European Journal of Innovation Management

Boundary integration and innovative work behavior among nursing staff

Muhammad Yasir, Abdul Majid,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Muhammad Yasir, Abdul Majid, (2018) "Boundary integration and innovative work behavior
among nursing staff", European Journal of Innovation Management, https://doi.org/10.1108/
EJIM-02-2018-0035
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-02-2018-0035
Downloaded by Mr Muhammad Yasir At 22:16 05 September 2018 (PT)

Downloaded on: 05 September 2018, At: 22:16 (PT)

References: this document contains references to 76 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by
Token:Eprints:VXQRVS7NM4WCACQSQCRJ:
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1460-1060.htm

Boundary
Boundary integration and integration
innovative work behavior among
nursing staff
Muhammad Yasir and Abdul Majid
Department of Management Sciences, Hazara University, Mansehra, Pakistan
Received 5 February 2018
Revised 9 May 2018
Accepted 20 July 2018
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of boundary integration (BI) on innovative
work behavior (IWB) of nursing staff. Furthermore, in order to understand the constructive role of BI, this
study also examines the mediating role of work-to-family enrichment (WFE) and moderating role of
Downloaded by Mr Muhammad Yasir At 22:16 05 September 2018 (PT)

co-worker and supervisor support.

Design/methodology/approach – Data were collected from 786 nurses and 144 doctors (nurse supervisors)
through self-administered questionnaires from public sector hospitals in Pakistan. Descriptive statistics,
correlation, Baron and Kenny approach (Causal steps approach), PROCESS Macro (Normal Test Theory)
developed by Hayes and hierarchical regression approaches were used to analyze the collected data that
provide several interesting results for the formulated hypotheses.
Findings – Results indicated that BI among nursing staff is positively related to doctors’ rating of innovative
behaviors. Moreover, WFE mediates the relationship of BI and IWB. Furthermore, the results also confirmed
that the relationship between BI and IWB is stronger among those nurses who frequently received support
from co-workers and supervisors.
Originality/value – Employees’ involvement in innovative work is of crucial importance for organization’s
strength, especially in health care sector. Although researchers have identified various antecedents of nurses’
IWB, however, it is still unclear how BI influences IWB. Moreover, this study focuses on another important
element of workplace support and argues that nurses who can successfully manage work and family matters
through the integration of boundaries have greater opportunities to achieve enrichment and respond more
effectively to demonstrate IWB.
Keywords Supervisor support, Innovative work behaviour, Boundary integration, Co-workers support,
Work-to-family enrichment
Paper type Research paper

Introduction
The importance of innovation becomes crucial for the organizations in contemporary business
environment ( Jansen et al., 2006). Employees’ innovative capabilities and subsequent
behaviors are the primary source for organizations to operate successfully in a highly
competitive environment (Chen and Chen, 2012). In order to cope with environmental
challenges, organizations intensely reliant on their employees’ innovative capabilities
and consequent behavior (Martinez-Conesa et al., 2017). Therefore, individual-level innovation
could be a critical and effective source of long-term survival and competitive advantages
(Shalley et al., 2004). Same is the case with health care organization due to the fact that health
care organizations are largely dependent on the creativity and innovation of their employees,
especially nursing staff (Chang and Liu, 2008). Innovativeness provides new ideas or methods
for the better solutions of newly created work-related requirements (De Jong and Den Hartog,
2010). McSherry and Douglas (2011) argued that innovation in health care organization can be
achieved through the process of doing different things or doing things differently. Moreover,
Chang and Liu (2008) and Yuan and Woodman (2010) found that IWB in the nursing
profession is a result of creativity and innovative engagement of nursing staff.
The challenges of quicker treatment response, reliable and technologically advanced
medical care and cooperation to increase patient satisfaction and increased quality of the health European Journal of Innovation
Management
care system have enforced hospital management to encourage IWB among nursing staff. In the © Emerald Publishing Limited
1460-1060
relevant literature, some efforts have been made to highlight the key organizational and DOI 10.1108/EJIM-02-2018-0035
 EJIM employees’ personal characteristics essential for IWB at workplace. Organizational level
characteristics include e.g. leadership styles (Garcia et al., 2011) organizational climate
(Sarros et al., 2008), shared and clear objectives, reflective team practices, motivation and
participation (Lansisalmi et al., 2006), structural and psychological empowerment (Knol and
Van Linge, 2009). In addition to these organizational factors, majority of studies also
investigated employees personal characteristics such as creative personality (Zhou and
Oldham, 2001), growth-need strength (Shalley et al., 2009) and social relationships (Anderson
et al., 2014; Baer, 2010). Beyond these predictors management of different life boundaries
(e.g. work and family) is considered as an important source of IWB (Tang et al., 2017). However,
the literature in the domain of health care sector is lacking to produce any evidence to provide
support for the link between proper management of work and family/non-work boundaries and
IWB. This makes the need to study BI in health care sector and the purpose of this study is to
address this need.
Nursing is among those professions where management of boundaries is considered as one
Downloaded by Mr Muhammad Yasir At 22:16 05 September 2018 (PT)

of the challenging task. The situation is even worse for the nurses working in the context of the
public sector hospitals. It has been observed that most of the nursing staff remained
unsuccessful to manage their work and non-work roles due to various work-related imperative
challenges (Chen et al., 2017). The most prominent challenges include: workload, nursing
shortage, unpredictable working hours and inflexible work schedules. De Paula Moura and
Moura (2016) found that challenges related to work environment create various work-related
psychological disturbance and imbalance between work and life domains. Therefore,
employees are making continuous efforts to achieve work–life balance by reducing the
incompatibilities between different life domains in order to achieve work-to-family enrichment
(WFE) (Michel and Clark, 2009). WFE can be achieved through the transfer of resources gain
from work domain to family domain (Greenhaus and Powell, 2006). Various studies empirically
tested the relationship between WFE and work-related outcomes e.g. effective commitment,
job satisfaction and high performance (Aryee et al., 2005; Carlson et al., 2010). There is hardly
any evidence available in the literature that presented a workable framework for IWB through
WFE. Therefore, this study focuses on the process of WFE and its potential effect on IWB.
In this regard, boundary theory provides an insight about the interplay between work
and family boundaries (Kreiner, 2006). According to Ashforth et al. (2000), boundary theory
proposed integration vs separation continuum that provides different aspects for the
management of boundaries. Self-evidently BI provide opportunities for WFE through better
management of work and family domains (Chen et al., 2017), limited empirical research, if
any, had considered how BI improve employees’ WFE. Therefore, this study attempted to
fill this gap and focuses on the point that literature needs empirical evidence that how BI
would be effective to enhance WFE. Acknowledging this gap in the literature, we attempt to
develop and empirically test a theory-based model explaining the fundamental effect of BI
on WFE and IWB among nursing staff.
In addition to BI preferences, organizations where workplace supports in the form of
supervisor and co-workers are higher offer a moderating source for handling work and
family related matters among nurses in a better way (Ghislieri et al., 2017; Russo et al., 2016).
Although BI provides foundation for IWB, on the other hand, the potential benefits of BI can
only be achieved through prevailing sympathetic and supportive culture. Support from
supervisor and co-workers provide strength for promoting IWB (Amo, 2006; Hulsheger
et al., 2009). Researchers stressed on the phenomenon that employees who successfully
manage their work and family demands are more inclined toward IWB, while culture of
workplace support strengthen this relationship more positively (Ferguson et al., 2015).
In this study, we aimed to empirically explain: how does a mechanism of BI shape IWB
among nurses of public sector hospitals? To what extent WFE mediates between BI and IWB?
To what extent supervisor support and co-worker support moderated BI and IWB link?
 In order to achieve these objectives, the study has been divided into different sections. Boundary
The second section discusses the concept of boundary theory as well as the literature on BI, integration
WFE, workplace support and IWB. The third section explains the design, participants, data
collection, validity and reliability, and overall methodology of the study. Results and
discussion are presented in the fourth and fifth section, respectively.

Literature review
BI is a mechanism through which employees prefer to enter into other life domain (e.g. family)
while working in one life domain (e.g. work) and vice versa (Ashforth et al., 2000). According to
Ashforth et al. (2000), boundary theory proposed integration vs separation continuum that
allows individuals to display different preferences for the management of work and family
demands. High integration involves that boundaries such as work and family are highly
permeable or highly flexible (Kreiner, 2006). BI is based on workplace flexibility and
permeability (Daniel and Sonnentag, 2016). Flexibility can be defined as a mechanism through
Downloaded by Mr Muhammad Yasir At 22:16 05 September 2018 (PT)

which demands of workplace can be met independently at any time or place in order to
perform the requirements originating from family domain and vice versa (Kreiner, 2006). The
boundary is flexible when an employee can easily depart from the office to meet the exigency
of a family at any time with cooperation of supervisor or co-workers. Permeability comprises
“the degree to which a role allows one to be physically located in the role’s domain but
psychologically and/or behaviorally involved in another role” (Ashforth et al., 2000, p. 474).
Permeability occurs if, for example, an individual is psychologically engaged in the matters of
work domain while meeting the requirements of the family domain.
The core emphasis of boundary theory lies in the fact that employees aggressively
maintain boundaries to manage and fulfills the work and family requirements
simultaneously. In addition, boundary theory implies that employees have different views
and preferences regarding separation and integration of life domains (work and family).
Some of them prefer to integrate both family and work domains, i.e. meet the requirements
of the family during the performance of the task at workplace or thinking about the
requirements of the workplace during the execution of family demands. While, others prefer
to separate work requirements from family, e.g., performing work tasks entirely at the
workplace and not thinking about the workplace issues at home.

Boundary integration (BI) and innovative work behavior (IWB)

BI can be defined as a mechanism through which employees prefer to enter into other life
domain (e.g. family) while working in one life domain (e.g. work) and vice versa (Ashforth et al.,
2000). This mechanism allows integration process of different domains (e.g. work and family)
for the utilization of experience and resources gain from one life domain for the betterment of
other life domains (Wayne et al., 2006). In this regard, boundary theory highlighted the
integration process of work and family domain that provides opportunities for achieving the
prosperity of the family life (Daniel and Sonnentag, 2016). Higher level of integration
opportunities increases the level of psychological satisfaction among employees and provides
more contentment toward workplace conditions. Tang et al. (2017) found that psychologically
satisfied workers are more inclined toward positive thinking and creative behaviors for the
accomplishment of the tasks at workplace. This notion is closely related to IWB.
IWB represent creation and implementation of innovative ideas to deal with the
problems at workplace for the improvement of work-related tasks (Yuan and Woodman,
2010). Nurses’ creative thinking ability increases the chances to engage in IWB through
which they are able to generate new ideas for the better performance of newly created
work-related requirements (Chang and Liu, 2008). Creativity and innovation activities of
individuals are directly related to their ability of managing family’s responsibility during
the performance of workplace activities (Tang et al., 2017). Individuals who are successfully
 EJIM managing the boundaries are more likely to create and implement new ideas during the
execution of activities at the workplace (Chang and Liu, 2008). Employee’s attitude toward
the creation and implementation of new ideas leads to IWB (Major and Lauzun, 2010). It has
been observed that individuals who have better management opportunities for the handling
of work–family interfaces are more probable to reduce conflicts and generate positive
outcomes (Daniel and Sonnentag, 2016). Mishra et al. (2017) found that positive perceptions
toward workplace conditions enhance the process of creativity and innovation at workplace.
For example, researchers observed that organizations that successfully provide a
supportive environment to their employees for the management of boundaries are in a better
position to enhance employees’ ability to be more creative and productive at workplace
(Thompson et al., 1999). Aleksic et al. (2017) also found that proper integration of boundaries
positively affects the employees’ creative thinking and innovative behavior. In line with
these arguments, we have developed the following hypothesis:
H1. BI has a positive relationship with IWB.
Downloaded by Mr Muhammad Yasir At 22:16 05 September 2018 (PT)

Boundary integration and work-to-family enrichment

Carlson et al. (2006) defined WFE as a mechanism through which employees use their
experience, skills and resources gain from the work domain in order to improve the
performance of a family domain. According to Greenhaus and Powell (2006), enrichment is a
process whereby one role enhances the quality of the other, e.g. WFE occurs when work
experience improves the quality of family life. For nursing staff, it is important to think
about BI (such as flexibility and permeability) that is not simply beneficial for hospitals,
however, the resources gained through the integration of boundaries, in turn, enriche the
nurse’s family life. Accomplishment of work tasks along with high family demands forced
employees for integration of work domain toward family domain. Nurses’ preference
regarding integration of boundaries creates an opportunity to stimulate efforts to meet the
requirements of family independently from work-related constraints (Almuhsen et al., 2017).
Greenhaus and Powell (2006) found that WFE is a result of integration of work domain
into the family domain that creates opportunities and facilities from one domain such as
work that can be utilized for another domain such as a family in order to make
improvements in the receiving domain. According to Rothbard et al. (2005), work and family
domains affect each other; through the process of BI individual can easily transfer resources
for the betterment of both domains. Halbesleben et al. (2010) are also in favor of the
argument that higher integration of work–family role facilitates the efficient use of
resources for managing boundaries. Positive outcomes that are the results of BI improved
WFE among nursing staff (Brooks and Swailes, 2002). Furthermore, nurses’ preference
regarding the transfer of positive experience gain from the workplace into the family life
results in positive outcomes (Russo and Buonocore, 2012). Burke and Singh (2014) found
that optimistic features of integrating work into family play an antecedent role of
enrichment of work–family domains among nursing staff. In line with these statements,
preference regarding integration of boundaries is considered as a powerful precondition and
foundation for the enrichment of work-to-family direction. Consequently, we formulated the
following hypothesis:
H2. BI has a positive relationship with WFE.

Work-to-family enrichment and innovative work behavior

Positive resources transfer from one domain to another domain enhances the process of WFE
(Hakanen et al., 2011). WFE is the result of successful completion of both work and family
requirements through the exchange of resources (Mishra et al., 2017). Proper management of
 work and family requirements increase the chances to pay more attention to think about new Boundary
ways to improve work-related tasks (Yuan and Woodman, 2010). Successful accomplishment integration
of work and family demands provides psychological motivation to the employees, which
enable them to think about new ways for the performance of newly created workplace tasks
(De Jong and Den Hartog, 2010).
Proper handling of family requirements increases job and psychological satisfaction
among workers. Positive perceptions toward workplace conditions provide a foundation for
creativity and innovative engagement of employees (Ford, 1996), which in turn improve
their IWB. WFE achieved through transferring of positive resources from work domain to
family domain motivate employees toward IWB. Moreover, the current study mainly
focused on prevailing working conditions of nursing profession. Nursing staff often
encounter with irregular and unpredictable working conditions that reduces their control to
manage family demands during the performance of workplace activities (Chen et al., 2015).
Nurses’ ability to manage family responsibilities during working hours increases their
Downloaded by Mr Muhammad Yasir At 22:16 05 September 2018 (PT)

satisfaction toward job and motivate them to think out of the box that make visible
improvements and innovation in their existing working domain (De Paula Moura and
Moura, 2016). In the current study, we assumed that nurses who successfully manage their
family requirements are more capable to show innovative behavior at the workplace:
H3. WFE has a positive relationship with IWB.

Mediating role of work-to-family enrichment

In support of H1–H3, we also found support for the mediation process, in which WFE
mediates between BI and IWB. In the current study, we have developed argument that how
BI process expands nurses WFE and IWB. Here, we explain the mediating role of WFE on
the relationship between BI and IWB. Since some empirical evidences obtained on the
potential mediating role of WFE (Baral and Bhargava, 2010) together with the
aforementioned support for the direct relationship of BI for WFE and IWB, there is a
strong point toward the possibility of mediation.
Addressing this phenomenon, we argued that mechanism of BI provide opportunities
based on workplace conditions for the successful management of boundaries. On the other
hand, WFE process permitting individuals to gain and transfer valuable resources for the
accomplishment of family requirements (Mishra et al., 2017). Nurses who manage their
family requirements more efficiently along with workplace demands are more satisfied with
their job and life domain (Ghislieri et al., 2017). This can lead to improve the level of
psychological satisfaction, which in turn becomes the foundation for IWB. Although,
empirical studies in the domain of WFE and innovation management highlighted the role of
WFE to organizational level outcome such as firm innovation and performance, however,
there is lack of understanding that how WFE process can encourage employees to exhibit
individual-level outcome such as IWB (Major and Lauzun, 2010).
Self-evidently, due to irregular and unpredictable working times, nurses have little
control over the working time, hence failed to meet the demands of non-work role such as
family’s responsibilities (Chen et al., 2015). Nursing profession where imperative challenges
such as workload, nursing shortage, unpredictable working hours and inflexible work
schedules constitute work-related psychological disturbance, nurses’ ability to manage the
diverse boundaries strengthens the process of WFE (Cortese et al., 2010), which contributes
toward the enhancement of their psychological satisfaction (Knol and Van Linge, 2009). We
argued that through WFE process employees gain psychological empowerment, resulting in
innovation at the workplace.
Following this proposition, WFE is anticipated to playa mediating role in BI and IWB
link. Based on boundary theory, WFE achieved through the workplace conditions such
 EJIM flexibility and permeability that provide an opportunity to successfully manage the family
demands, resulting in more concentration on the performance of workplace activities,
leading to enhanced IWB. With heightened WFE, employees are able to utilize the
workplace opportunities for the enrichment of family domain, and thereby are probable to
enhance their level of creative thinking which improve the level of innovation at workplace
(Tang et al., 2017; Mishra et al., 2017). Thus, it is rational to hypothesize that nurses’ level of
WFE has a mediating role for the relationship of BI and IWB (See Figure 1):
H4. WFE has mediating role between BI and IWB.

Moderation effect of supervisor and co-worker support

Workplace support can be defined as employees’ beliefs about instrumental and emotional
support as well as helping relationships available from supervisors and co-workers (Kossek
et al., 2011). Workplace support represents work domain resources that include support
Downloaded by Mr Muhammad Yasir At 22:16 05 September 2018 (PT)

from supervisor and co-workers (Russo et al., 2016). Workplace support facilitates the
members of the organization to navigate the work–family interfaces for positive outcomes
(Tang et al., 2014). Literature explains that workplace support facilitates nurses in two ways,
helping them for managing their job-related demands, and assists them to manage their life
domain challenges (Ghislieri et al., 2017).
Support from co-workers and supervisors counterbalance irregular working conditions
of hospitals such as extra workload and unpredictable working hours that create problems
for the nurses to manage the requirements of their families (Chen et al., 2017). Support from
co-workers and supervisors help nurses to manage work and family domain; moreover, it
also helps them to reduce job stress, psychological disturbance and dissatisfaction at
workplace (Cortese et al., 2010).
De Paula Moura and Moura (2016) found that proper management of family
requirements not only provides enrichment of individual’s family domain, it also brings
benefits for the organization. Previous literature supports this stance that workers who
successfully integrated boundaries through workplace support shown positive perception
toward effective commitment (e.g. Aryee et al., 2005), JS (e.g. Carlson et al., 2010; Jaga and
Bagraim, 2011) and IWB (Aleksic et al., 2017; Mishra et al., 2017).
Hospitals where workplace support in the form of supervisors’ support and co-workers’
support is higher facilitate nurses for better management of boundaries which in turn
motivate them to involve in creative thinking (Tsai et al., 2013). Social exchange theory
elucidates the relationship between workplace support and employees positive attitudes
toward job and increased level of commitment toward organization (Sinclair et al., 1995). In
view of social exchange theory, Sinclair et al. (1995) proved an optimistic relationship between
workplace support and employees’ positive attitudes, which in turn improve IWB (Zhang
et al., 2016). In line with these statements, we proposed that workplace support significantly
reduces nurses’ burnout, turnover intention and work stress ( Joiner and Bartram, 2004) and
provide positive feelings about work and also helpful toward innovation and creativity (Tang
et al., 2014). In line with these arguments, we have developed the following hypotheses:
H5a. BI accelerates nurses’ IWB through moderating role of supervisor support.
H5b. BI accelerates nurses’ IWB through moderating role of co-worker support (See Figure 1).

Methods
Research setting and participants
In this study, we employed a cross-sectional design to test the hypothesized model.
Registered nurses and doctors of 30 district headquarter hospitals of Pakistan participated
 Supervisor
support
Co-worker
support
Boundary
integration

Boundary Innovative
integration Work
Behavior

Work–family
enrichment
Figure 1.
Theoretical framework
Direct effect Moderating effect
Downloaded by Mr Muhammad Yasir At 22:16 05 September 2018 (PT)

in this study. Nursing registry databases of 30 district headquarter hospitals were used to
generate samples for the study. Initially, 1,800 nurses (60 from each hospital) and
180 doctors (six from each hospital) were approached. To improve the response rate,
Dillman et al. (2014) method was used for distributing the questionnaire and collection of
data. We acquired the services of five research assistants. Each questionnaire was sent to
the home addresses of the selected nurses. The questionnaire was comprised of the purpose
of research, guidelines about how to complete the questionnaire, pre-paid addressed return
envelope, researcher’s request and appreciation to the respondent for his/her participation,
as well as measures of BI, WFE, co-workers support, and supervisor support. Doctors who
are the immediate bosses were approached to rate the IWB of nurses. In the majority of
hospitals in Pakistan, nurses are supervised through doctor.
During the three-month process of data collection started from September to November
2016, selected nurses returned only 786 questionnaires. Therefore, the response rate was
44 percent. Out of received responses, only 652 were considered for analysis after matching
surveys (doctor rated IWB of nurses who had also turned in a survey). A total of 144 out of
180 doctors rated IWB of their nurses who had also turned in a survey.

Measurement
Boundary integration. The six-item scale used and formulated by Matthews and
Barnes-Farrell (2010) and Hecht and Allen (2009) was used to measure the construct of BI.
Factor analysis was performed for the items taken for the measurement of BI, loaded on one
factor that accounted for 58.67 percent of the variance. These items generated coefficient of
Cronbach’s α value of 0.83.
Work-to-family enrichment. WFE was measured through a six-item scale developed by
Hanson et al. (2006). In general, this scale measures the nurse’s feelings in respect of family life
enrichment due to the resources gained from the work domain. Factor analysis was performed
for the items taken for the measurement of WFE, loaded on one factor that accounted for
53.67 percent of the variance. These items generated coefficient of Cronbach’s α value of 0.79.
Supervisor and co-worker support. The moderating variable co-workers support was
measured through a three-item scale formulated and used by Beutell (2013). Whereas,
supervisor support was measured through three-item scale developed by Galinsky et al.
(2011). The items used for co-worker support generated coefficient of Cronbach’s α value of
0.78, while supervisor support generated coefficient of Cronbach’s α value of 0.73.
Innovative work behavior. Dependent variable IWB was measured through six-item scale
formulated and used by De Jong and Den Hartog (2010). Based on the results of factor analysis,
 EJIM all six items used for the measurement of IWB loaded on one factor that accounted for
58.26 percent of the variance. These items generated coefficient of Cronbach’s α value of 0.85.
Control variable. For better estimates of the effects of the independent and moderator
variables on the dependent variable, we controlled several factors relevant to the nursing
profession. Demographic factors were based on previous research that included job
experience, job status, age, education, marital status, number of children and working hours
as control variables.
Job experience was coded as 1 ¼ 1–5 years, 2 ¼ 6–10 years, 3 ¼ 11–15 years, 4 ¼ 16–20 years
and 5 ¼ job experience more than 20 years. Job status was coded as 0 ¼ temporary or
contractual job and 1 ¼ permanent job. Age was measured in years. Education was measured
using four dummy variables: postgraduate degree, bachelor’s degree, intermediate degree, high
school education or less. Marital status was coded as 0 ¼ married and 1 ¼ unmarried. No. of
children were coded 0 ¼ without any children or 1 ¼ one or more than one children. Working
hours were measured using the number of hours worked on a daily basis.
Downloaded by Mr Muhammad Yasir At 22:16 05 September 2018 (PT)

Data analysis and results

Descriptive statistics, correlation, and regression were used for analysis. Following Dardas
and Ahmad (2015), in this study we have used two tests such as Baron and Kenny approach
(Causal steps approach), and PROCESS Macro (Normal Test Theory) developed by Hayes to
verify the hypotheses for the mediation; whereas, multiple hierarchical regressions analyses
were performed in order to verify the moderating effect.
All measures used in the current study were self-reported, due to which the influence of
common method bias was examined by conducting Harman test. To check the discriminant
validity, Fornell and Larcker (1986) method was also followed. According to this technique,
the shared variance between the constructs is compared with AVE of each construct.
The results revealed that values of shared variance with any other constructs are lower than
the values of AVE for every construct. Hence, discriminant validity was supported.
To check the reliability of the construct, value of Cronbach’s α was used.

Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA)

In this study, we confirmed the model fit by using the technique of CFA. To test the
construct validity and evaluate the overall model fit, various indicators have been used.
The values of; χ² ¼ 1,254.45, goodness-of-fit-index (GFI) ¼ 0.91, comparative fit index
(CFI) ¼ 0.93, and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) ¼ 0.047, show the
overall model fit. The values of GFI, CFI, and RMSEA reasonably met the standard norms,
the GFI and CFI values should be 0.90 or higher (Hu and Bentler, 1999) and RMSEA value
should be 0.05 or less (Brown and Cudeck, 1992).

Common method bias (CMB) using common latent analysis (CLF)

All measures used in this study were self-reported except IWB, due to which common method
bias influence was examined by conducting Harman test. This method presumes that if
common method variance (CMV) is there then either one common factor might be accounted
for the covariance within the variables, or from the factor testing, a single factor might
emerge. All items of study constructs were loaded into exploratory factor analyses to find out
those factors that were essential to responsible for variance among variables and controlled
them in order to bring the rotation at zero level according to the Podsakoff et al. (2012)
suggestions. The results of factor analysis revealed the presence of 19 distinct factors present
Eigen value greater than one rather than a single factor. These 19 factors were accounted for
approximately 58 percent of the total variance. Furthermore, the largest first factor was
accounting for 16 percent of the variance. CMV is a counterfeit covariance shared among
 variables, which may be the result of using common method for the collection of data Boundary
(Buckley et al., 1990). Such method biases can be a serious problem and reduce the strength of integration
examining the actual phenomenon under consideration (Avolio et al., 1991; Hufnagel and
Conca, 1994). Consequently, considering Podsakoff and Organ (1986) suggestions CMV was
not a serious issue in respect of this study. Harman test have also some limitations and
considered insensitive (Podsakoff et al., 2012); a more sophisticated and refined test of CLF
needed to be utilized. The CLF analysis showed that the calculated variance (19.3 percent) was
below at threshold percentage of 50 percent. Hence, no major CMB existed in the data.

Test for discriminant validity and multicollinearity

To check the discriminant validity Fornell and Larcker (1986) method was followed.
According to this technique, the shared variance between the constructs is compared with
AVE of each construct. The results revealed that values of shared variance with any other
constructs are lower than values of AVE for every construct. Hence, discriminant validity
Downloaded by Mr Muhammad Yasir At 22:16 05 September 2018 (PT)

was supported. The constructs were also tested for multicollinearity issues in the light of
Myers (1990) suggestions. Accordingly, if the values of tolerance statistic are lower than 0.2,
largest variance inflation factor (VIF) is greater than 10, and average VIF is below than 1,
then multicollinearity issues might exist. In this study, no such issues were noted, as
tolerance statistic value was well above 0.2, all values of largest VIF were below 10, and
value of average VIF was about higher than 2. Table I shows the reliability statistics
(e.g. factor loading, α values, composite reliability and average variance extracted) of the
measurement items used to measure the constructs of the study.

Descriptive analysis
Table II shows mean, standard deviation and correlation of variables used in this study.
According to descriptive statistics, average respondent reported higher IWB. Respondent
sample means and standard deviation for WFE and supervisor support is also higher.
The average age of respondent was 32.67 years, and approximately 90 percent were
married. The results of descriptive statistics show that mean value of nurses having
children (one or more than one child) was 88 percent, and 94 percent nurses having
permanent nature of job. Table II also presents the value of r (coefficient of correlation) of
the variables. The coefficients of correlations confirmed positive and significant
associations among independent, mediator, moderator and dependent variables.
The results confirmed the relationship between BI and IWB (0.24), BI and WFE (0.39),
WFE and IWB (0.56). In support of these relationships, mediating effect can be analyzed
according with the norms recommended by Baron and Kenny (1986).

Mediation analyses
Initially, causal steps approach known as Baron and Kenny method was employed in order
to test the study hypotheses and confirm the mediation effect of WFE. Tables II and III
demonstrate the results of the mediation process.
Simple and multiple regressions were used to confirm the four conditions proposed by
Baron and Kenny (1986). The first condition was met because the results presented in
Table III shows that BI is positively related to IWB ( β ¼ 0.24, t ¼ 6.47, p o0.00). Based on
these results, we accept the study H1. The second condition was also met because BI is
positively related to WFE ( β ¼ 0.39, t ¼ 10.88, p o0.00). These results also confirmed the
study H2. The third requirement for mediation proposed by Baron and Kenny also met
because WFE is positively related to IWB ( β ¼ 0.56, t ¼ 17.14, p o0.00). On the basis of
these results, study H3 is accepted. The results of simple regressions confirm first three
steps suggested by Baron and Kenny.
 EJIM Constructs/measurement items Factor loading

IWB (α ¼ 0.85; CR ¼ 0.93; AVE ¼ 0.71)

How does this nurse……..
Pay attention to issues that are not part of his daily work? 0.882
Search out new working methods, techniques or instruments? 0.813
Find new approaches to execute tasks? 0.857
Make important organizational members enthusiastic for innovative ideas? 0.798
Attempt to convince people to support an innovative idea? 0.824
Systematically introduce innovative ideas into work practices? 0.897
BI (α ¼ 0.83; CR ¼ 0.94; AVE ¼ 0.72)
I am able to arrive and depart from work when I want in order to meet my family and my
personal life responsibilities 0.838
If something came up in my personal life, it would be all right if I arrived to work late 0.857
I am willing to take an extended lunch break so that I can deal with responsibilities relating to
Downloaded by Mr Muhammad Yasir At 22:16 05 September 2018 (PT)

my family and personal life 0.828

I am able to arrive and depart from home when I want 0.848
I receive work-related calls while I am at home 0.897
I hear from people related to my work while I am at home 0.827
WFE (α ¼ 0.79; CR ¼ 0.94; AVE ¼ 0.73)
When things went well at work, my outlook regarding my home life was improved 0.856
Being in a positive mood at work helped me to be in a positive mood at home 0.898
Being happy at work improved my spirits at home 0.862
Skills developed at work helped me in my home life 0.802
Values developed at work made me a better home member 0.829
Having a good day at work allowed me to be optimistic at home 0.872
Supervisor support (α ¼ 0.73 ; CR ¼ 0.87; AVE ¼ 0.70)
My supervisor or manager is responsive to my needs when I have family to take care of – for
example, medical appointments, meeting with child’s teacher, etc. 0.856
My supervisor or manager understanding when I talk about personal or family issues that
affect my work 0.805
I feel comfortable bringing up personal or family issues with my supervisor 0.805
Co-worker support (α ¼ 0.78; CR ¼ 0.89; AVE ¼ 0.73)
I feel I am really a part of the group of people I work with 0.823
Table I. I have the support from co-workers that I need to do a good job 0.851
Reliability statistics of I have support from co-workers that helps me to manage my work and personal or family life 0.898
measurement items Note: n ¼ 652

Table IV presents the results of multiple regression analysis, which were used to confirm the
fourth condition proposed for the confirmation of the mediating role. Model 1 illustrates the
effect of an independent variable on the dependent variable. In Model 2, the control variables
are added. Model 2 also presents the coefficients for the effect of an independent variable on
dependent variables after adding control variables. In Model 3, we added mediator into the
model. Mediation effect was captured in Model 3.
Table IV contain information showing the effect of BI → WFE → IWB. Models 1 and 2 were
used to provide the results for the effect of BI on IWB with and without control variables and
suggest that nurses who integrate boundaries are more probably to increase the level of IWB.
In both models, BI is significantly related to IWB (b ¼ 0.246** SE ¼ 0.052) and (b ¼ 0.253**
SE ¼ 0.052). Model 3 assesses the mediating role of WFE in explaining the association between
IWB and BI. After WFE is added to the model, the coefficient of BI shows insignificant effect
on IWB (b ¼ 0.597** SE ¼ 0.038) and (b ¼ 0.023 SE ¼ 0.47). Overall, these findings illustrate
that WFE fully mediates the effect of BI on IWB. Thus, H4 is fully supported.
 Downloaded by Mr Muhammad Yasir At 22:16 05 September 2018 (PT)

Variables Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

No. of children 0.88 0.31 1

Job experience 1.8 0.54 0.04 1
Job status 0.94 0.25 −0.04 −0.06 1
Age 32.67 13 0.06 0.13* 0.02 1
Marital status 0.09 0.29 −0.01 0.02 −0.03 0.02 1
Working hours 7.5 0.85 −0.03 0.03 0.14* 0.01 −0.01 1
Education level 2.2 0.74 −0.02 −0.02 −0.13* −0.01 −0.04 0.05 1
BI 3.2 0.63 0.01 0.05 −0.04 0.05 −0.07 0.02 0.04 1
WFE 3.6 0.78 0.01 0.02 −0.05 0.15* 0.04 0.03 −0.03 0.39** 1
IWB 3.5 0.86 −0.04 −0.03 −0.06 0.05 −0.02 0.01 −0.02 0.24** 0.56** 1
SS 3.7 0.53 −0.05 −0.08 −0.04 −0.10* 0.08 0.01 0.08 0.32** 0.54** 0.37** 1
CS 2.1 0.34 −0.04 −0.03 0.09 −0.11* −0.02 0.05 0.01 0.12** 0.30** 0.33** 0.36** 1
Notes: n ¼ 625. BI, boundary integration; WFE, work–family enrichment; SS, Supervisor support; CS, co-worker support; IWB, innovative work behavior. *p o0.05;
**p o0.01 (two-tailed)
Boundary
integration

Table II.
Correlations
 EJIM Normal test approach
Baron and Kenny approach simply states the occurrence of mediation and ignore the
strength and size of indirect effect (Preacher and Hayes, 2008). In the current study, we also
used normal test theory approach in order to determine the size and significance of indirect
effect of BI on IWB. Outcomes of normal test theory provide statistics for the total, direct
and indirect effect (Preacher and Hayes, 2008). Table V present the results of total, direct
and indirect effect using PROCESS Macro version of SPSS.
The results presented in Table V indicate that, BI has an insignificant direct effect
( β ¼ 0.03, t ¼ 0.63), while, outcomes Normal Test Theory i.e. (Z ¼ 4.04, p o0.00) confirmed
the indirect effect (0.36−0.03 ¼ 0.33) of BI on IWB, which also confirmed the study H4.

WFE IWB
Downloaded by Mr Muhammad Yasir At 22:16 05 September 2018 (PT)

Independent factors R2 SE β t-value Sig. R2 SE β t-value Sig.

Table III. BI 0.15 0.045 0.39 10.88 0.00 0.13 0.052 0.24 6.47 0.00
Regression with WFE WFE (Mediator) – – – – – 0.31 0.036 0.56 17.41 0.00
as mediator and IWB Notes: The regressions are performed separately between one independent, mediator and independent
as dependent variable variable: WFE, work–family enrichment and IWB, innovative work behavior

Model 1 Model 2 Model 3

b SE b SE b SE

Main independent variable

BI 0.246** (0.052) 0.253** (0.052) 0.023 (0.47)
Control variables
No. of children 0.002 (0.101) 0.001 (0.084)
Job experience 0.082 (0.078) −0.033 (0.066)
Job status −0.046 (0.127) −0.036 (0.106)
Age −0.204* (0.042) −0.213* (0.035)
Marital status 0.011 (0.111) −0.026 (0.092)
Working hours 0.005 (0.038) −0.004 (0.031)
Education level −0.032 (0.044) −0.027 (0.036)
Mediating variables
WFE 0.597** (0.038)
R2 14 22 30
RMSEA 0.05 0.04 0.047
CFI 0.97 0.96 0.93
Table IV. df 24 131 172
Mediating effect of χ 2
172.34** 612.14** 1,254.45**
WFE between Notes: WFE, work–family enrichment; IWB, innovative work behavior; CFI, comparative fit index; RMSEA,
BI and IWB root mean square error of approximation; df, degree of freedom. *p o0.01; **p o0.001 (two-tailed test)

Indirect effect
Table V. Total effect Direct effect Normal test theory
Direct and Indirect Mediation models β t p β pt β Z p
effects of BI on IWB
using SPSS version of BI → WFE → IWB 0.36 7.04 0.00 0.03 0.63 0.52 0.33 4.04 0.00
PROCESS Notes: BI, boundary integration; WFE, work–family enrichment; IWB, innovative work behavior
 Moderating analysis Boundary
To observe the moderation effect, hierarchical regression was utilized. Steps 1 and step 2 integration
used in Table VI provides information about the base model. In addition, step 3 provides
information about the moderation of supervisor support and co-worker support on the
association between BI and IWB. Table VI also presents the coefficient of the interaction
term, i.e. BI × supervisor support and BI × co-worker support, which indicates that
supervisor support and co-worker support positively affect the connection between BI and
IWB ( β ¼ 0.241, p o0.01) and ( β ¼ 0.154, p o0.01), respectively.
Furthermore, we conducted slope analysis as suggested by Aiken et al. (1991);
Figures 2 and 3 present the outcomes of slope analysis. The results presented in Table VI
and Figures 2 and 3 revealed that BI increases IWB when supervisor support and co-worker
support are high; in other words, the effect of BI on IWB is low when supervisor support
and co-worker support are not available. The results of step 3 in Table VI provided that
H5a i.e. BI accelerates nurses’ IWB through moderating role of supervisor support and
Downloaded by Mr Muhammad Yasir At 22:16 05 September 2018 (PT)

H5b i.e. BI accelerates nurses’ IWB through moderating role of co-worker support are accepted.

Discussion
This study has a primary concern to empirically test the mediation of WFE between BI and
IWB link. Furthermore, moderating role of supervisor support and co-worker support also

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3

(a) Moderating effect of supervisor support

No. of children −0.005 0.013 0.014
Job experience −0.038 −0.010 −0.003
Job status −0.071 −0.049 −0.051
Age −0.027 −0.023 −0.017
Marital status −0.004 0.004 0.007
Working hours 0.006 0.005 0.001
Education level −0.032 −0.036 −0.045
Boundary integration 0.146** 0.167**
Supervisor support 0.342** 0.389**
Boundary integration × supervisor support 0.241**
R2 0.007 0.181 0.197
Adjusted R2 0.003 0.169 0.185
ΔR2 0.007 0.173 0.027
ΔF 2.182 67.83 13.18
(b) Moderating effect of co-worker support
No. of children −0.005 0.006 0.005
Job experience −0.038 0.043 0.067
Job status −0.071 −0.048 −0.050
Age −0.027 −0.038 −0.031
Marital status −0.004 0.005 0.011
Working hours 0.006 0.002 −0.002
Education level −0.032 −0.043 −0.054
Boundary integration 0.215** 0.240**
Co-worker support 0.338** 0.337**
Boundary integration × co-worker support 0.154**
R2 0.007 0.183 0.204
Adjusted R2 0.003 0.172 0.192 Table VI.
ΔR2 0.007 0.176 0.031 Results of multiple
ΔF 2.182 70.23 18.82 hierarchical
Note: *po 0.01; **p o0.001 regressions
 EJIM 5
Low Supervisor support
4.5 High Supervisor support

Innovative work behavior

4

3.5

2.5

1.5
Downloaded by Mr Muhammad Yasir At 22:16 05 September 2018 (PT)

Figure 2.
Slope analysis
BI × SS on innovative 1
work behavior Low Boundary High Boundary
integration integration

5
Low Co-worker support
4.5
High Co-worker support
4
Innovative work behavior

3.5

2.5

1.5
Figure 3.
Slope analysis BI × CS
on innovative work 1
behavior Low Boundary High Boundary
integration integration

incorporated in the proposed model. All proposed relationships were statistically confirmed.
First, we found a direct and positive link between BI and IWB. Moreover, the positive
relationship between WFE and creativity at the workplace has also been confirmed
(Tang et al., 2017).
Second, the findings confirmed that BI positively contributes toward WFE. These findings
fall under the domain of Boundary Theory as well as the previous literature that assumes
positive relationships between boundaries management strategies (e.g. BI) and WFE (Ashforth
et al., 2000; Daniel and Sonnentag, 2016). Based on these findings, it is evident that higher
integration of boundaries reinforces the impression regarding positive outcomes for work and
family domain. According to our results, the positive effect of BI on WFE is confirmed. Third,
we found a significant relationship between WFE and IWB among nursing staff.
Fourth, results of the study confirmed the mediating role of WFE in the relationship
between BI and IWB. Finally, co-workers and supervisor support received by nurses at
 workplace moderated the relationship between BI and IWB. Our findings suggested that Boundary
level of IWB might be explained in part by the supports received by nurses from their co- integration
workers and supervisor at the workplace. These findings are consistent with the
arguments provided by the previous researchers (e.g. Cortese et al., 2010; Chen et al., 2017)
and suggest that support from supervisor and co-workers is a powerful factor that
contributes to handle the work–life conflicts, which in turn positively influence the nurses’
perception toward IWB. Based on these findings, this study provides several
contributions, from a theoretical point of view.

Theoretical contribution
The most important contribution of this study is that we have developed a theoretical model
of IWB for the health care organization in which WFE of nursing staff, co-workers support,
supervisor support and BI are important constituents. Development of this model
contributes to the theory by providing suggestions to expedite nurses IWB through WFE
Downloaded by Mr Muhammad Yasir At 22:16 05 September 2018 (PT)

which is the outcome of BI. Furthermore, this study contributes to the theory by providing
BI as a primary source for nursing staff to handle the family requirements. BI also plays a
constructive role for the management of dual responsibilities of nursing professionals; and
to counterbalance the imperative challenges such as irregular and unpredictable working
hours and inflexible work schedules.
The results of the study confirmed that BI positively contributes toward IWB.
The notion of IWB is not so simple for nursing staff especially working in public sector
hospitals in the developing countries. Various work-related imperative challenges such as
workload, nursing shortage, irregular and unpredictable working hours and inflexible work
schedules create work-related psychological disturbance for the nursing profession
(De Paula Moura and Moura, 2016), which make the process of IWB very difficult. Focusing
on the phenomenon of BI, there is a need to provide opportunities to the nursing staff for
proper management of work and family boundaries and its potential outcomes.
Researchers in the relevant field identified various outcomes which are the results of
proper management of work–family boundaries. There is hardly any evidence on the
relationship between BI and WFE. Although various strategies have focused on
the management of work and family boundaries as a valuable source to achieve WFE
(Daniel and Sonnentag, 2016), however, up till now, there is a no research available that
identifies that BI provides the basis for WFE. Therefore, the current study attempted to
explore and fill this gap and provides empirical evidence that BI is a key indicator for the
successful accomplishment of family requirements which in turn increases the chances for
enrichment process, i.e. WFE.
In addition, this study extends the scope of WFE by indicating that, WFE has strong
effect on IWB. Management of work and family domains adds significantly toward WFE
(Rothbard et al., 2005; Kreiner, 2006). Positive perception of nurses toward the BI may
results in increasing the level of positive work–family interface (Chen et al., 2017) leading to
IWB. Furthermore, the results of this study suggested that the relationship between BI and
IWB holds true for those organizations where employees are able to attain enrichment of the
family domain. This study adds to literature in a way to focus on the mediation mechanism
of WFE on BI and IWB link. Furthermore, this research is an attempt to provide in-depth
knowledge of the nursing staff and management of public sector hospitals; that how proper
management of work and family boundaries plays a positive role to achieve IWB through
WFE. Therefore, this study contributes to the existing body of knowledge by focusing on
WFE as a major outcome of BI that provides a strong basis of IWB.
Finally, we also analyzed the moderating roles of supervisor support and co-worker
support, which is a unique contribution in the context of boundary management.
Confirmation of interaction term proposed that the correlates of BI and IWB becomes
 EJIM stronger for nurses who receive support from supervisors and co-workers because
workplace support activities may be feasible to achieve BI opportunities easier than those
who have less support from their co-worker and supervisor.

Implication for nursing management

Overall, findings of the study provided significant implications for nursing management.
Importantly, this study suggests that hospital management can expedite WFE process of
the nursing staff through BI. Our findings suggest BI as a fundamental individual-level
factor necessary for WFE and IWB. Past studies suggested a direct relationship between
management of work–family boundaries and IWB. The current study not only allow
hospital management to understand the impact of BI on nurses IWB but also provides an
understanding of the mediating role of WFE and the moderating effect of supervisor and co-
worker support with respect to the connection between BI and IWB.
To engender IWB among the nurses, it is necessary to encourage their level of BI.
Downloaded by Mr Muhammad Yasir At 22:16 05 September 2018 (PT)

Moreover, this study suggests that hospital management should provide flexible and family
friendly climate and supportive culture where nurses can easily manage the role of different
life boundaries such as work and family. Specifically, our findings suggest that the
mechanism of BI increases the nurse’s psychological satisfaction level, a factor of critical
role in affecting IWB. In this regard, hospital management should encourage and support
for the integration of boundaries for nursing profession in order to increase the possibilities
for nurses to gain the benefits such as WFE which in turn not only enhances psychological
satisfaction, but also provide the basis for IWB.
Workplace support practices plays an important role for reducing the negative impact of
conflicts emerged from the work–family interactions (Ghislieri et al., 2017). Workplace
support facilitates employees to manage the role of the family domain (Leineweber et al.,
2014). Beyond these conditions, supervisor and co-worker support also provide the
foundation for the transfer of resources into family domain (Russo et al., 2016). The findings
of this study suggested that moderating effect of co-worker and supervisor support
strengthen the transformation of a positive aspect of the work–family interface into IWB.
Workplace support practices associated with organizational family friendly culture that
reduces the negative impact of conflicts emerged from the work–family interactions
(Ghislieri et al., 2017; Russo et al., 2016).
From organizations perspective, policies that contribute to decrease work–family
encounter and increase WFE and IWB are needed for employees. Especially nursing staff
meets various problems at both domains (work and family), which reduce their level of
psychological satisfaction. Health care organization should prefer to facilitate nursing staff
for proper handling of conflicts that might be a source of enhancing their WFE and IWB.
The findings suggested that those organizations who are interested in the well-being of their
employees should pay special consideration to provide possible opportunities for achieving
WFE, which in turn promote IWB.

Limitations and recommendations

This study also has some limitations. The preferences of nurses toward integration of
boundaries, which shape WFE should be longitudinally observed. Hence, single cross-
sectional study is to be considered as a limitation of this research. Second, owing to the
vulnerability of self-reported cross-sectional data to common methods variance bias,
Harman’s single factor test was used to validate CMB. Besides, according to Podsakoff et al.
(2003), collection of data at different points in time can reduce the threats of CMB. Finally,
the research data came from the nurses of public sector hospitals; therefore, the findings of
this research may not be generalizable to other employees and sectors due to industry
specific differences.
 Acknowledgments Boundary
During the conduct of this research, the authors made sure to maintain the quality and integrity integration
of research. Confidentiality and anonymity of research respondents have been maintained and
all the participants have participated in study on voluntarily basis. Furthermore, the authors
confirm that this research is independent and impartial. Besides, different international
standards and policies have also been taken into consideration for writing up process like
plagiarism, copy right, etc. There is no conflict of interest between authors.

References
Aiken, L.S., West, S.G. and Reno, R.R. (1991), Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions,
Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA.
Aleksic, D., Mihelic, K.K., Cerne, M., Cerne, M. and Skerlavaj, M. (2017), “Interactive effects of perceived
Downloaded by Mr Muhammad Yasir At 22:16 05 September 2018 (PT)

time pressure, satisfaction with work-family balance (SWFB), and Leader-Member Exchange
(LMX) on creativity”, Personnel Review, Vol. 46 No. 3, pp. 662-679.
Almuhsen, F., Alkorashy, H., Baddar, F. and Qasim, A. (2017), “Work environment characteristics as
perceived by nurses in Saudi Arabia”, International Journal of Advanced Nursing Studies, Vol. 6
No. 1, pp. 45-55.
Amo, B.W. (2006), “Employee innovation behaviour in health care: the influence from management and
colleagues”, International Nursing Review, Vol. 53 No. 3, pp. 231-237.
Anderson, N., Potocnik, K. and Zhou, J. (2014), “Innovation and creativity in organizations: a state-of-
the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework”, Journal of Management,
Vol. 40 No. 5, pp. 1297-1333.
Aryee, S., Srinivas, E.S. and Tan, H.H. (2005), “Rhythms of life: antecedents and outcomes of work-family
balance in employed parents”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 90 No. 1, pp. 132-146.
Ashforth, B.E., Kreiner, G.E. and Fugate, M. (2000), “All in a day’s work: boundaries and micro role
transitions”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 472-491.
Avolio, B.J., Yammarino, F.J. and Bass, B.M. (1991), “Identifying common methods variance with data
collected from a single source: an unresolved sticky issue”, Journal of Management, Vol. 17 No. 3,
pp. 571-587.
Baer, M. (2010), “The strength-of-weak-ties perspective on creativity: a comprehensive examination
and extension”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 95 No. 3, pp. 592-603.
Baral, R. and Bhargava, S. (2010), “Work-family enrichment as a mediator between organizational
interventions for work-life balance and job outcomes”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 25
No. 3, pp. 274-300.
Baron, R.M. and Kenny, D.A. (1986), “The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social
psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations”, Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 51 No. 6, pp. 1173-1182.
Beutell, N.J. (2013), “Generational differences in work-family conflict and synergy”, International
Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, Vol. 10 No. 6, pp. 2544-2559.
Brooks, I. and Swailes, S. (2002), “Analysis of the relationship between nurse influences over flexible
working and commitment to nursing”, Journal of Advanced Nursing, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 117-126.
Brown, M.W. and Cudeck, R. (1992), “Alternative ways of assessing model fit”, Sociological Methods &
Research, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 230-258.
Buckley, M.R., Cote, J.A. and Comstock, S.M. (1990), “Measurement errors in the behavioral sciences:
the case of personality/attitude research”, Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 50
No. 3, pp. 447-474.
Burke, R. and Singh, P. (2014), “Correlates of career priority and family priority among hospital-based
nursing staff”, Gender in Management: An International Journal, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 91-107.
 EJIM Carlson, D.S., Grzywacz, J.G. and Michele Kacmar, K. (2010), “The relationship of schedule flexibility
and outcomes via the work-family interface”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 25 No. 4,
pp. 330-355.
Carlson, D.S., Kacmar, K.M., Wayne, J.H. and Grzywacz, J.G. (2006), “Measuring the positive side of the
work–family interface: development and validation of a work–family enrichment scale”, Journal
of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 68 No. 1, pp. 131-164.
Chang, L.C. and Liu, C.H. (2008), “Employee empowerment, innovative behavior and job productivity of
public health nurses: a cross-sectional questionnaire survey”, International Journal of Nursing
Studies, Vol. 45 No. 1, pp. 1442-1448.
Chen, I.H., Brown, R., Bowers, B.J. and Chang, W.Y. (2015), “Work‐to‐family conflict as a mediator of the
relationship between job satisfaction and turnover intention”, Journal of Advanced Nursing,
Vol. 71 No. 10, pp. 2350-2363.
Chen, J.K. and Chen, I.S. (2012), “Creative-oriented personality, creativity improvement, and innovation
level enhancement”, Quality & Quantity, Vol. 46 No. 5, pp. 1625-1642.
Downloaded by Mr Muhammad Yasir At 22:16 05 September 2018 (PT)

Chen, S.C., Chiang, Y.H. and Huang, Y.J. (2017), “Exploring the psychological mechanisms linking
work-related factors with work–family conflict and work–family facilitation among Taiwanese
nurses”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 581-602.
Cortese, C.G., Colombo, L. and Ghislieri, C. (2010), “Determinants of nurses’ job satisfaction: the role of
work–family conflict, job demand, emotional charge and social support”, Journal of Nursing
Management, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 35-43.
Daniel, S. and Sonnentag, S. (2016), “Crossing the borders: the relationship between boundary
management, work–family enrichment and job satisfaction”, The International Journal of
Human Resource Management, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 407-426.
Dardas, L.A. and Ahmad, M.M. (2015), “For fathers raising children with autism, do coping strategies
mediate or moderate the relationship between parenting stress and quality of life?”, Research in
Developmental Disabilities, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 620-629.
De Jong, J. and Den Hartog, D. (2010), “Measuring innovative work behaviour”, Creativity and
Innovation Management, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 23-36.
De Paula Moura, E. and Moura, D.P. (2016), “The challenges of providing affordable healthcare in
emerging markets – the case of Brazil”, Journal of Management, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 33-46.
Dillman, D.A., Smyth, J.D. and Christian, L.M. (2014), 4th ed., Internet, Phone, Mail, and Mixed method
Surveys: The Tailored Design Method, John Wiley and Sons Inc., Hoboken, NJ.
Ferguson, M., Carlson, D. and Kacmar, K.M. (2015), “Flexing work boundaries: the spillover and
crossover of workplace support”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 68 No. 3, pp. 581-614.
Ford, C.M. (1996), “A theory of individual creative action in multiple social domains”, Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 1112-1142.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50.
Galinsky, E., Sakai, K. and Wigton, T. (2011), “Workplace flexibility: from research to action”, The
Future of Children, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 141-161.
Garcia, V.H., Meek, K.L. and Wilson, K.A. (2011), “Advancing innovation in health care leadership: a
collaborative experience”, Nursing Administration Quarterly, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 242-247.
Ghislieri, C., Gatti, P., Molino, M. and Cortese, C.G. (2017), “Work–family conflict and enrichment in
nurses: between job demands, perceived organizational support and work–family backlash”,
Journal of Nursing Management, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 65-75.
Greenhaus, J.H. and Powell, G.N. (2006), “When work and family are allies: a theory of work-family
enrichment”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 72-92.
Hakanen, J.J., Peeters, M.C. and Perhoniemi, R. (2011), “Enrichment processes and gain spirals at work
and at home: a 3‐year cross‐lagged panel study”, Journal of Occupational and Organizational
Psychology, Vol. 84 No. 1, pp. 8-30.
 Halbesleben, J.R., Zellars, K.L., Carlson, D.S., Perrewé, P.L. and Rotondo, D. (2010), “The moderating Boundary
effect of work-linked couple relationships and work–family integration on the spouse integration
instrumental support-emotional exhaustion relationship”, Journal of Occupational Health
Psychology, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 371-387.
Hanson, G.C., Hammer, L.B. and Colton, C.L. (2006), “Development and validation of a multidimensional
scale of perceived work-family positive spillover”, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology,
Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 249-262.
Hecht, T.D. and Allen, N.J. (2009), “A longitudinal examination of the work–non work boundary
enhanced measure of boundary flexibility for the work and family domains”, Journal of
Occupational Health Psychology, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 330-346.
Hu, L. and Bentler, P.M. (1999), “Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis:
conventional criteria versus new alternatives”, Structural Equation Modeling, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 1-55.
Hufnagel, E.M. and Conca, C. (1994), “User response data: the potential for errors and biases”,
Information Systems Research, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 48-73.
Downloaded by Mr Muhammad Yasir At 22:16 05 September 2018 (PT)

Hulsheger, U.R., Anderson, N. and Salgado, J.F. (2009), “Team-level predictors of innovation at work: a
comprehensive meta-analysis spanning three decades of research”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 94 No. 5, pp. 1128-1145.
Jaga, A. and Bagraim, J. (2011), “The relationship between work-family enrichment and work-family
satisfaction outcomes”, South African Journal of Psychology, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 52-62.
Jansen, J.J., Van Den Bosch, F.A. and Volberda, H.W. (2006), “Exploratory innovation, exploitative
innovation, and performance: effects of organizational antecedents and environmental
moderators”, Management Science, Vol. 52 No. 11, pp. 1661-1674.
Joiner, T.A. and Bartram, T. (2004), “How empowerment and social support affect Australian nurses’
work stressors”, Australian Health Review, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 56-64.
Knol, J. and Van Linge, R. (2009), “Innovative behaviour: the effect of structural and psychological
empowerment on nurses”, Journal of Advanced Nursing, Vol. 65 No. 2, pp. 359-370.
Kossek, E.E., Pichler, S., Bodner, T. and 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, Vol. 64
No. 2, pp. 289-313.
Kreiner, G.E. (2006), “Consequences of work-home segmentation or integration: a person-environment
fit perspective”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 485-507.
Lansisalmi, H., Kivimaki, M., Aalto, P. and Ruoranen, R. (2006), “Innovation in healthcare: a systematic
review of recent research”, Nursing Science Quarterly, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 66-72.
Leineweber, C., Chungkham, H.S., Westerlund, H., Tishelman, C. and Lindqvist, R. (2014), “Hospital
organizational factors influence work–family conflict in registered nurses: multilevel modeling
of a nation-wide cross-sectional survey in Sweden”, International Journal of Nursing Studies,
Vol. 51 No. 5, pp. 744-751.
McSherry, R.O.B. and Douglas, M. (2011), “Innovation in nursing practice: a means to tackling the
global challenges facing nurses, midwives and nurse leaders and managers in the future”,
Journal of Nursing Management, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 165-169.
Major, D.A. and Lauzun, H.M. (2010), “Equipping managers to assist employees in addressing work-family
conflict: applying the research literature toward innovative practice”, The Psychologist-Manager
Journal, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 69-83.
Martinez-Conesa, I., Soto-Acosta, P. and Carayannis, E.G. (2017), “On the path towards open
innovation: assessing the role of knowledge management capability and environmental
dynamism in SMEs”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 553-570.
Matthews, R.A. and Barnes-Farrell, J.L. (2010), “Development and initial evaluation of an enough:
the influence of work–family culture on benefit utilization, organizational attachment, ands
work–family conflict”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 54 No. 4, pp. 392-415.
 EJIM Michel, J.S. and Clark, M.A. (2009), “Has it been affect all along? A test of work-to-family and
family-to-work models of conflict, enrichment, and satisfaction”, Personality and Individual
Differences, Vol. 47 No. 3, pp. 163-168.
Mishra, P., Bhatnagar, J., Gupta, R. and Wadsworth, S.M. (2017), “How work–family enrichment
influence innovative work behavior: role of psychological capital and supervisory support”,
Journal of Management & Organization, pp. 1-23, doi: 10.1017/jmo.2017.23.
Myers, R.H. (1990), Classical and Modern Regression with Applications, PWS-Kent Publishing Company,
Duxbury Press, Boston, MA.
Podsakoff, P.M. and Organ, D.W. (1986), “Self-reports in organizational research: problems and
prospects”, Journal of Management, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 531-544.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2012), “Sources of method bias in social science
research and recommendations on how to control it”, Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 63 No. 1,
pp. 539-569.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases in
Downloaded by Mr Muhammad Yasir At 22:16 05 September 2018 (PT)

behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”, Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 879-903.
Preacher, K.J. and Hayes, A.F. (2008), “Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and
comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models”, Behavior Research Methods, Vol. 40
No. 3, pp. 879-891.
Rothbard, N.P., Phillips, K.W. and Dumas, T.L. (2005), “Managing multiple roles: work-family
policies and individuals’ desires for segmentation”, Organization Science, Vol. 16 No. 3,
pp. 243-258.
Russo, M. and Buonocore, F. (2012), “The relationship between work-family enrichment and nurse
turnover”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 216-236.
Russo, M., Shteigman, A. and Carmeli, A. (2016), “Workplace and family support and work–life
balance: implications for individual psychological availability and energy at work”, The Journal
of Positive Psychology, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 173-188.
Sarros, J.C., Cooper, B.K. and Santora, J.C. (2008), “Building a climate for innovation through
transformational leadership and organizational culture”, Journal of Leadership & Organizational
Studies, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 145-158.
Shalley, C.E., Gilson, L.L. and Blum, T.C. (2009), “Interactive effects of growth need strength, work
context, and job complexity on self-reported creative performance”, Academy of Management
Journal, Vol. 52 No. 3, pp. 489-505.
Shalley, C.E., Zhou, J. and Oldham, G.R. (2004), “The effects of personal and contextual
characteristics on creativity: where should we go from here?”, Journal of Management,
Vol. 30 No. 6, pp. 933-958.
Sinclair, R., Hannigan, M. and Tetrick, L. (1995), “Benefit coverage and employee attitudes: a social
exchange perspective”, in Tetrick, L.E. and Barling, J. (Eds), Changing Employment Relations,
American Psychological Association, Washington, DC, pp. 163-185.
Tang, S.W., Siu, O.L. and Cheung, F. (2014), “A study of work–family enrichment among Chinese
employees: the mediating role between work support and job satisfaction”, Applied Psychology,
Vol. 63 No. 1, pp. 130-150.
Tang, Y., Huang, X. and Wang, Y. (2017), “Good marriage at home, creativity at work: family–work
enrichment effect on workplace creativity”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 38 No. 5,
pp. 749-766.
Thompson, C.A., Beauvais, L.L. and Lyness, K.S. (1999), “When work–family benefits are not enough:
the influence of work–family culture on benefit utilization, organizational attachment, and
work–family conflict”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 54 No. 3, pp. 392-415.
Tsai, H.M., Liou, S.R., Hsiao, Y.C. and Cheng, C.Y. (2013), “The relationship of individual characteristics,
perceived worksite support and perceived creativity to clinical nurses’ innovative outcome”,
Journal of Clinical Nursing, Vol. 22 No. 17, pp. 2648-2657.
 Wayne, J.H., Randel, A.E. and Stevens, J. (2006), “The role of identity and work–family support in Boundary
work–family enrichment and its work-related consequences”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, integration
Vol. 69 No. 3, pp. 445-461.
Yuan, F. and Woodman, R.W. (2010), “Innovative behavior in the workplace: the role of
performance and image outcome expectations”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 53
No. 2, pp. 323-342.
Zhang, L., Bu, Q. and Wee, S. (2016), “Effect of perceived organizational support on employee
creativity: moderating role of job stressors”, International Journal of Stress Management, Vol. 23
No. 4, pp. 400-413.
Zhou, J. and Oldham, G.R. (2001), “Enhancing creative performance: effects of expected developmental
assessment strategies and creative personality”, The Journal of Creative Behavior, Vol. 35 No. 3,
pp. 151-167.

About the authors

Downloaded by Mr Muhammad Yasir At 22:16 05 September 2018 (PT)

Muhammad Yasir is Lecturer in Government College of Management Sciences, Mansehra, Pakistan. He

obtained MCom Degree from University of Peshawar, Pakistan. He is PhD Scholar in the Department
of Management Sciences, Hazara University, Mansehra. He is the Author of various publications in
different peer reviewed research journals. Muhammad Yasir is the corresponding author and can be
contacted at: mohammadyasirtaj@gmail.com
Dr Abdul Majid is Assistant Professor in Hazara University, Mansehra, Pakistan. He did his PhD
from University of Peshawar, Pakistan, and Post-Doctoral research from University of
Sheffield, UK. He wrote more than 40 papers in different peer reviewed research journals like
Journal of Organizational Change Management, Quality & Quantity, Management Decision, Journal
of Management Development, etc. and presented various papers in different international research
conferences like BAM. He is a Coordinator of PhD and MS program in Department of Management
Sciences, Hazara University, Pakistan.

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com