hen most researchers talk about work-life balance, they talk as though these two spheres are separate,” explains Blake Ashforth, ASU Regents Professor of management and Horace Steele Arizona Heritage Chair. As many of us know firsthand, though, this isn’t the case. “Humans have rich and overlapping identities at home, with their faith communities, at work, and more. The management field needs new ways of looking at the intersections of all our identities,” Ashforth says.
A new paper by Ashforth and colleagues Wayne S. Crawford, assistant professor at University of Texas at Arlington, and Merideth J. Thompson, associate professor at Utah State University, seeks to enrich the conversation. The authors propose a new model in the Academy of Management Review called “work-life events theory,” which helps explain how dual-earner couples handle shock events in their life. A shock event is something that is disruptive, rare, a priority, and requires an influx of the couple’s resources, such as time or money. An example of a shock event could be a major illness or loss of a job, but it could also be something positive, such as a promotion that requires relocation.
When one of these shock events happens, couples try to navigate through them together. “One thing we emphasize is there are three actors involved,” Ashforth says, “Partner A, Partner B, but then also the relationship itself is something that has its own particular needs and dynamics.” Ashforth and his co-authors stress that this point is important because just as both members of a couple have their own individual identities and histories, the couple as a unit has unique goals and a history that affects how they navigate a shock event.
Thus, Ashforth and his colleagues suggest there are two levels to how dual-earner couples manage a shock event: The first is individually, considering their own identities and goals, and then the couple comes together to make sense of the shock event and respond to it. Together, this process creates the researchers’ new work-life events theory.
hen most researchers talk about work-life balance, they talk as though these two spheres are separate,” explains Blake Ashforth, ASU Regents Professor of management and Horace Steele Arizona Heritage Chair. As many of us know firsthand, though, this isn’t the case. “Humans have rich and overlapping identities at home, with their faith communities, at work, and more. The management field needs new ways of looking at the intersections of all our identities,” Ashforth says.
A new paper by Ashforth and colleagues Wayne S. Crawford, assistant professor at University of Texas at Arlington, and Merideth J. Thompson, associate professor at Utah State University, seeks to enrich the conversation. The authors propose a new model in the Academy of Management Review called “work-life events theory,” which helps explain how dual-earner couples handle shock events in their life. A shock event is something that is disruptive, rare, a priority, and requires an influx of the couple’s resources, such as time or money. An example of a shock event could be a major illness or loss of a job, but it could also be something positive, such as a promotion that requires relocation.
When one of these shock events happens, couples try to navigate through them together. “One thing we emphasize is there are three actors involved,” Ashforth says, “Partner A, Partner B, but then also the relationship itself is something that has its own particular needs and dynamics.” Ashforth and his co-authors stress that this point is important because just as both members of a couple have their own individual identities and histories, the couple as a unit has unique goals and a history that affects how they navigate a shock event.
Thus, Ashforth and his colleagues suggest there are two levels to how dual-earner couples manage a shock event: The first is individually, considering their own identities and goals, and then the couple comes together to make sense of the shock event and respond to it. Together, this process creates the researchers’ new work-life events theory.
The new theory has real-life applications for both couples and organizations. For couples, Ashforth recommends focusing on long-term goals and values. Take an example where one partner is offered a promotion that requires moving to another country. There are, of course, positive aspects to that scenario, but being in a relationship requires also recognizing potential negatives. “Perhaps you have children in school, or your partner’s current career is not available in the new country,” he says. “It isn’t that there is a clear right or wrong, but couples do need to focus on their relationship as its own entity rather than just on Partner A and Partner B.” Having those priorities in place helps couples get past the initial shock of the event and work together to get through it.
Ashforth also says to remember that as couples go through these shock events, they develop patterns for how they deal with them. Sometimes, this is a good thing — couples get better at handling such events over time. Other times, though, Ashforth says it can create a lot of strain. “If multiple shock events happen in a row, for example, it can take a toll on the relationship.”
Further, Ashforth suggests organizations can use the theory to inform how they communicate with and support employees. While shock events are by their nature unexpected, organizations can map out the programs available. For example, he points out how most companies have employee assistance and counseling programs. “When employees know those resources are available and, importantly, that using them does not negatively affect their perceived work performance, they are more likely to take advantage of them when they experience a work-life shock event,” he explains. Even if they’re sharing bad organizational news, such as layoffs, corporations can make career or financial advisors available to help employees.
Finally, though the researchers had no prescient knowledge of the COVID-19 pandemic, Ashforth explains that much of the theory applies to current events. The novel coronavirus is undoubtedly a shock event — it’s disruptive, rare, a priority, and requires resources — and, Ashforth adds, what makes this interesting is its universal effects. “Many shock events happen only to the couple experiencing them,” he says, “which can be difficult because the couple feels alone, although they can lean on family or friends for support. With the coronavirus, everyone is experiencing the effects. So we’re all in it together, but might not have the capacity to give support in ways we normally would.”
Whether the shock event is individual or universal, positive or negative, the authors agree the biggest takeaway for dual-earner couples is to focus on their relationship as an entity. “Focus on the us, and your identity as a couple, to best process and respond to shocks in your own life,” Ashforth says.
— Emily Beach