Coping with multiple dimensions of work‐family conflict
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/00483480310467606 |
| Published date | 01 June 2003 |
| Date | 01 June 2003 |
| Pages | 275-296 |
| Author | Denise M. Rotondo,Dawn S. Carlson,Joel F. Kincaid |
| Subject Matter | HR & organizational behaviour |
Coping with multiple
dimensions of work-family
conflict
Denise M. Rotondo
Perdue School of Business, Salisbury University, Salisbury,
Maryland, USA
Dawn S. Carlson
Hankamer School of Business, Baylor University, Waco,
Texas, USA, and
Joel F. Kincaid
Perdue School of Business, Salisbury University, Salisbury,
Maryland, USA
Keywords Work, Conflict, Coping, Stress, Family life, Problem solving
Abstract One way to reduce work-family conflict is for individuals to have the ability to effectively
cope with the stressful demands. The relationships between four styles of work and family coping
(direct action, help-seeking, positive thinking, and avoidance/resignation) and levels of work-family
conflict are considered. Two different forms of work-family conflict (time-based and strain-based)
were examined as well as the effect of direction (work interfering with family, family interfering
with work) to examine the efficacy of different coping styles. Help-seeking and direct action coping
used at home were associated with lower family interfering with work conflict levels.
Avoidance/resignation coping was associated with higher conflict levels of all types. The results
suggest individuals may have greater control and opportunity for positive change within the family
domain compared with the work environment.
This study examines the relationships between various styles of coping and
perceived work-family conflict. The literature has clearly established the
impact of work-family conflict on various organizational and individual
outcomes (e.g. Frone et al., 1992; Gutek et al., 1991). Some of the common results
of experienced work-family conflict are increased levels of stress, decreased
performance at home and work, and decreased life and work satisfaction
(Adams et al., 1996; Allen et al., 2000; Frone et al., 1992; Higgins et al., 1992;
Kelly and Voydanoff, 1985; Voydanoff, 1987). Managing competing demands
from the work and family domains represents a source of formidable stress for
many employees; stress which, in turn, can lead to health risks and other
adverse outcomes. Although this stress is believed to be most salient among
female employees, there should be little doubt that males also experience stress
resulting from conflicting roles and demands (Burley, 1994; Davidson and
Cooper, 1992).
The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister http://www.emeraldinsight.com/0048-3486.htm
Coping with
work-family
conflict
275
Received April 2002
Accepted October 2002
Personnel Review
Vol. 32 No. 3, 2003
pp. 275-296
qMCB UP Limited
0048-3486
DOI 10.1108/00483480310467606
Research on work-family conflict has focused on defining the concept more
explicitly to reflect its complex nature (Frone et al., 1996; Greenhaus and
Beutell, 1985). The applied and practical response has been a proliferation of
suggested work-place strategies addressing family needs. The practitioner
literature has focused on the ways organizations can “manage the situation” by
creating flexible working policies or arrangements. Such flexibility is, clearly, a
potential means of reducing stress associated with work-family conflict
(Warren and Johnson, 1995). The fact remains, however, that such policies and
arrangements are still not available to everyone.
Many employees, especially those working in smaller companies, do not
enjoy benefits like flexitime, on-site day care, career-break schemes, and
informal support networks. Further, many jobs are not suitable for alternative
arrangements like job sharing. Often, the ability to cope with the stress created
from the simultaneous demands of work and family is a function of the
capabilities of the individual.
While research has supported the general, stress-reducing properties of
coping (Lazarus and Folkman, 1984), there is a lack of research examining
which styles of coping are most effective in dealing with the particular stressor
of work-family conflict. An understanding of the relationship between coping
and work-family conflict is needed. The purpose of our research is to consider
the efficacy of general styles of coping on various dimensions of work-family
conflict. In particular, we examine four styles of coping (direct action, help-
seeking, positive thinking, and avoidance/resignation) and two forms of work-
family conflict (time-based and strain-based) viewed from a bi-directional
perspective (work interference with family (WIF) and family interference with
work (FIW)).
Work-family conflict
Work-family conflict is a form of inter-role conflict in which role pressures from
the work and family domains are incompatible in some respect (Greenhaus and
Beutell, 1985). Originally believed to be unidimensional, research in the area of
work-family conflict has recently focused on refining the conceptualization of
work-family conflict (Carlson et al., 2000; Frone et al., 1996; Greenhaus and
Beutell, 1985). Indeed, much of the past research concerning work-family
conflict has failed to take into consideration the complex nature of the work-
family issues. This has led to a call for more consistency in measurement, more
refined construct development of the measures, and better sampling techniques
(Kossek and Ozeki, 1998).
Work-family conflict occurs in multiple forms because conflict can originate
under various conditions (Greenhaus and Beutell, 1985; Stephens and Sommer,
1996). Though there are many forms considered in the literature, most research
directly or indirectly focuses on the forms of time and psychological strain. The
work-family interface is also recognized as a permeable boundary. Demands at
PR
32,3
276
To continue reading
Request your trial