Work-life balance – Managing the interface between family and working life

Introduction

The concept of work-life balance and discussions around it have long been linked to discussions about worker's wellbeing and quality of life. However, the COVID-19 pandemic made it even clearer that poor work-life balance is not just a personal or lifestyle issue — it is a significant psychosocial risk with direct implications for occupational safety and health (OSH). The widespread shift to remote work blurred the boundaries between professional and personal life, contributing to increased stress, fatigue, and burnout among workers. At the same time, broader societal changes — including increasing awareness of mental health, shifting values around work and leisure, and the growing demand for flexibility — have further highlighted the importance of addressing work-life balance as an organisational issue. These trends have been amplified by technological advancements and globalisation, which have transformed work dynamics by offering more autonomy over schedules^[1] while also making it more difficult for many workers to fully disconnect^[2].  

The aim of this article is to define the nature, causes and consequences of poor work-life balance, explaining the impact of recent societal changes and outline some strategies used in workplaces to address and promote work-life balance.

What does “work-life balance" mean?

The concept of work–life balance is widely used in research, policy and business, as well as in daily life. The European Parliament refers to it as the reconciliation of professional, private and family life^[3]. Others define it as the level of prioritisation given to and time spend for an individual's work and personal life^[4][5]. However, work life balance is a broad and complex phenomenon, that lacks a universal definition^{[6] [7]}. The terminology and interpretations used in academic literature differ, and there is no clear consensus on how the concept should be expressed^[8].

The term 'work-life balance' is often used interchangeably with the related concept of 'work–family balance'^[8]. However, work-life balance is broader and more inclusive, encompassing not only family responsibilities, but also other personal commitments, such as community involvement, leisure activities, travel and education^{[8] [9]}. Therefore, work–life balance is generally relevant to all workers who wish to reconcile their personal interests and commitments with their work^[9]. Work-family balance is defined more narrowly, focusing on the degree to which an individual is equally involved and satisfied with both work and family roles. That is, work-family balance includes satisfaction and good functionality at work, as well as at home with a minimum of role conflicts^[10].

Work-life balance refers to the ability to manage both work and personal life roles in a way that is both effectively and harmoniously. In contrast, work-life conflict arises when the demands of work and personal life are incompatible, making it difficult to meet responsibilities in either domain. 

A specific form of work-life conflict is work-family conflict^[11], which can be further subdivided into two categories^[12]: 

• Work-to-family conflict occurs when work demands interfere with family life, for example working late or on weekends and missing important family events.
• Family-to-work conflict occurs when family demands interfere with work performance, for example leaving work early to care for a sick child or being distracted on the job by family issues.

Several authors conceptualise work-life balance as a psychological construct centred on achieving satisfaction across multiple domains. Kirchmeyer, for example, defines it as 'achieving satisfying experiences in all life domains', which necessitates the efficient allocation of personal resources, such as time, energy and commitment, across these areas^[9].

Greenhaus and colleagues^[7] suggest that work-life balance is defined by three key, and interconnected, components: firstly, “time balance" which refers to equal time being given to both work and non-work roles; secondly, “involvement balance" which refers to equal levels of psychological involvement in both roles; and finally, “satisfaction balance" which refers to experiencing similar levels of satisfaction from work and personal life. Therefore, in order to achieve a work-life balance these components should be considered^[7]. When an imbalance or interference occurs between work and or non-work roles for an individual this can result in conflict and diminished well-being.

However, the term 'work-life balance' continues to be the subject of ongoing debate particularly with regard to its underlying assumptions^{[13] [14]}. Criticisms have been formulated against the limited conceptualisation of the ‘work’ and ‘life’ domains. Life should not only encompass caring for dependent children, but also extend beyond family to include friendships, community engagement and personal interests. Similarly, the definition of 'work' is being re-evaluated to encompass not only traditional employment, but also non-standard forms such as self-employment and platform work^{[13] [15]}. As 'balance' may imply unrealistic expectations regarding the allocation of time and effort across different roles, some authors have proposed alternative terms such as 'work-life integration' or 'work-life harmony', which promote a more holistic and flexible approach. For instance, Timms et al.^[16] conceptualise work–life balance in terms of complementarity rather than strict compatibility. They suggest that engaging in multiple roles can enhance an individual's overall well-being^[16].

Other authors argue that the concepts of 'work-life balance' and 'work-life conflict' are inadequate for addressing the complexities of contemporary flexible working arrangements and digitalisation, which are making work and personal life increasingly interconnected^[17]. Rather than strictly separating the two, both domains should be managed in a way that achieves a sense of fulfilment in both work and personal life. Known as work-life blending, it can be understood as ‘the permeability and dissolution of boundaries between the domains of work and non-work, resulting in the integration and closeness of the domains^[17].

Despite ongoing debates, work-life balance remains a key concept in academic research, organisational policy and wider societal discussions, emphasising the interdependence of work and other life areas. Enabling a better work-life balance for workers throughout their lives is a key EU policy goal, as it is central to ensuring that work is sustainable for all. Principle 9 of the European Pillar of Social Rights^[18] emphasises that parents and people with caring responsibilities have the right to suitable leave, flexible working arrangements, and access to care services, promoting work-life balance. Directive 2019/1158/EU on work-life balance^[19] introduced extended parental leave, carers' leave and flexible working arrangements[^20].

Data on work-life balance and work-life conflict

The European Working Conditions Telephone Survey (EWCTS 2021)^[21] gathered data on work–life balance by asking respondents how well their working hours fitted in with their family or social commitments outside work. The results show that 81% of people across the EU reported that their working hours fit well or very well with their family or social commitments, with percentages ranging from 70% in Greece to 91% in the Netherlands. A higher proportion of women (82%) than men (80%) reported a good fit between their working and private lives. The data also show that people working from home exclusively or in combination with other locations enjoyed a better work-life balance than those working in other locations^[21]. At a sectoral level, the transport sector had the largest proportion of workers reporting a poor work-life balance (31%). Generally, the longer the paid working hours, the larger the proportion of people who reported a poor work-life balance. Only one in ten people working up to 20 hours per week reported a poor work-life balance, compared with one in three of those working 48 hours per week or more^[21]. 

However, difficulties in balancing work and private life are common, considering the fact that most people in employment spend a substantial number of hours at work. Inevitably, professional and personal lives influence each other, sometimes resulting in conflicts. Such work-life conflicts can arise regardless of how many hours someone spends at work. Examples include worrying about work outside of working hours or indicating that work prevents spending time with family. Data on these work-life conflict aspects are being gathered through the Living, working and COVID-19 e-survey launched by Eurofound in 2020 at the beginning of the pandemic^[22]. It has been organised in several rounds over the following years to track the impact of the pandemic on people's lives and work. The results show that, in 2020, 19% of workers said that work prevented them from spending time with their family. By 2024, this figure had risen to 30%^[23], highlighting a rise in work-life conflicts while remote working became less prevalent.

Theoretical concepts of the work-life interface

Since the late 1980s, a lot of theoretical concepts emerged that described the interaction between work and private life. The most commonly used theoretical concepts include^{[8] [24] [25]}

• The Conservation of Resources theory assumes that individuals try to gain and protect valuable resources – such as time and energy – and are looking to protect themselves against the depletion of these resources.
• Spill-over concepts suppose that experiences made in one area may have an impact on experiences and behaviour within the other area and that there is an ‘extension’ of experiences from the sphere of work to non-work. The spill-over may be characterised as positive or negative.
• The Conflict Theory posits that the fulfilment and achievement in one aspect of life result in sacrifice in the other aspect.
• The Segmentation Theory suggests that work and family domains do not affect one another and are separate life domains.
• The Enrichment Theory highlights the benefits of juggling multiple roles. It suggests that skills, experiences, or support gained in one area – such as work – can improve quality of life in another – such as parenting.
• The concept of Exhaustion of Resources declares that resources depleted for one area are not available for the other area anymore. Both areas therefore compete for resources. When one area uses up too many resources, there’s less left for the other, which can lead to conflict. 

According to Hupke (2010)^[26] there is empirical evidence for all of these concepts, but it depends on the individual situation and resources which one may be applicable. 

Antecedents and outcomes of work-life conflict

This section outlines the key antecedents of work-life conflict concerning both work and private life domains followed by a discussion of the associated health outcomes. 

The antecedents can be situated in three broad areas: the individual, the family, and the work environment^[27].

Individual antecedents 

A substantial body of empirical evidence has identified numerous demographic characteristics that have been observed to predict work-life conflict including gender, age, family status, the age of youngest child, and job type^[27].

Family-related antecedents

Several family-related variables have been identified in the scientific literature as antecedents of family-to-work conflict, as opposed to work-to-family conflict, including childcare and household chores, the amount of time spent and involvement with one’s family, martial tension, and the number and age of children^[27].

Work-related antecedents

Work-related factors primarily have been found to predict work-to-family conflict, as opposed to family-to-work conflict. Psychosocial risks that have been found to be related to higher levels of work-to-family conflict include work demands or overload, work-role conflict, work–role ambiguity, and job insecurity^[27]. One of the most consistently identified predictors of work-to-family conflict is the number of working hours; a higher number of hours worked predicts higher levels of work-to-family conflict^[28] [29]. 

Digitalisation and greater flexibility in terms of working hours and location are assumed to improve work-life balance[30]. Using digital devices (such as smartphones, laptops and desktop computers) to work outside of the office can facilitate a better work-life balance. Workers report shorter commuting times, greater autonomy over their working hours, increased flexibility, improved productivity and an enhanced overall work-life balance^[30]. 

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the widespread use of digital solutions and remote working meant that work and personal life became increasingly intertwined^[31]. This highlighted the need to adapt to this new reality and ensure that workers' work-life balance was maintained.

In that respect the pandemic also showed the fact that digitalisation can blur the lines between work and personal life, making it difficult to disconnect from work^[31] [32]. Using digital tools for work makes constant online availability possible^[30], which may result in longer working hours by inducing workers to extend their working day. Constant connectivity, combined with high job demands and the expectation that workers are always available, can negatively affect work-life balance and workers' physical and mental health and well-being^[33].

Outcomes of work-life conflict

Similar to the antecedents of work-life conflict, the relevant outcomes can be divided into those that impact the individual, the family and concern work. The current section aims to give a brief overview of the key findings from the scientific literature.

Individual level outcomes

Work-life conflict is often viewed in the literature as a stressor that, together with other stressors, has the potential to have a detrimental impact on the health and safety of workers. Research has consistently shown that conflict between the work and family domains has several significant adverse effects on individuals, particularly in terms of physical and mental health. Studies have linked work-life conflict to a wide range of negative outcomes, including poorer mental and physical health, lower life satisfaction, increased stress, greater emotional exhaustion, reduced motivation, less physical activity, a higher likeliness to engage in problem drinking, elevated anxiety and depression levels, poor appetite, higher fatigue, and a decline in both the quantity and quality of personal time^{[34] [35] [36] [37] [38]}.

Family level outcomes

Research demonstrates that work-family conflict also affects outcomes related to the family. In general, work-family conflict has been found to be associated with lower family satisfaction^[38], increased family-related absenteeism and tardiness, decreased performance in the family role, increased parenting overload^[27].  A literature review by Reimann et al.^[39] found in addition to these consequences that work-family conflict adversely affected children’s well-being and mental health. 

Work level outcomes

Work-life conflict has been demonstrated to be linked to a number of work-related outcomes, including decreased affective commitment, decreased job satisfaction, decreased work performance, higher rates of absenteeism, increased staff turnover, intention to leave the organisation, less organisational commitment, lower employee involvement^{[36] [27] [38] [40]}.

Gender aspects in relation to work-life balance

Demographic change and labour market influence the work and family life of Europeans. Shifts in the roles of men and women at home, as well as changing patterns of family formation impact work-life conflicts. However, household chores like cooking and cleaning are usually not shared equally between men and women and most of this unpaid work is still done by women^{[21] [41]}. Many more women than men adapt their working life in relation to their private responsibilities; they work part-time, for instance. Nevertheless, work-life balance is an issue for women, as well as men^[42].

According to Gregory and Milner^[43], work-life balance models traditionally focused on the perspective of female employment. They state that a holistic concept is more likely to activate workplace support and induce wider organisational change, than policies exclusively oriented on women or those with childcare responsibilities. A broader approach should be adopted that considers the perspectives of both men and women, balancing the demands of paid employment with those of personal and family life. Emslie and Hunt^[42] also highlight the need for gender-neutral models of work-life balance since they see gender as a “dynamic set of socially constructed relationships, rather than as a fixed and binary category"^[42].

Approaches to promote work-life balance

Family-friendly policies involve all actions that support the compatibility of work and family/ private life. These measures are aimed at balancing choices between private and working obligations and providing appropriate resources and equal opportunities for women and men in working life. The following section will discuss what strategies, actions and policies employers can implement to promote work-life balance; followed by a discussion of what workers themselves can do to manage their own work-life balance.

What can employers do to address work-life conflict

Research suggests that the impact of formal policies on improving the work–family interface is limited compared to the influence of informal support. Simply implementing policies 'on the books' is unlikely to significantly improve work-life balance. More effective strategies include enriching jobs through increased autonomy, job redesign and participative management, and fostering a workplace culture that truly supports family-friendly values^[44]. To improve work-life balance, employers need to focus on strategies like providing flexibility around work, increasing workers' sense of control and creating a more supportive work environment. 

Supportive managers and work environments

Organisational support, including support from the workplace, supervisors and co-workers, has been identified as an important factor in shaping workers’ expectations and their ability to achieve work-life balance. Such support reinforces job motivation and commitment, helping workers to manage their resources more effectively and reduce conflict between their professional and personal lives^[41]. Supervisors can help their workers balance work and non-work roles by offering emotional and instrumental support and setting an example. Therefore, managers should be trained (e.g. on communication, conflict management, time management and organisational skills, and how to give and receive feedback), as well as being provided with the necessary tools to manage people (e.g. family-friendly policies).

To make the work environment more supportive, employers should consult with their workers to identify appropriate measures. Not all supportive policies are feasible and practical in every context. 

Workers should be informed about family-friendly policies and how to access them. It is vital that workers feel secure that their careers are not impacted if they decide to take advantage of supportive policies. 

Job autonomy

Employers should improve human resources development within their organisation and promote greater autonomy by enabling workers to make decisions about how to respond to demands^[45]. Job autonomy refers to the extent to which workers can exercise discretion in how they perform their job^[46]. These decisions may relate to the quantity of work, how work is carried out, and when tasks are completed^[47]. More job autonomy can help individuals in achieving their preferred level of work-life balance. Workers who have better control over their work can manage their time well and complete their professional and personal commitments more efficiently^[48][41].

Flexible work arrangements

If possible, employers should give their workers more flexibility over when and where they work. Workers need to meet job demands, but organisations should be flexible on how work is arranged. The criteria under which these flexible arrangements can be used, should be mutually agreed upon and be transparent. The process for changing duration or location of work should be as flexible as possible. However, a potential drawback of flexible work and telework is that the boundaries between work and personal life become blurred. To prevent this, employers and workers must establish clear expectations and guidelines. Open communication and effective coordination are key to maintaining these boundaries^[47]. 

It is very difficult to implement flexible work arrangements in organisations where the focus is on hours rather than output, and on presence rather than performance. However, shifting the focus to results must be done carefully. While rewarding output rather than hours can support flexibility, it should not lead to unrealistic expectations or pressure to constantly deliver more and better. Organisations should promote a healthy work culture that values sustainable productivity and respects personal time. This includes publicly recognising those who successfully balance work and non-work domains, rather than those who work excessive hours or are always available.

Employers should give workers the right to refuse overtime work and exercise caution when promoting individuals based solely on availability or long working hours.

Managing workload

Employers need to examine workloads within their organisations. If they find that certain workers are consistently working long hours, they should aim to understand why (e.g. workload, career ambitions, unbalanced and unrealistic work expectations, poor planning, too many priorities, lack of tools and/or training to do the job efficiently, poor management, culture focused on hours instead of output) and how workloads can be adjusted to become more reasonable.

What can workers do to manage work-life conflict

Measures taken on organisational level are crucial to avoid a work-life conflict. There is no prospect of success when workers try to change their individual approach, while at organisational level circumstances do not allow for a healthy work-life balance. 

However, in support to organisational measures, workers might benefit from specific measures such as time management training offered at the workplace. 

The separation of working time from personal time is an important issue of time management. To put it into practice, it is important to be informed about and make use of flexible working arrangements. The intention is to increase self-efficacy by controlling one’s working hours to avoid overworking and creating clearer boundaries between work and home (such as putting away laptop or switching off (business) cell phone).