Cross-National Work-Life Research

Abstract

Increasing attention is being paid to the impacts of country-level contexts on the work-life interface. However, lack of theoretical clarity as well as operationalization challenges are significant roadblocks for comparative work-life research. This article provides guidance for cross-national work-life research by conducting a systematic interdisciplinary review of conceptual and empirical work on the country-level cultural impacts (i.e., the values, assumptions, and beliefs shared by individuals with common historical experience) and structural impacts (i.e., the rules and constraints produced by legal, economic, and social structures) on individual experiences of the work-life interface and organizational support for nonwork. Regarding culture, we offer an organized review of work-life research drawing on cultural dimensions, from the most researched dimensions, such as individualism-collectivism and gender egalitarianism, to the least researched. We also point to ways to locate scales and country scores. Concerning structure, we explain how legal (e.g., public policies), economic (e.g., industrialization), and social (e.g., actual gender equality) factors are operationalized with indicators or typologies and review the related work-life research. We carve out a research agenda pointing out untapped cultural dimensions and structural factors and underresearched work-life constructs and calling for more systemic and integrative cross-national work-life research.

Hardworking coworkers: A multilevel cross‐national look at group work hours and work–family conflict

“…Our findings show that employees also influence their coworkers through the examples they set by the hours they keep. (Ollier-Malaterre & Foucreault, 2017). However, our findings are significant in that they directly compare similar workers across many countries (Allen et al, 2015;Ollier-malaterre et al, 2013).…”

“…For example, cultural differences in how employees identify with their workgroups have important implications for their attitudes and behaviors (Hofstede, Hofstede, & Minkov, 2010;Taras, Kirkman, & Steel, 2010). National differences in how employees perceive WFC have been examined in several large multicountry studies (Lu, Gilmour, Kao, & Huang, 2006;Lyness & Judiesch, 2014;Ollier-Malaterre & Foucreault, 2017;Spector et al, 2004Spector et al, , 2007Yang et al, 2012). These studies demonstrate that employees experience workload and WFC differently across cultures in ways that cannot always be explained by differences in work hours, family situation, or the availability of domestic help (Lu, Siu, Spector, & Shi, 2009;Luk & Shaffer, 2005;Spector et al, 2007).…”

“…Societal values, beliefs, and expectations are known to influence the priority and pressure associated with work and family roles. This influence suggests that differences in cultural values might result in different perceptions of role stressors and WFC (Ollier-Malaterre & Foucreault, 2017;Powell, Francesco, & Ling, 2009). Culture influences how individuals interpret situational and environmental cues and subsequently forms attitudes and behaviors (Smith, 2004).…”

“…Collectivism has direct implications for perception of WFC (Billing, Bhagat, Babakus, Srivastava, & Brew, 2014;Ollier-Malaterre & Foucreault, 2017;Ollo-López & Goñi-Legaz, 2017;Yang, Chen, Choi, & Zou, 2000). Employees across different cultures are likely to react differently to the same number of work hours and workload (Hill, Yang, Hawkins, & Ferris, 2004;Lu et al, 2006;Spector et al, 2004Spector et al, , 2007Yang et al, 2000;Yang et al, 2012).…”

Linking Talent Management to Traditional and Boundaryless Career Orientations: Research Propositions and Future Directions

“…A fifth dimension that we found important in the careers literature is how careers are structured within particular geographic contexts and the way this impacts the management of talents nationally and globally. Themes that emerged include, but are not limited to, the role of culture, history, and more broadly social factors in understanding careers globally, and the impact of international HRM policies and employment relations (Ollier-Malaterre and Foucreault, 2017). Another theme is the international mobility of workers .…”