Workload is defined as the number of hours reported by employees and number of people served or worked for (Shirom, Nirel, & Vinokur, 2006). Beehr, Walsh and Taber (1976) defined work overload as employees having more work to do than could be completed within a given period. Previous studies have provided support for the negative effect of work overload on aspects of health, productivity and job performance. Laaksonen, Rahkonen, Martikainen and Lahelma (2006) found that physical workload and job control were associated with general health, whereas job demands were strongly related to mental health. Letvak and Buck (2008) reported that long working hours per day were significantly associated with job stress and low work productivity. Similarly, Schaubroeck, Cotton and Jennings (1989) found that workload was positively associated with job tension among workers in United States universities. With regard to job performance, Virtanen et al. (2009) reported that long working hours were linked to a negative effect on cognitive performance among middle aged British civil servants. Similarly, Spector et al. (1988) found that workload was negatively associated with job performance. Hence, Kahn et al. (1964) note that workload may influence job-related tension directly.
Similarly, the relationship between workload and job stress has been extensively examined in the accounting research literature. This could be due to the auditing profession being well known as a high stress profession, partly due to work overload existing during the peak (busy) period because of high work demand. This peak (or busy) period in the auditing profession has been well acknowledged by the industry and occurs during the first quarter of the calendar year, mainly because most companies (other than in Australia) close their accounts with December year ends (Campbell, et al., 1988). Hence, work overload is inherent to the nature of the auditing environment. According to DeZoort and Lord (1997), this pressure relates to professionals’ actual workload during the audit engagement process. Work overload results when auditors are facing higher workloads due to long working hours and extensive work demands during the peak period compared to the off-peak period. During the peak period, many
42
auditors work around 60 to 80 hours per week (Dalton, Hill, & Ramsay, 1997). Indeed, these workloads do not always decrease during the off-peak period and auditors typically work more than 40 hours per week (Sweeney & Summers, 2002; Ward & Albright, 2009). In addition to that, accounting work is based on clear and tight deadlines, in which the flow of tasks is often uncontrollable. Therefore, in many situations, job demands will exceed the abilities or resources of the individual, consequently workload can result in emotional exhaustion and burnout (Fogarty, et al., 2000).
Sweeney and Summers (2002) claimed that the peak period could be used as a mechanism to identify those auditors who can work effectively under a challenging environment. However, previous studies have shown that such an intensive workload is likely to exert considerable pressure on auditors. For example, Campbell et al. (1988) in their study of 221 tax practitioners in the United States, reported that 23% of tax practitioners considered stress as a very serious problem during the peak tax period compared to 8% during the off-peak period.
Sweeney and Summers (2002) found that at the end of a busy period, auditors experienced significantly greater emotional exhaustion from their work and were depersonalised in their approach to their work, colleagues and clients. They examined 142 respondents from various levels of the hierarchy (staff to partner) and profession (auditors, tax officers, consultants and administrator) in one national public accounting firm in the United States. They found that, for the pre-busy season, hours worked by public accountants were positively correlated to role stressors but not to public accountants’ job burnout, whereas, role stressors positively influenced job burnout. However, their investigation during the busy season showed that public accountants’ working hours were positively correlated to both role stressors and job burnout. Similarly role stressors were positively correlated with burnout. They further concluded that high workload could lead to psychologically stressful conditions.
43
Similarly, Fogarty et al. (2000) in their study of American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) members found that workload was associated with burnout. Almer and Kaplan (2002) extending the Fogarty et al. (2000) study, examined the effect of flexible work arrangements on public accountant’s (AICPA) burnout by comparing a sample of public accountants under a standard work arrangement to a demographically similar sample under a flexible arrangement. They found that public accountants under a standard work arrangement reported higher burnout and lower job satisfaction than their counterparts under a flexible work schedule. More recently, K. J. Smith et al. (2007), in their study of samples similar to those of Fogarty et al. (2000) and Almer and Kaplan (2002), found that workload was positively related with stress arousal.
Conversely, Ehlen, Cluskey and Rivers (2000) found there was no difference in terms of stress levels between the busy and slack periods for auditors and tax professionals even though the average hours worked increased more than 25% in the former period. Their investigation showed that audit firms used several strategies to mitigate stress levels during the busy period, such as using experienced staff to mentor junior staff, well defined overtime/bonus plans, offering interactive career tracks, the use of flexible time and using temporary staff to meet seasonal demands. However, a study by Friedman, Rosenman and Carroll (1958) found that during the peak tax season, tax accountants experienced high levels of cholesterol which declined significantly to a lower level during the off-peak season. Their finding indicates that working long hours could contribute to high levels of cholesterol probably due to maximum stress experienced by accountants as suggested by Campbell et al. (1988) and Sweeney and Summers (2002). Furthermore, high workload also contributes to high turnover rate in the accounting profession (Almer & Kaplan, 2002; Larson, 1991; K. J. Smith, et al., 2007). In other words, people who perceived or experienced high stress may desire to change their jobs.
From a job performance perspective, studies in accounting environment found that workload is positively related to job performance (Fogarty, et al., 2000; K. J. Smith, et al., 2007), contrary to previous studies in other work settings (e.g., Laaksonen, et al.,
44
2006; Schaubroeck, et al., 1989; Spector, et al., 1988; Virtanen, et al., 2009). Fogarty et al. (2000), in explaining this counterintuitive result, propose that overload includes an “eustress5” component that is unmediated. K.J. Smith et al. (2007) suggest that the positive relations between workload and job performance may result from overload being perceived as a challenge rather than a threat. Challenge stressors are viewed as having the potential to promote personal gain and growth (Lepine, et al., 2005).