Factors Affecting Work-Life Balance among

Corporate sector managers in Sri Lanka

Sanduni Uthpala Gunawadena

Table of Content
Acknowledgement..i
Abstract..ii
Chapter 1: Introduction ........................................................................................................... 1
1.1.

Background ....................................................................................................... 1

1.2.

Research Problem.............................................................................................. 3

1.3.

Justification of the Study ................................................................................... 4

1.4.

Research Questions ........................................................................................... 5

1.5.

Research Objectives .......................................................................................... 5

1.6.

Significance of the Study................................................................................... 5

1.6.1.

Practical Significance ................................................................................. 5

1.7.

Methodology ..................................................................................................... 6

1.8.

Scope of the Study ............................................................................................ 7

1.9.

Limitations of the Study .................................................................................... 7

1.10.

Chapter Summary .......................................................................................... 7

1.11.

Chapter Framework ....................................................................................... 7

Chapter 2: Literature Review .................................................................................................. 9

2.1.

Introduction....................................................................................................... 9

2.2.

Concept of work-life balance ............................................................................. 9

2.3.

Components of work-life balance and Theoretical foundation ......................... 10

2.3.1.

Theories relating to negative side of work-life balance ............................. 11

2.3.2.

Theories relating to positive side of work-life balance .............................. 12

2.4.

Traditional Models of work-life balance .......................................................... 13

2.4.1.

Spillover model ........................................................................................ 14

2.4.2.

Compensation Theory .............................................................................. 14

2.4.3.

Segmentation model ................................................................................. 15

2.5.

Antecedents of work-life balance .................................................................... 15

2.5.1.

Individual level factors ............................................................................. 15

2.5.2.

Organisational level factors ...................................................................... 18

2.6.

Managers and Work-life balance ..................................................................... 21

2.7.

Work-life balance in the Sri Lankan Context ................................................... 23

2.8.

Benefits of work-life balance ........................................................................... 24

2.9.

Summary......................................................................................................... 25

Chapter 3: Theoretical background and research design..................................................... 26

3.1.

Introduction..................................................................................................... 26

3.2.

Conceptual Framework ................................................................................... 26

3.3.

Operational definitions of variables ................................................................. 26

3.3.1.

Manager support ...................................................................................... 26

3.3.2.

Colleague support .................................................................................... 27

3.3.3.

Partner support ......................................................................................... 27

3.3.4.

Organisational time expectations .............................................................. 27

3.3.5.

Childcare responsibilities ......................................................................... 27

3.4.

Development of Hypotheses ............................................................................ 27

3.4.1.

Manager support and work life balance .................................................... 27

3.4.2.

Colleague support and work-life balance .................................................. 29

3.4.3.

Organisational time expectations and work-life balance ........................... 29

3.4.4.

Partner support and work-life balance ...................................................... 30

3.4.5.

Childcare responsibilities and work-life balance ....................................... 32

3.4.6.

Gender and Manager Support ................................................................... 32

3.4.7.

Gender and Colleague Support ................................................................. 34

3.4.8.

Gender and Partner Support...................................................................... 34

3.4.9.

Gender and Childcare responsibilities....................................................... 36

3.5.

Research Philosophy ....................................................................................... 37

3.6.

Research Approach ......................................................................................... 37

3.7.

Research Strategy ............................................................................................ 38

3.8.

Research Choice .............................................................................................. 38

3.9.

Overall Research Design ................................................................................. 38

3.9.1.

Quantitative Study.................................................................................... 39

3.9.2.

Sampling .................................................................................................. 39

3.9.3.

Sampling Plan .......................................................................................... 40

3.9.4.

Research Instruments ............................................................................... 41

3.10.

Validity and Reliability of Measurement Properties ..................................... 42

3.11.

Analysis of Data .......................................................................................... 42

3.12.

Outcome of the Pilot Survey ........................................................................ 44

3.12.1. Reliability and Convergent validity of the pilot study ............................... 44

3.12.2. Discriminant validity ................................................................................ 48
3.13.

Summary ..................................................................................................... 48

Chapter 4: Data analysis and presentation ........................................................................... 50

4.1.

Introduction..................................................................................................... 50

4.2.

Sample Profile of the Study ............................................................................. 50

4.3.

Data Preparation for Analysis .......................................................................... 50

4.3.1.

Data Cleaning .......................................................................................... 51

4.3.2.

Tests of Normality Distribution of Data.................................................... 51

4.3.3.

Findings of the Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) Test ....... 52

4.4.

Results of Partial Least Square (PLS) Analysis ................................................ 52

4.4.1.

The Measurement Model .......................................................................... 54

4.4.2.

Validity and Reliability of the Measurement model .................................. 55

4.5.

Structural model and hypothesis testing ........................................................... 58

4.6.

Testing the moderator ...................................................................................... 63

4.7.

Summary of Hypotheses Testing ..................................................................... 69

4.8.

Summary......................................................................................................... 70

Chapter 5: Discussion on findings ......................................................................................... 71

5.1.

Introduction..................................................................................................... 71

5.2.

Key Findings ................................................................................................... 71

5.3.

Re-examining the conceptual framework ......................................................... 72

5.4.

Discussion on Findings.................................................................................... 72

5.5.

Managerial Implications .................................................................................. 76

5.6.

Implications for Individuals ............................................................................. 76

5.7.

Limitations and areas for further research ........................................................ 76

5.8.

Conclusion ...................................................................................................... 77

6.

REFERENCES ................................................................................................................ 79

7.

Appendices ..................................................................................................................... 109

7.1.

Annexure 1 - Structured Questionnaire .......................................................... 109

7.2.

Annexure II- Average Variance Extracted of variables (PLS-Output) ............ 115

7.3.

Annexure III- Composite Reliability of Variables (PLS-Output).................... 116

7.4.

Annexure IV- Cronbachs Alpha of Variables (PLS-Output) ......................... 117

7.5.

Annexure V- Structural model with path coefficients (PLS-Output) .............. 118

7.6.

Annexure VI- Structural model of moderator testing (PLS-Output) ............... 120

List of Tables and Figures

Table 1:Benefits of work-life balance ............................................................................ 25

Table 2: Sampling Plan ................................................................................................. 40

Table 3: Sampling Adequacy ......................................................................................... 41
Table 4: Operationalisation ............................................................................................ 41
Table 5: Reliability and Validity of the Pilot Survey ...................................................... 47
Table 6: Discriminant Validity Test Data (Pilot survey)................................................. 49
Table 7: Results of Normality Test ................................................................................ 52
Table 8: Findings of MANOVA test .............................................................................. 53
Table 9: Variables Used for Further Analysis ................................................................ 55
Table 10: Reliability and Convergent Validity of Constructs ......................................... 58
Table 11: Inter-Construct Correlations ........................................................................... 60
Table 12: Cross Loadings for the Measurement Model .................................................. 60
Table 13: Results of hypothesis testing .......................................................................... 64
Table 14: Results of the Structural model for H6, H7, H8 and H9 .................................. 67
Table 15: Average variance extracted .......................................................................... 115
Table 16: Composite reliability of variables................................................................. 116
Table 17: Cronbach's Alpha Values of Variables ......................................................... 118

Figure 1: Conceptual Framework................................................................................... 28

Figure 2: Measurement Model ....................................................................................... 54
Figure 3: Results of the Structural Model with Path Coefficients ................................... 62
Figure 4: Results of Moderator Testing with Path Coefficients ...................................... 66
Figure 5: Strength of the Moderation Effect of Gender on Manager Support and Work-ife
Balance ......................................................................................................................... 68
Figure 6: Strength of the Moderation Effect of Gender on Partner Support and Work-life
Balance ......................................................................................................................... 68
Figure 7: Modified Conceptual Framework ................................................................... 72

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The dissertation presented here is the outcome of a steady, consistent and arduous effort.
Nonetheless, this dissertation will not bring into being without the substantial assistance
and guidance I received from a number of remarkable individuals.
It is with much gratitude and appreciation that I thank my supervisor Dr. Pavithra
Kailasapathy for her guidance, support and feedback given during this whole research
journey. That enormous support provided a deeper insight into my area of study and made
this success.
My heartfelt gratitude also goes to Prof. Neville Warnakulasooriya, Dr. Nilakshi
Galahitiyawa and Dr. Amila Jayaratne for the valuable advices and guidance when I was
in need of assistance. I wish to express my heartfelt thanks to Ms. Dinushi Wijesinghe
and Mr. Terans Gunawardena. Both were truly pillars of success which inspired me at all
times during the journey of the research.
At the same time it is extremely important to thank to all of my batch mates and
friends for their enormous support which gave all the time during the course. I would also
like to thank the academic and administrative staff at the Faculty of Graduate Studies,
University of Colombo, for their kind support extended throughout my academic journey
at the University.
Last but not least I am greatly indebted to my family for the enormous strength
given at all the time to enable me to reach where I am today. No words can express
sufficiently what I owe them.

Abstract
The concern about work- life balance has become a key consideration among the
employees all over the world irrespective of the industry that they work in The main
emphasis has been drawn towards achieving a good work-life balance. This may be
because it is apparent that work- life balance has a direct impact on the quality of life,
work and personal well-being.
With the increase of intense competition in corporate arena corporate sector
employees experience more problems in maintaining effective work- life balance than
other professionals due to long working hours, heavy work schedules, and on the other
hand increase in dual-earner couples, child and/or elder care responsibilities and less
support from the family.
The current study was undertaken in order to ascertain the factors affecting worklife balance in the context of managers in the corporate sector which, can be regarded as a
descriptive study. The data for the study was collected during the second and third quarter
of 2014, through a well-developed and structured questionnaire. 150 valid responses were
considered for the final analysis. Partial Least Squares (PLS) analysis via path strengths
was used to determine the nature of the hypothesised relationships between the
constructs. PLS-PM is made of a system of interdependent equations based on simple and
multiple regressions. Such a system estimates the network of relations among the latent
variables as well as the links between the manifest variables and their own latent
variables.
Accordingly, an exploratory factor analysis was performed followed by the PLS
analysis, using Smart-PLS, to analyse the validity of the models constructs and the
relationships between the constructs.
According to the findings of the current study Manager support, Partner support
and Organisational time expectations are found to be the major determinants of work-life
balance. According to the results colleague support and childcare responsibilities have no
significant impact on work-life balance among corporate sector managers in Sri Lanka.

Key words: Childcare responsibilities, Collegue support, Manager support,

Organizational

time

expectations,

Partner

support,

Work-life

balance

ii

Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background
Composition of work and family life spheres has significantly changed over a period of
time. Todays working male and female face a broad set of daily challenges due to
tightened economic conditions (Duxbury, 2005), increase in ageing population, childcare
issues, target driven organisational practices (Kalleberg,2005), which many times create
imbalance between their working life and personal/family life. According to Duxbury and
Higgins (2005), lack of work-life balance influences working individuals performance at
workplace as well as in personal life. As stated by Bellavia and Frone (2006), in the
current economic scenario, organisations are hard pressed for higher productivity and can
face the challenges better if their employees are more engaged with work and workplace.
Organisations, more than ever, need employees with improved work-life balance (WLB).
An employee with better work-life balance will contribute more meaningfully towards the
organisational growth and success (Lowe, 2001).
The concern about work- life balance has become a key consideration among the
employees all over the world irrespective of the industry that they work in (Melissa &
Schieman, 2009). The main emphasis has been drawn towards achieving a good work-life
balance (Lyonette, 2006). As stated by Ruppanner and Huffman (2012) this is because it
is apparent that work- life balance has a direct impact on the quality of life, work and
personal well-being.
For many employees, the boundaries between work and non-work life are porous
(Huffman, 2012). Despite efforts to keep them separate, work and family are considered
greedy institutions (Piftman, 1994, p.4), that compete for ones time and contribute to
the interference between work and non-work life (Coser, 1974; Piftman, 1994; Van der
Lippe & Peters, 2007; Voydanoff, 2007). Couples increasing reliance on a dual-earner
wage implies that the number of individuals balancing work and non-work demands is
higher than in the past (Eagle, Icenogle, Maes, & Miles, 1998).
According to Brummelhuis and Bakker (2010), a balance between work and life is
supposed to exist when there is a proper functioning at work and home with a minimum
of role conflict. Therefore, the incompatibility between the demands from the work and
non-work domain give rise to conflict and consequently, people experience lack of WLB
(Allen, 2008). There is a confirmation of the fact that people entering the work force
today are laying emphasis on the importance of work-life balance more than predecessors
1

(Crompton & Lyonette, 2006). According to Drew and Daverth (2009) managers and
professionals, in particular, have experienced increasing work-life imbalance while lessskilled workers have had a decline. The paradox is that managers and professionals in
knowledge-intensive industries may work the longest hours (Gornick & Meyers, 2003),
handle wide range of responsibilities (Glavin, 2008) and also accomplish the needs of the
home front as well.
In fact, the researchers bring to mind that corporate sector employees are being
drawn to this situation more than the employees of other sectors (Gornick & Meyers,
2003) where they have to work for progressively longer hours and so experience an
increasingly unsatisfactory balance between home life and work life (Gornick & Meyers,
2003). Subsequent research reiterated these findings, showing that managers have the
lowest levels of individual work-life balance (O'Connell et al., 2004). Managers
consistently report the longest hours (DTI, 2004) and highest stress levels (O'Connell et
al., 2004).
Very few researchers have specifically focused on managers in their work-life
balance studies and those that do most often limit their involvement to one small element
of the research (Kmec & Gorman, 2010). According to Stone and Grotto (2012), this is
perhaps due to the unusual nature of managers in relation to the rest of the workforce:
managers tend to have higher educational levels, higher salaries and different working
conditions to their staff.
International research on managers shows an intensification of working pressures
and a significant lengthening of their work week (Lyness et al., 2001). In 1993, Scase and
Goffee reported that most of the managers in their studies worked an average of 50 hours
a week and had experienced a general intensification of their working hours. These long
hours accord with what Wajcman (1999) calls the macho manager or the concept that
being a manager requires total commitment and sacrifice to the organization - the job
comes before anything else.
Despite these findings, Seron and Ferris (1995) found that working long hours
was often a sign of higher status. This has continued to surface in recent studies which
indicate that few managers can afford to work standard hours or avail of the work-life
balance accommodations available to them as that would be seen as indicating a lack of
organisational commitment and potentially hamper their work- life balance (Thesing,
1998; Drew & Murtag 2005, p.342).

1.2. Research Problem

With the increase of intense competition in corporate arena, Fisher (1994, p.63) found
that corporate sector employees experience more problems in maintaining effective worklife balance than other professionals due to long working hours, heavy work schedules,
and on the other hand increase in dual-earner couples, child and/or elder care
responsibilities and less support from the family. Corporate sector is the part of the
economy made up by companies. It is a subset of the domestic economy, excluding the
economic activities of general government, of private households, and of non-profit
organizations serving individuals (Fisher, 1994). According to the study of Anderson,
Morgan and Wilson (2002), corporate sector employees reported higher dissatisfaction
with the work-family lead to stress and cause harm to the psychological well-being of the
employees thus affecting their performance.
While it remains more common for women to make adjustments to their working
patterns in response to household responsibilities, changing socio-economic conditions
make it increasingly difficult to sustain one-earner households (Andersen, 2002).
Consequently, women are reporting a greater imbalance than men between their work and
non-work life (Fine-Davis et al., 2005; Kimmel, 1993). Without full-time domestic
support, dual-income couples are facing new challenges which are further complicated by
the added pressure many companies face to compete in a 24-7 workplace. The limited
nature of 'family-friendly' policies has often served to reinforce traditional gendered
breakdowns of labour and such gendered policies do little to address the issues and
pressures that newer family structures face (Leira, 1992; Walby, 1990).
We are living in a changing world where the rate of change is also accelerating
(Hill & Yang, 2004). In such a context, consistent performance is increasingly becoming
critical. According to Hawkins and Ferris (2004), this is particularly true for corporate
sector managers. According to Dharmasiri (2013), corporate sector managers are
supposed to achieve results in an efficient and effective manner utilising the existing
resources, as any management text book tells us. The crux of the matter is that they have
to do so, whilst playing multiple roles in professional and personal fronts (Dharmasiri,
2013). Therefore it is important for organisations and individuals to identify the critical
factors affecting the balance of work and life and make them deployed in designing worklife balance initiatives and strategies.

Having identified the nature of this situation the researcher decided to address the
problem, why do corporate sector managers experience difficulties in striking a balance
between work and life?
1.3. Justification of the Study
This study is based on an analysis of factors affecting work-life balance: in the context of
corporate sector managers in Sri Lanka. Interest in work-life balance (WLB) continues to
increase, with a plethora of initiatives designed to encourage employees to reconcile the
competing demands of paid work and personal life. The 20 th century saw the emergence
of professional management as a function responsible for the coordination and control of
organisational processes (Jacques, 1996). This development also gave rise to an
increasingly instrumental and calculative approach to work. Working harder while
switching their attention to life outside work (Watson, 2001) generates conflict between
work and non-work life; consequently managers experience a lack of work-life balance.
Yet, the position of manager is particularly pertinent to work-life balance issues for
number of reasons.
First, even though managers typical employment contract formally specifies their
hours of work, informally often incorporates expectations that they will work unlimited
hours (Brady, 2009). Second, the managerial function is closely associated with the
control of organisations. Managerial control covers all organisational processes such as
Finance, HR and Marketing (Cohen & Fuwa, 2007), and includes expectations about
managers ability to control their own lives and identities (Calas & Smircich, 1995).
Third, as more women move into managerial positions, issues of work-life balance have
become especially relevant (Brady, 2009). Childcare issues, typical role expected from a
woman are central points. While male managers also face WLB dilemmas, these
questions have traditionally been associated with Womens employment (Brady, 2009).
According to Kossek (2005), work-life imbalance occurs not only due to
organisational pressures but also due to high demands of family domain. According to
Kossek (2005), there has been a steady increase in dual-earner couples, consequently
eldercare responsibilities, childcare responsibilities and also less support from the
spouse/partner. These increased pressures can have negative impacts on employees
overall work-life balance (Anderson, Coffey & Byerly, 2002).
It is evident that there are many reasons that stand behind the notion of work- life
balance and there are many factors affecting work-life balance. Analysing and identifying
4

the major determinants of work-life balance is the main purpose of this research. Based
on empirical research, it is justifiable to carry out this study.
1.4. Research Questions
Based on the review of literature and the research problem, the following research
questions have been formulated in order to analyse the factors affecting work life balance.
1. What are the major determinants of work-life balance of corporate sector managers?
2. Does gender have a moderating effect on the relationship between determinants of
work-life balance and work-life balance of corporate sector managers?
1.5. Research Objectives
The objectives of this research are:
1. To identify the major determinants of work-life balance of corporate sector managers
2. To identify whether gender has a moderating effect on the relationship between
determinants of work-life balance and work-life balance.
1.6. Significance of the Study
As mentioned above, main objective of this study is to identify the major determinants of
work-life balance among the corporate sector managers of Sri Lanka. This study is
expected to contribute to the knowledge of the work-life balance and the study attempts to
analyse and identify the major factors from both the work and non-work spheres affecting
the work-life balance. Very few studies regarding work-life balance among corporate
sector manager have been conducted and this study will address the lacuna by conducting
the study among managerial level employees in the private sector. The outcome of the
study is significant since the authorised officers will be able to deploy the research
findings in the formulation of work-life balance initiatives and strategies and this will be
assisting individuals to identify their perceived level of work-life balance and further take
initiatives appropriately to cope with multiple pressures in order to achieve a balance
between work and non-work life.
1.6.1. Practical Significance
The research outcome would facilitate the identification of major factors affecting worklife balance, relationship between those factors and work-life balance and gendered
perception towards work-life balance.

Subsequently, this would enable relevant parties to formulate WLB strategies to

counterbalance the negative impacts of work-life imbalance and to create a harmonious
working environment.
This study would beneficial to any industry, sector to identify what type of
assistance and flexibility employees expect to strike a balance between work and nonwork life.
1.7. Methodology
This study was carried out to analyse the factors affecting work-life balance among
corporate sector managerial level employees in Sri Lanka. Firstly rigorous literature
review was done in order to understand the research problem and elucidate the answer for
that in the existing body of literature. The data required to test hypotheses are based on
primary data and the discussions of concepts, hypotheses development, methodologies
and research design are based on the literature survey.
In order to determine the sample for the study, population is considered as the
managerial level employees (individual) who work for corporate sector organizations
(FMCG-fast moving consumer goods industry). Total sample size for this study is fixed at
250 in view of the consideration of cost and time. According to Sekaran (2003)
population of 10,000 or more, researcher would probably consider a sample size between
200 and 1,000 respondents. In order to support that concept, KMO and Bartletts test was
conducted to assure the adequacy of the sample. Further study deploys the nonprobabilistic sampling method and convenient sampling deploys due to the time and
resources constraints. Primary data was collected from the respondents through a
structured questionnaire.
Validation of measurement properties should be assessed at least through ensuring
content validity and construct validity (Sekaran, 2003). Likewise, constructs used in this
study have high content validity as they are developed based on a rigorous literature
survey. Therefore factor analysis is used for each dimension to measure construct validity
of the study. Further, item correlation is also performed in order to ensure discriminant
and convergent validity (Sekaran & Bougie, 2010). Reliability of the measure indicates
the extent of un-biasness while ensuring the consistency of measurements across time and
across various items in the instruments. This helps to assess the goodness of the
measure (Sekaran & Bougie, 2010). Inter-item consistency reliability, Cronbachs

coefficient alpha (Cronbach, 1946) to test the reliability of the constructs. Scope of the
study is presented in the next section.
1.8. Scope of the Study
The purpose of this study is to identify the major determinants of work-life balance
among corporate sector managers in Sri Lanka. Participants of the study are managerial
level employees of the corporate sector.
This sample was chosen because corporate sector managers have to play multiple
roles in both the professional and personal domains, therefore there is a higher tendency
for them to experience difficulties in maintaining work-life balance.
A questionnaire based study will be carried out to identify the major determinants
of work-life balance among corporate sector managers in Sri Lanka.
1.9. Limitations of the Study
Dominant level of the sample is middle level managers and most of the managers from
top layer have not returned the questionnaires on time with their tight schedule and with
the time constraints researcher did not have room to withhold the process of data
analysing till all the questionnaires were collected. Also the accuracy of the analysis is
dependent on the accuracy of the data obtained from the respondents in selected
organisations. Confined by time and resource conditions, researcher was unable to
conduct the research with larger sample pools, so the sample results cannot be
generalised.
1.10. Chapter Summary
Chapter one discussed the general background to the research in the form of introduction,
background of the study, significance of the study and the scope of the study. This
chapter highlighted the assignment to be undertaken while identifying the concept of
work-life balance. The objectives of the study, research problem and justification were
developed in this chapter, which would aid the researcher to logical conclusions. Next
chapter will present the rigorous literature survey done for the study.
1.11. Chapter Framework
Chapter two contains the theoretical underpinning of the study. It highlights the related
models, empirical research findings of the phenomenon.
Chapter three of the Thesis is consist of conceptual framework, hypotheses of the
study followed by the research methodology.
7

Data analysis and interpretation will be presented in chapter four and discussion of the
findings will be presented in chapter five.

2.

Chapter 2

LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Introduction
The objective of this chapter is to review the available literature relating to the research
problem identified. Accordingly, the concept of work-life balance is introduced and
theories of work-life balance and antecedents of work-life balance are presented. For the
purpose of this research, work- family balance is considered synonymous with work-life
balance.
2.2. Concept of work-life balance
Work-family balance is defined as the degree to which you fulfill the demands coming
from your employment and the family (Opatha, 2002).Work-life balance refers to issues
relating to the integration of paid work and the rest of life (Lewis, 2003, p.343).
Although work-life balance has been widely studied, it is important to note that the
concept of work-life balance has remained theoretically cloudy and empirically illdefined (Felstead et al., 2002, p.191). A major critique of work-life balance discussions
has been placed around the problematic notion of balance. For instance, Clark (2001)
claims that some research used role conflict as a surrogate for work-life balance.
Similarly, a majority of the work-life balance studies are based on role conflict, which is
defined as the simultaneous occurrence of two or more role expectations such that
compliance with one would make compliance with the other more difficult in Katz and
Kahns study (as cited in Kopp, 2013). For these studies (Marks & Scholarios, 2004),
balance simply means the absence of conflict. Along the same line, Greenblatt (2002,
p.179) claims that work-life balance is simply characterised by the absence of
unacceptable levels of conflict between work and non-work demands.
Greenhaus, Collins and Shaw (2003) proposed a robust definition of work-family
balance in an attempt to distinguish it from other concepts. They defined work-family
balance as the extent to which an individual is equally engaged in -and equally satisfied
with his or her work role and family role (Greenhaus et al., 2003, p.513). This
definition does not view balance as universally good, but instead recognises that
balance can be either positive or negative. It accommodates the growing understanding
that participation in multiple roles can contribute to good mental and physical health so
long as the degree of fit between work and family is satisfactory (Barnett, Garies &
9

Brennan, 1999; Marks & MacDermid, 1996). Greenhaus et al. (2003) operationalised the
concept of work-family balance as comprising three components. These are:

Time balance - whereby equal amounts of time are devoted to work and family;

Involvement balance - whereby an equal level of psychological involvement in

work and family roles exists; and

Satisfaction balance - whereby an equal level of satisfaction is derived from work

and family roles.
Within this definition, imbalance occurs when greater time, psychological

involvement or satisfaction occurs in one role compared to the other. Furthermore,

Greenhaus et al. (2003) suggest that balance can be positive where inputs to both roles
and outputs (i.e. satisfaction) from both roles are high.
However, Hill et al. (2007) argue that this balance metaphor has serious
limitations because it sees work and non-work- life as zero-sum game, where work and
non-work are seen as conflicting nemeses. As a result, Hill et al. (2007) suggest the
possibility of changing the metaphor to harmony instead of balance. This suggestion is
mainly based on the viewpoint that work and non-work life are in many ways
complementary, rather than competing (e.g. Friedman, Christensen, & DeGroot 1998;
Kirchmeyer 1992; Ruderman, Ohlott, Panzer, & King, 2002).
2.3. Components of work-life balance and Theoretical foundation
Work-life balance consists of two main components negative side of interface (conflict)
and positive side of interface (enrichment), much of the work-life research has focused on
the negative side of work-life interface, i.e. work-life conflict. This draws primarily on
the Role Scarcity Theory. However, some research challenges the scarcity-based
assumptions (Barnett, 1998; Frone, 2003; Hill, 2005). These studies explore and highlight
the potential positive aspects of interaction between work roles and non-work roles
(Barnett & Hyde, 2001; Grzywacz & Marks, 2000).
More recently, researchers (Frone, 2003; Grzywacz & Marks, 2000; Innstrand,
Langballe, Espnes, Falkum, & Aasland, 2008; Kirchmeyer, 1992; Grzywacz & Carlson,
2007; Wayne, Musisca & Fleeson, 2004) have proposed to incorporate both negative side
of work-life interface (work-life conflict), as well as positive side of work-life interface
(refer to enrichment, facilitation or enhancement) in examining work-life balance. For
example, Frone (2003) specifies that work-life balance results from high levels of worklife enrichment and low levels of work-life conflict. In specific, unlike the typical
10

balance metaphor that only measure work-life conflict, Grzywacz and Carlson (2007)
suggest to measure work-life conflict, as well as work-life enrichment as the components
of work-life balance in total.
There are various theories and concepts that govern both negative and positive
sides of work-life balance.
2.3.1. Theories relating to negative side of work-life balance
Role Scarcity Theory (Goode 1960) posits that each person has a fixed sum of energy to
spend, and commitment to one role is seen necessarily detracting from the resources
available to another. As indicated by Kanter (1977), active participation in non-work
domains, such as family, community and recreation has been viewed historically as
robbing the work domain of time and commitment. More recently, Ruderman et al. (2002,
p.870) assert that a metaphorical pie is often used to illustrate fixed sum of energy to
spend; the time and energy represented by one slice of activity deplete the amount of
pie left for others roles. Therefore, commitment to one role is seen as necessarily
detracting from the resources available to another. Similar to Role Scarcity Theory, the
Depletion argument is based on the assumption that people have fixed amounts of
psychological and physiological resources to expend and that they make tradeoffs to
accommodate these fixed resources (Rothbard, 2001, p.40). In the relationship between
work and non-work, the depletion argument argues that work and non work are inherently
conflicting because they both make claims to the same scarce resources (Thompson &
Bunderson, 2001, p. 90).
In addition, Spillover Theory, in which affective and cognitive roles and
experiences are carried over from one domain of life into other domains (Kabanoff,
1980), is commonly used in work-life studies. Crouter (1984, p.642) proposes the
probability of both positive and negative spillover. However, extant research on spillover
effect between work roles and non-work roles show that such relationship is mainly
negative in nature (e.g. Frone, Russell & Cooper, 1992; Greenhaus & Parasuraman, 1985;
Kinnunen & Mauno, 1998; Williams & Alliger, 1994). According to Kahn, Wolfe, Quinn,
Snoek and Rosenthal (as cited in Bozionelos & Huges, 2007) Role Conflict is
simultaneous occurrence of two (or more) sets of pressures such that compliance with
one would make more difficult compliance with the other. Role conflict may arise
between different life roles, which are inter-role conflict. In specific, inter-role conflict
refers to the extent to which a person experiences pressures within one role that are
11

incompatible with the pressures that arise within another role (Kopelman, Greenhaus &
Connolly, 1983, p.201). Work-life conflict is a typical example of inter-role conflict
(Kopelman, Greenhaus & Connolly, 1983, p.201). For example, an employee is expected
to contribute and perform extensively in the workplace, and at the same time his or her
family may require high amount of attention and participation from him or her, result in
high levels of work-life conflict (Higginbottom, 1994, p.532).
2.3.2. Theories relating to positive side of work-life balance
The first study that determined positive effects of holding multiple roles was carried out
by Sieber (1974), who proposed Role Accumulation Theory: positive effects of holding
multiple roles tend to outweigh any cost (strain) to which it might give rise, thereby
yielding net gratification. Proponents of Role Accumulation theory have highlighted the
potential positive outcomes of holding multiple roles in their studies (Crouter, 1984,
p.632; Gray 1983, p.767; Pietromonaco, Manis & Frohardt-Lane, 1986; Randall, 1988).
In a more recent study, Ruderman et al. (2002, p.83) report that personal roles such as
those of spouse, friend, parent, traveler, sister, volunteer, and daughter were identified as
providing opportunities to learn skills, values, and abilities useful at work.
Expansion model is developed by Marks (1977) as an alternative model opposing
to the Role Scarcity Theory. The Expansion Model assumes that individuals have
abundant and expandable resources (e.g. time, energy, and allegiance) rather than limited
resources. Expansion approach provides an energy-creation theory of multiple roles,
implying that human activity not only consumes, but may also produce energy (Marks,
1977). For example, Kirchmeyer (1992) finds that workers activities and responsibilities
in non-work domains may actually energize them for work and enhance work attitudes.
Along the same line, Crouter (1984) identifies Positive Spillover between work and nonwork. Positive spillover refers to positive experience in one domain such as moods, skills,
values, and behaviors being transferred to another domain (Crouter, 1984, p.49).
According to Andreassi and Thompson (2007,p.943), because energy is a resource that
can be transferred from one domain to another, higher levels of energy at non-work
domain are likely to lead to better functioning at non-work, and in turn positive spillover
from the non-work to work.
Numerous alternative labels, such as enrichment, enhancement, expansion,
facilitation, etc are widely used across work-life literature to reflect a positive premise of
work-life integration (Witt & Carlson, 2006, p.74).However, despite the growing interest
12

in the positive aspects of integrating work life and non-work life, researchers have not
reached a consensus on definition as regards to positive effects of work-life integration
(Hill et al., 2007, p.834).
At times, these labels have been used interchangeably. For instance, Work-life
Enrichment is defined as the extent to which experiences in one role improve the quality
of life, namely performance or affect, in the other role (Greenhaus & Powell 2006,
p.113). Analysed by Carlson et al. (2006), the fundamental thinking behind enrichment is
that work and non-work each provide individuals with resources such as enhanced
esteem, income, and other benefits that may help the individual better perform across
other life domains (Barnett & Hyde 2001; Grenhaus & Powell 2006).
Work-life facilitation refers to the extent to which participation in one domain
fosters enhanced engagement or processes in another domain, is proposed by Grzywacz
(2000). Similarly, Frone (2003, p.145) conceptualizes facilitation as the extent to which
participation at work (or non-work) is made easier by virtue of the experiences, skills, and
opportunities gained or developed at non-work (or work). In all, facilitation includes
skills, experiences, resources, and knowledge interacting with individual and contextual
circumstances that are portable and contribute to increased levels of organization and
development (Frone, 2003; Grzywacz, 2000; Innstrand et al., 2008; Morris & Madsen,
2007). According to Carlson et al. (2006), the key distinction between enrichment and
facilitation is the level of analysis: enrichment focuses on improvement in individual role
performance or quality of life whereas facilitation focuses on improvements in system
functioning.
2.4. Traditional models of work-life balance
Through the 1980s and the 1990s the amount of research on work and family roles
increased substantially. This proliferation of research led to several models capturing the
relationship between work and family roles. Edwards and Rothbard (2000) provide a
review and integration of much of the existing research on the relationship between work
and family roles. They identified six recurring linking mechanisms depicted in the worklife literature: Spillover, Compensation, and Segmentation, Resource drain, Instrumental
and work-family conflict. Of these six mechanisms Spillover, Compensation,
Segmentation and Instrumental models have been primarily used to explain observed
relationship between work and family constructs (Edwards & Rothbard, 2000, p.234)
Whereas resource drain and work-family conflict are primarily outcomes of work and
13

family role enactment. Spillover, Compensation and Segmentation have emerged as

dominant models characterising the linkage between work and non-work roles (Edwards
& Rothbard 2000, p.234).
2.4.1. Spillover model
Spillover is a process whereby experiences in one role affect experiences in the other,
rendering the roles more similar. Research has examined the Spillover mood, values,
skills and behaviors from one role to another (Edwards & Rothbard, 2000, p.238). The
spillover model is supported when there is a significant positive relationship between
measures of work and non-work experiences (Edwards & Rothbard, 2000; Lambert,
1990; Staines, 1980). Congruence is also represented by a positive relationship between
measures of work and non-work experiences, but it is caused by a third factor affecting
both the work and non-work roles (Edwards & Rothbard, 2000, p.241).
Spillover can take two forms. One is characterised by similarity between a work
construct and a related construct in the non-work role, as when someone who is highly
satisfied with his or her work organisation becomes highly satisfied with his or her
experiences in the family role. The second form of spillover entails the transference of
experiences intact between work and non-work domains, as when fatigue from work is
displayed at home; however, this second form must also entail the fatigue affecting family
functioning for it to constitute spillover (Edwards & Rothbard, 2000, p.243). Existing
research finds significant evidence of spillover (Lambert, 1990). In a key study of
spillover, Williams and Alliger (1994) used experience sampling methodology to
examine mood-related spillover on a daily basis, finding that working parents in their
sample were more likely to bring work related emotions home than they were to transfer
family-related emotions to the work place (Williams & Alliger, 1994, p.83).
2.4.2. Compensation theory
A second process by which work and family roles may be linked has been termed
Compensation (Edwards & Rothbard, 2000, p.263). Compensation refers to a
relationship between work and non-work roles whereby people attempt to make up for
deficiencies in one role through greater involvement in another role (Champoux, 1978,
p.722; Edwards & Rothbard, 2000; Lambert, 1990; Zedeck, 1992), and entails a negative
relationship between constructs in the two roles (Edwards & Rothbard, 2000).
Individuals can compensate for dissatisfaction in one role in a number of ways: they can
reduce the importance ascribed to a less rewarding role or they can seek rewards and
14

invest more time and attention in an alternative role (Edwards & Rothbard, 2000, p.266).
Evidence for compensation has been found in number of studies. Evans and Bartolome
(1984, p.674) found that managers temporarily sought fulfillment in their family lives
when they faced disappointment with their experiences at work. Tenbrunsel et al, (1995,
p.52) also found a compensatory relationship between work and family roles for
employed men. More recently, Edwards and Rothbard (2000, p.93) found that women
who experienced negative affect from family were more engaged with their work
consistent with compensation theory.
2.4.3. Segmentation model
Unlike the compensation and spillover models, the segmentation model posits no
systematic relationship between work and non-work roles (Edwards & Rothbard, 2000,
p.301). Instead, segmentation has been used to describe the separation of work and
family, such that the two roles do not influence one another (Edwards & Rothbard, 2000;
Staines, 1980; Zedeck, 1992). Initially, segmentation was viewed as the natural division
of work and family due to the physical and temporal separation of the two roles and to
their innately different functions (Blood & Wolfe, 1960; Dubin, 1973).
However, given the more recent view that work and family are closely related
domains of human life as mentioned in the studies of Burke & Greenglass, 1987; Kanter,
1977; Voydanoff, 1987 (as cited in Burke & Jones, 1995) segmentation has been
reconceptualized as an active psychological process whereby people may choose to
maintain a boundary between work and family (Eckenrode & Gore, 1990; Lambert, 1990;
Morf, 1989; Near, 1984). For example, Piotrkowski (1979, p.76) found that some people
may actively suppress work-related thoughts, feelings and behaviors while at home, and
vice versa. Building on this notion of segmentation as an active psychological process,
recent research has articulated the notion that segmentation may be a strategy for work
and family boundary management (Kossek et al., 1999, p.977) for keeping work and nonwork roles (Nipper,1995).
2.5. Antecedents of work-life balance
2.5.1. Individual level factors
Work Centrality
Work centrality refers to the degree of general importance that working has in ones life
at any given time (Harpaz, 2002) More specifically, the centrality of work is
demonstrated by the personal responsibility individuals assume for their work, the amount
15

of time they devote to it, and the significance it has within the general context of their
lives (Harpaz, 2002, p.46).
According to Harpaz (2002), work plays a central role in peoples lives in modern
society because people spend a great deal of time working or preparing for it through
education and training. Furthermore, the economic (or instrumental) and the other social
(or intrinsic) means of work, offer reasons for the centrality of work (Harpaz, 2002)
Namely, people work not only to secure their basic sustenance and satisfy their material
needs, but also to obtain and maintain their self-esteem, status, and sense of
accomplishment through working. As a result, it is assumed that work is the central of life
of most, if not all adults (Dollard, 2011).
It is believed that the importance an individual places on work roles influences his
or her experience of work-life balance. According to Etzion (1988), when the extent of
the centrality of work in ones life, or the values placed by individuals on their
professional and private lives do not fit the actual relationship between ones work and
private life, debilitating friction occurs.
Carlson and Kacmars (2000) claim that the centrality of a role to an individual
may subsequently impact the choices and decisions he or she makes. If those decisions
are to focus on one domain and not the other, this may cause work-life conflict. In other
words, the different centrality placed on the role of work may explain differences in the
experience of work-life conflict (Carlson & Kacmar, 2000). Similarly, Hirschfeld and
Field (2000) find that people who consider work as a central life interest have a strong
identification with work, in the sense that they believe the work role to be an important
and central part of their lives. As a result, they may commit more energy and time in
work which is their central life interest. Such action may have certain effects on
achieving work-life balance.

Career Stage

A career can be defined as the sequence of job related experiences and attitudes an
individual shares over the span of their work life (Hall & Mirvis, 1996). Individuals
progresses through distinct career stages and have unique career concerns and
psychological needs at each respective stage (Super, 1957).
Cron (1984) identifies four stages through which an individual progress:
exploration, establishment, maintenance, and disengagement. Based on Crons (1984)
findings, Mehta, Anderson and Dubinskys (2000, p.509) stipulate the four aspects of
career stages as follows:
16

(1) Exploration stage: employees usually are concerned with finding an occupation in
which they can succeed. During this time, a focus is on self-discovery and developing a
professional self-image.
(2) Establishment stage: Those in the establishment stage generally aspire to achieving
stabilization in their career, getting ahead, and obtaining security at work. Success on
the job is a paramount issue with an often concomitant desire for a promotion.
(3) Maintenance stage: employees are especially focused on maintaining their current
position, status, and achievement level which are likely to be high. Upward mobility
tends to diminish and concern for financial remuneration increase.
(4) Disengagement stage: Employees in the disengagement stage tend to prepare for
retirement, although some might psychologically disengage long before retirement age.
These individuals may well de-emphasize rewards, given their organizational withdrawal
tendencies.
The different career concerns, psychological needs, and challenges reflected in
respective career stages may influence work-life balance differently. Rhodes (1983)
reports that work attitudes, values, and satisfaction change as workers pass through career
stages. Similarly, according to Loscocco and Kalleberg (1988), as individuals progress
through career stages, their work roles and non work roles may vary accordingly. Hence,
individuals at different career stages may have different experiences of work-life balance.
More specifically, it is possible that work-life conflict is strongest at the earlier
stages of a persons career (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985). For example, the early career
years are characterized by strong pressures from both the work and non-work domains
(Bailyn, 1980). A study on young graduates showed that they expect not only appropriate
and competitive pay for the work they perform, but also hope to achieve a balance
between work and the rest of their lives (Filipczak, Gordon & Stamps, 1997). On the
contrary, it is possible that work-life conflict is strongest during the midcareer stage
(Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985). For instance, Bartolome and Evans (1979) find that
managers in mid-career (ages 35-42) are likely to turn toward their family lives and to
question their earlier preoccupation with work. Greenhaus and Beutell (1985) further
conclude that the increasing importance of non work during mid-career may produce
strong pressures within the non work domain that conflict with work role pressures.

Family stressors

Straub (2012) indicates that the work-life balance issues generated by different life needs
for time for families elder care, sickness of family member, parental demand,
17

community and emergency situation and for personal time recreation / leisure, sports,
and holidays. Most of literature from very beginning examined parental demand is main
contributor of work-life conflict. For example, Herman and Gyllstrom (1977) showed
parents are more likely to experience work-family conflict than non-parents.
Parental demands increase with the number of children, and parents of younger
children (who are likely to be particularly demanding of their parents time) experience
more conflict than the parents of older children (Beutell & Greenhaus, 1980- cited in Fu
& Shaffer, 2001). Similarly, Greenhaus and Beutell (1985) identified family domain
stressors (e.g., young children, spouse employment, and large families) as contributing to
work-family conflict.
Frone, et al. (1997) found the family stressors of number of hours devoted to
childcare each week and perceived parenting overload, to be positively related to worklife conflict. Kinnunen and Mauno (1998) also reported number of children, employment
status (full versus part-time) and shift work to be positively related to work life conflict.
In support of these evidences, a closer look at work-life balance policies within
workplaces reveals that the work-life balance debate also has a particular perception of
life one centered on caring responsibilities (Eikhof, et al. 2007).
Hours spent on household work are also a major predictor of work-family conflict.
Because time is a limited resource, spending more time on household chores means that
less time is available for work. The result is an increased level of work family conflict (Fu
& Shaffer, 2001).
Empirical results have also revealed a number of additional antecedents with
stressors implications that are associated with work-family conflict including: gender
(Gutek, et al., 1991; Hammer, Allen, & Grigsby, 1997), marital status (Cooke &
Rousseau, 1984), employment status of ones spouse (Greenhaus, Parasuraman, Granrose,
Rabinowitz, & Beutell, 1989; Hammer et al., 1997; Parasuraman, 1992), age and number
of children (Greenhaus & Kopelman, 1981; Frone & Yardley, 1996), and shift work
(Greenhaus et al., 1989; Jaffe & Smolensky, 1996; Smith & folkhard, 1993). In contrast,
Fu and Shaffer, (2001) found no effect of marital status, working spouse, role autonomy
and ambiguity on work life conflict.
2.5.2. Organisational level factors

Industry/Sector

18

Different work conditions, in various industry sectors, may lead to different work-life
balance(s) experienced by individuals. This point is picked up by Lambert and HaleyLock (2004), who highlight the need to compare conditions across jobs (in different
industries) in work-life balance research.
Differences in work requirements emanating from sectoral effect are quite
common, and are deemed to impact work-life balance. For instance, construction industry
is an industry that is characterized by long hours work, which may contribute to
difficulty in work-life imbalance. Lingard and Francis (2005) assert that the construction
industry has a strong culture of long hours and weekend work, especially among sitebased employees. Employees from the hospitality industry are required to work on nontraditional hours; for instance, at night and during weekends.
Furthermore, in contrast to conventional manufacturing jobs, which start and end
on a predetermined schedule, work in the media industry is highly unpredictable in
nature, and fluctuation in the flow of work is a common norm. In this setting, employees
are required to continually update skills and knowledge (Perrons, 2003).
The concern of employees from computer or information technology (IT) industry
towards work-life balance has drawn mounting attention among researchers. As described
by Scholarios and Marks (2004), the nature of work which separation of work and nonwork life being substantially more blurred than for more traditional occupations make
software workers present an interesting case for work-life balance issues. Offsite client
work (Weisenfeld, Raghuram & Garud, 2001) and schedule flexibility, which may mean
uncertainty in some cases, is typical in IT industry. Consequently, the possibility of
overlap between work life and personal life is higher. Also, employees from IT industry
generally work long hours (Perlow, 1998). For instance, majority of the software workers
in Perlows study (1998) felt that they were expected to sacrifice non-work commitments
if they wanted to progress in their company.

Job autonomy

In general, job autonomy refers to the degree of freedom available on the job
(Parasuraman, Purohit, Godshalk & Beutell, 1996). Ganster (1989) defines job autonomy
as the degree to which the job provides substantial freedom, independence and discretion
in scheduling the work and in determining the procedures to be used in carrying it out.
Similarly, Clark (2001) defines job autonomy as the ability to decide when, where, and
how the job is to be done.

19

Numerous studies have investigated the direct impact of job autonomy on work-life
conflict. For instance, Voydanoff (1988) asserts that employees with higher autonomy in
the conduct of work are expected to be able to limit the negative effects of workload
pressure, and potential conflict on non-work life. Hence, autonomy leads to lower worklife conflict. Also, Thompson and Prottas (2005) claim that a job that allows employee
autonomy and discretion in how and when the job gets done should enable employees to
better meet multiple conflicting work and non-work demands. In addition, autonomy
provides employees the freedom to perform their work independently, and allows them to
make adjustments to accommodate other aspects of their lives as needed (Ahuja et al.,
2007). Hence, this may reduce the level of frustration in trying to balance work roles and
other aspects of life.
The significance of job autonomy in easing work-life conflict has been identified
in some other studies (e.g. Andreassi &Thompson, 2007; Clark 2001; Greenhaus &
Kopelman, 1981; Kossek, Lautsch & Eaton, 2006). Grzywacz and Butler (2005) even
recognize that worker control or authority is a strong candidate for promoting work-life
balance. In a study of work-life issues among entrepreneurs, Parasuraman et al. (1996)
discover that the greater perceived control implied by autonomy may enable
entrepreneurs to structure their work in a manner that accommodates their non-work
responsibilities, delegate responsibility for certain work-related tasks, thereby making
time for dealing with non-work role demands, and minimizing work-life conflict.

Number of work hours

Number of hours worked is a prominent feature in examining antecedents of work-nonwork conflict. Numerous studies have taken hours worked per week as the primary
independent variable in predicting work-non-work conflict (e.g. Burke, Weir & DuWors
1980; Frone, Yardley & Markel,1997; Gutek, Searle & Klepa, 1991; Hill et al. 2001;
Tausig & Fenwick, 2001; Tenbrunsel, Brett, Maoz, Stroh & Reilly, 1995; Thompson &
Bunderson, 2001). According to Thompson and Bunderson (2001), individuals are trying
to achieve appropriate distribution of hours among the domains of work, family,
community, religion, recreation and so forth. Time allocation for work is therefore an
important factor in determining work-life balance.
Time is a limited resource and the conditions of work and other nonwork roles
may place competing demands on an individuals time (ODriscoll, Ilgen & Hildreth,
1992). As a result, time devoted to one role makes it difficult to fulfill requirements of
other roles (Bamberger & Conley, 1991). It is therefore believed that total number of
20

hours spent for work roles, including normal working hours and overtime work at office
or at home, will affect the performance of an individual in other life spheres. For
example, working long hours limits the extent to which individuals are physically
available for non-work activities (Voydanoff, 1988). In other words, the more time an
individual commits to his/her jobs, the greater the perceived interference with his/her offjob activities and commitments. Adams, King and King (1996) has identified correlation
between increase in working hours and family difficulties and life dissatisfaction, which
appears to validate the influence of number of hours worked on work-life balance.
Many studies have shown that more hours worked tend to bring about more worknon-work conflict. For instance, Judge, Boudreau, and Bretz (1994) find a strong
relationship between number of paid work hours and work-life conflict. Other scholars
have also consistently revealed that the number of hours worked contributes directly to
experiences of work-life conflict (e.g. Burke, Weir & Duwors 1979; Frone, Yardley &
Markel, 1997; Keith & Schafer, 1980; Parasuraman et al., 1996; Pleck, Staines & Lang,
1980). More specifically, Shamir (1983) reports that working more than 9 hours a day
resulted in much greater difficulty in achieving work-life balance. In other words,
working with more hours was negatively related to work-life balance (Hill et al. 2001;
Tausig & Fenwick, 2001; Lyness & Kropf, 2005).
2.6. Managers and work-life balance
The 20th century saw the emergence of professional management as a function responsible for the coordination and control of organisational processes (Jacques, 1996). This
development also gave rise to a view of managers as heroic figures worthy of high
rewards and status: a view reinforced by the political and economic environment of the
early 1980s and 1990s which encouraged an enterprise culture (Burrell, 1992). Promoted
under Thatcherism policies, this view still prevails in some sectors although the current
recession and ongoing economic crisis (and many recent managerial scandals) lessened
its impact (Lauren, 2011). Constant restructuring and financial uncertainty in public
sector organisations has signaled a return to more regulated managerial environments,
frequently reinforced by policies such as those associated with work-life balance
(Collinson & Hearn, 1996, p.9).
Over 20 years ago Scase and Goffee (1989, p.179) described how middle
managers had to work under more tightly monitored circumstances. They depicted
managers as increasingly instrumental and calculative in their approach to work; working
21

harder under reduced promotional prospects, but also switching their attention to life
outside work. Similar themes were reported by Watson (2001, p.108) who found that
managers enthusiasm and loyalty were being eroded by greater regulation imposed by
the organisation. Collinson and Collinson (1997, p.27) documented important changes in
managers employment from being privileged employees enjoying long-term career
prospects to becoming much more disposable, insecure and at risk of delayering.
Managers therefore experienced themselves as both managers and managed, controllers
and controlled. Those who survived delayering were expected to work very long hours
and be seen as ever present at work by their colleagues and more senior managers
(Collinson & Collinson, 1997, p. 29). Similarly, managers were required to be in work
much earlier than the rest of the workforce and to stay long after official end times. Such
actions are typically construed as demonstrating managers organisational loyalty and
work commitment (Roberts 1997, p. 63).
There is now growing evidence of persistently long working hours for managers
(Bonney, 2005; Warhurst et al., 2008). Indeed, Park et al. (2007, p.95) suggest that senior
managers and professionals are most likely to argue that work does interfere with their
private lives. For managers there is a particular paradox here. Research evidence suggests
that managerial workers enjoy significant discretion over their working hours but it is
they who are under considerable pressure (Doyle 2004, p.37) rather than using flexibility
to fit in family and recreation, managers are reported to be opting for long working hours
thereby reducing personal and leisure time (Lewis, 2003; Perlow, 1998). The pressure of
long working hours and high performance expectations can reinforce traditional
masculine cultures in management, which separate and demarcate paid work and
domestic life. Feminist analyses highlight the centrality of work and family boundaries,
and the complex inter-connections between them (Collinson & Collinson, 1997 p.24).
Martin (2002, p. 357) questions why the false dichotomy between public and private
lives goes unchallenged, referring to the inextricable interlocking and interdependence
of the two spheres (Pocock et al., 2008,). Work and family imbalance can result from
expectations that managerial employees should conform to the hegemonic male model of
employment which tends to disregard responsibilities faced by individuals (frequently
women) outside employment (Gatrell & Cooper 2008, p.74).
Epstein and Kalleber (2004) argue that it is men rather than women managers who
are predominantly overachievers and workaholics. Clearly some women fit this profile,
but research indicates that this is frequently seen as a male model of managerial work,
22

such that the type of behaviour deemed appropriate for managers coincides with dominant
notions of masculinity, centering on detached rationality, control and competitiveness
(Wajcman & Martin, 2002, p.542). Watts (2009,p.xiii) found in the construction industry
that cultural issues of visibility combined with an ethos of presenteeism served to limit
opportunities for women managers unless they adopted male norms and behaviours.
However, she notes that even when women assume this approach, they tend to be
marginalized or excluded by other (male) managerial colleagues.
Hochschild (1997) discovered that for some employees, work has become the
place in which feelings of belonging, accomplishment and stimulation are engendered
whereas home is associated with sheer hard work, particularly for parents of young
children. Other studies report that technological developments (such as email and mobile
phones) facilitate considerable permeability in boundaries between employment and
home, making paid work more pervasive and possibly addictive (Pocock et al., 2008;
Warhurst et al., 2008). Enhanced possibilities of working at home as well as in the
workplace tend to lead to longer working days: this reinforces the blurring of boundaries
and can even make the two almost indistinguishable (Lewis, 2003).
2.7. Work-life balance in the Sri Lankan context
Work-life balance is one of the significant topics that have risen amid the most recent
decade in Sri Lanka because of impressive work escalation which was brought about by
expansion business rivalry and women contribution in the work force (Arachchige, 2013).
After 1977, with open market economic policies, a trend was set to earn money by
various means. As the economic policy indicated people are free from many strict
regulations, as such new businesses entering into the market became a visible factor. At
the same time, the opening up of free trade zone gave ignition to the economic activities
of the country with increasing working women population. With this economic expansion
the breadwinner model is being supplanted by the contemporary combination model in
which professional and family labor is being divided between men and women in a more
equal way (Vloeberghs, 2002, p.26). But In the Sri Lankan context whether the non-work
obligations, for example, family work is being separated amongst men and women in an
equivalent way is questionable (Arachchige, 2013).
Even though, Sri Lanka went through all macro level economic changes as the
other western countries, such as commercialization, deregulation and privatization.
Ironically an internal change that has occurred in line with macro changes, within the
23

organization, is minimal. (Arachchige, 2013). Majority of the organizations are poor in

providing employees with flexible work schedules, good policies and practices, good
supervisors,

performance

feedback,

and

recognition

except

IT

companies

(Wickramasinghe & Jayabandu, 2007). As a result family lives of many employees are
affected due to overwork and inflexibility (Arachchige, 2013). In the meantime
technological advancements, such as company mobile phones, laptops and the internet
imply that employees are required to take care of work matters outside typical working
hours. Subsequently, they are unable to properly organize their personal life and unable to
dedicate time and proper attention to non-work activities and obligations. It is being 39
years since open economic policy introduced to Sri Lanka, but lives and well-being of
individuals are uplifted is still questionable.
2.8. Benefits of work-life balance
Better work-life balance directly benefit employers as well as employees. This in turn
enhances the job satisfaction, work engagement and work productivity of employees.
These benefits are not only social and psychological but also economic, and that is the
primary reason why global and proactive organisations have leveraged work-life balance
programmes to enhance productivity and profitability, besides gaining higher employee
engagement (Voydanoff, 2007, p.85). McDonald and Bradley (2005) identified a set of
employer and employee benefits of better work-life balance. Availability of broader talent
pool, earlier return of employee to work after maternal leave, lower rates of absenteeism,
positive employer branding, enhanced work related performance, better employee
retention, reduced employee turnover, improved health of employee and higher degree of
job satisfaction were the benefits identified by McDonald and Bradley (2005). Hudson
2006; Byrne 2005; Hewlett 2006 brought forward a wide array of work-life balance
benefits which can be categorized into qualitative and quantitative benefits to employers
and employees are mentioned in Table 1.

24

Table 1:Benefits of work-life balance

Qualitative benefits for employer

Qualitative benefits for employee

Retaining valued employees

Happier life at work and at home

Motivated workforce

Better work place relations

Attracting a

Improved

wider

range of

candidates

self-esteem

and

concentration

Reputation of employer of choice

Time for personal and family life

Reduced recruitment costs

Greater control of working life

Maximized available labour

Better management of home and

Improved quality of applicants

Cost of absenteeism

Cost of diminished productivity

Cost

of

staff

turnover

work.

and

Supportive workplace that values

staff.

Cost

of

health

insurance

premiums

recruitment

Cost of direct medical claims

Cost of customer satisfaction

Source: (Hudson et al., 2005)

2.9. Summary
This chapter presented the concept of work-life balance based on various studies done by
researchers, well-established theories and models of work-life balance, antecedents of
work-life balance. Latter part of the section presented several studies on work-life balance
in the context of managerial level employees and concluded the section with benefits of
better work-life balance for both the employee and employer. Conceptual framework,
hypotheses of the study followed by the research methodology is presented in Chapter
three.

25

3.

Chapter 3

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND & RESEARCH DESIGN

3.1. Introduction
The objective of this chapter is to provide the conceptualisation of the study based on the
literature review carried out in chapter three. Accordingly, in this chapter, the conceptual
framework of the study, development of hypotheses and operationalisation are clearly
articulated. Sample selection, data collection methods and data analysis techniques are
explained in detail.
3.2. Conceptual framework
A conceptual framework is used in this research to outline the possible courses of action.
It is applied as an intermediate theory that has the potential to connect to all aspects of the
inquiry (e.g. problem statement, purpose, literature review, methodology, data analysis)
(Shields & Tajalli, 2006).
Throughout the literature review related to the concept of work-life balance, the
key variables are identified in the context of the study and based on these independent
and dependent variables, the conceptual framework was developed (Figure1).
This will assist to construct a link between both the variables enabling a
comprehensive understanding of the entire research study.
Based on the coherence of the study; this conceptual framework is designed to
understand the relationship between independent variables: Manager Support, Colleague
Support,

Organisational

Time

Expectations,

Partner

Support

and

Childcare

Responsibilities and Work-Life Balance (dependent variable). Hence, this study is meant
to understand the major determinants of work-life balance among the corporate sector
managers in Sri Lanka. Social support theory, Resource scarcity theory and Scarcity
theory provided the base to formulate the conceptual framework.
3.3. Operational definitions of variables
3.3.1. Manager support
Generic form of support that can provide socio-emotional resource to deal with their work
demands to individuals by their superiors (Frye & Breaugh, 2004).

26

3.3.2. Colleague support

Extent to which individuals view other workers at their organization as being helpful and
supportive of them ( Liao, Joshi & Chuang,2004).
3.3.3. Partner support
Instrumental aid and emotional support that individual receive from his/her
spouse/partner (Frye & Breaugh, 2004).
3.3.4. Organisational time expectations
Number of hours employees are expected to work and how they use their time in the
organization (Bailyn, 1997).
3.3.5. Childcare responsibilities
All the rights, duties, powers, responsibilities and authority which by law a parent of a
child has in relation to the child and his property National child protection act 1998
(no.50).
3.4. Development of hypotheses
3.4.1. Manager support and work life balance
Manager support can be explained by Social support theory. Social support has been
defined as the availability of helping relationships and the quality of those relationships
(Leavy, 1983, p. 5). Kahn and Quinn (1976) argue that social support entails giving
another person instrumental aid and emotional support such as affection and affirmation.
According to Hobfoll (2001), supportive resources of social support can be
emotional (e.g., nurturance), tangible (e.g., financial assistance), informational (e.g.,
advice), or companionship (e.g., sense of belonging) and intangible (e.g. personal advice).
As stated by Baltes (1990), social support can be measured as the perception that one has
assistance available, the actual received assistance, or the degree to which a person is
integrated in a social network. Supervisory support can be considered as a generic form of
social support that can provide socio-emotional resource to deal with their work demands.
Research in work-family studies suggests that although generic supervisory support is not
family specific, it can be an important resource for reducing work-life imbalance (Frye &
Breaugh, 2004; Kossek et al., 2011; Luk & Shaffer, 2005).

27

Figure 1: Conceptual framework

Independent

Moderator

Dependent Variable

Variables
Gender

Manager Support

Colleague Support

Work-life Balance

Organisational
Time Expectations

Partner Support

Control Variable
Childcare

Working

Responsibilities

Experience

Source: Authors Conceptualisation

Supervisory support can be considered as a generic form of social support that can
provide socio-emotional resource to deal with their work demands. Research in workfamily studies suggests that although generic supervisory support is not family specific, it
can be an important resource for reducing work-life imbalance (Frye & Breaugh, 2004;
Kossek et al., 2011; Luk & Shaffer, 2005). Supervisors are often considered as agents of
the organisation (Eisenberger et al, 2002) who implement organisation's policies and
practices. Thus, when employees perceive that their supervisors are favorably inclined
towards them and care for their well-being, it can act as an important emotional and
psychological resource that can reduce the strain created by work demands (Frye &
Breaugh, 2004; Luk & Shaffer, 2005).
It has been shown that the immediate supervisors response to work and family
concerns is more critical than that of the top management in setting the tone for a
supportive environment (Bernas & Major, 2000; Maxwell, 2005; Ray & Miller, 1994).

28

Friedman et al. (1999) found that it was the supportive attitudes and immediate managers
behaviours which employees considered the most significant factor in balancing their
work-life responsibilities. The enthusiastic support of managers means that employees
will be more likely to feel balance between work and life and experience an overall lower
level of work-life conflict (Allen, 2001; Carlson & Perrew, 1999). Research by BlairLoy and Wharton (2002) found that employees are able to strike a balance between work
and life if they work with powerful supervisors who could buffer them from perceived
negative effects on their careers. Thus, it is hypothesised that:
H1: There is a positive relationship between manager support and work-life
balance
3.4.2. Colleague support and work-life balance
Coworkers have the ability to define the social environment at work (Schneider, 1987)
and they can have a large influence on whether or not an employee is able to balance
his/her time between work and non-work life (Cook & Minnotte, 2008).
Social support has been defined as the availability of helping relationships and
the quality of those relationships (Leavy, 1983, p. 5). Kahn and Quinn (1976) argue that
social support entails giving another person instrumental aid and emotional support such
as affection and affirmation.
Coworker support can be defined as the extent that individuals view other workers
at their organisation as being helpful and supportive of them (Liao, Joshi, & Chuang,
2004). This type of support can include caring for fellow coworkers, giving them tangible
aid, and/or providing them with useful information (Ducharme & Martin, 2000; Parris,
2003).Work-life conflict can be reduced when a coworker helps an employee cope with
the competing demands between ones work and non-work life (Frone, Yardley, &
Markel, 1997; Thompson & Prottas, 2006). Social support theory provides the basis for
the relationship between colleague support and work-life balance. Thus, it is hypothesised
that:
H2: There is a positive relationship between colleague support and work-life
balance
3.4.3. Organisational time expectations and work-life balance
Bailyn (1997) has defined time expectations as the number of hours employees are
expected to work, how they use their time (for instance, whether or not employees are
expected to take work home) and the level of discretion in ones work schedule the
29

dominant finding is that many employees are spending longer hours at work and also
taking additional work home (Beynon et al., 2002; Green, 2001; Fagan, 2003;). In
traditional organisational cultures, working long hours tends to serve as an important
indicator of commitment and productivity, yet at the same time representing a stumbling
block towards meeting non-work responsibilities (Bonney, 2005).
This relationship can be explained with the resource scarcity hypothesis, the main
argument here is that since people have a limited, fixed amount of resources (e.g., energy,
time), problems may arise when different roles draw on these same resources (Frone et
al., 1992). For example, when both family and work roles draw on the scarce resource of
time, it is likely that one of these roles is compromised due to a lack of available time and
in turn it creates negative impact on individuals job role and family role (Frone et al.,
1992, p.146).
This dimension (Organisational time expectation) has been closely associated with
the related concepts of face time (Laekin, 1987) and the ideal worker (Macan, 1994).
Both of these are highly pertinent to this study.
Face time is widely understood to refer to employee physical time at the
workplace that is observed by co-workers, supervisors, and customers (Brubaker et al.,
1999), incorporating both face to face interaction and working in the presence of others.
Research has shown that for many organisations, time seen at work is typically
understood in terms of productivity levels, with many professionals reporting a sense of
pressure with regard to managing their face time and being present when and where their
supervisors work (Van Dyne et al., 2007). The ideal worker is fully cognisant with
organisational expectations of face-time, and possesses no other areas of life which
might impinge on their ability to work (Rapoport et al., 2002, p.170), conceptually
therefore, it is argued that this ideal type is underpinned by a separation between the
spheres of work and life (Bailyn, 1993, 2003; Lewis, 1997; Rapoportet al., 2002). Thus,
it is hypothesised that:
H3: There is a negative relationship between organizational time expectations
and work-life balance
3.4.4. Partner support and work-life balance
Given the increasing interdependence of the work and family domains, partner support is
being recognized as an increasingly important factor contributing to the understanding of
the well-being of employees (Peeters & LeBlanc, 2001). Investigating the existing
30

literature on the relationship between family social support and work-like balance reveals,
a similar pattern as that identified in the work domain. Receiving spouse or partner
support has been positively related to number of work-related outcomes, including
occupational success (Bird & Bird, 1986), positive mental health, work-life balance
(Aneshensel, 1986), marital adjustment (Roskies & Lazurus, 1980; Suchet & Barling,
1986), job satisfaction (Rudd & McHenry, 1986) and indirectly to the amelioration of
stress due to work and job loss (House, 1981).
To handle work-life balance, Friedman and Greenhaus (2003) emphasise that
working adults learn to build networks of support at home, at work, and in the
community. Conflict between work and family has real consequences and significantly
affects quality of family life and career attainment of both men and women (Friedman &
Greenhaus, 2003).The consequences for women may include serious constraints on career
choices, limited opportunity for career advancement (Aquino, 2003) and success in their
work role, and the need to choose between two apparent opposites an active and
satisfying career or marriage and children (Bommer & Coffey, 2002). Therefore in order
to reduce conflict, individuals should negotiate their household responsibilities
(Kailasapathy & Metz, 2012). Many men have to trade off personal and career values
while they search for ways to make dual career families work, often requiring them to
embrace family roles that are far different, and more egalitarian, than those they learned
as children. Specifically, support from two domains (partner and employer) has a
significant impact on one another (Srinivas 2005, p.132).
This relationship is supported by two well-established theories, social support
theory and compensation theory. Social support has been defined as the availability of
helping relationships and the quality of those relationships (Leavy 1983, p. 5). Kahn and
Quinn (1976) argue that social support entails giving another person instrumental aid and
emotional support such as affection and affirmation. This relationship is also supported
by compensation theory of work-life balance. Compensation refers to a relationship
between work and non-work roles whereby people attempt to make up for deficiencies in
one role through greater involvement in another role (Champoux, 1978; Edwards &
Rothbard, 2000; Lambert, 1990; Zedeck, 1992), compensatory effect between two forms
of psychological interference: work-to-family and family-to-work. Specifically, support
from two domains (partner and employer) has a significant impact on one another.
According to Friedman and Greenhaus (2000), the impact of partner support is
greater when professionals feel their employers are unsupportive of their lives beyond
31

work and partner/spousal support compensate for the lacking part whereby employee feel
comfortable in meeting organisational commitments Conversely, for employees with
relatively unsupportive partners, the employer family-friendliness reduces role conflicts
more than partners. Thus, one source of support compensates for the lack of the other.
Thus, it is hypothesized that:
H4: There is a positive relationship between partner support and work-life
balance
3.4.5. Childcare responsibilities and work-life balance
The literature on women and mens daily lives is fairly consistent in reporting that the
total demands on employed women (paid work, housework, and child care) are higher
than on employed men (Milkie & Peltola, 1999). In a study by Robinson and Godbey
(1997) using time diaries, they report that for those employed more than 20 hours a week,
women spend 30.8 hours doing paid work per week, and men spend 39.7 hours. Women
spend 25.6 hours and men spend 14.3 hours on family care, including standard
housework, shopping, and caring for the children. This means that for employed women,
the total time demands from unpaid and paid work exceed mens total by about 1 hours
per week. This can have a negative influence on the balancing of work and family
responsibilities for women, and therefore a negative perception of the work-life balance.
Hochschild (1989) reports that employed mothers put in an extra month per year of a
24-hour day, compared with employed fathers. Not only are employed women and men
likely to have different total workloads but they also allocate their time in different ways.
This relationship can be explained with the resource scarcity hypothesis, the main
argument here is that since people have a limited, fixed amount of resources (e.g., energy,
time), problems may arise when different roles draw on these same resources (Frone et al,
1992). For example, when both family and work roles draw on the scarce resource of
time, it is likely that one of these roles is compromised due to a lack of available time and
in turn it creates negative impact on individuals job role and family role (Frone et al,
1992, p.146). Thus, it is hypothesized that:
H5:

There

is

negative

relationship

between

childcare

responsibilities and work-life balance

3.4.6. Gender and Manager Support
It has been shown that the immediate supervisors response to work and family concerns
is more critical than that of the top management in setting the tone for a supportive
32

environment (Bernas & Major, 2000; Maxwell, 2005; Ray & Miller, 1994). A study of
Drobnic and Gullien (2011) revealed that a supportive environment is instrumental in
reducing work-life imbalance. Many of the respondents in the study of Drobnic and
Gullien (2011) admitted that they get support from their immediate supervisors (60%
male and 71% women) at the work place. Of those sampled 54% of the men and 63% of
women acknowledge the support from their boss. Both genders opined that a supportive
work environment is helpful in achieving work-life balance.
According to Denton (2004 as cited in Kailasapathy, Metz & Kraimer, 2008), the
traditional gender role ideology identifies specific and distinct roles for men and women
in marriages such as the husband should be the head of the family or male headship and
females should be submissive. Irrespective of the increased number of women entering
into the labor force during last three decades this traditional gender role ideology still
prevails and it is strongly rooted in Asian countries like Sri Lanka (Kailasapathy,Metz &
Kraimer, 2008).
Women still primarily take care of domestic tasks, irrespective of their
employment status. So, many women employees continue to face difficulties in balancing
these two forces (Hyman & Summers, 2004). The burden of meeting the demands of
home front and office front is high when womens exposure to the labor force and to
education increases. Given the context, for female employees a supportive supervisor
may make work situations less stressful by discussing family-related problems and being
flexible when emergencies arise at home (Carlson & Perrew, 1999 as cited in Hyman &
Summers, 2004). Instrumental support such as providing flexible work schedules or
changes to work priorities to help balance work and family conflict (Dienesch &
Liden1986; Carlson & Perrewe 1999 as cited in Kailasapathy & Metz, 2012), providing
them with emotional support and potential latitude to negotiate work demands (Major et
al. 2008).
Presumably, if female employees receive sufficient work support from
supervisors, it would ease off the burden they face in both the work and family domains
and it will be more beneficial for female employees than male employees since they play
major role in the home front. Such instrumental and emotional support allows female
employees compared to male employees to reduce the likelihood that work will interfere
with family demands. Thus, it is hypothesized that:
H6: Gender will moderate the positive relationship between manager support and
work-life balance, such that relationship will be stronger for women than for men.
33

3.4.7. Gender and Colleague Support

Coworkers have the ability to define the social environment at work (Schneider, 1987)
and they can have a large influence on whether or not an employee is able to balance
his/her time between work and non-work life (Cook & Minnotte, 2008). Support from
boss and support from team members and colleagues is a valuable source of assistance,
especially when emergencies at home arise. According to Rubery (2005 as cited in Allen
et al., 2009), trusted colleagues serve as valuable sounding boards. Many leaders reported
that health crises their own or family members might have derailed their careers if not for
compassionate bosses and coworkers (Upadhya & Vasavi, 2006).
Coworker/Peer support is a critical resource for working women to enable their
continued success in both work and family domains compared to male employees,
because balancing work and family is often more difficult for women than for men due to
the disproportionate burden of the family responsibilities (Bird, 2006). Women face
uneven distribution of childcare and other domestic responsibilities which become major
barriers in the career advancement as well as work-life balance (Cross & Linehan, 2006).
If

female

employees

receive

satisfactory level

assistance

from

their

peers/coworkers, especially in occasions when they have to take care of sick child,
husband or parent, attend parents meetings or any other events where role of mother or
woman is placed above and much more needed than the role of men. Since women
typically take more stock of the priorities in their lives and make adjustments compared to
males, if working women can really rely on support provided through coworker/peer
relationships, it would ease off the burden they face in both work and family fronts. Thus,
it is hypothesized that:
H7: Gender will moderate the positive relationship between colleague support
and work-life balance, such that relationship will be stronger for women than for
men.
3.4.8. Gender and Partner Support
Gender ideology traditionally assigns males to bring bread and butter for family, and
females to take family labor and childcare (Konrad & Cannings, 1997). However, women
have entered the workforce in increasing numbers, and employees gender-role attitudes
have changed. Both women and men have become less traditional in their gender-role
attitudes (Konrad & Cannings, 1997). For example, women and men in the 1980s were
more likely than in the 1960s to agree that it is appropriate for wives to have their own
34

careers, that employed women can be good mothers, and that men should do more
housework and child care (Thornton et al., 1989). Employees gender-role attitudes have
shifted from traditional perspectives to egalitarian perspectives (Rogers & Amato, 2000).
Therefore, mens and womens time in family work is converging, but women are still
holding more family responsibilities than men (Robbinson, 1988). Dmaris and Longmre
(1996) found that females do much more housework than males, even compared to
egalitarian males and males appear to be getting more spousal support overall. The study
by Baily and Hopkins (2006), male interviewees often spoke about their spouses
willingness to take care of children, tolerate long work hours, and even relocate,
sometimes as a way of life. The study conducted by Schneer and Reitman (2007) revealed
that most of the females felt that while their male counterparts did not have the
responsibilities for housework and childcare during their work life, they personally
continued to have these responsibilities and that these responsibilities increased their
stress level in turn impede their career success and married men have the greatest career
pleasure, especially compared to single men, because spouses give additional resources
for job performance. The wife not only takes care of household responsibilities, but also
provides counsel and work assistance for the husbands job (Bunchan & Thornthwaite,
2001).
Spousal support reduce burdens and road blocks for male employees by providing
assistance in terms of house hold responsibilities and in terms of counseling and
consoling when male employees confronted with work place challenges and work place
issues and also inspire to move up the career ladder. A spouse who is involved in
family/nurturing role, it means female is more likely to provide behavioral support for her
partner, then, a spouse who receives behavioral support tends to gain time and flexibility
at home that could be used to preserve energy in family domain. Psychological support
from spouses provides information, guidance, and acceptance that help partners build
self-esteem and confidence (Friedman & Greenhaus, 2000) that increase ones capacity to
better cope with work- family issues. But executive women or working women do not
benefit as much as men from spousal support (Craig, 2007), it is because though
employed wives attach uniformly high importance to their family responsibilities and
men are highly involved in work and career, tends to be viewed as life role priority, and
they tend to spend less time on family, take less time off for children, and make less
adjustment in work schedule for family. As a result career growth, work-life balance of

35

female employees may impede due to multiple roles she has to play with unsatisfactory
level of support she receives from the spouse.
Presumably, if females get satisfactory level of spousal/partner support it would
minimize the burden they get from handling responsibilities of both work and home
domains. Also if working women get adequate support from their partner it would
minimize the stress they go through and enhance their career success. Thus, it is
hypothesized that:
.H8: Gender will moderate the relationship between partner support and worklife balance, such that relationship will be stronger for women than for men.
3.4.9. Gender and Childcare responsibilities
As mentioned earlier, men have been socialized to give priority to the breadwinner role,
and women to give priority to the homemaker and motherhood roles, Men usually spend
more hours in paid work than women, although once non-market work is added in
womens total working week is on average longer because they usually have the main
responsibility for domestic work and child care. This division of domestic labour is still
widely accepted, even though social attitudes and norms are slowly changing in many
countries.
The current arrangement of gender roles leave men free from the responsibilities
of child care and domestic tasks, and thus able to concentrate on their working lives
(Burn, 2003), while women have to contend with the difficulty of combining employment
and family roles. This gender difference in work patterns and responsibilities provides the
context for the interpretation of the comments of men and women on their work-life
balance (Lofquist, 1999). Upon the birth of a child, women typically make career
decisions to accommodate their growing family responsibilities. This includes reducing
work to part-time or taking on more flexible positions to care for children (Friedman et
al., 2001). Men typically engage in more paid work, and women engage in more
housework, childcare, and eldercare. Crompton and Lynette (2006) found a negative
perceived work-life balance of working women in five different European countries
(Finland, Norway, Britain, France, Portugal) in particular when it came to childcare
responsibilities.
Gender roles often become more differentiated when men and women become
parents. Overall, women provide more direct care for and spend more time with children
(Walzer, 2001). This care includes taking responsibility for the mental work of gathering
36

and processing information about infant care, delegating the tasks related to infant care,
and worrying about infant health and well-being (Grosswald, 2003) In sum, the unequal
division of both household labor and childcare, with women doing the bulk of the work,
is thought to contribute to the reported lower marital satisfaction for women (Walzer,
2001). Thus, it is hypothesised that:
H9: Gender will moderate the negative relationship between childcare
responsibilities and work-life balance, such that relationship will be stronger for
women than for men.

3.5. Research philosophy

According to Saunders et al. (2011), research philosophy contains important assumptions
about the way in which the researcher view the world. This assumptions are the base on
which the research strategies and methods are decided. It is examined whether the current
study is based on which research philosophy out of the major four; positivism, realism,
interpretivism or pragmatism. It is understood that the study is based on positivistic
philosophy in which only observable phenomena can provide credible data, facts and
focus is on causality and law like generalizations, reducing phenomena to simplest
elements (Saunders et al., 2011, p.150). This study is based on the positivistic research
philosophy.
3.6. Research approach
Saunders et al. (2011) pointed out that first the researcher should select between two main
research approaches: deductive, which idea is to create theory on the basis of the
available literature, as well as existing findings and test it through observation and
inductive, where first you make the observation, then devise theory as a result of the data
analysis. However, the methodological approach that of the current study is deductive
research method (Bryman & Bell, 2007). Motive of the choice is that deductive process is
organized in a more consistent way, as each new step follows the previous in a logical
sequence and the conclusions are drawn through logical reasoning (Bryman & Bell,
2007). The limited time is another reason to apply a deductive approach, because the
inductive study is more exploratory and is connected with long process of collecting and
analyzing data in order to develop a theory from it, while deductive approach is narrow
and it investigates specific theory or hypothesis (Bryman & Bell, 2007).

37

3.7. Research strategy

Survey is the most popular data collection tool within the explanatory research, and is
usually defined by its structured nature in gathering data from a large sample which is
regarded as reliable source because of the stated limited alternatives. It provides certain
factual and descriptive information, which can be interpolated to the population. Survey is
a relatively easy method to administer, as well as economical and efficient in reaching its
target population (Malhotra & Dash, 2011). Thus, the study was adopted the survey
method to collect data.
3.8. Research choice
Saunders et al. (2011) stated that, if researcher prefers to use a single data collection
method and corresponding data analysis, it is known as the mono method study. Since
current study only based on primary data collected using questionnaire and deployed
quantitative analysis techniques, the study belongs to the mono method.
3.9. Overall research design
The study is undertaken in order to ascertain the factors affecting work-life balance in the
context of managers in the corporate sector which, can be regarded as a descriptive study
(Sekaran, 2010).
In order to achieve the objectives of the study, the researcher adopted a
quantitative based approach as the research methodology for the study. They were
selected based on their seniority level (convenient sampling) in particular organisation
and they expressed how they perceive and consider work-life balance. The study is
designed to analyse the factors affecting work-life balance, and to examine the
relationship or association between factors affecting work-life balance and the work-life
balance. The data for the study is collected during the second and third quarter of 2014,
through a well-developed and structured questionnaire. Accordingly, a cross- sectional
study was conducted (Sekaran & Bougie, 2010). Both personally administered
questionnaire method and mail questionnaire method was used by the researcher to
collect the relevant data from the respondents. Personally administered method was used
for majority of respondents who were at convenient places. A minority of respondents
was approached through the mail questionnaire method. The researcher ensured that the
mail questionnaires were sent back by the respondents by closely following each of them.

38

3.9.1. Quantitative study

This study describes the relationship between variables. Therefore it is explanatory in
nature and was conducted with less interference of the researcher. This research is a noncontrived research (Sekaran, 2010). Further, the data for this study was collected at a
single point of time (Sekaran, 2010; Zikmund, 1997); and the study is a cross-sectional in
time horizon. Pilot study was done in the second quarter of the year 2014 and the data
was collected during the third quarter of the year 2014. Pilot study was conducted with 7
top level managers, 12 middle level managers and 11 operational level managers. They
were selected based on their working experience.
Survey is the most popular data collection tool within the explanatory research,
and is usually defined by its structured nature in gathering data from a large sample which
is regarded as reliable source because of the stated limited alternatives. It provides certain
factual and descriptive information, which can be interpolated to the population. Survey is
a relatively easy method to administer, as well as economical and efficient in reaching its
target population (Malhotra & Dash, 2011). Thus, the study has adopted the survey
method to collect data.
3.9.2. Sampling
The process of selecting the right individuals, objects or events as representatives for
entire population is known as sampling (Sekaran, 2010).
In order to achieve the objectives of the study, researcher selected corporate sector
managers based on two main reasons. The 20th century saw the emergence of
professional management as a function responsible for the coordination and control of
organisational processes, this development also gave rise to a pressure of long working
hours and high performance expectations thereby reducing personal and leisure time
(Lewis, 2003; Perlow, 1998). Second with the growth of womens employment,
coordinating work and family activities has become increasingly difficult and many
parents are dissatisfied with the balance between their work and family lives (Bunchanan
& Thornthwhite, 2001; Craig, 2007). Also corporate sector is one of the sectors which
researcher can have access to more than hundred managers. The above mentioned reasons
lead researcher to focus on corporate sector in Sri Lanka in testing and achieving the
research objectives of the study.
Thus, the participations of the study were limited to the managerial level
employees in the corporate sector in Sri Lanka. Accordingly, the unit of analysis of the
39

study is individual. The study was designed to focus on managers who are categorized as
Top level, Middle level and Operational Level (professionals).
3.9.3. Sampling plan
The sample size is important as it affects the magnitude of difference in covariance
matrices (Malhotra & Dash, 2010). If the sample is inadequate, the probability to project
the results to the population becomes severely limited. Therefore, a minimum sample
size is needed. A priority statistical power analysis can be calculated using various
methods. Subsequently, there are different arguments on the size of the sample. The total
sample size was fixed at 250 in view of time and cost considerations, 225 questionnaires
were sent but only 174 valid responses received, yielding response rate of 77%. Most
experienced researches would probably consider a sample size between 200 and 1,000
respondents (Sekaran, 2010). Sampling plan is explained in Table 2 and Further KaiserMeyer-Olkin test (KMO) and Bartletts test was conducted to assure the sample adequacy
and it is explained in the Table 3.
Table 2: Sampling plan
Administrative Stage
First Wave

Number
of
Number
Questionnaires
rejections
Sent
170
17

Reminder
Second Wave

Total Valid Responses

Source: Survey Data

of

Number of Valid
Responses
Received
73
69

55

20

225

37

32

174

According to the Table 3 Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) Measure of Sampling Adequacy is

more than 0.5 each construct. Therefore, it shows the sample adequately represent the
population for all the variables. Bartlett test is designed to test the equality of variance
across groups against the alternative that variance are unequal for at least two groups
(Malhotra, 2011). According to results depicted in Table 3 equal variance is made.

40

Table 3: Sampling adequacy

Manager Support

Bartlett's
Test
of
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin
(KMO) Sphericity
Measure of Sampling Adequacy Approx. Chidf Sig.
Square
213.546
.871
21 <.001

Colleague Support

.683

229.862

21 <.001

.681

262.797

28 <.001

.612

299.361

22 <.001

Work Life Balance

.932

376.602

55 <.001

Partner Support

.748

341.232

21 <.001

Dimension

Organizational

Time

Expectations
Childcare
Responsibilities

Source: Survey Data

3.9.4. Research instruments
A structured questionnaire was used as the research instrument in collecting primary data
which were used to analysing and understanding the relationships established. Based on
the literature review, structured questionnaires tested in prior studies were used in
developing the research instruments. Source on which research instrument based and the
reliability of research instruments of prior studies are explained in the Table 4.
Table 4: Operationalisation
Reliability
of Source on which items
(Cronbachs
based
alpha value)
Hammer et al. (2009)
.83

Variables

No.
Items

Manager Support

10

Colleague Support

Ducharme & Martin (2000)

.76

Organisational Time
Expectations
Partner/Spousal Support

Gill (2010)

.79

Kirran & Buckley (2004)

.73

Childcare Responsibilities

Elliot(2003)
Levy(2012)
Padma & Reddy (2013)

.81

Work-Life Balance

Grzywacz & Carlson (2007)

.83
.79
.93
41

3.10. Validity and reliability of measurement properties

Properties of the measurement should be assessed at least through ensuring content
validity and construct validity (Sekaran, 2010). Hence, the validations of measurements
used in the study are discussed in the following sections.
Content validity is a function of how well the dimensions and elements of a
concept have been delineated (Sekaran, 2010). Constructs used in the survey have high
content validity as they were developed based on a rigorous literature survey. The
corporate sector background, dimensions of work-life balance was operationalised by
taking well-developed and tested scales.
Construct validity testifies to how well the results obtained from the use of the
measure fit the theories around which the test is designed (Sekaran, 2010). Factor analysis
is a multivariate technique that would confirm the dimensions of the concept that have
been operationally defined, as well as to indicate which of the items are most appropriate
for each dimension (establishing construct validity) (Sekaran, 2010). Therefore to
measure the construct validity of the study, factor analysis was used for each dimension.
Further, item correlation was also performed in order to ensure convergent and
discriminant validity (Sekaran & Bougie, 2010).
Convergent validity is how well the scale positively correlates with other
measurements of the same constructs (Malhotra & Birks, 2006). Discriminant validity is
the extent to which a measure doesnt correlate with other constructs from which it is
supposed to differ. It entails a lack of correlation among other constructs (Malhotra &
Birks, 2006).
Reliability of the measure indicates the extent to which it is unbiased hence
ensures the consistent measurement across time and across various items in the
instrument. This helps to assess the goodness of the measure (Sekaran, 2010). In order
to test the reliability of the constructs, Inter-item consistency reliability, Cronbachs
coefficient alpha (Cronbach, 1946) was used.
3.11. Analysis of data
All statistical techniques which simultaneously analyse more than two variables on a
sample of observations can be categorized as multivariate techniques (Kothari, 2004).
Multivariate techniques are largely empirical and deal with the reality; they possess the
ability to analyse complex data. Accordingly in most of the applied and behavioral
researches, generally resort to multivariate analysis techniques for realistic results
42

(Kothari, 2004). This study is also having multiple variables for the study, need to employ
multivariate techniques for the analysis of the data. Also, the data collected for the study
are of non-normal, therefore to examine the relationship between variables which PLS
can better cater (Chengalur-Smith, Duchessi, & Gil-Garcia, 2012).
The term path analysis was first introduced by the biologist Sewall Wright in
1934 in connection with decomposing the total correlation between any two variables in a
causal system. The technique of path analysis is based on a series of multiple regression
analyses with the added assumption of causal relationship between independent and
dependent variables. This technique lays relatively heavier emphasis on the heuristic use
of visual diagram, technically described as a path diagram (Kothari, 2004). Concerning
the hypothesized relationships between the constructs of the study, Partial Least Squares
(PLS) analysis via path strengths is to be used to determine the nature of the hypothesised
relationships between the constructs.
PLS Path (PLS-PM) Modeling aims to estimate the relationships among blocks of
variables, which are expressions of unobservable constructs. Essentially, PLS-PM is
made of a system of interdependent equations based on simple and multiple regressions.
Such a system estimates the network of relations among the latent variables as well as the
links between the manifest variables and their own latent variables (Handbook of partial
least squares, 2010).
Accordingly, an exploratory factor analysis will be performed followed by the
PLS analysis, using Smart-PLS, to analyse the validity of the models constructs and the
relationships between the constructs. PLS is well suited for analysing highly complex
predictive models with, multiple-item constructs and both direct and indirect paths
(Chengalur-Smith, Duchessi, & Gil-Garcia, 2012). PLS performs a measurement (outer)
model analysis to ascertain the overall psychometric properties of the scales used to
measure the models variables and a structural (inner) model analysis to ascertain the
important relationships among the variables (Chengalur-Smith et al., 2012; Hair, Sarstedt,
Ringle, & Mena, 2011). PLS can handle small sample sizes and does not impose
multivariate homogeneity and normality requirements on the data (Hair et al., 2011).
Further Fornell (2011) recommends PLS for the early stages of theory building and
testing because PLS is capable of testing the specified relationships even without good
scales and even when the scales fail to meet the criteria of convergent validity.

43

The above literature provides a justification for the current study to use PLS for the
purpose of data analysis. The study used relatively a small sample size of 150 where PLS
is well designed to cater for small sample sizes.
Thus the hypotheses of the study are to be tested with PLS using SmartPLS 2.0
M3 release, the software written specifically for PLS path analysis. Even though the PLS
is compatible with well-known software like SPSS, SmartPLS is a well- known software
package among researchers who use PLS as a path modeling which is similar to
Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) (Jayakody, 2011) and thus SmartPLS was used for
the purpose of data analysis.
3.12. Outcome of the pilot survey
Pilot study is primarily done in order to assess the extent of reliability and validity of a
research questionnaire (Kothari, 2004). A pilot study has been conducted for the research
by considering 20% of the overall research sample, which accounts to 30 respondents.
The questionnaire was further improved through the results of the pilot study.
3.12.1.Reliability and convergent validity of the pilot study
Pilot study was done in the second quarter of the year 2014. Sample of the pilot study
consisted of 7 top level managers, 12 middle level managers and 11 operational level
managers. Following the completion of the pilot study the questionnaire was refined
based on the results obtained.
Zikmund (2003, p.891) defines a pilot study as any small-scale exploratory
research technique that uses sampling but does not apply rigorous standards.
According to Sekaran and Bougie (2010, p.127), the reliability of a measure is an
indication of the stability and consistency with which the instrument measures the
concept and helps to assess the goodness of a measure.
Stability refers to the ability of a measure to remain the same overtime, despite
uncontrollable testing conditions or the state of the respondents being indicative of its
stability and having low vulnerability to changes in the situation. This stands as proof of
its goodness because the concept is measured with stability, regardless of when it is done
(Sekaran & Bougie, 2010).
Internal consistency of measures indicates the homogeneity of the indicators of
the measure that taps the construct (Sekaran & Bougie, 2010). The rationale for internal
consistency is that individual items used for a study should all be used to measure the
same construct and should therefore be highly correlated (Hair et al. 1998).
44

For the measurement of internal consistency of the scales used in this study, Cronbachs
Alpha was used. According to Hair et al. (1998), the accepted lower boundary for
Cronbachs Alpha is 0.7 although in some cases (where exploratory research is
undertaken) this value may reduce to 0.6. Therefore, it is generally assumed that values
above 0.6 indicate an acceptable consistency of the scales used (Malhotra, 2004).
Validity of the questionnaire is assessed to confirm that the research instrument
(questionnaire) actually measures what it intends to measure. Content (face) validity,
criterion validity and construct validity could be considered the three basic approaches
that are used to deal with the evaluation of validity (Zikmund, 2003).
According to Zikmund (2003), content validity is the subjective agreement among
professionals that a scale logically appears to measure accurately, that which is intended
to be measured. When it becomes evident to experts that a measure provides adequate
coverage of a concept, the measure is believed to have face validity.
According to Malhotra (2004), criterion validity examines the extent to which a
measurement scale performs as expected, compared with other variables selected as
meaningful criteria (criterion variables). These criterion variables may include
demographic and psychographic characteristics, attitudinal and behavioral measures or
scores taken from other scales.
Construct validity deals with the problem of what a specific measuring instrument
actually measures (Churchill, 1983). After assessing construct validity, the researcher
tries to answer theoretical questions on why the scale works and what deductions can be
made in terms of the existing theory. Construct validity is considered the most
sophisticated and difficult type of validity to establish (Malhotra, 2004).
According to Malhotra (2004), construct validity includes convergent and
discriminant validity, it is important for the researcher to have established the
meaningfulness of the measure by means of convergent and discriminant validity
(Zikmund, 2003).
Convergent validity is how well the scale positively correlates with other
measurements of the same construct, (Malhotra, 2004). Whereas the discriminant validity
is the extent to which a measure doesnt correlate with other constructs from which it is
supposed to differ. It entails a lack of correlation among other constructs (Malhotra &
Birks, 2006).
In order to accept convergent validity a particular dimensions Average Variance
Extracted (AVE) and Composite Reliability (CR) should be over 0.5 and 0.7 respectively.
45

In order to calculate AVE and CR, the factor loadings of the indicators relevant for each
dimension were considered, and if any indicator represents a component loading less than
0.5 was eliminated and factor loadings were recalculated after eliminating particular
indicator.
Discriminant validity is the extent to which a measure doesnt correlate with other
constructs from which it is supposed to differ. It entails demonstration lack of correlation
among other constructs (Malhotra & Birks, 2006).
In order to examine discriminant validity, the AVE values calculated were
compared with the correlation coefficients of each dimension with other dimensions.
Results of the reliability and validity tests are given in the Table 5.
Manager Support
Ten items developed by Hammer et al (2009) was used to measure the manager support
variable. According to Table 5, Cronbachs alpha value for manager support is 0.903
which is above the accepted value of 0.7 and therefore it was considered reliable.
Component loadings of the ten items represented the AVE and CR values of 0.572 and
0.734 respectively which are above the accepted values of 0.5 and 0.7 respectively.
Reliability and the convergent validity of the measures were ensured.
Colleague Support
Eight items developed by Ducharme and Martin (2000) was used to measure the
colleague support variable. Variable was considered reliable as the Cronbachs alpha
value is 0.811. Component loadings of items Q 11, My colleagues would fill in while I
am absent, Q15, My colleagues are friendly to me, Q16, I feel close to my
colleagues, Q17, I am appreciated by my colleagues, Q18, My colleagues are really
care about me could not be accepted as they were less than the standard value of 0.5 for
AVE and 0.7 for CR. Therefore the computation was redone by eliminating the above
mentioned indicators and as a result the remaining indicators represented an AVE value
of 0.523 and a CR value of 0.719. It was concluded that reliability and convergent
validity of colleague support is established.
Organisational Time Expectations
Six items developed by Gill, J (2010) was used to measure the variable organisational
time expectations. According to the Table 5, Cronbachs alpha value for Organisational
time expectations is 0.764 which is above the accepted value of 0.7 and therefore it was
considered reliable. Component loadings of the six items represented the AVE and CR

46

values of 0.631 and 0.865 respectively which are above the accepted values of 0.5 and 0.7
respectively. Reliability and the convergent validity of the measures were ensured.
Table 5: Reliability and validity of the pilot survey
Variable
Cronbachs Average
Composite No.of
alpha

variance

reliability

Indicators

extracted
Manager

Original
No.of
indicators

0.903

0.572

0.734

10

10

0.811

0.523

0.719

0.764

0.631

0.865

0.853

0.667

0.841

Childcare
0.701
Responsibilities

0.654

0.722

Work-Life
Balance

0.792

0.804

Support
Colleague
Support
Organisational
Time
Expectations
Partner Support

0.884

Source: Survey Data

Partner Support
Four items developed by Kirrane and Buckley (2004) was used to measure the partner
support variable. Variable was considered reliable as the Cronbachs alpha value is 0.853.
Component loadings of indicators accepted as they were above the standard value of 0.5
for AVE (0.667) and 0.7 (0.841) for CR. Reliability and convergent validity of the
measurers were established.
Childcare Responsibilities
Four items developed by Elliot (2003) and Levy (2012) was used to measure the childcare
responsibilities variable. Variable was considered reliable as the Cronbachs alpha value
is 0.701. Component loadings of Q 28, I believe spousal support helps me to achieve
career success could not be accepted as it was less than the standard value of 0.5 for
AVE and 0.7 for CR. Therefore the computation was redone by eliminating the above
mentioned indicator and as a result the remaining indicators represented an AVE value of
0.654 and a CR value of 0.722. It was concluded that reliability and convergent validity
of colleague support is established.

47

Work-Life Balance
Six items developed by Grzywacz and Carlson (2007) was used to measure the work-life
balance variable. According to the Table 5, Cronbachs alpha value for work-life balance
is 0.884 which is above the accepted value of 0.7 and therefore it was considered reliable.
Component loadings of the six items represented the AVE and CR values of 0.792 and
0.804 respectively which are above the accepted values of 0.5 and 0.7 respectively.
Reliability and the convergent validity of the measures were ensured.
3.12.2.Discriminant validity
The assessment of discriminant validity is performed by comparing percentage variance
obtained through factor analysis with a separate bivariate correlation analysis (Padgett,
2008). Discriminant validity tends to identify if the dimensions or variables of the
research are closely related. For discriminant validity to be ascertained the variable
should be different to each other. Table 6 shows the pairwise correlation between factors
obtained from the correlated model and variance extracted estimates for the dimensions
making up each possible pair.
As depicted in the Table 6, all AVE values of the respective variables are above
the standard value of 0.5 and higher than the inter-dimension correlation values, it could
be ensured that discriminant validity is established.
3.13. Summary
This chapter encompasses the conceptual framework of the study and moves into
development of hypotheses. Operationalisation has been developed for the study
indicating how each variable will be measured on gathered data. Subsequently, it goes on
to explain the methodology used to carry out the research. Therefore a quantitative study
has been performed among a sample of 150 respondents and path modeling techniques
were used to analyse the data set of the study (Hair et al., 2011; Jayakody, 2011). In the
next chapter Data analysis has been presented

48

Table 6: Discriminant Validity Test Data (Pilot survey)

Organisational
Work Life Manager Colleague Partner Time
Childcare
Balance
Support Support Support Expectations Responsibilities
Work Life Balance Pearson
0.629
Correlation
Sig.
(2tailed)
N
Manager Support

150

Pearson
-.114
Correlation

0.559

Sig.
(2.165
tailed)
N

150

Colleague Support Pearson

.003
Correlation

Partner Support

Organisational
Time
Expectations

Childcare
Responsibilities

150
-.111

0.649

Sig.
(2.976
tailed)

.176

150

150

Pearson
.371**
Correlation

-.105

.078

Sig.
(2.000
tailed)

.201

.345

150

150

150

Pearson
.229**
Correlation

-.113

-.068

.051

Sig.
(2.005
tailed)

.170

.410

.538

150

150

150

150

Pearson
-.012
Correlation

-.120

-.020

-.101

-.007

Sig.
(2.885
tailed)

.144

.812

.217

.934

150

150

150

150

150

150

150

150

0.747

0.779

0.631

150

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level

(2tailed).

49

4.

Chapter 4

DATA ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION

4.1. Introduction
The purpose of the study is to explore the factors affecting work-life balance in the
context of managers of the corporate sector. To explore this broader purpose, data was
collected from hundred and fifty (150) respondents of managerial level in the Sri Lankan
corporate sector. This chapter presents and analyses the survey data in relation to
objectives and hypotheses of the study. Therefore, the rest of the chapter is designed in
the following order.
Firstly, it describes the profile of the sample and descriptive data. Secondly, the
data were cleaned and checked for normality. Thirdly data were presented and analysed to
see the relationship between variables with a view to meet the objectives of the study.
4.2. Sample profile of the Study
Demographics: The sample is consisting of seventy one (47%) males and seventy nine
(53%) females.
Work Status: Sample is consisting of twenty (20) respondents with 1-5 years of working
experience (13%), eighty three (83) respondents with 6-10 years of working experience
(55%), thirty nine (39) respondents with 11-15 years of working experience (26%) and
eight (8) respondents with 16-20 years of working experience (6%) Sample is consisting
of three (3) operational level managers (2%), hundred and forty two (142) middle level
managers (95%) and five (5) top level managers (3%).
Family Status: forty nine (49) respondents have children less than 1 year (33%), ninety
two 92 respondents have children between 1-5 years (61%), four respondents have
children between 6-10 years (2.7%) and five respondents have children between 11-15
years (3%). Partners of 135 (90%) respondents are employed and partners of 15 (10%)
respondents are unemployed.
4.3. Data preparation for analysis
In order to carry out the data analysis of the study, 225 questionnaires were distributed
and 174 usable responses were collected, yielding a response rate of 77%. The unit of
analysis was individual manager in Sri Lankan corporate sector. The collected data was

50

preliminarily scanned for accuracy and precision. Then, they were subjected to cleaning
process. The purpose was to identify outliers and provide treatments for missing values.
4.3.1. Data cleaning
The data analysis is initiated by entering data into the IBM Statistical package for social
sciences (SPSS) software version 21.0. Then, they were subjected to the cleaning process.
Several plot diagrams/graphs helped in identifying the outliers. Outliers are cases that
have out-of-range values, as compared to the majority of other cases. Their presence in
the data may distort statistical test results (Malhotra & Dash, 2011). Outliers are
detectable via analysis of the residual scatter plot. Twenty four outliers were deleted and
150 questionnaires were used for the final analysis.
Random missing values were replaced using the Expectation-Maximization (EM)
method available in the software package; accordingly, nine missing values were
replaced.
4.3.2. Tests of normality distribution of data
Normality magnifies the shape of the sample data distribution to the population.
Subsequent estimates of sample will have representative variations with the population
mean (Malhotra & Dash, 2011). Normality is used to describe a curve that is symmetrical
and bell-shaped. The highest score frequency is depicted in the middle, with lower
frequencies towards the extremes. Even though there are multiple ways of assessing the
normality of the distribution of scores, to assess normality for this study the researcher
used Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistic (K-S test) and the Shapiro-Wilk statistic test. The
normality of the data set was assessed using the average values of the factors that were
used to measure a specific variable of interest and the results of the normality test
conducted for each variable are depicted in Table 7.
In order to assume the normality of data distribution the significant values of K-S
test and the Shapiro-Wilk test should be more than 0.05, so that the assumption of
normality can be met (Abhayakoon & Balathasan, 2013; Kaplan, 2009; Kothari, 2004)
But as Table 7 depicts most of the variables except for Manager support, Organisational
time expectations, and work-life balance the other variables do not score a significant
value of more than 0.05, and as a result the assumption of normality for the data set
cannot be satisfied. Therefore dataset was analysed applying the Partial Least Squares
(PLS) using the SmartPLS.

51

Table 7: Results of normality test

Variable
Kolmogorov-Smirnov

Shapiro-Wilk

Statistic

df

Sig.

Statistic

df

Sig.

Manager Support

.083

146

.077

.971

146

.024

Colleague Support

.063

149

.081

.749

149

.000

Time .075

149

.180

.978

149

.085

Partner Support

.107

150

.004

.946

150

.000

Childcare Responsibilities

.241

150

.000

.835

150

.000

Work-life Balance

.097

149

.021

.983

149

.233

Organizational
Expectations

Source: Author compiled based on survey data

4.3.3. Findings of the multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) test
Multivariate analysis of variance (one-way MANOVA) is used to determine whether
there are any differences between independent groups on more than one continuous
dependent variable. Multivariate analysis of variance test was performed to find statistical
differences between data gathered from males and females. In order to verify the findings
of one-way MANOVA, Wilks lamda also calculated findings are given in the Table 8
As shown in Table 8 p value is greater than 0.05 and Wilks lambda value is .953
(p=0.931) and it clearly indicate that there is no statistical difference between data
gathered from males and females.
4.4. Results of Partial Least Square (PLS) Analysis
As explained in chapter two, the data set is to be analysed applying the Partial Least
Squares (PLS) using the SmartPLS software.
The use of PLS for the study is more relevant due to several reasons. Firstly the
researchers prime objective is prediction oriented, that is, the purpose of this study is to
explore the factors affecting work-life balance and to examine the relationship between
variables which PLS can better cater (Chengalur-Smith, Duchessi, & Gil-Garcia, 2012).
Next as explained earlier, the data collected for the study are of non-normal and also it is
small in the sample size which is 150.Further, the proposed model of the study involves
relatively large number of indicators, constructs and complex relationships where PLS
analysis is recommended to employ (Handbook of partial least squares, 2010; Jayakody,
2011).Therefore based on the above reasons, the use of PLS for the study is justified.

52

Table 8: Findings of MANOVA test

Work-life balance

Manager support

Colleague support

Organisational
time expectations

Partner Support

Childcare
responsibilities

Between
Groups
Within Groups
Total
Between
Groups
Within Groups
Total
Between
Groups
Within Groups
Total
Between
Groups
Within Groups
Total
Between
Groups
Within Groups
Total
Between
Groups
Within Groups
Total

Sum of
Squares
.011
90.811
90.822

df

Mean
Sqaure
.011
1.108

Sig.

.231

.237

.442
47.467
47.909

3
226
229

.442
1.098

.669

.572

.213
152.885
153.098

3
226
229

.213
1.256

.301

.160

.031
80.811
80.822

3
226
229

.411
1.921

.371

.212

.011
180.671
180.622

3
226
229

.428
1.341

.521

.437

.074
79.427
79.999

3
226
229

.567
1.231

.589

.372

3
226
229

Source: Survey Data

The PLS analysis for the study was performed using the SmartPLS 2.0 (M3 release)
software (Chengalur-Smith et al., 2012; Hair et al., 2011).
Path analysis makes use of standardized partial regression coefficients (known as
beta weights) as effect coefficients. In linear additive effects are assumed, and then
through path analysis a simple set of equations can be built up showing how each variable
depends on preceding variables. The main principle of path analysis is that any
correlation coefficient between two variables, or a gross or overall measure of empirical
relationship can be decomposed into a series of parts: separate paths of influence leading
through chronologically intermediate variable to which both the correlated variables have
links (Kothari,2004 p.39). The merit of path analysis in comparison to correlation
analysis is that it makes possible the assessment of the relative influence of each
antecedent or explanatory variable on the consequent or criterion variables by first

53

making explicit the assumptions underlying the causal connections and then by
elucidating the indirect effect of the explanatory variables (Kothari, 2004).
Each Structural Equation Model is composed by two sub-models: the
measurement model and the structural model. The first one takes into account the
relationships between each latent variable and the corresponding manifest variables,
while the structural model takes into account the relationships among the latent variables
(Handbook of partial least squares, 2010). This process is called two-step process.
Supporting the two-step process (as cited by Jayakody, (2011, p.26), Hair et al (2006,
p.141) has stated that valid structural theory test cannot be conducted with bad measures
and thus, that the testing of the measurement model prior to the testing of the structural
model is essential.
Thus, the study followed the two-step process, where it first needs to test the
measurement model.
4.4.1. The Measurement model
The conceptual framework developed in Chapter two, for the purpose of achieving the
objectives of the study is depicted in Figure 2.
Figure 2: Measurement model

Gender

H6
Manager Support

H1

H7 H8
H9

H2

Work-Life Balance

Colleague Support
H3
Organisational
Time Expectations

H4

Control Variable
Partner Support

Working Experience
H5

Childcare
Responsibilities

Source: Authors Conceptualisation

54

4.4.2. Validity and reliability of the measurement model

As explained earlier, the PLS model has two sub models, where the first part is called the
measurement model. In this model the focus is on establishing the validity and reliability
of the measures used to represent each construct of the measurement model. Therefore the
structural model with the following constructs and relationships as in Figure 2 was
considered as the baseline model for the analysis.
To follow the first step of the SmartPLS, the initial measurement model was run
using the PLS algorithm option. The Path Weighting Scheme was selected for the inner
weights estimation and standardized data was selected for the data metric (Mean Value of
0, Variance of 1) (Hair, Ringle, & Sarstedt, 2011; Handbook of partial least squares,
2010; Jung, Wu, & Chow, 2008).
Firstly, the content validity of the indicators were measured based on the results of
indicator reliability test. The content validity measures to what extent a measurement
models variables belongs to the domain of the construct (Handbook of partial least
squares, 2010).The indicator reliability specifies which part of an indicators variance can
be explained by the underlying latent variable. A common threshold criterion is that more
than 70% of an indicators variance should be explained by the latent construct. Thus, for
each construct the factor loadings that had less than .7 were removed from further
analysis (Abhayakoon & Balathasan, 2013; Hair et al., 2011; Jung, Wu, & Chow, 2008)
to ensure the indicator reliability so that it meets the content validity of the measures.
Which were removed from further analyses. The variables that were selected for further
analysis along with their new factor loadings after eliminating the lower factor loading
variables are presented in Table 8.
Table 9: Variables used for further analysis
Construct
Code assigned

Factor
Loadings

Manager Support

Q1

0.910

Manager Support

Q2

0.923

Manager Support

Q3

0.934

Manager Support

Q4

0.901

Manager Support

Q5

0.967

Manager Support

Q6

0.958

Manager Support

Q7

0.892

55

Construct

Code assigned

Factor loadings

Manager Support

Q8

0.890

Manager Support

Q9

0.958

Manager Support

Q10

0.971

Colleague Support

Q12

0.896

Colleague Support

Q13

0.918

Colleague Support

Q14

0.720

Org.Time Expectations

Q19

0.884

Org.Time Expectations

Q20

0.759

Org.Time Expectations

Q21

0.757

Org.Time Expectations

Q22

0.831

Org.Time Expectations

Q24

0.813

Partner support

Q25

0.933

Partner support

Q26

0.935

Partner support

Q27

0.881

Partner support

Q28

0.924

Childcare Responsibility

Q29

0.888

Childcare Responsibility

Q30

0.954

Work-Life Balance

Q33

0.878

Work-Life Balance

Q34

0.943

Work-Life Balance

Q35

0.905

Work-Life Balance

Q36

0.937

Work-Life Balance

Q37

0.916

Work-Life Balance

Q38

0.937

Source: Author compiled based on SmartPLS output

As per the indicator reliability analysis, ten items used to measure the manager support
construct, three items out of eight were used to measure colleague support. For
organisational time expectations, five questions out of six were filtered. All four questions
were allowed to measure partner support. For childcare responsibility, two items were
used out of four questions and all six items were used to measure work-life balance
dimension.
After establishing the constructs indicators and indicator reliability, in respect of
uni-dimensionality, further evaluation was required regarding the reliability and validity
56

(Handbook of partial least squares, 2010).With a view of catering to this requirement, the
construct reliability, convergent validity and the discriminant validity of the measurement
model were ensured as follows.
Construct reliability indicates that although small indicator reliabilities may point
to a given indicators adequate measurement of a construct, it is usually more important
that all the constructs indicators jointly measure the construct adequately. Construct
reliability requires indicators assigned to the same construct to reveal a strong mutual
association. Subsequently, the composite reliability measure can be used to check how
well a construct is measured by its assigned indicators (Handbook of partial least squares,
2010).
In order to ensure the construct reliability, the composite reliability and the
cronbachs alpaha is used (Chengalur-Smith et al., 2012; Hair et al., 2011; Handbook of
partial least squares, 2010). The composite scale reliability for each construct (an internal
consistency estimate similar to alpha) and the Cronbachs alpha are expected to meet.70
or above (Hair et al., 2011) to ensure the construct reliability of each construct used in the
measurement model.
Convergent validity is based on the correlation between responses obtained by
maximally different methods of measuring the same construct. A common measure to
examine convergent validity is known as Average Variance Extracted (AVE) (Handbook
of partial least squares, 2010).If the AVE measure is measured at more than or equal to .5,
it is assumed to achieve the convergent validity of the measures (Hair et al., 2011). The
discriminant validity of the measurement model is used to ensure that a construct is more
strongly related to its own measures than with any other construct (Handbook of partial
least squares, 2010). To test this, the square root of the average variance extracted (AVE)
is compared with the correlations among constructs. Further, Factor cross loadings and
their correlations are used to measure the discriminant validity of the measurement model
indicators (Handbook of partial least squares, 2010). In the inter-construct correlations
table (Table 10) when go down a particular construct column, the item loadings are
expected to be lower than the square root of AVE. Similarly, in a particular item row, it is
expect to see that any item be more strongly related to its construct column than any other
construct column. If this is found to be the case, the claim can be made for discriminant
validity at the item level. Specifically, it can be stated that each item loads more highly on
their own construct than on other constructs and that all constructs share more variance

57

with their measures than with other constructs (Chengalur-Smith et al., 2012; Hair et al.,
2011; Handbook of partial least squares, 2010).
Table 9 presents the information relating to the composite scale reliability,
Cronbachs alpha and AVE measure for each construct of the measurement model.
Table 10: Reliability and convergent validity of constructs
Variable

No.of

AVE

Items

Composite

Cronbachs

reliability

Alpha

Manager Support

10

0.867

0.985

0.983

Colleague Support

0.677

0.859

0.747

Org.time Expectations

0.656

0.905

0.876

Partner Support

0.844

0.956

0.939

Childcare

0.849

0.918

0.830

0.846

0.971

0.964

Responsibility
Work-Life Balance

Source: Author compiled based on survey data

According to Table 9 the composite reliability and the Cronbachs alpha is well above .7
which suggests the construct reliability of the measurement model indicators (Sekaran,
2010). Furthermore, all the indicators have achieved an AVE value of well above .5
which ensures the convergent validity (Sekaran, 2010).
The discriminant validity which is well supported by the results of the interconstruct correlations and cross loadings are presented in Tables 10 and 11 respectively.
When referring to the Table 10 the square root of AVE which represents in the diagonal is
higher than its column wise and row wise correlation values which suggests a strong
discriminant validity of measures, and this is well supported by the table of cross loadings
(Table 11) which is evident in the loadings of the constructs that are meant to measure by
the measures that are higher than the loadings of the particular measure which has for the
other constructs.
Hence, the first step of the PLS analysis, which is about establishing the
measurement model validity and reliability is completed and the results obtained, are well
justified the reliability and validity of the model.
4.5. Structural model and hypothesis testing
The purpose of the structural model is to draw conclusions from the sample, such as
causal relationships and predictions. The structural model presents the relationship
58

between exogenous and endogenous variables. It offers a direct test of the theory of
interest as the structural model is used to capture the linear regression effects of the
exogenous constructs on the endogenous constructs, and the regression effects of the
endogenous constructs upon each other (Handbook of partial least squares, 2010).
PLS provides three estimates to assess the structural model or the relationship
between latent variables; path coefficient, corresponding significant score, and the
coefficient determinant. The path coefficient is similar to the beta value of the traditional
regression model. The significant score determined using the t-value generated through
the bootstrapping procedure in PLS. (Ahamed & Dambawinne, 2013; Handbook of
partial least squares, 2010; Jayakody, 2011). The bootstrapping procedure was performed
using 5000 samples.
As Figure 3 explains, the structural model is designed to test five hypotheses,
which were developed on the basis of achieving the objectives of the study.
The model tests five hypotheses for the relationship between the factors affecting
work life balance (Manager support, Colleague support, Organisational time expectations,
Partner support, Childcare responsibilities) and work-life balance.
Objective 01: To identify the major determinants of work-life balance of corporate
sector managers
The hypotheses from H1 to H5 were developed to achieve the first objective of the study.
In order to identify the major determinants of work-life balance, five hypotheses were
developed to examine the relationship between factors affecting work-life balance and
work-life balance. The results obtained in testing these hypotheses in the direct path with
their values are given in Table 12. Relationship between Manager support and work-life
balance (H1), relationship between organisational time expectations and work-life
balance (H3), relationship between partner support and work-life balance (H4),

59

Table 11: Inter-Construct correlations

Construct

Childcare
responsibility
Colleague Support
Manager Support
Organisational time
expectations
Partner Support
Work-life balance
Working Experience
Gender

Childcare
Colleague Manager Organisational Partner
Responsibility Support
Support time
Support
Expectations
0.921
0.140
-0.149
-0.092

0.823
-0.077
0.026

0.931
-0.145

0.810

-0.139
-0.155
0.167
0.123

0.094
0.082
0.132
-0.151

-0.104
0.119
0.101
0.137

0.146
0.298
0.031
0.042

0.919
0.378
0.321
0.232

Worklife
Balance

0.920
-0.129
0.291

Working
Experience

0.743
0.339

Gender

0.863

Table 12: Cross loadings for the measurement model

Q1
Q10
Q12
Q13
Q14
Q19
Q2

Childcare
Responsibility
-0.098
-0.150
0.125
0.173
0.023
-0.013
-0.114

Source: SmartPLS output

Colleague Support
-0.011
-0.097
0.896
0.918
0.720
0.058
0.022

Manager
Support
0.910
0.971
-0.099
-0.036
-0.056
-0.190
0.923

Organisational
Expectations
-0.184
-0.162
0.027
0.035
-0.006
0.884
-0.153

time Partner
Support
-0.075
-0.110
0.078
0.090
0.062
0.025
-0.102

Work-life
Balance
0.105
0.096
0.072
0.076
0.052
0.288
0.135
60

Table 12: Cross loadings for the measurement model

Childcare Responsibility

Colleague

Manager
Support

Organisational Partner
time
Support
Expectations

-0.065
-0.276
-0.070
-0.058
-0.117
-0.106
-0.046
-0.104
-0.144
0.934
-0.135
0.151
0.122
0.119
0.097
0.032
0.129
0.901
0.967
0.958
0.892
0.890
0.958

0.759
0.757
0.831
0.813
0.185
0.135
0.121
0.084
-0.022
-0.102
-0.126
0.187
0.319
0.333
0.274
0.222
0.287
-0.150
-0.174
-0.145
-0.078
-0.054
-0.155

Support
Q20
Q21
Q22
Q24
Q25
Q26
Q27
Q28
Q29
Q3
Q3
Q33
Q34
Q35
Q36
Q37
Q38
Q4
Q5
Q6
Q7
Q8
Q9

-0.246
0.111
0.020
-0.081
-0.149
-0.106
-0.129
-0.128
0.888
-0.135
0.954
-0.087
-0.153
-0.190
-0.102
-0.144
-0.167
-0.129
-0.135
-0.160
-0.179
-0.146
-0.139

-0.012
0.093
0.026
-0.032
0.058
0.070
0.118
0.112
0.085
-0.033
0.160
0.092
0.068
0.067
0.120
0.047
0.064
-0.055
-0.085
-0.125
-0.143
-0.117
-0.077

0.341
-0.132
0.010
0.147
0.933
0.935
0.881
0.924
-0.014
-0.099
-0.205
0.368
0.394
0.384
0.269
0.369
0.278
-0.103
-0.085
-0.095
-0.066
-0.135
-0.101

Work-life
Balance
0.313
0.092
0.210
0.146
0.395
0.369
0.304
0.306
-0.109
0.114
-0.167
0.878
0.943
0.905
0.937
0.916
0.937
0.089
0.113
0.124
0.124
0.104
0.085

Source: SmartPLS output

Having established the appropriateness of the measures, the next step is to evaluate the structural model results.
61

Accordingly, the path coefficients or the beta values for the above relationships are
positive with the scores of 0.189, 0.268 and 0.343 respectively. Also these path
coefficients are significant as the T-value is greater than the significant critical values
(>1.96, for significance at 95% level and >2.65, for significance at 99% level). Therefore
H1 (T-stat: 2.518) is significant at 95% significant level and H3 (T-stat: 3.394) and H4
(T-stat: 4.948) are significant at 99% significant level. Hence H1, H3, H4 are significant.
Figure 3: Results of the structural model with path coefficients

H1

Manager Support
0.189
H2
0.066
Colleague Support

R2
H3

0.268

0.4168

Work-life Balance
Organizational time Expectations

0.343

H4
-0.064
Partner Support
H5

Childcare Responsibilities

Source: Author compiled based on SmartPLS output

62

In H2, though the path coefficient is positive with the score of 0.066, T-stat is below
(0.760) the significant level of 1.96, since the significant score is determined using the tvalue generated through the bootstrapping procedure in PLS, H2 is not significant. As per
the results depicted in Table 12 T-value of H5 (0.958) is below the significant level of
1.96. Hence H5 is not significant.
Therefore Hypotheses H1 is significant which predicts that there is a positive
relationship between manager support and work-life balance. H3 is significant which
envisage that there is a negative relationship between organizational time expectations
and work-life balance. H4 is also significant which describe that there is a positive
relationship between partner support and work-life balance.
Five hypotheses were developed to examine the relationship between factors
affecting work-life balance and work-life balance, which leads to identify the major
determinants of work-life balance. Three hypotheses out of five were significant at the
confidence level of 95% (H1) and the confidence level of 99% (H3, H4). Therefore it is
evident that manager support, partner support have a positive relationship with work-life
balance while organizational time expectations has a negative relationship with work-life
balance.
4.6. Testing the moderator
Objective 2: To identify whether gender has a moderating effect on the relationship
between determinants of work-life balance and work-life balance.
The second objective of the study is to assess the influence of the gender to the
relationship between factors affecting work-life balance and work-life balance.
A moderator is a qualitative or quantitative variable that affects the direction
and/or strength of the relation between an independent or predictor variable and a
dependent or criterion variable (Stern et al, 1982).
To test the effect of moderator (Gender) on the relationship between independent
and dependent variable author designed four hypotheses. Moderator effect was tested on
four relationships. Graphical interpretation of results with path coefficients are depicted in
Figure 4 and results are clearly depicted in Table 13. Four hypotheses are,

63

Table 13: Results of hypothesis testing

Hypotheses

P.C

There is a positive relationship between Manager 0.189

S.E

T-Stat

Decision

0.075

2.518

Accepted

0.087

0.760

Rejected

0.079

3.394

Accepted

0.069

4.948

Accepted

0.067

0.958

Rejected

support and work life-balance (H1)

There is a positive relationship between Colleague 0.066
support and work life-balance (H2)
There is a negative relationship between Organizational 0.268
time expectations and work-life balance (H3)
There is a positive relationship between Partner support 0.343
and work-life balance (H4)
There is a negative relationship between Childcare -0.064
responsibilities and work-life balance (H5)

P.C

Path Coefficient

S.E

Standard Error

Source: Author compiled based on the PLS

output

64

H6: Gender will moderate the positive relationship between manager support and
work-life balance, such that relationship will be stronger for women than for men.
H7: Gender will moderate the positive relationship between colleague support and
work life balance, such that relationship will be stronger for women than for men.
H8: Gender will moderate the positive relationship between partner support and worklife balance, such that relationship will be stronger for women than for women
H9: Gender will moderate the negative relationship between childcare responsibilities
and work life balance, such that relationship will be stronger for women than for men.
In order to test the H6, H7, H8, and H9 PLS algorithm option was used and after
that the bootstrapping procedure was performed to determine the significance of the
scores and to determine the impact of gender on the relationship between factors affecting
work-life balance (Independent Variables) and work-life balance (Dependent Variable).
After verifying that there is a moderating effect on the relationships, second step was to
test the strength of the relationship for male and female. According to West,Aiken and
Krull (1996), IBM statistical package (SPSS) does not provide a straightforward method
for plotting interactions/moderations, hence simple slope test was utilized when
researcher is interested in testing the moderation effect.
H6, H7, H8 and H9 were developed to examine whether there is an influence of gender
on the relationship between factors affecting work life balance and work-life balance.
Accordingly, the path coefficients or the beta values for the above relationships are
positive with the scores of 0.472 (H6) and 1.087 (H8).Also these path coefficients are
significant as the T-value is greater than the significant critical values (>1.96, for
significance at 95% level and >2.65, for significance at 99% level). Therefore H6 is
significant at 99% significant level with the t-value of 3.507, H8 is significant at 99%
significant level with the t-value of 3.757. H7 was developed to examine whether gender
moderates the relationship between colleague support and work-life balance. As per the
results depicted in Table 13 H7 (0.009) is below the significant level of 1.96 and it is not
significant it can be concluded that gender does not moderate the relationship between
colleague support and work-life balance. It is evident that gender does not moderate the
negative relationship between childcare responsibilities and work-life balance (H9) since
the path coefficient is not significant (0.051) and it is below the significant level of 1.96.
Hence it is evident that gender only moderates the positive relationship between
manager support and work-life balance and positive relationship between partner support
and work-life balance
65

Figure 4: Results of moderator testing with path coefficients

0.189
Manager Support

Gender
0.164

0.066
Colleague Support
Work- Life
Balance
0.343
Partner Support

-0.064
Childcare
Responsibilities

0.051

Interaction effect:

0.009
(-)

(-)

Interaction effect:

Gender -> Childcare Gender -> Colleague

Support
responsibilities

0.472

1.087
(+)

(+)

Interaction effect:

Interaction effect:

Gender -> Partner

Gender -> Manager

support

Support

Source: Author compiled based on SmartPLS output

66

Table 14: Results of the structural model for H6, H7, H8 and H9
First half of the Hypothesis

P.C

Gender moderates the positive 0.472

T-stat

Decision

3.507

Gender moderates the

relationship between manager

support

and

relationship

work-life

balance.(H6)
Gender

moderates

the 0.009

1.056

relationship between colleague

support

and

Gender

does

not

moderate the relationship

work-life

balance.(H7)
Gender moderates the positive 1.087

3.757

relationship between partner

support

and

Gender moderates the

relationship

work-life

balance.(H8)
Gender

moderates

the 0.051

0.093

relationship between childcare

Gender

does

not

moderate the relationship

responsibilities.(H9)
P.C

Path Coefficient

Source: Author compiled based on SmartPLS output

Second half of the particular hypotheses were to determine the strength of the
relationship. According to West, Aiken and Krull (1996), IBM statistical package (SPSS)
does not provide a straightforward method for plotting interactions/moderations; hence
simple slope test was utilized when researcher is interested in testing the strength of the
moderation effect of gender on relationships between Manager support and Work-life
balance and Partner support and Work-life balance. And the results are clearly illustrated
in Figure 5 and Figure 6.
According to the simple slope test results correlation coefficient is closer to +1for
female (0.544) than men (0.036) (Figure 5) and it can be concluded that the relationship
between manager support and work-life balance is stronger for women than for men.
Hence H6 is significant and it can be said that gender moderates the relationship between
manager support and work-life balance and relationship is stronger for women than for
men. Results are graphically interpreted in Figure 5
67

Figure 5: Strength of the moderation effect of Gender on Manager Support and

Work-life balance

Standardized work-life balance

= .544, P = .003
0.5

= .036, P = .807
0
(-1 SD)

(+1 SD)

-0.5

Female
Male
Manager Support

-1

In order to test the strength of the moderation effect of gender on the relationship between
partner support and work-life balance, simple slope test was performed and results are
interpreted in the Figure 6.
Figure 6: Strength of the moderation effect of Gender on Partner Support and
Work-life balance

Standardized work-life balance

= .509, P = .003
0.5

= -.030, P = .844
0
(-1 SD)

(+1 SD)

-0.5
Female
Male
-1

Partner Support

68

According to the simple slope test results depicted in Figure 6 correlation coefficient is
closer to +1for male (0.509) than for women (-0.030) and it can be concluded that
relationship between partner support and work-life balance is stronger for men than for
women. Therefore second half of the H8 is rejected.
4.7. Summary of hypotheses testing
In order to achieve the objectives of the study, nine hypotheses were developed.
Objective 01: To identify the major determinants of work-life balance of corporate
sector managers
Five hypotheses were developed to examine the relationship between factors affecting
work-life balance and work-life balance, which leads to identify the major determinants
of work-life balance. Three hypotheses out of five were significant at the significant level
of 95%. They are;
H1: There is a positive relationship between manager support and work-life balance
H3: There is a negative relationship between organizational time expectations and worklife balance
H4: There is a positive relationship between partner support and work-life balance
Objective 2: To identify whether gender has a moderating effect on the relationship
between determinants of work-life balance and work-life balance.
To test the effect of moderator (Gender) on the relationship between independent and
dependent variable author designed four hypotheses. With the results it was evident that
relationship between colleague support

and work-life

balance and childcare

responsibilities and work-life balance is not significant and two hypotheses were
significant at the significant level of 95%. They are;
H6: Gender moderates the positive relationship between manager support and work-life
balance
H8: Gender moderates the relationship between partner support and work- life balance,
Second half of the particular hypotheses were to determine the strength of the
moderation effect on relationships. IBM statistical package (SPSS) does not provide a
straightforward method for plotting interactions/moderations (West, Aiken & Krull,
1996); hence simple slope test was utilized to determine the strength of the moderation
effect on relationships. According to the results, relationship between manager support
and work-life balance is stronger for women than for men, so it can be concluded that H6
is significant, but relationship between partner support and work-life balance (H8) is
69

stronger for men than for women, though first half of the hypothesis is significant at the
significant level of 95%, second half of the H8 is not significant.
4.8. Summary
The purpose of this chapter was to analyse sample data collected from the managers in
the corporate sector of Sri Lanka to identify whether the major determinants of work-life
balance. This was analyzed using the conceptual framework developed by the researcher
in chapter two.
Sample of 150 residuals were tested for normality using IBM SPSS Statistical package
and the data were analyzed using the SmartPLS software in two steps where via the
measurement model the validity and reliability of the model was tested and with the
structural model the analysis was carried out to assess the relationships characterized by
the hypotheses and the findings were presented. Furthermore, the study tested one
moderator which moderated the relationship between determinants of work-life balance
and work-life balance. Rigorous discussion based on the analysis of data will be carried
out in the next chapter.

70

5.

Chapter 5

DISCUSSION ON FINDINGS
5.1. Introduction
Chapter 4, (Data Analysis and Presentation) presented the findings of analysis in detail
about the key outcomes in relation to objectives and hypotheses testing of the study. This
chapter is to explain the findings of the data analysis with the discussion relevant to the
purpose of the research. Each section discusses the findings along with the prior
literature.
5.2. Key findings
The purpose of the study was to analyse factors affecting work-life balance among
corporate sector managers in Sri Lanka. To accomplish this purpose two objectives were
identified and to achieve the objectives nine hypotheses were developed in Chapter 2,
(Conceptual framework & Methodology).
The first objective was to identify major determinants of work-life balance, five
hypotheses were developed to achieve these objectives. As per the disclosure of results in
Chapter 4 out of five hypotheses only three were significant. Manager support, Partner
support and Organisational time expectations are found to be the major determinants of
work-life balance. According to the results colleague support and childcare
responsibilities have no significant impact on work-life balance among corporate sector
managers in Sri Lanka.
The second objective was to examine whether gender has a moderating effect on
the relationship between determinants of work-life balance and work-life balance. In
order to achieve this objective four hypotheses were developed. According to the results
gender moderates the positive relationship between manager support and work-life
balance and relationship is stronger for women than for men. Gender moderates the
positive relationship between partner support and work life balance and the relationship is
stronger for men than for women. Results revealed that gender does not moderate the
relationship between childcare responsibilities and work-life balance and colleague
support and work-life balance.

71

5.3. Re-examining the conceptual framework

After the results of the study obtained author had to modify the conceptual framework
according to the results and it is depicted in Figure 7.
Figure 7: Modified Conceptual Framework
Independent

Moderator

Dependent Variable

Variables
Gender

Manager support

Partner support

Work-life Balance

Organisational
Time Expectations

Control Variable
Working Experience

Source: Author developed based on the results of the research

5.4. Discussion on findings
When refer to the major determinants of work-life balance, Manger support is found to be
one of the key factors which affect work-life balance among corporate sector managers.
Work-life balance is one of the noteworthy topics that have risen amid the most recent
decade in Sri Lanka because of impressive work escalation which was brought about by
expansion business rivalry and women contribution in the work force (Arachchige, 2013).
It has been shown that the immediate supervisors response to work and family
concerns is more critical than that of the top management in setting the tone for a
72

supportive environment which supports the finding of Bernas and Major (2000). Finding
is also congruent with the finding of Friedman et al. (1999) who found that it was the
supportive attitudes and immediate managers behaviours which employees considered
the most significant factor in balancing their work-life responsibilities. These findings of
Bernas & Major (2000) and Friedman et al are well supported by the finding of the
current study. This studys finding is also in line with the finding of Allen et al (2001)
which describe that enthusiastic support of managers means that employees will be more
likely to feel balance between work and life and experience an overall lower level of
work-life conflict. This finding also support the finding of Kailasapathy et al. (2014)
which says that a high-quality supervisor exchange relationship helps the individual better
balance work and family demands .
Organisational time expectations is also found to be a major determinant of worklife balance. The finding of Bonney (2005) which reveals that Organisational time
expectations are widely held to negatively influence the non-work domain is well
supported by the finding of the current study. The result of the current study is also in the
alignment with the dominant finding, that many employees are spending longer hours at
work (Beynon et al., 2002; Green, 2001; Fagan, 2003) yet at the same time representing a
stumbling block towards meeting non-work responsibilities. Study findings also supports
the postulation of Van Dyne et al. (2007) which revealed that when there is a higher time
expectations employee perceive lower level of work-life balance and when there is a
lower time expectations employee perceive higher level of work-life balance.
Partner support is also found to be a major determinant of work-life balance.
Given the increasing interdependence of the work and family domains, partner support is
being recognised as an increasingly important factor contributing to the understanding of
the well-being of employees (Peeters & LeBlanc, 2001). According to the current study,
finding of positive relationship between partner support and work-life balance well
supports the finding of Bird and Bird (1999) and Aneshensel (1986) which reveals that
receiving spouse/partner support has been positively related to number of work-related
outcomes, including occupational success (Bird & Bird, 1986), positive mental health,
work-life balance (Aneshensel, 1986).
According to empirical findings colleague support is a major source of social
support and Coworkers have the ability to define the social environment at work
(Schneider, 1987) and they can have a large influence on whether or not an employee is
able to balance his/her time between work and non-work life (Cook & Minnotte, 2008).
73

Colleague support was found not significant pertaining to the current study. Presumably
this is may be due to, majority of corporate sector managers have to perform heavy work
load, under strict time lines, therefore assistance seeking behaviour or culture, in order to
strike a balance between work and home may not have been promoted. Since every
manager is working under pressure and all are working hard to meet deadlines, they may
not expect assistance or support from other colleagues to ease off the burden of work-life
conflict.
Childcare responsibilities has not been found significant in the current study.
According to empirical findings childcare responsibilities can have largely a negative
influence on work-life balance (Hochschild, 1989). Especially in Asian cultures, extended
family support is considered as a major source of support to raise and take care of
children. Working parents heavily depend on the assistance of their parents or relatives to
raise children and they rely on the security, protection and affection that their children get
from their grandparents or relatives when they (working parents) are at work.
Presumably, support and assistance of extended family plays a major role in order to
strike a balance between work and life, therefore working parents, especially in Asian
cultures may not perceive childcare responsibilities negatively or as an obstacle which
obstructs to maintain a balance between work and life.
Second objective of the study was to examine to identify whether gender has a
moderating effect on the relationship between determinants of work-life balance and
work-life balance. To test the effect of moderator (Gender) on the relationship between
independent and dependent variable author designed four hypotheses. Moderator effect
was tested on four relationships.
It was found that gender has an impact on the relationship between manager
support and work-life balance. It was also found that relationship is stronger for women
than for men. This is because women still primarily take care of domestic tasks,
irrespective of their employment status. So, many women employees continue to face
difficulties in balancing these two forces (Hyman & Summers, 2004). The burden of
meeting the demands of home front and office front is high when womens exposure to
the labor force and to education increases. Given the context, for female employees a
supportive supervisor may make work situations less stressful by discussing familyrelated problems and being flexible when emergencies arise at home (Carlson & Perrew,
1999). According to the current studys findings working women receive sufficient

74

support from their managers/supervisors which helps them to ease off the burden they
face in both the work and family domains.
Partner support is also significantly influenced by gender. The relationship
between partner support and work-life balance is stronger for men than for women. Men
perceive higher partner/spousal support than for women and it means that even though
both men and women are occupied; responsibilities of the home domain are not equally
divide, finding of the current study support the finding of Arachchige (2013) which says
that In the Sri Lankan context whether the non-work obligations, for example, family
work is being separated amongst men and women in an equivalent way is questionable
(Arachchige, 2013). Finding is also congruent with the revelation of Kailasapathy et al.
(2014) which says that this is common in traditional countries like Sri Lanka where
female holds more household and childcare responsibilities than men. This creates fewer
home-based responsibilities for the male employee and allows him to focus more on work
responsibilities.
In the current study childcare responsibilities were not found to be moderated by
gender. Gender roles often become more differentiated when men and women become
parents. Overall, women provide more direct care for and spend more time with children
(Walzer, 2001) and Men typically engage in more paid work. Presumably in Asian
countries, working parents receive support and assistance from their extended families to
raise children and it plays a major role to strike a balance between work and life.
Especially women face uneven distribution of childcare and other domestic
responsibilities which become major barriers in the career advancement as well as worklife balance, but when they receive support from their parents or other relatives, it ease off
the burden.
According to the findings of the current study colleague support also was not
moderated by gender. According to the findings of Wajcman & Martin (2002) women
cant survive in the corporate sector unless they adopted male norms and behaviours.
Therefore irrespective of gender all the employees are compelled to work towards
attainment of organizational goals and objectives. This may be due to less dependability
on support provided by colleagues since every employee is in their own battle of meeting
strict deadlines with challenging work tasks.

75

5.5. Managerial implications

This study shows that there is a positive relationship between Manager Support and worklife balance. For many employees the organisational culture is embodied in the attitudes
and behaviours of their immediate line manager. Therefore whether an individual feels
that he/she is able to discuss issues outside of work, request different ways of working
and believe that the organisation genuinely enables balance, will depend considerably on
the skills of the manager in creating an open communication culture of trust and respect.
Immediate manager should take the primary responsibility by ensuring above aspects and
facilitate employee to strike the balance between work and life.
Organisational time expectations also has a significant impact on work-life
balance. Organisations should take initiatives to make flexible working arrangements and
preventing long-hour working cultures and not to emphasise on face time. When
employee perceives higher time demands his/her intention of leaving the organisation is
also increases (Perrons, 2003). When making work life balance initiatives, organisation
should take this aspect into consideration.
5.6. Implications for individuals
This study shows that men perceive relatively higher partner support than women. Since
there is an increase in dual-earner couples it is challenging for women to handle the entire
domestic and childrens responsibilities as well as meeting job demands. This might
hinder the career progress of women and negatively influence the mental health.
Therefore it is important for men to understand this scenario and share possible household
responsibilities with women.
5.7. Limitations and areas for further research
The findings drawn from this research are subjected several constraints. Firstly the
researcher concentrated only on five variables which affect work- life balance, future
researches can expand their study by examining other variables such as leadership,
organizational culture, eldercare responsibilities, etc. Researcher selected only one
moderator and future researches can focus on more than one moderator such as age, level
of emotional intelligence, etc.
Secondly, the data collection from the managers in the corporate sector in Sri
Lanka was very difficult and the response rate was very poor. The researcher used
convenient and judgmental sample (Ho & Dampsey, 2010) and therefore, the ability to
generalise the findings of the study was confined only to this group. Future researchers
76

can develop a more reliable probability sampling technique and gather data in order to
ensure the statistical validation.
Thirdly, the data were derived from a single time point; as a result, the direction of
significant associations could be not determined. That is, the results presented do not
permit an assessment of the cause and effect relationships among variables of interest and
all that can be said is that the results are consistent with the theoretical position that the
study was based (Abernethy & Brownell, 1999).Therefore, longitudinal studies are
required to test out these speculations
The current study limited its scope to one sector which enables indirect control
over potentially confounding industry effects (Abernethy & Brownell, 1999). Further
research is required in other industries to access the generalisability of the model. The
sample of the study was selected from Sri Lankan corporate sector. Generalising the
results to other industries or countries should be done carefully.
Finally, the survey approach itself has limitations such as the use of self reported
measures, lack of control over the respondents to the questionnaire, inability to contact
the required personnel and survey method reduces the insights obtained regarding the
causes and processes behind the phenomena under study (Samudrage, 2005).
5.8. Conclusion
This study was designed to identify major determinants of work-life balance among
corporate sector managers in Sri Lanka. In order to conduct the study five variables were
identified and they are Manager support, Colleague support, Organisational time
expectations, Partner support and Childcare responsibilities. Based on the results it was
found that Manager support, Partner support and Organisational time expectations are
critical factors when determining work-life balance among corporate sector managers.
This finding gives an important indication to both organisations as well as individuals.
Current studys findings has been shown that the immediate supervisors response
to work and family concerns is more critical for employees and immediate managers
behaviours which employees considered the most significant factor in balancing their
work-life responsibilities. Therefore managers should promote and incorporate supportive
working culture in organizations which also increases job satisfaction and work
performance of employees. Partner support is also a critical factor which determines
work-life balance. Receiving spouse or partner support has been positively related to
work-life balance among corporate sector managers. Especially for dual-earner couples,
77

negotiating work responsibilities and providing assistance is important to minimize

consequences of demanding life style.
Organisational time expectations has been negatively associated with work-life
balance. According to previous research findings for many organisations, time seen at
work is typically understood in terms of productivity levels and the ideal worker is fully
cognisant with organisational expectations of face-time, and possesses no other areas of
life which might impinge on their ability to work (Rapoport et al., 2002, p.170).
Organisations should pay attention to formulate flexible working policies such as flexihours, work from home, etc. in order to facilitate employees to strike a balance between
work and family responsibilities.

78

6.

REFERENCES

Abernethy, C., & Brownell, S. (1999). Work-family benefits: Which ones maximize
profits? Journal of Managerial Issues, 13 (1), 28-44.
Abhayakoon, P. G. I. D. W., & Balathasan, Y. (2013). Transformational leadership and
Organizational

innovation

in

selected

Sri

Lankan

Industries.

Unpublished Masters dissertation, Postgraduate Institute of Management,

University of Sri Jayewardenepura, Sri Lanka.
Adams, G., King, L., & King, D. (1996). Relationships of job and family involvement,
family social support, and work-family conflict with job and life
satisfaction, Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(4), 411-420.
Ahuja, S., Luk, V., Leung, A., & Lo, S. (2007). Role stressors, interrole conflict, and
well-being: The moderating influence of spousal support and coping
behaviors among employed parents in Hong Kong. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 54(7), 259-278.
Allen, T.D. (2001). Family supportive work environments: the role of organizational
perceptions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58(3), 414435.
Aiken, L.S., & West, S.G. (1991). Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting
Interactions, Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Allen, T.D., (2008). The Effects of Flexible Work Arrangements on Stressors, Burnout,
and Behavior Job Outcomes in Public Accounting. Behavioral Research in
Accounting, 14 (5), 134.
Anderson, L. (2002) Sound Bite Legislation: The Employment Act 2002 and New
Flexible Working Rights for Parents. Industrial Law Review, 32(1), 3842.
Anderson, R.E. & Dubinsky, M.A. (2000). Working mothers and the family context:
Predicting positive coping. Journal of vocational Behavior, 28(12), 507523.

79

Anderson, S. E., Coffey, B. S., & Byerly, R. T. (2002). Formal organizational initiatives
and informal workplace practices: Links to workfamily conflict and jobrelated outcomes. Journal of Management, 28(10), 787810.

Andreassi, M., & Thompson, A. (2007). The relationships between work-family human
resource practices and Firm Profitability: A Multitheoretical Perspective.
Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 22 (16), 219252.
Aneshensel, J. (1986). Critical reflections on reflexive modernization. Theory, Culture
and Society, 14(4) 133 138.
Arachchige, J.H. (2013). Work-life balance: Does management care? Proceedings of HR
Dialogue, 01(1), 22-26
Bailyn, L., & Hopkins. (2006). The relationships between work-family human resource
practices and Firm Profitability: A Multitheoretical Perspective, Research
in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 22 (13), 219-252.
Bailyn, L. (1997) Breaking the Mold: Women, Men and Time in the Corporate World.
New York: Free Press.

Bailyn, L. (1980). Breaking the Mold: Redesigning Work for Productive and Satisfying
Lives. New York: Cornell University Press
Bailyn, L. (2003) Academic Careers and Gender Equity: Lessons Learned from MIT,
Gender, Work and Organization, 10(2), 137153.

Baltes, P. B., & Baltes, M. M. (1990). Psychological perspectives on successful aging:

The model of selective optimization with compensation. In P. B. Baltes, &
M.M.
Bamberger, P., & Conley, A. (1991). Work-Life Integration and the Changing Context of
Work, in Blyton, P., Blunsdon, B., Reed, K. and Dastmalchian, A. (eds)

80

Work-Life Integration: International Perspectives on the Balancing of

Multiple Roles. Basingstoke: Palgrave.

Barnett, R. C., & Hyde, J. S. (2001). Women, men, work, and family: An expansionist
theory. American Psychologist, 56(21), 781796.

Barnett, R. C. (1998). Toward a review and reconceptualization of the work/family

literature. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 124(77),
125182.

Barnett, K. A., Garies, R. L., & Brennan, R. L. (1999). Work and family balance among
dual-earner working-class Mexican-Americans: Implications for therapists.
Contemporary Family Therapy, 25(12), 353-366.
Bartolome, W. T. (1984). Family ties: Balancing commitments to work and family in dual
earner households. American Sociological Review, 54 (31), 671682.
Bellavia, R. J., & Frone, R. E.(2006). Type A behavior of administrators and wives_
reports of marital satisfaction and well-being. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 64 (32), 5765.
Bernas, R., & Major, P. (2000). Human resources practices as predictors of workfamilyoutcomes and employee turnover. Industrial Relations: A Journal of
Economy & Society, 42(2), 189-220. doi:10.1111/1468-232X.00287.

Beynon, S., Srinivas, E.S., & Tan, H.H. (2002). Rhythms of life: antecedents and
outcomes of work-family balance in employed parents. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 90(1), 132- 146

Bird, L. R., & Bird, T. R. (1986). Image theory: The unifying perspective. In L. R. Beach
(Ed.), Decisionmaking in the workplace: A unified perspective: 1-19.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

81

Bird, S. J. (2006). The relative contribution of formal and informal organizational

workfamily support. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66(3), 487-500.
doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2004.02.004
Blair-Loy, M., & Wharton, A. (2002). Employees Use of Work-Family Policies and the
Workplace Social Context, Social Forces, 80(3): 813845.

Bommer, R., & Coffey, S. (2002). Work-family enrichment as a mediator between

organizational interventions for work-life balance and job outcomes.
Journal

of

Managerial

Psychology,

25(3),

274-300.

doi:10.1108/02683941011023749
Bonney, N. (2005) Overworked Britons? Part-Time Work and Work-Life Balance,
Work, Employment and Society, 19(2), 391-401.

Bozionelos, A. B., & Huges, D. (2007). The crossover of daily work engagement: Test of
an actorpartner interdependence model. Journal of Applied Psychology,
94(56) 1562-1571.

Brady, D. (2009). Family ties: Balancing commitments to work and family in dual earner
households. American Sociological Review, 54(21), 776789.

Brubaker, V., Ickes, W., Bernstein, I., & Knowles, E. (1999). Personality moderating
variables: A warning about statistical artifact and a comparison of analytic
techniques. Journal of Personality, 58(27), 567587.

Brummelhuis, R., & Bakker, P. (2010). Human resources practices as predictors of work
family outcomes and employee turnover. Industrial Relations, 42(2), 189
220.
Buchanan, J., & Thornthwaite, L. (2001) Paid Work and Parenting: Charting a New
Course for Australian Families. Sydney: University of Sydney.

82

Burke, M., & Jones, C. (1995). Sharing of home responsibilities between professionally
employed women and their husbands, Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 60 (6), 844-860.
Burke, J.F., Weir, M.L. & Duwors, R.F. (1979). A model of fathers behavioral
involvement in child care in dualearner families. Journal of Family
Psychology, 13 (3), 401-415

Burke, J.F., Weir, M.L. & Duwors, R.F. (1980). Flexible schedules and shift work:
replacing the 9-to-5 workday?. Monthly Labor Review, 123(6), 3340.

Burn, R. J. (2003). Some antecedents and consequences for work-family confict. Journal
of Social Behavior and Personality, 3(2), 287-302.
Burrell, D. (1992). Rich democracies, poor people: How politics explain poverty. New
York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Byrne, S. J. (2005). The relative contribution of formal and informal organizational work
f amily support. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66(3), 487-500.
doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2004.02.004

Calas, C. S., & Smircich, J. K. (1995). Assessing coping strategies: A theoretically based
approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(5), 267-283

Carlson, D. S., & Perrewe, P. L. (1999). The role of social support in the stressor-strain
relationship. Journal of Management, 25(11), 513-540.

Carlson, D. S., & Kacmar, K. M. 2000. Workfamily conflict in the organization: Do life
role values make a difference? Journal of Management, 26(12) 1031-1054
Carlson, D. S., Kacmar, K. M., Wayne, J. H., & Grzywacz, J. G. (2006). Measuring the
positive side of the work family interface: Development and validation of
a workfamily enrichment scale. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68(23)
131-164.

83

Champoux, S. (1978), Womens work is never done: the division of domestic labor, in
Freeman, J. (Ed.), Women: A Feminist Perspective, Mayfield, Palo Alto,
CA.
Chengalur-Smith, I., Duchessi, P., & Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2012). Information sharing and
business systems leveraging in supply chains: An empirical investigation
of one web-based application. Information & Management, 49(1), 5867.
doi:10.1016/j.im.2011.12.001
Clark, S.C. (2001). Work-family border theory: a new theory of work-life balance,
Human Relations, 53(17), 747-770.

Cohen, J., & Fuwa, L. (2007). An Examination of the Perceived Impact Of Flexible Work
Arrangements on Professional Opportunities in Public Accounting,
Journal of Business Ethics, 32(4), 317328.
Collins, C.E. & Shaw, D.W. (2003), Type of social support and specific stress: toward a
theory of optimal matching, in Sarason, B.R., Sarason, I.G. and Pierce,
G.R. (Eds), Social Support: An Interactional View, Wiley, New York, NY.
Collinson, V., and Hearn, P. (1996) Five Strategies of Successful Part-Time Work,
Harvard Business Review, 79(7), 8-14.

Collinson, S., & Collinson, G.K. (1997). Perceived stress in a probability sample of the
United States. In S. Spacapan & S. Oskamp (Eds.), The social psychology
of health (pp. 21 62). Newbury, CA: Sage.
Cook, R.G., & Minnotte, Y, (2008). Profiles of attribution of importance to life roles and
their implications for the work-family conflict, Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 49(17), 212-220.
Cooke, C.R. & Rousseau, N. (1984) Working Time and Work and Family Conflict in the
Netherlands, Sweden and the UK, Work, Employment and Society, 18(3)
531-549.
84

Coser, R.K. (1974). Relationships among role conflicts, role satisfactions and life
satisfaction: Evidence from Hong Kong. Social Behavior and Personality,
26(12), 409-414.
Craig, L .(2007). Is there really a second shift, and if so, who does it? A time-diary
investigation. Feminist Review 86(1), 14970.
Crompton, R., & Lyonette, C. (2006). Work-life balance in Europe. Acta Sociologica,
49(21), 379393.

Cron, J. (1984). The Role of Non-standard Work Hours in Maternal Caregiving for Young
Children, IZA Discussion Paper, Institute for the Study of Labor, Bonn,
Germany

Cross, D. S., & Linehan, D. A. (2006). Do peers make the place? Conceptual synthesis
and meta-analysis of coworker effects on perceptions, attitudes, OCBs, and
performance.Journal

of

Applied

Psychology,

93(5),

1082-1103.

doi:10.1037/0021-9010.93.5.1082

Crouter, A. C. 1984. Spillover from family to work: The neglected side of workfamily
interface. Human Relations, 37(17), 631-644

Dharmasiri, A. (2013,April 29). Working Atypical Hours: What Happens to Family Life.
Daily FT
Dmaris, P.D., & Longmre, K. (1996). Workplace deviance, organizational citizenship
behavior, and business unit performance: The bad apples do spoil the
whole barrel. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(11), 67-80.

Dollard, J. E. (2011). Predictors of negative spillover from family to work. Journal of

Social Issues, 25(9), 241261.

85

Doyle, L.J. (2004), Husbands at home: predictors of paternal participation in child care
and housework, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(23),
34-47.
Drew, E., & Murtag, H. (2005). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress.
Psychological Bulletin, 125 (2), 341-363.

Drew, E., & Daverth, R. (2009). Rethinking happiness: The science of psychological
wealth. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Drobnic, S. & Gullien, J. (2011), Female part-time managers: networks and career
mobility, Work, Employment and Society, 24 (4), 621-640.

Dubin, F.M. (1999), Halving It All: How Equally Shared Parenting Works, Harvard
University Press, Cambridge, MA.

Ducharme, L. J., & Martin, J. K. (2000) Unrewarding work, coworker support, and job
satisfaction. A test of the buffering hypothesis. Work and Occupations,
27(2), 223-243.

Duxbury, L., Lyons, S., & Higgins, C. 2007. Dual-income families in the new
millennium: Reconceptualizing family type. Advances in Developing
Human Resources, 9(1),472-486

Duxbury, L. (2005) Non-standard work schedules, perceived family well-being and daily
stressors. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 70(4), 9911003

Eagle, B. W., Icenogle, M. L., Maes, J. D., & Miles, E. W. (1998). The importance of
employee demographic profiles for understanding experiences of workfamily interrole conflicts. Journal of Social Psychology, 138(78), 690709.

Eckenrode, L. T., & Gore, A. (1990). Work and family research in IO/OB: Content
analysis and review of the literature (19801989). Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 66(1), 124197.
86

Edwards, J. R., & Rothbard, N. P. (2000). Mechanisms linking work and family:
Specifying the relationships between work and family constructs. Academy
Of Management Review, 25,178199.

Eikhof, C.F., Seron, C., Oglensky, B. & Saute, R. (2007). The Part-Time Paradox: Time
Norms, Professional Life, Family, and Gender. New York: Routledge.

Eisenberger, R., Stinglhamber, F., Vandenberghe, C., Sucharski, I., & Rhoades, L.
(2002). Perceived supervisor support: Contributions to perceived
organizational support and employee retention. The Journal of Applied
Psychology, 87(45), 565573.
Elliott, A. (2003). Becks Sociology of Risk: A Critical Assessment, Sociology, 36 (2).
293315.

Etzion, J. (1988). Support from the top: Supervisors' perceived organizational support as a
moderator of leader-member exchange to satisfaction and performance
relationships. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(2), 321-330.

Evans, W.R. (1979). Job involvement and organization commitment among dual-income
and single income families: a multiple-site study.

Journal of Social

Psychology, 138 (93), 93-101.

Fagan, T. (2003). Families, states and labour markets: Institutions, causes and
consequences of family policy in post-war welfare states. Northampton,
MA: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
Felstead, A, Jewson N, Phizacklea, A., & Walters, S. (2002), "Opportunities To Work at
Home in the Context of Work-Life Balance", Human Resource
Management Journal, 12(2), 189-195.
Filipczak, D., Gordon, S., & Stamps, G. (1997). Age effects on the predictors of technical
workers

commitment

and

willingness

to

turnover.

Journal

of

Organizational Behavior, 23(5) 655-674.

87

Fine-Davis, S., Christensen, P. & DeGroot, J. (2005) Work and Life: The End of the
Zero-Sum Game, Harvard Business Review, November December: 119127.

Fisher, A. (1994). Is your business taking over your life? Fortune Small Business, 11(9),
6074.

Fornell, B. J. (2011). Personality and the work/life interface. Australian Journal of

Psychology,55(13), 178-195.
Francis, B. (2005). Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research, Qualitative
Inquiry, 12(2), 219-245.
Freidman, S., & Greenhaus, J. (2000). Work and Family Allies or Enemies. New York:
Oxford University Press.

Freidman, S.& Greenhaus, J. (2003). Work-family conflict: The effect of job and family
involvement. Journal of Occupational Behaviour, 8(3), 45-53.
Friedman, S., Christensen, P. & DeGroot, J. (1999). Work and Life: The End of the
Zero-Sum Game, Harvard Business Review, November December: 119127.

Friedman, S., McCarthy, M., Edge, G. & O'Dwyer, C. (2001). Work-life balance and
Social Inclusion in Ireland: Results of a nationwide survey, National Flexiwork Partnership, Dublin.

Friedman, S., Christensen, P. & DeGroot, J. (1998) Macro-level gender inequality and the
division of household labor in 22 countries. American Sociological
Review, 69(46), 751767.

88

Frone, M. R., & Yardley, J. K. (1996). Workfamily conflict and employee psychiatric
disorders: The national comorbidity survey. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 85(51), 888-895.

Frone, M. R., Yardley, J. K., & Markel, K. S. (1992). Developing and testing an
integrative model of the workfamily interface. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 50(31), 145167.

Frone, M. R. (2003). Workfamily balance. In J. C. Quick & L. E. Tetrick (Eds.),

Handbook of occupational health psychology: 143-162. Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association
Frone, M. R., Russell, M., & Cooper, M. L. (1997). Relationship of work-family conflict,
gender and alcohol expectancies to alcohol use/abuse. Journal of
Organisational Behavior, 14(3), 545-558.

Frone, M. R., Russell, M., & Cooper, M. L. (1992). Antecedents and outcomes of work
family conflict: Testing a model of the workfamily interface. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 77(39), 65-78.

Frye, N., & Breaugh, J. A. (2004). Family-friendly policies, supervisor support, work
family conflict, familywork conflict, and satisfaction: A test of a
conceptual model. Journal of Business and Psychology, 19(2), 197220.

Fu, G., & Shaffer, C. (2001). Nonstandard career paths and profiles of commitment to life
roles: A complex relation. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 74(41), 321331
Gatrell, M. & Cooper, S. (2008), Feature: the price of reconciliation: part-time work,
families and womens satisfaction, The Economic Journal, 526(118), F1F7.

89

Gil, P., & Garcia, S. (2012). Boundary-spanning work demands and their consequences
for guilt and psychological distress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior,
52(21), 4357.

Gill, J (2010). The quality of working life: Is Scandinavia different?. European

Sociological Review, 19 (8), 6179.

Glavin, P. (2008). Work-family role blurring and work-family conflict: The moderating
influence of job resources and demands. Work and Occupations, 39(11),
7198.

Goode T. A. (1960). Toward a psychology of dyadic organizing. In L. L. Cummings & B.

M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior, 9, (pp. 175208).
Greenwich, CT: JAI.
Gornick, J. C., & Meyers, M. K. (2003). Families that work: Policies for reconciling
parenthood and employment. New York, NY: Russell Sage.
Gray, M.A. (1983), A preliminary investigation of factors affecting appraisal of the
decision to take early retirement, Journal of Employment Counseling. 35
(3), 764-770.
Green, E.R. (2001). Social support and coping of employed women, in Long, B.C. and
Kahn, S.E. (Eds), Women, Work and Coping: A Multidisciplinary
Approach to Workplace Stress, McGill-Queens University Press,
Montreal.

Greenblatt, B. (2002). Shift work and negative work to family spillover. Journal of
Sociology and Social Welfare. 30(4), 178-188.

Greenhaus, J. H., & Beutell, N. J. (1985). Sources of conflict between work and family
roles. Academy of Management Review, 10(1), 7688.

90

Greenhaus, J. H., & Kopelman, S. (2003). When work and family collide: Deciding
between competing role demands. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Process, 90 (61), 291-303.
Greenhaus, J.H. and Parasuraman, S. (1985) A Work-Nonwork Interactive Perspective
of Stress and its Consequences, Journal of Organizational Behavior
Management, 8 (3), 37-60

Greenhaus, J. H., & Powell, G. N. (2006). When work and family are allies: A theory of
work-family enrichment. Academy of Management Review, 31(5), 105126.

Greenhaus, J. H., Collins, K. M., & Shaw, J. D. (2003). The relation between work-family
balance and quality of life. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63(12), 510531.

Grosswald, B. (2003). Shift work and negative work to family spillover. Journal of
Sociology and Social Welfare, 30(4) 3157.

Grzywacz, J. G., & Marks, N. F. (2000). Work, family, work-family spillover, and
problem drinking during midlife. Journal of Marriage and the Family,
62(33), 336-348.

Grzywacz, J. G. (2000). Work-family spillover and health during midlife: Is managing

conflict everything? American Journal of Health Promotion, 14(4), 236243.

Grzywacz, J. G.,& Butler, A. B., (2005) Work, family, and health: Work-family balance
as a protective factor against stresses of daily life. In A. Newhall- Marcus,
D. F., Halpern, & S. J. Tan (Eds.), Changing realities of work and family,
(pp. 194-215). New York: Wiley-Blackwell.

91

Grzywacz, J. G. & Carlson, D. S. (2007). Conceptualizing work-family balance:

Implications for practice and research. Advances in Developing Human
Resources, 9(4), 455-471.

Gutek, D.C., Searle, M.R. & Klepa, B.T. (1991). Role of social support in the experience
of stress at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(41), 102-110.

Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Mena, J. A. (2011). An assessment of the use
of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing
research. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40(3), 414433.
doi:10.1007/s11747-011-0261-6
Hall, D.T. & Mirvis, J. (1996). Balancing work life and home life: what can
organizations do to help? Academy of Management Executive, 2 (3), 213223.

Hammer, L. B., Kossek, E. E., Anger, W. K., Bodner, T., & Zimmerman, K. (2009).
Clarifying workfamily intervention processes: The roles of workfamily
conflict and family supportive supervisor behaviors. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 96(33), 134150
Hammer, L. B., Neal, M. B., Newsom, J. T., Brockwood, K. J., & Colton, C. L. (2005). A
longitudinal study of the effects of dual-earner couples' utilization of
family-friendly workplace supports on work and family outcomes. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 90(4), 799-810.

Hammer, L. B., Allen, E., & Grigsby, T. D. (1997). Work and family conflict in dualearner couples: Within-individual and crossover effects of work and
family. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 50(2), 185203.
92

Harpaz, N. (2009). A longitudinal examination of the worknonwork boundary strength

construct. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30 (13), 839-862.

Hawkins, D., & Ferris, D. (2005). The dynamic spillover of satisfaction between work
and marriage: The role of time and mood. Journal of Applied Psychology,
90 (57), 1273-1279.
Herman, J. & Gyllstrom, C.S. (1977). Where is the Justice? Examining Work-Family
Backlash in New Zealand: The Potential for Employee Resentment, New
Zealand Journal of Industrial Relations, 28(1), 5975.
Hewlett, J. (2006) Exploring the Benefits and Use of

Flexitime: Similarities and

Differences, Qualitative Research in Accounting and Management, 4(1),

69-82.

Higginbottom, M. (1994). Action control in the context of psychopathological disorders.

In J.Kuhl & J. Beckmann (Eds,), Volition and personality: Action versus
state orientation (pp. 515-561).

Hill, E. J., & Yang, C.(2004). A cross-cultural test of the work-family interface in 48
countries. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66(48), 13001316.
Hill, J., Ferris, M. and Martinson, V. (2007), 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 (2), 820-841

Hill, E.J, Allen, S, Jacob, J, Bair, AF, Bikhazi, SL, Langeveld, AV, Martinengo, G,
Parker, TT & Walker, E (2001), Work-Family Facilitation: Expanding
Theoretical Understanding Through Qualitative Exploration, Advances in
Developing Human Resources, 9(1),507-526.

93

Hill, E. J. (2005). Work-family facilitation and conflict, working fathers and mothers,
work-family stressors and support. Journal of Family Issues, 26(4), 793
819.
Hirschfeld, I. & Field, D. (2000). Dual-career couples, gender and migration, in
Reuschke, D. (Ed.), Wohnen und Gender: Theoretische, politische, soziale
und ra umliche Aspekte, VS Verlag fu r Sozialwissenschaften, Berlin,
pp. 239-59.

Ho, D.R., & Dampsey, J.F. (2010). Combined effects of organizaitonal and professional
identification on the reciprocity dynamic for professional employees.
Academy of Management Journal, 52(3), 506-526.

Hobfoll, S. E. (2001). The influence of culture, community, and the nested-self in the
stress process: Advancing conservation of resources theory. International
Review of Applied Psychology, 50(3), 337421.

Hochschild, A.R. (1989) The Second Shift. New York: Viking.

Hochschild, A. R. (1997) The Time Bind: When Work Becomes Home and Home becomes
Work. New York: Metropolitan Books
House, K.

(1981). Non-standard employment in the management and professional

workforce: training, consultation and gender implications, Work,
Employment and Society, 17 (4), 667-689.

Hudson, K. (2006). Supervisor Support and Work-Life Integration: A Social Identity

Perspective, in Kossek, E.E. & Lambert, S.J. (eds) Work and Life
Integration: Organizational, Cultural and Individual Perspectives. New
Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Huffman, L. (2012). Home-based working and the employment relationship: managerial
challenges and dilemmas, Personnel Review, 32 (4), 422-437.

94

Hyman, J. & Summers, D (2004). Work-life imbalance in call centers and software
development, British Journal of Industrial Relations, 41 (5), 215-239.

Innstrand, R., Langballe, K., & Espnes, D. (2008). The spillover of daily job satisfaction
onto employees family lives: The facilitating role of workfamily
integration. Academy of Management Journal, 52(31), 87-102.

Jacques, T. C. (1996). Time management as a moderator of relations between stressors

and employee strain. Work & Stress, 13 (3), 182-191.
Jayakody, J. A. S. (2011). Effects of Leader Charisma on Follower Dependency in Sri
Lanka. An unpublished PHD thesis, Postgraduate Institute of
Management, University of Sri Jayewardenepura, Sri Lanka.

Judge, T. A., Boudreau, R., & Bretz, B. A. (2006). Workfamily conflict and emotions:
Effects at work and at home. Personnel Psychology, 59(12), 779-814
Jung, E.N., Wu, D. and Chow, P.M. (2008). Alternative Work Arrangements and
Perceived Career Success: Current Evidence From the Big Four Firms in
the US, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 33(1), 48-72.

Kabanoff, E. H. (1980). Gender and discretionary work effort evidence from the United
States and Britain. Work and Occupations, 37 (11), 336.

Kahn, R. L., & Quinn, R. P. (1976). Organizational stress: Studies in role conflict and
ambiguity. New York: Wiley.

Kailasapathy,P., & Metz,I.(2012). WorkFamily Conflict in Sri Lanka: Negotiations of

Exchange Relationships in Family and at Work. Journal of social issues,
68, 790-813

Kailasapathy,P., Kraimer,L., & Metz,I. (2014).The interaction effect of leader-member

exchange, gender and spouses gender role orientation on work

95

interferences with family conflict: International Journal of Human

Resources Management,25, 2682-2697.
Kalleberg, P. (2004). Mechanisms of self-regulation: A systems view. Annual Review of
Psychology, 44(7), 23-52.

Kanter, R.M (1977). Work and family: A critical agenda for research and policy, New
York: Russell Sage Found

Keith, D & Schafer, R.L (1980). The Social Psychology of Organizations, Wiley, New
York

Kimmel, S. B. (1993). Enhancing coping behaviors in at-risk populations: The effects of

time-management instruction and social support in women from dualearner families. Behavior Therapy, 17(3), 57-66.

Kinnunen, R., & Mauno, T. (1998). Health Work-Stress, Productivity and the
Reconstruction of Working Life. New York: Basic Books.
Kirchmeyer, C. (1992). Non-work participation and work attitudes: A test of scarcity vs.
expansion models of personal resources, Human Relations, 45(19), 775795.

Kirrane, J. K., & Buckley, A. R. (2004). Finding meaning in difficult family experiences:
Sense-making and interaction processes during joint family storytelling.
Journal of Family Communication, 6(1) 49-76.

Kmec, T. & Gorman, P. (2010). Work-life balance: A review of the meaning of the
balance construct. Journal of Management & Organization, 14(5), 323327.

Konrad, J. R., & Cannings, J. (1997). Predictors of perceived work-family balance:

Gender difference or gender similarity. Sociological Perspectives, 47(6),
1-23.
96

Kopp,

L. (2013). The influence of gender on the performance of organizational

citizenship behaviors. Journal of Management, 28(5), 629-648.

Kossek, E. E. (2005). Workplace policies and practices to support work and families. In
S.Bianchi, L. Casper, & R. King (Eds.), Work, family health and wellbeing (pp. 97116). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Kossek, E. E., Colquitt, J. A., & Noe, R. A. (1999). Caregiving decisions, well-being, and
performance: The effects of place and provider as a function of dependent
type and workfamily climates. Academy of Management Journal, 44(11),
975989.

Kossek, E., Pichler, S., Bodner, T., & Hammer, L. B. (2011). Workplace social support
and workfamily conflict: A meta analysis clarifying the influence of
general and work family specific supervisor and organizational support.
Personnel Psychology, 64(2), 289-313

Kossek, E., Hammer, L. B., Durham, M., Bray, J., Chermack, K., Murphy, L. A., &
Kaskubar, D. (2006). Getting there from here: Research on the effects of
workfamily initiatives on workfamily conflict and business outcomes.
Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 305-349.
Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research methodology methods & techniques. New Delhi: New
Age International (P) Ltd., Publishers.
Lakein, A. (1987). How to get control of your time and life. New York: New American
Library.
Lambert, S J & Haley-Lock, A 2004, The organizational stratification of opportunities
for work-life balance, Community, Work and Family.7(2), 179-195.
Lambert, S. J. (1990). Processes linking work and family: A critical review and research
agenda. Human Relations, 43(29), 239257.

97

Lauren, H. (2011). Work and family sources of burnout in the Australian engineering
profession: a comparison of respondents in dual and single earner couples,
parents and non-parents. American Society of Civil Engineers, Journal of
Construction Engineering and Management, 130 (2), 290 - 298.
Leavy, R.L. (1983). Social Support and Psychological Disorder: A Review, Journal of
Community Psychology, 11(4), 321.
Leira, S.H. (1992) Occupational role stressors, coping, support, and hardiness as
predictors of strain in academic faculty: An emphasis on new and female
faculty, Research in Higher Education, 40(3), 285307.
Levy, A. (2012). The impact of job and organisational demands on marital and
relationship quality among Australian civil engineers. Construction
Management and Economics, 20(6), 507 521.
Lewis, S. (1997), Flexible working arrangements: implementation, outcomes, and
management, in Cooper, C.L. and Robertson, I.T. (Eds), International
Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 18, John Wiley
& Sons, Chichester, pp. 1-28.
Lewis, S. (2003). The constraints of a worklife balance approach: an international
perspective. International Journal of Human Resource Management,
18(3), 340363.

Liao, Y., Joshi, H., and T Chuang, F. (2004). Overtime work, insufficient sleep, and risk
of non-fatal acute myocardial infarction in Japanese men. Occupational
and Environmental Medicine, 59(22), 447-451.

Lofquist, T. M. (1999). Definition and measurement of job involvement. Journal of

Applied Psychology, 49(14), 2433.
Loscocco, S., & Kalleberg, D.(2004). Added benefits: The links between work-life
benefits and organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of Management
Journal, 43(12), 801 815.
98

Lowe, D. (2001). All work and no sleep: is fatigue waking up the transportation industry.
Safety and Health, 159 (3), 44-48.
Luk, D. and Shaffer, M. (2005), Mobile phones, spillover and the worklife balance, in
Hislop, D. (Ed.), Mobility and Technology in the Workplace, Routledge,
Oxford, pp. 167-79.
Lyness, J.A., and Kropf, J.P. (2005) New facultys perceptions of the academic work
life, New Forum Press, 15 (3), 103110.

Lyness, S., Hakkanen, M., Luukkonen, R.,& Viikari-Juntura, E. (2001). Perceived

physical work capacity, stress, sleep disturbance and occupational
accidents among firefighters working during a strike. Work and Stress, 16
(3), 264-274.
Lyonette, T. (2006), Being there: the acceptance and marginalization of part-time
professional employees, Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 24 (8),
923-943.

Macan, H. T. (1994). Time Management: Test of a Process Model. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 79(41), 381-391.
Major, V.S. (2000), The contradictions and intersections of class and gender in a global
city: placing working womens lives on the research agenda, Environment
& Planning, 37 (3), 441-461.
Major, V.S, Klein, K.J., & Ehrhart, M.G. (2002). Work time, work interference with
family and psychological distress. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87 (34),
427 436.

Malhotra, N. K., & Birks, R. (2006). A Review and Synthesis of the Measurement
Invariance Literature: Suggestions, Practices, and Recommendations for
Organizational Research, Organizational Research Methods (3:1), pp. 470
99

Malhotra, N. K. Dash. S. (2011). Marketing Research An Applied Orientation.". Sixth

Edition, Delhi, Pearson Prentice Hall, 170-203.
Marks, S. R., & MacDermid, S. M. (1996). Multiple roles and the self: A theory of role
balance. Journal of Marriage & the Family, 58(21), 417432.

Marks, S. R., & Scholarios, M. (2004). Role balance among white married couples.
Journal of Marriage and the Family, 63(21), 10831098.

Martin, M. A. (2002). Hardiness and support at work as predictors of work stress and job
satisfaction. American Journal of Health Promotion, 20(3), 347-373.
Maxwell, G.A. (2005). Checks and Balances: the Role of Managers in WorkLife
Balance Policies and Practices, Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services, 12, 179189.
McDonald, C., & Bradley, M.P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology,
52(12), 397 - 422.
Melissa, R., & Schieman, M. (2009). College students academic stress and its relation to
theiranxiety, time management, and leisure satisfaction. American Journal
of Health Studies, 16(2), 41-51

Milkie, M. A., & Peltola, P. (1999). Playing all the roles: Gender and the workfamily
balancing act. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61(22), 476490.

Morf, A. (1989). Marriage and psychological well-being: Some evidence on selection into
marriage. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54(13), 901-911.
Morgan, M., & Wilson, L. (2002), Taking its toll: the influence of paid and unpaid work
on womens well-being, Feminist Economics, 11 (1), 63-94.
Morris, K.E. and Madsen, J. (2007) Daily consequences of work interference with family
and family interference with work, Work and Stress, 8(3), 244-254.
100

Near, M. J. (1984). The supportive mentor as a means of reducing workfamily conflict.

Journal of Vocational Behavior, 59(19), 364381.
Nipper, N. M. (1995). Work-family conflict, work- and family-role salience, and
womens well-being. The Journal of Social Psychology, 144(62), 389-405.

O'Driscoll, M.P., Ilgen D.R., & Hildreth K. (1992). Time devoted to job and off-job
activities, interrole conflict and affective experiences. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 77(31), 272-279.

O'Connell, H. N., Britt, T. W., & Greene-Shortridge, T. M. (2004). Organizational work

family resources as predictors of job performance and attitudes: The
process of work family conflict and enrichment. Journal of Occupational
Health Psychology, 17(1), 28- 40.
Opatha, H.H.D.N.P. (2002), Performance Evaluation of Human Resources, 1st Ed,
Published by The Author, Sri Lanka

Parasuraman, S. (1992). Predicting turnover intentions and turnover behavior: A

multivariate analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 21(6), 111 - 121.
Parasuraman, S., Purohit, Y.S., Godshalk, V.M., & Beutell, N.J. (1996). Work and family
variables, entrepreneurial career success and psychological wellbeing.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 48(15), 275 - 300.

Park ,A., Parton, N., Thorpe, D. and Wattam, C. (2007) Child Protection: Risk and the
Moral Order. Basingstoke: Macmillan.

Parris, M. A. (2003). Work teams: Perceptions of a ready-made support system?

Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 15(2), 7183.

Peeters, R. and LeBlanc, L., (2001). Organisational culture in the public sector: evidence
from six organisations, The International Journal of Public Sector
Management, 13(4), 125-141.
101

Perlow, E. (1998). Review of the Satisfaction with Life Scale. Psychological Assessment,
5(3), 164-172.

Perrons, H.B. (2003). Non-standard work schedules and marital instability, Journal of
Marriage and the Family, 62(21), 93 - 110.
Pietromonaco, J., Manis, Y., Chung, H.K. & Frohardt-Lane, N. (1986). Long working
hours and subjective fatigue symptoms. Industrial Health, 39(11), 250254.

Piftman, M. (1994). Divine relations, social relations, and well-being. Journal of Health
and Social Behavior, 30(19), 2-14.

Piotrkowski, B. F. (1979). Religious domains and general well-being. Social Indicator

Research, 22(10), 75-91.

Pocock, T. G., Whitbred, R. C., & Contractor, N. (2008). Social information processing
and job\characteristics: A simultaneous test of two theories with
implications for job satisfaction. Human Communication Research,
26(11), 292330.

Randall,, M. (1987). The relationship between job involvement and well-being. Journal
of Psychology, 131(73), 81-89.

Ray, F., & Miller, C. (1994). Business and facts of family life. Harvard Business Review,
89(32), 121-129.
Rhodes T. (1983). Family in organizational research: A review and comparison of
definitions and measures. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 20 (11),
817 836.

Robbinson, R.T. (1988). Work stress among long-distance coach drivers: A survey and
correlational study. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 12 (3), 565-579.
102

Roberts, R.R. (1997). Extended workshifts and excessive fatigue. Journal of Sleep
Research, 4 (2), 61-76.
Robinson, C.E. and Godbey J. (1997) Childcare and emotional adjustment to wives
employment, Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 29 (11), 2738.

Rogers, C., & Amato, C. (2000). Authoritative, authoritarian and permissive parenting
practices: Development of a new measure. Psychological Reports, 77(28),
819 830.

Roskies, K., & Lazurus D.K. (1980). Coping and subjective well-being in women with
multiple roles. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 49(3), 175-184.

Rothbard, L. (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. Journal

of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 38- 59.

Rudd, N.M., & McHenry, P.C. (1986). Family influences on the job satisfaction of
employed mothers. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 10(4),363-372.
Ruderman,T., Rice, R. W., Frone, M. R., & McFarlin, D. B. (2002). Work-non-work
conflict and the perceived quality of life. Journal of Organisational
Behavior, 13(1), 869-895.

Ruppanner, V., & Huffman, C. (2012). Social support at work and affective commitment
to theorganization: The moderating effect of job resource adequacy and
ambient conditions. The Journal of Social Psychology, 150(4), 321-340.
Samudrage, D. N. (2005). A comparative Study between Japan and Sri Lanka on the
Relationship between Budget Participation and Job Performance: Budget
Adequacy and Organizational Commitment as Intervening Variables.
Unpublished Masters dissertation, Wakayama University, Japan.

103

Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2011) Research Methods for Business
Students(4th ed). Harlow: FT Prentice Hall p.150

Scase, E., & Goffee, L. (1989). Subjective well-being: The convergence and stability of
self-report and non-self-report measures. Journal of Personality, 61(24),
177-198.

Schneer, C., & Reitman, F. (2007). Antecedents and outcomes of workfamily conflict:
Toward a motivational model. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
27(5), 176-186.

Schneider, K. M. (1987). Goal striving, need satisfaction, and longitudinal well-being:

The Self-Concordance model. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 76(15), 482-497.

Sekaran, U. (2010). Research methods for business: A skill building approach. John
Wiley & Sons.
Sekaran, U., & Bougie D. (2010). Linking theory to practice: a grand challenge for
management research in the 21st century. Organization Management
Journal, 1(1), 1014.
Seron, K. M., & Ferris, T. (1995). Pursuing personal goals: Skills enable progress but not
all progress is beneficial. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
24(5), 546- 557.

Shamir, M. (1983). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural

equations models. In S. Leinhart (Ed.), Sociological methodology (pp. 290312). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Shields, M.,& Tajalli, A. (2006) Research Methods (4th ed). Harlow: FT Prentice Hall
p.150

104

Smith, E., & Folkhard, N. P. (1993) The multiple sources of workplace stress among
land-grant university faculty, Research in Higher Education, 36(3), 261282.

Srinivas, G. (2005). Work-family balance and job satisfaction: The impact of familyfriendly policies on attitudes of federal government employees. Public
Administration Review, 61(9), 128 147.

Staines, M. (1980). Methodological issues: Evaluating and using information. In W.S.

Paine, (Ed), Job stress and Burnout. Newbury Park: Sage.
Stern, N., Hartkamp, N., Kruse, J., Franke, G. H., Reister, G., & Tress, W. (1982). The
Symptom Check-List-90-R (SCL-90-R): A German validation study.
Quality of Life Research, 9, 185-193.
Stone, F., & Grotto, S. (2012). Should we have more family-friendly policies? European
Management Journal, 16 (5), 586 599.

Straub, M. (2012). Identifying the family, job and workplace characteristics of employees
who use workfamily benefits. Family Relations, 49(12), 217 - 225.
Suchet, W. & Barling, J. (1986). Fathers work experiences affect childrens behaviours
via job-related affect and parenting behaviours. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 17(7), 221 - 232.

Tausig, M. & Fenwick, R., (2001). Unbinding time: Alternate work schedules and worklife balance. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 22(9), 101 - 119.

Tenbrunsel,D., Thompson, C.A., Beauvais, L.L., & Lyness, K.S. (1995). When workfamily benefits are not enough: The influence of work-family culture on
benefit utilization, organizational attachment and work-family conflict.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54(9), 51-67.

Thesing, L., (1998), Crowded Lives, Pluto Press, Melbourne

105

Thompson, L. T., & Bunderson, D. (2001). Impact of family-supportive work variables

on workfamily conflict and strain: A control perspective. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 80(44), 86-101.

Thompson, L., & Prottas. (2006). Work-family balance: International research on

employee preferences. Working paper 79, from the Working time today
conference, 16 August, 2002. Sydney: University of Sydney.

Thornton, R., Kirkcaldy, B., Athanasou, J., & Cooper, C. (1989). Individual differences
in working hours, work perceptions and accident rates in veterinary
surgeries. Work and Stress, 14 (2), 181-188.

Upadhya, T., & Vasavi, J. (2006). Long working hours and ocupational stress-related
cardiovascular attacks among middle-aged workers in Japan. Journal of
Human Ergology, 20 (8), 147-153.

Van der Lippe, M., & Peters, S. (2007). Associations between overtime and psychological
health in high and low reward jobs. Work and Stress, 15 (3), 227-240.

Van Dyne, R., VanYperen, N. W., & Buunk, B. P. (2007). A longitudinal study of equity
and satisfaction in intimate relationships. European Journal of Social
Psychology, 20(7), 8599.
Voydanoff, P. (1988). Work role characteristics, family structure demands and
work/family conflict. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 50(21), 749762.
Voydanoff, P. (2007). Work Demands and Work-to-Family and Family-to-Work
Conflict: Direct and Indirect Relationships, Journal of Family Issues, 26
(6), 8496.

106

Wajcman, T., & Martin, P.J (2002). The impact of workplace support on work-family
role strain. Family Relations, 4(1), 539551.
Wajcman, T. (1999). Working part-time: Achieving a successful work-life balance? The
British Journal of Sociology, 55(21), 99-122.
Walzer, K.E. (2001). Changing managers defensive reasoning about work/family
conflicts. Journal of Management Development, 14(4), 77 - 88.

Warhurst, P., Westman, M., Etzion, D., & Danon, E. (2008). Job insecurity and crossover
of burnout in married couples. Journal of Organisational Behavior, 22(4),
467 - 481.

Watson, B. (2001). The effect of shift work on the quality and stability of marital
relations. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52 (32), 103 - 116.

Watts, D.G. (2009). The contribution of burnout to work performance. Journal of

Organizational Behavior, 18 (6), iv-xiii

Wayne, A.M., Musisca, A.M. and Fleeson, R. (2004). The impact of work practices on
fatigue in long distance truck drivers. Accident Analysis and Prevention,
28 (6), 709-719.
Weisenfeld, K.J., Raghuram, G.M., & Garud, S. (2001). Role stressors, mood spillover
and perceptions of work-family conflict in employed parents. Academy of
Management Review, 37 (11), 837 - 868.

West,S.G., Aiken, L.S., & Krull (1996). Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting
Interactions, Newbury Park, CA:Sage

107

Wickramasinghe, V. & Jayabandu, S. 2007. Towards workplace flexibility: flextime

arrangements in Sri Lanka, Employee Relations, 29(06), 554-575
Williams, M. & Alliger, D. (1994). Crossover of stress, strain and resources from one
spouse to another. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16(9), 169 181.

Witt, M. & Carlson, D. (2006). Effects of respite from work on burnout: vacation relief
and fade-out. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(49), 73 -87.
Zedeck, J. (1992) Work, Leisure, Time Pressure and Stress, in Haworth, J.T. and Veal,
A.J. (eds), Work and Leisure. Hove: Routlege

Zikmund, W.G. (1997) Business Research Methods (6th edn). Fort Worth, TX: Dryden
Press.
Zikmund, W.G. (2003). Validating Instruments in MIS Research. MIS Quarterly 13 (2),
147-169.

108

7.

7. Appendices

7.1. Annexure 1 - Structured Questionnaire

Survey on Work Life Balance

Dear Sir/Madam,
I am Sanduni Gunawardena, a postgraduate student at Faculty of Graduate Studies of
University of Colombo, conducting the research as per a requirement to complete the
Masters in Labour Relations and Human Resources Management. I would be very much
grateful if you could extend your kind cooperation by filling this questionnaire.
This survey asks for your opinions on work and life. Your responses will help
researcher to better understand lives of employees with family responsibilities. Please
answer all questions openly and honestly, your answers to the questionnaire will strictly
be considered as confidential and only be used for academic purposes. If you have any
questions, please feel free to contact the researcher su.gunawardena@gmail.com.

109

Strongly Disagree

Disagree
disagree nor
Neither
agree
Agree
Strongly Agree

2 3

4 5

2 3

4 5

2 3

4 5

I can rely on my manager to make sure my work responsibilities

1
are handled when I have unanticipated non work demands.

2 3

4 5

2 3

4 5

2 3

4 5

2 3

4 5

2 3

4 5

2 3

4 5

2 3

4 5

1. This section provides a description of the manager/supervisor

support.
Judge how frequently each statement fits your immediate
manager/
supervisor and circle the relevant number.

My manager is willing to listen to my problems in juggling work

1

and non-work life

My manager makes me feel comfortable talking to him or her

about my conflicts between work and non-work.

My manager and I can talk effectively to solve conflicts between

work and non-work issues.

My manager works effectively with workers to creatively solve

5

conflicts between work and non-work.

My manager demonstrates effective behaviors in how to juggle

work and non-work balance.

My manager demonstrates how a person can jointly be successful

on and off the job.

My manager thinks about how the work in my department can be

organized to jointly benefit employees and the company.

My manager asks for suggestions to make it easier for employees

to balance work and non-work demands.

I believe that my managers support is a significant factor in

10

balancing work-life responsibilities

110

Strongly Agree

colleagues
and circle the relevant number.
1
1
1
2
1
3
1
4
1
5
1
6
1
7
1
8

My colleagues would fill in while I am absent

I get support from my peers when I come across with

1
difficulties at non-work life
My colleagues give useful advice on work related issues
1
My colleagues are helpful in getting my job done
My colleagues are really care about me
I feel close to my colleagues
I am appreciated by my colleagues
My colleagues are friendly to me

3. Listed below are statements about working in your organization.

Judge how each statement fits that best reveal your degree of
agreement or disagreement. Please answer by circling the relevant
number.

2 3

4 5

2 3

4 5

2 3

4 5

2 3

4 5

2 3

4 5

2 3

4 5

Strongly Agree

co-worker/colleague. Judge how each statement fits your

Disagree
Neither disagree
nor agree
Agree

Disagree
Neither disagree nor
agree
Agree

from

Strongly Disagree

Strongly Disagree
1

2. This section provides a description of the support received

I have to work beyond conditioned hours to keep up with my work

19

load
I consider changing my job to help achieving a better work-life

20

balance

My organization consider working long hours as an indicator of

commitment towards work
I am unable to meet the requirements of my job without working
22
long hours
My job takes up so much energy and I dont feel up to doing thing
23
that need attention at home
24 I miss out lot of family together times due to work pressure
21

111

2 3

4 5

2 3

4 5

2 3

4 5

2 3

4 5

or disagreement with each statement by circling the number that

best represent your point of view.
.
I feel that my childrens responsibilities are getting neglected due
to the amount of work I have
Demands at work place restrict me from spending adequate time
30
with my children
I find hard to attend my childrens affairs due to the demands of
31
work place
I feel like my career progression hinders due to the child care
32
responsibilities I have to meet
29

2 3

4 5

2 3

4 5

2 3

4 5

2 3

4 5

Strongly Agree

5. This section provides a description of managing childcare

responsibilities and work. Please indicate your level of agreement

Strongly Agree

Disagree
Neither disagree
nor agree
Agree

Support from spouse helps me to strike a balance between

work and life
26 Support from spouse is of assistance to have quality time at work
My spouse listen to me when I have problems in work non work
27
life
28 I believe spousal support helps me to achieve career success
25

Disagree
Neither disagree nor
agree
Agree

circle the relevant number.

Strongly Disagree

Judge how frequently each statement fits your partner/spouse and

Strongly Disagree

4. This section provides a description of the partner/spouse support.

112

Disagree
Neither disagree nor
agree
Agree
2 3

4 5

2 3

4 5

2 3

4 5

2 3

4 5

2 3

4 5

38 members, that I am accomplishing both my work and family 1

responsibilities

2 3

4 5

responsibilities. Please indicate your level of agreement or

disagreement with each statement by circling the number that best
represent your point of view.
.

Strongly Agree

Strongly Disagree
1

6. This section provides a description of managing work and family

I am able to negotiate and accomplish what is expected of me at

33

work and in my family.

I do a good job of meeting the role expectations of critical people

34

in my work and family life.

People who are close to me would say that I do a good job of

35

balancing work and family.

I am able to accomplish the expectations that my supervisors and

36

my family have for me

My co-workers and members of my family would say that I am

37

meeting their expectations.

It is clear to me, based on feedback from co-workers and family

Information about Yourself

We are asking the following information so that we will be able to describe the overall
survey sample. This information will not be used to identify specific respondents.
Please tick appropriately ()
7) Gender
Male

Female

8) Years of working experience

1-5

6-10

11-15

16-20

More than 20

113

9) Level

of

Management

Operational level

you

are

Middle Level

belong

to:

Top Level

10) Civil
Single

Status
Married

Widowed

Divorced

11) Age category you belong to

20-30yrs

31-40yrs

12) Do
Yes

41-50yrs

you

More than 50yrs

have

children?

No

13) If yes, what are the age categories they belong to?
less than 1yrs

1-5yrs

6-10yrs

11-15yrs

16-20yrs

More than 20yrs

14) Is

your

Yes

partner/spouse

employed?

No

15) Being an employed man/woman who is helping you to take care of your children?
Spouse

Parents

In-laws

Daycare Centre

Servant

16) How many hours in a day do you normally work at office?

7-8 hrs

8-9 hrs

9-10 hrs

10-12 hrs

More

than 12 hrs

Thank you for taking time to complete this questionnaire.

114

7.2. Annexure II- Average Variance Extracted of variables (PLS-Output)

Table 15: Average variance extracted

Variable
Childcare responsibilities
Colleague Support
Manager Support
Organisational time expectations
Partner Support

AVE
0.849
0.677
0.867
0.656
0.844
115

Work-life balance
Source: PLS Output

0.846

7.3. Annexure III- Composite Reliability of Variables (PLS-Output)

Table 16: Composite reliability of variables

Variable
Childcare responsibilities
Colleague Support
Manager Support
Organisational
expectations

CR
0.918
0.859
0.985
time 0.905

116

Partner Support
Work-life balance

0.956
0.971

Source: PLS Output

7.4. Annexure IV- Cronbachs Alpha of Variables (PLS-Output)

117

Table 17: Cronbach's Alpha Values of Variables

Variable
Childcare responsibilities
Colleague Support
Manager Support
Organisational
expectations
Partner Support
Work-life balance

Cronbachs Alpha
0.830
0.747
0.983
time 0.876
0.939
0.964

Source: PLS Output

7.5. Annexure V- Structural model with path coefficients (PLS-Output)

118

Source: PLS Output

119

7.6. Annexure VI- Structural model of moderator testing (PLS-Output)

Source: PLS Output

120