İş/Kişisel Yaşam Sınırı Yönetimi Ölçeklerinin Yapısökümüne Uğratılması ve Yeniden Yapılandırılması: Bir Meta-Sentez

Year 2024, Volume: 15 Issue: 41, 137 - 166, 28.02.2024

Özgür Tunçel

https://doi.org/10.21076/vizyoner.1316315

Abstract

Mevcut araştırma, mercek altına alınan çalışmaların ölçek ifadelerindeki belirgin veya gömülü anlamların; sistematik, karşılaştırıcı, yapısökümcü, yeniden yapılandırmacı ve sentezleyici bir tarzda teorik çerçeveyle bilimsel kanıt köprüleri kurarak derinden sorgulanması bağlamında; ölçek yapılarının iş/yaşam sınırı yönetimi terminolojisini nasıl temsil ettiğine ve bu sınırların nasıl yönetilebileceğine dair yeni anlamlar, tasvirler, yorumlar, bilgiler ve içgörüler inşa etmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Araştırma, nitel araştırma yöntemlerinden meta-sentez tasarımında gerçekleştirilmiş ve buna ilaveten araştırmada amaçlı örnekleme yönteminden yararlanılmıştır. Veri analizi-sentezi sürecinde, araştırmaya dâhil edilen 18 ampirik uluslararası çalışmanın ölçeklerinin (46 ölçek ve ilgili 209 ölçek ifadesi) içerik geçerliliği; yapısökümcü okuma ve anlama tekniğiyle analiz edilmiş ve açığa çıkarılan gömülü anlamların derinlemesine yorumlanması veya ifadelerdeki açık anlamların betimlenmesi sonucunda sınır yönleri, mekanizmaları, alanları ve yapıları keşfedilerek sınıflandırılmıştır. Son olarak da incelenen çalışmaların ölçek ifadelerinin anlamlarının tematik sentezi gerçekleştirilerek kategori matrisleri oluşturulmuş ve bu matrislerden yola çıkılarak çok katmanlı bir sınır yönetimi modeli geliştirilmiştir. Mevcut araştırmanın; terminolojik karışıklık ve birbirine benzer ölçek yapılarının hızla gereğinden fazla çoğalması ana problemlerine yönelik farklı çözümler getirmesiyle ve iş/yaşam sınırlarının yönetimi için sınır koşullarının nasıl olması gerektiğine dair yeni ve derin bir bakış açısı ortaya koymasıyla bilimsel bilgi üretimine önemli bir katkı sağlayacağı öngörülmektedir.

Keywords

Sınır Teorisi, İş/Yaşam Sınırı Yönetimi, İçerik Geçerliliği, Yapısökümü, Meta-Sentez

Deconstructing and Reconstructing of Work/Personal Life Boundary Management Scales: A Meta-Synthesis

Abstract

In the context of deeply questioning the explicit or embedded meanings in scale statements of the studies under scrutiny by building bridges of scientific evidence with the theoretical framework in a systematic, comparator, deconstructive, reconstructive and synthesizing way; the study purposes to construct new meanings, descriptions, interpretations, information, and insights into how scale structures represent work/life boundary management terminology and how these boundaries can be managed. The study is conducted in the design of meta-synthesis, which is one of the qualitative research methods, and besides, the purposeful sampling method is utilized in the research. In the data analysis-synthesis process, content validity of the scales (46 scales and related 209 scale statements) of 18 empirical international studies included in the study is analysed by deconstructive reading and comprehension technique and as a result of in-depth interpretation of the embedded meanings that emerge from the scale statements or clarification of the explicit meanings in the statements; boundary aspects, mechanisms, domains and structures are discovered and classified. Finally, category matrixes are created by performing the thematic synthesis of the meanings of scale statements of the studies, and a multi-layered boundary management model is developed based on these matrixes. It is predicted that the current research would make a significant contribution to the production of scientific knowledge by bringing different solutions for the main problems of terminological confusion and rapid overgrowth of similar scale structures, and by revealing a new and deep perspective on how border conditions should be for the management of work/life boundaries.

Keywords

Boundary/Border Theory, Work/Life Boundary Management, Content Validity, Deconstruction, Meta-Synthesis

References

• Allen, T. D., Cho, E. ve Meier, L. L. (2014). Work-family boundary dynamics. The Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1), 99-121. https://doi.org/ 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091330
• Ashforth, B. E., Kreiner, G. E. ve Fugate, M. (2000). All in a day’s work: Boundaries and micro role transitions. Academy of Management Review, 25(3), 472-491. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2000.3363315
• Chiasson, M. ve Davidson, E. (2012). Reconsidering deconstruction in information systems research. European Journal of Information Systems, 21(2), 192-206. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2011.55
• Clark, S. C. (2000). Work/family border theory: A new theory of work/family balance. Human Relations, 53(6), 747-770. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726700536001
• Clark, S. C. (2002). Communicating across the work/home border. Community, Work & Family, 5(1), 23-48. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668800020006802
• Cobb, H. R., Murphy, L. D., Thomas, C. L., Katz, I. M. ve Rudolph, C. W. (2022). Measuring boundaries and borders: A taxonomy of work-nonwork boundary management scales. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 137(1), 103760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2022.103760
• Delanoeije, J. ve Verbruggen, M. (2019). The use of work-home practices and work-home conflict: Examining the role of volition and perceived pressure in a multi-method study. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02362
• Desrochers, S. ve Sargent, L. D. (2004). Boundary/border theory and work-family integration. Organization Management Journal, (1)1, 40-48. https://doi.org/10.1057/omj.2004.11
• Desrochers, S., Hilton, J. M. ve Larwood, L. (2005). Preliminary validation of the work-family integration-blurring scale. Journal of Family Issues, 26(4), 442-466. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X04272438
• Glavin, P. ve Schieman, S. (2012). Work–family role blurring and work–family conflict: The moderating influence of job resources and job demands. Work and Occupations, 39(1), 71-98. https://doi.org/10.1177/0730888411406295
• Hecht, T. D. ve Allen, N. J. (2009). A longitudinal examination of the work–nonwork boundary strength construct. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30, 839-862. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.579
• Hunter, E. M., Clark, M. A. ve Carlson, D. S. (2019). Violating work-family boundaries: Reactions to interruptions at work and home. Journal of Management, 45(3), 1284-1308. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206317702221
• Kossek, E. E., Lautsch, B. A. ve 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(2), 347-367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2005.07.002
• Kossek, E. E., Ruderman, M. N., Braddy, P. W. ve Hannum, K. M. (2012). Work–nonwork boundary management profiles: A person-centered approach. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 81(1), 112-128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2012.04.003
• Kreiner, G. E. (2006). Consequences of work‐home segmentation or integration: A person‐environment fit perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(4), 485-507. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.386
• Kreiner, G. E., Hollensbe, E. C. ve Sheep, M. L. (2009). Balancing borders and bridges: Negotiating the work-home interface via boundary work tactics. Academy of Management Journal, 52(4), 704-730. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.43669916
• Lawson, K. M., Davis, K. D., Crouter, A. C. ve O’Neill, J. W. (2013). Understanding work-family spillover in hotel managers. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 33, 273-281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2012.09.003
• Matthews, R. A., Barnes-Farrell, J. L. ve Bulger, C. A. (2010). Advancing measurement of work and family domain boundary characteristics. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 77(3), 447-460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2010.05.008
• McDowall, A. ve Lindsay, A. (2014). Work–life balance in the police: The development of a self-management competency framework. Journal of Business and Psychology, 29(3), 397-411. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10869-013-9321-x
• Olson-Buchanan, J. B. ve Boswell, W. R. (2006). Blurring boundaries: Correlates of integration and segmentation between work and nonwork. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68(3), 432-445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2005.10.006
• Paterson B. L., Thorne S. E., Canam C. ve Jillings C. (2001). Meta-study of qualitative health research: A practical guide to meta-analysis and meta-synthesis. https://books.google.com.tr/books?hl=tr&lr=&id=CAW-g4DrVgwC&oi=fnd&pg=PR9&dq=paterson adresinden 27 Ocak 2022 tarihinde alınmıştır.
• Schieman, S. ve Glavin, P. (2008). Trouble at the border? Gender, flexibility at work, and the work-home interface. Social Problems, 55(4), 590-611. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.2008.55.4.590
• Schieman, S. ve Glavin, P. (2016). The pressure-status nexus and blurred work–family boundaries. Work and Occupations, 43(1), 3-37. https://doi.org/10.1177/0730888415596051
• Schieman, S. ve Badawy, P. J. (2020). The status dynamics of role blurring in the time of COVID-19. Socius, 6, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1177/2378023120944358
• Sonnentag, S., Kuttler, I. ve Fritz, C. (2010). Job stressors, emotional exhaustion, and need for recovery: A multi-source study on the benefits of psychological detachment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 76(3), 355-365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2009.06.005
• Wepfer, A. G., Allen, T. D., Brauchli, R., Jenny, G. J. ve Bauer, G. F. (2018). Work-life boundaries and well-being: Does work-to-life integration impair well-being through lack of recovery? Journal of Business and Psychology, 33(6), 727-740. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-017-9520-y
• Zimmer, L. (2006). Qualitative meta-synthesis: A question of dialoguing with texts. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 53(3), 311-318. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2006.03721.x