Search results

A survey of employed workers was conducted at two time periods to assess relationships between work‐family conflict, well‐being, and job and family satisfaction, along with the role of social support from work colleagues and family members. Levels of work‐to‐family interference (WFI) were found to be uniformly higher than family‐to‐work interference (FWI). However, at each time period FWI showed more consistent negative relationships with well‐being and satisfaction, indicating that family‐to‐work interference may have a greater bearing on employees’ affective reactions. There were few cross‐time relationships between work‐family conflict and these reactions, which suggests that the association of work‐family conflict with well‐being and satisfaction may be time‐dependent. Although there was some evidence that social support from work colleagues moderated the relationship of WFI with psychological strain and family satisfaction, family support did not display a consistent moderator influence. Instead, both forms of support tended to exhibit direct (rather than moderator) relationships with the outcome variables. Implications of the findings for research and interventions are discussed.

This study investigates the impact of conflict style as a coping strategy in response to role conflict. Recent research has begun to examine workplace uncertainty as a mediator in the role stress process. Using this overall framework, we developed and tested hypotheses regarding the effect of conflict style activeness on the link between role conflict and uncertainty. Results supported the mediating role of uncertainty in the role stress process, thus replicating previous research. Additionally, the results showed that exhibiting a more active approach to conflict management decreased the negative impact of role conflict on uncertainty. These findings suggest that individuals may be able to reduce the negative individual impact of role conflict in their environment by adopting positive behavioral styles while avoiding negative ones.

This chapter explores what managers in the library and information science workplace can do to keep stress and burnout levels low. The literature on stress and burnout in human services, or the helping professions, is surveyed and the differences between the two phenomena are explained. Research is clear that keeping stress levels low and burnout at bay in the workplace benefits both employees and the organization. Even so, managers are given little training on how to identify and deal with stress and often fail to notice that their employees are chronically stressed. When managers become aware that they do have employees who are seriously stressed or burned out, they are often unsure whether they should address the problem and how to handle it. The author explains the differences between stress and burnout and clarifies how managers can minimize their negative impact by monitoring six areas in which workers are most likely to experience them: (1) the demands of the job which include the quantity of work and the knowledge required to perform; (2) the amount of control employees are permitted to exercise in the workplace; (3) the amount of the social support employee’s feel they have from managers and colleagues; (4) the quality of workplace relationships; (5) the clarity of one’s role on the job; and (6) support and honest communication during times of change. The practical implication of this information aimed at managers is to help them create a better workplace and mentally and physically healthier staff members.

The impact of technology on the health and well-being of workers has been a topic of interest since computers and computerized technology were widely introduced in the 1980s. Of recent concern is the impact of rapid technological advances on individuals’ psychological well-being, especially due to advancements in mobile technology that have increased many workers’ accessibility and expected productivity. In this chapter we focus on the associations between occupational stress and technology, especially behavioral and psychological reactions. We discuss some key facilitators and barriers associated with users’ acceptance of and engagement with information and communication technology. We conclude with recommendations for ongoing research on managing occupational health and well-being in conjunction with technological advancements.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the impact of psychological ownership (both job and organisational based) on extra-role behaviours among family and non-family employees in small overseas Chinese family businesses.

Empirical evidence was drawn from a survey of 80 family owners/managers and non-family employees from 40 small overseas Chinese family businesses from the transport industry in Malaysia. All proposed hypothesis were tested using hierarchical moderated regression analyses.

Job-based psychological ownership was found to significantly predict both types of extra-role behaviours. Organisational-based psychological ownership, however, was only a significant predictor of voice extra-role behaviour. Interestingly enough, no significant moderating effects on the relationships between the two dimensions of psychological ownership and two types of extra-role behaviour were found.

Having a dedicated workforce of both family and non-family employees who are willing to display extra-role behaviours may be considered as an essential component of business success and long-term continuity for many family firms around the world. This particular paper represents one of the few empirical efforts to examine the extra-role behaviours of employees in family firms from emerging economies.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, working from home (WFH) has become the norm for many employees and their families in Germany. Although WFH has been suggested as a form of flexible work to foster work–life integration (especially for workers with greater care responsibilities), studies have also pointed to its risks when the boundaries between these two life spheres become blurred. To help disentangle these inconsistent findings in relation to work–family conflict, this study focuses on two main concerns: the relevance of additional forms of flexibility for those who work from home (i.e., temporal flexibility, job autonomy, fixed rules about availability) and the implications of WFH for employees’ social relationships with co-workers and supervisors. Based on linked employer–employee data collected in the spring of 2021, the study examined work-to-family conflict (WFC) and family-to-work conflict (FWC) among a sample of 885 employees who worked from home. The results indicate that three factors – temporal flexibility, job autonomy, and fixed rules about availability as a way to set boundaries between work and family life – are important predictors of fewer work–family conflict. This equally applies to employees with caring obligations who overall experience more work–family conflicts while WFH. For those who cared for relatives, autonomy contributed even to fewer work–family conflicts. Supportive relationships with supervisors and co-workers are certainly directly beneficial when it comes to avoiding conflict, but they also reinforce the positive implications of flexible work, whereas poor relationships counteract the benefits of such flexibility. Thus, employers need to provide additional forms of flexibility to employees who work from home and should pay attention to social relationships among their employees as a way to support families and other individuals.

Research on coping at work has tended to adopt a between-person perspective, producing inconsistent findings on well-being outcomes. This focus on interindividual differences is in contrast to many theories that position coping as process, hence, as an intraindividual process that unfolds over time in response to job stressors and appraisals. The authors propose that focusing more on the within-person coping processes and integrating them with learning perspectives has the potential to advance our understanding. More specifically, coping behavior and well-being can be seen as an outcome of current and past learning processes. In this chapter, the authors discuss three mechanisms that explain how coping processes can produce positive versus negative effects on well-being, and how coping can be integrated into a learning framework to explain these pathways. First, the stress process entails encoding and evaluation of the situation and, as a consequence, deployment of suitable coping behavior. Over and above the efforts that have to be invested to understand the stressful situation, the coping behavior itself also requires time and energy resources. Second, coping behavior likely co-occurs with learning processes such as reflection, exploration, and exploitation. These learning processes require further time and cognitive resources. Third, although coping behaviors and their accompanying learning processes have the potential to drain resources at the within-person level, they can also build up interindividual coping resources such as a broader repertoire and coping flexibility. These between-level differences equip employees to deal with future stressors.

This paper examines the mediating process of enhancing employees' psychological ownership among family hotel employees.

A total of 1,005 employees from 197 budget-to-three-star family hotels took part in the study by completing an either self-reported or interviewer questionnaire. The respondents were selected using a convenient sampling technique. A partial least square structural equation was used to analyse the data.

Work engagement and organisational performance were shown to significantly predict psychological ownership, except for counterproductive work behaviour. Both counterproductive work behaviour and organisational performance were found to predict psychological ownership. Finally, the relationship between (1) counterproductive work behaviour and psychological ownership and (2) organisational performance and psychological ownership is mediated by work engagement.

Replication of this model in different countries and other work settings is highly recommended for cross validating the reported findings in this study. The study emphasises the need for family hotel owners to create a conducive work environment devoid of conditions that promote counterproductive work behaviour among employees and encourage them to engage in higher productivity.

This study appears to be one of the first to have investigated a model linking counterproductive work behaviour, performance to psychological ownership through work engagement in the family hotel context.