Boundary control and controlled boundaries: Organizational expectations for technology use at the work–family interface

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/job.2153
• Published date: 01 May 2017
• Author: Matthew M. Piszczek
• Date: 01 May 2017

Boundary control and controlled boundaries:

Organizational expectations for technology use at

the work–family interface

MATTHEW M. PISZCZEK*

University of Wisconsin Oshkosh, College of Business, Oshkosh, Wisconsin, U.S.A.

Summary Some studies have argued that information and communication technologies such as smartphones can

pressure employees to work more from home, while others argue that they help employees manage transitions

between work and family role domains. Leveraging boundary theory and the job demands–resources model,

the present study examines the conditions under which work–family technology use is associated with greater

boundary control. Findings show that technology use is associated with higher boundary control for those

who prefer role integration and lower boundary control for those who prefer role segmentation. Findings

also show that boundary control is linked to emotional exhaustion and that organizational after-hours elec-

tronic communication expectations can compel work–family technology use despite individual preferences.

Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Keywords: boundary theory; boundary control; work–family role management; technology

Introduction

Information and communication technologies are devices and services that facilitate the transmission of knowledge

by enabling written or vocal communication across physical and temporal boundaries. Such technologies, like

smartphones and laptops, are changing how people work and have become a fixture of the modern workplace

(Boswell & Olson-Buchanan, 2007). Although home-based work is not a new concept, rapid advances in technology

and its widespread adoption are raising new questions about its function in a broader work–family organizational

climate and how employees’technology use should be managed. It is critical for organizations and researchers to

understand the impact of technology on employees’ability to manage work and family roles as well as stress.

Specifically, the rise of smartphones and other forms of communication technology allows for work–family tech-

nology use, defined as the use of technology to perform work tasks while in the family domain (i.e., at home outside

of work hours). Two generally conflicting perspectives explaining the effects of technology use on employee well-

being have largely dominated research. The first argues that technology increases stress by preventing post-work

recovery (Derks & Bakker, 2012; Park, Fritz, & Jex, 2011), increasing the overall time spent working, and allowing

work demands to permeate the family domain (Barley, Meyerson, & Grodal, 2011; Duxbury, Towers, Higgins, &

Thomas, 2006; Fligstein & Sharone, 2002; Towers, Duxbury, & Thomas, 2005). The second argues that technology

can help employees work more flexibly through easier transitions between work and family role domains (Ashforth,

Kreiner, & Fugate, 2000) and increased boundary control (Golden & Geisler, 2007; Kaufman-Scarborough, 2006;

Robinson & Godbey, 1997). Boundary control is a perception that one “can control the timing, frequency, and

direction”of mental, physical, and temporal transitions between the work and family domains (Kossek, Ruderman,

*Correspondence to: Matthew M. Piszczek, University of Wisconsin Oshkosh, College of Business, 800 Algoma Blvd, Oshkosh, WI 54901,

U.S.A. E-mail: piszczem@uwosh.edu

Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Received 3 September 2015

Revised 4 September 2016, Accepted 8 September 2016

Journal of Organizational Behavior, J. Organiz. Behav. 38, 592–611 (2017)

Published online 29 September 2016 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/job.2153

Research Article

Braddy, & Hannum, 2012, p. 115) and has been linked to lower psychological distress and work–family conflict

(Kossek et al., 2012).

Organizations and researchers have had a difficult time addressing this “flexibility paradox”regarding employee

off-hours work via technology use (Milligan, 2016). More recently, researchers have acknowledged the paradoxical

and disjointed nature of the literature surrounding technology use (Mazmanian, Orlikowski, & Yates, 2013;

Middleton, 2008) and argued that further study is needed to identify the conditions under which technology use

intensifies work and under which it helps employees control their role boundaries (Day, Scott, & Kelloway,

2010; Duxbury, Higgins, Smart, & Stevenson, 2014; O’Driscoll, Brough, Timms, & Sawang, 2010). Duxbury

and Smart note that “little empirical evidence is available to support or dispute either of these points of view”

(2011, pg. 270). Derks and Bakker (2010) acknowledge the conflicting effects of technology in a descriptive review

of research on email. Day et al. (2010) discuss potential factors which may determine whether information and

communication technology functions as a job demand or resource, but do not empirically test these factors. A

qualitative study finds that the reason for the use of technology determines whether attitudes toward technology

are positive, negative, or mixed (Matusik & Mickel, 2011). Another study shows that when employees perceive

information and communication technologies to grant them flexibility, they experience both greater work satisfaction

and less work–life conflict, mediated by technology use (Diaz, Chiaburu, Zimmerman, & Boswell, 2012), but it does

not identify the conditions which enable employees to exhibit control over their work–family boundaries.

One promising stream of research suggests that norms for technology use develop informally at the organization

level and can influence individual behavior. After-hours electronic communications expectations are defined as the

degree to which an employee perceives the organization to require him or her to be available to perform technology-

based work outside of the typical time and place of work (Fender, 2010). Organizations may influence how and how

much employees use technology through informal organizational norms which may encourage employees to work

longer hours or to work harder by holding certain performance expectations and rewarding such behaviors (Fenner

& Renn, 2010). These norms may develop organically among employees (Mazmanian et al., 2013) and are enacted

through supervisors, coworkers, and the organization itself (Fenner & Renn, 2004; Rousseau, 1990). These organi-

zational norms create behavioral expectations that influence both how and how much employees use technology to

work in the family domain (Duxbury et al., 2014).

However, while this stream of research shows that informal norms around working time contribute to an expec-

tation of working at home (Mazmanian et al., 2013) and that organizations also play an important role in setting

these expectations (Fenner & Renn, 2010), their relationship to the paradoxically conflicting effects of technology

use on individual well-being is unknown. Additionally, research has only scratched the surface in understanding

why individual employees respond to and experience these norms differently. Understanding the role of individual

boundary management preferences in the technology paradox may help uncover the mechanism through which tech-

nology contributes either to better work–family role management or increased stress as argued in previous studies.

The present study builds on this line of research drawing upon boundary theory (Nippert-Eng, 1996) and the job

demands–resources model (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007; Demerouti, Bakker, Nachreiner, & Schaufeli, 2001) to an-

swer three research questions: First, do after-hours electronic communications expectations affect some employees’

use of technology differently than others? Second, is technology use experienced by some employees differently

than others? Finally, through what mechanisms do these differences affect individual well-being?

Theory

Job demands–resources

Recent research acknowledging the potentially conflicting effects of technology use suggests the use of technology

for work purposes at home can be experienced as either a job demand or a job resource (Day et al., 2010; Derks &

BOUNDARY CONTROL OR CONTROLLED BOUNDARIES? 593

Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 38, 592–611 (2017)

DOI: 10.1002/job