Contemporary interest in and demand for a healthy balance between work and family/life (WF/L) commitments has resulted in the proliferation of organisations commonly referred to as family-friendly workplaces (FFWs). Such a proliferation has been met with assertions that WF/L balance is as much organisational rhetoric as it is organisational reality. Such claims are damaging for organisations that are genuinely committed to providing WF/L-friendly work environments. Additionally, such allegations if true also indicate a more serious problem of organisational ineffectiveness. This study therefore perceives a way by which FFWs can test and evaluate the effectiveness of their efforts to provide employees with WF/L balance. Three research questions drive this study: Why are FFWs’ efforts to provide WF/L balance regarded as rhetoric? What is the gap level between WF/L balance rhetoric and reality in an organisation? What organisational issues and challenges contribute to the rhetoric claim? In the absence of models or frameworks that can effectively test and measure rhetoric-reality gaps this research may be considered as ‘experimental’, since it introduces a new conceptual framework, ‘The rhetoric-reality discrepancy framework’. The framework illustrates how gaps arise and highlights key underlying contributing factors. These factors represent organisational challenges that impede WF/L balance for employees, and indicate areas that organisations need to address if they wish to dispel claims that WF/L balance is more rhetoric than reality. The ‘experimental’ nature of this framework meant that a within-case approach was the obvious choice, as it allows for the thorough study of the research problem within one organisational setting. The study was based on a case analysis of an Australian organisation that promotes itself as and has achieved formal recognition as a FFW, through nominating itself for and subsequently winning national-level work and family awards. The dual-centred nature of the research inquiry meant that a mixed paradigmatic approach was selected. A positivist approach was used to measure gap levels while an interpretivist approach was used to guide understanding of underlying contributors of these gaps. Additionally, the combined paradigm meant that the choice of research methodology was framed by a mixed methods approach. Quantitative tools such as a questionnaire survey and qualitative channels such as document analysis, personal interviews and participant observation were used. In line with Creswell’s Sequential Exploratory Design (11.2a), fieldwork commenced with the quantitative phase and on its completion was followed by the qualitative phase. SPSS software was the predominant tool used in the quantitative analytical phase while NVivo software was used in the qualitative phase. Three areas of employee experiences - their awareness of, need for, and take up of WF/L balance initiatives - were used to explore the magnitude of the rhetoric-reality gap, while the qualitative phase sought to understand what caused the gaps, what employees thought of their organisation’s efforts, and uncover emergent themes. The two methods were ‘mixed’ in the final stage of the study, and provided a rich and deeper understanding of the research problem. The quantitative results showed that employees had less than satisfactory experiences in all three areas and further supported the notion that WF/L balance may be more rhetoric than reality. The qualitative findings identified a number of contributing factors, many of which could be broadly categorised under key themes in existing literature, such as poor communication, organisational culture, differential access, cost considerations, and managerial discretion. The study also uncovered other issues that could contribute to organisational rhetoric, such as implementation challenges. One such challenge involved an organisational need to cater for a diverse workforce and therefore to provide a broad range of initiatives. Another finding is that need for particular provisions is closely linked to employees’ life stage. Both these issues mean that while organisations should offer a wide range of provisions there is also the strong likelihood that a good number of provisions may have very poor take up or have no take up. An emergent theme, though linked to few participants only, was the set of WF/L balance challenges faced by first generation Australians or immigrant workers. Another finding which appears to contradict the gap level finding of organisational rhetoric is that a number of employees either specifically identified their organisation as being WF/L-friendly or identified that flexibility was a key ingredient of WF/L balance and acknowledged that their organisation provided such flexibility. / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:ADTP/273617 |
| Date | January 2008 |
| Creators | Fernandez, Santha, University of Western Sydney, College of Business, School of Management |
| Source Sets | Australiasian Digital Theses Program |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
Page generated in 0.0026 seconds