SPAEF

GOING BEYOND THE WORK ARRANGEMENT: THE CRUCIAL ROLE OF SUPERVISOR SUPPORT Author(s): MARK JULIEN, KAREN SOMERVILLE and NEIL CULP Source: Public Administration Quarterly, Vol. 35, No. 2 (SUMMER 2011), pp. 167-204 Published by: SPAEF Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41506753 . Accessed: 20/02/2014 10:13
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

SPAEF is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Public Administration Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

GOING BEYOND THE WORK ARRANGEMENT: THE CRUCIAL ROLE OF SUPERVISOR SUPPORT MARK JULIEN Brock University KAREN SOMERVILLE Hamline University NEIL CULP Brock University

ABSTRACT

in work arrangements Studies examiningthe role of alternative have mixed results. levels of work-life conflict yielded reducing in the studieshave used homogeneous samplesresulting Frequently research thefindings. little to generalize Relatively empirical inability workarrangements has previously exploredthe topicsof alternative and work-life conflictin the public sector. This paper examines are an effective whether alternative work arrangements employer work-life conflict in thepublicsector. intervention that to reduce helps Results from this empirical study involving 60 public sector workweek is an alternative thata compressed suggest organizations that reduces work-life work life arrangement conflict,however, conflict. these do notreducework-life flextime and telework Further, to enhance is important results also suggest thatmanagement support work-life balance. workalternative work arrangements, Keywords: publicadministration, lifeconflict, supervisor support Employees in North America are subjected to the daily pressures and challenges of tryingto balance the often competing demands of work and personal life. Men and women play a multiplicity of roles including employee, spouse, friend, volunteer as well as caregiver to both their children and parents (that is, the sandwich generation). The result of not balancing work and life demands effectively

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

168

PAQ SUMMER

2011

manifests itself as work-life conflict and there is extensive support for the proposition that work-life conflict has negative consequences for both employee and employer. From the employee perspective, high levels of work-life conflict have been associated with poor physical health (e.g., Higgins, Duxbury, & Johnson, 2004; Madsen, 2003), a variety of psychological symptoms such as depression (e.g., Hammer, Cullen, Neal, Sinclair, & Shafiro, 2005; Roxburgh, 2004) and psychological distress (e.g., Burke & Greenglass, 1999; Grandey & Cropanzano, 1999) as well as marital dissatisfaction (e.g., MacEwen & Barling, 1994; Netemeyer, Boles, & McMurrian, 1996) and substance abuse (Frone, Russell, & Barnes, 1996; Frone, 2000). also have Employers experienced negative of work-life conflict in the form of lower repercussions job satisfaction (e.g., Anderson, Coffey, & Byerly, 2002; Boles, Howard & Donofrio, 2001); lower organizational commitment (e.g., Netemeyer, et al., 1996; Thompson, Beauvais, & Lyness, 1999) and higher turnover intentions (e.g., Anderson, et al., 2002; Greenhaus, Parasuraman, & Collins, 2001). A number of factors increase our confidence in the finding that work-life conflict is deleterious to both employees and employers. First, the studies were remarkably consistent in finding the associations between of work-family conflict and the higher levels aforementioned negative outcomes featured in this section (for example, poor physical health, lower levels of life satisfaction) despite the fact that the researchers used a variety of measures of work-family interference (e.g., Bohen & Viveros-Long, 1981; Frone, Russell, & Cooper, 1992; Gutek, Searle & Klepa, 1991; Kopelman, Greenhaus & Connolly, 1983). Second, a number of the studies cited (e.g., Anderson et al., 2002; Burke, 1988; Frone, 2000; Frone, et al., 1996; Hammer et al., 2005) involved fairly

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PAQ SUMMER

2011

169

large (that is, 450 respondents or more) samples which increase the generalizability of the findings. Given the negative outcomes associated with worklife conflict, it is problematic for employees and employers that work-life conflict levels are on the rise in North America. A large sample Canadian study by Duxbury and Higgins (2001) noted that relative to their 1991 results, significant increases were reported in work-life conflict. These increases were experienced regardless of gender, job type or parental status. A rising trend in work-life conflict has also been reported in the United States. Whereas thirty percent of respondents in the late 1970s and early 1980s were claiming that their job interfered with family somewhat or a great deal (e.g., Galinsky, Ruopp, & Blum, 1983; General Mills, Inc., 1981; Quinn & Staines, 1979), more recent data indicate these numbers have climbed. The most recent National Study of the Changing Workforce (NSCW) indicates that employees with families report higher levels (45 per cent experienced 'some' or 'a lot') of interference between their jobs and their family lives compared to respondents in 1977 (34 per cent experiencing 'some' or 'a lot') (Bond, Thompson, Galinsky, & Prottas, This paper will review the literature on alternative work arrangements and supervisor support and the impact of these constructs on work-life conflict. Hypotheses will be developed and tested using a representative sample of Canadian federal government employees. The findings will be presented and discussed along with the limitations of the study and futureresearch directions. ROLE OF ALTERNATIVE ARRANGEMENTS WORK 2003).

One often touted solution in the practitioner and peer-reviewed literature to help reduce levels of work-life

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

170

PAQ SUMMER

2011

conflict is the introduction of various forms of alternative work arrangements such as flextime, compressed work week and telework. Alternative work arrangements can be seen as a form of schedule control. The employee can control when and where they work thereby enabling the employee to accommodate non-work obligations. This ability to better manage their schedules should in turn lead to reduced levels of work-life conflict since the employee is better able to meet both work and non-work demands. Theoretical support for this proposition can be found in Karasek's Demand-Control model (Karasek, 1979). Karasek theorized that for different jobs, the interaction of the level of control and the level of demands of the job would result in different levels of negative health for stress. Karasek's outcomes, example, (1979) model allows for four possible outcomes from the association between job demands and control: high demands, low control (high strain jobs), high demands, high control (active jobs), low demands, high control (low strain jobs) and low demands, low control (passive jobs). According to this model, as demands increase and control decreases, negative health outcomes increases. The reverse is also hypothesized to be true. As control increases and job demands decrease, negative health outcomes decrease. Details on the four proposed types of jobs (that is, high strain,active, low strain,passive) are given below. Figure 1 Karasek's (1979) Demand-Control Model Low Demand HighDemand Low Strain Active HighControl Low Control Passive HighStrain

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PAQ SUMMER

2011

171

High Strain Jobs A high strainjob is defined as an occupation where demands are high and control is low. High strain jobs job are represented in the lower right hand quadrant of Figure 1. Examples of high strain jobs include assembly line workers and wait staff. It is this group where the health risks will be highest because these workers do not have the control to develop effective solutions to the high level of job demands inherent in their jobs (Karasek & Theorell, 1990). Active Jobs An active job is defined as an occupation where job demands and control are both high. Active jobs are represented in the upper right hand quadrant of Figure 1. Examples of active jobs are professional jobs such as surgeons, judges, lawyers, engineers, professors and managers. These tend to be jobs carrying a high prestige factor. Karasek and Theorell (1990) suggest that it is the high level of control that allows workers in active jobs to meet the high demands of theirjobs by developing creative solutions to the problems brought on by high demands. Karasek and Theorell (1990) predict that the combination of high job demands and high control will result in only an average level of negative health outcomes. Low Strain Jobs A low strain job is defined as an occupation where are low and yet control is high. Low-strain demands job jobs are represented in the upper left hand quadrant of Figure 1. Examples of low-strain jobs are repair personnel, linemen and natural scientists. The high degree of control combined with low job demands leads to Karasek' s prediction that this group of workers should experience lower than average levels of negative outcomes because control can be exercised for each of the few demanding

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

172

PAQ SUMMER

2011

situations encountered on a daily basis. Karasek and Theorell suggest that "these people are actually made both happier and healthier than average by work" (Karasek & Theorell, 1990: 36). Passive Jobs A passive job is defined as an occupation where both job demands and control are low. Passive jobs are represented in the bottom left hand quadrant of Figure 1. Security personnel, sales clerks, billing clerks and custodial staff are examples of passive jobs. It is predicted by Karasek and Theorell (1990) that the long-term effects of low job demands and low control is a loss of motivation and productivitydue to the lack of job challenges combined with a rigid work environment. Curiously, despite the negative picture presented of the passive job holder, Karasek and Theorell (1990) predict that employees in this group will experience only average levels of illness. It is interesting to note that this level of stress is the same level predicted for those holding active jobs. Karasek suggests this is because "although each stressor exposure would result in substantial residual strain (just as in the high-strain psychological the low demands of this work situation circumstance), job mean that fewer stressors are confronted" (Karasek & Theorell, 1990: 38). There is extensive empirical support for Karasek' s model and generally speaking higher levels of control have been associated with lower levels of strain (e.g., Kristensen, 1995; Van der Doef & Maes, 1998, 1999). The research model developed for this paper uses Karasek 's Demand-Control Model as its theoretical underpinning. The research model has a number of features in common with Karasek's model: the basic constructs (that is, demands, strain and control) included in the models are identical. the and However, conceptualization

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PAQ SUMMER

20 11

173

operationalization of these constructs in this research are quite different from those used by Karasek in two key ways. Karasek' s (1979) notion of strain centres on job strain. When Karasek' s model was developed in the 1970s, there was a clear division of labour associated with gender (Kanter, 1977). In other words, the men worked outside the home in paid employment and the women were responsible for most of the household and child rearing duties. This does not describe the reality of most North Americans today. Seventy-five percent of couples with children work in paid employment (Vanier Institute of the Family, 2005). Furthermore, men are spending more time doing housework and helping raise their children (Bianchi & Raley, 2005) compared to their male counterparts in 1970s. Therefore, we have updated Karasek' s model to reflect these societal trends and realities by operationalizing strain as work-life conflict. Karasek defined his control construct (that is, decision latitude) as "the working individual's potential control over his tasks and his conduct during the working day" (Karasek, 1979: 289). Karasek's conceptualization of control is focused only on control in the workplace. Such a conceptualization of control does not take into account control in one's non-work life. The research model for this paper has attempted to develop a new construct of control that has relevance for today's workforce. It is suggested that enhancing an employee's control over their work-life interface (operationalized as an alternative work could to reduce levels of work-life help arrangement) conflict. Other studies (e.g., Kossek, Lautsch & Eaton, 2006) have also used Karasek's framework when discussing the notion of schedule as a form of control. Kossek et al., (2006) examined the impact of control over where one works on both work-family and family-work conflict for a

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

174

PAQ SUMMER

2011

group of telecommuters (n=245). Heightened perceptions of schedule control were associated with lower levels of work-life conflict. Despite the theoretical argument that alternative work arrangements should be associated with lower levels of work-life conflict, a review of the literaturehas produced rather mixed and inconsistent results. For example, some studies find that flextime helps reduce work-life conflict (e.g., Lingard, Brown, Bradley, Bailey, & Townsend, 2007; Barling & Barenburg, 1984; Bond et al., 2003; Walker, Fletcher & McLeod, 1975), others report mixed (that is, flextime helps one gender but not the other) (e.g., Lee, 1983; White, Hill, McGovern, Mills, & Smeaton, 2003) or neutral (that is, flextime did not make a difference) results (e.g., Bohen & Viveros-Long, 1981; Clark, 2001). Some studies find a negative impact (that is., flextime exacerbated work-life conflict) (e.g., Dunham, Pierce & Castaneda, 1987). Studies examining the impact of compressed work week (e.g., Cunningham, 1981; Dunham et al., 1987; Saltzstein, Ting & Saltzstein, 2001) and telework (e.g., Baruch, 2000; De Lay, 1995; Duxbury, Higgins & Neufeld, 1998; Hill, Hawkins, & Miller, 1996; McCloskey, 1998) on work-life conflict have also produced contradictoryresults. This leads to a fundamental question: given the intuitive appeal of alternative work arrangements, why has the literaturenot emerged with more definitive conclusions about the impact of alternative work arrangements on work-life conflict? One possibility raised by Baltes, Briggs, Huff, Wright and Neuman (1999) as well Geurts and Demerouti (2003) is that previous studies in the areas of alternative work arrangements and work-life conflict have tended to use homogeneous populations and have lacked a theoretical framework (e.g., Cunningham, 1981; Winnett, Neale & Williams, 1982).

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PAQ SUMMER

20 11

175

This paper tests whether or not those who worked alternative work arrangements reported lower levels of work-life conflict than those working regular schedules in a heterogeneous population. Therefore, we will test the following three hypotheses: HI: Employees who work flextime will report greater ability to balance personal, family and work needs than employees who work a regular 9-5 work day. H2: Employees who work compressed work weeks will report greater ability to balance personal, family and work needs than employees who work a regular Monday-Friday work week. Employees who work telework will report greater ability to balance personal, family and work needs than employees who work on-site at their employer. The aforementioned mixed results found in the literatureof alternative work arrangements impacting worklife conflict suggest that other antecedents may play a role in impacting work-life conflict. One such possible antecedent is whether or not one's supervisor is supportive of an employee's effortsto balance work and family. ROLE OF SUPPORT H3:

This section will review the potential role that supervisor support can play on an employee's ability to balance work and family obligations. The theoretical underpinnings of how this support may be associated with lower levels of work-conflict will be explored followed by

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

176

PAQ SUMMER

2011

the empirical literature on the role of supervisor support and work-life balance. From an exchange theory perspective (Homans, 1961), employees will alter their levels of commitment and effort to their employer based on what Kossek, et al., (2006) refer to as a reciprocity effect. Supervisors who recognize that the boundaries between work and family are permeable and that what goes on at work impacts family and vice versa (Kirchmeyer, 1995) are more likely to support their employees. Employees who feel wellsupported by the supervisors in their efforts to balance work and family are likely to reciprocate by improving their performance and are less likely to quit or be absent (Kossek et al., 2006). Exchange theory would also suggest that supervisors who see the boundaries between work and family as highly impermeable and who see work and family as rigid and separate domains are less likely to be supportive of their employees' effortsto balance work and family. This lack of support may result in higher levels of absenteeism and turnover and poorer performance (Kossek et al., 2006). There is some literature to suggest that having a supportive supervisor improves levels of work-life conflict. Supervisors can play a key role in helping employees reduce work-life conflict by informing employees about corporate policies (for example, alternative work arrangements, personal leave days) designed to help employees balance work and family obligations (Galinsky & Stein, 1990). Voydanoff (2004) argues that when supervisors "respond positively to discussing and accommodating employees' family obligations, employees are likely to feel comfortable using available work-family policies" (Voydanoff, 2004: 403). Furthermore, Carlson and Perrewe (1999) argue that supervisors who are flexible by allowing an employee to leave work early when the employee has to respond to a family-related issue (for

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PAQ SUMMER

2011

177

example., a sick child or elderly relative) can help the employee lower his/her work-life conflict. Carlson and Perrewe (1999) also suggest that those supervisors who are open to hearing employees' family-related problems and providing solutions may help reduce an employee's sense of work-life conflict. Supervisors who model a sense of work-life balance in their own lives and who do not penalize those who value work-life balance are also vital in reducing an employee's work-life conflict (Duxbury & Higgins, 1997; Thomas & Ganster, 1995). There is some evidence to support the notion that supervisor support is directly associated with lower levels of work-life conflict. Three studies supporting this notion come from large sample studies. For example, Anderson et al., (2002) examined the 1997 National Study of the Changing Workforce (NSCW) (2,248 respondents) and noted that supervisor support was associated with lower levels of both work-family interference and family-work interference. Bond et al. (2003) reported that in the latest NSCW report (n = 2,810 respondents), employees who rate their supervisor high in supervisor support report less interference between job and family and lower levels of negative spillover relative to those who reported low levels of supervisor support. Grzywacz and Marks (2000) used data from the National Survey of Midlife Development in the United States (n= 1,986) and reported that lower levels of support at work (operationalized as both coworker and supervisor support) was associated with higher levels of work-family interference (operationalized as negative work-family spillover) and higher levels of family-work interference (operationalized as negative family-work spillover). Other studies with relatively fewer respondents than the NSCW have also supported the notion that supervisor support is associated with less work-life conflict. Secret and Sprang (2001) who studied the responses from 374

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

178

PAQ SUMMER

2011

working parents concluded that parents with supportive supervisors were 2.7 times less likely to experience role strain. Thomas and Ganster (1995) with a sample of 398 health professionals concluded that supervisor support was significantly and negatively associated with work-family conflict. Frone, Yardley and Markel (1997) with their sample of 372 employed adults noted that supervisor support was negatively and statistically significantly associated with both role overload (operationalized as work overload) and work-family conflict. Warren and Johnson (1995) studied 116 employed mothers and reported that supervisor support (that is, supervisor flexibility and supervisor sensitivity) was negatively associated with work-family role strain such that those with supportive supervisors reported lower levels of work-family role strain. Goff, Mount and Jamison (1990) surveyed 253 respondents of a large, Midwestern United States organization and concluded that supervisor support was associated with less work-family conflict. Jones and Butler (1980) surveyed 181 married American sailors and remarked that supervisor support was negatively associated with work-family conflict (results were statistically significant). Supervisors often have the final say on whether or not an employees' request to work a given alternative work arrangement will be approved (that is, act as a gatekeeper). As noted in Duxbury and Haines, "until a manager has a favorable attitude towards a given work arrangement, little or nothing is going to happen" (Duxbury & Haines, 1991: 96). Duxbury and Haines (1991) go furtherto suggest that efforts to gain supervisor buy-in must focus not on the benefits to the employee but on the benefits to the organization. This view is echoed by Powell and Mainiero (1999) who note that the degree to which alternative work arrangements are actually available to the individual depends on the immediate supervisor. Supervisor support

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PAQ SUMMER

20 11

179

may help the employee enhance his/herflexibility through his/hersupport of the given alternative work arrangement. While a great deal of literature has been written about the role of the immediate supervisor on reducing work-life conflict, a review of the literature could not find any peer-reviewed articles about the impact of senior management support on work-life conflict. Given the literature supporting the proposition that supervisors must support the implementation of a given alternative work arrangement in conjunction with the preponderance of literature supporting a negative association between supervisor support and work-life conflict, and the lack of research concerning the impact of senior management support, we decided to test the following hypotheses accordingly: H4 High levels of senior management support of flexible work arrangements (e.g., flexible hours, compressed work weeks, telework) are positively associated with the ability to balance personal, family and work needs. H5 High levels of immediate supervisor support of flexible work arrangements (e.g., flexible hours, compressed work weeks, telework) are positively associated with the ability to balance personal, family and work needs. H6 High levels of superiors' support of flexible work hours, arrangements (e.g., flexible compressed work weeks, telework) are positively associated with the ability to balance personal, family and work needs.

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

180 RESEARCH

PAQ SUMMER METHODOLOGY

2011

This section discusses the study's research methodology. First, characteristics of the sample are provided followed by a description of the measures used to test the hypotheses. Subsequently, the approach used for analyzing the data is discussed. Sample

There are three sources of data for this research. The firstsource comes from results of a survey conducted in 2005 by the Canadian federal government, which was called the Public Service Employee Survey (PSES). The Canadian federal government invited all public service employees to communicate theirviews related to their work and workplaces through the PSES. This survey was designed to gauge employee opinion on a wide range of issues related to the health of the Canadian federal public service, individual organizations and work units. The PSES was initially administered in 1999, and then again in 2002 and 2005. More than 200,000 employees working in federal government departments and other organization types such as agencies, tribunals and commissions were encouraged to complete the 2005 PSES. The 2005 PSES yielded a response rate of 59 per cent, with approximately 106,000 employee responses. The PSES data was the main source of data for this study. The second and thirdsources of data are the number of employees in the Canadian federal government organizations in 2005, as well as the type of organization respectively. These data sets were provided upon request by the Public Service Human Resources Management Agency of Canada. The number of employees was used as a control variable concerning organizational size. Organization type was also used as a control variable, with 60 organizations providing data on this variable. These two

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PAQ SUMMER

2011

181

control variables will be furtherexplained in the section below entitled Control Variables. The unit of analysis in this research is the organization. The data was aggregated across all respondents in each of the organizations which is an approach that has been used in similar studies (e.g., Somerville & Dyke, 2008). Data related to the number of employees in 2005 was obtained for 57 organizations. The number of employees ranged from 22 to 23,214, with a mean of 2,872 employees. The results of the data indicate that 16 per cent of respondents worked compressed work week, 29 per cent worked flextime and 6 per cent telecommuted. Control Variables Two control variables have been used in this study. These are organizational size and organization type. It was expected that organizational size may impact the work arrangements. For example, larger organizations may have more resources to provide a formal alternative work arrangement and have the resources to ensure schedules are covered and customers are not inconvenienced. Conversely, smaller organizations might excel at their ability to be flexible and adapt in a more informal manner (MacDermid, Williams, Marks, & Heilbrun, 1994). Organization type may also impact the work arrangements offered in these government organizations. The most common type of organization included in this study is a government department, however, as noted previously, there are also other types of organizations such as commissions, tribunals and agencies. Some of these alternate types of organizations may enjoy greater autonomy and flexibility than government departments, perhaps due to less political interference and less onerous rules (Somerville & Dyke, 2008). It is expected that the effects of organization type will be independent of

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

182

PAQ SUMMER

2011

organizational size. While some of the commissions, tribunals and agencies tend to have a smaller number of employees, some do have a larger number of employees. Measures Table 1 presents the questions asked in the PSES related to the various measures used to test our six hypotheses. Table 1 Work-life Subjects and Public Service Employee Survey (PSES) Questions PSES Question(s) work flextime? Yes or Do youcurrently No work work compressed Employees working compressedDo youcurrently Yes orNo work weeks weeks? telework Do youcurrently work telework? Yes or Employees working No and Abilityto balance personal,I can balancemy personal, family inmycurrent needs work needs andwork job. (Four point family scale: Always, Likert often, sometimes, ornever rarely Thosewhoreport levels of Senior the actively high management supports work to the useofflexible (flexible relating arrangements superior support use of flexible work hours, work weeks, telework, compressed etc.) arrangements to operational Thosewhoreport levels of Subject my high requirements, immediate theuse of supervisor support immediate supervisor supports work to the use of flexible flexible arrangements relating (e.g.,flexible work work hours, compressed weeks, telework) arrangements Those whoreport a high levelof Composite of (Mean of): Senior or aggregate theuse of actively general supervisor management supports work to the use of flexible hours, (flexible support relating arrangements flexible work work weeks, telework, etc.)& arrangements compressed to operational Subject requirements, my immediate theuse of supervisor supports flexible work arrangements (e.g.,flexible work hours, compressed weeks, telework) Subject flextime working Employees For measures to be statistically valid, at least two questions that have a Cronbach's alpha of at least .70

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PAQ SUMMER

20 11

183

should be used (Nunnally, 1978). However, only one question for each of these subjects was asked in the PSES. Therefore, the results for hypotheses 1 to 3 are presented as exploratory. For the subject of superiors' support of flexible work arrangements,there were two questions that related to this subject. Superiors' support in this research is defined as immediate supervisor support and senior management support. A composite measure for superiors' support was created by combining the two PSES questions. These two items are highly correlated (r = 0.87) and so form a reliable scale with a Cronbach's alpha of .93. RESULTS A correlation analysis was used to test the firstthree hypothesis outlined above, which all examine the direct relationship between different types of alternative work arrangements (that is, flextime, compressed work week, and telework) with one's ability to balance work and personal/family responsibilities. Table 2 below shows the zero-order correlations between all relevant variables considered in the currentanalysis. As demonstrated above, there was a significant relationship between participation in a compressed work week and one's ability to balance work and life demands. The relationship between the other two alternative work arrangements and one's ability to balance work and life demands were not statistically significant. Therefore, H2 was supported, while HI and H3 were not supported. Moreover, several other significant associations could be identified, such as the strong linear relationship between all three managerial support variables (direct supervisor, senior management, and a composite measure of management) and the ability to balance one's work and life demands. Given the above significant main effects, initial

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

184

PAQ SUMMER

2011

support for the next set of hypotheses (that is, H4, H5 and H6) exists. Table 2 Correlations between Work-LifeBalance Abilities, Alternative WorkArrangement Participation, Managerial Support and Organizational Characteristics 4. 5. 6. 7. L 2. 3. 1.Work-life balance size -0.08 2.Organization 3.Compressed work q 19 week 0.14 4.Flex hours 5.Telework 0.16 q 19* ... 0.03 0.06 -0.15 -0.15 0.49**-

0.45** -0.13 0.31**0.34**0.32**6.Supervisor support 7.Senior management 0 52** _0.14 0.27**0.40**0.43**0.91**support 0.61** -0.16 0.38** 0.42**0.45**0.88** 0.92** 8.Support -aggregate **-p<0.05 Note: N = 60,* -p < 0.10, Given that organizational size and organization type may be associated with support for and access to alternative work arrangements, it was appropriate to examine whether these control variables influence the relationship between management support and work-life balance. To analyze the influence of such variables, two steps were taken. First, the existence of significant linear relations between organization size and organizational type with work-life balance was tested. Next, correlations between the linear relationships reported in Table 2 (that is, relationships between alternate work arrangements and work-life balance) were repeated, but this time controlling for organization size, then organization type, then both. Table 2 already contains zero-order correlations between organizational size and the work-life balance, alternative work arrangements and managerial support variables. As

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PAQ SUMMER

2011

185

demonstrated in Table 2, only the availability of a compressed work week was significantly related to organizational size. Given that the current organizational type variable is dichotomous, it was appropriate to perform t-tests to determine if there was a relationship between it and the other variables of question (work-life balance, immediate supervisor support, senior management support, and number of employees). The results of the t-tests are presented in Table 3. Table 3 T-Test Results Based on Organizational Type Df T I can balancemyworkandlife 58 -2.19* demands Immediate 57 -0.21 supervisor support Seniormanagement 56 -0.92 support -1.37 (composite) 58 Management support size*** 27 3.10** Organization * *** = = < where N 57), -p 0.05, ** -p Note:N 60 (except <0.01 Now that the relationships, or lack thereof,between the control variables and the variable of interest have been examined, it was appropriate to move onto the more important part of the analysis, specifically the partial correlations between the work-life variable and the manager support variables. Given the above results, it was hypothesized that the organization size will neither significantly attenuate nor enhance the established relationships. Organizational type, however, and the combination of that with organization size, may significantlyaffect the established relationships. The results of the partial correlational analysis are presented in Table 4.

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

186

PAQ SUMMER

2011

Table 4 Partial Correlations between Work-LifeBalance and Manager Support Variables I canbalancemyworkandfamily responsibility controlled (Variables for) Organization Organization Org.Size & Size*** Type Org. Type***

Immediate supervisor -42** '45** -46** support Seniormanagement -49** -52** -51** support Management support 58** 59** -58** (composite) Note:N = 60 (Except*** where N = 57), * -p < 0.10, ** -p < 0.05

By controlling for the effects of the organization size variable, the organizational type variable and then both, most linear relationships are slightly attenuated from the true zero-order correlation, but as demonstrated in size and Table 4, controlling for organization does not reduce the organizational type significantly relations providing evidence that the relationship between work-life balance and managerial support is robust. Therefore, H4, H5 and H6 were all supported. Finally, it was appropriate to review all variables in a more cohesive manner. Specifically, a hierarchical regression was performed to account for the variance in work-life balance. In the first step of the analysis, the individual alternative work arrangement variables were entered. The following two steps introduced the first and second order interactions between the alternative work arrangement variables. Next the supervisor support and senior manager support variables were introduced,

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PAQ SUMMER

20 11

187

followed in the next step by the aggregate manager support variable. The results can be found in Table 5. Table 5 Regression Analysis between Work-LifeBalance and Alternative WorkArrangement and Managerial Support Predictors Entered Variables perStep 1.Compressed work week, & telework flex hours, work 2. Alternative (first arrangements, order interactions) work 3. Alternative (second arrangements order interactions) & 4. Supervisor support senior management support 5. Support -aggregate R Q27 0.27 0.27 0.55 0.69 R2 Q07 0.07 0.07 0.30 0.47 Change 0 0? 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.17 ^ Change L45 0.02 0.01 8.03** 15.82**

N = 60, * - p < 0.10,** - p< Work-life variable: Note:Criterion balance, 0.05 echoes the results from the above procedures. To begin, the entry of the alternative work arrangements or the related interaction variables did not account for a significant amount of variance in one's ability to balance work and life demands. However, the introduction of supervisor and manager support did yield significant results. Beta coefficients and squared semi partials can be found in Table 6, illustrating the overall importance of individual variables to the overall model. Table 5

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

188

PAQ SUMMER

20 11

Table 6 Beta Coefficients and Squared Semi-Partials of Final Model Variable p Coefficient SemiPartial2 Constant 2.58 work week 0.33 0.0001 Compressed Flex hours 0.18 0.0001 Telework 4.00 0.0125 work Interaction week -2.75 0.0036 (compressed & flexhours) Interaction & telework) -18.31 0.0193 (flexhours 1 Interaction work week -3 .60 0.0166 (compressed & telework) Interaction work week 120.88 0.0193 (compressed & flexhours & telework) -0.46 0.0671 Supervisor support Seniormanagement 0.01 0.0020 support - aggregate 2.57 0.2440 Support Since dynamics can change in an organization as a result of organizational size and organizational type, it was appropriate to investigate whether controlling for these factors has a significant impact on the above model. As such, a similar analysis was performed, but in this second iteration, organizational size and organizational type were entered first, to act as control variables. Results can be found in Table 7. Beta coefficients and squared semi partials can be found in Table 8, illustrating the overall importance of individual variables to the overall model.

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PAQ SUMMER Table 7

2011

189

Regression Analysis between Work-LifeBalance and Alternative WorkArrangement and Managerial Support Predictors - Controlling for Organization Size and Type JL r R2 Entered Variables per ^ Step y R Change Change 1.Organization size& Q25 0 06 0.06 1.80 organization type 2. Compressed work week, 0 35 0.12 0.06 1.15 & telework flex hours, 3. Alternative work 0.02 0.12 0.00 0.35 .(first arrangements order interactions) 4. Alternative work 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.35 (second arrangements order interactions) & 5. Supervisor support 6.83** 0.33 0.21 0.57 senior, management support - aggregate 10.97** 0.46 0.13 0.68 6. Support N = 60, * - p < 0.10,** - p< variable: Work-life Note:Criterion balance, 0.05 The introduction of control variables has a minimal, but not a significant, effect on the model as previously articulated. Changes in R2 are similar between the two regression procedures, and the overall variance explained is also significant. Consistent with the zero-order correlations, organizational size and organizational type do not seem to impact heavily on one's ability to balance work and life demands. Nor do they appear to moderate the relationship between alternative work arrangements,managerial support and work-life conflict.

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

190

PAQ SUMMER

2011

Table 8 Beta Coefficients and Squared Semi-Partials of Final Model Variable Coefficient Semi-Partial ft Constant 2.42 Number ofemployees 0.00 0.01 51 0.05 0.0292 Organizational type work week 0.36 0.0009 Compressed Flexhours 0.19 0.0007 Telework 3.96 0.0130 Interaction work week & -2.88 0.0040 (compressed flex hours) Interaction & telework) hours -18.67 0.02 10 (flex Interaction work week & -31.86 0.0177 (compressed telework) Interaction work week & 125.89 16 0.02 (compressed flex hours & telework) -0.36 0.0412 Supervisor support Senior 0.04 0.0009 management support - aggregate 2.35 0.1998 Support DISCUSSION One of the three hypotheses associated with work arrangement, that is, compressed work week, was supported. The hypotheses concerning flextime and telework were not supported. Therefore, these results suggest that a compressed work week contributes to lessening work-life conflict while flextime and telework do not. It could be that compressed work weeks offer employees more genuine flexibilityin meeting the demands of work and family. Compressed work weeks give employees the opportunityto work longer hours on certain days in exchange for having other week days off. This work arrangement may give employees the opportunity to better schedule non-work responsibilities such as taking children or elderly parents to appointments. It is possible that flextime does not offer sufficient schedule flexibility for workers to meet the competing demands of work and non-work. Flextime is still based around a core set of hours

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PAQ SUMMER and it could effectiveness.

20 11 be that this arrangement has

191 limited

Furthermore, the literature (e.g., Baruch, 2000) points out that working telework can often be a doubleedged sword. Theoretically telework should enable workers to better balance work and family obligations by choosing when work and non-work related tasks are completed. Further,by eliminating commute times, teleworkers should have more time to complete non-work obligations. However, there are those who feel that telecommuting has the potential to increase work-life conflict because of Salomon, 1985). permeable boundaries (Shamir & to who this researchers view, when According espouse non-telecommuters leave work there is a clear separation and distance that they can put between themselves and their office. For telecommuters, on the other hand, the "office" is always there. This omnipresent office may lead employees to work extra hours thus making it more difficultto juggle work and family schedules (Shamir & Salomon, 1985). This desire to work harder and longer could potentially lead to workaholism and burnout (Shamir & Salomon, 1985). All three hypotheses concerning supervisor and managerial support were supported. The results from hypotheses H4, H5 and H6 suggest that support of these work arrangements at the immediate supervisor and senior management levels (as well as the composite measure of superiors' support) is crucial. Practical Implications of Our Findings This paper reported that only one of three alternative work arrangements (that is, compressed work weeks) was associated with lower levels of work-life conflict. This suggests that public sector senior managers who want to help employees juggle work and family obligations need to do more than providing a programmatic alternative work arrangements. such as approach

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

192

PAQ SUMMER

2011

Furthermore, given the challenges of attraction and retention of skilled workers in the public sector (Mastracci, Newman, & Guy, 2006), senior managers must provide a work environment that is conducive to enhancing the satisfaction and commitment of these employees. Organizations need to consider how to increase management support for these work arrangements. It is important to recognize that training initiatives could be helpful in this context. Training could raise awareness of the problems associated with work-life conflict and provide practical information on how supervisors can help to support their employees (for example, letting them leave early in an emergency, by providing information about various alternative work arrangements, etc.). The introduction of training is also an action that should be available to management without impacting collective agreements in mainly unionized environments, such as exists in the Canadian federal public sector. A focus on cultural change to one that recognizes that employees have demands and obligations outside of work may also be important to the effective use of alternative work arrangements. Researchers such as Lewis and Cooper (1999) and Allen (2001) suggest that culture is the key to perceived control over one's work day as employees will not take advantage of the flexibility inherent in schedules such as compressed work weeks if they feel that by doing so their careers or job security will be jeopardized. We suggest that organizations address this issue by introducing initiatives that focus on enhancing cultural support for work-life balance. In other words, the organization's culture should acknowledge the importance of balancing work and family obligations instead of forcing employees to choose between work or family. These initiatives could include ensuring senior management model the importance of balancing work and family, identifying best practices associated with balancing work

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PAQ SUMMER

2011

193

and family, and communicating those best practices (Duxbury & Higgins, 2003). Changing performance management practices to focus on objective measures of performance other than the number of hours an employee is physically at work is also importantas changing the culture away from face time and encouraging employees to complete their work within a reasonable timeframe could potentially lead to reduced levels of work-life conflict among their employees. CONTRIBUTIONS, LIMITATIONS RESEARCH AND FUTURE

This paper makes six contributions to the literature. most of the literature relating to alternative work First, arrangements and work-life conflict has not focused on public sector organizations (exception Saltzstein, Ting & Saltzstein, 2001). Given the unique organizational culture, pressures and challenges of operating in a public sector organization, it is long overdue that an empirical study be conducted that can shed some light on the potential impact of alternative work arrangements on work-life conflict within the public sector. Second, the work-life conflict studies that have been done on the public sector have involved small homogenous samples such as police officers (Burke, 1988) or nurses (e.g., Havlovic, Lau & Pinfield, 2002). These homogenous samples limit the generalizability of the findings. The empirical research conducted in this study involves 60 organizations in the public sector. The variety of missions and functions of these organizations leads us to assert that we have studied a heterogeneous population. As discussed earlier, previous studies concerning alternative work arrangements and work-life conflict have tended to focus on homogeneous populations (e.g., Winnett, et al., 1982). The results in this paper are thereforemore generalizable.

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

194

PAQ SUMMER

2011

Third, these results suggest that employers interested in helping employees balance work and life should consider introducing compressed work weeks into the workplace. It is acknowledged that there is much confusion in the compressed work week-work-life conflict literature. However, many of the previous studies that concluded that compressed work weeks had no impact on work-life conflict used homogenous populations. It could be that use of heterogeneous populations in studies such as this one are more indicative of the efficacy of compressed work weeks. Fourth, this study helps to clarify whether or not the size of the organization matters with respect to balancing work and family. While the majority of previous studies in this area indicate that employees in larger organizations report lower levels of work-life conflict, it is important to note that these studies had small sample sizes and samples. Our study is much more homogeneous and therefore more generalizable to both representative public and private organizations. Our finding that employees in small organizations report lower levels of work-life conflict than those in larger organizations is consistent with another representative study based on the National Study of the Changing Workforce (MacDermid, Hertzog, Kensinger, & Zipp, 2001). Fifth, this study features organizations ranging in size from 22 to 23,214 employees. This study contributes to the work-life conflict literature where few studies have been conducted involving small-sized organizations (MacDermid et al., 2001). Sixth, this paper supports the proposition that public sector senior managers should stop thinking of alternative work arrangements as a panacea that will solve all of their employees' work-life balance problems. Such alternative work arrangements, by themselves, may be an insufficient strategyfor employees seeking a balance between work and

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PAQ SUMMER

20 11

195

family. Instead, this paper argues for the importance of training supervisors to recognize the negative impact of work-life conflict, to provide practical measures on how supervisors can support their employees' requests for more flexibility in balancing work and family and to recognize the potential impact of a supportive organizational culture. It is acknowledged that this study is not without its limitations. The first limitation relates to the level of analysis for this research, that is, the organization. By focusing on the organizational level, micro employee level issues, such as job type, cannot be explored. However, an advantage to focusing on the organization as a whole is the ability to consider alternate work arrangements that might affect a number of units across the organization. Second, the fact that some measures in this study (that is, work-life conflict operationalized as balancing personal, family and work needs) were single item measures constitutes an additional limitation. Therefore, we re-emphasize our desire to see these results as exploratory. Third, given a sample size of 60 organizations, it is acknowledged that power could be an issue with this research; this was the motivation to consider significance at the level of 0.10 as opposed to the traditional 0.05. Finally, the potential issue of single source bias must be raised as a limitation given that the measures were gathered from the PSES (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee & Podsakoff, 2003). This is an important subject that is deserving of further research. Future research efforts are required to understand the role of organizational culture on superiors' support of alternative work arrangements and on work-life conflict. As well, given the inconsistencies in the literature regarding whether alternate work arrangements such as flextime, compressed work weeks and telework are positive or negative, research is required to determine why these inconsistencies exist.

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

196

PAQ SUMMER

2011

REFERENCES Allen, T. (2001). Family supportive work environments: The role of organizational perceptions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58, 414-435. Anderson, S., Coffey, B. & Byerly, R. (2002). Formal organizational initiatives and informal workplace practices: Links to work-family conflict and jobrelated outcomes. Journal of Management, 28, 787810. Baltes, B., Briggs, T., Huff, J., Wright & Neuman, G. Flexible and compressed work week (1999). schedules: A meta-analysis of their effects on workrelated criteria. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 496-513. Barling, J. & Barenburg, A. (1984). Some personal of 'flexitime' work schedules. consequences Journal of Social Psychology, 123, 137-138. Baruch, Y. (2000). Teleworking: Benefits and pitfalls as perceived by professionals and managers. New Technology, Workand Environment, 15, 34-49. Bianchi, S. & Raley, S. (2005). Time allocation in families. In Bianchi, S., Casper, L. & King, R. (Eds.) (2005). Work,family, health and well-being. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Bohen, H. & Viveros-Long, A. (1981). Balancing Jobs and Family life: Do Flexible Work Schedules Help? Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Boles, J., Howard, u. & Donotrio, H. (2001). An investigation into the inter-relationships of workfamily conflict, family-work conflict and work satisfaction. Journal of Managerial Issues, 13, 376390.

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PAQ SUMMER

20 11

197

Bond, J. (1996). Work-life sensitivities in small business: Preliminary research findings. Presentation at a conference by the Families and Work Institute,New York. Bond, J., Thompson, C., Galinsky, E., & Prottas, D. (2003). Highlights of the National Study of the Changing Workforce.New York: Families and Work Institute. Burke, R. (1988). Some antecedents and consequences of work-family conflict. In Goldsmith, E. (Ed.). Work and family: Theory, research and applications. Newbury Park, CA: Select Press. Burke, R. & Greenglass, E. (1999). Work-family conflict, spouse support and nursing staff well-being during Journal restructuring. of organizational 327-336. Health 4, Psychology, Occupational Carlson, D. & Perrewe, P. (1999). The role of social support in the stressor-strain relationship: An examination of work-family conflict. Journal of Management, 25, 513-540. Clark, S. (2001). Work cultures and work/familybalance. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 58, 348-365. Cunningham, B. (1981). Exploring the impact of a ten-hour compressed shift schedule. Journal of Occupational Behavior, 2, 217-222. De Lay, N. (1995). The effects of telecommuting and gender on work-family conflict and satisfaction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago. Alternative Dunham, K., Pierce, J. & L-astaneaa, M. work schedules: Two field quasi-experiments. Personnel Psychology, 40, 215-242. Duxbury, L. & Haines, G. (1991). Predicting alternative work arrangements from salient attitudes: A study of decision makers in the public sector. Journal of Business Research, 23, 83-97.

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

198

PAQ SUMMER

2011

Duxbury, L. & Higgins, C. (1997). Supportive managers: What are they? Why do they matter? The HRM Research Quarterly, 1(4), 1-4. Duxbury, L. & Higgins, C. (2001). Work-lifebalance in the new millennium: Where are we? Where do we need to go? Work Network: Canadian Policy Research Networks, Inc. Duxbury, L. & Higgins, C. (2003). Work-Life Conflict in Canada in the New Millennium: A Status Report. Healthy Communities Division, Health Canada. Duxbury, L., Higgins, C. & Neufeld, D. (1998) Telework and the Balance Between Work and Family: Is Telework Part of the Problem or Part of the Solution? In M. Igbaria and M. Tan (Eds) The Virtual Workplace. Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, PA, pp. 218-255. Frone, M. (2000). Work-family conflict and employee psychiatric disorders: The national comorbidity survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 888895. Frone, M., Russell, M. & Barnes, G. (1996). Work-family conflict, gender and health-related outcomes: A study of employed parents in two community Journal Health samples. of Occupational Psychology, 1, 57-69. Frone, M., Russell, M., & Cooper, L. (1992). Antecedents and Outcomes of Work-Family Conflict: Testing a Model of the Work-Family Interface. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 65-78. Frone, M., Yardley, J., & Markel, K. (1997). Developing and testing an integrative model of the work-family interface. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 50, 145167. Galinsky, E., Ruopp, R. & Blum, K. (1983). The Corporate Work and Family Life Study. Unpublished data.

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PAQ SUMMER

2011

199

Galinsky, E. & Stein, P. (1990). The impact of human resource policies on employees: Balancing work/familylife. Journal of Family Issues, 11, 368383. General Mills, Inc. (1981). General Mills American Family Report, Families at work: Strengths and strains. Minneapolis, MN: Louis Haldi & Associates. Geurts, S. & Demerouti, E. (2003). Work/non-work interface: A review of theories and findings. In Schabracq, M., Winnubst, J. & Cooper, C. (Eds.) The Handbook of Work and Health Psychology. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons. Goff, S., Mount, M, & Jamison, R. (1990). Employer supported child care, work-family conflict and absenteeism: A field study. Personnel Psychology, 43, 793-809. Grandey, A. & Cropanzano, R. (1999). The conservation of resources model applied to work-family conflict and strain.Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54, 350-370. Greenhaus, J., Parasuraman, S. & Collins, K. (2001). Career involvement and family involvement as moderators of relationships between work-family conflict and withdrawal from a profession. Journal of Occupational Health and Psychology, 6(2), 91100. Grzywacz, J. & Marks, N. (2000). Reconceptualizing the work-family interface: An ecological perspective on the correlates of positive and negative spillover between work and family. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 111-126. Gutek, B., Searle, S. & Klepa, L. (1991). Rational versus gender role expectations for work-family conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 560-568.

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

200

PAQ SUMMER

2011

Hammer, L., Cullen, J., Neal, M., Sinclair, R., & Shafiro, M. (2005). The longitudinal effects of work-family conflict and positive spillover on depressive symptoms among dual-earner couples. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 10(2), 138-154. Havlovic, S., Lau, D. & Pinfield, L. (2002). Repercussions of work schedule congruence among full-time,parttime and Care contingent nurses. Health 30-41. Management Review, 27(4), Higgins, C., Duxbury, L. & Johnson, K. (2004). Exploring the link between work-life conflict and demands on Canada's health care system: Report 3. Healthy Communities Division. Public Health Agency of Canada. Hill, E., Hawkins, A. & Miller, B. (1996). Work and Family in the Virtual Office: Perceived influences of mobile telework. Family Relations, 45, 293-301. Homans, G. (1961). Social behavior: Its elementary forms. London: Routledge. A. & Butler, M. (1980). A role transition approach Jones, to the stress of organizationally induced family role disruption. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 42, 367-376. Kanter, R. (1977). Work and family in the United States: A critical review and agenda for research and policy. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Karasek, R. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications forjob redesign. Karasek, R. & Theorell, T. (1990). Healthy work: Stress, productivity, and the reconstruction of working life. New York: Basic Books. Kirchmeyer, C. (1995). Managing the work-nonwork of organizational boundary: An assessment responses. Human Relation, 48(5), 515-536.

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PAQ SUMMER

20 11

201

Kopelman, R., Greenhaus, J. & Connolly, T. (1983). A model of work, family, and interrole conflict: A construct validation study. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 32, 198-215. & Kossek, E., Lautsch, B., Eaton, S. (2006). and control, Telecommuting, boundary management: Correlates of policy use and practice, job control, and work-family effectiveness. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68, 347-367. Kristensen, T. (1995). The demand-control-support model: Methodological challenges for future research. Stress Medicine, 11, 17-26. R. Lee, (1983). Flexitime and conjugal roles. Journal of Occupational Behavior, 4, 297-315. Lewis, S. & Cooper, C. (1999). The work-family research in changing contexts. Journal of agenda Health Occupational Psychology, 4, 382-393. Lingard, H., Brown, K., Bradley, L., Bailey, C., & Townsend, K. (2007). Improving employees' worklife balance in the construction industry: Project alliance case study. Journal of Construction Engineering & Management, 722(10), 807-815. MacDermid, S., Hertzog, J., Kensinger, K. & Zipp, J. (2001). The role of organizational size and industry to job quality and work-family relationships. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 22(2), 191216. MacDermid, S., Williams, M., Marks, S. & Heilbrun, G. (1994). Is small beautiful? Work-family tension, work conditions, and organizational size. Family Relations, 43, 159-167. MacEwen, K. & Barling, J. (1994). Daily consequences of work interference with family and family interference with work. Work and Stress, 8, 244254.

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

202

PAQ SUMMER

2011

Madsen, S. (2003). The effects of home-based teleworking on Resource work-family conflict. Human 35-58. Development Quarterly, 14, Mastracci, S., Newman, M., & Guy, M. (2006). Appraising emotion work: Determining whether emotional labor is valued in government jobs. American Review of Public Administration,36(2), 123-138. McCloskey, D. (1998). The impact of telecommutingon the work outcomes of professionals. Unpublished doctoral Drexel dissertation, University, Philadelphia. Netemeyer, R., Boles, J. & McMurrian, R. (1996). Development and validation of work-family conflict and family-work conflict scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 400-410. Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric theory, Second Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company. Podsakoff, P., MacKenzie, S., Lee, J, & Podsakoff, N. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 55(5), 879-903. Powell, G. & Mainiero, L. (1999). Managerial decision making regarding alternative work arrangements. Journal of Occupational and Organizational 41-56. Psychology, 72, guinn, K. & Staines, G. (1979). The 1977 Quality oj Employment Survey: Descriptive statistics with comparison data from the 1969-70 and 1972-73 surveys. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research. Roxburgh, S. (2004). There just aren't enough hours in the day: The mental health consequences of time pressure. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 45, 115-131.

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PAQ SUMMER

2011

203

Saltzstein, A., Ting, Y., & Saltzstein, G. (2001). Workfamily balance and job satisfaction: The impact of family-friendly policies on attitudes of federal government employees. Public Administration Review, 61, 452-466. Secret, M. & Sprang, G. (2001). The effects of familyfriendly workplace environments on work-family stress of employed parents. Journal of Social Service Research, 28, 21-45. Shamir, B. & Salomon, I. (1985). Work at Home and the Quality of Working Life. Academy of Management Review, 10, 455-463. Somerville, K. & Dyke, L. (2008). Culture change drivers in the public sector. The International Journal of Knowledge, Culture and Change Management, 8(6), 149-160. Thomas, L. & Ganster, D. (1995). Impact of familysupportive work variables on work-family conflict and strain: A control perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 6-15. Thompson, C., Beauvais, L. & Lyness, K. (1999). When work-family benefits are not enough: The influence of work-family culture on benefit utilization, organizational attachment and work-family conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54, 392-415. Van der Doef, M. & Maes, S. (1998). The job demandcontrol (support) model and physical health outcomes: A review of strain and bufferhypotheses. Psychological Health, 13(5), 909-936. Van der Doef, M. & Maes, S. (1999). The job demandcontrol (support) model and psychological wellbeing: a review of 20 years of empirical research. Work and Stress, 13, 87-114. Vanier Institute of the (2005). Family digest, http://www.vifamilv.ca/librarv/work/kitchen html.

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

204

PAQ SUMMER

2011

Voydanoff, P. (2004). The effects of work demands and resources on and work-to-family conflict facilitation. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 398-412. Walker, J., Fletcher, C., & McLeod, D. (1975). Flexible working hours in two British government offices. Public Personnel Management, 4, 216-222. Warren, J. & Johnson, P. (1995). The impact of workplace support on work-family role strain. Family Relations, 44, 163-169. White, M., Hill, S., McGovern, P., Mills, C. & Smeaton, D. (2003). 'High-performance' management practices, working hours, and work-life balance. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 41, 175-195. Winnett, R., Neale, M. & Williams, K. (1982). The effects of flexible work schedules on urban families with young children: Quasi-experimental, ecological studies. American Journal of Community 49-64. 10, Psychology,

This content downloaded from 111.68.106.109 on Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:13:53 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions