APS Quarterly: Spring 2001

Whose Job Is It Anyway?
Reducing Employees’
Work-Family Conflict
By Dr. Ellen Durnin

Editor's Note: Dr. Ellen Durnin is Dean of Connecticut State University at Waterbury, Ct., USA. Dr. Durnin's campus focuses on Management, Criminology and Nursing programs.

The last issue of the APS Quarterly contained an article that addressed the topic of interpersonal conflict and provided suggestions for understanding and reducing conflict between co-workers or others. The topic of this article is the reduction of employees’ work-family conflict, with the particular goal of allowing individuals to be more effective in all of their roles.
          Both academic and practitioner bodies of literature have focused on the issue of work-family conflict in recent years. The literature has raised many questions about the conflict: What are its sources? How can it be reduced? Whose responsibility is the reduction (the individual’s, the employing organization’s, or society’s? Do all employees experience this conflict, or is it particular to certain groups of individuals? What are the benefits (to the individual and to the employing organization (of reducing work-family conflict? This article offers answers to some of these questions and provides a discussion of the implications for all affected parties.
          First, where does the perceived conflict come from? The source is a combination of individual and situational factors. In a 1995 study I conducted of 286 working adults, I found that those employees who scored high on measures of need for achievement and need for affiliation reported higher levels of work-family conflict than other employees surveyed, all other variables held constant. Individuals who scored high on only one measure, or who scored low on both measures, reported lower levels of work-family conflict than those who were motivated by high levels of need on both measures. The results indicate that some individuals will experience higher levels of work-family conflict due to their individual personality make-up. This finding helps to explain why some employees in similar work situations report differing levels of work-family conflict.
          Situational or environmental factors can also affect the level of experienced conflict between the work and family domains. In the same study, parental status and dual-worker status were two other variables that were positively associated with increased work-family conflict. Those individuals who had children or were in a relationship where they and their partners were employed reported more conflict between the two domains than those who did not have children, had a non-employed partner, or were single.
          Objectively measured factors contributed to the perception of work-family conflict. For example, I asked respondents how many hours they worked per week on the job and how many hours they put in on the “second shift” at home. Not surprisingly, those who put in more cumulative hours in both locations reported more conflict, all other factors held constant. So, the conflict has a real, time-based dimension.
          Two results were unexpected. First, there was no significant difference between the levels of reported work-family conflict for men and women. A common perception is that this is a “woman’s problem,” but the findings do not sup- port that belief. There were differences between how men and women invest in the domains (men put in more hours at work, and women put in more hours at home (but the resulting levels of conflict were the same for the two groups.
          The second surprising result was the positive correlation between work-family conflict and income. It was hypothesized that higher levels of income would allow the individual to reduce his/her conflict by “purchasing assistance”, i.e., childcare, housework assistance, etc. The opposite, in fact, was true: those who earned more reported higher levels of conflict between the two domains.
          So, what are the implications of the study? First, it is advantageous for employees to be aware of their individual levels of need for affiliation and need for achievement so that they can predict their perceived work-family conflict. This information may assist individuals in making career and personal decisions.
          The employer may also want to know the need levels of employees to assist in making hiring, promotion, transfer, relocation, and other decisions that could influence the work-family balance. This can be accomplished by administering a simple survey to both job candidates and current employees. A review of the current human resource management literature shows that proactive employers periodically survey their workers regarding employment practices that add to or reduce the conflict. Some organizations have made changes as a result of these surveys, such as allowing more flexible work hours and work locations, offering referral services for non-work programs such as child care and elder care, and providing on-site benefits that reduce the need to leave work early or come in late (e.g., dry cleaning drop-off and pick-up, mini post offices, subsidized cafeterias).
          None of the benefits or changes listed above is costly; however, employers who have instituted them report improved attendance and timeliness on the part of their employees. Additionally, proactive organizations have experienced an advantage in the competition to recruit and retain qualified employees. Finally, employers that provide on-site services have found that employees are more productive when not distracted by non-work concerns. Thus, in a practical way, the understanding of the dynamics of work-family conflict can yield benefits to the employee and to the employer when each party takes responsibility for making choices that maximize productivity and effectiveness.

Back