Cultural value orientations and work–family conflict : The mediating role of work and family demands

The current paper examined the associations between Schwartz's (2006) cultural value orientations and individuals' work-family conflict. Results of multilevel analyses across 19 European countries (N = 16,145) showed that the cultural value orientation of embeddedness vs. autonomy, hierarchy vs. egalitarianism, and mastery vs. harmony were related to individuals' higher levels of family-to-work conflict (FWC). Embeddedness vs. autonomy was positively related with work-to-family conflict (WFC). These results hold after controlling for both individual-level predictors of WFC and the GLOBE cultural values of in-group collectivism, gender egalitarianism, performance orientation, and power distance. Whereas gender egalitarianism was negatively related to WFC, in-group collectivism was not related to any form of work-family conflict. Also, performance orientation (PO) related to lower FWC and WFC. Further, our analysis yielded significant indirect effects of embeddedness vs. autonomy and hierarchy vs. egalitarianism on FWC via family demands (household size) and on WFC via working demands (total working hours). Implications for theory and practice are discussed.Peer reviewe

Call for Proposals for I-O Graduate Program Rankings

Are you part of an I-O graduate program that is truly excellent, but the typical ranking systems do not necessarily show that? Would you like to help I-O psychologists (current as well as those who will be entering our field in the future) develop a better understanding of the different strengths of various graduate programs? We are issuing a Call for Proposals for rankings of I-O graduate programs. This is an excellent opportunity for graduate programs to highlight the ways in which they excel, and for individual SIOP members to help contribute to our field. In this Call for Proposals, we are seeking proposals for new and unique methodologies for ranking I-O PhD and MA/MS programs that reflect the diversity of values and strengths across the field of I-O. Multiple ranking methodology submissions will be accepted for publication, resulting in multiple rankings featured in an upcoming issue of TIP. We have developed this call in consultation with the TIP editor, in response to a need for more comprehensive and updated information about graduate programs

I-O Graduate Program Rankings: Update

In the summer 2016 issue of TIP (Salter et al., 2016), we put out a Call for Proposals for updated I-O graduate program rankings. In this call, we were looking for new and unique methodologies for ranking I-O graduate programs that reflect the diversity of values and strengths across our field. We are pleased to announce we have conditionally accepted five proposals. Each of these teams will now conduct their project (which we hope all SIOP members will help with once data collection begins); we anticipate the final rankings will be published in the summer 2018 issue of TIP. Please note that the goal of this project is to make our methodologies public before data collection to reduce the likelihood of researcher degrees of freedom influencing the results. Although frequently unintentional, it is all too common for analytic decisions to be driven in part by the results that follow. Our goal is to achieve transparency in the way rankings were conducted and to present multiple methodologies, to aid students and educators in their decision making

The Results Are In! Updated Alternative I-O Graduate Program Rankings

In the summer of 2016, we issued a Call for Proposals to submit unique and innovative methodologies to rank I-O graduate programs. In response to this, many projects were proposed to us. After much hard work (and the broader SIOP community’s help), the five selected projects have been completed. Each of these five papers are included in the current issue of TIP. We believe each of these papers will be an important contribution to our field and will guide individuals in the future – as well as generate much thought and discussion about the state of our field and the programs that educate the future of IO Psychology. In particular, we hope that these rankings will result in graduate programs examining them-selves and thinking about ways they excel, as well as areas they could improve. Additionally, we hope that future undergraduate students applying to I-O programs will use these rankings, not to determine what the “best” programs are, but which programs are the best fit for them