Work-Life Balance: Literature Review

Work-Life Balance: Literature Review

            The theory of work-life balance refers to an individual’s ability to favorably manage his or her career and personal life (Kofodimos, 1993).  Hence, researchers continuously seek and offer innovative means of effectively achieving such status.  Furthermore, as researchers analyze this phenomenon, causal factors associated with detrimental and constructive outcomes are identified.  In effort to provide ample consideration to the quality of work-life balance, researchers must continuously evaluate these factors in relation to the level of work-life balance realized in particular among differing individuals.  In order to explicate this concept, researchers should reflect on relevant psychological literature in regard to the topic.  Doing so enables one to address existing knowledge, identify problematic issues, amalgamate and rationalize these findings with current research, and justify the need for ongoing investigation.  The information presented henceforth demonstrates the previously mentioned.

            Typically, research offers varying approaches and factors of work-life balance.  First, according to Kofodimos (1993), a specific method of examining this concept includes a personal assessment in which problem areas, issues, and stressors are recognized.  Once the assessment is completed the course of personal development towards balance persists through the following nine phases; 1) balancing time, energy, & commitment, 2) integrating mastery & intimacy, 3) developing self-awareness &  self-realization, 4) vision of personal aspirations, 5) vision of approach to living, 6) vision of central life priorities, 7) structuring life in accordance with priorities, 8) implementing mastery & intimacy-oriented approaches, and 9) living consistently with life values & goals (Kofodimos, 1993, p. 86-87).

            Another approach implemented to determine the quality of work-life balance utilizes boundary management.  Based on a study in Work and personal life

boundary management: Boundary strength, work/personal life balance, and the segmentation-integration continuum (2007), researchers analyzed individuals’ sense of limitations and interference at work and at leisure.  The fundamental concerns focused on four factors; work interfering with personal life, personal life interfering with work, work enhancing personal life, and personal life enhancing work.  Again, an assessment was issued, yet consisted of organizational participation.  In addition, subjects were randomly selected.  Basic criteria for participation merely required subjects to have computer access while working to ensure that staff members from varying positions were considered.  Research results indicated that work inflexibility coupled with personal life interference increased occupational frustration as personal inflexibility in conjunction with work interference obstructed personal satisfaction.  Hence, the inability to separate work from leisure fosters work-life imbalance.  Furthermore, participants were separated into four clusters in which those exhibiting high levels of boundary adherence, those slightly incapable of separating personal life from the workplace, those somewhat incapable of omitting work from their personal life, and those exhibiting comparable levels of work and personal life interference were observed.  In addition, the demographics of cluster participants were considered in generalizations.  However, the demographics were not exclusively calculated in terms of work-life balance levels.  Hence, the affects of the cluster groups and individual demographics are inconclusive.  Another limitation associated with the study includes the fact that additional research is required in order to efficiently explicate and apply these findings.  Boundary management is a fairly new concept.  Thus, further examination must be executed (Bulger, Matthews, & Hoffman, 2007).

            An additional study on work-life balance regarded career hierarchy and the age of participants.  In journal article, Work-life balance: One size fits all? An exploratory analysis of the differential effects of career stage (2012), researchers attempted to analyze how work-life balance evolves over the course of an individual’s career span.  More specifically, they set out to prove that levels of work-life balance varied given the age and position of respective employees.  Participants were selected from 15 organizations and categorized into four tiers of career status.  Results indicated that although work-life balance was a concern for all employees, causal factors were inconsistent amongst the stages.  Hence, a generalized approach is an inadequate means of assessing and granting recommendations to individuals (Darcy, McCarthy, Hill, & Grady, 2012).  These findings further imply the need for additional research and specified considerations.

            A tertiary study measured the work-life balance of various employees in terms of their shift affiliation.  In particular, the article, Work-life balance of shift workers (2008), analyzed employees according to day shift, evening shift, rotating-shift, and split or irregular shift hours.  Additionally, gender and marital status were considered.  The results revealed that first-shift employees exhibited the highest levels of work-life satisfaction, followed by second-shift employees.  Furthermore, rotating-shift workers demonstrated a 73% satisfaction rating while split and irregular shift employees exhibited a rating of 65% satisfaction.  As far as the variance from male to female, women displayed greater work-life imbalance (at a rate of 27% versus 19%) although shift affiliation was a non-factor.  In regard to marital status, first-shift employees whose significant others are also employed full-time exhibited 75% satisfaction and those whose spouses are employed part-time exhibited a 77% satisfaction rate.  However, employees whose partners were not in the work-force displayed lower rates of employee satisfaction (Williams, 2008).  These findings indicate that limited family or leisure time or the realization that one’s spouse has more ‘free’ time at their disposal has a direct adverse affect on work-life balance.  Perhaps the most significant limitation of the study is the fact that the participant pool is unidentified.  The researcher uses various percentages yet does not disclose how many participants were observed or the location or organizations from which they were selected.  Furthermore, although the type of assessment employed was mentioned, General Social Survey (GSS, 2010), its usage was quite ambiguous.

The final literature for review, Assessing Strategies to Manage Work and Life Balance of Athletic Trainers Working in the National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I Setting (2011), utilized a qualitative approach in observance of 28 individuals (15 men, 13 women).  Internet, phone interviews, and email correspondence were employed respectively.  The dynamics considered were work conditions, role expectations, and schedule flexibility.  Furthermore, individual as well as organizational coping techniques were prescribed.  The results indicated that regardless of demographics, athletic trainers had difficulties balancing work and life.  Extensive hours and travel coupled with coaching demands were the most significant causes.  Additionally, these elements prohibited participants from fostering social relationships.  In effort to promote work-life balance, organizational policies were implemented to reinforce teamwork and support.  In this regard, maintaining an adequate number of team members was considered a critical component.  Now, from an individual perspective, boundary techniques were employed.  The ability to separate training and work from leisure, personal time was critical to participants’ work-life balance.  In addition, adherence to routine, establishing priorities, and the integration of family into work activities proved to be advantageous (Mazerolle, Pitney, Casa, & Pagnotta, 2011).

Now, while the aforementioned information and approaches illustrate beneficial means of assessing or achieving work-life balance, they fail to evaluate which factors are most advantageous or destructive in precise terms of cultural diversity.  For example, although the boundary method observed the percentage of participants in terms of gender, familial status, and economics, the actual results of such subgroups in comparison to one another was ignored.  Furthermore, it failed to address ethnicity, religion, or sexuality.  Undoubtedly, such factors influence the rate of work-life balance.  In addition, supplementary studies regarded occupational status, marital affiliation, gender, and shift association, yet disregarded the influence of parenthood in detail.  These methods and surveys would be more effective given a multi-faceted, inclusive approach.  Therefore, certain questions, consequences, and considerations remain indistinct.

In addition to the specificity of work-life balance research, ethical issues must be addressed.  These include the likelihood of offending an individual of a particular ethnicity or subgroup, confidentiality, informed consent, gender empathy, and boundary issues.  First, the practitioner should refrain from insulting the subject during the research process.  Those of varying ethnicities, cultures, genders, religions, and sexual preference should be addressed accordingly.  Hence, cultural awareness is imperative.  Second, confidentiality or informed consent may be an issue.  As a psychological professional, one must adhere to the Code of Conduct (APA, 2010).  Additionally, one may have difficulty relating to those of the opposite sex or maintaining certain boundaries.  At times, analyzing women or abstaining from sexual advances may prove to be difficult.  Given the critical nature of such factors, the researcher should ponder the manner of how to manage prior to and throughout the research process.

In summary, while performing research on work-life balance, the researcher must consider previous findings in conjunction with additional comprehensive analysis.  The implementation of specific demographics and cultural diversity awareness offer an in-depth examination of the causal factors related to the phenomenon.  Consequently, these elements offer a more relevant influence, realization, and diagnosis for varying individuals.  Furthermore, in terms of work-life balance, relative data, research limitations, and ethical considerations offer the researcher applicable hypothesis and insight associated within the research process. 

           

References:

American Psychological Association. (2010). Ethical principles of psychologists and

code of conduct: 2010 amendment. Standard 8: Research and Publication.

Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx?item=11#.

Bulger, C.A., Matthews, R.A., & Hoffman, M.E. (2007). Work and personal life

boundary management: Boundary strength, work/personal life balance, and the segmentation-integration continuum. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 12(4), 365-375.

Darcy, C., McCarthy, A., Hill, J., & Grady, G. (2012). Work-life balance: One size fits

            all? An exploratory analysis of the differential effects of career stage. European

            Management Journal, 30(2), 111.

General Social Survey. (2010). Retrieved from

http://www3.norc.org/GSS+Website/Documentation/.

Kofodimos, J. (1993). Balancing Act. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Mazerolle, S.M., Pitney, W.A., Casa, D.J., & Pagnotta, K.D. (2011). Assessing strategies

to manage work and life balance of athletic trainers working in the National

Collegiate Athletic Association Division I setting. Journal of Athletic Training,

46(2),194-205.

Williams, C. (2008). Work-life balance of shift workers. Perspectives on Labour and

            Income, 20(3), 15-26.