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.