Suchergebnisse

PurposeMore companies embrace flexible work arrangements (FWA) as one of their employee retention strategies, yet its effectiveness is not consistent. Generally, past researchers use the social exchange theory to explain how FWA lowers turnover intention, while the rest adopts the border theory to justify why FWA can be ineffective. Here, the authors compare the competing theories for the first time to differentiate the theoretical reasoning of three forms of FWA (flex time, flex leave and homeworking). Two mediators (organisational commitment and work−family conflicts) are chosen to represent the mechanism of each theory.Design/methodology/approachThe authors employ the latest wave of the International Social Survey Program (ISSP) Work Orientation Module from 2015. Based on nationally representative data from 35 nations and 17,604 participants, the authors employed simple mediation and parallel double-mediation models via bootstrapping procedures to investigate the theoretical reasoning behind each FWA.FindingsThe results indicate that organisational commitment and work−family conflicts as significant mediators in all models, supporting both theories. The authors first tested each mediator in separated models. In models concerning the social exchange theory, all FWA lead to increased organisational commitment before lowering turnover intention, implying the beneficial outcomes of FWA. However, findings also support the border theory's perspective where flex time and homeworking increase turnover intention through heightened work−family conflicts. The parallel double-mediation further suggests that all three FWA forms have their unique theoretical framework, impacting turnover intention differently.Originality/valueBoth the social exchange theory and border theory are well-developed theories but grounded on different theoretical reasoning. This is the first paper that compares both theoretical perspectives in the context of FWA. It offers a new perspective in explaining the inconclusive effectiveness of FWA and provides future researchers a more integrated interpretation and prediction of FWA's impact on turnover intention.

PurposeThis paper aims to address how national culture moderates the relationship between job characteristics and job satisfaction.Design/methodology/approachThe authors examine the most recent data collected from the International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) in 2015 from a group of 33 countries. Hofstede's cultural model is used to represent and measure national culture.FindingsOne of the most significant findings from the authors' two-level regression analysis is that having an interesting job contributes more to job satisfaction in individualistic countries than in collectivist countries. The authors also find that the newly introduced cultural dimension indulgence vs restraint has some significant moderating effect on the relationship between job security, salary, the perceived interest of a job and job satisfaction. Job security also seems to contribute less to job satisfaction in societies that are long-term oriented.Practical implicationsThis study provides further support for a more careful, nuanced examination of job motivation theories. Multinational companies should understand the needs of their employees and diversify their compensation packages accordingly. More attention should be paid to job design in individualistic or indulgent-oriented countries to create a satisfying job experience.Originality/valueThe authors examine the most recent data from ISSP and extend the literature by incorporating two additional cultural dimensions from Hofstede's model as moderators.