1 INTRODUCTION
2.4 Implications of international business travel on family life
2.4.1 Concepts of work-family balance and conflict
The interaction between work and family is in many ways a complex matter. First of all, the interaction is bidirectional meaning that work and family can encounter each other, in either a negative or positive way (Geurts & Demerouti, 2003;
Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985; Kinnunen et al., 2014). Work-family balance is a
positive way to consider the interaction between work and family spheres. Work-family balance can be defined “as a satisfaction and good functioning at work and at home with a minimum of role conflict” (Clark, 2001, p. 349). According to Clark’s definition, the balance between work and family is not dependent on equal time usage; instead, balance is experienced if an individual manages the different roles and fields of life (Clark, 2001; Greenblatt, 2002).
The positive effects of interaction between work and family have been called facilitation (Grzywacz & Butler, 2005), positive spillover (Grzywacz & Marks, 2000), enhancement (Fisher, Bulger & Smith, 2009) or enrichment (Greenhaus &
Powell, 2006; Wayne, 2009; Wayne, Randel & Stevens, 2006). Greenhaus and Powell’s (2006, p. 73) definition of work-family enrichment is ‘the extent to which experiences in one role improve the quality of life in the other role’ and includes the perception of the bidirectional nature of the positive interaction between work and family. In this way, enrichment can occur from work to family and from family to work. Previous research on the positive effects of international business travel is scarce. There is research that has shown that if trips are frequent, the traveller has the possibility to control travel and if the traveller’s attitude to travel is positive, there may be a positive relationship to traveller vigor (Westman, Etzion,
& Chen, 2008).
The negative perspective on balancing the work and family relationship has dominated previous research, and the work-family interface has often been studied from the perspective of role stress theory (Kahn et al., 1964). Role stress theory postulates that managing and balancing between multiple roles, such as a spouse, a parent, a friend, an employee, a colleague, is difficult and can impose competing demands that result in a role overload and conflict between work and family (WFC) (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985; Kahn et al., 1964). The idea that work and family are different and that there are easily conflicting spheres of life is central for the whole dissertation. The article 2 focuses on and examines especially the WFC experienced by IBTs. There are several theories that have been central to the development of research in work-family conflict (Bellavia & Frone, 2005). In addition to role stress theory described previously, COR theory (Hobfoll, 2001, 2002), ecological systems theory that postulates that work and family are microsystems that entail patterns of activities and roles (Bronfenbrenner, 1986;
Voydanoff, 2002), and boundary (Ashforth, Kreiner & Fugate, 2000) or border theory (Clark, 2002) described more in detail later are well known.
Work-family conflict has been considered a separate research subject because it has been associated with physical and mental well-being as well as general satisfaction and quality of work and family life (Aryee, 1992; Frone et al., 1997;
Kinnunen & Mauno, 1998; Kossek & Ozeki, 1998). Greenhaus and Beutell (1985:77) have defined work-family conflict (WFC) as ‘a form of interrole conflict in which the role pressures from the work and family domains are mutually incompatible in some respect.’ Conflict arises when the demands of one domain are incompatible with the demands of the other domain.
Greenhaus and Beutell (1985) present three major forms of work-family conflict that can arise: time-, strain-, and behavior-based. Time-based conflict occurs because multiple roles may compete for a person’s time, and time devoted to one role makes it difficult to participate in another role. Time-based conflict may occur in two forms: (1) when the person is physically absent due to membership in one role, which makes it impossible to comply with expectations arising from another role; (2) the person is mentally absent because of absorption in another role even if one is physically attending. Strain-based conflict means that strain experienced in one role intrudes into and interferes with participation in another role. Strain can manifest itself in distress, suspense, tiredness and irritability. Behavior-based conflict occurs when specific behaviors required in one role are incompatible with behavioral expectations in another role. For example, a person is expected to possess assertiveness as an employee and tenderness as a parent.
Studies focusing on antecedents aim to explain the factors behind work-family interactions. Factors behind work-family conflict have typically been placed in three categories: work domain variables (working hours, flexibility, work schedules etc.), non-work domain variables (family situation, children’s age etc.), and individual and demographic variables (gender, age, parenthood, career stage etc.) (Byron, 2005; Casper, Eby, Bordeaux & Lockwood, 2007). All three categories will be discussed in more detail in the next chapter.
When researching couple level issues such as this study does, it is relevant to discuss the crossover effect as well, that is, the dyadic transmission process of either positive or negative experiences and emotions between individuals (Bolger, DeLongis, Kessler, Ronald & Wethington, 1989; Carlson, Ferguson, Kacmar, Grzywacz & Whitten, 2010; Westman, 2001). Three main mechanisms that affect the crossover process have been found. These mechanisms are common stress, which increase the strain on both partners and cause strain to crossover from one situation to another; empathetic reactions, based on the close relationship between partners who share their lives and care for one another; and indirect crossover, where the transmission is mediated by interpersonal exchanges (Westman, Etzion
& Chen, 2008; Westman & Vinokur, 1998).
2.4.2 International business travel and other life spheres: conflict or balance?
International business travel, it has been noted, creates individual stress and health problems and, as discussed in previous sections, regular absences of one family member can be challenging for a family. Compared to expatriate assignments, where the employee and family move to the host country, frequent travel can be easier for the employee as they maintain family and personal life at the home-country location. However, previous studies all invariably indicate that work, which includes frequent travel abroad, has an influence on the private life of travellers (e.g. Mayerhofer, Muller & Schmidt 2010; Konopaske et al. 2009).
In particular, an increase in the frequency and duration of trips are work-related antecedents that produce stress, health problems and create challenges for family life (Bergbom et al., 2011; Espino et al., 2002). Previous research indicates a connection between the number of the trips and the strain experienced by both travellers and their families. The length of travel has been found to be positively related to IBTs’ work-life-conflict (Mäkelä, Kinnunen, et al., 2015) and has been connected to the stress experienced by a spouse’s psychological well-being and changes in the children’s behavior (Dimberg et al., 2002; Espino et al., 2002).
However, there is no consensus as to what is the amount of trips or travel days after which travel is detrimental to individual’s own health or the work-family balance.
Some sources indicate that spending more than 50 days travelling each year affects family life (Hyrkkänen et al., 2011). Although, it has been found that a high number of trips does not necessarily add to the strain experienced by the traveller if the traveller has the opportunity to prearrange the times and details of the trips.
In contrast, the lack of control over one’s own work has been shown to add to the strain (Jensen, 2013; Wickham & Vecchi, 2009.)
In addition to the frequency and duration of trips, last-minute changes to schedules and the inability to establish routines has been found to have negative effects on the families of travellers (Espino et al., 2002; Fisher & Cooper, 1990). In many companies, the principal aim of travel policies is a strict control of travel costs (Gustafson, 2012a; Mason, 2002) that, for example, may limit the travelling staffs’ ability to organize the travel schedules and, in that way, influence negatively the traveller’s personal life. As described previously (see the travel stress model, Figure 1.), travel-related stress is not limited to the actual travel time but the different phases of the trip (during-, after-, pre-trip). The experienced level of stress varies also according to the trip-phase so that it is highest before the trip and lowest after the return home (Westman & Etzion, 2002).
In addition to work-related factors that add to WFC, the family situation has been found to be a non-work related antecedent that also has a major effect on WFC.
Having family increases social and emotional burdens for the travellers and, in that way, also conflict. The traveller may, for example, be stressed over how travel and the absence from home impacts the family and how the other partner manages everyday tasks (Nicholas & McDowall, 2012; Striker et al., 1999). Family separation is a major source of negative effects on the work-family balance of IBTs (DeFrank et al., 2000; Welch & Worm, 2006). A traveller’s absence from home adds to the stress of the traveller’s partner, mainly through the increased workload.
Due to the physical distance when on a trip, the traveller is unable to take care of home responsibilities and partners are often needed to be flexible with their own work. Forced flexibility may be a source of family work conflict for partners if they, for example, need to stay at home with a sick child (Nicholas & McDowall, 2012).
Therefore, parental status may be a factor that increases the stress and imbalance between work and family. When a person has children, the number of roles increases, the more competing roles a person has, and the greater is the risk of role overload and WFC (Roehling & Bultman, 2002). Having children decreases the willingness of both genders to travel, especially mothers with small children who are unwilling to spend the night away from home when travelling (Gustafson, 2006).
Gender as a demographic variable behind WFC experiences has been found to have an effect on the range of experiences of work-family conflict. It has been found that females overall travel less and may have more problems with integrating work involving travel with family than males (Frone, 2003). However, there is no clear consensus how gender affects the experiences of WFC among IBTs. Some findings indicate that it may be dependent on gender (Westman, Etzion & Gattenio, 2008), whereas others suggest that gender does not affect the conflicting experiences between work and other life spheres (Jensen, 2013; Mäkelä, Bergbom, Kinnunen, et al., 2014). Instead, we know that men spend more time at work (Statistics Sweden., 2007). Previous research focusing on the WFC of IBTs has reported that WFC appears more commonly among female travellers (Westman, Etzion & Chen, 2008). However, one study conducted in Finland (Mäkelä, Kinnunen & Suutari, 2015) did not find any difference amongst men and women IBT’s work-to-personal life conflict (WLC) - a concept very close to WFC. In addition, in a study utilizing the same data as used in this particular dissertation (article 2), gender was included as a control variable and a direct relationship between gender and the level of WFC was not found (Mäkelä, Bergbom, Kinnunen, et al., 2014).