The chapter put focus on the introducing of research framework, study hypotheses, sample, data collection, measurement and questionnaire design. Eventually, the research processes were included.
Research Framework
In this study, the independent variables (X) are work family conflict and family work conflict. The dependent variable (Y) is workplace well-being. Mindfulness and family supportive organization perceptions are the moderators among the relationship of work family conflict, family work conflict and workplace well-being. The research framework is shown in Figure 3.1.
Figure 3.1. Research framework Work family conflict
Workplace well-being Mindfulness
Family supportive organization perceptions
H1 H3
Family work conflict H2
H4
H5 H6
30
Research Hypotheses
The hypotheses of the present study are contented as followed according to the research purpose and previous literature review:
Hypothesis 1. Work family conflict is related to workplace well-being.
Hypothesis 2. Family work conflict is related to workplace well-being.
Hypothesis 3. Mindfulness will moderate the relationship between work family conflict and workplace well-being.
Hypothesis 4. Mindfulness will moderate the relationship between family work conflict and workplace well-being.
Hypothesis 5. Family supportive organization perceptions will moderate the relationship between work family conflict and workplace well-being.
Hypothesis 6. Family supportive organization perceptions will moderate the relationship between family work conflict and workplace well-being.
Research Procedure
Identify the Research Topic
With several discussions about the interested research topic with my thesis advisor, and spending so much times on reviewing the correlative literatures simultaneously. Finally, the research topic primarily focused on the employee experiencing the workplace well-being, as they faced the work family conflict and family work conflict.
31
Review the Literature
The researcher obtained more related knowledge and deeper understanding of variables, work family conflict, family work conflict, workplace well-being, mindfulness and family supportive organization perceptions through continuously researching the literatures.
Finalize the Framework and Instruments
After framing the paper, the researchers continued to search for appropriate scales for each variable. Furthermore, the reliability and validity of each measurement were tested.
Finally, the questionnaire was selected for each variable and consulted with thesis advisor.
With the comprehensive discussion, modified the corresponding adjustment for this study.
Establish the Research Background, Purpose, Questions and Hypotheses
Recent researchers started to focus on workplace well-being in the recent decade, and the interaction of moderating effects on mindfulness and family supportive organization perceptions. In addition, the researchers basically focused on employees working in Taiwan.
On the basis of consulting the relevant literature, this study put forward to the research background, research purpose, questions and hypotheses.
Conduct the Pilot Test
Executing a pilot test was a must process for checking the internal variable reliability of the data.
Collect the Data
The responders of this study were chosen by convenience sampling and snowball sampling. The online questionnaire showed clear guidance and research purpose and was sent over the Internet. Finished the data collection process around two months later.
32
Analyze the Data and Discuss the Results
Researcher took statistical software including AMOS and SPSS to do the data analysis after collecting. Descriptive analysis, Pearson correlation analysis and Hierarchical regression analysis were executed in this study. In the end of the process, took the literature review and analytical data to discuss the conclusion of the study.
Figure 3.2. Research process
6. Collect the Data
7. Analyze the Data and Discuss the Results 1. Identify the Research Topic
2. Review the Literature
3. Finalize the Framework and Instruments
4. Establish the Research Background, Purpose, Questions and Hypotheses
5. Conduct the Pilot Test
33
Research Sample
The sample in this study were employees from different kinds of industry to broadly take into consideration a wide a variety of representatives. The research primarily focuses on employees in Taiwan with full time jobs.
Moreover, this study tried to hand out the questionnaires to the workers from multiple organizations, companies, occupation and level of management background. Snowball sampling and convenience sampling were used to collect the data.
Data Collection
This study was about to start to implement the data collection from April to June in 2019.
The questionnaire was conducted in the form of online questionnaire. The link and the QR code were sent synchronously to the target samples by social media (e.g. Facebook, Line).
There were total 70 items in the questionnaire, with the collecting methods of snowball and convenient sampling. Participants would receive a link about the questionnaire and were encouraged to distribute it to their friends, relatives or family members who were qualified.
All the answers of questionnaires were anonymous and confidential only provided for research purpose. In the end, there were 306 respondents from all walks of life.
Questionnaire Design
The questionnaire consisted of four parts and it measured five research interest variables:
work family conflict, family work conflict, workplace well-being, mindfulness and family supportive organization perceptions. By reason that our target samples were from different kinds of industry organization employees in Taiwan, all the questions were translated into
34 Chinese for the convenience of the subjects.
Instrument Validity
In this study, due to the questionnaire should be translated into Chinese, researchers conducted two peer reviews, expert review and back translation on the scale to ensure the accuracy and consistency of all the scale.
Expert Review
The scales in this study confirmed by two experts. Both of them had lived in the United Stated for over two decades, and one of them was also the professor of the relative social work domain. The other one has worked in Google for some years. They were invited to read the questionnaire and did the further assessment to evaluate the questions wereefficiently relevant to the topic. According to their translation and observation of the text, some necessary changes had been made.
Peer Review
The person who took responsibility of the peer review had a certain understanding of the Human Resource field. To confirm the consistency of translation, the researcher and her classmates cooperated together to do the back-and-forth translation of two languages (Chinese and English). The scale contents of translation questions were adjusted according to the relevant background feedback of peers. The background condition of experts and peers appeared in Table 3.1.
35
Back Translation
In order to make sure the accurate translation of questionnaire, the back translation was carried out. Two bilingual individuals were responsible for the translation. Translated the original questionnaire (English version) into the target language (Chinese version). In the present research, the questionnaires were done in double-side translation which called back translation (English to Chinese) to make sure the content of scale were very similar (Brislin, 1970). Researchers conducted pilot test after the revision of questionnaire. The reliability and validity of the scale were tested through the process to confirm whether the questionnaire was suitable for formal studies.
Table 3.1.
Background Condition of Experts and Peers
Expert 1 Expert 2 Peer 1 Peer 2
36
Pilot Test
Pilot studies helped researchers identify any problems or inconsistencies in the design of research tools before conducting formal studies (McBurney & White, 2010). Cronbach’s alpha was used to test the internal consistency of the questionnaire.
The questionnaire was mainly made up workplace well-being scale, WFC/FWC scale, mindful attention awareness scale, and the family supportive organization perceptions scale.
The researcher implemented a pilot test to examine the internal reliability. According to Tavakol, and Dennick (2011), the value of Cronbach’s alpha was acceptable and should be over than 0.7. The reliability test was finished by SPSS 22.0 after collecting data from 112 participants.
From Table 3.2., the Cronbach’s alpha of pilot test as bellowed. The dependent variable, workplace well-being was 0.949. The independent variables (work family conflict, family work conflict) were from the same source. The Cronbach’s alpha of work family conflict was 0.903.
The Cronbach’s alpha of family work conflict was 0.915. For the two moderators, mindfulness was a 15-item with one dimension and the Cronbach’s alpha value was 0.926; family supportive organization perceptions with 14 items under one dimension, and the Cronbach’s alpha value was 0.793.
Finally, almost every Cronbach’s alpha value were around 0.90 which mean the questionnaire had a very nice reliability.
37
Measurement
This section introduced the measurement methods in this study. The appendix provided a complete description of the questionnaire survey and measurement results.
Workplace Well-being
The study takes a 31-item workplace being scale to evaluate the workplace well-being, which scale was developed by Parker and Hyett (2011). There are four dimensions of the workplace well-being questionnaire which are Work Satisfaction, Organizational Respect for the Employee, Employer Care and Intrusion of Work into Private Life.
The definition of work satisfaction in the scale was obtaining the interviewees’
perceptions about the extent how they satisfied their jobs and on the other hand whether work Table 3.2.
Reliability of Pilot Test (N = 112)
Scale Dimension Number of
Items
Cronbach’s Alpha
Workplace Well-being 31 0.949
Work Satisfaction 10 0.936
Organizational Respect
Organization Perceptions 14 0.793
38
added the level of self-actualization, provided some objectives and meaning to life and improved their skills. The definition of organizational respect for the employee in the scale indicated that the interviewees estimated senior organization directions or supervisors were trustworthy, having moral values, and valued employees and treated them well.
The definition of employer care in the scale weighted to personal’s boss. Evaluating the direct boss were willing to care, listen and understand about the work concerns and employees’
opinion. The definition of intrusion of work into private life in the scale noted that whether employees were feeling overwhelmed at work to achieve the targets, and determined whether work affects their personal lives and whether it affects their self-esteem.
Each Pearson correlations value is r = 0.85, 0.83, 0.81, 0.78. Overall speaking, the Pearson correlations value of workplace well-being is 0.83. The example item “Does your work increase your sense of self-worth?” is from Work Satisfaction; “Do you feel content with the way your organization treats its employees?” is from Organizational Respect for the Employee;
“Is your boss caring?” is from Employer Care; “Does your work impact negatively on your self-esteem?” is from Intrusion of Work into Private Life. The participants respond on a 5-point Likert scale, from 0 (not at all) to 4 (extremely true).
39 Table 3.3.
Questions in Workplace Well-being
Dimension Question Items Cronbach’s α
value
Work Satisfaction
1. Is your work fulfilling?
0.85 2. Do your daily work activities give you a sense of
direction and meaning?
3. Does your work bring a sense of satisfaction?
4. Does your work increase your sense of self- worth?
5. Does your job allow you to recraft your job to suit your strengths?.
6. Does your work make you feel that, as a person, you are flourishing?
7. Do you feel capable and effective in your work on a day-to-day basis?
8. Does your work offer challenges to advance your skills?
9. Do you feel you have some level of independence at work?
10. Do you feel personally connected to your organization’s values?
Organizational Respect for the
Employee
1. In general terms, do you trust the senior people in your organization?
0.83 2. Do you believe in the principles by which your
organization operates?
3. Do you feel content with the way your organization treats its employees?
4. Do you feel that your organization respects the staff ?
5. How satisfied are you with your organization’s value system?
6. Compared with your organization’s ‘‘ideal values,’’ to what degree are actual work values positive?
7. Do people at your work believe in the worth of the organization ?
Employer Care
1. At a difficult time, would your boss be willing to lend an ear?
0.81 2. Is your boss caring?
3. Do you feel that your boss is empathic and understanding about your work concerns?
4. Does your boss treat you as you would like to be treated?
(continued)
40 Table 3.3. (continued)
Dimension Question Items Cronbach’s
α value
Employer Care
5. Does your boss shoulder some of your worries about work?
0.81 6. Do you feel your transactions with your boss
are, in general, positive?
7. Do you believe that your employer cares about his or her staff ’s well-being?
Intrusion of Work into Private Life
1. Does your work eat into your private life?
0.78 2. Do you feel stressed in organizing your work
time to meet demands?
3. Do you feel excessively pressured at work to meet targets?
4. After work, do you find it hard to wind down?
5. Do you find yourself thinking negatively about work outside of work hours?
6. Do you feel that you can separate yourself easily from your work when you leave for the day?(R)
7. Does your work impact negatively on your self-esteem?
41
Work Family Conflict / Family Work Conflict
The 10-item of work family conflict scale was adopted from Netemeyer et al. (1996).
The definitions of WFC and FWC in the scale were mentioned in the chapter one. According to the researchers’ study, it was the self-report survey with the Cronbach’s α coefficient value ranging from 0.83 to 0.89 and the average α value for WFC = 0.88, FWC = 0.86. All in all, this part of the scale was used to test work family conflict and family work conflict with each dimension having five questions, high consistency, and less loading on repliers with 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree).
Table 3.4.
Questions in Work Family Conflict / Family Work Conflict
Variables Question Items Cronbach’s
α value
5. Due to work-related duties, I have to make changes to my plans for family activities.
Family Work Conflict (FWC)
1. The demands of my family or spouse/partner interfere with work-related activities.
0.86 2. I have to put off doing things at work because of
demands on my time at home.
3. Things I want to do at work don't get done because of the demands of my family or spouse/partner.
4. My home life interferes with my responsibilities at work such as getting to work on time,
accomplishing daily tasks, and working overtime.
5. Family-related strain interferes with my ability to perform job-related duties.
42
Mindfulness
Mindfulness in this study was adopted from the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS) which was developed by Brown and Ryan (2003), however MacKillop and Anderson (2007) do the further verification process. There was no difference between these two questionnaires in both studies, but more samples were used to test.
In this research, mindfulness was defined as “the presence or absence of attention to, and awareness of, what is occurring in the present moment” (Brown and Ryan 2003, p. 824).
This study took a 15-item scale to access the mindfulness. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of mindfulness was 0.89, and it used a 6-point Likert scale (1 = almost always to 6 = almost never), the higher the score, the stronger the mindfulness is.
Table 3.5.
Questions in Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS)
Question Items Cronbach’s
α value 1. I could be experiencing some emotion and not be conscious of it until
sometime later.
0.89 2. I break or spill things because of carelessness, not paying attention, or
thinking of something else.
3. I find it difficult to stay focused on what’s happening in the present.
4. I tend to walk quickly to where I’m going without paying attention along the way.
5. I tend not to notice feelings of physical tension or discomfort until they really grab me.
6. I forget a person’s name almost as soon as I’ve been told it for the first time.
7. It seems I’m “running on automatic” without much awareness of what I’m doing.
8. I rush through activities without being really attentive to them.
9. I get so focused on the goal I want to achieve that I lost touch with what I am doing right now to get there.
(continued)
43 Table 3.5. (continued)
Question Items Cronbach’s
α value 10. I do jobs or tasks automatically, without being aware of what I’m
doing.
0.89 11. I find myself listening to someone with one ear, doing something else at
the same time.
12. I drive places on “automatic pilot” and then wonder why I went there.
13. I find myself preoccupied with the future or the past.
14. I find myself doing things without paying attention.
15. I snack without being aware that I’m eating.
Family Supportive Organization Perceptions
The questionnaire of family supportive organization perceptions (FSOP) with 14-item was produced by Allen (2001). The measurement of FSOP was comprised of a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree), moreover, there were 11 reversed questions. The higher score stated clearly that an employee considered himself or herself more optimistic. The Cronbach’s alpha of this scale was 0.91.
Table 3.6.
Questions in Family Supportive Organization Perceptions (FSOP)
Question Items Cronbach’s
α value 1. Work should be the primary priority in a person’s life. (R)
0.91 2. Long hours inside the office are the way to achieving advancement. (R)
3. It is best to keep family matters separate from work (R) 4. It is considered taboo to talk about life outside of work. (R)
5. Expressing involvement and interest in non-work matters is viewed as healthy.
6. Employees who are highly committed to their personal lives cannot be highly committed to their work. (R)
7. Attending to personal needs, such as taking time off for sick children is frowned upon. (R)
8. Employees should keep their personal problems at home. (R)
(continued)
44 Table 3.6. (continued)
Question Items Cronbach’s
α value 9. The way to advance in this company is to keep nonwork matters out of
the workplace. (R)
0.91 10. Individuals who take time off to attend to personal matters are not
committed to their work. (R)
11. It is assumed that the most productive employees are those who put their work before their family life. (R)
12. Employees are given ample opportunity to perform both their job and their personal responsibilities well.
13. Offering employees flexibility in completing their work is viewed as a strategic way of doing business.
14. The ideal employee is the one who is available 24 hours a day. (R)
Note. (R) indicates the item is reverse coded so that higher scores indicate more positive perceptions of the organization’s support for work/non-work balance.
Control Variable
The previous literature stated that workplace well-being might be affected by marital status (Proulx, Helms, & Buehler, 2007), gender (Hammer, Neal, Newsom, Brockwood, &
Colton, 2005) and children (Rothausen, 1999). As a consequence, to minimize the impact on the common method variance and elucidate the relationship among each variable, WFC/FWC, workplace well-being, mindfulness and family supportive organization perceptions, the present study controlled for these variables.
Marital Status
Proulx et al. (2007) stated that marital satisfaction was positively correlated with life satisfaction and individual well-being.
Gender
Past research contended that because today’s society was still a gender tendency society, most women were still anticipated to take on more responsibilities both at family and work domain (Hammer et al., 2005). Coding the man = 1, woman = 0.
45
Child
Family needs mainly include caring for young and middle-aged children, so the numbers of children were an objective indicator of the level of family demands (Rothausen, 1999).
Based on the above considerations from the past studies, this study took these factors as control variables.
Data Analysis
In the present study, IBM SPSS 23.0 and AMOS 23.0 were adopted and then took some analytical methods (e.g. Descriptive analysis, Pearson correlation analysis, Hierarchical Regression Analysis) to analyze the performing data. Taking confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to confirm the reliability and validity of measurement.
Descriptive Analysis
Descriptive statistics can allow the researcher to examine the whole process of descriptive statistics, for example, collecting data. The Frequency distribution includes the numbers and percentages displayed by demographic information such as gender, age, tenure, education degree and position level in this study. Moreover, work family conflict, family work conflict, workplace well-being, family supportive organization perceptions, mindfulness, and control variables were utilized to demonstrate the mean and standard deviation.
Pearson Correlation Analysis
Correlation could be interpreted as the relationship between two continuous variables with a linear relationship. The present study, the researcher expresses the degree of correlation by Pearson's correlation coefficient (Pearson’s r). As the degree of the correlation was strong, it can be inferred that the absolute value of Pearson’s r was positive and close to 1, on the