The influence of boundary management preference on work–nonwork policy effectiveness: Is “turning off” the solution?

IF 4 2区 心理学 Q2 MANAGEMENT European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology Pub Date : 2022-12-28 DOI:10.1080/1359432X.2022.2161371
Nicolas Mueller, Regina Kempen
{"title":"The influence of boundary management preference on work–nonwork policy effectiveness: Is “turning off” the solution?","authors":"Nicolas Mueller, Regina Kempen","doi":"10.1080/1359432X.2022.2161371","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT How does boundary management (BM) preference influence the effectiveness of work–nonwork policies? Drawing on BM and person–environment fit theory, we examine the effects of off-hours work-related communication restriction on policy satisfaction, organizational commitment, emotional exhaustion, and work engagement. We suggest a moderated mediation model, assuming that the interaction between communication restriction and BM preference predicts perceived BM fit, positively affecting the outcomes. We investigated this assumption using an experimental vignette study (Study 1, N = 257) and a correlational study (Study 2, N = 239). The findings of both studies show moderated indirect effects of the work–nonwork policy on policy satisfaction, organizational commitment, emotional exhaustion, and work engagement (only investigated in Study 2) via perceived BM fit and conditional on BM preference. Specifically, restricting work-related communication only benefits employees preferring low levels of integration. Contrarily, employees who prefer high levels of integration do not benefit from the policy. Due to using two studies with different methodological approaches, these findings rest on data with high internal and external validity. In particular, the experimental method in Study 1 allows for causal inferences on the effects of communication restriction, supporting the literature on BM fit and offering practical implications.","PeriodicalId":48240,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology","volume":"32 1","pages":"402 - 417"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2022.2161371","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT How does boundary management (BM) preference influence the effectiveness of work–nonwork policies? Drawing on BM and person–environment fit theory, we examine the effects of off-hours work-related communication restriction on policy satisfaction, organizational commitment, emotional exhaustion, and work engagement. We suggest a moderated mediation model, assuming that the interaction between communication restriction and BM preference predicts perceived BM fit, positively affecting the outcomes. We investigated this assumption using an experimental vignette study (Study 1, N = 257) and a correlational study (Study 2, N = 239). The findings of both studies show moderated indirect effects of the work–nonwork policy on policy satisfaction, organizational commitment, emotional exhaustion, and work engagement (only investigated in Study 2) via perceived BM fit and conditional on BM preference. Specifically, restricting work-related communication only benefits employees preferring low levels of integration. Contrarily, employees who prefer high levels of integration do not benefit from the policy. Due to using two studies with different methodological approaches, these findings rest on data with high internal and external validity. In particular, the experimental method in Study 1 allows for causal inferences on the effects of communication restriction, supporting the literature on BM fit and offering practical implications.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
边界管理偏好对工作-非工作政策有效性的影响:“关闭”是解决方案吗?
摘要边界管理偏好如何影响工作-非工作政策的有效性?基于BM和人-环境适应理论,我们研究了非工作时间与工作相关的沟通限制对政策满意度、组织承诺、情绪衰竭和工作投入的影响。我们提出了一个有调节的中介模型,假设沟通限制和BM偏好之间的相互作用预测了感知到的BM拟合,对结果产生了积极影响。我们使用实验性渐晕研究(研究1,N = 257)和相关研究(研究2,N = 239)。这两项研究的结果都表明,工作-非工作政策对政策满意度、组织承诺、情绪衰竭和工作投入的间接影响(仅在研究2中进行了调查)是通过感知的BM适合度和BM偏好来调节的。具体来说,限制与工作相关的沟通只会让喜欢低融合水平的员工受益。相反,喜欢高度一体化的员工不会从该政策中受益。由于使用了两项方法不同的研究,这些发现基于具有高度内部和外部有效性的数据。特别是,研究1中的实验方法允许对沟通限制的影响进行因果推断,支持BM拟合的文献,并提供实际意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
2.30%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: The mission of the European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology is to promote and support the development of Work and Organizational Psychology by publishing high-quality scientific articles that improve our understanding of phenomena occurring in work and organizational settings. The journal publishes empirical, theoretical, methodological, and review articles that are relevant to real-world situations. The journal has a world-wide authorship, readership and editorial board. Submissions from all around the world are invited.
期刊最新文献
Antecedents of physical sickness presenteeism during the COVID-19 pandemic Target pressure and corporate scandals: a natural language processing investigation of how organizational culture underlies institutional failures When identification with your group matters: leader consultation in response to constructive follower voice Can Harman’s single-factor test reliably distinguish between research designs? Not in published management studies Expertise and specialization in organizations: a social network analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1