Search results

Work-life flexibility policies (e.g., flextime, telework, part-time, right-to-disconnect, and leaves) are increasingly important to employers as productivity and well-being strategies. However, policies have not lived up to their potential. In this chapter, the authors argue for increased research attention to implementation and work-life intersectionality considerations influencing effectiveness. Drawing on a typology that conceptualizes flexibility policies as offering employees control across five dimensions of the work role boundary (temporal, spatial, size, permeability, and continuity), the authors develop a model identifying the multilevel moderators and mechanisms of boundary control shaping relationships between using flexibility and work and home performance. Next, the authors review this model with an intersectional lens. The authors direct scholars’ attention to growing workforce diversity and increased variation in flexibility policy experiences, particularly for individuals with higher work-life intersectionality, which is defined as having multiple intersecting identities (e.g., gender, caregiving, and race), that are stigmatized, and link to having less access to and/or benefits from societal resources to support managing the work-life interface in a social context. Such an intersectional focus would address the important need to shift work-life and flexibility research from variable to person-centered approaches. The authors identify six research considerations on work-life intersectionality in order to illuminate how traditionally assumed work-life relationships need to be revisited to address growing variation in: access, needs, and preferences for work-life flexibility; work and nonwork experiences; and benefits from using flexibility policies. The authors hope that this chapter will spur a conversation on how the work-life interface and flexibility policy processes and outcomes may increasingly differ for individuals with higher work-life intersectionality compared to those with lower work-life intersectionality in the context of organizational and social systems that may perpetuate growing work-life and job inequality.

Drawing on the theory of goal systems applied to family business this case study focuses on the interdependence between non-economic goals and family goals, in order to identify if and how achieving non-economic goals generates dysfunctional behavioural patterns for family members in the long term.

This study used an inductive, 20-year longitudinal case-study based methodology.

This case study shows how the business family faces ethical/affective dimensions, struggling every day for a balance and often undermining the legitimisation and differentiation of its children. Findings show that the achievement of non-economic goals can occur to the detriment of family goals, such as by generating a dysfunctional system, specifically in business family adaptability.

The principal limitation is that this single case study evidently does not allow for complete generalization of the findings.

This case study makes a contribution to alerting the family business system to the long-term risk they face in trying to simultaneously maintain both harmony/cohesion and ethics/responsibility. Practitioners and consultants are therefore called on to help family firm owners with adopting a strategic vision by considering possible long-term counterfinal (i.e. mutually incompatible) goals.

SMEs are the most widespread type of firm in the world, and consequently dysfunctional behavioural patterns within business families represent a prominent socio-economical problem for policy makers and institutions.

This study shows that, in the long term, that which is perceived to be a desirable goal can transpire to be a dysfunctional pattern. In doing so, this research introduces a new point of view to the literature on goal systems in family business.