). The demanding environment of athletics involves high emotional involvement, stress, responsibility, and time restraints (Cayton & Valovich McLeod, 2020; Mazerolle et al., 2008). Furthermore, the organization commonly inadequately compensates their employees while still expecting them to work long hours with inadequate numbers of staff, a lack of control over scheduling, and limited time off (Bruening & Dixon, 2007; Cayton & Valovich McLeod, 2020). The combination of these factors places those working within the sport organization at an increased risk of experiencing burnout. Positive relationships have been observed between burnout, work-family conflict, and intention to leave, while negative relationships have been observed with job and life satisfaction for those experiencing burnout (Mazerolle et al., 2008).

Due to the predispositions those working in sport face, burnout has been widely studied in sport. Those working in sports have been shown to experience moderate levels of burnout (Cairns et al., 2023; Singe et al., 2023a; Snarr & Beasley, 2022). However, there have been slight fluctuations in reported levels of burnout since the pandemic with levels of burnout lessening (Cairns et al., 2023). Sport professionals also tend to report high levels of personal and work-related burnout (Singe et al., 2023a; Taylor et al., 2019). Levels of personal burnout have a positive relationship with working hours and a negative relationship with hours of sleep (Singe et al., 2023a). Men and women report similar levels of burnout, suggesting that gender is not a significant predictor of experiences of burnout (Cairns et al., 2023). Incorporating coping strategies such as social support, continuing education, and self-care in addition to organizational support have all been associated with decreased levels of burnout in sport (Singe et al., 2023a; Snarr & Beasley, 2022).

Work-family Conflict

Work-family conflict defined as a form of inter-role conflict. The conflict occurs when the general demands of, time devoted to, and strain created by the job interfere with performing family-related responsibilities (Netemeyer et al., 1996). With the high demands concerning time and presence associated with working in sport, work-family conflict is a prominent area of interest within the sport organization. Work-family conflict has been framed as a complex construct that is explained by individual, organizational/structural, and socio-cultural factors (Dixon & Bruening, 2005). This integrated approach to the exploration of work-family conflict within sport is increasingly important as studies have shown the presence of work-family conflict across the sport organization regardless of factors such as job, age, sex, or family/marital status. (Bruening & Dixon, 2007; Mazerolle et al., 2008) .

While work-family conflict is experienced regardless of demographic factors, there have been increased levels of work-family conflict associated with marital and parental statuses. Those who are married with children are more likely to experience greater levels of work-family conflict (Singe et al., 2022). Setting has also been seen to play a role in the experiences of work-family conflict with those working in collegiate athletics reporting higher levels than those in the secondary setting (Mazerolle et al., 2015). Experiences of work-family conflict among those working in the sport organization have also been seen to be above average (Mazerolle et al., 2015). Previous research has also suggested that working within the NCAA DI setting increases experiences of work-family conflict (Singe et al., 2022). This is supported by findings that those working in the NCAA DI setting report greater levels of work-family conflict compared to those working in the NCAA DIII setting which could likely be attributed to the increased demand of the DI setting (Singe et al., 2022). Beyond intense professional demands, long working hours, lack of control over work schedules, and unbalanced workloads were all also related to increased conflict at the DI level (Mazerolle et al., 2011). Within the sport organization, four types of conflict have been found attributing to work-family conflict: time, energy, attention, and emotional spillover (Graham & Smith, 2022). However, several organizational and personal strategies help establish work-family balance. As an organization, the implementation of staffing policies and the creation of a supportive work environment help in reducing experiences of work-family conflict (Mazerolle et al., 2011). Individual management strategies can be broken down into personal factors and individual strategies on the professional level. Individual strategies involve the incorporation of teamwork, boundary setting, prioritization, and integration of family with work (Mazerolle et al., 2011). Personal factors focus greatly on the separation and work and life as well as the establishment of a support network (Mazerolle et al., 2011).

Purpose

Despite the growing body of research dedicated to the examination of these constructs within the sport organization, there remains a need for a better understanding of the varied experiences held by different stakeholders within the organization. Additionally, the exploration of work-addiction within the sport organization is novel. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine overall experiences of burnout, work addiction, and work-family conflict within sport organizations. Additionally, this study seeks to compare these experiences among the various stakeholders within the sport organization. Given this information, we hypothesized the following:

H1a– Coaches will report greater levels of work addiction compared to athletic trainers.

H2b– Athletic trainers will report greater levels of work addiction compared to sport performance coaches.

H2a– Athletic trainers will report greater levels of burnout compared to coaches.

H2b– Athletic trainers will report greater levels of burnout compared to sport performance coaches.

H3a– Athletic trainers will report greater levels of work-family conflict compared to coaches.

H3b– Athletic trainers will report greater levels of work-family conflict compared to sport performance coaches.

H4a– Work addiction and work-family conflict will have a positive relationship.

H4b– Work addition and burnout will have a positive relationship. 

METHODS 

Study design

The study design is a web-based cross-sectional study (Qualtrics, Provo, UT). Data was collected using a self-reported online questionnaire evaluating sleep, self-care, work-family conflict, work addiction, and burnout among NCAA Division I collegiate athletic trainers, coaches, and sport performance coaches. Approval for this study was obtained from the institutional review board (IRB) prior to data collection, which occurred over a four-week period in the Fall of 2023.

Procedures

Prior to survey distribution, we completed a face validity process; 3 athletic trainers took the survey for the purposes of the process. No changes were made to the survey based on the face validity feedback. Two email reminders were sent at the 1-week and 3-week marks, reminding participants to complete the survey.

Participants

The target population for the current study were NCAA Division I (DI) athletic trainers, sport performance coaches, and coaches. A list of all NCAA DI institutions was created using the NCSA college recruiting website (n = 363). From the list of institutions offering NCAA DI athletics programs, the individual athletics websites were accessed to create a list of emails for those individuals identified as an athletic trainer, sport performance coach, or a head or assistant coach. We were able to identify 13,412 email addresses across the 3 stakeholder groups. Our power analysis indicated a requirement of 258 respondents, which resulted in 86 participants from each stakeholder (group). Strata randomization was utilized since we did not have a complete list of all possible participants, thus phases of distribution were utilized and represented in Figure 1.  

Figure 1. Recruitment and Data Screening

Sample

A total of 153 athletic trainers (51.5%), 59 coaches (19.9%), and 78 sports performance coaches (26.3%) completed this research study. Of the participants, 166 were female (55.9%), 121 male (40.7%), and 2 preferred not to answer (0.7%). The mean age of the participants in this study was 33 ± 9, with ages ranging from 22 – 70 years. Participants on average had 10 ± 9 years of experience, with an average of 5 ± 6 years working at their current institution. On average, participants worked 55 ± 16 hours per week. Complete demographic data is shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Participant Demographics

DemographicScore
Gender, n (%)
    Male121 (40.7)
    Female166 (55.9)
    Prefer not to answer2 (0.7)
Highest level of education, n (%)
    Bachelor’s Degree48 (16.2)
    Master’s Degree237 (79.8)
    Doctorate5 (1.7)
Primary Role, n (%)
    Head Coach18 (6.1)
    Associate Coach9 (3.0)
    Assistant Coach34 (11.4)
    Head Athletic Trainer15 (5.1)
    Associate Athletic Trainer37 (12.5)
    Staff/Assistant Athletic Trainer99 (33.3)
    Director, Sport Performance (Conditioning)23 (7.7)
    Strength and Conditioning Coach51 (17.2)
Marital status, n (%)
    Single137 (46.1)
    Cohabitating28 (9.4)
    Married117 (39.4)
    Separated2 (0.7)
    Divorced3 (0.7)
    Widowed1 (0.3)
    Engaged3 (1.0)
Spouse employment status n (%)
    Employed, full-time210 (70.7)
    Employed, part-time18 (6.1)
    Does not work/stay at home25 (8.4)
Children, n (%)
    0202 (70.0)
    Currently Pregnant8 (2.7)
    121 (7.1)
    233 (11.1)
    3+27 (8.8)
Group Identity, n (%) 
    Single Female112 (37.7)
    Single Male33 (11.1)
    Married Female43 (14.5)
    Married Male80 (26.9)
    This does not apply to me20 (6.7)

Instrumentation

The online survey was hosted in Qualtrics and included 36-items not including the demographic questions. Participants completed 13 demographic questions, prior to the 3 scales (i.e. Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI), Bergen Work Addiction Scale, and Work-Family Conflict), which were not altered as they are valid instruments.  

Burnout. Burnout was measured using the CBI as a tool that demonstrates reliability (α=.85-.87) and had been used previously to measure burnout among athletic trainers (α=.88) (Kristensen et al., 2005; Naugle et al., 2013). The scale included 3 subscales: personal (n=6-items), work-related (n=7-items), and client-based burnout (n=6-items). Participants use a 5-point Likert scale 0 (never/almost never/low degree), 25 (seldom/low degree), 50 (somewhat or sometimes), 75 (often/high degree), and 100 (always/high degree). The scale is summed for an overall burnout score, with a higher score indicating a higher level of burnout (0 is low, 100 is severe).

Work addiction. The Bergen Work Addiction Scale (BWAS) was used to measure work addiction (α=.78) among our sample. The scale has 7-items, each representing an aspect, or symptom of work addiction (salience, mood modification, tolerance, withdrawal, conflict, relapse, and problems – Table 6). The 7-items are assessed using a 5-point Likert scale, 1 (never) to 5 (always). The responses are summed (range 7 to 35), and a score of 4 (often) or 5 (always) on 4 of 7 items indicates a high risk for work addiction.

Work-family conflict. Work-family conflict scale was assessed using the scale previously validated by Netemeyer et al. (α=.90). The 10-item scale evaluates the bi-directional nature of the construct; 5-items for work-family conflict (WFC) and 5-items for family-work conflict (FWC). Participants indicated their responses on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Sample questions include: “WFC®The demands of my job interfere with my home and family life,” and “FWC®The things I want to do at home do not get done because of the demands of my job.”

Data analyses

The data collected via Qualtrics was transferred to Excel by Microsoft Corporation. Following the completion of data collection, it underwent a filtration process to remove incomplete responses, defined as those failing to complete the required scales or the survey itself as per the scale validation. Subsequently, the filtered data was imported into SPSS, version, etc., for statistical analysis. Demographic information such as age, gender, and marital status were obtained through specific questions, and these demographic variables were subjected to descriptive and frequency analyses. The outcomes are presented as mean and standard deviation or frequency. Validated scales were assessed using means due to the non-parametric nature of the data analysis at hand, and Cohens d is reported for effect size.

RESULTS

Participant Demographics

Participants were 51.5% athletic trainers (n = 153), 19.9% were coaches (n=59), and 26.3% were sports performance coaches (n = 78). The average age of the participants was 33 ± 9 and they had been working in their respective roles for an average of 11± 9. They self-reported working 55 ± 17 hours per week (at the time of data collection).

Stakeholders and Work-Addiction

The mean score on the BWAS across all three stakeholder groups was 20.71 ± 4.57. Table 2 represents the mean scores on the BWAS, reported by each stakeholder group. Athletic trainers reported a score of 20.84 ± 4.51, whereas coaches reported a mean score of 20.05 ± 4.85. There was no significant difference in reported scores on the BWAS between athletic trainers and coaches (U = 3952.00, p = .160, d= 0.11). Additionally, sport performance coaches reported a mean score of 20.96 ± 4.50, and no significant difference was found between sport performance coaches and athletic trainers (U = 5894.00, p = .879, d= -0.010). Furthermore, across all three stakeholders, 80 were found to be workaholics while 210 (38%) were found not to be work addicted. Among athletic trainers, 45 of the 153 (29%) respondents were found to be workaholics. Of coaches, 12 of the 59 (20%) respondents were found to be workaholics. Among sport performance coaches, 23 of 78 (29%) respondents were found to be workaholics.

Stakeholders and Burnout

Across all three stakeholder groups, participants reported low levels (46.27 ± 16.04) on the CBI, additionally mean scores of 54.9 5 ± 17.24 on the personal-related subscale, 49.99 ± 18.87 on the work-related subscale, and 33.25 ± 18.67 on the client-related subscale. Table 2 represents the mean scores on the CBI and subscales, reported by each stakeholder group. Athletic trainers reported a mean score of 48.07 ± 16.42 on the CBI, while coaches reported a mean score of 41.99 ± 15.89 on the CBI. A significant difference of burnout levels between athletic trainers and coaches was revealed (U = 3559.50, p = .017, d= -0.16).Additionally, sport performance coaches reported a mean score of 45.97 ± 14.92. There was no significant difference discovered in the reported levels of burnout between athletic trainers and sport performance coaches (U = 5483.00, p = .313, d= -0.06).

Table 2: Comparison of Reported Scale Scores by Stakeholder

StakeholderCBI (Mean±SD)BWAS (Mean±SD)WFC (Mean±SD)
Athletic Trainers48.07±16.4220.84±4.5137.66±9.26
Coaches41.99±15.8920.05±4.8537.64±10.52
Sports Performance45.97±14.9220.96±4.5037.86±9.49

Stakeholders and Work-Family Conflict

The mean score across all stakeholders on the WFC scale was 37.71 ± 9.56. Athletic trainers reported a mean of 37.66 ± 9.26, whereas coaches reported a mean of 37.64 ± 10.52. There was no significant difference between athletic trainers and coaches (U = 4483.00, p =.939, d= -0.05).Furthermore, sport performance coaches reported a mean of 37.86 ± 9.49, and no significant difference was found between sport performance coaches and athletic trainers (U= 5576.50, p = .416, d= -0.06).

Variable relationships

Correlation matrices revealed a moderate positive correlation (.507) between work addiction and work-family conflict. Work addiction and burnout also resulted in a moderate positive relationship (.573).

DISCUSSION

Inferences has been made that working in sport can lead to experiences of burnout and work-family conflict, as well as that to be a productive member of the team one must be addicted to their role. Our purpose was to explore the experiences of work-addiction, burnout, and work-family conflict among athletic trainers, coaches, and sport performance coaches. This aim was directed at better understanding around one’s role in the sport organization and experiences of these constructs. As predicted work addiction, regardless of stakeholder position, leads to increased levels of burnout and work-family conflict. Uniquely, athletic trainers and coaches experience higher levels of burnout than sport performance coaches.

Stakeholders and Work-Family Conflict

We did not find any significant differences among our samples and experiences of WFC. The total mean score on the WFC scale is comparative to other studies examining WFC among athletic trainers work in the sport industry (Mazerolle et al. 2011; Pitney et al. 2011; Singe et al. in press). Our sample was largely represented by those who do not have children (70%); which could explain why we did not find any differences among our sample regarding experiences of WFC. Time is often a large facilitator of WFC, despite our sample reporting 55 hours per week, many did not have children another facilitator of WFC (Mazerolle et al., 2008; Pitney et al., 2011; Singe et al., 2023a). Perhaps working long hours has less of an impact on the individual when additional family responsibilities are not present, and one can focus on work and personal interests.

Stakeholders and Burnout

Overall, this sample of individuals working in the sport organization are experiencing low levels of burnout. Low levels of burnout does not imply that our sample is not experiencing it; however quantifiably it is lower. The literature over the last 5 years has suggested that coaches and athletic trainers are experiencing higher levels of burnout (Goodger et al., 2007; Singe et al., 2024; Singe et al., 2023a). We found that athletic trainers reported higher levels of burnout compared to coaches, but similar levels of burnout to sport performance coaches. Moderate levels of burnout have recently been reported among athletic trainers  (Singe et al., 2023a); however, fluctuations in experiences have been observed over the past 3 years with levels varying between moderate and low (Cairns et al., 2023; Oglesby et al., 2020; Singe et al., 2023a). Sport performance coaches have yet to be identified within the literature regarding burnout; our sample reported similar levels of burnout as athletic trainers. Similar to athletic trainers, sport performance coaches have high demands placed upon them, and they are invested in the success of their athletes as well as log long hours in the workplace (Bentzen et al., 2016; Olusoga et al., 2019).

Stakeholders and Work-Addiction

Our overall sample is not classified as a workaholic; however, both athletic trainers and sport performance coaches demonstrate a larger sample (29%) of those who would be classified as such. Workaholics may work long hours but that is by choice and perhaps not as a necessity (Andersen et al., 2023). Although our sample reports working excessive hours (55), they do not self-identify as workaholics. Moreover, we did not find significant differences between stakeholders. These findings suggest that work addiction is likely an individualized factor, and not necessarily an outcome of working in sport organization. As detailed in the work-family conflict framework of Bruening and Dixon (2005, 2007), there are individual, organizational, and sociocultural outcomes of experiences of work-family conflict.  

Variable relationships

Positive relationships were found between work addiction and both burnout and work-family conflict. The correlations found between the experiences of these constructs are consistent with those observed in previous studies examining these constructs in athletic trainers (Eason et al., 2022). These results make it apparent that experiences of work addiction, work-family conflict, and burnout occur at the same time. Previously stated, work-addiction can be attributed to experiences of work-family conflict and burnout. In this case all stakeholders are experiencing all three constructs.

We predicted there to be positive relationships between work addiction, burnout, and work-family conflict. Work addiction is yet another construct that is experienced by those working in the sport organization. This study adds to the literature that there are no differences in work-family conflict and burnout across athletic trainers, coaches, and SPCs. Yet, there are notable differences when it comes to burnout. Coaches and SPCs are experiencing work-family conflict, and work-addiction similarly to athletic trainers. This speaks to the sport organization as a whole; all employees are encountering these constructs. We suggest the sport organization investigate and assess reasons employees are work-addicted and have work-family conflict, to improve job and life satisfaction.

ATs experienced higher levels of burnout compared to coaches, and SPCs. There are many reasons this may be, the number of athletes per employee, responsibilities, and medical roles. However, in this sample athletic trainers reported low levels of burnout, though higher than coaches and SPCs, not quite as high as levels in recent literature (Barrett et al., 2016).

Consideration for Future Research and Study Limitations

The findings of this study expand upon the growing body of literature examining the constructs of work-addiction, burnout, and work-family conflict within the sport organization, yet limitations on these findings remain. Our study received 297 usable responses, which is a lower response rate than anticipated. Due to these factors, we recognize that these findings may not represent the experiences of all of those working within the sport organization. Our database was established using publicly available information therefore a complete list of all athletic trainers, coaches, and sports performance coaches at the DI level was unable to be obtained. Therefore, the results of this study may not represent the experiences of the entirety of NCAA DI athletic trainers, coaches, and SPCs. Our study also only examined those working within the NCAA DI setting; thus, those working in the DII, DIII, NAIA, or other collegiate levels may not have similar experiences with these constructs. Furthermore, those working in secondary schools or other settings also may not identify with the findings of this study.

Further research should include the investigation of work-addiction, burnout, and work-family conflict at all levels of collegiate athletics as well as those in secondary schools and alternate settings. Currently, the literature has examined these constructs within the sport organization solely focused on the experiences of athletic trainers, creating a need for future research among coaches and sports performance coaches on these constructs. Additionally, the study of work addiction within the sport organization is a novel issue, so further research is necessary to gain a better understanding of work addiction within athletics.

CONCLUSION 

This study sought to further our knowledge of the experiences of athletic trainers, coaches, and sport performance coaches in the DI setting, regarding work-addiction, burnout, and work-family conflict. Experiences were nearly universal across the sport organization except for athletic trainers experiencing greater levels of burnout compared to coaches. Positive relationships were also observed between levels of work addiction and both burnout and work-family conflict. The findings of this study suggest that these constructs are prominent issues across the sport organization. Given the prevalence across the sport organization, increased implication of both personal and organizational strategies may be necessary as a means of mitigating the impact of these issues (Cairns et al., 2023; Singe et al., 2022). This study serves as a preliminary exploration into the variance of experiences of work addiction, burnout, and work-family conflict across the sport organization stakeholders.

APPLICATIONS IN SPORT

Athletic trainers reported significantly different levels of burnout compared to coaches and sport performance coaches; thus we believe that understanding the specific role stressors for the athletic trainer can help address potential programs to prevent burnout. For example, wellness programs or a workload redistribution may be warranted for athletic trainers.  We did not find any differences among work-family conflict among any of the grups, which suggests more broad based policies that are family-friendly may help athletic trainers, coaches, and sport performance coaches (family-leave, time-off policies). Work addiction was a risk factor for both burnout and work-family conflict among our stakeholders, thus individuals and supervisors should be aware of the signs of burnout, but also encourage stress and boundary management,  as well as healthy work habits to prevent issues around burnout and conflicts between work and home. 

REFERENCES 

  1. Andersen, F. B., Djugum, M. E. T., Sjåstad, V. S., & Pallesen, S. (2023). The prevalence of workaholism: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1252373. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1252373
  2. Andreassen, C. S. (2014). Workaholism: An overview and current status of the research. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 3(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1556/JBA.2.2013.017
  3. Barrett, J., Eason, C. M., Lazar, R., & Mazerolle, S. M. (2016). Personality Traits and Burnout Among Athletic Trainers Employed in the Collegiate Setting. Journal of Athletic Training, 51(6), 454–459. https://doi.org/10.4085/1062-6050-51.7.08
  4. Bentzen, M., Lemyre, P.-N., & Kenttä, G. (2016). Development of exhaustion for high-performance coaches in association with workload and motivation: A person-centered approach. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 22, 10–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2015.06.004
  5. Bruening, J. E., & Dixon, M. A. (2007). Work–Family Conflict in Coaching II: Managing Role Conflict. Journal of Sport Management, 21(4), 471–496. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsm.21.4.471
  6. Cairns, A. H., Singe, S. M., & Eason, C. M. (2023). Perceived Stress as an Indicator of Work–Family Conflict and Burnout Among Secondary School Athletic Trainers. International Journal of Athletic Therapy and Training, 28(4), 215–220. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijatt.2021-0112
  7. Cayton, S. J., & Valovich McLeod, T. C. (2020). Characteristics of Burnout Among Collegiate and Secondary School Athletic Trainers: A Systematic Review. Athletic Training & Sports Health Care, 12(5), 227–234. https://doi.org/10.3928/19425864-20190529-01
  8. Clark, M. A., Michel, J. S., Zhdanova, L., Pui, S. Y., & Baltes, B. B. (2016). All Work and No Play? A Meta-Analytic Examination of the Correlates and Outcomes of Workaholism. Journal of Management, 42(7), 1836–1873. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314522301
  9. Dixon, M. A., & Bruening, J. E. (2005). Perspectives on Work-Family Conflict in Sport: An Integrated Approach. Sport Management Review, 8(3), 227–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1441-3523(05)70040-1
  10. Eason, C. M., Gilgallon, T. J., & Singe, S. M. (2022). Work-Addiction Risk in Athletic Trainers and Its Relationship to Work-Family Conflict and Burnout. Journal of Athletic Training, 57(3), 225–233. https://doi.org/10.4085/JAT0348-20
  11. Goodger, K., Gorely, T., Lavallee, D., & Harwood, C. (2007). Burnout in Sport: A Systematic Review. The Sport Psychologist, 21(2), 127–151. https://doi.org/10.1123/tsp.21.2.127
  12. Graham, J. A., & Dixon, M. A. (2014). Coaching Fathers in Conflict: A Review of the Tensions Surrounding the Work-Family Interface. Journal of Sport Management, 28(4), 447–456. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsm.2013-0241
  13. Graham, J. A., & Smith, A. B. (2021). Work and Life in the Sport Industry: A Review of Work-Life Interface Experiences Among Athletic Employees. Journal of Athletic Training, 57(3), 210–224. https://doi.org/10.4085/1062-6050-0633.20
  14. Graham, J. A., & Smith, A. B. (2022). Work and Life in the Sport Industry: A Review of Work-Life Interface Experiences Among Athletic Employees. Journal of Athletic Training, 57(3), 210–224. https://doi.org/10.4085/1062-6050-0633.20
  15. Hatfield, L. M., & Johnson, J. T. (2012, April 9). Work-Family Conflict and Related Theories in NCAA Division II Sports Information Professionals. The Sport Journal. https://thesportjournal.org/article/work-family-conflict-and-related-theories-in-ncaa-division-ii-sports-information-professionals/
  16. Kristensen, T. S., Borritz, M., Villadsen, E., & Christensen, K. B. (2005). The Copenhagen Burnout Inventory: A new tool for the assessment of burnout. Work & Stress, 19(3), 192–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370500297720
  17. Laskowski, K. D., & Ebben, W. P. (2016). Profile of Women Collegiate Strength and Conditioning Coaches. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 30(12), 3481–3493. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000001471
  18. Mazerolle, S. M., Bruening, J. E., & Casa, D. J. (2008). Work-Family Conflict, Part I: Antecedents of Work-Family Conflict in National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I-A Certified Athletic Trainers. Journal of Athletic Training, 43(5), 505–512. https://doi.org/10.4085/1062-6050-43.5.505
  19. Mazerolle, S. M., Bruening, J. E., Casa, D. J., & Burton, L. J. (2008). Work-Family Conflict, Part II: Job and Life Satisfaction in National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I-A Certified Athletic Trainers. Journal of Athletic Training, 43(5), 513–522. https://doi.org/10.4085/1062-6050-43.5.513
  20. Mazerolle, S. M., Eason, C. M., Pitney, W. A., & Mueller, M. N. (2015). Sex and Employment-Setting Differences in Work-Family Conflict in Athletic Training. Journal of Athletic Training, 50(9), 958–963. https://doi.org/10.4085/1052-6050-50.2.14
  21. Mazerolle, S. M., Pitney, W. A., Casa, D. J., & Pagnotta, K. D. (2011). Assessing Strategies to Manage Work and Life Balance of Athletic Trainers Working in the National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I Setting. Journal of Athletic Training, 46(2), 194–205. https://doi.org/10.4085/1062-6050-46.2.194
  22. McMillan, L. H. W., O’Driscoll, M. P., & Burke, R. J. (2003). Workaholism: A Review of Theory, Research, and Future Directions. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2003 (1st ed., pp. 167–189). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/0470013346.ch5
  23. Naugle, K. E., Behar-Horenstein, L. S., Dodd, V. J., Tillman, M. D., & Borsa, P. A. (2013). Perceptions of Wellness and Burnout Among Certified Athletic Trainers: Sex Differences. Journal of Athletic Training, 48(3), 424–430. https://doi.org/10.4085/1062-6050-48.2.07
  24. Netemeyer, R. G., Boles, J. S., & McMurrian, R. (1996). Development and validation of work–family conflict and family–work conflict scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(4), 400–410. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.81.4.400
  25. Norris, L. A., Didymus, F. F., & Kaiseler, M. (2017). Stressors, coping, and well-being among sports coaches: A systematic review. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 33, 93–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2017.08.005
  26. Oglesby, L. W., Gallucci, A. R., & Wynveen, C. J. (2020). Athletic Trainer Burnout: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Journal of Athletic Training, 55(4), 416–430. https://doi.org/10.4085/1062-6050-43-19
  27. Olusoga, P., Bentzen, M., & Kentta, G. (2019). Coach Burnout: A Scoping Review. International Sport Coaching Journal, 6(1), 42–62. https://doi.org/10.1123/iscj.2017-0094
  28. Our Division II Story. (n.d.). NCAA.Org. Retrieved September 17, 2024, from https://www.ncaa.org/sports/2021/2/16/our-division-ii-story.aspx
  29. Our Division III Story. (n.d.). NCAA.Org. Retrieved September 17, 2024, from https://www.ncaa.org/sports/2021/2/16/our-division-iii-story.aspx
  30. Our Three Divisions. (n.d.). NCAA.Org. Retrieved September 17, 2024, from https://www.ncaa.org/sports/2016/1/7/about-resources-media-center-ncaa-101-our-three-divisions.aspx
  31. Overview. (n.d.). NCAA.Org. Retrieved September 17, 2024, from https://www.ncaa.org/sports/2021/2/16/overview.aspx
  32. Pitney, W. A., Mazerolle, S. M., & Pagnotta, K. D. (2011). Work–Family Conflict Among Athletic Trainers in the Secondary School Setting. Journal of Athletic Training, 46(2), 185–193. https://doi.org/10.4085/1062-6050-46.2.185
  33. Pope, D. G., & Pope, J. C. (2014). Understanding College Application Decisions: Why College Sports Success Matters. Journal of Sports Economics, 15(2), 107–131. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527002512445569
  34. Robinson, B. E. (1999). The Work Addiction Risk Test: Development of a Tentative Measure of Workaholism. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 88(1), 199–210. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1999.88.1.199
  35. Schaufeli, W. B., Taris, T. W., & Van Rhenen, W. (2008). Workaholism, Burnout, and Work Engagement: Three of a Kind or Three Different Kinds of Employee Well‐being? Applied Psychology, 57(2), 173–203. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2007.00285.x
  36. Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational Culture and Leadership, 4th Edition (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
  37. Scriber, K. C., & Alderman, M. H. (2005). The Challenge of Balancing Our Professional and Personal Lives. Athletic Therapy Today, 10(6), 14–17. https://doi.org/10.1123/att.10.6.14
  38. Singe, S., Cairns, A., & Eason, C. (2024). Examining Burnout Among Collegiate Athletic Trainers: The Relationship with Age, Gender, and Years of Experience. Internet Journal of Allied Health Sciences and Practice, 22(3). https://nsuworks.nova.edu/ijahsp/vol22/iss3/8
  39. Singe, S. M., Cairns, A., Eason, C. M., & Marion, P. E. (2022). Work-Family Conflict and Guilt among Athletic Trainers: Influences of Family Role Performance, Years of Experience and National Collegiate Athletic Association Level. Journal of Issues in Intercollegiate Athletics.
  40. Singe, S. M., Mydosh, C. G., Cairns, A., & Eason, C. M. (2023a). Working Hours, Sleep, and Burnout Among Athletic Trainers Employed in College Athletics: A Cross-Sectional Study. The Internet Journal of Allied Health Sciences and Practice. https://doi.org/10.46743/1540-580x/2023.2430
  41. Singe, S. M., Rodriguez, M., Cairns, A., Eason, C. M., & Rynkiewicz, K. (2023b). Work-Family Conflict and Family Role Performance Among Collegiate Athletic Trainers. Journal of Athletic Training, 58(4), 381–386. https://doi.org/10.4085/227.22
  42. Snarr, R. L., & Beasley, V. L. (2022). Personal, Work-, and Client-Related Burnout Within Strength and Conditioning Coaches and Personal Trainers. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 36(2), e31–e40. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000003956
  43. Taylor, E. A., Huml, M. R., & Dixon, M. A. (2019). Workaholism in Sport: A Mediated Model of Work–Family Conflict and Burnout. Journal of Sport Management, 33(4), 249–260. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsm.2018-0248

Print Friendly, PDF & Email