THE MODERATING EFFECT OF BURNOUT IN RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN JOB COMPLEXITY AND PSYCHOLOGICAL DETACHMENT

Objective: this search aims to test the correlation between job complexity and psychological detachment then stats how the burnout can affect in this relationship and dose the burnout can contribute in development of this relationship. Theoretical framework: the research adopted some questions like how can psychological detachment can make the employee keeping away from work and isolates himself from work environment and how can the job complexity enhance this behavior for employee ,and how can the burnout increase the correlation between job complexity and psychological detachment ?, then trying to extraction some of recommendations may contributes in enhancing practicing and adopting these three variables (job complexity, psychological detachment and burnout) in a symbol of workers in center of Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research, and from the importance of this search to research's society and searched symbol this search made main question (dos the burnout increase the correlation between job complexity and psychological detachment ?). Method: the analytical survey method has been used in achieving this search, and it has been adopted the mean, standard deviation and different coefficient to analysis the answers of symbol which was reached (215), to determine the level of relative importance to each variable in depending on different coefficient , then to test the relationship among these variables the search made three main hypotheses one of them was the hypothesis of moderating effect of burnout in correlation between the job complexity with psychological detachment. Results and conclusion: the search concluded that the relationship between the job complexity and psychological detachment doesn’t increase in existence of burnout. The most important recommendation was the necessity of work the organizations to create psychological healthy environment far from burnout and low stress to reach continuous positive communication of employees with their organizations.


INTRODUCTION
Work stress is one of the most important topics in organizational behavior research, because this topic reproduces itself with the development of organizations although modern technology has facilitated many procedures for achieving organizational activities and work but the stress associated with work still exist and greatly affect the employee's productivity whether in the public or private sectors, One of the most prominent syndromes of work stress is psychological burnout, which is associated with particular behaviors that are associated with a pathological condition at the physiological and psychological levels, which in turn is reflected in the employee's performance at work and his social relationships inside and outside the organization. According to what many previous studies have proven, there is a relationship between complex jobs that move away from routine and monotony, and the psychological burnout that results from performing such these jobs. In addition, many studies indicated that there is a relationship between psychological burnout and psychological detachment, which refers to the state of the employee's distance from work and the lack of feeling of psychological communication with work, which in turn, according to previous studies, is associated with job complexity, which it is part of the recovery state that the employee resorts to in order to overcome the stress that he is exposed to during work by isolating himself from them or forgetting them. So, the research came out to explore the extent which psychological burnout can contribute to maximizing the correlation between job complexity with lack of psychological detachment, and does psychological burnout contribute to the development of this relationship and make the employee move away from work and isolate him from the environment associated with it?

Job Complexity
Job complexity is defined as the extent by which a job lacks repetition and routine, provides opportunities for training in independent judgment, requires creativity, and generally performs duties (Gould,1979:211) , (Sally, etal, 2009) defines it as the range by which the job requires independence and less routine, and the range by which the job allows the freedom to make decisions (Sally,etal,2009:493) , job complexity also refers to the range by which the duties within the job are complex and difficult to performance and require a high level of competitiveness (Morgeson&Humphrey,2006:1323, it also indicates the level of difficulty and the cognitive requirements in to complete the job (Resope,etal,2019:2), it can also be defined as the physical and mental demands upon the shoulder on an employee (London&Klimoski,1975:46).
When the job becomes complex and challenging, the individuals will be more likely to be exciting with work related to this job and they will be interested in performing the activities related to it when external control and restrictions are absent (Joo&Lim,2009:50) . Job complexity can boost the excitement and real interest of workers towards work, catalyze them to perform it effectually , and stimulate creative efforts (Sung,etal,2015:6), complex jobs consist of available competitions in the organization when performing jobs and the feeling that the employee is able to overcome challenges in complex jobs because competition develops the job when facing complexity and challenges (Audenaert,etal,2014:612), job complexity in general is a positive dimension of work, and it is related to job well-being and work behaviors, for example, it appeared that job complexity was positively associated with mental health and active life trends as well as motivation at work and performance. Moreover, complex jobs showed that they enhance the employees' ability to matching job requirements, so job complexity establishes important circumstantial resources for employees that mitigate the negative effects of the emotional disharmony of psychological burnout that inflicts employees (Kubicek&Korunk,2015:384) .

Job Complexity Dimensions
In this research, the dimensions developed by (Hackman & Oldham, 1980) were adopted, according to their inclusion in the study conducted by (Baek.K. Joo & Taejo Lim, 2009:53):

Task significance
Defined as the degree by which the job affects the lives of others inside and outside the organization (El.Asmar,2013:16) , (Hackman & Oldman, 1975) defined task significance as the degree by which the job has a fundamental impact on the life or work of employees in other departments of the organization or the external environment (Muwanguzi, etal, 2022), It is also defined as the degree by which work is perceived as affecting the happiness of individuals inside and outside the organization (Allan,etal,2016:2) , according to (Grant, 2008), the meaning of the task played an important role in the processing of social information and the research on job design, in terms social information processing, researchers believe that task meaning is a job feature that is socially constructed through interpersonal interactions, through it, managers can reformulate point of view of employees about the importance of their job through its social significance, In terms of job design, the researchers believe that the meaning of the job is achieved through the meaning of the tasks that make up the job, through which managers can maneuver in redesigning the job, despite the difference of these two points of view, but, (Grant, 2008) concludes that social information processing theorists and job design theorists share the same idea that task meaning makes employees more likely to perform their jobs effectively, and that employees will be motivated to experience their job identities and activities as meaningfully connected with other people (Anderson&Strich,2015:4), also, the job must be meaningful to the employees in a way that makes them believe in its importance and goals (Bezerra,etal,2015:304).

Job Autonomy
Job autonomy indicates as the degree by which the job provides fundamental freedom, independence and discretion to individuals in scheduling their work and determination the procedures to be used in carrying out the job (Sragih,2011:205), Job autonomy also refers to the degree of freedom and independence with which the employee decides to divide his time and choose work methods and other aspects of it (Zhou, etal, 2019:3). , and formulating the procedures that they will implement and choosing the process that they will apply in their work environment (Alvi,etal,2013:577).
Previous studies have shown that job autonomy is a precondition for proactive behavior at work, as it is associated with job formulation, which is defined as an activity based on selfinitiation in changing physical and cognitive specifications in tasks or changing relational boundaries at work (Saragih,etal,2021:178) . Increased job autonomy will allow employees to have more flexibility in defining their jobs because they will possess more freehand in deciding how to accomplish their work, The study conducted by (Parker, 1988) provides a theory about why autonomy increases role capacity and found that enhanced autonomy increases control over problems, in addition to introducing employees to a broader their skills and knowledge that important to their roles, , and increase control in the work environment motivates employees to experiment and acquire fresh skills that are harmonious with work design, and this proves the motivational benefits of functional independence, and this means that when independence is granted to employees, the possibility of making their skills integrated in the core of their roles will be greater (Morgeson&Klinger,2005:400).

Detachment Psychological
The first defined the psychological detachment are (Etzion, Eden, & Lapidot, 1998), as they indicated that it is an individual's feeling's far from the work environment (Etzion,etal,1998: 579) . The psychological detachment according to (Demsky, etal, 2014) also indicates that it is the lack of intellectual communication with work during periods of interruption from work (Demsky,etal,2014:197) . (Smit, 2014) defines it as the condition by which individuals avoid certain work-related behaviors such as reading work-related papers and answering work-related calls, and at the same time they may avoid even thinking about work-related content (Smit,2014:4). (Sonnentag & Fritz ,2007) defined it as the experience of leaving the individual to work behind when he returns home, and this means cutting off the individual's psychological connection with work when he is not in the workplace (Sonnentag,etal,2008:260). There are some theoretic models that shed light on the importance of psychological detachment in recovering from work pressure, the first of which is the border model, which is a model that shows the state of transition among life roles as part of the operations of fragmentation and integration, high role fragmentation indicates well-articulated boundaries among the roles, while high integration hints at ambiguous boundaries. Research indicates that fragmentation between work and home is emphatically associated with psychological detachment , but the other theoretical model is the (effort-recovery) model, which focuses on work requirements, high work requirements require investment in effort, which requires resource consumption , then the recovery phase comes by which resources are renewed and only by which employees can begin to not be exposed to the requirements of their work for a long period, psychological detachment can help secure that employees are not linked cognitively, emotionally and behaviorally with the requirements of work, and this means allowing the recovery process to begin. The other theoretical model is the resource conservation model, which focuses on individuals seeking to obtain, keep and shield tangible and intangible personal resources, psychological detachment according to this model generates a recovery process that helps replenish depleted resources due to the high demands of work, which may contribute to an increasing of positive mood and satisfaction (Potok & Ovadia,2013:2) .

Burnout
The term was coined for the first time by Herbert Freudenberger in 1973, where he defined burnout as a state of exhaustion or frustration caused by devotion to a particular cause, lifestyle, or relationships that fail to bring expected results (Ferrara,2013:3). (Maslach & Leiter, 2007) define it as the psychological syndrome of stress, lack of motivation and inefficiency within the workplace, and psychological burnout is the result of the nature of experiencing pressures that exist in an environment of complex social relations, which involves a person's perception of himself and others at work (Maslach&Leiter,2007:368). (Johnson, etal, 2005) define psychological burnout as the permanent and deep state of symptoms associated with cognitive, emotional, physical and social stress, which appear through long-term work pressure, especially in professions that require high responsibility and contain endless social interactions (Safari,2020:165). (Schaufeli & Enzmanm, 1998) defined it as the constant negative state of the brain of a normal person, which is diagnosed primarily through the appearance of signs of stress, pressure, a sense of decreased efficiency and motivation, and the development of dysfunctional traits and behaviors at work (Naude,2003:2). (Hayes & Bonnet, 2010) defined it as the psychological symptoms of emotional stress, lack of motivation, depersonalization, and a tendency to negative self-evaluation (Qattan,2017:46). From the previous definitions, the researcher can define psychological burnout as the negative psychological response to work pressures, and this response appears through negative reactions towards work and towards the individual's self-perception.

Dimensions of Burnout
The dimensions mentioned in the scale used by (Doris, etal, 2014:11) will be adopted. These dimensions are: 2.6.1 Cognitive wearing It refers to the difficulty in performing some operations related to memory and basic functions, which not only prevents a person from completing his work in his workplace or at home, but also leads to high levels of anxiety and pessimistic thoughts (Almen,20121), cognitive fatigue is reflected in the employee's ability to absorb new information and focus on his work (Horn,etal,2004:369), cognitive fatigue is also associated with negative mood and chronic fatigue, which leads to mental and physical problems (Smith,etal,2018:2).

Fatigue
It is a state of feeling tired, stressed, or drowsy, resulting from not getting enough sleep, mental and physical work for a long time, or prolonged periods of pressure and depression. Boring or repetitive tasks can also intensify the feeling of fatigue (Caldwell,etal,2019:272). It is also defined as the inability to function within desired levels resulting from incomplete recovery from workload or other activities (Gander,etal,2011:574). It also refers to the inability to perform the job at an ideal level, not only at work, which exceeds the existing ability (Banks,etal,2019:2).

Emotional exhaustion
It is a chronic condition of emotional and physical exhaustion caused by excessive job demands and constant troubles (Wright&Cropanzano,1998:486). (Bakker, Nachreiner, and Schaufeli (2001) suggest that emotional exhaustion represents almost a normal reaction to stress, and it has been studied a lot in work stress research, which is similar to job-related fatigue and psychological frustration, psychological and physical complaints, and depression (Cropanzano,etal,2003:160).

RESEARCH DESIGN
The problem of this research is how the psychological burnout of employees leads to their distance from the work environment and how the complexity of jobs is related to a direct relationship with their psychological detachment with work, as well as the importance of psychological burnout in this relationship in the researched organization. So, the aim of this research is to explore how psychological burnout increases the relationship between job complexity and psychological detachment, since the current work environment in Iraqi organizations is characterized by complexity in jobs and daily routines without signs of creative work and newness, in order to explore the relationships between the research variables, the research came up with the following hypotheses: 1.
There is an effect of functional complexity on psychological detachment.

2.
There is an influence of job complexity on burnout.

3.
There is an influence of burnout on psychological detachment. 4.
The effect of job complexity on psychological detachment increases with the presence of psychological burnout.

First. Internal Uniformity Test Results
The results of the test of stability or internal uniformity, came through the coefficient (Cronbach Alpha) which it is used to measurement the stability of the measurement tool in terms of the internal uniformity of the phrases of the tool and as shown in the table (1 ) with which the internal consistency of the items of the scale was confirmed at the level of all dimensions after it exceeded the values of the correlation ( Cronbach Alpha) has an acceptable minimum (0.70), which confirms the internal consistency of the scale and thus the required stability in the event of repeating the test.

Second. The Questionnaire's Stability
The half-split method used to measure reliability which is brief by finding the correlation coefficient between the scores of the odd numbers questions and the scores of the even numbers questions in the questionnaire, and the correlation coefficient corrected by the (Spearman-Brown) equation, if the stability coefficient is (0.67) according to the equation, then it is sufficient for the research that relies on the questionnaire as a tool for it. When applying this method, it was found that the correlation coefficients for the questionnaire was (0.78), which means that it has good stability with its various measures and can be adopted at different times and for the same individuals give the same results.

Third. Descriptive analysis of the search variables
From this analysis, we seek to identify the reality of job complexity as an independent variable and psychological detachment as a dependent variable in addition to burnout as a moderator variable at the Ministry of Education Center of Education. The mean, the standard deviation, and the difference factor for these answers will be dependent, in addition to determining the level of relative importance for each dimension within the same variable by relying on the factor of the difference. The research was relied on the five -year Likert scale , The level of each variable will be between (1-5) at four levels and table (2) shows this, and it includes two levels in the event of an increase from the supposed medium (2.60 to 3.39), so it will be good if it ranges between (3.40 to 4.19) and very good if It increased (4.20 to 5) also includes two levels if it decreases from the supposed medium (2.60 to 3.39), then it is weak if it ranges between (1.80 to 2.59) and very weak if it decreases from (from 1 to 1.79) and as is evident in the table (2 )

Job complexity
The average of job complexity was 2.97, and this indicates that the job complexity was at a middle level, which means that the tasks of the jobs performed by the employees within the researched organization are not characterized by great complexity. For the dimensions of job complexity, the task meaning dimension was the largest, this dimension reached about 3.31, that means its level was within the middle level, and this means that the employees in the researched organization do not feel that their current jobs greatly affect the organization and that their performance of these tasks makes them feel happy. But there is a good feeling that the tasks they perform within the organization somehow affect the community outside the organization. For the job independence dimension, it averaged 2.64, and this means that its level was an middle level, the employees in the researched organization do not feel that they have such great independence and freedom of action in carrying out the tasks assigned to them, in addition to not having the freedom to divide their time in completing these tasks, as well as their weakness in the initiative to change the physical and cognitive specifications of their jobs, as shown in Table (3).

Psychological detachment
Table (3) shows the average of the psychological detachment variable 2.64, and this means that its level was in the middle, as the employees do not feel that they are largely separated from work, but at the same time they feel that they constantly need to take a break and distance themselves from the work atmosphere from time to time, as well as work does not occupy an important space in their thinking, although they do not forget that they are very much associated with work.

Burnout
The average of burnout was 2.98, that mean its level was in the middle, and this means that the employees in the researched organization do not feel much stress because of the tasks they perform within the organization, and there is no great frustration among them because of the working conditions. For the dimensions related to burnout, the dimension of fatigue was the largest with an average of 3.33, meaning that its level was medium. cognitive stress came in second place, with an average of 2.88, which means that its level was average. Employees do not have a great focus at work, as well as ambiguity in thinking that pervades job circles. In addition, they have difficulty learning new things and skills about the job. Emotional Exhaustion came in the third place with an average of 2.71, this means that there is no significant feeling among employees of social relationships among them, in addition to the ambiguity of these relationships for them as shown in Table (3).

Fourth: Test Research Hypotheses
The hypotheses of effect and mediating effect among research variables will be tested:

Testing the first main hypothesis
Which states that (there is a significant effect of job complexity on psychological detachment) ,according to the results in Table (4), the calculated value of F between job complexity and psychological detachment reached to (14.819), which is greater than the tabular value of F which is (3.90) at the level of significance (0.000), i.e. less than the level of significance (0.05), that means, there is a significant effect of job complexity on psychological detachment, so, we accept this hypothesis. The value of the coefficient of determination (R2), it amounted to (0.066), which means that the job complexity variable is able to explain (6%) of the change in psychological detachment, and the (94%), it is due to other variables that are not included in the research form. The value of the straight line inclination coefficient was (0.28), meaning that the change occurs in the level of job complexity by one unit leads to a change in psychological detachment by (0.28), and the constant value was (2.31), so the regression equation for the second main hypothesis is: Y represents psychological detachment and X represents job complexity.

Testing the second main hypothesis
Which states that (there is a significant effect of job complexity on burnout)" and in light of the results in Table (4), the calculated value of F between job complexity and burnout amounted to (27.19), which is greater than the tabular value of F which is (3.90) at the level of significance (0.000), less than the significance level (0.05), That means there is a significant effect of job complexity on burnout, so we accept this hypothesis, the value of the coefficient of determination (R2) amounted to (0.11), which means that the job complexity variable is able to explain its percentage (11%) of the change in burnout, while the (89%) is due to other variables that are not included in the research model. The value of the straight line inclination coefficient was (0.33), which means the change in the level of job complexity by one unit leads to a change in burnout by (0.33), and the constant value was (3.96). Therefore, the regression equation for the second main hypothesis is Y=3.96+0.33X X represents psychological detachment and X represents burnout.

Testing the third main hypothesis
Which states (there is a significant effect of burnout on the psychological detachment) according to the results in table (4), the value of calculated F between burnout and psychological detachment amounted to (34.3), which is greater than the value of the tabular F (3.90), at a significant level (0.000), less than the significance level (0.05), this means there is a significant effect of burnout on psychological detachment, so we accept this hypothesis. The value of the determination coefficient (R2) amounted to (0.14), which means that the burnout variable is able to explain (14%) of the change in psychological detachment. and the (86%), it is due to other variables that are not included in the research model, and the value of the straight line slope coefficient was (0.43), which means, the change occurs in the level of burnout by one unit leads to a change in the psychological detachment by (0.43), and the constant value was (1.88), so the regression equation for the third main hypothesis is Y=1.88+0.43X Y represents psychological detachment and X represents burnout This hypothesis states that (the effect of job complexity on psychological detachment increases with the presence of psychological burnout), we note from table (5), which shows the direct and indirect effect between functional complexity and psychological detachment, and the direct effect is intended to be the effect of job complexity on psychological detachment without the presence of burnout, the indirect effect means the effect of functional complexity on the psychological detachment in the presence of burnout, and according to what Table (5) shows, the direct effect reached (0.497), while the indirect effect reached (0.106), and this means that the direct effect was greater than the indirect effect, so, the hypothesis will be rejected and the alternative hypothesis will be accepted, so the hypothesis will become (the effect of job complexity on psychological detachment does not increase in the presence of burnout), for the value of (R2), it amounted to (0.37), and this means that the regression model for job complexity by mediating burnout is able to explain (37%) of the change in psychological detachment, while the (63%) is due to other variables that are not included in the regression model, for the significance of the mediating effect of burnout, the (Sobel), (Arion) and (Goodmen) tests were performed, as in figures (1) and (2), depending on the values of (Estimate), (S.E.) and (C.R.) shown in the table ( 6) All values were greater than (1.96) at a significant level (0.000), less than (0.05), meaning that the mediating effect of burnout was significant.

CONCLUSIONS
The research reached, by the results obtained, to set of conclusions, on the basis of which the associated recommendations with were put: 1. There is a weakness in the job complexity of the sample of the researched organization because there is a dominant feeling among the employees in the surveyed organization, that means their work does not significantly affect the organization or society in general, and the independence in performing tasks was weak, and there is not a large and sufficient space of freedom in performing the tasks and daily work assigned to employees. Therefore, the research recommends the need to give importance to changing their job reality and making their jobs meaningful, as well as giving them a sufficient space of freedom to perform their duties within the organization, because of the positive impact on developing the Initiative of these employees and giving new ideas about the job. 2. The employees in the researched organization feel that they are in great contact with work, and that their communication with their work extends outside their official working hours, so they feel that they need to take a greater amount of rest necessary to re-energize themselves. Therefore, the research recommends the need to give employees a sufficient rest outside their work and give them more opportunity to spend enough time with their families and don't communicate with them outside official working hours.
3. Despite its average rates, there is a feeling of burnout among the employees, according to the findings of the organization, this means that the employees often feel that they are tired and exhausted because of the work, but this fatigue does not cause much burnout, but it has an effect on their psyche, the tasks and their requirements are not clear, so they face great difficulties in learning new skills. So the research recommends the need to make the organizational environment healthy and motivating environment in which the tasks are clear and understood by the workers because of this positive impact in enhancing the morale of the employees and making them willing to learn new skills pertaining to their jobs. 4. The research concluded that the effect of job complexity on psychological detachment does not increase with the presence of burnout as a moderating variable, this means that burnout in its relatively small amount does not enhance the relationship between job complexity and psychological detachment.