Understanding Employee Motivation for Work-to-Nonwork Integration Behavior: a Reasoned Action Approach
- PDF / 535,093 Bytes
- 14 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 23 Downloads / 196 Views
ORIGINAL PAPER
Understanding Employee Motivation for Work-to-Nonwork Integration Behavior: a Reasoned Action Approach Esther Palm 1 & Christian Seubert 1 & Jürgen Glaser 1
# The Author(s) 2019
Abstract This study investigates individual and organizational factors that motivate employees to enact the work role in the nonwork domain (work-to-nonwork integration behavior). We argue that implications of work-to-nonwork integration may be better understood by learning more about the reasons why employees perform integration behavior. Based on the reasoned action approach (RAA), we examined four antecedents of employee integration behavior: individuals’ attitudes toward integration (integration preference), perceived employer expectations (injunctive norms), perceived integration behavior of coworkers (descriptive norms), and perceived control to manage the work–nonwork interface (behavioral control). The results of structural equation modeling with a heterogeneous sample of 748 employees indicated the relevance of all four RAA factors in explaining integration behavior 1 month later. Specifically, the individual preference to integrate evolved as the strongest motivational aspect, followed by injunctive norms. Additionally, our results suggest that injunctive and descriptive norms each explained unique variance in integration behavior. Organizational interventions may aim at shaping both norms and behavioral control to improve employees’ work–nonwork boundary management. Furthermore, making employees aware of the importance of their integration preferences is a critical factor for actively managing the work–nonwork interface. Keywords Work–nonwork interface . Boundary management . Reasoned action approach . Boundary theory
Innovations and societal changes are well-known factors impacting the way we work. In this regard, recent technological innovations, the rise of dual-income families, and globalization, among others, have contributed to an increased integration of work aspects into the nonwork domain (Rothbard & Ollier-Malaterre, 2016). This study focuses on work-tononwork integration behavior (integration behavior), which we define as the enactment of behaviors relevant to the work role in the nonwork domain, thereby integrating work and nonwork roles (e.g., working at home, during vacations, and/or when spending time with friends and family). This definition draws upon the permeability of role boundaries, namely, the extent to which an individual is involved in the Esther Palm and Christian Seubert contributed equally to this work and thus share first authorship. * Christian Seubert [email protected] 1
Institute of Psychology, University of Innsbruck, Innrain 52, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria
work role, while being physically located in another role’s domain (Ashforth, Kreiner, & Fugate, 2000). A growing research body has dealt with potential implications of increased work-to-nonwork integration for employee health and well-being, yet findings remain inconclusive (Allen, Cho, & Meier, 2014; Rothbard & Oll
Data Loading...
