The influence of leadership styles and supervisor communication on employee burnout

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine the communicative factors enacted by supervisors’ leadership, including supervisors’ perceived communication competence and workers’ communication satisfaction with their supervisors that predict employees’ feeling of burnout. Employees who were employed on a full-time basis for at least 1 year (N = 166) completed a cross-sectional, online survey about interactions with their supervisors. Results from the path analysis indicated that both task- and relational-leadership were positively associated with communication competence. Only relational leadership was positively associated with communication satisfaction. In turn, communication satisfaction predicted decreased employee emotional exhaustion and depersonalization and increased personal accomplishment. Taken together, the findings from the current study suggest the importance of relationship-building between supervisors and employees to decrease employee burnout. Limitations and future research are addressed.

Keywords

Supervisor-employee communication leadership styles burnout communication satisfaction communication competence

Supervisor leadership is vital to the maintenance of relationships with employees and contributes to the climate of an organization (Kozak and Uca, 2008). In fact, leadership is enacted through communication (Madlock, 2008a), leadership styles that promote effective and open communication between supervisors and their employees are related to positive employee outcomes such as job satisfaction, motivation, and organizational commitment (Mikkelson et al., 2015). Employees also report they are less likely to experience burnout when they have open upward communication with their supervisors (Kim and Lee, 2009). Moreover, when employees are suffering from high levels of burnout, their overall well-being can be compromised, which might lead to diminished work engagement and productivity (Schaufeli and Bakker, 2004). Since business success and organizational growth are highly associated with employee engagement, employee burnout often hinders business development and organizational effectiveness (Robinson et al., 2004). Given that burnout is a common problem for many employees—nearly 44% of employees report feeling burned out in their work ocassionaly (Wigert and Agrawal, 2018)—it is important to investigate the communicative and interactive predictors of this outcome. Thus, the goal of the current study is to explore supervisor-employee communication in relation to employee burnout.

Many factors play a role in employees’ feeling of burnout. For instance, lack of communication and support from supervisors are frequently mentioned reasons employees report for their experience of burnout in the workplace (Wigert and Agrawal, 2018). Leaders who exhibit poor communication effectiveness can also predict employees’ high level of burnout (Miller et al., 1988; Omdahl and O’Donnell, 1999). Therefore, examining how perceived communication of leaders may affect employee burnout is warranted. With that in mind, the purpose of this study is to examine the associations between employees’ perception of their supervisors’ leadership styles, communication competence, employees’ reports of their communication satisfaction with their supervisors, and employee burnout.

Theoretical background

Leadership styles

Researchers from diverse disciplines including organizational communication have examined various ways leadership styles can best support employees and organizations (Hackman and Johnson, 2013; Jiang and Men, 2015; Walumbwa et al., 2008). Leadership is recognized as a process in which leaders influence people in order to reach specific goals and objectives as a unit (Sharma and Jain, 2013) and is manifested through communication and interaction between supervisors and their employees (Barge, 1994; Holladay and Coombs, 1993). However, scholars vary in their defining and categorizing of leadership behaviors.

Scholars examining leadership decades ago distinguished between two broad leadership styles: task-oriented leadership and relational leadership (Likert, 1961; Stogdill, 1974). In subsequent work, these styles were referred by different labels, such as initiating structure or production orientation for task behavior and consideration or employee orientation for relational behavior (Likert, 1961; Stogdill, 1974). Task and relational behaviors were also regarded as two dimensions to characterize a supervisor’s leadership style and thus four different leadership styles were identified based on leader’s orientation for task and the orientation for relationship with employees (Blake and Mouton, 1964). Leaders can rank high on both dimensions and have various combinations of task and relationship behavior; in other words, these foci are complementary and not necessarily conflicting (Fleishman and Hunt, 1973). Further, Hersey and Blanchard’s (1969) argued that supervisors are most effective when enacting high levels of both task- and relational leadership styles. Finally, because employee satisfaction has been linked to both task- and relational-leadership behaviors (Castaneda and Nahavandi, 1991) and because these leadership styles are believed to achieve different supervisory functions and may yield different results (Yukl et al., 2002), this study will focus specifically on employees’ perception of their supervisors’ enactment of task- and relational-leadership.

Task-oriented and relational leadership

Task-oriented leadership is based on the concept that leaders are focused on the efficacy of employees and accomplishing certain organizational goals. Thus, managers operating from this style focus on helping their employees achieve their goals and providing resources for such purposes (Yukl et al., 2002). As the name suggests, task-oriented leaders are more focused on the task at hand rather than the relationships they have with their employees. Relational leadership, conversely, emphasizes building relationships between management and employees (Yukl et al., 2002). Previous research has found that task-oriented and relational leadership behaviors are both positively related to employee outcomes, including employee satisfaction, motivation, and organizational commitment (Castaneda and Nahavandi, 1991; Mikkelson et al., 2015). Employees are also more likely to report greater work-life enrichment and employee engagement when their leaders had a relationship orientation and enacted communication that emphasizes active participation of employees and truthful and complete information distribution (Jiang and Men, 2015; Stirton and Lodge, 2001). Moreover, it is well established in previous research that a leader’s communicative behavior affects employees’ communication satisfaction (MacDonald et al., 2019; Madlock, 2008a, 2008b) and communication competence (Flauto, 1999; Madlock, 2008a).

Taken together, these findings suggest leadership style plays an important role in employees’ communication satisfaction—“the personal satisfaction inherent in successfully…being communicated with” (Thayer, 1968: p. 144)—with their supervisor and perceptions of their supervisors’ communication competence or “the knowledge of appropriate communication patterns in a given situation and the ability to use the knowledge” (Cooley and Roach, 1984: p. 25). However, prior literature has failed to demonstrate the nuances of which leadership style contribute more to supervisors’ perceived communication competence and employees’ communication satisfaction. Consequently, a study exploring the predictors of employees’ perception of their supervisors’ communication and the implications for employees is warranted. In the current study, the researchers tested a path model (See Figure 1) wherein task- and relational leadership styles predict direct associations with communication satisfaction and perceived supervisor communication competence as well as indirect associations with employee burnout via communication satisfaction and competence.

H1: (a) Task-oriented and (b) relational leadership styles are positively associated with subordinates’ communication satisfaction with their supervisors.

H2: (a) Task-oriented and (b) relational leadership styles are positively associated with supervisors’ perceived communication competence.

Figure 1.

Hypothesized model.

Communication satisfaction and competence

Employees’ communication satisfaction is a measure of how well the “available information fulfills the individual’s requests for information pertaining to the task-role or for simply being about organizational activities” (Putti et al., 1990: p. 45). Prior research reveals that poor employee communication satisfaction with supervisors results in negative employee outcomes, such as low employee commitment, high levels of absenteeism, increased employee burnout and turnover, and reduced productivity (Carrière et al., 2007; Hargie et al., 2002; Jusoh et al., 2011; Rajesh and Suganthi, 2013; Vermeir et al., 2018). Additionally, employees’ perceptions of their leaders’ communication competence can affect their reports of communication satisfaction with their supervisor as well (Madlock, 2008b). A communicatively competent individual possesses the ability to employ communicative resources effectively in the pursuit of personal or social goals (Stohl, 1985). Spitzberg and Cupach (1981) considered competent communication as a form of interpersonal influence and emphasized two communicative aspects: effectiveness and appropriateness. Specifically, appropriate communication abides by the normative expectations and avoids violating interpersonal rules, while effective interaction centers on fulfilling personal goals or communicative functions. Thus, competent interaction achieves communicative goals without violating social rules of appropriate conduct (Cupach and Spitzberg, 1983; Kreps, 1988).

Despite varying conceptualizations of communication competence, most scholars agree that supervisors’ communication competence aids in the achievement of organizational effectiveness and personal success in work contexts (Hawkins and Fillion, 1999; Sharbrough et al., 2006). When employees perceive leaders to possess effective communication skills, they are also more likely to report greater engagement, organizational identification and greater perceived organizational effectiveness (Avolio et al., 1988; Holladay and Coombs, 1993; Myers and Kassing, 1998). Supervisors’ perceived communication competence also predicts employees’ level of communication satisfaction and job satisfaction (Madlock, 2008a, 2008b; Madlock and Kennedy-Lightsey, 2010; Steele and Plenty, 2015) and it is linked to stress reduction (Wright et al., 2010). Conversely, when supervisors are not competent communicators, employees’ job satisfaction and organizational commitment tend to be compromised (Madlock and Kennedy-Lightsey, 2010). Therefore, based on the consistent findings in the literature establishing an association between communication competence and communication satisfaction, the research team posited the following hypothesis.

H3: Supervisors’ perceived communication competence is positively associated with employees’ communication satisfaction.

Burnout

Another primary aim of this study is to explore the communicative predictors of the level of employee burnout from work. Burnout is defined as “a psychological syndrome in response to chronic interpersonal stressors on the job” (Maslach et al., 2001: p. 399), and is characterized by three dimensions: emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced personal accomplishment (Maslach, 1982; Maslach and Jackson, 1981). Emotional exhaustion occurs when “emotional resources are depleted [and] workers are no longer able to give of themselves at a psychological level” (Maslach and Jackson, 1981). Depersonalization is characterized by a dissociation and negative feelings towards others, and reduced personal accomplishment is characterized by critical self-evaluation. Researchers have long been arguing to distinguish between “Burnout Stress Syndrome” (oftern mild burnout that does not prevent emplpoyees from participating in the workforce) and “Burnout Mental Disability” referring to clinical burnout that entails seveve burnout symptoms and prevents employee from doing their job (Maslach et al., 2001; Paine, 1982). Because the research team was interested in examining burnout employees experience from work, the level of employees’ perceived burnout was used as the study’s target variable to detect burnout syndrome.

Employees’ perceived stress is among several factors that have been often associated with burnout in previous research (Jackson et al., 1986; Maslach, 1982; Maslach and Jackson, 1981). However, if workers feel comfortable communicating their perceived stress with their supervisors, they are less likely to experience burnout (Kim and Lee, 2009). Scholars also report that employees who work with responsive (Miller et al., 1988; Omdahl and O’Donnell, 1999) and supportive supervisors (Gibson et al., 2009) and those who are satisfied with the interpersonal communication with their supervisors (Rajesh and Suganthi, 2013) are likely to report lower levels of employee burnout. Supervisors and employees with higher levels of leader–member exchange are also less likely to report feelings of emotional exhaustion and depersonalization (Becker et al., 2005). Additionally, supervisors’ enactment of job-relevant communication (Kim and Lee, 2009) and communication effectiveness (Miller et al., 1988; Omdahl and O’Donnell, 1999) are also negatively associated with employee burnout. On the contrary, unsupportive communication such as defensive communication in the workplace is shown to be positively associated with employee burnout (Becker et al., 2005; Stamp et al., 1992). Altogether, these findings suggest that the communication between supervisors and subordinates can have an impact on subordinate burnout. Consequently, the research team posed the following hypotheses predicting the associations between employees’ perceptions of supervisors’ communication satisfaction and competence and their own reports of burnout.

H4: Communication satisfaction is negatively related to (a) emotional exhaustion and (b) depersonalization and is positively related to (c) personal accomplishment.

H5: Communication competence is negatively related to (a) emotional exhaustion and (b) depersonalization and is positively related to (c) personal accomplishment.

Understanding how leaders’ communication affects employees’ communication satisfaction and how the above factors are connected to employees’ burnout are important to a greater understanding of improving employees’ well-being in the workplace and better organizational effectiveness. Previous research has consistently documented the direct impact of leadership style on employee burnout. For instance, extant literature has reported leadership styles that embody a relationship and task orientation are significantly and negatively correlated with employee burnout (Broome et al., 2009; Kanste et al., 2007; Webster and Hackett, 1999). The research team also knows that leadership styles may impact both communication variables in this study—employees’ communication satisfaction and supervisors’ perceived communication competence. And because employees who are satisfied with their supervisors’ communication and employees who work with responsive and supportive supervisors tend to report less job burnout (Gibson et al., 2009; Miller et al., 1988; Omdahl and O’Donnell, 1999; Rajesh and Suganthi, 2013). Thus, the researchers suspect that employees’ communication satisfaction and supervisors’ perceived communication competence might be a mechanism through which leadership styles impact employee burnout. However, previous research has yet to explore whether employees’ perception of their supervisors’ communication competence and their own reports of communication satisfaction with their supervisor mediate the association between supervisors’ leadership styles and employees’ self-reported burnout. Due to the research gap in prior literature, the following research questions were stated.

RQ1: Are there indirect associations between task-oriented leadership style and (a) emotional exhaustion, (b) depersonalization, and (c) personal accomplishment via communication satisfaction?

RQ2: Are there indirect associations between task-oriented leadership style and (a) emotional exhaustion, (b) depersonalization, and (c) personal accomplishment via communication competence?

RQ3: Are there indirect associations between relational leadership style and (a) emotional exhaustion, (b) depersonalization, and (c) personal accomplishment via communication satisfaction?

RQ4: Are there indirect associations between relational leadership style and (a) emotional exhaustion, (b) depersonalization, and (c) personal accomplishment via communication competence?

Method

Sample

To investigate the hypotheses in the current study, the researchers recruited participants (N = 166) from a large southwestern university to complete a cross-sectional survey. In order to qualify for participation, respondents must have been employed in a full-time capacity for at least one full year. The survey was distributed to students who were enrolled in a basic communication course from the university. They were asked to complete the survey themselves or forward the survey to their family members or friends for completion if the students didn’t meet the criteria for participation. Of those participants, 99 identified as female, 65 identified as male, and two participants preferred not to say. The age break-down for the participants consisted of 63.9% being between 19 and 25 years old, 7.8% between 26 and 30, 3.6% between 31 and 35, 6.6% between 36 and 40, 3.6% between 41 and 45, 7.8% between 46 and 50, and 6.6% 51 years or older. Nearly half of the participants identified as White (84, 50.6%). Other ethnicities/races identified were Hispanic or Latinx (n = 43, 25.9%), Black or African American (n =19, 11.4%), Alaskan Native (n = 3, 1.8%), Asian (n = 6, 3.6%), and Bi- or Multi-racial (n = 11, 6.6%). Most of the participants (n = 108, 65.06%) indicated that their work was part of one occupation (e.g., plumber, teacher, entrepreneur), other participants (n = 58, 34.94%) indicated their work was not part of one occupation. The nature of work identified by participants varied from professions in customer service (n = 58), business and administration (n = 29), education (n = 23), clerical support (n = 14), retail and sales (n = 12), science and engineering (n = 13), to health care professionals (n = 6) (see Table 1 for detailed breakdown). Most employees surveyed in the current study worked either 31–40 h per week (n = 59), 41–50 h per week (n = 51), or 30 or less hours per week (n = 41). A smaller number of participants indicated they worked either 51–60 h per week (n = 9) or over 60 h per week (n = 6). All participants were identified as having at least 1 year of full-time work experience.

Table 1.

Description of the nature of participants’ work.

Nature of work	Participants with one occupation	Participants with multiple occupation	Sum
Customer service	25	33	58
Business/admin	24	5	29
Education	20	3	23
Clerical support	9	5	14
Science/engineering	13	0	13
Retail/sales	5	7	12
Health care	4	2	6
Other	3	2	5
Construction	3	1	4
Design	2	0	2
Total	108	58	166

Procedures

To examine managers' leadership style and its relationship to employee communication satisfaction and burnout, a Qualtrics survey link was distributed via email to the instructors of selected courses of the fall 2019 semester at a large university in the southwestern United States. The instructors forwarded the survey link to students in their classes and offered extra credit as compensation for their participation or recruitment of someone in their network who was qualified to participate. After providing informed consent, participants completed items related to their supervisors' leadership styles and their supervisors’ perceived communication competence as well as their own reports of communication satisfaction and burnout.

Measures

Leadership style

Leadership style was measured using the 20-item Leadership Behavior Questionnaire (Northouse, 2001). This instrument measures an employer’s leadership style in categories of task-oriented and relational behaviors separately. The two dimensions of leadership style were of the reaserach team’s direct interest. Sample task-oriented subscale items include: “My immediate supervisor sets standards for performance for group members,” and “My immediate supervisor develops a plan of action for the group,” while sample relational subscale items include: “My immediate supervisor shows flexibility in making decisions,” “My immediate supervisor shows concerns for the personal well-being of others,” and “My immediate supervisor discloses thoughts and feelings.” The items for this instrument are measured on a 5-point Likert-scale ranging from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree). For this questionnaire, the mean for relational leadership was 4.01 (SD = 0.72, α = 0.91). The mean for task-oriented leadership was 4.11 (SD = 0.66, α = 0.90).

Communication satisfaction

Communication satisfaction was assessed using the 19-item Interpersonal Communication Satisfaction Questionnaire (Hecht, 1978). The research team favored this measure over Communication Satisfaction Questionnaire (Downs and Hazen, 1977) due to its unidimentionality of communication satisfaction and its high relability. Moreover, given that Hecht established this questionnaire to measure the level of communication satisfaction one feels after an interpersonal interaction with another person, the researchers chose this scale to help ground the study in the interactions between the supervisors and their employees and to help employees recall specific conversations they had with their supervisors. Moreover, other scales (e.g., Down and Hazen, 1977) operationalizing communication satisfaction are much longer and may contribute to participants’ fatigue. Thus, the research team selected Hecht’s (1978) scale to measure communication satisfaction in the current study. Items in this scale assessed the feedback from the exchange (e.g., “The other person let me know that I was communicating effectively”), the level of satisfaction one felt with the conversation (e.g., “I was very satisfied with the conversation” and “We both go to say what we wanted”), and the difficulties experienced within the conversation (e.g., “Nothing was accomplished” and “The other person did NOT provide support for what he/she was saying”). The research team adapted the scale to better situate the items within workplace settings. For example, a prompt “when communicating with my immediate supervisor” was provided at the beginning of each question, “the other person” was changed to “he/she.” The items for this instrument are measured on a 5-point Likert-scale ranging from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree). The mean for the communication satisfaction questionnaire was 3.75 (SD = 0.74, α = 0.95).

Communication competence

Perceived supervisor communication competence was measured by the 12-item Communicator Competence Scale developed by Monge and colleagues (1981). This instrument measures the level of supervisor’s communication competence from their employee’s perspective and taps into the conceptualization of competent supervision that emphasizes effectiveness and appropriateness. Other communication competence scales exist, such as Interpersonal Communication Competence Scale by Rubin and Martin (1994). However, they emphasize on communication in interpersonal contexts rather than situating in workplace settings. Consequently, the research team selected the current scale so as to limit the changes to the phrasing of the items. Items in this scale include: “My immediate supervisor has a good command of the language,” “My immediate supervisor expresses his or her ideas clearly,” and “My immediate supervisor usually responds to messages (memos, phone calls, reports, etc.) quickly” (Monge et al., 1981). The items for this instrument are measured on a 5-point Likert-scale ranging from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree). For the current study, the reliability estimate was excellent (M = 3.85, SD = 0.71, α = 0.89).

Burnout

Burnout was measured with the 22-item Maslach’s Burnout Inventory Questionnaire (MBI, Maslach and Jackson, 1979). One of the major advantages of MBI is that MBI can clearly distinguish perceived work-related burnout from other mental syndromes such as anxiety and depression, because of the nature of burnout defined as job-related by Maslach and Jackson (1979). Another popular survey is MBI-General Suvey (MBI-GS, Schutte et al., 2000; Taris et al., 1999). However, MBI-GS is rather generic and the items refer to work itself rather than to one’s personal relationships at work. Because this study focused on the effect of the relationships between supervisors and their employees and their interactions at work on employee burnout, MBI-GS does not sufficiently address the source of burnout of interest in the current study. Shorter versons of burnout measures such as the adapted version of MBI by Kemper and colleagues (2019) was not considered as a suitable measure for this study, because the shorter version dropped the dimension of personal achievement, which has been established as in a statistically significant association with perceived communication competence of leaders (Yukl et al., 2002). Despite the availability of other burnout measures, such as the reconstruction of MBI by Richardsen and Martinussen (2004), MBI was the most cited burnout measure and it was empirically validated to apply in various occupational setting (Worley et al., 2008). As a result, the researchers opted to use the MBI (Malasch and Jackson, 1979) to measure the multidimensional construct of employee burnout.

MBI survey asks participants to report how they feel regarding daily work to assess their level of each dimension of burnout: emotional exhaustion (“I feel burned out from my work”), depersonalization (“I’ve become more callous towards people since I took this job”), and personal accomplishment (“I feel exhilarated after working closely with my recipients”). The items for this instrument are measured on a 7-point Likert-scale (1 = Strongly Disagree, 7 = Strongly Disagree). Descriptive statistics for the subscales the burnout measure are as follows: emotional exhaustion was (M = 3.71, SD = 1.43, α = 0.92), depersonalization was (M = 3.24, SD = 1.23, α = 0.72), and personal accomplishment was (M = 5.09, SD = 0.89, α = 0.76).

Results

Before conducting the primary analyses of interest in the current study, the researchers first visually inspected the data and examined the skewness and kurtosis values for normality of the data (see Table 2). The researchers also investigated the multicollinearity (Table 2) and linearity (see Table 3) of the study variables prior to testing the hypotheses and research questions via path analysis with MPlus 7.0 (Muthén and Muthén, 1998-2012). The research team also investigated whether any controls needed to be added to the model. This was determined by conducting statistical tests of difference for participants’ age and number of hours worked per week. The results of the MANOVA tests suggested that only participants’ age predicted significant differences in the key variables of interest in the current study. Based on suggestions from Hayes (2009), indirect associations were tested using a bootstrapping method; this method involved resampling (n = 10,000) to provide the estimates of the 95% confidence intervals around the coefficients for the indirect effects (Preacher and Hays, 2008). The researchers also reported the bias-corrected and accelerated confidence intervals (BCaCIs) as previous research asserts these are more appropriate to report when testing indirect associations (MacKinnon et al., 2004).

Table 2.

Statistical assumption checks for study variables.

Variable		Skewness values (standard error)	Kurtosis values (standard error)	Variance inflation factor
1	Task-oriented leadership style	−0.52 (0.19)	−0.27 (0.38)	2.25
2	Relational leadership style	−0.63 (0.19)	0.24 (0.38)	3.89
3	Communication satisfaction	−0.63 (0.19)	0.51 (0.38)	4.34
4	Communication competence	−0.59 (0.19)	0.39 (0.38)	4.10
5	Emotional exhaustion	0.11 (0.19)	−0.59 (0.38)	—
6	Depersonalization	0.06 (0.19)	−0.38 (0.38)	—
7	Personal accomplishment	0.07 (0.19)	0.02 (0.38)	—

Table 3.

Bivariate correlations between study variables.

Variable		1	2	3	4	5	6	7
1	Task-oriented leadership	1	0.73**	0.62**	0.65**	−0.37**	−0.30**	0.40**
2	Relational leadership		1	0.80**	0.78**	−0.45**	−0.35**	0.39**
3	Communication satisfaction			1	0.85**	−0.59**	−0.45**	0.52**
4	Communication competence				1	−0.55**	−0.40**	0.42**
5	Emotional exhaustion					1	0.65**	−0.38**
6	Depersonalization						1	−0.42**
7	Personal accomplishment							1

Note. **p < .01

The initial model indicated good fit: χ² (6) = 6.38, p = .38, RMSEA = 0.02, TLI = 1.00, CFI = 1.00, SRMR = 0.02. However, given that participants’ age predicted significant differences in the experiences of the study variables¹, the research team conducted a second path analysis with age entered as a control variable. This model also indicated good fit: χ² (8) = 10.29, p = .25, RMSEA = 0.04, TLI = 0.99, CFI = 1.00, SRMR = 0.02. Because the models are nested, it is appropriate to explore the statistical difference between the models to determine which is a better fit for the data. Given that the chi-square difference test was not significant (∆ χ²(2) = 3.91, p = .14), the researchers, following the advice of Pavlov et al. (2020), opted to retain the more parsimonious model without age as a control. The following results are based on the initial model tested. The standardized R² values for the¹ dependent variables included: communication satisfaction (0.78), communication competence (0.62), emotional exhaustion (0.35), depersonalization (0.21), and personal accomplishment (0.27). See Figure 1 for the hypothesized model and Figure 2 for the final model.

Figure 2.

Final path analysis model.

H1 predicted a positive association between (a) task-oriented leadership style and communication satisfaction and (b) relational leadership style and communication satisfaction. The results of the path analysis suggest there was no significant relationship between task-oriented leadership style and communication satisfaction: β = −0.02, p = .71. There was a significant, positive association detected between relational leadership style and communication satisfaction: β = 0.34, p < .001. Thus, H1 was partially supported.

H2 predicted a positive association between a) task-oriented leadership style and communication competence and between b) relational leadership style and communication competence. The results of model testing indicated that both H2a (β = 0.18, p < 0.01) and H2b (β = 0.65, p < .001) were supported.

H3 predicted a positive association between communication competence and communication satisfaction. Results suggest H3 was supported (β = 0.58, p < .001).

H4 predicted a negative association between (a) communication satisfaction and emotional exhaustion and (b) communication satisfaction and depersonalization. H3c predicted a positive association between communication satisfaction and personal accomplishment. All three paths were significant in the model testing; thus H4a (β = −0.42, p < .001), H4b (β = −0.41, p < .01), and H4c (β = 0.59, p < .001) were all supported.

H5 predicted a negative association between (a) communication competence and emotional exhaustion and (b) communication competence and depersonalization, and a positive association between (c) communication competence and personal accomplishment. Based on the path analysis, none of these associations were significant in the model: H5a (β = −0.19, p = .10), H5b (β = −0.05, p = .72), and H5c (β = −0.08, p = .56).

RQ1 explored the indirect associations between task-oriented leadership style and (a) emotional exhaustion, (b) depersonalization, and (c) personal accomplishment via communication satisfaction. RQ2 investigated the indirect associations between task-oriented leadership style and (a) emotional exhaustion, (b) depersonalization, and (c) personal accomplishment via communication competence. None of the indirect associations in RQ1 or RQ2 were significant based on the bootstrapping method used to test these effects.

RQ3 explored the associations between relational leadership style and (a) emotional exhaustion, (b) depersonalization, and (c) personal accomplishment via communication satisfaction. Results of RQ3a suggested that the indirect effect was significant: −0.15, (p < .01, 95% BCaCI: −0.26, −0.07). This finding suggested that employees’ perceptions of their supervisors’ relational leadership style positively predicted their communication satisfaction with their supervisor, and in turn, they reported a decrease in emotional exhaustion. Results of RQ3b suggest the mediation path from relational leadership style to employees’ depersonalization via communication satisfaction was significant: −0.15 (p = .02, 95% BCaCI: −0.27, −0.05). This finding suggested that supervisors’ relational leadership style was positively associated with employees’ reports of their communication satisfaction. In turn, their communication satisfaction was negatively associated with their reports of depersonalization. RQ3c examining the indirect association between employees’ perceptions of their supervisors’ relational leadership style and their reports of personal accomplishment via their communication satisfaction was also supported in the current study: 0.21 (p < .001, 95% BCaCI: 0.13, 0.32).

RQ4 explored the indirect associations between relational leadership style and (a) emotional exhaustion, (b) depersonalization, and (c) personal accomplishment via communication competence. RQ4 investigated the indirect associations between task-oriented leadership style and (a) emotional exhaustion, (b) depersonalization, and (c) personal accomplishment via communication competence. None of the indirect associations in RQ4 were significant based on the bootstrapping method used to test these effects.

Discussion

The present research investigated leadership styles (relational and task-oriented leadership) and their associations with employees’ communication satisfaction with their supervisors, supervisors’ perceived communication competence, and the three dimensions of burnout: emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment. The purpose of the study was to validate the relationship among the above variables and extend prior research by exploring the indirect associations between supervisors’ leadership styles and employees’ burnout via perceived supervisors’ communication competence and employees’ communication satisfaction.

Based on the findings from the model testing in the current study, relational leadership style was associated with communication satisfaction and communication competence, while task-oriented leadership style was only related to communication competence. In line with prior studies, relational leaders focus on building relationships with employees, employees report being more satisfied with the communication (Anderson and Martin, 1995). However, the findings only somewhat supported previous studies related to the association between task-oriented leadership style and communication satisfaction (e.g., Madlock, 2008b; Mikkelson et al., 2015; Putti et al., 1990); although the correlation between task-oriented leadership and communication satisfaction was significant, the path did not remain significant in model testing. One explanation for this finding may be that other studies did not consider the variance accounted for by other related variables.

The study did report findings similar to extant scholarship that both leadership styles were positively associated with supervisors’ perceived communication competence (Madlock, 2008a; Mikkelson et al., 2015). Therefore, the findings of this study aligned with previous scholars’ assertion that employees were likely to perceive their supervisor to be competent communicators if they engaged in either relational or task-oriented leadership styles. In other words, leaders who build strong relationships with employees or emphasize goal achievement and clarification are likely to be perceived as competent by their employees (Yukl et al., 2002). However, relational leadership behavior may be more important in predicting employees’ communication satisfaction with their supervisors.

Another finding of the research is that all three dimensions of burnout were associated with communication satisfaction, that is, as employees’ communication satisfaction with their supervisors increased, employees’ level of emotional exhaustion and depersonalization decreased, and their personal accomplishment increased. This supported prior research as communication satisfaction was found to be related to many positive employee outcomes, including good supervisor-subordinate relationships, employees’ increased work performance, work engagement, motivation, and job satisfaction (Downs and Hazen, 1977). Although previous research has demonstrated associations between supervisors’ communication competence and employee outcomes, such as perceived stress and burnout, motivation and organizational commitment (Sharbrough et al., 2006; Wright et al., 2010), no connection between employees’ burnout and supervisors’ perceived communication competence was discovered in the study. The burnout scale Wright and his colleagues (2010) used only measured two dimensions of burnout (emotional exhaustion and depersonalization), whereas the scale included a third dimension of burnout (personal achievement), which might have led to different results. The results also seemed to be inconsistent with the findings from previous literature that showed that communication responsiveness and effectiveness are related to employees’ reduced burnout (Miller et al., 1988; Omdahl and O’Donnell, 1999). Even though effectiveness and responsiveness were considered dimensions of communication competence, the communication competence scale the researchers employed in the research encompassed more than communication responsiveness and effectiveness, which may explain the discrepancy between the results of this study and the findings of others.

A unique finding of the present research that addressed a research gap was the indirect association between relational leadership style and employees’ burnout via communication satisfaction. It indicates that relational leadership style with an emphasis on building strong relationships with employees (Yukl et al., 2002) can lead to increased employee communication satisfaction, which in turn, may lead to decreased reports of employee burnout. This finding supports previous research from Lopez and colleagues (2011) who reported that relational leadership predicted decreased emotional exhaustion and depersonalization. However, the findings added to the literature by indicating a mediated path between relational leadership style and employee burnout via communication satisfaction. Similar to their results, task-oriented leadership was not indirectly associated with employee burnout. In the Lopez et al. (2011) study, the authors noted that task-oriented leadership style was not associated with employees’ emotional exhaustion among generation Y. Considering that these individuals composed the major demographics of this research sample, it is not surprising that task-oriented leadership style did not predict employees’ burnout via their communication satisfaction.

Taken together, the research findings provided meaningful insights into organizational management by showing that relational leadership style and communication satisfaction were more predictive of employees’ burnout than task-oriented leadership style and employees’ perception of their supervisors’ communication competence. In other words, although supervisor communication competence and task-oriented leadership styles are considered prosocial and beneficial, these behaviors did not contribute to decreased burnout. Given the individual and organizational implications of employee burnout, scholars and organizational trainers should continue to focus on the study and facilitation of relationship-focused leadership behavior and strategies for developing perceived communication satisfaction in order to alleviate employees’ feeling of burnout.

Limitations and future research

There are a few factors that limit the generalizability of these findings. Convenience sampling method using students to recruit family members or friends with work experience may have led to a smaller sample size. As the descriptives of occupation indicated, nearly 35% of total participants and 23% of partcipants who held one occupation worked in customer service. This might be due to the university from which the sample was drawn specifically aiming to recruit students from low-income households, which explains for these findings. Moreover, approximately 35% of the sample in the current study indicated working multiple occupations. This may lead to greater burden as these participants may have had to manage various expectations, norms, and rules from their supervisors, coworkers, and industries writ large. With a larger sample that includes occupations of greater demographic and occupational diversity, this study’s findings could be made more generalizable to the overall working population. Future studies could use more intentional sampling methods to provide a larger sample size and target different types of workers (blue-collar, part-time, etc.) who are not traditionally included in organizational communication research to allow for a more holistic picture of these associations.

The researchers also failed to ask participants how long they had been employed in their full-time job. This means the researchers lacked an understanding of how experience plays a role in workers’ communication satisfaction and level of burnout. Future research could use tenure or work experience in general as a moderating variable to investigate how this affects leadership’s role in employee burnout and communication satisfaction. Furthermore, this study was cross-sectional in nature, meaning only correlational claims can be made from the findings. Future researchers interested in investigating these associations should consider adopting a longitudinal survey design. Future research could also follow employees starting a new job to see if ratings on managers’ task- and relational leadership styles affect supervisors’ communication competence perceived by subordinates, employee’s communication satisfaction and burnout over time. Finally, scholars should also consider investigating discrepancies between employees’ and supervisors’ perceptions of these leadership styles and communicative behaviors to determine whether these are predictive of employee outcomes including burnout. Understanding how communication plays a role in the relationship between supervisors and subordinates will allow researchers to make suggestions on how managers should act to better make their employees satisfied with their work and to minimize the burnout of their employees.

Conclusion

This study demonstrates the importance of continued investigation of leaders’ communication in the workplace. The contribution of this study lies in the investigation of how leadership style influences employee burnout from a communicative perspective. By scrutinizing the communicative and interactive predictors of employee burnout, the researchers further understandd the communicative factors that mediate between leadership styles and employee burnout. With the knowledge of employees’ communication satisfaction as the direct predictor to employee burnout, the research team suggests that supervisors should focus on developing strong relationships with their employees as a strategy for prompting communication satisfaction and decreased employee burnout. As employee burnout continues to have negative implications for individuals and the organizations that employee them, researchers should continue to investigate the supervisor-employee communicative predictors that may prevent or diminish the experience of employee burnout.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

We thank my classmates Michael Cavanagh and Toni Yrlas from Texas State University who contributed greatly to the initial design and execution of this study as well as the writing of the original paper. We thank Dr. Jeffrey Treem (University of Texas at Austin) for his valuable feedback for the paper and his exceptional support throughout the publication process.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Ethical approval

The research project was approved by the Texas State IRB on 3 November 2019.

ORCID iD

Yifan Xu

Kristen Farris

Note

References

Anderson

Martin

(1995) Why employees speak to coworkers and bosses: motives, gender, and organizational satisfaction. Journal of Business Communication 32(3): 249–265.

Avolio

Waldman

Einstein

(1988) Transformational leadership in a management game simulation. Group and Organization Studies 13(1): 59–80.

Barge

(1994) Putting leadership back to work. Management Communication Quarterly 8(1): 95–109.

Becker

JAH

Halbesleben

JRB

Dan O’Hair

(2005) Defensive communication and burnout in the workplace: the mediating role of leader-member exchange. Communication Research Reports 22(2): 43–150.

Blake

Mouton

(1964) The Managerial Grid: The Key to Leadership Excellence. Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing Co.

Broome

Knight

Edwards

, et al. (2009) Leadership, burnout, and job satisfaction in outpatient drug-free treatment programs. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 37(2): 160–170.

Carrière

Bourque

Bonaccio

(2007) The role of communication satisfaction as a mediator between an organization’s internal communication systems and two job outcomes: job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Available at: http://luxor.acadiau.ca/library/ASAC/v28/05/05_60.pdf (accessed 11 July 2020).

Castaneda

Nahavandi

(1991) Link of manager behavior to supervisor performance rating and subordinate satisfaction. Group and Organization Studies 16(4): 357–366.

Cooley

Roach

(1984) A conceptual framework. In: Bostrom

(ed) Competence in Communication. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1l–33.

10.

Cupach

Spitzberg

(1983) Trait versus state: a comparison of dispositional and situational measures of interpersonal communication competence. Western Journal of Speech Communication 47(4): 364–379.

11.

Downs

Hazen

(1977) A factor analytic study of communication satisfaction. Journal of Business Communication 14(3): 63–73.

12.

Flauto

(1999) Walking the talk: the relationship between leadership and communication competence. Journal of Leadership Studies 6(1–2): 86–97.

13.

Fleishman

Hunt

(1973) Current Developments in the Study of Leadership. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

14.

Gibson

Grey

Hastings

(2009) Supervisor support as a predictor of burnout and therapeutic self-efficacy in therapists working in ABA schools. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 39(7): 1024–1030.

15.

Hackman

Johnson

(2013) Leadership: A Communication Perspective. 6th ed. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.

16.

Hargie

Tourish

Wilson

(2002) Communication audits and the effects of increased information: a follow-up study. Journal of Business Communication 39(4): 414–436.

17.

Hawkins

Fillion

(1999) Perceived communication skill needs for work groups. Communication Research Reports 16(2): 167–174.

18.

Hayes

(2009) Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical mediation analysis in the new millennium. Communication Monographs 76(4): 408–420.

19.

Hecht

(1978) The conceptualization and measurement of interpersonal communication satisfaction. Human Communication Research 4(3): 253–264.

20.

Hersey

Blanchard

(1969) Life cycle theory of leadership. Training and Development Journal 23(5): 26–34.

21.

Holladay

Coombs

(1993) Communicating visions. Management Communication Quarterly 6(4): 405–427.

22.

Jackson

Schwab

Schuler

(1986) Toward an understanding of the burnout phenomenon. Journal of Applied Psychology 71(4): 630–640.

23.

Jiang

Men

(2015) Creating an engaged workforce: the impact of authentic leadership, transparent organizational communication, and work-life enrichment. Communication Research 44(2): 225–243.

24.

Jusoh

Simun

Choy Chong

(2011) Expectation gaps, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment of fresh graduates. Education + Training 53(6): 515–530.

25.

Kanste

Kyngas

Nikkil

(2007) The relationship between multidimensional leadership and burnout among nursing staff. Journal of Nursing Management 15(7): 731–739.

26.

Kemper

Wilson

Schwartz

, et al. (2019) Burnout in pediatric residents: comparing brief screening questions to the Maslach burnout inventory. Academic Pediatrics 19(3): 251–255.

27.

Kim

Lee

(2009) Supervisory communication, burnout, and turnover intention among social workers in health care settings. Social Work in Health Care 48(4): 364–385.

28.

Kozak

Uca

(2008) Effective factors in the constitution of leadership styles: a study of Turkish hotel managers. Anatolia-Ankara-International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research 19(1): 117–130.

29.

Kreps

(1988) Relational communication in health care. Southern Speech Communication Journal 53(4): 344–359.

30.

Likert

(1961) New Patterns of Management. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

31.

Lopez

Green

Carmody-Bubb

, et al. (2011) The relationship between leadership style and employee stress: an empirical study. The International Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Sciences: Annual Review 6(3): 169–182.

32.

MacDonald

Kelly

Christen

(2019) A path model of workplace solidarity, satisfaction, burnout, and motivation. International Journal of Business Communication 56(1): 31–49.

33.

MacKinnon

Lockwood

Williams

(2004) Confidence limits for the indirect effect: distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research 39(1): 99–128.

34.

Madlock

(2008a) The link between leadership style, communicator competence, and employee satisfaction. Journal of Business Communication 45(1): 61–78.

35.

Madlock

(2008b) Employee satisfaction: an examination of supervisors’ communication competence. Human Communication 11(1): 87–100.

36.

Madlock

Kennedy-Lightsey

(2010) The effects of supervisors’ verbal aggressiveness and mentoring on their subordinates. The Journal of Business Communication 47(1): 42–62.

37.

Maslach

(1982) Burnout: The Cost of Caring. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

38.

Maslach

Jackson

(1979) Burned-out cops and their families. Psychology Today 12(12): 59–62.

39.

Maslach

Jackson

(1981) The measurement of experienced burnout. Journal of Occupational Behavior 2(2): 99–113.

40.

Maslach

Schaufeli

Leiter

(2001) Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology 52(1): 397–422.

41.

Mikkelson

York

Arritola

(2015) Communication competence, leadership behaviors, and employee outcomes in supervisor-employee relationships. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly 78(3): 336–354.

42.

Miller

Stiff

Ellis

(1988) Communication and empathy as precursors to burnout among human service workers. Communication Monographs 55(3): 250–265.

43.

Monge

Bachman

Dillard

, et al (1981) Communication competence in the workplace: model testing and scale development. Annals of the International Communication Association 5(1): 505–527.

44.

Muthén

(1998-2012) Mplus User’s Guide. 7th ed. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén and Muthén.

45.

Myers

Kassing

(1998) The relationship between perceived supervisory communication behaviors and subordinate organizational identification. Communication Research Reports 15(1): 71–81.

46.

Northouse

(2001) Leadership: Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

47.

Omdahl

O’Donnell

(1999) Emotional contagion, empathic concern and communicative responsiveness as variables affecting nurses’ stress and occupational commitment. Journal of Advanced Nursing 29(6): 1351–1359.

48.

Paine

(1982) The burnout syndrome in context. In: Jones

(ed) The Burnout Syndrome: Current Research, Theory, Interventions. Park Ridge, IL: London House Press, pp. 1–29.

49.

Pavlov

Shi

Maydeu-Olivares

(2020) Chi-square difference tests for comparing nested models: an evaluation of non-normal data. Structural Equation Modeling 27(6): 908–917.

50.

Preacher

Hayes

(2008) Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods 40: 879–891.

51.

Putti

Aryee

Phua

(1990) Communication relationship satisfaction and organizational commitment. Group and Organization Studies 15(1): 44–52.

52.

Rajesh

Suganthi

(2013) The satisfaction of teachers with their supervisors’ interpersonal communication skills in relation to job burn-out and growth satisfaction in southern India. Management in Education 27(4): 128–137.

53.

Richardsen

Martinussen

(2004) The Maslach burnout inventory: factorial validity and consistency across occupational groups in Norway. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 77(3): 377–384.

54.

Robinson

Perryman

Hayday

(2004) The Drivers of Employee Engagement. Institute for Employment Studies. Available at: www.employment-studies.co.uk/system/files/resources/files/408.pdf (accessed 11 July 2020).

55.

Rubin

Martin

(1994) Development of a measure of interpersonal communication competence. Communication Research Reports 11(1): 33–44.

56.

Schaufeli

Bakker

(2004) Job demands, job resources and their relationship with burnout and engagement: a multi-sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior 25(3): 293–315.

57.

Schutte

Toppinen

Kalimo

, et al. (2000) The factorial validity of the Maslach Burnout Inventory-General Survey (MBI-GS) across occupational groups and nations. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 73(3): 53–66.

58.

Sharbrough

Simmons

Cantrill

(2006) Motivating language in industry: its impact on job satisfaction and perceived supervisor effectiveness. Journal of Business Communication 43(4): 322–343.

59.

Sharma

Jain

(2013) Leadership management: principles, models and theories. Global Journal of Management and Business Studies 3(3): 309–318.

60.

Spitzberg

Cupach

(1981, November). Self-monitoring and Relational Competence. Anaheim, CA: Speech Communication Association Convention.

61.

Stamp

Vangelisti

Daly

(1992) The creation of defensiveness in social interaction. Communication Quarterly 40(2): 177–190.

62.

Steele

Plenty

(2015) Supervisor–subordinate communication competence and job and communication satisfaction. International Journal of Business Communication 52(3): 294–318.

63.

Stirton

Lodge

(2001) Transparency mechanisms: building publicness into public services. Journal of Law and Society 28(4): 471–489.

64.

Stogdill

(1974) Handbook of Leadership: A Survey of Theory and Research. New York, NY: Free Press.

65.

Stohl

(1985, May) Going Around in Circles: The Impact of Changing Communication Patterns on Quality Circle Members’ Attitudes, Behaviors, and Cognition — A Social Network Perspective. Honolulu, HI: International Communication Association Convention.

66.

Taris

Schreurs

PJG

Schaufeli

(1999) Construct validity of the Maslach Burnout Inventory-General Survey: a two-sample examination of its factor structure and correlates. Work & Stress 13(3): 223–237.

67.

Thayer

(1968) Communication and Communication Systems in Organization, Management and Interpersonal Relations. Homewood, IL: Irwin.

68.

Vermeir

Blot

Degroote

, et al. (2018) Communication satisfaction and job satisfaction among critical care nurses and their impact on burnout and intention to leave: a questionnaire study. Intensive and Critical Care Nursing 48: 21–27.

69.

Walumbwa

Avolio

Gardner

, et al. (2008) Authentic leadership: development and validation of a theory-based measure. Journal of Management 34(1): 89–126.

70.

Webster

Hackett

(1999) Burnout and leadership in community mental health systems. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health 26(6): 387–399.

71.

Wigert

Agrawal

(2018, July 12) Employee burnout, part 1: the 5 main causes. Gallup. Available at: www.gallup.com/workplace/237059/employee-burnout-part-main-causes.aspx (accessed 10 July 2020).

72.

Worley

Vassar

Wheeler

, et al. (2008) Factor structure of scores from the Maslach Burnout Inventory: a review and meta-analysis of 45 exploratory and confirmatory factor-analytic studies. Educational and Psychological Measurement 68(5): 797–823.

73.

Wright

Banas

Bessarabova

, et al. (2010) A communication competence approach to examining health care social support, stress, and job burnout. Journal of Health Communication 25(4): 375–382.

74.

Yukl

Gordon

Taber

(2002) A hierarchical taxonomy of leadership behavior: integrating a half century of behavior research. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies 9(1): 15–32.