Pushing the boundaries: A qualitative study of how stem women adapted to disrupted work–nonwork boundaries during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Abstract

National reports widely publicized that the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic’s disruption of work–nonwork boundaries impacted women’s careers negatively, as many exited their jobs to manage nonwork demands. We know less about the adaptations made by highly career-invested women to remain in the workforce in occupations where they are extremely under-represented. Based on qualitative data from 763 academic Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics (STEM) women at 202 universities, we examined adaptation to disrupted work–nonwork boundaries and identified workplace contextual features associated with these adaptations. Results show that STEM women varied in their adaptation. Many women adapted their professional image management approaches: From concealing nonwork roles—particularly when in less supportive contexts, to revealing them—often to challenge existing ideal worker norms and advocate for change. Also, women adapted through varying forms of role sacrifice; trading off one role’s execution for another, mental detachment through psychological role withdrawal, or abandoning role duties through behavioral role exit. Notably, some sacrificed their nonwork roles, although the dominant media narrative highlights women sacrificing work roles. Work contextual features associated with boundary management adaptation include structural support (e.g., flexibility) and social support (e.g., empathy). Results illuminate the complex decisions faced by STEM women when they lose the scaffolding supporting their work–nonwork interface. Moreover, the results have practical and theoretical implications for advancing workforce gender equity, and for supporting all employees’ work–nonwork boundary management.

What innovations can address inequalities experienced by women and girls due to the COVID-19 pandemic across the different areas of life/domains: work, health, living standards, personal security, participation and education?

“…Qualitative studies: Three (n = 3) primary papers were qualitative studies (Chatzifotiou & Andreadou, 2021; Kossek et al, 2021; Moen et al, 2021)…”

“…Work: Six (n = 6) included papers were within the domain of work (Banks et al, 2021; Kossek, Dumas, Piszczek, & Allen, 2021; Millán, de la Torre, Rojas, & Jimber del Río, 2021; Moen et al, 2021; Richey & Pointer, 2021; Witteman, Haverfield, & Tannenbaum, 2021).…”

“…The six included work domain papers were comprised of one review (Richey & Pointer, 2021); one quantitative survey (Millán et al, 2021); one cohort study (Witteman et al, 2021), two qualitative studies (Kossek et al, 2021; Moen et al, 2021) and one commentary paper (Banks et al, 2021).…”

“…One qualitative study from France (Moen et al, 2021) highlighted peer-mentoring strategies to ensure diversity in health informatics. Another qualitative study from the USA (Kossek et al, 2021) investigated the difficult decisions faced by women working in the areas of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) when previous support networks were unavailable during COVID-19 lockdowns. The work and non-work interface changed immensely with increased stress related to balancing responsibilities at work and within the home.…”

“…The COVID-19 pandemic created challenges for many women working from home while providing elderly care, family care and childcare simultaneously (Kossek et al, 2021; Moen et al, 2021; Richey & Pointer, 2021). These challenges often disrupted work and home-life in negative ways, reducing work confidence and productivity and potentially increasing the gender gap in wages.…”