PDF - FHR Lim A Po Institute for Social Studies

MBA VI Management & Finance
2009-2011
Implementing Flexible Working in Suriname
By
Rachel J Kolf-Deira
Suriname
December 2011
Supervised by
Dr. Silvio de Bono
This paper was submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Masters of Business
Administration (MBA) degree at the Maastricht School of Management (MSM), Maastricht, the
Netherlands, December 2011
2

Acknowledgement
This thesis would not have been possible if it were not for the Grace, Guidance, Inner Strength,
Favor, Inspiration and Dedication endowed upon me by my Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ. All
glory be to His Name.
I am truly blessed for having the devoted support of my parents and my beloved husband, who
have stood behind me every step of the way during this program. I thank them for their prayers,
their encouragement and assistance.
I am grateful for having received the opportunity to partake in this endeavor and, therefore, wish
to thank my previous employer - Telesur, for introducing me to F.H.R Lim A Po institute and
allowing me to participate. I also wish to thank my current employer, by way of my supervisor
Arun Bhagwandin, for allowing me time off to work on the completion of this study.
I would also like to express my profound gratitude to Mr. Hans Lim A Po for believing in me
and encouraging me to enroll in the MBA program. Furthermore, I would like to sincerely thank
my supervisor, Dr. Silvio de Bono, for his guidance, comments and commitment in helping me
achieve the end result. Another warm „thank you‟ goes out to Dr. Mirdita Elstak, Meredith Plein,
Alida Pengel and all other faculty staff, for their support.
Last but not least, I would like to also thank my fellow students, who have teamed up to help me
„carry my load‟ when going through a difficult time in life.
Rachel Kolf-Deira
December, 2011
3

Abstract
Flexible working is a global trend which Suriname cannot escape if it wants to evolve in a 24/7
economy. Although formal flexible working is practically non-existent in Suriname, this type of
working will help improve its competitiveness in international markets. Companies should look
for alternative ways of doing business like keeping extended operating hours in order to cope
with diminishing global barriers, and to retain and attract skilled workers, specifically those with
experience from working abroad. Furthermore, the present global economic reality is forcing
developing economies to focus on incorporating cost saving strategies like flexible working,
which can help them achieve this. Flexible working includes arrangements such as: flextime,
tele-work, job rotation, job sharing and compressed workweeks. The literature review examines
the definition of flexible working, and highlights the importance of implementing this type of
working. This research is qualitative in nature and follows an inductive approach in examining
the perceptions of employers and employees regarding implementation of flexible working in
Suriname. The main research objective is to identify the perceptions and challenges to
introducing flexible working arrangements in Suriname‟s business environment. It gives an
overview of the perceptions of employers and employees on the definition, types of flexible
working arrangements offered, available and preferred provisions, drivers and benefits as well as
the barriers of implementing flexible working. It compares the perceptions of respondents from
the production and service sectors, and discusses the limitations of this research as well as the
issues that are recommended for future scrutiny. The study concludes with a set of
recommendations regarding the types of FWA most suitable for Suriname and the steps towards
their implementation. The study seeks to trigger discussions on an organizational level, which
hopefully will lead to adjustments of current HR policy and labor legislation.
4

List of figures
Figure 3.1 …………….pg. 39
Figure 4.1……………. pg. 58
Figure 4.2……………..pg. 59
5

Abbreviations
CFO : Chief Financial Officer
FWAs : Flexible Working Arrangement (s)
HR
ICT :
: Human Resources
Information and Communications Technology
IT : Information Technology
VPN : Virtual Private Network
6

Table of Contents
Acknowledgement .......................................................................................................................... 3
Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... 4
List of figures .................................................................................................................................. 5
Abbreviations .................................................................................................................................. 6
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................ 8
Chapter 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 13
General overview ...................................................................................................................... 13
Research Significance ............................................................................................................... 14
Leading Theories Supporting Flexible Work Arrangements. ................................................... 15
Theory of Work Adjustment ................................................................................................. 15
The Institutional Theory Approach ....................................................................................... 16
Person Job-fit Theory ............................................................................................................ 16
Role Theory .......................................................................................................................... 17
Problem Definition.................................................................................................................... 17
Conceptual Framework ............................................................................................................. 18
Research Objectives .................................................................................................................. 19
Research Question .................................................................................................................... 20
Scope and Limitations............................................................................................................... 20
Thesis Outline ........................................................................................................................... 20
Research Methodology ............................................................................................................. 21
Validity ..................................................................................................................................... 21
Chapter 2 Literature review .......................................................................................................... 23
8

Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 23
Definition of Flexible Working ................................................................................................ 23
Importance of Flexible working................................................................................................ 25
Forms of Flexible Working Arrangements ............................................................................... 26
Benefits of Flexible Work Arrangements ................................................................................. 27
General Benefits.................................................................................................................... 27
Specific benefits .................................................................................................................... 29
Drawbacks of Flexible Work Arrangements ............................................................................ 30
General Drawbacks ............................................................................................................... 30
Specific Drawbacks .............................................................................................................. 31
Comments on Flexible Working Research ............................................................................... 32
Flexible Working and Organizational Outcome ................................................................... 32
Flexible Working as a Productivity Measure........................................................................ 34
Flexible Working and Work-life Balance ............................................................................. 34
Factors Associated with Adopting Flexible Working Arrangements ....................................... 36
Summary ................................................................................................................................... 37
Chapter 3 Methodology ................................................................................................................ 38
Research Approach and Strategy .............................................................................................. 38
Sampling Approach .................................................................................................................. 38
Data Collection ......................................................................................................................... 39
Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 41
Limitations of the Research Methodology ................................................................................ 42
Chapter 4 Findings ........................................................................................................................ 43
9

Definition of Flexible working ................................................................................................. 43
Employees. ........................................................................................................................ 43
Employers. ........................................................................................................................ 46
Flexible Work Arrangements Offered ...................................................................................... 47
Type of Provisions Offered ................................................................................................... 49
Preferred FWAs ........................................................................................................................ 51
Level of Staff that works Flexible ............................................................................................ 53
Drivers and Benefits of Flexible Working ................................................................................ 55
Perceived Barriers of implementing Flexible Working ............................................................ 57
Summary of Key Findings ........................................................................................................ 61
Chapter 5 Discussion .................................................................................................................... 63
Patterns of Perception Differentiation Among Respondents .................................................... 63
Current Demand for Flexible Working Arrangements ............................................................. 64
Factors associated with implementing FWA in Suriname ........................................................ 66
Implications for theory and research ......................................................................................... 66
Theoretical implications........................................................................................................ 66
Managerial and practical implications .................................................................................. 67
Limitations ................................................................................................................................ 69
Future Research ........................................................................................................................ 70
Conclusions and Recommendations ......................................................................................... 72
Common forms of FWAs to be implemented in Suriname ...................................................... 73
Steps to Implementation ........................................................................................................... 75
References ..................................................................................................................................... 80
10

This page is intentionally left blank
12

Chapter 1 Introduction
General overview
Over the past two decades there has been an increasing interest in flexible forms of work
scheduling all over the world. This increase of interest in flexible work scheduling stems from
the changes resulting from, both, globalization of international markets as well as the recent
economic recession. Organizations are forced to restructure their operations due to mergers,
acquisitions, strategic alliances and privatization which go hand in hand with changes in work
contracts and work time scheduling (Sparks et al 2001). In order to successfully compete in the
increasingly competitive global market, organizations are forced to maintain a more flexible
work environment that consists of new ways of working also known as flexible or alternative
working arrangements. Businesses are pushed to cover extended working and operating hours,
while advances in technology continue to play an important role in moving towards a more
flexible environment (Sparks et al 2001).
Flexible working arrangements (FWAs) can be defined as “organizational policies and
practices that enable employees to vary, at least to some extent, when and/or where they work or
otherwise diverge from traditional working hours” (as cited in Lewis 2003). These FWAs are
also identified as a way to match the employee‟s style or preference of working to that of the
employer. Some forms include: flextime, part-time working, job sharing, family-related and
other leaves, job rotation and tele-working (Lewis 2003). According to Lewis (2003) FWAs are
also identified as having more benefits than drawbacks for both employers and employees. This
research, therefore, will investigate the use of FWAs in Suriname in light of the country‟s
transitioning from a developing to a developed country. The main focus will be to capture the
overall perceptions of employers and employees on implementing FWAs in Suriname.
13

Another reason for organizations to implement flexible working is the fact that
employees often find it difficult to balance work and their personal lives. In this context, flexible
working arrangements are referred to as family-friendly, work–family, or more recently work–
life policies (Lewis 2003). A third reason for organizations to implement flexibility is the
importance of facilitating equality of opportunity for men and women in the workplace (Bevan et
al., 1999). Female employees possessing critical business skills with domestic caring
responsibilities are an integral part of an ever increasing diversification of the workforce (Sparks
et al 2001, Bevan et al., 1999) and should be able to compete alongside male colleagues seeking
a promotion or a senior staff position in the corporate world. Therefore family-friendly policies
can serve a dual purpose of contributing to the needs of the business as well as meeting the needs
of employees with family responsibilities.
Research Significance
The need to adapt to change has become an important element of today‟s corporate
strategy to survive in the world of globalization. Organizations must become flexible in order to
achieve competitive advantage. This also applies to Suriname. Hence, it needs to increase its
overall competitiveness and adapt to the new trend of creating a flexible work environment. An
important strategy to accomplish this is to look at implementing alternative methods such as
Flexible Working Arrangements. This study will try to shed some light on what the current
demand is for implementing FWAs in Suriname, and if a favorable environment exists for
implementing such arrangements. Additionally, the study seeks to trigger discussions on an
organizational level, which hopefully will lead to adjustments of current HR policy.
14

In some Surinamese companies there are certain aspects of FWAs already being
implemented. A major challenge for most organizations however, is to ensure that the controls
and input needed for successful implementation of flexible working are made available.
Departments such as HR and IT will need to be aligned in such a way that new ways of working
are properly planned and implemented. This paper will operationalize the following concepts:
flexible working hours (flextime), job sharing, tele-working, part-time working and job rotation.
It will also try to assess to what extent FWAs are currently being used by Surinamese companies
and what the perceived challenges are that impede the successful implementation of such
arrangements. The outcome of this study should be considered a starting point for effective
implementation of flexible working.
Leading Theories Supporting Flexible Work Arrangements.
Theory of Work Adjustment
The major underlying theory for flexible working arrangements can be traced back to
Dawis‟ theory of work adjustment (TWA). The theory of work adjustment relates directly to the
work environment and according to Pierce and Newstrom (1980) comes from a class of theories
classified as P-E theories. P-E theory refers to the relationship or fit between the Person (P) in an
Environment (E) as well as the interaction between P and E. There are different environments
(different Es) involved in this theory such as work, personal, family, home, social and school.
The theory of work adjustment expresses a link between the individual and their job
under two conditions: first is a link between abilities of the individual and the requirements of
the job, and second the needs of the individual and the satisfaction of those needs by the work
environment. Dawis (2000) also argues that the TWA predicts high performance when the
15

abilities of the individual and the requirements of the job are aligned, and that TWA predicts
employee satisfaction when the work environment meets the needs of the individual.
The Institutional Theory Approach
Research suggests that there is an increasing institutional pressure on employers to
develop flexible working arrangements (Goodstein 1994). This institutional pressure stems from
the institutional theory approach, which considers the processes by which structures, including
schemes, rules, norms, and routines, become established as authoritative guidelines for social
behavior (Richard 2004). Lewis (2003) argues that changes in the demographics of the overall
workforce have resulted in an increase of the social issue of work-family conflict. At the same
time, public attention as well as state regulation has increased institutional pressure on employers
to respond to the increasing need of employees to balance work and family life. Researchers
agree that it all depends on the strength of these institutional pressures and the economic as well
as strategic business factors for an organization to comply (Goodstein 1994, Lewis 2003). Critics
of this theory find that institutional pressures do not leave much room for employers to decide on
their own strategic decisions when it comes to FWA (Lewis 2003). They also state that too much
flexibility can cause difficulties in coordinating and communicating with colleagues (Baltes et al
1999).
Person Job-fit Theory
Behavior is influenced by personal and situational characteristics (e.g., Schneider, 1983;
Terborg, 1981). People tend to choose situations and perform best in situations that are most
compatible to themselves (Emmons & Diener, 1986; Swann, 1983). Person-job fit theory thus
16

states that “People tend to be happier when they are in settings that meet their particular needs or
match their character" (Diener, Larsen, & Emmons, 1984, p. 582). According to this theory,
flexible working arrangements are closely related to employee preferences and needs (Krausz et
al 2000, Martens et al 1999). Martens et al (1999) go even a bit further by concluding that FWAs
had positive outcomes on employee behavior only when employees had the freedom to choose
and control their flexibility.
Role Theory
Research revealed that multiple life roles result in inter-role conflict as individuals
experience difficulty performing each role successfully, because of conflicting demands (as cited
in Kahn et al, 1995). This notion stems from the Role Theory, which argues that inter-role
conflict allows for individuals to experience strain. The role theory also argues that finding the
right resources can help prevent or reduce this strain. The Conservation of Resources (COR)
model proposes that individuals are thus motivated to acquire and maintain resources (Hobfoll,
1989) to reduce strain. One of the more obvious resources is a family-supportive work
environment, which allows individuals to balance work and family roles. Flexible working
arrangements, supportive supervisors, and the overall work environment can serve as employee
resources and improve their job attitudes and behaviors (Thomas & Ganster, 1995).
Problem Definition
Flexible working is practically non-existent in Suriname. This prohibits companies to
respond to the impact that economic globalization, strategic changes in the international business
market, fast technological development and diversification of labor force have on the way of
17

doing business nowadays. Companies should look for alternative ways to do business, which in
this case involves the implementation of strategies to encourage flexible working. According to
pre-research discussions with both employers and employees, there seems to be insufficient
knowledge or exposure to flexible working, which has resulted in the absence of structured
flexible working in Suriname. The business thrust that results from globalization is also forcing
developing economies such as Suriname, to cater to a 24/7 environment. Some of the
characteristics of the 24/7 economy are: globalized communication, extended operating hours
due to diminishing global barriers and increasing uncertainty due to high speed of change.
Another growing demand is the need to balance work and family duties. The institutional theory
approach pressures employers worldwide to develop family friendly working arrangements, to
assist employees in balancing work, personal commitments, while meeting business needs and
objectives. Due to the worldwide economic recession, developing economies are more than ever
required to focus on cost savings strategies in various areas. Flexible working can assist in
accomplishing cost savings for companies looking to cut down on human resources costs.
The ultimate objective of this research is to initiate a wider discussion on flexible working in
Suriname and increase the awareness of this phenomenon in the corporate world.
Conceptual Framework
Suriname‟s exposure to globalization is becoming an ever increasing fact. This study is
done to assess how much flexible working has infiltrated in the Surinamese labor force. The
underlying theories will be linked to the benefits of FWA as well as the organizational outcome
of these arrangements. This framework will ultimately result in a proposed combination of
flexible working arrangements to be implemented in Suriname.
18

To conduct this research, prior academic and scholarly research on FWA will be used as
reference, mostly from the schools of organizational behavior and psychology. However, most of
the data will come from field observation. This research is based on the four theories. First, is the
Theory of Work Adjustment by Dawis & Lofquist (1984), which explains the need of personal
fit between the individual‟s needs and the work environment (job description, job design).
Second is the institutional theory approach, which suggests that there is an increasing
institutional pressure on employers to develop flexible working arrangements (Goodstein 1994).
Third, is the person-job fit theory which suggests that individuals are more likely to perform
better in work environments that their personal preferences (krausz et al 2000, Martens et al
1999). Fourth, the role theory which suggests that finding the right resources can help prevent or
reduce inter-role conflict, mainly those that involve work and life roles.
Research Objectives
The main research objective is to identify the perceptions and challenges to introducing
flexible working arrangements in the Surinamese environment.
Other objectives include:
To highlight current employee demand for flexible working arrangements.
To explore what types of flexible working are currently available in Suriname.
To identify common forms of flexible working arrangements to be implemented
in the Surinamese environment.
19

Research Question
The main research question seeks to identify the perceptions on flexible working
arrangements and reads as follows: How do employers and employees perceive flexible working
arrangements?
The sub-questions are:
What are the perceived benefits and barriers of implementing flexible working
arrangements in Suriname according to employers and employees?
Is there currently a demand for flexible working arrangements in Suriname?
Which common forms of FWAs can be implemented in Surinamese companies?
Scope and Limitations
The scope of this research will be to investigate the perception and possible
implementation of FWAs and will be limited to service and production companies. The main
concepts are flexible working arrangements, job satisfaction, work-life balance and
organizational performance. To further limit the scope of this research, the focus will extend to
flexible working hours (flextime), job sharing, tele-working, part-time working and job rotation.
The limitations involved in this research involve the sampling size and limited data from
employees and employers. Generalization of results will therefore also be limited.
Thesis Outline
The research questions will be answered through a careful analysis of the interview
results. Chapter one is the introduction to flexible working and the problem definition. The
literature review will be done in chapter two highlighting the benefits and drawbacks of
20

implementing FWAs. The next chapter will focus on the methodology used to execute the
research. The findings of the research will be analyzed in chapter four, followed by a discussion
in chapter five on the conclusions and recommendations. The recommendations include forms of
FWA that can be mutually implemented in production and service sector organizations.
Research Methodology
A detailed analysis of relevant literature and research will be used to identify conceptual
frameworks and best practice approaches to flexible workplace arrangements and their impact on
employers and employees. An exploratory analysis (field observation) will be made of the
perceptions of employees and employers about what flexibility means to them and the
implementation of these arrangements. Data will be collected using in-depth, semi structured
interviews to capture the individual perception of the participants. Interviews will be uniform and
recorded using a tape recorder and will also have written transcripts. University students will be
used to assist the interviewer in conducting these interviews. The students will be instructed on
how to conduct these interviews. The questions are pre-written in an interview guideline to keep
interviewers focused. The sample size consists of a total of 20 participants consisting of
employees and employers from various service and production sector companies. The amount of
time spent on conducting the interviews will be approximately 3 weeks.
Validity
Due to the nature of this research, the data collected might be prone to researcher bias. To
resolve this issue the interviewer will abstain from revealing personal opinions as well as
avoiding yes/no and leading questions. Because of the sample size, generalization of the results
21

has its limits. The collected data will portray the actual opinions of Surinamese employees and
employers pertaining to their perceptions and the perceived challenges of implementing FWA.
22

Chapter 2 Literature review
Introduction
Globalization and other strategic changes in the international business market have
brought about changes in consumer demands, technology and other business considerations
Lewis 2003). This has resulted in businesses worldwide changing the way they operate to
achieve competitiveness. Flexibility in the workplace is thus becoming a popular way of
responding to the worldwide demands of economic globalization (Lewis, 2003). Flexible
working can be referred to as nonstandard employment relations, alternative work arrangements,
nontraditional employment arrangements, market-mediated arrangements, flexible staffing
arrangements, flexible working practices, atypical employment and contingent work (Kalleberg
et al 2000). These work arrangements are important for working towards achieving greater
competitiveness, which includes greater diversity, increased employee focus and HR policies
that address personal needs (Kossek et al 1999). On the contrary, other researchers believe that
the increase in the use of flexible working stems from changes in labor supply as well as the
diversification of the workforce (Wooden and Warren, 2003). The purpose of the literature
review is to provide for an adequate understanding of what flexible working is and emphasize its
importance.
Definition of Flexible Working
In order to understand the concept of flexible working, it is appropriate to start off with a
definition of the term itself. Researchers in the field of organizational behavior & psychology
have defined flexible working in a number of ways. Eaton (2001) for example, defines flexible
working as „the ability to change the temporal and spatial boundaries of one‟s job.‟ This
definition is very broad and does not give a clear and specific description of what is meant by the
23

term flexible working. Hackman and Oldham (1980) and Moen (1996) argue that „flexibility
includes, but is not limited to, autonomy on the job, but can also include taking days off in return
for working at non-standard times, or being able to work part-time temporarily at certain points
in life.‟ This definition gives a better scope of flexible working, because it takes various aspects
of flexible working into consideration.
According to Tam (1997:23) employers define flexible working as „the ability to rapidly
respond to changing market and economic conditions, with labour activity closely matched to
production and service demands.‟ Rosenfeld (2001) in turn, defines flexible working form
employees‟ perspective as „work practices that are accommodating to personal or household
commitments.‟ Tam and Rosenfeld‟s views show that flexible working can be approached from
an employers‟ and employees‟ perspective. Literature further defines flexible working as having
temporal and locational flexibility. Temporal flexibility relates to variations in the number of
hours worked (Humphreys et al 2000). The most widely implemented forms include part-time
working, flextime (flexible working hours), job sharing, job rotation and family related and other
leaves. Locational flexibility relates to the choice of geographical working location. The most
common form is tele-working or telecommuting (Humphreys et al 2000). An inclusion of
temporal and locational flexibility in the definition given by Hackman and Oldham (1980) and
Moen (1996), provides for a more solid definition of flexible working. Perhaps, the definition of
flexible working should sound as followed: “Flexible working includes, but is not limited to,
autonomy on the job through variations in the number of hours worked, working at non-standard
times or from a different geographical location, being able to work part-time temporarily at
certain points in life, and working flexibly to attain company goals.
24

Importance of Flexible working
The changing economic environment due to the globalization of international markets
(Lewis 2003) is the main reason for implementing flexible working in an organization. Because
of globalization, businesses can no longer confine themselves to standard operating hours, but
have become a 24/7 operation to accommodate ongoing business. Hence, the need for a flexible
work environment. Baxter (1998), Boreham, Watson et al.(2003) find that the increasing use of
flexible working arrangements in Europe and the United States are frequently driven by
employer demands for a flexible workforce that will more efficiently match peaks and troughs in
production and customer activity. The standard 40-hour workweek is disappearing in many
occupations worldwide: professionals regularly put in extra hours to meet deadlines, and many
hourly employees are required to work overtime (Golden 2001; Golden and Figart 2000).
Other important factors according to research is the attractiveness of flexible employment to
employers because of lower labor costs ( Carre and Tilly, 1998), and the ability to increase the
labor pool by attracting skilled employees who are otherwise not able to work traditional
working hours (e.g. Baruch, 2000; Lewis,2003).
Moreover, studies have shown that female‟s increasing participation in the workforce has
contributed to the growth of flexible working arrangements, especially part-time employment
and flexible scheduling (Campbell, 2000, Hakim, 2000). These studies show that because women
are participating more in the workforce, they are seeking jobs that offer flexibility in scheduling
and work location (Crompton, 2002). The use of flexible working is therefore desirable, because
by implementing these arrangements, organizations are responding to the working preferences of
their employees (Hakim, 1997, Rosenfeld, 2001). In fact, flexible working helps improve gender
25

equality by facilitating working mothers and other individuals who would otherwise not be able
to participate in the labor force (Watson et al.2003).
Forms of Flexible Working Arrangements
The most widely used forms of flexible working include: part-time working, flextime, job
rotation, job sharing and tele-work. According to literature part-time work is the most common
type of flexible working and is already being used worldwide. Part-time work is usually defined
as „regular wage employment in which the hours of work are less than “normal” (Thurman &
Trah 1990).‟ Thus usually, a part-time worker is someone who works fewer than 30 hours per
week (Kalleberg et al 2000).
Flextime or flexible working hours is another popular form of flexible working.
Humphreys et al (2000) define flextime as „flexible hours that allow employees to vary their start
and finish times at work.‟ The third form of flexible working is job rotation. Edwards (2005)
defines job rotation as „re-assigning employees from job to job within the same company.‟
Rotated employees do not permanently stay in one job, but after an agreed upon time they move
on to another job. Literature also identifies job sharing as another form of flexible working,
which can be defined as „two people sharing responsibilities, salary and all the other benefits of a
full-time job‟ (Data sources and definitions 1991). Tele-work is also identified as a commonly
used form of flexible working. Tele-work can be defined as “working outside the conventional
workplace and communicating with co-workers and supervisors through technological
resources” (Nilles, 1994; Olson & Primps, 1984). An example of a tele-worker is an account
manager whose primary job is to conduct sales visits. Van Horn & Storen define tele-work as in
which all parties involved use the possibilities of modern software environments, to exchange
26

data (e.g. work results) over some distance, and thus – being relatively independent on time and
space respects (Barjis and Shishkov, 2001).Despite the difference in wording, researchers all
agree that tele-work involves working at a different location than the employers place of
business, and the use of modern technology “working at home, away from the workplace, using
modern technology.” Tele-Work is also defined as “a kind of work, in which all parties involved
use the possibilities of modern software environments, to exchange data (e.g. work results) over
some distance, and thus – being relatively independent on time and space respects (Barjis and
Shishkov, 2001).Despite the difference in wording, researchers all agree that tele-work involves
working at a different location than the employers place of business, and the use of modern
technology.
Benefits of Flexible Work Arrangements
General Benefits
According to researchers (e.g. Lewis 2003, Humphreys et al 2000, Kalleberg et al 2000),
Flexible Working Arrangements (FWA) offer a number of benefits, which include a positive
effect on business performance and a contribution to a well-balanced Work-Life environment.
The positive effect on business performance comes from: being competitive in the labor market,
reducing overhead costs and thus increasing profitability, improving labor productivity levels,
and enhancing overall employee productivity. A well balanced Work-Life environment is
especially important for women who have children and employees with care taker
responsibilities (Watson et al 2003). Reducing overhead costs is probably one of the most
important drivers for employers to implement flexible working. Retrenchment is a major
27

component of these overhead costs; Hau and Chew (2006) therefore, argue that FWA offers a
good alternative to retrenchment. When faced with economic crises, employers usually respond
by cutting back on costs and employees. In their opinion however, by implementing FWAs,
organizations are able to incorporate, both, cutting back on costs as well as providing flexibility
to employees.
Another benefit according to Hau and Chew (2006) is that implementing FWA can result
in a flexible labor force and serve as a low cost practice that gives the company a competitive
edge 1 . In their article “The Effect of Alternative Work Schedules on Employee Performance”,
Hau and Chew (2006) argue that “Flexible working hours can also help organizations meet their
human resource requirements more efficiently, as employees‟ working hours can be matched
more closely with the demands of the organization to enable a win‐win situation.”
Existing studies show that stress affects several aspects of performance, such as
productivity, absenteeism, turnover, commitment, job involvement and satisfaction (Dalton and
Mesch, 1990; Golembiewski and Proehl, 1979; Narayanan and Nath, 1982b). These researchers
believe that all forms of stress have been found to lead to other problems that affect productivity
and are potentially costly to business. An example of such a study is the study by Sparks et al
2001, which discusses the well-being and occupational health in the 21 st century workplace.
Other benefits stated in literature include reduced casual sickness absence, improved retention,
improved productivity, improved recruitment and improved morale and commitment (Bevan et
al., 1999). FWAs are seen as a contributor to reduced Stress.
1 International Journal of Employment Studies, Vol. 14, No.1, April 2006. Irene Hau‐siu Chow and Irene Chew Keng‐Howe.
28

Specific benefits
The different forms of FWAs each have their specific benefits. For starters, part-time
employment has been used as a means of alleviating unemployment and is seen as a major
source of employment growth since the 1980s (Brewster et al 1997). The biggest benefit for
employers according to Kalleberg et al (2000) using this form of employment is that part-timers
usually cost less in wages and even less in fringe benefits. Part-time is seen as beneficial for
women with young children and other professionals who prefer these kind of arrangements.
Job rotation is considered beneficial because it promotes employee learning and increases
human capital growth (Campion et al 1994). It gives employees exposure to a variety of work
experiences and thus contributes to their professional development. Ortega (2001) states that job
rotation can also be implemented to reduce work automatism and boredom. This is especially
true for employees „that have reached a glass ceiling or plateau‟ (Near 1985, Stout et al 1988). In
this case, job rotation will add stimulation to employees‟ work (Near 1985. However, job
rotation is not easily applied to functions with high levels of confidentiality such as accountancy.
Besides the benefits for employees, Jovanovic (1979) argues that job rotation also offers benefits
to the organization by receiving information about the quality of different job-employee matches.
The employer can thus observe and examine the available human capital. According to other
studies job rotation is valuable for career development, because it offers an increase in work
experience (Mintzberg, 1973).
The next form, job sharing, is used as a means of offering part-time employment in
career-oriented positions that normally require full-time employment (Marshall, 2001). Research
has shown that teaching and nursing are examples of two popular professions that make use of
29

job sharing. Advantages include, an increase in balance between work and family, increased
schedule flexibility and use of a wider range of skills (Marshall 2001).
Tele-work on the other hand, is more used as an option for balancing work-family conflict
(Baines & Gelder, 2003, Tremblay, 2002).
Drawbacks of Flexible Work Arrangements
General Drawbacks
Besides knowing the benefits of flexible working, employers and employees should also
be aware of the drawbacks of FWAs. Being aware of the positive and negative impact of flexible
working, offers employers a balanced point of view, which enables them to implement the right
set of FWAs in their company. According to Hau and Chew (2006) flexibility has its drawbacks
for management. These drawbacks include loss of control or influence over work, challenges in
work scheduling, communication with colleagues, coordinating meetings, accounting for
employees‟ time, and possible abuse of the system. Others, like Kelly & Moen (2007) state that
„flexible working arrangements can also be implemented in such a way that it still limits
employees‟ flexibility over when and where they work.‟ More importantly, Lambert & Waxman
(2005) argue that FWAs are sometimes not easily accessible for all employees within an
organization and that the decision of who gets access to FWAs is often left to the discretion of
the immediate supervisor, regardless of whether or not formal policies are in place.
Furthermore, research has shown that most managers are not equipped to evaluate
employees using FWAs, which is often caused by the lack of performance review systems
(Kelly, 2005). According to literature, a company should also consider the costs associated with
implementing flexible working such as: reduced morale of those employees not benefiting (Dex
30

and Scheibl, 1999; Evans,2001), and cost of implementing new work-life balance policy
systems. This may include costs associated with changing processes or culture. And also, costs
of equipment to facilitate working at home (Evans, 2001). In general, researchers remain
skeptical of the ability of flexible working to simultaneously meet employers‟ and employees‟
needs simultaneously. Carre and Tilly (1998), Glass and Estes (1997) argue that flexible
employment practices largely meet employers‟ rather than employees‟ needs.
Specific Drawbacks
Just as there are specific benefits to FWAs, there are also specific drawbacks. A
frequently mentioned drawback for part-time jobs is that they usually offer low wages, routine
tasks, and limited or no advancement opportunities. White (1983) therefore argues that these
characteristics make it more difficult to balance work and family demands. However, the
difficulty assumed is subject to the priorities of the part-time worker.
Humphreys et. al., (2000) argue that there are certain drawbacks when implementing
flextime such as: defining core working hours (e.g. 9 am-4pm) and organizing the remaining
work hours around those times, having a system for recording flextime hours, incorporating a
limit to hours that can be carried over per week or per month. Other disadvantages include
workspace difficulties, less recognition as a career person, difficulty in career advancement,
increased administration and increased control issues (Marshall 2001). One of the risks
associated with tele-work for example, according to Taskin & Vendramin (2005) is the increase
of work-family conflict due to the increased amount of time spent working at home. Teleworkers
who work from home sometimes do not leave their “office” (Boden, 1999; Tremblay et
al 2006). Christensen (1987) indicates that tele-work can create more work-family conflict,
31

ecause of the presence of work material in the house as well as family interference with work.
Other critics of tele-work (Menzies 1997, Gurstein 2001) state that there are “blurred
boundaries” when trying to combine work and home activities in the same setting, which could
easily lead to increased stress levels. This means that tele-workers should have a high degree of
self-discipline and make sensible arrangements with other household members regarding privacy
while working.
Comments on Flexible Working Research
Studies have outlined the pros and cons of implementing flexible working arrangements,
with the main focus on balancing work and non-work demands, as well as on the increase of
business performance. The most related theories supporting flexible working arrangements are
highlighted in the next section.
Flexible Working and Organizational Outcome
There are two main types of research on flexible working arrangements; one examines
flexible working as a productivity or efficiency measure (e.g., Brewster et al 1993, Sagie &
Biderman 2000) and the other that stems from the work-life literature which portrays FWA as a
way to reduce work-family conflict (e.g., Barnet & Hall 2001, Friedman & Greenhaus 2000).
There have been several studies and meta-analyses of organizational outcome research
concluding that FWAs can have positive organizational effects (Friedman &Greenhaus 2000,
Baltes et al 1999). In Kossek and Ozeki‟s (1991) meta-analysis, a correlation between workfamily
conflict and organizational outcome is divided into six areas, which include: performance,
turnover, absenteeism, organizational commitment, job satisfaction and burnout. Their analysis
32

examined two important areas: one relationship between work-family conflict and policies and
organizational outcome, and secondly FWA and organizational outcome. The meta-analysis has
shown that out of all the FWAs, flextime is the one related mostly to phenomena like
absenteeism, turnover, organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and somatic health
complaints (Scandura & Lankau, 1997; Thomas & Ganster, 1995). Other studies found that
flextime was not at all associated with organizational effectiveness or organizational
commitment (e.g. Christensen and Staines (1990). A recent meta-analysis of Baltes et.al (1999)
determined that flextime was associated with employee productivity, job satisfaction, satisfaction
with work schedule, and employee absenteeism, with the largest effect found for absenteeism
(Baltes et. Al 1999). The above mentioned researchers study the same phenomena, but come to
opposing conclusions.
According to Meyer and Allen (1997) flexible working arrangements in general, can
reduce absenteeism and turnover. They argue that research has shown that companies offering
such arrangements are more successful at retaining highly skilled employees (Grover and
Crooker 1995; Thompson et al 1997). However, not all scholars agree that flexible working
arrangements are the solution to work-family conflict and job satisfaction. They do not believe
that flexible working arrangements have an impact on morale and therefore do not believe that
these policies are related to productivity or job satisfaction (e.g. Robinson and Godbey 1997).
Their research suggests less positive outcomes such as lower job satisfaction and organizational
commitment, less positive relationships with co-workers and greater work-family conflict due to
the tendency to work longer hours while working from home Olsen 1987, Prutchno et al 2000).
Research thus indicates that FWA can have two different outcomes; some positive and some
negative (Sullivan & Lewis 2001, Hill et al 1996).
33

Flexible Working as a Productivity Measure
Greenhaus et al. (1987) performed a quantitative research measuring the correlation of
work-family conflict. They found a negative correlation, which indicates that the more
employee‟s work-family conflict, the lower their performance. Other researchers such as
Netemeyer et al. (1996) who performed similar research found varying rates of negative
correlation, which could indicate that the level of performance is highly dependent on the
accompanying factors of work –family conflict such as type of job and the level of conflict. The
literature on flexible working as a productivity measure is not as extensive as that on flexible
working and work-life balance. There is no clarity in which type of measures are used to
quantify productivity; nor is there a clear categorization of the types of conflict that affect
productivity.
Flexible Working and Work-life Balance
Studies have shown that today‟s workforce has increasingly diversified as a result of an
increase in dual-career couples, an increase in working mothers with young children, singleparents
and young professionals going back to school. According to Byron (2005), this means
that the responsibilities for childcare, work and housework are no longer limited to traditional
gender roles. Others, such as Bond et al (1998), Gilbert et al (1994) state that female and male
employees have considerable responsibilities in addition to their work. As a result, many
organizations have responded by implementing programs or policies designed to help
accommodate the needs of today‟s diverse workforce (Lobel&Kossek, 1996). These policies are
commonly referred to as “work-family” or “family-friendly” and include arrangements such as
flexible work schedules, child-care referrals, and leaves of absence. These arrangements can also
34

e categorized as “flexible working arrangements”. According to Allen (2001), organizations
implement such benefits as a means for maintaining a competitive advantage, raising morale, and
attracting and retaining a dedicated workforce. The benefits of these policies for employees are
designed to alleviate the difficulty inherent in coordinating and managing multiple life roles,
specifically the work-family roles (Allen, 2001). The inability to balance these roles is called
“work-family conflict” or “family-work conflict” (Willis et al., 2006). Research shows that
work-family conflict has a negative effect on individuals‟ mental health, vitality and general
well-being (Frone 2000, Allen et al 2000, Kristensen 2005).
Kossek and Ozeki (1999) argue that there is no substantial evidence to support the notion
that work-life conflicting with family-life has any effect on productivity, but they suggest that
there is a negative effect on productivity when family-life conflicts with work-life. Anafarta
(2011) states that work-family conflict has an influence on job satisfaction, whereas family-work
conflict does not. O‟Laughlin & Bischoff (2005) support his notion and state that “inability to
cope with the effects of work-family conflict may result in dissatisfaction, absenteeism, poor
personal relationships, and decreased work performance.” This indicates that work-family
conflict has a negative impact on both the employee and the employer. Despite the benefits of
family-friendly policies, Allen (2001) argues that the availability of these benefits alone does not
address fundamental aspects of the organization that can hinder employees from successfully
balancing career and family.
35

Factors Associated with Adopting Flexible Working Arrangements
Besides possessing knowledge on the benefits and drawbacks of implementing flexible
working, companies should be able to create the right supportive environment. Factors associated
with the adoption of flexible working policies by organizations include organizational size,
sector and economic factors (den Dulk & Lewis 2000, Bardoel et al 1998), and the environment
of the company (Galinksy & Stein 1990). Lewis (2003) identifies additional factors, which
include: institutional pressures, local situational variables, human resource strategies and
strategic business concerns. According to Den Dulk (2001) state legislation is also another factor
that influences organizations to adopt FWAs. Other research has shown that organizations
promoting high-commitment management may also be likely to develop FWAs and other work–
family supports (Auerbach, 1990; Osterman, 1995). Thomas and Ganster (1995) for example
argue that family-supportive work environments are also a prerequisite for the successful
implementation of FWAs. They also state that in addition to a family-supportive work
environment, the perceptions of employees regarding the extent to which the organization is
family-supportive, is also an important factor. Such perceptions are referred to as familysupportive
organization perceptions (FSOP) (Allan 2001).
The extent to which the workplace environment is family-supportive appears to be
strongly related to employee job attitudes and experiences. Studies have shown that familysupportive
work environments are indirectly related to work–family conflict and job attitudes
through family-supportive organization perceptions (Thomas and Ganster 1995). Managers
fulfill a critical role in the implementation of FWAs and should lead by example (Lee 1990) and
are therefore encouraged to make use of these arrangements. Studies have revealed that some
36

managers are skeptical, because they fear problems arising from lack of supervision,
communication and workload management.
Summary
The objective of this literature review has been to highlight the current debate on the
effects of flexible working in relation to responding to economic globalization and the
diversification of the workforce . The chapter starts with defining flexible working, followed by
highlighting the importance of implementing this method of working. Next, the different forms
of flexible working arrangements are outlined for further clarification. Then, benefits and
drawbacks are discussed for a balanced view on the subject.
The most relevant theories supporting Flexible Working Arrangements have been considered to
come to a set of determinants necessary to implement flexible working.
37

Chapter 3 Methodology
This chapter explains the methodology applied to gather the data that is being analyzed in
this research. The topics being discussed are the research approach and strategy, data collection
process, sampling approach , data analysis process and the limitations of the research
methodology.
Research Approach and Strategy
The approach used in this study is the inductive approach, which means that the data was
collected first hand and the model was developed as a result of the data analysis. The study is
qualitative in nature due to the fact that the concept of flexible working arrangements is fairly
new to Suriname and thus conducted as an exploratory research. Because of this qualitative
study, the research strategy was to use the grounded theory approach to collect primary data
through semi-structured interviews and secondary data through desk research. The main research
objective is to identify the perceptions and perceived challenges to introducing flexible working
arrangements in Suriname. Because the concept of flexible working is fairly new to Suriname,
interviews were carried out to obtain insights about how much employees and employers really
know about the subject (what flexibility means to them); to what extent flexible working is
already being implemented in Suriname (How, if, and why they were making use of flexible
working); and the perceived challenges to effective implementation of flexible working
arrangements. Finally, the analysis of the data should present possible standard forms of flexible
working arrangements that can be implemented in the Surinamese environment.
Sampling Approach
The sample of this research consists of a judgment sample, because this allows for the
most productive and sufficiently representative sample to answer the research question. Three
38

characteristics were identified to qualify the sample population. The first characteristic selected
is: type of work, which gives the researcher a good idea on whether or not the job allows for
flexible working. Second is business sector: where a distinction was made between service and
production companies, which are the fastest growing sectors in Suriname. This allowed the
researcher to identify industry specific trends and characteristics. The third characteristic was the
size of the organization where the interviewees work. Size in this case, was defined as companies
having more than 200 employees.
In an attempt to reduce researcher bias, the sample population was chosen as diverse as
possible. The selection of the sample was focused on participants from IT departments, HR
departments, Operations departments, Sales (customer service) and Marketing departments. A
total of 20 individuals were interviewed. These were identified based on having access to
important sources of knowledge and were chosen from the: Telecommunications Company
Suriname (Telesur), N.V. Energie Bedrijven Suriname (the national electric power utility
company), IamGold (Rosebel Gold mines), Staatsolie Maatschappij N.V. (the local State Oil
Company), CKC BEM and Vensur (manufacturing companies).
Data Collection
To get a better understanding of flexible working, an extensive literature review was
carried out. Next, primary data was collected through semi-structured interviews with employees
and employers working in service and production sector organizations, to answer the research
questions. These interviews served as the main source of data collection. An interview guide was
used to conduct the interviews; during which audio recorders were used to document responses.
In addition to the use of audio recorders, two observers were appointed to assist the researcher in
39

documenting the interviews. These field notes were subsequently used as a second reference in
the data analysis process. All interviews were also transcribed verbatim to ensure validity of the
data collected.
Each interview started out with a general introduction on the topic of flexible working;
after which respondents were asked to give their definition of flexible working. The interviews
were further divided into separate open-ended questions for employers and employees on current
availability of FWAs, other provisions and preferences, perceived benefits and barriers of
implementing flexible working. All respondents were asked the same basic questions in the same
order. The interviews varied in duration; from the shortest being 15 minutes and the longest 45
minutes. Respondents were interviewed in their work environment during regular working hours.
The duration of the interview process was four weeks, because the interviewer was dependent on
the availability of the interviewees. In order to ensure trustworthiness of the data, the following
ground rules were established beforehand for conducting the interviews. Firstly, the interviewee
had the right to object to the use of an audio recorder. Secondly, the interviewee had the right to
remain anonymous or participate on a first name bases only. Lastly, the interviewee was
guaranteed a correct and “uncontaminated” representation of their statements.
Figure 3. 1
40

Data Analysis
The grounded theory (inductive) approach was used to generate ideas from the gathered
data. The constant comparative analysis was applied which involves comparing the interviews
that have similar or different characteristics in order to develop possible relationships. The first
step in analyzing the data was to listen to the audio recordings and document the responses word
for word. Triangulation was done by comparing oral recordings with field notes, which were also
incorporated into the final transcript. Field notes of the interviews were compared with those
produced by the interview partners and observers who are referred to as “data producers”, to
ensure that the findings were interpreted correctly; differentiating between “first-order data” (
terms, concepts and categories originating from the participants language) and “second order
data” (themes and dimensions originating from the researcher‟s theoretically based
interpretations of the participants‟ responses), as suggested by Corley (2004). An excel sheet was
used to document the responses of respondents to each question in a separate sheet. This is
considered “raw coding”, where initial concepts were identified to reduce the amount of data
gathered. These concepts or “codes” were then grouped into categories through “open coding”.
The next step was to find specific differences among the available categories or codes. These
differences formed relationships among the different categories and were then grouped into
“themes” (axial coding). To further eliminate researcher bias and guarantee validity, an
independent assessment of interview transcripts was done by both data producers and a
professional consultant who is specialized in qualitative research. The categorized data was then
used to find similarities and trends (aggregate dimensions) and served as a foundation for stating
key findings of the research.
41

Limitations of the Research Methodology
The research methodology carried out has two limitations. Firstly, the outcome of this
research is specific to the Surinamese environment and cannot be applied elsewhere. Secondly,
the judgment sampling approach allows for use of own judgment to select what seems like an
appropriate sample. This may allow for some degree of bias; however in this case the frame of
the sample was held as identical as possible.
42

Chapter 4 Findings
As the concept of flexible working is considered fairly new to Surinamese companies, a
research study was done to assess the various viewpoints of Surinamese employers and
employees on flexible working. The data collected was analyzed and the results were
subsequently interpreted to arrive at an overview of how flexible working is perceived and of the
types of flexibility currently offered in the Surinamese environment; particularly in the service
and production sector. An overview of the key findings of this research is presented below.
Definition of Flexible working
Both employers and employees were asked to give a definition of their understanding of flexible
working. Their understanding varies depending on the kind of work they do.
Employees.
When defining flexible working, most respondents focused on the deviation of the
conventional forty hours as stated in the labor union regulations. Their responses however, can
be categorized in the following themes: part-time working, outsourcing, standby-employment,
flextime, tele-work, having the right attitude, and output orientation. Respondents who defined
flexible working as part-time work, referring to employees who do not have to work the regular
forty hours as mentioned in labor legislation, believe that flexible work means accommodating
“Mothers who, for instance, want to work three days a week; that is, for example, twenty four
hours a week, also known as part-time work.” These women are willing to work three days out
of the week or the equivalent number of hours spread over the week, to balance their household
duties with a professional career. Outsourcing and stand-by employment are also defined as
flexible working. Outsourcing in this case involves working with job agencies or contractors
43

whereas stand-by employment involves working with individuals on an ad hoc and need-only
basis with no formal contract in place. The same respondent as before also states the following:
“ I also understand flexible working as working on contract or on call; if there is work you are
called to come in and work for 8 hours.”
A number of employees argued that flexible working means having the freedom to plan their
own work schedule or work alternative hours, which can be categorized as flextime. An
employee working in the service sector stated the following: “Under flexible working I
understand not having defined working hours. No defined arrival and departure times.” Another
respondent working in the production sector argued that: “flexible working means that you
schedule your workday based on the planned workload for the day, in accordance to good
concurrence between you and your supervisor. It can thus happen that you have to work late
into the evening, but your presence is not required in the morning hours. I should be able to
work 40 hours per week according to my personal time schedule.” Here, respondents view
flexible working as having flexibility in daily working hours where there is enough flexibility in
start and ending hours. Employees can either start later and leave when they have completed
their full 8 hours or start earlier than the regular start time and leave early as well (e.g. starting at
8.00am and leaving at 16.00pm instead of starting at 7.00am and leaving at 15.00pm). One
respondent even went further by stating that “flexible working is all about time management.
Working based on the available time one has.”
Others perceive flexible working as the ability to work from more than one office
location, from which they travel back and forth, or working from home. They felt that the
location where work is being done, is the main characteristic of flexible working. Again, other
employees argued that flexible working means having the right attitude. This means that
44

employees should “do everything work- related that is being asked of them, as effective and
efficient as possible.” More specifically, one respondent states that “individuals should work
proactively, be ready for the worst case scenario and incorporate more self-discipline.” Another
employee responded as follows: “ Flexible working means being ready for the worst- case
scenario.” He thinks that this attitude is necessary when working in the production sector. At the
same time “ workers should acknowledge that they should work as hard as possible even when
there is no supervision.” Another respondent believes that “ if you have people with the right
core values dedicated to achieve company goals, flexible working should not be an issue.”
Respondents also defined flexible working as working based on output orientation, which
means being able to work based on predetermined targets and workload division. It has to do
more with flexibility in the time-frame given to complete a certain amount of work given. One
respondent argued that “ I should be able to work according to the planned workload for the
day.” He states that a prerequisite in this case is a good understanding between employee and
employer. Another respondent argues that “ it should be possible to arrange my work and
working hours according to my work tasks and still work the regular 40 hours.” According to
another respondent, flexible working is “ setting personal targets for employees, so that
supervisors manage according to targets and less on the control factor.”
The interviews also revealed perceptions that stood out from the rest. One example of such a
perception is: “creating a pleasant environment as much as possible between employer and
employee in order to respond to and eliminate any shortcomings and other negative
circumstances.”Another perception that stood out is: “Working smooth without any obstacles”.
The guiding principle for flexible working according to a number of respondents involved in this
study, is the pre-requisite that employers should focus on targets and results instead of actual
45

hours worked. Additional pre-requisites include the individual flexibility of employees and
employers. One respondent stated that “ flexible working is a win-win situation; both employer
and employee should have a flexible attitude.” Others maintain that the level of flexibility is
dependent upon individual preferences and that the key to overcome discrepancies is to have a
good communications flow between employee and employer.
Employers.
In general, employers defined flexible working as: having flextime, being able to work
alternative hours, tele-work; working from home, and being output orientated. They maintain
that employees should be given autonomy over their work schedule but are expected to deliver
targets on designated deadlines. An employer in the production sector relayed that according to
him, “flexible working means the same as what is meant internationally: being able to work from
home or having flexible hours.” One respondent summed it up by stating that: “Flexible working
I define as delivering the same output that is agreed, but then in alternative hours that are not
strictly set , e.g. o07:00-15:00 hours, but the employee is given the opportunity to work from
home or not to report at 7 for duty, but a bit later, as long as the agreed output is delivered.”
His response indicates that working hours should not be strictly organized between certain hours,
but should allow for some flexibility. The important pre-requisite here is delivering the output
that is required from the employee. Another pre-requisite is that employees should be able to
work autonomously.
Most managers who are implementing flexible working, either formally or informally,
are benchmarking their practices against companies in the United States and Europe. Their main
concern remains whether or not employees are disciplined enough to deliver results and manage
their workload within the set time limit. However, some employers strongly believe that in order
46

to retain professionals it is imperative to apply flexible working and compensate based on targets
and output. The CFO of the Surinamese electric power utility company stated the following:
“We believe in what we call output orientation, meaning, that it is important that the
professional achieves his targets based on self-discipline and as such – as far as we are
concerned, has the freedom to determine when he or she executes these duties, because in the
end, he is ultimately being compensated on the achievement of those targets.” Certain
employers prefer to treat their employees as consultants where both employer and employee
benefit from a win-win situation. One respondent even went as far as stating that flexible
working means “ working when it is convenient for the employee as long as the continuity of the
organization is not threatened.” This implies a very employee-oriented focus where the
organization helps facilitate the different roles employees fulfill, and thus aims to minimize
work-role conflict.
Flexible Work Arrangements Offered
Formally there are no flexible working arrangements offered in the production or service
sector in Suriname. Informally, the types of FWAs offered include: flextime, tele-work, job
rotation and job sharing in very rare cases. However, for the most part, the companies involved
make use of contractors or job agencies. The results revealed that in both, the service and
production sector, flextime or a variation thereof, is the most popular form of FWA being
implemented informally. Employees have flexibility in arrival and departure time based on
individual arrangements with supervisors. One production sector employee attested to this notion
by saying: “ It is possible for me to leave work early due to personal circumstances, or arrive
later at work.” However, flexible working is more likely to be offered in the service sector and
47

less in the production sector and is highly dependent on the type of job. For instance, a manager
from BEM CKC (production company) argued that “ offering flexible working in the production
sector is limited, because you are talking about a production plant where it is not possible for
employees to bring their work home.” Yet, some respondents argued that employees who work
on a project basis, such as a PMO office, should not be forced to work regular hours as long as
they successfully complete the project. For certain production departments it is not feasible to
implement flexible working, because they are short staffed and are required to work longer hours
to meet targets and deadlines, especially during periods when there are extra orders to be
completed. The kind of flexibility they are allowed is to leave during work hours to tend to an
urgent personal matter.
Front office and customer service employees are less likely to make use of flextime, but
are more likely to make use of job rotation and job sharing. These flexible working arrangements
are not as popular as flextime and are implemented in three out of seven organizations where
interviews were conducted. They are being implemented more out of necessity to avoid
interruptions in business operations and maintain competitiveness, than out of an employeeoriented
focus. This is mainly due to the fact that the core activities of these departments include
transactions and involvement with customers. For front office employees of the electric power
utility company, there is a special arrangement, which entails that employees are allowed to
manage their own flextime amongst themselves, as long as this occurs in agreement and the same
order of departure is maintained as the order of arrival that day. The way job rotation works in
this company, is that when one employee calls in sick or is on leave, a co-worker is required to
perform the absentees‟ duties. This is done to guarantee the continuity of business operations.
48

Some companies, such as the national Telecommunications company, Telesur, are forced
to accommodate tele-working. In their particular case, they have technicians who work on-call
after regular operating hours in case of emergencies or technical failures. To accommodate these
employees, Telesur provides arrangements that make it possible to work from home instead of
coming to the office. These employees are only required to travel to the problem location
depending on the severity of the situation at that moment. Other companies informally
implement tele-work only when key employees are sick and cannot come to work. However,
employees do not perceive this as flexible working as they see this as being forced to work more
hours; “if you‟re sick, you‟re sick. I am not a supporter of tele-work”, said one respondent.
In the production sector, flextime and tele-work are implemented according to the
discretion of the supervisor. However, this is limited to employees in administrative and other
jobs that are not directly related to production itself. In fact, most of the time tele-working
involves working from a different office location or division during regular working hours. For
example, employees are allowed to work at a location closest to their home. In one of the biggest
production companies, NV Staatsolie Maatschappij (State Oil company), the HR department is
currently working out methods to adjust work scheduling for the IT department. This particular
method involves the use of a „duty roster‟ where employees can choose which hours of the day
they would like to work. Employers are more inclined to offer flexibility in arrival and departure
time, but say that they leave room for individual arrangements up to the immediate supervisor.
Type of Provisions Offered
Employees were asked which provisions or alternative working arrangements employers
offer to stimulate or accommodate flexible working. The results show that the commonly
available provisions are: Mobile phone with postpaid or prepaid credit , closed user group
49

systems, laptops with or without internet connectivity as well as remote access through virtual
private networks (VPN‟s). One company even offers videoconferencing. Mobile phones
(company phones), calling credit and closed user group systems are usually provided together.
Closed user group systems are incorporated as a cost savings strategy where calls can be made
unlimited for a fixed fee, but at the same time are intended to enhance communications between
employer and employee, amongst co-workers and with customers. This usually requires
employees to be available outside of standard operating hours. Laptops are provided to work at
alternative hours from home or a different office location. Some come with internet connection,
while others do not. Laptops and mobile phones are also offered to employees to enable reading
company emails while away from the office. Undoubtedly, the internet plays an important role in
implementing flexible working, because it makes it possible for employers and employees to
communicate in real time with each other and their customers regardless of their location. One
employer deliberately states that “internet is one of the main pre-requisites for flexible working,
particularly tele-work, because it enables you to send work electronically.” However, not every
company involved in the study offers above mentioned provisions all together. It is usually either
or; there were at least two companies offering no provisions at all.
Remote access in combination with a VPN is another provisions that allows one on one
access to the company network. Employees in general are not allowed to connect remotely to the
company‟s network, however the IT employees are allowed 24/7 remote access to the company
network due to the nature of their work. The study shows that production companies such as the
State Oil company and Rosebel Gold mines offer this provision to top management and suppliers
or employees that are overseas. Telesur is in this case, the only service company that offers this
50

provision to some of its employees (e.g. account managers, network technicians, top
management).
Preferred FWAs
Operational employees working in the production sector would like to see their
employers offer compressed workweeks or at least the option to work every other week ( one
week work, one week off). They argue that due to the hard manual labor and odd working hours,
their work interferes with their home life which causes stress. This stress causes health problems
and reduces job satisfaction. Compressed workweeks is particularly preferred by employees
who are still in school or want to go back to school. Other provisions include:
Ability to work less than 40 hours per week (part-time work). Employees with young
children and other responsibilities including a second job, prefer this kind of work arrangement.
Particularly those who have worked abroad (e.g. the Netherlands or United States) in an
environment where part-time work is accommodated, and those with young children who can
only work part of the week, have this as a high priority. Although many respondents would like
to work part-time, one argued that: “working part-time has its downside, because working parttime
equals less hours worked and less hard needed money.”
Ability to work from home (tele-work). Employees in administrative jobs prefer this
type of arrangement. Employers in favor of this type of FWA, argued that by implementing telework
they are able to accommodate employees who have some type of ailment, but are still able
to perform. For example, a temporarily disabled employee e.g a broken leg is not able to come to
work, but can still work from home.
Job rotation. Employees feel that co-workers should be able perform the duties of each
other. Also, they argue that they would like to “do something else once in a while.” Other
51

employees felt that job rotation would help eliminate concentrated knowledge; “ what you
sometimes get is that when one employee is on leave, work gets backed up because he or she is
the only one that has the knowledge or expertise to carry out that particular job.” In one
production company, filling in for absent co-workers does not occur. “Everyone is focused on
their own tasks. Job rotation, therefore, could be useful.” Another reason why employees favor
job rotation is because it helps to break down „silos‟ or so called „sacred cows‟.
Remote access and internet connection at home. One respondent from the
telecommunications company stated that he would “prefer to work via video conferencing and
come to the office for an hour to meet with colleagues if necessary.” This provision is especially
preferred by employees who work in service sector companies and currently have no provisions.
Employers added that when offering such provisions, a stringent network security system is
required. Having a company car available to commute to and from work, was also one of the
preferred provisions. Interestingly, there were a few employees who responded that they would
not like any provisions to work flexibly, as working flexible equals working more. More
specifically, one respondent argued: “the downside is that you take your work home. Taking work
home should be possible, but the company should not expect me to be available 24/7.” Another
argued that : “ If I choose not to take work home, I should not be forced to. Having company
provisions forces you to work from home where I have to work at midnight for example to meet a
deadline. My flexibility stops whenever I leave the office. You have to set boundaries to workrelated
stress.” Others stated that “ flexible working forms a threat to business operations and
business continuity.” Because “the affinity with the organization fades away, which in turn has a
negative impact on employee productivity.” This particular respondent believes that if an
employee is not frequently among his or her co-workers, they do not feel connected to the
52

organization. When asked to identify the types of flexible working arrangements they would
most likely offer to their employees, employers suggested: flextime, job rotation, part-time
working and tele-work.
Level of Staff that works Flexible
In the organizations involved in this study, flexible working is mostly designated to top
and middle management, IT employees who work odd hours. Other than that, flexible working
is not offered formally to employees; neither in the service nor production sector.
One employers believes that flexible working could be made possible for certain disciplines such
as janitorial departments and what they label as „contractors‟. Contractors in this case, are
individuals who work fulltime for the company, but are not entitled to fringe benefits such as
health, pension or other benefits.
Although outsourcing is not recognized as flexible working, the current trend for local
companies is to outsource jobs in ICT ,housekeeping, technical engineering and service
maintenance, in order to retain as much of a flexible workforce as possible and to reduce labor
cost. Executive staff are usually allowed to leave during working hours to tend to personal
matters. However, it is expected that they compensate for lost time. This indicates that flexibility
is attached to hierarchal positions. However, employers acknowledge the need to accommodate
lower levels of employees so that their work arrangements are more practical and suitable to
individual needs.
Employers offer informal flexible working arrangements based on the type of job
function, attitude and output produced by the employee, but mostly on an ad hoc basis.
Employers offering flextime do so by incorporating a time window for arrival times. One service
53

employer for example allows his employees to arrive between 7.00am and 8.30 am with the prerequisite
they still work their full eight hours. He states that: “ what I do is build in a reasonable
margin where core hours are established and employees are allowed to come in between 7.00am
and 8.30am.”
Some organizations do not offer any structured form of flexible working, but do allow
their employees to arrive later or depart earlier due to family or other obligations. Research has
shown that this is particular for companies in the production sector. Employees who are allowed
to work from home, are more likely to work as ICT technicians and account managers.
Technicians who are “on call” or work in long or late night shifts are generally provided with
tools to work from home. This is characteristic of both the production and service sector. Most of
these employees have what we call senior positions and are required to be available for work at
extended times during the day according to their contract. In some production companies such as
stone or steel manufacturing, flexible working is not an option for operational employees. Mostly
HR staff or marketing staff is allowed to make use of informal flexible working arrangements. In
the service sector you have a mix of operational (sales & marketing) and administration
employees who make use of flexible arrangements. These employees have 24/7 access to the
organizations‟ internal network.
One respondent argued that he would not offer flexible working to managers, because he
feels that they have more responsibilities and that“ they get paid to do a certain job.”
One employer argues that you should distinguish for yourself to whom you offer flexible
working. “Flexible working is an important instrument for professionals. And I am not denying
that even at lower levels you need to create some space for people. At lower levels where work
is more structured, people do not have the need for flexible working. They want to come to work
54

at 7 a.m. and leave at 3:15 p.m. and then leave. For the professional who strives for autonomy, if
you don‟t offer flexible working it will produce stress. That is qualitative stress, but if you
implement this instrument at a lower level to people who want structure, then it also produces
stress. It‟s not all black and white with me when I say, you cannot apply this at a lower level.
But it depends on the individual you are dealing with. To whom can you give this space?”
Drivers and Benefits of Flexible Working
According to the results, there are four drivers for implementing flexible working. These
are: job satisfaction, employee commitment, knowledge distribution and cost reduction.
Employers believe that they should offer employees flexibility in their work so that these
employees will be able to balance their work and family life and thus reduce conflicts that might
arise from inflexibility in their work schedule. This suggests that companies are starting to move
towards a more employee oriented focus. Employers strongly believe that they should move
towards an environment that accommodates family life, because they find that this will increase
employee satisfaction and output altogether. They also argue that employee satisfaction goes
hand in hand with job satisfaction and that an employee oriented focus increases commitment,
productivity and creativity. One employer argued that “ in Suriname there generally is a low
turnover rate for employees. This shows employee loyalty and commitment to the company who
should in turn appreciate this loyalty by offering flexibility. Certainly when confronted with
employee sickness and mothers with young children. In doing this, the company supports family
planning which will lead to job satisfaction.”
Another driver for offering flexible working is distribution of knowledge. According to
employers this involves knowledge sharing and process control that are imperative to guarantee
55

continuity of business operations. Employers in both the service and production sector admit that
there is too little focus on knowledge sharing and find that job rotation would be a perfect
solution to this shortcoming. As one employer puts it: “ With job rotation you not only aim for
flexibility as an instrument, but you achieve a distribution of knowledge and assurance of
processes regardless of whether one specific employee is absent from work. This enables you to
work more efficiently and create what we call a „flexible layer‟.”
The results also show that cost reduction is one of the main drivers for Surinamese
employers considering flexible working. The global recession has it effects on developing and
less developed economies as well. As a result, employers argued that they are forced to look into
alternative methods to incorporate cost reduction. They find that flexible working is one way to
address this issue. From this perspective, flexible working will result in a flexible workforce if
employees are allowed to work from home and work part-time. Working part-time will also
enable companies to facilitate professionals.
According to the results, employees also believe that flexible working will allow them to
balance their work and family life. They argue that flexible working will allow for more time off
to tend to personal affairs as well as create the environment to start their own business on the
side. One contractor working in the IT department stated the following: “I prefer flexible
working, because it allows me to do other things such as scouting and visiting clients for my own
consultancy business.”
According to employers, flexible working has the following benefits:
Increased employee performance. “Employees that are motivated and happy will be better
focused and will perform better.”
56

Positive company image. “ When your employees are happy, they radiate this to each other,
customers and other outsiders. This gives the company a positive image.”
Creating work-family balance for employees. “ when employees get the chance and time to
take care of their family responsibilities first, they are at peace when they come to work and are
better focused to get the job done.”
Overall cost reduction by working cost-effective from home. “ certain tasks can be done
from home which allows for savings on workspace.” One employer argued that employees who
prefer part-time work for example, allow for cost savings on salary.
Creativity is another benefit for employers. They believe that flexible work can stimulate
creativeness and employee productivity.
Employees perception of the benefits of flexible working do not vary substantially from those of
employers. One employee states that “ the benefits of flexible working for me include being able
to implement cost savings, being able to respond quickly to customer and employee needs (in the
case of tele-work) and personal benefits for the employee.” Another argues that “ it is all about
efficiency, cost savings and time management.” A substantial amount of employees view having
time off to tend to personal matters a major benefit.
Perceived Barriers of implementing Flexible Working
Both employees and employers agree that the organization‟s culture is undoubtedly the major
stumbling block in implementing flexible working. Flexible working constitutes a mind shift and
change as a whole, which often moves everyone out of their comfort zone. One employee
responded by stating that “ there needs to be an attitude change as well as habituation to
accommodate flexible working.” A second barrier is the lack of company policy to accommodate
57

flexible working. The study shows that there is only one company in the production sector that is
actively working to incorporate flexible working in their HR policies. Employers argue that there
has to be a clear policy on who is eligible to work flexibly. They also believe that as long as
there is no legislation on this issue, it is not recommended to formally implement flexible
working. Labor union regulations need to be amended as well. Others argue that our social
system in Suriname is not quite ready for this type of working. Flexible working involves
making a mind shift.
In many organizations you still have an old fashioned way of thinking: “ if you are not at
work early (7am) you are lazy and unproductive.” This stems from a control oriented attitude.
Some believe that flexible working would not work for employees who are considered „young‟.
They argue that „young‟ employees are often immature and do not have the self-discipline to
work flexibly; often employees do not possess enough sense of responsibility to work
autonomously. This involves the attitude of both employees and employers.
One employee working in the HR department of a production company, argues that “flexible
working arrangements are not suitable for the type of industry they are in, because the business
operations can be compromised.” This particular respondent spoke from personal experience:
“ I worked part-time in Holland for thirty two hours a week, and as a result I had less affinity
with the company and my co-workers, because I was hardly at the office.”
Inadequate tooling is also identified as a significant barrier to implementing flexible working.
58

Output
orientation
Defines
Flexible working
Influence/barrier
Culture
Employee
productivity
Stimulates
Drives
Informal
Ad Hoc
Results in
Commonly
available
provisions
Implementation
Model of Flexible Working according to Employers
Figure 4.1
59

Culture
Work
scheduling
Defines
Influence / Barrier
Flexible working
Individual Needs
Stimulates
Drives
Informal
Ad Hoc
Results in
Commonly
available
provisions
Implementation
Model of Flexible Working according to Employees
Figure 4.2
60

Summary of Key Findings
Flexibility can be applied to employees in a range of jobs and job levels. The results
show that employees in general define flexible working as “having the freedom to plan their own
work schedule as well as being able to work based on predetermined targets and workload.”
This also known as flextime. Employers on the other hand, define flexible working as
“delivering the same output as agreed upon in alternative working hours whereby the employee
is given the opportunity to work from home or plan his/her arrival and departure time.” In
Suriname, flextime or a variation thereof is the most common form of flexible working
arrangement currently being implemented informally. Flexibility is offered on an individual basis
and left to the discretion of the immediate supervisor. Most employers give their middle
management and supervisors the freedom to decide whether or not they implement flexible
working on an informal basis. Remarkably, results reveal that there can be different perceptions
and experiences within the same company. Flexible working or a variation thereof is more likely
to be offered in the service sector than in the production sector and is highly dependent on the
type of job. However, flexible working is not offered formally to employees in either sector. On
the flipside, not all employees are looking for flexible arrangements, because they fear it may
isolate them or affect their company affinity. However, the study shows that women are more
prone to flexible working than men.
Most employers have a positive attitude towards implementing flexible working. But at
the same time they mention some concerns that involve establishing boundaries between work
time (core hours) and face to face availability; and finding a balance in the benefits for both
61

employers and employees. Some employers view provisions as perks instead of tools, which
stems from a relationship of distrust. Employers should realize that employees can be guided
using output control instead of dominating control.
The provisions currently offered to accommodate flexible working are: Mobile phone,
calling credit and closed user group system, laptops with or without internet connectivity as well
as remote access through VPN‟s. In spite of the list seeming extensive, not every company
involved in this study offers these provisions all together. It is usually either or. There were at
least two that offered no provisions at all.
According to the results, employers have four main reason to implement flexible
working. These are: job satisfaction, employee commitment, knowledge distribution and cost
reduction. The benefits involved in implementing flexible working in their opinion include:
increased employee performance, positive company image, creating work-family balance for
employees, creativity and cost reduction. The positive image is being accomplished by
accommodating working mothers, disabled employees and employees who are care takers of
elderly parents or family members.
Both employees and employers agree that the organization‟s culture is undoubtedly the
major stumbling block in implementing flexible working. There are currently no formal policies
and structures in place to accommodate flexible working. Hence, the need for regulating the
informal use of FWA. Another major issue is that employers believe that the social system in
Suriname is not quite ready for this type of working.
62

Chapter 5 Discussion
The main goal of this research was to gain insight in the perception of employers and
employees about flexible working. The important question here is whether or not Suriname is
ready for formal implementation of flexible working. Women with young children are becoming
one of the fastest growing segments of the work force. Furthermore, employees are increasingly
showing interest in advance studies and therefore are in need of flexible work scheduling. This
makes flexible working a growing need in our society. In this section, the perception and current
demand are discussed in search for an answer to the before mentioned need. As mentioned in the
introduction chapter, the ultimate objective of this research is to initiate a wider discussion on
flexible working in Suriname and increase the awareness of this phenomenon in the corporate
world.
Patterns of Perception Differentiation Among Respondents
In general, the perception of employers and employees regarding flexible working is in
accordance with what literature tells us about the subject. However, there are some deviations in
employees‟ and employers‟ perception regarding FWAs. The results revealed that employers‟
perception of flexible working leans more towards a productivity (output oriented) focus,
whereas employees‟ perception is more motivated by personal convenience (work scheduling
factor). A few employees for example, argued that flexible working equals longer working hours
and that flexible working benefits the employer more than it does employees. Once they leave
the workplace, they do not wish to bring work home. Others perceived flexibility as having a
negative impact on the continuity of business operations. They believe that alternative working
arrangements that include being away from the office, creates estrangement among co-workers
and less commitment to the organization in general.
63

According to the data, employers perceive flexible working as facilitating employees by
introducing flexible or alternative working hours to achieve the highest possible outcome.
Employees on the other hand, perceive flexible working as having more time to cater to their
personal life and obligations, and therefore would like to work when it suites them best. In fact,
they prefer compressed work weeks and working from home in order to reduce face time at the
office. Employers however, want their employees to have remote access and internet at home in
order to work when away from the office regardless if such an employee has already worked
their full eight hours at the office.
From the results we can conclude that in employers‟ perception, flexible working has the
following benefits: increased employee performance, positive company image, creating workfamily
balance for employees, overall cost reduction by working cost-effective from home and
creativity. Responses revealed that employers have four main reason to implement flexible
working. These are: job satisfaction, employee commitment, knowledge spread and cost
reduction. Employees‟ perception on the other hand, identifies work-life balance as the major
and most important benefit of flexible working. The barriers perceived were: organizational
culture, attitude towards flexible working, lack of policies and regulation, and the readiness of
our social system.
Current Demand for Flexible Working Arrangements
Results show that there are a significant amount of companies offering flexible working
arrangements informally. Nevertheless, it is important to reiterate that flexible working is not
offered formally to employees in Suriname and the way it is being implemented deviates from
flexible working as described in literature. This implies that employers in Suriname have their
64

own interpretation to what flexible working entails and how flexible working arrangements
should be implemented; particularly in the service and production sector which were studied in
this case. And even in cases where flexible working is offered, it is mostly on an ad hoc basis.
The study revealed that every company has their own set of rules and guidelines they follow
based on their own views and perceptions of flexible working. Some organizations do not offer
any form of flexible working but do allow their employees to arrive later or depart earlier due to
family or other obligations. This is particularly so in the production sector. The forms of flexible
working that are currently offered informally include: Flextime, part-time working, job rotation,
job sharing and tele-work; at least, a variation thereof. Flexible working is more likely to be
offered in the service sector and less in the production sector and is highly dependent on the type
of job. Flextime is the most popular form of flexible working arrangement being implemented
informally. Job rotation and job sharing are not as popular and are implemented far less than
flextime.
Although outsourcing is not recognized as flexible working according to literature, the
current trend for local companies is to outsource jobs in ICT ,housekeeping, technical engineers
and service maintenance in to reduce labor cost. Based on the results, we can conclude that there
is a growing demand for flexible working in Suriname; both from an employer‟s and employee‟s
standpoint. Employees currently demand flextime and tele-work mostly, because they allow for
the highest level of freedom to schedule their working hours. Employers, on the other hand,
demand job rotation, flextime and part-time work because of the benefits they have for the
organization. Job rotation has proven to be a powerful tool for those employers that currently
implement this type of flexible working. Job rotation has thus far contributed to distribution of
knowledge ( knowledge sharing), which helps guarantee the continuity of business operations.
65

Factors associated with implementing FWA in Suriname
There are several factors to be considered when implementing flexible working in
Suriname. The first is organizational size. Hogarth et.al (2000) for example, suggests that large
organizations are more likely to adopt formal FWAs and that small sized organizations are more
likely to implement informal FWAs. This research was limited to medium and large
organizations and can thus not produce an adequate answer to this question. The second factor is
sector; data collected implies that flexible working is more likely to be offered in the service
sector and less likely in the production sector. Thirdly, there are economic factors to be
considered in relation to the demand and supply for labor. In an economic boom, there is usually
a short supply of skilled workers and flexible working would provide for an alternative to retain
or attract these skilled workers. In an economic downturn on the other hand, there is a surplus of
skilled workers on the market. Flexible working will be less attractive in this case.
Another interesting factor is institutional pressure. The results did not reveal significant evidence
to state that there is sufficient institutional pressure present for Suriname organizations.
Implications for theory and research
Theoretical implications
The overall goal of this study is to contribute to the introduction of flexible working in
Suriname. The findings of this study do not diverge from the two main traditions of research on
flexible working literature, which are the work-life tradition and the productivity and efficiency
tradition ( Dalton & Mesch, 1990; Krausz et al 2000; Barnett & Hall 2001;Friedman &
Greenhaus, 2000). They are merely a confirmation of what literature tells us. This research
66

implies that the theory on flexible working is universal and thus also applicable in the Suriname
context. The main lesson learned is that the perception of the employees supports the work-life
integration theory. However, employers are more inclined to favor flexible working, because it
can lead to increased productivity and efficiency of business operations. These findings also shed
light on the current level of knowledge and perception of flexible working in the Surinamese
context as well as the current demand for flexible working arrangements.
The overall implications of this study for literature on flexible working however, is the
production of a set of interesting questions, which will be further discussed in the section on
future research.
Managerial and practical implications
There are a few managerial and practical implications that can be deducted from the
results. Firstly, on organizational level, employers need to decide whether or not they want to
implement flexible working in their organization. This will require some strategizing on their
part of how flexible working will fit into the future of their company. Albeit, employers cannot
continue to neglect the fact that there is a growing employee demand for adopting FWAs which
will soon force organizations to revise their HR policies and formulate flexible working policies.
Labor unions will have to work with employers to incorporate FWAS in their regulations. The
ultimate goal of policy in this area is to find flexibility arrangements with some form of shared
control that serve the interests of both groups. Employers will also be challenged to provide
guidelines on eligibility. Secondly, a complete organizational restructuring is inevitable to create
an accommodating culture of change. Managers and subordinates will have to undergo a change
process (mind shift), which involves shifting from a control orientation where physical face-to-
67

face presence is required, to an output guided control orientation where target setting and
achievement are leading.
To facilitate the change process, managers need to be given the right tools and control
mechanisms such as employee assessment systems to exercise high performance management as
well as undergo training on how to exercise trust management. Initially, implementing flexible
working will require a high investment, because of equipment and facilities that need to be put in
place to accommodate FWAs. Tools to accommodate tele-work, job sharing and job rotation will
require additional software, hardware and other telecom infrastructure to work effectively.
Furthermore, schedule control of those employees working flexibly will require additional
coordination.
Although most of the employers that participated in the study are positive towards the
implementation of flexible working, there are some concerns mentioned. These include concerns
regarding the way flexible scheduling would affect productivity; and the limited experience they
have with subordinates‟ use of FWAs. In regards to general implications to the service and
production sector in Suriname, longer operating hours to facilitate customers and increased
productivity levels are two very important factors. Employee control over work scheduling is a
managerial issue that needs to be dealt with when implementing FWA. Employees having a high
degree of control over their work schedule requires a very high degree of trust between employer
and employee, because the employee determines his or her work schedule most of the time. Key
here is to make good working arrangements regarding required face time and core hours at the
office, as well as for delivery of assignments and targets.
68

Limitations
There were a few limitations while conducting this study. The first one is sample size.
The sample consists of 20 respondents from 7 different companies and was based on judgment
sampling. Due to the allotted time frame for conducting research, the interviews could only be
done during a period of the year (August thru September) where most Surinamese families are
vacationing. As a result many of the initial respondents identified were not available to
participate. This has resulted in a smaller sample size. The study group may not be representative
of the larger population and it was therefore difficult to make quantitative predictions. However,
the participating respondents were carefully chosen to represent a diverse as possible sample
from both the production and service sector companies. The companies involved in the study
have more than 200 employees and can be considered medium to large in size. Furthermore,
because this research is exploratory in nature it is tailored to the needs of production and service
sector population.
Another limitation is the fact that respondents do not always provide the “correct” or
“true” answer either intentionally or unintentionally out of fear that they would expose company
weaknesses. Because the subject of flexible working was fairly new to some respondents,
certain answers were inadequate. This has limited the researcher, because follow up questions
were based on the participants‟ responses to an earlier question.
A third limitation is the fact that the data analysis was done manually without the help of a
computer software program. This resulted in extensive and a long period of analysis and
researcher bias is therefore not entirely excluded.
69

Future Research
To further study the impact of implementing flexible working in Suriname, future
researchers should focus on the impact of labor legislation, the financial implications for
organizations and the tooling and control mechanisms needed to facilitate flexible working.
Eligibility and implementation procedures are other topics that also require looking into.
Although there is much research done on an international level regarding the above mentioned
topics, future researchers should carefully analyze whether or not the same findings can be
applied to Suriname. When it comes to labor legislation, one of the main questions to be
answered when looking at flexible working involves regulations and policies needed to facilitate
and regulate flexible working. Both on national and organizational levels it is observed that
legislation is somewhat outdated. Future researchers should advise on the type of legislation to
be adopted, and if current international legislation such as the Fair Work Act 2009 and the
Flexible Working Act for example, are applicable to Suriname. Financial implications, as to
financial benefits and costs of implementing flexible working, are also subject to further
research. This should be done from an organizational perspective as well as from a governmental
perspective.
The relationship between flexible working and organizational time demands is also
another relevant subject for future research. As part of the company‟s culture, employees are
often expected to take work home during the week and/or on weekends. As such, in some
organizations employees are expected to work more than 40 hours a week to be perceived as
committed and productive. How will flexible working manage these organizational demands?
Based on the interviews, a few interesting questions for future research emerged:
70

What is the relationship between flexible working and the affinity with the organization?
What level of employees should be allowed to work flexibly?
What is the impact of tele-work on work life balance?
What is the relationship between flexible working and the concept of outsourcing?
What role does the attitude of employees and employers play in the implementation of
flexible working? Specifically the employers‟ awareness and attitudes to flexible working
as well as the attitudes from co-workers.
How does workplace culture relate to flexible working? What types of workplace culture
facilitate the use of flexible working practices?
What is the role of HR in relation to the implementation process; e.g. training of flexible
employees and guidance and support of management
In order for future researchers to adequately answer these questions, the sampling size
should be expanded and further diversified. Alternative methods to analyze data should also be
taken into consideration, such as the use of software programs to code data. A combination of
qualitative and quantitative analysis might also enrich the findings.
During the execution of the literature review there were three main shortcomings that stood out,
which could serve as topics of future research. These involved: the use of formal policies versus
the use of informal policies within organizations, lack in research on the organizational effects of
FWA on co-workers who do not participate in flexible working, and the lack of research on the
impact of FWA on organizational change (structure, strategy etc.).
71

Conclusions and Recommendations
In general, employers and employees have congruent views regarding the definition of
flexible working. However, their perception of FWAs are not in alignment with each other. The
cause of this could be the absence of sufficient knowledge and information regarding the
implementation and regulation of flexible working in Suriname. Currently, there are no
institutions committed to educate on, or professionally guide business organizations with
implementing FWAs. From the government‟s side, there are also no official policies or programs
in place to facilitate the business sector in this matter. This indicates that there is opportunity
and need to formulate policies for structuring flexible working in Suriname. Regulating the
observed use of informal flexible working is a good starting point, considering the demand for
flexible working in Suriname. Formalizing flexible working will help eliminate discrimination
against women, working mothers, and employees who are care takers of elderly parents or family
members, and disabled employees.
Flexibility should be considered a management tool to improve productivity and
efficiency rather than an employee perk or accommodation. Possible reduction of overtime
costs, matching staff to organizational demand profiles, flexible and diverse workforce are
among the most important benefits. On the other hand, there are a few important factors to
consider. These include the additional cost of implementing FWAs, ability to meet customer
demands, ability to reorganize work among flexible staff, impact on quality and performance.
However, flexible working should support the organization's goals in order for it to be effective.
The perceived benefits as reported by respondents include: increased employee performance,
positive company image, work-family balance, cost reduction and improved creativity. The
72

arriers perceived were: organizational culture, attitude towards flexible working, lack of
policies and regulation, and the readiness of our social system.
Important considerations whether or not organizational size and business sector are
deciding factors in implementing FWAs. Besides, data collected implies that flexible working is
more likely to be offered in the service sector and less likely in the production sector. The verdict
whether flexible working can be applied to production sector companies is still pending.
Implementing flexible working currently does not appear to be of high priority in the Suriname
business environment. However, with the increasing influence of globalization the business
community will soon be confronted with this need. Therefore, it is recommendable to
immediately start the discussion on the usefulness of flexible working in Suriname and ways to
implement it. The proposed forms of FWAs and the steps to implement these are described
below.
Common forms of FWAs to be implemented in Suriname
The following FWAS are recommended for implementation in Suriname:
First, Flextime: according to the findings, flextime is the most commonly used FWA. Because it
is easiest to manage, the least costly, and workable for both parties, it is highly recommended.
Participants of this research viewed flextime as corresponding mostly with Work-Life balance. It
allows for individualized start and end times that could vary daily. However, the same number of
hours are expected to be worked every day. Important in implementation of flextime is the
incorporation of “core hours”. Core hours encourage face time between co-workers and allow
for group meetings and communications.
73

The second recommendation is Tele-work. It is predicted as “a likely direction for
organizational development” (Pieperl and Baruch, 1997; Chesborough and Teece, 1996),
because it is viewed as the FWA offering the most cost savings when it comes to office space.
Tele-work allows for a portion of the job to be performed away from the office, usually at home.
It is most suitable for work that has clearly defined tasks and targets, work activity that can be
measured and does not require daily face to face interaction. Important in the implementation, is
the use of tele-work agreements between employer and employee that specifies the number of
hours to be worked at the tele-work location and the specific time in which this will occur (e.g.,
every Monday or Wednesday, the last Friday of the month, etc.). Additionally, it is important to
provide appropriate tooling such as hardware (computer or laptop), software, and internet
connectivity . Providing technical support is also an important consideration for this type of
FWA.
Third is Compressed Work Schedules. This is a traditional 35-40 hour work week
condensed into fewer than five work days. This is a good alternative to flextime as it offers
similar benefits.
Common examples of Compressed Work Schedules for traditional 35-40 hour work weeks are:
Four 8.75-hour days (35 hours) , Four 10-hour days (40 hours) , Four varied days; Three 10-hour
days, and one 7.5-hour day (37.5 hours), etc.
Fourth is part- time work. This is usually defined as “regular wage employment in which the
hours of work are less than “normal” (Thurman & Trah 1990). This involves a work week
schedule between 20 and 34.5 hours per week. The most significant benefit for employers
according to Kalleberg et al (2000) using this form of employment is that part-timers usually cost
less in wages and even less in fringe benefits. Part-time working can also be applied to women
74

with young children and other professionals who are not able to work 40 hours due to personal
circumstances. This provides businesses with an opportunity to attract talented professionals who
would otherwise be overlooked.
Finally, job rotation. Job rotation is defined as re-assigning employees from job to job
within the same company (Edwards, 2005). According to the findings, job rotation offers
employees increased knowledge ; and employers with knowledge distribution and crossfunctionality
of its workforce. The major benefit in this case is continuity of business operations.
Steps to Implementation
To improve competitiveness, companies could use operating hours and working time as a
strategic resource to increase efficiency. In doing so, employers and labor unions should
negotiate certain types of FWAs as part of work reorganization that gives employees greater
autonomy.
The first step is to revise labor legislation and develop the business case. One of the
main issues to be addressed prior to implementing flexible working involves regulations and
policies needed to facilitate and regulate flexible working. The first step is to identify all the
stakeholders that have to partake in the process. On a national level, the parties involved in the
regulation process include governmental institutions such as the Ministry of Commerce &
Trade, the Chamber of commerce, Suriname Trade and Industry Association(VSB), Suriname
Business Forum, Manufacturers Association Suriname (ASFA) and the National Parliament.
The first step is for legislators and other stakeholders to perform a legal assessment analyzing the
current labor legislation and indicating which amendments or supplements need to be made to
75

facilitate flexible working. Law makers should approve legislation such as the Flexible Working
Act 2009, which allows employees to request changes in the number of hours they work,
changes in work scheduling (when they are required to work) and working from home. The
biggest concern however lies with the eligibility criteria. Who is allowed to work flexibly? Other
legislation worth looking into involves the Equality Act 2010 and the Disability Discrimination
Act, which are geared towards protection of disabled employees. Provisions of the law should
stipulate types of FWA to be implemented. Eligibility of flexible working cannot be legislated,
because this is always a matter between employer and employee in the context of organizational
demands and needs. The same goes for the application process including provisions for requests
and refusals.
On an organizational level, the Human Resources department should revise its HR policy
to include the facilitation of flexible working arrangements. Prior to revising, organizations must
develop the business case for implementing FWAs and identify which problems they hope to
address by implementing flexible working. One method of developing the business case is to
review any existing forms of FWAs that are currently implemented informally in terms of how
well they are working and what needs improvement. Based on the business case, organizations
should define policies and practices as to determine which FWAs will be created/implemented.
For starters, on organizational level employers could exercise control over flexible working
hours via individual flexibility agreements (IFAs), which allow for variation of terms with
employees.
The next step is communication of the change process. Communication and
involvement are key to success in the change process. Organizations need to make sure
supervisors and all employees are familiar with the company‟s stance on flexibility and the
76

implementation process, to ensure its introduction will work. All inconsistencies need to be
addressed as soon as possible.
The last step is to provide tooling and control mechanisms. Once the business case
has been made and accepted, organizations should provide tools and resources to accommodate
employees. Equipment (hardware), software and other applicable tools should be available
during non-traditional hours or outside of the workplace, whenever required. Most importantly,
supervisors need to be empowered and provided with the right tools to manage the process. They
should be able to manage flexible workers in an efficient manner to guarantee employee
productivity and continuity of business operations. The role the organization plays in this
instance, is to help supervisors learn to manage flexibly.
77

APPENDIX I INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
Dear (name of respondent),
I am doing research on implementing flexible working arrangements in Suriname. The concept
of flexible working is fairly new to Suriname and this interview is intended to give some insight
of the perceptions of employers and employees regarding the implementation of flexible working
arrangements. I will ask you a few questions, which I would like you to answer as elaborate as
possible. Before we continue, I would like to establish the following ground rules:
1. This interview will be recorded to guarantee an accurate representation of your
statements. You have the right to object to the use of an audio recorder, however your
statements will be written on paper.
2. If you do not wish to be called or recorded using your full name, we will record you
using a first name only.
Interview questions employees:
1. In your own words, what do you define as flexible working?
2. What type of flexible working does your employer offer?
3. What provisions to assist flexible working have been made available at your company?
4. What other provisions would you like to see made available?
5. What type of flexible working do you prefer?
6. Why do you prefer flexible working? (perceived benefits and drivers)
78

Interview questions employers:
1. In your own words, what do you define as flexible working?
2. What type of flexible working arrangements do you offer to your employees?
3. What are the main drivers for offering flexible working in your company?
4. Which benefits could flexible working have for your company?
5. Of those who work flexibly, what level of staff are they?
6. In your opinion, what are the main barriers to implementing flexibility in your company?
79

References
Allen, C., Brosnan, P., & Walsh, P. (1998). Non-standard working time arrangements in
Australia and New Zealand, in Hardbridge, R., Gadd, C., Crawford, A. (Eds.), Current
Research in Industrial Relations, Proceedings of the 21 st AIRAANZ Conference,
Wellington, pp. 30-9.
Allen, T. D. (2001). Family-supportive work environments: The role of organizational
perceptions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58, 414-435.
Allen, T. D., Herst, D. E. L., Bruck, C. S., & Sutton, M. (2000). Consequences associated with
work-to-family conflict: A review and agenda for future research. Journal of
Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 278-308.
Anafarta, Nilgün. (2010). The Relationship between Work-Family Conflict and Job Satisfaction:
A Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) Approach. International Journal of Business and
Management, Vol. 6, No. 4.
Arbuckle, J. L. (2006). Amos 7.0 user‟s guide. Chicago: SPSS.
Bailey, D. E., & Kurland, N. B. (2002). A review of telework research: findings, new directions,
and lessons for the study of modern work. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 383-
400.
Bailyn, L. (1993). Breaking the Mold. Women, Men and Time in the New Corporate World. New
York: Free Press.
Baltes, B. B., Briggs, T. E, Huff, J. W., Wright, J. A., & Neuman, G. A. (1999). Flexible and
compressed workweek schedules: A meta-analysis of their effects on work-related
criteria. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(4), 496-513.
80

Bara, R., Bhargava, S. (2010). Work-family enrichment as a mediator between organizational
interventions for work-life balance and job outcomes. Journal of Managerial Psychology,
25(3), 274-300.
Barham, L. J., Gottlieb, B. H., & Kelloway, E. K. (1998). Variables affecting managers‟
willingness to grant alternative work arrangements. Journal of Social Psychology, 138,
291-302.
Barjis, J., Shishkov, B., (2001). Telematic Applications for Supporting Telework Related
Activities. Proceedings of 6th International Conference on Computer Supported
Cooperative Work in Design. London, Ontario, Canada.
Barnett, R. C., & Hall, D. H. (2001). How to Use Reduced Hours to Win the War for Talent.
Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 29, No. 3, pp. 192-210.
Baruch, Yehuda. (2000). Teleworking: benefits and pitfalls as perceived by professionals and
managers. New Technology, Work and Employment 15:1.
Bass, L., Butler, B. A., Grzywacs, G. J., & Linney D. K. (2008). Work-family conflict and job
satisfaction: family resources as a buffer. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences,
10(1), 24-30.
Beers, Thomas, M. (2000). Flexible schedules and shift work: replacing the „9-to-5‟ workday?
Monthly Labor Review.
Berg, P., Appelbaum, E., Bailey, T., & Kalleberg A. L. (2004). Contesting Time: International
Comparisons of Employee Control of Working Time. Industrial & Labor Relations
Review, Vol. 57, No. 3, Article 1.
Bevan, Stephen. (2001). Does it pay to be family-friendly? Exploring the business case. Institute
for Employment Studies.
81

Bevan, S., Dench, S., Tamkin, P., & Cummings, J. (1999). Family Friendly Employment.
The Business Case (Research Report No. 136). London: Department for Education and
Employment.
Blum, T. C., Fields, S. L., & Goodman, J. S. (1994). Organizational level determinants of
women in management. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 241-268.
Brewer, Ann M. (2000). Work Design for Flexible Work Scheduling: Barriers and Gender
Implications. Gender, Work and Orgnization, 7
Bromet, E. J., Dew, M. A., & Parkinson, D. K. (1990). Spillover between work and family. In J.
Eckenrode & S. Gore (Eds.), Stress between work and family (pp. 131-151).New York:
Plenum.
Burud, S., & Tumolo, M. (2004). The Impact of Flexibility on Organizational Performance.
Leveraging the New Human Capital: Adaptive Strategies, Results Achieved, and Stories
of Transformation.
Byron, K. (2005). A Meta-Analytic Review of Work-Family Conflict and its Antecedents.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 67, 169-198.
Campion, M., Cheraskin, L., & Stevens, M. (1994). Career-related antecedents and the outcomes
of job rotation. Academic Management Journal. 37(6) 1518-1542.
Chapin, V.J. (1990). Work Life and Personal Needs: The Job-Sharing Option. A background
paper prepared for Human Resources Development Canada. Ottawa: Supply and
Services.
Cheung, F. M. (1975). A threshold model of flexibility as a personality style dimension in work
adjustment. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
82

Clake, Rebecca. (2005). Flexible Working: The Implementation Challenge. Chartered Institute of
Personnel and Development.
Clark, S. C. (2000). Work/family border theory: A new theory of work/family balance. Human
Relations, 53, 747-770.
Commission of Inquiry into Part-time Work (CIPW). (1983). Part-time Work in Canada: Report
of the Commission of Inquiry into Part-time Work. Ottawa: Supply and Services Canada.
Cooper, C. L., Lewis, S., Smithson, J. & Dyer, J. (2001). Flexible Working and Work-Life
Integration (Report on Phase One). London: Institute of Chartered Accountants in
England and Wales.
Corley, Kevin G. (2008). Defined by our strategy or our culture? Hierarchical differences in
perceptions of organizational identity and change. Human Relations, Vol. 57(9): 1145-
1177.
Crittenden, A. (2001). The Price of motherhood: Why the most important job in the world is still
the least valued. New York: Metropolitan Books.
Danielson, B., Swatek E., O‟Laughlin, M., Olischefski, K., Geddert, C., & Hutchinson, R.
Flexible Work Arrangements. Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of
the Province of Manitoba.
Davey, Ken J. (1997).Smarter Management Solutions Limited, Strategic Change, Vol. 6,
237±242
Davidson, M. J., & Cooper, C. L. (1992). Shattering the Glass Ceiling: The Woman Manager.
London: Paul Chapman.
Davies, Carol. (1997). Success with flexible work practices. A guide developed by the office of
the Director of Equal Opportunity in Public Employment
83

Dawis, R. V. (1996). The theory of work adjustment and person-environment-correspondence
counseling. In D. Brown, L. Brooks, & Associates (Eds.), Career choice and
development (3rd ed., pp. 75-120). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Dawis, R. V. (2000). The Minnesota Theory of Work Adjustment.
Dawis, R. V. (2002). Person-environment-correspondence theory. In D. Brown & Associates,
Career choice and development (4th ed., pp. 427-464). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Dawis, R.V., & Lofquist, L. H. (1984). A Psychological theory of work adjustment. Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
Dex, S., & Schreibl, F.(2001). Flexible and family friendly working arrangements in SMEs:
Business case 2001. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 38(3), 411-431.
DfEE. 2000. Work-Life Balance. Changing Patterns in a Changing World. London: Department
for Education and Employment.
Dickinson, Dee. Developing Partnerships. Work Wise North East and Ark Associates.
Di Martino, V., & Wirth, L. (1990). Telework: A new way of thinking and living.
International Labour Review, Vol. 129, No. 5.
Doorne-Huiskes, A., den Dulk, L., & Peper, B. (2005) Flexible Working and organisational
Change: The Integration of Work and Personal Life, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar,
Dunham, R., Pierce, J., & Casteneda, M. (1987). Alternative work schedules: Two field quaesiexperiments.
Personnel Psychology, 40, 215-242.
Foss, N. J., Minbaeva, D. B., Pedersen, T., & Reinholt, M. (2009). Encouraging knowledge
sharing among employees: How job design matters. Human Resource Management, Vol.
48, No. 6, pp. 871-893.
84

Friendman, S. F., & Greenhaus, J. H. (2000). Work and Family-Allies or Enemies. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Frolick, M. N., Wilkes, R. B., & Urwiler, R. (1993). Telecommuting as a workplace alternative:
An identification of significant factors at home in American firm‟s determination of
work-at-home policies. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 2, 206-222.
Frone, M. R. (2000). Work-family conflict and employee psychiatric disorders: The national
comorbidity survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 888-895.
Frone, M. R., Yardle, J. K., & Markel, K. S. (1997). Developing and testing an integrative model
of the work-family interface. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 50, 145-167.
Galinsky, E., Bond, J. T., & Hill, E. J. (2004). When work works: A status report on workplace
flexibility. Who has it? Who wants it? What difference does it make? New York: Families
and Work Institute.
Galinsky, E., Bond, J. T., Kim, S. S., Backon, L., Brownfield, E., & Sakai, K. (2005). Overwork
in America: When the way we work becomes too much. New York: Families and Work
Institute.
Galinsky, E., & Johnson, A. A. (1998). Reframing the Business Case for Work-Life Initiatives.
New York: Families and Work Institute.
Gay, E. G., Weiss, D. J., Hendel, D. D., Dawis, R. V., & Lofquist, L. H. (1971). Manual; for the
Minnesota Importance Questionnaire. Minnesota in Vocational Rehabilitation (No.
XXVIII), 1-83. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Industrial Relations Center.
Glass, J. (2004). Blessing or curse? Work-family policies and mother‟s wage growth over time.
Work and occupations, 31, 367-394.
85

Golden, L. (1996). The expansion of temporary help employment in the US, 1982-1992: a test of
alternative economic explanations, Applied Economics, 1996, 28, 1127-1141. Penn State
University, Delaware County Campus, Media, PA, USA.
Golden, L. (2001). Flexible work schedules. Which workers get them? American Behavioral
Scientist, 44(7) 1157-1178.
Golden, T. D., Veiga, J. F., & Simsek, Z. (2006). Telecommuting‟s differential impact on workfamily
conflict: Is there no place like home? Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 1340-
1350.
Goodstein, J. D. (1994). Institutional pressures and strategic responsiveness: Employer
involvement in work-family issues. Academy of Management Journal, 37(2), 350-382.
Grandey, A. A., Cordeino, L. B., & Crouter C. A. (2005). A longitudinal and multi-source test of
the work-family conflict and job satisfaction relationship. Journal of Occupational
Psychology, 78, 305-323.
Grant-Vallone, E. J., & Donaldson, S. I. 2001. Consequences of work-family conflict on
employee well-being over time. Work & Stress, 15, 214-226.
Greenhaus, J. H., & Powell, G. N. (2006). When work and family are allies: A theory of workfamily
enrichment. Academy of Management Review, 31, 72-92.
Greenhaus, J. H., Tammy, D. A., & Spector, P. E. (2006). Health consequences of work-family:
the dark side of the work-family interface. Research in Occupational Stress and Well-
Being, 5, 61-98.
Grzywacz, J. G., Carlson, D. S., & Shulkin, S. (2008). Schedule flexibility and stress: Linking
formal flexible arrangements and perceived flexibility to employee health. Community,
Work, and Family, 11, 199-214.
86

Gül, H., Oktay, E., & Gökḉe, H. (2008). The relationship between job satisfaction, stress,
organizational commitment, intention to leave job and performance: an application in the
health sector. Academic View: The University of Economics and Enterprise, Turkish
Social Sciences Institution, Journal E, 15.
Gupta, Y. P., Karimi, J., & Somers, T. M. (1995). Telecommuting: Problems Associated with
Communications Technologies and Their Capabilities. IEEE Transaction on Engineering
Management, 42:4.
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. M. (1976). Motivation through the Design of Work: Test of a
Theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 250-279.
Hadi, R., & Adil, A. (2010). Job Characteristics as Predictors of Work Motivation and Job
Satisfaction of Bank Employees. Journal of the Indian Academy of Applied Psychology,
Vol. 36, No. 2, 294-299.
Harris, Lynette. (2003). Home-based teleworking and the employment relationship: Managerial
challenges and dilemmas. Personnel Review, Vol. 32, No. 4, pp. 422-437.
Higa, K., & Wijayanayake, J. (1998). Telework in Japan: Perceptions and Implementation.
Department of Industrial Engineering and Management. Graduate School of Decision
Science and Technology. Tokyo Institute of Technology.
Higgins, C., Duxbury, L., & Johnson K. L. (2000). Part-time work for women: Does it really
help balance work and family? Human Resource Management, Vol. 39, No. 1, pp. 17-32.
Hill, E. J., Grzywacs, J. G., Allen, S., Blanchard, V.L., Matz-Costa, C., & Shulkin, S. (2008).
Defining and conceptualizing workplace flexibility. Community, Work, & Family, 11,
149-163.
87

Hill, E. J., Hawkins, A. J., Ferris, M., & Weitzman, M. (2001). Finding an extra day a week: The
positive influences of perceived job flexibility and work and family life balance. Family
Relations, 50(1), 49-58.
Hill, E. J., Hawkins, A. J., & Miller, B. C. (1996). Work and family in the virtual office.
Perceived influences of mobile telework. Family relations, 45(3), 293-301.
Hill, E. J., Martinson, V. K., Ferris, M., & Baker, R. Z. (2004). Beyond the mommy track: The
influence of new-concept part-time work for professional women on work and family.
Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 25, 121-136.
Hill E. J., Miller, B. C., Weiner, S. P., & Colihan, J. (1998). Influences of the virtual office on
aspects of work and work/life balance. Personnel Psychology 51: 667-683.
Hohl, K. (1996). The effects of flexible working arrangements. Nonprofit Management and
Leadership, 7, 69-86.
Holt, H., & Thaulow, I. (1996). Formal and informal flexibility in the workplace. In S. Lewis, &
J. Lewis (eds), The Work Family Challenge. Rethinking Employment. London, Sage.
Hosking, A. (2004). The Costs and Benefits of Flexible Employment for Working Mothers and
Fathers. Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of a Bachelor of Arts, School
of Social Science, The University of Queensland.
HRServices; The University of Chicago. Flexible Work Options Guide: For Staff Non-Union
Employees.
Humphreys, P. C., Fleming, S., & O‟Donnell, O. Balancing Work and Family Life: The Role of
Flexible Working Arrangements. Institute of Public Administration.
88

Jones, B. L., Scoville, D. P., Hill, E. J., Childs, G., Leishman, J. M., & Nally, K. S. (2008).
Perceived Versus Used Workplace Flexibility in Singapore: Predicting Work-Family Fit.
Journal of Family Psychology, Vol. 22, No. 5, 774-783.
Jovanovic, B.( 1979). Job Matching and the theory of turnover. Journal of Political Economy.
87(6) 972-990.
Kalleberg, Arne L. (2000). Non-standard Employment Relations: Part-Time, Temporary and
Contract Work. Annual Review of Sociology, 26(1), pp. 341-65.
Kalleberg, Arne L. (2003). Flexible Firms and Labour Market Segmentation: Effects of
Workplace Restructuring on Jobs and Workers. Work and Occupations 154-175.
Kaur, S., Sharma, R., Talwar, R., Verma, A., & Singh, S. (2009). A study of job satisfaction and
work environment perception among doctors in a tertiary hospital in Delhi. Indian
Journal of Medical Sciences, 63(4), 139-144.
Kelliher, C., & Anderson, D. (2010). Doing more with less? Flexible working practices and the
intensification of work. Ebsco Electronic Journals Service (EJS).
Kelly, E. L. (2005). Discrimination against caregivers? Gendered family responsibilities,
employer practices, and work rewards. In L. B. Nielsen & R. L. Nelson (Eds.), The
handbook of employment discrimination research (pp. 341-362). New York: Kluwer
Academic.
Kelly E. L., & Kalev, A. (2006). Managing flexible work arrangements in US organizations:
Formalized discretion or “a right to ask”. Socio-Economic Review, 4, 379-416.
Kelly, E. L., & Moen, P. (2007). Rethinking the Clockwork of Work: Why schedule Control
May Pay Off at Work and at Home. Advances in Developing Human Resources, Vol. 9,
No. 4, 487-506.
89

Klein, K. J., Berman, L. M., & Dickson, M. W. (2000). May I work part-time? An exploration of
predicted employer responses to employee request for part time work. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 57, 85-101.
Kossek, E. E. (1990). Diversity in child care assistance need: Problems, preferences and workrelated
outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 43, 769-791.
Kossek, E. E., Barber, A. E., & Winters, D. (1999). Using flexible schedules in the managerial
world: The power of peers. Human Resource Management, Vol. 38, No. 1, pp. 33-46.
Kossek, E. E., Lautsch, B. A., & Eaton S. C. (2005). Flexibility enactment theory: Implications
of flexibility type, control and boundary management for work-family effectiveness. In E.
E. Kossek & S. J Lambert (Eds.), Work and Life integration (pp. 243-261). Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kossek, E. E., Lautsch, B. A., & Eaton, S. C. (2006). Telecommuting, control, and boundary
management: Correlates of policy use and practice, job control, and work-family
effectiveness. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68, 347-367.
Kossek, E. E., & Ozeki, C. (1998). Work-family conflict, policies, and the job-life satisfaction
relationship: A review and directions for organizations behavior-human resources
research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 139-149.
Kossek, E. E., & Ozeki, C. (1999). Bridging the work-family policy and productivity gap: A
literature review. Community, Work and Family, 2(1), 7-32.
Krausz, M., Sagie, A., & Biderman, Y. (2000). Actual and preferred word scheduling control as
determinants of job related attitudes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 56, 1-11.
Kristensen, T. S., Smith-Hansen, L., & Jansen, N. (2005). A systematic approach to be
assessment of the psychology work environment and the associations with family-work
90

conflict. In S. M. Bianchi, L. M. Casper, & R. B. King (Eds.), Work, Family, health and
well-being (pp. 433-450). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Lambert, S. J., & Waxman, E. (2005). Organizational stratification: Distributing opportunities
for balancing work and personal life. In E. E. Kossek & S. J. Lambert (Eds.), Work and
life integration: Organizational, cultural, and individual perspectives (pp. 103-126).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Levin-Epstein, J. (2005). How to Exercise Flexible Work: Take Steps with a “Soft Touch” Law.
Work-Life Balance Brief No. 3. Center for Law and Social Policy.
Lewis, Suzan. (1997). Family friendly organizational policies: A route to organizational change
or playing about at the margins. Gender, Work and Organization, 4, 13-23.
Lewis, Suzan. (2000). Organizational change and gender equity. Case studies from the UK. In L.
Haas, P. Hwang, & G. Russell (eds), Organizational Change and Gender Equity.
London: Sage.
Lewis, Suzan. (2001). Restructuring workplace cultures: The ultimate work-family challenge?
Women in Management Review, 16(1), 21-29.
Lewis, Suzan. (2003). Flexible Working Arrangements: Implementation, Outcomes, and
Management. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, volume
18.
Lewis, S., Smithson, J., Cooper, C. L., & Dyer, J. (2002). Flexible Futures: Flexible Working
and Work-Life Integration (Report on Phase Two). London: Institute of Chartered
Accountants in England and Wales.
Lofquist, L. H., & Dawis, R. V. (1969). Adjustment to work. New York: Appleton-Century-
Crofts.
91

Mark, N, F., Ronald, B. W., & Robert, U. (1997). Telecommunicating as a workplace
alternative: an identification of significant factors in American firms‟ determination of
work-at-home policies. International Information Systems, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 206-221.
Marshall, Katherine. (1997). Job sharing. Statistics Canada – Catalogue no. 75-001-XPE.
Martens, M. F. J., Nijhuis, F. J. N., Van Boxtel, M. P. J., & Knottnerus, J. A. (1999). Flexible
work schedules and mental and physical health. A study of a working population with
non-traditional working hours. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(1), 35-47.
Martino, V. D., & Wirth, L. (1990). Telework: A new way of working and living. International
Labour Review, vol. 129, No. 5, pp. 529-554.
McNall, L. A., Masuda, A. D., & Nicklin, J. M. (2010). Flexible Work Arrangements, Job
Satisfaction, and Turnover Intentions: The Mediating Role of Work-to-Family
Enrichment. The Journal of Psychology, 144(1), 61-81.
Moen, P., & Roehling, P. V. (2005) The career mystique: Cracks in the American dream.
Boulder, CO: Rowman & Littlefield.
Moore, J., & Crosbie, T. (2004). Work-Life Balance and Working from Home. Social Policy and
Society, 3, 3 223-233.
Netemeyer R. G., Boles, J. S., & McMurrian, R. (1996). Development and validation of workfamily
conflict and family-work conflict scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 400-
410.
Nextra; a telenor company. (2002). Flexible working – business benefit or personal perk?
Citigate Technology.
92

Nilgün Anafarta. (2010). The Relationship between Work-Family Conflict and Job Satisfaction:
A Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) Approach. International Journal of Business and
Management, Vol. 6, No. 4.
Nilles, J. M. (1994). Making Telecommuting Happen: A guide for Telemanagers and
Telecommuters. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold
Nmasivayam, K., & Zhao, X.(2007). An investigation of the moderating effects of organizational
commitment on the relationships between work-family conflict and job satisfaction
among hospitality employees in India, Tourism Management, 28, 1212-1223.
O‟Lauglin, M. E., & Bischoff, G. L. (2005). Balancing Parenthood and Academia: Work/Family
Stress as Influenced by Gender and Tenure Status. Journal of Family Issues, 26, 79-106.
O‟Reilly Cully, M & Woodland S., A Dix, G., Millward, N., Bryson, Al. and Forth J. (1998).
The 1998 workplace employee relations survey: first findings. Department of Trade and
Industry, Great Britain.
Olmsted, B., & Smith, S. (1996). The Job Sharing Handbook. San Francisco: New Ways to
Work.
Olson, M. H., & Primps, S. B. (1984). Working at home with computers: work and non-work
issues. Journal of Social Issues 40: 97-112.
Ortega, Jaime. (2001). Job Rotation as a Learning Mechanism. Management Science, Vol. 47,
No. 10, pp. 1361-1370.
Ortega, Jaime. (2009). “Why do Employers give Discretion? Family versus Performance
Concerns”. Industrial Relations, Vol. 48, No. 1, 1-26.
Parker, L., & Allen, T. D., (2000). Work/Family benefits: Variables related to employees‟
fairness perceptions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58, 453-468.
93

Peak, M. (1994). Why I hate flextime. Management Review, 83,1.
Pierce, J. L., & Newstrom J. W. (1983). The design of flexible work schedules and employee
responses: relationships and process. Journal of Occupational Behavior, Vol. 4, 247-262.
Pinsonneault, A., & Boisvert, M. (2001). The impacts of telecommuting on organizations and
individuals: a review of the literature. In Telecommuting and Virtual Offices: Issues and
Opportunities (pp. 163-185), Johnson, N. J. (ed.). Idea Group Publishing: Hershey, PA.
Powell, N. G., Francesco A. M., & Ling, Y. (2009). Toward culture-sensitive theories of the
work-family interface. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30, 597-616.
Project Nomad. (2006). Flexible Working Guide. Project Nomad Document.
Prutchno, R., Lichtfield, L., & Fried, M. (2000). Measuring the Impact of Workplace Flexibility.
Boston : Boston College Center for Work and Family.
Purcell, K., Hogarth, T., & Simm, C. (1999). Whose Flexibility? The Costs and Benefits of Nonstandard
Working Arrangements and Contractual Relations. York, UK: Joseph Rowntree
Foundation.
Ralston, D. A. (1989). The Benefits of flexitime. Real or imaginary? Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 10, 369-373.
Regan, M. (1994). Beware the work/family culture shock. Personnel Journal 35-26.
Rothausen, T. J. (1994). Job satisfaction and the parent worker: The role of flexibility and
rewards. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 44, 317-336.
Rubin, B. A., & Brody, C. (2005). Contradictions of commitment in the new economy:
Insecurity, time and technology. Social science research, 34, 843-86.
94

Sanchez, A. M., Perez, M. P., De Luis Carnicer, P., & Jimenez, M. J. V. (2007). Tele-working
and workplace flexibility: A study of impact of firm performance. Personnel Review, 36,
42-64.
Sandholtz, K., Derr, B., Buckner, K., & Carlson, D. (2002). Beyond juggling. Rebalancing your
busy life. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Schwartz, D. B. (1994). An examination of the impact of family- friendly policies on the glass
ceiling. New York: Families and Work Institute Report.
Sheley, E. (1996). Flexible work options: Beyond 9-5. HR magazine, 53-58.
Small, S. A., & Riley, D. (1990). Toward a multidimensional assessment of work spillover ino
family life. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52, 51-61.
Sparks, K., Faragher, B., & Cooper C. L. (2001). Well-being and occupational health in the 21st
century workplace. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74, 489-
509.
Standen, P., Daniels, K., & Lamond, D. (1999). The home as a workplace: Work-Family
interaction and psychological well-being in telework. Journal of Occupational Health
Psychology, 4(4), 368-381.
Sullivan, Owen J. (2010). Size Fits One. Chief Learning Officer #21204
Taylor-Powell, E., & Renner, M. (2003). Analyzing Qualitative Data. Program Development &
Evaluation. University of Wisconsin-Extension.
Thornthwaite, L. (2004). Working time and work-family balance: A review of employees‟
preferences. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 42, 166-184.
Tinsley, H. E. A., & Browns, S. D. (Eds.). (2000). Handbook of applied multivariate statistics
and mathematical modeling. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
95

Trachtenberg, V. J., Anderson, A. S., & Sabatelli, M. R. (2009). Work-home conflict and
domestic violence: A test of a conceptual Model. Journal of Family Violence, 24, 471-
483.
U.S. Department of Labor. (1999). Futurework: Trends and challenges for work in the 21st
century. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved October, 27, 2007, from
http://www.dol.gov/asp/programs/history/herman/reports/futurework/report.htm
Van den Berg, P., & Van der Velde, M. (2005). Relationships of functional flexibility with
individual and work factors. Journal of Business and Psychology, 20, 111-129.
Van Horn, C. E., & Storen, D. (2000). Telework: Coming of Age? Evaluating the Potential
Benefits of Telework. Paper from the US Department of Labor Conference on Telework
and the New Workplace of the 21st Century Xavier University New Orleans LA 3-32
Voydanoff, P. (2005). Toward a conceptualization of perceived work-family fit and balance: A
demands and resources approach. Journal of Marriage and Family, 76, 822-836.
Warner, M., & Hausdorf, A. P. (2009). The positive interaction of work and family roles: Using
need theory to further understand the work-family interface. Journal of Managerial
Psychology, 24(4), 372-385.
Watson, Ian. (2005). Contented Workers in Inferior Jobs? Re-Assessing Casual Employment in
Australia. The Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 47, No. 4, 371-392.
Willis, A. T., O‟Conner, B. D., & Smith, L. (2008). Investigating effort-reward imbalance and
work-family conflict relation to morningness-eveningness and shift work. Work & Stress,
22(2), 125-137.
96

Wooden, M., & Warren, D. (2003). The Characteristics of Casual and Fixed-Term Employment:
Evidence from the HILDA Survey*. Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social
Research.
Workplace Flexibility. (2010). Flexible Work Arrangements: A Definition And Examples.
Georgetown University Law Center.
Workplace Flexibility. (2010). Flexible Work Arrangements: The Fact Sheet. Georgetown
University Law Center.
Yasbek, Philippa. (2004). The business case for firm-level work-life balance policies: a review of
the literature. Labour Market Policy Group, Department of Labour.
97