| Literature DB >> 32331405 |
Jiming Cao1, Cong Liu1, Yubin Zhou1, Kaifeng Duan1.
Abstract
This study explored the effects of work-to-family conflict on job burnout and project success in the construction industry. First, a theoretical model with affective commitment as a moderating variable was developed according to the conservation of resources theory. A structured questionnaire survey was then performed with Chinese construction professionals, with 309 valid responses received. In the valid data, the proportion of male construction professionals is 73% and that of female construction professionals is 27%. The analysis of the valid data used structural equation modeling. The results indicate that: (i) work-to-family conflict has a positive and significant effect on job burnout, and a negative and significant effect on project success; (ii) job burnout negatively affects project success; (iii) affective commitment negatively moderates the relationship between work-to-family conflict and job burnout. This study extends the existing body of knowledge on work-to-family conflict and helps us to better understand the functional and moderating roles of affective commitment in the context of construction projects. Furthermore, this study provides theoretical guidance and a decision-making reference to help construction enterprises manage the work-to-family conflict and job burnout of construction professionals and advance their levels of affective commitment.Entities:
Keywords: affective commitment; construction professionals; job burnout; project success; structural equation modeling; work-to-family conflict
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32331405 PMCID: PMC7216175 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17082902
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Theoretical model.
Measurements for variables.
| Variables | No. | Measurement | References |
|---|---|---|---|
| Work-to-family conflict | WFC1 | The requirements of work interfere with my family life. | [ |
| WFC2 | My work takes too long, so it is difficult for me to perform my family duties. | ||
| WFC3 | Because of the demands of my work, what I want to do at home cannot be done. | ||
| WFC4 | The pressure of work makes it difficult for me to perform my family duties. | ||
| WFC5 | I have no interest in taking part in family activities after work. | ||
| WFC6 | Because of my work duties, I have to change my plans for family activities. | ||
| Job Burnout | JB1 | Work makes me physically and mentally exhausted. | [ |
| JB2 | I feel exhausted after work. | ||
| JB3 | When I wake up in the morning and have to face the work of the day, I feel very tired. | ||
| JB4 | It’s stressful for me to work all day. | ||
| JB5 | Work makes me feel like I am falling apart. | ||
| JB6 | Since I started this job, I have become less and less interested in my job. | ||
| JB7 | I’m not as passionate about my work and my colleagues as before. | ||
| JB8 | I doubt the significance of my work. | ||
| Affective commitment | AC1 | My values are similar to those of the construction enterprise where I work. | [ |
| AC2 | I am concerned about the future of the construction enterprise where I work. | ||
| AC3 | I am proud to tell other people that I work in this construction enterprise. | ||
| AC4 | Achieving project goals is as important to me as it is to the project. | ||
| AC5 | I am willing to work harder than ever to help this construction enterprise make progress. | ||
| AC6 | For me, this is the best of all possible construction enterprises for which to work. | ||
| Project Success (PS) | PS1 | The progress of this project is on schedule. | [ |
| PS2 | This project is within budget. | ||
| PS3 | The project passed the acceptance check and was successfully delivered. | ||
| PS4 | Most problems encountered in the implementation of the project can be addressed. | ||
| PS5 | The project process is satisfactory. | ||
| PS6 | The owner is satisfied with the project results. | ||
| PS7 | The project meets the special requirements of client. | ||
| PS8 | We look forward to cooperating with the other party again in the future. |
Figure 2Quantile–quantile (Q–Q) plots of variables for the sample.
Demographic characteristics of respondents.
| Characteristic | Category | Frequency | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | Male | 226 | 73.14 |
| Female | 83 | 26.86 | |
| Age | <30 | 53 | 17.15 |
| 30–39 | 134 | 43.37 | |
| 40–50 | 89 | 28.80 | |
| >50 | 33 | 10.68 | |
| Marital status | Single | 73 | 23.62 |
| Married | 236 | 76.38 | |
| Dependent children (aged 18 years or below) | Yes | 213 | 68.93 |
| No | 96 | 31.07 | |
| Elderly dependents | Yes | 237 | 76.70 |
| No | 72 | 23.30 | |
| Work experience | <5 years | 94 | 30.42 |
| 6–10 years | 113 | 36.57 | |
| 11–15 years | 46 | 14.89 | |
| 16–20 years | 32 | 10.36 | |
| >20 years | 24 | 7.76 | |
| Job position | Project manager | 31 | 10.32 |
| Department manager | 67 | 21.68 | |
| Project engineer | 103 | 33.33 | |
| Professional manager | 91 | 29.45 | |
| Others | 17 | 5.22 | |
| Average hours worked per week | <40 h | 19 | 6.15 |
| 41–50 h | 42 | 13.59 | |
| 51–60 h | 143 | 46.28 | |
| >60 h | 105 | 33.98 |
Results of confirmatory factor analysis.
| Variables | CR | AVE | Fit indices |
|---|---|---|---|
| Work-to-family conflict | 0.87 | 0.79 | |
| Job burnout | 0.84 | 0.74 | |
| Project success | 0.81 | 0.71 | |
| Affective commitment | 0.79 | 0.67 | |
| All variables | 0.76 | 0.65 |
Figure 3Structural equation modeling (SEM) test results of the theoretical model. Note: *, p < 0.05. **, p < 0.01. ***, p < 0.001.
Results of theoretical model analysis.
| Hypothesis | Path | C.R. | S.E. | T | Hypotheses | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WFC→JB | 0.406 *** | 12.124 | 0.193 | 6.624 | 0.000 | H1: Supported |
| JB→PS | 0.347 *** | −4.986 | 0.176 | −5.428 | 0.000 | H2: Supported |
| WFC→PS | −0.129 ** | −3.286 | 0.105 | −3.246 | 0.001 | H3: Supported |
| WFC×AC→JB | −0.132 * | −2.526 | 0.101 | −2.513 | 0.014 | H4: Supported |
| Fit indices (the full model) | ||||||
Note: work-to-family conflict (WFC), job burnout (JB), affective commitment (AC), project success (Ps), critical ratio (C.R.), standard error (S.E.), *, p < 0.05. **, p < 0.01. ***, p < 0.001.
Figure 4Moderation of affective commitment on the relationship between work-to-family conflict and job burnout. Note: work-to-family conflict (WFC), job burnout (JB), affective commitment (AC).