1.1. Research Objectives and Contributions

By addressing these objectives, the study aims to contribute to the theoretical and practical understanding of occupational stress in social work while informing organizational policies, training programs, and institutional reforms aimed at reducing burnout and enhancing professional well-being. The paper is structured as follows. Section 2 presents the theoretical framework, detailing the JD–R model and its relevance to social work. Section 3 outlines the research methodology, including data collection and analytical strategies. Section 4 presents the results, including descriptive statistics and inferential analyses. Section 5 discusses the findings in relation to existing literature and theoretical models, and Section 6 concludes with implications for policy and practice.

This study is among the first to provide a systematic analysis of administrative workload, emotional exhaustion, and professional resilience within the German social work sector. By integrating the JD–R model with empirical data from practitioners, the study seeks to generate actionable recommendations that promote sustainable working conditions in social work. The findings have direct implications for policymakers, social work administrators, and educators seeking to enhance worker well-being and service quality in welfare institutions.

2.1. The JD–R Model

The JD–R model, originally developed by Demerouti et al. [2] and further refined by Bakker and Demerouti [1], provides a well-established framework for conceptualizing the interplay between job-related stressors and protective factors in occupational settings. The model distinguishes between job demands, which deplete employees’ mental and physical resources, and job resources, which facilitate coping and enhance well-being. In the context of social work, administrative workload functions as a job demand, as it places considerable strain on professionals by increasing cognitive and emotional exhaustion. The extensive bureaucratic requirements within the German welfare system, such as documentation, compliance with social regulations, and adherence to complex funding structures, contribute to an ever-increasing workload that may divert attention from client-focused interventions. Over time, this accumulation of administrative stressors leads to higher levels of emotional exhaustion, a key indicator of burnout [3]. Conversely, professional resilience serves as a job resource, helping social workers to manage occupational stress. Resilience encompasses a variety of coping strategies, including emotional regulation, reflective practice, and peer support. Higher levels of professional resilience have been linked to greater job satisfaction, lower burnout rates, and increased professional longevity [4]. The work of Bakker and Demerouti [5] further elaborates on job demands and resources, while Chen [6] provides a meta-analysis on resilience as a buffer against burnout. The development of new resilience scales, such as the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC) by Connor and Davidson [7], underscores the importance of measuring this crucial resource. Additionally, the nationwide analysis of working conditions in social work by DBSH [8], O’Donnell’s [9] research on mindfulness for social workers, and Van der Aa’s [10] exploration of AI in social work, all contribute to understanding the landscape of demands and resources in this field. Thus, within the JD–R framework, the presence of a high administrative workload is expected to correlate positively with emotional exhaustion, while professional resilience is hypothesized to buffer this effect. Prior studies have confirmed the applicability of the JD–R model across multiple human service professions, including healthcare [11], education [12], and social work [13]. However, its specific application within the German social work sector remains underexplored. Given the significant role of administrative workload as a systemic factor in German social work, this study aims to empirically validate the JD–R model within this unique institutional and cultural setting.

2.2. The German Welfare System: Structural and Bureaucratic Challenges

Germany’s welfare system is one of the most bureaucratically structured in Europe, shaped by its historical, political, and legal foundations. The country operates under a federal welfare structure, where each of the 16 states (Bundesländer) exercises significant autonomy in implementing social policies. This decentralization leads to substantial regional differences in the availability, administration, and delivery of social services [14]. A defining characteristic of the German welfare system is the principle of subsidiarity, which prioritizes the involvement of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), free agencies, and religious institutions in service provision. While this model allows for diverse approaches to social work, it also results in fragmented administrative processes, requiring social workers to navigate varying documentation procedures, compliance standards, and funding regulations depending on their specific organizational affiliation [15]. This administrative complexity contributes significantly to job demands and exacerbates stress among practitioners.

The administrative workload imposed on social workers in Germany is exceptionally high, as practitioners must comply with rigorous documentation requirements mandated by the Social Code Books (Sozialgesetzbuch [SGB]). Key legal frameworks, such as SGB VIII (Child and Youth Welfare Act) and SGB XII (Social Assistance Act), mandate extensive reporting obligations, requiring social workers to maintain detailed case records, document intervention strategies, and adhere to strict auditing processes [16]. Several studies have identified documentation overload as one of the primary causes of professional dissatisfaction among German social workers [17, 18]. Research indicates that social workers in Germany spend approximately 40% of their working hours on documentation and administrative tasks, reducing the time available for direct client interaction [17]. This disproportionate allocation of time toward bureaucratic work aligns with the JD–R model’s assertion that excessive job demands contribute to burnout. Furthermore, frequent legislative changes introduce additional administrative stress. Social work policies in Germany are continuously evolving due to political, demographic, and economic shifts. The constant modification of social assistance programs, eligibility criteria, and reporting standards requires social workers to engage in ongoing professional development to remain compliant with new regulations, adding to their cognitive workload and increasing emotional exhaustion [19].

Over the past 2 decades, the German welfare system has been influenced by neoliberal policies emphasizing cost-efficiency, performance measurement, and competitive service provision [20]. These reforms have led to reduced funding for social services, increased caseloads, and heightened pressure on social workers to demonstrate quantifiable outcomes [19]. The marketization of social work, driven by cost-containment measures, has intensified workload pressures. Social workers are now required to adhere to strict financial accountability measures, justify service expenditures, and demonstrate the “effectiveness” of interventions through standardized assessments. This shift toward efficiency-oriented social work has been criticized for compromising the relational and process-oriented nature of the profession, reducing practitioners’ ability to provide personalized support to service users [20]. As a result, many social workers experience moral distress, a form of psychological strain arising from conflicts between professional values and institutional constraints [21]. This ethical dilemma further contributes to emotional exhaustion, reinforcing the JD–R model’s premise that job demands, when unmitigated by sufficient resources, lead to burnout and disengagement from the profession.

Despite these systemic challenges, some social workers exhibit high levels of professional resilience, allowing them to navigate occupational stress more effectively. Studies suggest that access to supervision, peer support, and ongoing professional development opportunities enhances resilience, enabling practitioners to cope with bureaucratic stressors while maintaining engagement in their work [4]. However, resilience-building resources are unevenly distributed across organizational settings. Social workers employed in municipal agencies often report limited access to professional support mechanisms, whereas those working in church-affiliated organizations frequently benefit from structured pastoral care programs [21]. This discrepancy underscores the need for systemic interventions to promote resilience across all sectors of social work.

2.3. Summary and Research Hypotheses

By testing these hypotheses, this study aims to empirically validate the JD–R model within the German social work sector and identify key factors contributing to psychological burden.

3.1. Research Design

This study employs a cross-sectional survey design to examine the psychological burdens experienced by social workers in Germany, focusing on three key constructs: administrative workload, emotional exhaustion, and professional resilience. Given the need to assess these variables in a structured and quantifiable manner, a quantitative approach was adopted, utilizing standardized Likert-scale instruments to measure the relationships between these constructs. The research was conducted within the theoretical framework of the JD–R model, which provides a systematic approach to understanding how job-related stressors contribute to burnout and how personal and organizational resources may buffer these effects. The study aims to explore the impact of administrative workload on emotional exhaustion and assess the potential moderating role of professional resilience in mitigating occupational stress. In addition, it examines whether these relationships vary based on sociodemographic and organizational characteristics, such as educational qualification, field of practice, and organization type. Given the geographical and institutional diversity of social work settings in Germany, the study was conducted via an online survey to ensure accessibility and broad participation. An online survey format allows for a larger, more diverse sample while minimizing logistical constraints associated with in-person data collection. The study focused on social workers employed in various organizational settings across Rheinland-Pfalz, a federal state in Germany with a well-established network of social service providers, including municipal agencies, free welfare organizations, and church-affiliated institutions.

3.2. Sample and Data Collection

Participants were assured that participation was entirely voluntary and anonymous. No financial incentives were provided, as the study aimed to attract participants genuinely interested in contributing to the understanding of occupational stress in social work.

Data collection took place between January and May 2024 using Unipark survey software, a widely used platform in academic research known for its high security standards and flexible questionnaire design. The Unipark platform allowed for customization of the survey structure, ensuring clarity and ease of completion for participants. The survey link was distributed through professional networks, social work unions, and online forums specific to the profession. The survey was structured to take approximately 10–15 min to complete, balancing depth of data collection with participant engagement and survey fatigue. Participants were encouraged to respond in a distraction-free setting and were given the option to pause and resume the survey at a later time. The anonymity of responses was strictly maintained, with no identifying information collected, ensuring compliance with data protection regulations (GDPR).

3.3. Ethical Considerations

This study adhered to ethical research principles and was approved by the Ethics Committee of IU Internationale Hochschule. The research was conducted in accordance with the institution’s ethical guidelines, ensuring compliance with data protection regulations (GDPR) and best practices in social science research. All participants were provided with detailed study information and an informed consent form before beginning the survey. The consent form outlined the study’s purpose, data confidentiality measures, voluntary participation rights, and the option to withdraw at any time without consequences. The survey was designed in a way that minimized psychological distress for participants, particularly given the sensitive nature of occupational burnout.

3.4. Measures and Instrumentation

3.5. Data Analysis

Statistical analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics (Version 28). Descriptive statistics, including means, standard deviations, and frequency distributions, were computed for all demographic, professional, and psychological variables. Pearson’s correlation analyses were conducted to examine the relationships between administrative workload, emotional exhaustion, and professional resilience.

A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed to assess whether differences in emotional exhaustion existed across organizational types. To examine whether administrative workload predicts emotional exhaustion and whether professional resilience moderates this relationship, a hierarchical linear regression analysis was conducted. All statistical tests were two-tailed, with significance set at p < 0.05.

3.6. Summary

This methodological approach ensures a rigorous and systematic investigation of the psychological burdens faced by social workers in Rheinland-Pfalz. The use of Unipark survey software allowed for efficient data collection, ensuring a structured and secure process. By employing validated psychometric instruments, robust statistical techniques, and a diverse sample, the study contributes to a comprehensive understanding of the administrative workload and its effects on social workers’ well-being.

4.1. Descriptive Statistics

The descriptive statistics for the three core constructs, administrative workload, emotional exhaustion, and professional resilience, provide an overview of the distribution of responses within the sample. Table 3 presents the mean values, standard deviations, and observed score ranges for each variable.

The results indicate that emotional exhaustion had the highest mean score (M = 4.12, SD = 0.81), suggesting that a substantial proportion of social workers reported experiencing high levels of burnout. Similarly, administrative workload was perceived as relatively high (M = 3.89, SD = 0.76), confirming the hypothesis that bureaucratic demands are a prominent source of stress. In contrast, professional resilience had a moderate mean score (M = 3.45, SD = 0.72), indicating that social workers’ capacity to cope with occupational stress varies considerably across individuals.

4.2. Correlational Analysis

To examine the relationships between administrative workload, emotional exhaustion, and professional resilience, bivariate Pearson correlations were conducted. The results are presented in Table 4.

The analysis revealed significant relationships among the three constructs. Administrative workload was strongly positively correlated with emotional exhaustion (r = 0.687, p < 0.01), supporting the hypothesis that higher bureaucratic demands contribute to burnout among social workers. In addition, professional resilience was negatively correlated with emotional exhaustion (r = −0.468, p < 0.01), indicating that individuals with greater resilience reported lower levels of burnout. A significant negative correlation was also found between administrative workload and professional resilience (r = −0.352, p < 0.01), suggesting that increased bureaucratic strain may undermine social workers’ ability to maintain resilience.

4.3. Group Comparisons (ANOVA Results)

To assess whether the experience of administrative workload, emotional exhaustion, and professional resilience varied across different organizational types, a ANOVA was performed. The results indicated that emotional exhaustion differed significantly among social workers employed in municipal agencies, free welfare organizations, and church-affiliated institutions (F [2, 140] = 4.89, p = 0.009).

Post hoc Tukey comparisons revealed that social workers in municipal agencies reported significantly higher emotional exhaustion levels compared to those in free welfare organizations (p = 0.012). However, no significant differences were found between social workers in church-affiliated organizations and the other two groups. These findings suggest that workplace structures may influence burnout levels, with municipal social workers experiencing greater emotional exhaustion, likely due to stricter bureaucratic constraints. Interestingly, no significant differences were observed in administrative workload or professional resilience across organizational settings (p > 0.05). This suggests that while bureaucratic stressors are present across all settings, their psychological impact may be mediated by workplace conditions and individual coping mechanisms.

4.4. Regression Analysis Predicting Emotional Exhaustion

To assess the predictive power of administrative workload on emotional exhaustion and determine whether professional resilience moderates this relationship, a hierarchical linear regression analysis was conducted. The results are presented in Table 5.

Asterisks indicate levels of statistical significance: p < 0.05, p < 0.01, and p < 0.001. These markers denote the probability that the observed effects are due to chance. Thus, a greater number of asterisks reflects a higher level of statistical confidence. For example, predictors marked with ^∗∗∗ show highly significant results with less than 0.1% probability of being due to random variation. The regression analysis confirmed that administrative workload significantly predicts emotional exhaustion (β = 0.610, p < 0.001), reinforcing the idea that bureaucratic stressors are a primary driver of burnout among social workers. Professional resilience was also found to be a strong negative predictor of emotional exhaustion (β = −0.492, p < 0.001), highlighting its role as a protective factor against burnout. A crucial finding of this study is the significant interaction effect (β = −0.230, p = 0.019), which suggests that professional resilience moderates the relationship between administrative workload and emotional exhaustion. This means that while high administrative workload contributes to burnout, individuals with higher resilience experience a weaker negative effect, demonstrating that resilience can help buffer occupational stress.

4.5. Summary of Findings

These findings emphasize the need for systemic reforms aimed at reducing bureaucratic burdens, enhancing resilience training programs, and restructuring administrative processes within social work organizations. The next section discusses these results in greater depth, relating them to existing literature and practical implications.

5.1. Interpretation Within the JD–R Model

The present study’s findings offer strong empirical support for the overarching assumptions of the JD–R model, specifically that elevated job demands, such as administrative workload, heighten the likelihood of emotional exhaustion [1]. Our data revealed a pronounced positive correlation between administrative workload and emotional exhaustion (r = 0.687, p < 0.01), highlighting the significant strain that routine documentation, regulatory compliance, and other bureaucratic tasks impose on frontline social workers. This resonates with prior research by Hannemann and Becker [22], who observed that clerical and reporting responsibilities can foster a sense of chronic burden, thereby undermining practitioners’ psychological well-being. Crucially, the hierarchical regression indicated that administrative workload was a robust predictor of emotional exhaustion (β = 0.610, p < 0.001), reinforcing earlier work in human service contexts, suggesting that persistently high demands elevate the risk of burnout [13]. Within the JD–R framework, these results signal that administrative workload constitutes a core “job demand” capable of overwhelming practitioners’ resources if left unchecked. By contrast, our findings lend empirical weight to the notion that “job resources,” such as professional resilience, can help mitigate these adverse outcomes. Indeed, the negative correlation between professional resilience and emotional exhaustion (r = −0.468, p < 0.01) points to resilience as a psychological mechanism that offsets the burdens of administrative workload, a conclusion that complements Siebert’s [4] argument for resilience-enhancing strategies in social work education and supervision.

In addition, the moderating effect observed in the interaction between resilience and administrative workload (β = −0.230, p = 0.019) provides a nuanced perspective on how individual coping resources can buffer stress. This is particularly salient given that social work is characterized by multifaceted emotional, interpersonal, and organizational challenges. Echoing Kinman and Grant [23], our results suggest that resilience-building interventions, such as reflective practice, peer mentoring, and supportive supervision, can yield substantial dividends by fortifying individuals’ capacity to endure and adapt to high administrative demands without succumbing to burnout. Hence, strengthening resilience is not merely a matter of individual fortitude but also a strategic organizational investment.

5.2. The Role of Organizational Context

An important dimension of this study involved comparing social workers across three organizational types: municipal agencies, free welfare organizations, and church-affiliated institutions. While we did not detect any significant group differences in administrative workload or professional resilience (p > 0.05), a noteworthy finding emerged for emotional exhaustion, where municipal social workers reported higher burnout levels compared to their counterparts in free welfare organizations (p = 0.012). These results align with observations by Horsfall and Johnson [24]. who documented more stringent bureaucratic mandates and heightened managerial scrutiny in the public sector. Municipal agencies in Germany, in particular, operate under strict regulations and performance metrics, potentially intensifying the emotional and procedural load placed on practitioners. Previous studies suggest that such institutional pressure can compel social workers to allocate considerable time and energy to tasks indirectly tied to client-facing activities, thereby eroding opportunities for direct intervention [25]. Our study’s data corroborate that higher emotional exhaustion in these agencies could stem from the interplay of rigorous documentation standards, performance audits, and limited flexibility in organizational processes [21]. While the bureaucratic landscape is not entirely absent from free welfare or church-affiliated contexts, the levels of autonomy and procedural adaptability may differ enough to influence social workers’ overall stress levels. In addition, the organizational climate, encompassing leadership quality, team cohesion, and availability of mentorship, may further explain why emotional exhaustion manifests differently across settings [26]. Although we did not specifically measure organizational climate in this study, our findings imply that workplace culture is a critical factor in determining how job demands are experienced. Future research employing mixed-methods or longitudinal designs could illuminate how administrative policies, leadership styles, and institutional values collectively shape workers’ capacity to cope with bureaucratic requirements.

5.3. Implications for Policy and Practice

Given the strong relationship between administrative workload and emotional exhaustion, organizational and policy-level reforms appear imperative. Supporting our conclusions, Gomez and Carter [27] highlight how digitalizing routine documentation, hiring dedicated administrative staff, and revising record-keeping policies can significantly lighten the bureaucratic load on professionals. By delegating or automating tasks that do not necessitate social work expertise, agencies can enable practitioners to devote more attention to direct service provision, thereby potentially reducing burnout. The findings also suggest that building an infrastructure to cultivate resilience, both at the individual and team levels, could help social workers manage the ongoing demands of the profession [4]. Organizational efforts might include regularly scheduled debriefing sessions, mentorship pairings that connect less-experienced workers with seasoned professionals, and formalized peer support groups to share coping strategies [28]. These measures, when accompanied by management practices that acknowledge and accommodate the emotional intensity of client-facing roles, can bolster a culture of mutual support. Public-sector entities, including municipal agencies, may particularly benefit from re-examining their administrative protocols and establishing a supportive leadership model that respects professional discretion [29]. Policy discussions at the municipal and state levels could further address the inherent tension between legal accountability and human-centered practice. For instance, re-evaluating mandatory documentation standards to ensure they serve genuine accountability without imposing excessive administrative labor may strike a balance between compliance and professional autonomy [25]. Policymakers could also incentivize the development of specialized administrative units or cross-functional teams whose tasks are to streamline reporting, thereby freeing up frontline professionals. In essence, a concerted effort by stakeholders, from government officials to agency directors, is necessary to dismantle structural obstacles that contribute to heightened burnout rates.

5.4. The Centrality of Professional Resilience

While organizational reforms can mitigate some of the strain arising from administrative workload, the data also underscore professional resilience as a pivotal psychological resource. The correlation between resilience and emotional exhaustion (r = −0.468, p < 0.01) indicates that individuals who possess robust coping mechanisms or have cultivated adaptive traits are less susceptible to the detrimental impact of high bureaucratic demands. This observation parallels the findings by Kinman and Grant [23], who argue that resilience interventions need to encompass skill-building in emotional regulation, boundary setting, and reflective practice. The moderating role of resilience suggests that interventions aimed at fostering resilience may prove especially critical in settings where administrative workload reductions are not immediately feasible. For instance, municipal agencies that face statutory obligations might be constrained in how much they can feasibly streamline processes. Under such conditions, investing in resilience programs, ranging from structured workshops to ongoing peer reflection circles, may help practitioners manage workload demands more effectively [30]. The potential for digital solutions, such as online support communities or guided mindfulness applications, also merits exploration to complement in-person strategies [26]. Nevertheless, while resilience can buffer the impact of administrative strain, it should not be misconstrued as a license to overlook systemic reforms. Scholars caution that excessive emphasis on individual resilience may inadvertently shift blame for burnout to the professionals themselves, neglecting organizational and policy-level conditions that precipitate occupational stress [13]. To truly address the root causes of emotional exhaustion, a dual approach is warranted: reduce bureaucratic load where possible and simultaneously strengthen workers’ coping capacities. Such an integrative strategy acknowledges that burnout is multifaceted, arising from both systemic inefficiencies and individual vulnerabilities [28].

5.5. Limitations and Future Directions

Despite the valuable insights this study provides, a few limitations warrant attention. The cross-sectional nature of the research design precludes definitive conclusions about causality, although the statistical associations suggest that administrative workload is likely a significant driver of burnout. Incorporating longitudinal or experimental designs, possibly where administrative tasks are systematically reduced, could yield more robust evidence on the temporal dynamics between workload, resilience, and emotional exhaustion [31]. In addition, the reliance on self-reported measures opens the door to common method variance. However, the use of well-validated instruments with strong psychometric properties partially mitigates this concern. A further limitation pertains to the generalizability of the findings to broader national or international contexts. While the study included social workers from multiple organizational settings, it focused exclusively on practitioners in Rheinland-Pfalz, a specific region in Germany. Organizational structures, legal frameworks, and cultural norms may vary considerably elsewhere, potentially modifying the relationship between administrative workload, resilience, and emotional exhaustion [24]. Future research might employ comparative designs that look at multiple federal states or international settings to better delineate universal versus context-specific factors. Qualitative investigations, such as in-depth interviews or focus groups, could also illuminate the lived experiences underlying these statistical patterns and guide more tailored intervention strategies [23].