Professor Steven Poelmans is a leading international expert on the frontiers of work–family research contributing to theoretical and practice advancements. He is the Academic Director of the International Centre of Work and Family (ICWF) at IESE Business School in Barcelona, Spain, which has worked for more than a decade with numerous organisations in Spain, Latin-America, and various countries around the globe to create a family-responsible environment. In this conversation, Steven Poelmans responds to questions from Thomas Kalliath and Paula Brough (Guest Editors) on a range of theoretical and practice issues currently facing the field including measurement of work–life balance, work–life balance theory, engagement with industry, the role of organisational culture and strategic management in influencing work–life balance.

Research in human resource management has advocated the development of a systematic process of measurement that enables managers to obtain and evaluate evidence about the performance of work–life initiatives, in both financial and non-financial terms. We apply the resource-based view of the firm, within the context of strategic human resource management literature, and conduct qualitative research in focus groups with human resource professionals and managers from 27 medium to large organisations operating in Australia. Our research explores what organisations are currently measuring with regard to work–life outcomes, how they are measuring it, and what they would like to measure. Integrating the practitioners' perspective with academic literature, we develop a framework of measurement for work–life initiatives.

Employer perspectives on work–life balance are under-developed and under-represented within the context of public debate on work and family. The current state of policy debate on work and family is grounded in the value of ‘choice’ and implicitly suggests that expanding the range of programs available will inevitably deliver a superior program for employees and employers. While diversity in program design is obviously an important priority for both parties, the current debate has not substantially increased knowledge or awareness of how best to assess program ‘fit’ nor evaluate program effectiveness for either party. This paper presents the experience of two organisations which have implemented successful work-life programs by focusing exclusively on workplace and workforce need, rather than policy rhetoric. Comparing the experience of these two organisations demonstrates that the needs of employers may be better served by a shift in the policy debate toward program ‘appropriateness’ and improved program evaluation techniques, and away from ‘choice’. Government rhetoric on ‘choice’ may actually serve to confuse rather than assist employers in the formation of an integrated and effective organisational wide work and family policy and program.

In an Australian sample of over 16,000 employees we assessed whether employees are satisfied with their ability to balance work and other life commitments. We tested the hypothesis that work–life balance is important for engaging and retaining employees in the context of other aspects of organisational climate. We also explored how individual and organisational variables were related to work–life balance aiding further development of theory integrating work with other aspects of life. Results showed that of 28 organisational climate factors, work–life balance was least related to employee engagement and intention to stay with an organisation. We discuss implications for how organisations position work–life balance strategies, particularly in relation to social responsibility and wellness, rather than the solution to employee commitment and retention.

Many people (particularly women) see entrepreneurship as a way of achieving a better balance between work and family than that provided by paid employment. Fifty-eight entrepreneurs were interviewed in New Zealand (32 women and 26 men) in order to explore the work-family conflict they face, the techniques they use to achieve work–family balance and the effectiveness of these strategies. Our study finds that women entrepreneurs employ a number of flexible work practices, such as choosing where to work, when to work and with whom to work as well as managing their roles within the family. This study concludes that entrepreneurship may not be a panacea for achieving work–family balance. We offer some suggestions for how entrepreneurs may better achieve work–family balance.

As several previous studies have shown, the provision of work–life benefits (WLB) varies between organisations; while some organisations provide a comprehensive range of WLB, others do not. Our research aims to identify and examine the influences on the provision of WLB in an organisation. Recognising the potential for different goals and agenda, we propose that it is necessary to understand the perspectives of WLB held by managers and by employees. To inform our research, we have drawn upon the complementary theoretical bases of strategic choice theory, stakeholder theory and the resource-based view of the firm. Using multiple methods of data collection and including management and employee perspectives, qualitative case studies were undertaken with two Australian subsidiaries of large multinational firms. We develop and refine a framework that identifies the influences on the provision of WLB. This framework is a useful guide for researchers and practitioners seeking to understand and manage WLB.

Although the term work–family/life balance is widely employed, an agreed definition of this term has proved elusive. Instead, an array of definitions and measures populate the literature. The variety of work–life definitions and measures provide limited value for both the theoretical advancement of the construct and for practical human resource (HR) interventions. In this article, we review six conceptualisations of work–life balance found in the literature: (1) multiple roles; (2) equity across multiple roles; (3) satisfaction between multiple roles; (4) fulfilment of role salience between multiple roles; (5) a relationship between conflict and facilitation; and (6) perceived control between multiple roles. Based on our review of this research we identify the two primary features of the work–life balance definitions and propose a new definition of this construct.