Abstract:

Stress is a natural response to demanding situations; however, when it becomes chronic, it can significantly impair both physical and mental health. In the aftermath of the 2020 global health crisis, stress levels have increased notably across many professional sectors, including higher education. University faculty have faced heightened uncertainty, increased workloads, and the need to rapidly adapt to new teaching, administrative, and communication practices. This paper contributes to the analysis of stress in academia through a qualitative, narrative-based approach that captures everyday experiences often overlooked in conventional studies.

The work distinguishes between external and internal sources of stress. External factors—such as traffic congestion, infrastructure limitations, or unexpected service disruptions—are acknowledged as relevant but secondary, as they largely lie beyond institutional control. The main focus is on internal stressors arising from the organization and management of academic work.

Among these, digitalization plays a dual role. While it has improved accessibility and efficiency in teaching and administration, it has also introduced fragmentation through multiple, poorly integrated platforms, leading to redundancy, inefficiency, and increased cognitive load. Closely related is the growing bureaucratization of academic processes and the progressive loss of personalized administrative support, which results in slower procedures, reduced accountability, and a sense of depersonalization that can undermine faculty motivation and engagement.

Another critical source of stress is the compression and misalignment of academic and administrative calendars. Teaching, assessment, and administrative duties frequently overlap, particularly during examination periods and the evaluation of final degree and master’s projects. These tasks often require substantial time investments within limited timeframes, sometimes involving assessment of work outside the faculty member’s area of expertise.

Quantitative estimations presented in the paper reveal a structural mismatch between officially recognized workloads and the actual time required to perform teaching duties adequately. Teaching activities alone can occupy the entirety of the formal working schedule, leaving little or no time for research, despite its central role in academic careers. Moreover, essential but unrecognized tasks—such as administrative coordination, communication, and physical displacement—further intensify workload pressures.

Additional stressors include staff shortages, inaccurate enrollment forecasts, and rigid administrative procedures, which frequently compel faculty to assume extra responsibilities with minimal notice. This contributes to chronic overload, limited capacity for planning, and a persistent sense of loss of control over one’s work.

The findings suggest that faculty stress is not merely subjective but reflects systemic imbalances between institutional demands and available resources. While current institutional responses tend to emphasize individual coping strategies, this paper argues for structural interventions. These include more realistic workload assessment models, improved coordination of academic calendars, and organizational reforms aimed at aligning administrative processes with actual conditions of academic work.

Keywords:

Higher education, stress, well-being.