Work-linked couples and work-life balance: resource or liability?

1. Gail Kinman University of Bedfordshire, UK Work-linked couples and work-life balance: resource or liability?

2. Researching the work-home interface • The fulfilment of demands in one role depletes the resources available to meet the demands of other roles • Work-life conflict “.. a form of inter-role conflict in which the role pressures from the work and family domains are mutually incompatible in some respect” (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985) • Time, strain, and behaviour-based conflict - negative outcomes • Work roles can also facilitate and enrich non-working life

3. Border theory (Ashforth et al, 2000) • The boundaries between work and non-work roles vary in their flexibility and permeability • Two roles (i.e. professional and personal) are: • integrated if the boundary is flexible and permeable • segmented if the boundary is inflexible and impermeable • Blurred boundaries associated with more work-life conflict • BUT role integration is not necessarily damaging • wide variation in the desirability of role integration/segmentation • “goodness of fit” predicts wellbeing and satisfaction

4. Dual-career couples • Both partners employed in occupations that: • involve investment of time and energy • require a high level of commitment and involvement • have an upwardly mobile professional trajectory • Dual-career relationships more supportive, but more potential for work-life conflict • Communication about work is common: leads to crossover of work-related mood. Also competitive negotiation about career precedence can lead to burnout

5. Work-linked couples: • Both partners employed in the same occupation (or the same workplace) • Prevalence has generally increased - particularly common amongst academic employees • c40% academics in USA have a partner in the same profession; rise of “dual hiring policies” • proportion of UK dual-career academic couples is unknown • Little known about how work-linked couples manage the work-home interface • Academics are a particularly appropriate group to study

6. Academics and the work-home interface: • Particular problems managing the work-home interface (Kinman & Jones, 2009) • High demand, low support • Intra-professional role overload and conflict • Professional and personal roles highly integrated • The work is “unbounded” and “portable” • High schedule flexibility, but frequent boundary-spanning activities • High job involvement and commitment • Work-life conflict predicted by combined factors • Work-life conflict main predictor of psychological distress

7. Research questions: • What are the consequences for work-life balance of being in a work-linked relationship? • Are professional and personal roles more highly integrated and work-home boundaries weaker for work-linked couples? • What is the role of communication about work? • What are the implications for work-home boundary management?

8. Work-linked couples and work-life balance: resource or liability? • Potential benefits • Shared interests and mutual goals • Greater understanding of working conditions - more tolerance, understanding and support during stressful times • More mutual schedule flexibility - more efficient juggling • Potential drawbacks • The work role may be more salient during home life and leisure • Job demands may be more likely to spill over into the home • Greater risk of time-based and strain-based conflict • Implications for work-life balance and general wellbeing

9. Aims of research: • Two studies examining the implications for work-life balance of having a work-linked partner • Study 1: • Do academic employees in a work-linked relationship differ in levels of key work-home variables compared to those whose partners do different jobs? • Are work demands more likely to spill over into the personal domain for work-linked academics?

10. Method: • 644 FT academics in a dual-career relationship (61% male) - 45% (n=291) in a work-linked relationship • Measures • Job demands (Kinman & Jones, 2004) • Average working hours • Work-life conflict (Netemeyer et al, 1996) • Professional/personal role integration (current and ideal) • Boundary strength • Schedule flexibility • Organisational support for work-life balance • Over-commitment to the job role (Siegrist, 1996)

11. Differences between groups Group Mean (SD) Sign. Work-life conflict WL 4.88 (1.30) NWL 4.38 (1.43) .001 Role integration (current) WL 6.55 (1.95) NWL 5.20 (2.24) .001 Role integration (ideal) WL 3.57 (2.04) NWL 3.30 (2.02) ns Boundary strength WL 2.16 (0.88) NWL 3.82 (0.94) .01 Working hours WL 2.85 (1.11) NWL 2.38 (1.56) .01 Over-commitment WL 3.22 (0.54 NWL 2.70 (0.58) .001 Org. support for WLB WL 3.05 (1.35) NWL 3.45 (0.98) .05

12. Significant interaction effects p<.001

13. Study 2: Aims • To explore the work-home interface for employees in a work-linked relationship in greater depth • Thematic content analysis of qualitative data • Particular focus placed on: • Satisfaction with work-life balance • Mutual understanding of work-related issues • Communication about work • The impact of being in a work-linked couple on the work-home interface (positive and negative) • Crossover effects

14. Method: • 45 academics in a work-linked relationship provided data on-line (43% male; 79% in relationship for at least 6 years) • Questions: • Satisfaction with work-life balance (participant and partner) • Mutual understanding of working tasks and conditions • Communication about work (frequency, content and helpfulness) • Impact of partner having a good/bad day • Critical incidents where being in a work-linked relationship has helped/hindered work-life balance

15. Work-life balance To what extent are you satisfied with your work-life balance? To what extent is your partner satisfied with his/her work-life balance

16. Mutual understanding of working conditions To what extent do you understand the issues your partner faces at work? To what extent does your partner understand the issues you face at work?

17. Frequency of discussion about work with partner

18. Work discussions with partner:content and helpfulness

19. Topics of communication • Wide range of topics discussed – for some, “everything!” • Intrinsic aspects of the job: e.g. research and teaching • Extrinsic aspects of the job: e.g. salary, promotion • Wider organisational factors: e.g. corporate politics • Information sharing and updating • Relationships with (behaviour and performance of) colleagues and management • Personal successes and failures • Amusing incidents and gossip • General worries and concerns • Workload, stress, frustration, annoyances, bureaucracy, increased expectations and demands on time

20. Consequences of partner having a “good day” at work • Crossover effects between partners: enhanced mood, contentment and ability to relax • “It makes an enormous difference – if he is cheerier, then so am I” • Impact on activities, communication and family relationships • No real impact • “It is good to know, but doesn’t have a significant impact on me”

21. Consequences of partner having a “bad day” at work • A much stronger impact than a good day • “We cannot not talk about it” • Crossover of negative mood and tension between partners • “One suffers, both suffer” • Impact on activities, communication and relationships • Social/emotional withdrawal, less willingness to do household tasks, complaining/griping, disagreements/arguments • “I have to look for the positive on his behalf which can be exhausting and gives me no escape from thinking or talking about work” • Indirect positive impact • “It makes me stop worrying about my own day and lets me concentrate on something else for a change”

22. Work-linked relationships and work-life enrichment/facilitation • Mutual understanding and tolerance • Helping each other cope • “We listen, support and take care of each other” • Schedule flexibility and autonomy • Shared interests, passions and enthusiasm • Working together to help solve work problems • Professional admiration and respect • “I like him more because of the work he does” • Recognising the “danger signs” of over-involvement or lack of perspective on each other’s behalf

23. Work-linked relationships and work-life conflict • Busy times can occur simultaneously • “Spending time working at home in different rooms” • … or at different times • “One of us may be working while the other wants to have fun ” • Perceived lack of equity in workloads • “Moaning about his teaching load which is a fraction of mine” • Personal life revolves around work • “Talking shop” with the same friends from work”

24. Work-linked relationships and work-life conflict • Mismatched expectations about role boundaries • “My partner is obsessed with work and will talk about it even if I don’t want to” • Boundary spanning activities causing intrusion • Facing the same problems and shared understanding • “Can turn into a mutual moanfest” • Differing philosophies and approaches to work • Manager vs trade union official

25. Work-linked relationships and work-life conflict • Work disagreements can spill over into home life • “We both have strong views about our shared discipline which can lead to robust debate” • “I was the project manager. He would not meet deadlines, fell out with partners and blamed everybody else. Inevitably it spilled over into our home life and caused a lot of tension” • Career competitiveness • Difficulty finding work in the same geographical area- living apart

26. Conclusions: • Work-home boundaries are weaker for work-linked couples • Time-based and strain-based conflict • Work demands and concerns are more likely to threaten work-life balance for work-linked couples • Many risk factors, but many protective features – linked to job context, working practices, stress management strategies and mutual expectations • Crossover effects: the quality of a partner’s day and working strategies affects wellbeing • The nature, frequency and desirability of work-related communication is important – a good “fit” is required

27. Future research • Focus on crossover effects and explore potential mechanisms between partners • Use work-linked couples not individuals as the unit of analysis • Explore the role of over-commitment, involvement and social enmeshment in work • Further explore lack of concordance in perceptions of work-life balance between couples, and mutual understanding of working conditions • Develop interventions at the couple level – enhanced negotiation skills needed for dual career couples? • Research included “survivors” only, not those whose relationships had broken down

28. Questions: • Are work-linked couples a “special case”? • If so, are the work-life balance issues they face qualitatively or quantitatively different to other dual career couples? • To what extent would “traditional” work-life balance interventions be useful for work-linked couples?