Work\u2013Family Practices and Complexity of Their Usage: A Discourse Analysis Towards Socially Responsible Human Resource Management

Suvi Heikkinen,Anna-Maija Lämsä,Charlotta Niemistö

doi:10.1007/s10551-020-04458-9

Abstract

The question of work–family practices commonly arises in both theory and daily practice as a matter of responsibility in today’s organisations. More information is needed about them for socially responsible human resource management (SR-HRM). In this article our interest is in how work–family practices, serve as an important element of SR-HRM, constructed as (un)helpful for employees’ work–family integration, are realised in organisational life. We investigate the discursive ways in which members of two different organisations working at different organisational levels construct the issue in the Finnish context. Three discourses were interpreted: (1) a discourse of compliance with external pressure, (2) a discourse of negotiation and (3) a discourse of individual flexibility. Discursive constructions of work–family practices make visible the complex interconnectedness of individuals and organisations with the environment in which they operate. Many organisational efforts to create positive work–family practices can, in fact, lead to failure to make these practices either available or usable, and they may result in the unjust treatment of organisation members. Creating sustainable work–family practices is a complex challenge for which SR-HRM must work out a solution.

Highlights

The relationship between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and human resource management (HRM) has increasingly garnered scholarly attention during the past 15 years (Ehnert et al 2014; De Stefano et al 2018; Macke and Genari 2019), yet there has been a widespread failure to integrate CSR and HRM (Gond et al 2011)
Our study indicates that when work–family practices were designed from one viewpoint, that of the business case argument (Peper et al 2014), their usage was constructed by the organisation members in our study as not being available in daily organisational life
Our results suggest that even when an organisation is construed as having practices for work–family integration, it is still possible that HRM will try to avoid its responsibility to promote satisfactory work–family integration and socially responsible human resource management (SR-HRM)

Summary

Introduction

The relationship between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and human resource management (HRM) has increasingly garnered scholarly attention during the past 15 years (Ehnert et al 2014; De Stefano et al 2018; Macke and Genari 2019), yet there has been a widespread failure to integrate CSR and HRM (Gond et al 2011). The urge to respond to the challenges of employees’ work–family integration has resulted in organisations establishing different types of work–family programmes and practices as part of their HRM (Butts et al 2013; Voegtlin and Greenwood 2016). These programmes and practices (e.g., flexitime, teleworking, leave policies, childcare services) are geared to enhance organisational support for work and family as well as personal life in general (Kossek et al 2010; Putnam et al 2014). In organisational life employees may often face an agency gap when seeking to make use of the programmes and practices, due to the lack of a supportive supervisor or organisational culture, or even stigmatisation (Kirby and Krone 2002; Mescher et al 2010; Putnam et al 2014; Lewis et al 2017; Bourdeau et al 2019)

Methods

Discussion

Conclusion