See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/274043039

Work Family Conflict and Employee Outcomes: Mediating

Influence of Work Family Conflict and Moderating Influence of
Gender

Article  in  The International Journal of Human Resource Management · February 2015

CITATION READS
1 264

4 authors, including:

Peggy A. Cloninger Barjinder Singh

University of Houston – Victoria Elon University
17 PUBLICATIONS   298 CITATIONS    25 PUBLICATIONS   294 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Psychological Empowerment and Employee Outcomes in Mexico: Role of Power Distance View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Barjinder Singh on 19 February 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

This article was downloaded by: [Barjinder Singh]
On: 18 March 2015, At: 10:49
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

The International Journal of Human

Resource Management
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rijh20

The mediating influence of work–family

Click for updates
conflict and the moderating influence
of gender on employee outcomes
a b b
Peggy A. Cloninger , T.T. (Rajan) Selvarajan , Barjinder Singh &
b
Shengsheng (Charlie) Huang
a
Chair of the Department of Strategy and Decision Sciences,
School of Business Administration, University of Houston-Victoria,
Sugar Land, TX, USA
b
School of Business Administration, University of Houston-
Victoria, Sugar Land, TX, USA
Published online: 02 Feb 2015.

To cite this article: Peggy A. Cloninger, T.T. (Rajan) Selvarajan, Barjinder Singh & Shengsheng
(Charlie) Huang (2015): The mediating influence of work–family conflict and the moderating
influence of gender on employee outcomes, The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, DOI: 10.1080/09585192.2015.1004101

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2015.1004101

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or
arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
 Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
Downloaded by [Barjinder Singh] at 10:49 18 March 2015
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 2015
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2015.1004101

The mediating influence of work –family conflict and the moderating

influence of gender on employee outcomes
Peggy A. Cloningera*, T.T. (Rajan) Selvarajanb†, Barjinder Singhb and
Shengsheng (Charlie) Huangb
a
Chair of the Department of Strategy and Decision Sciences, School of Business Administration,
University of Houston-Victoria, Sugar Land, TX, USA; bSchool of Business Administration,
University of Houston-Victoria, Sugar Land, TX, USA
Finding a balance between work and home continues to be a challenge for many
employees. The influence of work– family conflict both from work interfering with
family (WIF) and from family interfering with work (FIW) on employee outcomes is
not well understood. Although substantial empirical research supports the general view
Downloaded by [Barjinder Singh] at 10:49 18 March 2015

that work– family conflict results from employees having conflicting roles, many
previous studies examine work – family conflict and outcomes in the same, or
‘matching’ domains. Some studies on work conflict also have found cross domain
outcomes that are largely unexplained. This research addresses this gap in the field by
developing and testing the hypothesis that cross domain relationships will be mediated
by conflict in the matching domains. Specifically, this study proposes that WIF
mediates the relationship between FIW and four employee work outcomes (job
satisfaction, organizational commitment, organizational citizenship behavior and
task performance), and that FIW mediates the relationship between WIF and life
satisfaction. This research also examines the moderating role of gender on the
relationships while controlling for age and family status. The results of this study using
a sample of 435 full time employees in the US provide support for most of the
hypothesized relationships. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings
are discussed.
Keywords: family satisfaction; gender; job satisfaction; organizational citizenship
behavior; organizational commitment; task performance; work– family conflict

Introduction
Work – family literature (e.g. Frone, Russell, & Cooper, 1992; Kelloway, Gottlieb, &
Barham, 1999; Wiley, 1987) has identified two conceptually different, but interrelated
forms of conflict, conflict resulting from work interfering with family (WIF) and conflict
resulting from family interfering with work (FIW). Work and Family can be considered
two distinct domains of life. WIF is a type of inter-role conflict when work requirements
impede performance in the family domain while FIW is a type of inter-role conflict when
family requirements impede performance in the work domain (Mesmer-Magnus &
Viswesvaran, 2005). WIF can be defined as an inter-role conflict when employees
experience excessive work pressures which interfere with their performance in the family
domain. FIW results when employee is burdened with family demands which negatively
impact their performance in the family domain (Byron, 2005; Mesmer-Magnus &
Viswesvaran, 2005). With WIF, the conflict originates in the work domain and the
receiving domain is the family domain and vice versa for FIW. Thus, the two forms of

*Corresponding author. Email: cloningerp@uhv.edu

†
Present address: School of Business, Montclair State University, Montclair, NJ 07043, USA.

q 2015 Taylor & Francis

 2 P.A. Cloninger et al.

work –family conflict, although are strongly related, are conceptually distinct. Both types
of conflict have been confirmed in recent years by various meta-analyses (e.g. Amstad,
Meier, Fasel, Elfering, & Semmer, 2011; Byron, 2005). Most studies, however, only have
examined same domain effects, whereby WIF (FIW) has been found responsible to
influence outcomes in the work (family) domain. A few studies have reported cross-domain
effects on outcomes (Amstad et al., 2011). Specifically, previous research has found that
WIF is negatively related to outcomes in the family domain such as family satisfaction, and
that FIW is negatively related to outcomes in the work domain such as job satisfaction.
Thus, although WIF and FIW are distinct constructs, the interrelationship between the two
constructs is not well understood and needs further examination (Byron, 2005).
Drawing upon Edwards and Rothbard (2000) study, this research employs two
mechanisms – spillover and resource-drain – to build hypotheses investigating the
interrelationship. Spillover captures the exchange between work and family domains that,
as the name suggests, takes place via spillover of affect, values, skills and overt behaviors
between the two domains (Eby, Casper, Lockwood, Bordeaux, & Brinley, 2005; Edwards
Downloaded by [Barjinder Singh] at 10:49 18 March 2015

& Rothbard, 2000; Stevanovic & Rupert, 2009; Zedeck, 1992). Resource drain recognizes
that resources are finite, and in order to successfully discharge responsibilities in the work
and family domains, individuals must manage with the limited resources by transferring
resources between the two domains (Edwards & Rothbard, 2000). However, because
resources are limited, increasing responsibilities in one domain may adversely impact the
discharge of the responsibilities and generate inter-domain conflicts (Schultz & Higbee,
2010). Based on the above frameworks, we propose that conflict in one domain (e.g. WIF)
is positively related to conflict in the other domain (FIW) via spillover, and that, due to
limited availability of resources, the discharge of duties and responsibilities in that domain
also suffers. In addition, we also use gender-role theory to explain the gender moderated
relationships between work– family conflict and individual outcomes.
Our study proposes that WIF mediates the relationship between FIW and four
employee outcomes, (1) job satisfaction, (2) organizational commitment, (3)
organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) and (4) task performance, and that FIW
mediates the relationship between WIF and family satisfaction. In addition, this research
also examines the moderating influence of gender on the relationship between work –
family conflict and subsequent outcomes, while controlling for family status. Despite the
fact that gender roles have greatly evolved, meta-analytic research on work– family
conflict and employee outcomes suggests that work –family literature can be advanced by
considering gender as a boundary condition in the relationship between work– family
conflict and individual outcomes (Eby et al., 2005). Recent studies continue to find gender
differentiated outcomes in the home and work domains in the presence of WIF and FIW
conflicts both in the USA and abroad (e.g. Misra & Strader, 2013). Therefore, examining
the role of gender as a moderator, while controlling for family status, is an essential step
to tease out these important differences, as undertaken in our research. Our model is shown
in Figure 1.
Our study is important to the field of work – family research as it extends the work –
family literature in three essential ways. First, this study examines cross-domain relations
by considering the mediating influence of conflict within the same domain. In other words,
our study investigates the mediating influence of WIF on the relationship between FIW
and four key work-related outcomes, and the mediating influence of FIW on the
relationship between WIF and a key family-related outcome of life satisfaction. Research
on work –family interface has reported that FIW is negatively related to cross-domain
outcomes such as job satisfaction, but previous studies have ignored the mechanism(s)
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 3

JOB SATISFACTION

ORGANIZATIONAL
WIF COMMITMENT

ORGANIZATIONAL
CITIZENSHIP
BEHAVIOR

TASK PERFORMANCE

GENDER
Downloaded by [Barjinder Singh] at 10:49 18 March 2015

FAMILY
FIW
SATISFACTION

Figure 1. Theoretical model.

through which conflict in the family domain may influence outcomes in the work domain.
Similarly, previous studies have not examined the mechanisms for the cross-domain
influence of WIF on family-related outcomes such as life satisfaction. Thus, this study
allows for a more thorough testing of the relationship between work –family conflict and
individual outcomes by clarifying that the cross-domain influence of work –family conflict
on individual outcomes passes through conflict in the matching domain. In order to better
understand the subtle nuances of the processes through which work– family conflict
influences individual outcomes, the clarifications offered by our research are of
importance to both organizational practitioners and work –family researchers.
Second, this research examines the moderating role of gender on the relationship
between work –family conflict and individual outcomes. Studies continue to indicate
significant differences between men and women in terms of variables such as employers’
hiring practices, salaries offered and promotion decisions. In the USA, women of every
ethnicity, and in virtually every line of work, both with and without children, suffer a pay
gap relative to men (American Association of University Women (AAUW), 2013).
Further, in other developed countries women with and without children are paid less than
men. In contrast, men with children do not suffer from these penalties compared with other
men, but tend to be paid more than men without children (Misra & Strader, 2013).
Similarly, in terms of home responsibilities, a study of 13 countries found that ‘even in the
most egalitarian countries women still were responsible for the majority of the housework’
(Geist & Cohen, 2011, pp. 842 and 843). Thus, within the domains of work and family,
there is a significant difference in treatment meted out to men and women and
consequently, significant gender differences in individual behaviors have also been
 4 P.A. Cloninger et al.

observed. In addition, focusing on the discriminant validity of WIF and FIW measures,
Mesmer-Magnus and Viswesvaran (2005) encourage future researchers to investigate
gender as a potential moderator between work –family conflict and outcomes such as job
satisfaction, organizational commitment and OCB. Thus, by examining gender’s role in
differentially impacting the relationship between the work –family conflict and individual
outcomes, our study addresses a major gap in the literature by highlighting the importance
that researchers and practitioners need to attribute to gender in the modeling of work –
family issues and in developing interventions to efficiently manage work – family conflict.
Third, this study is one of the relatively few studies that have examined work-related
outcomes such as OCB and task performance. Most work –family research has focused
extensively on job and family satisfaction alone, with only a limited focus on other
outcomes (Amstad et al., 2011). While there has always been a call from work– family
researchers to include other variables of interest, our study echoes this call by examining
the impact of work –family conflict on OCBs and task performance, in addition to job
and life satisfaction and organizational commitment (Amstad et al., 2011). With the
Downloaded by [Barjinder Singh] at 10:49 18 March 2015

aforementioned contributions, our study bridges multiple gaps in the work– family
literature, by shedding light on the mediating influence of conflict in the matching domain
and moderating role of gender on individual work and life outcomes.

Theory, literature review and hypotheses

Work – family conflict and outcomes – mediation effect of cross domain conflict
Theoretical framework
Human life is composed of two important microsystems or domains: work and family.
Between these domains, there exists a permeable boundary that facilitates the exchange of
influence from one domain to another (Hill, Ferris, & Martinson, 2003). The exchanges
that take place between work and family domains have been explained by way of several
competing and complimenting mechanisms, like spillover, resource drain, compensation
and segmentation (Edwards & Rothbard, 2000). This study employs two such mechanisms
to build our hypotheses – spillover and resource-drain. Spillover mechanism, as
articulated above, captures the exchange of influence between the life and work domains,
and also proposes the conditions under which such an exchange takes place. According to
spillover mechanism, the exchange between work and family domains takes place via
spillover of affect, values, skills and overt behaviors between the two domains (Eby et al.,
2005; Edwards & Rothbard, 2000; Stevanovic & Rupert, 2009; Zedeck, 1992). Research
in work –family conflict has established that the work and family domains are permeable
(Frone et al., 1992), for example, employees may carry their work home and they may be
thinking of family problems at work. Thus, spillover is a natural phenomenon as
individuals transition between their work and family roles in their daily routines. Thus, an
employee experiencing high levels of WIF will also experience higher levels of FIW. This
is because resources such as energy are finite and limited. For example, employees who
habitually come home tired from work will have little energy to perform their family
responsibilities. Eventually, they may experience that their family roles are burdensome
which may lead to perception of higher levels of FIW. A parallel argument can be made
for the spillover effect from family to work domain. Thus, the spillover mechanism
explains why the two forms of conflict are reciprocally related.
On the other hand, resource drain mechanism entails to transfer of resources (e.g. time,
energy and attention) between two domains. In the resource drain mechanism, resources
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 5

are finite, and in order to successfully discharge responsibilities in various domains of life,
individuals are required to manage with the limited resources (Edwards & Rothbard,
2000). If there is a surplus of resources in one domain, then the surplus can be
conveniently applied to the other domain. But if the role demands increase, resources in
the original domain would reduce significantly, which not only adversely impacts the
discharge of responsibilities in that domain but also generates conflicts with the other
domain (Schultz & Higbee, 2010). Further, gender-role theory is used to hypothesize that
gender moderates relationships between work – family conflict and outcomes (see
Figure 1).

WIF and outcomes on the work domain

WIF and organizational outcomes
Research has shown that work –family conflict is negatively related to outcomes within the
work domain. Previous research has established that work – family conflict is negatively
Downloaded by [Barjinder Singh] at 10:49 18 March 2015

related to job satisfaction (e.g. Amstad et al., 2011; Frone et al., 1992). WIF is negatively
related to job satisfaction because employees experiencing high levels of WIF may
attribute their WIF to their jobs or organization and thus may experience lower levels of
job satisfaction. For example, Wiley (1987) found a negative relationship between the
work and non-work role conflict and organizational commitment (without distinguishing
between the two directions of conflict). Similar findings have also been reported by
Thompson and Werner (1997). Theoretically too, based on the perspective of Becker
(1960) exchange theory of commitments, when work– family conflict, especially WIF, is
present, the person in question may perceive a negative exchange relationship with the
organization and in turn commit less into the organization. Out of the three components of
commitment proposed by Allen and Meyer (1990), affective commitment, which is
defined as emotional attachment with the organization, suffers the most. Thus, as work –
family conflict increases the emotional attachment with the organization dwindles.
Similar to organizational commitment, existing studies also suggest a negative
relationship between work – family conflict and task performance (Amstad et al., 2011;
Eby et al., 2005; Jackson & Schuler, 1985). This negative relationship is primarily rooted
in the disruption caused by work –family conflict, which is triggered by the competition
for limited resources (e.g. time and attention) among work and non-work roles. For
example, using generic measure for work – family conflict, Shih, Chiang, and Hsu (2010)
found that work –family conflict among expatriate managers in multinational companies is
negatively related to the supervisor ratings of their task performance. In a laboratory study,
Butler and Skattebo (2004) found that FIW was responsible for lower ratings of task
performance and reward. In a recent meta-analysis conducted by Amstad et al. (2011), it
has been further shown that there exists a strong negative relationship between WIF/FIW
and task performance, but that few studies simultaneously focus on the effect of both FIW
and WIF on task performance.
With regards to OCBs too there is a negative relationship with work– family conflict.
OCBs are defined as employee behaviors that benefit other employees or the organization,
and are considered discretionary because they are not specifically described in an
employee’s formal job description (Moorman, 1991; Organ, 1990, 1997). Prior research
on work– family conflict and OCBs is very limited (Amstad et al., 2011). Several studies
proposed a direct relationship by arguing that work– family conflict creates a time-related
constraint on OCB. In addition to time-based constraint, resource drain mechanism
(Edwards & Rothbard, 2000) also provides a valuable rationale explaining the relationship
 6 P.A. Cloninger et al.

between work – family conflict and OCBs. In the case of WIF, when work responsibilities
become more demanding, then individuals, in order to cope with increased work-loads, are
required to expend more resources. Because resources are limited, an over consumption of
resources (to counter increased in-role responsibilities) results in a dearth of resources that
makes it difficult for employees to engage in extra-role or citizenship behaviors
(Greenhaus, Collins, & Shaw, 2003). Some studies also suggest indirect effects of work –
family conflict on OCB by way of mediators, such as job satisfaction and organizational
commitment. For example, Thompson and Werner (1997) detected the presence of both
direct and indirect relationships between work and non-work role conflict and OCB. With
respect to the indirect relationship they found that work and non-work conflict negatively
related to job satisfaction and organizational commitment and in turn led to low OCBs
(Thompson & Werner, 1997). In a sample of US school teachers, Bragger, Rodriguez-
Srednicki, Kutcher, Indovino, and Rosner (2005) found that FIW, WIF and an overall
measure of work – family conflict were negatively related to teachers’ engagement in OCB
even after controlling the effects of job satisfaction and organizational commitment.
Downloaded by [Barjinder Singh] at 10:49 18 March 2015

Similarly using a sample of Spanish employees in various industries, Beham (2011) found
a significant negative relationship between FIW and OCB. They did not find significant
relationships detected for WIF, but they did find that FIW was negatively related to OCB
for women, but not for men, implying a moderating role of gender. As discussed
previously, OCBs are positive and discretionary behaviors on the part of an employee that
benefit other employees and/or the organization. OCBs generally extend beyond formal
job duties, roles and responsibilities and require employees to voluntarily expend extra
effort. Thus, as previously discussed, due to resource limitation it seems likely that an
employee experiencing WIF has less energy or time to engage in OCBs.

FIW and family satisfaction

Just as in the work domain where WIF is negatively associated with work related
outcomes, FIW is negatively associated with outcomes in the family domain. When
employees perceive that their family is interfering with their work responsibilities, they
feel a heightened level of dissatisfaction with their family life (Amstad et al., 2011). Thus,
employees experiencing FIW may be less satisfied with their family life at higher levels
of WIF.

Work – family conflict and mediation effects

As stated above, according to Edwards and Rothbard (2000) conflict in the work and
family domains is interconnected through a number of mechanisms such as spillover,
compensation and resource transfer. In the context of the present study, we propose that a
high level of conflict in one domain is positively associated with a high level of conflict in
the other domain, too, via spillover. As discussed, research in work– family conflict has
established that the work and family domains are permeable (Frone et al., 1992). Spillover
is a natural phenomenon as employees transition between their work and family roles, and
causes employees experiencing high levels of WIF to also experience higher levels of FIW
as their resources (e.g. time and energy) are finite and limited. As a parallel argument can
be made for the spillover effect from family to work domain, the spillover mechanism
explains why WIF and FIW are reciprocally related. Therefore, it is likely that when
employees perceive a high level of FIW, the negative effect of the conflict may spill over
to the work domain, causing high levels of WIF. Similarly, there could be a spillover from
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 7

WIF to FIW. In this regard, we propose that cross-domain influence of work– family
conflict on individual outcomes will be mediated by the conflict in the matching domain.
In other words, the impact of FIW on work-related outcomes will be mediated by WIF.
Resource drain mechanism is also a valuable framework that potentially links conflicts
in the work and family domains (Edwards & Rothbard, 2000). Because the resource drain
mechanism suggests that resources (such as time and energy) are finite, when resources are
consumed in excess in one domain this overconsumption creates a deficiency of resources in
the other domain, and negatively affects outcomes in that domain. For example, an
employee with high levels of FIW may consume a high level of resources in the family
domain, resulting in fewer resources available for use in the work domain, which, in turn,
may exacerbate the levels of WIF. Consequently, when high level of WIF is perceived,
attribution of the cause of WIF is perceived to be work-related factors, which in turn
adversely affects outcomes in the work domain (Amstad et al., 2011). Reiterating the
connections between work and family domains, in their meta-analysis, Amstad et al. (2011)
assert that when family demands increase in magnitude and family starts interfering with
Downloaded by [Barjinder Singh] at 10:49 18 March 2015

work, then, as a result work-related behaviors (for example in-role and extra-role
performance behaviors) suffer. But before the brunt of FIW destroys work related outcomes,
it devastates individual resources, resulting in increased WIF. Therefore, we propose
that in the relationship between FIW and work-related outcomes, WIF plays a mediating
role. A parallel argument can be made on the mediating effect of FIW on the relationship
between WIF and family satisfaction. Based upon these arguments, this study proposes:

Hypothesis 1a: WIF will mediate the relationship between FIW and job satisfaction.
Hypothesis 1b: WIF will mediate the relationship between FIW and organizational
commitment.
Hypothesis 1c: WIF will mediate the relationship between FIW and OCB.
Hypothesis 1d: WIF will mediate the relationship between FIW and task performance.
Hypothesis 1e: FIW will mediate the relationship between WIF and family satisfaction.

Work – family conflict and outcomes – moderating role of gender

Gender differences in work – family conflict are complex and are influenced by differences
in family status, the status of women in the society, family structure (Misra & Strader,
2013), as well as earnings and field of employment (Bender & Heywood, 2006). The
theoretical basis for gender differences in the relationship between work– family conflict
and outcomes is provided by the gender role theory (Eagly & Karau, 1991). Gender roles are
social expectations of the roles that a person of a particular gender is expected to perform.
According to the gender role theory, men and women place differential emphasis on work
and family roles due to the stereotypes associated with the roles they occupy. Although
these stereotypes may vary significantly across countries, gender role theory suggests
that men tend to place more importance on their work role than women, while women place
more importance on their family roles. Socialization influences men and women’s attitude
toward their social roles, whereby women often view their family role identity as equally or
even more salient than their identity related to their workplace (Eagly, 1997). Women
have a stronger need to focus on non-work activities such as taking care of their family,
as family role is more central to their existence (Bender, Donohoe, & Haywood, 2005).
Although human society is consistently becoming more egalitarian, but recent
evidence still suggests that gender role attitudes have changed very little in recent years
and this relative stagnation of gender attitudes is reflected at both home and work domains
 8 P.A. Cloninger et al.

(Cotter, Hermsen, & Vanneman, 2011). It has also been reported that even in countries
with a declining wage gap and with generous access to child care (such as East Germany,
France and Sweden) women who are mothers experience a ‘motherhood penalty’ of lower
wages, while men who are fathers experience a ‘fatherhood bonus’ (Misra & Strader,
2013). Gender role theory suggests that due to greater centrality of the family role, women
focus more on non-work activities and react more strongly to conflict at workplace which
interferes with their family roles. Conversely, gender roles influence men to work more
hours outside the home.
Within the USA, popular culture since the 1990s often supports traditional stay-at-
home role for women. Rather than workplaces adapting to working parents, traditional
stay-at-home roles for women have gained greater support. According to Cotter et al.
(2011), although the new gender framework could still be technically egalitarian between
husband and wife, and emphasize the importance of women’s autonomous choices, in
reality, there is substantial support regarding traditional gender division of labor.
Thus, based on extant evidence, it is reasonable to propose that the relationship
Downloaded by [Barjinder Singh] at 10:49 18 March 2015

between FIW and work-related outcomes such as job satisfaction, organizational

commitment, OCB and task performance is stronger for women than men. At lower levels
of WIF, women may have more time to perform their traditional family roles and feel more
satisfied with their performance in their family roles. In contrast, men react less strongly
to WIF due to the gender role stereotypes associated with men in relation to their
performance in family roles. Based on above discussion, we hypothesize that gender will
moderate the relationships between FIW and job outcomes.
With respect to job satisfaction, there is considerable evidence that suggests a negative
relationship between FIW and job satisfaction. For example, in their meta-analysis,
Mesmer-Magnus and Viswesvaran (2005) found that FIW has a greater negative impact on
job satisfaction than WIF. They hypothesized that FIW, by repeatedly interrupting the
work load has a stronger influence than WIF on job satisfaction, and that female
employees are more affected by such interruptions than male employees. Hoobler, Wayne,
and Lemmon (2009) research also supports this hypothesis. They too found evidence that
managers’ perceptions of employees’ FIW resulted in fewer promotions and growth
opportunities, and that women suffered from this bias disproportionately as managers
perceived women to have greater FIW (whether true or not). Similarly, findings in US-
based studies suggest that women with job flexibility are more satisfied with their jobs than
women without flexibility (Bender et al., 2005), implying job satisfaction is not merely
due to gender stereotypes, but to FIW.
Evidence also suggests that FIW interferes with career advancement and that greater
family responsibilities can significantly decrease the promotability of an employee
(Hoobler et al., 2009). In other words, employees with higher level of FIW conflict are less
likely to receive as many promotions or to be offered opportunities to advance their
careers. Therefore, based on these arguments, it is reasonable to suggest that for women,
relative to men, FIW has a stronger influence on job satisfaction and commitment to the
organization. Therefore,
Hypothesis 2a: Gender will moderate the relationship between FIW and job
satisfaction such that the negative relationship is more pronounced
for female employees than male employees.
Hypothesis 2b: Gender will moderate the relationship between FIW and organizational
commitment such that the negative relationship is more pronounced for
female employees than male employees.
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 9

OCBs, as articulated above, are positive behaviors from an employee that benefit other
employees or the organization, and are considered discretionary because they are not
specifically described in an employee’s formal job description (Moorman, 1991; Organ,
1990, 1997). Although OCBs are considered important to the success of an organization,
relatively little is known about how OCBs can be encouraged within an organization
(Cloninger, Ramamoorthy, & Flood, 2011). By definition OCBs require employees to
voluntarily expend extra effort to help others in the organization, and accordingly, it seems
likely that an employee experiencing FIW is simply not in a position to devote the extra
energy or time to engage in OCBs. Based on gender role theory, women (relative to men)
are expected to devote more resources towards the fulfillment of their family roles. But
when family’s interference with work increases, women are not only required to expend
more resources to counter the pressures of family but due to dearth of resources, they also
find it difficult to engage in OCBs.
Based on the same rationale, we also propose that the relationship between FIW and
job performance for women is also more pronounced as compared to men. With the
Downloaded by [Barjinder Singh] at 10:49 18 March 2015

increased FIW if women experience the dearth of resources and find it difficult to engage
in OCBs, by the same token, it is also difficult for women to discharge their in-role
responsibilities. Therefore,
Hypothesis 2c: Gender will moderate the relationship between FIW and OCB such that
the negative relationship is more pronounced for female employees
than male employees.
Hypothesis 2d: Gender will moderate the relationship between FIW and task
performance such that the negative relationship is more pronounced
for female employees than male employees.
Conversely, in the domain of family too women are more likely to attribute WIF as a
root cause of decrease in family satisfaction. With the increase in work-related
responsibilities, more resources are channelized toward the work domain to fulfill work
responsibilities, which creates a dearth of resources in the family domain and negatively
impacts satisfaction in the family domain. In the case of female employees, gender role
theory predicts that family outcomes hold greater importance, and implies that WIF plays
an even greater role in adversely impacting family outcomes. Therefore,
Hypothesis 3: Gender will moderate the relationship between WIF and family
satisfaction such that the negative relationship is more pronounced for
female employees than male employees.

Methodology
The hypotheses in this study were tested using a survey instrument and a large
convenience sample consisting of 435 full time employees working at various
organizations in the USA. These employees were also students in an MBA program at
a Southwestern university and were recruited for this study in return for minimal
extra credit. The average age of the sample was 30.6 and the sample consisted of
approximately 59% women and 41% men. The average number of years of work
experience was 10.9 years and approximately 50% of the employees in the study are
parents. In terms of race, approximately 42% of the sample identified themselves as White,
15% as Latino, 19% as Black, 18% as Asian and 6% as belonging to other racial categories
(or indicated no race).
 10 P.A. Cloninger et al.

Measures
Job satisfaction: Job satisfaction was measured using the three-item Michigan
organizational assessment scale developed by Cammann, Fichman, Jenkins, and Klesh
(1983). The a reliability for this measure was 0.9.
Organizational commitment: Organizational commitment was measured using the
nine-item short form organizational commitment questionnaire developed by Mowday,
Steers, and Porter (1979). The a reliability for this scale was 0.9.
Organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs): OCBs were measured using the seven-
item scale developed by Brockner, Tyler, and Cooper-Schneider (1992). The a reliability
for this scale was 0.8.
WIF and FIW: Work-to-family conflict (i.e. WIF) was measured using a five-item
scale based on Netemeyer, Boles, and McMurrian (1996). Family-to-work conflict (i.e.
FIW) was measured using a five-item was developed by Netemeyer et al. (1996). The a
reliability for these two scales was 0.9 and 0.92, respectively.
Task performance: Employees rated their performance on the job during the previous
Downloaded by [Barjinder Singh] at 10:49 18 March 2015

year on a five-point one item scale ranging from ‘1 ¼ very low performance’ and ‘5 ¼ very
high performance’.
Family satisfaction: This variable was measured using a three-item scale developed by
Edwards and Rothbard (1999). The a reliability for this scale was 0.92.

Controls
Family status and age were used as control variables. In addition to controlling for family
status and age, all analyses were run again controlling for parenthood and again for
number of children.

Results
The means, standard deviations and correlations of the variables are shown in Table 1.
To test for common method bias, Harmon’s one factor test was performed. The results
indicated that the single factor explained 23% of variance. Thus, common method
variance is not a significant issue in this research because the factor did not explain a large
variance.
Hierarchical regression analysis was used for testing the hypotheses, and for testing
mediation, we used Baron and Kenny (1986) framework. The relationship between WIF
and FIW is significant (b ¼ 0.38, p , 0.01) and similarly the relationship between FIW
and WIF is significant (b ¼ 0.72, p , 0.01). Table 2 shows the results of meditational
analysis.
Hypothesis 1a stated that WIF mediates the relationship between FIW and job
satisfaction. According to Baron and Kenny (1986), full mediation is suggested when the
significant relationship between the independent and dependent variable becomes
insignificant in the presence of the mediator variable. Thus, the results from Table 2,
suggest that the relationship between FIW and job satisfaction remains significant, but
with reduced effect in the presence of WIF (mediator). Therefore, the pattern of results
indicates that WIF partially mediates the relationship between FIW and job satisfaction.
Hypothesis 1b suggested that WIF will mediate the relationship between FIW and
organizational commitment. As indicated in Table 2, the relationship between FIW and
organizational commitment becomes insignificant in the presence of WIF which suggests
full mediation. Thus, WIF fully mediates the relationship between FIW and organizational
 Downloaded by [Barjinder Singh] at 10:49 18 March 2015

Table 1. Mean, standard deviation and intercorrelations among variables.

Variable Mean SD N 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1. Age 30.65 8.09 435 1
2. Gender 1.59 0.49 436 2 0.065 1
3. Marital status 1.70 0.96 435 0.412 2 0.75 1
4. Organizational commitment 3.14 0.80 434 0.122 2 0.014 0.059 1
5. OCB 3.97 0.53 434 0.060 0.029 0.037 0.123 1
6. Performance rating 4.33 0.66 405 2 0.012 0.77 0.115 0.157 0.072 1
7. Job satisfaction 3.54 0.86 435 0.127 2 0.009 0.047 0.720 0.089 0.142 1
8. Family satisfaction 3.52 0.75 430 0.076 0.057 0.207 0.291 0.043 0.028 0.352 1
9. WIF 2.49 1.02 435 0.137 2 0.170 0.084 20.194 20.069 20.115 20.323 20.136 1
10. FIW 2.08 0.67 432 0.080 2 0.050 0.114 20.146 20.098 20.079 20.258 20.153 0.512
Absolute value of correlations . 0.09 significant at 0.05 level.
Absolute value of correlations . 0.12 significant at 0.01 level.
The International Journal of Human Resource Management
11
 12 P.A. Cloninger et al.

Table 2. Mediational analysis.

Independent Job Organizational Task Family

variables satisfaction commitment OCB performance satisfaction
Model 1
Age 0.12* 0.12* 0.06 2 0.07 2 0.009
Marital status 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.14* 0.2**
R 2 change 0.02* 0.01* 0.0005 0.02* 0.04**
Model 2
Age 0.14** 0.12* 0.06 2 0.07 0.01
Marital status 0.010 0.010 0.020 0.15** 0.21**
FIW 2 0.27** 2 0.15** 20.18** 2 0.09*
WIF 2 0.15**
R 2 change 0.07** 0.02** 0.01** 0.01* 0.02*
Model 3
Age 0.14** 0.14** 0.05 2 0.07 0.14*
Downloaded by [Barjinder Singh] at 10:49 18 March 2015

Marital status 0.010 0.010 0.030 0.15** 0.010

FIW 2 0.12** 2 0.06 20.11** 2 0.03 2 0.14**
WIF 2 0.28** 2 0.18** 20.14** 2 0.1* 2 0.08
R 2 change 0.06** 0.02** 0.02** 0.01* 0.01*
Sobel’s Z score for mediation 2 4.58** 2 2.88** 23.20** 2 2.1* 2 2.0*
Note: *p,0.05 and **p,0.01.

commitment. In regards to hypothesis 1c which suggests that WIF will mediate the
relationship between FIW and OCB, the results from Table 2 indicate that the relationship
between FIW and OCB remains significant but with reduced magnitude in the presence of
WIF (mediator). Thus, WIF partially mediates the relationship between FIW and OCB.
Hypothesis 1d proposed that WIF will mediate the relationship between FIW and task
performance and the results from Table 2 suggest that relationship becomes insignificant
in the presence of the mediator which suggests full mediation. Hypothesis 1e suggested
that FIW will mediate the relationship between WIF and family satisfaction. The results
indicated in Table 2 suggest that the relationship between WIF and family satisfaction
becomes insignificant in the presence of FIW (mediating variable). This pattern of results
indicates that FIW fully mediates the relationship between WIF and family satisfaction,
thus providing support for hypothesis 1e.
The results of moderation analysis are presented in Table 3. The results from this table
suggest that gender moderates the relationship between FIW for the outcome variables job
satisfaction and OCB, providing support for hypotheses 2a and 2c. To better understand
the interaction between gender and FIW, the results were plotted on a graph using the
method described by Aiken and West (1991). The interaction between FIW and gender on
OCB is presented in Figure 2. As the graph suggests, the relationship between FIW and
OCB is stronger for women than men. Simple slope analysis suggests that the relationship
was significant for women (t ¼ 2 3.2, p , 0.01), but not for men (t ¼ 0.9, p . 0.05). The
interaction between FIW and gender on job satisfaction is presented in Figure 3. As the
figure suggests the relationship between FIW and job satisfaction was stronger for women
than men. Simple slope analysis indicates that the relationship was significant for women
(t ¼ 2 5.52, p , 0.01) and men (t ¼ 2 2.55, p , 0.05). Gender did not moderate the
relationship between FIW and organizational commitment and task performance. Thus,
hypotheses 2b and 2d were not supported. Gender did not moderate the relationship
between WIF and family satisfaction, and thus, hypothesis 3 was not supported.
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 13

Table 3. Moderation analysis.

Independent Family Organizational Job Task

variables satisfaction commitment OCB satisfaction performance
Age 0.001 0.012 0.005 0.014 0.014
Marital status 0.16** 0.01 0.020 0.010 0.10**
FIW 20.18** 2 0.09* 2 0.35* 20.09
WIF 20.11**
Gender 0.08 20.005 0.02 2 0.01 0.11
FIW*gender 20.14 2 0.17* 2 0.21* 0.01
WIF*gender 20.09
R 2 change due to interaction 0.005 0.003 0.01* 0.01* 0.001
Note: *p,0.05 and **p,0.01.

Further, all of the tests were rerun controlling for parenthood and for the number of
Downloaded by [Barjinder Singh] at 10:49 18 March 2015

children with similar results.

Discussion
In the field of human resource management, management of work – family conflict is a
major challenge that both researchers and practitioners face. In this regard, a major
objective of this research was to examine if the cross-domain effects of work– family
conflict mediate outcomes through conflict in the matching domain. Specifically, this
study examined if the relationships between FIW and outcomes such as job satisfaction,
organizational commitment, OCB and task performance are mediated by WIF, and
similarly, the relationships between WIF and family satisfaction are mediated by FIW.
In addition, this research also examined if gender moderated the relationships between
FIW and work-domain outcomes and WIF and family domain outcomes.
The results of this study indicate that WIF fully mediated the relationship between
FIW and organizational commitment, as well as FIW and task performance. The
mediation was partial for the other two outcome variables in the work domain, namely,
OCB and job satisfaction. The results suggest that employees may be attributing their level
of task performance or organizational commitment to their organizations. In other words,

Figure 2. Interaction between FIW and gender on OCB.

 14 P.A. Cloninger et al.

5
Men
4.5 Women

Job Satisfaction
3.5

2.5

1.5

1
Low FIW High FIW

Figure 3. Interaction between FIW and gender on job satisfaction.

Downloaded by [Barjinder Singh] at 10:49 18 March 2015

because the relationship between FIW and these two outcomes in this study is fully
mediated by WIF, employees with low levels of task performance or organizational
commitment due to high levels of FIW may be blaming their organization for their poor
task performance or organizational commitment.
It is interesting that the mediating influence of WIF for OCB and job satisfaction is
partial, that is, employees partially attribute their citizenship behaviors and job satisfaction
due to FIW to the conflict in the work domain. This suggests that job satisfaction
may exist independent of organizational factors for those who find intrinsic satisfaction in
their jobs, and that many employees engage in OCB especially in relation to their
co-workers independent of organizational factors. Considering that job satisfaction
and OCBs are important for organizational functioning, and that human resource managers
often encourage employees to engage in OCBs, our study informs both research and practice
of HRM by clarifying both direct and indirect paths to the above outcomes.
Results of our mediational hypotheses support spillover and resource drain
mechanisms. In the modeling of individual work and non-work outcomes, both WIF
and FIW are collectively responsible. As shown by our results, in determining work
related outcomes, FIW spills over to conflict in the work domain, which in turn causes
a paucity of resources and further deteriorates work-related attitudes and behaviors. Thus,
in determining work-related outcomes the importance of WIF and FIW cannot be
underestimated. Although, within HRM literature, there is rich evidence connecting
conflict within a domain with outcomes of the same domain, this study goes a step further
by examining the mechanism through which cross-domain influences impact individual
outcomes.
With respect to gender moderation hypotheses, our study also offers support to the
gender-role theory. Particularly, we found a significant interaction between FIW and
gender in relation to job satisfaction, which may be explained by the fact that women, in
general, are more satisfied with their jobs. Thus, it can be observed that at lower levels of
FIW, women had higher levels of job satisfaction. However, as FIW increased, the level
of job satisfaction was much lower. With regards to the outcome variable OCB, the
significant interaction term between FIW and gender can be explained by previous
research suggesting that women generally engage in more OCB than men (Huang, Jin,
& Yang, 2004). Therefore, women had higher levels of OCB at lower levels of FIW, but
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 15

with increase of FIW, women had less inclination to engage in OCB, perhaps because it
interfered with their traditional family roles.
The above findings also strengthen the claims made by resource-drain mechanism, by
reiterating that when family’s interference with work increases, women, who consider
family domain to be their primary responsibility according to gender role theory, may
expend all their resources to deal with increased FIW. Consequently, their job satisfaction
and their ability to undertake extra-role behaviors gets significantly compromised as
shown graphically in Figures 2 and 3. Research has shown that within the field of human
resource management, both from the research and practice stand points, management of
work –family conflict is a major imperative and our results, by providing support for
resource-drain mechanism, gender role and spillover theories, clarify the mechanisms
through which work– family conflict influences individual outcomes within work and
family domains.
Downloaded by [Barjinder Singh] at 10:49 18 March 2015

Practical implications
The findings of this study also have some significant implications for human resource
managers and practitioners. First, by illustrating the spillover between WIF and FIW, our
study informs human resource practitioners about the importance of work –life balance in
the lives of employees. In an effort to improve employee commitment, job satisfaction
and task performance, human resource managers need to find ways of reducing the levels
of WIF and FIW. Our findings also necessitate the implementation of organizational
policies and procedures that facilitate work – family balance and minimize the
encroachment of work into the family domain of employees. By adopting family
friendly practices such as, flexi-timing, work-from-home and onsite daycare,
organizations can try to limit the interference between work and family, and help ensure
employee job satisfaction, organizational commitment and beneficial voluntary
citizenship behaviors. By providing these facilities, organizations can actually increase
the resource-base of employees and considerably reduce the instances on resource drain
and depletion, which in turn results in a positive influence on employee behaviors.
By adopting and implementing the above suggestions, HR managers will also help in the
creation of an organizational culture, which is cognizant and respectful of employees’
work and family needs and consequently such a culture will not only attract but also help
in the retention of talented employees.
The examination of gender differences is another important contribution of this study
with major implications for human resource managers and organizational practitioners.
This study found that men and women react differently to perceived FIW conflict, with the
negative impact of FIW being more pronounced on job satisfaction and citizenship
behaviors of women, as compared to men. Although reduced levels of FIW appear to be
important for all employees, HR managers need to be more concerned about their work –
life balance for women employees especially because the traditional gender roles exist in
the society. With the large and increasing numbers of women in the workforce,
management of gender at work is another challenge that HR managers constantly face.
In this regard, our study offers valuable insights to HR managers in efficiently dealing with
the expectations of women at work. Women employees, perhaps due to the continued
socialization in society, appear to be more sensitive to FIW conflict than men, and FIW
conflict can be more damaging for work attitudes and behaviors of women. Therefore, in
the designing and distribution of work roles, human resource managers need to take into
consideration the gender of the focal employee, and doing this will not only positively
 16 P.A. Cloninger et al.

influence work behaviors and attitudes of women but will act as a boon for superior
employee– employer relationships.

Future research directions

The first avenue for future research is the replication of this study with samples from other
countries. Countries differ in the way of gender socialization, as well as in lending
organizational and community support to men and women. For example, countries that
support flexible work arrangements like the Netherlands and Germany have high levels of
part-time employment, but women experience severe wage penalties (e.g. motherhood
penalties) (Misra & Strader, 2013). Future researchers can test the efficacy of our research
model in non-US settings to check if our model is generalizable outside the USA. Future
research could also examine the extent to which these findings reflect the centrality of the
family for female employees, the centrality of work for male employees and the perception
of employers who may consider mothers more family-focused and fathers more career-
Downloaded by [Barjinder Singh] at 10:49 18 March 2015

focused.
Future research should also examine OCBs in more details. Research on OCBs has
identified two types of OCBs, i.e. OCB-Interpersonal (OCB-I) and OCB-Organizational
(OCB-O). OCB-I deals with helping behaviors with respect to co-workers and other
individuals, and OCB-O consists of behaviors that are targeted toward the good of the
organization. Our study did not separately assess OCB-O and OCB-I, but future research
could examine both components of OCBs to illuminate the detailed impact of work –
family conflict on both forms of OCBs. Our study suggests that women who are happier
with their jobs or with their pay are more likely to engage in OCBs than women who are
less happy or who perceive their pay is too low. Future research could also look at the
effect of intrinsic versus extrinsic rewards on the relationship between FIW and OCBs,
which will not only inform HR researcher, but also equip human resource practitioners to
efficiently deal with gender differences in motivation toward work.
Another important area for future research is to investigate the role of some other
important variables than gender and family status in the dynamism of FIW, WIF and
organizational outcomes. Gender roles continue to evolve and family roles may change
over time. Many parents assume the role of single parents or step-parents or the role of
caretakers of older parents. More research is needed to tease out the influence of different
types of parental arrangements, and perhaps even marital discord, on FIW stress, as
common assumptions such as two parents are better than one may not be valid (e.g.
Musick & Meier, 2010). Additional variables that may be included are the number and age
of children, non-custodial parental involvement, step-parent involvement, marital discord,
child care arrangements, familial support and organizational support such as on-site
daycare and flextime. Another avenue for future research is to examine caregiving related
to parents as well as to children. Many employees today are a ‘sandwich generation,’ who
provide care to their children and to their aging parents (Parker & Patten, 2013). In aging
populations in the developed world, employees providing elderly care are increasing.
In many locales, families and caregiving tend to be provided in extended family groups.
Future research should examine variables such as whether or not the employee is the
primary or secondary caregiver, whether one is caring for one or two parents and the extent
to which adult daycare or home care is available.
Future research could also examine enrichment, specifically work –family enrichment
in which work roles improve the quality of life for the individual in the family role
(Wayne, Randel, & Stevens, 2006), and family –work enrichment on work– family
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 17

conflict. Wayne et al. (2006) found a significant positive relationship between family –
work enrichment and two of the dimensions of organizational commitment, namely,
affective and continuance commitment.

Limitations
Every research has limitations, and ours is no exception. First, this study only includes
employees working in the USA and the data collected are cross-sectional in nature. Thus,
causal conclusions based on the observed relationships should be made with caution.
Second, single source data we used may produce common method bias. However, the
pattern of correlations among the variables and the presence of significant interactions
suggest that common method bias may not be a significant concern. Needless to say, future
researchers may use multi-source data to measure task performance and OCB to minimize
the effect of common method bias. Another limitation is the somewhat young age of the
sample. However, approximately 50% of the respondents in our sample were parents.
Downloaded by [Barjinder Singh] at 10:49 18 March 2015

Conclusion
In spite of above mentioned limitations, this research contributes to the work– family
literature by examining the mediating influence of work – family conflict and providing an
explicatory mechanism for the cross-domain linkages between work –family conflict and
outcomes. This research also included an examination of the moderating role of gender on
the work –family conflict and outcomes. Having done this, our study addresses the calls
in prior research to include important mediators and moderators in illuminating the
relationship between work – family conflict and outcomes, especially those under-studied
outcomes such as OCB and task performance.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

References
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance, and
normative commitment to the organizations. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 1 – 18.
American Association of University Women (AAUW). (2013). The simple truth about the gender
pay gap. Fall 2013 edition. Retrieved from http://www.aauw.org/files/2013/03/The-Simple-
Truth-Fall-2013.pdf (accessed 6 February 2014).
Amstad, F. T., Meier, L. L., Fasel, U., Elfering, A., & Semmer, N. K. (2011). A meta-analysis of
work– family conflict and various outcomes with a special emphasis on cross-domain versus
matching-domain relations. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 16, 151– 169.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social
psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173– 1182.
Becker, H. S. (1960). Notes on the concept of commitment. American Journal of Sociology, 66,
32 – 40.
Beham, B. (2011). Work – family conflict and organizational citizenship behaviors: Empirical
evidence from Spanish employees. Community, Work, and Family, 14, 63 – 80.
Bender, H. A., Donohoe, N. M., & Haywood, N. S. (2005). Job satisfaction and gender segregation.
Oxford Economic Papers, 57, 479– 496.
Bender, K. A., & Heywood, J. S. (2006). Job satisfaction of the highly educated: The role of gender,
academic tenure and comparison income. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 53, 253–279.
 18 P.A. Cloninger et al.

Bragger, J., Rodriguez-Srednicki, O., Kutcher, E. J., Indovino, L., & Rosner, E. (2005). Work–
family conflict, work– family culture and organizational citizenship behavior among teachers.
Journal of Business and Psychology, 20, 303– 324.
Brockner, J., Tyler, T. R., & Cooper-Schneider, R. (1992). The influence of prior commitment to
an institution on reactions to perceived unfairness: The higher they are, the harder they fall.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 241– 261.
Butler, A. B., & Skattebo, A. (2004). What is acceptable for women may not be for men: The effect
of family conflicts with work on job-performance ratings. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 77, 553– 564.
Byron, D. (2005). A meta-analytic review of work– family conflict and its antecedents. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 67, 169– 198.
Cammann, C., Fichman, M., Jenkins, D., & Klesh, J. (1983). Michigan organizational assessment
questionnaire. In S. E. Seashore (Ed.), Assessing organizational change: A guide to methods,
measures, and practices (pp. 71 –138). New York, NY: Wiley.
Cloninger, P. A., Ramamoorthy, N., & Flood, P. (2011). The influence of equity, equality and gender
on citizenship behaviors (OCBs). SAM’s Advancement of Management Journal, 76, 37 – 46.
Cotter, D., Hermsen, J. M., & Vanneman, R. (2011). The end of the gender revolution? Gender role
attitudes from 1977 to 2008. American Journal of Sociology, 117, 259– 289.
Downloaded by [Barjinder Singh] at 10:49 18 March 2015

Eagly, A. H. (1997). Sex differences in social behavior: Comparing social role theory and
evolutionary psychology. American Psychologist, 50, 1380– 1383.
Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (1991). Gender and the emergence of leaders: A meta-analysis. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 685– 710.
Eby, L. T., Casper, W. J., Lockwood, A., Bordeaux, C., & Brinley, A. (2005). Work and family
research in IO/OB: Content analysis and review of the literature (1980– 2002). Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 66, 124– 197.
Edwards, J. R., & Rothbard, N. P. (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.
Edwards, J. R., & Rothbard, N. P. (2000). Mechanisms linking work and family: Specifying the
relationships between work and family constructs. Academy of Management Review, 25,
178– 199.
Frone, M. R., Russell, M., & Cooper, M. L. (1992). Antecedents and outcomes of work– family
conflict: Testing a model of the work– family interface. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77,
65 – 78.
Geist, C., & Cohen, P. N. (2011). Headed toward equality? Housework change in comparative
perspective. Journal of Marriage and Family, 73, 832– 844.
Greenhaus, J., Collins, K., & Shaw, J. (2003). The relation between work– family balance and
quality of life. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 3, 510– 531.
Hill, J. E., Ferris, M., & Martinson, V. (2003). Does it matter where you work: A comparison of how
three work venues (traditional office, virtual office, and home office) influence aspects of work
and personal/family life. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63, 220–241.
Hoobler, J. M., Wayne, S. J., & Lemmon, G. (2009). Bosses’ perceptions of family –work conflict
and women’s promotability: Glass ceiling effects. Academy of Management Journal, 52,
939– 957.
Huang, J. H., Jin, B. H., & Yang, C. (2004). Satisfaction with business-to-employee benefit systems
and organizational citizenship behavior: An examination of gender differences. International
Journal of Manpower, 25, 195– 210.
Jackson, S. E., & Schuler, R. S. (1985). A meta-analysis and conceptual critique of research on role
ambiguity and role conflict in work settings. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 36, 16 –78.
Kelloway, E. K., Gottlieb, B. H., & Barham, L. (1999). The source, nature, and direction of work and
family conflict: A longitudinal investigation. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 4,
337– 346.
Mesmer-Magnus, J. R., & Viswesvaran, C. (2005). Convergence between measures of work-to-
family and family-to-work conflict: A meta-analytic examination. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 67, 215–232.
Misra, J., & Strader, E. (2013). Gender pay equity in advanced countries: The role of parenthood and
policies. Journal of International Affairs, 67, 27 – 41.
 The International Journal of Human Resource Management 19

Moorman, R. H. (1991). The relationship between organizational justice and organizational

citizenship behavior: Do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship? Journal of
Applied Psychology, 76, 845– 855.
Mowday, R., Steers, R., & Porter, L. (1979). The measurement of organizational commitment.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14, 224– 247.
Musick, K., & Meier, A. (2010). Are both parents always better than one? Parental conflict and
young adult well-being. Social Science Research, 39, 814– 830.
Netemeyer, R. G., Boles, J. S., & McMurrian, R. (1996). Development and validation of work–
family conflict and family –work conflict scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 400–410.
Organ, D. W. (1990). The motivational basis of organizational citizenship behavior. In B. M. Staw &
L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior, (Vol. 12, pp. 43 – 72). Greenwich,
CT: JAI Press.
Organ, D. W. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior: It’s construct cleanup time. Human
Performance, 10, 85 – 97.
Parker, K., & Patten, E. (2013). The sandwich generation: Rising financial burdens for middle-aged
Americans. Pew Research Center, Social & Demographic Trends Project. Retrieved from
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/01/30/the-sandwich-generation
Schultz, J. L., & Higbee, J. L. (2010). An exploration of theoretical foundations for working
Downloaded by [Barjinder Singh] at 10:49 18 March 2015

mothers’ formal workplace social networks. Journal of Business & Economics Research, 8,
87 – 94.
Shih, H. A., Chiang, W. H., & Hsu, C. C. (2010). High involvement work system, work– family
conflict, and expatriates’ performance – Evidence from Taiwanese expatriates stationed in
China. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 21, 2013– 2030.
Stevanovic, P., & Rupert, P. A. (2009). Work – family spillover and life satisfaction among
professional psychologists. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 40, 62 – 68.
Thompson, H. B., & Werner, J. M. (1997). The impact of role conflict/facilitation on core and
discretionary behaviors: Testing a mediated model. Journal of Management, 23, 583– 601.
Wayne, J. H., Randel, A. E., & Stevens, J. (2006). The role of identity and work – family support in
work– family enrichment and its work-related consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior,
69, 445– 461.
Wiley, D. L. (1987). The relationship between work/nonwork role conflict and job-related outcomes:
Some unanticipated findings. Journal of Management, 13, 467– 472.
Zedeck, S. E. (1992). Work, families, and organizations. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

View publication stats