Over the course of your Track 1 experience, you:
Identified a research topic.
Developed a problem statement.
Identified potential theoretical and practical implications for your topic.
Considered ethical implications for your identified population.
Through an iterative process, you developed and refined an early draft of sections of your research plan. You presented your research plan in the final session of the residency. For this assignment, please analyze the feedback that you received in the courseroom and the final Residency session, integrate relevant recommendations, refine your work, and complete the following sections of your Dissertation Research Plan, using the Track 1 Final Assignment Template, provided in the resources.
1.1 Research Topic
1.2 Research Problem.
2.1 Research Problem Background.
3.1 Theoretical Foundations.
3.2 Contributions to Theory.
3.3 Theoretical Implications.
3.4 Practical Implications.
4.3 Ethical Considerations
Review the Track 1 Final Assessment Scoring Guide to ensure that you address all grading criteria for this assignment. Your instructor will also use the scoring guide to provide you with feedback that can inform your current development stage of your dissertation and the areas that you should focus on between the Track 1 and Track 2 Dissertation Research Seminars. Review the Faculty Expectations discussion for any changes to due date information. Submit your assignment by Sunday, 11:59 p.m. CST, at the end of Week 5. Late submissions may result in no credit for Track 1.
Important: You must receive a minimum of 70% on this assignment AND receive a Basic, Proficient or Distinguished performance evaluation on all grading criteria in this assignment in order to pass this course.
Note: Your instructor may also use the Writing Feedback Tool to provide feedback on your writing. In the tool, click the linked resources for helpful writing information.
Track 1 Final Assignment Scoring Guide.
Track 1 Final Assignment Template.
The Writing Center – Graduate Resources.
Writing Feedback Tool.
1.1 Research Topic:
The specific topic to be studied is “How Work-To-Family Enrichment (WFE) Contributions Impact on Family Satisfaction for Both Income-Earner Couples”. This phenomenon has continued to create a restructuring of family interactions and gender roles. Studies also have continued to analyze the bilateral components of the Work-family enrichment, i.e., the work-to-family enrichment (WFE) and the family-to-work enrichment (FWE) components. The position of self-efficacy and work-life balance has furthermore been studied extensively with regards to their influence on family satisfaction (Leonce, 2020; Umrani et al., 2019). In the present analysis, researchers propose to analyze the role of WFE in the self-efficacy and satisfaction feelings of dual-earning families. The topic of this study is to examine the crucial contributors to how the household may improve their satisfaction and family experience by agreeing on workable and effective WFE outcome.
The significance of this topic to I/O psychology is to bring to the understanding that work-to-family enrichment roles has finally moved from the margins to the mainstream of industrial/organizational psychology, even in management and in organizational behavior. Furthermore, the significance of this topic continues to enhance the understanding of family outside the work environment as well as the enhancement of job performance, job satisfaction and good leadership in the workplace (Mcnall & Nicklin, 2014). Work-to-family enrichment with its effect on I/O psychology creates positive work outcomes and improves performance in the workplace which has been shown in research to be a leadership style that can enhance job satisfaction (Leonce, 2020). Subsequently, the target population of this study are male, female, managerial/non-managerial workers. While the target age group are young and matured adults between 18 years to 65 years old.
1.2 Research Problem:
In the research on Work-to-Family Enrichment (WFE) and job satisfaction of dual-income households, there have been some gaps existing variously within domains of organizational psychology, sociology, and organizational behavior (Chan et al., 2015). However, we know that the link between dual-income in households and the self-efficacy beliefs of household members has been determined by organizational psychologists to influence the work-life balance of employees (Kelliher et al., 2018). We also know that work to family enrichment occurs when involvement within the family results in the creation of a positive mood, feeling or support, or feeling of success which can help the couple to cope better, or more efficient, more confidence for both home or at work. However, we do not know how the linking causation and relationship between WFE and family satisfaction in dual households often return inconsistent findings. This analysis thereby intends to address the causes of such inconsistencies by developing a framework for empirically studying the impact of such WFE contributions in the family satisfaction elements.
2.1 Research Problem Background.
Work-family enrichment refers to the dual interaction between work and family that ensures the improvement in the quality of life in the experiences of the individual in both the family and workplace (Greenhaus & Powell, 2006). In the work-to-family enrichment component, the individual channels the experiences and benefits from the work situation into the family. These contributions may affect the satisfaction levels of the household members differently (Leonce, 2020). Depending on the cultural conditions and beliefs about the family units, the individuals in such WFE experience may experience varying degrees of satisfaction in the households (Rastogi & Chaudhary, 2018). Such varying satisfaction indices may thereby impact the attitudes and psychological readiness of individuals at the workplace.
A good number of modern family structures are dual-income earners (Chung & Lippe, 2018). As such, issues like family satisfaction and work-life balance require to be handled while respecting this new family dynamic. Compared to single income source families, the dual-income earners require work-life balance considerations for two independent-yet-interlinked lifestyles of employees (Mcnall & Nicklin 2014). The family dynamic and self-efficacies of such independent earners within the family strand may inform the new trend in workplace psychology in a continuously shifting family characteristics (Chung & Lippe, 2018). This analysis shall focus on dual earners in industrial contexts. As such, family households working in production and service organizations will serve as the target populations for this work-family enrichment study.
Analyzing the satisfaction of dual families through open communication and WFE contributions may serve to increase both individual and familial links (Rooney & Gray, 2019). Such improved links may thus allow the members of the family to open better about the cognitive and emotional aspects of both the family and workplace (Chan et al., 2015). The individuals may also improve their self-efficacy at the workplace as they will experience safety satisfaction emotions. While focusing centrally on organizational psychology, the author here intends to uncover the family-related factors that impact employee behavioral trends within the organizational pattern. The importance of WFE contribution to family satisfaction is thereby an essential base for a theoretical and empirical search for consistency-creation and theory development within the industrial/organizational psychology research paradigm (Ones, 2018).
3.1 Theoretical Foundations:
The main theoretical foundation that I/O psychologists use to study work and family relationships emanates from role theory (Chung, 2018), which focuses on how individuals in social contexts enact expectations of their roles or positions. Researchers continue to explore the new societal dynamic of increasing dual-income earners in modern families (Leonce, 2020). The theoretical foundation of this study explains the extent to which experiences of related concepts or theories usually created to draw several different aspects together (Chinn and Kramer, 2010). In this regard, the theoretical framework is less formal and typically less developed than a formal theory.
3.2 Contributions to Theory:
Contributions to theory is a process based on the theory development and advancement in existing theory with some logics and facts. With regards to my field of psychology, a framework will highlight an area which will generate abundance of knowledge and theory. As a result, the first process is to develop and identify the broad framework that addresses the specific phenomena in the new theory . In this respect, it must be comprehensive based on some specific terms as it relates to the field of I/O psychology. This study also suggests how theoretical concepts can be practically implemented in society and organizations to enhance organizational performance and validate or expand the theory through new processes (Anfara & Mertz, 2013). However, the theory will devise a method for investigating a particular topic, and this method may not have been previously used, or may have been described but not applied in detail (Chinn & Krammeer, 2014).
3.3 Theoretical Implications:
Theoretical implications that my study might have on my relevant field of interest which is I/O Psychology is enormous. However, the theory is based on logic, and so it is often believed that the anticipated outcome is more likely than just relying on a coin-like probability. It involves putting together some observations and then extracting a set of guidelines from them that regulate the activities of the subject and the energy engaged in the observations (Anfara & Mertz, 2013). More importantly, an anticipated outcome may happen and a theory will be be established, but it is still a theory until it is proven. In a nutshell, my study will have definite and expected outcome in my specialization and the theoretical implications will always be supported by a strong statistical significance and correlations of results from the research, keeping in view the shortcoming of the study.
3.4 Practical Implications:
Practical implications are basically the conclusions that one draws from one’s results and explains how the findings may be important for policy, practice, or theory (Kelliher & Boiarintseva, 2018). (. In my field of study, there are basically two practical implications that may result from the research of a particular theory. A practical implications would specifically enhance practice or will have functional applications in the field. Secondly, scholarly implications include theoretical and methodological contributions to existing bodies of knowledge and to be substantiated by evidence while the limitations be taken into account to avoid over-generalization of results . Consequently, practical implication is the reality that would occur if certain conditions are fulfilled, for example, the population being studied and professionals for whom the topic pertains (Ones, 2018).
4.3 Ethical Considerations:
Ethics is a system of moral principles. During the research process, several ethical issues must be considered in ensuring the safety of the research participants (Connelly, 2014). This is especially true in the case of human centered research designs, in which people are the focus of research and the research topic has greater than a minimal risk. Ethical Considerations can be specified as one of the most important parts of the research. Research participants should not be subjected to harm in any ways whatsoever. Respect for the dignity of research participants should be prioritized. Full consent should be obtained from the participants prior to the study. Phillips (1985) research ethics are the guidelines that are utilized to ensure that, during the complete research process, effective communication to all participants and recipients of research processes and results are ensured, that all research participants are free from harm in all its forms and formats. When obtaining informed consent as required in Standard 3.10, it must be reviewed by the IRB.
Ones, Deniz S. (2018). SAGE Handbook of Industrial, Work & Organizational Psychology: V3: Managerial Psychology and Organizational Approaches (1-4462-0723-4 978-1446- 0723-9).
Anfara V.A. & Mertz N.T. (2013). Theoretical Frameworks in Qualitative Research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Cross ref Google Scholar Find Full Text
Chan, X. W., Kalliath, T., Brough, P., Siu, O.-L., O’Driscoll, M. P., & Timms, C. (2015). Work–family enrichment and satisfaction: the mediating role of self-efficacy and work–life balance. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 27(15), 1755–1776. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2015.1075574
Chinn P.L. & Kramer M.K. (2014). Integrated Theory and Knowledge Development in Nursing, 7th edn. Elsevier Mosby, St Louis, MO. Google Scholar Find Full Text
Chung, H., & Lippe, T. V. D. (2018). Flexible Working, Work–Life Balance, and Gender Equality: Introduction. Social Indicators Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-2025-x
Connelly, Lynne M. “Ethical considerations in research studies.” MedSurg Nursing, Jan.-Feb. 2014, p. 54+. Gale Academic OneFile Accessed 9 Feb. 2020.
Greenhaus, J. H., & Powell, G. N. (2006). When Work And Family Are Allies: A Theory Of Work-Family Enrichment. Academy of Management Review, 31(1), 72–92. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2006.19379625
Kelliher, C., Richardson, J., & Boiarintseva, G. (2018). All of work? All of life? Reconceptualizing work‐life balance for the 21st century. Human Resource Management Journal, 29(2), 97–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12215