Search results

A core concept of work–home interface research is boundary permeability – the frequency with which elements from one domain cross, or permeate, the boundary of another domain. Yet, there remains ambiguity as to what these elements are and how these permeations impact important outcomes such as role satisfaction and role performance. The authors introduce a multidimensional perspective of work–home boundary permeability, identifying five forms of boundary permeation: task, psychological, role referencing, object, and people. Furthermore, based on the notion that employee control over boundary permeability behavior is the key to achieving role satisfaction and role performance, the authors examine how organizations’ HR practices, leadership, and norms impact employee control over boundary permeability in the work and home domains. The authors conclude with an agenda for future research.

This study aims to test the belief that work‐family practices could have a negative influence in the workplace for non‐users of these practices.

A quantitative approach was undertaken, where users and non‐users of work‐family practices reported on a number of job‐related attitudes. Organisational justice theories suggest that employees will report lower attitudes if they feel that they are missing out on some benefit or practice. T‐tests were used to compare differences in these attitudes between users and non‐users.

There were no significant differences in any of the examined attitudes between users and non‐users of the organisations' work‐family practices.

Implications are that firms should not necessarily decline the adoption of work‐family practices if they fear a “backlash” from their employees who would not use work‐family practices. The authors suggest that the social good these practices may provide might remove any negative feelings towards the organisation by employees who cannot use these practices.

Practical implications for public sector organisations might be offering work‐family practices that target the widest array of employees. Further, future research into work‐family backlash should compare actual users of multiple practices as explored here.

This is one of the few papers to explore users and non‐users of multiple work‐family practices. It confirms previous research into work‐family backlash, indicating that the non‐users are not adversely affected by work‐family practices that they do not or cannot use. However, unlike other studies, this paper explored the use of multiple work‐family practices, providing stronger and more realistic findings for managers to have confidence in their work‐family practices.

This paper aims to analyze the factors contributing to employee professed knowledge of work‐family practices offered by employers and the accuracy of their knowledge.

Survey data from four studies (ns=276, 2,877, 2,810, and 310) were used to relate employee demographics to their professed knowledge regarding the availability from their employing organizations of work‐family practices. For a subset of one study (n=140) the accuracy of employee perceptions was compared to the practice availability as reported by HR counterparts.

Women, employees with dependent care responsibilities and individuals with longer organizational tenure professed greater knowledge of practice availability. Employee attitudes were more related to employee perceptions than to the actual practices as reported by their HR manager. Employees who perceived their organization as family supportive were more likely to over‐report practices that their HR managers said did not exist, rather than to under‐report them. Professed knowledge and accuracy of the knowledge varied substantially among practices.

This study suggests that the relationships between practices as reported by organizations and attitudes of their employees are likely attenuated by inaccurate employee knowledge.

Organizations likely fail to reap full benefits of their enacted practices and should have strategies to better communicate their existence.

In summary, the results of this research give suggestions to reap the benefits of programs, it behooves organizations to think creatively about how best to communicate their existence, as well as reduce the time and effort that employees must expend to learn about program availability.

Examines the relative importance of institutional and resource dependent explanations versus managerial explanations of variations of formal and informal work‐family responsiveness. Work‐family responsiveness is defined in two ways: formal policies and practices that an organization offers, designed to assist employees to balance their work and family lives; and a work environment that is accommodating of its employees’ work‐family needs. Focuses attention on the important role that managerial attitudes have on the provision of work‐family practices and an accommodating work‐family workplace. Concludes that by integrating the insights of several theoretical perspectives, a more comprehensive model of organizational responsiveness in relation to work‐family practices is developed and a set of testable propositions that can guide future research can be made. Indicates that an additive theoretical model combining managerial and institutional factors offers the most appropriate theoretical explanation for identifying factors related to the provision of work‐family benefits and whether the workplace is accommodating of work‐family issues.

This paper aims to establish to what extent family-friendly practices and high-performance work practices are positively related to work–family balance and to identify the role played by job satisfaction and working hours as mediators of this relationship

We use data for a representative sample of almost 17,000 employees of dual-earner couples from European countries. To test the mediation mechanism implied by our hypotheses, we follow the procedure outlined in Baron and Kenny (1986). Given the nature of the dependent variables, ordered probit and regression models were estimated in the analysis.

The results show that, in general, family-friendly practices and high-performance work practices increase work–family balance and that these positive relationships are partially mediated by job satisfaction and working hours. While both family-friendly practices and high-performance work practices increase job satisfaction, only the first increase working hours. Moreover, job satisfaction increases work–family balance, while working hours reduces it. The net effect of these opposing forces on work–family balance is positive.

The use of secondary data posits some constraints, such as the type of measures and the failure to control for a higher number of family-friendly practices and high-performance work practices. Additionally, the non-longitudinal nature of the data set implies that some relationships cannot be considered causal in the intended direction.

Managers should implement family-friendly practices and high-performance work practices, as, in general, they increase work–family balance. A significant portion of this positive effect is channeled through job satisfaction and working hours.

The paper contributes to understanding the relationship between different subsets of human-resources management practices and work–family balance, proposing a model that aims to disentangle the mediating mechanisms through which this relationship occurs.

The qualitative study was conducted to examine work-family (W-F) balance practices in the collectivist culture of Pakistan. Keeping in view the context of Pakistan, three W-F practices, flexibility, childcare arrangement and social support, were studied by applying the theory of W-F balance.

In total, 16 In-depth interviews from the bank operating in three different cities in Sindh, Pakistan.

Data analysis showed that providing economic benefits and short working hours can achieve W-F balance. Nevertheless, the provision of flexibility in terms of short working hours is more important than economic benefits in balancing both domains of life. Secondly, the provision of childcare arrangements helps to balance work and home life. This practice favors females more compared to males. Thirdly, supervisor and co-worker support is most important in creating W-F balance than family support.

It is crucial to understand the W-F balance practices in developing countries; the bank should encourage policies related to flexibility, childcare arrangement and social support in Pakistan. In addition, banks should take the initiative to develop a way that facilitates the employees' social support, which should consequently help to achieve the W-F balance.

It is crucial to understand the W-F balance practices in developing countries; the bank should encourage policies related to flexibility, childcare arrangement and social support in Pakistan. Banks should take an initiative to develop a way that facilitates the employees' social support which should consequently help to achieve the W-F balance.

This research has a tremendous impact on society due to current changes in South Asian countries including Pakistan constitute a socio-cultural transition that directly affects working and family life.

Given the importance of W-F balance in recent times, the authors identified and extended the W-F balance practices in the collectivist culture of Pakistan. This study is novel and contributes to the W-F balance literature by considering most primary W-F balance practices that employees require.

Many employees do not use work-family practices to their full extent, even when they are in need of them. Drawing on the concept of psychological safety the authors propose a new construct: psychological accessibility– employees' sense of embracing the benefits of work-family practices without experiencing a fear of using them. The authors argue that the psychological accessibility of work-family practices could explain the variations in the utilization of work-family practices among employees with similar levels of family needs. Furthermore, the authors propose multilevel contextual factors that could affect the psychological accessibility of work-family practices.

The authors develop a theoretical multilevel framework for work-family practices that places psychological accessibility at its core and addresses accessibility of work-family practices from a macro level that includes institutions and the different attributes of the national culture, a meso level that includes work time norms in organizations, and a micro level, that includes the social context at the team level in organizations.

As part of the conceptual development the authors offer 10 propositions.

The authors' multilevel model of psychological accessibility could explain the variations in the utilization of work-family practices across different national, organizational and group contexts. This paper refocuses scholarly attention to the psychological antecedents of the utilization of work-family practices. The authors offer some practical recommendations to make the utilization of work-family practices a psychologically safe activity.

This paper aims to make the case for early action approaches with migrant families, introducing a set of principles for practice, mapped against the Professional Capabilities Framework for social work and the Social Work England professional standards.

The paper first explores the context of social work with migrant families, outlining the challenges and gaps in our conceptual understanding of this work. The paper then introduces a conceptual model of work with migrant families which draws on the literature from social work and allied professions, and informed by social work values and ethics.

Current social work practice with migrant children has been criticised as defensive, procedural and lacking a coherent conceptual basis, particularly for those who are subject to the no recourse to public funds (NRPF) rule. This field of social work practice would benefit from an evidence-informed model of practice, anchored in human rights approaches and focused on early action. Eight principles, drawn from existing good practice in other social work and social care contexts, are outlined as the basis for a new model of practice in social work with migrant families.

The NRPF rule is a provision in the immigration rules that prevents people who are subject to immigration control from claiming most social security benefits in the UK. In recent years, there has been an increased interest in research about the NRPF rule and its negative impact on children. However, there is currently no evaluated model of social work practice for children and families with NRPF.

Are organizations responding to significant changes in Australian labour force demographics by providing more family‐friendly programs? This article explores whether or not variations across companies in the implementation of work‐family programs and policies relate to demands of key constituent groups. Findings of the present evaluation indicate that certain employee demographic factors, particularly employees with dependents, women, union members, and long‐serving employees are more likely to predispose an organization to offer work‐family benefits. Employers need to be able to characterise the demographics of their workforce to plan the type of policies and programs that might be most suitable and contribute to productivity outcomes.

The paper considers the impact of work‐life balance policies on the work and family practices of professional, dual‐earner parents with dependent children, by assessing the extent to which “well‐balanced families” have been resultantly facilitated. It poses two research questions: the first centres on how far work‐life balance policies have better enabled working parents to manage their commitments to employers and children, whilst the second focuses on how far parental and employer responses to work‐life balance policies may be gendered. The ultimate aim is to (re)‐articulate the importance of gender in the work‐life balance agenda.

The paper draws upon historical and conceptual research on work and family practices. It invokes gender as a lens through which notions of the “well‐balanced family” are considered.

It is argued that work‐life balance policies have not led to well‐balanced, or “gender‐neutral”, work and family practices. This is for two reasons, both relating to gender. First, the take up of work‐life balance policies is gendered, with more mothers than fathers working flexibly. This is partly because organizational expectations fail to acknowledge social change around the paternal parenting role. Second, work‐life balance policies focus mainly on the issues of paid work and childcare, failing to take account of domestic labour, the main burden of which continues to be carried by mothers.

Deeply ingrained social assumptions about the gendered division of labour within heterosexual couples limit the impact of work‐life balance policies on work family practices.

The paper moves forward the debate on work‐life balance through taking an interdisciplinary approach to an issue which has often been addressed previously from discipline‐specific approaches such as health, psychology or policy.