Social Support and Employee Turnover Intention: The Mediating Role of Work-Family Conflict

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of workplace social support (WSS) and family social support (FSS) on employee turnover intention (TI) through both forms of work-family conflict (WFC), namely, work interfering with family (WIF) and family interfering with work (FIW).

Theoretical framework

The study is theoretically grounded on social exchange theory (Blau, 1964), the job demand-control-support model (Johnson & Hall 1988), cognitive appraisal theory (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984), and Hobfoll’s (1989) conservation of resources theory.

Design/methodology/approach

The study used a cross-sectional survey design. The multi-item measurement scales were developed based on prior studies to design survey questionnaires. An analysis was performed on 277 responses from employees working in different government and private firms in the Western Region of Saudi Arabia. The hypotheses were tested using SmartPLS3.

Findings

The investigation finds that both WSS and FSS significantly predict TI, and both WIF and FIW partially mediate the WSS-TI and FSS-TI relationships. The results demonstrate that support from both the family and work domains lead to a reciprocal relationship, and they play important roles in reducing work-family conflict, ultimately having a desirable impact on turnover.

Practical & social implications of the research

Management should create a supportive environment for employees within the workplace and ensure family-friendly policies so as to minimize work-family conflict. The study indicates that family members play a crucial role in reducing the stress associated with the work domain. Therefore, everybody should extend support to their working family members.

Originality/value

This is a pioneering attempt to investigate the implications of both WSS and FSS on both types of WFC (i.e., WIF and FIW) and their ultimate effect on TI.

Keywords
– Work social support; Family social support; Turnover intention; Work-family conflict; Saudi Arabia

Resumo

Objetivo

O objetivo deste estudo é investigar o impacto do apoio social no trabalho (AST) e do apoio social familiar (ASF) na intenção de rotatividade de pessoal (IR) por meio de ambas as formas de conflito trabalho-família (CTF), a saber, trabalho interferindo na família (TIF) e família interferindo no trabalho (FIT).

Referencial teórico

O estudo está fundamentado na teoria da troca social (Blau, 1964); no modelo de demanda-controle-apoio do trabalho (Johnson & Hall 1988); na teoria da avaliação cognitiva (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984); e na teoria da conservação de recursos (Hobfoll, 1989).

Metodologia

O estudo utilizou um desenho de pesquisa transversal. As escalas de medição multi-item foram desenvolvidas com base em estudos anteriores para projetar questionários de pesquisa. A análise foi realizada por meio de 277 respostas de funcionários que trabalham em diferentes governos e empresas privadas na região Ocidental da Arábia Saudita. As hipóteses foram testadas usando o SmartPLS3.

Resultados

A pesquisa descobriu que o AST e o ASF predizem significativamente a IR – e que tanto o TIF quanto o FIT medeiam parcialmente as relações AST-IR e ASF-IR. Os resultados mostram que o apoio por parte tanto dos domínios da família quanto do trabalho tem uma relação recíproca e desempenham papéis importantes na redução do conflito trabalho-família, com seu impacto final e desejável na rotatividade.

Implicações práticas e sociais da pesquisa

A gestão deve criar um ambiente de apoio para os funcionários no local de trabalho e garantir políticas favoráveis à família, a fim de que os funcionários possam minimizar o conflito trabalho-família. O estudo indica que os familiares têm papel crucial na redução do estresse associado ao domínio do trabalho. Portanto, todos devem estender o apoio aos membros da família que trabalham.

Contribuições

Esta é uma tentativa pioneira de investigar as implicações de AST e ASF em ambos os tipos de CTF (ou seja, TIF e FIT) e seu efeito final em IR.

Palavras-chave
– Apoio social no trabalho; Apoio social familiar; Intenção de rotatividade; Conflito trabalho-família; Arábia Saudita

1 Introduction

Employee turnover has attracted researchers’ attention for many decades (Conley & You, 2021; Guzeller Cem & Celiker, 2019). Given its damaging consequences for organizations in terms of lost human and social capital, scholars and practitioners across the globe are still keen to understand employee turnover (Hancock, Allen, Bosco, McDaniel, & Pierce, 2013; Hom, Lee, Shaw, & Hausknecht, 2017; Lee, Hom, Eberly, & Mitchell, 2017). Turnover intention (TI) is a proxy for actual turnover (Lee, 2004). TI usually precedes many detrimental actions such as workplace deviant behavior, job searching, and ultimate exit from the organization (Soltis, Agneessens, Sasovova, & Labianca, 2013). The literature on turnover identified job stressors as the major antecedents of TI (e.g., constraints in achieving task goals, time pressure, role overload, role conflict, and others) (Pindek & Spector, 2016). Another antecedent of turnover is work-family conflict (WFC), which is a form of stressor that is related to role overload and role conflict (Michel, Mitchelson, Pichler, & Cullen, 2010). While empirical evidence consistently supports a positive relationship between the two types of work-family conflict and employee turnover, some disagreements have not been resolved yet.

WFC refers to “a form of inter-role conflict in which the role pressures from the work and family domains are mutually incompatible in some respect. That is, participation in the work (family) role is made more difficult by virtue of participation in the family (work) role” (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985, p. 77). It may occur in both directions, i.e., work interfering with family (WIF) or family interfering with work (FIW). Both WIF and FIW are found to have an association with many job-related attitudes and behaviors, including turnover intentions (Amstad, Meier, Fasel, Elfering, & Semmer, 2011). Employees facing widespread WFC may leave their job as a means of reducing the conflict (Fong, Chui, Cheong, & Fong, 2018; Frone, 2003). Therefore, withdrawal from a job can be seen as a response to role incompatibility between work and family. By and large, meta-analyses of cross-sectional studies support a positive relationship between both WIF and FIW and TI (Amstad et al., 2011; Rubenstein, Eberly, Lee, & Mitchell, 2018).

Social support from both within and outside the organizational domain is also considered to be a likely antecedent of TI (Asghar, Gull, Bashir, & Akbar, 2018; Lauzier & Mercier, 2018; Lee, 2004). Within the organization, social support mostly comes from supervisors and co-workers, while outside the organization, support emanates from family, friends, and the community. The social exchange theory (Blau, 1964) and the reciprocity norm (Gouldner, 1960) explain the relationship between the support from an organization and employee behavior and attitudes, including TI. Help from family and friends also results in a variety of psychological consequences (Asghar et al., 2018). The study of Azim and Islam (2018) found that support from family and friends is positively and significantly related to the career commitment of Saudi nurses. Thus, a higher level of organizational and family support is expected to reduce the TI of employees. However, the link between TI and social support can be explored in terms of the latter’s buffering effect on the stressor-stress outcome relationship. Social support is widely recommended as an effective measure to reduce stress.

The job demand-control-support (JDCS) paradigm proposed by Johnson and Hall (1988) provides theoretical grounds for the buffering effects of social support. It suggests that stress in the workplace stems from high expectations, little control, and poor support. An employee who receives emotional and instrumental support from his/her social network is more likely to cope with role overload or role conflict related to the work-family relationship (Hobfoll, 1989). According to Hobfoll (1989), people suffer from stress when their resources are endangered or lost. Social support, both from the organization and the family, allows people to gain or secure these resources and thus serves as a proximal antecedent of stress that may emerge from work-family conflict. Thus, in the social support-TI relationship, work-family conflict is likely to have a mediating role (Gao & Jin, 2015). That is to say, social support is expected to affect the level of WFC, which in turn affects TI. Given this backdrop, this study attempts to explore the relationships among work social support (WSS), family social support (FSS), WFC (both WIF and FIW), and TI.

This study makes multiple contributions. First, it is designed to study the mediating role of WFC between social support and TI, which already has theoretical foundations, but empirical studies on this particular configuration are rare. In line with the conservation of resources (COR) theory, the research framework of the study is based on the premise that social support in the workplace and family plays a key role in reducing the stress related to inter-domain conflict, which ultimately affects turnover intention. Lack of support from the workplace or family is expected to increase the conflict and vice versa. Second, this research studies the implication of both WSS and FSS on both types of WFC, i.e., WIF and FIW, and their ultimate effect on TI, which is also not very common. Third, the study is based on the context of Saudi Arabia, where the family plays a pivotal role in individual decision-making in both the family and professional domains (Abalkhail, 2017; Allen, French, Dumani, & Shockley, 2015; Karam & Afiouni, 2014). People from different countries experience different levels of social support (French, Dumani, Allen, & Shockley, 2018). Therefore, a study focusing on family social support, WFC, and TI in the Arab context deserves attention. To the best of our knowledge, no such study has been conducted in this context. So, this study can be considered as a pioneering initiative in the context of the Arab region.

Literature Review and Hypothesis Development

1.1 Turnover intention

Turnover intention refers to the deliberate inclination to leave an organization, which has several negative effects on the organization and impacts employee relations (Eliyana, Ma’arif, & Muzakki, 2019 ; Oliveira & Rocha, 2017; Seema, Choudhary, & Saini, 2021). Cotton and Tuttle (1986) categorized the antecedents of turnover into three categories: personal, work-related, and external. Personal factors, including age, gender, education, job tenure, etc., influence TI (Williams & Hazer, 1986). Work-related factors such as job satisfaction, workplace incivility, workplace ethical climate, organizational commitment, and perceived organizational support are also found to affect TI (Rubel, Kee, Quah, & Rimi, 2017; Sharma & Singh, 2016; Yao & Wang, 2006). External factors such as family social support, job opportunities, etc., are similarly likely to affect TI (Lauzier & Mercier, 2018; Lee, 2004; Michel, Kotrba, Mitchelson, Clark, & Baltes, 2011).

1.2 Workplace social support

Workplace social support (WSS), also known as organizational social support, is the employees’ perception of their organizations’ stance regarding the employees’ contribution and well-being (Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchison, & Sowa, 1986; Klein & Colauto, 2020; Liu, Cui, Su, & Du, 2019). It represents the overall care-giving by the organization through thick and thin. It includes being aware of the employees’ needs, expectations, and difficulties and providing moral as well as material support accordingly (Bohle & Alonso, 2017; Colakoglu, Culha, & Atay, 2010). WSS mainly comes from supervisors or colleagues. It is considered to have a positive effect on health issues for employees (Arnold & Dupré, 2012). Grant-Vallone and Ensher (2001) found that employees who perceived a higher level of WSS reported a lower level of depression, anxiety, and health concerns. It also leads to productive work-related emotions, which results in positive work attitudes, performance, and commitment to the organization. Nohe and Sonntag (2014) observed a buffering effect of WSS on work-family conflict, and it was found to lower the influence of work-family conflict on turnover intention.

1.3 Family social support

Family social support (FSS) implies an individual’s cognitive appraisal of emotional concern and instrumental support from family and friends in fulfilling the individual’s obligations. The content of the support may come in different forms, such as emotional (e.g., love, trust, empathy, care, etc.), informational (e.g., access to information, suggestions, advice, etc.), and instrumental (e.g., skills acquisition, transportation, sharing of tasks and responsibilities, etc.) (López & Cooper, 2011). Empirical research supports the idea that social support acts as a buffer in protecting the individual from the harmful consequences of traumatic incidents, contributing to a greater perceived sense of well-being (Gjesfjeld, Greeno, Kim, & Anderson, 2010). Zhou, Li, and Gao (2020) found that a higher level of family support reduces individuals’ negative experiences at work.

1.4 Work-family conflict

Work-family conflict is conceptualized as a psychological state of an employee that emanates from the inter-role conflict between work and family. It is experienced when an employee finds that work responsibilities make it more difficult to perform family duties and vice versa. Greenhaus and Beutell (1985) anticipated that inter-role conflict between family and work might be related to time involvement, strain, or behavior pertaining to a role. WFC can be bidirectional: (i) work interfering with the family space (WIF) and (ii) family interfering with the work domain (FIW) (O’Driscoll, Brough, & Kalliath, 2004). Empirical research has suggested that WFC is correlated with work- and family-related consequences, including job performance, presenteeism, job and life satisfaction, burnout, absenteeism, and psychological well-being (Frone, 2003). It also plays a negative role in organizational performance, commitment (Taylor, DelCampo, & Blancero, 2009), and strategy (Jennings & McDougald, 2007). Perceived organizational support, family stressors, job stressors, personality, coping style, and biographical characteristics, such as sex and income, etc., are found to be the major antecedents of work-family conflict (Cinamon, Weisel, & Tzuk, 2007).

1.5 Social support and turnover intention

Social support from the workplace and family may act as a defensive mechanism that prevents adverse emotions resulting from workplace stress, including role overload, role conflict, etc., which may lead to damaging attitudes and behavior in the workplace (Wang, Liu, Zhan, & Shi, 2010). Social exchange theory demonstrates that social support in the workplace develops a strong sense of comfort and security in employees, and in exchange, they feel an emotional bond with the organization (Blau, 1964). Conversely, the job demand-control-support (JDCS) model endorses the view that receiving emotional and instrumental support from their social network (family/work) is likely to boost the morale of employees to cope with job stressors and helps develop a positive view about their job and/or organization (Johnson & Hall 1988). Consequently, it is expected that high levels of WSS and FSS are likely to reduce employee turnover intentions (Cavazotte, Araujo, & Abreu, 2017). Lee (2004) found a negative relationship between WSS (from supervisors and colleagues) and TI for computer professionals in Singapore, while he did not observe any significant association between FSS and TI. However, he identified the social need of employees as a strong moderating variable in this relationship (Lee, 2004). Nohe and Sonntag (2014) observed that social support from the leader plays a moderating role between work-to-family conflict and TI. However, they did not find such a role for FSS. The recent study of Fong et al. (2018) also found that social support from coworkers helped to reduce the TI of casino hosts. Zhou et al. (2020) also observed that support from family/friends is related to young preschool teachers’ intentions to leave in China. Using a sample of French SME owners, Leung, Mukerjee, and Thurik (2020) observed that work-family balance mediates the relationship between family support and the subjective well-being of SME owners. In his meta-analysis, Wang (1998) revealed a strong correlation between family social support and a number of factors including role performance, behavior, psychological adjustment, coping behaviors, stress, quality of life, well-being, and self-actualization. Most of the variables are well-documented antecedents of TI (Williams & Hazer, 1986). We therefore consider the following hypotheses.

H1: Workplace social support has a negative impact on employee turnover intention.

H2: Family social support has a negative impact on employee turnover intention.

1.6 Social support and work-family conflict

WFC refers to the incompatibility of role pressures that originate from the work and family domains. The conflict may arise in two forms: family interfering with work (FIW) and work interfering with family (WIF). Role overload in any of the domains, as well as the conflicting demands of the two spheres, leads to a higher level of WFC (Ahmad, 2010; Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985; Lingard & Francis, 2006). Social support from the workplace and the family is likely to play an important role in reducing or helping to cope with role overload or role conflict. WFC is expected to be lower for workers who believe that their organization is supportive.

Hobfoll’s (1989) COR theory offers a conceivable account of the contribution of social support in reducing the level of work-family conflict as well as the consequences of such conflict. Hobfoll (1989) describes COR theory as a stress model, and he defines stress as an outcome of resource loss. The theory postulates that everyone seeks to acquire, preserve, and protect his/her resources. Resources may come in the form of objects (e.g., transportation, accommodation), personal characteristics (e.g., self-efficacy, self-esteem), conditions (e.g., marriage, seniority), and energies (e.g., time, knowledge, money). According to Hobfoll (1989), people are stressed by threats to or lack of resources. Social support, from both the organization and family, helps people to gain or maintain these resources and thus acts as a proximal antecedent of work-related stress, including WFC. In their research on WFC, Grandey and Cropanzano (1999) applied COR theory. They believed that work-family conflicts could lead to stress as the coordination of work-family roles is resource-consuming. They assumed that an employee with more personal and social resources (gained through social support) would more easily combine their work and family roles with fewer conflicts. In the case of FIW, support from family members helps to reduce the conflict, while in the case of WIF, support from supervisors and colleagues may lessen the level of conflict. The questionnaire survey of Seiger and Wiese (2009) observed social support from coworkers (but not supervisors) as an antecedent for WIF, while they found that partner support (but not from other family members) was a significant antecedent of FIW. Therefore, we assume the following hypotheses.

H3: Workplace social support has a negative influence on work-interfering-with-family conflict.

H4: Workplace social support has a negative influence on family-interfering-with-work conflict.

H5: Family social support has a negative influence on family-interfering-with-work conflict.

H6: Family social support has a negative influence on work-interfering-with-family conflict.

1.7 Work-family conflict and turnover intention

Employees experiencing acute work-family conflict due to role overload or role conflict may choose to respond by leaving their job. Hence, withdrawal from their job may be seen by employees as a coping reaction in the face of conflicting work and family demands. When an employee experiences WIF, they may be interested in quitting their current job and look for a new job that promises a better work-life balance. Similarly, when an employee’s family responsibilities impede them from fulfilling their work duties (FIW), they may find quitting their job to be a solution to reduce WFC and better fulfill their family commitments (Boyar, Maertz, Pearson, & Keough, 2003).

Cognitive appraisal theory and coping mechanisms support this assumption (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). When someone appraises a situation as stressful, they try to get rid of the stress by altering the stress-causing behavior. For example, when an employee experiences stress because of high work-family conflict, they may intend to quit their job as it is believed to be the cause of the stress (Amstad et al., 2011). Most studies have observed a positive association between both WIF and FIW and turnover intention (Amstad et al., 2011; Chen, Ayoun, & Eyoun, 2018; Wang, Lee, & Wu, 2017). However, turnover intention in the case of WIF is higher than for FIW, as turnover may not effectively reduce the conflict (Frone, Russell, & Cooper, 1992). The longitudinal study of Nohe and Sonntag (2014) also revealed that (increases in) WIF predicted increases in turnover intentions, whereas (increases in) FIW did not. Thus, our study intends to test the following hypotheses.

H7: Work-interfering-with-family (WIF) conflict has a positive influence on turnover intention.

H8: Family-interfering-with-work (FIW) conflict has a positive influence on turnover intention.

1.8 Mediating role of work-family conflict

As discussed earlier, social exchange theory and JDCS theory clarify the relationship between social support (both workplace and family) and employee turnover intention. In fact, the decision to quit a job is a reactionary response to the stressful events around an employee. Role overload and inter-role conflict are vital sources of stress that may come from either the work or family domain. In line with COR theory, social support in the workplace and family plays a key role in reducing the stress related to such inter-domain conflict. Therefore, it is conceivable that in the social support-turnover relationship, work-family conflict is likely to act as a mediator. In other words, it is assumed that social support affects work-family conflict, which in turn affects TI. Our study considers the following hypotheses.

H9: Work interfering with family mediates the relationship between workplace social support and TI.

H10: Work interfering with family mediates the relationship between family social support and TI.

H11: Family interfering with work mediates the relationship between family social support and TI.

H12: Family interfering with work mediates the relationship between workplace social support and TI.

2 Research Framework

Based on the literature review, this study uses a holistic framework, incorporating WSS and FSS, WIF and FIW, and TI (Figure 1). The model below shows how social support in the work and family domains affects work-to-family conflict and family-to-work conflict, which ultimately affect employee turnover intention. The theoretical basis for the framework lies with the JDCS model (Johnson & Hall 1988), COR theory (Hobfoll, 1989), and cognitive appraisal theory and coping mechanism (Lazarus & Folkman 1984).

Figure 1
Research Framework

3 The Study

3.1 Participants

The participants were 277 employees working in different private and government organizations in Saudi Arabia, of which 65% were male and 35% were female. Fewer female respondents reflect the low level of women’s participation in the job market. Most of the respondents belong to the 20-30 years old age group. Among the participants, 45% were unmarried and 51% were married or others. Table 1 includes the demographic information of the respondents.

Table 1
Demographic information (N=277)

Participants	Number	Percentage
Gender
Male	181	65
Female	96	35
Marital status
Unmarried	125	45
Married	141	51
Divorced	9	3
Widow(er)	2	1
Age
Below 20	3	1
20 to 30	141	51
30 to 40	66	24
40 to 50	39	14
Above 50	28	10
Organization type
Government	127	46
Private	150	54
Working hours
Below 4	5	2
4 to 8	132	48
8 to 10	125	45
Above 10	15	5

3.2 Procedures

The data were collected through a questionnaire survey. With the help of research assistants, a total of 500 questionnaires were distributed to the employees of private and government organizations located in the Western Region of Saudi Arabia. The objective of the study was explained to the respondents in a cover letter. It was clearly highlighted that participation in the study was optional and the collected data would be kept confidential. The questionnaire was initially written in the English language. However, to facilitate ease of understanding, it was translated into Arabic, the respondents’ native language. For the translation, the back-translation method was used (Brislin, 1970). The translation (into Arabic) and back-translation (into English) of the survey measures were carried out by a panel of experts until no significant difference was observed between the translated survey measures and the original version. Data were collected using the Arabic version only. A total of 277 usable questionnaires were received, which indicates an acceptable response rate of 55.2% (Bourini, Jahmani, Mumtaz, & Al-Bourini, 2019). Smart PLS version 3.0. was used to analyze the data.

3.3 Scales

The variables were measured with the scales from previous research. A five-point Likert-type scale with points ranging from (1) strongly disagree to (5) strongly agree was employed for the data collection. Cronbach’s alpha (α) was used to measure the reliability of the scale. Factor loading was calculated to see if the related variables were contributed to by all queries. The Cronbach’s alphas and factor loadings in Table 2 and Table 3 along with their threshold limits attest that there is no concern regarding the suitability of each scale based on reliability and validity issues.

Table 2
Means, Standard Deviations, Correlations, Reliability and Validity Estimates

Variables	1	2	3		4		5		6		7		8		9	10	11	12
1. Gender	1
2. Age	-.06	1
3. MS	.10	.57**	1
4. OT	.15*	-.22**	-.15*		1
5. WH	-.16**	-.01	.06		.12*		1
6. FIWS	-.14*	-.04	-.04		-.04		-.03		0.91
7. FIWT	-.02	-.03	.10		.04		-.03		0.50**		0.91
8. FSS	-.02	.07	.04		.05		-.05		-0.33**		-0.41**		0.88
9. TI	-.06	-.04	-.01		-.02		.06		0.38**		0.42**		-0.55**		0.90
10. WIFS	-.04	-.03	-.01		-.06		-.01		0.09		0.03		-0.28**		0.37**	0.88
11. WIFT	.02	-.15*	-.04		-.10		.03		0.04		0.06		-0.30**		0.36**	0.31**	0.87
12. WSS	.06	.07	.02		-.02		-.04		-0.27**		-0.39**		0.42**		-0.47**	-0.28**	-0.30**	0.88
Cronbach's Alpha									0.90		0.89		0.90		0.88	0.86	0.83	0.90
Composite Reliability								0.94		0.93		0.93		0.92		0.91	0.90	0.93
Average Variance Extracted (AVE)								0.83		0.82		0.78		0.80		0.78	0.75	0.78
Mean									1.76		1.74		4.00		1.78	1.77	1.79	3.97
SDEV									0.73		0.73		0.70		0.71	0.68	0.64	0.69

• N = 277; MS: marital status; OT: organization type; WH: working hours; FSS: family social support; WSS: workplace social support;
• FIWS: family interfering with work (stress); FIWT: family interfering with work (time); WIFS: work interfering with family (stress); WIFT: work interfering with family (time).
• ^**
  p < .01. *p < .05.

Table 3
CFA estimates

Items	FIWS	FIWT	FSS	TI	WIFS	WIFT	WSS
FIWS1	0.93	0.50	-0.30	0.32	0.09	0.01	-0.23
FIWS2	0.90	0.43	-0.29	0.35	0.08	0.06	-0.21
FIWS3	0.91	0.44	-0.30	0.36	0.06	0.04	-0.30
FIWT1	0.49	0.93	-0.39	0.37	0.07	0.05	-0.32
FIWT2	0.43	0.89	-0.35	0.38	0.01	0.06	-0.32
FIWT3	0.45	0.90	-0.36	0.39	0.01	0.06	-0.43
FSS1	-0.27	-0.32	0.89	-0.51	-0.27	-0.27	0.35
FSS2	-0.31	-0.37	0.87	-0.50	-0.22	-0.28	0.40
FSS3	-0.27	-0.36	0.87	-0.46	-0.28	-0.25	0.36
FSS4	-0.29	-0.38	0.89	-0.48	-0.21	-0.26	0.37
TI1	0.35	0.38	-0.47	0.90	0.31	0.29	-0.42
TI2	0.33	0.40	-0.54	0.89	0.36	0.35	-0.45
TI3	0.33	0.35	-0.47	0.90	0.31	0.31	-0.39
WIFS1	0.07	-0.02	-0.23	0.31	0.90	0.27	-0.24
WIFS2	0.06	0.03	-0.24	0.33	0.86	0.31	-0.19
WIFS3	0.10	0.08	-0.27	0.33	0.89	0.23	-0.31
WIFT1	0.04	0.06	-0.29	0.34	0.24	0.87	-0.24
WIFT2	0.07	0.04	-0.23	0.29	0.30	0.86	-0.32
WIFT3	-0.02	0.06	-0.27	0.29	0.25	0.87	-0.21
WSS1	-0.28	-0.38	0.39	-0.45	-0.23	-0.25	0.90
WSS2	-0.24	-0.37	0.36	-0.42	-0.27	-0.31	0.87
WSS3	-0.24	-0.31	0.39	-0.40	-0.24	-0.27	0.87
WSS4	-0.17	-0.31	0.35	-0.38	-0.23	-0.21	0.88

WSS and FSS: The study measures social support in both the work (WSS) and family (FSS) domains. In order to measure the variables, we adapted the three-item scales developed by Caplan, Cobb, French, Harrison, and Pinneau (1975). The items in the scales for both WSS and FSS are the same. We simply phrased the items according to the domain. The item includes “When things get tough at work, I can always rely on my supervisor/colleagues to help me solve the problem” (Caplan et al., 1975, p.129).

WFC (WIF and FIW): In line with our proposed research framework, we measured work-family conflict in two directions, work to the family (WIF) and family to work (FIW). We measured both WIF and FIW from the perspective of time and strain, and we denoted them as WIFT, WIFS, FIWT, and FIWS, respectively. The six-item scale including three items for time-based conflict and three items for strain-based conflict, developed by Carlson, Kacmar, and Williams (2000), was adapted for this purpose. Sample items for WIF (time) include “My work keeps me from my family activities more than I would like.” WIF (strain) includes “I am often so emotionally drained when I get home from work that it prevents me from contributing to my family.” FIW (strain) includes “Because I am often stressed from family responsibilities, I have a hard time concentrating on my work.” FIW (time) includes “The time I spend with my family often causes me not to spend time on activities at work that could be helpful to my career” (Carlson et al., 2000, p. 260).

TI: TI was measured using the three-item scale developed by Meyer, Allen, and Smith (1993). The sample items include “I always consider giving up my current job” and “I am actively looking for a new job” (Meyer et al., 1993, p. 542).

4 Results

4.1 Descriptive analysis

Table 2 shows the demographic estimates regarding the mean and standard deviation of both latent variables and control variables. The estimates suggest that there is no concern regarding the mean and standard deviation of the observed variables. The table also reports that all the latent variables are significantly associated at p<0.01.

4.2 Measurement model

This study used SmartPLS3 based on structural equation modeling (SEM). SEM provides a comprehensive understanding of the research framework by incorporating the measurement model and structural model together (Azim, Fan, Uddin, Jilani, & Begum, 2019; Mahmood, Uddin, Ostrovskiy, & Orazalin, 2020; Uddin, Alam, Mamun, Khan, & Akter, 2020). We examined the measurement model by evaluating the cross-loading scores in the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and reliability and validity results. Table 3 displays the cross-loading scores, showing that all the items are highly loaded onto their own constructs, meaning that they converge with the relevant constructs (Hair, Hult, Ringle, & Sarstedt, 2014a; Hair, Hult, Ringle, & Sarstedt, 2017). Table 2 also shows reliability results, such as the Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability, and this ranges from 0.83 to 0.94, which is above the minimum acceptable limit (Hair, Black, Babin, & Anderson, 2014b; Hair, Hult, et al., 2014a; Hair. et al., 2017). Convergent validity is tested with the average variance extracted (AVE), and the result showed that the AVE ranges from 0.75 to 0.83, which is above the minimum acceptable limit (0.50) (Hair, Hult, et al., 2014a; Hair. et al., 2017). Hence, there is no concern about convergent validity. Finally, the discriminant validity result showed that the square root of a particular AVE is higher than its correlation with other variables. The value shown in the diagonal box among the latent variables showed that no correlation is larger than the diagonal score. Thus, both convergent validity and discriminant validity are confirmed.

4.3 Structural model

The structural model is tested by investigating the β, p-value, and R² estimates. Whereas β measures the strength of the relationship between the observed variables, R² explains the overall predictability of the structural model (Azim et al., 2019; Mahmood, Uddin, & Luo, 2019). Additionally, the p-value signifies the level of significance to determine whether a hypothesis is supported or not. Studies have recommended a β with a score of more than 0.20 (Hair, Hult, et al., 2014a) and a R² with a score of more than 0.13 (Cohen, 1977). Figure 2 shows the β, p-value, and R² for the structural model in this study. We found that the β score and R² are above the minimum threshold limits, and the p-values showed that all the path relationships are significant. In addition, we considered multi-collinearity issues to assess the strength of the regression weight, which can be measured by the VIF. A VIF score of more than 3.00 indicates a problem, but this study’s VIF scores range from 1.26 (WIFS) to 1.87 (TI). Hence, the regression weight is not exposed to a high standard error (Hair, Hult, et al., 2014a; Mahmood et al., 2019).

Figure 2
Structural Model Estimate

4.4 Hypotheses on direct effects

Table 4 reports the direct effects of the exogenous variables on the endogenous ones. The estimates in Table 4 show that the direct effect is significant (WSS→TI: β=-0.15, 0.02). Therefore, H1 is supported. In H2, we hypothesized that there is an influence of family social support on turnover intention. The result shows that the influence is significant (FSS→TI: β=-0.28, 0.000). Thus, H2 is also supported. Likewise, H3 (WSS→WIF: β=-0.25, 0.001), H4 (WSS→FIW: β=-0.25, 0.001), H5 (FSS→FIW: β=-0.32, 0.02), and H6 (FSS→WIF: β=-0.25, 0.02) are also supported, meaning that the independent variables have significant indirect effects on the dependable variables. Therefore, H3, H4, H5, and H6 are supported. Conversely, H7 hypothesized that work interfering with family has a positive influence on turnover intention, and the result shows that the influence is significant (WIF→TI: β=0.27, 0.000). Thus, H7 is supported. Similarly, in H8, we hypothesized that family interfering with work has a significant influence on turnover intention, and this influence is also significant (FIW→TI: β= 0.26, 0.000). Therefore, H8 is also supported.

Table 4
Estimates of direct effects

Hypothesis	Path relationships	β	SDEV	T-value	P-value	Hypothesis
H1	WSS -> TI	-0.15	0.07	2.32	0.020	Supported
H2	FSS -> TI	-0.28	0.06	4.46	0.000	Supported
H3	WSS -> WIF	-0.25	0.07	3.47	0.001	Supported
H4	WSS -> FIW	-0.25	0.08	3.24	0.001	Supported
H5	FSS -> FIW	-0.32	0.07	4.48	0.000	Supported
H6	FSS -> WIF	-0.25	0.07	3.54	0.000	Supported
H7	WIF -> TI	0.27	0.07	4.13	0.000	Supported
H8	FIW -> TI	0.26	0.06	4.25	0.000	Supported

4.5 Hypotheses on mediating effect

We assessed the mediating effect and reported the results in Table 5. To test the mediating effects, we measured the direct effect (c) before using the mediating variable, then we also estimated the direct effect (c^/) after adding mediating variables. Extant literature shows that there are three conditions to be fulfilled for a mediation effect to exist (Baron & Kenny, 1986; Chou & Yeh, 2013; Hayes, 2018; Uddin, Mahmood, & Fan, 2019; Yi, Uddin, Das, Mahmood, & Sohel, 2019). First, the independent variable (IV) must have a significant influence on the dependent variable (DV) before using MV. Second, indirect effects from IV to MV (a) and from MV to DV (b) must be significant. Third, there is full mediation if c^/ becomes insignificant and partial mediation if c^/ is significantly reduced after using MV (Baron & Kenny, 1986; Chou & Yeh, 2013; Hayes, 2018).

Table 5
Estimates regarding mediating effects

Hypothesis	Path relations	Beta	Indirect effect	Total effect	VAF	SDEV	P-value	Decision
H9	WSS→TI	-0.29	-0.07	-0.22	(0.31)	0.07	0.000	Partial Mediation
	WSS→WIF	-0.25				0.07	0.001
	WIF→TI	0.27				0.07	0.000
	WSS→TI	-0.15				0.07	0.020
H10	FSS→TI	-0.43	-0.07	-0.35	(0.20)	0.06	0.000	Partial Mediation
	FSS→WIF	-0.25				0.07	0.000
	WIF→TI	0.27				0.07	0.000
	FSS→TI	-0.28				0.06	0.000
H11	FSS→TI	-0.43	-0.08	-0.37	(0.23)	0.06	0.000	Partial Mediation
	FSS→FIW	-0.32				0.07	0.000
	FIW→TI	0.26				0.06	0.000
	FSS→TI	-0.28				0.06	0.000
H12	WSS→TI	-0.29	-0.066	-0.22	(0.30)	0.07	0.000	Partial Mediation
	WSS→FIW	-0.25				0.08	0.001
	FIW→TI	0.26				0.06	0.000
	WSS→TI	-0.15				0.07	0.020

With regard to H9, the results in Table 5 showed that the direct effect (c^/) after using the mediating variable is still significant (β=-0.15, p=0.020), whereas the mediated (indirect) effect is -0.22, with both indirect effects being significant. Since c^/ remains significant, there is no full mediation. However, we further tested the variance accounted for (VAF) to verify if partial mediation exists in this connection. Partial mediation does exist because the VAF ranges from 0.20 to 0.79. Thus, H9 is supported. In H10, we hypothesized that WIF mediates the influence of FSS on TI. We observed that c^/ is significant (β=-0.28, p=0.000) after using the mediating variable and the mediated (indirect) effect is -0.35. Likewise, it is evident that full mediation does not exist. To examine the extent of the mediation, we tested the VAF, which ranged between 0.20 and 0.79 (partial mediation). Therefore, H10 is supported. For H11, we investigated the mediating effect of FIW on the influence of FSS on TI. Table 5 depicted that c^/ remains significant (β=-0.28, p=0.000) and the mediating effect is -0.37. Subsequently, we assessed the VAF, and the calculated score was 0.23, which is in the range of 0.20 to 0.79 (partial mediation). Therefore, H11 is also supported. Finally, H12 hypothesized that there is a mediating effect of FIW on the influence of WSS on TI. The estimates showed that c^/ is also significant (β=-0.15, p=0.020), with a significant mediating effect (-0.22). Consequently, we calculated the VAF, which was 0.30 (partial mediation). Thus, H12 is also supported.

5 Discussion

The study observes a negative relationship between both workplace and family social support and turnover intention, which is in line with our hypotheses. This relationship is supported by the social exchange theory (Blau, 1964) and the JDCS model (Johnson & Hall 1988). The empirical studies of Lee (2004), Nohe and Sonntag (2014), and Fong et al. (2018) also found a negative relationship between WSS and TI. However, they did not find such a relationship between FSS and TI. The connection between FSS and TI in our study may be attributed to the fact that family plays a pivotal role in Saudi society, and when employees receive support from their family in fulfilling their work responsibilities, they intend to continue in their job and vice versa.

According to the findings, both workplace and family supports make a contribution to reducing work-family conflict in the form of WIF or FIW. Support helps a lot in reducing stress related to role overload or role conflict. The study finds that support works both within the domain and outside the domain. This implies that WSS not only contributes to reducing work-related stress, but it also mitigates stress emanating from the family domain. Similarly, FSS not only helps to reduce family-related stress but also diminishes the stress derived from the work domain. Consistently with COR theory (Hobfoll 1989), the resources people acquire through their family and work domains in the form of objects, conditions, energies, etc., give them a higher sense of self-efficacy and security, which in turn help them to cope with the demands in both the work and family domains. Thus, they feel fewer conflicts.

In line with most of the studies (Amstad et al., 2011; Chen et al., 2018; Wang et al., 2017) on WFC and TI, our study also found a positive relationship between WIF and TI and between FIW and TI. Thus, it is observed that in the face of stress, employees think about quitting their job as a solution to eliminate it. In order to ensure a work-life balance, they may either look for alternative jobs, which may lead to actual turnover, or reduce their efforts as a consequence of TI.

As regards the mediating effect of WFC in the social support and TI relationship, the study observes partial mediation by both WIF and FIW in the WSS-TI and FSS-TI relationships. This implies that along with other reasons, WFC explains the social support and TI link. In line with COR theory (Hobfoll 1989), social support from both the work and family domains makes a contribution to reducing stress related to inter-role conflict and maintaining a work-life balance. This, in turn, reduces the intention to quit a job. Partial mediation by WIF and FIW both within the domain (WSS-WIF-TI or FSS-FIW-TI) or cross-domain (FSS-WIF-TI or WSS-FIW-TI) implies the reciprocal relationship between the two types of WFC, i.e., WIF and FIW. As is explained by Frone et al. (1992, p. 74), “if one’s work-related problems and responsibilities begin to interfere with the accomplishment of one’s family-related obligations, these unfulfilled family obligations may begin to interfere with one’s day-to-day functioning at work. Conversely, if one’s family-related problems and responsibilities begin to interfere with the accomplishment of one’s work-related obligations, these unfulfilled work obligations may begin to interfere with one’s day-to-day functioning at home.”

6 Implications of the Study

The present study empirically establishes the premises of social exchange theory (Blau, 1964), the JDCS model (Johnson & Hall 1988), and COR theory (Hobfoll 1989) in the context of Eastern society. Support from supervisors and coworkers develops a sense of reciprocity in employees and they give back in the form of positive attitudes and behavior, including a lower level of TI. Similarly, receiving emotional and instrumental support from the family social network boosts the morale of employees to cope with job stressors and helps them develop a positive view about their job and/or organization (Johnson & Hall 1988). The study also confirms the fact that social support, both from the organization and family, helps people to gain or maintain their desired resources so as to strengthen their ability to cope with role overload or inter-role conflicts, which ultimately reduces the damaging consequences for organizations.

Thus, the study has implications for organizations, families, and individual employees. It implies that managers should ensure a supportive climate within the organization in the form of family-friendly policies, compassionate leadership, benevolent employee relations, participative decision making, and sensitive grievance handling procedures so that the employees feel honored and cared for by their organization. Similarly, the family, being the primary social unit, plays an important role in sustaining the physical and mental energy as well as in curbing the stress of employees. Family members should provide continuous moral and material support to other working family members in the form of love, counseling, and assistance in household chores. From the perspective of employees, the study implies that they should develop a supportive social network for themselves in order to cope with role overload or inter-role conflicts.

7 Conclusion

This study attempts to investigate the impact of workplace social support (WSS) and family social support (FSS) on employee turnover intention in the context of Saudi Arabia. It also hypothesizes that work-family conflict in the form of both work interfering with family (WIF) and family interfering with work (FIW) are mediating variables. The study finds significant negative relationships between WSS and TI and between FSS and TI. It also observes that both WIF and FIW partially mediate the relationship between social support and TI. This implies that support from both the family and work domains leads to a reciprocal relationship, and it plays an important role in reducing work-family conflict, ultimately having a desirable impact on turnover. Thus, this indicates that as social beings, employees cannot simply consider work and family as two completely separate domains and split their concerns and emotions into two separate spaces of life. Rather, issues and concerns in one domain have a bearing on the other. Therefore, management should create a supportive environment for employees within the workplace and ensure family-friendly policies so that employees can maintain a work-life balance. Under the auspices of Vision 2030, Saudi Arabia is expecting a massive social and economic reform that is likely to increase the participation of females in the workforce at a rapid pace. In these circumstances, the role of family support and workplace support in marinating a work-life balance cannot be overstated.

8 Limitations and Directions for Future Research

The study is an initial attempt to investigate the relationships between both types of social support (WSS and FSS), work-family conflicts (WIF and FIW), and turnover intention in one research framework. Despite its theoretical and empirical contributions, this research has a few limitations. First, the study collects data from only one region in Saudi Arabia, thus impairing any generalization of the results. Therefore, a study covering more cities or regions would more desirable. Second, the study measures social support as a general measure instead of via its emotional, informational, and instrumental components. Collecting data on all three components would provide more detail on the nature of the support respondents receive from their family or workplace. Third, the study measures WIF and FIW in terms of the strain and time dimensions only. It does not include the behavioral dimension. Including the behavioral dimension would make the measure more comprehensive. Fourth, the study considers TI as the dependent variable. However, given the plausible contribution of independent and moderating variables, other organizational attitudes and behaviors, namely, organizational citizenship behaviors, employee engagement, job satisfaction, employee productivity/job performance, etc., could also be studied as dependent variables. Finally, the impact of social support is likely to be affected by gender, marital status, number of children, and availability of domestic help. So, a study incorporating the mediating role of such variables may provide greater insights into the nature and effect of social support and its relationship with different organizational attitudes and behaviors.

• Evaluation process:

  Double Blind Review
• How to cite: Bajaba, S., Azim, M. T., & Uddin, M. A. (2022). Social Support and Employee Turnover Intention: The Mediating Role of Work-Family Conflict. Revista Brasileira de Gestão de Negócios, 24(1), 48-65.
• Funding: This project was funded by the Deanship of Scientific Research (DSR) at King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, under grant No. G- 218-120-1441. The authors, therefore, acknowledge with thanks the DSR for financial support.

• Plagiarism analysis:

  RBGN performs plagiarism analysis on all its articles at the time of submission and after approval of the manuscript using the iThenticate tool.

Referências

• Abalkhail, J. M. (2017). Women and leadership: Challenges and opportunities in Saudi higher education. Career Development International, 22(2), 165-183. doi:10.1108/CDI-03-2016-0029
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-03-2016-0029
• Ahmad, A. (2010). Work-family conflict among junior physicians: Its mediating role in the relationship between role overload and emotional exhaustion. Journal of Social Sciences, 6(2), 265-271. Retrivied from: https://doi.org/10.3844/jssp.2010.265.271
  » https://doi.org/10.3844/jssp.2010.265.271
• Allen, T. D., French, K. A., Dumani, S., & Shockley, K. M. (2015). Meta-analysis of work–family conflict mean differences: Does national context matter? Journal of Vocational Behavior, 90, 90-100. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2015.07.006
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2015.07.006
• Amstad, F. T., Meier, L. L., Fasel, U., Elfering, A., & Semmer, N. K. (2011). A meta-analysis of work–family conflict and various outcomes with a special emphasis on cross-domain versus matching-domain relations. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 16(2), 151-169. doi: 10.1037/a0022170
  » https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022170
• Arnold, K. A., & Dupré, K. E. (2012). Perceived organizational support, employee health and emotions. International Journal of Workplace Health Management, 5(2), 139-152. doi:10.1108/17538351211239171
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/17538351211239171
• Asghar, M., Gull, N., Bashir, M., & Akbar, M. (2018). The impact of work-family conflict on Turnover Intentions: The moderating role of perceived family supportive supervisor behavior. Journal Hotel Business Management, 7(178), 2169-0286. doi: 10.4172/2169-0286.1000178
  » https://doi.org/10.4172/2169-0286.1000178
• Azim, M. T., & Islam, M. M. (2018). Social support, religious endorsement, and career commitment: A study on saudi nurses. Behavioral Science, 8(8), 1-13.doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/bs8010008
  » https://doi.org/ https://doi.org/10.3390/bs8010008
• Azim, M. T., Fan, L., Uddin, M. A., Jilani, M. M. A. K., & Begum, S. (2019). Linking transformational leadership with employees’ engagement in the creative process. Management Research Review, 42(7), 837-858. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MRR-08-2018-0286
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-08-2018-0286
• Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173
  » https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173
• Blau, P. M. (1964). Justice in social exchange. Sociological Inquiry, 34(2), 193-206. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682X.1964.tb00583.x
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682X.1964.tb00583.x
• Bohle, S.A. L., & Alonso, A. R. M. (2017). The effect of procedural fairness and supervisor support in the relationship between job insecurity and organizational citizenship behavior. Review of Business Management, 19(65), 21. doi:10.7819/rbgn.v0i0.3023
  » https://doi.org/10.7819/rbgn.v0i0.3023
• Bourini, I., Jahmani, A., Mumtaz, R., & Al-Bourini, F. A. (2019). Investigating the managerial practices' effect on employee-perceived service quality with the moderating role of supportive leadership behavior. European Research on Management and Business Economics, 25(1), 8-14. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iedeen.2018.11.001
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iedeen.2018.11.001
• 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), 175-190. Retrivied from: https://www.jstor.org/stable/40604424
  » https://www.jstor.org/stable/40604424
• Brislin, R. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1(3), 185-216. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/135910457000100301
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/135910457000100301
• Caplan, R. D., Cobb, S., French, J. R., Harrison, R. v., & Pinneau, S. R. (1975). Job demands and worker health. Washington, DC: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
• Carlson, D. S., Kacmar, K. M., & Williams, L. J. (2000). Construction and initial validation of a multidimensional measure of work–family conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 56(2), 249-276. Retrivied from: https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1999.1713
  » https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1999.1713
• Cavazotte, F. S. C. N., Araujo, F. F., & Abreu, A. L. (2017). Organizational identification among Brazilian public employees: A study of the cultural sector. Review of Business Management, 19(64), 18. doi:10.7819/rbgn.v19i64.3366
  » https://doi.org/10.7819/rbgn.v19i64.3366
• Chen, H., Ayoun, B., & Eyoun, K. (2018). Work-Family conflict and turnover intentions: A study comparing China and U.S. hotel employees. Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality & Tourism, 17(2), 247-269. doi:10.1080/15332845.2017.1406272
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/15332845.2017.1406272
• Chou, J.-S., & Yeh, C.-P. (2013). Influential constructs, mediating effects, and moderating effects on operations performance of high speed rail from passenger perspective. Transport Policy, 30, 207-219. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2013.09.014
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2013.09.014
• Cinamon, R. G., Weisel, A., & Tzuk, K. (2007). Work-family conflict within the family:Crossover effects, perceived parent-child interaction quality, Parental Self-efficacy, and life role attributions. Journal of Career Development, 34(1), 79-100. doi:10.1177/0894845307304066
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/0894845307304066
• Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences New York, NY: Academic Press.
• Colakoglu, U., Culha, O., & Atay, H. (2010). The effects of perceived organisational support on employees' affective outcomes: Evidence from the hotel industry. Tourism and Hospitality Management, 16(2), 125-150.
• Conley, S., & You, S. (2021). School organizational factors relating to teachers’ intentions to leave: A mediator model. Current Psychology, 40(1), 379-389. doi:10.1007/s12144-018-9953-0
  » https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-018-9953-0
• Cotton, J. L., & Tuttle, J. M. (1986). Employee turnover: A Meta-Analysis and review with implications for research. The Academy of Management Review, 11(1), 55-70. doi:10.2307/258331
  » https://doi.org/10.2307/258331
• Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3), 500-507.
• Eliyana, A., Ma’arif, S., & Muzakki. (2019). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment effect in the transformational leadership towards employee performance. European Research on Management and Business Economics, 25(3), 144-150. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iedeen.2019.05.001
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iedeen.2019.05.001
• Fong, L. H. N., Chui, P. M. W., Cheong, I. S. C., & Fong, D. K. C. (2018). Moderating effects of social support on job stress and turnover intentions. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 27(7), 795-810. doi:10.1080/19368623.2018.1446862
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2018.1446862
• French, K. A., Dumani, S., Allen, T. D., & Shockley, K. M. (2018). A meta-analysis of work–family conflict and social support. Psychological Bulletin, 144(3), 284-314. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000120
  » https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000120
• Frone, M. R. (2003). Work-family balance Handbook of occupational health psychology (pp. 143-162). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association.
• Frone, M. R., Russell, M., & Cooper, M. L. (1992). Antecedents and outcomes of work-family conflict: Testing a model of the work-family interface. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(1), 65-78. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.77.1.65
  » https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.77.1.65
• Gao, L., & Jin, W. (2015). Work-family conflict mediates the association between job demands and life and job satisfaction in chinese middle-level managers. Current Psychology, 34(2), 311-320. doi:10.1007/s12144-014-9259-9
  » https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-014-9259-9
• Gjesfjeld, C. D., Greeno, C. G., Kim, K. H., & Anderson, C. M. (2010). Economic stress, social support, and maternal depression: Is social support deterioration occurring? Social Work Research, 34(3), 135-143.
• Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25(2), 161-178.
• Grandey, A. A., & Cropanzano, R. (1999). The conservation of resources model applied to work–family conflict and strain. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54(2), 350-370.
• Grant-Vallone, E. J., & Ensher, E. A. (2001). An examination of work and personal life conflict, organizational support, and employee health among international expatriates. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 25(3), 261-278. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0147-1767(01)00003-7
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/S0147-1767(01)00003-7
• Greenhaus, J. H., & Beutell, N. J. (1985). Sources of conflict between work and family roles. Academy of Management Review, 10(1), 76-88. doi:10.5465/amr.1985.4277352
  » https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1985.4277352
• Guzeller Cem, O., & Celiker, N. (2019). Examining the relationship between organizational commitment and turnover intention via a meta-analysis. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 14(1), 102-120. doi:10.1108/IJCTHR-05-2019-0094
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCTHR-05-2019-0094
• Hair, J. F.,Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2014b). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective (7 ed.). London: Pearson.
• Hair, J. F.Jr., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A Primer on partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Los Angeles USA: Sage Publication.
• Hair, J. F.Jr., Hult, G. T., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2014a). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Los Angeles: SAGE Publications, Inc.
• Hancock, J. I., Allen, D. G., Bosco, F. A., McDaniel, K. R., & Pierce, C. A. (2013). Meta-analytic review of employee turnover as a predictor of firm performance. Journal of Management, 39(3), 573-603. doi:10.1177/0149206311424943
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206311424943
• Hayes, A. F. (2018). Partial, conditional, and moderated moderated mediation: Quantification, inference, and interpretation. Communication Monographs, 85(1), 4-40. doi:10.1080/03637751.2017.1352100
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2017.1352100
• Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44(3), 513-524. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.44.3.513
  » https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.44.3.513
• Hom, P. W., Lee, T. W., Shaw, J. D., & Hausknecht, J. P. (2017). One hundred years of employee turnover theory and research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(3), 530-545. doi:10.1037/apl0000103
  » https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000103
• Jennings, J. E., & McDougald, M. S. (2007). Work-family interface experiences and coping strategies: Implications for entrepreneurship research and practice. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 747-760. doi:10.5465/amr.2007.25275510
  » https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2007.25275510
• Johnson, J. V., & Hall, E. M. (1988). Job strain, work place social support, and cardiovascular disease: A cross-sectional study of a random sample of the Swedish working population. American Journal of Public Health, 78(10), 1336-1342. doi:10.2105/ajph.78.10.1336
  » https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.78.10.1336
• Karam, C. M., & Afiouni, F. (2014). Localizing women's experiences in academia: Multilevel factors at play in the Arab Middle East and North Africa. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(4), 500-538. doi:10.1080/09585192.2013.792857
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2013.792857
• Klein, L., & Colauto, R. D. (2020). Perceptions of organizational justice in incentive contracts and their effect on congruence between personal and organizational goals. Review of Business Management, 22(3), 26. doi:10.7819/rbgn.v22i3.4066
  » https://doi.org/10.7819/rbgn.v22i3.4066
• Lauzier, M., & Mercier, G. (2018). The effect of error orientation, motivation to learn, and social support on training transfer intentions: A moderated mediation model. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences / Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l'Administration, 35(3), 419-428. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/cjas.1429
  » https://doi.org/10.1002/cjas.1429
• Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping: New York: Springer publishing company.
• Lee, P. C. B. (2004). Social support and leaving intention among computer professionals. Information & Management, 41(3), 323-334. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(03)00077-6
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(03)00077-6
• Lee, T. W., Hom, P. W., Eberly, M. B., & Mitchell, T. R. (2017). On the next decade of research in voluntary employee turnover. Academy of Management Perspectives, 31(3), 201-221. doi:10.5465/amp.2016.0123
  » https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2016.0123
• Leung, Y. K., Mukerjee, J., & Thurik, R. (2020). The role of family support in work-family balance and subjective well-being of SME owners. Journal of Small Business Management, 58(1), 130-163. doi:10.1080/00472778.2019.1659675
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2019.1659675
• Lingard, H., & Francis, V. (2006). Does a supportive work environment moderate the relationship between work‐family conflict and burnout among construction professionals? Construction Management and Economics, 24(2), 185-196. doi:10.1080/14697010500226913
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/14697010500226913
• Liu, Y., Cui, F., Su, X., & Du, X. (2019). How social support motivates trust and purchase intentions in mobile social commerce. Review of Business Management, 21(4), 22. doi:10.7819/rbgn.v21i5.4025
  » https://doi.org/10.7819/rbgn.v21i5.4025
• López, M., & Cooper, L. (2011). Social support measures review. National center for latino child & family research
• Mahmood, M., Uddin, M. A., & Luo, F. (2019). Influence of transformational leadership on employees’ creative process engagement: A multi-level analysis. Management Decision, 57(3), 741-764. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MD-07-2017-0707
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MD-07-2017-0707
• Mahmood, M., Uddin, M. A., Ostrovskiy, A., & Orazalin, N. (2020). Effectiveness of business leadership in the Eurasian context: empirical evidence from Kazakhstan. Journal of Management Development, 39(9), 793-809. doi:10.1108/JMD-05-2019-0154
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-05-2019-0154
• Meyer, J. P., Allen, N. J., & Smith, C. A. (1993). Commitment to organizations and occupations: Extension and test of a three-component conceptualization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(4), 538-551. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.4.538
  » https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.4.538
• 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. doi:10.1002/job.695
  » https://doi.org/10.1002/job.695
• Michel, J. S., Mitchelson, J. K., Pichler, S., & Cullen, K. L. (2010). Clarifying relationships among work and family social support, stressors, and work–family conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 76(1), 91-104. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2009.05.007
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2009.05.007
• Nohe, C., & Sonntag, K. (2014). Work–family conflict, social support, and turnover intentions: A longitudinal study. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 85(1), 1-12. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2014.03.007
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2014.03.007
• O’Driscoll M, P., Brough, P., & Kalliath T., J. (2004). Work/family conflict, psychological well‐being, satisfaction and social support: a longitudinal study in New Zealand. Equal Opportunities International, 23(1/2), 36-56. doi:10.1108/02610150410787846
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/02610150410787846
• Oliveira, L. B, & Rocha, J. da C. (2017). Work engagement: Individual and situational antecedents and its relationship with turnover intention. Review of Business Management, 19(65), 17. doi:10.7819/rbgn.v19i64.3373
  » https://doi.org/10.7819/rbgn.v19i64.3373
• Pindek, S., & Spector, P. E. (2016). Organizational constraints: A meta-analysis of a major stressor. Work & Stress, 30(1), 7-25. doi:10.1080/02678373.2015.1137376
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2015.1137376
• Rubel, M. R. B., Kee, D. M. H., Quah, C. H., & Rimi, N. N. (2017). Ethical climate and employee turnover intention in the ready-made garment industry of Bangladesh. Global Business and Organizational Excellence, 36(2), 61-73. doi:10.1002/joe.21770
  » https://doi.org/10.1002/joe.21770
• Rubenstein, A. L., Eberly, M. B., Lee, T. W., & Mitchell, T. R. (2018). Surveying the forest: A meta-analysis, moderator investigation, and future-oriented discussion of the antecedents of voluntary employee turnover. Personnel Psychology, 71(1), 23-65. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12226
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12226
• Seema, Choudhary, V., & Saini, G. (2021). Effect of Job satisfaction on moonlighting intentions: Mediating effect of organizational commitment. European Research on Management and Business Economics, 27(1), 100137. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iedeen.2020.100137
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iedeen.2020.100137
• Seiger, C. P., & Wiese, B. S. (2009). Social support from work and family domains as an antecedent or moderator of work–family conflicts? Journal of Vocational Behavior, 75(1), 26-37. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2009.03.001
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2009.03.001
• Sharma, N., & Singh, V. K. (2016). Effect of workplace incivility on job satisfaction and turnover intentions in India. South Asian Journal of Global Business Research, 5(2), 234-249. doi:10.1108/SAJGBR-02-2015-0020
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/SAJGBR-02-2015-0020
• Soltis, S. M., Agneessens, F., Sasovova, Z., & Labianca, G. (2013). A Social network perspective on turnover intentions: The role of distributive justice and social support. Human Resource Management, 52(4), 561-584. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21542
  » https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21542
• Taylor, B. L., DelCampo, R. G., & Blancero, D. M. (2009). Work–family conflict/facilitation and the role of workplace supports for U.S. Hispanic professionals. Journal of Organizational behavior, 30(5), 643-664. doi:10.1002/job.605
  » https://doi.org/10.1002/job.605
• Uddin, M. A., Alam, M. S., Mamun, A. A., Khan, T.-U.-Z., & Akter, A. (2020). A study of the adoption and implementation of enterprise resource planning (ERP): Identification of moderators and mediator. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 6(1), 2-19. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc6010002
  » https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc6010002
• Uddin, M. A., Mahmood, M., & Fan, L. (2019). Why individual employee engagement matters for team performance? Mediating effects of employee commitment and organizational citizenship behaviour. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 25(1/2), 47-68. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/TPM-12-2017-0078
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/TPM-12-2017-0078
• Wang, H. H. (1998). A meta-analysis of the relationship between social support and well-being. Kaohsiung Journal of Medical Science, 14(11), 717-726. Retrieved from: https://europepmc.org/article/med/9838768
  » https://europepmc.org/article/med/9838768
• Wang, I-A., Lee, B-W, & Wu, S-T. (2017). The relationships among work-family conflict, turnover intention and organizational citizenship behavior in the hospitality industry of Taiwan. International Journal of Manpower, 38(8), 1130-1142. doi:10.1108/IJM-04-2015-0056
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/IJM-04-2015-0056
• Wang, M., Liu, S., Zhan, Y., & Shi, J. (2010). Daily work–family conflict and alcohol use: Testing the cross-level moderation effects of peer drinking norms and social support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(2), 377-386. doi:10.1037/a0018138
  » https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018138
• Williams, L. J., & Hazer, J. T. (1986). Antecedents and consequences of satisfaction and commitment in turnover models: A reanalysis using latent variable structural equation methods. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(2), 219-231. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.71.2.219
  » https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.71.2.219
• Yao, X., & Wang, L. (2006). The predictability of normative organizational commitment for turnover in Chinese companies: A cultural perspective. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 17(6), 1058-1075. doi:10.1080/09585190600696671
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/09585190600696671
• Yi, L., Uddin, M., Das, A. K., Mahmood, M., & Sohel, S. M. (2019). Do transformational leaders engage employees in sustainable innovative work behaviour? Perspective from a developing country. Sustainability, 11(9), 1-18. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.3390/su11092485
  » https://doi.org/10.3390/su11092485
• Zhou, S., Li, X., & Gao, B. (2020). Family/friends support, work-family conflict, organizational commitment, and turnover intention in young preschool teachers in China: A serial mediation model. Children and Youth Services Review, 113(3), 1-8. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.104997
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.104997

Responsible Editor:

Prof. Dr. Teresa Proença

Reviewers: Miss Neuza Ribeiro; Dr. Ana Meireles

One of the reviewers decided not to disclose his/her identify

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  29 Apr 2022
• Date of issue
  Jan-Mar 2022

History

• Received
  23 Oct 2020
• Accepted
  21 Sept 2021