When work is wanted after hours: Testing weekly stress of information communication technology demands using boundary theory

• Published date: 01 July 2020
• Author: Lucille Headrick,YoungAh Park,Yihao Liu
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/job.2461
• Date: 01 July 2020

RESEARCH ARTICLE

When work is wanted after hours: Testing weekly stress of

information communication technology demands using

boundary theory

YoungAh Park | Yihao Liu | Lucille Headrick

School of Labor and Employment Relations,

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign,

Champaign, Illinois, U.S.A.

Correspondence

YoungAh Park, School of Labor and

Employment Relations, University of Illinois at

Urbana-Champaign, 504 E. Armory,

Champaign, IL 61820, USA.

Email: yapark15@illinois.edu

Summary

Information communication technologies (ICTs; e.g., smartphones) enable employees

to work anywhere and anytime, blurring work and family boundaries. Building on this

trend, this study draws from work–family border/boundary theory to examine ante-

cedents and consequences of employees' weekly experiences of ICT demands

(i.e., being accessible and contacted for work after hours via ICTs). A sample of

546 elementary teachers completed a registration survey and a weekly diary for

5 weeks. Multilevel modeling results suggest that ICT demands as a form of work

intrusion in the home can constitute a source of significant weekly strain

(i.e., negative rumination, negative affect, and insomnia). As border crossers, teachers'

adoption of a technological boundary tactic (i.e., keeping work email alerts turned off

on mobile phones) was related to lower weekly ICT demands. As important border

keepers at work, school principals' work–family support was related to teachers'

lower weekly ICT demands, whereas parents' after-hours boundary expectations

were related to teachers' higher weekly ICT demands. Moreover, teachers' boundary

control was found as a mediating mechanism by which the two border keepers

influenced teachers' ICT demands−negative rumination link. That is, teachers who

received fewer boundary expectations and/or more work–family support had greater

boundary control, which in turn buffered the ICT demands–negative rumination

relationship.

KEYWORDS

boundary control, boundary theory, ICT demands, stress, work–family support

1|INTRODUCTION

Information communication technologies (ICTs) are indispensable

tools for workers as these technologies can increase communication

efficiency and flexibility in addressing work and family demands at

any time and place. For example, ICT use outside of work could help

employees increase work–family facilitation and finish work tasks at

home without having to be in the office (Braukmann, Schmitt,

Ďuranová, & Ohly, 2018; Middleton, 2007). ICTs can, however, con-

nect employees to work 24/7 extending work duties into nonwork

time and blurring the work and family boundaries (Boswell & Olson-

Buchanan, 2007; Chesley, 2005). As such, after-hours ICT use for

work has been found to be associated with work–family conflict, poor

recovery from stress, and health impairments (see Ďuranová&

Ohly, 2016; Schlachter, McDowall, Cropley, & Inceoglu, 2018, for a

review). The constant work availability through ICTs is becoming a

concerning global phenomenon in that a few European countries

(e.g., France) passed legislation to give workers a “right to disconnect”

from work emails outside regular hours (Hanrahan, 2017). Also, the

Council of New York City has introduced a similar bill to ban

Received: 10 December 2019 Revised: 4 May 2020 Accepted: 6 May 2020

DOI: 10.1002/job.2461

518 © 2020 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J Organ Behav. 2020;41:518–534.wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/job

companies from requiring workers to respond to work messages via

ICTs once they are off the clock (Kesslen, 2019). Given this trend, it is

important to identify potential antecedents that influence work

encroachment via ICTs as well as employees' control over the perme-

able work–home boundaries.

From a theoretical standpoint, work–family border/boundary

theory (boundary theory hereinafter) posits that both personal and

situational factors determine the permeability of the boundaries

through which work demands encroach on the home domain

(Ashforth, Kreiner, & Fugate, 2000; Clark, 2000; Kreiner,

Hollensbe, & Sheep, 2009).

1

That is, how after-hours work

demands via ICTs influence employees does not rest solely with

the employees themselves but depends on multiple stakeholders at

work (e.g., supervisors and clients/customers). However, empirical

research on this topic has mostly focused on individual difference

factors (e.g., preference for work–family segmentation,

segmentation/integration practices, and role identity) and work–

family conflict outcomes (see Allen, Cho, & Meier, 2014;

Ďuranová& Ohly, 2016, for a review). Although research has

begun to examine a few situational factors

(i.e., spousal/supervisory pressure and integration norms; Capitano &

Greenhaus, 2018; Palm, Seubert, & Glaser, 2019), this still leaves

boundary theory only partially tested because they did not examine

other important sources of social influence (e.g., customers). Also,

the literature is lacking actionable knowledge on how to manage

permeable work–home boundaries and associated stress experi-

ences (Kreiner et al., 2009). Thus, we attempt to address the

important questions as follows. What specific boundary tactics can

employees adopt to reduce or prevent episodes of work intru-

sions? And how might important others (customers and supervi-

sors) hinder or help employees' work–home boundary control and

their stress associated with the episodic work intrusions?

Accordingly, using boundary theory as an overarching framework,

this study proposes and tests a multilevel model in which both

personal and situational antecedents influence employees' fluctuat-

ing stress experiences involving ICT demands after regular hours

(see Figure 1).

In so doing, we seek to contribute to the literature and boundary

theory in several ways. From the perspective of boundary theory, hav-

ing greater ICT demands—that is, being accessible and contacted for

work outside regular hours through ICTs (cf. Day, Paquet, Scott, &

Hambley, 2012)—means that employees are led to frequently engage

in so-called boundary crossing or cross-role enactment

(e.g., addressing work roles while at home) due to work intrusions

(Clark, 2000; Kreiner et al., 2009). The theory proposes that individ-

uals' boundary tactics can be helpful to reduce work intrusions, such

as leveraging technology and setting expectations for work communi-

cation (Kreiner et al., 2009). The theory further emphasizes the possi-

ble roles of border keepers at work (e.g., supervisors and customers)

who have more power to influence employees' work and home

boundaries and work intrusions (Clark, 2000; Kreiner et al., 2009). In

particular, we test the theory in the context of elementary school

teachers who used to have less permeable work and home bound-

aries, but this is no longer the case due to the prevalent use of ICTs.

In line with the theory, we examine teachers' technological

(i.e., keeping work email alerts off on one's mobile phone) and commu-

nicative (i.e., setting communication expectations for work-related

parties) boundary tactics as personal antecedents of their fluctuating

ICT demands across 5 weeks. As for situational antecedents, we test

teachers' perceived influences of important border keepers at work:

parents' boundary expectations (i.e., parents' expectations for

teachers to be reachable and respond to parent messages outside

work hours) and principals' work–family support (i.e., principals' sup-

port to facilitate employee work–family balance). Thus, our study not

only tests boundary theory more comprehensively with both personal

and situational factors but also helps to assess whether the theory

can be applied to a specific occupation against the backdrop of preva-

lent ICT uses.

FIGURE 1 Unstandardized

coefficients of the estimated

model. Notes. Solid lines are

significant, whereas dashed lines

are not. This figure does not

include the following for brevity:

effects of control variables, main

effects of Level 2 variables on

Level 1 outcome variables and

cross-level moderation effects of

situational factors at Level 2 on

the relationships between

information communication

technology (ICT) demands and

strain indicators. For these

estimates, please refer to Table 2.

*

p< .05,

**

p< .01

1

Clark (2000) used “border,”whereas Ashforth et al. (2000) used “boundary”in their

theoretical papers, but both terms refer to the same concept and thus are used

interchangeably in this paper.

PARK ET AL.519