The work-family conflict of university foodservice managers: An exploratory study of its antecedents and consequences

Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 22 (2015) 10e18

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management journal homepage: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-hospitalityand-tourism-management

The work-family conflict of university foodservice managers: An exploratory study of its antecedents and consequences Bill Ryan a, Emily Ma b, *, Aaron Hsiao b, Minyen Ku a a b

School of Hotel and Restaurant Administration, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK 74078, USA School of Tourism, Sport and Hotel Management, Griffith University, Nathan Campus, 170 Kessels Road, Nathan, Queensland 4111, Australia

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Received 23 June 2014 Received in revised form 26 November 2014 Accepted 22 December 2014 Available online

This study investigated the issue of work-family conflict (WFC) among university foodservice managers. Multiple regression results showed that Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity were two significant antecedents of WFC. In addition, working on weekends also led to increased levels of WFC. The main finding of the study is that WFC is a significant antecedent of university foodservice managers' intention to leave, indicating that WFC is an important factor that explains the high turnover rate of hospitality employees. © 2015 The Authors.

Keywords: Role conflict Role ambiguity Work-family conflict Turnover intention

1. Introduction There are currently over 4700 colleges and universities in the U.S. (Collegestats.org, 2014) and university food service managers and employees undertake important jobs in preparing and serving quality food and drinks for over 2.1 million college students on a daily basis. Their jobs are crucial, yet also challenging and the U.S. college food service sector is facing high employee turnover and labour shortages (Choi & Sneed, 2006). In particular, the average annual turnover rate for foodservice management has been found to be approximately 67% (Ghiselli, Lopa, & Bai, 2001). As an industry that is characterized by low pay and long working hours, managers often exhibit a wide range of physiological symptoms of burnout (Krone, Tabacchi, & Farber, 1989; Niu, 2010) and psychological distress (Rantanen, Pulkkinen, & Kinnunen, 2005). The excessive working hours of the food service industry has also been found to be significantly associated with managers' intention to leave (Berta, 2006; Crandall, Emenheiser, & Jones, 1995). In addition, a great majority of foodservice managers are required to take on more job responsibilities, including on weekends, resulting in higher work interference with personal lives than managers in office settings

* Corresponding author. E-mail address: emily.ma@griffith.edu.au (E. Ma). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2014.12.005 1447-6770/© 2015 The Authors.

(Chikwe, 2009), and in turn, creating conflicts between work and life. Work-family conflict (WFC) occurs when some work and family responsibilities are not compatible or interfere with each other (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985; Mathieu & Mathieu, 2011). This kind of conflict may have a negative influence on an employee's work situation by creating lower overall job satisfaction (Boles & Babin, 1996), and increasing the possibility of leaving a position (Andres, Moelker, & Soeters, 2012; Good, Sisler, & Gentry, 1988). Traditionally, job dissatisfaction has been regarded as a major cause for voluntary employee turnover. However, several reports have revealed that restaurant managers did not quit their jobs because they were dissatisfied, but because the amount of work time required for their jobs prevented them from being with their families and friends (Parsa, Self, Njite, & King, 2005). WFC has been suggested as an important factor in predicting employee turnover intention in various contexts, such as health care (Mathieu & Mathieu, 2011), expatriate assignments (e.g. Andres et al., 2012), the sports industry and non-managerial positions in the food industry (e.g. Ryan, Ghazali, & Mohsin, 2011). Within the college and university foodservice literature, an enormous number of empirical studies have explicitly explored the turnover intention of employees (e.g. Dougherty, Bluedorn, & Keon, 1985; Hackes & Hamouz, 1995) and employee job satisfaction (e.g. , Almanza, & Chen, 1995; VyskocilDuke & Sneed, 1989; Jafte Czajkowski & Gilmore, 1992). However, to date, there appear to

B. Ryan et al. / Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 22 (2015) 10e18

be no studies investigating the conceptual antecedents and consequences of WFC among university foodservice managers. A closer examination of the relationships among WFC and its antecedents and consequences is important because university food service is not only an important food service sector it also influences the lives of college and universities students on a daily basis. Therefore, this study aims to explore the issue of WFC for university food service managers, with the following three objectives: 1. Explore the underlying dimensions of WFC in the context of university foodservice; 2. Explore the antecedents of WFC; 3. Explore to what extent WFC determines the turnover intention of university food service managers. 2. Literature review 2.1. The concept of work-family conflict (WFC) Greenhaus and Beutell (1985) defined WFC as “a form of interRole Conflict in which the role pressures from the work and family domains are mutually incompatible in some respect” (p. 77). This general consensus was espoused from the pioneering work of Pleck (1985). However, Netemeyer, Boles, and McMurrian (1996) pointed out that WFC was different from Family-work Conflict (FWC). The authors define WFC as a type of inter-Role Conflict, wherein some responsibilities from the work area are not compatible and negatively influence the employee's family responsibilities. Conversely, they define FWC as being vice versa. However, the former has been dominantly studied by most researchers investigating the work-family interface because of the common premise that individuals are more likely to experience WFC than FWC (Mullen, Kelley, & Kelloway, 2008). In this paper, the term WFC is used to represent the inclusive concept that work and family influence each other. In addition to the bi-directional nature of WFC, researchers have also begun to consider the different forms of WFC (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985; Netemeyer et al., 1996). Three different forms of WFC have been identified and defined as time-based conflict, strain-based conflict, and behaviour-based conflict. According to Greenhaus and Beutell (1985), time-based conflict occurs when time contributed to one role inhibits participation in another role; strained-based conflict states that a strained experience in one role intrudes into and intervenes with participation in another role; and behaviour-based conflict happens when certain behaviours required in one role are incompatible with behavioural expectations in another role. Each of the three conflicts are bi-directional (Gutek, Searle, & Klepa, 1991), resulting in 6 dimensions of WFC and FWC. To date, these forms of conflict have been prevalently employed as the theoretical framework in the majority of workfamily research.

11

& Tromp, 2010; Magnini, 2009; Stalcup & Pearson, 2001). High employee turnover implies a high cost to companies because it can seriously hinder efficient, effective customer service, and undermine competitiveness, which means that employee retention is as important to business success as customer retention (Baldrige National Quality Program, 2005; Frank, Finnegan, & Taylor, 2004). Ahmad, Fakhr, Ali Shan, and Zaman (2010) reviewed various research studies and summarized that the reasons for employee turnover can be classified into the following:
Demographic factors: Various studies have investigated turnover across age, marital status, gender, number of children, education, work experience and employment tenure.
Personal factors: Health problems, family related issues, children's education and social status contribute to turnover intentions however, very little empirical research work is available on personal factors.
Push factors: These include organisational factors and attitude factors. Organisational factors consist of salary, benefits and facilities, size of the organisation, location of the organisation, nature and type of organisation, stability of the organisation, communication systems, management practice and polices and level of employee empowerment.
Attitudinal factors consist of job satisfaction which include extrinsic variables such as job security, physical conditions/ working environment, fringe benefits, and pay and intrinsic variables such as recognition, freedom, position advancement, learning opportunities, nature, and kind of job, job stress, ambiguity, Role Conflict, work-overload and work-family conflicts.
Pull factors: The reasons that attract employees to a new place of work. In some research papers pull factors are named as uncontrolled factors because they are out of the control of organisations. Various pull factors derived from the literature are high salary, career advancement, new challenges and interesting work, job security, good location of the company, better culture, improved life-work balance, more freedom/autonomy, high reputation of the organisation, values, more benefits, a supportive boss. It is clear that employee turnover can be caused by many reasons. Interestingly, Good, Page and Young (1996) underscored that due to long hours and low pay, WFC has a direct effect on entrylevel managers' intent to leave, regardless of job satisfaction or commitment levels. Therefore, this study will investigate the following hypothesis. Hypothesis One: Work-family conflicts significantly impact on university foodservice managers' turnover intentions;

2.2. Consequences of work-family conflict

2.3. Antecedents of work-family conflict

Previous studies have indicated that WFC can lead to a number of consequences, including physical and psychological distress, job dissatisfaction, loss of organizational commitment, and turnover intention (e.g. Adams, King, & King, 1996; Aryee, Luk, & Stone, 1998; Boles, Howard, & Donofrio, 2001; Karatepe & Baddar, 2006; Kinnunen, Geurts, & Mauno, 2004; Zhang, Griffeth, & Fried, 2012). Furthermore, WFCs significantly alter perceptions of employees regarding the quality of their work life and the quality of their family life, which can lead to lack of satisfaction with their present life (Md-Sidin, Sambasivan, & Ismail, 2010). Based on a meta-analytic review of work-family literature, Specifically in the hospitality industry, WFC has been found to be one of the major causes of turnover at the management level (Blomme, Van Rheede,

According to a meta-analytic review of WFC studies, Michel, Kotrba, Mitchelson, Clark, and Baltes (2011) indicated that work role stressors, work role involvement, work social support, work characteristics and employee personality were the antecedents of WFC. In particular, Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity were the two major components of job-related stress (Fisher & Gitelson, 1983; Harris, Artis, Walters, & Licata, 2006; Jackson & Schuler, 1985; Rizzo, House, & Lirtzman, 1970). In order to understand the relationship between work stresses and WFC, it is necessary to consider both Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity in the unity of the workfamily domain (Greenhaus, Bedeian, & Mossholder, 1987; Williams & Alliger, 1994). It has been well established in the literature that Role Conflict, Role Ambiguity, and time demands are

12

B. Ryan et al. / Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 22 (2015) 10e18

directly and positively related to WFC (Frone, Yardley, & Markel, 1997; Greenhaus et al., 1987; Michel et al., 2011; Soltani, Hajatpour, Khorram, & Nejati, 2013). 2.3.1. Role conflict Role Conflict is traditionally recognised as having a negative effect on the work-family interface (Khan, Wolfe, Quinn, Snoek, & Rosenthal, 1964). According to Spector (1997), Role Conflict derived from multiple roles exists when the different functions and responsibilities of the roles result in incompatible role pressures and psychological conflict. For instance, when an employee's jobrelated role interferes with his/her family or personal life. According to Greenberger and O'Neil (1993), involvement in excessive roles resulted in role strains, Role Conflicts, and led to negative impacts on mental and physical health. Some researchers have also argued that increased role obligations that require time devotion and participation may result in various forms of psychological conflict if each role cannot be adequately fulfilled (Bedeian, Burke, & Moffett, 1988; Singh, Goolsby, & Rhoads, 1994). Discrepancies regarding the impacts on multiple roles have been observed in recent literature. According to the “enhancement expansionist theory”, eminent researchers have proven by empirical examination that role accumulation can be beneficial for both men and women in terms of buffering, social support, opportunities to experience success, and increasing sources of reference (Barnett & Hyde, 2001). Studies have also provided empirical evidence that women who juggle multiple roles are less depressed than other women (Crosby, 1991), and role quantity has no significant association with psychological distress (Davis, Sloan, & Tang, 2011). In addition, men who had multiple roles reported fewer physiological symptoms of distress than men who had fewer roles (Gore & Mangione, 1983). Nevertheless, empirical evidence has also shown a common consensus that when roles are excessive and numerous, psychological stress may occur (Bekker, de Jong, Zijestra, & van Landeghem, 2000). Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed. Hypothesis Two: Role Conflict is a significant antecedent of WFC for university foodservice managers.

2.3.2. Role ambiguity As defined by Spector (1997), “Role Ambiguity is the degree of certainty the employee has about what his or her functions and responsibilities are” (p. 39). According to classical theory, every position in a structured organization should have a specified set of tasks or position responsibilities, and Role Ambiguity reflects the degree of employee uncertainty regarding the appropriate actions in performing job functions (Miles, 1976). For example, Role Ambiguity can occur because an employee does not know whether he/ she has the authority to make decisions, or he/she is not clear about job performance expectations. Due to uncertain role expectations, employees might hesitate to make decisions and may have to meet expectations through a process of trial and error (Rizzo et al., 1970). Therefore, Role Ambiguity results in the following situation. Hypothesis Three: Role Ambiguity is a significant antecedent of WFC for university foodservice managers;

2.3.3. Work schedule It is believed that the amount of time spent at work directly reduces the amount of time available for non-work activities in terms of time-based strains (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985; Voydanoff, 1988). Work hours have been one of the important indicators to

study work spillover into family life (Greenhaus et al., 1987). Milkie and Peltola (1999) found that work demands such as work hours devoted per week influence role balance. Further, in a study investigating the experiences of physicians, research has found that greater scheduling flexibility at work is positively associated with well-being (Hecht, 2001). In addition, in a US national study of business strategy and workforce development, Pitt-Catsouphes, Smyer, Matz-Costa, and Kane (2007) reported that workplace flexibility could effectively deal with competing work and family demands. Flexible working hours have been shown to cause a significant increase in job satisfaction (Orpen, 1981) and to assist in gaining in favour of alleviating WFC (Beers, 2000; Lo, 2003). In human resource practises, effective work scheduling is the main remedy for balancing work and family activities (Finn, 2000), and has even proven to reduce employees' WFC (Facer & Wadsworth, 2008). Besides, the research findings of Beutell's (2010) research findings have suggested that employees' perceived satisfaction of work schedule is one of the important factors that relate to their perceptions of WFC. However, Craig and Powell (2011) clarify that parents who have flexible work schedules may not necessarily spend more time on family commitments than those who work standard hours. Studies have also discovered that the number of hours worked do not necessarily translate into feelings of work spill-over (Moen & Yu, 1999; Wallace, 1997). Therefore, in order to increase understanding of work spill-over, and to further investigate work-family conflict, it is necessary to study work-related factors of which hours worked, motivators and pressures are the most relevant variables (Greenhaus, 1988; Wallace, 1997). The following hypothesis is proposed. Hypothesis Four: Work-schedules influence university foodservice managers' perceptions of work-family conflict; 2.4. Hypothesized model Based on a review of previous literature, four hypotheses on the relationships among Role Conflict, Role Ambiguity, Work Schedule, WFC and Turnover Intention are proposed and the hypothesized relationships of these constructs are shown in the following Fig. 1. Specifically, Role Conflict, Role Ambiguity and Work Schedule jointly lead to WFC and WFC contributes to employees' Turnover Intention. 3. Research method 3.1. Instrument This study used a self-administrated questionnaire of university foodservice mangers and the questionnaire contains four sections. Section one had 18 statements measuring WFC. These statements were adapted from Carlson, Kacmar and Williams' study (2000) and were modified for the current research. Section two was used to identify employees' intention to leave their current job/organization. Four items were adapted and revised from Mitchel (1981). Section three contained 13 questions that assessed the Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity constructs. The attributes were adapted from a scale designed by Rizzo et al. (1970) which has been extensively used in management and organizational research (Bedeian & Armenakis, 1981; Bedeian et al., 1988; Boles & Babin, 1996). A seven-point Likert-type scale was used for all three of these sections, with “1 ¼ strongly disagree” and “7 ¼ strongly agree”. Section four was designed to collect information regarding respondents' demographic characteristics and job characteristics. Work schedule

B. Ryan et al. / Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 22 (2015) 10e18

13

Fig. 1. The hypothesized model of this study.

was measured by the total hours of work during weekdays and weekends. No personal identification information was collected to protect the privacy of respondents.

3.2. Data collection A list containing 2875 university food service managers obtained from the US National Association of College and University Food Services (NACUFS) was used for data collection. The management positions included various managerial roles such as general manager, director, assistant director, foodservice manager and purchasing manager. This was considered to provide an appropriate representation across job classifications and serve the research purpose regarding the characteristics of the target population's organizational roles. A total of 2567 questionnaires were electronically sent to the people on the NACUFS list who had an email address. In addition, a printed questionnaire was created in the exact format of the webbased survey and was mailed to the members of the sample with no email address (308). 392 web-based and 65 postal mailed surveys were returned. This yielded a total of 442 (15.4%) usable responses combined from both survey methods.

4.2. Dimensions of work-family conflict In order to identify the dimensions of the set of 18 WFC statements, principal component factor analysis was performed. Barlett's test of sphericity and the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) test for sampling adequacy (MSA) were performed. Table 2 shows that the Barlett test was significant at .000, and the KMOeMSA overall value was above .80, indicating the data were suitable for factor analysis (Table 2). Principal component factor analysis with orthogonal VARIMAX rotation was performed in order to obtain the underlying dimensions of WFC. Items with a factor loading of .40 or higher were

Table 1 The demographic profile of respondents. F Gender Male Female

Valid, %

225 217

50.9 49.1

59

13.3

3.3. Data analysis

Marital status Single

Descriptive data analysis, factor analysis and regressions were performed using SPSS 22. Descriptive analysis was used to gain a general profile of the respondents. Factor analysis was used to identify the underlying dimensions of WFC, Role Ambiguity and Role Conflict. Regressions were used to test the hypotheses among the antecedents and consequences of WFC.

Married Separated

334 5

75.6 1.1

Divorced

44

10.0

Education High school

32

7,5

4. Findings and discussions 4.1. Demographic profile of respondents Of the 442 respondents, 50.9% were male and 49.1% were female. The majority of the respondents were aged between 35 and 54 (75.4%). 75.6% of the respondents were married and 63.3% of them had children. 74.5% of the respondents had completed a college education (including 2-year and 4-year college), and 17.1% of the respondents had received a Master or Doctorate Degree. The majority of the respondents were Caucasian (94.4%). The remaining ethnicity groups only included African American (3.1%), Hispanic/ Latino (1.4%), American Indian/Alaskan Native (.5%), and Asian (.7%). Over half of the respondents' annual household incomes ranged from $50,001 to over $80,000 (58.1%). Table 1 summarises the demographic profile of the respondents.

Two year college Four year college Master degree Doctorate degree Unwilling to answer

Current annual income Less than $30,000 $30,000 to $40,000 $40,001 to $50,000 $50,001 to $60,000 $60,001 to $70,000 $70,001 to $80,000 Over $80,000 Unwilling to answer

85 232 64 9 4

20.0 54.5 15.0 2.1 .9

11

2.6

65 103 77 48 51 60 12

15.2 24.1 18 11.2 11.9 14.1 2.8

Age Under 24 25e34 35e44 45e54 55e64 65 and above

F

Valid, %

4 33 136 189 65 4

.9 7.7 31.5 43.9 15.1 .9

13

3.1

Ethnicity African American/Black American Indian/Alaskan Native Asian Caucasian/White Hispanic/Latino

2

.5

3 402 6

.7 94.4 1.4

Number of children for care-giving responsibilities 0 1 2 3 4 5

120 85 127 55 8 7

29.8 21.1 31.6 13.7 2.0 1.7

Number of elder relatives for care-giving responsibilities 0 1 2 3 4 5

314 50 35 2 2 2

77.5 12.3 8.6 .5 .5 .5

Note: n ¼ 442; Valid % e Based only the cases who actually answered a question.

14

B. Ryan et al. / Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 22 (2015) 10e18

Table 2 KMO and Bartlett's test for ‘Work-family conflict’. KMOeMSA Bartlett's test of sphericity

Approx. Chi-square df Sig.

Table 4 KMO and Bartlett's Test for ‘Role Interference Attribute’. .898 4678.220 153 .000

retained as recommended by Hair, Black, Babin, and Anderson (2010). The 18 items yielded four factors (See Table 3). All four factors had eigenvalues greater than 1.0, and the cumulative percentage of variance explained in the four factor solution was 69.6%. The Cronbach's Alphas for the four factors ranged from .84 to .92 and were above the generally agreed lower limit of .60 (Hair et al., 2010). The first factor of WFC was labelled “Behavioural Interference from Dual Directions” which accounted for 23.29% of the total variance with a reliability coefficient of .91. The second factor was named “Time and Strain Interference from Family” which explained 17.82% of the total variance with a reliability coefficient of .84. The third factor was named “Time Interference from Work” and it accounted for 15.58% of the variance with a reliability coefficient of .92. The final factor was labelled “Strain Interference from Work” which explained 12.88% of the total variance with a reliability coefficient of .84%.

4.3. Dimensions of role conflict and role ambiguity The Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity items were analysed together in order to verify that they were two distinct dimensions. Table 4 shows that the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) Measure of Sampling Adequacy (MSA) was .91, and the Bartlett's Test of Sphericity was significant at .000, indicating the data were suitable for factor analysis. The 13 items, after conducting principle component factor analysis with orthogonal VARIMAX rotation, were aggregated into two factors: Role Ambiguity and Role Conflict

KMOeMSA Bartlett's test of sphericity

Approx. Chi-square df Sig.

.905 2722.681 78 .000

(See Table 5). Items with a factor loading of .40 or higher were retained. The two derived factors had eigenvalues greater than 1.0 and the cumulative percentage of variance explained in the two factor solution was 57.4%. The Cronbach's Alphas for the two factors were .90 and .84, well above the generally agreed lower limit of .60 (Hair et al., 2010). The first factor of role interference was labelled “Role Ambiguity” which accounted for 29.10% of the total variance with a reliability coefficient of .84. The other factor was labelled “Role Conflict” which explained 28.31% of the total variance with a reliability coefficient of .90 (See Table 5).

4.4. Antecedents and consequences of WFC 4.4.1. Antecedents and WFC Regression was conducted to identify the determinants of WFC. As the factor analysis generated four factors about work-family conflict, the total value of the four factors was used as the dependent variable. Role Conflict, Role Ambiguity and Work Schedule (Hours Worked at Night; Hours worked on Weekends) were used as independent variables. The results of the regression analysis, shown in Table 6, reveal that Role Conflict, Role Ambiguity and Work Schedule have significant relationships with WFC. The adjusted R Square of this model was .260, which indicated that 26% of the variation in university food service managers' work-family conflict was explained by the four variables. The significant F-ratio (F ¼ 36.787, p ¼ .000) indicated that the results of the regression model could hardly have

Table 3 Underlying dimensions of work-family conflict. Work-family conflict factors Factor 1: Behavioral interference from dual direction Behaviors at work do not help me to be a better parent and spouse Behavior that is effective and necessary for me at work would be counter-productive at home The behaviors work for me at home seem not effective at work. The problem-solving behaviors I use in my job are not effective in resolving problems at home. Behavior that is effective and necessary for me at home would be counter-productive at work The problem-solving behavior that works for me at home does not seem to be as useful at work. Factor 2: Time and strain interference from family The time I spend on family responsibilities often interferes with my work responsibilities Due to stress at home, I am often preoccupied with family matters at work The time I spend with my family often causes me NOT to spend time in activities at work that could be helpful to my career I have to miss work activities due to the amount of time I must spend on family responsibilities Because I am often stressed from family responsibilities, I have a hard time concentrating on my work Tension and anxiety from my family life often weakens my ability to do my job Factor 3: Time interference from work My work keeps me from my family activities more than I would like The time I must devote to my job keeps me from participating equally in family responsibilities and activities I have to miss family activities due to the amount of time I must spend on work responsibilities Factor 4: Strain interference from work When I get home from work I am often too tired to participate in family activities. I am often so emotionally drained when I get home from work that it prevents me from contributing to my family. Due to all the pressures at work, sometimes when I come home I am too stressed to do things I enjoy Total variance explained

Factor loading

Eigen value

Variance explained

Reliability coefficient

6.84

23.29%

.91

2.59

17.82%

.84

1.98

15.58%

.92

1.10

12.88%

.84

.71 .79 .77 .82 .84 .85 .67 .71 .66 .77 .73 .67 .87 .86 .87 .72 .75 .71 69.57%

Scale: ¼ Strongly disagree; 2 ¼ Disagree; 3 ¼ Somewhat disagree; 4 ¼ Neutral; 5 ¼ Somewhat agree; 6 ¼ Agree; 7 ¼ Strongly agree; n ¼ 442.

B. Ryan et al. / Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 22 (2015) 10e18

15

Table 5 Underlying Dimensions of Role Interference. Role interference factors

Factor loading

Factor 1: Role conflict I have to do things that should be done differently. I often receive assignments without the manpower to complete. I often have to go around a rule to carry out an assignment. I work with two or more groups who operate quite differently. I receive incompatible requests from two or more people. I do things that are apt to be accepted by one person and not accepted by others. I receive an assignment without adequate resources and materials to execute it. At work, I often work on unnecessary things. Factor 2: Role Ambiguity I feel uncertain about how much authority I have.* I don't have clear, planned goals and objectives for my job.* I don't know what my responsibilities at work are.* I don't know exactly what is expected of me.* The explanation for my assignment is not clear of what has to be done.* Total Variance Explained

Eigen value

Variance explained

Reliability coefficient

5.70

29.10%

.84

1.76

28.31%

.90

.69

.77 .83 .85 .88 .72 57.40%

Note: * Reverse-coded Scale: 1 ¼ Strongly disagree; 2 ¼ Disagree; 3 ¼ Somewhat disagree; 4 ¼ Neutral; 5 ¼ Somewhat agree; 6 ¼ Agree; 7 ¼ Strongly agree n ¼ 442.

occurred by chance. Thus, the goodness-of-fit of the model was satisfactory. Three out of the four variables (Role Conflict, Role Ambiguity, Work Schedule Hours Worked on Weekends) were significant independent variables that influenced university food service managers' perceptions of WFC. However, one variable, Hours Worked between 6:00 pm to 6:00 am was not significant. As shown in Table 6, the variable “Role Ambiguity” was the most important determinant of university food service managers' WFC. It had the highest standardized coefficient value of .331, and the highest tvalue of 6.479. Hours Worked on Weekends (beta ¼ .202), and Role Conflict (beta ¼ .161), followed, in descending order of importance. Therefore, Hypothesis Three is supported, and Hypothesis Four is partially supported. Role Conflict was negatively related to university foodservice managers' work-family conflict. Therefore, Hypothesis Two is also supported. 4.4.2. WFC and consequence A second regression was conducted to identify the relationship between work-family conflict and Turnover Intention. The result of this regression analysis is presented in Table 7 and shows that WFC has a significant relationship with Turnover Intention (b ¼ .373, t ¼ 8.431). This is consistent with the findings of Boyar, Maertz, Jr.Pearson, and Keough (2003). The significant F-ratio (F ¼ 71.08, Table 6 Determinants of work-family conflict. Dependent variable

Work-family conflict

Independent variables

Role conflict, role ambiguity and work schedule

Multiple R R Square Adjusted R Square Standard Error F Sig. N

.517 .267 .260 3.4 36.787 .000 442

Independent variables

b

Constant Role conflict Role ambiguity Hours at night Hours on weekends

10.749 e.487 1.179 .169 .531

Beta

t

Sig.

e.161 .331 .037 .202

7.588 3.158 6.479 .587 3.882

.000 .002 .000 .558 .000

p ¼ .000) indicates that the results of the regression model could hardly have occurred by chance. Thus, the goodness-of-fit of the model is satisfactory. However, work-family conflict explained only 13.7% of Turnover Intention among university foodservice managers. This implies that additional variables, such as job satisfaction, may explain the remaining variability in this relationship. Therefore, Hypothesis One is supported.

5. Theoretical and empirical implications 5.1. Theoretical implications The purpose of this study was to explore the issue of university food service managers and WFC and specifically to explore the antecedents and consequences of WFC. Based on the nature of university food service managers' jobs, three factors were identified as major antecedents of WFC, including Work Schedule, Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity. The impacts of WFC and its antecedents on university food service managers' turnover intentions were also assessed, given the importance of employee retention in the food service industry. There are several theoretical implications from this study. Firstly, the study confirmed that WFC was a significant predictor of employee turnover intentions in the context of university food service managers (b ¼ .373, t ¼ 8.431). However, although there has been extensive research focussing on the influence of job satisfaction, pay and benefits on turnover intention (e.g. Boxall, Macky, & Table 7 Work-family conflict and turnover intention. Dependent variable

Turnover intention

Independent variables

Work-family conflict

Multiple R R Square Adjusted R Square Standard error F Sig. N

.373 .139 .137 5.453 71.08 .000 442

Independent variables

b

Beta

t

Sig.

Constant Work-family conflict

5.678 .556

.373

5.429 8.431

.000 .000

16

B. Ryan et al. / Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 22 (2015) 10e18

Rasmussen, 2003; De Cieri et al., 2008; Ghiselli, La Lopa, & Bai, 2003) limited studies have examined the role of WFC (e.g. Lee & Eyraud, 2008). Nevertheless, research investigating WFC is critically important in hospitality organizations, which are characterized by extended working hours and work during holidays (Cleveland et al., 2007). This research helps to fill this gap in the WFC and turnover literature, particularly for the foodservice context. Second, the study confirmed Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity as significant predictors of WFC. Role Ambiguity was the most important determinant for WFC (b ¼ .331, t ¼ 6.479), followed by Hours on Weekend (b ¼ .202, t ¼ 3.882). An interesting finding is that Role Conflict is negatively related to WFC (b ¼ .161, t ¼ 3.158), which implies that multiple roles can provide an appropriate balance between work and life. This finding is consistent with the contemporary view that Role Conflict or multiple roles is an effective way of reducing employee depression and stress (e.g. Crosby, 1991; Davis et al., 2011). Third, a large variation in WFC was determined by Work on Weekends (b ¼ .531, t ¼ 3.882). This may be due the fact that a large percentage of the manager participants were married with kids (63.3%), and working on weekends may have prevented them from enjoying quality time with their families. Similar findings have been observed among nurses (Camerio et al., 2010) and front-line employees in the fast-food industry (Ryan et al., 2011). This study has extended on previous findings in the university food service sector suggesting that work on weekends is a major cause of WFC for university foodservice managers.

Flexible work arrangements may be included in company agreements and all managers should recognise and emphasise the importance of flexibility for managing the WFC of employees. 6. Limitations and future research This study was conducted using management professionals as the sample. Caution should be exercised regarding the generalization of the results, especially to frontline level employees. First, future research might replicate this study with a different foodservice segment (non-commercial foodservices as well as commercial foodservice) to see if comparable consequences could be obtained. In addition, a subsequent study might apply the same conceptual framework to different populations within the foodservice industry for various foodservice labour force comparisons. Second, although the current model accounts for approximately 14% of the variability in intention to leave, it is important to acknowledge that there may be other factors that cause individuals to quit or stay in their jobs. Such factors include organizational variables, such as the size of the organization or unit, organizational commitment, benefit, and job satisfaction, and individual difference variables, such as job tenure. Finally, further research may test the moderating effects of demographic characteristics, such as gender and ethnic groups on those relationships. This is significant since minority groups makeup a large proportion of the hospitality industry workforce. 7. Conclusion

5.2. Managerial implications The findings of this study have suggested several important managerial implications. First of all, universities should create a work environment that is professional, has clear role expectations, and specifications of responsibilities to make sure foodservice managers are clear about their job duties. Necessary training should be provided to university foodservice managers too. Second, an encouraging finding from the study is that multi-roles can be beneficial. The nature of the foodservice industry also determines that managers are facing multi-demands from various aspects of work. Coping effectively with work place demands can help managers to achieve work-family balance. Therefore, an understanding of each and every aspect of foodservice operations should become a selection criterion for university foodservice managers. Organizations should also provide the necessary training to enhance university foodservice managers' capabilities to cope with multi-roles. However, while multiple roles can be beneficial in a person's life there is possibly a point where multiple roles can become detrimental, and this point is different for each individual. The challenge for foodservice managers is to keep each person energized and productive through a diversity of experiences, but not to overwhelm them. This can be a difficult task when each person becomes overwhelmed at a different point. Third, the findings of this study have suggested that Work on Weekends is a major determinant of WFC. Considering that fewer students would eat on campus on weekends, university foodservice organizations may consider hiring students or part-time employees with less family responsibilities to cover managers' roles at these times. This would enable managers to enjoy quality family life on weekends and enhance their personal well-being, thus helping managers balance their work and family lives as well as contributing to their retention. Flexible scheduling is another possible direction for employee retention (Boxall et al., 2003; Parker, 2007).

This study looked at the issue of WFC among university food service managers. University food service is an important sector in the U.S. food service industry which supplies food and drinks for more than 21 million students on a daily basis (Collegestats.org, 2014). University food service managers play an important role in providing healthy and quality food and drinks to students so it is critical to know if they are happy with their jobs and if WFC is an issue that influences their job attitudes and turnover intentions. This study confirmed that Role Ambiguity and Work on Weekends are the major causes of WFC, leading to intentions to lead the organization. The study fills a theoretical gap regarding the WFC issue in the university foodservice sector and also offers practical ways to address this issue, such as clarifying the roles and responsibilities of managers to reduce Role Ambiguity and to use part-time employees to cover weekend shifts to reduce WFC. The study also opens avenues for future research, such as the need to explore other variables or other moderators that could help to determine the turnover intention of university food service managers and to investigate the issue of WFC for employees from different position levels and different genders. References Adams, G. A., King, L. A., & King, D. W. (1996). Relationships of job and family involvement, family social support, and workefamily conflict with job and life satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(4), 411e420. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1037/0021-9010.81.4.411. Ahmad, M. S., Fakhr, Z., Ali Shan, I., & Zaman, K. (2010). Measuring push, pull and personal factors affecting turnover intention: a case of university teachers in pakistan. Review of Economic and Business Studies (REBS), 5, 167e192. Andres, M., Moelker, R., & Soeters, J. (2012). The work-family interface and turnover intentions over the course of project-oriented assignments abroad. International Journal of Project Management, 30(7), 752e759. Aryee, S., Luk, V., & Stone, R. (1998). Family responsive variables and retentionrelevant outcomes among employed parents. Human Relations, 51(1), 73e87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001872679805100105.

B. Ryan et al. / Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 22 (2015) 10e18 Baldrige National Quality Program. (2005). Landmark dining, Inc. case study (pp. 1e82). National Institute of Standards and Technology Technology Administration Department of Commerce. Barnett, R. C., & Hyde, J. S. (2001). Women, men, work, and family: an expansionist theory. American Psychologist, 56(10), 781e796. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037// 0003-066X.56.10.781. Bedeian, A. G., & Armenakis, A. A. (1981). A path-analytic study of the consequences of role conflict and ambiguity. The Academy of Management Journal, 24(2), 417e424. Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/255852. Bedeian, A. G., Burke, B. G., & Moffett, R. G. (1988). Outcomes of work-family conflict among married male and female professionals. Journal of Management, 14(3), 475e491. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014920638801400310. Beers, T. M. (2000). Flexible schedules and shift work: replacing the ‘9 to 5’ workday? Monthly Labor Review, 123(6), 33e40. Retrieved from: http://www. bls.gov/opub/mlr/2000/06/art3full.pdf. Bekker, M. H. J., de Jong, P. F., Zijestra, F. R. H., & van Landeghem, P. (2000). Combining care and work: health and stress effects in male and female academics. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 7(1), 28e43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/ S15327558IJBM0701_3. Berta, D. (2006). People Report: Worker turnover rate continues to climb. Nation's Restaurant News. November 20, P. 4. Beutell, N. J. (2010). The causes and consequences of work-family synergy: An empirical study in the United States. International Journal of Management, 27(3), 650e664. Blomme, R. J., Van Rheede, A., & Tromp, D. M. (2010). Work-family conflict as a cause for turnover intentions in the hospitality industry. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 10(4), 269e285. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/thr.2010.15. Boles, J. S., & Babin, B. J. (1996). On the front lines: stress, conflict, and the customer service provider. Journal of Business Research, 37(1), 41e50. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/0148-2963(96)00025-2. Boles, J. S., Howard, W. G., & Donofrio, H. H. (2001). An investigation into the interrelationships of work-family conflict, family-work conflict and work satisfaction. Journal of Managerial Issues, 13(3), 376e390. Retrieved from: http://search. proquest.com.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/docview/194165031. Boxall, P., Macky, K., & Rasmussen, E. (2003). Labour turnover and retention in New Zealand: the causes and consequences of leaving and staying with employers. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 41(2), 195e214. Boyar, S. L., Maertz, C. P., Jr., Pearson, A. W., & Keough, S. (2003). Work-family conflict: a model of linkages between work and family domain variables and turnover intentions. Journal of Managerial Issues, 15(2), 175e190. Retrieved from: http:// search.proquest.com.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/docview/194165263. Camerion, D., Sandri, M., Sartori, S., Conway, P. M., Campanini, P., & Costa, G. (2010). Shiftwork, work-family conflict among Italian nurses, and prevention efficacy. Chronobiology International, 27(5), 1105e1123. Carlson, D. S., Kacmar, K. M., & Williams, L. J. (2000). Construction and initial validation of a multidimentional measure of work-family conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 56(2), 249e276. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1999.1713. Chikwe, A. C. (2009). The impact of employee turnover: the case of leisure, tourism and hospitality industry. Consortium Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 14(1), 43e56. Retrieved from: http://libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/login?url¼http:// search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx? direct¼true&db¼hjh&AN¼43417951&site¼ehost-live&scope¼site. Choi, W.-S., & Sneed, J. (2006). Factors related to job satisfaction and intent to turnover for part-time student employees in university dining services. Journal of Foodservice Management and Education, 2(1), 34e48. Retrieved from: http:// fsmec.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/ChoiSneed2006.pdf. Cleveland, K., O'Neill, J., Himelright, J., Harrison, M., Crouter, A., & Drago, R. (2007). Work and family issues in the hospitality industry: perspective of entrants, managers, and spouses. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 31(3), 275e298. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1096348007299919. Collegestats.org. (2014). Number of higher education institutions in the United States from 1980-2011. Retrieved from: http://www.statista.com/statistics/ 240833/higher-education-institutions-in-the-us-by-type/. Craig, L., & Powell, A. (2011). Non-standard work schedules, work-family balance and the gendered division of childcare. Work, Employment and Society, 25(2), 274e291. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0950017011398894. Crandall, W., Emenheiser, D. A., & Jones, C. A. (1995). Are we working our managers too hard? Examining the link between work hours and restaurant manager intentions to leave. Journal of Foodservice Systems, 8(2), 103e113. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-4506.1995.tb00080.x. Crosby, F. J. (1991). Juggling: The unexpected advantages of balancing career and home for women and their families. New York, NY: Free Press. Davis, C., Sloan, M., & Tang, C. (2011). Role occupancy, quality, and psychological distress among Caucasian and African American women. Journal of Women and Social Work, 26(1), 72e82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0886109910392535. De Cieri, H., Kramar, R., Noe, R. A., Hollenbeck, J. R., Gerhart, B., & Wright, P. M. (2008). Human resource management in Australia (3 ed.). North Ryde: Australia: McGraw-Hill. Dougherty, T. W., Bluedorn, A. C., & Keon, T. L. (1985). Precursors of employee turnover: a multiple-sample causal analysis. Journal of Occupational Behaviour, 6(4), 259e271. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.4030060404. Duke, L. M., & Sneed, J. (1989). A research model for relating job characteristics to job satisfaction of university foodservice employees. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 89(8), 1087e1091. Retrieved from: http://www.ncbi.nlm. nih.gov/pubmed/2760368.

17

Facer, R. L., & Wadsworth, L. (2008). Alternative work schedules and workefamily balance: a research note. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 28(2), 166e177. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0734371X08315138. Finn, P. (2000). On the job stress in policing-reducing it and preventing it. National Institute of Justice Journal, 18e24. Retrieved from: https://www.ncjrs.gov/ pdffiles1/jr000242d.pdf. Fisher, C. D., & Gitelson, R. (1983). A meta-analysis of the correlates of role conflict and ambiguity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(2), 320e333. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1037/0021-9010.68.2.320. Frank, F. D., Finnegan, R. P., & Taylor, C. R. (2004). The race for talent: retaining and engaging workers in the 21st century. Human Resource Planning, 27(3), 12e26. Frone, M. R., Yardley, J. K., & Markel, K. S. (1997). Developing and testing an integrative model of work-family interface. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 50(2), 145e167. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1996.1577. Ghiselli, R., La Lopa, J. M., & Bai, B. (2003). Meeting the challenge of making life more satisfying for hospitality managers. Hospitality Review, 20(2), 91e103. Ghiselli, R. E., Lopa, J. M. L., & Bai, B. (2001). Job satisfaction, life satisfaction and turnover intent among food-service managers. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 42(2), 28e37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 0010880401422002. Good, L. K., Page, T. J., & Young, C. E. (1996). Assessing hierarchical differences in jobrelated attitudes and turnover among retail managers. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 24(2), 148e156. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 0092070396242005. Good, L. K., Sisler, G. F., & Gentry, J. W. (1988). Antecedents of turnover intentions among retail management personnel. Journal of Retailing, 64(3), 295e314. Retrieved from: http://web.ebscohost.com.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/ehost/ pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid¼a6ff70cb-05ed-4b17-a8e3-3186265891b9% 40sessionmgr4001&vid¼2&hid¼4201. Gore, S., & Mangione, T. W. (1983). Social roles, sex roles, and psychological distress: additive and interactive models of sex differences. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24(4), 300e312. Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org.libraryproxy. griffith.edu.au/stable/2136397. Greenberger, E., & O'Neil, R. (1993). Spouse, parent, worker: role commitments and role-related experiences in the construction of adults' well-being. Developmental Psychology, 29(2), 181e197. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/00121649.29.2.181. Greenhaus, J. H. (1988). The intersection of work and family roles: individual, interpersonal, and organizational issues. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 3(4), 23e44. Retrieved from: http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1989-31411-001. Greenhaus, J. H., Bedeian, A. G., & Mossholder, K. W. (1987). Work experiences, job performance, and feelings of personal and family well-being. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 31(2), 200e215. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(87) 90057-1. Greenhaus, J. H., & Beutell, N. J. (1985). Sources of conflict between work and family roles. Academy of Management Review, 10(1), 76e88. Retrieved from: http:// www.jstor.org.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/stable/258214. Gutek, B. A., Searle, S., & Klepa, L. (1991). Rational versus gender role-explanations for work-family conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(4), 560e568. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.76.4.560. Hackes, B. L., & Hamouz, F. L. (1995). College and university foodservice perceptions of employee training on productivity and turnover. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 95(9), 41e42. Retrieved from: http://www.sciencedirect. com/science/article/pii/S0002822395005005. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Harris, E. G., Artis, A. B., Walters, J. H., & Licata, J. W. (2006). Role stressors, service worker job resourcefulness, and job outcomes: an empirical analysis. Journal of Business Research, 59(4), 407e415. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.busres.2005.06.003. Hecht, L. M. (2001). Role conflict and role overload: different concepts, different consequences. Sociological Inquiry, 71(1), 111e121. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ j.1475-682X.2001.tb00930.x. Jackson, S. E., & Schuller, R. S. (1985). a meta-analysis and conceptual critique of research on role ambiguity and role conflict in work settings. Organisational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 36(1), 16e78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ 0749-5978(85)90020-2. , W. F., Almanza, B. A., & Chen, C.-C. (1995). A study of factors affecting job Jafte satisfaction among university foodservice employees. Journal of College and University Foodservice, 2(2), 35e49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J278v02n02_05. Karatepe, O. M., & Baddar, L. (2006). An empirical study of the selected consequences of frontline employees' work-family conflict and family-work conflict. Tourism Management, 27(5), 1017e1028. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.tourman.2005.10.024. Khan, R. L., Wolfe, D. M., Quinn, R. P., Snoek, J. D., & Rosenthal, R. A. (1964). Organisational stress: Studies in role conflict and ambiguity. New York, NY: Wiley. Kinnunen, U., Geurts, S., & Mauno, S. (2004). Work-to-family conflict and its relationship with satisfaction and well-being: a one-year longitudinal study on gender differences. Work and Stress, 18(1), 1e22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 02678370410001682005. Krone, C., Tabacchi, M., & Farber, B. (1989). Manager burnout. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 30(3), 58e63. Retrieved from: http://www. sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010880489800497#. Lee, S. H., & Eyraud, F. (2008). Globalization, flexibilization and working conditions in Asia and the Pacific. Chandos.

18

B. Ryan et al. / Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 22 (2015) 10e18

Lo, S. (2003). Perceptions of work-family conflict among married female professionals in Hong Kong. Personnel Review, 32(3), 376e390. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1108/00483480310467679. Magnini, V. P. (2009). Understanding and reducing work-family conflict in the hospitality industry. Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality and Tourism, 8(2), 119e136. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15332840802269643. Mathieu, C., & Mathieu, C. (2011). The impact of work-family conflict on the intention to quit the job in a sample of medical residents. Academy of Health Care Management, 8(2), 43. Md-Sidin, S., Sambasivan, M., & Ismail, I. (2010). Relationship between work-family conflict and quality of life: an investigation into the role of social support. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 25(1), 58e81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ 02683941011013876. Michel, J. S., Kotrba, L. M., Mitchelson, J. K., Clark, M. A., & Baltes, B. B. (2011). Antecedents of workefamily conflict: a meta-analytic review. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32(5), 689e725. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.695. Miles, R. H. (1976). Role requirements as sources of organizational stress. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61(2), 172e179. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/00219010.61.2.172. Milkie, M. A., & Peltola, P. (1999). Playing all the roles: gender and the work family balancing act. Journal of Marriage and Family, 61(2), 476e490. Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/stable/353763. Mitchel, J. O. (1981). The effect of intentions, tenure, personal and organizational variables on managerial turnover. The Academy of Management Journal, 24(4), 742e751. Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/ stable/256173. Moen, P., & Yu, Y. (1999). Having it all: overall work-life success in two-earner families. In T. Parcel (Ed.), Vol. 7. Research in sociology of work (pp. 109e139). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Mullen, J., Kelley, E., & Kelloway, E. K. (2008). Health and well-being outcomes of the work-family interface. In K. Korabik, D. S. Lero, & D. L. Whitehead (Eds.), Handbook of work-family integration: Research, theory, and best practices (pp. 191e214). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Academic Press. Netemeyer, R. G., Boles, J. S., & McMurrian, R. (1996). Development and validation of work-family conflict and family-work conflict scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(4), 400e410. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.81.4.400. Niu, H.-J. (2010). Investigating the effects of self-efficacy on foodservice industry employees' career commitment. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 29(4), 743e750. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2010.03.006. Orpen, C. (1981). Effect of flexible working hours on employee satisfaction and performance: a field experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66(1), 113e115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.66.1.113. Parker, S. K. (2007). 'That is my job': how employees' role orientation affects their job performance. Human Relations, 60(3), 403e435. Parsa, H. G., Self, J. T., Njite, D., & King, T. (2005). Why restaurants fail. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 46(3), 304e322. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1177/0010880405275598.

Pitt-Catsouphes, M., Smyer, M. A., Matz-Costa, C., & Kane, K. (2007). The national study report: Phase II of the national study of business strategy and workforce development. Chestnut Hill, MA: Center on Aging and Work. Pleck, J. H. (1985). Working wives, working husbands. National Council on Family Relations. Sage Publications. Rantanen, J., Pulkkinen, L., & Kinnunen, U. (2005). The big five personality dimensions, work-family conflict, and psychological distress: a longitudinal view. Journal of Individual Differences, 26(3), 155e166. http://dx.doi.org/10.1027/16140001.26.3.155. Rizzo, J. R., House, R. J., & Lirtzman, S. I. (1970). Role conflict and ambiguity in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 15(2), 150e163. Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/stable/ 2391486. Ryan, C., Ghazali, H., & Mohsin, A. (2011). Determinants of intention to leave a nonmanagerial job in the fast-food industry of West Malaysia. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 23(3), 344e360. Singh, J., Goolsby, J. R., & Rhoads, G. K. (1994). Behavioral and psychological consequences of boundary spanning: burnout for customer service representatives. Journal of Marketing Research, 31(4), 558e569. Retrieved from: http://search. proquest.com.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/docview/235232075. Soltani, I., Hajatpour, S., Khorram, J., & Nejati, M. H. (2013). Investigating the effect of role conflict and role ambiguity on employees' job stress: articulating the role of work-family conflict. Management Science Letters, 3(7), 1927e1936. http:// dx.doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2013.06.036. Spector, P. E. (1997). Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, cause, and consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Stalcup, L. D., & Pearson, T. A. (2001). A model of the causes of management turnover in hotels. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, 25(1), 17e30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/109634800102500103. Voydanoff, P. (1988). Work role characteristics, family structure demands, and work/family conflict. Journal of Marriage and Family, 50(3), 749e762. Retrieved from: http://search.proquest.com.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/docview/ 219742816. Vyskocil-Czajkowski, T. L., & Gilmore, S. A. (1992). Job satisfaction of selected institutional foodservice supervisors. Foodservice Research International, 7(1), 29e41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-4506.1992.tb00199.x. Wallace, J. E. (1997). It's about time: a study of hours worked and work spillover among law firm lawyers. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 50(2), 227e248. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1996.1573. Williams, K. J., & Alliger, G. M. (1994). Role stressors, mood spillover, and perceptions of work-family conflict in employed parents. Academy of Management Journal, 37(4), 837e868. Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org.libraryproxy. griffith.edu.au/stable/256602. Zhang, M., Griffeth, R. W., & Fried, D. D. (2012). Work-family conflict and individual consequences. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 27(7), 696e713. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1108/02683941211259520.