Work Family Polices

Role Balance and Its Implications

Marks and MacDermid define role balance as ‘‘the tendency to become fully employed in the operation of every role in one's total role system, to approach every typical role and role partner with an attitude of attentiveness and caution. Put otherwise, it is the exercise of that evenhanded alertness known sometimes as mindfulness’’ (Marks & MacDermid, 1996, p. 421). They note that this expression of full engagement reflects a status of ‘‘positive’’ role balance, in contrast to negative role balance in which people are fully disengaged in every part. Although Marks and MacDermid (1996) are understandably more concerned with positive role balance than negative role balance, they recognize the importance of distinguishing between the two concepts.

Definitions of Work-Family Balance

Other scholars have defined work–family balance or work-life balance in ways similar to Marks and MacDermid's (1996) concept of positive role balance. For example, Kirchmeyer (2000) views living a balanced life as ‘‘achieving satisfying experiences in all life domains, and to do so requires personal resources such as energy, time, and commitment to be well distributed across domains’’ (p. 81). Similarly, Clark (2000) sees work–family balance as ‘‘satisfaction and good functioning at work and at home with a minimum of role conflict’’ (p. 349).

Challenges of Study-Family Conflict

According to Kofodimos (1993), balance refers to ‘‘a satisfying, healthy, and productive life that includes work, play, and love’’ (p. xiii). Study-family conflict is defined as inter-role conflict where responsibilities of employment and family are incompatible (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985). This conflict arises when participation in the family role is hindered by participation in the work role, hence the term “work-family conflict.” Previous research indicates that work-family conflict correlates with lower overall job satisfaction (Kossek & Ozeki, 1998) and other negative outcomes, such as emotional exhaustion (Boles et al., 1997) and a greater propensity to leave a position (Good et al., 1988).

Impact on Organizational Outcomes

Higgins, Duxbury, and Irving (1992) found that the struggle between work and family roles diminishes employees' perceptions of quality of work life and family life, which can, in turn, affect organizational outcomes such as productivity, absenteeism, and turnover. They suggest that alternative employment arrangements could potentially reduce work-family disputes. Study-family practices are defined as any welfare or working conditions that an organization provides to help employees balance family and work (Bardoel et al., 1998). Several researchers (Bardoel et al., 1991; Goodstein, 1994; Ingram & Simons, 1995) have reported that addressing the increasing demands of work and family balance is a significant challenge for many organizations.

Work-Family Policies and Their Benefits

Employment and family workplace policies enable parents to balance family needs while maintaining their careers. These policies include leave and hours flexibility entitlements, childcare services, and policies to facilitate labor market re-entry after a child-rearing absence. Work–family policy availability can enhance work attitudes through greater family support, reducing work-to-family conflict (Beauregard & Henry, 2009; Glass & Finley, 2002). Despite their potential benefits, no research has simultaneously examined how policy availability and function relate to employee work attitudes.

Types of Work-Family Policies

In organizations, three major types of work-family policies have been established: flexible work options, family leave policies, and dependent-care benefits (Morgan & Milliken, 1992). A communicative perspective allows for examining how such benefits are enacted through discourse and interactions. The intent of work-family policies is realized only when they are implemented effectively.

Organizational Culture and Work-Family Balance

Work-family benefits provide a rich context for studying policy due to their rising trend since the 1990s (Lobel, 1991; Mitchell, 1997; Osterman, 1995). However, implementing family-friendly policies does not automatically lead to widespread organizational culture change (Lewis, 1997). Research shows that a supportive work culture is significantly related to benefit utilization and work outcomes, such as organizational commitment and reduced work-to-family conflict, beyond mere policy availability (Thompson, Beauvais, & Lyness, 1999).

Models of Work-Family Policies

Organizational work-family policies have been developed to address the greater care commitments of employees with family responsibilities, assisting them in fulfilling both work and home responsibilities. Models include part-time work, career break schemes, parental leave, flexible hours arrangements, and compressed work weeks (Ministerial Task Force on Work and Family, 2002). To date, females with dependent children have been the largest demographic group to use these arrangements (Charlesworth, 1997), despite their availability to all employees.

References:

• Bardoel, E. A., Moss, S. A., Smyrnios, K. X., & Tharenou, P. (1998). Employee characteristics associated with the provision of work-family policies. International Journal of Manpower, 19(7), 513-533.
• Boles, J. S., Johnston, M. W., & Hair, J. F. (1997). Role stress, work-family conflict and emotional exhaustion: Inter-relationships and effects on some work-related consequences. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 17(1), 17-28.
• Clark, S. C. (2000). Work/family border theory: A new theory of work/family balance. Human Relations, 53(6), 747-770.
• Greenhaus, J. H., & Beutell, N. J. (1985). Sources of conflict between work and family roles. Academy of Management Review, 10(1), 76-88.
• Good, L. K., Page, T. J., & Young, C. E. (1988). The effect of perceived role conflict on retail buyers' work-related attitudes and intentions. Journal of Retailing, 64(4), 463-486.
• Higgins, C. A., Duxbury, L. E., & Irving, R. H. (1992). Work-family conflict in the dual-career family. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 51(1), 51-75.
• Kofodimos, J. R. (1993). Balancing act: How managers can integrate successful careers and fulfilling personal lives. Jossey-Bass.
• Kirchmeyer, C. (2000). Work-life initiatives: Greed or benevolence regarding workers' time? In C. L. Cooper & D. M. Rousseau (Eds.), Trends in organizational behavior (Vol. 7, pp. 79-93). John Wiley & Sons.
• Kossek, E. E., & Ozeki, C. (1998). Work-family conflict, policies, and the job-life satisfaction relationship: A review and directions for organizational behavior-human resources research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(2), 139-149.
• Lewis, S. (1997). 'Family friendly' employment policies: A route to changing organizational culture or playing about at the margins? Gender, Work & Organization, 4(1), 13-23.
• Marks, S. R., & MacDermid, S. M. (1996). Multiple roles and the self: A theory of role balance. Journal of Marriage and Family, 58(2), 417-432.
• Morgan, H., & Milliken, F. J. (1992). Keys to action: Understanding differences in organizations' responsiveness to work-and-family issues. Human Resource Management, 31(3), 227-248.
• Thompson, C. A., Beauvais, L. L., & Lyness, K. S. (1999). When work-family benefits are not enough: The influence of work-family culture on benefit utilization, organizational attachment, and work-family conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54(3), 392-415.