Supervisor support and work-life balance. Impacts on job performance in the Australian financial sector
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-12-2016-0314 |
| Date | 03 April 2018 |
| Published date | 03 April 2018 |
| Pages | 727-744 |
| Author | A.K.M. Talukder,Margaret Vickers,Aila Khan |
| Subject Matter | HR & organizational behaviour,Global HRM |
Supervisor support and
work-life balance
Impacts on job performance in the
Australian financial sector
A.K.M. Talukder, Margaret Vickers and Aila Khan
School of Business, Western Sydney University, Sydney, Australia
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this pa per is to investigate t he relations betwee n supervisor support (SS),
work-life balance (WLB ), job attitudes and perfor mance of employees in the Aust ralian financial
sector. More specific ally, the study explor e the impact of SS, WLB and job a ttitudes on employees ’job
performance (J P).
Design/methodology/approach –Using an online panel, the data comprised 305 employees working in
financial organisations to test a model with structural equation modelling. A list of survey items was tested
that replicated extensively in work-life research in the past.
Findings –The research contributed to the existing literature by identifying a significant mechanism
through which SS was linked to WLB that influenced job satisfaction, life satisfaction and organisational
commitment and JP given the paucity of such research in the Australian financial sector.
Originality/value –The study would guide employers, employees and managers involved in the financial
sector to implement policies which aim to augment JP and promote balance between work, home and life.
Keywords Australia, Employee attitudes, Work-life balance, Quantitative, Financial sector,
Job performance, Supervisor support
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
One in two people in Australia is not satisfied with their current work-life balance (WLB).
A recent study reported that 42 per cent of employees thought their WLB had worsened
over the previous five years with the most common reason reported being longer working
hours ( Johnson, 2015). Almost 14 per cent of Australian workers work very long hours,
defined as more than 50 hours a week, and slightly higher than the OECD average of 13
per cent of workers (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, 2015).
The financial sector is especially noted as being notorious for its poor WLB in recent times,
being recognised for long hours, weekend work, and an intensely stressful working
environment. The financial service is the Australia’s largest industry contributed to 9.30
per cent of national economy during 2015 (Financial Services Council –UBS, 2016). It has
experienced the highest rate of growth of any sector of the economy which is larger than
mining, agriculture or manufacturing in Australia. So, we were surprised to find few
academic researchers had specifically focussed on this sector and we claim that, if
Australian financial sector employees cannot cope well at work due to the mismatch
between the demands of their work, and their personal and family life, the whole financial
sector may be in jeopardy, putting in peril the entire Australian economy.
The role of a supervisor in the financesector is critical in ensuring a transparent, fair anda
legitimate process of decision making which usually carries financial consequences for
customers and other stakeholders (de Waal et al., 2015). In such an environment of close
supervision, it is the attitudes and behaviours of the immediate manager which has a direct
impact on employees’ability to maintaina WLB (Steinberg and McCartney, 2002). Therefore,
the skills of a supervisorin such an industry are even more importantin helping an individual
with non-workissues which may impact employees’working styles. Paststudy demonstrates
Personnel Review
Vol. 47 No. 3, 2018
pp. 727-744
© Emerald PublishingLimited
0048-3486
DOI 10.1108/PR-12-2016-0314
Received 1 December 2016
Revised 26 May 2017
Accepted 5 August 2017
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0048-3486.htm
727
Supervisor
support and
WLB
that supervisors not only impact employees’state of WLB but also exert considerable
influence overthe usage and success of formal and informal work-life practices (Fiksenbaum,
2014). Workplace support has been shown to be a crucial contextual resource that can help
employees to accomplish the things they value, including greater WLB (Greenhaus et al.,
2012). Supervisor support (SS) in the workplace promotes increased level of WLB through
offering flexible work schedule which enables employees to accomplish work and non-work
commitments and responsibilities (Russo et al., 2016). It is reported that SS can nurture
optimal psycholog ical and environment al conditions for emp loyees who may feel sa fer and
more capable to invest in activities that promote greater WLB.
Hobfoll’s conservation of resources (COR) theory shows organisational work-family
resources have positive effects on employees. According to Hobfoll (2002), resources are
defined as “entities that are either centrally valued in their own right or act to obtain
centrally valued ends”(p. 307) and are considered vital for employee resistance to stress.
Because organisational work-family resources are commonly implemented in response to
employees’desires and values –and therefore fall within Hobfoll’s definition of resources –
they are expected to aid in stress resistance and result in positive effects for employees.
This provides a rationale for a direct link between organisational work-family resources and
subsequent performance and attitudes. Theoretically, if resources are supplied by
organisations to assist individuals in managing work and family domains, the potential for
positive outcomes exists through perceptions of decreased role conflict, specifically,
decreased work-family conflict.
Regarding Australian perspective, Skinner and Chapman (2013) review the likely impact
of work-life policies and practices on work-life outcomes (e.g. work-life interference,
work-life facilitation) in the Australian public, health and social sectors. A study using the
Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia data reports an inverse relation
between sustained long hours and WLB (Brown, 2012). Hayman (2010) finds a positive
association between flextime and WLB, reduced work overload and stress, and increased
job satisfaction ( JS). Employee well-being is reported to have a stronger association
with individual effort than organisational deliberation in providing WLB programmes
(Zheng et al., 2015). Brough et al. (2014) identify the need for construct refinement of WLB
literature for Australian and New Zealand workers.
Gaps in the existing WLB literature led us to undertake the present study. First, past works
have investigated several predictors of WLB (e.g. social support, work-family conflict, family
supportive supervisor behaviour, family supportive organisational perceptions, organisation
commitment, and organisational resources), but the influence of SS on WLB, and its subsequent
effects on employees’attitudes and job performance ( JP), has not been fully examined.
Second, the extensive body of work-family research has been dominated by studies from the
USA (e.g. Eby et al., 2005). It is only quite recently that researchers have begun to conceptualise
and investigate the work-family interface in other national contexts (Poelmans et al., 2005).
The dominance of research from the US context, in concert with a general lack of consensus
between other countries, has resulted in a disparate and fractured understanding of the
interplay between work and life for those beyond the USA (Shaffer et al., 2011). There has been
especially meagre research into the financial sector in Australia. To shed light on this issue, it is
important to theorise and identify the mechanisms by which SS affects employees’JP. As such,
the research question that drives the present study is:
RQ1. How does SS link with employees’JP?
In supporting this, we developed a conceptual model (see Figure 1) to examine the
relationship between SS, WLB, employees’attitudes towards JS, life satisfaction (LS), and
organisational commitment (OC), and JP. By empirically testing the relationships in our
model, we contribute to the current body of knowledge.
728
PR
47,3
To continue reading
Request your trial