Spoiled for Choice? When Work Flexibility Improves or Impairs Work–Life Outcomes

Abstract

Work flexibility, which reflects employee discretion over where and/or when they complete tasks, has become a pervasive practice designed to reduce stress and enhance work–life balance. Despite its popularity, relatively little is known about its potential drawbacks. Through extending conservation of resources theory using dual process models of decision-making, we develop and test a theoretical model that demonstrates how and for whom perceived flexibility can improve or impair work-life outcomes. Across two studies utilizing panel data collected in three waves, we demonstrate that planning is a key mediating mechanism that allows individuals to translate the discretion afforded by flexibility into enhanced work-life balance and reduced exhaustion. Furthermore, we find that planning among those with a low future temporal focus, who are not inclined to plan by default, was strongly influenced by environmental discontinuities (e.g., disruptions to routines). Specifically, while flexibility increased planning when individuals experienced discontinuities, flexibility reduced planning among individuals in stable and familiar circumstances, which ultimately impaired work-life outcomes. Our model offers a useful theoretical lens to understand how individuals manage, and occasionally mismanage, the expanded discretion offered by flexibility.