The choices between our work and nonwork roles : Applying behavioral reasoning theory and the life-role-value concept.

The ways in which employees' work and nonwork roles conflict with each other have been studied in numerous contexts.

However, research has not focused on the specific behavioral decisions that may influence work-family conflict.

Therefore, the general purpose of this dissertation was to examine work-family conflict as an outcome of the decision to work beyond normal working hours, through the application of behavioral reasoning theory (Westaby, 2005).

Furthermore, life-role-values were introduced as potential moderators of the decision-making process.

Regarding specific hypotheses, this study first predicted that the decision to work beyond normal working hours would be related to work-family conflict.

This hypothesis is in line with expectancy violation theories, which posit that expectations guide behavior and that negative arousal results when these expectations are broken.

Next, behavioral reasoning theory provided a framework to explore the factors that contributed to the decision to work beyond normal working hours.

Based on this theory, it was proposed that behavioral reasons (for and against the behavior) and global motives (i.e., attitude toward the behavior, subjective norm, and/or perceived behavioral control) would predict intention which in turn would predict behavior.

Finally, the moderating effect of life-role-values on the relationship between attitude and behavioral intention was examined.

It was hypothesized that a stronger link between these variables would emerge when work-role-values were strong than when they were weak.

A cross-sectional survey design was utilized, involving 336 participants from 11 organizations.

Hypotheses were tested using hierarchical regression analyses.

Overall, it was found that: (1) the behavior of working beyond normal work hours predicted work-family conflict; (2) intention predicted behavior; (3) attitude predicted intention; (4) behavioral reasons predicted global motives; and (5) behavioral reasons independently predicted intention, over and above that explained by constructs in the theory of planned behavior.

Against predictions, life-role-values did not moderate the attitude-intention relationship.

Supplemental analyses also found that behavioral reasons for and against working beyond normal working hours directly predicted work-family conflict, suggesting that work-family conflict can be explained by the internal conflict associated with the decision to work beyond normal working hours.

Implications for organizations, managers, and employees are discussed.