Examining the link between flexible working arrangement bundles and employee work effort

Abstract

Empirical evidence regarding the link between flexible working arrangements (FWAs) and work effort is mixed, with the literature showing that some practices are linked to more while others to less work effort. In this study, we argue that this discrepancy may be due to the existence of different types of FWA bundles with potentially distinct effects on work effort. Using Understanding Society, a British national survey, and building on theories related to social exchange, the study examines the link between employee‐centered and employer‐centered FWA bundles, and work effort. This study further tests whether these relationships differ depending on employees' family responsibilities. Based on a sample of 13,834 employees, results show that both employee‐centered and employer‐centered FWA bundles are negatively associated with work effort, and findings for the latter bundle are more pronounced. These negative associations are somewhat stronger for employees with fewer family responsibilities. We infer that employees appear to use employee‐centered FWAs for their intended purpose, that is, to balance life and job demands, while they might perceive employer‐centered FWAs as unfair, resulting in less work effort in an attempt to restore fairness.

Still in search of strategic human resource management? A review and suggestions for future research with China as an example

“…While DEM practices may not be positively associated with organizational performance universally, there is ample scope for more studies to investigate what types of DEM practices may yield positive effects (and what these are) on particular groups of employees in specific circumstances through certain mechanisms. For example, Avgoustaki and Bessa's (2019, p. 431) study, based on a sample of 13,834 employees in a British national survey, yielded interesting and mixed findings regarding “the link between flexible working arrangements (FWAs) and work effort.” They inferred that “employees appear to use employee‐centered FWAs for their intended purpose, that is, to balance life and job demands, while they might perceive employer‐centered FWAs as unfair, resulting in less work effort in an attempt to restore fairness” (Avgoustaki & Bessa, 2019, p. 431).…”

The effects of offering flexible work practices to employees with unpaid caregiving responsibilities for elderly or disabled family members

“…Findings reveal the positive influence of flexible work practice availability on utilization and employee perceptions. In doing so, we integrated theoretical descriptions of the work–life interface (e.g., Casper & Harris, ; Keeney, Boyd, Sinha, Westring, & Ryan, ), research on work–family practices (Avgoustaki & Bessa, ; Chen & Fulmer, ; Fiksenbaum, ; Kröll & Nüesch, ; Townsend, McDonald, & Cathcart, ), and the caregiving literature (e.g., Bainbridge & Broady, ; Calvano, ; Cheng, Jepsen, & Wang, 2020; Henle et al, 2020; Kim & Gordon, ; Kossek et al, ; Li et al, ). Work–family researchers have historically explored practices that assist efforts to combine employment and parental childcare responsibilities.…”

Factors beyond Workplace Matter: The Effect of Family Support and Religious Attendance on Sustaining Well-Being of High-Technology Employees

“…Owing to the COVID-19 pandemic, when employees experienced the threat of coronavirus disease in the workplace, working from home has been widely adopted as a flexible work arrangement [77]. In the work/home role transition, employees may prefer a work-home integration that brings their role at work to family life, or a work-home segmentation that separates their work role from their role at home [78].…”