IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cbr/cbrwps/wp135.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Can We Measure and Communicate the Benefits of Work-Life Policies more Effectively

Author

Listed:
  • Fiona Scheibl

Abstract

The current paper reviews twenty one different studies of work-life programmes drawn from articles published in a range of academic and management journals and promotional documents aimed at businesses. The review was interested to find out if the use of control groups, or other rigorous forms of measurement techniques have become more widespread. The review also highlights those studies that make a contribution by developing an interdisciplinary framework or made an effort to disseminate findings in a bilingual format. On the basis of the review, the paper finds that recent studies have used one of five different research designs to measure and evaluate the impact of work -life practices. The designs included; multivariate modelling; control groups; action research; business case calculations; and social surveys. The paper concludes that there has not been a wider application of control group methods. There is also evidence that the 'action research' approach is leading the path toward a more inter-disciplinary understanding of work-life conflict.

Suggested Citation

  • Fiona Scheibl, 1999. "Can We Measure and Communicate the Benefits of Work-Life Policies more Effectively," Working Papers wp135, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    • Handle: RePEc:cbr:cbrwps:wp135
    Note: PRO-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.jbs.cam.ac.uk/cbrwp135/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kruse, Douglas L, 1992. "Profit Sharing and Productivity: Microeconomic Evidence from the United States," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 102(410), pages 24-36, 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. Kenju Kamei & Thomas Markussen, 2023. "Free Riding and Workplace Democracy—Heterogeneous Task Preferences and Sorting," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(7), pages 3884-3904, July.
    2. Michael J. Handel & Maury Gittleman, 1999. "Is There a Wage Payoff to Innovative Work Practices?," Economics Working Paper Archive wp_288, Levy Economics Institute.
    3. repec:eee:labchp:v:3:y:1999:i:pb:p:2373-2437 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Harbaugh, Rick, 2005. "The effect of employee stock ownership on wage and employment bargaining," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 565-583, September.
    5. Madeleine Feder & Barbara E. Weißenberger, 2019. "Understanding the behavioral gap: Why would managers (not) engage in CSR-related activities?," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 95-126, April.
    6. James C. Sesil & Yu Peng Lin, 2011. "The Impact of Employee Stock Option Adoption and Incidence on Productivity: Evidence from U.S. Panel Data," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(3), pages 514-534, July.
    7. Mortenson, Kristian G. & Pitre, Terence J., 2018. "Who benefits from share contracts?," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 125-135.
    8. Loek Groot & Daan van der Linde, 2017. "The Labor-Managed Firm: Permanent or Start-Up Subsidies?," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(4), pages 1074-1093, October.
    9. Hennig, Jan Christoph & Hullmann, Rieke & Rau, Holger A. & Wolff, Michael, 2021. "The hidden cost of profit sharing on participation in employee stock purchase plans," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 414, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    10. Balafoutas, Loukas & Kocher, Martin G. & Putterman, Louis & Sutter, Matthias, 2013. "Equality, equity and incentives: An experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 32-51.
    11. Stefania Cardinaleschi & Mirella Damiani & Fabrizio Pompei, 2020. "Knowledge-intensive sectors and the role of collective performance-related pay," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(5), pages 480-512, May.
    12. Andrews, Martyn & Bellmann, Lutz & Schank, Thorsten & Upward, Richard, 2010. "The impact of financial participation on workers' compensation (Der Einfluss von finanzieller Mitarbeiterbeteiligung auf die Entlohnung der Arbeitnehmer)," Zeitschrift für ArbeitsmarktForschung - Journal for Labour Market Research, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany], vol. 43(1), pages 72-89.
    13. Xin Meng & Frances Perkins, 1996. "Behavioural Differences among Chinese Firms - From the Perspective of Earnings Determination," Trade and Development 96/9, Australian National University, Department of Economics.
    14. Brice Corgnet, 2018. "Rac(g)e Against the Machine? Social Incentives When Humans Meet Robots," Post-Print halshs-01984467, HAL.
    15. H. Y. Sun, 2014. "Longitudinal Evidence of Firm Size Effect on Wage Premium and Wage Differential in Korean Labor Market," International Journal of Economic Sciences, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2014(3), pages 66-85.
    16. Derek Jones & Panu Kalmi & Mikko Mäkinen, 2010. "The productivity effects of stock option schemes: evidence from Finnish panel data," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 67-80, February.
    17. Göddeke, Anna & Haucap, Justus & Herr, Annika & Wey, Christian, 2011. "Stabilität und Wandel von Arbeitsmarktinstitutionen aus wettbewerbsökonomischer Sicht," DICE Ordnungspolitische Perspektiven 10, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    18. Olfa Aissa, 2016. "A Meta-Analysis of the Financial Participation Impact on Firm Performance," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 11(8), pages 186-186, July.
    19. Daniel Parent, 2001. "Incentive Pay in the United States: Its Determinants and Its Effects," CIRANO Working Papers 2001s-04, CIRANO.
    20. Noélie Delahaie & Richard Duhautois, 2019. "Profit‐Sharing and Wages: An Empirical Analysis Using French Data between 2000 and 2007," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 57(1), pages 107-142, March.
    21. Cardoso, Renato Fragelli, 1995. "Profit Sharing With Heterogeneous Entrepreneurial Prowess," Brazilian Review of Econometrics, Sociedade Brasileira de Econometria - SBE, vol. 15(2), November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cbr:cbrwps:wp135. 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: Ruth Newman (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.jbs.cam.ac.uk .

    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.