Management Research: The Journal of the Iberoamerican Academy

of Management
Family-friendly practices, high-performance work practices and workfamily
balance: How do job satisfaction and working hours affect this relationship?
Lorena Ronda Andrea Ollo-Lpez Salom Goi-Legaz

Downloaded by Universidad ESAN At 10:06 19 July 2016 (PT)

Article information:
To cite this document:
Lorena Ronda Andrea Ollo-Lpez Salom Goi-Legaz , (2016),"Family-friendly practices, highperformance work practices and workfamily balance", Management Research: The Journal of the
Iberoamerican Academy of Management, Vol. 14 Iss 1 pp. 2 - 23
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MRJIAM-02-2016-0633
Downloaded on: 19 July 2016, At: 10:06 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 84 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 42 times since 2016*

Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:

(2016),"Work-life balance and its relationship with organizational pride and job satisfaction", Journal
of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 31 Iss 2 pp. 586-602 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JMP-09-2014-0272
(2013),"Life-work balance: Emotional intelligence as a crucial component of achieving both personal
life and work performance", Management Research Review, Vol. 36 Iss 7 pp. 700-719 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/MRR-05-2012-0115
(2007),"Introduction: What work? What life? What balance?: Critical reflections on
the work-life balance debate", Employee Relations, Vol. 29 Iss 4 pp. 325-333 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/01425450710839452

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emeraldsrm:505203 []

For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com

Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.

Downloaded by Universidad ESAN At 10:06 19 July 2016 (PT)

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1536-5433.htm

MRJIAM
14,1

2
Received 1 February 2016
Revised 17 February 2016
4 March 2016
Accepted 5 March 2016

Family-friendly practices,
high-performance work practices
and workfamily balance
How do job satisfaction and working hours
affect this relationship?
Lorena Ronda
Universidad Pontificia Comillas, Madrid, Spain, and

Andrea Ollo-Lpez and Salom Goi-Legaz

Downloaded by Universidad ESAN At 10:06 19 July 2016 (PT)

Departamento de Gestin de Empresas, Universidad Pblica de Navarra,

Pamplona, Spain
Abstract
Purpose This paper aims to establish to what extent family-friendly practices and high-performance
work practices are positively related to workfamily balance and to identify the role played by job
satisfaction and working hours as mediators of this relationship
Design/methodology/approach We use data for a representative sample of almost 17,000
employees of dual-earner couples from European countries. To test the mediation mechanism
implied by our hypotheses, we follow the procedure outlined in Baron and Kenny (1986). Given the
nature of the dependent variables, ordered probit and regression models were estimated in the
analysis.
Findings The results show that, in general, family-friendly practices and high-performance work
practices increase workfamily balance and that these positive relationships are partially mediated by
job satisfaction and working hours. While both family-friendly practices and high-performance work
practices increase job satisfaction, only the first increase working hours. Moreover, job satisfaction
increases workfamily balance, while working hours reduces it. The net effect of these opposing forces
on workfamily balance is positive.
Research limitations/implications The use of secondary data posits some constraints, such as
the type of measures and the failure to control for a higher number of family-friendly practices and
high-performance work practices. Additionally, the non-longitudinal nature of the data set implies that
some relationships cannot be considered causal in the intended direction.
Practical implications Managers should implement family-friendly practices and highperformance work practices, as, in general, they increase workfamily balance. A significant portion of
this positive effect is channeled through job satisfaction and working hours.
Originality/value The paper contributes to understanding the relationship between different
subsets of human-resources management practices and workfamily balance, proposing a model that
aims to disentangle the mediating mechanisms through which this relationship occurs.
Keywords Satisfaction, Job satisfaction, High-performance work systems, Family-friendly policy
Management Research: The
Journal of the Iberoamerican
Academy of Management
Vol. 14 No. 1, 2016
pp. 2-23
Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1536-5433
DOI 10.1108/MRJIAM-02-2016-0633

Paper type Research paper

This research was supported by the Spanish Ministry of Education ECO2013-46954-C3-1-R

awarded to Salom Goi-Legaz and ECO2013-48496-C04-2-R awarded to Andrea Ollo-Lpez.

Downloaded by Universidad ESAN At 10:06 19 July 2016 (PT)

Resumen
Propsito El objetivo de este trabajo es establecer en qu medida las prcticas de conciliacin de la
vida laboral y familiar y las prcticas de trabajo de alto rendimiento estn positivamente relacionadas
con la conciliacin de la vida laboral y familiar, e identificar el papel mediador de la satisfaccin en el
trabajo y las horas de trabajo en dicha relacin.
Diseo/metodologa/enfoque Los datos usados corresponden a una muestra representativa de
casi 17,000 empleados de parejas de doble ingreso de pases Europeos. Con el fin de probar el mecanismo
de mediacin planteado en nuestras hiptesis, hemos seguido el procedimiento descrito por Baron y
Kenny (1986). Dada la naturaleza de las variables dependientes, los modelos estimados en los anlisis
son modelos probit ordenados y modelos de regresin.
Resultados Los resultados muestran que en las prcticas de conciliacin de la vida laboral y familiar
y las prcticas de trabajo de alto rendimiento mejoran la conciliacin de la vida laboral y familiar, y que
estas relaciones estn en general parcialmente mediadas por la satisfaccin en el trabajo y las horas de
trabajo. Asimismo, se ha encontrado que mientras las prcticas de conciliacin de la vida laboral y
familiar y las de alto rendimiento aumentan la satisfaccin en el trabajo, slo las primeras incrementan
las horas de trabajo. Por otra parte, si bien la satisfaccin en el trabajo aumenta la conciliacin de la vida
laboral y familiar, las horas de trabajo la reducen, siendo el efecto neto de estas fuerzas opuestas en la
conciliacin positivo.
Limitaciones/consecuencias de la investigacin (si procede) El uso de bases de datos
secundarias plantea algunas limitaciones en aspectos tales como el tipo de medidas o la falta de control
de un mayor nmero de prcticas de conciliacin de la vida laboral y familiar y prcticas de trabajo de
alto rendimiento. Adems, el hecho de no poseer datos de panel implica que algunas relaciones no
pueden considerarse causales en la direccin prevista.
Implicaciones prcticas Los directivos de las empresas deben implementar prcticas de
conciliacin de la vida laboral y familiar y prcticas de trabajo de alto rendimiento ya que en general
ambos grupos aumentan la conciliacin de la vida laboral y familiar. Una parte significativa de este
efecto positivo se canaliza a travs de la satisfaccin en el trabajo y del horario de trabajo.
Originalidad/valor El documento contribuye a enriquecer la relacin entre los diferentes
subgrupos de prcticas de gestin de recursos humanos y la conciliacin de la vida laboral y familiar,
proponiendo un modelo que pretende desentraar los mecanismos a travs de los cuales se produce
dicha relacin.
Palabras clave Prcticas de conciliacin de la vida laboral y familiar,
prcticas de trabajo de alto rendimiento, conciliacin de la vida laboral y familiar,
satisfaccin en el trabajo, horas de trabajo
Clasificacin del artculo Trabajo de investigacin

Resumo
Propsito O objetivo deste trabalho estabelecer em que medida as prticas favorveis a` famlia e as
prticas de trabalho de alto desempenho esto positivamente relacionadas ao equilbrio
trabalho-famlia, e identificar o papel desempenhado pela satisfao no trabalho e horas de trabalho
como mediadores dessa relao.
Desenho/metodologia/abordagem Ns usamos dados de uma amostra representativa de
aproximadamente 17,000 empregados de casais dual-assalariado de pases europeus. A fim de testar o
mecanismo de mediao implcito em nossas hipteses, siguimos o procedimento descrito em Baron e
Kenny (1986). Dada a natureza das variveis dependentes, modelos de probit ordenado e de regresso
foram estimados na anlise.
Resultados Os resultados mostram que em geral as prticas favorveis a` famlia e as prticas de
trabalho de alto desempenho aumentam o equilbrio trabalho-famlia e que estas relaes positivas so
parcialmente mediadas pela satisfao no trabalho e pelas horas de trabalho. Enquanto as prticas
favorveis a` famlia e as prticas de trabalho de alto desempenho aumentam a satisfao no trabalho,

Workfamily
balance

MRJIAM
14,1

Downloaded by Universidad ESAN At 10:06 19 July 2016 (PT)

apenas os primeiros aumentam as horas de trabalho. Alm disso, a satisfao no trabalho aumenta o
equilbrio trabalho-famlia, enquanto as horas de trabalho reduzem. O efeito final destas foras opostas
no equilbrio trabalho-famlia positivo.
Limitaes da pesquisa/implicaes (se aplicvel) O uso de dados secundrios postula
algumas restries em aspectos como o tipo de medidas ou a falta de controle para o maior nmero de
prticas favorveis a` famlia e a`s prticas de trabalho de alto desempenho. Alm disso, a natureza no
longitudinal do conjunto de dados implica que algumas relaes no podem ser consideradas causais na
direo pretendida.
Implicaes prticas Os gestores devem implementar prticas favorveis a` famlia e prticas de
trabalho de alto desempenho uma vez que em geral eles aumentam o equilbrio trabalho-famlia. Uma
parte significativa desse efeito positivo canalizada atravs de satisfao no trabalho e horas de
trabalho.
Originalidade/valor O artigo contribui para enriquecer a compreenso da relao entre os
diferentes subgrupos de prticas de gesto de recursos humanos e de equilbrio entre trabalho-famlia,
propondo um modelo que visa separar os mecanismos mediadores atravs do qual esta relao ocorre.
Palavras chave Prticas favorveis a famlia, prticas de trabalho de alto desempenho,
equilbrio trabalho-famlia, a satisfao no trabalho, horas de trabalho
Classificao artigo Trabalho de pesquis

1. Introduction
The relationship between organizations and employees in the workplace changed
during the latter part of the twentieth century in Europe. On the one hand, this was
because of increased global competition and the speed of technological change and
major financial events (Sarantinos, 2007). On the other hand, the increase in the number
of women in paid employment and the transition to dual-earner families increased the
likelihood that both men and women would have both family and work responsibilities
(Allen et al., 2000) in most developed countries. All this has induced managers to rethink
the way work is organized and the human-resource management practices that they
adopt.
In this new environment, where competition and uncertainty is very high,
organizations need to have the ability to adapt to fluctuations in demand and to changes
in their environment to be successful and maintain their competitiveness. Moreover,
firms are aware that not being able to combine work with family properly is negatively
related to quality of life (Md-Sidin et al., 2008), life satisfaction (De Simone et al., 2014;
Rode et al., 2007) and well-being (Milkie and Peltola, 1999; Voydanoff, 2005). In this
sense, firms adopt a set of human-resource management practices whose aim is to
implement more efficient organizational policies in the workplace and to increase
employees productivity and motivation (Gould-Williams, 2004). They are called
high-commitment management practices, high-involvement work practices or
high-performance work systems (Appelbaum and Berg, 2001; Macky and Boxall,
2007). Also, firms provide their employees with a set of practices named family-friendly
practices that enable employees to combine family and work commitments and,
therefore, enhance multiple role identities (Glass and Finley, 2002; Sirgy et al., 2008).
The majority of previous research about both types of practices has focused on the
perceived benefits to employers, analyzing in general only one of both sets of practices.
From this point of view, the literature has assumed and showed that, separately, both
high-performance work practices and family-friendly practices positively affect firms
performance (Beauregard et al., 2009; Wood et al., 2012). However, there is little research

Downloaded by Universidad ESAN At 10:06 19 July 2016 (PT)

that considers the effect of high-performance work practices and family-friendly

practices on workfamily balance (Bloom et al., 2009; Frye and Breaugh, 2004; Poelmans
et al., 2003). One explanation of this scarcity in research could be that studies are based
on surveys focused on the companies instead of the workers (Bloom et al., 2009;
Poelmans et al., 2003), making it difficult to analyze the effect of practices on work
family balance. Osterman (1995) talks about how companies that adopt
high-performance work practices are expected to offer their employees family-friendly
practices to avoid the problems that the high-performance practices have on employees
workfamily balance.
The present article aims to help solve this shortcoming in the existing literature, so
that we can understand the relationship between both sets of human-resources
management practices and workfamily balance. Concretely, on the one hand, we focus
our attention on how high-performance work practices and family-friendly practices
influence workfamily balance. On the other hand, we extend the theoretical foundation
by proposing a model that aims to increase our understanding of the mechanisms
through which that effect occurs. Specifically, our model proposes that job satisfaction
and working hours mediate the effect of human-resources management practices on
workfamily balance.
The hypotheses were tested using a representative sample of 16,898 workers in
dual-earner couples from 34 European countries. Most of the existing evidence on the
consequences of human-resources management practices for employees has been
obtained from samples in English-speaking countries (Idrovo et al., 2012; Jiang et al.,
2012). However, direct comparison of the consequences of the various types of
human-resources management practices has been difficult, due to cross-cultural
variation in government regimes, employment policies and labor market conditions; as
a result, the effectiveness of these policies may depend on the countries cultural
contexts (Brough et al., 2008). It is also worth noting that the information about
human-resources management practices was provided by the employees themselves
and therefore captured what employees perceived and used, rather than what employers
declared to be the case.
2. Theoretical framework
2.1 Family-friendly practices and workfamily balance
During recent decades, the expansion of family-friendly practices across firms has
accelerated in European countries (Jokinen and Kuronen, 2011). From a theoretical point
of view, family-friendly practices affect life satisfaction by reducing workfamily
conflict or increasing workfamily balance. Also, family-friendly practices facilitate the
employment of women, increasing gender equality (Voicu et al., 2009) and contributing
to the social approach of quality of life (apniewska, 2014). Family-friendly practices
can be classified into the following three broad subsets (Ferrer and Gagn, 2006; Glass
and Finley, 2002):
(1) family support practices;
(2) flexible arrangement practices; and
(3) parental leave practices.
However, most of the existing research has examined the effect of family-friendly
practices without taking into account the different subsets of practices (Hill, 2005) .The

Workfamily
balance

MRJIAM
14,1

Downloaded by Universidad ESAN At 10:06 19 July 2016 (PT)

different practices are designed to increase the workfamily balance of workers, but
they can do so in different ways.
Family support practices include a set of services that employers make available to
workers, such as nurseries and canteens, so that they can better meet their obligations
within the company. They seek to maintain the traditional vision of the ideal employee;
that is, someone working full-time, who is committed to his or her work and has no
outside responsibilities (Fursman and Callister, 2009). These policies aim to increase
workfamily balance by offering employee-supported solutions to help parents take
care of their family responsibilities while retaining a high productivity at work. Flexible
arrangement practices include all policies giving workers greater flexibility in terms of
working time and place. And finally, parental leave practices are all practices that
reduce working hours to provide time for family care-giving. These subsets of practices
endeavor to facilitate workfamily integration (Clark, 2000), enabling people to cope
with the fluctuating demands of home life. The expected result of this policy is a better
well-being of the parents and reduced turnover rates (Glass and Finley, 2002), increasing
at the same time their workfamily balance (Batt and Valcour, 2001; Ferrer and Gagn,
2006). Furthermore, as the employer permits employees to take time off, this will have a
positive effect on workfamily balance (Frye and Breaugh, 2004):
H1. Family-friendly practices improve workfamily balance.
2.2 High-performance work practices and workfamily balance
High-performance work practices are a bundle of practices that entail alternative
job-design practices, such as worker membership of work teams with the capacity to
decide how to organize their job (i.e. autonomous teams) and to rotate tasks with
co-workers (job rotation), thus allowing workers to take decisions in their jobs on issues
such as methods or task order (i.e. job autonomy) (Boxall and Macky, 2009; Wood et al.,
2012). These practices have to do with the way the work itself is organized and
opportunities to engage in problem solving and change management regarding work
processes (Boxall and Macky, 2009). They have been extended to firms (Ichniowski et al.,
1996) and seek to strengthen the knowledge, skills and abilities of both current and
potential employees and increase their motivation as well as their retention in the
company (Bayo-Moriones et al., 2002; Huselid, 1995). Also through the practices, firms
organize work in a way that workers can take advantage of their higher qualifications
and motivation, together with an active participation in the firms decision-making
(Roca et al., 2002). All this has a positive effect on workers sense of personal control and
efficacy (Voydanoff, 1988), as well as on intrinsic job satisfaction (Appelbaum et al.,
2000).
This is in line with previous studies which found that these practices increase
job-related skills and employees commitment (Macky and Boxall, 2007). At the same
time, the increase in job variety is positively associated with balance between the work
and family domains (Berg et al., 2003). In this sense, high-performance work practices
will have a positive impact on workfamily balance:
H2. High-performance work practices improve workfamily balance.
2.3 Disentangling the process: mediators
The mechanisms by which human-resource management practices affect employees
workfamily balance remain under-researched. It is generally assumed that the main

Downloaded by Universidad ESAN At 10:06 19 July 2016 (PT)

problems that individuals face in reconciling family and work domains are the problems
in fulfilling the demands of both areas of life as a consequence of limitations on time
(McMillan et al., 2011). This is reflected in the definition of workfamily balance offered
by Greenhaus et al. (2003), which states that workfamily balance must contain the
following three components:
(1) time balance (time dedicated equitably to work and family responsibilities);
(2) involvement balance (equitable psychological involvement in work and family
roles); and
(3) satisfaction balance (the equitable satisfaction level that individuals get from
work and family responsibilities).
Taking this definition into account and considering the data available, we attempt to
improve our knowledge of the process of human-resource management practices
influencing workfamily balance by studying two mediators: job satisfaction and
working time. These variables summarize potentially important positive and negative
influences of human-resource practices previously suggested in the literature. It is worth
noting that our approach is consistent with relevant models of workfamily interface
and employee outcomes (Boxall, 2012; Voydanoff, 2005).
2.3.1 Job satisfaction. Voydanoff (2005) developed a conceptual model that focused
on demands, resources and strategies that were presumed to be associated with work
family balance. This model includes family-friendly practices such as
boundary-spanning resources that directly address how the work and family domains
are connected with each other. In line with this model, family-friendly practices give
additional resources to employees to accomplish family responsibilities, which results in
a higher level of satisfaction with the work and family domains. So these policies aim to
increase worklife balance by offering employees solutions to help them take care of
their family responsibilities while maintaining a high level of productivity and
satisfaction at work. Moreover, family-friendly practices reduce the individuals
psychological pressure, contributing to the individuals satisfaction with both family
and work (Ezra and Deckman, 1996; Jones and McKenna, 2002).
Therefore, employees may perceive family-friendly practices as actions that benefit
them and, in line with social exchange theory (Blau, 1964), trigger a moral obligation to
reciprocate with more positive attitudes. As such, the previous literature found that
family-friendly practices give workers an easier way to fulfill their family and work
duties, having a positive effect on job satisfaction and commitment due to a more
positive attitude and a reduction of their stress (Bloom et al., 2009; Frye and Breaugh,
2004). This would imply that workers who use family-friendly practices are more
satisfied with their job, which results in a higher level of workfamily balance. In this
case, family-friendly practices can have an indirect effect on workfamily balance
mediated by the effect on job satisfaction:
H3a. Job satisfaction mediates the effect of family-friendly practices on
workfamily balance, so that workers using family-friendly practices are more
satisfied at work, resulting in improved workfamily balance.
According to the ability, motivation and opportunity (AMO) framework (Apspelbaum
et al. 2000) there are three mechanisms which contribute to firms success as follows:

Workfamily
balance

MRJIAM
14,1

Downloaded by Universidad ESAN At 10:06 19 July 2016 (PT)

(1) those that ensure that employees have appropriate skills;

(2) those that motivate employees to engage in desired behaviors; and
(3) those that empower them to contribute to organizational outcomes.
In line with this framework (Appelbaum et al., 2000; Boxall, 2012), high-performance
work practices improve the abilities and the motivation of workers, providing them with
the opportunities to put them into practice (Bello-Pintado, 2015), which in turn enhances
employee motivation and satisfaction (Batt, 2002). In this way, human-resources
management practices are expected to have a positive influence on the state of the
psychological contract, leading to greater levels of job satisfaction (Guest, 1999). The
greater participation and autonomy that these practices give to employees generate
feelings of achievement and responsibility which have a positive effect on job
satisfaction (Wood and de Menezes, 2011).
According to this, the previous literature has found that high-performance work
practices improve employees attitude at work and employees outcomes, among them,
job satisfaction (Appelbaum et al., 2000; Batt and Valcour, 2003; Yanadori and Van
Jaarsveld, 2014). So now we need to test if the positive influence of high-performance
work practices on employee satisfaction has, at the same time, an indirect positive effect
on workfamily balance. This perception of higher satisfaction can result in a higher
level of workfamily balance (Appelbaum et al., 2000; Harley et al., 2007; Macky and
Boxall, 2007). Then, high-performance work practices can have an indirect effect on
workfamily balance mediated by the effect on job satisfaction:
H3b. Job satisfaction mediates the effect of high-performance work practices on
workfamily balance, so that workers using high-performance work practices
are more satisfied at work, resulting in improved workfamily balance.
2.3.2 Working hours/time at work. Time is a fixed resource that must be divided into
work and non-work responsibilities. Previous literature has found that the more hours
and the more involvement spent in one role, work or family, the lower the workfamily
balance (Balmforth and Gardner, 2006; Edwards and Rothbard, 2000; Foley et al., 2005).
In line with Voydanoffs model (2005), family-friendly practices give additional
resources to employees to accomplish family responsibilities, which can invoke the
reciprocity principle. According to this principle, employees using family-friendly
practices work harder during their working hours in exchange for adapting their
working hours to meet their family responsibilities, thus reducing the number of
working hours.
In this way, previous studies show that family-friendly practices decrease the
number of working hours and increase the number of hours that employees can stay at
home (Gray and Tudball, 2002; Wolcott and Glezer, 1995). This implies that workers
who use family-friendly practices spend fewer hours at their workplace, which results in
a higher level of workfamily balance (Budd and Mumford, 2006; Dex and Smith, 2002).
Therefore, family-friendly practices can have an indirect effect on workfamily balance
mediated by the effect on working hours:
H4a. Working hours mediate the effect of family-friendly practices on workfamily
balance, so that workers using family-friendly practices work fewer hours,
resulting in improved workfamily balance.

Downloaded by Universidad ESAN At 10:06 19 July 2016 (PT)

According to Voydanoffs model (2005), high-performance work practices are seen as

work demands, as these practices imply an increase in participation in the
decision-making process, as well as an increase in the number of tasks and
responsibilities of workers.
This is consistent with previous work which found that high-performance work
practices increase job demands (Kalleberg et al., 2009; Gallie et al., 2012). Moreover,
several pieces of research show that high-performance work practices influence
working hours positively and demand more effort and time at work (Green, 2001;
Delbridge and Whitfield, 2001; Godard, 2004).
As time needs to be divided into both areas of life, longer working time implies less
time to dedicate to family responsibilities, having a negative effect on workfamily
balance (Eriksson and Ortega, 2006; Green, 2004). In this way, high-performance work
practices can have an indirect effect on workfamily balance mediated by the effect on
working hours:
H4b. Working hours mediate the effect of high-performance work practices on
workfamily balance, so that workers using high-performance work practices
work more hours, resulting in a worse workfamily balance.
3. Method
3.1 Data
The data used in the empirical part of this study come from the Fifth European Working
Conditions Survey (EWCS), conducted by the European Foundation (Eurofound) for the
improvement of living and working conditions in 34 countries in 2010. One of the
objectives of this survey is to provide an overview of the situation of labor conditions,
nature and contents of changes affecting workplaces across European countries. It
provides comparative information on job context, working conditions, work
organization, human resources practices, work-related outcomes and worklife balance
of workers in different European countries. The sample of the EWCS is representative of
the persons in employment during the fieldwork period in each of the countries covered.
In each country, the EWCS sample followed a multi-stage, stratified and clustered
design with a random walk procedure for the selection of the respondents at the last
stage. The target number of interviews was 1,000 in all countries except Germany and
Turkey (in which it was 2,000), Italy, Poland and the UK (1,500), Belgium (4,000), France
(3,000) and Slovenia (1,400). The total number of interviews was 43,816. All interviews
were conducted face-to-face in the respondents own home.
Given the objective of this paper, only dual-earner couples were used for two main
reasons. First, because previous research has found that married employees experience
lower levels of workfamily balance than single counterparts (Pichler, 2009). Secondly,
members of a couple are interactive with each other and influence respective work
family experience together (Zhang and Liu, 2011). In this case, workfamily balance is
not seen as an individual problem, but as that of a couple.
3.2 Variables
The goal of the paper is to analyze whether family-friendly practices and
high-performance work practices really contribute to workfamily balance. Therefore,
the dependent variable measures the degree to which people are satisfied with their
workfamily balance. In specific terms, individuals indicated their levels of satisfaction

Workfamily
balance

MRJIAM
14,1

Downloaded by Universidad ESAN At 10:06 19 July 2016 (PT)

10

with their work and family balance using a four-point Likert scale, where 1 is very
unsatisfied and 4 very satisfied. As in most of the literature, subjective assessments of
the individual are used to measure workfamily balance (McGinnity and Whelan, 2009).
This is not the most desirable setting but accurate enough to obtain a reliable outcome
(Lu et al., 2008).
The independent variables in the paper are family-friendly practices and
high-performance work practices. Following previous studies, family-friendly practices
are classified into the following three broad subsets of practices (Ferrer and Gagn, 2006;
Glass and Finley, 2002):
(1) family support practices;
(2) flexible work practices; and
(3) parental leave practices.
In the EWCS it is possible to find some variables related to flexible work practices:
flexibility, teleworking and time off. A factor analysis and Cronbachs alpha show that
each measure of family-friendly practices is a separate construct. Flexibility is measured
on a four-point Likert scale where 1 is assigned to individuals who have no flexibility
and value 4 to individuals who have total flexibility. Teleworking is captured by a
dummy variable that takes value 1 when the individual uses teleworking practices, and
0 otherwise. Time off indicates the possibility that workers take time off when necessary
for personal reasons. It is measured on a four-point Likert scale where 1 corresponds to
not difficult at all and value 4 to very difficult.
Regarding high-performance work practices, we focus on the following three core
practices:
(1) job rotation;
(2) job autonomy; and
(3) autonomous teams.
The factor analysis carried out shows that only items related to job autonomy collapse
in the same factors, with Cronbachs alpha being 0.780. Job rotation and autonomous
teams are measured by dummy variables that take value 1 when employees rotate
between tasks or do their job in a team that has autonomy, and 0 otherwise. Job
autonomy is an index taken from the scale developed by Breaugh (1985), made up of
three binary items assessing autonomy for the order of tasks, working method and work
pace on a scale of 1-5.
Two variables are considered in this study to mediate the effect that family-friendly
practices and high-performance work practices have on workfamily balance. These
variables are job satisfaction and working hours. Job satisfaction is measured as the
overall job satisfaction on a four-point Likert scale, where 1 is very unsatisfied and 4
very satisfied. The use of a single-item measure of job satisfaction is very common in the
literature (Bender et al., 2005; Sousa-Poza and Sousa-Poza, 2000) and show high
reliability, significant validity and considerable predictability (Dolbier et al., 2005;
Wanous et al., 1997). Working hours is a continuous variable that indicates the number
of working hours per week. Table I contains the main descriptive statistics for
dependent, independent and mediating variables.

Definition variables

Downloaded by Universidad ESAN At 10:06 19 July 2016 (PT)

Dependent variables
Workfamily balance
In the past 12 months, how often have you had to work during your free time
to meet your job demands?
Independent variables
Family-friendly practices
Flexibility
How are your working arrangements set? (1 set by the company and 4
entirely determined by yourself)
Telework
Is your main place of work your own home? (0 no and 1 yes)
Take time off
How difficult is it to take an hour or two off during work hours to take care
of family matters? (1 very difficult and 4 not difficult at all)
High-performance work practices
Job autonomy
Are you able to choose or change the order of your tasks? (0 no and 1
yes)
Are you able to choose or change the methods of work? (0 no and 1 yes)
Are you able to choose or change the order of your rate of work? (0 no and
1 yes)
Job rotation
Does your job involve rotating tasks between yourself and colleagues? (0
no and 1 yes)
Autonomous teams
Do you work in a group or team where members can decide and schedule
themselves the division of the work? (0 no and 1 yes)
Mediators
Job satisfaction
On the whole, are you satisfied with the working conditions in your main
paid job? (1 not at all satisfied and 4 very satisfied)
Working hours
Number of hours at work per week

Mean

SD

3.062

0.785

Workfamily
balance

11
1.901

1.208

0.035

0.184

3.062

0.785

2.061
0.664

1.169
0.472

0.678
0.716

0.467
0.451

0.433

0.495

0.330

0.470

2.988

0.741

39.100

13.250

Finally, in line with the previous literature, a series of control variables that influence
workfamily balance are included (Glass and Finley, 2002). These variables capture
employee characteristics (gender, age, level of education, number of people in the
householdand occupation) and firm characteristics (firm size, public sector and
industry). Table II shows the mean and standard deviation for these control variables.
3.3 Common method variance (CMV)
While recent research suggests that CMV may be much less a problem than previously
thought (Spector, 2006), concerns about it may arise, as all the variables were collected
from the same respondents. However, there are several features in the survey that
mitigate this problem. First of all, as suggested in the previous literature (Podsakoff
et al., 2003), one way to avoid CMV is to use different scale endpoints and formats for

Table I.
Descriptive statistics
for dependent,
independent and
mediating variables

MRJIAM
14,1

Downloaded by Universidad ESAN At 10:06 19 July 2016 (PT)

12

Variables
Employee characteristics
People living home
Gender
Male
Female
Age
Education
Primary
Secondary
Tertiary
Occupation
Managers
Professionals
Clerical
Service
Skilled
Craft

Firm characteristics
Economic sector
Industry
Agriculture
Construction
Services
Sector
Private
Public
Firm size
Small size
Table II.
Descriptive statistics
Medium size
for control variables
Big size

Mean (%)

SD

3.085

1.466

52
48
41.684

12.159

6.3
64.2
29.5
7.6
29.5
8.7
20.0
4.1
30.1

15.5
5.6
7.0
71.9
61.1
39.9
72.5
17.6
9.9

dependent and independent measures. Moreover, dependent and independent variables

are separated into different sections of the questionnaire. One way to reduce respondent
evaluation apprehension and make them less likely to edit their responses to be more
socially desirable is to guarantee anonymity. This happened in this survey. We also
performed Harmans one-factor test. The unrotated exploratory factor analysis on the
items of the dependent, independent and mediating variables shows four factors with
eigenvalues greater than 1. The variance explained by the first factor is around 22 per
cent. Consequently, we are confident that CMV is not a major limitation. The correlation
coefficients between the core variables of the study are shown in Table III.
3.4 Methodology
To test the mediation mechanism implied by our hypotheses, the procedure outlined in
Baron and Kenny (1986) is followed. First, the effect of family-friendly practices and
high-performance work practices on the mediating variables (job satisfaction and
working hours) is estimated. Then, the effects of these practices on workfamily balance

0.263***
0.296***
0.334***
0.171***
0.073***
0.070***
0.106***

Notes: *** p 0.001; ** p 0.01; * p 0.05;

Flexibility (1)
Telework (2)
Take time off (3)
Job autonomy (4)
Job rotation (5)
Autonomous teams (6)
Job satisfaction (7)
Working hours (8)

Variables

p 0.1

0.097***
0.094***
0.110***
0.086***
0.032***
0.010*

0.265***
0.060***
0.027***
0.203***
0.048***

0.050***
0.112***
0.165***
0.014**

0.330***
0.002
0.009

Downloaded by Universidad ESAN At 10:06 19 July 2016 (PT)

0.110***

0.074***
0.022***

Workfamily
balance

13

Table III.
Correlation matrix

MRJIAM
14,1

Downloaded by Universidad ESAN At 10:06 19 July 2016 (PT)

14

are analyzed. In more specific terms, we start with a model that regresses workfamily
balance on the control variables and human-resources management practices. This
equation allows us to test H1 and H2. The effect of the mediating variables is then
added. Partial mediation occurs when, in the presence of the mediating variables, the
relationship between family-friendly practices and high-performance work practices
and workfamily balance is reduced in size and significance. Full mediation occurs
when that previous relationship becomes insignificant and is essentially reduced to zero.
Given the nature of the dependent variables, ordered probit models were estimated
when the dependent variables were an ordered scale, while linear regressions were
estimated for quantitative dependent variables.
Finally, to prevent the problems derived from biased standard errors, models were
estimated using Moultons (1990) correction. Moulton suggests that standard errors
should be clustered according to units of aggregation in this case, country. The
clustering option assumes independence across clusters, but not across observations
within clusters. This option computes standard errors that are robust to this type of
dependence. Then, as Moulton suggests, the estimations of the standard deviation of the
parameters are provided with this correction.
4. Results
4.1 Family-friendly practices, high-performance work practices and mediators
As noted, we start our empirical analyses by estimating a series of models in which the
mediating variables are estimated on the family-friendly practices and highperformance work practices. Table IV summarizes the results of these estimations.
The results indicate that, in general, family-friendly practices and high-performance
work practices are positively associated with job satisfaction. The one exception is the
non-significant effect of job rotation. Regarding the impact on working hours, flexibility
and teleworking have a positive effect, while time off and autonomous teams have a
negative one.
4.2 Family-friendly practices, high-performance work practices and workfamily
balance
In the Baron and Kenny procedure (1986), the next step is to test a model in which
workfamily balance is regressed on family-friendly practices, high-performance work
practices and control variables. The results are displayed in Model I in Table V. In this
first model, we just want to study the direct effect so we have not included the mediating
variables.
In the results of this analysis, we find that family-friendly practices have a positive
effect on workfamily balance, except flexibility, which is negative. Therefore, we find
partial support for H1, according to which family-friendly practices improve work
family balance, for two of the three practices analyzed.
H2, according to which high-performance work practices improve workfamily
balance, is supported for two practices, autonomous teams and job autonomy. Contrary
to this, predicted job rotation shows a negative effect on workfamily balance.
4.3 Family-friendly practices, high-performance work practices, mediators and work
family balance
As human-resources management practices are related to mediators and the dependent
variables, the final step in the procedure is to test a model in which workfamily balance

Downloaded by Universidad ESAN At 10:06 19 July 2016 (PT)

Variables
Flexibility
Telework
Take time off
Job autonomy
Job rotation
Autonomous teams
People living home
Female
Age
Primary education
Tertiary education
Professionals
Clerical
Service
Skilled
Craft
Agriculture
Construction
Services
Public sector
Small size
Big size
Constant
Log likelihood
R2
Observations

Job satisfaction
0.040*
0.170*
0.209***
0.085***
0.017
0.072*
0.035**
0.043
0.001
0.150
0.092
0.034
0.038
0.065*
0.513**
0.070***
0.215**
0.119**
0.110**
0.020
0.060
0.020
16,356.992
12.85%
16,766

Workfamily
balance

Working hours
0.016
0.081
0.018
0.014
0.036
0.031
0.013
0.027
0.002
0.095
0.050
0.042
0.050
0.031
0.168
0.015
0.079
0.039
0.035
0.023
0.035
0.033

8.818***
21.299*
3.022*
0.898
2.853
5.597**
1.820
7.418**
0.100
9.468
0.109
10.775***
12.249***
6.130
28.368
0.273
9.507
10.341*
4.336
1.243
7.132***
1.545
49.653***

1.696
10.486
1.326
0.963
2.136
1.883
1.038
2.438
0.102
6.326
1.887
2.874
2.778
3.910
14.666
0.984
11.153
4.215
2.388
1.591
1.958
1.823
7.913

15

2.67%
16,896

Notes: *** p 0.001; ** p 0.01; * p 0.05; robust standard errors in italics

is regressed on the family-friendly practices, high-performance work practices and

mediating variables, with all the control variables included. This corresponds to Model
II on Table V. The amount of variance explained increases from 12.54 per cent in
Model I to 19.78 per cent in Model II. Here we can see that the explanatory power of the
model increases with the introduction of the mediators.
Comparing both models, we can also see that, in general, the coefficients of
human-resources management practices decrease. This provides evidence that in the
absences of mediators, human-resources management practices absorb the effect of
mediators. This therefore provides evidence of the partial mediating roles of job
satisfaction and working hours. After taking into account mediators in the analysis,
flexibility and job rotation still maintain a negative effect on workfamily balance, while
teleworking and time off still show a positive effect. These effects are not explained by
the effect of workfamily balance on the mediators. However, job autonomy and
autonomous teams do not show a significant effect once mediators are included in the
model.
For the effects of mediators on workfamily balance, the results show that, as
expected, job satisfaction has a positive effect on workfamily balance, whereas
working hours has a negative one. Therefore H3a according to which workers under

Table IV.
Models for mediators

MRJIAM
14,1

Downloaded by Universidad ESAN At 10:06 19 July 2016 (PT)

16

Table V.
Ordered probit
models for work
family balance

Variables
Flexibility
Telework
Take time off
Job autonomy
Job rotation
Autonomous teams
Job satisfaction
Working hours
People living home
Female
Age
Primary education
Tertiary education
Professionals
Clerical
Service
Skilled
Craft
Agriculture
Construction
Services
Public sector
Small size
Big size
Log likelihood
R2
Observations

Workfamily balance
0.035*
0.283**
0.320***
0.041**
0.075*
0.061*

0.016
0.099
0.017
0.015
0.035
0.028

0.038***
0.164***
0.004***
0.160*
0.011
0.200***
0.191***
0.042
0.169
0.010
0.134*
0.051
0.015
0.101***
0.044
0.027
17,684.357
12.54%
16,839

0.010
0.027
0.001
0.071
0.037
0.038
0.043
0.027
0.144
0.007
0.059
0.040
0.032
0.024
0.028
0.045

Notes: *** p 0.001; ** p 0.01; * p 0.05;

0.013
0.251**
0.276***
0.019
0.076**
0.041
0.465***
0.026***
0.029**
0.181***
0.005***
0.124
0.038
0.197***
0.184***
0.064*
0.001
0.031***
0.078
0.018
0.016
0.101***
0.034
0.021
16,920.337
19.78%
16,714

0.016
0.092
0.015
0.014
0.029
0.023
0.023
0.001
0.010
0.028
0.001
0.071
0.028
0.039
0.042
0.030
0.110
0.008
0.057
0.041
0.030
0.021
0.026
0.043

p 0.1; robust standard errors in italics

family-friendly practices are more satisfied at work, resulting in improved workfamily

balance is supported for two of the three family-friendly practices analyzed, as we can
see that this effect happens for both teleworking and time off. H4a states that workers
using family-friendly practices work fewer hours, resulting in improved workfamily
balance. This hypothesis is supported for only one family-friendly practice analyzed,
time off.
H3b, according to which workers using high-performance work practices are more
satisfied at work, resulting in improved workfamily balance, is supported for job
autonomy and autonomous teams. However, H4b, according to which workers using
these practices work longer hours, resulting in a worse workfamily balance, is also
supported for autonomous teams.
As coefficients of human-resources management practices decrease in almost all
cases when mediators are included in the model, it is important to test whether the
mediation is statistically significant. The approach proposed by Preacher and Hayes
(2008) is the most popular one for single-step multiple mediator models like the one
explained in this paper. According to this approach, for the whole sample, mediating
variables explain the total effect that flexibility, autonomous teams and job autonomy

Downloaded by Universidad ESAN At 10:06 19 July 2016 (PT)

have on workfamily balance. For the other human-resources management practices

analyzed, mediators explain 14.54 per cent of the total effect that teleworking has on
workfamily balance and 19.49 per cent of the total effect that time off has on work
family balance. All these mediating effects are statistically significant. In sum, the
mediation effect is especially significant regarding flexibility, autonomy and
autonomous teams, while it mediates in a lower degree the relationship of teleworking
and time off with workfamily balance.
5. Discussion
The aim of this paper was to contribute to the literature on the effect of two important
sets of human-resources management practices family-friendly practices and
high-performance work practices on workfamily balance. Besides the net main
effects, the aim has also been to disentangle the mechanisms by which such effects
occur, using as mediators job satisfaction and working hours. In light of the caution
required by the limitations related to single-item variables measuring the constructs and
the usual causation caveats, the overall results shows that, in general, family-friendly
practices and high-performance work practices have a positive effect on workfamily
balance. Additionally, we found that these effects are partially mediated by job
satisfaction and working hours. Specifically, we have observed that family-friendly
practices and high-performance work practices have a positive effect on job satisfaction,
while only two of the three family-friendly practices seem to increase working hours.
Moreover, the analyses show that the proposed model is, in general, a partial mediation
model.
Further considerations show effects that are opposite to the ones predicted. Contrary
to expectation, flexibility decreases workfamily balance. Moreover, flexibility in our
study increases time at work, having at the end an indirect positive and negative effect
on workfamily balance. Flexibility endeavors to facilitate workfamily integration,
enabling people to cope with the fluctuating demands of the family domain (Clark, 2000),
which increases job satisfaction and time at work. The fact that this practice allows
people to balance the competing needs of family and work, while maintaining their
responsibilities at work and at home, increases physical and emotional demands on
individuals, which results in lower levels of workfamily balance. This negative effect is
explained by the positive effect that flexibility has on time at work. This is in line with
previous literature which found that work demands lead to lower levels of workfamily
balance (Carlson and Kacmar, 2000). Time off also showed the opposite effect to that
predicted, as it increased working hours. However, the final effect on workfamily
balance is, in line with prediction, positive. It seems that while it has some negative
effect, the fact that this practice allows workers to accommodate their work schedule to
their family duties, completing all of them in a more convenient manner, has a final
positive effect on workfamily balance.
Regarding high-performance work practices, contrary to expectations, job autonomy
and autonomous teams increases workfamily balance. Moreover, autonomous teams
decrease working hours. In line with previous literature, employees that have more
autonomy at work are more motivated and make more voluntary effort (Ollo-Lpez et al.,
2010). This can imply that, according to the principle of reciprocity, they work harder
during their working hours, reducing the number of those hours and having more time
to dedicate to the family domain, increasing workfamily balance.

Workfamily
balance

17

MRJIAM
14,1

Downloaded by Universidad ESAN At 10:06 19 July 2016 (PT)

18

The fact that, in almost all cases, partial mediation occurs may be accounted for by
other aspects of the relationship between family and work, which are not taken into
account in this research (e.g. psychological involvement in work and family roles: Frone
et al., 1992; Greenhaus et al., 2003).
6. Limitations and future research
Of course, this paper is not free of limitations. First of all, the fact that the data are from
secondary data sources means that we could not participate in the design of the
questionnaire or limit the type of measure used in this study. Such a constraint was more
noticeable in the case of single-item measures. Likewise, while our interest was in the
effect of family-friendly practices on workfamily balance, it would be interesting to
analyze the real effects that the use of these practices may have. This may constitute an
interesting avenue for future research, as it may enable a clearer understanding of the
mechanisms that link the use of family-friendly practices and workfamily balance.
Furthermore, the non-longitudinal nature of the data sets used in the article implies
that the statistical relationships found in the article cannot be considered causal in the
intended direction. Also, the use of secondary data obtained by means of face-to-face
interviews meant that a measure of social-desirability (Fisher and Katz, 2000) could not
be included in the analysis. As workfamily balance can be a sensitive subject, in
face-to-face interviews, people can show a social-desirability bias, meaning that
social-desirability bias is a limitation in our study.
Finally, we should acknowledge that the omission of some other mediators and some
important moderators, as well as a wider set of family-friendly practices and
high-performance work practices, may qualify our results. Further research conducted
with more practices is essential.
7. Conclusions and practical implications
In summary, offering employees family-friendly practices and high-performance work
practices is a good starting point to increase peoples quality of life by helping them
achieve workfamily balance. Moreover, in general, the effect of both sets of
human-resources management practices on workfamily balance partially goes beyond
the effect of job satisfaction and working hours. In general, both sets of practices
increase job satisfaction, and with family-friendly practices, also working hours.
Managers should take into account that, in line with the previous literature, job
satisfaction increases employees performance (Judge et al., 2001), which eventually has
a positive effect on organizational performance (Harter et al., 2002).
Human resources managers should take these results into account to design and offer
a set of practices that fit well with employees needs and, as such, contribute to their
well-being and quality of life, as well as having more satisfied workers, which can be
translated into better organizational performance (Wood et al., 2012).
References
Allen, T.D., Herst, D.E.L., Bruck, C.S. and Sutton, M. (2000), Consequences associated with
work-family conflict: a review and agenda for future research, Journal of Occupational
Health Psychology, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 278-308.
Appelbaum, E. and Berg, P. (2001), High-performance work systems and labor market
structures, in Berg, I. and Kalleberg, A.L. (Eds), Sourcebook of Labor Markets, Kluwer
Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York, NY.

Downloaded by Universidad ESAN At 10:06 19 July 2016 (PT)

Appelbaum, E., Bailey, T., Berg, P. and Kalleberg, A. (2000), Manufacturing Advantage, Why
High Performance Work Systems Pay Off, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY.
Balmforth, K. and Gardner, D. (2006), Conflict and facilitation between work and family:
realizing the outcomes for organizations, New Zealand Journal of Psychology, Vol. 35
No. 2, pp. 59-68.
Baron, R.M. and Kenny, D.A. (1986), The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social
psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations, Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 51, pp. 1173-1182.
Batt, R. (2002), Managing customer services: human resource practices, quit rates, and sales
growth, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 45 No. 3, pp. 587-597.
Batt, R. and Valcour, M. (2001), Human Resource Practices as Predictors of Work-Family
Outcomes and Employee Turnover, Cornell University ILR School, Ithaca, NY.
Batt, R. and Valcour, P.M. (2003), Human resource practices as predictors of work-family
outcomes and employee turnover, Industrial Relations, Vol. 42 No. 2, pp. 189-220.
Bayo-Moriones, A. and Merino-Daz de Cerio, J. (2002), Las prcticas de recursos humanos de alto
compromiso: un estudio de los factores que influyen sobre su adopcin en la industria
espaola, Cuadernos De Economa Y Direccin De La Empresa, Vol. 12, pp. 227-246.
Beauregard, T., Henry, A. and Lesley, C. (2009), Making the link between work-life balance
practices and organizational performance, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 19,
pp. 9-22.
Bello-Pintado, A. (2015), Bundles of HRM practices and performance: empirical evidence from a
Latin American context, Human Resource Management Journal, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 311-330.
Bender, A., Donohue, S. and Heywood, J. (2005), Job satisfaction and gender segregation, Oxford
Economic Papers, Vol. 57 No. 3, pp. 479-496.
Berg, P., Kalleber, A. and Appelbaum, E. (2003), Balancing work and family: the role of
high-commitment environments, Industrial and Labor Relations, Vol. 42 No. 2, pp. 168-188.
Blau, P.M. (1964), Exchange and Power in Social Life, Wiley, New York, NY.
Bloom, N., Kretschmer, T. and Van Reenen, J. (2009), Determinants and Consequences of
Family-Friendly Workplace Practices: An International Study, LSE/Stanford Mimeo.
Boxall (2012), High-performance work systems: what, why, how and for whom?, Asia Pacific
Journal of Human Resources, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 169-186.
Boxall, P. and Macky, K. (2009), Research and theory on high-performance work systems:
progressing the high-involvement stream, Human Resource Management Journal, Vol. 19
No. 1, pp. 3-23.
Breaugh, J. (1985), The measurement of work autonomy, Human Relations, Vol. 38 No. 6,
pp. 551-570.
Brough, P., Holt, J., Bauld, A. and Ryan, C. (2008), The ability of worklife balance policies to
influence key social/organisational issues, Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources,
Vol. 46 No. 3, pp. 261-274.
Budd, J.W. and Mumford, K. (2006), Family-friendly work practices in Britain: availability and
perceived accessibility, Human Resource Management, Vol. 45 No. 1, pp. 23-42.
Carlson, D.S. and Kacmar, K.M. (2000), Work-family conflict in the organization: do life role
values make a difference?, Journal of Management, Vol. 26 No. 5, pp. 1031-1054.
Clark, S.C. (2000), Work/family border theory: a new theory of work/family balance, Human
Relations, Vol. 53 No. 6, pp. 747-770.

Workfamily
balance

19

MRJIAM
14,1

Downloaded by Universidad ESAN At 10:06 19 July 2016 (PT)

20

De Simone, S., Lampis, J., Lasio, D., Serri, F., Cicotto, G. and Putzu, D. (2014), Influences of
work-family interface on job and life satisfaction, Applied Research in Quality of Life, Vol. 9
No. 4, pp. 831-861.
Delbridge, R. and Whitfield, K. (2001), Employee perceptions of job influence and organizational
participation, Industrial Relations, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 472-489.
Dex, S. and Smith, C. (2002), The Nature and Pattern of Family-Friendly Employment Policies in
Britain, Policy Press and Joseph Rowntree Foundation, Bristol.
Dolbier, C.E., Webster, J.A., McCalister, K.T., Mallon, M.W. and Steinhardt, M.A. (2005),
Reliability and validity of a single-item measure of job satisfaction, American Journal of
Health Promotion, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 194-198.
Edwards, J.R. and Rothbard, N.P. (2000), Mechanisms linking work and family: clarifying the
relationship between work and family constructs, Academy of Management Review,
Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 178-199.
Eriksson, T. and Ortega, J. (2006), The adoption of job rotation: testing the theories, Industrial
and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 59 No. 4, pp. 653-666.
Ezra, M. and Deckman, M. (1996), Balancing work and responsibilities: flextime and child care in
the federal government, Public Administration Review, Vol. 56 No. 2, pp. 174-179.
Ferrer, A. and Gagn, L. (2006), The use of family friendly workplace practices in Canada,
Working Paper Series No. 2, Institute for Research on Public Policy.
Fisher, R.J. and Katz, J.E. (2000), Social-desirability bias and the validity of self-reported values,
Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 105-120.
Foley, S., Hang-yue, N. and Loi, R. (2005), Work role stressors and turnover intentions: a study of
professional clergy in Hong Kong, Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 16
No. 11, pp. 2133-2146.
Frone, M.R., Russell, M. and Cooper, M.L. (1992), Antecedents and outcomes of work-family
conflict: testing a model of the work-family interface, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 77
No. 1, pp. 65-78.
Frye, K. and Breaugh, J. (2004), Family-friendly policies, supervisor support, work-family
conflicto, family-work conflict, and satisfaction: a test of a conceptual model, Journal of
Business and Psychology, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 197-220.
Fursman, L. and Callister, P. (2009), Mens Participation in Unpaid Care, A Review of the
Literature, Department of Labour and the Ministry of Womens Affairs.
Gallie, D., Zhou, Y., Felstead, A. and Green, F. (2012), Teamwork, skill development and employee
welfare, British Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 50 No. 1, pp. 23-46.
Glass, J.L. and Finley, A. (2002), Coverage and effectiveness of family-responsive workplace
policies, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 313-337.
Godard, J. (2004), A critical assessment of the high-performance paradigm, British Journal of
Industrial Relations, Vol. 42 No. 2, pp. 349-378.
Gould-Williams, J. (2004), The effects of high commitment HRM practices on employee attitude:
the views of public sector workers, Public Administration, Vol. 82 No. 1, pp. 63-81.
Gray, M. and Tudball, J. (2002), Access to family-friendly work practices: differences within and
between Australian workplaces, Family Matters, Vol. 61, pp. 30-35.
Green, F. (2001), Its been a hard days night: the concentration and intensification of work in late
20th century Britain, British Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 53-80.
Green, F. (2004), Why has work effort become more intense?, Industrial Relations, Vol. 43 No. 4,
pp. 709-741.

Greenhaus, J.H., Collins, K.M. and Shaw, J.D. (2003), The relation between work-family balance
and quality of life, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 63 No. 3, pp. 510-531.
Guest, D. (1999), Human resource management the workers verdict, Human Resource
Management Journal, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 5-25.
Harley, B., Allen, B.C. and Sargent, L.D. (2007), High performance work systems and employee
experience of work in the service sector: the case of aged care, British Journal of Industrial
Relations, Vol. 45 No. 3, pp. 607-633.
Harter, J.K., Schmidt, F.L. and Hayes, T.L. (2002), Business-unit level relationship between
employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: a meta-analysis,
Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 87 No. 2, pp. 268-279.

Downloaded by Universidad ESAN At 10:06 19 July 2016 (PT)

Hill, E.J. (2005), Work-family facilitation and conflict, working fathers and mothers, work-family
stressors and support, Journal of Family Issues, Vol. 26 No. 6, pp. 793-819.
Huselid, M.A. (1995), The impact of human resource management practices on turnover,
productivity and corporate financial performance, Academy of Management Journal,
Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 653-672.
Ichniowski, C., Kochan, T.A., Levine, D., Olson, C. and Strauss, G. (1996), What works at work:
overview and assessment, Industrial Relations, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 299-333.
Idrovo, S., Carlier, C., Lorente, L. and Grau-Grau, M. (2012), Comparing work-life balance in
Spanish and Latin-American countries, European Journal of Training & Development,
Vol. 36 Nos 2/3, pp. 286-307.
Jiang, K., Lepak, D.P., Hu, J. and Baer, J.C. (2012), How does human resource management
influence organizational outcomes? A meta-analytic investigation of mediating
mechanisms, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 55 No. 6, pp. 1264-1294.
Jokinen, K. and Kuronen, M. (2011), Research on families and family policies in Europe Major
trends, in Uhlendorff, M.R. and Euteneuer, M. (Eds), Wellbeing of Families in Future
Europe, Challenges for Research and Policy, Family Platform Families in Europe Volume
1, Family Platform, pp. 13-118.
Jones, W.M. and McKenna, J. (2002), Women and work home conflict: a dual paradigm
approach, Health Education, Vol. 102 No. 5, pp. 1-15.
Judge, T.A., Thoresen, C.J., Bono, J.E. and Patton, G.K. (2001), The job-satisfaction-job
performance relationship: a qualitative and quantitative review, Psychological Bulletin,
Vol. 127 No. 3, pp. 376-407.
Kalleberg, A., Nesheim, T. and Olsen, K. (2009), Is participation good or bad for workers? Effects
of autonomy, consultation and teamwork on stress among workers in Norway, Acta
Sociologica, Vol. 52 No. 2, pp. 99-116.
apniewska, Z. (2014), Well-being and social development in the context of gender equality,
Working paper No. 1, Gender Equality and Quality of Life State of the Art.
Lu, L., Kao, S.-F., Chang, T.-T., Wu, H.-P. and Cooper, C.L. (2008), Work/family demands, work
flexibility, work/family conflict, and their consequences at work: a national probability
sample in Taiwan, International Journal of Stress Management, Vol. 15, pp. 1-21.
McGinnity, F. and Whelan, C. (2009), Comparing work-life conflict in Europe: evidence from the
European social survey, Social Indicators Research, Vol. 93 No. 3, pp. 433-444.
McMillan, H.S., Morris, M.L. and Atchley, E.K. (2011), Constructs of the work/life interface: a
synthesis of the literature and introduction of the concept of work/life harmony, Human
Resources Development Review, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 6-25.

Workfamily
balance

21

MRJIAM
14,1

Downloaded by Universidad ESAN At 10:06 19 July 2016 (PT)

22

Macky, K. and Boxall, P. (2007), The relationship between high performance work practices and
employee attitudes: an investigation of addictive and interaction effects, The International
Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 537-567.
Md-Sidin, S., Sambasivan, M. and Ismail, I. (2008), Relationship between work-family conflict and
quality of life: an investigation into the roles of social support, Journal of Managerial
Psychology, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 58-81.
Milkie, M. and Peltola, P. (1999), Playing all the roles: gender and the work-family balancing act,
Journal of Marriage and the Family, Vol. 61, pp. 476-490.
Moulton, B.R. (1990), An illustration of a pitfall in estimating the effects of aggregate variables on
micro units, The Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 72 No. 2, pp. 334-338.
Ollo-Lpez, A., Bayo, A. and Larraza, M. (2010), The relationship between new work practices
and employee effort, Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 52 No. 2, pp. 219-235.
Osterman, P. (1995), Work/family programs and the employment relationship, Administrative
Science Quaterly, Vol. 40 No. 4, pp. 681-700.
Pichler, F. (2009), Determinants of work-life balance: shortcomings in the contemporary
measurement of WLB in large-scale surveys, Social Indicators Research, Vol. 92 No. 3,
pp. 449-469.
Podsakoff, P., MacKenzie, S., Lee, J. and Podsakoff, N. (2003), Common method biases in
behavioural research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies,
Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 879-903.
Poelmans, S., Chinchilla, N. and Cardona, P. (2003), The adoption of family-friendly HRM policies:
competing for scarce resources in the labour market, International Journal of Manpower,
Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 128-147.
Preacher, K. and Hayes, A. (2008), Contemporary approaches to assessing mediation in
communication research, in Hayes, A.F., Slater, M.D. and Snyder, L.B. (Eds), The Sage
Sourcebook of Advanced Data Analysis Methods for Communication Research, Sage
Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 13-54.
Roca Puig, V., Escrig Tena, A.B. and Bou Llusar, J.C. (2002), Compromiso con los empleados y
estrategia competitiva: un anlisis intersectorial de su repercusin sobre los resultados,
Cuadernos De Economa Y Direccin De La Empresa, Vol. 12, pp. 267-289.
Rode, J., Rehg, M.T., Near, J.P. and Underhill, J.R. (2007), The effect of work/family conflict on
intention to quit: the mediating roles of job and life satisfaction, Applied Research in
Quality of Life, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 65-82.
Sarantinos, V. (2007), Flexibility in the workplace: what happens to commitment?, Journal of
Business and Public Affairs, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 1-10.
Sirgy, M.J., Reilly, N.P., Wu, J. and Efraty, D. (2008), A work-life identity model of well-being:
towards a research agenda linking quality-of-work-life (QWL) programs with quality of life
(QOL), Applied Research in Quality of Life, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 181-202.
Sousa-Poza. A. and Sousa-Poza. A. (2000), Taking another look at the gender/job-satisfaction
paradox, KYKLOS, Vol. 53 No. 2, pp. 135-152.
Spector, P. (2006), Method variance in organizational research: truth or urban legend,
Organizational Research Methods, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 221-232.
Voicu, M., Voicu, B. and Strapcova, K. (2009), Housework and gender inequality in European
countries, European Sociological Review, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 365-377.
Voydanoff, P. (1988), Work role characteristics, family structure demands and work-family
conflict, Journal of Marriage and the Family, Vol. 50 No. 3, pp. 749-761.

Downloaded by Universidad ESAN At 10:06 19 July 2016 (PT)

Voydanoff, P. (2005), Consequences of boundary-spanning demands and resources for

work-to-family conflict and perceived stress, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology,
Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 491-503.
Wanous, J.P., Reichers, A.E. and Hudy, M.J. (1997), Overall job satisfaction: how good are
single-item measures?, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 82 No. 2, pp. 247-252.
Wolcott, I. and Glezer, H. (1995), Work and Family Life: Achieving Integration, Australian Institute
of Family Studies.
Wood, S. and de Menezes, L.M. (2011), High involvement management, high-performance work
systems and well-being, The International Journal of Human Resource Management,
Vol. 22 No. 7, pp. 1586-1610.
Wood, S., Van Veldhoven, M., Croom, M. and de Menezes, L.M. (2012), Enriched job design, high
involvement management and organizational performance: the mediating roles of job
satisfaction and well-being, Human Relations, Vol. 65 No. 4, pp. 419-446.
Yanadori, Y. and Van Jaarsveld, D.D. (2014), The relationships of informal high performance
work practices to job satisfaction and workplace profitability, Industrial Relations, Vol. 53
No. 3, pp. 501-534.
Zhang, J. and Liu, Y. (2011), Antecedents of work-family conflict: review and prospect,
International Journal of Business and Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 89-103.
Corresponding author
Andrea Ollo-Lpez can be contacted at: andrea.ollo@unavarra.es

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

Workfamily
balance

23