Read exhaustion you associate with work, while keeping attribution and causation separate.
The seven-item CBI Work-related Burnout module asks about emotionally exhausting work, feeling burnt out or frustrated, fatigue across a working day and energy for family and friends. It summarizes reported work-related exhaustion rather than diagnosing its cause or assessing job performance.
The first three work items use degree anchors and the last four use frequency anchors. The energy-for-family-and-friends item alone is reversed as one hundred minus its response code. At least four of seven valid ratings are required; divide by the actual valid count.
Reported connection to work
The source defines work-related burnout as prolonged physical and psychological exhaustion perceived as related to one’s work. Perceived is important: these questions record a connection made in self-report, not an experiment establishing a cause. The module asks about work itself, the end of the working day, mornings and energy during leisure time. It does not observe your schedule, employment conditions or performance. Its mean should not determine a hiring decision, a fitness-for-work judgment or whether an organization has caused a person’s difficulties. Those decisions need different information and appropriate authority.
A higher mean and what remains unknown
A higher mean indicates more reported exhaustion or frustration in relation to work and less energy on the positively worded item after reversal. It does not give a probability of future illness or show that a specific intervention will be sufficient. A respondent may be facing workload, limited control, conflicting demands or another situation that these seven questions do not distinguish. The result can help name an experience for a discussion, but it should not turn uncertainty into a definitive explanation. Read the items and valid count before considering what support might be useful.
A lower mean is not a work-health certificate
A lower mean indicates less endorsement of the experiences captured by the answered work items. It does not certify safe working conditions, rule out a health problem or mean that you must continue an arrangement that concerns you. Difficulties not represented here can still matter. Likewise, reporting ample leisure-time energy does not cancel every concern about work; it contributes once to a seven-item summary after the source reversal. If tiredness is persistent, unexplained or affecting daily life, you can seek qualified health advice without waiting for a particular score or risk label.
Applicability and the minimum of four
If the work questions do not apply to your situation, NA lets you retain that fact rather than invent a work experience. You still make a selection for every displayed item. The source requires at least four valid work responses among seven; three are insufficient even if the program could compute an arithmetic average. Four valid zeroes yield 0.00 and are different from missing information. When a mean is available from a partial set, read which items contributed and the four-of-seven count. Different missing patterns can affect comparisons between attempts.
Degree frequency and the energy reversal
For a fictional full work sequence in source order, take response codes of 75, 50, 25, 100, 75, 0 and 100. The last item asks about sufficient energy, so its adjusted contribution is 100 minus 100, or zero. The adjusted sum is 325 and 325 divided by 7 gives 46.428571…, displayed as 46.43. The first three codes correspond to degree anchors; the remaining codes correspond to frequency anchors. A raw zero on the energy item instead contributes one hundred. Neither outcome is missing, and the mean is not a percentage risk.
Two domain means do not divide up the cause
Imagine a fictional respondent whose personal mean is higher than the work-related mean. The difference cannot show that a certain share of exhaustion comes from outside work: the modules have different item content and one explicitly asks for a perceived work connection. Another respondent may have a high work mean and several circumstances that were not measured. The questionnaire cannot assign causal percentages to either person. Nor do the two CBI modules reproduce the WHO’s three dimensions of occupational burnout. They are different frameworks with different questions and purposes.
Support can involve working conditions
Write a short description of one difficulty, the work conditions around it and what change or support you would like to discuss. Where appropriate and available, a supervisor, worker representative, occupational-health service or qualified health professional may be part of that conversation. WHO guidance emphasizes organizational action on working conditions and meaningful worker participation, alongside support for individuals. That does not guarantee a particular workplace can provide every option. You can read the personal guide, seek relevant support or end the reflection. The result does not require an additional personality or career test.
The source and the website presentation
This page uses the complete seven-item work module with the complete six-item personal module, while the client-related CBI module is not administered. The source permits commercial and non-commercial use with a clear citation to Borritz and colleagues’ 2006 PUMA study. We preserve the two response formats, the single energy reversal and the source minimum of four valid work ratings. Optional NA, interleaved presentation and working Chinese wording are identified website choices, without established local or cross-language validation. No combined score, clinical cutoff, risk band or population comparison is added; sharing contains no private responses or means.