Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Family-work conflict presentation

40 views

Published on

Family-work conflict presentation. Learn how Family Responsibility Discrimination negatively impacts employees.
Find slide transcript at http://essayplant.com/family-work-conflict/

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to like this

Family-work conflict presentation

  1. 1. Family-work conflict Student’s name: Professor’s name: Date:
  2. 2. Purpose of Study  This study was conducted on the phenomenon of family responsibility discrimination (FRD) and its negative effects on workers of both genders: – denied equal treatment and various job opportunities, – emotional exhaustion. – work-life conflict.  This research is important because toxic job environment where FRD takes place reduces workers’ productivity, causes stress, emotional exhaustion, work-life conflict and lowers worker achievement.  Employers can leverage this knowledge about FRD and improve the workplace environment. Research helps understand the problem of FRD in order to ultimately resolve it.
  3. 3. Theoretical Background  Conservation of Resources Theory, which argued that “resources that are valued and not provided in the work context deplete emotional energies and ultimately trigger work–life conflict.” (Trzebiatowski& Triana, 4). – limited opportunities, created stress – disgruntled, unmotivated and unproductive employees.  Social Role Theory, which hinted that since women still appear to dedicate more time to family in addition to work, they may be more affected by FRD than men (Trzebiatowski& Triana, 4).
  4. 4. Hypotheses  Based on this model the following hypotheses were proposed: (Trzebiatowski& Triana, 4):  1a. “Perceived family responsibility discrimination will be positively related to emotional exhaustion” (Trzebiatowski& Triana, 4).  1b. “Perceived family responsibility discrimination will be positively related to work–life conflict” (Trzebiatowski& Triana, 4).  2a. “The positive relationship between family responsibility discrimination and emotional exhaustion will be stronger for women than for men” (Trzebiatowski& Triana, 4).  2b. “The positive relationship between family responsibility discrimination and work–life conflict will be stronger for women than for men”. (Trzebiatowski& Triana, 4).  3. “The effect of perceived family responsibility discrimination on emotional exhaustion (H3a) as well as work–life conflict (H3b) will be stronger for women, regardless of power distance, and for men who score high on power distance compared to men who score low on power distance” (Trzebiatowski& Triana, 4).  4. “Perceived family responsibility discrimination relates indirectly to work–life conflict through emotional exhaustion. The direct effect as well as the indirect effect of family responsibility discrimination on work–life conflict will be moderated by both gender and power distance such that women (regardless of power distance) and men who are high in power distance experience more emotional exhaustion, and subsequently, work–life conflict compared to men who are low in power distance. ” (Trzebiatowski& Triana, 4).
  5. 5. Study variables  Independent variables (variables that may change independently of others): – Perceived discrimination in the workplace, i.e. FRD (Trzebiatowski& Triana, 6).  Dependent variables (variable that change when independent variable change): – Work-life conflict (Trzebiatowski& Triana, 6). – Emotional exhaustion (Trzebiatowski& Triana, 6).  Moderating variables (variable that affect the change of dependent variables): – Gender – Power Distance (Trzebiatowski& Triana, 6).
  6. 6. The End  Questions?  Comments?  Suggestions?
  7. 7. Reference  Trzebiatowski, T., Triana, M. (2018). Family Responsibility Discrimination, Power Distance, and Emotional Exhaustion: When and Why are There Gender Differences in Work–Life Conflict?, Journal of Business Ethics, 14 august. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-4000-5

×