IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i22p12207-d684008.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Bright and Dark Sides of Resources for Cross-Role Interrupting Behaviors and Work–Family Conflict: Preliminary Multigroup Findings on Remote and Traditional Working

Author

Listed:
  • Ferdinando Paolo Santarpia

    (Department of Psychology, Faculty of Medicine & Psychology Sapienza, University of Rome, via dei Marsi 78, 00185 Rome, Italy)

  • Laura Borgogni

    (Department of Psychology, Faculty of Medicine & Psychology Sapienza, University of Rome, via dei Marsi 78, 00185 Rome, Italy)

  • Chiara Consiglio

    (Department of Psychology, Faculty of Medicine & Psychology Sapienza, University of Rome, via dei Marsi 78, 00185 Rome, Italy)

  • Pietro Menatta

    (Department of Psychology, Faculty of Medicine & Psychology Sapienza, University of Rome, via dei Marsi 78, 00185 Rome, Italy)

Abstract

Using boundary management and conservation of resources theories, we examined how job resources (i.e., job autonomy and goal-oriented leadership) and a work-related personal resource (i.e., personal initiative at work) relate to cross-role interrupting behaviors—i.e., interrupting the work (or non-work) role to attend to competing non-work (or work) demands—and how, in turn, they correlate with work–family conflict. Furthermore, we examined differences in the proposed nomological network between workers adopting traditional and remote ways of working. Using a multigroup structural equation modelling approach on a sample of 968 employees from an Italian telecommunications company, we found that: (a) job autonomy was positively related to both work interrupting non-work behaviors and to non-work interrupting work behaviors, (b) goal-oriented leadership was negatively related to non-work interrupting work behaviors, (c) personal initiative at work was positively related to work interrupting non-work behaviors and, finally, (d) cross-role interrupting behaviors were positively related to work–family conflict. Additionally, our findings revealed previously undocumented results; (a) mediating patterns in how resources relate, through cross-role interrupting behaviors, to work–family conflict and (b) non-invariant associations among job autonomy, cross-role interrupting behaviors and work–family conflict across traditional and remote workers. The limitations and theoretical and practical implications of the present study are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Ferdinando Paolo Santarpia & Laura Borgogni & Chiara Consiglio & Pietro Menatta, 2021. "The Bright and Dark Sides of Resources for Cross-Role Interrupting Behaviors and Work–Family Conflict: Preliminary Multigroup Findings on Remote and Traditional Working," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(22), pages 1-20, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:22:p:12207-:d:684008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/22/12207/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/22/12207/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joop J. Hox & Cora J. M. Maas & Matthieu J. S. Brinkhuis, 2010. "The effect of estimation method and sample size in multilevel structural equation modeling," Statistica Neerlandica, Netherlands Society for Statistics and Operations Research, vol. 64(2), pages 157-170, May.
    2. Melissa Mazmanian & Wanda J. Orlikowski & JoAnne Yates, 2013. "The Autonomy Paradox: The Implications of Mobile Email Devices for Knowledge Professionals," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(5), pages 1337-1357, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chiara Consiglio & Nicoletta Massa & Valentina Sommovigo & Luigi Fusco, 2023. "Techno-Stress Creators, Burnout and Psychological Health among Remote Workers during the Pandemic: The Moderating Role of E-Work Self-Efficacy," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(22), pages 1-23, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Viktoria Maria Baumeister & Leonie Petra Kuen & Maike Bruckes & Gerhard Schewe, 2021. "The Relationship of Work-Related ICT Use With Well-being, Incorporating the Role of Resources and Demands: A Meta-Analysis," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(4), pages 21582440211, November.
    2. Angela Garcia Calvo & Martin Kenney & John Zysman, 2023. "Understanding work in the online platform economy: the narrow, the broad, and the systemic perspectives," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 32(4), pages 795-814.
    3. Zaitun Mohd Saman & Ab Hamid Siti-Azrin & Azizah Othman & Yee Cheng Kueh, 2021. "The Validity and Reliability of the Malay Version of the Cyberbullying Scale among Secondary School Adolescents in Malaysia," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-12, November.
    4. Yi Sun & Shihui Li & Lingling Yu, 2022. "The dark sides of AI personal assistant: effects of service failure on user continuance intention," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(1), pages 17-39, March.
    5. Nurmi, Niina & Koroma, Johanna, 2020. "The emotional benefits and performance costs of building a psychologically safe language climate in MNCs," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 55(4).
    6. Armanda Cetrulo & Dario Guarascio & Maria Enrica Virgillito, 2020. "Anatomy of the Italian occupational structure: concentrated power and distributed knowledge," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 29(6), pages 1345-1379.
    7. Nada Endrissat & Aurélie Leclercq Vandelannoitte, 2021. "From sites to vibes: Technology and the spatial production of coworking spaces," Post-Print hal-03332209, HAL.
    8. Ruthanne Huising, 2014. "The Erosion of Expert Control Through Censure Episodes," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 1633-1661, December.
    9. Christian P Theurer & Andranik Tumasjan & Isabell M Welpe, 2018. "Contextual work design and employee innovative work behavior: When does autonomy matter?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-35, October.
    10. Andrea Salvatori & Seetha Menon & Wouter Zwysen, 2018. "The effect of computer use on job quality: Evidence from Europe," OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers 200, OECD Publishing.
    11. Giurge, Laura M. & Bohns, Vanessa K., 2021. "You don’t need to answer right away! Receivers overestimate how quickly senders expect responses to non-urgent work emails," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 114-128.
    12. M. Lynne Markus & Frantz Rowe, 2018. "Is IT changing the world?," Post-Print hal-03716243, HAL.
    13. Zhuofei Lu & Senhu Wang & Wendy Olsen, 2023. "Revisiting the ‘flexibility paradox’: degree of work schedule flexibility and time use patterns across gender and occupational groups," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-10, December.
    14. Reinhardt, Ronny & Gurtner, Sebastian, 2018. "The overlooked role of embeddedness in disruptive innovation theory," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 268-283.
    15. Yasuhiro Kotera & Katia Correa Vione, 2020. "Psychological Impacts of the New Ways of Working (NWW): A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-13, July.
    16. Matt Beane & Wanda J. Orlikowski, 2015. "What Difference Does a Robot Make? The Material Enactment of Distributed Coordination," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(6), pages 1553-1573, December.
    17. Bertschek, Irene & Niebel, Thomas, 2016. "Mobile and more productive? Firm-level evidence on the productivity effects of mobile internet use," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 888-898.
    18. Mohamed Ali Ben Halima & Nathalie Greenan & Joseph Lanfranchi, 2021. "Organisational changes and long-term sickness absence and injury leave: a difference in difference approach," TEPP Working Paper 2021-05, TEPP.
    19. Dittes, Sven & Richter, Shahper & Richter, Alexander & Smolnik, Stefan, 2019. "Toward the workplace of the future: How organizations can facilitate digital work," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 62(5), pages 649-661.
    20. Ylenia Curzi & Tommaso Fabbri & Barbara Pistoresi, 2021. "The Stressful Implications of Remote E-Working: Evidence from Europe," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 15(7), pages 108-108, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:22:p:12207-:d:684008. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.