Work life balance issues in mobile enabled work environment

TECHNICAL REPORT

ON

WORK LIFE BALANCE ISSUES IN MOBILE ENABLED WORK ENVIRONMENT

BY

MAYANK BAHETI 1RV09IM024
RISHAB SHETTY 1RV08IM060
SUNAYAN MUKHERJI 1RV09IM043
KSHITIJ PURI 1RV09IM019

SUBJECT NAME: Management Practices For Business Excellence

SUBJECT CODE: 07IM764

DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT
R.V.COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
(An Autonomous Institution Affiliated to VTU, Belgaum)
BANGALORE-560059

Work Life Balance Issues in Mobile Enabled Work Environment Page 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SL.NO TOPIC PAGE NO.

1. Introduction 3

1.1. Work patterns are changing 3

1.2. The workforce is changing 5

1.3. The workplace is changing 6

1.4. Flexible work environments 6

1.5. Distributed work environments 6

2. Literature Review 8

3. Work Life Balance Issues in Mobile enabled Environment 13

3.1. Technology and the mix of jobs 15

3.2. The organization of work 17

3.3. Benefits of work life balance in mobile work 22

3.4. Suitability for mobile work 22

3.5. Security in Mobile Work 22

3.6. Steps For Establishing a Mobile Environment 23

3.7. Some techniques of implementation of mobile work 23

3.8. The Changing Work Environment in IBM 25

3.9. Work Life Strategy 25

4. Case Study 26

5. Conclusion 46

Reference 47


1. INTRODUCTION
Zedeck and Mosier (1990) and more recently O’Driscoll (1996) note that there are
typically five main models used to explain the relationship between work and life outside
work. The segmentation model hypothesizes that work and non-work are two distinct
domains of life that are lived quite separately and have no influence on each other. This
appears to be offered as a theoretical possibility rather than a model with empirical
support. In contrast, as pill over model hypothesizes that one world can influence the
other in either a positive or negative way. There is, of course, ample research to support
this but as a proposition it is specified in such a general way as to have little value. We
therefore need more detailed propositions about the nature, causes and consequences of
spillover. The third model is a compensation model which proposes that what may be
lacking in one sphere, in terms of demands or satisfactions can be made up in the
other. For example work may be routine and undemanding but this is compensated for
by a major role in local community activities outside work. A fourth model is
an instrumental model whereby activities in one sphere facilitate success in the
other. The traditional example is the instrumental worker who will seek to maximize
earnings, even at the price of undertaking a routine job and working long hours, to allow
the purchase of a home or a car for a young family. The final model is a conflict model
which proposes that with high levels of demand in all spheres of life, some difficult
choices have to be made and some conflicts and possibly some significant overload on an
individual occur.[26]

1.1 Work patterns are changing

In response to this demand for rapid innovation, work has become more flexible,
distributed and collaborative. Remember the elusive promise of more leisure time thanks
to technology innovations? That was obliterated when companies “reengineered” and
“right-sized,” causing surviving employees to face ever-increasing demands for
productivity. Although this productivity increase was meant to come from continuous
process improvement, workweeks of sixty hours or more became common. Job
requirements, enabled by advances in communication, have blurred the distinction
between work and personal time. Specific hours, location, and dress codes are rapidly
becoming obsolete. Anytime/anywhere has become the norm.

Management styles have become less hierarchical, job security has become an historic
artifact, and work is organized around collaborative teams, often geographically
dispersed. The Hollywood model of bringing together free agents for a project and then
disbanding has long been used in the construction industry and is now being adopted in a
business context. Employers hire and retain employees based on short-term


needs. Outsourcing and contracting are replacing traditionally in-sourced functions,
providing employers increased flexibility.

1.2 The workforce is changing

Companies are shopping globally for high-quality services at the lowest price by off-
shoring, near-shoring and seeking low-cost domestic labor markets. Nearly
instantaneous, low-cost communication has enabled the globalization of work. India,
the Philippines and many other countries are emerging as suppliers of highly skilled
workers due to their educational standards, language skills and low wage
rates. Managing this highly diverse workforce remotely across cultures requires new
skills and heightened awareness of differences. Providing the right processes, technology
and environment for these far-flung enterprises is critical to their success.

Profound shifts in the domestic workforce are also inevitable based on current
demographic trends. The Baby Boom generation is nearing retirement age and there are
not enough workers in the 25-44 age range to replace them. For example, even though
companies will continue to seek low-cost labor markets globally, the U.S. Bureau of
Labor Statistics projects a shortfall of 10 million workers in the United States by the year
2010. In response, companies will seek to attract talent that they may once have by-
passed including older workers, women and minorities. They will also depend more on
free-agents and contract employees. Attracting and retaining skilled workers will be
highly competitive.

Employers are beginning to appreciate the wisdom of keeping critically important skills,
knowledge, relationships and experience from walking out the door. They are
considering flexible retirement options that allow mature workers to continue on their
own terms, with much more control over their schedule and location. In a Harvard
Business Review article called “It’s Time to Retire Retirement,” Ken Dychtwald says,
“The concept of retirement is outdated and should be put out to pasture in favor of a more
flexible approach to ongoing work. People are living longer, healthier lives. Motivated
both by a desire to work and by economic necessity, many older workers are eager to
take advantage of these options.

As a result, many more generations will be in the work force simultaneously. Younger
workers’ priorities include creating a balance between work and personal time. Their
expectations of their employers extend beyond salary to issues such as flexible hours,
amenities (day-care, fitness centers, food service, etc.), the latest technology tools and the
quality of the work environment. They tend to choose companies with values that are
closely aligned to their own.


The number of women and minorities will better reflect the population. Women, already
constituting nearly 50% of the workforce, will be better represented across levels and
functions. Gender, cultural and racial workforce diversity offers employers competitive
advantage in many ways. For example, as the workforce begins to mirror their customers,
companies are better able to anticipate and meet customer needs. Diversity also brings
multiple, overlapping and, possibly, conflicting values, traditions, needs and desires into
the workplace. Careful attention must be paid to meet these needs.

Competition for key talent will be stiff. Employers will be constantly challenged to
attract and maintain a staff with the skills that are critical to the organization’s
success. Highly talented individuals will wield a good deal of discretionary
power. Richard Florida, professor at Carnegie Mellon, author and theorist, labels this
type of worker “the creative class”. Speaking as one of them, he writes “In addition to
being fairly compensated for the work we do and the skills we bring, we want the ability
to learn and grow, shape the content of work, control our own schedules and express our
identities through work. And companies of all types, including large established ones,
are adapting to this change by striving to create new workplaces that are more amenable
to creative work. In this, they have no choice: Either they will create these kinds of
environments or they will wither and die.”


1.3 The workplace is changing

While changes in work patterns and the workforce are occurring rapidly, changes in the
workplace are taking place at a much slower pace. Investments in buildings, furniture and
equipment remain on the books for long, fixed periods. As a result, work environments
are likely to reflect outdated work patterns. Because many companies are still trying to
shed excess space due to corporate mergers and staff downsizing, they may have little
appetite to embark on new initiatives even if the investment would lower operating
costs. As we have seen, competitive pressures and the impending labor shortage will
require that companies adapt their work arrangements to support workers, to help them
connect and to build a sense of community.

1.4 Flexible work environments

The work environment must be responsive to multifaceted requirements. This does not
mean that the workplace will be tailored to individuals or processes, since they are
continually changing. While work tasks may be more specialized than ever before, tools
are becoming more generic. The architect’s drafting table, the scientist’s lab and the
researcher’s library are no longer specialized spaces or hardware – just software and
access to information.

A corporate reorganization no longer foreshadows a series of staged moves and costly
refits. With phone number portability, the ability to log on to any device and flexible
furniture, this becomes a matter of moving boxes at most. The need for mobility has
provided the incentive to reduce extra baggage, print less and have fewer personal items
on hand, thus challenging long-standing assumptions about storage needs.

Teams need the ability to form and disband quickly and easily in response to project
requirements. The key is flexibility, accomplished by providing a variety of spaces (quiet
space, meeting rooms, gathering places, etc.), adaptable furniture configurations and
technology tools to link geographically dispersed team members.

1.5 Distributed work environments

Mobility has already happened even without formal policies. Whether someone is in the
office, on the road or working from home has become largely irrelevant. Non-traditional
workplaces include home offices, airports, workplace clubs, satellite offices, libraries,
coffee shops and any wireless hot-spot. Historic sites and rural locations that could not
function effectively when everything needed to be hardwired are now finding new
uses. Wireless voice and data are making workers increasingly independent of a fixed
location, even within the corporate office.


Work is coming to the worker. Employers go where they find qualified labor at the best
rates. Skilled workers are more in control of their location. Work can even follow the
sun. For example, at the end of the work day in Los Angeles, a team can pass work
electronically to colleagues in Singapore, who then pass it on to a team in Scotland, for
24-hour productivity.

Off-shoring and near-shoring trends will continue and accelerate. Employers are actively
seeking ways to best manage and support all remote workers in order to make the most of
the potential productivity gains and cost savings. McKinsey & Company’s tomorrow lab
co-founders, George Goldsmith and Cory Lefebvre, found four factors that lead to an
efficient and effective virtual team: a shared vision and process, great people, effective
communication and appropriate technology. By providing remote workers with the tools
and infrastructure they need, perceived distances are reduced.


2. LITERATURE REVIEW
Bettina Beurer-Zuellig et.al. [1] explains that the smartphones have the potential to
improve and accelerate work processes through timely provision of information,
enhanced reachability and the simplification of coordination processes. This study treats a
present organizational issue related to increasing the productivity of the mobile
workforce.

Torsten L. Brodt et. al. [2] explains the nature and practice of managing mobile work in
Europe. On basis of empirical analysis of five selected case studies from a large
European research project, a number of enablers and barriers for the successful
introduction of mobile work initiatives are presented and discussed. So far, research in
the area of mobile work is limited to a few, often singular, case studies and lacks a
systematic assessment of current types, practices and applications.

Jan Kietzmann, [3] explain the increasing popularity of mobile information systems, the
actual processes leading to the innovation of mobile technologies remain largely
unexplored. This study uses Action Research to examine the innovation of a mobile
RFID technology. Working from Activity Theory, it departs from the prevalent product-
oriented view of innovation and treats technology-in-the making as a complex activity,
made possible through the interaction of manufacturers, their organizational clients and
their respective mobile workers.

Johanna Koroma et. al. [4] explains the way of working with no fixed workplace, instead
mobile employees travel using ICT (information and communication technologies) for
communicating and collaborating with others from different locations.

T. Alexandra Beauregard et. al. [5] suggest that the business case may therefore need to
be modified to reflect the number of additional routes by which work-life balance
practices can influence organizational performance, including enhanced social exchange
processes, increased cost savings, improved productivity, and reduced turnover.

Val Jones et. al. [6] explains that the main objective of the MOSAIC project is to
accelerate innovation in mobile worker. Support Environments by shaping future


research and innovation activities in Europe. The modus operandi of MOSAIC is to
develop visions and illustrative scenarios for future collaborative workspaces involving
mobile and location-aware working.

Nikals Johansson et. al. [7] their research is concern about usability of mobile
technology, they are mainly interested in usability of mobile IT systems used in a
professional work context. Such work support systems are found in various work settings,
e.g. in health care, in technical maintenance and in sales and consultant organizations. IT
systems support mobile work activities and are sometimes necessary for making work
mobile.

Nick Bloom et. al.[8] Many critics of free-market liberalism argue that higher product-
market competition and the “Anglo-Saxon” management practices it stimulates increases
productivity only at the expense of employees’ work-life balance (WLB). After
controlling for management practices, however, we find no additional relationship
between WLB and productivity. WLB practices are also not reduced by tougher
competition, suggesting no deleterious effect of competition on employees’ working
environment.

E. Jeffrey Hill et. al. [9] Millions use electronic tools to do their jobs away from the
traditional office. Some labor in a ‘‘virtual office’’ with flexibility to work wherever it
makes sense and others telecommute primarily from home. Perceptions, direct
comparisons, and multivariate analyses suggest that the influence of the virtual office is
mostly positive on aspects of work but somewhat negative on aspects of personal/family
life. The influence of the home office appears to be mostly positive and the influence of
traditional office mostly negative on aspects of both work and personal/life.

Htwe Htwe Thein et. al. [10] ‘Work/family balance’ has recently come to the fore in
public policy debate and academic inquiry across the industrialized world. However, this
issue has been relatively under-explored in the context of Asian business and society.
Data from focus groups were used to explore how women in these countries perceive
work/family balance and the role of family, government and other support structures in
managing this aspect of their lives.


Masao Kakihara, [11] explains the concept of mobility, particularly in contemporary
work contexts. With support of information and communication technologies (ICTs) in
general and mobile technology in particular, contemporary work activities are
increasingly distributed and dynamically conducted in various locations. In such an
emerging work environment, maintaining a highly level of ‘mobility’ is becoming critical
for contemporary workers, particularly for mobile professionals.

Maria C. W. Peeters et. al. [12] The aim of the present study was to make a clear
distinction between work and home domains in the explanation of burnout. A model was
tested that delineates how demands in both life domains are related to occupational
burnout through work_home interference (WHI) and home_work interference (HWI). In
doing so, the partial mediating role of WHI and HWI was examined.

Seamus Tyler-Baxter, [13] Tells about work-life balance is an important topic that is
worthy of study and is becoming increasingly popular among researchers. There is a lack
of knowledge contributing to the work-life balance issues for new graduates. This study
seeks to explore how graduates in their first year of post-university study, experience
work-life balance.

Diane Perrons, [14] Given the varied claims made about the new economy and its
implication for the organization of work and life, this article critically evaluates some
conceptualizations of the new economy and then explores how the new media sector has
materialized and been experienced by people working in Brighton and Hove, a new
media hub.

The President Council of Economic Advisers, [15] explains that the Flexible workplace
arrangements can be in terms of when one works, where one works, or how much one
works (including time off after childbirth or other life events). They include a variety of
arrangements such as job sharing, phased retirement of older workers, and
telecommuting, that allow workers to continue making productive contributions to the
workforce while also attending to family and other responsibilities.

Australian Institute of management, [16] said that Across Australia there is a growing
demand for more flexible work arrangements. Working part time, staggering start and


finish times, teleworking, taking extended leave, staging retirement or phasing a return
from leave—all these and more are finding their way into workplaces.

UN women at Expert Group Meeting, [17] finds that a flexible work culture
encompasses, but goes beyond, the provision and use of flexible work practices. It is one
where employees feel comfortable working flexibly. It is a culture where managing
flexibly is a required management ability, where employees are empowered to challenge
notions of where, when and how work gets done, and where the business case for
flexibility is well understood and support for flexibility is characterized by clear and
visible leadership.

Vodafone white paper, [18] key concept of paper is mobile and flexible working is an
irreversible development, a shift that is not just about complying with development with
legislation but also about achieving social, economic and environmental benefits for your
employees.

Niharika doble et. al. [19] paper addresses work-life balance across genders. Both men
and women reported experiencing work life imbalance. Organizational efforts at
providing a supportive work environment are appreciated as they goes a long way
towards enhancing work life balance.

Jennifer Redmond et. al. [20] said that Work-life balance policies, workplace culture,
childcare and maternity issues can have a special resonance for those who are facing a
crisis pregnancy. those who feel that they can successfully combine work and parenthood
are more likely to continue with an unplanned pregnancy and parent their child.

Helen Lingard et. al. [21] A survey was conducted to determine the work-life
experiences of the employees of one large Australian construction firm. The
questionnaire was designed to elicit information about employees’ demographic
characteristics, feelings about work, family relationship quality and preferences for work-
life balance initiatives.


Hon Ruth Dyson, [22] said that participation in paid employment has become more
common, there has been increasing concern about how to achieve a work-life balance. It
is probably fair to say that everyone encounters issues of combining paid work with the
other things that matter to them at some stage of their lives. It is also clear from the
stories summarized in this report that some people face significant barriers to achieving
balance in their lives.

Nancy R. Lockwood, [23] concluded that the Work/life programs have the potential to
significantly improve employee morale, reduce absenteeism, and retain organizational
knowledge, particularly during difficult economic times. In today’s global marketplace,
as companies aim to reduce costs, it falls to the human resource professional to
understand the critical issues of work/life balance and champion work/life programs.

Bettina-Johanna Krings et. al. [24] concluded that the workplace are interconnected with
work-life balance in a changing environment, this relationship seems to be an important
topic in current political debates in Europe. Due to enormous processes of economic
upheavals, technological transformation and the dominance of service employment
provoke major changes not only on the labour markets but also in the social structure of
societies. Without doubt these changes also imply societal issues like ageing societies,
shortage of public health care or the ongoing integration of women into the labour
markets.

Dr. Muhammad Iqbal Saif et. al. [25] explained the relationship of employee work
satisfaction (job satisfaction) and prevalence of work life balance (WLB) practices in
Pakistan. A sample of 450 layoff survivors, gathered via stratified sampling, provides the
basis for analysis. The layoff survivors are working in two big organizations operating in
Pakistan.


3.Work Life Balance Issues in Mobile enabled
Environment
The various aspects of mobile enabled environment on work life balance is
discussed below . New technologies—especially advances in telecommunication and
information technology—have had profound impacts on the mix of jobs in the economies
of the industrialized nations, on how work is organized, and on people’s experience at
work.
The nature of these effects on the work-family interface is contested. Technology
is sometimes portrayed as a force enabling the successful integration of multiple life
roles. According to this line of reasoning, technology can provide opportunities for
people to balance their responsibilities at work with family duties and other interests. A
recent television commercial epitomized this optimistic vision of technology’s effects of
work-life integration: a working mother phoned into a conference call via cell phone
from the beach while her children stage-whispered, “Shh! Mommy is in a meeting.” To
other observers, however, technology is viewed as a vehicle for enslavement to work and
subjugation of the non-work domain to the job. In this vision, workplace technology has
the potential to invade workers’ lives. Employers could apply advances in
communication and information technology to monitor employees incessantly, render
them ever-available for work, and reduce their latitude to balance the realms of work and
non-work. One version of this vision was depicted in a film which showed an exhausted,
pajama-clad stockbroker hunched over his laptop in the middle of the night. Since
technology had enabled him to follow the progress of overseas stock markets in other
time zones during the North American night, he was no longer permitted the luxury of a
full night’s sleep.
Despite the plausibility of the arguments on both sides of this debate, however,
empirical examinations of the relationship between technology and work-life integration
have offered relatively few consistent findings. Generally, technology variables
considered devoid of context tend to explain little of the variance in other phenomena to
which they may conceivably be connected, such as workers’ attitudes or workplace skill
structures .In this sense, work-life balance is not unusual: few studies of individual
workers have turned up much evidence that the technologies workers use have effects on
work-life balance, whether in enhancing work-life integration or in exacerbating conflict.
In this chapter, we argue that a meaningful examination of this relationship must take into
account the many contextual factors that lie between technology and the integration of
work and life. Technology per se has few implications for work-life integration. Rather,
configurations of technology in organizational, individual, and family contexts may
exacerbate work-life conflict, or, in contrast, provide people with opportunity to balance
their work and non-work lives successfully.


Work-life integration is “a perceptual phenomenon characterized by a sense of
having achieved a satisfactory resolution of the multiple demands” of work and non-work
domains . People whose work and non-work (especially family) lives are well integrated
function effectively at work and at home, feel a sense of satisfaction with both domains,
and experience minimal levels of conflict between work and family. As this definition
suggests, work-life integration is a multifaceted construct. Researchers interested in
work-life integration have modeled multiple outcomes under the conceptual umbrella of
work-life or work-family integration or balance, including job satisfaction, family
satisfaction, work interference with family, family interference with work, work-family
conflict that is time-based, strain-based or behavior-based, role overload, and
psychological distress or well-being. It is plausible, and indeed has been demonstrated
empirically, that technology can have differential effects on different components of
work-life integration; for instance, by increasing people’s autonomy and work
functioning while simultaneously increasing their felt conflict between work and family
or by increasing both their reported spillover from work to family and their sense of
personal mastery. In this chapter, we employ a contextual approach in our examination of
the effects of technology on work-life integration in order to illuminate the sometimes
contradictory nature of the relationship.
The term “technology” evokes a number of images; its most general definition
refers to know-how that is objectified independently of specific actors.The interplay
between managers and workers in implementing technology, the goals of each party and
their relative power in the workplace influence outcomes, as do the characteristics of
workers and their home environments, including the relationship of the worker to other
members of his or her family unit.
In the current discussion we identify two main ways in which technology, in
conjunction with features of the workplace and the non-work domain, has effects on
work-life integration. First, technology influences the overall mix of jobs and the sets of
tasks that jobs comprise. To the extent that jobs in themselves differ in the ways in which
they influence the relationships between work and family life, technology has the
potential to affect work-life conflict and integration. Technological change leads to the
disappearance of some kinds of jobs, creates others, and in doing so, changes the
relationship between work and life outside work.
The exact nature of these changes, however, can only be fully understood by
considering the second mediating path, that is, how technology in use affects the
organization of work. Through technology, managers choose and constrain the tasks
associated with particular jobs and the conditions under which those tasks are performed.
Automation of production technologies typically reduces employees’ work autonomy and
skill discretion. Technology can also enable close and continual scrutiny of workers by
managers. Of particular consequence for the relationship between work and other parts
of workers’ lives is the fact that technology provides the means for redistribution of work


tasks across time and space. As we will see, the reorganization and redistribution of
work across time and space is associated with increased permeability of the boundary
between the work and non-work domains, which has numerous—and sometimes
contradictory—implications for work-life integration.

3.1 Technology and the mix of jobs
To a certain extent, the quality of individuals’ work-life integration reflects the
sorts of jobs and occupations in which they work. Therefore, understanding where
particular jobs fit into the production process, taking into account the amount of market
power held by their incumbents, and analyzing the extent to which these jobs provide
autonomy in scheduling and other activities will yield insight into the relationship
between technology and work-life integration.
The trajectory of technological development underlies the relationship between work and
the rest of life, and concerns over the tendency of technological change to exacerbate
work-life conflict have a long history.1 Prior to the advent of the factories that emerged
with the industrial revolution, work and other aspects of life were relatively tightly
integrated. In contrast to their agrarian and artisanal predecessors, modern workplaces
uprooted workers from their homes and families and subjected them to extensive, rigid,
and closely monitored working hours. Work no longer responded to the dictates of family
and home life; instead, life outside the workplace came to be something that was fitted
around work.
Technological progress in the twentieth century promised to reverse these effects of the
industrial revolution. Some authors even suggested that as the march of technology
automated work and eliminated jobs, societal problems might stem not from the inability
to integrate work with other aspects of life, but from dealing with displaced workers and
from attempts to fill in the hours that were once spent working. However, there is little
evidence of this trend. In the second half of the twentieth century, even as technology
advanced rapidly, the American economy found jobs for millions of new workers
(participation by women in the labor force, for example, increased from about 33% in
1950 to over 60% by 2000). Instead of a reduction in working hours, the period from
1976 and 1993 saw an increase in the average weekly work hours for both men and
women between the ages of 25 and 54. Technological advances, rather than reducing
employment to a sideshow, seem to be associated with an intensification of work.
Though technological change has neither liberated nor dislocated people from work, the
mix of jobs in which people are employed has changed significantly over time, and these
changes have ramifications for work-life integration. To take the most dramatic example,
about 38 percent of the U.S. labor force worked in agriculture at the turn of the 20th
century. In 2001, agriculture employed about 2 percent of the labor force. Similarly,


manufacturing employed over one-third of U.S. workers in 1950; half a century later,
fewer than 15% of workers were employed in manufacturing.
The assembly line and the factory floor were once the exemplars of the split
between work and the rest of life. Marx, for example, famously observed of the worker
under industrial capitalism that “life begins for him where [work] ceases.” The decline in
the share of workers employed in manufacturing and concomitant increases in service-
sector employment suggest that workers have moved into jobs that – in some instances –
permit more freedom of movement and communication outside the workplace, allow
more flexible scheduling, and provide other opportunities to achieve effective integration
between work and the rest of life. For example, U.S. service-sector employers are more
than half again more likely than manufacturing establishments to offer flex-time and job
sharing to their employees.
The share of people employed as managers and professionals has also increased
steadily. In 1940, fewer than 15% of American workers outside the agricultural sector
were managers and professionals; by 2003, this category encompassed nearly a third of
all workers. The increase in the share of workers with supervisory responsibility or
professional standing suggests a concomitant increase in the autonomy and discretion
enjoyed by workers, and research has established that job autonomy is associated with
increased opportunity to exercise control over the relationship between work and non-
work and with lower work-family conflict. Additionally, the research on workplace
accommodation of work-family concerns generally finds that workers with more
bargaining power, not those with greater need, are more likely to be the recipient of
favorable policies and benefits. This trend favors managers and professionals, who
possess more valuable and marketable human capital than do their lower-skilled,
nonsupervisory counterparts in the labor market.
This is not to say that successful work-life integration is easily achieved by white-
collar, managerial, or professional workers, despite the relative autonomy they may enjoy
in comparison with non-supervisory workers. In fact, much of the scholarly attention
given to the challenges associated with work-life integration is directed at managers and
professionals. Even as technological progress has led to increases in the share of jobs in
which individuals ostensibly direct and control their own schedules and working hours,
concerns have focused on the fact that people in these groups seem to be working, on
average, more than ever, and are having a great deal of difficulty in balancing their
responsibilities at work with the rest of their interest. In addition to working longer
hours, managerial and professional employees also tend to have a higher level of
psychological involvement with their jobs than do working-class employees, which
places them at higher risk for work-family conflict. It was found that job involvement
was positively related to work-to-family conflict among white-collar workers, whereas
these two variables were unrelated among blue-collar workers. In addition to reflecting
occupational differences in job involvement, this finding may signal the greater tendency


of white-collar work to spill over into the family domain, an effect that has been
intensified by the increasing use of a variety of communication technologies (e.g., cell
phones, laptop computers, and internet connections) among white-collar workers).
Differences in the nature of production technology across industries are associated
with differences in the ability of members of various occupations to integrate work and
family. For instance, research suggests that in industries such as manufacturing and
health services, work may be tied to machinery that is not portable and that may need to
be operated on an inflexible schedule, with the result that work schedules are determined
by the location and scheduling of the technology itself, rather than by workers’ needs.
Other industries that rely more on flexible, portable forms of information technology
(e.g., the use of laptop computers and cell phones among sales professionals or
consultants) offer greater opportunities for the integration of work and family demands
because workers have more ability to control how, where and when they deploy the
technology.

3.2 The organization of work
The second mediator in our model is work organization. The implementation of
technology in organizations represents a set of strategic choices made by managers.
Technology is implemented in the context of and in concert with sets of work practices
which, together with the technology itself, shape how work tasks are organized and how
employees experience work. Assessments of the relationship between technology and
work-life integration should thus consider the various ways in which the implementation
of technology influences the organization of work tasks. Since the same technology can
be used in different ways, it is difficult to make blanket predictions about the effect of
technologies on the work-life interface. Rather, it is critical to examine variations in how
technologies are used within and across workplaces. We discuss relevant moderating
factors in the subsequent section of this chapter.
Technology in use defines workers’ tasks. An assembly line under mass production, for
example, permits workers little control over the content of their work, its pace, or the
order in which they do particular tasks. The effects of automation are not limited to
manufacturing; service environments such as telephone call centers can feature never-
ending queues of customers and relentless pressure to handle calls. Technology deployed
in this fashion has long been held to have invidious effects on workers, underlying, for
example, the upward-sloping portion of Blauner’s famous “inverted-U” relationship
between technology and workplace alienation (1964). Automation has the potential to
raise obstacles to effective work-life integration. To the extent that technology controls
the pace of work and is combined with discretion-reducing managerial practices, it can
diminish workers’ ability to engage, both physically and psychologically, in other life
activities (Barnett, 1998). Work on assembly lines or in high-volume telephone call
centers requires that breaks be approved by supervisors or carefully scheduled in


advance. To take a simple example, automation-governed work can limit access to spur-
of-the-moment telephone calls to or from baby-sitters, teachers, or family members, and
restricts workers’ discretion in scheduling times to take or make such calls.
In addition to reducing autonomy, technology can also place workers under closer
managerial scrutiny by facilitating extensive monitoring of employees’ work. For
example, sophisticated computer systems are replacing mechanical time clocks and are
extending managers’ ability to track when employees start and stop—a capacity
previously applied primarily to working class employees—to more highly skilled
workers. For example, lawyers and members other occupational groups that are
responsible for “billable” hours may be required to have software on their computers that
tracks exactly when they log on and log off, as well as the number and length of periods
of inactivity. Instant messaging can serve the same purpose; when employees log off, or
even fail to respond promptly, it is apparent to others that they are not at their desks.
Many companies have installed monitoring software that tracks their employees’ usage of
the Internet and records all keystrokes made by employees. Telephone call center
workers are subject to some of the most sophisticated electronic monitoring technology
currently in use. Monitoring systems record the number of calls taken by each worker,
the length of each call, the amount of time callers are placed on hold, the number of rings
before the call is answered, and so on. The systems allow managers to monitor the extent
to which workers comply with specified work procedures, as in the case of operators who
are required to limit the number of keystrokes they use when searching the database for
telephone numbers. The monitoring system identifies those operators who are entering
more keystrokes than the number specified for optimal productivity. Research suggests
that electronic monitoring is a source of stress for those workers who are subject to it and
that it can have deleterious consequences for work-life integration. Electronic monitoring
has been identified as a predictor of emotional exhaustion, an aversive state which is
likely to spill over into the non-work domain. Evidence from a study of call center
workers shows that the intensity of monitoring is positively related to work exhaustion
and negatively related to satisfaction with work-life balance. It is likely that these
negative effects are most pronounced where monitoring technology is used in such a way
as to reduce workers’ discretion and to make them feel as if they are being constantly
scrutinized.
Consistent with our contextualist approach, we offer three reasons to be cautious in
hypothesizing direct links between the use of command-and-control production
technologies (those which restrict worker autonomy) and the undermining of work-life
integration. First, similar “hard” technologies can be deployed to quite varied effect. For
example, that the computerized automation of tasks in bank branches has very different
effects on wages depending on whether such automation is undertaken in conjunction
with high-involvement work practices, or, in contrast, with practices that reduce workers’
discretion. Information technologies can be deployed in such a manner as to render


workers independent from or interdependent with one another. When workers are
organized into self-managing groups and overlap in task assignments, they may be able to
take at least temporary responsibility for one another’s work when needed, thereby
allowing individual workers to accommodate needs arising from the family domain.
Indeed, a recent study of some 4000 manufacturing workers found that membership in a
self-directed work team was associated with greater work-family balance.
Second, a service or production context rarely invokes a single dominant technology. For
example, alternatives to assembly line and mass production technologies such as “flexible
specialization” and “lean production” rely more heavily on teamwork, worker skills and
decision-making. In services, too, firms may organize work more or less restrictively.
Call centers, for example, have been alternatively characterized as the “dark Satanic
mills” of the New Economy and as a setting for a variety of approaches to the
organization of work. In either case, the point is that the organizing logic of the
workplace is neither dictated by the environment nor fixed by design; rather, technologies
are deployed by managers (and this deployment may be contested by workers). One
question that has received almost no attention in field research is the extent to which
work-life integration is a consideration in managerial choices or in workers’ responses.
A third point is that not all automation has the same kinds of effects. A key distinction in
the literature addressing the effects of automation on job content is between equipment
that is designed with the goal of minimizing errors and reducing reliance on workers’
discretion, and that which is aimed at enhancing and leveraging workers’ skills and
abilities.
Technology provides supporting tools for non-routine activities that require high levels of
skill and worker engagement. Software applications such as spreadsheets, word-
processing, and sales-supporting technologies automate sets of tasks ranging from the
routine to the very complex, providing workers with the means to do higher-level
activities more efficiently. On the one hand, to the extent that such technologies provide
tools for workers to do their jobs more effectively, effects on work-life balance come
from possible increases in discretion, decreases in required time at work, and,
particularly, in freeing work across time and space, a topic to which we turn below.
Alternatives to command-and-control technologies, however, also create new threats to
work-life integration, particularly where processes have been designed to be tightly
coupled and to minimize buffers. The elimination of redundancy in processes means that
every worker’s role may be vital; the leaner the process, the more tightly linked its steps,
the more difficult it is for workers to exercise the sorts of discretion that would take them
away from focus on their work tasks. The effects of these kinds of technologies on work-
life integration thus depend especially heavily on the context in which they are deployed;
for example, we would not expect individuals’ use of word-processing per se to have
direct effects on work-life integration.
Technology and the redistribution of work across time and space


In terms of its potential impact on work-life integration, the most fundamental and
prevalent change brought on by advances in information technology is arguably the
redistribution of work across time and space. This occurs most notably through
teleworking, in which workers use information technologies including computers, e-mail,
telephones, pagers, fax machines, modems and other networking devices—combined
with servers that allow files to be accessed from and transmitted to remote locations—to
perform some or all of their work at home (or in another location away from the main
office). Related advances include policies such as flexible scheduling, which have been
facilitated through the implementation of technology that frees workers from a fixed,
standardized schedule for the completion of their work tasks. Additionally, even when
employees do not work from home for some portion of their regular work hours, the
increasingly pervasive use of communication and information technologies often brings
work into the home domain, particularly for information workers. Research suggests that
use of portable information and communication technologies is associated with increased
negative spillover from work to family, even when controlling for occupation, work
hours, and commuting time.
Although estimates of the number of telecommuters in the U.S. vary due to
definitional differences, the numbers are clearly substantial, ranging from 10 million to
nearly 30 million. According to the International Telecommuting Advisory Council
(2002), 28 million Americans reported teleworking at least part time in 2001. This figure
includes people who work at home, at a telework center or satellite office, on the road, or
some combination of the above. Approximately one-fifth of working Americans report
working some portion of their working hours at home (International Telework
Association & Council, 2002). Under a more restrictive definition of telecommuters as
“employees who engage in work at home on a regular basis two or more days per week
for an outside company,” the Institute for the Study of Distributed Work provides the
current low-end estimate of 10.4 million telecommuters. Compared to non-teleworkers,
teleworkers are significantly more likely to be from the Northeast and West, male, have
higher education and income, work in professional or managerial occupations, and be
employed in smaller and larger organizations.
Telecommuting is pervasive across work organizations, with 37% of all
employers and the majority of the Fortune 1000 firms currently offering telecommuting
to their employees. The occupational penetration of telecommuting is wide as well, with
telecommuters currently represented throughout the spectrum of jobs performed by
information workers.
Teleworking and other forms of redistribution of work outside the workplace and
beyond (or short of) the traditional working day are related to work-life integration
differently than are other workplace technological innovations. These, uniquely, may be
implemented by managers and workers who have as primary goals influence over the
balance between work and family life. With regard to teleworking, for example, early


views suggested it as a way to help women hold down jobs while managing their family
responsibilities effectively, and teleworkers were stereotyped as women with young
children. Indeed, although telecommuting was initially conceived as a strategy to make
firms less vulnerable to fuel shortages during the OPEC oil crisis in the early to mid-
1970s, most telework arrangements prior to the 1990s were established to accommodate
the family needs of individual employees.
Seeking technological solutions to enhance work-life integration is not, however,
the only force underlying telework arrangements. By the 1990s, more kinds of
teleworkers emerged and a number of organizational rationales for teleworking were
offered, including reduction of real estate and labor costs, efforts to increase productivity,
customer proximity, complementary with the required mobility of many client-focused
workers, compliance with regulations such as the Clean Air Act and the Americans with
Disabilities Act, and the desire to contract activities out to workers who are not
employees. Individuals, too, have a variety of reasons for telecommuting, including
increasing their productivity, gaining greater control over the environment in which they
work, reducing the amount of time spent commuting and avoiding office politics, as well
as more effectively integrating the demands of work and family. However, it can be
difficult to distinguish between those who work remotely by choice, and those who do so
involuntarily , as many companies have systematically moved certain groups of workers
into telecommuting programs.
Teleworking is clearly associated with increased permeability of the boundary
between work and non-work domains. The spatial, temporal, social, and psychological
aspects of the work-non-work boundary are all affected by the movement of work into
the home. Physically, work and non-work activities now take place in the same location.
Temporally, telecommuters often report interleaving work and family activities, for
instance, by occasionally performing housework or child care during the work day.
Whereas the social roles that people occupy at work and at home are generally separated
in a post-industrial society, telecommuting causes these roles to overlap. Finally, the
movement from home to work and vice-versa involves crossing a psychological
boundary; this aspect is also changed when people work at home. Indeed, telecommuters
often develop rituals to facilitate crossing the role boundary from family to work,
including such actions as putting on work clothes, reading the business section of the
newspaper, saying goodbye to the family before entering the home office, and taking files
and work implements out of cabinets . Nonetheless, work and family life are both more
susceptible to intrusions when they are carried on in the same location.
Evidence on the impact of technology and telecommuting on aspects of work-life
integration is equivocal. In a series of studies of IBM employees in professional
occupations, Hill and colleagues found that telecommuters reported higher levels of
work-life balance and success at personal/family life than did employees who worked in
a traditional office setting . Other studies indicate that work intrudes on and interferes


with the family and personal lives of telecommuters. Says one respondent in
Mirchandani’s study, “I was feeling very keenly a sense of intrusion into my
house…couriers showing up, a telephone line ringing, a fax machine going in the middle
of the night…this was not a pristine environment; I had sullied it.” The net effect of
bringing more work into the home may be to help individuals to integrate across different
spheres, while creating a work environment in the home that intrudes on family life. It
was found that more extensive use of information technologies was associated with more
perceived control over managing work and family, but also with higher levels of work-
family conflict.
There are a number of contextual factors that affect the strength of the
relationship between technology and work-life integration.

3.3 Benefits of work life balance in mobile work
Mobile work can have significant benefits for organisations, employees and for the
community. These include:
• improved attraction and retention of key staff;
• more flexibility and better work life balance for employees;
• reduced absenteeism;
• greater job satisfaction;
• increased trust between employers and employees;
• reduced office space and car parking costs;
• reduced travelling expenses (fuel, wear and tear on vehicle, fares) and environmental
costs;
• the organization being recognized as a good corporate citizen.

3.4 Suitability for mobile work
Definable tasks which involve minimal face-to-face contact or are time specific are most
suitable for being done at home. These may include:
 research
 computer design and programming
 projects
 policy writing
 report writing
 planning.

3.5 Security in Mobile Work
Work equipment and intellectual property can be safeguarded through the following
security measures:
 authorization and security clearance of mobile employees


 general physical security of employee’s homes
 arrangements for the transportation and disposal of official documents and papers
 directives for appropriate use of email and internet use
 protection of home computers and their links
 guidelines on access of family and friends to work materials
 the appointment of an employer security supervisor
 employees' obligations to report security incidents

3.6 Steps For Establishing a Mobile Environment
 Consider suitability for (employees, duties, work site)
 Assess expenses and cost effectiveness
 Consider taxation requirements
 Establish security measures for equipment and documentation
 Consider insurance liability for mobile equipment
 Consider occupational safety and health requirements
 Consider workers compensation regulations
 Develop performance control measures
 Develop a procedure for review
 Create written agreement or equivalent

3.7 Some techniques of implementation of mobile work
Virtual Private Network

Fig:1 Virtual networks
In this technology, users can access their companies private networks via the internet in a
secure manner using VPN tunnels.


Cloud Computing

Fig:2 Cloud computing
In this technology the companies infrastructure is accessed can be accessed by laptops,
mobile phones, tablets remotely. These devices purely act as thin clients showing only
the display where as all the actions happen on the servers in the company.

Mobile Usage scenario’s

Fig:3 Mobile usage


As shown in the figure above the company network can be accessed both within the
company premises and outside at various locations.

3.8 The Changing Work Environment in IBM

1998 2010
Fig:4 chart Work Environment in IBM

The pie chart above shows the change in work environment in one of the biggest
technology companies IBM. We can observer that percentage of home has increased
from o.4% to 8%, Similarly mobile workers ghave increade from 10.6% to 21%. This
amply illustrates the trend in technology companies.

3.9 Work Life Strategy
• helps employees sustain peak performance on the job and enables organisations to
become
more productive.
• improves employee engagement – the higher employee engagement is, the more willing
employees are willing to go the extra mile to contribute to their organisation’s success.
• improves attraction and retention of talent – this in turn leads to cost savings from
reduced
labour turnover.
• reduces stress related to work and work-life conflicts, therefore leading to lower
health-related costs.
• improves customer satisfaction indirectly (through happy employees) and directly
(through more customer-friendly business processes).


4. CASE STUDY
CS:1. Do Mobile Technologies Enable Work-Life Balance? Dual Perspectives on
BlackBerry Usage for Supplemental Work

Introduction:

This chapter explores the usage of mobile communication devices to support
supplemental work. The ‘anytime, anywhere’ functionality of the devices provides
enormous convenience for users, and is thought to enhance their work productivity, while
facilitating work-life balance. But their always-on nature can lead to conflict when family
members or others outside the users’ work environment feel that work is spilling over
into the users’ non-work life. Using texts from newspapers and magazines, the chapter
investigates usage of a popular mobile device, the BlackBerry, from the perspectives of
users’ families and friends, and of the users themselves. The contradictory interpretations
are striking. Indeed, the very acts that define balance for BlackBerry users are clear
signals of imbalance to those around them, resulting in strong opposition to the devices
among non-users. Described as BlackBerry orphans (Rosman, 2006) and widows (Sokol,
2006; von Hahn, 2004), non-users express ‘chagrin,’ ‘aggravation’ ‘disapproval,’ and
‘ire’ about the use of the device in their homes (and elsewhere). The chapter shows how
the behaviours that users adopt to increase their work-life balance result in the
materialization of work, and taunt those in the non-work environment with ‘absent
presence.’ As` the usage of ‘mobile work extending technologies’ like BlackBerries is
expected to rise in the future, the chapter outlines questions that should be addressed to
help reduce the potential for work-life conflict.

Work, Mobile Technologies and Work-Life Balance:

There is a vast literature on telecommuting and telework, which provides the foundation
for 2more recent studies on mobile work. ‘Telecommuting’ refers to a specific
arrangement to work at home, reducing or eliminating the need to travel (commute) to
work (Nilles, 1976). ‘Telework’ is used to describe “remote work [that] involves the use
of information and communication technologies” (Sullivan, 2003, p. 159). Many
researchers consider the terms telework and telecommuting synonymously (Ellison,
1999). What is important in this context is that an explicit arrangement (voluntary or
involuntary) is made between an employee and an employer that relocates some or all of
his or her tasks to the home, from an office location(Felstead, Jewson, Phizacklea, &
Walters, 2002; Fleetwood, 2007). These arrangements represent a substitution in the
work environment, where employees give up some time in their offices and replace it
with time spent working at home (Kraut, 1989). But the mobile work behaviours
described here are not generally part of a formal, intentional relocation of work from one
environment to another. Employees are not giving up their office space, instead they are


extending their work environments to include spaces beyond the office. This is an
important distinction (Kossek, Lautsch, & Eaton, 2006), yet the supplemental nature of
such work practices is not always reflected in studies on location of work (e.g. Felstead,
Jewson, & Walters, 2005; Hill, Ferris, & Martinson, 2003).Bailyn (1988) describes this
extension of work into home as ‘overflow,’ and notes that people have been bringing
work home from the office for many, many years. New technologies allow knowledge
workers to access, edit and create files, communicate with colleagues or clients, search
for information and conduct other tasks from many locations outside their offices. Brown
and O’Hara (2003, p. 1575) observe that mobile work ‘makes place,’ rather than ‘taking
place,’ suggesting that any location can be made into a work place by virtue of the fact
that someone chooses to work there. The portability of work, and of technologies, allows
employees to carry out ‘supplemental work at home’ (Venkatesh & Vitalari, 1992) but
also extends the potential workplace to anywhere within the reach of mobile technology.
In the past decade, supplemental work at home has given way to supplemental work
anywhere.The practise of working anywhere could easily be described as mobile work.
Hislop and Axtell (2007) point out that mobility is not considered in the existing telework
literature, but argue that mobile telework is becoming “an increasingly important form of
work” (p. 35). Mobile teleworkers move between home, office and “locations beyond
home and office” (p. 46), which include client premises and places visited for business
travel. However, Hislop and Axtell do not appear to identify these spaces as locations for
supplemental work. Other studies of mobile work (e. g. Brodt & Verburg, 2007; Brown
& O’Hara, 2003) also exclude explicit discussion of mobile work conducted outside
usual working hours. Thus, while there are existing literatures on supplemental work at
home, and on mobile work, it appears that there has been limited academic attention paid
to date to the phenomenon of mobile technologies being adopted in ways that allow
supplemental work to move beyond the boundaries of home. One exception is Duxbury,
Thomas, Towers and Higgins’s (2005) research on ‘work extension.’ Their definition of
work extension recognizes that much work is now done outside office hours (anytime)
and at multiple locations outside the office (anywhere). Thus, extended work is
supplemental work, but the definition no longer limits the location of supplemental work
to the home. Personal digital assistants (PDAs), laptop computers, mobile email devices
(e.g. BlackBerries) and home PCs are all considered work extending technologies, and
the technologies are becoming more prevalent among managerial and professional
workers (Towers, Duxbury, Higgins, & Thomas, 2006).As more people adopt extended
work patterns, work is imposed on spaces and at times that 4were previously ‘work free,’
thus increasing the potential for role conflict. Conflict between work and non-work
environments is not new (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985; Lewis, Gambles, & Rapoport,
2007) and it is addressed by an extensive literature (see Edwards & Rothbard, 2000, for a
review of key concepts). However, much previous work on ‘work-life’ or ‘work-family’
balance in a telework environment (e.g. Golden, Veiga, & Simsek, 2006; Hill et al., 2003;


Madsen, 2003; Shumate & Fulk, 2004) does not reflect the pervasiveness or ubiquity of
mobile technologies, nor does it fully reflect the supplemental nature of work that is
extending beyond office hours and office boundaries. When supplemental and mobile
work convergence to create an anytime, anywhere, always-on work environment, the
potential for conflict and imbalance is exacerbated (Menzies, 2005). Balance means
different things to different people, and the distinction between ‘work’ and ‘life’ is
problematic. The description of ‘family’ as being the core of life outside work is too
narrow (Ransome, 2007), while focusing on family alone as the key component to life
outside work excludes leisure and other non-family, non-work responsibilities (e.g.
contribution to local communities) (Guest, 2002). For expediency however, in this
chapter participants in the nonwork sphere of individuals’ lives are referred to as ‘friends’
and ‘family,’ and the non-work sphere is simply referred to as ‘life.’

In North America, the BlackBerry has become the device of choice for mobile email.
First attracting public notice for providing communication in New York City on
September 11, 2001 after much of the telecommunications infrastructure failed (see for
example “Downtown BlackBerry E-Mail Repository”), the BlackBerry experienced slow
but steady growth in subscriptions for its first few years. By early 2004, there were more
than 1 million BlackBerry subscribers, and by mid-2005, 3 million people had subscribed
(Research in Motion, 2004; Research in Motion, 2005) to this “iconic pocket-sized e-mail
device” (Economist Staff, 2005). A patent dispute in 2006 that threatened to shut down
BlackBerry service caused much 7consternation among users as they faced the potential
loss of their devices (Parks, 2006; Smith, 2006). Although rare, disruptions in service are
headline news (e.g. Vascellaro, Yuan, Sharma, & Rhoads, 2007). As of late 2007, there
were more than 10.5 million subscribers (Research in Motion, 2007), with growth
estimated at 1 million subscribers every three months (Sorensen, 2007). The
BlackBerry’s reputation, and continued success, rests upon its highly reliable, secure and
user-friendly email service – “It’s small and it works” (Estates Gazette Staff, 2005). The
device is a PDA and a mobile phone, and provides ‘push’ email functionality, delivering
messages as they are received without the need for users to take action to connect to the
internet. In many countries, before even stepping off an airplane, travelers can send and
receive email effortlessly by just turning on their BlackBerries. This simple device has
become indispensable for legions of business users around the world. It allows people to
check their email anywhere, and to respond to messages in an unobtrusive manner. It also
makes it very easy for individuals to carry their work with them, and to engage in work
activities in locations and at times that were previously ‘off limits.’


BlackBerry Usage Data:

The data that follow are drawn from popular press accounts of BlackBerry usage in the
past two years (2005-2007), as catalogued in the Factiva database. After a search on the
term 8‘BlackBerry’ yielded almost 60,000 ‘hits,’ the more restrictive term ‘Crackberry’
was used. While this approach excluded relevant articles about BlackBerry usage that did
not mention the word Crackberry, it does provide a good sample of articles that address
the tensions created as mobile technologies enable work to spill over into other aspects of
people’s lives. From a starting point of more than 1000 articles, a research team removed
duplicates and irrelevant articles, resulting in a final compilation of just over 200 articles
that discussed various aspects of BlackBerry (and other mobile device) usage in
individuals’ daily lives. The team then indexed the articlesin a bibliographic software
program and exported the texts into a qualitative data analysis program for thematic
analysis using a semi-structured coding protocol. It might be argued that BlackBerry
usage behaviours deemed newsworthy are extreme ones, and not representative of
‘ordinary’ BlackBerry users going about their daily lives. But the vivid examples
presented here do show the conflicts inherent in adopting mobile technologies to extend
supplemental work practices, and provide a focal point for discussing the implications of
continued uptake of work extending technologies. While the results may not be
generalizable, the anecdotes provided here are consistent with descriptions of BlackBerry
usage in a small scale study of Canadian BlackBerry users conducted in 2005 (Middleton
& Cukier, 2006; Middleton, Scheepers, & Cukier, 2005), and provide insights into users’
and non-users’ experiences of ‘mobile work extending technologies.’ In the section
below, data are presented to show how BlackBerries are used for supplemental work
away from the office. Descriptions of how the devices enable work-life balance for the
users are provided, followed by evidence from non-users that offer a contrary perspective
on the device’s role in balancing the work and non-work spheres.

Location of Use

BlackBerry users are described as “the ones hunched over like squirrels with a walnut,
thumbs flying manically, even at weddings, funerals and the movies.” A “devoted” user
reported using his BlackBerry during his wife’s stepfather’s funeral, a Congressman was
observed spending “a great deal of time on his BlackBerry during [Ash Wednesday]
service and prayer, both reading emails and sending emails.” Some users take their
BlackBerries into the shower (“keep[ing] it within view but dry”), and there are reports of
people who “accidentally dropped the device in the toilet.” One user described how he’d
“fallen asleep with it in his hands, read it as he ate, watched TV, waited in line, and while
playing soccer with [his] son.”

In describing the factors that led up to his divorce, a man says “the thing that really
brought it home to me was we were in an intimate moment in bed, and I lifted up my


head and I caught my wife checking her e-mail on the BlackBerry.” Not an isolated
incident, a doctor reported being asked by a patient “whether he thought it was abnormal
that her husband brings the BlackBerry to bed and lays it next to them while they make
love.” A woman describes a dream “about squirrels eating acorns. …And then I woke up,
and it was my husband, the tap, tap, tap, tap on the BlackBerry.” A man reports that
BlackBerry is “the last thing I check before going to sleep and the first thing I touch in
the morning.” Some people even use it in the middle of the night, including one man who
regularly checked email while getting up in the night with his newborn daughter. There
are many reports of drivers using BlackBerries (“It is actually scary to see people driving
in their cars receiving and sending e-mails”), and the devices also accompany their users
on vacation. BlackBerries can be found on the golf course, poolside or at the beach. A
man took his BlackBerry to Maui for his 10th anniversary celebration, and another “went
to Disneyland last year accompanied by his wife, their two children and his BlackBerry.
According to his wife, the BlackBerry drained much of the magic from the Magic
Kingdom.”

User Perceptions of Work-Life Balance

BlackBerries provide their users with a ‘24/7’ connection to their offices, and there is a
strong sentiment that the devices help provide balance in users’ lives. “I like to be
connected,” says a small business owner. “I don’t know what I would do without it. And
I’m much more likely to take vacation because of it. I have more work/life balance
because I carry my Treo [a Palm Pilot product with similar functionality to the
BlackBerry]; I feel less need to be in the office.” A lawyer describes how his BlackBerry
allows him to “go places and do things and still stay on top of my work… keep[ing] tabs
on the office, while hanging out with his kids.” BlackBerries allow their users to be
efficient, while spending time with friends and family – “If we’re standing in line for 40
minutes waiting for a ride [at Disneyland], I don’t see why I can’t answer my e-mail,”
says one user. When his son made the Little League all-star team, a man enthused that
“the BlackBerry allowed me to go to the game and still deal with some realtime issues we
had in the office.” A 2006 survey by recruitment firm Korn/Ferry found that “More than
one-third of 2,300 executives surveyed in 75 countries believed they spent too much time
connected to communications devices. But more than three-quarters, or 77 percent of
respondents, said they believe mobile communication devices primarily enhance their
work/life balance rather than impede it.”

An Alternative Perspective on Work-Life Balance

Many people, especially friends and family of BlackBerry users, do not share the belief
that BlackBerries create balance. This quote expresses a common sentiment – “She hates
that he’s a BlackBerry fiend, especially when he argues that using it leaves more time for
family.” The important people in users’ lives are not shy in expressing their opinions


about BlackBerry use in their environments. While a four-year old expressed her
displeasure at her mother’s BlackBerry 12usage by simply hiding the device, her seven
year old brother was more sophisticated in trying to flush it down a toilet. Immersing
BlackBerries in water seems to have broad appeal. “The winner of the British version of
The Apprentice, a reality TV show, has admitted that his wife has threatened to flush his
BlackBerry down the toilet,” a threat repeated by other users’ spouses. One wife “wanted
to pick it up and throw it into the swimming pool” (while on vacation) while another
“tried to throw it off the boat when [they] were on [their] honeymoon.” The Alex comic
strip regularly captures the frustrations of BlackBerry users’ families, as seen
below.Throwing the BlackBerry out a window was also suggested by an irate wife who
felt ignored by her husband. A husband remarked that he would not use his BlackBerry at
Christmas, for fear of watching his “BlackBerry crackling away on the fire along with the
Yule log.”

In some households, family members have adopted ‘rules of engagement’ for BlackBerry
use. This may mean a ban on using the BlackBerry on weekends, or a ban on use in
restaurants and the bedroom. Children help to discourage their parents’ BlackBerry
usage, “begging” them to stop using it at the table. One woman was surprised when her
daughter “literally applauded her decision to leave her BlackBerry behind when
vacationing.” Nevertheless, some people continue to use their BlackBerries, even when it
is very clear that such usage is not acceptable to others. Fearing discovery, users hide
their devices from spouses or family members but insist their behaviours are justified.
One user explains that “his BlackBerry actually alleviates maritaltension by allowing him
to secretly check his email and get work done during vacations with his wife.” Another
individual reports that checking his BlackBerry on vacation (while hiding in the
bathroom to do so) resulted in “A relaxed me, an unsuspecting girlfriend, a holiday
success.”

Analysis:

The data presented here show the pervasive usage of BlackBerries, and demonstrate the
conflicting assessment of the value of such devices. BlackBerries do enable people to be
Connected to their work from anywhere, at any time. This connectivity provides users
with great Comfort because it allows them to remain in contact with their jobs while
attending to other aspects of their lives. While there is no doubt that many users feel
pressured to remain connected to work at all hours, with some organizational cultures
reinforcing and validating this expectation (Middleton, 2007), users are adamant that
their BlackBerries allow them freedom, and contribute to work-life balance by allowing
them to spend more time with friends and family. But their friends and family often
resent the presence of the BlackBerry, seeing it as a means for users to extend their work
into spaces where work is not welcome. Rather than interpreting this as worklife balance,


friends and family view anytime, anywhere BlackBerry usage as always-on work. Rather
than experiencing less conflict as a result of being able to better manage their work and
life commitments, BlackBerry users may face increased conflict, as their friends and
family actively resist the device. BlackBerries have been successful because they can turn
any place into a work place, which is exactly the reason why they are reviled by those
who want to contain work within well-defined agreed upon boundaries.Clark’s (2000)
work/family border theory (described earlier) offers some insights to help understand the
data presented above. Of interest in this chapter is the border crossing from the work
domain into the family (non-work) domain, where work-family spillover is possible. The
14data show that when BlackBerry users cross from the work to the life (non-work)
sphere they frequently bring their BlackBerries ‘over the border.’ They are met by the
border-keeper, usually a spouse or significant other, as well as other domain members
(e.g. children). It is expected that upon crossing the border (which may be physical,
temporal or psychological), “domain-relevant behavior” (Clark, 2000, p. 756) takes
place.Applying the concept of border crossing to the data presented above generates
insights related to two themes. The first theme is described as the materialization of work,
in which a specific artifact, the BlackBerry, permeates the work-life border to bring work
into what is understood to be a non-work environment. The second theme relates to the
idea of ‘absent presence’ (Gergen, 2002), and can be seen here as a form of taunting.
Given its visibility and popularity, the BlackBerry has garnered more attention than other
devices, and it is likely a harbinger for more widespread uptake of mobile work
extending technologies. It is suggested that the observations made here are not device
dependent, but apply wherever mobile technologies are adopted to facilitate anytime,
anywhere supplementary work.

Materialization of Work:

Border theory suggests that there are acceptable behaviours for each sphere, and that
when a person crosses the border, he or she transitions to the norms of the sphere just
entered. Ashforth, Kreiner and Fugate (2000) note that these crossings involve exiting
one role and taking up another. The adoption of mobile technologies reduces the
likelihood that such role exit will actually occur when moving across the work-life
border, as the demands of the work role can continue to be met by using mobile
technologies in the life sphere. As such, a BlackBerry can be understood as a very visible
manifestation of work and of permeable work-life borders. When the device is taken
across the work-life border, it provides a clear indication that the user remains 15linked
to the work domain even though he or she is physically present in the non-work domain.
Even if the user leaves the device turned off, its mere presence signals that work is
possible. Users argue that this provides them with the flexibility to attend to their non-
work lives without neglecting work duties, but from the perspective of the domain
members this materialization of work shows that users have not left the work domain.


Prior to the widespread adoption of mobile devices, it was easier to contain work within
physical and temporal boundaries. While spillover of work into the non-work domain has
always been a potential source of conflict, what has changed with the uptake of mobile
work extending technologies is that temporal and physical boundaries are more easily
breached. It is easy to take a BlackBerry to a social event (dinner party, baseball game) or
to check email while lying in bed or while sitting by the pool on vacation. Users view
such behaviours as freeing themselves from the physical constraints of the office, but for
their friends and family, work is now visibly occupying times and spaces in the non-work
domain that were previously off-limits. The device that enables this extension of work
acts as a ‘lightning rod,’ attracting attention to the presence of work. Despite users’ best
efforts to be discrete when using BlackBerries in ‘inappropriate’ settings, its presence
draws attention to work. Because it is so pervasive, and provides a persistent visual
reminder that work has infiltrated the non-work domain, the BlackBerry has become an
obvious target for criticism and a flashpoint for work-family conflict. The device may
well act as a proxy for broader dissent about differential expectations regarding work-life
balance, increasing the intensity of resistance to the device and explaining why its very
appearance can provoke such ire and emotion from users’ friends and families.

Absent Presence: How Mobile Devices Taunt Non-Users:

Not only does the BlackBerry bring a visible manifestation of work into the home and
other 16non-work environments, it can also psychologically remove users from the non-
work environment and return them to a work mindset. As has been mentioned,
BlackBerry users feel that the device allows them to balance work and life domains,
because they can attend to work needs while outside the workplace. But although
physically present in the non-work domain, whenever users engage with their
BlackBerries, they are removing themselves from their present environment and focusing
their attention elsewhere. Described by Gergen (2002) as ‘absent presence’ and by
Fortunati (2002) as ‘present absence’ this behaviour taunts those around the user by
providing the appearance of attention to, or participation in the non-work domain, while
actually remaining grounded in the work domain. Users pride themselves on the fact that
their BlackBerries allow them to at ttend events and participate in activities that they
would have missed in the days before mobile technologies, yet arguably, they are still
missing such events by engaging with their devices, rather than with their physical
environment. In the past, people with heavy work commitments would have met these
commitments by staying at the office to complete the work, or by confining their work to
a specific location within their non-work domain (e.g. a home office), and not
participating in the non-work domain. BlackBerries allow the work to be done anywhere,
satisfying users that they are achieving balance, but frustrating their friends and family by
making it more obvious that work is spilling over into non-work times and spaces. Given
the particular reactions that BlackBerry use in the non-work domain provokes, . In the


name of participating in activities with families and friends, BlackBerry users join the
non-work environment, and promote the appearance of being engaged with it, but can at
any time ‘step out’ of the environment to return to work. From the perspective of
BlackBerry users, the guilt of missing an activity is removed or at least mitigated, but
from the perspective of family and friends, it appears that the BlackBerry exacerbates the
awareness of work-life imbalance.

Discussion and Conclusions:

The anecdotes of BlackBerry usage presented here show how actions that knowledge
workers take to balance their work activities with their personal lives can result in
conflict. By materializing work, mobile work extending technologies like BlackBerries
can become the centre of attention when used outside the office, and provide a focal point
for discontent among friends and family members. Likewise, efforts at being present in
the non-work environment are not always met with approval. Although the workers make
a special effort to engage with their friends and family by participating in events and
activities, the fact that they bring their BlackBerries with them triggers resentment.
Rather than appreciating the worker’s presence in the non-work environment, attention is
focused on the absences created when the worker engages with his or her job through a
mobile device.It is likely that the workers do not fully understand their friends and family
members’ disdain for their devices (and equally likely that friends and family do not
understand the demanding nature of the work environment that does expect workers to be
connected and available outside business hours). Towers et al. (2006) found that heavy
users of work extending technologies believed that their families understood their need to
work during family time, and although they recognized that heavy usage could be
problematic, individuals felt that they were doing a good job of controlling the extent to
which their technology use was spilling over into their personal lives. This justification of
individual work practices indicates that workers believe their approach of combining
work and non-work activities is both effective and appropriate. This approach to work-
life balance is comparable to the ‘integrating the self’ repertoire identified by Golden and
Gessler (2007), in which PDA users explicitly used their devices to transcend, rather than
contain, work-life boundaries. Felstead and Jewson (2000) identify segregated and
integrated approaches to creating work-life boundaries. The integrated approach, which
was adopted by the BlackBerry users described here, is based on weak temporal and
spatial separation of work and non-work domains. In their study comparing different
types of mobile work, Hislop and Axtell (2007) showed that an integrated approach
provided less worklife balance than a segregated approach. This study provides no point
of comparison to determine whether a more segregated approach to BlackBerry adoption
would have resulted in less work-life conflict, but it does show that the integrated
approach that was adopted did not sit well with friends and family. This is an interesting
finding, because one of the key affordances of mobile work extending technologies like


BlackBerries is that they allow users to integrate their home and work lives, and to
maintain open boundaries between the two. This study suggests that while this works for
the BlackBerry users, it may not work for those around them. It is possible that the covert
uses are a response to the shortcomings of an integrated approach, allowing individuals to
avoid disapproval and conflict by reverting to absence and secrecy to conduct their work
in non-work domains.

BlackBerries and other mobile work extending technologies are still relatively new, and it
is likely that the ways in which they are used will evolve over time. There is some
evidence of users adopting more structured approaches to keep their work and personal
lives in balance (Jackson, 2007), but the usage patterns portrayed here are the dominant
ones at present. As noted earlier, for many users the appeal of the BlackBerry or other
mobile devices is that they do enable anytime, anywhere work, functionality which has
been constructed by users as a means of controlling their busy, demanding lives and
enhancing work-life balance. As such, it is expectedthat the usage patterns documented
here and the conflict such usage engenders will continue. This raises a number of
questions to be considered by those adopting mobile technologies to support
supplemental work, and by researchers interested in the intersection of mobility and
supplemental work.

• What are the longer-term implications of work-life conflict that is exacerbated by the
adoption of mobile devices? Are there ways of mitigating the conflict? What actions
could be taken to achieve better fit between the users’ real needs to remain connected to
work while away from the office, and the demands of their non-work environments? Can
users learn to temper their addict-like attention to their devices, while those around them
accept that some usage is necessary? Are there alternatives to covert use that meet the
needs of users and their friends and families?

• What are the broader forces driving users’ compulsive attachment to mobile work
extending technologies? Are the devices truly addictive, or do users exhibit signs of being
addicted to their work? What can be learned from an extensive reading of the literature
on workaholism (see for example Burke, 2006; Kofodimos, 1993; Porter, 2006)? e.g. Do
choices that users make with respect to favouring their work domains over non-work
ones suggest deeper issues regarding their relationships with each domain?

• What are the broader cultural and societal forces driving such behaviours? Why do
organizations support uses that can have negative impacts on their employees’ personal
lives (and potentially reduce overall productivity and effectiveness)? Why do employees
feel such compulsion to remain connected to their offices and to work all the time? To
what extent is supplemental work really necessary? This chapter contributes to our
understanding of technology enabled mobile work by providing insights into the usage of
mobile technologies to support supplemental work. By definition, supplemental work


occurs outside the office, and with the advent of ubiquitous, user friendly communication
devices, it can be, and is, done from anywhere, at anytime. The chapter shows that claims
that mobile technologies facilitate work-life balance are one-sided, and applies border
theory to explain how current uses can increase work-life conflict by materializing work
and taunting family and friends with absent presence. Given that the adoption of mobile
work extending technologies is expected to increase, it is important that all those affected
by their usage consider how to make such usage more favourable to all. There are more
questions than answers at present. The convergence of supplemental work and mobile
technologies raises complex issues that require much more nuanced analysis and a greater
grounding in the literature than can be provided within a single book chapter. Issues of
gender and power were not addressed here but must be considered. It is also important to
determine the extent to which individuals and organizations are willing to move toward
an environment of always-on, anytime, anywhere work. What do people really want, and
how can they ensure that their needs are not subsumed by corporate agendas and
unfettered, uncritical adoption of technologies? In 1988, Bailyn wrote that “Information
technology makes it possible to free work from the constraints of location and time” (p.
149). Today the challenge is to free location and time from the constraints of work.


CS:2. Managing Mobile Work - Insights from European Practice

Introduction

The success of organizations depends to a large extent on the effort and performance of
their workforce. Knowledgeable, productive, and flexible employees contribute
significantly to firm competitiveness. In order to achieve flexibility, many companies
adopt ICTs that support mobility, context- and location-awareness, networking and
ambient interfaces. Mobile communication technology proves to be the most popular
application with the most dynamic growth rates in the last decade. Better quality (e.g.
mobile broadband connectivity and specialised mobile work solutions) and decreasing
costs, paved the way for the emergence of the so called mobile (tele-)worker in the
workforce of the European Union. The share of mobile (tele-)workers is already more
than 6% in Finland and over 5,5% for Germany.

The introduction of new mobile work environments in practice, attracted the attention of
scientific researchers from various research disciplines, such as information systems
research, management research as well as social theory and architecture and design. So
far, research on mobile work is in its early stages and definitions and concepts of mobility
are still emerging. Early work has focused on the geographical or spatial mobility of
workers, which is criticised for being a too narrow focus. Andriessen and Vartiainen
extended the concept of mobility to virtual mobility, which includes stationary actors
moving "with the help of ICTs in a virtual working space". Kakihara and Sørensen
postulate three interrelated aspects of worker mobility: location mobility concerned with
the workers’ extensive geographical movement, operational mobility in relation to
flexible operation as an independent unit of business, and interaction mobility associated
with their intense and fluid interaction with a wide range of people. As such, aspects of
collaboration can also widely change due to new qualities of ICT.

Objectives :

The objective is to provide a systematic and comparable overview of current mobile work
practice. Enablers and barriers for the adoption of these new innovative work practices
are discussed. The research takes on a user centric perspective, involving the
organisational decision makers and users of mobile work applications.

Methodology :

In-depth case studies were conducted. Whenever possible, we used triangulation to
validate the interview outcomes by interviewing strategic level representatives, process
owners and users. In order to compare the cases of researchers in the different countries
an interview guideline was developed on basis of our work environment benchmarking
framework .


The benchmarking framework consists of eight dimensions: 1) technology
progressiveness, 2) mobile value proposition, 3) mobility concept, 4) size, 5) social
impacts, 6) change efforts in implementation process, 7) enablers / barriers, 8) near term
developments. Each dimension was defined in detail and broken down to specific sets of
questions for the personal interviews. Dimensions 1 to 4 were used for the comparative
analysis of the cases. The dimensions were further defined in specified criteria sets and
rated on a 5-point Likert scale. Dimensions 5 to 8 helped the authors to identify issues
related to the success of mobile work environments. A "technology-value-matrix" was
used to visualize dimension 1 to 4 of the comparative analysis. Four specific sectors of
the matrix have been defined and a set of characteristic and implications per sector is
used to categorize the cases.

Case Analysis

The case studies range from small to medium enterprises to large corporations from
different industries and include private as well as public organizations. The cases stem
from various countries in Europe and deal with a variety of mobile work applications.
This article features selected cases, dealing with mobile sales force, mobile emergence
response applications and mobile patient data. For extended documentation of cases
please refer to [18]. Table 1 provides an overview of the cases.

Hero Food Vendor

Hero focuses on branded retail business and selected b2b markets for packaged food. Its
major products include fruit-marmalade, fruit-juices, fruit-bars and baby food. The
company generates revenues of ~1 bn. €. In Switzerland the company employs 270
people. The mobile sales force (MSF) solution is based on SAP "mobile sales" and tablet
PCs. It is a so called “offline MSF solution” – requiring wired synchronization via DSL.
It has no permanent online connectivity. In total 27 sales representatives are supported in
Switzerland. They serve restaurants, specialist retail sales points, totaling to 40.000
Switzerland. Each sales representative covers between 600 and 1.200 customers in a
dedicated region. The employee works from home, in the car and at the client site. A
presence in the company's office is not required. The company makes use of standard
technologies that are combined into a working solution. However, certain shortcomings
can be recognized; e.g. a lack of integration with companywide software environment, a
dynamic upgrade of the electronic product catalogue according to customer profile and
new marketing campaigns. The software solution is also not easily scalable to an
international level, since it has been adapted to the specific Swiss sales organization.
Both facts limit the generation of scale effects. The benefits of the solution include a
more advanced appearance of the sales people in front of the client. The improved
customer records allow for central marketing planning and controlling compare to the
former situation where most of the customer knowledge used to be stored in the heads of


Work life balance issues in mobile enabled work environment

Work life balance issues in mobile enabled work environment

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (13)

Ähnlich wie Work life balance issues in mobile enabled work environment

Ähnlich wie Work life balance issues in mobile enabled work environment (20)

Mehr von Mayank Baheti

Mehr von Mayank Baheti (6)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Work life balance issues in mobile enabled work environment