Tool · Self-knowledge
Burnout Self-Assessment
Twelve questions across three axes — energy, connection, and efficacy — that tell you not just if you're burning out, but which kind.
Rate each item on how often you've felt it over the last month. Answer for yourself, not for the version of you that you think you should be.
Higher = better on that axis (inverted from raw scores).
Based on Christina Maslach's three-axis model (exhaustion, cynicism, inefficacy). We use the positive framing (energy, connection, efficacy) because it's more useful in self-talk. A clinical burnout diagnosis requires a clinician.
What this actually does
Burnout research, since Christina Maslach's late-1970s work, has consistently found three things tend to drop together but not always at the same speed: your sense of energy, your sense of connection to the work, and your sense that you're any good at it. People who are exhausted but still feel effective are in a very different place from people who are exhausted and have started to doubt their competence.
The radar chart gives you the shape of your burnout at a glance. The plain-English recommendations below it respond specifically to which axis is lowest — because "you need to rest" is right for some people and wrong for others.
Who it's for
Anyone who's heard "are you burned out?" and couldn't answer with a yes or no. People returning from leave and wondering if the worst has passed. Managers trying to spot patterns in themselves before they spot them in their team. People in caring or client-facing roles where burnout is structural, not personal.
How to read the results
The radar shows three values, 0–100, where higher is healthier. The shape matters as much as the overall score. A balanced dip is one kind of problem; a single collapsed axis is a different one. The recommendations below the chart respond to which axis is lowest — read those before the overall label.
Limitations
This is a self-report screen, validated against the longer Maslach Burnout Inventory but not equivalent to it. It will systematically miss people who minimise their own exhaustion. If your answers all say "fine", that's worth sitting with for a moment before you click "show results".
FAQ
Is "burnout" a medical diagnosis?
Not in the DSM. It's a recognised occupational phenomenon (WHO, 2019) but the diagnostic criteria are still debated. A clinician can still treat the symptoms — depression, anxiety, insomnia — even without a "burnout" label.
Why "positive" framing for the axes?
Maslach's original wording ("exhaustion", "cynicism", "inefficacy") describes the loss. Looking at energy / connection / efficacy lets the chart show what you still have, not just what you're missing. It changes which axis you act on first.
How often should I re-take it?
Monthly is enough. Weekly is too often — the noise of a bad Tuesday will look like a trend. Save snapshots here if you want a side-by-side comparison.
I'm high on energy but low on connection — is that even possible?
Yes. It's the most common burnout pattern among long-term individual contributors, especially in remote roles. You can keep producing for a long time after the meaning has leaked out. The recommendation engine prioritises the meaning axis in that case.
How do I use Burnout Self-Assessment step by step without mistakes?
Follow the order given in the usage section: A 12-question burnout assessment across energy, connection, and efficacy axes. Radar chart, overall band, and tailored recommendations per axis. The step-by-step part matters less than the unit check that sits inside it. Confirm every unit matches the thing you are actually trying to measure before you press calculate - that single check catches more wrong answers than any other habit, and it costs about ten seconds.What are the common mistakes when using Burnout Self-Assessment?
Most common mistakes come down to four habits: entering 20 when the field expects 0.2 because the field is a percentage; leaving a field blank and accepting the default without checking what it stands for; changing one input and reading a result that was calculated before the change; and quoting the output as an exact figure when the page describes it as a reference estimate. Press calculate again after any edit, and treat the number as a reference point rather than a final answer.Advertisement