Search results

All staff at the University of New England were sent a personal particulars form and questionnaires designed to obtain information about job‐related factors which acted as stressors for them, their general stress, their emotional health, and their physical health. Factor analysis of the job stressors questionnaires revealed that six factors, namely, job significance, workload, work politics, interpersonal dealings at work, work conditions, and university reorganization, were the major stressors for the staff. In general, younger staff members reported more job stress than older staff. Staff belonging to the Faculty of Education, Nursing and Professional Studies at the Armidale campus and general staff at the Armidale campus reported more job stress than other staff. There was some indication that staff employed at the higher job levels were less stressed than those employed at the lower job levels and support staff. Both the job stress and non‐work stress were associated with poor physical health, poor emotional health, and high job dissatisfaction.

This paper seeks to describe how the results of the qualitative research method of focus groups may be used as conceptual data at the onset of a research study to inform researchers regarding relevant issues for future more in‐depth quantitative study.

Seven focus group sessions with a total of 50 participants were conducted, each focus group with six to eight participants. All focus groups included the homogeneous participants of new entrants to the hospitality industry. Focus group questions were inductive and naturalistic and centered on career expectations and work‐life issues. Sessions averaged 1 hour and 15 minutes and were conducted by trained graduate students.

The paper suggests that long, unpredictable hours create both work‐related and non‐work stress. Further, there is general agreement regarding the stressors and benefits associated with working in the hospitality industry.

Limitations include the use of senior, hospitality management majors, all of whom had hospitality industry employment experience, but some of whom had fewer than 1,000 hours of such experience.

This work illustrates how focus groups may fit into a larger research study involving the hospitality industry. This work also explores the common issue, but understudied topic of work‐life balance in the hotel industry. In so doing, it provides greater understanding of the issue to researchers.

Prior research has extensively examined how bringing technology from work into the non-work life domain creates conflict, yet the reverse pathway has rarely been studied. The purpose of this study is to bridge this gap and examine how the non-work use of smartphones in the workplace affects work–life conflict.

Drawing from three literature streams: technostress, work–life conflict and role boundary theory, the authors theorise on how limiting employees' ability to integrate the personal life domain into work, by means of technology use policy, contributes to stress and work–life conflict. To test this model, the authors employ a natural experiment in a company that changed its policy from fully restricting to open smartphone access for non-work purposes in the workplace. The insights gained from the experiment were explored further through qualitative interviews.

Work–life conflict declines when a ban on using smartphones for non-work purposes in the workplace is revoked. This study's results show that the relationship between smartphone use in the workplace and work–life conflict is mediated by sensed stress. Additionally, a post-hoc analysis reveals that work performance was unchanged when the smartphone ban was revoked.

First, this study advances the authors' understanding of how smartphone use policies in the workplace spill over to affect non-work life. Second, this work contributes to the technostress literature by revealing how, in specific situations, engagement with ICT can reduce distress and strain.

Previous research indicates that accompanying partners often struggle to find employment upon international relocations. This study aims to highlight diplomat’s partners’ employment situation and to examine how unrealized professional aspirations affect their socio-cultural and psychological adjustment in the foreign environment.

This study applies OLS regression analysis to a sample of 220 partners of German Foreign Service diplomats who were surveyed regarding their locational adjustment, general stress and perceived quality of life using an online questionnaire. This study differentiates between working partners (19.5% of the total sample), non-working partners with a desire to obtain paid employment (65.5%) and partners who are unemployed by choice (15.0%).

The results demonstrate that partners’ employment situation and employment aspirations are important variables explaining differences in socio-cultural and psychological adjustment. Working partners reveal the highest levels of general stress, non-working partners with an employment desire report the lowest levels of locational adjustment and non-working partners without employment aspirations experience the highest quality of life.

As this study has a cross-sectional design, the authors are not able to deal with potential issues of reverse causality.

Sending organizations should consider accompanying partners' unrealized employment aspirations by providing services with regard to job search and career development. Moreover, they should ensure the provision of services that support the work–life balance of working couples.

Previous research only sparsely examined the adjustment and well-being of partners accompanying foreign service employees, who are in contrast to business expatriates required to relocate every three to five years. Moreover, this study features the crucial role of partners' employment situation and discusses possibilities to promote spousal employment, as well as complementary measures to improve work–life balance for dual-earner couples.

In this chapter we extend previous theory on the effects of stressors at the intersection of the work–family interface by considering the challenge stressor–hindrance stressor framework. Our central proposition is that stressors in one domain (work or non-work) are associated with criteria in the same domain and across domains through four core mediating variables. Through this theoretical lens we develop a set of propositions, which as a set, suggest that managing the work–family interface involves balancing the offsetting indirect effects of challenge and hindrance stressors.

Expands on research which has demonstrated that employment has positive or neutral effects on women’s health. This pilot study examines whether these positive effects could also be found in employed mothers by comparing working mothers with non‐working mothers on measures of mental health, self‐esteem, and mother role satisfaction. Also this study assesses the stress experienced by these mothers and examines the coping strategies used by them. Of the 200 questionnaires distributed, 101 were returned giving a 50.5 per cent return rate of which 78 per cent were working mothers and 22 per cent non‐working mothers. The working mothers had better mental health and reported less depression than the non‐working mothers. The most frequently reported source of stress for working mothers was not having enough time to do everything, whereas for non‐working mothers lack of social life was a major stressor. The findings of this study support the expansion hypothesis, which emphasizes the benefits rather than the costs of multiple role involvement.

Occupational stress and the role of the family and other non-work activities continue to be an important area of research for organizational scientists. In our sixth volume of Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, we offer seven intriguing chapters that examine several key issues in work and non-work stress research. The theme for this volume is exploring the work and non-work interface.

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to address this gap in the literature by examining a cohort of Indonesians employed within a financial organisation and the cross‐cultural transition stresses that they and their families encountered when relocated within Indonesia. Design/methodology/approach – The research involved semi‐structured interviews conducted with managers in a financial institution in Indonesia. In specifically referring to non‐work issues, the paper explores the support given by the transferees’ organisation, the difficulties experienced by the employees and their families. Findings – The major finding was that managers believe that the organisation provides them with insufficient support to deal with the cross‐cultural transition stresses that result from their domestic relocations. Practical implications – The paper provides suggestions for HR and senior managers to more effectively address non‐work needs of domestic transferees. Originality/value – While expatriate management literature has devoted considerable attention to cross‐cultural transition stresses encountered when transiting across international borders to undertake international assignments, a smaller body of literature has examined the transition stresses experienced by domestic employees and their families when relocating jobs within nations. An issue erstwhile given much less consideration within the literature, however, is the cross‐cultural transition stresses experienced by employees and their families who are relocated within nations that have substantive regional cultural differences. Thus, this research adds value to the existing literature in undertaking an assessment of cross‐cultural transition stresses in domestic relocation.

This paper aims to examine a mediating model of work-to-leisure conflict (WLC) based on the job demand-control-support model (JDCS model) and conflict roles of work and non-work life. This model proposes that work loading, time-off autonomy and support from supervisors and co-workers are related to WLC and leisure satisfaction.

A sample of 457 frontline employees drawn from within the hospitality and tourism industry completed a study questionnaire. All hypothesized relationships were estimated using structural equation modeling.

Results support a theoretical model in which WLC works as a partial mediator between job stress variables and leisure satisfaction. Findings suggest that low workload and flexible time-off contribute to alleviating WLC and facilitating leisure satisfaction and with the addition of high co-worker support, directly benefit employee leisure satisfaction.

Management implications related to job design and work-related social support are discussed.

The current study contributes to the existing knowledge base by testing WLC as a partial mediator between work loading–leisure satisfaction and time-off autonomy–leisure satisfaction relationships. These findings help human resource management managers broaden their understanding of the role of WLC in balancing frontline employees’ life in work and non-work domains.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the moderating role of Type A/Type B personality on job stress-work and non-work outcomes. While research on the etiology of this predisposition has become important in recent years, there seems to be a lack of agreement regarding its exact moderating effects on important work and non-work outcomes.

Data collected from US-based organizations were analyzed using moderated regression analyses.

The results of the study reveal that Type A personality moderates the relationships between job stress and job satisfaction, job involvement and personal life satisfaction. Findings indicate that individuals with Type A personalities do not necessarily experience concomitant decreases in these outcome measures when organizational stress increases.

Although there has been an increased interest on the significance of Type A/Type B personality in the area of human stress and cognition, there is no consensus in the literature as to how it might act as a moderator or buffer of the effects of work stress on organizationally and personally valued outcomes. By examining the moderating role of these personality dispositions, our study provides important insights for organizational stress literature.