Journal of Global Mobility: The Home of Expatriate Management

Research
Boundary management in a boundaryless world: The impact of life domain
boundary management for expatriates’ life domain conflict and enrichment
Regina Kempen, Kate Hattrup, Karsten Mueller,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Regina Kempen, Kate Hattrup, Karsten Mueller, (2017) "Boundary management in a boundaryless
world: The impact of life domain boundary management for expatriates’ life domain conflict and
Downloaded by Universiti Utara Malaysia At 20:27 12 November 2017 (PT)

enrichment", Journal of Global Mobility: The Home of Expatriate Management Research, Vol. 5 Issue:
1, pp.43-59, https://doi.org/10.1108/JGM-06-2016-0029
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/JGM-06-2016-0029
Downloaded on: 12 November 2017, At: 20:27 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 45 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 95 times since 2017*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2017),"Unpacking differences in psychological contracts of organizational and self-initiated
expatriates", Journal of Global Mobility: The Home of Expatriate Management Research, Vol. 5
Iss 1 pp. 93-108 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/JGM-06-2016-0025">https://doi.org/10.1108/
JGM-06-2016-0025</a>
(2017),"Threatened identities: adjustment narratives of expatriate spouses", Journal of Global
Mobility: The Home of Expatriate Management Research, Vol. 5 Iss 1 pp. 78-92 <a href="https://
doi.org/10.1108/JGM-01-2017-0003">https://doi.org/10.1108/JGM-01-2017-0003</a>

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-
srm:394654 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
 well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

Downloaded by Universiti Utara Malaysia At 20:27 12 November 2017 (PT)
 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/2049-8799.htm

Boundary
Boundary management in a management in
boundaryless world a boundaryless
world
The impact of life domain boundary
management for expatriates’ life domain 43
conflict and enrichment Received 24 June 2016
Regina Kempen Revised 1 October 2016
2 December 2016
Department of Work and Organizational Psychology, 17 January 2017
Accepted 17 January 2017
University of Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany
Downloaded by Universiti Utara Malaysia At 20:27 12 November 2017 (PT)

Kate Hattrup
Department of Psychology, San Diego State University,
San Diego, California, USA, and
Karsten Mueller
Department of Work and Organizational Psychology,
University of Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate the relationship of flexible and permeable boundary
management with both life domain conflict and life domain enrichment among expatriate workers.
Design/methodology/approach – This study utilizes a sample of 199 expatriates working in
a higher education context, and analyses survey data with hierarchical regression analysis and
cluster analysis.
Findings – Relationships between the permeability and the flexibility of life domains, and work-private life
conflict, private life-work conflict, and work-private life enrichment were found. However, no significant
results were obtained for the relationship between boundary management and private life-work enrichment.
Two clusters of boundary management used by expatriates are described.
Research limitations/implications – Due to cross-sectional data, causal influences cannot be determined
with confidence.
Practical implications – The findings underscore the need to consider the role-related stakeholders of
expatriates, especially in the private life domain. Implications for the support of expatriates based on the
boundary management clusters are discussed.
Originality/value – This is the first study analysing boundary management distinguishing between
flexibility and permeability in an expatriate context.
Keywords Expatriates, Boundary management, Life domain conflict, Life domain enrichment
Paper type Research paper

Introduction
For expatriates, international job assignments are often associated with profound changes
in one’s work environment, one’s non-work environment, and in one’s living conditions
(Harrison et al., 2004). Expatriation, therefore, often represents a challenge for the expatriate,
as well as for other important stakeholders who interact with the expatriate, such as
individuals in the host country, parent firm members, and the expatriate’s family members
(Takeuchi, 2010). Role-related constructs, such as role overload, role ambiguity, and
work-family interactions are especially important variables that have the potential to
influence expatriates’ adjustment processes and expatriates’ success (Takeuchi et al., 2002). Journal of Global Mobility
Despite a growing body of research that addresses issues of work-life balance and conflict Vol. 5 No. 1, 2017
pp. 43-59
among expatriates (e.g. Grant-Vallone and Ensher, 2001), research on the interplay of life © Emerald Publishing Limited
2049-8799
domains of expatriates could be expanded in a number of critical ways. DOI 10.1108/JGM-06-2016-0029
 JGM In particular, recent research underscores the importance of going beyond a focus on
5,1 only the negative effects of work on life, and of life on work, to examine the positive
relationships among the two life domains, where the two might enrich each other rather
than be in conflict (Greenhaus and Powell, 2006). The interplay of life domains should also
be understood as consisting of bi-directional influences among work and life, where work
may affect non-work experiences and vice versa (e.g. Gutek et al., 1991). Moreover, recent
44 research has sought to broaden the non-work domain beyond just one’s family, to include
one’s entire “private life” (e.g. Tetrick and Buffardi, 2006). In domestic research,
characteristics of boundary management, such as boundary permeability and boundary
flexibility, have also gained interest (e.g. Ashforth et al., 2000; Bulger et al., 2007), with
evidence suggesting that positive relationships between life domains are facilitated by
dimensions of boundary management (Bulger et al., 2007).
Although a few studies have examined the interplay of life domains among expatriates,
Downloaded by Universiti Utara Malaysia At 20:27 12 November 2017 (PT)

much less is known about the potential antecedents of life domain conflict and life
domain enrichment among expatriates compared to what is known about the experiences
of domestic workers. This is unfortunate because the work and private life experiences of
expatriates may be vastly different from those of domestic employees in a number of critical
ways. Not surprisingly, expatriates experience unique stresses in managing the
work-private life interface (Caligiuri et al., 1998; Wurtz and Suutari, 2014). Work is more
disruptive on global assignments than in the domestic context (Wurtz and Suutari, 2014), in
that boundaries between one’s work and private lives are often less respected
during expatriate assignments, leading to the potential for stronger spillover between the
two domains. “Blurred boundaries” are a key feature of expatriates’ living situation
(Bhaskar-Shrinivas et al., 2005), leading to a lack of refuge in one life domain from the
stressors of another life domain. Thus, the experiences of expatriates are unique and
represent challenges that are not typically present in the domestic work situation. Research
is sorely needed that improves our understanding of how to foster a healthy interplay of life
domains for the increasing number of employees who take on foreign assignments.
Specifically, research should apply the growing knowledge about boundary management
among domestic workers to the expatriates’ situation.
The present study seeks to contribute to research on expatriate adjustment by
examining the role of boundary management on the positive and negative effects of work on
one’s private life, and the effects of one’s private life on work, in a sample of expatriate
workers on foreign assignment. This study builds on conservation of resources (COR)
theory (Hobfoll, 1989) to predict how boundary management affects life domain conflict and
enrichment of expatriates. Specifically, it contributes to the literature by distinguishing
between flexibility and permeability in an expatriate context. Moreover, this paper identifies
two boundary management profiles that can be used to customize interventions fostering a
positive interplay of life domains for expatriates.

Theoretical framework
The role of life domain interaction for expatriates
As noted, research has documented negative work-life conflict among expatriates
(Grant-Vallone and Ensher, 2001), and the potential for conflict between life domains to contribute
to poorer cross-cultural adjustment among expatriate employees (Takeuchi et al., 2002). On the
other hand, positive work-life interactions also occur among expatriates, with each life domain
having the potential to enrich the other (Schütter and Boerner, 2013). Kempen et al. (2015),
for example, found that life domain enrichment accounted for variance in several outcomes
among expatriate workers, beyond what was accounted for by life domain conflict.
Given the fact that, in the case of expatriates, boundaries between life domains are often
described as unclear (Shaffer et al., 2001; Bhaskar-Shrinivas et al., 2005), it is especially
 important to better understand how boundary management affects the interplay of life Boundary
domains among expatriates. Boundary management may lead to both negative and positive management in
spillover between the work and private life domains of expatriate employees. a boundaryless
Boundary management world
In domestic research, various authors have examined the boundaries that exist between the
work and personal life domains, as well as individual boundary management in the 45
interplay between work and private life (Kossek and Lautsch, 2012). Ashforth et al. (2000),
for example, pointed out that boundaries between work and home, or third places (i.e. other
social domains such as leisure activities, sports, church, or neighbourhood) can be described
on a continuum ranging from integration, in which the two domains have strong
mutual influences, to segmentation, where they are kept apart. According to COR theory
(Hobfoll, 1989), individuals seek to preserve resources that help them to achieve their goals,
Downloaded by Universiti Utara Malaysia At 20:27 12 November 2017 (PT)

and they experience stress at the perceived loss of goal-related resources. Boundary
management may act as a resource when dealing with the interplay among life domains
(Ferguson et al., 2015), particularly when boundary management increases one’s ability to
adapt to role-related challenges.
Overall, boundaries between life domains can be described by their permeability and
their flexibility (Bulger et al., 2007; Kossek and Lautsch, 2012). Permeability represents the
degree to which various elements from one life domain are allowed to encroach on the other
life domain. For example, permeability may include psychological elements, such as
worrying about home concerns while at work, as well as behavioural elements, like making
work-related phone calls while at home (Matthews and Barnes-Farrell, 2010). Boundary
flexibility, by contrast, represents the degree to which a person physically or temporally
expands or contracts the boundary between life domains. For example, a boundary is
flexible if an employee can leave work early to take care of concerns relevant to his or her
private life (Bulger et al., 2007). Hecht and Allen (2009) argued that it is important to
differentiate the boundary characteristics that separate one’s private life from work, and the
boundary characteristics that separate one’s work from one’s private life.
More recently, Matthews and Barnes-Farrell (2010) further refined the concept of
boundary flexibility by differentiating “flexibility ability” from “flexibility willingness”.
Flexibility ability reflects the degree to which an individual perceives that he or she is free
from personal or situational constraints that affect his or her boundary management, such
as the perception that external factors enable one to leave a domain and to move easily
between domains. Flexibility willingness describes an individual’s motivation to integrate or
segment life domains. Thus, overall, six different boundary management dimensions can be
identified: work flexibility ability, work flexibility willingness, work permeability, private
life flexibility ability, private life flexibility willingness, and private life permeability
(Bulger et al., 2007).
Boundary management and life domain conflict. Given that the resources available to
participate in different life roles are usually scarce (e.g. Kahn et al., 1964), boundary
permeability may have the potential to deplete resources needed to fulfil role expectations in
one’s life domains (Hecht and Allen, 2009; Hobfoll, 1989). For example, a weak boundary
separating one’s private life domain from work allows people to engage in work-related
concerns while at home. As a consequence, this engagement depletes resources available for
participating in the private life domain. Not surprisingly, several studies have demonstrated
that higher work- to non-work permeability is associated with higher life domain conflict
(Bulger et al., 2007; Olson-Buchanan and Boswell, 2006). Researchers have also argued that
the negative effects of permeability may be caused by high-role ambiguities and
interruptions (Ashforth et al., 2000), or due to inconsistent norms and expectations that
have to be fulfilled simultaneously (Hall and Richter, 1988). In the case of expatriates,
 JGM it is likely that the permeability of life domains is associated with life domain conflict
5,1 because role ambiguities and role overload are a major challenge for international assignees
(e.g. Takeuchi et al., 2002).
As opposed to boundary permeability, which may deplete resources needed for coping
with work and private life demands, boundary flexibility is likely to bolster one’s coping
resources. According to COR theory, workplace and private life conditions may serve as
46 important resources for the individual (Hobfoll, 2001). For example, autonomy at work,
which allows people to organize their own work tasks, is described as a workplace resource
by Hobfoll (2001). In the present study, we consider boundary flexibility as an important
resource that has the potential to reduce life domain conflict. Flexibility in one’s life domains
allows individuals to organize their schedule more freely, adapting to specific needs
emerging from the different life domains. For example, a flexible work boundary allows an
employee to take care of a sick child one day while on another day he or she can dedicate
Downloaded by Universiti Utara Malaysia At 20:27 12 November 2017 (PT)

more time to work. This in turn should reduce perceived time-based conflict. Ferguson et al.
(2015), for example, reported that boundary flexibility increased positive family functioning
and affective commitment in a sample of 503 married couples working in different
industries. Similarly, Matthews and Barnes-Farrell (2010) found that family and work
flexibility ability were both negatively related to life domain conflict. We would expect the
same pattern among expatriate workers. Specifically, given that flexibility in managing
one’s private life domain has been identified as an important predictor of cross-cultural
adjustment of expatriates (Rosenbusch and Cseh, 2012), we predict that boundary flexibility
is negatively associated with life domain conflict. Boundary permeability, by contrast,
should lead to negative spillover between life domains. Thus, it is predicted:
H1a. Permeability in the work boundary is positively associated with private life-work
conflict.
H1b. Permeability in the private life boundary is positively associated with work-private
life conflict.
H1c. Flexibility ability and flexibility willingness in the work boundary are negatively
associated with work-private life conflict and private life-work conflict.
H1d. Flexibility ability and flexibility willingness in the private life boundary are
negatively associated with work-private life conflict and private life-work conflict.
Boundary management and life domain enrichment. As noted, the interplay between life
domains may be characterized by both positive and negative spillover, and hence, research on
expatriates should focus on both work-life conflict and work-life enrichment (Schütter and
Boerner, 2013; Kempen et al., 2015). Greenhaus and Powell’s (2006) enrichment theory, for
example, implies that highly flexible and highly permeable boundaries may allow resources
from one domain to influence the quality of one’s experiences in the other domain. Carlson
et al. (2015) describe the example of an employee receiving a business call at home that gives
him or her the opportunity to reschedule a work obligation. This type of permeability would
increase one’s resources by permitting greater control over the work domain, thereby
enhancing one’s experiences in that domain. Similarly, Kossek and Lautsch (2012)
underscored the fact that permeable boundaries allow positive behaviours or emotions to spill
over into another role. Flexibility also has the potential to increase enrichment among life
domains. Specifically, flexibility allows employees to expand or contract their life domain
boundary according to their individual needs (Bulger et al., 2007; Hecht and Allen, 2009).
Consequently, flexibility is associated with higher perceived control over the boundaries. For
example, flexibility allows individuals to complete a task without external time constraints.
This in turn may produce a greater sense of accomplishment which can then lead to greater
 enrichment among life domains. In a domestic context, Bulger et al. (2007) conducted a Boundary
comprehensive investigation of the effects of boundary flexibility on the interplay of life management in
domains by examining both conflict and enrichment as outcomes. They found that boundary a boundaryless
flexibility ability and flexibility willingness were both positively associated life domain
enhancement. Moreover, the authors described several consistent clusters of boundary world
management practices used by different individuals. In an expatriate context, it is likely that
boundary management is particularly related to a positive interplay of life domains because of 47
the unique living situation of expatriates. Expatriate workers typically need to form social ties
in the private life and work domains to obtain information and formal and informal support
(Farh et al., 2010). These formal and informal ties can serve as resources for managing each
domain, and for managing the boundaries between domains. For example, experiences with
host country nationals during non-work activities may create a better understanding of the
host country’s culture, and may thereby improve communication processes at work.
Downloaded by Universiti Utara Malaysia At 20:27 12 November 2017 (PT)

Permeable boundaries may, therefore, help expatriates to transfer resources from one domain
to another. Cross-cultural motivation, flexibility, and openness play important roles in an
expatriate context (Chen et al., 2010; Rosenbusch and Cseh, 2012). Thus, it could be expected
that high permeability and high flexibility of the different life domains play a functional role in
the context of expatriation and are, therefore, positively related to the transfer of resources
between life domains. It is thus predicted:
H2a. Permeability in the work boundary is positively associated with private life-work
enrichment.
H2b. Permeability in the private life boundary is positively associated with work-private
life enrichment.
H2c. Flexibility ability and willingness in the work boundary are positively associated
with work-private life enrichment and private life-work enrichment.
H2d. Flexibility ability and willingness in the private life boundary are positively
associated with work-private life enrichment and private life-work enrichment.

Method
Participants and procedure
The present study relies on a sample of expatriates working as international researchers
(doctorate or postdoctorate) at a university and at different research institutions in a large
German city. Although academic expatriates differ from business expatriates in some
respects (e.g. Selmer and Lauring, 2011), life domain boundary management is no less
a concern in the academic context than it is in other business settings, and in some
ways, the work-life demands may be even more pronounced for academic expatriates.
Academics working at universities abroad are often confronted with so-called “greedy
institutions”, where international collaborations often involve demands that take place
off-campus (e.g. Lubitow and Zippel, 2014), blurring the boundaries between the life
domains. These challenges are similar to those faced by business expatriates, who also
often have problems establishing mechanisms to separate the life domains (Shaffer et al.,
2001). Richardson and McKenna (2002) also found that academic expatriates often
engage in off-campus network building and other career development activities while
on foreign assignment. Thus, our sample of expatriates provides a good opportunity to
study boundary management and their relationships with positive and negative
work-life spillover.
In total, data from 199 expatriates were available. Participants were contacted through a
service centre at the university that assists international researchers after their arrival.
 JGM Data were collected through web-based self-report questionnaires during the Summer of
5,1 2015. The sample included expatriates from 57 countries, and was about evenly divided
between men and women (47.4 per cent women and 52.6 per cent men). The majority
(54.5 per cent) lived in some sort of partnership with a significant other, and 25.9 per cent
indicated they had a least one child. The age of the sample ranged from 24 to 63 years, with
a mean of 32.8 years. On average, the expatriates indicated they worked 45.84 hours per
48 week, with a minimum of 20 hours and a maximum of 81 hours. Participants were selected if
they reported working a minimum of 20 hours per week, which is the official number of
working hours for most doctoral positions at German universities. Participants responded to
a survey, which was administered in English.

Measures
Boundary flexibility was measured with eight items obtained from Matthews and
Downloaded by Universiti Utara Malaysia At 20:27 12 November 2017 (PT)

Barnes-Farrell (2010). The measure included two items that assessed boundary flexibility
ability in the private life domain, two items that assessed boundary flexibility willingness in
the private life domain, two items that assessed boundary flexibility ability in the work
domain, and two items that assessed boundary flexibility willingness in the work domain.
Of the original set of 18 items described by Matthews and Barnes-Farrell (2010), these eight
items were chosen for the present study using several criteria. First, reverse-coded items
were avoided because previous research has shown that these types of items may result in
problems with factor structure (e.g. Idaszak and Drasgow, 1987). Second, priority was given
to items that are shorter in length, because they are easier to read. Third, items were avoided
that refer to very specific flexible working conditions, such as the opportunity to compress
the work week or to take an extended lunch break. A sample item used in the present study
is “While at work, I can stop what I am doing to meet responsibilities related to my family
and my personal life” (work flexibility ability). Cronbach’s α for the four flexibility scales
(flexibility ability and willingness in the work and private life domain) ranged from
0.73 to 0.91. All items were coded 1 ¼ strongly disagree, 5 ¼ strongly agree.
Permeability was measured with four items obtained from Clark (2002), including two
items that assessed permeability of the private life domain and two items that assessed
permeability of the work domain. Sample items included “My family or friends contact me
while I am at work” (work permeability). The measures of permeability of the private life
boundary and of the work domain boundary had Cronbach’s αs in the present study of
0.73 and 0.70, respectively. Items were coded 1 ¼ very seldom to 5 ¼ very often.
Life domain conflict was measured with six items of the Work-Family Conflict Scale
(Carlson et al., 2000), with three items assessing work-private life conflict and three items
measuring private life-work conflict. The wording of the life domain scales was changed to
“private life” instead of “family”. Sample items included “My work keeps me from my
private life activities more than I would like”. The measure had a Cronbach’s α of 0.75 in the
present sample.
Life domain enrichment was measured with the short version of the work-family
enrichment scale by Kacmar et al. (2014). The scale consisted of six items, with three items
capturing work-private life enrichment and three items capturing private life-work
enrichment. Sample items included “My involvement in my work helps me to understand
different viewpoints and this helps me in my private life” (work-private life enrichment). The
measure had a Cronbach’s α of 0.83 in the present study. All items were coded 1 ¼ strongly
disagree to 5 ¼ strongly agree.
Scholars have argued that research on expatriates should take other stakeholders and
the expatriate’s living conditions into account (e.g. Takeuchi, 2010), especially when
examining the interplay of life domains among expatriates. Therefore, the present study
includes working hours, partnership status, and the presence of children as control
 variables, in addition to the usual control of variables such as gender and age. Additionally, Boundary
a cultural distance score was included, using scores on Hofstede’s (2001) cultural management in
dimensions, as described by Kogut and Singh (1988). a boundaryless
world
Analysis
To test the factorial structure of the boundary management measures in the present study,
confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using AMOS was applied to test the postulated 49
six-factor model. This model distinguished between the six interrelated first-order factors
following the structure described by Bulger et al. (2007). Each of the two items measuring
these six factors was hypothesized to load on a specific first-order factor. This model of the
boundary management of expatriates was tested against alternative, more parsimonious
models of the data. An alternative second model combined boundary flexibility ability and
willingness, and specified four factors consisting of flexibility in the work and private life
Downloaded by Universiti Utara Malaysia At 20:27 12 November 2017 (PT)

boundaries, and permeability in each of the two boundaries. A third model combined the
work and private life boundaries, and distinguished between flexibility ability, flexibility
willingness, and permeability. In a fourth model, only two factors (flexibility and
permeability) were retained.
To evaluate the potential for common method variance, Harman’s single factor test was
used within a CFA. To this end, an additional single factor for all the items was modelled.
In a second step, standardized regression coefficients were compared for the model with and
without the single (common method) factor. A difference in loadings on the hypothesized
first-order factors between the model that included the single factor and the model that did
not include the common factor that exceeds 0.2 indicates that an item is affected by common
method variance.
To evaluate model fit, the comparative fit index (CFI), the incremental fit index (IFI), and
the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) were used. Values of 0.90 or above
for the CFI and IFI, and values of 0.08 or lower for the RMSEA, are usually taken as
evidence of adequate model fit (e.g. Diefendorff et al., 2005).
Results of the CFA of the postulated boundary management model are displayed
in Table I. As the results show, the postulated model distinguishing between the six
factors of work flexibility ability, work flexibility willingness, private life flexibility
ability, private life flexibility willingness, work permeability, and private life permeability
fits the data well ( χ2 ¼ 61.654; df ¼ 45; CFI ¼ 0.980; IFI ¼ 0.980; RMSEA ¼ 0.043). The fit
indices for each of the alternative models indicated poor fit, and supported the use of
separate measures for each of the six factors. Table I also shows the results of a CFA of the
life domain conflict and enrichment scales. A four-factor model distinguishing between the
direction work-private life and private life work for both conflict and enrichment fits

χ² df CFI IFI RMSEA

Boundary management scales

Six hierarchical factors (with sub-constructs) 61.654 45 0.980 0.980 0.043
Four factors (boundary management work, boundary management
private life, permeability work, permeability private life) 177.013 49 0.844 0.848 0.115
Three factors (boundary management ability, boundary management
willingness, permeability) 571.948 51 0.367 0.378 0.227
Two factors (boundary management and permeability) 658.911 53 0.263 0.275 0.240 Table I.
Results of
Life domain conflict and enrichment scales confirmatory factor
Four hierarchical factors (work-private life conflict, private life-work analysis model
conflict, work-private life enrichment, private life-work enrichment) 90.076 49 0.950 0.951 0.065 comparison
 JGM the data well ( χ2 ¼ 90.076; df ¼ 49; CFI ¼ 0.950; IFI ¼ 0.951; RMSEA ¼ 0.065). Results of
5,1 the Harman’s single factor test show that only one item showed a difference in
loadings that exceeded 0.2 for the model with the single common method factor
in comparison to the model without the single factor. The single factor accounted for
only 16.7 per cent of the variance. Thus, results confirmed the measurement of the
hypothesized factors, and largely ruled out common method variance as substantial bias
50 affecting correlations among measured variables.
H1 and H2 were tested with hierarchical regression analysis. In a first step, control
variables were entered, including working hours, age, gender, presence of own children,
partnership status, and cultural distance. In a second step, the boundary management
variables were entered. A significant increase in R2 after entering the boundary management
scores in this regression analysis indicates support for H1 and H2. In addition, significant
β-weights indicate which specific aspects of boundary management are relevant for the
Downloaded by Universiti Utara Malaysia At 20:27 12 November 2017 (PT)

prediction of life domain conflict and life domain enrichment.

Results
Table II shows the means, standard deviations, and intercorrelations of the study variables.
Table III shows the results of the hierarchical regressions that were conducted to test
H1 and H2.
As Table III shows, significant regression coefficients of the boundary management
dimensions were obtained for work-private life conflict, private life-work conflict, and
work-private life enrichment. However, boundary management did not predict private
life-work enrichment.

Boundary management and life domain conflict

More specifically, as predicted by H1a, work permeability ( β ¼ 0.18, p o0.05) was
positively related to private life-work conflict; and, as predicted by H1b, private life
permeability was positively related to work-private life conflict ( β ¼ 0.30, p o0.01). Private
life flexibility ability was negatively related to work-private life conflict ( β ¼ −0.32,
p o0.01) and to private life-work conflict ( β ¼ −0.21, p o0.05), partially supporting H1d.
H1c was not supported, however, in that neither work flexibility willingness nor work
flexibility ability was related to work-private life conflict.

Boundary management and life domain enrichment

In contrast to H2a and H2b, work permeability and private life permeability were not
related to work-private life enrichment and private life-work enrichment. In partial support
of H2d, private life flexibility ability was positively related to work-private life enrichment
( β ¼ 0.36, p o0.01), however, no significant results were obtained for the prediction of
work-private life enrichment by private life flexibility willingness and work flexibility
ability and willingness. No significant results were obtained for the prediction of private
life-work enrichment.
As the risk of a Type I error increases with increasing numbers of statistical tests,
we additionally calculated a false discovery rate following the procedure by Benjamini and
Hochberg (1995). For all the predictors reported in Table III to remain significant in the
present study, a study-wide significance level of p o0.14 would be needed. However, it is
common to control the per-family Type I error rate (Maxwell and Delaney, 1990). If we
consider all of the tests of life domain conflict as one family, all predictors remain significant
at a level of p o0.084. For all of the tests of the enrichment family, the predictors remain
significant at p o0.001. We consider this a reasonable trade-off between Types I and II
errors (Maxwell and Delaney, 1990).
 Downloaded by Universiti Utara Malaysia At 20:27 12 November 2017 (PT)

Variables M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

1. Work flexibility ability 3.57 0.83 –

2. Work flexibility willingness 3.31 0.92 0.61** –
3. Work permeability 2.66 0.99 0.23** 0.14 –
4. Private life flexibility ability 3.47 0.96 0.06 −0.10 −0.10 –
5. Private life flexibility willingness 3.64 0.82 0.01 0.04 0.00 0.25** –
6. Private life permeability 3.19 1.03 0.03 0.11 0.25** −0.05 0.16* –
7. Work-private life conflict 3.15 0.89 −0.11 0.05 0.12 −0.29** 0.16* 0.37** –
8. Private life-work conflict 2.43 0.81 0.20** 0.22* 0.24** −0.26** 0.02 0.08 0.39** –
9. Work-private life enrichment 3.59 0.75 0.12 0.11 0.05 0.23** 0.04 −0.03 −0.27** −0.19** –
10. Private life-work enrichment 3.88 0.72 0.13 0.09 0.06 −0.04 −0.03 0.04 −0.02 −0.09 0.48** –
11. Working hours 45.71 – −0.21** −0.14 −0.01 0.05 0.05 0.23** 0.24** −0.11 0.02 0.01 –
12. Age 32.85 – 0.09 0.04 −0.07 −0.03 −0.03 0.11 −0.05 −0.01 0.18* 0.03 0.02 –
13. Gender – – 0.14 0.01 0.04 −0.06 −0.03 −0.26** −0.06 0.01 0.08 −0.11 0.00 0.05 –
14. Children – – −0.18* −0.13 −0.11 0.21** −0.07 −0.04 −0.04 −0.33** −0.02 −0.04 0.16* −0.30** −0.05 –
15. Partnership – – −0.12 −0.10 −0.03 0.23** 0.09 −0.09 −0.07 −0.15* −0.02 −0.14 0.10 −0.19** −0.02 0.43** –
16. Cultural Distance 2.07 1.30 −0.06 −0.03 −0.03 0.07 0.11 −0.06 −0.04 0.10 −0.02 0.00 −0.12 −0.20* −0.03 0.04 0.11
Notes: n ¼ 199. *p o 0.05; **p o0.01
51
a boundaryless
Boundary

Correlations and
Table II.

descriptive statistics
of the study variables
world
management in
 Downloaded by Universiti Utara Malaysia At 20:27 12 November 2017 (PT)

5,1

52
JGM

Table III.

private life

enrichment
enrichment, and
work-private life

private life-work
conflict, private life-
work conflict, work-
regression analysis of
Results of hierarchical
Work-private life conflict Private life-work conflict Work-private life enrichment Private life-work enrichment
Predictors β Adj. R² ΔR2 β Adj. R² ΔR2 β Adj. R² ΔR2 β Adj. R² ΔR2

Step 1 0.06 0.08 0.01 0.00

Step 2 0.22 0.19** 0.17 0.13** 0.11 0.14** −0.04 0.01
Working hours 0.19* 0.03 0.01 0.02
Age −0.13 −0.09 0.25** 0.06
Gender 0.02 0.05 0.04 −0.11
Children −0.05 −0.27** 0.01 −0.07
Partnership 0.00 0.02 −0.05 −0.09
Cultural Distance −0.01 0.11 −0.03 0.01
Work flexibility ability −0.09 0.04 −0.14 −0.03
Work flexibility willingness 0.06 0.16 0.16 0.07
Work permeability −0.01 0.18* 0.12 0.04
Private life flexibility ability −0.32** −0.21* 0.36** 0.07
Private life flexibility willingness 0.12 0.04 0.03 −0.03
Private life permeability 0.30** 0.01 −0.06 0.07
Notes: n ¼ 199. *p o0.05; **p o0.01
 To better understand the types of boundary management strategies that were employed by Boundary
expatriates, we also followed the procedure described by Bulger et al. (2007) and additionally management in
performed a cluster analysis using the present data. Because there were no a priori reasons a boundaryless
to specify a particular number of clusters in the present context, the steps described by
Bulger et al. (2007) were followed, using the two-step clustering procedure within world
SPSS. First, cases are successively assigned to preclusters in a cluster feature tree, based on
a log-likelihood distance measure. Second, hierarchical clustering is applied to these 53
preclusters in place of the raw data. As this clustering can produce a range of solutions,
Schwarz’s Bayesian inference criterion is then used to determine the best number of clusters.
Table IV shows the centred variable means and the results of the multivariate analyses of
variance (MANOVA).
The second step of the clustering procedure resulted in a two-cluster solution, with the
MANOVA indicating several significant differences between the two groups (λ(192) ¼ 66.88,
p o0.01). The between-subjects effects show significant differences between the groups for
Downloaded by Universiti Utara Malaysia At 20:27 12 November 2017 (PT)

work permeability, work flexibility ability, and work flexibility willingness (Table IV).
When comparing the clusters, expatriates in cluster 1 (n ¼ 64) show relatively high
flexibility and permeability in the private life domain, but lower flexibility and permeability
in the work domain boundaries. Individuals in cluster 2 (n ¼ 135), by contrast, tend to show
an opposing boundary management style, with high scores for boundary management in
the work domain (work flexibility ability, flexibility willingness, and permeability),
and a mixed pattern for boundary management in the private life domain. To better
understand the different clusters, demographic variables for each cluster were investigated
(see Table V).
In addition to variables such as gender, partnership status, children and working hours,
nation-level scores for individualism/collectivism (I/C), obtained from Hofstede (2001), were
also included in this description. This cultural dimension has been frequently used to
characterize cultural differences (e.g. Kirkman et al., 2006), and may predict unique patterns
of boundary management among expatriate workers. This cultural dimension was included
because previous research has shown that I/C plays an important role in the interaction of

Cluster 1 Cluster 2
Mean SD Mean SD F

Work flexibility ability −0.37 0.65 1.02 0.45 307.99**

Work flexibility willingness −0.50 0.76 0.69 0.73 113.70**
Work permeability −0.60 0.90 −0.22 1.00 6.68* Table IV.
Private life flexibility ability 0.45 0.83 −0.49 1.01 0.05 Cluster membership
means, standard
Private life flexibility willingness 0.54 0.78 0.69 0.84 1.37
deviations, and
Private life permeability 0.35 0.78 0.11 1.12 2.46 analysis of variance
Notes: *p o0.05;**p o0.01 results

Cluster 1 Cluster 2
(n ¼ 64) (n ¼ 135)

Percentage of woman 61.3 41.0

Percentage partnered 47.6 57.8
Percentage with children 15.9 30.6
Mean age 31.54 (5.62) 33.44 (7.28) Table V.
Average working hours 48.25 (11.04) 44.70 (8.21) Cluster membership
Mean Hofstede I/C score 41.79 (20.10) 46.44 (23.59) demographics
 JGM different life domains (Spector et al., 2007). As Table V shows, cluster 1 (private life
5,1 integration/work segmentation) is associated with a lower percentage of children and
partnered individuals, a higher percentage of female respondents, and a higher amount of
working hours. Compared to the second group, this group is younger and has a more
collectivistic orientation. Cluster 2 (work integration, mixed private life boundary pattern) is
associated with a higher percentage of children and men, and a lower percentage of
54 partnered individuals. This group is older, reports fewer working hours and a more
individualistic orientation.
Comparing the two clusters regarding the interaction of boundary management and life
domain conflict and enrichment in two separate regression analyses, results show that the two
groups act differently. In cluster 1, private life flexibility ability ( β ¼ 0.54, po0.01) was
positively related to work-private life enrichment and private life flexibility willingness
( β ¼ −0.40, po0.05) was negatively related to private life-work enrichment. In cluster 2,
private life flexibility ability ( β ¼ −0.32, po0.01) was negatively related to work-private life
Downloaded by Universiti Utara Malaysia At 20:27 12 November 2017 (PT)

conflict and private life permeability ( β ¼ 0.36, po0.01) was positively related to work-private
life conflict. In addition, private life flexibility ability was negatively related to private life-work
conflict ( β ¼ −0.31, po0.01) and private life flexibility willingness was positively related to
private life-work conflict ( β ¼ 0.22, po0.05). Moreover, private life flexibility ability was
positively related to work-private life enrichment ( β ¼ 0.26, po0.05).

Discussion
The purpose of this research was to examine how boundary management, in the form of
boundary permeability and boundary flexibility, relates to life domain conflict and
enrichment among expatriates working on international assignments. Findings from this
study demonstrated that boundary permeability and flexibility are associated with life
domain conflict and life domain enrichment of expatriates, and explain variance beyond
several demographic variables. In particular, work-private life conflict was significantly
predicted by private life flexibility ability and private life permeability, whereas private
life-work conflict was significantly predicted by work permeability and private life
flexibility ability. Boundary management explained 19 per cent of the variance in
work-private life conflict and 13 per cent of the variance in private life-work conflict, which
both represent medium effect sizes. The results further demonstrated that work-private life
enrichment was significantly predicted only by private life flexibility ability. Boundary
management explained 14 per cent of the variance in work-private life enrichment, which is
a medium-sized effect. We did not find any significant predictors of private life-work
enrichment, despite our hypothesis that it would be predicted by boundary management.
Thus, the results suggest several major theoretical implications. First, as predicted from
COR theory (Hobfoll, 1989), boundary management dimensions appear to have the potential
both to deplete and to buffer resources for coping with the demands of work and private life
during foreign work assignments. Boundary permeability may allow demands from one
domain to deplete resources in another domain, leading to greater conflict between domains,
whereas private life flexibility ability appears to bolster resources, leading to greater
enrichment. Results also demonstrated that, among expatriates, boundary management in
the private life domain appears to have a greater effect on the interaction of life domains
than boundary management in the work domain. Permeability and flexibility in the
boundary separating one’s private life domain were related to life domain conflict, and
private life boundary flexibility ability predicted life domain enrichment. The interplay of
life domains among expatriates depends substantially on boundary management in the
private life domain. These results emphasize the urgent need to consider the entire
experience of expatriates in the context of both their work and private life domains
(Takeuchi, 2010). As the results further show, private life flexibility ability seems to be a key
 factor in the interplay of life domains for employees working in foreign assignments. Private Boundary
life flexibility ability seems to reduce conflict between life domains while increasing management in
enrichment between life domains. This means that by strengthening private life flexibility a boundaryless
ability, life domain conflict could be attenuated and life domain enrichment could be
enhanced in an expatriate context. world
Finally, the negative consequences of permeability of life domain boundaries on conflict
suggest that, among expatriate workers, weaker boundaries lead to potential problems with 55
adjustment during foreign assignments. According to work-family border theory (Clark,
2000), life domains that are perceived as being different from one another are more
challenging to manage than life domains that are perceived as being more similar. In the
case of expatriates, it is likely that the private life domain differs in many respects from the
work domain, for example in terms of language and culture. Consequently, employees may
benefit from reducing boundary permeability during overseas assignments, while
Downloaded by Universiti Utara Malaysia At 20:27 12 November 2017 (PT)

maintaining private life boundary flexibility ability.

In comparison to domestic research, results with our sample of expatriates largely
confirm previous findings of a negative association between private life flexibility ability
and life domain conflict (Bulger et al., 2007; Matthews and Barnes-Farrell, 2010). On the
other hand, the present findings differ from those obtained in domestic samples when it
comes to the effects of boundary management on life domain enrichment. For example,
domestic research has demonstrated effects of work flexibility ability on work-private life
enrichment, and effects of work flexibility ability, flexibility willingness, and permeability
on private life-work enrichment (Bulger et al., 2007). In our sample of expatriates, only
private life flexibility ability predicted work-private life enrichment. Life domain enrichment
seems to depend on a unique set of factors for expatriate workers and, thus, its prediction is
in need of additional empirical research. As Kempen et al. (2015) demonstrated, life
domain enrichment contributes to a number of positive outcomes for expatriate workers,
including enhanced job satisfaction and success in handling role-related expectations. Thus,
research is needed that investigates antecedents of life domain enrichment for workers on
foreign assignments.
Our cluster analysis identified two basic types of boundary management among the
expatriates in our sample. Individuals in the first cluster tended to show lower levels of
permeability and flexibility in the work domain, while at the same time, they had greater
flexibility and permeability in the private life domain. This may reflect different priorities
given to the different life domains. For instance, individuals in cluster 1 appeared to protect
their work domain by segmenting the borders of the work domain while they opened the
borders of their private life domain. This cluster may thus be labelled as “work protectors”.
Taking a closer look at the demographic characteristics, members of this cluster were less
likely to be in a relationship (more singles, less children), were younger, reported having
more working hours, and came from cultures with a more collectivistic value orientation.
By contrast, individuals in cluster 2 tended to integrate their work domain, showing
higher flexibility ability and flexibility willingness in the work boundary. Although they
reported relatively high willingness to have flexible boundaries at home, they reported
having less ability to do so. Thus, they seemed willing to open up their work boundaries,
even though they did not feel they had the ability to adapt their private life domain to
accommodate work demands. This cluster may be labelled “work integrators”. Looking at
the demographic characteristics, this group tended to have more children and was more
likely to be in a relationship. Demands originating from one’s family may have encouraged a
flexible approach to managing the boundary separating the private life from one’s work.
For example, this group may have to react to demands from the family and the private
life domain in a flexible way while they are at work. Overall, we did not identify any
clusters that were characterized by both low-boundary flexibility and low permeability
 JGM in both life domains. This may be due to the fact that expatriates often must integrate their
5,1 private lives with their work domains, given that international assignments often require
completely changing one’s living arrangements (Harrison et al., 2004).

Practical implications
Results of the present study suggest that it is particularly important for employers and
56 expatriates to foster the expatriates’ private life flexibility ability. This could be done by
providing different forms of support for the private life domain, such as childcare
assistance, a living space close to the workplace, or mobility support. Moreover, the results
clearly indicate that the private life of expatriates should be explicitly considered in the
preparation for and the supervision of an international assignment. Moreover, results
suggest that in the context of expatriation, employers should respect workers’ private
life boundaries by avoiding attempts to contact the worker outside of working hours,
Downloaded by Universiti Utara Malaysia At 20:27 12 November 2017 (PT)

because greater permeability of the private life domain may be a risk factor that increases
the potential for work-life conflict among workers on foreign assignments. In addition, more
tailored support packages for expatriates are needed that specifically address the different
boundary management patterns in the context of an expatriates’ overall living situation.
For example, while expatriates who have a high willingness to integrate life domains
(e.g. the work integrators) are likely to benefit from measures that help them to integrate
their working life in their private life and vice versa (e.g. through mobile communication
solutions and flexible time arrangements), expatriates with less willingness to integrate
their life domains would benefit from policies that help them to protect their life domains
(e.g. during specific times that stipulate reduced communication and contact attempts).

Limitations and future research directions

As with all research studies, a few limitations of the present investigation should be
considered. Most importantly, we used cross-sectional data in this study and, therefore, we are
unable to make inferences of causality regarding the variables that were investigated. For
instance, the possibility that life domain conflict and enrichment cause subsequent boundary
management, or that relationships are due to common causes, cannot be ruled out. Future
research should thus apply longitudinal research methods to better analyse the influence of
boundary management over time. Moreover, due to survey length restriction, boundary
management aspects were only measured with two items per factor. We considered this as an
acceptable compromise between maintaining good reliability and facilitating an acceptable
response rate. As Diamantopoulos et al. (2012) argue, shorter length measures can be justified
when sample sizes are small and items are homogeneous or semantically redundant, which
was true of the present investigation. This is supported by reliabilities that exceeded 0.70,
even though the scales were limited to two items each. In addition, although this study
addressed the experiences of expatriates in context, as suggested by Takeuchi (2010), we
relied on self-report data collected from expatriate employees themselves. Our CFA tests
suggested that common method variance did not appear to spuriously inflate correlations, but
future research is clearly needed that explicitly considers the perspectives of role-related
partners of expatriates in the private life domain or in the work domain.
Moreover, as the sample consisted of expatriates in a higher education setting,
generalizability to expatriates working in private organizations may be somewhat uncertain.
One might find different types of clusters of boundary management among domestic workers,
for example. In addition, the clusters that we identified may have emerged because of the
different job settings of our expatriate workers; some participants worked in the university
setting, while others worked in research institutions. To assure anonymity of the respondents,
we were not able to identify the specific affiliation of each participant. However, the research
 associations included in our sample are each very closely associated with the university that Boundary
participated in the study, collaborating under a joint umbrella organization. management in
Overall, it is hoped that the present findings encourage future research that a boundaryless
simultaneously analyses the influence of organizational policies (e.g. the use of
communication technology during leisure time, flexitime arrangements, home office world
policies, or childcare assistance), organizational settings, and individual boundary
management on life domain enrichment and life domain conflict during international 57
assignments. Additional research is needed that examines possible antecedents of life
domain enrichment among expatriates. Boundary management may have a moderating
effect on the influence of other content factors, such as role stressors, work characteristics,
or social support on life domain conflict and enrichment. Thus, future research is needed
that explicitly analyses content factors leading to life domain enrichment in an expatriate
context. The expatriate working situation is almost always characterized as an experience
Downloaded by Universiti Utara Malaysia At 20:27 12 November 2017 (PT)

that spans cultural and linguistic boundaries, and hence, cultural values, norms, and
expectations may clash or may be compatible, leading to unique effects that are not as
prevalent in the domestic work context. It is hoped that the present study stimulates future
research that helps us to better understand how the boundary management of expatriates
contributes to the success during international assignments.

References
Ashforth, B.E., Kreiner, G.E. and Fugate, M. (2000), “All in a day’s work: boundaries and micro role
transitions”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 472-491.
Benjamini, Y. and Hochberg, Y. (1995), “Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful
approach to multiple testing”, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological),
pp. 289-300.
Bhaskar-Shrinivas, P., Harrison, D.A., Shaffer, M.A. and Luk, D.M. (2005), “Input-based and time-based
models of international adjustment: meta-analytic evidence and theoretical extensions”,
Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 257-281.
Bulger, C.A., Matthews, R.A. and Hoffman, M.E. (2007), “Work and personal life boundary
management: boundary strength, work/personal life balance, and the segmentation-integration
continuum”, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 365-375.
Caligiuri, P.M., Hyland, M.M., Joshi, A. and Bross, A.S. (1998), “Testing a theoretical model for
examining the relationship between family adjustment and expatriates’ work adjustment”,
Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 83 No. 4, pp. 598-614.
Carlson, D.S., Kacmar, K.M. and Williams, L.J. (2000), “Construction and initial validation of a
multidimensional measure of work-family conflict”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 56 No. 2,
pp. 249-276.
Carlson, D.S., Kacmar, K.M., Zivnuska, S. and Ferguson, M. (2015), “Do the benefits of family-to-work
transitions come at too great a cost?”, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, Vol. 20 No. 2,
pp. 161-171.
Chen, G., Kirkman, B.L., Kim, K., Farh, C.I.C. and Tangirala, S. (2010), “When does cross-cultural motivation
enhance expatriate effectiveness? A multilevel investigation of the moderating roles of subsidiary
support and cultural distance”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 53 No. 5, pp. 1110-1130.
Clark, S.C. (2000), “Work/family border theory: a new theory of work/family balance”,
Human Relations, Vol. 53 No. 6, pp. 747-770.
Clark, S.C. (2002), “Communicating across the work/home border”, Community, Work & Family, Vol. 5
No. 1, pp. 23-48.
Diamantopoulos, A., Sarstedt, M., Fuchs, C., Wilczynski, P. and Kaiser, S. (2012), “Guidelines for
choosing between multi-item and single-item scales for construct measurement: a predictive
validity perspective”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 434-449.
 JGM Diefendorff, J.M., Silverman, S.B. and Greguras, G.J. (2005), “Measurement equivalence and multisource
5,1 ratings for non-managerial positions: recommendations for research and practice”, Journal of
Business and Psychology, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 399-425.
Farh, C.I.C., Bartol, K.M., Shapiro, D.L. and Shin, J. (2010), “Networking abroad: a process model of how
expatriates form support ties to facilitate adjustment”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 35
No. 3, pp. 434-454.
58 Ferguson, M., Carlson, D. and Kacmar, K.M. (2015), “Flexing work boundaries: the spillover and
crossover of workplace support”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 68 No. 3, pp. 581-614.
Grant-Vallone, E.J. and Ensher, E.A. (2001), “An examination of work and personal life conflict,
organizational support and employee health among international expatriates”, International
Journal of Intercultural Relations, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 261-278.
Greenhaus, J.H. and Powell, G.N. (2006), “When work and family are allies: a theory of work-family
enrichment”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 72-92.
Downloaded by Universiti Utara Malaysia At 20:27 12 November 2017 (PT)

Gutek, B.A., Searle, S. and Klepa, L. (1991), “Rational versus gender role explanations for work-family
conflict”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 76 No. 4, pp. 560-568.
Hall, D.T. and Richter, J. (1988), “Balancing work life and home life: what can organizations do to help?”,
The Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 213-223.
Harrison, D.A., Shaffer, M.A. and Bhaskar-Shrinivas, P. (2004), “Going places: roads more and less
traveled in research on expatriate experiences”, in Martocchio, J.J. (Ed.), Research in Personnel
and Human Resources Management, Vol. 22, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 203-252.
Hecht, T.D. and Allen, N.J. (2009), “A longitudinal examination of the work-nonwork boundary
strength construct”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 30 No. 7, pp. 839-862.
Hobfoll, S.E. (1989), “Conservation of resources: a new attempt at conceptualizing stress”, American
Psychologist, Vol. 44 No. 3, pp. 513-524.
Hobfoll, S.E. (2001), “The influence of culture, community, and the nested-self in the stress process:
advancing conservation of resources theory”, Applied Psychology: An International Review,
Vol. 50 No. 3, pp. 337-421.
Hofstede, G.H. (2001), Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and
Organizations Across Nations, 2nd ed., Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Idaszak, J.R. and Drasgow, F. (1987), “A revision of the job diagnostic survey: elimination of a
measurement artifact”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 72 No. 1, pp. 69-74.
Kacmar, K.M., Crawford, W.S., Carlson, D.S., Ferguson, M. and Whitten, D. (2014), “A short and valid
measure of work-family enrichment”, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, Vol. 19 No. 1,
pp. 32-45.
Kahn, R.L., Wolfe, D.M., Quinn, R.P., Snoek, J.D. and Rosenthal, R.A. (1964), Organizational Stress:
Studies in Role Conflict and Ambiguity, Wiley, New York, NY.
Kempen, R., Pangert, B., Hattrup, K., Mueller, K. and Joens, I. (2015), “Beyond conflict: the role of
life-domain enrichment for expatriates”, The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 1-22.
Kogut, B. and Singh, H. (1988), “The effect of national culture on the choice of entry mode”, Journal of
International Business Studies, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 411-432.
Kossek, E.E. and Lautsch, B.A. (2012), “Work-family boundary management styles in organizations a
cross-level model”, Organizational Psychology Review, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 152-171.
Kirkman, B.L., Lowe, K.B. and Gibson, C.B. (2006), “A quarter century of culture’s consequences: a
review of empirical research incorporating Hofstede’s cultural values framework”, Journal of
International Business Studies, Vol. 37 No. 3, pp. 285-320.
Lubitow, A. and Zippel, K. (2014), “Strategies of academic parents to manage work-life conflict in
research abroad”, in Demos, V., White Berheide, C. and Texler Segal, M. (Eds), Gender
Transformation in the Academy, Emerald Publishing, Bingley, pp. 63-84.
 Matthews, R.A. and Barnes-Farrell, J.L. (2010), “Development and initial evaluation of an enhanced Boundary
measure of boundary flexibility for the work and family domains”, Journal of Occupational management in
Health Psychology, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 330-346.
Maxwell, S.E. and Delaney, H.D. (1990), Designing Experiments and Analyzing Data: A Model
a boundaryless
Comparison Perspective, Wadsworth, Belmont, CA. world
Olson-Buchanan, J.B. and Boswell, W.R. (2006), “Blurring boundaries: correlates of integration and
segmentation between work and nonwork”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 68 No. 3,
pp. 432-445. 59
Richardson, J. and McKenna, S. (2002), “Leaving and experiencing: why academics expatriate and how
they experience expatriation”, Career Development International, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 67-78.
Rosenbusch, K. and Cseh, M. (2012), “The cross-cultural adjustment process of expatriate families in a
multinational organization: a family system theory perspective”, Human Resource Development
International, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 61-77.
Schütter, H. and Boerner, S. (2013), “Illuminating the work-family interface on international
Downloaded by Universiti Utara Malaysia At 20:27 12 November 2017 (PT)

assignments: an exploratory approach”, Journal of Global Mobility: The Home of Expatriate

Management Research, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 46-71.
Selmer, J. and Lauring, J. (2011), “Expatriate academics: job factors and work outcomes”, International
Journal of Manpower, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 194-210.
Shaffer, M.A., Harrison, D.A., Gilley, K.M. and Luk, D.M. (2001), “Struggling for balance amid
turbulence on international assignments: work–family conflict, support and commitment”,
Journal of Management, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 99-121.
Spector, P.E., Allen, T.D., Poelmans, S.A.Y., Lapierre, L.M., Cooper, C.L., O’ Driscoll, M. and Sanchez, J.I.
(2007), “Cross-national differences in relationships of work demands, job satisfaction, and turnover
intentions with work-family conflict”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 60 No. 4, pp. 805-835.
Takeuchi, R. (2010), “A critical review of expatriate adjustment research through a multiple
stakeholder view: progress, emerging trends, and prospects”, Journal of Management, Vol. 36
No. 4, pp. 1040-1064.
Takeuchi, R., Yun, S. and Tesluk, P.E. (2002), “An examination of crossover and spillover effects of
spousal and expatriate cross-cultural adjustment on expatriate outcomes”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 87 No. 4, pp. 655-666.
Tetrick, L.E. and Buffardi, L.C. (2006), “Measurement issues in research on the workhome interface”,
in Jones, F., Burke, R.J. and Westmann, M. (Eds), Work-Life-Balance: A Psychological Perspective,
Psychology Press, New York, NY, pp. S.90-S.114.
Wurtz, O. and Suutari, V. (2014), “Work-life balance and coping of international assignees”,
in Collings, D., Wood, G.T. and Caligiuri, P.M. (Eds), The Routledge Companion to International
Human Resource Management, Routledge, New York, NY, pp. 363-377.

Further reading
Shaffer, M., Westman, M. and Selmer, J. (2015), “Expanding the boundaries of research on global
employee families”, Journal of Global Mobility: The Home of Expatriate Management Research,
Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 106-212.

Corresponding author
Regina Kempen can be contacted at: rkempen@uos.de

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com