Impact of Work-Family Conflict on

Organizational Commitment

Arslan Jokhio

BBA Student, SZABIST Larkana, Sindh, Pakistan

Arslanjokhio@ymail.com

Key Words: Conflict, Work, Family, Work-Family Conflict, Organization, Organizational

Commitment.

Abstract

This paper examines the relationship between work-family conflict and organizational

commitment. A sample of N=100 employees from the Banking sector were taken for the

consideration. The work-family conflict is measured using WFCS; Netemeyer, Boles, and

McMurrian, 1996, whereas OCS; Allen and Meyer, 1990 was used to measure the organizational

commitment. The results of my research study evidently demonstrated there is moderate

significant relation between variables. It is also analyzed that there is less impact between WFC

and OC.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

There is continuous change in the organizations as well as individuals‟ life. Meeting all these

changes is difficult for both employees and organizations, so there are increasing issues for

both employees and organizations as they have to reconcile these matters. These changes

create work-family conflicts that have implication for both employee and organization because

work family conflict spillover creates disturbance in both domains (work and family). So if family

and work life of an employee is disturbed or he has conflicting roles to be performed, then

ultimate performance of the employee and organization is affected. So this issue is of great

importance for both employee and organization as a whole. Work-family conflict means a inter

role conflict which arises due to incompatible roles in work and family domain (Carmeli, 2003).

Work-family conflict has two dimensions; work-to-family conflict (WFC) represent workplace

issues interfering family (taking work home) and family-to-work conflict (FWC) means home

issues interrupt work (e.g. childcare issue at work). Although early researchers might have

assumed that the worlds of work and home were separate (Brotheridge & Lee, 2005), countless

empirical studies and several review articles examining the work-home interface have

documented that the two domains influence, and are influenced by, each other (e.g., Allen, Herst,

Bruck, & Sutton, 2000; Bellavia & Frone, 2005; Boyar, Maertz, Person, & Keough, 2003;

Byron, 2005; Eby, Casper, Lockwood, Bordeaux, & Brinley, 2005; Ford, Heinen, & Langkamer,

2007; Grandey, Cordeiro, & Crouter, 2005; Huang, Hammer, Neal, & Perrin, 2004; Voydanoff,

2005). This recognition has prompted many researchers to consider at least two directions of

conflict or interference, work-to-family (WF) and family-to-work (FW), as they have tried to

establish how work and home-domain variables are related to these forms of conflict. In

particular, the literature is replete with studies that have been aimed at identifying which types of

variables are predictors, mediators, moderators, and consequences in an effort to more fully

understand the nature and processes by which work and home domains interact (e.g., Aryee,

Srinivas, & Tan, 2005; Bellavia & Frone, 2005; Boyar et al., 2003; Brotheridge & Lee, 2005;

Eby et al., 2005).

Therefore, if an employee is experiencing high levels of family-work role conflict, their roles and

responsibilities in family life are interfering with the work domain. Meanwhile, because the

employee is more committed to the welfare of the family, this will take priority, reducing or

minimizing the resources of time and energy being able to be spending in the work domain.

Thus, employees who experience high family role conflict should experience less affective

commitment to the organization. However, work-to-family conflict occurs when the domain of

work interferes with the family demands and vice versa for work-family conflict (Ajiboye,

2008). The rationale for this hypothesis is that, if the employee is experiencing high conflict

from either the work or family domain, it will be dependant on the employees’ calculative

commitment levels. The higher the levels of conflict and the higher the number of inducements

offered by the organization will result in employee producing extra efforts to ensure their

continued employment. The fewer alternatives that are available to the continuance-committed

employee, the more dedicated they tend to be (Iverson and Buttgieg, 2008).

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Work-Family Conflict (WFC)

Work-family conflict means a conflict of work and family interrelated roles. Greenhaus and

Beutell (1985) stated that work family conflict occur when contribution in work role creates

problems in contribution of family role. He said that work-family conflict could arise from tough

time demands, stress originated in one role spillover to other role disturbing the quality of life,

and behaviors that were appropriate in one domain but are considered as inappropriate in other

domain. When demands from family and work were equally mismatched and meeting demands

of one field created difficulties in meeting demands of other field, it led to work-family conflict

(Bruke & Greenglass, 1987; Gary, 1991). Work-family conflict resulted in psychological

disturbances in employees. Piotrkowski (1979) focused on the psychological and structural

interference as working long hours at work will lose employee‟s energy at home. He studied that

how the work family conflict and work family facilities affected the mental health of the working

adults and explained what was work family fit. According to (Burke, Weir & DuWors, 1980) the

wives of the senior administrators perceived that their husbands‟ occupational demands are

affecting their home such as stress on communicating. Impact of work-family conflict was

studied among working women in Taiwan and findings showed that work-family conflict was

strongly linked with lower job and family satisfaction, greater stress and more severe physical

ailments (Lu, 2007). Mental health can be disturbed due to minor differences in the work family

understanding. Researchers found consistent positive relationship between long working hours,

work load and work-family conflict (Pleck et al., 1980; Keith & Schafer, 1980).

Negative affectivity (NA) is an individual‟s tendency to experience high levels of subjective

distress, depression, nervousness, anxiety, and feelings of anger, contempt, disgust, and fear.

Stoeva et al. (2002) studied the relationship between NA and work-family conflict among 148

senior civil servants in Hong Kong. NA resulted in job and family stress. Job stress led to work-

to-family conflict while family stress led to family-to-work conflict. They found that high-NA

individuals experience more work-to-family conflict and more family-to-work conflict than low-

NA individuals. According to a study conducted in Toronto, Canada, home to work conflict was

positively associated with anxiety and depression among employed males and females, and the

effects of home-to-work conflict were felt by both males and females, females tend to experience

greater anxiety associated with spillover than did men-even after statistically controlling for a

range of both non-work-related and work-related conditions and it also revealed that conflict and

distress were strongly associated among people with independent jobs, among women with

routine jobs and among men in harmful environment (Schieman et al., 2003).

National survey of post secondary faculty conducted in 1988 examined the length of workweek

and analyzed its relationship to faculty dissatisfaction with work overload. The authors

concluded that many professors were dissatisfied due to heavy workload and dissatisfaction

increased with long working hours but long hours spent on job also increased research

productivity. Faculty did work for long hour because they were expected to increase research

productivity. While high level of work-family conflict resulted in low level of performance and

decreased family and occupational well being (Kinnunen & Mauno, 1998). These long hours at

job, results in work-family conflict. The main challenge is to set potential work standards for

employees in academic sector that are well-matched with their family life. Work and family is

compatible when work demands and expectations are not excessive. There are two views

regarding faculty workload. According to Optimistic view, devotion to work is self-imposed

because they love their work. According to the alternative view, professors feel themselves

trapped into excessive institutional and professional expectations (Jacobs & Winslow, 2004).

Work-family spillover means the extent to which engagement in one area (family/organizational

work) affect the engagement in other area (organizational work/family). There is positive and

negative work-family spillover. Various types of work-family conflict and interference are

negative spillover (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985; Small & Riley, 1990). On the other hand, good

work-family balance and success (Milkie & Peltola, 1999; Moen & yu, 1999) and resource

enhancement were positive established (Kirchmeyer, 1992).

Parasuraman and Simmers (2001) studied that how work and family role features affected work-

family conflict. He also studied indicators of psychological well being among males and females

workers who are self employed or organizationally employed. In that study, employment type

and gender were independent variables. They concluded that as compared to the organizational

employees, self employed employees enjoy more self-sufficiency, and flexible working hours

which leads to more job involvement and job satisfaction however they also experience more

work-life conflict and less family satisfaction. Grzywacz et al. (2002) stated in his research on

work-family spillover and daily reports of work and family stress in adult labor force that female

workers reported higher level of positive spillover from work to family than did males. They test

hypothesis regarding the distribution of work-family spillover by social structural context.

Education was only attached with one type of work-family spillover and proved that less rather

than more; education was associated with less negative spillover from work to family. In a

research conducted on two hundred three teachers to see relationship of work-family culture,

work-family conflict, job satisfaction, organizational commitment and Organizational

Citizenship Behavior (OCB), Pearson correlations indicated that there was negative relation of

OCB and work-family conflict while OCB was positively related with work family culture, job

satisfaction and organizational commitment. Work-family culture indicated both organizational

commitment and OCB, and that organizational commitment did not settle the relationship

between work family culture and OCB. The findings were helpful for schools to foster a positive

work-family culture (Bragger et al., 2005).

In order to reduce dissatisfaction and stress resulted from work-family conflict among

employees, many factors are identified from the previous researches. According to (Mc-croskey,

1982) work place helped employees to coordinate between work family roles by:

1. Organizational culture: by providing supportive and friendly culture to balance both work and

family life of their employees (Mc-Croskey, 1982; Ontario women‟s directorate, 1991).

2. Supervisor support: as immediate supervisor helps employees to face low level of difficulties

by giving less stress in work. Green Berger et al. (1989) demonstrated if immediate supervisor of

married mothers with preschool age children are supportive and flexible he/she can provide less

strain to them.

3. Family-oriented benefits: according to (Paris, 1989; Raabe & Gessner, 1988) if formal benefits

are provided to employees that will help them to coordinate between work-family responsibilities

to lower work-family role strain. Family-friendly policies and increased organizational support

help working women to manage work family conflict and their health outcomes.

Person-environment fit revealed that good fit of individual within organizational culture resulted

in less work-life conflict and more employees‟ satisfaction (Chatmans, 1991). Values

determined the meaning that work holds for individuals, so the critical component of employee

experience at work was the degree to which their work organization helped or hindered

individual value attainment. Work family facilities are protective factors which eliminate the

affect of work family conflict on mental health of adults and it is when work family facilities are

higher than the work family conflicts (Piotrkowski, 1979). The use of family-friendly policies,

number of hours worked per week, and supervisor support were predictive of work-family

conflict (Frye & Breaugh, 2004). Significance of work-life conflict has been proved from

previous researches that work-life conflict is present in most situations than do family-work

conflict and work domain is found to be major determinant of the work life conflict so employer

must be aware of the practices and issues which might lead to such conflict. Warner (2005)

stated the work life conflict was more significant.

2.2 Organizational Commitment:

The construct of organizational commitment (OC) has been conceptualized in a variety of

fashions. The bulk of research related to OC can be viewed in terms of attitudinal versus

behavioral conceptualizations. Porter et al, (1974) defined organizational commitment as “the

relative strength of an individual’s identification with and involvement in a particular

organization” (Porter et al., 1974). Meyer and Allen (1984) later used the term affective

commitment (AC) to describe an employee’s emotional attachment to an organization because of

a belief and identification with the organization’s goals. The concept of organizational

commitment has been treated as a variable of interest in its own right and a variety of definitions

and measures have been proposed (Mowday et al., 1982; Meyer et al., 1998). The concept has

attracted more attention recently from organizational scientists, perhaps due to changes taking

place in employment practices that have arisen from the international employment marketplace

and increased alternatives for skilled employees in a global economy (Sullivan and Arthur,

2006).

Organizational commitment has received a great deal of attention from organizational

behaviorists (e.g. Allen and Meyer, 1990; Mowday, 1998). In sales and marketing it is

considered an important central construct in understanding salesperson behavior (Brown and

Peterson, 1993; Singh et al., 1996). By understanding commitment, practitioners will be in a

better position to anticipate the impact of a particular policy or practice on the organization

(Meyer and Allen, 1997; Bergmann et al., 2000). OC is a subjective measure that captures

employees’ perceptions of their identification with their organizations’ core values, their intent to

stay with their organization, and their willingness to exert more effort than expected by their

organization (Mowday et al., 1979). Continuance commitment refers to the commitment

employees experience towards the organization because of investments they have made or

because of the costs associated with leaving the organization (Dipboye et al., 1994; Mathieu and

Zajac, 1990). This form of commitment develops when employees realize that they have

accumulated investments they would lose if they left the organization or because their

alternatives are limited. The difference between affective commitment and continuance

commitment is that employees high in affective commitment stay with the organization because

they want to, while employees high in continuance commitment stay because they have to

(Meyer et al., 1990). Meyer and Allen (1991) have identified a third dimension of organizational

commitment, which they describe as normative commitment. This form of commitment concerns

a feeling of (moral) obligation to remain in the organization. What these three dimensions have

in common is that they all indicate the extent to which employees are willing to remain in an

organization. Organizational commitment is essential for reaching such challenging goals (Klein

et al., 1999) as these goals require more effort and typically have lower chances of success than

are easy goals (Latham, 2007). Organizational commitment has been conceptualized as a

psychological state or mindset that binds individuals to a course of action relevant to one or more

targets, and a willingness to persist in a course of action (Cooper-Hakim and Viswesvaran,

2005). Porter et al. (1974) defined commitment as a strong belief in and acceptance of the

organizational goals, willingness to exert considerable effort on behalf of the organization and a

desire to maintain organizational membership. As such, commitment is different from motivation

in that commitment influences behavior independently of other motives and attitudes, and may

lead to persistence to a course of action even if this conflicts with motives (Meyer et al., 2004;

Meyer and Herscovitch, 2001). One aspect of commitment consideration is rooted in terms of

exchange or reward-cost notions where the emphasis is on the bargaining between the individual

and the organization: the more favorable the exchange, the greater the individuals’ commitment

to the organization (Becker, 1960). Interest in organizational commitment has been stimulated

largely by its demonstrated positive relationship to work behaviors such as job satisfaction, high

productivity, and low turnover (Cohen, 2003), but the field has not conducted enough studies

outside the Western countries (Lee et al., 2001; Meyer et al., 2002). Herscovitch and Meyer

(2002) defined organizational commitment as the degree to which an employee identifies with

the goals and values of the organization and is willing to exert effort to help it succeed. The issue

of organizational commitment within both private and public sector organizations has, generally,

received significant research focus over the past 25 years (Meyer and Allen, 1997; Mowday,

1998; Hope, 2003). In addition, organizational commitment is viewed as an attitude of

attachment to the organization by an employee, which leads to particular job-related behaviours

such as work absenteeism, job satisfaction, turnover intensions, organizational citizen

behaviours, work motivation and work performance.

OC is an exchange agreement between individuals and the organization (Coopey, 1995). OC is

an essential element of employees’ PC, which may be understood within the motivational

processes of social exchange theory and the norm of reciprocity. Organizational commitment is

of considerable interest to psychologists because there is strong evidence of links between high

levels of commitment and favorable organizational outcomes. It is a form of psychological

contract, which employees make in response to the benefits provided by the organization (Angle

and Perry, 1983).

2.3 Work-Family Conflict (WFC) and Organizational Commitment (OC):

Work-family conflict has become an important issue in the determination of organizational

commitment. In recent years, there has been an increase in competitive pressures on

organizations to increase productivity and an increase in time demands on the workforce, leaving

less time available for the employees to be with their families. Moreover, the workforce

composition has changed in recent years, with an increase in women in the workplace and there

has been an increase in men being involved in family life (Cardson, 2005). Dual income couples

and an increase in single parenting are now becoming the norm of today’s society. Work-family

role conflict has been defined as “a form of inter-role conflict in which role pressures from the

work and family domains are mutually incompatible in some respect” (Flippo, 2005). The

conflict occurs when the employee extends their efforts to satisfy their work demands at the

expense of their family demands or vice versa (Cole, 2004).

Conflict could arise from work interfering with the family life, such as working overtime to meet

demands of the job or from family demands when there is illness with a family member. A

significant amount of researches have concluded that work-family conflict and family work

conflict are related but distinct constructs (Ajiboye, 2008). Workfamily conflict is primarily

caused by excessive work demands and predicts negative family outcomes, whereas family-work

conflict is primarily determined by family demands and predicts negative work outcomes

(Adebola, 2005).

In the recent times, arguments on work-family role conflict as it affects workers` behaviour at

workplace pervade the existing literature. Various researchers had investigated the relationship

between work-family role conflict and organizational efficiency and productivity. In most of

these studies, it was found that a significant relationship exist among work-family role conflict

and managerial efficiency of the managers (Popoola, 2008; Akinjide, 2006; Collins and George,

2004; Akinboye, 2003). Similarly, Poele (2003) reported that efficiency in managing

organizational resources for results could be better guaranteed when various variables other than

one, such as leadership style, self-efficient, personality, workfamily role conflict, job satisfaction

and motivation are jointly combined by the managers in work organizations.

The finding of the study is very unique in establishing the relevance of work-family conflict as

an important factor in the consideration of effective management of organizational resources for

results. Organizational commitment has become one of the most popular work attitudes studied

by practitioners and researchers (Allen and Meyer, 2000). One of the main reasons for its

popularity is that organizations have continued to find and sustain competitive advantage through

teams of committed employees. Meyer et al. (2000) have found that committed employees are

more likely to remain with the organization and strive towards the organization’s mission, goals

and objectives. Organizational commitment is defined as the degree to which the employee feels

devoted to their organization (Spector, 2000).

Further research into this variable has concluded that commitment is a diverse construct.

Akintayo (2006) posited that there is general acceptance that organizational commitment has

three main facets: affective, continuance, and normative, each with its own underlying

‘psychological states’. Affective commitment refers to the emotional bond and the identification

the employee has with the organization. For the employees, the positives include enhanced

feelings of devotion, belongingness, and stability (Meyer et al., 2003). Continuance

(economic/calculative) commitment refers to what the employee will have to give up if they have

to leave the organization or in other terms, the material benefits to be gained from remaining.

Employees whose primary link to the organization is based on continuance commitment remain

with the organization because they feel they need to do so for material benefits (Meyer et al.,

2003). Therefore, if the employees believe that fewer viable alternatives are available their

continuance commitment will be stronger to their current employer. Lastly, normative

commitment or moral commitment (Jaros et al., 2004) reflects a feeling of obligation to continue

employment. Employees with a high level of normative commitment feel that they ought to

remain with the organization (Bentein et al., 2005).

Reflecting on organizational commitment and managerial efficiency of the managers, reports of

some researchers (Akintayo, 2006; Ciarrochi et al., 2001; George, 2000, Tsui et al., 1992)

revealed that organizational commitment has significant influence on managerial efficiency of

the managers. The researchers submitted that, organizational commitment is expected to

moderate the relationship between work-family role conflict, working environment and job

satisfaction, and the relationship between work-family role conflict and job performance.

Adekola (2006), Ajaja (2004) and Williams and Warrens (2003) conducted researches on

assessment of gender differences in burnout at workplace, work-family role conflict and

managerial efficiency of the managers. Their findings revealed that the role conflict experienced

by the managers resulting from work-family role interface has deleterious effects on their

performance effectiveness. Also, female managers are less effective in managing organizational

resources than male managers based on work-family role conflict. This is possibly because

female managers tend to experience workfamily role conflict than the male managers do. This

finding still requires further empirical verification. Further still, literature reveals that the

negative effect of work-family role conflict on work attitude may be moderated by several

variables (Martins et al., 2002). In these studies, emotional intelligence is expected to moderate

the relationship between work-family role conflict and job satisfaction, and the relationship

between work-family role conflict and career commitment. George (2000); Tsui et al. (1992)

posit that family interference with work may have some negative consequences on the extent

which employees will be satisfied with their works and committed to their career. In essence, it

can be deduced that, emotionally intelligent individuals are likely to have the ability to control

such interferences or at least moderate them to an accepted level. On the basis of this logic,

conflict and job satisfaction are expected to exhibit a reasonable level of correlation. The

response to this assertion has been two ways. Existing literature suggests two hypotheses

concerning gender differences in domain sources conflict: domain flexibility and domain

salience. The domain flexibility hypothesis predicts that the work domains are greater sources of

conflict than the family domain for both men and women. The domain salience hypothesis

predicts that the family domains are greater sources of conflict for men than the work domain

(Lzaeli, 1993). Evans and Bartolome (1999) claim that the work domain is less flexible, so work

affects family life more than the reverse and there is no gender difference. But for Cooke and

Roussoau (1994) conflict is greater from the domain that is more salient to the person’s identity.

Therefore, women will experience more conflict from the family domain and men from the

work. Ajaja (2004) noted that women might experience more role conflict as a result of

simultaneity of their multiples roles. Research evidences revealed that associated with gender are

some family domain pressures like the effects of the presence of young children (Ciarrochi et al.,

2001), spouse time in paid work, (Akinjide, 2006; Poele, 2003) and work domain pressures like

number of hours worked per week (Akinboye, 2003) are gender differences associated with

work-family role conflict.

However, Pleck et al. (1990) discovered that specific conditions that contribute most to the work-

family (WFC) conflict were: excessive working hours, scheduling incompatibilities, and

physically/psychologically demanding duties that cause fatigue and irritability. Thus, husband

(men) were more likely than wives (women) to report WFC caused by excessive work time

whereas the wives (women) more than husband (men) were more likely to report WFC caused

by schedule incompatibilities. The authors submit that work and family boundaries are

asymmetrically permeable and that gender differences exist with regard to this has been

debunked. According to this research finding, family boundaries, in that demands of the work

role, are more likely to invade ones family roles than vice versa. Thus, no gender differences

were found in the pattern of asymmetry. Similarly, Drago (2002) had predicted that women,

because of responsibilities in the household, would have greater interferences from family to

work than men; and that men, because of a string world allegiance, would have greater

interferences from work families than women. In other studies, Popoola (2008) and Collins and

George (2004) on women heading one- parent families reported conflict somewhat less often

than women; or men in two-parent families, parent reported more conflict than childless couples

and parent with school- age children. The literature reviewed for the purpose of this study

revealed that extensive research work had been conducted to measure the relationship among

work-family role conflict, job satisfaction, managerial efficiency and productivity.

2.4 Research Model:

The proposed relationship among the variables:

Work-Family Conflict Organizational Commitment

2.5 Hypothesis

• H0: WFC is not related with OC.

• H1(a): WFC is positively related with Affective OC.

• H1(b): WFC is negatively related with Affective OC.

• H2(a): WFC is positively related with Normative OC.

• H2(b): WFC is negatively related with Normative OC.

• H3(a): WFC is positively related with Continuance OC.

• H3(b): WFC is negatively related with Continuance OC.

3.0 Methodology

3.1 Sample

I solicited 38 male and 34 female Bank employees from Al-Habib Bank, Muslim Commercial

Bank, and United Bank Limited Larkana, with an age range of 20 to 50 years and mean age of 30

years. I distributed a total of 100 packets with two scales (see below) to 100 Bank employees.

All the scales were selfadministered.

3.2 Instruments

1. Work-Family Conflict Scale (WFCS; Netemeyer, Boles, and McMurrian, 1996). This is a 10-

item scale that measures work-family conflict and family-work conflict. Both these scales are

composed of five items each. Each item is measured on a 5 point Likert type scale, with 1

representing strongly agree and 5 representing strongly disagree. The scale has high reliability

(α = 0.808).

2. Organization Commitment Scale (OCS; Allen and Meyer, 1990). This scale measures

organizational commitment and consists of 24items. Eight items each measure affective,

normative, and continuance commitment and responses are made on 5-point Likert-type

scale with 1 representing strongly agree and 5 representing strongly disagree. The scale has high

construct and content validities (Allen & Meyer, 2000).

3.3 Procedure

All respondents were approached through personal contacts and Bank managers. After briefly

explaining the nature of the study, I asked each participant for voluntary consent. Those who

declined did not become part of the study. Both scales were self-explanatory, however if

clarifications were needed they were given at that time or later on if the need arose. The scales

were selfadministered and completed at respondents’ leisure. Some were collected at the time of

meeting, while others later after the participant had completed them. Issues pertaining to family-

work conflicts were addressed in the meeting and if the participants needed clarifications they

were given.

5.0 Limitations

As banking sector is growing in a rapid speed in Pakistan, which brings difficulty for its

employees to handle extra work, not related with their job.

So, as I went and conducted the survey I found one major problem that employees were not

interested in filling the questionnaires.

Banking sector have this problem since the employees in banks have more work load than

expected.

6.0 Conclusion

Purpose of this research was to find out the impact of WFC on OC, and it is analyzed that there

is moderate significant relation between variables. It is also analyzed that there is less impact

between WFC and OC.

References:

Adebola, H. E. (2005). Emotional expression at workplace: Implications for work-family role

ambiguities. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(21), 102-115.

Akintayo, D. I. (2010). Work-family conflict and organization commitment among industrial

workers in Nigeria. Journal of Psychology and counseling, 2(1), 1-8.

Allen, J. N., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance

and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63(1), 1-

18.

Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1996). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the

organization: An examination of construct validity. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 49, 252-

276.

Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (2000). Construct validation in organizational behavior research: The

case of organizational commitment. In R. D. Goffin & E. Helmes (Eds.), Problems and solutions

in human assessment: Honoring Douglas N. Jackson at seventy (pp. 285-314). Norwell,

MA: Kluwer.

Ajiboye, S. O. (2008). Analysis of causal factors of work-family role conflict among male and

female workers. Journal of Sociological Studies, 4(2), 93-104.

Ansari, S. A. (2011). Gender difference: Work and family conflicts and family-work conflicts.

Pakistan Business Review, 13(2), 315-331.

Boehman, (2006). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment among student affairs

professionals (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Raleigh, NC: North Carolina State

University.

Canipe, J. S. (2006). Relationships among trust, organizational commitment, perceived

organizational support, and turnover intentions (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). San Deigo:

Alliant International University.

Carlson, S. D., Kacmar, K. M., & Williams, L. J. (2000).

Construction and initial validation of a multi-dimensional measure of work-family conflict.

Journal of Vocational Behavior, 56, 249-276.

Ciarrochi, J., Chan, A. Y. C., & Caputi, P. (2000). A critical evaluation of the emotional

intelligence constructs. Personality Individual Differences, 28(3), 539-561.

Cole, D. W. (2004). Social reflection on women playing dual roles: An assessment of women in

leadership positions. Journal of Gender Studies, 7(2), 126-132.

Collins, B. M., & George, M. A. (2004). Approaches to minimizing work-family role conflict in

organizations. Journal of Sociological Studies, 38(2), 48-59.

Duxbury, L., E., & Higgins, C. A. (1991). Gender differences in work-family conflict. Journal of

Applied Psychology, 76, 60-74.

Duxbury, L. E., & Higgins, C. A. (1994). Interference between work and family: A status report

on dual career and dual-earner mothers and fathers. Employee Assistance Quarterly, 9(4), 55-80.

Duxbury, L. E., Higgins, C. A., & Mills, S. (1992). After hour telecommuting and work-family

conflict: A comparative analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(1), 60-74.

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(1), 65-78.

Frone, M. R., Russell, M., & Cooper, M. L. (1997). Relation of work–family conflict to health

outcomes: A four-year longitudinal study of employed parents. Journal of Occupational and

Organizational Psychology, 70, 325-335.

Greenberg, J. (2005). Managing behavior in organizations (4th ed).

Prentice-Hall: Englewood. Greenhaus, J. H., & Beutell, N. H. (1985). Sources of conflict

between work and family roles. The Academy of Management Review, 10(1), 76-88.

Gutek, K. A., Searle, A. A., & Klepa, H. O. (1991). Work‐family role conflict: Evaluation study.

Journal of Social Work, 16(3), 88 96.‐

Higgins, C., Duxbury, L., & Lee, C. (1994). Impact of life-cycle stage and gender on the ability

to balance work and family responsibilities. Family Relations, 43(3), 144-150.

Hochschild, A. R., & Machung, A. (1989). The second shift: working parents and the revolution

at home. New York: Viking.

Hussain, I. (2008). Problems of working women in Karachi, Pakistan (1st ed). Cambridge:

Scholars Publishing.

Jaros, J. S., Jermier, J. M., Koehler, J. W., & Sincich, T. (1993). Effects of continuance,

affective, and moral commitment on the withdrawal process: An evaluation of eight structural

equations models. Academy of Management Journal, 36(1), 951-995.

Karrasch, A. I. (2003). Antecedents and consequences of organizational commitment. Military

Psychology, 15(3), 225-236.

Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2000). Emotional intelligence as zeitgeist, as

personality and as a standard intelligence. In R. Bar-On R & J. D. A. Parker (Eds.), Handbook of

emotional intelligence (pp. 92-112). New York: Jossey-Bass.

Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. M. (1982). Employeeorganization linkages: The

psychology of commitment, absenteeism and turnover. New York: Academic Press.

Parasuraman, S., Greenhaus, J. H., & Granrose, C. S. (1992). Role stressors, social support, and

well-being among two-career couples. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13, 339-356.

Pleck, J. H., Staines, G. L., & Lang, L. (1980). Conflicts between work and family life. Monthly

Labor Review, 103(3), 29-32.

Popoola, M. F. (2008). Psycho-social factors as predictors of principal managerial efficiency in

Ogun state secondary schools, Nigeria (Unpublished PhD Thesis). Ago Iwoye, Onabanjo

University.

Porter, L. W., Steers, R. M., Mowday, R. T., & Boulian, P. V. (1974). Organizational

commitment, job satisfaction and turnover among psychiatric technicians. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 59(3), 603-609.

Staines, G. L., & Pleck, J. H. (1983). The impact of work schedules on the family. Ann Arbor:

University of Michigan.

Turner, B. A., & Chelladurai, P. (2005). Organizational and occupational commitment, intention

to leave, and perceived performance of inter-collegiate coaches. Journal of Sport Management,

19(1), 193-211.

Ziauddin., Khan, M. R., Jam, F. A., & Hijazi, S. T. (2010).The Impacts of employee’s job stress

on organizational commitment. European Journal of Social Sciences, 13(4), 617-622.