Engaged at Work and Happy at Home: A Spillover–Crossover Model

Abstract

The current diary study among 50 Spanish dual-earner couples examines whether engagement at work has an impact on own and partners’ well-being. Based on the Spillover–Crossover model, we hypothesized that individuals’ work engagement would spill over to the home domain, increasing their happiness level at the end of the day. Moreover, we predicted a crossover of happiness between the members of the couple. Participants filled in a diary booklet during five consecutive working days (N = 100 participants and N = 500 occasions). The results of multilevel analyses showed that daily work engagement has a direct effect on daily happiness. We also found that employees’ daily work engagement influenced partner’s daily happiness through employees’ daily happiness. Finally, results showed a clear bidirectional crossover of daily happiness between both members of the couple. These findings indicate that the positive effects of work engagement go beyond the work setting and beyond the employee.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. Abdel-Khalek, A. M. (2006). Measuring happiness with a single-item scale. Social Behavior and Personality, 34, 139–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bakker, A. B. (2005). Flow among music teachers and their students: The crossover of peak experiences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66, 26–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bakker, A. B. (2009). Building engagement in the workplace. In R. J. Burke & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), The peak performing organization (pp. 50–72). Oxon, UK: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2009). The crossover of work engagement between working couples: A closer look at the role of empathy. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 24, 220–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2013). The Spillover–Crossover model. In J. Grzywacz & E. Demerouti (Eds.), New frontiers in work and family research. Hove: Psychology Press (in press).

  6. Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Burke, R. (2009a). Workaholism and relationship quality: A Spillover–Crossover perspective. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 14, 23–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bakker, A. B., Schaufeli, W. B., Leiter, M. P., & Taris, T. W. (2008). Work engagement: An emerging concept in occupational health psychology. Work and Stress, 22, 187–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bakker, A. B., Westman, M., & Van Emmerik, I. J. H. (2009b). Advancements in crossover theory. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 24, 206–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bakker, A. B., & Xanthopoulou, D. (2009). The crossover of daily work engagement: Test of an actor-partner interdependence model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1562–1571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Breevaart, K., Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Hetland, J. (2012). The measurement of state work engagement: A multilevel factor analytic study. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 28, 305–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Cook, W., & Kenny, D. A. (2005). The Actor–Partner Interdependence Model: A model of bidirectional effects in developmental studies. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 29, 101–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Culbertson, S. S., Mills, M. J., & Fullagar, C. J. (2012). Work engagement and work-family facilitation: Making homes happier through positive affective spillover. Human Relations, 65, 1155–1177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Demerouti, E. (2012). The spillover and crossover of resources among partners: The role of work-self and family-self facilitation. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 17, 184–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2005). Spillover and crossover of exhaustion and life satisfaction among dual-earner parents. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 67, 266–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 542–575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Edwards, J. R., & Rothbard, N. (2000). Mechanisms linking work and family: Clarifying the relationship between work and family constructs. Academy of Management Review, 25, 178–200.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Fowler, J. H., & Christakis, N. A. (2009). Dynamic spread of happiness in a large social network: Longitudinal analysis over 20 years in the Framingham Heart Study. British Medical Journal, 7685, 338–347.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Fredrickson, B. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56, 218–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Fredrickson, B. L., & Joiner, T. (2002). Positive emotions trigger upward spirals toward emotional well-being. Psychological Science, 13, 172–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. González-Romá, V., Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Lloret, S. (2006). Burnout and work engagement: Independent factors or opposite poles? Journal of Vocational Behavior, 62, 165–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Greenhaus, J., & Powell, G. (2006). When work and family are allies: A theory of work-family enrichment. Academy of Management Review, 31, 72–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Halbesleben, J. R. B., Harvey, J., & Bolino, M. C. (2009). Too engaged? A conservation of resources view of the relationship between work engagement and work interference with family. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1452–1465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Halbesleben, J. R. B., Wheeler, A. R., & Rossi, A. M. (2012). The costs and benefits of working with one’s spouse: A two-sample examination of spousal support, work-family conflict, and emotional exhaustion in work-linked relationships. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33, 597–615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Hammer, L. B., Allen, E., & Grigsby, T. D. (1997). Work-family conflict in dual-earner couples: Within individual and crossover effects of work and family. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 50, 185–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Hatfield, E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Rapson, R. L. (1994). Emotional contagion. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Ilies, R., Keeney, J., & Scott, B. A. (2011). Work-family interpersonal capitalization: Sharing positive work events at home. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 114, 115–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Kahneman, D. (1999). Objective happiness. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology (pp. 3–25). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Kashdan, T. B., Biswas-Diener, R., & King, L. A. (2008). Reconsidering happiness: the costs of distinguishing between hedonics and eudaimonia. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 3, 219–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Kenny, D. A., & Cook, W. (1999). Partner effects in relationship research: Conceptual issues, analytic difficulties, and illustrations. Personal Relationships, 6, 433–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Cook, W. L. (2008). Dyadic data analysis. New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Kimura, M., Daibo, I., & Yogo, M. (2008). The study of emotional contagion from the perspective of interpersonal relationships. Social Behavior and Personality, 36, 27–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Kunin, T. (1955). The construction of a new type of attitude measure. Personnel Psychology, 9, 65–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Macey, W. H., & Schneider, B. (2008). The meaning of employee engagement. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 1, 3–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Mathieu, J. E., & Taylor, S. R. (2006). Clarifying conditions and decision points for meditational type inferences in organizational behaviour. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 1031–1056.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Ohly, S., Sonnentag, S., Niessen, C., & Zapf, D. (2010). Diary studies in organizational research: An introduction and some practical recommendations. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 9, 79–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Rasbash, J., Browne, W., Healy, M., Cameron, B., & Charlton, C. (2000). MLwiN (Version 1.10.006): Interactive software for multilevel analysis. Centre for Multilevel Modelling, Institute of Education, University of London.

  37. Sanz-Vergel, A. I., Rodríguez-Muñoz, A., Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2012). The daily spillover and crossover of emotional labor: Faking emotions at work and at home. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 81, 209–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Scarpello, V., & Campbell, J. P. (1983). Job satisfaction and the fit between individual and organizational rewards. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 56, 315–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 293–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2006). The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 701–716.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., González-Romá, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of burnout and engagement: A confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, 71–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. 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: An International Review, 57, 173–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Shimazu, A., Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2009). How job demands influence partners’ well-being: A test of the Spillover–Crossover model in Japan. Journal of Occupational Health, 51, 239–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. In S. Leinhardt (Ed.), Sociological methodology (pp. 290–312). Washington, DC: American Sociological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Sonnentag, S., Dormann, C., & Demerouti, E. (2010). Not all days are created equal: The concept of state work engagement. In M. P. Leiter & A. B. Bakker (Eds.), Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research (pp. 25–38). New York: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Sonnentag, S., Mojza, E. J., Binnewies, C., & Scholl, A. (2008). Being engaged at work and detached at home: A week-level study on work engagement, psychological detachment, and affect. Work and Stress, 22, 257–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. ten Brummelhuis, L., & Bakker, A. B. (2012). Staying engaged during the week: The effect of off-job activities on next day work engagement. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 17, 445–455.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Tims, M., Bakker, A. B., & Xanthopoulou, D. (2011). Do transformational leaders enhance their followers’ daily work engagement? The Leadership Quarterly, 22, 121–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Westman, M. (2001). Stress and strain crossover. Human Relations, 54, 557–591.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Westman, M., & Etzion, D. (1995). Crossover of stress, strain and resources from one spouse to another. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16, 169–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Westman, M., & Vinokur, A. (1998). Unraveling the relationship of distress levels within couples: Common stressors, emphatic reactions, or crossover via social interactions? Human Relations, 51, 137–156.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2009). Work engagement and financial returns: A diary study on the role of job and personal resources. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 82, 183–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alfredo Rodríguez-Muñoz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rodríguez-Muñoz, A., Sanz-Vergel, A.I., Demerouti, E. et al. Engaged at Work and Happy at Home: A Spillover–Crossover Model. J Happiness Stud 15, 271–283 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-013-9421-3

Download citation

Keywords

  • Work engagement
  • Happiness
  • Spillover–Crossover model
  • Diary research