There has been little theoretical and empirical attention to the role of time in studying levels of work–family conflict. Contrary to theoretical assumptions that work–family conflict is a highly dynamic construct, we borrow from established theories to describe a Stability and Change Model, which posits that work–family conflict levels are primarily stable with some meaningful change over time. The proposed model also outlines predictors of stability (and change) in work–family conflict levels: stability (or change) in‐person (i.e., neuroticism) and situational factors (i.e., role demands and, to a lesser extent, resources). Findings across two longitudinal studies with timeframes of 5 months (one‐month lags) and 3 years (one‐year lags) suggest that 75–80% of the observed variance in work–family conflict levels is stable over mid‐ to long‐term timeframes. In line with our Stability and Change Model, trait‐state‐occasion modelling results indicate that stability in work–family conflict is primarily due to stability in workload demands and to a lesser extent, personality factors (i.e., neuroticism), but, unexpectedly, not resources. There was some meaningful change in work–family conflict levels over time, primarily due to changes in demands and to a lesser extent, changes in person characteristics. Theoretical, methodological, and analytical considerations for future studies of work–family conflict levels are discussed.Practitioner points WFC levels may be very resistant to change. Our findings highlight the importance for organizations to make a sustained commitment to addressing factors that might create WFC rather than short‐term efforts. Organizations may design impactful interventions by aiming to significantly and durably reduce job demands, specifically: High involvement work practices that foster empowerment, information sharing, rewards, and training have been shown to reduce job demands including role overload (Kilroy et al., 2016, Human Resource Management Journal, 26, 408). Supervisors could reduce workload by eliminating unnecessary tasks or prioritizing most important tasks and/or developing employees’ time management skills so they can accomplish important job tasks in the time available. Reducing hindrance stressors such as role ambiguity and hassles tend not to be as relevant. Organizations may also want to consider person variables (e.g., personality, affect) by training for individual characteristics that may help employees manage WFC such as mindfulness training.

No abstract

During the COVID-19 pandemic, teachers in the United States, an already at-risk occupation group, experienced new work-related stressors, safety concerns, and work-life challenges, magnifying on-going retention concerns. Integrating | 689 CHANGES IN TURNOVER INTENTIONS ( James et al., 2011), but there is no consensus around what key leader behaviours are needed during a crisis or the role of different leadership levels (e.g., senior, first-line; Bundy et al., 2017). Moreover, the dynamic nature of employees' responses to on-going crises have not been considered (Bundy et al., 2017;Williams et al., 2017), hindering understanding of how employees' changing responses during crisis eventually link to attrition. Thus, research is sorely needed to examine how leader actions across multiple levels relate to employees' dynamic responses during landscape-scale crises, like that created by the COVID-19 pandemic. Doing so would provide organizations with needed evidence-based recommendations and guide further theory development and refinement in crisis management.We use a latent growth modeling (LGM) approach to assess how teacher experiences (i.e., safety concerns, work-life balance) and turnover intentions change over the course of a semester during COVID-19, as a function of leadership actions at the start of the semester. We rely on COVID-19 guidance (McKinsey & Company, 2020) to identify leader actions at two levels (district decision-making and safety communication; principal 1 authoritarian leadership and warmth) that may set the course for teachers' responses. We examine whether leader actions at each level relate to initial teacher turnover intentions at the start of the 2020-2021 school year through their influence on safety concerns and work-life balance, two primary COVID-19 challenges (Kraft et al., 2021;Lizana & Vega-Fernadez, 2021). We expect that district leadership influences teacher retention through structural mechanisms (i.e., district safety practices), whereas principal leadership exert influence through more interpersonal mechanisms (i.e., family support and work-family balance). Further, we theorize that leader actions not only trigger initial employee responses but also set the stage for on-going crisis response. Effective leader actions early on may begin a resource spiral (Hobfoll, 2011) or an accumulation of positive outcomes over time (Williams et al., 2017), which may be especially influential in the context of a crisis (Hobfoll et al., 2018). Thus, we also examine changes in turnover intentions, over the course of the Fall 2020 semester, as a function of initial leader actions and the semester-long trajectories in safety and work-life balance experiences they incite. In sum, our goals are to explain (a) why teachers intended to turnover at the start of the semester, and (b) what factors related to changes in turnover intentions during the semester. To do this, we surveyed 617 U.S. teachers every 2 weeks from August to December 2020.We contribute to occupational health, crisis management, and ...

In the current study, we strategically link the work–family literature to employee creativity, a construct seen as a linchpin for organizational success, through family‐supportive supervision based on the concept of reciprocity of interdependent exchanges within social exchange theory. In Study 1 (N = 188), based on data with a one‐month lag between two assessments, we demonstrate that family‐supportive supervision is an explanatory leadership behaviour that connects broader leadership styles (i.e., leader–member exchange) to employee creativity. In Study 2, we further unpack the theoretical exchange processes at work to better address the leadership–creativity black box. With a sample of 251 participants, surveyed at two time points, we leverage a motivational process model and demonstrate that meaningfulness and intrinsic motivation mediate the relationship between family‐supportive supervision and creativity. These findings provide insight into the motivational mechanisms involved in the social exchange process and implications for inciting employee creativity through family‐supportive supervision. Practitioner points We demonstrate that family‐supportive supervision is an important driver of constructs of strategic importance (e.g., motivation, creativity) to many organizations. We provide practitioners with a focused opportunity for intervention to promote creativity given that leaders can be trained to engage in family‐supportive behaviours. We provide evidence that should encourage practitioners to start thinking about processes related to sustaining creativity.