What happened to the border? The role of mobile information technology devices on employees’ work-life balance
| Published date | 06 November 2017 |
| Date | 06 November 2017 |
| Pages | 1651-1671 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-08-2016-0222 |
| Author | Toyin Ajibade Adisa,Gbolahan Gbadamosi,Ellis L.C. Osabutey |
| Subject Matter | HR & organizational behaviour,Global HRM |
What happened to the border?
The role of mobile information
technology devices on employees’
work-life balance
Toyin Ajibade Adisa
College of Business, Arts, and Social Sciences, Brunel University, London, UK
Gbolahan Gbadamosi
Department of Leadership, Strategy and Organisation, Bournemouth University,
Bournemouth, UK, and
Ellis L.C. Osabutey
Department of International Management and Innovation, Business School,
Middlesex University, London, UK
Abstract
Purpose –Mobile information technology devices (MITDs) are of special interest for researchers who seek to
understand the role of these devices on employees’work-life balance (WLB). The purpose of this paper is to
examine the role of MITDs on employees’WLB.
Design/methodology/approach –This paper uses semi-structured interviews to investigate the role of
MITDs on employees’WLB.
Findings –The findings underscore the important role of MITDs in terms of the attainment of flexibility
(how, where, and when work is done), which is significant for achieving WLB. However, the use of MITDs has
blurred the division between work and non-work domains. This has inadvertently lengthened employees’
working hours, has affected their family relationships, and affected their general health and well-being.
The evidence suggests that MITDs have the potential to improve WLB but could also lead to work-life
conflict if not properly managed.
Originality/value –The study calls for a re-examination of WLB policies and practices, specifically border
theory, in order to ensure that MITDs can enhance productivity without inadvertently resulting in poor WLB.
Keywords Mixed methodologies, Flexibility, Qualitative, Employees, Mobile technology, Critical,
Work-life balance, Border theory
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Work-life balance(WLB) is an important theme in mainstream human resource management
(HRM) literature (Raiden and Caven, 2011), with a plethora of initiatives designed to help
employees to reconcile the competing demands of their paid work and non-work
responsibilities (Ford and Collinson, 2011). However, the continuous emergence of
sophisticated mobile information technology devices (MITDs) has changed both the way
that work is done and the structure of employees’non-work lives. This has been further
exacerbatedby the huge number of people who have accessto and use MITDs. According to a
United Nations(UN) report (2013), an estimated 6 billionpeople have access to mobile phones.
Therefore,smartphones and other MITDs have inspiredresearchers to consider how to define
the work and non-work time periods of employees (Den-Nagy, 2014). Since the 1980s, the
border between employees’work and non-work domains has become increasingly blurred
(Currie and Eveline, 2011), with increasing boundary porosity (Warhurst et al., 2008).
Development and use of sophisticated information technology systems have contributed to
this phenomenon (Hislop and Axtell, 2009). Technology has changed business modes and
Personnel Review
Vol. 46 No. 8, 2017
pp. 1651-1671
© Emerald PublishingLimited
0048-3486
DOI 10.1108/PR-08-2016-0222
Received 30 August 2016
Revised 16 December 2016
22 February 2017
Accepted 6 March 2017
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0048-3486.htm
1651
The role of
MITDs on
employees’
WLB
practices formillions of employees all over the world(Duxbury and Smart, 2011). Specifically,
MITDs have rendered Kahn et al.’s (1964) work on the separation of work and family
(non-work) roles in terms of time and space invalid. They argued that work occurs during
designated hours and at a place away from home and that transitions between work and
home-based roles are distinct and well defined. However, work can now be done at anytime
and anywhere (Glucksmann and Nolan, 2007). Arguably, even though MITDs provide
resources which enhance productivity and work performance, they can also serve as a
source of challengeto the management of the WLB of employees. MITDs have enhanced and
enabled whatused to be classified as office work to be doneanywhere, anytime. Consequently,
this has had a major effect on employees’WLB. This paper examines the role of MITDs on
employees’WLB, andattempts to answer the question: Do MITDs enhance employees’WLB
or exacerbates emp loyees’work-life conflict? Furthermore, the paper unmasks the role of
MITDs in terms of the borders between work and non-work domains and employees’
movements across those borders. Studies on how employees balance their work and private
lives is an old area of academic enquiry (Den-Nagy, 2014). Despite the significant number of
WLB studies (Casper et al., 2007; Chang et al., 2010; Kesting and Harris, 2009; Qu and Zhao,
2012), the role of information and commutation technology (ICT) and MITDs on employees’
WLB has not receivedadequate attention. Notwithstanding the prevalenceof such devices in
the work and privatelives of the majority of peoplein employment, only a few studies analyse
WLB from the ICTperspective (Den-Nagy, 2014;Pica and Kakihara, 2003). The majorityof the
existingstudies have also used quantitativeapproaches, which do not adequatelyevaluate the
relevant nuancesprevalent in employee border movementswith respect to MITDs. The main
contribution of this study is to examine the role of MITDs on employees’WLB. The paper
further discusseshow contemporary HRM and employees can make the mostof MITDs (such
as mobile smartphones–such as Blackberry, iPhone,etc., tablets, laptop computers and other
integrated wireless devices) in terms of balancing the competing demands of their work and
non-work lives. From a theoretical perspective, the research question is espoused through a
critical discussion of extant literature on WLB. Theoretically, border theory has been
employed to underpin this study. This is done in order to achieve the research objectives.
The remainder ofthis paper is organised as follows:First, we contextualise WLB and MITDs
separately. Second, we discuss the theoretical basis for the research. Third, we outline the
methodology.Fourth, we present the findings and then discusstheir implications. Finally, we
then draw conclusions.
WLB in context
Balancing work and non-work demands is a challenge for employees and employers
(Valcour, 2007). It has also been argued that employees’best interests are served when they
live a balanced life (Kofodimos, 1993). The term WLB means different things to different
people depending on the contextual use thereof (Lockwood, 2003). Researchers have defined
“balance”differently. For some, “balance”means an absence of conflict or a particularly low
level of conflict (Clark, 2000; Saltzstein et al., 2001). Alternatively, for others, it means having
greater enrichment than conflict (Frone, 2003; Aryee et al., 2005). For the latter group,
enrichment cancels the detrimental effect of conflict and balance is then achieved
(Haar, 2013). However, Osoian et al. (2009) argue that the word “balance”does not mean
allocating equal amounts of energy and time to work related and non-work related duties.
It means, in essence, allowing employees some degree of flexibility and control over when,
where, and how they do their daily work (Kesting and Harris, 2009). The terms WLB and
work-family balance are sometimes used interchangeably (Lyness and Judiesch, 2014).
WLB is, however, a more inclusive term (Lewis and Campbell, 2008). The term WLB
broadens the activities included in the “life”or non-work domain to include family as well as
other personal activities and interests (Greenhaus and Allen, 2011). Although WLB has
1652
PR
46,8
To continue reading
Request your trial