NMIMS Management Review, Special Issue on Global Markets and ...

Moore& Miceli, 1997, Mosier, 1982). Further,
different types of “workaholic” behaviour patterns
with unique antecedents and outcomes are also
likely to exist as specific to personnel and
organizations.
These dimensions of the concept of “workaholism”
put forth a necessity to understand and
conceptualize the word “workaholism”, though
understanding and conceptualizing the process by
several scholars (porter,1996; Killinger1991;
Seybold & Salomone,1994) has appeared to be
widely varied and conflicting.
Workaholism
The initial study of “workaholism” was confined to
popular magazines that pulled their readers
(Kiechel, 1989) or popular self-help books (like
Fassel, 1990, Killinger, 1991, Mchlowitch, 1980,
Oates, 1971). Despite its popular appeal, it has taken
more than three decades to bring the attention of
the scholars to define / conceptualize
“workaholism”.
Various scholars have tried to understand and
decode the word “workaholism” from different
perspectives viz, nature of behavior, work hours in
terms of classifying the nature of 'work', etc. Oates
(1971; P: 4) was the first thinker to interpret
“workaholism”. He defines a “workaholic” as a
person “whose need for work has become so
excessive that it creates noticeable disturbance or
interference with his bodily health, personal
happiness and interpersonal relationships, and
with his smooth social functioning”. Killinger (1991;
P: 6) also shared that a workaholic “is a person who
gradually becomes emotionally crippled and
addicted to control and power in a compulsive drive
to gain approval and success. Various other
researchers (Moiser, 1982; Cherrington,
1980;Spence and Robinson, 1992; Oates, 1981;
Fassel, 1990;) described different workaholic types
both with positive and negative connotations.
Along with varied definitions and
conceptualizations of “workaholism”, there is a need
to understand how workaholism contributes to
stress and anxiety among executives. There is
considerable consensus in the literature on
workaholism on the association of workaholism
and poorer psychological and physical well being. In
fact, some definitions of workaholism in the
corporate aspect are of diminished health. It is not
surprising that this relationship has received
research attention ( Burke 2001; Mosier, S.K., 1982;
Porter, G. 1996, Fassel,D,1990).
The opinions, observations and conclusions about
workaholism are both varied and conflicting. Some
writers view workaholism positively from the
organization's point of view (Korn et al, 1987;
Machlowitz, 1980; Sprankle and Ebel, 1987). Others
view it negatively (Killinger, 1991; Schaef and
Fassel, 1988; Oates, 1971). Some researchers
(Fassel 1990; Schaef and Fassel, 1988) have
suggested that organizational factors play a role in
the development and maintenance of workaholism.
Organizations reward workaholic behaviors.
Individuals who put in long working hours,
spending time on work out of office hours, are
rewarded with recognition and better career
opportunities. Organizations supporting the use of
latest technologies and developing a work culture
where extra working hours and sacrifices are seen
as requirement for success and advancement,
reinforce workaholic behavior. Such workplaces are
seen to be preferred by an increasing number of
executives and seem to be more satisfying than the
home. (Hochschild, 1997).
ISSN: 0971-1023
<strong>NMIMS</strong> <strong>Management</strong> <strong>Review</strong>
Volume XXII August 2012
Stress, Workaholism and Job Demands: A study of executives in Mumbai
97