Organizational Dynamics (2016) 45, 258—270

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/orgdyn

Managing work—life boundaries in the

digital age§
Ellen Ernst Kossek

‘‘The nature of my work requires me to focus on my job I’m a quality manager for several plants located around
while I am there. . .then because I spend so much of my the country. I travel several days each month to do quality
time focused on work, when I am home I like to keep that audits and once done I fly home as quickly as possible to
separate from personal time. I generally do not check e- focus on family and give them more attention. I’m flexi-
mails when I am home or on vacation. . .I do have a work ble, a volleyer. . . I focus where I need to focus when I need
phone, but I do not get calls often unless it is an to focus.
emergency. . .I do use my breaks during work to handle
- Ryan, a cycler, and also a divorced dad who alternates
personal matters.’’ periods of completely separating work from family while
-Alison,1 a separator, who has established clear work—life
traveling, followed by weeks of being the primary care-
boundaries
giver for his daughter when not on the road.
What’s your work—life boundary management style? Are
I am an engineer who works for a company that manu- you a separator like Alison, striving for a greater divide
factures bicycles. It’s an industry I am passionate about, between work and personal life? Or are you an integrator
since my main hobby is also cycling. Sometimes it is really who prefers to blend work and nonwork roles, often choosing
hard to turn work off, since I care so much about the to work during vacations or, perhaps like Sally, selecting a
product we are producing.. Because I’ve got constant career that overlaps with hobbies or personal life? Or maybe
connectivity, I can work anywhere, anytime. For example, you or someone you know is a cycler like Ryan who experi-
if I’m going on a plane to go on vacation, I’ve got my ences recurring patterns of separation to focus on work
computer with me and I try to do some work. When I’m on followed by intense work—life integration. Cyclers might
a business trip, I test ride bikes as part of my job, which have jobs with seasonal fluctuations, such as an accountant
can blur work—life boundaries, as even when I am not test working busily during tax season, or closing the books every
riding, I often do the same amount of riding for relaxation financial quarter, followed by periods of higher work—life
during personal time, so it is hard to separate personal integration to focus on personal life.
from professional life. Effectively managing boundaries can help you not only
-Sally an integrator, on her blurred lines blending work effectively balance your career with your personal life
and personal life. demands, but can also help you be more effective as a leader
who manages others. Perhaps you have to manage a wide
diversity of work—life styles in your group where individuals
have many different work—life demands. Some of your mem-
bers may answer electronic communications immediately
regardless of the day or time, while others have tight limits
§
I would like to thank Lauren Keating, Peter Heslin, Anne Barodel on their availability, and you’re not exactly sure when they
and several anonymous reviewers who made helpful comments to will respond.
improve the quality of this paper. What about the style of your employer? Do have a job that
1
*Names are pseudonyms. could be characterized as ‘‘work without boundaries’’ in an

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2016.07.010
0090-2616/# 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Managing work—life boundaries in the digital age 259

‘‘always on workplace’’? Or does your organization have a levels, caregiving demands have not subsided. Half of all
work culture of the ‘‘vanishing vacation or weekend’’, where children will live in a single parent household before the age
individuals are expected to be on call and constantly avail- of 18. Elder care is also rising as the population ages in many
able to work during personal times? Unfortunately, work- industrialized nations around the globe. Men also desire
places where people work regular hours and can completely opportunities to integrate work and nonwork, as they are
disengage to focus on personal matters during nonwork time increasingly involved in caregiving. Studies reveal that many
are becoming less common, unless individuals and leaders men seek improved work—life balance as much as women.
take active steps to create supportive boundary management Work—life interest also spans generations. Despite often
cultures. Leaders and managers often play a critical role in being more connected than many older workers, a study
championing work—life boundaries: by the IBM Institute for Business Value found that many
members of the younger generations such as millennials
 as role models by how they manage themselves, value drawing a line between work and nonwork to be able
 by how they manage the work—life diversity of others; and to enjoy a life outside the office.
 by fostering an organizational culture of well-being and While most academic and business scholarship has focused
workforce sustainability. on work-family conflict, my research shows that managing
work—life boundaries can provide a path to reduce role
In this article, I discuss the challenges leaders face in conflict and enhance the well-being of employees, teams,
managing the attention, well-being, and energies of them- and organizations. Effectively managing work—life bound-
selves on and off the job, as well as of their subordinates, aries can not only reduce work—life conflicts, but can also
peers, and teams. I begin with an introduction to managing reduce stress, burnout, addictions, mood disorders, and
boundary management styles — a growing career competency enhance mental and physical health. Organizations can often
for personal and life effectiveness. This is followed by a brief benefit as effectively managed work—life boundaries can
overview of trends making work—life boundaries increasingly lead to higher employee engagement, reduced turnover,
important for the effectiveness of individuals, organizations, talent attraction, a more diverse workforce, and reduced
and society. I then discuss the different types of boundary health care and leave costs, as well as absenteeism.
management styles. You will have the opportunity to diagnose
your style, understand its advantages and costs, and consider Trends Transforming Work—Life Boundaries
strategies to increase your boundary control. I conclude with
actions that leaders and organizations can take to foster Five trends in the nature of work are transforming work—life
healthy and inclusive boundary management environments. relationships, requiring greater attention to the effective
self-management of work—life boundaries. These include the
rise of boundarylessness, work—life customization, psycho-
WORK—LIFE BOUNDARY MANAGEMENT
logical control over working time, the fragmentation of work-
STYLES and nonwork interactions, and diversity and inclusion.
Trend 1: Boundarylessness. Work and nonwork roles are
Work—life boundary management styles are the approaches increasingly blurred and overlapping. The proliferation of
people use to demarcate work and nonwork lives, in con- mobile communication devices (laptops, tablets, smart
sideration of their personal identities and boundary control. phones) and social media are transforming work and nonwork
Boundary control is the degree to which you control the relationships. These changes have not only made work more
boundaries between your nonwork and work roles. Bound- portable, diffusing into more hours of the day, but have also
aries can be physical such as being able to block off time made it easier to work during personal time and space, such
periods where you do not check work email and can be as while commuting, when in ‘‘third places’’ including res-
completely away from your job. They can also be psycholo- taurants, and during vacations. Globalized work systems
gical such as being able to cognitively detach from your job to have also expanded the boundarylessness of work by increas-
focus on your family, partner, or friends; as well as making ing the times when many employees are available for work
time to just relax. Finally, they can be emotional where you over a 24-7 period, leading to more schedule variability and
can separate your feelings and emotions experienced during dispersion of work hours. For some employees at workplaces
the workday from your home life, such as missing your child that are ‘‘always on’’ somewhere, is it possible that too much
or loved one; or managing your mood by leaving a tough day flexibility and blurring boundaries has led to a ‘‘work without
at the office when you come home to be with family and boundaries ‘‘culture where there is too much overlap
friends. between jobs and personal lives?
Trend 2: Work—life customization. This trend reflects
Why are Work—Life Boundaries Growing in the fact that policies enabling employees to work nonstan-
Importance? dard and specialized hours has become the new job standard.
Organizations are offering a menu of workplace flexibility
National statistics in the US suggest that growing numbers of options providing employees with greater choice to craft
employees around the globe are feeling increased work—life their working time. Historically, companies set relatively
stress and need improved strategies for managing work—life uniform schedules for employees with little choice allowed.
relationships. For example, a Families and Work Institute Today many employees want and are working in personally
study reports that 75% of working parents say they do not tailored ways to match growing variation in preferences for
have enough time for their children (or each other). Further- flexibility in the location, scheduling, amount, and timing of
more, although women are in the workplace at historic work. Parents of young children, for example, sometimes
260 E.E. Kossek

leave work in the late afternoon to pick kids up from school work—life relationships as a diversity and inclusion matter.
and then continue working again after dinner. Single employ- For example, some individuals may want to control the
ees might want a sabbatical for the month of August to sail in degree to which they disclose personal aspects of their life
the Great Lakes or take a trip to Asia, Europe, or the US. at work until they feel safe to be ‘‘out’’ — such as being
Immigrant employees might want to take a month off at the lesbian, gay, bi-sexual, or transsexual (LGBT). People may
holidays to visit their families in their home countries. thus prefer to segment their work and personal life and share
Trend 3: Psychological control over working time. very little about their nonwork life on the job. Conversely,
Although companies may be offering employees greater others may be very open that they would not feel comfor-
opportunities to restructure their schedules or work from table working for a company that wouldn’t support diversity
home using flextime or telework policies, such restructuring in sexual identity and orientation.
doesn’t necessarily lead to employee psychological percep- Individuals who work in a different time zone than their
tions of job autonomy and control — the ability to actually family and friends can foster a need to integrate work and
control the boundaries governing the place and time of work. nonwork by, for instance, occasionally Skyping or Face-timing
There is a tension between employees and employers in during work hours that are the most suitable times to connect
socially navigating norms regarding how to implement flex- with geographically distant family and friends. While some
ibility policies that are formally provided by organizations and employees would want to hide the fact they are making a long
theoretically offer control on paper, compared to the degree personal call or videoconference during the work day, others
to which organizations actually give employees discretion to might want to be open that they are connecting with family
control their boundaries. Research is showing that it is not while on the job.
enough to merely have access to workplace flexibility policies Geographic distance in living arrangements is also a work—
that blur time and space boundaries to experience boundary life diversity issue. Some dual career couples may have one
control. Use of formal flexibility policies does not necessarily partner who needs to be able to telework from a different
lead to boundary control over when you are ‘‘on’’ and ‘‘off’’ city on Monday and Friday afternoon or every other week to
work and how you work. Employees may feel pressured, for be able to live with their partner, not uproot their families,
example, to check email or telework at night or on the and not feel their productivity is impeded for not maximizing
weekends, while not formally establishing a telework arrange- face time. This arrangement might be very different to their
ment. They may not choose to use formal arrangements co-workers’ work and living arrangements. Given these
during the work day, as some may fear they would not be trends, organizations, managers, and employees face numer-
seen as career-oriented. Yet they lack boundary control if they ous choices over determining the extent to integrate work—
are feeling pressure to be online during personal time. life boundaries.
Employees may also be accustomed to psychological control
from the workplace. For example, recent news articles report
that Sunday evening has become the new Monday morning for COMPETING PERSPECTIVES: IS INTEGRATION,
returning emails, being contacted by peers and co-workers, or SEPARATION, OR A COMBINATION BEST?
checking to see if there is a Monday morning meeting.
Trend 4: Work—life fragmentation. This trend highlights Integration perspective. Although the idea that every
the fact that work has become more transactional, short employee has a distinct boundary management style is a
term, and episodic with the increased use of mobile com- relatively new area for research and practice, it builds on
munication technologies. Cell phones and email have several existing competing historical perspectives on how to
increased the pace and frequency of work and family inter- manage work and family relationships. The integration per-
actions during the day. Historically, many people would go to spective argues that blending work and nonwork roles can
work and focus on their job with little interruption, and when lead to positive outcomes by facilitating flexibility to combine
not at work, they could focus on their personal life by work and nonwork however works best for the individual. Yet
shutting off from work during evenings, weekends, and holi- one challenge with this approach is that employing organiza-
days. Now there is a rise in daily work—life interruptions, tions have historically been characterized as ‘‘greedy work-
with easy switching back and forth between work and per- places’’ consuming individuals’ personal time. This problem is
sonal texts, emails, and websites, often resulting in frag- particularly an issue for individuals who highly identify with
mented and brief attention, and process losses from lack of their career. Economic pressures are also at play. Growing
sustained focus on the work or nonwork role. Studies suggest numbers of employees work face rising workloads- from those
that constant interruptions from communications can harm in start-ups, to others in firms that laid off personnel during
productivity by making employees more likely to make errors downturns and never quite adequately staffed up when busi-
and reduce task flow. ness improved. In such contexts, work is never quite done
Trend 5: Diversity and inclusion. A growing number of even if you work 50, 60, or even more hours a week.
employees hold increasingly diverse identities, with work— With growth of technology to facilitate work-nonwork
life situations motivating them to need and want to blend integration, it is unclear whether the rise of these ‘‘integrat-
work and life in different ways to manage social identities ing’’ and boundary blurring devices (phones, tablets, laptops)
which are culturally supported at work. It is important for are a help or hindrance to work and nonwork well-being. On
organizations to not only formally offer workplace flexibility the one hand, a work cell phone allows someone to take an
policies and the permission to customize schedules as sug- important phone call at a soccer game, thereby enabling
gested by the work—life customization trend, but to actively attendance at that game. Yet this same cell phone also makes
support differences in boundary management styles. Employ- it harder to ignore a work-related email or not be available
ees need to feel supported in how they are managing for an important call during vacation.
Managing work—life boundaries in the digital age 261

The same goes for connectivity enabling nonwork to work Continual separation from work when at home may often
spillover; that is, the physical, emotional, or cognitive carry- not be realistic. Many people have long commutes, constant
over of personal life to the job (e.g., being concerned about a demands to keep up with monitoring work emails and texts,
child’s or parent’s health while at work). Even when not and the expectation to answer them to show conscientious-
facing a medical issue, it is sometimes difficult to ignore a ness, particularly if coworkers do so. Similarly, a single
friend’s more recent Facebook post, or not take teenagers’ parent at work cannot easily separate from day care contact
texts asking whether they can go to a friend’s home after while working during a case of child illness or a school snow
school, instead of doing homework. These examples suggest day.
that contrary to some suggestions in the popular life-balance It may be overly simplistic to argue that separating is
literature, ‘‘integrating’’ boundaries may not necessarily always best; or integrating is preferable. Managing work—life
lead to reduced work—life conflict. Indeed, too much inte- boundaries involves multiple aspects of people’s complex
gration can actually increase such conflict! lives. Neither strategy in isolation may be a way to reduce
Blurring boundaries via work—life integration can also work—life conflict. Effective work—life strategies vary
lead to ‘‘job creep,’’ where an individual’s job creeps or depending on an individuals’ configuration of identities,
spreads into personal life. This can result in what is known behaviors, and level of boundary control over job and home
as ‘‘overwork,’’ or working more than is desirable for well- contexts.
being, with too much integration. Too much boundary Synthesizing the integration and separation
blurring may lead to challenging working style choices, perspectives. Historically, many work—family studies
like trying to do quality work on a critical work project at emphasize a single ‘‘variable approach’’ to capturing
the last minute while watching the Super Bowl or the World work—life styles — that is, individuals’ styles typically were
Cup on television. Of course, a benefit of being able to studied with one measure at a time, measuring a single point
integrate is that the individual doesn’t have to completely in time, implying that people either separated or integrated
miss out on time with family friends, or the game. How- roles. Another approach to such research was for an indivi-
ever, it often takes longer to finish the work project, and dual to assess how central work is to them. If s/he rated him
an over-preoccupation with work can spoil many opportu- or herself as highly work-oriented, researchers generally
nities to be truly present for meaningful moments in assumed that s/he cannot also be nonwork or family-
personal life. oriented. Yet my research shows that many individuals today,
Separation perspective. In contrast to the integration especially women and growing numbers of men, are dual
perspective, separation emphasizes that many individuals centric and synthesize their identities in styles across multi-
need role clarity in order to focus on the role at hand, given ple, linked aspects of their lives. This means they have high
limited psychological resources such as time and energy. identification with both their work and nonwork roles. Given
Such research suggests that being fully focused on each this, a single measure of how much people identify with work
domain (e.g., completely attending to work when at work, or nonwork roles may not capture the complexity of their
or focusing on nonwork matters when off the job) and boundary management style as some individuals do regularly
keeping them segmented can reduce dysfunctional cross- shift patterns of boundary management style. This is because
domain interruptions and work—family conflict. It also some people work or live in contexts where they may be
enables people to more easily psychologically detach from engaged in both separation and integration on a recurring
the other domain (e.g., not think about work when at home, basis. An example would be a parent who is firm on separating
in order to recover mentally and be able to completely and not checking email or working on weekends to focus on
transition to the domain in which one intends to focus). family, but who regularly integrates work and nonwork on
Researchers supporting separation of work and nonwork weekdays by teleworking each night after dinner after put-
roles argue that this approach is helpful for high quality role ting children to bed.
experiences and avoiding work—family conflicts. Separation We also found from interviewing people that some would
enables people to focus exclusively on the work realm or the say, ‘‘Yes, I integrate but I don’t control this strategy. I
nonwork realm without competing pressures. Scholars argue would really like more separation but my job or family
that some individuals have psychological preferences for situation doesn’t allow me to have much control over my
work detachment to enhance well-being. Studies show that life strategy. I have a job where I am on call on the week-
having some separation helps many people recover from ends, and there is no way I can separate from work, for
work and also improves mental and physical health, as well example, even when I am only supposed to be off.’’ One
as sleep quality. example of this situation involves public social workers who
Separation between work and nonwork was for many had to be readily available to ‘‘call in’’ to respond to a
decades the norm in most workplaces where employers report of child neglect. Even though they were not formally
set standardized work schedules such as from 9 a.m. to scheduled to work on the weekend, they were ‘‘on call’’ and
5 p.m. for employees. Yet separation may not work for forced to monitor work calls even while mowing the lawn.
everyone or indeed many people, and can make individuals They could not entirely separate or detach from work even if
captive to employer dictated work-scheduling and organiza- they wanted to as the design of their jobs afforded low
tion regimes. It can also reinforce gender roles, where boundary control. In sum, we found that an individuals’
women and men who focus on domestic tasks may find it boundary management style reflects their particular com-
hard to also engage in breadwinning. Workers engaged in bination of these five factors: their level of boundary con-
caregiving, homemaking, or community volunteering may trol, cross-role interruption behaviors, how they synthesize
also face barriers in workplaces that do not allow for some work—life identities, their technological dependence, and
integration. need for time for self.
262 E.E. Kossek

BOUNDARY MANAGEMENT STYLES: A BRIEF well-being. Indeed, studies consistently show that people
SURVEY TOOL AND OVERVIEW who feel in control of their life situations have better psy-
chological and physical health, as well as overall well-being.
In this section, I provide a brief survey tool, (see Table 1) that
can help you understand your boundary management style. Cross-Role Work—Nonwork Interruption
Of course, precisely measuring your style may require a Behaviors
longer psychological assessment, but these questions give
you a good baseline. In Table 2, I define the factors that are The second factor relates to how you manage work to non-
included and how to interpret your ratings. Below I define work interruptions. There are three main types: integrators,
each factor and how they relate to a typology of boundary separators, and cyclers. Each of these have subtypes vary in
management styles based on these items, each with a higher the degree of perceived control over boundary crossing
and lower control subtype, and some of the advantages and between work and nonwork.
costs of each style. Integrators. Do you have a high frequency of work to
Boundary control. The first factor, boundary control, nonwork interruption behaviors and/or a high frequency of
refers to the extent to which you perceive that you are in nonwork to work interruptions? For example, do you check
control of how you manage the boundaries between your work work emails often at home, even when not required by
life and personal life. Early research on boundary manage- your boss? Do you also often check personal emails or texts
ment typically asked people to rate how they managed at work throughout the day? If so, you are probably an
boundaries without separating out perceived boundary con- integrator.
trol. This was problematic as what individuals do in life is not There are two types of integrators; if you are a high
always their choice. If you have an inflexible job where you control integrator, then you are a Fusion lover — someone
are expected to take calls from overseas in the middle of the who chooses and enjoys integrating. If you are a low boundary
night, you have little boundary control over when you work. control integrator, you are reactor. Reactors often feel they
Or if you are a single parent or the only caregiver for an elderly are putting out fires and responding to both work and non-
parent, living far away from your relatives, with no family or work demands and often constantly juggling competing
professional backup, you may also have little boundary control demands. Reactors prefer more separation, as the lack of
between work and personal life as you must be available for control diminishes their well-being.
nonwork to work interruptions whenever needed. For exam- Separators. Perhaps you tend to have a low frequency of
ple, if your child or parent needs to go to the doctor, you must both work-to-nonwork and nonwork-to-work interruptions,
always be able to interrupt work and adjust work schedules in such as rarely taking a work call at home or a home call at
order to care for your family. In contrast, a colleague that has work. Then you are likely a separator. There are two types of
local support from family and friends for care assistance or separators. High control separators are dividers. If you are
limited care demands, can regularly assume she can work as this type, then you are able to give each role its priority by
long as desired without interruptions. focusing on work when at work and your home life when at
Boundary control is also key to shaping personal out- home. If you are a low control separator, you might be a
comes. Generally low boundary control results in lower captive, an individual who is forced to separate. An example

Table 1 Work—Life Boundary Management Mini- Self- Assessment: What’s Your Style?
Sample Items: Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly
Disagree 2 Agree Nor 4 Agree
1 Disagree 5
3
1. Boundary Control: I control whether I am able to keep my
work and personal life separate.
2. Cross-Role Interruption Behaviors
A. Nonwork to work interruption behaviors:
I take care of personal or family needs during work.
B. Work to nonwork interruption behaviors:
I work during my personal or family time.
3. Career-Family Identities
A. Work Centric: I invest a large part of myself in my work.
B. Family Centric: I invest a large part of myself in my family.
4. Needing time for self: Finding time for myself is important
to my overall quality of life.

5. Technological Dependence: I check my computer or hand-held

device as soon as I see or hear that a new message has arrived.
Managing work—life boundaries in the digital age 263

Table 2 Boundary Management: Definitions of the Five Work—Life Factors and Interpreting Your Score

Work—Life Factor Definition Interpretation

1. Boundary Control The degree to which you Ratings of: If you have high to moderate
feel in control as you - 1 or 2 suggest lower boundary control you tend to
manage the boundaries control feel in control of your
between your work life - 3 suggests medium interruption behaviors. If you
and nonwork life. control have low boundary control, you
- 4 or 5 indicate higher do not feel in control of
control interruption behaviors.
2. Cross- Role Work—Nonwork The degree to which you Ratings of: If you have low interruptions for
Interruption Behaviors engage in cross-domain - 1 or 2 indicate you have both nonwork to work and work
A. Nonwork to Work Interruptions boundary crossing low nonwork to work to nonwork you are a separator
interruption behaviors for interruptions If you have high interruptions
nonwork to work roles - 3 suggests moderate for both nonwork to work and
interruptions work to nonwork you are an
- 4 or indicate 5 higher integrator. If you have work—
interruptions from life patterns that vary and
nonwork to work include periods of integration
followed by separation in a
recurring pattern you may be a
cycler.
B. Work to Nonwork Interruption The degree to which you Ratings of: If you have high interruptions
Behaviors engage in cross-domain - 1 or 2 indicate you have from work to nonwork but low
boundary crossing low work to nonwork interruptions from nonwork to
interruption behaviors for interruptions work you are a work firster. If
nonwork to work roles - 3 suggests moderate you have high interruptions
interruptions from nonwork to work but low
- 4 or indicate 5 higher interruptions from work to
interruptions from work to nonwork you are a family firster.
nonwork
3. Career—Family Identity The degree to which your Ratings of: People high on work identity but
Centralities identity is work-centric, - 1 or 2 indicate lower lower on family identity are
family-centric, dual- role centrality for a work centric. People high on
centric, or neither family- particular identity being family identity but lower on
or career-centric but some rated (e.g., work identity, work identity are family
other avocation. or family identity) centric. People higher on both
- 3 medium role work and family identities are
centrality dual-centric. Those lower on
- 4 or 5 higher role work and family centrality may
centrality identify highly with roles other
than work or family.

4. Needing Time for Self The degree to which you Ratings of: People who rate higher on this
perceive having time for - 1 or 2 indicate lower scale must have time to recover
yourself is important for need for time for self for from both work and family
well-being. well-being demands in order to have well-
- 3 moderate need being.
- 4 or 5 higher need
5. Technological The degree to which you Ratings of: People who rate higher this item
Dependence are dependent on mobile - 1 or 2 indicate lower tend to be highly dependent on
communication devices. dependence their personal communication
- 3 moderate technological devices.
- 4 or 5 is higher
dependence

would be an employee who works in a customer facing job, Cyclers. Perhaps you are neither of these pure styles.
such as in food service that precludes taking calls from his or Instead, you separate during some weeks or time of the year
her child while at work to be able to confirm the child got and other times regularly integrate work and nonwork. If so,
home from school. then you are a cycler. Teachers and professors are often
264 E.E. Kossek

cyclers driven by the intense start-up of the school year and with which they have highest identification. This tends to
intense shut down period of exam grading. Retailers also tend involve placing that role first in priority and acting to guard
to be cyclers with the peaks of holiday shopping and the slack that role from interruptions; while at the same time being
of January. These are just a few examples of the many very open to let demands from the primary role cross over to
professions that can prompt employees to be cyclers. Most take over time and energy from other life roles. Being a
cyclers experience prolonged separation between work and firster involves putting one primary role over another in a
nonwork during habitual peak work times, with these moun- manner that shapes choices over whether and how to inter-
tains of work followed by periods of higher work—life inte- rupt roles and engage in boundary crossing behaviors. There
gration. During these times, cyclers then focus on friends or are three types of firsters.
partners they did not have time to be with during peak work Family firsters put their family needs over their job nearly
periods, or family such as parents with children during all the time. A family firster is someone who rarely allows
summer or school breaks. Someone can also cycle weekly work interruptions to enter into family time, yet regularly
to allow for involvement in nonprofits or exercise, such as interrupts work time when needed to manage family
regularly leaving mid-day on Thursdays to volunteer at a demands. They risk having family creep into their job and
charity, or to play in a tennis league for a few hours, and may face the midlife realization that they have sacrificed
then working from home the rest of the afternoon. themselves so much for family that they cannot catch up in
Other examples of cyclers involve cycles of living arrange- their careers.
ments. For example, perhaps a married couple has jobs in Work firsters put their work schedule first and let work
cities located several hours apart. Living apart and focusing creep into personal lives, but have few personal life inter-
on work from Monday through Thursday separates work and ruptions at work. If you are a work firster, you may need to
nonwork, yet on Fridays they both telework integrating take active steps to avoid the risk of becoming a workaholic.
work—life boundaries in order to be together. Another exam- My research shows that work firsters have lower perceptions
ple is someone who is divorced and has shared custody of well-being and that they have poorer perceived fit
children whose parental custody alternates every week. between work and personal life.
Some weeks an individual would separate to focus on work A third type of firster is a nonwork eclectic. This style
and, during other weeks, they would engage in high integra- involves placing your personal life ahead of work or family,
tion juggling school schedules and caring for children along- perhaps by being highly engaged in your church, a hobby,
side their job demands every day. Still another example focusing a lively social life, or some other avocation like a
includes individuals with jobs that require cycles of travel start-up business separate from your ‘‘real job.’’
followed by periods of nontravel. For example, individuals
who work on off-shore rigs or mines (often men) might have Work and Family Identity Centralities
jobs that are three week on where they might be too busy to
spend time with their families (and even live away from
The third factor of boundary management is your career and
them), followed by three weeks off at work.
nonwork identity centralities. Balance means different
There are two main types of cyclers—quality timers and
things to different people and it depends on what you most
job warriors. Quality timers are able to both separate to
value in life. You may be work-centric, family-centric, dual-
focus on work or family when needed, as well as integrate
centric, or other nonwork-centric (someone who identifies
when their dual roles demand this. In many workshops I have
most with an avocation like a nonprofit, or hobby more than
led, working parents with toddlers identify themselves as
your job or family.) If you are work centric, you focus time
cyclers trying to carve out focused quality time and yet
and energy on the work role, as that is what drives your
needing to integrate work and nonwork roles when working.
identity. Family centric individuals make career decisions
Another type of cycler has lower control: job warriors,
that are virtually always family first. Just because someone is
individuals who have constant recurring cycles of heavy
family-centric or work-centric, however, it doesn’t mean
job peaks that wear them out and they become overcom-
that they don’t value their jobs or families. A family-centric
mitted to work demands for lingering periods of time. Even
person is not necessarily a bad employee, nor is a work-
when their jobs have a lull, it may never be quite long enough
centric person necessarily a poor family member. It just
to fully recover, as these individuals often lack control over
means that these individuals draw most of their identity
either the timing, amount, or nature of work. For example,
and life validation from excelling in the role for which they
professors may lack control over the end of the term peak
have highest centrality.
work demands of wrapping up teaching their classes and
Employees who identify with both work and family are
grading, together with their research and administration
dual centric, a tendency that is increasingly common. When
duties.
people are dual centric, they constantly strive to give their
Hybrids: Role Firsters. Finally, there is also a hybrid
best to each work and nonwork role. Employees thrive when
subtype of how people respond to interruptions, where
their employer or manager does not force them to choose
some are asymmetrical; that is, interruptions in one direc-
between excelling at their jobs or excelling in their family
tion but not another. What determines which role (e.g.,
and personal life.
work) crosses over to interrupt another (e.g. nonwork)
depends on which role is more important to a person’s
identity. For example, depending on whether one is work Technological Dependence
centric, family centric, or nonwork centric (e.g., a tri-
athlete; key church volunteer), this individual would reg- Recently I have validated two new scales to reflect changing
ularly engage in patterns of separating to protect the role work life developments. Table 1 presents an illustrative item
Managing work—life boundaries in the digital age 265

from a ‘‘Technological Dependence’’ scale regarding the Advantages and Drawbacks of Boundary
degree to which you are constantly connected to a personal Management Styles
technology communication device. As expected, integrators
have higher technological dependence than separators. My
research shows that graduate students have the highest Every style has benefits and downsides and over the course of
technological dependence, higher than undergraduates or your life, styles may shift after you go through a life change,
employees. Many are juggling school jobs and families or such as new job, health scare, new boss, divorce, becoming a
partners. parent, or marriage.
If you are too connected to technology, you risk also being Integrators. As Table 3 shows, integrators can be seen as
bogged down by TASW — Technology Assisted Supplemental effective employees as they frequently answer emails
Work — whereby the communication devices that are sup- quickly, but a downside is they often seem rushed and face
posed to provide time savings and facilitate work efficiency switching costs. Switching costs are process losses from
can often increase work demands. For example, by having toggling between two tasks that you are trying to do simul-
your phone available on the weekends makes it easier for taneously, often in terms of the time it takes to get fully up to
colleagues to contact you during nonwork time when you previous speed on a task after transitioning to it from a
might be trying to relax. different task. An example would be an employee trying
to do high value work, like writing a paper while checking
Need Time for Self emails and, as a result, the paper doesn’t get written until
after midnight because they experienced lower concentra-
The ‘‘Need Time for Self’’ measure captures the degree to tion, flow, and focus.
which you need to carve out regular personal time for Separating styles. Styles that use full (separators) or
yourself, in order to foster positive mental health and partial separating ( firsters) of boundaries to support a role(s)
well-being. If you feel you do not have time to develop have the advantages of looking focused and professional
friendships outside of work, exercise, or just relax to take when separating their roles. Yet individuals with these styles
care of yourself, particularly if you place a high value on can sometimes face a stunted life and not fully develop as
needing time for self, you are unlikely to have healthy work— ‘‘whole people,’’ particularly for pure separators, as this
life boundaries. The inclusion of a ‘‘Need Time for Self’’ scale makes positive spillover of synergies between roles unlikely
in boundary management assessment provides a more fine- since they manage their lives as separate silos. They may also
grained analysis of nonwork time, and better captures the face under-development in whatever family or work role they
fact that nonwork time is often divided between family time routinely place as lower priority. Overly work-focused people
(which is a commitment even for both single and married may not, for example, devote sufficient energy and time to
people as most have parents and relatives), and also personal enjoying vigorous exercise, finding a life partner, or to
time for self. relishing their romantic or family relationship(s). Conversely,
overly family- and nonwork-focused individuals can also be
marginalized for not being flexible or willing to blur bound-
RATING YOUR APPROACH: WHAT’S YOUR aries, such as taking an email or call during personal time,
WORK—LIFE BOUNDARY STYLE? unlike their coworkers who are willing to do so, during a
client deadline.
Having taken the survey, scored yourself, and reviewed the All firsters, where one role is prioritized over the other,
definitions of each of the five factors, now turn to table 3 to and boundaries are managed to focus on these demands first
see the pros and cons of your style. to the detriment of time and attention to other roles, may not
Remember, separators generally have low interruption reap the benefits of positive work family enrichment—the
behaviors back and forth between work and personal life. sharing of skills, behaviors, and resources from one role to
In contrast, integrators, regularly engage in medium to another. While many of us may focus on negative work—non-
high interruption behaviors between work and nonwork work relationships such as work—family conflict, more recent
(perhaps checking Facebook and personal social media studies suggest that positive dynamics between work and
periodically while at work) and monitoring work commu- nonwork are important to consider. For example, having a
nications when at home at night. Cyclers have varying job where you get recognition and a paycheck can provide
patterns of different boundary interruption styles, some- positive emotional and financial resources for home. Or having
times highly separating and sometimes highly integrating. a loving and happy home life can prompt employees to bring a
For example, a teacher may have limited work contact positive mood and a social support system to the job.
during the summer months, but integrate work and perso- Cyclers. Cyclers are highly flexible and, if they have
nal life constantly during the school year. Firsters tend to boundary control, allocate themselves to peak work or non-
have an imbalanced pattern of interruptions from one work demands as they need for quality time. However, they
domain to another. A work firster typically takes a lot of can face confusion over which role to focus on, and their
job communications during nonwork time, but has few peers or families can sometimes be confused over which
nonwork interruptions when on the job. In contrast, a mode they are in. Cyclers can also face exhaustion from
family or nonwork firster has the reverse pattern, with managing the peaks and valleys of their work, and not having
lots of nonwork contacts during working time, and little time to adequately recover from peak demands.
work boundary blurring when not on the job. Below I Another drawback of individuals with styles with lower
discuss the advantages and drawbacks of each style, which boundary control is that these individuals experience lower
are summarized in Table 3. work—life fit and lower perceived time adequacy. They may
 266
Table 3 Boundary Management Styles

Boundary-Crossing Interruption Styles

Type Integrators Cyclers Separators Role Firsters
1. Definition Constantly blend work A fluctuating style switching Keeps work and Has a dominant role identity that is prioritized and
and nonwork with lots back and forth between cycles nonwork separated in focused on first where those role demands often
of cross-role of high work—life integration defined blocks of time; cross over & interrupt other roles but not the reverse
interruption) followed by periods of focuses on each role
separation with few interruptions
from the other

2. Level of boundary Other

control Fusion lovers Quality timers Dividers Work firsters Family nonwork
- High to moderate firsters interests
- Low Reactors Job warriors Captives Misaligned identities
3. Common Can do attitude Engaged Reliable Ability to focus and do one role well
Advantages Available whenever Very flexible Look focused, Less work—life conflict
needed professional
Downsides Switching costs Burnout, exhaustion, chaotic Rigid, not adaptable Countervailing role creep
Potential for role Peaks and valleys, leads to lack Lack of work—family Under-development of whole self
overload of recovery positive cross-over Workaholism for work firsters
Can feel exhausted and Limited buffers with potential enrichment Career sacrifice for family firsters and Nonwork
rushed for overload and ‘‘ball other-centric individuals
dropping’’ of other life roles
during peaks
4. Technological High Peaks and valleys of electronic Low Asymmetrical
dependence tethering
5. Need time for self Low High for quality timers, limited Moderate for Dividers, High for Nonwork other-centric individuals,
episodes for Job warriors likely for Captives Can be low for other styles, especially those with dependent
care demands
6. Career family identity Many are Dual Centric, Tends to value one role more Tends place equal One role identity is clearly dominant; cross-role
centralities valuing both work and than another at different times importance on work and interruption behaviors reflect crossover ‘‘creep’’ to support
nonwork equally but of the year or month nonwork roles and strives dominant identity
unsure how to prioritize for focus mindfulness for

E.E. Kossek
each
Managing work—life boundaries in the digital age 267

also face lower well-being as they may not have the chance to you are managing work—life boundaries. Similarly if your
create time for self or have the ability to realign energy and work colleagues feel it is hard to work with your style as
time with identities that matter most. part of a team, their input may suggest you might need to
explore some of the tactics I discuss in Table 4.
MAKE A CHANGE: STRATEGIES FOR GREATER Increasing boundary control supports alignment with iden-
tities and values, which enables greater well-being and
BOUNDARY CONTROL
performance. Table 4 outlines different physical, mental,
and social boundary management strategies to enable higher
Using the survey and reflecting on the benefits and costs of control. Some of the most important strategies you can use
your style may help you to consider how well your style is are to better manage your transitions and transition time, use
working, and whether you might want to make changes in time buffers, and manage expectations.
how you manage your work and life boundaries.

Time Management Values Assessment and Managing Transitions, Using Time Buffers and
Seeking Stakeholder Input Setting Expectations

Conducting a time management values assessment exercise Transition times are declining between work and nonwork
is another way to discover changes you would like to make. roles. Transition time is the time taken to transition
Personal time allocation data is helpful to identify where between a work task, such as answering a work electronic
you might want to make change. To complete this exercise, communication on your cell phone, and a nonwork role,
each evening for a week reflect on and record how you have such as watching a child’s sporting event. People are now
spent each of the last 24 h, which adds up to 168 h over a working while commuting, by talking on their cell phones
week. These activities may include sleeping, commuting, while driving and working on their laptops on buses, trains,
eating, browsing social media, working, studying, watching and in planes. This travel time used to be time to listen to
TV, and spending time exercising or with families and the radio, read the newspaper, or just relax. With home
friends, and so forth. Then you can make another life pie offices and smart phones, individuals can look at a work
on how you would prefer to spend your time. If you are email during personal time while at home and have their
spending far more time on tasks that have low value align- whole mood and focus of attention shift back to work if they
ment, this suggests that new boundary management and read an upsetting work communication. Managing transi-
life strategies are needed. tions by focusing in the moment on one role is a useful
Stakeholder input from work colleagues and family can strategy and involves preparing yourself mentally and emo-
also provide meaningful insights. If your family members are tionally to move from one role to another. For example,
often complaining that you are working too much at home, it when driving home from work, you can actively try to
is probably a sign that something is not working well in how disconnect from work problems and begin to think about

Table 4 Self-Management Strategies for Personal Boundary Control

Physical Mental Social

Use technology when necessary — avoid TASW Strive for mindfulness to be physically Let others know when you are
(Technology-assisted Supplemental Work). present and in the moment wherever available and how to contact you
you are working. Similarly, during during emergencies/critical times
personal time, psychologically detach when unavailable.
from work to focus on family and
personal life.
Separate by using different devices for work Organize time to focus on priorities Set and manage expectations to
and personal life. (high value work) when you are most provide boundary slack.
alert.
Separate by managing space boundaries Conduct a time management Find a role model or peer for social
(e.g., closed door to home office). assessment to align time with central support.
roles and identities.
Allow for transition times (also known as Set aside time in your calendar to Avoid mixing work and personal social
time buffers) between roles. focus on yourself (e.g., exercise, media.
lunch).
Turn off email and distracting devices for Organize blocks of time to focus. Offer quid pro quo substitute
working periods. coverage to trade off with a friend at
work or home to have a back-up when
you need it (e.g., someone to cover a
meeting at work or pick up your mail
when you are traveling, and vice
versa.)
268 E.E. Kossek

how to be emotionally ready to socialize with family and managers and peers and families and friends so that they
friends. can support experimentation. Managers might want to role
Creating time buffers — that is, enabling slack as you model their own experimentation or take steps to foster open
switch from work to nonwork or between work meetings dialog with their colleagues.
(such as scheduling a 10 min break between conference calls Finally, it is important to note that excessively high work-
and appointments so they are not scheduled back to back) — load and role overload may mean that merely tinkering with
can facilitate your boundary control. If a meeting runs over or boundary management styles might not improve outcomes.
a negative work event happens, having a time buffer and a Sometimes, particularly after a major career or personal life
little slack is less likely to immediately pervade your family change (e.g. divorce, major illness, family birth or death),
and personal life. We tend to schedule ourselves too tight. you might want to assess whether you want to experiment
Scheduling your day to include some time slack as you with some new boundary management strategies or make
transition from a work role to a nonwork role means, if some broader work—life changes.
you are stuck in traffic on the commute home, you are less And sometimes even major changes such as changing
likely to get upset that you will be late for the babysitter or occupations may not improve well-being unless new bound-
restaurant reservation. Transition time and time buffers ary management control tactics are adopted. Take ‘‘Scott,’’
reduce stress and help support positive work—life bound- now an executive, who gave up being a physician due to the
aries. fact ‘‘there was not an event I could be at where. . . I wasn’t
Another useful strategy is managing expectations so as to tied to my pager or patients.’’ Yet even after changing
focus on roles and tasks that matter most to you. Most of us careers, Scott struggled with boundary management until
want to be liked and think that saying ‘‘yes’’ to requests will his human resource department intervened.
make people like us. Yet if you are overloaded it is important
For the first year in my senior VP job, I was really bad at
to not further overcommit and say ‘‘yes’’ to everything else.
keeping work—life boundaries separate. I was functioning
Women in particular tend to say ‘‘yes’’ to service work, which
as if the day never ended and work and life were always
some scholars have labeled nonpromotable tasks. Being a
mixed together. Then my HR department. . . gave me an
pleaser by overcommitting to extra-role tasks that help
ultimatum warning: ‘‘If you want to kill yourself that’s
others, though are not core to your job, can burn you out,
great, but you’re setting a poor example and an unrea-
thereby diluting your energy for your ‘‘real work.’’ Remem-
sonable expectation for your people to do likewise. You
ber the old rule of three adage — that most tasks take three
are sending e-mails all the time, and you’re generating
times longer than you think they will. This underscores the
them by staying on-line and working all the time.’’ This
merit of negotiating and striving to allow yourself time
gave me a wake-up call and what I learned to do instead of
buffers and slack by, for instance, giving yourself long dead-
working at night or the weekends is to leave my laptop in
lines, managing expectations, and not overpromising.
the trunk of my car, in case there was an absolute emer-
Job and Family Role Creep gency. I also told my peers and superiors, ‘‘Here’s my
home phone number if you need me, but I’m shutting off
my cellphone.’’ It’s been a pretty successful strategy.’’
Boundary control can also be increased by consciously using
separation to countervail job and family ‘‘creep,’’ whereby Scott’s story illustrates how gaining boundary control may
one domain creeps over or intrudes on the other domain to involve a lifelong learning journey of adopting new habits and
the point where you do not give adequate attention to that ways of working.
role. One effective strategy is to separate physical bound-
aries by having a separate communication device, such as one
cell phone or tablet for work and one for nonwork. Another Boundary Management Strategies for Leaders and
approach is to leave your work cell phone out of the bedroom Organizations
at night so you won’t be tempted to check work emails as
soon as you wake up (or during the night). A third tactic is Not managing boundaries can deplete employees’ energy,
having an away message on your work email while you are on result in lower engagement and well-being, greater conflict,
vacation or taking a weekend off, letting people know that poorer teamwork and communication, and higher turnover.
you are offline. A fourth tactic is to keep personal email and Table 5 shows boundary management strategies that leaders
social media accounts separate from work accounts. and organizations can implement. A first step is for leaders
Overall, finding the right style involves first processing the and managers to identify their own boundary management
diagnosis of your current situation, as you cannot make style to understand how to increase their own and their
change without understanding the status quo. Then you team’s boundary control, as well as to better support mem-
can reflect and set goals on whether you would like to bers’ work and nonwork needs. For example, in an organiza-
integrate or separate more, or reduce peak work cycles tion I advised, the Vice President would sometimes send an
and gain more boundary control. You can experiment and email out Sunday evening calling for an early morning work
self-monitor your behaviors with different boundary manage- meeting. Because the scheduling and communication of the
ment control tactics. Finding a role model and engaging in meeting was random, many workers felt the leadership style
peer coaching can also be helpful. You can then reflect on resulted in low boundary control as they could not enjoy their
whether the strategies are working and repeat the cycle of weekends. They felt forced to check emails during personal
experimentation as part of an ongoing learning-feedback time. After the team did the boundary management assess-
loop. Employees who feel comfortable being open about ment, the leader heard from the team that they felt stressed
their experimentation can communicate this to their by this and he stopped setting up meetings at the last minute.
Managing work—life boundaries in the digital age 269

Table 5 Strategies Leaders and Organizations Can Use to Support Employees’ Work—Life Boundary Styles

Leaders and Managers Can: Organizations Can:

 Take time to learn about co-workers’ work—life styles, values, and needs.  Provide flexible options for increasing
employee control over work/life patterns.
 Be aware of boundary management styles when managing others and  Develop cultures that focus on results-oriented
working in teams. work rather than face time.
 Set/communicate clear expectations about boundaries and performance.  Embrace a diversity of boundary management
styles without stigma.
 Provide:  Educate others on social differences in
! Emotional support boundary management when team building.
! Role modeling
! Instrumental support
! Creative work—family management
! Provide performance support
 Create back-up systems and cross-training for key roles.  Implement work design that gives employees
greater boundary control.
 Engage in perspective taking to better understand work—life styles as a  Manage employees in different locations/time
workforce inclusion and diversity issue. zones in a way that supports work—life
wellbeing in that social locale.

Another strategy is to find out about employees’ work—life patterns. These need to be actively supported by manage-
values and develop perspective taking or the ability to ment as a regular way of working and not a special accom-
empathize with subordinates and co-workers about their modation. This approach creates a culture characterized by
work—life needs. Many managers may want to check their social support that values work life and career well-being.
own values and assumptions about face time and meetings as For example, a major corporation in Germany stops its
a way to assess productivity. They can support diverse bound- servers sending emails after work hours in order to promote
ary styles by striving to focus on creating a results-oriented work—life separation. This is an example of a holistic orga-
work environment where how you manage boundaries is less nizational strategy to stop integration. Organizations need to
important than the quality of work that is done. Managers can take proactive steps to change the design of work to ensure it
achieve this by setting and communicating clear expecta- fosters positive work—life relationships where individuals do
tions about boundaries and performance. Understanding not feel they have to sacrifice their family and personal life in
work—life boundaries is one way managers can manage work- order to perform effectively in their jobs.
force diversity to create an inclusive, healthy work environ-
ment. Managers should also take care to be sensitive to
burnout, heavy workloads, and long hours. CONCLUSION
There are a number of family supportive behaviors that
managers can engage in. These include managers acting as a This article has noted that one of the most important chal-
role model by emphasizing the importance of personal work— lenges that many professionals, leaders, and other employ-
life well-being in their own actions. Managers can also pro- ees currently face is managing their work—life boundaries.
vide social support by being emotionally present for employ- This is because such boundaries impact the attention, well-
ees who want to share at work an intimate (good or bad) being, and energies of themselves, their families/partners/
family or personal life experience. Leaders can demonstrate friends, and their teams. Leaders and organizations can
instrumental support by openly supporting the use of flexible foster enabling conditions for boundary control by support-
schedules and telework as a normal way of working. Finally, ing a diversity of boundary styles for a healthy and produc-
managers can ensure employees know what is expected of tive work environment. Managing work—life boundaries and
them and that they have the resources and support needed to letting employees shape boundary control is increasingly
complete their work as efficiently as possible. Employees important for career effectiveness so that employees do
might then experience less stress. They and managers not feel burnt out, depleted, and unable to craft a life that
together may also be more open to developing creative works within and outside of their jobs. Organizations, lea-
work—life solutions of cross-training and getting rid of legacy ders, and employees need to view developing competencies
work that may be not adding high value. in managing work—life boundaries and inclusive work—life
Organizations can benefit from providing a menu of flex- cultures as central to fostering effective careers and orga-
ible work options for increasing employee control over work nizations.
270 E.E. Kossek

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
To learn more about the original work on the development of of how workplace trends shape the changing nature of
boundary management style assessments and strategies boundary management see, Kossek, E., & Ruderman, M.
(called ‘‘flexstyles’’ in seminal writings), see Kossek, E. & 2012. Work—family flexibility and the employment relation-
Lautsch, and B. 2008. CEO of Me: Creating a Life That Works ship. In Understanding the Employee—Organization Relation-
in the Flexible Job Age. Philadelphia: Pearson/Wharton ship: Advances in Theory and Practice (In Shore, L. M., Coyle-
School Publishing. Readers interested in theoretical work Shapiro, J. and. Tetrick, L E., Editors) NY: Taylor and Francis,
to foster thinking about how organizational contexts can pp. 223—253.
support or detract from customization of individual’s work Those interested in the ways in which work—life identities
life boundary management strategies should take a look at and boundary management styles are a form of workforce
Kossek, E. & Lautsch, B. 2012. Work—family boundary man- and team diversity, see Kossek, E. E. 2015. Organizational
agement styles in organizations: A cross-level model, Orga- support and empowerment of diversity in work—life identi-
nizational Psychology Review, 2(2): 152—171. For seminal ties, Positive Organizing in a Global Society: Understanding
research on work—life configurations, see Kossek, E. E., R. and Engaging Differences for Capacity-Building and Inclu-
Noe, DeMarr, B. 1999. Work—family role synthesis: individual, sion. L.M. Roberts, L. Wooten, & M. Davidson (Eds.) NY: Taylor
family and organizational determinants. International Jour- and Francis, 176—184.
nal of Conflict Resolution, 10(2): 102—129. A tool to self- Readers who want to learn more about qualitative
assess your boundary management style is available for research and stories on boundaries, and boundary manage-
university educational use at: https://purdue.qualtrics. ment tactics and strategies see Nippert-Eng, C.E. (1996).
com/SE/?SID=SV_38n9h7OgvNdDeRf. Home and Work. Negotiating Boundaries through Everyday
Those interested in learning more about the development Life. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, as well as
of the Work Life Indicator, published by a research partner- Kreiner, G. E., Hollensbe, E. C. and Sheep, M. L. (2009).
ship with the Center for Creative Leadership that builds on Balancing borders and bridges: Negotiating the work—home
flexstyles see: Kossek, E., Ruderman, M., Braddy, P., Hannum, interface via boundary work tactics. Academy of Manage-
K. 2012. Work—nonwork boundary management profiles: ment Journal, 52, pp. 704—730. To learn more about what
Person centered approach, Journal of Vocational Behavior leaders can do to support work and family roles, see Hammer,
81: 112—128. L., Kossek, E., Yragui, N. Bodner, T., Hansen, G. 2009. Devel-
To learn more about boundary control as a form of job opment and validation of a multi-dimensional scale of family
control and flexibility enactment, see Kossek, E., Lautsch, B., supportive supervisor behaviors, (FSSB), Journal of Manage-
Eaton, and S. 2006. Telecommuting, control, and boundary ment, 35: 837—856.
management: Correlates of policy use and practice, job For a literature review on work—family and work—life
control, and work—family effectiveness. Journal of Voca- boundary dynamics, see Allen, T. Cho, E. & Meier, T.
tional Behavior, 68: 347—367, and Kossek, E., Lautsch, B., 2014. Work family boundary dynamics, Annual Review Orga-
Eaton, S. Flexibility Enactment Theory: Implications of Flex- nizational Psychology and Organizational. Behavior, 1: 99—
ibility Type, Control and Boundary Management for Work— 121 and, Dumas, T., & Sanchez-Burks, J. (2015). The profes-
Family Effectiveness, pp. 243—262. In Kossek, E. E. & Lam- sional, the personal and the ideal worker: Pressures and
bert, S. Editors. 2005. Work and Life Integration: Organiza- objectives shaping the boundary between life domains.
tional, Cultural and Psychological Perspectives. Mahwah, The Academy of Management Annals, 9(1): 803—843.
N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates (LEA). For a discussion

Ellen Ernst Kossek Ph.D. from Yale University. She is the Basil S. Turner Professor at Purdue University’s Krannert
School of Management and Research Director of the Susan Bulkeley Butler Center for Leadership Excellence. She
has won the Rosabeth Moss Kanter research award, the Work—Life Legacy award for helping build the work—life
movement, and the Sage Scholarly achievement award for advancing understanding of gender and diversity in
organizations. She was the first elected Work—Family Researchers Network President (Purdue University, United
States; e-mail: ekossek@purdue.edu).