Workplace Flexibility, Work–Family Guilt, and Working Mothers’ Parenting Behavior

Abstract Despite the important implications for families, limited research has examined how workplace environments influence parenting behavior. Situated within Work–Home Resources Model, purpose of this study was to investigate (a) whether flexibility, a contextual resource, predicts positive behavior, home outcome, and (b) work–family guilt mediates relationship. A sample working mothers with children between ages 1 18 (N = 302) completed an online survey. Linear regression analyses indicated perceived flexibility predicted overall parenting, reinforcement, warmth behaviors in mothers, but not proactive or supportiveness. Ordinary least squares (OLS) path did mediate these relationships, significantly associated indicating had significant negative effect on guilt. The results provide preliminary evidence that mothers’ may behaviors; thus, policies promote flexible work arrangements could family outcomes reduce feelings related life. Keywords Positive Work-family conflict enrichment Work–family Working Workplace Citation LaGraff, M.R. Stolz, H.E. (2023), "Workplace Flexibility, Work–Family Guilt, Mothers’ Parenting Behavior", Abendroth, A.-K. Lükemann, L. (Ed.) Flexible Work Family (Contemporary Perspectives Research, Vol. 21), Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, pp. 201-228. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1530-353520230000021007 Publisher: Limited Copyright © 2023 Melissa Rector LaGraff Heidi E. Stolz It is well-established, both popular press empirical literature, US very little support families as compared other high-income nations (Trask, 2017). parents experience greatest parenthood penalty 21 Organization Economic Cooperation Development (OCED) countries (Glass et al., 2016). In fact, more Americans are deciding have delaying due lack terms federal policy (e.g., paid parental leave) provisions affordable, quality childcare; Belluz, 2019). parents’ ability balance life influenced by (Brough 2009), absence taking its toll American particularly it “harder be mother United States than any country developed world” (Collins, 2019, p. 1). COVID-19 pandemic only served exacerbate issues mothers. Since February 2020, nearly 2 million women left labor force, part dearth supportive protective keep employed face caregiving challenges experienced during pandemic, like inconsistent childcare, school closures, nonexistent leave options (Fry, 2022). Three areas been shown beneficial families: expanded leave, sick 2017), pointing most set workers their (Pitt-Catsouphes 2009). becoming requirement our modern workforce (Hill 2008) cost-effective found turnover increase productivity (Ruppanner 2018) well attract better absenteeism also employee stress, encourage healthier lifestyles, improve long-term health employees (A Better Balance, 2010). investigated behavior (Kim, 2018). well-established literature safe which includes warm practices, healthy child development wellbeing (Sanders 2014; Stack 2010), yet we do know behaviors. Additionally, emotions surrounding domain explain relationship investigated. One such emotion guilt, often studied (Cho & Allen, 2012; Daly, 2001; Judge 2006; Livingston Judge, 2008). defined “discrepancy one’s preferred actual level role participation at versus work” (Korabik, 2015, 142) stems from inability one wholly fulfill social roles worker member (Livingston Thus, Literature Review Theoretical Framework Work–home resources model. situated work–home model (W-HRM; ten Brummelhuis Bakker, 2012), integrated grounded conservation theory, presents “work-home processes comprising antecedents, mechanisms, outcomes” (p. 553). posits demands, overtime, depletes personal resources, time energy, turn negatively affects outcomes. Conversely, supervisorial support, can thus leading Whereas investigation interested work-to-home process (as just described), accounts home-to-work where demands lead (ten 2012). More specifically, resource considered resource. “Contextual located outside self contexts individual” 2012, 548). An example provided job autonomy, allows schedule way saves time, saved then allow invest activities put them position gain another good marriage. addition attempting (i.e., domain) affect domain), W-HRM designed answer questions about develop over under what conditions conflict/enrichment likely occur. Contextual stressors, “physical, emotional, social, organizational aspects context require sustained physical and/or mental effort” 549). Demands domain, work, diminish leads poor home. (work depleting used home) defines conflict. On hand, “starting point enriching processes. line idea spiral, produce resources” Therefore, enrichment, opposed conflict, domains resources. Personal domain. authors state, “whereas causes of, respectively, linking pins domains” words, order must either increasing decreasing (see Fig. 7.1). Opens new window.Fig. 7.1.The Model Source: 2012 Psychological Association. Reproduced adapted permission. official citation should referencing material is: Brummelhuis, L., A. B. (2012). perspective work-home interface: Psychologist, 67(7), 545–556. 10.1037/a0027974. No further reproduction distribution permitted without written permission W-HRM, organized into following categories: production, behavioral, attitudinal. Production center around efficient effective performance domains. Examples production efficiency, product quality, meeting targets. examples… household chores, high care members, realizing leisure 550) Behavioral consist absenteeism, turnover, safety. Availability, accountability, provision secure environment examples behavioral Lastly, attitudinal refer beliefs valued employer, satisfaction, commitment, trust management, work-related well-being engagement low burnout). include relationships friends, happiness home, home-related stress). Based hypothesized parent’s work/contextual influential determining outcome expected increases reducing emotions, are, turn, predictive outcome. Flexibility Bakker (2012) contend autonomy subtype individual “decide when tasks performed” 550). As Hill al. (2010) contend, individualistic cultures, States, “are self-oriented value freedom, challenge” whereby seen emphasizes “‘personal self-fulfillment’” 350; cited Osyerman 2002, 4). According (2008), “the make choices influencing when, where, long they engage tasks” 152). choose arrange core central. worker’s control agency valuable promoting optimal oneself, family, workplace, community. Perceived reviewed de Menezes Kelliher (2011) key mediator remote describing potential satisfaction. designs enhance technology allowing greater work. “This flexibility… provides organize accordance preferences coordinate non-work activities,” 238) therefore, “workplace increased autonomy” 241) positively (ter Hoeven van Zoonen, 2015). Several external factors construct flexibility. First, different types placed five broad categories. first category number hours worked, regardless worked course week, month, year. part-time part-year sharing, phased retirement. second schedules. category, might able alter starting/quitting times request, shortening nonstandard hours, having choice shifts. third place employer locations location. fourth off take attend responsibilities short extended periods time. caregiving, extra unpaid vacation days, paid/unpaid training education, sabbaticals, volunteer. last contains fall previous These employee’s breaks allowance transfer reduced pay, if desired Second, defining conceptualizing (2008) explained continuum since some professions will conducive based “external constraints nature job, needs business, availability technology” originally salaried, professional positions slow adapt hourly shift-based jobs. currently disproportionally afforded salaried workers. Lower wage-earning, industries hospitality, retail, transportation, less access those managerial (Lambert Swanberg 2005). Third, definition highlights interaction employers. there opportunity organization, formal options, utilize policies. However, enough organization enact culture explicitly use For example, supervisor implementing usually approval direct (Jaoko, factors, status children, schedules (Swanberg (broad categories, type, parent status), investigates perception This intrapersonal coincides focus autonomy. Research control, contributes Workers who reported work–life (Jang, examining satisfaction dual-earner parents, Minnotte (2016) scheduling predict fathers. while fathers speculated finding gender expectations childcare so advantage Schedule involvement, children’s education (Earle 2011). impact (lower levels depression anxiety symptoms) irrespective mediated sense couple year after baby (Keeton Results Only Environment (ROWE) initiative perceptions spent children. ROWE change notifying manager; get done. fathers, initiative, controlling schedule. change, eating evening meals 2013). Ladge Greeberg (2019) describe, “many find standard workweek out sync family’s schedules” 136). adjust align responsibilities. sum, does benefit Behavior “high members” Baker, two dimensions consistently emerged. Barber (2005) described forms – psychological control. Parental correspond Baumrind’s (1971) typological framework responsiveness demandingness, respectively. substantial body science supports nurturing (parental support) guidance control; Drawing dimensions, composites identified. inquiry “typified affection, firm consistent discipline, active involvement monitoring child… activities” (Parent, 2017, measure herein subscales “child-centered appropriate responding anticipated difficulties”; reinforcement “contingent responses praise, rewards, displays approval”; affection; supportiveness “displayed interest child, encouragement communication, openness child’s ideas opinions” (Parent Forehand, 2146). influences component high-quality amount spend Another feeling developing functioning (Milkie Time routine success felt balancing whereas interactive, engaging Furthermore, interpersonal were decreases spillover effects (Costigan 2003). Mother’s report father’s dissatisfaction self-efficacy ineffective higher problem (Anderson, 2006). Job stress decrease withdrawal tension (Repetti Wang, 2014). benefits well-being, Role Guilt Definition unpleasant feels acknowledged wrongdoing acted violating norms “typically attached particular action condemn entire self” (Leith Baumeister, 1998, 3). situations, prompts “counteract bad consequences actions, confessing, apologizing, making amends” argued typically arising (Borelli 2017a). regard, encouraging awareness moving motivation repairing aspect weak, necessary counteract Increased work-interfering-with-family (WIF) family-interfering-with-work (FIW) transitioning prior maternity being potentially burdening coworkers returning (Millward, Daly’s (2001) notion “guilt pervasive men talked time” 292). inferred expressed born stark contradiction ideals standards held reality experienced. 142). “a form interrole pressures mutually incompatible respect” (Greenhaus Beutell, 1985, 77). Two common time-based strain-based WIF “occurs devoted hampers fulfillment role” generated inhibits 277). Those time- strain-based, consequently (Judge 2008), evidenced aforementioned qualitative studies. Cho Allen state “especially pertinent characteristic” 278). result FIW member. Conflict exists because believes cannot fully met missing bedtime would morning staying up late Family-to-work work-to-family assessed confirmed indirectly Again, Daly suggested, difference interview study, Aarntzen primarily mentioned mostly relation Women characterized perceiving adequately trying manage double contemporary society identified “mommy myth” contributor Parents, perhaps especially feel ideal so. renders unable meet prevents upholding (parent/spouse) standard. expectation generally primary responsibility tend puts risk experiencing dilemmas chooses prioritize distress violation traditional norms. points differences non-US “employment-related guilt” men, associations (Aycan Eskin, 2005), reporting (Martínez general toddlers WIF-guilt Number WIF-guilt, 2017b). Collins her interviews 135 Sweden, Germany, Italy, “enormous roles” 202). similar shared Germany blamed (outdated cultural government, respectively), “blamed themselves ‘balancing’ ‘managing’ responsibilities” Influence practices. acknowledging constructs scarce (Aarntzen 2019; Scholars suggested behaviors, stemming cause regularly permissive practices negati