Worklife balance:

Lubna Riz V has done research on “An Empirical Study On The Effectiveness Of Work-

Life Balance In Banking Industry”. This paper is aimed at the theme of work-life balance,

and to explain the significance of the said subject .Work-life balance is a key area for quality

concern gurus, who believes that balance between work and life is of vital importance when it

comes to performance of the workforce.The paper conducted study on effectiveness of

workforce in the banking sector in Pakistan where the aim was to find out whether the

employees are able to practice a sense of control. Does the employee stay prolific and

productive for his team, while sustaining contented vigorous family life?

Then Dr.Anshuja Tiwari and Mrs. Puneet S.Duggal have done research on Work life

Balance: A study of employee well being and performance of employees in banking

sector. The purpose of this paper is to explore the work-life practices of employees in banks

and the various problems faced by them while working in this sector. With this in mind, this

paper seeks to examine the employee wellbeing and performance in the organization.

And also Dr.R.Anitha has done research on A Study on Job Satisfaction of Paper Mill

Employees with Special Reference to Udumalpet and Palani Taluk. Job satisfaction is a

general attitude towards one’s job, the difference between the amount of reward workers

receive and the amount they believe they should receive. Employee is a back bone of every

organization, without employee no work can be done. So employee’s satisfaction is very

important. Employees will be more satisfied if they get what they expected, job satisfaction

relates to inner feelings of workers. As Udumalpet and Palani Taluk are famous for paper

industries, the main aim of this study is to analyze the satisfaction level of paper mill

employees.

Then later on Sameer Ahmad Shalla and Dr Asif Iqbal Fazili has worked on Quality of

Work Life and Employee Job Satisfaction- a Dimensional Analysis and concluded that

quality of work life and job satisfaction is very significant for ensuring sustained commitment

andproductivity from the employees of an organisation. The sustainability of organisational

success is primarily based on the employee satisfaction and the latter is contingent upon the

nature and level of quality of work life of an organisation. This paper attempts to bring fore

the perception of employees about quality of work life and job satisfaction across gender and

nature of job. The results of the study depict a strong association between quality of work life

and job satisfaction. Furthermore, the findings also point out a strong divergence in the

perception of employees towards quality of work life and job satisfaction across gender and

nature of job. Which is remarkable as it reflects the different requirements and priorities of

employees based on their gender and the kind of job they hold.

For more precision in this research Farah Mukhtar has worked on Work life balance and job

satisfaction among faculty at Iowa State University. This research sought to determine if:

(a) work life differs by academic discipline group: (b) job satisfaction differs by academic

discipline, and (c) there is a relationship between faculty work life and job satisfaction and

whether this relationship differs by academic discipline group, and (d) if academic discipline

has a unique effect on faculty work and life balance. Results indicated that the work life

balance and job satisfaction has no significant among academic disciplines at ISU. However,

the results indicated that there is a significant relationship (r = .595) between work life and

job satisfaction. When controlling for demographic and professional experience, the result

also indicated that age and climate, and culture were significant predicators for work life

balance. The results also showed that female faculty has lower job satisfaction. The findings

of this study provide valuable insight for educators and policy makers who are interested in

factors that contribute to work life and overall job satisfaction among academic disciplines at

a large research institution in Midwest.

To overcome the limitation of the above research R.Gayathiri and Dr. Lalitha Ramakrishnan

has worked on Quality of Work Life Linkage with Job Satisfaction and Performance.

The paper states that the increased complexity of today’s environment poses several

challenges to hospital management during the next decade. Trends such as changing

organizational structures, increased knowledge and specialization, interdisciplinary

collaboration, advancement of technology, new health problems and health care policy, and

sophistication in medical education have a part to play. All these affect the nursing profession

and skill requirements as well as their commitment to performance in hospitals. In view of

this, hospital management has to ensure quality of life for nurses that can provide satisfaction

and enhance job performance. In this paper, an attempt is made to review the literature on

quality of life to identify the concept and measurement variables as well its linkage with

satisfaction and performance.

Then lastly study on work of Sobia Shujat, Farooq-E-Azam Cheema and Faryal Bhutto has

been done which is base on Impact of Work Life Balance on Employee Job Satisfaction in

Private Banking Sector of Karachi. The core purpose of this study is to analyze the impact

of work life balance on employee job satisfaction in private banking sector of Karachi. The

data were collected keeping in consideration features such as gender, age, managerial

position and tenure of job. Factors involved are job satisfaction and work life balance with

respect to flexible working conditions, work life balance programs, employee intention to

change/leave job, work pressure/stress and long working hours.

REFERENCES:

Adams, G.A., King, L.A., & King, D.W. (1996). Relationships of job and family

involvement, family social support, and work-family conflict with job and life satisfaction.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(4), 411-420.

Alam, M.S., Biswas, K., & Hassan, K. (2009). A Test of association between working hour

and work family conflict: A glimpse on Dhaka’s female white collar professionals.

International Journal of Business and Management, 4(5), 27-35.

Aryee, S. (1992). Antecedents and outcomes of work-family conflict among married

professional women: Evidence from Singapore. Human Relations, 45(8), 813-835.

Aryee, S., &Luk, V. (1996). Balancing two major parts of adult life experience: work and

family identity among dual-earner couples. Human Relations, 49(4), 465-487.

Aryee, S., Fields, D., &Luk, V. (1999a). A cross-cultural test of a model of the workfamily

interface. Journal of Management, 25(4), 491-511.

Aryee, S., Luk, V., Leung, A. & Lo, S. (1999b). Role stressors, interrole conflict and well

being: the moderating influence of spousal support and coping behaviors among employed

parents in Hong Kong. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54, 259-278.

Bagger, J., Li, A., &Gutek, B.A. (2008). How much do you value your family anddoes it

matter? The joint effects of family identity salience, family-interfacewith-work and gender.

Human Relations, 61(2), 187-211.

Baral, R. (2010). Work-family enrichment: Benefits of combining work and

family.Retrieved October 7, 2010, from http://www.paycheck.in/main/work-andpay/women-

paycheck/articles/work-family-enrichment-benefits-of-combiningwork-and-family.

Bardoel, E.A ., Cieri, H.D., & Santos, C. (2008). A review of work-life research inAustralia

and New Zealand. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 46(3),316-333.

Bhargava, S. &Baral, R. (2009). Antecedents and consequences of work–familyenrichment

among Indian managers. Psychological Studies, 54, 213-225.

Butler, A.B., Grzywacz, J.G., Bass, B.L., &Linney, K.D. (2005). Extending the

demands control model: a daily diary study of job characteristics, work family conflict and

work- family facilitation. Journal of Occupational andOrganizational Psychology, 78, 155-

169.

Carlson, D.S. (1999). Personality and role variables as predictors of three forms ofwork-

family conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 55, 236-253.

Carlson, D.S. and Kacmar. K.M. (2000). Work-family conflict in the organization: Dolife

role values make a difference? Journal of Management 26 (5), 1031-1054.

Carmeli, A. (2003). The relationship between emotional intelligence and work

attitudes, behavior and outcomes–An examination among senior managers. Journal of

Managerial Psychology, 18(8), 788-813.

Greenhaus and Beutell(1985)31 defined work-family conflict as a form of inter-role conflict

in which the role pressures from the two domains, that is work and family, are mutually non-

compatible so that meeting demands in one domain makes it difficult to meet demands in the

other’. That is, participation in the work role is made more difficult by virtue of participation

1 3Greenhaus J.H., “Sources of conflict between work and family roles”, Academy ofManagement Review, Volume10, 1985, pp.76-88.

in the family and vice-versa. The major concern in this most widely used definition of work-

family conflict is that role conflicts are due to problems of role participation and emotional

intelligence.

Rice (1985)2 emphasized the relationship between work satisfaction and Quality of people’s

lives. The study contended that work experiences and outcomes can affect person’s general

Quality of life, both directly and indirectly which effects on their family interactions, leisure

activities and levels of health and energy.

Galinsky et al (1991)3 discussed on work life balance policies which are the values, which

attract prospective employees and are tools for employee retention and motivation. The study

found that one should also keep in mind that new generation employees evaluate their career

progress not only in terms of lucrative job assignments but also in terms of their ability to

maintain healthy balance between their work and non-work life.

Friedman and Greenhaus (2000)4, two leaders expressed on work/life balance, and bring

forth new evidence to help us understand choices we make as employers and individuals

regarding work and family. They had studied more than 800 business professionals

considered values, work, and family lives and found that “work and family, the dominant life

roles for most employed women and men in contemporary society, can either help or hurt

each other. To handle work/life balance, they emphasize that working adults learn to build

networks of support at home, at work, and in the community. Conflict between work and

family has real consequences and significantly affects quality of family life and career

attainment of both men and women. The consequences for women may include serious

constraints on career choices, limited opportunity for career advancement and success in their

work role, and the need to choose between two apparent opposites—an active and satisfying

career or marriage and children. Many men have to trade off personal and career values while

they search for ways to make dual career families work, often requiring them to embrace

family roles that are far different, and more egalitarian than those they learned as children.

2 Rice, R. W., “Organizational Work and the Perceived Quality of Life towards a ConceptualModel”, Academy of Management Review, April, Vol. 10(2), 1985, pp 296-310.3 Galinsky,E., et al “The Corporate Reference Guide to Work-Family Programmes, Families andWork Institute: New York, 1991.

4 Friedman, S. D. and Greenhaus, J. H., “Work and family—Allies or enemies? What happenswhen business professionals confront lifechoices”, New York: Oxford University Press,2000.

This research reveals a compensatory effect between two forms of psychological interference

i.e. work-to-family and family-to-work. Specifically, support from two domains (Partner and

employer) has a significant impact on one another. The impact of partner support is greater

when business professionals feel their employers are unsupportive of their lives beyond work.

Conversely, for employees with relatively unsupportive partners, the employer family-

friendliness reduces role conflicts more than partners. Thus, one source of support

compensates for the lack of the other. Looking at behavioral interference of work on family,

the picture changes. In this case, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts: the combined

impact of employer and partner support leads to a greater reduction in conflict than does

independent employer or partner support.

Hom and Kinicki (2001)5 examined that organizations take into consideration and apply

policies that manage a balance between employees work and their lives. Therefore the

organizations are giving an increased intention to adopt those policies which can reduce the

turnover of employees

Mark Tausig and Rudy Fenwick (2001)62stressed that alternate work schedules affect

perceived work-life imbalance the “time bind.” However, perceived control of work

schedules increases work-life balance net of family and work characteristics. The most

consistent family characteristic predicting imbalance is being a parent. The most consistent

work characteristic predicting imbalance is hours worked. Once we control for hours worked,

women and part timers are shown to perceive more imbalance. Younger and better educated

persons also perceive more work-life imbalance. However, they also report higher levels of

schedule control and since schedule control improves work-life balance, it may be more

important for unbinding time than schedule alternatives.

Roehling (2001)7 conducted an empirical research and suggested a direct relation-ship

between work life balance programs and retention which helps the employees to achieve a

meaningful balance between work and personal life, these programs may only hold benefits

5 Hom, P.W., and Kinicki, A.J., “Toward a greater understanding of how dissatisfaction drives,employee turnover”, The Academy of Management Journal, Volume No.44(5), 2001, pp.975-987.6 Mark Tausig and RudyFenwic, “Unbinding Time: Alternate Work Schedules Work-LifeBalance”, Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Volume No.22(2), Human Sciences Press,2001, pp.101-1197 Roehling, P.V., and Moen, P., “The relationship between work-life policies andpractices and practices and employee loyalty: A life course perspective. Journal ofFamily and economic issues, 2001

for the employers rather than employees. The complexities exists in balancing work and

personal life and the importance of balance for individuals’ well-being should be investigated

by an organization to provide work life balance programs which are related to retention

strategies through the positive impact of these programs on individual’s perceptions of

balance.

Burke (2002)8 has identified that is a gender differences regarding the work life balance that

is men feel more satisfied when they achieve more on the job even at the cost of ignoring the

family. On the other hand, women stress that work and family are both equally important and

both are the sources of their satisfaction. For them the former is more important when the

work does not permit women to take care of their family, they feel unhappy, disappointed and

frustrated.

Duxbury et al (2002)9 discussed on work-related stress consists of working conditions

involving heavy workloads, lack of participation in decision making, health and safety

hazards, job insecurity, and tight deadlines. Employees (with high levels of work-life

conflict) are three times more likely to suffer from certain heart problems, back pain and

mental health problems. They also indicated that workers are more likely to experience poor

health, experience negative impacts on relationships with children and their spouse, less

committed to the organization, less satisfied with the job, have poor quality of relationship

outside the work.

Duxbury and Higgings (2003)10 in their seminal report on work-life conflict demonstrated

that the respondents with high levels of work to family interference reported: lower levels of

job satisfaction and high levels of jobs stress the intent to turnover of the employees.

8 Burke, R.J., “Organizational values, job experience and satisfaction among managerial andprofessional women and men”, Management Review, Volume No.17(5), pp.5-6.9 Duxbury.L.,”The National work-life conflict study”, Final report , Public Health Agency ofCanada, 2002.10 Duxbury, L., and Higgings, C., “Work life conflict in Canada in the New Millenium: A statusreport”, Ottawa: Health Canada,2003

Fisher and Layte (2003)11Considered three distinct sets of measures of work life balance,

viz., proportion of free time, the over-lap of work and other dimensions of life, and the time

spent with other people helps the employees to balance both work and life.

Higgins C. (2004)12 analysed the gap between need for work-life balance and the reality in

most workplaces remains disturbingly wide. Employers across Canada do not provide

sufficient or adequate work-life balance programs for their employees. It indicates that the

factor has the association with employee commitment is managers’ recognition of their

employee’s needs for work-life balance. Hence employers need to create supportive work

place environments, as work life balance is the key to employee well-being and hence

organisations productivity.

Yasbek (2004)13 found that work life balance policies are positively associated with the job

tenure of the female employees, and moreover the practices of such policies have a great

effect on the turnover rate of employees. Work-life balance policies help in reducing the

stress and provide a good work place where, there is less chance of accidents in the working

and also provide a fair platform for every employee, ultimately enhancing productivity.

Keene and Renolds (2005)14 used the 1992 National Study on the Changing Workforce to

conclude that job characteristics are more salient than family factors for predicting the

likelihood that family will detract from job performance and for explaining the gender gap in

negative family-to-work spillover. Working in a demanding job or having little job

autonomy, the authors assert, was associated with more native family-to-work spillover

regardless of gender, while greater scheduling flexibility mitigated the gender gap

11 Fisher, K., and Layfe M., “Measuring work-life balance and degrees of sociability: A focus onthe value of time use data in the assessment of quality of life”, Working Paper of the EuropeanPanel Analysis Group, Volume No.32, 2003.12 Higgins.C, et al, “Exploring the link between work-life conflict and demands on Canada’shealthcare system, Health Canada, Report 3, 2004.13 Yasbek, P., “The business case for firm-level work-life balance policies: a review of theLiterature, Labour Market Policy Group”, Department of Labour, 200414 Keene,Jennifer Reid and John R. Renolds, “The job costs of family demands:Genderdifferences in negative family-to-work spillover”, Journal of Family Issues, VolumeNo.26(3),2005,pp.275-299

Pocock and Clarke(2005)15explored that spill -over of work into family life showed that

both men and women did not have enough time to spend with families and moreover work

pressures affected quality of the family life.

Thompson, Andreassi and Prottas (2005)16 has identified work life policies which are very

important and defined as the base level indicators of an organization, prioritizing work over

family or family over work and these policies include flexible work scheduling and leave of

employees from work.

Forsyth and PolzerDebruyne (2007)17 have studied that the organizational pay-offs for

visible work-life balance support the workers for the reduced intention of leaving the job

through increased job satisfaction and also the reduction of work pressure and also reported

about the employees that they feel organization is supportive and providing them work life

balance it enhances job satisfaction and reduces work pressure leading to reduction in

turnover intention.

Anup Kumar Singh and Richaawasthy (2009)18discuss different causes and consequences

of Work-Life Balance, where societal, organizational and individual causes are major

responsible for Work-Life Balance. Managers have to take the challenge of work life balance

seriously as it affects their professional success and personal well-being. They also need to

hone certain skills that conducive to better work life balance. Some of these skills are: time

management, delegation, coping with stress, negotiation, caring, listening, empathy, trust etc

help in managing things both at work and in family

Bilal,Zia-ur-Rahman and Raza (2010)19 examined the significant impact of family friendly

policies on employee’s job satisfaction and turnover intention in the banking industry. Long

15 Pocock, B., and Clarke, J., “Time, money and jobs spill over: How parents’s jobs affect youngpeople”, The Journal of Industrial Relations, Volume No.47 (1), 2005, pp.62-76.16 50Thompson, C. A., Andreassi, J., and Prottas, D., ”Work-family culture: Key to reducingworkforce-workplace mismatch”, Lawrence Erlbaum Publications, 2005,pp.117-132.17 Forsyth,Stewart and Polzer-Debruyne, Andrea”, The Organizational Pay-offs for PerceivedWork-life Balance Support”, Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources,45(1),2007,pp.113:123.18 AnupKumar Singh and RichaAwasthy,”Work-Life Balance: causes, consequences andinterventions”,NHRD Network Journal,2009,pp.59-6719 Bilal,Muhammad,Zia-ur-Rahman,Muhammad and RazaIrfan, ”Impact of Family FriendlyPolicies on Employees Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention:A study on work-life balance atworkplace”, Inter-disciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, Volume No.2(7),2010, pp.378-95

and inflexible work hours are the most consistent predictor of work-life conflict among

banking employees. The evaluation provided prima facie evidence that alternative work

schedules can improve banking employee’s work-life balance, creating benefits for banking

employees and corporate organizations.

Divya, Suganthi and Samuel (2010)20 illustrated the current workplace conditions and some

of the reasons causing imbalances in work and life in the IT industry in India. Their study

mainly focused on the working women in the age group 20-35 and the problems they face at

work and family life. Results obtained from using factor analysis suggest that organizations

may mitigate voluntary turnover among women belonging to IT sector and increase

workforce diversity.

Malik, Saleem and Ahmad (2010)21 examined the relationship of job satisfaction with the

concept of work-life balance, turnover intentions and burnout level of teachers in Pakistan.

The purpose of the study was to provide empirical evidence to prove the relationship. They

concluded that higher the work life balance higher will be the job satisfaction of the teachers.

Shankar and Bhatnagar (2010)22 looked at the literature of work life balance exhaustively

and accentuated the importance of broadening the narrow focus to broader one beyond work

and family. They have proposed a conceptual model of work life balance to be tested

empirically. This model focused on the work life balance construct and its relationship with

employee engagement, emotional dissonance and turnover intention and reviewed the

antecedents of Work-Family Conflict from the perspective of individual, work and family.

Findings revealed the effects of individual variables like stress influences, family variables

like family demands and spousal interactions.

The recent explosion of interest in the work–family interface has produced a number of

concepts to explain the relation between these two dominant spheres of life: accommodation,

20 Divya D, Suganthi L. and Samuel Anand A., ”Work life Balance of IT Women ProfessionalsBelongings to the Age Group 20-35 in India, ”Advance in Management VolumeNo.3(1),2010,pp.37-4621 Malik,MuhammadImran,Sallem, Farida Ahmad and Mehboob,”Work-life Balance and JobSatisfaction Professionals Belongings to the Age Group 20-35 in India”, Advance inManagement Volume No.3(1), 2010, pp.37-4622 Shankar, Tara and BhatnagarJyotsna, “Work-life balance, Employee, Engagement, EmotionalConsonance/ Dossonance& turnover intention”, The Indian Journal of Indian Relations, VolumeNo.46(1),2010,pp.74-87.

compensation, resource drain, segmentation, spillover, work–family conflict, work–family

enrichment, and work–family integration (Barnett, 1998; Edwards & Rothbard, 2000;

Friedman & Greenhaus, 2000; Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985; Greenhaus & Parasuraman, 1999;

Lambert, 1990). One term widely cited in the popular press is work–family balance.

Sometimes used as a noun (when, for example, one is encouraged to achieve balance), and

other times as a verb (to balance work and family demands) or an adjective (as in a balanced

life), work–family balance often implies cutting back on work to spend more time with the

family. Moreover, it is thought to be in an individual’s best interest to live a balanced life

(Kofodimos, 1993).

Despite the presumed virtue of work–family balance, the concept has not undergone

extensive scrutiny. Most of the major reviews of work–family relations either do not mention

work–family balance or mention balance but do not explicitly define the concept. Moreover,

empirical studies that discuss balance between work and family roles generally do not

distinguish balance from other concepts in the work–family literature (Nielson, Carlson, &

Lankau, 2001; Saltzstein, Ting, & Saltzstein, 2001; Sumer & Knight, 2001; Thompson,

Beauvais, & Lyness, 1999). For empirical research on balance to contribute to understanding

work–family dynamics, further development of the construct is essential.

Several scholars have recently proposed definitions of balance that distinguish it from other

related concepts (Clark, 2000; Hill, Hawkins, Ferris, & Weitzman, 2001; Kirchmeyer, 2000;

Kofodimos, 1990, 1993; Marks, Huston, Johnson, & MacDermid, 2001; Marks &

MacDermid, 1996). Nevertheless, the definitions of balance are not entirely consistent with

one another, the measurement of balance is problematic, and the impact of work–family

balance on individual well-being has not been firmly established.

The present study addressed these gaps in the literature. Specifically, the research:

(1) proposed a comprehensive definition of work–family balance that is distinguishable from

other work–family concepts; (2) developed a measure of work–family balance that is

consistent with this definition; and (3) examined relations between work–family balance and

quality of life, a prominent indicator of well-being. In subsequent sections of this article, we

discuss the concept and measurement of work–family balance, propose relations between

work–family balance and quality of life, and report the results of a study designed to examine

these relations.

2. The meaning of work–family balance, we do not consider balance to be a work–family

linking mechanism because it does not specify how conditions or experiences in one role are

causally related to conditions or experiences in the other role (Edwards & Rothbard, 2000).

Instead, work–family balance reflects an individual’s orientation across different life roles, an

interrole phenomenon (Marks & MacDermid, 1996). In contrast to the prevailing view that

individuals inevitably organize their roles in a hierarchy of prominence, Marks and

MacDermid (1996), drawing on Mead (1964), suggest that individual scan—and should—

demonstrate equally positive commitments to different life roles; that is, they should hold a

balanced orientation to multiple roles.

Marks and MacDermid define role balance as ‘‘the tendency to become fully engaged in the

performance of every role in one_s total role system, to approach every typical role and role

partner with an attitude of attentiveness and care. Put differently, it is the practice of that

evenhanded alertness known sometimes as mindfulness’’ (Marks & MacDermid, 1996, p.

421). However, they also note that this expression of full engagement reflects a condition of

‘‘positive’’ role balance, in contrast to negative role balance in which individuals are fully

disengaged in every role. Although Marks and MacDermid (1996) are understandably more

concerned with positive role balance than negative role balance, they acknowledge that it is

important to distinguish the two concepts.

Other scholars have defined work–family balance or work-life balance in a manner similar to

Marks and MacDermid_s (1996) conception of positive role balance. For example,

Kirchmeyer views living a balanced life as ‘‘achieving satisfying experiences in all life

domains, and to do so requires personal resources such as energy, time, and commitment to

be well distributed across domains’’ (Kirchmeyer, 2000, p. 81, italics added). In a similar

vein, Clark views work–family balance as ‘‘satisfaction and good functioning at work and at

home with a minimum of role conflict’’ (Clark, 2000, p. 349). According to Kofodimos,

balance refers to ‘‘a satisfying, healthy, and productive life that includes work, play, and

love. ’’ (Kofodimos, 1993; p. xiii).

These definitions of balance share a number of common elements. First is the notion of

equality, or near-equality, between experiences in the work role and experiences in the family

role. Clark (2000), Kirchmeyer (2000), and Kofodimos (1993) imply similarly high levels of

satisfaction, functioning, health, or effectiveness across multiple roles. Perhaps, Marks and

MacDermid_s (1996) notion of ‘‘even handed alertness’’ as a characteristic of positive

balance is most explicit with regard to equality of role commitments. Even negative balance,

to use Marks and MacDermid_s (1996) term, implies an evenhanded lack of alertness in

different roles. To draw an analogy from everyday life, a measuring scale is balanced when

there are equal weights on both sides of the fulcrum, whether the weights are equally heavy

or equally light.

Moreover, the definitions of work–family balance implicitly consider two components of

equality: inputs and outcomes. The inputs are the personal resources (Kirchmeyer, 2000) that

are applied to each role. To be balanced is to approach each role—work and family—with an

approximately equal level of attention, time, involvement, or commitment. Positive balance

suggests an equally high level of attention, time, involvement, or commitment, whereas

negative balance refers to an equally low level of attention, time, involvement, or

commitment. These inputs reflect an individual_s level of role engagement—in terms of time

devoted to each role or psychological involvement in each role. It is difficult to imagine a

balanced individual who is substantially more or less engaged in the work role than the

family role.

The other component of balance refers to the resultant outcomes that are experienced in work

and family roles. One outcome frequently included in definitions of balance is satisfaction

(Clark, 2000; Kirchmeyer, 2000; Kofodimos, 1993). Positive balance implies an equally high

level of satisfaction with work and family roles, and negative balance suggests an equally low

level of satisfaction with each role. Again, it is difficult to picture individuals as having

achieved work–family balance if they are substantially more satisfied with one role than the

other. In fact, one of Marks and MacDermid_s (1996) measures of positive role balance

(discussed shortly) assesses the extent to which an individual is equally satisfied in all life

roles.

We offer the following definition of work–family balance: the extent to which an individual

is equally engaged in—and equally satisfied with—his or her work role and family role.

Consistent with Marks and MacDermid (1996), our definition is broad enough to include

positive balance and negative balance. Because role engagement can be further divided into

elements of time and psychological involvement, we propose three components of work–

family balance:

• Time balance: an equal amount of time devoted to work and family roles.

• Involvement balance: an equal level of psychological involvement in work and family roles.

• Satisfaction balance: an equal level of satisfaction with work and family roles.

Each component of work–family balance can represent positive balance or negative balance

depending on whether the levels of time, involvement, or satisfaction are equally high or

equally low.

We view work–family balance as a matter of degree, a continuum anchored at one end by

extensive imbalance in favor of a particular role (for example, family) through some

relatively balanced state to extensive imbalance in favor of the other role (e.g., work) as the

other anchor point. In addition, we conceptualize balance as independent of an individual_s

desires or values. Bielby and Bielby (1989) observed that married working women may

emphasize their family ‘‘in balancing work and family identities’’ (p. 786) and Lambert

(1990) discussed ‘‘maintaining a particular balance between work and home’’ (p. 252). These

researchers appear to be using the term balance to represent a range of different patterns of

commitment, rather than an equality of commitments across roles. We believe that an

individual who gives substantially more precedence to one role than the other is relatively

imbalanced even if the distribution of commitment to family and work is highly consistent

with what the individual wants or values. Whether such imbalance in favor of one role is

healthy or not is, in our opinion, an empirical question.

3. The measurement of work–family balance Researchers has used several different

approaches to operationally define role balance, work–family balance, or work-life balance.

For example, some studies have assessed an individual’s reaction to an unspecified level of

balance. Milkie and Peltola (1999) used the item: ‘‘How successful do you feel in balancing

your paid work and family life?’’ White (1999) and Saltzstein et al. (2001) focused on

satisfaction with balance with the items ‘‘Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the balance

between your job or main activity and family and home life?’’ and ‘‘I am satisfied with the

balance I have achieved between my work and life’’ respectively. These measures are

somewhat limited because they measure perceptual or affective reactions to balance rather

than balance itself. Hill et al. (2001) developed a five-item scale to assess work-life balance.

However, three of their items (e.g., ‘‘How easy or difficult is it for you to balance the

demands of your work and your personal and family life?’’) seem to assess perceived success

in achieving balance rather than the level of balance.

Marks and colleagues_ scales come closest to assessing balance as conceptualized in the

present research. In their first study of employed wives and mothers, Marks and MacDermid

(1996) used a single item to measure role balance: ‘‘Nowadays, I seem to enjoy every part of

my life equally well.’’ Although, as the authors acknowledged, a one-item scale is not ideal,

at least the item assessed equality among roles in enjoyment or satisfaction, one component

of work–family balance.

In their second study, Marks and MacDermid (1996) developed a more complex 8-item scale

of role balance. Three types of items were included in the scale: (1) equal satisfaction or

enjoyment across roles (‘‘. . . I find satisfaction in everything I do.’’); (2) equal importance or

caring about roles (‘‘everything I do feels special to me; nothing stands out as more important

or more valuable than anything else.’’); and (3) equal attention or time across roles (‘‘I try to

put a lot of myself into everything I do.’’). Marks et al. (2001) used four items from Marks

and MacDermid_s (1996) 8-item scale, two of which reflected equal satisfaction and two of

which assessed equal time or attention. The alpha coefficients were modest for women (.64)

and men (.56), suggesting that the satisfaction and time components of balance may be

distinct constructs.

Although the items by Marks and his colleagues are faithful to their definition of role

balance, they represent respondents_ judgments of balanced satisfaction, importance, or

attention across roles. As Marks and MacDermid (1996) acknowledged, it is difficult to

interpret the meaning of a low score on their items. For example, individuals who disagree

with the item ‘‘I try to put a lot of myself into everything I do’’ might put very little into

everything they do (negative role balance) or might put much more into one role than another

(role imbalance). Therefore, Marks and Mac-Dermid (1996) encourage researchers to obtain

direct measures of positive balance, negative balance, and imbalance. One objective of this

study, as we elaborate below, was to develop direct measures of the components of work–

family balance that do not depend on employees_ self-reported assessment of balance.

4. The relation between work–family balance and quality of life Work–family balance is

generally thought to promote well-being. Kofodimos (1993) suggests that imbalance—in

particular work imbalance—arouses high levels of stress, detracts from quality of life, and

ultimately reduces individuals_ effectiveness at work. Hall (1990) proposes an organization-

change approach to promoting work–family balance, and the popular press is replete with

advice to companies and employees on how to promote greater balance in life (Cummings,

2001; Fisher, 2001; Izzo & Withers, 2001).

Why should work–family balance enhance an individual’s quality of life? First, involvement

in multiple roles protects or buffers individuals from the effects of negative experiences in

any one role (Barnett & Hyde, 2001). Beyond this buffering effect, work–family balance is

thought to promote well-being in a more direct manner.

Marks and MacDermid (1996, p. 421), believe that balanced individuals are ‘‘primed to seize

the moment’’ when confronted with a role demand because no role is seen as ‘‘less worthy of

one_s alertness than any other.’’ According to this reasoning, balanced individuals

experience low levels of stress when enacting roles, presumably because they are

participating in role activities that are salient to them. In fact, Marks and MacDermid (1996)

found that balanced individuals experienced less role overload, greater role ease, and less

depression than their imbalanced counterparts. Moreover, a balanced involvement in work

and family roles may also reduce chronic work–family conflict. Because balanced individuals

are fully engaged in both roles, they do not allow ‘‘situational urgencies’’ to hinder role

performance chronically (Marks & MacDermid, 1996). Instead, they develop routines that

enable them to meet the long-term demands of all roles, presumably avoiding extensive

work– family conflict. In sum, a balanced engagement in work and family roles is expected

to be associated with individual well-being because such balance reduces work– family

conflict and stress, both of which detract from well-being (Frone, Russell, & Cooper, 1992).

However, the beneficial effects of balance are based on the assumption of positive balance.

We suggested that an equally high investment of time and involvement in work and family

would reduce work–family conflict and stress thereby enhancing an individual_s quality of

life. To determine whether there are different effects of positive balance and negative balance

on quality of life, it is necessary to distinguish individuals who exhibit a high total level of

engagement across their combined work and family roles from those who display a low total

level of engagement. For example, those individuals who devote a substantial amount of time

to their combined work and family roles and distribute this substantial time equally between

the two roles exhibit positive time balance. By contrast, those individuals who devote only a

limited amount of time to their combined work and family roles and distribute the limited

time equally between the two roles exhibit negative time balance.

Similarly, individuals who invest a substantial amount of psychological involvement in their

combined roles and distribute their substantial involvement equally between their work and

family roles exhibit positive involvement balance, whereas those who distribute their limited

involvement equally exhibit negative involvement balance.

We believe that positive balance has a more substantial positive impact on quality of life than

negative balance. When individuals invest substantial time or involvement in their combined

roles, there is more time or involvement to distribute between work and family. In this

situation, imbalance can reflect sizeable differences between work time and family time or

between work involvement and family involvement, and therefore produce extensive work–

family conflict and stress that detract from quality of life. However, we expect little or no

benefit of balance when individuals invest limited time or involvement in their combined

roles. In this situation, because there is so little time or involvement to distribute, imbalance

reflects small differences between work time and family time or between work involvement

and family involvement, and arouses little or no work–family conflict and stress that detract

from the quality of one’s life. Therefore, we tested the following hypotheses.

Hypothesis 1. There is an interaction between time balance and total time devoted to work

and family roles in predicting quality of life. The relation between balance and quality of life

is stronger for individuals who devote a substantial amount of time to their combined work

and family roles than for individuals who devote a limited amount of time to their combined

work and family roles.

Hypothesis 2. There is an interaction between involvement balance and total involvement in

work and family roles in predicting quality of life. The relation between balance and quality

of life is stronger for individuals who are highly involved in their combined work and family

roles than for individuals who are relatively uninvolved in their combined work and family

roles.

Recall that the interactions are based on the notion that balanced individuals experience less

work–family conflict and stress than imbalanced individuals only when substantial time and

psychological involvement are invested across their work and family roles. Under conditions

of more limited investment of time and involvement, there are smaller differences in the

degree of balance and hence smaller differences in work–family conflict, stress, and

ultimately quality of life. In effect, we believe that work–family conflict and stress explain or

mediate the effects of balance on quality of life. Therefore:

Hypothesis 3. The interaction between time balance and the total amount of time devoted to

work and family roles predicting quality of life is mediated by work– family conflict and

stress.

Hypothesis 4. The interaction between involvement balance and total involvement in work

and family roles predicting quality of life is mediated by work–family conflict and stress.

Hypotheses 1–4 predicted relations of time balance and involvement balance with quality of

life. Balanced satisfaction across work and family roles (Clark, 2000; Kirchmeyer, 2000;

Kofodimos, 1993) is also likely to be associated with a high quality of life. Individuals who

are highly satisfied with both roles are likely to experience a more substantial achievement of

valued goals than those who are less satisfied with one role than the other, and goal

achievement has been associated with individual well-being (Diener, Suh, Lucas, & Smith,

1999). Moreover, we expect that an imbalanced satisfaction between work and family roles

can produce extensive stress because the imbalance is a constant reminder that one is not

meeting his or her needs or values as extensively in one role as the other.

However, the relation between satisfaction balance and quality of life is likely to depend on

the total level of satisfaction across work and family roles. Under conditions of high total

satisfaction, there is more satisfaction to distribute across work and family roles. Therefore,

imbalance can produce sizeable differences between work satisfaction and family

satisfaction, a high level of stress, and therefore a low quality of life. Under conditions of low

total satisfaction, where there is not much satisfaction to distribute across roles, imbalance

produces minor differences between work satisfaction and family satisfaction, generates little

stress, and has little or no effect on quality of life.

Therefore: Hypothesis 5. There is an interaction between satisfaction balance and total

satisfaction with work and family roles in predicting quality of life. The relation between

balance and quality of life is stronger for individuals who are highly satisfied with their

combined work and family roles than for individuals who are relatively dissatisfied with their

combined work and family roles. The rationale behind Hypothesis 5 is that imbalanced

individuals experience more stress than balanced individuals only when there is a substantial

amount of satisfaction to distribute across their work and family roles. In effect, stress

explains the effect of satisfaction balance on quality of life. We do not believe that work–

family conflict explains the relation between satisfaction balance and quality of life because

an imbalance in satisfaction is not likely to produce extensive work–family conflict as an

imbalance in time or involvement is expected to produce.

Therefore Hypothesis 6, The interaction between satisfaction balance and total satisfaction

with work and family roles predicting quality of life is mediated by stress.

References

Adams, G. A., King, L. A., & King, D. W. (1996). Relationships of job and family

involvement, family social support, and work–family conflict with job and life satisfaction.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 411–420.

Barnett, R. C. (1998). Toward a review and reconceptualization of the work/family literature.

Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 124(2), 125–182.

Barnett, R. C., & Hyde, J. S. (2001). Women, men, work, and family: An expansionist

theory. American Psychologist, 56, 781–796.

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social

psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.

Bielby, W. T., & Bielby, D. D. (1989). Family ties: Balancing commitments to work and

family in dual earner households. American Sociological Review, 54, 776–789.

Burke, R. J., Weir, T., & DuWors, R. E. (1979). Type A behavior of administrators and

wives_ reports of marital satisfaction and well-being. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 57–

65.

Clark, S. C. (2000). Work/family border theory: A new theory of work/family balance.

Human Relations, 53, 747–770.

Cummings, B. (2001). Sales ruined my personal life. Sales &Marketing Management,

153(11), 44–46, 48–50.

Deephouse, D. L. (1996). Does isomorphism legitimate? Academy of Management Journal,

39, 1024–1039.

Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three

decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 276–302.

Eagle, B. W., Icenogle, M. L., & Maes, J. D. (1998). The importance of employee

demographic profiles for understanding experiences of work–family interrole conflicts. The

Journal of Social Psychology, 138, 690–709.

Edwards, J. R., & Rothbard, N. P. (2000). Mechanisms linking work and family: Clarifying

the relationship between work and family constructs. Academy of Management Review, 25,

178–199.

Fisher, A. (2001). Is your business taking over your life? Fortune Small Business, 11(9), 32–

40.

Friedman, S. D., & Greenhaus, J. H. (2000). Work and family—allies or enemies? What

happens when business professionals confront life choices. New York: Oxford University

Press.

Frone, M. R., Russell, M., & Cooper, M. 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. R., Yardley, J. K., & Markel, K. S. (1997). Developing and testing an integrative

model of the work–family interface. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 50, 145–167.

Greenhaus, J. H., & Beutell, N. J. (1985). Sources of conflict between work and family roles.

Academy of Management Review, 10, 76–88.

Greenhaus, J. H., Collins, K. M., Singh, R., & Parasuraman, S. (1997). Work and family

influences on departure from public accounting. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 50, 249–

270.

Greenhaus, J. H., & Parasuraman, S. (1999). Research on work, family, and gender: Current

status and future direction. In G. N. Powel (Ed.), Handbook of gender and work (pp. 391–

412). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Greenhaus, J. H., Parasuraman, S., & Collins, K. M. (2001). Career involvement and family

involvement as moderators of relationships between work–family conflict and withdrawal

from a profession. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6, 91–100.

Greenhaus, J. H., Parasuraman, S., & Wormley, W. M. (1990). Effects of race on

organizational experiences, job performance evaluations, and career outcomes. Academy of

Management Journal, 33, 64–86.

J.H. Greenhaus et al. / Journal of Vocational Behavior 63 (2003) 510–531 529

Hall, D. T. (1990). Promoting work/family balance: An organization-change approach.

Organizational Dynamics, 18(3), 5–18.

Hill, E. J., Hawkins, A. J., Ferris, M., & Weitzman, M. (2001). Finding an extra day a week:

The positive influence of perceived job flexibility on work and family life balance. Family

Relations, 50, 49–58.

Izzo, J., & Withers, P. (2001). Balance and synergy: The greatest benefit? How companies

are responding to changing employee values. Compensation & Benefits Management, 17(3),

23–28.

Jaccard, J., Turrisi, R., & Wan, C. K. (1990). Interaction effects in multiple regression.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Janis, I. L., & Fadner, R. (1965). The coefficient of imbalance. In H. Lasswell & N. Leites et

al. (Eds.), Language of politics (pp. 153–169). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Judge, T. A., Boudreau, J. W., & Bretz, R. D. (1994). Job and life attitudes of male

executives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 767–782.

Kirchmeyer, C. (2000). Work-life initiatives: Greed or benevolence regarding workers_ time.

In C. L.

Cooper & D. M. Rousseau (Eds.), Trends in organizational behavior (Vol. 7, pp. 79–93).

West Sussex, UK: Wiley.

Kofodimos, J. R. (1990). Why executives lose their balance. Organizational Dynamics, 19(1),

58–73.

Kofodimos, J. R. (1993). Balancing act. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Kopelman, R. E., Greenhaus, J. H., & Connolly, T. F. (1983). A model of work, family, and

interrole conflict: A construct validation study. Organizational Behavior and Human

Performance, 32, 198–215.

Korman, A. K., & Korman, R. K. (1980). Career success/personal failure. Englewood Cliffs,

NJ: Prentice- Hall.

Lambert, S. J. (1990). Processes linking work and family: A critical review and research

agenda. Human Relations, 43, 239–257.

Lodahl, T. M., & Kejner, M. (1965). Definition and measurement of job involvement. Journal

of Applied Psychology, 49, 24–33.

Marks, S. R., Huston, T. L., Johnson, E. M., & MacDermid, S. M. (2001). Role balance

among white married couples. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 63, 1083–1098.

Marks, S. R., &MacDermid, S. M. (1996). Multiple roles and the self: A theory of role

balance. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 58, 417–432.

Mead, G. H. (1964). Selected writings. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.

Milkie, M. A., & Peltola, P. (1999). Playing all the roles: Gender and the work–family

balancing act. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61, 476–490.

Netemeyer, R. G., Boles, J. S., & McMurrian, R. (1996). Development and validation of

work–family conflict and family-work conflict scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81,

400–410.

Nielson, T. R., Carlson, D. S., & Lankau, M. J. (2001). The supportive mentor as a means of

reducing work–family conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 59, 364–381.

Parasuraman, S., Greenhaus, J. H., & Granrose, C. S. (1992). Role stressors, social support,

and wellbeing among two-career couples. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13, 339–356.

Parasuraman, S., Purohit, Y. S., Godshalk, V. M., & Beutell, N. J. (1996). Work and family

variables, entrepreneurial career success, and psychological well-being. Journal of Vocational

Behavior, 48, 275–300.

Patchen, M. (1970). Participation, achievement, and involvement on the job. Englewood

Cliffs, NJ: Prentice- Hall.

Quinn, R. P., & Sheppard, L. J. (1974). The 1972–1973 quality of employment survey.

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI: Survey Research Center.

Saltzstein, A. L., Ting, Y., & Saltzstein, G. H. (2001). Work–family balance and job

satisfaction: The impact of family-friendly policies on attitudes of federal government

employees. Public Administration Review, 61, 452–467.

Staines, G. L., Pottick, K. J., & Fudge, D. A. (1986). Wives_ employment and husbands_

attitudes toward work and life. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 118–128.

Sumer, H. C., & Knight, P. A. (2001). How do people with different attachment styles

balance work and family. A personality perspective on work–family linkage. Journal of

Applied Psychology, 86, 653–663.

Thompson, C. A., Beauvais, L. L., & Lyness, K. S. (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.

White, J. M. (1999). Work–family stage and satisfaction with work–family balance. Journal

of Comparative Family Studies, 30, 163–175.

Literature Review:

Work Life Balance:

Work life balance (acronym WLB) is the separation between work life and personal life of an

employee in the organization. It is the boundary that one creates between the professional

life, career advancement, personal life or any other segment that makes up the life of an

individual. Apart from the career life these segments include family, personal growth, fitness

and health, community relations and friendship. Finding the balance between career and

personal life has always been a challenge for working people.

Some widely used definitions of work-family issues or work-family balance, found in the

literature, are listed below:

“Work-family conflict is defined as a form of role conflict characterized by the incongruence

between responsibilities of the home and workplace which are mutually incompatible”.

(Greenhaus and Beutell, 1985)

WLB is defined as “satisfaction and good functioning at work and at home with a minimum

of role conflict" (Clark, 2000)

WLB is defined as “the absence of unacceptable level of conflicts between work and non-

work demands. (Greenbatt, 2002)

Work life balance as “the extent to which an individual is equally engaged in – and equally

satisfied with – his or her work role and family role” (Greenhaus et al, 2003, )

Work life balance is “the extent to which an individual’s effectiveness and satisfaction in

work and family roles are compatible with the individual’s life priorities. (Greenhans and

Allen, 2006)

Work–family balance is defined “as accomplishment of role related expectations that are

negotiated and shared between an individual and his or her role-related partners in the work

and family domains” (Grzywacz and Carlson, 2007).

WLB for any person is having the “right” combination of participation in paid work (defined

by hours and working conditions) and other aspects of lives. This combination will change as

people move through life and have changing responsibilities and commitments in their work

and personal lives. Frone, Russell, & Cooper, (1992). With these definitions it can be

understood that any imbalance that is formed either creates more pressure or psychological

involvement or satisfaction towards one role as compared to other role.

The origin of the research work life balance can be seen from the seminal work of rapport

and rapport (1969), the research are been that both work and family needs time and energy.

Work is an important source of income, financial stability and status. Where tow partners

come join hands together and earn and support and raise their children together.

As work and family has no direct relationship with each other so conflicts is inevitable to

arise.

Khan wolf, Quinn, snoek and Rosenthal, 1964) from their seminal studies associated work

life balance with role theory, that is conflicting expectations associated with different roles

which the male and female has to play in their day to day life.

Kanter (1977) was able to continue the research of khan (1964) proving that work and family

are not independent of each other rather have an interlink which consequently brings in

conflicts between the two. With the pioneering work of pleck (1977) there was a general

consensus formed that work and family affect each other either in a positive or negative way.

And there are various extraneous variables like time, task, attitudes, stress emotions, and

behaviors which have an influence over work life imbalance.

Another influential theory after Pleck (1977) was the theory of spill over (Piotrkowski ,

1979), based on asymmetric permeable boundaries between the work and family life

domains. The spill over theory basically talked about two type of factors job related factors

and work related factors. There was a relationship established between the two domains of

job related factors and work related factors like the influence of spill over theory over job

context more for women then for men, whereas the converse would be true for job related

factors. Further the spill over theory also invited various research scholars to identify few

more factors that influence the work family dependency like compensation, benefits, and

bonuses (Champoux, 1978).

Greenhaus & Beutell ( 1985) further segregated few more factors like time, task, attitudes,

stress emotions, and behavioral spill over work and family. They tried to maintain either

positive or negative relation between the two domains. (1988) found out that interface

between work and family is asymmetric and work tends to influence more on family than

family on work. A distinction was made between work family interface (family interfering

work) and (work interfering family) greenhouse & Brutell (1988).

Several scholars during that time concluded that interference between work and family and

the conflict arising out of it are conceptually and empirically distinct from each other. (Wiley,

1987). As explained previously the field was dominated more by role theory which was

derived from seminal studies of khan, Wolfe (1964). According to Cohen & wills (1985) role

theory and its conflicting expectations form the tow domains have detrimental affects on the

well being of male and females both. This further led to the stressors – strain mode (Cohen &

wills (1985), Krasek & Theorell, 1990) with work family conflicts as stressors.

Many theoretical models were then published detailing the stressors that cause conflicts

among work and family domain (Bedeian, Bruke & Moffet, 1988). Kelly & Voydanoff,

1985) offered a general integrative framework of work family interface. Factors which were

taken into considerations were social support, time commitment, overload (both at work and

at family) as antecedents, and work family conflict and family work conflicts and core

variables, and distress, dissatisfaction and performance as outcomes.

This mismatch between the two set of roles that is work role responsibility and family role

responsibility leads to work – life imbalance ( Greenhaus et al. , 2003). The general aim of

such working time policies is to strike a balance between employment and domestic

commitments that is equitable and beneficial to both employer and employee. Greenhaus et

al, (2003) conceptualized mainly three components of work life balance. Firstly they took

time as a base and observed that if equal amount of time is devoted to work and family there

happens to be a balance between two. Secondly psychological involvement balance has to be

there in two roles of work and family and thirdly satisfaction balance which strives to keep

balance between job satisfaction and family life satisfaction.

Work-life balance is the term used in the literature to refer to policies that strive to achieve a

greater complimentary and balance between work and home responsibilities. These policies

apply to all workers, not just working parents, alone females or working parents with children

and dependents particularly in judging their own ability to combine both work and family

life.

Some of the terms used in the literature on work-life balance which were then commonly

used by various organizations are given below:

WLB: Work-life Balance also referred to as family friendly work arrangements (FFWA),

and, in international literature, as alternative work arrangements (AWA).

V-Time: this is voluntary overtime to meet production needs; extra hours are 'banked' and

taken as time off or as extra pay. It differs from flextime where starting and finishing times

are staggered, and can mean reduced or increased weekly working hours over a period of

time.

Zero hours contract: this is a flexible contract that does not specify the amount of time a

worker will spend per year on their employment, leaving it open to meet demand.

E-working: the term used to describe flexible working that can be done from any location

using technologies such as laptops, wireless internet connection and mobile phones.

Teleworking: this is where the location is flexible by using technologies to complete work -

this allows work to be done from home; also known as e-working.

Term-time working: this is when a parent is allowed to work only during school term times,

with all school holidays off.

Payment can be calculated either by usual payment, with no payment during holidays, or

salaries can be spread out across the year.

Other forms of flexible working conditions include: Part-time working, Job sharing,

Flexitime, Shift working, Compressed hours, Home working, and Career breaks. (Source:

Employment Act 2002, U.K., which came into force in April 2003)

Work Life Conflict:

The assumption, that involvement in one role (i.e. job) necessarily precludes attention of

another (i.e. family). Such interference between role commitments leads to WLC.

(Frone,2003) In other words individuals perceive that they have more flexibility in terms of

engaging in family commitments and responsibilities than they do for work commitments.

(Carlson and Frone , 2003).

There are basically two interfaces to work life conflict: Work to family interference (WIF)

Family to work interference (FWI) Working time of an individual is dictated by the person’s

employment contract or the organization commitments whereas family time is purely

discretion of the individuals. The clash of time in these two aspects creates an imbalance in

two directions i.e. work family interference (WFI) tends to dominate the family work

interference (FWI).

Work home interference generally operates in two directions. First, work demands more time

and energy hindering activities at the family end. For example attending an early morning

meeting or marketing tours arranged by the organization leads individual to compromise on

home related activities. Researchers call this as work interference with home. Second,

responsibilities at home interfere with performance at work. For example worrying about sick

dependents, spouse or partners responsibility many a times diverts an individual’s attention

towards work related responsibilities leading to family interfering work. ( Duxbury, Higgins,

& Lee, 1994, MacEwen & Barling 1994).

Studies distinguishing between the two directions of interference have presupposed a

positive, reciprocal relationship between work interference with home and home interference

with work, based on the assumption that if work-related problems and obligations begin to

interfere with the fulfillment of responsibilities at home, these unfulfilled home

responsibilities may then begin to interfere with one’s day-to-day functioning at work, and

vice versa (Frone, Russell, & Cooper, 1992).

Combining both directions of work-family interference and family to work interference into

one construct renders it difficult to ascertain whether given antecedents are predicting work

interference with home or the vice-versa. (Erdwins, Buffardi, Casper, & O’Brien, 2001; Hill,

Hawkins, Ferris, & Weitzman, 2001; Parasuraman & Simmers, 2001; Saltzstein, Ting, &

Saltzstein, 2001; Tausig & Fenwick, 2001).

Conceptual Framework:

Carlson and Frone (2003) discussed about the psychological involvement of the person in the

organization as well as on the family front. A high degree of psychological involvement with

context to role of an individual i.e. job role and family role would prioritize the individual to

be somewhat mentally preoccupied with their performance in that role, such imbalance in

performance will have significant implications on work to family and family to work

interference.

Conceptually, it seems evident that psychological involvement would have significant

implications for levels of work to family and family to work interference.

Carlson and Frone (2003) found that both psychological involvement and behavioral (time)

involvement were significant related to WIF but the reverse did not apply with FIW or family

involvement into work. Clearly more research and dynamic interplay in relationship of time

and family was required to draw conclusions.

Therefore, Frone (2003) summarized the findings from US based survey and noted that

family boundaries may be more permeable than job boundaries and hence the levels of work

to family (WFI) interference are reported higher or more intense than those of family to work

interference (FWI).

Various other researches in US and other western countries have confirmed these findings. So

finally Frone (2003) mainly concluded two main antecedents to Work – Family Balance.

Work related and family related conditions in which individual work. Of the Work Related

Variables were Job demands, Working hours, Role responsibility, Organization citizenship

behavior, Work load, irregular working hours etc. Family Related Variables were Family

responsibility, Parental responsibility, Role of spouse and other family dependents

responsibility, Leisure time and other activities with family. Personal Variables included

Gender, age , marital status, no of children etc. as the most important predictor of WFC .

(Pleck, 1977, Gutek et al, 1991) observed that because of different role responsibilities of

men and women they exhibit different inter role conflict. For example men exhibit greater

interference from work to family (WFI) and women reporting more interference from family

to work (FWI). Gutek et al. (1991) proved that women reported more interference in family

than men despite spending about same number of hours in paid work as men do. Williams &

Alliger (1994) and Losocoo (1997) found that women spend more hours in family work thatn

men and reported same level of family interference. Even the spoil over theory found out that

both FWI and WFI were stronger for women than men.

Several international studies have been conducted on antecedents of WFC. One of the

prominent research programs was developed by Samuel Aryer and his colleagues in Hong

Kong (1999) they examined within Job and within family conflicts along with job

involvement as predictors of WFI & FWI. Also the results obtained from the study were

similar to Frone, Russell and Cooper (1999) in US.

In another study by Aryer, Luke et al (1999) work over load and parental over load were

considered as predictor of WFI and FWI in the city of Hong Kong. They observed that WFI

was significantly higher than FWI as especially males reported higher levels of WFI than

females experiencing FWI.

A key issue discussed in the study was impact of role stressors on both WFI and FWI. Where

in the moderating variable was considered as gender. As more work load leads to more WFC

in case of males and more parental work load leads to mare WFC among females, Aryer,

Luke et al (1999) also explored social support as potential moderator of relationship between

WFI and FWI.

The results of Frone and Carlson, (2003) about the psychological involvement with WFC

were inconsistence with the conceptual framework. That is some research have confirmed

positive relationship between the domains others have obtained either very less or no

association between the two variables.

However looking to the different jobs and equality of men and women many results have

found no gender differences as even with (FWI or WFI) (Grzwac and Marks, 2000). Studies

done by (Guay , 2001) in French – Canadian Sample describe no gender difference same was

in Yant et al (2001) in China reported not much significant difference between FWI and WFI

with men or women. Other dispositional antecedents of WFC in particular are personality

factors.

Bernas&Maor (2000), Grzywacz& Marks, 2000) illustrated that huge levels of hardiness,

extraversion and self-esteem are linked with reduced WFC. Similarly Brruck& Allen (2003),

examined relationship of Type A behavior disposition, Big 5 Personality variables with both

work and family interference and family to work interference. Evidences from other US and

other European countries consistently demonstrated that work demands, work related

stressors and stain are predictors to Work to family interference whereas family responsibility

and family stressors ( conflict within the family ) contribute more towards family to work

interference ( Frone 2003,). Other influencing variables /moderators which have influence of

either WFI or FWI were social support (in both domains): support in the organization by

supervisor/peers lead to more WFI and support from the society /relatives leads to FWI.

Frone (2003) also concluded antecedents of WFI preside primarily in Job Domains and

antecedents of FWI lie mainly in Family domains.

From the US based study Grzywacz and Marks (2000) found out that social support at work

and from one’s spouse were negatively related to WFC. Low levels of support at work were

strongly correlated with negative spill over from work to family interference especially for

women.

Greenhaus and beutelll (1985) initially identified various kinds of job demands affecting

work life balance or work life conflict among men and women. Basically researchers divided

job demands into time-based and behavior based. i.e. the amount of one’s time that is spend

on work place and the time devoted for family activities. Similarly the kind of job

responsibility the individual is possessing in the organization. Parsuram, Godshalk and

Beutell (1996) suggested that time commitments at work place are more importantly

associated with WLC because time is a limited source. Further Frone et al. (1997) proved that

along with time based conflict also behavior (strain-based conflict) is equally the predictor of

work life balance for individuals in the organization. Such role related or strain based

predictors also lead to dissatisfaction or affect organizational performance (Greenhaus &

Beutell 1999).

Work schedule flexibility has been found to be negatively associated with work life balance /

work family conflict. The financial industry is a demanding work environment wherein

employees are supposed to work of long hours. Higher the flexibility lower is the work

family conflict Victoria, Lingard and Sublet (1996). In other words, higher the work schedule

flexibility, higher is the work life balance. Loscocoo (1997) examined how people with

considerable control over their working hours construct and experience their work to family

connections. In a study in New South Wales reported work hours to be significant predictors

of quality in the marital relationship (Aldous, Osmond & Hicks, 1979). Working hours have

consistently been linked to difficulties in balancing work and family life resulting in more the

number of hours and less the work schedule flexibility leads to work family conflict.

Role responsibility has been found to be negatively associated with work life balance or work

life conflict. Higher the responsibility of employee, the more tasks and roles one has to

perform. In other words, higher the works load, higher the imbalance between the work and

family life (Loseocoo 1997). Hill et al (2001) examined the perceived role stress on jobs and

flexibility of timings on work family balance issues. It was found that employees with job

flexibility in timings and high work load work longer hours and lead to work life conflict

issues.

Parents reported more work life conflicts than other individuals in the organization (Pleck et

al. 1980). He tried to examine the impact of long excessive hours at work, less job flexibility,

no support from organization or psychologically demanding work were associated with

experiencing work life conflicts which in turn was also related to low job satisfaction and low

commitment with life in general.

Aryee (1992) examined the impact of few such variables which have influence on family

domains. The family related variables were parental responsibility, demands from household

chores, lack of spouse support and number of dependants at the family. As against the work

related variables were task variety, job autonomy, role responsibility, working hours flexible

work schedules. Irregularity of work hours and non standard work schedules have also been

identified as the most important variables affecting dual earner couples with children specific

(white & Keith , 1992) and (Lingard & Francis, 2002)

Tausig and Fenwick (2001) report that married couples without children reported higher

levels of work life balance and the presence of children – whether in single or two parent

households or dual earner is relatively low on work life balance issues. For an individual who

is not subject to high levels of family role expectations, being mentally preoccupied with a

job assignment while at home may generate only a small amount of work interference with

home. For an individual who is pressurized by friends or family to prioritize family over

work, however, the experience of work interfering with family may be more intense. Parental

demands are believed to be greatest for people with infants and preschool aged children and

less for those with school aged children and even lowest for with adult children who have left

home (Parsuraman & Simmers, 2001).

Continuing further with the research (Parsuraman & Simmers, 2001) investigated the

relationship between parental responsibilities and time commitments to family and at work.

They reported the pattern that those with both the spouse working and more role

responsibility with children of infant category face with work life balance issues and have

more conflicts in managing the two domains.

Lingard (2004) examined whether or not an individual complies with family role

expectations, the pressure upon him/her over the job responsibilities would focus attention on

both domains. Wherein elements of work domain may interrupt family more prominent or it

can be vice-versa. An impending explanation for this relationship is that conforming to

family role expectations may result in role overload, generating time pressures and strain

which can spill over into the work domain, creating home interference with work.

Organizational and support from co-workers and supervisors have always been an influential

variable for the study of work life balance issues. Previous studies demonstrated that, in order

for employees to have better work life balance it is equally important that they get supportive

work environment Thompson et al, 1999, Allen, 2001;, O’Driscoll et al., 2003). Further

Frances, 2003) revealed that employees who reported their organizations to be supportive of

their family commitments, they are satisfied with their job and face less work life conflicts. In

contrast, unsupportive work environments, stressful job, long working hours, negative

supervisors support leads to negative commitment on job and work life conflicts issues in

organizations.

In the work life literature review some studies has confirmed that the presence of social

support reduces the negative consequences of work related stressors and work family conflict

(Thomas & Ganster, 1995; Goff, Mount & Jamison, 1990). It is anticipated that, when

supervisors or co-workers support is high, job satisfaction and employee commitment is also

very high. This leads to a better work life balance for employees. The extent to which

favorable or unfavorable treatments perceived by the employees concerning the extent to

which the organization values their contribution and cares about their well being is termed as

Perceived Organization support Wiesenberger et al. (1986).

Casper et al. (2002) explored that employees who work in supportive or organizations are

like to experience less amount of stress and more organizational commitment. This in turn

leads to less work life conflicts and greater affective commitment towards the organization.

Supervisors play a particularly important role in the work arrangements and controlling

access over employees (Walkins 1995). Having a supportive supervisor has been reported to

reduce the negative impact of Work family Conflict (Thomas & Ganster 1995). It has been

examined that if the supervisor is supportive it leads to low level of stress, low psychological

strain and reduced work life conflicts (O’Drisoll et. al). Also Barham Gotllieb, & Kelloway

(2001) reported that when the supervisor is supportive it also leads to flexi work

arrangements, gender favors, reduced employee working hours and low amount of work

responsibilities. Those with high levels of supervisor support reported less conflicts and less

psychological strain than those with unsupportive supervisor support.

In most of the studies, job satisfaction has been directly linked with work life conflict. (Boles,

Howards & Donrio, 2001). It has been observed that when there is high amount has been

observed that when work life conflict increases it creates the negative impact on job

satisfaction and the employee tends to lose interest in working in the organization. Bruke,

Allen and Spector (2002) framed the relationship between work life conflicts and job

satisfaction. The relationship was formed by using two interfaces that is work to family and

family to work and any discrepancy leads to job dissatisfaction.

When employees are not satisfied with their job and are not able to balance between the two

domains of work and family they tend to withdraw from their work related activities

Greenhaus, Parsuraman and Collins (2001). Further Greenhaus et al. discussed about the

level of stress that the employee possesses in the organization leads to work life conflict

which then lead to quitting of the job. Batt and Valcour (2003) reported work interference

with family to be significantly and positively related to turnover intentions, and employee

perceptions of control over managing work and family to be significantly negatively related

to turnover intentions. Turnover intentions are the direct outcome of work life conflict or

WFI or FWI Boyar et al. (2003).

The above literature review on work life balance or work life conflict tries to associate work

and family variables which are interlinked with each other. It tries to examine various sources

of conflict and its effect on organizational outcomes and individual level outcomes. Below

are four models explaining the relationship between variables studied which would then

further be examined empirically.

Figure

Figure 1 Relationship between Variables (Work Domain and Family Domain) on WFI/FWI

Figure.1 illustrates the relationships between work domain variables and family domain

variables with its impact on WFI and FWI. Also the model is able to explain the different

ways in which work life practices and outcomes are conceptualized and measured in the

literature.

The model tries to explain the relationship of work to family interference and family to work

interference with work life conflicts for an individual in the organization. However two

things become very clear after reviewing the literature on work life balance practices. One,

that there is some association between work domain variables and family domain variables

on WFI and FWI. Also, the effect of moderating variables can also be seen in the framework.

Two, regardless of effects on work life conflict, work life balance practices are often

associated with improved organizational outcomes and individual outcomes. The model

correlates to the concept of work life conflict and outcomes both at individual level and

organizational level.

Conclusion:

Literature on work life balance or work life conflict tires to identify various factors associated

with WFI and FWI. It tries to examine various sources of conflicts that an employee

possesses in the organization. The focus is mainly on various roles that an individual has to

perform in his personal life as well as professional life. The literature review reveals that

most of the studies done in the past were based on empirical research which tried to identify

relationship between work life conflict and its outcomes like job satisfaction, organizational

commitment , work to family interface and family to work interface. Other variables like

gender, age, marital status, no of dependents, employee role, job responsibility, parental

status etc were widely studied. The results show that all these have either negative or positive

relation with work life balance or work life conflict.

Different views of work life balance have been suggested by various research scholars in

literature review. Despite the popularity of work life conflict as a topic of research interest,

work life practices in the organization still have a long way to travel to develop a

compressive map of the antecedents and consequences of work life balance (Kersley et al. ,

2005; US Bureau of labour 2007)

Among the various theoretical models that help us to understand various relationship

constructs like job satisfaction, long working hours, stressful job, competing demands of

work and family with work life conflict or work life imbalance. In terms of organizational

level, HR policies and practices represent organizational efforts to provide employees with

supportive work place environment, increase the commitment and citizenship behavior of

employee towards the workplace.

Over the past two decades the outcomes of work life practices has been discussed by various

researchers in various disciplines (e.g. Johnson & Provan, 1995; Whitehouse & Zetlin, 1999),

family studies (e.g. Hill, Hawkins, Ferris & Weitzman, 2001; Raabe, 1996), gender studies

(e.g. Nelson, Quick, Hitt, & Moesel, 1990). The literature review tries to examine the

relationship between work life balance practices and organizational effectiveness. The paper

tires to find out from literature review various variables and constructs which affect the work

life balance policies in the organization.

References:

[1] Aryee, S. (1992). Antecedents and outcomes of work-life conflict among married

professional women: Evidence from Singapore. Human Relations, 45(8), 813−837.

[2] Aryee, S., Luk, V., & Stone, R. (1998). Family-responsive variables and retention-

relevant outcomes among employed parents. Human Relations, 51(1), 73−87.

[3] Ashforth, B. E., Kreiner, G. E., & Fugate, M. (2000). All in a day's work: Boundaries and

micro role transitions. Academy of Management Review, 25(3), 472−491.

[4] Aldous, J., Osmond, M.W., & Hicks, M.W. (1979). Men’s work and men’s families, in

W.R. Burr, R.Hill, F.I. Nye, & I.L. Reiss (Eds), Contemporary Theories about the Family.

New York: The Free Press.

[5] Allen, N. J. & Meyer, J. P., (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective,

continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational

Psychology, 63, 1 - 18.

[6] Allen, T. D., (2001). Family-supportive work environments: The role of organizational

perceptions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58, 414 - 435.

[7] Australian Bureau of Statistics. (1994). Focus on families: Work and family

Responsibilities, Cat No 4422.0, Canberra. Australian Government Printing Service.

[8] Beauregard, T. A. (2006). Predicting interference between work and home: A comparison

of dispositional and situational antecedents. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21(3),

244−264.

[9] Burke, R. J., & Greenglass, E. R. (1999). Work-life congruence and work-life concerns

among nursing staff. Canadian Journal of Nursing Leadership, 12(2), 21−29.

[10] Bacharach, S.B., Bamberger, P., & Conley, S. (1991). Work-home conflict among

nurses and engineers: Mediating the impact of stress on burnout and satisfaction at work,

Journal of Organisational Behavior, 12, 39 - 53.

[11] Barham, L. J., Gottlieb, B. H., & Kelloway, E. K., (2001). Variables affecting managers’

willingness to grant alternative work arrangements. The Journal of Social Psychology, 138,

291 - 302.

[12] Barnett, R.C., Garies, K.C., & Brennan, R. T. (1999). Fit as a mediator of the

relationship between work hours and burnout. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 4,

307 - 317.

[13] Baron, R.M. & Kenny, D.A., (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in

social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173 - 1182.

[14] Batt, R. & Valcour, P.M. (2003). Human resources practices and predictors of work-

family outcomes and employee turnover. Industrial Relations, 42, 189 - 220.

[15] Benbow, S.M. & Jolley, D.J. (2002). Burnout and stress amongst old age psychiatrists.

International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 17, 710 - 714.

[16] Beer, M., (1990), Why organizational change programs don’t produce change, Harvard

Business Review, 68, 158- 166.

[17] Bohen, H.H. & Viveros-Long, A. (1981). Balancing jobs and family life: Do flexible

work schedules help? Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

[18] Boise, L. & Neal, M. B. (1996). Family responsibilities and absenteeism: Employees

caring for parents versus employees caring for children. Journal of Managerial Issues, 8, 218

– 238.136

[19] Boyar, S.L., Maertz, C.P. (jr), Pearson, A.W., & Keough, S. (2003). Work-family

conflict: A model of linkages between work and family domain variables and turnover

intentions, Journal of Managerial Issues, 15, 175 - 190.

[20] Bruck, C.S., Allen, T.D., Spector, P.E., (2002). The relation between work-family

conflict and job satisfaction: A finer-grained analysis, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 60,

336 - 353.

[21] Butler, A., Gasser, M., & Smart, L., (2004). A social-cognitive perspective on using

family-friendly benefits, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65, 57 - 70.

[22] Casper, W.J., Martin, J.A., Buffardi, L.C., & Erdwins, C.J. (2002). Work-family

conflict, perceived organizational support and organizational commitment among employed

mothers. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 7, 99 - 108.

[23] Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S.G., & Aiken, L.S. (2003). Applied multiple

regression/correlation analysis for the behavioural sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,

Mahwah, New Jersey.

[24] Crandall & P.L. Perrewe (Eds), Occupational stress: A handbook. Washington: Taylor &

Francis.

[25] Crouter, A. C., Bumpus, M. F., Maguire, M. C., & McHale, S. M.. (1999). Linking

parents’ work pressure and adolescents’ well-being: Insights into dynamics in dual-earner

families, Developmental Psychology, 35, 1453 - 1461.

[26] Crouter, A.C., Bumpus, M.F., Head, M.R., & McHale, S. M. (2001). Implications of

overwork and overload for the quality of men’s family relationships, Journal of Marriage and

the Family, 63, 404 – 416.

[27] Dolan, S.L. (1995). Individual, organizational and social determinants of managerial

burnout: Theoretical and empirical update. Crandall, Rick (Ed); Perrewe, Pamela L. (Ed).

(1995). Occupational stress: A handbook, (pp. 223 - 238). Philadelphia, PA, US: Taylor &

Francis.

[28] Dunham, R.B., Grube, J.A., & Castaneda, M.B. (1994). Organizational commitment:

The utility of an integrative definition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 370 – 380.

[29] Eaton, S. C., (2003). If you can use them: Flexibility policies, organizational

commitment and perceived performance, Industrial Relations, 42, 145 - 167.

[30] Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived

organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 500 – 507.

[31] Eisenberger, R., Jones, J.R., Aselage, J., & Sucharski, I.L., (to be published in 2004). In

J. Coyle-Shapiro, L. Shore, & S. Taylor, & L. Tetrick (Eds.). The employment relationship:

Examining psychological and contextual perspectives. Oxford University Press.

[32] Fallon, B. & Mallamace, J. (2000). The need for and the availability of family friendly

programs does not mean they will be used. Personal communication to principal authors.

[33] Francis V E (2004) “Supportive organisational cultures and their effect on male civil

engineers”, The Australian Journal of Construction Economics and Building. Vol4 (1), pp.1-

9.

[34] Francis V E and Lingard H (2002) “The case for family-friendly work practices in the

Australian Construction Industry”. The Australian Journal of Construction Economics and

Building, Vol.2(1), pp.28–36.

[35] Frone, M. R., Russell, M., & Barnes, G. M. (1996).Work-life conflict, gender, and

health-related outcomes: A study of employed parents in two community samples. Journal of

Occupational Health Psychology, 1(1), 57−69.

[36] Frone, M. R., & Yardley, J. K. (1996). Workplace family-supportive programmes:

Predictors of employed parents' importance ratings. Journal of Occupational and

Organizational Psychology.

[37] Frone, M. R., Yardley, J. K., & Markel, K. S. (1997). Developing and testing an

integrative model of the work-life interface. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 50, 145−167.

[38] Frone, M. R., Russell, M. & Cooper, M. L., (1992) Antecedents and outcomes of work-

family conflict: Testing a model of the work-family interface, Journal of Applied

Psychology,77,65 - 78.

[39] Frone, M.R., (2000), Work-family conflict and employee psychiatric disorders: The

national comorbidity survey, Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 888 - 895.

[40] Frone, M.R., Yardley, J.K., & Markel, K.S. (1997). Developing and testing an

integrative model of the work-family interface, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 50, 145 -

167.

[41] Gaines, J. & Jermier, J.M. (1983). Emotional exhaustion in a high stress organization.

Academy of Management Journal, 26, 567 – 586.

[42] Gmelch, W.H. & Gates, G., (1998). The impact of personal, professional and

organizational characteristics on administrator burnout. Journal of Educational

Administration, 36, 146 - 159.

[43] Goff, S.J., Mount, M.K., & Jamison, R.L. (1990). Employer supported child care,

work/family conflict and absenteeism: a field study, Personnel Psychology, 43, 793 - 809.

[44] Graham, S. (1995). Narrative versus meta-analytic reviews of race differences in

motivation: A comment on Cooper and Dorr. Review of Educational Research,

65(4),509−514.

[45] Grandey, A. (2001). Family-friendly policies: Organizational justice perceptions of

need-based allocations. In R. Cropanzano (Ed.). Justice in the workplace: From theory to

practice, vol. 2 (pp. 145 - 174).

[46] Gray, M. & Tudball, J. (2002). Family-friendly work policies: Differences within and

between workplaces. Research report number 7 Australian Institute of Family Studies.

[47] Greenhaus, J. H., Collins, K. M., Singh, R., & Parasuraman, S. (1997).Work and family

influences on departure from public accounting. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 50,

249−270.

[48] Greenhaus, J.H., & Beutell, N.J. (1985). Sources and conflict between work and family

roles. Academy of Management Review, 10, 76 – 88.

[49] Greenhaus, J.H., Collins, K.M., & Shaw, J.D. (2003). The relation between work-family

balance and quality of life. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63, 510 - 531.

[50] Greenhaus, J.H., Parasuraman, S., Granrose, C.S., Rabinowitz, S., & Beutell, N.J.,

(1989). Sources of work-family conflict among two-career couples. Journal of Vocational

Behavior, 34, 133 - 153.

[51] Greenhaus, J.H., Parasuraman, S.J. & Collins, K.M. (2001). Career involvement and

family involvement as moderators of relationships between work-family conflict and

withdrawal from a profession. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 2, 91 - 100.

[52] Grzywacz, J.G. & Marks, N.F. (2000a). Family, work, work-family spillover and

problem-drinking during midlife. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 336 - 348.

[53] Grzywacz, J.G. & Marks, N.F., (2000b). 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 - 126.138

[54] Guerts, S.A.E., Rutte, C., & Peeters, M., (1999). Antecedents and consequences of

work-home interference among medical residents. Social Science and Medicine, 48, 1135 -

1148.

[55] Hammer, L.B., Allen, E., & Grigsby, T.D. (1997). Work-family conflict in dual earner

couples: Within individual and crossover effects of work and family. Journal of Vocational

Behavior, 50, 185 - 203.

[56] Hamilton, E. A., Gordon, J. R., & Whelan-Berry, K. S. (2006). Understanding the work-

life conflict of never-married women without children. Women in Management Review,

21(5), 393−415.

[57] Hill, E. J., Miller, B. C., Weiner, S. P., & Colihan, J. (1998). Influences of the virtual

office on aspects of work and work/life balance. Personnel Psychology, 51, 667−683.

[58] Hill, E.J., Hawkins, A.J., Ferris, M., & Weitzman, M. (2001). Finding and extra day a

week: The positive influence of perceived job flexibility on work and family life balance.

Family Relations, 50, 49 - 58.

[59] Hobson, C.J., Delunas, L, & Kesic, D. (2001). Compelling evidence of the need for

corporate work/life balance initiatives: Results from a national survey of stressful life-events.

Journal of Employment Counseling, 38, 38 – 44.

[60] Hughes, R.E., (2001). Deciding to leave but staying: teacher burnout, precursors and

turnover. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 12, 288 - 298.

[61] Kanungo, R. (1982). Measurement of job and work involvement. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 67, 341 - 349

[62] Kelloway, E.K., Gottlieb, B.H., & Barham, L. (1999). The source, nature and direction

of work and family conflict: A longitudinal investigation. Journal of Occupational Health

Psychology, 4, 337 - 346.

[63] Kossek, E.E. & Ozeki, C., (1998). Work-family conflict, policies and the job-life

satisfaction relationship: A review and directions for organizational behaviour-human

resources research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 139 - 149.

[64] Kossek, E.E., Colquitt, J.A., & Noe, R.A. (2001). Care-giving decisions, well-being and

performance: The effects of place and provider as a function of dependent type and work-

family climate. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 29 - 44.

[65] Lewis, V., Hand, K., & Tudball, J. (2001). Family and work: the family’s perspective.

Department of Family and Community Services: Canberra, ACT.

[66] Lingard H and Francis V E (2002) Work-life issues in the Australian Construction

Industry: Findings of a pilot study. Construction Industry Institute, Australia, Research

Report, Brisbane, 94pp.

[67] Lingard, H. & Francis, V. The work-life experiences of office and site-based employees

in the Australian construction industry. Construction Management and Economics, accepted

26th April 2004.

[68] Lingard, H. & Lin, J (2003). Career, family and work environment determinants of

organizational commitment among women in the Australian construction industry.

Construction Management and Economics.

[69] Lingard, H. & Sublet, A. (in press). The impact of job and organisational demands on

marital and relationship quality among Australian civil engineers, submitted to Construction

Management and Economics.

[70] Lingard, H. & Sublet, A., (2002). The impact of job and organisational demands on

marital and relationship quality among Australian civil engineers. Construction Management

and Economics, 20, 507 – 521.

[71] Lingard, H., (2003). The impact of individual and job characteristics on ‘burnout’ among

civil engineers in Australia and implications for employee turnover. Construction

Management and Economics, 21, 69 - 80.

[72] Marks, S.R; & MacDermid, S.M. (1996). Multiple roles and the self: A theory of role

balance. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 58, 417 – 432.

[73] Mauno, S. & Kinnunen, U. (1999). The effects of job stressors on marital satisfaction in

Finnish dualearner couples. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 879 - 895.

[74] McKeen, C.A. & Burke, R.J. (1994). The woman-friendly organisation: Initiatives

valued by managerial women. Employee Counselling Today, 6, 18 - 25.

[75] Meyer, J.P., Paunonen, S.V., Gellatly, I.R., Goffin, R.D., & Jackson, D.N., (1989).

Organizational commitment and job performance: It’s the nature of the commitment that

counts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 152 - 156.

[76] Meyer, J.P., Allen, N.J., & Smith, C.A. (1993). Commitment to organizations and

occupations: Extension and test of a three component conceptualization. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 78, 538 - 551.

[77] Moen, P. & Yu, Y., (2000). Effective work/life strategies: Working couples, work

conditions, gender and life quality. Social Problems, 47, 291 - 326.

[78] Netemeyer, R.G., Boles, J.S., & McMurrian, R. (1996). Development and validation of

work-family conflict and family-work conflict scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 400

- 410.

[79] O’Driscoll, M.P., Poelmans, S., Kalliath, T., Allen, T. D., Cooper, C. L., and Sanchez, J.

L. (2003), Family responsive interventions, perceived organizational and supervisor support,

work-family conflict and psychological strain, International Journal of Stress

Management,10,326-344.

[80] Parasuraman, S. & Simmers, C.A. (2001). Type of employment, work-family conflict

and wellbeing, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22, 551 - 568.

[81] Parasuraman, S. (1982). Predicting turnover intentions and turnover behavior: A

multivariate analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 21, 111 - 21.

[82] Parasuraman, S., Greenhaus, J.H., & Granrose, C.S. (1992). Role stressors, social

support and wellbeing among two career couples. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 13,

339 - 356.

[83] Parasuraman, S., Purohit, Y.S., Godshalk, V.M., & Beutell, N.J. (1996). Work and

family variables, entrepreneurial career success and psychological wellbeing. Journal of

Vocational Behavior, 48, 275 - 300.

[84] Russell, G., Barclay, L., Edgecombe, G., Donovan, J., Habib, G., Callaghan, H., &

Pawson, Q. (1999). Fitting fathers into families: men and the fatherhood role in contemporary

Australia. Department of Family and Community Services: Canberra.

[85] Selder, F. E. & Paustian, A. (1989). Burnout: Absence of vision. In D.T. Wessells, A.H.

Kutscher, I.B.

[86] Seeland, F.E. Selder, D.J. Cherico, & E.J. Clark (Eds.). Professional Burnout in

Medicine and the Helping Professions. USA: Haworth Press, Inc.

[87] Smithers, G. (2000). The effect of the site environment on motivation and de-motivation

of construction professionals. Proceedings of the 16th Annual Conference of the Association

of Researchers in Construction Management, September 6 - 8, Glasgow Caledonian

University, Glasgow, 455-464.

[88] Stewart, W. & Barling, J. (1996). Fathers’ work experiences affect children’s behaviours

via job-related affect and parenting behaviours. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17, 221 -

232.

[89] Sullivan, I.G. (1989). Burnout: A study of a psychiatric centre. In D.T. Wessells, A.H.

Kutscher, I.B. Seeland, F.E. Selder, D.J. Cherico, & E.J. Clark (Eds.). Professional Burnout

in Medicine and the Helping Professions. USA: Haworth Press, Inc.

[90] Sydney Morning Herald, March 29, 2003, Work and stress: Judge finds a deathly link,

John Fairfax Publications Pty Ltd., p. 27.

[91] Taylor, J.C. & Bowers, D.G. (1972). Survey of organisations: A machine scored

standardized questionnaire instrument. Ann Arbor, Centre for Research on the Utilization of

Scientific Knowledge, University of Michigan.

[92] Thomas, L.T. & Ganster, D.C. (1995). Impact of family-supportive work variables on

work-family conflict and strain: A control perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 6

– 15.

[93] Thompson, C.A., Beauvais, L.L., & Lyness, K.S. (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.

[94] Thompson, L.F., Surface, E.A., Martin, D.L., & Sanders, M.G. (2003). From paper to

pixels: moving personnel surveys to the web. Personnel Psychology, 56, 197 - 225.

[95] Thornwaite, L. (2002). Work-family balance: International research on employee

preferences. Working paper 79, from the Working time today conference, 16 August, 2002.

Sydney: University of Sydney.

[96] Wallace, J. E., (1997), It's about time: a study of hours worked and work spillover

among law firm lawyers, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 50, 227-248.

[97] Watkins, K.E. (1995). Changing managers’ defensive reasoning about work/family

conflicts. Journal of Management Development, 14, 77 - 88.

[98] Westman, M. & Etzion, D. (1995). Crossover of stress, strain and resources from one

spouse to another. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16, 169 – 181.

[99] Westman, M., Etzion, D., & Danon, E. (2001). Job insecurity and crossover of burnout

in married couples. Journal of Organisational Behavior, 22, 467 - 481.

[100] White, L. & Keith, B. (1990). The effect of shift work on the quality and stability of

marital relations. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52, 453 - 462.

[101] Williams, K.J. & Alliger, G.M., (1994). Role stressors, mood spillover and perceptions

of work-family conflict in employed parents. Academy of Management Review, 37, 837 -

868.

[102] Wright, T.A. & Bonnett, D.G. (1997). The contribution of burnout to work

performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 491 - 499