Bergen Burnout Inventory: reliability and validity among Finnish and Estonian managers

  • Katariina Salmela-AroEmail author
  • Johanna Rantanen
  • Katriina Hyvönen
  • Kati Tilleman
  • Taru Feldt
Original Article



This study introduces a short measure for burnout (the Bergen Burnout Inventory, BBI) and examines its validity and reliability among managers in Finland and Estonia by means of confirmatory factor analysis. Burnout comprises three dimensions: (1) exhaustion at work (emotional component), (2) cynicism toward the meaning of work (cognitive component), and (3) the sense of inadequacy at work (behavioral component).


A total of 742 young Finnish managers and 414 Estonian managers responded to burnout (BBI) and effort–reward imbalance (ERI) scales.


The results showed that the three-factor solution for burnout, compared to the one- or two-factor solutions, fitted the data best and gave the best reliability indices. The three theoretically derived dimensions of burnout were closely related but separate constructs. The BBI also had high item scale reliabilities among the managers in both countries. Finally, the effort–reward imbalance (ERI) model and the three dimensions of burnout had similar associations among Finnish and Estonian managers providing evidence for the concurrent validity of the BBI. That is, high effort was related to high exhaustion and high cynicism. High reward was related to low exhaustion, but especially to low cynicism and low inadequacy. High overcommitment was related particularly to high exhaustion, but also to high cynicism and high inadequacy.


The BBI can be used for the measurement of burnout in both research and occupational health contexts.


Burnout Managers Effort–reward imbalance 



The study has been supported by The Finnish Work Environment Fund (grant no. 101135 105363) and Estonian Business School.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. Ahola K, Hakanen J (2007) Job strain, burnout and depressive affects: a prospective study among dentists. J Affect Disord 103:103–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bollen KA (1989) Structural equations with latent variables. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Calnan M, Wainwright D, Almond S (2000) Job strain, effort-reward imbalance and mental distress: a study of occupations in general medical practice. Work Stress 14:297–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Calnan M, Wadsworth E, May M, Smith A, Wainwright D (2004) Job strain, effort-reward imbalance, and stress at work: competing or complementary models? Scand J Public Health 32:84–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Casper WJ, Eby LT, Bordeaux C, Lockwood A, Lambert D (2007) A review of research methods in IO/OB work-family research. J Appl Psychol 92:28–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dai JM, Collins S, Yu HZ, Fu H (2008) Combining job stress models in predicting burnout by hierarchical multiple regressions: a cross-sectional investigation in Shanghai. J Occup Environ Med 50:785–790CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. De Jonge J, Bosma H, Peter R, Siegrist J (2000) Job strain, effort-reward imbalance and employee well-being: a large-scale cross-sectional study. Soc Sci Med 50:1317–1327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. De Jonge J, van der Linden S, Schaufeli W, Peter R, Siegrist J (2008) Factorial invariance and stability of the Effort-Reward Imbalance scales: a longitudinal analysis of two samples with different time lags. Int J Behav Med 15:62–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Feldt T, Leskinen E, Kinnunen U, Ruoppila I (2003) The stability of sense of coherence: comparing two age groups over a 5-year follow-up study. Pers Individ Dif 35:1151–1165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Feldt T, Hyvönen K, Mäkikangas A, Kinnunen U, Kokko K (2009) Development of trajectories of Finnish managers’ work ability over a 10-year follow-up period. Scand J Work Environ Health 35:37–47Google Scholar
  11. Griep RS, Rotenberg L, Vasconcellos AGG, Landsbergis P, Comaru C, Alves MGM (2009) The psychometric properties of demand-control and effort-reward imbalance scales among Brazilian nurses. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 82:1163–1172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hu L, Bentler PM (1999) Cut-off criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model 6:1–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hyvönen K, Feldt T, Salmela-Aro K, Kinnunen U, Mäkikangas A (2009) Young managers’ drive to thrive: a personal work goal approach to burnout and work engagement. J Vocat Behav 75:183–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hyvönen K, Feldt T, Tolvanen A, Kinnunen U (2010) The role of goal pursuit in the interaction between psychosocial work environment and occupational well-being. J Vocat Behav 76:406–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Inoue A, Kawakami N, Ishizaki M, Shimazu A, Tsuchiya M, Tabata M, Akiyama M, Kitazume A, Kuroda M (2010) Organizational justice, psychological distress, and work engagement in Japanese workers. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 83:29–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kelloway EK (1998) Using LISREL for structural equation modeling: a researcher’s guide. Sage Publications, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  17. Kinnunen U, Feldt T, Mäkikangas A (2008) Testing the effort-reward imbalance model among Finnish managers: the role of perceived organizational support. J Occup Health Psychol 13:114–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Little TD (1997) Mean and covariance structures (MACS) analyses of cross-cultural data: practical and theoretical issues. Multivar Behav Res 32:53–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Liukkonen J, Leskinen E (1999) The reliability and validity of scores from the children’s version of the perception of success questionnaire. Educ Psychol Meas 59:651–664CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lundberg U, Frankenhaeuser M (1999) Stress and workload of men and women in high-ranking positions. J Occup Health Psychol 4:142–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Maslach C, Leiter MP (1997) The truth about burnout. How organizations cause personal stress and what to do about it. Jossey-Bass Publishers, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  22. Maslach C, Schaufeli WB, Leiter MP (2001) Job burnout. Annu Rev Psychol 52:397–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. McNamara S (2000) Stress in young people: what’s new and what can we do? Continuum International Publishing group, LondonGoogle Scholar
  24. Muthén LK, Muthén BO (1998–2007) Mplus user’s guide, 5th edn. Muthén & Muthén, Los AngelesGoogle Scholar
  25. Näätänen P, Aro A, Matthiesen S, Salmela-Aro K (2003) Bergen Burnout Indicator 15. Edita, Helsinki Google Scholar
  26. Nurmi J-E, Salmela-Aro K, Keskivaara P, Näätänen P (2008) Confidence in work-related goals and feelings of exhaustion during a therapeutic intervention for burnout: a time-series approach. J Occup Organ Psychol 81:277–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Preckel D, von Känel R, Kudielka BM, Fischer JE (2005) Overcommitment to work is associated with vital exhaustion. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 78:117–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Salmela-Aro K, Nurmi J-E (2004) Motivational orientation and well-being at work: a person-oriented approach. J Chang Manag 17:471–489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Salmela-Aro K, Nurmi J-E, Näätänen P (2004) Personal projects and burnout intervention: two longitudinal interventions. Work Stress 18:208–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Schaufeli WB, Martinez I, Pinto AM, Salanova M, Bakker A (2002) Burnout and engagement in university students: a cross-national study. J Cross Cult Psychol 33(5):464–481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Schaufeli WB, Bakker AB, Salanova M (2006) The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: a cross-national study. Educ Psychol Meas 66:701–716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Siegrist J (1996) Adverse health effects of high-effort/low reward conditions. J Occup Health Psychol 1:27–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Siegrist J (2000) Place, social exchange and health: proposed sociological framework. Soc Sci Med 51:1283–1293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Siegrist J, Starke D, Chandola T, Godin I, Marmot M, Niedhammer I, Peter R (2004) The measurement of effort-reward imbalance at work: European comparisons. Soc Sci Med 58:1483–1499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Spruijt-Metz D, Spruijt RJ (1997) Worries and health in adolescence: a latent variable approach. J Youth Adolesc 26:485–501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Steiger JH (1990) Structural model evaluation and modification: an interval estimation approach. Multivar Behav Res 25:173–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Suls J (2001) Affect, stress and personality. In: Forgas JP (ed) Handbook of affect and social cognition. Lawrence Erlbaum, Matwah, pp 392–409Google Scholar
  38. Tennat C (2001) Work-related stress and depressive disorders. J Psychosom Res 51:697–704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Tsutsumi A, Kawakami N (2004) A review of empirical studies on the model of effort–reward imbalance at work: reducing occupational stress by implementing a new theory. Soc Sci Med 59:2335–2359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Van Vegchel N, De Jonge J, Bosma H, Schaufeli W (2005) Reviewing the effort-reward imbalance model: drawing up the balance of 45 studies. Soc Sci Med 60:1117–1131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Willis TA, O’Connor DB, Smith L (2008) Investigating effort-reward imbalance and work family conflict in relation to morningness–eveningness and shift work. Work Stress 22:125–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Zurlo MC, Pes D, Siegrist J (2010) Validity and reliability of the effort-reward imbalance questionnaire in a sample of 673 Italian teachers. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 83:665–674CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Katariina Salmela-Aro
    • 1
    Email author
  • Johanna Rantanen
    • 2
  • Katriina Hyvönen
    • 2
  • Kati Tilleman
    • 3
  • Taru Feldt
    • 2
  1. 1.University of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland
  2. 2.University of JyväskyläJyväskyläFinland
  3. 3.Estonian Business SchoolTallinnEstonia

Personalised recommendations