Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Knowledge ...

Juan-Gabriel Cegarra-Navarro, Mª Eugenia Sánchez-Vidal and David Cegarra-Leiva
relationships are examined through an empirical investigation <strong>of</strong> 229 SMEs in <strong>the</strong> Spanish metal
sector. The processes that characterise <strong>the</strong> relational learning process and <strong>the</strong> WLB culture are
discussed in detail in <strong>the</strong> following section. Section 2 also investigates <strong>the</strong> development <strong>of</strong> hypo<strong>the</strong>ses
as to how <strong>the</strong> relational learning and <strong>the</strong> WLB culture contribute to business performance. Details <strong>of</strong>
<strong>the</strong> survey which was used to collect appropriate data to test <strong>the</strong> models is presented in section 3,
whilst <strong>the</strong> results <strong>of</strong> testing <strong>the</strong> models are presented in section 4, followed by a discussion in section
5.
2. Conceptual framework
WLB initiatives are considered among <strong>the</strong> human resource practices that are believed to be more
relevant today (Fleetwood, 2007). Although <strong>the</strong>re is no clear definition <strong>of</strong> WLB, it could be described as
<strong>the</strong> “individuals´ ability <strong>of</strong> finding a life rhythm that allows <strong>the</strong>m to combine <strong>the</strong>ir work with o<strong>the</strong>r
responsibilities, activities or aspirations, irrespective <strong>of</strong> age and gender” (Felstead et al., 2002). In
relevant literature, authors have considered two different domains regarding WLB: “WLB practice” and
“WLB culture”. Several academics stress, for example, that formal WLB organisational policies have
less impact on organisations and employees than informal organisational support for WLB (Behson,
2005). O<strong>the</strong>r authors also affirm that WLB efforts have historically focused on implementing WLB
practices ra<strong>the</strong>r than changing <strong>the</strong> WLB culture within organisations (Harrington and Ladge, 2009).
WLB culture is defined as <strong>the</strong> “shared assumptions, beliefs and values regarding <strong>the</strong> extent to which
an organisation supports and values <strong>the</strong> integration <strong>of</strong> employees´ work and family lives” (Thompson et
al., 1999). Allen (2001) calls firms with high levels <strong>of</strong> WLB values ‘Family-Supportive Organisations’
(FSO), and Cappelli (2000) fur<strong>the</strong>r emphasises that a WLB culture is a key element <strong>of</strong> an
organisation’s employee retention strategies. There are several studies in relevant literature examining
which aspects characterise a WLB culture. One <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> predominant approaches in <strong>the</strong> literature is <strong>the</strong>
one <strong>of</strong> Thompson et al., (1999) that divides WLB culture into three sub-dimensions: managerial
support for WLB, perceived negative career consequences <strong>of</strong> using work-family benefits and
organisational time expectations.
This approach has been used by o<strong>the</strong>r researchers, such as O´Neill et al. (2009) who found that <strong>the</strong>
managerial support for WLB was <strong>the</strong> most important factor <strong>of</strong> WLB culture and <strong>the</strong> main determinant <strong>of</strong>
lower turnover intentions and employee commitment. Managerial support for WLB indicates how
managers empathise with employees´ efforts to balance <strong>the</strong>ir work and life and are sensitive to <strong>the</strong>ir
family responsibilities. We consider that in SMEs, <strong>the</strong> managerial support for WLB is <strong>the</strong> factor to be
considered, as managers are <strong>the</strong> key decision makers who have <strong>the</strong> last word in deciding who enjoy
WLB benefits. Moreover, as workers <strong>of</strong> SMEs normally negotiate <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> WLB practices with <strong>the</strong>ir
managers, <strong>the</strong> positive attitude <strong>of</strong> managers towards WLB becomes key to support and encourage a
WLB culture in small organisations. Hence, in this paper, <strong>the</strong> term WLB culture is used to describe
companies in which WLB values are supported and encouraged by management.
The creation <strong>of</strong> a WLB culture supposes, in each case, <strong>the</strong> reactivation and development <strong>of</strong> new
values which, in turn, foster learning and <strong>the</strong> integration <strong>of</strong> new knowledge in members <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>
organisation. For example, managers’ strategies which endeavour to address <strong>the</strong> lack <strong>of</strong> harmony
between work demands and life commitments include: employee compliance with new practices; <strong>the</strong>
exchange <strong>of</strong> information and sharing <strong>of</strong> personal concerns; acceptance <strong>of</strong> constraints related to
responsibilities in life; and collaboration with colleagues to accommodate <strong>the</strong> work/life needs <strong>of</strong> a
diverse workforce (Joplin & Daus 1997; Dass & Parker, 1999). It is worth noting that managers
implement <strong>the</strong>se WLB initiatives based on concerns expressed by employees or o<strong>the</strong>r stakeholders
(groups affected by <strong>the</strong> organisation’s values and practices) or through observing <strong>the</strong> benefits
achieved by o<strong>the</strong>r companies through <strong>the</strong>ir WLB programmes or because <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir personal preferences
(Carlson et al., 2006).
However, creating new knowledge frequently generates internal problems when it conflicts with
current knowledge in terms <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> beliefs, habits and things individuals take for granted (Argyris &
Schön, 1978). As Macinnes (2005) stated, one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> factors preventing WLB culture is managers’
negative attitude towards WLB practices due to perceived ambiguous results (e.g. <strong>the</strong> perceived cost
<strong>of</strong> implementing some initiatives). As noted above, WLB practices demand different organisational
architectures and <strong>the</strong>y change <strong>the</strong> economics <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> industry (Poelmans and Beham, 2008).
Consequently, <strong>the</strong>y destroy existing company competences, create new value networks in which to
compete and challenge some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> managerial functions (e.g. commanding, organising, coordinating,
199