Conference PaperPDF Available




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.
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.
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
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,
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.
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
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).
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
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).
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
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).
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.
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.
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
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
306 68.61
140 31.39
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
324 72.65
105 23.54
17 3.81
Family Type
284 63.68
162 36.32
Career Level
Entry Level
68 15.25
200 44.84
Senior Level 178 39.91
Work Option
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
Standard Hours
56 12.56
Source: Author’s Computation
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).
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
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
N Mean
Male 108 14.94 4.30 19.07 4.38 28.39 6.07 12.40 2.12
& Job
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)
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
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
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.
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.
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), 95105.
Ahire, S. L., Golhar, D. Y., & Waller, M. A. (1996). Development and Validation of TQM Implementation
Constructs. Decision Sciences, 27(1), 2356.
Allen, T. D. (2001). Family-Supportive Work Environments: The Role of Organizational Perceptions. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 58(3), 414435.
Allen, T. D., Cho, E., & Meier, L. L. (2014). WorkFamily Boundary Dynamics. Annual Review of Organizational
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1), 99–121.
Allen, T. D., & Finkelstein, L. M. (2014). Workfamily 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. 376384). Educational Publishing Foundation.
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), 4068.
Allen, T. D., Johnson, R. C., Kiburz, K. M., & Shockley, K. M. (2013). WorkFamily Conflict and Flexible Work
Arrangements: Deconstructing Flexibility. Personnel Psychology, 66(2), 345376.
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), 472491.
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), 357374.
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. 5570). 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.
Baral, R., & Bhargava, S. (2010). Workfamily enrichment as a mediator between organizational interventions for
worklife balance and job outcomes. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 25(3), 274300.
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), 165218.
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
Brannan, A. M., Brennan, E. M., Sellmaier, C., & Rosenzweig, J. M. (2018). Employed Parents of Children
Receiving Mental Health Services: Caregiver Strain and WorkLife Integration. Families in Society, 99(1),
Brittany, H. M., & Rhiannon, M. (2012). Is telework effective for organizations? A metaanalysis of empirical
research on perceptions of telework and organizational outcomes. Management Research Review, 35(7), 602
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), 534549.
Burnett, S. B., Gatrell, C. J., Cooper, C. L., & Sparrow, P. (2010b). Wellbalanced families? A gendered analysis of
worklife balance policies and work family practices. Gender in Management: An International Journal,
25(7), 534549.
Byrne, U. (2005). Work-life balance: Why are we talking about it at all? Business Information Review, 22(1), 5359.
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.
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), 163179.
Carlson, D. S., Grzywacz, J. G., & Michele, K. K. (2010). The relationship of schedule flexibility and outcomes via
the workfamily interface. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 25(4), 330355.
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), 8293.
Chesley, N. (2005). Blurring Boundaries? Linking Technology Use, Spillover, Individual Distress, and Family
Satisfaction. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(5), 12371248.
Christensen, K. E., & Stanes, G. L. (1990). Flextime: A Viable Solution to Work/Family Conflict? Journal of
Family Issues, 11(4), 455476.
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
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.
Chung, H., & van der Lippe, T. (2018). Flexible Working, WorkLife Balance, and Gender Equality: Introduction.
Social Indicators Research, 0123456789.
Clark, S. C. (2000). Work/Family Border Theory: A New Theory of Work/Family Balance. Human Relations, 53(6),
Clark, S. C. (2002). Communicating across the work/home border. Community, Work & Family, 5(1), 2348.
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), 297334.
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), 191210.
Desrochers, S., Hilton, J. M., & Larwood, L. (2005). Preliminary Validation of the Work-Family Integration-
Blurring Scale. Journal of Family Issues, 26(4), 442466.
Desrochers, S., & Sargent, L. D. (2004). Boundary/Border Theory and Work-Family Integration1. Organization
Management Journal, 1(1), 4048.
Duncan, K. A., & Pettigrew, R. N. (2012). The effect of work arrangements on perception of work-family balance.
Community, Work and Family, 15(4), 403423.
Edward, H., & Erica, C. (2018). Compressed lives: how “flexible” are employer-imposed compressed work
schedules? Personnel Review, 47(2), 278293.
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 worklife balance support.
Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 45(1), 113123.
Franco, F., Sara, Z., & Donald, T. (2017). Job Design and Older Workers. In Age Diversity in the Workplace (Vol.
17, pp. 139159). Emerald Publishing Limited.
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
Friedman, S. D., & Greenhaus, J. H. (2000). Work and FamilyAllies or Enemies?: What Happens When Business
Professionals Confront Life Choices. Oxford University Press.
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), 353393.
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. 368383). Sage Publications.
Glass, J. L., & Estes, S. B. (1997). The Family Responsive Workplace. Annual Review of Sociology, 23(1), 289313.
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), 463476.
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), 447456.
Grant, C. A., Louise, W. M., & Spurgeon, P. C. (2013). An exploration of the psychological factors affecting remote
eworker’s job effectiveness, wellbeing and worklife balance. Employee Relations, 35(5), 527546.
Greenhaus, J. H., & Beutell, N. J. (1985). Sources of Conflict between Work and Family Roles. The Academy of
Management Review, 10(1), 7688.
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), 11651183.
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.
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
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.
Jang, S. J., & Zippay, A. (2011). The juggling act: Managing work-life conflict and work-life balance. Families in
Society, 92(1), 8490.
Julien, M., Somerville, K., & Brant, J. (2017). Indigenous perspectives on work-life enrichment and conflict in
Canada. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion, 36(2), 165181.
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).
Kelliher, C., & Anderson, D. (2009). Doing more with less? Flexible working practices and the intensification of
work. Human Relations, 63(1), 83106.
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.
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), 485516.
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.
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), 352369.
Kossek, E. E., Lewis, S., & Hammer, L. B. (2009). Worklife initiatives and organizational change: Overcoming
mixed messages to move from the margin to the mainstream. Human Relations, 63(1), 319.
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. 535572). American Psychological
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
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.
Kossek, E. E., Thompson, R. J., & Lautsch, B. A. (2015). Balanced Workplace Flexibility: Avoiding the Traps.
California Management Review, 57(4), 525.
Kossek, E., & Lautsch, B. (2012). Work–family boundary management styles in organizations A cross-level model.
Organizational Psychology Review, 2, 152–171.
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. 5368). Elsevier Science.
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.
Lanoie, P., Raymond, F., & Shearer, B. (2001). Work Sharing and Productivity: Evidence from Firm Level Data.
Applied Economics, 33, 12131220.
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.
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), 752765.
Lyonette, C. (2015). Part-time work, worklife balance and gender equality. Journal of Social Welfare and Family
Law, 37(3), 321333.
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.
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), 162168.
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
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, 6181.
Minuchin, S. (1974). Families & family therapy. In Families & family therapy. (pp. viii, 268viii, 268). Harvard U.
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), 15671591.
O’Brien, T., & Hayden, H. (2008). Flexible work practices and the LIS sector: balancing the needs of work and life?
Library Management, 29(3), 199228.
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), 184217.
Pedulla, D. S., & Thébaud, S. (2015). Can We Finish the Revolution? Gender, Work-Family Ideals, and Institutional
Constraint. American Sociological Review, 80(1), 116139.
Prasad, J. R. V. (2017). Ignored aspect of Personal Life in Work-Life Integration. IOSR Journal of Business and
Management, 19, 6771.
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.
Richman, A. L., Civian, J. T., Shannon, L. L., Jeffrey Hill, E., & Brennan, R. T. (2008). The relationship of
perceived flexibility, supportive worklife policies, and use of formal flexible arrangements and occasional
flexibility to employee engagement and expected retention. Community, Work & Family, 11(2), 183197.
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.
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
Salma, S., & Abderrahman, H. (2016). Worklife balance: how can we help women IT professionals in Morocco?
Journal of Global Responsibility, 7(2), 210225.
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), 235250.
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, 8491.
Shockley, K. M., & Allen, T. D. (2007). When flexibility helps: Another look at the availability of flexible work
arrangements and workfamily conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 71(3), 479–493.
Singley, S. G., & Hynes, K. (2005). Transitions to Parenthood: Work-Family Policies, Gender, and the Couple
Context. Gender and Society, 19(3), 376397.
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), 129146.
Spieler, I., Scheibe, S., & Roßnagel, C. S. (2018). Keeping work and private life apart: Age-related differences in
managing the worknonwork interface. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39(10), 1233–1251.
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. 151169). 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.
Toffoletti, K., & Starr, K. (2016). Women Academics and WorkLife Balance: Gendered Discourses of Work and
Care. Gender, Work and Organization, 23(5), 489–504.
Tremblay, D.-G., & Ilama, I. I. (2015). WorkLife Integration and Workplace Rights for Domestic Workers in
Support to Elderly Persons: A Real Challenge in a Complex Working Environment! SAGE Open, 5(2),
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
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), 111148.
Vasumathi, A. (2018). Work life balance of women employees: a literature review. International Journal of Services
and Operations Management, 29(1), 100146.
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), 380437.
Williams, J. C., Berdahl, J. L., & Vandello, J. A. (2016). Beyond Work-Life “Integration.” Annual Review of
Psychology, 67(1), 515539.
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.
5th Middle East College Student Research
Conference Proceeding
ISSN: 2167-1907
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Full-text available
Recent studies have shown that flexible boundaries between work and family may make employees work harder and longer. Yet most studies were not able to show whether there are differences across different types of flexible working arrangements, and whether this relationship may only hold for certain groups of workers. We examine how three different types of flexible working arrangements, that is schedule control, flexitime, and teleworking, are associated with an increase in unpaid overtime hours of workers in the UK using the Understanding Society data from 2010 to 2015 and fixed effects panel regression models. Results show that the flexible arrangements that were introduced primarily for work-life balance purposes, i.e., flexitime and teleworking, do not necessarily increase unpaid overtime hours significantly. On the other hand, workers’ control over their schedule, mainly introduced as a part of high-performance strategies, leads to increased unpaid overtime hours. This is especially true for professional men, and women without children, especially those working full-time, and surprisingly part-time working mothers. The results of this study point to the importance of distinguishing between different groups of workers as well as between different types of arrangements when examining outcomes of flexible working. Furthermore, the results of the study contribute to the argument that performance enhancing flexible working arrangements can potentially exacerbate gender inequalities in the labour market by enabling men to commit more time to their jobs, while for women, especially full-time working mothers, this may be less possible.
Full-text available
This special brings together innovative and multidisciplinary research (sociology, economics, and social work) using data from across Europe and the US to examine the potential flexible working has on the gender division of labour and workers’ work–life balance. Despite numerous studies on the gendered outcomes of flexible working, it is limited in that the majority is based on qualitative studies based in the US. The papers of this special issue overcome some of the limitations by examining the importance of context, namely, family, organisational and country context, examining the intersection between gender and class, and finally examining the outcomes for different types of flexible working arrangements. The introduction to this special issue provides a review of the existing literature on the gendered outcomes of flexible working on work life balance and other work and family outcomes, before presenting the key findings of the articles of this special issue. The results of the studies show that gender matters in understanding the outcomes of flexible working, but also it matters differently in different contexts. The introduction further provides policy implications drawn from the conclusions of the studies and some thoughts for future studies to consider.
Full-text available
Reduced-load (RL) work, a flexible customized form of part-time work in which a full-time job is redesigned to reduce the hours and the workload while taking a pay cut, can enable sustainable careers. Yet previous research suggests mixed results, with RL work facing implementation hurdles such as insufficient workload reduction, and stalled careers often adversely affecting women and caregivers. This study, therefore, focuses on the implementation of sustainable RL work and sheds light on key issues under-examined in prior studies: 1) the job redesign tactics that supervising managers implement to reduce workloads, and 2) shared responsibilities at the job and organizational levels. Drawing on the literature on sustainable careers, work redesign, and job crafting, we analyze 86 qualitative interviews with managers who experimented with RL work, HR experts, and executives in 20 organizations that were early adopters of RL work. We identify differentiating and integrating work redesign tactics that either reduced or reshuffled workloads. Next, we propose a three-stage process of collaborative crafting of RL work, in which employees, managers, and employers share responsibilities to strengthen the work redesign tactics and manage cultural expectations to support RL implementation. We provide implications for future research and practice.
Full-text available
This paper explores gendered impact of home-based work (HBW) on the capability to balance work with non-work in double-earner families with dependent children in two countries with distinct models of division of labour: Poland and Sweden. At first, I critically engage with the WLB conceptualization in HBW studies and try to address identified gaps. Driving from the theoretical concept of ‘burden of responsibilities’ and setting it in the capability approach, I propose to operationalize the capability to balance work with non-work as a latent construct, observed through two indicators of the burden of unpaid work responsibilities related to one’s engagement in paid work. To simultaneously measure this capability as a latent construct and the impact of HBW on this capability, I estimate a simple structural equation model for each country. The results show that men in both countries have higher capabilities to balance work with non-work than women, but the difference between genders is smaller in Sweden. I also find that HBW is related to lower capability to balance work with non-work for mothers in both countries and for fathers in Sweden only. The results of this study show that in a relatively gender equal society (Sweden) the negative impact of home based work on the capability to balance work with non-work affects both genders. On the contrary—in a more traditional society (Poland), men are able to ‘escape’ the trap of double burden of paid and unpaid work when working from home while women do not.
Full-text available
Initial evidence suggests that older workers enjoy higher work-life balance than young workers. Yet little is known about the mechanisms of this effect or the robustness of age differences when accounting for differences in life context. We introduce and test the boundary management account of aging and work-life balance, which suggests that older workers maintain stronger work-nonwork boundaries as a pathway towards work-life balance. Both in Study 1 (cross-sectional; N = 298 bank employees) and in Study 2 (aggregated diary entries; N = 608 workers), older workers reported better work-life balance and stronger boundaries at work than young workers; and stronger boundaries at home (Study 1). In both studies, stronger boundaries were related to better work-life balance, and boundary strength mediated the relationship between age and work-life balance. Study 2 additionally suggests that the use of boundary management strategies is responsible for stronger boundaries at higher age. Analyses accounted for differences in family and work context characteristics (both studies), and boundary preferences (Study 1). The findings corroborate evidence of older workers’ enhanced work-life balance and suggest that it results from more successful boundary management with age rather than merely from changes in contextual factors or boundary preferences.
Many organizations in Europe offer work–life policies to enable men and women to combine work with family life. The authors argue that the availability of organizational work–life policies can also reduce gender inequality in wages. The authors test their expectations using the European Sustainable Workforce Survey, with data from 259 organizations and their employees in 9 European countries. Multilevel analyses show that organizations that offer work–life policies have a smaller gender wage gap. Their findings also suggest that both the type and number of policies matter. Contrary to their expectations, dependent care policies, such as parental leave and childcare support, are less important for the gender wage gap than flexibility policies. Controlling for organizational culture regarding family supportiveness does not alter the results.
Purpose: People in both the developing and developed worlds now face issues like work-to-family and family-to-work conflicts. Accordingly, the purpose of this research is to explore the relationships between work-life balance, work-family conflict, and family-work conflict and perceived employee performance with job satisfaction serving as a moderating variable. Design/methodology/approach: The object of this study is a full-time teaching faculty. Responses from 280 young university teaching faculty serving in public-sector universities in Islamabad, Pakistan were investigated by applying linear regression analysis to test six hypotheses. Findings: The results show that work-life balance and work-family conflict have a positive effect on employee performance. Job satisfaction has moderating effects on the relationships between work-life balance, work-family conflict, and family-work conflict with perceived employee performance. Originality/value: The study presents some unique results, which are different from previous studies such as work-family conflict has a positive significant effect on employee performance, family-work conflict has no significant effect on employee performance and job satisfaction can be a negative moderator between these relations.