Content uploaded by Chang-Qin Lu
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Chang-Qin Lu on Oct 09, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
Flexible Work Arrangements Availability and
their Relationship with Work-to-Family Conflict,
Job Satisfaction, and Turnover Intentions:
A Comparison of Three Country Clusters
Aline D. Masuda*
EADA Business School, Spain
Steven A.Y. Poelmans
EADA Business School, Spain
Tammy D. Allen and Paul E. Spector
The University of South Florida, USA
Laurent M. Lapierre
University of Ottawa, Canada
Cary L. Cooper
Lancaster University, UK
Nureya Abarca
Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile, Chile
Paula Brough
Griffith University, Australia
Pablo Ferreiro
Universidad de Piura, Peru
Guillermo Fraile
Austral University, Argentina
* Address for correspondence: Aline D. Masuda, EADA—Escuela de Alta Dirección y
Administración, C/Aragó, 204-08011 Barcelona, Spain. Email: amasuda@eada.edu
APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY: AN INTERNATIONAL REVIEW, 2012, 61 (1), 1–29
doi: 10.1111/j.1464-0597.2011.00453.x
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology. Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 9600 Garsington
Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.
Luo Lu
National Taiwan University, Taiwan
Chang-Qin Lu
Peking University, China
Oi Ling Siu
Lingnan University, Hong-Kong
Michael P. O’Driscoll
University of Waikato, New Zealand
Alejandra Suarez Simoni
Private University of Santa Cruz of the Sierra, Bolivia
Satoru Shima
Tokyo Keizai University, Japan
Ivonne Moreno-Velazquez
University of Puerto Rico, Puerto Rico
The present study explored the availability of flexible work arrangements
(FWA) and their relationship with manager outcomes of job satisfaction, turn-
over intentions, and work-to-family conflict (WFC) across country clusters. We
used individualism and collectivism to explain differences in FWA availability
across Latin American, Anglo, and Asian clusters. Managers from the Anglo
cluster were more likely to report working in organisations that offer FWA
compared to managers from other clusters. For Anglo managers, flextime was
the only FWA that had significant favorable relationships with the outcome
variables. For Latin Americans, part-time work negatively related with turn-
over intentions and strain-based WFC. For Asians, flextime was unrelated to
time-based WFC, and telecommuting was positively associated with strain-
based WFC. The clusters did not moderate the compressed work week and
outcome relationships. Implications for practitioners adopting FWA practices
across cultures are discussed.
INTRODUCTION
Today, organisations are increasingly adopting work–family programs, such
as flexible work arrangements (FWA), as a reaction to socio-demographic
changes (Davis & Polonko, 2001; Golden, 2006; Goodstein, 1994). Accord-
ing to Lambert, Marler, and Gueutal (2008), FWAs are “employer provided
2MASUDA ET AL.
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology.
benefits that permit employees some level of control over when and where
they work outside of the standard workday” (p. 107). They include part-time
work, flextime, compressed work week, and telecommuting. FWAs are
needed because there are more women, dual-earner couples, single-parent
families (e.g. Bond, Thompson, Galinsky, & Prottas, 2002), and people
assuming elder care responsibilities in the workplace (Society for Human
Resource Management, 2003). Thus, employees, now more than ever, are
expecting and demanding workplace flexibility to cope with family demands.
Studies have shown that FWAs relate to employee and company benefits
such as higher job satisfaction (Baltes, Briggs, Huff, Wright, & Neuman,
1999), lower turnover intentions (Allen, 2001), and lower work–family con-
flict (Gajendran & Harrison, 2007). Work–family conflict is defined as
inter-role conflict in which role pressures from the work and family
domains are mutually incompatible (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985). However,
most studies on FWA have been conducted using Western samples
assuming that “the context is relatively homogeneous in terms of its legal
and cultural characteristics, and that differences are mainly due to differ-
ences in internal and external labor markets” (Poelmans & Sahibzada,
2004, p. 413).
Further, even if these practices have benefits across countries, it is not clear
whether these FWAs are being adopted equally by organisations in Asia and
Latin America. A recent study has shown that the rate of implementation of
FWA differs across countries in Europe (European Commission, 2000). Spe-
cifically, Northern European countries adopt these practices more frequently
than do Southern European countries (European Commission, 2000; Gareis,
2002). However, there have been no studies comparing the availability of
such practices in Asia and Latin America. While some scholars have argued
that the difference in FWA adoption by country is explained by govern-
ments’ unique welfare state regimes (den Dulk, 2005; Gornick & Meyers,
2003), others have linked these differences to the cultural context (Peters &
den Dulk, 2003). Although political, legal, and economic institutions may
oblige employers to implement FWA, their “acceptance and effectiveness is
likely to be dependent upon congruency with cultural factors” (Raghuram,
London, & Larsen, 2001, p. 738).
In this study we tested differences in FWA availability and its relationship
with job satisfaction, turnover intentions, and work–family conflict across
Anglo (English-speaking), Latin American, and East Asian countries. We
focused on the availability of FWA to understand how culture serves as an
institutional pressure that leads to differences in FWA adoption by organi-
sations. We chose to examine countries within these clusters because they
have been shown to share cultural values (House, Javidan, Hanges, &
Dorfman, 2002; Spector, Cooper, Poelmans, Allen, O’Driscoll, Sanchez, Siu,
Dewe, Hart, Lu, Renault de Moraes, Ostrognay, Sparks, Wong, & Yu, 2004)
WORK-TO-FAMILY CONFLICT ACROSS COUNTRIES 3
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology.
that are theoretically relevant to the study of FWA, job satisfaction, turnover
intentions, and work–family conflict. Below we develop our hypotheses.
FWA Availability
According to institutional theory, organisations must adapt, or strategically
react to handling institutional pressures such as cultural expectations (Meyer
& Rowan, 1977). Institutional theory has been useful in explaining adoption
of FWA. For instance, Lyness and Kropf (2005) used institutional theory to
explain how cultural expectations regarding gender equality may prompt
employers to offer FWA. After comparing a sample of managers and pro-
fessionals in 20 European countries, they found that gender equality was
positively related to FWA adoption. FWA adoption, in turn, positively
correlated with manager’s work–life balance. Their study is a good example
of how culture, which is defined as the “human-made part of the environ-
ment” (Triandis, 1995, p. 1), explains national differences in the adoption of
organisational practices.
In addition to gender equality, another cultural dimension that may
explain differences in organisations’ adoption of FWA is individualism–
collectivism (I–C). According to Triandis (1995), individualism pertains to
the degree that people prioritise individual goals over group goals, and prefer
loose to close personal ties. In individualistic societies, people are primarily
motivated by their own needs, and they are more likely to prefer loose
personal ties. Collectivism is the extent to which individuals express pride in
being part of a group, community, or family. In collectivist societies, people
prefer close over loose personal ties and are encouraged to explore their need
for belonging with others (Falicov, 2001). In general, studies show that Asian
and Latin American countries are higher in collectivism than Anglo countries
(Hofstede, 2001).
FWA can limit daily and physical contact with employees’ colleagues or
supervisors, which can hamper the quality of work relationships. Gajendran
and Harrison’s (2007) meta-analysis showed that frequency of telecommut-
ing accentuated the negative relationship between telecommuting and the
quality of co-worker relationships. Specifically, Gajendran and Harrison
(2007) explained, “the more extreme loss of ‘face time’ that comes with being
a high-intensity telecommuter undermined the depth of ties with co-workers”
(p. 1536). These characteristics are incongruent with a culture of collectivism
where people place importance on building social ties.
Additionally, there has been empirical evidence that I–C at the country
level relates to FWA (Raghuram et al., 2001). For example, Raghuram et al.
(2001) showed that companies in individualistic countries, within 14 coun-
tries in Europe, were more likely to report having a greater proportion of
their workforce working under part-time and contractual work arrange-
4MASUDA ET AL.
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology.
ments. However, companies in collectivistic countries were more likely to use
shift work. They argued that part-time and contractual work practices signal
that the employees’ relationship with their company is temporary. Hence,
these practices are more consistent with the values espoused by individualistic
than by collectivistic countries. Raghuram et al. (2001) explained that the
greater use of shift work in collectivist countries allowed workers more
opportunities to interact with others and to share each other’s concerns given
their extended working hours (e.g. night shift or weekend shift).
Thus, given that FWAs are more likely to fit with individualistic values
than with collectivistic values, organisations in individualistic countries may
experience more social pressures to offer such practices than would organi-
sations in collectivistic countries.
Hypothesis 1: Managers in individualistic countries (i.e. Anglo cluster) will report
greater FWA availability than will managers in collectivistic (i.e. Latin American
and Asian clusters) countries.
FWA and Employee Outcomes
FWA and Job Satisfaction. Previous studies have shown that FWA
availability is positively related to job satisfaction (Allen, 2001; McNall,
Masuda, & Nicklin, 2010), although most of these studies have been con-
ducted in individualistic countries. The positive reaction of employees to
FWA is likely attributable to employee perceptions that their organisations
value and have concern for them (McNall et al., 2010). This assumes that
employees value FWA. Although we might presume that employees in indi-
vidualistic countries value FWA, such is not necessarily the case in collectiv-
istic countries.
In fact, previous research shows that culture may moderate the relation-
ship between job characteristics and job satisfaction. For example, intrinsic
job characteristics (e.g. autonomy in the job, and recognition) are more
strongly related with job satisfaction in individualistic and more economi-
cally developed countries (Adigun & Stephenson, 1992; Huang & Van de
Vliert, 2003) than in collectivistic and less economically developed countries.
Huang and Van de Vliert (2003) explained that people in individualistic
countries attach more importance to mastery and self-actualisation needs
than do people in collectivistic countries.
These findings are congruent with value percept theory, which states that
employees are more satisfied in their job when their expectations are fulfilled
(Locke, 1976). This theory has received strong empirical support to explain
job satisfaction (Judge, Parker, Colbert, Heller, & Ilies, 2001). Because favor-
able perceptions are dictated by groups’ cultural values (i.e. preferences for
certain practices) and norms (i.e. preferred behaviors) (Schwartz, 1999),
factors that fulfill individualistic cultural values will predict job satisfaction
WORK-TO-FAMILY CONFLICT ACROSS COUNTRIES 5
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology.
to a greater extent among individualists than among collectivists. For
example, FWA, which enhance privacy and individuality, a desirable state
among individualists, should be positively associated with job satisfaction for
managers within individualistic countries. On the other hand, FWA may not
have the same effect on managers in collectivistic countries who may prefer
to work in an environment where people interact on a daily basis (Hofstede,
2001). In fact, managers in collectivistic countries may find it even more
difficult to manage subordinates when they work under arrangements that
inhibit the development of strong social ties. This is because flextime and
telecommuting limits daily contact and socialisation with subordinates, and
managers in collectivistic countries may be more likely to feel the need to
have daily contact with them.
Further, telecommuting requires that employees have the appropriate
technological support and physical space (e.g. office) to work in their homes.
In collectivistic countries, households tend to be bigger (Triandis, 1995) given
that children tend to leave home at an older age. Also, in collectivistic
countries, it is more common to host and receive unannounced daily visits
from extended family members and friends compared to individualistic coun-
tries. Therefore, as children and grandparents share the same household, and
as the house becomes a busy place for socialisation and sharing, collectivistic
homes may not be the optimal physical environment for working (Hofstede,
2001). Hence, while managers from individualistic countries may perceive the
availability of FWA to be desirable, managers from collectivistic countries
may not feel the same.
Hypothesis 2: Country cluster will moderate the relationship between FWA avail-
ability and job satisfaction. The relationship will be more positive in the Anglo
cluster than in the Latin American or Asian cluster.
FWA and Turnover Intentions. Previous studies involving Anglo
samples have shown that FWA availability is negatively related to turnover
intentions (Allen, 2001; Batt & Valcour, 2003; McNall et al., 2010). Specifi-
cally, Allen (2001) found that flexible benefits were positively related to job
satisfaction and negatively related to turnover intentions, Batt and Valcour
(2003) showed that flextime availability was negatively related to turnover
intentions, and McNall et al. (2010) found that flextime and compressed
work week availability were negatively related to lower turnover intentions.
Additionally, Grover and Crooker (1995) found that individuals with access
to family-responsive policies (e.g. flexible hours, information about commu-
nity childcare services) reported significantly lower turnover intentions than
did employees without access to these policies.
Signaling theory (Casper & Harris, 2008; Grover & Crooker, 1995) and
social exchange theory (Blau, 1964) have been used as explanations as to why
6MASUDA ET AL.
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology.
FWAs relate to attachment to the organisation (McNall et al., 2010). Organi-
sations offering FWAs provide a signal that they care about their employees’
well-being. Such signs promote greater psychological commitment and lower
tendency to quit (Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002). These results suggest that
availability of policies can influence turnover intentions when people perceive
these policies as a sign that the organisation cares for their well-being.
Cultural expectations shape perceptions of ideal job characteristics (Hof-
stede, 2001). Accordingly, offering FWA may be perceived positively by
managers in individualistic countries because it signals that the organisation
trusts them and cares about their well-being. However, they may not be
perceived as favorably among managers in collectivistic countries who would
not value working under such conditions. Managers in collectivistic countries
may even view such practices negatively if they interpret them as a sign that
their relationship with the company is temporary or unimportant. Hence,
while FWAs may be negatively related to lower intentions to quit among
managers in individualistic countries, this relationship may not be observed
in collectivistic countries.
Hypothesis 3: Country cluster will moderate the relationship between FWA avail-
ability and turnover intentions. The relationship will be more negative in Anglo
than in Latin American or Asian clusters.
FWA and Work–Family Conflict. FWA were created to help employees
cope with work–family conflict (Galinsky, Bond, & Sakai, 2008). There are
two types of work–family conflict: Strain-based conflict, which occurs when
participating in one role produces stress that is carried into the other, and
time-based conflict, which happens when participating in one role impedes
time spent in another role. This interference can occur from work-to-family
(WFC) and from family-to-work (FWC). Drawing on the notion of domain
specificity (Frone, 2003), predictors that reside in the work domain tend to
be more highly related to WFC while predictors that reside in the family
domain tend to be more highly related to FWC. In fact, a previous meta-
analysis examining the antecedents of work–family conflict showed that
work practices were more strongly related with WFC than with FWC
(Byron, 2005). Thus, we focus on the relationships between FWAs and
WFC.
Allen (2001) showed empirical evidence that FWA availability related to
lower work–family conflict, and that family supportive organisational per-
ceptions (FSOP) mediated this relationship. Further, her study showed that
FSOP explained unique variance associated with work–family conflict. Sig-
naling theory (Casper & Harris, 2008; Grover & Crooker, 1995) has been
used to explain how FWA can lead to positive perceptions (see McNall et al.,
2010). By offering FWA, organisations show that they support employees’
WORK-TO-FAMILY CONFLICT ACROSS COUNTRIES 7
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology.
well-being. In feeling supported by their organisations, employees may expe-
rience more control to cope with work–family demands. Wayne, Randel, and
Stevens (2006) explained that the availability of FWA may lead to percep-
tions of control over work–family matters and positive affect, which can help
employees cope with work–family conflict.
The aforementioned studies have been conducted in countries with more
individualistic cultures. We argue that I–C will moderate the relationships
between FWAs and WFC because, as previously stated, compared to man-
agers in individualistic cultures, those in collectivistic cultures working
in companies offering FWA will not necessarily perceive these practices as
supportive or useful to help them cope with work–family demands. This is
because I–C influences the way individuals interpret work and family
demands (Spector, Allen, Poelmans, Lapierre, Cooper, O’Driscoll, Sanchez,
Abarca, Alexandrova, Beham, Brough, Ferreiro, Fraile, Lu, Lu, Moreno-
Velázquez, Pagon, Pitariu, Salamatov, Shima, Suarez Simoni, Siu, &
Widerszal-Bazyl, 2007, Spector et al., 2004, Yang, Chen, Choi, & Zou, 2000).
In fact, Powell, Francesco, and Ling (2009) stated that, “individualism/
collectivism is regarded as one of the cultural dimensions that have the
greatest impact on the work–family interface” (p. 605).
For example, employees in some collectivistic countries such as Hong
Kong are more tolerant of the idea of sacrificing time for personal and family
life. According to Luk and Shaffer (2005), “Chinese assign lower importance
to sufficient time for personal and family life than do Westerners (Redding,
1993) because the most important function of the individual is in the main-
tenance and preservation of the household” (p. 490). Based on this observa-
tion, the availability of FWA could be interpreted as a support coming from
the organisation to help employees cope with work–family conflict more so in
individualistic countries than in collectivistic countries where people are
more tolerant of spending more time at work. As such, people in individu-
alistic countries will perceive having more control, which can help them cope
with work–family conflict.
Lastly, managers in collectivistic countries may prefer other types of prac-
tices that help them cope with work–family conflict by strengthening social
ties in the workplace. In fact, Lu, Kao, Cooper, Allen, Lapierre, O’Driscoll,
Poelmans, Sanchez, and Spector (2009) showed that supervisor support was
more negatively related with work–family conflict for Taiwanese employees
(i.e. high in collectivism) compared with British employees (i.e. high in indi-
vidualism). These results showed the relative importance that employees
from collectivistic countries place on social support from work compared
with employees from an individualistic country. If FWAs have the potential
to harm relationships at work (Gajendran & Harrison, 2007), then they may
not be viewed as desirable by managers in collectivistic societies. Hence, we
hypothesise the following:
8MASUDA ET AL.
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology.
Hypothesis 4a: Country clusters moderate the relationship between FWA avail-
ability and time-based WFC. The relationship will be more negative in Anglo than
in Latin American or Asian clusters.
Hypothesis 4b: Country clusters moderate the relationship between FWA avail-
ability and strain-based WFC. The relationship will be more negative in Anglo
than in Latin American or Asian clusters.
METHOD
Participants
Participants were 3,918 managers from 15 countries. Three country clusters
were created following procedures carried out in previous studies (Spector
et al., 2007; Gupta, Hanges, & Dorfman, 2002). The Anglo cluster (n=1,492)
included Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United States, and the United
Kingdom. The Asian cluster (n=1,213) included responses from managers in
Hong Kong, Korea, Japan, PR China, and Taiwan. The Latin American
cluster (n=1,213) comprised Argentina, Chile, Bolivia, Puerto Rico, and Peru.
The country clusters were created using procedures similar to Spector et al.
(2007). Specifically, we consulted the I–C scores from the Project GLOBE
(Gelfand, Bhawuk, Nishii, & Bechtold, 2004), Hofstede (2001), CISMS
(Spector et al., 2007), and Oishi, Diener, Lucas, and Suh (1999), who
obtained ratings of I–C from Geert Hofstede and Harry Triandis. These
sources showed that employees from Asian and Latin American countries
scored higher in collectivism compared with employees from Anglo coun-
tries. Additionally, separating Asian, Latin American, and Anglo clusters is
congruent with previous studies that aggregate countries based on shared
cultural factors such as common history and geographic proximity (Gupta
et al., 2002).
Measures
WFC. WFC was assessed with two subscales from the Carlson,
Kacmar, and Williams (2000) work–family conflict scale. Strain-based and
time-based WFC were each assessed with three items. Sample items were “I
am often so emotionally drained when I get home from work that it prevents
me from contributing to my family” for strain-based WFC and “My work
keeps me from my family activities more than I would like” for time-based
WFC. Items were rated on a 5-point scale (1 =strongly disagree to 5 =
strongly agree). Alphas for time-based WFC were a=.86 in Asia, a=.84 in
Anglo countries, and a=.86 in Latin America. Alphas for strain-based WFC
were a=.83 in Asia, a=.87 in Anglo countries, and a=.81 in Latin America.
Higher scores on each scale indicate higher levels of WFC.
WORK-TO-FAMILY CONFLICT ACROSS COUNTRIES 9
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology.
Job Satisfaction. Job satisfaction was assessed with the three-item
Cammann, Fichman, Jenkins, and Klesh (1979) job satisfaction subscale
from the Michigan Organizational Assessment Questionnaire. Only the two
positively worded items were retained because we experienced problems in
some of our samples with the negatively worded item that produced unac-
ceptably low coefficient alphas. The scale had six response choices that
ranged from 1 (disagree very much) to 6 (agree very much). A sample item is
“All in all, I am satisfied with my job”. Alphas were a=.88 in Asia, a=.83
in Anglo countries, and a=.64 for the Latin American sample. Higher scores
indicate higher levels of job satisfaction.
Turnover Intentions. Turnover intentions were assessed with a single
item, “How often have you seriously considered quitting your current job
over the past 6 months?” from Spector, Dwyer, and Jex (1988). Response
choices ranged from 1 =never to 6 =extremely often. This single-item
measure has been used in previous studies and has been shown to relate
significantly to job satisfaction and turnover (e.g. Spector, 1991).
Flexible Work Arrangements. The availability of four types of flexible
work arrangement was assessed: flextime, compressed workweek, telecom-
muting, and part-time work. Participants were asked, “Is the benefit given to
you at work?” The availability of each form of flexibility was dummy coded
as1=yes it is and 0 =it is not. Analysis was carried out using each practice
as a separate variable.
Demographics. Data were collected concerning age in years, tenure in
months, gender (1 =male, 2 =female), education level, management level
from first to top, marital status (1 =married, 2 =not married), the number of
children living at home, and the number of hours worked during the week. As
shown in Table 1, there were small differences in age with Asian managers
being younger than in Anglo and Latin American countries. Additionally,
Latin American managers were more likely to have children compared with
Anglo and Asian managers, and Latino tended to have higher tenure in their
organisations compared with the other samples.
Scale Equivalences. Spector et al. (2007) used the same data reported in
this study to test other hypotheses and showed equivalences across the three
clusters for the WFC scales. Following recommendations by Riordan and
Vandenberg (1994), they conducted measurement equivalence within the
scales that had more than three items. Because the job satisfaction and
turnover intentions scales had fewer than three items, they did not conduct
equivalence analyses for these scales.
10 MASUDA ET AL.
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology.
Procedure
The reported data are from the second phase of the Collaborative Interna-
tional Study of Managerial Stress (CISMS 2). A common questionnaire was
designed by a project team. The team recruited research collaborators from
different countries. Collaborators were asked to administer questionnaires to
at least 200 managers representative of their country. Ideally each participant
would work for a separate local as opposed to a multi-national organisation
with diverse industries represented. Procedures varied in individual countries
for data collection, e.g. some used management associations to recruit par-
ticipants while others used school alumni lists. Data were collected via web-
based and paper questionnaires. In countries where English was not the
native language, the questionnaire was translated by research partners who
were native speakers and back-translated into English. A native English
speaker double-checked for accuracy of the translation by comparing it with
the original English questionnaire.
RESULTS
Correlations among the study variables by country cluster are shown in
Tables 2, 3, and 4.
FWA Availability
To test Hypothesis 1, we conducted a series of ANOVAs including each
specific FWA as dependent variables. To test grouping assumptions we con-
ducted a series of ANOVAs with the country clusters as independent vari-
ables and using each variable in our study as dependent variables (see
TABLE 1
Demographic Means by Country Region
Measure Anglo Asia Latino Range F(df) R2
Gender 1.42a1.45a1.37b1–2 9.16 (2,3871) .002**
Age 43.65a35.53b40.83c18–79 224.13 (2,3802) .16**
Marital status 1.17a1.36b1.24c1–2 68.47 (2,3855) .01**
Education 3.09a2.88b3.26c1–6 29.19 (2,3860) .03**
Level 1.99a2.66b2.17c1–4 153.05 (2,3792) .12**
Tenure 119.79a104.13b128.30a0–600 15.41 (2,3740) 130.68**
Children .85a.66b1.32c0–9 104.680 (2,3742) .06**
Working hours 4.18a4.07b4.28c1–6 13.23 (2,3892) .01**
Note: Means with different superscripts are significantly different from one another using Bonferroni adjust-
ments. ** p<.05.
WORK-TO-FAMILY CONFLICT ACROSS COUNTRIES 11
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology.
TABLE 2
Correlations among Study Variables for the Latin American Cluster, N=1,211
12345678910111213141516
1. Age –
2. Gender -.19** –
3. Marital status -.23** .25** –
4. Education .07* .02 -.01 –
5. Level -.27** .27** .16** -.12** –
6. Tenure .64** -.11** -.19** .01 -.12** –
7. Children .04 -.14** -.29** -.06 -.19** -.01 –
8. Working hours .10** -.20** -.10** .05 -.22** .06 .08** –
9. Job Satisfaction .12** .04 -.08* -.07* -.08* .11** .02 .08* –
10. Turnover Intention -.08* .06 .02 -.01 .11** -.03 -.04 .05 -.31** –
11. Time-based WFC -.03 .00 -.08** -.02 -.08** .01 .12** .28** -.19** .22** –
12. Strain-based WFC -.03 .06* .02 -.04 .03 .03 -.03 .13** -.21** .22** .51** –
13. Flextime .02 -.08* -.02 .04 -.13** .01 .04 .02 .02 -.01 -.05 -.01 –
14. Compressed WW .02 -.01 .01 -.06 -.03 .04 .04 -.02 .09* -.09* -.01 -.02 .17** –
15. Telecommuting .02 -.01 .01 .00 -.10** -.01 .08* .03 .04 -.04 .02 -.01 .33** .31** –
16. Part-time -.06 .04 .00 -.03 -.01 -.04 .02 -.02 .08* -.12** -.05 -.08** .19** .33** .30** –
Note:**p<.01; * p<.05.
12 MASUDA ET AL.
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology.
TABLE 3
Correlations among Study Variables for the Asian Cluster, N=1,211
12345678910111213141516
1. Age –
2. Gender -.23** –
3. Marital status -.46** .26** –
4. Education -.17** .12** .14** –
5. Level -.09** .10** .15** .04 –
6. Tenure .66** -.20** -.30** -.23** -.01 –
7. Children .21** -.17** -.40** -.05 -.03 .18** –
8. Working hours .04 -.19** -.07* -.04 -.12** -.03 .03 –
9. Job Satisfaction .17** -.04 -.14** .04 -.11** .06 .02 -.04 –
10. Turnover Intention -.22** .14** .18** .01 .09** -.18** -.12** .04 -.44** –
11. Time-based WFC -.05 .00 -.02 .00 -.10** -.09** -.01 .29** -.11** .16** –
12. Strain-based WFC -.05 .01 .03 -.14** -.15** -.10** -.07* .21** -.13** .19** .54** –
13. Flextime -.06* -.01 .06 .02 .09** -.07* -.10** -.03 .13** .02 .04 -.00 –
14. Compressed WW -.07* .00 .06 -.02 .05 -.04 -.09** -.03 -.03 .05 .01 .04 .23** –
15. Telecommuting -.06 .01 .09** -.06 .04 -.08* -.11** -.00 .01 .07* .03 .07* .35** .42** –
16. Part-time -.05 .02 .04 -.07* .09** -.03 -.09** -.04 -.05 .10** .05 .01 .34** .30** .40** –
Note:**p<.01; * p<.05.
WORK-TO-FAMILY CONFLICT ACROSS COUNTRIES 13
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology.
TABLE 4
Correlations among Study Variables for the Anglo Cluster, N=1,492
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10111213141516
1. Age –
2. Gender -.25** –
3. Marital status -.20** .22** –
4. Education .04 .04 -0.04 –
5. Level -.28** .13** .17** .02 –
6. Tenure .39** -.12** -.12** -.13** -.21** –
7. Children -.11** -.14** -.17** .02 -.08** -.03 –
8. Working hours .05 -.15** -.05 -.01 -.23** .06* .01 –
9. Job Satisfaction .20** -.01 -.05 .01 -.16** .10** .02 .02 –
10. Turnover Intention -.16** .05 .02 .00 .10** -.05 .01 .08** -.62** –
11. Time-based WFC -.10** -.04 -.01 -.10** -.10** .00 .13** .41** -.23** .23** –
12. Strain-based WFC -.17** .11** .04 -.10** .03 -.04 .02 .20** -.34** .34** .54** –
13. Flextime .11** -.01 -.01 .16** -.02 -.01 .02 -.05 .15** -.11** -.17** -.16** –
14. Compressed WW -.02 .04 .01 .10** -.01 .04 .03 -.13** .09** -.07** -.12** -.09** .33** –
15. Telecommuting .10** -.03 -.07* .24** .03 -.06* .05 .07* .10** -.05 -.10** -.12** .34** .26** –
16. Part-time -.14** .17** .02 -.03 .04 -.06* .01 -.16** -.02 -.01 -.07** -.03 .15** .24** .10** –
Note:**p<.01; * p<.05.
14 MASUDA ET AL.
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology.
Table 5). Given the statistical power achieved with our large sample size, all
of the effects were significant. The results show small effect sizes of compari-
sons between countries for each dependent variable. Country clusters
accounted for less than 2 per cent of variance in strain-based, time-based
WFC, and turnover intentions, and for 26 per cent of variance in job satis-
faction and 8 per cent of variance in turnover intentions. Hence, the results
showed homogeneity within country clusters with regard to the variables
included in our study.
The results showed differences between countries for flextime R2=.04,
p<.01, available telecommute R2=.02, p<.01, compressed working week
R2=.01, p<.01, and part-time work R2=.02, p<.01. See Table 5 for results
of post-hoc analyses. In support of Hypothesis 1, Anglo managers were more
likely to report working in organisations where all types of FWA were
available as compared to Asians and Latin American managers.
FWA and Job Satisfaction
To test Hypotheses 2 to 4 we used hierarchical regressions. In the first step we
included the control variables. In the second step we included our indepen-
dent variables dummy coded and country clusters. In the third step we
included the two-way product of each FWA and country cluster (see Tables 6
and 7). We conducted analyses with and without controls. Results testing
Hypotheses 2 and 3 did not change. Results testing Hypothesis 4 without
controls changed slightly as reported below. However, throughout the text
we only report results with controls.
The results of the regression analysis pertaining to Hypothesis 2 showed
that the entire model significantly predicted job satisfaction, F(17, 1948) =
TABLE 5
Comparison of Variable Means by Region
Measure Anglo Asia Latino Range F(df) R2
Time-based WIF conflict 3.22a3.09b3.17a1–5 6.08 (2,3915) .001**
Strain-based WIF conflict 3.10a2.91b3.02c1–5 13.19 (2,3915) .01**
Turnover Intentions 2.60a2.61a2.21b1–6 27.38 (2,3612) .04**
Job Satisfaction 4.94a4.00b4.89c1–7 173.884 (2,2785) .26**
Flextime available .67a.26b.49c0–1 222.715 (2,3517) .04**
Telecommuting available .35a.13b.14b0–1 104.025 (2,2980) .02**
Compressed Working Week .24a.12b.07c0–1 74.93 (2,3426) .01*
Part-time .38a.14b.13c0–1 150.711 (2,3423) .02**
Note: Means with different superscripts are significantly different from one another using Bonferroni adjust-
ments. ** p<.05.
WORK-TO-FAMILY CONFLICT ACROSS COUNTRIES 15
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology.
16.74, R2=.13**. However, only one interaction uniquely predicted job
satisfaction. Specifically, the product term of flextime with the Latin Ameri-
can versus Anglo clusters was significant.
Based on Aiken and West’s (1991) suggestion, we plotted simple regression
lines of job satisfaction (Y) on flextime (X) as a function of country clusters.
For testing the flextime and part-time work interaction, a “Z” value for
part-time work and flextime was defined as 1 for available and 0 for not
available (see Figure 1).
Slope analyses showed a positive relationship between flextime availability
and job satisfaction for the Anglo cluster. Specifically, the slope for the Anglo
cluster was positive and significantly different from zero, t(17, 1948) =3.32,
p<.01. However, the relationship was not significant for the Latin American
cluster, t(17, 1948) =1.26, ns. Hence, Hypothesis 2, which stated that country
cluster would moderate the relationship between FWA availability and job
satisfaction, was partially supported. While there was a positive relationship
TABLE 6
Results of Moderating Effects of Country Clusters on the FWA with Job
Satisfaction and Turnover Intentions
Job Satisfaction Turnover Intentions
bb tDR2bb tDR2
Age 0.02 0.14 5.80** .07** -0.02 -0.14 -6.34** .03**
Gender 0.15 0.06 2.58** 0.18 0.06 3.00**
Level -0.08 -0.07 -2.93** NA NA NA
Work hours NA NA NA 0.16 0.11 5.42**
Asia -0.45 -0.17 -4.36** .05** -0.46 -0.15 -4.51** .01**
Latin 0.24 0.09 2.23* -0.51 -0.16 -4.53**
Flextime 0.22 0.09 2.07* -0.29 -0.10 -2.79**
Telecommuting 0.13 0.04 1.27 0.00 0.00 -0.01
Part-time -0.10 -0.03 -1.08 0.07 0.02 0.70
Compressed 0.16 0.05 1.51 -0.13 -0.03 -1.16
Flextime ¥Latin -0.29 -0.08 -1.99* .01** 0.43 0.10 2.80** .01**
Flextime ¥Asia 0.15 0.03 0.95 0.21 0.04 1.35
Telecommuting ¥Asia -0.08 -0.01 -0.38 0.18 0.02 0.89
Telecommuting ¥Latin 0.04 0.01 0.21 -0.01 0.00 -0.06
Part-time ¥Latin 0.33 0.06 1.90 -0.41 -0.05 -2.07*
Part-time ¥Asia -0.16 -0.02 -0.86 0.25 0.04 1.36
Compressed ¥Latin 0.02 0.00 0.07 -0.21 -0.02 -0.84
Compressed ¥Asia -0.32 -0.04 -1.56 0.16 0.02 0.79
Note: The unstandardised regression coefficients presented are those derived at the third step B=unstand-
ardised regression coefficient; DR2=increment when adding product terms to regression equations hierarchi-
cally. Interaction terms involve the dummy-coded variables numbered 0–1. ** p<.01; * p<.05.
16 MASUDA ET AL.
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology.
FIGURE 1. Interaction between flexible working arrangements and country cluster on job satisfaction and turnover
intentions.
WORK-TO-FAMILY CONFLICT ACROSS COUNTRIES 17
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology.
between flextime availability with job satisfaction for the Anglo cluster, the
same was not found in the Latin American cluster.
FWAs and Turnover Intentions
As shown in Table 6, the entire model significantly predicted turnover inten-
tions, F(18, 2.510) =8.51, R2=.06**, with the product terms for both
part-time work and flextime availability with the Latin American versus
Anglo cluster contributing uniquely.
Figure 1 illustrates these interactions. The results showed that while there
is a negative relationship between flextime work and turnover intentions
for the Anglo cluster with a negative slope significantly different from zero,
t(18, 2510) =-2.09, p<.01, the relationship was not significant for the Latin
American cluster, t(18, 2510) =-1.04, ns. Further, there was a negative
relationship between part-time work availability and turnover intentions for
managers in the Latin American cluster with t(18, 2510) =-3,04, p<.01.
However, the relationship was not significant for managers in the Anglo
cluster, t(18, 2510) =0.7, ns.
Hence, Hypothesis 3, which stated that country cluster moderates the
relationship between FWA availability and turnover intention, was partially
supported. The interaction was significant with regard to flextime and part-
time work availability and when comparing Anglo versus Latin American
countries. However, it was not significant when examining other FWA and
comparing the Anglo with the Asian cluster.
FWAs and Time-Based WFC
Table 7 reports results of the regressions testing Hypothesis 4a. The entire
model predicted time-based WFC, F(19, 2772) =26.60, R2=.16**. Further,
there was a significant interaction effect for flextime comparing the Anglo
cluster with the Asia and Latin American clusters.
Figure 2 shows that the relationship between flextime availability and
time-based WFC was negative for the Anglo cluster, t(20, 2.632) =-3.53,
p<.01. However, it was non-significant for the Latin American cluster,
t(20, 2,632) =-.14, and the Asian cluster, t(13, 3.049) =.70, ns. Hence,
Hypothesis 4a was partially supported. There was a negative relationship of
flextime availability and time-based WFC for Anglo managers but not for
managers from other clusters.
FWA and Strain-Based WFC
Table 7 reports the results from the regression analyses conducted to test
Hypothesis 4b. The entire model predicted strain-based WFC, F(20, 2.632) =
18 MASUDA ET AL.
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology.
12.29, R2=.09**. Further, there was a significant interaction effect for both
part-time work and flextime comparing Latin American clusters with the
Anglo cluster, and for telecommuting comparing Asian and Anglo clusters.
When conducting regressions without controls, the results showed that flex-
time with Asia versus the Anglo cluster was significant.
Figure 2 shows that the relationship between flextime availability and
strain-based WFC was negative for the Anglo cluster, t(20, 2,632) =-3.39,
p<.01. However, it was non-significant for managers in the Latin American
cluster, t(19, 2.727) =-.94, ns. Further, there was a significant positive
relationship between telecommuting and strain-based WFC in the Asian
cluster, t(19, 2.727) =2.83, p<.01, while the same was not found in the Anglo
cluster, t(19, 2.727) =-1.27, ns. Lastly, part-time work was negatively related
with strain-based WFC for the Latin American cluster, t(19, 2.727) =-4.42,
p<.01, but non-significant in the Anglo cluster, t(19, 2.727) =.31, ns.
TABLE 7
Results of Moderating Effects of Country Clusters and FWA on Time-based
WFC and Strain-Based WFC
Time-based WFC Strain-based WFC
bb tDR2bb tDR2
Age -0.01 -0.10 -5.02** .14** 0.00 -0.04 -2.10* .06**
Gender 0.10 0.05 2.62** 0.18 0.09 4.54**
Level -0.05 -0.06 -2.92** -0.04 -0.05 -2.29**
Education -0.04 -0.05 -2.84** -0.08 -0.10 -5.37**
Working hours 0.34 0.35 18.49** 0.19 0.20 10.19**
Children 0.06 0.07 3.90** -0.03 -0.03 -1.53
Asia -0.43 -0.21 -6.49** .01** -0.54 -0.26 -7.85** .02**
Latin -0.33 -0.16 -4.61** -0.31 -0.15 -4.19**
Flextime -0.25 -0.13 -3.70** -0.24 -0.13 -3.43**
Telecommuting -0.09 -0.04 -1.43 -0.09 -0.04 -1.33
Part-time 0.04 0.02 0.58 0.03 0.01 0.40
Compressed -0.09 -0.03 -1.31 -0.06 -0.02 -0.76
Flextime ¥Latin 0.24 0.09 2.53* .01** 0.31 0.12 3.12** .01**
Flextime ¥Asia 0.30 0.09 2.97** 0.18 0.05 1.72
Telecommuting ¥Asia 0.07 0.01 0.55 0.29 0.06 2.19*
Telecommuting ¥Latin 0.11 0.02 0.95 0.01 0.00 0.07
Part-time ¥Latin -0.20 -0.04 -1.72 -0.31 -0.06 -2.54*
Part-time ¥Asia 0.14 0.03 1.21 -0.05 -0.01 -0.42
Compressed ¥Latin 0.21 0.03 1.43 0.10 0.02 0.67
Compressed ¥Asia 0.09 0.02 0.69 0.14 0.03 1.04
Note: The unstandardised regression coefficients presented are those derived at the third step B=unstand-
ardised regression coefficient; DR2=increment when adding product terms to regression equations hierarchi-
cally. Interaction terms involve the dummy-coded variables numbered 0–1. ** p<.01; * p<.05.
WORK-TO-FAMILY CONFLICT ACROSS COUNTRIES 19
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology.
FIGURE 2. Interaction between flexible working arrangements and country cluster on WFC.
20 MASUDA ET AL.
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology.
DISCUSSION
Powell et al. (2009) noted that few empirical studies exist that address the
work–life interface cross-culturally. This paper is the first empirical study to
examine differences in FWA availability across Latin American, Anglo, and
Asian countries. Based on institutional theory (Meyer & Rowan, 1977), we
argued that cultural expectations reflecting levels of I–C are institutional
pressures that explain the adoption of business practices congruent with
cultural values and norms. Our results indicate that managers in individual-
istic (i.e. Anglo) countries were generally more likely to report working in
companies that offer flextime, compressed working week, part-time work,
and telecommuting compared with managers in collectivistic (i.e. Asian and
Latin American) countries. These results stress the importance of examining
the impact of culture on FWA adoption or on the adoption of any other
organisational policy.
This paper also reports the first investigation to examine the moderating
effect of country cluster on FWA availability with work-to-family conflict,
job satisfaction, and turnover intentions relationships. Specifically, managers
in the Anglo cluster working in organisations that offered flextime were more
satisfied with their job, less likely to report turnover intentions, and less likely
to report experiencing time-based and strain-based WFC. However, the same
relationships were not found with regard to the Latin American cluster, and,
in the case of the relationship of FWA with time-based WFC, in the Asian
cluster.
Interestingly, managers in the Latin American cluster who worked in
companies offering part-time work had lower turnover intentions and strain-
based WFC. The unique findings between the Asian and the Latin American
clusters suggest that mechanisms other than I–C are needed to explain these
differences. For example, research has shown that some Anglo, Asian, and
Latin American countries differ with regard to cultural orientations such as
mastery orientation (Schwartz, 1999). According to Sagiv and Schwartz
(2007), “The cultural orientation labeled mastery encourages active self-
assertion in order to master, direct and change the natural and social envi-
ronment to attain group or personal goals (values: ambition, success, daring,
competence” (p. 180). Sagiv and Schwartz (2007) reported data from 76
national groups with regard to cultural values, showing that Anglo countries
such as the USA are higher in mastery orientation compared with Japan.
Further, Japan and the USA were higher in mastery orientation compared
with countries in Latin America such as Chile, Mexico, Venezuela, and
Brazil. If this is the case, spending less time fulfilling working roles may lead
to higher job satisfaction in countries in Latin America because it allows
employees to spend more time with the family or caring for other values
besides professional recognition. We encourage more empirical studies
WORK-TO-FAMILY CONFLICT ACROSS COUNTRIES 21
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology.
exploring the benefits of part-time jobs as an FWA in Latin American
countries and examining other explanatory factors.
We also found differences in the relationship of some FWA and outcome
variables for Asian managers, particularly with regard to WFC. Specifically,
while flextime was negatively related to time-based WFC in the Anglo cluster,
this relationship was not found in the Asian cluster. Further, managers from
the Asian cluster who worked in organisations in which telecommuting was
available were more likely to report strain-based WFC. Managers in Asian
countries could have interpreted the availability of telecommuting as a sign
that their companies are not committed and are not willing to build strong
ties with them. Future empirical studies should investigate the signals that the
availability and use of telecommuting can send to employees under different
cultural contexts.
Further, while flextime was related to outcomes for Anglo managers, and
part-time work was related to outcomes for Latin American managers, we
found that telecommuting and a compressed working week did not relate to
outcomes across cultures. Perhaps these findings reflect unmeasured modera-
tors of these relationships (Allen & Shockley, 2009; Gajendran & Harrison,
2007; Shockley & Allen, 2007). Future studies should examine the relation-
ship of FWA availability with outcome variables across cultures using a
sample of general workers, and including other possible moderators (e.g. use
of FWA, frequency, and intensity).
Lastly, results showed a different pattern when comparing the Latin
American and the Asian clusters. Specifically, telecommuting demonstrated
less favorable relationships for managers in the Asian cluster as compared to
managers in the Latin American cluster. Further, part-time was favorable for
Latin Americans but not for Asians. There could be different explanations
for these findings. First, in this sample, managers in the Asian cluster could
have been higher in collectivism compared with managers in the Latin Ameri-
can cluster. This could explain the positive relationship of telecommuting
with strain-based WFC in Asia but not in Latin America. In fact, three of the
sources we used to measure I–C showed that Asians are lower in individual-
ism than are Latin Americans (see Gelfand et al., 2004; Hofstede, 2001; Oishi
et al., 1999).
Limitations
The limitations of this study should be acknowledged. An important factor
is the typical challenge of directly comparing results across countries with
dissimilar cultures and languages. Although we tested the WFC scale for
measurement invariance and transportability across countries and languages,
we cannot assume that the nature of those constructs is similar across coun-
tries. Additionally, scales could be contaminated by cultural response ten-
22 MASUDA ET AL.
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology.
dencies (e.g. Iwata, Umesue, Egashira, Hiro, Mizoue, Mishima & Nagata,
1998; Triandis, 1995; Van de Vijver & Leung, 1997). Thus, comparisons
between country clusters must be read with caution.
Second, we did not rule out the possibility of other explanations such as
economic and political reasons or other cultural differences. These other
differences may explain the uneven pattern in our findings. For example,
another possible explanation for these findings that could be further explored
is the concept of monochronic versus polychronic cultures defined by Hall
(1959). Individuals from more polychronic cultures prefer doing several
things simultaneously and may not use traditional planning. Cultures where
polychronism is predominant may have difficulty working under flextime.
Latin American countries may be in general more polychronic cultures com-
pared with Asian ones. This may explain why flextime had no positive effects
for Latin Americans. So far, research has not used this concept to examine
country differences and the use of time and FWA. More cross-cultural
studies using this concept or exploring other cultural variables to understand
these differences are desirable and needed so that we can start accumulating
findings and develop a stronger theoretical rationale to explain cross-cultural
differences in FWA and WFC.
Another limitation in our study is that our measure of FWA availability
did not capture actual frequency in use. As previous studies have shown, the
intensity of using certain FWAs moderates the relationship between FWA
use and working outcomes (Gajendran & Harrison, 2007). However, the
purpose of our study was to understand how culture might influence the
adoption of these practices by organisations and how its availability can send
signals that lead to different consequences for employees across cultures.
Future studies examining the consequences of FWA frequency and intensity
of usage on employee outcomes should be conducted to better understand
the role of FWA on important employee outcomes across cultures. It is also
important to conduct longitudinal studies investigating FWA use over time
as previous studies have found that the benefits of flexible working arrange-
ments diminish over time (Baltes et al., 1999). Further, it is important to
capture whether telecommuting is optional. For example, if telecommuting is
used in certain countries only as a way to reduce costs of resources, then it
will likely lead to negative consequences, which are associated with forced
telecommuting.
Implications and Conclusions
This study is the first to examine the role of FWA availability across Anglo,
Latin American, and Asian clusters. Our results show the importance of
considering the cultural context when implementing FWA practices. To our
knowledge, so far only one study has examined the relationship between
WORK-TO-FAMILY CONFLICT ACROSS COUNTRIES 23
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology.
FWA and work–family interaction (e.g. work–family balance) across coun-
tries (Lyness & Kropf, 2005). The current study extends the work of Lyness
and Kropf (2005) outside European countries. The lack of studies examining
FWA in Asian and Latin American countries is problematic given that the
success of managerial practices depends on the fit between cultural assump-
tions inherent in organisational practices and the employees (Kirkman &
Shapiro, 1997). Because the initial implementation of FWA implies addi-
tional costs to the organisation (Coltrin & Barendse, 1981), it is imperative to
inform global business leaders of the effectiveness of FWA practices in
certain cultures before attempts are made to export these practices to differ-
ent countries. Based on our study, it may be premature to implement certain
types of flexible practices in countries where the number of extended family
members living at home tends to be larger (e.g. Brazil), the houses tend to be
smaller (e.g. Japan), the technology is deficient, and where individuals are
more likely to prefer strong social ties. However, more study is needed to
better guide practitioners. We hope that this study encourages others to
examine possible effects of FWA on other outcome variables not examined
here such as family-to-work conflict, work–family enrichment, and other
employee attitude variables.
The fact that the availability of flextime examined in this paper did not
relate to lower WFC in managers from Latin America and Asia is problem-
atic as research has shown that work-to-family conflict is also associated with
negative consequences for employees in collectivistic countries (see Aryee,
Fields, & Luk, 1999; Luk & Shaffer, 2005). As such, collectivistic employees
as much as individualistic employees need organisational support and pro-
grams that will help them cope with work–family conflict. Hence, with this
paper we are not only calling for a better understanding of the cultural
barriers that may hinder the applicability of certain Western-made practices
across the globe but we are urging companies and researchers to search for
new culturally sensitive solutions to help employees across the globe to cope
with work–family conflict. For example, it is possible that employees in
collectivistic cultures will have a better perception of FWA if they are also
offered other practices that help them build social ties and spend time with
their family. According to Aryee et al. (1999), in some collectivistic societies
like China, employees place greater importance on family roles and feel the
need to spend more time with family members even though they expect to
work many hours in order to acquire the means to support family members.
As such, in some of these countries other arrangements besides telecommut-
ing could be offered so that employees spend time with family members.
Yang (2010) suggests that, “organization-sponsored social activities, outings,
and sports that encourage family involvement are effective ways to foster
healthy harmonious employee relations, and can help employees expand
their network” (p. 176). These suggestions show that the company can offer
24 MASUDA ET AL.
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology.
flexibility not only by letting employees work at home, but also by helping
employees integrate their family into the workplace. In fact, some companies
have already started adopting culturally sensitive practices to help employees
integrate work and family roles. For example, Caparas (2010) explains that a
company called Sierra Atlantic, with its headquarters in the USA but with
offices in India, introduced a “take your parents to work” day, which recog-
nises the importance of having parental guidance in the India culture. She
reports that this practice reduced the turnover rate to 50 per cent for new
college graduates. The possibilities are unlimited and go beyond the Western-
made solutions proposed in this paper.
REFERENCES
Adigun, I.O., & Stephenson, G.M. (1992). Sources of job motivation and satisfaction
among British and Nigerian employees. Journal of Social Psychology,132, 369–
376.
Aiken, L.S., & West, S.G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting inter-
actions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Allen, T.D. (2001). Family-supportive work environments: The role of organizational
perceptions. Journal of Vocational Behavior,58, 414–435.
Allen, T.D., & Shockley, K.M. (2009). Flexible work arrangements: Help or hype? In
D.R. Crane & E.J. Hill (Eds.), Handbook of families and work: Interdisciplinary
perspectives (pp. 265–284). Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
Aryee, S., Fields, D., & Luk, V. (1999). A cross-cultural test of a model of the
work–family interface. Journal of Management,25, 491–511.
Baltes, B.B., Briggs, T.E., Huff, J.W., Wright, J.A., & Neuman, G.A. (1999). Flexible
and compressed workweek schedules: A meta-analysis of their effects on work-
related criteria. Journal of Applied Psychology,84, 496–513.
Batt, R., & Valcour, P.M. (2003). Human resources practices as predictors of work–
family outcomes and employee turnover. Industrial Relations,42, 189–220.
Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.
Bond, J.T., Thompson, C.A., Galinsky, E., & Prottas, D. (2002). Highlights of the
National Study of the Changing Workforce. New York: Families and Work
Institute.
Byron, K. (2005). A meta-analytic review of work–family interference and its ante-
cedents. Journal of Vocational Behavior,67, 169–198.
Cammann, C., Fichman, M., Jenkins, D., & Klesh, J. (1979). The Michigan Organi-
zational Assessment Questionnaire. Unpublished manuscript, University of Michi-
gan, Ann Arbor.
Caparas, M.V.Q. (2010). Work–family policies and practices: The case of four Asian
countries. In N. Chinchilla, M. Las Heras, & A.D. Masuda (Eds.), No matter
where you are: A practical guide to help organizations deal with the workforce
challenge (pp. 139–156). Amherst, MA: HRD Press.
Carlson, D.S., Kacmar, K.M., & Williams, L.J. (2000). Construction and initial
validation of a multidimensional measure of work–family conflict. Journal of
Vocational Behavior,56, 249–276.
WORK-TO-FAMILY CONFLICT ACROSS COUNTRIES 25
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology.
Casper, W.J., & Harris, C.M. (2008). Work–life benefits and organizational attach-
ment: Self-interest utility and signaling theory models. Journal of Vocational
Behavior,72, 95–109.
Coltrin, S.A., & Barendse, B.D. (1981). Is your organization a good candidate for
flexitime? Personnel Journal,60, 712–715.
Davis, D.D., & Polonko, K.A. (2001). Telework in the United States: Telework
America Survey 2001. http://www.workingfromanywhere.org/telework/twa2001.
htm.
Den Dulk, L. (2005). Workplace work–family arrangements: A study and explana-
tory framework of differences between organizational provisions in different
welfare states. In S.A.Y. Poelmans (Ed.), Work and family: An international
research perspective (pp. 211–238). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
European Commission (2000). E-work 2000. Status report 2000 on new ways to work
in the information society. http://www.eto.org.uk.
Falicov, C.J. (2001). The cultural meanings of money: The case of Latinos and Anglo-
Americans. American Behavioral Scientist,45, 313–328.
Frone, M.R. (2003). Work–family balance. In J.C. Quick & L.E. Tetrick (Eds.),
Handbook of occupational health psychology (pp. 143–162). Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association Books.
Gajendran, R.S., & Harrison, D.A. (2007). The good, the bad and the unknown
about telecommuting: Meta-analysis of psychological mediators and individual
consequences. Journal of Applied Psychology,92, 1524–1541.
Galinsky, E., Bond, J., & Sakai, K. (2008). 2008 National study of employers.
Retrieved 28 January 2009, from http://familiesandwork.org/site/research/reports/
2008nse.pdf.
Gareis, K. (2002). The intensity of telework in 2002 in the EU, Switzerland and the
US. Paper presented at the International Congress New Work 2002, Sustainability
in the new economy: Designing a new work space. Sustainability and ethical
dimensions, September, Badajoz, Spain, www.sibis-eu.org.
Gelfand, M.J., Bhawuk, D.P.S., Nishii, L.H., & Bechtold, D.J. (2004). Individualism
and collectivism. In R.J., House, P.J. Hanges, M. Javida, P.W. Dorfman, & V.
Gupta (Eds.), Culture, leadership and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62
societies (pp. 437–512). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Golden, T.D. (2006). Avoiding depletion in virtual work: Teleworking and the inter-
vening impact of work exhaustion on commitment and turnover intentions.
Journal of Vocational Behavior,69, 176–187.
Goodstein, J.D. (1994). Institutional pressures and strategic responsiveness:
Employer involvement in work–family issues. Academy of Management Journal,
37, 350–382.
Gornick, J.C., & Meyers, M.K. (2003). Supports for working families: Work and care
policies across welfare states, 2003. CESifo Dice Report.
Greenhaus, J.H., & Beutell, N.J. (1985). Sources of conflict between work and family
roles. Academy of Management Review,10, 76–88.
Grover, S.L., & Crooker, K.J. (1995). Who appreciates family-responsive human
resource policies? The impact of family-friendly policies on the organizational
attachment of parents and non-parents. Personnel Psychology,48, 271–288.
26 MASUDA ET AL.
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology.
Gupta, V., Hanges, P.J., & Dorfman, P. (2002). Cultural clusters: Methodology and
findings. Journal of World Business,37, 11–15.
Hall, E.T. (1959). The silent language. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
Hofstede G. (2001). Culture’s consequences (2nd edn.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
House, R., Javidan, M., Hanges, P., & Dorfman, P. (2002). Understanding cultures
and implicit leadership theories around the globe: An introduction to project
GLOBE. Journal of World Business,37, 3–10.
Huang, X., & Van de Vliert, E. (2003). Where intrinsic job satisfaction fails to work:
National moderators of intrinsic motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
24, 159–179.
Iwata, N., Umesue, M., Egashira, K., Hiro, H., Mizoue, T., Mishima, N., & Nagata,
S. (1998). Can positive affect items be used to assess depressive disorder in the
Japanese population? Psychological Medicine,28, 153–158.
Judge, T.A., Parker, S., Colbert, A., Heller, D., & Ilies, R. (2001). Job satisfaction: A
cross-cultural review. In N. Anderson, D. Ones, H.K. Sinangil, & C. Viswesvaran
(Eds.), Handbook of industrial, work and organizational psychology (pp. 25–52).
London: Sage Publications.
Kirkman, B.L., & Shapiro, D.L. (1997). The impact of cultural values on employee
resistance to teams: Toward a model of globalized self-managing work team
effectiveness. Academy of Management Review,22, 730–757.
Lambert, A.D., Marler, J.H., & Gueutal, H.G. (2008). Individual differences: Factors
affecting employee utilization of flexible work arrangements. Journal of Vocational
Behavior,73, 107–117.
Locke, E.A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M.D. Dunnette
(Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1297–1343).
Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
Lu, L., Kao, S., Cooper, C.L., Allen, T.D., Lapierre, L.M., O’Driscoll, M., Poelmans,
S.Y., Sanchez, J., & Spector, P. (2009). Work resources, work-to-family conflict,
and its consequences: A Taiwanese–British cross-cultural comparison. Interna-
tional Journal of Stress Management,16, 25–44.
Luk, D.M., & Shaffer, M.A. (2005). Work and family domain stressors and support:
Within- and cross-domain influences on work–family conflict. Journal of Occupa-
tional and Organizational Psychology,78, 489–508.
Lyness, K.S., & Kropf, M.B. (2005). The relationships of national gender equality
and organizational support with work–family balance: A study of European man-
agers. Human Relations,58, 33–60.
McNall, L.A, Masuda, A.D., & Nicklin, J.M. (2010). Flexible work arrangements
and job satisfaction/turnover intentions: The mediating role of work-to-
family enrichment. Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary & Applied,144,
1–21.
Meyer, J.W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutional organizations: Formal structure as
myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology,4, 103–120.
Oishi, S., Diener, E.F., Lucas, R.E., & Suh, E.M. (1999). Cross-cultural variations in
predictors of life satisfaction: Perspectives from needs and values. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin,25, 980–990.
WORK-TO-FAMILY CONFLICT ACROSS COUNTRIES 27
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology.
Peters, P., & den Dulk, L. (2003). Cross cultural differences in managers’ support for
home-based telework: A theoretical elaboration. International Journal of Cross
Cultural Management,3, 329–346.
Poelmans, S.A.Y., & Sahibzada, K. (2004). A multi-level model for studying the
context and impact of work–family policies and culture in organizations. Human
Resource Management Review,14, 409–431.
Powell, G.N., Francesco, A.M., & Ling, Y. (2009). Towards culture-sensitive theories
of the work–family interface. Journal of Organizational Behavior,30, 597–616.
Raghuram, S., London, M., & Larsen, H.H. (2001). Flexible employment practices in
Europe: Country versus culture. International Journal of Human Resource Man-
agement,12, 738–753.
Redding, S.G. (1993). The spirit of Chinese capitalism. New York: de Gruyter.
Riordan, C.M., & Vandenberg, R.J. (1994). A central question in cross-cultural
research: Do employees of different cultures interpret work-related measures in an
equivalent manner? Journal of Management,20, 643–671.
Rhoades, L. & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of
the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology,87, 698–714.
Sagiv, L., & Schwartz, S.H. (2007). Cultural values in organizations: Insight for
Europe. European Journal of International Management,1(3), 176–190.
Schwartz, S.H. (1999). A theory of cultural values and some implications for work.
Applied Psychology: An International Review,48, 23–47.
Shockley, K.M., & Allen, T.D. (2007). When flexibility helps: Another look at the
availability of flexible work arrangements and work–family conflict. Journal of
Vocational Behavior,71, 479 –493.
Society for Human Resource Management (2003, December). HR professionals see
more employees struggle with eldercare. Retrieved 19 February 2009, http://
www.businessknowhow.com/manage/eldercare.htm.
Spector, P.E. (1991). Confirmatory test of a turnover model utilizing multiple data
sources. Human Performance,4, 221–229.
Spector, P.E., Allen, T.D., Poelmans, S., Lapierre, L.M., Cooper, C.L., O’Driscoll,
M., Sanchez, J.I., Abarca, N., Alexandrova, M., Beham, B., Brough, P., Ferreiro,
P., Fraile, G., Lu, C., Lu, L., Moreno-Velázquez, I., Pagon, M., Pitariu, H.,
Salamatov, V., Shima, S., Suarez Simoni, A., Siu, O.L., & Widerszal-Bazyl, M.
(2007). Cross-national differences in relationships of work demands, job satisfac-
tion and turnover intentions with work–family conflict. Personnel Psychology,60,
805–835.
Spector, P.E., Cooper, C.L., Poelmans, S., Allen, T.D., O’Driscoll, M., Sanchez, J.I.,
Siu, O.L., Dewe, P., Hart, P., Lu, L., Renault de Moraes, L.F., Ostrognay, G.M.,
Sparks, K., Wong, P., & Yu, S. (2004). A cross-national comparative study of
work/family stressors, working hours, and well-being: China and Latin America
vs. the Anglo world. Personnel Psychology,57, 119–142.
Spector, P.E., Dwyer, D.J., & Jex, S.M. (1988). The relationship of job stressors to
affective, health, and performance outcomes: A comparison of multiple data
sources. Journal of Applied Psychology,73, 11–19.
Triandis, H.C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview
Press.
28 MASUDA ET AL.
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology.
Van de Vijver, F., & Leung, K. (1997). Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural
research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Wayne, J.H., Randel, A.E., & Stevens, J. (2006). The role of identity and work–family
support in work–family enrichment and its work-related consequences. Journal of
Vocational Behavior,69, 445–461.
Yang, N. (2010). The work–family relationship in China: Cultural tradition, socio-
economic changes, and policy implications. In N. Chinchilla, M. Las Heras, &
A.D. Masuda (Eds.), No matter where you are: A practical guide to help organiza-
tions deal with the workforce challenge (pp. 157–175). Amherst, MA: HRD Press.
Yang, N., Chen, C.C., Choi, J., & Zou, Y. (2000). Sources of work–family conflict: A
Sino-US comparison of the effects of work and family demands. Academy of
Management Journal,43, 113–123.
WORK-TO-FAMILY CONFLICT ACROSS COUNTRIES 29
© 2011 The Authors. Applied Psychology: An International Review © 2011 International
Association of Applied Psychology.
