Work-Family Conflict

Work-family conflict has been considered a key indicator of workers and their

family’s quality of life (Galinsky, Bond, & Friedman, 1993). In a study by Kopelman,

Greenhaus and Connolly (as cited in Virick, Lilly, & Casper, 2007), they found that work-

family conflict mediated the relationships between work conflict and life satisfaction -

higher work conflict led to higher work-family conflict, which was thus related to lower life

satisfaction. For the purpose of this study, the definition of work-family conflict offered in

a study by Kahn, Wolfe, Quinn, Snoek, & Rosenthal (1964) is employed: a form of interrole

conflict in which the role pressures from the work and family domains are mutually

incompatible in some respect (as cited in Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985). This translates as

participation in work life being made more difficult as a result of participation in family

life, and vice versa.

An abundance of studies have been conducted on the matter of defining the sources

of WLC, as concisely reported in Greenhaus and Beutell (1985), with results showing a

positive relation between work-family conflict and number of hours worked per week

(Burke, Weir, & Duwors, 1980), inflexibility of the work schedule (Pleck, Staines, & Lang,

1980), and family role fulfillment requiring a person to spend a lot of time in family

activities (Greenhaus and Beutell, 1985) to name a few. Greenhaus and Beutell’s study

(1985) summarized the following:

Work schedules, work orientation, marriage, children, and spouse

employment patterns may all produce pressures to participate

extensively in the work role or the family role. Conflict is experienced

 when these time pressures are incompatible with the demands of the

other role domain. (p.80)

In a more recent study by Kossek and Lee (2017), the blurring of boundaries and

the pace of daily life brought about by the spread of technology has increased the

occurrence of WLC. This is due to the widespread presence of personal electronic

communication devices that keep individuals in constant contact with concerns from both

family and work around the clock (Kossek, 2016 in Kossek & Lee, 2017). In the status quo,

this regularity of one’s accessibility by family, brought about by the current stay-at-home

situation, and the workplace, as online connectivity becomes a necessity in the completion

of one’s duties and responsibilities to their respective companies, the desired differentiation

between set boundaries seems to slowly decline, at best.

Work-family conflict during COVID-19 pandemic. As shown in the literature on work-

family conflict, we see that the level of intersection between work and family can positively

(or negatively) affect either institution. Both work and family demand significant amounts

of time from one individual and as the resource of time is allocated throughout the day,

certain psychological boundaries exist that separate the two. These boundaries compose

WLB, as seen to have a direct impact on many aspects of a worker’s life, both in the work

and family context.

         In a similar vein, WLB reflects “the extent to which an individual is equally engaged

in – and equally satisfied with – his or her work role and family role” (Greenhaus et al.,

2003, p. 513 in Virick, Lilly, & Casper, 2007). Just as a disruption, or imbalance, of the

psychological boundaries set between work and life or work and family can negatively
impact one’s performance, the level to which an individual can exercise control to maintain

these boundaries also plays a hand in positively affecting one’s performance in either

institution and supplying satisfaction in one’s respective roles. 

A study by Hyman (2004) enumerated 3 factors by which a disruption in work-life

balance is likely to stem from:

First is the problem of allocation of time, of which only finite and fixed divisions are

possible (Jacobs & Gerson, 2001; Thompson & Bunderson, 2001). Linked to this is

the nature of work and in particular the autonomy presented to workers to schedule

their work and out of work commitments (Lambert, 1990, p. 240). Third are the

physical and psychical demands placed on employees and the extent to which these

are able to exert any meaningful control over work-domestic demands (Hyman,

2004).

The difference between workplace realities of online Filipino workers and

traditional working professionals may impact results from the second factor, which is the

nature of their work and the autonomy they are afforded outside of work, but otherwise,

all factors are still considered relevant and serve as guides in the data interpretation of this

study.

Coping Strategies

For the purpose of clearly defining this concept, the researcher has chosen Zheng et

al.’s (2015) definition of ‘coping’: an individual’s ability to deal with stress and anxiety

derived from accommodating family and organisational situations, and is considered as the
variable that, if exercised effectively, can determine the degree of positive physiological

(health) and psychological (well-being) outcomes.

Hence, coping strategies are the actions taken in response to the stress and anxiety

experienced from accommodating family and organizational situations, in order to

maintain a perceived work-life balance.

Coping strategies of digital workers. In the results of her study in search for effective

coping strategies, Haddon (n.d.) validated the importance of employees finding a ‘fit’

between workplace policies and practices, and their preferred boundary management

strategy. These strategies come in two forms: segmentation, or the separation of work and

non-work times and activities, and integration, of the overlap of both roles. On the other

hand, the results echo support for technology as a means of increasing people’s autonomy

and work functioning and enables the successful integration of multiple life roles (Jackson,

2002 in Haddon, n.d.)

Taking both these results into account, it seems as though online Filipino workers

have the best of both worlds - occupations with the promise of ‘working at your own time’

and the convenience of never having to leave home and commute to and from work.

Yet, as we have seen so far, work-life balance is a multi-dimensional concept, and

what may be a coping strategy for one industry, may contribute to the experience of work-

family conflict in another.

From this premise, it is thus argued that organizations play a central role in

providing quality jobs that will raise not only the standard of material life of the employees
and their family, but also the intrinsic rewards and psychological well-being of the

workforce (Burgess & Connell 2008 in Xiao & Cooke, 2012). 

         It can be conferred that this role only comes up to a certain extent in the individual

worker’s experience of work-life balance. The family and/or life roles assumed outside of

work share part of the burden of stress from maintaining psychological boundaries

between work and non-work spaces. 

As it is argued by Sturges (2012), individuals can specifically craft their own

cognitive, physical and relational techniques to enable WLB (as cited in Zheng et al., 2015).

Taking upon these lenses, it is hypothesized that the several different techniques described

in this study, as employed by OFW 2.0, may be specific to their circumstances brought

about by the COVID-19 pandemic.