EMPLOYEE’S WORK-LIFE BALANCE?
Master thesis Human Resource Management
University of Groningen, Faculty of Management and Organization
June, 2012
PAULIEN RENKEMA Student number: 1690469 Burgemeester Stramanweg 75 1191 CX Ouderkerk aan de Amstel
tel.: +31 (0)627335750 E-mail: psrenkema@hotmail.com
Supervisor/university Dr. P. van der Meer
Second evaluator T. Vriend
DOES WORKING AT HOME REALLY IMPROVE AN EMPLOYEE’S WORK-LIFE BALANCE?
ABSTRACT
This research investigates the relationship between working at home and an employee’s work-life balance. Additionally, the influence of working overtime and stress experienced by an employee has been studied. The questionnaire of Glebbeek and van der Lippe (2003) that has been used for this research yielded 1086 suitable respondents.
The linear regression analysis showed that a significant positive relationship exists between working at home and working overtime. Also a significant positive influence of working overtime on stress and an employee’s negative work-life balance has been found. Additionally, working overtime has a significant positive relationship with an employee’s positive work-life balance. Finally, stress experienced by an employee has a significant positive effect on the employee’s negative work-life balance, and a significant negative influence on the employee’s positive work-life balance.
The findings of the multiple regression analysis show that working at home and stress are the most important predictors of an employee’s negative work-life balance, whereas for an employee’s positive work-life balance this is stress.
When working at home is stimulated, the negative effects it can have on an
employee’s negative work-life balance should be kept in mind. These findings also indicate that more investigation should be done on the topic of working at home.
TABLE OF CONTENT
1. INTRODUCTION………...… 4
2. THEORY………...………...……….…………... 8
2.1 Work-Life Balance……...……….…8
2.2 Flexible Work Arrangements.……..…….………..…...………...……9
2.2.1 Working at Home………....……… 10
2.3 Overtime………..………...……… 13
2.3.1 Overtime and Work-Life Balance……….……...………14
2.3.2 Overtime and experienced Stress….………...……… 15
2.4 Stress.…...………….………..………...……… 16 2.5 Conceptual Model. ………….………….………..………… 17 3. METHODS……..………...…….………...18 3.1 Sample………...………...………...18 3.2 Measures………….……..…….………...………..……18 3.3 Factor Analysis………...………20 3.4 Data Analysis………..………...……….22 4. RESULTS……...………...………..………...23 4.1 Test of Hypothesis………...………...……….……...25
4.2 Multiple Regression Analysis.………...……….30
5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION………..………..…………..… 33
5.1 Summary of Findings……….………...……….……...33
5.2 Limitations……….………...……….……….……...34
5.3 Theoretical Implications and Future Research……...……….……...35
5.4 Practical Implications………..…………...……….……...36
6. REFERENCES………..………..………..38
1. INTRODUCTION
In 2007, the Dutch Government developed a taskforce called ‘DeeltijdPlus’ in order to encourage Dutch women to work more hours per week. The reason for the formation of this taskforce can be found in the national and international participation numbers of women on the labor market (press release Dutch Government, 2007).
In 2008, the participation of Dutch males on the labor market was with its 83%, the highest within the European Union. Dutch women had a relatively high participation
percentage (71%) on the labor market as well, compared to other countries (Leufkens, 2009). However, the number of working hours of Dutch women, which have an average workweek of 24 hours, is significantly lower than the average workweek of women in other European countries (press release Dutch Government, 2007). The majority of the time available to Dutch women is spent on unpaid jobs, which includes taking care of the children, housekeeping, and volunteering (Cloïn and Hermans, 2006). The participation of Dutch women on the labor market decreases after the age of thirty, whereby the main reason for quitting their jobs or reducing their working hours is to take care of children (Leufkens, 2009). This statement can be supported by data gathered by the Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek between 2008 and 2010. As can be seen in table 1, the percentage of Dutch women that do not have a job grows as more children are born. At the same time, a significant decrease can be found in the percentages of Dutch mothers working 35 hours or more per week. This confirms the decrease in labor participation of Dutch women, through quitting their jobs or reducing the amount of working hours, when they become a parent.
TABLE 1.
Number of hours worked by Dutch mothers per week in relation to the number of children whereby the age of the youngest child is zero (percentages)
No job < 12 hours Between 12 and 19 Between 20 and 27 Between 28 and 34 35 hours or more No children 14 2 4 10 22 48 1 child 18 3 8 30 22 20 2 children 22 4 13 37 16 8 3 or more children 39 9 13 23 11 6
A large part of the Dutch citizens born in the first year after the end of World War II will reach the age of retirement in 2011. In the coming years more and more so called ‘baby boomers’ will follow (Wobma and Portegijs, 2011). To anticipate on the expected shortages on the labor market, due to the aging workforce, the Dutch government would like to see Dutch women to work more hours per week in order to fill the vacancies caused by the retiring baby boomers.
The main recommendation of the taskforce ‘DeeltijdPlus’ to employers is to provide employees with more flexibility through for example working from home and flexible working hours. These flexible arrangements should encourage Dutch women to work additional working hours, which has been the main goal of the taskforce ‘DeeltijdPlus’. The flexible work arrangements are not only beneficial for female employees, also male
employees can benefit from these flexible arrangements. It provides them the opportunity to be more involved in raising their children (press release Dutch Government, 2007).
The goal of the Dutch government to increase the amount of working hours made by Dutch women will automatically result in more time spent on paid work and less on non-work activities. So a different balance between work and life, also called work-life balance, will be the desired outcome for Dutch women according to the ‘DeeltijdPlus’ workforce. In general, when Dutch women do not mind a work-life balance whereby more time is spent on work than previously, it does not need to influence their well-being and/or happiness negatively. But when Dutch women do not prefer to spend more time on work at the expense of family-time, this can negatively influence their well-being and/or happiness, since time can only be spent once.
According to Anderson, Coffey and Byerly (2002) is it possible to reduce the negative influence of spending additional time at work through flexible work arrangements.
When using flexible arrangements, an employee can adjust his or her working hours to obligations the employee has in his or her private life. With these flexible arrangements, the Dutch government responds to the wishes of Dutch women. Since a total of 84% of the Dutch women declared that they are willing to work more hours per week if they are able to combine those extra hours of work with their private life (Cloïn and Hermans, 2006).
According to Collings (2005), employees who work at home are more satisfied with their work-life balance than those who do not work at home. One reason why homeworkers are more satisfied is because they do not have commuting costs, like time and money, because they work at home and do not have to travel to the company’s office (de Graaf and Rietveld, 2007). This could result in a win-win situation, whereby Dutch women work more hours per week, but this would not negatively affect their work-life balance. The question within this research will be whether the flexible work arrangements which will be stimulated by the Dutch government have a positive influence on the work-life balance of the employees making use of these arrangements.
Within this research the focus will be on one of these flexible work arrangements, namely working at home and its effect on employees’ work-life balance. In particular the effect of working overtime will be investigated when the relationship between working at home and employees’ work-life balance is examined. There has been chosen for working overtime, because Mirchandani (2000), and other authors, describes that working at home makes it easier to work during leisure time, which causes a shift in the work-life balance of a person at the expense of the time spent on life.
The reason to choose for the subject of working at home has been the submitted legislative proposal on February the 16th 20121, developed by two Dutch political parties CDA and Groenlinks (de Lange, 2012). The goal of this proposal is to make it easier for employees, both women and men, to choose to work at home or outside the normal working hours of the company they work for. The political parties would like to have a law that entitles flexible working for employees in 2013. The main reason for the proposal is the fact that only in 16% of the collective labor agreements arrangements have been made regarding flexible working possibilities, which is too low according to CDA and GroenLinks2.
The research question that will be central in this research is: To what extent does working at
home influences an employee’s work life balance?
In order to give an answer on the previous question, data will be used that has been collected by Arie Glebbeek and Tanja van der Lippe in 2003. They developed a questionnaire which has been sent out to several organizations in the Netherlands, which makes this research a quantitative one. Additional factors that will be taken into account when considering the
1
Dagblad van het Noorden, 2012-02-17
relationship between working at home and an employee’s work-life balance are working
overtime and stress.
This leads to the following sub-questions which have been developed in order to give an answer to the previous mentioned research question:
What is the relationship between working at home and the number of hours an employee works overtime?
What is the relationship between an employee’s number of hours working overtime and the level of stress experienced by that same employee?
What is the relationship between an employee’s number of hours working overtime and the work-life balance of that same employee?
What is the relationship between the level of stress experienced by an employee and the work-life balance of that same employee?
2. THEORY
This theoretical chapter will first elaborate the dependent variable in this research, which is work-life balance. Thereafter the flexible work arrangement working at home, which will be central in this research, will be discussed. Then two possible effects of working at home, working overtime and stress, are introduced. Finally, the relationships between the different variables are depicted in a conceptual model.
2.1 Work-life Balance
People possess a limited and often fixed amount of resources, for example time and money (Geurts, Taris, Kompier, Dikkers, van Hooff and Kinnunen, 2005). The time resource is closely related to the work-life balance investigated in this research because a day has only 24 hours, and each hour can only be spent once. So if you decide to stay an hour longer at work in order to finish an important assignment, this means that you can spent an hour less with your family at home and this also holds the other way around.
Because time spent as employee in the office cannot also be spent as partner or parent at home, the roles of employee and partner or parent are in conflict, also known as work-family conflict. Greenhaus and Beutell (1985: 77) define work-work-family conflict as ‘a form of interrole conflict in which role pressures from the work and family domains are mutually incompatible in some respect’. The existence of a work-to-family conflict implies that an employee is not satisfied with his or her balance between work and life (which includes family). In other words, a work-to-family conflict is related to an out of balance distribution of the employee’s time between work and life.
In order to create a work-life balance, which has to do with finding a balance between time spent on a (paid) job and time spent on other activities, a person has to prioritize and divide his or her available time over several activities that are part of his or her life, for example family and friends, leisure and career. So, work-life balance is a result of the choices made by a person (Lewis, 2003). That is why the ideal work-life balance differs from person to person. How the optimal work-life balance looks like is partly dependent on the age of the person, the situation at home and at work (Peters, den Dulk, and van der Lippe, 2009), and personal preferences (Kossek, Lautsch and Eaton, 2005). Work-life balance is therefore a subjective construct. In general, it would be the case that each employee aims for a work-life balance that is optimal for its own situation. However, it is possible that an employee is restricted in its choices to reach its optimal work-life balance. For example an employee’s function can only be executed on a full-time basis whereas the employee would like to have a part-time job. In order to re-establish their work-life balance employees declare that they need more freedom in order to decide when, how long and where they are working (Cloïn and Hermans, 2006). Based on these employee’s needs it is expected that flexible work
arrangements can help employees to restore their ideal work-life balance. Having employees that are satisfied with their work-life balance is exactly what is important for organization, because an undesirable distribution of the available time can lead to more stress (Peters et al., 2009), and can have a negative effect on the functioning of employees in their private lives (Dikkers, Geurts, Den Dulk, Peper and Kompier, 2004).
2.2 Flexible Work Arrangements
According to Fleetwood (2007) there are two main categories of flexible work arrangements. First, there are arrangements that have a positive influence on an employee’s work-life balance. This includes arrangements like flexible start and finish time, job share and the possibility of taking a sabbatical. These types of arrangements are also called ‘employee friendly’ arrangements. The main focus of the second type of arrangement, which is ‘employer friendly’ arrangements, is on the profit the arrangement will bring to the organization and not on the influence of the arrangement on the work-life balance of the organization’s employees. Some examples of ‘employer friendly’ arrangements are zero hour contracts, overtime and stand-by arrangements (Fleetwood, 2007). In general employees will not profit themselves of ‘employer friendly’ arrangements, but there are exceptions.
that organizations offer (potential) employees flexible work arrangements that are ‘employee friendly’. This is done in order to make sure that there will be no significant shortages in the headcount of the organization and that the right talent will be attracted to the organization. When the labor market is loose, organization are more likely to provide their (potential) employees with ‘employer friendly’ work arrangements. There are more employees than jobs available in the market, and therefore employees are less inclined to leave the organization.
Within this research the flexible work arrangement of working at home is the central topic.
2.2.1 Working at Home
Obviously, the definition of working at home has to do with an employee working at home instead of a central place which is usually the company’s office. Most of the time working at home is facilitated through a combination of an internet connection with the world outside and several communication techniques (including e-mail and videoconference) which makes communication with for example colleagues, clients and supervisors possible. When these previously described techniques are used, the employee can be seen as a home-based teleworker or an employee making use of telecommunication (van Klaveren, 2003).
In 2009, the research agency Synovate researched working at home. A result of this study is that more than half of the office workers make use of the possibility to work at home (Sanderse, 2009). The percentage of employees working at home is somewhat higher for males (55%) than females (41%).
A study by ADV Market Research showed that 79% of the active labor force considers working at home as one of the major contributors of reducing the amount and length of traffic jams in the Netherlands (Beffers and van den Brink, 2008). Having a long commuting time, can be a reason for an employee to work at home since it reduces travelling time significantly. Still, employees need some time in order to switch their attention from non-work to work activities and therefore do not reach full productivity directly. For the employee who spends less time in commuting the difference between working at home and at the office in terms of commuting time is less significant. Therefore, according to van Klaveren (2003), employees with a longer commuting time have a stronger preference for working at home than
employees with a shorter commuting time. If more employees will be working at home, this will result in a decrease in the CO2 emission because of fewer movements between office and home. Another major benefit provided by working at home is the opportunity to work more hours throughout the workweek, which has been mentioned by 58% of the active labor force (Beffers and van den Brink, 2008).
Literature about working at home describe that conflicting outcomes are found on the effects of working at home. According to Greenhaus, Parasuraman, Granrose, Rabinowitz and Beutell (1989), working at home contributes to more flexibility for an employee. Through this flexibility, an employee is able to manage their own schedule and can adapt their working hours to other activities in its life, which leads to reduced level of job-related stress
experienced by an employee (Greenhaus et al., 1989). Based on the above, it is expected that working at home has a positive influence on an employee’s work-life balance. However, according to Beffers and van den Brink (2008) the opposite is true. One of the main
disadvantages of working at home is, according to 62% of the Dutch employees (Beffers and van den Brink, 2008), that working at home makes the boundary between work and an employee’s personal life less obvious (Hill, Miller, Weinig and Colihan, 1998). When the boundaries between work and work are vague there will be more interference of non-work activities during non-work and the other way around, which can cause an increase in the level of work-life conflict experienced by an employee (Raghuram and Wiesenfeld, 2004).
and well-being (Kahneman and Sugden, 2005). Peters and van der Lippe (2007) describe in their article that working at home can result in employees working more hours during their workweek, which negatively influence an employee’s work-life balance. This because working at home provides ongoing access to work towards a teleworker, which can lead to employees working overtime at the expense of family time. This has also been acknowledge by Lewis (2003) who described that working at home can lead to working more overtime because of the blurring boundaries between work and non-work activities as a consequence of working at home.
Through the technologies available to employees these days they have access to their work twenty-four hours a day, which lead to the feeling that the work that needs to be done is never finished (Lewis, 2003). The ambiguous boundaries between work and non-work, the previously described feeling and the ongoing accessibility to work can result in employees turning into workaholics. Moreover, employees who work at the office are more managed through presence done by a supervisor. An employee who works at home is managed and assessed not by presence but by objectives (Peters, den Dulk and van der Lippe, 2009). In general, it is always possible to improve these objectives which can result in employees working overtime during their workweek in order to reach higher objectives.
Based on the above, the following hypothesis describes the positive relationship between working at home and working overtime..
Hypothesis 1: the extent to which employees are working at home has a positive relationship with the number of hours working overtime. Such that when employees are working more hours at home, this will result in an increase in the number of hours working overtime at home.
2.3 Overtime
If an employee works overtime during his or her work week, this means that he or she works outside his or her normal working hours and therefore works more hours than are
incorporated in his or her contract of employment (Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek). In the European Union a directive has been developed which prescribes a maximum work week of 48 hours. The reason for the development of the directive has been the familiar negative effects of working long hours on an employee’s health and the increased chance of accidents at the workplace and outside (Kirkcaldy, Trimpop and Cooper, 1997). However, Dutch employees work more than those 48 hours per week on a regular basis, see table 2.
TABLE 2.
Percentages of Dutch employees working overtime Employees who regularly work overtime (%)
Gender Male Female
Year 2010 2010 Age 15 till 25 29 22 Age 25 till 35 45 34 Age 35 till 45 46 32 Age 45 till 55 42 35 Age 55 till 65 36 30
Source: Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek
general these employees are willing to work more hours than agreed in their contract because they are afraid of losing their jobs too. Basically, they have no other choice than to work harder and longer.
In this research both the direct effect of working overtime on an employee’s work-life balance and the indirect effect through experienced stress will be taking into account.
2.3.1 Overtime and work-life balance
According to Peeters, de Jonge, Janssen and van der Linden (2004), are a higher workload and working overtime two of the sources of the occurrence of work-home interference. A higher workload does not always have to bring negative consequences for employees. It can also motivate employees and give them additional energy in order to handle the additional workload (Dikkers, Geurts, Kompier, Taris, Houtmans and van den Heuvel, 2007). When the workload is temporarily higher and will return at its normal level within considerable time, it does not have to result in any negative effects for an employee and his or her work-home balance. However, when the workload remains high and an employee has to work overtime on a continuous base in order to keep up, it will cause work-home interference and negatively influence an employee’s work-life balance (Dikkers et al., 2007).
Also Greenhaus and Beutell (1985) describe the relationship between working overtime and an employee’s work-life balance in their research. Working overtime can lead to, what Greenhaus and Beutell (1985) define as, time-based work-home interference. Spending more time on work means that less time is available for the non-work activities of an employee, which can lead to an unbalanced work-life balance since more time is spent on work than is intended.
Lewis (2003) describes the self-reinforcing relationship between working overtime and an employee’s work-life balance. If an employee spends more time on its job, at the expense of non-work or family time, this can affect the relationship with an employee’s family at home negatively. The same counts for interference of work during non-work or family time. As a result the atmosphere within the family will be less pleasant, which causes the desire by the employee to spend even more of his time on its job instead of at non-work and family activities. In the end, this will lead to a work-life balance whereby significantly more time is spent on work than on non-work or family activities.
Hypothesis 2a: the number of hours working overtime at home has a negative relationship with the work-life balance of an employee. Such that when an employee works more overtime, this will result in an more inferior work-life balance.
2.3.2. Overtime and experienced stress
Stress can be defined as ‘an adaptive response, mediated by individual characteristics and/or psychological processes, that is a consequence of any external action, situation, or event that takes place special physical and/or psychological demands upon a person (Ivancevich and Matteson, 1980: 8). For many people, having a good family life is of great importance. When an employee has a job that intervenes in its family life because an employee works overtime at the expense of its family life, this can be experienced as stressful by the employee (Allen et al., 2000).
Through the technological possibilities these days, it is easy to work outside his or her normal working hours during for example an employee’s weekend or holiday, which is generally not beneficial to an employee’s work-life balance. The resulting imbalance between an employee’s work and family life is another source for stress (Frone, Russell and Cooper, 1992). Not being able to completely disconnect from an employee’s work is described by Beulens, van den Broeck, Vanderheyden, Kreitner and Kinicki (2006) as one of the main contributors to stress experienced by employees.
The amount of working hours is positively related to the level of stress experienced by employees (Kirkcaldy, Riidiger and Trimpop, 1997). In other words, the more (over)hours employees work, the higher the stress they will experience. It was also found that employees who reserved more time for their lunch break during a workday are having a lower level of stress than employees that have less or no time at all for their lunch break.
Based on the above described information, a positive relationship is expected between the number of hours working overtime and the amount of stress experienced by an employee.
2.4 Stress
As described by Matjasko and Feldman (2006) and Lewis (2003), the boundaries between work and home are not always straightforward. The stress experienced by employees and caused by working overtime will in general have a negative effect on an employee’s work-life balance. Moreover, the stress can spill over from work to home easily, and can even affect other family members of the employee. This because the employee and its family cannot fully enjoy their family-time because the employee is through the stress also occupied with its work, which would influence an employee’s work-life balance negatively.
The previously described relationship has also been acknowledged by Dikkers, den Dulk, Geurts and Peper (2004). The stress experienced by an employee can have a negative effect on its functioning during non-work and family time. Furthermore, some teleworkers do not even enjoy the time they spent with their family and friends during leisure time because of the experienced stress. These employees often think of their work during their leisure time (Dikkers et al., 2004).
In the research of Parasuraman, Greenhaus and Granrose (1992) the positive relationship between stress experienced by an employee and work-family conflict is
described. As mentioned earlier, a family conflict implies that there is an inferior work-life balance. So if stress leads to more work-family conflict, then stress also has a negative effect on an employee’s work-life balance.
The following hypothesis describes the above explained negative relationship between experienced stress and an employee’s work-life balance.
2.5 Conceptual Model
The previous described relationships between the variables have been translated into a conceptual model, see figure 1.
3. METHODS
3.1 Sample
In order to be able to measure the above described hypothesis, data which has been obtained by Arie Glebbeek and Tanja van der Lippe in 2003 will be used. A number of organizations in the Netherlands, both public and private organizations, have been approached in order to participate in the time competition study of Glebbeek and van der Lippe. The questions that have been developed for this specific research have been asked during an interview with a single employee, see Appendix A.
A total of 1114 employees have participated in the study. After the deletion of the participants that did not answered all the questions needed for this research, and the participants who filled in incorrect answer to some questions, a total of 1086 respondents remained, which leads to a response rate of 97%. From these 1086 respondents, 579 are male and 507 are female. The average age of the people who filled in the questionnaire completely is 41.2 with a standard deviation of 9.08. A total of 280 respondents are single, whereas the other 806 respondents are living together with a partner. Of the 1086 respondents, 554 are having children living at home. The remaining 532 respondents do not.
3.2 Measures
Work-life balance. The measurement of work-life balance is based on five statements that have been included in the interview. These statements are part of the SWING
the previously mentioned statements has been made while making use of the reliability analysis and factor analysis, which will be discussed later in this chapter.
Besides these three negative work-home interaction statements, also two positive work-home interaction statements have been included in the interview, ‘You come home cheerfully after a successful day at work, positively affecting the atmosphere at home’, and ‘After a pleasant working day/working week, you feel more in the mood to engage in activities with your spouse/family/friends’. The two statements measure whether the
interviewee’s private life is positively influenced by the work the interviewee performs. Also here, the previous mentioned 5-point scale of never – always has been used after the data had been recoded. Based upon this, a high score on a statement means that the interviewee does experience a positive work-home interaction. With a coefficient alpha estimate of reliability of .7 we can use these two statements to measure the construct of positive work-home interaction appropriately.
Stress. Within the interview ten statements are related to the variable stress. These statements are derived from the investigation of Glebbeek and van der Lippe (2004). Some example of these statements are: ‘I do not get enough sleep’, ‘I am under time pressure’, and ‘I would like to have more time for myself’. The interviewees have been asked to rate the statements while making use of a 5-point scale whereby after rotation, 1 corresponds with strongly disagree and 5 with strongly agree. All ten statements have a negative loading, which means that if the interviewee has a high score on a statement than he or she experiences stress. With the deletion of the following statements: ‘I am stuck on a schedule’, ‘I am late for
appointments’, and ‘I miss deadlines’, the coefficient alpha estimate of reliability increased from .74 until .79. The choice to delete these items has been made while making use of a combination of reliability analysis and factor analysis, which will be discussed later.
Working from home. The question within the interview related to the dependent variable working from home in this research is: ‘In average how many days do you work at home during a workweek?’ When the question was asked during the interview, the
interviewer clearly mentioned that this question is related to normal working hours and therefore does not include overtime. The answers given by the respondents vary between 1 which corresponds with (almost) never and 7 which means that an employee works on average five days a week at home.
3.3 Factor Analysis
The deletion of the items that have been described above has been done on the base of factor analysis and reliability analysis. The original factor analysis, without the deletion of any of the items, can be found in Appendix B. The Varimax rotation method has been used and a total of three factors have been extracted from the data. These three factors correspond with the earlier described dependent and independent variables. As can be seen in Appendix B, whereby only the factor loadings of .4 or higher are boldfaced, some of the statements have high loadings on one factor, whereas other constructs have statements, which were meant to measure the same construct, which have high loadings on other factors.
During the deletion process both the results of the factor analysis and the reliability analysis have been used. By for example the deletion of the ‘I miss deadlines’ statement, the reliability analysis did not show a significant improvement in the reliability of the construct stress. However, the factor analysis improved significantly with the deletion of this item. Sometimes the factor analysis was the leading indicator during the deletion process, whereas at other moments the reliability analysis has been decisive. However, it has never been the case that if the factor analysis has been leading for the deletion of a statements, the reliability analysis of the factor to which this statement belongs got of poorer quality and vice versa. The factor analysis after the deletion of several statements can be found in table 3. Here as well, the factor loadings of .4 or higher are boldfaced.
statements on negative work-home interaction could be that if at work the time pressure is so high that the health of an employee suffers, this will also have a negative effect on the
employee’s family life at home because the employee is limited in its actions because of its poorer health.
TABLE 3.
Factor Analysis
Component
1 2 3
I do not get enough sleep ,531 ,115 -,005
I'm under time pressure ,773 ,155 -,011
I would like to have more time for myself ,707 ,048 -,080
Others give me time pressure ,741 ,036 -,026
I cannot deal with important issues due to time constraints ,644 ,229 ,026 I cannot recover from illness due to time constraints ,546 ,267 ,006 I'm under so much pressure that my health suffers ,566 ,426 -,048 You cannot optimal enjoy your partner (if applicable), family or friends
because you worry about work
,205 ,848 -,049
You have difficulties meeting your obligations at home because your work is always in your mind
,182 ,864 -,011
Your good mood after a successful day at work positively affects the atmosphere at home
-,061 -,101 ,870
You after an enjoyable day or week are more in the mood to undertake activities with your partner (if applicable), family or friends
,006 ,041 ,881
TABLE 4. Factor Labels
Component Label
1 Stress
2 Negative Work-Home Interaction 3 Positive Work-Home Interaction
3.4 Data analysis
Several steps have been taken prior to the regression analysis. First, the incomplete
questionnaires have been removed from the data set. Also the respondents who have given incorrect answers to a question have been deleted. Thereafter, the reliability of the statements that have been used for the measurement of the variables ‘stress’ and ‘work-life balance’ has been measured while making use of factor analysis and the coefficient alpha estimate of reliability. Only those statements that measure the construct appropriately will be included in the linear regression analysis. After the measurement of the reliability, the mean of the reliable statements of the variables ‘stress’ and ‘work-life balance’ will be taken together for each variable. This will result in one measurement for the variable ‘stress’ and one
4. RESULTS
The mean, standard deviations, and correlations for the dependent, independent and
significant control variables that have been taken into account in this research can be found in table 5. From the table it can be concluded that a significant correlation exists between the following variables: working at home and working overtime, working at home and stress, working at home and negative work-life balance, working overtime and stress, working overtime and negative work-life balance, stress and negative work-life balance, stress and positive life balance, and finally between negative life balance and positive work-life balance. Moreover, it can be seen that all the independent variables described in the different hypothesis have a significant influence on the dependent variable described in that same hypothesis.
TABLE 5.
Means, Standard Deviations and Correlations
Variable Mean S.D. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1. Gender .47 .499 2. Age 40.872 9.079 -.068* 3. Education 7.99 2.204 -.082** -.141** 4. Marital status .74 .438 .140** .124** -.006 5. Family Composition 2.77 1.349 .142** .118** -.093** .618** 6. Working at home 1.42 .801 -.066* .023 .278** .053 .049 7. Working Overtime 1.316 1.320 -.306** .024 .350** .097** .008 .256** 8. Stress 2.214 .626 .065* -.079** .171** -.024 .042 .099** .168**
9. Negative Work-Life Balance 1.663 .665 -.029 -.063* .202** .105** .005 .151** .189** .443** 10. Positive Work-Life Balance 2.932 .967 .091** -.062* .034 -.042 -.089** -.003 -.004 -.069* .069*
N = 1086
4.1 Test of Hypothesis
In order to be able to approve or disapprove the hypothesis previously described in this hypothesis a linear regression analysis has been performed. During the first step in the analysis the control variables gender, age, education, marital status and family composition are inserted. Even though the control variables do not have a significant correlation with all the variables, see table 5, there has been chosen to include them in all the linear regression analysis that will be performed. This because through the inclusion of the control variables, the influence of the control variable on the relationship between an independent and a
dependent variable can be examined. By the second step the dependent variable of one of the hypothesis is entered. The dependent variable changes during the research and is thus
different for each hypothesis.
TABLE 6.
Working Overtime as a Function of Working at Home
The first hypothesis can be accepted based on the data in table 6. As expected a significant positive relationship has been found between working at home and working overtime (B =.258, SD = .046, p <.001), which means that the more days an employee works at home, the more overtime this employee will work. The ΔR2 describes that 2.2% of the variance in the working overtime variable is covered by the independent variable working at home.
TABLE 7.
Negative Work-Life Balance as a Function of Working Overtime
Step Variable
Negative Work-Life Balance
1 2 1 Gender -.006 (.040) .027 (.041) Age -.003 (.002) -.004 (.002) Education .057 (.009)*** .047 (.009)*** Marital Status .233 (.058)*** .222 (.057)*** Family Composition -.033 (.019) -.031 (.019) 2 Working Overtime .014 (.004)*** R2 .057 .069 ΔR2 .057 .012 F-test 13.080*** 13.384*** N = 1086 *p <.05 ** p<.01 *** p<.001
From the data provided by table 7, is can be concluded that a positive significant relationship exists between working overtime and negative work-life balance (B = .014, SD = .004, p <.001). The more hours an employee works overtime the larger the negative effect it will have on an employee’s work-life balance. So, the second hypothesis can be accepted.
TABLE 8.
Positive Work-Life Balance as a Function of Working Overtime
Step Variable
Positive Work-Life Balance
1 2 1 Gender .145 (.06) * .176 (.061)** Age -.006 (.003) -.066 (.003) Education -.019 (.014) -.029 (.014)* Marital Status .065 (.085) .054 (.085) Family Composition -.063 (.028)* -.061 (.028)* 2 Working Overtime .041 (.006)* R2 .018 .023 ΔR2 .018 .005 F-test 3.931** 4.248*** N = 1086 *p <.05 ** p<.01 *** p<.001
As can be seen in table 8, the relationship between working overtime and positive work-life balance is positively significant (B = .041, SD = .006, p < .05). In other words, there is a positive significant relationship between working overtime and positive work-life balance. This does not support the second hypothesis, and contradicts the negative relationship found between working overtime and negative work-life balance.
When looking at the ΔR2 it can be seen that the second model does not predict the variable positive work-life balance significantly better than the first model (ΔR2 = .005).
The ΔR2 shows that the second model explains 2.2% more of the variance in the stress variable than does the first model. This additional percentage is covered by the variable working overtime.
TABLE 9.
Stress as a Function of Working Overtime
Step Variable Stress 1 2 1 Gender .105 (.038)** .146 (.038)*** Age -.004 (.002) -.004 (.002) Education .052 (.009)*** .039 (.009)*** Marital Status -.119 (.054)* -.133 (.054)* Family Composition .060 (.018)** .062 (.018)*** 2 Working Overtime .018 (.004)*** R2 .048 .070 ΔR2 .048 .022 F-test 10.892*** 13.454*** N = 1086 *p <.05 ** p<.01 *** p<.001
TABLE 10.
Negative Work-Life Balance as a Function of Stress
Step Variable
Negative Work-Life Balance
1 2 1 Gender -.006 (.040) -.054 (.036) Age -.003 (.002) -.002 (.002) Education .057 (.009)*** .033 (.008)*** Marital Status .233 (.058)*** .288 (.052)*** Family Composition -.033 (.019) -.061 (.017)*** 2 Stress .462 (.029)*** R2 .057 .237 ΔR2 .057 .180 F-test 13.080*** 55.823*** N = 1086 *p <.05 ** p<.01 *** p<.001
A significant negative effect has been found between stress and positive work-life balance (B = -.108, SD = .048, p <.05), see table 11. This means that people who experience more stress are also the employees who experience a less positive work-life balance, and therefore
indirectly a more negative work-life balance. This result also supports the last hypothesis, and that is way also the last hypothesis is accepted.
TABLE 11.
Positive Work-Life Balance as a Function of Stress
Step Variable
Positive Work-Life Balance
1 2 1 Gender .145 (.06)* .157 (.06)** Age -.006 (.003) -.006 (.003) Education -.019 (.014) -.014 (.014) Marital Status .065 (.085) .052 (.085) Family Composition -.063 (.028)* -.056 (.028)* 2 Stress -.108 (.048)* R2 .018 .023 ΔR2 .018 .005 F-test 3.931** 4.151*** N = 1086 *p <.05 ** p<.01 *** p<.001
4.2 Multiple Regression Analysis
In order to find out which independent variables are the most important predictor for the dependent variables negative and positive work-life balance, a multiple regression analysis has been performed. Table 12 presents the analysis for the dependent variable negative work-life balance, whereas the dependent variable in table 13 is positive work-work-life balance.
During the linear regression analysis of an employee’s negative work-life balance, the independent variables working overtime and stress turned out to be significant. However, when looking at the multiple regression analysis (see table 12) only stress remains positively significant (B = .450, SD = .029, p < .001), and is also the most important predictor of
experienced by employees stress and working at home are according to the multiple regression analysis the two most influential independent variables within this research.
A possible explanation for the insignificance of the independent variable working overtime could be that working overtime itself does not influence the dependent variable negative work-life balance. Only if working overtime causes an employee to experience more stress than this additional stress, which could be caused by working overtime, it has an
influence on negative work-life balance.
TABLE 12.
Multiple Regression Analysis Negative Work-Life Balance
Step Variable
Negative Work-Life Balance
1 2 1 Gender -.006 (.04) -.032 (.038) Age -.003 (.002) -.002 (.002) Education .057 (.009)*** .023 (.009)* Marital Status .233 (.058)*** .279 (.052)*** Family Composition -.033 (.019) -.061 (.017)*** 2 Working at Home .059 (.023)* Working Overtime .025 (.015) Stress .450 (.029)*** R2 .057 .244 ΔR2 .057 .187 F-test 13.080*** 43.532*** N = 1086 *p <.05 ** p<.01 *** p<.001
with positive work-life balance during the linear regression analysis (see table 8), this effect has lost its significance during the multiple regression analysis (B = .039, SD = .025, p > .05).
Overall, it can be stated that the most important predictive independent variable for positive life balance in this research is stress. In order to create a more positive work-life balance for employees the level of stress they experience should be reduced.
Also here, stress could be the explanation for the insignificance of working overtime. Working overtime does not result in a more or less positive work-life balance experienced by employees. However, when working overtime leads to stress it could be that through this stress a less positive work-life balance will be experienced by an employee.
TABLE 13.
Multiple Regression Analysis Positive Work-Life Balance
Step Variable
Positive Work-Life Balance
5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
5.1 Summary of Findings
Within this research the main research question has been to what extent does working at home influences an employee’s work-life balance? In order to be able to answer this question four sub-questions have been developed, which will be individually discussed below.
A positive significant relationship has been found between working at home and working overtime. So employees who work at home are working more overtime than employee who do not work at home, but for example at the company’s office. Also employees who work more days at home are working more overtime than employees who work from home less common.
Working overtime has a significant positive effect on an employee’s negative work-life balance. This implies that employees that are working more overtime, because they are working at home, experience a more negative work-life balance than employees who work less overtime.
The influence of working overtime on an employee’s positive work-life balance is not as expected negatively but positively significant. This contradicts the previous relationship found between working overtime and an employee’s negative work-life balance. Thus, working at home results in working more overtime which results in both a more negative and a more positive work-life balance. An explanation for the positive relationship found between working overtime and positive work-life balance could be that non-work activities like family and friends not always have to suffer from working overtime.
As expected, a significant positive effect has been found between working overtime and stress. This indicates that employees who are working more overtime, which are the employees who work at home, are also experiencing more stress.
Stress itself has a positive significant effect on an employee’s negative work-life balance. This result corresponds to the relationship that had been expected. So, employees who are experiencing more stress, which are employees who are working more overtime because they are working at home, are also the employees that have a more negative work-life balance. This effect is even strengthened through the significant negative effect between stress and the dependent variable positive work-life balance.
Based on the above it can be stated that working at home does influence an
positive relationship with both an employee’s positive and negative work-life balance, which indicates that working overtime can improve and deteriorate an employee’s work-life balance. The stress caused by working at home has a negative effect on an employee’s work-life balance. In general working at home will have a negative effect on an employee’s work-life balance, however there also exists a relationship whereby working at home improves an employee’s work-life balance through working overtime.
The two most important independent variables for the dependent variable negative work-life balance are working at home and stress, based on the multiple regression analysis. Working at home does not have a significant influence on an employee’s positive work-life balance according to the multiple regression analysis, which makes stress the most important independent variable for the dependent variable positive work-life balance. In both multiple regression analysis working overtime turned out to be insignificant, which means that working overtime is not a significant predictor of an employee’s negative and positive work-life balance.
5.2 Limitations
The first limitation of this research in the outdated data set. The data has been gathered in 2003, whereas this research has been taken place in 2012. It therefore could well be that if the data had been more up-to-date, different relationship would have been found between
independent and dependent variables. This because working at home has received much attention in the last decade. As a result the findings of this research should be generalized with caution.
A second limitation is that the data that has been used in this research has been gathered at only one measurement moment. This means that the data is not longitudinal and therefore it is not possible to prove any causality between the independent and dependent variables that have been the subject of this research. The data does suggest a relationship between two variables, but it could well be that other variables have an influence on or are the cause for the relationship found.
5.3 Theoretical Implications and Future Research
As mentioned above, the data used for this research has been gathered at only one
measurement moment. In the future a longitudinal research should be executed in order to figure out whether the negative relationship between working at home and an employee’s work-life balance found in this research holds in the long run. A positive relationship found between working at home and an employee’s work-life balance does not reject the results found in this research directly. At first instance, working at home can reduce the negative work-life balance experienced by an employee who worked previously at the company’s office. But, because homeworkers work more overtime and experiencing more stress, the work-life balance of homeworkers is still more negative than that of employees working elsewhere, like at the company’s office. Therefore, an employee who would like to improve its work-life balance through working at home needs to control their overtime hours and stress experienced in order to really improve their work-life balance.
During the execution of the analysis, the importance of the control variables on the dependent variables has been noticed. Gender, education, marital status and family
composition are the control variables that are having a significant relationship with more than one dependent variable. So future researchers on the topic working at home should keep these control variables in mind during their investigation. It is likely that there are other control variables that also influence the dependent variables in this research. Future research should investigate what these other control variables could be. An example of such a control variable could be whether employees are working full-time or part-time.
Further research is also needed in order to get a better understanding of the complex relationship between working at home and an employee’s work-life balance. This because it could well be that other factors can also explain the existence of a relationship between working at home and an employee’s work-life balance. An example of such a factor could be (physical) contact with other colleagues, since Kahneman and Sugden (2005) describe interaction with colleagues as an important factor for an employee’s well-being.
5.4 Practical Implications
The results show that working at home leads to a more negative work-life balance experienced by the employee. Therefore, it can be stated that the plans of the Dutch
government to stimulate flexible work arrangement, like working at home and make it easier for employees to work at home, will lead to a more negative work-life balance for Dutch employees. It is thought that working at home contributes to restoring an employee’s work-life balance. Based on the results it can be stated that this is not true, working at home has instead a negative influence on an employee’s work-life balance. Besides, working at home does not reduce the negative effects of working more hours since the respondents who work at home and are working overtime still experiencing stress. In other words, when the Dutch government stimulates working at home by employees, they indirectly choose to negatively influence an employee’s work-life balance.
However, there are possibilities to decrease, or even eliminate, the negative influence working at home has on an employee’s work-life balance. Several parties like the Sociaal-Economische Raad (SER), VNO-NCW and labor unions can have an active contribution to the improvement of homeworkers’ work-life balance. First, the parties should identify the effects working at home can have on an employee’s work-life balance. Research that has been done on the subject of working at home can consult the parties hereby. Then the parties should inform Dutch employers about the positive and negative effects working at home can have on employees so that Dutch employers are able to take action in order to reduce the negative effects of working at home as far as possible. This could be done in the form of a handbook which explains the most important facets of working at home. The parties will have a supervisory role in order to make sure the Dutch employers cooperate.
Finally, also the homeworker should be aware of the possible consequences of
working at home on its work-life balance. This information needs to be communicated by the parties and the employer towards the employee. The employer can use the handbook
distributed by the parties as a base for the information that is communicated towards its employees. The parties can inform the homeworker through a conference about the subject of working at home. If an employee has the feeling that working at home leads to any kind of problem that could influence its work-life balance negatively, it should contact its employer as soon as possible. Together they should take a look at the situation and what can be done to eliminate the problem experienced by the employee.
6. REFERENCES
Allen, T., Herst, D., Bruck, C., & Sutton, M. 2000. Consequences associated with work-to-family conflict: a review and agenda for future research. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5(2): 278-308.
Anderson, S.E., Coffey, B.S., & Byerly, R.T. 2002. Formal organizational initiatives and informal workplace practices: links to work-family conflict and job-related outcomes. Journal of Management, 28 (6): 787-810.
Beffers, T., & van den Brink, I. 2008. Telewerken: Samenvatting resultaten. Den Dolder: ADV Markt Research.
Beulens M., & van den Broeck H., Vanderheyden K., Kreitner R., & Kinicki A. 2006. Organisational Behaviour, Mc Graw Hill, UK.
Cloïn, M., & Souren, M. 2010. Onbetaalde arbeid en de combinatie van arbeid en zorg. In: A. Merens, M. van den Brakel, M. Hartgers and B. Hermans (red.),
Emancipatiemonitor 2010 (p. 108-147). Den Haag: Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau/Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek.
Cloïn, M., & Hermans, B. 2006. Onbetaalde arbeid en de combinatie van arbeid en zorg. In W. Portegijs, B. Hermans amd V. Lalta (red.), Emancipatiemonitor 2006 (p. 100-140). Den Haag: Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau.
Collins, M. 2005. The (not so simple) case for teleworking: a study at Lloyd’s of London. NewTechnology, work and employment, 20 (2): 115-132.
Dikkers, J., Geurts, S., den Dulk, L., Peper, B., & Kompier, M. 2004. Relations among work-home culture, the utilization of work-home arrangements, and work-home interference. International Journal of Stress Management, 11(4): 323-345.
Dikkers, J., Geurts, S., Kompier, M., Taris, T., Houtmans, I., & van den Heuvels, F. 2007. Does workload cause work-home interference or is it the other way around? Stress and Health, 23: 303-314.
European Commission. 1999. Status Report on European Telework. New Methods of Work 1999. Brussels (http://www.eto.org.uk/twork/tw99/).
European Commission. 2000. Status Report on New Ways to Work in the Information Society 2000, Brussels (http://www.eto.org.uk/twork/tw00/).
Fleetwood, S. 2007. Why work-life balance now? The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18(3): 387-400.
Frone, M., Russell, M., & Cooper, M. 1992. Antecedents and outcomes of work-family conflict: testing a model of the work-work-family interface. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77: 65-78.
Glebbeek, A., & van der Lippe, T. 2004. Tijdconcurrentie: een individueel of maatschappelijk probleem. Tijdschrift voor Arbeidsvraagstukken, 20: 8-20.
Geurts, S.A.E., Taris, T.W., Kompier, M.A.J., Dikkers, J.S.E., Van Hooff, M.L.M., & Kinnunen, U.M. 2005. Work-home interaction from a work psychological perspective: Development and validation of a new questionnaire, the SWING. Work & Stress, 19 (4): 319-339.
de Graaf, T., & Rietveld, P. 2007. Substitution between working at home and out-of-home: The role of ICT and commuting costs. Transportation Research Part A, 41: 142-160
Greenhaus, J.H., & Beutell, N.J. 1985. Sources of conflict between work and family roles. The Academy of Management Review, 10(1): 76-88.
Greenhaus, J. H., Parasuraman, S., Granrose, C., Rabinowitz, S., & Beutell, N. 1989. Sources of work-family conflict among two career couples. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 34: 133–153.
Hill, E. 1995. Work (remote and otherwise) and family: shifting the balance. Telecommuting Review, 13(12): 1-3.
Hill, E., Miller, B., Weiner, S., & Colihan J. 1998. Influences of the virtual office on aspects of work and work/life balance. Personnel Psychology, 51: 667-683.
Ivancevich, J.M., & Matteson, M.T. 1980. Stress and work: A managerial perspective. Glenview, IL: Scott, Forseman and Company.
Kahneman, D., & Sugden, R. 2005. Experienced utility as a standard of policy evaluation. Environmental and Resource Economics, 32: 161–181.
Kirkcaldy, B., Trimpop, R., & Cooper, C. 1997. Working hours, job stress, work satisfaction, and accident rates among medical practitioners and allied personnel.
International Journal of Stress Management, 4(2): 79-87.
van Klaveren, M. 2003. Teleworking policies of organizations – the Dutch experience. Amsterdam (www.uva-aias.net/files/aias/WP07.pdf).
de Lange, B. Wet voor thuiswerkers. Dagblad van het Noorden, 2012-02-17.
Leufkens, K.; Arbeidsparticipatie in Nederland behoort tot de top van de EU (http://www.cbs.nl/nl-NL/menu/themas/dossiers/eu/publicaties/archief/2009/2009-2819-wm.htm; 2009-07-01).
Lewis, S.2003. The integration of paid work and the rest of life. Is post‐industrial work the new leisure? Leisure Studies, 22(4): 343-345.
Matjasko, J., & Feldman, A. 2006. Bringing work home: the emotional experiences of mothers and fathers. Journal of Family Psychology, 20: 47-55.
Mirchandani, K. 2000. The Best of Both Worlds’ and ‘Cutting My Own Throat’: Contradictory Images of Home-Based Telework. Qualitative Sociology, 23 (4): 159-182.
Parasuraman, S., Greenhaus, J., & Granrose, C. 1992. Role stressors, social support, and well-being among two-career couples. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13(4): 339-356.
Peeters, M., de Jonge, J., Janssen, P., & van der Linden, S. 2004. Work-home interference, job stressors, and employee health in a longitudinal perspective. International Journal of Stress Management, 11 (4): 305-322.
Peters, P., & van der Lippe, T. 2007. The time-pressure reducing potential of
telehomeworking: the Dutch case. Internal Journal of Human Resource Management, 18 (3): 430-447.
Peters, P., den Dulk, L., & van der Lippe, T. 2008. Effecten van tijd-ruimtelijke flexibiliteit op de balans tussen werk en privé. Tijdschrift voor Arbeidsvraagstukken, 24(4): 341-362.
Pressrelease; Taskforce deeltijdplus voor uitbreiding uren deeltijders;
(http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten-en-publicaties/persberichten/2007/09/28/taskforce-deeltijdplus-voor-uitbreiding-uren-deeltijders.html; 2007-09-28).
Raghuram, S., & Wiesenfeld, B. 2004. Work-nonwork conflict and job stress among virtual workers. Human Resource Management, 43: 259-277.
Sanderse, K. 2009. Onderzoek Thuiswerken. Amsterdam: Synovate.
Tsui, A., Ashford, S. J., St. Clair, L., & Xin, K. R. 1995. Dealing with discrepant expectations: response strategies and managerial effectiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 38(6): 1515-1543.
Wobma, E., & Portegijs, W. 2011. Bevolking. In: A. Merens, M. van den Brakel, M. Hartgers en B. Hermans (red.), Emancipatiemonitor 2010 (p. 23-37). Den Haag: Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau / Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek.
http://www.cbs.nl/nl-NL/menu/methoden/toelichtingen/alfabet/o/overwerk.htm
http://statline.cbs.nl/StatWeb/publication/?DM=SLNL&PA=71906NED&D1=a&D2= 1-2&D3=0-5,25-28&D4=9-11&HDR=T,G1,G3&STB=G2&VW=T
APPENDIX A
Questions used for Research Gender X4. Gender 1. Male 2. Female Marital Status X5. Marital Status 1. Single
2. (un)married living together
Age
A1. Date of birth
___day ____ month ____ year (4 numbers)
Education
A2. What is your highest educational qualification?
Family Composition
A6. How many people live in your household, including yourself? All who use the same
kitchen, so children and other adults count.
…. persons
Working overtime
C2 How many hours do you work per week according to your contract with [organization name]? If varying hours, than the average.
... hours per week
C6. How many hours average per week do you actually work at [organization name]?
... hours per week
Working at Home
D3. Do you ever work at home? If so, how many days on average per week? This does not include working overtime.
1. (almost) never
2. less than 1 day per week
3. 1 day per week (approximately) 4. 2 days per week (approximately) 5. 3 days per week (approximately) 6. 4 days per week (approximately) 7. 5 days per week (approximately)
Stress
To what extent do you agree with the following statements? 1. Strongly disagree
2. Disagree
3. Neither agree nor disagree 4. Agree
5. Strongly agree
K9. I do not get enough sleep K10. I am under time pressure
K11. I would like to have more time for myself K12. I am stuck on a schedule
K13. Others give me time pressure
K14. I cannot deal with important issues due to time constraints K15. I cannot recover from illness due to time constraints K16. I am under so much pressure that my health suffers K17. I am late for appointments
K18. I miss deadlines
Work-Life Balance
2. Uncommon 3. Regular 4. Frequently 5. Always
K19. You cannot optimal enjoy your partner (if applicable), family or friends because you worry about work?
K20. You have difficulties meeting your obligations at home because your work is always in your mind
K21. Your working hours make it difficult to meet your obligations at home?
K22. Your good mood after a successful day at home positively affects the atmosphere at home?
APPENDIX B
TABLE B1 Factor Analysis
Component
1 2 3
I do not get enough sleep ,532 ,077 -,007
I'm under time pressure ,679 ,308 -,004
I would like to have more time for myself ,693 ,048 -,076
I am stuck on a schedule ,445 -,458 ,012
Others give me time pressure ,675 ,133 -,020
I cannot deal with important issues due to time constraints ,597 ,318 ,031 I cannot recover from illness due to time constraints ,622 ,052 -,015 I am under so much pressure that my health suffers ,611 ,298 -,063
I am late for appointments ,094 ,583 ,011
I miss deadlines ,158 ,619 -,032
You cannot optimal enjoy your partner (if applicable), family or friends because you worry about work
,333 ,599 -,064
You have difficulties meeting your obligations at home because your work is always in your mind
,327 ,625 -,021
Your working hours make it difficult to meet your obligations at home ,491 ,222 ,023 Your good mood after a successful day at work positively affects the
atmosphere at home
-,065 -,097 ,869
You after an enjoyable day or week are more in the mood to undertake activities with your partner (if applicable), family or friends
