The relation between work–family balance and quality of life
Introduction
The recent explosion of interest in the work–family interface has produced a number of concepts to explain the relation between these two dominant spheres of life: accommodation, compensation, resource drain, segmentation, spillover, work–family conflict, work–family enrichment, and work–family integration (Barnett, 1998; Edwards & Rothbard, 2000; Friedman & Greenhaus, 2000; Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985; Greenhaus & Parasuraman, 1999; Lambert, 1990). One term widely cited in the popular press is work–family balance. Sometimes used as a noun (when, for example, one is encouraged to achieve balance), and other times as a verb (to balance work and family demands) or an adjective (as in a balanced life), work–family balance often implies cutting back on work to spend more time with the family. Moreover, it is thought to be in an individual’s best interest to live a balanced life (Kofodimos, 1993).
Despite the presumed virtue of work–family balance, the concept has not undergone extensive scrutiny. Most of the major reviews of work–family relations either do not mention work–family balance or mention balance but do not explicitly define the concept. Moreover, empirical studies that discuss balance between work and family roles generally do not distinguish balance from other concepts in the work–family literature (Nielson, Carlson, & Lankau, 2001; Saltzstein, Ting, & Saltzstein, 2001; Sumer & Knight, 2001; Thompson, Beauvais, & Lyness, 1999). For empirical research on balance to contribute to understanding work–family dynamics, further development of the construct is essential.
Several scholars have recently proposed definitions of balance that distinguish it from other related concepts (Clark, 2000; Hill, Hawkins, Ferris, & Weitzman, 2001; Kirchmeyer, 2000; Kofodimos, 1990, Kofodimos, 1993; Marks, Huston, Johnson, & MacDermid, 2001; Marks & MacDermid, 1996). Nevertheless, the definitions of balance are not entirely consistent with one another, the measurement of balance is problematic, and the impact of work–family balance on individual well-being has not been firmly established.
The present study addressed these gaps in the literature. Specifically, the research: (1) proposed a comprehensive definition of work–family balance that is distinguishable from other work–family concepts; (2) developed a measure of work–family balance that is consistent with this definition; and (3) examined relations between work–family balance and quality of life, a prominent indicator of well-being. In subsequent sections of this article, we discuss the concept and measurement of work–family balance, propose relations between work–family balance and quality of life, and report the results of a study designed to examine these relations.
Section snippets
The meaning of work–family balance
We do not consider balance to be a work–family linking mechanism because it does not specify how conditions or experiences in one role are causally related to conditions or experiences in the other role (Edwards & Rothbard, 2000). Instead, work–family balance reflects an individual’s orientation across different life roles, an interrole phenomenon (Marks & MacDermid, 1996). In contrast to the prevailing view that individuals inevitably organize their roles in a hierarchy of prominence, Marks
The measurement of work–family balance
Researchers have used several different approaches to operationally define role balance, work–family balance, or work-life balance. For example, some studies have assessed an individual’s reaction to an unspecified level of balance. Milkie and Peltola (1999) used the item: “How successful do you feel in balancing your paid work and family life?” White (1999) and Saltzstein et al. (2001) focused on satisfaction with balance with the items “Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the balance
The relation between work–family balance and quality of life
Work–family balance is generally thought to promote well-being. Kofodimos (1993) suggests that imbalance—in particular work imbalance—arouses high levels of stress, detracts from quality of life, and ultimately reduces individuals’ effectiveness at work. Hall (1990) proposes an organization-change approach to promoting work–family balance, and the popular press is replete with advice to companies and employees on how to promote greater balance in life (Cummings, 2001; Fisher, 2001; Izzo &
Participants
The present research was part of a larger study on the quality of life in public accounting (Greenhaus, Collins, Singh, & Parasuraman, 1997; Greenhaus, Parasuraman, & Collins, 2001). Participants were members of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) who were employed in public accounting at the time of the study. Surveys were mailed to 1,000 randomly selected members of the AICPA who met pre-established criteria, of whom 428 (42.8%) responded. The present analyses were
Results
Respondents spent considerably more hours per week on work (M=47.43) than family (M=27.57; t=14.1, p<.01). This differential was reflected in an average time balance coefficient of .28. On the other hand, the respondents were more psychologically involved in their family (M=4.24) than their work (M=3.26; t=16.18, p<.01), with an average involvement balance coefficient of −.08. Individuals were also more satisfied with their family life (M=4.05) than their work (M=3.46; t=10.09, p<.01) as
Discussion
Work–family balance is associated with quality of life, but only under certain conditions and not in the manner we had predicted. When individuals invest relatively little of their time or involvement in their combined work and family roles, or when they derive little satisfaction from their combined roles, work–family balance is unrelated to quality of life. Under these conditions, there is little time, involvement, or satisfaction to allocate between roles. Therefore, imbalance produces such
Acknowledgments
We thank John M. Schaubroeck for his assistance with the statistical analysis and Tammy D. Allen for her helpful comments on an earlier version of the manuscript.
References (49)
- et al.
Developing and testing an integrative model of the work–family interface
Journal of Vocational Behavior
(1997) - et al.
Work and family influences on departure from public accounting
Journal of Vocational Behavior
(1997) Promoting work/family balance: An organization-change approach
Organizational Dynamics
(1990)Why executives lose their balance
Organizational Dynamics
(1990)- et al.
A model of work, family, and interrole conflict: A construct validation study
Organizational Behavior and Human Performance
(1983) - et al.
The supportive mentor as a means of reducing work–family conflict
Journal of Vocational Behavior
(2001) - et al.
Work and family variables, entrepreneurial career success, and psychological well-being
Journal of Vocational Behavior
(1996) - et al.
When work–family benefits are not enough: The influence of work–family culture on benefit utilization, organizational attachment, and work–family conflict
Journal of Vocational Behavior
(1999) - et al.
Relationships of job and family involvement, family social support, and work–family conflict with job and life satisfaction
Journal of Applied Psychology
(1996) Toward a review and reconceptualization of the work/family literature
Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs
(1998)