Measuring the positive side of the work–family interface: Development and validation of a work–family enrichment scale

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2005.02.002Get rights and content

Abstract

Based on current conceptualizations of enrichment, or the positive side of the work–family interface, a multi-dimensional measure of work–family enrichment is developed and validated using five samples. The final 18 item measure consists of three dimensions from the work to family direction (development, affect, and capital) and three dimensions from the family to work direction (development, affect, and efficiency). The validity of the scale was established by assessing the content adequacy, dimensionality, reliability, factor structure invariance, convergent validity, divergent validity, and its relationship to work and family correlates.

Introduction

A growing number of work–family researchers are calling for attention to the positive side of the work–family interface (Barnett and Hyde, 2001, Frone, 2003, Hammer, 2003, Parasuraman and Greenhaus, 2002). Work–family enrichment is one construct representing how work and family benefit each other (Greenhaus & Powell, in press). The fundamental thinking behind enrichment is that work and family each provide individuals with resources such as enhanced esteem, income, and other benefits that may help the individual better perform across other life domains (Barnett and Hyde, 2001, Friedman and Greenhaus, 2000; Greenhaus & Powell, in press). Initial evidence suggests that synergies between work and family exist (Barnett and Hyde, 2001, Rankin, 1993), and that these synergies are distinct from incompatibilities or work–family conflicts (Grzywacz and Butler, in press, Grzywacz and Marks, 2000a, Grzywacz and Marks, 2000b, Kirchmeyer, 1992, Kirchmeyer, 1993, Wayne et al., 2004). Unfortunately, relative to conflict, enrichment remains conceptually and empirically underdeveloped (Frone, 2003).

Greenhaus and Powell (in press), recently provided a conceptual foundation for the enrichment construct. It is both feasible and necessary to develop self-report measures of enrichment just as it was for work–family conflict (Greenhaus & Powell, in press), and other scholars have argued that this construct awaits the same degree of empirical research as work–family conflict (Frone, 2003). As of yet, however, this cannot be accomplished because no well-developed and validated measure of the construct exists. Related concepts such as positive spillover (Kirchmeyer, 1992, Sumer and Knight, 2001) have been measured, but as we elaborate later, these measures suffer from improper development or incomplete validation and do not capture the complexity of enrichment (Grzywacz and Bass, 2003, Wayne et al., 2004). Thus, scale development and construct validation work is a much needed step in the work–family literature so that researchers will be able to hone emerging ideas about enrichment and advance more comprehensive theories of the work–family interface. Our studies are designed to fill this void by developing and validating a comprehensive measure of work–family enrichment.

Section snippets

Defining work–family enrichment

Work–family enrichment is defined as the extent to which experiences in one role improve the quality of life, namely performance or affect, in the other role (Greenhaus & Powell, in press). Greenhaus and Powell proposed that enrichment occurs when resource gains generated in Role A promotes improved individual performance in Role B. More specifically, enrichment occurs when resources (skills and perspectives, flexibility, psychological and physical social-capital, and material resources) gained

Previous scale development

Not surprisingly given the confusion of construct development, there are currently no validated measures of enrichment that fully capture the construct as it has now been defined (Greenhaus & Powell, in press). While some measures of the positive side of the work–family interface have been employed, several characteristics of existing measures limit their usefulness. First, there has been little clarity or consistency in the definitions and labels used across measures, resulting in a conceptual

Purposes and contributions

To further theory building and empirical research, our paper attempts to remedy limitations of existing measures. As urged by work–family scholars (e.g., Frone, 2003; Greenhaus & Powell, in press; Wayne et al., 2004), we develop a self-report measure of enrichment that captures the extent to which resource gains experienced in one domain are transferred to another in ways that result in improved quality of life in the other role for the individual. Both resource gains, or the specific benefits

Part 1: Scale development

The first two steps we took to create our scale were to develop items that adequately reflected the definition of enrichment guiding our research and to determine whether there were multiple dimensions of this construct. We undertook the first study reported in part 1 to generate an initial set of items. To augment the initial set of items we conducted a second study. We also used the second study to test how accurately the items reflected the enrichment construct.

Part 2: Validation

The procedure we followed in part 1 produced 30 items that spanned six dimensions of enrichment. We undertook part 2 to purify and validate the items and dimensions. We did this through two studies using three different samples. Study 1 focused on measurement purification and reduced the 30 items to 18. Study 2 provided evidence used to assess the validity of the final 18-item scale.

Discussion

In the present research, we developed and validated a comprehensive scale measuring the enrichment construct. The final 18-item scale includes items from each direction (work to family and family to work) as well as measures multiple dimensions within each direction. Further, the items were developed to capture the true essence of the definition of enrichment by incorporating the transfer of resource gains into the other domain in ways that enhance functioning for the individual, which has not

References (73)

  • R.C. Barnett et al.

    Positive spillover effects from job to home: A closer look

    Women and Health

    (1992)
  • R.C. Barnett et al.

    Women, men, work, and family: An expansionist theory

    American Psychologist

    (2001)
  • K. Bollen

    Structural equations with latent variables

    (1989)
  • C. Cammann et al.

    The Michigan Organizational Assessment Questionnaire

    (1979)
  • J.M. Cortina

    What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and application

    Journal of Applied Psychology

    (1993)
  • A.C. Crouter

    Spillover from family to work: The neglected side of the work–family interface

    Human Relations

    (1984)
  • R.F. DeVillis

    Scale development: Theory and applications

    (1991)
  • J.R. Edwards et al.

    Mechanisms linking work and family: Clarifying the relationship between work and family constructs

    Academy of Management Review

    (2000)
  • J.K. Ford et al.

    The application of exploratory factor analysis in applied psychology: A critical review and analysis

    Personnel Psychology

    (1986)
  • S.D. Friedman et al.

    Work and family—allies or enemies? What happens when business professionals confront life choices

    (2000)
  • M.R. Frone

    Work–family balance

  • J.H. Greenhaus et al.

    Sources of conflict between work and family roles

    Academy of Management Review

    (1985)
  • Greenhaus, J. H., & Foley, S. (2004). The positive side of the work–family interface: It’s meaning, measurement, and...
  • J.H. Greenhaus et al.

    Research on work, family, and gender: Current status and future directions

  • Greenhaus, J. H., & Powell, G. N. (in press). When work and family are allies: A theory of work–family enrichment....
  • J.G. Grzywacz

    Work-family spillover and health during midlife: Is managing conflict everything?

    American Journal of Health Promotion

    (2000)
  • Grzywacz, J. G. (2002). Toward a theory of work–family enrichment. Paper presentation, 34th Annual theory construction...
  • J.G. Grzywacz et al.

    Work–family spillover and daily reports of work and family stress in the adult labor-force

    Family Relations

    (2002)
  • J.G. Grzywacz et al.

    Work, family, and mental health: Testing different models of work–family fit

    Journal of Marriage and Family

    (2003)
  • Grzywacz, J. G., & Butler, A., (in press). The impact of job characteristics on work-to-family enrichment: Testing a...
  • J.G. Grzywacz et al.

    Reconceptualizing the work–family interface: An ecological perspective on the correlates of positive and negative spillover between work and family

    Journal of Occupational Health Psychology

    (2000)
  • J.G. Grzywacz et al.

    Family, work, work–family spillover and problem drinking during midlife

    Journal of Marriage and the Family

    (2000)
  • Hammer, L. B. (2003). Work–family enrichment: An expansion of the work–family paradigm. In L. B. Hammer (Chair)...
  • A.W. Harrison et al.

    The ingratiation construct: An assessment of the validity of the Measure of Ingratiatory Behaviors in Organizational Settings (MIBOS)

    Journal of Applied Psychology

    (1998)
  • Hill, E. J. (in press). Work–family enrichment and conflict, working fathers and mothers, work–family stressors and...
  • A.R. Hochschild

    The time bind: When work becomes home and home becomes work

    (1997)
  • Cited by (791)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text