Síndrome de Boreout : ¿qué sabemos de él?

Abstract

RESUMEN: se realizó una revisión de literatura para conocer el estado del desarrollo conceptual, enfoques y perspectivas acerca del síndrome de Boreout, que se presenta en el ámbito laboral, y que surge como respuesta a una infraexigencia. Su consecuencia es el aburrimiento crónico en el lugar de trabajo. Se identifica que todos los autores que se han referido a este síndrome lo han hecho a partir de la conceptualización realizada en 2009 por Rothlin & Werder, siendo casi inexistente la producción teórica novedosa. Aunque se han hecho algunos ejercicios de evaluación y medición, no se encuentran mediciones y/o evaluaciones que revistan suficiencia para establecer condiciones determinantes en la aparición y mantenimiento del síndrome, como tampoco estrategias de afrontación relacionadas con las variables de personalidad del individuo.

ABSTRACT: In this work, a literature review was performed to identify the state of conceptual development, theoretical approaches, trends and perspectives about the Boreout syndrome, conceptualized in 2009 by Rothlin & Werder, and defined as the psychological and behavioral manifestations that appear in a person when experiences underdemand in his job. The incidence of the phenomenon has been studied with works such as that of Dan Malachowski (cited in Rothlin & Werder, 2009), who in 2005 and from a survey of more than one hundred thousand workers, concluded that 33% of them believed that their work presented no challenge, and he spent an average of two hours a day “killing” time (not counting the feeding times and rest times allowed within the day). The same research stated that 15% of office staff worldwide are bored with their work. Another survey, this time from the consulting firm TMI (Transformation Driven with Inspiration), found that 80% of the staff did not feel involved in their work, and remained indifferent to the successes and failures of their organization (Rothlin & Werder, 2009). The resources used to acces to the bibliographic materials were electronic databases,including EBSCOhost, PsycINFO, ProQuest, Dialnet, ScienceDirect and Google Scholar.A manual search for information was also carried out in some journals such as the International Journal of Psychological and Behavioral Sciences, the Journal of Organizational Behavior, the Journal of Applied Psychology, and the Inter-American Journal of Occupational Psychology, among others. In addition, the library catalogs and digital repositories of the Universidad de San Buenaventura, Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana, Universidad CES, Universidad de Antioquia, and Institución Universitaria de Envigado were also searched. It is identified that all the authors who have referred to the syndrome, take up the concept elaborated by Rothlin and Werder (2009), the novel theoretical production being almost non-existent. Although some design and validation exercises of instruments have been carried out for its measurement, such as those carried out by Cabrera (2014), Azabache (2016), Beltrán et al. (2016) and Stock (2016), measurements and evaluations have not been made that are sufficient to establish determining conditions in the appearance and maintenance of the syndrome.