The Impact of Work–Family Enrichment on Subjective Career Success through Job Engagement: A Case of Banking Sector

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

To survive in the current competitive era, organizations need continuous performance and development. The performance of any organization is linked with their employees’ performance. However, employees give their best when they see subjective career success in the organization. There are certain factors such as work–family enrichment (WFE) that affect employee’s subjective career success. The purpose of this research is to investigate the relationship between work–family enrichment and subjective career success through the mediating effect of work engagement. The data for this study were collected from various private banks located in a large metropolitan city through a self-administered questionnaire. The data were analyzed through the structural equation modeling (SEM) method. The results confirmed that work–family enrichment (WFE) positively affects subjective career success (SCS), and job engagement (JE) completely mediates this relationship. These findings will be helpful for banking sector policymakers to improve the subjective career success of personnel at the workplace through WFE and JE.

Related collections

Most cited references 100

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error

Claes Fornell, David Larcker (2018)

0 comments Cited 7641 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations.

Reuben M. Baron, David A Kenny (1986)

In this article, we attempt to distinguish between the properties of moderator and mediator variables at a number of levels. First, we seek to make theorists and researchers aware of the importance of not using the terms moderator and mediator interchangeably by carefully elaborating, both conceptually and strategically, the many ways in which moderators and mediators differ. We then go beyond this largely pedagogical function and delineate the conceptual and strategic implications of making use of such distinctions with regard to a wide range of phenomena, including control and stress, attitudes, and personality traits. We also provide a specific compendium of analytic procedures appropriate for making the most effective use of the moderator and mediator distinction, both separately and in terms of a broader causal system that includes both moderators and mediators.