Work-life benefits and organizational attachment: Self-interest utility and signaling theory models

被引:196
作者
Casper, Wendy J. [1 ]
Harris, Christopher M. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Texas Arlington, Dept Management, Arlington, TX 76019 USA
关键词
work-life; employee benefits; work-family; employee attitudes; organizational support; sex differences;
D O I
10.1016/j.jvb.2007.10.015
中图分类号
B849 [应用心理学];
学科分类号
040203 ;
摘要
This study examines two competing theoretical explanations for why work-life policies such as dependent care assistance and flexible schedules influence organizational attachment. The self-interest utility model posits that work-life policies influence organizational attachment because employee use of these policies facilitates attachment. The signaling model posits that these policies facilitate attachment indirectly through perceived organizational support. Regression analyses explored both models using a sample of 286 full time employees. Results supported both the signaling model and the self-interest utility model. For women, the availability of work-life benefits influenced organizational attachment irrespective of use, and these effects were mediated by support perceptions, consistent with the signaling model. In contrast, the self-interest model was also supported for men only. Specifically, the availability and use of flexible schedules interacted in predicting affective commitment among men such that flexible schedule availability was positively related to commitment only when use was high and negatively related to commitment when use was low. Dependent care assistance and schedule flexibility also interacted in predicting affective commitment, turnover intentions, and perceived organizational support, suggesting that the effect of policy implementation may depend on what other policies are already offered by the organization. Findings are discussed in terms of implications for theory and organizational practice. (c) 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:95 / 109
页数:15
相关论文
共 43 条
[1]  
Aiken L. S., 1991, Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions
[2]   Family-supportive work environments: The role of organizational perceptions [J].
Allen, TD .
JOURNAL OF VOCATIONAL BEHAVIOR, 2001, 58 (03) :414-435
[3]   Share price reactions to work-family initiatives: An institutional perspective [J].
Arthur, MM .
ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, 2003, 46 (04) :497-505
[4]  
AUERBACH JD, 1988, BUSINESS CHILD CARE
[5]   Flexible and compressed workweek schedules: A meta-analysis of their effects on work-related criteria [J].
Baltes, BB ;
Briggs, TE ;
Huff, JW ;
Wright, JA ;
Neuman, GA .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, 1999, 84 (04) :496-513
[6]   THE MODERATOR MEDIATOR VARIABLE DISTINCTION IN SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGICAL-RESEARCH - CONCEPTUAL, STRATEGIC, AND STATISTICAL CONSIDERATIONS [J].
BARON, RM ;
KENNY, DA .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1986, 51 (06) :1173-1182
[7]   The relative contribution of formal and informal organizational work-family [J].
Behson, SJ .
JOURNAL OF VOCATIONAL BEHAVIOR, 2005, 66 (03) :487-500
[8]   MEASUREMENT OF PSYCHOLOGICAL ANDROGYNY [J].
BEM, SL .
JOURNAL OF CONSULTING AND CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1974, 42 (02) :155-162
[9]   Employees' use of work-family policies and the workplace social context [J].
Blair-Loy, M ;
Wharton, AS .
SOCIAL FORCES, 2002, 80 (03) :813-845
[10]  
BUTTS M, 2007, 2007 SOC IND ORG PSY