All of work? All of life? Reconceptualising work‐life balance for the 21st century

• Author: Julia Richardson,Galina Boiarintseva,Clare Kelliher
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12215
• Published date: 01 April 2019
• Date: 01 April 2019

PROVOCATION PAPER

All of work? All of life? Reconceptualising

work‐life balance for the 21st century

Clare Kelliher

1

|Julia Richardson

2

|Galina Boiarintseva

3

1

School of Management, Cranfield University,

Bedford, UK

2

School of Management, Curtin Business

School, Curtin University, Perth, Western

Australia, Australia

3

School of Human Resources Management,

York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Correspondence

Associate Professor Julia Richardson, School

of Management, Curtin Business School,

Curtin University, Perth, Western Australia,

Australia.

Email: julia.richardson@curtin.edu.au

Abstract

This paper argues that the study of work‐life balance to

date has, in the main, adopted a restricted conception of

both “work”and “life”, which does not take account of

recent developments in life worlds, working arrangements

and employment relationships. “Life”has hitherto been

viewed as largely comprising caring activities for dependent

children, whereas “work”has been premised largely on a

traditional model of work, characterised by full‐time, perma-

nent employment with one employer and a conventional

understanding of what work involves. This means that

extant research and theory only provides a partial view of

the work‐life needs and experiences of the workforce. In

the paper, we propose extending conceptions of both work

and life to incorporate different life worlds and social

groups and different working arrangements and employ-

ment relationships.

KEYWORDS

qualitative research methods, thematic analysis, work‐life balance

1|INTRODUCTION

In recent decades, the relationship between work and non‐working time—work‐life balance—has been the subject of

much attention in public discourse. There has also been a longstanding academic interest in work‐life balance—what

it is; how to achieve it; what the consequences of a “good”or “bad”work‐life balance might be; and how employers

might develop policies to foster it. Although extensive in volume, we argue that the study of work‐life balance has, in

the main, adopted a restricted conception of what “life”entails and is based on a traditional model of work, which

does not incorporate recent developments in work and employment relationships. In this paper, we build on earlier

critiques of how the extant literature has understood “life”(De Janasz, Forret, Haack, & Jonsen, 2013; Eikhof,

Warhurst, & Haunschild, 2007; Ozbilgin, Beauregard, Tatli, & Bell, 2011) to address what we argue are only partial

Received: 6 July 2017 Revised: 28 July 2018 Accepted: 28 August 2018

DOI: 10.1111/1748-8583.12215

Hum Resour Manag J. 2019;29:97–112. © 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltdwileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/hrmj 97

considerations of both “work”and “life.”“Life”has hitherto been largely viewed as comprising caring activities for

dependent children, with the inference that attaining a work‐life balance is principally a concern of working parents.

Likewise, “work”has largely been premised on a traditional model characterised by full‐time, permanent employment,

with one employer and a conventional understanding of what work involves.

Although the needs of those with caring responsibilities and those working under traditional arrangements are

undoubtedly important,we argue that changing modes of work and non‐work life that have emerged in the 21st century

mean that there is much that has not been examined by extant work‐life scholarship. This is problematic because it

restricts the value and relevance of the knowledge base in this field, by creating what Ozbilginet al. (2011) and Moen

(2015) refer to as “blind spots.”There are, therefore, limitations on how it can inform public policy and organisational

policy and practice. Little is known, for example, about the work‐life balance concerns of those without dependent chil-

dren, who may wish to balance work with other activities that are important to them. This might include other caring

activities (e.g., elder or disabled care, and caring for pets), pursuing further education, non‐work‐related training,

hobbies, and exercise, maintaining and recovering health, or engaging in religiousor community activities. Furthermore,

those with dependent children may also wish to balance some of these activities with work. Equally, little is known

about the work‐life balance of individuals who have non‐standard employment arrangements, such as those on

short‐term, part‐time, or zero hours contracts, those with multiple jobs, and those who are self‐employed, including

the increasing numbers in the “gig economy”(Deloitte, 2018; McKinsey, 2016).

There are a number of important arguments in support of a more holistic and contemporary understanding of

work‐life balance. First, there is strong empirical evidence showing positive outcomes for individuals and for organi-

sations from a satisfactory work‐life balance (Hobson, Delunas, & Kesic, 2001; Kalliath & Brough, 2008; Lero, Rich-

ardson, & Korabik, 2008). If support for work‐life balance focuses only on certain lifestyles, or certain working

arrangements, it is likely that maximum benefit will not be realised by organisations or individuals. Second, to retain

its practical and scholarly value, work‐life research needs to be aligned with contemporary social and economic

trends. Ozbilgin et al. (2011) observe “making the conceptualization of the work‐life interface more akin to the nature

of reality on the ground would render organizational change initiatives to improve work‐life arrangements more

effective”(p. 178). Third, a more holistic and contemporary understanding of work‐life balance would allow for more

strategic policy alignment with current trends, as well as more informed preparation for future developments. For

human resource (HR) practitioners, it is therefore important to appreciate the various life forms of their workforce

in order to respond to their needs better. It is also important that they appreciate the implications of different work

arrangements and relationships for work‐life policy development.

The paper starts with an overview of the extant work‐life balance literature where we explore definitions of

balance and present a brief summary of the evolution of the field. We then argue for a more comprehensive

understanding of what constitutes “life”in work‐life balance, examining what it may involve beyond fulfilling

childcare responsibilities. Next, we examine developments in working arrangements and relationships and consider

how they might shape understanding of work‐life balance. Finally, we propose an agenda for further research and

theoretical development and consider the implications of this reconceptualisation for HR practitioners.

2|OVERVIEW OF EXTANT LITERATURE

2.1 |Definitions

The term “work‐life balance”refers to the relationship between work and non‐work aspects of individuals' lives,

where achieving a satisfactory work‐life balance is normally understood as restricting one side (usually work), to have

more time for the other. Although the notion of work‐life balance may be intuitively easy to understand, there has

been some debate in the literature about the appropriate terminology to use, with some authors preferring terms

such as work‐life interface instead (Kelliher, 2016). There has also been debate about what constitutes “balance”

98 KELLIHER ET AL.