University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Understanding workplace burnout in the nonprofit sector

(USC Thesis Other)

Understanding workplace burnout in the nonprofit sector

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Understanding Workplace Burnout in the Nonprofit Sector

Wanda Cooper

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education

May 2023

© Copyright by Wanda Cooper, 2023
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Wanda Cooper certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Brandi P Jones
Sandra Kaplan
Eugenia Mora-Flores, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2023

iv
Abstract
The study’s conceptual framework is grounded in Bandura’s social cognitive theory (SCT),
which asserts that there is a reciprocal causation between environmental, personal, and
behavioral factors influencing learning (Bandura, 1978). The purpose of this qualitative
phenomenological study was to understand nonmanagerial employees’ perception of the factors
of workplace stressors that lead to burnout, its impact on productivity, their recommendations to
mitigate burnout in the nonprofit (NP) sector, and what, if any, differences exist for employees of
color. The study addressed three research questions:
1. What factors contribute to burnout of employees in the nonprofit sector, and what, if
any, differences exist for employees of color?
2. How does burnout impact employees’ productivity in the nonprofit sector, and what,
if any, differences exist for employees of color?
3. What recommendations do employees perceive would mitigate workplace burnout in
the nonprofit sector?
This study’s data collection process included semi-structured interviews and document
analysis of the study participant’s employer websites. The participants were diverse employees
currently working in community-based organizations in the NP sector. Nonmanagerial
employees with at least 1 year tenure at their employer and willing to share their experiences
related to workplace stress and burnout. The general findings of this study identified workplace
stressors as a lack of managerial accessibility, supervision, modeling/coaching, lack of adequate
resources, and an unsupportive organizational culture. The recommendations were to invest in
enhancing managerial practices, organizational support, and supportive organizational culture
that has a sustainable, diverse, equitable, and inclusive workplace. The recommendations are

intended to provide NP leaders with actionable and sustainable ways to collaborate with
employees to create healthy working conditions.

vi
Dedication
To Damali, Nala, and Kiara, I dedicate this body of work to you as an example that anything is
possible. May you always know that if you believe in yourself, take the time to practice and
master your skills; your opportunities will be endless! Never doubt that you are bound for
greatness!

vii
Acknowledgements
There is a “Doctor en la Casa”! To my hubby, thank you for your endless support
throughout this journey. Thank you for your patience and for the countless pints of Ben and
Jerry’s, to keep me going! Te quiero mucho, mi amor!
Mami, gracias por todos tus sacrificios! Thank you for believing in me even when I
couldn’t. So grateful to have you as my biggest cheerleader, I love you! Dad, rest in power! Your
baby girl did it! I miss you but know you continue to be with me - every step of the way!
To my children and grandchildren, I love you and hope you can use this as an example
that anything is possible! It’s never too late to invest in your dreams and achieve any goal you
desire! Thank you to my village, I am so grateful for your support!
Dr. Seanelle Hawkins, thank you for always believing in me by planting the “Dr.” seed,
10 years ago and for supporting me through this journey! Thank you, Dr. Nikisha Johnson, for
always being such a supportive force in my life, and this process was no different! Dr. Jeanine
Dingus - Prima - your check-ins always came right on time! Gracias for your love and support!
Dr. Lorna Washington, I appreciate you for always lifting me up when I needed it the most!
To my SororZ of Zeta Phi Beta Sorority Incorporated, WE are trailblazers, and we never
tire in our efforts toward Scholarship, Service, Sisterhood, and Finer Womanhood! Thank you
for your support, SororZ! ZPhiii! Soooo Sweet!
Dr. Jones, and Dr. Kaplan, thank you for serving on my dissertation committee and for
your support. Dr. Mora-Flores, I truly appreciate your time, support, and guidance. It was
invaluable to me!
To those struggling to believe in themselves, YOU have the power inside you to
accomplish anything! Go for it, and don’t look back! Your goals are waiting for you!

viii
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ...................................................................................................................................... vi
Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................... vii
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. x
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ xi
Chapter One: Introduction to the Study .......................................................................................... 1
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................ 2
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions .................................................................... 3
Significance of the Study .................................................................................................... 3
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology .................................................... 4
Definition of Terms............................................................................................................. 4
Organization of the Dissertation ......................................................................................... 5
Chapter Two: Literature Review .................................................................................................... 7
History of Workplace Conditions ....................................................................................... 7
Employees of Color in the Workplace .............................................................................. 23
Research on Workplace Burnout ...................................................................................... 27
Nonprofit Organizations ................................................................................................... 34
Conceptual Framework ..................................................................................................... 36
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 40
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 43
Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 43
Overview of Design .......................................................................................................... 43
Research Setting................................................................................................................ 45
The Researcher.................................................................................................................. 45

ix
Data Source ....................................................................................................................... 48
Credibility and Trustworthiness ........................................................................................ 54
Research Ethics ................................................................................................................. 54
Chapter Four: Results and Findings .............................................................................................. 56
Research Question 1: What Factors Contribute to Burnout of Employees in the
Nonprofit Sector, and What, if Any, Differences Exist for Employees of Color? ........... 56
Research Question 2: How Does Burnout Impact Employees’ Productivity in the
Nonprofit Sector, and What, if Any, Differences Exist for Employees of Color? ........... 65
Summary and Implications of Findings ............................................................................ 73
Chapter Five: Recommendations .................................................................................................. 76
Overview of the Findings.................................................................................................. 77
Research Question 3: What Recommendations Do Employees Perceive Would
Mitigate Workplace Burnout?........................................................................................... 78
What, if Any, Differences Exist for Employees of Color? ............................................... 91
Implications of Recommendations ................................................................................... 94
Discussion ......................................................................................................................... 96
Limitations and Delimitations........................................................................................... 99
Recommendations for Future Research .......................................................................... 100
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 101
References ................................................................................................................................... 102
Appendix: Interview Protocol ..................................................................................................... 131

x
List of Tables
Table 1: Demographic Characteristics of the Research Participants 50
Table 2: Summary of Burnout Factors and Impact 74
Table 3: Sample Co-created Supervision Agenda 83
Table A1: Interview Protocol 132

xi
List of Figures
Figure 1: Social Cognitive Theory and Reciprocal Determinism 39
Figure 2: Intersecting Axes of Privilege, Domination, and Oppression 47
Figure 3: What Factors Contribute to Burnout of Employees in the Nonprofit Sector, and
What, if Any, Differences Exist for Employees of Color? 65
Figure 4: How Does Burnout Impact Employees’ Productivity in the Nonprofit Sector, and
What, if Any, Differences Exist for Employees of Color? 73
Figure 5: Recommendation 1: Managerial Support 85
Figure 6: Recommendation 2: Organizational Support with Adequate Resources 88
Figure 7: Recommendations 3 and 4: Supportive Organizational Culture With a Focus on the
Sustainability of a Diverse, Equitable, and Inclusive Workplace 93
Figure 8: Overview of Recommendations 96

1

Chapter One: Introduction to the Study
In 2019, the World Health Organization (2019) included workplace burnout in the
International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11). Workplace burnout is an occupational
phenomenon defined as multifactorial, where unstable work relationships and chronic workplace
stressors result in overtiredness, cynicism, and declining work achievements, which are primarily
found in helping professions (Awa et al., 2010; Cordes & Dougherty, 1993; Maslach et al., 1996;
Maslach et al., 2001; Schaufeli & Enzmann, 2020; World Health Organization, 2019). A survey
of almost 25,000 employees working full-time found that the primary drivers of workplace
burnout were environments with high job demands with little to no resources supporting the
employees in completing the work (Gallup, 2019).
Additionally, Satcher (2001) states that race is a social construct (not a biological
differentiator) that has been historically used in the United States to separate humans into groups
perpetuating the superior treatment of Whites and the inferior treatment of people of color.
Furthermore, the authors asserted that employees of color (EOCs) are disproportionately
impacted by chronic stress due to historical structural racism, institutional racism, and White
supremacy, as well as the inequities within the workplace culture, conditions, and policies in the
United States (Boskin, 1976; Epperly et al., 2020; Gates, 2020; Kania et al., 2022; Miah, 2012;
Myrdal, 2017; Ritchie, 2016; Rushdy, 2012).
This study focused on the perception of nonmanagerial employees in community-based
organizations (CBO) that are in the 501(c)(3) nonprofit (NP) sector and perceived differences
from EOCs. Study participants provided support services such as case management, peer
education, and resource navigation to community residents (Arnsberger et al., 2008; Maslach et
al., 1996; Nonprofit Hub, 2017; White, 2017). Currently, there is limited research on employee
2

perception of workplace stressors that lead to burnout in the NP sector. This study addressed this
gap by conducting virtual semi-structured interviews and document analysis to explore the
perceptions of workplace stressors within CBOs.
Background of the Problem
In 2019, the World Health Organization (2019) legitimized workplace burnout as an
occupational problem by adding it to the ICD-11. Kanter et al. (2016) defined workplace burnout
as a feeling of being overwhelmed due to high demands, low resources, and low recovery time,
which produces physical, emotional, and mental exhaustion. Moreover, Bhui et al. (2016) stated
that mental illness, psychological distress, and physical illness can result from workplace stress
as employees attempt to balance job demands.
Several studies have found a statistical significance in the rate of employees in human
services organizations experiencing burnout symptoms, demonstrating that this is a problem
(Andersen et al., 2010; Borritz et al., 2006; Pugh et al., 2011). The evidence further highlights
that there is also a correlation between an increase in sick time for employees and burnout
(Borritz et al., 2006). The authors’ study found that employees experiencing burnout utilized
more sick time (7 more days) than employees who were not experiencing burnout (Borritz et al.,
2006). According to Andersen et al. (2010), this problem was important to address because
burnout also correlates with job dissatisfaction, conflict with employees’ roles, and the
employees’ overall emotional state. Eva et al. (2019) asserted that high performance can be
leveraged when employees feel valued and that their wellness is also part of the organization’s
vision. Investing in the workforce adds to the continuous improvement of organizational
productivity and performance (Al Zuned, 2017). Organizations must address the problem to
3

reduce or eliminate burnout incidents and the consequences for the employees, the organization,
and the organization’s consumers.
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions
This qualitative phenomenological study explored the perceived workplace stressors that
lead to burnout by nonmanagerial employees in CBOs in the NP sector, and what, if any,
differences exist for EOCs. The results of this study benefit NP organizations, their employees,
and their program consumers with a better understanding of perceived workplace stressors which
could be modified to reduce or eliminate incidents of burnout. This study was guided by three
research questions:
1. What factors contribute to burnout of employees in the nonprofit sector, and what, if
any, differences exist for employees of color?
2. How does burnout impact employees’ productivity in the nonprofit sector, and what,
if any, differences exist for employees of color?
3. What recommendations do employees perceive would mitigate workplace burnout in
the nonprofit sector?
Significance of the Study
It is important to mitigate workplace burnout because of the adverse effects on
employees, organizations, and consumers. According to Sijbom et al. (2018), organizations will
experience losses (i.e., financial expenses, loss of productivity, and increased absenteeism) if
employee burnout is not addressed. Authors asserted that since Americans spend an average of
90,000 hours in paid employment throughout their lives, and NPs spend up to 300 billion
annually on work-related stress health costs, it is essential to understand and mitigate workplace
burnout (American Institute of Stress, 2021; Thompson, 2016). Borritz et al. (2010) study found
4

that improving the work environment and staying observant of burnout symptoms would assist
organizations in reducing absenteeism. It is necessary for employers to proactively create
environments and workplace cultures that promote and value employee health and wellness.
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
This study applied Bandura’s (1978) triadic model of reciprocal determinism in the SCT
to explore the factors that influence workplace burnout. This framework analyzed how
environmental factors, personal factors, and behavioral factors reciprocally impact one another
(Bandura, 1978; Schunk & Usher, 2012). This study sought to understand how environmental
factors (workplace culture, conditions, policies), personal factors (knowledge and motivation),
and behavioral factors (self-regulation, modeling, self-efficacy) influence each other with respect
to workplace burnout.
The methodology for this study was virtual semi-structured interviews with 15 diverse
nonmanagerial employees and a document analysis of their employer’s websites. The interview
protocol included 32 questions about employees’ experiences before, during, and after work,
with questions about perceived workplace stressors that may lead to burnout. The study was
advertised on social media platforms such as Facebook, LinkedIn, and online NP affinity groups
for recruitment purposes.
Definition of Terms
The following are terms used in this study:
Employees of color: minoritized and marginalized groups of races identifying as Black,
Latino, Asian, American Indian or Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, or Other Pacific Islander
(U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity, 2022).
5

Nonprofit organizations: 501(c)(3) CBOs that are public-serving and assist the
community with increasing their quality of life by providing supportive services to access
resources (i.e., case management, peer education, resource navigation) to fulfill the client’s needs
(i.e., food, shelter, clothing, economic insecurities; Arnsberger et al., 2008; Maslach et al., 1996;
Nonprofit Hub, 2017; White, 2017).
Social cognitive theory: reciprocal determinism between environmental factors, personal
factors, and behavioral factors which influence learning (Bandura, 1978; Schunk & Usher,
2012).
Social determinants of health: Social (non-medical) conditions that affect people’s health
outcomes. These conditions encompass the environments in which people are born, live, are
educated, work, and age (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2022).
Secondary trauma: trauma transmission to and from client and provider (Salberg &
Grand, 2016).
Workplace burnout: multifactorial, where unbalanced work relationships and chronic
workplace stressors result in exhaustion, cynicism, and declining accomplishments and are
primarily found in helping professions (Awa et al., 2010; Cordes & Dougherty, 1993; Maslach et
al., 1996; Maslach et al., 2001; Schaufeli & Enzmann, 2020; World Health Organization, 2019).
Organization of the Dissertation
This five-chapter study begins with an introduction to the general problem of practice
addressed in the study, the background of the problem, the significance of the problem, and an
overview of the study research questions and methods in Chapter One. Chapter Two reviews
pertinent empirical literature about the historical inequities resulting from systemic racism,
institutional racism, and White supremacy in the United States, which affects EOCs in the
6

workplace. Chapter Two also reviews the history of workplace burnout (causes and
consequences), the evolution of workplace conditions, and NP organizations. Chapter Two
concludes with an overview of Albert Bandura’s SCT utilized to frame the research questions for
this study. Chapter Three reviews the methodology for this study, the research questions, the
selection of participants, the interview protocol, data sources, data collection, and the data
analysis for this study. Chapter Four discusses the findings of the study. Chapter Five concludes
with recommendations to mitigate workplace burnout as perceived by the study participants.
Chapter Five also provides recommendations for future research.

7

Chapter Two: Literature Review
This literature review analyzed the historical and contemporary empirical research on
workplace burnout and its effects on employees in CBOs and perceived differences for EOCs
that may exist. This review begins with the historical accounts of the evolution of workplace
conditions, the racial inequities within federal labor regulations and practices, and the ongoing
discriminatory practices toward people of color throughout history. It continues with the
literature on EOCs in the workplace, their exposure to leaders with implicit biases, and EOCs
lived experiences with racism. Next, this chapter reviews the research on workplace burnout, its
causes, consequences, and the current challenges for the NP sector. Finally, this chapter
concludes with an overview of Bandura’s SCT, utilized as the framework to analyze how
workplace burnout affects environmental, personal, and behavioral factors.
History of Workplace Conditions
While this literature review focused on EOC workplace stress which leads to burnout, it
is important to understand the historical contexts which have contributed to the present-day
realities, including the institutionalization of racial inequalities that further marginalized people
of color. According to Miah (2012), the evolution of federal regulations which govern present-
day workplace conditions and employment laws may present inequities due to the remnants of a
racist society. Furthermore, Kania et al. (2022) posited that no other population in the United
States has experienced chronic stress more than people of color.
Birth of the United States
The Declaration of Independence in 1776 brought a new governmental culture and
followed the victory of the American Revolutionary War, where 13 Great Britain North
American colonies rebelled against British rule and, after winning the war, established the
8

United States of America (Breen, 2019; Wallace, 2021). The battle was due to the British
imposing financial burdens, unmanageable tax practices, and the desire of the British to gain
greater control of the colonies (Ritchie, 2016; Wallace, 2021). Authors asserted that the North
American rebellion shifted the people’s mindsets that government should be ruled by the
people’s will, not through aristocratic honor or entitlements through royal bloodlines (Breen,
2019; Littlejohn, 2018; Wallace, 2021). According to Ritchie (2016), the United States, with its
newfound freedom, was eager to create an ideal world where the will of the people would govern
its new society.
Industrial Revolution: Mid-18th Century
During the mid-18th century, the Industrial Revolution began in the United Kingdom and
spread worldwide, shifting labor from handcrafted goods to a machine-dominated industry
(Coulter, 1927; Rafferty, 2022). These advancements brought new ways of getting the work done
while new fuel sources, machinery, and medicine were developed (Coulter, 1927). The rapid rise
in machinery and manufacturing factories increased labor efficiencies, and people moved from
rural communities to big cities hoping for a better life and higher wages (Breen, 2019; Coulter,
1927; Rafferty, 2022).
According to Rafferty (2022), working conditions were poor during the Industrial
Revolution, and the factory workers were fatigued from working long hours. The author also
noted that workers sustained physical injuries, inhaled toxic fumes, and drank unsafe water,
causing infectious diseases to spread (Rafferty, 2022). Authors claimed that the low wages paid
to men in factories were still twice as much as women and children and even higher than EOC
(Breen, 2019; Coulter, 1927; Lucas, 2018; Rafferty, 2022). Hassler and Weber (2021) posited
that while the North invested 84% of its capital in the industrialization of labor, the South
9

invested in enslaved people, which doubled the South’s per capita wealth since enslaved people
were considered property. According to Ritchie (2016), as the United States began to develop its
laws and government, it excused the continued practice of slavery as a custom from Great Britain
while denouncing the custom of “divine rights of kings and passive obedience by Americans” (p.
809).
The author claims that the advantages of free labor in the Southern colonies solidified the
demand for a slave economy, doubling the number of enslaved Africans transported to the South
between 1790 and 1820, which produced economic growth in the Southern colonies (Littlejohn,
2018). The authors further asserted that the treatment and transportation of enslaved people
across the Atlantic Ocean to the United States were cruel and inhumane (Berlin, 2004; Filler,
2017). Known as the Middle Passage, enslaved people (children, women, and men) were forcibly
taken from their land, culture, language, and families, tightly packed on ships, transported across
the world, and treated as disposable property (Berlin, 2004; Filler, 2017). According to Filler
(2017), during the Middle Passage, enslavers held guns and cracked their whips as enslaved
people were forced to sing and dance to activate blood circulation in their limbs due to being
tightly chained together for long periods; if enslaved people rebelled or became ill, they were
thrown overboard into the ocean and left for dead.
Littlejohn (2018) stated that the federal, state, and local governments in the United States
legally endorsed the slave economy, reflecting the primary morals of the people, including their
racial attitudes. Furthermore, authors claimed that enslaved people were seen as property,
subjected to brutal work conditions, and physical and psychological violence, and often died
prematurely due to these stressful conditions (Berlin, 2004; Littlejohn, 2018). Berlin (2004)
10

asserted that “slave owners enjoyed a monopoly of violence backed by the power of the
government” (p. 3).
American Civil War 1861–1865
In 1860, when Abraham Lincoln became President, Southern states (Alabama, Arkansas,
Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North and South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and
Virginia) withdrew from the United States (Ritchie, 2016). The Southern states formed the
Confederate States of America (Ritchie, 2016). The author further posited that Southerners
continued the practice of slavery and the ideology of Whites’ superiority over people of color
(Ritchie, 2016). The cause of the American Civil War between the United States and the
Confederate States of America was due to the increasing conflict of the South’s continued
practice of slavery (Coulter, 1927; Hassler & Weber, 2021; Rugemer, 2009). Three years later,
President Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation to free enslaved people but only from
territories that were actively rebelling against the North, leaving border states out of the mandate
(Carnahan, 2007; Jones et al., 2013). In fact, President Lincoln told the New York Daily Tribune
that he would not have freed enslaved people if he thought that they could win the war without it,
detailing that abolition was a way to harm the South and win the war, not a moral principle
(Ritchie, 2016). The strategy to free enslaved people was to gain an advantage against the
Confederacy, not because people of color were seen as deserving of fundamental human rights.
Reconstruction Era: Mid-19th Century
As the United States entered the Reconstruction Era, also known as the Era of Promise
for racial equality, it changed the Constitution by ratifying the 13th, 14th
,
and 15th Amendments
between 1865 and 1870 (Gates, 2020; Harrison, 2001; Miah, 2012). The 13th amendment
abolished slavery, the 14th amendment gave birthright citizenship to Blacks, and the 15th
11

amendment allowed Black men the right to vote (Gates, 2020; Harrison, 2001; Littlejohn, 2018;
Miah, 2012). Miah (2012) asserted that the United States was evolving from a “half Slave and
half free” country to a country that extended equal rights to all men, including formerly enslaved
people and their children (p. 2). Conversely, Forsyth and Copes (2014) claimed that following
the Civil War, in 1865, the Klu Klux Klan was established as a group focused on White
domination over people of color by using violence such as lynching and burning crosses in Black
neighborhoods to instill fear and suppress Black voters.
In 1867, of the approximately 3.9 million enslaved Blacks, 80.5% of Black men
registered to vote (Gates, 2020). The 1870 elections were the first time Blacks voted alongside
Whites (Lewis, 2010). Authors posited that White people in the North and South feared losing
power as 500 thousand Black men voted in 1870 (Gates, 2020; Lewis, 2010). The Black vote
increased opportunities for Blacks to occupy influential roles within the government (Gates,
2020; Lewis, 2010). For example, by 1868, in South Carolina, the House of Representatives was
majority Black and created a potential for the cotton wealth in the South to be controlled by
Blacks (Gates, 2020).
Rise of Jim Crow Laws: 1877–1960s
Jim Crow Laws emerged from 1877 to the 1960s as anti-Black laws (Hall, 2015; Myrdal,
2017). According to the authors, as the North and South acknowledged the power of the Black
vote, they created a movement to suppress the voting rights of Blacks, creating a system of racial
discrimination (Epperly et al., 2020; Gates, 2020). Furthermore, the authors claimed that voter
suppression tactics included physical and psychological violence such as lynching’s, literacy
exams, voting taxes, and constant harassment by Whites to instill fear and deter Blacks from
voting (Epperly et al., 2020; Gates, 2020; Miah, 2012). Rushdy (2012) posited that Whites would
12

often gather to observe lynchings and abuse, where Black individuals were beaten, hung up by a
noose on a tree, castrated, disfigured, and then burned alive while White people cheered, and
their charred bodies were hung on trees for days to intimidate people of color.
Ritchie (2016) stated that many Whites believed that God chose them to be superior to
Blacks and that Blacks were cursed to a life of servitude, as Christian priests often reinforced this
message from their pulpits. Evidence suggests that many public institutions during this time
supported the oppression and harassment of Blacks (Boskin, 1976; Myrdal, 2017; Rushdy,
2012). As Blacks navigated through the Jim Crow Laws, guides were produced to assist them,
such as The Negro Motorist Green Book, which detailed locations in the United States that were
safe and served Blacks (Hall, 2015, p. 307). There was also a Jim Crow Guide that outlined how
Blacks should behave, such as never cursing or laughing at White people, never remarking about
a White women’s appearance, never accusing White people of lying or nefarious intent, and
never suggesting that Whites were inferior to Blacks or exhibiting greater intellect than Whites
(Kennedy, 1959).
Authors claimed that at an Alabama Democratic Convention in 1900, a White delegate
stated they would disenfranchise the Black vote by law (Epperly et al., 2020; Gates, 2020).
Additionally, the authors asserted that Whites’ strategic defamation of people of color impacted
their quality of life and caused them to live under constant fear and stress (Azari-Rad & Philips,
2022; Popescu, 2018; Winbush, 2015). Finally, the evidence revealed that the violence against
Blacks helped lower the number of Black voters and solidified the power of White Southerners
(Gates, 2020; Rushdy, 2012).
13

Labor Policies of the 20th Century
The 20th century experienced an increase in the government’s attention toward
establishing federal regulations. In 1933, during the first hundred days of Franklin D.
Roosevelt’s (FDR) presidency, he passed a series of policies known today as the New Deal
(Farhang & Katznelson, 2005; Friedel, 2022; Klarman, 2007; Perea, 2010; Reinders, 1972;
Silver & McAvoy, 1987). The New Deal policies aimed to provide financial relief to Americans,
stimulate economic growth to ensure recovery from the Great Depression, and reform the U.S.
economy (Farhang & Katznelson, 2005; Friedel, 2022; Klarman, 2007; Perea, 2010; Reinders,
1972; Silver & McAvoy, 1987). According to Silver and McAvoy (1987), FDR wanted to
mitigate the pressing issues of banks in financial crisis, a 25% unemployment rate, and the
decline in workforce productivity and wages.
In 1935, the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) placed labor legislation under the
purview of the U.S. federal government and was the foundation of present-day U.S. labor laws
(Silver & McAvoy, 1987). In 1938, the Fair Labor Standards Act further established the
regulations for working hours and wages, which included payment to workers for overtime, child
labor regulations, and proper documentation for the protection of employees (Office of the Law
Revision Counsel of the United States House of Representatives, 2022). Rafferty (2022) stated
that these policies caused a reduction in child labor and shorter working days and weeks for
employees, including mandatory breaks and lunches. The Federal Housing Administration
(FHA) and the Home Owners Loan Corporation (HOLC) were also established in 1933 to
mitigate the failing housing market (Ayers, 2019; Friedel, 2022).
Authors posited that FDRs original policies were intended for all Americans; Congress,
which lacked diversity, approved an updated version of the policies which excluded agriculture
14

and domestic employees, who were primarily EOCs (Farhang & Katznelson, 2005; Klarman,
2007; Perea, 2010). According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (1935), at that time, the
racial make-up of agriculture and domestic employees was 73% Blacks, Indians, Chinese,
Japanese, and other non-White races and 37% White which included Mexicans and Hindus in
their calculation, increasing the total number of EOCs in these occupations well over 73%.
Furthermore, the exclusion of agriculture and domestic employees continued the practice of free
or cheap labor by EOCs in the South (Farhang & Katznelson, 2005; Klarman, 2007; Perea,
2010). The authors suggested that FDRs policies were discriminatory and protected primarily
White workers participating in producing, buying, or selling goods (Farhang & Katznelson,
2005; Klarman, 2007; Perea, 2010).
In the 1930s, EOCs represented much of the workforce in agriculture and domestic jobs
but were not protected by federal benefits and securities that Whites were afforded under the law
(Farhang & Katznelson, 2005; Perea, 2010). Perea (2010) found that 75% of Blacks earned an
average annual income of $7,500 or less, demonstrating that Blacks were the lowest paid while
living and working in brutal conditions. Authors posited that equally important were the
inequities created by the FHA and HOLC, as they labeled non-White communities as high-risk
neighborhoods and rarely invested in those communities (Ayers, 2019; Popescu et al., 2018).
Kushner (1981) claimed that racial segregation was common, legal, shaped by racism, and
enforced by Jim Crow Laws and the FHA’s early lending. Furthermore, Massey (1990) asserted
that Blacks have experienced the highest levels of segregation than any other race, which has
impacted their ability to thrive. In fact, authors claim that the wealth gap between Whites and
people of color in present times is strongly associated with the practice of intentionally
segregating neighborhoods by race and systemic racism (Massey, 1990; Popescu et al., 2018).
15

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP, 2022)
advocated for the equality of people of color in accessing federal aid, while the discrimination
against Black people prohibited access to FDRs national aid policies. According to Klarman
(2007), “Blacks have had to fight for every inch of racial progress” (p. 250). Perea (2010)
posited that the current U.S. labor laws are directly related to contemporary slavery and that the
NLRA was a statute created with a lens of discrimination.
Authors asserted that the 1960s experienced a considerable increase in social movements
with Black leaders such as Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK), Malcolm X, and the NAACP, as well
as Black citizens and their White allies, speaking out against racial discrimination and furthering
national movements of protests for the fair treatment of people of color (Santoro, 2002;
Whitlinger & Fretwell, 2019). Santoro (2002) stated that by the mid-1960s, Blacks continued to
protest for equal treatment, amplifying the need for changes in legislation.
In 1964, Congress passed the Civil Rights Act, which provided federal protection against
discrimination for voting rights, public accommodations, education, federal financial assistance,
and employment (Harvard Law Review Association, 1965; Santoro, 2002; Stein, 1995). Title
VII: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), known as Affirmative Action,
Section 703 states that discrimination due to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin for
employment, employee wage, working conditions, opportunities for advancement, and
segregation, is unlawful, and the EEOC was formed to monitor and hold employers accountable
to the Act (Harvard Law Review Association, 1965; Stein, 1995). Congress also passed the 1964
Economic Opportunity Act to assist those suffering from economic hardship and experiencing
the consequences of poverty by forming the Community Services Administration, which created
16

new support programs such as Early Childhood Education (i.e., Headstart), and Neighborhood
and Job Corps for youth and adults (Mahoney, 2000; McAndrews, 2018; Riggs, 2015).
As asserted by Wright (2008), the Civil Rights Act did not end racial discrimination, and
the Economic Opportunity Act did not end poverty. Furthermore, the author posited that protests
across the country continued, including bus boycotts in 1953 and 1955-56, sit-ins at White only
establishments in the 1960s, and numerous marches through the 1960s to the present day
demanding fair opportunities and access to employment and basic living needs (Wright, 2008).
For example, Labor protests in 1963 and 1966 by Black sanitation workers who attempted to
strike and end racial discrimination within the Public Works Department were unsuccessful
(Estes, 2000; Sundstrom, 1995; Whitlinger & Fretwell, 2019). However, authors noted that in
1968, two Black sanitation workers from Memphis were crushed by a faulty garbage truck, and it
led to a successful strike known today as the I am a Man sanitation strike (Estes, 2000;
Sundstrom, 1995; Whitlinger & Fretwell, 2019). The I am a Man strike demanded economic
justice through better working conditions, better pay, and Black workers being treated with
human dignity (Estes, 2000; Sundstrom, 1995; Whitlinger & Fretwell, 2019).
Estes (2000) claimed that Memphis Mayor Loeb was a proponent of racial segregation
while referring to Blacks as “his Negroes” and would not concede on their strike demands but
insisted that the strike and negotiations be televised to manipulate the media’s coverage (p. 153).
On March 28, 1968, thousands of Black protesters marched alongside MLK with an “I Am a
Man” sign hanging on their chests in support of over 1300 Black sanitation workers, and a week
later, MLK was assassinated at the Lorraine Motel in Memphis, Tennessee, on April 4, 1968
(Estes, 2000; Whitlinger & Fretwell, 2019).
17

According to Santoro (2002), 1966-1970 corresponded with intense Black rioting, which
slightly affected the federal government’s movement toward policy revisions. Rubio (2020)
asserted that the rise of Black protests for equality in the workplace also affected the U.S. postal
system, and thousands of workers of all races went on strike across the country against the
federal government and won their demands by receiving a 14% raise, collective bargaining
power, and better conflict resolution processes. Simultaneously, authors claimed that the
workplace changed due to observed gaps within social and medical institutions (Gartner &
Riessman, 1974; Hoffarth, 2017). Evidence showed that the late 1960s also experienced an
increase in (i.e., free clinics, peer counseling, rape counseling, substance abuse counseling, basic
needs hotlines, and self-help groups) NP CBOs (Gartner & Riessman, 1974; Hoffarth, 2017).
Focused on helping people of color, children, and women who were living in poverty and lacked
resources for basic living needs (Gartner & Riessman, 1974; Hoffarth, 2017). According to the
authors, people of color experienced increased residential racial isolation and poverty in urban
areas, contributing to the development of an inner-city underclass primarily of people of color
(Massey, 1990; Popescu, 2018).
Developments Through the 70s, 80s, 90s, and 2000s
With heightened attention to on-the-job injuries, Congress created the Occupational
Safety and Health Act (OSHA) in 1970 to establish workers’ physical safety guidelines and
enforce standards for safe working conditions (U.S. Department of Labor, 2021). Two years
later, OSHA established the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) to
partner with employers and employees to create safe working conditions for everyone regardless
of gender by conducting research, providing resources such as conferences and publications on
the influence of job stress to workers illness and injury as well as strategies to create healthier
18

working conditions (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2021). Today, OSHA and
NIOSH provide enforcement of mandatory regulations and research of best practices for healthy
workplace conditions. Silver and McAvoy (1987) stated that the NLRA has been amended
several times since its inception to protect employees’ rights, balance the power of management
and labor, and address unions and management abuses. In 1972, President Nixon expanded the
Equal Employment Opportunity Act to include educational institutions and state and local
governments and allowed the right to sue private parties violating the EEOC (Santoro, 2002).
The 1980s continued efforts toward policy expansion by local (city and state)
governments for minimum wage, workplace safety regulations, and anti-discrimination
protections for people of color (Gleeson, 2016). In 1999, the U.S. Census Bureau reported that
32.3 million people lived in poverty (Dalaker & Proctor, 2000). The authors claimed that the
median household income for Blacks was $27,910 and $30,700 for Hispanics compared to
$44,504 for Whites (Dalaker & Proctor, 2000). Finally, Dalaker and Proctor (2000) asserted that
Blacks and Hispanics are two to three times more likely to live in poverty than Whites.
Research from the late 1990s found that people of color had a higher death rate, a lower
life expectancy, and received substandard quality of healthcare compared to Whites (Gaskin et
al., 2004; Mayberry et al., 2000). The formation of Minority Health and Health Disparities
Research and Education Act of 2000, Public Law 106-525, was enacted to research and eliminate
racial health disparities within the United States and address the quality, obtainability, and
convenience of health services, including mental health services by 2010 (Clinton, 2000; Gaskin
et al., 2004; Satcher, 2001). Between 1999 and 2018, a cross-sectional study of almost 5 million
participants found that Blacks and Hispanics (45 years of age or older) still experienced a higher
rate of poor health than their White counterparts (Odlum et al., 2020). In addition, the author’s
19

research findings indicated that the Minority Health and Health Disparities Research and
Education Act did not meet its goal of eliminating health disparities in the United States (Odlum
et al., 2020).
Present Day: COVID and Racial Unrest
In 2012, the United States elected its first Black president, President Barack Obama.
Thurber (2011) found that during President Obama’s tenure, several enacted policies addressed
inequities such as affordable health care, financial reform, unemployment, environmental
sustainability, occupational safety and health, consumer protection, and government ethics. Gates
(2020) asserted that after 8 years of President Obama’s tenure, the United States witnessed a
backlash of White supremacy rhetoric and violent racial unrest as Donald J. Trump was
ultimately elected as the 45th President of the United States.
Evidence suggested that the 2016 elections were contentious and laced with voter
suppression tactics, as exampled by armed Trump supporters harassing Democratic campaign
offices and Republican campaign offices being firebombed (Epperly et al., 2020; Rosza, 2016).
Gates (2020) further claimed that President Trump’s message that he would systematically
reverse the policies enacted by President Obama resonated with White fear as Trump
continuously spoke about people of color taking White people’s power, property, and jobs. The
Urban Institute (2017) found that millions were adversely impacted by President Trump’s budget
due to the significant funding decreases for work readiness, food assistance, and cash assistance
programs while increasing work mandates for those receiving public assistance. Finally, the
author asserted that these policies perpetuated the inequities many people of color were already
experiencing (Urban Institute, 2017).
20

In the winter of 2019, a deadly virus named COVID-19 was discovered in Wuhan, a
Province of China, and quickly spread across the world, causing the World Health Organization
(WHO) to declare it a pandemic (Ammar et al., 2020; Ksinan, 2020; Larue, 2020; McNamara et
al., 2021; Petts et al., 2021; Zeegers et al., 2021). In March 2020, countries around the world
went into a physical and economic lockdown, closing down nonessential businesses (i.e.,
restaurants, schools, childcare, domestic housekeeping services), mandating people to stay home,
and social distance from each other to help stop the spread of COVID-19 (Ammar et al., 2020;
Ksinan, 2020; Larue, 2020; McNamara et al., 2021; Petts et al., 2021; Zeegers et al., 2021).
According to the United for ALICE report (2021), 51 million families living below the federal
poverty line in the United States struggled to meet their basic living needs before the pandemic.
The evidence shows that COVID-19 severely impacted people’s livelihood and employment as
many employees had to balance homeschooling their children and caring for their family
members while simultaneously working from home due to the lockdown (Petts et al., 2021).
Additionally, the authors found that 1 month into the lockdown, from March 2020 to April 2020,
the unemployment rate rose from 4.4% to 14.7%, respectively (Petts et al., 2021).
Zeegers (2021) claimed that people of color and the elderly were negatively impacted by
the precautionary measures to address the spread of COVID-19. In April 2020, an international
survey of 1,047 respondents (54% women, 46% men) found that preventative measures (i.e.,
lockdown, social distancing) had a negative effect on the respondent’s emotional and mental
well-being (Ammar et al., 2020). In October of 2021, several studies found that of those living
below the federal poverty line, 68% reported having no savings, 60% reported a loss in income,
42% reported struggling financially, 44% reported increased anxiety and depression, and lastly,
17% stated that they had to quit their jobs due to lack of childcare (American Psychological
21

Association, 2021; Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 2021; United for ALICE, 2021). The
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (2021) determined that increased economic hardship was
experienced by people of color, perpetuating the historical inequities in the United States due to
structural racism. Furthermore, evidence suggests structural racism has impacted the quality and
access to health care, education, housing, and employment for people of color (Center on Budget
and Policy Priorities, 2021). Today, employers continue to implement mitigation measures to
stop the spread of COVID-19 in their workplaces.
Simultaneously, while the world was dealing with the challenges of the pandemic, in
May 2020, people across the world saw the footage of George Floyd, an unarmed Black male,
being murdered by a White police officer (Brown et al., 2022; Eichstaedt et al., 2021; Fine,
2021; Mir & Zanoni, 2020; Okri, 2021; Tootsie et al., 2021). The officer dug his knee into
Floyd’s neck while Floyd was handcuffed and lying on the ground gasping for air as he
repeatedly cried out, “I can’t breathe” until he died (Brown et al., 2022; Eichstaedt et al., 2021;
Fine, 2021; Mir & Zanoni, 2020; Okri, 2021; Tootsie et al., 2021). Authors claimed that Floyd’s
murder sparked worldwide outrage and protests against police brutality toward people of color
(Brown et al., 2022; Eichstaedt et al., 2021; Fine, 2021; Mir & Zanoni, 2020; Okri, 2021; Tootsie
et al., 2021). Shortly after George Floyd’s murder, Karen Bass, former member of the U.S.
House of Representatives, stated,
This video shows George Floyd being slowly murdered by a police officer while a crowd
of people watches. It’s consistent with U.S. history. Black lives didn’t matter when our
ancestors were enslaved. Black lives didn’t matter as we were lynched. We could not
breathe on the boats. We could not breathe under trees. We cannot breathe with knees on
our necks. (Tootsie et al., 2021, p. 1184)
22

According to Eichstaedt et al. (2021), Representative Bass’ comments mirrored the sentiments of
many Black people and racially minoritized groups worldwide as millions protested in support of
Black lives and held police accountable for their unjust brutality.
A study showed that Black Americans experienced an increase in anxiety and depression
at a higher rate than White Americans after the murder of George Floyd, and over a third of the
population stated that Floyd’s murder and the racial unrest produced feelings of anger, sadness,
and depression (Eichstaedt et al., 2021). Okri (2021) claimed that the gruesome footage
spotlighted a long-standing problem of unarmed people of color being murdered by police
officers and those officers usually not being convicted of the said crime. Similarly, in the 2014
murder of Eric Garner, another unarmed Black man killed by a White police officer as Garner
gasped for air while crying out several times that he could not breathe until he died (Radebe,
2020).
Eichstaedt et al. (2021) reviewed cases of individuals who were killed by police officers
from 2019 to 2020 and found that police officers killed approximately 30 unarmed Black men.
Additionally, studies on police-involved killings revealed that Black men are two to three times
more likely to be killed by a police officer than White men in the United States (Edwards et al.,
2021; Fagan & Campbell, 2020). Moreover, the authors claimed that among the primary reasons
for the deaths of young men of color is the deadly use of force by police officers (Edwards et al.,
2021). According to Okri (2021), countless people of color have died unjustly during encounters
with police officers, highlighting the inequity associated with the unjust use of force against
people of color.
Conversely, Radebe (2020) posited that White lives garner more interest and desire for
accountability than Black lives, as exampled in 2017 when a Black police officer killed a White
23

woman after calling 911, and the officer was sentenced to over 12 years in prison; this
demonstrates the dichotomy between Whites and people of color as it relates to the unjust use of
force. The evidence showed that racial injustice, including bullying, abuse, discrimination, and
harassment, has also permeated the workplace, and has caused adverse psychological outcomes
and poor health (Okechukwu et al., 2021). Authors claimed that employers are responding to the
George Floyd murder and ongoing oppression of EOCs by assessing workplace inequities of
diversity, equity, and inclusion (Chow et al., 2021; Murray & Loyd, 2021).
Employees of Color in the Workplace
Research confirmed that the historical exclusion and unfair treatment of people of color
through implicit biases, and discriminatory laws in workplaces, have prolonged exposure to
inequities and stressful work situations (Boskin, 1976; Epperly et al., 2020; Gates, 2020; Kania
et al., 2022; Miah, 2012; Myrdal, 2017; Ritchie, 2016; Rushdy, 2012). Leaders with unidentified
implicit biases can impact the workplace culture, hiring practices, and the earning power of
racially minoritized groups. Furthermore, Kang (2005) asserted that studies showed that most
people have an implicit bias against people of color and that significant consequences are
associated with the negative interpretation of the actions of people of color due to implicit biases.
Studies revealed that organizations that worked diligently to create a positive and
productive environment for all employees created influential leaders (Northouse, 2018). The
author further claimed that influential leaders developed a deep understanding of identifying and
addressing implicit biases and creating a sustainable, diverse, equitable, and inclusive workplace
(Northouse, 2018). This includes improving workplace culture, hiring practices and initial
screenings, earning power, and decreasing EOC stress.
24

Workplace Culture
According to Waters et al. (2003), authentic workplace interactions support productivity
and a sense of belongingness. Baumeister and Leary (1995) stated that belongingness is
fundamental, motivating, and a powerful stimulator for people. Similarly, the authors posited that
a person’s sense of belongingness increases with frequent, positive, and lasting interpersonal
relationships and that reciprocity of emotional concern for one another is needed to sustain it
(Baumeister & Leary, 1995). Creating a safe and inclusive workplace culture is important for
leaders as they become and stay aware of their implicit biases and how their biases impact their
actions.
The authors claimed that implicit biases negatively impact EOCs when attempting to
acclimate to the workplace culture (Cheryan & Markus, 2020; Williams, 2018). For example, in
a study of cultural bias, the authors found that when leaders have an implicit bias that women are
less capable than men, the policies, practices of inclusiveness, and organizational values can
prevent the full engagement and development of the women in those organizations (Cheryan &
Markus, 2020). Furthermore, Williams (2018) stated that biases could add hardships to those
affected as leaders unconsciously develop unfair policies and processes which lack equity and
inclusiveness. The author also found that these leaders may evaluate the employees differently,
creating inequities in the supervision process and the workplace culture (Williams, 2018).
Casad and Bryant (2016) found that the workplace’s lack of opportunities and resources
contributes negatively to employees’ sense of belonging and work performance. The authors also
found that a lack of trust and decreased commitment by the affected population results from a
workplace that is not diverse (Casad & Bryant, 2016). Furthermore, the policies and practices
developed by these leaders can significantly affect hiring practices.
25

Hiring Practices and Initial Screenings
Williams (2018) asserted that racial bias against people of color could lead to
discriminatory hiring practices. Bertrand and Mullainathan (2004) conducted a study of 1,300
organizations in Boston and Chicago, where identical resumes were sent with Black-sounding
names such as Lakisha and Jamal and White-sounding names such as Greg and Emily. The
authors found that Black-sounding resumes received 50% fewer calls for interviews (Bertrand &
Mullainathan, 2004). Although the authors could not find direct evidence that these results were
due to implicit biases, they inferred that leaders might have either an implicit or explicit belief
that people of color are less qualified than White people (Bertrand & Mullainathan, 2004).
Furthermore, Williams (2018) conducted an audit that found that White applicants with a
criminal record were more likely to receive an interview than qualified Black applicants with or
without a criminal record, contributing to the ongoing disadvantages of hiring practices and
earning power in the workplace. The earning power gap between EOCs and their White
counterparts is another adverse outcome of workplace inequities.
Earning Power
The U.S. Department of Labor (2021) confirmed an ongoing disparity in equal pay for
women and EOCs. The report showed that White women earn approximately 80 cents per dollar,
whereas Black and Latina women earn less at about 65 cents per dollar than their White male
counterparts (U.S. Department of Labor, 2021). In 2017, a per-dollar wage gap showed that
Black and Latino males earned approximately 30 cents less per dollar than their White male
counterparts earned, creating more earning power for their White male coworkers (U.S.
Department of Labor, 2021). Moreover, men with a bachelor’s degree earn more than women
with a graduate or doctoral degree, $87,000 to $83,000, respectively (Mulhere, 2018). Boll et al.
26

(2017) stated that over the span of a lifetime, the impact of the wage gap represents a 49.8%
decrease in earnings for women. Furthermore, the authors found that the loss of income over the
lifetime of an EOC is another contributing factor to their stress (Boll et al., 2017).
EOC Stress
According to Shakel (2017), “racial hierarchies that were naturalized in the mid-to late-
nineteenth century legitimized the foundation of what became a long-term history of structural
violence and the legacy of poverty and health disparities in the area, past and present” (p. 878).
Moreover, Gates (2020) asserted that EOCs have experienced generational stress from overt and
covert discriminatory acts. Lacagnina (2019) posited that internal and external exposure to life
circumstances affect the function of our genes. Research has found that adverse human health
outcomes from livelihood stress are transferred through our DNA to our family members from
generation to generation, exacerbating generational trauma (Shackel, 2017). Additionally, the
National Council of Nonprofits (2021) found that along with generational trauma, EOCs are also
at risk of burnout through secondary trauma from the increasing needs of the clients they serve,
which threatens to trigger the EOCs generational trauma and increase their stress. According to
Higgins (2017), EOCs continuous utilization of their coping skills to deal with microaggressions
and systemic racism causes racial fatigue and places the EOC at greater risk of burnout.
Authors asserted that microaggressions are subtle interactions that stem from implicit or
explicit biased thoughts, beliefs, and discrimination that incite emotional turmoil and resentment
in EOC (Marks et al., 2020; Ong & Burrow, 2017; Willie et al., 2016). Additionally, Franklin
(2016) claimed that one’s quality of life, relationships, and overall satisfaction are hindered by
continuous exposure to microaggressions and racist interactions. Finally, Higgins (2017) stated
that “people of color must also contend with elements of racism, microaggressions, and
27

respectability politics, all while being expected to dismantle said elements of systematic
oppression with a smile” (p. 2).
Today, the NAACP (2022) continues to provide advocacy and legal support for the
undoing of structural racism, noting that 65% of Blacks and 35% of Latinos and Asians still
report being mistreated due to their race. As people of color continue to face stressful workplace
conditions, employers would benefit from assessing organizational factors that may contribute to
EOC workplace burnout.
Research on Workplace Burnout
Workplace burnout is a phenomenon that has been researched since the 1970s by
numerous scholars. An empirical studies query on workplace burnout through the University of
Southern California library generated a list of over 200,000 published works since the 20th
century. At its inception, psychoanalyst Freudenberger coined the first definition of burnout as a
psychiatric and physical breakdown (Weber & Jaekel-Reinhard, 2000). The first tool to measure
burnout, the Maslach Burnout Inventory, was published in 1981 and new versions of the manual
for the human services sector, medical personnel, educators, students, and general populations,
have since been developed (Maslach et al., 1996). Authors posited that the inventory is
recognized as the leading burnout measurement tool that captures burnout in employees through
subscales of exhaustion, cynicism, and declining accomplishments, which are found in helping
professions (Maslach et al., 1996; Weber & Jaekel-Reinhard, 2000).
In 2019, the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) included work burnout as
an occupational phenomenon and defined it as unmanaged prolonged stress at work which
results in “energy depletion, cynicism related to one’s work and reduced professional efficacy”
(WHO, 2019, p. 1). Similarly, Borritz et al. (2006) defined burnout as disengagement from work,
28

having low energy, and emotional exhaustion as an adverse effect of working in the human
service field. In fact, Gallup (2017) conducted a world poll and found that 70% of U.S. workers
reported feeling disengaged at work, affecting their productivity. Casserly et al. (2009) defined
burnout as a feeling of total exhaustion and an inability to give any more effort toward a task.
Additionally, authors defined burnout as increased cynicism and emotional exhaustion due to job
demands, increased workloads, and strained resources (Bakker et al., 2014; Fida et al., 2018). By
comparison, Zoeckler (2017) and Felton (1998) defined workplace burnout as a result of chronic
stress or frustration from demanding jobs that produce emotional and physical exhaustion. For
this study, workplace burnout was defined as multifactorial, where unbalanced work
relationships and chronic workplace stressors result in exhaustion, cynicism, and declining
accomplishments primarily found in helping professions (Awa et al., 2010; Cordes & Dougherty,
1993; Maslach et al., 1996; Maslach et al., 2001; Schaufeli & Enzmann, 2020; WHO, 2019). It is
important to understand the causes of workplace burnout to mitigate or eliminate it successfully.
Causes of Workplace Burnout
A longitudinal study completed by Gallup (2019) surveyed almost 25,000 full-time
employees and concluded that the top causes of workplace burnout were unreasonable job
demands, lack of resources, lack of control and autonomy, lack of managerial support, and lack
of recognition from organizational leaders. Authors asserted that job demands, and lack of
resources cause employee exhaustion which produces feelings of being overstretched and worn
out physically and emotionally (Awa et al., 2010; Cordes & Dougherty, 1993; Maslach et al.,
1996; Maslach et al., 2001; Schaufeli & Enzmann, 2020). Additionally, authors claimed that
cynicism produces a negative, disengaged feeling toward work tasks, coworkers, and program
29

clients (Awa et al., 2010; Cordes & Dougherty, 1993; Maslach et al., 1996; Maslach et al., 2001;
Schaufeli & Enzmann, 2020).
Bakker et al. (2014) found that job aspects such as the amount of mental, emotional, and
physical effort needed to accomplish job goals are directly linked to burnout as these demands
strain the employees’ psychological and physiological well-being. Moreover, the StressPulseSM
survey conducted by ComPsych (2017) found that 39% of employees reported workload as the
primary stressor, and 31% reported coworker issues as the secondary top issue. Additionally,
Gallup (2020) reported that burnout substantially influences employees who experience
unmanageable workloads or work over 50 hours weekly. Authors asserted that a decline in
accomplishments on the job creates a sense of incompetence and low self-efficacy, reducing the
employee’s productivity (Awa et al., 2010; Cordes & Dougherty, 1993; Maslach et al., 1996;
Maslach et al., 2001; Schaufeli & Enzmann, 2020). Bakker et al. (2016) claimed that access to
adequate resources to accomplish job goals “promotes employee well-being and effective
organizational functioning” as the employees are well-equipped and supported throughout the
process (p. 273).
Consequences of Workplace Burnout
There are severe consequences to workplace burnout for the employee, the organization,
and the organization’s consumers. Empirical studies on workplace burnout revealed that
absenteeism, work dissatisfaction, decreased productivity, workplace violence, poor health, and
financial implications are consequences of burnout (Andersen et al., 2010; Borritz et al., 2006;
Kahill, 1998; Maslach et al., 1996; Maslach et al., 2001). These consequences are detrimental to
the workplace, impacting both the organization’s mission and the employees’ overall well-being.
30

Absenteeism
The evidence highlighted a correlation between increased absenteeism, where 63% of
employees experiencing burnout were more likely to be absent from work (Borritz et al., 2006;
ComPsych, 2017; Gallup, 2019). Authors claimed that organizations will experience increased
sick time utilization as their employees develop burnout (Borritz et al., 2006; Borritz et al., 2010;
Sijbom et al., 2018). According to Borritz et al. (2006), employees experiencing burnout used an
additional 7 days of sick time than an employee not experiencing burnout. A 2010 study revealed
that burnout employees could have longer terms of up to 2 weeks of sick time off (Borritz et al.,
2010). Workers who are out ill cannot produce the daily outcomes expected for their position and
the organization often pays employees to stay home through their sick time benefits. Sijbom et
al. (2018) found that this behavior negatively impacts the organization financially and causes
productivity loss. Furthermore, the employee may experience greater dissatisfaction with their
job roles and the organization.
Work Dissatisfaction
Authors claimed that employee job dissatisfaction negatively affects the organization
(Casserley & Megginson, 2009; Leiter, 1991; Pugh et al., 2011). Employers that do not openly
discuss workload expectations with staff to ensure mutual understanding may create an
environment that produces burnout. Furthermore, Leiter’s (1991) research found that burnout
symptoms accelerated as the employee sensed a conflict with work expectations and
administrative policies. A survey of 528 frontline service workers found that employees begin to
decide what they prefer to do versus what the organization wants them to do as they struggle
with work demands (Pugh et al., 2011). Casserley and Megginson (2009) found that employees’
job dissatisfaction is often unnoticed, which affects the employee’s emotional state.
31

Moreover, Pugh et al. (2011) claimed that employees who experience burnout may fake
their emotions (i.e., feeling content when dissatisfied) while at work, causing the leaders not to
realize that there is a problem. Gallup’s (2019) survey found that employees are almost three
times more likely to actively look for another job than those not experiencing work burnout.
Authors claimed that those who chose to stay experienced lower self-efficacy (13%) in their
ability to meet the organization’s performance standard (Gallup, 2019). Furthermore, the
StressPulseSM survey found that 41% of employees lose up to 30 mins daily of productivity, and
36% lose 1 hour or more daily (ComPsych, 2017).
A study by the National Council of Nonprofits (2021), which surveyed more than 1,000
NPs, identified salary competitiveness, lack of childcare, burnout, and stress among the causes of
current staff vacancies in the sector. The National Council of Nonprofits (2021) claimed that
staffing shortages affect the organization’s ability to fulfill its mission due to employee vacancies
and absenteeism, causing organizations to close programs, limit services, decrease clients served,
or implement a waitlist for services. For example, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2021)
Work Experience Summary reported a decrease in full-time workers from 2019 to 2020 from
70.2 % to 63.1%, respectively. Authors asserted that staffing shortages cause a problem for the
employees who report to work because, in addition to being paid low wages, their workload
increases to manage the deficit, which in turn increases the employee’s stress (Andersen et al.,
2010; Borritz et al., 2006; ComPsych, 2017; Gallup, 2019; National Council of Nonprofits,
2021). Moreover, Anderson et al. (2010) claimed that these consequences affect the
organizations’ ability to provide quality services to their consumers.
32

Decrease Productivity
Authors found that burnout also contributes to higher stress levels that impact work
productivity (American Psychological Association, 2010; Pugh et al., 2011; Stajkovic &
Luthans, 1998). Higgins (2017) claimed that employers experienced an annual loss in revenue of
approximately 300 billion dollars due to a decrease in work productivity. The American
Psychological Association (2010) reported that 68% of women and 70% of men said that their
jobs were a substantial cause of stress in their lives, impacting productivity, as reported by 51%
of respondents. Pugh et al. (2011) stated that negative outcomes are a result of “emotional
dissonance resulting from an employee’s emotional labor” (p. 377). Additionally, Stajkovic and
Luthans (1998) stated that an employee’s effort and time spent on a work task are affected by
their emotional state. Furthermore, a study of 1,517 public service workers found that the
emotional labor of their jobs causes stress, a decrease in productivity, and burnout (Kim &
Wang, 2018) Additionally, an American Institute of Stress (2021) study found that workplace
burnout can also be caused by experiencing verbal and physical abuse in the workplace.
Workplace Violence
The American Institute of Stress (2021) survey respondents reported experiencing verbal
(42%) and physical abuse (10%), yelling at a coworker (29%), and damaging office equipment
(14%) due to workplace stress. In addition, a survey found that 45% of Canadian workers were
experiencing bullying in their workplace (Milloy & Sangster, 2020). Moreover, a multi-cohort
study of almost 80,000 employees found a “higher risk of cardiovascular disease” for those
exposed to bullying or violence in the workplace (Xu et al., 2019, p 1125). Studies show that
workplace stress negatively impacts employees’ health and could foster unhealthy behaviors
(WHO, 2017).
33

Poor Health Implications
The American Psychological Association (2010) found in the Stress in America survey
that high stress is a precursor to detrimental health consequences and that 47% of adults reported
having physical effects of stress. According to a Gallup (2020) survey, emergency room visits
are 23% more likely for employees experiencing burnout. Similarly, according to Zoeckler
(2017), even if stress does not produce burnout, stressful work is highly toxic to one’s health.
Another study by the WHO in 2017 concluded that workplace stress increases long-term illness
and absenteeism due to depression and cardiovascular disease. In addition, authors claimed that
there is extensive literature linking cardiovascular and psychological disorders for employees
experiencing burnout due to having high workloads and little to no autonomy in their job roles
(Karasek & Theorell, 1990; Landsbergis et al., 2018). The WHO (2020) claimed that
cardiovascular disease was responsible for 8.9 million deaths in 2019 and remains the leading
cause of death globally.
Furthermore, a study using Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scans and psychological
measurements for 110 participants concluded that the neural circuits in the brain are altered when
employees experience burnout which causes an inability to control negative emotions (Golkar et
al., 2014). Similarly, Savic (2013) found a correlation between workplace burnout and physical
changes to the amygdala and cortical thinning, leading to decreased fine motor function in 80
participants undergoing MRIs. Moreover, the WHO (2017) found that unhealthy eating, alcohol
consumption, smoking, and lack of exercise increased for those experiencing stress at work.
Finally, Higgins (2017) asserted that an unhealthy employee financially impacts an organization
with increased expenses.
34

Financial Impact
According to the American Institute of Stress (2021), approximately $200-300 billion is
spent annually on healthcare costs in the United States due to work stress. For example,
according to the WHO (2017), the United States spent an average of $18 to $30 per employee on
the prevention of work-related illnesses. Moreover, Pfeffer (2018) posited that when employers
do not create environments that protect their employees’ health and wellness, the health and
welfare systems become strained as employees seek assistance. However, according to the WHO
(2017), a reduction in absenteeism (27%) and healthcare costs (26%) can be realized with health
and wellness initiatives in the workplace, alleviating the public health system. These trends of
adverse outcomes due to workplace burnout are being experienced in the NP sector.
Nonprofit Organizations
Nonprofit organizations have existed since the early 1800s and have evolved throughout
time. Between 1894 and 1969, Congress built the regulations for the tax-exempt sector through
the U.S. tax code over 75 years (Arnsberger et al., 2008). In 1969, the Internal Revenue Service
created the Tax Reform Act (TRA69) for the 501c3 NP sector and required NPs to file an annual
informational 990 form to disclose revenue, expenses, and assets to hold NPs accountable for
their financial transactions; as of 2006, the 990 forms are open to the public (Arnsberger et al.,
2008; Nonprofit Hub, 2017; White, 2017). The Nonprofit Hub (2017) asserted that congress
allowed NPs to influence the government and the business world with the ability to use up to a
million dollars annually on lobby efforts in 1976. White (2017) stated that NPs are considered
tax-exempt organizations that are not required to pay taxes but are prohibited from using their
resources to endorse political candidates established by the Johnson Amendment. “In order to
qualify for tax-exempt status, an organization must show that its purpose serves the public good,
35

as opposed to a private interest” (Arnsberger et al., 2008, p. 110). As the world recovers from the
economic and human capital losses caused by the shutdowns to stop the spread of COVID-19,
NPs face staffing shortages and financial sustainability challenges.
Staffing Shortages
According to the National Council of Nonprofits (2021), a survey of over 1,000 NPs in
the United States found that 26% reported a staffing vacancy rate of 20% to 29% due to the lack
of competitive wages, employees’ inability to access affordable child care, employee stress, and
burnout, as well as employees, fear of contracting COVID-19. The survey also found that the
vacancies caused higher workloads for employees and longer waiting lists for their clients (27%),
negatively impacting the organizations’ ability to accomplish their mission (National Council of
Nonprofits, 2021). Furthermore, Pettijohn et al. (2013) found that an NP’s financial well-being is
critical to achieving its mission and continues to struggle as the NP revenue does not fully cover
the organization’s expenses.
Financial Implications
In 2016, authors found that NPs contributed approximately one trillion dollars to the U.S.
economy, and in 2012, online donations totaled 2.1 billion dollars (National Center for
Charitable Statistics, 2020; Nonprofit Hub, 2017). A survey of 20,000 NPs found that
government funding for NPs in the United States totaled approximately $137 billion in 2012 but
left a deficit of 54% of NPs’ expenses unfunded, causing limitations in managing day-to-day
administrative and program operations costs (Pettijohn et al., 2013). Arnsberger et al. (2008)
claimed that to cover the revenue gap, NPs continuously cultivate private donors with the hope
of receiving in-kind donations and monetary gifts to cover the remainder of their expenses.
Additionally, Smith and Lipsky (2009) stated that NPs routinely engage in the arduous task of
36

securing revenue-generating contracts and donations (public and private) for the organization’s
financial sustainability while simultaneously managing the employees’ delivering services to the
program clients. Lebanon (2021) reported that NP employees are projected to receive a pay
increase of 3.9% in 2022, the highest since 2008. Today, NPs continue to evolve and adapt to
current opportunities and challenges. This study aimed to assess the current NP settings with a
conceptual framework that assesses the reciprocal determinism of environmental factors,
personal factors, and behavioral factors.
Conceptual Framework
This study utilized the SCT developed by Bandura, which posits a mutual interaction
between environmental, personal, and behavioral factors that influence learning; this is known as
reciprocal determinism (Bandura, 1978; Schunk & Usher, 2012). SCT is framed through a lens
of human agency perspective, which asserts that when people feel efficacious in their abilities to
achieve a task or goal, they persist through adversity and obstacles (Bandura, 1999, 2002, 2005).
The components of SCT that this study focused on were environmental factors (organizational
policies and culture, management practices), personal factors of knowledge (procedural,
metacognitive) and motivation (utility value, self-efficacy), and behavioral factors (self-
regulation, modeling).
Environmental Factors
This study defined environmental factors as the NP organizational culture, organizational
policies, management practices, and working conditions (Zimmerman & Schunk, 2011). Schunk
and Usher (2019) asserted that NP environmental factors impact self-efficacy and motivation.
According to Bandura (1978), environmental factors also affect employees’ ability to achieve
organizational goals. For example, Borowitz et al. (2006) claimed that an organization that
37

focuses on employee wellness creates a culture in which employees feel valued and safe utilizing
the resources available (i.e., employee assistance programs) to mitigate their stress and
contribute positively to their well-being. The author further asserted that studies have shown a
correlation between environmental work factors such as job demands, lack of managerial
support, lack of job clarity, and employee burnout (Borowitz et al., 2006).
According to Retno Anggraini et al. (2019), work environments also influence the
employees’ development of self-efficacy through on-the-job learning or training opportunities
that motivate and enhance their confidence in their skills. Moreover, organizational culture and
policies impact employees’ ability to mitigate workplace stressors. Studies have shown that
unaddressed stress causes problems for an organization as the productivity and quality of the
services decrease when employee burnout increases (American Psychological Association, 2010;
ComPsych, 2017; Pugh et al., 2011; Stajkovic & Luthans, 1998). Finally, McGee and Johnson
(2015) found that managerial practices positively influence the employees’ motivation when
consistently showing appreciation for the employees’ work contributions.
Personal Factors
Employee knowledge and motivation are the defined personal factors in this study
(Bandura, 1999, 2002, 2005). The author asserted that knowledge is defined as both procedural
and metacognitive, where the employees’ procedural knowledge is demonstrated by
understanding the tasks involved in their job role and the overall goals of the job, and
metacognitive knowledge is gained through the reflection of their learning, after completing the
tasks or achieving goals (Bandura, 1999, 2002, 2005). For example, procedural knowledge
reduces stress as the employee is well prepared to engage in the task and achieve the goal. The
author claimed that as employees reflect on procedural knowledge, they can think about ways to
38

complete the task and persist through barriers (Bandura, 1999, 2002, 2005). Furthermore,
Bandura (1978, 1986) states that employee motivation is defined as utility value and self-
efficacy. The author defined utility value as the employee’s belief that they will gain a benefit
when the task is implemented, or the goal is achieved (Bandura, 1978, 1986). The author defines
self-efficacy as the employee’s confidence in their ability to accomplish a goal (Bandura, 1978,
1986).
According to Bandura (1997), self-efficacy is pliable and vicarious, and social or
physiological reinforcements can increase or decrease throughout the day and by a specific task.
For example, Schunk and Usher (2012) found that the employee’s perception of progress fosters
sustainability of self-efficacy and motivation. Progress and goal attainment also strengthens the
employee’s skill set and enhances their ability to coach and motivate coworkers as they gain
confidence.
Behavioral Factors
Behavioral factors in this study are defined as modeling, self-regulation, and job skills
reinforced by the individual’s choices, actions, and persistence (Zimmerman & Schunk, 2011).
Modeling occurs when observing coworkers who demonstrate the behavior and action one must
take to complete a task and allows the learner to gain knowledge and self-efficacy in their skills.
Schunk and Usher (2012) asserted that as employees observe and set goals through self-
regulation, they continuously assess their progress. Allowing them to change their strategies as
needed to achieve the goal. Self-regulation is also a critical part of the theory as it influences a
person’s motivation to persevere through complex tasks and take control of their learning
process. The environment and behaviors displayed by the organizational culture influence the
employee’s learning of what is expected of them. The SCT framework allows for a thorough
39

assessment of what may contribute to employee burnout. Figure 1 illustrates the reciprocal
determinism of the environmental, personal, and behavioral factors.

Figure 1
Social Cognitive Theory and Reciprocal Determinism

40

Summary
The Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution state that “all men are created
equal” and have “unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” (Chang, 2020,
p. 53; U.S. National Archives and Records Administration, 2018, p. 1). Yet, according to
authors, enslaved Africans endured centuries of cruelty, substandard living and working
conditions, and were psychologically and physically abused by White Americans, leading to
premature deaths (Berlin, 2004; Littlejohn, 2018). Additionally, the authors asserted that as
workplaces evolved from manual labor to machine-operated, workers moved from rural
neighborhoods to city neighborhoods for better opportunities (Breen, 2019; Coulter, 1927;
Rafferty, 2022). The working conditions remained substandard while the United States
experienced rapid advancements during the Industrial Revolution, which created efficiencies and
enhancements in medicine, machinery, and fuel sources and highlighted the need for workplace
regulations (Breen, 2019; Coulter, 1927; Lucas, 2018; Rafferty, 2022). Furthermore, the authors
claimed that while the government continued to legally endorse slavery, the South increased its
investment in enslaved people, and the North invested in the industrialization of the work
(Hassler & Weber, 2021; Littlejohn, 2018).
As a strategy to win the American Civil War, President Lincoln signed the Emancipation
Proclamation in 1863 and disrupted the Confederacy’s slave economy (Carnahan, 2007; Jones et
al., 2013). The Emancipation Proclamation was used as a strategy to win the war against the
Confederacy but allowed bordering states to continue to practice slavery since they were not in
conflict with the North during the Civil War (Carnahan, 2007; Jones et al., 2013). Moreover,
slavery wasn’t constitutionally abolished until 1868, and Black men weren’t given citizenship or
the right to vote until 1867 and 1870, respectively (Gates, 2020; Pusey, 2016).
41

Authors claimed that U.S. institutional and systemic systems legally supported the
historical accounts of psychological and physical abuse of people of color to ensure Whites
remained in power (Berlin, 2004; Boskin, 1976; Forsyth & Copes, 2014; Gates, 2020; Hall,
2015; Littlejohn, 2018; Myrdal, 2017; Ritchie, 2016; Rushdy, 2012). Even with policies such as
the Civil Rights Act, Voting Rights Act, and Affirmative Action of the late 1960s, these
generational inequities continue to affect people of color in present times (Santoro, 2002;
Whitlinger & Fretwell, 2019). Furthermore, the authors found that chronic stress due to
inequities in the workplace (i.e., lack of access to adequate benefits, comparable wages,
promotional opportunities, and good working conditions) perpetuates the psychological and
physiological consequences for EOC, as they continue to advocate for equitable treatment, in
present times (Bertrand & Mullainathan, 2004; Boll et al., 2017; Cheryan & Markus, 2020;
Higgins, 2017; Klarman, 2007; Massey, 1990; Mulhere, 2018; Perea, 2010; Santoro, 2002;
Shakel, 2017; U.S. Department of Labor, 2021; Williams, 2018; Wright, 2008).
The WHO’s inclusion of workplace burnout in the International Classification of
Diseases (ICD-11) legitimized this as a workplace issue (World Health Organization, 2019). This
study defined workplace burnout as chronic work stressors which lead to exhaustion, cynical
feelings, and a decrease in professional accomplishments (Awa et al., 2010; Cordes &
Dougherty, 1993; Maslach et al., 1996; Maslach et al., 2001; Schaufeli & Enzmann, 2020;
WHO, 2019). According to studies, job demands, and lack of resources are directly associated
with work burnout which leads to consequences such as employee absenteeism, work
dissatisfaction, decreased productivity, workplace violence, and poor health, causing a financial
burden for both the employee and the organization (Andersen et al., 2010; Borritz et al., 2006;
Kahill, 1998; Maslach et al., 1996; Maslach et al., 2001). Bandura’s SCT is the lens through
42

which this study analyzed workplace burnout (Bandura, 1978; Schunk & Usher, 2012).
Exploring how the reciprocal determinism of the environmental factors, personal factors, and
behavioral factors impact employee knowledge, motivation, skills, self-efficacy, organizational
culture, and policies to mitigate workplace burnout.

43

Chapter Three: Methodology
This qualitative phenomenological study aimed to explore the perceived workplace
stressors that lead to burnout in the NP sector. This chapter reviews the research questions,
setting, and the researcher’s paradigm of inquiry and positionality. It examines the methodology,
including participant selection, instrumentation, data collection, and analysis protocols, and
closes with explored ethical considerations for the study.
Research Questions
To further understand the perceived factors of workplace burnout, the impact of
workplace burnout, and the recommendations for mitigation of workplace burnout from the
employees’ perspective, with a special focus on any perceived differences from EOCs, three
research questions guided this study:
1. What factors contribute to burnout of employees in the nonprofit sector, and what, if
any, differences exist for employees of color?
2. How does burnout impact employees’ productivity in the nonprofit sector, and what,
if any, differences exist for employees of color?
3. What recommendations do employees perceive would mitigate workplace burnout in
the nonprofit sector?
Overview of Design
According to Merriam and Tisdell (2015), to gain greater insight into a phenomenon, an
inquiry through research questions will offer a better understanding of the perspective of those
being studied. A qualitative phenomenological design was utilized in this study. This approach
was chosen to allow for a deeper understanding of the employee perspective, how employees
create meaning from their experiences, and the “underlying structure of the phenomenon” of
44

workplace burnout (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2015, p. 24). Purposeful
sampling was utilized to identify and select the most appropriate participants. The study’s data
collection process included semi-structured interviews and document analysis of the study
participant’s employer websites.
Employees in CBOs in the NP sector were purposefully sampled for the interview phase
as they are at the center of this study (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2015).
The eligibility criteria were employees who identify as people of color (i.e., Black, Latino,
Asian, American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, or Other Pacific Islander) and
employees who identify as non-people of color, who were currently working in CBOs in the NP
sector with nonmanagerial responsibilities with at least 1 year tenure at their employer and were
willing to share their experiences related to workplace stress and burnout. Those who met the
eligibility criteria were asked to participate in one-to-one virtual semi-structured interviews
aligned with the stated research questions.
The interview questions (Appendix) were created to provide insight into the unobservable
thoughts and meanings constructed from employee experiences to answer the research questions
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). For example, employees may perceive
stress factors within their work environment that their leadership would not identify as
workplace stressors. This difference in perspective creates an opportunity for further inquiry into
understanding the employee’s perceived workplace stressors, the impact of those stressors, and
possible mitigation measures that would reduce or eliminate the perceived stressors.
Second, a document analysis process was conducted by reviewing the websites of the
employers of the participants. According to Merriam and Tisdell (2016), document analysis
45

strengthens the study’s credibility by triangulating the data sources. The researcher sought to
corroborate the data collected from the semi-structured interviews as well as capture additional
data on the employer’s commitment to employee health and wellness or lack thereof. Finally,
member checking was utilized as a process in which the participants validated the accuracy of
the data to enhance the study’s credibility (Birt et al., 2016).
Research Setting
This study utilized purposeful sampling of employees in the NP sector within the United
States with nonmanagerial responsibilities, a minimum of 1 year tenure, and the ability to
participate in virtual online interviews. The NP CBOs provide community residents with various
services to access basic living needs. The United States has over 300 million online users
(Johnson, 2022), and this study was advertised online as a recruitment strategy. A purposeful
sampling of community-based employees was utilized as the selection technique as it focused on
the population at the center of this study and allowed the researcher to gain a greater
understanding of their perspective (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). This study also aimed to give
voice to the employees’ perceived factors of workplace stressors in NP settings and further
examined how to mitigate them.
The Researcher
My professional experience is that of an EOC in a community-based organization in the
NP sector with over 25 years of professional experience. I have served in multiple roles in the
NP sector, including direct care, middle management, and executive leadership positions.
Through this study, I sought to understand the current conditions that cause employee burnout
and how to mitigate or eliminate these factors. As the researcher, I understood the importance of
46

being aware of my implicit and explicit biases toward workplace burnout. Understanding my
positionality in this study was vital to ensuring that my unconscious bias did not compromise the
study.
Understanding positionality is fundamental to a research study as “it forces us to
acknowledge our own power, privilege, and biases just as we are denouncing the power
structures that surround our subjects” (Madison, 2011, p. 8). My positionality in this inquiry was
multipronged. According to the intersecting axes of privilege, domination, and oppression
(Cooper, 2020), I identified with eight axes of domination and six axes of oppression. Figure 2
represents my intersecting axes of privilege, domination, and oppression through the bolded red
lines. Figure 2 illustrates my understanding of the power and privileges allowed to me due to my
leadership role that other EOCs were not privy to. For example, I have been at decision-making
tables where I have had the liberty and platform to express my opinions, concerns, and solutions.
The opportunity to express views, concerns, and solutions may not be afforded to EOCs who do
not hold leadership roles, further perpetuating the inequity of not having the power to influence
change in their workplaces. I utilized member checking to reduce unconscious bias and enhance
the study’s credibility and trustworthiness.

Figure 2
Intersecting Axes of Privilege, Domination, and Oppression

Note. Adapted from Describing the Emperor’s New Clothes: Three Myths of Educational (In-)Equity by K. P. Morgan, 1996, In A.
Diller (Ed.), The Gender Question in Education (pp. 105–122) Routledge. Copyright 1996 by Taylor & Francis.
46
48

The paradigm of inquiry for this study was the critical realism paradigm. Critical realism
explains that what we cannot see has a causal effect on what we can observe (Saunders et al.,
2019). Critical realism also states that what is observed and experienced is only a small part of
the whole experience (Saunders et al., 2019). Axiology, ontology, and epistemology are three
assumptions embedded in this paradigm of inquiry.
Axiology refers to assumptions of the underlying values and ethics (Saunders et al.,
2019). This study sought a reciprocal relationship with employees to have a win-win outcome
where both the organization and employees benefit from the results. The researcher engaged in
bi-directional communication to ensure that the values and ethics of the participants were
honored in the process of gaining their insight into workplace burnout. Ontology refers to the
nature of being (Saunders et al., 2019), framing the existence of the employees in NP settings as
the subjects. The different perspectives of employees regarding employee burnout and potential
causes were at the center of this project. Epistemology refers to the nature of knowing and how
knowledge is communicated (Saunders et al., 2019). NP employees were the focus of this study
since they hold knowledge of the organization’s policies, working conditions, and perceived
workplace stressors. Furthermore, the paradigm of inquiry aligned with the conceptual
framework. SCT explored the influences of environmental, personal, and behavioral factors and
their causal effect on employee workplace burnout.
Data Source
This qualitative phenomenological study utilized one-to-one semi-structured virtual
interviews followed by a document analysis process. According to Creswell and Creswell
(2018), a qualitative study is most beneficial when seeking to understand the perspective of
49

stakeholders. This section describes the study’s participants, semi-structured interview,
document analysis, instrumentation, and data collection and ends with a description of the data
analysis.
Participants
The participants of this study were a purposeful sampling of nonmanagerial employees
from CBOs in the NP sector. The data for this study were collected in October of 2022 with 15
participants (nine EOC and six non-EOC). Participants were willing to share their lived
experiences, and perceptions of workplace stressors, and had worked in their organizations for
no less than a year. The average age of the participants was 40.8, and the average annual salary
was $44,000. General participant demographics are discussed in this study to enhance the
participants’ confidentiality. Table 1 illustrates the general characteristics of the participants.

50

Table 1
Demographic Characteristics of the Research Participants
Characteristics n % of n
Participants 15 100
Race identity
Non-employees of color
(Participants 1–6)
Caucasian
Jewish

5
1

33
7
Employees of color (non-White)
(Participants 7–15)
Black
Latinx
Biracial (German/Black)

6
2
1

40
13
7
Gender identity
Female
Male
Gender queer or non-conforming

8
6
1

53
40
7
Age
18–24
25–34
35–44
45–54
55–64

1
4
4
4
2

7
27
27
27
13
Annual salary
35K–40K
41K–45K
46K–50K
51K–55K
56K–60K

5
4
4
1
1

33
27
27
7
7
Education
Associate
Bachelor’s
Master’s

3
8
4

20
53
27

Note. Jewish was included under the non-employees of color category as designated by the U.S.
Census Bureau. From Census Bureau data by U.S. Census Bureau. 2022.
(https://data.census.gov/. https://data.census.gov/)

51

Semi-Structured Interviews
The study consisted of a one-to-one semi-structured interview via Zoom for
approximately 60–90 minutes. Zoom was an appropriate setting for interviewing as video
conferencing programs, and social media use have increased substantially since the onset of
COVID-19 (Johnson, 2022). The researcher interviewed 15 participants with an interview
protocol of 32 questions (see Appendix) to explore the participants’ perceived workplace
stressors, how the stressors impacted their productivity, and their recommendations to mitigate
workplace burnout in October of 2022. With the participants’ permission, the interview was
recorded and transcribed via Zoom to ensure the trustworthiness and accuracy of the responses
collected.
Interview Instrumentation
The interview questions created provided insight into the unobservable thoughts, feelings,
behaviors, and meanings constructed from employee experiences (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015).
The interview protocol had three sections including the employees’ experiences before, during,
and after work. The interview questions were aligned with the SCT conceptual framework as it
incorporated environmental factors, personal factors, and behavioral factors questions in the
interview protocol. The interview protocol consisted of 32 questions and provided probes for
participants to explore the meanings attached to their experiences (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015).
The interview protocol also allowed for consistency in this study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). The
interview was recorded and transcribed by Zoom for accuracy and trustworthiness.
Data Collection Procedures
The data from the interviews were collected in October 2022. Interviews ranged from 60
to 90 minutes and were conducted online, via Zoom. The interview was recorded and transcribed
52

using the Zoom transcription features with consent from the participant. The transcription
allowed for greater credibility and trustworthiness of the data collection (Bodgan & Bilken,
2007). The interview data was well organized and stored on password-protected internal and
external hard drives. The interviews were filed under pseudonyms (i.e., P1, P2) versus
identifying information to enhance the confidentiality of the participants. There were no
handwritten notes; all notes added by the researcher and not transcribed were typed on the
participants’ transcribed interview notes immediately following the interview’s closing and
stored on password-protected internal and external hard drives to ensure confidentiality.
Data Analysis
This section will review the inductive data analysis utilized in this study. The interview
process was repeated for each interview and incorporated the simultaneous collection of data and
data analysis. The interview transcript analysis immediately followed each interview (Creswell
& Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). Additional data, such as observer comments or
reflection notes, were added immediately following the interview. The data analysis sought to
answer the study’s research questions and note emerging themes (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015).
The analysis process utilized in this study included the organization of the data, review of
the data, coding the data, correlating the themes and descriptions from the data coding, and
interpreting the meaning of the themes and descriptions (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The
coding process utilized apriori codes and open coding to capture themes (i.e., significant
findings) and descriptions (i.e., details about the participants, setting, and events) as they aligned
with the conceptual framework and research questions (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The
53

trustworthiness of this study was enhanced with the use of the reflexivity method during the
analysis by the researcher (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
Document Review
This study included a purposeful sampling of the participants’ employers’ online
presence through their organization’s websites and annual reports. According to Merriam and
Tisdell (2016) document review can enhance the data gathered from the interview and create
more learnings related to the study’s problem of practice.
Document Review Data Collection Procedures
Documents (i.e., organizational websites, annual reports) that were accessible to the
researcher were reviewed. The review of the organization’s websites sought out evidence of the
organization’s public commitment to employees’ health and wellness or lack thereof. The review
allowed the researcher to triangulate the data collected from the semi-structured interviews to
support or oppose the employee’s experiences and the meanings created from their experiences.
According to Burke and Litwin (1992), performance evaluations and recognition processes in
organizations are transactional supervisory practices which provide evidence of the
organizational culture.
Document Review Data Analysis
Data analysis was conducted throughout the document review data collection process.
The document review analysis was similar to the interview data analysis. The first phase of
analysis included apriori coding and open coding to capture categories based on emergent codes
from the conceptual framework’s constructs and subconstruct. The second phase of analysis
included axial coding, in which the open-coded categories are grouped into broader themes. The
cumulative captured categories and broader themes were documented in a separate memo in
54

which some categories became subcategories as new patterns and meanings emerged. The final
data set was compared and analyzed with the results from the other data collection methods.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
This study ensured credibility and trustworthiness by utilizing various techniques.
According to Maxwell (2013), a good bias-controlling exercise ensures that the participants
selected are within the field of study and are willing to share their lived experiences. To ensure
that the participants met the eligibility criteria to participate in this study, ads on the internet
advised potential participants of the criteria. Then the researcher discussed the interview process
and document analysis with the participants. If the participant met the criteria and agreed to the
study’s process, the researcher scheduled a time for the virtual interview. Also, with the
participant’s consent, the interview was recorded and transcribed. The interview sought to clarify
the meaning participants constructed from their experiences. It is important to note that the
researcher did not infer or insert their own opinion or views. To increase transferability, thick
and rich descriptions were included; to improve conformability, a rubric, and analysis of raw
data, when available, were used (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Finally, member checking was
utilized to ensure the credibility of the data collection, analysis, and interpretation (Birt et al.,
2016).
Research Ethics
Research studies should ensure that the processes utilized are ethical, protect the
participants and bring them no harm. The study was voluntary, and participants could withdraw
from the study at any time without consequences. The recruitment material did not include
deceptive information about the study’s purpose and reporting process (Gelinas et al., 2017). The
55

study also incorporated the ethical guidelines from internet programs (i.e., Facebook, Twitter,
LinkedIn) used for recruitment.
Participants were not compensated or offered incentives for their participation. The
participants understood their rights and how the content in this study would be used before they
consented to their interviews. This allowed the participants to make an informed decision on how
their engagement may or may not benefit them. The final report will not contain the names of the
participants, and participants were assigned a number for data collection purposes (i.e., P1, P2,
etc.), ensuring confidentiality and anonymity. Recording and transcribing of the interviews were
done after consent was granted from the participants. All data and documentation were stored on
password-protected internal and external hard drives.

56

Chapter Four: Results and Findings
This chapter discusses the results and findings of this study. As previously stated, this
study aimed to understand the perceptions of workplace stressors that may lead to burnout by
nonmanagerial employees in the NP sector serving in CBOs. Social cognitive theory (SCT) is the
conceptual framework from which the interview protocol was developed, incorporating
questions about environmental, personal, and behavioral factors. Three research questions guided
this study:
1. What factors contribute to burnout of employees in the nonprofit sector, and what, if
any, differences exist for employees of color?
2. How does burnout impact employees’ productivity in the nonprofit sector, and what,
if any, differences exist for employees of color?
3. What recommendations do employees perceive would mitigate workplace burnout in
the nonprofit sector?
This chapter will discuss the findings of the first two research questions on the perceived
workplace stressors that may lead to burnout and the impact on the employees’ productivity.
Chapter Four will end with a summary of the implications of the findings. The third research
question of the recommendations for mitigating workplace stressors will be discussed in Chapter
Five: Recommendations.
Research Question 1: What Factors Contribute to Burnout of Employees in the Nonprofit
Sector, and What, if Any, Differences Exist for Employees of Color?
Based on the data collected, multiple stressors contribute to employee burnout in the
NP sector. According to the SCT framework, environmental factors include management
practices, working conditions, and organizational policies and culture. Personal factors include
57

the employees’ knowledge and motivation, and behavioral factors consider the employees’
ability to self-regulate their emotions and resilience when persisting through challenges and
barriers, have confidence in their ability to perform the job tasks successfully, and the
opportunity to have a leader or coworker model the appropriate skills needed in their roles. This
section will discuss the participant’s perception of workplace stressors within SCT’s triadic
reciprocal causation model (environmental, personal, behavioral).
Environmental Factors
The implication is that the participants perceived three workplace stressors within their
organizational environments. The data identified a lack of managerial support (management
practices), a lack of adequate resources (working conditions), and a lack of opportunities for
authentic relationship building with organizational leaders and coworkers (organizational
culture). Based on the data, participants (13 out of 15) perceived the lack of access to their
supervisor was due to virtual or hybrid work settings of COVID-19, as well as their perception of
the supervisor’s considerable workload. The study participants identified managerial support as
supervisor access and responsiveness. As stated by Participant 2, “I always struggle to get a hold
of my supervisor because he’s in all of these meetings. … I barely see him with our virtual and
hybrid schedules.” Similarly, Participant 10 stated, “I get so frustrated and anxious because it is
challenging to connect with her [supervisor] when I need it the most, which delays my ability to
get my work done.” Participants perceived that this stressor impeded their ability to receive
support when barriers arose and caused delays in completing their work tasks.
Some participants (five of 15) said they rarely engaged in recurring supervision meetings
due to their supervisor’s “jam-packed schedule.” Participant 5 said they hadn’t had one-to-one
supervision meetings for over 4 months because the supervisor continuously canceled their
58

sessions due to “competing priorities.” Participants also perceived that their supervisor’s
workload impacted their opportunity to receive timely feedback on their work performance.
Additionally, participants asserted that it impeded their ability to work efficiently through
barriers and hindered their self-efficacy.
Lack of adequate resources was the second environmental factor identified by 86% of
participants. Participants defined adequate resources as appropriate staffing to meet
organizational goals. All 15 participants experienced an increased workload since the onset of
COVID-19 due to increased staff vacancies. Fourteen participants stated that the increased
workload raised their stress levels and decreased their ability to focus. Participant 13 expressed,
When you get in the habit of taking on extra work because of understaffing, it’s easy for
people [leaders] to forget that it’s very stressful for you. … It’s hard to focus. … Then,
you get stuck between wanting to do a good job, and not wanting to do such a good job
that our leaders think they don’t need to refill the vacancies.
Participants asserted that their leaders had unreasonable work demands due to the lack of
staffing available to accomplish the organizational goals. Additionally, 60% of participants
expressed feeling undervalued due to not receiving proper compensation or acknowledgments
from their leaders for the increased workloads.
Another resource identified by the participants was thorough training at the beginning of
employment on organizational protocols, organizational culture, and work procedures and access
to proper tools and supplies to accomplish work goals. The data identified that 13 participants
did not receive an orientation on the organizational protocols, organizational culture, and work
procedures. Furthermore, 46% of participants were not supplied with appropriate tools and
supplies to perform their job duties. As reported by Participant 1, “I immediately regretted
59

accepting the job when I was taken to a run-down cubicle … and not given a company laptop or
office supplies until a week later.” Access to office supplies on the first day of employment
impacted the participant’s work satisfaction. Additionally, Participant 6 said,
If you invite people to your house for dinner, you cook, clean, and make sure you have
everything you need to entertain them. It’s the same when you hire someone; you should
want them [employee] to feel like you [leader] are happy they came and that you value
and respect them enough to make sure their first day and first impression are good. When
a place is not prepared to receive you, it shows that they don’t value you as a person, and
that does something to you emotionally. It made me feel like I didn’t matter, and I know
it sounds silly, but it hurt a little bit. … It affected my ability to respect them [leader].
Participant 6 perceived that their ability to build a trusting work relationship with their leader
was impacted (on the first day of employment) by the leader’s lack of preparedness and
connected the leader’s actions to the amount of worth and value that the leader placed on them
(employee).
The third environmental factor identified by 13 participants was the lack of opportunities
for authentic relationship building with organizational leaders and coworkers. Since the onset of
COVID, 100% of the participants experienced a change in their work schedules and were
working virtually and or hybrid schedules from 2020 through present-day 2022. Participant 4
stated, “I rarely see my supervisor or coworkers due to COVID protocols at our organization. …
That has impacted my ability to build a relationship with them and feel like I’m part of a team.”
Based on the participants’ perception working virtually significantly impacted their opportunity
to build camaraderie among coworkers and organizational leaders. In contrast, two participants
expressed that the pandemic enhanced their teams’ relationships. Participant 7 asserted that his
60

coworkers and supervisor seemed to show more compassion and empathy toward each other
since the onset of COVID-19. Further, Participant 8 stated, “Since the pandemic, I felt like my
relationship with my coworkers and supervisor became very positive and supportive.” These
participants perceived that the challenges through the pandemic helped their teams become more
appreciative of each other and relied on one another, strengthening their relationships.
In summary, the data identified the environmental factors of management practices,
working conditions, and organizational culture as workplace stressors. Participants defined a
supportive infrastructure as providing adequate staffing, appropriate orientation and training,
access to tools and supplies, and ongoing opportunities for relationship building among
coworkers and organizational leaders. The participants asserted that access to their supervisors
and effective bi-directional communication was an essential resource that supported their success
in their roles.
Personal Factors
The implication is that the participants perceived two workplace stressors as personal
factors that may lead to burnout. The data identified a lack of proper job training (knowledge)
and insufficient time for reflection (motivation). As a reminder, the SCT framework defines
personal factors as knowledge (procedural and metacognitive) and motivation (utility value and
self-efficacy). Procedural knowledge is an employee’s understanding of the tasks or goals, and
metacognitive knowledge reflects the learning acquired after completing tasks or attaining goals
(Bandura, 1999, 2002, 2005). Utility value is the perceived benefit from completing tasks or
achieving goals, and self-efficacy is the confidence employees gain in their abilities after
accomplishing a goal (Bandura, 1999, 2002, 2005). Reciprocal determinism of SCT asserts that
the factors (environmental, personal, and behavioral) influence one another (Bandura, 1978).
61

Based on the data, a lack of proper job training and insufficient time for reflection to
assess the learning acquired and gain confidence were identified as personal factors which
impacted the participants’ knowledge and motivation. Lack of proper job training correlates with
the environmental factor, which the data identified as inadequate orientation. Twelve participants
stated that they did not receive training specific to their job roles, information on barriers and
challenges of the position, and how to overcome them. As said by Participant 5, “I had no
training specific to my job except a couple of manuals on my desk. It was very frustrating and
stressful until I figured everything out.” Job satisfaction was impacted as this participant
struggled to learn his role without appropriate training and tools. Similarly, Participant 1
describes his first week as a nightmare due to not receiving training or office supplies, and by the
end of the first week was “so stressed out” that he regretted accepting the position. Employees
perceived that the absence of training placed an undue burden on them to understand their roles
and caused high anxiety and stress and decreased their job satisfaction.
Based on the data, the second personal factor that impacted the metacognitive knowledge
and motivation of 73% of participants was an absence of time for reflection on knowledge or
skills gained throughout their work week. The participants perceived that increased workloads
(due to understaffing and vacancies) and unreasonable organizational work demands hindered
their opportunity to reflect on the learning gained or celebrate goals accomplished to increase
self-efficacy. Participant 3 said, “We rarely get performance feedback. … I wish we had time to
understand what we’ve learned, how we overcame challenges, or how our skills have improved.
That would make me feel more accomplished, confident, and happier.” Participants expressed
feeling high stress when they could not reflect on their learning and skills enhancement to gain
confidence.
62

In summary, the data identified the personal factors of a lack of job training and time for
reflection as a workplace stressor. Participants asserted that procedural knowledge of their job
roles was essential to enhancing their self-efficacy and increasing motivation. Time for reflection
was perceived as a strategy that would positively impact their [participants’] knowledge,
motivation, and job satisfaction.
Behavioral Factors
The implication is that the participants perceived two workplace stressors as behavioral
factors that may lead to burnout. The data identified the following the absence of modeling or
coaching from their leaders or peers and the inability to control negative emotions. SCT defines
behavioral factors as the employees’ confidence, resilience, and ability to regulate emotions to
persist through barriers and accomplish job tasks. Behavioral factors also include the opportunity
for the employees to receive modeling and coaching (from their leaders or coworkers) to acquire
the skills necessary to attain the goals specific to their job roles. Twelve participants perceived
that the lack of job training (personal factor) contributes to the absence of modeling or coaching
from their leaders or peers (behavioral factor) and negatively impacts their work performance.
Participant 15 said,
I’m highly stressed often since I don’t have the support needed to do my job. My
supervisor is rarely around, and my coworkers are juggling their increased workloads. …
I don’t want to add to their plates and ask them to mentor or coach me. Coaching is the
organization’s responsibility, not my coworkers’.
The lack of access to supervisors (environmental factor) was perceived to impact the leaders’
ability to model, and coach employees (behavioral factor) on the work skills and ongoing
professional development needed to be successful in their [participants] roles. Additionally,
63

participants perceived that understaffing (environmental factor) impeded the opportunity for
cross-training (modeling and coaching) with coworkers to acquire the knowledge and skills to
persist through potential barriers. Participant 14 stated, “There are times when I get so angry and
can’t shake it. … [I] just need someone to show me how to do the job. … Having to deal with
this messes up my entire day.” Participants also perceived that the lack of behavioral support
(modeling, coaching, reinforcement with constructive feedback) impacted their stress levels and
their ability to self-regulate negative emotions and focus. In summary, the data identified the
behavioral factors of the absence of modeling or coaching from their leaders or peers and an
inability to control negative emotions. Participants perceived that access to modeling and
coaching was a resource that would support the enhancement of their self-efficacy and assist
them in managing their negative emotions and stress levels (physical and psychological health).
What, if Any, Differences Exist for Employees of Color?
There was a total of nine participants of color in this study. Participants of color (seven
out of nine) identified microaggressions as an environmental workplace stressor. The data
determined that they experienced microaggressions from their organizational leaders, direct
supervisors, and coworkers. According to the authors, microaggressions are subtle and based on
an individual’s implicit and explicit biases, which can result in discriminatory interactions or
actions (Marks et al., 2020; Ong & Burrow, 2017; Willie et al., 2016). Participants reported that
these interactions negatively impacted their ability to trust their leaders and coworkers, sense of
safety, and job satisfaction. Participant 11 expressed feeling very uncomfortable and disrespected
when asked why there was so much Black-on-Black crime and why “those people” couldn’t get
it together. Additionally, the participants of color perceived that they were in a “lose-lose
situation” as they felt that they did not have the support of the organization or coworkers to
64

address micro-aggressive interactions that impacted their environment and, ultimately, their
productivity and work satisfaction.
On the contrary, two out of nine participants of color perceived that since the murder of
George Floyd, their organization, immediate supervisors, and coworkers were more attuned to
the current climate of racial violence and the historical inequities for people of color. Participant
7 expressed that his interactions with his direct supervisor became more supportive and allowed
him to discuss his emotional well-being and what support he needed to feel safer at work.
Similarly, Participant 8 stated, “My supervisor took time to understand how the murder of
George Floyd impacted me by making space for us to discuss it one-to-one. That made me feel
seen and valued for the first time in my career.” The two participants perceived that their
supervisors’ approach positively impacted their sense of safety, productivity, and job
satisfaction. To conclude, Figure 3 illustrates the findings for the first research question based on
the study participants’ perceptions.

65

Figure 3
What Factors Contribute to Burnout of Employees in the Nonprofit Sector, and What, if Any,
Differences Exist for Employees of Color?

Research Question 2: How Does Burnout Impact Employees’ Productivity in the Nonprofit
Sector, and What, if Any, Differences Exist for Employees of Color?
Based on the data collected, workplace stress which leads to burnout negatively impacts
employees’ productivity. The perceived impact is correlated to the workplace stressors within
SCT’s triadic model (environmental, personal, behavioral). This section will discuss the study’s
findings of the participant’s perception of the impact of the workplace stressors.
66

Environmental Factor
The implication is that the participants perceived the environmental workplace stressors
(a lack of managerial support, a lack of adequate resources, and a lack of opportunities for
authentic relationship building) directly impacted their daily work operations. The data collected
identified decreased productivity, quality of work, and work engagement. Eighty-six percent of
participants perceived that their productivity declined due to the high stress levels experienced
by the stressors above. For example, Participant 2 said, “I get behind [on work tasks] because
when I need my supervisor, he’s never around. … I have to wait and can’t get anything done.”
Participants correlated their decreased productivity to the lack of managerial support and the
leader’s inaccessibility. Equally important, 10 participants perceived that they lost productive
work time per “stressful moment.” Participant 9 stated,
Whenever I have a stressful moment, I spend time frustrated because I don’t have what I
need to do my job and no one to turn to. Then I spend time trying to calm down, time
brainstorming how to get it [job task] done, and then I get frustrated all over again, and
the cycle repeats. … I lose time, and my work piles up.
Participants defined stressful moments as a lack of resources needed to complete job tasks, a lack
of leadership support during work barriers or challenges, and an environment that did not support
employees’ physical and psychological well-being.
Sixty-six percent of participants also perceived that the lack of formal one-to-one
supervision impacted their ability to be productive. Participant 5 stated, “At least if I had regular
one-to-one supervision, I could get some feedback and answers instead of wasting time and
feeling like it’s me. It’s so frustrating.” Aside from training, one-to-one supervision was
perceived by participants as an essential tool for enhancing procedural knowledge and
67

motivation. Participants expressed that supervision provides time to discuss specific work
performance, job tasks, and strategies to overcome barriers or challenges.
In addition, 13 participants perceived increased workloads as challenging to produce
high-quality work consistently. Participants stated that the increased work responsibilities due to
understaffing impacted their ability to produce high-quality work as they felt “undervalued and
unprepared with no training.” Participants claimed they experienced undue stress when “unable
to manage all of their responsibilities” while their leaders “piled on more work with no
additional compensation or acknowledgments.” Participants perceived that their quality of work
also suffered due to a lack of access to proper training and work supplies. Participant 1 said,
“How can I provide high-quality work without the proper training or supplies? I can’t!” The
absence of proper training and coaching on how to be successful in their job roles from leaders
and coworkers was perceived to hinder the participant’s quality of work.
Finally, the data identified that the lack of opportunities for authentic relationship
building negatively impacted participants’ work engagement. Sixty percent of participants
withdrew from communications and interactions with leaders and coworkers. Participant 15 said,
“I was so stressed that I just had to detach myself emotionally. It’s not like they [leaders] take
time to develop a relationship with us...so I keep to myself and countdown the hours until it’s
time to go home.” The absence of authentic relationship-building opportunities caused the
participants to disengage as they perceived a lack of authenticity, value, and support from their
leaders.
Moreover, five participants stated that they disengaged to protect their stress levels.
Participants indicated that they began to mirror the same engagement level that their leaders
demonstrated. In conclusion, the environmental stressors (a lack of managerial support, adequate
68

resources, and opportunities for authentic relationship building) negatively impacted the
participant’s ability to be productive, produce high-quality work, and stay engaged with their
leaders and organization.
Personal Factors
The implication is that the participants perceived that the personal factors identified (a
lack of proper job training and insufficient time for reflection) had an adverse impact on them.
The data identified a lack of focus (knowledge) and protective isolation and work dissatisfaction
(motivation). All participants claimed that they experienced moments when they could not focus
on job tasks. Participants asserted that the stress of the expectations from their leaders and
organizations to complete their daily tasks with minimum instruction and support was the cause
of their stress. Participant 13 stated, “I couldn’t focus on anything; I kept thinking about what I
don’t know and what I may be doing wrong. … What-if scenarios went through my mind all day
long.” Additionally, attempting to complete job tasks without proper training caused anxiety to
80% of the participants, which impacted their ability to focus on the task at hand and possible
learning opportunities.
Furthermore, 12 participants expressed that they often isolate themselves as a protective
response after being reprimanded by organizational leaders or coworkers for not knowing their
job tasks or roles (procedural knowledge). As Participant 12 said,
They didn’t train me, so I was figuring it out on my own. … There was never time to
discuss our work or how to do it better and make it more manageable; it was rough. Many
times, I kept to myself, so I wouldn’t be exposed [for not knowing my job], but it was
frustrating because it wasn’t my fault; it’s theirs [organization] for not training me, for
69

not making time to be with me and walk me through the process. I saw many of my peers
get written up for not knowing their jobs.
Protective isolation was a strategy utilized by 80% of the participants to create a sense of safety
within the workplace and from leadership’s negative perceptions. Similarly, Participant 9 stated,
It was noted on my 90 days probationary evaluation that I didn’t take the initiative to
learn my role. Initiative? I was never trained. … The organization didn’t take the
initiative, not me. … I made myself invisible after that.
Isolation was a strategy utilized for self-protection, and 12 participants also acknowledged that
they had an increased desire to leave their organization due to the stress of the isolation.
Eighty percent of the participants asserted that their continued inability to control their
negative emotions caused a decrease in work satisfaction, and 60% desired to leave the
organization for a “better working environment.” Participants stated that they “enjoyed serving
their community” but felt their physical and mental health was negatively impacted due to their
working conditions. Participant 6 said, “I spend my evenings feeling completely depleted,
overwhelmed, and anxious, … sleeping my evenings away, disconnected and isolated from my
family. My family gets what I have left, not my best.” Three participants were actively looking
for employment outside of the NP sector. One participant said, “I started having daily I hate my
job moments and knew it was time to leave.” Another participant stated, “I will not be working
in the nonprofit sector again. … The stress is not worth it.” The participant’s negative perception
of the working conditions in the NP sector and the high stress level they experienced factored
into their desire to leave the NP field.
On the contrary, three participants stated that they leaned on their peers to understand the
day-to-day operations and didn’t rely on their supervisor for specifics of their job roles.
70

Furthermore, these three participants expressed a sense of responsibility to show their leaders
that they “figured it out” to be seen as high performers, receive accolades, and have promotional
opportunities. However, the three participants also expressed a decrease in their work
satisfaction. In conclusion, the data identified that the personal factors (a lack of proper job
training and insufficient time for reflection) adversely impacted the participants’ ability to focus
on their job tasks, decreased work satisfaction, and caused them to isolate themselves as a form
of protection (self-preservation).
Behavioral Factors
The implication is that the participants perceived that the behavioral factors identified
(absence of modeling or coaching from their leaders or peers and inability to control negative
emotions) caused a negative impact. The data identified the impact as a decrease in self-efficacy
and an increase in poor health. Participant 13 said,
Not being able to successfully do my job made me question my ability to do the work.
So, I would spend my time questioning if I am smart enough or what’s wrong with me
and why I can’t get it [procedural knowledge].
Self-efficacy was impacted when participants perceived that their inability to understand work
procedures was partly due to their deficiency, which increased their frustration and stress levels.
Ten participants correlated their increased poor health to work stress. Participant 3
asserted, “I’ve never experienced this kind of uncontrollable anxiety and stomach aches until I
came to this organization.” Ten participants asserted that their poor health (i.e., high blood
pressure, stomach aches, headaches, and anxiety) was connected to the daily stress they
experienced at their organizations. Five of the 10 participants claimed they were taken out of
work due to the high stress levels and the negative impact on their health. Participant 15 said,
71

My partner begged me to go to the doctor because I was constantly experiencing
headaches, stomach aches, and anxiousness. My doctor told me that my job was killing
me and took me out of work because my blood pressure was sky-high. … When I
eventually returned to work, I was placed on daily medication for my blood pressure,
stomach aches, and anxiety. Now I’m stuck with medical and prescription bills. … All
because of my job.
In conclusion, the data identified that the behavioral factors (absence of modeling or coaching
from their leaders or peers and inability to control negative emotions) negatively impacted the
participants’ ability to believe in their skills and knowledge to succeed in their job roles as well
as their physical and psychological health.
What, if Any, Differences Exist for Employees of Color?
Seven of the nine participants of color in this study perceived micro-aggressive
interactions with organizational leaders and coworkers as an environmental workplace stressor.
The data identified a decrease in trust in their organization and leadership and in feeling safe at
work. Participant 13 asserted,
I cannot trust anyone that shows that they are judging me by my skin color versus my
resume. They [leaders and coworkers] make racist comments all the time and then say
that it wasn’t their intention to offend if they apologize at all. Leadership sweeps it under
the rug, and we are just supposed to forget about it and keep working. No way I can feel
safe knowing that I cannot speak up and get support when I am experiencing racist or
discriminatory interactions. I want to work for a place that shows that they value me. …
A better environment where I am appreciated and my experience and knowledge matter,
regardless of my skin color.
72

Participants of color (seven out of nine) asserted that they feared for their physical and
psychological safety due to covert and overt microaggressions by peers and organizational
leaders. Participants also stated that they were actively seeking employment in organizations
with leaders of color, which they perceived would create a safer, more supportive, and
welcoming environment. In summary, Figure 4 illustrates the findings for Research Question 2
based on the study participants’ perceptions.

73

Figure 4
How Does Burnout Impact Employees’ Productivity in the Nonprofit Sector, and What, if Any,
Differences Exist for Employees of Color?

Summary and Implications of Findings
To conclude, as asserted by the data collected from the study participants, workplace
stressors negatively impacted their work productivity, work satisfaction, and physical and
74

psychological health. Table 2 summarizes the findings for this study’s first two research
questions:
1. What factors contribute to burnout of employees in the nonprofit sector, and what, if
any, differences exist for employees of color?
2. How does burnout impact employees’ productivity in the nonprofit sector, and what,
if any, differences exist for employees of color?

Table 2
Summary of Burnout Factors and Impact
Factor Stressor Impact
Environmental Lack of managerial support Decreased productivity
Lack of adequate resources Decreased work quality
Lack of authentic relationship building Decreased work engagement
Employees of color
Environmental Micro-aggressive interactions Decreased trust in leadership
Decreased sense of safety

Personal Lack of proper job training Increased lack of focus
Lack of time for reflection Increased protective isolation
Increased work
dissatisfaction
Behavioral Lack of modeling/coaching Decreased self-efficacy
Decreased ability to self-regulate Increased poor health

75

The data identified that study participants experienced burnout symptoms, and their
ability to cope with high stress varied. For example, some participants became physically ill and
were taken out of work to recover. Other participants continued to work and found that they
isolated themselves due to high stress. In contrast, 13% of study participants leaned on their
peers to navigate through barriers and challenges.
Participants asserted that their work and personal relationships were negatively impacted
due to work stress. Work dissatisfaction affects an organization’s ability to meet its goals.
Organizations that ignore potential or identified workplace stressors further exacerbate the
negative impact on the employees, organizational goals, and the organizations’ consumers.
76

Chapter Five: Recommendations
This qualitative phenomenological study aimed to understand nonmanagerial employees’
perception of the factors of workplace stress which lead to burnout, its impact on productivity,
their recommendations to mitigate burnout in the NP sector, and what, if any, differences exist
for EOCs. Workplace burnout is defined as chronic stress and unstable relationships in helping
professions which results in diminishing accomplishments, cynicism, and exhaustion (Awa et al.,
2010; Cordes & Dougherty, 1993; Maslach et al., 1996; Maslach et al., 2001; Schaufeli &
Enzmann, 2020; WHO, 2019). The study participants were employees who have worked for at
least a year in CBOs within the NP sector. The study’s conceptual framework is grounded in
Bandura’s SCT, which asserts that there is a reciprocal causation between environmental factors,
personal factors, and behavioral factors which influence learning (Bandura, 1978). Workplaces
that understand how environmental, personal, and behavioral factors influence their employees’
learning and motivation are beneficial.
Recruitment for the study was facilitated through social media platforms and conducted
in October 2022. The data was collected through virtual semi-structured interviews and a
document analysis of the participant’s employer website for triangulation purposes. A total of 15
diverse nonmanagerial employees were interviewed. The study research questions were
1. What factors contribute to burnout of employees in the nonprofit sector, and what, if
any, differences exist for employees of color?
2. How does burnout impact employees’ productivity in the nonprofit sector, and what,
if any, differences exist for employees of color?
3. What recommendations do employees perceive would mitigate workplace burnout in
the nonprofit sector?
77

This chapter will review the overall findings of the study’s first and second research
questions. It will then review the findings for the third research question and the participant’s
recommendations to mitigate workplace stressors that lead to burnout. This chapter will then
discuss the implications of the recommendations and the study’s limitations and delimitations.
The chapter ends with recommendations for future research and a conclusion.
Overview of the Findings
This study’s findings align with the literature research findings and the SCT conceptual
framework on workplace burnout (reciprocal causation). Several studies have determined that the
causes of workplace burnout were a lack of managerial support, unreasonable job demands, a
lack of resources, a lack of leadership acknowledgment, and a lack of autonomy and control
(Awa et al., 2010; Cordes & Dougherty, 1993; Maslach et al., 1996; Maslach et al., 2001;
Schaufeli & Enzmann, 2020). The authors assert that the impact of the stressors is loss of
productivity, employee disengagement, increased absenteeism, and increased health costs due to
a decrease in physical and psychological health (Awa et al., 2010; Cordes & Dougherty, 1993;
Maslach et al., 1996; Maslach et al., 2001; Schaufeli & Enzmann, 2020). Furthermore, a poll
identified that 70% of U.S. workers reported that work disengagement affected their productivity
(Gallup, 2017).
The data for this study’s first research question identified that participants perceived
several factors of workplace stress leading to burnout. Lack of managerial support, inadequate
resources, and a lack of authentic relationship building was perceived to be environmental
factors of workplace stress. In addition, the study’s participants of color perceived micro-
aggressive interactions as an environmental stressor. The personal factors of workplace stress
identified by the data were a lack of proper job training and time for reflection. The data also
78

identified that participants perceived a lack of modeling and coaching and a decreased ability to
regulate negative emotions as behavioral factors of workplace stress.
The data for this study’s second research question identified that participants perceived
that the workplace stressors negatively impacted their productivity. In addition, the participants
perceived that their work quality, work engagement, trust in leadership, sense of safety, and self-
efficacy decreased due to the stressors. The data also identified increased protective isolation,
work dissatisfaction, and poor health. The study’s participants of color perceived that micro-
aggressive interactions impacted their sense of safety and increased their lack of trust in the
organization’s leadership.
The findings of this study on the factors of workplace stress (a lack of managerial
support, a lack of organizational support, and an unsupportive culture) and its impact (work
dissatisfaction, decreased productivity, and decreased physical and psychological health) align
with the literature research (Andersen et al., 2010; Borritz et al., 2006; Kahill, 1998; Maslach et
al., 1996; Maslach et al., 2001). The third research question aimed to understand the participant’s
perceived recommendations for mitigating workplace burnout. The study participants shared
recommendations that they perceived would mitigate the findings of the first and second research
questions. The recommendation for the practice section of this chapter is intended to give voice
to the participants as they are at the center of this study.
Research Question 3: What Recommendations Do Employees Perceive Would Mitigate
Workplace Burnout?
The implication is that 80% of participants recommend mitigating burnout in three areas:
(a) managerial practices; (b) organizational support (adequate resources); and (c) organizational
culture as beneficial for the employees, organization, and organizational clients. The data
79

identified that participants perceived NPs need to focus on improving policies and operations to
mitigate the identified workplace stressors and prevent burnout. Participant 15 stated,
They [organization] need to understand the day-to-day rat race we go through to get the
work done and the stress leaders cause [employees] with unrealistic expectations. It
should start with wanting to understand how the current workloads are unmanageable and
what it takes to get the job done. Managers either can’t support us in real time or have
biases that prevent them from genuinely supporting all staff.
Twelve participants perceived that organizational leaders lacked a thorough understanding of job
functions for the roles they supervise, the daily barriers or challenges faced by employees, high
stress levels impacted by increased workloads, and how these factors impact productivity.
Another participant perceived that leaders should be accessible at all times to assist with
supporting employees through barriers in real-time versus relying on untrained and overwhelmed
coworkers. Participant 6 said,
Leaders should be the expert on accomplishing the job goals for the positions they
supervise. All too often, they rely on untrained workers to support challenges, and that is
a problem because they [leaders] never truly learn the job and cannot support us through
tough times.
Additionally, 73% of participants felt that leaders need to be physically present during the day-
to-day operations to understand better how to individualize training, support, and development of
their subordinates. Moreover, Participant 9 said,
We [coworkers and leaders] don’t trust each other enough because we rarely get to spend
time together to build relationships and don’t feel comfortable leaning on each other
since we are all struggling. Ultimately, the organization needs to show that they care
80

about the workers in an actionable way. They can repeat the mission in their sleep but
only apply it to the clients, … not us [employees]. We need leaders to live the mission
with us, the workers, first … since they rely on us to meet the mission.
Participant 9 perceived a disconnect between the organization’s mission and the treatment of
employees. In fact, 80% of participants perceived that leaders didn’t practice the mission with
employees and that the mission was a public statement that was not embedded into the
organizational culture or policies. In conclusion, 12 participants perceived that creating policies
and procedures to enhance four categories would mitigate workplace burnout:
1. Managerial support: accessibility, one-to-one supervision, modeling/coaching, and
relationship-building opportunities
2. Organizational support with adequate resources: training, supplies, and workload
equity
3. Supportive Organizational Culture: on-the-job physical and psychological resources
4. Creating a sustainable, diverse, equitable, and inclusive workplace
The following section will focus on the specific recommendations for each category.
Recommendation 1: Managerial Practices (Accessibility, Supervision, Modeling/Coaching)
The data identified a lack of access to the supervisor as a workplace stressor impacting
employees’ productivity and work satisfaction. Borowitz et al. (2006) assert that a lack of
managerial support, unreasonable job demands, and a lack of role clarity correlates with
employee burnout. The first managerial recommendation, supported by 80% of participants,
recommends that NPs have working supervisors (WS) whose primary focus is employee
development, engagement, and real-time support. Participants define WS as experts in the job
functions they supervise to train, support, and develop employees’ skills through hands-on
81

modeling and coaching. A defined organizational process for WS accessibility and
responsiveness is recommended to ensure that employees receive the support needed to achieve
their job goals. Participants perceived that a defined organizational process would assist them in
reducing their stress and increasing productivity. Participants defined accessibility as real-time
access to the WS for modeling or coaching. For example, when an employee is confronted with a
barrier or challenge, there should be a defined communication process for real-time access to the
WS in person or virtually (i.e., by phone, text, or video conference) to receive support. The
participants also perceived that knowing when the WS is physically and virtually present during
their workday assists them in understanding the best method of contact during challenges.
The second managerial recommendation is ongoing one-to-one supervision. Participants
recommend that the WS have biweekly one-to-one supervision with employees for the first 3
months of their employment and monthly supervision after that. One-to-one supervision sessions
should include a co-created (WS and employee) agenda where both parties contribute to what
will be discussed. “Leaders at all organizational levels can collaborate with workers to examine
and eliminate workplace hazards, then design, implement, and regularly evaluate programs for
workplace safety” (Murthy, 2022, p. 14). This process ensures that the WS engages the
employees to have a voice in the content of the meetings and allows for collaboration and
relationship building. Supervision can also be utilized as a resource tool to empower and engage
employees to work proactively with leadership on upcoming organizational initiatives and to
discuss how to overcome future barriers. Supervision should include recognition for
achievements and performance improvements, update on action items, performance feedback,
and upcoming professional development opportunities, discussing workplace physical and
82

psychological well-being issues that the employee may be experiencing, and providing resources
to reduce workplace stress and increase self-efficacy.
Ten participants recommended that the WS facilitate recurring monthly team meetings to
provide recognition of team achievements and milestones, promote ongoing bi-directional
communication, brainstorm effective methods to complete tasks and overcome barriers or
challenges, discuss upcoming organizational initiatives or changes that affect the team, share
stress-reducing strategies, and engage in team-building activities (Borgogni et al., 2011). The
preparation process for team meetings should mirror the one-to-one supervision process to
ensure input from all team members. “Once a leader has activated the group, it can determine
whether its actions solve the problems of working effectively in its environment and create a
stable internal system” (Schein, 2017, p. 242). Table 3 provides a sample of the supervision
agenda, which can also be modified for team meetings.

83

Table 3
Sample Co-created Supervision Agenda
One-to-one agenda
Date/time
Location
Objective: The overall goal of one-to-one meetings to be created in collaboration (WS and
employee)
Topic Description Notes
Achievements Begin with bi-directional recognition
of achievements, milestones or
improvements observed

Action items from previous
1:1
Recap the status of previous action
items

Main topics to be discussed WS and employee add top three
topics for discussion
Employee
1.
2.
3.
WS
1.
2.
3.

Physical and psychological
well-being

WS and employee engage in a
discussion of perceived work-
related physical and psychological
challenges and resources to address

Upcoming professional
development opportunities
Potential training or development
opportunities within the
organization or community

Organizational update WS updates employees on pertinent
organizational initiatives and/or
changes that may directly impact
the employee

New action items/goals who will do what, by when, and
what the reporting process for each
item will be (formal report, email
follow-up, discussion at next 1:1,
etc.)

84

The final managerial recommendation is for the WS to be fully trained in all aspects of
their job roles to be better equipped to model tasks, coach employees, and build authentic
relationships with their direct reports. Working Supervisors should provide weekly hands-on
modeling and coaching during the first month of the employee’s employment and continue
during one-to-one supervision afterward. Working conditions that support managerial modeling,
coaching, and acknowledgment also increase employee motivation and self-efficacy (Johnson,
2015). As a reminder, self-efficacy is the personal belief in one’s abilities and skills to execute a
task (Bandura, 1978, 1986). Water et al., (2003), assert that employees who engage in authentic
interactions benefit from a feeling of inclusion and productivity.
Moreover, according to the SCT framework, employees who engage in observational
learning gain self-efficacy while learning their roles and can persist through challenges and
barriers that arise (Schunk & Usher, 2012). WS modeling can also build relationships between
the leader and employee, strengthening trust, work satisfaction, and engagement. Baumeister and
Leary (1995) claim that with repeated positive interactions, a person’s sense of inclusion
increases, which motivates employees. According to Marsh (2017), restorative practices can also
positively change an organization’s culture when grounded in relationship building and repair
versus disciplinary actions. Figure 5 illustrates the summary of the managerial support
recommendations.

85

Figure 5
Recommendation 1: Managerial Support

This first recommendation has three components that are perceived by the participants to
enhance managerial support. All three components are equally important and encompass an
approach perceived to support the procedural knowledge and motivation (personal factors) of
employees with ongoing support.
Recommendation 2: Organizational Support With Adequate Resources (Training, Supplies,
and Workload Equity)
The data identified a lack of adequate resources as a workplace stressor impacting
employees’ productivity and work satisfaction. Adequate resources are defined as tools and
resources needed to meet job goals successfully. The first resource recommendation supported
by 80% of participants is to develop robust training to support the employees’ procedural and
metacognitive knowledge. Developing job-specific training in collaboration with staff currently
86

in the roles and the leaders who supervise the position ensures that the barriers, challenges, and
nuances of the role are thoroughly addressed. Job training is essential to skill building, goal
attainment, self-efficacy building, and motivation enhancement (Retno Anggraini et al., 2019).
Job training is recommended on the first day of employment immediately after the employee
receives general onboarding orientation to the organization (i.e., employee benefits,
organizational policy, and procedures). The training plan should detail the timeline, specific
categories to be covered in training, and where the supporting training materials can be located.
The timeline should be presented to the employee for alignment and awareness. Finally,
employees should receive updated training every 6 months to ensure that they are fully equipped
with the knowledge and skills for the evolving aspects (i.e., goals, tasks) of the position and
organization.
The second resource recommendation supported by 12 participants is to ensure proper
work supplies and resources are available to the employees on the first day of employment.
Participants perceived that employees equipped with adequate resources positively influence
employee work satisfaction and motivation. Work supplies are defined as the equipment needed
to fulfill the goals of the role (i.e., laptop, office, phone, paper clips). Proactively preparing to
secure the necessary work supplies before the first day of employment for new employees is
recommended as a standard operating procedure for the organization and WS. Bakker et al.,
(2016) assert that adequate resources “promotes employee well-being and effective
organizational functioning” (p. 273). When employees are well-equipped with the resources to
attain job goals successfully, their progress reinforces their self-efficacy, motivation, and
satisfaction (Schunk & Usher, 2012). Furthermore, authors claimed that adequate resources and
reasonable job demands could prevent physical and emotional exhaustion (Awa et al., 2010;
87

Cordes & Dougherty, 1993; Maslach et al., 1996; Maslach et al., 2001; Schaufeli & Enzmann,
2020).
The final resource recommendation supported by 100% of the participants was for NPs to
assess operational capacity regarding workloads. Strub (2020) asserts that NPs face a 19%
turnover rate. Additionally, the author stated that out of the 45% of NP employees seeking new
employment, 23% are leaving the NP sector due to low pay, a lack of promotional opportunities,
and ineffective organizational structures, which lack the necessary support for attaining work
goals (Strub, 2020). Moreover, 39% of respondents from the StressPulseSM survey reported
workload as a primary workplace stressor, and a Gallup poll correlated burnout with individuals
working over 50 hours weekly or unreasonable workloads (ComPsych, 2017; Gallup, 2020).
Efforts for the recommendation include thoroughly examining the job tasks for vacant positions
to develop an equitable work distribution process. The tasks should be distributed amongst team
members versus assigned to just one employee. Additional duties should be given to workers
willing to take on more responsibility, provide additional compensation and training, and be
finite. Equally important is for the organization not to penalize workers not wanting to take on
additional responsibilities (i.e., performance appraisals, promotional opportunities). Another
alternative recommendation is for the organization to contract with an employment agency to
hire temporary workers for vacant positions until they are permanently filled.
Finally, equitable policies, productivity goals, and workloads with access to training
opportunities, adequate resources, and supplies can positively affect and increase employees’
work satisfaction and motivation (Lovejoy et al., 2021; Milner et al., 2017; The Work and Well-
Being Initiative, n.d.; U.S. Department of Labor, n.d.; Occupational Safety and Health
Administration, n.d.). To summarize, the recommendation supports eliminating practices that
88

unnecessarily add to an employee’s workload; if an employee opts in to take on additional
responsibilities, they should receive additional training, compensation, clear deliverables
expectations, and a finite timeline. Figure 6 illustrates the organizational support
recommendation.

Figure 6
Recommendation 2: Organizational Support With Adequate Resources

89

Recommendation 3: Supportive Organizational Culture
The data identified an inability to control negative emotions due to unaddressed
workplace stressors and a lack of behavioral support that impact the employees’ physical and
psychological well-being. The recommendation is to collaborate with all employees to create and
sustain a supportive organizational culture. The recommendation was supported by 93% of the
participants. Investing in an environment that values all employees’ physical and psychological
well-being as part of its organizational mission and vision is at the core of this recommendation.
Workplace burnout must be equally as important as workplace injuries and have policies
and procedures embedded into the day-to-day operations to prevent all forms of injuries
(physical and psychological). For example, if an employee falls and is injured due to a crack in
the floor, the crack is immediately fixed. The employee is referred to receive medical attention;
the organization supports the employee through workers’ compensation resources. However,
when an employee is experiencing burnout symptoms (low productivity, absenteeism, decreased
work engagement), it is seen as a performance issue, and the organization does not intervene or
address stress factors. The performance issue (burnout symptoms) is typically managed through
a progressive disciplinary process (i.e., formal written warnings, suspension, termination), and
the employee carries the entire burden. Creating a supportive organizational culture would
mitigate the issue and make all hazards to physical or psychological injury a work-related
problem.
The recommendation is to create a supportive culture by investing in training leaders to
be proponents of healthy (physical and psychological) work environments. Knowledgeable
leaders will be better equipped to regulate their negative emotions and invest in their well-being.
Leaders can then authentically model how employees implement stress reduction strategies
90

through modeling and coaching (Recommendation 1). Modeling and coaching can normalize the
utilization of resources available to employees (i.e., wellness initiatives, employee assistance
programs). Coaching continues through on-the-job training, one-to-one supervision, and team
meetings to reduce or eliminate employees’ fear of judgment or retaliation. Training on the
consequences of workplace burnout and its impact on physical and psychological well-being
(i.e., increased absenteeism, poor health, work dissatisfaction) should also be embedded into the
onboarding training process (Recommendation 2) and continued every quarter to increase
knowledge and normalization for all employees.
The second component of this recommendation is for organizations to invest in an
employee wellness department staffed with occupational social workers to provide real-time
support to implement stress-reducing strategies and referrals to community resources as needed.
Occupational social workers can provide on-the-job support with wellness strategies and are
beneficial to ensuring the sustainability of a supportive organizational culture (Sabbath, 2019).
Continuous access to interventions and self-care strategies built into the workday can further
encourage self-regulation strategies for stress-inducing and trauma-triggering interactions (i.e.,
restorative practices, mindfulness strategies). Dedicated additional resources within the
organization for stress-reducing interventions and wellness activities (i.e., quiet room, flexible
work breaks, equitable policies, smoking cessation interventions, and healthy eating education)
during work hours can assist in sustaining a supportive wellness culture. According to the author,
organizations that focus on employee wellness as part of their mission can leverage high
performance due to the employees feeling valued (Eva et al., 2019).

91

What, if Any, Differences Exist for Employees of Color?
The data analysis to answer this research question focused on race and responses from the
participants of color. Sixty percent of the study participants were EOCs, and all had adverse
experiences due to microaggressions or discriminatory interactions during their tenure within
their organizations. However, two of the nine participants claimed that between 2020 -2022 their
negative experiences decreased due to their leaders and coworkers gaining knowledge of the
historical inequities EOCs experienced due to a heightened awareness after the murder of George
Floyd. Nevertheless, those two participants supported Recommendation 4 to sustain their
organizations’ gains after the racial unrest following George Floyd’s murder and the revelation
of the health disparities for people of color during COVID-19.
Recommendation 4 is to create a sustainable, diverse, equitable, and inclusive workplace.
One hundred percent of the participants of color supported the recommendation of organizations
creating a sustainable organization that values diversity, equity, and inclusiveness. The study
participants’ fourth and final recommendation is reviewed with specific, actionable steps to
ensure that all employees understand the benefits of and commitment to a culture that values
diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI).
This recommendation begins with an analysis of all organizational policies and
procedures (P&P) with the formation of an Equity P&P Committee to mitigate harmful
inequities. The committee must include the representation of all employees (frontline employees,
WS, and executive leaders). The committee’s responsibility would be to review, update, and
implement equitable P&Ps with a bi-directional input process from employees who are not on
the committee. This goal should also have a transparent timeline to ensure accountability and
sustainability.
92

The second component of this recommendation is to provide mandated implicit and
explicit bias and discrimination training for all employees during the onboarding process and
every quarter after that for continuous education and skill building. Participants perceived that
the content could include (a) definitions of implicit/explicit bias and discrimination; (b) the legal
ramifications of such actions; (c) consequences to the workplace and the worker’s physical and
psychological health; (d) strategies to identify biases; (e), mitigation strategies to alter bias or
discriminatory behaviors and actions; and (f) the organizations reporting process for those
experiencing bias or discriminatory interactions.
The third component of the participants recommendation is for the organization to create
and commit to clear and finite DEI goals. The progress of the DEI goals should be
communicated regularly at organizational meetings and posted in obvious places within the
organization and their website with the progress made toward meeting them. For example, if the
organization has a goal to diversify its leadership team, the goal should be clearly and reported
on:
Organization X is committed to achieving a diverse leadership team where 50% of the
leaders are from diverse backgrounds. We commit to achieving this goal by December
31, 2023. We commit to reporting on the progress of this goal quarterly within the
organization and our website. As of March 2022, the organization’s leadership team is
comprised of 80% non-employees of color and 20% employees of color. An update on
this goal will be provided in June 2022.
Reporting of DEI goals should be incorporated into quarterly training and educational activities
to ensure sustainability, transparency, and accountability. The final component of this
recommendation is for organizations to create an anonymous reporting and feedback process for
93

employees experiencing microaggressions or discrimination. A mechanism where employees can
anonymously address experiences or observations of discriminatory actions allow leadership an
opportunity to mitigate these issues (i.e., training, or progressive discipline). Figure 7
summarizes recommendations 3 and 4 for creating and sustaining a supportive organizational
culture that focuses on being a diverse, equitable, and inclusive workplace.

Figure 7
Recommendations 3 and 4: Supportive Organizational Culture With a Focus on the
Sustainability of a Diverse, Equitable, and Inclusive Workplace

94

Implications of Recommendations
The findings and recommendations of this study support prior research and Bandura’s
SCT and should be considered by NP leaders seeking to optimize employee well-being and
organizational operations. The study findings support that there are negative impacts of
workplace burnout (workplace dissatisfaction, declined productivity, and decreased physical and
psychological well-being), and the recommendations detail steps to mitigate workplace stressors
that lead to burnout. In this study, the environmental factors identified (management practices,
working conditions, and organizational policies and culture) were perceived to directly influence
the study participants’ personal factors (knowledge and motivation) and behavioral factors (self-
regulation and self-efficacy). Although there was no new information discovered in this study,
the findings support that workplace burnout is an issue within the NP sector and detrimental to
employee well-being, the mission of the organizations, and the services to organizational clients.
Frontline employees in this study were not organizational decision-makers, policy
creators, or contributors and had little to no autonomy. The recommendations are intended to
provide NP leaders with actionable and sustainable ways to collaborate with employees to create
healthy working conditions. The recommendations also serve as a pathway to creating a culture
of authenticity about valuing employee well-being as part of the organization’s mission and
vision. Implementation must include representation from all levels of employees, not be
hierarchical, and be embedded in the organization’s ongoing strategic plans to ensure
sustainability.
The recommendations are intended to positively impact the working conditions for
nonmanagerial employees; therefore, positively influencing the employees’ personal and
behavioral factors. The recommendations also guide the opportunities for collaboration between
95

the organizational leaders and employees to further the organizational mission while protecting
the well-being of all employees:
• Recommendation 1: Managerial practices (accessibility, supervision,
modeling/coaching)
• Recommendation 2: Organizational support with adequate resources (training,
supplies, and workload equity)
• Recommendation 3: Supportive organizational culture
• Recommendation 4: Creating a sustainable, diverse, equitable, and inclusive
workplace
Since authors claim NPs can incur up to 300 billion in health costs due to workplace
stress (American Institute of Stress, 2021; Thompson, 2016), the benefits from the
recommendation positively impact the organization in preventing unnecessary financial
hardships. The recommendation also positively contributes to an organization achieving its
mission and sustaining healthy working conditions. The recommendations are perceived by study
participants, supported by research, and the SCT framework to positively impact employee well-
being (physical and psychological) and the organization’s consumers with uninterrupted high-
quality service (American Psychological Association, 2010; ComPsych, 2017; McGee &
Johnson, 2015; Pugh et al., 2011; Stajkovic & Luthans, 1998). Furthermore, the proposed
recommendations were perceived by participants, supported by the literature research, and the
SCT framework to reduce stress and support employees in accomplishing work goals without
delay, therefore, increasing their productivity and work satisfaction (Borowitz et al., 2006).
Figure 8 provides an overview of the recommendations.

96

Figure 8
Overview of Recommendations

Discussion
The culture of nonprofits is different in many ways from its for-profit counterparts.
Typically, for-profit organizations are better positioned financially to invest in needed resources
with the revenue produced from their products and services. Whereas NPs are unlikely to find
themselves in such a position, given the inherent fiscal structure of not producing revenue but
covering operational expenses. NP leaders spend significant time securing financial support from
public entities (i.e., government) to cover organizational expenses. According to the authors,
54% of NPs expenses remain unfunded, and private funding (i.e., philanthropic organizations) is
97

sought to close the gap, a task that is not always successful (Pettijohn et al., 2013; Smith &
Lipsky, 2009). Even after securing financial support, cash flow often remains an issue, as public
funding sources are usually in arrears. The organizations must pay expenses upfront and then
wait to be reimbursed (Smith & Lipsky, 2009). The constant juggling of cash flow causes a
significant strain on NPs impacting their ability to provide competitive salaries and benefits as
they continue to struggle with the “stress of covering vacant positions on top of low pay”
(National Council of Nonprofits, 2021, p. 4).
The current rate of NP staff vacancies varies from 20% to 29% due partly to low pay
(National Council of Nonprofits, 2021). Furthermore, due to limited financial resources, NPs are
flat organizations with minimal executive leadership and middle management positions. This
type of organizational structure limits the possibility of promotions and pay increases. Also,
since resources are low, when workers get promoted, they rarely receive ample pay raises and
training for their new positions, which causes animosity to build within the workforce. Frontline
workers continue to experience a lack of proper support to accomplish daily goals as promoted
leaders struggle to learn their new positions and produce results, further exacerbating the
potential for burnout. To address these issues, NPs must advocate for funding that allows for
people operations (i.e., competitive salaries, benefits), program operations, and resources for
employee wellness interventions. Kim and Wang (2018) study found that employee burnout was
higher when income was lower, placing NP employees at greater risk of burnout due to financial
barriers. A shift in funding protocols will contribute to sustaining a vibrant and healthy
workforce.
Moreover, preventing workplace burnout should also be championed by the entire
community (funders, organizational leaders, employees, and community residents). Nonprofits
98

and employees working together to mitigate workplace stressors that lead to burnout should be
normalized as a natural way of conducting business. As stated previously in this study, the
impact of employee burnout affects the entire community due to the strain it places on the
employee’s physical and psychological health and community resources to assist with the
symptoms of burnout. Imagine a burnt-out employee (mentally and physically exhausted) after
another stressful day at work, arriving home knowing that her day is not over. Trying to muster
up the energy to prepare dinner, help with homework, clean the house, and prepare her children
for the next day at school with a loving smile. Now imagine this happening night after night and
the potential consequences for the children because of their mom’s inability to be present
physically and mentally due to burnout. The entire family unit experiences the consequences of
burnout as their family member (burnt-out employee) becomes disengaged and or physically ill.
As one participant said, “My family gets what is left of me, not my best.” Oftentimes, NP
workers are in helping professions because they want to serve their community with long-term,
sustainable, high-quality services. The desire to work in a helping profession should not come at
the cost of the employee’s or their family’s health and wellness.
Nonprofits are uniquely positioned to prioritize employee health and wellness. The
mission statements of NPs often reflect a desire to help their community residents improve their
quality of life and do no harm. Organizations should seek to fulfill their mission with their
employees and the community simultaneously. When NPs focus on fulfilling the mission with
employees (their first customers), it enhances the organization’s credibility and trust in its
leaders. Nonprofits must demonstrate an authentic desire to impact the entire community, which
includes the employee. In turn, the employee feels valued and that their quality of life is
protected and matters just as much as the program clients.
99

It is also critical that employees are involved in the process of sustaining positive
working conditions, which enhances their sense of safety and belongingness. Nonprofits must
intentionally incorporate employee voices as part of the organizational culture, creating a
network of invested individuals who are bought into the success of the organization and its
community residents. The operations and fiscal health of the organization are also positively
impacted as healthy, and satisfied workers are better equipped to contribute daily to their job
roles. Finally, NPs could model the way for other industries by amplifying the importance of
ensuring employees remain healthy and satisfied with their working conditions. A focus on the
people [employees] taking care of the people [community residents] will benefit the organization
(mission, fiscal, operations), the workers (health and wellness), and the community (quality of
life).
Limitations and Delimitations
All studies experience limitations and delimitations that may jeopardize the study of
misinterpreting or incorrect data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). Limitations are considered flaws
that the researcher cannot control, whereas delimitations are choices the researcher makes that
create weaknesses within the study (Theofanidis & Fountouki, 2019). The primary limitation of
this study is the various NP workplaces from which the participants are from. The researcher
could not observe the participants at their worksite or observe workplace stressors identified by
the participants. Due to this limitation, the researcher cannot ascertain how the participant’s
worksite impacted their stress. The other limitation of this study is that the interviews were
conducted virtually. The researcher could not fully observe the participant’s environment,
behavior, or social cues due to not being in person. Therefore, the interpretation of the data could
be a limitation of this study.
100

The delimitation in this study is the analysis of a small sample of employees in the United
States This sample size represents a larger population but cannot account for all experiences in
the United States by employees in CBOs in the NP sector. The analysis of this small sample may
not represent the full scope of the problem of workplace burnout or an exhaustive list of the
perceived causes of workplace stressors.
Recommendations for Future Research
Further research on the perception of workplace stressors that lead to burnout from the
leaders of the study participants is warranted to triangulate the findings of this study. Is there a
correlation between burnt-out leaders and the employees they supervise? The research questions
of this study should be used to mirror the recommended research. Seeking to understand the
perception of factors that contribute to burnout, the impact of burnout on leaders, and the
leaders’ recommendations to mitigate workplace stressors. The study should also seek to further
the research on (a) how burnt-out leaders affect frontline employees’ well-being and work
satisfaction; (b) whether leaders receive proper support to model appropriate stress-reducing
strategies with their direct reports; and (c) if leaders perpetuate burnout behaviors within the
organization.
A mixed methods study is also recommended across the NP sector to measure levels of
burnout (quantitative) and understand perceived workplace stressors (qualitative) for all
employees. Triangulation of the findings will better support NPs in understanding the actual
volume of burnout in their organizations and the identified workplace stressors. The study results
can benefit organizations as they seek to improve workplace conditions to positively contribute
to their employees’ well-being and better serve their communities.

101

Conclusion
The study findings identified a correlation between unaddressed workplace stress and
work dissatisfaction, increased absenteeism, a lack of trust in the organization and its leaders,
and a negative impact on employees’ physical and psychological health. Declined productivity is
also heavily correlated with stressful working conditions and affects the employees’ and
employers’ ability to meet organizational goals (Bandura, 1978). Burnout also negatively
impacts the organization’s financial health, further jeopardizing the sustainability of the mission
(American Institute of Stress, 2021; Thompson, 2016). Workplace burnout is detrimental to the
employees, the organization, and the organization’s clients. The results of this study can be used
to inform and guide NP leaders in creating and sustaining an organizational culture that values
wellness.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention states that workplace burnout is
preventable, and employers are uniquely positioned to promote physical and psychological well-
being (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2021). NPs benefit from investing in an
organizational culture that focuses on employee well-being as it increases the employee’s sense
of safety and normalizes the utilization of wellness resources, decreasing the negative impacts
identified in this study and supported by literature research (Borowitz et al., 2006).
Organizational leaders must shift their mindset to see their employees as their first customers and
key partners in fulfilling their mission. Continuous collaboration with employees will assist in
sustaining a workplace culture of well-being that will positively impact the end-user (community
residents) with uninterrupted high-quality services.

102

References
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (2000). Attitudes and the attitude-behavior relation: Reasoned and
automatic processes. European Review of Social Psychology, 11(1), 1–33.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14792779943000116
Al Zuned, A. M. (2017). Effective business leadership styles: A case study of Harriet green.
Middle East Journal of Business, 12(2), 10–19.
https://doi.org/10.5742/MEJB.2017.92943
Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How
learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching. John Wiley & Sons.
The American Institute of Stress. (2021). Workplace stress. https://www.stress.org/workplace-
stress/
American Psychological Association. (2010). Research roundup: Work stress.
https://www.apaservices.org/practice/update/2010/07-28/research-roundup
American Psychological Association. (2021). Stress in America 2021: One year later, a new
wave of pandemic health concerns. https://www.apa.org.
https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/stress/2021/one-year-pandemic-stress
Ammar, A., Mueller, P., Trabelsi, K., Chtourou, H., Boukhris, O., Masmoudi, L., Bouaziz, B.,
Brach, M., Schmicker, M., Bentlage, E., How, D., Ahmed, M., Aloui, A., Hammouda, O.,
Paineiras-Domingos, L. L., Braakman-jansen, A., Wrede, C., Bastoni, S., Pernambuco, C.
S., . . . Hoekelmann, A. (2020). Psychological consequences of COVID-19 home
confinement: The ECLB-COVID19 multicenter study. PLoS One, 15(11), Article
e0240204. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240204
103

Andersen, I., Borritz, M., Christensen, K. B., & Diderichsen, F. (2010). Changing job-related
burnout after intervention—A quasi-experimental study in six human service
organizations. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 52(3), 318–323.
https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0b013e3181d1cd87
Arnsberger, P., Ludlum, M., Riley, M., & Stanton, M. (2008). A history of the tax-exempt
sector: An SOI perspective. Statistics of Income Bulletin, 27(3), 105–135.
https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A177872474/ITBC?u=usocal_main&sid=bookmark-
ITBC&xid=ea422e49
Aronsson, G., Theorell, T., Grape, T., Hammarström, A., Hogstedt, C., Marteinsdottir, I., Skoog,
I., Träskman-Bendz, L., & Hall, C. (2017). A systematic review including meta-analysis
of work environment and burnout symptoms. BMC Public Health, 17(1), 264. Advance
online publication. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-017-4153-7
Awa, W. L., Plaumann, M., & Walter, U. (2010). Burnout prevention: A review of intervention
programs. Patient Education and Counseling, 78(2), 184–190.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2009.04.008
Ayers, O. (2019). Fred Trump, the Ku Klux Klan and grassroots Redlining in interwar America.
Journal of Urban History, 47(1), 3–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0096144219858599
Azari-Rad, H., & Philips, P. (2002). Origin of the factoid-prevailing wage laws are remnant Jim
Crow laws. The Review of Radical Political Economics, 34(3), 275–284.
https://doi.org/10.1177/048661340203400303
Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2017). Job demands–resources theory: Taking stock and
looking forward. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 22(3), 273–285.
https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000056
104

Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Sanz-Vergel, A. I. (2014). Burnout and work engagement: The
JD–R approach. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational
Behavior, 1(1), 389–411. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091235
Bandura, A. (1978). The self system in reciprocal determinism. The American Psychologist,
33(4), 344–358. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.33.4.344
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.
Pearson.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Macmillan.
Bandura, A. (1999). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Asian Journal of Social
Psychology, 2(1), 21–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-839X.00024
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 9(3), 75–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00064
Bandura, A. (2002). Social cognitive theory in cultural context. Applied Psychology, 51(2), 269–
290. https://doi.org/10.1111/1464-0597.00092
Bandura, A. (2005). The evolution of social cognitive theory. In K. G. Smith & M. A. Hitts
(Eds.) Great minds in management (pp. 9–35). Oxford University Press.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal
attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497–
529. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497
Berlin, I. (2004). Generations of captivity: A history of African-American slaves. Harvard
University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv16f6j57
105

Bertrand, M., & Mullainathan, S. (2018). Are Emily and Greg more employable than Lakisha
and Jamal? A Field experiment on labor market discrimination. The American Economic
Review, 94(4), 991–1013. https://doi.org/10.1257/0002828042002561
Bhaskar, R. (2010). Reclaiming reality: A critical introduction to contemporary philosophy.
Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203843314
Bhui, K., Dinos, S., Galant-Miecznikowska, M., De Jongh, B., & Stansfeld, S. (2016).
Perceptions of work stress causes and effective interventions in employees working in
public, private and non-governmental organisations: A qualitative study. BJPsych
Bulletin, 40(6), 318–325. https://doi.org/10.1192/pb.bp.115.050823
Bianchi, R., Truchot, D., Laurent, E., Brisson, R., & Schonfeld, I. S. (2014). Is burnout solely
job-related? A critical comment. The Journal of Psychology, 55(4), 357–361. https://doi-
org.libproxy1.usc.edu/10.1111/sjop.12119
Birt, L., Scott, S., Cavers, D., Campbell, C., & Walter, F. (2016). Member checking. Qualitative
Health Research, 26(13), 1802–1811. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732316654870
Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to
theories and methods (5th ed.). Prentice Hall.
Boll, C., Jahn, M., & Lagemann, A. (2017). The gender lifetime earnings gap—exploring
gendered pay from the life course perspective. Journal of Income Distribution, 26(1), 1–
53. https://doi.org/10.25071/1874-6322.40355
Borgogni, L., Dello Russo, S., & Latham, G. P. (2011). The relationship of employee perceptions
of the immediate supervisor and top management with collective efficacy. Journal of
Leadership & Organizational Studies, 18(1), 5–13.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051810379799
106

Borritz, M., Christensen, K. B., Bültmann, U., Rugulies, R., Lund, T., Andersen, I., Villadsen,
E., Diderichsen, F., & Kristensen, T. S. (2010). Impact of burnout and psychosocial work
characteristics on future long-term sickness absence. Prospective results of the Danish
PUMA study among human service workers. Journal of Occupational and
Environmental Medicine, 52(10), 964–970.
https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0b013e3181f12f95
Borritz, M., Rugulies, R., Bjorner, J. B., Villadsen, E., Mikkelsen, O. A., & Kristensen, T. S.
(2006). Burnout among employees in human service work: Design and baseline findings
of the PUMA study. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 34(1), 49–58.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14034940510032275
Boskin, J. (1976). Urban racial violence in the twentieth century. Prentice Hall.
Breen, T. H. (2019). The will of the people: The revolutionary birth of America. Harvard
University Press.
Brown, A., Auguste, E., Omobhude, F., Bakana, N., & Sukhera, J. (2022). Symbolic solidarity or
virtue signaling? A critical discourse analysis of the public statements released by
academic medical organizations in the wake of the killing of George Floyd. Academic
Medicine, Publish Ahead of Print., https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000004597
Bulkeley, K., & Schredl, M. (2022). Dreams, race, and the Black Lives Matter movement:
Results of a survey of American adults. Pastoral Psychology, 71(1), 29–41.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11089-021-00986-x
Callebert, R., & Soni, R. S. (2018). A political economy of the poor people’s campaign: From
MLK and Polanyi to Trump. Sikh Formations, 15(3-4), 441–451.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17448727.2018.1528039
107

Carnahan, B. M. (2007). Act of justice: Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation and the law of
war. University Press of Kentucky. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt2jcrrq
Casad, B. J., & Bryant, W. J. (2016). Addressing stereotype threat is critical to diversity and
inclusion in organizational psychology. Frontiers in Psychology, 7(8). Advance online
publication. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00008
Casserley, T., & Megginson, D. (2009). Learning from burnout: Developing sustainable leaders
and avoiding career derailment. Routledge.
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. (2021). Tracking the COVID-19 recession’s effects on
food, housing, and employment hardships. https://www.cbpp.org/research/poverty-and-
inequality/tracking-the-covid-19-recessions-effects-on-food-housing-and
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021a). About NIOSH.
https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/about/default.html
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021b). Workplace health strategies.
https://www.cdc.gov/workplacehealthpromotion/health-strategies/index.html
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2022). Social determinants of health.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/socialdeterminants/index.html#:~:text=Social%20determin
ants%20of%20health%20(SDOH,the%20conditions%20of%20daily%20life Chang, R. S.
(2020). The 14th Amendment and Me: How I Learned Not to Give Up on the 14th
Amendment. Howard Law Journal, 64(1), 53-81.
Cheryan, S., & Markus, H. R. (2020). Masculine defaults: Identifying and mitigating hidden
cultural biases. Psychological Review, 127(6), 1022–1052.
https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000209
108

Chow, R. M., Phillips, L. T., Lowery, B. S., & Unzueta, M. M. (2021). Fighting backlash to
racial equity efforts. MIT Sloan Management Review, 62(4), 25–31.
Clinton, W. (2000). Statement on Signing the Minority Health and Health Disparities Research
and Education Act of 2000. Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents, 36(47),
2925. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A68663641/PPBE?u=usocal_main&sid=bookmark-
PPBE&xid=52cc7205
ComPsych. (2017). Three out of Five Employees Are Highly Stressed.
https://www.compsych.com/press-room/press-article?nodeId=37b20f13-6b88-400e-
9852-0f1028bd1ec1
Conspiracy in Memphis. (1999). The Economist London, 353(8150), 27.
Cooper, Y. (2017). Intersectionality. National Career Development Association.
https://www.ncda.org/aws/NCDA/pt/sd/news_article/139052/_PARENT/CC_layout_deta
ils/false
Cordes, C. L., & Dougherty, T. W. (1993). A review and an integration of research on job
burnout. Academy of Management Review, 18(4), 621. https://doi.org/10.2307/258593
Coulter, E. M. (1927). The movement for agricultural reorganization in the cotton south during
the Civil War. Agricultural History Society.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Dalaker, J., & Proctor, B. D. (2000). Poverty in the United States: 1999 (P60-210). U.S. Census
Bureau. https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2000/demo/p60-210.html
Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of
Psychology, 53(1), 109–132. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135153
109

Edwards, F., Lee, H., & Esposito, M. H. (2019). Risk of being killed by police use of force in the
United States by age, race–ethnicity, and sex. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences of the United States of America, 116(34), 16793–16798.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1821204116
Eichstaedt, J. C., Sherman, G. T., Giorgi, S., Roberts, S. O., Reynolds, M. E., Ungar, L. H., &
Guntuku, S. C. (2021). The emotional and mental health impact of the murder of George
Floyd on the US population. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the
United States of America, 118(39), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2109139118
Epperly, B., Witko, C., Strickler, R., & White, P. (2020). Rule by violence, rule by law:
Lynching, Jim Crow, and the continuing evolution of voter suppression in the U.S.
Perspectives on Politics, 18(3), 756–769. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592718003584
Estes, S. (2000). “I am a man!”: Race, masculinity, and the 1968 Memphis sanitation strike.
Labor History, 41(2), 153–170. https://doi.org/10.1080/00236560050009914
Eva, N., Robin, M., Sendjaya, S., Van Dierendonck, D., & Liden, R. C. (2019). Servant
leadership: A systematic review and call for future research. The Leadership Quarterly,
30(1), 111–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2018.07.004
Fagan, J. A., & Campbell, A. D. (2020). Race and reasonableness in police killings. Columbia
Law School Scholarship Archive. Retrieved June 21, 2022, from
https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/2656/
Farhang, S., & Katznelson, I. (2005). The southern imposition: Congress and labor in the New
Deal and fair deal. Studies in American Political Development, 19(1), 1–30.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0898588X05000015
110

Felton, J. S. (1998). Burnout as a clinical entity—Its importance in health care workers.
Occupational Medicine, 48(4), 237–250. https://doi.org/10.1093/occmed/48.4.237
Fida, R., Laschinger, H. K., & Leiter, M. P. (2018). The protective role of self-efficacy against
workplace incivility and burnout in nursing. Health Care Management Review, 43(1),
21–29. https://doi.org/10.1097/HMR.0000000000000126
Filler, L. (2017). Slavery in the United States. Routledge. https://doi-
org.libproxy1.usc.edu/10.4324/9781351306522
Fine, M. (2021). George Floyd (October 14, 1973–May 25, 2020): Make future public health
better than the past. American Journal of Public Health, 111(5), 758.
https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306239
Flanagan, R. J. (1989). Compliance and enforcement decisions under the National Labor
Relations Act. Journal of Labor Economics, 7(3), 257–280.
https://doi.org/10.1086/298208
Forsyth, C. J., & Copes, H. (2014). Klu Klux Klan. In Encyclopedia of social deviance (pp. 391–
392). SAGE Publications.
Franklin, A. J., Boyd-Franklin, N., & Kelly, S. (2006). Racism and invisibility. Journal of
Emotional Abuse, 6(2-3), 9–30. https://doi.org/10.1300/J135v06n02_02
Franklin, J. (2016). Racial microaggressions, racial battle fatigue, and racism-related stress in
higher education. Journal of Student Affairs at New York University, 12(44), 44–55.
Friedel, F. (2022). Franklin D. Roosevelt. Encyclopedia Britannica.
https://www.britannica.com/event/New-Deal
Gallagher, T. (2022). Repairing the damage done by red-lining is an uphill battle. Indianapolis
Business Journal, 42(47), 7A.
111

Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
36(1), 45–56. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3601_5
Gallup. (2017). The world’s broken workplace.
https://news.gallup.com/opinion/chairman/212045/world-broken-workplace.aspx
Gallup. (2020). Employee burnout: Causes and cures. Retrieved February 19, 2022, from
https://www.gallup.com/workplace/282659/employee-burnout-perspective-
paper.aspx?thank-you-report-form=1
Gallup. (20203). Employee burnout: The biggest myth.
https://www.gallup.com/workplace/288539/employee-burnout-biggest-myth.aspx
Gartner, A., & Riessman, F. (1974). The service society and the consumer vanguard. Harper &
Row.
Gaskin, D. J., Headen, A. E., Jr., & White-Means, S. I. (2004). Racial disparities in health and
wealth: The effects of slavery and past discrimination. The Review of Black Political
Economy, 32(3-4), 95–110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12114-005-1007-9
Gates, H. L. (2020). Stony the road: Reconstruction, white supremacy, and the rise of Jim Crow.
Penguin.
Gelinas, L., Pierce, R., Winkler, S., Cohen, I. G., Lynch, H. F., & Bierer, B. E. (2017). Using
social media as a research recruitment tool: Ethical issues and recommendations. The
American Journal of Bioethics, 17(3), 3–14.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2016.1276644
112

Golkar, A., Johansson, E., Kasahara, M., Osika, W., Perski, A., & Savic, I. (2014). The influence
of work-related chronic stress on the regulation of emotion and on functional connectivity
in the brain. PLoS One, 9(9), e104550. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0104550
Guidi, J., Lucente, M., Sonino, N., & Fava, G. (2020). Allostatic load and its impact on health: A
systematic review. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 90(1), 11–27.
https://doi.org/10.1159/000510696
Hall, M. R. (2015). The negro traveller’s guide to a Jim Crow South: Negotiating racialized
landscapes during a dark period in United States cultural history, 1936–1967.
Postcolonial Studies, 17(3), 307–319. https://doi.org/10.1080/13688790.2014.987898
Harrison, J. (2001). The lawfulness of the reconstruction amendments. The University of
Chicago Law Review. University of Chicago. Law School, 68(2), 375.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1600377
Harvard Law Review Association. (1965). The Civil Rights Act of 1964. Harvard Law Review,
78(3), 684–696. https://doi.org/10.2307/1339128
Harvard Law Review Association. (2013). Title V. II - employer liability for supervisor
harassment. Harvard Law Review, 127(1), 389+.
https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A352041325/UHIC?u=usocal_main&sid=bookmark-
UHIC&xid=ecc489c3
Hassler, W. W., & Weber, J. (2021). American Civil War. Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved
March 25, 2022, from https://www.britannica.com/event/American-Civil-War#ref229867
Higgins, J. (2017). Addressing burnout in higher ed professionals of color. Presence.
http://www.presence.io/blog/addressing-burnout-in-poc-higher-ed-professionals/
113

Hoffarth, M. J. (2017). The making of burnout: From social change to self-awareness in the
postwar Unites States, 1970-82. History of the Human Sciences, 30(5), 30–45.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0952695117724929
Hutchinson, A. (2020). People are spending 20% more time in apps during the COVID-19
lockdowns. Social Media Today.
Jackson, K. T. (1987). Crabgrass frontier: The suburbanization of the United States. Oxford
University Press.
Jim Crow Museum. (2022). What was Jim Crow. Ferris State University. Retrieved March 26,
2022, from https://www.ferris.edu/HTMLS/news/jimcrow/what.htm
Johnson, J. (2022). Worldwide digital population as of January 2022. Statistas.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/262966/number-of-internet-users-in-selected-
countries/
Jones, M. S., Masur, K., Masur, L., Oakes, J., & Sinha, M. (2013). Historians’ forum: The
emancipation proclamation. Civil War History, 59(1), 7–31.
https://doi.org/10.1353/cwh.2013.0009
Josefak, L. M. (2017, October 18). The right-to-work movement. Long Island Business News.
https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A511107338/ITBC?u=usocal_main&sid=bookmark-
ITBC&xid=362c95e0
Kahill, S. (1988). Symptoms of professional burnout: A review of the empirical evidence.
Canadian Psychology, 29(3), 284–297. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0079772
Kang, J. (2005). Trojan horses of race. Harvard Law Review, 118(5), 1489–1593.
https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A131133576/UHIC?u=usocal_main&sid=bookmark-
UHIC&xid=bb02d3a9
114

Kania, J., Williams, J., Schmitz, P., Brady, S., Kramer, M., & Juster, J. S. (2022). Centering
equity in collective impact. Policy & Practice, 80(2), 12–19.
Kanter, B., Sherman, A., & Le, V. (2016). The happy, healthy nonprofit: Strategies for impact
without burnout. John Wiley & Sons.
https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/socal/detail.action?docID=4694622
Karasek, R., Baker, D., Marxer, F., Ahlbom, A., & Theorell, T. (1981). Job decision latitude, job
demands, and cardiovascular disease: A prospective study of Swedish men. American
Journal of Public Health, 71(7), 694–705. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.71.7.694
Karasek, R. A. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications for job
redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(2), 285. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392498
Karasek, R. A., & Theorell, T. (1990). Healthy work: stress, productivity, and the reconstruction
of working life. Basic Books.
Kennedy, S. (1959). Jim Crow guide: The way it was. Florida Atlantic University.
Kim, S., & Wang, J. (2018). The role of job demands–resources (JDR) between service workers’
emotional labor and burnout: New directions for labor policy at local government.
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(12), 2894.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15122894
Klarman, M. J. (2007). Unfinished Business: Racial Equality in American History. Virginia Law
Review, 93, 249–263.
Kramer, J., Rubin, A., Coster, W., Helmuth, E., Hermos, J., Rosenbloom, D., Moed, R., Dooley,
M., Kao, Y., Liljenquist, K., Brief, D., Enggasser, J., Keane, T., Roy, M., & Lachowicz,
M. (2014). Strategies to address participant misrepresentation for eligibility in web-based
115

research. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 23(1), 120–129.
https://doi.org/10.1002/mpr.1415
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice,
41(4), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Ksinan Jiskrova, G. (2022). Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the workforce: From
psychological distress to the great resignation. Journal of Epidemiology and Community
Health, 76, 525–526. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech-2022-
218826
Kushner, J. A. (1981). Apartheid in America: A historical and legal analysis of contemporary
racial segregation in the United States. Michigan Law Review, 79(4), 856.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1288314
Lacagnina, S. (2019). Epigenetics. American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, 13(2), 165–169.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1559827618817247
Landsbergis, P. A., Schnall, P. L., & Dobson, M. (2018). The workplace and cardiovascular
disease. In P. Schnall, M. Dobson, E. Rosskam, & R. Elling (Eds.), Unhealthy work (1st
ed., pp. 89–111). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315223421-8
Larue, B. (2020). Labor issues and COVID-19. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics,
68, 231–237. https://doi.org/10.1111/cjag.12233
Leiter, M. (1991). The dream denied: Professional burnout and the constraints of human service
organizations. Canadian Psychology, 32(4), 547–558. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0079040
Levanon, G. (2021). 2022 salary increase budgets are the highest since 2008. The Conference
Board. https://www.conference-board.org/blog/labor-markets/2022-salary-increase-
budgets
116

Lewis, P. A. (2010). The democratic partisan militia and the Black peril: The Kentucky militia,
racial violence, and the fifteenth Amendment, 1870-1873. Civil War History, 56(2), 145–
174. https://doi.org/10.1353/cwh.0.0147
Littlejohn, E. J. (2018). American Law, Slaves, and Freedmen 1619-1860. Journal of Law and
Society, 8(1), 1–17.
Lovejoy, M., Kelly, E. L., Kubzansky, L. D., & Berkman, L. F. (2021). Work redesign for the
21st century: Promising strategies for enhancing worker well-being. American Journal of
Public Health, 111(10), 1787–1795. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306283
Lucas, R., Jr. (2018). What was the Industrial Revolution? Journal of Human Capital, 12(2),
182–203. https://doi.org/10.1086/697243
Madison, D. S. (2011). Critical ethnography: Method, ethics, and performance. Sage.
Mahoney, D. J. (1986). Economic Opportunity Act 78 Stat. 580 (1964). Encyclopedia of the
American Constitution, 2, 843.
Mahoney, D. J. (2000). Economic Opportunity Act 78 Stat. 580 (1964). Encyclopedia of the
American Constitution, 2(2), 843.
https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/CX3425000795/GVRL?u=usocal_main&sid=bookmark-
GVRL&xid=1945475b
Marks, L. R., Yeoward, J., Fickling, M., & Tate, K. (2020). The role of racial microaggressions
and bicultural self-efficacy on work volition in racially diverse adults. Journal of Career
Development, 49(2), 311–325. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894845320949706
Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1981). The measurement of experienced burnout. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 2(2), 99–113. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030020205
117

Maslach, C., Jackson, S. E., & Leiter, M. P. (1996). Maslach Burnout Inventory manual (3rd
ed.). Consulting Psychologists Press.
Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job Burnout. Annual Review of
Psychology, 52, 397–422. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.397
Massey, D. S. (1990). American apartheid: Segregation and the making of the underclass.
American Journal of Sociology, 96(2), 329–357. https://doi.org/10.1086/229532
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach: An interactive
approach. Sage.
Mayberry, R. M., Mili, F., & Ofili, E. (2000). Racial and ethnic differences in access to medical
care. Medical Care Research and Review: MCRR, 57(1_suppl), 108–145.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1077558700057001S06
McAndrews, L. J. (2018). Promoting the poor: Catholic leaders and the Economic Opportunity
Act of 1964. The Catholic Historical Review, 104(2), 298–321.
https://doi.org/10.1353/cat.2018.0027
McGee, H. M., & Johnson, D. A. (2015). Performance motivation as the behaviorist views it.
Performance Improvement, 54(4), 15–21. https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.21472
McKinsey & Company. (2020, September 30). Women in the workplace 2020.
https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/diversity-and-inclusion/women-in-the-
workplace
McNamara, C. L., McKee, M., & Stuckler, D. (2021). Precarious employment and health in the
context of COVID-19: A rapid scoping umbrella review. European Journal of Public
Health, 31(4, Supplement_4), iv40–iv49. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckab159
118

Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. John Wiley & Sons.
Miah, M. (2012). Rolling back Reconstruction: Attacking the 14th & 15th Amendments. Against
the Current, 2(3), 2–3,14.
Milloy, J., & Sangster, J. (Eds.). (2020). Violence of work: New essays in Canadian and US
labour history. University of Toronto Press. https://doi.org/10.3138/9781487530679
Milner, A., Witt, K., Maheen, H., & LaMontagne, A. (2017). Access to means of suicide,
occupation and the risk of suicide: A national study over 12 years of coronial data. BMC
Psychiatry, 17(1), 125. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-017-
1288-0
Mir, R., & Zanoni, P. (2020). Black Lives Matter: Organization recommits to racial justice.
Organization, 28(1), 3–7. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508420966740
Mulhere, K. (2018, February 27). Women need one more degree than men to earn the same
average salary. Money. https://money.com/gender-pay-gap-college-degrees/
Mullangi, S., & Jagsi, R. (2019). Imposter syndrome. Journal of the American Medical
Association, 322(5), 403. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.9788
Murray, T. A., & Loyd, V. (2021). Advancing racial justice and diversity through equity and
inclusion. The Journal of Nursing Education, 60(10), 543–544.
https://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20210908-01
Murthy, V. (2022). The U.S. surgeon general’s framework for workplace mental health & well-
being. U.S. Public Health Service Surgeon General of the United States.
Myrdal, G. (2017). An American dilemma: The Negro problem and modern democracy.
Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315082400
119

National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. (2022). Legislative milestones.
https://naacp.org/find-resources/history-explained/legislative-milestones
National Center for Charitable Statistics. (2020). The nonprofit sector in brief 2019. Retrieved
March 3, 2022, from https://nccs.urban.org/publication/nonprofit-sector-brief-2019
National Center for Charitable Statistics. (2020). The nonprofit sector in brief. Urban Institute.
https://nccs.urban.org/project/nonprofit-sector-brief
National Council of Nonprofits. (2020). What is a “nonprofit”?
https://www.councilofnonprofits.org/what-is-a-nonprofit
National Council of Nonprofits. (2021). The Scope and Impact of Nonprofit Workforce
Shortages. https://www.councilofnonprofits.org/sites/default/files/documents/nonprofit-
workforce-shortages-report.pdf
Newburn, T. (2021). The causes and consequences of urban riot and unrest. Annual Review of
Criminology, 4(1), 53–73. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-criminol-061020-124931
Nonprofit Hub. (2017). A brief history of nonprofit organizations (And what we can learn).
https://nonprofithub.org/a-brief-history-of-nonprofit-organizations/
Northouse, P. G. (2018). Leadership: Theory and practice. SAGE Publications.
Occupational Safety and Health Administration. (n.d.). Workplace violence - Prevention
programs. U. S. Department of Labor Retrieved January 10, 2023, from
https://www.osha.gov/workplace-violence/prevention-programs
Odlum, M., Moise, N., Kronish, I. M., Broadwell, P., Alcántara, C., Davis, N. J., Cheung, Y. K.,
Perotte, A., & Yoon, S. (2020). Trends in poor health indicators among Black and
Hispanic middle-aged and older adults in the United States, 1999-2018. JAMA Network
Open, 3(11), e2025134. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.25134
120

Office of the Law Revision Counsel of the United States House of Representatives. (2022). Fair
Labor Standards. In Title 29—Labor (pp. 201-250).
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title29-
section201&num=0&edition=prelim
Okechukwu, C. A., Souza, K., Davis, K. D., & De Castro, A. B. (2013). Discrimination,
harassment, abuse, and bullying in the workplace: Contribution of workplace injustice to
occupational health disparities. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 57(5), 573–
586. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.22221
Okri, B. (2021). ‘I can’t breathe’ Why George Floyd’s Words Reverberate Across the World.
Journal of Transnational American Studies, 12(1), 45–47.
https://doi.org/10.5070/T812154907
Ong, A. D., & Burrow, A. L. (2017). Microaggressions and daily experience. Perspectives on
Psychological Science, 12(1), 173–175. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691616664505
Perea, J. F. (2010). The echoes of slavery: Recognizing the racist origins of the agricultural and
domestic worker exclusion from the National Labor Relations Act. Ohio State Law
Journal, 72(1), 95–. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1646496
Pettijohn, S. J., Boris, E. T., De Vita, C. J., & Fyffe, S. D. (2013). Nonprofit-government
contracts and grants: Findings from the 2013 national survey. Urban Institute.
https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/24231/412962-Nonprofit-
Government-Contracts-and-Grants-Findings-from-the-National-Survey.PDF
Petts, R., Carlson, D. L., & Pepin, J. R. (2021). A gendered pandemic: Childcare,
homeschooling, and parents’ employment during COVID-19. Gender, Work and
Organization, 28(S2), 515–534. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12614
121

Pfeffer, J. (2018). Dying for a paycheck: How modern management harms employee health and
company performance—and what we can do about it. HarperBusiness.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667–686.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.667
Popescu, I., Duffy, E., Mendelsohn, J., & Escarce, J. J. (2018). Racial residential segregation,
socioeconomic disparities, and the White-Black survival gap. PLoS One, 13(2),
e0193222. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193222
Posner, G. (1999, December 13). MLK Jr.: The killing, the family; despite recent court findings,
the conspiracy theory is not credible. The Washington Post.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPcap/1999-12/13/054r-121399-idx.html
Pugh, S. D., Groth, M., & Hennig-Thurau, T. (2011). Willing and able to fake emotions: A closer
examination of the link between emotional dissonance and employee well-being. The
Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(2), 377–390. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021395
Pusey, A. (2016). The 14th Amendment is ratified. American Bar Association, 102(7), 72.
https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A457975134/ITBC?u=usocal_main&sid=bookmark-
ITBC&xid=d3099737
Radebe, P. (2020). Derek Chauvin: Racist cop or product of a racist police Academy? Journal of
Black Studies, 52(3), 231–247. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021934720983501
Rafferty, J. P. (n.d.). The rise of the machines: Pros and cons of the Industrial Revolution.
Brittanica.com. Retrieved March 18, 2022, from https://www.britannica.com/story/the-
rise-of-the-machines-pros-and-cons-of-the-industrial-revolution
122

Reinders, R. C. (1972). Raymond Wolters, negroes and the Great Depression: The problem of
economic recovery (Westport, CONN.: Greenwood publishing Corp., 1970, $13.50). Pp.
xvii, 398. Journal of American Studies, 6(2), 222–223.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021875800001444
Retno Anggraini, F. R., Joko Siswanto, F. A.. (2019). Ethical leadership for internal auditor: An
examination of social cognitive theory. Jurnal Akuntansi dan Keuangan Indonesia, 16(2),
165-179. https://doi.org/10.21002/jaki.2019.09
Riggs, T. (2015). Economic Opportunity Act (1964). Gale Encyclopedia of U.S. Economy and
History, 1(2), 361–364.
https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/CX3611000265/GPS?u=usocal_main&sid=bookmark-
GPS&xid=f4291046
Ritchie, D. (2016). War, religion and anti-slavery ideology: Isaac Nelson’s radical abolitionist
examination of the American Civil War. Historical Research, 89(246), 799–823.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2281.12134
Rosza, M. (2016, October 14). Armed Donald Trump supporters caught menacing democratic
campaign office. Salon. https://www.salon.com/2016/10/14/armed-donald-trump-
supporters-caught-menacing-democratic-campaign-office/
Rubio, P. F. (2020). Undelivered: From the great postal strike of 1970 to the manufactured crisis
of the U.S. postal service. UNC Press Books.
https://doi.org/10.5149/northcarolina/9781469655468.001.0001
Rugemer, E. B. (2009). Explaining the causes of the American Civil War, 1787–1861. Reviews
in American History, 37(1), 56–68. https://doi.org/10.1353/rah.0.0069
123

Rushdy, A. H. (2012). American lynching. Yale University Press.
https://doi.org/10.12987/yale/9780300181388.001.0001
Sabbath, E. L. (2019). The workplace, social work, and social justice: Framing an emerging
research and practice agenda. Social Work, 64(4), 293–300.
https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/swz031
Salberg, J., & Grand, S. (Eds.). (2016). Wounds of history: Repair and resilience in the trans-
generational transmission of trauma. Taylor & Francis.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315751061
Salmela-Aro, K., & Upadyaya, K. (2018). Role of demands-resources in work engagement and
burnout in different career stages. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 108, 190–200.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2018.08.002
Samo, A. H., Qazi, S. W., & Buriro, W. M. (2019). Labelling them is negating them.
Management Research Review, 42(3), 391–411. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-04-2018-
0170
Santoro, W. A. (2002). The civil rights movement’s struggle for fair employment: A “Dramatic
events-conventional politics” Model. Social Forces, 81(1), 177–206.
https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.2002.0059
Satcher, D. (2001). Mental health: Culture, race, and ethnicity: A supplement to mental health:
A report of the surgeon general. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
https://doi.org/10.13016/jela-ckxw
Saunders, M. N., Thornhill, A., & Lewis, P. (2019). Research methods for business students.
Pearson.
124

Savic, I. (2013). Structural changes of the brain in relation to occupational stress. Cerebral
Cortex, 25(6), 1554–1564. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bht348
Schatteman, A. (2020, May 29). The nonprofit sector is an economic engine. Center for
Nonprofit and NGO Studies. https://nngo.news.niu.edu/2020/05/28/the-nonprofit-sector-
is-an-economic-engine/
Schaufeli, W., & Enzmann, D. (2020). The burnout companion to study and practice: A critical
analysis. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003062745
Schein, E. H. (2017). Organizational culture and leadership (5th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Schunk, D. H., & Usher, E. L. (2019). Social cognitive theory and motivation. The Oxford
Handbook of Human Motivation (pp. 9–26).
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190666453.013.2
Schwarzer, R. (Ed.). (2014). Self-efficacy: Thought control of action. Taylor & Francis.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315800820
Shackel, P. A. (2017). Transgenerational impact of structural violence: Epigenetics and the
legacy of anthracite coal. International Journal of Historical Archaeology, 22(4), 865–
882. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10761-017-0451-0
Shrider, E. A., Kollar, M., Chen, F., & Semega, J. (2021). Income and Poverty in the United
States: 2020. U.S. Census Bureau.
https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2021/demo/p60-273.html
Siegrist, J., & Klein, D. (1990). Occupational stress and cardiovascular reactivity in blue-collar
workers. Work and Stress, 4(4), 295–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678379008256992
125

Siegrist, J., & Wahrendorf, M. (Eds.), (2016). Work stress and health in a globalized economy:
The model of effort-reward imbalance. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-
32937-6
Sijbom, R. B., Lang, J. W., & Anseel, F. (2018). Leaders’ achievement goals predict employee
burnout above and beyond employees’ own achievement goals. Journal of Personality,
87(3), 702–714. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12427
Silver, E., & McAvoy, J. (1987). The National Labor Relations Act at the Crossroads. Fordham
Law Review, 56(2), 181–208.
Smith, S. R., & Lipsky, M. (2009). Nonprofits for hire: The welfare state in the age of
contracting. Harvard University Press.
Stajkovic, A. D., & Luthans, F. (1998). Self-efficacy and work-related performance: A meta-
analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 124(2), 240–261. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-
2909.124.2.240
Stein, N. (1995). Affirmative action and the persistence of racism. Crime and Social Justice
Associates, 22(3), 28+.
https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?p=PPBE&u=usocal_main&id=GALE|A18285711&v=2.1&it
=r&sid=bookmark-PPBE&asid=aa16c816
Strub, C. (2020, February 10). 45% of Nonprofit Employees to Seek New Jobs By 2025: Report.
Forbes.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/chrisstrub/2020/02/10/nonprofithr/?sh=4870f33d15ca
Sull, D., Sull, C., & Zweig, B. (2022). Toxic culture is driving the great resignation. MIT Sloan
Management Review, 63(2), 1–9.
126

Sundstrom, W. A. (1995). Reviewed work: Southern Labor and Black Civil Rights: Organizing
Memphis Workers. by Michael K. Honey. The Journal of Economic History, 55(1), 193–
195. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022050700040894
Theofanidis, D., & Fountouki, A. (2019). Limitations and delimitations. Perioperative Nursing,
7(3), 155–162. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2552022
Thompson, K. (2016, August 16). What percentage of your life will you spend at work?
ReviseSociology. https://revisesociology.com/2016/08/16/percentage-life-work/
Threlkeld, K. (2021, March 11). Employee burnout report: COVID-19’s impact and 3 strategies
to curb it. Indeed. https://www.indeed.com/lead/preventing-employee-burnout-report
Thurber, J. A. (2011). Obama in office. Routledge.
Toosi, N. R., Layous, K., & Reevy, G. M. (2021). Recognizing racism in George Floyd’s death.
Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy (ASAP), 21(1), 1184–1201.
https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12282
United for ALICE. (2021, October). The pandemic divide: An ALICE analysis of national
COVID surveys. Retrieved April 22, 2022, from https://unitedforalice.org/national-
reports
Urban Institute. (2017). Trump’s budget deals a double whammy to people struggling to gain a
foothold in today’s economy. www.urban.org. https://www.urban.org/urban-wire/trumps-
budget-deals-double-whammy-people-struggling-gain-foothold-todays-economy
Urban Institute. (2020). Studying the economic security and well-being of low-income working
families. https://www.urban.org/policy-centers/cross-center-initiatives/low-income-
working-families/studying-economic-security-and-well-being-low-income-working-
families
127

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2021, December 9). Work experience summary. Retrieved
March 3, 2022, from https://www.bls.gov/news.release/work.nr0.htm
U.S. Census Bureau. (n.d.). 1930 census: Volume 4. Occupations, by states. Reports by states,
giving statistics for cities of 25,000 or more.
https://www.census.gov/library/publications/1933/dec/1930a-vol-04-occupations.html
U.S. Census Bureau. (2022). Census Bureau Data. https://data.census.gov/.
https://data.census.gov/
U.S. Department of Agriculture. (1935). Census of agriculture historical archive.
https://agcensus.library.cornell.edu/wp-content/uploads/1935-
Population_Dwellings_and_Labor_on_Farms_Years_on_Farm_and_Part-
Time_Work_Off_Farm-
TABLES_FOR_THE_UNITED_STATES_AND_SOUTHERN_STATES-1532-Table-
02.pdf
U.S. Department of Labor. (n.d.). About OSHA. Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
Retrieved February 27, 2022, from https://www.osha.gov/aboutosha
U.S. Department of Labor. (n.d.). Good jobs principles. Retrieved December 28, 2022, from
https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/goodjobs/Good-Jobs-Summit-Principles-
Factsheet.pdf
U.S. Department of Labor. (2021). Usual Weekly Earnings of Wage and Salary Workers Fourth
Quarter 2020. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/wkyeng.pdf
128

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (2022). Job patterns for minorities and
women in private industry (EEO-1). Retrieved May 24, 2022, from
https://www.eeoc.gov/statistics/employment/jobpatterns/eeo1#Explore
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (n.d.). Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of
1964. Retrieved February 16, 2022, from https://www.eeoc.gov/statutes/title-vii-civil-
rights-act-1964
U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. (2018). The Declaration of Independence:
A history. https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-history
Wallace, W. (2021). American Revolution. Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved March 22, 2022,
from https://www.britannica.com/event/American-Revolution
Waters, T., Marzano, R. J., & McNulty, B. (n.d.). Balanced leadership: What 30 Years of
research tells us about the effect of leadership on student achievement [A Working
Paper]. Mid-Continent Regional Educational Lab.
http://www.mcrel.org/PDF/LeadershipOrganizationDevelopment/5031RR_BalancedLead
ership.pdf
Weber, A., & Jaekel-Reinhard, A. (2000). Burnout syndrome: A disease of modern societies?
Occupational Medicine, 50(7), 512–517. https://doi.org/10.1093/occmed/50.7.512
West, C. P., Dyrbye, L. N., Satele, D. V., Sloan, J. A., & Shanafelt, T. D. (2012). Concurrent
validity of single-item measures of emotional exhaustion and depersonalization in
burnout assessment. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 27(11), 1445–1452.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-012-2015-7
White, A. (2017). Tax reform Act of 1969. Learning to Give.
https://www.learningtogive.org/resources/tax-reform-act-1969
129

The White House. (2021, January 20). The Constitution. https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-
white-house/our-government/the-constitution/
Whitlinger, C., & Fretwell, J. (2019). Political assassination and social movement outcomes:
Martin Luther King and the Memphis sanitation workers’ strike. Sociological
Perspectives, 62(4), 455–474. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731121419842116
Williams, J. B. (2018). Accountability as a Debiasing Strategy: Testing the Effect of Racial
Diversity in Employment Committees. Iowa Law Review, 103(4), 1593–1638.
Willie, C. V., Rieker, P. P., Kramer, B. M., & Brown, B. S. (Eds.). (2016). Mental health, racism
and sexism. Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315041254
Wiltse, K. T. (1964). Book review: In the midst of plenty: The poor in America. Social
Casework, 45(9), 550. https://doi.org/10.1177/104438946404500909
Winbush, R. A. (2015). Malcolm X: A Living Icon in His Own Words [Review of The
Iconography of Malcolm X; The Diary of Malcolm X, El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz, 1964,
by Graeme Abernethy & Herb Boyd and Ilyasah Al-Shabazz, eds.]. Journal of African
American History, 100(2), 290–293. https://doi.org/10.5323/jafriamerhist.100.2.0290
The Work and Well-Being Initiative. (n.d.). Work design principle #2: Tame excessive work
demands. Retrieved January 10, 2023, from https://workwellbeinginitiative.org/module-
3-improving-workplace-social-relationships
World Health Organization. (2017). Protecting workers’ health. https://www.who.int/news-
room/fact-sheets/detail/protecting-workers’-health
World Health Organization. (2019, May 28). Burn-out an ‘occupational phenomenon’:
International classification of diseases.
130

World Health Organization. (2020). Top ten causes of death. who.int. Retrieved March 1, 2022,
from https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/the-top-10-causes-of-death
Wright, A. N. (2008). Labour, leisure, poverty and protest: The 1968 poor people’s campaign as
a case study. Leisure Studies, 27(4), 443–458.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02614360802456964
Xu, T., Magnusson Hanson, L. L., Lange, T., Starkopf, L., Westerlund, H., Madsen, I. E. H.,
Rugulies, R., Pentti, J., Stenholm, S., Vahtera, J., Hansen, Å. M., Virtanen, M., Kivimäki,
M., & Rod, N. H. (2019). Workplace bullying and workplace violence as risk factors for
cardiovascular disease: A multi-cohort study. European Heart Journal, 40(14), 1124–
1134. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehy683
Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (2011). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement:
Theory, research, and practice. Springer.
Zoeckler, J. M. (2017). Occupational stress among home healthcare workers: Integrating worker
and agency-level factors. New Solutions, 27(4), 524–542.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1048291117742678

131

Appendix: Interview Protocol
I’d like to thank you for taking the time to meet with me. I truly appreciate your
participation. I wanted to recap the purpose of our time together. As covered in the introduction
email, I am currently a doctoral candidate at the University of Southern California, conducting a
study about workplace burnout of employees of color in the nonprofit sector.
The study aims to increase the knowledge of employees and organizational leaders about
the perceived causes and consequences of workplace burnout, as well as recommendations to
address the causes. The interview will take about an hour, and your answers will remain
confidential be assured that the published study will not include your name or any identifying
information.
There will be four parts to this interview: first, we will discuss some general background
information, and the second, third and fourth parts will cover your experiences before, during,
and after your work shift, respectfully. I want you to know that you have the right to end this
interview at any time. Do you have any questions?
Finally, do I have your permission to record this meeting to ensure accurate note-taking?
Great, thank you! Are you ready to get started? Ok, let’s begin with Part 1: your general
background information.

132

Table A1
Interview Protocol
Interview questions Potential probes RQ Key concept
addressed
Which city and state do you reside
in?

Which race do you identify with?
Which gender do you identify with?
How old are you?
What is your annual income?
What’s your highest level of
education?
If you have a college degree,
which field?

How many jobs do you currently
have?
Full-time
Part-time

If you have more than one job, let’s
focus on the one you spend the most
of your time at. Please describe
your job role?
What are your core
responsibilities?
What were you hired for?

What is your work schedule (days,
hours)?

What is your definition of stress? 1 Personal factors
How do you know when you are
stressed?
1 Personal factors
Now we will begin Part 3, focusing on your experiences before you report to work.
Describe your general feeling the
night before you go to work?
What thoughts go through
your mind?
What physical feelings do
you experience?
Which emotions are most
prominent?
2 Behavioral
factors
What is your routine in the morning
to get ready for work?
2 Personal factors
Describe your commute to work? Private or public 2 Personal factors
133

Interview questions Potential probes RQ Key concept
addressed
transportation
Do you listen to music?
Talk on the phone?
Do you commute alone?
How long is your commute?
Now, we will begin Part 3 and we will focus on your experiences at work.
Describe your general feeling when
you arrive at work?
What thoughts go through
your mind?
b. What physical feelings do
you experience?
c. Which emotions are most
prominent?
2 Behavioral
factors
Describe your relationships with your
coworkers and your immediate
supervisor.
Is it friendly, supportive or
contentious?
1 Environmental
factors
Tell me about a time during your
workday that you have experienced
a stressful situation?

What happened?
What did you do to reduce
your stress?
Did your coworkers or
supervisor assist you, in
anyway?
1, 2 Environmental
factors
Do you have any workplace stressors
that you can specifically identify?
How do you believe your
organization contributes to
your stress?
1 Environmental
factors
Could you specifically identify the
consequences of you being stressed
at work?
How does it impact your
productivity?
How does it affect your job
satisfaction?
Do you feel that you are able
to stay focused and
attentive?
2 Environmental
factors
How often have you called out of
work this month due to workplace
stress?
2 Environmental
factors
Describe how your organization
currently supports you in reducing
your workplace stress?
Have they trained you on
effective stress-reducing
strategies?
3 Environmental
factors
134

Interview questions Potential probes RQ Key concept
addressed
What could your organization do to
support you in reducing your stress
in the moment?
3 Environmental
factors
Describe what you believe your
organization can do overall to
address the causes of your stress?
3 Personal factors
How often would you say that you
implement strategies to reduce your
stress while at work?
In a day?
In a week?
2 Behavioral
factors
Which stress relieving strategies work
best for you?

Where did you learn them?
Why these strategies versus
others?
2 Personal factors
Tell me about your thoughts on the
value of stress relieving strategies?

Does it help? If so, how?
Do you feel any better?
Are you better able to focus
on the task at hand?
2 Personal factors
Do you feel that you have the skills to
properly reduce your stress?
2 Behavioral
factors
Have you discussed your workplace
stress with anyone at work? If so,
what transpired afterwards?
Leadership or coworkers
Was the problem addressed?
2 Environmental
factors
How do you feel at the end of your
work shift?
What thoughts go through
your mind?
What physical feelings do
you experience?
Which emotions are most
prominent?
2 Behavioral
factors
Now, we will begin Part 4, and we will focus on your experiences after work.
What is your routine when you arrive
home from work?
2 Behavioral
factors
How do you reflect on your workday
and what are the themes that
emerge?
Reflect when you go to bed,
take a shower, prepare
dinner
What are your common
feelings, or thoughts?
2 Personal factors
135

Interview questions Potential probes RQ Key concept
addressed
Are you considering leaving your
current role within the next year? If
so, why?

What will the new job role
or organization have that
the current one doesn’t?
2 Personal factors

Thank you so much for sharing your experiences with me today! If I find myself with
follow-up questions, could I reconnect with you via email? I will be emailing you a copy of the
transcription for this interview and ask that you respond to the email confirming the accuracy of
the notes. If the notes do not accurately capture your responses, please submit the correction via
email.
Also, please remember that if any question triggers any ill feelings that you may need to
speak to someone about, please call your local Lifeline at 211 to be connected to someone, asap.
I really appreciate your transparency and willingness to share as your perspective is extremely
helpful to this study! Again, thank you for your participation!

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Burnout of female executive directors in nonprofit organizations during COVID-19

PDF

Exploring barriers to growth for Latina entrepreneurs

PDF

Centering underrepresented voices: the underrepresentation of BIPOC professionals in the nonprofit sector

PDF

Workplace neurodiverse equity

PDF

Understanding burnout in non-denominational clergy: a social cognitive approach

PDF

Managers’ roles in supporting employee engagement in Jewish nonprofit organizations

PDF

Women of color in higher education leadership: opportunities to improve representation

PDF

Workplace bullying of women leaders in the United States

PDF

An analysis of the selection and training of guiding teachers in an urban teacher education program

PDF

"After a neutral and impartial investigation...": implicit bias in internal workplace investigations

PDF

The role of organizational leaders in creating sustainable diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in the workplace

PDF

The tracking effect: tracking and the impact on self-efficacy in middle school students

PDF

Investigating the personal and organizational factors influencing the departure of female physicians from healthcare leadership roles

PDF

Faculty’s influence on underrepresented minority (URM) undergraduate retention

PDF

Impact of tenure on the professional motivation of civil servants

PDF

Transformational leadership theory aligned-practices and social workers' well-being: an exploratory study of leadership practices in the context of stress and job burnout

PDF

Black women in tech: examining experiences in tech industry workplaces

PDF

An intersectional examination of inequity in Black Bahamian men’s employment experience: a critical theory and social cognitive perspective

PDF

Promoting well-being amid a global pandemic: evaluating the impact on nonprofit employees

PDF

Universal algebra: an evaluation

Asset Metadata

Creator Cooper, Wanda I. (author)

Core Title Understanding workplace burnout in the nonprofit sector

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2023-05

Publication Date 03/14/2023

Defense Date 02/23/2023

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag Burnout,employees of color,equity,lack of resources,managerial practices,nonprofit,OAI-PMH Harvest,social cognitive theory,workplace stress

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Mora-Flores, Eugenia (committee chair), Jones, Brandi P. (committee member), Kaplan, Sandra (committee member)

Creator Email mrzcooper2017@gmail.com,wicooper@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC112839095

Unique identifier UC112839095

Identifier etd-CooperWand-11502.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-CooperWand-11502

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Cooper, Wanda I.

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20230320-usctheses-batch-1010 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu