Leaning In and Out: Work–Life Tradeoffs, Self-Conscious Emotions, and Life Role Satisfaction

Abstract

Drawing on self-discrepancy theory, which posits discomfort when actual selves deviate from ideal or ought selves (Higgins, 1987), we examine the complementary and compounding effects of work–life tradeoffs on self-conscious emotions, life role satisfaction, and spouse/partner work satisfaction. Across multiple samples, we augment and refine extant tradeoff measures to include minor tradeoffs (e.g., limiting networking, missing a family event) in addition to the more frequently researched major tradeoffs (e.g., quitting a job, choosing not to have children) and test their effects. Work compromising tradeoffs (i.e., sacrificing work for family/personal activities) were associated with negative self-conscious emotions and lower levels of job, career, and life satisfaction indirectly through professional self-discrepancy, suggesting that making work compromises for family affects how individuals see themselves as professionals. Family/personal compromising tradeoffs (i.e., sacrificing family/personal activities for work) were associated with negative self-conscious emotions and lower levels of job, career, family, and life satisfaction indirectly through family and professional self-discrepancy, suggesting individuals view their family and professional selves less favorably when they make family/personal compromises for work. Despite negative effects for the employees, our results suggest work tradeoffs are beneficial for spouse/partner work hours and satisfaction.

Keywords:

• Work–life balance
• self-concept
• quality of life

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to John Kammeyer-Mueller, Kelly Schwind Wilson, Taryn Stanko, and Allison Ellis for their comments on earlier drafts of this manuscript. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 2016 Work and Family Researchers Network meeting in Washington, DC.

Notes

1 For all samples, American Psychological Association and Institutional Review Board guidelines were followed in the treatment of participants, and informed consent was granted by the participants.

2 Of the 43 written-in work tradeoffs in Sample 1, 21 mapped onto one of the six work tradeoff items. Write-ins suggested the need to split “temporarily stopped working” into three different time lengths: “temporarily stopped working (quit),” “taken a day or part of a day off,” and “taken a leave of absence.” The 22 remaining write-ins fit into 5 new categories. Of the 34 written-in family/personal life tradeoffs, eight mapped on to existing items. Remaining responses generated 11 new family/personal life tradeoff items.

3 The dichotomous scale was retained for “decided not to have children” and “decided to have fewer children.”

4 Major work tradeoff construct averages ranged from 0 to 4 including N = 52 “0” responses; major family/personal tradeoff construct averages ranged from 0 to 1.83 including N = 153 “0” responses. Our scale option of “does not apply” remediates concerns about whether a “0” response is conditional on having the opportunity to make the tradeoff.

5 Principal components analysis (PCA) can also be used to create measurement models from formative indicators (Howell, Breivak, & Wilcox, 2007). We conducted a usefulness analysis (Darlington, 1990) and determined that in comparison to PCA, averaging items explained more variance in constructs relevant for convergent validity (analyses available upon request)

6 Does not apply was an option only for Minor Family/Personal Tradeoffs items 1–7.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Patricia C. Dahm

Patricia C. Dahm ([email protected]) is an assistant professor of management and human resources at the Orfalea College of Business, California Polytechnic State University in San Luis Obispo. She received her Ph.D. in Business Administration (Concentration: Organizational Behavior/Human Resource Management) from the Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota. Her research focuses on work-life integration, identity, self-regulation, and gender differences in career success.

Yeonka (Sophia) Kim

Yeonka (Sophia) Kim ([email protected]) is an assistant professor of management at the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse. She received her Ph.D. in Business Administration (Concentration: Organizational Behavior/Human Resource Management) from the Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota. Her research focuses on work-life interface and identity management, diversity, and emotions in organizations.

Theresa M. Glomb

Theresa M. Glomb ([email protected]) is the Toro Company-David M. Lilly Chair of Organizational Behavior in the Carlson School of Management at the University of Minnesota. She received her Ph.D. in social, organizational, and individual differences psychology from the University of Illinois. Her research focuses on the well-being of workers, defined broadly to include psychological, physiological, affective, and familial effects, and the use of micro-interventions to promote flourishing.