Women’s Perceptions of Work-Life
Balance: An Analysis of the Moderating
Effects of Leader’s Attainable Behavior
Master Thesis, MSc. Human Resource Management
University of Groningen
Faculty of Economics and Business
Supervisor: Prof. F. Rink
Jesra Wiersma
S3137910
j.r.wiersma.2@student.rug.nl
ABSTRACT
Work-life balance (WLB) is a mechanism that occurs when workers perceive an (in)balance
between competing demands of work and personal life (Göblet, 2017). While theory shows that
personal, organizational, time and social characteristics moderate the relationship between
gender and perceptions of work-life balance, to date, little methodical research has been
conducted on this topic. Thus, the elements that influence gendered perceptions of WLB remain
unclear. Hence, this study aimed to show that gendered WLB perceptions are caused by lower
levels of leader identification among women compared to men. I argued, however, that the
attainability of the leader position could buffer this effect, such that women come to identify
more with their leader, and hence, perceive more WLB when the leader's position seems
attainable to them. Leader attainability was expected to have less influence on men's leader
identification and WLB perceptions. This study takes an experimental approach to test the
proposed hypothesis. The results do not support my hypothesis, such that women have better
WLB perceptions than men, only when the leader did not indicate the attainability of her
position.
INTRODUCTION
At present, work-life balance (WLB) is increasingly being discussed. For instance, the
majority of organizations indicate that well-being programs have become a critical part of their
employment brand and culture (Deloitte, 2018).This has been mainly attributed to the excessive
demands of work that are perceived to present a unique issue that needs to be addressed (Guest,
2002).
Throughout the decades, work-life balance has typically been defined as an “individual’s
perception of how well work and non-work roles fit together and are managed in accordance
with their personal system of life values, goals, and aspirations” (Casper et al. 2017; Greenhaus
and Allen 2011; Haar 2013; Valcour 2007). Remarkably, this definition conceptualizes WLB in terms of an individual’s choices and time management. Yet, this definition made it difficult to
explain the gender differences that exist between WLB perceptions (Bond et al., 1998; Eby et al.,
2005). Generally speaking, women experience higher levels of conflict in their work to life
experiences than man (Powel & Greenhaus, 2010, Duxbury & Higgins 1991). These differences
are primarily caused by societal and behavioral expectations placed on both men and women
(Duxburi & Higgins, 1991). Such that, working is for men, and women are supposed to take care
of the family responsibilities (Pleck, 1977). However, Delina & Prabhakara (2013) argue that
throughout the decades, there has been a significant increase in female participants in the labor
market. For example, from 2006 to 2015, the amount of working women has increased from 1.5
billion to 1.75 billion worldwide (World Economic Forum, 2018). Nonetheless, traditional role expectations about men and women’s responsibilities haven’t changed that much (Malhotra &
Sachdeva, 2005). Such that women are still expected to take care of family responsibilities while
be as committed to their jobs as men are. Hence, it has become more difficult for women to
control their home and work demands. In addition, research has shown that individuals who
work at more senior levels within organizations may be able to modify their working hours
(Tomlinson, 2006). However, women still lack the autonomy to influence their work schedule because they usually don’t have influential positions within an organization (Rio, 2018). As a
result, women are in a disadvantageous position to control their WLB in comparison to men.
The inability to find a proper balance between work and private life has shown to have
negative consequences for women and the organization where they are employed. Individual
consequences are for instance mental health, stress, overall life gratification and well-being (e.g.,
Duxbury, Higgens, & Lee, 1992, Frone, Russell, & Cooper, 1997; Grzywacz & Bass, 2003;
Major, Klein, & Ehrhart, 2002; Bell, Rajendran, & Theiler, 2012). Organizational consequences
regard variations in employee satisfaction, turnover, employee commitment and absenteeism
(e.g., Duxbury, Higgins, Lee, & Mills, 1992; Grover & Crooker, 1995).
Taken together, the above-mentioned antecedents of WLB, solely focus on organizational
factors and objectively looks at time factors that influence women’s WLB. However, research
also suggests that psychological factors can have an influence on an individual’s WLB. For
example, regarding coping mechanisms, Keller and colleague’s (2013) showed that men and
women have different ways of dealing with work and private life demands. For instance, women
tend to search for support from outside the family and by cutting back on time they have for
themselves (Higgins, Duxbury & Lyons, 2010). Whereas, men tend to demonstrate control and
self-efficient behavior (Higgins, Duxbury & Lyons, 2010).
I want to introduce the social identity theory (SIT) as a perspective to better understand
theory, people do not only have individual responses, but also group-based responses to
experiences, and hence this should also affect their perceptions of WLB. In other words, people
derive an important part of their self-esteem to depend on the groups they belong to, particularly
when members of that group are very similar to the self, as this affirms one self-view (Ashforth
& Mael, 1989; Tajfel & Turner, 1986; Turner et al., 1987). Consequently, the more individuals
identify with a group, in terms of similarities, the more their attitudes and actions will be governed by this group membership (Hogg, 2003, Turner et al., 1987). “Thus, social
identification guides one to experience the group identity as not only self-describing but also as
self-guiding” (Knippenberg, 2011, p.1078).
In an organizational context, individuals do not randomly choose which organizational
member they identify with. Hogg (2011) proposed that employees generally identify most with
leaders, who are best positioned to impact the functioning of the group. Moreover, leaders can
increase personal identification with employees when their position is perceived to be attainable. Conversely, when the leader’s success is perceived as unattainable, employee might not identify
with the leader and can result in self-deflating consequences. Relating this to women, Lockwood
(2006) showed how women are more likely to identify with a female leader because she proves
that women can conquer gender barriers to achieve careers success.
Based on the aforementioned, I argue that in organizations, women could benefit from a
female leader to represent the group but that this should particularly be the case when the female leader’s success is perceived to be attainable. Consequently, women will identify with her and
will try to resemble her behavior via imitation. On its turn, this will motivate, inspire, and
The unique contribution of the present research is, that it will extend previous research by
focusing on the differences between men and women’s perception of WLB. Particularly, how these perceptions are related to one’s group membership. The conceptual model will be
supported with theoretical literature and will emphasize how female leaders can increase
personal identification with women, by indicating how attainable her achievements are. Hence,
improving their WLB.Lastly, this study will also look at the positive and negative consequences
of WLB for the individual.
THEORY AND HYPOTHESIS
Conceptualizing Work-Life Balance
Several authors refer to WLB as an “individual’s perceptions of how well work and
non-work roles fit together and are managed in accordance with their personal system of life values,
goals, and aspirations (Casper et al. 2017; Greenhaus and Allen 2011; Haar 2013; Valcour
2007)”. This definition emphasizes the notion that perceptions of WLB are based upon the
person-centered approach. Moreover, this definition embraces all areas of a person’s lifetime,
which is unique for each person (Kossek et al., 2014).
However, this definition lacks to explain why WLB occurs and what the consequences
are if there is an imbalance. Some studies argue that imbalance happens due to time conflicts
experienced by the individual. For example, hours worked per week (Eagle, 1995; Greenhaus &
Beutell, 1985; Gutek, Searle, & Klepa, 1991), and inflexibility in one’s work schedule have
continuously shown to be linked to WLB (Eagle, 1995; Greenhaus, Parasuraman, Granrose,
Rabinowitz, & Beutell, 1989; Johnson, 1982). Others argue that imbalance is related to one’s
work environment. For instance, job role stressor (ambiguity), job’s social support (supervisor
causes of imbalance (Michel et al., 2011). Moreover, Michel and colleagues (2011) also show
that an individual's personality can be a cause of imbalance. More specifically, how a person
reacts when agitated can explain why imbalance occurs. All of the aforementioned, indicate that
imbalance can be caused by several things at a time and that several factors must be taken in to
account when trying to understand this concept.
As for the consequences of WLB, studies have shown that a lack of balance between
work and life demands have negative effects for both the individual and the organization where
they work. Organizational consequences regard variations in employee satisfaction, turnover,
employee commitment and absenteeism (e.g., Duxbury, Higgins, Lee, & Mills, 1992; Grover &
Crooker, 1995). Whereas, individual consequences are for instance mental health, stress, overall
life gratification and well-being (e.g., Duxbury, Higgens, & Lee, 1992, Frone, 2000; Frone,
Russell, & Cooper, 1997; Grzywacz & Bass, 2003; Major, Klein, & Ehrhart, 2002, Bell,
Rajendran, & Theiler, 2012).
In short, WLB represents one’s perceptions about the way they manage their work and
private life demands. Moreover, WL imbalance can happen due to time demands, organizational
demands, and personal characteristics. Lastly, WL imbalance is harmful to both the individual
and organization. Importantly, however, is that research strongly suggesting that perceptions and
consequences of WLB vary greatly for men and women.
Gender differences in perception of work-life balance
Research on WLB has shown several times that women experience more conflict in their WLB
than men (Powel & Greenhaus, 2010, Duxbury & Higgins 1991). These dissimilarities are
predominantly caused by social and behavioral expectations placed on both men and women
of the family responsibilities (Pleck, 1977). However, Delina & Prabhakara (2013) indicate that
over the decades, there has been a noteworthy increase in female participants in the labor market.
Yet, long-established role expectations about men and women’s responsibilities haven’t changed
that much (Malhotra & Sachdeva, 2005). Such that women are still expected to take care of
family duties while their workload has become comparable to their male counterparts.
Additionally, women are expected to be as dedicated to their jobs as men are. For this reason, it
has become more difficult for women to control their home and work demands when compared
to men (Baars, 2016).
One particular stream of research further elaborates on this by arguing that in
organizational settings, women are in disadvantageous position. Such that, employees who work
at more senior levels within organizations may be able to modify their working hours
(Tomlinson, 2006). However, women still lack the autonomy to influence their work schedule because they usually don’t have influential positions within an organization. This is primarily
caused by gender discrimination, unsympathetic work situations, negative stereotypes regarding
women in management, and biases. This leads to women lacking the opportunities for
progression like men do (Rio, 2018). Consequently, women are “opting-out” of their job (Belkin,
2003), by either choosing specific occupations (Glass & Camarigg, 1992), working part-time
(Tomlinson, 2006), dropping their ambitions (Budig & England, 2001), or stopping with working
(Belkin, 2003). Contrariwise, men usually experience a better WLB and when this is not the
case, men tend to demonstrate control and self-sufficient behavior (Higgins, Duxbury & Lyons,
2010).
Based on the above mentioned, I want to introduce the social identity theory (SIT) as a
Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher & Wetherall, 1987). According to social identity theory,
employees do not only have individual responses, but also group-based responses, and so this
should also affect their perceptions of WLB. Because men and women allow an important part of
their self-esteem to depend on the organizational groups they belong to. The more they feel part
of a group, the more they will behave according to the norms and values of that group.
The Social Identity Theory
According to the social identity theory (SIT), an individual’s social identity refers to the
feeling of identification that they develop from their membership in a social group (Turner et al.,
1987). This is also, referred to as social identification (Kippenberg, 2011). Remarkable from this
is that individuals can be members of several groups at a time. Varying from group memberships based on “demographic and sociological variables, those based on opinion groups and attitudes,
or those based on memberships to organizations and teams (Tajfel, 1978)”. Moreover, Turner
and colleagues (1994) expanded SIT by showing that an individual's discernment, attitudes,
choices, and actions are predisposed by social identities. This is because, groups prescribe
norms, stereotypes, and expected behaviors upon its members. Also noteworthy, is Hogg’s
(2011) proposition that leaders are better positioned to impact the functioning of the group
especially when their behavior is prototypical to the organizational characteristics and norms.
As a consequence, several studies have proposed the notion of personal identification with one’s leader (Aron, 2003; Aron & McLaughing-Volpe, 2001). Personal identification with
one’s leader has been defined as: “A self-categorization process that involves an individual
defining him or herself in terms of the attributes of the leader, shifting his or her focus on
individual gains for the leader, and experiencing a high level of connection with the leader”
with. Employees identify with a leader based on their perceptions of this person’s behavior and
how this behavior is relevant to the self (Collins, 1996; Gibson, 2003). Lastly, employees also examine the leader’s gender, age, and social characteristics such as experience and background
(Kulik & Ambrose, 1992). Similarly, Lockwood (2006) states that identification will happen easier when the leader’s gender is similar to that of the employee.
Personal identification has shown to have positive consequences for the individual and
organization such that a higher degree of identification might lead to increased career aspirations,
motivation, bond with the profession, bond with the organization, and improved WLB
(Lockwood & Kunda, 1997). Consequently, research on social identity theory is needed as feelings of identification strongly relate to WLB and are fluid. Such that one’s identity is
responsive to one’s current situation.
From the above mentioned, it can be concluded that identification with a leader is important for employee’s identity. Moreover, identification can be based on many different
things. Such that, identification based on gender has proven to be positive for women (more so
than for men). Hence this has led organizations to state that once there are more women in top
position, that this will motivate other women to become more ambitious etc. Yet research does
not always find clear gender identification effects. In other words, not all female role models are
positively evaluated (Hoyt & Simon, 2011). Therefore, I introduce one reason why this may be
the case: attainability matters. In other words, identification with leader only works when the female leader’s behavior is perceived to be attainable (Hoyt & Simon, 2011).
Leader’s Attainable Behavior
In 1991, Major et al., (1991), hypothesized that successful leaders will increase personal
attainable). Conversely, when the leader’s success is perceived as unattainable, the employee
might not identify with the leader and can result in self-deflating consequences. In order to
confirm this, Lockwood and Kunda's (1997) research assessed whether the importance and the attainability of the leader’s career accomplishments would shape individual’s self-perception.
Their results did find support for the proposition. Such that, leaders have an inspiring role on
their employees. Especially, when their career success is perceived to be attainable. Not
surprisingly, unattainable achievements seem to have a self-deflation effect on employees. In a
more recent publication by Lockwood (2006), women are more likely to identify with a female
leader, because she proves that women can conquer gender barriers to achieve careers success.
These results imply that identification with a categorically similar leader and the perception that
their accomplishments are attainable may be predominantly essential for employees who are
working in a negatively stereotyped domain, like women.
Based on this, I argue that in a work-setting, women who are already deviating from
prototypical male managers could thus benefit from a female leader to represent the group but
that this should particularly be the case when the female leader’s success is perceived to be
attainable. Consequently, women will recognize this person as a role model and will try to resemble this person’s behavior via imitation. On its turn, this will motivate, inspire, and provide
women with insights on how to achieve their own goals and even an improved WLB. More
specifically, I propose that female employees will identify easier with a high ranked female
leader who has achieved relatively a lot in their career while reporting being similar to regular
somebody is similar to them. Contrariwise, I did not expect this for men. Based on the theoretical
framework, this study proposed the following:
Hypothesis 1: When compared to men, women are more likely to identify with a female leader who demonstrates attainable behavior.
Hypothesis 2: When compared to men, women will have greater perceptions of work-life balance due to the attainability of the female leader’s position.
Hypothesis 3: The female leader’s attainable behavior will increase women’s identification with this person. As a result, women will have greater perceptions of their work-life balance due to the realization that if my leader can do it, so can I (this effect was not expected for men).
Conceptual Model
The following conceptual model summarizes the propositions derived from theory:
Employee s Gender Leader Attainable Behavior Personal Identification with Female Leader Perceived WLB H3 H1 H2
As mentioned before, identification with one’s leader will ease women’s perceptions of
their work-life balance more than it does for men. More specifically, women will identify easier
with a female leader whose achievements are perceived as attainable. On its turn this will tap
into their WLB perceptions. Moreover, I did not expect this for men.
METHODOLOGY
Participants
Initially 277 respondents participated in this experiment. However, 14 participants who
did not complete the survey were excluded from the sample. In addition, 56 participants failed to
pass the manipulation checks (see below). Hence, the final sample of this study consisted of 207 (Male 59.9%, Female 40.1%) workers. The majority of participant’s had a British (53.5%) or an
American (20.8%) nationality. The most common age group was between 25 – 34 years old
(47.8%) followed by participants between the ages of 35 – 44 (36.7%). Regarding their working
conditions, 63.3% of the participants had an intermediate position at their current organization
and 81.2% indicated that they work more than 33 hours per week. The results also show that
68.1% of the participants have possibilities for flexible working at their current organization.
Furthermore, 76.3% of the participants agreed that they experience a fit with their current leader. Lastly, these participants took part in the experiment in exchange for €1.25.
Procedures
This research used a web-based experimental method to examine the proposed
hypotheses. To be specific, participants were contacted via Prolific, which is an online platform
that connects researchers to participants (Prolific, 2018), to participate in a study on work-life
leadership position: unattainable vs. attainable vs. control) between-subjects experiment. Also,
the system randomly assigned the participants to one of the three conditions.
Moreover, participants were told to imagine that they are getting a new female
department leader. In order to introduce the leader, participants had to read a hypothetical
internal news bulletin of their organization that featured an interview conducted with the new
leader. After reading the bulletin, participants were asked to answer some questions related to the
bulletin they just read and to provide their opinion about the new leader. Lastly, participants
were asked to answer some demographical questions.
Attainability Manipulation
In order to manipulate the attainability of the leader’s position, participants were randomly
presented with either a control condition, an unattainable condition, or an attainable condition. In
all three conditions, the news bulletin portrayed the leader as Julia Lawler. She was presented as
someone who has achieved a lot, and is more advanced in their career than the participant. It was
also indicated that the leader graduated from a top-ranked university, had recently received a graduate’s award for outstanding career accomplishments, and will have a top-ranked position
within the participant’s company. In the unattainable condition, however, participants were
additionally presented with a statement of the new leader from the interview indicating how she
handles career challenges. The statement of the leader was: "I don't find it particularly
experiences have merely been positive and are very distinct from the experiences of regular
employees (i.e., signaling that her career progress may be unattainable by everybody). In the
attainable condition, participants were additionally presented with the following leader statement: “It's challenging, just like it would be for any new leader at this level, but I feel like
I'm able to reach my goals. It's just like with everything you do for the first time - it's tough at first and you feel like you don't really know what you're doing, but then, over time, you figure out what works for you and you get better. I felt the same way when I first started my job in a very junior position - it's really not all that different”. In this condition, participants were led to
believe that the leader’s work experiences have not always been positive and are very similar to
the experiences of regular employees (i.e., signaling that her career progress is attainable for
everybody).
After completion, participants had to answer questions about the leader and their WLB.
The study lasted between 10 to 15 minutes to ensure that the respondents perform enough
attention to give honest answers. Lastly, an anonymous data collection procedure was used and
the study was done in English. This because English is the native language for the majority of the
respondents. The advantage of this is that respondents can express themselves better.
Manipulation Checks
I checked the successfulness of my manipulations through the following ways. First, I checked if participants considered the leader’s position to be attainable (i.e., “Did Julia Lawler
state that it has always been easy for her to perform well in the positions she occupied? (1) yes.
(2) no, (3) did not receive this information).
Simultaneously, I also checked participant’s score on the attainability of the leader’s
indicate the effects this person had on the participant. More specifically, participants were
presented with the following statements: Being like this leader seems out of reach for me
(recoded), I can be like this leader in the future if I want to, being like this leader seems
attainable to me, and I could never be in such a leadership position (reverse coded), (Ryan et al., n.d.). Participant’s had to rate their answer on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree and 7
= strongly agree). Thus, a high score on this scale means that participants felt that the leadership
position was attainable for them. Lastly, there was a Cronbach's alpha of 0.851, which indicates a
high level of internal consistency for our scale with this specific sample.
Based on the above mentioned, participants who had a score below 3.5 on the
unattainable condition, a score above 3.5 on the attainable condition (due to reverse coding), and
who did not correctly match their answer to the condition they were presented with, were
excluded from the analysis. In total, I removed 56 participants. However, before I removed these participants’ I checked whether the statistical results would differ in case of excluding these
participants. This was not the case. Yet, I decided to exclude these participants in order to have a
cleaner sample (Velasco, 2010).
Conceptual Model Variables
Identification with the leader. Participants had to rate their degree of agreeableness
with the following statements: I would experience a fit with this leader, I am quite different from
this leader (recoded), I have a lot in common with this leader, it is possible for people like me to
become like such a leader, and I would have to change myself to fit in such a leadership position (recoded), (Ryan et al., n.d.). Moreover, participant’s had to rate their answer on a 7-point Likert
scale (1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree). Lastly, the Cronbach's alpha of the scale was
Perceptions of work-life balance. Participants perceptions of their WLB was measured
on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree) using the following
statements: It would be difficult to maintain balance in my life (recoded), it would be easy to
achieve a good work-life balance, it would be feasible to balance my private life, and I would
prefer to work less than full – time (recoded), (Ryan et al., n.d.). There was also a reliable
Cronbach's alpha of .788.
Control variables. To control for inaccuracy among the hypothesized associations
mentioned in the aforementioned paragraphs, the following variables will be controlled for: ‘seniority’ (starter, junior, intermediate, senior, very senior), working hours per week (between 0
– 12, 13 – 32, equal or more than 33), possibilities for flexible working at current organization (1
= yes, 2 = no), fit with current leader (1 = yes, 2 = no).
Participant’s seniority. Research has shown that women who work at more senior levels
within organizations may be able to modify their working hours (Tomlinson, 2006).
The amount of hours that participant’s work per week was also controlled for in the main
analysis. This is due to the fact that several studies have proven that more working hours, rather
than lesser working hours, lead to less WLB (Albertsen et al., 2008). Similarly, Eikhof et al.
(2007) emphasized this notion by arguing that work pressure, described as long working time, can cause problems in one’s private life.
Possibilities for flexible working at current organization. Studies indicate that
organizations offer possibilities for flexible working hours in order to help their employees
improve their WLB (Thomson, 2008). Consequently, employees do indicate that flexible
flexible working hours decreases work-life imbalance (Shagvaliyeva, & Yazdanifard, 2014;
Glass & Estes, 1997).
As mentioned above, identification with a leader can affect individual’s perceptions of
their WLB. Therefore, if a respondent already experiences a fit with their leader. This might
influence their responses on the survey.
Supplementary Variables
Besides the main analysis, I also wanted to explore the downstream consequences of
WLB perceptions. According to literature, when women have positive WLB perceptions they are
more likely to have greater ambitions (Budig & England, 2001), experience less stress (Bell,
Rajendran, & Theiler, 2012), are less likely to have turnover intentions (Grover & Crooker,
1995), and are less likely to stereotype.
Ambitions. The following statements where used to measure how this new leader
affected participant’s ambitions: I would be motivated to aim high in my organization (in terms
of my goals, ambitions, etc.), I would be motivated to work hard to advance my professional
career, I would be motivated to seek out opportunities to take on new endeavors and bigger
responsibilities within my organization, and I would be motivated to maintain my current
position, instead of moving up to higher status positions in my organization (recoded). In
addition, there was a Cronbach's alpha of .799. Last but not least, this variable was measured on
7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree).
Perceived stress. In order to measure perceived stress, participants had to indicate if this
leader would be a hindrance or a challenge to their aspirations. The challenge statements where: I
think that in the future she will help me to learn a lot, help me to develop my skills, encourage
think that in the future she will hinder any achievements I might have, restrict my capabilities,
limit how well I can do, and prevent me from mastering difficult aspects of the work (Searle &
Auton, 2015). Besides, there was a Cronbach's alpha of .942 for the challenge scale, and an alpha
of .910 for hindrance. These two variables were also measured on a 7-point Likert scale (1 =
strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree).
Turnover Intentions. This variable was measured by three questions. These where: I
would actively search for another job, I would often think about leaving my organization, and I
would like to leave my organization (Ryan et al., n.d.). In addition, there was a Cronbach's alpha
of .970 and possible answers varied from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree).
Stereotypes. In order to assess how respondents stereotyped the leader, participants were
asked to indicate to which extent this person would possesses the following traits: assertive,
warm, bold, tough, supportive, understanding, dominant, sensitive, strong, and caring (Ryan et
al., n.d.). These traits were then divided into two types of stereotypes. Either the leader was
stereotyped as masculine-agentic or feminine-communal (Abele, 2003). Masculine traits were:
assertive, bold, though, dominant, and strong. Feminine traits were: warm, supportive,
understanding, sensitive, and caring. Furthermore, the statements were measured on a 7-point
Likert scale ranging from: 1 (very atypical of this leader), atypical of this leader, somewhat
atypical of this leader, neither atypical not typical of this leader, somewhat typical of this leader,
typical of this leader, to 7 (very typical of this leader). Lastly, both scales were reliable
(male-agentic: .795 & female-communal: .942).
Main Model Analysis
I used several analyses to test my model. First, a Pearson Correlations test determined all
looked at all these relationships individually to determine whether two variables were related to
each other or not. Second, to test the first hypothesis, a two-way ANOVA was done to determine if there was an interaction between participant’s gender and attainability of the leader’s position,
on identification with the leader. Hereafter, an analysis of simple main effects was done to
determine the difference in group means. Hypothesis 2, was tested in the same way. However,
for this analysis the focus was on determining if there was an interaction between participant’s
gender, and the attainability of the leader’s position, on WLB. Lastly, the main hypothesis
proposed that: The female leader’s attainable behavior will increase women’s identification with
this person. As a result, women will have greater perceptions of their work-life balance due to the realization that if my leader can do it, so can I. In order to test this, model 8 from Hayes’s
Process was executed to assess if this moderated mediation effect exists (Hayes, 2013).
Supplementary Analysis
In addition to the main analysis, two-way ANOVA’s checked how the interaction
between attainability and gender affected downstream consequences of WLB. Moreover, it could be expected that participant’s gender and attainability will positively increase participant’s
ambitions, decrease perceived stress, and lessen the desire to leave the organization. If a
manipulation interaction effect on any of these variables was found, I conducted further
moderated mediation analyses to test whether these effects were explained through WLB
perceptions. When, however, the interaction effects were insignificant no further analyses were
RESULTS
Correlations Between Main Analysis Variables
To examine the relations between the dependent variable, independent variables and
control variables, a Pearson correlation was computed (Pallant, 2005). The correlations are
presented in appendix A.
The results indicate that gender had a negative correlation with the attainability of the leader’s position (R = -.149, p = .02), identification with the leader (R = -.132, p = 0.03), and
participant’s perceptions of their WLB (R = -.284, p = .001). Thus, participant’s gender does not
correlate with any of the main variables, in contrast to what was proposed in the theory. On the contrary, attainability of the leader’s position indicated a positive correlation with identification
(R = 0.692, p = .0.001). Identification with the leader also displayed a positive correlation with
WLB (R = .441, p = .001).
Concerning the control variables, seniority did not show any significant correlations with
WLB. This was also the case for possibilities for flexible working, and fit with current leader.
Hence, these variables will not be incorporated into the main analysis. Lastly, the amount of
working hours indicated a positive correlation with WLB, this diverges from what was proposed
in theory. Still, this variable will be controlled for in the main analysis as it does affect the
dependent variable (Salkind, 2010).
Two-way ANOVA on Identification
The first goal of this study was to determine if female participants would identify easier
with a female leader if this leader’s position was attainable. For male participants, I did not
with gender and attainability as two independent factors on identification with leader, controlling
for the effect of working hours. The results are presented in Appendix C.
The results did not show a significant main effect for participant’s gender on
identification with leader (F(1, 193) = .064, p = .80). Nonetheless, a significant main effect is
found for attainability on identification with the leader (F(1, 193) = 10.224, p = .001). These main effects were, however, qualified by the expected interaction between participant’s gender
and attainability of the leader’s position (F(5, 256) = 5.061, p = .007).
In order to understand the difference in means between attainability of the leader’s
position (conditions), I did a Tukey’s HSD tests (Appendix C). The results show that women
identified more with a leader whose position is attainable, than with an unattainable one (M =
-1.599, SD = .348, p = .001). Similarly, women also identified more with a leader whose position
was attainable, compared to a leader who did not indicate how attainable her position was (M =
.892, SD = .348, p = .042). As a result, a leader whose position is attainable seems to be an
important factor which influences women’s identification with their leader.
For men, however, the attainability of the leader’s position did not increase personal
identification, as there were no significant differences among the three attainability conditions
(lowest p-value = .392).
Two-way ANOVA on WLB
To test Hypothesis 2, I did a two-way ANOVA with gender and attainability as two
independent factors on WLB while controlling for the amount of working hours (Appendix E).
The ANOVA results revealed an insignificant main effect between participant’s gender and
WLB (F(13, 193) = 1.502, p = .222). The attainability of the leader’s position did seem to
by the expected interaction between participant’s gender and attainability of the leader’s position
(F(13, 193) = 6.269, p = .002).
The interaction between gender and attainability on WLB was additionally fragmented
with the use of simple effects tests on the basis of the overall error term (Tukey honestly significant difference (HSD). The results show that women had better WLB perceptions when
the leader had an attainable position, than with an unattainable position (M = -1.345, SD = .347,
p = .001) (Appendix F). As a result, a leader whose position is attainable seems to be an
important factor which influences women’s WLB perceptions.
For men, however, the attainability of the leader’s position did not improve their WLB
perceptions, as there were no significant differences among the three attainability conditions
(lowest p-value = 1.000).
Moderated Mediation
According to Hypothesis 3, the leader’s attainable behavior will increase women’s
identification with this person. As a result, women will have greater perceptions of their
work-life balance due to the realization that if my leader can do it, so can I (this effect was not
expected for men). In order to test this, a moderated mediation analysis was done using model 8
of Hayes’s Process (Hayes, 2013). In addition, the amount of working hours was controlled for
in this analysis.
The results indicate that in the unattainable [B = .290, SE = .106, 95% CI = [.509,
-.095] and attainable condition [B = -.134, SE = .073, 95% CI = [-.288, -.001], identification
negatively predicted WLB (Appendix G). However, it is still unclear whether there is a
difference between men and women’s WLB. The findings illustrate that gender did not have a
show an indirect effect of gender and identification (due to attainability) on WLB [B = .175, SE
= .081, 95% CI = [.036, .356]. To better understand this indirect effect, I re-did the moderation
mediation using Model 7 of Hayes (Appendix H). In addition, a syntax command was used to plot the differences between men and women’s WLB. Y-axis refers to the difference in WLB (Y)
between men and women (X). When the effect is positive, women experience more WLB than
men. When the effect is negative, men experience more WLB than women. When the effect is 0,
there is no significant difference between men and women’s perception of their WLB. The
results show that women have better WLB perceptions than men, only when no information was
given regarding attainability (Figure 1).
Figure 2. Moderation Mediation on WLB. (Gender 1 = Male, 2 = Female).
Supplementary Analysis
The ANOVA’s showed that the interaction between gender and attainability was insignificant for participant’s ambitions (F(5, 201) = 2.00, p = .138), perceived stress
(Hindrance: (F5, 201) = 2.883, p = .058; Challenge: (F(5, 201) = 2.283, p = .105), and
stereotypic behavior (Communal: (F(5, 201) = 1.725, p = .181; Agentic (F(5, 201) = .918, p = -0.31 -0.12 0.06 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1
Unattainable Attainable Control
Ef fe cts on W L B (Y )
Difference in WLB between Male & Female (X) Moderated Mediation on WLB
.401). Conversely, the results do indicate a significant interaction effect for turnover intentions
(F(5, 201) = 3.061, p = .049). Such that, both man (M = -1.384, SD = .342, p = .001) and women
(M = -2.612, SD = .372, p = .001) had less turnover intentions when the leader’s position was
attainable. Moreover, a moderated mediation analyses was used to test whether these effects
were explained through WLB perceptions. However, the results were insignificant for this
moderated mediation effect [B = -.137, SE = .094, 95% CI = [-.335, .030].
DISCUSSION
The present study aimed to show the relationship between gender, attainability, and
identification on WLB. As expected, the results show that a female leader increases the
likelihood that female employees identify with her, especially if she has an attainable position.
However, this effect disappears completely when the position of her is not attainable. As a result,
female supervisors lose their motivating role model function for other women. Moreover, and as expected, this attainability effect did not influence men’s identification. Thus, Hypothesis 1 can
be supported. The results also showed that when compared to men, an attainable position seems
to be an important factor which influences women’s perception of their WLB. Diving deeper into
this, only an attainable position seems to affect women's perception of their WLB. Thus, the
more attainable the position of the leader, the more positive women perceived their WLB. All in
all, Hypothesis 2 can be supported in this research.
Most importantly, Hypothesis 3 proposed that the leader’s attainable behavior will increase women’s identification with this person. As a result, women will have greater
perceptions of their work-life balance due to the realization that if my leader can do it, so can I.
women have better WLB perceptions than men, only when the leader does not indicate how
attainable her achievements are. Thus, there is no support for the proposed hypothesis.
Additionally, supplementary analyses analyzed several positive and negative outcomes
that can be caused by the attainability of the leader’s position. The results show that gender and
attainability do not: (1) increase ambitions, (2) affect perceived stress, and (4) influence whether
the leader is seen as a challenge or hindrance. However, participants indeed experience less
turnover intentions. Such that both men and women experience less turnover intentions when the leader’s position was perceived as attainable. Yet, WLB perceptions did not explain these
effects.
Theoretical Implications
The first hypothesis stating that when compared to men, women are more likely to
identify with a female leader who demonstrates attainable behavior is fully supported. This can
be seen by the fact that gender interacts with attainability to predict personal identification with a
female leader. More specifically, women identified more with a female leader whose position
was attainable. This indicates that in order to identify with a leader, women need to perceive
their position as attainable. This positive interaction of gender and attainability on personal
identification contributes to the already existing literature by confirming that leaders can indeed
increase personal identification with their employees (Lockwood & Kunda, 1997). Especially if the female leader’s her position is perceived to be attainable by female employees (Lockwood,
2006).
The second hypothesis proposed that when compared to men, women will have greater
perceptions of work-life balance due to the attainability of the female leader’s position. The
perceptions of WLB. Yet, the interplay between an individual’s gender and the attainability of the leader’s position did have an impact on WLB perceptions. As expected, the results reveal that
a female leader impacts women’s WLB perceptions when her position is attainable. This
proposition was never tested before. Therefore, its results contribute to the WLB and attainability
literature by providing insides into the mechanisms that can affect and improve women’s WLB.
According to Hypothesis 3, the leader’s attainable behavior will increase women’s
identification with this person. As a result, women will have greater perceptions of their
work-life balance due to the realization that if my leader can do it, so can I (this was not expected for
men). The results however, indicate that women have better perceptions WLB than men, only
when the leader did not indicate how attainable her position is. This hypothesis has never been
tested before and contributes to the WLB literature by confirming that more women at the top, or
having a female manager, is not enough to make women think they can do it themselves. It
depends on what that female manager does (Powel & Greenhaus, 2010, Duxbury & Higgins
1991). She should therefore not emphasize the difficulty of what she has achieved. If this is
emphasized, women will identify less with her and this might lead to less positive WLB
perceptions.
Supplementary Analysis
The additional research analyzed from additional data showed that participant's experienced
fewer turnover intentions when they perceived the leader's success to be attainable. This implies
that not only does attainability affect identification and WLB, however, it also affects other WLB
related outcomes. Furthermore, research on attainability is usually focused on understanding how
it affects participant's perceptions of a leader. However, little to no research has looked at how
to the attainability and turnover literature by indicating that there's more than meets the eye. In
other words, literature should not only assess how attainability influences perception of a leader.
However, it should start assessing if attainability has an influence on other leader-follower
related outcomes
Strengths and Limitations
This research has several strengths. First, an online study gives easier and faster access to
individuals with particular interests, opinions, and ideals regarding an issue or problem (Wright,
2005). In addition, it prevents the need for data entry which can reduce the errors made in
manual data entry (Haushofer et al., 2014). Second, this study managed to develop an effective
manipulation of attainability. There's limited research on how to manipulate attainability. Yet,
our manipulation showed to be effective. Another strength of this study is that it gives a more
comprehensive picture of the consequences of WLB. Thus, not only did I look at what influences
WLB, but I also looked at the effects of WLB for men and women. Moreover, all variables used
for this study had fairly high validities (between 0.776 – 0.970) meaning that the scales measured
what they were supposed to measure. Lastly, this study focused on women’s perceptions of their
WLB. However, males were also included in the data collection making it possible to compare
between genders.
Regardless of the strengths, I acknowledge that the present research is not without
limitations. The limitations are mainly focused on the first study described in this paper.
Especially, since I did not find any significant results for the main hypothesis. First of all, and
even though I managed to properly manipulate attainability, participants were presented with a
lot of information at once. Meaning that participant’s either did not remember the information or
properly answer the manipulation checks. Second, the results are exclusively founded on
self-report surveys. This could lead to inappropriate assumptions due to some insinuations such as
giving socially anticipated responses. A third limitation of this study was, that the majority of the
sample consisted of British employees. This makes it hard to generalize the results across other
countries. Organizations have diverse work methods and cultures guiding the attitudes and
comportment of employees.
Future Research
Beyond addressing the above-mentioned limitations, future research can expand both the
main study and the additional study. First, I found that female participant’s identified more with
a leader who had an attainable position. Hence, attainability seems to play an important factor for
women when it comes to identification with their leader. Based on this, attainability should be
considered as a hygiene factor when it comes to personal identification. Such that, identification
with a female leader will only happen when the leader’s achievements are perceived to be
attainable. However, in this study, participants experienced a fictional leader for a short period of
time. This makes it harder to assess if the results are similar to ‘the real world’. Hence, future
research can assess if our results are true by replicating this study in a real-world setting.
However, future research, should not manipulate attainability like it was done in this study.
Instead, future research should study women’s identification with an actual female leader who
has achieved relatively a lot in her career. This real-world comparison can confirm if attainability
is indeed a hygiene factor when identifying with a female leader.
Second, this study only focused on organizational mechanisms that might improve women’s WLB perceptions. However, most definitions of WLB also state that one’s private life
personal life mechanism that might help women improve their WLB. For example, earlier
research has shown that social support outside of the work, such as support provided by spouses
or partners can offer women with vital instrumental and emotional support that make it less
complicated for her to attain personal ambitions and aspirations. On the contrary, women who do
not get support from their partners are most likely to experience emotional stress, bad moods and
a reduction of physical and emotional resources when trying to achieve both work and personal
ambitions and aspirations. On its turn, this will result in a lesser ability for women to achieve
WLB (Griggs et al., 2013). In view of that, future research could develop the present model of
this study by assessing how both partner support and leader identification interact to affect women’s perceptions of their WLB. I propose that when women receive support from their
partner, this will help them feel that it is possible to achieve their ambitions. This will also make
it easier for them to identify with a high ranked female leader since they already have a sense
that it possible to achieve their goals. Ultimately, this identification will neutralize employee’s
perceptions of misbalance, and can even enhance it particularly when somebody is similar to
them. This approach will illustrate how other factors can improve women’s perception of their
WLB.
Third, this research shows that there is indeed a difference in how men and women
perceive their work-life balance. Such that women experience better WLB perception’s when the
leader did not indicate the attainability of her position. It would be interesting for future research
to assess what information the leader should and should not provide, to positively affect
women’s WLB. For instance, Hoyt & Simon (2011) showed that “if female leaders are subtyped
as exceptions to the norm, they may cause more harm than help (p. 154). Hence, I propose that
is by assessing what their female subordinate’s ambitions are and basing her behavior on this.
Only then, she can positively influence women’s WLB.
Lastly, the supplementary analysis highlighted that attainability of a female leader’s
position decreases turnover intentions for both men and women. Still, the literature on how
attainability influences other organizational outcomes is scarce. Therefore, future research should
focus on this. For instance, research states that leaders can improve employee’s performance
Gottfredson & Aguinis, 2017), job satisfaction (Mosadegh Rad & Yarmohammadian, 2006), and
commitment to the organization (Iljes, Nahrgang & Morgeson, 2007). Yet, what remains unclear
is whether attainability of a leader’s position will influence these outcomes. For instance, it can
be argued that attainability can motivate women to work harder to reach their professional goals.
In order to reach these goals, women will perform better, experience more job satisfaction, and
be more committed to the organization.
Practical Implications
From a practical standpoint, this study presents several implications. The results of the
study suggest that powerful individuals, such as female managers, can increase identification
with other women especially when her position is attainable. Research indicates that personal
identification can lead to increased career aspirations, motivation, bond with the profession, and
bond with the organization (Lockwood & Kunda, 1997). Therefore, it is important for
organizations to create an environment where female managers can tell their story so that other
women can identify with her. In addition, research has already demonstrated that individuals
have fewer turnover intentions due to greater perceptions of their WLB. The results support the
theory by showing that individuals experience fewer turnover intentions due to greater
1995). Hence, if organizations want to decrease their turnover rates, they should keep searching for ways to improve women’s WLB.
Conclusion
Due to changes in the labor market, employee’s work-life balance has become more
important than ever. Especially women experience less work-life balance due to conflicting work
and private life demands. Therefore, this paper proposed that identification with a female manager might be a key way to improve women’s perceptions of their WLB. More specifically,
women are more likely to identify with a female leader whose position is perceived as attainable.
Due to this increased identification, the manager will have a motivating role on how women
perceive their WLB. Because, if my leader can do it, so can I. However, the results indicate that
women experience better WLB perceptions when the leader did not say how attainable her
position is. My conclusion from this is that more women at the top, or having a female manager,
is not enough to make women think they can do it themselves. It depends on what that female
manager does. She should therefore not emphasize the difficulty of what she has achieved is. If
this is emphasized, women will identify less with her. However, more research is necessary to
REFERENCES
Albertsen, K., Rafnsdóttir, G. L., Grimsmo, A., Tómasson, K., & Kauppinen, K. 2008. Workhours and
worklife balance. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 34(5): 14.
Belkin, L. 2003. The opt-out revolution.
Bell, A. S., Rajendran, D., & Theiler, S. 2012. Job Stress, Wellbeing, Work-Life Balance and Work-Life
Conflict Among Australian Academics. E-Journal of Applied Psychology, 8(1).
Bond, J. T., Galinsky, E., & Swanberg, J. E. 1997. The National Study of the Changing Workforce,
1997. No. 2. Families and Work Institute, 330 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001.
Budig, M. J., & England, P. (2001). The wage penalty for motherhood. American sociological review,
204-225.
Carlson, D., & Perrewe, P. 1999). The role of social support in the stressor-strain relationship: an
examination of work-family conflict. Journal of Management, 25(4): 513-40.
Casper, W. J., de Hauw, S., Wayne, J. H., & Greenhaus, J. H. 2017. The jingle–jangle of work–non
work balance: A comprehensive review of its meaning and measurement. Journal of Applied
Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000259.
Collins, N. L. (1996). Working models of attachment: Implications for explanation, emotion, and
behavior. Journal of personality and social psychology, 71(4): 810.
Crompton, R., & Lyonette, C. 2006. Work-life ‘balance’ in Europe. Acta Sociologica, 49: 379 - 393.
Deelstra, J., Peeters, M., Schaufeli, W., Stroebe, W., Zijlstra, F. & Doornen, L. 2003. Receiving
instrumental support at work: when help is not welcome. Journal of Applied Psychology, 8(2):
324-31.
Delina, G., & Prabhakara, R. 2013. A study on work-life balance in working women. International
Deloitte, 2018. Global Human Capital Trends. Retrieved 23 June, from
https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/insights/us/articles/HCTrends2018/2018-HCtrends_Rise-of-the-social-enterprise.pdf
Duxbury, L. E., & Higgins, C. A. 1991. Gender differences in work-family conflict. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 76(1): 60-74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.76.1.60
Duxbury, L. E., Higgins, C. A., & Mills, S. 1992. After-hours telecommuting and work-family conflict:
A comparative analysis. Information Systems Research, 3(2): 173-190.
Eagle, B. 1995. A construct validity study of bidirectional measures of work-family conflict.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Georgia State University.
Eby, L. T., Casper, W. J., Lockwood, A., Bordeaux, C., & Brinley, A. 2005. Work and family research
in IO/OB: Content analysis and review of the literature (1980–2002). Journal of vocational
behavior, 66(1), 124-197.
Eikhof, D. R., Warhurst, C. & Haunschild, A. 2007. Introduction: What work? What life? What
balance? Critical reflections on the work-life balance debate. Employee Relations, 29(4):
325-333.
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: 65-78.
Frone, M. R., Russell, M., & Cooper, M. L. 1997. Relation of work–family conflict to health outcomes:
A four-year longitudinal study of employed parents. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 70: 325-335.
Gibson, D. E. 2003. Developing the professional self-concept: Role model construals in early, middle,
Glass, J., & Camarigg, V. 1992. Gender, parenthood, and job-family compatibility. American Journal
of Sociology, 98(1): 131-151.
Glass, J., & Estes, S. 1997. The family responsive workplace. Annual Review of Sociology, 23(1):
289–313.
Greenhaus, J. & Parasuraman, S. 1994. Work-family conflict, social support and well-being, in
Davidson, M. and Burke, R. (Eds), Women in Management: Current Research Issues, Paul
Chapman, London. pp. 213-29.
Greenhaus, J. H., & Beutell, N. J. 1985. Sources of conflict between work and family roles. Academy of
Management Review, 10: 76-88.
Greenhaus, J. H., Parasuraman, S., Granrose, C. S., Rabinowitz, S., & Beutell, N. J. 1989. Sources of
work-family conflict among two career couples. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 34: 133-1 53.
Greenhaus, J., & Allen, T. 2011. Work–family balance: A review and extension of the literature. In J. C.
Quick & L. E. Tetrick (Eds.). Handbook of occupational health psychology. Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
Griggs, T. L., Casper, W. J., & Eby, L. T. (2013). Work, family and community support as predictors of
work–family conflict: A study of low-income workers. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 82, 59–
68.doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2012.11.006.
Gottfredson, R. K., & Aguinis, H. 2017. Leadership behaviors and follower performance: Deductive and
inductive examination of theoretical rationales and underlying mechanisms. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 38(4), 558-591.
Grover, S. L., & Crooker, K. J. 1995. Who appreciates family‐responsive human resource policies: The
impact of family‐friendly policies on the organizational attachment of parents and non‐
Grzywacz, J. G., & Carlson, D. S. 2007. Conceptualizing work—family balance: Implications for
practice and research. Advances in developing human resources, 9(4): 455-471.
Guest, D. E. 2002. Perspectives on the study of work-life balance. Social Science Information, 41(2):
255-279.
Gutek, B. A., Searle, S., & Klepa, L. 1991. Rational versus gender role expectations for work-family
conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76: 560-568.
Haar, J. M. 2013. Testing a new measure of work–life balance: A study of parent and non-parent
employees from New Zealand. International Journal of Human Resource Management,
24(17/18): 3305–3324.
Haushofer, J., Collins, M., de Giusti, G., Njoroge, J., Odero, A., Onyango, C., & Hughes, C. 2014. A
methodology for laboratory experiments in developing countries: Examples from the busara center. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2155217.
Hewlett, S. A., & Luce, C. B. 2005. Off-ramps and on-ramps. Harvard Business Review, 83: 43-54.
Higgins, C., Duxbury, L., & Lyons, S. 2010. Coping with overload and stress: Men and women in
dual-Earner families. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72(4): 847-859.
doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010. 00734.x
Hobman, E., Jackson, C. J., Jimmieson, N., & Martin, R. (2011). The effects of transformational
leadership behaviors on follower outcomes: An identity based analysis. European Journal of
Work and Organizational Psychology, 20: 553-580.
Hoyt, C. L., & Simon, S. 2011. Female leaders: Injurious or inspiring role models for
women? Psychology of Women Quarterly, 35(1), 143-157.
Ilies, R., Nahrgang, J. D., & Morgeson, F. P. 2007. Leader-member exchange and citizenship behaviors:
Keeton, K., Fenner, D. E., Johnson, T. R., & Hayward, R. A. (2007). Predictors of physician career
satisfaction, work–life balance, and burnout. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 109(4): 949-955.
Keller, A.C., Meier, L.L., Gross, S. & Semmer, N.K. 2013. Gender differences in the association of a
high quality job and self-esteem over time: a multiwave study. European Journal of Work and
Organizational Psychology, 24(1): 113-125.
Kossek, E. E., Valcour, M., & Lirio, P. 2012. The sustainable workforce. Wellbeing.
Kulik, C., & Ambrose, M. 1992. Personal and Situational Determinants of Referent Choice. The
Academy of Management Review, 17(2): 212-237.
Leach, C. W., Van Zomeren, M., Zebel, S., Vliek, M. L., Pennekamp, S. F., Doosje, B., & Spears, R.
2008. Group-level self-definition and self-investment: a hierarchical (multicomponent) model of
in-group identification. Journal of personality and social psychology, 95(1):144.
Lockwood, N. 2003. Work/Life balance: Challenges and solutions. Society for Human Resource
Management.
Lockwood, P. 2006. Someone like me can be successful: Do college students need same-gender role
models? Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30, 36–46. doi:10.1111/j.1471–6402.2006.00260.x.
Lockwood, P., & Kunda, Z. 1997. Superstars and me: Predicting the impact of role models on the
self. Journal of personality and social psychology, 73(1): 91.
Major, B., Testa, M., & Bylsma, W. H. 1991. Responses to upward and downward social comparisons:
The impact of esteem relevance and perceived control. In J. Suls & T. A. Wills (Eds.), Social
comparison: Contemporary theory and research (pp. 237–260). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Major, V. S., Klein, K. J., & Ehrhart, M. G. (2002). Work time, work interference with family, and
