Shouldering a double burden: the cultural stigma of the dogma of gender role ideology and its impact on work–family conflict

Purpose - Drawing on the role theory and work–family border theory, this study aims to examine the relationship between work/family demands and sui generis forms of work–family conflict and further investigates the gender role ideology as a moderator of the relationship between work/family demands and work–family conflict. Design/methodology/approach - The data were garnered with a self-reported questionnaire from randomly selected 569 employees working in the banking sector. As a caveat, nonresponse bias, common method variance and the reliability and validity of the measure were examined. Findings - The results revealed that work demand and family demand were strongly related to both time- and strain-based work–family conflict; however, the relationship was not established with behavioural-based conflict. Notably, the findings affirmed the existence of a neglected form of psychological-based work–family conflict as thepièce de résistanceand established a strong connection with its precursor. The dogma of gender role ideology, as a moderator, was indubitably confirmed and strengthened the positive relationship between family demand and family-to-work conflict. Practical implications - The present study emphasises the importance of work/family demands and gender role ideology on work–family conflict. Consequently, it behoves human resource managers, strategists and practitioners to frame the organisational arrangements to alleviate the work–family conflict. Originality/value - The present study fills a hiatus by establishing the relationship between work/family demand and work–family conflict with its cultural beliefs in the context of a collectivist culture.