Search results

In this chapter, we theorize about online freelancers’ approaches to work flexibility. Drawing from an ongoing digital ethnography of US-based online freelancers pursuing work on digital platforms, our data question the common conceptualizations around the flexibility of online freelancing. We posit that the flexibility of where to work, not when to work, is the most important attribute of their work arrangement. Our data show (1) the online freelancers in our study prefer the stability and sustainability of full-time work over freelancing when both are offered as remote options; (2) full-time remote employment increases these workers’ freelancing control / flexibility; (3) these workers keep freelance work options open even as they transition to more permanent full-time work arrangements. We discuss how these findings relate to workplace culture shifts and what this means for contemporary working arrangements. Our insights contribute to the discourses on knowledge-based gig work and for what it means to study individuals online.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, working from home (WFH) has become the norm for many employees and their families in Germany. Although WFH has been suggested as a form of flexible work to foster work–life integration (especially for workers with greater care responsibilities), studies have also pointed to its risks when the boundaries between these two life spheres become blurred. To help disentangle these inconsistent findings in relation to work–family conflict, this study focuses on two main concerns: the relevance of additional forms of flexibility for those who work from home (i.e., temporal flexibility, job autonomy, fixed rules about availability) and the implications of WFH for employees’ social relationships with co-workers and supervisors. Based on linked employer–employee data collected in the spring of 2021, the study examined work-to-family conflict (WFC) and family-to-work conflict (FWC) among a sample of 885 employees who worked from home. The results indicate that three factors – temporal flexibility, job autonomy, and fixed rules about availability as a way to set boundaries between work and family life – are important predictors of fewer work–family conflict. This equally applies to employees with caring obligations who overall experience more work–family conflicts while WFH. For those who cared for relatives, autonomy contributed even to fewer work–family conflicts. Supportive relationships with supervisors and co-workers are certainly directly beneficial when it comes to avoiding conflict, but they also reinforce the positive implications of flexible work, whereas poor relationships counteract the benefits of such flexibility. Thus, employers need to provide additional forms of flexibility to employees who work from home and should pay attention to social relationships among their employees as a way to support families and other individuals.

This study explores the practices of locational flexibility in the Nigerian higher education sector. It examines the realities of remotely organising and managing academics' teaching and administrative workload, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Relying on the interpretative paradigm, the dataset consists of semi-structured interviews with 92 professionals in the Nigerian higher educational institution (HEI) sector drawn from private and public federal government-owned and regional (otherwise known as state government) tertiary institutions.

The study highlights the practices of locational flexibility across the Nigerian higher education sector. Therefore, it underscores the notions of locational flexibility from the perspective of Nigerian academics. It reveals a paucity in the range and usage of locational flexibility options across the Nigerian higher education sector, as well as the factors shaping its implementation and utilisation. Ultimately, in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, the findings reveal that locational flexibility is predominantly environmentally induced.

This study focused on a salient topic that explores the practices of locational flexibility, particularly in an underresearched context of developing economies, specifically Nigeria. Moreover, the study contributes to the scarce literature on locational flexibility. Additionally, unlike previous studies that are mostly preoccupied with the meaning of the concept and the importance of the practice to employees' work-life balance, organisational flexibility, and overall operational performance, this study underpins the practices, utilisation and barriers to implementing locational flexibility.

Despite all the complications COVID-19 brought to the education sector, the pandemic has indirectly created various work flexibility arrangements for educators. This paper investigates the impact of different work flexibility arrangements on educators' emotional exhaustion while taking educators' backgrounds (gender, tenure and age) into consideration. This paper explores which work flexibility arrangements fit best for particular educators.

This study employs a quantitative approach to investigate the effect of different work flexibility arrangements (low, medium and high) on educators' emotional exhaustion. In total, 462 educators from various educational levels in Indonesia participated as the respondents.

In general, the findings suggest that female educators are more prone to experience emotional exhaustion than their male counterparts. This study also finds that educators' age negatively relates to emotional exhaustion, and the longer-tenured educators might not be suitable for highly flexible work arrangements. In addition, different degrees of work flexibility have various impacts on educators, depending on their gender, tenure and age. These results are potentially helpful for educational institutions to design the best work arrangements for educators.

It is crucial for educational administrators to determine how much work flexibility should be given to educators from different backgrounds. This study is among the first to empirically examine the impact of different work flexibilities on educators' well-being.

Despite the important implications for families, limited research has examined how workplace environments influence parenting behavior. Situated within the Work–Home Resources Model, the purpose of this study was to investigate (a) whether workplace flexibility, a contextual resource, predicts positive parenting behavior, a home outcome, and (b) whether work–family guilt mediates this relationship. A sample of working mothers with children between the ages of 1 and 18 (N = 302) completed an online survey. Linear regression analyses indicated perceived workplace flexibility predicted overall positive parenting, positive reinforcement, and warmth behaviors in working mothers, but not proactive parenting or supportiveness. Ordinary least squares (OLS) path analyses indicated work–family guilt did not mediate these relationships, but was significantly associated with workplace flexibility, indicating workplace flexibility had a significant negative effect on work–family guilt. The results of this study provide preliminary evidence that mothers’ workplace flexibility may influence positive parenting behaviors; thus, policies that promote flexible work arrangements could promote positive family outcomes and reduce feelings of guilt related to work and family life.

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 from the workplace flexibility and coping literatures, the purpose of this paper is to re-conceptualize the workplace flexibility construct as a coping resource that may help prevent work-interferes-with-family (WIF) from arising and/or assist employees manage such interference when it has occurred. A measure capturing this re-conceptualized view of flexibility is developed and tested using two samples of dual-income employees with dependent care demands.

In Study 1, the authors use LISERL to develop and test a new multi-dimensional measure of workplace flexibility (n₁=6,659). In Study 2 (n₂=947), the authors use partial least squares, a component-based structural equation modeling technique, to test a model that posits workplace flexibility that helps employees cope with WIF.

This research provides support for the idea that workplace flexibility helps employees cope with WIF by: preventing interference (i.e. negatively moderating the relationship between work hours and WIF), and managing interference that has occurred (i.e. negatively moderating relationship between WIF and perceived stress).

This study highlights the complexity of the relationship between workplace flexibility and work-to-family interference and offers guidelines on how employers and employees can use the workplace flexibility measure developed in this study.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship of schedule flexibility with performance and satisfaction in the work and family domains, and whether these associations are mediated by the work‐family interface. Possible gender differences in the putative benefits of schedule flexibility are also to be explored.

Using a sample of 607 full‐time employees in either schedule flexibility or traditional working arrangements the authors tested a moderated‐mediation model. Regression was used to test the mediation of work‐family and the moderation of gender to the schedule flexibility to work‐family path.

Both work‐to‐family conflict and work‐to‐family enrichment are mediating mechanisms in the relationship of schedule flexibility with outcomes. More specifically, full mediation was found for job satisfaction and family performance for both enrichment and conflict while partial mediation was found for family satisfaction with enrichment only and mediation was not supported for job performance. Finally, gender moderated the schedule flexibility to work‐family conflict relationship such that women benefited more from flexible working arrangements than men.

The paper adds value by examining a mediation mechanism in the schedule flexibility with the outcome relationship of the work‐family interface. It also adds value by including work‐family enrichment which is a key variable but has little research. Finally, it adds value by demonstrating that schedule flexibility plays a stronger role for women than men regarding the work‐family interface.

The ability to work anytime from anywhere is attractive to job seekers, who respond by developing needs regarding flexible working. Flexibility needs are compared to the flexibility perceived in job advertisements to form an overall perception of flexibility fit. The purpose of this paper is to examine both the impact of flexibility fit (on applicant attraction) and its antecedents.

The impact of flexibility fit on applicant attraction and its antecedents are examined using person–job (PJ) fit theory. 92 job seekers analyzed a total of 391 job advertisements. The hypotheses are tested using multilevel structural equation modeling.

The results show that perceived flexibility fit is positively related to job pursuit and job acceptance intentions. They further show that perceived flexibility fit is driven by perceived job advertisements' flexibility exceeding applicants' needed flexibility, which in turn is driven by the flexibility actually present in job advertisements exceeding applicants' flexibility needs.

This study contributes to literature on new ways of working by highlighting the desirable nature of flexibility and its impact on fit perceptions. It further contributes to literature on job search and PJ fit by investigating a full model of fit, examining both outcomes and antecedents of perceived fit. For practitioners, this study highlights the importance of advertising flexibility to attract applicants.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate employee perceptions of the flexibility they utilize or have available to them in an NHS Trust and relate these perceptions to the concept of control.

The paper adopts a constructivist approach and uses semi‐structured interviews, allowing employees, in their own way, to explain what flexibility policies, and practice mean to them. The paper conducted 43 interviews and one focus group across five directorates, to include a range of staff levels and job types.

The findings in this paper show that informal rather than formal flexibility was more widely used and valued; and that, although staff needed to be proactive to access formal flexibility, some staff did not see formal flexibility as relevant to themselves; and informal flexibility generated an increased sense of employee responsibility. Uses the perspective of employee control over their working lives, in order to interpret the impact of flexible working.

The paper shows that these findings may be context‐specific, and further investigation of informal flexible working is needed in different settings.

This paper shows that organizations need to communicate flexibility well, and train their managers' adequately but, critically, they need to understand what different forms of flexibility mean to employees, and how they are valued.

The paper shows the prevalence and value of informal flexible working, and its potential. Uses the concept of control to explain why different individuals value different forms of flexible working differentially.