Workplace Cultures/ Climates Reflecting Concern for Employees’ Lives Outside of Work
A growing literature illustrates that it is not formal WL benefits and policies in isolation that make a difference in reducing WLC but rather the daily practices that surround their use and whether there is a culture/climate that supports WL policies (Allen, 2001; Behson, 2002; Eaton, 2003; O’Driscoll et al., 2003; Premeaux, Adkins, & Mossholder, 2007).
Thus, while benefits might exist on paper, employees may not feel that they can use them to alleviate WLC based on how the policies are talked about by supervisors, the climate of the workgroup, and/or perceived career repercussions (see Eaton, 2003; Kirby, 2000; Kirby & Krone, 2002; Schutte & Eaton, 2004). For example, in their study of 2,810 employees, Bond, Galinsky, and Hill (2004) note that 39% of respondents agree that there is job jeopardy for working flexibly.WL culture refers to “the shared assumptions, beliefs, and values regarding the extent to which an organization supports and values the integration of employees’ work and (family) [personal] lives” (Thompson, Beauvais, & Lyness, 1999, p. 394). Allen (2001) also introduces family supportive organization perceptions, as “global perceptions that employees form regarding the extent to which the organization is family[life] supportive” (p. 414). Eaton (2003) offers the construct of perceived usability to explore the extent to which employees feel free to utilize their “available” formal and informal WL policies. These concepts are important because employees who perceive a supportive WL culture/climate (a) are more likely to use WL benefits (Allen, 2001; Behson, 2002; Kossek, Noe, & Colquitt, 2001; Thompson et al., 1999) and (b) have lower levels of WLC (Allen, 2001; Behson, 2002; Kossek et al., 2001; Thompson et al., 1999; Voydanoff, 2005).
In their foundational work, Thompson et al. (1999) lay out three considerations regarding WL culture.
The first is organizational time demands, or the extent to which there are expectations for rigid schedules, for long hours of work, and for prioritizing work over family. Another dimension of culture is perceived career consequences, or the degree to which employees perceive positive or negative career consequences for using WL benefits. The third aspect of managerial support alludes to the extent to which individual managers are sensitive to and accommodating of employees’ family needs, not only in terms of policy use but also in more informal accommodations (see the Relational Impacts on Work-Life Conflict section; Premeaux et al., 2007).Thus, organizations can transform WL problems by becoming “life friendly” (see Pitt-Catsouphes, 2002). This begins with providing benefits, policies, and programs that promote employees’ quality of life, recognizing that flexibility and giving employees some control over work scheduling seems to most reduce WLC (see Brough & O’Driscoll,
2010). But it also involves cultivating a culture/climate in which employees perceive that (a) their nonwork life is respected, (b) they are not required to prioritize work above family/personal life or manage unrealistic schedules to achieve desired career consequences, (c) there will be no negative career consequences associated with using WL benefits, and (d) their managers and coworkers will listen to and support them in striving to reduce WLC (Andreassi & Thomson, 2004; Kossek et al., 2010; Thompson et al., 1999). To enact such cultures, supervisors may need to be trained to be more supportive of WL issues (see the Relational Impacts on WorkLife Conflict section) and should then in turn be rewarded by the organization for supporting WL issues; Galinsky et al. (2008) found that only 20% of 1,100 employers said it was “very true” that management rewards those supervisors who support effective flexible work arrangements. Finally, workplace relationships should be developed that are respectful of employees’ WL responsibilities.