Explore the vast range of titles available.

Purpose We examine the bi-directional nature of role segmentation preferences— preferences to protect the home domain from work intrusions , and to protect the work domain from home intrusions —and hypothesize that the dimensions independently prompt individuals to manage their boundaries in ways that complement their preferences. Design and Methodological Approach In a series of three studies, we investigate whether segmentation preferences vary on two dimensions, how they reflect enactive and proactive boundary management, and their association with domain-specific satisfaction and performance. Findings In Study 1 (field design, n  = 314), we confirmed that segmentation preferences comprise two distinct dimensions, and individuals experience fewer intrusions into the domain they desired to protect. In Study 2 (experimental design, n  = 1253), we found that participants who prefer to protect their home domain are less inclined to accept jobs in scenarios where their significant other is employed in the same organization, and participants who prefer to protect their work domain are less inclined to initiate a romantic relationship in scenarios that involve a coworker. In Study 3 (field design, n  = 65), we found that individuals who prefer to protect their work or home domain report greater satisfaction with the preferred domain, and whereas the preference to protect the work domain is not associated with higher supervisor ratings of job performance, preference to protect the home domain is associated with higher significant-other ratings of non-work performance. Implications Understanding employees’ proclivities to blur boundaries can inform recruitment and selection of employees to anticipate organizational fit, diagnose sources of misfit, structure individualized policies to ameliorate employee strain, and decrease turnover costs. Originality/Value This synthesis provides a unique investigation of segmentation preference dimensions’ differential functioning and reinforces the validity of the role segmentation preferences concept.

In this dissertation, I take a social network perspective to investigate several explanatory pathways through which workplace relationships impact individual job performance. Workplace relationships, including both formal coworker relationships and informal friendships, are integral in understanding employee behavior1 because they have been linked to access to resources such as information, advice, and emotional support2. Social network researchers also recognize the potential for multiplexity, or the coexistence of multiple elements in a social relationship. For example, it is possible for someone to be both a coworker and a friend3. Although this type of overlap is common in organizational contexts 4, practically no research to date has examined the effects of these complex relations on job performance. To address this limitation, I propose and test a model predicting that multiplexity impacts job performance through two offsetting pathways: (a) resource accumulation, whereby the security, intimacy, and trust inherent in these relations increases a person’s resources, eliciting a positive association with job performance and, (b) resource depletion, whereby the increased time and attention dedicated to these relations detracts from a person’s available resources, eliciting a negative association with job performance. To test this model, data was collected from 182 employees of nine independent companies in the southeast United States. Overall, findings suggest that multiplex relationships that comprise both instrumentality and friendship are largely functional for work performance by providing a broader range of support resources, but also have significant trade-offs in the form of curtailing employees’ ability to focus on their work. 1 Mitchell, J. C. (1969). The concept and use of social networks. In J. C. Mitchell (Ed.), Social networks in urban situations (pp. 1–50). Manchester: University of Manchester Press.; Wellman, B. (1988). Structural analysis: From method and metaphor to theory and substance. In B. Wellman & S. D. Berkowitz (Eds)., Social structures: A network approach (pp. 19–61). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 2 Kram, K. E., & Isabella, L. A. (1985). Mentoring alternatives: The role of peer relationships in career development. Academy of Management Journal, 28, 110–132.; Rawlins, W. K. (1992). Friendship matters: Communication, dialectics, and the life course. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine.; Sias, P. M. (2005). Workplace relationship quality and employee information experiences. Communication Studies, 56, 375–395.; Sias, P. M., & Cahill, D. J. (1998). From coworkers to friends: The development of peer friendships in the workplace. Western Journal of Communication, 62, 273–299.; Winstead, B. A., Derlega, V. J., Montgomery, M. J., & Pilkington, C. (1995). The quality of friendships at work and job satisfaction. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 12, 199–215. 3 Gluckman, M. (1962). Les rites de passage. In D. Forde, M. Fortes, M. Gluckman, & V. W. Turner (Eds.), Essays on the ritual of social relations. Manchester: Manchester University Press.; Verbrugge, L. M. (1979). Multiplexity in adult friendships. Social Forces, 58, 1286–1309. 4 Fischer, C. S. (1982). What do we mean by ‘friend’” An inductive study. Social Network, 3, 287–306.; Gersick, C. J. G., Bartunek, J. M., & Dutton, J. E. (2000). Learning from academia: The importance of relationships in professional life. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 1026–1044.

Scholars have long claimed that teams involve complex systems of member interaction that involve both task and social elements, yet very little research has directly examined the implications of the interplay of these two elements for team member relationships specifically and for the functioning and effectiveness of teams more generally. This gap is crucial to resolve because relationships among team members often serve as the explanation for linkages among team inputs on one hand and team outcomes on the other (Ilgen, Hollenbeck, Johnson, & Jundt, 2005; McGrath, 1964). To address this gap, we draw from social network theory to propose a model, depicted in Figure 9.1, that describes how task interdependence and perceived similarity influence the nature of relationships among team Figure 9.1 Conceptual model of the antecedents and outcomes of instrumental, friendship, and multiplex network ties. members and how these relationships, in turn, influence team effectiveness by virtue of their effects on taskwork, teamwork, member attitudes and cognitions, and member well-being.