What sets us apart is more than just fingerprints: A person-centered and resource-based approach to work-life balance

Key Points:

Conserving resources is crucial for maintaining a sustainable work-life balance: Be mindful of loss spirals!
A sense of control is key to effectively managing work and family boundaries.
Work-life balance is not the same for everyone; it varies based on distinct boundary management profiles shaped by cross-role interruption behaviors (how often work and family roles interrupt each other), identity centrality (the importance placed on each role), and perceived boundary control (the level of control over boundary crossings).

We are all unique beings, and the work-life balance we strive to achieve also reflects that uniqueness, shaping itself differently for everyone and producing different effects. Modern developments have made maintaining this balance increasingly challenging. The blurring of spatial boundaries and the pervasive role of technology has caused work and life domains to overlap more. The rise of home-office opportunities, easy access to both work and home through technology, and the increasing prevalence of dual-career families have made work-life balance a major concern for many employees.

Before diving into the details of what affects work-life balance and how it impacts us, it is helpful to clarify what this concept truly means. Rather than referring to a perfect equilibrium between work and life, work-life balance is about adjustment and flexibility. It means having a balance where one domain does not completely dominate the other, allowing each to meet its needs. Our focus on both professional and personal life goals can sometimes narrow our perspective. At this point, work-life balance means being aware of this narrowing focus and having the flexibility to respond to the needs of the other domain.

This narrowing of focus is closely tied to the limited nature of our resources. The Conservation of Resources theory (Hobfoll, 1989) suggests that individuals have limited resources, such as time, energy, and personal traits, which help them cope with stressful situations. These resources are finite and can become depleted over time. When individuals experience a resource loss, their efforts to recover those resources can trigger a “loss spiral,” where attempts to recover lost resources lead to further depletion and heightened stress. This situation can be compared to someone in debt taking on more loans to cover existing debts, leading to a stressful cycle.

Work-life imbalance can be seen as a form of loss spiral. When too much focus is placed on work, resources available for family diminish, leading to unmet needs in the family domain, which in turn can negatively affect the work domain. It creates a significant strain and work-family interference cycle. A meta-analysis study by Nohe et al. (2015) has demonstrated that there is a reciprocal effect between strain and work-life balance. In other words, a person struggling to maintain a work-life balance is likely to experience a decline in well-being, and someone already experiencing poor well-being finds it even more challenging to achieve balanced work-life dynamics.

Does this mean we are trapped with no solution? Not at all. Rather than letting our resources drain away, falling into a loss spiral, or reaching the peak of the stress curve that leads to burnout, we can step back and understand our preferences and resources. By discovering new ways to replenish our resources—much like streams that feed a river—we can maintain our work-life balance and overall well-being.

The resource-based perspective suggests that demands in one domain deplete resources in the other, leading to stress and interference between the two domains. Research highlights the importance of autonomy, flexibility, and control in managing and conserving our resources effectively. Autonomy means having control over how work gets done, allowing employees to allocate resources like time and energy more effectively. Flexibility goes hand in hand with autonomy by offering adaptable work arrangements, such as flexible work hours and workplaces, which enable employees to balance their work and family responsibilities more effectively by adjusting their schedules. While autonomy focuses on how decisions are made, flexibility emphasizes when and where work is done to meet personal needs better. As Liao et al. (2019) pointed out in their meta-analysis, when individuals have the option to tweak their workspace to make it comfortable or start their day when it works best for them, it can positively impact their overall well-being and, thus, work-life dynamics.

While flexibility and autonomy have a significant impact on work-life balance, their effectiveness is closely tied to an individual’s sense of control. Control refers to a person’s ability to self-manage and manage their roles in both work and family domains. Having a high sense of control has been shown to reduce work-family interference. For instance, individuals who have greater control over their work schedules or family responsibilities are more likely to manage work-family boundaries effectively (Liao et al., 2019).

Kossek and colleagues (2012) identified six distinct boundary management profiles that capture how individuals handle work and family responsibilities, navigate cross-role interruption behaviors, prioritize role identities, and exercise perceived boundary control. These person-centered profiles—Work Warriors, Overwhelmed Reactors, Family Guardians, Fusion Lovers, Dividers, and Nonwork Eclectics—each represent a unique approach to handling work-family dynamics. Work Warriors prioritize work above other activities, often letting it spill into personal time. Overwhelmed Reactors struggle to manage the pressures of both roles due to frequent interruptions. Family Guardians allow family needs to take precedence, ensuring that work does not dominate their personal lives. Fusion Lovers are comfortable blending work and personal life while maintaining a sense of control. Dividers prefer a clear boundary between work and family, while Nonwork Eclectics focus on interests that extend beyond work and family responsibilities. Understanding these profiles can help individuals recognize their own approach to work-life balance.

These profiles highlight how different approaches to boundary control, identity centrality, and interruption behaviors can shape work-life balance. Individuals with higher control (e.g., Fusion Lovers, Dividers) tend to manage boundaries more effectively, leading to better work-family outcomes, while those with lower control (e.g., Overwhelmed Reactors, Work Warriors) may face greater challenges like psychological distress.

It might be helpful to clarify this point: Research strongly confirms that employees’ commitment to either work or family can lead to an imbalance between these domains. This conflict between domains, in turn, diminishes commitment to both work and family (Liao et al., 2019). In situations where autonomy and flexibility are present, a lack of control can lead to potential issues. For example, a person with high autonomy might become overly focused on either work or family if they lack the self-regulation needed to balance their priorities. A person committed to work may start working earlier, stay later, and unintentionally neglect their personal life, failing to recognize the importance of self-control. This can result in a work-family conflict, causing the commitment to the neglected area to diminish over time.

In conclusion, maintaining a sustainable work-life balance requires a focus on preventing loss spirals, enhancing the sense of control, and effectively managing boundaries. It is important to recognize that the negative impact of resource loss often outweighs the benefits of resource gains. Therefore, before seeking new gains, focus on minimizing losses.

Takeaways for your practice

Know Your Preferences: Reflect on what work-life balance means to you—do you need clear boundaries or prefer a blended approach? Boundaries are essential for healthy dynamics; their permeability may vary, but a clear distinction should always exist.
Communicate Your Boundaries: Share your preferences with colleagues, managers, and partners to align expectations and prevent misunderstandings.
Respect Employee Boundaries: Managers should honor employees’ preferences, whether with segmented or integrated boundaries. Offering flexibility alone is not enough; fostering a sense of control over that flexibility is key.
Raise Awareness: Encourage boundary-setting by integrating assessments and training in human resources practices, empowering employees to maintain control over their preferred boundary style effectively.
Avoid the Loss Spiral: Prevent stress from disrupting balance by fostering self-awareness before it escalates.
Strengthen Your Sense of Control: Invest in skills like flexibility and create an adaptable schedule based on your energy levels to maintain control over work and personal life, reducing stress and enhancing job satisfaction, performance, and commitment (Kossek et al., 2012; Liao et al.; 2019; Nohe et al.; 2015).

Did you like this article? share it with your network by clicking on the buttons below!

Follow us on LinkedIn, Twitter ,instagram and subscribe to our newsletter to receive all the quality of scientific research!

Trustworthiness score:

This article is based on multiple meta studies of moderate or above trustworthiness score; therefore, we give this article %80 trustworthiness score. This means that there is a 20% chance that alternative explanations for the effects found are possible.

Learn how we critically appraise studies to assign them a Trustworthiness Score

We aim to provide you only the best available scientific evidence to inform your decisions.

References

Kossek, Ellen & Ruderman, Marian & Braddy, Phillip & Hannum, Kelly. (2012). Work–nonwork boundary management profiles: A person-centered approach. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 81. 112–128. 10.1016/j.jvb.2012.04.003.

Liao, E. Y., Lau, V. P., Hui, R. T.-y., & Kong, K. H. (2019). A resource-based perspective on work–family conflict: Meta-analytical findings. The Career Development International, 24(1), 37–73. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-12-2017-0236

Nohe, Christoph & Meier, Laurenz & Sonntag, Karlheinz & Michel, Alexandra. (2014). The Chicken or the Egg? A Meta-Analysis of Panel Studies of the Relationship Between Work-Family Conflict and Strain. Journal of Applied Psychology. 100. 10.1037/a0038012.