wlb
Post on 16-Nov-2015
1 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
-
Chapter - 5
Family Related Variables and Work Life Balance
-
129
CHAPTER 5
FAMILY RELATED VARIABLES AND WORK LIFE
BALANCE
5.1. INTRODUCTION
The relationship between family related variables and work life balance, and the
differences in work life balance of working professionals at varied levels of family
related variables are discussed in this chapter. Descriptive statistics - mean, median,
standard deviation, skewness and kurtosis were calculated to study the nature of
distribution of scores for family related variables (household responsibility, spouse
support and parental demands). Pearson product moment correlations were computed to
study the correlations between family related variables (household responsibility,
spouse support and parental demands) and work life balance and its dimensions. For the
variable of parental demands (number of children) point biserial correlation was
calculated. In addition, one way analysis of variance was used to study the significance
of differences among the high, average and low groups (categorized on the basis of
M0.5) on each of the family variables with respect to the work life balance and its
three dimensions namely work interference with personal life, personal life interference
with work and work/personal life enhancement. Wherever F-values were found to be
significant, t-test was applied to study the significance of differences between means of
various groups.
5.2 NATURE OF DISTRIBUTION OF SCORES
Tables 5.1 shows the descriptive statistics - mean, median, standard deviation,
skewness and kurtosis for family related variables. The distribution of scores on
-
130
household responsibility (HHR) were found to be significantly positively skewed
(Sk=.87) at .01 level of significance. The kurtosis (Ku=1.13) was also found to be
significant at .01 level. Thus, the curve was found to be platykurtic.
Table 5.1: Descriptive statistics for family related variables
Statistics
Family related variables HHR
(N=308) SS
(N=147) PD
(N=102) Mean 14.06 20.10 18.04 Median 14.00 20.00 18.00 Std. Deviation 4.79 4.97 4.61 Skewness 0.87 -0.02 -0.56 Std. Error of Skewness 0.14 0.20 0.24 Kurtosis 1.13 -0.82 0.86 Std. Error of Kurtosis 0.28 0.40 0.47 Minimum 6 9 4 Maximum 30 28 30
HHR SS PD Sk Significant at 0.01 level .359 .516 .617 Ku Significant at 0.01 level - 0.452 to .978 - 0.761 to 1.287 - 0.960 to 1.486
The scores on spouse support (SS) ranged between 9 and 28.The mean and
median were found to be 20.10 and 20.00 respectively. The value of skewness
(Sk=-.02) for the score on spouse support was found to be insignificant at .01 level and
the distribution of scores was thus found to be normal. The value of kurtosis (Ku= -.82)
was found to be significant at .01 level. The curve was thus found to be leptokurtic.
The distribution of scores on parental demands (PD) was found to be normal
and within limits at .01 level (Sk=-.56). The value of kurtosis (Ku =.86) was found to be
insignificant at .01 level.
-
131
5.3 HOUSEHOLD RESPONSIBILITY (HHR) AND WORK LIFE
BALANCE
The correlation between household responsibility and work life balance and its
dimensions; and differences among IT and ITES working professionals at varied levels
of household responsibility on work life balance and its dimensions are discussed
below.
(a) Correlations between household responsibility and work life balance and
its dimensions
The variable of House hold responsibility (HHR) was found to be negatively
correlated (Table 5.2) with WLB Total and its three dimensions namely, WIPL, PLIW
and WPLE. However, the correlations were not significant either at .05 or at .01 level.
Table 5.2: Correlations between household responsibility and work life balance and its dimensions
Work Life Balance Correlation with HHR ( N=308)
WIPL1 -0.01
PLIW1 -0.05
WPLE -0.05
WLB Total -0.04 * Significant at the 0.05 level . ** Significant at the 0.01 level. 1 Higher score means lesser interference.
The results indicate that household responsibility is not related to work life
balance. Hence, Hypothesis HFa(i) that there will be significant correlation between the
-
132
household responsibility and work life balance (including its dimensions) of working
professionals in IT and ITES industry stands rejected.
(b) Work life balance of IT and ITES working professionals at varied levels of
household responsibility
Insignificant F-values (Table 5.3) show that there were no significant
differences among IT and ITES working professionals with low, average and high
household responsibility (HHR) on the dimensions of WIPL (F= .10), PLIW (F=1.36),
WPLE (F= 2.82) and on WLB Total (F = .62).
Table 5.3: Work life balance of IT and ITES working professionals at varied levels of household responsibility
Work Life Balance Sources of Variance Sum of Squares df
Mean Square F
WIPL Between Groups 8.62 2 4.31 0.10 Within Groups 13479.46 305 44.20 Total 13488.08 307
PLIW Between Groups 40.02 2 20.01 1.36 Within Groups 4487.55 305 14.71 Total 4527.57 307
WPLE Between Groups 118.16 2 59.08 2.82 Within Groups 6394.81 305 20.97 Total 6512.97 307
WLB Total
Between Groups 151.24 2 75.62 0.62 Within Groups 37069.93 305 121.54 Total 37221.17 307
df 2, 305 F significant at .05 * .01 ** 3.03 4.68
-
133
Further, Table 5.4 shows the mean scores on work life balance of IT and ITES
working professionals at varied levels of household responsibility.
Table 5.4: Mean scores on work life balance of IT and ITES working professionals at varied levels of household responsibility
Work Life Balance HHR N Mean Std. Deviation
WIPL
Low 97 30.44 6.82 Average 128 30.82 6.72 High 83 30.77 6.32 Total 308 30.69 6.63
PLIW
Low 97 21.68 3.92 Average 128 21.86 3.70 High 83 20.99 3.94 Total 308 21.57 3.84
WPLE
Low 97 19.41 4.72 Average 128 18.19 4.79 High 83 17.95 4.05 Total 308 18.51 4.61
TOTAL WLB
Low 97 71.54 11.22 Average 128 70.87 10.98 High 83 69.71 10.87 Total 308 70.77 11.01
The findings of the earlier studies (Aryee, 1992; Hyman et al., 2003) lend
support to the findings of the present study. Aryee (1992) did not find any significant
effect of household chores responsibility on job-homemaker conflict and explained this
by the fact that most respondents had hired help to take care of domestic chores.
Hyman et al. (2003) found that household responsibility had no effect on any of the
intangible indicators of extension of work into household and family life. The results of
the present study too may be explained by the fact that in India domestic helpers are
easily available at an affordable price and most of the families hire them, hence the
-
134
household work does not result in any interference of personal life with work or
interference of work with personal life.
Hence, Hypothesis HFa(ii) that there will be significant differences among the
mean scores of IT and ITES working professionals at varied levels of household
responsibility on work life balance and its dimensions is rejected.
5.4 SPOUSE SUPPORT AND WORK LIFE BALANCE
The correlation between spouse support and work life balance and its
dimensions; and differences among IT and ITES working professionals at varied levels
of spouse support on work life balance and its dimensions are discussed below.
(a) Correlations between spouse support and work life balance and its
dimensions
Spouse support was found to be significantly positively correlated with the
dimensions of PLIW (r=.29, Table 5.5) and WPLE (r=.33) and with WLB Total
(r=.24).
Table 5.5: Correlations between spouse support and work life balance and its dimensions
Work Life Balance Correlation with SS ( N=147 )
WIPL1 -0.01
PLIW1 0.29(**)
WPLE 0.33(**)
WLB Total 0.24(**) * Significant at the 0.05 level. ** Significant at the 0.01 level. 1 Higher score means lesser interference.
-
135
The findings indicate that higher the spouse support, higher is the overall work
life balance and lesser is the interference of personal life with work and higher is the
work/personal life enhancement and vice versa. The IT and ITES working professionals
with high spouse support in terms of household work, emotional support, child care
and positive attitude towards spouses work tend to have less interference of personal
life with work, high work/personal life enhancement and high overall work life
balance.
The findings of the earlier studies by Frone et al. (1992), Aryee (1992), Frone et
al. (1997), Aryee et al. (1999) and Kim and Ling (2001) lend support to findings of the
present study. Frone et al. (1992) found lack of spouse support to be positively related
with family to work conflict. Aryee (1992) reported a negative relation between spouse
support and job spouse conflict. Frone et al. (1997) reported that family related support
(spouse and other family members) may reduce family to work conflict by reducing
family distress and parental overload. Aryee et al. (1999) found spouse support to be a
negative predictor of work family conflict. Kim and Ling (2001) found emotional and
attitudinal support of the spouse to be negatively related to job spouse conflict. The
results of the present study are also consistent with the findings of Suchet and Barling
(1986).
Hence, Hypothesis HFb(i) that there will be significant correlation between the
spouse support and work life balance (including its dimensions) of working
professionals in IT and ITES industry is accepted for the dimensions of personal life
interference with work, work/personal life enhancement and for overall work life
balance. However, it is rejected for the dimension of work interference with personal
life.
-
136
(b) Work life balance of IT and ITES working professionals at varied levels of
spouse support
From the Table 5.6, it is evident that F-values were found to be significant for
the dimensions of personal life interference with work (PLIW; F=6.20) work/personal
life enhancement (WPLE; F=7.90), and for overall work life balance (WLB Total;
F=5.02) indicating that there were significant differences among IT and ITES working
professionals with low, average and high spouse support on the two dimensions,
namely PLIW and WPLE and on WLB Total.
Table 5.6: Work life balance of IT and ITES working professionals at varied levels of spouse support
Work Life Balance
Sources of Variance
Sum of Squares
df Mean Square
F
WIPL Between Groups 156.44 2 78.22 2.43
Within Groups 4632.46 144 32.17 Total 4788.90 146
PLIW Between Groups 171.09 2 85.55 6.20(**)
Within Groups 1988.19 144 13.81 Total 2159.28 146
WPLE Between Groups 242.77 2 121.39 7.90(**)
Within Groups 2212.98 144 15.37 Total 2455.76 146
WLB Total
Between Groups 981.16 2 490.58 5.02(**)
Within Groups 14087.30 144 97.83 Total 15068.46 146
df 2, 144 F significant at .05 * .01 ** 3.06 4.75
-
137
Table 5.7 shows the results of the t-ratios calculated to find out the significance
of differences between means. Significant differences were observed between IT and
ITES working professionals with low and high spouse support on the dimensions of
PLIW (ML=19.83, MH=22.56, t=3.47, p=.01), WPLE (ML=17.51, MH=20.73, t= 4.11,
p=.01) and on WLB Total (ML=68.57, MH =74.42, t=2.85, p=.01).
Table 5.7: Significance of differences among mean scores on work life balance of IT and ITES working professionals at varied levels of spouse support
Work Life Balance
SS N Mean Std. Deviation Group differences t-ratios
WIPL
Low 47 31.23 5.24 Low-average Not applicable
Average 55 29.05 6.27 Low-high Not applicable
High 45 31.13 5.33 Average-high Not applicable
Total 147 30.39 5.73
PLIW
Low 47 19.83 3.87 Low-average 1.92
Average 55 21.25 3.62 Low-high 3.47(**)
High 45 22.56 3.67 Average-high 1.78
Total 147 21.20 3.85
WPLE
Low 47 17.51 3.36 Low-average 1.63
Average 55 18.75 4.18 Low-high 4.11(**)
High 45 20.73 4.14 Average-high 2.38(*)
Total 147 18.96 4.10
WLB Total
LOW 47 68.57 9.53 Low-average 0.25
AVERAGE 55 69.05 9.95 Low-high 2.85(**)
HIGH 45 74.42 10.19 Average-high 2.66(**)
Total 147 70.54 10.16
t significant at .05 * .01 ** df 100 1.98 2.63 df 98 1.98 2.63 df 90 1.99 2.63
-
138
Significant differences were also observed between professionals with average
and high spouse support on the dimensions of WPLE (MA=18.75, MH=20.73, t= 2.38,
p=.05) and on WLB Total (MA=69.05, MH=74.42, t=2.66, p=.01 level). However, no
significant differences were found between professionals with low and average spouse
support on any of the dimensions of work life balance, namely, WIPL (ML=31.23,
MA=29.05), PLIW (ML=19.83, MA=21.25), WPLE (ML=17.51, MA=18.75) and on
WLB Total (ML=68.57, MA= 69.05).
The mean scores of IT and ITES working professionals with high spouse
support were significantly higher than the mean scores of professionals with low spouse
support on the dimensions of PLIW, WPLE and on WLB Total and were also
significantly higher than the mean scores of professionals with average spouse support
on the dimension of WPLE and on WLB Total. The results thus showed that the IT and
ITES working professionals with high spouse support had less interference of personal
life with work as compared to IT and ITES working professionals with low spouse
support and also had higher work/personal life enhancement and higher overall work
life balance than the IT and ITES working professionals with low and with average
spouse support.
From the results, it can be concluded that in case of professionals having high
spouse support in terms of household work, childcare, positive attitude towards work,
there is lesser interference of personal life with work and both work and personal life
complement each other and as a result, there is high level of work life balance as
compared to those, who have low spouse support.
-
139
Hence, Hypothesis HFb(ii) that there will be significant differences among the
mean scores of IT and ITES working professionals at varied levels of spouse support on
work life balance and its dimensions is accepted for the dimensions of personal life
interference with work, work/personal life enhancement and for overall work life
balance. However, it is rejected for the dimension of work interference with personal
life.
5.5 PARENTAL DEMANDS AND WORK LIFE BALANCE
Parental demands were measured by the number of children and by the
responsibility of taking care of children. The correlation between parental demands and
work life balance and its dimensions; and differences among IT and ITES working
professionals at varied levels of parental demands on work life balance and its
dimensions are discussed below.
(i)(a) Correlations between parental demands (in terms of number of children)
and work life balance and its dimensions
To compute the correlation between parental demands (in terms of number of
children) and work life balance and its dimensions, the IT and ITES working
professionals with and without children were coded as 1 and 0 respectively.
No significant correlations (Table 5.8) were found between parental demands
(in terms of number of children) and work life balance and its dimensions. The results
thus indicate that there is no relationship between parental demands and work life
balance.
-
140
Table 5.8: Correlations between parental demands (in terms of number of children) and work life balance and its dimensions
Work Life Balance Correlation with PD2 ( N=147)
WIPL1 .07
PLIW1 -.10
WPLE .08
WLB Total .04 * Significant at the 0.05 level. ** Significant at the 0.01 level. 1 Higher score means lesser interference 2With children coded as 1, Without children coded as 0
The findings of the study are in contradiction to the findings of an earlier study
by Pleck et al. (1980). The survey study of workers suggested that substantial minority
of workers living in families experienced conflict between work and family life and
parents reported more conflict than other couples.
Hypothesis HFc(i) that there will be significant correlation between the parental
demands (in terms of number of children) and work life balance (including its
dimensions) of working professionals in IT and ITES industry is thus rejected.
(i)(b) Work life balance of IT and ITES working professionals with 0, 1 and 2 or
more children
Table 5.9 shows that F-values were found to be insignificant for all the
dimensions of work life balance, namely, WIPL (F=0.91), PLIW (F=0.63), WPLE
(F=0.62) and for WLB Total (F=0.91).
-
141
Table 5.9: Work life balance of IT and ITES working professionals with 0, 1 and 2 or more children
Work Life Balance
Sources of Variance Sum of Squares df Mean
Square F
WIPL
Between Groups 59.51 2 29.75 0.91
Within Groups 4729.39 144 32.84
Total 4788.90 146
PLIW
Between Groups 18.71 2 9.36 0.63
Within Groups 2140.57 144 14.87
Total 2159.28 146
WPLE
Between Groups 21.07 2 10.54 0.62
Within Groups 2434.69 144 16.91
Total 2455.76 146
WLB Total
Between Groups 94.58 2 47.29 0.46
Within Groups 14973.88 144 103.99
Total 15068.46 146 df 2, 144 F significant at .05 * .01 ** 3.06 4.75
The results showed that there were no significant differences among IT and
ITES working professionals with 0, 1 and 2 or more children either on overall work life
balance or on any of its dimensions.
Table 5.10 shows the mean scores on work life balance of IT and ITES working
professionals with 0, 1 and 2 or more children.
-
142
Table 5.10: Mean scores on work life balance of IT and ITES working professionals with 0, 1 and 2 or more children
Work Life Balance
PD (number of children)
N Mean Std. Deviation
WIPL 0
1 68 30.22 5.71
2 or more 34 31.50 4.12
Total 147 30.39 5.73
PLIW 0 45 21.73 4.09
1 68 20.94 3.81
2 or more 34 21.00 3.62
Total 147 21.20 3.85
WPLE 0 45 18.47 4.12
1 68 19.01 4.38
2 or more 34 19.50 3.50
Total 147 18.96 4.10
TOTAL WLB
0 45 70.00 10.82
1 68 70.18 9.96
2 or more 34 72.00 9.81
Total 147 70.54 10.16
Hence, Hypothesis HFc(ii) that there will be significant differences among the
mean scores of IT and ITES working professionals at varied levels of parental demands
(in terms of number of children) on work life balance and its dimensions is rejected.
(ii)(a) Correlations between parental demands (in terms of responsibility of
children) and work life balance and its dimensions
Insignificant correlations (Table 5.11) were found between parental demands
and work life balance and its dimensions, thus indicating that parental demands are not
related to work life balance.
-
143
Table 5.11: Correlations between parental demands and work life balance and its dimensions
Work Life Balance Correlation with PD ( N=102)WIPL1 -0.18 PLIW1 -0.15 WPLE 0.12 WLB Total -0.10
* Significant at the 0.05 level. ** Significant at the 0.01 level. 1 Higher score means lesser interference.
These findings are in contradiction to the findings of the earlier studies by
Keene and Quadagno (2004), Frye and Breaugh (2004) and Luk and Shaffer (2005).
Keene and Quadagno (2004) found that greater responsibility for childcare predicts less
balance. Frye and Breaugh (2004) found that having child care responsibility was
predictive of family-work conflict. Luk and Shaffer (2005) found parental demands to
be positive predictor of both work interference with family and family interference with
work. Aryee, 1992 and Aryee et al., 1999 also reported similar findings.
Hence, Hypothesis HFd(i) that there will be significant correlation between the
parental demands (in terms of responsibility of children) and work life balance
(including its dimensions) of working professionals in IT and ITES industry is
rejected.
(ii)(b) Work life balance of IT and ITES working professionals at varied levels of
parental demands (in terms of responsibility of children)
Table 5.12 shows that F-values were found to be insignificant for all the
dimensions, namely, WIPL (F=2.84), PLIW (F=3.03), WPLE (F=0.30) and for WLB
Total (F=2.09).
-
144
Table 5.12: Work life balance of IT and ITES working professionals at varied levels of parental demands
Work Life Balance
Sources of Variance
Sum of Squares df Mean Square
F
WIPL Between Groups 151.07 2 75.53 2.84 Within Groups 2634.23 99 26.61 Total 2785.29 101
PLIW Between Groups 81.13 2 40.56 3.03 Within Groups 1324.72 99 13.38 Total 1405.84 101
WPLE Between Groups 10.28 2 5.14 0.30 Within Groups 1682.54 99 17.00 Total 1692.82 101
WLB Total Between Groups 400.79 2 200.39 2.09 Within Groups 9502.47 99 95.99 Total 9903.26 101
df 2, 99 F significant at .05 * .01 ** 3.09 4.82
The results thus indicate that there were no significant differences among IT and
ITES working professionals with low, average and high parental demands on overall
work life balance or on any of its dimensions.
Further, trend of mean scores (Table 5.13) showed that IT and ITES working
professionals with low parental demands had lesser work interference with personal life
(WIPL; MH=29.72, MA=30.13, ML=32.76), lesser personal life interference with work
(PLIW; MH=19.69, MA=21.33, ML=21.92) and higher overall work life balance (WLB
Total; MH=68.28, MA=71.00, ML=73.60) than the professionals with high and with
average parental demands.
-
145
Table 5.13: Mean scores on work life balance of IT and ITES working professionals at varied levels of parental demands
Work Life
Balance PD (Responsibility of
children) N Mean Std. Deviation
WIPL Low 25 32.76 3.97 Average 45 30.13 5.85 High 32 29.72 4.91 Total 102 30.65 5.25
PLIW Low 25 21.92 4.18 Average 45 21.33 3.54 High 32 19.69 3.38 Total 102 20.96 3.73
WPLE Low 25 18.92 5.31
Average 45 19.53 4.08 High 32 18.88 2.97 Total 102 19.18 4.09
TOTAL WLB Low 25 73.60 9.90 Average 45 71.00 10.29 High 32 68.28 8.96 Total 102 70.78 9.90
The plausible reason for the differences not being significant might be that in
India, joint family system is still prevalent in many households and childcare
responsibilities are taken over by grand parents and other members who might be at
home. Even for nuclear families, paid helpers are available at affordable prices to look
after the children.
Thus, Hypothesis HFd(ii) that there will be significant differences among the
mean scores of IT and ITES working professionals at varied levels of parental demands
(in terms of responsibility of children) on work life balance and its dimensions is
rejected.
-
146
To Conclude,
Hypotheses HFa(i) and HFa(ii) are rejected for all the dimensions of work life
balance, i.e., work interference with personal life, personal life interference
with work, work/personal life enhancement and also for overall work life
balance.
Hypothesis HFb(i) is accepted for the dimensions of personal life interference
with work, work/personal life enhancement and for overall work life balance.
However, it is rejected for the dimension of work interference with personal
life.
Hypothesis HFb(ii) is accepted for the dimensions of personal life interference
with work, work/personal life enhancement and for overall work life balance.
However, it is rejected for the dimension of work interference with personal
life.
Hypotheses HFc(i) and HFc(ii) are rejected for all the dimensions of work life
balance, i.e., work interference with personal life, personal life interference
with work, work/personal life enhancement and for overall work life balance.
Hypotheses HFd(i) and HFd(ii) are rejected for all the dimensions of work life
balance, i.e., work interference with personal life, personal life interference
with work, work/personal life enhancement and also for overall work life
balance.
-
147
REFERENCES
Aryee, S. (1992). Antecedents and outcomes of work-family conflict among married
professional women: Evidence from Singapore. Human Relations, 45(8),
813-835.
Aryee, S., Luk, V., Leung, A. & Lo, S. (1999). Role stressors, interrole conflict and
well being: the moderating influence of spousal support and coping behaviors
among employed parents in Hong Kong. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54,
259-278.
Frone, M.R., Russell, M., & Cooper, M.L. (1992). Antecedents and outcomes of work-
family conflict: Testing a model of the work-family interface. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 77(1), 65-78.
Frone, M.R., Yardley, J.K., & Markel, K.S. (1997). Developing and testing an
integrative model of the work family interface. Journal of Vocational Behavior,
50, 145-167.
Frye, N.K., & Breaugh, J.A. (2004). Family friendly policies, supervisor support, work-
family conflict and satisfaction: A test of a conceptual model. Journal of
Business and Psychology, 19(2), 197-219.
Hyman, J., Baldry, C., Scholarios, D., & Bunzel, D. (2003). Work-life imbalance in the
new service sector economy. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 41(2),
215-239.
Keene, J.R., & Quadagno, J. (2004). Predictors of perceived work-family balance:
Gender difference or gender similarity? Sociological Perspectives. 47(1), 1-23.
Kim Siew Lee Fean & Ling Seow Choo (2001). Work-Family conflict of women
entrepreneurs in Singapore. Women in Management Review, 16(5), 204-221.
-
148
Luk, D.M., & Shaffer M.A. (2005). Work and family domain stressors and support:
within- and cross-domain influences on work-family conflict. Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 78(4), 489-508.
Pleck, J.H., Staines, G.L., & Lang, L. (1980). Conflicts between work and family life.
Monthly Labor Review, 103(3), 29-32.
Suchet, M., & Barling, J. (1986). Working mothers: Interrole conflict, spouse support
and marital functioning. Journal of Occupational Behaviour, 1, 167-178.
top related