» Articles » PMID: 32098327

Occupational and Individual Determinants of Work-life Balance Among Office Workers with Flexible Work Arrangements

Overview
Publisher MDPI
Date 2020 Feb 27
PMID 32098327
Citations 10
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Flexible work arrangements permitting workers to work anytime and anywhere are increasingly common. This flexibility can introduce both challenges and opportunities for the organisation, as well as for worker work-life balance (WLB). This cross-sectional study aimed to examine the extent to which occupational factors (organizational, leadership and psychosocial) and individual work-related behaviours (over-commitment, overtime work and boundary management) are associated with WLB, and whether these associations are modified by the perceived level of flexibility at work (i.e., control over when, where, and how to do the work). In total, 2960 full-time office workers with flexible work arrangements at the Swedish Transport Administration participated. Associations were determined using linear regression analyses with adjustment for covariates. The strongest negative associations with WLB were found for over-commitment, quantitative job demands, expectations of availability, and overtime work. Strongest positive associations were found for boundary management, information about organizing work, social support, and relation-oriented leadership. Perceived flexibility was positively associated with WLB, and interacted with several of the examined factors, buffering their negative associations with WLB. Results suggest that WLB can be promoted by organizational initiatives focusing on minimizing excessive job demands, increasing psychosocial resources, supporting boundary management, and enhancing perceived flexibility.

Citing Articles

Psychosocial hazards and work-life balance: the role of workplace conflict, rivalry, and harassment in Latvia.

Paegle D, Lakisa S, Matisane L, Matisane M, Paegle L, Martinsone K Front Psychol. 2025; 16:1494288.

PMID: 40051401 PMC: 11884417. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1494288.


Challenges of modern work environments and means of overcoming them in the context of psychosocial risk assessments.

Pavlista V, Angerer P, Diebig M BMC Public Health. 2024; 24(1):3394.

PMID: 39639298 PMC: 11622553. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-024-20818-w.


The Mediating Role of Employee Engagement in the Relationship between Flexible Work Arrangements and Turnover Intentions among Highly Educated Employees in the Republic of Serbia.

Gasic D, Berber N Behav Sci (Basel). 2023; 13(2).

PMID: 36829360 PMC: 9952613. DOI: 10.3390/bs13020131.


A Work Time Control Tradeoff in Flexible Work: Competitive Pathways to Need for Recovery.

Edvinsson J, Mathiassen S, Bjarntoft S, Jahncke H, Hartig T, Hallman D Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023; 20(1).

PMID: 36613009 PMC: 9819246. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20010691.


Spillover and crossover effects of working time demands on work-life balance satisfaction among dual-earner couples: the mediating role of work-family conflict.

Lott Y, Wohrmann A Curr Psychol. 2022; :1-17.

PMID: 36258892 PMC: 9561319. DOI: 10.1007/s12144-022-03850-0.


References
1.
McNall L, Masuda A, Nicklin J . Flexible work arrangements, job satisfaction, and turnover intentions: the mediating role of work-to-family enrichment. J Psychol. 2010; 144(1):61-81. DOI: 10.1080/00223980903356073. View

2.
Demerouti E, Bakker A, Nachreiner F, Schaufeli W . The job demands-resources model of burnout. J Appl Psychol. 2001; 86(3):499-512. View

3.
Allen T, Martin A . The work-family interface: A retrospective look at 20 years of research in JOHP. J Occup Health Psychol. 2017; 22(3):259-272. DOI: 10.1037/ocp0000065. View

4.
Mazzetti G, Vignoli M, Schaufeli W, Guglielmi D . Work addiction and presenteeism: The buffering role of managerial support. Int J Psychol. 2017; 54(2):174-179. DOI: 10.1002/ijop.12449. View

5.
Cohen J . A power primer. Psychol Bull. 2009; 112(1):155-9. DOI: 10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155. View