Ahuja, Manju

Sarker, Saonee

Sarker, Suprateek

LSE Research Online

The	work–life	conflicts	of	globally	distributed	softwaredevelopersConsider	the	words	of	a	senior	manager	in	a	global	IT	company:“I	think	our	company	historically	has	rewarded	people	who	are	very	technically	competent	…Those	people	aren’talways	the	best	people-managers….We	need	people	who	are	leaders,	who	…	set	realistic	priorities	and	understandyou	are	going	to	be	most	effective	as	an	employee	when	you	achieve	a	good	WLB	[work-life	balance]…”The	above	quote	emphasizes	a	crucial	aspect	of	today’s	organizational	life:	that	of	work-life	balance	(WLB).		As	weexplored	research	possibilities	with	the	company,	a	manager	directly	said:	“if	you	want	to	study	a	real	problem	that	isplaguing	globally	distributed	software	development	teams,	why	don’t	you	study	work-life	balance	and	help	us	findsome	real	solutions	to	achieve	it?”We	had	not	considered	the	importance	of	WLB	in	globally	distributed	organizations,	but	the	concept	soundedintriguing,	the	challenge	was	real,	and	since	we	were	engaged	scholars,	it	seemed	like	an	opportunity	that	we	couldnot	miss.	Thus	started	our	journey	into	the	topic,	which	led	us	through	many	countries	ranging	from	“Eastern”	nationslike	South	Korea,	China,	and	India	to	the	“Western”	nations	of	Denmark,	Finland,	UK,	France,	and	the	United	States,with	the	help	of	generous	contributions	from	the	aforementioned	global	IT	company	as	well	as	the	National	ScienceFoundation	in	the	US.Being	relatively	new	to	the	notion	of	WLB,	particularly	its	application	to	globally	distributed	IT	development,	we	beganby	taking	stock	of	the	organizational	literature	on	the	topic	and	to	assess	whether	the	strategies	andrecommendations	held	relevance	for	globally	distributed	software	development	companies	and	workforce.We	triangulated	this	assessment	with	organizational	realities	by	continuing	our	conversations	with	companies	tounderstand	what	WLB	meant	for	them,	practices	they	had	in	place,	and	how	these	practices	affected	employeemorale	and	performance.	It	is	worth	mentioning	that	distributed	IT	work	brought	up	several	issues	that	had	not	beenencountered	by	researchers	studying	traditional	settings.Our	initial	results	from	qualitative	and	quantitative	data	across	multiple	countries	led	us	to	conclude	that	the	definitionof	WLB	was	not	a	universal	one,	and	that	it	varied	not	just	among	countries,	but	between	individuals.	Three	differentperspectives	emerge	on	WLB:	compartmentalized,	overlapping,	and	encompassing.LSE Business Review: The work–life conflicts of globally distributed software developers Page 1 of 3		Date originally posted: 2018-04-17Permalink: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessreview/2018/04/17/the-work-life-conflicts-of-globally-distributed-software-developers/Blog homepage: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessreview/Individuals	subscribing	to	the	compartmentalized	view	prefer	a	total	separation	of	work	and	personal	life	andregarded	any	spillover	of	work	into	personal	life	as	undesirable	or	even	unacceptable.	Those	believing	in	anoverlapping	perspective	believe	that	a	clean	separation	of	work	and	personal	life	domains	is	neither	feasible	nornecessary.	These	individuals	assume	that	although	the	two	domains	may	have	“physical	and	temporal	boundaries,”there	are	“emotional	and	behavioural”	overlaps	between	the	two,	and	that	this	overlap	leads	to	each	domain	affectingthe	other	in	positive	or	negative	ways.Finally,	those	subscribing	to	the	encompassing	view	believe	that	the	entirety	of	an	individual’s	life	is	embedded	withinhis/her	work	domain,	and	any	success	in	the	work	domain	equates	to	success	in	the	personal	life	domain.	Given	thedivergent	perspectives	on	WLB	amongst	employees,	it	is	no	surprise	that	often	a	single	practice	adopted	byorganizations,	say,	work-life	integration,	to	address	work-life	balance	has	typically	not	been	successful	in	eitherraising	morale	or	increasing	productivity.	Our	take-away	from	these	findings	was	that	managing	the	work-life	balanceof	employees	needs	a	more	nuanced	approach	that	is	tailored	to	the	individual’s	view	about	work	and	life.How	does	an	organization	move	forward	toward	developing	such	strategies,	especially	in	globally	distributedsoftware	development	work?	Wouldn’t	one	first	need	to	know	what	causes	poor	work-life	balance	(or	work-lifeconflict)	in	this	type	of	work,	which	is	characterized	by	follow-the-sun	approaches	to	work,	complex	coordination	andcommunication,	fluctuations	in	software	requirements,	challenging	interactions	with	clients,	agile	methodology,	etc.?So	we	investigated	factors	that	affected	WLB	in	this	context.We	found	that	our	data	challenged	many	existing	myths.	Chief	among	these	is	that	flexibility	of	work	hours,	usuallytouted	as	the	most	popularly	used	strategy	by	organizations	to	address	work-life	conflict	not	only	does	little	tomitigate	work-conflict,	but	actually	increases	it.	When	given	flextime,	employees	feel	the	stress	of	not	having	a	setschedule	and	an	ability	to	commit	to	personal	events	in	advance.	They	perceive	all	of	their	time	to	be	owned	by	theorganization,	thereby	adding	to	emotional	conflict.Another	surprising	result	was	the	effect	of	the	use	of	agile	methodology	in	developing	software,	often	viewed	as	the“magic	bullet”	in	globally	distributed	software	development.	While	this	“light-documentation”	methodology	can	makethe	processes	of	software	development	less	cumbersome,	the	challenges	of	organizing	daily	SCRUM	meetingsamong	members	separated	by	significant	time-zone	differences,	the	incredibly	fast	speed/acceleration	associatedwith	30-day	sprints,	and	burdens	of	weekly	burn-down	charts	adds	to	(rather	than	reduces)	work-life	conflict.The	ultimate	goal	in	this	journey	was	to	provide	guidance	to	organizations	on	how	to	develop	strategies	that	mighthelp	mitigate	the	challenges	highlighted	above.	Underscoring	the	importance	of	doing	so	was	the	finding	that	lowWLB	tends	to	increase	turnover.	While	recognizing	the	difficulty	of	developing	strategies	for	each	individualemployee,	we	believe	that	certain	overall	strategies	that	compensates	for	the	differences	in	perceptions	surroundingwork-life	balance	can	be	helpful.	These	include	additional	compensation	(e.g.,	four	days	off	after	a	four-month	longproject),	separation	(no-work	weekends	and	evenings),	and	integration	(helping	individuals	seamlessly	blend	workand	life	by	providing	life-related	facilities	and	activities	within	the	work	environment.Furthermore,	while	organizations	must	pay	heed	to	the	undesirable	impacts	of	imbalance,	and	continually	strive	tomonitor	and	reduce	these	effects,	they	must	also	keep	in	mind	that		forcing	a	balance	with	rigid	policies	can	becounterproductive,	because	the	unintended	consequence	of	such	policies	is	often	even	more	imbalance	and	stress.A	process-based	dynamic	approach	that	is	sensitive	to	the	changing	tensions	and	is	based	on	an	empatheticunderstanding	of	an	employee’s	situations	holds	more	promise.	In	the	end,	what	really	matters	is	the	degree	to	whichthe	organizational	culture	remains	true	to	the	spirit	of	the	WLB	concept,	because	attaining	the	ideal	of	balance	mayalways	remain	an	elusive	dream.♣♣♣Notes:This	blog	post	is	based	on	the	authors’	papers	Work–Life	Conflict	of	Globally	Distributed	Software	DevelopmentPersonnel:	An	Empirical	Investigation	Using	Border	Theory,	Information	Systems	Research,	2018,and	Managing	Employees’	Use	of	Mobile	Technologies	to	Minimize	Work/Life	Balance	Impacts,	co-authoredwith	Xiao	Xiao,	MIS	Quarterly	Executive,	2012.	The	post	gives	the	views	of	its	authors,	not	the	position	of	LSE	Business	Review	or	the	London	School	ofLSE Business Review: The work–life conflicts of globally distributed software developers Page 2 of 3		Date originally posted: 2018-04-17Permalink: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessreview/2018/04/17/the-work-life-conflicts-of-globally-distributed-software-developers/Blog homepage: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessreview/Economics.Featured	image	credit:	Photo	by	WOCinTech	Chat,	under	a	CC-BY-2.0	licenceWhen	you	leave	a	comment,	you’re	agreeing	to	our	Comment	PolicySaonee	Sarker	is	the	Rolls	Royce	Commonwealth	Professor	of	Commerce	and	professor	of	IT	at	theMcIntire	School	of	Commerce	in	the	University	of	Virginia.	She	also	serves	as	the	coordinator	of	the	ITarea	in	McIntire.	Earlier,	she	was	the	Hubman	Distinguished	Professor	of	MIS	and	the	Chair	of	theDepartment	of	Management,	Information	Systems,	and	Entrepreneurship	at	Washington	StateUniversity.	She	is	also	(or	has	been)	visiting	professor	at	Lund	University,	Sweden,	University	ofAugsburg,	Germany,	and	Aalto	University,	Finland.	Her	research	focuses	on	globally	distributedsoftware	development	teams	and	other	types	of	computer-mediated	groups,	technology	adoption	bygroups,	Green	IS,	and	Health	IT,	and	has	appeared	in	outlets	such	as	MIS	Quarterly,	Information	Systems	Research,Journal	of	Management	Information	Systems,	Journal	of	the	Association	of	Information	Systems,	Decision	Sciences,European	Journal	of	Information	Systems,	and	MIS	Quarterly	Executive,	among	others.	Her	research	has	also	beenfunded	by	the	National	Science	Foundation.	Currently,	she	is	a	Senior	EEditor	at	MIS	Quarterly,	and	also	of	AISTransactions	in	Replication	Research.Manju	Ahuja	is	professor	and	university	scholar	in	the	department	of	computer	information	systems	atthe	College	of	Business,	University	of	Louisville,	Kentucky.	She	has	previously	held	faculty	positions	atvarious	other	universities.	Her	publications	have	appeared	in	top	academic	journals.	Manju	is	a	senioreditor	at	MIS	Quarterly,	and	has	served	in	editorial	roles	at	many	other	elite	journals.	She	is	activelyinvolved	in	research	on	issues	related	to	impacts	and	use	of	IT,	innovation	related	to	IT,	virtualcommunities	and	teams,	effects	of	mobile	technologies,	as	well	as	management	of	human	resourcesin	IT	professions.	Manju	has	held	visiting	scholar	appointments	at	premier	institutions	across	theworld,	including	HEC	(Paris),	National	University	of	Singapore,	University	of	New	South	Wales,	Bocconi	University,University	of	California,	and	the	University	of	Hawaii	at	Manoa.	She	has	received	three	National	Science	Foundationgrants	for	over	one	million	dollars	for	her	research	on	IT	workforce	issues.Suprateek	Sarker	is	Professor	of	IT	and	Rolls-Royce	Commonwealth	Commerce	Professor	ofinformation	technology	at	the	University	of	Virginia’s	McIntire	School	of	Commerce.	He	teachescourses	on	data	management,	systems	analysis	and	design,	management	of	IT	in	organizations,	andqualitative	research	approaches.	His	research,	which	is	largely	qualitative	in	nature,	has	beenpublished	in	top	academic	journals,	and	has	been	funded	by	the	National	Science	Foundation,	as	wellas	the	Institute	for	the	Study	of	Business	Markets.	Professor	Sarker	is	currently	the	editor-in-chief	ofthe	Journal	of	the	AIS,	and	has	served	as	Senior	Editor	at	MIS	Quarterly	in	the	past.	He	also	serveson	the	editorial	boards	of	a	number	of	other	journals,	and	holds	(or	has	held)	visiting	professorships	or	visitingscholar	positions	at	the	University	of	London	and	at	universities	in	Finland,	Denmark,	Sweden,	Vietnam,	Switzerland,Germany,	Australia	and	Taiwan.	LSE Business Review: The work–life conflicts of globally distributed software developers Page 3 of 3		Date originally posted: 2018-04-17Permalink: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessreview/2018/04/17/the-work-life-conflicts-of-globally-distributed-software-developers/Blog homepage: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessreview/

The work-life conflicts of globally distributed software developers

http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/89469/1/businessreview-2018-04-17-the-work-life-conflicts-of-globally.pdf

The work-life conflicts of globally distributed software developers

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

LSE Research Online