Work-family Research Research Articles

Work-Family Resources: New Theory and Perspectives

Work-family research has grown dramatically the past decade, as management scholars increasingly recognize positive work-family interactions can contribute to employee health, well-being and produc...

Work-Family Interface of Hospitality Industry in Malaysia: The Moderating Effects of Religiosity

This paper highlighted the lack of studies that examined the relationship between work-family interface and job and family satisfaction in hospitality industry. Based on review of past research on work-family studies and related constructs, this paper discussed the development of propositions linking work-family conflict, work-family enrichment, job and family satisfaction. Next, the development of proposition to test the possible moderating effects of religiosity will also be discussed. The major theoretical, empirical and practical contributions of this study will also be highlighted and discussed. The conceptual model presented shed light on work-family research which could be used for future research in this area.

How Work–Family Research Can Finally Have an Impact in Organizations

Although work-family research has mushroomed over the past several decades, an implementation gap persists in putting work-family research into practice. Because of this, work-family researchers have not made a significant impact in improving the lives of employees relative to the amount of research that has been conducted. The goal of this article is to clarify areas where implementation gaps between work-family research and practice are prevalent, discuss the importance of reducing these gaps, and make the case that both better and different research should be conducted. We recommend several alternative but complementary actions for the work-family researcher: (a) work with organizations to study their policy and practice implementation efforts, (b) focus on the impact of rapid technological advances that are blurring work-family boundaries, (c) conduct research to empower the individual to self-manage the work-family interface, and (d) engage in advocacy and collaborative policy research to change institutional contexts and break down silos. Increased partnerships between industrial-organizational (I-O) psychology practitioners and researchers from many industries and disciplines could break down silos that we see as limiting development of the field.

Innovative Ideas on How Work–Family Research Can Have More Impact

The commentaries on our focal article agreed with its main premise that work-family research should follow new strategies to improve its practical impact, and made suggestions clustering into three main themes. The first theme built on our suggestion to improve the research focus, terminology, and framing of work-family research. These essays offered additional ideas such as decoupling work-family from work-life research, and examining contextual factors more deeply. The second theme focused on how to better apply the findings from work family research. These commentaries provided social change approaches for making work-family issues more central to key stakeholders and to organizations. The third theme focused on broadening our scope to the societal level. These editorials advocated tactics supporting the development of basic rights of work-life balance within and across nations.

Work–Family Research Has a Public Relations Problem: Moving From Organizational Nicety to Necessity

Work–Family Research Has a Public Relations Problem: Moving From Organizational Nicety to Necessity

Work–Family Research: A Broader View of Impact

TAMMY D. ALLENUniversity of South FloridaWe agree with many of the suggestionsmade by Kossek, Baltes, and Matthews(2011) that pertain to future directionsfor work and family research. They poseexcellent avenues for the field to take.However, we offer an alternative viewpointwith regard to several of the assertions,both explicit and implicit, made along theway. We first address specific claims madeby Kossek et al. with regard to family-friendly policy implementation, followedby a discussion of impact and the roleresearchers have with regard to the appliedimpact of scientific research. Finally, wenotetheimportanceofcarefullyconsideringwhen research is ready to be applied.A More Optimistic AssessmentKossek et al. cite research suggesting that(a) employers have been reducing theirofferings of family-friendly benefits and(b) this should be interpreted asasignof thelow impact of work–family research. Ourinterpretation of thecurrent state of affairs ismoreoptimistic.First,thereislittleevidenceto support the claim that work–family poli-cies are on the decline. Our review of

Building a Citizenship Argument on Top of the Business Case Argument: A Systemic Perspective on Work–Family Articulation

ARIANE OLLIER-MALATERRERouen Business SchoolAs a work–life scholar at a Grande Ecolein France and a former project leader,entrepreneur and Accenture manager, Iagree with Kossek, Baltes, and Matthews(2011) that work–family research seems tobemakinglessofanimpactonpracticethanit should. Making an impact on practice is achallenge in many areas of social sciencesresearch, not only for work–family research(Rynes & Shapiro, 2005). Yet work–familyresearch is a particularly complex areaof research because of its intrinsic cross-disciplinary nature and of the many layersof context it has to embrace. Each one ofus reads and designs research through aset of lenses: the gender lens, the ethnicitylens, the disciplinary lens, and the countryof origin lens, to name only a few. TheKossek et al.’s article is no exception:it is rooted in industrial–organizational(I–O) psychology and proposes typical U.S.centric views. This commentary provides adifferent perspective that, combined withtheir perspective and other scholars’, mayhelp moving the field toward making agreater impact. Specifically, I argue thatto make an impact, work–life research

Creating a High Impact Work–Family Research Agenda

Creating a High Impact Work–Family Research Agenda

Expanding the boundaries of work—family research: A review and agenda for future research

Given the dominance of work—family research within the context of the United States and a disparate and fractured understanding of the dynamic interplay between work and family for those who live and work beyond the borders of the United States, we review and synthesize 219 empirical work—family studies that have targeted employees outside of the United States. Our review answers four questions about international work—family research. First, what constitutes the work—family interface and is there consensus about how to measure it? Second, what theories have researchers used to explain the work—family interface? Third, which antecedents and consequences of the work—family interface are common across countries and which are unique to particular countries? Fourth, what can we learn from this review that will inform future research in this area? Based on our review, a universal theoretical framework that integrates both work—family conflict and facilitation is provided. Future research directions are also discussed.

A qualitative examination of the work–family interface: Parents of children with autism spectrum disorder

Within the work–family literature little is known about the work–family challenges and opportunities faced by families that have one or more children with autism spectrum disorder. However, it has been consistently demonstrated that parents of children with autism spectrum disorder are at a higher risk of experiencing a host of negative outcomes. Using a qualitative design, within grounded theory, the present study sheds light on the needs, experiences, and challenges that parents of children with autism spectrum disorder face and also offers insight into ways to expand the scope of work–family research in this area. The present research provides evidence of how the family domain can greatly impact experiences and decisions made in the work domain for families with special needs. The present research adds to the small but growing literature examining the interplay between home and work life for families with special needs and demonstrates that this is an important research domain in need of additional conceptual and empirical consideration.

Conservation of Resources theory in the context of multiple roles: an analysis of within- and cross-role mediational pathways

Based on the Conservation of Resources theory, we used data from the National Survey of Midlife Development in the United States (MIDUS I, 1995–1996; N=1779) to estimate by covariance structure analysis the direct and indirect effects of work and family demands, resources, and support on psychological distress. In a new application of the theory, we estimated six within-role mediational pathways linking work-related predictors to psychological distress through work interfering with family (WIF) and family-related predictors to psychological distress through family interfering with work (FIW). Finally, in a departure from previous work–family research, we estimated six cross-role mediational pathways linking work-related predictors to psychological distress through FIW and family-related predictors to psychological distress through WIF. Ten of the 12 hypothesized mediational effects were significant and another was marginally significant, supporting the mediational role of work–family conflict within Conservation of Resources theory.

Enhancing Work—Family Balance Research in Family Businesses

Rothausen thoroughly reviews the literature on work—family balance in traditional workplaces and provides a useful framework for determining a healthy balance between work and family in a family business context. This article addresses Rothausen’s contributions to enhancing work—family research in family businesses, and it specifies areas for further research using a fit model. Work family scholars have the potential to integrate research in economics, sociology, and psychology and so help form interdisciplinary teams to conduct research on family businesses.

Is managing the work–family interface worthwhile? Benefits for employee health and performance

AbstractPast work–family research has shown that employees' work–family conflict experiences relate to adverse self‐reported health and performance outcomes, whereas work–family facilitation experiences relate positively to these self‐reports. The present research extends these findings by relating experiences in the work–family interface to objective health and performance indicators. We conducted two studies within a multinational financial services organization. The results of Study 1, a large‐scale cross‐sectional study (N = 1134), supported our hypotheses that conflict experiences relate to objective indicators of poor health (cholesterol level, body mass index, physical stamina), whereas facilitation experiences indicated better health. Study 2 (N = 58) was designed to longitudinally examine the relationship between employees' facilitation experiences and their objective physical health (cholesterol level, body mass index), actual sickness absence, and objective job performance over time. Corroborating our hypotheses, facilitation at Time 1 reliably predicted better physical health (cholesterol level and BMI), lower absenteeism, and increased job performance one year later (after correction for base‐line indicators). This research makes an important and much needed contribution to the literature and indicates that supporting employees to combine work and family roles not only enhances subjective well‐being of individual employees but also objectively benefits the organizations they work in. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The economic impact of work and family issues: Child care satisfaction and financial considerations of employed mothers.

This article introduces the role of financial considerations into work-family research by considering the costs and benefits of employed mothers' child care satisfaction. Data from 2 samples offer empirical support for the addition of a fourth factor to a current measure of child care satisfaction so that the measure reflects mothers' satisfaction not only with caregiver attentiveness, communication, and dependability but also with child care-related financial considerations. This article also discusses relationships between child care satisfaction and work-family conflict and job satisfaction for this population. The results of this study provide both organizations and child care providers with a broader picture of the concerns that employed mothers face as they search for reliable, affordable child care.

Innovations in the study of the work‐family interface: Introduction to the Special Section

Research on the work–family interface has grown substantially over the past three decades. Two recent reviews of the literature (Casper, Eby, Bordeaux, Lockwood, & Lambert, 2007; Eby, Casper, Lockwood, Bordeaux, & Brinley, 2005) analysed approximately 200 articles published in industrial–organizational psychology and organizational behaviour journals between 1980 and 2003. Work–family scholarship has continued to flourish in I–O psychology, OB, and related disciplines since 2003, largely fuelled by an increasing representation of women in the workforce, a growth in the number of dual-earner, single parent, and ‘sandwiched-generation’ (Neal & Hammer, 2007) employees, and individual values that increasingly emphasize life balance. We have come a long way since Kanter (1977) revealed the mythical assumption that work and family constitute separate worlds. Research over the past several decades has convincingly demonstrated that work and family lives are often interdependent, sometimes negatively and sometimes positively, and that these interdependencies flow in both directions, from work to family and from family to work (Frone, 2003). New models of the work–family interface have emerged (Greenhaus & Powell, 2006; Voydanoff, 2008; Wayne, Grzywacz, Carlson, & Kacmar, 2007), and meta-analyses have assessed the strength of the relationships among key variables, most prominently work– family conflict (Byron, 2005; Ford, Heinen, & Langkamer, 2007; Mesmer-Magnus & Viswesvaran, 2005, 2006). Nevertheless, several reviews have identified a number of limitations in work–family research (Barnett, 1998; Casper et al., 2007; Eby et al., 2005; Greenhaus & Parasuraman, 1999; Parasuraman & Greenhaus, 2002). Some of the concerns expressed in the reviews pertain to the content of the research, such as a lack of comprehensive theory building, preoccupation with negative work–family interdependencies, and a minimal consideration of individual differences and changes in work–family relationships over time. Methodological concerns include an over-reliance on cross-sectional survey-based designs with single-source data and the tendency to use samples (managerial and professional employees, individuals in Western cultures, predominantly Caucasian employees in intact families) that are overly restrictive. Moreover, the neglect of contextual influences observed more broadly in organizational behaviour ( Johns, 2006) seems equally relevant to the work–family literature. The British Psychological Society 343

The development of a new measure for work-family research: Community resource fit

We describe the development and validation of a quantitative measure of community resource fit; i.e., satisfaction with the extent to which community resources meet the needs of working families of school-aged children. The measure has good psychometric properties, and preliminary results suggest that the measure warrants further study. The measure is composed of six moderately intercorrelated subscales assessing resource fit in the areas of work, public transportation, school, school transportation, after-school programs and after-school transportation resources. We found interesting patterns of results linking community resource fit, especially in the areas of work and school resource fit, to a variety of quality-of-life and well-being outcomes among employed parents of school-aged children. These outcomes include work-to-family and family-to-work conflict and enhancement, psychological distress, job–role quality, likelihood of losing or leaving one's job and likelihood of leaving one's line of work.

Achieving work–life balance: Current theoretical and practice issues

AbstractProfessor Steven Poelmans is a leading international expert on the frontiers of work–family research contributing to theoretical and practice advancements. He is the Academic Director of the International Centre of Work and Family (ICWF) at IESE Business School in Barcelona, Spain, which has worked for more than a decade with numerous organisations in Spain, Latin-America, and various countries around the globe to create a family-responsible environment. In this conversation, Steven Poelmans responds to questions from Thomas Kalliath and Paula Brough (Guest Editors) on a range of theoretical and practice issues currently facing the field including measurement of work–life balance, work–life balance theory, engagement with industry, the role of organisational culture and strategic management in influencing work–life balance.

Achieving work–life balance: Current theoretical and practice issues

AbstractProfessor Steven Poelmans is a leading international expert on the frontiers of work–family research contributing to theoretical and practice advancements. He is the Academic Director of the International Centre of Work and Family (ICWF) at IESE Business School in Barcelona, Spain, which has worked for more than a decade with numerous organisations in Spain, Latin-America, and various countries around the globe to create a family-responsible environment. In this conversation, Steven Poelmans responds to questions from Thomas Kalliath and Paula Brough (Guest Editors) on a range of theoretical and practice issues currently facing the field including measurement of work–life balance, work–life balance theory, engagement with industry, the role of organisational culture and strategic management in influencing work–life balance.

Work-Family Experiences and the Insights of Municipal Government Employees: A Case Study

This qualitative case study brings the work-family concerns of the municipal work force to the fore by sharing the insights employees in one city government have about their paid work and family experiences and about strategies that could create work environments that are more supportive of their multiple roles. A review of the literature indicated that while much is known about employees' work-family relationships in the private sector, the city government workplace has been neglected in work-family scholarship. A work-family spillover model and an organizational analysis framework guided this exploratory study. Findings from 12 focus groups with a total of 96 participants suggest that municipal government employees face several challenges in managing their work and caregiving responsibilities and that they can best meet these challenges by having flexible schedules, supervisor support, and an organizational culture that is responsive to employees' needs. Additional work-family insights that emerged from the focus groups were that public sector employees have a high level of commitment to voluntary work in their community, that “family friendly” means a work environment that embodies the positive qualities of a nurturing family system, that there is a strong demand for elder care, that employees want to have the prerogative to individualize and identify their own list of family members for whom Family and Medical Leave Act time off can be used, and that a work-family advocate should be employed to help supervisory staff create and maintain a more family friendly workplace culture. Such findings form a foundation for future work-family research in local government settings and provide useful strategies other public sector workplaces could consider.

Investigating workplace flexibility using a multi-organization database: A collaboration of academics and practitioners

In most countries of North America, Europe, and Oceania; and increasingly in Asia and Latin America as well; dual-earner families have become the norm. This major shift in the global labor market and the realities of a global economy, have brought about important changes in the lives of many individuals and families. The conflict between working and caring responsibilities has intensified and both men and women have to come to terms with changing gender role expectations. A new field of inquiry has emerged, under the broad umbrella of work–family research, drawing on scholars from a wide range of disciplines. Testimonies of this growing, multi-disciplinary field are the many work and family special issues published in journals like Human Resource Management (Lobel, 1992), Qualitative Sociology (Gerstel & Clawson, 2000), International Journal of Cross-Cultural Management (Poelmans, 2003), Public Finance and Management (Amuedo-Dorantes & Kimmel, 2005), and Career Development International (de Janasz, 2007). In 1999, Community, Work & Family became the first journal to create a dedicated forum for this multi-disciplinary field. This special issue, ‘Investigating Workplace Flexibility Using a Multi-organization Database: A Collaboration of Academics and Practitioners’, is unique and offers an important landmark in this growing domain of scholarship.