Abstract

The existing two-dimensional work stressor framework predicts that challenge and hindrance stressors have differing effects on job performance and job satisfaction,
but the two stressors have a similar (positive) effect on job strain and burnout. I propose that perceived strain and burnout should be treated as two distinct concepts. Perceived strain partially mediates the relationships between challenge and hindrance stressors and burnout. After considering perceived strain as a mediator, the two stressors have differing direct relationships with burnout. I also propose that individual differences moderate the
effects of challenge and hindrance stressors. This study of full time employees (N = 518) examined the mediating effect of perceived strain, and the moderating effects of gender,
Type-A behaviour, and work locus of control on the relationship between the two stressors and burnout, in-role performance and job satisfaction.

Data were collected through an online survey with an approximately 80% response rate. The established measures were used. Multiple regressions and moderated multiple regressions were used to analyze the data. In supporting the hypotheses, both challenge and hindrance stressors had positive indirect effects on burnout through perceived strain, but challenge stressors had a negative direct effect on burnout and hindrance stressors had a positive direct effect on burnout. Type-A behavior enhanced the positive effect of challenge stressors on in-role performance. It weakened the negative effect of hindrance stressors on job satisfaction. The positive relationship between challenge stressors and in-role performance was stronger for males than for females.

At the most general level, results of this study increase our confidence about the validity of the challenge and hindrance stressors framework. After distinguishing
perceived strain and burnout as two separate concepts, we can be confident that challenge stressors may indeed have potentials to reduce rather than increase burnout. Results of this study send several fresh messages to practicing managers. Challenge stressors may not be health impairing. Organizations should keep hindrance stressors to a minimum and consider increasing levels of challenge stressors strategically as long as they have practices in place that can buffer energy-depleting effects associated with challenges. Meanwhile, managers may consider taking advantage of Type A behavior;. It may interact with challenge stressors and lead to high in-role performance, and interact with hindrance stressors and remain high job satisfaction. Type A behavior is not related to burnout either, after controlling the two stressors and perceived strain.