Stability and change in levels of work–family conflict: A multi‐study, longitudinal investigation

Abstract

There has been little theoretical and empirical attention to the role of time in studying levels of work–family conflict. Contrary to theoretical assumptions that work–family conflict is a highly dynamic construct, we borrow from established theories to describe a Stability and Change Model, which posits that work–family conflict levels are primarily stable with some meaningful change over time. The proposed model also outlines predictors of stability (and change) in work–family conflict levels: stability (or change) in‐person (i.e., neuroticism) and situational factors (i.e., role demands and, to a lesser extent, resources). Findings across two longitudinal studies with timeframes of 5 months (one‐month lags) and 3 years (one‐year lags) suggest that 75–80% of the observed variance in work–family conflict levels is stable over mid‐ to long‐term timeframes. In line with our Stability and Change Model, trait‐state‐occasion modelling results indicate that stability in work–family conflict is primarily due to stability in workload demands and to a lesser extent, personality factors (i.e., neuroticism), but, unexpectedly, not resources. There was some meaningful change in work–family conflict levels over time, primarily due to changes in demands and to a lesser extent, changes in person characteristics. Theoretical, methodological, and analytical considerations for future studies of work–family conflict levels are discussed.Practitioner points WFC levels may be very resistant to change. Our findings highlight the importance for organizations to make a sustained commitment to addressing factors that might create WFC rather than short‐term efforts. Organizations may design impactful interventions by aiming to significantly and durably reduce job demands, specifically: High involvement work practices that foster empowerment, information sharing, rewards, and training have been shown to reduce job demands including role overload (Kilroy et al., 2016, Human Resource Management Journal, 26, 408). Supervisors could reduce workload by eliminating unnecessary tasks or prioritizing most important tasks and/or developing employees’ time management skills so they can accomplish important job tasks in the time available. Reducing hindrance stressors such as role ambiguity and hassles tend not to be as relevant. Organizations may also want to consider person variables (e.g., personality, affect) by training for individual characteristics that may help employees manage WFC such as mindfulness training.

Toward a better understanding of the causal effects of role demands on work–family conflict: A genetic modeling approach.

“…Specifically, recent mean correlations of rfalse¯ = .36 between work demands and WIF and rfalse¯ = .24 between family demands and FIW have been reported (Allen et al, 2020). In addition, studies suggest substantial within-person stability of WFC across time (e.g., Matthews et al, 2014; Rantanen et al, 2012; Smith et al, 2022).…”

“…Although longitudinal models are powerful, conducting longitudinal research is expensive, time consuming, and logistically challenging. More importantly, research typically includes employees who are already established in their work and family roles—many of the processes linking factors such as role demands with conflict experiences are likely to have reached a level of equilibrium (Smith et al, 2022). Unless there are major shocks that occur during the course of the longitudinal study (e.g., change in employment; birth of a child), there may be little change in relevant constructs for panel models to detect (McArdle, 2009).…”

Childhood psychological maltreatment and work–family conflict throughout adulthood: A test of self-concept and social mechanisms.

“…Longitudinal research suggests that individuals have relatively stable levels of WIF and FIW that endure over months and years (Cho et al, 2013; Cooklin et al, 2016; Hecht & McCarthy, 2010; Rantanen et al, 2012; Smith et al, 2021). Stable WIF and FIW levels are likely due to chronic dispositions and situations (Smith et al, 2021), akin to consistencies found in daily hassles over time (e.g., Chamberlain & Zika, 1990). Yet, the typical exclusive focus on adulthood experiences obfuscates our understanding of how these levels develop.…”

“…A smaller set of recent studies, however, suggests work–family conflict has stable features as well. For example, longitudinal work suggests work–family conflict is relatively consistent on average across several years (e.g., Cho et al, 2013; Cooklin et al, 2016; Hecht & McCarthy, 2010; Rantanen et al, 2012; Smith et al, 2021). Studies with monthly assessment similarly show work–family conflict is highly correlated across waves (e.g., r ranges from .66 to .83 across 1-month lags in Matthews et al, 2014; see also Nohe et al, 2015 meta-analysis).…”

“…Thus, it seems that in addition to shortterm environmentally driven fluctuations in work-family conflict, people have a relatively stable set point for work-family conflict (e.g., Matthews et al, 2014Matthews et al, , 2016Zapf et al, 1996). These stable levels of work-family conflict serve as a gauge for typical feelings of work-family conflict, guiding the level and range of shorter term fluctuations (Smith et al, 2021). There is an important, unrealized opportunity in the work-family literature to expand our understanding of how stable work-family conflict levels are established and what drives changes in stable levels of work-family conflict across adulthood.…”