If individual weaknesses and working conditions are accused to lead to burnout, this does not explain why an individual decides to stay in an unbearable situation that could lead him to suicide rather than cut the link binding him to his organization. This link is called organizational commitment (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990). Thus, in a context where organizations seek to strengthen the bond between each of their employees, we question the role of organizational commitment in explaining burnout. Organizational commitment is a multidimensional concept (Meyer & Allen, 1991) negatively related to burnout, especially in its affective dimension (Meyer & Maltin, 2010). Studies related to the other dimensions are rare. Besides, Meyer and Maltin (2010) highlight the contradiction of the researches related to the indirect link between organizational commitment and burnout. In this research, we focus on all dimensions simultaneously, using an approach-based profile to capture the interactions between dimensions (Meyer et al., 2012). The direct and indirect relations that link organizational commitment to burnout are enlightened by the conservation of resources theory (Hobfoll, 1988, 2001). To do this, we mobilize a mixed methodology combining a qualitative study and two quantitative studies. The data analyzed in this study defend the thesis that organizational commitment is a double-edged resource that protects individuals from burnout but that can be harmful under certain conditions.
