Page 1 of 14

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal – Vol. 11, No. 7

Publication Date: July 25, 2024

DOI:10.14738/assrj.117.17325.

Johari, F. S., Ahmad, S. N. A., Bashirun, S. N., Zolkapli, N. M., & Samudin, N. M. R. (2024). Flexible Work Arrangements, Job

Satisfaction and Family Satisfaction: The Spillover Effect of Work-Family Conflict. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal,

11(7). 274-287.

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

Flexible Work Arrangements, Job Satisfaction and Family

Satisfaction: The Spillover Effect of Work-Family Conflict

Farah Shazlin Johari

Faculty of Business and Management,

Universiti Teknologi MARA; Malacca

Siti Nurul Akma Ahmad

Faculty of Business and Management,

Universiti Teknologi MARA; Malacca

Siti Norashikin Bashirun

Faculty of Business and Management,

Universiti Teknologi MARA; Malacca

Nurhafizah Mohd Zolkapli

Faculty of Business and Management,

Universiti Teknologi MARA; Malacca

Nor Maslia Rasli Samudin

Faculty of Business and Management,

Universiti Teknologi MARA; Malacca

ABSTRACT

Since its beginning, the pandemic has forced many organizations to adopt new

norms, offering more flexible work arrangements. Yet, there is limited knowledge

on how these arrangements, particularly flextime, could affect the work-family

conflict (WFC) and its consequences on both job and family satisfaction. Despite

this, there has been limited research on the spillover effect of WFC, concentrating

on cross-domain effects on both job and family satisfaction in Eastern culture.

Hence, the aim of this study is to investigate the spillover effect of WFC on job and

family satisfaction among academicians from selected Malaysian public

universities. The web-based survey questionnaire was employed, and statistical

analyses were performed using SPSS software. Flextime was found to have a

significant negative association with both WIF and FIW. Furthermore, the findings

revealed that WIF has a stronger spillover effect on cross-domains, notably family

satisfaction. FIW has a greater impact on its own domain specificity, namely family

satisfaction. Thus, the study contributes to our understanding of the spillover effect

of WFC on cross-domains, particularly in Eastern contextual cultures, and helps to

provide additional insight into family-friend policies intended to reduce the

occurrence of WFC, leading to a better balance of work and personal

responsibilities.

Keywords: Flexible Work Arrangements, Work-Family Conflict, Job Satisfaction, Family

Satisfactions, Spillover Effect.

Page 2 of 14

275

Johari, F. S., Ahmad, S. N. A., Bashirun, S. N., Zolkapli, N. M., & Samudin, N. M. R. (2024). Flexible Work Arrangements, Job Satisfaction and Family

Satisfaction: The Spillover Effect of Work-Family Conflict. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 11(7). 274-287.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.117.17325

INTRODUCTION

Today, most organizations have changed their work arrangements to be more adaptable and

flexible in a competitive environment. Beginning with the Covid-19 pandemic, which has had a

significant impact on how people work, most organizations find it challenging to carry out their

routine operations, affecting a wide range of business processes [1]. The pandemic has not only

disrupted the entire operation, but it has also dramatically affected the workforce, ushering in

a new era of employment [2]. As such, most businesses are considering flexible work

arrangements (FWA) as an alternative to the new norm, leading to the shift of most jobs to

online and remote work.

Generally, FWA refers to work options that allow for flexibility in terms of “where” work is

completed (flexplace) and “when” work is completed (flextime) [3]. Some empirical evidence

consistently indicates that FWA is associated with improved work-life balance, job satisfaction,

and employee engagement [4, 5]. Furthermore, FWA is seen as an important factor in reducing

absenteeism and enhancing organizational productivity [6, 7]. Despite this, FWA, specifically

flextime, could also have a substantial impact on a higher level of work-family conflict since it

blurs the boundaries between work and family life, leading to increased interference between

these two domains [8, 9, 10].

On the other hand, WFC is often referred to as incompatible interferences between the

individual’s work and family roles [11]. Prior studies continuously addressed this notion using

two key indicators; work interference with family (WIF) and family interference with work

(FIW) [12, 13, 14]. And, WFC is not only contributing to poor job satisfaction, performance, and

well-being [15, 16] however, it also possesses the spillover effect on cross-domains such as life

and family satisfaction [17]. During the pandemic, most employees experienced great

challenges balancing work and family. Particularly, in the tertiary education sector, lectures and

tutorials have had to be moved online swiftly, resulting in most academicians shifting to new

norms in managing workloads [18]. Academicians who have been observed to work

extraordinarily long hours and late nights (including weekends and holidays) may be

negatively impacted by WFC [19, 20]. It is because, they have the inability to detach from work

[21] and have failed to fulfil both personal and professional responsibilities [22].

Therefore, our study adds three new perspectives to the existing literature. First, we contribute

to the current understanding of work-family conflict research by adding the effect of flexible

work arrangements on WFC during a pandemic outbreak, whereas prior research studied it

differently. Second, the current study investigates the spillover effect of WFC on both job

satisfaction and family satisfaction (i.e., cross-domains: work to family and family to work

domains), while previous studies have largely looked at the effect of WFC on work-related

domains exclusively. Finally, the study sheds light on perspectives from an Eastern contextual

culture where research on the spillover effect of WFC is limited, particularly among Malaysian

academicians that emphasize high collectivist and power distance values that differ from

Western individualistic and low power distance cultures [23].

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

Theoretically, we draw on boundary theory, which posits that individuals create discrete

boundaries between their work and family domains to deal with the demands of each sphere

[24]. This distinction enables individuals to maintain a sense of balance and separation

Page 3 of 14

276

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ) Vol. 11, Issue 7, July-2024

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

between the multiple roles they occupy (such as work and family roles). When there are clear

boundaries between work and family roles, flexible work arrangements (FWA) seem to offer

employees more control over their time and work environment. This situation enables

employees to better manage their responsibilities in both domains, and resulting FWA helps to

lessen work-family conflict among them. However, if not managed appropriately, FWA can

cause work to spill into family time where there are no obvious boundaries.

Furthermore, the boundary theory acknowledges that these boundaries can be permeable,

resulting in spillover effects from work to non-work domains. The spillover process outlines

how the intra-individuals transmit strains or emotions across domains [25], with transmission

occurring at work potentially spilling over to the family domains. So that, when boundaries

between work and family roles are permeable, work is more likely to interfere with family

responsibilities, and vice versa. In a nutshell, the spillover process describes how expectations

from one role frequently result in poor performance and low satisfaction in other roles.

Following the concept of cross-domain effects [26, 27], we argue that WIF is highly connected

with family-related outcomes, whereas FIW is more strongly associated with work-related

outcomes than family-related domains.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Flexible Work Arrangements and Work-Family Conflict

As changing patterns in work environments necessitate greater flexibility, the FWA is widely

acknowledged as a new norm for working arrangements, leading to favourable outcomes for

both individuals and organizations. FWA provides employees with flexibility in how, when, and

where they work, including hybrid work, telecommuting, a compressed workweek, and

flextime. A meta-analysis found that FWA is associated with fewer physical health issues, less

somatic symptoms, and reduced absenteeism, suggesting that FWA can help employees

maintain their health [28].

Despite this, some studies have extensively investigated the effect of FWA on WFC, notably in

Western literature [29, 30]. The uneven boundaries of FWA when working remotely from the

office have caused conflict among family members. Even though some scholars claim that FWA

does not directly affect WFC [8], others argue that FWA such as telecommuting, taking work

home, having flexible hours, and taking a family leave are negatively associated with WFC

among employees [31, 32]. To support this notion, FWA is more highly associated with WFC,

specifically work interference with family (WIF), than family interference with work (FIW) [13,

14]. Empirical evidence confirms that flextime has a stronger relationship with WIF [33]

compared to its FIW counterparts [12, 13].

Nevertheless, the FWA is considered uncommon in Eastern working cultures, particularly in

Malaysia. Even though some organizations sought to establish FWA, especially at the beginning

of the pandemic, flextime appears to be a more viable alternative than flexplace arrangements.

Employers may prefer flextime because it provides greater control and effective management.

To date, studies on FWA and WFC have primarily concentrated on traditional working

arrangements [33], with few studies focusing on FWA, specifically flextime, during a pandemic

outbreak involving academicians with an Eastern cultural background. Therefore, we propose

the following hypotheses:

Page 4 of 14

277

Johari, F. S., Ahmad, S. N. A., Bashirun, S. N., Zolkapli, N. M., & Samudin, N. M. R. (2024). Flexible Work Arrangements, Job Satisfaction and Family

Satisfaction: The Spillover Effect of Work-Family Conflict. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 11(7). 274-287.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.117.17325

• Hypothesis 1: flextime arrangements negatively associated to work interference with

family

• Hypothesis 2: flextime arrangements negatively associated to family interference with

work

Work-Family Conflict, Job Satisfaction and Family Satisfaction

Work and family conflict (WFC) are consistently interrelated regardless of the nature of work

[34] and ultimately affect the imbalance of fulfilment between employees, family members, and

organizations. WFC refers to incompatible interferences between the individual’s work and

family roles [11]. Western scholars reveal that conflicts between work and family will arise

when employees spend too much time on the job [35]. These conflicts subsequently result in

significant influences on the spillover process from work (e.g., performance, turnover,

emotional exhaustion, and well-being) to non-work-related domains (e.g., life and family

satisfaction) [17].

As previously mentioned, the literature has widely discussed two types of WFC; WIF and FIW,

each having its own set of occurrences and outcomes [36, 37]. Both WIF and FIW were classified

as time-based, strain-based, and behavior-based [38]. Time-based conflict occurs when the

time spent on one function makes it difficult to participate in another, such as working overtime

or long hours, which affects family time allocation [39, 40]. While strain-based conflict occurs

when one role’s function interferes with another, particularly when work-related weariness

during the day impairs an individual’s capacity to play with children at home. Finally, behavior- based conflict develops when particular behaviors necessitated in one function do not match

expectations in another [38, 39], such as a leadership approach that is not feasible at home

while engaging with family members.

Particularly when individuals perceive a high level of WIF or FIW, their energy and effort are

reduced, and they may then become aggrieved and create troubles for the job itself or the

organization [41]. WIF is a common issue among employees and has a significant spillover

impact on family life compared to FIW [42]. WIF often causes conflict between work and family

[43], resulting from greater work stressors [44, 45, 46]. Frequently, work stressors have a

different impact on WIF, especially involving working women [47], as they have tight schedule

flexibility or job autonomy.

Contradictory, Zhao et al. [11] claim that FIW is considered the main barrier among employees

to achieving career success as they perceive family roles as non-negotiable. Family-related

issues brought into the workplace often trigger counterproductive work behavior, which can

harm job performance and reduce job satisfaction [14]. In this sense, both of the above- mentioned situations empirically indicated that the spillover effects are highly associated with

WIF and non-work-related domains, such as life and family satisfaction. While the spillover

effect between FIW is highly associated with work-related domains. Despite this, cultural

beliefs may have a significant influence on how work and family responsibilities are allocated

[48]. Therefore, the current study suggests the following hypotheses:

• Hypothesis 3: WIF has a stronger negative association with family satisfaction than job

satisfaction

Page 5 of 14

278

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ) Vol. 11, Issue 7, July-2024

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

• Hypothesis 4: FIW has a stronger negative association with job satisfaction than family

satisfaction

Figure 1: Proposed Framework

METHODS

Sample and Procedure

The current study used a cross-sectional research design involving full-time academicians from

selected Malaysia public universities. Using a web-based survey, this study employed a

purposive approach because participation rates among Malaysians are very low if using other

sampling approaches. Out of 250 web-based surveys distributed via email, 155 academicians

returned the questionnaires, obtaining a total response rate of 62%. In general, most

participants were female (89.6%), with most aged between 35 – 39 (38%) and 30 – 34 (24%)

years. The majority of participants were married (76%) with most of them having 2 (19.8%)

and 3 (20.8%) children respectively.

Measures

Flexible work arrangements. Flextime arrangements were assessed using four-item scale from

Hyland [49]. A sample question is “I change the time that I begin and end my workday due to

personal preferences.” All items were used a five-point Likert scale where 1 = four or five times

per week, 2 = between one and three times per month, 3 = once or twice per month, 4 = less

than once per month and 5 = never.

Work-family conflict. WFC consist of two categories, namely Work-Interference with Family

(WIF) and Family-Interference with Work (FIW). WFC were assessed using six-item scale from

Mathews, Kath and Barness-Farrell [50], an abbreviated version of Carlson, Kacmar and

Williams’s [38] multidimensional measure of WFC. Sample questions for WIF and FIW are “I

have to miss family activities due to the amount of time I must spend on work responsibilities”

and “I have to miss work activities due to the amount of time I must spend on family

responsibilities respectively.” All measured were used a five-point Likert scale where 1 =

strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree.

Page 6 of 14

279

Johari, F. S., Ahmad, S. N. A., Bashirun, S. N., Zolkapli, N. M., & Samudin, N. M. R. (2024). Flexible Work Arrangements, Job Satisfaction and Family

Satisfaction: The Spillover Effect of Work-Family Conflict. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 11(7). 274-287.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.117.17325

Job Satisfaction. Job satisfactions were assessed using the traditional three-item scale from

Cammann, Fichman, Jenkins and Klesh [51]. All three items were measured using a five-point

Likert scale where 1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree. A sample question for job

satisfactions is “In general, I like working here.”

Family Satisfaction. Family satisfactions were assessed using three-item scale from Brough et

al. [52]. All three items were measured using a five-point Likert scale where 1 = strongly

disagree and 5 = strongly agree. A sample question for family satisfaction is “In general, I like

my family.”

Common Method Variance

In this study, Harman’s single-factor test was used to assess common method variance. The

statistical remedy was carried out to validate that the common method bias did not pose a

significant threat to the measured data. In conducting research based on self-reported data of

the same person, variations are likely to be problematic [53]. Though Brough and Boase [54]

claimed that self-report is an appropriate research design for evaluating employees’ subjective

experiences with occupational stress, the single-source data and its potential bias remain a

source of concern.

All the measurement items of every construct (flextime, work interference with family, family

interference with work, job satisfaction, and family satisfaction) were included in the unrotated

principal component factor analysis. According to Podsakoff et al. [53], evidence of common

method bias appears when a single factor emerges from the analysis or when one general

component accounts for the majority of the covariance. Common method bias is a significant

concern when a single latent component accounts for more than half of the total variation of

the measurements. In this research, the single-factor model accounted for just 24% of the

overall variation. In short, multiple scale components in this investigation did not load onto a

single common factor, implying that common method bias was not a substantial threat in this

observed data.

Statistical Analyses

All statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics version 28. Pearson bivariate

correlations were performed and preceded the overall analyses. Several regression analyses

were performed for each direct path, including regression of the dependent variable on both

predictors.

RESULTS

Table 1 presents mean, standard deviations, and correlations between measures involving

flextime, WIF, FIW, job satisfaction, and family satisfaction. We used gender and marital status

as control variables in the study. As shown in Table 1, only marital status had a significant

relationship with flextime arrangements and FIW.

In Hypothesis 1 (H1), we predicted that flextime arrangements would have a negative

relationship with both WIF and FIW. As shown in Table 2 (Model 1), we found that flextime

arrangements were negatively related to WIF (β = -.29, SE = .12, p < .05). Thus, H1 was

supported. In Hypothesis 2 (H2), we expected that flextime arrangements would have a

negative relationship with FIW. The result shows that (see Model 2), flextime arrangements

Page 7 of 14

280

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ) Vol. 11, Issue 7, July-2024

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

were negatively related to FIW (β = -.33, SE = .11, p < .01). Thus, it indicates that H2 was

supported.

With reference to Hypothesis 3 (H3), which proposes that WIF has a stronger negative

association with family satisfaction than job satisfaction. From the results, we found that WIF

has a greater negative spillover effect on family satisfaction (Model 7; β = -.16, SE = .06, p <

.001), than job satisfaction. Therefore, H3 was supported. While Hypothesis 4 suggested that

FIW had a more significant negative association with job satisfaction than family satisfaction.

However, the results indicate that FIW had a stronger spillover effect on the same domain,

which is family satisfaction FIW (Model 8; β = -.14, SE = .06, p < .01), indicating that H4 was

rejected.

DISCUSSION

The current study aims to gain a better understanding of how flexible work arrangements

(FWA) during a pandemic outbreak affect both WIF and FIW, resulting in a spillover effect on

cross-domains, including work-related and non-work-related aspects. We contend that WIF

had a greater spillover effect on non-work domains (i.e., family satisfaction) than on work- related domains (i.e., job satisfaction). While FIW has a greater spillover effect on job

satisfaction than on family satisfaction. Despite a plethora of WFC research, the study was

undertaken during a pandemic among academicians from Eastern contextual cultures in order

to better understand the spillover effects of WFC on both job satisfaction and family

satisfaction. Even though the overall findings appear to be consistent with previous studies in

Western literature, some of them are conflicting and correspond to Eastern cultures.

With regard to direct hypotheses, we found that flextime arrangements have a negative

association with both WIF and FIW. These findings corroborated prior studies indicating that

high levels of flextime arrangements are significantly associated with lower levels of WIF [33,

55, 56, 57] and FIW [55, 57], respectively. However, we found interesting findings in which

flextime arrangements have a stronger negative effect on FIW than WIF. This indicates that

Eastern societies often incorporate both work and non-work domains, as they believe work is

necessary for the survival of the family. Then, family members are probably more

understanding if work is carried out at home, implying that the family domain is more adaptive

than the work domain [37].

Table 1: Means, standard deviations and Pearson bivariate correlations

Variables α M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Gender - 1.9 0.31 1

Marital status - 1.78 0.44 0.063 1

Flextime 0.84 3 0.75 -0.08 -.214* 1

WIF 0.89 3.33 0.89 0.061 0.139 -.244* 1

FIW 0.97 3.01 0.88 0.146 .259* -.335** .642** 1

JS 0.97 4.23 0.89 -0.044 -0.112 .239* -.216* -.247* 1

FS 0.85 4.61 0.44 0.006 0.005 0.088 -.322** -.261* .563** 1

Note: +p <.10 * p < .05, ** p < .01, ***p < .001, JS = job satisfaction, FS = family satisfaction

Page 8 of 14

281

Johari, F. S., Ahmad, S. N. A., Bashirun, S. N., Zolkapli, N. M., & Samudin, N. M. R. (2024). Flexible Work Arrangements, Job Satisfaction and Family

Satisfaction: The Spillover Effect of Work-Family Conflict. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 11(7). 274-287.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.117.17325

Table 2: Direct effects between variables

Variables WIF FIW JS JS JS FS FS FS

Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5 Model 6 Model 7 Model 8

Gender .11(.29) .32(.74) -.04(.17) -.05(.17) -.12(.17) .02(.15) .03(.14) .06(.15)

Marital

status

.18(.21) .38(.20) + -.08(.12) -.10(.12) -.61(.12) .02(.11) .05(.10) .08(.10)

Flextime -.26(.12)

*

-.33(.11)

**

.16(.07)

*

.06(.06)

WIF -.13(.06)

*

-.16(.05)

***

FIW -.14(.06)

*

-.14(.05)

**

R2 0.263 0.401 0.248 0.293 0.252 0.233 0.327 0.275

∆ R2 0.069 0.161 0.061 0.086 0.064 0.054 0.107 0.076

Note: The first value is the unstandardized parameter estimate; the value in parentheses is the standard error

(SE); +p <.10 * p < .05, ** p < .01, ***p < .001, JS = job satisfaction, FS = family satisfaction

Concerning the spillover effect, the study confirmed that WIF has a greater impact on family

satisfaction than job satisfaction. Thus, these findings are consistent with prior meta-analyses

that contend that WFC outcomes, particularly WIF, have stronger spillover effects on cross- domains such as family satisfaction [26, 27]. Despite a plethora of research on the effect of WIF

on specific domains, the findings suggest that the attribution perspective, in which individuals

favor contributing more negative effects to the domain where the interferences come from [58],

could also shift in the opposite direction [17]. We believe that, when employees have a heavy

workload at work, it can dramatically blur the boundaries between work and home life,

potentially leading to family dissatisfaction.

On the other hand, our study found an unexpected finding in which FIW is more prevalent in its

own specific domain, family satisfaction. Based on the assumption of a cross-domain effect,

work-related domains contribute a substantial degree of variance in family satisfaction,

whereas family-related domains contribute a significant degree of variation in job satisfaction

[26]. So that, FIW should have a greater spillover impact on job satisfaction, but our findings

indicate otherwise. Despite this, numerous studies have consistently shown that FIW has a

greater impact on family satisfaction, implying that it spills over on domain specificity [59, 60].

Indeed, some studies of Eastern culture suggest that Asian employees typically place the

priorities of family over individual interests, with work serving as a trade for family is

continued existence rather than pursuing individual career advancements [61, 62].

RESEARCH AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Despite a plethora of research investigating the effect of WFC on its domain specificity, such as

work-to-work versus family-to-family-related outcomes, this study provides a different

perspective on the spillover effect of WFC on both outcomes. In terms of theoretical

contribution, the current findings suggest that both WIF and FIW are consistently regarded as

mechanisms that link to spillover processes across multiple domains (i.e., cross-domains),

including job satisfaction and family satisfaction.

Even though the study’s findings support the boundary theory, in which academicians are more

likely to establish boundaries between work and family responsibilities during the pandemic,

Page 9 of 14

282

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ) Vol. 11, Issue 7, July-2024

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

it appears that only WIF can provide the spillover effect on cross-domain, particularly family

satisfaction. While FIW only considers the spillover effect in specific domains, which indicates

that cultural values in Eastern societies, have a substantial impact on family satisfaction since

they are more family-oriented due to strong collectivist attitudes. Thus, the study contributes

to existing knowledge on the spillover effect, particularly in collectivist cultures that may differ

from Western societies with individualistic values.

Furthermore, the study offers several practical implications for the organization in terms of

developing a family-friends policy, which can help policymakers design a more accommodating

work environment. Better flexible work arrangements, such as flextime or flexplace, could help

to lessen WFC challenges and, subsequently, help employees manage their work stress more

effectively while fulfilling both professional and personal responsibilities.

LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RECOMMENDATIONS

The result of this study should be considered in light of several limitations. First, the response

rate from the academicians’ survey was lower than expected, limiting the generalizability of the

findings. A larger sample size would have allowed for a more robust result. Second, the current

study relies on cross-sectional data to make inferences about employee behavior and its effect

on job satisfaction and family satisfaction. Despite the fact that we used statistical remedies to

compensate for common method variance for the current study, this limitation should be

counterbalanced by using a better research design, such as a longitudinal design. Third, this

study used commonly self-reported nature of data. Following research could avoid this problem

by collecting the variables independently, such as from their children, spouse and colleague by

using multisource data.

Future research might focus on other outcomes such as work productivity; turn over, intention,

and mental health effects among academicians in addition to the typical outcomes of job

satisfaction. In addition, future research could replicate this study using longitudinal design

data that would have the advantage of testing for causality, limiting inherent bias from cross- sectional studies, and testing the mediated models [63]. Additionally, the study also opens

avenues for future research, such as the need to explore other variables or other potential

mediators that could help to determine the job and family satisfaction of academics and to

investigate the issue of WFC from different position levels in university.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the aim of our study was to investigate the spillover effect of WFC within the

association of FWA on job satisfaction and family satisfaction among academicians during the

pandemic. Hence, this study has made significant contributions to existing knowledge on the

spillover effect of WFC on cross-domains, notably in Eastern societies. Academicians play an

important role in delivering their lectures via online approaches; thus, it is critical to

understand if they are satisfied with their commitment and if WFC is considered a negative

issue that influences their job satisfaction and family satisfaction. Finally, the study’s findings

are intended to provide more guidance to family-friend policies aimed at reducing the

occurrence of WFC, thereby leading to a better balance of work and personal commitments.

Page 10 of 14

283

Johari, F. S., Ahmad, S. N. A., Bashirun, S. N., Zolkapli, N. M., & Samudin, N. M. R. (2024). Flexible Work Arrangements, Job Satisfaction and Family

Satisfaction: The Spillover Effect of Work-Family Conflict. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 11(7). 274-287.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.117.17325

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors would like to extend their gratitude to Universiti Teknologi MARA, Melaka for

funding this research through TEJA Grant 2020 (GDT2020-8) which has funded this research

project.

References

[1]. Yildzihan, H., Hosouli, S., Yilmaz, S. E., Gomes, J., Pandey, C., Alkharusi, T. (2023). Alternative work

arrangements: Individual, organizational and environmental outcomes. Heliyon, 9(11), 1-16.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e21899.

[2]. Adecco Group (2020, July 2). Resetting Normal: Defining the New Era of Work. The Adecco Group.

https://www.adeccogroup.com/future-of-work/latest-research/reset-normal

[3]. Rau, B. L., & Hyland, M. M. (2002). Role conflict and flexible work arrangements: The effects on applicant

attraction. Personnel Psychology, 55(1), 111–136. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2002.tb00105.

[4]. Gudep, V. K., (2019). An Empirical Study of the Relationships between the Flexible Work Systems (FWS),

Organizational Commitment (OC), Work Life Balance (WLB) and Job Satisfaction (JS) for the Teaching Staff

in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). International Journal of Management, 10 (5), 11–27.

[5]. Weideman, M., & Hofmeyr, K. B. (2020). The influence of flexible work arrangements on employee

engagement: An exploratory study. SA Journal of Human Resource Management, 18(1), 1-18.

[6]. John, W. (2017). Flexible working hours and organizational productivity: Exploring the potential linkage.

AIMA Journal of Management and Research, 11(4), 1-7.

[7]. Possenriede, D. (2011). The effects of flexible working time arrangements on absenteeism–The Dutch

case. Utrecht, Netherlands: Utrecht University School of Economics.

[8]. Jostell, D., & Hemlin, S. (2018). After hours teleworking and boundary management: Effects on work- family conflict. Work, 60(3), 475-483. https://doi.org/ 10.3233/WOR-182748

[9]. Yu, K. (2017). Schedule control, work interference with family, and emotional exhaustion: a reciprocal

moderated mediation model. Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology, 11, 23.

https://doi.org/10.1017/prp.2017.3

[10]. Shockley, K. M., & Allen, T. D. (2015). Deciding between work and family: An episodic approach. Personnel

Psychology, 68(2), 283-318.

[11]. Zhao, X., Wang, J., Law, R., & Fan, X. (2020). A meta-analytic model on the role of organizational support in

work-family conflict and employee satisfaction. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality

Management, 32(12), 3767-3786. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-05-2020-0371

[12]. Higgins, C. Duxbury, L., & Julien, M. (2014). The relationship between work arrangements and work family

conflict. Work, 48, 69–81. https://doi.org/ 10.3233/WOR-141859

[13]. Shockley, K. M., & Allen, T. D. (2007). When flexibility helps: another looks at the availability of flexible

work arrangements and work-family conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 71(3), 479-493.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2007.08.006

[14]. Greenhaus, J. H. & Beutell, N. J. (1985). Sources of conflict between work and family roles. Academy of

Management Review, 10(1), 76-88. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1985.4277352

Page 11 of 14

284

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ) Vol. 11, Issue 7, July-2024

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

[15]. Medina-Garrido, J. A., Biedma-Ferrer, J. M., & Ramos-Rodríguez, A. R. (2017). Relationship between work- family balance, employee well-being and job performance. Academia Revista Latinoamericana de

Administración, 30(1), 40-58. https://doi.org/10.1108/ARLA-08-2015-0202

[16]. Ribeiro, N., Gomes, D., Oliveira, A. R., & Dias Semedo, A. S. (2023). The impact of the work-family conflict

on employee engagement, performance, and turnover intention. International Journal of Organizational

Analysis, 31(2), 533-549. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-02-2021-2646

[17]. Warokka A., & Febrilia I. (2015). Work Family conflict and job performance: Lesson from a southeast

Asian emerging market, Journal of southeast Asian research.

[18]. Rudolph, J., Tan, S., Crawford, J. & Butler, H. K. (2023). Perceived Quality of Online Learning during COVID- 19 in Higher Education in Singapore: Perspectives from Students, Lecturers, and Academic Leaders.

Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 22 (1), 171-191. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s10671-022-

09325-0

[19]. Raiden, A. & Räisänen, C. (2013) Striving to achieve it all: men and work-family-life balance in Sweden and

the UK. Construction Management and Economics, 31(8), 899-91.

https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2013.802364

[20]. Solomon, C. R. (2011). Sacrificing at the altar of tenure: Assistant professors’ work/life management. The

Social Science Journal, 48(2), 335–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2010.11.006

[21]. Santos G. G. (2014). Narratives about work and family life among Portuguese academics. Gender, Work &

Organization, 22(1), 1-15.

[22]. Sallee, M., Ward, K., & Wolf-Wendel, L. (2016). Can anyone have it all? Gendered views on parenting and

academic careers. Innovative Higher Education, 41(3), 187-202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-015-

9345-4

[23]. Hofstede, G. and Hofstede, G.J. (2005) Culture and Organizations—Software of the Mind: Intercultural

Cooperation and its Importance for Survival. 2nd Edition, McGraw Hill, New York.

[24]. Liu, J., Kwan, H. K., Lee, C., and Hui, C. (2013). Work-to-family spillover effects of workplace ostracism: The

role of work-home segmentation preferences. Human Resource Management, 52, 75–93.

https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21513

[25]. Westman, M. (2001). Stress and Strain Crossover. Human Relations, 54(6), 717-751.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726701546002

[26]. Ford, M. T., Heinen, B. A., & Langkamer, K. L. (2007). Work and family satisfaction and conflict: A meta- analysis of cross-domain relations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(1), 57–80.

https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.1.57

[27]. Frone, M. R., Russell, M., & Cooper, M. L. (1992). Antecedents and outcomes of work-family conflict:

Testing a model of the work-family interface. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(1), 65–78.

https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.77.1.65

[28]. Shifrin, N. V., & Michel, J. S. (2021). Flexible work arrangements and employee health: A meta-analytic

review. Work & Stress, 36(1), 60–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2021.1936287

[29]. Reimann, M. (2023). Working from home during the COVID-19 pandemic: lessons learned about the

relationship between flexible work and work–family conflict. In Flexible Work and the Family, Emerald

Publishing Limited. pp. 31-67.

Page 12 of 14

285

Johari, F. S., Ahmad, S. N. A., Bashirun, S. N., Zolkapli, N. M., & Samudin, N. M. R. (2024). Flexible Work Arrangements, Job Satisfaction and Family

Satisfaction: The Spillover Effect of Work-Family Conflict. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 11(7). 274-287.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.117.17325

[30]. Schooreel, T., & Verbruggen, M. (2016). Use of family-friendly work arrangements and work–family

conflict: Crossover effects in dual-earner couples. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 21(1), 119.

https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039669

[31]. Min-Kyoung, R., Soo, K. P., & Chung-Kwon, L. (2020). Pathways from workplace flexibility to turnover

intention: Role of work–family conflict, family–work conflict, and job satisfaction. International Journal of

Social Welfare, John Wiley & Sons, 29(1), 51-61.

[32]. Breaugh, J. A., & Frye, N. K. (2008). Work-family conflict: The importance of family-friendly employment

practices and family-supportive supervisors. Journal of Business and Psychology, 22(4), 345–353.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-008-9081-1

[33]. Allen, T. D., Johnson, R. C., Kiburz, K. M. & Shockley, K. M. (2013). Work-family conflict and flexible work

arrangements: Deconstructing flexibility. Personnel Psychology, 66, 345-376.

https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12012

[34]. Winter T., Roos E., Rahkonen O., Martikainen, & Lahelma E. (2006). Work family conflicts and self-rated

health among middle aged municipal employees in Finland. International Journal of Behavioral medicine,

13, 276-285. https://doi.org/ 10.1207/s15327558ijbm1304_2

[35]. Bruck C. S., Allen T. D., & Spector P. E. (2002). The relation between work family conflict and job

satisfaction, Journal of Vocational behavior, 60, 336-353. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.2001.1836

[36]. Frone, M. R., Russell, M., & Cooper, M. L. (1997). Antecedents and outcomes of work-family conflict: testing

a model of the work-family interface. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 65-78. https://doi.org/

10.1037/0021-9010.77.1.65

[37]. Gutek, B. A., Searle, S., & Klepa, L. (1991). Rational versus gender role explanations for work-family

conflict. Journal of applied psychology, 76(4), 560.

[38]. Carlson, D. S., Kacmar, K. M., &Williams, L.J. (2000). Construction and initial validation of a

multidimensional measure of work-family conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 56, 249-276.

https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1999.1713

[39]. Greenhaus, J. H., & Beutell, N. J. (1985). Sources and conflict between work and family roles. The Academy

of Management Review, 10(1), 76–88. https://doi.org/10.2307/258214

[40]. Hoobler, J. M., Hu, J. & Wilson, M. (2010). Do workers who experience conflict between the work and

family domains hit a ‘glass ceiling?’ a meta-analytic examination. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 77(3),

481-494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2010.07.001.

[41]. Conte, J. M., Aasen, B., Jacobson, C., O’Loughlin, C., & Toroslu, L. (2019). Investigating relationships among

polychronicity, work–family conflict, job satisfaction, and work engagement. Journal of Management

Psychology, 34, 459–473. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-01-2018-0046

[42]. Frone M. R. (2003). Work family balance. Occupational Health Psychology, 1, 143-162.

[43]. Eby, L. T., Casper W. J., Lockwood A., Bordeux C., & Brinley A. (2006). Work and Family Research: Content

analysis and review of the literature. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66, 124-197.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2003.11.003

[44]. Goh C. F., Chan L.K., Tan O. K., & Choi S. L. (2015). Work family conflict on job satisfaction: Moderating or

direct effect of social support exist IT professionals. International Journal of Human Resource Studies, 7(1),

170-187.

Page 13 of 14

286

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ) Vol. 11, Issue 7, July-2024

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

[45]. Nielson T. R., Carlson D. S., & Lankau M. J., (2005). The supportive mentor as a means of reducing work

family conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 59, 364-381. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.2001.1806

[46]. Bolino, M. C., & Turnley W. H. (2005). The personal cost of citizenship behavior: the relationship between

individual initiative and role overload, job stress and work family conflict, Journal of Applied Physcology,

90, 740-748.

[47]. Stevens, D. P., Minnotte, K. L., Mannon, S. E. and Kiger, G., 2007. Examining the neglected side of the work- family interface antecedents of positive and negative family-to-work spillover. Journal of Family Issues,

28(2), pp. 242–262.

[48]. Trompenaars, F., & Hampden-Turner, C. (1998). Riding the Waves of Culture: Understanding Cultural

Diversity in Global Business (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

[49]. Hyland, M. M. (2000). Flexibility in work arrangements: How availability, preferences and use affect

business outcomes. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Toronto, ON.

[50]. Matthews, R. A., Kath, L. M., & Barnes-Farrell, J. L. (2010). A Short, Valid, Predictive Measure of Work- Family Conflict: Item Selection and Scale Validation. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 15, 75.

https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017443

[51]. Cammann, C., Fichman, M., Jenkins, D., & Klesh, J. (1979). The Michigan Organisational Assessment

Questionnaire. Unpublished manuscript, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

[52]. Brough, P., O’Driscoll, M. P., & Kalliath, T. J. (2005). The ability of family friendly organizational resources

to predict work-family conflict and job and family satisfaction. Stress and Health, 21, 223-234.

https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.1059

[53]. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in

behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879

[54]. Brough, P., & Boase, A. (2019). Occupational stress management in the legal profession: Development,

validation, and assessment of a stress‐management instrument. Australian Journal of Psychology, 71(3),

273–284. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajpy.12244

[55]. Christensen, K. L., & Staines, G. L. (1990). Schedule flexibility: a viable solution to work-family conflict?

Journal of Family Issues, 11, 455-476. https://doi.org/10.1177/01925139001100400

[56]. Golden, T. D., Veiga, J. F., & Simsek, Z. (2006). Telecommuting’s differential impact on work-family conflict:

Is there no place like home? Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 1340–1350. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-

9010.91.6.1340

[57]. Kinman, G., & Jones, F. (2008). Effort-reward imbalance, over-commitment and work-life conflict: testing

an expanded model. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23, 236-251. https://doi.org/

10.1108/02683940810861365

[58]. Amstad, F. T., Meier, L. L., Fasel, U., Elfering, A., & Semmer, N. K. (2011). A meta-analysis of work-family

conflict and various outcomes with a special emphasis on cross-domain versus matching-domain

relations. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 16(2), 151-69. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022170

[59]. Jahan, P. T., Akter, M. M., Asadujjaman, M., Arani, M., & Billal, M. M. (2022). Impacts of work-family role

conflict on job and life satisfaction: a comparative study among doctors, engineers and university

teachers. PSU Research Review. https://doi.org/10.1108/PRR-10-2021-0058

Page 14 of 14

287

Johari, F. S., Ahmad, S. N. A., Bashirun, S. N., Zolkapli, N. M., & Samudin, N. M. R. (2024). Flexible Work Arrangements, Job Satisfaction and Family

Satisfaction: The Spillover Effect of Work-Family Conflict. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 11(7). 274-287.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.117.17325

[60]. Lu, L., & Kao, S. F. (2013). The reciprocal relations of pressure, work/family interference, and role

satisfaction: Evidence from a longitudinal study in Taiwan. Human Resource Management, 52(3), 353-373.

https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21532

[61]. Aryee, S., Fields, D., & Luk, V. (1999). A cross-cultural test of a model of the work-family interface. Journal

of Management, 25(4), 491-511. https://doi.org.10.1177/014920639902500402

[62]. Yang, N., Chen, C.C., Choi, J., & Zou, Y. (2000). Sources of work-family conflict: a Sino-U.S. comparison of the

effects of work and family demands. Academy of Management Journal, 43(1), 113-123.

https://doi.org/10.2307/1556390

[63]. Aguinis, H., Edwards, J. R., & Bradley, K. J. (2017). Improving Our Understanding of Moderation and

Mediation in Strategic Management Research. Organizational Research Methods, 20(4), 665-685.

https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428115627498