There is a truism about applied research that an inadequate concept of change leads to diminished or misguided applied research. Hence this paper urges distinguishing kinds of change, distinctions which are suggested by experience and also are supported with evidence generated by exotic statistical and computational techniques in which we have been engaged. An immediate pay-off of making such distinctions is more definite reliance on existing research findings, whose interpretation is necessarily related to their underlying concept of change. More central still, the goal is to facilitate the design and evaluation of efforts to improve the human condition and the quality of life, especially in organizations. Initially, conceptual clarification of "change" will show that at least three kinds seem distinguishable. Later, data from a study of a "successful" Flexi-Time intervention will be used to test these conceptual clarifications. Detailed statistical analysis will support the broad position that a unitary concept of change is inappropriate and may be seriously misleading.

The term "burnout" represents a significant perspective on how people respond to their work, but the attention paid to this phenomenon has largely been clinical and often anecdotal. In this article, the authors seek to expand the analysis of burnout in ways that permit comparative analysis, especially in large populations. This study specifically addresses three questions. First, does a paper-and-pencil instrument isolate domains of burnout that are relatively consistent between people-intensive work and the broader range of activities found in a commercial enterprise? Second, can we develop phases of progressive burnout? Third, can we test the efficacy of the burnout phases by searching for regularities in a panel of 22 variables commonly thought to tap the important facets of the work site? The author's analysis shows that we can answer these three central questions affirmatively, though occasionally with complex and potentially significant qualifications. The results of the analysis provide further evidence of the usefulness of a convenient instrument for measuring burnout and also suggest that behavioral scientists will find valuable a phase model that distinguishes regular and robust covariation by using a panel of variables thought to tap the important aspects of organizational life.

No abstract

No abstract