A comparison of types of support for lower-skill workers: Evidence for the importance of family supportive supervisors |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Texas A&M University, United States;2. Indiana University – Purdue University at Indianapolis, United States;3. George Mason University, United States;4. Zayed University, United Arab Emirates;5. University of Memphis, United States;6. Rice University, United States;1. Department of Management & Quantitative Methods, College of Business, Illinois State University, Normal, IL 61790, United States of America;3. Department of Business – Management and Strategy, Faculty of Social Sciences and Solvay Business School, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium;1. University of Georgia, United States;2. The Graduate Center and Baruch College, City University of New York, United States;3. University of South Florida/American Institutes for Research, United States;4. University of South Florida, United States;1. Aston Business School, Aston University, UK;2. IESE Business School, Spain;3. University of Bath, Bath School of Management, UK;4. ESE Business School, Chile |
| |
| Abstract: | The work–family literature to date does not offer a clear picture in terms of the relative importance of different types of supports for balancing work and family demands. Grounded in conservation or resources theory, we develop an integrative model relating multiple forms of social support, both formal (i.e., work–life benefit use) and informal (supervisor work–family support and family support) to work-interference-with-family and family-interference-with-work and task and contextual performance. We chose to focus our study on lower-skill workers because, despite being a relatively large segment of the workforce, these workers are relatively understudied in the work–family literature. Results revealed that supervisor support is a key form of support in this sample. Supervisor support had negative same domain (work-interference-with-family) and cross domain (family-interference-with-work) effects with work–family conflict, as well as positive relationships with task and contextual performance. Family support was negatively related to family-interference-with-work; whereas use of work–life benefits was not significantly related to either form of work–family conflict or any of the performance variables. The implications of our results for conservation of resources theory and practical implications to employers of lower-skill workers are discussed. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
