You are on page 1of 16

Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 2011, Vol. 16, No.

3, 297312

2011 American Psychological Association 1076-8998/11/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0022880

Work-Family Enrichment and Job Performance: A Constructive Replication of Affective Events Theory
Dawn Carlson
Baylor University

K. Michele Kacmar
University of Alabama

Suzanne Zivnuska
California State University, Chico

Merideth Ferguson
Baylor University

Dwayne Whitten
Texas A&M University
Based on affective events theory (AET), we hypothesize a four-step model of the mediating mechanisms of positive mood and job satisfaction in the relationship between work-family enrichment and job performance. We test this model for both directions of enrichment (workto-family and family-to-work). We used two samples to test the model using structural equation modeling. Results from Study 1, which included 240 full-time employees, were replicated in Study 2, which included 189 matched subordinate-supervisor dyads. For the work-to-family direction, results from both samples support our conceptual model and indicate mediation of the enrichment-performance relationship for the work-to-family direction of enrichment. For the family-to-work direction, results from the rst sample support our conceptual model but results from the second sample do not. Our ndings help elucidate mixed ndings in the enrichment and job performance literatures and contribute to an understanding of the mechanisms linking these concepts. We conclude with a discussion of the practical and theoretical implications of our ndings. Keywords: affective events theory, work-family enrichment, positive mood, job satisfaction, job performance

Within the last decade, scientic interest in how normal people ourish under benign conditions (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000, p. 5) has exploded (e.g., see Lazarus, 2003 for a brief review). Under the rubric of this positive psychology approach, researchers study constructs such as wellbeing, contentment, and satisfaction with the same rigor and interest as more traditional concepts such as

Dawn Carlson and Merideth Ferguson, Hankamer School of Business, Department of Management, Baylor University; K. Michele Kacmar, Management and Marketing Department, Culverhouse College of Commerce and Business Administration, University of Alabama; Suzanne Zivnuska, College of Business, Department of Management, California State University, Chico; Dwayne Whitten, Mays Business School, Department of Information and Operations Management, Texas A&M University. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Merideth Ferguson, Hankamer School of Business, Department of Management, Baylor University, One Bear Place #98006, Waco, TX 76798-8006. E-mail: merideth_ferguson@baylor.edu

stress, conict, and pathology. However, little scholarly attention has been given to this positivist approach within the work-family literature (Carlson, Grzywacz, & Zivnuska, 2009; Frone, 2003; Greenhaus & Powell, 2006) or the study of work-family enrichment. Enrichment is dened as the extent to which experiences in one role (e.g., work) improve the quality of life in another role (e.g., family) (Greenhaus & Powell, 2006, p. 73). As such, research conceives of enrichment between the work and family domains as the accumulation of times when resources are transferred between roles, often leading to synergistic effects (Witt & Carlson, 2006). Because of the relatively recent emergence of enrichment as a construct of interest, little is known about its relationship with critical outcomes such as job performance. We designed this study to ll that gap by examining this relationship in the work setting. Theory suggests that enrichment should improve performance indirectly through its impact on attitudes, as well as directly because of resource gains and skill transfer between roles (Hobfoll, 1989, 2002; Marks, 1977; Sieber, 1974), but empirical results are

297

298

CARLSON, KACMAR, ZIVNUSKA, FERGUSON, AND WHITTEN

scarce and inconclusive. In fact, we are aware of only two studies directly measuring the enrichmentperformance relationship (Graves, Ohlott, & Ruderman, 2007; Witt & Carlson, 2006), neither of which reported signicant direct effects. However, Graves, Ohlott, & Ruderman (2007) found an indirect relationship between enrichment and performance mediated by job strain as measured by a mood-based variable. We believe that mood, the resulting accumulation of affective experiences, may provide a key to understanding the relationship between the work and family environments with attitudes and behavioral outcomes (Judge, Ilies, & Scott, 2006). This argument is consistent with, and an extension of, Greenhaus and Powells (2006) work suggesting that resources generated in one role can spill over and lead to high performance in another role through an affective path (Edwards & Rothbard, 2000). In other words, Greenhaus and Powell suggest that affect plays a central role in understanding how two distinct roles are interconnected with the potential to create enrichment. Our study picks up where their model ends, considering the role that affect plays in connecting the experience of enrichment to job performance. Interestingly, research nds that of the three enrichment components (affective, behavior-based instrumental, and value-based instrumental), the two nonaffective components of work-family enrichment relate directly to job satisfaction while the affective component does not (Hanson, Hammer & Colton, 2006). Accepting that enrichment includes an affect element, our research moves beyond the moment-tomoment emotional responses related to the enrichment experience to focus on a global measure of affect captured as mood that results from the enrichment. Thus, we draw a distinction between positive affect specically related to the enrichment experience versus an accumulated resultant mood state. We theorize that it is this global mood regarding work that leads to job satisfaction and performance. To deepen our understanding of these relationships in a work setting, we apply affective events theory (AET) (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996) to the enrichment-performance relationship. AET allows us to separate the affective component of work-family enrichment (Greenhaus & Powell, 2006) from the affective reaction to work-family enrichment by treating work-family enrichment as an event. Following AET we argue that the work-family enrichment events create a positive mood which in turn acts as an antecedent to attitudes upon which we act. Based on

this rationale, we build a four-step model linking events (the accumulation of times an employee experiences work-family enrichment), affect (accumulated positive mood about work), attitude (job satisfaction), and behavior (job performance). We theorize that each instance of enrichment is an event. As these events accumulate, they may have synergistic effects, so that the momentary emotional impact of a particularly enriching event builds on other similar events, creating an overall affective mood state. We believe this research contributes to the literature in several ways. Using two distinct samples that include matched employee-supervisor data, we provide a constructive replication (Lykken, 1968) that empirically tests a model rmly grounded in AET (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996). In so doing, we explore potential mechanisms by which work-family enrichment may contribute to job performance and build on earlier work in enrichment that argues for an affective path (Greenhaus & Powell, 2006). Specically, we examine the mediating role of an affective variable (positive mood about work) and the attitude that it engenders (job satisfaction). Shedding light on a relatively new construct in the work-family literature provides insight into the emotional, attitudinal, and behavioral implications of the work-family interface. Consistent with a positivist approach to the work-family interface, this work augments a burgeoning literature in the enrichment area. Additionally, our work expands the two prior studies of the enrichment-performance relationship.

Theoretical Framework and Hypotheses


AET (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996) explains the role of emotion and evaluative judgment in the relationship between an individuals experiences and his or her behaviors. At the heart of AET is the premise that ones affective response to workplace events largely determines ones attitudes and subsequent behaviors. AET emphasizes the role of affective response in the formation of work attitudes. While affect refers to employees moods and emotions, attitude is an evaluative, cognitive judgment based on affect. AET specically identies job satisfaction as an attitude that arises out of ones affective state or mood. Empirical research has supported the basic tenets of AET, as studies have demonstrated that emotional experiences explain how a number of workplace events inuence job satisfaction (Mignonac & Herrbach, 2004; Wegge, 2006), counterproductive work behaviors (Spector & Fox, 2002), and

WORK-TO-FAMILY ENRICHMENT AND PERFORMANCE

299

organizational withdrawal (Zhao, Wayne, Glibkowski, & Bravo, 2007). Applied to the work-family realm, and adopting a positivist approach, AET suggests that an accumulation of enriching work-family events will enhance job performance behaviors through a process mediated by positive mood and attitude. Our application of AET begins with the impact of the work-to-family enrichment events on accumulated positive mood about work (affect), job satisfaction (attitude), and job performance (behavior). Our rationale is that when an employee enjoys experiences in which the work environment supports and augments the family domain, the employee is likely to experience a positive mood state (Greenhaus & Powell, 2006; Voydanoff, 2001). This positive mood state should have a benecial effect on ones work attitudes, engendering job satisfaction. Employees are likely to act on their job satisfaction by engaging in behaviors that support high levels of job performance. We expound upon each of these posited relationships in the following sections.

Work-Family Enrichment and Performance


Prior studies positing that work-family enrichment positively relates to job performance (Witt & Carlson, 2006; Graves, Ohlott, & Ruderman, 2007) relied largely on two theories: role accumulation (Marks, 1977; Sieber, 1974) and conservation of resources (COR; Hobfoll, 1989, 2002). Both theories suggest that employees resources are not xed, or subject only to depletion, but actually can be expanded. The central premise is that investing resources (e.g., energy, time) in one domain may lead to an increase in resources (e.g., skills, resiliency) in another domain. For example, an employee who learns effective strategies for prioritizing and managing conict at work may discover times when these same skills have a positive effect in his or her family. Both role accumulation and COR theories seem to make intuitive sense to researchers, but despite repeated efforts neither has been empirically substantiated, suggesting that neither theory offers adequate explanation of the underlying mechanisms between enrichment and performance. Further, empirical attempts to link enrichment to job performance have been unsuccessful. For example, in a study of 136 employees and their supervisors, Witt and Carlson (2006) studied the impact of both directions of enrichment on performance. Their results revealed only a .02 nonsignicant correlation between family-to-work enrichment and job perfor-

mance and a .01 nonsignicant correlation between work-to-family enrichment and job performance. A study by Graves, Ohlott, & Ruderman (2007) did nd support for an indirect relationship between the family-to-work direction of enhancement (a term they equated to enrichment) and job performance mediated by job strain, but no direct relationship. Consistent with this mediated relationship, a host of empirical studies demonstrates that enrichment directly contributes to other behavioral outcomes that support job performance, including decreased bias in information processing, increased creativity, better decision making, and more productive behavioral choices (Csikszentmihalyi & Schneider, 2001; Forgas & George, 2001; Fredrickson, 2001; Hektner, 2001; Madjar, Oldham, & Pratt, 2002; Rothbard, 2001). In reecting on these results, we noted that the mediated relationship with job strain found by Graves, Ohlott, & Ruderman (2007) was dened and measured by the frequency of negative psychological states (p. 47). Thus, they found support for the notion that enrichment did inuence job performance when mediated by affect, consistent with, though not a full test of, AET. Therefore, we argue that emotional processes like positive mood and attitude mediate the enrichment-performance relationship.

Work-Family Enrichment and Positive Mood


AET suggests that workplace events will directly impact employees affective experiences and that affective experience comprises both moods and emotions. Mood refers to the pervasive and generalized stream of affective experience that provides employees with important information regarding their environmental context and subsequently has important consequences for information processing and behavior (George & Zhou, 2007; Schwarz & Clore, 1983, 2003; Watson, 2000). In the work-family domain, mood and emotion have largely been studied in relation to conict rather than enrichment (Judge, Ilies, & Scott, 2006; Williams & Alliger, 1994; Williams, Suls, Alliger, Learner, & Wan, 1991). For instance, negative mood increases and task enjoyment diminishes for working mothers who juggle the demands of multiple roles simultaneously (Williams et al., 1991). Similarly, work-family juggling heightened negative mood states such as distress and fatigue and diminished feelings of elation and calmness (Williams & Alliger, 1994). Evidence exists that positive and negative mood states spill over between the work and

300

CARLSON, KACMAR, ZIVNUSKA, FERGUSON, AND WHITTEN

family domains (Song, Foo, & Uy, 2008), but to our knowledge, only one study has investigated the effects of enrichment on mood. Using the term positive spillover, which is frequently characterized as enrichment (Greenhaus & Powell, 2006), this study found that positive spillover between work and family diminishes depressive symptoms (Hammer, Cullen, Neal, Sinclair, & Sharo, 2005). Greenhaus and Powell (2006) theorize that enrichment occurs when experiences in one role improve quality of life in another role, and that enrichment is achieved through the accumulation of psychological resources in one role that spill over into the other. We argue that this spillover effect is at the heart of the relationship between enrichment and positive mood. For instance, each time an employee uses conict resolution skills learned at work when at home with a spouse or child, the home life of that employee is improved and an instance of enrichment has occurred. Noticing the positive impact that work has on his or her family life may result in positive emotions about work; the employee may appreciate the skills and resources that the work domain provides and feel good about participating in that domain. Thus, when work-to-family enrichment increases resources that can be used at home, employees will experience a positive mood in turn. H1a: Work-to-family enrichment will be positively related to positive mood. In addition to the spillover effect of the work-tofamily direction of enrichment, we also contend that family-to-work enrichment inuences positive mood. Prior research supports this relationship in that family work positive spillover (i.e., family-to-work enrichment) related to reduced psychological distress in a sample of Australian employees (Haar & Bardoel, 2008). For instance, each time an individual uses interpersonal skills learned at home when at work, the work life of that employee is improved and an instance of enrichment has occurred. The individual may take note of the positive effect that family life has on his or her work life, which then inuences positive emotions about family; the individual may value the skills and resources that the family domain offers and experience positive feelings about participating in that domain. Thus, employees experience a heightened positive mood when family-to-work enrichment increases resources that can be used at work. H1b: Family-to-work enrichment will be positively related to positive mood.

Positive Mood and Job Satisfaction


Attitudes contain affective, cognitive, and behavioral components (Brief & Roberson, 1989; Eagly & Chaiken, 1993; Hulin & Judge, 2003; Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996; Weiss, Nicholas, & Daus, 1999). Although job attitudes and moods share affective components, job attitudes are more stable than moods and are related to a specic target (satisfaction with ones job, for instance) (Ilies & Judge, 2004). Furthermore, affect is thought to inuence both the content and process of thinking (Zhao et al., 2007). Congruent with these ideas, AET identies job satisfaction as a job attitude and denes it as a positive or negative evaluative judgment of ones job or job situation (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996, pp. 2). AET was in part developed based on theory and evidence suggesting that positive and negative affective states are direct antecedents to job satisfaction (e.g., Cropanzano, James, & Konovsky, 1993; Levin & Stokes, 1989). Mood-as-information theory (MIT) is consistent with AET and offers additional support for the examination of mood as an antecedent of job satisfaction (Schwarz & Clore, 2003). MIT specically addresses the possible relationship between moods and attitudes, suggesting that moods provide information about the environment that inuences cognitive processes and behavior (Schwarz & Clore, 1983, 2003). In a study of role juggling, Williams et al. (1991) found that negative work affect experienced during the day negatively inuenced job satisfaction at the end of the day. In essence, positive moods provide important signals that all is well and that the environment is free of problems. Substantial empirical research on moods demonstrates support for MIT and for the effects of mood at work on job satisfaction (Fisher, 2000; Heller & Watson, 2005; Ilies & Judge, 2002, 2004; Ilies, Wilson, & Wagner, 2009; Niklas & Dormann, 2005; Thoresen, Kaplan, Barsky, Warren, & de Charmont, 2003; Weiss, Nicholas, & Daus, 1999). H2: Positive mood will be positively related to job satisfaction.

Job Satisfaction and Job Performance


The nal construct of interest specied in the AET model is work behavior. Work behavior, such as performance, is thought to have tangible effects on workplace outcomes (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996; Zhao et al., 2007). Therefore, we follow Harrison, Newman, and Roth (2006) and Zhao et al. (2007) in

WORK-TO-FAMILY ENRICHMENT AND PERFORMANCE

301

using an individual effectiveness measure (job performance) as an indicator of employee behavior. Work behavior, and specically in-role job behavior, is usually dened as obligated behavior that is explicitly part of an employees job and recognized by the organizations formal reward systems (Katz & Kahn, 1978). However, employees may vary the time and effort put into these obligatory behaviors depending on their attitudes, ultimately resulting in performance variations (Cropanzano, Howes, Grandey, & Toth, 1997; Rosen, Levy, & Hall, 2006). Consistent with the theory of planned behavior (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980), AET provides theoretical rationale for expecting a relationship between job attitudes and job behavior. Results regarding the relationship between job satisfaction and job performance are mixed. On one hand, the general relationship between attitudes and behaviors has been supported by meta-analytic results (Kraus, 1995). Furthermore, the literature indicates that job satisfaction is a primary component of the motivational processes associated with job performance (Judge, Thoreson, Bono, & Patton, 2001; LePine, Podsakoff, & LePine, 2005). On the other hand, meta-analyses of the specic satisfaction-performance relationship provide mixed support (Iaffaldano & Muchinsky, 1985; Judge et al., 2001; Petty, McGee, & Cavender, 1984). The most recent meta-analysis (Judge et al., 2001) combined with other recent ndings supporting the relationship (Edwards, Bell, Arthur, & Decuir, 2008; Harrison, Newman, & Roth, 2006) indicate that further inquiry into this relationship is warranted. H3: Job satisfaction will be positively related to job performance.

H4b: The relationship between family-to-work enrichment and job performance is indirect and fully mediated, such that it depends on positive affect and job satisfaction. In this study we used two distinct samples to provide a constructive replication (Lykken, 1968) of our ndings. We used this research design to strengthen our ndings and to take advantage of the different characteristics each sample offers. Study 1 includes employees from a broad diversity of organizations, enhancing the generalizability of our ndings. Study 2 provides us with the advantages of matched supervisor-subordinate data.

Study 1 Method Sample


With the assistance of Zoomerang, an online data collection service, we obtained complete data for 240 responses. The primary advantage of this approach is that specic characteristics can be stipulated to ensure the sample is representative of the population of interest. We were interested in respondents who were employed full-time and who had a spouse or partner. This approach allowed us to capture a sample that ts work-family research well because we could specify that they participated in both work and family roles. This manner of collecting data has been successfully used in the management literature (Judge, Ilies, & Scott, 2006; Neubert, Carlson, Roberts, Kacmar, & Chonko, 2008; Piccolo & Colquitt, 2006). A disadvantage of using this type of data collection procedure is that a response rate cannot be calculated because the number of e-mail requests sent is known only to the data collection service. The sample was 57% male, respondents averaged 5.0 years in their current job, 75% had children living with them, and the average age was 35.86 years (SD 6.12). Nearly half (46%) of our sample supervised other employees in the workplace. With regard to occupation, 47% worked in a public organization, 40% worked in a private organization, 9% worked for a nonprot organization, and 5% were self-employed.

AET Hypotheses
Based on our review of AET and related theories, supplemented by empirical ndings, we have developed a four-step causal model that describes the mediating effects of both affect and attitude on the relationship between work context and behavior. Theory and empirical ndings lead us to expect that work-family enrichment relates to job performance (Graves, Ohlott, & Ruderman, 2007; Hobfoll, 1989, 2002; Marks, 1977; Sieber, 1974; Witt & Carlson, 2006) but that this relationship is mediated by positive affect and job satisfaction. H4a: The relationship between work-to-family enrichment and job performance is indirect and fully mediated, such that it depends on positive affect and job satisfaction.

Measures
A ve-point scale with anchors of strongly agree (5) and strongly disagree (1) was used for each measure. Work-to-family enrichment. A nine-item work-to-family enrichment scale (Carlson, Kacmar, Wayne & Grzywacz, 2006) was used to measure the job incumbents level of enrichment. A sample item

302

CARLSON, KACMAR, ZIVNUSKA, FERGUSON, AND WHITTEN

from the work-to-family enrichment scale is My involvement in my work helps me to gain knowledge, and this helps me to be a better family member. Cronbachs alpha was .92. Family-to-work enrichment. A nine-item family-to-work enrichment scale (Carlson et al., 2006) was used to measure the job incumbents level of enrichment. A sample item from the family-to-work enrichment scale is My involvement in my family helps me acquire skills, and this helps me be a better worker. Cronbachs alpha was .94. Positive mood. Positive mood was measured with a 10-item scale developed by Watson, Clark, and Tellegen (1988). Our interest was in positive moods as affective states (rather than trait-based positive affect), so we asked respondents to indicate how they had felt at work during the past week. This modication to the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) scale has been established as a reliable and valid way to assess mood as a state rather than as a trait (e.g., George & Zhou, 2007; Watson, 2000; Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988). Cronbachs alpha was .90. Job satisfaction. A three-item scale was used to capture global job satisfaction (Cammann, Fichman, Jenkins, & Klesh, 1979). A sample item is All in all, I am satised with my job. Cronbachs alpha was .88. Job performance. We used a three-item measure of general job performance developed by Liden, Wayne, and Stilwell (1993). A sample item is I am a strong performer on the job. Although true performance and any other rating of performance may differ, assessment of the difference is difcult (Viswesvaran, Schmidt, & Ones, 2005). We chose to focus on selfrated performance because employees have the most knowledge of their own general performance (Harris & Schaubroeck, 1988), and we emphasized aspects of self-ratings that lessen variability (Mabe & West, 1982). Cronbachs alpha was .80. Control variables. Three control variables were used in our analyses: age, gender, and tenure. Theory and extant research have shown these factors are related to our dependent variable (Bowen, Swim, & Jacobs, 2000; Butler & Skattebo, 2004; Shirom, Gilboa, Fried, & Cooper, 2008; Wayne, Randel, & Stevens, 2006).

effect of each direction of enrichment while controlling for the other direction to accurately test the hypothesized model. All analyses used a covariance matrix as input and a maximum likelihood estimation. We began by estimating a measurement model. We then added paths to the measurement model to test the hypothesized relationships. Finally, we estimated several alternative models to explore the type of mediation (i.e., partial vs. full) that best represented our data.

Study 1 Results
Before testing our hypotheses, we conducted a conrmatory factor analysis (CFA) on the scales used in our study to ensure that they were independent and that the items produced the expected factor structures. Our measurement model consisted of ve factors, one for each of our scales. After allowing nine pairs of items within the factors to correlate, the t indices showed that the ve-factor model t the data well [ 2(476, n 240) 1163.15, p .01; CFI .96; RMSEA .065], and all of the standardized loadings were signicant (p .01). To ensure that the mood factor was distinct from enrichment, which has an affective component, we ran a three-factor model for comparison. The threefactor model that combined work-to-family enrichment, family-to-work enrichment, and positive mood into a single factor was compared to the ve-factor baseline 2 model via 2 difference test. Results [ diff (7) 2235 p .01] demonstrate that the ve-factor model had signicantly better t suggesting that positive mood is conceptually and empirically different from the affective components of work-family enrichment. Table 1 provides the descriptive statistics, reliabilities, and the correlations among the variables of interest in our study.

Work-to-Family Enrichment Models


To test our hypothesized model for work-to-family enrichment we added the paths to our measurement model starting with the work-to-family direction. We also controlled for gender, age, tenure, and familyto-work enrichment, however these results are not presented in the gures for reasons of parsimony. Results indicated (see Table 2) that the hypothesized model t the data [ 2(571, n 240) 1266, p .01; CFI .96; RMSEA .069]. To ensure that the hypothesized model was the best portrayal of the relationships examined, we compared it to two alternative models that depicted partial mediation. Table 2 provides the results from these analyses. In the rst alternative model, we added a direct path from enrichment to job satis-

Data Analysis
We used structural equation modeling (SEM) in LISREL 8.8 (Jreskog & Srbom, 1993) to test a hypothesized model for work-to-family enrichment (while controlling for family-to-work enrichment) and a model for family-to-work enrichment (while controlling for workto-family enrichment). We separately tested the unique

WORK-TO-FAMILY ENRICHMENT AND PERFORMANCE

303

Table 1 Correlations, Means, Standard Deviation, and Reliability


Variable Study 1 1. Gender 2. Age 3. Tenure 4. Family-to-work enrichment 5. Work-to-family enrichment 6. Positive mood 7. Job satisfaction 8. Job performance Study 2 1. Gender 2. Age 3. Tenure 4. Family-to-work enrichment 5. Work-to-family enrichment 6. Positive mood 7. Job satisfaction 8. Job performance Mean .43 35.82 6.14 3.92 3.34 3.68 3.87 4.29 0.56 41.67 6.84 3.82 3.61 3.45 4.03 4.39 SD .50 5.99 5.43 .67 .88 .66 .86 .65 0.50 10.45 6.80 0.56 0.66 0.97 0.80 0.59 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

.12 .02 .09 .04 .05 .14 .03

.31 .07 .02 .11 .10 .17

.03 .05 .00 .01 .08

.94 .51 .37 .52 .16

.92 .47 .36 .28

.90 .32 .34

.88 .45

.80

.07 .16 .05 .16 .08 .09 .13

.38 .12 .12 .15 .04 .13

.12 .00 .04 .02 .12

.85 .51 .18 .21 .06

.85 .46 .63 .14

.83 .53 .25

.91 .23

.91

Note. Study 1: n 240; Study 2: n p .05. p .01.

177. Cronbach alpha coefcients are on the diagonal.

faction. This model, when compared with our hypothesized model, tested whether full or partial mediation of enrichment to job satisfaction is the best representation of our data. The 2 difference test between these two models was signicant 2 [ diff (1) 48, p .01] and the path between enrichment and job satisfaction was signicant, indicating that the relationship between work-tofamily enrichment and job satisfaction is partially rather than fully mediated.

Next we added a direct path between positive mood and performance to explore whether full or partial mediation of positive mood to job performance is the best representation of our data. Neither the 2 difference test between this alternative model 2 and our baseline model ( diff (1) 6, ns) nor that added path were signicant suggesting the moodperformance relationship is fully mediated. Given the results of our alternative model tests, the enrichment to job satisfaction path was the only path

Table 2 Work-to-Family Enrichment Alternative Model Test Results


Model Study 1 Baseline: hypothesized fully mediated model Partial mediation: enrichment to job satisfaction Work-to-family enrichment 3 job satisfaction .48, p Partial mediation: positive mood to job performance Positive mood 3 job performance Study 2 Baseline: hypothesized fully mediated model Partial mediation: enrichment to job satisfaction Work-to-family enrichment 3 job satisfaction .53, p Partial mediation: positive mood to job performance Positive mood 3 job performance Note. Study 1: n p .01. 240; Study 2: n 177.
2

df 571 570 570

2 diff

dfdiff

CFI .96 .96 .96

RMSEA .069 .068 .069

1266 1218 .01 1260

48 6

1 1

1267 1214 .01 1265

607 606 606

53 2

1 1

.93 .93 .93

.074 .072 .074

304

CARLSON, KACMAR, ZIVNUSKA, FERGUSON, AND WHITTEN

that signicantly improved t. Therefore, we used this alternative model as our nal model (see Figure 1) to examine the hypothesized indirect effects. Hypothesis 1a is supported as work-to-family enrichment was positively and signicantly related to positive mood (.40). Hypothesis 2 is supported as positive mood is positively and signicantly related to job satisfaction (.17). Finally, we nd support for Hypothesis 3 as there was a signicant, positive relationship between job satisfaction and job performance (.49). The total indirect effect through both positive affect and job satisfaction of work-to-family enrichment on job performance was .26. In conclusion, our results provide partial support for Hypothesis 4a as the relationship between enrichment and performance was partially mediated by job satisfaction and fully mediated by positive mood.

Family-to-Work Enrichment Models


To test our hypothesized model for family-to-work enrichment we added the paths to our measurement model starting with the family-to-work direction of enrichment. We also controlled for gender, age, tenure, and work-to-family enrichment, however these results are not presented in the gures for reasons of parsimony. Results indicated (see Table 3) that the hypothesized model t the data [ 2(571, n 240) 1179, p .01; CFI .96; RMSEA .067]. To ensure that the hypothesized model was the best portrayal of the relationships examined, we compared it to two alternative models that depicted partial mediation. Table 3 provides the results from these analyses. In the rst alternative model, we added a

direct path from enrichment to job satisfaction. The 2 difference test between these two models was not 2 signicant [ diff (1) 6, ns]. Next we added a direct path between positive mood and job performance, and the path was signicant. The 2 difference test between this alternative model and our baseline model was signicant, suggesting the mood2 performance relationship is partially mediated [ diff (1) 12, p .01]. Given the results of our alternative model tests, the positive mood to job performance path was the only path that signicantly improved t. Therefore, we used this alternative model as our nal model (see Figure 2) to examine the hypothesized indirect effects. Hypothesis 1b is supported as family-to-work enrichment was positively and signicantly related to positive mood (.53). Hypothesis 2 is supported as positive mood is positively and signicantly related to job satisfaction (.37). Finally, we nd support for Hypothesis 3 as there was a signicant, positive relationship between job satisfaction and job performance (.50). The total indirect effect through both positive affect and job satisfaction of family-to-work enrichment on job performance was .24. In conclusion, our results provide partial support for Hypothesis 4b as the relationship between enrichment and performance was partially mediated by positive mood and fully mediated by job satisfaction.

Common Method Variance (CMV)


As with all self-report data, there is the potential for the occurrence of method variance. Thus, we took steps, based on recommendations by Podsakoff,

.48**

Work-toFamily Enrichment

.40**

Positive Mood

.17**

Job Satisfaction

.49**

Job Performance

.53** Work-toFamily Enrichment Positive Mood Job Satisfaction Job Performance .27**

.47**

.33**

Figure 1. Standardized path loadings from Study 1 and Study 2 examining work-to-family enrichment. Study 1 top model. Study 2 bottom model. p .01.

WORK-TO-FAMILY ENRICHMENT AND PERFORMANCE

305

Table 3 Family-to-Work Enrichment Alternative Model Test Results


Model Study 1 Baseline: hypothesized fully mediated model Partial mediation: enrichment to job satisfaction Work-to-family enrichment 3 job satisfaction Partial mediation: positive mood to job performance Positive mood 3 job performance .27, p .01 Study 2 Baseline: hypothesized fully mediated model Partial mediation: enrichment to job satisfaction Work-to-family enrichment 3 job satisfaction Partial mediation: positive mood to job performance Positive mood 3 job performance Note. Study 1: n p .01. 240; Study 2: n 177.
2

df 571 570 570

2 diff

dfdiff

CFI .96 .96 .96

RMSEA .067 .067 .066

1179 1173 1167

6 12

1 1

1211 1206 1208

607 606 606

5 3

1 1

.92 .92 .92

.075 .075 .075

MacKenzie, Lee, and Podsakoff (2003), to reduce single-source bias. First, to decrease socially desirable responding and increase respondent candidness, we presented detailed information about the precautions taken to ensure the condentiality of our respondents. To decrease evaluation apprehension, we assured our respondents that there was no right or wrong answer to the measures in the survey. The nal procedural step we took was to carefully pretest and screen the items that we created for this study. We also used statistical remedies to test for the extent of method variance in the current data. Specically, we implemented the procedure recommended by Widaman (1985) and used by Williams, Cote, and Buckley (1989). Results from these anal-

yses indicated that while the method factor slightly improved model t, it accounted for some (16%) of the total variance but less than the amount of method variance (25%) observed by Williams, Cote, & Buckley (1989) and well within the acceptable ranges reported for attitudinal measures (41%), personality and achievement measures (25%), and performance measures (25%) (Cote & Buckley, 1987). The results of these analyses suggest that the model tested does benet from the addition of a method factor. However, the gain in t is small and, more importantly, the method factor appears to account for little variation in the data. Although the results suggest that common method variance is not a pervasive problem in this study and that the relationships observed rep-

.27**

Family-toWork Enrichment

.53**

Positive Mood

.37**

Job Satisfaction

.50**

Job Performance

Family-toWork Enrichment

Positive Mood .12 (ns) .58**

Job Satisfaction

.32**

Job Performance

Figure 2. Standardized path loadings from Study 1 and Study 2 examining family-to-work enrichment. Study 1 top model. Study 2 bottom model. p .01.

306

CARLSON, KACMAR, ZIVNUSKA, FERGUSON, AND WHITTEN

resent substantive rather than artifactual effects, some may still view data collected from a single source as a severe study limitation. Thus, we replicated our study using data collected from two sources.

Study 2 Method Sample


Letters explaining the study were sent to 1065 potential participants whose names appeared on a list of business school alumni from two southern universities in the United States. The letter explained that to qualify for inclusion in the study participants needed to be working full time, have supervisory responsibility for at least one person, and be willing to provide a performance appraisal of the individuals who reported to them. A total 125 agreed to participate and received a written questionnaire to complete. While our efforts to generate a supervisor sample produced only a 12% response rate, we argue that this response rate is not accurate for several reasons. First, the databases included all alumni who were registered with alumni services, which included many individuals who were not qualied to participate in our study (e.g., stay-at-home moms, retired individuals, employees who did not supervise others, and individuals employed in organizations who were forbidden to participate in external surveys). Second, numerous addresses in the databases were incorrect or out of date. We received a total of 75 usable supervisor responses (60%). Included in the supervisor survey was the name and contact information of their direct report subordinates. Subordinates (n 396) named by their supervisor were asked to complete a questionnaire. A total of 268 (68%) returned the questionnaire to the researchers. After eliminating surveys with missing data and those who could not be matched to the supervisor, we deemed 189 subordinate surveys (71% response rate) usable. Thus, a distinct strength of this sample is that we were able to incorporate a supervisors performance rating. Supervisors. A total of 75 supervisors were included in our sample. The demographic composition of the supervisor sample was 47 (63%) males and 28 (37%) females, and 90% were Caucasian. The average age of the supervisors was 46.28 years (SD 6.09), and they averaged 8.98 years in their current job. The average supervisor provided evaluations on 2.59 subordinates. Because our supervisors rated more than one subordinate, our data are nested within supervisor. To determine the extent of the nonindependence in our supervisor ratings of performance

we calculated an intraclass correlation coefcient [ICC(1); Hofmann, Grifn, & Gavin, 2000]. Our results showed that the percentage of variance in performance ratings residing between supervisors was .001. Given that the ICC(1) value was so low, we concluded that the supervisor effect was not a concern. Subordinates. The subordinate sample consisted of 189 individuals of whom 85 (45%) were male and 104 (55%) were female and 155 (82%) were Caucasian. The average age of the subordinate sample was 41.84 years (SD 10.57). With respect to tenure, the individuals in the subordinate sample averaged 6.98 years in their current job and 3.90 years with their current supervisor. Seventy-two percent of the subordinate sample was married, and 60% had at least one child living at home.

Scales Measured From Subordinate


The response scale used for each measure was a ve-point scale with the anchors of strongly agree (5) and strongly disagree (1). Work-to-family enrichment. As was done in Study 1, a nine-item work-to-family enrichment scale (Carlson et al., 2006) was used to measure the job incumbents level of enrichment. A sample item from the work-to-family enrichment scale is My involvement in my work helps me to gain knowledge, and this helps me to be a better family member. Cronbachs alpha was .85. Family-to-work enrichment. As was done in Study 1, a nine-item family-to-work enrichment scale (Carlson et al., 2006) was used to measure the job incumbents level of enrichment. A sample item from the family-to-work enrichment scale is My involvement in my family helps me acquire skills, and this helps me be a better worker. Cronbachs alpha was .85. Positive mood. We measured positive mood with four items developed to capture a general affective state. Items are happy, fortunate, relaxed, and pleased. To capture state mood we asked respondents to think of their day-to-day experiences at work. Cronbachs alpha was .83. Job satisfaction. A three-item scale was used to capture global job satisfaction (Cammann et al., 1979). Cronbachs alpha was .91.

Scales Measured From Supervisor


Job performance. A seven-item measure of job performance developed by Williams and Anderson

WORK-TO-FAMILY ENRICHMENT AND PERFORMANCE

307

(1991) was used. A sample item is On average, how often do you feel your subordinate meets formal performance requirements of the job? Cronbachs alpha was .91. Control variables. We controlled for age, gender, and tenure in our analyses.

Study 2 Results
Before testing our hypotheses, we conducted a conrmatory factor analysis (CFA) on the scales used in our study to ensure that they were independent and that the items produced the expected factor structures. Our measurement model consisted of ve factors, one for each of our scales. After allowing eight pairs of items within the factors to correlate, the t indices showed that the ve-factor model t the data well [ 2(509, n 173) 976.68, p .01; CFI .94; RMSEA .073], and all of the standardized path loadings were signicant (p .01). Similar to Study 1 we compared this model to a three-factor model that combined the mood and enrichment variables. The ve-factor model had signicantly better 2 t than the three-factor model ( diff (7) 1869, p .01), again demonstrating that the affective component of work-family enrichment is conceptually and empirically distinct from positive mood. The correlations and descriptive statistics for the second sample appear at the bottom of Table 1.

direct path from positive mood to job performance to conrm our prediction that job satisfaction fully mediates the relationship between positive mood and performance. Our results suggest that full mediation is the best representation of our data, as the 2 difference between the hypothesized model and this 2 alternative model was not signicant ( diff (1) 2, ns) and the path added was not signicant. Echoing our results for Study 1, we added a path between enrichment and job satisfaction to our hypothesized model and used this alternative model as our nal model (see Figure 1) to explore the indirect effects. We found support for Hypothesis 1a as workto-family enrichment was positively and signicantly related to positive mood (.47). We found support for Hypothesis 2 as positive mood is positively and signicantly related to job satisfaction (.33). Finally, Hypothesis 3 was supported as there was a signicant, positive relationship between job satisfaction and supervisor-rated job performance (.27). The total indirect effect through positive affect and job satisfaction of work-to-family enrichment on supervisorrated job performance was .19. In conclusion, our results provide partial support for Hypothesis 4a, as the relationship between enrichment and performance was partially mediated by job satisfaction and fully mediated by positive mood.

Family-to-Work Enrichment Models


To test our hypothesized model we added the paths to our measurement model originating with familyto-work enrichment. We controlled for gender, age, tenure, and work-to-family enrichment; however, these results are not presented in the gures for reasons of parsimony. Results indicated (see Table 3) that the hypothesized model t the data [ 2(607, n 240) 1211, p .01; CFI .92; RMSEA .075]. To ensure that the hypothesized model was the best depiction of the relationships examined, we compared it to two alternative models. Table 3 provides the results from these comparisons. In the rst alternative model, we added a direct path from workto-family enrichment to job satisfaction. The 2 difference test between this model and our baseline, hypothesized model was not signicant, indicating that the relationship between work-to-family enrich2 ment and job satisfaction is fully mediated [ diff (1) 5, ns]. Next, we estimated a model in which we added a direct path from positive mood to job performance to conrm our prediction that job satisfaction fully mediates the relationship between positive mood and

Work-to-Family Enrichment Models


To test our hypothesized model we added the paths to our measurement model using work-to-family enrichment. We controlled for gender, age, tenure, and family-to-work enrichment; however, these results are not presented in the gures for reasons of parsimony. Results indicated (see Table 2) that the hypothesized model t the data [ 2(607, n 240) 1267, p .01; CFI .93; RMSEA .074]. To ensure that the hypothesized model was the best depiction of the relationships examined, we compared it to two alternative models. Table 2 provides the results from these comparisons. In the rst alternative model, we added a direct path from workto-family enrichment to job satisfaction. The 2 difference test between this model and our baseline, 2 hypothesized model was signicant [ diff (1) 53, p .01] and the path between enrichment and job satisfaction was signicant, indicating that the relationship between work-to-family enrichment and job satisfaction is partially rather than fully mediated. Next, we estimated a model in which we added a

308

CARLSON, KACMAR, ZIVNUSKA, FERGUSON, AND WHITTEN

performance. Our results suggest that full mediation is the best representation of our data, as the 2 difference between the hypothesized model and this alternative model was not signicant and the path 2 added was not signicant [ diff (1) 3, ns]. This is inconsistent with our nding in Study 1, which found this partially mediated model to be the best tting model. Therefore, our hypothesized model was the best tting model and used as our nal model (see Figure 1) to examine the relationships of interest. We failed to support Hypothesis 1b, as family-to-work enrichment was not signicantly related to positive mood (.12, ns). We found support for Hypothesis 2, as positive mood is positively and signicantly related to job satisfaction (.58). Finally, Hypothesis 3 was supported, as there was a signicant, positive relationship between job satisfaction and supervisorrated job performance (32). The analytical test for H4b could not be performed because the required link between the independent variable (family-towork enrichment) and the rst stage mediator (positive mood) was not signicant, thus failing to meet the conditions of mediation. In conclusion, our results did not provide support for Hypothesis 4b.

Discussion
The goal of this study was to examine the process by which work-to-family enrichment and family-towork enrichment related to job performance using affective events theory as our guiding theoretical model. The results presented herein indicate that in two distinct samples the experience of work-tofamily enrichment is associated with a positive mood state, which is in turn associated with a positive attitude about work and ultimately a behavioral response that includes enhanced workplace performance. More specically, the results of both studies supported an indirect relationship between work-tofamily enrichment and performance fully mediated by positive mood and partially mediated by job satisfaction. Furthermore, work-to-family enrichment directly related to employee job satisfaction. When employees experience a positive spillover between the work and family domains, they also experience heightened positive mood, job satisfaction, and job performance. However, this was not the case for the family-to-work direction of enrichment. For Study 1, the indirect relationship between family-to-work enrichment and performance was partially mediated by positive mood and fully mediated by job satisfaction. Conversely, in Study 2 when performance was mea-

sured from the supervisor, the relationship between family-to-work enrichment and performance was not mediated by positive mood and job satisfaction as hypothesized. Specically, family-to-work enrichment did not relate to positive mood. We believe the lack of nding in this study is attributable to the positive mood variable being focused on the respondents mood while at work compared with a more general mood variable used in Study 1. However, these results are in line with previous research suggesting that the positive effects of enrichment tend to reside in the originating domain. For example, two recent studies on work-family enrichment and satisfaction demonstrated that work-to-family enrichment has a signicant impact on job satisfaction and family-to-work conict has no signicant impact on job satisfaction (Carlson, Grzywacz, & Zivnuska, 2009; Wayne, Musisca, & Fleeson, 2004). Furthermore, a recent meta-analysis of enrichment and outcomes found that work-to-family enrichment more strongly related to work variables whereas family-to-work enrichment more strongly related to family variables (McNall, Nicklin, & Masuda, 2010). These ndings help shed light on this critical organizational relationship that has previously lacked both theoretical and empirical attention. This study makes several contributions to the work-family literature. These ndings shed light on inconsistent ndings in previous research related to enrichment and performance. Our research indicates that enrichment and performance are likely related, as suggested by theory, but that the relationship is a complex one that is not fully explained by simple direct relationships. Rather, the process through which work-to-family enrichment plays a role in performance may be an affective one in which the emotion toward work plays a critical role in the experience of job satisfaction and performance. There are important implications of these ndings for employees, supervisors, and organizations. Employees may stand to benet from these ndings by understanding the importance of mood and actively seeking opportunities to apply work-based skills to the family arena, rather than compartmentalizing the work and family realms. Taking advantage of opportunities for work to enrich home life may elevate mood and thereby make work more satisfying. This process may even lead to increased performance. Acknowledging the full range of human emotions and moods is important to mental health, and we do not suggest that employees deny the stress associated with busy, multidimensional lives. Yet our results do indicate that taking advan-

WORK-TO-FAMILY ENRICHMENT AND PERFORMANCE

309

tage of situations where employees can apply work skills to benet family may have important benets for the individual, enhancing the pleasure associated with each domain. In a similar vein, we encourage supervisors to inspire employees to seek enrichment opportunities. As each individual in a work team optimizes satisfaction and performance, the entire team may reap the rewards. Finally, organizations as a whole may benet from seeking opportunities to support workto-family enrichment. For example, policies that encourage interaction between the work and family domains, rather than those restricting domain overlap, may facilitate the organizations aggregate level of satisfaction and performance.

Strengths, Limitations, and Future Directions


There are several strengths of the current study. First, this study contributes to our understanding of the enrichment construct (Greenhaus & Powell, 2006) by explicitly adopting a positivist approach to investigate the mechanisms through which work-tofamily enrichment affects employee work performance. While evidence suggests that work-to-family enrichment has a positive inuence on job performance (Karatepe & Bekteshi, 2008), we are not aware of any empirical research that tested the processes or mechanisms through which these effects occur. Second, by applying AET this study provides an integration of theoretical knowledge with empirical ndings in a way that allows for a new perspective on a critical organizational outcome. AET allows us to organize the relationship between enrichment and various outcomes in a meaningful way. Third, both of our samples come from employees across a broad variety of organizational settings; we contend that this diversity is more representative of the overall population than data drawn from a single organization. Furthermore, our constructive replication (Lykken, 1968) demonstrates the robustness of our ndings while the inclusion of a matched supervisorsubordinate data set allowed us to use an objective measure of performance, offsetting the weaknesses of our rst sample. Despite these strengths, limitations to the present study should be acknowledged. First, both samples use a cross-sectional approach. Research that uses longitudinal data to assess the inuence of enrichment on performance over time or uses experiencedbased data that would more robustly reect accumu-

lation of enrichment events would allow for a stronger test of the ndings presented in this study. Second, given our data collection approach we were unable to establish a response rate for sample 1. Not being able to calculate a response rate is a disadvantage of using a data collection service. On the other hand, we would argue that the benets of using a data collection service, such as being able to clearly articulate the characteristics of the respondents, help to offset this disadvantage. Unfortunately, the benet of being able to specify the qualications for inclusion in the study was not available to us in our second sample. The databases we used to generate our pool of respondents for sample 2 included many individuals who were not qualied to participate resulting in a low (12%) response rate to our initial mailing which may be viewed as a limitation. However, once we were able to eliminate the unqualied individuals from the database our response rates were much higher (60%71%). Third, although we examine two mediators of the enrichment to performance relationship (positive mood and job satisfaction), there are a number of additional mechanisms through which enrichment may inuence an employees job performance. However, our choice of variables was theory driven and we believe appropriate for an initial examination of AET in relation to work-to-family enrichment. Future research might consider other mechanisms such as leader-member exchange, satisfaction with the nature of their work, or supervisor satisfaction. Furthermore, future research should consider the potential for personality factors as a moderator of these relationships. For instance, those high in positive affectivity may experience more enrichment, positive mood, job satisfaction, and thus performance as a result of that personality trait. Similarly, workers with high job involvement also may experience or perceive more enrichment, positive mood, satisfaction, and subsequently better performance. Last, while AET suggests that an enrichment event occurs, followed by affect, attitude, and then behavior, the reverse also may be true. Future studies should employ longitudinal data to empirically establish the causal order. The present studies have scholarly and practical implications. From a scholarly standpoint, this work is the rst we know of to apply AET to the study of enrichments effects, and our signicant ndings across two samples emphasize the utility of using AET to explore relationships within the work-family interface. Situations in both work and family life are likely to elicit strong emotions, distinct attitudes, and behavior aligned with those attitudes. Our work may

310

CARLSON, KACMAR, ZIVNUSKA, FERGUSON, AND WHITTEN family interface: Development and validation of a workfamily enrichment scale. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68, 131164. Cote, J. A., & Buckley, R. (1987). Estimating trait, method, and error variance: Generalizing across 70 construct validation studies. Journal of Marketing Research, 24, 315318. Cropanzano, R., Howes, J. C., Grandey, A. A., & Toth, P. (1997). The relationship of organizational politics and support to work behaviors, attitudes, and stress. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 159 180. Cropanzano, R., James, K., & Konovsky, M. A. (1993). Dispositional affectivity as a predictor of work attitudes and job performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 14, 595 606. Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Schneider, B. (2001). Becoming adult: How teenagers prepare for the world of work. New York: Basic Books. Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Edwards, B. D., Bell, S. T., Arthur, W., Jr, & Decuir, A. D. (2008). Relationships between facets of job satisfaction and task and contextual performance. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 57, 441 465. Edwards, J. R., & Rothbard, N. P. (2000). Mechanisms linking work and family: Clarifying the relationship between work and family constructs. Academy of Management Review, 25, 178 199. Fisher, C. D. (2000). Mood and emotions while working: Missing pieces of job satisfaction? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 185202. Forgas, J. P., & George, J. M. (2001). Affective inuences on judgments and behavior in organizations: An information processing perspective. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86, 334. Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of emotions. American Psychologist, 56, 218 226. Frone, M. R. (2003). Work-family balance. In J. C. Quick and LE Tetrick (Eds.). Handbook of occupational health psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 143162. George, J. M., & Zhou, J. (2007). Dual tuning in a supportive context: Joint contributions of positive mood, negative mood, and supervisory behaviors to employee creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 605 622. Graves, L. M., Ohlott, P. J., & Ruderman, M. N. (2007). Commitment to family roles: Effects on managers attitudes and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 44 56. Greenhaus, J. H., & Powell, G. N. (2006). When work and family are allies: A theory of work-family enrichment. Academy of Management Review, 31, 7292. Haar, J. M., & Bardoel, E. A. (2008). Positive spillover from the work-family interface: A study of Australian employees. Asia Pacic Journal of Human Resources, 46, 275287. Hammer, L. B., Cullen, J. C., Neal, M. B., Sinclair, R. R., & Sharo, M. V. (2005). The longitudinal effects of work-family conict and positive spillover on depressive symptoms among dual-earner couples. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 10, 138 154. Hanson, G., Hammer, L. B., & Colton, C. (2006). Development and validation of a multidimensional scale of

provide a theoretically grounded jumping-off place for a solid stream of future investigation in the workfamily domain. Our study also has implications for practice. For example, evidence of the effects of enrichment on an employees moods, attitudes, and behaviors demonstrate the potential value that may be found in fostering enrichment in employees. Our study suggests that enriching workplace policies and practices go beyond recruiting and retention impacts and may have clear, demonstrable impacts on bottom-line performance outcomes. Managers seeking to help employees attain an optimal level of performance may benet from promoting enrichment through relatively simple tactics, such as effectively managing organizational time demands on employees and providing appropriate levels of managerial support (Wayne, Randel, & Stevens, 2006). Thus, organizational leaders have an opportunity to consciously develop an enriching workplace context for their subordinates and in doing so may reap a high performance workforce. In summary, very little is known about the role work-to-family enrichment plays in an organizational setting. Previous ndings have been inconclusive regarding the positive view of the work-family interface and job performance. This research takes some rst steps in understanding how enrichment impacts behavior in the workplace. However, we look forward to future research that further assesses the mechanism through which enrichment affects other aspects of work and family life.

References
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Bowen, C. C., Swim, J. K., & Jacobs, R. R. (2000). Evaluating gender biases on actual job performance of real people: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 2194 2215. Brief, A. P., & Roberson, L. (1989). Job attitude organization: An exploratory study. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 19, 717727. Butler, A. B., & Skattebo, A. (2004). What is acceptable for women may not be for men: The effect of family conicts with work on job-performance ratings. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77, 553564. Cammann, C., Fichman, M., Jenkins, D., & Klesh, J. (1979). The Michigan Organizational Assessment Questionnaire. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan. Carlson, D. S., Grzywacz, J., & Zivnuska, S. (2009). Is work-family balance more than conict and enrichment? Human Relations, 62, 1459 1486. Carlson, D. S., Kacmar, K. M., Wayne, J. H., & Grzywacz, J. G. (2006). Measuring the positive side of the work-

WORK-TO-FAMILY ENRICHMENT AND PERFORMANCE work-family positive spillover. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 11, 249 265. Harris, M. M., & Schaubroeck, J. (1988). A meta-analysis of self-supervisor, self-peer, and peer-supervisor ratings. Personnel Psychology, 41, 43 62. Harrison, D. A., Newman, D. A., & Roth, P. L. (2006). How important are job attitudes? Meta-analystic comparisons for integrative behavioral outcomes and time sequences. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 305326. Hektner, J. M. (2001). Family, school, and community predictors of adolescent growth-related experiences: Global and specic approaches. Applied Developmental Sciences, 5, 172183. Heller, D., & Watson, D. (2005). The dynamic spillover of satisfaction between work and marriage: The role of time and mood. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 12731279. Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44, 513524. Hobfoll, S. E. (2002). Social and psychological resources and adaptation. Review of General Psychology, 6, 307324. Hofmann, D. A., Grifn, M. A., & Gavin, M. B. (2000). The application of hierarchical linear modeling to organizational research. In K. J. Klein & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.). Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations (pp. 467511). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Hulin, C. L., & Judge, T. A. (2003). Job attitudes. In W. C. Borman, D. R. Ilgen, and R. J. Klimoski (Eds.). Handbook of psychology: Industrial and organizational psychology, Vol 12. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 255276. Iaffaldano, M. T., & Muchinsky, P. M. (1985). Job satisfaction and job performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 97, 251273. Ilies, R., & Judge, T. A. (2002). An experience-sampling measure of job satisfaction and its relationships with affectivity, mood at work, job beliefs, and general job satisfaction. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 13, 367389. Ilies, R., & Judge, T. A. (2004). An experience-sampling measure of job satisfaction and its relationships with affectivity, mood at work, job beliefs, and general job satisfaction. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 13, 367389. Ilies, R., Wilson, K. S., & Wagner, D. T. (2009). The spillover of daily job satisfaction onto employees family lives: The facilitating role of work-family integration. Academy of Management Journal, 52, 87102. Jreskog, K. G., & Srbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Chicago: SSI. Judge, T. A., Ilies, R., & Scott, B. A. (2006). Work-family conict and emotions: Effects at work and at home. Personnel Psychology, 59, 779 814. Judge, T. A., Thoreson, C. J., Bono, J. E., & Patton, G. K. (2001). The job satisfaction-job performance relationship: A quantitative and qualitative review. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 376 407. Karatepe, O. M., & Bekteshi, L. (2008). Antecedents and outcomes of work-family facilitation and family-work facilitation among frontline hotel employees. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 27, 517528.

311

Katz, D., & Kahn, R. (1978). The social psychology of organizations (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley. Kraus, S. J. (1995). Attitudes and the prediction of behavior: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 58 75. Lazarus, R. S. (2003). Does the positive psychology movement have legs? Psychological Inquiry, 14, 93109. LePine, J. A., Podsakoff, N. P., & LePine, M. A. (2005). A meta-analytic test of the challenge stressor-hindrance stressor framework: An explanation for inconsistent relationships among stressor and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 764 775. Levin, I., & Stokes, J. P. (1989). Dispositional approach to job satisfaction: Role of negative affectivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 752761. Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Stilwell, D. (1993). A longitudinal study on the early development of leader member exchanges. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 662 674. Lykken, D. T. (1968). Statistical signicance in psychological research. Psychological Bulletin, 70, 151159. Mabe, P. A., III & West, S. G. (1982). Validity of selfevaluation of ability: A review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 280 296. Madjar, N., Oldham, G. R., & Pratt, M. G. (2002). Theres no place like home? The contributions of work and nonwork creativity support to employees creative performance. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 757767. Marks, S. R. (1977). Multiple roles and role strain: Some notes on human energy, time and commitment. American Sociological Review, 42, 921936. McNall, L. A., Nicklin, J. M., & Masuda, A. D. (2010). A meta-analytic review of the consequences associated with work-family enrichment. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25, 381396. Mignonac, K., & Herrbach, O. (2004). Linking work events, affective states and attitudes: An empirical study of managers emotions. Journal of Business and Psychology, 19, 221240. Neubert, M. J., Carlson, D. S., Roberts, J. A., Kacmar, K. M., & Chonko, L. B. (2008). Regulatory focus as a mediator of the inuence of initiating structure and servant leadership on employee behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 1220 1233. Niklas, C. D., & Dormann, C. (2005). The impact of state affect on job satisfaction. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 14, 367388. Petty, M. M., McGee, G. W., & Cavender, J. W. (1984). A meta-analysis of the relationships between individual job satisfaction and individual performance. Academy of Management Review, 9, 712721. Piccolo, R. F., & Colquitt, J. A. (2006). Transformational leadership and job behaviors: The mediating role of core job characteristics. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 327340. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879 903. Rosen, C. C., Levy, P. E., & Hall, R. J. (2006). Placing perceptions of politics in the context of the feedback environment, employee attitudes, and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 211220.

312

CARLSON, KACMAR, ZIVNUSKA, FERGUSON, AND WHITTEN richment and its work-related consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69, 445 461. Wegge, J. (2006). Communication via videoconference: Emotional and cognitive consequences of affective personality dispositions, seeing ones own picture, and disturbing events. Human-Computer Interaction, 21, 273318. Weiss, H. M., & Cropanzano, R. (1996). Affective events theory: A theoretical discussion of the structure, causes, and consequences of affective experiences at work. In Staw, B. M. & Cummings, L. L. (Eds.). Research in organizational behavior, 18. Greenwich, CT: Elsevier Science/JAI Press, 174. Weiss, H. M., Nicholas, J. P., & Daus, C. S. (1999). An examination of the joint effects of affective experiences and job beliefs on job satisfaction and variations in affective experiences over time. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 78, 124. Widaman, K. F. (1985). Hierarchically nested covariance structure models for multitrait-multimethod data. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9, 126. Williams, K. J., & Alliger, G. M. (1994). Role stressors, mood spillover, and perceptions of work-family conict in employed parents. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 837 868. Williams, K. J., Suls, J., Alliger, G. M., Learner, S. M., & Wan, C. K. (1991). Multiple role juggling and daily mood states in working mothers: An experience sampling study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 664 674. Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of Management, 17, 601 617. Williams, L. J., Cote, J. A., & Buckley, M. R. (1989). Lack of method variance in self-reported affect and perceptions of work: Reality or artifact? Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 462 468. Witt, L. A., & Carlson, D. S. (2006). The work-family interface and job performance: Moderating effects of conscientiousness and perceived organizational support. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 11, 343357. Zhao, H., Wayne, S. J., Glibkowski, B. C., & Bravo, J. (2007). The impact of psychological contract breach on work-related outcomes: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 60, 647 680.

Rothbard, N. P. (2001). Enriching or depleting? The dynamics of engagement in work and family roles. Administrative Sciences Quarterly, 46, 655 684. Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. (1983). Mood, misattribution, and judgments of well-being: Informative and directive functions of affective states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 513523. Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. (2003). Mood as information: 20 years later. Psychological Inquiry, 14, 296 303. Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist, 55, 514. Shirom, A., Gilboa, S. S., Fried, Y., & Cooper, C. L. (2008). Gender, age and tenure as moderators of work-related stressors relationships with job performance: A metaanalysis. Human Relations, 61, 13711398. Sieber, S. D. (1974). Toward a theory of role accumulation. American Sociological Review, 39, 567578. Song, Z., Foo, M., & Uy, M. A. (2008). Mood spillover and crossover among dual-earner couples: An event sampling study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 443 452. Spector, P. E., & Fox, S. (2002). An emotion-centered model of voluntary work behavior: Some parallels between counterproductive work behavior and organizational citizenship behavior. Human Resource Management Review, 12, 269 292. Thoresen, C. J., Kaplan, S. A., Barsky, A. P., Warren, C. R., & de Charmont, K. (2003). The affective underpinnings of job perceptions and attitudes: A meta-analytic review and integration. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 914 945. Viswesvaran, C., Schmidt, F. L., & Ones, D. S. (2005). Is there a general factor in ratings of job performance? A meta-analytic framework for disentangling substantive and error inuences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 108 131. Voydanoff, P. (2001). Incorporating community into work and family research: A review of basic relationships. Human Relations, 54, 1609 1637. Watson, D. (2000). Mood and temperament. New York: Guilford Press. Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 10631070. Wayne, J. H., Musisca, N., & Fleeson, W. (2004). Considering the role of personality in the work-family experience: Relationships of the big ve to work-family conict and facilitation. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64, 108 130. Wayne, S. J., Randel, A. E., & Stevens, J. (2006). The role of identity and work-family support in work-family en-

Received June 9, 2010 Revision received December 14, 2010 Accepted December 15, 2010 y