INTRODUCTION
The work-family interface has been an area of vibrant research, prior to
the Covid-19 pandemic and more so during the recovery phase. The origins
of this research focused on the ways in which family roles and work
roles almost often tugged in different directions, breeding work-family
conflict. At the time, it was hypothesized that work and family roles
occupied mutually exclusive domains, so that the devotion of the finite
resources of time and energy to one role correspondingly diminished
their availability to the other. Subsequent research sought to dispel
the foundational conclusions of work-family incompatibility by exploring
the possibilities for work-life balance. Although the precise definition
of work-life balance is still in flux, it is thought to signify a
personal fulfillment with the performance of salient work and family
roles through the devotion of equitable time to the two segments. At the
same time, research opines that the balance is better achieved if the
worker invests psychological capital in the shape of optimism,
resilience and efficacy. acknowledge the impossibility of completing all
the tasks involved in the two domains and insist that the balance is
achieved when there is a possibility of meaningful engagement on both
sides of the divide.
Critics of the work-family balance dimension argue that it is impossible
to devote equal time to the competing dimensions of work and family, on
the basis of changing demands. Further, that the exact computation of
the balance is difficult to achieve because of its highly subjective
measure. Others contend that the ‘family’ component of the balance is
constructed too narrowly, leaving out other life elements such as
friends, leisure and personal health, which are equally important.
Still, others are unhappy with the construction of the ‘family’ as
working parents with children, arguing the marginalization of elderly,
single and childless workers. During the tenure of the Covid-19 pandemic
and the current recovery phase, emergent work arrangements have greatly
blurred the hard line between work and family segments, contributing
heavily to the impractical nature of the uncompromising divide..
Discontent with the conceptualization of work-family balance has
produced additional dyadic theorizations. Work-family fit has been
proposed as a viable alternative portending a situation where the
demands placed upon the worker are designed to correspond to their
family responsibilities, allowing them to perform optimally in both
roles. It is contended that a good ‘fit’ results into a win-win scenario
in both the job and family fronts. An obvious drawback, especially for
large organizations is the endless number of addendums that will have to
be made to the worker’s role and the assumption that while family needs
fluctuate, work demands are somehow static. The next revolution brought
with it the concept of work-life harmony which sees work and life as
integrated components, differing from the disjointed work-family balance
perspective. Within this construction, work and life weave into a single
strand of life, with each portion feeding into the other. Although
conceptually distinct from work-family balance, validation of the
practical differences do not have a strong literature backing.
Associated with the harmony concept, other framings such as work-family
enrichment and positive-spill over involve a bi-directional mutual
benefit between the work and family facets, with the inherent hypothesis
that one role, such as spousal support enables better coping in the
workplace . Most recently, work-family integration is an emerging
concept whose aim is to generate greater fusion between the integrants.
Practical examples, which appear alive to the changing work contexts,
include completing chores around the house while simultaneously
attending to a conference call or bringing children to the office when
schools are closed. The practicability of these examples across sectors
provides an obvious challenge, as is the level of concentration
requisite to straddle both segments. It is indisputable that these
emergent conceptualizations enrich the understanding and appreciation of
the work-family interface, although their nascence means that they are
discussed largely alongside the dominant work-family balance concept. In
addition, proponents of the work-family balance are also revising the
concept’s scope, arguing that the balance is basically an attitude
relating to the manner in which work and family roles combine and
therefore a representation of the extent of fit, integration or
co-existence.
While in agreement that the work-family interface will benefit from
further research and refining, the paper takes a step back to argue that
the exact nomenclature of the relationship constitutes a secondary
discussion. The primary question is not one of balance, but of
redefinitions at both ends of the equation. The 21stcentury work context is undergoing massive changes and departing in many
ways from the way work has always been conceptualized. At the same time,
the reinforcements that held up the family, especially within the
African space, are coming down and a reconceptualization of this second
component is fraught with urgency.
At the confluence of these dramatic shifts is the ‘Millennial’ who is
assuming greater responsibility at the work place and at the home front
and who is expected to navigate both waves and succeed. are credited
with coining the sobriquet of the generation which entered adulthood at
the turn of the millennium, the ‘Millennials’ ascribing their birth
years to the 1985 to 1995 span. Although ‘Millennials’ currently occupy
the dominant share of the global workforce, the world does not seem to
have a lot of confidence in this Me, me, me, generation.
Millennial workers are often contrasted with previous generations of
workers and often come out as disloyal, self-absorbed, entitled and
non-committal job-hoppers . And that is not a great starting point.
Already, a growing corpus of research findings indicate that young
employees are now facing a higher level of age discrimination in
comparison to old employees, referred to as reverse ageism. The
generational stereotypes developed in the pursuit of rationalizing
age-related qualities are engendering an ‘us versus them’ mentality,
with the ironic effect of undermining the very harmony that research of
this kind seeks to build in the workplace . And it is not just
‘Millennials’ who are troubled with the burgeoning generation-directed
research. The entire body of generational theories upon which
ever-growing numbers of research, comparative studies and entire
organizations perch, critically lack scientific backing . The term
‘generation’ itself is problematic, because different meanings are
assigned to it depending on the specific field of research. Semantic
dissonance aside, the intersectionality of age, race, colour, wealth,
gender, culture and an infinite list of other considerations apart from
birth year and shared experience cannot possibly be studied
contemporaneously on a global scale. In addition, the labelling of
generations uncovers a highly informal and haphazard process, undertaken
by any number of players including the media, marketing executives and
even the general public. Given this unsystematic labelling, it is little
wonder that the start and end year of each generation varies
significantly from one research to the next, sometimes with up to a
decade. In addition, the generational labelling has largely been an
American exercise and to a lesser extent a European and Australian one .
The considerations upon which these generations derive identity, the
World Wars, the Great Depression, Post-war birth spurts and
technological leap-frogging are essentially a Western experience. In
most cases, some of these ‘global’ phenomenon have marginal or
significantly different nuances within the African context. For example,
although roughly 1% of the African population was involved in the
1st World War in the position of soldiers, carriers
and recruits to fill positions vacated by foreign conscripts, this
effort was merely a reinforcement to colonial powers in a war that had
little to do with progressing welfare at home. And while the outcome of
the 2nd World War was obviously significant to the
belligerent powers, with Africa again, playing second fiddle, the
significance of this global event had perhaps the most far reaching
gains, in the shattering of ‘white supremacy’ and laying a ground for
decolonization campaigns. Even where people experience common events on
a global scale, their level of participation and the impacts imprinted
are variedly nuanced, and not enough to characterize a generation.
Within the African continent for example, the colonization period, the
fight for independence and the exercise of that independence under
various political regimes mark the most significant milestones,
glaringly missing from the ongoing generational labelling and
stereotyping. Additionally, even within a continental scale, the journey
to independence and the post-independence experience varies very greatly
from country to country. Rwanda’s experience during the genocide, South
Africa’s struggle with apartheid, Somalia’s battle against Al-shabab and
the continued civil war and internal conflict in the Democratic Republic
of Congo are powerful forces, shaping the lives of those present and
those yet to come. The possibility of creating an African generational
construct, leave alone a global one is extremely fanciful. All in all,
emergent studies including , although noting various variations between
employees in the course of their careers, conclude that employees are
essentially generic, making the generational dissections unnecessary.
That said, the ubiquity of generational research especially with
reference to ‘Millennials’ in the workplace has already framed a
construction through which employment is already being analyzed . The
paper uses the term ‘Millennials’ strictly referring to an age cohort of
those between 28-38 years, without importing the requirement for shared
experience. The hope is to set a foundational understanding of the
challenges and opportunities presented within the contextualization of
current work and family interfaces, particularly within the African
continent.