Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 4, 2235-2246 2025 Publisher: Learning Gate DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i4.6540 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate History: Received: 4 February 2025; Revised: 9 April 2025; Accepted: 14 April 2025; Published: 24 April 2025 * Correspondence: smlhs@sookmyung.ac.kr Effects of job embeddedness, faculty identity, burnout, and organizational traits on job satisfaction in university professors Suk Yeol Lee1, Ho Seub Lee2* 1College of General Education, Namseoul University, Cheonan, South Korea; edupro@hanmail.net (S.Y.L.) 2College of General Education, Sookmyung Women’s University, Seoul, South Korea; smlhs@sookmyung.ac.kr (H.S.L.) Abstract: This study examines the impact of job embeddedness, faculty identity, burnout, and organizational traits on the job satisfaction of university professors. It investigates general trends in job embeddedness, faculty identity, burnout, and job satisfaction, and examines the relationships among these variables. Additionally, the paper analyzes how professors' characteristics, backgrounds, and psychological factors—such as job embeddedness, faculty identity, and burnout—affect their job satisfaction. Data were gathered from 27 universities, chosen based on region and size, with 236 out of 247 survey responses used for analysis. Findings indicate that while burnout levels were somewhat elevated, professors generally had positive insights regarding their faculty identity, job embeddedness, and job satisfaction. Positive correlations were found between faculty identity, job embeddedness, and job satisfaction, while burnout exhibited a negative correlation. These results suggest that strengthening faculty members’ identification with their roles and fostering a stronger sense of institutional embeddedness may reduce burnout and enhance job satisfaction. Keywords: Burnout, Generalized linear modeling, Job satisfaction, Organizational traits, Professors. 1. Introduction South Korean universities are facing significant problems in the Fourth Industrial Revolution period as a result of shifts in the educational landscape, with a drop in students enrolled at school and budgetary constraints brought on by tuition price freezes. As their prestige as university professors declines, they are also facing more challenges and role-conflict situations. In education, research, and service—areas traditionally considered stable and secure—professors are now facing demanding responsibilities (Lee, 2023). In the past, university professors were seen to have a fewer demanding job since they had strong job safety and competitive pay for the amount of hours they worked. However, as academic institutions fight for survival and competitiveness, there is increasing demand on academics to oversee and share in monetary funding programs and results linked to evaluations. Moreover, there is a trend toward hiring non-tenure-track faculty members, whose wages are approximately 65% to 80% of those earned by tenure-track faculty. It is important to investigate university professors' job satisfaction and the factors that influence it. Research addressing these queries has been limited relative to their significance [1-3]. Continuous study is needed on university professors, with a focus on job satisfaction. The study of job satisfaction between university professors should consider the various roles they play, which can differ based on the university's setting and features [4]. Thus, research should include an examination of professors' personal and psychological characteristics, as well as environmental and organizational factors. It should also aim to identify strategies to enhance professors' job satisfaction. Various factors can positively or negatively impact professors' job satisfaction. Personal characteristics include university traits and individual attributes (e.g., gender, position, field of study, https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5233-7690 https://orcid.org/0009-0009-0475-5033 2236 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 4: 2235-2246, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i4.6540 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate tenure). Psychological factors involve burnout, which is a response to the stress and demands of multiple roles. Burnout is characterized by psychological detachment, cynicism, and rigidity towards one's job, including symptoms such as fatigue, frustration, job detachment, anxiety, depression, fatigue, weakness, misery, and sarcasm [5-8]. For professors, burnout represents a physical, relational fatigue, and doubts about their abilities due to the diminished status of their profession and increased role demands. Burnout can negatively affect job performance and satisfaction. On the other hand, faculty identity is a psychological factor that can positively impact job satisfaction. Higher levels of faculty identity, that involve passion and commitment to one's role at the university, can enhance job satisfaction [5, 9-11]. Faculty identity involves deriving importance from one's role as a professor, and professors must actively manage and sustain this identity. Its relationship with job satisfaction warrants further study. In the context of South Korean universities, job embeddedness is also a crucial factor. Embeddedness includes emotional, intellectual, and ecological influences that affect persons' decisions to remain with the society [12, 13]. High embeddedness can significantly impact professors' job satisfaction. As was mentioned, a professor's work happiness is directly tied to how well they function in the face of changes in the university environment [14, 15]. The objective is explaining the ways in which a positive faculty identity and job embeddedness contribute to job happiness and mitigate burnout, taking into account the personal, organizational, and environmental backgrounds of academics. In particular, the study looks at differences in work satisfaction across environmental and organizational levels as well as university-level variations depending on the traits of academics and the mental variables of burnout, faculty identity, and job embeddedness. It is anticipated that the results would provide light on how to improve academics' work happiness. What are the general tendencies in academics' perceptions of burnout, faculty identity, embeddedness, and work satisfaction? Is one of the particular study topics. What connections exist between the elements of embeddedness, work satisfaction, faculty identity, and burnout? What are the consequences on work satisfaction at the organizational and environmental levels of academics' personal traits, faculty identity, burnout, and embeddedness? 2. Theoretical Framework 2.1. Burnout Burnout is characterized by emotional and mental exhaustion, leading to fatigue, diminished interest, and a lack of attention towards one's work. Significant feelings of annoyance, helplessness, and loss can arise from extended burnout [16, 17]. Burnout is a common occurrence for university instructors who feel alone and excluded, think their profession is pointless, or doubt their own skills. Burnout is a comprehensive occurrence with 3 primary components: exhaustion, cynicism, and diminished professional efficacy. Those experiencing burnout may feel emotionally drained or fatigued in situations requiring emotional management. In response, individuals might develop a cynical attitude towards others and a negative perception of their professional achievements. Maslach, et al. [17] created the Maslach Burnout Inventory-General Survey (MBI-GS) to assess these burnout symptoms. Unlike job stress, burnout is considered a response to prolonged job-related anxiety. 2.2. Faculty Identity Consideration to faculty identity is crucial for comprehending the roles professors play in university education and how they view their social grade. Faculty identity could be examined from multiple perspectives, emphasizing the professional roles of professors in education, research, and service. Professors who develop a strong sense of faculty identity through a clear understanding of their role are likely to be more engaged and committed to their educational duties, and also reflect on and strive to improve their professional standing. Faculty identity is significant because it includes meanings and values that permit academics to successfully merge their experiences and talents to contribute to research and instruction. Related ideas 2237 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 4: 2235-2246, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i4.6540 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate include self-identification with the role of professor, role understanding, self-image, self-reflection, and future vision [1]. The way a person perceives themselves as a profession is known to their professional identity, and it changes over time [18]. It is a dynamic process of understanding experiences rather than a static object. As a result, in addition to the corporate culture and setting, faculty identity is influenced by personal values and views [19]. 2.3. Embeddedness Embeddedness refers to a mental, intellectual, and ecological factor which impacts a decision of an individual to remain with an organization [12]. Essentially, embeddedness helps to analyze the reasons behind why individuals stay in their organizations [13]. According to Mitchell, et al. [20] it is assumed that a variety of social, psychological, and economic networks link the members of an organization and their families to the surrounding community, friends, and housing. Internal and external aspects are included in the idea of embeddedness; they are classified as community embeddedness and organization embeddedness, respectively [14]. The roles, actions, and choices made by professors inside their companies, as well as their interpersonal interactions, are influenced by their embeddedness. Three fundamental ideas make up this embeddedness: the connection to the organization; the fit with the work or the surroundings; and the material and psychological costs associated with departing the society [12]. 'Link' exactly states to the linkage connections that exist with the company or in the neighborhood where a person commutes. "Fit" refers to the sense that one's needs and comfort level are well-aligned with the work or place. Last but not least, "sacrifice" refers to the alleged financial and psychological costs associated with quitting the company [15]. To gauge job embeddedness, Mitchell, et al. [20] established a 40 item test based on the aspects of sacrifice, fit, and connection. Unfortunately, there were problems with validity and reliability, and this instrument was frequently long. In order to allay these worries, [21] reworked the idea by integrating all three components into a single factor and creating a shorter measurement [12]. Understanding how each sub-factor particularly affects job happiness can be illuminating, even if the sub-factors of sacrifice and connection combine to influence job satisfaction. 2.4. Job Satisfaction The level of satisfaction that professors have with their careers and responsibilities is identified as faculty job satisfaction. This pleasure is strongly related to the professors' motivation and can be either positive or negative, depending on how they feel about their work. Faculty work satisfaction is frequently analyzed in connection to factors including personal traits and demographic information, including components of their professional function (tenure status, position, and field of study). Additionally, university management and communication systems, along with psychological factors, are important elements that impact faculty satisfaction. Typically, university professors engage in research within their specialty, teach students, and undertake various other academic responsibilities. While the role of a university professor is often viewed positively by the public and seen as prestigious, it is not always clear if professors themselves are content with their profession. Recognition from their institutions and peers is crucial for professors, encompassing adequate compensation, resources, and remuneration. Moreover, a sense of belonging to the institution and its members is vital for job satisfaction, fostering a connection that encourages active communication. The importance of organizational elements in influencing faculty work satisfaction has increased recently. These elements include faculty participation in education and study, university administration and communication systems, and social and ecological issues. These aspects shaped by university restructurings aimed at improving research output and educational excellence, along with adjustments in management practices to support these goals [4]. 2238 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 4: 2235-2246, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i4.6540 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate 2.5. Connections Between the Study Variables Professors apply their educational expertise and abilities to assist their students' learning, whereas also advancing their own research and contributing to new knowledge. Engaging in these activities enhances the significance and fulfillment of their work, thereby improving job satisfaction. Furthermore, gaining social respect and recognition can positively affect professors' self-identity, sense of embeddedness, and overall job satisfaction. Professors develop a professional self-identity that includes liberty and their part in generating knowledge and nurturing ability via teaching and research. This self-identity significantly shapes their perceptions of their professions and how they perform their duties. Nonetheless, professors may encounter trials such as institutional management issues, student expectations, and research funding constraints, which can diminish their sense of professional identity. Professors must have a clear grasp of their position and its purpose in order to sustain their sense of self. Mitchell, et al. [20] characterized job embeddedness as an overall connection to common individuals within and beyond the society. This means that embeddedness involves how individuals perceive their connection to the organization, influenced by their emotions and attitudes. This highlights the importance of organizational commitment in studying faculty job satisfaction. Professors who feel committed to their institution of higher education may sense a responsibility to meet educational objectives, leading to greater job satisfaction. Thus, exploring job satisfaction among professors in Korea is crucial as a key factor [12]. Given this, it is important to adopt a perspective that considers various aspects of faculty identity. Studying how faculty identity influences job satisfaction, and examining the part of embeddedness in this relationship, is essential. The objectives of this study are to investigate whether faculty identity and embeddedness give to job satisfaction, addressing a gap in research on the interplay between these factors. Previous research on professors' job satisfaction has indicated its relation to organizational structure and employee behavior. Future studies should further explore the possibility of job satisfaction through examining linked variables and linking findings with past research. This paper seeks to connect faculty identity with embeddedness to better understand job satisfaction. The objective is to assess the effect of faculty identity on job satisfaction and how faculty embeddedness influences this relationship. This study builds on previous research by incorporating faculty identity and embeddedness as additional variables to enhance understanding of job satisfaction. 3. Methodology 3.1. Characteristics of the Designed Sample Regarding the size and geographic distribution of the universities, the researchers concentrated on professors from 27 different universities for this study: 8 colleges in the Seoul cosmopolitan area, 6 in the countryside of Chungcheong and Gangwon, 7 in Gyeongsang Province, and 6 in the regions of Honam and Jeju. We polled 5 to 15 academics from each university for our surveys. After removing incomplete or erroneous responses, 236 of the 247 academics who took part in the survey were included in the analysis. Table 1 displays the sample's demographic information. 2239 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 4: 2235-2246, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i4.6540 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate Table 1. Characteristics of the analysis (N = 236). Type Section Occurrence % University Public 59 25.0 Private 177 75.0 Employment Period (years) <5 37 15.7 ≥5 to <10 54 22.9 ≥10 to <15 51 21.6 ≥15 to <20 47 19.9 ≥20 47 19.9 Rank Professor 117 49.6 Associate professor 63 26.7 Assistant professor 56 23.7 Sex Female 161 68.2 Male 75 31.8 Previous Experience of Working Yes 89 37.7 No 147 62.3 Region Seoul metropolitan area 79 33.5 Chungcheong and Gangwon 67 28.4 Gyeongsang 38 16.1 Honam and Jeju 52 22.0 Restraint Humanities and Social Sciences 110 46.6 Science and Engineering 45 19.1 Education 61 25.8 Medicine and Pharmacy 8 3.40 Arts and Sports 12 5.10 Selection Type Tenure track 212 89.8 Non-tenure track 24 10.2 University Size (as determined by student enrollment) <5,000 64 27.1 ≥5,000 to <10,000 58 24.6 ≥10,000 to <15,000 62 26.3 ≥15,000 52 22.0 3.2. Measurement Tools 3.2.1. Tool for Measuring Burnout A translation of the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI)-GS [16] which was obtained from the Maslach, et al. [17] tool, was utilized to evaluate burnout. The sixteen items on the MBI-GS, or overall Survey, are intended to assess overall occupational burnout [17]. This instrument assesses burnout in three dimensions: cynicism (four items), professional effectiveness (six items), and weariness (five items). A five-point Likert scale, extending from 1 to 5, is used in the survey. The sub-level components' internal consistency (measured by Cronbach's α) varied from 0.830 to 0.932, and the total center reliability was 0.801, signifying good dependability. 3.2.2. Faculty Identity Measurement Tool To measure faculty identity, the researchers employed a tool developed by Lee [1]. This tool comprises five queries each on “Professor as an individual,” “Professor as an educator,” “Professor as a researcher,” “Professor as a member of the university,” and “Professor as a member of society,” totaling 25 items across five factors. The measurement employs a five-point Likert scale from 1 to 5. The tool's overall reliability was 0.921, showing that the scale is dependable, while its sub-level components had internal reliability (Cronbach's α) extending from 0.757 to 0.912. 2240 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 4: 2235-2246, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i4.6540 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate 3.2.3. Job Embeddedness Assessment Tool For assessing job embeddedness, the study utilized a translated version of the tool developed by Crossley, et al. [21]. This tool is based on Maslach, et al. [17] 40-item measure covering three dimensions: link, fit, and sacrifice. Crossley, et al. [21] refined this into a single-factor measure that encompasses all three dimensions. Seven items total, evaluated from 1 to 5 on a five-point Likert scale, make up the work embeddedness measuring instrument. This tool's internal consistency, or Cronbach's α, was 0.852. 3.2.4. Tool for Measuring Job Satisfaction Job satisfaction was gauged utilizing a tool that reflects professors' satisfaction with many characteristics of their job, as reported by Choi, et al. [22]. This tool includes nine items addressing “satisfaction with teaching,” “opportunity for academic exploration,” “teaching load,” “autonomy and independence,” “promotion process,” “quality of students,” “research room and laboratory space,” “salary,” and “administrative support system.” Every item receives a score between 1 and 5 on a five- point Likert scale. This measuring tool's internal consistency, or Cronbach's α, was 0.853. 3.2.5. Measurement Tools' Validity A factor analysis verified the measuring instruments' validity. χ² = 2729 (df = 1439, p <.001), a Tucker-Lewis index of 0.828, a comparative fit index of 0.84, and a root mean square error of calculation of 0.058 a the results of the analysis. Every factor loading was statistically significant (p < 0.001) and above 0.4. Table 2 contains specifics about the measuring instruments. Table 2. Things and measurement instruments' dependability. Measurement tool Sub-variables No. of items Reliability Question model Burnout Exhaustion 5 0.932 I am completely exhausted from performing my job. Cynicism 4 0.892 I am passive in performing my job. Reduced Professional Efficacy 6 0.830 I believe I do my work well. Total 15 0.801 Faculty Identity Professor as an individual 5 0.862 As a professor, I try to behave professionally. Professor as an educator 5 0.809 My concern is and is the careers of my students. Professor as a researcher 5 0.912 I conduct research in my area of expertise. Professor as a member of the university 5 0.757 I provide a range of viewpoints to help the school. Professor in the role of a citizen. 5 0.840 As a professor, I work to find solutions to societal issues. Total 25 0.921 Embeddedness Comprehensive item 7 0.852 I feel a connection to this organization. Job Satisfaction Satisfaction in education and research 2 0.734 Teaching students gives me satisfaction. Conditions and support systems 7 0.869 My current salary is satisfactory. Overall 9 0.853 3.3. Processing of Data Initially, the paper used descriptive statistics, such as the mean (M) and standard deviation (SD), to find general developments in burnout, faculty identity, job embeddedness, and work satisfaction. Relationships were then computed to investigate the connections among faculty identity, job embeddedness, job happiness, and academic burnout. Ultimately, the effects of faculty identity, burnout, work embeddedness, and organizational and individual university characteristics on job satisfaction 2241 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 4: 2235-2246, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i4.6540 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate were evaluated using generalized linear models. With JAMOVI 2.3, the statistical analyses were carried out. 4. Results and Analysis 4.1. Descriptive Statistics of Key Variables The important variables' descriptive statistics are displayed in Table 3. Table 3. Variables' descriptive statistics. Variable name Circumstances Mean Standard deviation (SD) Job Satisfaction 237 3.58 0.75 Identity Specific 237 4.50 0.64 Teaching 237 4.45 0.56 Study 237 4.34 0.75 College 237 4.08 0.68 Organization 237 4.28 0.65 Embeddedness 237 3.86 0.80 Burnout Fatigue 237 2.95 1.07 Sarcasm 237 2.36 0.94 Efficiency 237 4.08 0.62 The correlation analysis findings for the major variables are shown in Table 4. The correlations between Burnout-Exhaustion and Burnout-Cynicism and the other variables were negative, and the correlation coefficients varied in absolute value from 0.2 to 0.5. 4.2. Research Model Analysis Results This study looked at how South Korean academics' job happiness was affected by a variety of environmental conditions, the three characteristics of burnout, embeddedness, and the five dimensions of faculty identity. Generalized linear modeling, which concurrently takes into account qualitative and quantitative factors, was used for the analysis. Qualitative variables included university characteristics (such as the type of university establishment, its location region, and its size), along with factors like the length of employment at the university, gender, previous university experience, academic field, and appointment type. Burnout, embeddedness, and faculty identification were among the quantitative characteristics. 2242 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 4: 2235-2246, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i4.6540 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate Table 4. Outcomes of the key variables' correlation analyses. Type Satisfaction Identity Specific Identity Teaching Identity Study Identity College Identity Organization Embeddedness Burnout Exhaustion Burnout Cynicism Burnout Efficacy Satisfaction — — Identity Individual 0.504 — <0.001 — Identity Education 0.253 0.528 — <0.001 <0.001 — Identity Research 0.336 0.576 0.493 — <.001 <.001 <.001 — Identity University 0.208 0.36 0.399 0.262 — 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 — Identity Society 0.3 0.513 0.491 0.572 0.48 — <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <.001 <.001 — Embeddedness 0.473 0.462 0.338 0.24 0.462 0.326 — <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 — Burnout Exhaustion -0.393 -0.372 -0.162 -0.226 0.017 -0.225 -0.162 — <.001 <.001 0.012 <.001 0.797 <.001 0.013 — Burnout Cynicism -0.456 -0.502 -0.358 -0.396 -0.161 -0.366 -0.381 0.615 — <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.014 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 — Burnout Efficacy 0.27 0.347 0.324 0.361 0.381 0.329 0.317 -0.225 -0.373 — <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 — 2243 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 4: 2235-2246, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i4.6540 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate The study revealed that the statement of normalcy was satisfied (Shapiro–Wilk = 0.99, p = 0.32; Kolmogorov–Smirnov = 0.03, p = 0.96) and that the model's explanatory power, as measured by R- squared, was 0.46, indicating an appropriate model fit (F = 6.10, P < 0.001). The impact of each independent variable on the work satisfaction of academics is presented in Table 5. The findings showed that the following factors had statistically significant influence on work satisfaction: appointment type (ranked first), faculty identity as an individual (ranked second), embeddedness (ranked third), and burnout's exhaustion component (ranked fourth). In particular, tenure track appointments had a favorable effect on instructors' work satisfaction. Job satisfaction was also significantly impacted by the Embeddedness and Individual facets of Faculty Identity. On the other hand, academics' work satisfaction was negatively impacted by the burnout component of exhaustion. Table 5. Examination of the variables that affect academics' work satisfaction. Variable name Estimation SE β p (Intercept) 3.42 0.08 0.00 <.001 University Establishment Type Private–Public -0.14 0.10 -0.22 0.161 Duration of Employment at the University (years) ≥5 to <10–<5 -0.05 0.13 -0.07 0.73 ≥10 to <15–<5 -0.18 0.15 -0.28 0.213 ≥15 to <20–<5 -0.18 0.17 -0.28 0.285 ≥20–<5 -0.07 0.18 -0.11 0.679 Rank Associate Professor–Professor -0.04 0.11 -0.06 0.744 Assistant Professor–Professor -0.06 0.15 -0.09 0.69 Sex Male–Female -0.08 0.08 -0.12 0.339 Prior Work Experience Yes–No 0.03 0.08 0.04 0.719 Location of the University by Region Chungcheong & Gangwon–Seoul 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.414 Gyeongsang–Seoul 0.09 0.11 0.14 0.431 Honam & Jeju–Seoul 0.20 0.11 0.30 0.081 Discipline Science & Engineering– Humanities & Social Sciences -0.07 0.10 -0.10 0.51 Education–Humanities & Social Sciences 0.08 0.09 0.12 0.377 Medicine & Pharmacy– Humanities & Social Sciences 0.28 0.22 0.43 0.201 Arts & Sports–Humanities & Social Sciences 0.02 0.17 0.04 0.893 Selection Type Non-tenure Track–Tenure Track -0.33 0.14 -0.51 0.018 University Size (in thousands, according to the total number of pupils) ≥5 to <10–<5 0.07 0.12 0.11 0.534 ≥10 to <15–<5 0.17 0.11 0.26 0.128 ≥15–<5 0.13 0.13 0.21 0.283 Faculty Identity Individual 0.24 0.09 0.20 0.012 Education -0.13 0.10 -0.09 0.193 Research 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.302 University -0.01 0.08 -0.01 0.922 Society -0.01 0.09 -0.01 0.872 Embeddedness 0.27 0.06 0.29 <.001 Burnout Exhaustion -0.10 0.05 -0.14 0.05 Cynicism -0.09 0.06 -0.12 0.134 Efficacy 0.04 0.08 0.03 0.591 2244 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 4: 2235-2246, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i4.6540 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate 5. Discussion and Conclusion In addition to identifying techniques for improving professors' work happiness, this study aimed to investigate how professors' views of burnout, faculty identity, and job embeddedness impact job satisfaction. The research observed the patterns in burnout, faculty identity, job embeddedness, and job satisfaction and explored the connections amid these factors. Furthermore, this study evaluated how academics' personal traits and psychological variables—like identity, burnout, and embeddedness— affect their job happiness. The results show that personal, environmental, and contextual factors—like self-perception, identity, and efficacy—as well as academic reputation and employment type have an impact on work satisfaction. As with previous studies, this study took into account individual conceptions of identity as well as organizational and environmental influences. Using generalized linear models, the analytical model examined the impacts of psychological elements like burnout, identity, and embeddedness as well as personal background factors like organizational and environmental features on work satisfaction. The findings lead to several conclusions. First, professors’ perceived levels of burnout were slightly above the median, indicating a need for ongoing measures to mitigate burnout. Faculty identity, job embeddedness, and job satisfaction were commonly rated positively, with mean values beyond the median. Particularly, professors reported high levels of faculty identity, especially in terms of "Professor as an individual." However, job satisfaction was relatively lower related to faculty identity and job embeddedness. While burnout was notable, it was not deemed severe, suggesting a need for further investigation into its causes. Second, correlation analysis revealed that only the fatigue and sarcasm components of burnout had negative correlations with job satisfaction, while all other variables showed positive correlations. The strongest correlation with job satisfaction was found with “Professor as an individual” sub-variable of identity. Third, generalized linear modeling revealed that appointment type, individual faculty identity, embeddedness, and the exhaustion component of burnout significantly impacted professors’ job satisfaction. The detailed analysis showed that university characteristics, such as establishment type, region, and size, did not significantly affect job satisfaction. Instead, personal psychological factors played a more significant role. Since improving these university characteristics in the short term is challenging, focusing on enhancing job satisfaction through policy changes and better management strategies is recommended. Fourth, appointment type, rank, employment duration, and prior experience influenced job satisfaction. Non-tenure track positions were found to negatively affect job satisfaction, with respondents in these roles reporting lower satisfaction levels compared to their tenure-track counterparts. Given that non-tenure track positions are associated with lower job security and differing perceptions of faculty identity, there is a need for policy adjustments to address these disparities and improve job satisfaction. Fifth, faculty identity, particularly the component of "Faculty identity as an individual," significantly impacted job satisfaction. This component, which includes aspects such as gaining social recognition and professional behavior, should be comprehensively examined to enhance its positive effects on job satisfaction. Sixth, job embeddedness positively affected job satisfaction. Professors who felt a stronger sense of belonging and connection to their institution reported higher job satisfaction. Institutions should identify and foster factors that enhance this sense of embeddedness among faculty. Seventh, burnout, particularly the exhaustion component, negatively impacted job satisfaction. Institutions should investigate the causes and contexts of burnout to address and mitigate its effects on job satisfaction. Based on these findings, several policy recommendations are proposed. First, efforts should be made to limit the number of non-tenure track appointments, potentially linking financial support and evaluations to the performance of existing non-tenure track professors. Additionally, the tenure track system may need reform to better meet current needs without solely expanding tenure track positions. Second, enhancing faculty identity and embeddedness should be prioritized, as they significantly contribute to job satisfaction. Understanding how to improve social recognition, professional behavior, and faculty identity could help in devising strategies to boost job satisfaction. Third, future research should consider extending the model to include additional demographic or relevant variables, applying 2245 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 4: 2235-2246, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i4.6540 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate multilayer or mixed models for more precise analysis, and utilizing longitudinal research designs to track changes over time. Exploring trends in satisfaction and influencing factors will provide valuable insights for decision-making and improving job satisfaction among professors. Funding: The university of Namseoul is funding the research. Korea. Transparency: The authors confirm that the manuscript is an honest, accurate, and transparent account of the study; that no vital features of the study have been omitted; and that any discrepancies from the study as planned have been explained. This study followed all ethical practices during writing. Copyright: © 2025 by the authors. This open-access article is distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). References [1] S.-Y. Lee, "Assessment and analysis of professional identity of university professors," Korean Journal of Educational Administration, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 429–458, 2022. https://doi.org/10.22553/keas.2022.40.1.429 [2] D.-H. Jang, "An exploratory study for job environment of some university professors based on the ecological systems theory " Korean Journal of Teacher Education, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 31–60, 2021. https://doi.org/10.24211/tjkte.2021.38.1.31 [3] G. Rhoades, The study of the academic profession. In P. J. Gumport (Ed.), Sociology of higher education. Contributions and their contexts. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2007. [4] B.-K. Choi and J.-Y. Choi, "The influence of individual and institutional characteristics on faculty job satisfaction," Korea Journal of Education Research, vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 337–363, 2021. https://doi.org/10.30916/KERA.59.1.337 [5] L. S. Hagedorn, "Conceptualizing faculty job satisfaction: Components, theories, and outcomes," New Directions for Institutional Research, vol. 2000, no. 105, pp. 5-20, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.10501 [6] R. G. Baldwin, "Adult and career development: What are the implications for faculty," Current Issues in Higher Education, vol. 2, pp. 13-20, 1979. [7] M. J. Finkelstein, The American Academic. Profession. Ohio: Ohio State University, 1984. [8] J. F. Ybema, P. G. Smulders, and P. M. Bongers, "Antecedents and consequences of employee absenteeism: A longitudinal perspective on the role of job satisfaction and burnout," European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 102-124, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594320902793691 [9] V. J. Rosser, "Faculty members' intentions to leave: A national study on their worklife and satisfaction," Research in Higher Education, vol. 45, pp. 285-309, 2004. [10] N. Jang, "A study on professors' job satisfaction and its factors," Journal of Human Resource Management Research, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1-20, 2002. https://doi.org/10.16999/jhrmr.2002.1.1.1 [11] J.-y. Park and K.-h. Wee, "A study on the relationship among coaching leadership job autonomy and job commitment," Asia-Pacific Journal of Educational Management Research, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1-8, 2020. https://doi.org/10.21742/AJEMR.2020.5.1.04 [12] I.-S. Lee, "Influential factors of international faculty's departure from Korea to overseas University," Yonsei University, Doctoral Dissertation. South Korea: Seoul, 2021. [13] A. Ramesh and M. J. Gelfand, "Will they stay or will they go? The role of job embeddedness in predicting turnover in individualistic and collectivistic cultures," Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 95, no. 5, p. 807, 2010. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0019464 [14] K. Jiang, D. P. Lepak, J. Hu, and J. C. Baer, "How does human resource management influence organizational outcomes? A meta-analytic investigation of mediating mechanisms," Academy of Management Journal, vol. 55, no. 6, pp. 1264-1294, 2012. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0088 [15] M. L. Kraimer, M. A. Shaffer, D. A. Harrison, and H. Ren, "No place like home? An identity strain perspective on repatriate turnover," Academy of Management Journal, vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 399-420, 2012. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.0644 [16] K.-H. Shin, "The Maslach burnout inventory-general survey (MBI-GS): An application in South Korea: The Korean journal of industrial and organizational psychology," Retrieved: https://typeset.io/papers/the-maslach-burnout- inventory-general-survey-mbi-gs-an-2799lckop8, 2003. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ https://doi.org/10.22553/keas.2022.40.1.429 https://doi.org/10.24211/tjkte.2021.38.1.31 https://doi.org/10.30916/KERA.59.1.337 https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.10501 https://doi.org/10.1080/13594320902793691 https://doi.org/10.16999/jhrmr.2002.1.1.1 https://doi.org/10.21742/AJEMR.2020.5.1.04 http://doi.org/10.1037/a0019464 https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0088 https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.0644 https://typeset.io/papers/the-maslach-burnout-inventory-general-survey-mbi-gs-an-2799lckop8 https://typeset.io/papers/the-maslach-burnout-inventory-general-survey-mbi-gs-an-2799lckop8 2246 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 4: 2235-2246, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i4.6540 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate [17] C. S. Maslach, E. M. Jackson, and P. Leiter, Maslach burnout inventory manual, 3rd ed. Mountain View, CA Scarecrow Education, 1996. [18] H. R. Woo, "Instrument construction and initial validation: professional identity scale in counseling," University of Iowa, PhD Thesis, 2013. [19] J. Billot, "The imagined and the real: Identifying the tensions for academic identity," Higher Education Research & Development, vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 709-721, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2010.487201 [20] T. R. Mitchell, B. C. Holtom, T. W. Lee, C. J. Sablynski, and M. Erez, "Why people stay: Using job embeddedness to predict voluntary turnover," Academy of Management Journal, vol. 44, no. 6, pp. 1102-1121, 2001. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3069391 [21] C. D. Crossley, R. J. Bennett, S. M. Jex, and J. L. Burnfield, "Development of a global measure of job embeddedness and integration into a traditional model of voluntary turnover," Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 92, no. 4, p. 1031, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.1031 [22] J. Choi et al., Strategic planning for the advancement of the teaching-learning quality in higher education (Ⅳ). JinCheon-Gun, South Korea: Korean Educational Development Institute, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2010.487201 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3069391 https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.1031