This article examines the level of work–family conflict of self-employed persons, a changing but neglected group in work–life research, compared to employees in Europe. Differences between the two groups are explained by looking at job demands and resources. The inclusion of work–family state support makes it possible to examine differences between countries. Multilevel analysis has been applied to data from the European Social Survey (ESS 2010). The results show that job demands and resources operate differently for employees and the self-employed. The relationship between employment type and WFC is mediated mainly by job demands such as working hours, working at short notice, job insecurity and supervisory work. The results also reveal variation across countries that cannot be explained by state support, signalling the need for a more complete understanding of WFC from a cross-national perspective.
This qualitative study aims to explain how social support enables independent professionals to achieve work–life balance. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with 50 independent professionals in the Netherlands, Spain, and Sweden. The interview data were analyzed from a capability approach, from which work–life balance is understood in terms of capabilities. The most important sources of social support for independent professionals appeared to be their partner, family, as well as work and nonwork-related friends who were able to provide emotional and instrumental support. However, the extent to which social support can be converted into capabilities is influenced by individual (gender and cohabitation), institutional (the ease of doing business and formal childcare), and societal factors (financial hardship and familialism). The cross-national comparison shows that the institutional and societal context may hinder or reinforce social support for work–life balance, resulting in different experiences across countries.
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to explore the effect of self-employed work characteristics (consumer orientation, innovativeness, number of employees, motivation, and entrepreneurial phase) on work-life balance (WLB) satisfaction.
Design/methodology/approach
The job demands and resources approach is applied to test whether self-employed work characteristics are evaluated as job demands or resources for WLB. The Global Entrepreneurship Data (2013) offer a unique opportunity to conduct multilevel analysis among a sample of self-employed workers in 51 countries (N=11,458). Besides work characteristics, this paper tests whether country context might explain variation in WLB among the self-employed.
Findings
The results of this study reveal that there is a negative relation between being exposed to excessive stress and running a consumer-oriented business and WLB. Being motivated out of opportunity is positively related to WLB. In addition, the results indicate that country context matters. A higher human development index and more gender equality are negatively related to WLB, possibly because of higher social expectations and personal responsibility. The ease of doing business in a country was positively related to the WLB of self-employed workers.
Social implications
For some workers self-employment might be a way to combine work and responsibilities in other life domains, but this does not seem to be valid in all cases.
Originality/value
This paper contributes to current literature on the WLB of self-employed workers by showing how work characteristics can be evaluated as job demands or resources. Including work characteristics in future research might be a solution for acknowledging the heterogeneity among self-employed workers.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.