WorkaholismAddictedtoWork.pdf

Workaholism: Addiction to Work
Rachel Shifron and Rebekah R. Reysen

Abstract

Addiction, from the perspective of Individual Psychology, can be conceptualized as goal-
oriented, creative, and chosen behavior. Shifron (1999) indicated that addictions are creative

choices to deal with the hardships of life. In this article, workaholism is introduced as an
addiction through an Adlerian framework. Workaholism is important because it negatively

affects not only the individual, but also the family system.

Keywords: addiction, Individual Psychology, workaholism

Following a review of the literature, Robinson (2001a) reported that the prevalence of
workaholism in the United States is somewhere in the range of 25-30%. Vodanovich and
Piotrowski (2006) claimed that workaholism has recently received much more attention,
supported by R. J. Burke’s (2004) observation of this tendency on an international level. Despite
being a widely known concept, the research base of workaholism is undeveloped (Aziz & Zickar,
2006; Chamberlin & Zhang, 2009; Naughton, 1987), and researchers lack an agreed-upon
definition of this phenomenon (Ng, Sorensen, & Feldman, 2007).

The need for workaholism to be more fully understood is great, as it has been linked to
negative factors including ‘”burnout,’ ‘job stress,’ and “subjective health complaints”
(Andreassen, Ursin, & Eriksen, 2007, p. 617), heart disease (Booth-Kewley & Friedman, 1987),
and emotional difficulties (R. A. Burke, Oberklaid, & Burgess, 2004). Robinson (2000b) goes so
far as to say that workaholism can “lead to unmanageable life, family disintegration, serious
health problems, and even death” (p. 34). This indicates that workaholics can face major
repercussions as a result of their over engagement of the work life task.

Workaholism can also negatively affect the workaholic’s family. It has been linked to
marital unhappiness (Robinson, Carroll, & Flowers, 2001; Robinson, Flowers, & Ng, 2006), and
the offspring of workaholic parents have been shown to have an increased risk of physical,
psychological, and self-esteem issues as well (Chamberlin & Zhang, 2009). Such risks make it
of crucial importance for professional helpers to know how to help those and their families who
suffer from workaholism.

Workaholism 137

Although it has not previously been conceptualized from an Individual Psychology
framework, the elements of workaholism have already been identified in the work life task, and
its effects can be found in all life tasks. Therefore, the holistic psychology of Alfred Adler is an
appropriate theory to use when conceptualizing workaholism.

Workaholism as an Addiction

Like addiction, workaholism has been defined in a variety of ways since the term was
coined by Oates (1971). For example, Griffiths (2005) noted that, over time, psychologists have
begun “preferring the term ‘work de- pendency’ to ‘workaholism’ (i.e., work addiction)” (p. 97).
Because of the similarities between workaholism and other addictions, we are introducing
workaholism from an addictions paradigm. Furthermore, we will also show how workaholism
can be conceptualized from both Adlerian and Dreikursian standpoints.

Workaholism over time has been defined in a variety of ways. Robinson, Carroll, and
Flowers (2001) defined workaholism as “a compulsive and progressive, potentially fatal
dis , characterized by self-imposed demands, compulsive overworking, inability to regulate
work habits, and an overindulgence in work to the exclusion and detriment of intimate
relationships and major life activities” (pp. 397-398). Selinger (2007) echoed Robinson, Carroll,
and Flowers’ definition by saying that a workaholic is “someone who works at the expense of his
family and personal life. Workaholics have the compulsion to just do more work. Therefore it is
different from just working hard” (p. 71). In both definitions, workaholism involves working to the
point that it interferes significantly with one’s life tasks, which is why we suggest that
workaholism be conceptualized as an addiction.

One possible reason for such an addiction is explained by Shifron (1999): “Addiction is a
creative chosen repetitious developing behavior. The goal of this behavior is to escape
existential fears” (p. 114). These fears can be rudimentarily conceptualized as the goals of
misbehavior in children, which can later become manifested in the work habits of adults.
Dreikurs (1968) conceptualized children’s reasons for misbehavior as being due to four
objectives: getting attention, control, retribution, and displaying inadequacy. Although this
concept was based on children, these goals can become more complex in adolescence and
even more so in adulthood, making it relevant to workaholics over the course of time.
Workaholics can achieve power by working hard and becoming well known in their field or
organization. They can get the attention of their peers, supervisors, and community members by
achieving a high status and level of pay in their career.

138 Rachel Shifron and Rebekah R. Reysen

They can also seek revenge on a spouse by escaping marital problems in favor of work.
Dis- playing inadequacy can also come into play when the workaholic feels that there is no other
option but to work in to keep his or her job in times of economic uncertainty and in
to maintain feelings of significance. These lifestyle attributes parallel those of addicts and
demonstrate the relationship between addiction and Dreikurs’s goals of misbehavior.

Bauman (2000) conceptualized addiction from the Adlerian perspective by using the
BASIS-A Inventory (Wheeler, Kern, & Curlette, 1993) to study how lifestyle variables differ
between individuals who were diagnosed with a mental health dis , a substance use
dis , or both. Bauman found that substance abusers and those who qualified for both
categories scored significantly higher on the Taking Charge scale and lower on the Going
Along, Wanting Recognition, and Liked by All scales. Based on these findings, we believe that
workaholics would also score higher on Taking Charge as a group and are hesitant to go along
with the needs or wants of anyone who stands in their way. One could also argue that some
workaholics would score lower in Wanting Recognition if they were more focused on keeping
their job than rising higher in an organization. In contrast to Bauman’s results, however, it would
make sense for workaholics to score higher in the Wanting Recognition category, if they are
interested in a high profile Iifestyle.

Finally, addiction has been formally conceptualized by the American Psychiatric
Association in the DSM-IV-TR (2000). Being substance dependent can involve a large amount
of time spent using or acquiring a substance; experiencing a deficit in other areas of one’s life
(e.g., the social realm); and failing to inhibit or quit its use despite how it is causing significant
problems in the individual’s life. Van Wormer and Davis (2003) said that “addiction” and
“substance dependence” are terms that can be used interchangeably and that “substance use is
a multifactorial process involving social, psycho- logical, and biological factors … ” (p. 3).
Workaholics, like addicts, engage in this lifestyle despite other areas of their lives being
neglected.

Goal-directed Behavior in Workaholism

The goal of compulsive work habits, which serve as the fundamental basis of
workaholism, can be brought to life through a variety of factors. These factors can be viewed
through the lens of the workforce of modern- day America, which has recently changed
dramatically. In The Disposable American, Uchitelle (2-006) discusses changes in both the
workforce and in the expectations of employers and organizations over the years. Several
decades ago, it was common for workers, once hired by a company or organization, to expect to
have a tenure-like status if they worked hard and

Workaholism 139

were loyal to their employers. “We had decided as a people-managers, politicians, and workers-
that job security had value, and in pursuit of that value, we lifted ourselves out of insecurity”
(Uchitelle, p. 5). The goal of the worker was always to reach the tenure stage; it promoted a
sense of security, stability, and enticing bonuses, like retirement packages. However, these
comforts soon diminished once job tenure became less common within the organizational
structure. Hall (1996) seconded Uchitelle’s claims by stating, “Job insecurity has soared, and
any thoughts of long-term careers in one firm have been shattered” (p. 18). This state of affairs
worsened, and by 2004, millions had lost their jobs. The U.S. economy, which for most of a
century consisted of an alliance between employer and employee, became much more guarded
as a result.

Over half of the American public believes that the leaders of big business care more
about their own power and rewards than they do about the well-being of their companies

or their employees. (Hall, 1996, p. 19)

With such feelings of insecurity, those who work hard can believe that working harder
than others could carve them a more secure place in the workforce. Workaholics take this idea
to an even greater extreme of trying to be successful to keep their jobs despite the detrimental
effects they experience in other areas of their lives.

This compulsiveness to work is an integral component of the workaholic, but it is only the
behavioral manifestation of insecurity. While Uchitelle (2006) and Hall and Associates (1996)
described the outward reaction of workaholics, Gottfredson (1981) focused on the inward,
psycho- logical realm of workaholism. Gottfredson theorized that people develop “occupational
images” of what working is like in certain professions and how suitable they believe themselves
to be with those images. With the view of job stability in the U.S. workforce having changed
significantly over the years, Gottfredson might argue that workaholics may perhaps have a
distorted view of how often they need to work in to reach their over- all goal of keeping
their job. Furthermore, this continued effort at moving toward this image is given precedence
over other areas of one’s life, which can cause significant impairment in many ways. This
impairment is why workaholism can be viewed from a holistic standpoint.

Workaholism: A Holistic Problem

Addictive behaviors, such as those performed by workaholics, are holistic in nature.
These behaviors are expressed physically, biologically, psychologically, cognitively, and socially
for the individual. These behaviors can also negatively affect the individual’s entire family
system and society (Shifron, 1999, 2010).

140 Rachel Shifron and Rebekah R. Reysen

First, the workaholic can reach a point of physical crisis, manifested as exhaustion from
overworking one’s body. Research indicates that workaholism may cause serious threats to the
worker’s health and can even result in death (Robinson, 2000b, 2001b; Selinger, 2007). This
desire to work can result in job and family stress. Sapolsky (1998) went so far as to say that the
body not only reacts on a biological level to stress, but also reacts to fore- seen stress, which,
although it has not yet occurred and may never occur, still affects humans negatively in the
body: “When something stressful hap- pens or you think a stressful thought, the hypothalamus
secretes an array of releasing hormones into the hypothalamic-pituitary circulatory system … ”
(p. 31). Thus, physiological effects can occur even in the absence of a stressful event, one that
is experienced solely in thought. For the workaholic, just thinking about the possibility of not
meeting work-related goals is enough to produce hormones even when the work-related
stressors are not present. In the mind of the workaholic, what better way to bring these
hormones back to homeostasis than by working and thereby preventing future stressors from
occurring?

Second, psychologically, the higher the reward at work, the more emotional investment a
workaholic is likely to make in trying to achieve his or her goal (Andreassen, Ursin & Eriksen,
2007). When workaholics feel powerful or are either seeking or receiving attention, there is a
tendency to invest even more energy and time into their work (Shifron, 2009). Workaholics are
also affected by their addiction on a cognitive level when they think about work during leisure
time and family events (Snir, 2008). In addition, the workaholic’s private logic could involve a
belief that he or she is providing for his or her family by working hard.

Third, there are also social aspects to consider in the life of a workaholic. Specific
problems that may arise in this area can affect the family as a whole or at an individual level for
specific family members. Such concerns can include disappointing holidays because of lack of
involvement on the part of the workaholic, demonstrating no boundaries between work, leisure,
and family life. Added family pressures include expectations for children to act in parental roles.
Children can also develop negative attitudes toward work or imitate the workaholic’s behavior
(Shifron, 2006b).

A workaholic’s romantic relationships can be negatively influenced by the workaholic’s
behavior. Robinson, Flowers, and Ng (2006) found that workaholism was positively related to
marital discontentment for men. These findings supported previous research that the same
authors conducted with women who identified their husbands as workaholics. These women
also reported greater marital displeasure and less positive feelings between themselves and
their partners. In addition, marital dissatisfaction can also affect the couple’s children, who can
serve as mediators between their parents (Shifron, 2006a). Robinson et al. (2006) also
concluded that workaholism

Workaholism 141

and poor marital relationships continue to be an ignored area of clinical and empirical research.

Finally, workaholism not only affects the workaholic and family but also the entire global
culture. Shifron et al. (2010) view this as a culture addicted to power and pose an important
question: How can organizations be motivated to reduce these workaholic tendencies by
reducing extreme demands at work? We argue that Individual Psychology can be applied to
working with the workaholic, the family, and the organization.

Treatment Options for Workaholics

A variety of treatment options exist for workaholics and their families using Individual
Psychology. Robinson (2000a) stated that analyses of one’s childhood family can be used to
facilitate treatment for grown children of workaholic parents. “Although relatively few writers
have addressed how counselors can assist workaholic clients, many have presented self-help
procedures for workaholics themselves” (Seybold & Salamone, 1994, p. 6). Seybold and
Salamone suggest either individual, long-term individual, or group counseling for treating
workaholism, depending on the traits of the workaholic. They also supply suggestions for
managers of organizations who are workaholics themselves. We chose to introduce
workaholism from an Individual Psychology perspective because “the psychological principles
upon which Adlerian therapy is based make it the procedure of choice for addictive issues”
(Linkenbach, 1993).

Furthermore, Piotrowski and Vodanovich (2008) offered suggestions to companies
and/or organizations regarding how to help workaholics. These suggestions include assessing
the level of workaholism at the place of employment; encouraging employees to develop non-
work-related activities; and encouraging workaholics to participate in counseling.

Ferguson (2003) also discussed how to help individuals thrive in the work force,
particularly with regard to satisfying their need to belong. Ferguson argued that employees need
respect and reassurance from one another to achieve this sense of belonging and to enhance
work associations. When this need is not met and feelings of insecurity arise, employees may
develop lofty goals that are difficult to achieve. This dynamic can be witnessed in the
workaholic, who continually works to accomplish not only job security, but a sense of belonging
within an organization through achievement. Thus, helping workaholics receive support from
other employees could facilitate a feeling of belonging and prevent the workaholic from focusing
on impractical goals. In short, we argue that all of these factors are important for mental health
specialists to consider when working with the workaholic client.

142 Rachel Shifron and Rebekah R. Reyse

Therapeutic Recommendations for Mental Health Specialists

We have come to the conclusion that psychotherapists and counselors need to examine
the workaholic’s family constellation and lifestyle. Worka- holics differ in their lifestyles, and
each workaholic is a unique individual. As in psychotherapy of other addictions, ideally there
should be a balance between individual therapy and, as appropriate, couples or family therapy
(Shifron, 1999, 2006a). A suggested outline of psychotherapy for treating workaholics is shown
in Figure 1.

Stage 1

• Analysis of lifestyle
• Disclosing hidden goals
• Couple’s therapy

Stage 2

• Changing tools in to reach goals
• Family therapy

Figure 1. Suggested psychotherapy stages for treating individuals with workaholism.
Encouragement is needed at all stages of therapeutic inter- ventions, especially when working
with workaholics. Encouragement is meaningful when it is appropriate to one’s lifestyle (Shifon,
2006b).

Workaholism 143

The goals for therapy with the family:

• To help families negotiate boundaries

• To learn that work should not dominate their lives

• To work on effective family roles

• To teach family members how to encourage the individual when efforts to
cut back are being made

Clinical Observations

I (Shifron) have conducted many therapy sessions with workaholics over the years and
have found that workaholism is the addiction of this era. I have clinical experience helping
clients work toward confronting their mal- adaptive beliefs that overworking at present will
ensure an endless vacation from the world of work in the future. Some of these clients have
stated things such as,

I’ll quickly make a large amount of money and retire early, at which time I’ll be able to
enjoy excellent luxuries and quality time with my wife and chil- dren. Meanwhile, we have

to sacrifice.

This extreme, unbalanced perception of fulfilling the three primary life tasks of family,
work, and friendship helps to explain the problems of workaholics’ experience on the job and
with family. In addition, workaholics experience difficulties when they finally actualize the
“dream” of early retirement. Feelings of emptiness and a lack of meaning in their lives can lead
to suicidal thoughts. At this point, it is crucial for the therapist to discuss new creative goals that
might trigger the client’s social interest.

Furthermore, I (Shifron) have witnessed some of these workers’ extreme investment in
the world of work and the need to be perfect at all times, resulting in total burnout and a fear of
failure. The outcome of this fear may mean a decision never to enter the world of work again.
Depression and anxiety attacks can be the consequences of such an outlook.

One such client was a woman in her late 30s who initiated therapy because she feared
that she was about to lose her partner. She said,

I have to invest all of my energy into my work. I have to prove myself constantly. I have to
develop the others’ trust in me so I’ll be promoted. At present this is more important than
spending time with my partner or having children. Why doesn’t he understand it?

When asked if she was afraid to lose her job if she became more flexible and less rigid
with herself, she said, “No, they need me, they admire me, I’m the best worker, but I have to
constantly prove that I’m not disappointing anyone.” In her early recollections, she experienced
emotional pain inflicted by other people and said that she feels like nobody pays attention to
her. This woman is in the addictive cycle of workaholism. The more she works, the higher the
price she pays, and the more she suffers.

Summary

In this article, we have introduced workaholism as an addiction using Adlerian concepts to
conceptualize the psychological aspects of the

144 Rachel Shifron and Rebekah R. Reysen

workaholic lifestyle. The Individual Psychology conceptualization suggests that an addiction is
not an unconscious behavior but rather a goal-oriented, creative, chosen solution to achieve
significance. Shifron (1999) indicated that addictions are creative choices to deal with the
hardships of life, as is the case of workaholism. Workaholism negatively affects not only the
individual, the family system, and his or her entire community, but paradoxically working
organizations encourage this outcome. Therefore, the treatment and prevention of workaholism
should include not just the individual and his or her family members, but also interventions that
organizations can use to help workaholic employees. Last, it is important to remember that an
individual makes creative choices and, moreover, is capable of making posi- tive, adaptive
choices to the work life task.

Authors’ note

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Rachel Shifron, Tarshish
46, P.O. Box 701, Shoham 60850, Israel (email: shifrong@ zahav .net.ii). The authors would
like to thank Dr. Kevin Stoltz for his contin- ued assistance and support in the development of
this manuscript.

References

American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental
dis s (4th ed., text rev.). Washington, DC: Author.

Andreassen, C. S., Ursin, H., & Eriksen, H. R. (2007). The relationship between strong
motivation to work, “workaholism,” and health. Psychology and Health, 22(5), 615-629.

Aziz, S., & Zickar, M. J. (2006). A cluster analysis investigation of workaholism as a
syndrome. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 7 7(1), 52-62.

Bauman, G. S. (2000). Clinical usefulness of the BASIS-A Inventory with substance
abusers (Unpublished dissertation). Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA.

Booth-Kewley, S., & Friedman, H. S. (1987). Psychological predictors of heart disease:
A quantitative review. Psychological Bulletin, 101(3), 343-362. Burke, R. A., Oberklaid, F., &
Burgess, Z. (2004). Workaholism among

Australian women: Antecedents and consequences. Women in Management Review, 5,
252-259.

Workaholism 145

Burke, R. J. (2004). Workaholism in organizations. Journal of Organizational Change
Management, 17, 420-423.

Chamberlin, C., & Zhang, N. (2009). Workaholism, health, and self- acceptance. Journal
of Counseling & Development, 87(2), 159-169.

Dreikurs, R. (1968). Psychology in the classroom: A manual for teachers (2nd ed.). New
York: Harper & Row.

Ferguson, E. (2003). Work relationships, lifestyle, and mutual respect.

The Journal of Individual Psychology, 59(4), 501-506.

Gottfredson, L. S. (1981). Circumscription and compromise: A developmental theory of
occupational aspirations [Monograph]. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28(6), 545-579.

Griffiths, M. (2005). Workaholism is still a useful construct. Addiction Research and Theory,
13(2), 97-100.

Hall, D. T., & Associates. (1996). The career is dead-long live the ca- reer: A relational
approach to careers. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Linkenbach, J. (1993). A bidirectional addictions model. Individual Psychology: The
Journal of Adlerian Theory, Research & Practice, 49(2), 248-256.

Naughton, T. J. (1987). A conceptual view of workaholism and im- plications for career
counseling and research. The Career Development Quarterly, 35(3), 180-187.

Ng, T. W. H., Sorensen, K. L., & Feldman, D. C. (2007). Dimensions, antecedents, and
consequences of workaholism: A conceptual integration and extension. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 28(1); 111-136.

Oates, W. E. (1971). Confessions of a workaholic. New York: World Publishing.

Piotrowski, C., & Vodanovich, S. J. (2008). The workaholism syndrome: An
emerging issue in the psychological literature. The Journal of Instructional Psychology,
35(1), 103-105.

Robinson, B. E. (2000a). Adult children of workaholics: Clinical and empirical research
with implications for family therapists. Journal of Family Psychotherapy, 11(3), 15-26.

Robinson, B. E. (2000b). A typology of workaholics with implications for counselors.
Journal of Addictions and Offender Counseling, 21(1), 34-48.

Robinson, B. E. (2001 a). Chained to the desk: A guidebook for workaholics, their
partners and children, and the clinicians who treat them. New York: New York University Press.

Robinson, B. E. (2001b). Workaholism and family functioning: A profile of familial
relationships, psychological outcomes, and research considerations. Contemporary Family
Therapy: An International Journal, 23(1), 123-135.

Robinson, B. E., Carroll, J., & Flowers, C. (2001). Marital estrangement, positive affect,
and locus of control among spouses of workaholics and spouses of nonworkaholics: A national
study. American Journal of Family Therapy, 29(5), 397-410.

Robinson, B. E., Flowers, C., & Ng, K. M. (2006). The relationship between
workaholism and marital disaffection: Husbands’ perspective. The Family Journal, 14(3),
213-220.

Sapolsky, R. M. (1998). Why zebras don’t get ulcers. New York: W. H. Freeman
& Company.

Selinger, C. (2007). Workaholism. IEEE Spectrum, 44(6), 71-72.

Seybold, K. C., & Salamone, P. R. (1994). Understanding workaholism: A review of
causes and counseling approaches. Journal of Counseling & Development, 73(1), 4-9.

Shifron, R. (1999). Addictive behaviors: An Adlerian perspective. In P. Prina, C.
Shelley, & C. Thompson (Eds.), Adlerian yearbook 1999 (pp. 114-127). London, England:
Adlerian Society (UK) and Institute for Individual Psychology.

Shifron, R. (2006a, July). Adult children of alcoholics. ICASSI. Germany. Shifron, R.
(2006b). Unemployment and re-employment: An Adlerian perspective. In P. Prina, A. Millar, C.
Shelley, & K. John (Eds.), Adlerian year- book 2006 (pp. 110-121). London, England: Adlerian
Society (UK) and Institute for Individual Psychology.

Shifron, R. (2009). Addictions: Workaholism. In P. Prina, A. Millar,

C. Shelley, & K. John (Eds.), Adlerian.yearbook 2009 (pp. 107-117). London, England:
Adlerian Society (UK) and Institute for Individual Psychology.

Shifron, R. (2010). Adler’s need to belong as the key for mental health.

The journal of Individual Psychology, 66(1), 10-29.

Shifron, R., Shifron, G., Linden, G. W., Rasmussen, P., Abramson, Z., Newbauer, J., &
Joosten, T. J. (2010). Addiction to power. In P. Prina, A. Millar,

C. Shelley, & K. John (Eds.), Adlerian yearbook 2010 (pp. 76-100). London, England:
Adlerian Society (UK) and Institute for Individual Psychology.

Snir, R. (2008). Workaholism as discretionary time investment at work: An experience-
sampling study. Applied Psychology, 57(1), 109-127.

Uchitelle, L. (2006). The disposable American. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. ·

Van Wormer, K., & Davis, b. R. (2003). Addiction treatment: A strengths perspective.
Canada: Brooks/Cole.

Vodanovich, S. J., & Piotrowski, C. (2006). Workaholism: A critical but neglected factor
in O.D. Organization Development Journal, 24(2), 55-60.

Wheeler, M. S., Kern, R. M., & Curlette, W. L. (1993). BASIS-A Inventory. Highlands,
NC: TRT Associates.

Copyright of Journal of Individual Psychology is the property of University of Texas Press and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder’s express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.

The Journal of Individual Psychology, Vol. 67, No. 2, Summer 2011

©2011 by the University of Texas Press, P.O. Box 7819, Austin, TX 78713-7819

Editorial office located in the College of Education at Georgia State University.

Workaholism: Addiction to Work
Workaholism as an Addiction
Goal-directed Behavior in Workaholism
Workaholism: A Holistic Problem
Treatment Options for Workaholics
Therapeutic Recommendations for Mental Health Specialists
Clinical Observations
Authors’ note
References