Content uploaded by Sourabh Munjal
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Sourabh Munjal on Aug 29, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
IMPACT OF FLEXIBLE WORK ARRANGEMENTS ON
WORK-LIFE INTEGRATION OF WORKING
PROFESSIONALS
ABSTRACT
Work and life boundary dynamics have been changed over the years. Two domains are no longer separated and are
integrated. For the fulfilments of work and life demands, employees seek to use different flexible work arrangements
for integration. This research investigates the impact of flexible work arrangements on the work-life integration of
employees in the service industry. Gender was taken as an intervening factor. Survey was conducted on 446 employees
of service sectors. Results show that when employees utilize the FWAs, are more effective in integration and
experience fewer conflicts irrespective of gender. In the case of flexitime and part-time work, options are more
effective in reducing stress. Study contribute to the work-life literature and results can be implemented to take
managerial decisions and useful in future researches.
INTRODUCTION
Work and family are the two important parts of life and in today’s world, both domains are merged (Tremblay &
Ilama, 2015). Demands of both domains of family and work have increased and one has to work beyond the domain
boundaries and to fulfil the demands one is expected to be present anytime anywhere. Due to the demands of work
and life, one is expected to work beyond the boundaries of one domain, e.g. office work in the evening or weekend or
taking family calls in the office hours.
Initially the concept of work life balance was considered, which suggest keeping two domains separate and gives the
equal weightage to both domains. With the time the concept has been changed to work life integration with the
realization that keeping two domains separate is impossible. Technology has played a major role in that by enabling
one to perform tasks at any time anywhere, organizations have accepted the need of family friendly policies that has
helped in merging of two domains. (Edward & Erica, 2018 Richman et al., 2008).
Although the integration enabled one to work anywhere anytime, there are certain consequences of integration too.
The availability of one anytime anywhere excerpts more pressure on individuals because the increased expectations
to fulfil the demands. When the demands from on domain increases, In the integrated domains
By the integration there are certain consequences. When the two domains are integrated one receive the demands from
both domains continuously, regardless of time and physical boundaries as they are already removed with integration,
sometime these demands or responsibilities put a lot of pressure and cause the complexities and stress. (Brannan et
al., 2018). On the same time integration provide the benefits too, one can schedule his/her time according to
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
www.JSR.org
1
requirements, manage the work remotely, and also can choose the no of hours to work, to enable them to address
personal issue.
Integration is different from the work-life balance which suggests that work and personal life are two different
segments, and one needs to create a balance between them which require compromise with another domain, whereas
work-life integration is a healthy midpoint between separation and enmeshment of work and life segments (Chesley,
2005).
When these two domains coincide, there is Spillover, which can be good or bad or negative. When there is a negative
spillover it leads to work-to-family conflict. A positive work-to-family Spillover transfers happiness and feeling of
completeness to other domains (Bakker & Demerouti, 2013).
Organizations are offering various FWAs and providing environment to integrate work and life. Integration has proved
beneficial in increasing productivity (Friedman & Greenhaus, 2000). Organizations are now giving value to employee
happiness and satisfaction equally to the productivity, i.e. fostering the balance between work and life of employees
(Forsyth & Polzer-Debruyne, 2007). With the increasing usage of technology and drawing the boundary line between
the work and personal life is difficult. By merging two domains i.e. integrating organization are trying to find a work
structure that beneficial for both, employees and organizations.
WORK-LIFE INTEGRATION
WLI refers to approach of effective and efficient synchronization among time, energies & efforts in a way that enables
workers to fulfil their work, family, and societal obligations (Ashforth et al., 2000; Clark,2002; Sutton & Noe, 2005).
For the effective WLI. Organizations are trying to implement policies that care for the employee’s personal issues and
also ensure the organizational productivity (Panda, 2019). Based on the literature, WLI can be understood in the
following variables:
Work to family & Family to work Interference
Every person has to perform the different roles related to work and personal life. The physical, temporal, and behaviour
boundaries between the work and life domains keep two domains separate (Friedman & Greenhaus, 2000; Spieler et
al., 2018). To perform the tasks or to fulfil the responsibilities, everyone navigate and communicate between these
work and life domains (Kelly et al., 2014). In the current times one need to move between these domains very
frequently and the transitions are no longer bounded with the time and physical boundaries, which has blurred the
boundaries of domains (Desrochers et al., 2005; Graham & Dixon, 2014) and work-family are merged or integrated
(Ahire et al., 1996). When the boundaries vanish, the two domains integrate and roles of both domains interfere with
each other and interferences are created with each other (Hayman, 2005). To manage both domains and develop a
positive impact of integration one need to create a balance between two and ensure no task of any domain is suffered.
The managed state results in higher productivity, performance and positive behavioural impact, contrary to this if
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
www.JSR.org
2
domains are not balanced affects efficiency & commitment (Baral & Bhargava, 2010). This interference can cause
conflict or enrichment (Franco et al., 2017).
Work-family Strain
When the interference is beyond the control and affect one domain’s tasks or overload one beyond the capacity,
become the source of strain. For example, when someone take office work at home frequently, the net available time
for household activities, family, self or society reduce and start disturbing one’s personal life, similarly the too much
interference of personal work in office time distract one from work and cause stress due to reduced efficiency (Allen
& Finkelstein, 2014; Desrochers & Sargent, 2004; Galinsky & Kim, 2000). These conflicts and interferences when
not managed, cause the strain (Graham & Dixon, 2014). Also, the research shows that most of work-life policies are
biased towards the work and not protect the personal life (Prasad, 2017). Another major reason is, when individual
fail to manage the interruptions results in the dissatisfaction (Bader et al., 2018; Chen et al., 2009).
Work-family Enrichment
When there is proper communication between the two domains and both domain’s functions are accommodating each
other, the one is able to manage the different responsibilities of two domains (Salma & Abderrahman, 2016; Soomro
et al., 2018). Work-life enrichment is the positive side of interference (Julien et al., 2017; Williams et al., 2016). When
the work arrangements allow one to manage responsibilities of each domain, the level of satisfaction increases and
one feel more accomplished (Masuda et al., 2011). Balance between the work and life gives more satisfaction, results
in less stress, better mental & physical health and better productivity (Abualloush et al., 2017; Vasumathi, 2018).
FLEXIBLE WORK ARRANGEMENTS (FWAs)
FWAs are work structures that give an employee flexibility on how long, where, and when the employees work or the
work structures that alters the time and/or place that work gets done regularly (Watson & Swanberg, 2013) and provide
the opportunity to the employees to select their work schedules, place, and quantity of the work (Bal & De Lange,
2015). Most offered flexible work options are telecommuting, compressed workweek, flex-time, voluntary part-time
work, and job sharing (Duncan & Pettigrew, 2012; Kelly & Kalev, 2006; Masuda et al., 2011). Because of the direct
impact on workers and families, the FWA has been the topic of discussion and research. Nuclear families and dual-
career culture have increased the demand for flexible work arrangements in today’s work environment (Sharma &
Kaur, 2019). Job flexibility is very important to manage the competing demands of an employee. Flexibility
requirements are not only limited to employees who are having families but also a motivating factor to employees
who don’t have families to manage their work and non-work responsibilities (De Janasz et al., 2013; Tremblay &
Ilama, 2015).
Flexible work arrangements give various advantages to the employees and organizations, employees especially
women seek flexibility to fulfil their work and family demands (Chung & van der Lippe, 2018). Employees prefer
organizations that are more flexible (Glass & Estes, 1997). When employee chose the flexibility to increase the
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
www.JSR.org
3
performance or to meet the demands at the workplace or to increase the income it may lead to increase the work-life
conflict due to devoting the extra time and effort at work, which make less time available for home (Lott & Chung,
2016). Designing a flexible work arrangement that suits the requirement of employees and organizations is a
cumbersome task (Allen et al., 2013).
TYPES OF FWAs
Flexibility in time
Flexitime refers to the work option where an employee has the freedom to select the timing of work, i.e. different start
and end time than the standard timing of workplaces. Work hours can be set weekly or monthly and core working
hours which are mandatory (O’Brien & Hayden, 2008; Rau & Hyland, 2002). Shift working and compressed week
(working five or fewer days than six days a week with increased per day hours) (Bloom et al., 2013; Duncan &
Pettigrew, 2012; Kelly & Kalev, 2006; Williams et al., 2013). Flexitime, Compress workweek, flexible breaks, and
flexible shift arrangements are common arrangements for flexibility in time (Duncan & Pettigrew, 2012; Edward &
Erica, 2018; Matilla-Santander et al., 2019).
Flexibility in workplace/Location
Flexi-place gives autonomy to the workers to work from the alternate location or the home (Allen et al., 2015; Munsch,
2016; Shockley & Allen, 2007). Work from home or telecommuting means completing the office work from the home
with the help of computers and technology. With the advancement of technology virtual office can be established
anywhere and office tasks can be done from anywhere (Gajendran et al., 2015). Telecommuting is a preferred
substitute for working in an office from a different location that may be home, satellite office, or from the customer’s
location. There are various benefits of telecommuting like location flexibility, employee satisfaction, employee
retention, employer branding, improved productivity, cost saving, and social benefits (Allen, Golden, et al., 2015;
Kecklund et al., 2017). However, telecommuting is not possible for every job & work culture, for example, the service
industry e.g. hotel, retail stores where physical presence is a must. Telecommuting can help in coordinate work
schedules and family responsibilities. These options have a limited scope as every organization cannot work remotely
or from different locations.
Flexibility in the quantity of work (Part-Time Work & Work Sharing)
Other option of FWAs includes the control on the quantity of work and work hours of the employees entitled to serve
(Goñi-Legaz & Ollo-López, 2015; Kossek & Ollier-Malaterre, 2020). Reduced hours or part-time options are
preferred by the employees to meet their personal and family demands. Employees can share a task voluntarily in a
“job share” option (Christensen & Stanes, 1990). Reduced hours refer to working less than a routine full week (Jacobs
& Padavic, 2015; Kelliher & Anderson, 2009). Salary or compensation is adjusted accordingly (Tremblay & Ilama,
2015). A part-time employee may work less hours in each day or less days in each weak, individual who cannot go
for a full-time job due to responsibilities, e.g. females taking care for the child, old age employees, part-time work
options help them to continue their career without an eight-hour job (Hill et al., 2004; Lyonette, 2015).
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
www.JSR.org
4
Reduced hours are not the only method of flexibility but also gives a solution to the availability of specialist which
can-not be hired full time due to less availability and high cost. (Byrne, 2005; Goñi-Legaz & Ollo-López, 2015; E. E.
Kossek & Ollier-Malaterre, 2020).
In work-sharing arrangements, two or more employees share the duties and responsibilities of a full-time job. (E. E.
Kossek & Ollier-Malaterre, 2020; Williams et al., 2013). The employees may share all the tasks or divide the
responsibilities according to skill, time & expertise. The job-sharing option is suitable for organizations that are willing
to retain their key people who cannot work for the whole day. Job sharing option may result in an increase or decrease
in productivity for example if a worker is working for the lesser hours there will be less stress and fatigue that increase
the productivity and on the other hand total, no of work has been reduced which may require more employees to finish
the work (Lanoie et al., 2001). Employees opting for the work-sharing options get fewer benefits than full-time
employees, also there is more risk of laid off when organizations decide to reduce the workforce as they are first to be
eliminated (Sherwyn & Sturman, 2002).
GENDER AND WORK-LIFE INTEGRATION
The increase in participation of working females and dual-earner families have changed the concept of work-life
balance (Chung & van der Horst, 2018). So the default solution of “forced compartmentalization” the work and non-
work to avoid conflicts in work and life activities no longer work (Bailyn et al., 2004). Research shows that female
employees in Indian organizations has lot of challenges to handle the dual responsibilities, as in Indian culture the
family responsibilities are given more to females and also non-availability of the organization’s support, add up the
challenges, also barriers in career progression (Sharma & Kaur, 2019). It is important to investigate how the different
work arrangements (standard and flexible), effects work-life integration for different gendered employees. FWAs or
controlling schedules can mean differently according to gender e.g. females may prefer the flexibility for caring for
newborn children on the other side male may choose flexibility to earn more to secure the future of the child (Burnett
et al., 2010b; Lott & Chung, 2016). In both cases, the FWAs are useful when enabling one to fulfil the work-life
requirements. The following hypotheses are derived to analyze the effect of gender on work-life integration.
HYPOTHESES
Male and female employees utilizing standard work options possess experience different work-life integration.
Male and female employees utilizing flexitime options possess experience different work-life integration.
Male and female employees utilizing flexplace options possess experience different work-life integration.
Male and female employees utilizing part-time/job-sharing options possess experience different work-life integration.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Sampling
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
www.JSR.org
5
A descriptive research design has been taken to analyze the role of FWAs in WLI for male and female employees. To
collect the sample, respondents were taken from working professionals in the different service industries (IT, banking
& finance, consultancy, education, hospitality & healthcare). The sample size was determined with the Cochran
formula (Cochran, 1977). A total of 600 questionnaires were administrated to the working professionals through direct
emails and social media. 496 filled questionnaires returned and after analyzing 446 questionnaires were used for
further analysis. Table 1 shows the demographic profiles of the respondents. In the sample 68.6 percent were male
and 31.3 were females. Maximum respondents were from the age group of 31-40 years (39.46 %), followed by the
age group up to 30 years (24.89 %) and age group 41-50 years (21.08%). Out of total 72.65 percent of respondents
were married and 23.54 percent were unmarried. The sample was divided based on work arrangements; 34.98% of
respondents were on the standard work option i.e. not availing any kind of flexible work option. In the flexible work
options, 30.72% of respondents were availing the flexitime, 21.75% flexitime and 12.56% were availing the part-time
work option. Overall respondent's profile shows that the sample was spread between all categories, and free from the
biasness error.
Table 1 - Demographic Information of respondents
Total (n=446)
Frequency Percentage
Gender
Male
306 68.61
Female
140 31.39
Age
Up to 30 Years 111 24.89
31-40 years
176 39.46
41-50 years
94 21.08
above 51 years 65 14.57
Marital Status
Married
324 72.65
Unmarried
105 23.54
Single
17 3.81
Family Type
Nuclear
284 63.68
Joint
162 36.32
Career Level
Entry Level
68 15.25
Mid-Level
200 44.84
Senior Level 178 39.91
Work Option
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
www.JSR.org
6
Standard Hours
156
34.98
Flexitime
137
30.72
Flexi-Place
97
21.75
Part-Time
56 12.56
Source: Author’s Computation
Measurement
To measure the work-life integration, tailored scales for FIW, WIF, WFS, and WFE were originally developed by
Allen et al., 2014; Clark, 2002; Bohen & Viveros-Long, 1981; and Fisher, 2002 were used. The WLI scale consists of
four items for WIF, factor loadings from .76 to .85 (eigenvalue 1.75 and variance explained 10.3%), four items in FIW
with factor loading .76 to .86 (eigenvalue 3.39 and variance explained 19.9%). For the WFS six items with factor
loading .74 to .87 (eigenvalue 6.08 and 35.7% variance explained) and for WFE with three items with factor loadings
.85 to .89 (eigenvalue 1.4 and variance explained 8.4%). Cronbach values for all four factors FIW, .85; WIF, .86;
WFS, .92; WFE. .87 exceeds the threshold value (Cronbach, 1951).
DATA ANALYSIS
Difference between Work-life interference between male and female employees.
Family to work interference
Table 2 shows the work-life integration of male and female employees in different work arrangements. Descriptive
data show that female employees experience more interference than male employees in all categories. T-test was
conducted to check the significance of this difference (Table 3). Only in Flexi-place option, the result of t-test for
family to work interference (FIW) is significant (t = -2.46, p < 0.05). This means female employees availing Flexi-
place option, face more work-to-family interference than the male employees availing flex-place option.
Work to Family Interference
WIF experienced by male and female employees is almost the same and maximum in the standard work option. In
case of employee utilizing flex-time option, female employees experience significantly more work-to-family
interference, then male employees (XM = 17.35, XF = 20.5, t = -2.74, p < 0.05). For flex place, the difference is not
significant, however male employees report, slightly more interference. Female employees utilizing the part-time work
option, experience more work to family interference than male employees (XM = 13.77, XF = 16.85) and difference is
significant with t = 1.753, p < 0.1.
Work-life Strain
Descriptive of work-life strain, shows that female employees experience more work-life stain in case of flexitime (XM
= 20.30, XF = 21.22) and part-time work (XM = 14.94, XF = 15.90), in comparison of male employees. However, in
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
www.JSR.org
7
both cases difference is not statistically significant. It is to notice that male and female employees utilizing any flexible
work option, experience less strain than the standard work option.
Work-life enrichment
Descriptive statistics and t-test results for work-life integration are given in the table. Data shows that female
employees experience more enrichment than male employees while utilizing a flexible work option. Difference was
significant for the flexitime work option (XM = 14.42, XF = 15.78), with t = -2.58, p < 0.05.
Table 2: Descriptive - Work-life Integration
FIW WIF WFS WFE
N Mean
Std.
Deviation
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Standard
work
options
Male 108 14.94 4.30 19.07 4.38 28.39 6.07 12.40 2.12
Female
48
15.50
5.14
19.08
4.23
28.77
7.02
12.70
2.42
Flexitime
Male
100
13.41
5.59
17.35
5.93
20.30
3.79
14.42
2.88
Female
37
15.32
6.43
20.35
4.92
21.22
4.10
15.78
2.29
Flexi-
place
Male
63
11.87
5.33
17.17
4.20
16.08
3.45
15.92
2.64
Female
34
14.82
6.13
17.09
3.92
16.18
2.63
16.20
2.69
Part-time
& Job
sharing
Male
35
11.91
5.15
13.77
5.81
14.94
4.08
15.71
2.58
Female 21 12.43 4.62 16.86 7.25 15.90 3.99 16.04 2.69
Source: Author’s Computation
Table 3: t-test - Work-life Integration (Gender)
FIW WIF WFS WFE
t
sig.
t
sig.
t
sig.
t
sig.
Standard
work option -0.65 0.52 -0.01 0.99 -0.35 0.73 -0.78 0.44
Flexitime -1.71 0.09 -2.75 0.01 -1.23 0.22 -2.58 0.01
Flexi-place -2.47 0.02 0.10 0.92 -0.14 0.89 -0.50 0.62
Part-time &
Job sharing -0.38 0.71 -1.75 0.09 -0.86 0.39 -0.46 0.65
Source: Author’s Computation
DISCUSSION
Gender is one of the important factors regarding policymaking. It is argued that there should not be discrimination
based on gender. But in the case of work-life integration, gender is the most important factor (Pedulla & Thébaud,
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
www.JSR.org
8
2015). Because of the different nature of household responsibilities and social boundaries, males and females require
different flexibilities to facilitate their obligations (Chung & van der Lippe, 2018). Results show that females
experience more family-to-work interference in every work arrangement, which justifies that females have more
household responsibilities and in working from home, females experience significantly more interferences (Kurowska,
2018). Similarly, females experience the work to family interference more than males. Employees using flexible work
arrangements experience less strain than the employees utilizing standard work options that mean the FWAs help
employees to manage their work and life in better ways (Burnett et al., 2010a; Toffoletti & Starr, 2016). In the
integration of work-life, FWAs plays important role in work-life enrichment. Employees utilizing the FWAs
experience more enrichment. The flexible work arrangements support female employees more than male employees
in terms of enrichment, as primarily the FWAs help in household obligations (Burnett et al., 2010b; Lott & Chung,
2016; Van der Lippe et al., 2018). Overall, the FWAs are useful for both male and female employees, however, the
effect of different FWAs may different on interference, strain, and enrichment for male and female employees. The
research emphasis that FWAs should be available for both gendered employees equally and freedom must be given to
choosing according to their requirements.
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS
Results show that in work-life integration, FWAs play a significant role. In each case the employee experience less
strain and higher enrichment in comparison to standard work arrangements. Female employees experience
significantly less interference and strain in the case of flexitime and part-time work options and justify the need for
flexibility of females due to more contribution in household activities. The results of the study are useful in developing
strategies for work-life. Managers can use the results in developing different work arrangements that enable both male
and female employees to use and enrich work-life. The study also provides the inputs for future researches. Further
studies can be executed to investigate more insights into work-life integration in the association of performance,
organizational and personal factors, etc. The industry-specific variable can affect the availability and usage of FWAs.
Further researches are required for such cases.
References
Abualloush, S. H., Bataineh, K., & Aladwan, A. S. (2017). Impact of Information Systems on Innovation (Product
Innovation, Process Innovation) - Field Study on the Housing Bank in Jordon. International Journal of
Business Administration, 8(1), 95–105.
Ahire, S. L., Golhar, D. Y., & Waller, M. A. (1996). Development and Validation of TQM Implementation
Constructs. Decision Sciences, 27(1), 23–56. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1996.tb00842.x
Allen, T. D. (2001). Family-Supportive Work Environments: The Role of Organizational Perceptions. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 58(3), 414–435. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.2000.1774
Allen, T. D., Cho, E., & Meier, L. L. (2014). Work–Family Boundary Dynamics. Annual Review of Organizational
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
www.JSR.org
9
Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1), 99–121. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-
091330
Allen, T. D., & Finkelstein, L. M. (2014). Work–family conflict among members of full-time dual-earner couples:
An examination of family life stage, gender, and age. In Journal of Occupational Health Psychology (Vol. 19,
Issue 3, pp. 376–384). Educational Publishing Foundation. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036941
Allen, T. D., Golden, T. D., & Shockley, K. M. (2015). How effective is telecommuting? Assessing the status of our
scientific findings. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 16(2), 40–68.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100615593273
Allen, T. D., Johnson, R. C., Kiburz, K. M., & Shockley, K. M. (2013). Work–Family Conflict and Flexible Work
Arrangements: Deconstructing Flexibility. Personnel Psychology, 66(2), 345–376.
https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12012
Ashforth, B. E., Kreiner, G. E., & Fugate, M. (2000). All in a Day’s Work: Boundaries and Micro Role Transitions.
The Academy of Management Review, 25(3), 472–491. https://doi.org/10.2307/259305
Bader, A. K., Froese, F. J., & Kraeh, A. (2018). Clash of Cultures? German Expatriates’ Work-Life Boundary
Adjustment in South Korea. European Management Review, 15(3), 357–374.
https://doi.org/10.1111/emre.12102
Bailyn, L., Bookman, A., Harrington, M., & Kochan, T. A. (2004). Work-family interventions and experiments:
Workplaces, communities, and society.
Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2013). The spillover-crossover model. In New frontiers in work and family
research. (pp. 55–70). Psychology Press.
Bal, P. M., & De Lange, A. H. (2015). From flexibility human resource management to employee engagement and
perceived job performance across the lifespan: A multisample study. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 88(1), 126–154. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12082
Baral, R., & Bhargava, S. (2010). Work‐family enrichment as a mediator between organizational interventions for
work‐life balance and job outcomes. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 25(3), 274–300.
https://doi.org/10.1108/02683941011023749
Bloom, N., Liang, J., Roberts, J., & Ying, Z. J. (2013). Does Working from Home Work? Evidence from a Chinese
Experiment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 130(1), 165–218. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qju032
Bohen, H. H., & Viveros-Long, A. (1981). Balancing jobs and family life. Temple University Press.
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
www.JSR.org
10
Brannan, A. M., Brennan, E. M., Sellmaier, C., & Rosenzweig, J. M. (2018). Employed Parents of Children
Receiving Mental Health Services: Caregiver Strain and Work–Life Integration. Families in Society, 99(1),
29–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/1044389418756375
Brittany, H. M., & Rhiannon, M. (2012). Is telework effective for organizations? A meta‐analysis of empirical
research on perceptions of telework and organizational outcomes. Management Research Review, 35(7), 602–
616. https://doi.org/10.1108/01409171211238820
Burnett, S. B., Gatrell, C. J., Cooper, C. L., & Sparrow, P. (2010a). Well-balanced families?: A gendered analysis of
work-life balance policies and work family practices. Gender in Management: An International Journal,
25(7), 534–549. https://doi.org/10.1108/17542411011081356
Burnett, S. B., Gatrell, C. J., Cooper, C. L., & Sparrow, P. (2010b). Well‐balanced families? A gendered analysis of
work‐life balance policies and work family practices. Gender in Management: An International Journal,
25(7), 534–549. https://doi.org/10.1108/17542411011081356
Byrne, U. (2005). Work-life balance: Why are we talking about it at all? Business Information Review, 22(1), 53–59.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0266382105052268
Caillier, J. G. (2012). Satisfaction With Work-Life Benefits and Organizational Commitment/Job Involvement: Is
There a Connection? Review of Public Personnel Administration, 33(4), 340–364.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X12443266
Caligiuri, P. M., Joshi, A., & Lazarova, M. (1999). Factors influencing the adjustment of women on global
assignments. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 10(2), 163–179.
https://doi.org/10.1080/095851999340495
Carlson, D. S., Grzywacz, J. G., & Michele, K. K. (2010). The relationship of schedule flexibility and outcomes via
the work‐family interface. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 25(4), 330–355.
https://doi.org/10.1108/02683941011035278
Chen, Z., Powell, G. N., & Greenhaus, J. H. (2009). Work-to-family conflict, positive spillover, and boundary
management: a person-environment fit approach. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 74(1), 82–93.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2008.10.009
Chesley, N. (2005). Blurring Boundaries? Linking Technology Use, Spillover, Individual Distress, and Family
Satisfaction. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(5), 1237–1248. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3600309
Christensen, K. E., & Stanes, G. L. (1990). Flextime: A Viable Solution to Work/Family Conflict? Journal of
Family Issues, 11(4), 455–476. https://doi.org/10.1177/019251390011004007
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
www.JSR.org
11
Chung, H., & van der Horst, M. (2018). Flexible Working and Unpaid Overtime in the UK: The Role of Gender,
Parental and Occupational Status. Social Indicators Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-2028-7
Chung, H., & van der Lippe, T. (2018). Flexible Working, Work–Life Balance, and Gender Equality: Introduction.
Social Indicators Research, 0123456789. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-2025-x
Clark, S. C. (2000). Work/Family Border Theory: A New Theory of Work/Family Balance. Human Relations, 53(6),
747–770. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726700536001
Clark, S. C. (2002). Communicating across the work/home border. Community, Work & Family, 5(1), 23–48.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13668800020006802
Cochran, W. G. (1977). Sampling Techniques (3rd ed.). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297–334.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555
De Janasz, S., Forret, M., Haack, D., & Jonsen, K. (2013). Family Status and Work Attitudes: An Investigation in a
Professional Services Firm. British Journal of Management, 24(2), 191–210. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-
8551.2011.00797.x
Desrochers, S., Hilton, J. M., & Larwood, L. (2005). Preliminary Validation of the Work-Family Integration-
Blurring Scale. Journal of Family Issues, 26(4), 442–466. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X04272438
Desrochers, S., & Sargent, L. D. (2004). Boundary/Border Theory and Work-Family Integration1. Organization
Management Journal, 1(1), 40–48. https://doi.org/10.1057/omj.2004.11
Duncan, K. A., & Pettigrew, R. N. (2012). The effect of work arrangements on perception of work-family balance.
Community, Work and Family, 15(4), 403–423. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668803.2012.724832
Edward, H., & Erica, C. (2018). Compressed lives: how “flexible” are employer-imposed compressed work
schedules? Personnel Review, 47(2), 278–293. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-08-2016-0189
Fisher, G. (2002). Work/personal life balance: A construct development study. Dissertation Abstracts International:
Section B. The Sciences and Engineering, 63.
Forsyth, S., & Polzer-Debruyne, A. (2007). The organisational pay-offs for perceived work—life balance support.
Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 45(1), 113–123. https://doi.org/10.1177/1038411107073610
Franco, F., Sara, Z., & Donald, T. (2017). Job Design and Older Workers. In Age Diversity in the Workplace (Vol.
17, pp. 139–159). Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1877-636120170000017008
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
www.JSR.org
12
Friedman, S. D., & Greenhaus, J. H. (2000). Work and Family—Allies or Enemies?: What Happens When Business
Professionals Confront Life Choices. Oxford University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195112757.001.0001
Gajendran, R. S., Harrison, D. A., & Delaney-Klinger, K. (2015). Are Telecommuters Remotely Good Citizens?
Unpacking Telecommuting’s Effects on Performance Via I-Deals and Job Resources. Personnel Psychology,
68(2), 353–393. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12082
Galinsky, E., & Kim, S. (2000). Navigating Work and Parenting by Working at Home: Perspectives of Workers and
Children Whose Parents Work at Home. In Telework and New Workplace in 21st Century.
Galinsky, E., & Stein, P. J. (1990). The impact of human resource policies on employees: Balancing work/family
life. In Journal of Family Issues (Vol. 11, Issue 4, pp. 368–383). Sage Publications.
https://doi.org/10.1177/019251390011004002
Glass, J. L., & Estes, S. B. (1997). The Family Responsive Workplace. Annual Review of Sociology, 23(1), 289–313.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.23.1.289
Goñi-Legaz, S., & Ollo-López, A. (2015). Factors that Determine the Use of Flexible Work Arrangement Practices
in Spain. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 36(3), 463–476. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10834-014-9408-1
Graham, J. A., & Dixon, M. A. (2014). Coaching fathers in conflict: A review of the tensions surrounding the work-
family interface. Journal of Sport Management, 28(4), 447–456. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsm.2013-0241
Grant, C. A., Louise, W. M., & Spurgeon, P. C. (2013). An exploration of the psychological factors affecting remote
e‐worker’s job effectiveness, well‐being and work‐life balance. Employee Relations, 35(5), 527–546.
https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-08-2012-0059
Greenhaus, J. H., & Beutell, N. J. (1985). Sources of Conflict between Work and Family Roles. The Academy of
Management Review, 10(1), 76–88. https://doi.org/10.2307/258214
Hayman, J. (2005). Psychometric Assessment of an Instrument Designed to Measure Work Life Balance. Research
and Practice in Human Resource Management, 13(1), 85–91.
Hill, E. J., Jackson, A. D., & Martinengo, G. (2006). Twenty Years of Work and Family at International Business
Machines Corporation. American Behavioral Scientist, 49(9), 1165–1183.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764206286384
Hill, E. J., Märtinson, V. K., Ferris, M., & Baker, R. Z. (2004). Beyond the Mommy Track: The Influence of New-
Concept Part-Time Work for Professional Women on Work and Family. Journal of Family and Economic
Issues, 25(1), 121–136. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JEEI.0000016726.06264.91
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
www.JSR.org
13
Jacobs, A. W., & Padavic, I. (2015). Hours, scheduling and flexibility for women in the US low-wage labour force.
Gender, Work and Organization, 22(1), 67–86. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12069
Jang, S. J., & Zippay, A. (2011). The juggling act: Managing work-life conflict and work-life balance. Families in
Society, 92(1), 84–90. https://doi.org/10.1606/1044-3894.4061
Julien, M., Somerville, K., & Brant, J. (2017). Indigenous perspectives on work-life enrichment and conflict in
Canada. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion, 36(2), 165–181. https://doi.org/10.1108/EDI-11-2015-0096
Kanter, R. M. (1977). Men and Women of the Corporation. Basic Books.
Kecklund, G., Beckers, D. G. J., Leineweber, C., & Tucker, P. (2017). How Does Work Fit with My Life? The
Relation Between Flexible Work Arrangements, Work–Life Balance and Recovery from Work. In An
Introduction to Work and Organizational Psychology (pp. 430–447).
https://doi.org/doi:10.1002/9781119168058.ch23
Kelliher, C., & Anderson, D. (2009). Doing more with less? Flexible working practices and the intensification of
work. Human Relations, 63(1), 83–106. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726709349199
Kelly, E. L., & Kalev, A. (2006). Managing flexible work arrangements in US organizations: formalized discretion
or ‘a right to ask.’ Socio-Economic Review, 4(3), 379–416. https://doi.org/10.1093/ser/mwl001
Kelly, E. L., Moen, P., Oakes, J. M., Fan, W., Okechukwu, C., Davis, K. D., Hammer, L. B., Kossek, E. E., King, R.
B., Hanson, G. C., Mierzwa, F., & Casper, L. M. (2014). Changing Work and Work-Family Conflict:
Evidence from the Work, Family, and Health Network. American Sociological Review, 79(3), 485–516.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122414531435
Ko, J., Hur, S., & Smith-Walter, A. (2013). Family-Friendly Work Practices and Job Satisfaction and Organizational
Performance: Moderating Effects of Managerial Support and Performance-Oriented Management. Public
Personnel Management, 42(4), 545–565. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091026013505503
Kossek, E. E., Baltes, B. B., & Matthews, R. A. (2011). How Work-Family Research Can Finally Have an Impact in
Organizations. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 4(3), 352–369. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-
9434.2011.01353.x
Kossek, E. E., Lewis, S., & Hammer, L. B. (2009). Work—life initiatives and organizational change: Overcoming
mixed messages to move from the margin to the mainstream. Human Relations, 63(1), 3–19.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726709352385
Kossek, E. E., & Michel, J. S. (2011). Flexible work schedules. In APA handbook of industrial and organizational
psychology, Vol 1: Building and developing the organization. (pp. 535–572). American Psychological
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
www.JSR.org
14
Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/12169-017
Kossek, E. E., & Ollier-Malaterre, A. (2020). Desperately seeking sustainable careers: Redesigning professional
jobs for the collaborative crafting of reduced-load work. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 117(June), 103315.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2019.06.003
Kossek, E. E., Thompson, R. J., & Lautsch, B. A. (2015). Balanced Workplace Flexibility: Avoiding the Traps.
California Management Review, 57(4), 5–25. https://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2015.57.4.5
Kossek, E., & Lautsch, B. (2012). Work–family boundary management styles in organizations A cross-level model.
Organizational Psychology Review, 2, 152–171. https://doi.org/10.1177/2041386611436264
Kurland, N. B., & Bailey, D. E. (1999). Telework: The advantages and challenges of working here, there, anywhere,
and anytime. In Organizational Dynamics (Vol. 28, Issue 2, pp. 53–68). Elsevier Science.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0090-2616(00)80016-9
Kurowska, A. (2018). Gendered Effects of Home-Based Work on Parents’ Capability to Balance Work with Non-
work: Two Countries with Different Models of Division of Labour Compared. Social Indicators Research.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-2034-9
Lanoie, P., Raymond, F., & Shearer, B. (2001). Work Sharing and Productivity: Evidence from Firm Level Data.
Applied Economics, 33, 1213–1220. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036840122568
Lobel, S. A., Googins, B. K., & Bankert, E. (1999). The future of work and family: Critical trends for policy,
practice, and research. Human Resource Management, 38(3), 243–254. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-
050X(199923)38:3<243::AID-HRM6>3.0.CO;2-T
Lott, Y., & Chung, H. (2016). Gender Discrepancies in the Outcomes of Schedule Control on Overtime Hours and
Income in Germany. European Sociological Review, 32(6), 752–765. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcw032
Lyonette, C. (2015). Part-time work, work–life balance and gender equality. Journal of Social Welfare and Family
Law, 37(3), 321–333. https://doi.org/10.1080/09649069.2015.1081225
Masuda, A. D., Poelmans, S. A. Y., Allen, T. D., Spector, P. E., Lapierre, L. M., Cooper, C. L., Brough, P., Ferreiro,
P., Fraile, G., Lu, L., Lu, C., Simoni, A. S., & Moreno-velazquez, I. (2011). Flexible Work Arrangements
Availability and their Relationship with Work-to-Family Conflict , Job Satisfaction , and Turnover Intentions :
A Comparison of Three Country Clusters. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2011.00453.x
Matilla-Santander, N., Lidón-Moyano, C., González-Marrón, A., Bunch, K., Martín-Sánchez, J. C., & Martínez-
Sánchez, J. M. (2019). Attitudes toward working conditions: are European Union workers satisfied with their
working hours and work-life balance? Gaceta Sanitaria, 33(2), 162–168.
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
www.JSR.org
15
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaceta.2017.10.006
Mcnall, L., Masuda, A., & Nicklin, J. (2009). Flexible Work Arrangements, Job Satisfaction, and Turnover
Intentions: The Mediating Role of Work-to-Family Enrichment. The Journal of Psychology, 144, 61–81.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980903356073
Minuchin, S. (1974). Families & family therapy. In Families & family therapy. (pp. viii, 268–viii, 268). Harvard U.
Press.
Munsch, C. L. (2016). Flexible Work, Flexible Penalties: The Effect of Gender, Childcare, and Type of Request on
the Flexibility Bias. Social Forces, 94(4), 1567–1591. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sov122
O’Brien, T., & Hayden, H. (2008). Flexible work practices and the LIS sector: balancing the needs of work and life?
Library Management, 29(3), 199–228. https://doi.org/10.1108/01435120810855322
O’Driscoll, M. P., & Brough, P. (2010). Work organization and health. In Occupational health psychology. (pp. 57–
87). Wiley-Blackwell.
Panda, A. (2019). Why do leadership development efforts fail in organisations in India and what can be done about
it? International Journal of Indian Culture and Business Management, 18(2), 184–217.
https://doi.org/10.1504/IJICBM.2019.098010
Pedulla, D. S., & Thébaud, S. (2015). Can We Finish the Revolution? Gender, Work-Family Ideals, and Institutional
Constraint. American Sociological Review, 80(1), 116–139. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122414564008
Prasad, J. R. V. (2017). Ignored aspect of Personal Life in Work-Life Integration. IOSR Journal of Business and
Management, 19, 67–71. https://doi.org/10.9790/487X-1903016771
Rau, B. L., & Hyland, M. A. M. (2002). Role conflict and flexible work arrangements: the effects on applicant
attraction. Personnel Psychology, 55(1), 111–136. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2002.tb00105.x
Richman, A. L., Civian, J. T., Shannon, L. L., Jeffrey Hill, E., & Brennan, R. T. (2008). The relationship of
perceived flexibility, supportive work–life policies, and use of formal flexible arrangements and occasional
flexibility to employee engagement and expected retention. Community, Work & Family, 11(2), 183–197.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13668800802050350
Rothbard, N. P., & Dumas, T. L. (2006). Research perspectives: Managing the work-home interface. In Work-life
balance: A psychological perspective. (pp. 71–89). Psychology Press.
Ryan, A. M., & Kossek, E. E. (2008). Work-life policy implementation: Breaking down or creating barriers to
inclusiveness? Human Resource Management, 47(2), 295–310. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20213
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
www.JSR.org
16
Salma, S., & Abderrahman, H. (2016). Work–life balance: how can we help women IT professionals in Morocco?
Journal of Global Responsibility, 7(2), 210–225. https://doi.org/10.1108/JGR-07-2016-0017
Sharma, S., & Kaur, R. (2019). Glass ceiling for women and its impact on women’s career progression in the Indian
service sector: the moderating role of family structure. International Journal of Indian Culture and Business
Management, 18(2), 235–250. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJICBM.2019.098025
Sherwyn, D., & Sturman, M. (2002). Job Sharing A potential tool for hotel managers. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant
Administration Quarterly - CORNELL HOTEL RESTAUR ADMIN Q, 43, 84–91.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-8804(02)80059-3
Shockley, K. M., & Allen, T. D. (2007). When flexibility helps: Another look at the availability of flexible work
arrangements and work–family conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 71(3), 479–493.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2007.08.006
Singley, S. G., & Hynes, K. (2005). Transitions to Parenthood: Work-Family Policies, Gender, and the Couple
Context. Gender and Society, 19(3), 376–397. http://www.jstor.org/stable/30044599
Soomro, A. A., Breitenecker, R. J., & Shah, S. A. M. (2018). Relation of work-life balance, work-family conflict,
and family-work conflict with the employee performance-moderating role of job satisfaction. South Asian
Journal of Business Studies, 7(1), 129–146. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAJBS-02-2017-0018
Spieler, I., Scheibe, S., & Roßnagel, C. S. (2018). Keeping work and private life apart: Age-related differences in
managing the work–nonwork interface. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39(10), 1233–1251.
https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2283
Sutton, K. L., & Noe, R. A. (2005). Family-Friendly Programs and Work-Life Integration: More Myth Than Magic?
In Work and life integration: Organizational, cultural, and individual perspectives. (pp. 151–169). Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Thompson, C., & Prottas, D. (2006). Relationships Among Organizational Family Support, Job Autonomy,
Perceived Control, and Employee Well-Being. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 11, 100–118.
https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.10.4.100
Toffoletti, K., & Starr, K. (2016). Women Academics and Work–Life Balance: Gendered Discourses of Work and
Care. Gender, Work and Organization, 23(5), 489–504. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12133
Tremblay, D.-G., & Ilama, I. I. (2015). Work–Life Integration and Workplace Rights for Domestic Workers in
Support to Elderly Persons: A Real Challenge in a Complex Working Environment! SAGE Open, 5(2),
2158244015584236. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244015584236
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
www.JSR.org
17
Van der Lippe, T., Van Breeschoten, L., & Van Hek, M. (2018). Organizational Work–Life Policies and the Gender
Wage Gap in European Workplaces. Work and Occupations, 46(2), 111–148.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0730888418791652
Vasumathi, A. (2018). Work life balance of women employees: a literature review. International Journal of Services
and Operations Management, 29(1), 100–146. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSOM.2018.088477
Watson, L., & Swanberg, J. E. (2013). Flexible Workplace Solutions for Low-Wage Hourly Workers: A Framework
for a National Conversation. The Labor and Employment Law Forum, 3(3), 380–437.
Williams, J. C., Berdahl, J. L., & Vandello, J. A. (2016). Beyond Work-Life “Integration.” Annual Review of
Psychology, 67(1), 515–539. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-122414-033710
Williams, J. C., Blair-Loy, M., & Berdahl, J. L. (2013). Cultural schemas, social class, and the flexibility stigma.
Journal of Social Issues, 69(2), 209–234. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12012
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
www.JSR.org
18
