The article is devoted to a theoretical analysis of the following psy-chological phenomena - motivation of counterproductive behavior, demotivating factors, and professional burnout syndrome. Particular attention is paid to the interaction and influence of these factors on the psyche of a working person. In particular, some aspects of the psychological health of personnel are considered. The study of these phenomena and relationships is a new step for psychological science, in particular, we are talking about the study of the motivation of counter-productive behavior. An approach is relevant from the point of view of preventing the increase in the impact of demotivating factors, the development of the syn-drome of professional burnout among employees and preventing the development of counterproductive behavior in them.
motivation of counterproductivebehavior, demotivating factors, burnout syndrome, mental health, activity
Introduction
In modern realities, labor activity is associated with influences that are different in nature and strength. These include stress, which causes the appearance of various syndromes in workers, for example, professional burnout syndrome [5]. Such situations are always accompanied by psychoemotional stress, which causes various reactions in the human body and psyche, makes him vulnerable or unable to cope with the situation [25]. The work process often actualizes a large number of employee resources, requires a high concentration and motivation from him to implement the assigned tasks. However, unfortunately, employees are not always motivated to work for the good of their organization, which can lead to the development of so-called counterproductive motivation. In the worst case, workers are affected by various demotivating factors, which can also lead to a wide variety of negative consequences.
The problem of professional burnout and some aspects of the psychological health of personnel. The problem of studying professional burnout as a psychological phenomenon was posed at the turn of the 60s of the XX century in America. However, it is still relevant today, especially in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Specialists in the helping profession, such as nurses, eventually lose empathy and emotional support for their patients. They try to distance themselves from their clients and even tend to avoid them. Educators and managers are also experiencing difficulties in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Various representatives of socionomic professions from different countries noted an increase in the level of fatigue due to the introduction of remote forms of work [6; 17; 28; 29]. Currently, professional burnout is usually viewed from the position of the situational context of work. Experts point out that professional burnout syndrome develops in situations of chronic stress at work, as an accumulation of its effects. Therefore, the syndrome of professional burnout is studied from the point of view of its three components: emotional exhaustion, depersonalization and reduction of professional achievements [11; 15; 26].
The following components of the development of the professional burnout syndrome were identified:
1. Symptoms that may precede burnout
2. No feeling of fatigue
3. Increased activity. Burnout manifests itself most clearly, when there is some kind of contradiction or opposition.
4. Decreased activity
5. Change in the emotional state for the worse. There is a search for the culprit, depression or aggression may develop
6. Recession. Depression of activity begins, any errors in activity may appear, and activity may also stop monotonous, stereotyped
7. Deviation. A person can freeze, slow down in all spheres of life. Life can seem lonely and meaningless, then psychosomatic reactions follow, which in particular manifest themselves as psychosomatic diseases
8. Despair. When a person already feels so helpless that he begins to think about committing suicide and can carry out this intention [11].
The study of the burnout syndrome has led to the need to analyze and highlight the personal and organizational factors that could affect the development of this syndrome. The first characteristic highlighted is the system of remuneration and incentives for personnel. If employees find the remuneration unsatisfactory or unfair, the situation becomes stressful and contributes to the development of burnout in their professional activities. It should be noted that incentives on the part of the company, on the part of the immediate manager, which does not coincide with the motives of professional activity, the expectations of employees, also provokes the development of the syndrome of professional burnout. The next factor is management style and leadership. If a manager or leader behaves democratically, then employees feel more satisfied, and also do not experience the consequences of negative syndromes, in particular, the syndrome of professional burnout. The next factor is the socio-psychological climate in the organization. This characteristic is due to the fact that among the employees in the team there may be any tension, excitement, misunderstanding. This is extremely negative for the collective organization of labor and can lead to oppression of the employee [27; 30].
Burnout is a condition that occurs in response to prolonged exposure to chronic stress. No matter how similar the causes and symptoms of burnout are in different people, they all have individuality in their expression. Therefore, in addition to organizational factors, personal characteristics are of great importance for the development of burnout. It was found that such characteristics are empathy and communication skills. Well-developed empathy prevents an employee from developing professional burnout syndrome. Employees with communicative competence have been shown to cope better with situations of stress and burnout. They seek and successfully find support among their environment: in the family or at work, in a team of like-minded people [1; 2; 22].
Conterproductive work behavior motivation and demotivating factors. The phenomenon of motivation is the main concept in the study of the incentive and driving forces of the human personality, including in professional activity. Motivation determines the characteristics of the course of human activity and explains the actions he performs. Today there are many theoretical systems that try to reveal this phenomenon from various angles, for example, modern domestic theories T.O. Gordeeva, Yu.V. Dubovik, S.V. Kotov; foreign theories G. Lazaroi, A. Elliot, M. Church [7; 9; 10; 16; 18].
Motivation is a special state focused on resolving a person's needs, as well as the conscious creation of a specific state of motivation for activity in other people. The essence of the concept of motivation is revealed in a systematic explanation of a simple scheme: there are certain incentives and indefinite incentives that arise from any need. This need entails an indefinite number of different motives, which together give the concept of motivation [10; 12].
To understand the characteristics of the behavior of a working person, the functions of motives and components of motivation are of great importance. The following functions of motives were identified:
• Guiding function, implies the direction of behavior in a situation of choosing options for behavior in specific situations.
• Sense-forming function, implies the definition of the subjective significance of behavior for the employee, and also identifies the personal meaning of behavior for this employee.
• Mediating function, reflects the collision of motive at the junction of internal and external incentive forces that can influence behavior.
• Mobilizing function, implies the concentration and strengthening of various forces of the employee for the implementation of significant goals and activities.
• The justifying function is that the employee is able to justify his behavior by various motives [20].
The following components of motivation are also described:
1) Emotional component, implying the experience of emotions associated with the presence of an urgent need
2) The intellectual component associated with the cognitive functions of motivation
3) Conceptual component related to understanding the situation
4) Verbal component
5) Behavioral component
“A comprehensive theory of motivation at work must encompass at least three important sets of variables that make up the work situation, ie. personality characteristics, job characteristics and characteristics of the working environment ” [24, p. 247]. At this point, we come to another important problem in the study of motivation: often experts set their goal to influence only one of the variables listed above [18]. Unfortunately, such approaches do not give the desired results, since we may overlook the importance of the remaining variables when trying to motivate employees. For example, motivation measures may affect the employee's working situation, but this will absolutely not relate to his personal qualities, or even contradict them [3; 4; 8; 21].
Thus, the question of studying the motivation of counterproductive behavior and demotivating factors arises. Traditionally, the following factors are considered as consequences of burnout, which can acquire a negative connotation: performance efficiency, satisfaction, identification with the organization, attitude to work, the desire to leave the position and state of health. We will turn to the factors of demotivation, which may in some way be associated with the presence of professional burnout syndrome in employees. The following demotivating factors were identified: violations of the tacit contract, non-use of any significant skills of employees, ignorance of initiative, lack of a sense of belonging among company employees, lack of assessment of achievements and a sense of results from management and / or colleagues, that is, lack of feedback, lack of change in the status of an employee [7]. It should be noted that, in our opinion, the presence of demotivating factors in employees within a specific organization directly correlates with the presence of professional burnout syndrome in these employees. We believe that a condition that is a consequence of the presence of a professional burnout syndrome in an individual violates the motivation system [13].
Consider some aspects of counterproductive behavior that negatively impacts employee productivity in an organization. The criteria for such behavior can be:
• object of action,
• the nature of the act,
• the severity of the damage caused
The following types of counterproductive behavior were identified: 1) Damage to the organization's property, which implies damage to the labor apparatus. It is worth dwelling here on the fact that we are considering precisely the intentional infliction of such damage. 2) Disrespect for other employees, as well as for the leader. It is understood that the employee is showing negative emotions or aggression towards his own colleagues and his leader. 3) Personal aggression. This type of counter-productiveness implies the spread of aggression to a specific person, as well as to oneself.
Counterproductive behavior depends partly on the specifics of the activity and, in addition, depends on the norms and values that are prevalent in the given organization. Various forms of counterproductive activity reduce labor productivity. Thus, counterproductive behavior has a negative impact on the financial and psychological well-being of the organization and employees. It can be assumed that, on the one hand, counterproductive behavior is generated by the presence of burnout among employees. However, on the other hand, counterproductive behavior contributes to the development of burnout syndrome among employees of the organization.
The main factors that contribute to the motivation of counterproductive behavior include:
1. Individual characteristics of employees: personality traits, values and ways of behavior,
2. Interpersonal relations: interaction with colleagues, regulatory control, fairness, coordination of actions of the leader, workload and organization of work, implying the presence of obstacles.
Counterproductive behavior is any deliberate activity by employees that is detrimental to the legitimate interests of the organization. In addition, this is any deliberate actions of employees that violate common norms and values in the organization, harm the organization as a whole and individual employees of the organization [19].
Today, there are two main types of motivation for counterproductive behavior:
1. Instrumental motivation assumes that employees harm the organization in order to achieve their own goals. They eliminate any injustice that is significant to them and improve their own situation.
2. Expressive motivation assumes that counterproductive behavior is an expression of negative emotions, primarily anger, which arises in relation to the organization and its employees.
It can also be noted that counterproductive behavior is more often detected in employees who experience negative emotions, and also do not receive positive emotions in the process of their work. It is easy to draw parallels here with emotional exhaustion as part of burnout syndrome.
Conclusion
The presence of demotivating factors in employees within the organization is presumably correlated with the presence of professional burnout syndrome in these employees. The state that occurs in an individual as a result of the professional burnout syndrome violates the motivation system, as a set of the most significant motives for the employee. The most significant values are subject to distortion. In order to preserve the mental, emotional and physical resources of the individual, the previously selected higher values are replaced with more primitive ones. Such a state of an individual can contribute to the development of counterproductive behavior in him.
It is important to note that for organizational psychology the issue of the effectiveness of the organization, the leveling of demotivating factors, the prevention of the development of various syndromes, including the professional burnout syndrome, is by far the most important and relevant.
1. Ahola K. Occupational burnout and health//Research Reports 81, 2007 - p. 117.
2. Bakker A. B., Costac P. L.. Chronic job burnout and daily functioning: A theoretical analysis//Elsevier GmbH, 2007 - p. 112-119.
3. Barysh O. Why staff motivation may not work // HR-management. Practice of personnel management. 2011. No. 12. S. 34-36.
4. Borisova I.I. Psychological conditions for reducing staff motivation under the influence of external influences // Russian Journal of Education and Psychology. 2018 S. 12-17.
5. Burchakova M.A., Sardanyan A.R. Organizational stress: management in the context of a socially oriented economy // Russian Journal of Entrepreneurship. - 2012 - Volume 13. - No. 20 - p. 79 - 84.
6. Chen X., Hu D. Research on Online Teaching Based on Multiple Platforms and Teaching Methods in COVID-19 Epidemic Period// Proceedings of the 2020 3rd International Seminar on Education Research and Social Science (ISERSS 2020) “Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research”. Volume 516. Published by Atlantis Press SARL. P.229-233.
7. Dubovik Yu.V. Demotivation as the opposite effect of motivation: foreign and Russian practice // Electronic Bulletin of the Rostov Socio-Economic Institute. 2016. No. 2.
8. Dunlop, P.D., Lee, K. Workplace Deviance, Organizational Citizenship Behavior, and Business Unit Performance: the Bad Apples Do Spoil the Whole Barrel//Journal of Organizational Behavior, 2004, p. 67-80.
9. Elliot A.J., Church M. A. A Hierarchical Model of Approach and Avoidance Achievement Motivation//Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1997, No. 1, p. 218-232
10. Gordeeva T.O. Basic types of activity motivation: a need-based model // Bulletin of Moscow University. Series 14: Psychology. 2014. No. 3. S. 63-78.
11. Grabe M. Burnout syndrome - a disease of our time. Why people burn out and what can be done against it. SPb .: Rech, 2008 - 96s.
12. Ilyin E.P. Motivation and motives. - SPb, 2000.
13. Kelloway, E.K., Francis, L., Prosser, M., Cameron, J.E. Counterproductive Work Behavior as Protest//Human Resource Management Review, 2010, p. 18-25.
14. Kokoulina D.M., Leonov D.O., Akhmedova Yu.D., Krivosheeva D.S. Employee motivation // International Journal of Applied Sciences and Technology "Integral" 2018. P. 55-60
15. Koroleva E.G., Shuster E.E. Burnout syndrome // Journal of the State Medical University -2007 № 3. P. 108-111.
16. Kotov S.V. Psychological determinants of positive motivation // ISOM. 2014. No. 6-1. S. 196-199.
17. Kruglova M. A., Starchenkova E. S.,Kruglov V. G., Vodopyanova N. E.,Leontiev O. V., Kruglov V.A. Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Among Teachers in the Conditions of Distance Learning // Proceedings of the 2020 3rd International Seminar on Education Research and Social Science (ISERSS 2020) “Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research”. Volume 516. Published by Atlantis Press SARL. P.162-165. Larina A.A. Features of mental determinants of burnout in management activities // Territory of Science. 2013. No6 S. 196-199.
18. Lazaroi G. Employee Motivation and Job Performance//Linguistic and Philosophical Investigations, 2015, p. 97-102.
19. Popescu D. M., Bulei I., Mihalcioiu V. The impact of professional identity factors on employee motivation//Proceedings of the 8th international management conference "Management challenges for sustainable development", 2014, p. 907-915.
20. Rodionova E.A. Motivation and stimulation of personnel in the organization. - SPb, SPbSU, 2009.
21. Rozhkov N.T. Motivation and its components. Science-2020. 2013
22. Schaufeli W. B. Burnout: 35 years of research and practice//Career Development International - No. 3, 2009 p. 204-220.
23. Simonov P.V. Motivated brain. M .: "Science", 1987.
24. Steers R.M., Porter L. W. Motivation and Work Behavior. McGraw-Hill, 1987. 595 p.
25. Vodopyanova N.E. Psychodiagnostics of stress. - SPb .: Peter, 2009. - 336 p.
26. Vodopyanova N.E., Starchenkova E.S. Burnout Syndrome: Diagnosis and Prevention, 2nd ed. - SPb .: Peter, 2009 .-336p.
27. Vodopyanova N.E., Shestakova K.N. A positive approach to combating burnout // Russian Journal of Education and Psychology. 2014 No. 3p. 1-23.
28. Wang C., Jiang Zi’an, Zhu Ye. Empirical Study on the Design and Implementation of Online Courses at the Training Center During the COVID-19// Proceedings of the 2020 3rd International Seminar on Education Research and Social Science (ISERSS 2020) “Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research”. Volume 516. Published by Atlantis Press SARL. P. 17-20.
29. Wang H., Xu H. Research on Financing Difficulties and Countermeasures of Small and Micro-Enterprises in China: An Analysis Based on COVID-19// Proceedings of the 2020 3rd International Seminar on Education Research and Social Science (ISERSS 2020) “Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research”. Volume 516. Published by Atlantis Press SARL. P.247-251.
30. Zamfir K. Job satisfaction. M .: Politizdat, 1983.
