Supportive Organizations, Work–Family Enrichment, and Job Burnout in Low and High Humane Orientation Cultures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study draws on the work–family and cross‐national management literature to examine the relationships between Family‐Supportive Organizational Perceptions (FSOP), work–family enrichment, and job burnout across five countries with different cultural backgrounds: Malaysia, New Zealand, France, Italy, and Spain. Using a combined sample of 980 employees, we find support for a partial mediation model in which FSOP is positively associated with work–family enrichment, which in turn is negatively related to job burnout. Given our focus on support, we test the moderating role of the cultural value humane orientation, that is, the extent to which a society values altruism, kindness, and compassion. The five countries in our sample offer variation in their country‐level scores as determined by the GLOBE study (House et al., 2004). We found that individuals from cultures that scored higher in “as is” humane orientation (i.e., scores for actual practices) experienced lower job burnout when FSOP increased. This pattern was reversed when considering “should be” humane orientation (i.e., scores for ideal values). The implications for the work–family and the cross‐national management literature, and for practice, are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".