Work And Family Life Balance: A Modified Delphi Study Of Working Mothers In
Administrative Profession In Korea
Refereed Paper
Young Yun, Ji
Abstract
The purpose of the study is to identify and analyze supporting factors which help administrative
professional mothers manage their work and family life. The research, using a modified Delphi
method, asked 15 panelists to rate to what extent pre-identified statement on supporting factors is
agreeable in a 5-point Likert-type scale.
As a result, the research identified nine supporting factors under four categories: Internal Support, for
self preparation and individual management; Domestic Support, for family support both in attitude and
finance; Organisational Support, for family friendly organisational culture, consistent and proper work
schedule, and family friendly policies and benefits; Social Support, for practical and reliable social
structural system, and family friendly public policies. Conclusions of the study showed that there
existed no quick and painless solutions in balancing work and family life but administrative
professionals with children can take advantage of various supports to improve quality of life.
Key words: Work and Family Life Balance, Administrative Professional
I. Introduction
Work and family issues are merged as working people, especially female workers; struggle to meet
both domestic and economic demands. Galinsky and Stein (1990) indicated that the major problems
that working mothers address can be placed into several categories such as child or elder care, time
management, relocation, job autonomy and demands, supervisory relationship, and a supportive
organisational culture. Nobbe and Manning (1997) identified specific challenges women face in
organisation, in particular: the lack of role models and mentors for women with children, the difficulty
of planning maternity leave and developing strategies to balance work and family, and the
requirement of precise planning to accommodate the demands of work and family life.
This research is intended to build awareness of the work and family life issues faced by administrative
professional mothers. Administrative professionals are defined as "individuals who are responsible for
administrative tasks and coordination of information in support of an office related environment and
who are dedicated to furthering their personal and professional growth in their chosen profession
(IAAP, 2011)."
The administrative professionals' roles generally vary. Typically working full days, they undertake both
mundane and complex tasks. In addition to their roles as employees, working mothers maintained
their full domestic roles and responsibilities since care givers are more likely to be women
(Hochschield, 1989, 2003; Williams, 1999).
These enormous roles and responsibilities provide administrative professionals who have children
with significant stress from both workplace and family. Some of accommodations include restrictive
options such as rearranging schedules, working fewer hours, and time off without pay. However,
administrative professional mothers often find it hard to substantiate these alternatives due to unique
nature of their job which requires them to be able to interact extensively with any person or group that
supervisors are responsible to interact with as well as supervisors (McCune, 2005).
It is important to address the topic of work and family life balance as it relates to administrative
professionals since the diverse character of their roles and responsibilities leads administrative
professionals to be chosen to shed light on work and family life experiences at the organisational level.
The combination of the types of duties these administrative professionals perform coupled with the
responsibilities can be quite challenging. Administrative professionals may face the juggling act in
unique ways due to various demands of work and home and make decisions impacting their families
and careers. In addition, while there is extensive research on the work and family life balance, little
research exists on the work and family life balance of administrative professional mothers.
Few resources exist to inform and guide women in administrative profession who have children or
those who are planning to raise a family. Research is needed to support these women to take
advantage of the strategies and utilize resources in balancing life and family values. The training and
development which these professional women receive is lost to the organisations when they leave the
field.
The purpose of the study is to identify and analyze supporting factors which help administrative
professional mothers manage their work and family life. This study used data from 15 working
mothers of administrative professional in a variety of organisational backgrounds in Korea. Personally
involved in balancing work and family life, these participants had pertinent information to share in their
own perceptions of the workplace and experiences. A modified Delphi process enabled the study
participants, through two rounds of questionnaires, to arrive at consensus on the supporting factors in
work and family life balance.
II. Work and Family Life Balance
1. Concept of Work and Family Life Balance and Role Conflict Theory
A. Concept of Work and Family Life Balance
In work and life literature, the concept of work and life is often coupled with the word "balance"
(Williams, 1999). In this study, the term of work and family life refers to a person's work or
employment life, and family life which is home demands and not work-related. A basic definition for
balance used in work and life literature encompasses physical, emotional, spiritual, and
developmental components; taking beliefs, dreams, and experiences into account; living in the
present; and taking action (Haddock, Zimmerman, Scott, & Current, 2001).
However, the term "balance" implies an equal distribution of work and life and causes people to
struggle with the idea that there should be an equal division between these two aspects of lives.
Instead, some researchers prefer the term "integration" by viewing work and personal life as
interdependent and equally valued activities (Bailey, 2005; Bailyn, Drago, & Kochan, 2001; Rapoport,
Bailyn, Fletcher, & Pruitt. 2002). In this study, work and family life balance includes the meaning of
integration.
B. Role Conflict Theory
How work constrains family life have been asked within a role conflict theory. Greenhaus and Beutell
(1985) defined the experience of work-family conflict as "a form of inter-role conflict in which the role
pressures from work and family domains are mutually incompatible in some respects (p.77)." Some
research recognized that women are not internally in conflict, but that the boundaries between work
and family life often disappear, particularly in favor of work (Benedict & Taylor, 1995; Galinsky, 1999).
There are three forms of work and family role conflict theory: time-based conflict, strain-based conflict,
and behavior-based conflict.
O'Driscoll, Ilgen, and Hildreth (1992) pointed that time-based conflict results from viewing time as a
limited resource. Work and non-work demands are in competition for an individual's time which is a
key component. The other form of role conflict theory, a strain-based conflict, arises when stress
produced in one domain is carried over to the other, which makes it difficult to fulfill the role
obligations of the second domain. The strain-based conflict focuses on the expectations associated
with work and family roles. The competing expectations can often lead to physical and psychological
strain which then results in feelings of being overloaded in both areas of a person's life and leads to
lower job and life satisfaction (Cooke & Rousseau, 1984; O'Driscoll, et al., 1992).
The last one is behavior-based conflict. It occurs when the types of behavior required in one domain
conflict with those expected in another domain. Parson (1951) articulated that in the work place
activities are primarily goal oriented while those of the home are expected to be mutually emotionally
rewarding. The study is structured from the role conflict theory focusing on the demands of the job
and family lives of administrative professionals.
2. Perspectives for Work and Family Life Balance
The act of balancing time and responsibilities is more complicated than it may appear. This study
illustrates gender and business perspectives for work and family life balance.
A. Gender Perspective
The one view on work and family life balance is generated from a gender perspective regarding the
impact of workforce changes on women. Table 1 illustrates the number of Korean female employees
has sharply climbed in past 30 years. (Korea Statistical Year Book, 2009). Especially, women workers
in 20s in 2005 outnumbered their counterparts, which imply more women will enter the workforce in
near future.
Table 1 Employed Persons by Gender
Ye
Age
ar
1980
1985
Gender
(Percentage)
1990
1995
2000
2005
Male
61.1
58.9
54.5
53.8
51.3
47.5
Female
38.9
41.1
45.5
46.2
48.7
52.5
Male
68.0
67.0
65.2
65.4
64.4
64.1
Female
32.0
33.0
34.8
34.6
35.6
35.9
Male
61.9
61.4
60.9
60.8
59.6
59.7
Female
38.1
38.6
39.1
39.2
40.4
40.3
Male
61.8
61.0
59.2
59.5
58.5
58.3
Female
38.2
39.0
40.8
40.5
41.5
41.7
20-29
30-39
40-49
Total
Source: Korea Statistical Year Book retrieved from http://www.nso.go.kr
In a similar trend, results of 2008 National Study of the Changing Workforce revealed the proportion
of women and men in the wage and salaried workforce has become nearly equal in the United States
(Galinsky, Aumann, & Bond, 2009). The same survey showed that the percent of employed mothers
with children under 18 increased from 47% in 1975 to 71% in 2007.
Despite the demographic shift that has occurred in work patterns, the culture and organisation of paid
work and domestic care have maintained the traditional work model (Bailyn, et al., 2001). In addition,
although both of working fathers and mothers exist in the workplace, the discipline has tended to
focus on working mothers because mothers continue to hold primary responsibility for managing the
family's daily activities (Baily, 2005; Bianchi, 2000).
This is more evident in Korea where the rigid gender ideology is deeply rooted from the past. Attitudes
toward fathers' roles may have changed in recent decades, but behaviors have not changed on the
average. The recent report showed working mothers' share of the household and child rearing tasks is
twice as large as her husband's (Choi, 2008). While gender issues are still at the forefront of work and
family life, some men are beginning to understand the challengers of their female employees as
increasing numbers of men in dual career couples face similar struggles when they attempt to share
care giving responsibilities (Galinsky, Aumann, & Bond, 2009; Rayman, 2001).
B. Business Perspective
The other view on work and family life balance is created from business perspective, which mainly
concerns the ways and time people spend at work (Bailey, 2005). Braun Padulo (2001) and Swiss
(1998) concluded that working mothers perceived the consistency and flexibility of work schedule,
proper job demands, and organisational support as the most beneficial workplace environmental
factors. This section explores these issues of work schedule, job demands, and organisational
support from business perspective.
According to Braun Padulo (2001), the consistency and flexibility of the work schedule is as important
as the actual amount of hours worked. Flexibility in schedule is key to working mothers' balance, as
unpredictable events demand the ability to take unplanned absence (Bui, 1999). Survey by SHRM
and SHRM Global Forum proved the importance of flexibility by showing that 66% of the female
respondents brought a need for flexibility related to family issues, while 44% reported an increased
need for reduced work hours and more flex time (HR Focus, 2002). In order to pursue flexibility in
schedule, working mothers can change structures and alter the work environment by delegating more
consistently and building in or negotiating flexibility.
This flexibility in schedule can also be built by using technology. Possibilities of nontraditional
schedules such as job-sharing or part-time schedules, or reduced schedules including four-day work
weeks, earlier and later hours have been investigated in the work and family life balance area.
However, these options are met with resistance since they require additional planning, scheduling,
and communication (Kossek, 2003). It is especially difficult for the administrative professional to utilize
these resources in reality.
As of job demand, administrative professionals are required to handle multiple tasks simultaneously
within limited time. The quality and quantity of tasks are, in turn, associated with various mental and
physical problems (Repetti, Matthews, & Waldron, 1989). Meanwhile, research suggested that family
cohesiveness and coping strategies mitigate negative effects caused by job demands (Voydanoff,
1987).
Along with domestic support, research indicated securing more organisational support can make work
and family life balance easier in business perspective (Swiss & Walker, 1993), Research by Warren
and Johnson (1995) found out a critical combination of three components in organisational support:
organisational culture, supervisors’ support, and family oriented benefits and policy. In fact, the latter
two are closely intertwined under the umbrella of organisational culture.
Warren and Johnson (1995) suggested that the more supportive the organisational culture of the work
organisation, the less conflict occurred between work and family roles. Hochschild (1997) also
concluded that solutions to the work and family balance come from understanding and changing the
real issue - organisational culture.
With regard to the organisational culture, Warren and Johnson (1995) recognized that attitude of
supervisors play significant roles in diminishing work strain for working mothers. Supervisors create
daily working environment and set expectations for subordinates since supervisors are primarily
responsible for defining what the working experience of their employees will be. Hughes and Galinsky
(1988) insisted that supervisors’ sensitivity to employees' family responsibilities and flexibility are
crucial, along with attitudes of co-workers as the informal communication of business culture.
One way that employer attitude is indicated is the family friendly policies of an organisation such as
employer-sponsored daycare and flextime. Throughout the last decade, work-family initiatives,
policies, and programs have continued to grow in response to the changing demographics of the
workplace. More and more organisations in Korea have adopted the family friendly policies. The
programs related to the family friendly policies which include day care center within work place and
counseling programs have expanded popular grounds among Korean companies (Jeong, 2006).
Despite the variety of approaches including legislative action, community programs, and direct
support activities, family-friendly policies are not generally utilized in real time. Administrative
professionals, in particular, shy away from these opportunities. Recent survey shows both of
employees and employers struggle with equitable application of these policies and programs, pointing
out that employees need to know the benefits they are entitled to, and employers need to understand
how to provide those benefits in a way that is fair for all workers (CPA Practice Management Forum,
2007). Overt and covert corporate unfriendly policies and practices may limit women's opportunities
for advancement, thereby constraining the available work to home balance options.
III. Methods and Results
1. Methods
The study took a qualitative approach using a modified Delphi method. This semi-structured approach
with closed questions allows participants to explore their unique experiences for candid and personal
responses (Merriam, 1998).
The Delphi method is good at soliciting a wide array of subjective opinions and responses from a
group of panel to generate a range of alternative solutions when precise statistical analysis can not be
taken because of the nature to issues and problems (Linstone & Turoff, 1975; Murray & Hammons,
1995). It can also elicit areas of collective yet tacit professional knowledge in the field of professional
inquiry (Eggers & Jones, 1998).
The study utilised feedback of 15 panelists through two rounds of survey. Helmer (1983) reported the
most movement occurs between the 1st and the 2nd rounds while later rounds in the process
produced less convergence. Regarding the number of panel, there have been diverse accounts that
point to the proper number of panel in a Delphi study. While a majority Delphi studies have used a
panel of 15 to 20 experts, the number of participants is not determinant as in traditional survey
research (Cross, 2004; Delbecq, Vande Ven & Gustafson, 1975; Stone Fish & Busby, 1996; Ulschak,
1983). Based on a number of previous modified Delphi research (Cross, 2004; Heo, 2008; Kim, 2009;
Lee, 2008), a target sample size of 15 was chosen.
The researcher used specific criteria in selection of participants as administrative professional
mothers and these criteria have to do with the level of the person's expertise and experiences
regarding the topic of study. All of the participants are college graduates, and have more than five
years of experience as administrative professionals. The years of experience range from five to 12
years with average of eight years. The panel comes from various types of organisations which
represent 11 Korean and four multi-national ones. The research limited participants to administrative
professional mothers with child or children aged less than 14 years old in order to more focus on the
challenges and conflicts of raising younger children and to explore supporting factors. Five
participants have two children while the rest of panel has one child. The panel was selected through
various sources including referrals and invitation on internet sites.
Fifteen panelists volunteered to participate in the study out of their interest of the topic and its
applicability to their lives. Once its approval was granted, a questionnaire was sent to the panel
through e-mail. Participants responded to the questionnaire using a five-point Likert-type scale (from
1-strongly disagree to 5-strongly agree). Space was also provided to include written rationale and
feedback on each position statement in the questionnaire.
The questionnaire was developed from reviewing the literature on work and family life balance,
focusing on which factors in internal, domestic, organisational, and social supports contribute to ability
to successfully balance work and family life. The questionnaire was, in turn, examined by a review
panel of two experts considered to be knowledgeable about the topic for content and face validity who
make suggestions for fine tuning the instrument. The original questionnaire for the 1st round
consisted of 14 questions in four categories.
The closed questions were placed before the panel in the 1st round. Participants were asked to rate
items which they felt support the career success of working mothers in administrative profession.
They were also asked not only to examine their own working environment, but also to consider factors
they have heard of in other organisations.
The goal of the 2nd round of questionnaire was to provide feedback to the panelists and to ask them
to consider their own responses in comparison with the responses of the others. The list of answers
which had been generated in previous round was provided to the participants with frequency of
response and median. The anticipated outcome of the study was the creation of guidelines for
organisations to retain valuable female employees as well as a list of factors for women to consider as
they seek new family-friendly balance in the field.
2. Results
A. The Results of the 1st Round of Delphi Study
In the 1st round, the panel rated the importance of 14 supporting factors in four categories in work
and family life balance. Collected data was analyzed by descriptive statistics such as mean, standard
deviations, percentage of positive answers of respondents assigning the rating of four or five. In this
study, the degree of consensus on the importance of supporting factors was indicated by percentage
of positive answer. 75% was taken as a minimum percentage of consensus on the importance of
each item in the 2nd round (Tigelaar et al. 2004; Murry & Hammons, 1995, cited from Sim, 2006). In
addition to the descriptive statistics, convergence tendency was analyzed with median, mode, and
inter-quartile range. Table 2 shows the results of the 1st round of Delphi study.
Table 2 The Results of the 1st Round of Delphi Study (N=15)
Descriptive
Convergence
Statistics
Tendency
Categories Questions
Mean SD
1.
Internal
Support
2.
Domestic
Support
3.
Organiza
-tional
Support
4.
Social
Support
No.
of
%
of
Inter- Comments
Positive Median Mode quartile
Answers
Range
1-1.
Self
4.00 1.13 66.67
Preparation
1-2.
Dual
3.93 0.80 80.00
Satisfaction
4
5
3-5
3
4
4
4-4
2
4
4
3-4
1
1.19 66.67
4
4
3-4
5
0.82 93.33
5
5
4-5
3
0.78 80.00
4
4
4-5
2
1.18 60.00
4
4
3-4
1
3-2. Supervisors’
4.00 0.93 73.33
Support
4
4
3-5
3
3-3. Coworkers’
Support
3.60 0.74 60.00
4
4
3-4
4
3-4.
Family
4.13 1.41 80.00
Friendly Policies
5
5
4-5
2
3-5. Consistency
and Flexibility of 3.47 0.83 53.33
Work Schedule
4
4
3-4
4
3-6. Proper Job
Demands
3.67 0.82 60.00
4
4
3-4
1
4-1. Structural
System
3.93 1.10 73.33
4
4
3-5
3
1-3. Individual
Management
3.53 0.64 60.00
1-4. Mentoring
3.53
2-1.
Family
Support
4.60
in Attitude
2-2.
Family
Support
4.20
in Finance
3-1.
Family
Friendly
3.53
Organisational
Culture
4-2.
Family
Friendly
3.73 0.96 73.33
4
4
3-4
1
Public Policies
1) Validity Scale: 1-strongly disagree, 2-disagree, 3-neither disagree nor agree, 4-agree,
5-strongly agree.
The panel gave 37 comments to rephrase, combine, omit or add items: 11 for internal support, five for
domestic support, 15 for organisational support, and four for social support. Three comments were
given with no regard to categories.
Under internal support, one comment was asked to delete the term "workaholic" on individual
management (1-3). Comments on mentoring (1-4) mostly pointed out the difficulty to find a role model
or mentor in workplace. For domestic support, four comments strongly recommended domestic
support (2). For organisational support, one comment emphasized the close relationship between
organisational culture (3-1) and family happiness. Three comments suggested supervisors’ support
(3-2) is hard to get in reality since most of supervisors are too busy to care for administrative
professionals. Three comments requested to relate coworkers’ support (3-3) to family friendly policies
(3-4). In addition, one comment was made to strengthen family friendly policies (3-4). "Flexibility" of
work schedule (3-5) was advised to delete due to the nature of administrative professional job. As a
result of the statistical analysis and the panelists' comments in the 1st round, the questionnaire for the
2nd round was developed (See Table 3).
Some related items were combined, omitted, or absorbed in order to avoid duplication according to
the comments. Based on the changes of items, the number of supporting factors was decreased to 12.
In the questionnaire of the 2nd round, dual satisfaction (1-2) and individual management (1-3) were
combined into "dual satisfaction through individual management". Mentoring (1-4) in the internal
support is changed to "providing mentoring through organisational systems" under the organisational
support. Coworkers’ support (3-3) was extended as part of efforts of company's family friendly policies
(3-4). Consistency and flexibility of work schedule (3-5) and proper job demands (3-6) are combined
into "consistent and proper work schedule."
Table 3 Changes of the Questionnaire by the 1st Round Results
Questions
1st Questionnaire
1-1. Self Preparation
2nd Questionnaire
1-1. Self Preparation
1-2. Dual Satisfaction
1-3.
Management
1-2. Dual Satisfaction
Individual Individual
Management
Changes
No change
through
Combined
1-4. Mentoring
3-5. Providing Mentoring through
Organisational Systems
Modified
2-1. Family Support in
Attitude
2-1. Family Support in Attitude
No change
2-2. Family Support in Finance
No change
2-2. Family
Finance
Support
in
3-1. Family Friendly
Organisational
Culture
3-1. Family Friendly Organisational
No change
Culture
3-2. Supervisors’ Support
3-2. Supervisors’ Support
3-3. Coworkers’ Support
3-4.
Coworkers’
Support
as
Extended
Modified
Efforts of Family Friendly Policies
and Benefits
3-4.
Family
Policies
and Benefits
3-3. Family Friendly Policies and
Benefits
Friendly
No change
No change
3-5. Consistency and
Flexibility
of Work Schedule
3-6. Consistent and Proper Work
Schedule
Combined
4-1. Structural System
4-1. Structural System
No change
4-2. Family Friendly Public
Policies
4-2. Family Friendly Public Policies No change
3-6. Proper Job Demands
B. The Results of the 2nd Round of Delphi Study
The 2nd round Delphi study was implemented to search for consensus on the supporting factors in
work and family balance. The convergence tendency as well as descriptive statistics was analyzed.
As indicated in the 1st round analysis, consensus on the importance of each item is determined by
the criterion of above 75% with the rating of four or five on a 5-point Likert scale. Table 4 shows the
results of the 2nd round of Delphi study compared to the previous round.
One indication of the effect of a Delphi experiment is the amount of convergence caused by the
iteration process. In this study, the change in the percentage of participants rating each item four or
five between two rounds is used as an indicator of a move toward consensus among panelists
(Lambert, 2004). Table 5 presents considerable increase of consensus between two rounds.
The panelists also gave 12 comments on the questionnaire to enrich supporting factors: one for
internal support, two for domestic support and six for organisational support. Four comments were
given with no regard to categories. One panelist expressed strong opinion regarding internal support
(1), saying that internal support should be prioritized above all other supporting factors in order to be
recognized as true administrative professional. Under domestic support, one comment was given on
organisational culture (3-1) to strengthen the item. The other comment advised to relate consistent
and proper work schedule to supervisors’ support considering the nature of administrative profession.
For organisational support, two comments demanded to articulate practical and reliable social support
(4). Most of the comments were made for general opinions regarding the questionnaire.
Table 4 The Results of the 2nd Round of Delphi Study (N=15)
Descriptive Statistics
Categories
Questions
Mean SD
1.
Internal
Support
2.
Domestic
Support
3. Organizational Support
Convergence
Tendency
No. of
%
of
Inter- ComPositive Median Mode quartile ments
Answers
Range
1-1.
Self 4.07 0.88 80.00
4 (4)
Preparation
(4.00) (1.13) (66.67)
1-2. Individual
Management
4.13
through Dual
(N/A)
Satisfaction
2-1.
Family
4.60
Support
(4.60)
in Attitude
2-2.
Family
4.13
Support
(4.20)
in Finance
3-1.
Family
Friendly
3.80
Organisational
(3.53)
Culture
0.52 93.33
(N/A) (N/A)
4 (N/A)
4 (5)
4-5 (30
5)
4
4-4
(N/A) (N/A)
0
0.83 93.33
5 (5)
(0.83 (93.33)
5 (5)
4-5 (41
5)
0.74 80.00
4 (4)
(0.78) (80.00)
4 (4)
4-5 (41
5)
0.94 80.00
4 (4)
(1.19) (60.00)
4 (4)
4-4 (31
4)
3-2. Supervisors’ 4.13 0.92 80.00
Support
(N/A) (N/A) (N/A)
4 (N/A)
4/5
4-5
(N/A) (N/A)
1
3-3.
Family 4.33 1.11 86.67
5 (5)
Friendly Policies (4.13) (1.41) (80.00)
5 (5)
4-5 (42
5)
3-4. Coworkers’
Support
4 (4)
3-4 (31
4)
3.73 0.59 66.67
4 (4)
(3.60) (0.74) (60.00)
3-5. Providing
Mentoring
3.60
through
(N/A)
Organisational
Systems
3-6. Consistent
and
4.13
Proper Work
(N/A)
Schedule
4.
Social Support
4-1. Structural
System
0.91 66.67
(N/A) (N/A)
4
(N/A)
4
3-4
(N/A) (N/A)
0
0.74 80.00
(N/A) (N/A)
4
(N/A)
4
4-5
(N/A) (N/A)
1
4.00 1.06 80.00
4 (4)
(3.93) (1.10) (73.33)
4 (4)
4-5 (30
5)
4-2.
Family
3.87 0.83 93.33
4-4 (3Friendly
4 (4)
4 (4)
0
(3.73) (0.96) (73.33)
4)
Public Policies
1) Validity Scale: 1-strongly disagree, 2-disagree, 3-neither disagree nor agree, 4-agree, 5-strongly
agree.
2) ( ) is the result in the previous round.
Table 5 Change in the Percentage of Items Rated with 4 or 5
The 1st Round
The 2nd Round
Rounds
75%
or Less
than
75%
Total
Total
more
75%
more
% of Positive
14(100%) 4(29.6%)
Answers
10(70.4%)
12(100%) 10(83%)
or
Less than 75%
2(17%)
As a result of the final 2nd round, coworkers’ support (3-4) and providing mentoring through
organisational systems (3-5) which reached less of 75 % of positive answers were deleted as
independent supporting factors. However, these two items are absorbed to strengthen organisational
support where coworkers’ support is combined to organisational culture (3-1), and providing
mentoring is combined to family-friendly policies (3-3). Family friendly policies (3-3) and structural
system (4-1), two items with more than one standard deviation, were more articulated as
recommended by panel. Table 6 shows the identified nine supporting factors in four categories in
work and family life balance of administrative professional.
Table 6 Supporting Factors in W ork and Family Life Balance
Categories
Supporting Factors
1. Internal
Support
2. Domestic
Support
3.
Organisatio
nal
Support
1-1. Self preparation for balancing by having a sense of self
1-2. Individual management through dual satisfaction both at work
and home by compartmentalization and valuing perspectives
2-1. Family support in attitude such as family cohesiveness
2-2. Family support in finance such as getting helper or outsourcing
3-1. Family friendly organisational culture including professed and
informal statements of the organisational philosophy, and coworkers’
moral support
3-2. Consistent and proper work schedule under supervisors’ support
3-3. Family friendly policies and benefits such as employersponsored daycare, maternity leave, and providing mentoring through
organisational systems
4.
Social
Support
4-1. Practical and reliable social structural system such as child and
day care systems
4-2. Family friendly public policies
IV. Conclusions and Implications
The study revealed nine supporting factors under four categories in work and family life balance of
administrative professionals: Internal Support, for self preparation and individual management;
Domestic Support, for family support both in attitude and finance; Organisational Support, for family
friendly organisational culture, consistent and proper work schedule, and family friendly policies and
benefits; Social Support, for practical and reliable social structural system, and family friendly public
policies. While all of factors are valuable to administrative professionals, internal and organisational
supports were more highlighted due to the nature of the administrative profession.
Internal support such as self preparation and individual management is the basic factors in work and
family life since many of administrative professionals work relatively in independent ways and take
initiatives of their own tasks.
For organisational support, working mothers in administrative professions value a consistent and
proper work schedule. Proper work schedule is more strongly tied to supervisors’ support because
administrative professional's job is closely interwoven to supervisor. Regarding supervisors' support,
gender issues in the findings are also noted; most of supervisors administrative professionals serve
are male executives who have more difficulties in understanding female subordinates’ multiple
responsibilities in work and life than female counterparts.
While coworkers’ support and mentoring are regarded critical, those factors can be smeared into
organisational support. Meanwhile, there are signs of organisations' change which indicate an
awareness of work and family life policies and practices. Such organisations' change may facilitate
the recruitment and retention of people who juggle multiple roles into these challenging professional
positions. However, the administrative professionals in this study rarely take advantage of any work
and family life policies that may exist at their institutions.
Overall, the administrative professionals are definitely challenged by their work and time they spend
working. However, the majority of them accept their workloads as part of the job. The vast roles and
the work involved in the position are seen as the nature of the job whether participants personally like
it or not. They convey that they have passion for what they do and that they have made a choice to be
an administrative professional.
Conclusions of the study showed that there existed no quick and painless solutions in work and family
life balance but administrative professionals with children can take advantage of various supports to
improve quality of life. The unresolved issues would require fundamental changes in the workplace
and at home.
A particular limitation of this research is that a panel of experts consisted of administrative
professional mothers in 20s and 30s with child or children aged less than 14 years old. The
differences in subgroup composition may have influenced the results of the study and should be
considered limitations to the external validity of the study. Participants are also chosen with no regard
to organisation's structure in a cross-section of industries without presenting the specific industry as
well.
While the unique circumstances for administrative professionals and the ways their positions can lead
to burnout and additional stress, more research needs to be done to explore how these
circumstances contribute to work and life issues of administrative professionals to shed light on the
ways they manage their lives. In addition, the focus on women alone provides a very limited view.
Future research recommendations included conducting a comparative study with fathers who are
administrative professionals, and a longitudinal study focusing on the long-term effects.
References
Bailey, J. M. (2005). Work and Life Balance: A Study of Community College Occupational
Deans. Doctorate Dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing.
Bailyn, L., Drago, R., & Kochan, T. A. (2001). Integrating W ork and Family Life: A Holistic
Approach, A Report of the Sloan W ork-Family Polic y Network. MIT Sloan School of
Management. Retrieved November 24, 2010, from http://lsir.la.psu.edu/workfam
Bianchi, S. M. (2000). Maternal Employment and Time with Children: Dramatic Change or
Surprising Continuity? Demography, 37 (4), 401-414.
Benedict, R., Taylor, C. A. (1995). Managing the Overlap or W ork and Family: A Shared
Responsibility. CUPA Journal, 1-9.
Braun Padulo, M. K. (2001). The Balancing Act: W ork Environment Issues for W omen
with Children in Student Affairs. Dissertation Abstracts International, 62 (3), 938.
(UMI No. 3007296).
Bui, L. S. (1999). Mothers in Public Relations: How are They Balancing Career and
Family? Public Relations Quarterly, 44 (2), 23-26.
Choi, Y. K. (2008). W orking Mothers' Share of the Household is Twice as Large as Her
Husbands’. Seoul Newspaper, Retrieved from
http://www.seoul.co.kr/news/newsView.php?id=20080115015016&spage=1 on November 1,
2010.
Cooke, R. A., & Rousseau, D. M. (1984). Stress and Strain from Family Roles and W ork
Role Expectations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 252-260.
Cross, K. A. (2004). Family Business Consultation. Doctorate Dissertation, Purdue
University, W est Lafayette.
CPA Practice Management Forum (2007). SHRM Survey Shows Employees and
Employers Struggle with Equitable Application of FMLA. 3 (3), 17-22.
Delbecq, A. L., Van de Ven, A. H., & Gustafson, D. H. (1975). Group Techniques for
Program Planning: A Guide to Nominal Group and Delphi Processes, Glenview,
IL: Scott, Foresman & Company.
Eggers, R. M., Jones, C. M. (1998). Practical Considerations for Conducting Delphi
Studies. Educational Research Quarterly, 21, 52-66.
Galinsk y, E., Aumann, K. & Bond, J. T. (2009). 2008 National Study of the Changing
Workforce, New York:Families and W ork Institute.
Galinsk y, E., Stein, P. J. (1990). The Impact of Human Resource Policies on Employees:
Balancing W ork/Family life. Journal of Family Issue, 11 (4), 368-383.
Galinsk y, E. (1999). Ask the Children: What America's Children Really Think about
Working Parents, New York: W illiam Morrow and Company.
Greenhaus, J. H., Beutell, N. J. (1985). Sources of Conflict between W ork and Family
Roles. Academy of Management Review, 10, 76-88.
Haddock, S. A., Zimmerman, T. S., Scott, J., & Current, L. R. (2001). Ten Adaptive
Strategies for Family and W ork Balance: Advice from Successful Families.
Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 27 (4), 445-458.
Helmer, O. (1983). Looking forward, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Heo, Y. J. (2008). The Development of Thematic Areas, Sub-areas and Agricultural
literacy. Doctorate Dissertation, Seoul National University, Seoul.
Hochschild, A. (1997). The Time Bind: When Work Becomes Home and Home Becomes
Work, New York: Henry Holt & Co.
Hochschild, A. (2003). The Commercialization of Intimate Life: Note from Home and Work,
Berkeley & Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.
Hochschild, A., Machung, A. (1989). The Second Shift: Working Parents and the
Revolution at Home, New York: Avon Books.
HR Focus, SHRM Surveys Cover W orkplace Demographics, Global Leadership, 79 (8), 9.
Hughes, D., & Galinsk y, E. (1988). Balancing Work and Family Lives: Research and
Corporate Applications, In A.E. Gottfried & A. Q. Gottfried (Eds.), Maternal
employment and children's development, New York: Plenum., pp.233-268.
IAAP, Retrieved February 9, 2011, from http://www.iaap.hq.or
Jeong, Y. (2006). A Study on Analysis of Facilitating Factors and Program Development
for W ork-family Balance. Korean Home Management Research, 24 (6), 131-145.
Kim, S. N. (2009). The Development of Instrument for Diagnosing the Employability of
University Students. Doctorate Dissertation, Seoul National University, Seoul.
Korea Statistical Year Book. Retrieved from http://www.nso.go.kr on February 15, 2010.
Kossek, E. (2003). Telecommuting, In M. Pitt-Catsouphes & E. Kossek (Eds.). Sloan
W ork and Family Research Network Resources for Teaching: W ork and Family
Encyclopedia retrieved from
http://wfnetwork.bc.edu/encyclopedia_entry.php?id=258&area=All on February 5, 2010.
Lambert, D. (2004). Determining Research Needs in North American Christian Youth
Ministry: A Delphi Study. Journal of Youth Ministry, 3 (1), 65-95.
Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A Quantitative Approach to Content Validity. Personnel
Psychology, 28 (4), 563-575.
Lee, G. N. (2008). The Development of College Major Selection Program Model for High
School Students. Doctorate Dissertation, Seoul National University, Seoul.
Linstone, H., & Turoff, M. (1975). The Delphi method. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
McCune, J. (2005). Imbalance Happens. OfficePRO, June/July, 22-27.
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education,
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Murry, Jr. J. W ., Hammons, J. O. (1995). Delphi: A Versatile Methodology for Conduction
Qualitative Research. The Review of Higher Education, 18 (4), 423-436.
Nobbe, J., & Manning, S. (1997). Issues for W omen in Student Affairs with Children.
NASPA Journal, 34, 101-111.
O'Driscoll, M. P., Ilgen, D. R., & Hildreth, K. (1992). Time Devoted to Job and Off-job
Activities, Inter-role Conflict, and Affective Experiences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77,
272-279.
Parsons, T. (1951). The Social System. New York, Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc.
Rapoport, R., Bailyn, L., Fletcher, J. K., & Pruitt, B. H. (2002). Beyond Work-family
Balance: Advancing Gender Equity and Workplace Performance, San Francisco: JosseyBass.
Rayman, P. M. (2001). Beyond the Bottom Line: The Search for Dignity at Work, New
York:Palgrave.
Repetti, R. L., Matthews, K. A., & W aldron, I. (1989). Employment and W omen's Health:
Effects of Paid Employment on W omen's Mental and Physical Health. American
Psychologist, 44 (11), 1394-1401.
Schor, J. B. (1992). The Overworked American: The Unexpected Decline of Leisure, New
York: Basic Books.
Sim, M. O. (2006). The Development of a Competency Model for Korean Extension
Professionals. Doctorate Dissertation, Seoul National University, Seoul.
Stone Fish, L., & Busby, D. M. (1996). The Delphi method. In D. H. Sprenkle, & S. M.
Moon (Eds.), Research Methods in Family Therapy, New York: The Guilford
Press, pp.469-482.
Swiss, D. J. (1989). Good Worker or Good Parent; The Conflict between Policy and
Practice, In M. G. Mackavey & R. J. Levin (Eds.), Shared Purpose: Working Together to
Build Strong Families and High-performance Companies. New York: American Management
Association.
Swiss, D. J., & W alker, J. P. (1993). Women and the Work/family Dilemma: How Today's
Professional Women are Finding Solutions, New York: John W iley & Sons, Inc.
Tigelaar, D. E., Dolmans, D. H., W olfhagen, I. H., & Van Der Vleuten, C. P. (2004). The
Development and Validation of a Framework for Teaching Competencies in
Higher Education. Higher Education, 48, 253-268.
Ulschak, F. L. (1983), Human resource development: The theory and practice of need
assessment, Reston, VI: Reston Publishing Company.
Voydanoff, P.(1987), Work and Family Life, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
W arren, J. A., & Johnson, P. J. (1995). The Impact of W orkplace Support on W ork-family
Role Strain. Family Relations, 44, 163-169.
W illiams, J. (1999). Unbending Gender: Why Work and Family Conflict and What to Do
about It, New York: Oxford University Press.