Journal Articles
Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://mro.massey.ac.nz/handle/10179/7915
Browse
2 results
Search Results
Item Work and family interaction management: the case for zigzag working(Taylor and Francis Group, 2024-08-21) Harris C; Haar JThe present study seeks to advance understanding of the interaction of work and family roles. Typically, while the intersection of these domains is established as either being detrimental (i.e. work-family conflict) or beneficial (i.e. work-family enrichment), we argue there is a fundamental issue with timing. Specifically, we offer zigzag working as an approach to understanding how work and family interact. We suggest, rather than roles operating separately (e.g. work to family or family to work), the reality of work is where employees have work and family roles intersecting simultaneously. We believe this provides unique insights for those with dependent responsibilities, representing potentially both a unique challenge and benefit. Our study has two samples (n = 318 employees and n = 373 managers) and we find support for zigzag working at the day-level and while it is positively related to work-family conflict dimensions it is also positively related to happiness. Overall, our paper offers a new lens on work-family border negotiation, providing empirical evidence showing that zigzag working does occur and that it appears to have unique properties. Importantly, zigging and zagging around work and dependents during a typical day represents both positive and negative effects, highlighting a unique occurrence within the literature.Item What are the odds of burnt-out risk and leaving the job? Turnover intent consequences of worker burnout using a two sample New Zealand study(John Wiley and Sons Ltd, 2023-03) Haar JJob burnout is a pressing issue for organizations, and this study explores the new Burnout Assessment Tool (BAT), which provides a robust calculation of burnt-out risk. Next, the odds of high turnover intentions from burnt-out risk are calculated using two samples: (1) N = 709 employees and (2) N = 313 managers. Analysis shows the odds of burnt-out risk are higher for managers (17%) than employees (8%). High burnt-out risk in employees shows a 47% likelihood of high turnover intent versus 13% for employees with nonburnt-out risk. High burnt-out risk in managers shows a 51% likelihood of high turnover intent versus 12% for managers with nonburnt-out risk. Furthermore, moderating effects of supervisor organizational embodiment were found to interact with burnt-out risk for employees only, showing the highest turnover intent when embodiment is high, reflecting the potential backlash against the organization.