University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The bi-directional impact of work-family conflict and family-work conflict on entrepreneurs, executives and organizations in high stress careers

(USC Thesis Other)

The bi-directional impact of work-family conflict and family-work conflict on entrepreneurs, executives and organizations in high stress careers

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

The Bi-directional Impact of Work-Family Conflict and Family-Work Conflict on
Entrepreneurs, Executives, and Organizations in High-Stress Careers
by
Jennifer Dawn Musselman

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education

December 2022

© Copyright by Jennifer Dawn Musselman 2022
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Jennifer Dawn Musselman certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Mary Andres
Christopher Bresnahan
Helena Seli, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2022

iv
Abstract
Entrepreneurs and executives face high-pressure, high-demand roles. These roles often conflict
with their relationships and family demands. How these two domains successfully or
unsuccessfully interface underscores an entrepreneur’s or executive’s feelings about their
marriages and their work. The purpose of this study is to research the bi-directional impact of
work stress to an entrepreneur or executive’s relationship, and relationship stress to their work
performance. This study uses qualitative interviews with entrepreneurs and executives to explore
work and family spill-over challenges faced by entrepreneurs and executives, and the strategies
that they, their partners, and organizations employ which enables or deteriorates their ability to
successfully handle demands of their relationships and high-performance career goals. This
paper looks at overarching themes from the crossover impact of stress using a social cognitive
theory lens. While a number of healthy and unhealthy strategies were revealed by the
entrepreneurs and executives and their partners, it also illuminated organizational practices of
flexible work schedules and that a psychologically safe culture plays a critical role in supporting
this demographic in work and relationships and influenced how participants felt toward their
companies. These results demonstrate that an entrepreneur and executive’s relationships play an
important role in their work performance and satisfaction and that organizations should
proactively support leaders’ relationship satisfaction through practices, benefits, trainings, and
work culture which will ultimately their relationship and have a positive spill-over impact on
their work performance and organizational climate.
Keywords: work, family, conflict, spill-over, emotional contagion, organizational culture,
psychological safety, couple’s therapy

v
Dedication
To my many clients past and present, whose personal struggles in their relationships with work
aspirations inspired this dissertation topic. May the findings here support more connection
among our most precious relationships and inspire more supportive work-life integration for
healthier capitalistic ecosystems.”

vi
Acknowledgements
Thank you to my dissertation chair, Dr. Helena Seli. You led with the space and grace for
me to show up when I could, to pull back when I needed, and the accountability to finish strong.
To my dissertation committee members USC Marshall School’s Dr. Christopher Bresnahan and
USC Rossier School’s Dr. Mary Andres, thank you. Your subject matter expertise to this
dissertation makes the research more meaningful, applicable, and aspirational. To retired U.S.
Marine and fellow doctoral colleague Colonel Chris Naler, thank you for not leaving any woman
behind. I would not have finished this emotional battle without your service.
I am blessed with a sisterhood of women who cheered me along this journey but am
especially grateful to Rachel Nee Hall and Maureen Shay for your talents; this doctorate is ours
to celebrate. To all my interview participants who shall remain private, thank you for your
candor, insights, and vulnerability. It is because of you and your generosity of time, experience,
truth, and network that this powerful research was possible. I could not have done this doctorate
without the emotional support of my beloved companion Leo who grounded me through this
journey even as his own journey on Earth came to an end. To all the world’s therapists who put
themselves through the expensive education, training, and grueling licensing process despite
knowing that our clinical talents and skills are not monetarily compensated well. You are seen
here. Finally, to my little girl: I am proud of you. You survived workplace toxicity and made
meaning from your childhood trauma so that you could support the healing of others’ own
struggles, personally and professionally.
My license as a marriage and family therapist, former executive in corporate America and
experience in start-up culture certainly frames my research as the author of this study. I have
taken great lengths to ensure my professional work did not conflict with the research of this

vii
study and ensured limited bias. Data from this research is intended for future research and public
consumption in hopes of implementation of organizational best practices that support marital
health and relationship satisfaction. At no point will interviewees be identified without consent.

viii
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ........................................................................................................................................v
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ vi
List of Tables ...................................................................................................................................x
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ xi
Chapter One: Introduction to the Study ...........................................................................................1
Background of the Study .....................................................................................................1
Context of the Study ............................................................................................................2
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions ...................................................................3
Importance of the Study .......................................................................................................5
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology .....................................................5
Definitions............................................................................................................................6
Organization of the Dissertation ..........................................................................................8
Chapter Two: Literature Review .....................................................................................................9
Background of WFC and FWC Spill-Over Impact on Executives and
Entrepreneurs .......................................................................................................................9
Theories Used for Work-Family Conflict and Family-Work Conflict ..............................20
Best Practices for Work-Family Interface and Work-Family Enrichment ........................23
Partner and Spousal Work-Family and Family-Work Conflict Strategies ........................31
Conceptual Framework: Social Cognitive Theory Past Research to Problem of
Practice ...............................................................................................................................34
Summary ............................................................................................................................38
Chapter Three: Methodology .........................................................................................................39
Research Questions ............................................................................................................39
Overview of Methodology Design.....................................................................................40

ix
The Researcher...................................................................................................................41
Data Sources: Interviews ...................................................................................................43
Credibility and Trustworthiness .........................................................................................47
Ethics..................................................................................................................................48
Chapter Four: Findings ..................................................................................................................49
Research Question 1: What Are the General Causes of Work-Family and Family-
Work Conflict as Identified by Entrepreneurs and Executives? ........................................53
Research Question 2: What Work-Family Behaviors and Strategies do
Entrepreneurs and Executives Employ to Maintain Marital Satisfaction? ........................59
Research Question 3: What Behaviors and Policies Do Organizations Practice
That Support or Harm Work-Family Integration and Overall Life Satisfaction for
Entrepreneurs and Executives? ..........................................................................................65
Research Question 4: What Strategies and Behaviors Do Entrepreneurs and
Executives Say Their Intimate Partners Employ That Increase or Decrease
Family-Work Conflict? ......................................................................................................70
Summary ............................................................................................................................75
Chapter Five: Recommendations ...................................................................................................77
Discussion of Findings .......................................................................................................77
Recommendations for Practice ..........................................................................................83
Limitations and Delimitations............................................................................................89
Recommendations for Future Research .............................................................................90
Conclusion .........................................................................................................................91
References ......................................................................................................................................94
Appendix A: Script ......................................................................................................................135

x
List of Tables
Table 1: Summary of Interview Participants ................................................................................ 50

xi
List of Figures
Figure 1: Social Cognitive Theory in Work-Family Conflict Spillover Impact ........................... 36

1

Chapter One: Introduction to the Study
Personal and professional lives are becoming ever-more intertwined over the last 2
decades partially due to the dramatic increase in digitization and increased use of information
and communication technologies (Bjärntoft et al., 2020). Matthews et al. (2012) found that
dedicating more resources to one domain, personal or professional, over the other increases a
person’s likelihood of conflict because of insufficient resources to meet the obligations of
multiple roles, demonstrating this is a problem. The evidence highlighted that the demands of the
work role deplete resources (e.g., time, energy, emotions) necessary to fully engage in the family
role (Hammer et al., 2011). This problem was important to address because Unger et al. (2014)
found that, in a study of 152 individuals (72 couples), people put more time in at work when
their intimate relationships are going well, because the absence of stressors at home gives them
greater emotional, cognitive, and physical vigor to bring to the workplace. More qualitative
research was needed to learn about this reciprocal relationship, specifically how entrepreneurs
and executives in long-term relationships negotiate autonomous needs for achievement in work
with family roles and protect against work strains and threats, and an organization’s strategies for
reducing work-family conflict.
Background of the Study
The study of work-family interface can be traced back to at least the 1960s, with family-
friendly work practices rooted in benefitting an organization’s bottom-line economics; however,
businesses have been slow to adopt them (Williams et al., 2016). In a study of employees, stress
underpinned the negative impact of this integration in contemporary organizations, costing
companies as much as $300 billion annually (American Psychological Association, 2007).
Millennials, who as of 2015 account for the largest portion of the U.S. workforce, cite work-life
2

balance as a top priority, forcing companies to prioritize policies that promote flexibility with
unlimited vacation time to attract and retain talent (Schlegel, 2017). Previous research has
primarily focused on organizational strategies for work-life balance, yet recent work and family
responsibilities have blurred the boundaries that once separated these domains and have
dramatically altered the ways in which work and family roles interact, causing work-family role
blurring and an increased work-family integration (Glavin & Schieman, 2012). Solomon and
Jackson (2014) found that experiences that occur within intimate relationships, such as negative
interactions, stress and mood can sometimes spill-over and color experiences in the workplace,
known as “crossover effect.” Unfolding family crisis cause an executive abroad to feel
dissatisfied with the family and tends to bring these negative emotions to the workplace, where it
could cause further problems (McNulty et al., 2019; Wurtz, 2018). Kennard (2012) highlighted
the Global Relocation Services research which found spousal dissatisfaction as the most stated
reason for expatriate breaking contract to return home earlier than expected.
Full-time work factors including overwhelming workload, inflexible work hours, job
instability, and lack of supervisor social support partnered with a stressful home environment
involving children at home and a partner in a demanding job makes conflict between work and
family reciprocal in nature (Jansen et al., 2003). French et al. (2018) found that employee
perceptions of a company’s support in handling work-family conflict, especially in collectivist or
assertive cultures, was even more important than family support.
Context of the Study
This study sampled entrepreneurs and executives in high-stress, high-performance careers
who work full-time and who are either currently married, divorced or in a long-term, exclusive
relationship. For the purpose of this paper, a high-stress, high-performance career is defined as a
3

highly competitive culture with high job demands and narrowly-defined productivity
(Kloutsiniotis & Mihail, 2020) with individuals who seek achievement-oriented outcomes
whereby others outside the self-validate them by pay, social status, promotion, creativity and
authority over their work (Benson et al., 2019) and whose effort to achieve their goals require a
high-level of responsibility to execute and manage their own primary task (Wood & de Menezes,
2011). The majority of these participants were recruited from high-stress, high-performance
careers in private equity and venture-backed, consumer, technology and media companies. The
participants were leaders in their companies and their fields. Several participants were currently
founders and in key operational roles or have founded and successfully exited their own
companies. The participants predominantly resided in California’s Silicon Valley or San
Francisco area, and also included Los Angeles and San Diego; as well as Portland, Oregon;
Chicago, Illinois; Washington DC; Austin, Texas; Phoenix, Arizona; and Nashville, Tennessee.
The study invited gender-neutral, male, and female-identified participants, and made an earnest
attempt to recruit an ethnically diverse pool of participants
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions
The purpose of this study explored work and family spill-over challenges faced by
entrepreneurs and executives, and the strategies that they, their partners, and organizations
employed that enabled or deteriorated their ability to successfully handle demands of their
relationships and high-performance career goals. This research study focused on the integration
of both work and family domains. It reviewed previous research on work-family conflict, self‐
regulation and individual resource management, and spousal and organizational strategies, that
collectively are part of larger, overarching life satisfaction.
4

There is limited knowledge on the actual experiences of entrepreneurs and executives,
and the spill-over impact on relationship satisfaction of high-performance career goals on their
partnerships. Conversely, little is known about how an entrepreneur’s and executive’s work
performance is impacted by family conflict. Further, there is little research on organizational
climate that supports entrepreneurs and executives in managing overall work-family conflict.
The majority of research encapsulates employee well-being, not the satisfaction of entrepreneurs
and executives who lead them, and the impact on their relationships.
The study attempted to identify the positive and negative behaviors and strategies that
entrepreneurs and organizational executives activate to manage work-family spill-over
challenges and illuminate the behaviors and strategies that their partners and organizations use
that either corrode or empower marital and overall life satisfaction. Findings from this study will
be used to generate recommendations for prevention and interventions tools for entrepreneurs
and organizational executives and to human resource management.
The following research questions guided the study:
1. What are the general causes of work-family and family-work conflict as identified by
entrepreneurs and executives?
2. What work-family behaviors and strategies do entrepreneurs and executives employ
to maintain marital satisfaction?
3. What behaviors and policies do organizations practice that support or harm work-
family integration and overall life satisfaction for entrepreneurs and executives?
4. What strategies and behaviors do entrepreneurs and executives say their intimate
partners employ that increase or decrease family-work conflict?

5

Importance of the Study
An entrepreneur and executive’s challenges in managing work and family conflict is
important to solve for a variety of reasons. Greater work demands spill-over to work-family
conflict and then spill-over to work attitudes, creating reduced job satisfaction and commitment
to work (Carlson et al., 2019). Emotion of leaders and their ability to regulate their own emotions
and the moods, job attitudes, and performance of their employees is important, especially in
high-performance workplaces, because employees cannot feel confident if their leaders express
fear, anxiety, and other confidence-sapping emotions (Humphrey, 2012). Turnover retention was
directly and negatively related to job satisfaction, and it was directly, indirectly, and positively
related to work stress and work-family conflict (Lu et al., 2008).
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
Voydanoff (2005) found that responsibilities and resources expected in the work or
family domain directly impact individual well-being, role quality and performance in the other
domain. Craft et al. (2015) noted starting a business has a stressful impact on executives and
entrepreneurs’ spousal relationship due to the many resources from each spouse required in
terms of energy, time, and money. This study reviewed the bi-directional spill-over effect of
work-family conflict guided by social cognitive theory. Specifically, the study explored the
personal, behavioral, and environmental impacts on entrepreneurs’ and executives’ ability to
manage work-family conflict and the strategies these individuals, partners and organizations do
to reduce or increase work-family conflict. The research employed a qualitative approach where
data was gathered via individual interviews and document analysis.
6

Definitions
Work-family conflict (WFC): The construct of work-family conflict is a perception of
insufficient energy and/or time to successfully perform work and family roles that spill-over into
cross-domains bidirectionally, influencing the relationship between work and family in negative
ways (Jansen et al., 2003).
Family-work conflict (FWC): Family role conflict whereby inter-roles of family and work
are incompatible; family-work conflict is more likely to cause more problems within the home
domain, resulting in lower life satisfaction and more internal conflict within the family unit (Frye
& Breaugh, 2004).
Work-family integration or interface (WFI): describes the amount (high or little) of
segmentation, or separation of work and family roles that employees make between their work
and family roles (Ilies et al., 2009).
Work-family enrichment (WFE): is the concept that individuals obtain resources in one
role (work) which enhances capabilities in another role; family (Lapierre et al., 2018).
Emotional labor and regulation: Hochschild (1983) defined emotional labor as the
“management of feeling to create a publicly observable facial and bodily display,” (p.7) with
emotional labor tactics helping leaders to both manage their own emotions and control the
emotions they portray to others (Humphrey, 2012).
Emotional support: Emotional support is a set of behaviors that exhibit encouragement,
understanding, attention, and positive regard, love and care that can bring about feelings of
happiness and a spiritual uplift (Ross et al., 2005) and whose support includes problem solving
behaviors and support of their partner’s participation in other domains.
7

Emotional exhaustion: Emotion exhaustion is defined as “feelings of being overextended
and depleted of one’s emotional and physical resources” (Maslach & Leiter, 2008, p. 498)
Emotion contagion: Emotion contagion are fluctuating emotional states that are
vulnerable to external influences, including physical and personal factors, that create an overall
mood (Ustrov et al., 2016).
Executive: An individual in a leadership position of authority, who may or may not be a
founding member of the organization, and who is employed in an organizational structure that
comes with a specified set of tasks or responsibilities (Ebbers & Wijnberg, 2017), including
managing teams, and who identifies with and acts in accordance with what is right for the
organization (Kline et al., 2017).
Entrepreneur: Entrepreneurs are founding executives who recognize the reality of
problems (D’Intino & Kury, 2018) and utilize limited resources to solve persistent and seemingly
insurmountable problems (Larivet & Brouard, 2010) because of a need for autonomy, and
propensity for innovation and achievement (Volery et al., 2013) which creates a strong
desirability for venture driven by intrinsic reward and supported by extrinsic social norms
(Meyskens et al., 2010).
Locus of control: Schjoedt and Shaver (2012) defined locus of control (LOC) as the
belief that the outcomes of an individual’s actions are as a result of their actions (internal LOC)
or under the control of external forces such as luck, fate or powerful others (external LOC), and
underscore locus of control as an important aspect in work motivation, satisfaction, and
performance.
8

Organization of the Dissertation
Five chapters were used to organize this study. This chapter provided the reader with key
concepts and terminology commonly found in a discussion about work-life conflicts of
entrepreneurs and executives contributing to their overall life satisfaction, and in the impact to
their marriages or long-term relationships and the organizations they lead. The context and
background of the problem of practice in the field of entrepreneurship and among executives and
the framework for the project were introduced. Chapter Two provides a review of current
literature surrounding the scope of the study. Causes of work-life conflict and FWC; spill-over
impact of work-life and FWC; and effective and ineffective strategies practiced by organizations,
entrepreneurs and executives and their intimate partners for handling work-life and FWC
integration were examined from previous literature, which is discussed in Chapter Two, as well
as the conceptual framework. Chapter Three details the methodology for selection of
participants, data collection and analysis. In Chapter Four, the data was assessed and analyzed.
Chapter Five provides a discussion and recommendations for practice and for future research.

9

Chapter Two: Literature Review
This section reviews the challenges caused by the spill-over impact of stressors
originating from work, work-family conflict (WFC), and the stressors that originate from their
family lives, family-work conflict (FWC). Further, the sections extrapolate the effective and
ineffective strategies practiced by organizations, entrepreneurs and executives and their spouses
or partners for increased work-life integration as examined from previous literature. The
literature review is intended to mine for and provide valuable insights for WFE, organizational
best practices and partnership support strategies to develop to moderate the negative effects of
spill-over from one domain to another while increasing their positive impact.
Background of WFC and FWC Spill-Over Impact on Executives and Entrepreneurs
Work and family domains are often bifurcated in literature review, but organizational
research has increasingly studied the antecedents of work-family spill-over and integration
preferences with work demand policies (Liu & Yu, 2019). The literature on cross domain
processes incorporates roles, interpersonal relationships, and patterns of activities which research
has shown, collectively, creates resource drain and generation, and negative and positive spill-
over impact (Voydanoff, 2005). Research shows positive organizational experiences in work will
ultimately spill-over to the life domain and increase employee life satisfaction (Tu & Lu, 2016)
while negative work-related experiences make WFI challenging, and negatively impacts an
employee’s quality of family life (Grzywacz & Marks, 2000) with reciprocal spill-over impact to
employees’ work, organization and society (Liu et al., 2013).
To combat this negative spill-over, organizations implement a variety of benefits,
policies, and engagement strategies to off-set common challenges found in the workplace that
impact performance, engagement and work-related issues that conflict with personal demands.
10

This is increasingly important as evidence exists that for long-term job success, job satisfaction
predicts productivity, performance, engagement, and organizational commitment (Blömeke et
al., 2015). The role that entrepreneurs and executives specifically play in this spill-over impact,
both to themselves and organization-wide, was studied in the following sections.
Organizational Policies Impacting WFC
An organization’s culture guides its responsiveness to employee work-family needs with
the resources (or lack thereof) to meet environmental demands that reduce WFC or with more
organizational demands that increase potential of WFC (Nikandrou et al., 2008). Historically,
organizational work-family-friendly policies include work from home (van der Lippe &
Lippényi, 2020), childcare and maternity leave (Yang et al., 2017), work flexibility and work
load moderation (Lu et al., 2008), healthcare benefits (Danis et al., 2007) and paid time off,
including the adoption of unlimited paid time off (Ford & Locke, 2002) among others. Work-
family policies have been connected to increased organizational citizenship behaviors, decreased
turnover, increased loyalty, increased job satisfaction, and decreased job burnout (Del Campo et
al., 2013). The United States has lagged behind other countries in the enactment of ‘‘family-
friendly’’ WFI policies but the tension between some family-friendly policies and gender
equality is a growing trend in research (Bianchi & Milkie, 2010).
Research shows that these organizational work-family policies do not always work. For
example, employees may fear negative career impact if they take advantage of formal cultural
policies that encourage flexible work schedules and that management will perceive them as
uncommitted to the organization (Anderson et al., 2002; Rodgers, 1992). Research finds that
WFC occurs when employees do not perceive direct leader support and supportive organizational
environment (Jiang & Shen, 2015). However, Kossek and Ozeki (1998) found that when
11

executive level leaders utilize flexible work arrangements without negative consequences to
long-term careers, employees are more inclined to do the same.
Executive and Entrepreneurial Emotion Shape Organizational Culture
Executive and entrepreneurial emotions create a collective efficacy, defined as a team’s
shared belief (or confidence) in its ability to successfully accomplish teamwork (Bandura, 2001;
Lin et al., 2020), with emotions resting at the core of effective leadership (Goleman, 2003). Fink
and Yolles (2015) noted that organizations are relational systems made up of multi-level
employees who have dysfunctional or functional emotional attachments to each other through
experiences that make them feel seen, felt, known, and not alone in their work lives that shape
the way members operate and perform. Ashkanasy and Humphrey (2011) identified five
categories of emotion in organizations including within person, between persons, interpersonal,
groups and team, and organization-wide.
Organizational culture shapes patterns of behaviors based on common values,
assumptions, schemas, symbols, and beliefs about how to meet role expectations and achieve
business goals (Park & Kim, 2019). Executives’ emotions shape an organization’s culture
through emotional contagion, a process whereby executives manage organization-level emotions
through their own appropriate expression of emotion (Humphrey et al., 2016). Emotion
contagion research shows that when executives and entrepreneurs are in a positive mood,
employees are more positive and cooperative with each other (Sy et al., 2005). Conversely,
executives and entrepreneurs who show negative emotions (e.g., anger, depression, and sadness)
can influence employees and solidify the executive-employee relationship as much as positive
emotion through emotional contagion (Liang & Chi, 2013). When an executive or entrepreneur
with strong morals exhibits negative emotion and is distant from employees, employees will look
12

down on them and negatively impact employees’ judgments about their leader, leading to poor
outcomes (Cavazotte et al., 2021). Executive and entrepreneurial emotional contagion spreads
and can have a multi-level impact on employees’ role performance at home (Braun & Nieberle,
2017; Morganson et al., 2014), which crosses-over and spreads among employees into their
organizations through common workplace stressors (Zagenczyk et al., 2020).
Emotional climate consists of feelings toward the organization and leadership; the
collective mood, or shared perceptions, of employees about the organizational environment
which inform role behavior due to what behaviors are rewarded and supported (Zohar & Luria,
2005). Organizational climate is separate from organizational culture in that it is less stable and
is informed by but separate from the cultural beliefs, values, and assumptions (Ashkanasy &
Humphrey, 2011; Schein, 2006). Momeni (2009) found that leaders’ emotional intelligence had a
direct effect on climate. Organizational climate can fluctuate and is often dependent on
leadership’s own emotional well-being, spilling over to both their own WFC and that of
employees.
Bi-directional Stress Factors on Organizations, Spouses, Executives, and Entrepreneurs
The impact of stressors which arise originally from either work or family is bi-directional
in nature. Conservation and regulation of emotion plays a critical resource in navigating this bi-
directional system, among other entrepreneurial and executive personality and behavioral traits.
Partner capabilities also impact, negatively and positively, work and family, causing spill-over
emotion in both domains. Overall, low resources in one domain and high demands in another
produce work and family conflict, with an imbalance of entrepreneurs’ and executives’
demanding work roles impacting availability for family roles (Braun et al., 2019; Demerouti et
al., 2001; ten Brummelhuis & Bakker, 2012).
13

Braun et al. (2019) found that executives assume a higher risk of WFC due to their
leadership role stressors. Their research noted that on 1080 correlations from 178 samples, work
role stressors (job stressors, role conflict, role ambiguity, role overload, time demands), work
role involvement (job involvement, work interest), work social support (organizational support,
supervisor support, coworker support), work characteristics (task variety, job autonomy, family-
friendly organization), and personality (internal LOC, negative affect and neuroticism) are
antecedents of conflict originating from work (WFC); while family role stressors (family
stressors, role conflict, role ambiguity, role overload, time demands, parental demands, number
of children/dependents), family social support (family support, spousal support), family
characteristics (family climate), and personality (internal LOC, negative affect and neuroticism)
are antecedents of FWC. Nohe et al. (2015) found reciprocal relationships of strain between WFI
and FWI consistent for both men and women (Nohe et al., 2015). Liu and Cheung (2015) found
FWC conflict could exhaust employees’ resources at work and be more likely to behave in a
socially inappropriate or aggressive manner. Conversely, Danner-Vlaardingerbroek et al. (2016)
found that work demands spill-over into relationship behavior when self-regulation resources are
depleted and cause a decrease in psychological availability for their partner, especially among
employees who had low self-control.
Emotion Exhaustion
When an entrepreneur or executive finds themselves drained emotionally due to work or
stressors, emotional exhaustion can settle in and impact their work and crossover into their
family domain, causing conflict. In a study of 238 employees and managers in a luxury service
business, financial reward incentives strengthened the relationship between WFC and emotional
exhaustion and increased negative impact between FWC and job performance (Wang et al.,
14

2020). Their research found that because the rewards require significant effort to achieve,
including an employee’s time and energy, an employee’s self-regulatory emotional resources
become depleted and triggers emotional exhaustion, leaving employees to feel overwhelmed by
work and family demands and negatively impacting their performance.
Entrepreneur and Executive Behavior and Personality Traits
Entrepreneur and executive personality and behavior play a large role in impacting
organizational outcomes and executive and entrepreneur well-being. Clark et al. (2016) found
that executives’ workaholism can negatively impact their own well-being and their employees.
Workaholism is defined by a compulsive drive to work from internal pressures and recurring
thoughts about work when not working (Clark et al., 2014). Workaholism has proven to be
associated with difficulties in interpersonal relationships with colleagues, physical and mental
strain and health problems, psychosomatic symptoms, increased WFC and lower levels of life
satisfaction (Wojdylo et al., 2014). The various mental, physical, and psychosomatic pain
includes alcohol dependence, mood disorders (depression and anxiety disorders), headaches,
gastrointestinal problems, and Type 2 diabetes as well as negative work-related outcomes such as
low performance, absenteeism, and turnover (for a review, see Bakker et al., 2014). Nohe et al.
(2015) found stronger associations of burnout attributed to work demands more than when
family demands conflict with work (Nohe et al., 2015). Work-family conflict research has also
found WFC impacts employee health, well-being, and organizational outcomes (Eby et al., 2019;
Kossek et al., 2010).
Research shows entrepreneurs and executives who exhibit workaholism (work addiction),
reportedly feel guilty when not working and feel the pressure to work even when they feel no
pleasure in their activities or show physical symptoms of fatigue (Schaufeli et al., 2008). These
15

underlying beliefs negatively impact their family satisfaction, well-being, and overall life
satisfaction because the executive and entrepreneur with the workaholic thinking invests an
extraordinary amount of time and effort in their work, leaving them with fewer resources to
devote to their family (Bakker et al., 2014; Braun et al., 2019; Wojdylo et al., 2014).
High self-esteem and LOC traits of executives and entrepreneurs also have shown key to
leading effectively and acting as a buffer to high-stress situations. Szpitalak and Polczyk (2015)
noted that high self-esteem can protect against stress and is a key important resource that
successfully supports coping with stressful situations. Locus of control (LOC) captures
individual’s perceptions of the causal link between their own actions (e.g., seeking new
challenges and acquiring human capital) and what happens subsequently believing that what they
do has consequences (Cobb-Clark, 2015). Labor market research found there is a clear
relationship between LOC and labor market success (Cobb-Clark, 2015).
Entrepreneurs ’ Work-Family Conflict and Family-Work Conflict Challenges
The entrepreneurial process impacts entrepreneurs in additional ways than
organizationally employed executives in the kinds of spill-over conflict caused by their work.
Research shows that organizationally employed executives experience fewer role tasks than
entrepreneurs, with entrepreneurs fulfilling more roles inside the organization and out because
they are singularly responsible for the new venture and its success (Schjoedt, 2020). How the
two domains of work and family influence entrepreneurs’ well-being is inconclusive, but the job
demands of work hours, intensity of stressful work, and the instability and precariousness of the
work leads to more WFC than that of the organizationally employed (Annink et al., 2016;
Schjoedt, 2020).
16

New venture capital and entrepreneurial start-up is a resource-exhaustive process which
requires human, social, and financial capital (Werbel & Danes, 2010). Michel et al. (2011) found
that family involvement and family stressors (e.g., time commitments, overload) in new ventures
cause FWC which in turn creates job distress/dissatisfaction, while job stressors and involvement
are antecedents for WFC. Research has shown that a lack of job resources or confronting high
job demands can result in entrepreneurial employees’ emotional exhaustion and ill-being
(Alarcon, 2011). Emotional arousal is a potent source of self-efficacy cognitions, with negative
emotions contributing to lower self-efficacy to entrepreneurial action, and positive emotions
associated with increased self-efficacy (Zampetakis et al., 2017). Pleck (1977) has studied WFC
for decades and found that entrepreneurial FWC includes pressures to recoup personal financial
investments, less time engaged with their families and income uncertainty. Hilbrecht (2016)
noted additional drawbacks to entrepreneurship that negatively impact quality of family life
include erratic and anti-social work hours, limited social associations, reduced vacation and sick
days and financial uncertainty.
Much entrepreneurial research focused on entrepreneurial mindset, defined as
individuals who seek out new opportunities passionately and with a great deal of discipline,
focus on execution while inspiring others toward their vision (Rhee & White, 2007). Cubbon et
al. (2020) noted that entrepreneurs are at risk for social isolation and relationship strain,
potentially resulting in feelings of failure and shame. Their research also highlighted stigma and
a need to project a positive brand identity as underlying factors that may prevent entrepreneurs
from seeking the help that they need.
There is limited research of how entrepreneurs experience fear of failure throughout the
entrepreneurial process and how they cope with it (Cacciotti & Hayton, 2015) but research
17

shows fear of an undesirable future outcome leads to negative attitudes and avoidance behaviors,
which is associated with higher risk perceptions, and is inversely related to business opportunity
evaluation and exploitation (Zampetakis et al., 2017). Zhou et al. (2020) found that entrepreneurs
employed reactive role behavior strategy to meet demands of both entrepreneurial and family
roles, leading to more WFC.
Reciprocal Impact of WFC and FWC on WFE, Marital, and Life Satisfaction
An executive or entrepreneur’s marital and life satisfaction plays a central role to an
entrepreneur’s or executive’s psychological and emotional well-being, impacting venture
success, positively and negatively. Judge et al. (2006) found that even daily fluctuations in WFC
had a negative influence on an entrepreneur’s or executive’s perceived marital satisfaction.
Burch (2019) noted that work assignments that create significant impairment to an executive or
entrepreneur’s home indirectly impacts their attitudes about their home and family satisfaction,
jeopardizing the survival of the couple relationship and family expansion.
Multiple empirical and theoretical studies show individual preferences for WFI strategies
need to be considered but are not always indicative of WFE satisfaction. For many individuals,
work–home boundary preferences are crucial to WFE (McNall et al., 2009) and family
performance (Liao et al., 2016). Conversely, research shows alignment of individual WFI
preferences and workplace supplies are not always balanced with similar levels of work-family
satisfaction (Liu & Yu, 2019). Empirical evidence has shown WFC is interrelated with lower life
satisfaction (Kossek & Ozeki, 1998) while positive spill-over is interrelated with higher life
satisfaction (Sumer & Knight, 2001). Further, the importance an individual places on their role,
in their career or within their family, often indicates how these roles are used to create their self-
identity, sometimes impacting how much spills over to the other role and overall life satisfaction
18

(Wolfram & Gratton, 2014). Research on attachment styles from childhood development indicate
an individual’s experiences in the work-family interface impacts their life and marital
satisfaction as adults through their interpersonal lives, at work and home (Sumer & Knight,
2001).
Much research showed that individual preferences and attributes need to be considered to
better optimize work-family roles for marital and life satisfaction, while numerous studies reveal
key chief complaints underpinned in assumptions, mental models, and beliefs may underline
current practices, leading to positive and negative spill-over effects among entrepreneurs and
executives (Bailyn & Harrington, 2004). Couples experiencing high levels of WFC were found
to decrease individuals’ marital satisfaction and their spouses’ marital satisfaction (van
Steenbergen et al., 2014). And while negative spill-over effects are primarily highlighted in this
research study, previous literature studying positive spill-over between work and life
demonstrated people’s positive affect and attitude toward their work or family as a value could
be interconnected, enhancing their performance, and benefitting their mental health (Bailyn &
Harrington, 2004; Minnotte et al., 2015). Several research studies demonstrated that individuals
can also report work-family enrichment (WFE) when participation in the work role makes the
fulfillment of family roles better or easier (van Steenbergen et al., 2014).
Key Challenges for WFE Among Partnered Executives and Entrepreneurs
Research identified key reasons entrepreneurs, executives and their partners struggle to
succeed at WFE and satisfaction. A meta-analysis by Allen et al. (2000) observed a negative
effect on marriage, life, and family satisfaction when a leader was unable to adapt their behavior
when switching between roles, positively predicting conflict between domains. Their report
found that role conflicts increase family-related stress while reducing job satisfaction,
19

commitment to the company, and increasing intention to quit work, and burnout. If an
entrepreneur or executive’s partner has a career that conflicts with the entrepreneur’s or
executives work schedule, the time couples have for one another and how they balance pressures
of work and social life may become strained, leading to poor emotional support of the
entrepreneurs from their partners (Cubbon et al., 2020). A study of 245 married couples found
that optimistic or pessimistic perceptions about the entrepreneurship process had a significant
role in how entrepreneurs reported their spouses felt about creating another new venture (Liang
& Dunn, 2010). Their research found that entrepreneurs with a realistic and optimistic worldview
believed their spouses are happier about business outcomes and would support them in new
ventures; pessimistic entrepreneurs reported that they did not think their spouses would support
them in starting another venture and that their partner was not happy in the entrepreneurial
process. Women who work with entrepreneurial male partners or spouses reported it was more
difficult to switch off from the business while at home, linking WFC to couple separation and
childbirth choices due to conflict from work impacting their satisfaction within the home (Burke
& Belcourt, 1974).
Goleman (1998) noted that adaptability is a critical skill to “smoothly handle multiple
demands and shifting priorities and adapt their responses to fit fluid circumstances” (p. 95).
While working hours contribute as a major source of WFC among entrepreneurs and executives
on their WFE, resources of control and support are positively related and spill-over into aspects
of both work and family domain (Demerouti et al., 2001). While the predominance of research
highlighted that negative spill-over between domains occurs, Ilies, et al. (2009) found that
affective spill-over also interconnects work and family domains in a longitudinal, multisource,
20

multi-method study, with job satisfaction spilling over to family, especially impacting those who
have highly integrated work and family roles.
Impact of Divorce and Separation on Entrepreneurs and Executives
Kallioniemi et al. (2009) found entrepreneurs who are divorced or separated have a
higher chance of depression and insomnia (45%) when compared with the general population
(26%). Lurtz et al. (2020) found in a study of 583 divorced entrepreneurs in financial planning
who stated that their WFC was positively associated with being divorced. Neyland (2020) noted
that the longer it takes a chief executive officer (CEO) to finalize a divorce, the more the length
of time a CEO loses focus and productivity, among other impacts to the organization. Divorced
individuals experience more depression, less life satisfaction and more health problems than
married individuals (Finzi-Dottan & Cohen, 2012) and can manifest in psychosomatic ways like
colds, headaches, gastrointestinal pain, job satisfaction, stress and sleep problems (Goh et al.,
2015; Ng & Feldman, 2014) and psychological strains like anxiety, irritation, depression and
exhaustion (Ford et al., 2014). Empirical research illuminated that psychological and physical
health are associated with cognitive performance (e.g., Austin et al., 2001; Diestel et al., 2013),
self-efficacy and motivation (Mitchell et al., 1994) and general productivity (Ford et al., 2014).
Theories Used for Work-Family Conflict and Family-Work Conflict
Literature review showed several theories that have been developed and utilized to better
understand WFC, work-family integration (WFI) and WFE for employees and organizations.
Lesser research has studied entrepreneurs and executives and their spouses on WFI and WFE,
and the bi-directional impact of FWC to this population and their work. The following
paragraphs outline some of the core theories that contribute to the literature.
21

Spill-over effect theory shows WFC can inhibit an employee’s multiple role performance,
by exhausting their psychological and physiological resources (Dierdorff & Ellington, 2008).
Research has identified and categorized time-based, strain-based, and behavior-based conflict as
creating WFC (Michel et al., 2011). Time-based conflict is caused when work schedule and
demands impair an employee’s personal life; behavior-based conflict is when work roles (role
conflict, ambiguity, overload, underload) conflict with home demands; and strain-based conflict
is when work demands spill-over and negatively impact an employee’s personal life (Lambert et
al., 2016). Salient factors influencing behavior-based WFC include being responsible for other
employees and when an employee is in a role that requires high-level engagement with other
people to complete their own work (Dierdorff & Ellington, 2008). Spill-over, or crossover,
model research has shown that leaders can spiral into emotion contagion (Dasborough et al.,
2009) and that in order to take control of emotional contagion processes, executives and
entrepreneurs need to use emotional labor and regulation tactics to control their own emotional
reactions and feelings (Humphrey et al., 2008).
Emotional intelligence model is a state whereby a person recognizes and regulates their
own feelings and those of others, supporting personal motivation and contributing to overall
effectiveness as a leader (Goleman, 1995). Goleman (1998) noted that a person who
demonstrates emotional self-control and manages their impulsive feelings and distressing
emotions well, thinks clearly and stays focused under pressure. Emotional self-control was one
of the lowest demonstrated competencies of 161 participants in a self-assessment in Young
Entrepreneur’s Organization despite rating higher on other competencies (Rhee & White, 2007).
Meanwhile, Mortan et al. (2014) found in a study of 394 entrepreneurs that emotional
intelligence’s two domains of regulation and utilization of emotions positively affect
22

entrepreneurial self-efficacy, meditating the relationship between emotional intelligence and
entrepreneurial intent. Liu et al. (2021) noted that higher emotional self-efficacy, defined as a
person’s judgment about how well they can take actions to handle potentially emotionally
charged situations, are capable of coping with difficult emotional situations and role conflicts
with strategies like framing threats as challenges or employing reasoning skills to reduce
stressful situations deal with role conflicts better.
Work-family interface model (WFI) serves as a foundational theory for many studies
(Greenhaus & Parasuraman, 1987) and is defined as work and family lives are often
interdependent and bi-directional with work to family and family to work sometimes negatively
and sometimes positively impacting the other with WFC and work-family enrichment often
resulting (Greenhaus, 2008). Work-family enrichment (WFE) is the concept that individuals
obtain resources in one role (work) which enhances capabilities in another role; family (Lapierre
et al., 2018). Kossek et al. (2010) noted that WFC and WFE impacts employee health, well-
being, and organizational outcomes.
Conservation of resources theory is a theory born from motivation whereby the core
principle is that people are motivated to protect their current resources while they acquire new
resources; whereby stress occurs when a threat or actual loss, or gained resource loss, does not
meet the resource invested (Gao et al., 2013). Conservation of resources proponents promote that
it is psychologically more harmful for individuals to lose resources than it is valuable for them to
gain the resources that they lost, underpinned in cognitive psychology’s loss salience (Tversky &
Kahneman, 1974). Loss of resources have been applied in organizational psychology to
understand stress and strain (Halbesleben & Buckley, 2004) with numerous studies determining
that when individuals lose resources at work, they are more likely to experience strain in the
23

form of burnout and depression (Halbesleben et al., 2014). Gao et al. (2013) noted there are four
types of resources in COR: objects (e.g., homes, cars), personal characteristics (e.g., emotion-
regulation skills); conditions (e.g., marital status, employment); and energies (time, money,
knowledge).
Best Practices for Work-Family Interface and Work-Family Enrichment
Work-family policies and workplace benefits are the most common approaches
organizations use to support their employees with WFI for more WFE. Yet, research results from
several studies suggest that employee perceptions of family supportive organizations were
associated with positive employee commitment through both employee work-to-family
experiences, partner attitudes, WFE and employee affective commitment (Holliday et al., 2013).
An organization that makes family-focused support a core resource enhances employees’ bi-
directional experience of WFE and reduces emotional exhaustion and cynicism, both symptoms
of burnout (Ollier-Malaterre et al., 2020).
The literature is limited in work and family interface impact, overall, to executives and
entrepreneurs, specifically, who are often at the forefront of creating the WFI policies
themselves. Some studies have noted the importance of integrating the family and
entrepreneurial spheres in research on WFI when establishing research instead of historically
separating them (St. Arnaud & Giguère, 2018). Jennings and McDougald (2007) were among the
first to note that the largest collection of research on WFE and WFI best strategies for
entrepreneurs and executives was approached as individual determinants (age, gender,
personality,), work domain determinants (social support, job autonomy, schedule flexibility,
hours worked, and family-friendly workplace policies), and family domain determinants
(household time demands, family responsibility level, household income, spousal support, and
24

life course stage), with gendered entrepreneurship gaining much of the research attention. The
rise to gendered entrepreneurship revealed the interface of both domains and WFE best practices
are different among women, who significantly and positively related business support to WFI
satisfaction greater than men, while men significantly and positively related family support to
more WFI satisfaction (Eddleston & Powell, 2012). Instead, much of the research for executives
and entrepreneurs on WFE and WFI illuminates entrepreneurs’ and executives’ leadership style
and emotional well-being in relation to its impact to the organization, with social support
(business, family) and coaching, emotional and psychological development among the
foundational strategies for entrepreneurs and organizationally employed executives in WFE and
WFI.
Workplace Policies and Benefits for Work-Family Enrichment
Organizational leaders can adopt behaviors and implement work-family policies that
support WFE. Hammer et al. (2011) found in a longitudinal study that an organization can
increase support for entrepreneurs and executives through trainings in work-family sensitivity,
and by increasing work-family leadership perceptions on policies that lead employees to perceive
the organizational climate as more work-family supportive and encourages positive workplace
social support for employees for both on the job and for work-family-specific issues. Michel et
al. (2011) found that changing workplaces to be more socially supportive of WFI benefits society
as a whole.
Social Support
Social support proves to be a critical factor in mediating organizational stress that
conflicts with family demands. Fear of mental health stigma can lead entrepreneurs and
executives to internalize emotions and often prevent them from seeking assistance socially and
25

professionally (Alshibani & Volery, 2019). Entrepreneurs need to be proactive in building a
strong network because perceived support is a strong buffering mechanism that mitigates job
demands (Cubbon et al., 2020). Research showed that social support perceptions are more likely
to predict life and work outcomes even better than work policies and benefits like flexible work
and childcare (Ollier-Malaterre et al., 2020).
Business Social Support
Work-family supportive leadership is where an employee perceives that their leaders care
about their work-family well-being with empathy or attitudes toward healthy WFI (Thomas &
Ganster, 1995) and who demonstrate behaviors that attempt to resolve WFC (Hammer et al.,
2009). Kossek et al. (2011) found employees’ perception of a lack of organizational social
support was a source of conflict regarding their work and family crossover stress; when a direct
authority expresses emotional support to an employee and tangible assistance, it is the most
impactful organizational strategy for well-being of the employee. A recent study found that
employees who received high levels of social support from their immediate work group, such as
that which an entrepreneur might receive from the other members of the entrepreneurial team,
experienced significantly lower levels of WFC (Bhave et al., 2010). Burch (2019) found that
entrepreneurs and executives must see their employees as a family system, not just an individual,
when prescribing work assignments if they care about the well-being of their employees. Michel
et al. (2011) noted that organizations can reduce employees’ WFC, and vice versa, by ensuring
that job duties and responsibilities are clear and compatible, amount of task responsibility is
reasonable, and that schedules were flexible to partnered employees or employees with children.
Family support as social support is foundational to an entrepreneur’s or executive’s
psychological and emotional health and reduction in conflict spill-over, contributing to business
26

success and life satisfaction. In a clinical setting, work and family conflicts are rated as a top
problematic issue, with research showing marriage and family therapists offering much to
employee assistance programs through marital communication support (Carroll et al., 2013).
Kirkwood and Tootell (2008) noted that entrepreneurs who have the flexibility of choosing
where to work, including close to home, from home entirely, or a combination of both can
reduce stress and reduce work and family conflict by allowing an entrepreneur to shut off from
work and increase in community engagement and share in child-rearing.
Social support by way of family is evidenced through social capital in time and effort
investment, bonding, and guidelines about acceptable and unacceptable behaviors within couple
culture which is drawn upon to achieve new business goals (Werbel & Danes, 2010). The way
spouses interact and sustain one another influences new venture success as well as
couple relationships (Danes et al., 2010) with couple interaction showing crucial to an emerging
business (Aldrich & Cliff, 2003; Blenkinsopp & Owens, 2010). Couple culture is foundational
for the new business, including whether the couple relationship is unified or negatively impacted
from the liabilities of a new business venture (Van Auken & Werbel, 2006). Kirkwood and
Tootell (2008) found that many male-owned businesses would not become established and
succeed without help from a spouse especially in the early stages of a business start-up. Nohe et
al. (2015) found spouse career support decreased the odds of turnover in organizations, with WFI
and job satisfaction mediating the relationship between the two domains.
Coaching and Developmental Training for Entrepreneurial and Executive WFE
Executive coaching can support executives and entrepreneurs in developing the skills
they need for self-efficacy, emotional intelligence (regulation and awareness), LOC, self-esteem
and WFI. Coaching is a dyadic, non-clinical, personalized intervention (Bozer & Jones, 2018)
27

for learning and development. Bradford (2021) found that coaching supported enactive mastery
to bolster confidence, modeling to show entrepreneurs success with minimal risk, psychological
arousal for self-awareness of others’ emotions and behaviors, and social persuasion for
interpersonal relations.
Organizations and venture capital firms can offer entrepreneurial coaching on both
business-related skills but also the chances, limits and risks based on personality structures that
impact the entrepreneurial process like cognitive abilities, motives, values, and temperament or
LOC (Brandstätter, 2011). Pattusamy and Jacob (2017) noted that training programs to improve
functioning or performance at work and home would be a more appealing investment than
programs helping entrepreneurs or executives to manage conflicts. Schermuly et al. (2021) found
a strong improvement in psychological well-being and viral exhaustion from coaching services.
Jones (2016) found entrepreneurs’ declarative and procedural knowledge, cognitive strategies,
and performance improvement but no reduction in stress chemicals from coaching.
Emotional Leadership Training and Coaching
Emotional intelligence among entrepreneurs and executives can mitigate WFC spill-over
and positively impact the climate of their organizations and spill-over into their family life.
Because leadership emotions evolve into a collective emotional climate for organizational unity
and cultural identity (Fink & Yolles, 2015) and the fact that employees learn to adapt to attitudes,
values, emotional propensity, and new ways of behaving by watching the behavior and actions of
others (Mazziotta et al., 2011), executives and entrepreneurs should be trained in positive
leadership styles that bolster the importance of emotions and behaviors. Authentic, benevolent,
transformational, and servant leadership are all positive leadership styles supporting the
importance of executive attitudes, emotions and behaviors regarding work-related issues that
28

enhance family functions (benevolent leadership offers additional individualized care in family
domain), which lead to WFE (Wu et al., 2020). Transformational leadership, in particular,
encourages intense emotional attachments between executives and employees, enabling
employees to maintain positive emotions at work by regulating emotional arousal through their
emotional attachment to their leaders (Liang & Chi, 2013). Burch (2019) noted that these
leadership styles hold that leaders have a moral obligation to take an employee-centric approach
seeking to understand how work benefits or harms the well-being of the employee and their
family, resulting in lower turnover and withdrawal and greater commitment among their
employees.
Emotional intelligence is the most important factor in predicting success in an
entrepreneurial career according to many studies (Othman & Tengku Muda, 2017).
Entrepreneurs with high emotional intelligence can manage their emotions to make and
implement effective decisions (Kunnanatt, 2004; Petrides & Furnham, 2000). A combination of
personal and job-related skill development is seen to enable insight, flexibility and behavioral
changes that allow the delivery of sustained, responsive, and effective leadership that positively
impacts individuals, organizations, and the community at large (King & Nesbit, 2015). Given the
high importance of being able to deal with uncertainty and ambiguity in the entrepreneurial
process, entrepreneurial and leadership emotion-regulation skills training could help the volatile
challenges of entrepreneurship (Rhee & White, 2007) and could be an effective strategy for the
interface of work and family domains to support marital and overall life satisfaction.
Furthermore, entrepreneurship education curriculum should incorporate emotional intelligence
coursework in addition to the practical and theoretical aspects of entrepreneurship, as well
29

employ professors who exhibit competency in and knowledge of emotional intelligence as role
models for skills development (Othman & Tengku Muda, 2017).
Self-Awareness Training
Self-awareness is a key component of emotional intelligence and self-regulating
processes driven by self-reflection techniques. Executive and entrepreneurial research showed
that self-awareness through self-regulation leads to entrepreneurial expertise through self-
reflection, understanding, and control of one’s own entrepreneurial cognitions and has adaptive
significance required for entrepreneurship (Nambisan & Baron, 2013). Self-reflection, or inner
reality, involves two processes: cognitive and emotional processes, and metacognitive processes
(Schaefer et al., 2020). Metacognition is the awareness and regulation of one’s own thought
patterns and feelings (Flavell, 1976). Cognitive and emotional processes are perceptions, filters,
and assumptions, which influence decision-making (Haynie & Shepherd, 2009).
Self-awareness is the key to emotional intelligence, in that self-aware individuals seek to
understand the emotions, strengths, weaknesses and values of other individuals (Goleman, 1995,
2004) and are able to control their emotions and act appropriately when working with others
(Albrecht, 2006). Individuals who are self-aware have a high potential to identify and explore
opportunities in their surroundings and are able to understand their own potential to become
successful entrepreneurs. Reflecting on one’s sense of self is an important component of self-
awareness to ensure recognition of emotion, evaluation of ability for task completion, and
emotion adjustment and reflection for enabling intellectual learning and performance to be drawn
upon to shape future emotional experiences (Johnson et al., 2002). Wang et al. (2020) assessed
the human capital of 150 firms in China and found that self-reflection significantly contributes to
individual human capital, individual structural capital and individual relational capital and thus,
30

organizations may need to make efforts to identify and hire individuals with such active self-
reflection and invest in self-reflection and insight training for employees, and encourage them to
frequently conduct self-reflection.
Self-Efficacy and Locus of Control Coaching
Entrepreneurs often suffer from poor psychological well-being and emotion exhaustion
(Schermuly et al., 2021). ten Brummelhuis and Bakker (2012) found that an individual’s key
resources of self-efficacy, optimism, and self-esteem enable the individual to effectively cope
and enlist contextual resources to meet demands which leads to WFE instead of work and family
conflict. Because research has shown that reduced internal LOC damages an individual’s ability
to personally contend with stressors and erodes their ability to ask for help with stressful events
(Ryon & Gleason, 2014), executives and entrepreneurs should seek out support for LOC
development. Ryon and Gleason (2014) found in their study of pregnant couples who
documented their struggles and anxiety in daily journals that compounded anxiety and hassles
from same-day and previous-day reduced levels of LOC was predicted. Of the entrepreneurial
participants in their study who were coached, coachees stated it gave them better control of
entrepreneurial self-efficacy over their own skills and abilities than those who were not coached
(Bradford, 2021). Bandura (2015) noted self-regulation consists of goal-setting, planning, and
monitoring tasks to achieve behavior change (Bandura, 2015).
Locus of control is key to surviving the unpredictable entrepreneurial process. Hsiao et
al. (2016) noted that people with an internal LOC are able to better support the entrepreneurial
processes because they recognize, develop and assess external opportunities with emotional
stability and dependability compared to people with an external LOC. Luthans and Youssef
(2007) found that people with an internal LOC maintain positive values and are committed to
31

personal skills development to proactively solve challenges. Lee and McKinnish (2019) found in
a study on internal LOC that it is associated with higher marital satisfaction, with personal LOC
more important to marital satisfaction than a spouse’s LOC. Their research illuminated that
couples in which the husband’s LOC is more externally oriented declines in marital satisfaction
over time relative to couples in which the husband’s LOC is more internally oriented.
Partner and Spousal Work-Family and Family-Work Conflict Strategies
Research indicated that partners and spouses of entrepreneurs and executives utilize
specific strategies that support the success of their partners in these high-stress positions.
Entrepreneurs require a supportive environment to establish or expand their businesses
(Kannadhasan et al., 2018) and use their agency to influence their social support to act on their
behalf to secure the outcomes they desire and directly control outcomes (Bandura, 2012). Family
support is one such social support in entrepreneurship that plays out in start-up phase by tackling
administrative tasks and fulfilling customer orders, and business enablement by entrusting
personal tasks like watching kids and running errands to free up time to conduct business (Kim et
al., 2013). Social relationships are often relegated to the entrepreneur’s partner as well
(Wilhelmsen et al., 2013). Burch (2019) noted that couple members who consider both their own
and their spouse or partner’s current work stress when taking on work assignments and who
accurately predict the impact of the change to the quality of their relationship is another
important strategy to minimize the spill-over conflict between work and family demands.
Self-control is another strategy that supports entrepreneur and executive marital
satisfaction and contributes to overall life satisfaction. The most satisfying and least conflicted
marriages are where partners perceive control over marital events (Neal et al., 2014). Vohs et al.
(2011) found the most successful relationships were marked by high self-control in both partners,
32

with high-self-control partners mitigating impulses to respond to their partners’ hurtful
behaviors, whether real or perceived, and supported their partners’ personal goals which, if
benefitting the couples’ goals, may lead to division of labor.
Another key strategy among couples who achieved psychological wellness over time in
their marriage was complimentary values of domestic work and employment, and explicit role
definition. Kalmijn and Monden (2011) noted that differing valuation of household tasks versus
employment could affect couple culture and their associations with relationship satisfaction.
Eddleston and Powell (2012) found that the expression of an “unwritten contract” of role
division between couple members created a sense of (internal) unity, as opposed to couples who
approach their relationship as two separate individuals asserting personal agency as more
important than the essential partnership. Their study found that male entrepreneurs and
executives often receive more domestic relief and emotional support, which enhance their WFI
experience, while female entrepreneurs report more WFI satisfaction when receiving a higher
level of instrumental support. Ajrouch et al. (2005) noted that spousal emotional support is likely
to help partners to manage the pressures of daily life, contributing to psychological well-being.
Control over negative emotion contagion serves as a foundational strategy for
entrepreneurial and executives’ couple culture success. Baral and Sampath (2019) noted that
crossover of emotions from one partner to another is not always direct and straightforward
(Steiner & Krings, 2016) with frequency and quality of interactions, empathy, susceptibility, and
similarity impacting each member of the couple culture’s interaction experience (Bakker et al.,
2009; Ilies et al., 2007; Steiner & Krings, 2016; Westman & Etzion, 2005). Bakker et al. (2009)
identified susceptibility to emotional contagion as the reason for spill-over of stress, strain, and
burnout. Studies showed that individual differences in vulnerability to emotional stimuli are
33

good predictors of the degree to which members of a couple will catch positive and negative
emotions from the other (Doherty et al., 1995; Ilies et al., 2007; Stiff et al., 1988).
Couples therapy is a best practice option for entrepreneurs, executives and their spouses
for self-control, reducing emotional contagion, WFC, FWC and LOC. LOC interventions have
proven effective with individual psychotherapy and research suggests that a couple’s therapist
with expertise in LOC exploration can address presenting problems using internal and external
control perspectives or by using a LOC genogram as potential effectiveness among couples
(Neal et al., 2014). A focused genogram is defined as a specific type of genogram that homes in
on a specific problem by exploring a set of questions on that topic and can dissect defense
mechanisms and cultivate insight into historical patterns of behavior (Danes & Jang, 2013).
Carroll et al. (2013) noted that couples’ therapists can change the impact of work conflict on
clients’ marriages and relationships by deconstructing distressing communication styles like
criticism, defensiveness, flooding, contempt, and stonewalling and, instead, teaching
constructive communication skills, because research showed destructive communication
mediated the relationship between WFC and marital satisfaction more.
Mindfulness skills-building is another technique that has proven a potential best practice
for relationship satisfaction technique in couple’s therapy. Mindfulness is composed of self-
regulation of attention and an orientation that remains curious, open, non-judgmental, and
accepting, paying attention to thoughts, emotions, and sensation instead of reacting to them
(Fletcher & Hayes, 2005; Gethin, 2011; Nilsson & Kazemi, 2016). Studies show the positive
effects of mindfulness in couples and families by improving communication, emotional
regulation, empathy, and relationship well-being (Gambrel & Keeling, 2010). Mindfulness has
been positively correlated with relationship satisfaction, effective responses to relationship stress,
34

acceptance of partner, and empathy (Pruitt & McCollum, 2010; Westman & Etzion, 2005) and
has shown a strong relationship with a person’s ability to identify, regulate and effectively
communicate their emotions and relate to a partner’s feelings and experience, leading to greater
self-control, essential for self-regulation (Kaoun, 2019). Barnes et al. (2007) found that higher
mindfulness was correlated with increased relational satisfaction, more adaptive response skills
when faced with relational stress, increased self-control and accommodation, more positive
perceptions of the partner, and more effective communication. Incorporating mindfulness
exercises, such as mindful touch or loving-kindness meditations in traditional couple’s therapy
(Fletcher & Hayes, 2005), and other forms of mindfulness exercises has proven to reduce stress
so that people can communicate more congruently, connect more deeply to themselves and to
their partners (Satir & Bitter, 1991). Mindfulness-based-stress-reduction, one systemized
therapeutic modality that uses mindfulness strategies as its core foundation, is speculated to
reduce family-related stress and help entrepreneurs, executives, and their partners to show up
more attentive at home and in the office by being in the present and not thinking about work
while at home or about home while at work (Myrtveit et al., 2014).
Conceptual Framework: Social Cognitive Theory Past Research to Problem of Practice
The theoretical framework used to examine WFI strategies of organizations, executives
and entrepreneurs and their partners impacting their overall relationship and life satisfaction and
performance is social cognitive theory, developed by Bandura (1977). Social cognitive theory is
a theory of learning that posits people’s individual behavior as the result of a combination of
personal factors (e.g., beliefs, preferences, interpretations, self-perceptions and expectations,
inner motivation) and environmental constraints or resources (Bandura, 2001; Lin et al., 2020).
This reciprocal interaction, or triadic reciprocal determinism, of environment, personal factors
35

and behavior posits that people are capable of self-directed behavior change through self-efficacy
(Bandura, 2001).
Social cognitive theory is underpinned in several key concepts. A core concept of social
cognitive theory is self-efficacy. Self-efficacy is a person’s felt confidence (or lack of) to be
successful at a specific task using perception, attention, and memory to determine their behaviors
and persistence of effort despite setbacks and overcoming negative core beliefs (Ozyilmaz et al.,
2018). Perceived control over achievement (self-efficacy) is correlated with cognitive
preservation, motivation, and positive emotions of joy, pride and hope while negatively
associated with shame, hopelessness, anxiety, shame, and boredom (Jarrell & Lajoie, 2017).
Outcome expectancy is also a core tenet of social cognitive theory whereby an individual’s
subjective evaluations of a behavior (e.g., attitudes, normative beliefs) are a direct result of an
individual’s perceived likelihood that these behavior-related outcomes (e.g., expectancies) are
worth the effort (Fowler et al., 2021); outcome expectancy works in tandem with self-efficacy to
function as important determinants of human motivation and action (Koletsou & Mancy, 2011).
Affective-motivational states include self-efficacy, interest, achievement goals, and perceived
task value about the challenge at hand (Wessels et al., 2018).
Social cognitive theory’s process of vicarious learning, commonly called modeling,
happens when an individual learns through exposure to a peer’s experience and prescribes
meaning to it, and is well-documented as a driver of individual, team, and organizational
perceptions of efficacy (Myers, 2018). When individuals adjust their own efficacy beliefs based
on the vicarious experiences of peers, this makes this process a bi-directional influence on the
behavioral direction that an individual chooses (Eun, 2019). Self-efficacy is processed through
self-reflection, or self-monitoring, and self-regulation of an individual’s behavior in order to
36

judge their behavior based on personal standards, environmental circumstances and affective
self-reaction (Bandura, 1991).

Figure 1
Social Cognitive Theory in Work-Family Conflict Spill-Over Impact

37

There is limited research utilizing a social cognitive theory lens to better understand the
spill-over impact of work and family conflict on each domain, and the strategies organizations,
entrepreneurs, executives, and their partners employ that benefit or disrupt positive goal
outcomes. Research examining entrepreneurs and executives through the social cognitive theory
lens regarding conflict originating from work first or family first is even more limited. Still,
existing findings on WFC and FWC using social cognitive theory support that work overload is
related to both WFC and FWC especially among individuals with low self-efficacy (Aryee et al.,
1999; Lent & Brown, 2008; Mulki et al., 2009). Parental demands also proved to be a positive
predictor of both work and family conflict spill-over (Aryee et al., 1999; Luk & Shaffer, 2005).
Further findings revealed that conflict arising from family demands was negatively associated
with the self-efficacy to manage emotional exhaustion and was positively associated with spill-
over conflict in their work domain; and that when organizations support employees with
emotional intelligence training, mentoring, critical support and other tactics, they decreased the
negative influence of WFC, moderating the relationship between WFC and job satisfaction (Liu
& Cheung, 2015; Tang et al., 2016).
Partner support research demonstrates that when partners displayed more help to each
other, it moderated FWC (Frone, 2003; Green et al., 2011; Greenhaus, 2008). This evidence is
supported by the theory’s outcome expectancy concept whereby an individual’s estimate that a
specific behavior will lead to assured results inspires more interest to pursue a task in the face of
setbacks (Johnson & Marakas, 2000; Koletsou & Mancy, 2011; Lin & Chang, 2018). Research
confirmed that constructive and negative conflict interactions among partners predict future
relationship efficacy for male and female partners; and that communication behaviors
exchanged, due to beliefs each partner holds for who or what is causing the problem, either build
38

or erode each partner’s future confidence in the efficacy to meet their partner’s needs and
partnership goals (Johnson & Anderson, 2015; Riggio et al., 2013.) Self-efficacy is an antecedent
to emotional intelligence (Bozer & Jones, 2018) and bolsters the importance of emotion-
regulation strategies by interpreting negative feedback as an opportunity for learning instead of
attaching a negative emotion to it, so as to become a potentially useful emotional-regulation
strategy against WFC and FWC (Nesbit, 2012).
Summary
Overarchingly, the literature provided evidence that supports the spill-over impact of
work and family domains. This spill-over can cause conflict and may be detrimental to
relationship satisfaction and job performance among entrepreneurs and executives in high-
performance careers; evidence suggests it may also have positive implications as well but those
are less studied. The literature also supported that entrepreneurs’ and executives’ emotions,
behaviors and underlying psychology play a pivotal role in mitigating the family-work and WFC
and in shaping organizational climate, culture and the overall well-being and performance of
employees. Partner support plays an important role in the success of an entrepreneur and
executive successfully integrating work and life domains, both in WFE and in life and marital
satisfaction. Entrepreneurs especially can benefit from partner support in a number of ways
including task-oriented support, constructive communication, and emotional support if proper
strategies are implemented to protect the relationship from the volatility of new venture business.

39

Chapter Three: Methodology
This study aimed to identify themes and patterns from the bi-directional spill-over of
work and family conflict faced by entrepreneurs and executives in high-performance, high-
demand roles and the specificity of the challenges and issues it causes to their marriages and
partnerships and the organizations they lead. The study aimed to gain an in-depth understanding
of the inter-relation of entrepreneurs’ and executives’ work satisfaction and performance with
marital or partner relational satisfaction through an analysis of the strategies entrepreneurs, their
partners and organizations deploy that effectively or ineffectively mediate work activities and
family demands. The review began with the description of the participants in the study and
highlights the selection criteria and strategy for ascertaining them. Next, this chapter describes
the methodology used to examine entrepreneurs’ and executives’ role conflict between their
work and partner relationships, and its impact on the companies they lead and their marital and
life satisfaction. It begins with the description of the participants in the study. Finally, this
chapter outlines the researcher’s proposed data collection processes and instrumentation,
providing rationale for these decisions, and subsequent procedures for data analysis. This is
particularly important in entrepreneurship research, bringing out the complexity of the roles and
responsibilities in the work involved in new venture business (Nambisan & Baron, 2013), and
beliefs and behaviors of entrepreneurs that influence their work performance, organizational
climate, and marital satisfaction. The chapter also includes the credibility and trustworthiness
aspects of the study, the ethical considerations, and the study limitations.
Research Questions
1. What are the general causes of work-family and family-work conflict as identified by
entrepreneurs and executives?
40

2. What work-family behaviors and strategies do entrepreneurs and executives employ
to maintain marital satisfaction?
3. 3.What behaviors and policies do organizations practice that support or harm work-
family integration and overall life satisfaction for entrepreneurs and executives?
4. What strategies and behaviors do entrepreneurs and executives say their intimate
partners employ that increase or decrease family-work conflict?
Overview of Methodology Design
Qualitative methodology was used to collect the data from entrepreneurs and executives.
Specifically, I gathered data using semi-structured interviews. Through the interview protocol, I
attempted to glean in-depth insights into how entrepreneurs and executives, their partners and
organizations manage conflict emerging from work (WFC) and emerging from family (FWC)
and spilling into the other. The qualitative data from these interviews was utilized to understand
concepts, opinions, and experiences of the participants regarding their inner realities and
strategies which may have been successful or unhelpful in navigating WFC and FWC for WFI.
The relationship between the researcher and the participants focused on cultivating and retaining
rich meaning needed towards exploring an interpretative understanding of the participants’
experiences, and to bring about awareness from which they create multiple meanings about the
phenomenon (Low et al., 2017). From this reciprocal relationship, new, divergent, or conflicting
constructed views and experiences were examined, searching for tacit meanings about values,
beliefs, and ideologies and underlying assumptions between the researcher and participants, to
drive consensus about the patterns of meaning and interrelationships about the phenomenon
(Mills et al., 2006).
41

This qualitative study used criterion and purposive sampling method to select 12
entrepreneurs and executives (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Patton, 2002) for interviews to ensure
participants have experiences of high-performance, high-demand scenarios, as well as meet
relationship status inclusion criteria. Individual interviews were semi-structured, a pertinent
method for gleaning insight into the internal experience of entrepreneurs and executives (Dillen
et al., 2019). A series of open-ended questions were intended to establish a baseline of self-
reported responses from which to generate systematic patterns drawn from individual
participants’ insights of their patterns of thoughts, feelings, and behaviors, and their awareness of
these patterns. Open-ended questions were intended to inspire further clarification and self-
reflection for meaning-making insight. Questions prompted self-reflection of their partners’
proposed lived experiences, as well as others’ perceptions of them in their roles at their work, all
intended to support the four main research questions. It provides a subjective, in-depth
understanding into the cultural norms of the participants and behavioral motivations during the
analysis phase in contrast to objectively observable facts (Field-Springer, 2020).
The Researcher
My positionality as a former corporate executive turned California-licensed marriage and
family psychotherapist and an executive coach informs the need to make more in-depth
qualitative research available on the topic of the bi-directional linkage of marital conflict and
work conflict, and its impact to organizations, executives and entrepreneurs, and their
relationships. The bi-directional impact and ineffective strategies that organizations and couples
implement to attenuate the negative impact are frequently issues among the clients in my field
and which I have personally experienced as a former corporate executive. Previous research
findings suggested that lived experience of the condition under investigation can enhance the
42

research process by identifying issues that may be overlooked by academic researchers or by
bringing research closer to everyday life‐experiences, creating interpersonal safety (Waite et al.,
2019).
My role in this study has been as a researcher, in that any of my affiliation to the
participants being studied is secondary to the role of information gatherer (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). My education and training as a licensed marriage therapist, as well identifying as a White,
heterosexual female, brings about assumptions and bias that may affect my study. Holloway and
Biley (2011) noted that qualitative researchers cannot exclude themselves from data collection,
analysis, and reporting of the research, and that researchers might let their own non-evidenced
assumptions influence the research, making it skewed or create bias. I recognize that my
positionality influenced the research and I strived to mitigate the paradox of researcher and
positionality by using methodological rigor, systematic reviewing, peer review, and by assessing
the validity and value of findings (Reich, 2021). To further combat bias, I utilized reflexive
journaling to document my perspective as researcher over time, noted as a metacognitive
research process that allows peers to engage in and interpret the data (Gerstl-Pepin & Patrizio,
2009).
Participants of different genders and ethnicities may have perceived imbalances with my
positionality. Additional biases and assumptions are mitigated by limiting the interview
recruitment to previously unknown participants. While the participants only had contact with the
researcher electronically during the study, participants may elect to review the researcher’s
background. To help mitigate this occurrence, the email communication highlighted the value of
the participant’s diverse viewpoints.
43

Data Sources: Interviews
The interviews served as data sources for this study, developed from a qualitative
research design from which to create a collection of narrative data (St. Arnaud & Giguère, 2018)
to examine organizations’, entrepreneurs’ and executives’, and their partners’ bi-directional
impact of conflict to their work and their relationships. The individual interviews were a
dynamic process between data collection and review of interview responses for analysis to
extrapolate a shared meaning making of the data. This dynamic process makes the collection
process fluid and enables analysis of new or unexpected information to open up new questions
and clarify some aspects, which helped to guide the subsequent individual interviews. Once the
individual interviews were completed and the collected material coded and analyzed, insights
emerged for formulating key findings.
Research Setting and Participants
Interviews were conducted and recorded via video platform (HIPAA-compliant Zoom).
Conducting interviews by video allows both for access to infrequently accessible participants due
to their high-demand careers and conflicting family demands. Recording the interview allowed
for observation, transcription, coding and triangulation of the data, which supported further
extrapolation of the material for understanding the entrepreneurs’ and executives’ inner realities,
environment and non-verbal cues (Galunic & Eisenhardt, 1996). I provided participants the
opportunity to complete the interview in one sitting but provided a 10-day period to complete the
interview at the discretion of participants’ schedule to encourage participation. The researcher
also offered to record audio only on the video platform for additional privacy at the participants’
discretion upon request.
44

For practical purposes, the 12 participants for this study were inclusive of the following
selection criteria: (a) married, divorced or currently or formerly in an exclusive relationship for 2
years or more while working as an entrepreneur or executive; (b) in an executive leadership role
managing five or more full-time employees directly and/or indirectly; and (c) managing a
business that generates an annual gross revenue of $1 million or more or has privately raised $2
million in funds for venture-backed organizations. The selection pool of participants will attempt
to include racial, gender, sexual orientation, age and socially-economically diverse entrepreneurs
and executives. Selected participants will have committed via email a willingness to talk openly
about their inner realities on the topic.
Instrumentation
The open-ended and semi-structured interviews were conducted via Zoom, a HIPAA-
compliant web-based platform, with responses to the questions recorded by video, or by the
platform’s audio only. Each interview question fell into one or more of Patton’s (1997) question
types: behavioral, experience, feeling, values, opinions, emotion, background, and knowledge
and were afforded a wide aperture for exploration within the execution of the interviews.
However, creating a conversational and private environment to build trust and entice participants
to open up was necessary. The order in which the qualitative questions were asked were designed
to evoke comfort or warm-up the participants before asking more challenging questions
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). I kept a tablet nearby for me to jot observational notes of narrative,
voice inflections and pauses. All interviews were recorded and transcribed using Happy Scribe to
convert files from vtt. to word.doc. The transcript was uploaded to NVivo, the qualitative data
analysis computer software system, to understand patterns from the data.
45

Data Collection Procedures
Participants were recruited from the researcher’s social network of private equity, venture
capital and initial public offered companies primarily from across California and the United
States. To ensure a diverse pool of participants, I actively outreached across the country through
private equity and venture capital-backed portfolio executive gatekeepers. Recruitment began
with an initial email to colleagues and members of Young Presidents Organization (YPO) and
Entrepreneur’s Only (EO), who act as private equity, angel investors’, venture capital and
corporate executive gatekeepers, highlighting the value of feedback to the industry to encourage
participation. The gatekeepers shared my invitation and email to participants electronically,
requesting they contact the researcher directly. For those who agreed, I sent a warm email
introduction to the participant. The email formally introduced the research study and included
privacy protocol. It also noted a 10-day requested deadline to conduct the interview if they
elected to do so. A second email was sent 7 days after the initial email. A final email was sent on
the 15th day if a commitment to the interview had not been made, or if they had committed but
not set a date and time for the interview.
Interviews were conducted at the discretion of participants’ availability.
In order to ensure the quality of collected data, no more than two interviews were conducted per
day. Interviews lasted between 45–60 min. Data collection took place over HIPAA-compliant
video platform Zoom. Consent from the participant in advance allowed for recording of the
interview to capture responses which will later be transcribed. As the interviews proceeded,
questions were clarified when the focus, depth and scope of the phenomenon emerged. The
participants were interviewed once, using the web-based platform Zoom and recorded to ensure
46

that the interview content was accurately captured. After the interviews, field notes were kept to
jot down issues that cannot be audiotaped such as the participants’ gestures or facial expressions.
Data Analysis
Data analysis was conducted at the same time as data collection when possible and was
an iterative process. The dynamic interaction of information-gathering, memoing and
transcribing occurred after each participant was interviewed throughout the entire process of the
qualitative data analysis. Upon completion of interviews, all interview recordings were
transcribed verbatim. This required checking through each transcript against the taped recordings
to ensure accuracy of the content and that the translation of terms and words were consistently
used throughout. The data was analyzed using the constant comparative analysis methods. This
generated the concepts that were used to develop the theory through an inductive process of
defining, categorizing, comparing data, and explaining and seeking relationships in the data
(Williams, 2008). The researcher ensured that a systematic and logical approach was used to
fully describe the data, and then to ensure that all the variations in the data were compared in
order to account for the related properties in each category that emerges.
NVivo was used by the researcher to code, organize and manage the data to facilitate data
interpretations. The transcriptions were input into NVivo where open coding allowed for themes
to emerge. These themes allowed for categorization of meaningful segments to draw upon for
pattern awareness. Later, case-by-case table comparisons were utilized to allow the researcher to
dynamically compare and dissect content by reviewing and extrapolating the original text to
reveal the differences and linkages of the data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Selected quotes from
participants in the study collectively illuminated their relationship to one another. More
specifically, intersecting the qualitative data of interview extracts in a table aligned the
47

participant’s quotes to the correlating factor used for both a priori and axial coding (Gehman et
al., 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Credibility and Trustworthiness
The research process maximized credibility and trustworthiness by undergoing rigorous
triangulation strategies (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Patton, 2002). To counter biases and
assumptions, triangulation of the data included cross-checking interview transcripts against
recorded observations and memo notations. Throughout the data collection and analysis process,
I interviewed and compared data of 13 individual interviews from different industries and roles
to further increase triangulation strategies. Finally, emerging findings provided adequate
observable overlaps of participants’ responses (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Given the sensitivity
associated with the emotions that emerged during data collection, the researcher was mindful of
the potentially vulnerable position it put the participant in, and therefore, voluntary participation
in the study was emphasized. The right to ask any questions and to decline participation at any
time was also emphasized during the data collection process.
Techniques of reflexivity and peer review were also employed to establish credibility and
trustworthiness of the research. Researcher reflexivity is defined as the process of thinking about
how thinking came to be, pre-existing understandings in light of new understandings and how
that impacts the research (Symon et al., 2018). Berger (2015) noted reflexivity is especially
beneficial in positioning the researcher as non-exploitative and compassionate toward the
participant to mitigate power dynamics, and to consciously and deliberately attune to the
researcher’s own reactions to participants and to the way in which the research account is
constructed. Peer review helps to ensure the researcher produces work that is not invalid,
inappropriate, or fake by being reviewed and approved by subject matter experts (Merriam &
48

Tisdell, 2016). Peer review confirms originality and integrity of science and is a well-established
process of validating published research (Witham, 2014).
Ethics
Informed consent was obtained in advance of the interview via an information sheet for
Exempt Studies that will be provided to all participants via email upon agreement to participate
in the interview. At the start of any interview, the information sheet was shared again during the
second phase of the proposal. Given the sensitivity associated with the unraveling of emotions
surrounding the research topic, the researcher was mindful of this potentially vulnerable group.
Voluntary participation and the right to ask any questions and to decline participation at any time
was emphasized during the data collection. All audio-visual recordings, notes, memos, and
document artifacts were de-identified and the actual names of participants omitted or changed,
including on any resulting papers or publications. Permission to record was obtained at the
beginning of interview sessions. An offer for audio-only interview recording instead of video-
recorded interviews was provided to all participants.
Raw data was stored on a password-protected hard drive and laptop computer. Any
printable documentation was stored in a locked file cabinet. All participants were also reminded
that they may choose to leave the study at any time during both the survey and interview phases
and that they could choose to skip any interview question.

49

Chapter Four: Findings
Qualitative data was collected via a semi-structured protocol in order to explore the bi-
directional impact of work-relationship stress among high-achieving executives and
entrepreneurs. In the initial phase, in order to recruit participants who met the criteria of the
study, outreach was made via email across the country to executives of public companies, private
equity and venture capital-backed portfolio gatekeepers. Only participants whose responses
satisfied all of the following criteria were invited to participate: (a) married, divorced or
currently or formerly in an exclusive relationship for 2 years or more while working as an
entrepreneur or executive; (b) in an executive leadership role managing five or more full-time
employees directly and/or indirectly; (c) managing a business that generates an annual gross
revenue of $1million or more or has privately raised $2 million in funds for venture-backed
organizations. Thirteen qualifying participants were selected to engage in virtual interviews
using the semi-structured protocol. Table 4 summarizes these 13 final participants, their
pseudonyms, self-ascribed ethnic identities, ages, respective employment roles, number of
children, marital status, partner employment status, and self-ascribed gender identity.

Table 1
Summary of Interview Participants
Name Role Age Ethnicity Marital
status
Children Partner role Gender Sexual
orientation
Vickie Executive 49 Caucasian Divorced 2
teens
FT outside Female Heterosexual
Jenna Executive 49 Caucasian Divorced 2
tweens
FT outside Female Heterosexual
Jessica Executive 49 Filipino Married 1
youth
FT outside Female Heterosexual
Lo Entrep 42 Caucasian Divorced 1
youth
FT business Female Heterosexual
Amy Entrep 28 Latina Engaged 0 PT outside Female Heterosexual
Jade Entrep 38 Caucasian Married 3 (2 youths
and a baby)
FT outside Female Heterosexual
Ken Executive 57 African
American
Divorced/
remarried
3 grown
kids
FT outside Male Heterosexual
Kyle Entrep 59 Caucasian Divorced 0 Home-
maker
Male Heterosexual
Kirk Entrep/exec 48 Caucasian Married 0 FT outside Male Homosexual
Sam Entrep X Indian Married 4 (2 teens,
1 youth, and
1 college)
Home-
maker
Male Heterosexual
50

Name Role Age Ethnicity Marital
status
Children Partner role Gender Sexual
orientation
Liam Exec-entrep 46 Latino Married 3
youth
FT business Male Heterosexual
Dan Exec-entrep 65 Caucasian Married 2
adult
Home-
maker
Male Heterosexual
Ethan Entrep-exec 45 Caucasian Married 3 (2 youths
and a baby)
FT outside Male Heterosexual

51
52

Responses were transcribed and axially coded using NVivo software under five
categorical groups: (a) causes of conflict, sub-categorized between work-originated stress and
relationship-originated stress; (b) participant strategies that impact bi-directional spill-over; (c)
partner strategies (as reported by participants) that reduce or increase relationship spill-over
stress; (d) organizational policies and culture that reduce or increase spill-over stress; (e) work-
family spill-over positive and negative outcomes. The findings were organized according to the
guiding research questions. Emergent themes were derived from the categorical coding process
described above.
Of the 13 completed interviews, six identified as female in gender, including four
Caucasian, one Latina-Filipino-American, and one Filipino American. The seven remaining
participants identified as male in gender, including four Caucasian, one Latino American, one
African American, and one Indian American. In terms of sexual orientation, one participant
identified as homosexual. Participants ranged in age from 28–65 years old. Nine participants
were currently entrepreneurs or had been an entrepreneur, including three female participants
and six male participants. The other four participants had never been entrepreneurs, but held
executive roles for publicly traded companies, including three females and one male. Two male-
identified participants had been divorced, with one remarried, for a total of six male-identified
currently married participants. Three female-identified participants were divorced, two are
currently married and one engaged. Ten of the 13 participants had children, ranging from 10
months to 34 years of age. Of the nine participants who were either current or former
entrepreneurs, two of their partners had worked full-time for the participants’ venture business;
three partners worked full-time outside the home during the venture business; three current or
former partners were full-time homemakers during venture business; and one participant’s
53

partner worked part-time outside the home during venture business. All three partners who were
full-time homemakers were female. The remaining four executive participants had partners who
worked full-time outside the home.
Research Question 1: What Are the General Causes of Work-Family and Family-Work
Conflict as Identified by Entrepreneurs and Executives?
General causes of stress that spills over bidirectionally between work and home domains
were identified by each of the 13 participants in the semi-structured interviews. Domain conflict
etiology, WFC and FWC, has been found to predict job satisfaction. Both domains shape
perceptions, attitudes and behaviors about work, relationship, and overall life satisfaction, though
WFC plays a stronger role (Pedersen & Minnotte, 2012). Questions 4–6 and 8–15 of the
interview protocols were designed to elicit perspectives on work-relationship stress amongst
high-achieving entrepreneurs and executives in an effort to uncover key themes across these
populations.
Theme 1: FWC Household Management Conflict
To questions and probes pertaining to conflict originating from family that spill-over into
an executive or entrepreneur’s work performance, all 13 respondents indicated that daily
household management underpinned conflict which interfered with participants’ work
performance. Of household management conflict, the following three categories were most
prominently cited: (a) financial responsibility, (b) re-location, and (c) child-rearing, with issues
ranging from childbirth, childcare, transportation, homeschooling, social activity, fertility
challenges, special-needs children. Three of the 13 participants did not have children at the time
of interview; however, family-planning played a significant role in their household management
conflict. Participant Amy shared her partner’s concern that she “puts work above all else scared
54

him” as it pertained to their future and questioned if they have children, would the entrepreneur
still “put work above all else” because he already “felt number two” in her life.
Of the other 10 participants with children, eight had adolescents, teenagers, or adult
children. Two participants, Jade and Ethan, each had multiple children under the age of 6 years,
including an infant within the past year and a half. Jade shared that “juggling children” was
especially challenging during “running a fund” and that she needed a “50/50 partner and a
support system like assistants” for childcare, “because it’s the biggest stressor.” She reported that
as the mother, “it is never truly an equal trade.” Lo, a divorced, female entrepreneur, and CEO,
expressed a similar sentiment, “I think a choice between work, kids, relationships and the
pressure to excel at all of them creates a tremendous amount of stress, and just being able to be
taken seriously as CEO.”
Theme 2: FWC Emotional and Psychological Conflict
Emotional and psychological states frequently underscored conflict originating from
home that impacted work performance. Some of the emotional and psychological conflict was a
manifestation from household management conflict, including the resulting lack of sleep due to
childbirth and child-rearing; sole or primary financial responsibility pressures; and too much
change at once. Participating executives and entrepreneurs expressed the accumulation of
emotional and psychological stress created by these task-oriented matters often invoked an
overall negative mood or induced anxiety, inciting some mental health symptoms such as
fatigue, inability to focus, irritability, emotional overwhelm, reduced motivations, panic attacks,
anxiety, and depression. Overarchingly, 10 participants explained that though they believed they
frequently compartmentalized the FWC from impacting their work, most acknowledged that
when the FWC grew to an overwhelming amount, it caused reduced work engagement, less
55

availability to employees, displaced relationship frustrations were taken out on employees and
suboptimal results to key stakeholders. Jenna shared that her job was to “stabilize employees”
but that she was “bringing my home chaos to work,” with a bad attitude and overall pessimism.
Another driving factor for psychological and emotional conflict among entrepreneurs and
executives was born from their beliefs that their partners either did not support their work or
purpose or fully understand its importance to them. Eight of the 13 participants expressed they
believed their partner did not fully support their motivations for the demanding nature of their
job. A mix of eight male and female entrepreneurs and executive participants explained that their
partners believed they were not a priority. Amy stated that her partner expressed that he felt like
he was “competing” with her work to be “a priority.” Vickie reinforced this theme, “I wish he’d
known he was always the priority.” Five of the eight participants, two male and three female,
who expressed their partner did not believe they were a priority had been divorced. Divorced and
remarried, Ken reflected that his first wife complained about his frequent absence due to work.
He noted he believed he “needed to provide for the family,” but years later realized he worked
hard due to his “competitive nature and need to achieve.” Ken said his second wife never
complained about his absence due to work and “was deeply sad to learn how lonely she had
been” upon his retirement.
Of the most impairing psychological and emotional conflicts that spill over into an
entrepreneur or executives’ work performance was divorce. All five of the divorced participants
expressed that the process of divorce negatively impacted their work. Jenna, a divorced female
executive with two kids, said of going through the initiation of her divorce, “The emotional
awareness of holy shit. … This is changing. I didn’t compartmentalize anymore, and my life was
my life. It was impacting the professional side, too.” Kyle, a male entrepreneur participant said,
56

While I was working, I was crying and got depressed. It’s a mind game; it’s a lot of
emotional toll. That’s a super amount of stress because when you’re in the middle of it,
you don’t see the other side. It’s a very big dark place, the uncertainty of not knowing
how it’s gonna end up. Where am I gonna live? Am I gonna have a house? Am I gonna
have to lose my business?
Theme 3: WFC Workload and Responsibilities
All 13 participants cited the amount of work and type of work responsibilities frequently
spilled over into their relationships with their partners. Of the nine participants who identified as
entrepreneurs, fundraising and responsibility to employees was cited as the biggest responsibility
and stressor that spilled over into their relationship and caused conflict. Ethan, a male
entrepreneur participant, expressed,
I don’t think anyone other than a CEO of a start-up can really understand the pressure
that you have toward investors and your employees. It’s grueling, especially when the
company’s not doing well and it’s all encompassing.
Sam, a married, male entrepreneur participant with four children, said of the ensuring employees
will get paid,
The emotional burden of work at home with me is that there were times where I’ve not
been the best version of myself at home because of just an extreme amount of stress, like
bordering on bankruptcy. And, and of course, having younger kids means my wife’s
definitely stressed. I’m distant. I’m not responsive. You know, she obviously has things
going on and wants to talk about them, but, you know, I’m just really disinterested.
Work responsibilities that require overnight travel or prolonged hours from home were
cited as one of the most prominent reasons that work caused conflict with their partners. Twelve
57

of the 13 participants reported they had frequent arguments about work travel or long hours at
work. This conflict was particularly highlighted as the erosion of marital satisfaction among
participants with young or adolescent children.
Three of the 13 executive and entrepreneur participants whose partner or spouse had been
employed full-time for the same business at various points during their relationship in either
entrepreneurial venture or corporate environments said they experienced positive and negative
spill-over impact. Three of the 13 participants expressed that the shared workload and thought-
partnership with their spouse stimulated feelings of psychological and emotional support over the
shared experience. All three of the 13 also expressed that the shared work experience created
conflict in their relationship for various reasons.
The most stated reason for conflict among couples who worked together was that the
shared work experience created family conflict due to “no separation” of work and personal
lives. Corporate executive Jenna said,
There was no block between my professional life and my personal life. It all bled together
because we worked at the same place, then we would talk about it. So, I felt like we never
got away from the workplace.
Liam, an entrepreneurial participant, expressed,
My partner kind of reluctantly came into the business and didn’t really have a passion for
the business. The particular role that she was doing, which was a critical role, had
become pretty toxic for her and for us. What would be really challenging for me would
be coming home and having her unload on me. I’d like ‘I’m here to support you if you
really do need to escalate, but let’s keep it in the office.’ And, an hour later, she would
58

still be talking about this. I think that working together sort of magnifies the good and the
bad of your personal relationship.
Theme 4: WFC Psychological and Emotional Stressors
Other key areas of WFC that created psychological and emotional stressors that spilled
over to family conflict included an emotionally volatile supervisor or work culture; disagreement
in how to handle work conflict; and the recent increased stressors relating to COVID-19 and
racial tensions in the United States. Jessica, a Filipino female executive, stated,
I was sexually harassed at work by my boss, and my husband’s a White male and very
privileged and he wanted me to stand up for myself. As a woman of color in this industry,
you just kind of bear it and keep moving forward. So, we would argue all the time about
me reporting it, and I did report it. And I was told by HR that if I did report it, that I
would be the one asked to leave my job versus the executive director.
All 13 participants from the study expressed that work created emotional and
psychological conflict that spilled over into their relationships, manifesting behaviorally as being
more distracted and not fully engaged at home; mentally distant and less available to their
partner in emotional and in physical presence; and irritable mood. Six of the 13 participants
reported psychosomatic symptoms from work spill-over conflict including mental health
disorders like panic attacks, major depressive disorders, and anxiety disorders. Sam stated that he
had experienced anxiety attacks due to a stressful work project, and that “having a good partner
who talked me through it many times” helped him manage his stress.
59

Research Question 2: What Work-Family Behaviors and Strategies do Entrepreneurs and
Executives Employ to Maintain Marital Satisfaction?
Questions 7, 9, 11, 12, and 15 of the protocol were designed to engender responses on the
behavior or strategies that entrepreneurs and executives employ to maintain marital satisfaction.
These are strategies and behaviors that entrepreneurs and executives do either consciously or
unconsciously to attenuate distress in their relationship while balancing their work goals.
The sections below present the findings for entrepreneurial and executive strategies for
maintaining marital satisfaction.
Theme 1: Healthy Strategies for Marital Satisfaction Among Participants
The 13 participants interviewed for this study identified five foundational ways in which
they use positive strategies to manage work stress to maintain marital satisfaction. Each
participant enacted one or more of these strategies at varying points of their relationships to
maintain marital satisfaction. These five areas include (a) social support, (b) partner support, (c)
marital therapy, (d) outsourced household management support, and (e) self-care techniques.
Outsourcing household management tasks with hired support was cited by four
participants of the 13 interviewed as critical. All four of these participants were women, and all
four had children of varying ages. Childcare, executive assistants and housekeepers were the
most cited outsourced household management resources. Jade said,
We’re building all of that out and trying to create more childcare support. I think we need
that all around, but that’s a much bigger issue. It’s an education issue too. It’s like the
zero through six education, like that is broken. And you know, that would help
everything in the world if we could figure out what to do with kids zero to six and keep
them safe and educate them. I think that most families like the biggest stress right now.
60

Partner support was the most cited strategy of all 13 participants enlisted to maintain
marital satisfaction. Partners most commonly cited the following behaviors of partner support:
talking to their partner about their work and relationship stress; attending and celebrating their
partner’s important events; protecting bonding time for dinners, dates and vacation; sex and
affection; agreed-upon work hours and partner-connection hours; negotiated, shared household
responsibilities; agreed-upon lifestyle sacrifices to support their partner’s work purpose. One
participant reported his wife took the initiative to study and learn best practices relationship skills
to support their healthy discussion about conflict. Lifestyle sacrifices cited included financial
income, homebuying, absence in the home or events due to work, and working at the
entrepreneurial venture.
Interview data demonstrated that entrepreneurship created opportunities for partner
support as well. Of the nine entrepreneurs interviewed for this study, two had worked full-time
for the venture business at some point in their relationship in various capacities. Three
participants’ partners of the nine entrepreneurs interviewed did not work full-time for the
entrepreneurial venture but would occasionally support their business during critical projects by
doing work tasks like accounting or supporting events. Each of these participants expressed that
this engendered positive feelings of emotional support and prevented or reduced psychological
stress. Of his experience with having his wife support an event for his business, Sam said,
She planned it all out for our team. She’d meet with our team, and just her and I just
working together on an actual goal, it actually affected my job, and it was pretty
awesome; it had a huge effect.
61

Conversely, three of the nine entrepreneurs’ partners did not have their partners
contribute to their entrepreneurial venture in any capacity, with entrepreneurial participant Dan
stating,
There are clearly successful spousal business partnerships but for me, I just thought,
there’s a good thing. And then there’s too much of a good thing. Too much of a good
thing could become a bad thing. And I didn’t want to risk it.
Social support beyond partners as contributing to marital satisfaction was expressed by all 13 of
the participants. Social support was noted as contributing to participants’ emotional and mental
well-being by talking about stressors. Social support looked different for several of the
participants. Among social support cited included memberships in business organizations like
Young Presidents’ Organizations and Entrepreneurs’ Only; friends; and work colleagues.
Participants expressed enlisting a mix of the different types of social support identified.
Eight of the 13 participants expressed seeking the support of a professional marriage
therapist for support in marital satisfaction at some point of their relationship. The reasons for
seeking marriage therapy varied among participants. The most commonly cited reasons were for
communication and listening skills, emotion-regulation strategies, addressing self-defeating
beliefs, shared-values and for self-reflection. Dan, a male entrepreneur, said,
One of the things I used to do when we had arguments was to literally storm out, leave
the room and it turns out that was a trigger for her because she had a family history of
people storming out and everything like that. I had to change to stay physically in the
house, if not engage at that point. There might have been a door slammed and we were in
separate rooms for a while, but just changing of behavior of not literally leaving to go
walk around the block, but staying in the house was difficult for me, but important for
62

her, and so, behavioral changes like that might not have meant anything to me but it
meant a lot to her.
Ethan, describing his unawareness of his own emotions, said,
I don’t know if I really have always been that great at connecting with my emotions. I
think, especially when I was leading the start-up, you have to compartmentalize. And, so,
sometimes that means closing off some of that stress when you get home. So, I wasn’t
always able to express how I was feeling effectively. I think that tools to help people
express themselves who get really good at compartmentalizing, cuz otherwise it just is
totally overwhelming. I think a lot of times my wife wanted to hear how I was feeling,
not just what I was worried about that I had to do next. I think she just wanted to know
how I was feeling. So, if I was able to communicate that more effectively, that would’ve
been better than maybe what I did.
Several other participants expressed they sought out marriage therapy when the stress in the
marriage “felt” like they were “never enough.” The behaviors that were most quoted leading to
the “never enough” belief included not home enough, not enough trips, not enough connecting
time, not enough dinners together, and not enough partner presence due to work distractions and
technology. These partner complaints drove the participants’ belief that they were “constantly
letting someone down,” driving dissatisfaction in the relationship, leading to marriage therapy
for support.
Individual stress-management strategies were also cited by all 13 participants for ways
they moderate their marital satisfaction. Among the key strategies noted by participants were
self-reflection techniques, mediation, alone time or silence, individual therapy, physical activity
or walking, and compartmentalization. Compartmentalization, though a double-edged strategy,
63

was the most cited stress-management strategy, with eight out of the 13 participants expressing
they believed their ability to compartmentalize was key to their marital satisfaction. Kyle, a
divorced entrepreneur, said of one of his key learnings from his divorce,
I probably brought the stress home, or I probably let the stress manifest itself into perhaps
taking over my time away from work. Whereas I really don’t do that anymore. I now
know how to leave it at the store when I leave the store.
Ethan, a male entrepreneur, acknowledged his inability to compartmentalize, which later
was associated with increased relational distress and eroded their marital satisfaction over time.
It’s make a list, go through it, reiterate the list because something changed and then
priority list in a, it’s just, you’re thinking about it all the time. And, so, even when I was
home on time, which, luckily, I didn’t have to work too crazy of hours, a lot of times my
mind wasn’t really on my kids or my wife, because I was thinking about some pitch I had
to give the next day. And then when we would have dinner or we would be watching the
kids or something like that, I would pull out my phone and check some emails or
something like that. I found that I was easily distracted by the work that I had to do or the
thoughts that I had around some idea that pulled me away from being present and in the
moment with my family.
Sam, acknowledging his inability to compartmentalize work stress from impacting his personal
life, said, “I’d say probably half the month, I stay awake at night, just thinking about whether or
not we’re gonna be able to continue to fund the company week after week.”
Theme 2: Unhealthy Strategies Impacting Marital Satisfaction Among Participants
Six out of the 13 participants expressed they concentrated on putting more energy into
their work when their marital satisfaction was low. They initially cited work as their refuge when
64

they felt dissatisfied and lacked the self-efficacy to make their relationship better. They said
work was where they believed they “could be successful,” causing less stress. Still, several
participants acknowledge putting more effort into their work during relational distress hit a
threshold, suggesting the putting more energy into work strategy was a temporary solution for
the executive or entrepreneur but which eventually proved detrimental to both the relationship
and their work performance. Kyle said, “Work was a great refuge during my divorce, because I
could just work and not deal.” Kirk, elaborating on his strategy for mitigating low marital
satisfaction, said,
If I’m having issues at home, I’ll focus on work that much more. It’s kinda like you
throw yourself into it to get away from it; a lot of people who do that because they have
grief or something, they’ll dump it into work and really focus on that. So, I think that’s
certainly a piece of it. I do that a lot. The flip side though is being distracted at work
because you’re thinking about an issue, a relationship problem, or something of that sort,
and it ends up nagging you. I think it’s easier to compartmentalize work when you’re at
home than it is to compartmentalize relationships when you’re at work.
Liam, similarly, referred to his strategy to compartmentalize as a short-term solution:
So, you’re not gonna maybe notice it today or tomorrow, but, you know, if I’m struggling
personally for even a few weeks, the midterm to long-term effects can be really
meaningful because of not moving meaningful conversations forward, whether they be
for fundraising or business development or even hiring.
Pulling back on career ambition by declining promotions, disengaging in work due to
relationship stress, or by not taking on more work responsibilities was another strategy expressed
by three of the 13 participants in an effort to create marital satisfaction. All three participants
65

were female and had children; two of the three were divorced. Two of these participants
expressed that sometimes the impact of these decisions was experienced later in their
relationships and contributed to their overall marital dissatisfaction.
Two of 13 participants acknowledged having affairs as a behavioral strategy to mitigate
marital dissatisfaction. One of the two participants was male and still married; the other
participant was female and divorced. Liam explained how affairs reduced his dissatisfaction to
his marriage:
I think we’ve got some major challenges in our relationship, like particularly on the
intimacy side, and I’ve had extra marital affairs. I think being in a sexless marriage, I feel
like I kind of continue to just think about whether we’re in like a great friendship and like
a parental partnership, but not, I don’t know. I love her deeply, but I’m not sure that I
want to be married to her and it’s really just, it’s the intimacy.
Liam expressed he and his wife had not tried marriage therapy due to the expense. The divorced
female participant who had expressed she had had an affair stated that her ex-husband and she
had sought professional marriage therapy.
Research Question 3: What Behaviors and Policies Do Organizations Practice That
Support or Harm Work-Family Integration and Overall Life Satisfaction for
Entrepreneurs and Executives?
The spill-over of work-life issues impacts employee efficiency, with work-life conflicts
sometimes causing negative consequences either at the workplace or in family life (Yadav et al.,
2022). Questions 7, 9, 11, 12, and 15 of the protocol were designed to engender responses on
what organizational practices and policies support or harm WFI and overall life satisfaction for
executives and entrepreneurs. The organizational themes that emerged are below.
66

Theme 1: Supportive Organizational Behaviors or Policies of WFI

Paid time off was expressed by all 13 participants as an organizational policy that
supported WFI. Paid time off included vacation days, mental health days, sabbaticals and
unexpected days rewarded by the company or direct supervisor. An emerging theme for several
entrepreneurs was the ability to identify when they “needed to take vacations” for their “mental
well-being.” Amy stated she had gotten to a point in her career that she questioned if she could
do it to the level of intensity any longer and give to her partner:
He is extremely supportive and understanding and knows how to alleviate overwhelm or
stress in other areas of my life. But, yeah, that was a conversation we had to have. But we
came up with a solution. He was just like, “You need to be better about mental health
days and vacations.” That’s all. I was burnt out.
Other supportive organizational policies cited included resources to do their job effectively;
flexible work schedules; maternity and paternity paid leave; and explicitly stated and enforced
work policies regarding expectations of working hours during the week, weekends and during
vacation.
Salary, including potential earnings, early retirement pay-outs, bonuses and promotions
were remarked by all 13 participants as an organizational strategy that supported WFI. Several
participants reported psychological benefits like “security” and “financial freedom,” as well as
trips or relocations abroad, homes and vacation homes, children’s education, and a nice lifestyle
as the support they recognized their organization provided.:
The day we went public, my wife and I realized that financially life would be different
for us going forward. And, so, that was the payoff for all, and, so, I remember us just
sitting in our bedroom slash office in Paris going, “You know, wow! We hit the lottery.”
67

Entrepreneurial participants also acknowledged that it also played a stressor in their WFI, with a
limited salary at the start of an entrepreneurial venture, but that they recognized potential
earnings created an underlying supportive motivation. Amy said,
I feel like I carry the burden of the financials in our family and that correlates with my
work, because then there are times where I’m like, I should be paid more. I should be
compensated or how do I work towards X amount of salary, X amount of benefits. And it
just puts a lot more stress on me in that regard.
An organization’s cultural practices were also identified as positively affecting WFI
through emotional and psychological impact. These cultural practices identified by participants
included provision of authority and autonomy to achieve goals; psychological safety to address
challenges and failures; an empathetic direct supervisor toward personal life demands; inspiring
leadership and mentors; and positive role modeling by leaders. All participants acknowledged
their responsibility as leaders in their organizations for setting the mood for their organization
and that their negative and positive moods spilled over to impact stakeholders. Sam said,
I can obviously create stress on her (wife) when she’s stressed out. Like we’re all stressed
out as a family. And I definitely carry that into my work. I’ve had customers catch me
where I’ve been stressed out. It’s not because of her but because I handle stress terribly.
About the spill-over impact his relationship conflict has on his performance at work, Liam said,
If I’m having challenges at home, my energy levels, my focus, my overall state of well-
being at work is not gonna be at optimum levels to perform and to focus. Certainly, a few
times a year, there’ll be major, major issues and definitely affect my work.
Jackie said,
68

Right after I got married, I mean the first couple years after I got married, it was great at
home and fun and we were doing all kinds of good things together, enjoying each other. I
think I took that positive energy into the workplace as well and felt motivated and
energized and not overwhelmed.
Theme 2: Harming Organizational Behaviors or Policies of Work-Family Integration
Organizational policies that participants expressed harmed WFI included work travel;
entrepreneurs raising funds; long work hours; inflexible work schedules; and limiting paid time
off. Keith said,
I worked really long hours and she [wife] let me know that she didn’t move 3,000 miles
across the ocean to be in this country with no family, to have a husband who’s not home
with these two young children. And she said, “I moved here for you.”
Ethan said, “I felt more connected with my wife when she knew I’d closed a round of
funding. Then my wife knew that ‘Okay, we don’t have to worry about him not taking a salary.’”
Regarding the stressors of work travel, Jade said,
I was having trouble traveling for work, and I have to travel. And, so, I was having
trouble doing that because he would totally freak out every time I got on a plane. And, so,
we had to figure that out and it got worse with every additional child we had.
Organizational cultural behaviors that negatively impacted WFI for participants included
the participants’ experiences of organizational bias surrounding women in the workplace issues
such as balancing motherhood and career, barriers to rising into executive roles or felt sense of
responsibility to help other females rise into leadership roles; not celebrating wins long enough
before moving onto next goal; not being challenged intellectually or creatively; psychologically
69

unsafe environments with leadership or colleagues and macro socio-political cultural issues.
Vickie said her boss’ behavior takes an emotional toll on her well-being:
I have a boss who’s really intense former military and sometimes his comments are not
constructive, and he just applies more pressure. And when he feels he’s going to miss a
target, he can get very, very volatile to the point that he’s yelled at meetings and stuff.
That is very stressful, cuz sometimes you don’t know what you’re gonna get in the
meeting and especially the last 2 years, the environment’s so dynamic and there’s so
much, that’s unpredictable geopolitical, social, and there’s constantly bad news.
Twelve of the 13 participants expressed the COVID-19 macro-level pandemic as a massive
impairment to their WFI. Liam said,
We have a travel business, and we just went through a global pandemic. Essentially,
cataclysmic, it was a traumatic event. We went from being a really fast-growing start-up
to, literally in a matter of 7 days, no revenue and a massive spike in cancellations. And,
you know, basically 2020, we dismantled the team and had no sales. And the fact that
both my partner and I were in the business was really challenging.
Vickie also said the United States’ socio-political climate strained her WFC:
The mental stress right now has been incredibly difficult, through the last 2 years with
COVID and the social challenges. We had a watershed moment with racial justice and
the tension that it’s created in life. Oftentimes the job is the one place people can come to
for some consistency and some security, and, so, I feel this heavy responsibility to just
really provide the best environment for ’em.
70

Research Question 4: What Strategies and Behaviors Do Entrepreneurs and Executives
Say Their Intimate Partners Employ That Increase or Decrease Family-Work Conflict?
Intimate partners provide security, comfort and support, and entrepreneurs without strong
spousal support may cause there to be reduced temporal and psychological resources available to
the venture business (Craft et al., 2015). Questions 9–16 of the protocol were designed to
engender responses on what behavior or strategies that entrepreneurs’ and executives’ say their
partners employ to maintain marital satisfaction. The findings are presented below.
Theme 1: Strategies and Behaviors of Partners That Decrease Family-Work Conflict
Stress-management behaviors was a partner strategy theme that decreased WFC among
the entrepreneur and executive participants. All 13 participants cited varying forms of stress-
management strategies from their partners that reduced the spill-over of WFC, including
listening; verbal reassurance (i.e., “It’s going to be okay”); verbal acknowledgement of effort;
awareness of partner mood; awareness of partner well-being; and collaboration on partner
differences or preferences. Jade identified verbalization of reassurance as a stress-management
technique from her partner, “And I feel like telling myself okay, things are going okay helps de-
stress, and I kind of wish my husband would say that more to me.” Amy also stressed the partner
strategy for verbal reinforcement as supportive:
And sometimes it just takes words. And I had told my fiancé and I had this conversation
and I said, “You haven’t in a while, you haven’t even said out loud that everything’s
gonna be okay. Like I’m gonna make sure I take care of you.” And that doesn’t mean just
money. That means like mentally and emotionally and just creating like a safe haven.
And I do know that, but sometimes it’s nice to hear.
71

Effective bonding strategies were also cited by all 13 participants to reduce stress on the
executive or entrepreneur. Effective bonding strategies cited included emotion regulation from
partners during stressful times; the partner withholding their frustration all together or until best
timing to discuss conflict; learned and modeled effective conflict communication skills for the
relationship; and positive affirmation. Sex, affection, and intimacy were also cited as forms of
effective bonding strategies. Vickie elaborated on the impact effective bonding strategies have
on her,
You have someone that cares and is supporting you, you go in with so much more
confidence and courage. They build you up. I think if you’re in a good place and you can
bring your whole self to work and you’re just like fully, mentally there, you’re confident,
your confidence personally spills over professionally. You’re more productive, you’re
more level-headed, you sleep better. If you’re sleeping better, you’re making better
decisions. Your cognitive ability is so much stronger.
Acts of service demonstrated supportive behaviors from partners, according to all 13
participants, expressed in a variety of ways. Some acts of service included coordinating social
activities for the couple and family; planning trips; and shared household chores. One participant
expressed that the “letting me sleep on the weekends” in lieu of doing household chores “was
supportive.” Other supportive acts of service by partners cited by participants included
thoughtful gestures like getting coffee; helping to care for a participant’s family; and material
gifts.
Personal interests were also cited as supportive behaviors by partners, including personal
or professional development; hobbies and interests; and a sense of purpose. Jade said of her
husband’s job change, “I’m the larger provider in our family, and I need a lot more support right
72

now. But because he’s having fun, I’m happy. He’s happy cuz he went through a very tough time
before.”
Eleven of the 13 participants said their partners’ interest in their purpose was an
important, supportive behavior. This supportive behavior theme was described as being
demonstrated by helping work on the participant’s entrepreneur venture; attendance at their work
functions or events; joining work travel; and understanding and empathy for work demands that
take them away from family time and demands. Vickie said,
He stayed home and I had to take the kids to daycare because he, ego-wise, was not
accepting of being a stay-at-home dad. My career felt lesser than to the point that he
wouldn’t even support me in my career. He wouldn’t come to the Christmas party. He
wouldn’t come to work events. He wanted me to stay home with the kids if they were
sick. And that’s the first time we talked about the marriage not working and that we
should go to counseling.
Theme 2: Strategies and Behaviors of Partners That Increase Family-Work Conflict
Executives’ and entrepreneurs’ partners’ unstable mental and emotional health was cited
by seven of 13 participants which increased conflict in family and work domains. Participants
expressed their partners’ mental and emotional behaviors that impacted them negatively were
demonstrated through poor stress-management techniques and mental health diagnostic disorders
of mood disorders like major depressive disorder and anxiety disorders. Behaviors described
included irritability; flurry of texts regarding household management issues; spiraling thoughts;
panic attacks; mental scorekeeping; not attending events or celebrating participant wins; and
“frequent heightened emotion” and “reactivity.” Jade said,
73

I think I was having periodic breakdowns cuz I just was being rated by my husband; and
it wasn’t my fault it, it wasn’t me. I kept being like, ‘Am I doing something wrong?’ I
was trying to figure out what was going on and I think I just hadn’t identified depression.
Liam said,
I’ve been really open and clear about my request that our home is a peaceful and joyful
place, and that the more difficult things are in the business, there’s no better support for
me than to come home to that.
A partner’s work was a theme that emerged as a contributor to FWC and had a negative
impact on the participants’ mood. The varying reasons cited for a partner’s work causing FWC
included conflicting schedules; no separation from work-life conversations for couples who
worked together; work travel; and a partner being unsatisfied in their own work or career
purpose. Liam, whose wife had worked for his start-up, said,
I’m very clear about my expectation of everyone carrying their load and what would be
really challenging for me would be coming home and having her unload on me. I’d say,
“I empathize, and I’m here to support you if you really do need to escalate, but let’s keep
it in the office.”
Jenna, who met her ex-husband at her job and continued to work with him after their
divorce, said,
There was no block between my professional life and my personal life. It kind of all bled
together. And because we worked at the same place, then we would talk about it. So, I
felt like we never got away from the workplace.
Lo, whose ex-husband had his own career when they met and married but later began
consulting for Lo’s entrepreneurial business, said, “I needed him to perpetuate not only his own
74

personal happiness, but the fact that I had this other thing that was really what he was competing
with all the time, he needed more attention and adoration.”
Daily life management differences of partners also emerged as a source of increased
FWC. Six out of 13 participants expressed frustration with their partner’s life management
conflicts stemming from differing lifestyle values; distribution of household responsibilities; and
roles in contributing to the family. Expectations from partners for tackling household chores,
including childcare, “caused a great deal” of the initial conflict among participants with younger
children. Dan said,
And, so, we finally had to negotiate a 30-minute kind of, even though I’m home, give me
a little time to decompress. And then I had to not have it be 2 hours, but just 30 minutes
and then I can jump in with the family. So, I was having to consciously change behavior
and not go with my knee jerk reaction, but go with, “okay, let me try something that
doesn’t feel comfortable right now, but let’s see if the end result is worth making the
change.”
Over half, seven out of 13 participants, expressed disappointment in their partner’s
reduced interest in intimacy in their relationships. The participants expressed they experienced
reduced intimacy from their partners in a multitude of ways including decreased or no sexual
intercourse, their partner’s inability to “take feedback” or being excluded from important life
decisions that impacted them like changing jobs or work travel. Liam said,
I think part of what I crave with physical connection is you certainly don’t feel lonely for
at least a period of time. But all of the things that you deeply understand, the intensity
and the desire and all of those wonderful things, you miss them.
75

Suggesting the entrepreneur and executive strategy of compartmentalization was negatively
associated with marital satisfaction, Jade expressed,
Him complaining that he’s not feeling like a priority and saying things like, “Your work
is taking priority.” And, so, that balance is constantly being evaluated and a little out of
whack. We’re always trying to assess, ‘What do you need? What do I need?’ And I think
he feels he’s not a priority and he’s not getting his time and whatever that means to him
because my work is taking precedence over our family.
Summary
Qualitative results in the form of raw interview transcripts were first organized according
to the guiding research questions being explored, and then based on categorical coding using
NVivo software. Ten themes were identified during analysis of the interview data generated by
the study. With regard to WFC among entrepreneurs and executives, some key themes that
emerged were household management; workload and responsibilities; and emotional and
psychological stressors originating from each domain. Questions and probes exploring these
issues yielded responses that indicated the importance of organizations to consider policies and
practices that support a family-first culture. The qualitative feedback also supported who
entrepreneurs, executives, and their partners, collectively, have direct agency over their
perceptions and experiences of marital satisfaction and work performance. Supportive themes
emerging from entrepreneur and executive FWC strategies included outsourcing household
management tasks; partner support; social support; marriage psychotherapy; and stress-
management techniques. Unhealthy themes were also raised as strategies impacting marital
satisfaction among executives and entrepreneurs including pouring themselves into their work
when unhappy in their relationships; pulling back on career ambition; and extramarital affairs.
76

Feedback among the participants identified organizational policies and practices that positively
affected the directionality of work-to-family integration including paid time off; resources to do
their job; flexible work schedule; paid paternity and maternity leave; explicitly stated and
honored working hours expectations; salaries; and cultural practices that felt empowering. Such
practices include authority and autonomy; psychological safety; employee-supervisor
relationship; inspiring leadership and mentorship; and positive role modeling by leadership. In
response to the harmful policies to WFI that organizations demand, participants said work travel;
fundraising; long work hours; inflexible work schedules; and limited paid time off. Cultural
practices of female executive bias; not celebrating wins long enough before moving onto next
goal; not being challenged intellectually or creatively; psychologically unsafe work
environments; and macro socio-political cultural issues were cited as harmful to WFI. Executives
and entrepreneurs collectively noted that their partners played the largest role in their perceptions
of WFI. Helpful partner strategies for WFI including effective bonding; stress-management
skills; acts of service; personal purpose and hobbies; and support in the executives’ and
entrepreneurs’ work purpose. Feedback regarding harmful partner strategies illuminated themes
including unstable psychological and emotional health; differing life management approaches
(values; household responsibilities; roles and contributions to the family finances) and reduced
intimacy. Table 5 summarizes the emergent themes that describe these mixed alignments
between work-family domains in terms of organizational policies and practices, entrepreneurs’
and executives’ strategies and partner strategies.

77

Chapter Five: Recommendations
This chapter discusses the study’s findings in the context of the extant research available
on the topic of the bi-directional impact of WFC on entrepreneurs and executives in high-
achieving careers as it pertains to (a) entrepreneurs’ and executives’ strategies that help or hurt,
(b) their partners’ strategies that help or hurt, and (c) organizational practices and policies that
help or hurt the success of WFI. Each subsequent section will relate the findings back to relevant
literature review and clarify the emergent themes that were generated by the study. This section
also includes recommendations for practice, describes the limitations and delimitations regarding
the study and recommendations for future research.
Discussion of Findings
Organizational policy and cultural factors emerged as supportive or hindering of WFE.
Prominent conflict spill-over themes originating from the work domain surfaced inflexible and
long work schedules, travel, fundraising, a psychologically toxic work culture, unsupportive
stakeholders, and a start-up’s financial responsibility to employees. Themes originating from the
family domain that spilled over into the work domain gave rise to beliefs among entrepreneurs,
executives, and partners about psychological and emotional stress-management support from
each other demonstrated through various ways. Psychological compartmentalization, defined
here as the process through which individuals isolate and separate certain aspects from the rest of
their personality or core self, or managing the transition from one role to another of the many
roles a person plays, was the most cited strategy practiced by entrepreneurs and executives to
mitigate bi-directional spill-over in both domains (Rozuel, 2011). Some participants
acknowledged psychological compartmentalization was not possible for them in one or both
domains. Further findings emerged that the ability to psychologically compartmentalize became
78

an ineffective strategy in both domains at a certain level of distress. Overall, the findings
emerged as evidence for social cognitive theory’s core tenet of reciprocal determinism, whereby
a person’s behavior influences and is influenced by personal factors (cognition, affect, biology)
and environment (Bandura, 2001). Schunk (2012) found in a study that individuals wanted more
autonomy over WFI and that this finding supported social cognitive theory’s assumption that
people seek to develop a sense of agency and exert control over their lives and is determined by
their self-efficacy, outcome expectations, goals, and self-evaluation of the interplay of personal
factors, environment, and behaviors.
Family-Work Spill-Over Etiology
Key partner behaviors and strategies that negatively impacted an executive or
entrepreneur’s marital satisfaction included a partner’s emotional and psychological instability;
reduced intimacy; a partner’s own work or purpose; a partner’s negative beliefs about the
entrepreneur’s or executive’s work; and differences in life management ranging from values,
household management, and family roles. According to Sternberg’s triangular theory of love,
intimacy is the emotional component consisting of feelings of closeness, bondedness, and
connectedness and is determined by the level of commitment and positive affective, cognitive,
and physical closeness one experiences with a partner (Constant et al., 2016). When participants
perceived emotional and psychological support from their partners, the entrepreneurs and
executives experienced positive perceptions regarding their relationships. Emotional support is a
set of behaviors that exhibit encouragement, understanding, attention, and positive regard, love
and care that can bring about feelings of happiness and a spiritual uplift and whose support
includes problem solving behaviors and support of their partner’s participation in other domains
(Ross et al., 2005). The study revealed partner emotional support resulted in the belief that their
79

partners supported them, and they could competently meet their partners’ needs, generating an
overall positive mood about their relationship and marital status.
The study validated the literature regarding the importance of partner emotional support,
with several participants expressing that they looked to their partner to help them regulate their
own emotions, illuminating this as a critical skill that makes some entrepreneurs and executives
feel satisfied in their relationship. The same participants who leaned on their partners to help
them regulate their own emotions acknowledged less ability to psychologically
compartmentalize their relationship distress from their work, leading to more FWC and
impacting their work performance. The most frequently described FWC that impacted their work
performance included loss of focus, motivation, disengagement, and negative mood. Effective
bonding techniques such as communication, sex and affection, acts of service, outsourced
household management tasks, a partner’s own mental wellness and positive feelings toward their
own career were the most cited supportive strategies that underpinned feelings of emotional and
psychological support.
The study’s participants who reported they had learned and employed emotion-regulation
strategies for managing psychological and emotional stressors supported the literature that
emotion contagion, the fluctuating emotional states that are vulnerable to external influences,
including physical and personal factors, that create an overall mood, played an integral role in
how executives and entrepreneurs felt about their partners and relationships (Ustrov et al., 2016).
The study illuminated that partners who learned emotion-regulation tools, the management of
feelings, reported experiencing more conflict resolution with their partners and felt more
confident about their relationship (Teymouri et al., 2020). Self-regulation skills modulate the
emotions of others and include behaviors of emotion management, contagion, and labor for both
80

positive and negative and that emotional labor tactics helping individuals to both manage their
own emotions and control the emotions they portray to others (Humphrey, 2012; Williams,
2007).
Social cognitive theory purports the importance of self-regulation of emotion and its
impact on beliefs and behaviors (Williams, 2007). Negative beliefs about their relationship in the
family domain represented the biggest spill-over impact to participants’ work domain long term.
Environment is not unidirectional and can be imposed, selected, or created, leaving a person to
not have control over its present state (Bandura, 2001). Psychological compartmentalization was
stated as the most successful strategy for some participants to mitigate negative emotion spill-
over from impacting their work. This strategy provided positive benefits to the organization, with
some participants reporting putting more effort into their work because they felt more
efficacious, and that work served as a sanctuary during distressing times in their relationships. A
subset of social cognitive theory is the theory of self-efficacy, a construct whereby an
individual’s behavior is determined by perceived efficacy and outcome expectancies of positive
or negative consequences of performing the behavior. One finding from the study is that
participants who chose to put more attention toward work during distressing times in their
relationship appeared to find comfort in the domain in which they believed they could exercise
self-efficacy and expect positive outcomes to compensate for their beliefs of inadequate skill and
positive outcomes in their family domain. Another relationship that can be drawn from this study
is the reciprocal correlation of increased relationship stress when entrepreneurs and executives
increased their attention to their work domain during the times they felt reduced efficacy in their
relationship.
81

Participants reported unmanageable stress to the point of emotional exhaustion, the
feelings of being overextended and depleted of one’s emotional and physical resources (Maslach
& Leiter, 2008). Divorce, affairs, physical illness, mental illness, and reduced bonding
techniques such as sex, affection and communication were the most cited ways the distress
manifested in their family domains. Not moving critical conversations forward such as
fundraising, business development or hiring; negative mood and irritability with stakeholders,
reduced productivity, reduced responsibility, reduced motivation, declining promotions, and
overall reduced engagement in work were the most cited ways the distress manifested in their
work domains.
A key difference among entrepreneurs and organizationally employed executives was
their reported agency to manage their stress. Individuals with an internal LOC believe that the
events in their lives are generally the result of their own behavior and actions and are critical to
motivation, satisfaction, and performance (Chen et al., 2016). While both participants expressed
WFC and FWC as a problem in their lives at various times, participants who identified as
entrepreneurs at some stage in their career said that fundraising and consistently meeting
employee salaries created most stress. Those participants who had been an organizationally
employed executive before becoming an entrepreneur also concurred that nothing they had
experienced in their organization could compare to their stressful experience in entrepreneurship.
While all participants of the study expressed that emotional and psychological support
from partners was the most critical behavior for handling stress that led to marital and
relationship satisfaction, the literature showed entrepreneurs require it even more than
organizationally employed executives. Entrepreneurs with internal LOC have been shown to
cope with stress and strain better than organizationally employed executives, but that they
82

receive less social support, suggesting they may need to find it from non-work sources (Rahim,
1996). The importance of an entrepreneur’s partner’s belief in their purpose emerged as a theme,
with participants needing to trust their partners would be supportive when their work created
conflict with their family demands, such as acceptance of an entrepreneur working longer hours,
reduced paid time off and vacations, or reduced expendable income to fund a start-up, or partners
who work for the venture, or take on more household management responsibilities.
Organizational Policies and Practices Impact to WFE
The study confirmed existing research which found conflict from work emerged in four
distinct ways (a) time-based (inflexible work schedules, long hours, work travel), (b) strain-
based (negative work situations spill-over to family resulting in increased conflict), (c) behavior-
based (work role that conflicts with home role such as a take-charge CEO), and (d) family-based
(originating from home; Qureshi et al., 2019). Existing research has identified that organizational
commitment, demonstrated through continuance of commitment (loyalty because of salary,
position, vacation, and pension) and affective commitment (psychological bonds from feelings of
pride and loyalty), impacted work conflict that spilled over negatively and positively (Lambert et
al., 2014; Modaresnezhad et al., 2021). Existing findings for strain-based conflict most often
resulted in conflict with their partner, with the likelihood that the organization was held partially
responsible for this strain, eroding the affective bond with the organization (Lambert et al.,
2016). Erosion of affective commitment to the organization due to conflict with a partner is an
important theme that emerged from this study with entrepreneurs and executives frequently
citing that their partner “did not feel like a priority” due to their work, resulting in the
entrepreneur or executive’s overarching negative affect.
83

Affect refers to a momentary, fluctuating change in the emotional weather whereas mood
refers to a more prolonged emotion that is more pervasive and sustained, known as emotional
climate (Ashkanasy & Dorris, 2017). Extant research found the competing work-related strain
requirements with family demands deplete entrepreneurs’ and executives’ emotional resources,
moving from affect and mood to giving rise to emotional exhaustion (Cui et al., 2022).
Illuminating the reciprocal relationship of social cognitive theory’s personal factors, behavior
and environment, the participants of this study expressed that once the conflict in their work-
family environments had reached emotional exhaustion, they lost their ability to
compartmentalize and both domains were negatively impacted.
Participants’ emotional exhaustion negatively impacted both their marital satisfaction and
work performance. The study’s participants reported that their focus, discipline, and decision-
making skills became impaired at work and sometimes led to other mental and physical illness.
They also acknowledged that the emotional exhaustion caused them to behave in irritable,
impatient, and pessimistic ways, and that they understood their behavior negatively impacted
their employees. Existing research shows that higher levels of negative workplace emotions
predict employees’ reduced organizational citizenship behavior, including readiness to provide
help to other members at the workplace without expecting subsequent rewards (Chernyak-Hai &
Tziner, 2021). This study reflected on affect, mood and emotional capacity of entrepreneurs and
executives for the purpose of intervening with supportive resources to prevent the reciprocal
determinism that emotional exhaustion causes to work-family domains.
Recommendations for Practice
Four recommendations for organizations, entrepreneurs and executives are identified
below to address key findings. The first recommendation outlines an organization’s practice to
84

provide emotion regulation for stress-management coaching to leaders for a positive
organizational climate and to reduce WFC spill-over to leaders’ relationships. The second
recommendation outlines an organizational incentive program for couples counseling to increase
healthy conflict management skills and marital satisfaction to support entrepreneurs’ and
executives’ work productivity, focus and engagement. The third recommendation details
leadership practices of flexible work options and boundaries with working hours so that leaders
perform at their highest level while prioritizing their relationship. The fourth recommendation
outlines mental-well-being orientation and onboarding.
Recommendation 1: Company-Paid Emotion Regulation and Perception Training for
Stress Management
Given that stress impacts individuals’ emotional state, it is important organizations
provide emotion regulation to leaders on how to regulate their emotion. Entrepreneurs and
executives in this study reported WFC with varying levels of emotion-regulation techniques to
assuage conflict. Conflict spurs negative emotion and erodes teamwork (Jiang et al., 2013).
Work-to-family conflict experienced at home and family-to-work conflict experienced at work
have been shown to be positively associated with guilt and hostility at work and at home
(Bochantin & Cowan, 2016). Leaders skilled in emotion regulation may improve their affect, the
quality of their relationships, and organizational outcomes (Haver et al., 2013). Expanding on
Bandura’s social cognitive theory, individuals’ levels of self-efficacy about their ability to
regulate their emotions has an impact on both physiological arousal and emotional experience
and is believed to support perceptions of personal competence in response to achievement
situations (Villani et al., 2017).
85

Educating executives and entrepreneurs on the benefits of self-efficacy of emotion
regulation (ER) and emotion perception (EP) for WFI and its psychological impact on a culture
may inspire training. Self-efficacy research supports that leaders who have expectations over
regulation of their physiological states and affective experiences such as stress, tension, anxiety,
and fatigue model for others who observe and learn relevant skills and behaviors and cultivate
collective emotion-regulation efficacy. Emotion regulation and EP training can positively spill-
over to entrepreneur’s and executive’s relationships as WFC research shows a positive
association in co-regulation of cortisol (the stress hormone) and negative mood among spouses,
and a negative association with husbands’ marital satisfaction, though not with wives’ marital
satisfaction (Saxbe & Repetti, 2010). Key stakeholders in positional and influential power (board
members, investors and C-suite members) and an entrepreneur and executive’s social support
(partners, YPO and EO groups) will be critical in inspiring the training for stress management at
the outset of a start-up where financial resources are restricted and because many executives do
not understand the correlations that ER and EP play in stress management.
A hybrid, web-based emotional intelligence training (WEIT) and in-person training
makes ER and EP stress-management training more accessible and more effective to busy
leaders (Christina et al., 2019). Colombo et al. (2021) found 8–12 weeks after conducting a
WEIT study that stress response decreased, and resilience coping strategies remained constant
and may last well beyond the training. The same study found emotional intelligence and negative
affect skills did not persist, illuminating the importance of integration of face-to-face
interventions for ER and EP to enhance transfer of new skills. Creating a budget for a mandated
ER and EP hybrid training for all C-suite and VP members of an organization and tying a portion
of annual bonuses to outcome measurements of employee retention and satisfaction may further
86

inspire executives to make ER and EP a priority and pursue further stress-management training
or coaching on their own if they experience physiological benefit and it has a positive impact on
their marriages.
Recommendation 2: Organizationally Incentivized Couples Counseling
This study illuminated the importance of entrepreneurs’ and executives’ effective
bonding techniques of creating intimacy, offering emotional and psychological support, and
providing affection, especially when facing workplace conflict and further supports Bandura’s
theorizing. Bandura’s social cognitive theory identifies the importance of social support from
individuals who provide encouragement through moral support, behavior, and accountability;
social support has shown a positive effect toward various physical and mental health activities
such as coping with pain, adjustments, and life satisfaction (Rolando & Lazaro, 2020). Work and
family domains influence each other, with research identifying that WFC has a negative
association with marital satisfaction and was exacerbated when FWC was also high (Minnotte et
al., 2015). Research also shows that stressors from the family domain which spill-over can also
be costly for families and organizations, with marital conflict being a significant factor of health,
depressive symptoms, and work satisfaction (Choi & Marks, 2008).
Research has shown that teaching communication skills to high-stress career couples as a
mediating intervention was efficacious for solving WFC (Carroll et al., 2013). Work-family
relationship studies have suggested that a couple’s style of communication (constructive versus
destructive) between partners massaged the dynamic between WFC and marital satisfaction
(Iskra-Golec et al., 2017). Psychologist John Gottman studied heterosexual couples and
established empirically-evidenced techniques for couples therapy: (a) teaching wives the use of
softened start-ups in communication conflict, (b) supporting husbands to allow their partners to
87

influence them, (c) identifying physiological arousal states and teaching relaxation techniques to
partners to self-soothe and calm their partner, (d) maximize each partners’ functioning and
maturity, and (e) foster friendship between the partners through supporting their partner’s needs
for autonomy and self-fulfillment with mutual care for the other which increases admiration,
shared dreams and positive sentiments toward the their continuous growth (Gubbins et al., 2010).
With this growing evidence satisfaction in marital relationships influences work
satisfaction and productivity with spouses serving as buffers to work stress (Sandberg et al.,
2012), organizations would be wise to provide psychoeducation and create policies and benefits
that improve entrepreneurs’ and executives’ marriages. Entrepreneurial participants of this
research in particular frequently stated that they leaned on their partners to help navigate their
venture stress through various means. This study also supported prior research which found that
business-owning couples experienced more tension and stress when the spouse worked in the
business. Both executives and entrepreneurs in this study also reported relational behaviors
between their partners which created conflict, and if left unresolved, stirred impairment to their
work, and to their mental and physical health.
A meta-analysis of couple and relationship education (CRE) programs established by the
United States government for lower income couples showed small but significant positive effects
on relationship quality, communication, and aggression (Bradford, 2021) and demonstrates that
supportive systems can create demand. Early-stage entrepreneurs and executives with a growing
family might find couples therapy too costly due to poor reimbursement rates from insurance
carriers and could benefit from these CRE programs and organizationally incentivized couples
therapy benefits. Organizations and key stakeholders would be wise to use socialization
techniques to provide psychoeducation on the benefits for a healthy relationship on their business
88

and incentivize couples with an employee health savings account (HSA) policy and by having
contracts with a couples’ therapy provider network to provide services, entrepreneurs and
executives are more inclined to take advantage of couple’s therapy. Company policies that
support a 1-hour mental health appointment during the workday each week also helps to
destigmatize therapy culturally.
Recommendation 3: Family-Friendly Flexible Work Schedules and Policies
Participants of this study most frequently cited flexible work schedules as an
organizational policy that has positively influenced their work-life integration. Research finds
family-friendly flexible work schedules and policies help their organizations support employees
to achieve a realistic balance between work and family life (Dimertas, 2017). Flexible work and
compressed workweeks increase employees’ experience with enhanced WFE, which, in turn, is
associated with higher job satisfaction and lower turnover intentions (McNall et al., 2009).
Flexible work schedules may also support feelings of marital satisfaction, with entrepreneurs’
and executives’ partners experiencing more care in handling household management
responsibilities, a frequently cited WFC. More time to share in household management tasks
may create positive feelings for the partner and may bolster partners’ beliefs that they are a
priority to the entrepreneurs and executives, one of the most cited challenges reported by this
study’s participants.
Recommendation 4: Mental-Well-Being Orientation and Onboarding
Providing mental well-being orientation during onboarding of new organizationally
employed executives is essential for adopting an organization’s cultural pillar of mental well-
being and provides an opportunity to introduce the organization’s incentivized benefits for
individual and couple’s therapy. Onboarding research shows that socializing and networking at
89

work contribute through the provision of organizational resources which supports newcomer
adjustment (Ellis et al., 2015). Hence, new employee onboarding is an essential first introduction
toward executives adopting an organization’s cultural pillar of mental well-being and accessing
the company’s benefits. Executives can be encouraged through literature about the benefits of
individual and couple’s therapy and directly correlated to organizational benefits that support
these mental-well-being services like the aforementioned recommendation of employee HSA
policy, couples’ therapy provider contractors, and weekday mental health appointments. A
multipronged communication strategy regarding the benefits of mental health well-being and the
organization’s employee resources can also prove beneficial during National Mental Health
Awareness Month annually in May.
Limitations and Delimitations
This study was limited by several weaknesses. The pool of participating couples was
small (13 individuals). Though the participants represented diversity in ethnicity, gender and
sexual orientation for this study, further research with a larger and increased diverse sample of
individuals is warranted. The findings for this study were based on a single source participant,
possibly inflating bias. Several of the participants were also members of professional
organizations that provide and facilitate psychoeducation on emotional intelligence and couples
coaching, perhaps making them more willing to be vulnerable for this study. Other source
participants with less exposure to emotional intelligence training might require more probing and
may offer less insightful data. Future research should include perceptions of work and family
conflict and WFE from spouses and partners of entrepreneurs and executives. This would
provide valuable for the development of a comprehensive theory of work and family conflict
spill-over and WFI interventions for WFE. Second, entrepreneurs’ and executives’ perceptions
90

were captured and measured at one point in time. A longitudinal research study that examines
work and family spill-over conflict at different points in a relationship might pinpoint causality
and indicate further interventions that prevent WFC and FWC (McNall et al., 2009). Third, this
study cultivated rich data from participants’ self-report measures. Future research should
incorporate the marital adjustment/satisfaction assessment by the Locke-Wallace Marital
Adjustment Test (Locke & Wallace, 1959) to measure differences in partner-to-entrepreneur and
executive responses and which would enable generalizability of findings to a larger population.
Finally, it is recommended future research offer less heteronormative contexts and identify any
unique data for this population.
Due to the delimitations of this study, the small sample size should not be generalized to
a large population. Further, the sample population for this study is indicative of the delimitations
of entrepreneurship and corporate leadership talent pool, and thereby is restricted to individuals
who have had a certain privilege or success in their industry. The paths to leadership are
unaccounted for in this study and could have an impact on the participant pool’s responses.
Finally, qualitative interviews were conducted by and recorded on a video platform, potentially
inciting participants to be restrictive with their responses.
Recommendations for Future Research
Future research that further elucidates differences between entrepreneurs and executives
when it comes to the bi-directional impact of WFC and FWC in high-achieving careers could be
useful for a point of comparison of WFC interventions which would prepare and support WFE
for each subgroup of leadership. A longitudinal study that determines behavior patterns of these
subgroups at varying points of their work and family demands would also provide more insight
into specific needs during different developmental stages of a family and organization. A
91

longitudinal study incorporating partners’ and spouses’ perspectives may provide additional
perspectives that could benefit entrepreneurs, executives, and organizations. Identifying whether
an entrepreneur or executive’s gender elucidates different themes in a future study could also
contribute important organizational and partner interventions for WFI for WFE. Future research
could also be more inclusive of same-sex and transgender partners.
Compartmentalization was one of the most commonly cited interventions by participants
that mitigated their work and family conflict. Research shows that both compartmentalization
and integration may be adaptive methods for structuring positive and negative self-views,
mediating self-esteem and mood (Limke & Showers, 2010). As such, future research is needed
about compartmentalization as a strategy to mitigate spill-over conflict between work and family
domains and specifically, its impact in the following areas: (a) positive and negative impact to
relationships and marital satisfaction over time, (b) its effectiveness to an entrepreneur and
executive’s work performance, (c) correlation to the entrepreneur and executive’s mental and
physical health, and (d) attachment styles of participants who use compartmentalization.
Attachment styles are the motivational system that promotes the search for safety in close and
intimate relationships in all life stages categorized into four styles: secure, insecure-avoidant,
insecure-anxious, and insecure-disorganized (Schimmenti et al., 2019). Future research should
incorporate the psychometric characteristics of the Workplace Attachment Styles Questionnaire
to measure possible correlation between attachment styles and compartmentalization coping
strategies for WFC and FWC and to elucidate its impact to their partners’ attachment style.
Conclusion
The purpose of the study was to examine the bi-directional impact of WFC on
entrepreneurs, executives and to organizations in high-achieving careers. The results of the data
92

indicated the most common themes for WFC, successful strategies entrepreneurs and executives
and their partners employ, negative strategies entrepreneurs and executives and their partners
employ, and organizational policies and practices that reduce or incite conflict. Participants in
this study all noted the importance of their career, and that their partners’ effective bonding
techniques contributed to their relationship and marital satisfaction, which, in turn, impacted
their work performance. Effective bonding techniques were identified in a myriad of ways such
as emotional and psychological support when in conflict, communication skills, emotion-
regulation skills, intimacy and affection, household task management and working at their start-
up venture. Participants reported that one of the most important emotional and psychological
supportive tactics received from their partner was their partner’s own psychological and
emotional health, their own career satisfaction, and household task management. The executives
and entrepreneurs most frequently cited long working hours and work travel as organizational
policy that correlated to conflict in their relationships. Psychologically unsafe work culture also
exacerbates their FWC. Entrepreneurial participants acknowledged fundraising induced the most
spill-over conflict to their relationship.
Understanding the impact and spill-over impact of FWC helps organizations define
policies, benefits and create cultures that support entrepreneurs and executives. Negative
emotions from their relationships cause stress and negative mood that can sometimes spill-over
and cost organizations in employee turnover due to negative climates and impede work
performance due to psychological and physical impairment. Based on the collected data, it is
recommended that organizations increase leadership’s awareness about WFC and provide
entrepreneurs and executives with ER and perception training to modulate their stress levels for a
positive work climate, and to reduce spill-over to their family domain. Providing and
93

encouraging company-sponsored couples therapy through HSA funding for couples counseling
as a cultural norm is also highly recommended. Providing a flexible work schedule and clear
working hour expectations are essential policies for supporting entrepreneurs and executives in
positive interactions with their spouses and to prevent burnout. This could help to increase
feelings of positive affect, drive further engagement and performance, models healthy behavior
to employees, fosters employee retention and enhances operational efficiency.
Recommendations for future research include an in-depth, longitudinal study that follows
varying demands during different developmental phases of an organizational life cycle (planning,
growth, maturity, and decline) and family demands (commitment, newlywed, childbirth and
toddlers, adolescence, teen, and empty nest) to identify unique needs among entrepreneurs,
executives, and genders to support WFE. Partner and spousal interviews would contribute
substantially to this study with rich data that may elucidate new findings. Finally, exploring
psychological compartmentalization as a strategy for reducing conflict spill-over and if it
mediates, increases, or decreases conflict originating from work or conflict originating from the
family domain,

94

References
Ajrouch, K. J., Blandon, A. Y., & Antonucci, T. C. (2005). Social networks among men and
women: The effects of age and socioeconomic status. Journal of Gerontology, 60(6),
S311–S317. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/60.6.S311
Alarcon, G. M. (2011). A meta-analysis of burnout with job demands, resources, and attitudes.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 79(2), 549–562.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2011.03.007
Albrecht, S. (2006). Organizational politics: Affective reactions, cognitive assessments and their
influence on organizational commitment and cynicism toward change. In E. Vigoda-
Gadot & A. Drory (Eds.), Handbook of organizational politics (pp. 230–252). Edward
Elgar.
Aldrich, H. E., & Cliff, J. E. (2003). The pervasive effects of family on entrepreneurship:
Toward a family embeddedness perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(5), 573–
596. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(03)00011-9
Allen, T. D., Herst, D. E. L., Bruck, C. S., & Sutton, M. (2000). Consequences associated with
work-to-family conflict: A review and agenda for future research. Journal of
Occupational Health Psychology, 5(2), 278–308. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-
8998.5.2.278
Alshibani, S. M., & Volery, T. (2019). Social support and life satisfaction among entrepreneurs:
a latent growth curve modelling approach. International Journal of Manpower, 42(2),
219–239. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJM-02-2019-0107
American Psychological Association. (2007). Whole workplace health.
https://www.apa.org/monitor/mar07/whole
95

Anderson, S. E., Coffey, B. S., & Byerly, R. T. (2002). Formal organizational initiatives and
informal workplace practices: Links to work-family conflict and job-related outcomes.
Journal of Management, 28(6), 787–810. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2063(02)00190-
3
Annink, A., den Dulk, L., & Steijn, B. (2016). Work–family conflict among employees and the
self-employed across Europe. Social Indicators Research, 126(2), 571–593.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-015-0899-4
Aryee, S., Fields, D., & Luk, V. (1999). A cross-cultural test of a model of the work-family
interface. Journal of Management, 25(4), 491–511.
https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639902500402
Ashkanasy, N. M., & Dorris, A. D. (2017). Emotions in the workplace. Annual Review of
Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 4(1), 67–90.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032516-113231
Ashkanasy, N. M., & Humphrey, R. H. (2011). Current emotion research in organizational
behavior. Emotion Review, 3(2), 214–224. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073910391684
Austin, M. P., Mitchell, P., & Goodwin, G. M. (2001). Cognitive deficits in depression: Possible
implications for functional neuropathology. British Journal of Psychiatry, 178(3), 200–
206. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.178.3.200
Bae, K. B., & Yang, G. (2017). The effects of family-friendly policies on job satisfaction and
organizational commitment: A panel study conducted on South Korea’s public
institutions. Public Personnel Management, 46(1), 25–40.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0091026016689669
96

Bailyn, L., & Harrington, M. (2004). Redesigning work for work-family integration. Community
Work & Family, 7(2), 197–208. https://doi.org/10.1080/1366880042000245470
Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Burke, R. (2009). Workaholism and relationship quality: A
spillover-crossover perspective. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 14, 23–33.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013290
Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Sanz-Vergel, A. I. (2014). Burnout and work engagement: The
JD-R approach. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational
Behavior, 1, 389–411. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091235
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 248–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-
5978(91)90022-L
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of
Psychology, 52(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1
Bandura, A. (2012). On the functional properties of perceived self-efficacy revisited. Journal of
Management, 38(1), 9–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206311410606
Bandura, A. (2015). On deconstructing commentaries regarding alternative theories of self-
regulation. Journal of Management, 41(4), 1025–1044.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206315572826
Baral, R., & Sampath, P. (2019). Exploring the moderating effect of susceptibility to emotional
contagion in the crossover of work–family conflict in supervisor-subordinate dyads in
India. Personnel Review, 48(5), 1336–1356. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-05-2017-0139
97

Barnes, S., Brown, K. W., Krusemark, E., Campbell, W. K., & Rogge, R. D. (2007). The role of
mindfulness in romantic relationship satisfaction and responses to relationship stress.
Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 33(4), 482–500. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-
0606.2007.00033.x
Benson, N. F., Floyd, R. G., Kranzler, J. H., Eckert, T. L., Fefer, S. A., & Morgan, G. B. (2019).
Test use and assessment practices of school psychologists in the United States: Findings
from the 2017 national survey. Journal of School Psychology, 72, 29–48.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2018.12.004
Berger, R. (2015). Now I see it, now I don’t: Researcher’s position and reflexivity in qualitative
research. Qualitative Research, 15(2), 219–234.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794112468475
Berthelsen, C., & Hølge‐Hazelton, B. (2021). The importance of context and organization culture
in the understanding of nurses’ barriers against research utilization: A systematic review.
Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 18(2), 111–117.
https://doi.org/10.1111/wvn.12488
Bezner, J. R., & Held Bradford, E. C. (2020). Integrating health promotion and wellness into
neurorehabilitation. In Lazaro, R. T. (Ed.), Umphred ’s neurological rehabilitation (7th
ed., pp. 938–952). Elsevier.
Bhave, D. P., Kramer, A., & Glomb, T. M. (2010). Work-family conflict in work groups: Social
information processing, support, and demographic dissimilarity. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 95(1), 145–158. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017885
98

Bianchi, S. M., & Milkie, M. A. (2010). Work and family research in the first decade of the 21st
century. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72(3), 705–725.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00726.x
Bilodeau, J., Marchand, A., & Demers, A. (2020). Work, family, work–family conflict and
psychological distress: A revisited look at the gendered vulnerability pathways. Stress
and Health, 36(1), 75–87. https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.2916
Bjärntoft, S., Hallman, D., Mathiassen, S., Larsson, J., & Jahncke, H. (2020). Occupational and
individual determinants of work-life balance among office workers with flexible work
arrangements. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health,
17(4), Article 1418. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17041418
Blenkinsopp, J., & Owens, G. (2010). At the heart of things: The role of the “married” couple in
entrepreneurship and family business. International Journal of Entrepreneurial
Behaviour & Research, 16(5), 357–369. https://doi.org/10.1108/13552551011071850
Blom, N., Kraaykamp, G. L., & Verbakel, C. M. (2017). Couples’ division of employment and
household chores and relationship satisfaction: A test of the specialization and equity
hypotheses. European Sociological Review, 33(2), 195–208.
https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcw057
Blömeke, S., Gustafsson, J.-E., & Shavelson, R. J. (2015). Beyond dichotomies: Competence
viewed as a continuum. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 223(1), 3–13.
https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000194
Bochantin, J. E., & Cowan, R. L. (2016). Focusing on emotion and work–family conflict
research: An exploration through the paradigms. Journal of Management Inquiry, 25(4),
367–381. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492616642330
99

Bozer, G., & Jones, R. J. (2018). Understanding the factors that determine workplace coaching
effectiveness: a systematic literature review. European Journal of Work and
Organizational Psychology, 27(3), 342–361.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2018.1446946
Bradford, K. (2021). Non-self psychology: The Buddhist phenomenology of self-experience: A
follow-up article to The Subject Matter of Psychology: Psyche, Dasein, non-self
Existential Analysis, 32(1), 101–.
Bradley, M. M. (2000). Emotion and motivation. In M. M. Bradley & P. J. Lang (Eds.),
Handbook of psychophysiology (Vol. 2, pp. 602–642). Cambridge University Press.
www.cns.nyu.edu/~vessel/courses/NeuralAesthetics/Readings/09_Mar_29/Bradley.pdf
Brandstätter, H. (2011). Personality aspects of entrepreneurship: A look at five meta-analyses.
Personality and Individual differences, 51(3), 222–230.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.07.007
Braun, A. C., Machado, W. de L., De Andrade, A. L., & De Oliveira, M. Z. (2019). Why work-
family conflict can drive your executives away? Revista de Psicología, 37(1), 251–278.
https://doi.org/10.18800/psico.201901.009
Braun, S., & Nieberle, K. W. A. M. (2017). Authentic leadership extends beyond work: A
multilevel model of work-family conflict and enrichment. The Leadership Quarterly,
28(6), 780–797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2017.04.003
Burch, T. (2019). All in the family: The link between couple-level work-family conflict and
family satisfaction and its impact on the composition of the family over time. Journal of
Business and Psychology, 35(5), 593–607. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-019-09641-y
100

Burke, R. J., & Belcourt, M. L. (1974). Managerial role stress and coping responses. Journal of
Business Administration, 5(2), 55–68.
Burnette, J. L., Pollack, J. M., Forsyth, R. B., Hoyt, C. L., Babij, A. D., Thomas, F. N., & Coy,
A. E. (2020). A growth mindset intervention: Enhancing students’ entrepreneurial self-
efficacy and career development. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 44(5), 878–908.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1042258719864293
Cacciotti, G., & Hayton, J. C. (2015). Fear and entrepreneurship: A review and research agenda.
International Journal of Management Reviews, 17(2), 165–190.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12052
Carlson, D. S., Thompson, M. J., Crawford, W. S., & Kacmar, K. M. (2019). Spillover and
crossover of work resources: A test of the positive flow of resources through work–
family enrichment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 40(6), 709–722.
Carnes, A. M. (2017). Bringing work stress home: The impact of role conflict and role overload
on spousal marital satisfaction. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology,
90(2), 153–176. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12163
Carroll, S. J., Hill, E. J., Yorgason, J. B., Larson, J. H., & Sandberg, J. G. (2013). Couple
communication as a mediator between work–family conflict and marital satisfaction.
Contemporary Family Therapy, 35(3), 530–545. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10591-013-
9237-7
Cavazotte, F., Abelha, D. M., & Turano, L. M. (2021). Image filters: Effects of emotion displays
on followers’ perceptions of principled leaders. BAR - Brazilian Administration Review,
18(1), Article e190142. https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-7692bar2021190142
101

Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative
analysis. Sage.
Chen, T., Li, F., & Leung, K. (2016). When does supervisor support encourage innovative
behavior? Opposite moderating effects of general self-efficacy and internal locus of
control. Personnel Psychology, 69(1), 123–158. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12104
Chernyak-Hai, L., & Tziner, A. (2021). Attributions of managerial decisions, emotions, and
OCB. The moderating role of ethical climate and self-enhancement. Journal of Work and
Organizational Psychology, 37(1), 36–48. https://doi.org/10.5093/jwop2021a4
Choi, H., & Marks, N. (2008). Marital conflict, depressive symptoms, and functional
impairment. Journal of Marriage and Family, 70, 377–390.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2008.00488.x
Clark, M. A., Michel, J. S., Stevens, G. W., Howell, J. W., & Scruggs, R. S. (2014).
Workaholism, work engagement and work–home outcomes: Exploring the mediating role
of positive and negative emotions. Stress and Health, 30(4), 287–300.
Clark, M. A., Michel, J. S., Zhdanova, L., Pui, S. Y., & Baltes, B. B. (2016). All work and no
play? A meta-analytic examination of the correlates and outcomes of workaholism.
Journal of Management, 42(7), 1836–1873.
Cobb-Clark, D. A. (2015). Locus of control and the labor market. IZA Journal of Labor
Economics, 4, Article 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40172-014-0017-x
Colombo, D., Díaz‐García, A., Fernandez‐Álvarez, J., & Botella, C. (2021). Virtual reality for
the enhancement of emotion regulation. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 28(3),
519–537. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpp.2618
102

Conley, N., & Bilimoria, D. (2021). Barriers and mitigating strategies of entrepreneurial business
growth: The role of entrepreneur race and gender. Entrepreneurship Research Journal,
12(3), 391–439. https://doi.org/10.1515/erj-2020-0061
Constant, E., Vallet, F., Nandrino, J. L., & Christophe, V. (2016). Personal assessment of
intimacy in relationships: Validity and measurement invariance across gender. European
Review of Applied Psychology, 66(3), 109–116.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erap.2016.04.008
Cook, D., & Artino, A., Jr. (2016). Motivation to learn: An overview of contemporary theories.
Medical Education, 50(10), 997–1014. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13074
Craft, S. M., Seal, K. L., Jang, J., & Danes, S. (2015). Spousal expectations and perceived social
support during the creation of a new business venture. Journal of Couple & Relationship
Therapy, 14(2), 169–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332691.2014.921263
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Sage Publications.
Cubbon, L., Darga, K., Wisnesky, U. D., Dennett, L., & Guptill, C. (2020). Depression among
entrepreneurs: A scoping review. Small Business Economics, 57(2), 781–805.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-020-00382-4
Cui, G., Wang, F., Sun, J. M., & Cheng, Y. (2022). Time for life? The spillover effect of strain-
based family-to-work conflict on early retirement intentions and the role of HR practice
flexibility. Personnel Review. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-
03-2021-0199
103

Danes, S. M., & Jang, J. (2013). Copreneurial identity development during new venture creation.
Journal of Family Business Management, 3(1), 45–61.
https://doi.org/10.1108/20436231311326481
Danes, S. M., Matzek, A. E., & Werbel, J. D. (2010). Spousal context during the venture creation
process. In J. A. Katz & Lumpkin, G. T. (Eds), Advances in entrepreneurship, firm
emergence and growth (Vol. 12, pp. 113–162). Emerald.
Daniels, L. M., Stupnisky, R. H., Pekrun, R., Haynes, T. L., Perry, R. P., & Newall, N. E. (2009).
A longitudinal analysis of achievement goals: From affective antecedents to emotional
effects and achievement outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(4), 948–963.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016096
Danis, M., Goold, S. D., Parise, C., & Ginsburg, M. (2007). Enhancing employee capacity to
prioritize health insurance benefits. Health Expectations, 10(3), 236–247.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1369-7625.2007.00442.x
Danner-Vlaardingerbroek, G., Kluwer, E. S., Van Steenbergen, E. F., & Van Der Lippe, T.
(2016). How work spills over into the relationship: Self-control matters. Personal
Relationships, 23(3), 441–455. https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12136
Dasborough, M. T., Ashkanasy, N. M., Tee, E. Y. J., & Tse, H. H. M. (2009). What goes around
comes around: How meso-level negative emotional contagion can ultimately determine
organizational attitudes toward leaders. The Leadership Quarterly, 20, 571–585.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.04.009
Del Campo, R. G., Cook, A., & Arthur, M. M. (2013). Cultural differences in work-family
policies and perceptions of organizational support. Employee Responsibilities and Rights
Journal, 25(1), 23–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10672-011-9188-9
104

Demerouti, E., & Bakker, A. B. (2011). The job demands–resources model: Challenges for
future research. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 37, 1–9.
https://doi.org/10.4102/sajip.v37i2.974
Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., Nachreiner, F., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2001). The job demands-
resources model of burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 499–512.
Demirtaş, Ö., Arslan, A., & Karaca, M. (2017). Why perceived organizational and supervisory
family support is important for organizations? Evidence from the field. Review of
Managerial Science, 13(4), 841–869. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-017-0264-x
Desrochers, S., Sargent, L. D., & Hostetler, A. J. (2012). Boundaryspanning demands, personal
mastery, and family satisfaction: Individual and crossover effects among dual-earner
parents. Marriage & Family Review, 48, 443–464.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01494929.2012.677377
Dierdorff, E. C., & Ellington, J. K. (2008). It’s the nature of the work: Examining behavior-
based sources of work-family conflict across occupations. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 93(4), 883–892. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.4.883
Diestel, S., Cosmar, M., & Schmidt, K. H. (2013). Burnout and impaired cognitive functioning:
The role of executive control in the performance of cognitive tasks. Work and stress,
27(2), 164–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2013.790243
Di Fabio, A. (2017). Positive healthy organizations: Promoting well-being, meaningfulness, and
sustainability in organizations. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1938–1938.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01938
Dillen, Y., Laveren, E., Martens, R., De Vocht, S., & Van Imschoot, E. (2019). From “manager”
to “strategist”: An examination of the evolving role of persistent high-growth
105

entrepreneurs. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 25(1), 2–
28. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-01-2017-0010
D’Intino, R. S., & Kury, K. W. (2018). Encouraging social entrepreneurship research legitimacy
through academic journal special issues. Journal of Ethics & Entrepreneurship, 8(1), 4–
Doherty, R. W., Orimoto, L., Singelis, T. M., Hatfield, E., & Hebb, J. (1995). Emotional
contagion: Gender and occupational differences. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 19,
355–371. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1995.tb00080.x
Ebbers, J., & Wijnberg, N. (2017). Betwixt and between: Role conflict, role ambiguity and role
definition in project-based dual-leadership structures. Human Relations, 70(11), 1342–
1365. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726717692852
Eby, L. T., Allen, T. D., Conley, K. M., Williamson, R. L., Henderson, T. G., & Mancini, V. S.
(2019). Mindfulness-based training interventions for employees: A qualitative review of
the literature. Human Resource Management Review, 29(2), 156–178.
Eddleston, K. A., & Powell, G. N. (2012). Nurturing entrepreneurs’ work-family balance: A
gendered perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(3), 513–541.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2012.00506.x
Elliot, A. J., Dweck, C. S., & Yeager, D. S. (2018). Handbook of competence and motivation:
Theory and application (2nd ed.). The Guilford Press.
Ellis, A. M., Bauer, T. N., Mansfield, L. R., Erdogan, B., Truxillo, D. M., & Simon, L. S. (2015).
Navigating uncharted waters: Newcomer socialization through the lens of stress theory.
Journal of Management, 41(1), 203–235. doi:10.1177/0149206314557525
Eun, B. (2019). Adopting a stance: Bandura and Vygotsky on professional development.
Research in Education, 105(1), 74–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/0034523718793431
106

Field-Springer, K. (2020). Reflexive embodied ethnography with applied sensibilities:
methodological reflections on involved qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 20(2),
194–212. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794119841835
Fink, G., & Yolles, M. (2015). Collective emotion regulation in an organisation – A plural
agency with cognition and affect. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 28(5),
832–871. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-09-2014-0179
Finzi-Dottan, R., & Cohen, O. (2012). Predictors of parental communication and cooperation
among divorcing spouses. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 23(1), 39–51.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-012-9684-z
Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), The
nature of intelligence (pp. 231–235). Lawrence Erlbaum.
Fletcher, L., & Hayes, S. C. (2005). Relational frame theory, acceptance and commitment
therapy, and a functional analytic definition of mindfulness. Journal of Rational-Emotive
& Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, 23(4), 315–336. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10942-005-
0017-7
Ford, L. R., & Locke, K. (2002). Paid time off as a vehicle for self-definition and sensemaking.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(4), 489–509. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.152
Ford, M. T., Matthews, R. A., Wooldridge, J. D., Mishra, V., Kakar, U. M., & Strahan, S. R.
(2014). How do occupational stressor-strain effects vary with time? A review and meta-
analysis of the relevance of time lags in longitudinal studies. Work and Stress, 28(1), 9–
30. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2013.877096
Fowler, L. A., Moore, P. J., Macura, Z., Singh, M. A., Cooke, F. P. R., & Charmak, W. D.
(2021). How are expectancies and values cognitively combined to determine behavioral
107

intentions? The role of expectancy‐value theory, information integration and behavioral
outcomes in dietary intentions. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 35(4), 1023–1034.
https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3833
French, K., Dumani, S., Allen, T., & Shockley, K. (2018). A meta-analysis of work-family
conflict and social support. Psychological Bulletin, 144(3), 284–314.
https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000120
Frone, M. R. (2003). Predictors of overall and on-the-job substance use among young workers.
Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 8(1), 39–54. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-
8998.8.1.39
Frye, N. K., & Breaugh, J. A. (2004). Family-friendly policies, supervisor support, work-family
conflict, family-work conflict, and satisfaction: A test of a conceptual model. Journal of
Business and Psychology, 19(2), 197–220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-004-0548-4
Galunic, D. C., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (1996). The evolution of intracorporate domains: Divisional
charter losses in high-technology, multidivisional corporations. Organization Science,
7(3), 255–282. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.7.3.255
Gambrel, L. E., & Keeling, M. L. (2010). Relational aspects of mindfulness: Implications for the
practice of marriage and family therapy. Contemporary Family Therapy, 32(4), 412–426.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10591-010-9129-z
Gao, Y., Shi, J., Niu, Q., & Wang, L. (2013). Work-Family Conflict and Job Satisfaction:
Emotional Intelligence as a Moderator. Stress and Health, 29(3), 222–228.
https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.2451
Gehman, J., Glaser, V. L., Eisenhardt, K. M., Gioia, D., Langley, A., & Corley, K. G. (2018).
Finding theory-method fit: A Comparison of three qualitative approaches to theory
108

building. Journal of Management Inquiry, 27(3), 284–300.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492617706029
Gerstl-Pepin, C., & Patrizio, K. (2009). Learning from Dumbledore’s Pensieve: Metaphor as an
aid in teaching reflexivity in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 9(3), 299–308.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794109105029
Gethin, R. (2011). On some definitions of mindfulness. Contemporary Buddhism, 12(1), 263–
279. https://doi.org/10.1080/14639947.2011.564843
Glavin, P., & Schieman, S. (2011). Getting the best out of yourself: How coaching can enable
female entrepreneurs to overcome barriers and achieve their potential. (2021).
Development and Learning in Organizations, 35(2), 22–24. https://doi.org/10.1108/DLO-
02-2020-0043
Glavin, P., & Schieman, S. (2012). Work–family role blurring and work–family conflict: The
moderating influence of job resources and job demands. Work and Occupations, 39(1),
71–98. https://doi.org/10.1177/0730888411406295
Gliwny, M. (2020). The relationship between work-family conflict and family-work conflict, and
self-esteem and emotional intelligence among managers. Zeszyty Naukowe Mał opo l s k i e j
Wy ż s z e j Sz k oł y Ekonomicznej w Tarnowie, 45(1), 137–151.
https://doi.org/10.25944/znmwse.2020.01.137151
Goh, Z., Ilies, R., & Wilson, K. S. (2015). Supportive supervisors improve employees’ daily
lives: The role supervisors play in the impact of daily workload on life satisfaction via
work–family conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 89, 65–73.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2015.04.009
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. Bantam Books
109

Goleman, D. (1998). The emotionally competent leader. Health Forum Journal, 41(2), 36-.
Goleman, D. (2003). What makes a leader. Organizational Influence Processes, 82, 229–241.
Goleman, D. (2004). Destructive emotions: How can we overcome them? A scientific dialogue
with the Dalai Lama. Bantam.
Green, S. G., Bull Schaefer, R. A., MacDermid, S. M., & Weiss, H. M. (2011). Partner reactions
to work-to-family conflict: Cognitive appraisal and indirect crossover in couples. Journal
of Management, 37(3), 744–769. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309349307
Greenhaus, J. H. (2008). Innovations in the study of the work-family interface: Introduction to
the Special Section. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 81(3),
343–348. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317908X332135
Greenhaus, J. H., & Parasuraman, S. (1987). A work-nonwork interactive perspective of stress
and its consequences. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 8(2), 37–60.
https://doi.org/10.1300/J075v08n02_04
Grzywacz, J. G., & Marks, N. F. (2000). Family, work, work-family spillover, and problem
drinking during midlife. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62(2), 336–348.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00336.x
Gubbins, C. A., Perosa, L. M., & Bartle-Haring, S. (2010). Relationships between married
couples’ self-differentiation/individuation and Gottman’s model of marital interactions.
Contemporary Family Therapy, 32(4), 383–395. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10591-010-
9132-4
Haggard, D. L., & Haggard, K. S. (2017). Value creation through executive diversity.
International journal of Organization Theory and Behavior, 20(2), 141–160.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOTB-20-02-2017-B001
110

Halbesleben, J. R. B., & Buckley, M. R. (2004). Burnout in organizational life. Journal of
Management, 30(6), 859–879. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jm.2004.06.004
Halbesleben, J. R. B., Neveu, J. P., Paustian-Underdahl, S. C., & Westman, M. (2014). Getting
to the “COR”: Understanding the role of resources in conservation of resources theory.
Journal of Management, 40(5), 1334–1364. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314527130
Halbesleben, J. R. B., Zellars, K. L., Carlson, D. S., Perrewé, P. L., & Rotondo, D. (2010). The
moderating effect of work-linked couple relationships and work-family integration on the
spouse instrumental support-emotional exhaustion relationship. Journal of Occupational
Health Psychology, 15(4), 371–387. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020521
Hammer, L. B., Kossek, E. E., Anger, W. K., Bodner, T., & Zimmerman, K. L. (2011).
Clarifying work-family intervention processes: The roles of work-family conflict and
family-supportive supervisor behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(1), 134–150.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020927
Hammer, L. B., Kossek, E. E., Yragui, N. L., Bodner, T. E., & Hanson, G. C. (2009).
Development and validation of a multidimensional measure of family supportive
supervisor behaviors (FSSB). Journal of Management, 35(4), 837–856.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308328510
Haver, A., Akerjordet, K., & Furunes, T. (2013). Emotion regulation and its implications for
leadership: An integrative review and future research agenda. Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies, 20(3), 287–303. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051813485438
Haynie, M., & Shepherd, D. A. (2009). A measure of adaptive cognition for entrepreneurship
research. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 695–714.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00322.x
111

Hilbrecht, M. (2016). Self-employment and experiences of support in a work-family context.
Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship, 28(1), 75–96.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08276331.2015.1117878
Hochschild, A. R. (1983). The managed heart: Commercialization of human feeling. University
of California Press.
Holliday, W. J., Casper, W. J., Matthews, R. A., & Allen, T. D. (2013). Family-supportive
organization perceptions and organizational commitment: The mediating role of work-
family conflict and enrichment and partner attitudes. The Journal of Applied Psychology,
98(4), 606–622. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032491
Holloway, I., & Biley, F. C. (2011). Being a qualitative researcher. Qualitative Health Research,
21(7), 968–975. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732310395607
Hsiao, C., Lee, Y.-H., & Chen, H.-H. (2016). The effects of internal locus of control on
entrepreneurship: The mediating mechanisms of social capital and human capital.
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 27(11), 1158–1172.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2015.1060511
Humphrey, R., Burch, G., & Adams, L. (2016). The benefits of merging leadership research and
emotions research. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1022–1022.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01022
Humphrey, R. H. (2012). How do leaders use emotional labor? Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 33(5), 740–744. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1791
Humphrey, R. H., Pollack, J. M., & Hawver, T. H. (2008). Leading with emotional labor.
Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23, 151–168.
https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940810850790
112

Ilies, R., Keeney, J., & Goh, Z. (2015). Capitalising on positive work events by sharing them at
home. Applied Psychology, 64(3), 578–598. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12022
Ilies, R., Nahrgang, J. D., & Morgeson, F. P. (2007). Leader-member exchange and citizenship
behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(1), 269–277.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.1.269
Ilies, R., Wilson, K. S., & Wagner, D. T. (2009). The spillover of daily job satisfaction onto
employees’ family lives: The facilitating role of work-family integration. Academy of
Management Journal, 52(1), 87–102. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.36461938
Iskra-Golec, I., Smith, L., Wilczek-Ruzyczka, E., Siemiginowska, P., & Watroba, J. (2017). Shift
schedule, work-family relationships, marital communication, job satisfaction and health
among transport service shift workers. International Journal of Occupational Medicine
and Environmental Health, 30(1), 121–131. https://doi.org/10.13075/ijomeh.1896.00670
Jansen, N., Kant, I., Kristensen, T., & Nijhuis, F. (2003). Antecedents and consequences of
work-family conflict: A prospective cohort study. Journal of Occupational and
Environmental Medicine, 45(5), 479–491.
https://doi.org/10.1097/01.jom.0000063626.37065.e8
Jarrell, A., & Lajoie, S. P. (2017). The regulation of achievements emotions: Implications for
research and practice. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne, 58(3), 276–287.
https://doi.org/10.1037/cap0000119
Jennings, J. E., & McDougald, M. S. (2007). Work-family interface experiences and coping
strategies: Implications for entrepreneurship research and practice. The Academy of
Management Review, 32(3), 747–760. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2007.25275510
113

Jiang, H., & Shen, H. (2015). Conflict? What work–life conflict? A national study of future
public relations practitioners. Public Relations Review, 41(1), 132–134.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.10.006
Jiang, J. Y., Zhang, X., & Tjosvold, D. (2013). Emotion regulation as a boundary condition of
the relationship between team conflict and performance: A multi-level examination.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(5), 714–734. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1834
Johnson, M. D., & Anderson, J. R. (2015). Temporal ordering of intimate relationship efficacy
and conflict. Journal of Marriage and Family, 77(4), 968–981.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12198
Johnson, R. D., & Marakas, G. M. (2000). Research report: The role of behavioral modeling in
computer skills acquisition: Toward refinement of the model. Information Systems
Research, 11(4), 402–417. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.11.4.402.11869
Johnson, S. C., Baxter, L. C., Wilder, L. S., Pipe, J. G., Heiserman, J. E., & Prigatano, G. P.
(2002). Neural correlates of self‐reflection. Brain, 125(8), 1808–1814.
https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awf181
Judge, T. A., Woolf, E. F., Hurst, C., & Livingston, B. (2006). Charismatic and transformational
leadership. Zeitschrift Fur Arbeits-u Organisationspsychologie, 50(4), 203–214.
Kallioniemi, M. K., Simola, A. J., Kymäläinen, H. R., Vesala, H. T., & Louhelainen, J. K.
(2009). Mental symptoms among Finnish farm entrepreneurs. Annals of Agricultural and
Environmental Medicine, 16, 159–168.
Kalmijn, M., & Monden, C. W. S. (2011). The division of labor and depressive symptoms at the
couple level: Effects of equity or specialization? Journal of Social and Personal
Relationships, 29(3), 358–374. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407511431182
114

Kannadhasan, M., Singh, P., Charan, P., & Balivada, P. K. (2018). Personality characteristics
and the process of start-up: The moderating role of institutional environment. Decision,
45(4), 287–300. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40622-018-0192-x
Kaoun, T. (2019). Enhancing leaders’ emotional intelligence: Why mindfulness? Journal of
Leadership Education, 18(1), 200–212. https://doi.org/10.12806/V18/I1/T2
Kennard, E. (2012). Stories of expatriate spouses in Silicon Valley: An exploration of the
adjustment process (Publication No. 3554862) [Doctoral dissertation, Alliant University].
ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
Kim, P. H., Longest, K. C., & Aldrich, H. E. (2013). Can you lend me a hand? Task-role
alignment of social support for aspiring business owners. Work and Occupations, 40(3),
213–249. https://doi.org/10.1177/0730888413481365
King, E., & Nesbit, P. (2015). Collusion with denial: Leadership development and its evaluation.
Journal of Management Development, 34(2), 134–152. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-02-
2013-0023
Kirkwood, J., & Tootell, B. (2008). Is entrepreneurship the answer to achieving work–family
balance? Journal of Management & Organization, 14(3), 285–302.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S183336720000328X
Kline, W., Kotabe, M., Hamilton, R., & Ridgley, S. (2017). Organizational constitution,
organizational identification, and executive pay Executive controls in the USA and Japan.
Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration, 9(1), 54–68.
https://doi.org/10.1108/APJBA-02-2016-0022
115

Kloutsiniotis, P. V., & Mihail, D. M. (2020). Is it worth it? Linking perceived high-performance
work systems and emotional exhaustion: The mediating role of job demands and job
resources. European Management Journal, 38(4), 565-579.
Koletsou, A., & Mancy, R. (2011). Which efficacy constructs for large-scale social dilemma
problems? Individual and collective forms of efficacy and outcome expectancies in the
context of climate change mitigation. Risk Management, 13(4), 184–208.
https://doi.org/10.1057/rm.2011.12
Köppe, C., Held, M. J., & Schütz, A. (2019). Improving emotion perception and emotion
regulation through a web-based emotional intelligence training (WEIT) program for
future leaders. The International Journal of Emotional Education, 11(2), 17–32.
Kossek, E., Lewis, S., & Hammer, L. B. (2010). Work-life initiatives and organizational change:
Overcoming mixed messages to move from the margin to the mainstream. Human
Relations, 63(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726709352385
Kossek, E., & Ozeki, C. (1998). Work–family conflict, policies, and the job–life satisfaction
relationship: A review and directions for organizational behavior–human resources
research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(2), 139–149. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-
9010.83.2.139
Kossek, E. E., Pichler, S., Bodner, T., & Hammer, L. B. (2011). Workplace social support and
work-family conflict: A meta-analysis clarifying the influence of general and work-
family-specific supervisor and organizational support. Personnel Psychology, 64(2), 289–
313. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2011.01211.x
116

Kunnanatt, J. T. (2004). Emotional intelligence: The new science of interpersonal effectiveness.
Human Resource Development Quarterly, 15(4), 489–495.
https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.1117
Lambert, E. G., Hogan, N. L., Kelley, T. M., Kim, B., & Garland, B. (2014). When domains spill
over: The relationships of affective and continuance commitment with work-family
conflict among correctional staff. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 25(4), 476–502.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0887403412474889
Lambert, E. G., Qureshi, H., & Frank, J. (2016). Spilling over: An exploratory study of the
correlates of strain-based work–family conflict among police officers in India.
International Journal of Police Science & Management, 18(2), 87–103.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1461355716641972
Landolfi, A., Barattucci, M., & Lo Presti, A. (2020). A time-lagged examination of the
Greenhaus and Allen work-family balance model. Behavioral Sciences, 10(9), 1–19.
https://doi.org/10.3390/bs10090140
Lapierre, L. M., Li, Y., Kwan, H. K., Greenhaus, J. H., DiRenzo, M. S., & Shao, P. (2018). A
meta‐analysis of the antecedents of work–family enrichment. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 39(4), 385–401. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2234
Larivet, S., & Brouard, F. (2010). Complaints are a firm’s best friend. Journal of Strategic
Marketing, 18(7), 537–551. https://doi.org/10.1080/0965254X.2010.529155
Lee, D., Lee, W. J., Choi, S. H., Jang, J. H., & Kang, D. H. (2020). Long-term beneficial effects
of an online mind-body training program on stress and psychological outcomes in female
healthcare providers: A non-randomized controlled study. Medicine, 99(32), e21027–
e21027. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000021027
117

Lee, D. W., Hong, Y. C., Seo, H., Yun, J.-Y., Nam, S., & Lee, N. (2021). Different influence of
negative and positive spillover between work and life on depression in a longitudinal
study. Safety and Health at Work, 12(3), 377–383.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shaw.2021.05.002
Lee, W. S., & McKinnish, T. (2019). Locus of control and marital satisfaction: Couple
perspectives using Australian data (IDEAS Working Paper Series). Institute of Labor
Economics.
Lent, R. W., & Brown, S. D. (2008). Social cognitive career theory and subjective well-being in
the context of work. Journal of Career Assessment, 16(1), 6–21.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072707305769
Liang, C.-I., & Dunn, P. (2010). Examining four dimensions of entrepreneurs’ perceptions on
spouses’ reactions to new venture creation - Realistic optimism, pessimism, other
entrepreneurial characteristics, and expectations. Journal of Business &
entrepreneurship, 22(2), 75–95.
Liang, S.-G., & Chi, S.-C. S. (2013). Transformational leadership and follower task
performance: The role of susceptibility to positive emotions and follower positive
emotions. Journal of Business and Psychology, 28(1), 17–29.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-012-9261-x
Liao, Y., Yang, Z., Wang, M., & Kwan, H. K. (2016). Work-family effects of LMX: The
moderating role of work–home segmentation preferences. The Leadership Quarterly,
27(4), 671–683. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2016.03.003
118

Limke, A., & Showers, C. J. (2010). Organization of parent knowledge: Compartmentalization
and integration in adult child-parent relationships. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 36(9), 1225–1240. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167210379112
Lin, C., Liu, C., & Liao, W. (2020). Being excellent: predicting team performance based on
social cognitive theory and social identification theory. Total Quality Management &
Business Excellence, 31(11-12), 1363–1380.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2018.1485483
Lin, H. C., & Chang, C. M. (2018). What motivates health information exchange in social
media? The roles of the social cognitive theory and perceived interactivity. Information
& Management, 55(6), 771–780. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2018.03.006
Liu, G., Isbell, L. M., & Leidner, B. (2021). Quiet ego and subjective well-being: The role of
emotional intelligence and mindfulness. Journal of Happiness Studies, 22(6), 2599–2619.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-020-00331-8
Liu, H., & Cheung, F. M. (2015). The role of work–family role integration in a job demands–
resources model among Chinese secondary school teachers. Asian Journal of Social
Psychology, 18(4), 288–298.
Liu, J., Lee, C., Hui, C., Kwan, H. K., & Wu, L. Z. (2013). Idiosyncratic deals and employee
outcomes: The mediating roles of social exchange and self-enhancement and the
moderating role of individualism. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(5), 832–840.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032571
Liu, X., & Yu, K. (2019). Emotional stability and citizenship fatigue: The role of emotional
exhaustion and job stressors. Personality and Individual Differences, 139, 254–262.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.11.033
119

Low, L. P., Chien, W. T., Lam, L. W., & Wong, K. K. Y. (2017). A qualitative study protocol of
ageing carers’ caregiving experiences and their planning for continuation of care for their
immediate family members with intellectual disability. BMC Geriatrics, 17, Article 81.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-017-0473-9
Lu, L., Kao, S.-F., Chang, T.-T., Wu, H.-P., & Cooper, C. L. (2008). Work/family demands,
work flexibility, work/family conflict, and their consequences at work: A national
probability sample in Taiwan. International Journal of Stress Management, 15(1), 1–21.
https://doi.org/10.1037/1072-5245.15.1.1
Luk, D. M., & Shaffer, M. A. (2005). Work and family domain stressors and support: Within-
and cross-domain influences on work-family conflict. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 78(4), 489–508. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317905X26741
Lurtz, M., Tharp, D., Mielitz, K., Kitces, M., & Ammerman, D. (2020). Decomposing the gender
divorce gap among personal financial planners. Journal of Family and Economic Issues,
41(1), 19–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10834-019-09655-x
Luthans, F., & Youssef, C. M. (2007). Emerging positive organizational behavior. Journal of
Management, 33(3), 321–349. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307300814
Marshall, A., Dyrbye, L., Shanafelt, T., Sinsky, C., Satele, D., Trockel, M., Tutty, M., & West,
C. (2020). Disparities in burnout and satisfaction with work–life integration in U.S.
physicians by gender and practice setting. Academic Medicine, 95(9), 1435–1443.
https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000003521
Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. P. (2008). Early predictors of job burnout and engagement. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 93(3), 498–512. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.3.498
120

Matthews, R., Swody, C., & Barnes‐Farrell, J. (2012). Work hours and work–family conflict:
The double‐edged sword of involvement in work and family. Stress and Health, 28(3),
234–247. https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.1431
Mazziotta, A., Mummendey, A., & Wright, S. C. (2011). Vicarious intergroup contact effects:
Applying social-cognitive theory to intergroup contact research. Group Processes &
Intergroup Relations, 14(2), 255–274. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430210390533
McMillan, H., Morris, M., & Atchley, E. (2011). Constructs of the work/life interface: A
synthesis of the literature and introduction of the concept of work/life harmony. Human
Resource Development Review, 10(1), 6–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484310384958
McNall, L. A., Masuda, A. D., & Nicklin, J. M. (2009). Flexible work arrangements, job
satisfaction, and turnover intentions: The mediating role of work-to-family enrichment.
The Journal of Psychology, 144(1), 61–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980903356073
McNulty, Y., Lauring, J., Jonasson, C., & Selmer, J. (2019). Highway to hell? Managing
expatriates in crisis. Journal of Global Mobility, 7(2), 157–180.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JGM-10-2018-0054
Mensah, A., & Adjei, N. (2020). Work-life balance and self-reported health among working
adults in Europe: A gender and welfare state regime comparative analysis. BMC Public
Health, 20(1), Article 1052. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-09139-w
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Meyskens, M., Robb-Post, C., Stamp, J. A., Carsrud, A. L., & Reynolds, P. D. (2010). Social
ventures from a resource–based perspective: An exploratory study assessing global
Ashoka fellows. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(4), 661–680.
121

Michel, J. S., Kotrba, L. M., Mitchelson, J. K., Clark, M. A., & Baltes, B. B. (2011). Antecedents
of work-family conflict: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
32(5), 689–725. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.695
Mills, J., Bonner, A., & Francis, K. (2006). The development of constructivist grounded theory.
International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(1), 25–35.
https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690600500103
Minnotte, K. L., Minnotte, M. C., & Bonstrom, J. (2015). Work–family conflicts and marital
satisfaction among US workers: Does stress amplification matter? Journal of Family and
Economic Issues, 36(1), 21–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10834-014-9420-5
Mitchell, T. R., Hopper, H., Daniels, D., George-Falvy, J., & James, L. R. (1994). Predicting
self-efficacy and performance during skill acquisition. Journal of Applied Psychology,
79, 506–517. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.79.4.506
Modaresnezhad, M., Andrews, M. C., Mesmer‐Magnus, J., Viswesvaran, C., & Deshpande, S.
(2021). Anxiety, job satisfaction, supervisor support and turnover intentions of mid‐
career nurses: A structural equation model analysis. Journal of Nursing Management,
29(5), 931–942. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.13229
Momeni, N. (2009). The relation between managers’ emotional intelligence and the
organizational climate they create. Public Personnel Management, 38(2), 35–48.
https://doi.org/10.1177/009102600903800203
Morganson, V. J., Litano, M. L., & O’Neill, S. K. (2014). Promoting work–family balance
through positive psychology: A practical review of the literature. The Psychologist-
Manager Journal, 17(4), 221.
122

Mortan, R. A., Ripoll, P., Carvalho, C., & Bernal, M. C. (2014). Effects of emotional intelligence
on entrepreneurial intention and self-efficacy. Journal of Work and Organizational
Psychology, 30(3), 97–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rpto.2014.11.004
Mulki, J. P., Jaramillo, J. F., & Locander, W. B. (2009). Critical role of leadership on ethical
climate and salesperson behaviors. Journal of Business Ethics, 86(2), 125–141.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9839-4
Myers, C. G. (2018). Coactive vicarious learning: Toward a relational theory of vicarious
learning in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 43(4), 610–634.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2016.0202
Myrtveit, I., Jez, V., & Johansen, V. (2014). The effect of mindfulness training on employees in
a dynamic organizational setting. International Journal of Multidisciplinarity in Business
and Science, 2(2), 13.
Nambisan, S., & Baron, R. A. (2013). Entrepreneurship in innovation ecosystems:
Entrepreneurs’ self-regulatory processes and their implications for new venture success.
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37(5), 1071–1097. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-
6520.2012.00519.x
Neal, M., Weeks, G., & DeBattista, J. (2014). Locus of control: A construct that warrants more
consideration in the practice of couple therapy. The Family Journal, 22(2), 141–147.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1066480713515160
Nesbit, P. (2012). The role of self-reflection, emotional management of feedback, and self-
regulation processes in self-directed leadership development. Human Resource
Development Review, 11(2), 203–226. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484312439196
123

Neyland, J. (2020). Love or money: The effect of CEO divorce on firm risk and compensation.
Journal of Corporate Finance, 60. Article 101507.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2019.101507
Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2014). Embeddedness and well-being in the United States and
Singapore: The mediating effects of work-to-family and family-to-work conflict. Journal
of Occupational Health Psychology, 19(3), 360–375. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036922
Nikandrou, I., Panayotopoulou, L., & Apospori, E. (2008). The impact of individual and
organizational characteristics on work-family conflict and career outcomes. Journal of
Managerial Psychology, 23(5), 576–598. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940810884540
Nilsson, H., & Kazemi, A. (2016). Reconciling and thematizing definitions of mindfulness: The
big five of mindfulness. Review of General Psychology, 20(2), 183–193.
https://doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000074
Nohe, C., Meier, L. L., Sonntag, K., & Michel, A. (2015). The chicken or the egg? A meta-
analysis of panel studies of the relationship between work-family conflict and strain. The
Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(2), 522–536. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038012
Ollier‐Malaterre, A., Haar, J. M., Sunyer, A., & Russo, M. (2020). Supportive organizations,
work–family enrichment, and job burnout in low and high humane orientation cultures.
Applied Psychology, 69(4), 1215–1247. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12217
Othman, N., & Tengku Muda, T. N. A. A. (2017). Emotional intelligence towards
entrepreneurial career choice behaviours. Education & Training, 60(9), 953–970.
https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-07-2017-0098
Ozyilmaz, A., Erdogan, B., & Karaeminogullari, A. (2018). Trust in organization as a moderator
of the relationship between self‐efficacy and workplace outcomes: A social cognitive
124

theory‐based examination. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology,
91(1), 181–204. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12189
Pajares, F. (2008). Motivational role of self-efficacy beliefs in self-regulated learning. In D. H.
Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory,
research, and application (pp. 111–139). Routledge.
Park, S., & Kim, E. (2019). Organizational culture, leaders’ vision of talent, and HR functions on
career changers’ commitment: The moderating effect of training in South Korea. Asia
Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 57(3), 345–368. https://doi.org/10.1111/1744-
7941.12192
Patton, M. (1997). Utilization-focused evaluation: The new century text (3rd ed.) Sage.
Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Sage
Pattusamy, M., & Jacob, J. (2017). A test of Greenhaus and Allen (2011) Model on work-family
balance. Current Psychology, 36(2), 193–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-015-9400-
4
Pedersen, D. E., & Minnotte, K. L. (2012). Self- and spouse-reported work-family conflict and
dual-earners’ job satisfaction. Marriage & Family Review, 48(3), 272–292.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01494929.2012.665015
Petrides, K. V., & Furnham, A. (2000). On the dimensional structure of emotional intelligence.
Personality and Individual Differences, 29(2), 313–320. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-
8869(99)00195-6
Pleck, J. H. (1977). The work-family role system. Social Problems, 24(4), 417–427.
https://doi.org/10.2307/800135
125

Pnina, R. (2009). The differences in role division between partners in long-term marriages and
their well-being. Journal of Family Social Work, 12(1), 44–55.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10522150802667106
Pruitt, I. T., & McCollum, E. E. (2010). Voices of experienced meditators: The impact of
meditation practice on intimate relationships. Contemporary Family Therapy, 32(2), 135–
154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10591-009-9112-8
Qureshi, H., Lambert, E. G., & Frank, J. (2019). When domains spill over: The relationships of
work–family conflict with Indian police affective and continuance commitment.
International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 63(14), 2501–
2525. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X19846347
Rahim, A. (1996). Stress, strain, and their moderators: An empirical comparison of entrepreneurs
and managers. Journal of Small Business Management, 34(1), 46–58.
Reich, J. A. (2021). Power, positionality, and the ethic of care in qualitative research. Qualitative
Sociology, 44(4), 575–581. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11133-021-09500-4
Rhee, K. S., & White, R. J. (2007). The emotional intelligence of entrepreneurs. Journal of Small
Business and Entrepreneurship, 20(4), 409–425.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08276331.2007.10593408
Riggio, H. R., Weiser, D. A., Valenzuela, A. M., Lui, P. P., Montes, R., & Heuer, J. (2013). Self-
efficacy in romantic relationships: Prediction of relationship attitudes and outcomes. The
Journal of Social Psychology, 153(6), 629–650.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2013.801826
Rodgers, C. (1992). The flexible workplace: What have we learned? Human Resource
Management, 31(3), 183–199
126

Ross, R., Zeller, R., Srisaeng, P., Yimmee, S., Somchid, S., & Sawatphanit, W. (2005).
Depression, stress, emotional support, and self-esteem among baccalaureate nursing
students in Thailand. International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship, 2(1), 25–
Article 25. https://doi.org/10.2202/1548-923X.1165
Rozuel, C. (2011). The moral threat of compartmentalization: Self, roles and responsibility.
Journal of Business Ethics, 102(4), 685–697. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0839-4
Ryon, H. S., & Gleason, M. E. J. (2014). The role of locus of control in daily life. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40(1), 121–131.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167213507087
Satir, V., & Bitter, J. (1991). The therapist and family therapy: Satir’s human validation process
model. Family Therapy and Counseling, 13-45.
Saxbe, D., & Repetti, R. L. (2010). For better or worse? Coregulation of couples’ cortisol levels
and mood states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(1), 92–103.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016959
Schaefer, M. B., Abrams, S. S., Kurpis, M., Abrams, M., & Abrams, C. (2020). Making the
unusual usual:” Students’ perspectives and experiences of learning at home during the
COVID-19 pandemic. Middle Grades Review, 6(2), n2.
Schaufeli, W. B., Taris, T. W., & Van Rhenen, W. (2008). Workaholism, burnout, and work
engagement: Three of a kind or three different kinds of employee well‐being? Applied
Psychology, 57(2), 173–203. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2007.00285.x
Schein, E. H. (2006). From brainwashing to organizational therapy: A conceptual and empirical
journey in search of “systemic” health and a general model of change dynamics. A drama
127

in five acts. Organization Studies, 27(2), 287-301.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840606061831
Schermuly, C. C., Wach, D., Kirschbaum, C., & Wegge, J. (2021). Coaching of insolvent
entrepreneurs and the change in coping resources, health, and cognitive performance.
Applied Psychology, 70(2), 556–574. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12244
Schimmenti, A., Musetti, A., Costanzo, A., Terrone, G., Maganuco, N. R., Aglieri Rinella, C., &
Gervasi, A. M. (2019). The unfabulous four: Maladaptive personality functioning,
insecure attachment, dissociative experiences, and problematic internet use among young
adults. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 19(2), 447–461.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-019-00079-0
Schjoedt, L. (2020). Exploring differences between novice and repeat entrepreneurs: does stress
mediate the effects of work-and-family conflict on entrepreneurs’ satisfaction? Small
Business Economics, 56(4), 1251–1272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-019-00289-9
Schjoedt, L., & Shaver, K. G. (2012). Development and validation of a locus of control scale for
the entrepreneurship domain. Small Business Economics, 39(3), 713–726.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-011-9357-0
Schlegel, G. (2017). Achieve work-life balance. Chemical Engineering Progress, 113(3), 52.
Schoel, C., Bluemke, M., Mueller, P., & Stahlberg, D. (2011). When autocratic leaders become
an option-Uncertainty and self-esteem predict implicit leadership preferences. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 101(3), 521–540. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023393
Shockley, K. M., & Singla, N. (2011). Reconsidering work-family interactions and satisfaction:
A meta-analysis. Journal of Management, 37(3), 861–886.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310394864
128

Soegoto, E. S. (2018). Effective enterprise communication and learning attitude in business
performance: A case study on SMEs. European Research Studies, 21(4), 55–68.
Solomon, B. C., & Jackson, J. J. (2014). The long reach of one’s spouse: Spouses’ personality
influences occupational success. Psychological Science, 25(12), 2189–2198.
St. Arnaud, L., & Giguère, É. (2018). Women entrepreneurs, individual and collective work–
family interface strategies and emancipation. International Journal of Gender and
Entrepreneurship, 10(3), 198–223. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJGE-09-2017-0058
Steiner, R. S., & Krings, F. (2016). How was your day, Darling? A literature review of positive
and negative crossover at the work-family interface in couples. European Psychologist,
21(4), 296–315. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000275
Stiff, J. B., Dillard, J. P., Somera, L., Kim, H., & Sleight, C. (1988). Empathy, communication,
and prosocial behavior. Communication Monographs, 55(2), 198–213.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03637758809376166
Sumer, H. C., & Knight, P. A. (2001). How do people with different attachment styles balance
work and family? A Personality perspective on work-family linkage. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 86(4), 653–663. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.4.653
Sy, T., Côté, S., & Saavedra, R. (2005). The contagious leader: Impact of the leader’s mood on
the mood of group members, group affective tone, and group processes. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 90(2), 295–305. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.2.295
Symon, G., Cassell, C., & Johnson, P. (2018). Evaluative practices in qualitative management
research: A critical review. International Journal of Management Reviews: IJMR, 20(1),
134–154. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12120
129

Szpitalak, M., & Polczyk, R. (2015). Reinforced self-affirmation as a method for reducing the
eyewitness misinformation effect. Psychology, Crime & Law, 21(10), 911–938.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2015.1077243
Tang, G., Kwan, H. K., Zhang, D., & Zhu, Z. (2016). Work-family effects of servant leadership:
The roles of emotional exhaustion and personal learning. Journal of Business Ethics,
137(2), 285–297. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2559-7
ten Brummelhuis, L. L., & Bakker, A. B. (2012). A resource perspective on the work-home
interface: The work-home resources model. The American psychologist, 67(7), 545–556.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027974
Teymouri, Z., Mojtabaei, M., & Rezazadeh, S. M. R. (2020). The effectiveness of emotionally
focused couple therapy on emotion regulation, anger rumination, and marital intimacy in
women affected by spouse infidelity. Caspian Journal of Health Research, 5(4), 78–82.
https://doi.org/10.52547/cjhr.5.4.78
Thomas, L. T., & Ganster, D. C. (1995). Impact of family-supportive work variables on work-
family conflict and strain: A control perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80(1),
6–15. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.80.1.6
Tu, Y., & Lu, X. (2016). Work-to-life spillover effect of leader–member exchange in groups:
The moderating role of group power distance and employee political skill. Journal of
Happiness Studies, 17(5), 1873–1889.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases: Biases
in judgments reveal some heuristics of thinking under uncertainty. Science, 185(4157),
1124-1131.
130

Unger, D., Niessen, C., Sonnentag, S., & Neff, A. (2014). A question of time: Daily time
allocation between work and private life. Journal of Occupational and Organizational
Psychology, 87(1), 158–176. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12045
Ustrov, Y., Valverde, M., & Ryan, G. (2016). Insights into emotional contagion and its effects at
the hotel front desk. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,
28(10), 2285–2309. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-08-2014-0378
Van Auken, H., & Werbel, J. (2006). Family dynamic and family business financial
performance: Spousal commitment. Family Business Review, 19(1), 49–63.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-6248.2006.00059.x
van der Lippe, T., & Lippényi, Z. (2020). Beyond formal access: Organizational context,
working from home, and work–family conflict of men and women in European
workplaces. Social Indicators Research, 151(2), 383–402.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-1993-1
van Steenbergen, E. F., Kluwer, E. S., & Karney, B. R. (2014). Work-family enrichment, work-
family conflict, and marital satisfaction: A dyadic analysis. Journal of Occupational
Health Psychology, 19(2), 182–194. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036011
Vasileiou, K., Barnett, J., Thorpe, S., & Young, T. (2018). Characterising and justifying sample
size sufficiency in interview-based studies: Systematic analysis of qualitative health
research over a 15-year period. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18(1), 148–148.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0594-7
Villani, D., Caputo, M., Balzarotti, S., & Riva, G. (2017). Enhancing self-efficacy through a
blended training: A pilot study with basketball players. International Journal of Sport
131

and Exercise Psychology, 15(2), 160–175.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2015.1079921
Vohs, K. D., Finkenauer, C., & Baumeister, R. F. (2011). The sum of friends’ and lovers’ self-
control scores predicts relationship quality. Social Psychological and Personality
Science, 2(2), 138–145. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550610385710
Volery, T., Müller, S., Oser, F., Naepflin, C., & del Rey, N. (2013). The impact of
entrepreneurship education on human capital at upper‐secondary level. Journal of Small
Business Management, 51(3), 429–446. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12020
Voydanoff, P. (2004). The effects of work demands and resources on work-to-family conflict
and facilitation. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66(2), 398–412.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2004.00028.x
Voydanoff, P. (2005a). Consequences of boundary-spanning demands and resources for work-to-
family conflict and perceived stress. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 10(4),
491–503. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.10.4.491
Voydanoff, P. (2005b). Social integration, work-family conflict and facilitation, and job and
marital quality. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(3), 666–679.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2005.00161.x
Waite, J., Poland, F., & Charlesworth, G. (2019). Facilitators and barriers to co‐research by
people with dementia and academic researchers: Findings from a qualitative study.
Health Expectations: An International Journal of Public Participation in Health Care
and Health Policy. 22(4), 761–771. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.12891
Wang, I.-A., Tsai, H.-Y., Lee, M.-H., & Ko, R.-C. (2021). The effect of work-family conflict on
emotional exhaustion and job performance among service workers: The cross-level
132

moderating effects of organizational reward and caring. International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 32(14), 3112–3133.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2019.1651373
Wang, Z., Cai, S., Liu, M., Liu, D., & Meng, L. (2020). The effects of self-reflection on
individual intellectual capital. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 21(6), 1107–1124.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-03-2019-0043
Werbel, J. D., & Danes, S. M. (2010). Work family conflict in new business ventures: The
moderating effects of spousal commitment to the new business venture. Journal of Small
Business Management, 48(3), 421–440. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-
627X.2010.00301.x
Wessels, I., Rueß, J., Jenßen, L., Gess, C., & Deicke, W. (2018). Beyond cognition: Experts’
views on affective-motivational research dispositions in the social sciences. Frontiers in
Psychology, 9, Article 1300. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01300
Westman, M., & Etzion, D. (2005). The crossover of work-family conflict from one spouse to
the other. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 35(9), 1936–1957.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2005.tb02203.x
Wilhelmsen, M., Lillevoll, K., Risør, M. B., Høifødt, R., Johansen, M.-L., Waterloo, K.,
Eisemann, M., & Kolstrup, N. (2013). Motivation to persist with internet-based cognitive
behavioural treatment using blended care: A qualitative study. BMC Psychiatry, 13(1),
296. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-244X-13-296
Williams, J., Berdahl, J., & Vandello, J. (2016). Beyond work-life “integration.” Annual Review
of Psychology, 67(1), 515–539. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-122414-033710
133

Williams, M. (2007). Building genuine trust through interpersonal emotion management: A
threat regulation model of trust and collaboration across boundaries. Academy of
Management Review, 32(2), 595–621. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2007.24351867
Williams, M. (2008). An orchestra of soloists? Sociology, 42(5), 1023–1028.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038508094577
Witham, G. (2014). Editorial: The peer-review process and the boundaries of “valid” qualitative
research - “where are the three themes?” Journal of Clinical Nursing, 23(9-10), 1173–
1174. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.12536
Wojdylo, K., Baumann, N., Fischbach, L., & Engeser, S. (2014). Live to work or love to work:
Work craving and work engagement. PloS One, 9(10), Article e106379.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0106379
Wolfram, H. J., & Gratton, L. (2014). Spillover between work and home, role importance and
life satisfaction. British Journal of Management, 25(1), 77–90.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2012.00833.x
Wood, S., & de Menezes, L. M. (2011). High involvement management, high-performance work
systems and well-being. The International Journal of Human Resource Management,
22(7), 1586–1610, DOI: 10.1080/09585192.2011.561967
Wu, C., Kuo, C., Lin, C., Hu, W., Wu, C., & Cheng, S. (2020). How does benevolent leadership
lead to work–family enrichment? The mediating role of positive group affective tone.
Stress and Health, 36(4), 496–506. https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.2950
Wurtz, O. (2018). Expatriation, alcohol and drugs: antecedents and consequences of substance
use in expatriation. Journal of Global Mobility, 6(3/4), 316–334.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JGM-08-2017-0035
134

Yadav, A., Pandita, D., & Singh, S. (2022). Work-life integration, job contentment, employee
engagement and its impact on organizational effectiveness: A systematic literature
review. Industrial and Commercial Training, 54(3), 509–527.
https://doi.org/10.1108/ICT-12-2021-0083
Yang, S., Liu, D., Liu, H., Zhang, J., & Duan, Z. (2017). Relationship of work-family conflict,
self-reported social support and job satisfaction to burnout syndrome among medical
workers in southwest China: A cross-sectional study. PLoS One, 12(2), Article e0171679.
Zagenczyk, T. J., Powell, E. E., & Scott, K. L. (2020). How Exhausting!? Emotion Crossover in
Organizational Social Networks. Journal of Management Studies, 57(8), 1589–1609.
https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12557
Zampetakis, L. A., Kafetsios, K., Lerakis, M., & Moustakis, V. S. (2017). An emotional
experience of entrepreneurship: Self-construal, emotion regulation, and expressions to
anticipatory emotions. Journal of Career Development, 44(2), 144–158.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0894845316640898
Zhou, Y., Zhao, W., & Fan, X. (2020). Going on or going home? The impact of new venture
creation progress on work-to-family conflict. Management Decision, 58(6), 1210–1236.
https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-04-2017-0419
Zohar, D., & Luria, G. (2005). A multilevel model of safety climate: Cross-level relationships
between organization and group-level climates. The Journal of Applied Psychology,
90(4), 616–628. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.4.616

135

Appendix A: Script
I want to thank you for taking time out of your schedule to meet with me and agreeing to
participate in my study by answering some questions. This interview will take about 45 minutes,
although we have allocated an hour in case we need extra time.
I am currently enrolled in a doctoral program at USC and am conducting a study on the
bi-directional impact that work and relationship stress causes entrepreneurs and executives. I am
not here as an employee of this organization or to make a professional assessment or judgment of
your performance as a leader. I would like to emphasize that today I am only here as a researcher
collecting data for my study. The information you share with me will be placed into my study as
part of the data collection. This interview is completely confidential, and your name will not be
disclosed to anyone or anywhere outside the scope of this study and will be known only to me
specifically for this data collection. While I may use a direct quote from you in my study, I will
not provide your name specifically and will make the best effort possible to remove any
potentially identifying information. I will gladly provide you with a copy of my final product
upon request.
Your participation is entirely voluntary. You may skip any questions you don’t want to
answer, and you may stop this interview at any time. During the interview, I will be using a
recording device to help me capture all of your responses accurately and completely. This
recording will not be shared with anyone outside the scope of this project. If you would like me
to stop recording at any point, I will do so. The recording will be transferred to my password-
protected files on a cloud file storage account and will be deleted from the recording device
immediately upon transfer. I will be using the Zoom embedded transcription to transcribe the
recording and all files will be returned to me upon finalization of the transcription. The recording
136

and all other data will then be destroyed after 3 years from the date my dissertation defense is
approved.
With that, do you have any questions about the study before we get started? If not, please
review and keep the information sheet.
I would like your permission to begin the interview. May I also have your permission to
record this conversation? Thank you.
Interview Questions
1. What is your gender identity, age, and ethnicity?
2. Do you currently have or have had children or dependents you care for and provide
for in the home? Age and how many?
3. Does your partner work outside of the home? If so, what is their job or role and
employment status (full-time, part-time, temporary or entrepreneur)?
4. Tell me about a time when your work positively impacted your relationship.
5. Can you think of a time when you were most happy at work and in your relationship?
Tell me about that time. What made that time happy?
6. Tell me what issues influence your work to feel the most stressful. How or why?
7. What are some behaviors or strategies that you employ to prevent or mitigate your
relationship stress from spilling over into your work or organization?
8. What formal policies (i.e., work from home, paid sabbatical) and aspects of
organizational culture influence your life and relationship satisfaction? Can you walk
me through a couple examples of work policies or aspects of work culture that either
helped or hurt?
137

9. When you’re going through a stressful time at work, how or what do you think and
feel about your relationship? What do you want or need from your partner?
10. How, if at all, does your partner’s behavior mitigate or reduce the negative impact of
your work stress to your relationship? Give me an example. If not, how or why not?
11. Does your partner influence your stress levels that impact your work? If so, what and
how is your work or organization impacted?
12. What relationship issues do you feel impact your career or job the most and how?
Can you give me some examples from different points in your relationship?
13. Walk me through a time that your work may have negatively impacted your
relationship.
14. When you’re feeling dissatisfied in your relationship, how or what do you think and
feel about your career? Can you give me an example?
15. What do you wish your partner knew about you and your career that might have a
positive impact on how you view your relationship?
16. What are your top five core values? Prioritize them in order of most importance.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Entrepreneurs and executives face high-pressure, high demand roles. These roles often conflict with their relationships and family demands. How these two domains successfully or unsuccessfully interface underscores an entrepreneur's or executive's feelings about their marriages and their work. The purpose of this study is to research the bi-directional impact of work stress to an entrepreneur or executive's relationship, and relationship stress to their work performance. This study uses qualitative interviews with entrepreneurs and executives to explore work and family spill-over challenges faced by entrepreneurs and executives, and the strategies that they, their partners, and organizations employ which enables or deteriorates their ability to successfully handle demands of their relationships and high-performance career goals. This paper looks at overarching themes from the crossover impact of stress using a social cognitive theory lens. While a number of healthy and unhealthy strategies were revealed by the entrepreneurs and executives and their partners, it also illuminated organizational practices of flexible work schedule and emotional intelligence training for psychologically safe cultures plays a critical role in supporting this demographic in work and relationships and influenced how participants felt toward their companies. These results demonstrate that an entrepreneur and executive's relationships play an important role in their work performance and satisfaction and that organizations should proactively support leaders' relationship satisfaction through practices, benefits, trainings, and work culture which will ultimately support their relationship and have a positive spill-over impact on their work performance and organizational climate.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Understanding the varied effects of leadership on employee retention in high stress work environments

PDF

Stress and burnout: a qualitative study of the influences on female leaders' decision to leave

PDF

Student loan debt and the impacts on first-generation student success

PDF

Hail to the chief: an exploration of female chief executives’ successes

PDF

Parenting during a pandemic: how stress and supports influence parental perceptions of child behaviors

PDF

Gender barriers towards women on the career path and within executive leadership

PDF

Improving the representation of female executives in a large utility provider: a modified KMO framework

PDF

Transformational leadership theory aligned-practices and social workers' well-being: an exploratory study of leadership practices in the context of stress and job burnout

PDF

Preparing for the future of work: exploring worker perceptions of the impact of automation

PDF

Social work faculty practices in writing instruction: an exploratory study

PDF

Reducing employee turnover through organizational identity

PDF

The lack of gender diversity in executive leadership ranks within higher education

PDF

The impact of COVID-19 on the wellbeing of veterinarians

PDF

Disclosure of abuse to empowerment: exploring psychological safety as a leadership tool to support women struggling with workplace performance

PDF

The integration of medicine and compassionate care: an evaluation study

PDF

Graduating with faith: the impact of family, culture, and mentorship on Latino males in a Catholic high school

PDF

Learning in the workplace: investigating perceived workload, work motivation, and choice independence in the construction industry

PDF

The impact of cultural wealth and role models on the transformation of an individual’s future self

PDF

COVID-19 pandemic: the impact on the Napa Valley wine industry workers

PDF

Managers’ roles in supporting employee engagement in Jewish nonprofit organizations

Asset Metadata

Creator Musselman, Jennifer Dawn (author)

Core Title The bi-directional impact of work-family conflict and family-work conflict on entrepreneurs, executives and organizations in high stress careers

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Educational Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2022-12

Publication Date 10/24/2022

Defense Date 08/31/2022

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag conflict,couple's therapy,emotion contagion,Family,OAI-PMH Harvest,organizational culture,psychological safety,spill-over,Work

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Seli, Helena (committee chair), Andres, Andrea (committee member), Bresnahan, Christopher (committee member)

Creator Email jdmussel@usc.edu,jen@jennifermusselman.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC112195843

Unique identifier UC112195843

Identifier etd-MusselmanJ-11280.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-MusselmanJ-11280

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Musselman, Jennifer Dawn

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20221026-usctheses-batch-988 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu