Background. Organization not only must recruit the top talent, but also have to inspire employees to apply their full capabilities at work. Whereas engagement is defined as a persistent, positive affective-motivational state of fulfillment characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption; burnout refers to a psychological syndrome of emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced personal accomplishment. As burnout is characterized with feeling emotionally and physically drained, detached attitude towards work, and decline in feelings of competence and productivity at work, it can be expected burnout influences people’s functioning at work in an unfavorable way. By contrast, engagement expected to be positively related with job performance and organizational outcomes. However, employee engagement will always be limited by the amount of enablement the organization provides. So it is important to identify the qualities of work environment contribute to employees’ experience of engagement and burnout.

Methods. This study follows cross-sectional research design, using a questionnaire consist of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (2003), Maslach Burnout Inventory-General Scale (1996), and Areas of Work Life Scale (2000). Data were collected from a convenience sample of 123 full-time employees from various public and private sector organizations. One-way between-groups multivariate analysis of variance was performed to investigate the difference in perceived congruence at work environment (workload, control, reward, community, fairness, and values) on employees’ psychological well-being (engagement and burnout).

Results. There was a statistically significant difference between employees perception of their work environment on the combined dependent variables, F (2, 120) = 13.51, p = .01; Wilks’ Lambda = .82; partial eta squared = .18. Using a Bonferroni adjusted alpha level of .03, when the results for the dependent variables were considered separately, the two dependent variable, burnout (F (1, 121) = 27.06, p = .01, partial eta squared = .18) and engagement (F (1, 121) = 5.49, p = .02, partial eta squared = .04) both reach statistical significance difference. An inspection of the mean scores indicated employees who experience congruence reported higher levels of engagement (M = 59.29, SD = 1.20) and lower levels of burnout (M = 26.46, SD = 0.75), than employees experienced incongruence with lower engagement level (M = 50.62, SD = 3.50) and higher burnout level (M = 38.47, SD = 2.17). In depth statistical analysis run to find which aspect of work environment correspond to employees’ psychological well-being. It is found there is a statistical significance difference in the degrees of value congruence on employees’ engagement and burnout experience, F (2, 120) = 6.71, p = .01; Wilks’ Lambda = .90; partial eta squared = .10.

Conclusions. The results suggest with greater congruence there is a greater likelihood of high engagement level, whereas with less congruence there is a greater likelihood of experiencing high burnout level. Value congruence plays a central role in employees’ psychological well-being. Value influence employees’ behavior by providing both direction and meaning to the job they do. When there is a values conflict on the job, employees find themselves making a trade-off between works they want to do and the work they have to do.

Added-Values. By examining engagement and burnout as a unique state occur simultaneously, this research explains how difference in work environment evaluation linked to employees’ level of engagement and burnout. The results showed organization should consider value congruence seriously. Employees do not arrive with identical values, one possible attempt is by accommodating a variety of work approaches employee applied to their job. This shows organization are responsive to the values employees bring to their work. A more extensive process is values clarification. Value clarification involves a dialogue managed by special task force includes a strong representation of both management and staff. As the discussion takes place, both party identifies conflicts reflect perspectives of people with a range of approaches to work, its challenges and its limitations. The main aim is to establish processes for conflict resolution targeting an individual or group. Both parties should work together to formalize clearly articulated values later enact corporate policies to assure it direct important decisions and guide day-to-day work. Value clarification contributes to building the necessary harmony makes engagement with work possible and reduces the mismatches lead to burnout.

Keywords: engagement; burnout; Areas of Worklife; MANOVA; organizational value