Job stress, Job Performance, and Leadership support

Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management JIEM, 2013 – 6(4): 1188-1209 – Online ISSN: 2013-0953 – Print ISSN: 2013-8423

http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem.858

Job stress with supervisor’s social support as a determinant of work

intrusion on family conflict

Azman Ismail, Fara Farihana Suhaimi, Rizal Abu Bakar, Syed Shah Alam

School of Management, Faculty of Economics and Management,

University Kebangsaan Malaysia (Malaysia)

a [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

Received: May 2013 Accepted: November 2013

A bstract:

Purpose: The primary objective of this study is to examine the influence of supervisor’s social

support in the correlation between job stress and work intrusion on family conflict.

Design/methodology/approach: A survey method was employed to gather survey questionnaires

from academic staff in a Malaysian government university in Borneo. Findings: The outcomes

of SmartPLS path model showed three major findings: first, supervisor’s social support does

act as an important moderating variable in the relationship between role ambiguity and work

intrusion on family conflict. Second, supervisor’s social support does not act as an important

moderating variable in the relationship between role conflict and work intrusion on family

conflict. Third, supervisor’s social support does not act as an important moderating variable in

the relationship between role overload and work intrusion on family conflict. In sum,

supervisor’s social support does act as a partial moderating variable in the hypothesized model.

Findings: The outcomes of SmartPLS path model showed three major findings: first,

supervisor’s social support does act as an important moderating variable in the relationship

between role ambiguity and work intrusion on family conflict. Second, supervisor’s social

support does not act as an important moderating variable in the relationship between role

conflict and work intrusion on family conflict. Third, supervisor’s social support does not act as

an important moderating variable in the relationship between role overload and work intrusion

-1188-

Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem.858

on family conflict. In sum, supervisor’s social support does act as a partial moderating variable

in the hypothesized model.

Practical implications: The findings of this study can be used as guidelines by management to

overcome job stress problems through updating the content and methods of stress

management training program, strengthening work groups and group cohesiveness in executing

job, improving work-life balance programs to reduce the employee physiological and

psychological stresses, revisiting the existing job designs based on the qualifications and

expectations of individual employees, and revising compensation and benefits policies and

procedures to cover stress-related disorder diseases, and activating internal employee assistance

programme in order to help employees and their families with problems arising from both

work-related and external resources. If these suggestions are given highly attention this may

increase the capability of employees to enhance the performance of institutions of higher

learning.

Originality/value: The role of supervisor’s social support in influencing the effect of job stress on

family conflict is commonly investigated in Western countries, but it has not been thoroughly

studied in the context of this study.

Keywords: job stress, supervisor’s social support, work intrusion on family conflict

1. Introduction

Most of the research on work stress have been focused on the stressor-strain nucleus of the

traditional stress models and developed them for work context (Poelmans, 2001). Early stage

of the research on the development of work-family conflict (WFC) model researcher introduced

family as an extra-organizational stressor in their work and stress model Matteson and

Ivancevich (1979). Researchers assumed from this model is that some stressors at different

levels that cause strain in the individual, moderated by a number of individual differences

(Poelmans, 2001). This strain finally create behavioural, cognitive and physiological problems.

Based on the demand-control-support model researchers argued that jobs that combine

stressful working conditions, such as high workloads, with low levels of control or decision

latitude and limited social support are associated with more stress, more health problems and

lower job performance (Karasek, 1985; Karasek & Theorell, 1990).

Stress is a situation or an emotion experienced when a someone feels that “demands go

beyond the personal and social resources the individual is able to marshal” (Lazarus, 1966). In

other words, it is a situational feeling when one thinks one has lost control of events (Dar,

-1189-

Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem.858

Akmal, Naseem & Khan, 2011). In any organization for example, job stress is not uncommon.

The incidents of job stress reported by workers have increased steadily in the last decade

(Bliese & Britt, 2001; Brouwers, Evers & Welko, 2001; O’Driscoll & Brough, 2003). A recent

study found that 33% of stress was caused by factors outside the organization while 67% of

stress was caused by internal, company factors. The internal factors included heavy or difficult

work load, working long hours, leadership (or lack thereof), and work environment (Bhatti,

Shar, Shaikh & Nazar, 2010).

In an organizational context, many scholars like Fu and Shaffer (2001), Major, Klein and

Ehrhart (2002), Eby, Casper, Lockwood, Bordeaux and Brinley (2005), Ismail, Mohamed,

Sulaiman, Ismail and Mahmood (2010), and Yu-Fei, Ismail, Ahmad and Kuek (2012) view job

stress as a multidimensional concept that comprises three salient characteristics: role

ambiguity, role conflict and role overload. Firstly, role ambiguity is often viewed as an

employee does not have clear information about his or her work objectives, work scope,

supervisor’s expectations, and responsibilities of his or her job may lead to higher job-related

tension. Secondly, role conflict is usually seen as an employee feels dilemma with his/her job

demand; doing things he or she does not want to do, or doing things that is not considered

part of his/her job. Being in between these two things requires an individual to make decision

and making decision under conflicting demands is frequently stressful. It is seen as an

employee is expected to do his/her job that may cause conflict with other job or non-job

demands. Finally, role overload is normally referred to as an employee associates with too-

heavy work burden which is beyond one’s capability to cope and often results in stress. There

are two different types of role overload described by researchers; quantitative and qualitative.

Quantitative overload simply refers to having too much work to do, whereas qualitative

overload refers to a work that is too difficult for an individual.

A review of recent organizational support literature highlights that the ability of employees to

properly handle role ambiguity, role conflict and role overload may decrease the intrusion of

work problems in employees’ family affairs and increase their abilities to decrease family

conflict (Schiem & Young, 2010; Yildirim & Aycan, 2008). Many scholars like Boles, Howard and

Donofrio (2001), Major et al. (2002); Yildirim and Aycan (2008), and Schiem and Young

(2010) generally view that work intrusion on family conflict as work obstructs employees’

family affairs and thus may disturb their family wellbeing. It can occur in three major forms:

time-based, strain-based and behavior-based. First, time-based conflict occurs when the time

demands of one role are incompatible with those of another (e.g., working overtime forces an

individual to cancel a family outing). Second, strain-based conflict occurs when tension

experienced in one role interferes with participation in another role (e.g., meeting key

performance indicators prevents an individual to concentrates on family matters). Third,

behavior-based conflict occurs when behavior patterns appropriate to one role are

inappropriate in another (e.g., emotional restrictions at work are contrary with the openness

expected by family members). In the workplace, individual employees have different

-1190-

Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem.858

capabilities in handling job stress and in controlling the effect of job stress on their family

conflict. For example, individuals who have experienced moderate and low stress levels in

executing job will be able to manage their physiological and psychological stresses. In this

situation, it may decrease their family conflict. Conversely, individuals who have experienced

high stress levels in implementing job will not be able to control and manage their

physiological and psychological stresses. As a result, it may increase their family conflict

(Ismail et al., 2010; Yu-Fei et al., 2012).

Unexpectedly, a further investigation of the workplace stress reveals that the effect of job

stress on family conflict is not consistent if supervisor’s social support is present in

organizations (Fu & Shaffer, 2001; Goldsen & Scharlach, 2001; Yu-Fei et al., 2012).

Supervisor’s Social Support is viewed as involving perceptions that one has access to

supervisor who is rendering a helping relationship of varying quality or strength that provide

resources such as communication of information, emotional empathy or tangible assistance

(Viswesvaran, Sanchez & Fischer, 1999). Additionally, House (2003) views supervisor’s social

support as involving four important psychosocial aspect namely: emotional support (esteem,

trust, affect, concern, listening), appraisal support (affirmation, feedback, social comparison),

informational support (advice, suggestions, directives, information), and physical support (aid

in-kind, money, labor, time and environmental modification). This support may increase

employees’ predictability, purpose and hope while handling upsetting and threatening

situations in the workplace (Mansor, Fontaine & Chong, 2003; Simpson, 2000).

Obviously, supervisor’s social support focuses on support for personal effectively at work and

at the same time enables the employee’s ability to jointly manage work and family

relationships. Within a job stress model, many scholars view that role ambiguity, role conflict

and role overload, supervisor’s social support, and work intrusion on family conflict, but highly

interrelated constructs. For example, the level of job stress will not interfere and create

employees’ family conflicts when supervisors can adequately provide social support (e.g.,

emotional support, appraisal support and physical support) (Thomas & Ganster, 1995; Allen,

Herst, Bruck & Sutton, 2000; Goldsen & Scharlach, 2001; Yu-Fei et al., 2012). Even though the

nature of this relationship is interesting, the moderating role of supervisor’s social support is

given less emphasized in the workplace stress research literature (Galinsky, Bond & Friedman,

1993; Fu & Shaffer, 2001; Yu-Fei et al., 2012). Many scholars argue that the role of

supervisor’s social support as a moderating variable is given less attention in previous studies

because they have used a segmented approach to separately describe the role of job stress

features, supervisor’s social support characteristics, work intrusion on family conflict

conditions, much employed a simple correlation method to assess the association of job stress

and work intrusion on family conflict, and neglected to explain the influence of supervisor’s

social support in increasing or decreasing the effect of job stress on employees’ family affairs.

As a result, results from these studies have not provided sufficient useful information to be

used as guidelines by practitioners in designing and managing employees’ physiological and

-1191-

Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem.858

psychological stresses in agile organizations (Edwards & Rothbard, 2000; Fu & Shaffer, 2001;

Yu-Fei et al., 2012). Hence, it motivates the researchers to further explore the nature of this

relationship.

2. Objective of the study

This study has three major objectives. Firstly, is to assess the relationship between role

ambiguity, supervisor’s social support and work intrusion on family conflict. Secondly, is to

assess the relationship between role conflict, supervisor’s social support and work intrusion on

family conflict. Thirdly, is to assess the relationship between role overload, supervisor’s social

support and work intrusion on family conflict.

3. Literature review

According to Burke and El-Kot (2010), Grandey, Cordeino and Crouter (2005) work-family

conflict is considered to be an important issue in today’s business world. Nowadays, there has

been an increasing interest in the conflict between work and family life domains, and recent

studies highlight the conflict experienced by individuals between their roles in the family and at

work, which is covered under the heading called work-family conflict. In Western countries

work-family conflict researchers identified theories on the relationships between work demands

and work-family conflict (Spector, Allen, Poelmans, Lapierre, Cooper & Widerszal-Bazyl, 2007).

Other researchers also identified that long working hours, duty and heavy work load have a

direct influence on work-family conflict (Boyar, Maertz, Mosley & Carr, 2008; Kim, Leong & Lee,

2005). So, it is important to establish a successful balance between work and family domains

so that several demands in both domains could be met efficiently, and the required resources

could be attained and used easily (Bass, Butler, Grzywacz & Linney, 2008).

Willis, O’Conner and Smith (2008) cited from the study of Greenhaus and Boutell defined

work-family conflict as a consequence of inconsistent demands between the roles at work and

in the family. In other words, work-family conflict exists when the expectations related to a

certain role do not meet the requirements of the other role, preventing the efficient

performance of that role (Greenhaus, Tammy & Spector, 2006). Therefore, it could be said that

the conflict between work and family domains tends to stem from the conflict between the

roles. Several studies reveal that work and family are not two separate domains as they are

highly interdependent, having a dynamic relation with one another. While family life is affected

by the factors at work, the reverse is also experienced (Trachtenberg, Anderson & Sabatelli,

2009; Namasivayam & Zhao, 2007).

Researchers identified the relationships between social support at work and employees health

and wellbeing (Nabavi & Shahriari, 2012). Studied by McCall, Lombardo and Morrison (1988)

found supervisor support facilitates employee job satisfaction, staff development; on-the-job

learning and organizational commitment. According to Boyar and Mosley (2007) the support of

-1192-

Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem.858

the immediate supervisor has a central impact on the experience and perception of workplace

well-being. In relation to work-family balance, researchers investigations into the role of social

support at work have indicated a negative relationship between support and work-family

conflict.

Several recent studies using an indirect effects model to measure the influence of social

support in the relationship between job stress and work intrusion of family conflict using

different samples, such as 800 employees from 29 academic departments and 34

administrative officers in Hong Kong University (Fu & Shaffer, 2001), 200 working women from

teaching and healthcare professions in Nigeria (Hammed, 2008), and 96 employees in higher

learning institutions in Sarawak (Yu-Fei et al., 2012). Findings from these studies reported that

role ambiguity, role conflict and role overload problems had not increased employees’ family

conflict when supervisors willing to provide adequate physical and moral support in the

respective organizations (Fu & Shaffer, 2001; Hammed, 2008; Yu-Fei et al., 2012).

These studies are consistent with the notion of organizational behavior theory. For example,

role theory (e.g., Kahn, Wolfe, Quinn, Snoek & Rosenthal, 1964; Katz & Kahn, 1978) suggests

that differences between work and family roles, expectations and beliefs is an essential factor

that may affect positive or negative conflict. Besides that, Edwards and Rothbard’s (2000)

spillover theory explains that an individual’s first experience may subsequently affect his/her

experience. For example, emotions and behavior (e.g., an employee’s mood) in one role will

affect second role (e.g., interaction between an individual and his/her supervisor) and this may

affect third factor (i.e., an employee who experiences bad or good interaction with his/her

supervisor will bring this experience when he/she returns home). Application of this theory in a

job stress model shows that the essence of supervisor’s social support is to promote positive

relationship between work and family affairs. For example, the interference of work stress

problems will not increase employees’ family conflict when supervisors keen to provide

adequate material and moral support in the workplace (Fu & Shaffer, 2001; Hammed, 2008;

Yu-Fei et al., 2012).

The literature has been used as a foundation to develop a conceptual framework for this study

as shown in Figure 1.

-1193-

Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem.858

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework

Based on the framework, it can be hypothesized that:

H1: Supervisor’s social support positively moderates the relationship between role

ambiguityand work intrusion on family conflict.

H2: Supervisor’s social support positively moderates the relationship between role conflict

and work intrusion on family conflict.

H3: Supervisor’s social support positively moderates the relationship between role overload

and work intrusion on family conflict.

4. Methodology

This study used a cross-sectional method which allowed the researchers to integrate the job

stress research literature, the semi-structured interview, the pilot study and the actual survey

as a main procedure to collect data. The use of such methods may decrease the inadequacy of

single method and increase the ability to gather accurate, less bias and high quality data

(Cresswell, 1998; Ismail et al., 2010; Sekaran & Bougie, 2010). This study was conducted in a

Malaysian government university in Borneo. The name of this organization is kept anonymous

to avoid intrusiveness. In the first step of data collection, semi-structured interviews were

conducted involving six experienced academic staff in the two types of faculty, namely science

and technology based faculty and social science, humanities and liberal arts based faculty.

They were selected using a purposive sampling technique because they have working

experiences more than seven years and good knowledge about the nature of academic work

practiced in their organizations. This interview method was used to understand the nature of

job stress features, supervisor’s social support characteristics, and work intrusion on family

conflict elements, as well as the relationship between such variables in the studied

organization. The information gathered from such interviews was recorded, categorized

according to the research variables, and constantly compared to the related literature in order

to clearly understand the particular phenomena under study and put the research results in a

proper context. Further, the results of the triangulation process were used as a guideline to

develop the content of survey questionnaires for a pilot study. Next, a pilot study was done by

discussing pilot questionnaires with the academic staff and information gathered from them

was used to verify the content and format of survey questionnaire for an actual study. A back

translation technique was used to translate the content of questionnaires in Malay and English

languages in order to increase the validity and reliability of the instrument (Sekaran & Bougie,

2010; Wright, 1996).

-1194-

Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem.858

4.1. Measurement

The independent variables for this study is job stress features, i.e., role ambiguity had 3 items,

role conflict had 3 items, and role overload had 4 items that were developed based on job

stress literature (Beehr & McGrath, 1992; Fu & Shaffer, 2001; Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985;

Matteson & Invancevich, 1979). Moderating variables supervisor’s social support had 6 items

that were developed based on supervisor support literature (Allen et al., 2000; Beehr &

McGrath, 1992; Boles et al., 2001; Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002; Turner, Frankel & Levin,

2004). The dependent variable for this study is work intrusion on family conflict had 6 items

that were developed based on work intrusion on family conflict literature (Allen et al., 2000;

Boles et al., 2001; Eby et al., 2005; Frone, Rusell & Cooper, 1992). These items were

measured using a 7-item scale ranging from “very strongly disagree/dissatisfied” (1) to “very

strongly agree/satisfied” (7). Demographic variables were used as controlling variables

because this study focused on employee attitudes.

4.2. Study sample

The population for this study is 320 academic staffs who have worked in a Malaysian

government university in Borneo. In the first step of data collection, the researchers met HR

manager of the studied organization to get his permission to conduct this study and get his

opinion about the rules for distributing survey questionnaires in his organization. Considering

the organization rule, and length of study and financial constraints, 200 survey questionnaires

were distributed to academic staff in 8 faculties of the organization using a convenient

sampling technique. This sampling technique was chosen because the list of registered

employees was not given to the researchers and this situation did not allow the researchers to

choose randomly the respondents in the organizations. Of that total, 93 usable questionnaires

were returned to the researchers, yielding 46.5 percent response rate. The survey

questionnaires were answered by participants based on their consent and a voluntarily basis.

The number of this sample exceeds the minimum sample of 30 participants as required by

probability sampling technique, showing that it may be analyzed using inferential statistics

(Cresswell, 1998; Sekaran & Bougie, 2010).

4.3. Data analysis technique

The SmartPLS 2.0 was employed to assess the validity and reliability of the instrument and

thus test the research hypotheses (Henseler, Ringle & Sinkovics, 2009; Riggle, Edmondson &

Hansen, 2009). The main advantage of using this method may deliver latent variable scores,

avoid small sample size problems, estimate every complex models with many latent and

manifest variables, hassle stringent assumptions about the distribution of variables and error

terms, and handle both reflective and formative measurement models (Henseler et al., 2009;

Riggle et al., 2009). A SmartPLS path model was employed to test the moderating effect of

supervisor’s social support in the hypothesized model. This procedure stresses the

-1195-

Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem.858

development of a multiplicative term, which is used to encompass the interaction effect, and to

calculate two R²s, one for the equation, which includes only main effects (main-effect model)

and the other for a three-term equation (product-term model), which includes both the main

and interaction effects. This technique may separate the component parts of the product term

from the term itself to account for the complex combination of variance due to main and

interaction effects (Henseler et al., 2009; Riggle et al., 2009). Results of an interaction are

evident when the relationship between interacting terms and the dependent variable is

significant (the value of t statistic ≥ 1.96). The fact that the significant main effects of

predictor variables and moderator variables simultaneously exist in analysis it does not affect

the moderator hypothesis and is significant to interpret the interaction term (Cohen & Cohen,

1983; Jaccard, Turrisi & Wan, 1990). Thus, a global fit measure is conducted to validate the

adequacy of PLS path model globally based on Wetzels, Odekerken-Schroader & van Oppen's

(2009) global fit measure. If the results of testing hypothesized model exceed the cut-off value

of 0.36 for large effect sizes of R², showing that it adequately support the PLS path model

globally (Wetzels et al., 2009).

5. Findings

Table 1 (see appendix) shows that most respondents were male (55.9 percent), with majority

of the staff age between 40 years old to 45 years old (36.6 percent), with married staff making

up around 79.6 percent and most of the respondents had served from 5 to 15 years (more

than 80 percent).

Participant characteristics Sub-profile Percentage

Gender Male

Female 55.9 44.1

Age

< 27 28-33 34-39 40-45 > 45

24.7 5.4 24.7 36.6 8.6

Marital status Single

Married 20.4 79.6

Length of service

1-5 years 6-10 years 11-15 years > 16 years

46.2 18.3 22.6 12.9

Table 1. Participant characteristics (n = 93)

Table 2 shows the results of convergent and discriminant validity analyses. All constructs had

the values of average variance extracted (AVE) larger than 0.5, indicating that they met the

acceptable standard of convergent validity (Barclay, Higgins & Thompson, 1995; Fornell &

Larcker, 1981; Henseler et al., 2009). Besides that, all constructs had the values of √ AVE in

diagonal were greater than the squared correlation with other constructs in off diagonal,

showing that all constructs met the acceptable standard of discriminant validity (Fornell &

Larcker, 1981; Henseler et al., 2009).

-1196-

Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem.858

Variable AVE Role

ambiguity Role

conflict Role

overload Supervisor’s

social support Work-family

conflict

Role ambiguity 0.865 0.930

Role conflict 0.707 -0.035 0.841

Role overload 0.704 -0.042 0.088 0.839

Supervisor’s social support 0.718 0.323 0.284 0.546 0.847

Work intrusion on family conflict 0.796 0.3383 0.344 0.234 0.413 0.892

Table 2. The results of convergent and discriminant validity analyses

Table 3 shows the factor loadings and cross loadings for different constructs. The correlation

between items and factors had higher loadings than other items in the different constructs.

The loadings of variables for their own constructs in the model were greater than 0.7,

indicating that all constructs are considered adequate (Chin, 1998; Fornell & Larcker, 1981;

Gefen & Straub, 2005; Henseler et al., 2009). In sum, the validity of measurement model met

the criteria.

Construct/item Role

ambiguity Role

conflict Role

overload

Supervisor’ s social support

Work intrusion on

family conflict

Role ambiguity

Clarity of job scope 0.923399 -0.077449 -0.143925 0.125872 0.277636

Clarity of job description 0.968817 -0.061246 -0.011624 0.390383 0.361154

Clarity of superior expectations 0.896615 0.023555 0.046909 0.356989 0.295178

Role conflict

In line with the organizational objectives. 0.163723 0.886550 -0.008643 0.556575 0.237153

Execute extra tasks -0.144987 0.772103 0.227333 0.229329 0.061274

Follow my superior instructions -0.238554 0.854934 0.129773 0.440706 0.201362

Role overload

Time for accomplish tasks 0.017637 0.016462 0.909693 0.196735 0.387155

Excessive workloads. -0.064581 0.071015 0.851143 0.322277 0.226969

Execute multiple tasks -0.086367 0.205552 0.753719 0.242951 0.185424

Supervisor’s social support

Understand about my family matters 0.267462 0.351322 0.301485 0.842903 0.420940

Some time off from my family affairs 0.256080 0.513954 0.252240 0.814555 0.155423

Looks out for my work-related problems. 0.211283 0.492450 0.336665 0.880233 0.341602

Accommodate with my family/personal affairs 0.447146 0.477826 0.206557 0.844924 0.388537

Understand about my personal/family issues. 0.151357 0.544269 0.096761 0.852604 0.319549

Work intrusion on family conflict

Affect my attitude at home 0.185198 0.320981 0.404196 0.330143 0.915463

Enough time with my family 0.318962 0.335431 0.277589 0.413007 0.890185

Enough time with my personal social activities 0.300089 0.322121 0.389912 0.505261 0.921157

Concentration on my family 0.299721 0.041294 0.293213 0.280054 0.886688

Affect relationship with my family. 0.376465 0.057969 0.227157 0.393053 0.863231

Affect my concentrate towards my family 0.349251 0.078172 0.208762 0.216388 0.874964

Table 3. The results of factor loadings and cross loadings for different constructs

Table 4 shows the results of reliability analysis for the instrument. The composite reliability and

Cronbach’s Alpha had values of greater than 0.8, indicating that the instrument used in this

-1197-

Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem.858

study was high internal consistency (Henseler et al., 2009; Nunally & Benstein, 1994; Sekaran

& Bougie, 2010).

Construct Composite reliability Cronbach Alpha

Role ambiguity 0.935594 0.920587

Role conflict 0.873959 0.795345

Role overload 0.885055 0.811917

Work-family conflict 0.953284 0.936472

Reliability Estimation is Shown Diagonally

Table 4. Composite reliability and Cronbach’s Alpha

The impact of multicollinearity is a concern for interpreting the regression variate (Hair,

Anderson, Tatham & Black, 2006). Highly collinear variables can distort the results

substantially and thus not generalizable. According to Bryman and Cramer (2001), the

Pearson’s r between each pair of independent variables should not exceed 0.80, otherwise the

independent variables that show a relationship at or in excess of 0.80 may be suspected of

exhibiting multicollinearity. The output in Table 5 showed that none of the correlations between

all independent variables exceed 0.80, which indicate that multicollinearity is not a problem in

this study. These statistical results further confirm the validity and reliability of measurement

scale used in this study.

Variable Pearson correlation analysis (r)

1 2 3 4 5

1. Role ambiguity 1

2. Role conflict -.10 1

3. Role overload -.06 .17 1

4. Supervisor’s social support .29** .49** .29** 1 .

5. Work intrusion on family conflict .35** .15 .30** .36** 1

Note: Significant at **p < 0.01

Table 5. Pearson correlation analysis and descriptive statistics

Figure 2 shows the outcomes of SmartPLS path model which explain that the interaction

between role ambiguity and supervisor’s social support positively and significantly correlated

with work intrusion on family conflict (Beta = 3.13; t = 2.35), therefore H1 was supported. In

terms of explanatory power, the inclusion of these variables in the analysis had explained 30

percent of the variance in dependent variable. In sum, this result confirms that role ambiguity

does act as an important moderating variable in the relationship between role ambiguity and

work intrusion on family conflict.

-1198-

Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem.858

Note: Significant at t ≥ 1.96

Figure 2. The Results of SmartPLS Path Model Showing the Moderating Effect of Supervisor’s Social

Support in Between Role Ambiguity and Work Intrusion on Family Conflict

In order to determine a global fit for the PLS path modeling, we carried out a global fit

measure (GoF) based on Wetzels et al. (2009) guideline as follows: GoF=SQRT{MEAN

(Communality of Endogenous) x MEAN (R²)}=0.493, indicating that it exceeds the cut-off

value of 0.36 for large effect sizes of R². This result confirms that the PLS path model has

better explaining power in comparison with the baseline values (GoF small=0.1, GoF

medium=0.25, GoF large=0.36). It also provides adequate support to validate the PLS model

globally (Wetzels et al., 2009).

Figure 3 shows the outcomes of SmartPLS path model which display that the interaction

between role conflict and supervisor’s social support positively and insignificantly correlated

with work intrusion on family conflict (Beta = 2.01; t = 1.33), therefore H2 was not supported.

In terms of explanatory power, the inclusion of these variables in the analysis had explained 28

percent of the variance in dependent variable. In sum, this result confirms that role ambiguity

does act as an important moderating variable in the relationship between role conflict and work

intrusion on family conflict.

Note: Significant at t ≥ 1.96

Figure 3. The Results of SmartPLS Path Model Showing the Moderating Effect of Supervisor’s Social

Support in Between Role Conflict and Work Intrusion on Family Conflict

-1199-

Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem.858

In order to determine a global fit for the PLS path modeling, we carried out a global fit

measure (GoF) based on Wetzels et al. (2009) guideline as follows: GoF=SQRT{MEAN

(Communality of Endogenous) x MEAN (R²)}=0.478, showing that it exceeds the cut-off value

of 0.36 for large effect sizes of R². This result confirms that the PLS path model has better

explaining power in comparison with the baseline values (GoF small=0.1, GoF medium=0.25,

GoF large=0.36). It also provides adequate support to validate the PLS model globally (Wetzel s

et al., 2009).

Figure 4 shows the outcomes of SmartPLS path model which reveal that the interaction

between role overload and supervisor’s social support positively and insignificantly correlated

with work intrusion on family conflict (Beta = 3.13; t = 2.35), therefore H1 was supported. In

terms of explanatory power, the inclusion of these variables in the analysis had explained 30

percent of the variance in dependent variable. In sum, this result confirms that role ambiguity

does act as an important moderating variable in the relationship between role overload and

work intrusion on family conflict.

Note: Significant at t ≥ 1.96

Figure 4. The Results of SmartPLS Path Model Showing the Moderating Effect of Supervisor’s Social

Support in Between Role Overload and Work Intrusion on Family Conflict

In order to determine a global fit for the PLS path modeling, we carried out a global fit

measure (GoF) based on Wetzels et al. (2009) guideline as follows: GoF = SQRT{MEAN

(Communality of Endogenous) x MEAN (R²)}=0.459, signifying that it exceeds the cut-off

value of 0.36 for large effect sizes of R². This result confirms that the PLS path model has

better explaining power in comparison with the baseline values (GoF small = 0.1, GoF

medium= 0.25, GoF large = 0.36). It also provides adequate support to validate the PLS

model globally (Wetzels et al., 2009).

6. Discussion and implications

This study aims at examining the moderating effect of supervisor’s social support in the

relationship between role ambiguity, role conflict as well as role overload and work intrusion on

family conflict. The findings of this study highlight that interaction between role ambiguity and

-1200-

Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem.858

supervisor’s social support has decreased employees’ family conflict. In the context of this

study, management teams have planned and implemented challenging jobs for academic staff

in order to sustain and achieve their organizational strategies and goals. The interviewed

respondents perceive that the levels of role ambiguity, role conflict and role overload are high,

the willingness of supervisors to provide adequate social support are high, and the levels of

work intrusion on family conflict are high. In this condition, the majority academic staff feel

that the willingness of supervisors to properly provide social support have decreased the

intrusion of role ambiguity problems in employees’ family affairs and increase their abilities to

decrease family conflict.

The study presents three major implications: theoretical contribution, robustness of research

methodology, and practical contribution. In terms of theoretical contribution, the results of this

study reveal three important outcomes: firstly, supervisor’s social support has played an

important role as a moderating variable in the relationship between role ambiguity and work

intrusion on family conflict. This result is consistent with the studies by Fu and Shaffer (2001),

Hammed (2008), and Yu-Fei et al. (2012). Secondly, supervisor’s social support has not played

important roles as a moderating variable in the relationships of: a) between role conflict and

work intrusion on family conflict, and b) between role overload and work intrusion on family

conflict. These findings signify that having supervisory support per se is not enough in

ameliorating work burden and work conflict with family issues in the background. Additionally,

information gathered from the semi structured interviews reveals that this finding may be

affected by external factors. Firstly, respondents who different backgrounds may have

inconsistent views and judgments about the abilities of supervisors in solving role conflict and

role overload among employees who have worked in different job categories. Secondly,

individual employees have different capabilities and readiness to properly practice guidelines

and methods as suggested by supervisors in overcoming their role conflict and role overload.

These factors may overrule the effectiveness of supervisor’s social support in the job stress

model of the workplace.

With respect to the robustness of research methodology, the survey questionnaires used in this

study have exceeded the acceptable standards of the validity and reliability analyses may lead

to produce accurate and reliable findings. In terms of practical contributions, the findings of

this study can be used as guidelines by management to overcome job stress problems in

organizations. The potential suggestions are: Firstly, update the content and methods of stress

management training program. For example, the content of current training programs should

focus on four domains: cognitive, affective, psychomotor and good moral values. The content

of such trainings will be easily implemented if employees are trained using proper case studies

and team building styles. Secondly, management needs to strengthen work groups and group

cohesiveness. For example, involving employees in teamwork planning and administration will

help them to increase positive socialization, improve career and psychosocial well-being. In a

long term, it may lead to higher positive attitudinal and behavioral outcomes. Thirdly, improve

-1201-

Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem.858

work-life balance programs. For example, in order to reduce the employee physiological and

psychological stresses, management should organize company trips for employees to relax

their minds and bodies, as well as initiate physical fitness and sport games. Additionally,

relaxation programs such as deep breathing, progressive muscle relaxation, massage therapy,

yoga and mindfulness based activities and meditation might have positive additional values in

reducing distress among employees. Fourthly, revisit the existing job designs based on the

qualifications and expectations of individual employees may help to achieve the organizational

key performance indicators.

Fifthly, revise compensation and benefits policies and procedures. For example, employer

should allow paid stress leaves if proven by medical practitioners that an employee is suffering

from stress-related disorder due to job stress. Additionally, swapping job roles might also help

in alleviating the stress related symptoms experiencing by employees. Finally, an employer

should introduce a systematic, on-going and organized services funded by employer such as

Employee Assistance Programme (EAP) which helps the organization by providing counselling,

advice, and help to employees and their families with problems arising from both work-related

and external resources. If management pays attention to these suggestions this may increase

the capability of employees to increase institutions of higher learning performance.

7. Conclusion

This study proposed a conceptual framework based on the workplace stress literature. The

confirmatory factor analysis showed that the measurement scales met the acceptable

standards of validity and reliability analyses. The outcomes of SmartPLS path model confirmed

that supervisor’s social support did act an important moderating variable in the relationship

between role ambiguity and work intrusion on family conflict. This finding also has supported

and broadened the workplace stress research literature mostly published in Western countries.

Conversely, supervisor’s social support did not act an important moderating variable in the

relationships: a) between role conflict and work intrusion on family conflict, and b) between

role overload and work intrusion on family conflict, Information gathered from the semi

structured interview reveals that this result may be affected by two major external factors,

namely different respondent perceptions about the abilities of supervisors in solving role

conflict and role overload among employees who have worked in different job categories.

Besides that, individual employees have different capabilities and readiness to properly

practice guidelines and methods as suggested by supervisors in overcoming their role conflicts

and role overloads. These factors may overrule the effectiveness of supervisor’s social support

in the job stress model of the workplace. Therefore, current research and practice within the

workplace stress needs to consider supervisor’s social support should be viewed as a crucial

dimension of job stress domain. This study further suggests that the willingness of supervisors

to adequately provide social support will strongly ability the capability of employees to cope

with stress in implementing job. Consequently, it may induce positive subsequent attitudinal

-1202-

Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem.858

and behavioural outcomes (e.g., satisfaction, commitment, performance, ethics and balance

life style). Thus, these positive outcomes may lead to maintain and support institutions of

higher learning strategic missions in an era of global competition.

The conclusions drawn from this study should consider the following limitations. First, a cross-

sectional research design used to gather data at one time within the period of study might not

capture the causal connections between variables of interest. Second, this study does not

specify the relationship between specific indicators for the independent variable, moderating

variable and dependent variable. Third, the outcomes of SmartPLS path model have only

focused on the level of performance variation explained by the regression equations, but there

are still a number of unexplained factors that affect the causal relationship among variables

and their relative explanatory power. Finally, the sample for this study was taken from one

institution of higher learning that allowed the researchers to gather data via survey

questionnaires. These limitations may decrease the ability to generalize the results of this

study to other organizational settings.

The conceptual and methodological limitations of this study should be considered when

designing future research. First, several organizational and personal characteristics should be

further explored, as this may provide meaningful perspectives for understanding how individual

similarities and differences affect the mentoring program within an organization. Second, other

research designs (e.g., longitudinal studies) should be used to collect data and describe the

patterns of change and the direction and magnitude of causal relationships between variables

of interest. There has been an increased interest in the investigation on the impact of

supervisor’s social support on long term psychological and organisational outcomes and this

remains a significant area for future research. Third, to fully understand the effect of job stress

on individual attitudes and behaviors via its impact upon supervisor’s social support, more

organizations need to be used in future study. Fourth, other specific theoretical constructs of

social support, such as coworker's social support, and manager's social support need to be

considered because they have widely been recognized as an important link between

supervisor’s role and many aspects of individual attitudes and behavior (Mohra &

Wolfram,2010; Glazer, 2006). Fifth, response bias and common-method variance is a common

issue in all questionnaire-based research. This research garnered the response rate of 46%

which is acceptable but does show that views of only half the sample were reported. Therefore

in inclusion of a larger sampling pool would also improve the generalizability of the reported

results. Finally, other personal outcomes of job stress like satisfaction, commitment,

performance, turnover and health should be considered given their prominence in job stress

research literature (Karatepe & Kilic, 2007; Karatepe & Sokmen, 2006; Mohra &

Wolframa,2010; Yildirim & Aycan, 2008). The importance of these issues needs to be further

explained in future studies.

-1203-

Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem.858

References

Allen, T.D., Herst, D.E.L., Bruck, C.S., & Sutton, M. (2000). Consequences associated with

work-to-family conflict: a review and agenda for the future research. Journal of Occupational

Health Psychology, 5, 278-308. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.5.2.278

Barclay, D., Higgins, C., & Thompson, R. (1995). The partial least squares (PLS) approach to

causal modeling: Personal computer adoption and use as an illustration. Technology Study, 2

(2), 285-309.

Bass, L.B., Butler, B.A., Grzywacz, G.J., & Linney, D.K. (2008). Work-family conflict and job

satisfaction: family resources as a buffer. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 10(1),

24-30.

Beehr, T.A., & McGrath, J.E. (1992). Social support, occupational stress anxiety. Anxiety,

Stress, and Coping, 5, 7-19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10615809208250484

Bhatti, N., Shar, A., Shaikh, F., & Nazar, M. (2010). Causes of stress in organization, a case

study of Sukkur. International Journal of Business and Management, 5(11), 3-14.

Bliese, P.D., & Britt, T.D. (2001). Role clarity, work overload, and organizational support: multi-

level evidence of the importance of support. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 22, 425-436. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.95

Boles, J., Howard, W.G., & Donofrio, H. (2001). An investigation into the inter-relationships of

work-family conflict, family-work conflict, & work satisfaction. Journal of Managerial Issues,

13, 376-391.

Boyar, S.L. & Mosley, D.C. (2007). The relationship between core self-evaluations and work

and family satisfaction: The mediating role of work–family conflict and facilitation. Journal of

Vocational Behavior, 71, 265-281. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2007.06.001

Boyar, S.L., Maertz, Jr.C.P., Mosley, Jr.C.D., & Carr, C.J. (2008). The impact of work/family

demand on work-family conflict. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23(3), 215-235. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02683940810861356

Brouwers, A., Evers, W.J.G., & Welko, T. (2001). Self efficacy in eliciting social support and

burnout among school teachers. Journal of applied Social Psychology, 31, 1474-1491. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2001.tb02683.x

Bryman, A., & Cramer, D. (2001). Quantitative Data Analysis with SPSS Release 10 for

Windows: A Guide for Social Scientists. East Essex, Routledge.

-1204-

Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem.858

Burke, R.J., & El-Kot, E.G. (2010). Correlates of work-family conflicts among managers in

Egypt. International Journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern Finance and Management, 3(2),

113-131. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17538391011054363

Chin, W.W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modelling, in R.H.

Hoyle (Eds.). Statistical Strategies for Small Sample Research (pp. 307-341). Thousand Oaks

– California: Sage Publication, Inc.

Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the

behavioural sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Cresswell, J.W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five

traditions. London: SAGE Publications.

Dar, L., Akmal. A, Naseem, M.A., & Khan, K.U.D. (2011). Impact of Stress on Employees Job

Performance in Business Sector of Pakistan. Global Journal of Management and Business

Research, 11 (6), 1-5.

Eby, L.T., Casper, W.J., Lockwood, A., Bordeaux, C., & Brinley, A. (2005). Work and family

research in IO/OB: Content analysis and review of the literature (1980-2002). Journal of

Vocational Behavior, 66, 124-197. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2003.11.003

Edwards, J.R., & Rothbard, N.P. (2000). Mechanisms linking work and family: clarifying the

relationship between work and family constructs. Academy of Management Review, 25,

178-199.

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D.F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable

variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, XVIII, 39-50. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3151312

Frone, M.R., Russell, M., & Cooper, M.L. (1992). Antecedents and outcomes of work-family

conflict: testing a model of the work-family interface. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77,

65-78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.77.1.65

Fu, C.K., & Shaffer, M.A. (2001). The tug of work and family: direct and indirect domain-

specific determinants of work-family conflict. Personnel Review, 30, 502-522. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000005936

Galinsky, E., Bond, J., & Friedman, D. (1993). The changing workforce: Highlights of the

National study. New York: Families and Work Institute.

Gefen, D. & Straub, D. (2005). A practical guide to factorial validity using PLS-Graph: Tutorial

and annotated example. Communication of the Association for Information Systems, 16,

91-109.

-1205-

Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem.858

Glazer, S. (2006). Social support across cultures. International Journal of Intercultural

Relations, 30 (5), 605-622. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2005.01.013

Goldsen, K.I., & Scharlach, A.E. (2001). Families and work: New directions in the twenty-first

century. New York: Oxford University Press.

Grandey, A.A., Cordeino, L.B., & Crouter, C.A. (2005). A longitudinal and multi-source test of

the work-family conflict and job satisfaction relationship. Journal of Occupational and

Organizational Psychology, 78, 305-323. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/096317905X26769

Greenhaus, H.J., Tammy, D.A., & Spector, P.E. (2006). Health consequences of work-family:

the dark side of the work-family interface. Research in Occopational Stress and Well-Being, 5,

61-98.

Greenhaus, J.H. & Beutell, N.J. (1985). Sources of conflict between work and family roles.

Academy of Management Review, 10, 76-88.

Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L., & Black, W.C. (2006). Multivariate data analysis. New

Jersey: Prentice Hall International, Inc.

Hammed, A. (2008). The interactive effect of stress, social support and work-family conflict on

Nigerian women's mental health. European Journal of Social Sciences 7(2), 53-65.

Henseler, J., Ringle, C., & Sinkovics, R. (2009). The use of Pertial Least Square Path modeling

in international Marketing. Advances in International Marketing, 20, 277-319. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/S1474-7979(2009)0000020014

House, J.S. (2003). Job stress and social support. Reading Mass: Addison-Wesley.

Ismail, A., Mohamed, H.A.B., Sulaiman, A.Z., Ismail, Z., & Mahmood, W.N.W. (2010).

Relationship between work stress, coworker’s social support, work stress and work

interference with family conflict: An empirical study in Malaysia. International Business

Management, 4(2), 76-83. http://dx.doi.org/10.3923/ibm.2010.76.83

Jaccard, J., Turrisi, R., & Wan, C.K. (1990). Interaction effects in multiple regression. Newsbury

Park, California: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Kahn, R.L., Wolfe, D.M., Quinn, R.P., Snoek, J.D., & Rosenthal, R.A. (1964). Organizational

stress: studies in role conflict and ambiguity. New York: Wiley.

Karasek, R.A. (1985). Job content questionnaire and user's guide. Lowell: University of

Massachusetts Lowell.

-1206-

Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem.858

Karatepe O.M., & Sokmen, A. (2006). The effects of work role and family role variables on

psychologic al and behavioral outcomes of frontline employees. Tourism Management, 27(2),

255-268. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2004.10.001

Karatepe, O.M., & Kilic, H. (2007). The Corresponding Author Relationships of supervisor

support and conflicts in the work–family interface with the selected job outcomes of frontline

employees. Tourism Management, 28 (1), 238-252. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2005.12.019

Katz, D., & Kahn, R. (1978). The social psychology of organizations. New York: Wiley.

Kim, W.G., Leong, J.K., & Lee, Y.K. (2005). Effect of service orientation on job satisfaction,

organizational commitment, and intention of leaving in a casual dining chain restaurant.

Hospitality Management, 24, 171-193. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2004.05.004

Lazarus, R.S., (1966). Psychological Stress and the Coping Process. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Major, V.S., Klein, K.J. & Ehrhart, M.G. (2002). Work time, work interference with family, and

psychological distress. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 427-436. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.3.427

Mansor, A.T., Fontaine, R., & Chong, S.C. (2003). Occupational stress among managers: a

Malaysian survey. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18(6), 622-628. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02683940310494412

Matteson, M.T., & Ivancevich, J.M. (1979). Organizational stressors and heart disease: A

research model. Academy of Management Review, 4, 347-357.

McCall, M., Lombardo, M., & Morrison, A. (1988). Lessons of experience: How successful

executives develop on the job. Free Press.

Mohra, G., & Wolfram, H.J. (2010). Stress Among Managers: The Importance of Dynamic

Tasks, Predictability, and Social Support in Unpredictable Times. Journal of Occupational

Health Psychology, 15 (2), 167-179. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0018892

Nabavi, A.H., & Shahryari, M. (2012). Linkage Between Worksite Support with Work Role

Expectation, Role Ambiguity and Its Effects on Work-Family Conflict, Canadian Social Science,

8(4), 112-119.

Namasivayam, K., & Zhao, X. (2007). An investigation of the moderating effects of

organizational commitment on the relationships between work-family conflict and job

satisfaction among hospitality employees in India. Tourism Management, 28, 1212-1223. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2006.09.021

Nunally, J.C., & Bernstein, I.H. (1994). Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

-1207-

Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem.858

O’Driscoll, M., & Brough, P. (2003). Job stress and burnout. In O’Driscoll, M., Taylor, P., &

Kalliath, T. (Eds.). Organizational Psychology in Australia and New Zealand, 188-211.

Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

Poelmans, S. (2001). A multi-level, multi-method study of work-family conflict: A managerial

perspective. Spain: Universidad de Navarra.

Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the

literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 698-714. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021- 9010.87.4.698

Riggle, R., Edmondson, D., & Hansen, J. (2009). A Meta-analysis of the Relationship Between

Perceived Organizational Support and Job Outcomes: 20 Years of Research. Journal of

Business Research, 62(10), 1027-1030. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.05.003

Schiem, S., & Young, M. (2010). The demands of creative work: Implications for stress in the

work–family interface. Social Science Research, 39(2), 246-259. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2009.05.008

Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2010). Research methods for business: A skill building approach.

New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Simpson, M.E. (2000). Societal support and education. Handbook on stress and anxiety:

Contemporary knowledge, theory and treatment. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Spector, P.E., Allen, T.D., Poelmans, S.A.Y., Lapierre, M.L., Cooper, C.L., & Widerszal-Bazyl, M.

(2007). Cross-national differences in relationships of work demands, job satisfaction, and

turnover intentions with work-family conflict. Personnel Psychology, 60, 805-835. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2007.00092.x

Thomas, L.T., & Ganster, D.C. (1995). Impact of family-supportive work variables on work-

family conflict and strain: a control perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 6-15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.80.1.6

Trachtenberg, V.J., Anderson, A.S., & Sabatelli, M.R. (2009). Work-home conflict and domestic

violence: A test of a conceptual Model. Journal of Family Violence, 24, 471-483. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10896-009-9246-3

Turner, R.J., Frankel, B.G., & Levin, D. (2004). Social support: Conceptualization,

measurement, and implications for mental health. Ontario: Health Career Research Unit,

University of Western Ontario.

Viswesvaran, C., Sanchez, J.I., & Fisher, J. (1999). The role of social support in the process of

work stress: A meta-analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54(2), 314-334. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1998.1661

-1208-

Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem.858

Wetzels, M., Odekerken-Schröder, G., & van Oppen, C. (2009). Using PLS path modeling for

assessing hierarchical construct models: guidelines and empirical illustration. MIS Quarterly,

33(1), 177- 195.

Willis, A.T., O’Conner, B.D., & Smith, L. (2008). Investigating effort-reward imbalance and

work-family conflict in relation to morningness-eveningness and shift work. Work & Stres,

22(2), 125-137. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02678370802180558

Wright, L.L. (1996). Qualitative international management research. In Punnett, B.J., &

Shenkar, O. (Eds.). Handbook for International Management Research, 63-81. Oxford, UK:

Blackwell.

Yildirim, D., & Aycan, Z. (2008). Nurses’ work demands and work–family conflict: A

questionnaire survey. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 45(9), 1366-1378.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2007.10.010

Yu-Fei, M.C., Ismail, A., Ahmad, R., & Kuek, T.Y. (2012). Impacts of job stress characteristics

on the workforce – organizational social support as the moderator. South-Asia Journal of

Marketing and Management Research, 2(3), 1-20.

Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 2013 (www.jiem.org)

Article's contents are provided on a Attribution-Non Commercial 3.0 Creative commons license. Readers are allowed to copy, distribute

and communicate article's contents, provided the author's and Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management's names are included.

It must not be used for commercial purposes. To see the complete license contents, please visit

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/.

-1209-