IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/humman/v7y2022i1d10.1007_s41463-022-00124-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evolving Conceptions of Work-Family Boundaries: In Defense of The Family as Stakeholder

Author

Listed:
  • Miguel Pina E. Cunha

    (Universidade Nova de Lisboa)

  • Remedios Hernández-Linares

    (Universidad de Extremadura)

  • Milton Sousa

    (Universidade Nova de Lisboa)

  • Stewart Clegg

    (Universidade Nova de Lisboa
    University of Sydney
    University of Stavanger)

  • Arménio Rego

    (Católica Porto Business School
    Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL), Business Research Unit (BRU-IUL))

Abstract

In the management and organization studies literature, a key question to explore and explain is that of the family as an organizational stakeholder, particularly when working-from-home became the “new normal”. Departing from meta-analytic studies on the work-family relation and connecting with scholarly conversation on work-family boundary dynamics, we identify three main narratives. In the separation narrative, work and family belong to different realms, and including the family in the domain of organizational responsibility is seen as pointless. The interdependence narrative stresses that organizations and families are overlapping domains in which it is important to acknowledge that the policies and practices of the former might have an impact on family life, and vice-versa. The embeddedness narrative, brought to the fore by the COVID-19 pandemic, sees employment and family as progressively convergent and hybrid work domains. The evolution of employment relations towards increased hybridity of the work situation being embedded in the familial/household context increasingly calls for consideration of the family/household as an integral rather than a peripheral stakeholder.

Suggested Citation

  • Miguel Pina E. Cunha & Remedios Hernández-Linares & Milton Sousa & Stewart Clegg & Arménio Rego, 2022. "Evolving Conceptions of Work-Family Boundaries: In Defense of The Family as Stakeholder," Humanistic Management Journal, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 55-93, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:humman:v:7:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s41463-022-00124-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s41463-022-00124-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s41463-022-00124-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s41463-022-00124-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Barrero, Jose Maria & Bloom, Nick & Davis, Steven J., 2020. "Why Working From Home Will Stick," SocArXiv wfdbe, Center for Open Science.
    2. Jessica R. Mesmer-Magnus & Chockalingam Viswesvaran, 2006. "How Family-Friendly Work Environments Affect Work/Family Conflict: A Meta-Analytic Examination," Journal of Labor Research, Transaction Publishers, vol. 27(4), pages 555-574, October.
    3. Nicholas Bloom & James Liang & John Roberts & Zhichun Jenny Ying, 2015. "Does Working from Home Work? Evidence from a Chinese Experiment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 130(1), pages 165-218.
    4. Chris Doucouliagos, 1994. "A Note on the Evolution of," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(3), pages 877-883, September.
    5. Andrea Calabrò & Alessandro Minichilli & Mario Daniele Amore & Marina Brogi, 2018. "The courage to choose! Primogeniture and leadership succession in family firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(7), pages 2014-2035, July.
    6. Kapo Wong & Alan H. S. Chan & Pei-Lee Teh, 2020. "How Is Work–Life Balance Arrangement Associated with Organisational Performance? A Meta-Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-19, June.
    7. S. Philip Morgan, 2003. "Is low fertility a twenty-first-century demographic crisis?," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 40(4), pages 589-603, November.
    8. Philip M. Podsakoff & Scott B. MacKenzie & Daniel G. Bachrach & Nathan P. Podsakoff, 2005. "The influence of management journals in the 1980s and 1990s," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(5), pages 473-488, May.
    9. Remedios Hernández-Linares & Soumodip Sarkar & Manuel J. Cobo, 2018. "Inspecting the Achilles heel: a quantitative analysis of 50 years of family business definitions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(2), pages 929-951, May.
    10. André Hanelt & René Bohnsack & David Marz & Cláudia Antunes Marante, 2021. "A Systematic Review of the Literature on Digital Transformation: Insights and Implications for Strategy and Organizational Change," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(5), pages 1159-1197, July.
    11. David Ahlstrom & Jean‐Luc Arregle & Michael A. Hitt & Gongming Qian & Xufei Ma & Dries Faems, 2020. "Managing Technological, Sociopolitical, and Institutional Change in the New Normal," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(3), pages 411-437, May.
    12. Gratton, Lynda & Ghoshal, Sumantra, 2003. "Managing Personal Human Capital:: New Ethos for the 'Volunteer' Employee," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 1-10, February.
    13. Kaylene J. Fellows & Hsin-Yao Chiu & E. Jeffrey Hill & Alan J. Hawkins, 2016. "Work–Family Conflict and Couple Relationship Quality: A Meta-analytic Study," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 37(4), pages 509-518, December.
    14. W. Gibb Dyer Jr., 2003. "The Family: The Missing Variable in Organizational Research," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 27(4), pages 401-416, October.
    15. Jörgen Sandberg & Mats Alvesson, 2021. "Meanings of Theory: Clarifying Theory through Typification," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(2), pages 487-516, March.
    16. Taylor, Frederick Winslow, 1911. "The Principles of Scientific Management," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, number taylor1911.
    17. Michael Pirson & Cinzia Dessi & Michela Floris & Ernestina Giudici, 2021. "Humanistic Management: What Has Love Got to Do with it?," Humanistic Management Journal, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 1-4, April.
    18. Martin Schlag & Domènec Melé, 2020. "Building Institutions for the Common Good. The Practice and Purpose of Business in an Inclusive Economy," Humanistic Management Journal, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 1-6, July.
    19. Andrew L. Friedman & Samantha Miles, 2002. "Developing Stakeholder Theory," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(1), pages 1-21, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ro’i Zultan & Eldar Dadon, 2023. "Missing the forest for the trees: when monitoring quantitative measures distorts task prioritization," Working Papers 2319, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Department of Economics.
    2. Elstner, Steffen & Grimme, Christian & Kecht, Valentin & Lehmann, Robert, 2022. "The diffusion of technological progress in ICT," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    3. Vij, Akshay & Souza, Flavio F. & Barrie, Helen & Anilan, V. & Sarmiento, Sergio & Washington, Lynette, 2023. "Employee preferences for working from home in Australia," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 214(C), pages 782-800.
    4. Alfred Michael Dockery & Sherry Bawa, 2015. "When two worlds collude: working from home and family functioning," Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre Working Paper series WP1504, Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre (BCEC), Curtin Business School.
    5. Masayuki Morikawa, 2023. "Productivity dynamics of remote work during the COVID‐19 pandemic," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(3), pages 317-331, July.
    6. Zarate, Pablo & Dolls, Mathias & Davis, Steven & Bloom, Nicholas & Barrero, Jose Maria & Aksoy, Cevat Giray, 2024. "Why Does Working from Home Vary Across Countries and People?," CEPR Discussion Papers 19003, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    7. Janice C. dup Eberly & John dup Fernald, 2022. "Jackson Hole 2022 - Reassessing Economic Constraints: Potential Output (The Impact of COVID on Productivity and Potential Output)," Proceedings - Economic Policy Symposium - Jackson Hole, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, August.
    8. Biermann, Marcus, 2024. "Remote talks: Changes to economics seminars during COVID-19," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    9. Julia Darby & Stuart McIntyre & Graeme Roy, 2022. "What can analysis of 47 million job advertisements tell us about how opportunities for homeworking are evolving in the United Kingdom?," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(4), pages 281-302, July.
    10. Abrardi Laura & Grinza Elena & Manello Alessandro & Porta Flavio, 2022. "Work From Home Arrangements and Organizational Performance in Italian SMEs: Evidence from the COVID-19 Pandemic," Working papers 076, Department of Economics, Social Studies, Applied Mathematics and Statistics (Dipartimento di Scienze Economico-Sociali e Matematico-Statistiche), University of Torino.
    11. Christian Kagerl & Julia Starzetz, 2023. "Working from home for good? Lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic and what this means for the future of work," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 93(1), pages 229-265, January.
    12. Behrens, Kristian & Kichko, Sergei & Thisse, Jacques-Francois, 2024. "Working from home: Too much of a good thing?," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    13. Bloom, Nicholas & Davis, Steven J. & Hansen, Stephen & Lambert, Peter John & Sadun, Raffaella & Taska, Bledi, 2023. "Remote work across jobs, companies and space," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 121302, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    14. Essbaumer, Elisabeth, 2022. "Home Office is here to stay? Access to Home Office and Remote Work Potentials across Swiss Industries," Economics Working Paper Series 2213, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science.
    15. Masayuki Morikawa, 2022. "Work‐from‐home productivity during the COVID‐19 pandemic: Evidence from Japan," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 60(2), pages 508-527, April.
    16. Dan Zhou & Sibo Yang & Xue Li, 2022. "Internet Use and Job Satisfaction: Evidence from China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-16, September.
    17. John G. Fernald & Huiyu Li, 2022. "The Impact of COVID on Productivity and Potential Output," Working Paper Series 2022-19, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
    18. Leth-Petersen, Søren & Lee, Minjoon & Caplin, Andrew & Shapiro, Matthew D. & Sæverud, Johan, 2022. "How Worker Productivity and Wages Grow with Tenure and Experience: The Firm Perspective," CEPR Discussion Papers 17545, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. Andrew Gustafson & Celeste Harvey, 2023. "The Economy of Communion Movement as Humanistic Management," Humanistic Management Journal, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 149-166, August.
    20. Lee, Kangoh, 2023. "Working from home as an economic and social change: A review," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:humman:v:7:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s41463-022-00124-6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.