Workaholism and work engagement can be depicted, respectively, as the pathological and the healthy form of heavy work investment. In spite of their different definitions and outcomes on individual and organizational life, workaholism and work engagement are not clearly and adequately distinguished by scholars and researchers as they appear to show some overlapping features. The aim of this investigation was to meta-analyze available studies, selected by systematic review, on the relations between subdimensions of workaholism and work engagement. Thirty-five studies were eligible for analysis. Associations emerged between Working Excessively and Absorption (g = .34), Working Compulsively and Absorption (g = .28), and Working Excessively and Dedication (g = .14). Moreover, the results were not influenced by publication bias and showed nationality to be a significant moderator. Overall, these findings suggest that further research is necessary to extend our knowledge of workaholism, work engagement, and the relationship between the two, in order to disentangle commonalities and differences between them.

This study analyzed the differences between workaholism and work engagement in relation to their influence on work–life interference. Workaholism is an addiction to work, characterized by obsessive attitude towards job, whereas work engagement concerns a positive pattern of thoughts and feelings about one’s job; these two constructs thus represent pathological and healthy forms of heavy work investment, respectively. As a consequence, it was expected that workaholism and work engagement would have different effects on perceived interference between work and life domains. We assessed levels of workaholism, work engagement, work-to-life interference, and life-to-work interference in a sample of 212 Italian workers. Results from structural equation modeling showed an inverse symmetry involving patterns and magnitudes of the relations observed: work engagement was more negatively related to life-to-work interference than work-to-life interference, whereas workaholism was more positively related to work-to-life interference than life-to-work interference. Implications about findings of the study are discussed.

This study focuses on two types of heavy work investment, namely workaholism and work engagement, and on psychological detachment from work. Both workaholism and work engagement refer to an intense work effort, yet with a different impact on work and personal life. Building on Stressor–Detachment Model (SDM), we examine how different levels of workaholism, work engagement, and psychological detachment influence different outcomes related to employees’ well-being (i.e., perceived health, negative affectivity, positive affectivity). Data were collected from 342 employees via online survey and analyzed by mean of latent profile analysis. Five employee profiles were identified: High-Detachment and Engaged, Heavy Work Investors, Mild-Detachment and Disengaged, Mild-Detachment and Engaged, and Pure Workaholics. The profiles showed different patterns of the outcomes under investigation. Our findings also indicate that psychological detachment is an important factor that alleviates the detrimental effects of heavy work investment on employees’ well-being and that work engagement can play an immediate protecting role for employees’ well-being even in absence of significant levels of psychological detachment.

No abstract