Exploring Work Motivation and Work Burnout

When working from home started, many were happy to work remotely. Slowly many began to accept this blessing of working online as stressful. Working online has made work burnout a new issue in managing employee’s emotional illness. It became a common issue to be discussed, and it can create a situation where the performance of employees might be affected and increase the level of depression among workers in the organisation. However, this phenomenon arose when the current situation required employees to work from home since the pandemic was hit the world. Similarly, academicians are getting overwhelmed with making work from home a success and online teaching and learning. This also affects the university employees as they need to work from home, and the teaching and learning are conducted through online learning. This study aims to explore work burnout among employees by using Herzberg's theory. 82 university staff responded to the instrument. The instrument is a survey with a 5 Likert scale. It has 4 sections; section A is the demographic profile, section B looks at items for personal related burnout, section B has items for work-related burnout, and section D has items for colleague related burnout. Generally, this study found that work demotivation can be caused by personal related burnout, work burnout and also colleague related burnout. Findings bear interesting implications for work-related burnout during the times of online learning and work from home. from Home, Online Teaching, Personal Related Burnout, Work-Related Burnout, Colleague Related Burnout


Background of Study
According to Robbins et al (2010), motivation is the internal and external factors that lead to individuals engaging in goal-related behaviour. Motivation can affect individual intensity, direction, and persistence to work towards the goal (Pinder, 1998;Robbins et al. ,2010). Moody and Pesut (2006) define motivation as a value-based, psycho-biologically stimulus-driven internal impulse that activates and directs human behaviour. It will result in inherent satisfaction and accomplishment of human needs and desired goals. According to the self-determination theory, motivation is a multidimensional construct that includes motivation, extrinsic regulation, introjected regulation, identifiable regulations, and intrinsic motivation (Khairuddin et al., 2019). So, motivation can be described as a set of intrinsic and extrinsic elements that drive individuals to achieve their goals. As a result, various people will have distinct elements that can direct their behaviour to reach specific goals. Individual burnout is one of the intrinsic and extrinsic elements that can affect individual motivation and goal attainment in the context of this study.
Work burnout can be defined as a prolonged response to chronic emotional and interpersonal stressors on the job (Maslach et al., 2001). The authors described burnout based on three dimensions, which is exhaustion, cynicism, and inefficacy. The most commonly reported burnout criterion is an individual's exhaustion experience. On the other hand, depersonalisation refers to cognitive distance through indifference or cynicism when people feel exhausted or discouraged. As a result, weariness and cynicism can diminish a person's effectiveness (inefficiency). Burnout is defined by Kristensen et al (2005) as the attribution of fatigue and exhaustion to specific domains or spheres in one's life, such as work and client domain. Meanwhile, Shirom and Melamed (2006) described burnout as a psychological syndrome involving physical fatigue, cognitive weariness and emotional exhaustion resulting from continuous, unresolved stress at work. Madigan and Kim (2021) suggested three elements of burnout: exhaustion, depersonalisation and reduced accomplishment, similar to the Maslach Burnout Inventory for the general survey (Maslach et al., 2001). In general, burnout is interpreted as an individual's physical and emotional exhaustion or fatigue due to work-related stress.
Every individual will experience different levels of burnout. Some individuals see changes in the workplace (such as online teaching under COVID 19) as a positive challenge that they can handle, which can help reduce burnout levels (Daumiller et al., 2021). On the other hand, individuals who regard the situation as threatening will have a higher level of burnout. Similarly, Chan (2021) stated that how people perceive key features of the job influences whether they are more relational or transactional in their professional relationships. The author claims that individuals' perceptions can influence their resilience to face work problems and interactions, resulting in varied burnout and engagement experiences.
There are several implications of work burnout that can affect the employees themselves and the work environment. The first implication of work burnout is that it may cause individuals to consider quitting their jobs (Madigan & Kim, 2021). Consequently, employee turnover and replacement can increase the organisation's cost (Smyth et al., 2015). Burnout is also linked to a decreased degree of job commitment and poor physical and mental health (Hakanen et al., 2006). Similarly, Smyth et al (2015) postulated that disability workers' commitment is influenced by perceived stress and burnout. Further, job-related stress at a high level can put individuals at a risk for occupational diseases such as depression (Kongcharoen et al., 2020). Additionally, burnout can diminish the effectiveness of classroom practices and lead to absenteeism in the teaching profession (Brunsting et al., 2014). Stressed teachers will deliver less effective teaching and later can negatively impact the students' academic performance (Kongcharoen et al., 2020).

Statement of Problem
When the pandemic first started, many were excited with the thought of working online. The study by Zamani et al (2021) found that working from home gave employees meaningfulness, safety and made them available for their family members. Employees found that working from home gave them satisfaction in terms of work and life commitments. The study by Abdullah et al (2020) further found that working from home provided the employees with flexibility, work-life balance and also increased their performance. However, too much of a good thing can pose problems as time progresses.
Working in university as academicians or non-academicians has become challenging due to the rapid development, global competition, technological advancements, and changes in the job nature that could make jobs more demanding than previously. The big shift from face-to-face can cause more stress than it had before. These changes can cause stress, resulting in tension in psychology, physiology, and behaviour (Bhargava & Trivedi, 2018). According to Naghieh et al (2015), teaching is usually reported as one of the most stressful professions. It is due to the need for intensely personal online interactions with students and other colleagues who can find the shift overwhelming. Yildirim and Sait Dinc (2019) indicated that prolonged exposure to a stressful work environment could result in work burnout. Work burnout at the workplace can negatively impact both the individual and the organisation. The employees may experience burnout in the form of physical and psychological health problems. These health issues inevitably result in absenteeism, job loss, and decreased productivity (Schnall et al., 2016). In Malaysia, a recent study was done on 278 academicians and non-academicians in Universiti Teknologi MARA to determine the quality of life of the respondents. It shows that 41 per cent had mild to extremely severe symptoms of depression, 28.8 per cent had mild to extremely severe symptoms of stress. Meanwhile, 60.1 per cent had mild to extremely severe symptoms of anxiety based on psychological well-being profiling (Nazali et al., 2021).
However, as Kyriacou (2001) indicated, job burnout has received less attention than stress due to operationalisation difficulties and a lack of theoretical frameworks. Therefore, researchers have drawn attention to exploring it more due to the lack of understanding of burnout. For example, according to Maslach et al (2008), although there is a body of literature on burnout among university teachers, certain aspects of burnout remain unexplored. Thus, previous researchers such as Byrne et al (2013); Goncalves et al (2019); Zhang and Feng (2011) recommended that future researchers may focus on identifying the diverse causes and subsequent effects of academic burnout. Hence the main objective of this study is to explore work burnout using Herzberg's theory. Specifically, this study is done to answer the following research questions:

•
Research Question 1-How do work conditions influence personal related burnout? • Research Question 2-How do work conditions influence work related burnout? • Research Question 3-How do co-workers' relations influence colleague related burnout?

Literature Review
Personal burnout There are two perspectives to consider when discussing personal burnout; it is related to a person's attributes (Maslach, 2015) and the "physical and psychological fatigue or exhaustion", as mentioned in the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI) (Mohamed et al., 2021).
Employee's personality types can possibly determine their ability to cope with burnout. Those who have a Type A personality or a high score for the 'neurotic' index are more prone to become emotionally exhausted or even depersonalised (Maslach, 2015). As an illustration, Sadoughi (2017) has explained that agreeableness is negatively affected job burnout among high school teachers, where those who have a high level of agreeableness tend to experience low job burnout and vice versa. The teachers with a high level of agreeableness tend to have empathy towards others, like to help out when needed and have a more positive relationship than those who have a lower score in agreeableness (Sadoughi, 2017).
As for another perspective, Mohamed et al (2021) has found that the personal domain scored higher than the work and client domain when they have conducted a survey using the CBI. This domain can predict an individual's level of burnout regardless of occupational status. Nonetheless, in another study, the level of burnout seems to be greater among the lecturers and civil servants (2.3333 and 2.3457 respectively), compared to research assistants and Associate Professors (2.0582 and 1.8889 respectively) in Bingol University (Aslan & Bektas, 2016). This situation happens when the lecturers have more workloads with high weekly teaching hours, and the civil servants come to work daily and conduct their job according to the superior's order. As there is a mixed result from both studies, it cannot be denied that there is a possibility for a person's career level to cause him/her to be 'worn out' eventually.
In sum, personal burnout is not merely about people's characteristics and personalities, but it goes beyond that. It needs to consider the reasons for them (as an individual) to become emotionally collapse and depersonalise (living in "own bubble" and hardly experiencing his/her surroundings). Personal burnout may influence a person's motivation to work if these perspectives are taken into consideration.

Work-related Burnout
Various work-related factors can contribute to work burnout in organisations. According to Chayu and Kreitler (2011), work-related stress factors such as poor supervision, conflict with peers, high job demands, and working overtime are all associated with one or more dimensions of burnout. According to the Maslach Burnout Model, prolonged exposure to environmental and situational stressors resulting from work-related stress will impact emotional exhaustion, depersonalisation, and a lack of personal accomplishment (Schaufeli et al., 1996).
Besides, Khan et al (2015) pointed out that the environmental sources of burnout can be classified into work demands, role demands, resource scarcity, time constraints, relationships demands and other demands such as lack of facilities and leadership issues. They reported that nine distinct types of workloads lead to burnout. It includes academic load (teaching and research), administrative work and additional office work performed at home or on weekends (Goddard et al., 2006;Gonzalez & Bernard, 2006;Shanafelt et al., 2009).
Furthermore, the types of role demand such as role ambiguity and role conflict can lead to burnout (Ghorpade et al., 2011). In addition, time-related demands (less or no time to complete specific academic tasks) such as in Golub et al (2008) and lack of rapport with colleagues and students such as in Goddard et al (2006) are also among the work-related factors that lead to burnout.
Additionally, burnout can be caused by leadership issues and inadequate facilities, a failure to keep up with knowledge developments, a lack of performance-based compensation, a lack of collaborative research, and a lack of recognition, exposure to performance appraisal, a poor physical work environment and also a non-supportive organisational culture (Çam, 2001;Golub et al., 2008;Pishghadam et al., 2014;Salami, 2011;Singh & Bush, 1998;and Zamini et al., 2011). Other related work-related factors such as supervisor perception (Teven, 2007), attitude, belief, and involvement toward work (Azeem, 2010;Olivos-Jara et al., 2014), frustration with research and publication (Lackritz, 2004;Tijdink et al., 2013), job dissatisfaction and organisational justice perception (Zhong et al., 2009) are also among the work-related contributing factors to burnout.

Colleague Related Burnout
Maslach and Leiter (2016) classify colleagues as a "community", which reflects the whole value of social relations at the workplace. It includes interpersonal clashes management, the supportive role of others, and the capability to work as a team. As for Mansourian et al (2019), this type of burnout is categorised under environmental and organisational factors (i.e. relationship with co-workers and social support). The level of burnout can possibly be heightened in an unharmoniously workplace, with lots of quarrels and conflicts with the managers and co-workers (Mansourian et al., 2019), where lack of trust and support are prominent there (Maslach & Leiter, 2016).
In a study by Reddy and Poornima (2012), the university teachers in South India seems to have a higher level of burnout when the stressors (that are based on several dimensions), for instance, organisational structure and climate, and intra-and interpersonal interactions existed. To control them from being 'burned' by the stressors, social support and assistant is crucial, especially from the authorities. In another situation in Turkey, the academicians who kept things to themselves for protecting their relationships with others have made their emotions become wearied (Akin & Ulusoy, 2016). They seem to be 'forced' not to say anything bad regarding their supervisors (i.e., the professors) and always be cautious about this relationship since the promotional power is in their hands. In short, fear can trigger people to feel down and depressed (that indicates burnout) (Maslach & Leiter, 2016) about their works and, worse of all, about themselves.
All and all, colleague related burnout usually forms at the workplace. Supporting role is important to control the level of burnout among employees. It comes not only from the coworkers at the same level but also from the superiors. With this support, trust can be built, and the employees can possibly become more productive and in a better state.

Past Studies Past Studies on Work Motivation
Several aspects that can affect individual motivation have been highlighted in previous studies on work motivation. The majority of the studies focus on the link between stress and work motivation. Khairuddin et al (2019) discovered that a number of stress-related elements, including work relationships, work overload, job security, resources, and communication, substantially impact SME entrepreneurs' motivation in Malaysia.
Further, work motivation can also partially mediate stress and performance. Meanwhile, a study conducted for a sample of teachers in Thailand reported higher stress levels among teachers at secondary school. The primary factors are financial concerns and work obligations (Kongcharoen et al., 2020). Their study also found a positive association between stress level and work motivation. Due to COVID 19, Sulaiman et al (2021) discovered a weak and negative association between stress and work motivation among Malaysian school teachers during the movement control order. Teachers encounter challenges when teaching online; however, with the help of their leaders and peers, they can better handle the situations.
Rather than looking at the implications of stressors, Rahim and Daud (2013) examined the relationship between intrinsic and extrinsic reward with work motivation among administrators in Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin (UNISZA), Malaysia. The authors used Herzberg's two-factor theory to analyse motivation. The majority of respondents agreed on a high degree of intrinsic and extrinsic rewards given by the university. The intrinsic reward is intangible rewards such as appreciation and caring, job rotation and challenging tasks. Extrinsic reward, on the other hand, includes salary, bonus and allowance.
Furthermore, the rewards are positively associated with work motivation. The result implies that better rewards can enhance employees' motivation in performing their job. Similarly, Ahmat et al (2019) found that work motivation mediated the relationship between compensation satisfaction and work engagement as well as job satisfaction among hotel employees in Malaysia. The motivation instrument by using Motivation at Work scale (MAWs) items. The MAWs items assessed motivation based on intrinsic motivation, identified regulation, introjected regulation and external regulation. The findings proved that after implementing minimum wage policy, there is an improvement in the employees' satisfaction toward compensation and benefit. Consequently, it can enhance employee motivation and later affect employees' engagement and job satisfaction. Hence, empirical evidence has shown that work-related components can either increase or decrease employee motivation.

Past Studies on Work Burnout
Work burnout is a phenomenon that always occurs among employees. According to Maslach et al (2001), the relationship that people have with their work and the difficulties that arise can create anxiety among the workers. In this research, secondary data was used to evaluate the workers' burnout, and the findings have shown that several elements contributed to this issue. The elements are demographic characteristics, personality characteristics and job attitudes. Maslach et al (2001) highlight the implication of job burnout in this study is mixed information where some exhausted problems cannot be solved even the training and other support systems provided to the employees. Moreover, a study by Ritacco et al (2013) stated that job burnout might damage the business and health circle. The study is to find the impact of stress and burnout among the employees by collecting data in Botswana Power Corporations (BPC). The findings are 73% of employees felt that they were stressed at the workplace due to unfulfilled social needs. The study also found that the performance of employees started deteriorating since they started feeling stressed and the employee could not perform at optimum level.
Other studies from Hills (2018) stated that employee burnout occurs when employees are physically, mentally or emotionally exhausted. Hills (2018) also provide ten common symptoms of work burnout, for example, forced themselves to go to work, lack of energy, feeling disillusioned about the job, change of sleep and appetite become impatient with coworkers and many more. The implications of employee burnout are that the employee will be ignored or unaddressed job burnout, the top employees will transform into ineffective employees, lower productivity, lower engagement, and high turnover. Hills (2018) suggests that the organisation should be inclusive by involving employees in every decision directly relevant to their work. Not only that, but the organisation should also equip the employees with proper tools and resources, be generous with gratitude and praise to the employees and demonstrate management appreciation.
Work burnout usually affects the performance and productivity of the employees and also their emotions. The organisation should provide a support system to their employees and understand the phenomenon of burnout. Figure 2 shows Herzberg's two factor principles. According to Herzberg (1966), two main factors that influence employees' work motivation are the (a) motivator factors and (b) hygiene factors. Job satisfaction is influenced by motivator factors, while job dissatisfactory is influenced by hygiene factors. Employees can be demotivated by factors like working conditions, co-worker relations, policies and rules, superior quality and also salary. On the other hand, they can be motivated by achievement, recognition, responsibilities, work itself, advancement and also personal growth. Understanding how Herzberg (1966) portrayed what made people happy and unhappy at work is a good start in understanding work burnout among employees.  Herzberg, 1966) This study is done to explore the reasons for work burnout among academicians due to online learning. The framework is rooted in Herzberg's (1966) hygiene factors and factors for work burnout by (Kristensen et al., 2005). Work burnout can be caused by (a) Co-Worker relations through colleague related burnout. Next, burnout can be caused by work conditions through (i) work-related burnout and (ii) personal related burnout.

Methodology
This study employs a quantitative design in exploring the work burnout due to online learning and working from home. The respondents were asked to complete an electronic questionnaire in assessing their level of work burnout. A total of 82 university staff responded to the questionnaire, which consists of both public and private universities in Malaysia. Section A of the questionnaire consists of respondents' demographic profiles. The information includes gender, age, academic background, marital status, number of households, salary, academic/non-academic and private/public university. Statements about work burnout can be found in sections B, C, and D. The Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI) was used to assess work burnout in this study. The instruments have been developed by (Kristensen et al., 2005).
The questionnaire instruments have three sub-dimensions which are personal burnout, work-related burnout, and colleague-related burnout. Five-point Likert scales are used to respond to each statement (1=never, 2=seldom, 3=sometimes, 4=often, and 5=always). Section B provides six items related to personal burnout, Section C contains seven items on work-related burnout, and Section D consists of 6 items on colleague related burnout. Similar to the adopted CBI survey, personal burnout questions provide a general statement in evaluating individual experience with physical and emotional exhaustion or fatigue. Meanwhile, the work-related burnout questions examine the individual fatigue experience attributed to his/her work. In this study, the colleague related burnout was investigated on how much colleague influences the individual experience of fatigue or exhaustion. Data is analysed using SPSS software package version 26. The total percentage is used to assess the demographic profile data. Meanwhile, the work burnout items are analysed by using the mean value. Cronbach's alpha reliability analysis is performed to verify the reliability of the work burnout items used in the survey. The Cronbach's alpha value result is 0.888, showing good internal reliability for the instrument.   The second is university background (figure 6). The findings are shown in figure 6 that 63 percent of the staff were from public universities and 37 percent from private universities.

Findings for Personal Related Burnout
This section presents analysed data to answer research question 1: How do work conditions influence personal related burnout?  Figure 7 presents the result of personal burnout. Based on the mean value, the highest score is 'how often do you feel tired?' with a mean value of 3.7. The second highest score is 'how often are you physically exhausted?' and 'how often are you emotionally exhausted?' with the mean value of 3.6. On average, the respondents sometimes feel that they are feeling worn out (3.1) and feeling weak and susceptible to illness (3.4). Meanwhile, the lowest score is 'how often do you think "I can't take it anymore!"' with the mean value of 2.8. Overall, the findings on the personal burnout faced by the respondents are at a moderate level. The results indicate that the general experience of university staff in relation to work burnout is still under control. Sometimes they might face personal burnout in the situation of online learning or working from home. Findings for Work-Related Burnout This section presents data to answer research question 2: How do work conditions influence work-related burnout? Figure 8-mean for Work-Related Burnout Figure 8 presents findings for work-related burnout; the findings can be categorised based on the low to a high level of the mean value. From the table, the highest level of workrelated burnout where the staff felt exhausted in the morning the thought of another day at work (mean value= 3.6) and followed by the exhausting emotional feeling from the nature of their work (mean value= 3.4). Despite the high feeling of exhaustion, the staff felt a medium level of work-related burnout because of their work (mean value= 2.8) and felt tiring of every working hour (mean value= 2.9). These feelings showed the lowest mean value among others. The findings also reported that the staff felt worn out at the end of the working day at the medium level of work-related burnout (mean= 3.1). Interestingly the staff have enough energy for their family and friends despite feeling exhausted, worn out and burnt out while working in the universities (mean= 3.2). Based on figure 9, these scores represent basically how do the respondents feel about their colleagues and does it relate to their burnout level. The highest score of mean is about "hard to work with their colleagues" and the question on "how long you will be able to continue working with your colleague" shows the lowest mean score (i.e., 3.2 and 2.6 respectively). "Drain your energy to work with colleagues" and "find it frustrating to work with colleagues" have an average score (2.8 for both questions). All in all, from the mean score, it reflects that the respondents tend to have a low or medium feeling of burnout when working with their colleagues. It shows that colleagues at the respondents' workplace may not be the main contributor to their burnout level, but only in some parts.

Summary of Findings and Discussion
From the findings above its show that the work burnout among employees still under control and they do know how to manage stress when they feel it. Personal burnout among workers occurred when they felt too tired with the workload given and did not have any way to control the stress. As stated in the finding, the personal burnout faced by the respondents is at a moderate level. This is proved that the respondents can manage their own work stress, and sometimes they might face personal burnout in the situation of online learning/ working from home. The previous study also shows a mixed result from a variety of findings where it depends on the situation of work and task that assigned to the employees. The study by Mohamed et al (2021) shows the highest score of personal burnout on employees higher than work and client domain. However, it contrasts with Sadoughi (2017)  workload expected and when the new situation of the working environment needs to be adapted, such as working from home or online learning. Next on the criteria of work-related burnout. The work-related burnout refers to the environment of the workplace and the nature of the work. From the findings, it can be seen that respondents were moderately feeling stressed when it is related to working hours, feeling exhausted from work in a day and also the next day of work, the nature of the work and limited spent quality time with family and friends. The findings show a similar result from the previous study such as Chayu and Kreitler (2011); Khan et al (2015); Schaufeli et al (1996), where the environment and the nature of work will impact the emotional exhausted and also lack of accomplishment among the workers.
The criteria of colleague related burnout are referred to the situation on the social relations at the workplace. From the finding, it reflects that the respondents tend to have a low or medium feeling of burnout when they are working with their colleagues. It shows that colleagues at the respondents' workplace may not be the main contributor to their burnout level, but only in some parts of it. The findings are in contrast to the study from Mansourian et al. (2019), where the level of burnout increased in an unharmoniously workplace with lots of conflict with managers and co-workers. It is supported by a study by Reddy and Poornima (2012), where the stressor level is higher when interpersonal interaction exists.

Implications and Suggestions for Future Research
Academicians and the other staff can be exposed to stress with the current working conditions-online learning and working from home; all can be stressful. As work burnout is becoming a widespread phenomenon (especially in the online environment), Malaysian universities will have to avoid burnout at their workplace. Our results have provided two main contributions to the literature. First, this study offers a new perspective on how a challenging working environment, such as online learning and working from home, can affect an employee's burnout level due to COVID 19 breakouts. Since early 2020, Malaysian's university staff have already been engaging in online learning and working from home. However, some universities now allow job rotation when it comes to coming to work. As a result, the staffs are more acquainted with the situations than they were when they initially started online learning or working from home. Nonetheless, familiarity with the events over a certain period of time does not reduce employee burnout. Second, unlike prior studies, this study examines work burnout from Herzberg's Two-Factor Principles motivational approach. Colleaguerelated burnout is the basis for the co-worker-related component. Meanwhile, work-related and personal burnout were investigated in terms of working conditions components. Managing and resolving employee burnout is essential because it enhances employees' motivation to perform their jobs and ensure the achievement of organisational objectives. The findings demonstrate that the employees are more likely to experience personal and work-related burnout as compared to colleague related burnout.
The results of this study also suggest several managerial implications. First, given the higher likelihood of employees facing personal and work-related burnout, the ministry of higher education and the university's top management can recommend some initiatives to help employees cope with their burnout. The root cause of employees' personal and work issues should be identified and assessed to avoid the effect on employee motivation. Several circumstances, such as family problems, financial issues, work overload, lack of empowerment, high work commitment etc., may influence an employee's personal and workrelated burnout. Additionally, since employees are a valuable asset to the firm, managing and resolving employee burnout can lead to better service delivery by employees, resulting in increased stakeholders' satisfaction. Therefore, constant monitoring and intervention programs from the educational institution, management and the government are essential to creating a tranquil environment for all staff in the workplace.
Some recommendations are included to assist future researchers interested in pursuing a relevant topic and making improvements to it. To overcome the sample size constraint, it is recommended that future researchers conduct relevant research in other Malaysian universities, including both public and private, to examine the trend that may differ between universities, whereby comparison can be made. Therefore, it is recommended that different sample sizes based on the different university types be investigated in future research to ensure the results are significant.
In addition to that, this study used factors including personal, workplace, and colleaguerelated burnout to examine the level of burnout among university staff. However, based on Herzberg's theory, other factors such as supervisor quality, base and wage salary (hygiene factors) and achievement, recognition, advancement and personal growth (motivator factors) may influence job satisfaction among workers. Therefore, future researchers can conduct this study by focusing on other variables that may lead to work burnout among workers in Malaysia. Additionally, the study among other job professions also may lead to different results as their working environment is different with academician and non-academicians in university.
Lastly, as this study aims to examine work motivation and burnout among university staff, it is recommended that future researchers focus their research on a narrower subset of staff. This includes focussing on lecturers with administration positions and faculty who have different approaches or methods in conducting their classes.