Work Family Interface

Work family Interface

Edwards and Rothbard

Work-life interface is (2000) describe in their
the intersection of  paper six mechanisms
work and private life. which link both work
and family domain.
 Six mechanism
Spill-over Resource drain

Compensation Congruence

Work-family
Segmentation
Conflict
• Spillover
• This approach focuses on the transfer of affects, values, skills, and overt behaviors from one domain have on the other domain. Furthermore, also experiences as
fatigue can spill over. Positive spillover refers to situations in which, for example, energy derived from one domain transfers to another. On the contrary, in the
process of negative spillover negative affects are carried from one domain to another. For example, dissatisfaction in the work domain leads to increased
satisfaction dissatisfaction with life.
• Compensation
• It is a bidirectional mechanism stating that the relationship between work and non-work domain is one in which one domain may compensate for what is missing
in the other. Thus, domains are likely to be interrelated in a counterbalancing manner. For example, individuals unsatisfied with family life may try to enhance
performance at work.
• Segmentation
• Domains might also be separated due to segmentation. Accordinngly, each domain operates independently. Therefore, segmentation is the antithesis of spillover
theory in which it is assumed that one can actively compartmentalize competing role demands.
• Resource drain
• Resource drain describes the process of finite resources such as time and energy being taken away in one domain to be spend in another.
• Congruence
• Congruence is a theory that states although a positive or negative relationship may be found between work and family, the relationship is spurious because it is
caused by a third common factor, like personality.
• Work-Family Conflict
• WFC is also understood as a linking mechanism between work and family.
 Work family Conflict

Work and family roles will inevitably interfere with each other Work-family conflict
Results from pressures from work and family roles that are mutually incompatible
Has negative consequences for Employees Family members Employers

Work-family conflict is defined as interrole conflict where the participation in one

role interfere with the participation in another. Greenhaus and Beutell (1985)
differentiate three sources for conflict between work and family: 
Time based conflict: "time devoted to the requirements
of one role makes it difficult to fulfill requirements of
another"

Strain Based Conflict: "strain from participation in one

role makes it difficult to fulfill requirements of another"

Behavior-Based Conflict: "specific behaviors required by

one role make it difficult to fulfill the requirements of
another"
• Conceptually, the conflict between work and family is bi-directional.
• work-to-family conflict (WFC),
• family-to-work conflict (FWC).
• Accordingly, WFC might occur when experiences at work interfere with family life like
extensive, irregular, or inflexible work hours.
• Family-to-work conflict occurs when experiences in the family interfere with work life. For
example, a parent may take time off from work in order to take care of a sick child.
• Although these two forms of conflict - WFC and FWC - are strongly correlated with each
other, more attention has been directed at WFC. This may because family demands are
more elastic than the boundaries and responsibilities of the work role.
• Also, research has found that work roles are more likely to interfere with family roles than
family roles are likely to interfere with work roles.
Role Conflict Theory
• Role conflict refers to the difficulty faced by employees in dealing with two or
more sets of pressures and conflicting roles occurring simultaneously (Katz
and Kahn 1978; Kahn et al. 1964) ,

• a situation commonly faced by many professionals Brewer and Clippard

2002;Dodge and Storey 1979; Kantas, A. 1995;Steers and Black 1994.

• Research has found role conflict to be associated with higher level of WFC
e.g., Bedeian et al 1988; Greenhaus and Beutell 1985; Greenhaus et al.
1989;Kopelman 1983).
• Sources of work family conflict
• Role demands at work i.e., role overload, role conflict and role
ambiguity

• Scarcity and Depletion hypothesis which states that individuals have a

finite amount of time and energy. As such, their participation in
various roles (e.g., professional, family and leisure activities) leads to
role ambiguity, role overload, and role conflict that can eventually
result in the deterioration of quality of life
(Greenhaus & Parasuraman, 1999).
 WORK FAMILY BALANCE
•   work–family balance as a state wherein an individual’s work and family lives
experience little conflict while enjoying substantial facilitation. 
(Frone, 2003) 

• work–family balance as ‘a global assessment that work resources meet family

demands, and family resources meet work demands such that participation is
effective in both domains’
(Voydanoff, 2005) 

• Similarly, others view balance in terms of an individual’s self appraisal of effectiveness

in, and satisfaction with, their work and family lives
(Greenhaus & Allen, 2007; Valcour, 2007).
• Grzywacz and Carlson (2007)suggested an alternative definition of work–family balance:
• ‘accomplishment of role-related expectations that are negotiated and shared between an individual and
his/her role-related partners in the work and family domains’
• There are several important features of this definition.
• First, the proposed definition is valuable because it shifts the construct from the psychological domain into
the social domain, thereby making it observable and subject to observation.
• Next, there are no requirements imposed on how accomplishment of role-related responsibilities is
achieved. This is valuable because it suggests that work–family balance is possible despite experiences of
work–family conflict.
• Finally, the definition differs from others because neither effectiveness, nor overall performance in either
the personal or professional spheres of life, are necessary conditions for work–family balance. This feature
is important because work–family balance does not mean that an individual is a ‘superstar’ in both the
work and family domains. Rather, upholding mutually agreed upon responsibilities is, in essence, meeting
basic or core requirements of the role; it does not necessitate high levels of effectiveness or performance.
Role Accumulation
• There are three ways in which participation in multiple roles—often
referred to as role accu-mulation can produce positive outcomes for
individuals (Voydanoff, 2001).
1. First, work experiences and family experiences can have additive
effects on well-being.
2. Second, participation in both work and family roles can buffer
individuals from distress in one of the roles.
3. Third, experiences in one role can produce positive experiences and
outcomes in the other role.
 Positive spillover

Enhancement
Positive side
of work- Engagement
family
interface Fecilitation

Enrichment
Carlson et al.(2006) pointed out that these concepts are distinct, varying in their focus on received
benefits, experiences, and improvement of role performance. For example, work-family facilitation has
been defined as a form of synergy where resources associated with one role (e.g., affect, skills, self-
esteem, monetary benefits, etc.) make participation easier in the other role
Four fold
texonomy
• The four-fold taxonomy
of work-family balance
distinguishes between
the direction (work-to-
family or family-to-work)
and type of effect
occurring (facilitation or
conflict). A low degree of
inter-role conflict and a
high level of inter-role
facilitation lead to work-
family balance.
(Grzywacz & Marks, 2000)
Work Family Enrichment
• Work-family enrichment or work-family facilitation is a form of positive
spill-over, defined as a process whereby involvement in one domain
establishes benefits and/or resources which then may improve
performance or involvement in another domain
• (Greenhaus & Powell, 2006). 

• For example, involvement in the family role is made easier by

participation in the work role (Wayne, Musisca, & Fleeson, 2004).
• Conceptually, enrichment between work and family is bidirectional.
• work-family enrichment: Work-family enrichment occurs, when ones
involvement in work provides skills, behaviors, or positive mood
which influences the family life in a positive way.
• family–work enrichment: Family-work enrichment, however, occurs
when ones involvement in the family domain results in positive mood,
feeling of success or support that help individuals to cope better with
problems at work, feel more confident and in the end being more
productive at work
(Wayne, et al., 2004).
Three dimensions of work-family and family-work
enrichment are identified (see Figure 8.3).
Work-to-family enrichment refers to
(1) work-family affect (moods and attitudes), for example
work “puts me in a good mood and this helps me be a
better family member”;
(2) work-family development (skills, knowl- edge,
behavior), for example work “helps me to gain
knowledge and this helps me be a better family
member”; and
(3) work-family capital (work enhances psychological
resources as sense of security, confidence, self-
fulfillment), for example work “helps me feel
personally fulfilled and this helps me be a better family
member”.
Family-to-work enrichment has two similar dimensions
( family-work affect and family-work development) but
differs in the third one: family-work efficiency. The latter
refers to the situation where family involvement
encourages concentration on tasks, which helps one be a
better worker; for example family obligations “requires me
to avoid wasting time at work and this helps me be a better
worker”. Research shows that family-to-work enrichment is
significantly higher than work-to-family enrichment
(Greenhaus & Powell, 2006).
• The initial research on work-family enrichment described the benefits obtained from
multiple roles as encompassing: role privileges, status security, status enhancement,
and enrichment in personality (Sieber, 1974).
• Subsequently, Hanson, Colton and Hammer (2003) suggested a conceptualization that
used two types of enrichment. Instrumental enrichment refers to skills and abilities
acquired in one domain and applied in another, and it can be illustrated as follows:
employees who acquired team-management and conflict-resolution skills at work
can apply them in their family, resolving conflicts more effectively and managing better
chil- dren (Crouter, 1984; Kirschmeyer, 1992).
Other benefits such as perspective, flexibility, and psychological, physical, social-capital,
and material resources also belong to this category (Greenhaus & Powell, 2006).
Affective enrichment refers to positive emotions or affect transmitted from one role to
another. This is similar to mood spillover explained above (Edwards & Rothbard, 2000).
 FIGURE 1
Model of Work-Family Enrichment

•The resources generated in Role A

can promote high performance and
positive affect in Role B and that the
extent to which a resource heightens
performance and positive affect is
moderated by the salience of Role B,
the perceived relevance of the
resource to Role B, and the
consistency of the resource with the
requirements and norms of Role B.

(Greenhouse & Powel, 2006)