Understanding cultural differences is a very important aspect of delivering health care to various populations who have immigrated to the United States from various parts of the world. Part I: Individual work Select 1 chapter in The Spirit Catches You and You Fall Down that discusses Hmong history (Ch. 8 to 14) to read individually. Write a 350-word summary of the chapter that includes the following:
Identify the historical events or cultural practices in your selected chapter.
Examine and describe how these differences create disparities between U.S. health care and the Hmong in California.
Share your summary with your team. Part II: Teamwork Discuss as a team the key historical events or cultural practices you each found in your reading and summary. As a team, identify commonalities of Hmong history and cultural practices that recur throughout the chapters. Create a list of 3 to 5 key cultural practices or factors that could impact health care program delivery to the Hmong community. Include a 2- to 3-sentence description to support your choices. Part III: Individual Reflection: Write a 350-word summary explaining how the 3- to 5-key factors your team identified apply to the chapter you read. Describe how these factors impact disparities between U.S. health care and the Hmong in California. Cite 3 reputable references to support your assignment (e.g., trade or industry publications, government or agency websites, scholarly works, or other sources of similar quality).
Part 2
Respond to the following in a minimum of 175 words:
What are the primary responsibilities of the health care industry in preventing child abuse and neglect, responding to child abuse and neglect, and supporting and preserving families?
What circumstances should be present (or what considerations should be made) before removing a child from the guardianship of the parent?
Include sources/references to support your perspective.
GET SOLUTION FOR THIS ASSIGNMENT, Get Impressive on aspect of delivering health care to various populations who have immigrated to the United States from various parts of the worldtype of disability and research context in Australia
Scenario: You are an IT security intern working for Health Network, Inc. (Health Network), a fictitious health services organization headquartered in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Health Network has over 600 employees throughout the organization and generates $500 million USD in annual revenue. The company has two additional locations in Portland, Oregon and Arlington, Virginia, which support a mix of corporate operations. Each corporate facility is located near a co-location data center, where production systems are located and managed by third-party data center hosting vendors.
Company Products
Health Network has three main products: HNetExchange, HNetPay, and HNetConnect.
HNetExchange is the primary source of revenue for the company. This service handles secure electronic medical messages that originate from its customers, such as large hospitals, which are then routed to receiving customers such as clinics.
Many of the company’s HNetExchange clients manage safe payments and invoices using the HNetPay online interface. The HNetPay online gateway, which is housed at Health Network production facilities, communicates with credit card processing businesses and accepts a variety of payment methods. In order to help Health Network consumers discover the appropriate level of treatment at the appropriate locations, HNetConnect is an online directory that includes listings for physicians, clinics, and other medical institutions. It includes the personal details of the doctors, their workplace addresses, their credentials as physicians, and the range of services that the clinics and doctors provide. Doctors receive credentials and have the ability to edit the data on their profiles. All three of the company’s goods are accessible to Health Network’s clients, who are the hospitals and clinics. Using HTTPS websites that are accessible via the Internet, doctors and prospective patients may update their profiles and make payments. Overview of the Information Technology Infrastructure Three production data centers where Health Network operates offer high availability for all of the business’s products. Around 1,000 production servers are housed in the data centers, while Health Network manages 650 business laptops and employee-owned mobile devices. Threats Recognized Following an evaluation of the present risk management strategy, the following dangers were found: Loss of data due to hardware removal from production systems; Loss of data on lost or stolen company-owned property, such as laptops and mobile devices; Loss of customers due to production outages brought on by various events, such as natural disasters, change management, unstable software, etc.; Internet threats because company products are available online; Insider threats; and Alterations in the regulatory environment that may have an impact on operations Organizational Request Health Network’s senior management has concluded that a new risk management strategy has to be created because the organization’s current one is out of date. Senior management is supportive of the effort to create a new strategy and dedicated to it since risk management is crucial to the firm. It is your responsibility to create this new strategy. During the risk assessment process, when reassessing the present danger environment, additional hazards beyond those already mentioned may be found. Due to senior management’s intention to respond to any and all major risks identified in the new plan, the budget for this project has not yet been established. It is possible to estimate realistic expectations based on the company’s yearly sales.
Deliverables
This project is divided into several parts, each with a deliverable. The first four parts are drafts. These documents should resemble business reports in that they are organized by headings, include source citations (if any), be readable, and be free from typos and grammatical errors. However, they are not final, polished reports.
Pick a neighborhood in the proximity of where you live[1]. You will be studying the social environment and reporting on how it structures opportunities related to health and illness. You may choose your neighborhood, but be careful, as we tend not to recognize the obvious in our lives. McCamey, Texas. This project involves observation. You shouldn’t interview, survey, or speak with anybody as part of your study for ethical reasons. If you took any photos of people, you wouldn’t be at your best. Any project that incorporates interviews with locals or other people WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED, and a grade of 0 will be assigned. I want you to concentrate on the actual surroundings instead. Even if your knowledge is solely observational and needs no interaction, no specific people should be included in your report. You should abide by all applicable local, state, and federal laws. NO TRAFFICKING AT ALL. A grade of 0 will also be assigned for any documented unlawful action. Furthermore, it would be ideal if you avoided placing yourself in risk. Avoid going to places where you might endanger yourself. Please be reasonable. Never go out at night or alone yourself, and avoid any scenario where there may be a danger to your safety. Take extra precautions. I don’t want you to live in an area where drug sales are conducted openly, and I don’t want you to hang around in parks late at night to watch shady characters commit crimes. I don’t want you to provide a conflict zone report from a renegade journalist. Instead, you may do the majority of the task using a computer.Webcamsscreenshotsareas through online street views, maps, and all-you-can-eat establishments, among other things.
You may take digital pictures (a camera phone should be just fine) to include with your project.
You may use Google Street View (but not required) and show screen shots of specific area. Any photos you take should be of places, NOT people. No individual should be identifiable in any of the photos you take.
What types of factors should you be looking for?
• Public spaces. – exercise, playgrounds, parks
• Food – groceries (type of), fast food availability, all you can eat buffets, etc.
o What type of food displays are prominent in the grocery store? Healthy food/junk food?
o If there is no grocery store in your area, find the closest one(s) that ·you think people in your selected area use for their food. all-you-can-eatIs smoking allowed indoors? Only in bars? Not at all?
• Pedestrian safety/ability or need to drive everywhere
• Bike lanes
• Road safety – How often do major car accidents occur? Official data may not be available, but in Odessa, for example, the news covers them in detail.
• Proximity to medical clinic/hospital
• How do people come together? How many churches/if any? How many bars? Do people have to walk to the bars or do most drive? Other positive/negative areas of interaction?
• Other factors may be unique to your specific situation – proximity to power plants, waste dumps, industrial areas
Your paper will take the following basic format: (NO GPT CHAT OR ANY AI)
1. Introduction
-introduce social causation of disease
-introduce your neighborhood. Where is it? Do you believe residents are healthy?
-based on available data, what do the statistics say about the general health of your area? This may include broad information, as noted above, such as car accidents reported on the news. Alternatively, the EPA provides data on environmental hazards (and there,lots in Odessa, Midland, and Houston, for example), which you can are also discussthreeare summarize criticalthree summarizethree thetiny Introduce. Findings
-Pick at least three key areas to examine (among those listed above). Discuss what you found. I don’t want a list of all 47 restaurants, but you could summarize how many fast food places there are, etc. Provide critical details and avoid adding filler that doesn’t speak to the project. Think critically. Analyze what is going on.
3. Conclusion
-Summarize your findings. Perhaps suggest how you think health could be improved if needed.
***NO GPT CHAT OR ANY AI.
[1] What constitutes a neighborhood? This is somewhat undefined. Generally speaking, it should be a residential area bordered by a few major streets. 1-2 square miles would be about right, but depending on population density, this could vary. If you live in a tiny town (say up to 10,000 people), and for example, there is only one place to buy groceries, three summarizeyou may use the entire town. I provide an example below.
Social Risk Autopsy
Part A: Introduction
· Introduce the threesummarize three the must also asocial causation of disease
· Introduce your neighborhood. Where is it? Do you believe residents are healthy?
· Based on available data, what do the statistics say about the general health of your area? This may include broad information, as noted above, such as car accidents reported on the news. Alternatively, the EPA provides data on environmental hazards (and there are lots in Odessa, Midland, and Houston, for example), which you can also discuss.
· Five pages, excluding the title page and references page. You can use up to three pictures in your five-page project. You can add the rest of your images in the appendix.
Part B: Findings
· Pick at least threesummarize three key areas to examine (among those listed above).
· Discuss what you found. I don’t want a list of all 47 restaurants, but you could provide a summary of how many fast food places there are, etc.
· Provide key details and avoid adding filler that doesn’t speak to the project.
· One source of your choice (still must be scholarly), such as a website.
· The title page has all the required elements and formatting:
· Formatted in the ASA style or APA (APA is allowed if you are not majoring in sociology. However, you must inform me which style you will follow). Remember to be consistent with your style.
Part D: Conclusion
· Summarize your findings.
· Perhaps suggest how you think health could be improved if needed.
Respond to the following in a minimum of 175 words:
:If mergers and market consolidation in health care do not increase access or lower consumer prices, why have they been so prevalent in the last 20 years in the United States?
:Are there economic theories or concepts that help to explain the regional variation in healthcare utilization and cost, as outlined by the Dartmouth Atlas of Healthcare report?
Part 2
Assignment Content Due Monday
The decade since the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act went into effect in 2010 has seen fundamental shifts in the cost and practices in health care and insurance. Studying the data from this period of transformation in the United States can help us to understand the movement of healthcare costs in the years to come.
Review the Dartmouth Atlas of Health Care 2018 Data Update.
Write a 525- to 700-word analysis that includes the following:
:Identify the results for your area of the United States (state or region).
:Analyze the results for your area and write a 525- to 700-word summary of why you think the trends in utilization and cost are either positive or negative.
:Examine and explain whether you think the utilization and costs information for your organization or geography can be used to build a stronger brand for health care.
Cite any references to support your assignment.
Format your citations according to APA guidelines.
………Get more on Dartmouth Atlas of Health Care 2018 Data Update
You will consider the impact of functional assessments, diversity, and sensitivity in conducting health assessments. You also explore various assessment tools and diagnostic tests that are used to gather information about patients’ conditions and examine the validity and reliability of these tests and tools. Finally, you examine assessment techniques, health risks and concerns, and recommendations for care related to patient growth, weight, and nutrition.
ASSIGNMENT
Post an explanation of the specific socioeconomic, spiritual, lifestyle, and other cultural factors associated with the patient you were assigned. Explain the issues that you would need to be sensitive to when interacting with the patient, and why.
Provide at least five targeted questions you would ask the patient to build his or her health history and to assess his or her health risks. Questions are based on socioeconomic, spiritual, lifestyle, and other cultural factors.
CASE STUDY 4:
Mono Nu, a 44 year-old Filipino patient comes to the clinic today to have his “blood thinner” labs drawn since he started them two weeks ago. Upon assessing the labs the nurse practitioner notes that he is still out of range. When assessing the patients’ compliance both stated that he had been taking them just as prescribed. He has been doing well and eating a diet rich in fish and tofu. He doesn’t understand why his medications are not working.
references used are to be no older than five (5) years old
scholarly peer-review journals are to be used
rubric to following for assignment is in an attached file
j ourna l homepage: www.e lsev ie r .com/ locate / jvb
Outcomes of work–life balance on job satisfaction, life satisfaction and mental health: A study across seven cultures
c
Jarrod M. Haar a,1, Marcello Russo b,⁎,1, Albert Suñe c, Ariane Ollier-Malaterre d
a School of Management, Massey University, Private Bag 102904, North Shore City, New Zealand b Department of Management, KEDGE Business School, 680 Cours de la Liberation, 33405 Talence cedex, Bordeaux, France Department of Management, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Etseiat, C. Colom 11, 08222 Terrassa, Barcelona, Spain
d Organisation and Human Resources Department, École des Sciences de la Gestion, Université du Québec A Montréal, 315, rue Sainte-Catherine Est, local R-3490, Montréal, Québec H2X 3X2, Canada
a r t i c l e i n f o
⁎ Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: j.haar@massey.ac.nz (J.M. Haar), m
(A. Ollier-Malaterre). Denotes shared first authorship.
Article history: Received 22 May 2014 Available online 7 September 2014
This study investigates the effects of work–life balance (WLB) on several individual outcomes across cultures. Using a sample of 1416 employees from seven distinct populations – Malaysian, Chinese, New Zealand Maori, New Zealand European, Spanish, French, and Italian – SEM analysis showed that WLB was positively related to job and life satisfaction and negatively related to anx- iety and depression across the seven cultures. Individualism/collectivism and gender egalitarian- ism moderated these relationships. High levels of WLB were more positively associated with job and life satisfaction for individuals in individualistic cultures, compared with individuals in collec- tivistic cultures. High levels of WLB were more positively associated with job and life satisfaction and more negatively associated with anxiety for individuals in gender egalitarian cultures. Overall, we find strong support for WLB being beneficial for employees from various cultures and for cul- ture as a moderator of these relationships.
Work–life balance (WLB) is a central concern in everyday discourses (Greenhaus & Allen, 2011; Greenhaus, Collins, & Shaw, 2003; Guest, 2002; Kossek, Valcour, & Lirio, 2014; Maertz & Boyar, 2011). However, despite its popularity, WLB remains one of the least stud- ied concepts in work–life research (Greenhaus & Allen, 2011). Valcour (2007) noted that it is “a concept whose popular usage has outplaced its theoretical development” (p. 1513). A reason for this is the field’s struggle to agree on a common definition of WLB (Greenhaus & Allen, 2011). Another reason is that research on the positive individual outcomes of WLB has been relatively slow to accumulate (Greenhaus & Allen, 2011; Maertz & Boyar, 2011). In addition, most of the current studies focus on work–family balance, without considering individuals’ broader lives including community, leisure, church, sport and other activities (Hall, Kossek, Briscoe, Pichler, & Lee, 2013). In this study we work with a relatively consensual definition of WLB as being an individual’s assessment of how well her or his multiple life roles are balanced (e.g. Greenhaus & Allen, 2011; Haar, 2013; Kossek et al., 2014). We aim to contribute to WLB research at solidifying the concept of WLB by examining its relationship with four important individual outcomes: job satisfac- tion, life satisfaction, anxiety, and depression.
Furthermore, we know very little about the impact of cultures on the relationship between WLB and individual outcomes. A recent review of cross-national work–life research has identified only two cross-cultural studies focusing on WLB compared with 29 focusing
362 J.M. Haar et al. / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 361–373
on conflict and nine on enrichment; the only cultural dimension examined in these studies was gender egalitarianism (Ollier- Malaterre, 2014). This is a clear shortcoming of current research given that numerous calls have been issued to broaden the scope and ambition of work–life research by conducting cross-national studies that consider the impact of multiple cultural dimensions (Greenhaus & Allen, 2011; Kossek, Baltes, & Matthews, 2011; Ollier-Malaterre, Valcour, den Dulk, & Kossek, 2013; Poelmans, 2005). In this paper we address this gap by testing whether the relationships between WLB, job satisfaction, life satisfaction, anxiety, and de- pression are moderated by two important cultural dimensions: (1) individualism/collectivism (I/C) and (2) gender egalitarianism (GE). Based on a sample of 1416 employees from seven distinct cultures – Malaysian, Chinese, New Zealand Maori, New Zealand European, Spanish, French, and Italian, we find strong support for direct effects of WLB across all of the study’s samples. We also find moderating effects of I/C and GE on these relationships.
Our study makes three important contributions to the literature. First, we contribute to establish WLB as a solid construct that sheds light on major individual outcomes, thereby encouraging future research on WLB as a way to better understand a complex work–life interface, and encouraging practitioners to assess their employees’ WLB as part of their HR efforts. Second, our study is unique in the burgeoning body of cross-cultural research on the work–life interface (for a review, see Ollier-Malaterre, 2014) since it is the first, to our knowledge, to focus on WLB rather than work–family conflict or work–family enrichment and to have collected evidence that two dimensions of national culture, i.e. I/C and GE, moderate the relationships between WLB and individual outcomes. The finding that WLB has beneficial outcomes for individuals across seven distinct cultures lends further support to the construct of WLB. Third, our study provides evidence that work–life concepts that originated in Western cultures are generalizable beyond these cultures — we do so by including cultures of growing interest in the literature (e.g. Malaysia and China) as well as understudied cul- tures (e.g. New Zealand European and Maori).
2. Theoretical background and hypotheses
2.1. Work–life balance
Consistent with recent theoretical advancements (e.g. Frone, 2003; Greenhaus & Allen, 2011; Haar, 2013; Kossek et al., 2014), we conceptualize WLB as an individual’s perceptions of how well his or her life roles are balanced. This conceptualization of individuals subjectively gauging balance between the work and the rest of their life (Guest, 2002) is in contrast with prevailing views that considered balance to be equivalent to low role conflict (Duxbury & Higgins, 2001), to high role enrichment (Frone, 2003) or to an equal division of time and attention amongst the several roles that compose an individual’s life system (Marks & MacDermid, 1996). Our definition is grounded in the perception-centred approach that considers work–life balance to be a holistic concept, unique for each person and that depends upon his or her life values, priorities and goals (Kossek et al., 2014).
With a few exceptions (see Hill, Yang, Hawkins, & Ferris, 2004; Lyness & Judiesch, 2014), cross-national research has mostly neglected work–life balance. However, there is general consensus amongst scholars that work–life balance is highly valued by nearly all employees (Kossek et al., 2014) and it has important implications on people’s well-being and work productivity all over the world (Lyness & Judiesch, 2014). Interestingly, research conducted by IBM has shown that people’s nationality does not translate in differences in the expressed desire for work–life balance (Hill et al., 2004). Regarding the effects of WLB, extant research shows that people who perceive balance between their work and life roles tend to be more satisfied of their life and report better physical and mental health (Brough et al., 2014; Carlson, Grzywacz, & Zivnuska, 2009; Ferguson, Carlson, Zivnuska, & Whitten, 2012; Greenhaus et al., 2003; Haar, 2013; Lunau, Bambra, Eikemo, Van der Wel, & Dragano, 2014). Building on these premises, in this article we hypothesize, for two reasons, that WLB will be positively related to job and life satisfaction and negatively related to mental health universally for all employees.
First, we believe that individuals who experience WLB may be more satisfied of their job and life “because they are participating in role activities that are salient to them” (Greenhaus et al., 2003; p. 515). Second, we believe that balanced individuals may be mentally healthier because they experience a sense of harmony in life and optimal psychophysiological conditions which enable them to meet the long-term demands of work and nonwork roles (Greenhaus et al., 2003). This may lead them to be less apprehensive about their abilities to conciliate work and nonwork commitments and also less prone to develop ruminating thoughts about the lack of balance in life that can deplete their physical and mental resources (Rothbard, 2001). Accordingly, we hypothesize that the benefits of WLB will be universal across all country cultures.
H1. WLB will be positively related to job satisfaction across cultures.
H2. WLB will be positively related to life satisfaction across cultures.
H3. WLB will be negatively related to anxiety across cultures.
H4. WLB will be negatively related to depression across cultures.
2.2. Moderating effects of individualism/collectivism
I/C is the cultural dimension that has received the “lion’s share of attention as a predictor of cultural variation” (Brewer & Chen, 2007, p. 133). This dimension is also a powerful moderator of employee cross-cultural studies (Ramamoorthy & Flood, 2002), including work– family studies (Hill et al., 2004; Spector et al., 2004, 2007). I/C reflects whether people view themselves as independent (individualists)
363 J.M. Haar et al. / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 361–373
or are tightly linked to others as part of groups (collectivists) (Triandis, 1995). We follow House, Hanges, Javidan, Dorfman, and Gupta (2004), where in-group collectivism is defined as “the degree to which individuals express pride, loyalty, and cohesiveness in their or- ganizations or families” (p. 30). In essence, in individualistic cultures people tend to prioritize personal interests over common goals, whereas in collectivistic cultures people tend to prioritize common goals, including family ones, over personal needs.
A recent review of cross-cultural work–life research found no studies linking I/C and WLB (Ollier-Malaterre, 2014). However, there is considerable research showing that work–family conflict is less detrimental to individuals in collectivistic than in individualistic cul- tures (Lu, Gilmour, Kao, & Huang, 2006; Lu et al., 2010; Spector et al., 2004, 2007; Yang, Chen, Choi, & Zou, 2000). This can be explained by the presence of different appraisal mechanisms in different cultures (Aycan, 2008). In collectivistic cultures, work is viewed as a way of supporting a family (Redding, 1993; Redding & Wong, 1986) such that people tend to deem work–family conflict as an inev- itable life experience to promote wealth and financial stability for the family (Aryee, Luk, Leung, & Lo, 1999; Spector et al., 2007). In- stead, in individualistic cultures work is generally viewed as an individual achievement that contributes to self-actualization and that is incompatible with family roles (Spector et al., 2004, 2007); therefore people deem work–family conflict to be problematic and a threat to personal health and well-being (Aycan, 2008). Drawing on these assumptions, we expect WLB to be less strongly related to positive outcomes in collectivistic than in individualistic cultures. We reason that achieving balance should be more pivotal for peo- ple in individualistic cultures, as it is considered more essential in individualistic societies to live one’s life to the fullest and to recover from the stress and strains associated with work roles (Spector et al., 2004, 2007). Instead, people in collectivistic cultures tend to per- ceive role imbalance in a less problematic way as they view it as an inevitable cost in promoting family well-being (Aryee et al., 1999). From this we can infer that individuals in individualistic cultures will benefit more from experiencing greater WLB as achieving WLB is more of a focus in their cultures and thus will weigh more towards their satisfaction and mental health. Accordingly,
H5. Individualism/collectivism will moderate the relationship between WLB and individual outcomes, such that:
H5. The positive relationship between WLB and (a) job satisfaction and (b) life satisfaction will be stronger in countries higher in
individualism. H5. The negative relationship between WLB and (c) anxiety and (d) depression will be stronger in countries higher in individualism.
2.3. Moderating effects of gender egalitarianism
GE reflects the presence of “beliefs [in the society] about whether members’ biological sex should determine the roles that they play in their homes, business organizations, and communities” (House et al., 2004, p. 347). Low GE cultures are characterized by be- liefs in the traditional gendered division of labour, which depict men as breadwinners and women as caregivers and homemakers (Wood & Eagly, 2002). Notably, extant research has shown that in high GE cultures there is less adhesion to traditional gender pat- terns and it is considered personally and socially acceptable that both women and men pursue their own life goals and struggle to guarantee the desired level of involvement in both work and non-work roles (Lyness & Judiesch, 2014).
Research on the influence of GE on the work–life interface is still at a very early stage and cross-national research in particular is very scarce (Lyness & Judiesch, 2014; Lyness & Kropf, 2005). Lyness and Judiesch (2008) found a GE moderated relationship, with managers’ self-rating of WLB more positively related to peer’s and supervisor’s advancement potential rating for female managers in high gender egalitarian cultures and for men managers in low gender egalitarian cultures. In this paper, we hypothesize that WLB will be associated with higher job and life satisfaction and lower anxiety and depression for individuals living in high GE cultures than for those living in low GE cultures. We contend that living in cultures where both men’s and women’s work and non-work role involvement is encouraged and considered socially acceptable can amplify the beneficial effects of WLB (Corrigall & Konrad, 2006). Conversely, in low GE cultures we believe that achieving WLB may be less beneficial as traditional gender role prescriptions are pre- vailing and may instil in the population the expectations that men should prioritize work over the family and women should do the opposite. Thus, experiencing WLB might not be perceived as beneficial as it might be in high GE cultures because it is inconsistent with societal expectations about gender division of labour. Accordingly,
H6. Gender egalitarianism will moderate the relationship between WLB and individual outcomes, such that:
H6. The positive relationship between WLB and (a) job satisfaction and (b) life satisfaction will be stronger in countries higher in
GE. H6. The negative relationship between WLB and (c) anxiety and (d) depression will be stronger in countries higher in GE.
Fig. 1 illustrates our general structural model.
3. Method
3.1. Samples and procedures
Data were collected from six countries (New Zealand, Spain, France, Italy, Malaysia and China) and included seven samples. Two separate samples were collected from New Zealand: Maori (indigenous people of New Zealand) and New Zealand European, the
364 J.M. Haar et al. / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 361–373
Fig. 1. General study model: Outcomes of WLB across cultures.
largest population group (equivalent to Caucasians in the US). Table 1 illustrates the descriptive data of the seven samples as well as of the combined sample. The authors personally collected data from four countries including both samples from New Zealand, while two research assistants native of China and Malaysia collected data from these countries. We used our networks to generate the largest number of employees from a broad range of organizations. Then, following basic principles of snowball sampling (Biernacki & Waldford, 1981), we asked recruited participants to recommend participation in the research to their contacts. The necessary require- ment to be included in the sample was being engaged in a full-time job. All surveys where English is not the first language were trans- lated into the native language (e.g., French, Italian, Mandarin) and then back-translated to minimize translation error (Brislin, 1980).
Overall, the combined sample includes 1416 employees of whom 546 come from collectivistic cultures (Maori, Malaysia and China). The average age was 37.6 years, gender was fairly evenly split (55% female) and the majority were married (70%) and parents (61%).
Table 1 Overall study demographics.
Country Demographics Sector
N Age (years) Gender (female) Married Parent Private Public Not-for-profit
New Zealand New Zealand Maori France Italy Spain Malaysia China
366 335 139 238 127 110 101
34.3 38.9 39.2 44.0 39.7 32.1 31.4
55% 63% 62% 43% 50% 48% 63%
70% 67% 80% 69% 78% 75% 47%
51% 69% 74% 60% 66% 63% 43%
56% 22% 74% 63% 62% 4%
45%
40% 70% 22% 35% 36% 96% 38%
4% 8% 4% 2% 2% 0%
17%
Total sample Collectivistic: Average age Gender Married Parents Industry:
1416 Maori, Malaysia and China (n = 546) 37.6 years (SD = 11.5 years) 55% female 70% 61% 46.8% Private 48.5% Public 4.6% Not-for-profit
365 J.M. Haar et al. / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 361–373
3.2. Measures
All samples used the same items, and except where noted, all items were rated on a 5-point scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree). Items were averaged to produce composite indicators, with higher scores indicating higher values of the given mea- sure. All measures achieved adequate reliability within each country sample (all α N .70). We thus combined the seven samples to test our hypotheses (with alphas reported in Table 3).
3.2.1. WLB WLB was measured using a 3-item measure by Haar (2013). A sample item is “I manage to balance the demands of my work and
personal/family life well”. As this measure is still new, we conducted factor analysis (principal components, varimax rotation) for each distinct population and on the combined sample. The three items loaded onto a single factor universally across all seven samples with eigenvalues greater than 1; accounting for sizeable amounts of the variance and achieving adequate reliability in all samples as shown in Table 2.
3.2.2. Job satisfaction Job satisfaction was measured using 3-items by Judge, Bono, Erez, and Locke (2005). A sample question is “Most days I am enthu-
siastic about my work”.
3.2.3. Life satisfaction Life satisfaction was measured using the 5-item scale by Diener, Emmons, Larsen, and Griffin (1985). A sample question is “In most
ways my life is close to ideal”.
3.2.4. Anxiety and depression Anxiety and depression were assessed using 6-items by Axtell et al. (2002). This measure has been shown to have good psychomet-
ric properties (Haar, 2013; Spell & Arnold, 2007). The items were rated on a 5-point scale (1 = never to 5 = all the time). Presented with three adjectives for each measure, respondents were asked to indicate how often each adjective applied to them while they were at work.
3.2.5. Collectivism Collectivism was assessed by coding cultures using GLOBE scores for in-group collectivism (House et al., 2004). This approach is
superior to the typical dichotomous approach often used in the work–family literature (e.g. Spector et al., 2004), as it offers a range of scores that better reflect cultural variations across countries. New Zealand (European) was rated the most individualistic (3.67), and China the most collectivistic (5.8). One issue we came across was that the GLOBE study does not list New Zealand Maori as a sep- arate culture than the rest of the New Zealand population. Indeed, while making up 14% of the population, it is grouped into New Zealand culture as a whole. Since Maori have been found to have a strong collectivistic culture (Brougham & Haar, 2013; Haar, Roche, & Taylor, 2012) and prior research has widely documented that is distinct from the individualistic New Zealand European (Haar & Brougham, 2011; Podsiadlowski & Fox, 2011), we decided to use for this particular ethnic group the same score as in China (5.8). This score aligns with the GLOBE collectivism score for the Southern Asia cluster (Gupta, Surie, Javidan, & Chhokar, 2002), which provides an overall score for the six countries that make up the cluster. As such, we suggest that this provides a useful proxy for a collectivistic culture that aligns well with Maori (Brougham & Haar, 2013). Furthermore, we tested our model without in- cluding the Maori sample and we found no noticeable differences in our results. Therefore, we suggest that including the Maori sam- ple does not distort our overall findings and provides an additional rich new population to explore.
3.2.6. Gender egalitarianism Gender egalitarianism was assessed by coding cultures using the GLOBE scores (House et al., 2004). China was rated the least gen-
der egalitarian (3.68) with Italy the highest (4.88). As with collectivism, this approach is superior to the dichotomous approach but
Table 2 Results of exploratory factor analysis for WLB.
Responses were coded 1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree Factor loadings for each country
NZ NZ Maori France Italy Spain Malaysia China Combined
1. I am satisfied with my WLB, enjoying both roles .847 .906 .875 .873 .801 .912 .907 .874 2. Nowadays, I seem to enjoy every part of my life equally well .866 .904 .842 .870 .841 .882 .809 .875 3. I manage to balance the demands of my work and .821 .883 .910 .800 .886 .916 .867 .860
personal/family life well
Number of items in measure All analyses confirmed a one factor 3-item measure Eigenvalues 2.141 2.471 2.304 2.159 2.134 2.450 2.230 2.267 Percentage variance 71.4% 80.6% 76.8% 72.0% 71.1% 81.7% 74.3% 75.6% Cronbach’s alpha .80 .88 .85 .80 .80 .89 .83 .84
366 J.M. Haar et al. / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 361–373
similarly, does not have a score for Maori. We followed the same logic outlined above for collectivism and used the same score as in China.
3.2.7. Control variables In line with prior research (Carlson et al., 2009), we included gender (coded as 1 = female and 0 = male) and work–family conflict
as covariates in our analyses. We used 6-items from the scale by Carlson, Kacmar, and Williams (2000) to measure work-to-family conflict (WFC) and family-to-work conflict (FWC). A sample item for WFC is “I have to miss family activities due to the amount of time I must spend on work responsibilities” and a sample item for FWC is “The time I spend on family responsibilities often interfere with my work responsibilities”.
3.3. Measurement models
To confirm the separate dimensions of the various study’s measures in the combined sample, a CFA was run in SEM using AMOS 20.0. We followed Williams, Vandenberg, and Edwards (2009) recommendations regarding the goodness-of-fit measures: (1) the comparative fit index (CFI ≥ .95), (2) the root-mean-square error of approximation (RMSEA ≤ .08), and (3) the standardized root mean residual (SRMR ≤ .10). The hypothesized measurement model included seven distinct factors: WLB, WFC, FWC, job satisfaction, life satisfaction, anxiety and depression, and resulted in a good fit to the data, meeting all minimum requirements: χ2 (209) = 771.0 (p = .000), CFI = .97, RMSEA = 0.05 and SRMR = 0.04. The goodness of the hypothesized model was also confirmed by testing al- ternative models as advocated by Hair, Black, Babin, and Anderson (2010). Overall, the hypothesized measurement model did fit the data better than all the alternative models (results available from authors), which resulted in all alternative models being a significant- ly poorer fit (p b .001). This confirmed WLB to be a distinct construct from WFC and FWC.
Multi-group analysis CFA was conducted to establish measurement invariance between the seven samples (Bou & Satorra, 2010). While SEM model comparisons typically test chi-squared differences, this heavy reliance has been criticized (Schmitt & Kuljanin, 2008). This is because large samples and complex models are highly susceptible to significant changes in the chi-squared value. Cheung and Rensvold (2000) offered a number of alternative goodness-of-fit measures and we focus on the RMSEA because Meade and Kroustalis (2006) show that this measure is not affected by model complexity. Our model showed measurement equivalence as the difference in RMSEA between the seven samples; constrained and unconstrained models were very small at .002 (0.022 versus 0.024), which is below the critical value established by Cheung and Rensvold (2000). As such, this gives us confidence that the com- bined sample has metric invariance and can be analysed as a combined sample.
3.4. Analysis
Hypotheses were tested using SEM in AMOS v.20 to assess the direct (Hypotheses 1–4) and potential moderating effects of I/C (Hypotheses 5) and GE (Hypotheses 6), due to SEM being found to be superior to regression analysis (Cheng, 2001; Iacobucci, Saldanha, & Deng, 2007). Aligned with recommendations by Aiken and West (1991), the interaction terms were z-scored. Because the size of the structural models became overly complex when we included both moderators in the models, we ran two sets of mod- eration models for I/C and GE, respectively. For moderation analyses in SEM, all three z-scored WLB items were multiplied by the sin- gle GLOBE variable (I/C or GE score) to create a new variable in each model: (1) the interaction of WLB × I/C, and (2) the interaction of WLB × GE.
4. Results
4.1. Correlations
Descriptive statistics and intercorrelations for the study variables in the combined sample are shown in Table 3. The four outcome variables were all significantly correlated to each other (all p b .01) in the expected directions. WLB, WFC and
FWC were also correlated (all p b .01). In addition, I/C was significantly correlated to WLB (r = .08, p b .01), anxiety and depression (both r = − .14, p b .01), while GE was significantly correlated to WLB (r = − .09, p b .01), job satisfaction (r = .18, p b .01), anxiety (r = .34, p b .01) and depression (r = .15, p b .01). Furthermore, I/C and GE were significantly correlated to each other (r = − .38, p b .01).
4.2. Structural models
The two moderated SEM models included an additional interaction term to the measurement model: (1) WLB × I/C, and (2) WLB × GE. Consequently, both models were larger than the original measurement model. Despite this, the moderated structural models still resulted in a good fit to the data, meeting all minimum requirements for I/C (model 1): χ2 (307) = 970.4 (p = .000), CFI = 0.96, RMSEA = 0.04 and SRMR = 0.03, and for GE (model 2): χ2 (307) = 1145.1 (p = .000), CFI = 0.96, RMSEA = 0.04 and SRMR = 0.04. Table 4 highlights the significant direct and moderation effects from both models.
Aligned with the recommendations of Grace and Bollen (2005), unstandardized regression coefficients are presented in our tables. Table 4 shows that WLB was significantly related to job satisfaction (path coefficient = .50, p b .001) and life satisfaction (path coefficient = .52, p b .001), supporting Hypotheses 1 and 2. WLB was also significantly linked with anxiety (path coefficient = − .37,
367
9
J.M. Haar et al. / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 361–373
Table 3 Means, standard deviations and correlations of model variables.
N = 1416 (Cronbach’s alpha is reported on diagonal line in italics). ⁎ p b .05. ⁎⁎ p b .01.
p b .001), and depression (path coefficient = − .38, p b .001), supporting Hypotheses 3 and 4. Furthermore, we re-analysed the data separately for all seven samples and these confirmed the effects held in all country samples (see Table 5). Importantly, these effects were found after controlling for WFC and FWC.
Model 1 explored I/C as a moderator, and it was directly and significantly related to both anxiety and depression (both path coef- ficients = − .10, p b .001). Significant interaction effects were found between WLB and I/C towards job satisfaction (path coeffi- cient = − .12, p b .01) and life satisfaction (path coefficient = − .11, p b .01). Model 2 explored GE as a moderator, and it was directly and significantly related to job satisfaction (path coefficient = .08, p b .001), anxiety (path coefficient = .29, p b .001), and depression (path coefficient = .10, p b .001). Significant interaction effects were found between WLB and GE towards job satisfaction (path coefficient = .05, p b .05), life satisfaction (path coefficient = .10, p b .001), and anxiety (path coefficient = − .09, p b .01).
4.3. Interaction plots
To provide a better understanding of the interaction effects, plots are presented in Figs. 2 to 4. The interactions for I/C on job and life satisfaction (Fig. 2) are almost identical and are thus reported together. They show that there
are significant differences between respondent groups, with respondents living in individualistic cultures reporting higher levels of satisfaction (both job and life) at low levels of WLB compared to respondents living in collectivistic cultures. At high levels of WLB, respondents living in individualistic cultures reported stable levels of job and life satisfaction, while respondents living in collectivistic cultures reported significantly less job and life satisfaction, in line with our expectations. Overall, employees living in individualistic cultures reported significantly higher job and life satisfaction as expected, supporting Hypotheses 5a and 5b. Results provided no sup- port for Hypotheses 5c and 5d.
The interactions for GE on job and life satisfaction (Fig. 3) are almost identical and again, we represent them together. They show that there are significant differences between respondent groups, with respondents living in high gender egalitarian cultures reporting higher levels of job and life satisfaction at low levels of WLB compared to respondents living in less GE cultures. At high levels of WLB, all respondents reported higher levels of job and life satisfaction, but respondents in high GE cultures reported signif- icantly higher levels of job satisfaction and life satisfaction than those living in less GE cultures. Overall, employees living in GE cultures reported significantly higher levels of job satisfaction and life satisfaction. Fig. 4 shows there are no significant differences towards anxiety at low levels of WLB between respondent groups at low or high GE. At high levels of WLB, all respondents report lower anxiety
Table 4 Final structural model results (combined data).
Outcomes
Job satisfaction Life satisfaction Anxiety Depression
Model 1: Work–life balance .50⁎⁎⁎ .52⁎⁎⁎ − .37⁎⁎⁎ − .38⁎⁎⁎
Unstandardized regression weights, only main effects are shown. We controlled for gender, work–family conflict and family–work conflict directly on the DVs, and these three control variables covary on WLB. Similarly, all four DVs covary.
⁎ p b 0.05. ⁎⁎ p b .01. ⁎⁎⁎ p b .001.
368 J.M. Haar et al. / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 361–373
Table 5 Direct effects structural model results (individual samples).
Outcomes
New Zealand Maori: New Zealand European France Italy Spain Malaysia China
Job satisfaction Work–life balance Total R2
.26⁎⁎⁎
.13 .67⁎⁎⁎
.42 .58⁎⁎⁎
.22 .57⁎⁎⁎
.72 .48⁎⁎⁎
.15 .55⁎⁎⁎
.41 .59⁎⁎⁎
.40
Life satisfaction Work–life balance Total R2
.21⁎⁎⁎
.12 .66⁎⁎⁎
.39 .65⁎⁎⁎
.58 .73⁎⁎⁎
.40 .49⁎⁎⁎
.36 .34⁎⁎⁎
.32 .66⁎⁎⁎
.47
Anxiety Work–life balance Total R2
− .17⁎⁎⁎
.09 − .40⁎⁎⁎
.26 − .26⁎
.16 − .39⁎⁎⁎
.19 − .34⁎⁎⁎
.24 − .42⁎⁎
.26 − .19†
.12
Depression Work–life balance Total R2
− .25⁎⁎⁎
.11 − .46⁎⁎⁎
.23 − .39⁎⁎
.10 − .37⁎⁎⁎
.21 − .32⁎⁎
.12 − .64⁎⁎
.33 − .34⁎⁎
.15
Unstandardized regression weights, only main effects are shown. We controlled for gender, work–family conflict and family–work conflict directly on the DVs, and these three control variables covary on WLB. Similarly, all four DVs covary.
† p b 0.1. ⁎ p b 0.05. ⁎⁎ p b .01. ⁎⁎⁎ p b .001.
although those respondents in high GE cultures reported a steeper decrease compared to respondents in low GE cultures. These find- ings support Hypotheses 6a, 6b, and 6c.
Overall, the structural model accounted for moderate amounts of variance for all outcomes, and these were identical between the two moderation models for most outcomes: job satisfaction (R2 = .25), life satisfaction (R2 = .33), and depression (R2 = .18). Only towards anxiety were there major differences in variance, with the GE model accounting for far greater variance (R2 = .28) than the I/ C model (R2 = .18).
4.4. Supplementary analyses
Finally, an ANOVA test was conducted to examine the reported levels of WLB between the seven samples. Although the ANOVA test is important to know that at least two groups differ, it does not identify the groups that actually differ. Therefore, we run a mul- tigroup mean comparison between all distinct populations to identify the pattern of differences in our results by using the Fisher’s Least Significant Difference (LSD) and Student–Newman–Keuls tests as post-hoc analyses. The LSD test indicates which group config- urations significantly differ from one another, whereas the Student–Newman–Keuls is a sequential test designed to indicate which groups are significantly different from all the others. It orders mean scores from the lowest to the highest and compares pairs of groups for significant differences. Overall, the F-tests (results available from authors) revealed the presence of a significant difference for WLB across sample between at least two distinct populations. The Student–Newman–Keuls test revealed that the only significant difference existed between the Spanish and Italian samples, with Spanish respondents reported significantly higher levels of WLB (M = 3.47, s.d. = 0.76) than the Italian respondents (M = 3.24, s.d. = 0.79). Notably, the Maori sample (M = 3.56,
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
Jo b
an d
Li fe
S at
is fa
ct io
n
Individualism
Collectivism
Low Work-Life Balance High Work-Life Balance
Fig. 2. Interaction between WLB and I/C on Job and Life satisfaction.
369 J.M. Haar et al. / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 361–373
5
4.5
Low Work-Life Balance High Work-Life Balance
Low Gender
Egalitarianism
High Gender
Egalitarianism
Jo b
an d
L ife
S at
is fa
ct io
n 4
3.5
3
Fig. 3. Interaction between WLB and Gender egalitarianism on Job and Life satisfaction.
s.d. = 0.94) reported significantly higher levels of WLB than the samples from Italy (p b .000), New Zealand (p b .000), France (p b .01), Malaysia (p b .05), but not China (p = .052).
5. Discussion and conclusions
The present study investigated the outcomes of WLB on job satisfaction, life satisfaction, anxiety and depression across seven distinct cultures. More specifically, we explored whether individualism/collectivism (I/C) and gender egalitarianism (GE) moderated the relationship between WLB and these four outcomes. We found strong and consistent support across all cultures for WLB to be as- sociated with outcomes in the expected directions, albeit with some differences related to variations in national culture. Regarding I/C, as expected, we found that high levels of WLB were more positively associated with job and life satisfaction for individuals in individ- ualistic cultures, compared with those in collectivistic cultures. As such, we provide the first or one of the first empirical evidence that the outcomes of WLB can be better understood by including I/C in the analysis. A possible explanation for this result is linked to the importance that WLB has in individualistic cultures where it is a critical component influencing individuals’ subjective assessment of the overall quality of their work and life experiences (Spector et al., 2004, 2007). Furthermore, in individualistic cultures individuals generally have full responsibility for achieving WLB. Therefore, it is possible that, once achieved, WLB may lead to higher feelings of satisfaction in life due to contentment linked to this achievement. Notably, I/C did not significantly moderate the relation- ship between WLB and anxiety or depression. This is an interesting finding that can be understood in light of the broader network and greater level of social/family support usually experienced by individuals in collectivistic cultures that may help them to cope better with life adversities (Powell, Francesco, & Ling, 2009).
Regarding GE, we found that the beneficial effects of WLB on job and life satisfaction were most salient for individuals living in highly gender egalitarian cultures. This suggests that people in high GE cultures tend to be more satisfied with their job and life when experiencing high WLB than people in low GE cultures. This result is remarkable as this is the first study that documents the presence of differentiated outcomes of WLB across cultures that vary in their levels of GE. A possible explanation for this result is that in high GE cultures there is less adhesion to traditional gender role beliefs and therefore both women and men can perceive equal opportunities to pursue personal and professional life goals (House et al., 2004). Importantly, in such cultures there is higher
3
2.5 Low Gender
Egalitarianism
High Gender
Egalitarianism
Low Work-Life Balance High Work-Life Balance
A nx
ie ty
2
1.5
1
Fig. 4. Interaction between WLB and Gender egalitarianism on Anxiety.
370 J.M. Haar et al. / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 361–373
social approval and more tolerance towards the individual’s desire to balance work and non-work roles according to personal life preferences and values without having to sacrifice one domain over the others (Corrigall & Konrad, 2006; Lyness & Kropf, 2005). As a result, individuals may feel more satisfied when experiencing WLB as it is consistent with both personal and societal values and beliefs.
GE also moderated the relationship between WLB and anxiety. The negative relationship between WLB and anxiety was stronger for those living in high GE cultures. This implies that achieving WLB in high GE cultures is likely to enhance the beneficial effects of role balance on mental health. In line with our knowledge that individuals tend to internalize societal gender norms of the country they live in (Eagly & Wood, 2012), this finding indicates that there may be less mental pressure and anxiety for those achieving greater WLB in high GE cultures, indicating the presence of higher acknowledgement of benefits associated with greater role balance. It is also important to note that the low levels of anxiety for people living in high GE cultures may depend on the fact that in such cultures, people are more likely to engage in activities that are functional to experience detachment from work and replenish mental and phys- ical energies (Larson, Verma, & Dworkin, 2001).
5.1. Theoretical contributions
The present study contributes to the emerging WLB literature in several ways. The present study makes significant contributions to the work–life literature. First, we strengthen research on WLB by establishing its relationship with positive outcomes for individuals, which holds after controlling for work–family conflict. This supports the insightfulness of the perception-centred approach character- izing WLB research. It extends prior work conceptualizing WLB as a holistic construct (Greenhaus & Allen, 2011; Kossek et al., 2014) being different than work–family conflict and enrichment (Carlson et al., 2009; Greenhaus & Allen, 2011; Valcour, 2007). We believe that this will help to encourage future research on WLB, and this is important because WLB, as a concept distinct from work–life con- flict and work–life enrichment (Valcour, 2007), has the potential to shed light on the complexity of the work–life interface. Our study also emphasizes the importance to focus on work–life balance rather than on work–family balance, as the former term reflects more truthfully the myriads of personal life situations and role involvement decisions that nowadays characterize the contemporary society (Hall et al., 2013). This is consistent with major trends in work–life research emphasizing WLB to be a broad issue relevant for all working people (Haar, 2013; Kossek et al., 2014).
Second, this is one of the first studies that explores the outcomes of WLB across several countries and considers the influence of two distinct cultural dimensions, namely individualism/collectivism and gender egalitarianism. This is important as we compare countries that present noticeable differences with regard to their values, assumptions, norms, and belief systems about the gender roles. Thus, our paper enriches comparative work–life research at the individual level and contributes to bridge the macro–micro gap between country-level contexts and individual-level variables (Bamberger, 2008; Ollier-Malaterre et al., 2013). Moreover, while a couple of studies have explored the relationship between WLB and GE (e.g., Lyness & Judiesch, 2014), this is the first study, to our knowledge, that considers the moderating role of I/C on the positive effects generated by WLB. This is noteworthy given that I/C represents one of the most studied dimension in cross-cultural research (Brewer & Chen, 2007) and is an important boundary con- dition of our model explaining why people living in different countries perceive the benefits of WLB to greater or lesser extent. Fol- lowing recent recommendations in cross-cultural research (e.g., Taras, Rowney, & Steel, 2009), we used GLOBE scores for I/C and GE as these are reliable and objective instruments for quantifying cultural differences (House et al., 2004).
Third, we tested WLB effects in some settings of growing interest in the literature (e.g. Malaysia and China) and in some understudied settings (e.g. New Zealand European and Maori). Thus, this article contributes to establish the generalizability of work–life concepts and measures developed in Western countries to other regions of the world (Kossek & Ollier-Malaterre, 2013; Ollier-Malaterre et al., 2013; Powell et al., 2009). This is important given that WLB has considerable implications for people all around the world (Hill et al., 2004; Lyness & Judiesch, 2014). Our finding that the direct effects of WLB hold across all of the study’s samples aligns with research pointing out the universal benefit of the work–life interface (Hill et al., 2004; Poelmans et al., 2003; Shaffer, Joplin, & Hsu, 2011; Spector et al., 2004, 2007). However, our finding that two dimensions of national culture (I/C and GE) moderate the re- lationships between WLB and individual outcomes highlights the need to include cultural dimensions in research designs.
5.2. Practical implications
Our findings imply that achieving WLB may hold the key to greater job and life satisfaction, and diminished mental health issues, and this may hold in many countries. This has important implications for organizations that should make sure to assess their employees’ WLB in addition to measuring their work–life conflict. Organizations should invest in promoting WLB by implementing work–life policies, such as flexible working hours, and by embracing a supportive work culture that encourages em- ployees to use the work–life policies that are available in the organization (Allen, 2001; Eaton, 2003; Hammer, Kossek, Anger, Bodner, & Zimmerman, 2011). In addition, encouraging employees to recognize and celebrate their success in balancing roles (when achieved) and to elongate the time frame upon which they to gauge their work–life balance (Marsh, 2010) is also critical to foster greater benefits through understanding the potential changing nature of WLB. This may be particularly important in individu- alistic cultures and in high gender egalitarian cultures where work–life balance seems to be especially beneficial. Moreover, this can also prevent – especially in individualistic cultures – employees become frustrated when experiencing temporary situations of role imbalance.
371 J.M. Haar et al. / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 361–373
5.3. Limitations, future research and conclusions
While the present study encompasses seven distinct samples across six countries, a limitation is the cross-sectional, self-report na- ture of the data, although this approach is common in other work–family cross-cultural studies (Greenhaus & Allen, 2011; Spector et al., 2007). To alleviate this limitation we conducted higher order statistical approaches (i.e., CFA) using SEM to confirm the distinct nature of our measures. Furthermore, Kenny (2008) suggests that SEM does somewhat mitigate the potential bias related to the presence of common method variance. Similarly, testing for moderation effects also reduces the chances for common method variance (Evans, 1985). In addition, as advocated by Haar (2013), a self-report approach is needed to accurately tap the perception-centred na- ture of WLB. While additional secondary source data (e.g., supervisor, partner) would be preferable, it was prohibitively difficult to gain such data across a wide range of countries and individuals. As such, the data collected here are similar to that undertaken in other cross-cultural studies, but the CFA and structural analysis run in our study provide some unique statistical contributions, and the moderation analyses also help offset such limitations.
The present study has implications for future studies, especially cross-cultural studies in the work–life research areas. We hope that it will encourage research based on the concept of WLB, which is an important concept shedding light in job and life satisfaction as well as mental health, and which is more generalizable across cultures than what its Western origin presumed. While our study used robust scores for I/C and GE, it has been noted that individual-level allocentrism and idiocentrism may make some individuals more sensitive to cultural contexts than others (Triandis, Leung, Villareal, & Clack, 1985; Wang, Lawler, Walumbwa, & Shi, 2004). Therefore future studies should strive to measure both culture-level and individual-level of I/C and GE. Furthermore, there is to date no research investigating the role that other cultural dimensions may play in the relationship between WLB and outcomes. In particular, we encourage researchers to include in future studies the four other dimensions identified in a recent review as extensively impacting work–life conflict, enrichment and balance (Ollier-Malaterre, 2014): i.e. power distance, uncertainty avoidance, humane orientation (House et al., 2004) and specificity/diffusion (Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner, 1998). This area of research is almost void and opens avenues for many fruitful studies.
In conclusion, the present study emphasizes the crucial role that WLB plays in promoting greater job and life satisfaction and better mental health across employees in different cultures. It also points out that culture, in this study I/C and GE, moderates these relation- ships. Taken together, the findings of this study offer a fresh and nuanced picture on similarities and differences across cultures, which we hope will encourage future studies in the growing field of comparative work–life research.
Acknowledgments
We thank Tammy Allen and other conference attendees for their helpful feedback on an earlier version of this paper presented at the International Center for Work and Family 2013 conference. We are also grateful to the anonymous reviewers who gave us insight- ful suggestions.
References
Aiken, L. G., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Allen, T. D. (2001). Family-supportive work environments: The role of organizational perceptions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58(3), 414–435. Aryee, S., Luk, V., Leung, A., & Lo, S. (1999). Role stressors, interrole conflict, and well-being: The moderating influence of spousal support and coping behaviors among
employed parents in Hong Kong. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54(2), 259–278. Axtell, C., Wall, T., Stride, C., Pepper, K., Clegg, C., Gardner, P., et al. (2002). Familiarity breeds content: The impact of exposure to change on employee openness and
well-being. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75, 217–231. Aycan, Z. (2008). Cross-cultural perspectives to work–family conflict. In K. Korabik, D. Lero, & D. Whitehead (Eds.), Handbook of work–family integration (pp. 359–371).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bamberger, P. (2008). Beyond contextualization: Using context theories to narrow the micro–macro gap in management research. Academy of Management Journal,
51(5), 839–846. Biernacki, P., & Waldford, D. (1981). Snowball sampling: Problems and techniques of chain referral sampling. Sociological Methods & Research, 10(2), 141–163. Bou, J. C., & Satorra, A. (2010). A multigroup structural equation approach: A demonstration by testing variation of firm profitability across EU samples. Organizational
Research Methods, 13(4), 738–766. Brewer, B. M., & Chen, Y. R. (2007). Where (who) are collectives in collectivism? Toward conceptual clarification of individualism and collectivism. Psychological
Review, 114(1), 133–151. Brislin, R. W. (1980). Translation and content analysis of oral and written materials. In H. C. Triandis, & J. W. Berry (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology.
Methodology, vol. 2. (pp. 389–444). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Brough, P., Timms, C., O’Driscoll, M. P., Kalliath, T., Siu, O., Sit, C., et al. (2014). Work–life balance: A longitudinal evaluation of a new measure across Australia and New
Zealand workers. International Journal of Human Resource Management. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2014.899262. Brougham, D., & Haar, J. (2013). Collectivism, cultural identity and employee wellbeing: A study of New Zealand Maori. Social Indicators Research, 114(3), 1143–1160. Carlson, D. S., Grzywacz, J. G., & Zivnuska, S. (2009). Is work–family balance more than conflict and enrichment? Human Relations, 62(10), 1459–1486. Carlson, D. S., Kacmar, K., & Williams, L. J. (2000). Construction and initial validation of a multidimensional measure of work–family conflict. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 56, 249–276. Cheng, E. (2001). SEM being more effective than multiple regression in parsimonious model testing for management development research. The Journal of
Management Development, 20, 650–667. Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2000). Assessing extreme and acquiescence response sets in cross-cultural research using SEM. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,
31, 187–212. Corrigall, E. A., & Konrad, A. M. (2006). The relationship of job attribute preferences to employment, hours of paid work, and family responsibilities: An analysis com-
paring women and men. Sex Roles, 54, 95–111. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75. Duxbury, L., & Higgins, C. (2001). Work–life balance in the new millennium: Where are we? Where do we need to go? CPRN discussion paper no. W/21. Ottawa:
372 J.M. Haar et al. / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 361–373
Eagly, A. H., &Wood, W. (2012). Social role theory. In P. A. M. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology, vol. 2. (pp. 458–476). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Eaton, S. (2003). If you can use them: Flexibility policies, organizational commitment, and perceived performance. Industrial Relations, 42(2), 145–267. Evans, M. (1985). A Monte Carlo study of the effects of correlated method variance in moderated multiple regression analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 36(3), 305–323. Ferguson, M., Carlson, D., Zivnuska, S., & Whitten, D. (2012). Support at work and home: The path to satisfaction through balance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80(2),
299–307. Frone, M. R. (2003). Work–family balance. In J. C. Quick, & L. E. Tetrick (Eds.), Handbook of occupational health psychology (pp. 143–162). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association. Grace, J. B., & Bollen, K. A. (2005). Interpreting the results from multiple regression and structural equation models. Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America, 86,
283–295. Greenhaus, J., & Allen, T. (2011). Work–family balance: A review and extension of the literature. In J. C. Quick, & L. E. Tetrick (Eds.), Handbook of occupational health
psychology (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Greenhaus, J. H., Collins, K. M., & Shaw, J. D. (2003). The relation between work–family balance and quality of life. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63(3), 510–531. Guest, D. E. (2002). Perspectives on the study of work–life balance. Social Science Information, 41, 255–279. Gupta, V., Surie, G., Javidan, M., & Chhokar, J. (2002). Southern Asia cluster: Where the old meets the new? Journal of World Business, 37(1), 16–27. Haar, J. M. (2013). Testing a new measure of WLB: A study of parent and non-parent employees from New Zealand. International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 24(17/18), 3305–3324. Haar, J., & Brougham, D. (2011). Outcomes of cultural satisfaction at work: A study of New Zealand Maori. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 49(4), 461–475. Haar, J. M., Roche, M., & Taylor, D. (2012). Work–family conflict and turnover intentions of indigenous employees: The importance of the whanau/family for Maori.
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23(12), 2546–2560. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). New York: Pearson Prentice Hall. Hall, D. T., Kossek, E. E., Briscoe, J. P., Pichler, S., & Lee, M. D. (2013). Nonwork orientations relative to career: A multidimensional measure. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 83(3), 539–550. Hammer, L. B., Kossek, E. E., Anger, W. K., Bodner, T., & Zimmerman, K. (2011). Clarifying work–family intervention processes: The roles of work–family conflict and
family supportive supervisor behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 134–150. Hill, E., Yang, C., Hawkins, A., & Ferris, M. (2004). A cross-cultural test of the work–family interface in 48 countries. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 66(5),
1300–1316. House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, V. (Eds.). (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies. Thousand Oaks:
Sage Publications. Iacobucci, D., Saldanha, N., & Deng, Z. (2007). A meditation on mediation: Evidence that structural equations models perform better than regressions. Journal of
Consumer Psychology, 17, 139–153. Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Erez, A., & Locke, E. A. (2005). Core self-evaluations and job and life satisfaction: The role of self-concordance and goal attainment. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 90(2), 257–268. Kenny, D. A. (2008). Reflections on mediation. Organizational Research Methods, 11(2), 353–358. Kossek, E. E., Baltes, B. B., & Matthews, R. A. (2011). How work–family research can finally have an impact in the workplace. Industrial and Organizational Psychology:
Perspectives on Science and Practice, 4, 352–369. Kossek, E. E., & Ollier-Malaterre, A. (2013). Work–family policies: Linking national contexts, organizational practice and people for multi-level change. In S. A. Y.
Poelmans, J. H. Greenhaus, & M. Las Heras Maestro (Eds.), Expanding the boundaries of work–family research: A vision for the future (pp. 3–30). United Kingdom: Palgrave.
Kossek, E. E., Valcour, M., & Lirio, P. (2014). The sustainable workforce: Organizational strategies for promoting work–life balance and well-being. In C. Cooper, & P. Chen (Eds.), Work and wellbeing (pp. 295–318). Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
Larson, R., Verma, S., & Dworkin, J. (2001). Men’s work and family lives in India: The daily organization of time and emotion. Journal of Family Psychology, 15(2), 206–224.
Lu, L., Cooper, C. L., Kao, S. -F., Chang, T. -T., Allen, T. D., Lapierre, L. M., et al. (2010). Cross-cultural differences on work-to-family conflict and role satisfaction: A Taiwanese–British comparison. Human Resource Management, 49(1), 67–85.
Lu, L., Gilmour, R., Kao, S. F., & Huang, M. T. (2006). A cross-cultural study of work/family demands, work/family conflict and wellbeing: The Taiwanese vs. British. Career Development International, 11, 9–27.
Lunau, T., Bambra, C., Eikemo, T. A., Van der Wel, K. A., & Dragano, N. (2014). A balancing act? Work–life balance, health and well-being in European welfare states. European Journal of Public Health. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/cku010.
Lyness, K. S., & Judiesch, M. K. (2008). Can a manager have a life and a career? International and multisource perspectives on work–life balance and career advance- ment potential. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 789–805.
Lyness, K. S., & Judiesch, M. K. (2014). Gender egalitarianism and work–life balance for managers: Multisource perspectives in 36 countries. Applied Psychology, 63(1), 96–129.
Lyness, K. S., & Kropf, M. B. (2005). The relationships of national gender equality and organizational support with work–family balance: A study of European managers. Human Relations, 58, 33–60.
Maertz, C. P., & Boyar, S. L. (2011). Work–family conflict, enrichment, and balance under ‘levels’ and ‘episode’ approaches. Journal of Management, 37(1), 68–98. Marks, S. R., & MacDermid, S. M. (1996). Multiple roles and the self: A theory of role balance. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 58, 417–432. Marsh, N. (2010, May). Nigel Marsh: How to make work–life balance work . Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/nigel_marsh_how_to_make_work_
life_balance_work#t-3923 Meade, A. W., & Kroustalis, C. M. (2006). Problems with item partialing for confirmatory factor analytic tests of measurement invariance. Organizational Research
Methods, 9, 369–403. Ollier-Malaterre, A. (2014). Cross-national work–life research: A review at the individual level. In T. D. Allen, & L. E. Eby (Eds.), Oxford handbook of work and family. Ollier-Malaterre, A., Valcour, M., den Dulk, L., & Kossek, E. E. (2013). Theorizing national context to develop comparative work–life research: Building bricks and re-
search agenda. European Management Journal, 31(5), 433–447. Podsiadlowski, A., & Fox, S. (2011). Collectivist value orientations among four ethnic groups: Collectivism in the New Zealand context. New Zealand Journal of Psychol-
ogy, 40(1), 5–18. Poelmans, S. (2005). Work and family. An international research perspective. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Poelmans, S., Spector, P. E., Cooper, C. L., Allen, T. D., O’Driscoll, M., & Sanchez, J. I. (2003). A cross-national comparative study of work/family demands and resources.
International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 3(3), 275–288. Powell, G. N., Francesco, A. M., & Ling, Y. (2009). Towards culture-sensitive theories of the work–family interface. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30(5), 597–616. Ramamoorthy, N., & Flood, P. C. (2002). Employee attitudes and behavioral intentions: A test of the main and moderating effects of individualism–collectivism orien-
tations. Human Relations, 55(9), 1071–1096. Redding, S. G. (1993). The spirit of Chinese capitalism. New York: de Gruyter. Redding, S. G., & Wong, G. Y. Y. (1986). The psychology of Chinese organizational behaviour. In M. H. Bond (Ed.), The psychology of the Chinese people (pp. 267–295).
New York: Oxford University Press. Rothbard, N. P. (2001). Enriching or depleting? The dynamics of engagement in work and family roles. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(4), 655–684. Schmitt, N., & Kuljanin, G. (2008). Measurement invariance: Review of practice and implications. Human Resource Management Review, 18(4), 210–222. Shaffer, M. A., Joplin, J. R. W., & Hsu, Y. S. (2011). Expanding the boundaries of work–family research: A review and agenda for future research. International Journal of
373 J.M. Haar et al. / Journal of Vocational Behavior 85 (2014) 361–373
Spector, P. E., Allen, T. D., Poelmans, S. A. Y., Lapierre, L. M., Cooper, C. L., O’Driscoll, M., et al. (2007). Cross-national differences in relationships of work demands, job satisfaction, and turnover intentions with work–family conflict. Personnel Psychology, 60(4), 805–835.
Spector, P. E., Cooper, C. L., Poelmans, S. A., Allen, T. D., O’Driscoll, M., Sanchez, J. I., et al. (2004). A cross-national comparative study of work–family stressors, working hours, and well-being: China and Latin America versus the Anglo world. Personnel Psychology, 57(1), 119–142.
Spell, C. S., & Arnold, T. J. (2007). A multi-level analysis of organizational justice climate, structure, and employee mental health. Journal of Management, 33(5), 724–751.
Taras, V., Rowney, J., & Steel, P. (2009). Half a century of measuring culture: Approaches, challenges, limitations and suggestions based on the analysis of 112 instru- ments for quantifying culture. Journal of International Management, 15(4), 357–373.
Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview. Triandis, H. C., Leung, K., Villareal, M. J., & Clack, F. L. (1985). Allocentric versus idiocentric tendencies: Convergent and discriminant validation. Journal of Research in
Personality, 19(4), 395–415. Trompenaars, A., & Hampden-Turner, C. (1998). Riding the waves of culture: Understanding diversity in global business. New York: McGraw Hill. Valcour, M. (2007). Work-based resources as moderators of the relationship between work hours and satisfaction with work–family balance. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 92(6), 1512–1523. Wang, P., Lawler, J. J., Walumbwa, F. O., & Shi, K. (2004). Work–family conflict and job withdrawal intentions: The moderating effect of cultural differences.
International Journal of Stress Management, 11(4), 392–412. Williams, L. J., Vandenberg, R. J., & Edwards, J. R. (2009). 12 Structural equation modelling in management research: A guide for improved analysis. The Academy of
Management Annals, 3(1), 543–604. Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2002). A cross-cultural analysis of the behavior of women and men: Implications for the origins of sex differences. Psychological Bulletin,
128(5), 699–727. Yang, N., Chen, C. C., Choi, J., & Zou, Y. (2000). Sources of work–family conflict: A Sino-US comparison of the effects of work and family demands. Academy of
Using Microsoft® Word, prepare an evaluation of your potential academic skill sets to be gained through the MHA program in a minimum of 500 words.
Access and complete the ACHE Self-Assessment to identify your competence level with various health care concepts and tasks.
Analyze your strengths and weaknesses in relation to the skill sets required for your current position and a position you would like to attain.
Describe your current position – Clinical Research Associateand the position to which you aspire.Clinical Director
List the skill sets required for these positions. – Google
Explore the courses you will be taking within the MHA program.
Core Coursework
The Master of Health Services Administration has twelve core courses:
MHA/505 – Systems Thinking in Health Care Environments
MHA/506 – Ethical Marketing: The New Health Care Economics
MHA/507 – Leveraging Informatics in the Health Sector
MHA/508 – Navigating the Regulatory Environment in Health Care
MHA/598 – Leveraging Results to Build Brand in the Health Sector
MHA/515 – Scanning the Health Sector as an Industry Expert
MHA/516 – Operating in Structure: Health Sector Policy and Governance
MHA/520 – Sector Stakeholders: Identifying and Cultivating Alliances
MHA/542 – Leading With Authenticity in the Health Sector
MHA/543 – Tackling the Talent War in the Health Sector
MHA/560 – Creating a Sustainable Legacy: Healthy Communities
MHA/599 – Capstone: Leading the Organization Through Change
Choose 3 courses that you believe will provide additional skill sets to help you be more successful in your current position as well as prepare you for your desired position.SELECTED
Describe how you believe those courses will help you add those skill sets to help perform more successfully in your current position and prepare you for a position with more responsibility.
1. Explain the Christian view of the nature of human persons.
2. Compare the Christian view of intrinsic human value and dignity in contrast to secular views of personhood.
3. Evaluate how the concept of intrinsic human dignity is applied in the process of ethical decision-making.
Assignment 1
What is the Christian concept of the imago Dei? How might it be important to health care, and why is it relevant?
Assignment 2
According to your worldview, what value does a human person have? How does your position affect your stance on controversial bioethical issues, such as abortion, designer babies, and stem cell research?
Assignment 3
Case Study on Moral Status
Based on “Case Study: Fetal Abnormality” and the required topic Resources, write a 750-1,000-word reflection that answers the following questions:
1. What is the Christian view of the nature of human persons, and which theory of moral status is it compatible with? How is this related to the intrinsic human value and dignity?
2. Which theory or theories are being used by Jessica, Marco, Maria, and Dr. Wilson to determine the moral status of the fetus? What from the case study specifically leads you to believe that they hold the theory you selected?
3. How does the theory determine or influence each of their recommendations for action?
4. What theory do you agree with? Why? How would that theory determine or influence the recommendation for action?
Remember to support your responses with the topic Resources.
While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.
Although integrated delivery systems offer the opportunity to coordinate all aspects of patient care under a single umbrella, their complexity makes the overall management process much more complicated than in smaller organizations that focus on one type of service.
Write an informative essay that includes:
a. Descriptions of the financial challenges in each of the following health care environments:
o Hospitalso Ambulatory careo Home health careo Long-term careo Integrated delivery systems
b. Financial challenges or drawbacks associated with implementing integrated delivery systems
Requirements
Follow APA style for the title and reference page, as well as APA style within the paper itself (Times New Roman 12-point font and properly double spaced).
Minimum 2-page limit or 600 words.
Maximum 4-page limit or 1,200 words.
Information should be summarized in your own words with appropriate APA formatting and citation style of in-text citations in the body of the text to acknowledge the source(s) of information.
According to the World Health Organization (WHO), in 2019, a new strain of the coronavirus disease was discovered. Also known as COVID-19, this strain of the virus had previously not been identified in humans. A worldwide pandemic ensued as the virus quickly spread across the globe, impacting countless lives, including many individuals in the United States.
In an effort to contain the virus, numerous countries’ leaders encouraged social distancing, which is an infection control strategy aimed to help lessen the spread of a contagious disease. This directive was given by leaders in the United States as well. Two schools of thought emerged. In fact, many people were skeptical about the authenticity of this pandemic due to perplexing and often conflicting messages that were received across social media and news outlets. Therefore, numerous Americans assumed business as usual and maintained their daily living and social rituals. On the other hand, scores of others quickly retreated to their homes, embracing the warning provided by some of the nation’s top infectious disease experts.
This assignment provides you with an opportunity to analyze a real-world, peer-reviewed, psychology journal article that contains research examining the social psychology aspects of motivation and emotion. You will then demonstrate your understanding of the article by relating the research and conclusions contained therein to current events.
Begin by visiting the CSU Online Library to locate and choose a journal article in which motivation and emotion are viewed under the lens of social psychology. The article must be peer-reviewed and should be no older than 7 years.NOTE: You are not required to locate an article about COVID-19; instead, you must find a peer-reviewed journal article concerning research that specifically examines motivation and emotion. You will then be critiquing the article and framing the research and conclusions presented in the article in the context of how they can be applied to behavior and social psychology during such an event as the COVID-19 pandemic.
A good place to start your search is the PsycARTICLES database or the Academic Search Ultimate database. You can access these databases from the Databases box on the library homepage.
For assistance in locating your article, you may find the following tutorial How to Find Journal Articles helpful. Additionally, you may find this tutorial How to Search in PsycARTICLES useful.
Once you have chosen your article about motivation, emotion, and social psychology, you will write an article critique that addresses the following elements.
Explain the research methodology that was used in the study.
Discuss social factors that influence people or groups to conform to the actions of others.
Indicate how behaviors and motivation are impacted by the presence of others. (How does this apply to COVID-19?)
Indicate the structures of the brain that are involved in emotion and motivation. (How could a person’s emotions related to fear drive their behaviors during this pandemic?)
Examine the article’s generalizability to various areas of psychology.
Why would some people choose to follow the orders to avoid social contact and others allow desire for human interaction to be their driving force?
In addition, your article critique should clearly identify the article’s premise and present an insightful and thorough analysis with strong arguments and evidence. You should present your own informed and substantiated opinion on the article’s content and its relation to social psychology during the COVID-19 pandemic. You should use the textbook as your second source to support your analysis and to supplement any information that is not contained in the journal article.
Your article critique must be a minimum of three pages in length, not including the title and reference pages. All sources used must be properly cited. Your article critique, including all references, must be formatted in APA style.
You may view the following CSU Writing Center tutorial Article Critiques for assistance in writing an article critique.
