Article: Parenthetical citations are used, but the sources are not delineated separately from the reference list Intersection of work and personal life
In the intersection of work and personal life, the work–life balance is the equilibrium between the two. There are many aspects of one's personal life that can intersect with work, including family, leisure, and health. A work–life balance is bidirectional; for instance, work can interfere with private life, and private life can interfere with work. This balance or interface can be adverse in nature (e.g., work–life conflict) or can be beneficial (e.g., work–life enrichment) in nature. Recent research has shown that the work–life interface has become more boundary-less, especially for technology-enabled workers.
Dominant theories of the relationship
Several theories explain different aspects of the relationship between work and family life. Boundary theory and border theory are the two fundamental theories that researchers have used to study these role conflicts. Other theories are built upon the foundations of these two theories. In the two decades since boundary theory and border theory were first proposed, the rise of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) has drastically altered the work–life interface. Work can now be completed at any time and in any location, meaning that domains are more likely to be blended and boundaries barely exist.
Seven dominant theories have been utilized to explain this relationship on the boundary-border spectrum; These theories are: structural functioning, segmentation, compensation, supplemental and reactive compensation, role enhancement, spillover, and work enrichment model.
Structural functionalism
The roots of this theory can be traced back to the early 20th century, when industrial revolution was separating economic work from the family home. The 19th century's technological advancements in machinery and manufacturing initiated the separation of work from family. However, it was not until the early 20th century that the first view of work–family theories started to take shape. Structural-functionalism was one of the dominant sociology theories of early 20th century and one the first to resemble modern work–family theories.
The structural functionalism theory, which emerged following WWII, was largely influenced from the industrial revolution and the changes in the social role of men and women during this period. This theory implies that the life is concerned mainly with two separate spheres: productive life which happens in the workplace and affective life which is at home. Structural functionalism theory believes in the existence of radical separation between work (institution, workplace, or market) and families. According to this theory, these two (workplace and family) work best "when men and women specialize their activities in separate spheres, women at home doing expressive work and men in the workplace performing instrumental tasks" (Kingsbury & Scanzoni, 1993; as cited in MacDermid, 2005:18).
Greedy institutions
It has been argued that the work–family conflicts, in particular role conflicts, can be interpreted in terms of Lewis A. Coser's concept of "greedy institutions". These institutions are called "greedy" in the sense that they make all-encompassing demands on the commitment and loyalty of individuals, and tend to discourage involvement in other social spheres. Institutions such as religious orders, sects, academia, top level sports, the military and senior management have been interpreted as greedy institutions. On the other hand, also the family has been interpreted as a greedy institution in consideration of the demands placed on a caretaker. When a person is involved in two greedy institutions—be it child care and university, or family and the military, or others—task and role conflicts arise.
A 2020 LinkedIn survey based on over 2.9 million responses concluded that employees struggling with work-life balance were 4.4 times more likely to show symptoms of occupational burnout.
Segmentation
Based on this theory work and family do not affect each other, since they are segmented and independent from each other. The literature also reports the usage of the terms compartmentalization, independence, separateness, disengagement, neutrality, and detachment to describe this theory.
Compensation Theory
In 1979, Piotrkowski argued that according to this theory employees "look to their homes as havens, [and] look to their families as sources of satisfaction lacking in the occupational sphere." What distinguishes compensation theory from the previous theories is that, in compensation theory, for the first time, the positive effect of work to family has been recognized.
Supplemental and reactive compensation
Supplemental and reactive compensation theories are two dichotomies of compensation theory which were developed during the late 1980s and the early 1990s. While compensation theory describes the behavior of employees in pursuing an alternative reward in the other sphere, supplemental and reactive compensation theories try to describe the reason behind the work–family compensation behavior of employees.
Role enhancement theory
According to this theory, the combination of certain roles has a positive, rather than a negative effect on well-being. This theory states that participation in one role is made better or easier by virtue of participation in the other role. Moreover, this theory acknowledges the negative effect of the work–family relationship, in which, only beyond a certain upper limit may overload and distress occur, however, the central focus of this perspective is mainly on the positive effects of work and family relationship, such as resource enhancement.
The Negative Effects of Spillover
Spillover is a process by which an employee's experience in one domain affects their experience in another domain. Theoretically, spillover is perceived to be one of two types: positive or negative. Spillover as the most popular view of relationship between work and family, considers multidimensional aspects of work and family relationship.
According to a 2021 study by Indeed, 53% of on-site workers found it challenging to stop thinking about work in their spare time.
Work enrichment model
This theory is one of the recent models for explaining the relationship between work and family. According to this model, experience in one role (work or family) will enhance the quality of life in the other role. In other words, this model tries to explain the positive effects of the work–family relationship.
Work–family conflict
Work and family studies historically focus on studying the conflict between different roles that individuals have in their society, specifically their roles at work, and their roles as a family member.
Work–family conflict is defined as interrole conflict where the participation in one role interfere with the participation in another. Greenhaus and Beutell (1985) differentiate three sources for conflict between work and family:
"time devoted to the requirements of one role makes it difficult to fulfill requirements of another" (p. 76);
"strain from participation in one role makes it difficult to fulfill requirements of another" (p. 76);
"specific behaviors required by one role make it difficult to fulfill the requirements of another" (p. 76).
Conceptually, the conflict between work and family is bi-directional. Scholars distinguish between what is termed work-to-family conflict (WFC), and what is termed family-to-work conflict (FWC). This bi-directional view is displayed in the figure on the right.
Accordingly, WFC might occur when experiences at work interfere with family life like extensive, irregular, or inflexible work hours. Family-to-work conflict occurs when experiences in the family interfere with work life. For example, a parent may take time off from work in order to take care of a sick child. Although these two forms of conflict—WFC and FWC—are strongly correlated with each other, more attention has been directed at WFC. This may because family demands are more elastic than the boundaries and responsibilities of the work role. Also, research has found that work roles are more likely to interfere with family roles than family roles are likely to interfere with work role.
Allen, Herst, Bruck, and Sutton (2000) describe in their paper three categories of consequences related to WFC: work-related outcomes (e.g., job satisfaction or job performance), nonwork-related outcomes (e.g., life or family satisfaction), and stress-related outcomes (e.g., depression or substance abuse). For example, WFC has been shown to be negatively related to job satisfaction whereas the association is more pronounced for females.
The vast majority of studies investigating the consequences of WFC were interrogating samples from Western countries, such as U.S. Therefore, the generalizability of their findings is in question. Fortunately, there is also literature studying WFC and its consequences in other cultural contexts, such as Taiwan and India. Lu, Kao, Cooper, Allen, Lapierre, O'Driscoll, Poelmans, Sanchez, and Spector (2009) could not find any cultural difference related in work-related and nonwork-related outcomes of WFC when they compared Great Britain and Taiwan. Likewise, Pal and Saksvik (2008) also did not detect specific cultural differences between employees from Norway and India. Nevertheless, more cross-cultural research is needed to understand the cultural dimensions of the WFC construct.
The research concerning interventions to reduce WFC is currently still very limited. As an exception, Nielson, Carlson, and Lankau (2001) showed that having a supportive mentor on the job correlates negatively with the employee's WFC. However, other functions of mentoring, like the role model aspect, appear to have no effect on WFC. Therefore, the mechanisms how having a mentor influences the work–family interface remain unclear.
In terms of primary and secondary intervention there are some results. Hammer, Kossek, Anger, Bodner, and Zimmerman (2011) conducted a field study and showed that training supervisors to show more family supportive behavior, led to increased physical health in employees that were high in WFC. At the same time, employees having low WFC scores even decreased in physical health. This shows that even though interventions can help, it is important to focus on the right persons. Otherwise, the intervention damages more than it helps.
Another study (Wilson, Polzer-Debruyne, Chen, & Fernandes, 2007) showed that training employees helps to reduce shift work related WFC. Additionally, this training is more effective, if the partner of the focal person is also participating. Therefore, integrating the family into the intervention seems to be helpful too.
There are various additional factors that might influence the effectiveness of WFC interventions. For example, some interventions seem more adequate to reduce family-to-work conflict (FWC) than WFC (Hammer et al., 2011). More research is still needed, before optimal treatments against WFC can be derived.
Work–family enrichment
Work–family enrichment or work–family facilitation is a form of positive spillover, defined as a process whereby involvement in one domain establishes benefits and/or resources which then may improve performance or involvement in another domain (Greenhaus & Powell, 2006). For example, involvement in the family role is made easier by participation in the work role (Wayne, Musisca, & Fleeson, 2004).
In contrast to work–family conflict which is associated with several negative consequences, work–family enrichment is related to positive organizational outcomes such as job satisfaction and effort (Wayne et al., 2004). There are several potential sources enrichment can arise from. Examples are that resources (e.g., positive mood) gained in one role lead to better functioning in the other role (Sieber, 1974) or skills and attitudes that are acquired in one role are useful in the other role (Crouter, 1984).
Conceptually, enrichment between work and family is bi-directional. Most researchers make the distinction between what is termed work–family enrichment, and what is termed family–work enrichment. Work–family enrichment occurs, when ones involvement in work provides skills, behaviors, or positive mood which influences the family life in a positive way. Family-work enrichment, however, occurs when ones involvement in the family domain results in positive mood, feeling of success or support that help individuals to cope better with problems at work, feel more confident and in the end being more productive at work (Wayne, et al., 2004).
Several antecedents of work–family enrichment have been proposed. Personality traits, such as extraversion and openness for experience have been shown to be positively related to work–family enrichment (Wayne et al., 2004). Next to individual antecedents, organizational circumstances such as resources and skills gained at work foster the occurrence of work–family enrichment (Voydanoff, 2004). For example, abilities such as interpersonal communication skills are learned at work and may then facilitate constructive communication with family members at home.
New family models emerge
"Our review suggests that most of what is known about Work–Family issues is based on the experiences of heterosexual, Caucasian, managerial and professional employees in family arrangements" (Casper et al., 2007, p. 10).
The role of organization and supervisor
Research has focused especially on the role of the organization and the supervisor in the reduction of WFC. Results provide evidence for the negative association between the availability of family friendly resources provided by the work place and WFC. General support by the organization aids the employees to deal with work family issues so that organizational support is negatively connected to WFC (Kossek, Pichler, Bodner, & Hammer, 2011). Furthermore, Kossek et al. (2011) showed that work family specific support has a stronger negative connection with work family conflict. Interesting results by other researchers show that family friendly organizational culture also has an indirect effect on WFC via supervisor support and coworker support (Dolcoy & Daley, 2009). Surprisingly, some research also shows that the utilization of provided resources such as child care support or flexible work hours has no longitudinal connection with WFC (Hammer, Neal, Newson, Brockwood, & Colton, 2005). This result speaks against common assumptions. Also, the supervisor has a social-support function for his/her subordinates. As Moen and Yu (2000) showed supervisor support is an indicator for lower levels of WFC. Further support for this hypothesis stems from a study conducted by Thompson and Prottas (2005). Keeping in mind the support function, organizations should provide trainings for the supervisors and conduct the selection process of new employees. Similar as for organizational support, the meta-analysis by Kossek et al. (2011) showed that general supervisor is negatively connected to WFC. Again, work–family-specific supervisor support has a stronger negative connection with WFC. Aside from support by the organization and the supervisor, research points out a third source of work-place support: The coworker. The informal support by the coworker not only correlates with positive aspects such as job satisfaction, but is also negatively associated with negative variables such as WFC (Dolcos & Doley, 2009; Thompson & Prottas, 2005).
In terms of work–family enrichment, supervisors and organizations are also relevant, since they are able to provide with important resource (e.g., skills and financial benefits) and positive affect.
Research methods to investigate
A methodological review by Casper, Eby, Bordeaux, Lockwood, and Lambert (2007) summarizes the research methods used in the area of work–family research from 1980 to 2003. Their main findings are:
The descriptions of sample characteristics are often inconsistent and leave out essential information necessary to evaluate if generalization is appropriate or not.
Samples are mostly homogenous, neglecting diversity regarding racial, ethnic, cultural aspects, and non-traditional families (e.g., single or homosexual parents).
The research design of most studies is cross-sectional and correlational. Field settings are predominant (97%). Only 2% use experimental designs.
Surveys are mostly used for data collection (85%) whereas qualitative methods are used less often. Measures are mainly derived from one single person (76%) and focus on the individual level of analysis (89%). In this respect, research on, for example, dyads and groups have been neglected.
Simple inferential statistics are preferred (79%) instead of, for example, structural equation modeling (17%).
Regarding reliability aspects, coefficient alpha is often provided (87%), thereby reaching .79 on average. Pre-existing scales are often used (69%) containing multi-item measures (79%).
In light of these results, Casper, et al. (2007) give several recommendations. They suggest, for example, that researchers should use more longitudinal and experimental research designs, more diverse samples, data sources and levels of analysis.
History
Lillian Moller Gilbreth established the philosophical basis for work-life balance.
See also Achievement ideology Annual leave Burnout Critique of work Downshifting (lifestyle) Effects of overtime Four-day workweek Leisure
List of minimum annual leave by country
Marx's theory of alienation
Need for achievement Overwork Paid time off Productivism
Right to rest and leisure
Six-hour day Social alienation Workaholic Work–family conflict
Work–life balance in Germany
Work–life balance in South Korea
Work–life balance in the European Union
Work–life balance in the United States
References |
Source: IE 11 is not supported. For an optimal experience visit our site on another browser.
SKIP TO CONTENT NBC News Logo Trump on trial Politics U.S. News World Business Sports Health NBC News Tipline Culture & Trends
Share & Save —
My News Manage Profile Email Preferences Sign Out Search Search Profile My News Sign Out Sign In
Create your free profile
Sections U.S. News Politics World Local Business Sports Paris 2024 Olympics Investigations Culture & Trends Health Science Tech & Media Weather Video Features Photos NBC Select Decision 2024 NBC Asian America NBC BLK NBC Latino NBC OUT tv Today Nightly News MSNBC Meet the Press Dateline Featured NBC News Now Nightly Films Stay Tuned Special Features Newsletters Podcasts Listen Now More From NBC CNBC NBC.COM NBCU Academy Peacock
NEXT STEPS FOR VETS
NBC News Site Map
Help Follow NBC News news Alerts
There are no new alerts at this time
Search Search Facebook Twitter Email SMS Print Whatsapp Reddit Pocket Flipboard Pinterest Linkedin Latest Stories Trump on trial Politics U.S. News World Business Sports Health NBC News Tipline Culture & Trends Business News
Survey: U.S. workplace not family-oriented
The United States lags far behind virtually all wealthy countries with regard to family-oriented workplace policies such as maternity leave, paid sick days and support for breast-feeding, a new study by Harvard and McGill University researchers says.
Print
Feb. 1, 2007, 6:36 AM UTC
/ Source : The Associated Press
The United States lags far behind virtually all wealthy countries with regard to family-oriented workplace policies such as maternity leave, paid sick days and support for breast-feeding, a new study by Harvard and McGill University researchers says.
The new data comes as politicians and lobbyists wrangle over whether to scale back the existing federal law providing unpaid family leaves or to push new legislation allowing paid leaves.
The study, officially being issued Thursday, says workplace policies for families in the United States are weaker than those of all high-income countries and many middle- and low-income countries. Notably, it says the U.S. is one of only five countries out of 173 in the survey that does not guarantee some form of paid maternity leave; the others are Lesotho, Liberia, Swaziland and Papua New Guinea.
“More countries are providing the workplace protections that millions of Americans can only dream of,” said the study’s lead author, Jody Heymann, founder of the Harvard-based Project on Global Working Families and director of McGill’s Institute for Health and Social Policy.
Among the study’s findings:
Fathers are granted paid paternity leave or paid parental leave in 65 countries, including 31 offering at least 14 weeks of paid leave. The U.S. guarantees fathers no such paid leaves.
At least 107 countries protect working women’s right to breast-feed; the breaks are paid in at least 73 of them. The U.S. does not have federal legislation guaranteeing the right to breast-feed at work.
At least 145 countries provide paid sick days, with 127 providing a week or more annually. The U.S. provides unpaid leave through the Family and Medical Leave Act, which does not cover all workers; there is no federal law providing for paid sick days.
At least 134 countries have laws setting the maximum length of the work week. The U.S. does not have a maximum work week length or a limit on mandatory overtime per week.
According to the study, the U.S. fares comparatively well in some areas — such as guaranteeing significantly higher pay for overtime work and ensuring the right to work for all racial and ethnic groups, regardless of gender, age or disability.
“The U.S. has been a proud leader in adopting laws that provide for equal opportunity in the workplace, but our work/family protections are among the worst,” Heymann said. “It’s time for a change.”
The topic is of keen interest in Washington.
The Labor Department is examining regulations that give workers unpaid leave to deal with family or medical emergencies — a review that supporters of the rules worry might be a prelude to scaling back these protections, as requested by some business groups. Comments to the agency on the 1993 Family and Medical Leave Act — which grants eligible workers up to a total of 12 weeks of unpaid leave a year — are due by Friday.
At the same time, Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., plans to announce Thursday that he will propose new legislation that would enable workers to take six weeks of paid family leave. Congress also is expected to reconsider the Healthy Families Act, a bill introduced last session that would require employers with at least 15 employees to provide seven paid sick days per year.
On the state level, some New Jersey lawmakers are pushing legislation that would make their state the second, along with California, to provide paid family leave. Under one New Jersey proposal, workers who take leave would be paid through the state’s temporary disability insurance fund, augmented by a 0.1 percent charge on workers’ weekly wages.
Traditionally, many conservatives have opposed moves for paid family leave, but there are signs of some shifts. A prominent anti-abortion leader, the Rev. Paul Schenck of the National Pro-Life Action Center, recently said he would support paid maternity leave on the premise that it might dissuade some pregnant women from having abortions.
“Across the political spectrum, people are realizing these policies have an enormous impact on working families,” Heymann said in a telephone interview. “If you look at the most competitive economies in the world, all the others except the U.S. have these policies in place.”
About Contact Help Careers Ad Choices Privacy Policy
Do Not Sell My Personal Information
CA Notice
Terms of Service (Updated JULY 7, 2023)
NBC News Sitemap Closed Captioning Advertise Select Shopping Select Personal Finance
© 2024 NBC UNIVERSAL
NBC News Logo MSNBC Logo Today Logo |