Work-life Balance; the Case of Foreign Scientists in Denmark

Transcription

1 Aarhus University Department of Business Communication MA in Corporate Communication Work-life Balance; the Case of Foreign Scientists in Denmark MA Dissertation written by Bozena Piech Supervisor Henrik B. Sørensen

2 The total number of characters of this dissertation amounts to which is equivalent to 76 standard pages (Excl. abstract, acknowledgement, table of contents, literature list and appendices). September 1, 2015 Bozena Piech

3 Abstract An opportunity to combine work and life has become very important matter for today s employees, thus the work-life balance (WLB) has become a major concern for employers and policy makers. Individuals experiences and perceptions of WLB, however, vary across different contexts. For example, previous studies have shown that in Scandinavia it is much easier to combine full time employment with childcare than anywhere else. Furthermore, achieving satisfactory WLB in highly demanding and stressful academic environment might be difficult especially for foreign employees who face additional challenges and dilemmas related to settling in a foreign country. Therefore this thesis investigates the phenomenon of WLB in the context of academic environment in the country which excels in WLB provisions (i.e., Denmark), at a public institution which claims to offer healthy psychological working environment (i.e., Aarhus University), from the perspective of foreign researchers. In particular, the present research explores the foreign researchers experiences and perceptions of WLB, including; (1) negative (i.e., conflict) and positive (i.e., enrichment) aspects of WLB; (2) the conditions affecting the work/non-work interface (i.e., antecedents) and; (3) the consequences of these experiences. My study examines two key theories within the workfamily research, namely work/non-work conflict and work/non-work enrichment, which form a basis for a new model of WLB. The aforementioned model is tested with an employment of qualitative research methods (i.e., qualitative interviewing and qualitative coding) which subscribe to ontological stance referred to as constructionist and epistemological stance described as interpretivist. The present study is based on the data derived from semi-structured interviews with two foreign postdoctoral researchers employed at the department of Interdisciplinary Nanoscience Center (inano), Aarhus University. The detailed analysis of this research revealed that the selected participants experience and perceive both negative and positive aspects of WLB (i.e., time and strain based conflict, and development, affect and capital dimension of enrichment). The conflict is primarily caused by time pressures, role pressures, psychological involvement, stages of their careers and inability to control one s work environment. The enrichment, in turn, is primarily generated by flexible working environment and networking in the organization, organizational culture which promotes creativity, satisfaction and success at work, job discretion and ability to make decisions. Overall, this study has importantly highlighted that WLB is influenced by one s ambition and desire to stay in academia and to achieve success, where success is defined by positive research outcomes, published papers and research grants. These negative experiences result in diminished mental and physical health, less satisfaction with private life, relationship satisfaction and leisure activities, and inability to abandon work-related thoughts. The positive experiences, on 2

4 the other hand, improve one s well-being and functioning within and outside work, increase satisfaction with work and private life, stimulate psychological energy and promote personal growth, improve quality of interactions with others and give opportunity to interact with others who are in a similar situation. These experiences and perceptions depend on current life priorities which are determined by individuals work and life circumstances (e.g., the stage of a career or living in a foreign country far away from family and friends). This means that the WLB is very personal, thus everyone need to find their own balance as what might be seen as important for one person might be viewed as less important for the other. Therefore the presented conflict and enrichment perspectives combined reflect adequately how work and non-work domains may affect each other as individuals can experience both negative and positive aspects of WLB. Thus the new model of WLB is relevant to study individuals WLB in specific settings. Keywords WLB / conflict / enrichment / antecedents / consequences 3

5 Acknowledgement I would like to thank everyone who have helped and inspired me to write this dissertation. First and foremost, I would like to thank my supervisor Henrik for guiding me during the construction of this thesis. I would like to thank my family and friends, especially my dearest boyfriend Ryo who inspired the thesis and who has been supporting and encouraging me throughout these five months of intense work. Finally I want to thank all the scientists from the department of inano for their willingness to participate in this study and to share their insights. 4

6 5

7 Contents 1. Introduction Problem statement Delimitations Structure Literature review Construct definitions New definition of WLB Background Responses to WLB pressures Organizational culture Theory Role theory Theory 1: Work/non-work conflict Construct definition Theoretical model Measurement Antecedents Consequences Theory 2: Work/non-work enrichment Construct definition Theoretical model Measurement Antecedents and consequences Comparison of theory 1 and theory New model of WLB Empirical analysis Methods/methodology Scientific approach Sampling Interview guide Research evaluation Empirical example 1: interview Empirical example 2: interview Comparison of empirical example 1 and empirical example Discussion Conclusion 84 References 86 Appendices 90 6

8 Appendix I: Aarhus University - information 90 Appendix II: Transcript from interview 1 91 Appendix III: Transcript from interview 2 96 Appendix IV: The process of coding 103 Appendix V: Thematic analysis - excerpt from the transcripts 104 Appendix VI: The Framework 108 Figures Figure 1. Figure 2. Figure 3. Figure 4. Figure 5. Figure 6. Levels of response to WLB pressures Conceptual model of the work-family interface Conceptual model of the work family interface Model of work-family enrichment New model of WLB Revised model of WLB Tables Table 1. Table 2. Table 3. Interview guides Final version of work-family conflict scale Final 18 items work family enrichment scale 7

9 1. Introduction The issue of WLB has recently gained much attention due to the following reasons. First, advancement in technology, global competitiveness and quality of customer service all require flexibility of organisations and employees. Second, as a result of demographic and social changes, there is a growing number of dual-earner couples where working mothers becoming the norm rather than exception (Jones et al., 2006, p. 1). Third, the changing nature of work (e.g., a decline in life-long employment) increase the sense of insecurity which can potentially undermine the opportunity for individuals to achieve work-life balance by restricting their ability to plan for the future (Noon et al., 2013, p. 349). Furthermore, the employees are under pressure to work longer hours and they experience work intensity which lead to exhaustion, stress-related issues, poor work performance, absenteeism and increased turnover. Thus employers together with employees try to find new ways to sustain productivity without compromising employees well-being, relationships and others aspects of their life (Jones et al., 2006). The challenge of balancing paid employment and private life plays an increasingly important role in the well-being of European workers, and the opportunity for individuals to balance their home and work lives is central component of good job (Drobnic, 2011, p. 2). However, the attention to it varies across Europe (i.e., WLB is currently seen as an important aspect of satisfactory life mainly in Nordic and Western European countries than in Southern or Eastern European countries). In recent study Denmark ranked very high in the work-life balance (3) and job security (7) (...) family well-being (1), costs of childcare and education (2), availability of childcare and education (4) ( Struggling to attract, 2014). This means that in Denmark it is much easier to combine fulltime employment with childcare than other European countries which might be explained by generous governmental policies and gender-egalitarian model in which, for example, child rearing time is equally divided between both parents (Enkegaard & Schwarz, 2009; Rostgaard et al., 2011). Located in Denmark, Aarhus University (Appendix I), which provides the contexts for this thesis, emphasizes employees well-being and job satisfaction and tries to create a healthy psychological working environment which allows balance between the demands made on the employee and the resources and skills he or she possesses to meet what is required. If there is imbalance, there is an increased risk of stress, conflict, dissatisfaction, more sick leave (...) (Aarhus University, 2015). Therefore to attract and sustain quality (foreign) talent, the university offers flexible working 8

10 provisions that help to achieve satisfactory WLB. Furthermore, the institution provides foreign employees with assistance necessary to settle in at the university (e.g., located at the Aarhus University, the international center supplies all important information, helps with administrative issues and organizes social events) (Aarhus University, 2015). This approach (i.e., the assistance and the WLB initiatives) is especially important when working with high quality employees (i.e., faculty staff) in environment where the employees are expected to be professional, productive and committed to their work (Aarhus University, 2015). From the employees perspective this is defined by; (1) a pressure to come up with meaningful ideas that can benefit and advance society as whole; (2) to carryout research and to produce findings for a publication in high impact journals and; (3) to devote more time to secure research funding (Overbaugh, 2011; Polkowska, 2014). Besides the demanding nature of the academic profession, the foreign scientists face further challenges and dilemmas. First, settling in Denmark might be very hard due to the difficulties of learning the language (46), the unfriendly locals (54), the sense of feeling unwelcome (55) and the difficulty of finding friends (59) ( Struggling to attract, 2014). Although English is most commonly used academic language, in everyday life basic knowledge of Danish is necessary (e.g., administrative or leisure activities). However, the demanding character of academic employment might limit the time available to learn the local language. Second, the difficulty to find friends outside work means that in most cases the expats friends are fellow expats (e.g., work colleagues). Third, academic career very often involves an employment at foreign universities, which means that the researchers face the dilemma of choosing between foreign employment at established institution which could further their career or, if available, local employment close to family and friends. Fourth, once settled in a foreign country and at an institution, the researcher might face another dilemma of accepting long-term employment (e.g., tenure) or returning to his/her home country because of potential family issues (e.g., parter s career). Finally, some female researchers face dilemma of having a career or having a child. For instance, sometimes they choose to postpone the child bearing until the foreign employment is complete or when they get offered a long-term employment. Despite the generous WLB provisions, achieving satisfactory balance between life roles might be very challenging in a highly demanding and stressful academic environment, especially for international researchers who have chosen to live and work in a foreign country far away from family and friends. 9

11 1.0 Problem statement Individuals experiences and perceptions of WLB vary across different contexts (i.e., life and work circumstances). Therefore the purpose of this thesis is to investigate how foreign researchers experience and perceive their WLB (i.e., whether they experience conflict and/or enrichment), with a particular attention to the conditions affecting the work and non-work interface (i.e., antecedents) and to the consequences of these experiences. This research findings will expand our current understanding of WLB phenomenon in the context of Danish academic environment from the perspective of foreign nationals. 1.1 Delimitations The theories selected in this dissertation are inspired by Frone (2003) who argued that the phenomenon of WLB comprises negative (i.e., conflict) and positive (i.e., enrichment) experiences. These experiences have different antecedents and lead to different consequences. Thus to understand WLB, it is important to look into the following four components of WLB: work/nonwork conflict, non-work/work conflict, work/non-work enrichment and non-work/work enrichment (Grzywacz & Carlson, 2007). The negative aspects are conceptualized as a conflict and negative spillover but the positive aspects on the other hand, are conceptualized as enrichment, enhancement, positive spillover and facilitation, and these terms have been frequently used interchangeably. The present study builds on the scope of conflict and enrichment as these constructs are well-established and possesses globally validated measures. Both constructs derive from role theory (i.e., strain, accumulation and expansion) which views work and non-work as two distinct life dimensions in which individuals are expected to perform different roles (Drobnic, 2011). These social roles give meaning and structure to people s lives, thus it is interesting to investigate how people balance their roles in different contexts (Frone, 2003). In terms of roles outside of work, some scholars emphasize home or family. However this study uses terms life and non-work to include individuals who might be single or engaging in different roles, including leisure or community. However when discussing scholars who measured specific domains, the authors terminology is used (e.g., work-family conflict or family-work conflict). The aforementioned theories and measures are mainly based on quantitative studies conducted in large companies in USA. The experiences and perceptions of WLB, however, are very personal and vary across people, therefore it is necessary to adjust the measures to the context of Danish academic environment to reflect the realities of foreign researchers who are the focus of this investigation (Demerouti et al., 2013). This means that this 10

12 study does not employ methods belonging to quantitative research (e.g., questionaries or structured interviewing). Instead, the selected participants experiences and perceptions are investigated with the use of qualitative research methods, including semi-structured interviewing and thematic analysis, as this gives them opportunity to express their views and experiences in their own voices. For example, some of the items developed by Carlson and colleagues (2000; 2006) are transformed into open questions posed at the qualitative interviewing sessions. Since the focus of this thesis are employees as stakeholders, and the public organization as a case study, and due to the time constraints the work/non-work direction prevails. This means that the non-work/work conflict and the non-work/work enrichment are not considered (i.e., the efficiency dimension of enrichment will not be examined). Furthermore, the antecedents and consequences are assessed from employees perspective only (e.g., when assessing the supervisor/employee relations) as the purpose of this research is to learn about personal experiences and views. In addition, the sampling of the participants (i.e., cases) should be carried out until no new data emerges, however due to the time constraint this study considers data derived from two semi-structured interviews only. Finally, the topic (i.e., WLB) and the cases (i.e., foreign researchers) are inspired by personal experiences as the researcher s partner as well as close group of friends who are international employees at the Aarhus University. Hence foreign rather than Danish faculty staffs have been selected as a focus of this investigation. 1.2 Structure The dissertation is divided into six chapters. Chapter 1 provides context and key objectives of this research. Chapter 2 reviews literatures relevant to the research topic and includes a new definition of the main concept (i.e., WLB). Chapter 3 explores and discusses two key theories on WLB and accounts for a new model of WLB which is tested in the subsequent chapter. Chapter 4 discusses the methodology, investigates the issue of WLB and compares the present research findings. Chapter 5 discusses the empirical findings against the theory and proposes a new revised model of WLB. Finally, the last chapter answers the research questions. 11

13 2. Literature review This study draws on human resource communication theory, namely WLB. The following section will provide general overview of theories on WLB, including construct definitions, new definition, background, responses to the WLB pressures and the role of organizational culture. 2.0 Construct definitions The term work-life balance is commonly used in popular literature as well as in academic writing. Scholars use the terms work-life balance, work-family balance or work-home balance interchangeably (Sok, et al., 2014). The construct, however, is not explicitly defined as Guest (2002) stated the term work-life balance is in itself a misnomer and serves simply as a convenient shorthand for work and the rest of life (p. 262). Even though work might refer to volunteer work or housework, in the context of WLB it is limited to the paid employment (Drobnic, 2011). Life, family and home, on the other hand, are used to represent the activities outside work. The use of life, however, might suggest that work is not considered a life role, thus Frone (2003) suggested it might be more precise to call the domains employment and non-employment. Schieman (2009), on the other hand, proposed the use of broad frame non-work that includes family, home and leisure. Kossek and Lambert (2005, p. 6), in turn, argued that, the broadening of the field to encompass the work-life domain reflects the view that just because employees do not have familycare responsibilities does not necessarily insulate them from life stresses and pressures to integrate work and non-work roles. This means that some people might be single or participate in different roles not limited to family (e.g., community, study, leisure), hence the lack of family responsibilities does not isolate a person from life stresses and demands to integrate multiple domains (Demerouti et al., 2013). Regardless of how broadly the life dimension is conceptualized, the basic idea behind the worklife dichotomy is that there are separate life dimensions in which people perform different roles (Drobnic, 2011, p. 4). Here the author refers to the role strain, role accumulation and expansion approach theory, which influenced the work-family research. The role strain theory guided the research on the negative aspects of the work-family interaction. The role accumulation and the expansion approach theory, on the other hand, guided the research on the positive aspect of the inter-role interaction, and has recently triggered the debate on the essence of work-life 12

14 balance (Jones et al., 2006, as cited in Rantanen et al., 2013, p. 27). These theories will be discussed in the next chapter. Work-family research identifies the following three kinds of mechanisms that can explain the relationship between domains: 1. Spillover. This mechanism implies that experiences in one role can influence experiences in the other life role (e.g., stress at work can spill over to the home domain). 2. Compensation. The compensation mechanism suggests that what may be lacking in one role (e.g., role satisfaction) people may try to find it in the other role. For example, people who experience family problems might put more effort into their work. 3. Segmentation. This mechanism sees work and non-work roles as separate domains that have no influence on each other. For instance, some people try to leave family-related issues at home and work-related stresses at work (Drobnic, 2011; Guest, 2002). These mechanisms can be used to achieve balance, which is yet another complex and fuzzy term that possesses multiple definitions (Drobnic, 2011). Barnett and Baruch (1985, as cited in Rantanen et al., 2011, p. 28) conceptualize balance as rewards minus concerns. The researchers investigated link between psychological distress and balance of rewards and concerns acquired by women engaging in multiple roles (e.g., employee, spouse and mother). They found out that more rewards than concerns derived from a role are associated with low levels of role overload, role conflict and anxiety. For Guest (2002), in turn, balance is a form of metaphor (i.e., symbol) for the relationship between work and non-work domains. The author recognized that balance may have subjective and objective meaning and measurement, and that depends on circumstances and between individuals. According to Clarke and colleagues (2004, p. 121) balance is generally associated with equilibrium or maintaining an overall sense of harmony in life. Pichler (2009, as cited in Drobnic, 2011, p. 6), on the other hand, regards balance a sense of achievement, as an individual might feel accomplished when he/she successfully combines (i.e., balances) multiple roles. For Kalliath and Brough (2008, p. 326), in turn, work life balance is the individual perception that work and non-work activities are compatible and promote growth in accordance with an individual s current life priorities. Their definition considers people s different priorities regarding the amount of time and effort they want to devote to work and non-work responsibilities, and emphasizes that well balanced life leads to success in both professional and private domains. According to Clark (2000, p. 751) balance means satisfaction and good functioning at work and at 13

15 home, with minimum of role conflict. Frone (2003, p. 145), on the other hand, argues that, low levels of inter-role conflict and high levels of inter-role facilitation represent work-family balance. This means that balance occurs when there is a minimum level of conflict or when the conflict is absent. The scholar proposed four-fold taxonomy of WLB which is based on bi-directional character of the construct, meaning that work (or family) can interfere or enrich the family (or work) domain. The author suggested that work-family (or family-work) enrichment is the second component of WLB. Thus WLB is comprised of four measurable components: work-family conflict (WFC), family-work conflict (FWC), work-family enrichment (WFE) and family-work enrichment (FWE). Finally, Grzywacz and Carlson (2007, p. 455) conceptualize WLB as accomplishment of role-related expectations that are negotiated and shared between an individual and his or her rolerelated partners in the work and family domains. Unlike the previous conceptualizations which overemphasize WLB as a psychological construct (i.e., as experience of an individual), the researchers highlight the social and contextual character of the construct (e.g., daily interactions between work members). The social aspect has important implications for validating the construct and for identifying the organizational circumstances that contribute to work family balance (Grzywacz & Carlson, 2007, p. 466). Thus this extended perspective is seen as necessary to accurately characterize WLB (Rantanen et al., 2011). The above mentioned conceptualizations of WLB can be placed into the following two categories: 1. Overall appraisal. This approach considers person s general evaluation of his/her entire life. For instance, definitions of WLB proposed by Clark (2000) and Clarke and colleagues (2004). In this approach WLB is assessed through the following question: All in all, how successful do you feel in balancing your work and personal/family life? (Clarke et al., 2004, p. 127) The problem with this approach is whether this single item can extract an accurate summary of individuals performance in complex life domains like work or family (Grzywacz & Carlson, 2007, p. 460). 2. Components approach. Components approach regards WLB as comprising multiple facets that precede balance and give meaning to it (Grzywacz & Carlson, 2007, as cited in Rantanen et al., 2011, p. 30). For example, WLB as defined by Frone (2003). Unlike the overall appraisal which evaluates an individual s general role performance, the component approach allows to evaluate one s WLB through conceptually based and globally validated measures of balance, including WFC, FWC, WFE and FWE. These measures enable to identify and clarify different antecedents and consequences of WLB, as both conflict and enrichment are preceded by different antecedents and they both lead to different outcomes (Grzywacz and Carlson, 2007). 14

16 2.0.0 New definition of WLB The aforementioned views illustrate that the concept of WLB has different meaning among people, depending on their work and outside work circumstances. Since WLB is the main concept of this dissertation it was necessary to develop a new definition. The newly created definition incorporates elements from the previously mentioned conceptualizations and characterizes WLB as: Accomplishment of role-related activities and responsibilities across work and nonwork domains The definition suggests that participation in multiple roles is possible and can be fulfilling and enriching (e.g., it can give a sense of satisfaction and pride). This, however, is very subjective and it depends on an individual s current life priorities, which change according to one s life circumstances, because at different stages of life or career people have different preferences, expectations and objectives (e.g., priorities in terms of how much time they want or need to devote to work and non-work activities). Furthermore, the definition considers the individual and contextual aspects of the construct. This means that the individuals role expectations have social character as at work or outside work people interact, create and share different responsibilities (e.g., interactions between peers or between an employee and a supervisor). Thus others within domain might influence the individual's WLB (e.g., in the case of foreign researchers their friends are usually their coworkers and fellow expats). Here reference is made to the role theory which highlights that work and non-work are two distinctive domains in which people participate in different social roles, including employee, supervisor, spouse, parent and friend. (Grzywacz & Carlson, 2007; Kalliath & Brough, 2008; Poelmans et al., 2008) 2.1 Background As briefly mention in the introduction the issue of WLB has recently gained much attention and has become a subject of increased investigation. Guest (2002) identified the following three sets of factors that have brought the issue to the forefront of policy debates: 1. Advancement in technology, job intensity and pressure on employees to work at high speed and to tight deadlines, global competitiveness and quality of customer service (i.e., customers expectations of constant availability of service) all require flexibility of organisations and employees. 15

17 2. Deteriorating quality of life outside work (i.e., family and community) which is associated with more women entering employment, increase in single-parent families, pressure to work longer hours (e.g., evenings or weekends) leaving less time for quality time outside of work. Furthermore, growing number of dual-earner couples and individuals caring for elderly family members, and growing need for two incomes and to sustain employment (Sok et al., 2014). Finally, decline in extended family networks caused by growing geographic mobility and employment opportunities (e.g., living far away from parents limits the employees opportunity to receive informal childcare or other support) (Noon et al., 2013). 3. Individuals attitudes and values in work. There is a view, promoted by some managerial literature however not strongly supported by empirical evidence, that people are less committed to the organizations due to changing nature of work (i.e., life-long employment and career jobs that offer promotion and security are replaced with fixed-term contracts and temporary employment) which increase sense of insecurity. In this environment individuals feel pressure to work long hours, they are insecure about their job, and experience work intensity which lead to exhaustion, stress-related issues and inability to balance work and life domains. Furthermore, the lack of balance might result in decreased performance, absenteeism and increased turnover. Therefore organizations should address the issue and find new ways to sustain their workforce productivity without harming their employees wellbeing, relationships and other aspects of their life (Jones et al., 2006). As well as participating in work which represents a satisfactory balance between individual needs and values, individuals are increasingly seeking a job which enables them to achieve a satisfactory work-life balance (Cartwright and Holmes, 2006, p. 206). Here the scholars emphasize the importance of WLB programs which play an important role in recruiting and retaining high quality employees, as flexibility at work attracts talent and builds commitment. This means that when the employees perceive that the organisation supports the WLB programs they are willing to work much harder for the organisation. Furthermore, the employees are satisfied with their jobs and have less intention to leave the employer. There is ample empirical evidence that supports these claims. According to recent studies, increasing number of highly qualified corporate employees downshifting to professions that give them more control over their life (e.g., plumbing). Furthermore, there is increase in number of women resigning from powerful jobs to look after their children. For graduates, in turn, balanced life seems to be more important aspect than salary, as they would choose an employer which offers WLB programs (e.g., flexible working provisions) (Jones et al., 16

18 2006; Beardwell & Thompson, 2014). However, how organisations should respond to their employees needs is not very clear as individuals have different opinions in terms of how their work and life should be balanced. Therefore effort must be made to investigate employees needs and consider how to meet them in line with the organisation s needs so as to satisfy both and thus secure greater productivity and achieve greater competitiveness (Shortland & Cummins, 2007, p. 42). 2.2 Responses to WLB pressures Noon and colleagues (2013) proposed four levels of response to WLB pressures: societal, organisational, community and individual (Figure 1). Much attention on how to resolve work-life imbalance has focused on the individual level (p. 353) which is seen as central, embedded and constricted by the other levels. Thus to acquire complete picture of what a sufficient response should be like, it is necessary to consider each of the following levels: 1. Individual. Individual responses can have different forms. The most popular response is part-time working which provides couples with ability to balance paid work and dual income with childcare. Another strategy is looking for working arrangements that can be adjusted to domestic and childcare responsibilities (e.g., one parent working during day time and the other during evening or only during school time). Third possibility is working from home which is an advantage for the employees who are granted the opportunity (usually the higher-grade staff). Their office-restrained colleagues (usually the lower-grade staff), however, see it as disadvantage as it creates more work and gives sense of injustice. Fourth option that might help to balance different domains is to reduce the size of family or postpone childbearing (e.g., having child at the beginning of career). As a result, however, there is considerable increase in the age of women having the first child. Next, some people try to balance work and non-work by looking for an employment near home, thereby cutting traveling time and generating more time for private life. Finally, one can seek better balance by rethinking the income needs which may reduce the pressure to acquire income through paid work (e.g., downshifting to jobs which allow more control over ones life). This strategy, however, requires support of community (i.e., family, friends, neighbours) as it may challenge (...) the prevailing norms on what constitutes a successful career and life (Noon et al., 2013, p. 356). Here the authors emphasise the increasing value placed on consumption: that consumption performs a key role in shaping people s identity and satisfaction (p. 351). 17

19 2. Community. Communities play an important role in promotion of WLB. Community-level responses can take a form of youth activities, school breakfast clubs and after-school clubs which prolong the time schools are normally open for children. The extended school time matches an adult standard working day which allows full-time employment and gives working parents more time for themselves. In addition, the community can provide care facilities for elderly (e.g., day centres and transportation). 3. Organisational. There are three-forms of organisational-level responses. First, workplaces are bound by law to provide their employees with parental leave (i.e., maternity and paternal leaves). Second, employers provide shorter or flexible working arrangements that helps to balance work and non-work spheres (e.g., part-time working, flexible work hours, term-time working, working from home or job sharing). The flexible working arrangements vary across organisations and countries and are not formalised. Furthermore, the flexible working time poses a problem in a form of intensification caused by the working hours being reduced in contrary to the workload which remains the same. Lastly, organisations give provisions in a form of workplace nursery or childcare subsidies. These, however, are least common and available mainly for high-grade staff. The organisational responses help employees to balance their work and life and give an opportunity to be actively employed. However, it is not enough for the organisation to have the policies but it is important to have a culture that supports individuals who use these programs. 4. Societal. In order to ensure decent terms of employment (i.e., to cover range of issues including WLB) governments intervene with varies regulations (e.g., regulations on maternity and paternity leave provide opportunity to return to work after childbirth). These regulations also allow the employees to request flexible working provisions (e.g., in Scandinavia employees are provided with childcare provisions such as nursery or extensive leave provisions allowing working parents to attend to outside work obligations). 18

20 Figure 1. Levels of response to WLB pressures (as adopted from Noon et al., 2013, p. 354) 2.3 Organizational culture As mentioned above an organisational culture has an important role in work and life integration. According to Rosin and Korabik (2001, as cited in Burke, 2006, p. 236) the WLB programs will work only if they match the employees needs and are supported by the organisational environment (e.g., recent study showed that majority of female university staff think that maternity leave would have negative consequences on their career). This implies that the employees might not use the WLB provisions if they think that they might negatively affect their career or salary. Previous research identified the following barriers in realising WLB programs; (1) cultural assumptions and values concerning work and family domains (e.g., the meaning of competent employee ); (2) beliefs about gender roles in relation to work and non-work spheres (e.g., perception that men are responsible for work issues and women are responsible for family issues) and; (3) non-supportive managers and supervisors (e.g., manager who promotes long working hours which interfere with life outside work) (Burke, 2006). 19

21 WLB programs offered by organisations can be placed into two categories: organisation family support and perceived organisation family support (POFS). The former considers all the programs available for the employees. The POFS, on the other hand, encompasses employees perceptions of an organisational support (i.e., instrumental, informational and emotional support) and it affects employees opinions and reactions to particular family-friendly initiatives. These initiatives have been successfully implemented in several organisations which are characterised by making the following efforts; (1) they consider WLB as a bottom-line issue; (2) they study behavioural and organisational effects of WLB initiatives and; (3) they examine and subsequently change the cultural assumptions about work-life relationship. Work-family culture is defined as the shared assumptions, beliefs and values regarding the extent to which an organisation supports and values the integration of employee s work and family lives (Thompson et al., 1999, as cited in Burke, 2006, p. 239). The authors distinguished between three dimensions of work-family culture: managerial support for WLB, fewer negative career outcomes linked with using WLB programs, and fewer work-related time demands which may interfere with non-work obligations. Thompson and colleagues found out that employees POFS increases their commitment and decreases their intentions to quit. In addition, the employees report more job satisfaction and will to work harder for their organisation. Thus to benefit from WLB policies it is necessary to consider both organisational values and management attitudes towards WLB initiatives. Furthermore, it is important to identify and question informal practices and cultural assumptions and how these practices limit the work-life integration. Recent studies identified the following three characteristics of supportive working environment which helps the employees to achieve satisfactory WLB. First, employees are able to influence their working arrangements (e.g., plan and structure their work schedules) which increases their work satisfaction and reduces stress. Second, employees receive instrumental (i.e., tangible support) and emotional (i.e., perception that one is surrounded by caring others) support which reduces different kinds of tensions they experiences at work or outside work. Third, employees are supported by their supervisors who genuinely encourage the use of WLB provisions. The supervisors are considered to embody and reflect the organisational culture (Burke, 2006, p. 254) and to play important role in retaining the employees as employees leave managers not companies (Buckingham, 2000: 45, as cited in Beardwell & Thompson, 2014, p. 167). Thus supportive managers are those who allow flexibility, encourage the use of flexible working provisions, rearrange priorities to accommodate 20

22 a family crisis (Burke, 2006, p. 255), and support the WLB programs through practices. For example, a manager should not just tell his employees to take care of their career and private life and at the same time promote employees who are willing to work longer hours and to sacrifice their outside work relationships (Open communication, 2014). Overall, an organisation can be characterised as having a supportive organisational culture when it represents values which can bring about peer and supervisor support, when it creates possibilities to make a career without constantly being visible and working long hours, when it demonstrates work home friendly attitudes and when it presents possibilities to make effective use of work home arrangements (Sok et al., 2014, p. 460). 21

23 3. Theory This section will provide an overview of two prominent theories within the work/non-work research, namely conflict and enrichment. The former, conflict theory, suggests that work and non-work domains are incompatible. The enrichment theory, on the other hand, implies that both domains have beneficial effects on each other. These concepts are linked with the role theory (i.e., role strain, role accumulation and expansion approach) which views work and life (or nonwork ) as two distinct life dimensions in which individuals are expected to perform different roles (Demerouti et al., 2013; Drobnic, 2011) Role theory Role strain theory is defined as felt difficulty in fulfilling role obligations (Goode, 1960, p. 483). According to the role strain theory people are willing to do what they are expected to do, however, they do not have necessary resources and energy to fulfill their role obligations. The role strain stems from several sources. First, even when the role is not difficult or unpleasant it has to be enacted at certain time and location, and this can lead to conflict between different roles. Second, people have obligations to participate in varies role relationships that may demand conflicting actions or may lead to conflict of resources. Third, each role relationship is associated with norms that might be contradictory. Thus people are likely to face a wide, distracting, and sometimes conflicting array of role obligations (p. 845). If the person conforms fully to one role it will be difficult to fulfill another role and satisfy all demands. The inability to meet given role demands, however, is normal as one s role obligations are too demanding (Goode, 1960). The role strain theory has been challenged by role accumulation (Sieber, 1974) and expansion approach (Marks, 1977). Sieber recognized four benefits of role accumulation, including roleprivileges, overall status security, resources for status enhancement and role performance, and enrichment of the personality and ego gratification These benefits tend to outweigh any stress to which it might give rise, thereby yielding net gratification (p. 567). Marks expansion approach provides an energy-creation theory of multiple roles rather than a spending or drain theory (p. 921). In other words, the role accumulation theory and the expansion approach assert that engagement in multiple roles can provide an individual with social and economic resources (e.g., support, personality enrichment, sense of personal growth and psychological energy) which may 22

24 compensate for the growing demands emerging in work and non-work spheres. (Drobnic, 2011; Demerouti et al., 2013; Peeters et al., 2013) 3.1 Theory 1: Work/non-work conflict Construct definition The work-family research has been dominated by the conflict perspective which asserts that people have difficulties to balance different roles they perform at work and non-work domains (Drobnic, 2011). The terms work/non-work conflict, work/non-work interference or work interference with family (WIF) and family interference with work (FIW) have been used interchangeably. Furthermore, the work/non-work conflict is frequently referred to as negative spillover (Stevens et al., 2007). For example, Grzywacz and Marks (2000) investigated positive and negative spillover (i.e., enhancement and conflict, respectively) between work and family. Spillover is defined a process whereby experiences in one role affect experiences in the other, rendering the roles more similar (Rothbard & Dumas, 2006, p. 73) In other words, spillover is a process by which an individual s experience in one sphere influences his/her experience in other sphere (e.g., spillover of mood, values, skills and behaviors). However, Edwards and Rothbard (2000) regard spillover a linking mechanism between domains (e.g., negative spillover happens when work strain appears in family domain). Thus the term negative spillover is used to explain the relationship between work and non-work constructs. The term conflict, on the other hand, is related to experiences of mutually incompatible pressures (Demerouti et al., 2013, p. 35). Work-family conflict (WFC) is defined as a form of inter-role conflict in which the role pressures from the work and family domains are mutually incompatible in some respect (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985, p. 77). In other words, participation in one role (e.g., work) affects negatively participation in other roles (e.g., family). The conflict between roles emerges when one role characteristics have an impact on individuals time, strain or behavior within that role. Furthermore, role pressures (and hence work-family conflict) are intensified when the work and family roles are salient (p. 77). This means that person who values particular role is highly responsive to pressures related to that role as achievements in that domain are very important. In addition, the conflict increases when one can face negative consequences for not fulfilling the role requirements. Here the researchers refer to negative sanctions that, may arise not only from other role senders but from the focal person as well (i.e., guilt) (p. 84). For example, men traditionally face stronger 23

25 consequences for not fulfilling work demands, women, on the other hand, may experience negative sanctions for not meeting family demands. Greenhaus and Beutell (1985) identified the following three forms of WFC: 1. Time-based conflict. Time-based conflict is described by scarcity of time to meet the multiple role demands and it is experienced when time dedicated to one domain makes it difficult to participate in the other domain. Time-related conflict may be generated by work schedule (i.e., inflexible working schedules), marriage, children (i.e., number and age of children) and partners working patterns (i.e., number of hours worked per week, hours commuted to work, overtimes, irregular shifts). For instance, previous study demonstrated that university professional staff experience more work-family pressure than university faculty staff. This is caused by their working schedule, where the faculty members, although working longer hours, have more control over their schedule. 2. Strain-based conflict. Strain-based conflict is when tensions generated by one role hinder individual s involvement in the other role. Within the work domain the strain-related conflict may be caused by role conflict and ambiguity, lack or low support from a supervisor, physical and psychological demands. In addition, time and strain-based conflict share similar sources of conflict, long or inflexible hours. Regarding the family domain the strain may be caused by conflict, lack of spouse support (e.g., spouses disagreement about family roles or employment status) and family characteristics (e.g., age of children). 3. Behavior-based conflict. Behavior-based conflict occurs when certain manner of conducting oneself required in one role conflicts with behavioral expectations in the other role. For instance, stereotypical male manager behavior, which involves independency and emotional stability, might interfere with his family expectations to be warm and vulnerable when interacting with his family members. In a similar vein, Voydanoff (2005) proposed time-based, strain-based and boundary-spanning work demands. The demand is defined as structural or psychological claims associated with role requirements, expectations, and norms to which individuals must respond or adapt by exerting physical or mental effort (p. 708). This means that demand is a role-related requirement that one is expected to fulfill. Work demands include within-domain demands (i.e., time and strain) and boundary-spanning demands. The latter, the boundary-spanning demands, focus on the interaction between domains (i.e., between work and family) and more specifically how different work and 24

26 family-related aspects affect the interplay between domains (e.g., an unsupportive culture, working from home, time spend on commuting). The focus is on the organizational support of family life, role blurring and the length of the transition time between domains. Voydanoff s (2005) analysis of the relationship between the work demands and WFC and FWC demonstrated the following: 1. Work demands such as working overtimes without notice, job insecurity, time and workload pressure, and unsupportive work-family culture are linked with WFC. 2. Work demands such as working overtimes without notice, job insecurity, time and workload pressure, and unsupportive work-family culture are linked with FWC, paid work hours and commuting are not associated with FWC, and finally, night shifts or overnight travel do not show relationship with FWC. This implies that different demands embedded in the different domains decrease people ability to cope with the numerous roles (Voydanoff, 2005; Demerouti et al., 2013) Theoretical model Frone and colleagues (1992) developed and tested a model (Figure 2) of work and family interface. In this model, work and family conditions (e.g., stressors and involvement) may spill over to influence the quality of life associated with the other life domain. Furthermore, any relationship between either family stressors or homemaking commitment and job-related affect is not direct, but is mediated by the frequency of F -» W conflict (Frone et al., 1992, p. 74). This means that stressors associated with one role (e.g., work) cause conflict with other roles (e.g., WFC) and as a consequence it limits the sense of achievement in the latter role (e.g., family). Here WFC is used as a key mediating variable to account for cross-role relations between the domains of work and family. (Frone et al., 1997, p. 146) The model considers cross-domain relationship (i.e., WIF has an impact on family sphere and FIW has an impact on work sphere) which stems from assumption that conflict emerged in one domain causes tensions in the other domain. For example, increase in time spend at work limits the time spend with family, and as a result the quality of family life deteriorates, causing family-related outcomes, such as decreased family satisfaction. Furthermore, the researchers noticed that work seems to interfere with family more frequently than family with work (Frone et al., 1992; Amstad et al., 2011). 25

27 Figure 2. Conceptual model of the work-family interface (as adopted from Frone et al., 1992, p. 66) Figure 3. Conceptual model of the work family interface (as adopted from Frone et al., 1997, p. 147). 26

28 Regarding the model developed by Frone and colleagues (1992), Byron (2005) provided an evidence that work-related stressors contribute more towards WIF than FIW and non-work related stressors contribute more towards FIW than WIF, however the latter was not as evident as the relationship between work demands and work and family conflict. Furthermore, antecedents such as job stress, family stress and family conflict are associated with both types of conflict implying that these factors can simultaneously affect employees both domains (i.e., work and non-work domains). The aforementioned model (Figure 2) was further developed by Frone and colleagues (1997) (Figure 3) with additional variables to demonstrate more accurately the relationship between work and family spheres. The expanded model illustrates: 1. Indirect relationship between WFC and FWC mediated by different mechanisms. This means that FWC indirectly influences WFC through work distress and overload. Likewise, WFC has an impact on FWC via family distress and parental overload. 2. Proximal (i.e., distress, dissatisfaction, overload, and time commitment) and distant (i.e., support) predictors of conflict. This suggest that supervisor support may reduce WFC by decreasing the work overload. Likewise, spouse support may decrease the FWC by reducing the parental overload. 3. Relationship between the type of conflict and domain specific outcomes and antecedents. For instance, work stressors (i.e., domain specific antecedents) affect employee s well-being, creating WFC, which in turn affects family-related well-being (i.e., domain specific outcomes). 4. Behavioral outcomes of conflict. For example, FWC may affect work performance and increase work withdrawal (Frone et al. 1997; Amstad et al., 2011; Frone, 2003) Measurement The three types of conflict identified by Greenhaus and Beutell (1985) were further developed by Carlson and colleagues (2000) into six dimensions, including time, strain and behavior based; (1) work interference with family and; (2) family interference with work. They proposed 18 items scale (Table 2) to measure the conflict between work and family domains. Each of the six dimensions include three items. For example, the following item measures the time-based work interference with family: I have to miss family activities due to the amount of time I must spend on work responsibilities. Carlson and colleagues scale is the most used measure to examine the dimensions of work and family conflict. 27

29 Work family conflict items Time-based work interference with family 1. My work keeps me from my family activities more than I would like 2. The time I must devote to my job keeps me from participating equally in household responsibilities and activities 3. I have to miss family activities due to the amount of time I must spend on work responsibilities Time-based family interference with work 4. The time I spend on family responsibilities often interfere with my work responsibilities 5. The time I spend with my family often causes me not to spend time in activities at work that could be helpful to my career 6. I have to miss work activities due to the amount of time I must spend on family responsibilities. Strain-based work interference with family 7. When I get home from work I am often too frazzled to participate in family activities/ responsibilities 8. I am often so emotionally drained when I get home from work that it prevents me from contributing to my family 9. Due to all the pressures at work, sometimes when I come home I am too stressed to do the things I enjoy Strain-based family interference with work 10. Due to stress at home, I am often preoccupied with family matters at work 11. Because I am often stressed from family responsibilities, I have a hard time concentrating on my work 12. Tension and anxiety from my family life often weakens my ability to do my job Behavior-based work interference with family 13. The problem-solving behaviors I use in my job are not effective in resolving problems at home 14. Behavior that is effective and necessary for me at work would be counterproductive at home 15. The behaviors I perform that make me effective at work do not help me to be a better parent and spouse Behavior-based family interference with work 16. The behaviors that work for me at home do not seem to be effective at work 17. Behavior that is effective and necessary for me at home would be counterproductive at work 18. The problem-solving behavior that work for me at home does not seem to be as useful at work Table 2. Final version of work-family conflict scale (as adopted from Carlson et al., 2000, p. 261) The above studies recognize the bi-directional character of the inter-role conflict as work can interfere with non-work aspects (i.e., WFC) and the opposite (i.e., FWC). Thus to fully understand the work-family interface, both directions of work-family conflict (WIF and FIW) must be considered (Carlson et al., 2000, p. 250). The two types of conflict, to some extend, are comparable, however they have different antecedents and consequences. Thus to clarify the form of WFC and FWC and their components both types of conflict should be separately examined within one research (Mesmer-Magnus & Viswesvaran, 2005). 28

30 3.1.3 Antecedents Michel and colleagues (2009) examined several models on work-family conflict and extracted range of antecedents, including; (1) lack of social support from family members, work colleagues and supervisors; (2) psychological involvement with one s role; (3) conflicting role pressures within domain; (4) time dedicated to a role; (5) role overload; (6) too many tasks and not enough time to accomplish them and; (7) role ambiguity. Frone (2003) complemented the list with personality characteristics as a potential cause of conflict (e.g., negative affectivity). Considering the existing models Michel and colleagues (2009) developed and tested new model to learn that social support is important to decrease role conflict, thus organizations are advised to create supportive working environment. Furthermore, the authors found out that family time demands have low effect on FIW which is important for employed parents, especially for females who sometimes encounter unequal treatment. Along similar lines, Drobnic (2011) emphasized that conflict between work and family is very often caused by work-related conditions, as it has been shown that work interferes more with family than the opposite. Thus to understand the pressures associated with WLB, it is important to look at job characteristics and working conditions such as autonomy, task discretion, social support from supervisor and colleagues and supportive organizational culture, as these can decrease the pressures and improve employees WLB. Previous research recognized the following three elements of supportive organizational cultures that can help reduce work-family conflict: 1. Control. An opportunity to influence one s working arrangements (e.g., plan, structure and control work schedules) can reduce conflict between work and family. 2. Social support. Instrumental (i.e., tangible support an individual directly receives from others) and emotional (i.e., perception that one is surrounded by others who care about him/her) support received from work colleagues or family can decrease the different tensions one can experience in professional or private life. 3. Supportive supervision. Supervisors are seen as embodying and reflecting the organizational culture. Employees who are supported by their managers who are genuinely concerned about their employees WLB (e.g., managers that encourage the use of flexible working arrangements) experience less conflict between work and family domains (Burke, 2006). 29

31 3.1.4 Consequences Mesmer-Magnus and Viswesvaran (2005) listed the following outcomes of conflict between work and family domains: 1. Both types (i.e., WFC and FWC) indicate organizational withdrawal (i.e., tardiness, absenteeism, family-related interruption at work, and intention to leave the organization). 2. Work-related stress (e.g., overload, ambiguity) increases WFC, and family-related stress leads to FWC. 3. Frequent disruption of work performance by family demands might decrease job satisfaction. However, this might depend on the employee s sex, as previous study provided evidence of strong relationship between WFC and job satisfaction, found predominately in females who are most often responsible for child or elder care. Eby and colleagues (2005) and van Steenbergen and colleagues (2009) provided further evidence that WFC has negative impact on people s health, including; (1) physical health and; (2) mental health (i.e., depression, stress, hypertension, anxiety disorders, mood disorders, substance abuse disorders, lower life satisfaction, emotional exhaustion). Allen and colleagues (2000) complemented the aforementioned outcomes with the following three categories of consequences: 1. Work-related: job satisfaction, organizational commitment, turnover, absenteeism, job performance, and career success. 2. Non work-related: life satisfaction, relationship or marital satisfaction/functioning, family satisfaction, leisure activities, family performance and parental satisfaction. 3. Stress-related: psychological strain, physical health, depression, alcohol abuse, job burnout, work and family stress (O Driscoll et al., 2006). Amstad and colleagues (2011) analyzed outcomes of work and family conflict with specific emphasis on cross-domain versus matching-domain (or within domain). The matching-domain hypothesis presume that the outcomes of work-family conflict lie within the work domain. This means that WIF has more influence on work-related outcomes and FIW has more influence on family-related outcomes. For example, if an employee experiences work overload which limits his/ her time with family, he/she might feel anger towards the employer for having too much work and not enough time, and as a consequence he/she might resign. Their study demonstrated strong 30

32 relationship between both types of conflict (i.e., WIF and FIW) and work-related outcomes (e.g., job satisfaction), family-related outcomes (e.g., family satisfaction) and domain-unspecific outcomes (e.g., life satisfaction, health problems, psychological strain, somatic/physical symptoms, depression, substance use/abuse, stress, anxiety). Furthermore, they found the within-domain hypothesis to be stronger than the cross-domain hypothesis as WIF was more strongly related to work-related outcomes than to family-related outcomes, and FIW was more strongly related to family-related outcomes than to work-related outcomes (Amstad et al., 2011, p. 160). Along similar lines, Peeters and colleagues (2013) extracted from previous research the following three groups of outcomes: 1. Work outcomes: WFC can decrease women s satisfaction with job and increase turnover. 2. Non-work outcomes: WFC can diminish marital and parental satisfaction, and increase parental stress. 3. Health outcomes: WFC affects physical and mental health (e.g., it leads to emotional exhaustion (burnout) which in turn increases levels of WFC). These examples suggest that it is important to look at both relationships (i.e., cross-domain and within-domain) as both domains might be affected by the conflict (Peeters et al., 2013). 3.2 Theory 2: Work/non-work enrichment Construct definition Although the conflict perspective prevails in the work-family literature, scholars have identified benefits generated by engagement in multiple roles. Thus they have recently shifted their attention from the negative (i.e., conflict) to the positive aspects of the work/non-work interface, including enhancement, positive spillover, facilitation and enrichment (Drobnic, 2011). These concepts have often been used interchangeably to illustrate how work and non-work domains advance each other, and they are described as follows: 1. Enhancement. According to the work-family enhancement theory participation in multiple roles improves resources and experiences. For example, women in managerial positions gain better interpersonal skills, increased self-esteem, confidence and psychological well-being (Ruderman et al., 2002; Rothbard & Dumas, 2006). 2. Positive spillover. The positive work-family spillover is defined as the transfer of positively valence affect, skills, behaviors, and values from the originating domain to the receiving domain, 31

33 thus having beneficial effects on the receiving domain (Hanson et al., 2006, p. 251) This definition lists gains derived from interaction between life domains and recognizes the bidirectional character of the interaction. 3. Facilitation. The work-family facilitation is defined as the extent to which an individual's engagement in one life domain (i.e., work/family) provides gains (i.e., developmental, affective, capital, or efficiency) which contribute to enhanced functioning of another life domain (i.e., family/work) (Wayne et al., 2007, p. 65). This definition comprises three elements: the extent to which a person is involved in domain-related matters, gains acquired from work/non-work interaction and improved functioning on a system level (e.g., family member). 4. Enrichment. The work-family enrichment (WFE) has been defined as the extent to which experiences in one role improve the quality of life in the other role (Greenhaus & Powell, 2006, p. 72). The quality of life is considered as comprising two elements: high performance and positive affect. According to this definition individuals involvement in one role (e.g., work) results in improved functioning in the other role (e.g., family). Unlike the work-family facilitation which focuses on systems analysis (e.g., family or work team), WFE specifies an individual as a unit of analysis. Similar to the work-family conflict, work-family enrichment is bi-directional (i.e., WFE happens when work experiences advance the quality of family life and FWE happens when family experiences advance the quality of work life). Building on theoretical insights from Sieber (1974) and Marks (1977) Rothbard (2001, p. 656) proposed enrichment argument, which emphasizes that, greater number of role commitments provide benefits to individuals rather than draining them (...) Moreover (...) the benefits of multiple roles outweigh the costs associated with them, leading to net gratification rather than strain. This means that participation in multiple roles is beneficial as it expands energy and attention one can devote to each role. The enrichment argument disputes the scarcity hypothesis (or depletion argument ) which asserts that people have finite amount of energy that has to be divided between different roles, in such a way that the energy devoted to one domain decreases the amount of energy available for the other domains (Shein & Chen, 2011). In a similar vein, Barnett and Hyde (2001) proposed expansionist theory according to which engaging in multiple roles provides benefits that can exceed potential pressures one may experience. They referred to previous studies which showed that regardless of gender, both females and males who participate in numerous roles declare lower levels of stress-related mental and 32

34 physical health problems and higher levels of subjective well-being than do their counterparts who engage in fewer roles (p. 784). Furthermore, they found an employment status to be an important factor lowering the distress of women (i.e., despite parental or marital status, employed females announced greater well-being than any of the unemployed ones). Moreover, married mothers with prestigious jobs declared the highest well-being of all. Following the expansionist approach, in particular Marks (1977) who argued that, some roles may be performed without any net energy loss at all; they may even create energy for use in that role or in other role performance (p. 926), Kirchmeyer (1992) provided further evidence that engagement in multiple roles results in resource enrichment. According to Kirchmeyer domain participation can even enrich the supply of resources which are available for use in other domains. Hence, the time and involvement which employed individuals spend in non-work domains need not depress commitment to the employing organization, and could actually enhance it (p. 778). The author referred to previous studies suggesting that involvement in non-work domains, including family, community and recreation, are positively associated with work attitudes. Considering Sieber s (1974) four types of benefits derived from participation in several roles (i.e., privileges gained, status security, status enhancement and personality enrichment), Kirchmeyer developed 15 items to measure the resource enrichment of alumni of undergraduate business program. She found strong relationship between work attitude and resource enrichment from participation in non-work domains. For example, involvement in community and recreational domains enriches personal resources (e.g., increases rights and privileges, provides security against failures and strains at work, enhances status, develops skills and perspectives useful for work) which in turn have positive influence on work attitude (e.g., organizational commitment and job satisfaction) Theoretical model Greenhaus and Powell (2006) proposed a theoretical model of WFE (Figure 4), which extends the theoretical insights from Sieber (1974) and Marks (1977), as it incorporates a wider range of resources generated in one role that may be applied to another role and proposing two different paths by which resources from one role may be applied to another (Greenhaus & Powell, 2006, p. 74). Here they refer to previous research that failed to examine the process by which a full range of variables can generate the phenomenon of enrichment. The researchers responded to Frone (2003) who emphasized that it would be a mistake to take established models of work-family conflict and 33

35 simply substitute in work-family facilitation (p. 159) and developed new conceptual model to understand the enrichment process, it causes and outcomes. According to Greenhaus and Powell (2006, p. 79) experiences in Role A (work or family) can improve the quality of life in Role B (family or work). The authors argue that resources produced in one role (e.g., work) can advance high performance and positive affect in other role (e.g., family). The positive affect is defined as positive moods and positive emotions derived from role experiences (p. 82). The resource is defined as an asset that may be drawn on when needed to solve a problem or cope with a challenging situation (p. 80). The production of resources is an integral part of the enrichment process. The researchers identified five types of resources: 1. Skills and perspectives. Skills are defined as a broad set of task-related cognitive and interpersonal skills, coping skills, multitasking skills, and knowledge and wisdom derived from role experiences (p. 80). Perspectives refer to ways of viewing and managing different situations. 2. Psychological and physical resources. Psychological and physical resources include positive selfevaluations (e.g., self-esteem, self-efficacy, physical health). 3. Social capital. Social capital is defined as the goodwill that is engendered by the fabric of social relations and that can be mobilized to facilitate action (Adler & Kwon, 2002: 17, as cited in Greenhaus & Powell, 2006, p. 80). For example, influence and information gained from work or family relationships can contribute to achievement of one s goals. 4. Flexibility. Flexibility refers to discretion to determine the timing, pace, and location at which role requirements are met (p. 80). 5. Material resources. Material resources (e.g., money and gifts acquired from work or family domain). 34

36 Figure 4. Model of work-family enrichment (as adopted from Greenhaus & Powell, 2006, p. 79) The resources generated in Role A can advance quality of life in Role B through two paths: 1. Instrumental path. The resources are transferred directly from Role A to Role B improving performance in the latter role. The authors referred to previous studies which determined that resources (e.g., self-esteem, confidence) generated within family role improve managerial performance (e.g., interpersonal skills), and workplace flexibility provides employees with more family time improving their functioning within the non-work role. 2. Affective path. This path comprises two components: the resources in Role A advance positive affect within Role A (component 1), which in turn generates high performance and positive affect in Role B (component 2). Resources can lead to positive affect within the role in two ways; (1) some resources have direct influence on positive affect within the role (e.g., supportive working environment enhances one s feelings about his/her job) and; (2) some resources can enhance within role functioning, which in turn improves positive affect in that role (e.g., employee s positive feeling that he/she is doing good job). The positive affect in Role A enhances performance in Role B. For instance, positive mood affects one s attention in another role leading to high performance within the Role B. 35

37 The enrichment process is moderated by: 1. The salience of Role B. People have different roles which are organized in a hierarchy of importance (or salience), thus achievements (e.g., high performance) in highly salient roles may improve one s well-being more than achievements in less salient roles. The more meaningful the role is the more time one devotes to it. Therefore an individual purposely applies resources to the role which he/she values more as good performance in that role is particularly important. 2. The perceived relevance of the resource to Role B. The resources produced in one role would be applied to the other role only if an individual perceives that the application of the resources will have beneficial outcomes. 3. The consistency of the resource with the requirements and norms of Role B. This suggest that the resources may improve functioning in the other role when the resources are compatible with requirements and norms of the latter role. The above model has been expanded by Daniel and Sonnentag (2014) with a second pathway of positive work reflection as an addition to positive affect. The authors used term work-life enrichment (WLE) rather than work-family enrichment to include in their sample all employees regardless of their family situation. The positive work reflection is considered an indirect cognitive mechanism as [t]hinking positively about work during leisure time and thereby reliving positive work experiences while being off the job could be a pathway that links work to the non-work domain (Kreiner, 2006, as cited in Daniel & Sonnentag, 2014, p. 53) This implies that positive work reflection during non-work time (e.g., leisure) can expand an employee s resources (e.g., positive thoughts about work achievements), which in turn results in enrichment as the employee reintroduces the resources generated at work into another domain. This suggests that highly workengaged employees carry positive work-related experiences into non-work domains through positive feelings and emotions (i.e., affective path) and positive thoughts about work during free time (i.e., reflection or cognitive path). These affective and cognitive processes are important for work-to-life enrichment, which in turn might benefit both the employee and the employer (p. 64). Thus organizations are advised to promote WLE which can enhance employees job satisfaction and subsequently their job performance. Here the authors relate to the important role of supervisors to improve employees work engagement. Finally, the extended Greenhaus and Powell s (2006) model can be used to study all employees regardless of their marital or family status. 36

38 3.2.2 Measurement Drawing on Greenhaus and Powell s (2006) theoretical model, Carlson and colleagues (2006) developed multidimensional measure of work-family enrichment (Table 3). Work family enrichment items My involvement in my work Work to family development 1. Helps me to understand different viewpoints and this helps me be a better family member 2. Helps me to gain knowledge and this helps me be a better family member 3. Helps me acquire skills and this helps me be a better family member Work to family affect 4. Puts me in a good mood and this helps me be a better family member 5. Makes me feel happy and this helps me be a better family member 6. Makes me cheerful and this helps me be a better family member Work to family capital 7. Helps me feel personally fulfilled and this helps me be a better family member 8. Provides me with a sense of accomplishment and this helps me be a better family member 9. Provides me with a sense of success and this helps me be a better family member My involvement in my family Family to work development 10. Helps me to gain knowledge and this helps me be a better worker 11. Helps me acquire skills and this helps me be a better worker 12. Helps me expand my knowledge of new things and this helps me be a better worker Family to work affect 13. Puts me in a good mood and this helps me be a better worker 14. Makes me feel happy and this helps me be a better worker 15. Makes me cheerful and this helps me be a better worker Family to work efficiency 16. Requires me to avoid wasting time at work and this helps me be a better worker 17. Encourages me to use my work time in a focused manner and this helps me be a better worker 18. Causes me to be more focused at work and this helps me be a better worker Table 3. Final 18 items work family enrichment scale (as adopted from Carlson et al., 2006, p. 147) The 18-item scale comprises three dimensions for WFE (i.e., development, affect, and capital) and three dimensions for FWE (i.e., development, affect, and efficiency). The development occurs when involvement in one domain drives acquisition of skills, knowledge, behaviors and ways of viewing things that improves functioning in the other domain, while the affect occurs when involvement in one role generates positive emotional state or attitude that helps to improve performance in the other role. The capital refers to acquisition of psychosocial resources such as a sense of security, confidence, accomplishment, or self-fulfillment, while the efficiency happens when engagement with family gives a sense of focus or urgency that contributes to improve one s performance at work. These measures are not identical for both types of enrichment as function and activities of 37

39 these two systems are not completely similar and may therefore provide qualitatively different types of resource gains (p. 135). The measure acknowledges the bi-directional character of the construct and it s complexity (i.e., each item of the scale includes the two components of the enrichment process such as resource gains and improved functioning). The scale has been globally validated and successfully applied to numerous studies (Carlson et al., 2006; Demerouti et al., 2013) Antecedents and consequences Greenhaus and Powell (2006) extracted from previous studies range of antecedents and consequences of WFE, including: 1. Income acquired from work is positively associated with marital quality and parental satisfaction. 2. Job characteristics (i.e., scope, discretion, complexity) are correlated with marital quality, parental satisfaction (e.g., quality of interaction between children and parents) and positive home environment. 3. Supportive and flexible work environment are linked with more time available for children and home matters, positive functioning and family satisfaction. 4. Networking in the organization and acceptance by peers are connected with family satisfaction and in the case of women with parenting satisfaction and child-related outcomes (e.g., child physical health and performance at school). 5. Job performance is related with parenting performance. 6. Work engagement, in the case of men, leads to family engagement (e.g., attention in work domain is linked with positive affect within the domain and subsequently with men s psychological engagement in family domain). 7. Work satisfaction brings satisfaction with family, parenting, and positive child-related outcomes (e.g., child emotional health and performance at school) 8. Marriage and children, primarily for men, are associated with income, advancement and work satisfaction. 9. Family support is linked with career success and development, work satisfaction at work and acceptance at work. 10. Family engagement, for women only, is related with engagement at work. Similarly, Sok and colleagues (2014) suggested that behaviors (e.g., teamwork, participation, involvement, open communication) and human affiliation can have positive affect on home domain via instrumental and affective path, respectively. For instance, flexible working arrangements (e.g., 38

40 part-time work, parental leave), which are embedded in supportive organizational cultures, can increase employees autonomy and subsequently improve the work-home integration. Furthermore, culture which promotes; (1) values such as learning and innovation and; (2) behaviors, including risk taking, creativity and adaptability, might result in positive work-home spillover. This is in line with the notion that creativity and the creation of new resources stimulate growth and psychological energy that, in turn, can spill over to the home environment (p. 467). The above mentioned studies make clear distinction between the domain that causes the phenomenon of enrichment and the domain where the outcomes of the phenomenon lie. This suggests that resources generated in a sending domain cause changes in the receiving domain through the phenomenon of enrichment. Recent studies, however, challenged this assumption. Wayne and colleagues (2007) implied that organizational members make cognitive attributions concerning the source of enrichment which generates positive affects to that domain. For example, the feeling that one s organization supports WLB, which enables the work-family enrichment, makes the employee more satisfied with and committed to the organization. Likewise, benefits received within family domain generate positive cognitive attributions towards the latter domain. For instance, energy and excitement about work derived from interactions with family generates positive evaluations about family relations whereby satisfaction with family grows. This implies that it is important to look at both relationships (i.e., cross-domain and within-domain) as both domains might be influenced by the enrichment (Peeters et al., 2013). In a similar manner, Peeters and colleagues (2013) extracted from previous longitudinal studies the following work, non-work and health outcomes: 1. Work outcomes: both WFE and FWE increase job performance, and WFE and work engagement simultaneously affect each other. 2. Non-work outcomes: FWE predicts marital satisfaction, in contrast to the WFE which is not linked with marital satisfaction. 3. Health outcomes: both directions of enrichment have significant impact on one s health (e.g., healthy BMI and cholesterol level). These examples illustrate that the outcomes of work/non-work enrichment both lie in the sending (within-domain relations) and the receiving domain (cross-domain relations). 39

41 3.3 Comparison of theory 1 and theory 2 This section will shed a light on the topic of work/non-work interface by comparing elements of the conflict and enrichment constructs, including origins, definitions, theoretical models, measurement, antecedents and consequences. The discussion will form a basis for a new model of WLB. Regarding the origins both constructs derive from the role theory: role strain (Goode, 1960), role accumulation (Sieber, 1974) and expansion approach (Marks, 1977). According to the role theory people are expected to enact different roles within two distinct life dimensions (i.e., work and nonwork). Goode argues that people have scarce resources and energy to meet their over demanding role expectations as resources allocated in one domain are automatically taken away from the other domain. For Sieber and Marks engagement in multiple roles can contribute people with social and economic resources (e.g., support, psychological energy) which may compensate for the growing demands emerging in different domains. This has formed different views of the work/non-work interface. Goode s argument inspired the conflict perspective, Sieber s and Marks hypothesis, on the other hand, inspired the positive perspective (i.e., enrichment). The former considers the negative experiences, the enrichment, on the other hand, recognizes the positive aspects acquired from engaging in multiple roles. Both perspectives possess multiple definitions which have been used interchangeably. Conflict has been frequently referred to as negative spillover and interference, the enrichment phenomenon has been referred to as enhancement, positive spillover and facilitation. In my view the role theory offers valuable insights about the work-family relationship. Goode emphasizes the negative aspects of engaging in multiple roles and even though I cannot completely agree with him that people have limited amount of energy to meet multiple demands, he still contributes with important findings about the negative aspects of work/non-work interaction. In the end, however, Sieber s and Marks suggestion, that engagement in multiple roles can expand energy one can devote to each role, highlights the positive aspects of work/non-work interface and thus deserves further consideration in my opinion. Drawing on Goode s scarcity hypothesis, Greenhaus and Beutell (1985) define work-family conflict as a form of inter-role conflict in which the role pressures from the work and family domains are mutually incompatible in some respect (p. 77). Greenhaus and Beutell stress that participation in one role (e.g., family) affects negatively participation in other roles (e.g., work) and this results in 40

42 work-family conflict which can be time-based, strain-based and behavior-based. Similarly, Voydanoff (2005) identifies time-based, strain-based and boundary-spanning work demands. Timebased conflict arrises from limited amount of time one can devote to different roles. Strain-based conflict occurs when stressors originated in one role affect one s engagement in other roles. Behavior-based conflict happens when different roles require different kind of behavior. The timebased and strain-based are within-domain demands, and the boundary-spanning demands focus on how different work and family-related aspects affect the interplay between the domains. The conflict increases when the roles are important to the individual s self-concept (i.e., person who values particular role is highly responsive to pressures related to that role as achievements in the domain are very important). Besides the role salience the conflict increases when one can face negative consequences for not fulfilling role requirements. As opposed to Greenhaus and Beutell, Greenahaus and Powell (2006) argue that individuals involvement in one role (e.g., family) results in improved functioning in the other role (e.g., work), the result is work-family enrichment defined as the extent to which experiences in one role improve the quality of life in the other role (p. 72). Similarly to the conflict perspective, the enrichment approach highlights the role salience as people have different roles which are organized in a hierarchy of importance (or salience), thus achievements (or loss) in highly salient roles may improve (or diminish) one s well-being more than achievements (or loss) in less salient roles. Building on theoretical insights from Sieber and Marks, Rothbard (2001) further disputes Goode s scarcity hypothesis and proposes enrichment argument which asserts that participation in multiple roles is beneficial as it expands energy and attention one can devote to each role. Along similar lines, Barnett and Hyde (2001) propose expansionist theory according to which engaging in multiple roles provides benefits that can exceed potential pressures one may experience. Kirchmeyer (1992) provides further evidence that engagement in multiple roles (i.e., work, family, community and recreation) results in resource enrichment (e.g., increased rights and privileges) which in turn has positive effect on work attitude (e.g., organizational commitment). In my opinion time pressures and stress related to either work or non-work domain can affect people s functioning and thus can lead to conflict. Engagement in multiple roles can also have positive effects on one s mood and performance which results in experience of enrichment. Here I argue that people can experience both conflict and enrichment when engaging in multiple roles and the intensity of these experiences depends on how important the particular role is for the person. 41

43 Concerning the theoretical models of the work/non-work interface, Frone and colleagues (1992) developed and tested model of WFC. According to their model, involvement and stressors associated with one domain (e.g., family) may affect ones functioning in the other domain (e.g., decrease job satisfaction). The relationship between domain-related stressors (e.g., family involvement) and the outcomes (e.g., job satisfaction) is not direct but moderated by the recurrence of conflict (e.g., FWC). The model emphasizes cross-domain relationship which is based on the assumption that conflict emerging in one domain affects negatively the other domain. The model was expanded by Frone and colleagues (1997) with additional variables to demonstrate more accurately the relationship between work and family spheres. Unlike the previous model, which suggests direct relationship between the two types of conflict, the new model implies indirect relationship between WFC and FWC influenced by role-related distress, dissatisfaction, overload and time commitment. The conflict is predicted by proximal (i.e., distress, overload and time commitment) and distal (i.e., support) factors. The outcomes of the conflict originated in one domain lie within the other domain (e.g., WFC leads to family distress). Furthermore, the conflict is linked with specific behavioral outcomes (e.g., FWC may affect work performance and increase the work withdrawal). Both models recognize the bi-directional character of the work-life conflict as work can interfere with non-work aspects (i.e., WFC) and the opposite (i.e., FWC). Thus to have a complete understanding of the work family relationship both directions of conflict should be studied. As opposed to Frone and colleagues (1992, 1997) who studied the conflict perspective, Greenhaus and Powell (2006) developed theoretical model to reflect on the positive relationship between work and family domains. The researchers considered Frone s (2003) call for new approach and did not simply take established model of WFC and substituted in WFE but developed new conceptual model to understand the enrichment process, it causes and outcomes. According to their model, resources produced in one role (e.g., work) can advance high performance and positive affect (i.e., positive mood and emotions) in the other role (e.g., family). The process is moderated by role salience, perceived relevance of resource, and consistency of resource with requirements and norms. The integral part of the enrichment process is generation of resources (e.g., interpersonal skills, self-esteem and flexibility). These resources can enhance one s functioning via instrumental (i.e., direct) or affective (i.e., indirect) paths. Similarly to WFC, the WFE model recognizes the bidirectional nature of the concept (i.e., WFE happens when work experiences advance the quality of family life and FWE happens when family experiences advance the quality of work life). The 42

44 enrichment model has been expanded by Daniel and Sonnentag (2014) with a second pathway of positive work reflection (i.e., cognitive path) as an addition to positive affect. The researchers argue that positive work reflection (i.e., positive thinking about work) during leisure time can expand an employee s resources, which results in enrichment as the employee reintroduces the resources generated at work into another domain. This implies that highly work-engaged employees carry positive work related experiences into non-work domains through positive feelings and emotions and positive thoughts about work during free time. Both paths are important and can be beneficial to the employee and the employer. Thus organizations are advised to foster WLE which can improve employees job satisfaction and work performance. This can be achieved through supportive organizational cultures and more specifically via supportive supervision. In my view these models adequately illustrate the processes of work/non-work conflict and work/ non-work enrichment. I think that the level of conflict can be decreased by supportive supervisor, partner or spouse. Furthermore, positive thoughts and feelings of being appreciated, supported and valued by peers and supervisor can improve job satisfaction and work performance, and might positively affect ones mood at home. The quality time with friends or family can, in turn, generate positive emotions which might affect ones functioning at work. Same applies to conflict. For instance working overtimes leads to exhaustion and inability to participate in family activities and vice versa, stress at home might lead to distraction at work as one can be absorbed with family issues. Evidently both phenomena (i.e., conflict and enrichment) can function in two directions. Considering the measures of the two concepts, Carlson and colleagues (2000, 2006) proposed two multidimensional scales to reflect the negative and positive interaction between domains. The former scale considers the three types of conflict identified by Greenhaus and Beutell and the bidirectional nature of the concept. The scale comprises 18 items to measure the six dimensions of the construct, including: time-based WIF, time-based FIW, strain-based WIF, strain-based FIW, behavior-based WIF and behavior-based FIW. The latter scale, the measure of WFE, is based on Greenhaus and Powell s (2006) model. Similarly to the previous measure, the WFE scale acknowledges the bi-directional character of the construct. Furthermore, it highlights the uniqueness of the construct in how it operates depending on the direction (i.e., both directions include development and affect, however the third dimension differs as work to family includes capital, whereas family to work includes effectiveness). These dimensions are not identical as activities within different domains provide diverse benefits. The development occurs when involvement in 43

45 one domain drives acquisition of skills, knowledge, behaviors and ways of viewing things that improves functioning in the other domain, while the affect occurs when involvement in one role generates positive emotional state or attitude that helps to improve performance in the other role. The capital refers to acquisition of psychosocial resources such as a sense of security, confidence, accomplishment, or self-fulfillment, while the efficiency happens when engagement with family gives a sense of focus or urgency that contributes to improve one s performance at work. Both scales have been globally validated and successfully applied to numerous empirical studies. I think that both scales adequately capture the negative and positive interaction between domains as they consider the bi-directional character of the constructs and acknowledge the uniqueness of the constructs in terms of how they operate depending on the direction. Although these measures have been globally validated and frequently used in different studies they still have some limitations. Similarly to the theoretical models, the measures are primarily based on data derived from quantitative studies conducted in big-size companies in USA. In my view the scales need to be adjusted to fit different settings as to adequately reflect people s experiences in specific contexts (e.g., foreign researchers in Denmark). In my opinion these measurements could be supplemented with qualitative methods (e.g., interviews) which can provide in-depth insights into people s perceptions and experiences. The above mentioned studies indicate that both types of conflict (i.e., WFC and FWC) and enrichment (i.e., WFE and FWE) are disparate process with unique antecedents and consequences. Michel and colleagues (2009) identified range of factors that might lead to conflict (e.g., lack of social support from family members and work colleagues and supervisors, psychological involvement with one s role or conflicting role pressures within domain). Burke (2006) adds control as the ability to influence one s working environment can reduce the conflict between work and family. Along similar lines, Drobnic (2011) emphasizes that conflict between work and family is very often caused by work-related conditions, as it has been shown that work interferes more with family than the opposite. Thus to understand the pressures associated with WLB, it is important to look at job characteristics and working conditions (i.e., autonomy, task discretion, social support from supervisor and colleagues and supportive organizational culture) as these can decrease the pressure and improve employees WLB. Regarding the consequences of conflict, research distinguishes between cross-domain (i.e., outcomes of WFC reside within the family domain) and within-domain (i.e., outcomes of WFC lie within the work domain) hypothesis. Allen and colleagues (2000) provided an evidence that WFC may lead to decreased marital and family 44

46 satisfaction. Amstad and colleagues (2011), on the other hand, demonstrated strong relationship between both types of conflict and work and family outcomes. Their study determined that the within-domain hypothesis are much stronger than the cross-domain hypothesis. This suggest that it is important to look at both relationships (i.e., cross-domain and within-domain) as both domains might be influenced by the conflict. Regarding the positive work-family interface, Greenhaus and Powell (2006) provided a list of antecedents and consequences. For example, supportive and flexible working environment is linked with family satisfaction, networking in the organization and acceptance by peers are connected with family satisfaction, and family support is linked with career success and development. Similarly, Sok and colleagues (2014) suggested that flexible working arrangements, which are embedded in supportive organizational cultures, can increase employees autonomy and subsequently improve the work-home integration. Furthermore, an organizational culture which promotes learning, innovation, risk taking and creativity might result in positive work-home spillover as creativity stimulates psychological energy that can transfer to the home domain. The authors support the cross-domain hypothesis which suggest that resources generated in a sending domain cause changes in the receiving domain through the phenomenon of enrichment. Similarly to the conflict perspective, the cross-domain hypothesis have been challenged. According to Wayne and colleagues (2007) organizational members make cognitive attributions concerning the source of enrichment which generates positive affects to that domain. For example, the feeling that one s organization supports WLB, which enables WFE, makes the employee more satisfied with and committed to the organization. I believe that the social support is particularly important as people interact with each other on a daily basis, thus support received from peers, supervisors or family can reduce conflict and enrich one s performance, and subsequently improve an individual s WLB. Therefore organizations need to create supportive working environments in which WLB is promoted through not only policies but practices. This means that supervisors should encourage the use of flexible working provisions, clearly communicate with employees about their expectations and promote employees regardless their working patterns. Furthermore, the outcomes of conflict or enrichment originated in one domain can be found not only within the domain but also in the other domain. Therefore it is important to look at cross-domain and within-domain relationships as both domains might be influenced when an individual experiences conflict or enrichment. 45

47 Overall, the aforementioned scholars offer important insights into the problems I have chosen to study (i.e., WLB of foreign scientists in Denmark). The discussion shows that there are different views on how work and non-work roles affect each other. The conflict perspective provides insights into the negative aspects of work-family interaction, the enrichment perspective, on the other hand, contributes with positive experiences derived from participation in multiple roles. These views combined reflect adequately how work and family domains may affect each other as individuals can experience different levels of conflict and/or enrichment depending on their work and outside work circumstances. Thus both perspectives can supplement each other in the context of work-family (or work/non-work) research as they are both relevant to study WLB. The present discussion could be enriched by third viewpoint which considers both perspectives (i.e., conflict and enrichment). Previous research suggested small negligible negative relationship between WFE and WFC (Demerouti et al., 2013). According to Powell and Greenhaus (2006) lack of enrichment caused by unsuccessful implementation of resource generated in one role into the other role may induce conflict (e.g., when an individual incorrectly uses skills developed at work to solve family issues, he/she does not improve but worsens the situation within the family domain). In a similar vein, Boz and colleagues (2015) provided an evidence that the experience of conflict and enrichment co-occur within individuals at different levels (p. 1). For instance, the feeling that time devoted to family matters might have negatively affected work (i.e., FWC) co-occurs with positive mood derived from quality time with family, which in turn improves functioning at work (i.e., FWE). Thus it is relevant to examine positive and negative experiences (i.e., conflict and enrichment) simultaneously rather than separately (i.e., focusing on conflict and/or enrichment). This is in accord with; (1) Frone (2003) who argues that balance occurs when a person experiences low level of conflict combined with high level of enrichment between roles and; (2) Rantanen and colleagues (2011, as cited in Rantanen et al., 2013, p. 143) who consider WFC, FWC WFE and FWE as components of WLB. Finally, as emphasized by Grzywacz & Carlson (2007) it is important to look at the social and contextual aspect of the construct (e.g., people daily interactions at work or at home) as this is necessary to accurately characterize WLB New model of WLB The following model (Figure 5) is based on the discussion and it includes elements from both constructs (i.e., conflict and enrichment). According to the model both constructs form WLB as individuals can experience combination of conflict and enrichment. Work/non-work conflict can be 46

48 time-based, strain-based and behavior-based and it is caused by range of antecedents (e.g., lack of social support). Work/non-work enrichment, on the other hand, has four dimensions: development, affect, capital and efficiency, and it can be predicted by different antecedents (e.g., supportive and flexible working environment). Both, conflict and enrichment, result in cross-domain and withindomain consequences (e.g., WFE and FWE increase job performance). Finally, both perspectives highlight the role salience as achievements (or loss) in highly salient roles may improve (or diminish) one s well-being more than achievements (or loss) in less salient roles. The following model will be tested in the next section. Figure 5. New model of WLB 47

49 4. Empirical analysis The following section will provide an overview of the research, including methods for data collection and analysis, scientific approach, sampling method, interview guide, empirical findings and comparison of the empirical examples Methods/methodology As emphasized by Demerouti and colleagues (2013), the work-family research has been dominated by positivist approach (i.e., quantitative research) which proposes that social phenomena can be measured and explained through employment of natural sciences methods (i.e., the aforementioned theoretical models and measures are primarily based on data collected through surveys conducted in large corporations in the USA) (Bryman, 2012). Thus the knowledge about WLB (i.e., conflict and enrichment) is limited and might not reflect the experiences of individuals (e.g., foreign scientists) in different countries (e.g., Denmark). Therefore there is need for qualitative approach which will help to uncover people s experiences and perceptions in specific settings (e.g., academic environment), conditions affecting their WLB and consequences of these experiences. Hence the present study employs methods belonging to the qualitative approach which provides the selected participants with an opportunity to express their views and situation in their own voice. Most qualitative studies imply an inductive view of the relationship between theory and research (Bryman, 2012, p. 380), which means that the theory is the outcome of social research. This study, however, has a deductive approach as it tests the new model of WLB (Figure 5) derived from the aforementioned theories. This dissertation will, thus, result in new insights that will broaden existing theories, concepts or models and put them into new perspectives and contexts. In particular, this research findings will expand our current understanding of the phenomenon of WLB in the context of Danish academic environment from the perspective of foreign nationals. Within qualitative research there are several methods to collect data, including focus group or interviewing. To collect necessary data the researcher could invite the participants to a focus group session which would form a natural group as the participants might know each other (e.g., they are work colleagues or friends) and are used to interacting within a team (e.g., they are members of research groups). This method, however, possesses several challenges. First, the moderator (i.e., the person running the session) might have limited control over the process, there is a danger that the group might take over and as a consequence a set of research questions might not be fully 48

50 answered. Second, the transcription of the recordings might be time-consuming as it is difficult to distinguish who said what, and subsequently the ample data might be difficult to analyse. Third, the sessions might be difficult to organise as people might not be available to attend at the specific time and location. Fourth, there is a problem of group effect where some participants might be influenced by others. Finally, there are situations when group sessions are unsuitable and should be substituted with individual interviews (e.g., when discussing private/intimate matters) (Bryman, 2012). Therefore to obtain individuals opinions (i.e., how the participants perceive and experience WLB) this study utilises interviewing which is one of the most popular technique used to collect qualitative data. In qualitative research there are two types of interviews, unstructured and semi-structured, both are frequently referred to as in-depth or qualitative interviews. In the unstructured interview the researcher enters the filed with may be just a single question (...) and the interviewee is then allowed to respond freely (Bryman, 2012, p. 471). The semi-structured interview, on the other hand, can be used when the researcher has clear focus of the examination extracted from research questions and theory. Unlike the unstructured interview which is guided by the world views of the participants, the semi-structured interview is guided by list of questions and matters to be explored, called interview guide. Since this study has a clear agenda (i.e., investigation of the participants perceptions and experiences of WLB) the use of semi-structured interviews was seen as the most appropriate. The researcher has used an interview guide (Table 1) with a list of interviewer questions developed to answer the posed research questions. Generally all the questions and in similar wording have been used to interview all participants (Bryman, 2012). The interview sessions were conducted in quiet and private settings in location and time suitable for the participants (i.e., in the participants offices). The researcher used audio device to record the interviews which were subsequently transcribed (Appendix II and III) and anonymized (i.e., the participants were assigned code 1 and 2). The purpose of this research is to learn about the selected participants experiences and perceptions of WLB (i.e., conflict and/or enrichment), the conditions affecting their experiences and the consequences. This means that the researcher has a specific agenda (i.e., to look for themes and subthemes that would help to answer the posed research questions) therefore the employment of qualitative coding, namely thematic analysis was found to be an appropriate method for this study. The interview transcripts were examined to extract core themes that could be distinguished both 49

51 between and within transcripts (Bryman, 2012, p. 579). This means that the themes were identified through coding (Appendix IV and Appendix V) which is a first step in most types of qualitative data analysis and it entails breaking down the data into elements which then are given labels or tags. In this case, the codes related to the concepts and terminology in the existing literature (i.e., WLB, conflict and enrichment) thus specific terms or concepts were used to label the observations. Afterwards the codes were placed into categories (i.e., themes) which were compared across documents to learn whether the themes recur and whether there are links between the themes. Subsequently the interpreted data was linked with the research questions, the literature and the theory used to highlight the issues under investigation (Bryman, 2012; Denscombe, 2007). The researcher used Framework defined by Ritchie and colleagues (2003:219, as cited in Bryman, 2012, p. 579) a matrix based method for ordering and synthesizing data. Here the themes and subthemes emerged from transcripts were presented in the table together with brief quotes from the data inserted into the relevant cell. For instance, the researcher looked for recurring motifs about negative perceptions of WLB. In this example, conflict is the core theme and time, strain and behavior are the sub-themes (Appendix VI) Scientific approach The methods applied in this paper belong to qualitative research strategy that adopts ontological stance described as constructionist and epistemological stance described as interpretivist. The former asserts that social phenomena and their meanings are continually being accomplished by social actors (Bryman, 2012, p. 33) This means that social phenomena are constantly created and recreated by human beings in their daily interactions. For example, the phenomenon of WLB is not pre given but shaped and reshaped by people in their social interactions across work and non-work domains. The interpretivism, in turn, requires the social scientist to grasp the subjective meaning of social action (p. 30) In other words, to understand the complexities of the social phenomena the qualitative researcher needs to view the world through the eyes of people being studied. This implies double interpretation as the researcher needs to provide an interpretation of the social actors (i.e., the selected participants) interpretations of their social world (e.g., the phenomenon of WLB) Sampling The participants for the semi-structured interviews were sampled through snowball sampling which is an example of purposive sampling technique. The technique entails selecting people or 50

52 cases that are relevant to answer the posed research questions (Bryman, 2012). In this case, the method of snowballing was found to be the most appropriate as the researcher has contacts at the Aarhus University, in inano department. The researcher initially sampled small group of people suitable for the research. In this case, foreign postdoctoral researchers from departments of natural sciences, technology and engineering were found to be suitable as they work in highly demanding and stressful environment which is characterized by innovation, teamwork, flexibility, creativity, productivity and commitment. Achieving satisfactory WLB in this kind of environment might be challenging, thus the selected participants were believed to contribute with valuable insights about their WLB. The sample included foreign staff, both women and men, in different ages, with different family patterns, and employed by the Aarhus University for at least a year to make sure that they have had some time to adjust to the work and non-work environment, and they possess the best knowledge about the scientific environment. In this sampling technique, the initially sampled participants suggest others with experiences and characteristics relevant to the research questions. Furthermore, the participants are sampled until a category has been saturated with data (p. 421) which implies that the sampling procedure lasts until the emerging data offers no more new insights regarding the examined category. However, due to the time constraint the number of participants were limited to the initial two samples Interview guide As suggested by Kvale and Brinkmann (2009) two interview guides (Table 1) were developed, one with researcher questions and the other with interviewer questions. The former includes questions derived from theory (i.e., model depicted in Figure 5). The latter includes questions to be posed at the interview sessions. Unlike the researcher questions which are usually formulated in academic language, the interviewer questions are articulated in common (i.e., everyday) language of the interviewees. The following interview guide includes different types of questioned proposed by Kvale and Brinkmann (2009). Furthermore, the questions are based on overall appraisal (e.g., All in all, how successful do you feel in balancing your work and personal/family life? ) and components approaches (i.e., questions inspired by scales developed by Carlson and colleagues, 2000, 2006). 51

53 Researcher questions How foreign researchers overall experience and perceive their WLB? Do they experience conflict and/or enrichment between roles? What forms of conflict do they experience? (time, strain, behavior-based) What dimensions of enrichment do they experience? (development, affect, capital) How these experiences affect their work and non-work domain? (consequences: withindomain, cross-domain) Interviewer questions (Introductory questions) All in all how successful do you feel in balancing your work and personal/family life? Do you remember an occasion when work-related activities negatively affected your private/family life? Do you remember an occasion when your involvement at work benefited you outside work? (Probing questions) Could you tell me more about that? What happen afterwards? How did that make you feel? Did that affect you at work or only outside work? Do you have further examples of this? What do you think might have caused it? (Direct questions) Have you experienced conflict between what you wanted to do and what you had to do to meet your daily responsibilities at work and outside work? Have you ever have to miss private event? Have you ever came home stressed or tired and could not enjoy things you usually do? Have you ever used ineffective problem solving behavior at home? Have you ever been rewarded with resources other than salary for you involvement in work? Have you ever successfully used skills or knowledge gained at work in your private spheres? Have you ever felt that your involvement at work improved your mood and your functioning outside work? Have your ever felt accomplished at work and how did that affect you outside work? What do you think might have caused it? What affects the researchers experiences? (antecedents of conflict and/ or enrichment) What role is more important? (Role salience) (Specifying questions) What factors would have to be present to help you to achieve satisfactory balance? What do you think about your current working environment? What do you think about your colleagues? What do you think about your supervisor? How flexible are your working arrangements? (Indirect questions) How do you believe others think about the working environment? (Structuring questions) I would now like to introduce new topic: role importance. You are employee, spouse, friend, parent, which role is the most important for you? What is the main purpose in going to work? (Interpreting questions) Is it correct that achievements (or loss) in work (private/family) domain could improve (diminish) your well-being more than achievement (or loss) in private/ family (work) domain? Are there any more things you would want to say before we end the interview? Table 1. Interview guides 52

54 An interview session begins from the following introduction: Thank you for your willingness to participate in this interview and to share your insights. I have been studying the issue of WLB and now I am interested to learn how the foreign academic faculty staff experiences and perceives their WLB. I would like to first ask you all in all how successful do you feel in balancing your work and personal/family life? The purpose of this questions is to gain spontaneous and rich descriptions of the phenomenon as experienced by the participants. The follow-up questions (i.e., the second question) depend on the interviewee's response. Thus the interviewer needs to actively listen to what and how it is said in order to go on with the interview in a fruitful way that will help answer the research questions (Kvale & Brinkmann, 2009, p. 139). This means that the interviewer should not place her full attention on the interview guide but focus on the situational cues. In this case, the researcher is interested whether the participants experience conflict and/or enrichment, thus depending on the answer the next question will explore the cues provided in the response (i.e., whether the interviewee indicated negative or positive aspect of work/non-work interaction). For instance the next question could be: Do you remember an occasion when work-related activities negatively affected your private/family life? followed by: Could you tell me more about that? and What happen afterwards? How did that make you feel? Did that affect you at work or only outside work? The researcher can also use nod, mm, pause or silence to encourage participants to elaborate more on the topic. Here the answers will provide information about the consequences of these experiences. Next, Do you have further examples of this? and finally What do you think might have caused it? to find out the causes (i.e., antecedents). If the respondent cannot remember any of such occasions then the interviewer might use series of direct questions (e.g., Have you ever have to miss private event? Have you ever felt that your involvement at work improved your mood and your functioning outside work?) followed by: What do you think might have caused it? The direct questions, however, are best used later in the interview after the respondents shared their spontaneous descriptions and indicated which aspect of the phenomena are important for them. Next, the interviewer could pose the following specifying question: What factors would have to be present to help you to achieve satisfactory balance? Here again, depending on the response the following questions might explore the cues and learn about the potential effects of working environment, flexible arrangement, relationships with peers and supervisor on WLB. Afterwards the interviewer can pose indirect question: How do you believe others think about the working environment? to elicit directly the attitudes of others or indirectly the interviewee s own attitude. Finally, the interviewer will move to the next theme with a use of structuring question: I would now like to introduce new topic: role importance and ask: You are employee, spouse, friend, 53

55 parent, which role is the most important for you? followed by interpreting question: Is it correct that achievements (or loss) in work (non-work) domain could improve (diminish) your well-being more than achievement (or loss) in non-work (work) domain? The interview concludes with statement allowing the participant to express any additional thoughts he/she might have on the topic and subsequently the interviewer thanks the participant for the cooperation (Kvale & Birkmann, 2009) Research evaluation The quality of this research has been assessed through criteria of trustworthiness which comprises the following four elements: 1. Credibility. The purpose of this study is to uncover individuals perceptions and experiences, thus the implementation of qualitative interviews is appropriate as the individuals have the opportunity to provide insights about their personal experiences using their own voices. The recordings from the interviews were transcribed word by word by the researcher after each session. This primary data provided answers to the interview questions derived from the model (Figure 5) built upon key theories of WLB (i.e., conflict and enrichment). Furthermore, to learn whether the researcher s interpretations corresponded with the individuals experiences and perceptions the research participants were invited to comment on the findings (i.e., process referred to as member validation ). Finally, the researcher has spent great deal of time with the participants in their social world (i.e., at their offices) while conducting the interviews and while thoroughly scrutinising the data. 2. Transferability. This research provides thorough information that enable other researchers to judge [t]o what extent could the findings be transferred to other instances? (Denscombe, 2007, p. 299). In other words, the present study supplies thick descriptions about the investigated phenomena (i.e., the main elements of the WLB construct), information about the selected participants (e.g., foreign scientists) and the context of this study (e.g., Danish academic environment). 3. Dependability. To allow other researchers to evaluate whether this study was conducted according to proper procedures, the present dissertation offers documentation of the research process, including the decisions behind the methodology (i.e., methods for data collection, data analysis and sampling), the interview transcripts and the interview guide. For example, the interview sessions were conducted with a use of the interview guide, and in the process of coding 54

56 the researcher used terms and concepts derived from the literature about WLB to label the observations. 4. Confirmability. Although in social research complete objectivity is impossible, the researcher tried not to allow her personal values or theoretical inclination to influence the process of data collection and analysis. This means that she approached the research with open mind and did not ignore data that did not completely fit the analysis (e.g., when one of the participants stated that the question about role importance is not fair and instead he suggested that it is not about the hierarchy of importance but current life priorities). Here the researcher acknowledged the data and investigated it further (Denscombe, 2007; Bryman, 2012). 4.1 Empirical example 1: interview 1 Five main themes emerged from the data: overall perceptions of WLB, negative and positive experiences and perceptions (i.e., conflict and enrichment), conditions affecting WLB (i.e., antecedents), consequences of these experiences and role salience. Theme 1: Overall perceptions of WLB The respondent 1 revealed that he struggles to balance his work and personal life: My personal life outside work right now is not very well balanced (Q1) The imbalanced life is mainly due to his type of work which requires much time dedication: my career makes extremely difficult to have my own time (Q1) Theme 2: Negative and positive experiences and perceptions (i.e., conflict and enrichment) The participant 1 experiences both conflict and enrichment. In terms of conflict, two types of conflict were observed: time and strain based. The time-based conflict dominates: there is a lot of time when I have to work over weekends (...) I do 7 days a week of work so if I want to do something with my girlfriend on a weekend but sometimes I can t... because of my work (Q2) Here the participant emphasizes that job in academia is very demanding, as it requires long working hours which prevent him from spending time with his girlfriend and in general does not allow him to enjoy his weekends with friends: some of my colleagues or friends encourage me to join things on weekends and do something outside of work which is I think good in a way. Of course I have to turn things down sometimes if I have to put work first (Q22) 55

57 I enjoy spending time with them, but sometimes depending on my progress of my work I can t even spend time with them or I choose not to spend time with them, because I have to put my work first (Q27) The participant is aware that WLB is important as it could improve his performance but postdoctoral research positions are contract based which means that the researchers are constraint by time to accomplish their projects: I know in my head, that it is important to have work life balance, because that would, that definitely contributes to how efficiently and effectively you can do work and I know that, but it is difficult because time is very valuable (Q27) The participant concludes that the time is his major concern: is this balance of finding spare time and work is extremely difficult (Q27) I wish I had more spare time so I can actually spend time outside of my work ahh but that is my major concern (Q4) The strain-based conflict is mainly due to pressures at work which causes stress that is very often carried outside work: I stress a lot from work so I sometimes bring that home which is not very good and it is very hard to switch off (Q7) Here again it is demonstrated that academic work is very stressful and it s nature affects the participant's functioning outside work: I mean academic positions are very stressful in general (Q24) I mean stress could build up from work (Q27) I become certainly critical of things outside of work that maybe I should not be which I see it as not benefit... I can call stress (Q8) In regards to the positive aspects of work/non-work interface, the participant experiences three dimensions of enrichment: development, affect and capital. The development dimensions prevails, as the participant acquired knowledge and skills which have improved his functioning outside work (e.g., enhanced communication skills which help him in some situations outside work): maybe communication skills in presenting stuff (...) because of my work and numerous occasions when I have to give presentations and stuff that maybe I feel a little bit more comfortable talking in front of people and feel a bit more confident (Q6). The type of work which is very analytical also improved his decision making: because my work is very analytical, (...) It is a lot of decision making that needs to be done anyway and it needs to be quite critical because we work with facts so I guess in certain situations I can imagine that this would have benefit on everyday life, the way I make decisions outside of work (Q10) Interactions and discussion with colleagues help him to deal with problems at work as well as outside work: 56

58 I think discussing it with someone you can trust, somebody who has experienced things that I don t have experience in, could definitely give you an insight and another view as to how I should approach whether it is a problem or whatever it is (Q22) Regarding the affect, positive outcomes from work improve his mood and allows him to take some time off from work: if I have success in my experiments or in general if I get good outcome from my work that I do then it definitely brings up my mood and I feel that I can afford to have spare time and in general it does definitely makes me feel happy (Q9) The capital dimension demonstrates itself in a sense of achievement, personal fulfillment and satisfaction to be able to do something that can advance not just the participant in terms of salary but can benefit people in general: I definitely have sense of achievement to what I do at work as I said for in a larger scale so not just to get the salary, I feel like I am doing it for the human race (Q14) it is this satisfaction I get from the work that I am being involved in (Q31). Theme 3: Conditions affecting WLB (i.e., antecedents) The participant 1 gave an account of conditions affecting his experiences: antecedents of conflict and enrichment and general conditions affecting his WLB. The conflict is caused by several factors. As previously mentioned, one of the factors is the contract based job, which means that the participant is pressured by time to produce results which affect his current work as well as his future career: These positions are in contract term so it is like a ticking time bomb, you know when you got to finish and so the every moment that you spend at work could help in getting better results that could lead to, as I said, to potential publications, the grant opportunity (Q27) Furthermore, the type of job requires analytical and critical thinking: I think you need to be really sharp all the time at work (Q8) I am doing hard science so it is analytical work. It is a lot of decision making that needs to be done anyway and it needs to be quite critical because we work with facts (Q10) This leads to another aspect that contributes towards conflict which is time dedication and psychological involvement. This means that the flexibility in academia allows the researchers to organize their work which very often means that they work over weekends and bring work home in their thoughts: I have to work over weekends as well as during a week (...) I have to put my work first because it affects my future career and it is something I am obviously concern within long term (Q2) 57

59 because of my work in being in academia its very hard to switch off because it is not like 9 to 5 work and then you can switch yourself off. So there are quite often that even my spare time that the thoughts related to my work appears outside of my work (Q7) Furthermore, the participant is passionate about his work which is another factor which prevents him from abandoning work-related thoughts: I am passionate about my work but and I love what I do (...) I always think about my work, even if I am not at work (Q3) Another factor contributing towards work-family conflict is the stage of his career: because of my work... which is being a researcher at my stage of my career (Q1) I am at the hight or start to be at the hight of my career (Q30) Next, pressures within role: You can ask any academic person who wants to stay in academia they are all pressured to achieve, basically it is quantified in academia, you know, if you want to be successful is about publishing papers, it is about getting your own money research grants and fundings (Q24) This means that the researchers have to be very productive and creative, to come up with ideas and produce results. Similarly to the conflict, the enrichment experience is influenced by several factors. First factor is the scope of work which involves conferences and meetings where he has to, for example, present his work: because of my work and numerous occasions when I have to give presentations and stuff (Q6) Another factor is the type of work which is very analytical: I am doing hard science so it is analytical work. It is a lot of decision making (Q10) Next, job performance: if I have success in my experiments or in general if I get good outcome from my work (Q9) Furthermore, the satisfaction with work: I am kind of working in biomedical field I do feel like I am saving the world, I am doing it for the society, for the people (Q13) Another factor that promotes personal growth and generates psychological energy is creative and innovative working environment: I mean it could be that one of my discoveries of research could benefit peoples quality of life and healthcare so in that sense that definitely its rewarding in itself for me. (Q14) Finally, networking in the organization, discussions with colleagues improve his functioning as it provides him with new perspectives: I think discussing it with someone you can trust, somebody who has experienced things that I don t have experience in, could definitely give you an insight and another view (...) it enriches through conversation with my colleagues (Q22) 58

60 Regarding other aspects that influence WLB, the participant revealed that the flexible working environment has no effect on WLB unless you have children: It does not achieve any work life balance whether it is flexible or not. It could be different if you have a child or something but I don t have a child. I know a lot of my colleagues for example with child can go home any time essentially they want (Q19) Furthermore, the work colleagues, friends or family do not have direct influence on his WLB as they don t understand his situation fully. In other words, his WLB is a personal battle against himself: if you are under pressure I don t think any colleagues and spouses, girlfriends can help me because it is like a personal battle against yourself I mean, you yourself would only know how well you doing, truly. I mean my girlfriend or my friends don t know my personal goal and ambition and how I am getting on in terms of my work. So in my opinion I don t think they can help me in whether for me to be able to achieve work life balance because if I have to work I have to work no matter what (Q25) This means that it is more down to the researcher, his ambition and desire to stay in academia and to achieve success: in academia (...) your desire to achieve success (...) It is more like it is down to you and I think if you ask any researchers who are ambitious you would just work all the time anyway until you reach the satisfactory outcome of your research (...) if you succeeding at work then you get you feel good about yourself and you feel like I mean I would feel that I can take little bit more time off (Q16) However, the colleagues, friends or family can indirectly help, as time with friends can reduce rolerelated tensions: to be able to kind of spend outside of work time, of course, that kind of relieves my stress and I enjoy spending time with them (Q26) to some extend (...) some of my colleagues or friends encourage me to join things on weekends and do something outside of work which is I think good in a way (...) I think rather then just keep it to yourself, I think discussing it with someone you can trust, somebody who has experienced things that I don t have experience in, could definitely give you an insight and another view as to how I should approach (Q22) The international working environment is also important for the researcher as it gives him opportunity to interact with others who are in a similar situation (i.e., living in a foreign country) and who are keen to socialize outside work: I am in a research group (...) They are great, very easy going. They are very informal working environment (...) We have coffee together, lunch together. And living in a foreign country as well I guess it is very international my institute which is good in a way especially if you are in a foreign country like Denmark in my case. So we do things together outside of work. (Q21) Finally, good relationship and support from supervisor are also important for him: I get on with my boss very well. He is very understandable in any situation that I am in. He is very supportive (Q23) 59

61 Theme 4: Consequences of these experiences The respondent 1 provided insights into how these positive and negative experiences affect his work and non-work spheres. In terms of negative aspects, the inability to spend time with his girlfriend and friends affects his mood, relationship satisfaction and leisure activities: if I want to do something with my girlfriend on a weekend but sometimes I can t [it does make me feel] not great (...) I wish I could kind of separate work and life (...) But I can t do that at most of the time I always think about my work, even if I am not at work. (Q3) Stress generated at work leads to stress outside work and less satisfaction with his private life: I stress a lot from work so I sometimes bring that home which is not very good (...) thoughts related to my work appears outside of my work (Q7) I mean academic positions are very stressful in general (...) any academic person who wants to stay in academia they are all pressured to achieve (Q24) The type of work affects his functioning outside work: I become certainly critical of things outside of work that maybe I should not be (Q8) Negative experiences affect his well-being as he becomes frustrated, impatient and short-tempered in both work and non-work domains: I think it makes me very frustrated, short tempered and impatient person just for everyday my new things (...) this is like a vicious cycle where... it bothers me because it is important to me and that affects my everyday life (Q34) The positive aspects, on the other hand, lead to the following outcomes. First, skills acquired at work improve functioning within and outside work: I feel a little bit more comfortable talking in front of people and feel a bit more confident at least (Q6) I can imagine that this would have benefit on everyday life, the way I make decision (Q10) Good outcomes at work improve his mood, allow more time for himself and increase satisfaction in his private life: success in my experiments or in general if I get good outcome from my work that I do then it definitely brings up my mood and I feel that I can afford to have spare time and in general it does definitely makes me feel happy. (Q9) The scientific type of work gives him sense of satisfaction and achievement which increases his overall life satisfaction: I definitely have sense of achievement to what I do at work (Q14) if you succeeding at work then you get you feel good about yourself (Q16) this satisfaction I get from the work that I am being involved (Q31) 60

62 The participant stated that flexible working environment is beneficial for researchers with children as it gives them opportunity to accommodate family matters. This, in turn, can make the employee more satisfied with work as well as with family: my colleagues for example with child can go home any time essentially they want (Q19) The international working environment and networking within the organization advance his functioning within and outside work: it is very international my institute which is good in a way especially if you are in a foreign country like Denmark in my case. So we do things together outside of work. (Q21) Positive experiences (e.g., good outcomes) improve his well-being and performance within and outside work: if you have a great outcome and performance at work it would definitely, it have led to mentally or psychologically it makes me better and this obviously affects well-being of me outside of work. (Q33) Theme 5: Role salience The participant 1 revealed that all life roles are equally important to him and it is very difficult to put them into the hierarchy of importance, which means that the experiences of conflict and enrichment are very intense. Furthermore, he found the question about the role salience very unfair, and instead, he suggested that it is not about the importance but current life priorities: Everything is important to me of course. I mean that makes up my life (Q28) I can t put it as a hierarchy I think it is very unfair question to ask, because it is almost like saying do you value more to be an employee of a company compare to be a boyfriend or friend of somebody (...) All roles are equally important as it is hard to separate them as work can influence other aspects of my life (...) I think the question should be more about current life priorities rather than importance. (Q29) His priorities depend on his existing life circumstances: as I am getting older the work matters more to me now (...) I am at the hight or start to be at the hight of my career (...) 6 years ago, it was way more balanced, had an equal importance in everything, but now I think the importance has shifted to work and neglecting other aspects of my life role. (Q30) At the moment I prioritize work over everything else. But as I said before that does not reflect on the importance level, they are all important to me on probably the same level. At the moment the work definitely comes first, because of my situation. (Q32) The respondent concluded that success (or loss) at work affects his well-being more than success (or loss) in private life: if you have a great outcome and performance at work it would definitely, it have led to mentally or psychologically it makes me better and this obviously affects well-being of me outside of work. (Q33) I think [loss in work domain] makes me very frustrated, short tempered and impatient person just for everyday my new things, I noticed that (Q34) 61

63 In summary, the participant 1 struggles to balance work and life. He experiences both conflict (i.e., time and strain based) and enrichment (i.e., development, affect and capital). The negative experiences, however, prevail and are affected mainly by the job characteristics (i.e., contract based work, analytical nature), time dedication (e.g., working on weekends) psychological involvement (e.g., thinking about work all the time), pressures within role, stage of a career and indirectly by working environment (i.e., relations with peers and supervisor). These negative experiences affect his mood, decrease relationship and life satisfaction, leisure activities, affects his well-being and functioning. The positive aspect, on the other hand, are influenced by the type of work (analytical, creative, innovative), performance at work, satisfaction with work and indirectly by the working environment (i.e., the international working environment, networking with peers and support from supervisor). The enriching aspects improve his well-being and functioning, give more time for himself and for others within private sphere, increase satisfaction with work and private life. Finally, the overall experience of WLB depends on current life priorities which change according to his life and work circumstances. For example, the participant values all his life roles equally, however due to the stage of his career he prioritizes work over other roles. Here he is aware that balance is important because it can increase one s efficiency, however time pressures associated with contract work make him work harder compromising his balance. 4.2 Empirical example 2: interview 2 Similarly to the previous example, five main themes emerged from the data: overall perceptions of WLB, negative and positive experiences and perceptions (i.e., conflict and enrichment), conditions affecting WLB (i.e., antecedents), consequences of these experiences and role salience. Theme 1: Overall perceptions of WLB The respondent 2 expressed that she manages to control and balance very well her work and private life: Actually I feel quite successful (...) I kind of shut the door and the work gets behind and I have my private life when I am after work (...) unless it is ahm my boyfriend, we live together and he is also a scientist, if there is any doubt that we can help each other (...) I think it s a good balance, nowadays I can control that quite well (Q1) Here she mentioned that her partner is also a scientist and sometimes they discus work-related issues at home, but this happens rarely and it is seen more as positive as they help each other in that sense. 62

64 Theme 2: Negative and positive experiences and perceptions (i.e., conflict and enrichment) The participant 2 experiences both conflict and enrichment. In terms of conflict, two types of conflict were observed: time and strain based. The participants experiences time based conflict as she is constraint by time to finish different projects (e.g., scientific paper or phd thesis) on time: I was writing my phd thesis and there was a lot of pressure to get it done on time (Q2) This means that the scientist has very busy schedule which prevents her from enjoying things at home, sometimes very simple activities like going out for dinner: should we go out for dinner? Of course not I have a schedule (Q3) Sometimes she feels that others at home don t understand her working patterns: I needed to finish (...) the others who are at home they always think that you can do it tomorrow or you can do it next week and they don t understand you rushing doing stuff (Q20) Some tasks (e.g., experiments) at work are time consuming and require much time dedication: you need to spend time doing that and (...) you end up (...) using more time than you think, and then people at home don t understand why you are just so late for dinner (Q21) The strain-based conflict is mainly due to pressure to meet deadlines: there was a lot of pressure to get it done on time and I get quite stressed sometimes (Q2) when I have deadline if I am stressed (Q9) These pressures cause much stress, however at work the participant pretends that she is not stressed: I feel stressed about I feel stressed with myself because I was not able to organise myself (Q4) I stress but I don t want to show it to anyone (Q6) There are occasions when she is very tired and can t even enjoy dinner: sometimes it happens that you are just so tired you don t even want to enjoy your dinner properly (Q22) Sometimes she has to do things she does not want to do as she can not make decision without her supervisor approval and this very often leads to stress: my work I can t just decide on my own (...) I feel sometimes I do things I don t want to do but I need to somehow. SO I fight a bit with myself. (Q21) Regarding work/non-work enrichment the participant experiences all three dimensions: development, affect and capital. 63

65 The development dimensions dominates, as the participant acquired knowledge and skills which have improved her functioning within and outside work. For instance, working in international environment made her more open and understanding to different issues (e.g., cultural issues): We have different nationalities working together, that is quite awesome because then we are a little bit more open to several different issues, even cultural issues (Q11) Working with people provided her with interpersonal skills: I learnt a lot about how not to tell your opinions to others so often (Q12) I don t fight that much in both my work and private life (...) I learnt to be more relaxed (Q12,13) She also become more aware of problems that concern society (e.g., diet): I am more aware of society problems than before (...) regarding food, so what can we eat what can t we eat (Q15) Regarding the affect, positive outcomes from work improve her mood and functioning, she feels very comfortable, happy and proud: if you have great achievement at work of course it will affect your mood and you take that home (Q14) Oh I feel great when I do this kind of things (...) I feel very comfortable and happy (Q16) Success at work provides her with energy to actively celebrate and share her joy with others: it affects my pride so if it affects my pride it affects everything around me because why, when I am happy I am the kind of person: let s do this let s do that so I always have, I need to arrange things to celebrate somehow (Q19) The capital dimension demonstrates itself in sense of achievement to be able to receive something that is very hard to get (e.g., phd grant): getting my phd grant was kind of an award for me because (...) there are no chances or there is a little chance of getting it (Q17) Creating something that might be used by others (e.g., sensors) gives her sense of fulfillment and satisfaction: at work things that are great awards for me it s being sure, being close to knowing that what I did what I have developed will be actually applied (Q18) Theme 3: Conditions affecting WLB (i.e., antecedents) The participant 2 gave an account of conditions affecting her experiences: antecedents of conflict and enrichment and general conditions affecting her WLB. The conflict is caused by several factors. As previously mention one of the factors is the pressure within the job, in particular deadlines and time consuming work: pressure to get it done on time (Q2) when the deadlines are quite close (Q3) 64

66 time consuming [work] (Q21) Next, the implicit requirement to be the best to progress within academia: Nobody is asking you to be the best one, but it is more or less requirement, and if you are applying for something, if you are applying for grants or, it is again, it is indirect competition, because everybody wants to get the grant (Q25) Another factor contributing towards conflict is lack of partner support and understanding (i.e., when her boyfriend can t understand her working patterns): when I feel that I am not being well supported (Q2) the others who are at home they always think that you can do it tomorrow or you can do it next week and they don t understand you rushing doing stuff (Q20) people at home don t understand why you are just so late for dinner (Q22) Further aspect contributing towards conflict is lack of control at work (i.e., the inability to decide without her supervisor s approval): my work I can t just decide on my own, I always need my supervisor whatever he needs to agree with me (...) if he does not agree it will always be kind of mmm - I will do this but I don t want to, so that would be the kind of frustration inside the work that happens as well. And then there is this kind of frustration (Q21) Finally, she gets affected by stressful atmosphere at work which is sometimes created by others who bring their own problems, complain, fight and blame others: everybody has problems and stress regarding work. So if you are bringing your own problems it is even bringing more problems to the working environment and I think we should (...) in order to just make it relaxing environment, not bring just problems but bring some joy and some good attitudes. (Q6) if people are fighting all the time or shouting or not complaining all the time because somebody did this or the equipment is broken. This kind of things or blaming others, because the equipment is not ok. Then this is the kind of thing that annoys me a lot. (Q24) Regarding the enriching aspect, factors contributing towards good balance are job discretion and support from her supervisor: Having comprehensive boss that would allow me to do more than he wants like to allow me to test other options, even if he does not agree (...) to be a bit open minded and allow me to do different tries and explore (Q24) the persons I have been working with I think they prepared me quite well for bad results (Q9) Next, complexity and creative nature of the work gives her sense of achievement and personal growth: in academia we always need to look for solutions, the reality is that we are working to improve something (W14) Another aspect is flexible working arrangements which provides her with opportunity to arrange her work with activities outside work (e.g., she likes to go to fitness): 65

67 it is kind of alright because I don t have kids that helps a lot I think. So I can decide on the spot more or less (...) it is quite positive balance because it is your decision (...) I always try to have my time, my personal time (Q10) Furthermore, the international working environment and working with different personalities: We have different nationalities working together (Q11) at work you have different people and different personalities (Q12) Success at work improves her mood and functioning: if you have great achievement at work (...) if there are good things coming from your work (Q14) something that comes from you and they are happy about it, and you just write it, and then it is national application, you get it, it is really great, and I was not expecting that (Q18) I am the kind of person: let s do this let s do that so I always have, I need to arrange things to celebrate (Q19) Personal desires: I am kind of a utopic in the sense that maybe we can still change the world (Q16) Satisfaction with work: being close to knowing that what I did what I have developed will be actually applied (Q18) Family support: understanding of my partner how I deal with work and accepting me like I am not a person who works from 8 to 4 (Q23) In terms of other aspects affecting her overall WLB she stated that her colleagues can t help her to achieve good balance as they can t do the work for her: They [colleagues] can t do anything. The thing is if I am stressed, they can t do the work for me. So if I keep talking about the problem then it will not help (Q7) The colleagues, however, can help indirectly by creating relaxing environment: we should (...) in order to just make it relaxing environment, not bring just problems but bring some joy and some good attitudes. (Q6) even if you are too stressed, you were have a short break there and people will just talk about nice things to do during a weekend so it is also, it is good for your mood (Q11) Theme 4: Consequences of these experiences The responded 2 shared her insights into how these positive and negative experiences affect her work and non-work spheres. In terms of negative aspects, stress at work affects her mentally (e.g., she is annoyed and frustrated) but at work she pretends that she is relaxed, however as soon as she gets home she complains about her work-related issues: 66

68 [at work] I try to pretend that I am always a good company and I am not stressed and I am a relaxed person (Q3) At work I don t think people realise actually, I try to pretend that I am really calm, everything is under control. (Q5) I get quite stressed sometimes and I want everybody to help me (...) like at home (...) I start to complain to people and I get really boring person (Q2) I get in a really bad mood (...) I was just so annoyed (Q3) [it made me feel] really upset (...) I feel stressed with myself (...) I get really frustrated (...) I start to speak more aggressively then I try to (...) calm [myself] (Q4) at home I just annoy everybody with my problems and then at work I can relax (Q7) Sometimes work makes her tired which affects her functioning at home, but she still tries to find energy to enjoy things: it happens that you are just so tired you don t even want to enjoy your dinner (...) because you have respect for the other person and sometimes I just pretend that I am not tired (Q22) I try to find energy (...) sometimes I am really really tired but I still need to do some exercise because it is my way of relaxing (...) I force myself to do whatever I need to do and then I will feel actually better (Q22) Overall, she does not let her work to affect her mood: If something wrong happens I don t bring that home, I just leave it in the office, and lock it there (laugh) I just don t bring that with me, it s rare that I am in a really bad mood because something did not work or something bad happen work-related (Q14) if everything is wrong at work I am still happy person (Q9) The positive aspects, on the other hand, lead to the following outcomes. First, she acquired interpersonal skills which improve her functioning within and outside work: I try to be a little bit more balanced so listen to the others, try to understand their perspective and not being stubborn (...) I don t fight that much (...) I learnt to be more relaxed (...) if you fight that much then the environment it will not be so great (...) it is just a waste of energy (Q12,13) Working with international people made her more open, relaxed and understanding improving the quality of interaction between her and others across domains: we are a little bit more open to several different issues, even cultural issues (...) we are more relaxed, understanding and being comprehensive (Q11) Furthermore, thanks to the complexity of her work she became more curious about problems concerning society: I am paying more attention to what is happening (...) I feel more curious (...) I need to help (Q14,15) Good working environment makes her happy and satisfied with work: Coming to work it is not like boring or you always have breaks or you can have you know that even if you are too stressed, you were have a short break there and people will just talk about nice things to do during a weekend so it is also, it is good for your mood, so I think I have a good great working environment. (Q11) 67

69 Success at work improves her well-being and overall performance (e.g., affects self-confidence and motivation): I feel great (...) helps you to feel more motivated (...) it feels good that you can have some influence and you feel that you should do something and not just be static and ignore what is happening around you. So in that sense I feel very comfortable and happy. (Q16) if you have great achievement at work of course it will affect your mood and you take that home (Q14) Satisfaction and achievements at work generate energy, increase satisfaction with private life: it affects my pride it affects everything around me because why, when I am happy I am the kind of person: let s do this let s do that so I always have, I need to arrange things to celebrate somehow (...) I just want people to be together and I feel more joy somehow, so I need to share it because I can t contain inside me. I need to share it (...) So it brings me a lot of joy, yeah, in genera (Q19) Theme 5: Role salience The participant 2 revealed that all life roles are equally important to her which means that the experiences of conflict and enrichment are intense. Currently, however, the most important role is being a good girlfriend: I don t know how to split myself in terms of what it would be more important. But maybe right now it would be a good partner. So it would be a being a good girlfriend (Q26) When asked which role she prioritizes the answer was similar (i.e., to be a good girlfriend), as here in Denmark she only has her boyfriend and her family lives far away. She added that it would be difficult question if she was in her home country: I would prioritize being good girlfriend still, because me and my boyfriend we are far away from home (...) I think he would be the only person that needs some help (...) It would be tough question if I was in Portugal (Q27) She concluded that achievements and loss in her private life affect her well-being more than achievements and loss at work: The loss in private life would affect my work but the loss at work does not affect my private life. That I just close the pandora box there and I don t let it come out. But the other way around yes if I am happy in my daily life then I will be happy at work. If I am not happy at work, I am still happy in my daily life, it does not affect me (Q30) In summary, the participant 2 overall is quite successful in balancing her work and non-work spheres. She still, however, experiences both conflict (i.e., time and strain based) and enrichment (i.e., development, affect and capital). The negative experiences are affected by pressures within the job (e.g., deadlines and time consuming work), implicit requirement to be the best, lack of control, lack of support and understanding from her partner, stressful working atmosphere and indirectly by 68

70 work colleagues. These negative aspects affect her mentally (e.g., she is frustrated, annoyed) and physically (e.g., she is tired). However these consequences are only visible outside work as at work she pretends to be in a good mood. The positive aspects, on the other hand, are influenced by the nature of the job (e.g., discretion, complexity, creativity), support from supervisor, flexible working arrangements, international working environment (e.g., colleagues), success and satisfaction with work, personal desires and family support. These beneficial experiences improve her mood (e.g., she is happy and relaxed) and functioning (e.g., enhanced interpersonal skills) within work and nonwork domains, improve her well-being and overall performance (e.g., she is more confident and motivated), increase her satisfaction with work and life, and generate energy. Finally, the overall experience of WLB depends on current life priorities which change according to life and work circumstances. Here she values all her life roles equally and she can t place them into hierarchy. However, due to her current life situation (i.e., living in a foreign country with her boyfriend) she prioritizes being good girlfriend over anything else. 4.3 Comparison of empirical example 1 and empirical example 2 This section will compare between the two empirical examples, namely the interview 1 and the interview 2, regarding the following five themes emerged from the data: overall perceptions of WLB, negative and positive experiences and perceptions (i.e., conflict and enrichment), conditions affecting WLB (i.e., antecedents), consequences of these experiences and role salience. Regarding the overall perceptions of WLB the responses varied among the participants. The participant 1 implied that he is not very successful in balancing his life roles. The imbalanced life is mainly due to his type of work which requires much time dedication. Unlike the participant 1 who seems to struggle to integrate his work and life, the participant 2 appears to be very successful in managing her multiple roles. Here she mentioned that her partner is also a scientist and sometimes they discus work-related issues at home, but this happens rarely and if it happens it is seen as positive and very helpful. Concerning the components of WLB (i.e., conflict and enrichment) both respondents experience time and strain based conflict, and development, affect and capital dimension of enrichment. The behavior based conflict was not observed. Regarding the negative aspects of WLB, participant 1 reported mainly the time-based conflict. Here the participant emphasized that the job in academia is 69

71 very demanding as it requires long working hours which prevents him from spending time with his girlfriend and in general does not allow him to enjoy his weekends with friends. The participant showed awareness that WLB is important as it could improve his performance but postdoctoral positions are contract based which means that the researchers are constraint by time to accomplish their projects. Overall, he emphasized that time is his major concern. The strain-based conflict, in turn, is mainly due to pressures at work which causes stress that is very often carried outside work. Here it is shown that academic work is very stressful and it s nature affects the scientist s functioning outside work. The participant 2, on the other hand, reported time-based conflict caused by time constraint to finish different projects on time. This means that the scientist has very busy schedule which prevents her from enjoying things at home (e.g., very simple activities like going out for dinner). She stated that sometimes she feels that others at home don t understand her working patterns. Furthermore, some of her work-related tasks (e.g., experiments) are time consuming and require much time dedication. The strain-based conflict, in turn, is mainly due to pressure to meet deadlines. These pressures cause much stress, however at work she pretends to be in a good mood. Sometimes at work she has to do things she does not want to do as she can t make decision without her supervisor s approval and this very often leads to stress. Finally, there are occasions when she is very tired and can t even enjoy dinner. Regarding the positive aspects of work/non-work interface, the participant 1 experiences three dimensions of enrichment: development, affect and capital. The development dimensions prevails, as the participant stated that he acquired knowledge and skills which have improved his functioning outside work (e.g., enhanced communication skills which help him in some situations outside work). The type of work which is very analytical also improved his decision making. Furthermore, interactions and discussion with colleagues help him to deal with problems at work as well as outside work. Regarding the affect, positive outcomes from work improve his mood and allow him to take some time off from work. Finally, the capital dimension demonstrates itself in sense of achievement, personal fulfillment and satisfaction to be able to do something that can benefit the society. Similarly to participant 1, the participant 2 experiences three dimensions of enrichment. The development dimensions dominates, as the participant acquired knowledge and skills which have improved her functioning within and outside work (e.g., working in international environment made her more open and understanding of different cultural issues). Working with people provided her with interpersonal skills useful in all life domains. Furthermore, she has become more aware of problems that concern society (e.g., diet). Regarding the affect, positive outcomes and success at 70

72 work improve her mood and provide her with energy to actively celebrate and share her joy with others. The capital dimension, in turn, demonstrates itself in a sense of achievement to be able to receive something that is very hard to get. Finally, the ability to create something that might be used by others gives her sense of fulfillment and satisfaction. In terms of conditions affecting WLB, the participants gave an account of several factors that contribute towards conflict and enrichment. In case of participant 1, one of the factors leading to conflict is the contract based job which means that the participant is pressured by time to produce results which affect his current work as well as his future career. Furthermore, the scientific type of job requires analytical and critical thinking. This leads to another aspect that contributes towards conflict which is time dedication and psychological involvement (i.e., being passionate about work). This means that the flexibility at academia allows the researchers to organize their work which very often means that they work over weekends and bring work home in their thoughts. Further factor contributing towards work-family conflict is the stage of his career. Finally, pressures within role, which means that the scientist has to be very productive and creative to come up with ideas and to produce results. Similar to participant 1, the participant 2 listed pressures within work (i.e., deadlines and time consuming work) as one of the factors preceding conflict. Another factor contributing to conflict is the implicit requirement to be the best to progress and remain within academia (e.g., receive grants). Unlike the previous respondent, she mentioned the following two antecedents of conflict: lack of partner support and understanding (i.e., when her boyfriend can t understand her working patterns) and lack of control at work (i.e., the inability to decide without supervisor s approval). Finally, she emphasized that she becomes easily affected by stressful atmosphere at work created by colleagues who very often complain, fight and blame others. Regarding the positive experiences, the selected participants are affected by several aspects. The participant 1 listed the scope of work (i.e., conferences and meetings where he has to presents his work), the analytical type of work, job performance (i.e., success at work) and satisfaction with work (e.g., the feeling that he can save the world). Another factor is the creative and innovative working environment which promotes personal growth and generates psychological energy. Furthermore, networking in the organization, discussions with colleagues improve his functioning as it provides him with new perspectives. The support and good relationship with supervisor is also important. Finally, the international working environment is valuable as it gives opportunity to interact with others who are in similar situation and who are keen to socialize outside work. In 71

73 similar manner, the participant 2 stated that the complexity and creative nature of the work gives her sense of achievement and personal growth. Satisfaction and success at work improve her mood and functioning. Other factors influencing her balance include job discretion, support from supervisor and support from family. Furthermore, flexible working arrangements provide her with opportunity to arrange her work with activities outside work (e.g., attend fitness). Finally, the international working environment and working with different personalities improve her interpersonal skills. Concerning other aspects that influence WLB both participants revealed that; (1) the flexible working environment are beneficial for researchers who have children; (2) it is a personal battle against oneself because their work colleagues, friends or family do not have direct influence on their WLB as they don t understand their situation fully and can t do the work for them; (3) the colleagues, friends or family, however, can indirectly help by creating relaxing environment and by spending time together outside of work and; (4) it is more down to the researcher, his ambition and desire to stay in academia and to achieve success, where success means positive research results, published work and research grants. In terms of consequences of these negative experiences, the participant 1 stated that the inability to spend time with his girlfriend and friends affects his mood, relationship satisfaction and leisure activities. Stress generated at work leads to stress outside work and less satisfaction with private life. These negative experiences affect his functioning and well-being as he becomes frustrated, impatient and short-tempered in both work and non-work domains. In similar way, participant 2 revealed that stress at work affects her mentally (e.g., she is annoyed and frustrated) but unlike participant 1, the participant 2 pretends at work that she is relaxed, however as soon as she arrives home she complains to her partner about her work-related problems. Sometimes work makes her tired which affects her functioning at home, but she tries to find energy to enjoy things (i.e., even if she is tired, she forces herself to do something she likes and eventually she feels fresh and recharged). She concluded that overall she does not let her work to affect her mood. The positive aspects, on the other hand, lead to the several outcomes. In case of participant 1, the skills acquired at work improve his functioning within and outside work. Good outcomes at work improve his mood, allow more time for himself and increase satisfaction in his private life. The type of work gives him sense of satisfaction and achievement which increases overall his life 72

74 satisfaction. The participant 1 stated that flexible working environment is beneficial for researchers with children as it gives them opportunity to accommodate family matters. This, in turn, can make the employee more satisfied with work as well as with family. Furthermore, he emphasized that international working environment and networking advance his functioning within and outside work. Finally, positive experiences improve his well-being and performance within and outside work. In case of participant 2, the interpersonal skills acquired at work improve her functioning within and outside work. Working with international people made her more open, relaxed and understanding which has improved quality of interaction between her and others within work and non-work domains. Furthermore, thanks to the complexity of her work she has become more curious about problems of society. In addition, good working environment makes her happy and satisfied with work. Similar to the participant 1, she highlighted that success at work improves her well-being and overall performance (e.g., affects self-confidence and motivation). Finally, satisfaction and achievements at work generate energy and increase satisfaction with her private life. Regarding the role salience, throughout the interviews the participant 1 has implied that work is the most important and the participant 2 has suggested that non-work domain is the most important. However when asked directly both stated that it is difficult to place their life roles into hierarchy as all roles are equally important for them. This means that experiences of conflict and enrichment are intense in both cases. Here however the participant 1 suggested that it is not about the hierarchy of importance but current life priorities which depend on one s existing life and work situation (e.g., for the participant 1 is the stage of his career and for participant 2 living together with her boyfriend far away from family). The respondent 1 concluded that success (or loss) at work affects his wellbeing more than success (or loss) in private life. The respondent 2, on the other hand, concluded the opposite (i.e., achievements and loss in her private life affect her well-being more than achievements and loss at work). Overall, both interviewees have different experiences and perceptions of WLB. Although both reported conflict and enrichment the intensity and frequency of these experiences differ between the two. This is mainly due to their life and work situation, in particular stage of a career, and living and working abroad. The Participant 1 seems to struggle to balance his work and life as he is at the height of his career, which means that he experiences much pressures within work (e.g., securing grants). Furthermore, his passion for work increases his psychological involvement which means 73

75 that he gives priority to his work neglecting other life roles. Furthermore, he is aware that WLB is important as it could improve his performance but the postdoctoral positions are contract based which means that the researchers are constraint by time to accomplish their projects. He concludes the interview with a wish to be able to better balance his work and life and with a hope that [his WLB] will change as [his] career progresses. The participant 2, on the other hand, appears to successfully manage her life roles as she is at the beginning of her academic career which means that she has not experienced much pressures yet. Furthermore, she prioritizes her non-work domain (i.e., being good girlfriend) over work domain as together with her boyfriend she lives and works in a foreign country far away from family. Her private life is very important and she always tries to find time to participate in outside work activities (e.g., fitness). She concludes: I just think that each person should find this balance between work and private life but of course it is really personal (...) what is good for one person is not good for the other. Thus each person should try to find her/his own balance. 74

76 75

77 5. Discussion The primary objective of this dissertation is to learn how the foreign scientists in Denmark experience and perceive their WLB (i.e., whether they experience conflict and/or enrichment), with a particular attention to the conditions affecting their WLB (i.e., antecedents) and to the consequences of these experiences. Given that the primary focus of this research is WLB and specifically the work/non-work direction (i.e., the new model of WLB presented in Figure 5) the following section first examines the overall experiences and perceptions of WLB, followed by more specific components of WLB (i.e., work/non-work conflict and work/non-work enrichment) and the role salience. The antecedents of conflict and enrichment and the consequences of these experiences are subsequently discussed. Finally, the results of this discussion are presented in a revised model of WLB (Figure 6). The presented study provides a very comprehensive picture of the phenomenon of WLB in the context of Danish academic environment from the perspective of foreign nationals. The results revealed that the respondents experience both negative (i.e., conflict) and positive (i.e., enrichment) aspects of WLB, however these experiences and perceptions, and the intensity of these experiences varied among the participants. Regarding the overall experiences and perceptions of WLB, one of the respondents reported unsuccessful balance as opposed to the other respondent who reported a very successful balance between life roles. For example, one respondent stated that he struggles to balance his work and life which is mainly due to time pressures, while another reported a good balance as she manages successfully to control her different roles. Unlike the former participant who clearly implied the experience of conflict and more specifically time-based conflict, the latter respondent provided a very general answer without pointing to either negative (i.e., conflict) or positive (i.e., enrichment) aspects. Thus to gain further insights into their WLB, the question was assessed with the use of components approach. Unlike the previously mentioned overall appraisal approach which evaluates an individual s general role performance, the components approach allows in evaluating one s WLB through conceptually based and globally validated measures of balance, including WFC, FWC, WFE and FWE (i.e., scales developed by Carlson and colleagues 2000; 2006). These measures enable in identifying and clarifying different antecedents and consequences of WLB, as both conflict and enrichment are preceded by different antecedents and they both lead to different outcomes (Grzywacz & Carlson, 2007). 76

78 In terms of specific experiences and perceptions, both participants experience time and strain based conflict, and development, affect and capital dimension of enrichment, the behavior-based conflict was not observed. The time-based conflict prevails as time is a major concern for the scientists. This means that the job in academia is very demanding as it requires long working hours or work on weekend because the researchers are constraint by the time to finish different projects which are time consuming and require much time dedication. This very often prevents them from spending time with their partners or friends, and overall enjoying activities outside work. Here the respondents shown an awareness that WLB is important as it could improve their performance, but the time pressure experienced by the respondents to accomplish projects make them work much harder which compromises their WLB. Furthermore, they sometimes feel that others within private sphere don t understand their working patterns which causes further stress. The strain-based conflict, in turn, is mainly due to pressures at work which leads to stress that is very often carried into the private domain. This means that the academic work is very stressful and it s nature affects the participants functioning within and outside of work (e.g., pressures to meet deadlines or inability to make decisions without their supervisor s approval can cause much stress). These findings are consistent with previous studies (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985; Voydanoff, 2005; Frone et al., 1992; 1997) which described the process of conflict, and identified and defined the two types of conflict, claiming that the time-based conflict arises from a limited amount of time one can devote to different roles, and the strain-based conflict occurs when stressors originated in one role affect one s engagement in other roles. Based on my findings and theoretical insights it can be argued that time pressures and stress related to either work or non-work can affect people s functioning and thus can lead to a conflict. Regarding the positive aspects of WLB the respondents experience three dimensions of enrichment: development, affect and capital. The development dimensions dominates as the respondents acquire knowledge and skills which improve their functioning within and outside work (e.g., the analytical type of work improves decision making, interactions and discussion with colleagues help to deal with problems and provide interpersonal skills, and the innovative type of work raises awareness of societal problems). Regarding the affect, positive outcomes from work improve the employees mood and functioning (e.g., success at work allows one to take some time off from work, and provides with energy to actively celebrate and share their successes with others). Finally, the capital dimension demonstrates itself in a sense of achievement, personal fulfillment and satisfaction to be able to do something that can benefit the society and to be able to receive something that is very 77

79 difficult to get (e.g., research grants). The aforementioned findings are coherent with theoretical insights from Rothbard (2001), Barnett and Hyde (2001), Kirchmeyer (1992), Greenhaus and Powell (2006), and Carlson and colleagues (2006) who proposed the enrichment argument, described the process of enrichment and distinguished between the three dimensions of enrichment. The latter authors suggested that development occurs when involvement in one domain drives acquisition of skills, knowledge, behavior and ways of viewing things that improves functioning in the other domain, while the affect occurs when involvement in one role generates positive emotional state or attitude that helps to improve performance in the other role. The capital, in turn, refers to acquisition of psychosocial resources such as sense of security, confidence, accomplishment, or self-fulfillment that contributes to improve performance in non-work domain. On the basis of my findings which are consistent with previous studies, it is evident that engagement in multiple roles can have positive effect on one s mood and performance which results in experience of enrichment. Regarding the role salience, the results suggest that the aforementioned negative and positive experiences are intense as the participants explicitly stated that all roles are equally important for them and it is very difficult to place them into hierarchy of importance. Prior research (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985; Greenhaus & Powell, 2006) has indicated that people have different roles which are organized in hierarchy of importance (or salience), thus achievements (or loss) in highly salient roles may improve (or diminish) one s well-being more than achievements (or loss) in less salient roles. This means that the experience of conflict or enrichment increases when the roles are important to the individual self-concepts (e.g., a person who values particular role is highly responsive to pressures related to that role as achievements in the domain are very important). This study however demonstrates that the intensity depends on current life priorities rather than role salience (i.e., the hierarchy of importance). For example, one of the participants stated that currently work is the most important as he is at the height of his career which means that he is under pressure to secure research grants in order to progress within academia. This means that success (or loss) at work affects his well-being more than success (or loss) in private life. Unlike the first participant who prioritizes work over anything else, the other participant values the most her role as a good girlfriend as she lives in a foreign country, far away from family and friends, together with her boyfriend who currently needs much support. This means that achievements and loss in her private life affect her well-being more than achievements and loss at work. She further emphasized that if she lived in her home country close to her family and friends, it would be much more difficult to 78

80 prioritize her life roles. Thus the present study offers a refinement to the previously mentioned view regarding the role salience. On the basis of my finding, I would argue that in order to learn more about the intensity of conflict and enrichment, one needs to assess individuals current life priorities which depend on their life and work situation as previously suggested by Kalliath and Brough (2008) and my new definition of WLB. Concerning the conditions affecting WLB (i.e., antecedents), the participants gave an account of several factors that contribute towards work/non-work conflict and work/non-work enrichment. The conflict is caused by the following factors. First, the postdoctoral positions are contract based which means that the scientists are under the pressure in terms of time to produce results that can affect their current work as well as future career. Second, an academic job requires analytical and critical thinking. Third, the work involves time dedication and psychological involvement. Fourth, the stage of their career (e.g., being at a height of one s career means much pressure to sustain the job and future career). Fifth, the pressures within a role, which means that the scientists have to be very productive and creative to come up with ideas and produce results. Sixth, the implicit requirement to be the best in order to progress within the academia (e.g., to secure research grants). Seventh, the lack of partner support and understanding. Eighth, the lack of control at work (e.g., inability to decide without their supervisor s approval). Finally, stressful atmosphere at work created by colleagues who sometimes complain, fight and blame others. The present results are consistent with previous research (Michel et al., 2009; Burke, 2006; Drobnic, 2011, Frone et al., 1992; Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985) confirming that, in the case of academic faculty staff, conflict is caused primarily by time pressures, role pressures, psychological involvement, stage of a career and inability to control one s work environment. Concerning the positive experiences, the selected participants are affected by the following aspects. First, the scope of work which involves conferences and meetings where they have to present their work. Second, the type of work which requires critical and analytical thinking. Third, satisfaction and success at work (e.g., positive results or receiving research grants). Fourth, complex, creative and innovative working environment. Fifth, networking in the organization and discussions with colleagues. Sixth, flexible working arrangements which provide opportunity to arrange work with activities outside work. Seventh, job discretion and ability to make decisions. Eighth, support from family and good relationship with supervisor. Ninth, international working environment and working with different personalities. Tenth, good working atmosphere. These findings are 79

81 consistent with previous studies (Greenhaus & Powell, 2006; Sok et al., 2014) implying that flexible working environment and networking in the organization increase overall work and life satisfaction, and organizational culture which promotes creativity stimulates psychological energy and promotes personal growth. Overall, the present study demonstrates that WLB is very personal and it depends on individuals goals and ambitions. Unlike prior research (Michel et al., 2009; Burke, 2006; Greenhaus & Powell, 2006) which highlighted the effect of social support (i.e., support from colleagues, supervisor and spouse) on one s WLB, the results demonstrate that WLB is a personal battle against oneself. The work colleagues or family do not have a direct influence on the respondents WLB as the role partners (e.g., work colleagues or spouse) don t understand their situation fully and can t do the work for them. This means that the role partners can t help through instrumental support. The colleagues, friends or family, however, can help indirectly by creating a relaxing environment, by spending time together outside of work and by understanding their role partners working patterns. Here they can affect their WLB by offering an emotional support. Thus my findings suggest that the scientists WLB is mainly influenced by their ambition and desire to stay in academia and to achieve success. Here success is defined by positive research outcomes, published papers and research grants. Concerning the consequences of conflict and enrichment the participants reported a range of outcomes of conflict and enrichment. The conflict leads to the following outcomes. First, the inability to spend time with partners and friends affects one s mood, relationship satisfaction and leisure activities. Second, stress generated at work leads to stress within and outside work and less satisfaction with private life (e.g., one of the respondents revealed that she pretends at work that she is relaxed, however at home she complains about work-related issues and frustrations). Third, the negative experiences affect one s well-being as the person becomes frustrated, impatient, annoyed and short-tempered in both work and non-work domains. Fourth, the conflict can affect one s physical health (e.g., sometimes work can lead to tiredness which can affect an individual s functioning at home). Finally, the psychological involvement with work prevents the scientists from abandoning work-related thoughts. Here the flexibility of academic occupation allows the researchers to organize their work which very often leads to working over weekends and bringing work home in their thoughts. These results are in accord with evidence provided by; (1) Eby and colleagues (2005) and van Steenbergen and colleagues (2009) who suggested that WFC has a 80

82 negative impact on people s mental and physical health; (2) Allen and colleagues (2005) who linked conflict with decreased relationship and private life satisfaction and; (3) Amstad and colleagues (2011) who observed a strong relationship between both types of conflict and work and family outcomes (i.e., cross-domain and within-domain relationships). This means that the outcomes of conflict can lie within both domains (i.e., within work and outside work), thus it is important to look at both relationships as both domains might be influenced by the phenomenon of conflict. The positive aspects, on the other hand, lead to the following outcomes. First, skills acquired at work improve functioning within and outside work (e.g., interpersonal skills acquired at work improve one s overall functioning, conferences and meeting when the researchers have to present their work build their confidence). Second, success at work improves one s well-being and overall performance, and increases satisfaction in private life (e.g., it affects self-confidence and motivation, and allows more time for oneself). Third, satisfaction and achievements at work generate energy and increase satisfaction with private life. Fourth, complex, creative, innovative type of work gives sense of satisfaction and achievement which increases overall life satisfaction (e.g., the work increases one s awareness and curiosity about problems of society, and the ability to create something that can advance society brings a sense of fulfillment). Fifth, the flexible working environment is beneficial for researchers with children as it gives them the opportunity to accommodate family matters, which can make the employees more satisfied with work as well as family. Sixth, the international working environment, networking and working with different personalities advance functioning within and outside work as it provides the participants with new perspectives (e.g., working in international environment one can become more open, relaxed and understanding which can improve quality of interactions with others within work and outside work domains). Furthermore, the international working environment gives opportunity to interact with others who are in similar situation and who are keen to socialize outside work, as in the case of foreign researchers, very often their friends are work colleagues and fellow expats. Finally, a good working environment makes one happy and satisfied with work. The aforementioned findings confirm theoretical claims made by; (1) Greenahus and Powell (2006) who linked work satisfaction and success at work with satisfaction in private life; (2) Sok and colleagues (2014) who connected creative working environment with personal growth and psychological energy and; (3) Wayne and colleagues (2007) and Peeters and colleagues (2013) who suggested that the outcomes of work/nonwork enrichment lie in both the sending (within-domain relations) and the receiving domains (cross-domain relations). Thus similarly to the conflict perspective, it is important to look at both 81

83 relationships as both domains can be influenced when an individual experiences the phenomenon of enrichment. Overall, the present findings suggest that an individual can experience combination of both negative and positive aspects, which is consistent with conceptualization of WLB proposed by Frone (2003) and Rantanen and colleagues (2011, as cited in Rantanen et al., 2013) implying that balance occurs when a person experiences low level of conflict combined with high level of enrichment between roles, which means that WLB comprises work/non-work conflict, non-work/work conflict, work/ non-work enrichment and non-work/work enrichment. Furthermore, my findings demonstrate that the respondents might have a limited amount of energy to satisfy demands of all life roles which implies that participation in one role (e.g., work) might affect negatively participation in other roles (e.g., family) (Goode, 1960; Greenahaus & Beutell, 1985). The present study also indicates that individuals involvement in one role (e.g., family) might result in improved functioning in the other role (e.g., work) as engagement in multiple roles can benefit people with social and economic resources (Greenahus & Powell, 2006; Sieber, 1974; Marks, 1977). In addition, this study provides an evidence that conflict and enrichment are disparate processes with unique antecedents and consequences (Grzywacz & Carlson, 2007). Therefore the combination of these different theoretical views (i.e., conflict and enrichment perspectives) reflect adequately how work and non-work domains may affect each other as a result of individuals experiencing both negative and positive aspects of WLB. These experiences and perceptions depend on current life priorities which are determined by individuals existing work and life circumstances. Thus, as presented in the following figure (Figure 6), both perspectives supplement each other in the context of work/nonwork research and they are relevant for studying individuals WLB in specific settings. The new revised model, however, is not without limitations. Due to the scope of this project and the time constraint the present qualitative study examined only the work/non-work direction of conflict and enrichment as experienced and perceived by the sample of two foreign postdoctoral researchers employed at the department of inano, Aarhus University. The participants were purposively chosen with an aim to select individuals who have relevant experience with working in academic environment and settling in a foreign country. The number of participants is very narrow and offers only two perspectives (i.e., perspective of Japanese male and Portuguese female, both in early thirties, not married, with no children, working in one department only). Therefore generalizations to all foreign researchers employed at Danish universities would not be appropriate. Finally, the proposed model is not suitable to examine the complex phenomenon of WLB in certain contexts. 82

84 For instance, to investigate one s WLB from the perspective of others within work and non-work domains (e.g., partners, supervisors, spouses, children) as it is highly possible that the role-related partners might not be fully aware of the participants current life priorities, conditions affecting their WLB and the outcomes of these experiences. Figure 6. Revised model of WLB 83

85 6. Conclusion The present dissertation was set out to investigate the phenomenon of WLB in the context of stressful and demanding academic environment, in the country which excels in WLB provisions (i.e., Denmark), at a public institution which claims to offer healthy psychological working environment (i.e., Aarhus University), from the perspective of foreign researchers who face additional challenges and dilemmas related to settling in a foreign country. More specifically, the thesis sought to answer how foreign researchers experience and perceive their WLB (i.e., whether they experience conflict and/or enrichment), with a particular attention to the conditions affecting the work and non-work interface (i.e., antecedents), and to the consequences of these experiences. The following section will provide answers to the aforementioned research questions. The presented study provided a comprehensive picture of the phenomenon of WLB in the context of Danish academic environment as experienced and viewed by foreign scientists. The results revealed that the foreign researchers experience both negative (i.e., conflict) and positive (i.e., enrichment) aspects of WLB, however these experiences and perceptions, and the intensity of these experiences vary among the participants. The studied participants experience time and strain based conflict, and development, affect and capital dimension of enrichment. The primary factors that affect their functioning and thus lead to a conflict include time pressures, role pressures, psychological involvement, stage of their career and inability to control one s work environment. Although some of the participants seemed to be aware that good WLB can improve their performance, the pressures involved in accomplishing projects on time make them work much harder which compromises their WLB. These negative experiences result in diminished mental and physical health (e.g., the person becomes frustrated, impatient, annoyed and short-tempered), stress within and outside work, less satisfaction with private life, relationship satisfaction, leisure activities and inability to abandon work-related thoughts. Furthermore, engagement in multiple roles can have a positive effect on one s mood and performance which results in an experience of enrichment. The enrichment is mainly generated by flexible working environment, networking in the organization, organizational culture which promotes creativity, satisfaction and success at work, job discretion and ability to make decisions. These positive aspects improve one s well-being and functioning within and outside work, increase satisfaction with work and private life, stimulate psychological energy, promote personal growth and improve quality of interactions with others. In addition, the international working environment, networking and working with different 84

86 personalities provide the foreign researchers with an opportunity to interact with others who are in similar situation and who are keen to socialize outside work as very often their friends are work colleagues and fellow expats. Overall, the study revealed that WLB is a personal battle against oneself where the researchers role-related partners have only indirect influence on the studied participants WLB through emotional support (e.g., they can help by creating relaxing environment). This means that in the case of the scientists, WLB is mainly influenced by one s ambition and desire to stay in academia and to achieve success, where success is defined by positive research outcomes, published papers and research grants. Finally, the researchers WLB depends on their current life priorities which are determined by their existing work and life circumstances (e.g., the stage of a career or living in a foreign country far away from family and friends). I believe that my dissertation expands our current understanding of the complex phenomenon of WLB in the context of Danish academic environment from the foreign employees perspective. In particular, my research provides an evidence that the studied individuals experience and perceive both conflict and enrichment aspects of WLB, which are caused by different factors and lead to different outcomes. Furthermore, these experiences vary across people and are determined by their current life priorities as expressed by one of the respondents: I just think that each person should find this balance between work and private life but of course it is really personal (...) what is good for one person is not good for the other. Therefore the presented conflict and enrichment perspectives together reflect adequately on how work and non-work domains may affect each other, thus the proposed model of WLB is relevant to study individuals WLB in specific settings. 85

87 References Aarhus University. (2015). Staff Service at AU - HR. Psychological Work Environment. Retrieved 26 May, 2015, from Aarhus University. (2015). Staff Service at AU - HR. Policies. Retrieved 26 May, 2015, from Aarhus University. (2015). International Centre. Retrieved 30 June, 2015, from Aarhus University. (2015). About Aarhus University. Retrieved 30 June, 2015, from Allen, T.D., Herst, D.E.L., Bruck, C.S., & Sutton, M., (2000). Consequences Associated With Work-to-Family Conflict: A Review and Agenda for Future Research. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, Vol. 5, No. 2, Amstad, F.T., Meier, L.L., Fasel, U., Elfering, A., & Semmer, N.K. (2011). A Meta-Analysis of Work Family Conflict and Various Outcomes With a Special Emphasis on Cross-Domain Versus Matching-Domain Relations. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, Vol. 16, No. 2, Barnett, R.C., & Hyde, J.S. (2001).Women, Men, Work, and Family. An Expansionist Theory. American Psychologist. Vol. 56, No Beardwell, J. & Thompson, A. (2014). Human Resource Management. A Contemporary Approach. (7. ed) Pearson Education Limited. Boz, M., Martínez-Corts, I., & Munduate, L. (2015). Types of Combined Family-to-Work Conflict and Enrichment and Subjective Health in Spain: A Gender Perspective. Sex Roles. Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015 Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods. (4. ed) Oxford University Press Inc. Burke, R.J. (2006) Organizational culture: a key to the success of work-life integration. In Jones, F., Burke, R. J., & Westman, M. (Eds.). Work-Life Balance. A Psychological Perspective. Psychology Press. Byron, K. (2005). A meta-analytic review of work family conflict and its antecedents. Journal of Vocational Behavior 67 (2005) Carlson, D.S., Kacmar, K.M., & Williams, L.J. (2000). Construction and Initial Validation of a Multidimensional Measure of Work Family Conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior 56, Carlson, D.S., Kacmar, M.K., Wayne, J.H., & Grzywacz, J.G. (2006). Measuring the positive side of the work-family interface: Development and validation of a work-family enrichment scale. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68(1), Cartwright, S., & Holmes, N. (2006). The meaning of work: The challenge of regaining employee engagement and reducing cynicism. Human Resource Management Review, 16(2), Retrieved from Clark, S.C. (2000) Work/family border theory: a new theory of work/family balance. Hum Relat 53, pp Clarke, M.C., Koch, L.C., & Hill, E.J. (2004) The work-family interface: differentiating balance and fit. Fam Consum Sci Res J 33, pp Daniel, S., & Sonnentag., S. (2014). Work to non-work enrichment: The mediating roles of positive affect and positive work reflection. Journal of Work, Health & Organisations, 28:1, 49-66, DOI: / Demerouti, E., Corts I.M., & Boz. M., (2013) A closer look at key concepts of the work-nonwork interface. In Grzywacz, J. G., & Demerouti, E. (Eds.) New Frontiers in Work and Family Research. Psychology Press. Denscombe, M. (2007). The Good Research Guide for small-scale social research projects. (3. ed) Open University Press. Drobnic, S. (2011) Intorduction: Job quality and work-life balance. In Drobnic, S., & Guillen, A. M. (Eds.). Work-life Balance in Europe. The Role of Job Quality. Palgrave Macmillan. 86

88 Eby, L.T., Casper, W.J., Lockwood, A., Bordeaux, C., & Brinley, A. (2005) Work and family research in IO/OB: Content analysis and review of the literature ( ). Journal of Vocational Behavior 66 (2005) Edwards, J.R., & Rothbard, N.P. (2000). Mechanisms linking work and family: Clarifying the relationship between work and family constructs. Academy of Management Review, 25, Enkegaard, J., & Schwarz, F. (2009). Scandinavian Employment Law. Thomson Reuters Professional AB Frone, M.R., Russell, M., & Cooper, M.L. (1992). Antecedents and outcomes of work-family conflict: A model of the work- family interface. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, Frone, M.R., Yardley, J.K., & Markel, K.S. (1997). Developing and testing an integrative model of the work family interface. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 50, Frone, M.R. (2003) Work-Family Balance in J. C. Quick and L. E.. Tetrick (eds) Handbook of Occupational Health and Psychology (Washington DC: American Psychological Association), pp Goode, W.J., (1960). A Theory of Roe Strain. American Sociological Review, Vol. 25, No. 4 (Aug., 1960), pp Greenhaus, J.H., & Beutell, N.J. (1985). Sources of conflict between work and family roles. Academy of Management Review, 10, Greenhaus, J.H., & Powell, G.N. (2006). When work and family are allies: A theory of work-family enrichment. Academy of Management Review, 31(1), Grzywacz, J.G., & Carlson, D.S. (2007). Conceptualizing work-family balance: Implications for practice and research. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 9, Grzywacz, J.G., & Marks, N.F. (2000) Reconceptualizing the Work-Family Interface: An Ecological Perspective on the Correlates of Positive and Negative Spillover Between Work and Family. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, Vol. 5, No. 1, Guest, D.E. (2002), Perspectives on the study of work-life balance, Social Science Information, Vol. 41 No. 2, pp Hanson, G.C., Hammer, L.B., & Colton, C.L. (2006). Development and validation of a multi-dimensional scale of perceived work family positive spillover. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 11, pp Jones, F., Burke, R. J., & Westman, M. (Eds.). (2006). Work-Life Balance. A Psychological Perspective. Psychology Press. Kalliath, T., & Brough, P. (2008). Work-life balance: A review of the meaning of the balance construct. Journal of Management and Organization, 14(3), Retrieved from accountid=14468 Kirchmeyer, C. (1992). Nonwork participation and work attitudes: A test of scarcity vs. expansion models of personal resources. Human Relations, 45, Kossek, E.E., & Lambert. S.J. (Eds.). (2005). Work and Life Integration. Organizational, Cultural, and Individual Perspectives. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Kvale, S, & Brinkmann, S. (2009). Interviews. Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research Interviewing. (2. ed) Sage Publications Inc. Marks, S.R. (1977). Multiple Roles and Role Strain: Some Notes on Human Energy, Time and Commitment. American Sociological Review, Vol. 42, No. 6, pp Mesmer-Magnus, J., & Viswesvaran, C. (2005). Convergence between measures of work-to-family and family-to-work conflict: A meta-analytic examination. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 67, Michel, J.S, Mitchelson, J.K., Kotrba, L.M., LeBreton, J.M., & Baltes, B.B. (2009). A comparative test of work-family conflict models and critical examination of work-family linkages, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 74, Issue 2, pp Noon, M., Blyton., O & Morrell, K. (2013). The realities of work. Experiencing work and employment in contemporary society. (4. ed) Palgrave Macmillan 87

89 O Driscoll, M. Brough, P., & Kalliath, T. (2006) Work-family conflict and facilitation. In Jones, F., Burke, R. J., & Westman, M. (Eds.). Work-Life Balance. A Psychological Perspective. Psychology Press. Open communication is key to change. (2014, September 22). The Straits Times. Retrieved October 10, 2014, from LexisNexis database. Overbaugh, J. (2011) 24/7 isn't the only way: A healthy work life balance can enhance research. Nature 477, (01 September 2011) doi: /477027a Peeters M.C.W., ten Brummelhuis L.L., & van Steenbergen E.F. (2013) Consequences of combining work and family roles. In Grzywacz, J. G., & Demerouti, E. (Eds.). New Frontiers in Work and Family Research. Psychology Press. Poelmans, S.A.Y., Kalliath, T., & Brough, P. (2008). Achieving work-life balance: Current theoretical and practice issues.journal of Management & Organization, 14(3), doi: Polkowska, D. (2014) Why the scientific pipeline is still leaking? Women scientists and their work life balance in Poland, International Studies in Sociology of Education, 24:1, 24-43, DOI: / Powell, G.N., & Greenhaus, J.H. (2006). Is the opposite of positive negative? Career Development International, Vol. 11 Iss 7 pp Rantanen, J., Kinnunen, U., Mauno, S., & Tillemann, K. (2011). Introducing theoretical approaches to work-life balance and testing a new typology among professionals. In S. Kaiser, M. Ringlstetter, D. R. Eikhof, & M. Pina e Cunha (Eds.), Creating balance? International perspectives on the work-life integration of professionals (pp ). Berlin Springer. Rantanen, J., Kinnunen, U., Mauno, S., & Tement, S. (2013). Patterns of conflict and enrichment in work-family balance: A three-dimensional typology. Work & Stress: An International Journal of Work, Health & Organisations, 27:2, Rostgaard, T., Kangas, O., & Bjerre, L.. (2011) Time between job and care - how configurations of care policies shape the patterns of informal care for children ad the elderly. In Drobnic, S., & Guillen, A. M. (Eds.). Work-life Balance in Europe. The Role of Job Quality. Palgrave Macmillan. Rothbard, N. (2001). Enriching or depleting? The dynamics of engagement in work and family roles. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46, Rothbard, N.P., & Dumas, T.L. (2006) Research perspectives: managing the work-home interface. In Jones, F., Burke, R. J., & Westman, M. (Eds.). Work-Life Balance. A Psychological Perspective. Psychology Press. Ruderman, M.N., Ohlott, P.J., Panzer, K., & King, S.N. (2002). Benefits of multiple roles for managerial women. Academy of Management Journal, 45, Schieman, S., Milkie, M.A., & Glavin, P. (2009). When Work Interferes with Life: Work-Nonwork Interference and the Influence of Work-Related Demands and Resource. American Sociological Review, Vol. 74, No. 6 (Dec 2009), pp Shein, J., & Chen, C.P. (2011). Work-family Enrichment. A Research of Positive Transfer. Rotterdam, NL: Sense Publishers Shortland, S., & Cummins, S. (2007), Work-life balance: Expatriates reflect the international dimension. Glob. Bus. Org. Exc., 26: doi: /joe Sieber, S.D. (1974). Toward a Theory of Role Accumulation. American Sociological Review, Vol. 39, No. 4 (Aug., 1974), pp Sok, J., Blomme, R., & Tromp, D. (2014). Positive and Negative Spillover from Work to Home: The Role of Organizational Culture and Supportive Arrangements. British Journal of Management, Vol. 25, Stevens, D.P., Minnotte, K.L., Mannon, S.E., & Kiger, G. (2007). Examining the neglected side of the work-family interface : Antecedents of positive and negative family-to-work spillover. Journal of Family Issues, 28, doi: X Struggling to attract skilled foreigners, but good at keeping them (2014, October 17-23). Retrieved from

90 van Steenbergen, E.F., Ellemers, N., & Mooijaart, A. (2007). How Work and Family Can Facilitate Each Other: Distinct Types of Work-Family Facilitation and Outcomes for Women and Men. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, Vol. 12, No. 3, Voydanoff, P. (2005). Work Demands and Work-to-Family and Family-to-Work Conflict: Direct and Indirect Relationships, Journal of Family Issues, 26, Wayne, J.H., Grzywacz, J.G., Carlson, D.S., & Kacmar, K.M. (2007). Work family facilitation: A theoretical explanation and model of primary antecedents and consequences. Human Resource Management Review, 17, doi: /j.hrmr

91 Appendices Appendix I: Aarhus University - information Aarhus University is an academically diverse and strongly research-oriented institution that creates and shares knowledge. The university was founded in 1928 and today it has several world class research fields. Aarhus University (AU) is a top ten university among universities founded within the past 100 years. It has a long tradition of partnerships with some of the world's best research institutions and university networks. AU has a strong commitment to the development of society that is realised through its collaboration with government agencies and institutions and the business community. The university s goal is to contribute towards solving the complex global challenges facing the world. The university therefore strives to combine the high level of academic standards of its researchers with collaboration across disciplinary boundaries to combine research in new ways. This takes place in close contact with the world around us and creates the basis for the university to be internationally competitive within the areas of research, education, talent development and knowledge exchange. Facts about AU: Number of students 44,500 Number of employees 11,550 Number of Bachelor s degree graduates ,455 Number of Master s degree graduates ,002 Number of PhD graduates Turnover in 2013 DKK 6,146 million (Aarhus University, 2015) To learn more about the institution please refer to their website ( 90

92 Appendix II: Transcript from interview 1 BP 1: Thank you for your willingness to participate in this interview and to share your insights. I have been studying the issue of WLB and now I am interested to learn how the academic faculty staff experiences and perceives their WLB. I would like to first ask you all in all how successful do you feel in balancing your work and personal/family life? Participant 1: My personal life outside work right now is not very well balanced (laugh) I would say ehhh I think because of my work... which is being a researcher at my stage of my career makes extremely difficult to have my own time... I work long hours and yeah it is very difficult. BP 2: Do you remember an occasion when work-related activities negatively affected your private/family life? Participant 2: I think there is a lot of time when I have to work over weekends as well as during a week... essentially I am doing ehm quite a lot of times, I do 7 days a week of work so if I want to do something with my girlfriend on a weekend but sometimes I can t... because of my work, I have to put my work first because it affects my future career and it is something I am obviously concern within long term... but aaa... it is usually the weekends when you plan to do something and then sometimes I have to put it off because I have to do some work. BP 3: Let s take the situation when time at work prevents you from spending more time with your girlfriend, how does that make you feel? Participant 3: Not great ahh I am passionate about my work but and I love what I do but it is kind of like... it takes over my life I think and it is difficult to switch off ahhhm and I wish I could kind of separate work and life... like have more clearer line so I can actually truly just let go off everything I do at work and just not think about it and then I just do my private things. But I can t do that at most of the time I always think about my work, even if I am not at work. BP 4: Do you have further examples of negative effects of work on your private life? Participant 4: I mean ehh as I said I don t have specific examples other than that I wish I had more spare time so I can actually spend time outside of my work ahh but that is my major concern BP 5: Do you remember an occasion when your involvement at work benefited you outside work? Participant 5: Ahm I do a lot my work involves in applied science so it is not like fundamental science ahmm so there are some occasions I mean in particular I work in surface science so there are some knowledge that I obtained through work that has benefited me in everyday life but in terms of practical terms so how efficiently can you clean a plate (laugh) or you know this kind of everyday life so in terms of actual benefit I don t know what you mean are you talking about practical benefit or you talking about transferable benefits like how I handle people or how I go about in managing things or do you mean by actually the science or related BP 6: Yes, let s take the interpersonal skills and also how you go about things Participant 6: Hmm I don t really handle people but as I said before I kind of become, because of my job it becomes a little bit meticulous at times. So the details are important at my work so I think anything, but then I don t know actually, I don t know whether, maybe I am not so meticulous at everything and doing things in detail outside of work because I have to be meticulous at work so I don t think I have anything transferable in that sense I don t think. In terms of interpersonal skills, it is different I would say, it is nothing get transfer from work to my everyday life because I don t handle. Sometimes I deal with people who are younger then me, you know. But you approach people slightly differently I guess at work to compare to everyday life, rather than people on a streets or whatever, I would say. I did not learn any interpersonal skills in particularly from my work situation, I think I am, certain occasion you kind of learn to be formal with people but you do that anyway with random people. For friends and family you just be as you are before you had this job. So I don t think the job changes anything, I mean I have not changed, noticeably from work of how I go about with other people. Hmm I don t think interpersonally I take anything away, I mean everything I learn at work is more like practical knowledge, I gain great knowledge over past 6 years. So in interns of interpersonal skills, communication skills... ok so maybe communication skills in presenting stuff but then really outside of my work I don t really present anything, I don t try to sell anything or try to convince people, probably not. I mean, I have always been how I have been essentially. So it might be different, for example I have to go and give a wedding speech at the end of August, and maybe because of my work and numerous occasions when I have to give presentations and stuff that maybe I feel a little bit more comfortable talking in front of people and feel a bit more confident at least, but again for everyday life not really. So the last 6 years of working at the University it has not given me new skills outside of my work but if I was to say go to work in another institute or another company in the future, of course that I have learnt management skills interpersonal skills, communication skills, you know, also practical in terms of experimental, hands on skills as well as 91

93 writing skills. These definitely I have learnt but that is only from the work within work environment so nothing personally outside of work. BP 7. How about emotions, mood, feelings, functioning... Participant 7: Ooo emotions and moods (laugh) ahhh not really ahh I stress a lot from work so I sometimes bring that home which is not very good and it is very hard to switch off because of my work in being in academia its very hard to switch off because it is not like 9 to 5 work and then you can switch yourself off. So there are quite often that even my spare time that the thoughts related to my work appears outside of my work. BP 8: So do you also stress at work and then the work-related stress affect your work and outside life? Participant 8: I would say so, I would definitely say so so I don t see actually any benefit in terms of psychological benefits feelings and etcetera cause I think you need to be really sharp all the time at work, the things I do and you don t have to be like that all the time ehm outside of my work but I become certainly critical of things outside of work that maybe I should not be which I see it as not benefit... I can call stress and etcetera BP 9: Do you have further examples of positive effects of work on your private life? Participant 9: I think if you have, if I have success in my experiments or in general if I get good outcome from my work that I do then it definitely brings up my mood and I feel that I can afford to have spare time and in general it does definitely makes me feel happy. BP 10: And would that improve your functioning? Participant 10: I mean in general terms I think if I because of the work as I said (laugh), because my work is very analytical, I am doing hard science so it is analytical work. It is a lot of decision making that needs to be done anyway and it needs to be quite critical because we work with facts so I guess in certain situations I can imagine that this would have benefit on everyday life, the way I make decisions outside of work. I can t think of specific examples right now but the work has definitely made me to think that way, being very critical and analytical in a right settings of course not like in for everything. I guess you can have both positive and negative effect by having this kind of critical way of thinking. I think that sometimes you need to relax a little bit and not to be so critical but my work I have to everything needs to be very critical. BP 11: What do you mean by the negative? Participant 11: So I think there are certain situations where you don t need to be so black and white about things so, as I said, because you work in science is very black and white, the work I do is very black and white because we work with facts but I guess in social settings not everything have to be black and white so it does not have to be whether is right or wrong. I think certain things can be quite relaxed, as I said again, I can t think of specific examples but ehm I think in conversations and etceteras you don t want to be too critical about things I suppose you can relax a little bit BP 12: You mean with your relations with co-workers and bosses? Participant 12: Yeah I think co-workers and... Well no that s I mean the co-workers who I interact with outside my work maybe as friends it can have an effect I suppose ehm but not really, I think, I am who I am I suppose but I don t know it is very difficult question. I think I try to tell myself at least that I am definitely don t want to be critical at everything outside of my work when it is not necessary I think, yeah, but as I said at work I have to be critical and this does shine through to outside of my work the way I think of being critical. BP 13: Have you ever been rewarded with resources other than salary for you involvement in work? Participant 13: I am not really doing it for money. I mean the money did not or does not come first. In this filed of work that I do... I think I do my work because I love what I do so I mean that is reward in itself every day. I am very ambitious and passionate about what I do and I feel that I am, because I am kind of working in biomedical field I do feel like I am saving the world, I am doing it for the society, for the people. I suppose if you work in any other organisation, for example, in a company as such where you working for the company, essentially for the profit. I am not doing that. I mean being in academia is a bit of romantic endeavour I would say in a sense that you are passionate about what you do. So I mean that in itself is rewarding and that is what I do, why I do it. BP 14: And does that benefit you within work or in private life? Participant 14: Yeah I definitely have sense of achievement to what I do at work as I said for in a larger scale so not just to get the salary, I feel like I am doing it for the human race, which sounds ridiculous but I mean it could be that one of my discoveries of research could benefit peoples quality of life and healthcare so in that sense that definitely its rewarding in itself for me. 92

94 BP 15: What factors would have to be present to help you to achieve satisfactory balance? Participant 15: What factors hmm to achieve satisfactory balance hmm between work and private life? like in general? hmm what do you mean? like in general terms or you talking about myself if I were to achieve satisfactory work life balance? BP 16: Yes, for example what do you think about your current working environment, is the working environment beneficial, does it promote good work-life balance? Participant 16: I think I mean regardless I think from my previous employment or if you call it employment but whether you doing phd essentially or post doc which I am doing right now or even if you got higher up in general I think within in academia ahm of course the work infrastructure and where you work and etcetera of course matters but I don t think it has that much of an influence in having work life balance because it s predominately your desire to achieve success is driven by your own desire to achieve the success (laugh) so in other words you work with your own pace I don t think that the surrounding factors could affect that much in achieving work life balance. For example you know even if they say in my contract it says as long as you work 37 hours a week - ahm you know aaa I am satisfying my work the employment condition but in reality so it means if you achieve that number of hours you could you reach the satisfactory number of hours so you can actually go and do whatever you want in your spare time but it is not the case you working. So it is not what the employer said in the condition. It is more like it is down to you and I think if you ask any researchers who are ambitious you would just work all the time anyway until you reach the satisfactory outcome of your research and that really depends. It is combination of luck as well as how efficient you are at working. So I am not sure whether the employer themselves can try to balance the work life balance. I mean they can always encourage you to take more breaks or take holiday or whatever but it is really like down to you as a researcher to succeed in work. I guess if you succeeding at work then you get you feel good about yourself and you feel like I mean I would feel that I can take little bit more time off but if you don t achieve then it is really down to the experimental outcome and the output of your work. BP 17: How flexible are your working arrangements? Participant 17: Very flexible ahm you can essentially work I mean there is no such a thing as 9 to 5. BP 18: What do you think about this flexible arrangements? Participant 18: I mean that is the part of thing that I love of academia it is not where I work right now has this time management criteria. I think in academia in general has this very flexible working style so you know whether you coming in the middle of the night and do your work or you coming during the day it does not really matter because I think the research outcome is what determines your output of your work. BP 19: How this flexible arrangement might help you to achieve good work life balance? Participant 19: It does not achieve any work life balance whether it is flexible or not. It could be different if you have a child or something but I don t have a child. I know a lot of my colleagues for example with child can go home any time essentially they want. If they say there is, if they say they have to take care of the child it is really down to them to go home and take care of your kid and then do your work at night or do whenever... I mean that is very flexible. So yeah I mean you can essentially take holiday suddenly with notice of course but it is quite flexible, it is really down to them. BP 20: How do you believe others think about the working environment? Participant 20: I don t know ahm good I think. I am happy with my working environment at least in terms of I mean the facilities essentially matters most. I think as said there is no enforcement as such you have to work from 9 to 5 unless you have a meetings and things like this but I think other then that it is really the time management is really down to you. So I think my colleagues would think in the same way it is very flexible and they like the environment I work or we working. BP 21: What do you think about your colleagues? Participant 21: Well yeah I am in a research group of ahh I mean I have a boss, my group consists of around, lets see from the top of my head, 6 or 7 people, which comprises of bachelor students, master students, phd students, some post docs including myself. They are great, very easy going. They are very informal working environment. I also have good friends and colleagues outside of my own group ahm with other groups. We have coffee together, lunch together. And living in a foreign country as well I guess it is very international my institute which is good in a way especially if you are in a foreign country like Denmark in my case. So we do things together outside of work. BP 22: Do you feel that good relations with your colleagues and your boss might help you to achieve better balance? 93

95 Participant 22: Yeah, I guess so to some extend, so some of my colleagues or friends encourage me to join things on weekends and do something outside of work which is I think good in a way. Of course I have to turn things down sometimes if I have to put work first but it is good that these people provide me with an opportunity to enjoy my life essentially so they are not just my work colleagues but as I said they are friends and we do things together so in that sense is good. Hm... I discuss things with my colleagues, who are, some of them are friends not just work colleagues, about work in some parts life. Hmm... there is one particular person that I discussed before about my life, it is not just one person actually, I discussed a bit with several colleagues, about work situations because we are looking for jobs, or experiments, frustrating things, life. And I think rather then just keep it to yourself, I think discussing it with someone you can trust, somebody who has experienced things that I don t have experience in, could definitely give you an insight and another view as to how I should approach whether it is a problem or whatever it is. So it definitely it has enriched in that way or I believe it enriches through conversation with my colleagues, enriches the things related to work or outside work. BP 23: What do you think about your relations with your boss in the context of work life balance? Participant 23: I think he is very good. I get on with my boss very well. He is very understandable in any situation that I am in. He is very supportive. So I have no bad things to say about him really. BP 24: How about your relations outside work, do they help to create better balance, do you feel supported? Participant 24: As I said I think that the researcher position that i am in, I mean academic positions are very stressful in general. You can ask any academic person who wants to stay in academia they are all pressured to achieve, basically it is quantified in academia, you know, if you want to be successful is about publishing papers, it is about getting your own money research grants and fundings and so on. So what was the question again? BP 25: Do you think the support you get from people outside work might help you with your work life balance? Participant 25: As I said if you have to achieve something, if you are under pressure I don t think any colleagues and spouses, girlfriends can help me because it is like a personal battle against yourself. I mean, you yourself would only know how well you doing, truly. I mean my girlfriend or my friends don t know my personal goal and ambition and how I am getting on in terms of my work. So in my opinion I don t think they can help me in whether for me to be able to achieve work life balance because if I have to work I have to work no matter what. BP 26: Do you think they could reduce the tensions and help you to balance and relax? Participant 26: Of course, ahm that is as I said going back to what you have asked me which is you know to be able to kind of spend outside of work time, of course, that kind of relieves my stress and I enjoy spending time with them, but sometimes depending on my progress of my work I can t even spend time with them or I choose not to spend time with them, because I have to put my work first. BP 27: Would that affect you outside work or at work? Participant 27: Sometimes, yeah, of course, I mean stress could build up from work and you know, I think it is important, I know in my head, that it is important to have work life balance, because that would, that definitely contributes to how efficiently and effectively you can do work and I know that, but it is difficult because time is very valuable. These positions are in contract term so it is like a ticking time bomb, you know when you got to finish and so the every moment that you spend at work could help in getting better results that could lead to, as I said, to potential publications, the grant opportunity. So is this balance of finding spare time and work is extremely difficult. BP 28: I would now like to introduce new topic: role importance. You are employee, friend, boyfriend, which role is the most important for you? Participant 28: Everything is important to me of course. I mean that makes up my life. BP 29: If you were to put it in hierarchy of importance? Participant 29: I can t put it as a hierarchy, I don t think. I think it is very unfair question to ask, because it is almost like saying do you value more to be an employee of a company compare to be a boyfriend or friend of somebody. So I can t put it to hierarchy because even though that my work to life balance, this is the topic that you asked, we discussing. Ahm and I am saying that work takes hell of a lot of portion of my life, it does not mean that the value of being a boyfriend, or the value of being a friend of somebody is less. So it is just as important to me, but I am looking ahead, have to think ahead about my future and I think if I, as I said it is contract work, so i need to be able to secure next job, potentially be successful, and I think if I can t secure my own money, my own work position, my career, I think it brakes everything else that I am being, a boyfriend or friend, because I be so unhappy that I am not settled. So I think being a boyfriend or being a friend is just as valuable as being an employee of some organisation. So I can t put it in a ranking of what position is important, is just as important as each other. All roles are equally important as it is hard to 94

96 separate them as work can influence other aspects of my life. I also have ambitions, I want to be successful recognised scientist. I love what I do, I love my girlfriend, I love my parents and friends. For example something happens to my family it will affect me and the other roles. I think the question should be more about current life priorities rather than importance. BP 30: You said it is hard to say which role is more important but do you feel that you give more attention to one role neglecting other roles? Participant 30: Yeah (laugh) yeah definitely, I think as I am getting older the work matters more to me now, because that is gonna, ehm yes I guess the money aspect, the potential future career. I am at the hight or start to be at the hight of my career and I mean I started, when I started 6 years ago in my current role I was I think my work life balance was very balanced, if you see what I mean. But I think as the time gone past or gone by if I think about different roles so myself being an employee, myself being a friend, myself being a boyfriend, there is definite shift in last 6 years where my career has definitely has become more important than my other roles. And certainly there is some aspects of neglecting who I really want to be, so maybe paying more attention to my friends, maybe paying more attention to of course my girlfriend I got spare times. In terms of family, my family is based abroad so I can only contact them by skype and such and I do make an effort to see them once a year, because they live far away. I don t think that part has changed as I still call them very frequently. But in terms of seeing my friends, both mainly in the UK and, I have a lot of important friends in the UK, as well I have some great friends in Denmark, the friends that I have made over the last 6 years, and of course my girlfriend as well. Sorry to give you very long answer, but yeah, it has definitely shifted. So short answer is yes, it was not like that 6 years ago, it was way more balanced, had an equal importance in everything, but now I think the importance has shifted to work and neglecting other aspects of my life role. BP 31: What is the main purpose in going to work? Participant 31: As I said before, it is this satisfaction I get from the work that I am being involved in or the area that I am working in. I am, as I said, I am not doing it for corporate profits, I feel like I am doing it for the society. So that is what drives me overall. BP 32: Lets take your previous comment and rephrase the question to what role do you prioritise right now? Participant 32: At the moment I prioritise work over everything else. But as I said before that does not reflect on the importance level, they are all important to me on probably the same level. At the moment the work definitely comes first, because of my situation. BP 33: Is it correct then that achievements in work domain could improve your well-being more than achievements in private/family domain? Participant 33: Yeah (laugh) I feel that actually, I am in the last 6 years I had some successes and looking back it is definitely like both mentally, well more mentally than physically I suppose. That if you have a great outcome and performance at work it would definitely, it have led to mentally or psychologically it makes me better and this obviously affects well-being of me outside of work. BP 34: Does this also mean that loss in work domain could diminish your well-being more than loss in private/family domain? Participant 34: Absolutely, I think it makes me very frustrated, short tempered and impatient person just for everyday my new things, I noticed that. I definitely get that and it s just try to, I constantly think to myself, knowing this is happening, constantly think to myself don t let it get to me but because this is like a vicious cycle where... it bothers me because it is important to me and that affects my everyday life but then thinking try not to do it. It is just like there is no, it is very difficult for me to think outside of that circle. BP 35: Are there any more things you would want to say before we end the interview? Participant 35: (laugh) Not really ahm I think ahm, what could I say, I wish I could balance my work better with life. I really, truly wish for that, but because of the type of work I am in, I find it difficult at the moment, but I try to. Hopefully, that will change as my career progresses BP 36: Thank you very much for you cooperation. 95

97 Appendix III: Transcript from interview 2 BP 1: Thank you for your willingness to participate in this interview and to share your insights. I have been studying the issue of WLB and now I am interested to learn how the academic faculty staff experiences and perceives their WLB. I would like to first ask you all in all how successful do you feel in balancing your work and personal/family life? Participant 1: Actually I feel quite successful, before, maybe a couple of years ago I was mixing everything. Nowadays I try to, when I leave the University or the work then unless I have really like close deadline that I need to... try to finish something then of course I will work. Otherwise I kind of shut the door and the work gets behind and I have my private life when I am after work. I don t really mix that much unless it is ahm my boyfriend, we live together and he is also a scientist, if there is any doubt that we can help each other then of course we talk about work but really really rarely. In general he does not like to talk so this helps me to control myself (laugh) so it is good in that sense. So I think it s a good balance, nowadays I can control that quite well. BP 2: Do you remember an occasion when work-related activities negatively affected your private/family life? Participant 2: Yes, not long time ago (laugh) I was writing my phd thesis and there was a lot of pressure to get it done on time and I get quite stressed sometimes and I want everybody to help me, instead off, like at home so I want people to just help me like cooking or cleaning and that simple tasks that you do at home. So sometimes when I feel that I am not being well supported I stressed out and I start to complain to people and I get really boring person. But if you want me to say concrete situation... BP 3: Yes, if you can think of any Participant 3: It is just I get in a really bad mood so: Oh should we go out for dinner? Of course not I have a schedule (raised voice) and of course you have the time to have dinner anyway and of course you can spare two hours to go out at least. But I was just so annoyed with so much pressure and I was being not a good company and I am aware of that. I try to pretend that I am always a good company and I am not stressed and I am a relaxed person but sometimes when the deadlines are quite close then I am not the same one (laugh) BP 4: And how that make you feel? Participant 4: Really upset, I don t like to feel that my personalities ahm not my personality but the way I react it s affected by the work, you should, if you know you have that deadline you need to kind of organise yourself in order to be able to have that work done by that time. And when I feel stressed about I feel stressed with myself because I was not able to organise myself and that annoys me, really really much and I hate that. But sometimes when I am really stressed that when I strat to shout, shout not really shout because I don t really shout but when I start to speak more aggressively then I try to like: Joana (the participant name) calm, you can t do that, this is wrong, nobody is, the only guilty person is you so just assume your, if you panic you have to panic with yourself not with anybody else. So I get really frustrated when that happens, because I don t like, I don t like when people do that to me so I should not do that and I am aware of that but I just, I am trying to control that but I am not organised. BP 5: Does that affect you only at work or it affects you in your private life? Participant 5: At home. At work I don t think people realise actually, I try to pretend that I am really calm, everything is under control. BP 6: Hmm you mention you pretend, does this mean that you still stress at work? Participant 6: Yeah I stress but I don t want to show it to anyone so I think I am more aware of, since I am not controlling at home and I am being upset with that I try at least to not pass that to my colleagues because they will not have the patience for sure to this kind of stressful time that I am having and I think it is important to have a good working environment. So I believe that people have less patience to you so if you don t make anything to have a great environment at work. It is kind of tricky, I don t think at work your colleagues should just have you in that... if you are in a bad mood, come on, nobody is guilty about it so if you bring that to work I think it is even worse, everybody has their deadlines, everybody has problems and stress regarding work. So if you are bringing your own problems it is even bringing more problems to the working environment and I think we should just lie it on [6:39], in order to just make it relaxing environment sometimes and not bring just problems but bring some joy and some good attitudes. At home I don t control that much, people know me quite well, they know that I will be stressed. At work, of course I have good friends at work as well they know me so they understand but I try not to bring that. I try to control, I try to pretend as much as I can that everything is perfect. BP 7: How about the support from your colleagues would not that help you to reduce the tensions? 96

98 Participant 7: They can t do anything. The thing is if I am stressed, they can t do the work for me. So if I keep talking about the problem then it will not help. So I think I, maybe at home I just annoy everybody with my problems and then at work I can relax (laugh) I think it is more or less like that I think it is not fair because I think at home and with my family in general I think I should just spare them but no. BP 8: How about your boss, do you receive any support from him? Participant 8: Yeah, actually I have. So until now I had more than one boss so I was working with 3 different persons. They were kind of my boss in a different lines. My main two bosses they were always quite supportive and they know me, they were in the same situation before so they kind of predict my problems before I know that I would have them. So in that sense it helped me to kind of be prepared in that sense. They support me because they say: you would always have difficulties, you will always have troubles to overcome so I think in that sense my two main bosses they were great, they were always quite supportive and helping all the time, always available. It was great to work with them actually, but I know that it s probably the perfection. I don t think that is what people would say in general, I think I was specially lucky regarding that. BP 9: You said they help you and support you with your problems but do you think that this support kind of help you to achieve better balance between work and private life? Participant 9: Yeah, because I think I am the other kind of person, so I am not the kind of person, I think if everything is wrong at work I am still happy person, because there is wrong I can be stressed when I have deadlines but that is one thing, and another thing is when the work is going wrong then I am used to it is part of my life it is part of being scientist, most of the time I think everything is wrong (laugh) so I know how to deal with that, but I don t know how to deal with a situation. If I am not happy in my personal life then it will affect my work, then I am sure. But the other way around it is not really like that, it is just when I have deadline if I am stressed. But if it is just work that it is not going well then I know how to react to that and with that situation. And my supervisors they are good in a sense that they are always telling me the chances, like this chance is not a high chance of being successful thing, but let s try. So I know, I am aware of maybe it will not work but I want to try so it is my choice. So that is why I never consider it as problem, it is part of the work. So I think my problem it s really to have deadlines and be aware it will be difficult to finish on time. The rest, bad results are bad results, when things do t work it is part of the work, I can deal with that. And that support was... the persons I have been working with I think they prepared me quite well for bad results. So I have always this in mind, bad results are results, so you know the way to go, at least you have several options that you try, and having bad results is not the same as no results, it is not the same, it is a lot. BP 10: How flexible is your working environment? Participant 10: I think it really depends on the task that you are on, for example, I think it is quite flexible but I set a lot of personal deadlines and that deadlines I don t stress so much (laugh). So if I want to do this by the end of the week and if I decided that I would have that results by the end of the week then I work much more then I should so I think it is flexible in the two ways. It is flexible in working less this week because I don t have that much to do or I will work extra hours because I want to have it done. And regarding my personal life with the balance between it is kind of alright because I don t have kids that helps a lot I think. So I can decide on the spot more or less. So today if I feel that I want to be working until late and if I feel like then it is ok. So I think it is quite positive balance because it is your decision, it is your call. Of course I try not to... ahm I always try to have my time, my personal time so I like to go to the gym so during these days even if I really want to do that I would probably do it the day before because the next day I know that I want to go to the gym so I want to have my personal things on as well as so I think I balance quite well that point. But you have a lot of flexibilities in terms of work, so of course you can do it. It is not like you have to be here for exactly that time, you can always change, last minute change. Nobody is dependent on you so that is great most of the times. You are working your project and unless you need to prepare something for another group or another collaborator, then you need to organise yourself in the way that you should get things done but otherwise if it is just relying on you then it is ok you can do whatever you want, but I think I am quite balanced, I am not the kind of workaholic person, I always try to have my time. BP 11: So what do you think overall about your current working environment, is it beneficial towards work life balance? Participant 11: Right now it is. The working environment is good, people are quite friendly, helpful. We have different nationalities working together, that is quite awesome because then we are a little bit more open to several different issues, even cultural issues. So in that sense we are more relaxed, understanding and being comprehensive. So I really like the environment work, of course for me it is difficult, I am difficult person, when I like people I tend to be their friends so I mix a bit. In my working environment I have friends so that makes it even better (laugh) in that sense. It is not really common I understand that but I have a few so that makes it easier. Coming to work it is not like boring or you always have breaks or you can have you know that even if you are too stressed, you were have a short break there and people will just talk about nice things to do during a weekend so it is also, it is good for your mood, so I think I have a good great working environment. 97

99 BP 12: Do you remember an occasion when your involvement at work benefited you outside work? Participant 12: I think I learnt a lot about how not to tell your opinions to others so often or to not tell [18:39] because sometimes, for example, at work you have different people and different personalities as well. What happen to me it s that there are different personalities, if you would say something, for example this is black, and you would say ehm for me it is not really black it is kind of white, and some people just don t agree with you and if it is work related for example you need to come to agreement, and some people are just so stubborn that they would not listen to you. So for me what I learn is sometimes you just need to let the others try first, see if they are right or no, and then if they are not right you need to work out another solution. For me I brought that to my personal life, because I was the one that was being stubborn all the time, so now I try to be a little bit more balanced so listen to the others, try to understand their perspective and not being stubborn to the point like it s my way or no way. So in that sense I learnt a lot. And where I was working before if I was telling my opinion I would have a debate for two hours and you get tired, when it is the first time you try it is ok, second time it is ok, third time you get tired of debating so much about one thing. Sometimes better it is just to ignore or to try what the other people want, what the other person want, and I actually try to do that now, so I don t fight that much in both my work and private life. I brought that to my private life because I was fighting all the time for an idea and now I just, sometimes I just shut up and it is probably the other extreme but I actually try to get the balance of it. So if I know that that person will never listen to me, not in working environment but in my daily life, then I don t fight for it, I just let it go. Even if it is my mom or even if it is someone that I really care, but I just don t fight much for the idea, even if I feel that it is completely wrong, BP 13: Even if I feel strongly about? Participant 13: No, I don t and especially when you that the person will never listen to you. Of course it depends on the person that you have in front of you. If you know that you will just talk about it and you will have different perspectives and that is it and you are just talking it is fine but if you know that it will be fight, like kind of real fight like I have my opinion you have yours and I want you to have my opinion then I just don t go for it. I just learn to, because I think sometimes at work you need to fight for it but in my personal life I just don t. I learnt to be more relaxed in that sense. Otherwise, in working environment if you fight that much then the environment it will not be so great as you think or as it might be because then people will always remember that fight, and when it s one fight it is just one fight but when it is 2 or 3 then it will always remain there so it is not good for work I think and in the same way I am thinking in my personal life, it is the same, if you fight much, then it is just a waste of energy, I just don t think it is worth it. That was one of the things that I learnt at work not fighting so much. You still need to do it sometimes in your working environment but I just don t do it in my personal life. I think it s just a waste. Maybe I just waste all my energy at work and I don t have any left (laugh). That is anther thing that I remember. BP 14: Do you have further examples of positive effects of work on your private life? Participant 14: Of course that is impossible to say you know, if you have great achievement at work of course it will affect your mood and you take that home, of course you will. So if there are good things coming from your work of course you will. But it does not work the other way around, if I have positive things from my work I bring them home for sure, I am happy I need to share, and I will do it and I will be in a great mood. If something wrong happens I don t bring that home, I just leave it in the office, and lock it there (laugh) I just don t bring that with me, it s rare that I am in a really bad mood because something did not work or something bad happen work-related. Yeah, in that sense. What else hmm communication was never a problem actually, probably the work made me more, I don t think it is a skill, but worried more about the world in general. So when I started working in academia we always need to look for solutions, the reality is that we are working to improve something. In that sense I am more aware of problems of the society wherever they are, it can be like contamination in the other side of the world so I am more aware of society problems than before. For example, if we want to screen any kinds of disease in the middle of Africa so that makes, you need to think, you need to visualise what is happening in the other side of the world or in Africa, because if you want to solve a problem, that you would have a solution to be applied there, then you need to be aware of the conditions. So I think I am more aware of what is happening in the sense that if I can kind of, if my skills would be able to help them somehow, so I need to understand better so I am paying more attention to what is happening, for example regarding diseases or regarding food, so what can we eat what can t we eat, what should we do, what not to do. So I am more focused in that kind of but I don t know if you were meaning that. BP 15: Yes, the awareness does it make you change your diet for example? Participant 15: Yes definitely, it affects my daily life of course, but it could be sometimes ii s indirectly related, for example if I know if somebody, if we want to detect cancer or malaria or something in Africa for example, and we want early detection and if we want to work a sensor to detect and I am reading about their habits how they live so I feel more curious sometimes if I find another problem, for example I volunteer to give money to a specific association or to be a step mother of a child there, that kind of things I already did because of the work and at the end it came to my private life, it influenced me in the way that like o I am reading about it but now I need to help. BP 16: How does it make you feel? 98

100 Participant 16: Oh I feel great when I do this kind of things. I don t do it as often as I would like but I think I am kind of... like my goal in the future could be just to leave to do something, maybe it will not be related to science in the future, because I am kind of a topic in the sense that maybe we can still change the world so if we could stop using packages and all... so yeah that is part of the work actually it makes me look, search for other things. But it is the other way around as well, sometimes I am searching for things and then I bring that to work. So I would like to do, so you end up having new ideas because you know that person, for example good friend has a disease and there is no detection or early detection for this kind of disease or there is no cure, that also helps you to feel more motivated to find something or to work in that direction. So it is good when you can do something, when you feel that you can change, even if it is a tinny percentage of something, it feels good that you can have some influence and you feel that you should do something and not just be static and ignore what is happening around you. So in that sense I feel very comfortable and happy. BP 17: Have you ever been rewarded with resources other than salary for you involvement in work? Participant 17: I was kind of, for example, getting my phd grant was kind of an award for me because, hmm it is probably not what you were expecting me to say but in Portugal when you apply for phd is a national application so everybody is applying at the same time and there are no chances or there is a little chance of getting it and if I got it, it was like an award for me more or less. And for example our previous work, we got that to the media and we were explaining it and showing that to people in general, that was kind of award but I never really got an award in sense like wining or poster award or something like that. I don t know which kind of awards can you expect... BP 18: How about psychological rewards? Participant 18: Psychological ah... that is what I was actually meaning with that one, with the phd it was definitely psychological one, you feel more motivated, you feel self-confidence, that is great because you write something, right, on your own and then you have your supervisor like saying yes or no but of course you always have a support, but it is mainly something that comes from you and they are happy about it, and you just write it, and then it is national application, you get it, it is really great, and I was not expecting that. Especially the last few years in Portugal there is a lot of unemployment and people that don t have anything and any other options they started to try to do phd, because it was a way of getting a salary even if they did not want to stay in academia but without any other option people started to do it, so there was many many people applying and of course I was like I will never get it, because, I need to say that, I tried a year before and I did not get it, so I was like oh this year let s try but probably it will never going happen. So it was a great award when I saw it - yay great! But I think for example at work things that are great awards for me it s being sure, being close to knowing that what I did what I have developed will be actually applied and when I did this last work and we could try to use real wine and there is a possibility of going to a company and having this working in a company, having this sensor in the company, so somebody will use it, it will be useful for something, that is great great award for me. I am kind of scientist that likes to be, so my project needs to have a final application, I like to see it work. Otherwise I don t feel motivated, so having that possibility right now it is not award yet not award but if it happens that we can sell it to a company or something then it will be like uhhh great but I did not get there yet. BP 19: Would that affect your private life as well or just your functioning at work? Participant 19: Yeah it affects my pride so if it affects my pride it affects everything around me because why, when I am happy I am the kind of person: let s do this let s do that so I always have, I need to arrange things to celebrate somehow so the celebration could be: let s go to the botanical garden, let s enjoy the flowers, it can be something as simple as that but then I don t want to be by myself watching tv all the time, no way, I need to be active and do something else. So in that sense it affects me because I always drug with me, like in this case, because I am here alone, it will probably be my boyfriend that would be drugged to whatever I want to do. But if I am in Portugal, for example, I tend to do the same with my friends and with my family. Like I always have to arrange, let s do a party, let s... And I am always happy to prepare the things myself, so I don t want the others to do the work for me because I am the one that is best and you need to prepare party for me, no, it s the other way around, I like to prepare for the others, I just want people to be together and I feel more joy somehow, so I need to share it because I can t contain inside me. I need to share it, I don t know. Ahmm it is not a real award in that sense but I think if you are happy then people that like you and share life with you they like to see it and they like to share it with you as well so in that sense, I like when people do it with me so I think I like it, I like to do it as well. So it brings me a lot of joy, yeah, in general. BP 20: Going back to the negative aspects of work effect on private life, have you experienced conflict between what you wanted to do and what you had to do to meet your daily responsibilities at work and outside work? Participant 20: Yeah yeah of course. For example there were times that I wanted to I needed to finish, the thing is sometimes you know what you need to do but sometimes the others who are at home they always think that you can do it tomorrow or you can do it next week and they don t understand you rushing doing stuff and that is probably the where you feel more kind of frustrated because you want to finish something or you want to get something done and the others always think: why is the rush, you can control your time, why, why you are getting late all the time or your 99

101 schedule is from 9 to 5 and why are you arriving at 8. So that kind of things, so sometimes it can be frustrating in that sense... but can you repeat the question again cause I think I get lost with something... BP 21: Have you experienced conflict between what you wanted to do and what you had to do to meet your daily responsibilities at work and outside work? Participant 21: Ok, sometimes you want and you don t want and there is other thing sometimes at work you really need to do something and you can be frustrated because you don t agree with this. For example my work I can t just decide on my own, I always need my supervisor whatever he needs to agree with me, so if I want to do something else, then if he does not agree it will always be kind of mmm - I will do this but I don t want to, so that would be the kind of frustration inside the work that happens as well. And then there is this kind of frustration that I was talking about: that even if you don t want to do, you need to spend time doing that and sometimes you need to get it done, because it looks like it is easy to do but it s time consuming and you end up wasting more time than you think or not wasting but using more time than you think, and then people at home don t understand why you are just so late for dinner or, for example, if I have a birthday party and I know that I need to be there at 7 and I be at home half past 6 rushing let s go, let s go, when people like: why did you arrive so late, you could of arrived one hour before or you could organise and then go together... but you always rushing... And that is why I feel sometimes I do things I don t want to do but I need to somehow. SO I fight a bit with myself. BP 22: Have you ever came home stressed or tired and could not enjoy things you usually do? Participant 22: Yeah, sure, it happens. Sometimes it happens, I am not saying that. I am always tired (laugh) But sometimes it happens that you are just so tired you don t even want to enjoy your dinner properly, you would just go and sleep. You just don t do it, because you have respect for the other person and sometimes I just pretend that I am not tired (laugh) I think I am pretending too much (laugh) But I still fight myself, I sometimes feel like that kids that are completely tired and their moms are trying to make them sleep and they are still no no I am here so I am not sleeping and I am not tired. So sometimes I am like that kid so even if I am tired I am fighting against myself: no no I am still fresh, I try to find energy where I don t have sometimes but I do get tired sometimes and sometimes I don t enjoy that much, but it is not that often. No, I don t think I have that moment. Sometimes I have that moment when I am tired but I can still enjoy, because as soon as I get home or as soon as I go to the gym or as soon as I do thing that I like I forget everything else. So it is really rare that being really tired will affect the way I enjoy other things at home. Whatever it is even if I am, for example, sometimes I am really really tired but I still need to do some exercise because it is my way of relaxing, so even if I am really really tired, what I do I force myself to do whatever I need to do and then I will feel actually better, so if I don t force myself it is probably worse than just pretend ignore I am tired, and then I feel fresh. So if I do sometimes that I really, even if I am really tired before at the end I will be happy and I will be able to enjoy - o luckily I came and I am refreshed, I am kind of recharge my batteries sometimes. So if it is something I really, really like I enjoy, I think I do. BP 23: What factors would have to be present to help you to achieve satisfactory balance? Participant 23: First of all, as I mention before, being happy at my personal life it will definitely affect the way I work, that is more than certain, if I am really unhappy, if I feel really demotivated at home because, I don t know, my father is really sick then it will definitely affect my work and my efficiency will decrease for sure. That I know. But if, other factors that could affect... a good working environment is good for me in terms of working well. For example the understanding of my partner how I deal with work and accepting me like I am not a person who works from 8 to 4. I usually, if I am motivated I tend to forget the rest sometimes. I am not a workaholic I think but if I am excited about something I will probably forget what time it is, so if my partner understands that I am a little bit like that, it is important for me. It is important to get the right balance, because if you are just too motivated you forget about the time and then you arrive really late at home and the other person for example is in a bad mood then it is kind of annoying, because even if you feel motivated and you showing all the joy that you have and the other person is not really satisfied with that then it is difficult to have a great balance. So I think if your partner really understands you it is really great to have a good balance between both things. BP 24: How about work-related aspects? Participant 24: Having comprehensive boss that would allow me to do more than he wants like to allow me to test other options, even if he does not agree, that is a huge and great factor actually, and it s important for me in a sense that sometimes I don t like to follow the rules. So in that sense if people telling me to do like that, I get a bit like, I don t know, I don t want to do it exactly how people tell me to do it. So in that sense to be a bit open minded and allow me to do different tries and explore, I like that, give me all the opportunities to explore that is great. I don t like bad working environment, for example, if people are fighting all the time or shouting or not complaining all the time because somebody did this or the equipment is broken. This kind of things or blaming others, because the equipment is not ok. Then this is the kind of thing that annoys me a lot. I really hate that. It disturbs me a lot, not for long, of course not for long time, but it affects me, the way people behave in general, that affects me. But of course sometimes you just have to ignore it and I learn that (laugh). 100

102 BP 25: How do you believe others think about the working environment? Participant 25: I think we would all agree that we have a good working environment. Of course it depends on what are you doing, what is your level in the hierarchy. For me that I just finishing my phd I don t feel any stress with my other colleagues or even with other people in the house. Maybe if I was trying to find a position, then I would probably feel more competition. Now I don t really feel it. Regarding for example my boss, he already has a position, I don t think he cares much actually. I think he just tries to do his job and he is a nice guy for example. I don t know. Maybe it is because it is that I am coming from a different place. The place where I was working in Portugal there were always conflicts and you even as a student would know about conflict between professors and people in general. Here, I actually never hear any kind of, I don t even know if people like each other. That is great actually. Maybe sometimes they don t like each other but you just don t know and you just don t see. Even if it happens it is just between two persons. And that is great. So I think in general working environment is quite good. Regarding competition, it is just the way it is, there is a lot of competition, sometimes not direct, it is indirect, because nobody is competing directly with you, nobody is working in the exactly same field here. I am lucky, nobody is working in my field, for example, so I don t really feel that. But I know sometimes it could be a little bit tricky, even different areas could, yeah you have indirect competition. Nobody is asking you to be the best one, but it is more or less requirement, and if you are applying for something, if you are applying for grants or, it is again, it is indirect competition, because everybody wants to get the grant and if you get it then I have less chance of getting it so if I am better than you it is always good. But I think it is a healthy competition. I don t see like the one, sometimes in Portugal I saw things like someone would try to ruin your work without you knowing, your samples would be just destroyed, you would not know who did this or was it by mistake or was it by purpose and here I don t see anything like that. So I think it is a healthy competition, but I don t feel that much. BP 26: I would now like to introduce new topic: role importance. You are employee, spouse, friend, girlfriend, daughter which role is the most important for you? Participant 26: Ohh I don t know how to split myself in terms of what it would be more important. But maybe right now it would be a good partner. So it would be a being a good girlfriend. I am in Denmark, I am more or less alone here, and I think my role right now, if someone need my support right now it is actually my boyfriend. I think right now I am more focused in being good girlfriend. BP 27: If I were to ask you what role do you prioritise right now would that be easier to answer? Participant 27: It is more or less the same, I would prioritise being good girlfriend still, because me and my boyfriend we are far away from home, we don t really affect their life, their everyday life, they don t really affect ours. We are, I mean my boyfriend he needs to find himself and he needs to find work and he needs to find what he wants to do, so he is probably the one with a lot of question marks around him so I think he would be the only person that needs some help and of course it would be my help. Because all the others are kind of ok, and they are not really here in our daily life so we can t affect them that much in that sense. So it would still be the same. I think it is because I am far away. It would be tough question if I was in Portugal BP 28: What is your then main purpose in going to work? Participant 28: First of all (laugh) you need money to survive because if I have money I would find a lot of other interesting things to do, even I could be a volunteer to do something else. So first of all you need to survive so you need money and second of all I again I am a bit utopic and I would like to change the world, not change the world, but change small part of the world, I would like to have some influence on something, so help something. So when I come to work I always feel motivated if I could develop something that would be great for this company or that company, that is a great motivation for me. But of course the biggest one, I don t love to work in the sense, I could survive without working, but it is my main motivation to do a bit of science and try to find application of science because I really think sometimes science. I understand that you need a lot of fundamental studies but I also understand that sometimes we waste a lot of money to do fundamental studies and we are just playing guitar, you know (laugh) Portuguese expression. That we are just doing nothing we are just wasting resources and in that sense it annoys me because I know that is a lot of people that are not worried about getting what they promised done because it is fundamental studies, nobody will come to them saying look you did not do more then this because it is fundamental studies, they don t know what they will get yet, so they can kind of be more relaxed. I am not saying that everybody is relaxed, I know one case, very specific person that is doing fundamental research and she never stops. But in general I see a lot of money that is wasted because usually if you get grants, if you get a somebody is giving you the money so they are kind of investing and if in the end it s just don t care, and it happens. And I think it is not correct but I believe if somebody is investing money in me I should provide a solution to something, I know that is not the same in all fields but for me that is my main motivation actually. I don t like to do science just for the fundamental, I understand that it is important, I just like to, we could live all of us happy without fundamental science. We would not figure out about other diseases or figure out the cure or something but I think if we need solution sometimes it s practical solution and we should not complicate. But I think that is my main motivation - it is to get my things, it is to help to develop something that would be useful for something, whatever it is could be as simple as measuring the ph in a middle of Africa, you know. But if that would be important, why not. I think that is my main goal to do the difference with the science that you make. 101

103 BP 29: Is it correct then that achievements in private life could improve your well-being more than achievements in you work life? Participant 29: Yeah definitely. BP 30: Does this also mean that loss in private life could diminish your well-being more than loss in you work life? Participant 30: The loss in private life would affect my work but the loss at work does not affect my private life. That I just close the pandora box there and I don t let it come out. But the other way around yes if I am happy in my daily life then I will be happy at work. If I am not happy at work, I am still happy in my daily life, it does not affect me, no. I manage, that was not, it was not happening from the beginning I just learn how to live with that, how to prioritise, how to not letting the work affecting you so much. So in that sense, it is not exactly the way, it does not work both ways. BP 31: Are there any more things you would want to say before we end the interview? Participant 31: No (laugh) I think, I just think that each person should find this balance between work and private life but of course it is really personal. What is good for one person is not good for the other. So you need to find your own balance, I think, it is the only way. BP 32: Thank you very much for you cooperation. 102

104 Appendix IV: The process of coding First, the transcripts were read through without taking any notes. Afterwards the researcher wrote down few general notes about what has struck her as especially important or interesting. Second the transcripts were reread and initial observations were noted down on the margins (i.e., the transcripts were coded). The initial notes after reading the interview transcripts for he first time: Personal fight, personal battle against yourself, ambitions, desire to succeed Colleagues (others) can not help much as they don t know how important things are or they can t do work for you, they can help indirectly through conversations, happy mood, activities outside work, also talking about problems Boss support is valuable, if he is understanding, encourages flexibility, allows control in how you can perform task, gives you opportunity to explore They experience conflict and enrichment but not simultaneously Their experiences depend on the stage of their career, ambitions and whether they have kids Conflict: mainly stress, time demands (working on weekends, less time for partner) Enrichment: decision making, raise awareness about society) Both domains are affected but it differs Paradox: you are aware that good balance will improve your well-being and efficiency but the time pressure (contract work) makes you work much harder and longer hours compromising your balance and well-being One respondent pretends at work that she is not stressed, at home that she has energy to do things with respect to others, if she forces herself to do things she enjoys that makes her to forget that she is tired and that generates energy and improves her mood as she is happy again Role importance/salience, all roles are important, it is difficult to split and decide or put it into hierarchy, it is more to do with how you prioritize right now (the time aspect) as the roles are interconnected, they influence each other. The role importance depends on your career stage. Very international environment, diverse, makes you aware of cultural issues, important when you live in foreign country as you do things together outside work (sense of support and understanding) openness to different cultures Communication skills, interpersonal skills 103

105 Appendix V: Thematic analysis - excerpt from the transcripts Interviewee 1: 104

106 105

107 Interviewee 2: 106

108 107