Navigating workaholism, life balance, and quality of life among academic nurse educators: exploring the role of resilience

Abstract

Background

Academic nurse educators play a vital role in shaping the future nursing workforce. However, the high demands of their profession often contribute to workaholism—an uncontrollable compulsion to work excessively—which disrupts work-life balance and negatively impacts professional quality of life and well-being.

Purpose

This study aimed to examine the relationships among workaholism, resilience, life balance, and professional quality of life among academic nurse educators. Additionally, it explored whether resilience mediates the effects of workaholism on quality of life.

Methods

A descriptive correlational research design was used, involving a convenience sample of 317 academic nurse educators from the Faculty of Nursing at Alexandria University, Egypt. Four validated and reliable tools were utilized: the Dutch Work Addiction Scale, Life Balance Inventory, Professional Quality of Life Scale, and Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale. Descriptive statistics, correlation analysis, and path analysis using structural equation modeling (SEM) were applied.

Results

The findings revealed that approximately two-thirds of academic nurse educators exhibited workaholic tendencies, particularly compulsive working patterns, and reported unbalanced lives. While 77.9% demonstrated moderate professional quality of life, 67.5% exhibited moderate resilience. Significant negative correlations were found between workaholism and life balance, professional quality of life, and resilience (p < 0.001). Path analysis showed that resilience and life balance both played significant roles in reducing the negative impact of workaholism and enhancing professional quality of life. Demographic factors such as age, gender, academic qualifications, and years of experience significantly influenced levels of workaholism and resilience.

Conclusions

Workaholism significantly undermines life balance and professional quality of life among academic nurse educators, while resilience and life balance act as protective factors that mitigate these negative effects. Academic institutions should implement structured interventions such as resilience building programs, workload management strategies, and faculty well-being policies to support educators. For policymakers, prioritizing resilience building and workload reforms within national higher education frameworks is essential to protect faculty well-being, strengthen retention, and ensure the sustainability of nursing education.

Clinical trial number

Not applicable.

Introduction

In recent years, the academic community has undergone significant shifts, with fewer individuals feeling secure in their jobs and an increasing emphasis on producing high-quality research, rather than solely focusing on student numbers and teaching quality. This shift underscores the need to address sources of stress within academia, as it is believed to exacerbate existing job-related pressures [1–3]. Academic nurse educators, as one of society’s most valuable resources and a critical component of nursing institutions, play a pivotal role in educating and training specialized nursing workforces. At the same time, they continually strive to enhance their abilities to achieve the objectives of their educational institutions [1, 2, 4].

Academic nurse educators face numerous pressures from various responsibilities, including teaching, exam preparation, research, clinical training, community outreach, administration, participation in campus-wide and professional committees, pursuing promotion, self-development, scholarship commitments, and meeting institutional expectations (American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN) [5]. These demanding job requirements and expectations can be risk factors for workaholism, diminished quality of life, and work-life imbalance, potentially leading to burnout and a higher likelihood of leaving academia [6].

Resilience has emerged as a key protective factor that supports well-being, goal-setting, and emotional regulation. It may buffer the negative impact of excessive work demands and help faculty sustain both personal and professional effectiveness [7, 8]. However, while workaholism, life balance, and resilience have been studied in various contexts, little is known about how they interact among academic nurse educators in the Middle East and North Africa This study addresses that gap by examining the relationships among workaholism, life balance, resilience, and professional quality of life among academic nurse educators in Egypt. Using structural equation modeling, it further explores the mediating role of resilience, providing new evidence for both theory and practice.

Conceptual framework

The constructs of workaholism, quality of life, life balance, and resilience guide conceptualization and measurement in this study

Workaholism refers to an individual’s overwhelming drive to work excessively, even when it negatively impacts their personal and professional lives [9]. A key feature of workaholism is the overcommitment of time and energy to one’s job [10, 11].

Schaufeli et al. [12] identified two interrelated components of workaholism: working excessively and working compulsively. Working excessively refers to the behavioral aspect, where individuals consistently put in long hours, often at the expense of other areas of life. In contrast, working compulsively refers to the cognitive aspect, characterized by an obsessive preoccupation with work and an inability to stop thinking about it [12–15]. Although workaholics often feel eager to engage in their work, they seldom derive true satisfaction from it. Compulsive workers, in particular, tend to experience high levels of stress and anxiety [16, 17].

Life balance and quality of life (QoL) are variables that can be significantly impacted by workaholism [18]. Life balance refers to how everyday activities are organized to meet key human needs, drawing from interdisciplinary research on the physiological and psychological factors crucial for well-being [19]. Matuska and Christiansen [20] identify four need-based scales within the life balance model: physiological health, relationships, identity, and challenge or interest. Physiological health refers to the active processes that involve various adaptation mechanisms to maintain or restore health by coordinating interactions across all physiological systems. Relationships emphasize the importance of fostering comfort and trust before collaboration can occur, including factors such as time spent with friends and the quality of family interactions. Identity is the combination of traits, qualities, experiences, and behaviors that define individuals as unique [20]. Lastly, challenge or interest represents obstacles that make life more engaging. Finding a challenge or interest is essential to achieving a fulfilled and meaningful life [21]. Having a challenge or interest not only adds meaning but also contributes to personal peace. Overcoming challenges can make life more fulfilling and reduce suffering [20, 22].

For individuals to maintain a healthy work-life balance and fulfill their roles in both life and society, they must allocate appropriate attention to all their responsibilities [23]. However, there is a growing consensus among experts that workaholism is a subset of work addiction, which negatively impacts both life balance and quality of life [1, 10].

Quality of life is shaped by how individuals interpret their goals, expectations, norms, and fears within the context of their culture. Stamm [24] defines Professional Quality of Life (ProQOL) as individuals’ attitudes toward their work, comprising two key components: compassion satisfaction (CS) and compassion fatigue (CF). Compassion satisfaction refers to the positive aspects of a job, where individuals derive joy and a sense of self-appreciation from their work. In contrast, compassion fatigue is the negative result of prolonged exposure to suffering, consisting of two elements: burnout and secondary traumatic stress, which can occur simultaneously or independently [24]. Burnout is marked by emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and a lack of personal fulfillment at work, while secondary traumatic stress stems from work-related trauma and fear, leading to negative emotions [24, 25].

ProQOL is influenced by both the positive and negative elements of a job, which may be shaped by an individual’s personal characteristics and work-related factors [26, 27]. Additionally, various aspects of life such as health, beliefs, social connections with friends and family, and the environments in which individuals live can significantly affect their QoL [28]. Overworking has been linked to numerous health risks, including cardiovascular disease, fatigue, stress, depression, anxiety, poor sleep quality, substance abuse, poor mental health, hypertension, musculoskeletal disorders, unhealthy behaviors, and an overall diminished quality of life [29].

Given the increasing demands placed on academic educators, cultivating resilience is essential. Resilience, as an adaptive capacity, allows individuals to navigate challenges, recover from setbacks, and maintain their well-being while balancing the pressures of both professional and personal life [1].

Resilience is the capacity to effectively manage stressful situations and adapt to challenges without disrupting personal growth [30, 31]. It is shaped by social support systems and protective factors that help individuals regulate emotions and engage in metacognitive processes. In educational and academic contexts, resilience refers to the ability to overcome both one-time and recurring challenges that may hinder academic progress [32]. Resilient individuals are better equipped to cope with stress, often minimizing or avoiding its negative effects [33]. Likewise, research indicates that individuals with high resilience are more likely to thrive despite academic difficulties, recover quickly from setbacks, and adjust more easily than those with lower resilience levels [34].

Resilience is linked to factors such as academic confidence, well-being, goal-setting, relationships with peers, physical stamina, and emotional regulation [7, 8]. Low resilience is associated with depressive and anxious symptoms, while higher resilience corresponds to better emotional health [35].

Research hypotheses

The proposed conceptual framework is grounded in an integrative approach that draws on both empirical evidence and theoretical underpinnings, particularly the Conservation of Resources (COR) theory. The COR theory posits that individuals are motivated to acquire, preserve, and protect valuable resources—including psychological, emotional, and social assets—to withstand stress and avoid resource depletion [37]. In the academic context, workaholism represents a key stressor that drains personal resources and disrupts life balance, leading to negative emotional and professional consequences [12, 14]. This is especially true for academic nurse educators who often navigate overlapping roles in clinical education, research, and administration—pressured by institutional demands and heightened publication and promotion expectations [1].

In this study, workaholism is conceptualized as the initiating strain that adversely affects both the life balance and professional quality of life. Studies have demonstrated a positive correlation between workaholism and job demands, including work overload, due to the emotional attachment and difficulty in detaching workaholics from their work [10]. Even though they recognize their excessive work habits, workaholics often feel powerless to stop, driven by the stress they experience when they are not working [11]. The negative effects of workaholism extend to both physical and emotional well-being, often leading to poor job performance and reduced enthusiasm for work. However, Ruiz-Garcia et al. note that we can tolerate a certain degree of workaholism if it leads to achievement [17].

Resilience is positioned as a central psychological resource capable of mediating this relationship, acting as a protective factor that enables educators to manage occupational stressors and maintain well-being [21, 33]. Research has highlighted the importance of resilience as a mediator between adverse experiences and quality of life (QoL) and happiness, demonstrating its critical role in helping individuals maintain well-being despite challenges. In this study, resilience is conceptualized as a personal resource that could play a role in the effect of workaholism on life balance and quality of life. Resilience is expected to buffer the negative impact of workaholism, helping individuals maintain better life balance and higher quality of life despite excessive work demands [17, 36, 37].

The relevance of this model is underscored by the increasing workload and psychological demands placed on faculty in academic settings, where role overload often fosters excessive work engagement and weakens boundaries between professional and personal life [2, 38].

By integrating behavioral (workaholism), psychological (resilience), and outcome-based (life balance and professional quality of life) dimensions, this framework advances current literature in two ways. First, it addresses a significant research gap by focusing on academic nurse educators—a population frequently overlooked despite their vulnerability to burnout and professional exhaustion. Second, it offers a structured pathway for examining how resilience can be fostered institutionally and individually to counter the escalating risks associated with excessive work involvement. This model offers a foundation for future empirical investigations and practical interventions aimed at promoting faculty sustainability and psychological resilience in academic nursing settings.

Accordingly, the following hypotheses are proposed (Fig. 1):

Fig. 1.

Proposed conceptual framework

Hypothesis 1

(H1): Workaholism will be negatively correlated with life balance and quality of life among academic nurse educators.

Hypothesis 2

(H2): Resilience partially mediates the relationship between workaholism and each of life balance and quality of life among academic nurse educators.

Study context

Full-time academic positions, particularly in the university sector, are associated with extended working hours, high intensity, and mounting expectations for continuous productivity in teaching, research, and service [39]. In the Egyptian academic context—such as at Alexandria University, one of the oldest and most reputable nursing colleges in the Middle East—nurse educators typically work 36 to 40 h per week. However, actual workload often exceeds these hours due to extracurricular responsibilities, student advising, committee work, and research obligations. Despite their expertise and institutional contributions, academic salaries at the public institution are low compared to private universities and also remain modest compared to peer institutions in other Gulf countries, posing challenges for faculty retention and motivation [40, 41].

Adding to this workload is the large faculty-to-student ratio. In recent years, nursing programs in Egypt have witnessed rising enrollment rates among both male and female students. As a result, faculty are expected to manage large student cohorts, often with limited staffing, which adds strain to academic delivery and individualized student support. Nurse educators are expected to be present in various instructional roles—delivering lectures, evaluating assignments and exams, and supervising clinical training in both real-world hospital settings and simulation labs. They also participate in community outreach and student-centered learning activities [1, 14, 42, 43].

Becoming a qualified academic nurse educator in Egypt requires a lengthy academic journey. Obtaining a master’s or doctoral degree typically takes three to five years, depending on research progress and program structure. Following the doctoral degree, a promotion to assistant/associate professor generally demands a minimum of five years of academic service that includes a documented record of research publications, classroom teaching, thesis supervision, student mentoring, and regular engagement in clinical education, etc. Faculty promotion to full professor involves similar expectations, with added emphasis on research leadership and institutional service. These cumulative expectations alongside the implicit “publish or perish” culture—create high demands for sustained performance across diverse academic tasks. Faculty are expected not only to maintain consistent teaching and clinical excellence, but also to produce publishable research under increasing institutional pressure [44]. In the current academic climate, particularly within open access publishing models, publication in reputable, high-impact journals often requires substantial article processing charges (APCs), which can be prohibitively expensive for faculty in low- and middle-income countries. This financial burden adds another layer of stress to the academic role [45]. As Abou Hashish et al. (2024) highlighted, the rise in predatory publishing practices and financial barriers to legitimate journals have placed faculty at risk of exploitation or academic marginalization, especially when institutional support for research dissemination is limited [3].

However, it is noteworthy that in recent years, some public universities in Egypt, including Alexandria University, have begun offering publication incentives to encourage faculty research productivity. These incentives provide financial support or rewards for publishing in indexed journals, which may partially alleviate the burden of APCs and motivate scholars to pursue high-quality, peer-reviewed publications. Nevertheless, the availability and consistency of such incentives vary across institutions and remain limited relative to the rising global costs of open-access publishing. This discrepancy contributes to a persistent tension between institutional expectations and individual resource availability.

When work demands become overwhelming, these pressures can transform into significant stressors, leading to detrimental effects on overall well-being. Moreover, work-family conflict emerges when individuals or their families perceive their roles as central to their identity, causing further stress [46]. Studies suggest that those who prioritize family over work experience a better quality of life compared to individuals who strive for an even balance between the two [47]. This highlights the importance of understanding the factors that influence the quality of life of nurse educators [48], especially since this balance directly impacts both personal and professional fulfillment.

The impact of work on well-being is a double-edged sword. On one hand, work can provide satisfaction and purpose, but on the other, it can lead to harmful consequences such as workaholism. In academia, workaholism has become increasingly common due to the open-ended and self-directed nature of academic work [38]. Workaholism exacerbates stress, fatigue, and the risk of depression, making it challenging for individuals to maintain a healthy work-life balance [49].

Problem statement and significance of the study

Despite a growing interest in workaholism, life balance, quality of life, and resilience across professional and healthcare contexts, few studies have examined these variables concurrently among academic nurse educators in the Middle East or North Africa [1, 4, 14]. While the role of resilience as a protective factor consistently emerges in the literature—helping to buffer the negative impacts of work–life conflict and promote well-being—most research has focused on frontline nursing staff or students, not educators [50–52]. Recent evidence confirms that nurse educators in the region face unique stressors including growing academic workload, increasing student enrollment, curriculum reform, and faculty shortages. However, empirical investigations into how resilience relates to their professional quality of life remain limited, particularly within regional academic settings [53, 54].

Although workaholism has been studied as a concept, its prevalence and effects on life balance and quality of life remain underexplored in academic contexts [38]. Common behaviors among academics—such as working during weekends, evenings, or holidays—reflect patterns of workaholism [55]. These behaviors are often normalized in academia, despite their potential to erode personal well-being and life satisfaction. In contrast, research shows that resilience can mitigate the impact of such occupational stress. Resilient nurse educators tend to experience lower stress levels, better overall well-being, and stronger empathy, even under intense demands [56]. For instance, during the COVID-19 pandemic, faculty members who demonstrated higher adaptability also reported improved quality of life and greater psychological strength [36].

Academic nurse educators are particularly vulnerable to workaholism due to overlapping demands in teaching, research, student advising, and clinical supervision. High job expectations and chronic role overload threaten not only their personal and family well-being but also institutional productivity and retention [18, 38]. The mechanisms linking these pressures to professional and personal outcomes—especially through the mediating role of resilience—are not well understood in the academic nursing domain.

This study addresses these gaps by investigating the interrelationships among workaholism, life balance, professional quality of life, and resilience among a large sample of academic nurse educators in Egypt. Using structural equation modeling, it explores both direct and indirect effects and offers one of the first regional path analyses that position resilience as a key mediating resource. The findings contribute novel evidence on how psychological resilience may help mitigate the adverse consequences of excessive work behaviors in academic nursing environments.

This work offers practical implications for developing resilience-focused interventions and institutional strategies that foster sustainable academic careers. Ultimately, the study provides actionable insights for improving job satisfaction, reducing burnout, and strengthening organizational commitment among nursing faculty within higher education settings.

Aim of this study

This study aims to determine the relationship among workaholism, life balance, and quality of life in academic nurse educators. Additionally, it seeks to investigate the role of resilience in the relationships between workaholism, life balance, and quality of life.

Methods

Research design and setting

This descriptive correlational study was conducted at the Faculty of Nursing, Alexandria University—one of the oldest and most prestigious nursing faculties in Egypt and the Middle East. The faculty offers undergraduate and postgraduate degrees, including the Bachelor of Science in Nursing (BSc), postgraduate diplomas, master’s, and doctoral degrees. It comprises nine academic departments: nursing administration, critical care and emergency nursing, psychiatric and mental health nursing, nursing education, community health nursing, gerontological nursing, medical-surgical nursing, pediatric nursing, and obstetric and gynecologic nursing.

The Faculty of Nursing at Alexandria University is the first nationally accredited nursing faculty in Egypt and the second accredited faculty across all scientific fields in Egyptian universities. Its academic programs are periodically reviewed in alignment with national quality assurance standards for higher education [57].

In Egypt, the clinical training model used in undergraduate nursing education is referred to as the Traditional Learning Model (TLM). This model reflects structured collaboration between faculties of nursing and affiliated university hospitals, aiming to bridge the theory–practice gap and ensure high-quality clinical learning. Within the TLM, academic faculty members—including lecturers, assistant lecturers, demonstrators, and clinical instructors—are primarily responsible for supervising groups of students (typically 5 to 15) in assigned hospital units. Students depend heavily on faculty for direct instruction, especially in procedures such as medication administration and technical nursing skills. Faculty assume full responsibility for skill acquisition, clinical integration, and patient safety, while working alongside ward staff to coordinate clinical practice.

Ward nursing personnel, including staff nurses and head nurses, are not formally assigned teaching responsibilities in their job descriptions; however, they are expected to cooperate with faculty in facilitating the learning environment. Their supportive roles include orienting students to ward routines, ensuring compliance with hospital policies, and safeguarding patient safety during clinical training. Head nurses frequently serve as coordinators, arranging student placement and acting as a liaison between faculty and clinical staff. Although structured national training for ward nurses in student teaching does not exist, their collaboration is essential for the smooth functioning of the TLM.

After completing the four-year academic program, students must undertake a mandatory one-year internship, which constitutes the formal preceptorship phase and is conducted primarily in university hospitals. During this year, interns rotate across major clinical specialties and are assigned nurse preceptors who are experienced clinical nurses offer preceptorship, direct supervision, and performance feedback. The goal is to transition interns into competent registered nurses [58]. Faculties organize orientation workshops for preceptors to familiarize them with educational goals, evaluation tools, and mentoring techniques, although a unified national policy for preceptor preparation is still lacking. Evidence from recent Egyptian preceptorship programs indicates that structured preparation significantly enhances preceptors’ teaching knowledge and supervisory skills, underscoring the value of formalized training and support mechanisms.

Faculty supervisors play a complementary role by conducting regular site visits, monitoring progress, and supporting both interns and preceptors. Their responsibilities include aligning the clinical experience with curricular objectives, mediating challenges, and providing academic oversight. Other ward nurses contribute indirectly by serving as role models, reinforcing professional behaviors, and assisting with skill practice when appropriate. The head nurse and nurse manager ensure that staffing and ward routines accommodate interns, while the dean of the faculty provides overall oversight, securing agreements with hospital administrators and monitoring the program quality.

Regarding compensation, interns typically receive a modest stipend during their internship year, but preceptors and faculty supervisors are generally not provided with additional payment, and their teaching contributions are considered part of their professional roles. Support mechanisms include preceptor orientation workshops, structured evaluation forms, and feedback sessions between faculty, students, and hospital leadership. Site visit policies ensure ongoing faculty engagement in clinical settings, while collaborative meetings help address challenges and sustain quality standards.

This structure highlights that the preceptorship program in Egypt, though locally coordinated rather than nationally standardized, is a collaborative endeavor that clearly defines the roles and responsibilities of preceptors, preceptees, faculty, head nurses, nurse managers, and deans. Together, these arrangements ensure that graduates transition into practice as competent and safe registered nurses while also demonstrating how hospital personnel support academic institutions in delivering clinical education [58].

While preceptors guide and evaluate interns in the clinical setting, their role is coordinated and overseen by faculty supervisors from the Faculty of Nursing. These faculty supervisors are responsible for ensuring the alignment of clinical experiences with institutional learning objectives, monitoring students’ progress, and managing any emerging clinical issues [58].

The TLM ensures strong student-faculty contact but also contributes to workload intensification for academic nurse educators, who must balance clinical supervision with curriculum design, academic advising, research output, community engagement, and university service. These overlapping demands—paired with minimal clinical teaching support—create substantial stressors that may impact the professional quality of life and resilience of nursing faculty.

This context provides the foundation for the present study, which explores the interrelations among workaholism, life balance, professional quality of life, and academic resilience among nurse educators working within this multifaceted academic and clinical framework.

Study participants and inclusion criteria

The study targeted all academic nurse educators (N = 350) employed at the Faculty of Nursing, Alexandria University, during the study period, and the entire accessible population of eligible faculty was invited to participate rather than selecting only a subgroup. Inclusion criteria required active employment as an academic nurse educator engaged in teaching and academic duties, while exclusion criteria included those who had been hired for less than six months, those on extended leave, or those not directly involved in teaching activities. Recruitment was carried out through face-to-face interactions, WhatsApp invitations, and Microsoft Forms links, with both paper-based and electronic versions of the questionnaire made available to maximize accessibility and participation. Although a convenience sampling approach was used, measures were taken to enhance representativeness by inviting faculty across all academic departments and tracks and by using multiple recruitment channels to achieve broad coverage. An a priori power analysis using G*Power indicated that a minimum of 150 participants would be sufficient to detect small-to-medium effect sizes (f² = 0.10) with 80% power at α = 0.05 in multiple regression analysis. Ultimately, 317 nurse educators, representing 90.6% of the target population, completed the survey, which provides strong support that the sample is representative of the broader academic nurse educator population at the institution.

Data collection instruments

A self-reported structured questionnaire with four instruments were utilized to gather the data according to follow:

1. The Dutch Work Addiction Scale (DUWAS)

   The current study utilized the English version of the DUWAS, developed by Schaufeli et al. [12], to assess workaholism tendencies among academic nurse educators. The scale consists of 10 items divided into two subscales, each with 5 items: Working Excessively (WE) and Working Compulsively (WC). Respondents rated their answers on a 4-point Likert scale, from 1 (almost never) to 4 (almost always). A cutoff score of 2.5 was applied to both subscales; individuals scoring above 2.5 on both WE and WC were classified as workaholics. Those scoring above 2.5 in WE but below 2.5 in WC were identified as hard workers, while those scoring below 2.5 in WE but above 2.5 in WC showed compulsive working tendencies. A relaxed work approach was characterized by scores below 2.5 in both subscales.

   Originally, Schaufeli et al. [12], validated the scale, finding adequate internal consistency for both subscales (α = 0.78). Recently, the DUWAS was validated for use in Arabic context by Abou Hashish et al. [1], with the Cronbach’s alpha showing acceptable values, indicating the reliability of the workaholism construct (α = 0.88).

2. Professional Quality of Life (ProQOL)

   This study used Stamm [24] ProQOL scale to assess the quality of life among academic nurse educators. The scale consists of 30 items, divided into three subscales: compassion satisfaction (10 items), compassion fatigue in the form of burnout (10 items), and secondary traumatic stress (10 items). Responses were measured on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 = “never” to 5 = “very often.” The overall score ranges from 30 to 150, with classifications of low (22 or less), moderate (23 to 41), and high (42 or more). The ProQOL scale has demonstrated strong internal consistency in previous studies, with Cronbach’s alpha values ranging between 0.72 and 0.87. In a previous study conducted in the Arabic context, the ProQOL demonstrated reliability, achieving a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.89 at a statistical significance level of p = 0.05 [25].

3. Life Balance Inventory (LBI)

   The LBI developed by Matuska and Christiansen [19], was utilized in the current study to evaluate the perceived alignment between how academic nurse educators desire to spend their time in various activity categories and how they actually allocate their time. The inventory consists of 53 items, divided into four need-based scales: physiological health (6 items), relationships (10 items), identity (16 items), and challenge/interest (19 items). Responses were measured on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = “Always LESS than I want” to 5 = “Always More than I want.” Scores on the LBI are interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.49 = very unbalanced, 1.50 to 1.99 = unbalanced, 2.00 to 2.49 = moderately balanced, and 2.50 to 3.00 = very balanced. The LBI has demonstrated satisfactory internal consistency and content validity as a measure of life balance, with Cronbach’s alpha for the four need-based scales ranging from 0.89 to 0.97 [59].

4. Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC)

   The CD-RISC developed by Connor and Davidson [60] and validated by Nartova-Bochaver et al. [61] was used in this study to assess the resilience of academic nurse educators in the workplace. The CD-RISC is a single-dimensional tool consisting of 10 items. Responses were measured on a 5-point Likert scale, where participants rated the extent to which each item described a resilient person, ranging from 0 = “not at all true” to 4 = “absolutely true.” The total score ranges from 10 to 40, with higher scores indicating greater adherence to resilience traits, such as being “able to adapt to change.” Scores were categorized as low (13 or less), moderate (14 to 26), and high (27 or more). The CD-RISC demonstrated reliability with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.90 at a significance level of p = 0.05 [36].

   In addition, demographic and professional data about the participants were collected, including age, gender, academic department, highest degree earned, academic position, and years of experience.

Validity and reliability

The study instruments, administered in English, underwent face and content validity evaluation by a panel of five academic experts to ensure clarity, cultural appropriateness, and alignment with the study objectives. Based on expert feedback, minor adjustments were made to enhance tool effectiveness. Reliability of the instruments was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, demonstrating acceptable internal consistency for each scale: 0.88 for DUWAS, 0.90 for LBI, 0.93 for ProQOL, and 0.94 for CD-RISC, with a significance level of p ≤ 0.05. Additionally, a pilot study was conducted with 20 academic nurse educators to evaluate the clarity and practical applicability of the instruments. Based on the pilot findings, no further modifications were required.

Data collection

After obtaining the necessary ethical approvals and institutional permissions, the researchers distributed the study questionnaires to eligible participants. Both paper-based questionnaires and electronic links were provided, based on participant preference. Electronic links were shared through secure university channels and social media platforms, including WhatsApp and Microsoft Forms, to facilitate participation.

Participants were provided with an informed consent form, which explained the purpose of the study, the voluntary nature of participation, and assurances of confidentiality and anonymity. Completion and submission of the questionnaire were considered as implied consent. Data collection was conducted over a five-month period, from September 2023 to January 2024.

Data analysis

Statistical analysis of the data was conducted using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 25. Descriptive statistics, including frequencies, percentages, means, and standard deviations, were used to summarize the demographic characteristics and study variables. The independent t-test and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) were employed to assess differences in study variables across demographic groups.

Prior to conducting inferential analyses, assumptions of normality, linearity, and homoscedasticity were tested through visual inspection of residual plots and histograms, with no serious violations detected. The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) was used to examine the relationships among the study variables, with correlation strengths interpreted as follows: weak (r = 0.10), moderate (r = 0.30), and strong (r ≥ 0.50). For structural equation modeling (SEM), the data were further examined for multivariate normality and absence of multicollinearity, which confirmed suitability for SEM analysis. SEM was then performed using AMOS version 28 to examine the direct, indirect, and total effects among the study variables. All statistical tests were interpreted at a significance level of p ≤ 0.05 with 95% confidence intervals.

Ethical considerations

Upon receiving approval from the Nursing Research Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Nursing at Alexandria University in Egypt (IRB00013620), the researchers-initiated data collection. They began by explaining the study’s purpose to all participants, highlighting key ethical considerations such as the right to refuse or withdraw from the study at any time, the estimated duration of interviews, data confidentiality measures, and the voluntary nature of participation. The consent procedures and protocols for handling quoted information were also emphasized to ensure transparency and ethical compliance. Anonymity was ensured by not collecting identifying information. Data were coded numerically, and results were reported in aggregate form only.

Results

Demographic and professional characteristics

A total of 317 academic nurse educators participated in the study, with the majority being female (n = 298, 94.0%). Most participants were between 30 and 40 years old (n = 289, 91.2%), indicating that the age distribution of the sample was highly skewed toward this group. This concentration reflects the demographic profile of academic nurse educators in the study setting, where the majority are early- to mid-career faculty members. Academic nurse educators were distributed across various academic departments. The largest proportion held a PhD degree (n = 120, 37.9%), with significant representation among Lecturers (21.8%), Assistant Professors (15.5%), and Professors (15.8%). Additionally, a notable portion of participants (n = 104, 32.8%) had more than 15 years of professional experience. Detailed demographic and professional characteristics are provided in Table 1.

Table 1.

Distribution of the studied sample according to demographic data (N = 317)

Demographic characteristic	No.	%
Age
< 30	12	3.8
30–40	289	91.2
41–50	6	1.9
> 50	10	3.2
Mean ± SD	36.15 ± 4.63
Gender
Male	19	6.0
Female	298	94.0
Department
Nursing education	29	9.1
Nursing administration	32	10.1
Psychiatric Nursing and Mental Health	34	10.7
Community health nursing	31	9.8
Gerontological nursing	20	6.3
Medical surgical nursing	80	25.2
Pediatric Nursing	19	6
Obstetric and Gynecologic Nursing	29	9.1
Critical care and emergency nursing	43	13.6
Academic degree
Bachelor	87	27.4
Master degree	59	18.6
PhD	51	16.1
Post-PhD	120	37.9
Academic occupation
Professor	50	15.8
Assistant professor	49	15.5
Lecturer	69	21.8
Assistant lecturer	28	8.8
Demonstrator	75	23.7
Clinical instructors	46	14.5
Years of experience
< 5	96	30.3
5–10	73	23.0
11–15	44	13.9
> 15	104	32.8
Mean ± SD	10.27 ± 6.1

SD. Standard Deviation

Descriptive analysis of overall workaholism, professional quality of life, life balance, and resilience among the studied nurse educators

Based on the descriptive analysis of Table 2, workaholism showed an overall average score of 2.79 ± 0.57, indicating moderate workaholic tendencies, with a percentage score of 59.60 ± 19.14. The Working Excessively (WE) subscale had an average score of 2.70 ± 0.58, while the Working Compulsively (WC) subscale scored slightly higher at 2.87 ± 0.68. These results suggest that academic nurse educators tend to engage in both excessive and compulsive work behaviors. In terms of classification, the majority of participants (63.4%) were identified as workaholics, a strikingly high prevalence that underscores the extent of excessive work patterns among academic nurse educators. By contrast, 20.8% were categorized as relaxed workers, 13.9% as compulsive workers, and only 1.9% as hard workers.

Table 2.

Mean scores and levels of workaholism, professional quality of life, life balance, and resilience among the studied nurse educators (N = 317)

Variable	Average score	Percent score
Workaholism	2.79 ± 0.57	59.60 ± 19.14
Working excessively (WE)	2.70 ± 0.58	56.76 ± 19.31
Working compulsively (WC)	2.87 ± 0.68	62.44 ± 22.69
Level	No.	%
Relaxed worker	66	20.8
Hard worker	6	1.9
Compulsive worker	44	13.9
Workaholic	201	63.4
Life Balance	1.98 ± 0.58	24.56 ± 14.55
Level	No.	%
Very unbalance	31	9.8
Unbalanced	195	61.5
Moderately balanced	67	21.1
Very balanced	24	7.6
Professional Quality of Life	3.38 ± 0.42	59.47 ± 10.59
Level	No.	%
Low	48	15.1
Moderate	247	77.9
High	22	6.9
Compassion satisfaction	2.57 ± 0.42	39.30 ± 10.48
Burnout	3.31 ± 0.50	57.71 ± 12.38
Fatigue	3.40 ± 0.46	60.01 ± 11.62
Resilience	2.37 ± 0.71	59.18 ± 17.74
Level	No.	%
Low (0–13)	59	18.6
Moderate (14–26)	214	67.5
High (27–40)	44	13.9

Life balance yielded an average score of 1.98 ± 0.58, which falls within the “unbalanced” category and provides strong evidence of compromised balance among academic nurse educators. The majority (61.5%) were classified as unbalanced, 21.1% as moderately balanced, and only 7.6% as very balanced. Additionally, 9.8% were categorized as very unbalanced, highlighting the considerable difficulties many participants face in managing both personal and professional responsibilities effectively.

The ProQOL results indicated a moderate level of professional quality of life, with an average score of 3.38 ± 0.42. Most participants (77.9%) reported moderate ProQOL, while 15.1% had low ProQOL and 6.9% scored high. The compassion satisfaction subscale had a relatively low score of 2.57 ± 0.42, suggesting that many educators derive limited satisfaction from their work. On the other hand, the burnout and fatigue subscales had higher scores (3.31 ± 0.50 and 3.40 ± 0.46, respectively), pointing to moderate to high levels of work-related stress and exhaustion.

On the other hand, the resilience showed an average score of 2.37 ± 0.71, with a significant portion of participants (67.5%) demonstrating moderate resilience. However, 18.6% had low resilience, and 13.9% exhibited high resilience. This suggests that while many educators have the capacity to cope with stress and adversity, a considerable number show only moderate or low levels of resilience. See Fig. 2 for the perceived level of the studied variables among academic nurse educators.

Fig. 2.

Perceived level of the studied variables among academic nurse educators

Study variables and nurse educators’ professional characteristics

Table 3 illustrated statistical significances in the study variables according to academic nurse educators’ professional characteristics, where age, gender, academic degree, and years of experience show significant differences. Significant differences were observed across age groups for several variables. Participants aged > 50 years had the highest scores for workaholism (3.11 ± 0.52), professional quality of life (ProQOL) (3.75 ± 0.41, F = 3.985, p = 0.008), and resilience (2.80 ± 0.74, F = 2.636, p = 0.049). For life balance, participants aged 41–50 years reported the highest score (2.35 ± 1.17, F = 5.655, p = 0.001. Gender differences were also significant. Males had significantly higher scores for ProQOL (3.68 ± 0.21, t = 3.231, p = 0.001) and resilience (2.73 ± 0.66, t = 2.291, p = 0.023) compared to females.

Table 3.

Relationship between demographic data and the study variables (N = 317)

Demographic characteristic	Workaholism	Life balance	Pro-QOL	Resilience
Age
< 30	2.67 ± 0.65	2.48 ± 1.04	3.17 ± 0.31	1.96 ± 0.60
30–40	2.78 ± 0.57	1.97 ± 0.53	3.37 ± 0.42	2.37 ± 0.71
41–50	2.88 ± 0.45	2.35 ± 1.17	3.54 ± 0.47	2.45 ± 0.64
> 50	3.11 ± 0.52	1.57 ± 0.34	3.75 ± 0.41	2.80 ± 0.74
F(p)	1.305 (0.273)	5.655(0.001*)	3.985(0.008*)	2.636(0.049*)
Gender
Male	2.92 ± 0.59	1.92 ± 0.51	3.68 ± 0.21	2.73 ± 0.66
Female	2.78 ± 0.57	1.99 ± 0.59	3.36 ± 0.43	2.34 ± 0.71
t(p)	1.042 (0.298)	0.479 (0.633)	3.231(0.001*)	2.291(0.023*)
Academic degree
Bachelor	2.69 ± 0.58	1.96 ± 0.53	3.28 ± 0.38	2.29 ± 0.77
Master degree	2.78 ± 0.54	2.0 ± 0.57	3.35 ± 0.35	2.28 ± 0.59
PhD	2.70 ± 0.54	2.03 ± 0.62	3.45 ± 0.40	2.43 ± 0.70
Post-PhD	2.90 ± 0.59	1.97 ± 0.62	3.44 ± 0.48	2.44 ± 0.72
F(p)	2.958(0.033*)	0.208 (0.891)	2.964 (0.032*)	1.167 (0.322)
Academic position
Professor	2.77 ± 0.65	2.03 ± 0.79	3.57 ± 0.51	2.47 ± 0.83
Assistant professor	2.98 ± 0.58	1.86 ± 0.42	3.43 ± 0.47	2.52 ± 0.67
Lecturer	2.81 ± 0.51	2.03 ± 0.59	3.35 ± 0.39	2.35 ± 0.65
Assistant lecturer	2.73 ± 0.51	2.02 ± 0.44	3.37 ± 0.32	2.39 ± 0.63
Demonstrator	2.72 ± 0.57	1.97 ± 0.61	3.25 ± 0.33	2.21 ± 0.71
Clinical instructors	2.73 ± 0.60	1.97 ± 0.47	3.39 ± 0.45	2.37 ± 0.72
F(p)	1.472 (0.199)	0.624 (0.681)	3.898(0.002*)	1.441 (0.209)
Years of experience
< 5	2.71 ± 0.57	2.0 ± 0.60	3.29 ± 0.33	2.24 ± 0.69
5–10	2.80 ± 0.53	1.96 ± 0.47	3.35 ± 0.41	2.34 ± 0.69
11–15	2.74 ± 0.54	2.06 ± 0.62	3.36 ± 0.41	2.42 ± 0.67
> 15	2.88 ± 0.62	1.95 ± 0.62	3.49 ± 0.49	2.48 ± 0.75
F(p)	1.532 (0.206)	0.431 (0.731)	3.942 (0.009*)	1.992 (0.115)

t: Student t-test F: F for ANOVA test *: Statistically significant at p ≤ 0.05

Moreover, significant differences were found based on the participants’ academic qualifications. Those with a post-PhD degree had the highest score for workaholism (2.90 ± 0.59, F = 2.958, p = 0.033). Additionally, PhD holders reported the highest ProQOL score (3.45 ± 0.40, F = 2.964, p = 0.032). Regarding years of experience, participants with more than 15 years of experience reported the highest ProQOL score (3.49 ± 0.49, F = 3.942, p = 0.009).

Correlation and regression analysis

Table 4 showed a significant negative correlation between workaholism and each of the study outcomes: life balance (r = -0.424, p < 0.001, R² = 0.18), professional quality of life (r = -0.544, p < 0.001, R² = 0.30), and resilience (r = -0.316, p < 0.001, R² = 0.10). The corresponding R² values indicated that approximately 18% of the variance in life balance, 29.6% of the variance in professional quality of life, and 10% of the variance in resilience can be explained by workaholism alone. Conversely, resilience showed a significant positive correlation with both life balance (r = 0.387, p < 0.001, R² = 0.15) and professional quality of life (r = 0.441, p < 0.001, R² = 0.20). The corresponding R² values indicated that resilience alone explains approximately 15% of the variance in life balance and 19.5% of the variance in professional quality of life, highlighting its positive contribution to these outcomes.

Table 4.

Correlation and regression coefficient among workaholism, life balance, quality of life, and resilience among academic nurse educators

Variables	r	R²	p-value
Workaholism → Resilience	-0.316	0.100	< 0.001
Workaholism → Life Balance	-0.424	0.180	< 0.001
Resilience → Life Balance	0.387	0.150	< 0.001
Workaholism → Quality of Life	-0.544	0.296	< 0.001
Resilience → Quality of Life	0.441	0.195	< 0.001
Life Balance → Quality of Life	0.572	0.327	< 0.001

r: Pearson correlation, R²: regression coefficient, *: Statistically significant at p ≤ 0.05

Additionally, life balance was strongly positively correlated with professional quality of life (r = 0.572, p < 0.001, R² = 0.33), with an R² value indicating that approximately 32.7% of the variance in professional quality of life can be explained by life balance alone. This underscores the critical role of life balance in enhancing the professional quality of life of academic nurse educators.

Moreover, Table 5; Fig. 3 summarized the results of the path analysis using structural equation modeling (SEM). Workaholism demonstrated a significant negative total effect on life balance (total effect = -0.23, t = -3.289, p = 0.001), indicating that higher levels of workaholism are associated with lower life balance. Similarly, workaholism showed a significant negative total effect on quality of life (total effect = -0.27, t = -7.185, p < 0.001). Notably, this relationship included a small but significant indirect effect (-0.03), suggesting that resilience and life balance partially mediate the negative impact of workaholism on quality of life.

Table 5.

Total, direct, and indirect effects of workaholism, resilience, and life balance on quality of life among academic nurse educators

Path	Total effect	Direct effect	Indirect effect	95% CI	t-statistics	p- value
Workaholism → Resilience	-0.23	-0.23	-	[-0.414, -0.144]	-3.289	0.001*
Workaholism → Life Balance	-0.23	-0.23	-	[-0.414, -0.144]	-3.289	0.001*
Workaholism → Quality of Life	-0.27	-0.24	-0.03	[-0.374, -0.186]	-7.185	< 0.001*
Resilience → Life Balance	0.38	0.38	-	[0.267, 0.685]	5.479	< 0.001*
Resilience → Quality of Life	0.12	0.12	-	[0.108, 0.268]	4.404	< 0.001*
Life Balance → Quality of Life	0.30	0.26	0.05	[0.197, 0.613]	7.507	< 0.001*

Model fit parameters: CFI = 1.000; IFI = 1.000; RMSEA = 0.088 Model χ²/df = 51.681/6, p ≤ 0.001

CFI: Comparative Fit Index, IFI: Incremental Fit Index, RMSEA: Root Mean Square Error of Approximation

Fig. 3.

Path analysis illustrating the direct effects of workaholism, resilience, and life balance on quality of life

Resilience had a significant positive total effect on life balance (total effect = 0.38, t = 5.479, p < 0.001), indicating that individuals with greater resilience are better able to maintain life balance. Additionally, resilience exerted a significant direct positive effect on quality of life (total effect = 0.12, t = 4.404, p < 0.001), highlighting its contribution to overall well-being.

Life balance also demonstrated a strong positive total effect on quality of life (total effect = 0.30, t = 7.507, p < 0.001), with a significant indirect effect (0.05), further supporting the central role of life balance in promoting better quality of life among academic nurse educators.

The model fit indices indicated an acceptable model fit further supported the adequacy of the model.

Discussion

The present study examined the relationships among workaholism, professional quality of life, life balance, and resilience among academic nurse educators, providing important insights into how workaholism affects personal and professional well-being and how resilience might serve as a key factor in mitigating these effects. In the high-stakes environment of healthcare and education, it is crucial to understand the complex interplay of these variables to ensure the well-being of nurse educators, whose role is integral to the development of future nurses and the quality of patient care [62].

Prevalence of workaholism and quality of life imbalance

The descriptive analysis revealed a moderate prevalence of workaholism among academic nurse educators. Notably, nearly two-thirds of the sample (63.4%) were classified as workaholics. This exceptionally high prevalence underscores the urgency of addressing workaholism in academic nursing settings. It suggests that excessive and compulsive work behaviors are not isolated but rather pervasive, and thus need institutional attention. Additionally, a significant majority of participants reported unbalanced lives, struggling to manage both personal and professional responsibilities. The imbalance faced by nurse educators is particularly concerning as it impacts both their personal well-being and the quality of their teaching. Their demanding roles, which include teaching, supervising, curriculum development, research, and administrative tasks, require long hours and continuous professional development. This often leaves little time for self-care, leading to stress, exhaustion, and various health challenges [1, 2].

This trend is consistent with global findings. For example, Schaufeli et al. [12] in the Netherlands identified workaholism as a common issue in both educational and healthcare sectors, where professionals are driven by strong responsibilities and high commitment to their roles. Similarly, Abou Hashish et al. [1] in Saudi Arabia found that most nurse educators exhibited workaholic tendencies and perceived their lives as unbalanced. Likewise, Farber et al. [21] in Canada reported that educators struggled significantly with work-life balance due to the demanding nature of their academic roles. This finding could be also supported by the American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN) [5], which emphasized that nurse educators must meet their students’ educational needs while fulfilling their professional and administrative duties. The emotional toll of these combined challenges directly affects their work-life balance and overall quality of life. Similarly, Farber et al. [63] highlighted that nursing educators often reported unbalanced lives, which had a significant negative impact on both their physical and mental health.

Moreover, the study also revealed moderate levels of professional quality of life, with many participants reporting low compassion satisfaction but high levels of burnout and fatigue. This suggests that while nurse educators are deeply committed to their work, the emotional demands and stress of their roles prevent them from finding fulfillment. These findings align with the work of Prodanova and Kocarev [18] in North Macedonia, who also found that healthcare professionals experience emotional strain and burnout due to the demands of their work, resulting in diminished professional satisfaction.

Furthermore, resilience among participants was found to be moderate, with about two-thirds of the educators demonstrating a reasonable ability to manage stress and adversity. However, nearly one-fifth exhibited low resilience, suggesting a significant vulnerability to work-related stress. These findings align with Keener et al. [36] in the U.S, who observed that educators with lower resilience struggled more, particularly during crises, underscoring the crucial role of resilience in overcoming workplace challenges. For academic nurse educators, resilience is key to managing the demands of their profession. As Kossek and Perrigino [64] emphasized, structured workplace support and targeted interventions can play a critical role in strengthening resilience and buffering the adverse impacts of academic stress.

Given these findings, academic institutions should prioritize targeted interventions to reduce work overload and promote a culture of balance and well-being among academic staff. For example, implementing flexible scheduling policies, adjusting teaching loads, and providing access to mental health support services may help address the systemic contributors to workaholism and imbalance [39, 65]. Embedding resilience-building strategies and stress management training into continuing professional development programs could also enhance nurse educators’ ability to cope with these demands, especially in high-stakes environments like nursing education [1, 36]. Future research should explore institutional strategies that embed resilience as a core component of faculty development frameworks to sustain long-term well-being and educational effectiveness.

Interrelationships between variables

The correlation analysis revealed a significant negative relationship between workaholism and both life balance and professional quality of life. The corresponding regression values indicate that approximately 18% of the variance in life balance, 29.6% of the variance in professional quality of life, and 10% of the variance in resilience can be explained by workaholism alone. These findings suggest that workaholism is an important predictor of lower resilience, poorer life balance, and diminished professional quality of life among academic nurse educators. This highlights the detrimental impact of workaholic tendencies, which not only erode individuals’ ability to balance their personal and professional lives but also undermine their overall well-being and capacity to manage stress. The result is consistent with the well-documented impact of workaholism, which leads to elevated stress, burnout, and reduced job satisfaction [66]. This highlights the importance of developing institutional policies that reduce excessive workloads, promote healthy boundaries, and recognize faculty contributions through non-productivity-based incentives such as mentoring, student outcomes, and service engagement [64].

Workaholism triggered by occupational pressures may result in an unbalanced work life. Researchers found that workaholism and job demands are positively correlated [66, 67]. The findings are consistent with Yang et al. [68] in China, who found that workaholism depletes emotional resources, resulting in poor life balance and lower job satisfaction. Also, Matuska [69] in the United States, found that workaholism creates an imbalance that negatively impacts family life and overall well-being. This calls for developing workload management strategies and structured rest opportunities, such as sabbatical leave or protected time for self-care and research development [65].

The current study findings, which reveal a negative correlation between workaholism and professional quality of life, are consistent with previous research that links workaholism to increased workplace stress and lower job satisfaction [70]. Also, Kasemy et al. [14] in Egypt, demonstrated that workaholics tend to experience higher levels of workplace stress and lower job satisfaction. Other studies, such as those by Guidetti et al. [66] in Italy and Jenaabadi et al. [71] in Iran, further confirm that workaholics report greater stress and worse job satisfaction due to their excessive work involvement.

Additionally, there is substantial evidence linking workaholism with fatigue and burnout. Studies by Adolfo et al. [72] in Italy and Caesens et al. [73] in Belgium demonstrated the positive association between workaholism and both of these factors. Likewise, Studies by Delgado et al. [74] in Spain and Wilkinson et al. [75] in the United Kingdom indicate that workaholics, who engage in excessive and obsessive work, are more prone to burnout and emotional exhaustion. Similarly, the positive association between workaholism and exhaustion suggests that workaholics are more vulnerable to both physical and mental fatigue, which aligns with findings from Andreassen et al. [70] in Norway and Balducci et al. [76] in Italy, who reported a link between workaholism and heightened exhaustion and health issues. These findings emphasize the need for academic institutions to restructure workload expectations and enhance job design to support healthier faculty engagement. Policies promoting reduced overload, fair distribution of tasks, and protected time for recovery may mitigate the strain associated with excessive work demands [1, 65].

Interestingly, the regression coefficient values indicate that resilience alone explains approximately 15% of the variance in life balance and 19.5% of the variance in professional quality of life, highlighting its positive contribution to these outcomes. Likewise, the path analysis revealed that resilience plays a crucial mediating role in the relationship between workaholism and quality of life. Specifically, resilience helps mitigate some of the negative effects of workaholism, as evidenced by its indirect impact on quality of life. Resilience also demonstrated a significant positive effect on life balance and quality of life, showing that individuals with higher resilience are better equipped to maintain a balance between their personal and professional lives and report greater overall well-being. These findings align with Ruiz-Garcia et al. [17] in Spain, who noted that resilience acts as a protective buffer, allowing individuals to recover from the negative effects of excessive work involvement. Similarly, Keener et al. [36] in the U.S found that educators with higher resilience were more successful in adapting to the disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, leading to better life balance and professional satisfaction. This supports the need for implementing structured faculty development programs focused on mindfulness, cognitive flexibility, and emotional regulation to build long-term adaptive capacities [17]. Also, these outcomes imply that academic nursing institutions should adopt comprehensive well-being policies that support faculty resilience through mentorship, psychological safety, peer support, and faculty development programs focused on self-regulation and stress recovery [1, 36].

Additionally, life balance was strongly positively correlated with professional quality of life and accounted for approximately 32.7% of its variance. Path analysis further demonstrated a strong positive total effect of life balance on quality of life. These findings underscore the critical role of life balance in enhancing professional quality of life among academic nurse educators, emphasizing the mutual benefits of maintaining a balanced lifestyle. Achieving a healthy balance between work and personal life appears essential for improving well-being and job satisfaction. This aligns with the findings of Rahim et al. [77] in Malaysia, who highlighted the importance of life balance in promoting well-being. Similar conclusion was drawn by Andersen et al. [78], who emphasized that a positive work-life balance is crucial for professional success, contributing to greater job satisfaction and reduced burnout among educators. These results suggest that interventions aimed at enhancing life balance can exert a profound positive impact on both job satisfaction and overall well-being in academic settings.

Theoretical integration

The current study findings can be further understood in light of Conservation of Resources (COR) theory, which posits that stress arises when individuals lose or fail to gain resources needed to cope with demands [37]. Workaholism represents a process of resource depletion, consuming time, energy, and emotional reserves, narrowing opportunities for recovery, and straining interpersonal relationships. This loss spiral undermines life balance and ultimately diminishes professional quality of life. In contrast, resilience functions as a “resource caravan” [21, 33], equipping individuals with adaptive coping, emotional regulation, and optimism that conserve existing resources and enable the acquisition of new ones.

Through these mechanisms, resilience directly and indirectly enhances both life balance and quality of life. Life balance itself may also be viewed as a protective resource, mediating these relationships by ensuring that time and energy are distributed more equitably across personal and professional domains. Taken together, these findings extend COR theory by illustrating how resource-depleting (workaholism) and resource-enhancing (resilience and life balance) forces jointly shape the well-being of academic nurse educators [1].

Influence of demographic factors

The study revealed that age, gender, academic qualifications, and years of experience significantly influenced the study variables. Each demographic factor plays a crucial role in shaping the work behaviors, professional satisfaction, and resilience levels of academic nurse educators. The age distribution of the sample was highly skewed, with 91.2% falling between 30 and 40 years. This demographic concentration reflects the predominance of early- to mid-career faculty in the Egyptian academic nursing workforce. It also suggests that the observed patterns of workaholism and imbalance may be particularly salient for this career stage, where promotion pressures and dual role responsibilities are most pronounced. Older Nurse educators (over fifty years old) reported higher levels of professional quality of life, and resilience compared to younger participants. This can be rationalized by the idea that older professionals have gained more experience, developed coping mechanisms, and often had a stronger sense of career fulfillment, which helps them manage work demands more effectively. Similarly, Sirgy and Lee [47] in South Korea highlighted that older professionals, due to their accumulated experience and perceived sense of achievement, tend to report higher job satisfaction even when faced with greater work demands. Furthermore, Leiter et al. [79] in Canada suggested that with age, individuals are more likely to achieve greater resilience and professional satisfaction as they adapt to stressors more efficiently over time, reinforcing these findings. These findings suggest the need for designing age-tailored faculty development initiatives that leverage the experience of senior academics to mentor and support junior staff, creating generational bridges in academic settings.

The study also found significant gender differences, with male participants reporting higher levels of professional quality of life and resilience compared to their female counterparts. This may be attributed to cultural expectations, social roles, or different coping strategies between genders. For instance, Torp et al. [38] in Norway reported that men in high-stress professional environments tend to report greater job satisfaction and resilience, possibly due to societal norms that support a more focused career orientation for men. Additionally, Pacheco et al. [80] in Brazil noted that women, particularly in healthcare, often face additional domestic and caregiving responsibilities, which may heighten their stress levels and negatively impact their work-life balance and resilience. This is consistent with earlier studies showing that, in comparison to their male counterparts, female educators frequently experience higher levels of stress and work-life conflict [81]. These cultural and societal expectations and gender-based role expectations may explain the disparities in professional satisfaction between men and women in high-stress academic environments. From a policy perspective, this calls for the introduction of gender-sensitive policies in academic institutions—such as flexible work schedules, on-site childcare support, and mentorship programs specifically designed to support female faculty—thereby promoting gender equity in resilience and quality of life outcomes.

Participants with post-PhD degrees (assistant professors and professors) exhibited the highest levels of workaholism, which may be explained by the increased expectations and responsibilities associated with advanced academic positions. Senior academics often face higher demands for publishing, research, and teaching excellence, contributing to their workaholic tendencies. However, PhD holders reported the highest levels of professional quality of life, likely due to the sense of accomplishment and fulfillment that comes with achieving their doctoral degree. Fontinha et al. [82] in Portugal similarly found that senior academic staff face greater work demands but often experience higher job satisfaction due to their professional achievements. Additionally, Biron et al. [83] highlighted that advanced academic qualifications can contribute to a stronger sense of purpose and job satisfaction, despite the accompanying pressures, reinforcing the link between academic accomplishments and higher professional quality of life. To address the risk of burnout in this group, academic leaders should consider workload redistribution policies and prioritize psychological support for senior faculty to ensure sustainability in their productivity and well-being.

The study found that participants with more than fifteen years of experience reported the highest levels of professional quality of life. This is likely because experienced nurse educators have developed effective coping mechanisms and resilience over time, enabling them to manage the demands of their roles more efficiently. Thomas et al. [84] in the United States found that professionals with longer careers report higher job satisfaction, largely due to their ability to navigate workplace challenges with greater ease. Similarly, De Ruiter et al. [85] in the Netherlands suggested that years of experience allow professionals to develop a more refined approach to work-life balance, leading to improved well-being and job satisfaction over time. Also, Santos [86] clarified that professional quality of life perceptions were also influenced by position and experience, with higher positions and more experience often associated with better job control, recognition, and coping mechanisms. Based on these findings, educational policymakers should implement structured career development pathways that harness the strengths of experienced educators through mentoring, while also supporting early- and mid-career faculty through training in resilience and work-life integration strategies.

Strengths and limitations

This study has several strengths. It provides a comprehensive examination of the relationships among workaholism, life balance, professional quality of life, and resilience in the academic nursing context. By addressing these multiple interrelated factors, the research offers a holistic understanding of how professional work behaviors impact well-being among academic nurse educators. The substantial sample size of 317 participants supports robust statistical analysis and enhances the internal validity of the findings. Moreover, situating the findings within an international context through comparison with existing global literature enriches the study’s relevance and highlights shared challenges across educational systems.

However, several limitations should be acknowledged. The cross-sectional design restricts the ability to infer causality; although significant associations were identified, causal directions cannot be established [87]. Longitudinal research is needed to better understand how these relationships develop and change over time. The reliance on self-reported data may introduce social desirability bias, as participants could underreport workaholism or overreport resilience and life balance. In addition, since all data were collected through a single self-report survey at one point in time, the risk of common method variance cannot be ruled out, and this may have inflated some of the observed relationships. The sample was drawn from a single Egyptian academic institution, which may limit external validity, and the strong gender imbalance (94% female) restricts the generalizability of findings related to gender differences, even though they were statistically significant. Furthermore, although ANOVA was used to compare differences across demographic groups, some groups had relatively small sample sizes, which may affect the stability of these comparisons and should be interpreted with caution.

Conclusion and implications

This study offers an in-depth understanding of how workaholism, life balance, professional quality of life, and resilience interact among academic nurse educators. Findings revealed a high prevalence of workaholism, which negatively affects educators’ well-being, work-life balance, and professional satisfaction. However, resilience and life balance emerged as critical protective factors that buffer these adverse outcomes. These findings highlight the urgent need for academic institutions to move beyond individual-level interventions and adopt a systemic approach that promotes sustainable work habits, faculty well-being, and resilience. Investing in structured, evidence-based strategies can help transform academic work environments into healthier, more supportive spaces that enhance the long-term professional success of nurse educators.

Implications for nursing education

Academic institutions should implement structured faculty development programs that integrate mindfulness, cognitive flexibility, and emotional regulation to promote adaptive capacity and resilience. Peer mentorship, stress recovery programs, and resilience training workshops should be embedded into ongoing professional development. Faculty should be encouraged to engage in reflective practices, set clear boundaries between personal and professional life, and use institutional support systems. Establishing psychological safety and fostering a culture of appreciation and well-being can further strengthen job satisfaction and mitigate burnout. These efforts must be supported by leadership that models healthy work practices and values work-life integration.

Implications for policy makers

Higher education policymakers should design and enforce policies that promote faculty well-being and discourage excessive work cultures. These may include regulated workload expectations, flexible scheduling, faculty sabbaticals, and institutional support for caregiving responsibilities. Incorporating routine well-being audits and offering counseling services can provide early intervention for stress-related issues. Institutions should also offer gender-sensitive policies that account for the dual professional and domestic burdens often experienced by female faculty. Moreover, creating reward systems that value teaching excellence, mentorship, and service—not just publication output—can reduce pressure to overwork and foster a more balanced academic culture.

Implications for future research

Future research should adopt longitudinal designs to examine how workaholism, life balance, professional quality of life, and resilience evolve across different stages of academic nursing careers. This would provide valuable insights into the temporal and developmental dynamics of these constructs and help identify critical points for intervention. Comparative and cross-cultural studies across nursing schools and academic institutions could further clarify how organizational and systemic factors shape these relationships. Mixed-methods and grounded theory approaches are recommended to capture the complex lived experiences of academic nurse educators and to uncover deeper psychosocial and institutional contributors such as academic competition, publication pressure, or inadequate recognition systems.

In addition, intervention studies should test the effectiveness of resilience training, structured mentoring, workload redistribution, and other systemic strategies in improving professional quality of life and reducing burnout. Evaluating institutional policies, psychological safety practices, and leadership behaviors through experimental or quasi-experimental research could provide robust evidence for sustainable organizational reforms. Finally, developing and validating culturally relevant assessment tools for resilience, life balance, and academic workaholism would improve measurement precision and enhance the contextual applicability of future studies.

Abbreviations

AACN

American Association of Colleges of Nursing

AMOS

Analysis of Moment Structures

ANOVA

Analysis of Variance

APCs

Article Processing Charges

BSN

Bachelor of Science in Nursing

CD-RISC

Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale

CFI

Comparative Fit Index

DUWAS

Dutch Work Addiction Scale

IFI

Incremental Fit Index

LBI

Life Balance Inventory

ProQOL

Professional Quality of Life Scale

RMSEA

Root Mean Square Error of Approximation

SEM

Structural Equation Modeling

SPSS

Statistical Package for the Social Sciences

TLM

Traditional Learning Model

Author contributions

All authors, Ebtsam Aly Abou Hashish, Hala Ahmed Abdou, Noura Mohamed Fadl Abdel Razek have substantial contributions to Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Data curation, Writing- Original draft preparation. Ebtsam Abou Hashish: final manuscript draft and corresponding. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Data availability

Data are provided within the manuscript file.

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study adhered to the ethical principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Nursing, Alexandria University with approval number (IRB00013622). Following approval from the hospital’s administration and before embarking on data collection, written informed consent was obtained from participants after explaining the aim of the study and assuring confidentiality of the obtained data, securing anonymity, and respecting privacy.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.