Swinburne Research Bank | Swinburne Research …...4 indicate that they will never marry (ABS, 2002b). The delay in couples getting married, coupled with standards of living and changing

1

Generation X: The effect of work-life balance and emotional

intelligence on well-being.

Richard Harmer

Bachelor of Arts (Hons.)

2

Abstract

Generation X (25-35 years) is a significant demographic, and work-life

balance is valued highly for this demographic. The aim of the study was to

determine the role job satisfaction, relationship satisfaction and emotional

intelligence had in determining work-life balance. Sample comprised of 27

females (Mean age 27.6 years, SD = 2.28) and 24 males (Mean age 29 years, SD

= 2.84). Job satisfaction was found to be a significant predictor of perceived

work-life balance for Generation X and was mediated by emotional

intelligence. The impact of job and relationship satisfaction, emotional

intelligence and work-life balance on mental, physical and spiritual well-being

for Generation X was also explored. Results suggested that job satisfaction

helps to enhance mental well-being and is mediated by both emotional

intelligence and work-life balance. Physical well-being is enhanced by

relationship satisfaction. Spiritual well-being is important to Generation X,

more so than mental and physical well-being and is enhanced by emotional

intelligence. The results suggest that holistic well-being is a consequence of

one’s ability to maintain relationship satisfaction, job satisfaction and perceived

work-life balance, a process augmented by emotional intelligence. Implications

of the study’s finding are discussed and suggestions for further research are

made.

3

“Be aware of wonder. Live a balanced life - learn some and think some and

draw and paint and sing and dance and play and work every day some. “

Robert Fulghum (1993)

The landscape of the modern family and the modern worker has changed.

Like the rest of the western world, Australia has experienced significant change

in its population demographic, family structure and worker profile in the last

15 to 20 years (Bardoel, Tharenou & Ristov, 2000). The Australian Bureau of

Statistics (ABS), in the 2001 National Census, indicated that Australia has an

ageing population. One-third of Australia’s population is currently over the

age of 45 years (ABS, 2001). We are a longer living population; in the last half

century the life expectancy for both men and women has risen by over 10 years

to 81.5 years for women and 76 years for men (ABS, 1999).

Family structure has also changed with this changing population

demographic. Whereas in 1981 the average age of marriage in Australia was 26

years for men and 23 for women, currently this age has risen to 31 years for

men and 29 for women (ABS, 2002a). Further research indicates that one in

four couples are choosing not to get married, instead opting for an alternative

de-facto marriage arrangement. Seventy-two percent of married couples

indicate that they cohabitated with their partner prior to getting married, and

in the past 15 years there has been a 10% increase in both men and women who

4

indicate that they will never marry (ABS, 2002b). The delay in couples getting

married, coupled with standards of living and changing views on family size,

has had consequences for when families are commenced. The average age for a

woman to commence a family is now 29 years with the average number of

children per woman down to 1.7 children. A change from 3.5 children per

woman in 1961 (ABS, 2002c). Other research indicates further changes in

relationship and family structures with the traditional family, a heterosexual

couple with children, no longer the norm (Lewis & Lewis, 1996).

Australia’s changed population demographic and relationship and family

make-up has also had a significant impact upon Australia’s worker profile

(Bardoel et al., 2000). Bardoel et al. (2000) explored the changing composition of

Australia’s workforce and its impact upon the employer-employee and

employee-family dynamic. This research indicated that there is a new level of

women’s participation in the workforce. Since 1968 there has been an 18%

increase in the number of women who are employed, with a corresponding

(yet not equal) decline in the number of employed men. This increase in

working women is coupled with a 24% increase in working females with

dependent children.

The number and range of hours worked has also changed in the past 15

years. Since the introduction of un-restricted trading hours by each state of

Australia, Australian workers are fast becoming a society of “shift-workers”

5

with 64% of the working population not working a traditional 40-hour, nine-to-

five, Monday-Friday working week (ABS, 2002c).

Current academic literature on these emerging workforce trends has

focused on researching the impact of changing work and family structures on

the ageing worker (e.g., Bardoel et al., 2000; Fallon, 2001; Guest, 2002;

Kinnunen, Vermulst, Gerris & Makikangas, 2002). Both men and women are

working more hours per week with over 9% of the population now working in

excess of 50 hours per week, double that of 15 years ago. However the greatest

increase in hours worked, especially for women, has been within the 25

through 35 age group (ABS, 2003); “Generation X” as it has been defined in

popular literature. And this makes sense; with the changes in relationship and

family make-up over the same period of time it would appear as though this

age range provides the greatest earning and career advancement potential

(Hays, 1999). After all, this demographic is increasingly less likely to be

encumbered by family responsibilities.

Generation X is a significant demographic in Australia’s workforce. Yet

research literature concentrating of the impact on these changing working

conditions on the younger Australian worker is lacking. There is little research

focusing on understanding the effect of increased working commitments and

little information available to assist the younger worker to better manage or

“balance” their work and life commitments. The present research was

6

designed to explore the role of work-life balance and its impact on the health and

well-being of the younger Australian worker, between the ages of 25 and 35

years of age.

Work-life Balance

Work-life balance has been increasingly researched in the past five years

(Milkie & Peltola, 1999). Researchers have addressed the construct from an

assortment of perspectives. Consequently a clear and succinct definition of

work-life balance is lacking and despite increasing research, the work-life

interface is not well understood (Grzywacz & Marks, 2000).

To be fair, the construct itself makes it difficult to define what work-life

balance is. Any definition is reliant on very personal and increasingly

individual choices. For example, the subjective value individuals place upon

the many roles they play whilst “living” is dependent upon life stage (Aryee &

Luk, 1996; Lewis & Cooper, 1987). It makes sense that as one moves through

the various stages of life, from childhood through old age, the roles they might

be expected to play will change, increase or disappear. Further, the focus or

emphasis placed upon each of the roles played will also vary with changing life

circumstances.

Within academic research the definition of work-life balance is also reliant

upon a researcher’s theoretical and philosophical standpoint and on the social

7

and demographic landscape at the time research into the construct may be

undertaken (e.g., Johnson, 1991; Marks & MacDermid, 1996). A definition is

also reliant on adequately defining “work” (with whatever roles are invoked in

this domain) and “life” (with whatever roles are invoked in this domain) and

subsequently how the researcher treats the relationship between these two

dominant domains, as segmented (mutually exclusive), compensating (related)

or spill-over (co-dependant) (Sumer & Knight, 2001).

For the present study a definition of the construct of work-life balance

must also be distinguished from other similar constructs, such as work-family

balance. Work-family balance can be defined as an individual’s ability to

manage the time commitments of commencing a family and raising children

whilst maintaining and developing a career (Aryee & Luk, 1996). Within the

current research this definition of work-family balance does not apply, as

frequently, the younger Australian worker, between the ages of 25 and 35, will,

unlike their older counterparts, not have children.

Research has indicated that role overload pressures resulting from the

greater work and career focus adopted by younger workers has resulted in it

being common to now wait longer before having children (ABS, 2002c; Daniels

& Weingarten, 1982; Wiersma, 1994). A broader definition of work-life balance

is needed and must conceptually consider the many and varied interests,

responsibilities and commitments (roles) of this age demographic.

8

Thus the present study elected to employ a holistic and non-hierarchical

approach (Mead, 1964, cited in Marks & MacDermid, 1996) to defining work-

life balance. Such a premise suggests that individuals organise an equally

positive commitment to all of their typical role performances resulting in the

promotion of desirable consequences for their well-being (Marks &

MacDermid, 1996). The present study defined work-life balance as:

The ability of an individual to fully engage in balancing the

expenditure of their time, their energy, their emotional resources and

their whole being between their own needs, the needs of those with

whom they live and love (independent of offspring responsibilities),

and the needs of those who provide them income, with an attitude of

attentiveness and care (Fallon, 2001).

Indeed Marks & MacDermid (1996) termed such a non-hierarchical and

broad definition of work-life balance as role balance and suggest that an

individual’s ability to achieve a balanced work-life state was attitudinal. They

suggested that future research into work-life balance be devoid of any role-

specific or role-segmenting focus. Unfortunately the reality of the modern

workplace and the modern workforce is contrary to the embracing of a broader

construct, such as that of role balance, in work-life balance research. With the

necessity to work longer and more varied hours, Generation X’s ability to

9

positively meet all of their role commitments is increasingly challenged. It is

beyond the scope of the present study to determine, define and measure the

influence of all of the many roles Generation X chooses to embrace. The present

study explored the two primary roles individuals in the 25 to 25 age bracket

spend the majority of their emotional and physical resources and their time on:

their work role and their relationship role (Csikszentmihalyi, 1992; Milkie &

Peltola, 1999; Netemeyer, Boles & McMurrian, 1996; Piotrkowski, Rapoport &

Rapoport, 1987).

The selection of only these two roles is supported by past research into

role balance (Marks & MacDermid, 1996) and the present study operationalised

these two roles undertaken by Generation X through measures of job

satisfaction (Balzer et al., 1997) and relationship satisfaction (Hendrick, 1988).

Job Satisfaction

Work is one of the most fundamental life tasks (Csikszentmihalyi, 1992;

Sweeney & Witmer, 1991). Satisfaction with one’s work is related to both the

task being completed as well as the individuals feelings about the workplace

tasks undertaken (Csikszentmihalyi, 1992). Most importantly, in the present

study, recent research suggests that job satisfaction is primarily determined by

the feelings one experiences in relation to their present work; whether they are

happy in completing the tasks required of them in their workplace (Hofmann

& Tetrick, 2003; Seligman, 2002). The definition of job satisfaction used in the

10

present study is by Balzer et al. (1997), who define job satisfaction as “…the

feelings a worker has about his or her job or job experiences in relation to

previous experiences, current expectations, or available alternatives” (p. 10).

The definition of job satisfaction proposed by Balzer et al. (1997), is

interesting given the current landscape of work in Australia. Previous

experiences of job role and job satisfaction may no longer apply as a result of

the severe changes in working conditions, increasing work hours, varying

working arrangements and intensifying job demands (Allen, O’Connell &

Peetz, 1999; Guest, 2002). A lack of available alternatives may also be the

current reality for many workers, especially in the current study’s 25 to 35 year

old demographic (Peetz, 1998). Increasingly, an individual’s job satisfaction

may be determined not only by their perceived “control” over their current

work circumstances and their current work enjoyment but also by their ability

to find solace outside of their current work context (Csikszentmihalyi, 1992). A

difficult challenge given the longer working hours by Generation X.

The current business climate is one of cost reduction and increasing

productivity efficiencies (Hochschild, 1997). From the organisation’s

perspective the effectiveness of the modern worker is paramount. Many

organisations have increased the number of their workers working under

flexible employment arrangements, including contracts or flexible working

hours. The rational for this change by organizations is that an increase in one’s

11

work flexibility will result in an increase in one’s work-life balance (Hill,

Hawkins, Ferris & Weitzman, 2001). Part time or casual employment has

increased by nearly 41% in Australia, during the last decade, (Kramar, 1998).

These changes in working conditions are also mirrored by the 25 to 35 year old

demographic who have embraced flexible working conditions as the new norm

(Hays, 1999). How does the Australian worker perceive these flexible working

conditions? In a report by the Department of Industrial Relations (1995) it was

proposed that the Australian worker perceives that they have not gained from

the changes in workforce flexibility. Many stated that they feel less satisfied

with management, the nature and frequency of communication and

consultation, job security and feel a greater dissatisfaction with their ability to

manage their work and family life (Kramar, 1998).

Job satisfaction has been shown to impact upon an individuals’ mental

and physical health and overall satisfaction with their life (Balzer et al., 1997;

Csikszentmihalyi, 1992; Earnshaw, Amundson & Borgen, 1990; Kinnunen &

Natti, 1994). Specific areas researched with respect to job satisfaction have

included consequences of work and workforce alienation, job attachment and

job insecurity, depression, burnout, physical and mental exhaustion, personal

and job morale, stress and tension, enthusiasm and job aspiration (Ameen,

Jackson, Pasewark & Strawser,1995; Davy, Kinicki & Scheck, 1997; Guest, 2002;

Lim, 1996; Mauno & Kinnunen, 1999; Warr, 1990)

12

Research has been widespread and varied in what impacts upon an

individual achieving and maintaining job satisfaction (e.g., Gardner, 2003;

Guest, 2002; Oats & Vella-Brodrick, 2003). Within the 25 to 35 year old

demographic published research is less readily available. The present study

reports on the degree of impact of a number of possible factors on job

satisfaction. Further, the present study also explored the extent to which job

satisfaction impacts upon Generation X’s perceived work-life balance and

health and well-being.

Relationship Satisfaction

Social activity is pivotal to an individuals’ mental and physical health.

Research indicates that individuals who regularly engage in social activity have

greater positive well-being (Myers, Sweeney & Witmer, 2000; Okun, Stock,

Haring & Witter, 1994). Marriage and close intimate relationships are probably

the most intense social relationship. A large number of studies have shown that

a positive marital status correlates positively with health and well-being (e.g.,

McCabe, Cummins & Romeo, 1996). Relationship satisfaction is also a

contributor to reported levels of trust and intimacy and the quality of

communication between partners and is a predictor of marriage longevity

(Fincham & Linfield, 1997).

Relationship satisfaction is also one of the most established areas of

relationship assessment (Hendrick, 1988). Recent studies indicate that an

13

individual’s level of satisfaction with their present intimate relationship will

impact on levels of health and well-being, susceptibility to illness, depression,

stress, excessive alcohol intake and sexual functioning (Berry & Worthington,

2001). Research conducted by Burns, Sayers and Moras (1994) found that the

relationship between health and relationship satisfaction was one of

reciprocity. Relationship satisfaction influences health and well-being and an

individual’s level of health will have a spillover effect on their relationship

satisfaction.

Contradictory research indicates that the link between relationship quality

and well-being is increasingly tenuous with the institution of marriage waning

and being replaced with alternative forms of co-operative partnerships (e.g.,

Cramer, 1993; Csikszentmihalyi, 1992; McCabe et al, 1996). Changing family

and social structures and the increased pressure to develop and maintain social

interaction outside of the environment of the traditional family may be

adversely affecting the relative importance of an individuals’ relationship.

Of keen interest to the present study is the role that relationship

satisfaction plays in the maintenance of work-life balance for the individual.

Does relationship satisfaction continue to be an important and non-negotiable

role that Generation X focuses their time and emotional and physical energies

upon? The present study explored the role of relationship quality in the

preservation of positive work-life balance and health of Generation X.

14

Holistic Health

A re-definition of health by the World Health Organisation in 1948 called

for a more holistic approach to health and illness:

“… a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the

absence of disease or infirmity.” (Preamble to the Constitution of the World Health

Organization, 1948, p. 100)

Such a definition of health not only focuses on the absence of disease

(Wardwell, 1994) but calls for a focus on the positive aspects of health and for a

consideration of the multi-dimensionality of what constitutes an individual’s

good health, commonly referred to as well-being (Vella-Broderick & Allen

1995).

The multi-dimensionality of physiological and psychological well-being is

nothing new in psychology. Maslow’s (1968) concept of self actualization and

Rogers’s (1961) view of the fully functioning person are but two of the many

perspectives suggested (Ryff, 1989). Although it is recognised that other factors

may affect health status, for example, social, emotional, environmental,

educational, governmental, family and community factors (Cohen, 1988;

Corsini, 1984; Hancock, 1985; Myers et al., 2000; Simper, 1985; Szasz, 1970) the

three dimensions of mind, body and spirit are increasingly referred to as the

most influential (Myers, Sweeney & Witmer, 2000; Vella-Brodrick & Allen

15

1995). Research by Cassel (1988) and Anderson and Morgan (1994) indicates

that for positive well-being to occur there needs to be a balance between all

three of these dimensions.

For those individuals’ wanting more that just the absence of illness or

disease, holistic health is reliant on the individual continually striving to

nurture their mind, body and spirit, through undertaking proactive activities

believed to enhance well-being in these areas (Vella-Broderick, 1995). Such

activities include a desire to increase knowledge, use rational cognitive

processes and develop an appreciation for aesthetics (mental well-being); the

attainment of efficient functioning of the body’s physical components, such as

the absence of nausea or vomiting, headaches, indigestion, insomnia and body

aches and pains (physical well-being); and the practice of religious or

existential activities centred around the pursuit of life satisfaction and the

alignment of the individual’s being to a divine or higher purpose (spiritual

well-being) (Vella-Broderick, 1995).

Recent research would suggest that the attainment of mental, physical and

spiritual well-being is only possible once an individual has achieved both

relationship and job satisfaction and a semblance of positive work-life balance

(Marks, Huston, Johnson & MacDermid, 2001). This association is shown in

Figure 1.

16

Figure 1. Relationships between relationship and job satisfactions, work-life balance and holistic well-being.

Other research into holistic well-being suggests a similar theme - that the

higher order cognitive processing required to obtain higher levels of mental,

physical and spiritual well-being is not available to the individual during times

of low coping or survival (Csikszentmihalyi, 1992; Seligman, 2000; Sweeney &

Witmer, 1991).

In a social framework of health promotion there is a plethora of research

into the factors that influence an individual’s level of health and well-being.

The emergence of more widely acceptable non-bio-medical health promoting

activities in western society in the past ten years is evidence of this (e.g., Myers

et al., 2000). Activities such as stress management (Sternberg, 1997), techniques

to improve communication and interpersonal relationships (Sternberg, 1997),

modification of lifestyle factors such as exercise and diet (Myers et al., 2000),

communication with a personally defined higher power (Larson & Larson,

1991; Sweeney & Witmer, 1991), goal setting (Pelletier, 1994), cognitive re-

17

structuring (Csikszentmihalyi, 1992; Ellis, 1984; Seligman, 2000), humour

(Hafen, Franksen, Karren, Hooker, 1992), raising of emotional awareness

(Compton, Swith, Cornish & Qualls, 1996; Ulione, 1996), work satisfaction (;

Pelletier, 1994), friendships (Csikszentmihalyi, 1992; Ishii-Kuntz, 1990) and

relationship satisfaction (Csikszentmihalyi, 1992; Ishii-Kuntz, 1990), have all

been researched to explore their impact upon an individual’s mental, physical

and spiritual well-being.

The present research was further interested in exploring another of the

many avenues by which an individual looks at the process of balance in order

to obtain holistic well-being. Emotional awareness has shown great promise in

facilitating positive development in an individual’s mental, physical and

spiritual health (Gardner & Stough, 2003; Tugade & Fredrickson, 2003).

Emotional Intelligence

Research into emotional awareness as one activity influencing an

individual’s holistic well-being, and more recently its operationalised construct

of emotional intelligence, has been widely researched in the last ten years (see

Gardner, 2003, for a comprehensive review). Emotional intelligence is an

individual’s capacity to perceive emotions, regulate and manage those

emotions, and utilize those emotions in more constructive cognitive thought

(Mayer, Salovey & Caruso, 2000).

18

Recent research into emotional intelligence has found it to be important in

maintaining an individual’s satisfaction with life (Palmer, Donaldson & Stough,

2001), interpersonal effectiveness, listening and oral communication,

negotiation skills, leadership and motivation (Palmer & Stough, 2001), stress

management, mood, affect and positive disposition (Bar-On, 1997), work-

family balance (Gardner & Stough, 2003), personal resilience (Tugade &

Fredrickson, 2003), job satisfaction (Gardner, 2003) and, the facilitation of

satisfying interpersonal relationships (Fitness, 2001). However little research

has been undertaken into the role emotional intelligence plays in mediating the

interaction between these aspects of an individual’s life (Gardner & Stough,

2003).

The construct of emotional intelligence has also been found to have a

degree of malleability over an individuals’ lifespan (Mayer, Caruso & Salovey,

1999; Mayer & Salovey, 1997; Mayer, Salovey, Caruso & Sitarenios, 2001).

Thus, through structured training, reflection and personal insight, one’s

emotional awareness, emotional repertoire and emotional intelligence can be

improved. The question remains, how much additional influence, above and

beyond satisfaction with one’s relationship and satisfaction with one’s job does

emotional intelligence have on an individual’s ability to effectively balance

their work and life and enhance their holistic well-being?

19

The model of emotional intelligence selected for the current study used a

behaviourally based self-report measure of emotional intelligence to measure

the way individuals think, feel and act with respect to their emotions. The

Swinburne University Emotional Intelligence Test (SUIET; Palmer & Stough,

2001) measures the five core dimensions of one’s emotional intelligence. Each

of the scores for the five dimensions of the emotional intelligence measure are

then summed to provide an indication of one’s total emotional intelligence.

The present study explored the possible role mediating (as defined and

discussed by Baron & Kenny, 1986) that emotional intelligence, and each of its

five dimensions, has on an individual’s perceived work-life balance and their

stated mental, physical and spiritual well-being (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Relationships between relationship and job satisfactions, emotional intelligence, work-life balance and holistic well-being.

20

The Present Study

Objectives and Aims

The general aim of the present study was to examine the role job

satisfaction and relationship satisfaction had in determining perceived work-

life balance for Generation X. Previous research has mostly discussed the

interference of one’s work role on one’s capacity to maintain positive

relationship or family affect. Little research has been undertaken into the work-

life balance of the 25-35 year old demographic, unencumbered by dependent

responsibilities yet burdened by increasing work demands. One goal of the

present study was to determine if this age demographic was able to spend

adequate time and cognitive and emotional resources on all role performances

equally.

Research exploring the construct of work-life balance has typically

reported on the negative consequences of poor work-life balance (e.g.,

Greenhaus, 1989). Hence the present study was more interested in measuring

the positive outcomes of effective work-life balance. Specifically an exploration

of three key components of one’s holistic health: mental, physical and spiritual

well-being. In exploring the positive impact of striving for work-life balance for

Generation X it was intended that Generation X may subsequently become

more proactive in fostering positive personal work-life balance.

21

The development of more adaptive and positive work-life balance was the

final area of interest for the present study. Research into the area of emotional

intelligence had shown great promise in areas complementary to the

attainment of work-life balance. The present research aimed to explore the role

of emotional intelligence on facilitating movement towards, or the preservation

of, adaptive work-life balance, and the subsequent affect of positive work-life

balance on one’s holistic health.

Hypotheses. Job satisfaction and relationship satisfaction were operationalised

through high scores on the Job in General (JIG) Index of the Job Descriptive

Index (JDI; Balzer et al., 1997) and Relationship Assessment Scale (RAS;

Hendrick, 1988), respectively. Perceived work-life balance was operationalised

through the Role Balance scale developed by Marks and MacDermid (1996)

whilst holistic well-being was operationalised via the Mental, Physical and

Spiritual (MPS) Scale (Vella-Brodrick, 1995). Finally emotional intelligence was

measured by the Swinburne University Emotional Intelligence Test (SUIET),

including this measure’s five dimensions (Palmer & Stough, 2001).

The specific hypotheses explored by the present study were that a

respondent’s level of job satisfaction would significantly correlate with their

relationship satisfaction; a respondent’s level of job satisfaction would be

significantly associated with their perceived work-life balance; and a

22

respondent’s level of relationship satisfaction would be significantly associated

their perceived work-life balance. Further, a respondent’s level of job

satisfaction and relationship satisfaction would significantly influence their

mental, physical and spiritual well-being.

In exploring the role of emotional intelligence, it was predicted that

emotional intelligence would significantly influence a respondent’s perceived

work-life balance beyond that predicted by job satisfaction and relationship

satisfaction. Further, that work-life balance would predict mental, physical and

spiritual well-being beyond that predicted by emotional intelligence, job

satisfaction and relationship satisfaction.

Method

Participants

Fifty-one individuals who classified themselves as currently in a dual-

earner relationship participated in the present study, 24 males with a mean age

of 29 years and 27 females with a mean age of 27.6 years. The mean length of

relationship for the participating sample was 4.5 years (range less than 6

months through to 12 years) with 43.1% indicating that they were married and

56.9% indicating that they were not married.

23

For the participating sample: 82.4% indicated their employment status as

full-time, 13.7% indicated their employment status as part-time, 2% indicated

their employment status as casual and 2% indicated their employment status as

“other”. Of the participants who took part in the present study: 22 indicated

that they presently held positions of management of others, 23 indicated that

they did not presently hold a position of management of others, and 6 did not

indicate either management or non-management of others. The average hours

worked per week (not including commuting time) by those participating in the

present study was 43.9 hours per week, with a range of 11 hours to 65 hours

worked. The average unpaid hours worked per week was 7.5 hours, with a

range of zero unpaid hours work per week to 30 unpaid hours worked per

week.

Using the following annual salary ranges: $0-$40,000, 40,000-$60,000,

$60,000-$80,000, $80,000-$100,000 and $100,000-$120,000, the present study

yielded the following percentage responses: 37.3%, 43.1%, $13.7%, 3.9% and

2%, respectively.

Of those who participated in the present study, 13.7% classified

themselves as having completing a high school certificate, 9.8% completing a

tertiary certificate, 47.1% completing an undergraduate university degree,

17.6% completing a postgraduate university degree, 9.8% indicating "other" as

their level of education and, 2% did not indicate a level of education.

24

Respondents were drawn from a wide range of employment contexts

within the Melbourne area and all participants took part in the present study

on a voluntary and anonymous basis.

Materials

The study used a self-report questionnaire to collect data from the

participant. A wide range of assessment instruments were selected for the

present study, as previous research into the selected sample group is minimal.

A copy of the questionnaire is included as Appendix A.

The questionnaire included the following scales measuring the

independent variables in the present study; the Workplace Swinburne

University Emotional Intelligence Test (SUEIT; Palmer & Stough, 2001), a

modified version of the Relationship Assessment Scale (RAS; Hendrick, 1988),

the Role Ease, Role Balance and a modified version of the Role Overload scales

(Marks & MacDermid, 1996), the Work-Life Balance Scale (Hill et al., 2001), the

Job Descriptive Index (JDI) and Job in General (JIG) scales (Balzer et al., 1997),

modified version of the Job Competence, Job Aspiration and Job Spill-over

scales (Warr, 1990), a modified version of the short-form Marlowe-Crowne

Social Desirability Scale (Reynolds, 1982), two items measuring the subjective

value given to work-life balance of the respondent and their perceptions of

their partner. The dependent variable in the present study, holistic well-being,

25

was measured using the Mental, Physical and Spiritual Well-being Scale (Vella-

Broderick, 1995). Standard demographic questions, such as; sex, age,

occupation, hours worked, work classification, annual salary, level of education

and relationship status, were included in the study.

Swinburne University Emotional Intelligence Test (Workplace SUEIT). Emotional

Intelligence was assessed by the Workplace Swinburne University Emotional

Intelligence Test (SUEIT). The SUEIT (Palmer & Stough, 2001) is a self-report

instrument comprising sixty-four items, with a balanced number of positively

and negatively worded items. The SUEIT was specifically designed for use in

the workplace, which indexes individuals' perceptions of the way they feel,

think and act at work, with emotions, and on the basis of emotional

information. Respondents are instructed to indicate the extent to which each

statement is true of the way they typically think, feel and act at work using a

five-point scale ranging from 1 (never) to 7 (always). An example item is: “I can

tell how colleagues are feeling at work”.

The SUEIT gives scores on five facets of Emotional Intelligence (EI):

Emotional Recognition and Expression, the extent to which the respondent

perceives their own emotions and how effectively they express those feelings to

others at work; Understanding Emotions, the extent to which the respondent

perceives and understands the emotions of others with whom they work;

Emotions Direct Cognition, the extent to which the respondent considers how

26

they feel about different options when making decisions and how those

different choices might affect both themselves and others emotionally;

Emotional Management, the extent to which the respondent is able to repair

negative moods and emotions and to maintain beneficial positive moods and

emotions both within themselves and others at work and; Emotional Control,

the extent to which the respondent is able to control strong emotions

experienced at work. These emotions include feelings of frustration, anger,

sadness or hostility (Palmer & Stough, 2001). The authors claim good reliability

and internal consistency for the report with reliability coefficients () as

follows; Emotional Recognition and Expression ( = .73); Understanding of

Emotions External ( = .63); Emotions Direct Cognition ( = .83); Emotional

Management ( = 0.72); Emotional Control ( = .72); Total EI Score ( = 0.88)

(Palmer & Stough, 2003).

Job Role Overload Scale. Job Role Overload was measured using a scale initially

developed by Reilly (1982), consisting of thirteen-items. This scale was

subsequently revised to eight-items by Marks & MacDermid (1996) and was

developed to measure role overload for full-time academic students. The scale

has been modified in the present study to reflect a study sample of the general

public. The scale has also been modified to focus on role overload resulting

from the participants’ work only. The scale’s responses are also time period

restricted using the following question predicate - "Considering the past twelve

months only". Individual items on the scale include, “In my job I can’t ever

27

seem to get caught up” and “In my job there are too many demands on my

time”.

The scale uses eight items that are responded to using a seven-point scale

ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). All items are summed

to provide a measure of the respondents retrospective job role overload for the

preceding 12 months, with a higher score indicating greater job role overload.

The authors claim good reliability and internal consistency for the scale with a

reliability coefficient () of .89 (Marks & MacDermid, 1996).

Role Ease Scale. Role Ease was measured using a scale developed by Marks &

MacDermid (1996). The measure defines role ease as any felt ease in carrying

out one’s role performances. The scale was modified in the present study to

reflect a study sample of the general population. The scale’s responses are also

time period restricted using the following question predicate - "Considering the

past twelve months only how easy is it to…". Individual items on the scale

include, ”Have some ‘quality time’ with your friend(s), including phone calls”

and “Maintain contact with your parents”.

The scale uses five items that are responded to using a seven-point scale

ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). All items are summed

to provide a measure of the respondents’ retrospective role ease for the

preceding 12 months, with a higher score indicating greater role ease. The

28

author claims good reliability and internal consistency for the scale with a

reliability coefficient () of .73 (Marks & MacDermid, 1996).

Work-Life Balance Scale. Work-Life Balance was measured using a scale

developed by Hill et al. (2001) and used at International Business Machines

(IBM) to measure employee satisfaction and the ability of employees to balance

the demands of work and their own personal and family life. The scale has

good internal consistency on an internal IBM sample group of n = 6,451 (Hill

Hawkins & Miller, 1996). The scale consists of five-items that measure the

ability of the respondent to balance the demands of work and their own

personal and dual-earner lives. Items include, ”How often do you feel drained

when you go home from work because of work pressures and problems” and

“When I take a vacation, I am able to separate myself from work and enjoy

myself”.

Item one on the scale uses a seven-point response scale ranging from 1

(extremely successful) to 7 (extremely unsuccessful). Item two uses a five-point

response scale ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (almost always). Both items one and

two are reverse scored. The final three items on the Work-Life Balance Scale use

a five-point response scale ranging from 1 (very difficult) to 5 (very easy).

All items are summed to provide a measure of work and life balance with

a higher score indicating greater work-life balance. The author claims good

29

reliability and internal consistency for the scale with a reliability coefficient ()

of .83 (Hill et al., 1996).

Relationship Assessment Scale (RAS). The Relationship Assessment Scale (RAS) is

a global measure of relationship satisfaction developed by Hendrick (1988) and

has been found to be a good predictor of whether couples will stay together or

split apart. The scale, originally consisting of seven-items was modified in the

present study to include five of the seven items of the former scale. Items used

in the present study include; “How much do you love your partner” and “

How often do you wish you hadn’t gotten into the relationship”. Each item

was measured using a five-point response scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5

(extremely). Negative items on the scale are reverse scored and all items are

summed with a higher score indicative of greater relationship satisfaction. The


reliability coefficient () of .86 (Hendrick, 1988).

Role Balance Scale. Role Balance was measured using a scale developed by

Marks & MacDermid (1996). The scale explores the tendency for the

respondent to become fully engaged, alert and mindful in the performance of

every role in their total role system. The scale measures the respondents’:

enjoyment across roles, their ability to focus adequate attention upon a specific

role, their balance of effort across roles and their distribution of importance

30

across roles. Items included within this scale are, “Nowadays I seem to enjoy

every part of my life equally well” and “I try to put a lot of myself into

everything I do”. Role Balance is measured using eight items that are

responded to using a seven-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7

(strongly agree). Three of the items on this scale are reverse scored with a

higher score indicating greater role balance. The authors claim good reliability

and internal consistency for the scale with a reliability coefficient () of .68

(Marks & MacDermid, 1996).

Subjective work-life balance value measure. A two-item measure of the subjective

value the respondents place upon work and personal life balance was included

in the questionnaire. The first item is "What value do you place on your own

need for work/personal life balance?" whilst the second item asked the

respondent to comment on their partner "What value do you perceive your

partner places on their need for work/personal life balance?". Each item was

measured using a 11-point response scale ranging from 0 (not valuable) to 10

(highly valuable) and provides an indication as to whether the individual

places importance on the attainment of work and life balance for themselves

and whether the individual perceives that their partner perceives work and life

balance as valuable.

31

Job Competence Scale. Job competence was measured using a scale developed by

Warr (1990). The scale measures the respondents’ psychological resources (or

mental health) for dealing with experienced difficulties within the domain-

specific context of work. Items in this scale tap into the respondent’s ability to

cope with their current job, rather than absolute levels of occupational ability.

Items included within this scale are, “I can do my job well” and “I find my job

quite difficult”. The job competence scale consists of six items that are

responded to using a five-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5

(strongly agree). Three of the items on this scale are reverse scored with all

items then summed with a higher score indicating greater reported job

competence. The author claims good reliability and internal consistency for the

scale with a reliability coefficient () of .68 (Warr, 1990).

Job Aspiration Scale. Job aspiration was measured using a scale developed by

Warr (1990). The scale measures the respondents’ mental health with respect to

having the capacity to be interested and engaged with the domain-specific

context of work. Items included within this scale are, “I enjoy doing new things

in my job” and “I am not very concerned how things turn out in my job”. The

job aspiration scale consists of six items that are responded to using a five-point

scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Negative items

are reverse scored with all items then summed. Higher score indicating greater

32

reported job aspiration. The author claims good reliability and internal

consistency for the scale with a reliability coefficient () of .62 (Warr, 1990).

Although the reliabilities of the job competence and job aspiration scale

are lower than desired, they were included because they relate conceptually to

perceptions of job satisfaction.

Job Spill-over Scale. Job spill-over was measured using a scale developed by

Warr (1990). The scale measures the respondents’ negative job spill-over only

and as such is interested in the carry-over of job experiences into other

activities and feelings experienced by the respondent. Items included within

this scale are, “After I leave my work, I worry about job problems” and “My job

makes me feel quite exhausted at the end of the workday”. The job spill-over

scale consists of four items that are responded to using a five-point scale

ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Items on the scale are

summed with a higher score indicating greater negative job spill-over. The


reliability coefficient () of .78 (Warr, 1990).

Job Descriptive Index (JDI) and Job In General (JIG) Scale. Work and job satisfaction

was measured using the JDI and JIG scales (Balzer et al., 1997). The JDI

measures the respondents’ present level of work satisfaction in line with five

facets of the responding individuals’ work; work in present job, other co-

33

workers, promotional opportunities, present pay and, supervision. A sixth facet

of the respondents work, satisfaction with the job (in general), is measured

using the JIG scale, and has sometimes been used as a stand-alone measure of

job satisfaction.

The respondents are asked to think about each facet of their present work

separately and are asked to respond, 'yes', 'no', or 'cannot decide' to each of the

words listed to describe that facet of their work. For example, within the work

facet of Present Pay, the phrases and words included, "Barely enough to live

on", "Well paid", "Less than I deserve", and "Insecure".

The two work facets of Opportunities for Promotion and Present Pay

include nine items with the remaining three work facets, and the Job in General

scale, including eighteen items each. Half of the words and phrases are

positively worded with all negatively worded items reverse scored. In

accordance with the user manual for the JDI and JIG a 'yes' response to a

positive item receives 3 points, a 'no' response receives 0 points and a 'cannot

decide' response receives 1 point.

Scores for each of the five facets and the Job In General scale are summed

separately with scores obtained on the two work facets of Opportunities for

Promotion and Present Pay doubled to provide equal comparison between all

34

facets of the respondent’s work and job in general. Higher scores indicate

greater work and job in general satisfaction.

The authors claim good reliability and internal consistency for the report

with reliability coefficients () as follows: Satisfaction with present work ( =

.90); Satisfaction with promotions ( = .87); Satisfaction with supervision ( =

.91); Satisfaction with co-workers ( = 0.91); Satisfaction with present pay ( =

.86); Satisfaction with job in general ( = 0.92) (Balzer et al., 1997).

Mental, Physical and Spiritual Well-being Scale (MPS Scale). The MPS Scale is a

30-item instrument that incorporates mental, physical and spiritual subscales

developed by Vella-Brodrick (1995). Each of the three subscales consists of 10

items, each measuring positive aspects of the three facets of health as well as

some appraisal of illness and sickness.

The mental subscale defines optimal mental functioning as a desire to

increase knowledge, to develop an appreciation of aesthetics and to use

rational cognitive processes. Individual items in this 10-item subscale include;

"Do you watch quiz programs", Do you read novels" and "Do you think before

you act".

The physical subscale focuses on aspects of the respondents’ physical

health, specifically objective and measurable health and illness. Individual

35

items in this 10-item subscale include; "Over the past year, have you suffered

from nausea and/or vomiting" and "Over the past year, have you gone on a

diet to lose or gain weight".

The spiritual subscale explores two dimensions of spirituality, religious

and existential. The former explores religious aspects of spirituality, namely

the respondent’s relationship with a higher being, whilst the latter focuses on

the development of self, by focusing on issues relating to ethics, morality, self

actualization, self worth, self purpose and, peace with one's self. Individual

items in this 10-item subscale include; "Do you engage in thoughtful

discussions about ethical or moral issues", "Do you discuss maters of the spirit

(eg: purpose of life, religion, inner peace, death etc)." and "During difficult

times do you reach out for spiritual help (eg: God, or a higher being, church or

place of worship, prayer, priest, etc.)"

Each of the 30 items is responded to using a five-point scale ranging from

1 (never) to 5 (often). Negatively worded items are reverse-scored with all

items summed to provide measures of mental, physical and spiritual well-

being. A higher score on each of the subscales, as well as the overall health

assessment, indicates greater level mental, physical, spiritual and overall well-

being.

36

The author claims good reliability and internal consistency for the report

with reliability coefficients () as follows; Mental well-being ( =.75); Physical

well-being ( = .81); Spiritual well-being ( = .85) (Vella-Brodrick & Allen,

1995).

Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale. Social desirability was measured using

a modified version of the short-version of the Marlowe-Crowne Social

Desirability Scale-Form C (Reynolds, 1982). The short-version consists of

thirteen items answered in a true-false manner, with several of the items

negatively worded. In the present study the instrument used a five-point scale

ranging from 1 (true) to 5 (false). Negatively worded items are reverse scored

and then all items were reverse scored and summed with a higher score on this

scale is indicative of more socially desirable responses. The author claims good

reliability and validity for the scale with a reliability coefficient () of .76

(Reynolds, 1982). This level of reliability compares favorably with the original

33-item scale despite its reduced number of items (Reynolds, 1982).

Procedure

All participants were recruited via word by mouth of the researcher.

Criteria for participation in the present study included: no children or other

dependents reliant upon the participant, 25 - 35 years of age and currently

engaged in some form of paid employment. Data was collected using a self-

37

report questionnaire. Questionnaires were supplied with a reply paid envelope

and respondents were instructed to complete the questionnaire and return to

Swinburne University of Technology using the reply paid envelope.

Each questionnaire provided to the subject included a “Checklist for

Participation” outlining the criteria for participation in the present study and a

covering letter explaining the purpose of the research and informing

prospective participants that their participation was voluntary and that all

responses would remain confidential. Of the 240 questionnaires distributed 51

were returned, equating to a 21.25% return rate.

Results

No respondents’ were eliminated from the study due to incomplete

responses. The data collected was analyzed using SPSS Version 11.5.0.

The means, standard deviations, theoretical ranges and internal

consistency reliabilities (Cronbach’s ) for all variables and sub-tests measured

are presented in Table 1.

38

Table 1 Means, standard deviations, internal consistency reliabilities (coefficient alpha), theoretical means and theoretical ranges for the different measures (N = 51)

Measure Mean (M) SD Theoretical

Range Alpha

Coefficient Emotional recognition/expression

36.88 5.37 11-55 .78

Understanding others’ emotions

73.94 8.09 20-100 .87

Emotions direct cognition 33.76 5.39 12-60 .75

Emotional management 39.75 5.48 12-60 .78

Emotional control 30.98 4.30 9-45 .60

Total Emotional Intelligence 215.31 20.39 64-320 .91

Social desirability 37.51 5.60 13-65 .60

Relationship satisfaction 22.82 2.17 7-35 .73

Present work satisfaction 36.57 16.39 0-54 .94

Co-worker satisfaction 37.86 13.65 0-54 .86

Promotion satisfaction 29.08 16.03 0-27 .84

Pay satisfaction 28.08 7.78 0-27 .75

Supervisor satisfaction 36.82 12.07 0-54 .82

Job in general satisfaction 36.75 13.55 0-54 .92

Job role overload 31.43 14.31 8-56 .96

Role ease 21.86 7.27 5-35 .90

Role balance 32.61 6.43 8-56 .60

Work-life balance 16.69 4.52 5-25 .75

Job competence 23.14 3.90 6-30 .69

Job aspiration 23.04 4.37 6-30 .69

Negative job spill-over 11.49 4.63 4-20 .89

Mental well-being 31.10 5.52 10-50 .63

Physical well-being 32.31 7.10 10-50 .77

39

Table 1 continued

Measure Mean (M) SD Theoretical Range

Alpha Coefficient

Spiritual well-being 25.29 7.86 10-50 .88

Work-life balance value (self)* 8.35 1.88 0-10 -

Work-life balance value (partner)*

8.04 1.97 0-10 -

Note: * Single item

In general, the means, standard deviations and alpha coefficients were

similar to those previously reported. Data tended to be moderately negatively

skewed but it was considered insufficient to warrant statistical transformation

towards normality.

Although a sizeable battery of measures was used in the study, participant

fatigue was apparently not a problem. There were no anomalies in the data

upon inspection and scales administered towards the end of the questionnaire

battery still yielded adequate internal consistencies.

Results yielded for the subjective work-life balance (self and partner) value

questions indicate that work-life balance is important for this sample (M = 8.35,

SD = 1.88). Sex differences were found in the mean scores on only two

measures. Males had higher scores on emotions direct cognition and females

had a higher score on the satisfaction with co-worker measure. All other

measures found no significant difference between males and females.

40

Combined responses for males and females are used in the data analysis of this

study.

Validating the selection of the study’s three key independent variables Job satisfaction. In order to determine the appropriateness of using the variable;

job in general satisfaction (JIG; Balzer et al., 1997), as a key measure of job

satisfaction, Pearson’s correlation coefficients were calculated between this

variable and other workplace measures. The Pearson’s correlation coefficients

for JIG and other measures of work are shown in Table 2.

As shown from Table 2, JIG was not correlated with social desirability and

was highly correlated with the sub-tests on the Job Descriptive Index (Balzer et

al., 1997). The correlation with Pay satisfaction was not significant. However

present level of salary was moderately positively correlated with JIG. Job

aspiration was significantly positively correlated with JIG, although job

competence was not significantly correlated.

Job role overload and negative job spill-over were significantly negatively

correlated with JIG whilst work-life balance was significantly positively

correlated with JIG.

41

Table 2 Correlation coefficients between JIG, other workplace measures and related demographic variables (N = 51)

Measure JIG

Age .21

Job status (1=F/T, 2=P/T, 3=Casual, 4=Other)

.15

Management status (1=manage others, 2=not managing)

-.21

Average hours worked .09

Average hours worked un-paid .21

Salary level .38**

Education level .08

Work-life balance value (self) .01

Work-life balance value (partner) .02

Present work satisfaction .87***

Co-worker satisfaction .72***

Promotion satisfaction .51***

Pay satisfaction -.03

Supervisor satisfaction .64***

Job role overload -.34*

Work-life balance .43**

Job competence .01

Job aspiration .52***

Negative job spill-over -.41**

Social desirability -.12

Note: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 (two-tailed significance)

42

These results imply that JIG is a state driven by an individual’s internal

and intra-personal resources and circumstances related to the internal

workings of one’s workplace system.

A number of simultaneous regressions were undertaken to best predict the

degree to which the workplace measures used in the study accounted for the

key variable of job in general satisfaction. Table 3 shows the final regression.

Tabachnick and Fidell (1989) recommend the elimination of a variable

with a correlation coefficient greater than r = 0.70 with a key variable in a

regression equation due to multicollinearity. Both work on present job

satisfaction and satisfaction with co-worker were eliminated from the

regression equation due to their high degree of multicollinearity with the key

variable of job in general satisfaction (r = .87, p < .001 and r = .72, p < .001,

respectively).

Table 3 Simultaneous regression analysis predicting JIG (N = 50)

Predictor Beta () t R R2 R2

.76 .51 .57

Job aspiration .34 3.30**

Supervision satisfaction .44 3.97***

Promotion satisfaction .22 2.03*

Note: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001

43

The model was significant and accounted for 57.1% of the variance in job

in general satisfaction (F (3, 47) = 20.38, p < 0.001). Each variable was a

significant predictor and thus added uniquely to the prediction of job in

general satisfaction in the regression model.

Relationship satisfaction. The Relationship Assessment Scale (RAS; Hendrick,

1988) was selected as the key variable to measure relationship satisfaction and

Pearson’s correlation coefficients were calculated for this variable with other

measures. The Pearson’s correlation coefficients for RAS and other measures

are shown in Table 4.

Table 4 Correlation coefficients between relationship satisfaction (RAS), other measures and related demographic variables (N = 51)

Measure Relationship satisfaction

Age -.02

Average hours worked .06

Average hours worked un-paid -.04

Relationship length .27



Work-life balance .26

Role ease .45***

Job role overload -.12

Negative job spill-over -.32*



44

As shown from Table 4 relationship satisfaction, was not significantly

correlated with social desirability. The measure of relationship satisfaction was

significantly positively correlated with role ease and significantly negatively

correlated with negative job spill-over.

Role Balance. In order to determine the suitability of using role balance (Marks &

MacDermid, 1996) as the key variable measuring work-life balance Pearson’s

correlation coefficients were calculated for this variable with work-life balance

measures. The Pearson’s correlation coefficients for role balance and other

work-life balance measures are in Table 5.

As shown from Table 5, role balance (Marks & MacDermid, 1996) is

significantly positively correlated with role ease and work-life balance. Role

balance is highly significantly negatively correlated with negative job spill-over

and moderately significantly negatively correlated with job role overload.

Interestingly, role balance is significantly positively correlated with job

status indicating that role balance decreases with full time employment. This

assumption is further supported by role balance being moderately and

significantly negatively correlated with average working hours. Incidentally, as

the number of hours worked increases work-to-life spill-over also increases

resulting in reduced personal time and work-to-life conflict (r = .28, p < 0.05).

45

Table 5 Correlation coefficients between the key variable of role balance, other work-life balance measures and related demographic variables (N = 51)

Measure Role Balance

Age .18

Average hours worked -.30*

Average hours worked un-paid -.16

Job status (1=F/T, 2=P/T, 3=Casual, 4=Other)

.26

Salary level -.09

Education level .16



Role ease .59***

Work-life balance .51***

Job role overload -.31*

Negative job spill-over -.43**



A number of hierarchical regressions were undertaken to determine which

of the work-life balance measures best accounted for the variance in scores for

the key variable of role balance. Table 6 shows the final hierarchical regression.

The measure of work-life balance was entered into the regression equation

first as this measure is purported to predict an individuals’ overall work-life

balance. Role ease was entered second into the regression equation as it was

46

thought that this measure would indicate the ease with which the individual

maintained work-life balance.

Table 6 Hierarchical regression analysis predicting role balance (N = 50)


STEP 1 .51 .26 .26

Work-life balance .51 4.15***

STEP 2 .60 .35 .09

Work-life balance .06 .30

Role ease .54 2.63*

Note: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001

The hierarchical regression model accounted for 26% of the variance in

role balance scores using the variable of work-life balance at Step 1 (F (1, 49) =

17.23, p < 0.001), and then 35.4% of the variance in role balance scores once role

ease was added (F (2, 48) = 13.13, p < 0.001) at Step 2. The model demonstrates

that role ease, how well one organizes one’s life, mediates the effect of work-life

balance when predicting the variability in role balance scores.

Predicting role balance from job satisfaction, relationship satisfaction and emotional intelligence

Table 7 shows the Pearson’s correlation coefficients of the two key

variables, job satisfaction (JIG; Balzer et al., 1997) and relationship satisfaction

(RAS; Hendrick, 1988), the five dimensions of emotional intelligence, total

emotional intelligence and social desirability, with the variable of role balance.

47

Table 7 Correlation coefficients between Role Balance and its predictor variables, JIG, relationship satisfaction and the five dimensions of emotional intelligence (N = 51)

Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 Role balance

2 Job satisfaction .45**

3 Relationship satisfaction .27 .35*

4 Emotional recognition/expression

.22 .12 .23

5 Understanding others’ emotions

-.00 .21 .23 .52

6 Emotion’s direct cognition .16 .07 .20 .49*** .28

7 Emotional management .32* .47*** .31* .45*** .56*** .39**

8 Emotional control .45*** .39** .06 .18 .22 -.06 .55***

9 Total Emotional Intelligence .27 .34* .30* .759*** .81*** .60*** .83*** .48***

10 Social desirability -.17 -.12 -.02 -.00 .04 .19 -.16 -.44*** -.07


48

Social desirability was significantly correlated with the emotional

intelligence dimension of emotional control. The negative relationship

demonstrates that as an individual’s awareness of their own emotional

repertoire increases and their ability to control the extremes of these emotions

Table 7 indicates that although the five dimensions of emotional

intelligence do significantly correlate with each other multicollinearity is not

apparent (Tabachnick & Fidell, 1989).

Job satisfaction was significantly positively correlated with the emotional

intelligence dimensions of emotional management and emotional control,

whilst relationship satisfaction had a moderate and significant positive

correlation with the emotional intelligence dimension of emotional

management.

Role balance was significantly positively correlated with job satisfaction

but not with relationship satisfaction. However a significant positive

correlation was found between job satisfaction and relationship satisfaction.

Two dimensions of emotional intelligence, emotions direct cognition and

emotional control were significantly correlated with role balance. This implies

that role balance is related to by how an individual feels about different roles

when making decisions, and that role balance is also related to an individual’s

ability to manage and control the extremes of their emotions.

49

(e.g., extreme anger) increases also, their tendency to respond with socially

desirable responses with respect to possible outbursts in the extremes of their

emotions (for example, “I never get really angry”) decreases.

A hierarchical regression was undertaken to determine the role that

relationship satisfaction, job satisfaction and total emotional intelligence had in

predicting the variance in role balance scores. Relationship satisfaction and job

satisfaction were entered at Step 1 and total emotional intelligence at Step 2.

Table 8 shows the hierarchical regression.

Table 8 Hierarchical regression analysis predicting role balance using the variables relationship satisfaction, job satisfaction and total emotional intelligence (N = 50)


STEP 1 .45 .20 .20

Relationship satisfaction .15 1.04

Job satisfaction .38 2.70**

STEP 2 .46 .21 .01

Relationship satisfaction .12 .85

Job satisfaction .34 2.36*

Total emotional intelligence .12 .84

Note: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001


role balance scores using the variables of relationship satisfaction and job

satisfaction (F (2, 47) = 5.91, p < 0.01) and 21% of the variance in role balance

scores when total emotional intelligence was added (F (3, 46) = 4.15, p < 0.05).

50

However, only job satisfaction was a significant predictor of role balance in the

regression equation.

A number of subsequent regression analyses were undertaken, using the

five dimensions of emotional intelligence, to determine which aspects of

emotional intelligence could be used to predict the variability in role balance

scores. Table 9 shows the hierarchical regression with the greatest predictive

power.

Table 9 Hierarchical regression predicting role balance using the variables relationship satisfaction, job satisfaction and emotional intelligence dimensions (N = 50)


STEP 1 .45 .20 .20



STEP 2 .61 .37 .17


Job satisfaction .27 1.91

Emotional recognition/expression .24 1.68

Understanding others’ emotions -.31 -2.13*

Emotional control .35 2.65*

Note: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001

The hierarchical regression model accounted for 20.1% of the variance in

role balance scores using the variables of relationship satisfaction and job

satisfaction (F (2, 47) = 5.91, p < 0.01) and 37.3% of the variance in role balance

scores once the dimensions of emotional intelligence, emotional

recognition/expression and understanding others’ emotions and emotional

51

control were added (F (5, 44) = 5.23, p < 0.001). At Step 2 the emotional

intelligence dimension of emotional control was significant as was the

dimension of understanding others’ emotions. This latter statistic is interesting

as it indicates that by reducing your emotional intelligence with respect to

understanding others’ emotions, role balance improves. The emotional

intelligence dimensions of emotional control and understanding others’

emotions appear to mediate the effect of job satisfaction in predicting the

variance in role balance scores.

Predicting the role relationship satisfaction, job satisfaction, emotional intelligence and role balance has on mental, physical and spiritual well-being

The Pearson’s correlations between the three dependent variables mental,

physical and spiritual well-being and pertinent demographic variables are

shown in Table 10.

As shown in Table 10 relationship satisfaction is highly positively

correlated with physical well-being but not with mental or spiritual well-being.

Satisfaction with job in general is positively correlated with mental well-being

and moderately positively correlated with physical well-being but not spiritual

well-being.

52

Table 10 Correlations between dependent and independent measures (N = 51)

Measure Mental

well-being Physical

well-being Spiritual

well-being Sex (1 = male, 2 = female) .21 -.28 .14

Age -.07 -.01 -.12

Average hours worked -.18 -.19 -.10

Average hours worked un-paid .02 -.22 .01

Salary .06 -.09 -.10

Education .04 -.05 .12

Relationship status .03 -.05 .05

Relationship length .14 .21 -.09

Emotional recognition/expression .16 .27 .18

Understanding others’ emotions .24 .28 .24

Emotions direct cognition -.04 .17 .18

Emotional management .36* .17 .25

Emotional control .46** .19 .41**

Total Emotional Intelligence .33* .32* .35*

Relationship satisfaction .16 .46** .11

Present work satisfaction .34* .14 .09

Co-worker satisfaction .38* .19 .14

Promotion satisfaction .08 -.06 -.20

Pay satisfaction .09 .12 .01

Supervisor satisfaction .30 .24 -.09

Job in general satisfaction .44** .31* .20

Job role overload -.28 -.53*** -.24

Role ease .39** .61*** .27

Role balance .50*** .34* .20

Work-life balance .40** .55*** .18

Job competence .30* .43** .40**

Job aspiration .22* .15 -.04

Negative job spill-over -.42** -.57*** -.32*

Mental well-being - .18 .47***

Physical well-being .18 - .25

Spiritual well-being .47*** .25 -

Social desirability -.18 -.24 .06


53

The measures of work-life balance and role balance; job role overload, role

ease, role balance, work-life balance and negative job spill-over, are correlated

with physical well-being with all but job role overload significantly correlated

with mental well-being.

Role ease, role balance and work-life balance are all significantly

positively correlated with mental well-being and physical well-being. Job role

overload and negative job spill-over are significantly negatively correlated with

both mental well-being and physical well-being but not with spiritual well-

being. Only negative job spill-over is significantly negatively correlated with

spiritual well-being.

As shown in Table 10 total emotional intelligence is significantly positively

correlated with mental, physical and spiritual-well-being. The sub-dimensions

of, emotional management and emotional control seem to account for this

significance with both emotional management and emotional control

significantly positively correlated with mental well-being and emotional

control significantly positively correlated with spiritual well-being.

Interestingly job competence, a measure of one’s psychological resources

(or mental health) for dealing or coping with experienced difficulties in one’s

current job, is significantly positively correlated with mental, physical and

54

spiritual well-being, suggesting that enhancing holistic well-being may only be

possible once one is coping in the important domain of work.

A number of hierarchical regression analyses were performed to

determine the degree of predictability the key variables, relationship

satisfaction, job satisfaction, emotional intelligence, including the five

dimensions of emotional intelligence, and role balance had in predicting the

variability of mental, physical and spiritual well-being scores.

Mental well-being. A three step hierarchical regression was conducted to predict

mental well-being. Job satisfaction and relationship satisfaction were entered

at Step 1, total emotional intelligence at Step 2 and role balance at Step 3. The

results of this regression are in Table 11.


mental well-being scores using the variables of relationship satisfaction and job

satisfaction (F (2, 47) = 5.95, p < 0.01), with job satisfaction found to be a

statistically significant predictor of mental well-being at Step 1.

55

Table 11 Hierarchical regression analysis predicting mental well-being (N = 50)


STEP 1 .45 .20 .20



STEP 2 .48 .23 .03


Job satisfaction .36 2.51*

Total emotional intelligence .19 1.35

STEP 3 .55 .30 .07



Total emotional intelligence .16 1.13

Role balance .30 2.12*

Note: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001

A further 3% of the variability in mental well-being was significantly predicted

at Step 2 after the inclusion of total emotional intelligence into the regression

equation (F (3, 46) = 4.64, p < 0.01), with job satisfaction remaining as the only

significant predictor of mental well-being. Role balance was entered into the

regression model at Step 3 and accounted for a further 7% of the variance in

mental well-being scores (F (4, 45) = 4.87, p < 0.01). The results indicate that at

Step 3 role balance mediates the effect of job satisfaction in accounting for the

variance in mental well-being scores.

A number of additional hierarchical regression analyses were also

performed to determine what predictability the five dimensions of total

emotional intelligence had in determining the variability of mental well-being

56

scores. Only the regression analysis with the greatest predictability has been

reported.

A three step hierarchical regression was conducted to predict mental well-

being. Job satisfaction and relationship satisfaction were entered at Step 1, the

emotional intelligence dimension of emotional control at Step 2 and role

balance at Step 3. The results of this regression are in Table 12.

Table 12 Hierarchical regression analysis predicting mental well-being (N = 50)


STEP 1 .45 .20 .20



STEP 2 .54 .30 .09



Emotional control .33 2.47*

STEP 3 .58 .33 .04



Emotional control .26 1.80

Role balance .23 1.54

Note: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001


mental well-being scores using the variables of relationship satisfaction and job

satisfaction (F (2, 47) = 5.95, p < 0.01), with job satisfaction found to be a

statistically significant predictor of mental well-being at Step 1. A further 9.3%

of the variability in mental well-being was predicted at Step 2 after the

57

inclusion of emotional control into the regression equation (F (3, 46) = 6.42, p <

0.001), with job satisfaction no longer a significant predictor of mental well-

being. The results generated at Step 2 indicate that the emotional intelligence

dimension of emotional control mediates the effect of job satisfaction on mental

well-being. Role balance was entered into the regression model at Step 3 and

accounted for a further 3.5% of the variance in mental well-being scores (F (4,

45) = 5.56, p < 0.001). The results indicate that at Step 3 neither emotional

control nor role balance uniquely and independently account for the variance

in mental well-being scores.

Physical well-being. A three step hierarchical regression was conducted on the

dependent variable of physical well-being. Job satisfaction and relationship

satisfaction were entered at Step 1, total emotional intelligence at Step 2 and

role balance at Step 3. The results of this regression are in Table 13.


physical well-being scores using the variables of relationship satisfaction and

job satisfaction (F (2, 47) = 5.50, p < 0.01), with relationship satisfaction found to

be a statistically significant predictor of mental well-being at Step 1. Neither

the addition of total emotional intelligence or role balance at Step 2 and Step 3

respectively added significantly to the prediction of physical well-being.

58

Table 13 Hierarchical regression analysis predicting physical well-being (N = 50)


STEP 1 .44 .19 .19

Relationship satisfaction .37 2.62*

Job satisfaction .14 .99

STEP 2 .44 .19 .00




STEP 3 .44 .19 .00




Role balance .03 .18

Note: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001


performed to determine the predictability of the five dimensions of total

emotional intelligence had in determining the variability of physical well-being

scores. None added to the predictability of physical well-being.

Spiritual well-being. A three step hierarchical regression was conducted on

the dependent variable of spiritual well-being. Job satisfaction and relationship

satisfaction were entered at Step 1, total emotional intelligence at Step 2 and

role balance at Step 3. The results of this regression are in Table 14.

59

Table 14 Hierarchical regression analysis predicting spiritual well-being (N = 50)


STEP 1 .23 .05 .05



STEP 2 .37 .14 .09

Relationship satisfaction -.06 -.37


Total emotional intelligence .32 2.17*

STEP 3 .38 .15 .01

Relationship satisfaction -.07 -.43


Total emotional intelligence .31 2.07*

Role balance .09 .57

Note: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001


spiritual well-being scores using the variables of relationship satisfaction and

job satisfaction (F (2, 47) = 1.28, p > 0.05), with neither job satisfaction nor

relationship satisfaction found to be a statistically significant predictor of

spiritual well-being at Step 1. A further 8.8% of the variability in spiritual well-

being was predicted at Step 2 after the inclusion of total emotional intelligence

into the regression equation (F (3, 46) = 2.49, p > 0.05). Emotional intelligence

was a significant predictor of spiritual well-being at Step 2.

Role balance was entered into the regression model at Step 3 and did not

account for any additional variance in physical well-being scores.

60


performed to determine the predictability of the five dimensions of total

emotional intelligence had in determining the variability of spiritual well-being

scores. Only emotional control was found to be a significant predictor,

behaving in a similar fashion to total emotional intelligence as reported above.

Discussion

Key Findings

In finding out what is going on for the sample demographic selected for

the study it was necessary to explore the person’s role system, including the

many and varied predictors that have the potential to impact upon a total

system. The issue of inadequate sample size is endemic to studies of role

balance and work-life balance and is one of necessity (Marks, Huston, Johnson

& MacDermid, 2001). Caution should therefore be exercised when interpreting

the findings presented for this study due the large ratio of variables to sample

size.

The focus of the present study was threefold. First an exploration of what

defines work-life balance for Generation X and what roles impact on one’s level

of work-life balance; second, how does one improve their experience of the

61

factors that determine one’s work-life balance; and third, what is the impact of

one’s perceived work-life balance upon one’s holistic well-being?

A significant relationship was found between relationship satisfaction and

job satisfaction in the present study, supporting the study’s first hypothesis.

The result implies a spill-over association between the two roles of relationship

and work, for Generation X. This finding is not surprising and supports

previous research (e.g., Allen, Herts, Bruck & Sutton, 2000; Barnett, 1994;

Grzywacz & Marks, 2000; Judge, Watanabe, 1994; Kinnunen et al., 2002).

Contrary to the initial hypotheses of the Marks and MacDermid (1996)

expecting a non-hierarchical architecture for role balance, their data suggested

that work-life balance actually becomes one of hierarchical allocation of role

performances during times of greater role overload. More important roles are

allocated a greater subjective weighting in order to assist the individual to

determine the allocation of their limited internal resources (Aryee & Luk, 1996).

The present study was interested in how Generation X balanced the two major

roles of an intimate relationship and employment in the absence of children in

the relationship. The results of the present study are provocative in indicating

how the sample demographic selected in the study, Generation X, weight the

two roles of relationship and work.

62

Although relationship satisfaction and job satisfaction were significantly

positively correlated with each other, only job satisfaction was significantly

correlated with role balance, the study’s key measure of work-life balance. In

the subsequent hierarchical regression predicting role balance, job satisfaction

and relationship satisfaction accounted for 20.2% of the variance in role

balance, with only job satisfaction being a significant predictor of work-life

balance.

This result suggests that relationship satisfaction does not significantly

impact upon one’s perceived work-life balance but indicates the importance of

job satisfaction on work-life balance. This finding implies that for Generation X

a greater weighting is proffered to job satisfaction and maintaining a high

degree of happiness within one’s work, at the possible jeopardy of relationship

satisfaction. This result is contradictory to research recently undertaken by

Milkie & Peltola (1999) that suggested that marital satisfaction was a significant

predictor of work-life satisfaction for both spouses.

The ramifications of this for one’s relationship are significant. If the

demands of one’s work increase, for example work intensity or working hours,

one may be tempted (or forced) to allocate more of one’s internal and time

resources in maintaining job satisfaction. As a result of the higher role

performance weighting for job and job satisfaction, the individual may

continue to re-allocate internal and time resources to work to the point where

63

negative job spillover becomes an issue for the individual. At this point there is

very likely to be a detrimental impact upon relationship satisfaction.

Research also suggests that with the changing make-up of the modern

family, relationship satisfaction and its impact of work-life balance is an

increasingly tenuous one. Netemeyer , Boles and McMurrian (1996) in research

in work-family conflict for middle-aged families with children suggested that

marital satisfaction was not impacted upon by work-to-family spillover.

However other research reported by Kinnunen et al. (2002), with a similar

sample demographic to Netemeyer et al., found contradictory results; marital

satisfaction was significantly and negatively impacted upon by increased

work-to-family spillover.

In short, work-life balance is primarily dependent on one’s ability to

maintain job satisfaction. The results of the present study suggest that this can

be facilitated by minimising the volatility of workplace demands (e.g., reduce

the quantity of work required), developing acceptable supervisor and co-

worker relationships, maintaining interest and motivation in one’s present

work, and to a lesser degree, ensuring equity between one’s pay and the

perceived value of work undertaken (refer Table 2 & Table 3). Further, the ease

with which one is able to navigate or cope with workplace demands also assists

in preserving one’s work-life balance. Indeed role ease appears to be a function

64

of how well an individual organizes their role performances, more so than

what or how much they actually undertake (Marks & MacDermid, 1996).

The present study was also interested how Generation X can improve

their experience of work-life balance, specifically their experience of the two

key roles explored in the study, job satisfaction and relationship satisfaction.

Drawing upon the work of Johnson (1991) and his phenomenological study of

personal, moral and structural commitment within social systems, Marks and

Macdermid (1996) recommended that future research into role balance focus on

the construct from a personal perspective more than the moral or structural

perspective. Rather than attempting to a reallocate one’s time more equitably

between various role performances, work-life balance is more sustainable by

changing one’s attitude towards one’s own work-life balance, from a “have to”

and “ought to” attitude towards a “want to” attitude. Put another way

obtaining work-life balance is a case of changing one’s perspective of one’s own

work-life balance.

The current study followed this suggestion and emotional intelligence

was selected for exploration, as previous research had reported that emotions

influence the way a situation is perceived (Chan & Margolin, 1994; Seligman,

2000; Spector & Goh, 2001). In other words, emotions influence one‘s

subjective and situational attitude. It was expected that developing one’s

emotional intelligence this way would positively impact upon an individual’s

65

relationship satisfaction, job satisfaction and attitude towards work-life

balance.

Emotional intelligence was expected to predict role balance beyond that

already predicted by job satisfaction and relationship satisfaction. This

hypothesis was supported. Total emotional intelligence was not a significant

predictor, however understanding others’ emotions and emotional control, two

dimensions of total emotional intelligence, did mediate the effect of job

satisfaction in predicting role balance.

Understanding others’ emotions negatively predicted role balance

suggesting, perhaps counter-intuitively, that one must reduce one’s emotional

intelligence in this dimension in order to enhance one’s role balance. Ciarrochi,

Deane and Anderson (2002) found a similar result when looking at the role of

emotional intelligence in stress management. These researchers suggested that

individuals who are high on the emotional intelligence dimensions of

emotional perception (e.g., understanding others’ emotions) have an increased

risk of being susceptible to the adverse consequences of stress, presumably due

to a greater competence in perceiving and empathizing with how badly others

are also dealing with the situation. Obviously reducing one’s capacity to

understand others’ emotions is counter-intuitive to the role emotional

intelligence plays with facilitating effective social functioning. However the

results of the present study demonstrate that in trying to understand, please

66

and empathize with others our capacity to maintain personal role balance is

reduced.

Role balance was also significantly predicted by emotional control, one’s

ability to regulate the extremes of one’s emotions. This result is not surprising

and suggests work-life balance is determined by coping ability more so than

what or how much is actually undertaken (Marks & MacDermid, 1996).

One’s ability to facilitate successful coping and prevent unhelpful

rumination, panic or stress is determined by one’s ability to effectively manage

and control emotions and react in a personally constructive and effective way

(Ciarrochi et al., 2002; Salovey, Bedell, Detweiler & Mayer, 1999). As the

pressures of work-life imbalance increase, instead of viewing the situation as

stressful, taxing or exceeding their resources, an individual’s cognitive or

behavioural efforts to control or manage the situation is influenced by their

emotional control (Gardner & Stough, 2003; Kinnunen et al., 2003; Lazarus &

Folkman, 1984).

Further research into the role of emotional intelligence in facilitating

effective work-life balance is needed. The findings of the present research are

encouraging and future research is required to validate the findings found in

this study.

67

The impact of effective and ineffective role balance upon one’s holistic

health, specifically one’s mental, physical and spiritual well-being, was also

explored in this study. The hypotheses that role balance would account for

additional variance in mental, physical and spiritual well-being scores above

that already accounted for by job satisfaction, relationship satisfaction and

emotional intelligence were partially supported.

Mental well-being can be likened to one’s desire for challenge, to increase

knowledge and enhance the complexity of one’s cognitive processes. The

development of self (or “maximal self”; Seligman, 2000) and the obtainment of

the peak state of flow is a process of increasing one’s complexity, by continual

differentiation and integration (Csikszentmihalyi, 1992). Mental well-being

allows the possibility of achieving flow. Mental well-being is not available to an

individual during times of coping or survival (Csikszentmihalyi, 1992;

Seligman, 2000).

Previous research has explored the role of lower job satisfaction on mental

ill-health (e.g., Myers et al., 2000; Seligman, 2000; Witmer, Rich, Barcikowski &

Mague, 1983) and negative emotionality, anxiety, ineffective coping and stress

symptomology (Compton et al., 1996; Csikszentmihalyi, 1992). In this previous

research significant causal relationships were found between mental ill-health

and these aforementioned variables was found. The results gained in the

68

present study indicate that greater job satisfaction, work-life balance and

emotional control do result in greater mental well-being.

It was proposed that one’s physical well-being would also be impacted

upon by the experience of work-life balance. Thus it was expected that both

satisfaction with one’s job and satisfaction with one’s relationship would

significantly influence physical well-being. The present study found that

relationship and job satisfaction accounted for 19% of the variance in physical

well-being, with relationship satisfaction being the significant predictor. Hafen

et al. (1992) found a similar result, stating that regardless of gender, committed

and positive relationships protect against physical (and mental) illness and

increase a sense of well-being. Surprisingly, emotional intelligence was not a

significant predictor of physical well-being. Gardner & Stough (2003) account

for this discrepancy suggesting that although there is research into emotions

and physical health there is little validated and substantiated research into

emotional intelligence and specifically physical health.

The non-significant relationship between emotional intelligence and

physical well-being in the present study may also be an artifact of the

emotional intelligence measure used in the present study. The SUIET was

primarily developed as a workplace measure of emotional intelligence (Palmer

& Stough, 2001) and therefore may not adequately tap into non-work aspects of

an individual’s emotional behaviour. This would also explain the non-

69

significant relationship between relationship satisfaction and each of the five

dimensions of emotional intelligence in the present study.

Spirituality has been defined as an awareness of a being or force that

transcends the material aspects of life (Csikszentmihalyi, 1992; Myers et al.,

2000). Spiritual well-being is the pursuit of self development, encompassing

aspects of existentialism, religiosity and life purpose, morality and ethics, peace

with oneself, and self actualization (Csikszentmihalyi, 1992; Vella-Brodrick,

1995). Spirituality has been conceptualized as a core characteristic of healthy

people (Seaward, 1995) with spiritual well-being as the source of all other well-

being (Chandler, Holden & Kolander, 1992), including mental well-being

(Westgate, 1996) and physical well-being (Larson & Larson, 1991).

It was proposed that spiritual well-being would be impacted upon by the

experience of work-life balance. It was expected that both satisfaction with

one’s job and satisfaction with one’s relationship would significantly influence

spiritual well-being. However, spiritual well-being was poorly predicted in the

present study. Spiritual well-being was not predicted by relationship

satisfaction or job satisfaction suggesting that for Generation X spiritual well-

being is developed individually, unrelated to social or romantic relationships.

What is interesting is that the sample used in the present study scored higher

than the norm for a general sample of men and women on the spiritual well-

being scale, when compared to mental and physical well-being (Vella-Brodrick,

70

1995). This suggests that although the variables measured in the current study

did not significantly predict spiritual well-being, Generation X are more

interested in self-development and enhancing personal self-actualization, than

they are in mental and physical well-being.

Spiritual well-being was significantly predicted by emotional intelligence

in the present study. Total emotional intelligence accounted for 8.8% of the

variance in spiritual well-being scores beyond relationship and job satisfaction.

Subsequent regression analyses found emotional control to be the significant

predictor dimension of emotional intelligence. Maslow (1954, cited in Papalia &

Wendkos-Olds, 1992) suggests that self-actualization is only possible with an

appreciation for the richness of emotional reactivity. More recently, research

into spirituality and emotional education in children has indicated that it is

emotions, not cognition, that brings consciousness of the moral and spiritual

aspects of life (Scheindlin, 2003). The same research suggests that educators

need to promote rich emotional engagement, the experience of emotional

intensity and the targeting of the language of emotion as a preparatory step

toward developing relational consciousness and spiritual awakening. The

present research supports these past findings and suggests that emotional

intelligence and the experiencing and understanding of all emotions helps to

enhance spiritual well-being. Further research is needed into the key

determinants of spiritual well-being. However emotional intelligence appears

to be one variable that deserves attention.

71

Implications

The findings of the present study provide evidence of the key role that

work has in facilitating work-life balance for Generation X. By overloading

individuals with work commitments, organizations decrease an individual’s

self-perceived competence for the work they undertake, and with it work-life

balance (Wiersma, 1994). Alternatively, by providing individuals with the

opportunity to competently complete work undertaken, and by generating

flexibility in how they undertake that work commitment, then one’s perceived

role ease increases and with it one’s work-life balance. The incentive for

organizations to promote work-life balance is also high. Indeed, organizations

that pursue work-life balance initiatives have been found to enjoy a positive

increase in their share market price (Arthur, 2003).

More importantly, the present study demonstrated that work-life balance

is linked to an attitudinal or perspective shift for an individual. By equipping

individuals with the skills to change their attitude towards a “want to”

perspective, then regardless of current work demands the individual will

continue to preserve perceived work-life balance (Marks & MacDermid, 1996).

Generation X is an increasingly well-educated workforce (Tulgan, 1996) and

one that is committed to the whole notion of work-life balance (Hays, 1999).

The present research demonstrates that training in the skills and competencies

of emotional intelligence will assist in developing one’s self-awareness and

72

emotional-awareness, leading to a change towards more adaptive attitudes and

the augmentation of more positive perceptions of one’s work-life balance

(Seligman, 2002).

Limitations

As already been indicated, the present study’s sample size means that

results should be treated as exploratory and interpreted with caution. The

sample also reported a slight non-significant skewing of the study’s data which

may suggest possible social desirability effects, or may reflect, as Marks et al.

(2001) suggest, that people already having trouble with work-life balance, do

not respond to questionnaires. Further research would either need to employ

an increased sample size or focus on fewer aspects than the many explored in

the present study.

The sample used in the present study was restricted to those individuals

currently within dual earner relationships. This excludes men and women who

may be separated or recently divorced, as well as those men and women who

have either abandoned their careers or had their partners abandon theirs. Thus

the sample may be biased towards those who are in more satisfying

relationships and careers (Rosin, 1990). The slight non-significant skewing of

present study’s data is suggestive of this.

73

The ambiguity of the results, especially the non-significant impact of

relationship satisfaction on role balance, may be the result of the individuals

selected for the present study having no dependent children. Previous research

has indicated that children do facilitate improved work-life balance for men

and increased work-life conflict for women (Marks et al., 2001) and that overall,

couples with children do experience greater work-family interference than

childless couples (Lewis & Cooper, 1987). However the double income no-kids

(“DINK’s” in popular literature) sample, selected for the present study, is a

significant one. The steady decline in the number of children per family and

the increase in couples electing not to have children (at all or at least until later

in life) indicates that further research into this demographic is crucial.

Finally, gender differences were not explored in the present study.

Previous research into role balance conducted by Marks and MacDermid (1996)

did not find gender differences in a sample of traditional college students (but

only 16% of the sample used were over the age of 22 years). However Milkie &

Peltola (1999) did find gender differences, with women experiencing greater

role imbalance, with a sample of older workers (mean age 44 years). No gender

differences were found in the present study. However additional research

exploring gender differences for this study’s demographic is suggested.

74

Further research

The pursuit of holistic health is of increasing importance and the

findings in the present study demonstrate that achieving holistic health is a

complex task, involving work competence and satisfaction, relationship

competence and satisfaction and emotional intelligence competence. The

implications for counselors, health care professionals, government,

organizations and individuals themselves are significant and further research is

required to determine what role each of these entities has in enhancing one’s

holistic health.

Emotional intelligence has been demonstrated to play a significant role in

facilitating perceived work-life balance and mental and spiritual well-being.

Further research is required to validate the exploratory finding outlined in this

study.

The question of work intensity also needs consideration. Sekaran (1989)

suggests that when individuals’ spend too much time on organizational work it

results in a significant reduction in job satisfaction. Hill et al. (2001) suggests

that reducing working hours by approximately 11 hours per week (for those

employees working between 40 and 50 hours per week) would lead to an

improvement in perceived work-family balance of nearly 20%. Further research

to explore the impact of reducing work hours on Generation X’s relationship

satisfaction, job satisfaction, work-life balance and holistic health is suggested.

75

Conclusion

Generation X is a significant demographic in Australian society. The

preservation of positive work-life balance is an important value to this

demographic (Hays, 1999). The present study explored the function one’s

relationship and work have in facilitating positive work-life balance. The

results of the study indicate that one’s job satisfaction is a significant factor

determining work-life balance for Generation X. Unfortunately the working

conditions currently experienced by Generation X, including decreased

employment stability, increased work intensity and longer working hours are

not conducive to the management of work-life balance (Guest, 2002). The

results of this study suggest that work intensification and work-life imbalance

for Generation X has the potential to detrimentally impact upon relationship

satisfaction.

In recognizing the current working climate for Generation X the present

study was keen to establish one means by which Generation X could be

assisted in the preservation of work-life balance. Specifically, the present study

hoped to find that one’s emotional intelligence was a significant contributor in

the management of more adaptive work-life balance. The results of the present

study suggest that emotional intelligence, specifically understanding others’

emotions and emotional control, do have a role in increasing one’s work-life

balance. This result suggests that work-life balance is a state-of-mind or an

attitude towards one’s various role performances and hence, the preservation

76

of one’s work-life balance for Generation X can be facilitated through a change

in one’s work-life balance perception.

The study concluded by exploring the impact of work-life balance and

imbalance on the holistic well-being of Generation X. Job satisfaction helps to

enhance one’s mental well-being and is mediated by both emotional

intelligence and work-life balance, whilst physical well-being is enhanced by

one’s relationship satisfaction. Spiritual well-being is an important focus for

Generation X and is helped by one’s emotional intelligence. These results

suggest that mental, physical and spiritual well-being is a consequence of one’s

ability to maintain relationship satisfaction, job satisfaction and perceived

work-life balance, a process that can be augmented through the development

of one’s emotional intelligence.

77

References

Allen, C., O’Connell, M., & Peetz, D. (1999). More tasks, less secure,

working harder: Three dimensions of labour utilization. The Journal of Industrial

Relations, 41, 519-535.

Allen, T., Herts, D., Bruck, C., & Sutton, M. (2000). Consequences

associated with work-to-family conflict: A review and agenda for future

research. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 278-308.

Ameen, E., Jackson, C., Pasewark, W., & Strawser, J. (1995). An empirical

investigation of the antecedents and consequences of job insecurity on the

turnover intentions of academic accountants. Issues in Accounting Education, 10,

65-82.

Anderson, P. & Morgan, M. (1994). Spirituality and sexuality: The health

connection. Journal of Religion and Health, 33, 115-121.

Arthur, M. (2003). Share price reactions to work-family initiatives: An

institutional perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 46, 497-505.

78

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

experience: Work and family identity among dual-earner couples. Human

Relations, 49, 465-487.

Australian Bureau of Statistics. (1999). Australian Social Trends, downloaded

from official ABS website.

Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2001). Census Basic Community Profile and

Snapshot, downloaded from official ABS website.

Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2002a). Australia Demographic Statistics:

Special Article – Marriage and Divorce in Australia, downloaded from official ABS

website.

Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2002b). Marriages and Divorces,

downloaded from official ABS website.

Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2002c). Australian Social Trends,

downloaded from official ABS website.

Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2003). Australian Social Trends, downloaded

from official ABS website.

79

Balzer, W., Kihm, J., Smith, P., Irwin, J., Bachiochi, P., Robie, C., Sinar, E.,

& Parra, L. (1997). Users’ manual for the job descriptive index (JDI; 1997 Revision)

and the job in general (JIG) scales. Ohio: Bowling Green State University.

Bardoel, A., Tharenou, P., & Ristov, D. (2000). The changing composition of

the Australian workforce relevant to work-family issues. International Human

Resource Issues, 1, 58-80.

Barnett, R. (1994). Home-to-work spillover revisited: A study of full-time

employed women in dual-earner couples. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 56,

647-656.

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

in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical

considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.

Bar-On, R. (1997). Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory: A measure of

emotional intelligence, technical manual. Toronto: Multi-Health Systems

Berry, J. & Worthington, E. (2001). Forgivingness, relationship quality,

stress while imagining relationship events, and physical and mental health.

Journal of Counseling Psychology, 48, 447-455.

80

Burns, D., Sayers, S., & Moras, K. (1994). Intimate relationships and

depression: Is there a casual connection? Journal of Consulting and Clinical

Psychology, 62, 1033-1043.

Cassell, R. (1988). Defensive living as the basis for fitness. Journal of

Instructional Psychology, 15, 51-56.

Cohen, F. (1988). Psychosocial models of the role of social support and the

etiology of physical disease. Health Psychology, 7, 269-297.

Chan, C. & Margolin, G. (1994). The relationship between dual-earner

couples’ daily work mood and home affect. Journal of Social and Personal

Relationships, 11, 57-586.

Chandler, C., Holden, J., & Kolander, C. (1992). Counseling for spiritual

wellness: Theory and practice. Journal of Counseling and Development, 71, 168-

175.

Ciarrochi, J., Forgas, J., & Mayer. (2002). Emotional intelligence in everyday

life: A scientific inquiry. New York: Psychology Press.

81

Compton, W., Swith, L., Cornish, K., & Qualls, D. (1996). Factor structure

of mental health measure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 406-

413.

Corsini, R. (1984). Encyclopedia of psychology. New York: Wiley.

Cramer, D. (1993). Living alone, marital status, gender and health. Journal

of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 3, 1-16.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1992). Flow: The psychology of happiness. Sydney:

Random House.

Daniels, P. & Weingarten, K. (1982). Sooner or later: The timing of parenthood

in adult lives. New York: W. W. Norton.

Davy, J., Kinicki, A., & Scheck, C. (1997). A test of job security’s direct and

mediated effects on withdrawal cognitions. Journal of Organizational Behavior,

18, 323-349.

Department of Industrial Relations (1995). Enterprise bargaining annual

report 1994. Canberra: AGPS.

82

Earnshaw, A., Amundson, N., & Borgen, W. (1990). The experience of job

insecurity for professional women. Journal of Employment Counseling, 27, 2-18.

Ellis, A. (1984). Rational-emotive therapy. In R.J. Corsini (Ed.), Current

psychotherapies (3rd edition). Third edition. Itasca: Peacock.

Fallon, B. (2001). The loves of our lives – home and work: How can we

keep them in perspective? Keynote address at the First APS Interest Group on the

Psychology of Relationships Conference. Melbourne, November 2001.

Fincham, F. & Linfield, K. (1997). A new look at marital quality: Can

spouses feel positive and negative about their marriage? Journal of Family

Psychology, 11, 489-502.

Fitness, J. (2001). Emotional intelligence and intimate relationships. In J.

Ciarrochi, & J. Forgas, Joseph P. (Eds.)., Emotional intelligence in everyday life: A

scientific inquiry. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.

Fulghum, R. (1993). All I Really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten:

Uncommon Thoughts on Common Things. New York: Ballantine Publishing

Group.

83

Gardner, L. (2003). Assessing the relationship between workplace

emotional intelligence, job satisfaction and organizational commitment.

Presentation paper for the 5th Australia Industrial and Organizational Psychology

Conference. Melbourne, June 2003.

Gardner, L. & Stough, C. (2003). Assessing the relationship between emotional

intelligence, occupational stress, psychological health and coping. Unpublished

manuscript, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne.

Greenhaus, J. (1989). The intersection of work and family roles: Individual,

interpersonal and organizational issues. In E. B. (Goldsmith (Ed.), Work and

family: Theory, research and application. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.

Grzywacz, J. & Marks, N. (2000). Reconceptualizing the work-family

interface: An ecological perspective on the correlates of positive and negative

spillover between work and family. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5,

111-126.

Guest, D. (2002). Human resource management, corporate performance

and employee wellbeing: Building the worker into HRM. The Journal of

Industrial Relations, 44, 335-358.

84

Hafen, B., Franksen, K., Karren, K., & Hooker, K. (1992). The health effects of

attitude, emotional relationships. Provo: EMS Associates.

Hancock, T. (1985). The mandel of health: A model for human ecosystems.

Family and Community Health, 8, 1-10.

Hays, S. (1999). Generation X and the art of reward. Workforce, 78, 45-48.

Hendrick, S. (1988). A generic measure of relationship satisfaction. Journal

of Marriage and the Family, 50, 93.98.

Hill, E., Hawkins, A., 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, 60, 49-55.

Hill, E., Hawkins, A., & Miller, B. (1996). Work and family in the virtual

office: Perceived influences of mobile telework. Family Relations, 45, 293-301.

Hochschild, A. (1997). The time bind. New York: Metropolitan.

Hofmann, D. & Tetrick, L. (Eds). (2003). Health and safety in organizations: A

multilevel perspective. San Francisco: Josey–Bass.

85

Ishii-Kuntz, M. (1990). Social interaction and psychological well-being:

Comparison across stages. International Journal of Aging and Human

Development, 30, 15-36.

Johnson, M. (1991). Commitment to personal relationships. In W.H. Jones

& D. Perlham (Eds.)., Advances in personal relationships, 3. London: Jessica

Kingsley.

Judge, T. & Watanabe, S. (1994). Individual differences in the nature of the

relationship between job and life satisfaction. Journal of Occupational and

Organizational Psychology, 67, 101-108.

Kinnunen, U. & Natti, J. (1994). Job insecurity in Finland. European Work

and Organizational Psychologist, 4, 279-321.

Kinnunen, U., Vermulst, A., Gerris, J., & Makikangus, A. (2003). Work-

family conflict and its relations to well-being: The role of personality as a

moderating factor. Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 1669-1683.

Kramar, R. (1998). Flexibility in Australia: Implications for employers and

managers. Employee Relations, 20, 453-461.

Larson, D & Larson, S. (1991). Religious commitment and health: Valuing

the relationship. Second opinion: Health, faith and ethics, 17, 26-40.

86

Lazarus, R. & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress appraisal and coping. New York:

Spinger Publishing Company.

Lewis, S. & Cooper, C. (1987). Stress in two-earner couples and stage in life

cycle. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 60, 289-303.

Lewis, S. & Lewis, J. (Eds.). (1996). The work-family challenge. London: Sage

Publications.

Lim, V. (1996). Job insecurity and its outcomes: Moderating effects of work-

based and nonwork-based social support. Human Relations, 49, 171-194.

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

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

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

role balance. Journal of Marriage and Family, 58, 417-433.

Maslow, A. (1968). Towards a psychology of being. New Jersey: Van Nostrand

Reinhold.

87

Mauno, S. & Kinnunen, U. (1999). Job insecurity and well-being: A

longitudinal study among male and female employees in Finland. Community,

Work and Family, 2, 147-171.

Mayer, J., Caruso, D., & Salovey, P. (1999). Emotional intelligence meets

traditional standards of an intelligence. Intelligence, 27, 267-298.

Mayer, J. & Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotional intelligence? In P. Salovey

& D. Sluyter (Eds.). Emotional development and emotional intelligence: Implications

for educators. New York: Basic Books.

Mayer, J., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. (2000). Selecting a measure of

emotional intelligence: The case for ability scales. In R. Bar-On & J.D.A. Parker

(Eds.), The handbook of emotional intelligence. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Mayer, J., Solovey, P., Caruso, D., & Sitarenios, G. (2001). Emotional

intelligence as a standard intelligence. Emotion, 1, 232-242.

McCabe, M., Cummins, R., & Romeo,Y. (1996). Relationship status,

relationship quality, and health. Journal of Family Studies, 2, 109-120.

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

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

88

Myers, J., Sweeney, T., & Witmer, M. (2000). The wheel of wellness

counseling for wellness: A holistic model for treatment planning. Journal of

Counseling and Development, 78, 251-267.

Netemeyer, R., Boles, J., & McMurrian,, R. (1996). Development and

validation of work-family conflict and work-family conflict scales. Journal of

Applied Psychology, 81, 400-410.

Oats, R. & Vella-Brodrick, D. (2003). Generation X and Baby Boomers’

Vocational Need Satisfaction and Affective Organisational Commitment.

Unpublished manuscript, Monash University, Melbourne.

Okun, M., Stock, W., Haring, M., & Witter, R. (1994). The social

activity/subjective well-being relation: A quantitative synthesis. Research on

Aging, 6, 45-65.

Palmer, B., Donaldson, C., & Stough, C. (2001). Emotional intelligence and

life satisfaction. Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 1091-1100.

Palmer, B. & Stough, S. (2001). Workplace SUIET: Swinburne University

Emotional Intelligence Test – Interim Technical Manual. Melbourne: Organisational

Psychology Research Unit, Swinburne University.

89

Palmer, B. & Stough, S. (2003). Workplace SUIET: Swinburne University

Emotional Intelligence Test – Interim Technical Manual Version 2. Melbourne:

Organisational Psychology Research Unit, Swinburne University.

Papalia, D. & Wendkos-Olds, S. (1992). Human development (5th edition).

Sydney: McGraw-Hill Inc.

Peetz, D. (1998). Unions in a contrary world. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Pelletier, K. (1994). Sound mind, sound body: A new model for lifelong health.

New York: Simon & Shuster.

Piotrkowski, C., Rapoport, R., & Rapoport, R. (1987). Families and work. In

M.B. Sussman & S.K. Steinmetz (Eds.), Handbook of marriage and family. New

York: Plenum.

Reilly, M. (1982). Working wives and consumption. Journal of Consumer

Research, 8, 407-418.

90

Reynolds, W. (1982). Development of reliable and valid short forms of the

Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 38, 119-

125.

Rogers, C. (1961). On becoming a person: A therapist’s view of psychotherapy.

Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Rosin, H. (1990). The effects of dual career participation on men: Some

determinants of variation in career and personal satisfaction. Human Relations,

43(2), 169-182.

Ryff, C. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the

meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,

57, 1069-1081.

Salovey, P., Bedell, B., Detweiler, J., & Mayer, J. (1999). Coping

intelligently: Emotional intelligence and coping process. In C.R. Snyder (Ed.),

Coping: The psychology of what works. New York: Oxford University.

Scheindlin, L. (2003). Emotional perception and spiritual development.

International Journal of Children’s Spirituality, 8, 179-194.

91

Seaward, B. (1995). Reflections on human spirituality for the worksite.

American Journal of Health Promotion, 9, 165-168.

Sekaran, U. (1989). Understanding the dynamics of self-concept of

members in dual-earner families. Human Relations, 42, 97-116.

Seligman, M. (2000). Learned optimism. Sydney: Random House.

Seligman, M. (2002). Authentic happiness: Using the new positive psychology to

realize your potential for lasting fulfillment. Sydney: Random House.

Simper, M. (1985). Programming for optimum health and wellness.

Activities, Adaptation and Aging, 6, 61-67.

Spector, P. E., & Goh, A. (2001). The role of emotions in the occupational

stress process. In P. L. Perrewe, & D. C. Ganster. (Eds.), Exploring Theoretical

Mechanisms and Perspectives, 1. New York: JAI.

Sternberg, S. (1997, September 10). Medicare gives preventive Ornish heart

program a try. USA Today.

92

Sumer, C. & Knight, P. (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.

Sweeney, T. & Witmer, M. (1991). Beyond social interest: Striving towards

optimum health and wellness. Individual Psychology, 47, 527-540.

Szasz, T. (1970). The myth of mental illness. In H. Wechler, L. Solomon, &

B.M. Kramer (Eds.), Social psychology and mental health. New York: Holt,

Rinehart & Winston.

Tabachnick, B. & Fidell, L. (1989). Using multivariate statistics: Second edition.

New York: Harper Collins.

Temoshok, L. & Dreher, H. (1992). The Type C connection: The behavoural

links to cancer and health. New York: Random House.

Tugade, M. & Fredrickson, B. (2003). Resilient individuals use positive

emotions to bounce back from negative emotional experiences. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, in press.

Tulgan, B. (1996). Managing Generation X: How to bring out the best in young

talent. Oxford: Capstone.

93

Ulione, M. (1996). Physical and emotional health in dual-earner families.

Family and Community Health, 19, 14-20.

Vella-Brodrick, D. (1995). A user’s guide to the mental, physical and spiritual

well-being scale. Melbourne: Monash University.

Vella-Brodrick, D. & Allen, F. (1995). Development and psychometric

validation of the mental, physical, and spiritual well-being scale. Psychological

Reports, 77, 659-674.

Wardwell, W. (1994). Alternative medicine in the United States. Social

Science and Medicine, 38, 1061-1068.

Warr, P. (1990). The measurement of well-being and other aspects of

mental health. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 193-210.

Westgate, C. (1996). Spiritual wellness and depression. Journal of Counseling

and Development, 75, 26-35.

Wiersma, U. (1994). A taxonomy of behavioral strategies for coping with

work-home role conflict. Human Relations, 47, 211-221.

94

Witmer, J., Rich, C., Barcikowski, R., & Mague, J. (1983). Psycho-social

characteristics mediating stress response: An exploratory study. The Personnel

and Guidance Journal, 62, 73-77.

World Health Organization (1948). Constitution. Geneva, World Health

Organization.

95

Appendices

96

Appendix A

Self-report questionnaire

97

Swinburne University of Technology Research title:

“The direct role of perceived work/personal life balance and emotional intelligence on the well-being of 25-35 year old dual earner couples.”

Investigators:

Dr. B. Findlay and Mr. R. Harmer We are conducting a study to explore the role of perceived work/personal life balance, and the mediating role of emotional intelligence, on individual well-being of 25-35 year old dual-earner couples. The results of this study can be used in future planning within Organisations in relation to the recognition of the importance of employee well-being and the promotion of individual work/life balance and emotional intelligence in the workplace. If you volunteer to participate you and your partner will each be asked to [separately] complete a questionnaire, which takes approximately 25 minutes to complete. Please do not consult with your partner in completing this questionnaire and please return your completed questionnaires separately. You will first be asked some general questions, such as age, education, and marital status for the purpose of describing the sample we use. You will then be asked a series of questions relating to your emotional intelligence, your attitude to your work and personal life, your support networks, your spiritual, physical and mental well-being and the level of priority to you allocate to the various aspects of your life. Many of the items are very similar. It is important to answer all of them as conscientiously as possible, but without spending too much time on any one item. First reactions are usually the best. Your responses will be completely anonymous and confidential. The results of this study may be published in a scientific journal, however, only group data will be presented and no individual will be identifiable. Your participation in this study is completely voluntary. Your initial agreement to participate does not stop you from discontinuing participation and you are free to withdraw at any time. Return of this questionnaire will be taken as consent for your data to be used in the study. Please consider the purposes and time commitment of this study before you decide whether or not to participate. Retain this information sheet for your own records. Although unlikely the questionnaire may raise some concerns for you because of some personal questions. If you would like to discuss them with a counsellor, you could ring the Swinburne Centre for Psychological Services on 9214 8653, or Lifeline on 131114. This research conforms to the principles set out in the Swinburne University of Technology Policy on Research Ethics and the NHMRC guidelines as specified in the National Statement on Ethical Conduct on Research Involving Humans. If you have any questions regarding this study please contact the investigators: Dr Bruce Findlay on 9214 8093, or Richard Harmer on 0409 323 062. If you have any concerns that the Senior Investigator was unable to satisfy, or you have any complaints about the way you have been treated, write to:

The Chair, SBS Research Ethics Committee School of Social & Behavioural Sciences, Mail H24 Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria 3122

All responses will be treated in Confidence Code: ____________

PLEASE TURN PAGE OVER

98

Descriptive Information Please complete appropriate response in the table below:

a. Sex Male Female

c. Day of week this questionnaire completed

b. Age Years

d. Please indicate the type of industry you work in (e.g., telecommunications)

Occupation

e. Do you have a direct responsibility for others (e.g. manage) in your present role? Yes No

Employment f. In the last four weeks average number of hours worked per week (both paid and unpaid)?

Hours

g. How many of these hours are unpaid hours at work?

Hours

h. What is your present employment status? Full time (38hr week) Part time Casual Other

i. Annual Salary j. Level of Education

$0 - $40,000 Completed high school certificate (e.g., VCE)

$40,001 - $60,000 Completed Tertiary Certificate

$60,001 - $80,000 Completed Undergraduate Degree

$80,001 - $100,000 Completed Postgraduate Degree

$100,001, $120,000 Other

$120,001 - $140,000

$140,001 - $160,000 $160,001 - $180,000

$180,000+

Relationship Information

k. Marital Status Married Not Married

l. Length of time in relationship Years

m. Number of children

n. Role in study Participant Partner of Participant



99

Instructions: There are no right and wrong ways to respond in the following questionnaire form. Each set of items has been selected to explore your present situation, with respect to your perceived experience of work/life balance. For this study to be successful it is important that the assessment phase is as accurate as possible. This can be achieved via accurate responses gained from people who respond to the statements honestly. Therefore it is essential that you are truthful about yourself, and that you do not answer in a way that you think sounds good or acceptable. In general, try not to spend too long thinking about responses. Most often the first answer that occurs to you is the most accurate. However, do not rush your responses or respond without giving due consideration to each statement. Below is an example

Q. I am aware of my moods and emotions at work. You are required to indicate on the response scale, the extent to which the statement is indicative of the way you typically think, feel or act at work. There are five possible responses to each statement (shown below). You are required to fill in the circle containing the number that corresponds to your answer where...

I = Never 2 = Seldom 3 = Sometimes 4 = Usually 5 = Always NB: Scales used vary throughout questionnaire

When selecting your answer to each of the questions it is important to “mark” the scale appropriately to allow the researchers to efficiently and effectively collate the raw responses. There are two sections to this questionnaire and each section requires you to mark your responses differently. As such please mark each of your responses as follows:

Example: SECTION A. SECTION B.

Circle numbers like this

Q. How often do things add up to being just to much? 1 3 4

Do not shade like this

Q. How often do things add up to being just to much? 1 2 3 4

If you make a mistake just cross it out and fill in the correct response

All responses will be treated in Confidence Code: _________


100___

Workplace Swinburne University Emotional Intelligence Test – Self Report Version If you make a mistake simply cross it out and fill in the correct response

Nev

er

Sel

dom

S

omet

imes

U

sual

ly

Alw

ays Below are a series of statements, please fill in the circle containing the number

that is most indicate of the way you typically think, feel and act at work.

1. I can tell how colleagues are feeling at work.

2. I generate positive moods and emotions within myself to get over being frustrated at work.

3. Examination of feelings is useful in solving work related problems.

4. When I'm anxious I can remain focused on what I am doing.

5. I can tell whether colleagues like each other or not.

6. When I'm under stress, I tend to get irritated by colleagues.

7. I find it difficult to talk about my feelings with my colleagues.

8. I find it hard to determine how a colleague is feeling from their body language alone.

9. Difficult situations at work elicit emotions in me that I find hard to overcome.

10. Colleagues find it easy to pick-up on how I am feeling.

11. I find it difficult to keep from getting stressed-out when I am under a lot of pressure at work.

12. My moods and emotions help me generate new ideas.

13. I can tell how a colleague is feeling by the tone in their voice.

14. When I am anxious at work, I find it difficult to express this to my colleagues.

15. I find it easy to influence the moods and emotions of clients.

16. I don't easily pick-up on the emotional overtones of workplace environments.

17. I can tell when a colleague is trying to hide their true feelings.

18. I try not to let my emotions guide me when problem solving at work.

19. I find it easy to control my anger at work.

20. I can describe my feelings on an issue to colleagues.

21. I don't think it's a good idea to use emotions to guide work related decision-making.

22. I find it hard to identify if a colleague is upset without them telling me.

23. I find it hard to get colleagues to cooperate with each other.

24. I come-up with new ideas at work using rational thoughts rather than my moods and emotions.

25. I find it hard to concentrate on a task when I'm really excited about something.

26. I can portray how I am feeling to colleagues through my body language.

27. I find it hard to determine who gets along and who doesn't at work.

28. I overcome conflict with my colleagues by influencing their moods and emotions.

29. I watch the way clients react to things when I'm trying to build rapport with them.

30. My problem solving at work is based on sound reasoning rather than feelings.

31. I find it difficult to think clearly when I'm feeling anxious about something at work.

32. At work, I have trouble finding the right words to express how I feel.

All responses will be treated in Confidence Code: _________


101___

Workplace Swinburne University Emotional Intelligence Test – Self Report Version If you make a mistake simply cross it out and fill in the correct response

Nev

er

Sel

dom

S

omet

imes

U

sual

ly

Alw

ays Below are a series of statements, please fill in the circle containing the number

that is most indicate of the way you typically think, feel and act at work.

33. I find it difficult to get colleagues excited about things at work.

34. I can pick-up on the 'emotional tone' of staff meetings.

35. I attend to my feelings on a matter when making important work related decisions.

36. I overcome anger at work by thinking through what's causing it.

37. Colleagues know when I am worried.

38. I readily understand the reasons why I have upset someone at work.

39. I find it hard to reduce anxiety in colleagues.

40. I weigh-up how I feel about different solutions to work-related problems.

41. I can be upset at work and still think clearly.

42. I find it hard to convey my anxiety to colleagues.

43. I can determine when a colleague's emotional reactions are inappropriate.

44. I find it easy to comfort colleagues when they are upset about something at work.

45. Colleague's facial expressions reveal a lot to me about the way they are feeling.

46. At work, I experience strong emotions that are hard to control.

47. Feelings should be kept at bay when making important work related decisions.

48. I readily notice the 'feel' of work environments.

49. When something gets me down I find it difficult to snap out of it.

50. I go with my 'feelings' when making important decisions at work.

51. At work, I can detect my emotions as I experience them.

52. When discussing an issue, I find it difficult to tell whether colleagues feel the same way as me.

53. Thinking about how I felt in certain situations at work helps me remember them.

54. I can easily snap out of feeling down at work.

55. I find it hard to distinguish my emotions at work.

56. I can tell when a colleague feels the same way as myself about another colleague without actually discussing it.

57. I find it difficult to maintain positive moods and emotions when I'm under stress.

58. When colleagues get worked-up I stay out of their way.

59. I find it hard to determine exactly how colleagues feel about work related issues.

60. When something goes wrong at work, I find if difficult to remain positive.

61. Colleagues can easily tell how I feel.

62. I try to keep emotions out of work related decision-making.

63. I can tell when a colleague doesn't really like me.

64. When a colleague upsets me at work, I think through what the person has said and find a solution to the problem.



102

SECTION B Circle responses only !

With respect to your relationship with your partner please respond to the following items using the scale provided N

ot a

t all

Extr

emel

y

65. Considering only the positive qualities of your partner, and ignoring the negative ones, evaluate how positive these qualities are.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

66. Considering only positive feelings you have toward your partner, and ignoring the negative ones, evaluate how positive these feelings are.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

67. Considering only good feelings you have about your relationship, and ignoring the bad ones, evaluate how good these feelings are.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

68. Considering only the negative qualities of your partner, and ignoring the positive ones, evaluate how negative these qualities are.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

69. Considering only negative feelings you have toward your partner, and ignoring the positive ones, evaluate how negative the feelings are.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

70. Considering only bad feelings you have about your relationship, and ignoring the good ones, evaluate how bad these feelings are.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Considering the past twelve months only please respond to the following questions using the scale provided:

St

rong

ly d

isag

ree

Stro

ngly

agr

ee

71. In most ways my life is close to ideal 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

72. The conditions of my life are excellent 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

73. I am satisfied with my life 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

74. So far, I have gotten the important things I want in life 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

75. If I could live my life over, I would change almost nothing 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

76. For me, having a career and having a partner with a career is my ideal lifestyle 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

77. The conditions of my dual-earner relationship are excellent 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

78. I am satisfied with my dual-earner lifestyle 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

79. So far, I have gotten the important things I want out of my dual-earner lifestyle 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

80. I would not change anything about my dual-earner lifestyle 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Considering the past twelve months only please respond to the following questions using the scale provided:

St

rong

ly d

isag

ree

Stro

ngly

agr

ee

81. In my job I do things which I don't really have the time and energy for. 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

82. In my job there are too many demands on my time. 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

83. In my job I need more hours in the day to do all the things which are expected of me.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

84. In my job I can’t ever seem to get caught up. 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

85. In my job I don't ever seem to have any time for myself 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

86. In my job I seem to have to overextend myself in order to be able to finish everything I have to do.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

87. In my job I feel I have to do things hastily and maybe less carefully in order to get everything done.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

88. In my job I just can’t find the energy in me to do all the things expected of me. 1

2

3

4

5

6

7



103

Considering the past twelve months only how easy has it been for you to:

Stro

ngly

dis

agre

e

Stro

ngly

agr

ee

89. Have some “quality time” with you friend(s), including phone calls? 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

90. Get your housework, laundry, and other chores done? 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

91. Have a pleasant meal, either alone or with someone else? 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

92. Have some satisfying leisure time? 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

93. Maintain contact with you parents'? 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

More generally speaking:

Extr

emel

y su

cces

sful

Ex

trem

ely

unsu

cces

sful

94. All in all, how successful do you feel in balancing your work and personal/family life?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

With respect to your relationship with your partner please respond to the following items using the scale provided

N

ot a

t all

Slig

htly

M

oder

atel

y C

onsi

dera

bly

Extr

emel

y

95. How well does your partner meet your needs?

1

2

3

4

5

96. In general, how satisfied are you with your relationship?

1

2

3

4

5

97. How often do you wish you hadn’t gotten into this relationship?

1

2

3

4

5

98. To what extent has your relationship met your original expectations?

1

2

3

4

5

99. How much do you love your partner?

1

2

3

4

5


N

ever

Alm

ost a

lway

s

100. How often do you feel drained when you go home from work because of work pressures and problems?

1

2

3

4

5


Very

diff

icul

t

Very

eas

y

101. How easy or difficult is it for you to balance the demands of your work and your personal and family life?

1

2

3

4

5

102. I have sufficient time away from my job to maintain adequate work and personal/family life balance?

1

2

3

4

5

103. When I take a vacation, I am able to separate myself from work and enjoy myself 1

2

3

4

5



104

Consider the following statements and respond using the scale provided

Stro

ngly

dis

agre

e

Stro

ngly

agr

ee

104. Now days I seem to enjoy every part of my life equally well. 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

105. I am pretty good at keeping the different parts of my life in balance; I generally don't let things "slide."

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

106. Some things I do seem very important, but other things I do are a waste of my time.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

107. Everything I do feels special to me: nothing stands out as more important or more valuable than anything else.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

108. There are some parts of my life that I don't care much about, and there are other parts I care deeply about,

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

109. Work time, classes and study time, partner time, friend time, family time, leisure time - I find satisfaction in everything I do.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

110. I try to put a lot of myself into everything I do. 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

111. There are some things I like to do so much that I often neglect other things I also care about.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7


Not

val

uabl

e

Very

val

uabl

e

112. What value do you place on your own need for work/personal life balance? 0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

113. What value do you perceive your partner places on their need for work/personal life balance?

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10


Stro

ngly

dis

agre

e St

rong

ly a

gree

114. I can do my job well 1

2

3

4

5

115. In my job, I make a special effort to keep trying when things seem difficult 1

2

3

4

5

116. I am not very interested in my job 1

2

3

4

5

117. I find my job quite difficult 1

2

3

4

5

118. In my job I often have trouble coping 1

2

3

4

5

119. I enjoy doing new things in my job 1

2

3

4

5

120. I sometimes think that I am not very competent in my job 1

2

3

4

5

121. In my job I like to set myself challenging targets 1

2

3

4

5

122. I prefer to avoid difficult activities in my job 1

2

3

4

5

123. I am not very concerned how things turn out in my job 1

2

3

4

5

124. I can deal with just about any problem in my job 1

2

3

4

5

125. I feel that I am better than most people at tackling job difficulties 1

2

3

4

5

126. After I leave my work, I worry about job problems 1

2

3

4

5

127. I find it difficult to unwind at the end of the workday 1

2

3

4

5

128. I feel used up at the end of the day 1

2

3

4

5

129. My job makes me feel quite exhausted at the end of the workday 1

2

3

4

5



105

These next 2 pages contain questions about your job. Don’t spend too much time on any question. Your responses should be as spontaneous as possible, and reflect the most frequent feelings you have about aspects of your job

Think of the work you do at present. How well does each of the following words or phrases describe your work? Please circle the correct response beside each word or phrase below.

Think of the majority of the people that you work with now or the people you meet in connection with your work. How well does each of the following words or phrases describe these people? Please circle the correct response beside each word or phrase below.

Y for “Yes” if it describes your work

N for “No” if it does NOT describe it

? if you cannot decide WORK ON PRESENT JOB

Y for “Yes” if it describes the people you work with

N for “No” if it does NOT describe them

? if you cannot decide CO-WORKERS (PEOPLE)

130. Fascinating Y N ? 148. Stimulating Y N ?

131. Routine Y N ? 149. Boring Y N ?

132. Satisfying Y N ? 150. Slow Y N ?

133. Boring Y N ? 151. Helpful Y N ?

134. Good Y N ? 152. Stupid Y N ?

135. Gives a sense of accomplishment Y N ? 153. Responsible Y N ?

136. Respected Y N ? 154. Fast Y N ?

137. Uncomfortable Y N ? 155. Intelligent Y N ?

138. Pleasant Y N ? 156. Easy to make enemies Y N ?

139. Useful Y N ? 157. Talk too much Y N ?

140. Challenging Y N ? 158. Smart Y N ?

141. Simple Y N ? 159. Lazy Y N ?

142. Repetitive Y N ? 160. Unpleasant Y N ?

143. Creative Y N ? 161. Gossipy Y N ?

144. Dull Y N ? 162. Active Y N ?

145. Uninteresting Y N ? 163. Narrow interests Y N ?

146. Can see results Y N ? 164. Loyal Y N ?

147. Uses my ability Y N ? 165. Stubborn Y N ?

Think of the opportunities for promotion that you have now. How well does each of the following words or phrases describe these? Please circle the correct response beside each word or phrase below.

Think of the pay you get now. How well does each of the following words or phrases describe your present pay? Please circle the correct response beside each word or phrase below.

Y for “Yes” if it describes your opportunities for promotion.

N for “No” if it does NOT describe them

? if you cannot decide OPPORTUNITIES FOR PROMOTION

Y for “Yes” if it describes your pay


? if you cannot decide

PRESENT PAY

166. Good opportunities for promotion Y N ? 175. Income adequate for normal expenses

Y N ?

167. Opportunities somewhat limited Y N ? 176. Fair Y N ?

168. Promotion on ability Y N ? 177. Barely live on income Y N ?

169. Dead-end job Y N ? 178. Bad Y N ?

170. Good chance for promotion Y N ? 179. Income provides luxuries Y N ?

171. Unfair promotion policy Y N ? 180. Insecure Y N ?

172. Infrequent promotions Y N ? 181. Less than I deserve Y N ?

173. Regular promotions Y N ? 182. Well paid Y N ?

174. Fairly good chance for promotion Y N ? 183. Underpaid Y N ?



106

Think of the kind of supervision that you get on your job. How well does each of the following words or phrases describe this? Please circle the correct response beside each word or phrase below.

Think of your job in general. All in all, what is it like most of the time? Please circle the correct response beside each word or phrase below.

Y for “Yes” if it describes the supervision you get on your job


? if you cannot decide SUPERVISION

Y for “Yes” if it describes your job


? if you cannot decide

JOB IN GENERAL

184. Asks my advice Y N ? 202. Pleasant Y N ?

185. Hard to please Y N ? 203. Bad Y N ?

186. Impolite Y N ? 204. Ideal Y N ?

187. Praises good work Y N ? 205. Waste of time Y N ?

188. Tactful Y N ? 206. Good Y N ?

189. Influential Y N ? 207. Undesirable Y N ?

190. Up-to-date Y N ? 208. Worthwhile Y N ?

191. Doesn’t supervise enough Y N ? 209. Worse than most Y N ?

192. Has favourites Y N ? 210. Acceptable Y N ?

193. Tells me where I stand Y N ? 211. Superior Y N ?

194. Annoying Y N ? 212. Better than most Y N ?

195. Stubborn Y N ? 213. Disagreeable Y N ?

196. Knows job well Y N ? 214. Makes me content Y N ?

197. Bad Y N ? 215. Inadequate Y N ?

198. Intelligent Y N ? 216. Excellent Y N ?

199.Poor planner Y N ? 217. Rotten Y N ?

200.Around when needed Y N ? 218. Enjoyable Y N ?

201.Lazy Y N ? 219. Poor Y N ?



107

Circle one number per question based on how close you feel you are to one of the alternatives at each end of the scale. Please answer all questions honestly.

Nev

er

O

ften

220. During difficult times do you reach out for spiritual help (eg. God or a higher being, church or place of worship, prayer, priest, etc.)?

1

2

3

4

5

221. Do you watch quiz programs? 1

2

3

4

5

222. Do you read novels? 1

2

3

4

5

223. Do you engage in thoughtful discussions about ethical or moral issues? 1

2

3

4

5

224. Over recent months have you been lethargic or tired? 1

2

3

4

5

225. Do you read or study about religion or spiritual issues? 1

2

3

4

5

226. Do you collect as much information as possible on a subject before making judgments on it?

1

2

3

4

5

227. In the past year, have you suffered nausea and/or vomiting? 1

2

3

4

5

228. Do you engage in games which are designed for mental stimulation (eg. bridge, crosswords, chess, etc.)?

1

2

3

4

5

229. In the past year, have you had stomach aches and/or indigestion? 1

2

3

4

5

230. Do you engage in serious self-analysis of your behaviour for the purpose of improving your moral behaviour?

1

2

3

4

5

231. Over the past year, have you suffered headaches? 1

2

3

4

5

232. Do you visit places of culture, art or creativity (eg. museum, art gallery, theatre, etc.)?

1

2

3

4

5

233. When you gain insights into life that others could learn from, how often do you share them with people close to you?

1

2

3

4

5

234. Over the past year, have you been constipated? 1

2

3

4

5

235. Do you believe in life after death? 1

2

3

4

5

236. Over the past year, have you written for pleasure (eg. letters, stories, poems, etc.)? 1

2

3

4

5

237.

238. How long have you been making use of an activity for obtaining inner peace (eg. meditation, yoga, prayer etc.)?

1

2

3

4

5

Never <5yrs >10yrs

N

ever

Ofte

n

239. Over the past year, have you taken steps to improve your environment (eg. made your home or office pleasing, provided yourself with more objects of beauty etc.)?

1

2

3

4

5

240. Over the past year, have you gone on a diet to lose or gain weight? 1

2

3

4

5

241. In recent months, do you wake up fresh and rested most mornings? 1

2

3

4

5

242. Do you discuss matters of the spirit (eg. purpose in life, religion, inner peace, death etc.)?

1

2

3

4

5

243. Do you think before you act? 1

2

3

4

5

244. Over the past year, have you tried to enhance your personal or spiritual development (eg. meditation, yoga, praying, etc.)?

1

2

3

4

5

245. Are your hands and feet warm enough, generally? 1

2

3

4

5

246. Do you watch, read or listen to the news? 1

2

3

4

5

247. Do you watch documentaries? 1

2

3

4

5

248. Do you suffer diarrhea at least once a month? 1

2

3

4

5

249. Over the past year, have you experienced aches and pains? 1

2

3

4

5

250. Do you make use of meditation and/or prayer for the purpose of gaining inner peace?

1

2

3

4

5



108

For each of the statements below, please indicate whether they are more true than false or more false than true as a description of your-self. (circle one number per question)

True

Fals

e

251. It is sometimes hard for me to go on with my work if I am not encouraged. 1

2

3

4

5

252. I sometimes feel resentful when I don't get my way. 1

2

3

4

5

253. On a few occasions, I have given up doing something because I thought too little of my ability.

1

2

3

4

5

254. There have been times when I felt like rebelling against people in authority even though I knew they were right.

1

2

3

4

5

255. No matter who I am talking to, I’m always a good listener. 1

2

3

4

5

256. There have been occasions when I took advantage of someone. 1

2

3

4

5

257. I am always willing to admit it when I make a mistake. 1

2

3

4

5

258. I sometimes try to get even rather than forgive and forget. 1

2

3

4

5

259. I am always courteous, even to people who are disagreeable. 1

2

3

4

5

260. I have never been irked when people express ideas very different from my own. 1

2

3

4

5

261. There have been times when I have been quite jealous of the good fortune of others.

1

2

3

4

5

262. I am sometimes irritated by people who ask favours of me. 1

2

3

4

5

263. I have never deliberately said something that hurt someone's feelings. 1

2

3

4

5

THANKYOU FOR COMPLETING THIS QUESTIONNAIRE Please return this booklet to the researchers using the attached self-addressed envelope.

109

Appendix B

Computer disk containing copy of thesis manuscript and thesis raw data

110

Documents

Swinburne Research Bank | Swinburne Research …...4 indicate that they will never marry (ABS, 2002b). The delay in couples getting married, coupled with standards of living and changing