Research on work family conflict and well being

Researchers have focused on the concept of WFC in some form for the past 40 years, dating back to Kahn, Wolfe, Quinn, Snoek, and Rosenthal (1964). WFC was originally conceptualized as a one-dimensional, bidirectional construct, meaning that it referred to both the influence of work on family and the influence of family on work as part of one dimensions. Explain on dimensionalityaˆ¦

Work-family conflict has been defined as “a form of interrole conflict in which the role pressures from the work and family domains are mutually incompatible in some respect” (Greenhause and Beutell, 1985). Participation in one role (work or family) is made more difficult by virtue of participation in the other role. Work conflict is defined as the extent to which an individual experiences incompatible role pressures within the work domain, and family conflict is defined as the extent to which an individual experiences incompatible roles pressures within the family domain (Kopelman, Greenhaus, and Connolly 1983). In other word, the responsibility of the participation in both work and family domains unable to fulfill due to the pressure from work and family related condition. Thus, work, family, and work-family (interrole) conflict are three measures of role conflict, measures at the individual level.

Much of the research on work-family conflict has been based on the premise that multiple roles inevitably create strain (e.g., Chapman, Ingersoll-Dayton, & Neal, 1994; Frone et al., 1992; Goff, Mount, & Jamison, 1990; Hammer, Allen, & Grigsby, 1997), as suggested by role theory (Katz & Kahn, 1978) and role scarcity (Goode, 1960)

DIRECTIONALITY OF WORK-FAMILY CONFLICT

These dimensions of directionality have been identified as distinct, reciprocal constructs that have independent antecedents and outcomes (Frone, Russell, & Cooper, 1992; Frone, Yardley, & Markel, 1997). For example, some research has demonstrated that work-to-family conflict is primarily caused by work-related stressors and characteristics and that it predicts family-related affective and behavioral outcomes, while family-to-work conflict is caused by family-related stressors and characteristics and predicts work-related outcomes (e.g., Frone et al., 1997).

The directionality dimension distinguished between the source of the conflict, i.e. work interfering with family and family interfering with work. However most of the early research focused on either a broad measure of conflict that included both directions or just work interfering with family, with substantially less attention paid to family interfering with work. However, current study does not examine the distinction of the directionality between work and family conflict.

As can be seen in the examples above, work-family conflict is bi-directional. That is, work can interfere with family (referred to as work-to-family conflict) and family can interfere with work (referred to as family-to-work conflict). Although it was once assumed that WFC was a uni-dimensional construct (e.g., Kopelman, Greenhaus, & Connolly, 1983), most recent definitions display a bi-directional conceptualization (Eagle, Miles, & Icenogle, 1997; Frone et al., 1992; Frone et al., 1997; Gutek, Searle, & Klepa, 1991; Netemeyer, Boles, & McMurrian, 1996), with WFC having two components: work interfering with family (WIF Conflict), and family interfering with work (FIW Conflict). As recent literature suggests, WIF Conflict and FIW Conflict are distinct, yet related, forms of interrole conflict.

Frone et al. hypothesized a positive, reciprocal and direct relationship between the two types of WFC. The rationale was that if one’s work-related problems start to interfere with the accomplishment of one’s family-related obligations, these unfulfilled family obligations might begin to interfere with one’s day-to-day functioning at work. A parallel process explaining the direct positive effect between FIW Conflict and WIF Conflict was hypothesized. Frone et al.’s (1992) model was tested with structural equation modeling techniques using cross-sectional data obtained from a random sample of 613 individuals. The authors concluded that the findings were strongly supportive of a positive, direct, reciprocal relationship between these two types of conflict.

Frone (2003), noted that family boundaries may be more permeable than job boundaries and hence levels of work-to-family interference are typically reported as being higher or more intense than those for family-to-work interference. Duxbury and Higgins (2001) documented an increase in both work-to-family (WTF) and family-to-work (FTW) conflict in the decade between 1991 and 2000-2001. Employees in 2001 were still far more likely to experience WTF interference than they are to experience FTW interference. Due to most of the literature in this area has taken the conflict perspective, the dysfunctional consequences of the interference of one domain on the other (Hill, 2005; Parasuraman & Greenhaus, 2002) has been extensively explored. Moreover, Mikkelsen and Burke (2004), studied on the directionality of work-family conflict and they typically found that work-to-family conflict has more negative consequences for employees.

TYPES OF WORK-FAMILY CONFLICT

Greenhaus and Beutell’s (1985) conceptualization of work-family conflict incorporated three different ‘forms’ of conflict: time-based, strain-based and behavior-based. Time-based refers to individual’s inability to perform a task in one role, either physically or due to a cognitive preoccupation, as a result of time demands in another role. Time-based conflict builds upon a rational model (Gutek et al., 1991) which posits that time is a limited resource and devoting greater time to one area of life (such as one’s job) inevitably reduces the amount of time available for another (e.g., the family). Strain-based conflict is experienced when a preoccupation with the demands from one role interferes with the ability to perform adequately within a second role. Strain-based conflict is usually characterized by a spillover of negative emotions from one domain into the other. Finally, behavior-based conflict stems from situations where expectations or norms for behavior in one role are incompatible with the expectations for behavior in the other role. Work-family conflict can be time-based, strain-based, or behavior based (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985). However, this study only concentrate on two dominant types that are time-based and strain based as defined by Netemeyer and collegues (1996).

Work-family conflict can be time-based, strain-based, or behavior based (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985). However, this study only concentrate on two dominant types that are time-based and strain based as defined by Netemeyer and collegues (1996). According to Greenhaus & Beutell (1985), time-based conflict occurs when role pressures stemming from the two different domains compete for the individual’s time (e.g., requiring employees to work late with little notice might make it difficult for employees to meet family obligations, like picking up a child at daycare). Strain-based conflict occurs when the strain experienced in one role domain interferes with effective performance of role behaviors in the other domain. For instance,

ANTECEDENTS OF WORK-FAMILY CONFLICT

Antecedents found to affect levels of work-family conflict include family characteristic, work and family stressors, and psychological involvement in one’s work (Adams, King & King , 1996).

Antecedents of WIF conflict include work role stressors and characteristics, such as lack of supervisor support or long work hours, while antecedents of FIW conflict tend to be family role stressors and characteristics, such as having young children at home (e.g., Frone et al., 1992; Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985).

-start with Greenhaus & Beutell (1985) explain three forms of WFC. Research on these antecedents has supported the bidirectional nature of WFC, with one meta-analysis showing that work-related antecedents tend to have a stronger influence on WIF than FIW, whereas family related antecedents have a stronger influence on FIW than WIF (Byron, 2005) (Byron, K. (2005) A meta-analytic review of work-family conflict and its antecedents. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 62, 169-198. The present study, discuss time-based factors and strain-based factors, which have received the most attention out of the three types. Relate with Netemeyer et al

Long working hours, lack of control over work schedules (Mazerolle, S.M, Bruening, J.E & Casa, D.J, 2008) (Work-family conflict, part 1: Antecedents of work-family conflict in National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I-A Certified Athletic Trainers Journal of Athletic Trainers’ Association, In.

WIF in Byron’s (2005) review were job involvement, hours spent at work, work stress and work support. FIW were time spent with household activities, family support, family stress and conflict within the family.

(COR) hofboll, (1989) suggest the value of resources as a basis for explaining stress. Resources are defined as those objects namely personal characteristics, condition, energies that value to the person. Hofboll state that the more people can gain or conserve such resources, the more they will feel successful and/or able to achieve higher levels of success in life and less they will experience stress.

Individuals with extensive work and family responsibilities need to find ways to manage their work-family interface effectively. This involves not only reducing their level of work-family conflict to a reasonable level but also increasing the likelihood that their work and family roles will enrich one another.

Problem-focused coping has been shown to be a potentially effective means of managing the work-family interface (Rotondo, Carlson & Kincaid, 2002). This is consistent with Hobfoll’s (1989) argument that individuals are basically motivated to invest some resources in an effort to achieve a net gain of resources. By using a religious coping style, individuals invest some of their time and energy in planning and carrying out ways of dealing with challenges in their work and family environments to more easily fulfill role obligations. (Rotondo, D. M., Carlson, D. S., & Kincaid, J.F. (2002) Coping with multiple dimensions of work-family conflict. Personnel Review, 32, 275-296. Coping strategies represent efforts to prevent or reduce the negative effects of stress. Numerous studies suggest that problem-focused strategies are positively related to well-being, whereas emotion-focused ones are negatively related to well-being (Westman & Shirom, 1995) (Westman, M. & Shirom, A Dimensions of copinf behavior: A proposed conceptual framework. Anxiety, Stress and coping, 1995) 8, 87-100). most of the these studies examined the direct effect of partners’ coping on their partners’ well-being. Therefore, coping can be viewed as a predictor

Personality traits and the interaction on work-family conflict have been studied, including aggressiveness (Lightdale & Prentice, 1994) and negative affectivity (Carlson, 1999; Bruck & Allen, 2003). In addition, there have been several studies that found a positive relationship between Neuroticism and work-family conflict. (Bruck & Allen, 2003). Further research has shown that conscientiousness helps reduce the negative impact that work role ambiguity has on one’s well-being (Bruck & Allen, 2003). Moreover, agreeable was found to have a negative effect on work-family conflict: the more agreeable the individual, the greater reported work-family conflict (Bruck & Allen, 2003). Higher Emotional Intelligence positively influenced well-being. Specifically, those individuals in this sample who had high Emotional Intelligence with low work-family conflict reported the highest well-being while those with low Emotional Intelligence and high work-family conflict reported the lowest well-being. This finding is consistent with past research that has theorized that aˆ¦..quaote (Lenaghan, J. A, Buda, R. & Eisner, A. B. 2007). An Examination of the role of Emotional Intelligence in Work and Family Conflict, Journal of Managerial Issues, Vol. XIX Number 1 Spring 2007: 76-94, Noor (2003), examine the effects of the two personality variables that are neuroticism and extraversion on well-being. Neuroticism had a direct positive effect on distress, it also influenced well-being indirectly via work-family conflict. Thus personality variables should be considered in studies examining the relationship between multiple roles and well-being.

Many studies in the domain of Occupational Health Psychology have shown that unfavorable working conditions negatively influence employees’ mental and physical health and well-being (Quick & Tetrick, 2003) (Quick, J.C., & Tetrick, L.E. (2003). Handbook of occupational health psychology. Washington, D.C: American Psychological Association.

Work-family conflict has been identified as a source of stress that influences well-being (Greenhaus & Parasuraman, 1986). (Greenhaus, J.H. & S. Parasuraman, 1986). “A Work-Nonwork Interactive Perspective of Stress and Its Consequences. ” Journal of Organizational Behavior Management 8: 37-60.For instance, it has been shown

STRESS IN TEACHER

As it was mentioned, teaching is considered one of the most stressful jobs. Nowadays there are many studies that analyze this phenomenon (Valero, 1997; Verdugo and Vere, 2003). Kyriacou (1998) notes five sources of stress in teachers that have been reported consistently in a wide range of studies: poor pupil behavior, time pressure and work overload, poor school ethos, poor working conditions, and poor prospects.

The School of Education at the University of Manchester conducted an extensive research on stress in teachers (in Brown and Ralph, 1998). The work-related factors that produce stress in teachers were as follows:

aˆ? Teacher/pupil relationship: class size and ability mix, lack of discipline as perceived by teachers, changes in pupil motivation and attitude, and anxiety over test and examination results.

aˆ? Relationships with colleagues: uneven distribution of work loads, personality clashes/differences, poor systems of communication at every level, lack of community spirit, and scarce or no social interaction between different staff groupings.

aˆ? Relationships with parents and the community: parental pressure to achieve good results, the threat of performance management systems, poor status and pay, biased media coverage, being obliged to accommodate unrealistic expectations, and general societal cynicism about the role of teachers.

aˆ? Innovation and change: apparent lack of rationality behind constant demands for change, feelings of powerlessness and of failure, and lack of resources and information to facilitate change.

aˆ? School management and administration: scarce real involvement in the decision making process, poor overall school organization, poor models of communication, lack of appropriate training to meet new job demands, poor technical and administrative support, and poor staff facilities.

aˆ? Time factors: increasing variety and number of tasks, additional work demands outside the normal school hours, and frequency and ineffective organization of meetings.

In addition, Brown and Ralph (1998) lists the most common stress effects on teachers:

aˆ? Performance at work: feeling like staying off work, inability to manage time well, inability to meet deadlines, inability to concentrate, having a heavy workload, inability to delegate, feelings of inadequacy related to performance at work, job dissatisfaction, taking work home more frequently, and low level of productivity.

aˆ? Relationships with colleagues: increased feelings of irritation or aggression, becoming increasingly introverted, inability to relate to colleagues, unwillingness to cooperate, frequent irrational conflicts at work, inappropriate humor, demotivation, withdrawing from supportive relationships, lying, role ambiguity, and role conflict.

OUTCOMES OF WORK-FAMILY CONFLICT

A meta-analysis of the consequences of work-family conflict by Allen et al. (2000) provides a viable starting point for examination of the consequences of work-family conflict. Allen et al. suggested that there are three groups of consequences: work-related outcomes (e.g., job satisfaction, commitment, turnover intentions, absenteeism, performance and success), non-work-related outcomes (e.g., marital, family, leisure and life satisfaction, family performance), and stress-related outcomes (e.g., psychological strain, physical health, depression, burnout, substance abuse and work and family stress). This study focus on one groups of consequences: stress-related outcomes namely psychological well-being (distress and job-family dissatisfaction).

Work-family conflict has been related to important individual and organizational outcomes, such as absenteeism (Barling, MacEwen, Kelloway, & Higginbottom, 1994; Goff et al., 1990; Hepburn & Barling, 1996; Kossek, 1990; Kossek & Nichol, 1992; MacEwen & Barling, 1994; Thomas & Ganster, 1995), intentions to leave work (Aryee, 1992; Burke, 1988) and decreased job, family, and life satisfaction (Bedian et al., 1988; Boles, Johnston, & Hair, 1997; Burke, 1988; Higgins, Duxbury, & Irving, 1992; Kossek & Ozeki, 1998; Thomas & Ganster, 1995; Wiley, 1987). Additionally, negative mental and physical health outcomes have been related to high levels of work-family conflict and work-to-family conflict (Barnett & Rivers, 1996; Boles et al., 1997; Frone, 2000; Frone et al., 1997; Thomas & Ganster, 1995).

Both work interfere with family (WIF) and family interfere with work (FIW) have been shown to lead to significant negative outcomes in their respective domain. Higher levels of WIF predict work dissatisfaction, turn over

Firstly, Mikkelsen & Burke (2004), examined (a) potential predictors of work-family conflict and marital partner concerns and (b) consequences of these 2 work-family measures on indicators of psychological and physical well-being. Data were collected, using self-report questionnaires, from 766 male and female police officers in Norway. Work-family conflict was found to have significant negative relationships with measured of psychological health but not physical health.

Parasuraman & Simmers, (2001) examined the impact of work and family role characteristics on work-family conflict, and indicators of psychological well-being among self-employed and organizationally employed women and men. Results show that employment type and gender have independent main effects on several of the study variables. Self-employee persons enjoy greater autonomy and schedule flexibility at work, and report higher levels of job involvement and job satisfaction than those employed in organizations. However, they also experience higher levels of work-family conflict, and lower family satisfaction than organizational employees. The findings suggest that there are trade-offs between the costs and benefits of self-employment, and that business ownership is not a panacea for balancing work and family role responsibilities.

Noor (2006) presented some selected research findings in work, family and women’s well-being. The paper looked at the last few decades, which witnessed unprecedented changes in the lives of men and women. These changes can be seen in the societal gender-role prescription, the composition of the workforce, and the lives of men and women. She suggested that women however are more strongly affected by these changes because even when employed, they are still primarily responsible for the home and family. As they juggle multiple roles, the potential for stress and conflict also increases. Thus, she examines the impact of Malaysian women’s changing roles on their well-being. Three main studies relating to the Malaysian context are highlighted. The first is exploratory and considers the effects of multiple roles on well-being with social support and personality variables as potential moderators in the stress-strain relationship, the second involves model testing and fitting, and the third examines women’s perception of progress. While the first two studies are specific in terms of its objectives, the third study focusing only on Malay women is more general. The results of the first study indicated that women influenced by certain role experiences and both social support and extraversion moderated the relationship between roles and well-being. The findings of the second study provided support for the proposed model of the relationship between roles and well-being with the model showing reasonable fit when applied to three different age groups of women. The results also indicated that the predictors of women’s well-being differ according to their respective age groups. The third study related to Malay women’s perception of successful children, academic achievement and income.

The impact of work-family conflict on one’s well-being has also been demonstrated in a few qualitative and longitudinal studies. Frone, Russell, and Cooper’s (1997) study of employed parents is one of the few longitudinal studies of the effects of work-family conflict. They found that FWI was related to elevated levels of depression and poor physical health and to the incidence of hypertension. The results of the study of Grzywacz & Bass (2003) suggested that higher levels of both work-to-family and family-to-work conflict are associated with poor mental health (depression, anxiety disorder).

According to Pillay et al. (2005), traditionally the teaching role has been one of nurturing and developing students’ potential. However, teachers’ work today comprises a complex mix of various factors that include teaching; learning new skills; keeping abreast of technological innovations and dealing with students, parents and the community. These are demanding roles and there are growing concerns about teacher well-being and competence. In particularly, teachers are experiencing increasing levels of attrition, stress and burnout. Pillay et al., study investigated the relationship between burnout and competence for a sample of mid-career teachers in primary and secondary schools in Queensland. The results break new ground in reporting a negative association between the MBI subscale Depersonalization and competence that may be attributed to a distancing mechanism in human interactions.

Outcomes of WIF conflict include family-related distress and family-related behaviors, such as less family satisfaction, while the outcomes of FIW conflict include work-related distress and work-related behaviors, such as less job satisfaction, more absenteeism, lateness to work, and greater intention to quit work (e.g., Frone et al., 1992; Frone et al., 1997). Recent research has shown that the most consistent family characteristic predicting work-life imbalance is being a parent, and the most consistent work characteristic predicting work-life imbalance is hours worked (Tausig & Fenwick, 2001).

WFC EFFICACY, WFC AND WELL-BEING

Psychologists defined the term personality as an existence of a living being with an inner mental life consisting of thoughts, feeling, desires and goals as well as behaviors. Allport (1961) define personality as “the sum total of a person’s thoughts, feeling, desires, intentions and action tendencies, including their unique organization within the person.” To sum, personality as those thoughts, feelings, desires, intentions and action tendencies that contribute to important aspects of individuality {cognitive, affective, motivational and behavioral processes.

Bandura (1977) described self-efficacy, among other things, as a key determinant of psychological change and level of persistence when one meets adverse experiences. These functions of self-efficacy are relevant to work/family conflict. Teachers can use the findings of the present research study as a way to assess an their self-efficacy beliefs with regard to managing work/family conflict. Teachers could, for example, identify particular areas of work and family life that increase her experience of work/family conflict. The work-family conflict-efficacy (WFC-E) could be used as an initial assessment of her self-efficacy beliefs and could provide valuable information for future teachers’ teaching training. It could be helpful for teachers to explore how realistic or unrealistic their beliefs and expectations are and how these perceptions are influencing her goals and behaviors. Self efficacy is a powerful belief, and the teachers can make a difference for their students and themselves through self-efficacy.

Individual differences in personality and coping play a major role in the process by which work and family conditions impact upon one’s well-being. People differ from one another in their personality and ability as well as in their perception of potential sources of stress. These differences also can determine how they deal with stress and ultimately the extent to which they experience stress. Among the relevant individual difference variables for women are locus of control, negative affectivity (NA), and coping, which involves coping with work, coping with conflict and overload and coping with spillover (Noor, 2006).

Although very few studies have looked at the relationship between self-efficacy and work/family conflict (e.g. Kahn & Long, 1988; Matsui & Onglatco, 1992), Erdwins et al. (2001) noted that “it seems logical that a relationship may exist between these two constructs” (p. 231). Erdwins et al. (2001) examined the relationship of social support, role satisfaction, and self-efficacy to measures of work/family conflict and role overload. Participants included 129 married women, all of whom had at least one preschool-aged child. The researchers hypothesized that self-efficacy in work and family roles would be associated with work/family conflict, role overload, and maternal satisfaction. Role overload was measured by a single item asking, “How often do the things you do add up to being just too much?” (Erdwins et al., 2001).

Of most interest to the current study, results indicated that self-efficacy in work and family is a significant predictor of women’s work/family conflict. Results indicated a negative relationship between work/family conflict and self-efficacy in work and family, suggesting that a woman’s level of work/family conflict decreases as self-efficacy in her work and family roles increases. In addition, Hennesy (2007) has found work-family conflict self-efficacy was related to work-family conflict.

RELIGIOUS COPING, WFC AND WELL-BEING

The research on the implications for individuals in managing the work-family interface is sketchy and mixed. Kirchmeyer (1992) found that strategies that were effective in coping with the demands of multiple life domains involved altering one’s own attitudes rather than trying to alter those of others, and increasing one’s efficiency rather than decreasing one’s activity level or trying to rely on others.

Various definitions of coping have been proposed, including coping as a psychoanalytic process; as a personal trait, style, or disposition; as a description of situationally specific strategies; and as a process. Traditional approaches to conceptualizing coping defined it in terms of relatively stable trait or some enduring behavior or characteristic of the person (Stone, Greenberg, Kennedy Moore, & Newman, 1991). Using a transactional perspective, one can define coping as “cognitive and behavioral efforts to master, reduce or tolerate the internal or external demands that are created by the stressful transaction” (Folkman, 1984, p. 843).

Research shows that the elimination of distress is primarily achieved through effective coping (Lazarus and Folkman, 1984). The chronic nature of most contemporary stressors (like work-family conflict) compels individuals to continually cope in order to attenuate the distress. To some extent there is a similarity among the types of ongoing coping efforts an individual makes, and the individual can be described as using a particular coping “style.” Though no coping styles are universally appropriate, some may be more useful than others when dealing with the specific stressor of work-family conflict. Alternatively, some styles may work better with specific forms of conflict or with specific directional influences than others.

Religion and spirituality are some of the most powerful forces present in human nature. Though they are subjective and difficult to convey verbally, the experiences and ways in which religion and spirituality shape who we are can be fascinating to observe. Religion inspires tremendous emotionality, both in those who are religious and in those who are not. It largely affects public and private life, by providing a community of believers to fellowship with, as well as a foundation for private reflection, meditation, and personal growth. The role that religion plays in family relationships is also paramount, in that it provides a common framework from which to operate and order lives around. Particularly, religion is an important aspect for many in emotion-focused coping – the ability to adjust mentally to help deal with the consequences of stressful events. However, little research focuses on the actual process of coping as opposed to the outcomes of coping. Equally important to the outcome of a coping situation is how effective or ineffective specific coping strategies are for the well-being of the person (and the person’s relationships). If effective, the likelihood increases that these coping strategies will be drawn upon again in subsequent stressful events.

Within the coping literature, most of the articles direct their attention to the outcome of coping processes rather than the actual process itself. The very definition that Pargament supplies for the concept of religion suggests that it is a process: “a search for significance in ways related to the sacred” (Pargament, 1997, pg. 32). The Process Evaluation Model of Religious Coping discussed in his literature, then, proposes that meaningful coping can still occur even if there is a negative outcome. In evaluating the process, one can see that coping is either well or poorly integrated, where ‘integration’ addresses whether coping elements are in balance as they work together or are working against each other and out of balance. The particular elements that are either balanced or unbalanced are things like whether or not the coping strategy fits the situation, that the goals of coping do not contradict themselves, and that the social resources are supportive.

Most recently, Lapierre and Allen (2006) used conservation of resources model (COR) to study the different coping methods employed by individuals to avoid WFC. Findings revealed that some coping methods are more useful than others to help individuals gain or conserve resources when switching between work and family roles. Empirical studies have used COR to examine the effect of interrole conflict on well-being (Grandey & Cropanzano, 1999), the importance of resources in preventing or coping with WFC (Jansen, et al., 2003; Lapierre & Allen, 2006; Rosenbaum & Cohen, 1999), and the potential for WFC to lead to resource loss spirals (Demerouti et al., 2004).

One way to reduce work-family conflict is for individuals to have the ability to effectively cope with the stressful demands. Two different forms of work-family conflict (time-based and strain-based) were examined as well as the effect of direction (work interfering with family, family interfering with work) to examine the WFC-efficacy and religious coping of work-family conflict and well-being.

Work-family conflict, coping and well-being in nurses was studied by Ruhaya Hussin and Noraini Mohd Noor (2006). The number of Malaysian women engaged in the paid labour force is increasing f