<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

HAL
open science

# Work passion, work-family conflict, and counterproductive work behaviors

Nicolas Gillet, Victor Noble, Guillaume Souesme, Julia

Aubouin-Bonnaventure, Rebeca da Rocha Grangeiro

► To cite this version:

Nicolas Gillet, Victor Noble, Guillaume Souesme, Julia Aubouin-Bonnaventure, Rebeca da Rocha Grangeiro. Work passion, work-family conflict, and counterproductive work behaviors. Journal of Management and Organization, 2025, 31 (6), pp.1-13. 10.1017/jmo.2025.10055. hal-05295689

HAL Id: hal-05295689

https://hal.science/hal-05295689v1

Submitted on 3 Oct 2025

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Work passion, work-family conflict,
and counterproductive work behaviors

Nicolas Gillet¹,² ID, Victor Noble¹, Guillaume Souesme³, Julia Aubouin-Bonnaventure¹ and Rebeca da Rocha Grangeiro⁴

¹QualiPsy UR 1901, Université de Tours, Tours, France; ²Institut Universitaire de France (IUF), Paris, France; ³Laboratoire de Psychologie UR 3188, Université Marie & Louis Pasteur, Besançon, France and ⁴LAPPS, Université Paris Nanterre, Nanterre, France

**Corresponding author:** Nicolas Gillet; Email: nicolas.gillet@univ-tours.fr

(Received 24 March 2025; revised 20 June 2025; accepted 4 September 2025)

Abstract

We examined whether obsessive passion and harmonious passion interacted in the prediction of work-family conflict, and the indirect effects of obsessive passion on counterproductive work behaviors as mediated by work-family conflict. We collected data from two samples of employees with jobs in engineering (Sample 1) and administration (Sample 2). Obsessive passion was associated with higher levels of work-family conflict, whereas harmonious passion was negatively related to work-family conflict. Furthermore, the positive effects of obsessive passion on work-family conflict were lower at high levels of harmonious passion. Work-family conflict was also positively related to counterproductive work behaviors (Sample 2). Finally, the indirect effects of obsessive passion on counterproductive work behaviors (Sample 2) were lower at high levels of harmonious passion.

**Keywords:** work passion; work-family conflict; counterproductive work behaviors; mediation; moderation

The work environment is changing rapidly and many employees complain that they are faced with a constant work intensification, which is characterized in particular by high pressure and very short deadlines (Hünefeld, Meyer, Erol & Ahlers, 2025). This is not without consequences for employees' health and behaviors (e.g., ill-being, absenteeism) and may be explained by a decrease in employees' passion for their work (Trépanier, Fernet, Austin, Forest & Vallerand, 2014). In particular, when employees have to cope with many job demands (e.g., work overload and interpersonal conflicts), their work passion can gradually wane as they become tired of always having to make strenuous efforts (Vallerand & Houlfort, 2019). Although employees' levels of work passion may vary across industries and job levels, it is important to note that this erosion of work passion following constant and prolonged exposure to high job demands appears to be generalizing to a multitude of work contexts and occupations (Gillet, Morin, Brault, Becker & Verbeke, 2024).

The dualistic model of passion (DMP; Vallerand, 2010, 2015) defines passion as a strong inclination toward a specific activity, such as work (Vallerand & Houlfort, 2019). Passionate workers invest substantial effort and time in their work, consider it central to their identity, love it, and regard it as important (Vallerand & Houlfort, 2019). However, the major advantage of the DMP, compared to other approaches (Bajaba, Al-Judibi, Basahal & Alsabban, 2025; Elemo, Ahmed & Kara, 2024), is that it is not limited to a one-dimensional approach to passion, but rather considers two forms of passion that do not reflect the same relationship to work. More precisely, the DMP
(Vallerand, 2015) highlights the need to differentiate passion based on its harmonious (HP; a strong psychological investment in an activity [job] that is freely chosen by the individual) or obsessive (OP; strong psychological investment in an activity [job] that is driven by internal or external contingencies associated with the activity) nature. Research has generally reported well-differentiated associations between these two forms of passion and a variety of outcomes (e.g., work-family conflict [WFC] and counterproductive work behaviors [CWB]), in addition to showing that the benefits of passion were accompanied by undesirable consequences when this passion became obsessive (e.g., Gillet et al., 2023b; Huyghebaert-Zouaghi, Morin, Fernet, Austin & Gillet, 2022).

However, recent research has demonstrated that the adverse effects of OP may also be reduced when employees display high levels of HP (Morin et al., 2023; Schellenberg et al., 2019). This has important theoretical and practical implications for how to promote a work environment that limits WFC and CWB. The current research builds on prior studies to examine whether HP could moderate the influence of OP on WFC (Samples 1 and 2), while also considering the potential impact of WFC on CWB (Sample 2). These dimensions are important to consider given that they are known to be highly relevant to employees' professional success and ability to experience satisfactory career trajectories (Huyghebaert-Zouaghi et al., 2022; Spector, Bauer & Fox, 2010). By showing the likely indirect and positive effects of employees' OP on CWB as mediated by WFC, and by considering whether these relations vary as a function of their levels of HP, the present study seeks to better understand the mechanisms and circumstances involved in the effects of OP. In this way, we aim to offer organizations practical recommendations to reduce employees' OP. This is all the more important when we know the deleterious effects of OP on both individual and organizational functioning (Vallerand & Houlfort, 2019). In addition, it is crucial to identify levers for reducing WFC and CWB in light of the numerous studies showing that these dimensions are closely linked to employees' productivity (Huyghebaert-Zouaghi et al., 2022; Spector, Bauer & Fox, 2010). More generally, in a context of work intensification, such actions could be particularly useful to reduce employees' exposure to job demands, which represent a threat for their work-family balance and psychological well-being (Trépanier et al., 2014).

## The effects of work passion

The DMP (Vallerand, 2015) posits that a passion may be harmonious or obsessive depending on how it is internalized into one's identity. HP workers freely choose to engage in the work that they love, which has come to be autonomously internalized into their identity. Work occupies an important, but not overpowering, place in their identity. As a result, HP for work represents a strong, but controllable, motivational force that can exist in harmony with other facets of employees' lives (Vallerand & Houlfort, 2019). In contrast, although OP employees also love their work, they feel pressured to engage in it as a result of internal or external pressures and contingencies (Vallerand, 2015). Such contingencies might be a boost of self-esteem, social approval, or the avoidance of negative emotions. As a result of this more externally driven form of internalization, OP entails an uncontrollable urge to work, leading obsessively passionate workers to struggle with establishing adaptive boundaries between work and other life domains (Vallerand & Houlfort, 2019). Not surprisingly, past research has shown that HP was associated with low levels of WFC, while OP was positively related to WFC (Gillet et al., 2023a; Huyghebaert-Zouaghi et al., 2022). However, none of these investigations was conducted with samples of employees with jobs in engineering and administration as it is the case in the present research. Yet, it is important to demonstrate that such results may generalize to employees working in various work settings.

Obsessively passionate employees engage in their work with a rigid persistence, making it harder to establish boundaries between work and other life domains, thereby increasing the likelihood that work will interfere with other life areas (Gillet et al., 2023a). These employees are thus less likely to accumulate personal resources to support their work. Likewise, because they tend to spend most of their personal resources at work, employees with high levels of OP should be more likely to adopt
defensive strategies to protect themselves from further loss of resources in other life domains (Hobfoll, 2011). As a result, they are more likely to experience the demands of their personal life as a threat to their work functioning. By prioritizing their work role obsessively, these employees should be less willing to capitalize on resources gained at work to support their psychological functioning, leading them to experience negative outcomes at the work-family interface (e.g., high WFC). Contrastingly, work can typically co-exist harmoniously with other facets of their life among harmoniously passionate employees (Vallerand, 2010, 2015). This harmonious co-existence allows them to establish adaptive boundaries between their work and other life areas, thus reducing their risk of experiencing conflicts between their personal and professional lives (Vallerand & Houlfort, 2019). HP should also help employees to build up, or accumulate, work-related resources as a result of the enjoyment (e.g., well-being) they derive from working (e.g., better health, more positive mood, and greater knowledge and skills; Hobfoll, 2011). As these resources accumulate, they become available to support the demands of employees' personal life, allowing them to experience positive outcomes in their life in general (e.g., low WFC; Vallerand, 2015; Vallerand & Houlfort, 2019).

The DMP (Vallerand, 2015) explicitly positions HP and OP on two separate continua, thus acknowledging the possibility that some workers may simultaneously experience high levels of OP and HP, while others may experience only one, or neither, form of passion. This perspective highlights the need to move beyond the examination of the additive and independent effects of HP and OP to consider their combined role (Schellenberg et al., 2019). More specifically, is it better to display high levels of both OP and HP than high levels of OP coupled with low levels of HP? Little research has attempted to answer this question to date, and the only study conducted in France (Gillet et al., 2024) did not consider employees with jobs in engineering as is the case in our first sample. There is also a need for additional investigations in a Western cultural context – which differs substantially from the cultural contexts (e.g., China) considered in the few previous studies examining the combined of HP and OP (e.g., Li, Zhang, Shao & Chen, 2020). Future research is thus needed to document whether and how previous results may apply to different settings and cultures. From an applied standpoint, this is an important contribution, as it enables us to envisage whether or not work passion interventions developed in other contexts and countries could be generalized to French employees with jobs in engineering and administration.

It is quite conceivable that an employee could be characterized by high levels of both HP and OP. This is not necessarily because both types of passion are simultaneously present at the same time in the same individual, but rather because employees may have different levels of passion at work, depending on the period and tasks involved. For instance, the same employee could very well display obsessive behavior during a period of intense pressure to meet deadlines, and much more harmonious behavior at another time, when the pressure to achieve results is less acute. We expect workers displaying high levels of OP and HP to benefit from HP to limit the harmful effects of OP. This can be explained by the fact that HP is theoretically associated with positive emotions (Vallerand, 2015; Vallerand & Houlfort, 2019) that help increase workers' well-being and functioning by attenuating the undesirable effects of negative emotions. In doing so, the presence of HP, in combination with OP, should lead to a more adaptive functioning than the combination of high OP and low HP, which is consistent with the protective role of HP identified in previous research (Gillet et al., 2023a; Schellenberg et al., 2019).

Based on these considerations and past results, we propose the following hypotheses:

*Hypothesis 1.* OP will be positively related to WFC.

*Hypothesis 2.* HP will be negatively related to WFC.

*Hypothesis 3.* HP will moderate the effect of OP on WFC, such that higher HP will buffer the positive effect of OP on WFC.
## The mediating role of WFC

Previous studies have shown that WFC was associated with negative outcomes, including high levels of CWB (Darrat, Amyx & Bennett, 2010; Ferguson, Carlson, Hunter & Whitten, 2012). However, none of these studies on the effects of WFC on CWB have been conducted with French employees. Yet, numerous European and developed Western countries, including France, have recently implemented policies seeking to protect employees' personal life against intrusions from the work domain (e.g., flexible work arrangements, accessible and affordable daycare, the right to disconnect; Drobnič, Beham & Präg, 2010) which are likely to help limit WFC (Huyghebaert-Zouaghi et al., 2022). In contrast, in many Asian and developing countries, work tends to be characterized by long working hours and inflexible workplace policies that may increase employees' WFC (Gillet et al., 2022). It thus remains important to investigate whether and how similar effects of WFC on CWB will be identified in various occupational groups (e.g., engineering and administration) and cultures (e.g., France).

Employees with high WFC levels may feel that they are unable to manage competing priorities in work and personal contexts (Ellis, Bauer & Crain, 2023). In addition, repeated experiences of WFC are exhausting and associated with negative emotional responses (e.g., French & Allen, 2020). This may lead employees to experience low levels of work-to-nonwork self-efficacy (Cho, Chen, Cheng & Ho, 2022). Yet, self-efficacy is a critical mechanism of self-regulation that determines employees' behaviors. More specifically, employees who lack confidence in their ability to cope with their multiple family and work demands may not do their best to do their job, but rather tend to want to harm their organization and its members (e.g., by gossiping or talking badly about their colleagues; Bai, Lin & Wang, 2016). WFC may also be the source of negative emotions such as anger, which may then turn into CWB (Morgan, Perry & Wang, 2018). Indeed, such behaviors may be a way for employees experiencing WFC to take revenge on their organization, and its members, who, in their view, do not respect the rules, norms, or promises (Huyghebaert-Zouaghi et al., 2022). For instance, when employees are faced with excessive expectations from some of their colleagues and are forced to attend very long meetings that do not allow them to fulfil their family obligations or simply to spend time with their children, they feel that their work interferes with their personal life (i.e., high WFC). This is accompanied by frustration that can turn into CWB, as they are determined to reduce this sense of injustice by targeting the people who are at the root of the problem (Bordia et al., 2008). We thus hypothesized the following:

**Hypothesis 4.** WFC will be positively related to CWB.

Despite the negative effects of OP on WFC, and more generally on individual functioning (Vallerand & Houlfort, 2019), and the negative outcomes associated with WFC (Huyghebaert-Zouaghi et al., 2022), no study to our knowledge has considered WFC as an explanatory mechanism in the relationship between OP and CWB. Although research has considered other dimensions (e.g., need satisfaction, work engagement) in order to explain the harmful effects of OP (Malchelosse, Houlfort, Lavoie & Masson, 2024; Teng, Cheng & Chen, 2021), further research is needed to identify alternative mechanisms (e.g., WFC) explaining the effects of OP on employees' functioning. From this perspective, other studies have largely demonstrated that WFC may be an important variable to consider in explaining the effects of individual and organizational factors on employees' functioning (Gillet et al., 2021; Zhang, Ye & Ferreira-Meyers, 2017).

The relations considered in the present research describe a full mediation model according to which: (1) OP is associated with higher levels of WFC (Hypothesis 1) and (2) WFC is associated with higher levels of CWB (Hypothesis 4). In line with prior investigations showing similar indirect effects of OP on employee's functioning, we propose that the following:

**Hypothesis 5.** WFC will fully mediate the effect of OP on CWB.
However, we also examine whether the effects of OP on WFC may vary depending on employees' levels of HP. Thus, we can investigate the conditional indirect effects of OP on CWB via WFC, across different levels of HP. More specifically, we expect that the effects of OP on WFC will be attenuated when employees are harmoniously passionate (Hypothesis 3). The following moderated mediation hypothesis is thus proposed the following:

*Hypothesis 6.* The indirect relationship between OP and CWB through WFC will be weakened by HP, such that the relationship will be weaker for employees characterized by higher levels of HP.

## Method

### Participants

In this study, we collected data from two separate samples of French employees. Sample 1 included 497 employees with jobs in engineering (e.g., engineer, technician, and project manager), 64.8% of whom were men. The average age of participants was 38.10 years (SD = 12.26), with an average tenure in the organization of 10.37 years (SD = 9.99), and 61.4% were in a relationship. In terms of degree level, 1.4% had no diploma, 7.4% completed vocational training, 17.1% completed high school, and 74.0% had a university diploma. Participants worked in companies of different sectors and sizes: 6.0% in companies with less than 10 employees, 13.5% in companies with 11–49 employees, 14.7% in companies with 50–249 employees, 11.3% in companies with 250–499 employees, and 54.5% in companies with 500 or more employees. A majority of participants worked in the private sector (88.7%), with permanent (90.7%) and full-time (95.6%) employment.

Sample 2 consisted of 401 employees with administrative jobs (e.g., secretary, administrative manager, and executive assistant), 88.5% of whom were women. The average age of participants was 42.57 years (SD = 10.46), with an average tenure in the organization of 11.45 years (SD = 9.68), and 65.1% were in a relationship. In terms of degree level, 0.5% had no diploma, 13.0% completed vocational training, 35.4% completed high school, and 51.1% had a university diploma. Participants worked in companies of different sectors and sizes: 14.0% in companies with less than 10 employees, 15.7% in companies with 11–49 employees, 19.0% in companies with 50–249 employees, 12.7% in companies with 250–499 employees, and 38.7% in companies with 500 or more employees. A majority of participants worked in the private sector (63.3%), with permanent (91.3%) and full-time (86.3%) employment.

### Procedure

Research assistants recruited employees from multiple French organizations through a combination of snowball sampling and networking procedures (i.e., social networks, and personal and professional networks). We only recruited individuals who were employed by an organization (i.e., unemployed, self-employed, and students were excluded). Participants were asked to complete an online self-report questionnaire. Before accessing the survey, they were provided information on the aims of the study. They were also told that they could stop participating in the study at any time, and that participation was confidential and voluntary. They received no remuneration for their participation.

### Measures

All questionnaires were previously validated in French and were administered in this language. These French versions were found to display psychometric properties comparable to those of the original versions (Fouquereau, Morin, Lapointe, Mokounkolo & Gillet, 2019; Huyghebaert et al., 2018; Philippe, Vallerand, Bernard-Desrosiers, Guilbault & Rajotte, 2017).
## Work passion

Work passion was assessed using Philippe et al.'s (2017; originally developed in French) questionnaire covering HP (three items; e.g., "Work is in harmony with the other things that are part of me"; $\alpha$ = .80 in Sample 1 and .81 in Sample 2) and OP (three items; e.g., "I have almost an obsessive feeling for work"; $\alpha$ = .66 in Sample 1 and .76 in Sample 2). Items were rated on a 7-point scale (*Strongly disagree* to *Strongly agree*). The below .70 Cronbach's alpha for OP in Sample 1 might be explained by the limited number of items available to measure this dimension. Nevertheless, this value of .66 is still acceptable, especially with three items within this subscale and a sample of less than 500 employees (Lance, Butts & Michels, 2006).

## Work-family conflict

WFC was assessed with three items (e.g., "My work schedule makes it difficult for me to fulfill my family obligations"; $\alpha$ = .89 in Sample 1 and .88 in Sample 2) from Huyghebaert et al. (2018; originally developed in French). Items were rated on a 7-point scale (*Strongly disagree* to *Strongly agree*).

## Counterproductive work behaviors

CWB were assessed using five items focusing on social interactions (e.g., "Insulted someone about their job performance"; $\alpha$ = .79 in Sample 2) developed by Spector et al. (2010; French version by Fouquereau et al., 2019), all rated on a seven-point scale (Never to Always).

## Analyses

We used the Mplus 8.10 (Muthén & Muthén, 2023) software and the robust maximum likelihood estimator. In Sample 1, we first tested a measurement model including work passion, using exploratory structural equation modeling in line with recent studies (Cheyroux, Morin, Colombat & Gillet, 2023; Gillet et al., 2023a), and WFC as a latent variable defined by three items. In Sample 2, we also tested a measurement model including work passion, using exploratory structural equation modeling, and WFC and CWB defined by their respective items. Factor scores used in the main analyses were extracted from these measurement models.

These models were then converted into predictive structural equation models (SEM). In Sample 1, HP and OP had direct effects on WFC. In Sample 2, HP and OP had direct effects on WFC, which also had direct effects on CWB. To test the extent to which the effects of HP on WFC could be moderated by OP, we estimated an interaction between HP and OP that was allowed to predict WFC in both samples. Significant interactions were plotted using simple slope analyses to assess the effects of HP at different levels of OP (Marsh, Hau, Wen, Nagengast & Morin, 2013).

To test the adequacy of the measurement models and SEM solutions, we relied on the Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), the comparative fit index (CFI), and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA). Values above .90 for TLI and CFI and below .08 for RMSEA indicate that the model tested is well suited to the data collected (Marsh, Hau & Grayson, 2005). Finally, the indirect effects of HP and OP on CWB through WFC were tested using bias-corrected bootstrap (10,000 bootstrap samples) confidence intervals (CI; Cheung & Lau, 2008), which show significant indirect effects when the CI do not include 0.

## Results

In both samples, the model fit of the measurement models (Sample 1: $\chi^2$ = 60.806, *df* = 20; CFI = 0.973; TLI = 0.952; and RMSEA = 0.064 [0.046; 0.083]; Sample 2: $\chi^2$ = 153.416, *df* = 67; CFI = 0.954; TLI = 0.937; and RMSEA = 0.057 [0.045; 0.069]), and SEM (Sample 2: $\chi^2$ = 1.220, *df* = 3; CFI = 1.000; TLI = 1.000; and RMSEA = 0.000 [0.000; 0.058] [In Sample 1, the SEM solution was saturated, so we cannot report any fit indices.)] solutions was satisfactory. (In Sample 2, we also tested a predictive model in which HP, OP, and the interaction between the two dimensions had,
<table><caption>**Table 1.** Standardized factor loadings (λ) and uniquenesses (δ) for the measurement models</caption><thead><tr><th>Items</th><th>HP (S1) λ</th><th>OP (S1) λ</th><th>HP (S2) λ</th><th>OP (S2) λ</th><th>WFC (S1) λ</th><th>WFC (S2) λ</th><th>CWB (S2) λ</th><th>δ (S1)</th><th>δ (S2)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>HP</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Item 1</td><td><strong>.813</strong></td><td>-.090</td><td><strong>.803</strong></td><td>-.052</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>.311</td><td>.338</td></tr><tr><td>Item 2</td><td><strong>.912</strong></td><td>-.049</td><td><strong>.862</strong></td><td>-.049</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>.153</td><td>.240</td></tr><tr><td>Item 3</td><td><strong>.603</strong></td><td>.166</td><td><strong>.670</strong></td><td>.104</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>.636</td><td>.565</td></tr><tr><td><strong>OP</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Item 1</td><td>.029</td><td><strong>.769</strong></td><td>-.035</td><td><strong>.890</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>.413</td><td>.195</td></tr><tr><td>Item 2</td><td>.236</td><td><strong>.569</strong></td><td>.238</td><td><strong>.603</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>.656</td><td>.631</td></tr><tr><td>Item 3</td><td>-.269</td><td><strong>.600</strong></td><td>-.162</td><td><strong>.711</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>.525</td><td>.428</td></tr><tr><td><strong>WFC</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Item 1</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>.846</td><td>.865</td><td></td><td>.284</td><td>.251</td></tr><tr><td>Item 2</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>.822</td><td>.783</td><td></td><td>.325</td><td>.387</td></tr><tr><td>Item 3</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>.897</td><td>.900</td><td></td><td>.195</td><td>.190</td></tr><tr><td><strong>CWB</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Item 1</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>.659</td><td></td><td>.566</td></tr><tr><td>Item 2</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>.712</td><td></td><td>.493</td></tr><tr><td>Item 3</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>.625</td><td></td><td>.610</td></tr><tr><td>Item 4</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>.741</td><td></td><td>.451</td></tr><tr><td>Item 5</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>.642</td><td></td><td>.587</td></tr><tr><td>ω</td><td>.831</td><td>.702</td><td>.827</td><td>.795</td><td>.891</td><td>.887</td><td>.808</td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

Note: HP: harmonious passion; OP: obsessive passion; WFC: work-family conflict; CWB: counterproductive work behaviors; S1: Sample 1; S2: Sample 2; λ: factor loading; δ: item uniqueness; ω: omega coefficient of model-based composite reliability; target factor loadings are indicated in bold; the non-significant parameters (*p* > .05) are marked in italics.

in addition to the effects already specified, a direct effect on counterproductive work behaviors. The results showed no significant direct effect of these variables on counterproductive work behaviors, thus confirming the relevance of the full mediation model proposed and retained.) The final parameter estimates from the measurement model in both samples are reported in Table 1. The results support the adequacy of the HP, OP, WFC, and CWB factors, which appear to be well-defined and reliable.

The parameter estimates from the SEM solutions, in addition to the interactions, are reported in Table 2. In both samples, HP was associated with lower levels of WFC, whereas OP was associated with higher levels of WFC. WFC was also associated with higher levels of CWB (Sample 2). Without considering the interaction effects, the indirect effects of HP (IE = -0.170; CI = -0.230 to -0.124) and OP (IE = 0.307; CI = 0.229 to 0.404) on CWB were significantly mediated by WFC.

The results also revealed that HP and OP interacted in the prediction of WFC. Simple slope analyses are reported in Table 2 and graphically represented in Figs. 1 (Sample 1) and 2 (Sample 2). As hypothesized, HP buffered the undesirable effects of OP. More specifically, the effects of OP on WFC were lower at high levels of HP. Importantly, simple slope analyses also revealed that the indirect effects of OP on CWB were lower at high levels of HP. More specifically, the indirect effect of OP on CWB was mediated by WFC at -2SD of HP (IE = 0.351; CI = 0.253 to 0.477), -1SD of HP (IE = 0.327; CI = 0.240 to 0.434), mean of HP (IE = 0.302; CI = 0.225 to 0.395), +1SD of HP (IE = 0.277; CI = 0.207 to 0.365), and +2SD of HP (IE = 0.253; CI = 0.183 to 0.344).
<table><caption>**Table 2.** Predictive results</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Predictors (Sample 1)</th><th colspan="2">Work-family conflict</th><th colspan="2">Counterproductive work behaviors</th></tr><tr><th>b (s.e.)</th><th>B</th><th>b (s.e.)</th><th>β</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Harmonious passion</td><td>-.321** (.024)</td><td>-.319</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Obsessive passion</td><td>.793** (.024)</td><td>.736</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Obsessive passion × Harmonious passion</td><td>-.086** (.024)</td><td>-.083</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>R<sup>2</sup></td><td>.749** (.022)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>a</td><td>b (s.e.)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td colspan="5"><strong>Obsessive passion: simple slope analyses</strong></td></tr><tr><td>-2SD harmonious passion</td><td>.643</td><td>.965** (.045)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>-1SD harmonious passion</td><td>.321</td><td>.879** (.026)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Mean harmonious passion</td><td>0</td><td>.793** (.024)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>1SD harmonious passion</td><td>-.321</td><td>.708** (.041)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>2SD harmonious passion</td><td>-.643</td><td>.622** (.063)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><th rowspan="2">Predictors (Sample 2)</th><th colspan="2">Work-family conflict</th><th colspan="2">Counterproductive work behaviors</th></tr><tr><th>b (s.e.)</th><th>B</th><th>b (s.e.)</th><th>β</th></tr><tr><td>Harmonious passion</td><td>-.397** (.028)</td><td>-.386</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Obsessive passion</td><td>.706** (.024)</td><td>.690</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Work-family conflict</td><td></td><td></td><td>.428** (.058)</td><td>.451</td></tr><tr><td>Obsessive passion × Harmonious passion</td><td>-.057* (.025)</td><td>-.057</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>R<sup>2</sup></td><td>.761** (.027)</td><td></td><td>.204** (.041)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>a</td><td>b (s.e.)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td colspan="5"><strong>Obsessive passion: simple slope analyses</strong></td></tr><tr><td>-2SD harmonious passion</td><td>.794</td><td>.821** (.057)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>-1SD harmonious passion</td><td>.397</td><td>.763** (.035)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Mean harmonious passion</td><td>0</td><td>.706** (.024)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>1SD harmonious passion</td><td>-.397</td><td>.648** (.034)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>2SD harmonious passion</td><td>-.794</td><td>.591** (.055)</td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

*Note:* R²: squared multiple correlation (reflecting the proportion of explained variance); a: regression intercept (used in drawing the simple slope graphs); b: unstandardized coefficient; s.e.: Standard error of the coefficient; β: standardized coefficient.

*p* < .05; **p* < .01.

Discussion

The current research sought to examine the indirect effects, through WFC, of OP on CWB, while considering how these relations might differ as a function of employees' levels of HP. Our findings showed that OP was associated with higher levels of WFC, whereas HP was negatively related to WFC.
<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 1.** Simple slope analysis of the effects of obsessive passion on work-family conflict at different levels of harmonious passion (Sample 1).</figcaption></figure>

Note: HP: harmonious passion.

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 2.** Simple slope analysis of the effects of obsessive passion on work-family conflict at different levels of harmonious passion (Sample 2).</figcaption></figure>

Note: HP: harmonious passion

In addition, the effects of OP on WFC were weaker at higher levels of HP. WFC was also associated with higher levels of CWB. Finally, the indirect effects of OP on CWB were mediated by WFC, but these effects were weaker when employees displayed high levels of HP. These results have theoretical and practical implications that are detailed in the following sections.

## Theoretical implications

Previous research has emphasized the need for additional studies on the effects of work passion particularly on CWB (Gillet et al., 2023b). Other studies have also emphasized the importance of identifying mechanisms that could explain these effects of work passion on individual functioning (Vallerand & Houlfort, 2019). By showing that higher levels of OP were associated with higher levels of WFC, which in turn were associated with higher levels of CWB, our findings support and enrich these previous observations. These positive and indirect relations between OP and CWB can be explained by the fact that employees with high levels of OP are more inclined to invest too much of their personal resources in their work roles despite the detrimental effects on their work-family balance (i.e., high WFC), leaving them with fewer resources available for their personal life (Hobfoll, 2011). As a result,
they may be tempted to take revenge on their organization and its members in the form of CWB (Bordia et al., 2008; Morgan et al., 2018).

In addition to these indirect effects of OP, the present findings also replicated the results from prior research showing that WFC was associated with higher levels of CWB (Darrat, Amyx & Bennett, 2010; Ferguson et al., 2012). This is in line with the idea that employees displaying high levels of WFC are not able to cope with all the problems they encounter in their work and personal lives (Huyghebaert-Zouaghi et al., 2022). Furthermore, our results revealed that HP was associated with lower levels of WFC. This association is consistent with past results demonstrating that HP allows employees to distance themselves from work and not focus too much on it so as not to risk an imbalance between work and personal life (Vallerand, 2010; Vallerand & Houlfort, 2019).

When more specifically considering how the effects of OP differed as a function of employees' levels of HP, we found that the direct effects of OP on WFC were less pronounced among employees displaying high levels of HP. Employees with high levels of OP and high levels of HP may question their excessive investment in their work. They may be more attentive to the prevention messages addressed to them, to the possible signs of deterioration in their health, and to the expectations of their friends and family (Morin et al., 2023). In other words, they are more concerned with establishing a clear and impermeable boundary between professional and personal lives and are not prepared to sacrifice everything for work, thus leading to lower levels of WFC.

When considering the whole explanatory chain of relations, the present results highlight a contingency perspective that helps to clarify and unpack the conditions under which OP may have differential effects on employees' functioning. More specifically, the present findings revealed that the adverse effects of OP on CWB (through WFC) were attenuated when HP was high. Such findings are aligned with those from past research showing that the effects of some characteristics (e.g., OP) on various outcomes (e.g., CWB) were mediated by WFC (Zhang et al., 2017). They also suggest that HP, because it contributes to reinforce the boundaries between employees' professional and personal lives (Vallerand & Houlfort, 2019), can facilitate employees' functioning. More particularly, high levels of HP seem to offer employees with high levels of OP the control they need to maintain a more balanced life and a reasonable investment in work (Vallerand, 2015).

## Limitations and suggestions for future research

Limitations of the current research must be highlighted. First, we relied solely on self-report questionnaires, which implies that social desirability biases may play a role in our results. To reduce this concern, further research should include informant ratings (e.g., supervisor and colleagues) and objective measures (e.g., official data about turnover and performance). Further studies are also needed to replicate these findings with other questionnaires assessing work passion and having higher levels of internal consistency. Second, since this study only covered workers (with jobs in engineering and administration) who lived and worked in France, additional studies will be needed to test the replicability of the current findings to a variety of work settings, cultures, languages, and countries. Third, we used a cross-sectional research protocol that precludes the establishment of directionality or causality between the constructs considered. Even if investigations provide support for some of the proposed associations (e.g., Gillet et al., 2023a, 2023b), reciprocal or inverse associations may also exist. Future studies should examine the nature of these relations using longitudinal methodologies better suited to substantiate the temporal ordering of the observed associations, the dynamic changes in work passion over time, and the long-term effects of work passion on employees' functioning. Finally, we only considered WFC as an exploratory mechanism and HP as an individual factor that could attenuate the detrimental effects of OP. Additional studies are needed to examine the potential mediating role of other dimensions (e.g., sleep and burnout) and identify other individual and organizational factors (e.g., work-home segmentation preferences, organizational justice, and organizational culture) that may influence OP or moderate the effects of OP (Gillet et al., 2024; Huyghebaert-Zouaghi, Morin, Thomas & Gillet, 2024). Likewise, other negative (e.g., turnover and
presenteeism) and positive (e.g., creativity and organizational citizenship behaviors) outcomes could be included to better understand the implications of employees' work passion (e.g., Fernet, Gillet, Austin, Trépanier & Drouin-Rousseau, 2021; Sandrin, Morin, Fernet & Gillet, 2020).

## Implications for practice

Although we are currently in a society in which organizations and managers tend to value and promote very high work investment (Huyghebaert-Zouaghi et al., 2022), our results underline the need to limit OP and WFC, while facilitating HP, in order to prevent employees' CWB. First, it would be important for organizations, supervisors, and the society more generally to consider implementing actions to help employees decrease their levels of OP. Consulting the employees with low levels of OP may make it possible to identify the most useful (or harmful) practices in this regard. Such interventions may subsequently be expanded to help employees displaying higher levels of OP to increase their likelihood of decreasing their levels of OP. Interventions may also be offered to employees with lower levels of OP to help them decrease their likelihood of eventually experiencing a rise in OP. Moreover, counseling or coaching should also help reduce OP at the individual level (Van Gordon et al., 2017). Modifications to decrease workload sustainably may also help decrease the prevalence of OP over time (Huyghebaert et al., 2018).

Likewise, interventions can be proposed to reduce employees' WFC. As in the case of OP, actions aimed at reducing employees' workload and, more generally their exposure to job demands, are means of limiting the development of WFC (Gillet et al., 2021). Furthermore, changes designed to increase employees' HP could be leveraged to help employees be less exposed to the negative effects of OP, and more generally to support better functioning. For instance, it may be interesting to encourage balanced and healthier lifestyles, to create well-being-oriented workplaces, and to offer enabling versus enclosing work-life policies (Kreiner, 2006). More generally, actions to facilitate work recovery processes could be considered as a means of protecting employees' well-being while allowing them to maintain a satisfactory work-family balance. Interestingly, interventional studies have shown that employees can learn and develop efficient work recovery through training (e.g., mindfulness; Hülsheger, Feinholdt & Nübold, 2015).

**Data availability statement.** The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

**Conflict(s) of interest.** The authors report no conflicts of interest.

## References

Bai, Q., Lin, W., & Wang, L. (2016). Family incivility and counterproductive work behavior: A moderated mediation model of self-esteem and emotional regulation. *Journal of Vocational Behavior, 94*, 11–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2016.02.014

Bajaba, S., Al-Judibi, Z., Basahal, A., & Alsabban, A. (2025). The broken trust: How exploitative leadership damages employee work passion. *The Journal of Social Psychology, 165*(1), 154–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2024.2311256

Bordia, P., Restubog, S. L. D., & Tang, R. L. (2008). When employees strike back: Investigating mediating mechanisms between psychological contract breach and workplace deviance. *Journal of Applied Psychology, 93*(5), 1104–1117. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.5.1104

Cheung, G. W., & Lau, R. S. (2008). Testing mediation and suppression effects of latent variables: Bootstrapping with structural equation models. *Organizational Research Methods, 11*(2), 296–325. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428107300343

Cheyroux, P., Morin, A. J. S., Colombat, P., & Gillet, N. (2023). Predictors and outcomes of nursing students' engagement trajectories at the beginning of their program. *Journal of Vocational Behavior, 145*, 103917. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2023.103917

Cho, E., Chen, T.-Y., Cheng, G. H.-L., & Ho, M.-H. R. (2022). Work-family balance self-efficacy and work-family balance during the pandemic: A longitudinal study of working informal caregivers of older adults. *Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 27*(3), 349–358. https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000321

Darrat, M., Amyx, D., & Bennett, R. (2010). An investigation into the effects of work-family conflict and job satisfaction on salesperson deviance. *Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 30*(3), 239–251. https://doi.org/10.2753/PSS0885-3134300304
Drobnič, S., Beham, B., & Präg, P. (2010). Good job, good life? Working conditions and quality of life in Europe. *Social Indicators Research*, 99(2), 205–225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-010-9586-7

Elemo, A. S., Ahmed, A. H., & Kara, E. (2024). Linking perceived job insecurity and work passion: The mediating role of mindful self-care in academic staff. *Psychology in the Schools*, 61(8), 3284–3297. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.23220

Ellis, A. M., Bauer, T. N., & Crain, T. L. (2023). Newcomer work-to-nonwork conflict to withdrawal via work-to-nonwork self-efficacy: The buffering role of family supportive supervisor behavior. *Journal of Vocational Behavior*, 144, 103895. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvbb.2023.103895

Ferguson, M., Carlson, D., Hunter, E. M., & Whitten, D. (2012). A two-study examination of work-family conflict, production deviance and gender. *Journal of Vocational Behavior*, 81(2), 245–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvbb.2012.07.004

Fernet, C., Gillet, N., Austin, S., Trépanier, S. G., & Drouin-Rousseau, S. (2021). Predicting nurses' occupational commitment and turnover intention: The role of autonomous motivation and supervisor and coworker behaviours. *Journal of Nursing Management*, 29(8), 2611–2619. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.13433

Fouquereau, E., Morin, A. J. S., Lapointe, E., Mokounkolo, R., & Gillet, N. (2019). Emotional labour profiles: Associations with key predictors and outcomes. *Work & Stress*, 33(3), 268–294. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2018.1502835

French, K. A., & Allen, T. D. (2020). Episodic work-family conflict and strain: A dynamic perspective. *Journal of Applied Psychology*, 105(8), 863–888. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000470

Gillet, N., Austin, S., Fernet, C., Sandrin, E., Lorho, F., Brault, S., & Aubouin Bonnaventure, J. (2021). Workaholism, presenteeism, work-family conflicts and personal and work outcomes: Testing a moderated mediation model. *Journal of Clinical Nursing*, 30(19-20), 2842–2853. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15791

Gillet, N., Morin, A. J. S., Austin, S., Fernet, C., Huyghebaert-Zouaghi, T., & Vallerand, R. J. (2023a). On the nature, predictors, and outcomes of longitudinal work passion profiles. *Motivation Science*, 9(4), 298–314. https://doi.org/10.1037/mot0000307

Gillet, N., Morin, A. J. S., Brault, S., Becker, M., & Verbeke, I. (2024). On the nature, predictors, and outcomes of work passion profiles: A generalisability study across distinct types of employees. *Stress and Health*, 40(6), e3495. https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.3495

Gillet, N., Morin, A. J. S., Ndiaye, A., Colombat, P., Sandrin, E., & Fouquereau, E. (2022). Complementary variable- and person-centred approaches to the dimensionality of workaholism. *Applied Psychology: An International Review*, 71(1), 312–355. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12323

Gillet, N., Vallerand, R. J., Schellenberg, B., Aubouin Bonnaventure, J., Becker, M., Brault, S., & Sandrin, E. (2023b). On the role of harmonious and obsessive passion in work and family outcomes: A test of the quadripartite approach. *Current Psychology*, 42(27), 23644–23655. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-03442-y

Hobfoll, S. E. (2011). Conservation of resource caravans and engaged settings. *Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology*, 84(1), 116–122. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.2010.02016.x

Hülsheger, U. R., Feinholdt, A., & Nübold, A. (2015). A low-dose mindfulness intervention and recovery from work: Effects on psychological detachment, sleep quality, and sleep duration. *Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology*, 88(3), 464–489. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12115

Hünefeld, L., Meyer, S.-C., Erol, S., & Ahlers, E. (2025). Work intensity: Identification and analysis of key determinants. *International Journal of Workplace Health Management*, 18(2), 238–258. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJWHM-12-2023-0177

Huyghebaert, T., Fouquereau, E., Lahiani, F.-J., Beltou, N., Gimenes, G., & Gillet, N. (2018). Examining the longitudinal effects of workload on ill-being through each dimension of workaholism. *International Journal of Stress Management*, 25(2), 144–162. https://doi.org/10.1037/str0000055

Huyghebaert-Zouaghi, T., Morin, A. J. S., Fernet, C., Austin, S., & Gillet, N. (2022). Longitudinal profiles of work-family interface: Their individual and organizational predictors, personal and work outcomes, and implications for onsite and remote workers. *Journal of Vocational Behavior*, 134, 103695. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvbb.2022.103695

Huyghebaert-Zouaghi, T., Morin, A. J. S., Thomas, J., & Gillet, N. (2024). The daily dynamics of basic psychological need satisfaction at work, their determinants, and their implications: An application of dynamic structural equation modeling. *European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology*, 33(3), 294–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2023.2276534

Kreiner, G. E. (2006). Consequences of work-home segmentation or integration: A person-environment fit perspective. *Journal of Organizational Behavior*, 27(4), 485–507. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.386

Lance, C. E., Butts, M. M., & Michels, L. C. (2006). The sources of four commonly reported cutoff criteria: What did they really say? *Organizational Research Methods*, 9(2), 202–220. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428105284919

Li, J., Zhang, J., Shao, B., & Chen, C. (2020). A latent profile analysis of work passion: Structure, antecedent, and outcomes. *Personnel Review*, 49(3), 846–863. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-04-2019-0145

Malchelosse, K., Houlfort, N., Lavoie, C.-É., & Masson, R. (2024). The role of resilience and psychological needs satisfaction in the relationship between passion for work and work-life enrichment. *Current Psychology*, 43(7), 6640–6656. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04846-0

Marsh, H. W., Hau, K.-T., & Grayson, D. (2005). Goodness of fit in structural equation models. In A. Maydeu-Olivares, & J. J. McArdle (Eds.), *Contemporary Psychometrics* (275–340). Mahwah, New Jersey: Erlbaum.

Marsh, H. W., Hau, K.-T., Wen, Z., Nagengast, B., & Morin, A. J. S. (2013). Moderation. In T. D. Little (Ed.), *The Oxford Handbook of Quantitative Methods: Statistical Analysis* (361–386). Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
Morgan, W. B., Perry, S. J., & Wang, Y. (2018). The angry implications of work-to-family conflict: Examining effects of leadership on an emotion-based model of deviance. *Journal of Vocational Behavior, 108*, 13-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2018.05.009

Morin, A. J. S., Gillet, N., Chénard-Poirier, L. -A., Craven, R. G., Mooney, J., Magson, N., & Vallerand, R. J. (2023). On the nature, predictors, and outcomes of work passion profiles: A comparative study across samples of Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australian employees. *Australian Journal of Management*, Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/03128962231196325

Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. (2023). *Mplus User's Guide*. Los Angeles, California: Muthén & Muthén.

Philippe, F. L., Vallerand, R. J., Bernard-Desrosiers, L., Guilbault, V., & Rajotte, G. (2017). Understanding the cognitive and motivational underpinnings of sexual passion from a dualistic model. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113*(5), 769-785. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000116

Sandrin, E., Morin, A. J. S., Fernet, C., & Gillet, N. (2020). A longitudinal person-centered perspective on positive and negative affect at work. *The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 154*(7), 499-532. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2020.1781033

Schellenberg, B. J. I., Verner-Filion, J., Gaudreau, P., Bailis, D. S., Lafrenière, M. -A. K., & Vallerand, R. J. (2019). Testing the dualistic model of passion using a novel quadripartite approach: A look at physical and psychological well-being. *Journal of Personality, 87*(2), 163-180. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12378

Spector, P. E., Bauer, J. A., & Fox, S. (2010). Measurement artifacts in the assessment of counterproductive work behavior and organizational citizenship behavior: Do we know what we think we know? *Journal of Applied Psychology, 95*(4), 781-790. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019477

Teng, H.-Y., Cheng, L.-Y., & Chen, C.-Y. (2021). Does job passion enhance job embeddedness? A moderated mediation model of work engagement and abusive supervision. *International Journal of Hospitality Management, 95*, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2021.102913

Trépanier, S.-G., Fernet, C., Austin, S., Forest, J., & Vallerand, R. J. (2014). Linking job demands and resources to burnout and work engagement: Does passion underlie these differential relationships? *Motivation and Emotion, 38*(3), 353-366. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-013-9384-z

Vallerand, R. J. (2010). On passion for life activities: The Dualistic Model of Passion. *Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 42*, 97-193. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(10)42003-1

Vallerand, R. J. (2015). *The Psychology of Passion*. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.

Vallerand, R. J., & Houlfort, N. (2019). *Passion for Work: Theory, Research and Applications*. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.

Van Gordon, W., Shonin, E., Dunn, T. J., Garcia-Campayo, J., Demarzo, M. M. P., & Griffiths, M. D. (2017). Meditation awareness training for the treatment of workaholism: A controlled trial. *Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 6*(2), 212-220. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.6.2017.021

Zhang, R., Ye, C., & Ferreira-Meyers, K. (2017). Linking workplace ostracism to interpersonal citizenship behavior: A moderated mediation model of work-to-family conflict and rumination. *International Journal of Stress Management, 24*(3), 293-320. https://doi.org/10.1037/str0000056

**Cite this article:** Gillet, N., Noble, V., Souesme, G., Aubouin-Bonnaventure, J., & Grangeiro, R. d. R. (2025). Work passion, work-family conflict, and counterproductive work behaviors. *Journal of Management & Organization*, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2025.10055