Employers need to recognize the constant challenge many employees
face in balancing work and family. Recruiting and retaining top workers
is essential to the success of the organization; thus, it behooves
employers to understand the variables associated with the effective
management of the work-family conflict.
One cannot pick up a newspaper or periodical or even turn on the
news without being confronted with the issue of balancing work and
family. For most, it is a constant struggle to attempt to balance the
commitments of work and family life. Some researchers have suggested
that work-family balance is an illusive goal and one that is
unattainable (Caproni, 1997). The concern is that the more one is
committed to work, the more one enjoys the associated benefits, both
financial and non-financial, which encourage them to devote even more
time and energy to work. Since neither one's time nor energy is
limitless, by definition, then, such workers will find themselves far
from the balance they originally sought with one of the roles invariably
ending up on the losing end.
As a result of an increasingly larger share of the workforce
occupying many non-work roles in addition to that of paid worker,
organizations need to understand the impact of multiple roles on
workers' productivity. Attitudes, behaviors and emotions associated
with one role may spill over to the other (Edwards and Rothbard, 2000).
In fact, many employers fear that engagement in the family role is
accomplished only to the detriment to the work role.
The work-family literature frames this balance in seemingly
diametrically opposed views, namely the depletion and enrichment
arguments (Marks, 1977). The former is more deeply rooted in the
literature and views these roles as conflicting (Friedman and Greenhaus,
2000). One's energy and time are limited, and, as such, the demand
in each role depletes resources at the expense of the other. Yet those
scholars that view the work-family research through the lens of the
enrichment hypothesis suggest that it is the occupancy of multiple roles
and the quality of those roles that yield beneficial effects on
one's well-being (Barnett and Hyde, 2001). The benefits to
individuals provide a net gain over the costs, leading to a positive
emotional response and better well-being,
In an effort to explain the competing views in the literature--the
depletion or enrichment hypotheses--we propose that the question needs
to be examined at the individual level. Specifically, we posit that
Emotional Intelligence, a dispositional variable, interacts with
work-family conflict to predict one's well-being. Consistent with
research conducted by Noor (2003) that resulted in support for the
effect of locus of control on the relationship between work-family
conflict and well-being, this study expands the link to examine the
effect of a broader dispositional measure. Noor (2003) sampled 310
married women with children who were employed full-time in Malaysia. She
found that "women with high control beliefs generally were more
vulnerable to work-family conflict" and that work-family conflict
was positively related to symptoms of psychological
distress--women's sense of general well-being" (2003: 658).
This study builds on past models of work and family stress that use
individual differences as moderators of the effects of work and family
experiences on well-being (e.g., Frone et al., 1997a; Greenhaus and
Parasuraman, 1986; Higgins et al., 1992; Parasuraman et al., 1996). In
addition, the present study answers the call of Greenhaus and Beutell
for more research "to determine the impact of specific personal
characteristics on role attitude/behaviors that affect the arousal of
work-family conflict" (1985: 83), as well as Carlson's (1999)
call for additional study of personality variables such as the "Big
Five" to provide further insight into the underpinnings of
work-family conflict. We posit that it is not necessarily a general
all-encompassing trait that distinguishes the "handlers" from
the "non-handlers," but rather it is an individual trait which
can cross gender, race, ethnicity, and age.
The ultimate question is can you have it all? As Friedman and
Greenhaus (2000) state in their book, Work and Family--Allies or Enemies
?, it is possible to have both a fulfilling career and a satisfying
family life, but it requires balanced involvement in both of these
spheres of our life. In other words, Freidman and Greenhaus suggest that
it is the successful management of conflicting demands and one's
level of satisfaction with their decisions that lead to balance. It is
on the interrole conflict between the work role and the other life roles
that much of the literature is based. Work-family literature is based on
the boundaries between the two domains as being permeable such that work
can influence family and family can influence work.
Work-family conflict has been found to be a predictor of
employee's well-being (Vallone and Donaldson, 2001) and several
studies have shown that it is a mediator between work and family roles
and individual well-being (Aryee et al., 1999; Frone et al., 1997a).
Also, it has been empirically shown to lead to psychological depression
(Googins, 1991), physical ailments (Frone et al., 1997a), lower life
satisfaction (Aryee, 1992), lower quality of family life (Higgins et
al., 1992) and lower energy levels (Googins, 1991). Additionally, it is
negatively related to employee job satisfaction (Boles et al., 2001).
Depletion
The depletion argument stems from research on role drain, namely
what Marks refers to as the "drain theory" of energy (1977) as
well as role conflict (Merton, 1957; Greenhaus and Beutell, 1985). The
depletion argument of interrole conflict, according to Kahn, Wolfe,
Quinn, Snoek and Rosenthal, is defined as the "simultaneous
occurrence of two (or more) sets of pressures such that compliance with
one would make more difficult compliance with another" (1964: 19).
Goode suggests that the "individual's total role obligations
are over-demanding." He further states that "role
strain--difficulty in meeting given role demands --is therefore
normal" (1960: 485). He likens the need for an individual to
allocate his energy and skills to reduce role strain to "some
bearable proportions" to the way the individual handles limited
economic resources. One needs to make decisions as to where to allocate
money and where not, the same as one needs to do with their energy.
Similar to the equimarginal principle in economics which posits that one
should maximize utility in allocating limited dollars among goods and
services, an individual needs to maximize the results of his/her efforts
and energy invested in one domain over the other. Opposing pressures
arise from engaging in multiple roles and these pressures can be
incompatible by requiring different roles to compete for a person's
limited time resources as well as the strains associated with one or
more roles (Kopelman et al., 1983). The assumption underlining the
depletion argument is that multiple demands of paid worker and family
role are detrimental to the individual and that role participation
invokes stress, resulting in emotional strain (Rothbard, 2001).
Enrichment
The enrichment view, as postulated by Marks (1977), suggests that
as an individual increases the number of roles he or she occupies, there
is a net gain or benefit from them (enrichment) rather than a loss or
depletion. Many studies have empirically supported the enhancement
hypothesis by depicting a positive relationship between the involvement
in multiple roles and various measures of psychological well-being
(Barnett et al., 1992; Baruch and Barnett, 1986). The enrichment
argument assumes that the benefits of multiple roles outweigh the costs,
leading to gratification rather than strain (Rothbard, 2001).
HYPOTHESES
This study is primarily concerned with identifying a possible
explanation for the disagreement regarding the beneficial effects of
multiple roles on well-being. Similar to prior research, this study
analyzed the roles of spouse, parent and worker (Sieber, 1974). These
non-work roles were identified and studied because we want to focus on
work-family conflict. Sociologists have focused on the resulting outcome
of role strain or overload from one possessing both a paid worker role
and a family role (Geerken and Gove, 1983).
Well-being
Researchers have developed models to predict how work and family
influence stress and well-being (e.g., Frone et al., 1997b; Greenhaus
and Parasuraman, 1986; Higgins et al., 1992; Kopelman et al., 1983;
Parasuraman et al., 1996). Edwards and Rothbard (1999) studied how the
cognitive appraisal process (up to that point, "notably absent from
the models") influenced stress. Using the person-environment fit
theory, Edwards and Rothbard "examined how the comparison of work
and family experiences to the person's values relates to stress and
well-being" (1999: 85). They wanted to explore possible
explanations for why different people in the same situation experience
different levels of stress.
Some models of work and family stress use individual differences as
moderators of the effects of work and family experiences on well-being
(e.g., Greenhaus and Parasuraman, 1986; Higgins et al., 1992;
Parasuraman et al., 1996). Friedman and Greenhaus (2000) argue that time
is not the major enemy of work-family conflict, rather it is the level
of psychological interference of work into the family domain and of
family concerns into the workplace. Recent research has associated
personality variables and work-family conflict.
Personality traits and the interaction on work-family conflict have
been studied, including aggressiveness (Lightdale and Prentice, 1994)
and negative affectivity (Carlson, 1999; Bruck and Allen, 2003). In
addition, there have been several studies that found a positive
relationship between Type A behavior and workfamily conflict (Burke et
al., 1979). Neuroticism was also found to have a positive relationship
to work-family conflict (Bruck and Allen, 2003). Further research has
shown that conscientiousness helps reduce the negative impact that work
role ambiguity has on one's well-being (Bruck and Allen, 2003).
Moreover, agreeableness was found to have a negative effect on
work-family conflict: the more agreeable the individual, the greater
reported work-family conflict (Bruck and Allen, 2003). Emotional
Intelligence (EI) was also shown to predict persistence under
frustrating circumstances (Schutte et al., 2000) and has been found to
moderate the effect of work-family conflict on career commitment
(Carmeli, 2003). In a study of senior managers, Carmeli found a
significant interaction of work-family conflict and Emotional
Intelligence in predicting career commitment. Stated differently, the
higher a senior manager is on Emotional Intelligence, the weaker the
negative effect of work-family conflict on career commitment (2003).
Emotional Intelligence
Emotional Intelligence is a profile of self-awareness, of managing
one's emotions, of motivation, of empathy and social competence.
Goleman's (1995) work thrusted the concept into the spotlight,
although the term Emotional Intelligence was first used by Salovey and
Mayer (1990). They defined Emotional Intelligence as "the ability
to monitor one's own feelings and emotions, to discriminate among
them, and to use this information to guide one's thinking and
actions" (1990: 189).
Mayer and Salovey (1997) later identified four components of
Emotional Intelligence: perception, assimilation, understanding and
management. The first component is described as an ability to be
self-aware of emotions and to be able to express one's emotional
needs. Assimilation refers to one's ability to distinguish among
different emotions they may be feeling and to prioritize those that are
influencing their thought processes (Mayer and Salovey, 1997). The third
component is the ability to understand complex emotions such as
simultaneous feelings of loyalty and betrayal (Mayer and Salovey, 1997).
The ability to distinguish the emotions that emerge from perceptions is
important in overcoming negative responses to emotions. It is also in
this component that Mayer and Salovey include the ability to understand
other's emotional expressions and behaviors. Lastly, the management
component is the ability to connect or disconnect from an emotion,
depending on its usefulness in any given situation (Mayer and Salovey,
1997). This component varies from the personality domain because the
regulation of emotions can vary to suit specific personality traits
(Mayer and Salovey, 1997). Caruso et al. (2002) examined the relation of
an ability measure of Emotional Intelligence to personality. This
examination found that Emotional Intelligence was a "measure as
reliable and independent of traditional defined personality traits,
supporting the discriminant validity of the Emotional Intelligence
construct" (2002: 306). Similarly, Saklofske et al. (2003) state
that Emotional Intelligence self-reports measures account for variance
not accounted for by personality. The contribution of Emotional
Intelligence to one's attitude toward change was found to be
significant, indicating the added value of using an Emotional
Intelligence measure above and beyond the effect of personality (Vakola
et al., 2004).
Many scholars have theorized that high Emotional Intelligence
contributes to success in various aspects of life including work and
relationships (e.g., Goleman, 1995; Salovey and Mayer, 1990). Because
Emotional Intelligence theoretically includes the ability to understand
and regulate others' as well as one's own emotions, it may be
related to both characteristics that build relationships and the quality
of those relationships (Schutte et al., 2001).
Furthermore, scholars have theorized that high Emotional
Intelligence would lead to greater feelings of emotional well-being
(Goleman, 1995; Saarni, 1999; Salovey and Mayer, 1990; Salovey et al.,
1995; Schutte et al., 2002). Some empirical evidence that Emotional
Intelligence is associated with emotional well-being comes from research
indicating that higher Emotional Intelligence is associated with less
depression, greater optimism (Schutte et al., 1998) and greater
self-esteem (Schutte et al., 2002). Moreover, research found that
individuals with higher Emotional Intelligence were better able to
maintain a positive mood and self-esteem when faced with a negative
state induction (Schutte et al., 2002). Thus, both theory and prior
research advance a connection between Emotional Intelligence and
well-being.
Hypothesis 1: Emotional Intelligence is positively related to
well-being.
Work-family conflict has been identified as a source of stress that
influences well-being (Greenhaus and Parasuraman, 1986). For example, it
has been shown to be positively related to depression and decreased
satisfaction with life and an intensified depressive affect (Marshall
and Lang, 1990). Even perceived unfairness between work and family
demands leads to psychological distress and depression in both men and
women (Voydanoffand Donnelly, 1999). Thus, if one perceives the
work-family demands as unfairly monopolizing their time and attention,
one experiences more conflict between the two domains. This conflict
leads to reduced feelings of well-being.
Hypothesis 2: Work-family conflict is negatively related to
well-being.
The ability to perceive, understand and manage emotions is an
integral part of Emotional Intelligence; thus, it seems that people with
high Emotional Intelligence should experience lower worker family
conflict. Carmeli (2003) studied the relationship between Emotional
Intelligence and work attitudes and the behavior of senior managers.
Among other findings, his results supported a finding that Emotional
Intelligence moderated the negative influence of work-family conflict on
career commitment. He suggests that this result "indicates that
senior managers who have high Emotional Intelligence may better and more
carefully handle the inherent work-family conflict than those with low
Emotional Intelligence" (2003: 805).
A person with high EI is one that can recognize, and then
effectively deal with their own emotions while at the same time
recognize and empathize with others' feelings. Inherent in the
work-family conflict is a tremendous amount of emotional upheaval.
Inevitably one domain will encroach on the other and it results in more
than just a time issue or energy constraints; it also invokes one's
emotions. The ability to be aware of your emotions, express them and
effectively manage them is a key determinant in whether the conflict
between the two domains negatively impacts one's well-being.
This study suggests that Emotional Intelligence will have an impact
on the relationship between work-family conflict and well-being.
Consistent with Jordan et al. who argued that "Emotional
Intelligence moderates the links between perceptions of job insecurity
and affective reaction, as well as the links between affective reactions
and behavior" (2002: 365), we posit that Emotional Intelligence
interacts with work-family conflict to predict well-being.
Hypothesis 3: There is an interaction effect between Emotional
Intelligence and work-family conflict on well-being.
METHODS
Participants
A total of 205 people participated in this study. For the study,
60.0% were female. Most (81.0%) were married and the most common racial/
ethnic group was Caucasian (77.1%), followed by African-American
(15.1%). The age of the respondents ranged between 19 and 70, with a
mean of 47.48 years, and a standard deviation of 11.14 years. For number
of children, 34.6% reported having no children, with the most any
respondent had was five children (M = 1.27, SD = 1.19). For education,
50.2% had a high school diploma, and the remainder had a college degree
or more education. Years with the organization ranged from 1 to 34 (M =
10.78, SD = 7.32). Hours of work reported ranged from 4 to 82 (M =
38.25, SD = 8.16). For satisfaction and importance of work, the means
and standard deviations, are 5.04 (1.36) and 5.87 (1.19), respectively.
The data collected for use in this study were part of a
"Quality of Work-Family Study" at a university in the
northeast of the U.S. This sample was drawn from a large university
representing a large variety of jobs including unionized trade workers
to executive managers. The survey sample was obtained from the
population of employees at a suburban doctoral-granting university with
a budget of over $242 million with approximately 8,000 full-time and
part-time employees.
Measures
Gender was coded "0" for Male and "1" for
Female. Marital status was coded as "1" for married and
"0" for all other categories (i.e., single, widowed or
divorced). Information on race, age, number of children and number of
children living at home, average number of hours worked/week, number of
hours caring for elderly parent were also collected from the respondent.
Control Variables. Consistent with prior research, martial status
was considered a control variable (Bruck and Allen, 2003; Carlson, 1999;
Cooke and Rousseau, 1984). In addition, work satisfaction (Netermeyer et
al., 1996) and importance of work (Rothbard, 2001) were controlled for
since these have been found to have a significant influence on
work-family conflict, Emotional Intelligence and/ or well-being--a
finding that is replicated in this study (Table 1).
Dependent Variable. The General Well-Being scale (GWB), developed
in 1970 for the National Center for Health Statistics, was used to
measure the dependent variable of well-being. The GWB is a structured
instrument for assessing self-representations of subjective well-being.
Scale scores run from 14 (lowest well-being) to 110 (highest well-being)
for the first 18 items as described by Fazio (1977). This measure has
been validated and shown to have good psychometric properties (Fazio,
1977). Mean scores for the first 18 items of the schedule were 75 for
men and 71 for women (SD = 15 and 18, respectively). An example of an
item from this scale is "Have you been under or felt you were under
any strain, stress, or pressure during the past month?" The
internal reliability, as measured by Cronbach's alpha, for this
study was .89, an acceptable level based on Nunnally's (1978)
criteria of .70.
Independent Variables
Work-Family Conflict. In this study, Work-Family Conflict (WFC) was
measured using an eight-item scale. The first four items in the scale
measure work-interfering with family (WIF), as developed by Kopelman,
Greenhaus and Connolly (1983). The last four items were developed by
Burley (1989) to assess family-interfering with work (FlW). This study
analyzed both directions of work-family conflict (work interfering with
family (WIF) and family interfering with work (FIW) as a combined
measured of overall conflict. The internal reliability for this study,
as measured by Cronbach's alpha, was .89. In addition, the
work-family conflict variable means and standard deviations were
comparable to those found in previous work-family conflict studies.
An example of an item from the WIF scale is "On the job I have
so much work to do it takes away from my personal interests." An
example from the FIW scale is "I'm often too tired at work
because of the things I have to do at home." These eight items have
been used in other work-family conflict research (Adams et al., 1996;
Judge et al., 1994).
Emotional Intelligence. The Schutte Emotional Intelligence Scale
(EIS), a self-report measure, was used in this study to measure
Emotional Intelligence. This scale is based on the model of Salovey and
Mayer (1990), which has been labeled as the standard for "scholarly
discourse" (Jordan et al., 2003). As Schutte et al. (1998) stated
in the defining article of the EIS, it is a reliable, valid measure of
Emotional Intelligence as conceptualized by Salovey and Mayer (1990).
The EIS represents the following categories which are consistent with
the Mayer and Salovey (1997) conceptualization of Emotional
Intelligence: appraisal and expression of emotion in oneself and others,
regulation of emotion in self and others, and utilization of emotions
solving problems.
The EIS is a scale of a trait measure of Emotional Intelligence
that was developed through factor analysis which showed good reliability
with two different samples. Two-week test-retest reliability indicated
that the scores were fairly stable over time. The EIS reported internal
consistency was between .87 and .90 (Schutte et al., 1998). It consists
of 33 items which assess to which extent individuals perceive,
understand, regulate and harness emotions adaptively. On a five-point
Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree) respondents
rate their agreement with such items as "I am aware of my emotions
as I experience them," and "I help other people feel better
when they are down." The sum of all items constitutes the total
score, which can range from 33-165 (higher scores indicate greater
Emotional Intelligence). The internal reliability for this study, as
measured by Cronbach's alpha, was .90.
Analysis
To test hypotheses 1, 2 and 3, a two-way ANOVA was used with the
independent variables being Emotional Intelligence (low and high) and
WFC (low and high), and the dependent variable was well-being. The
independent variables were dichotomized using median splits to conduct
the 2 x 2 analysis of variance on well-being. The dichotomization of the
variables is consistent with prior research (Nikolaou and Tsaousis,
2002; Hammer et al., 2004). Since job satisfaction and job importance
were found to be significantly correlated with the dependent variable,
factorial analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was carried out, with job
satisfaction and job importance as covariates, along with marital status
since prior research suggested its impact on well-being (Bruck and
Allen, 2003; Carlson, 1999; Cooke and Rousseau, 1984). As covariates in
the ANCOVA, any variability attributed to these variables was partialled
out of the dependent variable, well-being.
RESULTS
The correlations between the three primary scales (Emotional
Intelligence, work-family conflict, and well-being) and the selected
variables including the control variables as well as the reliability
estimates are presented in Table 1. Emotional Intelligence (M = 123.7,
SD = 13.5) was correlated with well-being (r = .36), importance of work
(r = .17) and negatively correlated with work-family conflict (r =
-.27). Work-family conflict (M = 19.53, SD = 5.8) was also negatively
correlated with well-being (r = -.35), age (r = -.15), satisfaction with
work (r = -.23), and importance of work (r = -.19). Work-family conflict
was significantly yet slightly correlated with number of hours the
respondent worked (r = .16). In addition, well-being was positively
correlated with work satisfaction (r = .33), and importance of work (r =
.24).
Table 2 displays the analysis of covariance for well-being, based
on Emotional Intelligence and work-family conflict. The covariates
included marital status, work satisfaction, and importance of work. The
overall model was significant (p < .001), accounting for 30.7% of the
variance in well-being. Both main effects (Emotional Intelligence and
work-family conflict) were significant (p < .001), with Emotional
Intelligence accounting for 10.8% of the variance in well-being and
work-family conflict accounting for 7.4% of the variance. In addition,
the interaction of Emotional Intelligence and work-family conflict was
also significant (p < .05).
Inspection of the means and standard errors in Table 3 found the
group with high Emotional Intelligence coupled with low work-family
conflict to have the highest mean for well-being (M = 81.13). In
addition, respondents with low Emotional Intelligence and high
work-family conflict had the lowest level of well-being (M = 63.36).
Figure I provides a graph of the interaction of Emotional Intelligence
and work-family conflict. Based on the results indicated in Tables 2 and
3 and Figure I, hypotheses 1, 2 and 3 could not be rejected. (1)
[FIGURE I OMITTED]
DISCUSSION
As shown, the hypotheses advanced in this study on the influence of
work-family conflict and Emotional Intelligence on well-being could not
be rejected. The results showed that the variables of Emotional
Intelligence and work-family conflict (hypotheses 1 and 2) had
significant influence on the dependent variable of well-being.
Similarly, results from testing Hypothesis 3 showed a significant
interaction effect between Emotional Intelligence and work-family
conflict on well-being.
The results presented in this study suggest that Emotional
Intelligence acts as a protector variable in the impact of work-family
conflict on one's well-being. Higher Emotional Intelligence
positively influenced well-being. Specifically, those individuals in
this sample who had high Emotional Intelligence with low work-family
conflict reported the highest well-being while those with low Emotional
Intelligence and high work-family conflict reported the lowest
well-being. Additionally, the results of this study showed that low
Emotional Intelligence and low work-family conflict yielded similar
well-being scores as those with high Emotional Intelligence and high
work-family conflict. Thus, in situations where one experiences a
significant amount of work-family conflict, the possession of high
Emotional Intelligence will protect their well-being. This study showed
that for these people, their well-being scores were very similar to
those who experience low work-family conflict. Consequently, it seems
that possession of high Emotional Intelligence is more important when
facing work-family conflict.
This finding is consistent with past research that has theorized
that high Emotional Intelligence leads to greater feelings of well-being
(Goleman, 1995; Saarni, 1999; Salovey and Mayer, 1990; Salovey et al.,
1995; Schutte et al., 2002). The ability to be aware of one's
emotions and capable of managing them successfully will enhance
one's well-being when facing work-family conflict. To help
illustrate this effect, one may think of Emotional Intelligence as
something one can develop to help protect them against the stress of
meeting demands in both domains. It is something in one's
"bag-of-tricks," if you will, that can be utilized to maintain
a healthy well-being.
This study makes several contributions to the field. It contributes
to the work-family literature by focusing the lens in which work-family
conflict is viewed. Specifically, this study suggests that the
dichotomous hypotheses of depletion and enrichment may each have value
but they are driven by an intensely individualistic phenomenon.
Implications
Work-family conflict is an issue that cannot be ignored. The
profile of the labor supply (workers have increased family
responsibilities, i.e., greater number of dual-income households and
elder-care responsibilities) coupled with societal pressure places this
issue squarely on any human resource professional's radar. Lost
time due to family demands and employee stress costs employers billions
of dollars each year. In fact, despite employers having strong
work-family or work-life initiatives, many employees still face
difficult and oftentimes debilitating stress from the conflict that
arises from trying to balance both domains. As found in this study, in
Hypothesis 2, the resulting work-family conflict experienced by
employees has a negative effect on their well-being.
The tested hypotheses in this study begin to shed light on possible
avenues for employee training to better equip them with much needed
tools to handle work-family conflict. Demographic trends highlight that
if employees cannot find ways to effectively deal with the work-family
conflict, they choose to remove themselves from the work domain. The
finding in this study (Hypothesis 1c), that emotionally intelligent
individuals have higher well-being when facing work-family conflict than
those with lower Emotional Intelligence, can be useful to employers when
trying to retain workers. Successful employers recognize the strategic
advantage that human resources can provide and must find ways to help
retain highly skilled employees. Retention, therefore, needs to be a
significant goal of employers and they must determine ways to help these
employees deal with the oftentimes conflicting demands of the family and
work domain.
Organizations can target resources to help individuals improve
their Emotional Intelligence in order to better handle the conflicting
demands. One's resiliency can be measured through their Emotional
Intelligence. Emotionally intelligent individuals can, through
self-regulation, adapt to the social situation and remain functional
(Eisenberg and Fabes, 1992). Human resource professionals need to
implement learning opportunities as well as nurture an environment that
recognizes the value of self-exploration. It is a concept often met with
skepticism and ridicule. Therefore, it is important that the
organization's culture supports and encourages employees to put
effort into self-awareness training and exercises.
Emotional Intelligence can be developed and improved. Organizations
can begin to allocate resources to helping employees learn to be
resilient and to develop increased Emotional Intelligence. By helping
employees effectively deal with the inherent emotions of handling the
family and work domains, employers will benefit as well. As Cappelli
noted, "when employees believe that their employer is supportive of
their well-being, they are more committed" (2003:11). Similarly,
Thompson et al. suggested that the "organization's ability to
communicate respect for employees' non-work lives affects the level
of perceived work-family conflict" (2004: 558). Moreover,
organizations that assist employees in improving their Emotional
Intelligence should benefit by reducing the oftentimes dysfunctional
behavior that results when employees become overwhelmed by stress.
Employees struggling to meet the demands in both domains are searching
for avenues that provide help and relief to this constant dance between
work and family. Organizations that can effectively offer training in
the abilities underlying the construct of Emotional Intelligence will
ultimately enjoy more committed employees.
Limitations and Future Research
There are several limitations of this study that should be
understood in interpreting the results. To begin, the cross-sectional
nature of the study prevents the examination of causal relationships.
Future studies with an experimental design are needed to draw
conclusions about causality. Although causation cannot be substantiated
with cross-sectional data, the theoretical underpinnings strongly
support the directions suggested in the study.
All measures were derived from the self-report of the respondents,
potentially contributing to inflated inter-item correlations due to
common method variance (Podsakoff et al., 2003). Common method variance
is variance that is attributable to the measurement method rather than
to the constructs measured. However, the use of self-report scales seems
logical since the study was interested in capturing stable, internal
states of the respondents that could not be manipulated. Furthermore,
Crampton and Wagner (1994) challenge the validity of the general
condemnation of self-reports, citing that there is research that has
failed to show evidence of any meaningful inflation. Rothbard and
Edwards (2003) justify the use of self-report measures when they are
consistent with the focal constructs of the study, since the most
accurate source of information regarding an individual's own
perceptions of workfamily conflict and well-being is the person
him/herself. Thus, this limitation is warranted by the focus on
psychological stress which arises from the person's perception of
the situation and self (Edwards and Rothbard, 1999). Moreover, the
pattern of results observed suggest that common method bias is an
unlikely explanation for the results.
All data were collected at one point in time and from one
organization. A more precise study should involve multiple methods
(e.g., interviews with family and co-workers, diaries of employees and
their family) of data collection. Also, multiple sources of data should
be used (family members, co-workers, supervisors). Further, all of the
respondents worked for a northeast university. Nearly half of them had a
college degree or higher. It is important to note that the sample did
not include any members of the faculty since that is a position unique
to a university setting. The sample, however, did include a broad range
of non-faculty job types. Yet it cannot be overlooked that a university
culture is quite unique. For example, a core value for most institutions
of higher learning is the longevity of service by its employees. As a
result, employees tend to have less anxiety over job security.
Additionally, a common benefit associated with employment at a
university or college is a generous time-off allotment, thus allowing
for greater workfamily flexibility. Consequently, the depletion argument
may be underrepresented.
This study helps support the introduction of an individual-specific
variable into the continuous analysis of work-family conflict. Future
research, however, should address the limitations of this study to
confirm the findings. Specifically, future research should test more
diverse samples, encompassing many industries, geographic locations, and
classification of employees. In addition, the study would be greatly
enhanced if one could obtain confirmatory data. A longitudinal study is
needed so that the process can be studied over time, capturing the data
during various occurrences of stressful situations.
Additionally, it would be helpful to substitute an ability measure
of Emotional Intelligence, such as the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional
Intelligence Test (MSCEIT), to substantiate the finding using the
self-report measure. Also, it would be useful to look at the model
separately for work interfering with family and family interfering with
work. While this study did use a work-family conflict measure that
differentiates between work interfering with family and family
interfering with work, the study analyzed them together, because the
purpose of this study was to look at all sources of work-family
conflict. Future research, however, may look at each separately.
Furthermore, this study primarily consisted of working spouses and
parents. However, an emerging trend that will undoubtedly affect the
workfamily conflict is the role of elder-care provider. According to the
National Council for the Aging, approximately 40% of the workforce will
be caring for an elderly parent by 2020. Arguably the role of elder-care
provider stirs even greater emotional response as many find it difficult
to handle the emotional burdens of caring for an ailing parent. This
role needs to be included in the debate of work-family conflict as it is
one many people will find themselves occupying.
Lastly, much of the work-family literature is not cross-cultural. A
significant contribution to the field and the body of literature at
large would be to analyze cross-cultural differences in the antecedents
and moderators of work-family conflict and well-being.
Conclusion
The primary purpose of this study was to gain further insight into
the effect that work-family conflict has on one's well-being, by
introducing a dispositional variable, Emotional Intelligence, into the
equation. The results provide an avenue to explore that attempts to shed
some light on the opposing views in the work-family conflict literature,
namely the depletion and the enrichment hypotheses. The results of this
study support the finding that possession of Emotional Intelligence will
act as a protector variable of one's well-being in the face of
work-family conflict. In other words, Emotional Intelligence interacts
with work-family conflict to predict one's well-being.
References
Adams, G. A., L. A. King and D. W. King. 1996. "Relationships
of Job and Family Involvement, Family and Social Support and Work-family
Conflict with Job and Life Satisfaction." Journal of Applied
Psychology 81: 411-420.
Aryee, S. 1992. "Antecedents and Outcomes of Work-family
Conflict Among Married Professional Women: Evidence from
Singapore." Human Relations 45: 813-837.
--, V. Luk, A. Leung and S. Lo. 1999. "Role Stressors,
Interrole Conflict, and Well-being: The Moderating Influence of Spousal
Support and Coping Behaviors Among Employed Parents in Hong Kong."
Journal of Vocational Behavior 54: 259-278.
Barnett, R. C. and J. S. Hyde. 2001. "Women, Men, Work and
Family: An Expansionist Theory." American Psychologist 56: 781-796.
--, N. L. Marshall and J. D. Singer. 1992. "Job Experiences
Over Time, Multiple Roles and Women's Mental Health: A Longitudinal
Study." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 62 (4):
634-644.
Baruch, G. K. and R. Barnett. 1986. "Role Quality, Multiple
Role Involvement, and Psychological Well-being in Midlife Women."
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51 (3): 578-585.
Boles, J. S., W. G. Howard and H. H. Donofrio. 2001. "An
Investigation Into the Inter-relationships of Work-Family Conflict,
Family-Work Conflict and Work Satisfaction." Journal of Managerial
Issues 13 (3): 376-391.
Bruck, C. S. and T. D. Allen. 2003. "The Relationship Between
Big Five Personality Traits, Negative Affectivity, Type A Behavior, and
Work-family Conflict." Journal of Vocational Behavior 63: 457-472.
Burke, R. J., T. Weir and R. E. DuWors. 1979. "Type A Behavior
of Administrators and Wives' Reports of Marital Satisfaction and
Well-being." Journal of Applied Psychology 64: 57-65.
Burley, K. 1989. "Work-family Conflict and Marital Adjustments
in Dual Career Couples: A Comparison of Three Time Models."
Dissertation Abstracts International 50: 10B (UMI No. 9315947).
Cappelli, P. 2003. "Managing Without Commitment."
Organizational Dynamics 28 (4): 11-25.
Caproni, P. J. 1997. "Work/Life Balance: You Can't Get
There From Here." Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 33 (1):
46-56.
Carlson, D. S. 1999. "Personality and Role Variables as
Predictors of Three Forms of Work-family Conflict." Journal of
Vocational Behavior 55: 236-253.
Carmeli, A. 2003. "The Relationship Between Emotional
Intelligence and Work Attitudes, Behavior and Outcomes: An Examination
Among Senior Managers." Journal of Managerial Psychology 18 (8):
788-813.
Caruso, D. R., J. D. Mayer and P. Salovey. 2002. "Relation of
an Ability Measure of Emotional Intelligence to Personality."
Journal of Personality Assessment 79 (2): 306-320.
Cooke, R. A. and D. M. Rousseau. 1984. "Stress and Strain from
Family Roles and Work-role Expectation." Journal of Applied
Psychology 69: 252-260.
Crampton, S. M. and J. A. Wagner. 1994. "Percept-Percept
Inflation in Micro-Organizational Research: An Investigation of
Prevalence and Effect." Journal of Applied Psychology 79: 67-76.
Edwards, J. R. and N. P. Rothbard. 2000. "Mechanisms Linking
Work and Family: Clarifying the Relationship Between Work and Family
Constructs." Academy of Management Review 25: 178-199.
-- and -- 1999. "Work and Family Stress and Well-being: An
Examination of Person-environment Fit in the Work and Family
Domains." Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 77:
85-129.
Eisenberg, N. and R. A. Fabes. 1992. "Emotion, Regulation, and
the Development of Social Competence." In Review of Personality and
Social Psychology: Emotion and Social Behavior. Ed. M. Clark. Newbury
Park, CA: Sage. pp. 119-150.
Fazio, A. F. 1977. A Concurrent Validation Study of the NCHS
General Well-being Schedule (Dept. of H. E. W. Publ. No. HRA-78-1347).
Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics.
Friedman, S. D. and J. H. Greenhaus. 2000. Work and Family--Allies
or Enemies? What Happens When Business Professionals Confront Life
Choices. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Frone, M. R., M. Russell and M. L. Cooper. 1997a. "Relation of
Work-family Conflict to Health Outcomes: A Four-year Longitudinal Study
of Employed Parents." Journal of Occupational and Organizational
Psychology 70: 325-335.
--, J. K. Yardley and K. S. Markel. 1997b. "Developing and
Testing an Integrative Model of the Work-family Interface." Journal
of Vocational Behavior 50: 145-167.
Geerken, M. and W. R. Gove. 1983. At Home and at Work: The
Family's Allocation of Labor. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Goleman, D. 1998. Working with Emotional Intelligence. New York,
NY: Bantam. 1995. Emotional Intelligence. New York, NY: Bantam.
Goode, W. J. 1960. "A Theory of Role Strain." American
Sociological Review 25: 483-496.
Googins, B. K. 1991. Work/family Conflicts: Private Lives-Public
Responses. New York, NY: Auburn House.
Greenhaus, J. H. and N. J. Beutell. 1985. "Sources of Conflict
Between Work and Family Roles." Academy of Management Review 10:
76-88.
-- and S. Parasuraman. 1986. "A Work-Nonwork Interactive
Perspective of Stress and Its Consequences." Journal of
Organizational Behavior Management 8: 37-60.
Hammer, T. H., P. O. Saksvik, K. Nytro, H. Torvatn and M. Bayazit.
2004. "Expanding the Psychosocial Work Environment: Workplace Norms
and Workfamily Conflict as Correlates of Stress and Health."
Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 9 (1): 83-97.
Higgins, C. A., L. E. Duxbury and R. H. Irving. 1992.
"Work-family Conflict in the Dual-Career Family."
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process 51: 51-75.
Jordan, P. J., N. M. Ashkanasky and C. J. Hartel. 2003. "The
Case for Emotional Intelligence in Organizational Research."
Academy of Management Review 28 (2): 195-197.
--, -- and --. 2002. "Emotional Intelligence as a Moderator of
Emotional and Behavioral Reactions to Job Insecurity." Academy of
Management Journal 27 (3): 361-372.
Judge, T. A., J. W. Boudreau and R. D. Bretz. 1994. "Job and
Life Attitudes of Male Executives." Journal of Applied Psychology
79 (5): 767-782.
Kahn, R., D. M. Wolfe, R. P. Quinn, J. D. Snoek and R. A.
Rosenthal. 1964. Organizational Stress: Studies in Role Conflict and
Ambiguity. New York, NY: Wiley.
Kopelman, R. E., J. H. Geenhaus and T. F. Connolly, 1983. "A
Model of Work, Family and Interrole Conflict: A Construct Validation
Study." Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 32: 198-215.
Lightdale, J. R. and D. A. Prentice. 1994. "Rethinking Sex
Differences in Aggression: Aggressive Behavior in the Absence of Social
Roles." Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 20: 30-44.
Marks, S. R. 1977. "Multiple Roles and Role Strain: Some Notes
on Human Energy, Time and Commitment." American Sociological Review
42: 921-936.
Marshall, G. N. and E. L. Lang. 1990. "Optimism, Self-mastery,
and Symptoms of Depression in Women Professionals." Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology 59: 132-139.
Mayer, J. D. and P. Salovey. 1997. "What is Emotional
Intelligence?" In Emotional Development and Emotional Intelligence
Implications for Educators. Eds. P. Salovey and D. Sluter. New York, NY:
Basic Books. pp. 3-32.
Merton, R. K. 1957. Social Theory and Social Structure. Glencoe,
IL: Free Press.
Netemeyer, R. G., J. S. Boles and R. McMurrian. 1996.
"Development and Validation of Work-family Conflict and Family-work
Conflict Scales." Journal of Applied Psychology 81: 400-410.
Nikolaou, I. and I. Tsaousis. 2002. "Emotional Intelligence in
the Workplace: Exploring its Effects on Occupational Stress and
Organizational Commitment." International Journal of Organizational
Analysis 10 (4): 327-342.
Noor, N. M. 2003. "Work and Family Related Variables,
Work-family Conflict and Women's Well-being: Some
Observations." Community, Work and Family 6 (3): 297-319.
Nunnally, J. C. 1978. Psychometric Theory. New York, NY:
McGraw-Hill.
Osterman, P. 1995. "Work/Family Programs and the Employment
Relationship." Administrative Science Quarterly 40: 681-700.
Parasuraman, S., Y. S. Purohit, V. M. Godshalk and N. J. Beutell.
1996. "Work and Family Variables, Entrepreneurial Career Success,
and Psychological Well-Being." Journal of Vocational Behavior 48:
275-300.
Podsakoff, P. M., S. B. MacKenzie and J. Y. Lee. 2003. "Common
Method Biases in Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of the
Literature and Recommended Remedies." Journal of Applied Psychology
88 (5): 879-903.
Rothbard, N. P. 2001. "Enriching or Depleting? The Dynamics of
Engagement in Work and Family Roles." Administrative Science
Quarterly 46: 655-68.
-- and J. R. Edwards. 2003. "Investment in Work and Family
Roles: A Test of Identity and Utilitarian Motives." Personnel
Psychology 56: 699-730.
Saarni, C. 1999. The Development of Emotional Competence. New York,
NY: Guilford Press.
Saklofske, D. H., E. J. Austin and P. S. Minski. 2003. "Factor
Structure and Validity of a Trait Emotional Intelligence Measure."
Personality and Individual Differences 34: 707-721.
Salovey, P. and J. D. Mayer. 1990. "Emotional
Intelligence." Imagination, Cognition and Personality 9 (3):
185-211.
--, --, S. L. Goldman, C. Turvey and T. P. Palfai. 1995.
"Emotional Attention, Clarity and Repair: Exploring Emotional
Intelligence Using the Trait Meta-Mood Scale." In Emotion,
Disclosure and Health. Ed. J. W. Pennebaker. Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association. pp. 125-154.
Schutte, N. S., J. M. Malouff, C. Bobik, T. D. Coston, C. Greeson,
C. Jedlicka, E. Rhodes and G. Wendorf. 2001. "Emotional
Intelligence and Interpersonal Relations." The Journal of Social
Psychology 14 (4): 523-536.
--, --, L. E. Hall, D. J. Haggerty, J. T. Cooper, C. J. Golden and
L. Dornheim. 1998. "Development and Validation of a Measure of
Emotional Intelligence." Personality and Individual Differences 25:
167-177.
--, --, M. Simunek, J. McKenley and S. Hollander. 2002.
"Characteristic Emotional Intelligence and Emotional
Well-being." Cognition and Emotion 16 (6): 769-785.
--, E. Schuettpelz and J. M. Malouff. 2000. "Emotional
Intelligence and Task Performance." Journal of Imagination,
Cognition and Personality 20 (4): 347-354.
Sieber, S. D. 1974. "Toward a Theory of Role
Accumulation." American Sociological Review 39: 67-578.
Thompson, C. A., E. W. Jahn, R. E. Kopelman and D. J. Prottas.
2004. "Perceived Organizational Family Support: A Longitudinal and
Multilevel Analysis." Journal of Managerial Issues 16 (4): 545-566.
Vakola, M., I. Tsaousis and I. Nikolaou. 2004. "The Role of
Emotional Intelligence and Personality Variables on Attitudes Toward
Organizational Change." Journal of Managerial Psychology 19 (2):
88-110.
Vallone, E. J. and S. I. Donaldson. 2001. "Consequences of
Work-family Conflict on Employee Well-being Over Time." Work and
Stress 15 (3): 214-226.
Voydanoff, P. and B. W. Donnelly. 1999. "Multiple Roles and
Psychological Distress: The Intersection of the Paid Worker, Spouse and
Parent Roles with the Role of the Adult Child." Journal of Marriage
and Family 61: 725-738.
Janet A. Lenaghan
Assistant Professor of Management
Hofstra University
Richard Buda
Associate Professor of Management
Hofstra University
Alan B. Eisner
Associate Professor and Graduate Program Chair of Management
Pace University
* The authors gratefully acknowledge the insightful comments of Dr.
Charles C. Fischer, editor of JMI and two anonymous reviewers. We would
also like to thank Alvin Hwang and Dan Baugher for their contributions
to this research. This article is dedicated to the memory of our friend
and coauthor, Dr. Richard Buda, who passed away on September 2, 2005.
(1) Outcomes comparable to those reported emerged when treating WFC
and EI as continuous variables and using hierarchical regression. The
interaction effect remained significant at the .05 level.
Table 1
Correlations between Primary Scales and Selected Variables
Work-
Emotional family Emotional
Intelligence Conflict Well-being
Emotional Intelligence 1.00
Work-family Conflict -.27 ** 1.00
Well-being .36 ** -.35 ** 1.00
Gender (a) .13 -.12 -.06
Marital Status (b) .08 -.05 .13
Race/Ethnicity (c) .08 .03 -.06
Age .07 -.15 * .09
Number of Children -.03 .01 -.09
Education .09 .05 .07
Staff Size -.05 .06 -.01
Years in Organization .05 .02 .05