Work–life strategies in the Australian construction industry: Implementation issues in a dynamic project-based work environment

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.08.002Get rights and content

Abstract

A participatory work–life balance intervention was implemented in a medium-sized construction contracting organization based in Melbourne, Australia. Weekly data capturing the number of hours worked, satisfaction with work–life balance and capacity to complete required tasks at work and at home were collected for 25 consecutive weeks. Data was subjected to time series modeling procedures and weekly work hours were found to significantly predict participants' overall satisfaction with work–life balance, and capacity to complete tasks at work and at home. The occurrence of ‘long weekends’, i.e., a period of three days away from work arising as a result of a public holiday coinciding with a ‘rostered day off’, was also found to predict workers' capacity to complete tasks at home. An evaluation workshop explored workers' experiences of a work–life intervention. Participants' were generally positive about the organization's support of their work–life balance, however areas for improvement were identified, such as the need for better communication of work–life strategies and to address the ‘long hours’ culture within the organization. The research presents a participatory framework for improving the work–life balance of project-based construction workers.

Highlights

► The research examined work–life balance in a dynamic project-based industry. ► Fluctuating experiences of balance were captured using a weekly work–life record. ► Strong relationships between work hours and work–life balance over time were found. ► An action research approach was used to develop and evaluate work–life interventions. ► Challenges in the practical implementation of work–life balance are revealed.

Introduction

Work–life balance is a key challenge facing organizations in the 21st century. Almost all work–life balance research has taken place in ‘steady-state’ work environments and utilized a cross-sectional research design. Consequently, little is known about the work–life experiences of workers in dynamic project-based industries, despite the fact that project work is understood to have unique characteristics and demands. Further, the few previous attempts that have sought to create a better understanding of work–life balance in project environments have been purely descriptive in nature (see, for example, Lingard and Francis, 2004, Perlow, 1998). Brough and O'Driscoll (2010) argue that there is a need to move beyond descriptive investigations of work–life balance to undertake research that trials and evaluates organizational interventions to improve work–life balance.

The aim of the research was to address these knowledge gaps in two respects. The research explored work–family experiences using a weekly reporting technique that captured the experiences of project-based workers over time. In addition to the dynamic measurement of work–life experiences, a participatory work–life intervention was implemented and evaluated in the context of a medium-sized construction contracting organization in Australia.

Specific research objectives were:

  • (i)

    to examine the extent to which the quality of work–life experiences of project-based workers in the construction industry changes over time;

  • (ii)

    to implement and evaluate a number of strategies designed to improve work–life balance in the contracting organization over the research period; and

  • (iii)

    to identify factors that facilitated and/or impeded the implementation of the intervention in the context of the contracting organization.

The construction industry is a high risk industry for work stress associated with excessive workloads, time constraints and deadlines (Leung et al., 2007, Sutherland and Davidson, 1989). Work stress has been linked to lower levels of performance in construction project managers (Djebarni, 1996, Leung et al., 2008). Ng et al. (2005) identify work–family conflict as one of the least easily managed work stressors experienced by construction professionals. Similarly, Haynes and Love (2004) identify long hours, workload and insufficient time spent with family as the three most significant stressors experienced by construction managers in Australia. Lingard et al. (2010a) report that time- and strain-based work interferences with family are higher among Australian construction workers than among other occupational groups in international research. Watts (2009) identifies the prevailing and intransigent culture of long work hours and the resulting high level of work–family conflict as impediments to women's career involvement and success in the construction industry. Thus, work–family conflict seems to be a significant problem for workers in the construction industry. Further research to better understand the experiences of construction workers at the work–family nexus is therefore warranted.

Within the construction industry researchers report significant variation in the experience of work stress between different groups of workers. Love et al. (2010) found that workers employed by construction contractors suffer higher levels of work stress than workers employed by consulting organizations. In an analysis of public and private sector construction workers, Lingard and Francis (2004) found that project-based workers experience significantly longer hours, higher levels of work–family conflict and burnout than their office-based counterparts.

The research presented in this paper responds to calls to consider the specific characteristics and challenges of human resource management in project work (Heumann et al., 2007). Project work is dynamic, fast-paced and subject to periods of high intensity and the occurrence of unexpected events (Aitken and Crawford, 2007, Asquin et al., 2010). Mohr and Wolfram (2010) report that dynamic tasks are associated with higher levels of stress in managers, especially when unexpected problems arise. Zika-Viktorsson et al. (2006) report that, for project workers working in multi-project organizations, a lack of opportunity for recuperation, scarcity of time and resources and a large number of simultaneous projects all contribute significantly to perceptions of project overload. Lindgren and Packendorff (2006) reflect on the ‘greediness’ of project work in the IT industry which prevents workers from engaging in stimulating activities outside work. Long hours combined with tight deadlines significantly increase the extent to which work negatively impacts upon family life (Wharton and Blair-Loy, 2006). One feature of projects is the occurrence of critical points, prior to which work intensifies, impacting on work hours and work–life balance (Perlow, 1998). The work–life balance experience of workers in dynamic project work environments is not well understood but Lingard et al. (2010b) provide preliminary evidence that the quality of work–life balance experiences varies significantly over time in the life of a project. If this is the case, there may be considerable potential for project work to be better planned to improve workflows and ‘smooth’ out the pressure points experienced by project workers.

There is a growing interest in the provision of work–life strategies within organizations. Previous research suggests that organizations that provide a ‘family-friendly’ work environment benefit significantly in terms of decreased turnover intentions, increased organizational commitment (Grover and Crooker, 1995, Thompson et al., 1999) and increased job satisfaction (Allen, 2001, Breaugh and Frye, 2007). Work–life strategies are designed to ‘help employees with many facets of their lives, including their personal well-being, professional development and family responsibilities’ (Muse et al., 2008, p. 29). Thus they are not just focused on workers with family responsibilities. Work–life strategies can include child-related supports, childhood health programs, maternity and paternity leave, flexible work scheduling, physical well-being programs, psychological well-being programs and eldercare assistance. Halpern (2005) reports that the greater the number of work–life strategies an organization offers, the more loyal employees are, the fewer stress symptoms they report and the lower the costs incurred due to days late, missed deadlines and absenteeism. Research also indicates that organizations offering a supportive work–life balance environment through the implementation of work–life strategies are better positioned to attract employees when recruiting new staff (Casper and Buffardi, 2004, Thompson and Aspinwall, 2009).

The business case for work–life strategies depends upon the extent to which these strategies are valued and utilized by workers (Blair-Loy and Wharton, 2004). However, research shows that utilization rates of work–life strategies are often low (Swody and Powell, 2007). Patterns of take-up of work–life strategies are shaped by the organizational culture, in particular, perceptions of managerial support and expectations about potential (negative) career consequences for users (Thompson et al., 1999). Beliefs about the ‘legitimacy’ of strategy use are also shaped by discourse within workgroups (Kirby and Krone, 2002, Blair-Loy and Wharton, 2004), creating informal peer pressure that can militate against strategy utilization. The utilization of strategies is also related to workers' individual characteristics, such as family status and the extent to which available strategies provide a good ‘fit’ with workers' needs (Shockley and Allen, 2010). It is therefore important that, to ensure an appropriate ‘fit’ with workers' needs, work–life strategy development is undertaken in a participatory manner involving workers themselves. For this reason, the research presented in this paper adopted a highly participatory approach to the design and development of work–life strategies.

Section snippets

The research context

Data collection took place within a medium-sized construction contracting organization based in Melbourne, Australia, between October 2009 and December 2010. Data were collected from waged and salaried workers engaged in two commercial building projects, one small civil engineering project and corporate office-based work, primarily related to tendering for new projects. For the purpose of the analysis, data collected within this organization were aggregated because, due to the small size of the

Research design

An ‘action research’ approach was adopted using a structured and participatory intervention process recommended by Nielsen et al. (2010). Action research utilizes external persons (the research team) to consult with organizational stakeholders (e.g. managers and workers) to produce and evaluate an intervention (Brough and O'Driscoll, 2010). Workers and managers are treated as co-learners during the research process and ‘ownership’ of the intervention is transferred from researchers to members

Longitudinal survey

During October, November and December 2009, 92 participants completed the first of the two work–life surveys. During September, October and November 2010 the survey was re-administered to 55 participants. Data collection was performed using the ‘TurningPoint’ automated response system with ‘KeyPad’ hand held devices. The use of this system helps to overcome issues of literacy as survey questions are projected onto a screen and read out by the researcher. The response system can be set so that

Work hours and work–life balance

The research reveals a strong inverse relationship between weekly work hours and the quality of work–life balance experiences. Generally, participants indicated working long hours. For example, one participant wrote: “I actually had Friday off even though I worked 51–55 hours this week!” Qualitative comments made by participants indicated that they experience time poverty, resulting in feelings of tiredness and frustration. For example, one participant wrote: “Generally I feel that I cannot get

Conclusions

The research has implications for research and practice. For researchers, the results highlight the limitations associated with reliance on cross-sectional surveys for collecting data about work–life balance experiences in the dynamic construction contracting environment. As the quality of work–life experiences of project workers fluctuates considerably over time, more dynamic longitudinal research models are needed to understand workers' experiences. It is also important to move beyond cross

Acknowledgement

This research was funded by the Australian Research Council under Linkage Project Grant LP08820335. We would also like to thank two anonymous reviewers for the suggestions for improvement they made on the first draft of this paper.

References (55)

  • J.H. Wayne et al.

    Work–family facilitation: A theoretical explanation and model of primary antecedents and consequences

    Human Resource Management Review

    (2007)
  • A. Zika-Viktorsson et al.

    Project overload: An exploratory study of work and management in multi-project settings

    International Journal of Project Management

    (2006)
  • D.H. Barlow et al.

    Single Case Experimental Designs

    (1984)
  • M. Blair-Loy et al.

    Organizational commitment and constraints on work–family policy use: Corporate flexibility policies in a global firm

    Sociological Perspectives

    (2004)
  • N. Bolger et al.

    Diary methods: Capturing life as it is lived

    Annual Review of Psychology

    (2003)
  • G.E.P. Box et al.

    Time Series Analysis: Forecasting and Control

    (1976)
  • G.E.P. Box et al.

    Intervention analysis with applications to economic and environmental problems

    Journal of the American Statistical Association

    (1975)
  • J.A. Breaugh et al.

    An examination of the antecedents and consequences of the use of family-friendly strategies

    Journal of Managerial Issues

    (2007)
  • P. Brough et al.

    Organizational interventions for balancing work and home demands: An overview

    Work and Stress

    (2010)
  • A.B. Butler et al.

    Extending the demands–control model: A daily diary study of job characteristics, work–family conflict and work–family facilitation

    Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology

    (2005)
  • A.C.B. de Quiros et al.

    Human reliability as a source of error in research

  • R. Djebarni

    The impact of stress in site management effectiveness

    Construction Management and Economics

    (1996)
  • S.A.E. Geurts et al.

    Work–home interaction from a work psychological perspective: Development and validation of a new questionnaire, the SWING

    Work and Stress

    (2005)
  • S. Grover et al.

    Who appreciates family responsive human resource policies: The impact of family-friendly policies on the organizational attachment of parents and non-parents

    Personnel Psychology

    (1995)
  • J.G. Grzywacz et al.

    Reconceptualizing the work–family interface: An ecological perspective on the correlates of positive and negative spillover between work and family

    Journal of Occupational Health Psychology

    (2000)
  • D.F. Halpern

    How time-flexible work policies can reduce stress, improve health and save money

    Stress and Health

    (2005)
  • G.C. Hanson et al.

    Development and validation of a multidimensional scale of perceived work–family positive spillover

    Journal of Occupational Health Psychology

    (2006)
  • Cited by (37)

    • Working time in multi-project settings: How project workers manage work overload

      2020, International Journal of Project Management
      Citation Excerpt :

      Their results reveal a strong inverse relationship between weekly work hours and the quality of work–life balance experiences, and illustrate employees’ experience of time poverty, which results in feelings of tiredness and frustration. Their study aims to answer a current gap of research on projects, since “little is known about the work–life experiences of workers in dynamic project-based industries, despite the fact that project work is understood to have unique characteristics and demands” (Lingard et al., 2012, p. 282). Although work–life balance issues have been related to project organization in a notable way, the fact that this topic remains under-investigated continues to be raised (Noury, Gand & Sardas, 2017).

    • Understanding front-end project workshops with Social Practice Theory

      2019, International Journal of Project Management
    • Cross-domain negative effect of work-family conflict on project citizenship behavior: Study on Chinese project managers

      2018, International Journal of Project Management
      Citation Excerpt :

      During the whole process of the project, upper managers in the organizations should continually emphasize the project's common goals to the project managers, and thus encourage their commitment to that project. In addition, organizational supports such as child-related supports, family health welfare, and eldercare assistance (Lingard et al., 2012) can reduce work-family conflicts as well as strengthen project managers' project commitment. Upper managers should also exert sufficient efforts to build high-quality relationships with the project managers to increase their commitment to the project, and this is especially important in China because personal relationships with upper managers are prestigious honors which are even more important resources than financial rewards.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text