Lauren D. Murphy

Research on commuting to work and its potential consequences for employee strain and wellbeing has accumulated across various disciplines. However, this has led to a narrow research scope with wide methodological variability. An integration of this literature is needed to understand the breadth of the commuting experience and interpret heterogeneous findings. Extending the transactional stress model, we propose that commuting is a demand that can have both negative and positive effects on outcomes through commuting appraisals. We present a systematic review (k = 109 studies) and meta-analysis (k = 39 studies) of these relationships. Our systematic review finds partial support for our hypotheses, and our meta-analysis suggests that objective commuting demands are positively associated with strain outcomes (r ̅_xy = .089; especially perceived stress, r ̅_xy = .153), but unrelated to wellbeing outcomes. Subjective commuting appraisals are unrelated to strain or wellbeing outcomes. We conclude with recommendations for methodological improvements and implications for research and practice. Plain language summary: Commuting is a nearly ubiquitous part of contemporary employment. Over the last several decades, empirical research on commuting has accumulated across various disciplines. Our systematic review and meta-analysis take stock of relationships regarding commuting demands, appraisals of commuting, and strainand wellbeing-related outcomes. The results of the qualitative review indicate that there are both positive and negative implications of commuting. Commuting demands are related to favorable and unfavorable appraisals, and commuting demands are also related to both strain and wellbeing outcomes. However, the result of our quantitative meta-analysis suggests that time spent commuting is positively associated with strain outcomes, but unrelated to wellbeing outcomes. Subjective commuting appraisals are unrelated to strain and wellbeing outcomes. We outline implications for future research (e.g., commuting's role in boundary management), highlight methodological challenges (e.g., variability in reporting), and provide recommendations for practice (e.g., offer resources that mitigate consequences of commuting).

Research on commuting to and from work and its potential consequences for employee strain and wellbeing has accumulated across various disciplines. However, this has led to a narrow research scope with wide methodological variability. An integration of this literature is needed to understand the breadth of the commuting experience and interpret heterogeneous findings. Drawing upon and extending the transactional stress model, we propose that commuting is a demand that can have both negative and positive effects on outcomes through commuting appraisals. We present a systematic review (i.e., based on k = 109 studies) and meta-analysis (i.e., based on k = 39 studies) of these relationships. Our systematic review finds partial support for our hypotheses. Supplementing this, our meta-analysis suggests that objective commuting demands (i.e., time spent commuting to work) are positively associated with strain outcomes (rxy = .089; especially perceived stress, rxy = .153), but unrelated to wellbeing outcomes. Subjective commuting appraisals are unrelated to strain or wellbeing outcomes. We conclude with recommendations for methodological improvements and implications for research and practice.

Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, work and life has became more blended as more workers have shifted to a telework context. Due to these notable changes in work and life, it is important to consider how supervisors are supporting their employees and how employees feel supported regarding their nonwork responsibilities. Here, we qualitatively and quantitatively assessed how well traditional conceptualizations of family-supportive supervisor behaviors (FSSB) align with the telework context. Results from interviews with supervisors and subordinates suggest that the traditional FSSB framework is relevant to the telework context, but that the actual expression of FSSB is somewhat different and unique when supervisors and subordinates work remotely. We followed up this qualitative investigation with a cross-sectional, online survey. Survey results also suggested that the traditional FSSB conceptualization holds within the telework context. Overall, based on our mixed methods, two-study report, we provide preliminary evidence that FSSB in a telework context are consistent with traditional conceptualizations (i.e. align with traditional dimensions) but the actual engagement in and reception of these behaviors may be different (i.e. consist of nuanced behavioral expressions).

Boundary management refers to the ways that individuals create, maintain, and manage demarcations between work and personal life. Research regarding boundary management provides multi-disciplinary value across the organizational sciences, including work-family and work-nonwork research, but is hindered by terminological confusion and construct proliferation. We present a systematic review of work-nonwork boundary management scales, and we organize the scales into a measurement taxonomy that aligns scale items with conceptual definitions of boundary management constructs. We found evidence of misalignment between conceptualizations and operationalizations of the identified scales (n = 91), and we also find little evidence for convergent and discriminant validity among scales. Findings suggest a need to strengthen the construct validity of relevant boundary management scales, which can be guided by the proposed measurement taxonomy.

Summary: Work–family research has blossomed over the past several decades but mostly remains focused on traditional couples and heteronormative individuals. However, research suggests that LGBTQ+ employees face unique challenges, such as discrimination and stigma, that impact their work–family interface in ways that current work–family research may not be fully capturing. We propose a review and synthesis that summarize current LGBTQ+ and work–family literature with four primary goals: (1) identify predictors and outcomes of the work–family interface for LGBTQ+ employees, (2) integrate empirical findings and current theory into a recently developed framework to delineate our understanding of LGBTQ+ work–family experiences, (3) provide direction for future research, and (4) provide recommendations on translating the current findings into practice. Our results identify k = 74 studies that cover the work–family interface and LGBTQ+ individuals. This comprehensive and integrated review will help inform researchers on how to best address unique research questions for LGBTQ+ employees and provide employers with empirical evidence as they develop inclusive policies, cultures, and workforces.

Work-family research has blossomed over the past several decades but mostly remains focused on traditional couples and heteronormative individuals. However, research suggests that LGBTQ+ employees face unique challenges, such as discrimination and stigma, that impact their work-family interface in ways that current work-family research may not be fully capturing. We propose a review and synthesis that summarizes current LGBTQ+ and work-family literature with four primary goals: (1) identify predictors and outcomes of the work-family interface for LGBTQ+ employees, (2) integrate empirical findings and current theory into a recently developed framework to delineate our understanding of LGBTQ+ work-family experiences, (3) provide direction for future research, and (4) provide recommendations on translating the current findings into practice. Our results identify k = 74 studies that cover the work-family interface and LGBTQ+ individuals. This comprehensive and integrated review will help inform researchers on how to best address unique research questions for LGBTQ+ employees and provide employers with empirical evidence as they develop inclusive policies, cultures, and workforces.

Feeding infants breastmilk (both directly and via pumping) is a pro-health behavior that has well-documented benefits for the mother and child. Although there are many factors that impact a mother’s decision to initiate and continue breastfeeding (e.g., family norms or health constraints), barriers to lactation at work in the postpartum period consistently predict breastfeeding discontinuation. In efforts to support women’s return to work postpartum and their lactation decisions, there are many mandates in the United States across the federal and state levels that provide protection and benefits for working women who are lactating. However, it is currently unclear how these mandates align with best practices of providing support to working mothers identified via organizational research. This Article reviews the federal and state mandates available to understand (1) what benefits/protections are offered, (2) how these benefits align with evidence-based recommendations for supporting lactating women, and (3) where lactating employees are being successfully supported or require additional support.