How does the availability and use of flexible leave influence the employer–employee relationship?

• Author: Graeme Currie,Andy Lockett,Leroy White
• Published date: 01 September 2020
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.22004
• Date: 01 September 2020

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

How does the availability and use of flexible leave influence

the employer–employee relationship?

Leroy White | Andy Lockett | Graeme Currie

Warwick Business School, University of

Warwick, Coventry, UK

Correspondence

Leroy White, Warwick Business School,

University of Warwick, Coventry

CV4 7AL, UK.

Email: leroy.white@wbs.ac.uk

Funding information

British Academy, Grant/Award Number:

SG120877

Abstract

In this article, we develop, and empirically test, a moderated mediation model of the

effects of flexible leave on employees' organizational attachment. Drawing on a social

exchange framework and signaling theory, we explore how the material and non-

material nature of exchange between the employer and employee shapes their rela-

tionship. First, we show that the relationship between the availability of flexible leave

and organizational attachment is shaped by two competing mediators, perceived orga-

nizational support (POS) and perceived flexibility stigma. Second, we delineate

between availability and use of the policy, to show how the effect of POS is enhanced

and perceived flexibility stigma reduced, with use. Our findings demonstrate that the

relationship between the availability of flexible leave and organizational attachment is

complex, but is enhanced through use of flexible leave. We contribute toward HRM

scholarship aboutthe relationship between employees' experience ofHR practices and

their corresponding impact on employees'subsequent behavior.

KEYWORDS

flexible leave, perceived flexibility stigma, perceived organizational support, signaling theory,

social exchange theory

1|INTRODUCTION

Flexible working arrangements are considered to be a positive

development, leading to their proliferation, associated growing media

attention, and a burgeoning literature on their effectiveness (Kossek,

Sweet, & Pitt-Catsouphes, 2006). Empirical evidence of their effec-

tiveness, however, has been less than clear; meta-analyses of the

growing literature include Byron's (2005) study showing a positive

impact of flexible working arrangements and Mesmer-Magnus and

Viswesvaran's (2006) study showing insignificant results. In reviewing

the evidence, Shockley and Allen (2007) conclude that, even within

meta analytic research, there is a great deal of equivocaility associated

with the effectiveness of flexible working arrangements. Furthermore,

in their narrative review of the literature, Kelly and co-authors (Kelly

et al., 2008, p. 306) suggest that despite the rapid adoption of flexible

working arrangements, “managers in employing organizations simply

do not know whether and which organizational initiatives …are likely

to impact employees and the organization as a whole.”We suggest

the lack of clarity about the relationship between flexible working

arrangements and employee outcomes may be due to three limita-

tions of extant studies.

First, scholars have employed “flexible working arrangements”as

an umbrella term, assuming the effects of all flexible working policies

will be uniformly positive across a range of, proximal to distal,

employee outcomes (Beauregard & Henry, 2009; Perry-Smith & Blum,

2000). Second, scholars have tended to assume a direct relationship

between policies for flexible working and employee outcome, with

effects that are indirect in nature remaining under-researched

(T. D. Allen, 2001; Beauregard & Henry, 2009; Butts, Casper, & Yang,

2013). To date, absent is any consideration of the question as to how

flexible leave policies indirectly shape employees' experiences before

leading to employee outcomes (Kelly et al., 2008). Third, scholars have

paid little attention to whether or not the relation to the relationship

between flexible working and employee outcomes is shaped by the

difference between the availability and use of such arrangements

(Beauregard & Henry, 2009; Kelly et al., 2008). Differentiating

DOI: 10.1002/hrm.22004

Hum Resour Manage. 2020;59:445–461. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/hrm © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 445

between the availability and use of flexible leave enables us to

address the question as to when, that is, under what conditions does

flexible leave matter? In this article, we focus on one specific form of

flexible working arrangement, flexible leave, to explain how the avail-

ability and use of flexible leave shape employees' organizational

attachment.

We address the three limitations of extant studies, and contribute

to extant scholarship, as follows. First, we focus on a specific flexible

working arrangement, flexible leave, because it is a flexible working

arrangement that is available to all employees, regardless of family

responsibilities and circumstances (Smithson & Stokoe, 2005). Flexible

leave, however, remains the least understood of flexible working

arrangements in terms of its effects on employee outcomes (Baltes,

Briggs, Huff, Wright, & Neuman, 1999; Kelly et al., 2008). In addition,

we note that extant studies have employed a wide range of outcomes

relating to employees' attitudes, ranging from measures of employees'

perceptions of work–life balance well-being, and job satisfaction, to

organizational attachment encompassing both employees' organiza-

tional commitment and turnover intentions. In this study, we focus on

the latter, employees' organizationalattachment, because it is a general

construct that encompasses the socio-emotional outcomes relating to

employer–employee relationship (Lee & Mitchell, 1994), comprising

both attitudinal (e.g., organizational commitment) and behavioral

(e.g., turnoverintention) components (Labianca& Brass, 2006).

Second, to address the how question we develop a mediation

model to link the availability of flexible leave to employee outcomes

through their effect employees' attitudes toward their employer.

Drawing on social exchange theory (SET) (see Cropanzano & Mitchell,

2005 for a review) and signaling theory (Spence, 1973), we explore

the process of social exchange between the employer and the

employee, which are characterized by interdependency and contin-

gency, involving material as well as non-material exchange (Blau,

1964). Cropanzano and Mitchell (2005) suggest that employers pro-

vide the first “signal”of a desire for a closer working relationship with

their employees, through the introduction of a new HRM practice

such as flexible leave. Employers hope that their actions will be recip-

rocated in a positive manner by employees. It is through such signal-

response incidents that employers intend to develop high quality

employer–employee relationships.

Due to the equivocal findings of extant studies we include two

mediators to account for the potentially positive and negative impact

of flexible leave, perceived organizational support (POS) and per-

ceived flexibility stigma, respectively. We employ POS because it is a

key concept in SET, which acts as a mediator in linking HRM practices

to employee outcomes (Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchison & Sowa,

1986). Our inclusion of perceived flexibility stigma stems from the

recent emergence of a literature about the potential dark side of poli-

cies promoting flexible working (see Perrigino, Dunford, & Wilson,

2018, for a narrative review). In their review, Perrigino et al. (2018)

highlight that it is important to incorporate the dark side into studies

of the effects flexible working because the dark side is pervasive

across different types of policies, and it enables a positioning of atti-

tudes across a broad spectrum from positive to negative. In employing

two mediators, we contribute to extant scholarship by exploring how

flexible leave shapes employee outcomes.

Third, we explore the differential effect of the availability and use

of the policy (T. D. Allen, Johnson, Kiburz, & Shockley, 2013; Butts

et al., 2013; Kelly & Moen, 2007; Kossek, 2005; Kossek, Barber, &

Winters, 1999). We do so by developing a moderated mediation

model to examine the difference between availability and use of the

policy on the relationship between our mediators (POS and perceived

flexibility stigma) and employee outcomes. A moderated mediation

approach enables us to contribute to extant scholarship by exploring

the question as to when does flexible leave have an effect on

employee outcomes, through our two mediators POS and perceived

flexibility stigma. Simply stated, the moderated mediation model

enables us to simultaneously address the how and when questions

relating to the relationship between flexible leave and employee

outcomes.

Theoretically, bringing the foci of our study together, we contrib-

ute toward HRM scholarship that has become increasingly concerned

with the relationship between employees' experience of HR practices

and their corresponding impact on employees' subsequent behavior

(Alfes, Bailey, Shantz, & Soane, 2012; Baluch, 2017; Bos-Nehles &

Veenendaal, 2017; Bowen & Ostroff, 2004; Jiang, Hu, Liu, & Lepak,

2017; Purcell & Hutchinson, 2007; Purcell& Kinnie, 2006). Specifically

focusing upon flexible leave, we highlight the relationshipbetween the

availability of flexible leave and organizational attachment is complex,

but is enhancedthrough actual use of flexible leave.

Empirically, we examine the introduction of flexible leave at the Brit-

ish Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) in the UK. At the time of our study,

the BBC was going through a period of cutbacks, which exemplifies a

context within which recent calls for research to investigate HR practices

in organizations undergoing austerity, can be addressed (Ruth-Eikhof &

Warhurst, 2013). We employed a longitudinal quasi-experimental

approach, with all participants surveyed when flexible leave policy was

first introduced, and then 12 months later, which enabled us to delineate

between the availability and use of the policy. To test our model, we

drew on a recent innovation in mediation modeling approach based on a

path analysis, which is derived from developments in structural equation

modeling (Kline, 2015), and the simultaneous testing of multiple indirect

effects (Preacher & Hayes, 2008).

2|MODEL DEVELOPMENT

Flexible working spans a considerable range of organizational prac-

tices, including flexible work hours, working from home, sharing a full-

time job between two employees (job sharing), family friendly leave

programs (e.g., parental leave, adoption leave, and compassionate

leave), on-site childcare, and financial and/or informational assistance

with childcare and eldercare services (Shockley & Allen, 2010). To

date, there is a lack of studies that examine the effects of specific flex-

ible working policies on specific employee outcomes (Moen, Kelly, &

Chermack, 2009). Each form of flexible working, however, should be

treated as a distinct policy (Kossek & Nichol, 1992).

446 WHITE ET AL.