Work–Family Practices and Complexity of Their Usage: A Discourse Analysis Towards Socially Responsible Human Resource Management

被引:0
作者
Suvi Heikkinen
Anna-Maija Lämsä
Charlotta Niemistö
机构
[1] University of Jyväskylä,School of Business and Economics
[2] HANKEN School of Economics,undefined
来源
Journal of Business Ethics | 2021年 / 171卷
关键词
Work–family practices; Socially responsible human resource management; Discourse analysis; Work–family integration; Qualitative research;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The question of work–family practices commonly arises in both theory and daily practice as a matter of responsibility in today’s organisations. More information is needed about them for socially responsible human resource management (SR-HRM). In this article our interest is in how work–family practices, serve as an important element of SR-HRM, constructed as (un)helpful for employees’ work–family integration, are realised in organisational life. We investigate the discursive ways in which members of two different organisations working at different organisational levels construct the issue in the Finnish context. Three discourses were interpreted: (1) a discourse of compliance with external pressure, (2) a discourse of negotiation and (3) a discourse of individual flexibility. Discursive constructions of work–family practices make visible the complex interconnectedness of individuals and organisations with the environment in which they operate. Many organisational efforts to create positive work–family practices can, in fact, lead to failure to make these practices either available or usable, and they may result in the unjust treatment of organisation members. Creating sustainable work–family practices is a complex challenge for which SR-HRM must work out a solution.
引用
收藏
页码:815 / 831
页数:16
相关论文
共 143 条
[1]  
Allen TD(2001)Family-supportive work environments: The role of organizational perceptions Journal of Vocational Behavior 58 414-435
[2]  
Alvesson M(2000)Varieties of discourse: On the study of organizations through discourse analysis Human Relations 53 1125-1149
[3]  
Kärreman D(2014)How does supervisory family support influence employees’ attitudes and behaviors? A social exchange perspective Journal of Management 40 1123-1150
[4]  
Bagger J(2011)E-mail as a source and symbol of stress Organization Science 22 887-906
[5]  
Li A(2009)Making the link between work–life balance practices and organizational performance Human Resource Management Review 19 9-22
[6]  
Barley SR(2005)The relative contribution of formal and informal organizational work–family support Journal of Vocational Behavior 66 487-500
[7]  
Meyerson DE(2017)Qualitative research on work–family in the management field: A review Applied Psychology 66 382-433
[8]  
Grodal S(1998)Covered by equality: The gender subtext of organizations Organization Studies 19 787-805
[9]  
Beauregard TA(2016)Focusing on emotion and work–family conflict research: An exploration through the paradigms Journal of Management Inquiry 25 367-438
[10]  
Henry LC(2019)Not all work–life policies are created equal: Career consequences of using enabling versus enclosing work–life policies Academy of Management Review 44 172-193