Journal of Distribution Science (유통과학연구)

Korea Distribution Science Association (한국유통과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Mediating and Moderating Role of Work-life Balance on Performance of Distribution Center Employees

  • Received : 2023.07.31
  • Accepted : 2023.11.05
  • Published : 2023.11.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: Along with the dynamics of work and family life, the purpose of this study is to determine whether work-life balance plays a more mediating or moderating role. Research design, data, and methodology: This quantitative study employs PLS-SEM modeling with a questionnaire. Purposive sampling is used, and 106 samples are employed. Employees who have worked in the distribution center area for at least a year determine the sample criteria. Furthermore, the employees identified in this study are already married. Results: According to the findings of this study, when associated with the physical work environment and job satisfaction, work-life balance acts as a mediator. Surprisingly, work-life balance has no effect on employee performance when it comes to the physical work environment. This study also shows that work-life balance has no moderating effect. Conclusions: Work-life balance in this case will be determined by what happens at work and the outcomes of the work done. The sample criteria in this study are limited to employees who are already married, with no restriction on the number of children or family dependents. This can help to better understand the work-life balance of dependents in a number of families.

Keywords

1. Introduction

Working hours and work systems are not always as flexible as one would like. Some jobs or work environments do not permit this. Workplace demands or working hours can have an impact on productivity (Bartoll & Ramos, 2020). Not to mention when it comes to personal matters like family matters. These factors frequently have an impact on the emergence of work-family conflict (Clark, 2000), albeit at a lower level (Michel et al., 2011). Furthermore, an alternative viewpoint posits that there is a correlation between work-family conflict and job performance (Obrenovic et al., 2020). Furthermore, jobs with specific work areas, such as distribution centers, are not possible to do from home, which can apply to a variety of flexibly performed tasks (Peters et al., 2004). Although several previous studies have revealed that working remotely, such as from home, is not always possible, it does provide flexibility in doing work. Because it allows for intervention in doing work, this can lead to more intense work-family conflicts (Allen et al., 2013; Golden et al., 2006). Work flexibility, on the other hand, is important when workers have families or are in the process of becoming parents, and it can reduce work-family conflict (Allen et al., 2013; Erickson et al., 2010; Kelly et al., 2014; Michel et al., 2011).

Workers who are married, both men and women, take on more responsibility at work and deliver better results. This is due to the fact that family dependents must be supported, despite the fact that male and female workers' earnings tend to differ (Kim, 2020). Male workers who are already married, particularly in Indonesia, tend to take on the role of breadwinner, while female workers are prioritized in household or family matters. This is also consistent with the belief that men, particularly those with families, will bear increased responsibility as breadwinners to meet the needs of their families (Knight & Brinton, 2017; Miani & Hoorens, 2014). Meanwhile, according to the normative view, married women can continue to work while prioritizing their role as caregivers for children and household chores (Bianchi et al., 2012; Dotti Sani & Treas, 2016).

Several previous studies on the subject have limitations in that work-life balance is only used as a direct effect variable to measure job satisfaction or work performance. According to Talukder et al. (2018), one in every two Australians is dissatisfied with their current work-life balance. Job satisfaction has been identified as a mediating or moderating effect in other studies (Soomro et al., 2018). Conversely, the impact of workers' health conditions on job performance is also of considerable importance (Christian et al., 2023). Sirgy and Lee (2018) identified work-life balance as a variable that can explain indirect effects in the context of the research framework. However, the concept is geared toward life satisfaction rather than job satisfaction or performance. Satisfaction, like most concepts explaining satisfaction, is shaped by how an individual feels as a service user (Christian et al., 2022) or as a worker in an organization. Meanwhile, work-life balance is applied to a variety of research uses, including qualitative research (Chung & van der Lippe, 2020), professional workers who are stable and have flexible working hours (Cech & Blair-Loy, 2014; Chung & van der Horst, 2020; Craig & Powell, 2012), and research areas described by Chung and van der Lippe (2020) that come from large countries such as the United States or England.

Existing studies should be supplemented with work-life balance analysis and its relationship to other variables in the retail distribution center work area. This work area is known for having a high workload and a high demand for fieldwork. This is because distribution arrangements to supply products to retail networks at various points throughout the region occur on a regular basis. This type of work presents unique challenges for workers with families because the workload can exacerbate the formation of family conflict. These work characteristics then serve as the foundation for research questions in which work-life balance is shown to have an indirect influence on other variables such as physical work environment, job satisfaction, and employee performance. The use of work-life balance for indirect effects, namely mediation and moderation effects, is the study's main novelty. Existing studies, which only consider work-life balance in terms of direct effects, demonstrate this. Indeed, if we look deeper into the evidence, it is very likely that work-life balance will have an indirect effect on workers with families, particularly in work areas with high workloads and demands, such as the distribution center area.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Work-life Balance

Work-life balance is defined as a situation that fits the person-environment, or in this case, relates to work and family, where a suitable situation shapes well-being and an unsuitable situation shapes job dissatisfaction or work stress (Edwards & Billsberry, 2010; Edwards & Rothbard, 1999; Wibowo et al., 2023). Meanwhile, work-life balance, according to Clark (2000), is a condition of achieving a high level of satisfaction in both the work and family environments. This refers to a balanced distribution or allocation of time for all roles as well as the current environment. Work-life balance is also defined as a worker's ability to fulfill commitments between work and family matters while maintaining responsibility (Hill et al., 2001), and this commitment can also mediate an employee's suitability to work in a job that requires organizational citizenship behavior (Christian et al., 2023). Thus, work-life balance can be defined as the regulation of balanced conditions between work and personal and family matters.

2.2. Physical Work Environment

The physical work environment is one of the factors that influences work performance. Workplace layout settings can help to speed up work. Furthermore, it can reduce or eliminate excessive ergonomic exposure such as bending, lifting, carrying, or squatting (Andersen et al., 2018; Lund et al., 2006; Sterud, 2014; Thorsen et al., 2021). On another level, the physical work environment contributes to the development of a safe climate (Wibowo et al., 2023). A complex physical work environment can influence employee attitudes or behaviors (Zoghbi-Manrique-de-Lara & Sharifiatashgah, 2020), including forming or breaking employee morale (Shravasti & Bhola, 2015). According to the explanations above, the physical work environment includes work support equipment and equipment, as well as the layout arrangements for employees provided by the organization.

2.3. Job Satisfaction

Job satisfaction can reflect a sense of relief and confidence in one's work (Wibowo et al., 2023). This is also consistent with the viewpoint that job satisfaction is defined as workers' emotional state when something pleasant or useful occurs as a result of their work (Irawanto et al., 2021). Meanwhile, job satisfaction can be expressed through workers' affective orientation, according to Said & El-Shafei (2021) and Lu et al. (2005). Thus, job satisfaction is defined as a sense of fulfillment derived from the accomplishments of employees' work.

2.4. Employee Performance

Employee performance is explained in several studies as a result of work in an organization that is related not only to success but also to failure (Sopiah et al., 2020; Wolor et al., 2020). This term is frequently associated with and mentioned in the context of explaining employee performance, such as job performance (Pancasila et al., 2020). As a result, the perception of employee performance is often the same. Employee performance is inseparable from the achievement of work results by workers within a certain period, which is usually stated in the results of key performance indicators (KPIs) in its implementation in organizations. Related to this, Saffar (2020) raises the review explained by Ahire and Dreyfus (2000), where employee performance describes employees' involvement, participation, and contribution to achieve continuous performance improvements for the achievement of organizational goals. As a result, work performance is defined as all of the efforts that employees put into their jobs.

2.5. Hypothesis Development

Workers must strike a balance between work and personal life in order to support work performance. In this case, married male and female workers have a balance of responsibilities in different roles at work and in the family (Michel et al., 2011; Peters et al., 2009; van der Lippe & Lippényi, 2020), which can affect work results (Emslie & Hunt, 2009; Lewis et al., 2007). In this case, a healthy work-life balance can influence job satisfaction. In practice, however, Clark (2000) emphasized the existence of a subjective limitation on the balance in which the work or family domain will be prioritized. It is explained in a review based on several previous research results that determining employee performance is not an easy thing and is determined by various factors that are not always the same. According to Delery and Shaw (2001), employee performance is not determined by knowledge, abilities, or skills. On the contrary, as with most research findings, these factors generally shape or determine employee performance (Malik & Nilakant, 2016; Nguyen et al., 2019; Wang et al., 2016; Witherspoon et al., 2013).

Based on the explanations provided above, work-life balance can be proposed as an intermediary role between the variables in the hypotheses (H) as follows:

H1: Work-life balance mediates the physical work environment's effect on employee performance.

H2: Work-life balance mediates the physical work environment's effect on job satisfaction.

H3: Work-life balance, along with job satisfaction, mediates the effect of the physical work environment on employee performance.

Work-life balance, as an intermediary, also allows for intervention in a volatile relationship. In addition to supporting the link between job satisfaction and employee performance, Roberts and David (2020) who specifically examine disturbances that can further affect job satisfaction and performance, reveal that satisfaction and job performance have a significant relationship. These findings are supplemented by the findings of other studies that corroborate previous findings (Pancasila et al., 2020). Because of the work-life balance dynamics that occur, this is possible as a moderator. This means that whether or not the formation of a work-life balance is very easy to become an intervention in the work environment, job satisfaction, and employee performance. This is especially true when considering the contribution of partial work-life balance relationships. Unfavorable working conditions can have an impact on somatic complaints, fatigue, and employee job satisfaction (McGowan, 2001). Similarly, negative trends in the workplace, according to Said and El-Shafei (2021), will have a negative impact on job satisfaction.

H4: Work-life balance moderates job satisfaction and employee performance.

H5: Work-life balance moderates the physical work environment's effect on employee performance.

The preceding explanations provide a comprehensive analysis of the theoretical framework employed in prior research, as depicted in Table 1.

Table 1: Theoretical Background from Previous Studies

OTGHB7_2023_v21n11_55_t0001.png 이미지

The explanation for the development of the above hypotheses then forms the research conceptual framework, as shown in Figure 1, as follows:

OTGHB7_2023_v21n11_55_f0001.png 이미지

Figure 1: Conceptual Framework

3. Research Methods and Materials

3.1. Research Design

This study employs a quantitative approach based on PLS-SEM structural modeling. This modeling allows for the completion of the analysis with constructs or relationships in complex structural modeling (Christian et al., 2023; Hair et al., 2019). This study includes four variables: work-life balance, physical work environment, job satisfaction, and employee performance. Each variable is made up of a series of items, as shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Operationalization Variable

OTGHB7_2023_v21n11_55_t0002.png 이미지

3.2. Sample and Data Collection

This study used a survey method with a questionnaire to measure these items. The questionnaire was created on a Likert scale of 1-5, with answers ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). The questionnaire distribution took place in July and August of 2022. Employees from a distribution center at a Bitung branch retail company in Tangerang, Banten, served as the study's sample. Purposive sampling was used in this study. Employees who work in the distribution area and have worked for at least one year are the sample criteria determined in this study. The following criterion applies to employees who are already married. According to the study's family, these employees were married (whether still together or separated), with or without children. There were 106 samples that met the criteria in this study.

The SmartPLS tool is used in this study's analysis. In the analysis of this study, a number of tests were performed, including a reliability test using composite reliability (CR), the result of which must be greater than 0.7. The average variance extracted (AVE) test is used in this study, and the results must be greater than 0.5 (Barati et al., 2019; Christian, Wibowo, Yulita, Melati, & Sunarno, et al., 2023; Memon & Rahman, 2014). Furthermore, the validity test in this study examined the results of cross-loadings to ensure that the correlation between constructs and items was greater than that of other constructs. The Fornell-Larcker criterion also demonstrates discriminant validity, as the roots of the AVE of each construct are greater than the correlation with other variables (Wong, 2013).

4. Results and Discussion

4.1. Participant Profile Distribution

study, followed by female employees. Based on these findings, it is possible to conclude that male employees predominate in this distribution center. It is perceived that the nature of the work at the distribution center where this work is performed prioritizes work skills, physical strength, and work endurance. Employees aged 26-40 years were the oldest participants in this study, followed by those aged 18-25 years and over 40 years. The vast majority of distribution employees are of productive age. The educational backgrounds of the employees in this distribution area reflect the work character, which is dominated by those with a high school or vocational background. Employees in the distribution industry are surprisingly dedicated to their jobs. This is evident from the length of time worked, which ranges from at least 7 years to more than 10 years; the figure is greater than 50%. It also has employees who have been with the company for 4-6 years, with a percentage of more than 15%. Furthermore, the majority of participants in this study were married employees with a background as widows or widowers. These employees, despite being widowers, already have dependent children and family members. Employees with 1 child account for nearly 50% of those working in this distribution center area, those with 2 children account for close to 28%, and those with more than 2 children account for nearly 8%.

Table 3: Participant Profile Distribution

OTGHB7_2023_v21n11_55_t0003.png 이미지

4.2. Reliability and Validity

Table 4 displays the findings of this study's reliability and validity. Reliability refers to the composite reliability results, which show that all variables (physical work environment, work-life balance, job satisfaction, and employee performance) have results greater than 0.7. Based on these findings, it is possible to conclude that all variables in this study are reliable. Furthermore, the validity test in this study refers to the results of outer loading items where all items (Physical_WE2, Physical_WE3, Physical_WE4, Physical_WE5) show greater results than 0.7 (Work-life_B3, Work-life_B4, Job_S1, Job_S2, Job_S3, Employee_P2, Employee_P3, and Employee_P4). Furthermore, the average variance extracted demonstrates the research's validity. The results for all variables (physical work environment, work-life balance, job satisfaction, and employee performance) are greater than 0.5. The following validity, discriminant validity, refers to the Fornell-Larcker criterion results for each variable and the cross-loading for each item. Based on the findings, it is possible to conclude that all items and variables in this study were found to be valid.

Table 4: Reliability and Validity Test

OTGHB7_2023_v21n11_55_t0004.png 이미지

4.3. Hypothesis Testing

According to the findings of this study (Table 5), the work-life balance of workers with families in the distribution center work area does not moderate the effect of the physical work environment on employee performance (P>0.05). This conclusion explains why H1 is rejected. Meanwhile, when measured by the physical work environment, work-life balance acts as a mediator in relation to the job satisfaction of married workers in the distribution area (P<0.05). This conclusion explains why H1 is rejected. Meanwhile, when measured by the physical work environment, work-life balance acts as a mediator in relation to the job satisfaction of married workers in the distribution area (P <0.05). These findings explain why H2 is accepted. Furthermore, when paired with job satisfaction, the mediating effect of work-life balance acts as a mediator between the physical work environment and employee performance (P<0.05). With these findings, it is concluded that H3 is acceptable. Work-life balance does not play the moderating role it should when it is associated with job satisfaction and employee performance (P>0.05). The same is true for work-life balance in terms of the physical work environment and employee performance. Based on these findings, it is possible to conclude that H4 and H5 are rejected.

Table 5: Hypothesis Testing

OTGHB7_2023_v21n11_55_t0005.png 이미지

4.4. Discussion

4.4.1. Work-Life Balance Is Taking Over as Mediation

Work-life balance does not act as a mediator in the physical work environment on the performance of married employees in this study. As is well known, the distribution work area is one of the most complex. Because of workload demands and a physical work environment that differs from workers in other areas, such as the back office or frontline, this work area presents unique work challenges. Several other jobs have flexible hours and work areas to allow workers to be more flexible in their work (Glass & Estes, 1997; Kelly et al., 2011) The distribution area frequently necessitates more effort because there is not only work focus but also work pressure, which frequently affects physical conditions. Fulfilling the need for the supply of goods for dozens or even hundreds of outlets, one of which will be heavily reliant on the field work team, The retail distribution center, as it is known, is a location where companies store their goods and products before sending them to outlet points and other sales channels. This allows for physical fatigue, which leads to decreased work focus.

This must be considered in the concept of work-life balance so that it does not affect the family environment. Quoting from various perspectives, work-life balance is also related to the balance of time at work and remaining time owned, especially for the family (Soomro et al., 2018), where the meaning of this varies from worker to worker, such as the consideration of life priorities and inherent social factors (Haar et al., 2019; Pichler, 2009). According to this study, the physical work environment has only a direct and limited effect on both work-life balance and employee performance. The physical work environment in this case emphasizes that work performance must be achieved regardless of the working environment. This means that employees in this distribution area value work-life balance, but not as a bridge between the physical workplace and employee performance. When a work-life balance is formed, the physical work environment will affect job satisfaction, according to this study. In this case, work-life balance serves as a bridge. It is undeniable that a good physical work environment will provide employees with comfortable work (Wibowo et al., 2022). Particularly in distribution work areas where work activity can be extremely high. Because of the high frequency of goods coming in and going out, workflow can be extremely high. Workplace fatigue is frequently a major issue that has a long-term impact on the family environment. On the one hand, it is not uncommon for male breadwinners to work overtime hours to supplement their income (Glass & Noonan, 2016). Female workers who have families and are motivated by various personal factors can have an impact on job satisfaction and performance work (Chung, 2020; Fuller & Hirsh, 2018; Hilbrecht et al., 2008). In contrast to male workers who play more of a role as breadwinners for the family, so the intensity of working hours is expected to form a maximum increase in work (Lott & Chung, 2016). This concern then emphasizes that maintaining physical condition, fatigue at work, and work stress are not uncommon in balancing work and family matters.

This emphasizes the fact that work fatigue and stress related to worker psychology can have an impact on work performance (Wibowo et al., 2023). As a result, this positive work environment will influence employee job satisfaction. As is well known, job satisfaction is defined as a feeling or positive attitude among workers toward their current job (Abu Ajamieh et al., 1996; Alrawashdeh et al., 2021; Giménez-Espert et al., 2020). When job satisfaction is measured using the physical work environment, life balance is crucial. Employees in this study believe that job satisfaction will have a relationship with feeling calm at work, where the physical work environment and work-life balance are formed. Adding to the findings of Hypothesis 2, when employees experience job satisfaction, which is preceded by a work-life balance and a physical work environment, it has an effect on employee performance (Malik & Nilakant, 2016; Nguyen et al., 2019; Wang et al., 2016; Witherspoon et al., 2013). This explains how work performance for employees in the distribution area is influenced by perceived physical work environment conditions, work-life balance, and job satisfaction. According to the explanation above, balancing work and family life will provide employees with a sense of fulfillment. Even if the effect is temporary, it will have a positive impact on the organization. Employee job satisfaction can contribute to optimal performance, which in turn can contribute to organizational success. As previously stated, job satisfaction must be driven by a sense of security, comfort, and the ability to create an easy work environment for employees to adapt and carry out their work smoothly and well. Furthermore, this must be driven by employees' ability to manage personal interests, particularly family interests.

Workplace professionalism is demonstrated by not bringing personal or family matters into the workplace. Work-related issues are not discussed in the family. This explains why balance is important in two areas: the organization and the family. The family does not want to see their partner or parents not spending as much time as possible with the family. Of course, in this case, stress and physical exhaustion after work can be managed in this manner in the family setting (Wibowo et al., 2023). In line with the role played by employees as the family breadwinner, this role is not easy because it requires balancing work and family. Workers in this field must be able to balance their responsibilities (both on and off the job) and adapt to the physical work environment. This connection will boost job satisfaction and performance. This emphasizes the importance of the ability to balance work and family matters for creating job satisfaction, a good physical work environment, and work productivity for workers who are already married.

4.4.2. Work-life Balance Does Not Serve as a Moderator

According to the findings of this study, work-life balance has no effect on employee performance. Workers in the distribution center believe that job satisfaction has only a direct impact on employee performance. Work-life balance stands alone in this case, not in its ability to increase the effect of job satisfaction on distribution workers' performance. Job satisfaction can shield workers from stress, which is also a function of stress regulators (Hoboubi et al., 2017). In relation to job satisfaction and work performance, the aspects of work enthusiasm that form the motivation for other things outside of work or a relaxed personal life that makes readiness to do work the next day are separate in nature. Work-life balance is not a focal point in this study for enhancing the influence of job satisfaction and performance in the distribution work area. Job satisfaction can either directly influence performance or be formed by work-life balance. This emphasizes that it is not personal factors that can strengthen distribution workers who are satisfied and have an impact on the quality of their performance. As the center, the moderating effect of work-life balance does not play a strong enough role.

Similarly, when it comes to work-life balance, the moderating effect of the physical work environment on employee performance has not been proven. This explains why the physical work environment in the distribution center work area has been designed primarily in accordance with applicable standards. The work equipment and work environment available in the distribution center area are in accordance with applicable standard operating procedures. Organizational fairness can be a useful intermediary variable in achieving job satisfaction and employee performance (Dong & Phuong, 2018; Islam et al., 2016; Kim & Chung, 2019; Paais & Pattiruhu, 2020). Furthermore, in the retail industry, distribution center areas where product arrangements according to categories must be arranged according to appropriate arrangements to provide efficiency and effectiveness of distribution operations, the layout of the work area must have been adjusted to fulfill the company's terms and conditions. Thus, this study emphasizes that the physical work environment is distinct from the quality of performance, rather than being strengthened by aspects of work-life balance. This is appropriate when the physical work environment has only a direct impact not only on worker performance, but also on job satisfaction and work-life balance.

5. Conclusions

Balancing work and personal and family obligations is difficult. This is also emphasized in the study's findings, where work-life balance serves as a mediator between one variable and another. This study adds to previous research that identifies work-life balance as a direct influence. This study was successful in demonstrating that work-life balance plays a special role as a mediator between the physical work environment and job satisfaction. The physical work environment in the distribution center work area presents its own set of challenges, as loading or frequency can be high and intense at times. Furthermore, for employees who are married, the physical work environment in this study explains that there is a significant influence on job satisfaction. These findings emphasize the importance of a good physical work environment, as well as work-life balance and job satisfaction, in influencing employee performance. Thus, work-life balance is mentioned as an important factor in mediating what happens in the physical work environment, job satisfaction, and employee performance in this study.

5.2. Theoretical and Practical Implications

At work, time and family are important factors that can influence work performance. This explains the existence of a well-balanced time distribution between work and family. Workers who are married, both men and women, have a responsibility to balance their roles at work and in the family environment. Even more so if the worker is a single parent, who has a different working time distribution based on their role (Ajenjo Cosp & García Saladrigas, 2019). Similarly, in relation to this research, the distribution of additional working hours, or what is commonly referred to as overtime work, which is often used by male workers who are already married to earn more income (Glass & Noonan, 2016; Lott & Chung, 2016) should also be considered from the perspective of work-life balance, which will support optimal work quality. Job performance must be optimized, which is supported by balancing roles at work and in the family (Rodríguez Rodríguez, 2022). Workers, on the other hand, must see the distribution of time at work as a reciprocal of what the organization has paid for the contribution of work done, such as the utilitarian view, which emphasizes the ethical basis for all parties involved (Chung & van der Horst, 2020; Glass & Noonan, 2016; Kelliher & Anderson, 2009; Lott, 2020). The findings of this study show that the concept of work-life balance has a direct impact on job satisfaction and performance when it comes to the distribution of work time. Work performance will be improved further if work-life balance and job satisfaction are combined into a single variable unit. Thus, this study ultimately connects the relationship between utilitarianism and the management of time and work distribution, which is emphasized in this study as a work-life balance.

5.3. Limitations and Recommendation for Future Research

There are several limitations to this study. First, the employees in this study are all family members, with no limit on the number of dependent family members. This will be useful in future studies because the number of dependents may affect work-life balance. Second, this study only employs one distribution branch, where the number of employees with specific backgrounds is, of course, limited. Subsequent research can compare other distribution work areas to supplement existing research. Third, by incorporating physical work environment variables as exogenous variables, this study only examines the role of work-life balance as a mediating and moderating factor. Work-life balance development as another role in the research framework can be considered for involvement in future research.

References

  1. Abu Ajamieh, A. R., Misener, T., Haddock, K. S., & Gleaton, J. U. (1996). Job satisfaction correlates among Palestinian nurses in the West Bank. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 33(4), 422-432. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-7489(95)00068-2
  2. Ahire, S. L., & Dreyfus, P. (2000). The impact of design management and process management on quality: an empirical investigation. Journal of Operations Management, 18(5), 549-575. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6963(00)00029-2
  3. Ajenjo Cosp, M., & Garcia Saladrigas, N. (2019). La distribucion del tiempo en los hogares monoparentales de madre ocupada. Vivir con otros como estrategia de conciliacion. Revista Internacional de Sociologia, 77(3), e131. https://doi.org/10.3989/ris.2019.77.3.18.027
  4. Akinwale, O. E., & George, O. J. (2020). Work environment and job satisfaction among nurses in government tertiary hospitals in Nigeria. Rajagiri Management Journal, 14(1), 71-92. https://doi.org/10.1108/RAMJ-01-2020-0002
  5. Allen, T. D., Johnson, R. C., Kiburz, K. M., & Shockley, K. M. (2013). Work-Family Conflict and Flexible Work Arrangements: Deconstructing Flexibility. Personnel Psychology, 66(2), 345-376. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12012
  6. Alrawashdeh, H. M., Al-Tammemi, A. B., Alzawahreh, M. K., AlTamimi, A., Elkholy, M., Al Sarireh, F., Abusamak, M., Elehamer, N. M. K., Malkawi, A., Al-Dolat, W., Abu-Ismail, L., Al-Far, A., & Ghoul, I. (2021). Occupational burnout and job satisfaction among physicians in times of COVID-19 crisis: a convergent parallel mixed-method study. BMC Public Health, 21(1), 811. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-10897-4
  7. Alromaihi, M. A., Alshomaly, Z. A., & George, S. (2017). Job satisfaction and employee performance: A theoretical review of the relationship between the two variables. International Journal of Advanced Research in Management and Social Sciences, 6(1), 1-10.
  8. Aman-Ullah, A., Ibrahim, H., Aziz, A., & Mehmood, W. (2022). Impact of workplace safety on employee retention using sequential mediation: evidence from the health-care sector. RAUSP Management Journal, 57(2), 182-198. https://doi.org/10.1108/RAUSP-02-2021-0043
  9. Andersen, L. L., Thorsen, S. V, Flyvholm, M.-A., & Holtermann, A. (2018). Long-term sickness absence from combined factors related to physical work demands: prospective cohort study. European Journal of Public Health, 28(5), 824-829. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/cky073
  10. Barati, M., Taheri-Kharameh, Z., Farghadani, Z., & Rasky, E. (2019). Validity and Reliability Evaluation of the Persian Version of the Heart Failure-Specific Health Literacy Scale. International Journal of Community Based Nursing and Midwifery, 7(3), 222-230. https://doi.org/10.30476/IJCBNM.2019.44997
  11. Bartoll, X., & Ramos, R. (2020). Working hour mismatch, job quality, and mental well-being across the EU28: a multilevel approach. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, 93(6), 733-745. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-020-01529-2
  12. Bianchi, S. M., Sayer, L. C., Milkie, M. A., & Robinson, J. P. (2012). Housework: Who Did, Does or Will Do It, and How Much Does It Matter? Social Forces; a Scientific Medium of Social Study and Interpretation, 91(1), 55-63. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sos120
  13. Cech, E. A., & Blair-Loy, M. (2014). Consequences of Flexibility Stigma Among Academic Scientists and Engineers. Work and Occupations, 41(1), 86-110. https://doi.org/10.1177/0730888413515497
  14. Christian, M., Wibowo, S., Indriyarti, E. R., Sunarno, S., & Yuniarto, Y. (2022). Do Service Quality and Satisfaction Affect the Intention of Using Application-Based Land Transportation? A Study on Generation YZ in Jakarta. Studies in Systems, Decision and Control, 216, 737-746. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10212-7_60
  15. Christian, M., Wibowo, S., Yulita, H., Melati, R., Sunarno, S., & Titis Perdini, F. (2023). Two phases of online food delivery app users' behavior in Greater Jakarta during the second year of the COVID-19 pandemic: Perceptions of food safety and hygiene. Environmental Health Engineering and Management, 10(3), 249-259. https://doi.org/10.34172/EHEM.2023.28
  16. Christian, M., Yulita, H., Nan, G., Wibowo, S., Indriyarti, E. R., Sunarno, S., & Melati, R. (2023). A PLS-SEM Analysis of Consumer Health Literacy and Intention to Use Complementary and Alternative Medicine in the COVID-19 Pandemic. Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics, 459-473. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-34589-0_35
  17. Christian, M., Yuniarto, Y., Wibowo, S., Yulita, H., & Manurung, S. (2023). Predictors of Health Workers' Organizational Citizenship Behavior in Indonesia Using PLS-SEM Analysis in the Digitalized Healthcare and COVID-19 Post-Pandemic. Studies in Systems, Decision and Control, 488, 406-415. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-39158-3_39
  18. Christian, M., Yuniarto, Y., Wibowo, S., Yulita, H., Melati, R., & Perdini, F. T. (2023). Person-Organization Fit Terhadap Organizational Commitment dan Organizational Citizenship Behavior Pada Tenaga Kesehatan di Jakarta. Jurnal E-Bis, 7(1), 93-106. https://doi.org/10.37339/e-bis.v7i1.1125
  19. Chung, H. (2020). Gender, Flexibility Stigma and the Perceived Negative Consequences of Flexible Working in the UK. Social Indicators Research, 151(2), 521-545. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-2036-7
  20. Chung, H., & van der Horst, M. (2020). Flexible Working and Unpaid Overtime in the UK: The Role of Gender, Parental and Occupational Status. Social Indicators Research, 151(2), 495-520. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-2028-7
  21. Chung, H., & van der Lippe, T. (2020). Flexible Working, Work-Life Balance, and Gender Equality: Introduction. Social Indicators Research, 151(2), 365-381. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-2025-x
  22. Clark, S. C. (2000). Work/Family Border Theory: A New Theory of Work/Family Balance. Human Relations, 53(6), 747-770. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726700536001
  23. Craig, L., & Powell, A. (2012). Dual-earner parents' work-family time: the effects of atypical work patterns and non-parental childcare. Journal of Population Research, 29(3), 229-247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12546-012-9086-5
  24. Delery, J. E., & Shaw, J. D. (2001). The strategic management of people in work organizations: Review, synthesis, and extension. In Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management (Vol. 20, pp. 165-197). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-7301(01)20003-6
  25. Dong, L. N. T., & Phuong, N. N. D. (2018). Organizational Justice, Job Satisfaction and Organizational Citizenship Behavior in Higher Education Institutions: A Research Proposition in Vietnam. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 5(3), 113-119. https://doi.org/10.13106/JAFEB.2018.VOL5.NO3.113
  26. Dotti Sani, G. M., & Treas, J. (2016). Educational Gradients in Parents' Child-Care Time Across Countries, 1965-2012. Journal of Marriage and Family, 78(4), 1083-1096. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12305
  27. Edwards, J. A., & Billsberry, J. (2010). Testing a Multidimensional Theory of Person-Environment Fit. Journal of Managerial Issues, 22(4), 476-493. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25822526
  28. Edwards, J. R., & Rothbard, N. P. (1999). Work and Family Stress and Well-Being: An Examination of Person-Environment Fit in the Work and Family Domains. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 77(2), 85-129. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1998.2813
  29. Emslie, C., & Hunt, K. (2009). 'Live to Work' or 'Work to Live'? A Qualitative Study of Gender and Work-life Balance among Men and Women in Mid-life. Gender, Work & Organization, 16(1), 151-172. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.2008.00434.x
  30. Erickson, J. J., Martinengo, G., & Hill, E. J. (2010). Putting work and family experiences in context: Differences by family life stage. Human Relations, 63(7), 955-979. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726709353138
  31. Fisher, G. G., Bulger, C. A., & Smith, C. S. (2009). Beyond work and family: A measure of work/nonwork interference and enhancement. In Journal of Occupational Health Psychology (Vol. 14, pp. 441-456). Educational Publishing Foundation. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016737
  32. Fuller, S., & Hirsh, C. E. (2018). "Family-Friendly" Jobs and Motherhood Pay Penalties: The Impact of Flexible Work Arrangements Across the Educational Spectrum. Work and Occupations, 46(1), 3-44. https://doi.org/10.1177/0730888418771116
  33. Gaiardelli, P., Resta, B., & Dotti, S. (2019). Exploring the role of human factors in lean management. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, 10(1), 339-366. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLSS-08-2017-0094
  34. Gimenez-Espert, M. D. C., Prado-Gasco, V., & Soto-Rubio, A. (2020). Psychosocial Risks, Work Engagement, and Job Satisfaction of Nurses During COVID-19 Pandemic. Frontiers in Public Health, 8(566896), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2020.566896
  35. Glass, J. L., & Estes, S. B. (1997). The Family Responsive Workplace. Annual Review of Sociology, 23(1), 289-313. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.23.1.289
  36. Glass, J. L., & Noonan, M. C. (2016). Telecommuting and Earnings Trajectories Among American Women and Men 1989-2008. Social Forces; a Scientific Medium of Social Study and Interpretation, 95(1), 217-250. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sow034
  37. Golden, T. D., Veiga, J. F., & Simsek, Z. (2006). Telecommuting's differential impact on work-family conflict: Is there no place like home? In Journal of Applied Psychology (Vol. 91, pp. 1340-1350). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.6.1340
  38. Haar, J. M., Sune, A., Russo, M., & Ollier-Malaterre, A. (2019). A Cross-National Study on the Antecedents of Work-Life Balance from the Fit and Balance Perspective. Social Indicators Research, 142(1), 261-282. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-1875-6
  39. Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2-24. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203
  40. Hendri, M. I. (2019). The mediation effect of job satisfaction and organizational commitment on the organizational learning effect of the employee performance. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 68(7), 1208-1234. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-05-2018-0174
  41. Hilbrecht, M., Shaw, S. M., Johnson, L. C., & Andrey, J. (2008). 'I'm Home for the Kids': Contradictory Implications for Work-Life Balance of Teleworking Mothers. Gender, Work & Organization, 15(5), 454-476. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.2008.00413.x
  42. Hill, E. J., Hawkins, A. J., Ferris, M., & Weitzman, M. (2001). Finding an Extra Day a Week: The Positive Influence of Perceived Job Flexibility on Work and Family Life Balance. Family Relations, 50(1), 49-58. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2001.00049.x
  43. Hoboubi, N., Choobineh, A., Kamari Ghanavati, F., Keshavarzi, S., & Akbar Hosseini, A. (2017). The Impact of Job Stress and Job Satisfaction on Workforce Productivity in an Iranian Petrochemical Industry. Safety and Health at Work, 8(1), 67-71. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shaw.2016.07.002
  44. Irawanto, D. W., Novianti, K. R., & Roz, K. (2021). Work from Home: Measuring Satisfaction between Work-Life Balance and Work Stress during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Indonesia. Economies, 9(3:96), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies9030096
  45. Islam, Z. ul, Bangish, S. B., Muhammad, H., & Jehan, A. S. (2016). The Impact of HR Practices on Job satisfaction: A Case Study of Hotel Industry in Pakistan. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 3(1), 43-48. https://doi.org/10.13106/JAFEB.2016.VOL3.NO1.43
  46. Kalsoom, Z., Khan, M. A., & Zubair, S. S. (2018). Impact of Transactional Leadership and Transformational Leadership on Employee Performance: A Case of FMCG Industry of Pakistan. Industrial Engineering Letters, 8(3), 23-30.
  47. Kelliher, C., & Anderson, D. (2009). Doing more with less? Flexible working practices and the intensification of work. Human Relations, 63(1), 83-106. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726709349199
  48. Kelly, E. L., Moen, P., Oakes, J. M., Fan, W., Okechukwu, C., Davis, K. D., Hammer, L. B., Kossek, E. E., King, R. B., Hanson, G. C., Mierzwa, F., & Casper, L. M. (2014). Changing Work and Work-Family Conflict: Evidence from the Work, Family, and Health Network. American Sociological Review, 79(3), 485-516. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122414531435
  49. Kelly, E. L., Moen, P., & Tranby, E. (2011). Changing Workplaces to Reduce Work-Family Conflict: Schedule Control in a White-Collar Organization. American Sociological Review, 76(2), 265-290. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122411400056
  50. Kim, J. (2020). Workplace Flexibility and Parent-Child Interactions Among Working Parents in the U.S. Social Indicators Research, 151(2), 427-469. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-2032-y
  51. Kim, S. J., & Chung, E. K. (2019). The effect of organizational justice as perceived by occupational drivers on traffic accidents: Mediating effects of job satisfaction. Journal of Safety Research, 68, 27-32. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2018.11.001
  52. Knight, C. R., & Brinton, M. C. (2017). One Egalitarianism or Several? Two Decades of Gender-Role Attitude Change in Europe. American Journal of Sociology, 122(5), 1485-1532. https://doi.org/10.1086/689814
  53. Lewis, S., Gambles, R., & Rapoport, R. (2007). The constraints of a 'work-life balance' approach: an international perspective. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18(3), 360-373. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585190601165577
  54. Lott, Y. (2020). Does Flexibility Help Employees Switch Off from Work? Flexible Working-Time Arrangements and Cognitive Work-to-Home Spillover for Women and Men in Germany. Social Indicators Research, 151(2), 471-494. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-2031-z
  55. Lott, Y., & Chung, H. (2016). Gender Discrepancies in the Outcomes of Schedule Control on Overtime Hours and Income in Germany. European Sociological Review, 32(6), 752-765. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcw032
  56. Lu, H., While, A. E., & Louise Barriball, K. (2005). Job satisfaction among nurses: a literature review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 42(2), 211-227. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2004.09.003
  57. Lund, T., Labriola, M., Christensen, K. B., Bultmann, U., & Villadsen, E. (2006). Physical work environment risk factors for long term sickness absence: prospective findings among a cohort of 5357 employees in Denmark. BMJ, 332(7539), 449-452. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38731.622975.3A
  58. Malik, A., & Nilakant, V. (2016). Knowledge integration mechanisms in high-technology business-to-business services vendors. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 14(4), 565-574. https://doi.org/10.1057/kmrp.2015.9
  59. McGowan, B. (2001). Self-reported stress and its effects on nurses. Nursing Standard (Royal College of Nursing, 15(42), 33-38. https://doi.org/10.7748/ns2001.07.15.42.33.c3050
  60. Memon, A. H., & Rahman, I. A. (2014). SEM-PLS Analysis of Inhibiting Factors of Cost Performance for Large Construction Projects in Malaysia: Perspective of Clients and Consultants. The Scientific World Journal, 2014(165158), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/165158
  61. Miani, C., & Hoorens, S. (2014). Parents at work: Men and women participating in the labour force: Short Statistical Report No. 2. RAND Corporation PP - Santa Monica, CA. https://doi.org/10.7249/RR348
  62. Michel, J. S., Kotrba, L. M., Mitchelson, J. K., Clark, M. A., & Baltes, B. B. (2011). Antecedents of work-family conflict: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32(5), 689-725. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/job.695
  63. Nguyen, T.-M., Nham, T. P., Froese, F. J., & Malik, A. (2019). Motivation and knowledge sharing: a meta-analysis of main and moderating effects. Journal of Knowledge Management, 23(5), 998-1016. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-01-2019-0029
  64. Obrenovic, B., Jianguo, D., Khudaykulov, A., & Khan, M. A. S. (2020). Work-Family Conflict Impact on Psychological Safety and Psychological Well-Being: A Job Performance Model. Frontiers in Psychology, 11(475), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00475
  65. Paais, M., & Pattiruhu, J. R. (2020). Effect of Motivation, Leadership, and Organizational Culture on Satisfaction and Employee Performance. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 7(8), 577-588. https://doi.org/10.13106/JAFEB.2020.VOL7.NO8.577
  66. Pancasila, I., Haryono, S., & Sulistyo, B. A. (2020). Effects of Work Motivation and Leadership toward Work Satisfaction and Employee Performance: Evidence from Indonesia. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 7(6), 387-397. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2020.vol7.no6.387
  67. Peters, P., den Dulk, L., & van der Lippe, T. (2009). The effects of time-spatial flexibility and new working conditions on employees' work-life balance: the Dutch case. Community, Work & Family, 12(3), 279-297. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668800902968907
  68. Peters, P., Tijdens, K. G., & Wetzels, C. (2004). Employees' opportunities, preferences, and practices in telecommuting adoption. Information & Management, 41(4), 469-482. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(03)00085-5
  69. Pichler, F. (2009). Determinants of Work-life Balance: Shortcomings in the Contemporary Measurement of WLB in Large-scale Surveys. Social Indicators Research, 92(3), 449-469. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-008-9297-5
  70. Roberts, J. A., & David, M. E. (2020). Boss phubbing, trust, job satisfaction and employee performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 155, 109702. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.109702
  71. Rodriguez Rodriguez, E. (2022). La "soberania sobre el tiempo". Unilateralidad e imposicion en la distribucion del tiempo de trabajo frente a conciliacion corresponsable. Cuadernos de Relaciones Laborales, 40(1), 37-55. https://doi.org/10.5209/crla.77642
  72. Saffar, N. A. G. A.-. (2020). The effect of total quality management practices on employee performance: The moderating role of knowledge sharing. Management Science Letters, 10(1), 77-90. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2019.8.014
  73. Said, R. M., & El-Shafei, D. A. (2021). Occupational stress, job satisfaction, and intent to leave: nurses working on front lines during COVID-19 pandemic in Zagazig City, Egypt. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(7), 8791-8801. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-11235-8
  74. Shravasti, R., & Bhola, S. S. (2015). Study on Working Environment and Job Satisfaction of Employees in Respect to Service Sector: An Analysis. Review of Research, 4(4), 1-4. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2589502
  75. Sirgy, M. J., & Lee, D.-J. (2018). Work-Life Balance: an Integrative Review. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 13(1), 229-254. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-017-9509-8
  76. Soomro, A. A., Breitenecker, R. J., & Shah, S. A. M. (2018). Relation of work-life balance, work-family conflict, and family-work conflict with the employee performance-moderating role of job satisfaction. South Asian Journal of Business Studies, 7(1), 129-146. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAJBS-02-2017-0018
  77. Sopiah, S., Kurniawan, D. T., Nora, E., & Narmaditya, B. S. (2020). Does Talent Management Affect Employee Performance?: The Moderating Role of Work Engagement. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 7(7), 335-341. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2020.vol7.no7.335
  78. Sterud, T. (2014). Work-related mechanical risk factors for long-term sick leave: a prospective study of the general working population in Norway. European Journal of Public Health, 24(1), 111-116. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckt072
  79. Talukder, A. K. M., Vickers, M., & Khan, A. (2018). Supervisor support and work-life balance: Impacts on job performance in the Australian financial sector. Personnel Review, 47(3), 727-744. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-12-2016-0314
  80. Thorsen, S. V., Flyvholm, M.-A., Pedersen, J., Bultmann, U., Andersen, L. L., & Bjorner, J. B. (2021). Associations between physical and psychosocial work environment factors and sickness absence incidence depend on the lengths of the sickness absence episodes: a prospective study of 27 678 Danish employees. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 78(1), 46-53. https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2020-106554
  81. van der Lippe, T., & Lippenyi, Z. (2020). Beyond Formal Access: Organizational Context, Working From Home, and Work-Family Conflict of Men and Women in European Workplaces. Social Indicators Research, 151(2), 383-402. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-1993-1
  82. Wang, Z., Sharma, P. N., & Cao, J. (2016). From knowledge sharing to firm performance: A predictive model comparison. Journal of Business Research, 69(10), 4650-4658. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.03.055
  83. Wibowo, S., Christian, M., Sunarno, S., & Yuniarto, Y. (2022). Determinants of Stress Recognition and Job Satisfaction in Hospitals For Health Professionals in Indonesia. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management Systems, 15(1), 26-34. https://doi.org/10.30813/jiems.v15i1.3601
  84. Wibowo, S., Sunarno, S., Gasjirin, J., Christian, M., & Indriyarti, E. R. (2023). Psychological and Organizational Factors Impacting Job Satisfaction during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Study on Similar Exposure Groups in Indonesia. Acta Medica Philippina, Online(March), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.47895/amp.vi0.3688
  85. Witherspoon, C. L., Bergner, J., Cockrell, C., & Stone, D. N. (2013). Antecedents of organizational knowledge sharing: a meta-analysis and critique. Journal of Knowledge Management, 17(2), 250-277. https://doi.org/10.1108/13673271311315204
  86. Wolor, C. W., Solikhah, S., Fidhyallah, N. F., & Lestari, D. P. (2020). Effectiveness of E-Training, E-Leadership, and Work Life Balance on Employee Performance during COVID-19. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 7(10), 443-450. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2020.vol7.no10.443
  87. Wong, K. K.-K. (2013). Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) Techniques Using SmartPLS. Marketing Bulletin, 24(1), 1-32.
  88. Zoghbi-Manrique-de-Lara, P., & Sharifiatashgah, M. (2020). An affective events model of the influence of the physical work environment on interpersonal citizenship behavior. In Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology (Vol. 36, Issue 1, pp. 27-37). Colegio Oficial de Psicologos de Madrid. https://doi.org/10.5093/jwop2019a27