Violating Work-Family Boundaries: Reactions to Interruptions at Work and Home

Abstract

Our study builds on recent trends to understand the work-family interface through daily experiences of boundary management. In particular, we investigated boundary violations, or events in which family life breaches the boundary of work and vice versa. Our purpose was to enlighten the process between violations and relevant outcomes, building on the foundations of affective events theory and boundary theory. Specifically, we aim to (1) tease apart boundary violations at work and at home from the established construct of work-family conflict, (2) explore the affective events theory process through which cognitive and affective reactions to boundary violation events contribute to work-family conflict and satisfaction, and (3) examine positive and negative reactions to boundary violations. Findings from a 2-week daily diary study of 121 employed participants partially supported our predictions. Boundary violations contributed to general perceptions of work-family conflict both directly and indirectly through cognitive appraisals of thwarted goals and, in the work domain, negative affective reactions. Violations were also related to satisfaction through goal appraisal. Finally, benefits in the form of positive affect were found from boundary violations due to facilitated goals in the interrupting domain.

Work–Family Backlash: The “Dark Side” of Work–Life Balance (WLB) Policies

“…Employees might experience anger on receiving electronic work communications during nonwork hours, particularly when the tone of the note is unfriendly or the time required to respond to the note is lengthy (Butts et al, 2015). Beyond the tone or task within the note, the interruption itself can create feelings of anger because it hinders employees from accomplishing family-related goals or to-do's they had otherwise planned (Hunter, Clark, & Carlson, 2017). Alternatively, workplace telepressure combined with the receipt of electronic work communications can create feelings of guilt: if the employee addresses work, he or she might feel guilty regarding the neglect of household duties, family time, or other nonwork activities (Williams, Blair-Loy, & Berdahl, 2013).…”

The knife cuts on both sides: Examining the relationship between cross‐domain communication and work–family interface

“…However, the phenomenon that employees also communicate with family members during work (Wajcman et al ., ), and the implications of this communication for family‐to‐work outcomes has been overlooked (Chen & Karahanna, ). Previous studies have provided indirect evidence supporting that boundary violation events exist both at work and at home (Hunter et al ., ), but the explicit emphasis on technology‐based communication with family members at work (i.e., cross‐domain communication) is still missing. Our findings indicate the importance of the –bidirectional perspective when researchers examine the effects of cross‐domain communication behaviours on employees’ work–family experiences because both conflict and enrichment between work and family are deemed to be bidirectional (Greenhaus & Beutell, ; Greenhaus & Powell, ).…”

“…However, work and family are two distinct systems with different cultures, rules, and expectations (Clark, ). The predictors and theoretical mechanisms of family‐to‐work direction deserve similar conceptual and empirical attention as those of work‐to‐family direction (Chen & Karahanna, ; Hunter, Clark, & Carlson, ; Wajcman, Bittman, & Brown, ). Although some scholars have paid specific attention to the family‐to‐work interface (e.g., Dilworth, ; Krouse & Afifi, ), the effects of family factors, both negatively and positively, on work systems have been less researched than the effects of work factors on the family (Crouter, ; Kanter, ; Zhao, Settles, & Sheng, ).…”

Technology, Long Work Hours, and Stress Worsen Work-life Balance in the Construction Industry

“…The average mean was 2.82, indicating a relatively low level of work-life balance, aligning with the results of previous studies. Items 7 and 9 were the two lowest items, showing how the employees were struggling to separate work from their mental state while in a life environment [20,21]. When prolonged, this can lead to increased exhaustion, increased stress, and work-life conflict as shown in items 4, 6, and 8.…”