Work and Non-work Balance - Essay Example

?WORK AND NON-WORK BALANCE Work and non-work issues have been at the centre of heated discussions over the recent decades, but this ongoing debate has not changed the scenario much. Rather the controversy is becoming increasingly complex. Basically work can be termed as a paid activity for the purpose of making a livelihood at the cost of a certain amount of time (Watson, 2012). This work has some special features that are different in nature. Though various people see it from contrasting perspectives the basic background of work is similar to that of others. In work there must be one or more activities in exchange for which the workers who perform the completion of the work deserve monetary compensation. This is easily explained from the economic background. It goes without saying that a person has to take into account his or her valuable time and effort in performing work to serve others’ interest. Non work issues can be explained from different perspectives and among them the social context is the most popular. The social perspective focuses on the leisure activities the workers do or like to do, which are beyond the scope of interest of the business or other obligations (Beauregard, 2006). Thus the work and non-work issues continue to attract strong debate. In order to understand the situation between the work and non-work issues one has to have a good grasp of the issues separately. Work comes in various kinds and dimensions. Williams’s (2007) Typology of Work describes work as paid or unpaid and obligatory or voluntary involvement of person for the economic well-being of society; other writers have put emphasis on the declared work and formal employment (Review Eby et al., 2005). However, the concept of work has greatly evolved over the past few years. People are now viewed as more than a corporate resource. But the present issue which has adversely affected not only individuals but whole communities is the work-life balance and its effect upon every aspect of life. This underscores the urgency of identifying the non-work issues (Arnold et al, 1995). Non-work issues are multifaceted, complex and dispersed, but they are simplistically identified as the concerns external to the direct business activity. Parker (2004) describes the non-work issues as the outer part of the actual work life which is very much connected with personal life. The leisure period has been stressed on by some writers, while others have described the various leisure-related dimensions outside the scope of work. Relationship between the work and non-work issues are conventional and quite obtrusive in nature. These two issues frequently overlap each other (Kossel, and Colquittand, 2001). There are various relationships between the work and non-work issues and some of them are easily understood. A recent study shows the spillover cost and benefit, neutrality, opposition and compensation benefits denote some of the specific relationships that may be examined by academic researchers. Several non-work issues that have implications on work-related effects include absenteeism, social expectation, frequent or lengthy travel between the home and the workplace (Parker, 1982). An important non-work issue is the family and personal life complexity as a result of or exacerbated by the stress of the work issues. Concluded spill over is a consistent outcome of work in the contemporary economy. Different employees are coping with strategies driven by contrasting labour processes and labour market positions. More family friendly policies involving long hours and a more permeable work life boundary are promoting the work-life balance. Though the work and non-work issues are different in nature they constantly impact upon each other mutually and drastically (Rain et al, 1991). But work environment enables the workers to learn new skills and to know the unknown which helps them to develop their self identity. Simultaneously, the emotional well-being, work satisfaction, leisure period, and the leeway to choose – all these things have a special effect on the workers. Parker (1982) describes the work and non-work issues from three aspects which are complementary to the real life issues. They are namely spillover, opposition, and neutrality. These three aspects play important roles in the overall balance of the work and non-work issues. Work place issues raise many concerns in a worker’s own life and spillover benefits and costs are two of them. The economic implications of the spillover cost and benefits profoundly affect the complex work and non-work relationship. Spill over cost are opposite to that of the other fringe benefits regarding the work and non-work issues (Burke, 2000). However, some writers say that spillover benefits always help the workers to retain their potential as well as their vitality within the organization. Like UK and North America many other countries such as Canada, China, and France these are also being affected by the dynamics of work and non-work clashes. The workers are now either protesting or being exploited at their workplace as a result of the misconception of the spillover cost they have in the workplace (Jex and Bliese, 2007). Moreover, the stresses which come out from the workplace do affect their personal life and creates conflict among the various roles needed to be performed by these workers in the larger social sphere. For example- the workers in Japan are suffering acutely from the misconception of their roles in the job place and in society. This is an example of the spillover cost the workers have to incur. However, there are some spillover benefits like increasing the workers’ skills and other work related knowledge (Edgell, 2012). The spillover cost and benefits are just the complementary and opposite of each other, both of which exert great influence in the work place issues. Workers always want to receive a reasonable amount of compensation from their employers, as the first definition of work always says about. This compensation is always a matter of good thinking about the firm (Wilson, 2010). On the other hand, some writers believe that the imbalance between work and other responsibilities would continue to be a major cause of conflict. Apparently, additional monetary compensation is not sufficient to make up for the hard work and longer hours some workers are subject to. Although the working environment may be convenient, the compensation may appear inadequate to the workers, which may lead them to experience severe resentment. Basically the opposition arises from differences in the way people think. If the ideas of someone do not go coincide with those of someone else then conflict is the inevitable consequence (Cousins and Tang, 2004). Again if the compensation is perceived to be disproportionately small compared to what pay levels normally encountered in the organization then the workers would tend to oppose the leader of the workplace. Moreover, the personality clashes, the collision of ideas, and similar other events commonly result in workplace conflict. Some writers are of the opinion that such adversarial encounters are beneficial for a firm when they are undertaken on behalf of the firm’s advancement. If the firm’s goodwill decreases as a result of the clash then the personnel are often blamed for that reason (Noon and Blyton, 2007). However, the issues of compensation and opposition are contradictory phenomena in the work place. Work place conflicts arise as a result of these. Neutrality to mediate the conflicting issues in the workplace plays an important role in balancing the work and non-work issues. Simultaneously, writers have admitted that the neutrality in mediating the conflicting issues in the work places has some effect upon the workers. Theories regarding neutrality places emphasis upon the mediation of the non-work conflicts. Though some writers think of neutrality as pervasive and sometimes even misleading, it can be considered as one of the special tools personnel can use to deal with the issues in the workplace (Ford and Collinson 2011). For example- the concept of neutrality is so confusing that in Australia neutrality is not commonly resort to when dealing with the cases. But neutrality denotes imbalances in power and imparts heavy critical view of the opposition that emerges from the work place issues (Prottas 2006). In contrast, some writers have placed emphasis on the flexibility of adopting neutrality in the life and work balance because neutrality fails to identify the main reason behind all these issues (Bagger et al., 2008). Different writers have expressed strong and convincing arguments on both sides, for which reason neutrality remains an important issue. Work and leisure are the complementary activities in the life of a worker who works within an organization and its distinct culture. Leisure pertains to the activities that contribute to the psychological health of the workers within an organization. Though a person may differ on various points with regard to working conditions and the leisure he is able to avail of, it is a good strategy to engage in activities that cool down the conflicting parties on controversial issues affecting the organization (Rigby and O’Brien, 2010). Some writers say that the organization should develop a leisure plan for the employees in a way so that they can understand that the organization they are working for has a deep sympathy for them and this leisure is a just an expression of the importance with which the organization regards its employees. Leisure is the psychological relief for the employees who are subjected to a lot of stress originating from the workplace. Parker (2007) described 5 categories by which leisure managing and its need by the workers may be easily identified and can be related to the demand of the actual situation of the organization. Leisure acts as a mediator between work and non-work issues. Working time, work related time, existence time, non-work obligations, leisure /free /uncommitted time are some of the aspects that influence the work and non work issues and the leisure period. Another important aspect for the employees to look at in an organization is the level of work load. As the work age grows, more and more work are stored in the file system which causes high level of stress in the mind of the employees and the workers (Kamenou, N., 2008). Different writers have defined this topic from different perspectives but one thing which was similar among all of these discussions was that the work load is often seen as a negative issue in an organization. However, the organization wants the job to be done and profits to be raised, thereby intensifying the controversy concerning work load. For example, Scase and Goffee, (1989) have put emphasis on the balanced distribution of the work so that the workers who actually perform the job are able to do so more conveniently. The more convenient the manner by which the work is managed, the higher the work efficiency delivered to the employers. So the work-life balance is restored through this process of leisure choosing. In this era of technology workers and managers no longer have to think so rigorously about the workplace issues. Advances in technology have endowed the workers with various tools which enable them to attain greater flexibility in their work and performance (Kendler et al, 2005). They have the internet, the online conversation and hanging out, chat box and online call centres to help them perform the work and the duties they are assigned. The emerging work and non-work issues are creating extraordinary conflicts which in turn create clashes among different managerial roles. Employees at their workplaces sometimes engage in various ways of reducing their workloads and contributing to non-work metrics which are directly related to their personal lives (Thompson and Prottas, 2006). This tends to increase the level of misunderstanding among employees, increasing their likelihood of getting involved in non-linear conflicts. On the other hand, some experts call it a flexible working environment, which can really contribute in reducing the clashes. Employees may work at the time and place convenient to them in order to cope with the demands of the work situation (e.g. Gignac et al, 1996; Higgins et al, 2000). Mid level executives are now passing time in the beach and attending meetings with their subordinates simultaneously through the use of technology. Moreover, this has given employees greater opportunity to perform their duties from an at-home environment. However, it has created new problems in the work place. The flexible working policy is not applicable to some jobs based on their nature, particularly those wherein the flexible approach causes the disruption of the workflow through the working environment (Kuttler and Fritz, 2010). Unless management recognizes the special circumstances in which the strategy could be effective, indiscriminately applying the flexible approach may even create a clash among different layers of organization (Kamenou, 2008). Flexible work alternatives may work as therapy in the case where workers suffer severely from certain mental disorders. Creating the right working environment is so important that sometimes the top executives who make the important decisions and policies also opt for work flexibility. So it is important to look into the matter of finding a suitable work-place and working environment both after proper scrutiny. The managers and executives need to view the situation from both the perspective of the employee and that of the employer (Clark, 2001). However, carefully chosen alternatives are always a blessing to an employee, in order to arrive at a win-win situation within a work-place. Work life balance is a novel approach in the management of development of a firm’s human resources, in order to increase job satisfaction for the employee and productivity for the company. The ability of individuals to successfully pursue both their work and non-work lives, without undue pressures from one undermining the satisfactory experience of the other can be termed as the work and life balance (Noon and Blyton, 2007). However, striking a harmonious balance between one’s work life and social life is paramount, and this is the rationale behind improving the work and non-work situation integral with success. People in this world are moving forward with a view to improving their social status and economic condition. People are now becoming more than a ‘working insect’ (Cropanzano et al., 1997). But the present issue which has affected not only individuals but the whole community is the work-life balance and its impact upon every aspect of life. Writers have also emphasized the changing trends all over the world, especially the UK and North America, concerning the changing pattern of work force diversity and the work and non-work life dynamic. Writers have tried to link the work and non-work aspects of daily life. Reconciling the competing demands of paid work and home life has always been a challenge for the employees (Ford and Collinson, 2011). From the dawn of industrialization it is needed to maintain the work life balance. Women involvement is one of the fastest-changing scenarios of the contemporary work place environment. Because of their central role in the family and offspring rearing, women in the workplace have become increasingly occupied with various dimensions of work and non-work issues. Women play vital roles in organizations since, it is not only work skills that sustain the firm but also the gendered views that influence its operations. Several writers have credited the females for having more tolerance to stress than the males in a working environment. In contrast, what is more regrettable is that the amount of support they get over the work-life issues is still insufficient to address their needs. Though the traditional views about females have somewhat changed, the rearing of the children and care of the home and family are still principally attributed to females. This imparts a heavy stress on women, as they cannot leave their child without care when they report for work. For this reason the personnel policies in support of female workers are still insufficient and ineffective. The role of women however showed us the way to arrive at the same outcome through a different process (Lambert, 1990). Some experts say women undertake the majority of household tasks in the house (Edgell 2012). On the other hand, male workers are likewise suffering not only from the imbalance, but also from the added commitment to cover the crucial jobs at work. This has long-term consequences in terms of deteriorating situations in the work environment. Though both males and females work in the same environment, stress management capability may not be similar. On the other hand, due to personal family purposes, females cannot concentrate upon other work issues, and they have exhibited ambivalence towards to the work-life balances (Rhoades and Eisenberger, 2002). However the recent studies have shown a greater involvement of women in the work place. Even so, it is the complexity of relationship that most severely affected employees. This complexity is now being addressed through different measures. Work relationship is associated with different work and career orientations today. Spill over is most common in every complex relationship (Lee, 1997). However, the miners have stains and the packing workers have Blum. So no single work evidence is applicable in all instances. Thus the complexity of relationships is now being dealt with along various dimensions. Though this complexity depends upon the level of disagreement on the compensation and other plans regarding non-work issues, it is not being downgraded or relegated to a lower priority. The work places tend to become routinary and tedious and therefore reduce the work efficiency, while at the same time, work relationship complexity tends to increase the clashes between managerial roles. Though these types of developments are viewed as obstacles on the way of development, motivational support can overcome these obstacles (Thompson et al., 1999). That is why before taking any decision complexity of relationship must be considered. Workers sometimes suffer from the mutual interference of the work and family over the work and non-work issues (Bagger et al, 2008). Two perspectives on the interface between family and work are being much talked and rigorously undemanding. Another facilitative perspective is that the degree to which a worker is involved in work and family tends to enrich the other domain. On the other hand, depletion may take place in the fixed pool of resources, meaning that engagement in one domain may reduce resources available for the other. These perspectives tend to put the worker and employer in ambivalent situations. Writers have put emphasis on the balancing of the work and family interference, meaning that persons who work in a competitive environment need to cope with the evolving issues like this interference (Jahn et al, 2003). Thus the mutual interference is sometimes negative and sometimes positive. Though the workers might face a lot of complexity in the workplace and from non-work issues, writers say that this can be minimized from different perspective (Thompson, 2004). In contrast, if there is a supportive home and work culture with the working environment and if the workers can deal with the changing trends of those complexity and non-work issues, then it can be determined that by the time the workers leave for home, they will be able to overcome all kind of work related problems. This work and home culture imparts a significant amount of influence over the others in terms of work stresses. Moreover, this also encompasses the level of tolerance the workers have over their work place and work issues (Thompson and Prottas, 2006). So a supportive work and home culture is very important for better output. To sum up, the work and non-work issues should be considered from some basic background which frames them in a more realistic and relevant framework. Work probably impacts on family more than family impacts on work. Therefore, it is wise to balance between the work area and the non-work areas based on the level of interference. The Experiences will vary on an individual basis due to personal circumstances and attitudes towards work. Household context may also include the category of professional dual earner which is different from a low income family. Responses are required from all levels in order to balance or reconcile, though it will vary depending on the job or economic situation. References: Parker, S. (1982) Work and Retirement, London: Allen and Unwin Beatty, C. A. (2006). ‘The stress of managerial and professional women: is the price too high?’, Journal of Organizational Behavior,17, pp. 233–251. Bittman M., Ho?mann S. and D. Thompson (2004). ‘Men’suptake of family-friendly employment provisions’. Policy Research Paper No. 22, Australian Government Departmentof Family and Community Services, Canberra. Beauregard, T. A. (2006). ‘Are organizations shooting them-selves in the foot?Workplace contributors to family-to-work con?ict’, Equal Opportunities International ,25, pp. 336–353 Cohen, J. and P. Cohen (1983).Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences, 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum [online] Available at: [Accessed 19th-October-2012] Cornelius, N. and D. Skinner (2008). ‘The careers of senior men and women – capabilities theory perspective’, British Journal of Management,19, pp. 141–149. [online] Available at: [Accessed 15th-October-2012] Cropanzano, R., J. C. Howes, A. A. Grandey and P. Toth (2005). ‘The relationship of organizational politics and support to work behaviours, attitudes, and stress’, Journal of Organizational Behavior,18, pp. 159–180. [online] Available at: < http://www.alertnet.org/thefacts/reliefsources > [Accessed 19th-October-2012] Jex, S. M. and P. D. Bliese (2009). ‘E?cacy beliefs as a moderator of the impact of work-related stressors: a multi-level study’, Journal of Applied Psychology,84, pp. 349–361. Kamenou, N. (2008). ‘Reconsidering work–life balance debates: challenging limited understandings of the ‘‘life’’ component in the context of ethnic minority women’s experiences’, British Journal of Management,19, pp. 99–109. [online] Available at: [Accessed 19th-October-2012] Kidder,D.L.(2002).‘The in?uence of gender on the performance of organizational citizenship behaviours’, Journal of Management,28, pp. 629–648. [online] Available at: [Accessed 15th-October-2012] Kim, S. (2001). ‘Perceived impacts of family leave policy: do organizational factors matter?’, Public Personnel Management,30, pp. 221–239. Kinnunen, U., S. Mauno, S. Guerts and J. Dikkers (2005).‘Work–family culture in organizations: theoretical and empirical approaches’. In S. Poelmans (ed.), Work and Family: An International Research Perspective, pp. 87–120. Kendler, K.S.,J.Myers and C.A.Prescott (2005). ‘Sex di?erences in the relationship between social support and riskfor major depression: a longitudinal study of opposite-sex in pairs’, American Journal of Psychiatry,162, pp. 250–256. [online] Available at: [Accessed 15th-October-2012] Landauer, J. (2006, July). Bottom-line benefits of work/life programs. HR FOCUS, 74, 7, 3-4. Lazarus, R. S. and S. Folkman (1984).Stress, Appraisal, and Coping. New York: Springer.Lyness, K. S., C. A. Matsui, T., T. Ohsawa and M. Onglatco (1995). ‘Work–family con?ict and the stress-bu?ering e?ects of husband support and coping behaviour among Japanese married working women’, Journal of Vocational Behavior,47, pp. 178–192. [online] Available at: < http://www.woments blog.com/thefacts/reliefsources > [Accessed 19th-October-2012] Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Kossek, E. E., J. A. Colquitt and R. A. Noe (2001). ‘Care giving decisions, well-being, and performance: the e?ects of place and provider as a function of dependent type and work–family climates’,Academy of Management Journal ,44, pp. 29–44. Nelson, D. L., J. C. Quick, M. A. Hitt and D. Moesel (2000).‘Politics, lack of career progress, and work/home con?ict: stress and strain for working women’, Sex Roles,23, pp. 169 185 [online] Available at: [Accessed 19th-October-2012] O?ce for National Statistics (2005).Focus on Families. London: O?ce for National Statistics. Peeters, M., C. Wattez, E. Demerouti and W. de Regt (2009).‘Work–family culture, work–family interference and well-being at work: is it possible to distinguish between a positiveand a negative process?’, Career Development International ,14, pp. 700–713. Parker, V. A. and D. T. Hall (2008). ‘Conclusion: Expanding the domain of family and work issues’. In S. Zedeck (ed.),Work, Families and Organizations, pp. 432–452.San Fran-cisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. [online] Available at: [Accessed 19th-October-2012] Rhoades, L. and R. Eisenberger (2002). ‘Perceived organiza-tional support: a review of the literature’, Journal of Applied Psychology,87, pp. 698–714. Reynolds, H. B. (1999). Work/life initiatives require cultural readiness. Employee Benefit Plan Review, 54, 6, 25-26. Thompson, C. A. and D. J. Prottas (2006). ‘Relationshipsamong organizational family support, job autonomy, per-ceived control, and employee well-being’,Journal of Occupa-tional Health Psychology,11, pp. 100–118. Swift, L. (2002). Work-life balance important in relief world,too. Reuters AlertNet. Retrieved January 30, 2003, [online] Available at [Accessed 19th-October-2012] Thompson, A. M. Francesco and M. K.Judiesch (2009). ‘Work and pregnancy: individual andorganizational factors in?uencing organizational commit-ment, timing of maternity leave, and return to work’,SexRoles,41, pp. 485–508 Read More